[Bill Press, Co-host:] Tonight: President Bush addresses Congress and the nation just 90 minutes from now. Will he be able to sell his $1.6 trillion tax cut?
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] I really am looking forward to giving the speech. I hope you're looking forward to listening to it.
[Announcer:] Live from Washington: CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Robert Novak. In the CROSSFIRE, Democratic Senator John Edwards from North Carolina and Republican Senator George Allen from Virginia.
[Tucker Carlson, Co-host:] Good evening, and welcome to CROSSFIRE. In about 90 minutes, President George W. Bush will deliver a speech to a joint session of Congress in which he will outline his economic plan. CNN will carry that speech live as well as a response from Democratic leaders Dick Gephardt and Tom Daschle. Tonight we're kicking off CNN's coverage of the debate over the president's proposed budget and its most controversial element: tax cuts. There is something for everyone in the Bush economic plan: debt reduction, protection for entitlements, more money for education. But the heart of the plan is lower taxes. Mr. Bush says he wants $1.6 trillion in across-the-board tax cuts spread out over the next decade. Democrats say that's far too much, and that too much of the money will go to the rich. Some Republicans, meanwhile, say it's too small, given the ballooning surplus. Tonight, the president is expected to stick to his Goldilocks defense: the amount is just right. We'll spend the next half hour finding out if that defense holds up. But first we go to CNN's John King at the White House, who's had a chance to look at parts of the speech. John, what's the president going to say?
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, the president's going to say look at this like your family budget, Tucker. He said himself today it won't be poetry, but it will be a little pointed. The president knows we're about to have a debate over the role of government. He knows right now he's short the votes for that tax cut. His case to the American people will be: I'm going to spend 5 billion more on education, 3 billion more on medical research, pay down 2 billion of the debt, put a trillion aside for contingencies and guess what that still leaves a lot of money in Washington. Mr. Bush will make the case, let's give 1.6 trillion back over 10 years. The price actually could go up a little bit in his view because he wants to make it retroactive. And Mr. Bush will make the case that if you leave that money in Washington, Democrats will spend it, and that runs the risk of deficit spending. That, a direct rebuttal to what we've heard from the Democrats in recent days who are saying that it is the Bush plan that runs the risk of deficit. So, pretty pointed from the president tonight, although aides saying he's trying to be bipartisan.
[Press:] All right. John King, thanks so much for setting us up tonight. Not poetry but important speech tonight. Let's go right to Senator George Allen who joins us from Capitol Hill tonight. Senator Allen, let me ask you, or just tell you, first of all About 6:00 this morning I staggered out of the house and pick up my "Washington Times," and almost in fact, I did laugh out loud when I saw the headline. Here it is. "Bush Will Tell Americans They Can Have It All." Now, senator, you've got to agree, anybody who believes that and that is the president's message has to believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy all at the same time. There's no way, wouldn't you agree, that you can take care of Social Security, take care of Medicare, take care of education, take care of prescription drugs for seniors take care of whatever else, and give Americans a $1.6 trillion tax cut?
[Sen. George Allen , Virginia:] Well, I think it's very optimistic and I think we, as Republicans, are optimistic. And, indeed, I think if you look at the blueprint that President Bush has outlined and will tonight, is that the first thing you do is have discipline on Social Security, and not spend a penny of it on anything other than Social Security as far as the taxes coming in. That discipline helps reduce the national debt. Then, for the part of the surplus, the 3 trillion, you set priorities as would a business. The priorities are education, national defense, basic scientific research, as well as non prescription drugs. But after you do that, even with an increase in spending of 4 percent, which that I think is very reasonable after that there is still a dividend for the shareholders and the taxpayers, and this is the time to reduce the tax burden on the American people. When you have these surpluses it's the time to do it. If we can't do it now, when will we be able to allow people to keep more of what they earn so they make the priorities in spending rather than the government.
[Press:] Well, you know, Senator, the problem is it sounds so familiar, and it is. We've been there. We've done that. Ronald Reagan came in with the same message. We can have it all! And what did we end up with? We ended up with almost $300 billion deficits. Here's how Senator John Kerry, one of your colleagues, put it today. Just please take a listen.
[Allen:] OK.
[Sen. John Kerry , Massachusetts:] This is a case of here we go again, back to 1981 with Ronald Reagan. The American people have a clear choice. We can go back to Reaganomics, where you cut much more than you can, give a big tax, mostly to the wealthy, at the expense of a lot of people at the lower end.
[Press:] That, of course, was Sunday. But it didn't work then. You want to go back to the days of the big deficit, Senator?
[Allen:] Compared to Ronald Reagan's tax cut, this is very measly. This is one-third of the tax cut that Ronald Reagan presented. I think the American people would like to go back to the days of Ronald Reagan as opposed to Clintonomics, and I think George Bush is taking the proper approach in this regard. And so there are tax cuts but they are tax cuts that I think are very reasonable. We ought to get rid of death taxes. Why should the death of an individual be an occasion for the government to tax an asset? The asset ought to be taxed as a capital gain when it is sold, not because your mother or father or grandparents died. A man and woman should not have higher taxes just because they're married. Families are important in our society. And there are a variety of other taxes that I think that ought to be reduced so that families can invest and spend that money as they see fit. The question is: Who spends part of this surplus? Part is determined by the government, taking care of priorities. Another part of the surplus ought to go to the people, and they make the decision.
[Carlson:] OK, Senator. We want to get to the other senator here. Now, Senator, you heard John Kerry. He was making the argument that a lot of Democrats are making, which isn't really an argument on the tax cut, it's an attack on the rich, the most vulgar kind of class warfare. The rich will use this money to buy new Bentleys, the poor will get bus tokens. Now, Al Gore ran an entire presidential campaign on this notion and it didn't work. The Democrats have focus groups that show that the American people are more resentful and envious than they were. I mean, why do you expect this is going to work?
[Sen. John Edwards , North Carolina:] Well, I think what'll work, Tucker, is to talk about what makes common sense to American families. Every American family has to make decisions about what matters to them, what their priorities are. They can't get everything. They know they can't get everything, so it's absolutely truthful of us, as nation, that we can't have everything. We have decisions to make. Very important decisions that are going to say a lot about what we stand for as a country and where we're headed over the next 10 years. And if you ask: Should we have a tax cut? Absolutely. If you ask: Should we have a tax cut of this magnitude, compared with a more moderate tax cut? And at the same time do what we need to do to make every school in America a quality school, making sure that every senior citizen has access to prescription drugs, making sure that every man and woman in our military has adequate housing and adequate health care. I mean, those are the kind of paying down the debt, which is critically important, particularly given the fact that we have some sluggishness in the economy. These are decisions. We don't get everything. We have to make choices. The president, by proposing this tax cut, has made a choice. He has made a choice that this is his top priority. It's more important to him than these other things. And I think I think it's very important, Tucker, that we be honest with people.
[Carlson:] But that's only part of what democrats are saying. On the other side, again, as you just heard Senator Kerry say, democrats are saying that the rich are getting a lot and you're getting nothing. And in fact, that's not true, is it? Because George W. Bush is proposing the exact same rate reduction for everybody, rich and poor. Now, the you know, the rich are American citizens or, Marc Rich isn't... ... but most wealthy people are American citizens in this country. Why shouldn't they get exactly the same rate cut as everybody else?
[Edwards:] Well, I think what John Senator Kerry was saying was the vast majority of benefits associated with President Bush's tax cut end up going to the richest people in America. Now, let me give you example, Tucker. The estate tax. I, conceptually, don't like the idea that estate taxes exist in this country, but we have decisions to make, important decisions. First of all, we should make sure that every farmer in America is protected against estate taxes. We should make sure that every small businessman who wants to pass on a business that's been in the family for generations has the ability to do that without being taxed. But then we get to a third question, which is: Should we allow estates of, for example, $100 million or more to be completely protected from estate taxes? Some of the wealthiest people in the country. Now...
[Allen:] Now, just so you understand on this one issue, it's not exempting any estates from it's exempting them from death taxes. An estate, whatever the asset is, would be taxed at the capital gains rate, so they'd be taxed at, say, 20, 25 percent as opposed to 55 percent.
[Edwards:] But we get to the question George, I think we get to the question of whether in our list of priorities, if we're protecting farmers and we're protecting small businessmen, where on the list does it fall, these very large estates? And, at least from my perspective, if we're trying to invest in schools, trying to do prescription drugs, trying to do all these other things I think it's just dishonest to suggest to people that we can have everything. We're also very optimistic. I mean, there are enormous opportunities available to us as country. But those opportunities depend on us making the right decisions.
[Press:] Senator Allen, let me come back to you, because you just said your last answer about how eager the American people are for all these tax cuts. I mean, I like to remind you I hate to remind you, but, you know, George Bush sold this during the campaign and Al Gore got over 500,000 more votes than he did, but let Let me show our viewers what "The Washington Post" showed this morning in terms of their nationwide survey of what the American people think about this. "Washington Post," ABC News. First question: What's the top priority for surplus money? Domestic programs, 35 percent. Social Security, 25. Taxes come down to third on the list, 22 percent. Next question: What kind of a tax cut do you think we ought to have? As Senator Edwards said, we're going to have one. Across the board: Bush's plan, 43 percent. A smaller, targeted tax cut, the Democratic plan, 53 percent. You keep puffing about all this support. Where is it? The people don't like this plan.
[Allen:] Well, I'll tell you what people won't like is if you keep all the money in Washington, and when you think of the amount of money that is projected to come in the next 10 years, this tax cut is only about 6 percent of all the funds that'll come in. You talk about Ronald Reagan. This tax cut's smaller than the tax cut that John F. Kennedy put into place. Yes, we'll have to make priorities, and I agree with John. Education is vitally important and the federal government can help and support local and state efforts in education. National defense is a priority prescription drug coverage, also of course research into diseases and medical improvements. But we also ought to allow the people to keep more of what they earn. So if you say, "Gosh, the government can't turn back 6 percent," a measly 6 percent, what can we turn back? Is it 5 percent? Now when you get into the details, Bill, of marriage penalty taxes, health insurance being fully deductible for individuals and the self-employed, I think we'll probably have good mix and match and great argument. But nevertheless, the bottom line is, is I think we can turn back just 6 percent of the funds that are coming into Washington for the next 10 years.
[Press:] Well, I guess the question again is, I guess, what is the priority? And I think question is, if you do this 1.6 trillion tax cut, is there anything left for what those priorities are? Let me give you tell you...
[Allen:] Well, Bill, it's a 4 percent increase in spending generally, across the board. There are some areas that are going to get a higher increase in spending, such as education.
[Press:] Let me mention another bellwether. Congressman Charles Stenholm, "Blue Dog" Democrat from Texas, good buddy of George Bush's in fact Bush was even I mean, there were rumors that he was going to get a job in the Bush administration. He was a big, big supporter of the Reagan tax cut. He said now it's the biggest mistake he ever made. And here's what he said just the other day about George Bush's plan. I quote Congressman Stenholm from Texas. Quote: "Everybody's talking" "taking photo-ops as being public policy. At some point, we have to fit that within the budget. My constituents are telling me 2-1 to pay down the debt, fix Social Security and Medicare first, don't have a tax cut first." You're not getting the message, senator.
[Allen:] No, Bill, you're missing the message. The message is, is that in the last several years the Congress has spent more they spent the entire surplus, and then some. Now, the reality is having a discipline in keeping Social Security taxes for only Social Security, that is a discipline that pays down the debt. Debt has been paid down because of this lockbox approach for the last few years, by about $360 billion. Now, in the first two years of George Bush's plan, they'll be more that'll be matched more than double in the first two years, and indeed over the next 10 years, the debt will be down to the lowest level since it was back in 1920. So there'll be a pay-down of the debt with this discipline.
[Press:] All right, senators, take a break there. We're going to take a break. And Senator Allen was just talking about the national debt. But if the economy goes down, will that surplus that we're spending even be there to spend? We'll be right back. Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. Big test for President Bush tonight. His first speech to Congress, which members of Congress, the media and the American people will all be watching closely, not only to hear his proposals, but to see how well he does. Can he sell his tax cut? Will he look presidential? We take an advance look tonight with two key senators: Republican George Allen of Virginia, joining us from the nation's capitol, and Democrat John Edwards of North Carolina Tucker Carlson.
[Carlson:] Senator, let's just talk numbers really quick. Now when George W. Bush first proposed this tax plan last year, the federal budget surplus was estimated over the next 10 years to rise to about 3 trillion. Those numbers are now up to 6 trillion, some economists estimate 8 trillion over the next decade. The tax plan hasn't changed. It hasn't gotten any bigger. It's still pretty small. You're still against it. Specifically, how huge would the surplus have to get before you could support this tiny tax cut?
[Edwards:] Well, I may be wrong, but are we already spending this surplus that doesn't exist? I mean, I think that...
[Carlson:] No, you know, we have to go with estimates, they're the best we have.
[Edwards:] Yes, but think about how many how many corporations in America would give a dividend based upon a projection of what's going to happen eight years from now. Not a single one. And the whole problem with this is look back five years, look back 10 years at the projections that were being made. They turned out to be dead-wrong. The odds are these estimates are going to be dead-wrong. What we know, in terms of being responsible...
[Carlson:] Well, wait, wait. How can we plan for anything then? If we're saying all CBO numbers are bunk, then, I mean, why even have them? Why even make estimates of any kind? I mean, you couldn't run the government without using estimates.
[Edwards:] Because what we need to do, Tucker, is act more responsibly in the shorter term. What we know is in the out years these estimates become unreliable. In the short term, they're relatively reliable, and there are ways of dealing with this. For example, there's been some discussion in the Senate about having a trigger mechanism, seeing if in fact we're paying down the debt, seeing if in fact we're developing these surpluses before the tax cuts kick in. That's one idea that's worth talking about. But we need to be very responsible, and always recognize that there are very serious questions about these projections. And the further out we get, the less reliable they get. And to suggest that, you know, eight, 10 years from now we know surpluses are going to be is absolute nonsense. Of course we don't.
[Press:] Senator Allen, I want to ask you about another part of the speech. The president tonight is going to announce, we're told, a create a new commission to study Social Security reform. I mean, we've had commissions, after commissions after commissions studying Social Security, senator. Isn't it true that when a politician doesn't know what to do, he or she just creates a commission?
[Allen:] That'll happen from time to time, I'll grant you that, Bill.
[Press:] You're an honest man.
[Allen:] However, on this wonderful briar patch of an issue, I think that what we need to do is give the people of America some confidence that we're not going to raid Social Security trust funds. And I think that if that's done for several years in a bipartisan manner and it has to be bipartisan, because you're almost going back to back through the doorway on an issue like this if there are some ideas that will be able to increase people's their security and retirement benefits, hopefully we can derive it, and it's going to need to be done in a bipartisan way. And you have to cautious. This is a politically sensitive issue. Let's be realistic.
[Press:] Well, you know why he's doing it really, first of all...
[Allen:] He's trying to build consensus and try to get Republicans actually convinced about it as well as Democrats.
[Press:] You're right. He's trying to get people behind his plan of privatizing Social Security. So I want to ask you this question: Let's say I privatize my Social Security fund and I bought Priceline. It was up about $90 and now it's selling for less than $3. I would be out of luck and I'd be back to you for a handout, right, senator? Isn't that the problem? It's a bogus plan.
[Allen:] But if you put all your eggs in that basket, it probably wouldn't be very prudent, and I'm not sure that that's what you would do. You're a smart fellow, Bill. I hope hopefully, you didn't. But...
[Press:] You have more confidence in me than I have in myself.
[Allen:] But Bill, these are types of issues and concerns that ought to be addressed. I'm not an advocate of it. My main advocacy is make sure you keep your paws as politicians off of the Social Security trust fund and save it for Social Security and don't use it for other government programs. And that's that's the point of it all.
[Carlson:] Now Governor Edwards, the Democratic response...
[Edwards:] Senator Edwards.
[Carlson:] I beg your I'm jumping I'm planning your future for you. OK.
[Press:] You're spending his surplus.
[Carlson:] I know I am. Now, the Democratic response in this speech is so canned that CNN actually even has a copy of it. Yes, it's true. And a lot of what Tom Daschle is going to say tonight, he's going to say, look, the Reagan cut account of '81 was a complete disaster. I could read you part of it, but it's just too tiresome. I won't. But the bottom line is America America fell apart after the Reagan tax cut. Am I misremembering? I mean, there were no bread in the '80s, there were no Hoovervilles. It wasn't a Great Depression. Democrats called it the decade of greed. And now all of the sudden, they're calling the '80s as a time of poverty in America. What's going on?
[Edwards:] But Tucker, we did have extraordinary developed extraordinary deficits, which we spent most of the '90s trying to dig out of. And the question is, are we going to leave this kind of deficit, this kind of debt long-term to our children? The one thing we know we talked a few minutes ago about the projections and the fact that they're inherently unreliable. No economist believes you can project out eight, 10 years. But what we do know is 10, 12 years from now the baby boomers are going to start to retire. And one thing that's not being discussed very much, at least not publicly in this debate, is not just the next 10 years, but what's going to happen over the next 20, 30 years, because over that period of time, there aren't surpluses, there are deficits. And there are very serious problems. And we're not leaving ourselves any room to protect against that. I mean, would most American families leave themselves some protection? Would they act in a fiscally responsible way, or would they spend every dollar they have? And I think that's what that's what we're talking about.
[Press:] Senator Edwards...
[Carlson:] Senator George Allen of Virginia. Thank you both.
[Allen:] Thank you.
[Carlson:] Bill Press and I will be back in just a moment to offer our projections for the next decade and decades to come in our closing comments. We'll be right back.
[Press:] Tucker, you and I both from California. You may remember the Paul Gann initiative. It said give the surplus back to the people. They did this in the late '80s in California. Do you know what the California people said? What are you giving us these checks for? Use them to fix the schools, don't just give them a measly little check in our pocket.
[Carlson:] Is that what the California people said? You must know different...
[Press:] They did. No, they did, Tucker.
[Carlson:] ... California people than I do.
[Press:] The Republicans underestimate the American people.
[Carlson:] Is that true? Well, I think I think the Democrats overestimate the envy of the American people. Every single critique of this tax plan is all about "The rich people are getting things you're not going, down with the rich." I mean, it's so vulgar, and I think it's ineffective in the end.
[Press:] I do think, Tucker, that it is hard to make an argument that you and I need or deserve a tax cut when there are people who can't put their kids through college, who can't pay their bills...
[Carlson:] But we're all getting a tax
[Press:] But the...
[Carlson:] And we're getting an even, equal, fair one.
[Press:] No, we're not.
[Carlson:] Of course we are.
[Press:] Sixty percent of the benefits in the Bush plan go to the top 2 percent of Americans.
[Carlson:] That's because they make more money, Bill. This is like economics 101.
[Press:] They help the people who need need it the most, Tucker.
[Carlson:] Well, they're getting help...
[Press:] I thought you were a compassionate conservative.
[Carlson:] We're in this together, Bill, all Americans, rich and poor.
[Press:] From the left, I'm Bill Press. You'll hear more on the president's speech coming up in just an hour, and hear more from Tucker and me in "THE SPIN ROOM" at 10:30.
[Carlson:] With Charlie Rangel. I'm Tucker Carlson from the right. Good night for CROSSFIRE.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] The president should feel pretty good this morning. Major Garrett is at the White House. Morning, Major, so far it looks like smoother sailing for his agenda on Capitol Hill.
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Finishing with a flourish is the way they like to talk about this week here at the White House, Carol. A big vote in the House of Representatives yesterday, okaying a good portion of the president's comprehensive national energy plan. Among the provisions okayed by the House, drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, by far the most controversial and most publicly known part of the Bush energy plan. This would allow for drilling on about 2,000 acres of the 1.5 million- acre coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It was the topic of heated debate on the House floor yesterday. Representative Billy Tauzin, a Republican from Louisiana, and David Bonior, a Democrat from Michigan, squared off on that issue.
[Rep. Billy Tauzin , Louisiana:] And some of you come to the well of this house and say don't drill in my backyard, don't explore for energy off my coast, don't explore for energy in the offshore off my state, but I'm amazed at you when you show up on the floor and say don't do it in somebody else's state when they want to do it. Don't do it on areas that were set aside to be protected areas. Don't do it in areas that are rich in natural resources that this country is starving for and we send our young men and women to battle to fight over it, to die for us so we can have some energy to power our cars.
[Rep. David Bonior , Michigan:] I have been to this refuge. I have stood on the banks of the Aichilik River. I have watched the caribou thundering across the horizon. I have seen the grayling running in the streams and the rivers. I have listened to the wolves howl at night and I have hiked this wondrous tundra knowing that even though I didn't see a grizzly bear, they certainly were watching me. This, my friends, is no ordinary land. This is a cathedral of nature. It's an American inheritance and it's our responsibility to protect it.
[Garrett:] A part of that House of Representatives debate was the fact that this energy proposal did not do enough in the eyes of some to emphasize conservation. There was one small move the House agreed to take on the question of gas mileage efficiency for large gas guzzling vehicles like sport utility vehicles. What the House agreed to is require those vehicles to save five billion gallons more than they do now, making them slightly more energy efficient. But there were more stringent efforts to make them even more efficient that were defeated in the House. Now the bill moves on to the Senate where it's future is much cloudier indeed Carol.
[Lin:] Major, and it's not a done deal for the patients' bill of rights yet is it?
[Garrett:] Not quite a done deal, but the White House feels very good that either today or tomorrow the House of Representatives will, in fact, endorse and support a patients' bill of rights the president of the United States, President Bush, can sign. The president reached an agreement yesterday with a key Republican, Charlie Norwood of Georgia, working out some of the last remaining details on the question of how patients can sue their HMO if, in fact, they are harmed by a decision that HMO makes either to delay or deny care. That was a crucial breakthrough for the White House. They predict a House victory. The White House very much looking forward to that today or tomorrow Carol.
[Lin:] All right, we'll see what happens in the Senate. Thanks so much, Major Garrett, live from the White House this morning. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] New York has a Republican governor, and New York City has a Republican mayor, come November, New York Republicans hope to replace the retiring Democratic senator, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, with one of their own. Rick Lazio running against Hillary Clinton. A look now at the role of New York's Republicans, both in this convention and the campaign to come. Joining us, one of New York's congressman, Vito Fossella, from Staten Island, not Long Island. Nice to see.
[Rep. Vito Fossella , New York:] Good to see you, Bill. I am doing great.
[Hemmer:] Let's first shift our focus on this convention, where are all the House leaders at this? where is Dick Armey? where is Tom DeLay? how come they are not on stage?
[Fossella:] Well, they are working hard to maintain the Republican control of Congress, and to get George Bush and Dick Cheney elected president. I don't believe that it's necessary to be front and center all the time. I know they've been working hard all year, and it is not so much the convention that's going to make the difference, I think it's the where these leaders stand on issues, whether it is tax cuts, or improving education, strengthening our national defense, and protecting and strengthening Social Security. I think that's the message that the American potential want to hear, not who is going to be speaking at a convention.
[Hemmer:] But you well know, for the past six months, the minority leader, Dick Gephardt, the Democrat, has been saying he wants to take back the House, the margin is slim right now between Republicans and Democrats. Is it a flawed strategy not to highlight the House members here?
[Fossella:] No, I don't think so. I think that American people, in my opinion, really concern themselves with, and should, is how governing policies affect their every day lives. I think the Republican Congress has cut taxes, to the benefit of the American people; has reformed welfare, it has been good for the American people; have rebuild the military, that is good for the American people; and now we are committed to protecting and strengthening Social Security, improving education, and really I think resurrecting the notion that the government works for the people, and not the other way around. So regardless of what the others say, that's the message we are trying to convey.
[Hemmer:] Let's talk specifically now about your home state, the Empire State of New York. Susan Molinari, former congresswoman, was on our show yesterday. I asked her whether or not the strategy right now is conceding the state of New York to the Democrats, and she said I hope that is not the case. Can you say if it is or not?
[Fossella:] I agree with Susan. I think what we are going to do, come November, is elect a new Republican into the United States Senate, his name is Rick Lazio, and he will serve the state well. And I think, while you can never give anything for grant take anything for granted, we are going to be working hard I know in Staten Island and Brooklyn to get George Bush elected president.
[Hemmer:] Can he win your state?
[Fossella:] He can. If the people of New York hear his message, one of a positive outlook for America, one where tax cuts are good for the American people, where we can all work together, Democrats and Republicans, to improve education for our kids, to ensure that seniors get their Social Security benefits, but to try to make it stronger for the next generation. If people hear that message, he should win.
[Hemmer:] All right, we'll find out first Tuesday of November, Vito Fossella, Republican from New York, thanks for your time.
[Fossella:] Thank you very much.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We want to take folks right now to New York Yonkers, New York, we believe this is and where "Consumer Reports" is about to issue its not-acceptable ratings for a number of cars. Stay tuned.
[R. David Pittle, Technical Director, Consumers Union:] As soon as we have analyzed all the data and the surrounding issues. And, as Linda said, in addition to this news conference, the full article will be published in the August issue of "Consumer Reports" and will be available online this afternoon at ConsumerReports.org free as a public service. The safety concern we are reporting today surfaced during routine tests conducted at our 327 acre auto test facility in East Haddam, Connecticut. At this facility, we test more than 40 new cars and trucks each year. This is a photograph of the operating part of the facility. I'll just point out some of the elements of it. This is a skid pad. That skid pad is used for evaluating tires, which allow acceleration tests for cars. This straightaway is used for breaking tests. We do emergency avoidance maneuver tests in this area. We have a handling course that puts a vehicle through quite a test so that we can see how the vehicle will handle when you're driving it. We have off-road courses back in these trees to go through mud and rocks and over logs to see how vehicles like SUVs can handle the rough terrain. One other point: This asphalt here is carefully maintained so that it has the frictional characteristics of a good highway. All along here, that is maintained to make sure that the frictional characteristics are the kind of characteristics that a consumer might experience when they're driving down the highway. In our excuse me?
[Unidentified Female:] Is anyone else having trouble hearing in the back?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, we can't we have no sound. You know, we're not...
[Pittle:] Oh, I'm sorry. I would you like me to go through that part again or... No. OK, but I'll stay here. Nonetheless. Well, I know what you didn't hear. In our regular test program, we evaluate the emergency handling characteristics of vehicles by testing them in our emergency avoidance maneuvers. "Consumer Report"'s avoidance maneuvers are designed to simulate real-world emergencies in which a driver steers sharply to the left into an adjacent lane to avoid hitting an obstacle or a person in the road and then quickly back to the right to avoid oncoming traffic, and then back into the original lane. So, as you can notice from the diagram at the top, if you follow the yellow arrows, the vehicle is coming down. The little orange dots are the cones that define the course. The vehicle comes down between those cones. The obstacle if I can point to it for a minute the obstacle area is right in there. So when the driver is coming down the bottom lane, sees the obstacles, steers around it on the path, the general path that those yellow arrows are, to avoid the oncoming traffic, steers back into the original lane. That's the purpose. We consider that kind of left turn, right turn, left turn to be the kind of experience that a consumer could confront a consumer suddenly without notice. Our other test engineers run two types of avoidance maneuvers: our short-course and our long-course tests. In both, the test vehicle is driven at progressively faster speeds when entering the course so that we can assess its handling characteristics under emergency avoidance conditions. For today's news conference, we are focusing only on the short- course test. This is a test we use to help us evaluate emergency handling of all SUVs, minivans and light trucks. The maximum speed at which a test vehicle completes the short course without hitting cones is not as important as what happens when the vehicle exceeds its handling limits. Typically, this means the vehicle will slide or skid sideways, knocking over cones. In most circumstances, this is a more controllable situation than a tip up or a rollover. Because of the possibility of rollover, the vehicles are equipped with safety outriggers to protect our test engineers. On May 16, in accordance with our protocols, three of our auto engineers each tested seven SUVs in our long-course short-course avoidance maneuver. Each test consists of an engineer driving the vehicle on multiple runs through the course. During those tests, the 2001 Mitsubishi Montero Limited tipped up in eight out of nine test runs at speeds of 36.7 miles per hour or faster. Tipped up means two wheels are off the ground at the same time.
[Harris:] Now, folks, we have been listening here to this "Consumer Reports" press conference. We were hoping that they would be the ones to break the news to you. But we're going to jump the gun a bit. As we said coming into this, they've been testing a number of cars. And we expect them to come up with a not-acceptable rating for a number of cars. The number turned out to be one. It is this one: the Mitsubishi Montero. They said they tested some seven different SUVs out of 40 new vehicles tested. And the Mitsubishi Montero had did not come through with passing or flying colors, as you see there, with the emergency-handling characteristics in real-life situations. We'll of course have some more on that. And we also expect to get some response from the makers, Mitsubishi. So stay with us for all that. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jim Moret, Co-host:] Hello everyone. I'm Jim Moret in Los Angeles, along with Laurin Sydney. Laurin, I'm so excited you're here. I came in from my sick bed just to be with you today.
[Laurin Sydney, Co-host:] We can tell.
[Moret:] It was an emotional night on Broadway, as Julie Andrews startled an audience with the sounds of music.
[Sydney:] Absolutely. Andrews, beloved for her roles in classics like "Mary Poppins" and "VictorVictoria," wowed the crowd at a Broadway benefit.
[Moret:] Cynthia Tornquist was there and has more.
[Cynthia Tornquist, Cnn Correspondent:] It was a packed house for some of Broadway's favorite stars, including Julie Andrews.
[Julie Andrews, Actress:] Broadway musicals are so indigenous to America. They are part of America. And the music is so special. And what I'm worried about is that they'll be forgotten.
[Tornquist:] Andrews emceed the event, a concert where love was in the air.
[Unidentified Female:] There was love all around, but I never heard it speaking.
[Unidentified Male:] When I'm near you, can I hear you speak my name.
[Unidentified Female:] When I'm close to you, dear.
[Chita Rivera, Actress:] It just fit perfectly with Julie and the opportunity to hear some beautiful love songs sung.
[Unidentified Male:] Listen to the lullaby of old Broadway.
[Tornquist:] More than a dozen stars sang a mix of musical standards. But the real show-stopper came from the person who supposedly can't sing.
[Unidentified Male:] I think she's got it.
[Andrews:] The rain in Spain falls mainly in the plane.
[Unidentified Male:] By George, she's got it. By George, she's got it. [singing]: Now once again, where does it rain?
[Andrews:] On the plane in Spain, in Spain.
[Tornquist:] How did you feel to be on stage singing again?
[Andrews:] Well, I wasn't really singing. That was cheating really. I just faked my way through it. But it was wonderful just to be part of it.
[Tornquist:] She has been unable to sing for the past three years following vocal surgery. The entertainer says she still has problems with her voices.
[Michael Crawford, Actor:] It went better than any of us could have ever imagined it could go. And I think she was completely bowled over by it.
[Tornquist:] Cynthia Tornquist, CNN Entertainment News, New York.
[Sydney:] Now, Jim, as someone who had a Farrah Fawcett poster in his youth and maybe right now. We're not quite sure I'm sure you can't wait for the new "Charlie's Angels" movie.
[Moret:] What do you mean "had" a poster? Exactly.
[Sydney:] OK, you heard it here first.
[Moret:] We happen to have an exclusive clip of the film starring Cameron Diaz, Lucy Liu and Drew Barrymore. It opens nationwide November 3rd.
[Battista:] And here are the angels in action, hitching a ride on a helicopter. Enjoy. [Begin Video Clip, "charlie's Angels"]
[Lucy Liu, Actress:] All right let's see if I can
[Moret:] Wow. You know, I have little notes on that particular scene. They could have fallen three feet and hurt themselves on the green screen.
[Sydney:] Wow, good line. Actually, Cameron Diaz wasn't on a green screen but on a red carpet last night at the premiere of "Requiem for a Dream." Diaz turned up to support her boyfriend, Jared Leto, who stars in the film about addiction and despair. Rocker Courtney Love and Oliver Stone were also there.
[Moret:] The unrated film has generated some controversy, but Diaz had high praises for director Darren Aronofsky.
[Cameron Diaz, Actress:] He conditions you with sounds and images that are from the very beginning that he just sort flashes to you. And by the end of it, you are completely conditioned. I'm just tears coming down watching this movie. I'm going to go in for more.
[Moret:] She was conditioned. Darren Aronofsky is at work now on a sequel, not to "Requiem for a Dream," but for "Batman."
[Sydney:] You're very witty when you're sick. That's been in the works for a while, but lately the studios aren't waiting long to put sequels in the pipeline. Take "Blair Witch 2," for example.
[Moret:] It's on a fast-track to theaters like a lot of films. Gloria Hillard boards Hollywood's "Sequel Express."
[Begin Video Clip, "blair Witch Project") Heather Donahue, Actress:] Oh, my god, what is that?
[Gloria Hillard, Cnn Correspondent:] Don't panic. It's only a sequel.
[Announcer:] This fall, "The Witch" is back.
[Hillard:] The sequel, also known as the movie with the number, has become Hollywood's way of doing business. Of course, you expected a sequel to last year's hit, "The Blair Witch Project," but did you expect it this fast?
[Joe Berlinger, Director, "blair Witch 2":] Because of what we chose to make the movie about, the fact that it's out very quickly is very important, because the movie is about the cultural phenomenon of "The Blair Witch Project."
[Paul Dergarabedlan, President, Exhibitor Relations:] I think the idea behind turning these films around really quickly is to strike while the iron is hot. [Begin Video Clip, "scary Movie"]
[Unidentified Actor:] I am in the house.
[Hillard:] "Blair Witch" isn't alone in it's fast return to theaters. This summer's low-budget, big-returns comedy, "Scary Movie," will have its sequel arrive in theaters next year. "The Mummy Returns" is still months away from release, but Universal Pictures has already announced plans for a prequel to the "Mummy" movies.
[Announcer:] He's the World Wrestling Federation champion.
[Hillard:] Pro wrestler "The Rock" will star as "The Scorpion King."
[The Rock:] The treatment was fantastic, and they're working on the script now. And it's everybody's collaborating with the writers. It's going to be fantastic, no question.
[Hillard:] What if multiple sequels were made simultaneously? [Begin Video Clip, "the Matrix"]
[Carrie-anne Moss, Actress:] No one has ever done anything like this.
[Keanu Reeves, Actor:] That's why it is going to work.
[Hillard:] Actually, it has been done.
[Dergarabedian:] "The Matrix" sequels are going to be shot concurrently, and that's been done before. "Back to the Future II" and "III," the same thing. I think that brings to it the economies of scale. This way, you've got everybody working on the two simultaneously, and I think it's very cost-effective to do it that way.
[Announcer:] One ring to rule them all.
[Hillard:] All three films in the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy are being filmed concurrently.
[Bob Friedman, Co-chmn., Worldwide Marketing, New Line Cinema:] It became a situation where if we were able to do the magnitude and the epic nature of this property, where we have 20,000 extras and it's based on probably the most popular book of our generation, we really wanted to do it the way the fans demanded that this be done. And the only way to really do that would be to do it in one time frame.
[Hillard:] At a cost of $270 million, some may call it a gamble. But New Line Cinema is counting on the popular mythical tale of Middle Earth being a hit with moviegoers for years to come. Gloria Hillard, CNN Entertainment News, Los Angeles.
[Sydney:] There's a new spin on "Spin City." Charlie Sheen and castmate Heather Locklear on this year's Michael J. Fox-less show. And we'll take a look at a new site for some online laughs.

[Begin Video Clip, April 17, 1996) Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Jessica Dubroff was determined, she was confident, and she was just 7 years old too young to drive, but old enough to fly. What she really wanted to do was become the youngest person to fly across North America. Jessica had just taken off on the second day of this adventure when her plane crashed during a rain and hailstorm. It came down in a residential area just a half-mile from the Cheyenne, Wyoming Airport.
[Carl Rochelle, Cnn Correspondent:] They took off in the teeth of the storm and the airplane stalled and fell and crashed just down at the end of the runway, and Jessica Dubroff was killed, her father and the flight instructor were all killed in this accident. It turned out that when the investigators looked at it, that the airplane was overloaded and out of its flight envelope and should have never been taking off in that kind of situation. And she was supposed to fly the airplane, be at the controls all the way through this entire flight. This is what they were saying, that Jessica Dubroff was in control of the airplane, she was the person who was flying it across the country. How much she was actually flying the airplane, I don't know. The only people who were in the airplane, her father, her instructor, and Jessica Dubroff are the only ones who really know who was flying the airplane in those last minutes.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Right now we have news coming from the Supreme Court, a new decision coming out. It concerns rape victims and what they're are allowed to do after they are a victim of that crime. Let's bring in our Charles Bierbauer who's covering the story from the Supreme Court Charles.
[Charles Bierbauer, Cnn Sr. Washington Correspondent:] Daryn, a short while ago the Supreme Court struck down provisions of the Violence Against Women Act, which would've allowed a woman subjected to sexual violence to sue in federal court: invoking what's known as the commerce clause of the Constitution. This case goes back to an alleged rape on the Virginia Tech campus, back in 1994, where a young coed by the name of Christy Brzonkala contends that two members of the football team raped her in a dormitory. The court has ruled narrowly, in a five to four opinion, against Ms. Brzonkala and against the U.S. government, saying that Congress over-stepped it's constitutional limits. Chief Justice William Rehnquist said that every law enacted by Congress must be based on the powers enumerated in the Constitution. And in enacting the Violence Against Women Act, The Congress invoked both the 14th Amendment which separates state and federal jurisdictions, and the so-called commerce cause. But the chief justice said that gender motivated crimes of violence are not in any sense economic activity. Ms. Brzonkala had argued, and others for her, that because of this alleged rape she had to leave school and, of course, her chances at improving her education and her job and her income were therefore limited. But the chief justice said that this is a matter that should provide some remedy, and any civilized justice system would. But he said it has to come from the Commonwealth of Virginia, not the federal government. Charles Bierbauer, CNN, reporting live from the Supreme Court.
[Kagan:] Charles, thank you.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Now, the debate over capital punishment a long-standing one here in the U.S. For more on America's attitudes on the death penalty, we're joined by the Gallup Poll editor-in-chief, Frank Newport, live in Princeton. Frank, good morning.
[Frank Newport, Editor-in-chief, Gallup Poll:] Good morning, Bill. The bottom line is: two-thirds of Americans support the idea as the death penalty in cases of murder. So, there won't be a lot of protest against the execution you were just talking about in Texas. These numbers have changed over the years. We actually started tracking that at Gallup back in the 1950s and we can show you. The numbers went up and down, particularly in the '60s, when there were no executions for a while, and early '70s. But, by 1994, 80 percent of the public supported the death penalty. Actually, we have seen some slight erosion in our last three surveys and just about a week ago, if you can see: 66 percent, or two- thirds, of Americans say they support the death penalty. Still high, but down a little. Now, we do give people an alternative; that's just a straight question. This is a question where we say: What if the alternative was absolute life with no with or without any chance of parole? Still you find 52 percent of Americans support the death penalty in those circumstances. Now, this is what's very interesting. We asked Americans five years ago and just a week or two ago: Is it likely I mean, does it happen that innocent people are executed, or at least sentenced to death? Then 82 percent of Americans said yes back five years ago. And when we just asked it, now we've gotten 91 percent of Americans say yes, innocent people do get sentenced to death. And what's important is: Even 90 percent of those who support the death penalty admit that, occasionally, an innocent person does get caught up in the death penalty. So, that's obviously not keeping them from supporting it. Finally, we said: In your own words, why do you support the death penalty? Well, the old biblical: an eye for an eye. Forty percent of the people say it's straight revenge. Those reasons are mentioned much more than deterrent or saving money or some of the others you can see. Bottom line: Two-thirds of Americans support the death penalty. Back to you, Daryn and Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right, Frank, thank you.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] A team of specialists from the United States is in Uganda examining the recent Ebola virus outbreak that has claimed 41 lives. CNN's Charlayne Hunter-Gault has more from Uganda.
[Charlayne Hunter-gault, Cnn Correspondent:] They arrived in two small planes loaded with equipment to tackle a big problem: refrigerators to preserve specimens, masks and gloves and other protective gear, and the technology to run a full-fledged laboratory.
[Pierre Rollin, Centers For Disease Control:] We're going to collect specimen to confirm the diagnostic of Ebola in the different patients that are hospitalized and the ones that is going to be brought in, because they suspect it.
[Hunter-gault:] The Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control will be joining the World Health Organization in helping the government track and manage cases. The government is optimistic.
[Christus Kiyonga, Ugandan Health Minister:] We are confident that we will contain this disease, because already within an operation of less than a week, we can see very positive responses from the population.
[Hunter-gault:] International experts are giving the government high marks for its management of the outbreak, saying that its previous experience with HIV AIDS and other infectious diseases helped prepare it to be proactive. Meanwhile, WHO's Dr. Guenael Rodier and his team will be coordinating all teams being deployed to trace the contacts of infected victims back to their homes, and bring them in for testing: a key element in containing the virus spread by contact with body fluids. Even a handshake can do it. Working with the CDC and local authorities, they also hope to confront the delicate issue of cultural practices that involve communal hand-washing at funerals, thought to be a major source of the spread of the virus. [on camera]: The CDC team says it isn't exactly sure how long it will take to complete its work. It could take days. It could be weeks. It could be months. But it is proceeding on the optimistic assumption that they're dealing with a virus that's basically contained and not spreading. Charlayne Hunter-Gault, CNN, Gulu, Uganda.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Among our top stories today, President Clinton says he plans to use millions of tax dollars to buy bulletproof vests for police on the front lines. White House correspondent John King joins us now from the White House with more on all of this John.
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Lou, the president in the company of police today, this part of an annual ceremony honoring those law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty in the past years. And the president using that event not only to talk about more bulletproof vests for police officers, but also to follow up on the message of the Million Mom March over the weekend and to call on the Congress to adopt what the president says is common-sense gun control legislation. The president wants to raise the age, for example, for buying a handgun, the federal law. Also wants to close what he calls the gun show loophole, allowing people to buy guns at gun shows without a background check. This legislation has been tied up for months. The president says it's time now for the House and the Senate to work out their differences.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] It's been stalled here for 10 months, and yesterday on this mall there were somewhere between a half a million and 750,000 mothers gathered, and over a million in 70 sites across America, to say that we shouldn't wait any longer for this kind of legislation. I hope we will listen to what they had to say. It will also save a lot of police officers' lives.
[King:] Now, at this event, the president also announcing the latest installment of a government program, spending $24 million now to buy some 90,000 bulletproof vests for police officers around the country: that program due to expire. The president making the case today that Congress should renew it and spend $150 million over the next three years. That money, the president said, would buy up to a half million bulletproof vests to protect police officers. John King, CNN, reporting live from the White House.

[Prudence Solomon, Guest:] Ahead on BUSINESS UNUSUAL, Drew Nieporent, the entrepreneur without an office. He holds some of New York's most successful businesses in the palm of his hand. Once a regular on the "Carol Burnett Show," today Lyle Waggoner is making a name by putting rolling roofs over the heads of Hollywood stars. And speaking of rolling, you'll soon meet little Jeff, who rolled off the assembly line and into the surgical suite where he now helps save lives every day. That's all ahead on BUSINESS UNUSUAL. Welcome to BUSINESS UNUSUAL. I'm Prudence Solomon in for Rhonda Schaffler. He began at McDonald's flipping burgers. Then he got a degree in hotel and restaurant management from Cornell University. And after stints at Tavern on the Green and Maxwell's Plum in Manhattan, Drew Nieporent set out on his own, opening Montrachet in 1985. Seven weeks later, it received three stars from the "New York Times" and has kept that rating ever since. Today, he's got a full repertoire of restaurants in his Myriad Restaurant Group. And as Allan Dodds Frank reports, he manages all of them without an office.
[Drew Nieporent, President, The Myriad Restaurant Group:] Headquarters, can I help you?
[Allan Dodds Frank, Cnn Correspondent:] Drew Nieporent runs a $45 million restaurant group without a desk, a file cabinet, or even a calendar.
[Nieporent:] Is today Thursday or Friday? All day?
[Dodds Frank:] His company, the Myriad Restaurant Group, owns and has consulting contracts with some of New York City's top destination restaurants it the Lower East Side neighborhood of Tribeca. The Myriad Group's portfolio of owned and operated restaurants: The Tribeca Grill where Robert DeNiro is a partner, Tri Bakery just next to Tribeca Grill, Montrachet, and Layla located just around the corner. And there's Rubicon in San Francisco where Francis Ford Coppolla and Robin Williams are partners. As for the Myriad consulting contracts, Japanese hotspot and Nobu and Nobu Next door, as well as Nobu London and Heartbeat to name a few. Wherever there's a table and chair, Drew conducts business.
[Nieporent:] Why don't we talk at 3:00 and make a judgment call?
[Dodds Frank:] Table and chair and cell phone, that is.
[Nieporent:] I would tell you without that cell phone where I'm able to conduct my business in the car as it would be an office enables me to do what I do. Without that cell phone, without that fax machine, I doubt very highly I'd have a multi-restaurant group.
[Dodds Frank:] Nieporent is a child of the '60s. The motto of the time: "Don't sell out." It's something he's been struggling with his whole life.
[Nieporent:] You're looking at somebody who used to go to the Fillmore East and grew up on a big diet of anti-establishment rhetoric, music, whether it was The Doors or The Who or Bob Dylan or whoever. Bottom line is I'm trying to keep one foot in and one foot out. We realize we're part of the new establishment. But we just don't want to sell out yet. The thing with the office is that I've worked in enough establishments as an employee where the managers hide in the office.
[Dodds Frank:] And none of the Myriad partners do any hiding out, be it Michael Bonadies or Marty Shapiro, both seen here grabbing a meeting with Drew outside Tri Bakery, or Drew's brother Tracy Nieporent who heads up the marketing department.
[Tracy Nieporent, Partner, The Myriad Restaurant Group:] Our meetings are wherever Drew wants to have a meeting. We don't tend to do things in a very, very corporate way. But we do have disciplines. And we have our own personal integrity and standards. So we get the job done. But we don't do it in probably the most normal procedures.
[Dodds Frank:] Nieporent's style, normal or not, has generated a cult following of talented people who want to work with him.
[David Rockwell, President, The Rockwell Group:] As an architect designing restaurants, you're only as good as the restaurateur. And I found Drew's approach was so committed to service and so committed to food quality and so different. Each one of his projects I knew about I knew Montrachet and I knew Tribeca Grill and I thought those each offered their own unique perspectives. So I thought it would be a great next step for me creatively to work with someone who would challenge us.
[Michael Batterberry, Editor In Chief, "food Arts" Magazine:] Well, I think it's interesting that Drew doesn't see himself as a specialist in money raising. And that demands a little study when you think what a fortunate position he found himself in to be able to say that, that people want to be associated with him, or people want to raise money for him.
[D. Nieporent:] Good morning, everybody.
[Dodds Frank:] Nieporent has a unique kinship with his employees. He says hello to everyone and has the uncanny ability of remembering names.
[D. Nieporent:] I work hard to remember people's names. Good morning, Puffy. I also still have the mentality of an employee, which is good because I want to treat everybody the way I myself would want to be treated. And I try that a lot.
[Dodds Frank:] And his social conscience does not end with his employees.
[Unidentified Female:] The 2000 James Beard Foundation humanitarian of the year...
[Dodds Frank:] Nieporent has been recognized by the James Beard Foundation, which named him humanitarian of the year for 2000.
[D. Nieporent:] Things that are personal to me, that touch me, the American Heart Association, I'm a walking poster boy for heart problems if I don't take care of my health soon. I try to involve myself with things that I know are significant. And I think we've touched on probably at least 40, 50 charities over just the last few years.
[Dodds Frank:] He's a master showman and a three-ring circus of food, stars, and entertainment, and remains dedicated to his patrons, even if that means going against some of his most basic principles about dining out.
[D. Nieporent:] And I see it in all of our restaurants Icon, Heartbeat a whole new group of diners young, hip, affluent, interested. But there's just one thing lacking. They're not that interested about the food. It's more the environment, the experience, and sort of being in the cool, hip place. So the food has taken a little bit of a dumbing-down process just because that's just the way it is.
[Dodds Frank:] With Montrachet, his first success, now 15 years old, and Tribeca Grill 10 years old, one wonders what is next.
[Clark Wolf, New York Based Food And Restaurant Consultant:] For a guy like Drew, he needs to break his own box a little bit. He needs to say, "OK, I've been doing this this way really successfully for X amount of years. What am I going to hold on to? And what am I going to take the top of my head off with and do in a different way than I've ever done before?"
[D. Nieporent:] There's two things you've got to know. Professional knowledge and the confidence in what you know, because if you speak confidently and you know what you're saying is factual, accurate, people will follow you. If you speak with forked tongue, people will know that you're BSing them. And in the restaurant business, there's no one bible. There's a lot of ways to do this. But you need professional knowledge.
[Dodds Frank:] For BUSINESS UNUSUAL, Allan Dodds Frank, CNN Financial News, New York.
[Solomon:] Just ahead, meet the man who's putting a roof over the heads of some of today's biggest stars next on BUSINESS UNUSUAL.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] The world's largest air carrier apparently piloting a new course. United Airlines has agreed to buy US Airways in a deal well over $11 billion. If approved by both United employees and government regulators, the new monster would rule from coast to coast. The prospect of a potential monopoly, though, raising some eyebrows, but could it also help raise airfares?
[Hemmer:] There may be reason for concern among air travelers and it won't go unnoticed by government regulators. The new airline would be a giant, dominant at airports from coast to coast. Right now. United Airlines flies mostly eastwest routes. Its major hubs are located in the Midwest and the West: Chicago, Denver, Los Angelessouth routes with hubs in Charlotte, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. The purchase would give United a bigger presence along the East Coast, and that's what may raise concerns. Here's why: The new combined airline could potentially suffocate competition in the hub cities now served by US Airways, pushing smaller, low-cost airlines out of business. That would leave the merged airline free to set higher prices. But United is promoting the potential benefits. The airline will reportedly promise to freeze fares for at least two years time. The buy out would potentially give the airline more resources to help improve customer service at a time when traveler complaints are taking off. United also is expected to continue to employ US Airways workers. All employees below management level will reportedly be guaranteed work.
[Michael Miller, "aviation Daily":] The hurdles are so many I don't think they could even count them right now. They face hurdles not only with the Justice Department and Washington Department of Transportation, but as well as with unions all over the place. Unions have had a habit of disrupting any deals that the management of airlines have wanted to make for the past decades.
[Hemmer:] Good or bad, the deal won't be the last. Analysts predict competitors will now scramble for partners. So where does all this leave the traveler? Well, up in the air for now. Back on the ground now. For a closer look from ground zero, and the passengers' point of view, CNN Chicago bureau chief Jeff Flock at O'Hare Airport, the main hub for United. Jeff, what's reaction thus far today?
[Jeff Flock, Cnn Chicago Bureau Chief:] A couple of different buzzes this morning from the passengers out here this morning. Perhaps you can see them lining up this morning for flights already. One of the buzzes from the passengers is they are pretty happy about the prospect of combining their frequent flyer miles, their United frequent-flyer miles with the USAir miles. So that could be a good thing. But of course, they also worry about the prospect of a very large airline having a lot of power. Already, United, of course, is the biggest carrier here in Chicago. This is their home, and Elk Grove Village is their headquarters, just not far from the airport where we stand here this morning. And given the fact that this airline is 55 percent employee owned, of course, it will have to have the approval of a good significant portion of the folks that work for this airline. One other UAL employee this morning pointed out that the US Airways chairman, Steve Wolf, is well-known to the folks at United. He headed United when the employees essentially took the airline over and forced him out. They say that he doesn't have a whole lot of friends here at United. And of course, the United employees will be the ones essentially approving this deal, and although it is unclear, they point out, whether Mr. Wolf will have a significant role with the new company. So, as you point out yourself, a lot of hurdles to be crossed, not the least of which those unions and labor, but of course one final note is that United has on its board three representatives of labor, and it was that board that has approved this takeover. We'll, of course, continue to watch it. I'm Jeff Flock, CNN, reporting live from O'Hare in Chicago
[Hemmer:] All right, Jeff, thank you.

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] We want to take you to George Bush's rally right now. He has called McCain's remarks gracious. Let's listen to what he has to say.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] ... we have watched this administration lower the morale in the United States military. For eight years, morale amongst our troops has declined. In order to keep the peace, in order to keep the peace, I will rebuild the military power of the United States of America.
[Sesno:] George W. Bush delivering his campaign stump speech there. At the beginning, we're told, he did acknowledge or on the way out, one or the other, he did acknowledge that Bush's I'm sorry John McCain's remarks and his withdrawal from this race were gracious. We're expecting Governor Bush to have more to say on the McCain announcement at a post rally news conference, question and answer session, so we'll be monitoring that for you.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] More now on the fighting in Afghanistan. Opposition forces are claiming they're gaining ground on what's been a Taliban stronghold. We're talking about the city to the north Mazar-e-Sharif and that comes after U.S. warplanes pummeled that area with intensive bombing. More now from CNN's Satinder Bindra.
[Satinder Bindra, Cnn Correspondent:] One day after the fiercest U.S. airstrikes in this area signs the united front is training and preparing for an attack. These rookies are getting a crash course in fighting a ground war. Many of these soldiers have never ridden in an armored personnel carrier before, so a battle scarred veteran teaches them how to get into, out of, and fire from these Russian built carriers. Waiting their turn, their youthful energy standing out some very young and ill equipped soldiers, none old enough to sport beards, but willing to do a man's work and die in war.
[Unidentified Male:] Now we have an advantage because U.S. planes destroyed the Taliban's stronghold. Their ground troops are demoralized and we will be able to push back Taliban troops.
[Bindra:] For all such talk, the situation along the frontlines with World War I style trenches remains the same. From these united front trenches, it's possible to see artillery strikes against Taliban positions about a mile away. Since U.S. planes first started bombing Taliban frontlines in this sector about eight days ago, soldiers here say some of their guns have fallen silent. But the united front commanders the Taliban aren't leaving. They're busy reinforcing their defenses and preparing for a ground attack from this side. Commanders here believe about 5,000 crack Taliban troops, most of them Arabs, have dug in along these frontlines.
[Unidentified Male:] These people are feared fighters and have been expelled from their own countries, so they will fight to death.
[Bindra:] As wave upon wave of U.S. planes have bombed Taliban positions, those fighters say united front troops have suffered casualties. These anti Taliban troops say they want to liberate their country from the terror of the Taliban. As the sun sets across this breathtaking landscape, some united front soldiers take advantage of the dark to jump out of their trenches and test their enemies resolve. It's another sign of full skilled ground offensive may be just around the corner. Satinder Bindra, CNN,

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Technically, they're not being called peacekeepers, but foreign ministers from the eight largest industrialized nations are talking about having neutral international observers in the Middle East to monitor the peace process.
[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] That's right. It is an attempt to stop the violence between Israelis and Palestinians after the latest cease-fire sort of crashed before it ever really got off the ground. Jerusalem bureau chief Mike Hanna now has some perspective.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Jerusalem Bureau Chief:] A former U.S. senator, George Mitchell, drew up the report intended to break the cycle of violence. The director of the CIA, George Tenet, secured the agreement of both sides on a cease-fire plan intended to pave the way for the implementation of the Mitchell recommendations. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell came to the region to bolster the cease-fire and introduce a new concept: a seven-day violence-free period as a start point to the whole process, leaving the adjudication of when the period started and ended to the Israeli prime minister alone. The violence continued. The Palestinian Authority argued the seven-day period had been and gone. The Israelis said they hadn't even started counting proof, said the U.N.'s regional representative two weeks ago, the seven-day concept had failed.
[Roed-larsen, U.n. Middle East Envoy:] Neither parties are conducting a dance of mortal dangers at the brink of the abyss, swinging back and forth, moving from crisis to crisis.
[Hanna:] The intense violence of recent days starkly affirming the cease-fire is dead; a seven-day violence-free period an unattainable ideal; the political confidence-building measures that George Mitchell saw as critical to achieving a lasting cessation of hostilities mere words on paper.
[Ghassen Katib, Palestinian Military Analyst:] We now are living the disastrous consequences of the failure approach of Colin Powell. And it's not late to correct this mistake by taking Mitchell report as whole, including all its security and nonsecurity components, including these articles that are beneficial for the Israeli side and these are the others that are useful and necessary for the Palestinian side.
[Hanna:] But the Sharon government insists the Mitchell report will not be implemented until the violence stops. There is no talk of negotiation, only about containment of violence.
[Dore Gold, Sharon Adviser:] This is now a borderless conflict. And the Palestinians are trying to turn all of Israel into ground zero. And all our civilians could be affected, which I think puts places great burden on the government of Israel to provide the people of Israel with the defense they need. And I think that is going to be the approach you're going to be seeing in the days ahead.
[Hanna:] The further deployment of Israeli forces in the West Bank Wednesday: a tangible sign of this approach. [on camera]: The Mitchell plan intertwined three pillars: political, economic and security. But months after both sides accepted the recommendations, after repeated U.S. efforts to implement them, there is, in Israel, talk only of security. Mike Hanna, CNN, Jerusalem.

[Announcer:] Today on CNNdotCOM...
[James Hattori, Co-host:] Using your body to prove who you are. But will these sci-fi sensors lead to an invasion of the body- snatchers?
[Sharon Collins, Cnn Correspondent:] And all of a sudden, a criminal takes my finger to get my fingerprint to gain access to my ATM machine.
[Hattori:] And putting the zip back in your PC.
[Mary Kathleen Flynn, Cnn Correspondent:] What can I do to make my computer run faster?
[Hattori:] Tune-up tips, a do-it-yourself guide for turning your computer into a well-oiled machine. Plus, online roots.
[Maya Angelou:] Everybody knows something about the African heritage.
[Hattori:] All things African, a Web site that captures the black experience worldwide. All that and more, ahead on CNNdot
[Com. Announcer:] CNNdotCOM with Perri Peltz and James Hattori.
[Hattori:] Welcome to CNNdotCOM. I'm James Hattori. Perri's off this week. Forget your computer password, throw away your bank access card. There's technology emerging that could soon make them a thing of the past. It's called biometrics, and while this new way of identification may be convenient, correspondent Sharon Collins tells us it's not without controversy. Let's go to technology that's straight of Bond James Bond.
[Unidentified Actress:] ID confirmed.
[Collins:] What you used to only see in the movies could soon become a big part of your life. It's called biometrics, identification by body part.
[Actress:] ID confirmed.
[Collins:] Here at the National Biometrics Test Lab in San Jose, California, it takes not a password but the right face to open a door. It's just one of the many ways to prove who you are through biometrics.
[Dr. Jim Weyman, National Biometrics Test Lab:] Right now, the computer is taking a picture of your iris. When you get it in focus, we'll take a picture of it.
[Collins:] Dr. Jim Weyman heads the lab, where equipment like this iris scan is put to the test.
[Weyman:] You see, the computer has found the iris. Here's the pupil. This white part is called the sclera.
[Collins:] So this is kind of like a fingerprint.
[Weyman:] Exactly. But instead of using the information of the ridges on the fingers, we're using the information in the bands and the styrations of the pupil of the iris region here of the eye. The information in these bands will be compared against the bands of previously stored irises by you to find out if you're the same person that you claim to be. Are you the person who previously enrolled using this iris in our system? Do we know you as you?
[Collins:] Like most of our body, the iris is very different person to person. It can be your iris, your finger, the shape of your hand, your voice.
[Weyman:] Biometrics.
[Collins:] The beauty of biometrics is that you are your password. You can't forget it, it can't be stolen, and no one else has it which is why the government started using it.
[Unidentified Man:] OK, let me see your right
[Collins:] Biometrics is quickly becoming the weapon of choice against welfare fraud in eight states, including California. New York's welfare program has saved close to $300 million since it began using fingerprint scans five years ago. It's cut down on recipients who were double-dipping for benefits or collecting welfare checks from multiple locations.
[Unidentified Male:] Someday, a computer chip in your car will recognize your unique mark.
[Collins:] In the area of credit and debit cards, fraud amounts to $3 billion a year, so companies like MasterCard plan to have you scan your fingerprint when you make a purchase.
[Unidentified Male:] What we'll do is, we'll just get an image from you of your finger.
[Collins:] Identicator is one of the leading companies in biometrics. The technology began as a way to guarantee high-level access to secret government installations. But as the costs came down, the applications began to spread.
[Paul Collier, Identicator:] I'd say the least expensive and most applicable to a consumer, if you want to get into the biometrics world and see what it can do for you, would be some of the computer products. To be able to log onto your computer, not using a password but using your fingerprint, or using your facial recognition, it's very inexpensive. I think the average product right now is about $100.
[Collins:] And if you want to avoid these lines when you travel internationally, Immigration and Naturalization has come up with something called the INS Pass. It's a system you can use at eight North American airports. [on camera]: It only takes about 15 minutes, and all you need is a passport. After that, the agency uses both hand geometry and fingerprinting to identify you in the future.
[Unidentified Female:] Go ahead and put your hand back in.
[Collins:] A hand geometry unit takes more than 90 measurements of your palm and fingers. Those dimensions are then stored on a smart card and the computer. [on camera]: Once you enter the United States, here's how the INS Pass works. [voice-over]: You take the card and slide it into the INS Pass machine. The unit then scans your hand. If your data matches that on file, you get to bypass the long lines at the end of an international trip. Disney World has a similar procedure for season pass holders. There's no waiting, just a show of hands into their two-finger geometry system. But not everyone thinks this is a good idea.
[Unidentified Female:] In May of this year, I will have to submit my thumbprint, and I don't want to do that.
[Collins:] In the state of Georgia, there have been protests over a requirement to have your fingerprint scanned to get a driver's license.
[Barry Steinhardt, American Civil Liberties Union:] I fear that we're going to live in what amounts to a surveillance society. It's not going to be the evil Big Brother of "1984," but I fear that we are rapidly moving towards a society where all of our movements, all of our transactions, all of our business is known to somebody out there. And profiles of us will be easy to assemble.
[Collins:] Barry Steinhardt is an expert on privacy issues in technology for the American Civil Liberties Union. He believes biometrics is advancing faster than the legal issues it will impact.
[Steinhardt:] Need to be very careful about the power of what this technology, and especially the power of DNA. It's iris scans or fingerprints today, but it'll be DNA tomorrow. [Begin Video Clip, "sneakers"]
[Unidentified Actor:] NSA uses the same technology.
[Collins:] And even eight years ago, when the movie "Sneakers" came out, people were already thinking about ways to trick the system. [Begin Video Clip, "sneakers"]
[Robert Redford, Actor:] My voice is my passport. Verify me.
[Collins:] What if it becomes so popular, and we're using a fingerprint for an ATM machine, and all of a sudden a criminal takes my finger to get my fingerprint to gain access to my ATM machine?
[Weyman:] Oh, you're worried that the finger that your finger's going to be cut off.
[Collins:] Well, yes.
[Weyman:] That makes good stuff for spy thrillers, doesn't it? There've been a number of systems fielded that actually test for the liveness of the fingerprint before the liveness of the finger before they accept the fingerprint. Not all systems do that, but that certainly can be incorporated in the systems.
[Collins:] You might know that and I might know that, but what if the criminal doesn't? [voice-over]: So ready or not, it appears biometrics is here to stay.
[Collier:] I think you'll begin to see this on your cell phones. You'll begin to see this on cable boxes for parental controls. You'll begin to see this in your alarm system in your home for your enunciator panel, so that you can turn the alarm off in the case of a false alarm. Your automobile. We're already beginning to see that in some systems. It boggles the mind.
[Unidentified Actress:] ID confirmed.
[Collins:] But we'll leave you with this warning. As biometrics becomes commonplace, remember, it does work through a computer. And if that computer is having a bad day...
[Weyman:] Now what's wrong?
[Collins:] ... you may have a tough time proving that you are you.
[Weyman:] I screwed with it, I screwed with it. Aggggh!
[Hattori:] Here's a use of biometrics you might want to be aware of. Some casinos are using facial recognition technology to pick out known cheaters at gambling tables. And sorry, putting on a poker face won't protect you. We'll be right back.
[Announcer:] Just ahead on THE DOT, using the World Wide Web for a worldwide view of the black perspective.
[Darrel Roberts, President And Coo, Africana.com:] Educators all around the country and around the world, you know, they have their African-American lesson plan sort of done for them.
[Announcer:] Out of Africa, when CNNdotCOM continues.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] It was a week in which we had a very large surprise: The Federal Reserve cut interest rates, unexpectedly, by just about all concerns, and the result was a powerful rally in the equities markets. Here to talk a little bit about what the Fed was aiming for and what it's likely to receive is David Horner, senior financial strategist at Merrill Lynch. And on the phone from Denver, Colorado: David Jones, chief economist at Aubrey G. Lanston. And I'd like to start with you, David Jones. The Fed cut interest rates. Is policy still too tight, or have we've seen what we're going to see?
[David Jones, Chief Economist, Aubrey G. Lanston & Co:] Well, Deborah, it's clear that when the Fed began this series of easing steps they were behind the curve. They waited too long to start easing, actually, being so surprised that the economy was slowing so dramatically at the end of last year and early this year. But I do think they're about even with the curve with this surprise 50-basis point cut. Remember now, we're down two full percentage points and the Fed's target to 4.5 percent from 6.5 percent in the overnight funds rate when these easing moves began. And I certainly think we have more to come.
[Marchini:] David Horner, do you agree?
[David Horner, Senior Financial Strategist, Merrill Lynch:] I do agree. I think there's more to come, although I believe the Fed may start with 25 increments now at the May 15 meeting and then perhaps the June meeting, because we have a sizable tax cut coming in the second half of the year. And while, certainly, that's not cast in stone yet, I'm pretty sure it'll be sizable. A lot of it will be front-loaded, and the Fed will be wary of cutting too much from here on. But they definitely did the right thing in cutting intermeeting. And yes, there's probably another 50-basis points to come over the rest of the quarter.
[Marchini:] I mean, do you think the Fed's been too tight?
[Horner:] No, I don't. I mean, I think last year they had to do what they did to slow an economy which was threatening to get out of control, but they also had to ease quickly. You know, Meyer, Governor Meyer made a very prescient speech about a little more than a year ago about the possibility of a boom-bust. He said correctly, if they had to slow down the economy, which was threatening to get out of control, but he talked about the possible aftermath. And this is one of the most aggressive Fed easings we've ever seen, because they understood the process. So I think they've done a great job.
[Marchini:] All right. David Jones, the concern here is what's going to happen to capital spending, since that's where the weakness in the economy seems to be. It was the corporate profits and spending plans that the Fed mentioned. Will this respond to lower interest rates?
[Jones:] Not immediately, Deborah. I think this is the important point to make: that the Fed has shifted attention to something new in this slowdown which is, of course, declining profits and, most importantly, the threat that businesses will cut back sharply on investment spending. Of course, this comes on top of inventory correction, which is really quite far along, and the Fed is not as worried about. But in direct answer to your question, if we have excess capacity, we have declining profits, weakening growth. I think it's going to be some time before business investment will, in fact, respond to Fed rate cuts.
[Marchini:] All right. We need to take a break right here. We'll be back with more from David Jones and David Horner in just a moment. We're back again with David Horner, Merrill Lynch, and David Jones who's joining us from Denver, Colorado from Aubrey G. Lanston. David Horner, I guess the essential question here, with the Federal Reserve having cut interest rates rather dramatically: Have we moved in time to avert a recession? Will we see a pick up in the second half?
[Horner:] I think we will, but it will be close. Picking up on a point that David made just before the break, the Fed is very concerned about profitability, not only because it hurts capital spending, but it also hurts employment as well. I mean, businesses cut labor, and we've seen a rise in unemployment claims. The worst is not over for joblessness. So you add the job insecurity with the pullback in the stock market not recently, but over the last year and there could be some dampening consumer consumption in the second half. That has to be offset by this aggressive Fed easing and eventually, of course, the tax cuts will begin to revive a spending. So it'll be touch and go on growth this quarter and next quarter, but by the fourth quarter, I think, we'll be picking up pretty nicely.
[Marchini:] David Jones, do you think we have escaped a recession?
[Jones:] I think we're just barely going to escape one, Deborah. All the risks, I think, are on the downside. And that's one of the reasons why the Fed has been so aggressive in rate cuts and one of the reasons why we got this surprise move. I think when the Fed thought about it, they simply realized that it was we really needed an insurance policy in this surprise aggressive easing move because, you know, almost everything you think of is giving this danger to the economy. One is this big potential cutback in business investment. The other, of course, is the diminishing wealth effect, equity wealth effect on consumption, and even the slowdown in the economies abroad. So we'll avoid a recession, but just barely this year.
[Marchini:] All right, David Jones of Aubrey G. Lanston joining us by telephone from Aspen, lucky devil; and David Horner of Merrill Lynch here in New York. Thank you both. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Are your taxes finished?
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Yes.
[Phillips:] Oh, you're so lucky. For me it might be a time to chat with the
[Irs. Waters:] Oh, really? Well, I'll tell you, we'll learn more about all this process. Now CNN's Jeff Flock told his wife last night at dinner, honey, I'm going to be live at the tax processing center in Ogden, Utah, tomorrow, and sure enough here he is Jeff.
[Jeff Flock, Cnn Correspondent:] And, boy, was she impressed by that. And I hope you're as equally as impressed. And perhaps you are by all of the reams of documents you see around me. I am strolling through now what amounts to a quarter million tax returns. There are plenty more where this come from have come from. We're sort of taking you through the whole process today, from here to another area not far from here where they try and make certain that all of your returns have all of the right data on them, that all numbers of your add up, that your Social Security number is proper. From there, each of the documents goes on to another area, where some would say it's an antiquated system that numbers it's a hand numbering system, but they say it works quite well. Each document that you send to the IRS gets a number. From there, on down the hall farther to some of the fastest key strokers in the West. They are about the business of entering all of that data into the main computer system. We want to Amplify this whole system for you, and these guys are working very quickly, particularly Anthony freeman, who is one of the fastest tax examiners in the West. Anthony, if I can interrupt you for a second, what are you doing?
[Anthony Freeman, Tax Examiner:] I'm editing a document. What I'm doing is looking at this document for problems, looking for missing return information, like W2s, Social Security numbers, attachments that need to be to the document to get it through the process.
[Flock:] Now we asked you earlier what some of the most common problems are, and we want to show our viewers that now if we can. First of all, the thing that people most screw up in addition to not signing their return is the wrong Social Security number, either wrong or missing. People also wrongly claim earned income tax credit or get that amount wrong. Either a wrong computation or a failure to check the box for your child tax credit is also a problem. You had a mistake on the refund or balance due addition and reading the wrong tax from the tax table. How come people make all these mistakes, and what do you do, I guess is the better question, when you see a mistake?
[Freeman:] Well what I do, I just check all the documents. And the reason why they make them, they're probably going too fast and not double checking. Double checking will help them a lot. But the best and surest way to do it to make sure they don't make a mistake is to e-file. The e-file solves all those problem from Social Security numbers missing, signatures missing, attachments missing and it being illegible all of it's there.
[Flock:] Well, that may all put you out of a job if they e-file though, so we'll have to watch that. Anthony Freeman, I appreciate it very much. We do want to talk a little bit more about that whole process and what people go through to try and make sure everything is A-OK, because the IRS, that last S is for service. And you really, Linda Weiskopf, try to do your best to make sure that you get these returns straight for people and get them the money when they got it coming.
[Linda Weiskopf, Ogden Processing Division:] We sure do. We take some extra steps sometimes that I don't think people are aware of. We actually when a check comes to us and we don't know how to apply it to the account, they haven't given us enough information, sometimes we call them, when we can get a hold of them at home and get their help in getting it in to the right place.
[Flock:] So it's a much more friendly IRS, at least your trying.
[Weiskopf:] We're definitely trying, that's for sure.
[Flock:] And lastly, Anthony sort of made this point, but what would be the easiest way of eliminating some of this paper that now you stand in front of?
[Weiskopf:] Electronic filing. We could get rid of all this. And taxpayers would have the information right up front to know it was correctly filed.
[Flock:] OK, a pitch for electronic filing. And it's an appropriate place to make it, among this sea of documents that almost drowns the IRS each year. But they're bailing fast. That's the latest from here. I'm Jeff Flock, CNN, reporting like from Ogden, Utah.
[Waters:] OK, have a fun day, Jeff. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Anchor:] The postmaster in Trenton, New Jersey is speaking now.
[Tony Esposito, Postal Inspector:] ... who is the mayor of Hamilton Township. I have a brief statement to make. And then we will entertain a few questions. The Postal Inspection Service, along with the FBI, is conducting a joint investigation in order to determine who was responsible for mailing the letter postmarked September 18, 2001, Trenton, New Jersey. We are giving this matter our highest degree of investigative attention. We are in the process of providing updated guidelines to all postal employees, designed to assist them with the proper procedures to be followed in identifying and handling suspicious articles of mail. We have over 800,000 employees working from over 38,000 facilities, delivering approximately 680 million pieces of mail every day to over 130 million households. Our highest priority is to provide a safe and secure workplace for all of our customers and employees. Since September 11, 2001, the postal service has processed over 20 billion pieces of mail. To date, we have one confirmed report of an article of U.S. mail containing the anthrax virus. We are asking that all our employees remain calm and to be cautious during these difficult times. We are also asking that our customers remain calm, and to please use return addresses in all of their correspondence. We have been advised by the New Jersey State Department of Health and Senior Services that the chances of someone contracting the anthrax virus from merely handling the outside wrapper of an article of U.S. mail is extremely remote and possibly nonexistent. In addition, the assistant commissioner of health has advised us there is no evidence of environmental exposure at this facility. Now, we will take just a few of your questions, because, as you can imagine, we are in the middle of an investigation.
[Question:] Sir, have you been contacted by the FBI regarding a letter to Senator Daschle that apparently contained a positive test of anthrax?
[Esposito:] We have not been notified at this particular facility. However, we do have a command center located in Washington, D.C. And I'm sure they have been notified.
[Question:] How does that change what you do and what you need to do if a second letter has been identified as being postmarked through this facility?
[Esposito:] Well, once we have a confirmed report, we will evaluate the results of that and take extra precautionary measures to insure, again, the safety of all of our employees.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] figured out where this original letter came from, which specific post office within your jurisdiction?
[Esposito:] We are currently conducting an investigation with the FBI to determine exactly that.
[Question:] If you do find out that, sir, will you share that with us? You have 46 feeders here. Isn't that difficult in that you have 46 feeders here? Can you speak to that challenge that faces you?
[Esposito:] Yes. The article of mail that was postmarked here in Trenton, New Jersey on September 18, along with approximately 246,000 other articles of mail, was brought here from any one of possibly 46 other post offices and or stations or branches.
[Question:] Do you think you will be able to find out where that letter was from, sir? Can I have a follow-up? Does that present with you a significant difficulty or challenge in the fact that this takes mail from all over the place?
[Esposito:] We would not care to speculate at this time. We are confident that we will be able to identify the location from where that was mailed, but we do not want to compromise the integrity of the investigation.
[Question:] It was said that the mail the original letter underwent testing for fingerprints, other DNA evidence. Do you have any comments on results of those tests?
[Esposito:] I am not going to comment on any tests done that were done on the particular letter.
[Question:] Were the tests done and there are results, or...
[Esposito:] I am not going to comment on that.
[Question:] Have any employees been tested at this facility?
[Esposito:] At this point, we have two employees that reported to us that they had symptoms that could be construed as possibly being related to the anthrax virus. There is no confirmed reports of that. It could be some other ailment. But just to proceed cautiously, we have allowed them to be tested. And we are providing them the best medical assistance we can at this point in time.
[Question:] Where did they work?
[Esposito:] They worked here at this facility.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] medical problems, when did they first come down with the alleged problems?
[Esposito:] There was a carrier who worked at the Trenton facility, actually on the 17th and the 19th, who reported to her doctor that she had some ailments. I believe she was treated within seven to 10 days of that particular visit. And, at this point, we're still waiting for final results. The other individual was a...
[Question:  Esposito:] Joe, you want to stand in front of here?
[Joe Sautello, Trenton Area Postmaster:] The other employee was a maintenance employee that works at the facility. Yes.
[Question:  Esposito:] Well, again, symptoms that most people and they are no different than any others there are common flu-like symptoms. There is a headache. There is a mild-grade fever. Those are the sort of symptoms that they are reporting to us. But, nevertheless, we are giving this our highest level of attention.
[Question:] Did any of them have skin lesions?
[Esposito:] I'm not aware if that's the case.
[Question:] What about the employees at the 46 other postal offices? Are you encouraging them to be tested?
[Esposito:] We are encouraging all postal employees at all facilities to follow the guidelines that we have provided, and that if anyone has reason to believe that they handled a suspicious article that may have leaked a chemical or biological item, to report that directly to us. And we're getting them health services provided.
[Question:  Esposito:] Every postal employee in every postal facility is in the process of being issued these guidelines over the next couple of days.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] What are the guidelines?
[Esposito:] I will make those available to you at the end of
[Question:] Has you noticed whether it is business as usual here or whether there has been any drop-off? What kind of volume are you handling here on a day-to-day basis?
[Sautello:] It's been business as usual. The employees have all reported to work. They have good attitudes. And, you know, we're going on. And we're going to do the job that we were doing prior to this and before this all started.
[Question:] ... locate the origin of the letter? And if you do find the origin, will you share that with the public?
[Esposito:] Well, we are working together with the FBI. But the postal inspection service has a long, proud and successful tradition of protecting the American public from those criminals who would use the U.S. mails to either defraud or otherwise endanger the American public. We have a 98 percent conviction rate on all of our cases that go to trial, so we are very confident we'll be able to handle this matter.
[Question:] Will you share that with the public once you find that out, sir? Is that true?
[Esposito:] We have heard reports that the outside of the particular letter that was processed here on September 18, after having been cultured, did test negative for the anthrax virus.
[Question:] They also said that this is like finding a needle in a haystack, when you go back to those 46 offices, plus all of the mailboxes that feed into there. Can you talk a little more about how you are going about this? I know you have talked about surveillance video. But how do you boil down some person dropping a letter in a mailbox? How do you track that back?
[Esposito:] Well, we want to be careful not to compromise the integrity of the investigation, but it is safe to say that through the automated equipment that's available at the Trenton P&DC;, we can pretty much pinpoint when the item was handled at our postmarking equipment and, from that point, determine when it was brought into the facility.
[Question:] There's been no environmental testing in here, from what I understand. So how do you know the building is clean?
[Esposito:] We have been advised, again, by the New Jersey State Department of Health and Senior Services that it is not necessary to do that. There has been no leakages. There's been no breaks in any of the letters. And there's been no fumes.
[Question:] This new Daschle development, how is that now going to affect you guys here, if any?
[Esposito:] Well, obviously, as things continue to unfold and develop, we will be guided on those developments.
[Questions:] In these 46 places that you mentioned, geographically, where are they in New Jersey and how many counties do they serve?
[Sautello:] Well, the NE office I'm sorry. The NE that starts with the 085 or 086 zip codes.
[Question:  Sautello:] They are in the city of Trenton. I don't have that number, but we could provide you with it.
[Question:] Would it be in the hundreds or thousands?
[Sautello:] Yes, it would be in the hundreds. It would be over 100.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] tell you what town it was dropped in, or no?
[Sautello:] I can't really comment on that.
[Question:] How many pieces of mail do you process here each day?
[Sautello:] Each day, anywhere from 400,000 to 600,000 pieces are canceled a night.
[Question:] I read that was 200-some-thousand [OFF-MIKE] September 18.
[Sautello:] I don't know where they got that information.
[Question:  Sautello:] Oh, OK. That's actual pieces that are canceled. That's maybe the number that they were quoting.
[Question:] That's an average, sir?
[Sautello:] That's an average, yes.
[Question:] Two hundred and forty-six thousand, Trenton postmarks a day?
[Sautello:] Yes.
[Question:] Are you offering counseling or medical care? I read one report in one of the papers. Or what are you offering to the employees who may be upset about what's happened?
[Sautello:] Absolutely. We have counselors. We have some nurses on call. We have a doctor that's available to them. Plus, we had the health department here earlier this morning to educate them a little bit and educate them on what their concerns should be and what they should be looking for and things like that.
[Brown:] The postal inspector and the postmaster in Trenton, New Jersey talking about what precautions are being taken to primarily, to protect postal workers from exposure to anthrax. He talked about Mr. Esposito, the postal inspector talked about one confirmed anthrax letter having come through the Trenton system. There are 46 individual post offices in the Trenton area. They all feed into that one central location, Hamilton County; 200- plus-thousand pieces get canceled a day. So you are talking about a lot of mail coming into this one facility. It is not clear which of the 46 post offices around Trenton. This one confirmed letter, that's the NBC letter. There is a second letter that is postmarked Trenton. That's the letter that was received on Friday in the office of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle. That was opened today. And the early tests they have done two field tests on that and those early tests show positive for anthrax. But they need to run at least one more test before they say that is a confirmed case. But that, too, came through anthrax. Mr. Esposito said two employees are showing symptoms. And we are very careful with this. This, in fact, could be the flu. It's hard to know. In any case, they are being checked and treated. One was a mail carrier, the other a maintenance employee who may have come into contact with the suspicious letter or letters. Bill Delaney, our Boston bureau chief, is in Brookline, Massachusetts, suburban Boston. He has been looking at how mail service has been changed, or how security has been altered in the wake of the anthrax Bill.
[Bill Delaney, Cnn Boston Bureau Chief:] Well, Aaron, you know, since September 11, every post office in the country has been on high alert. And if you ask the postal system what that means, they say, well, procedures haven't really changed. We are just asking everyone to be more vigilant. Now, in the last couple of days, with all this talk of anthrax, we have seen a number of memos put out throughout the postal system for employees to read. I have one in my hand here. To give you an idea of what postal employees are getting, Aaron: management instruction, emergency response to mail allegedly containing anthrax. Now, we talked to postal employees here in Brookline, Massachusetts this morning. At least here, they all seemed very relaxed. We have made some phone calls around the country. And, in general, postal employees seem pretty relaxed about all this. There has been some agitation in some quarters to get protective suits for postal employees. But, as far as we can tell, that hasn't gone very far employees being told: If you find a substance that is suspicious, isolate where it came from. Call a supervisor. And wash your hands with soap and water. But, as I say, in general, postal employees going about their business many wear gloves anyway. Now, as for the general public, Aaron, there have been some guidelines put out by the U.S. postal system for people, like all of us, who get mail and packages routinely every day. In this new world, here is some advice: the U.S. postal system urging, if you receive something unexpected or from someone you don't know, be concerned about it; receiving something addressed to someone where you work who no longer works there, be concerned about it. If there is no return address, that's considered a tip-off as something suspicious. Be wary of packages of unusual weight or shape. Be cautious about packages marked personal or confidential if there doesn't seem any other reason for them to be. Strange odors, stains, protruding wires common sense there are a tip-off and a city or state in the postmark that doesn't match the return address, something to look for. And what the postal system urges the general public as how to deal with a suspicious package is very much what they are telling to postal employees. Don't open the package. Isolate it. Get away from it. Evacuate the area if necessary and alert police authorities and postal inspectors the U.S. postal system walking a very fine balance here, very fine line, Aaron. As in so much of our ordinary lives in America right now, they don't want to alert people they don't want upset people. They don't want to alarm people; 208 billion pieces of mail pass through the U.S. postal system every year. A tiny fraction will be dangerous walking a fine line between not alarming the public and telling the public to pay attention, to be a bit more cautious than usual back to you, Aaron.
[Brown:] Well, I feel like we have been living on that fine line now for a while. It is hard it imagine that people are not upset or nervous about this. Somebody, somebodies out there, are sending some number of letters we have no idea how many that have anthrax in them. And try though people might to just assume that this is just another day at the office, it is not. It is not another day at the office here. It is not another day at the office at the post office, certainly. And, yes, the odds are small, and everybody needs to sort of keep that perspective. But, obviously, people everywhere are enormously concerned about this. Bill, at that, just one quick question on this: It's my impression, at least, that most of the mail handling is, in fact, automated these days, that only at the beginning and the end of the process do people actually get their hands on it. Is that roughly correct?
[Delaney:] Well, I don't know if that is roughly correct, Aaron. We are told that every piece of mail that comes into a typical post office, like this one here in Brookline, Massachusetts, is handled by no less than a half-a-dozen postal many employees. And, as we have seen in the past couple of days, in the Boston area, for example, we had two post offices evacuated because powders showed up. Somebody touched an envelope and a powder came out of the envelope. In both cases, it turned out to not amount to much. There was one case out in the Midwest where powder came out of an envelope. The building was evacuated. It turned out to be dry pudding someone was being sent as a present. So, yes, a lot of it is automated, but a lot of it also is by hand. And that's why we keep hearing these reports of powders that come out of envelopes and out of packages Aaron.
[Brown:] Bill, thanks Bill Delaney, our Boston bureau chief, in Brookline. Kate Snow, one of our congressional correspondents, is reporting that the public tours of the U.S. Capitol Building have been halted for now. You heard Senator Daschle, actually, talk about this, saying he hoped that wouldn't happen, that we need to keep these buildings open to the public. At least for now we assume for security reasons I think that is fair to assume the Capitol tours have been closed, as security in Washington is very intense now.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Before you know it your 1999 income tax will be due. You fill out the forms, you write a check, you send it all in but what happens next? CNN news source's Keith Oppenheim joins me now at this early hour for a special look at the IRS processing center in Ogden, Utah. Good morning, Keith.
[Keith Oppenheim, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, David. And we're give you a behind the scenes look at this processing center in Ogden, and it's our way of trying to demystify how your tax return is actually handled. We have a number of live cameras posted throughout this massive facility, a building that covers, like, 10 acres and has about something like 6,500 employees during the peak April crunch time. The mail operation that you're looking at here, they take in about 82,000 pieces of mail on average per day, David, although that goes up to 6.7 pieces of mail during those critical April weeks. And what we're going to do right now is give you a sense of the sometimes-complicated adventure a tax return can make.
[Unidentified Female:] We can process on our incoming. We process about 650,000 in a 24-hour time frame.
[Oppenheim:] Then all the envelopes go to what's known as the "Tingle tables," named after an IRS employee who created an ideal desk for sorting, sorting which, the IRS says, is done more effectively by humans than by machines.
[Unidentified Female:] There's too many checks and balances, too many things that the extractors watch for that they can identify right up front.
[Oppenheim:] The simpler EZ forms are scanned and checked for errors. Some EZs and all the more complex returns go to a place called "document perfection," where examiners are looking for problems like missing signatures, schedules and Social Security numbers. If documents are complete, they go to data entry, the process of converting paper returns into the IRS database no easy task for each operator.
[Unidentified Female:] We would approximately do around 350 documents a day, and that would equate to about 50 documents an hour, around 9,000 keystrokes per hour.
[Oppenheim:] In the end, the checks are checked to make sure the amount paid is the same as the amount on the return. Last year, this machine handled plenty of revenue.
[Unidentified Female:] And on our busiest day, it was April 26th, we did $1.1 billion.
[Oppenheim:] Back live now with a view of the Tingle tables, where humans work a little bit more efficiently than machines would. But speaking of machines, the IRS wants folks to file more and more electronically. Last year, David, about 15 percent of taxpayers did e-filing, about 4 percent used a telephone system, but 81 percent did the traditional thing; they filed by paper. And the IRS is trying to change those proportions toward e-filing. Back to you in New York.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, thank you, Keith. And certainly those e-filings will save on a lot of keystrokes, I imagine.
[Oppenheim:] That's right. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] News now from Gainesville, Florida, where a 10-year-old kidnapping victim has been reunited with her family. Jessica Rodriguez's three-day ordeal is over, but the search for clues to her abductor is still going on. CNN's Brian Cabell has the latest.
[Jennifer Graham, Mother:] Oh, Hallelujah. Dear God, thank you Lord, thank you Lord.
[Unidentified Male:] What happened?
[Graham:] They found my baby.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] The good news for Jennifer Graham came three days after her 10-year-old daughter, Jessica, was abducted from her family's driveway after getting off a school bus. It was three long days before a mother and daughter reunion.
[Sheriff David Turner, Gilchrist County, Florida:] Hugs and kisses. She jumped up in mom's arms and wonderful sight.
[Cabell:] According to authorities, the girl walked into a Wal- Mart alone in nearby Gainesville shortly before noon on Thursday. Doctors examined her for several hours at a Gainesville hospital and pronounced her in good condition before discharging her with her mother.
[Thomas Keely, Stepfather:] It's tough, it really is, even though it's over, it's not over because they didn't catch him.
[Cabell:] The suspect allegedly abducted Jessica in a green Jeep Cherokee outside her home in rural central Florida on Monday afternoon.
[Ken Tucker, Florida Law Enforcement Dept:] We are still focusing on the green SUV vehicle with tan interior, and the general description of a white male in his 30s to 40s described as six foot and possibly balding.
[Cabell:] Law enforcement authorities and several family members spent the last few days searching the woods near the family home for the girl. Until Thursday's joyous news, they had found no sign of her. Jessica was reunited with her family last evening at around 7:30. One relative said she looked tired but she also looked happy. She will not be appearing publicly this morning, as was thought. Her mother will be with investigators here at about 10:00 this morning in front of the sheriff's department. Investigators say they've gotten some good leads from her. They talked to her at some length yesterday evening, yesterday afternoon. They also say that in fact this man was a stranger to her; he did not she did not know him. he did not know her, apparently. And they say they will not say at this point whether or not he was he physically harmed her. I'm Brian Cabell, CNN, live in Gainesville, Florida.
[Kagan:] Brian, thank you very much.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] A mixed picture for the Nasdaq big caps there, but not for the index.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] I'll say. And on the heels of the record highs, the Nasdaq experiences its fourth-worst point loss. So aside from upset stomach and indigestion, what does this volatility mean for investors?
[Marchini:] To help answer that question we have technology manager Mark Klee of John Hancock Mutual Funds. Mark, great to see you again. And what exactly was it that we witnessed yesterday?
[Mark Klee, John Hancock Mutual Funds:] You want to know something? I really think it was more the retail investor got spooked out by what went on in Asia, moved on to Europe, and then it came here. Because if you look at what happened on the opening, the Nasdaq was down 209, and we had, actually, a fairly orderly market after that. And as somebody who is not really that concerned with the short- term moves, because I am a long-term investor, I was actually kind of pleased with yesterday's action, overall.
[Marchini:] Were you buying?
[Klee:] Yes, I was. I'm not going to tell you what I was buying, but, yes, I'm actually feeling pretty good about things. I mean, we're very disciplined buyers, and we've been waiting for some periods. And, you know, stocks like Dell have been giving us opportunities for the past few months, and we've been buying and buying and, you know, now we're getting rewarded on that. But I think you have to pick your spots and do it, and I think yesterday gave you those opportunities.
[Haffenreffer:] You said it was the retail investor getting spooked. Hasn't it been the retail investor that's been sort of the stalwart of patience through this the rocky times?
[Klee:] Yes, he really has been all along, and that's sort of the interesting thing about yesterday. I think Mondays, in general, are kind of a strange thing. You read...
[Haffenreffer:] Mondays and Fridays, right?
[Klee:] Yes. Well, Friday afternoons, nobody wants to be long over the weekend, but I think that's more institutional. I think Mondays you read "Barron's" over the weekend, you read the "New York Times" over the weekend, and you walk away from there generally scared because they've had a generally negative tone to them. And then, like I said, you had Asia and Europe on top of that. But the fact that we really rebounded very quickly, and then we sold off towards the end, but I thought it was a generally, orderly market given what's gone on in the last few weeks. I mean, obviously, the last 18 months have been spectacular in technology, but the last few weeks, we've been in another spike. I think we're due for a pause in here.
[Marchini:] Earnings season is coming upon us, and before earning season comes warnings season. What do you think we're going to see?
[Klee:] Actually, I would have thought that we would have a big sell-off in March. I think you and I talked at year-end, what was my forecast for this year, and I thought that we would have a pretty good run through January and February, and then, around mid-March, which is obviously where we are, here we are approaching the ides of March...
[Marchini:] The ides, right.
[Klee:] ... that's it I thought we would get a pretty good selloff because of lack of news and, if anything, bad news just from the preannouncement as we go into that season. I don't think we're going to get many. You know, companies like Oracle that report in the off-season I think are going to report good numbers, and I think they're going to tell you that business is good. And most interesting is the PC business. We have seen good reports starting mid-to-late February, and, if anything, business is improving. So I think we're going to have very few preannouncements.
[Haffenreffer:] You mentioned liking Dell. What other names do you like?
[Klee:] Big caps: America Online, I think, is giving you a big buying opportunity in here. And, you know, the stock has moved up a little bit, but I think you can still buy that. I like Computers Associates, another big-cap name. I'll tell you the truth, I've generally been preferring small-to- mid cap names, but those are a few of the bigger ones. Some of the smaller ones: Applied Science and Technology, Amcore, companies like that in the semiconductors space. And a little special situation, a company called Bluestone Software, which is what's known as a middleware software company, which sort of bridges together different computer systems.
[Marchini:] Mark Klee, don't go far please, we're going to have you back in the next half-hour. I, for one, want to know, as you're out there buying tech, whether you agree with those who believe the old-economy stocks are dead. Don't answer it now, hold that thought.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] In the wake of Wednesday's videotaped police beating story from Philadelphia, how do Americans feel about the police?
[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] Well, Gallup Poll editor-in-chief Frank Newport has been asking that question. He joins us now with some of the answers. Frank, good morning.
[Frank Newport, Editor-in-chief, Gallup Poll:] Good morning, Linda and Leon. In fact, just a couple of weeks ago, we updated our annual Gallup Confidence in Institutions series, which we've been doing for a number of years, where we ask Americans to say how confident are you in a variety of different major institutions in society. Now, in answer to the question, the bottom line is: Police, overall in society, and this is very important given what happened in Philadelphia, still have a great deal of confidence from the average American. Now what we did is we took our long list here and just excerpted it for here, the top five. Interestingly, particularly since the Gulf War, it's been the military which has the most confidence of any institution we test, actually above the organized religion or church. But there comes the police, 54 percent of Americans say they are have quite a lot or some confidence in police, which is very, very high on a relative basis, actually above the Supreme Court and above banks, which form the next two. By the way, at the very bottom of the list are HMOs and Congress. Those are the institutions Americans have the least confidence, and maybe not surprising. Now we've tracked this confidence in police since earlier this decade. Now, remember, Rodney King was in 1991, we started using police in 1993 and it was at 52. And basically hadn't changed a lot. By the middle of the decade it was up to about 60, as you can see. But in the last couple of weeks ago, again, right before the Philadelphia incident I should point out, it was at 54 percent. But, this is a key, and we find it consistently in our data. There is a big gulf between blacks and non-whites in American society and whites in terms of any question we ask about police. Here it is, confidence in police and look at the difference: 57 percent confidence for whites, but for non-whites in American society, primarily African-Americans, you can see 38 percent confidence. So there's that 20-point swing that we consistently find, which might have been, again, exacerbated by that videotape in Philadelphia, with the African-American perpetrator who was being allegedly beaten by the police. One other disturbing trend is age. The younger you are, the lower the confidence in police. Look at those 18 to 29 years over there, only 43 percent, confidence goes up as you get older. That's where the public stands, in terms of confidence in the major institution in our society, police. Back to you in Atlanta, Leon and Linda.
[Harris:] All right, thanks, Frank.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] We begin with the case of missing Washington intern Chandra Levy, who has not been seen or heard from for over two months now. CNN's Bob Franken joins us from Washington with the latest in the mystery. Bob, what can you tell us a little bit more about this third possible police interview with Congressman Condit?
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] That's becoming more and more probable. The police investigators have determined that Congressman Gary Condit, who of course has been so prominently mentioned here in his relationship with Chandra Levy, so thoroughly discussed, that he possibly has information that he still has not been asked about, has not contributed that might in fact, give them some idea of where Chandra Levy is. Chandra Levy, of course, the 24-year-old former Washington intern, not an intern for Condit, but somebody who has been repeatedly discussed as possibly having a romantic relationship with the congressman, something that the congressman through his spokespeople have up to now denied. In any case, the police have interviewed Condit twice. By all accounts he has been cooperative although he did by several accounts refuse to answer certain questions about the relationship. The police do say that while they have no plans at the moment, no specific plans, to ask for a third interview, that Congressman Condit may probably be asked to talk with them again.
[Kelley:] Bob, the congressman's wife has also been interviewed.
[Franken:] Carolyn Condit was interviewed. What happened was, the first time Condit talked to the police he did not mention the fact that his wife had been in town during that same period when Chandra Levy disappeared. So, police decided they wanted to talk with her. There was a contracted negotiation before, on July 4, they secreted of Modesto where the congressman did not appear in the Fourth of July parade. In fact, they were on their way to Washington, where, in a suburb of Washington the next day Mrs. Condit spent about three hours being interviewed by FBI agents and more importantly the D.C. police investigators who are leading this. We have been told by sources that the time was spent with a moment by moment description of what she was doing when she was in Washington, when she was with her husband, when she was not and at those points where they were not in fact together they would go back and try and find out if the congressman could account for his time. That was what happened during that interview.
[Kelley:] Bob, have they started looking at those other places, they were going to expand the search to some other places for Chandra Levy, have they started that yet?
[Franken:] Oh, golly, they are all over the country.
[Kelley:] But I mean the other part that they talked about with the landfills and some of those around D.C.?
[Franken:] Actually they have not done the landfills. For those who might not be following this so closely, all two or three of them, the police have decided that they are going to take meaning exactly what they say, to landfills in the area where garbage is dumped. They want to look. They realize that sounds ominous. They repeatedly say that it is not as ominous as is sounds. They have not concluded that Chandra Levy met foul play. They just want to expand all possibilities. They were not able to make those arrangements this week. Apparently it is not that easy to get these specially trained dogs. But they expect sometime next week they are going to actually begin doing that.
[Kelley:] OK, Bob Franken, thanks very much for the information as usual.

[Larry King:] Tonight as U.S. forces pound terrorist targets in Afghanistan for a second day, an anthrax scare in Florida has people lining up for tests and preventative treatments. Joining us from Tallahassee, Florida secretary of health Dr. John Agwunobi. From Washington, with startling new information, on how two people may have come in contact with the legal germ, "Newsweek's" ace, journalist Michael Isikoff. Also in D.C., Homeland security expert, Colonel Randy Larson, United States Air Force retired, and with him counterterrorism expert Larry Johnson, former CIA officer. Also in Washington, Senator Richard Shelby, vice chairman of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, and Congresswoman Jane Harman ranking member of the new subcommittee on terrorism and homeland security. Plus, Pulitzer prizewinning journalist and best-selling author Bob Woodward "The Washington Post," and Walter Cronkite former anchor of the "CBS Evening News," long know as America's most trusted man. They are all next, on LARRY KING LIVE! Good Evening. The headlines of tonight: The Pentagon says the first wave of strikes hit more than 30 targets including early warning radars, Taliban ground forces, and military command sites. The attorney general warned Americans be alert but not panicky as the United States tightens security. And the FBI investigates the case of a Florida man found to have been exposed to anthrax. We begin with Dr. John Agwunobi, the secretary of health to state of Florida. He joins us from Tallahassee. We know that one is dead. Can you explain what you mean, Doctor, by "exposed to."
[Dr. John Agwunobi, Florida Health Secretary:] Yes, perhaps I can. We have an individual, he is actually 73 years of age, who was found not to have classical symptoms of anthrax, but was found to have signs of having anthrax spores in his nostrils, his nasal cavities.
[King:] Meaning that he could develop it worst?
[Agwunobi:] Theoretically, given time he could have actually developed full blown anthrax.
[King:] When you see something like this, as a health official, what's the first thing you suspect? Someone is dead, another person has early spores. What is first thing a health official thinks?
[Agwunobi:] As a health official. It is clearly worrying, worrisome. Especially when we have more than one individual. However, we have no real answer as to how this has come about. We are investigating, fortunately with a very good, strong team. We have individuals from the CDC, from the state and from our local teams working together, and we are investigating really vigorously. But as of now, we still don't have an answer.
[King:] Does it have to be, Doctor, delivered by someone?
[Agwunobi:] We don't have an answer to that question either. We are pursuing all leads, and there are many different possibilities for how this could come about. We are looking at them all.
[King:] The building in which both men worked is the American Media Building and you have closed that building, right?
[Agwunobi:] That is correct, sir. We felt that given the fact that we had two samples that were positive: one in the original case, who went on to die, and the other in this most recent 73-year-old male, in addition to that, we found a sample of anthrax on the keyboard of the index case. Given that cluster of information, we decided that it was prudent to evaluate all of the employees in that building to see if anyone else had been exposed and to offer protection using prophylactic antibiotics.
[King:] How long does the evaluation take?
[Agwunobi:] The evaluation, sir, of, I'm sorry.
[King:] Of the employees.
[Agwunobi:] Ah, yes. Well we are hoping within a day or two we should have gotten to all of the employees and provided them with education, access to any informational questions they might need to have answered and to have give them antibiotics.
[King:] And do you work closely with the FBI on something like this?
[Agwunobi:] We do. Typically we do, and in actual fact this building is also current the building that we were speaking of is actually being evaluated in some detail, as you can imagine, by the FBI, even as we speak.
[King:] Is antibiotic the known treatment?
[Agwunobi:] Yes, sir. Yes, it is. Antibiotics are known to be quite effective if used very early on in the course of disease. However they are less effective once the symptoms have occurred.
[King:] Have you seen any other case of this in your career?
[Agwunobi:] I haven't, personally. In fact, very few physicians in the United States have. There are not that many cases. It is very rare. It is not contagious. And it is just just not seen that often.
[King:] Thank you, Doctor. Dr. John Agwunobi, the Florida state secretary of health. Joining us now in Washington is Michael Isikoff, the famed investigative correspondent for "Newsweek" magazine. There is a very compelling article posted today on "Newsweek's" Web site that deals with how all of this may have started. Give us the insight here, Michael. What do you report? What happened?
[Michael Isikoff, "newsweek":] A couple things: No. 1 that the individual who is now hospitalized, and being examined, who did have the anthrax spore, is a 73-year-old mail clerk in the building. He is a Cuban-American, described as a sweet little man, who delivers mail and packages to reporters and editors in the building and would have delivered any letters or packages received by Bob Stevens, the photo editor of the "Sun" tabloid who died last Friday. So that and whose anthrax spores found on his keyboard. So that sort of connects the two individuals being looked at here. The question the FBI, which is taking this very seriously, is examining is, how would how would the transmission have worked? They are looking at any letters and packages that would have arrived at the building in the last few weeks. They are also looking at people who would have had access to the building or known how to deliver something to the building, including former company employees and interns.
[King:] That is a building where the "Inquirer," the "Sun," the "Star" are printed, right?
[Isikoff:] Right, it essentially houses just about every supermarket tabloid in the country from the high end "National Inquirer," and "Star" to the low end, "News of the World"
[King:] Now what's the story about this that letter came prior to September 11, kind of a weird love letter to Jennifer Lopez that contained a powdery substance?
[Isikoff:] Right, well a couple things. No. 1 is, given the nature of these publications, they get letters to and about celebrities like Jennifer Lopez all the time. Some company employees do remember hearing about a letter that had some sort of foamy substance attached to it, and are suggesting that there might be a connection there. The FBI is also very interested, as I said before, in people who had access to the building, and including there is a couple of interns they are aggressively hunting down, including one who seemed to send a weird e-mail just upon his departure at the end of the summer. The individual is of Middle Eastern extraction, so that obviously has popped out. But nobody has got any hard answers here yet. The one thing you know is, you have the mail room clerk, and the guy who gets deliveries from mail room clerk.
[King:] What was weird about the message from the departing intern?
[Isikoff:] Well, one, and this is variously remembered by different employees. One of the problems here is that the email, the computer system has been shut down with the entire building being sealed. So nobody had actually a hard copy or access to the e-mail, but we did talk to several employees and editors of the newspaper, who remembered it slightly differently. But all said that there was some reference to that one described it as a sense of foreboding about it, that the former intern was sort of seemed to be warning about a surprise, or saying that he was going to have a surprise for company employees there. But, again, nobody has got a hard copy. We can't quote from it exactly. And, you know, needless to say, nobody has been charged in this.
[King:] Michael, you are a veteran of investigative journalism. Where does this, what does this feel like to you? Where is the texture going?
[Isikoff:] Well, you know, I think all of us, you know, in media, have been trying to go and bend over backwards not to be too alarmist here. And, you know, until today, I think if you read most of the coverage, everybody has plenty of caveats about, let's not get hysterical about it. But if you talk to anybody today who sees the coincidence of the two situations in the same building and the same company at the same time, a disease that is exceedingly rare in the country, and they say this one does feel serious, this does feel real. Now, again, that doesn't necessarily mean that this is a highly sophisticated attack. In fact, one question is why more people have not come down with symptoms by now. Especially if it was something timed to September 11. You would have expected to see if this agent was delivered around the time of the September 11 attacks, you would have expected to see a lot more company employees coming down with symptoms of the disease. So there is still a lot we don't know yet.
[King:] Thank you, Michael. Michael Isikoff, investigative correspondent, "Newsweek" magazine, posted on the Web site today. Colonel Randy Larson, United States Air Force [Ret], expert with things like this will be with us. As we go to break, the Attorney General John Ashcroft answers questions on the topic we have been talking about. Watch.
[John Ashcroft, Attorney General:] We regard this as an investigation which could become a clear criminal investigation. And we are pursuing this with with all the dispatch and care that is appropriate relying on the expertise of the Centers for Disease Control, and health authorities.
[King:] What you are seeing on your screen is the latest pictures we have of the latest strike in Afghanistan, occurring a little while ago, this evening. Joining us now in Washington is Colonel Randy Larson, United States Air Force [Ret.], he is the director of the Answer Institute for Homeland Security, a nonprofit public research institute. Formerly served as the chairman of the department of military strategy and operations at the National War College. He has briefed Vice President Cheney and key members of Congress, and the military. Colonel Larson, how concerned are you about this anthrax story?
[Colonel Randall Larsen, United States Air Force:] Well, this is clearly a troubling story. I have been looking at biological warfare for seven years and this is the day I have not been looking forward to. But we have to keep this in perspective. First of all, this seems to be a very low tech sort of an attack, if it is attack. It hasn't been confirmed yet, but I just don't think there is any chance this could be naturally occurring. It is low tech. This is not a Tom Clancy type scenario. It is treatable with antibiotics. It is not contagious. It does not pass from human to human. And the most important thing is, it has been detected early and that is the most important thing we have learned about biological warfare, is early detection.
[King:] How concerned should we be as a country, should mothers and parents and children be about this threat?
[Larsen:] We are in a war right now, Larry. We are in a serious war with an evil enemy. I think biological attacks are some of the least likely attacks, particularly like I say, the Tom Clancy scenario, we may see some small scale attacks likes this. The most likely thing we are going to see are like car bombs and those sorts of conventional attacks. Biological warfare is possible. We need to understand that in the 21st century. But it is also still very difficult to do, even if you can manufacture it, you still have to deliver it, and that is a challenge. The good news is we have had some incredible people in this country working on this for several years, like Dr. Scott Lillybridge right now, who I'm sure has been going 24-7 for quite a few days right now. And other folks, like Dr. Bob Cadillac, who handles BW programs at the Pentagon. These folks have been working on this for years, and we are much better prepared for this today than we were two years ago, and far better prepared than we just three months ago.
[King:] Colonel, if forewarned is forearmed, would it be a good idea to have a supply of antibiotics on hand, to have a gas mask? How could it hurt?
[Larsen:] Two weeks ago, when I got the question about the gas masks, I said don't waste your time. I have changed my tone a little bit, Larry. I said look, if it will lower your blood pressure, if it will make you sleep better at night, go ahead and buy a gas mask. But understand, you need wear it 24 hours a day! There is no indication about when there is a biological attack. It is not like an explosion or a chemical attack where people are going to fall down in the street. So, there are some folks during flu season in Japan, they walk around with little gauze masks and I am sure there is some psychological benefit there, maybe some medical benefit. But if you really want to feel better about yourself, and you want to help America, instead of spending money on a gas mask, giving that money to the USO to help take care of out troops out there fighting a war tonight and their families at home.
[King:] The Answer Institute, which you are director, is the Institute for Homeland Security. It is a nonprofit public research that you can get on the net at homelandsecurity.org. What does it do?
[Larsen:] Well, we have been around for about two years, Larry. We have been very concerned about the national security equation has changed. Small states and some nonstate actors, as we saw on 11th of September can bring enormous damage, enormous threats to the United States. Right now, our national security apparatus is designed on the national security act of 1947. That was a pretty good model for the Cold War. I'm not sure that is what we need for the 21st century. I'm very encouraged with the developments we had today. Governor Ridge was the right man for this job.
[King:] Because?
[Larsen:] Oh, several reasons. First of all, he is very good friends with President Bush. I know he is going to have the president's ears. If he gets frustrated by bureaucratic roadblocks, he is going to call the president. Second of all he is a governor. For most of a history of this nation we have looked directly to the federal government for national security. In the 21st century that national security is going to require a partnership of federal, state, county and municipal governments. He is a governor. He knows these sorts of things. This is primarily a state response going on in Florida. What happened in New York City on the 11th of September was state response. So this is a new environment, we need new structures, new organizational structures here to respond to this security threat.
[King:] By the way, are there are elements worse than Anthrax?
[Larsen:] Sure. We did an exercise called Dark Winter that has received a lot of publicity. That is an exercise we did with Senator Sam Nunn, and former CIA director Jim Woolsey back in June. People hear about that and it has caused some concern in town. They need to understand, that is a very unlikely scenario. The chance of a small pox attack are virtually nil. We chose that as a model so that we could stress the system between the federal and state government to see how we could learn to respond. The most likely sorts of things are like anthrax, or plague, or tuarevia. And they are all treatable with antibiotics. The most important thing is early detection. And that is why citizens need be alert. And one thing I'd like to say, a lot of people ask me, what can I do, as a private citizen? One thing is if I lived in the Florida area tonight around this location, and I had a pet or an animal die in the last couple weeks, I would report that. That is something we learned during the West Nile virus episode is that crows were dying and falling in the street and no one reported them. We learned a good lesson from that: Animals are good sentinels. Dr. Tracy McNamera at the Bronx Zoo broke the story on West Nile Virus. She is a real hero in that story.
[King:] Colonel Larsen will remain with us and we will be joined by Larry Johnson who was with us last night, our terrorism expert and former CIA officer. You are watching LARRY KING LIVE. Lots more to come. Don't go away.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Together we will confront the threat of terrorism. We'll take strong precautions aimed at preventing terrorist attacks. And prepare to respond effectively if they might come again. We will defend our country. And while we do so, we will not sacrifice the freedoms that make our land unique.
[King:] Colonel Randy Larsen remains with us. We are joined now by Larry Johnson, terrorism expert and former CIA officer. Larry, what's your read on this anthrax story in Florida?
[Larry Johnson, Terrorism Expert:] Well, let's just assume for a moment, Larry, that it is the worst case, that it is terrorism. What do we see? We see that you only have one dead, you have one who has been discovered, and then in the last hour you have had more people die in automobile accidents. So I think Colonel Larsen was exactly dead on. We need to put it in context because the public health system now is up on it toes and very alert and very responsive. And one of the things we do have in this country despite concerns in the past about health care, is very competent capable people, that when you give them a target to go after, they are very thorough.
[King:] What is bin Laden's capabilities in this area, Larry?
[Johnson:] Very limited. He would have to basically get it from someone else, the countries in the region that have it, Iraq probably still has it, Iran, or he would have to buy it from the Russians or the Chinese. And I think really Russians and Chinese have been very remiss to sell it. So it is not the kind of thing that, you know, a devilish Betty Crocker can do by putting on an apron and whipping it up in the garage. I just doesn't happen that way.
[King:] Before we take call or two, we will ask Colonel Larsen and then you, greatest vulnerability in terms of homeland defense Colonel?
[Larsen:] Oh, I think the greatest vulnerability is the traditional terrorist attack, using car bombs, truck bombs, suicide bomber with dynamite around him. That is why folks need to be very alert right now. I tell people, don't be panicky, don't be overly nervous, but be alert like we used to teach our troops in Vietnam. Stay alert, stay alive. If you are in an airport terminal or a shopping mall you see a somebody set down a briefcase and quickly walk away grab a security officer, grab a police officer. Stay alert.
[King:] Would you agree, Larry?
[Johnson:] I would take a slightly different tact. I think our biggest threat comes we've got so many different agencies and organizations of well meaning people, but the way to share the information between them sometimes gets bogged down in bureaucracy. I think once we can start breaking those walls down, people are going to feel a little more certain and confident that the government look, the government is not sitting here right now like a sleepy Maytag repairman. They are out there. They are alert and we need to harness all of those capabilities together, because from the first responders up through the federal level, you've got a lot of very good hardworking, well intentioned folks.
[King:] Let's take a call. Saint Augustine, Florida, hello.
[Caller:] My question was, we heard these anthrax spores were found in a newspaper printing office in Florida. What are odds that these kind of spores could now be being printed along with our issue of "The National Inquirer," and distributed?
[King:] Colonel Larsen, could someone tomorrow buy a paper and pick up anthrax?
[Larsen:] No that is not a problem. The Army has done a tremendous amount of research on what he is talking about. There is a technical term called secondary aerosolization. And it is just not a highly likely thing. The simple forms of anthrax which we would expect an organization like Osama bin Laden to have would be a liquid slurry which is very difficult to dispense. It is like
[King:] Prior Lake, Minnesota, hello hello?
[Caller:] Hello.
[King:] Go ahead. Turn your TV down and go.
[Caller:] OK, I had a question regarding the crop duster.
[King:] Yes.
[Caller:] The crop dusters, when they fly, if these guys were going to take the crop dusters, what do you think they would have put in there?
[King:] Larry?
[Johnson:] I would just be it would it be just a wild guess. I would go more for a chemical than a biological agent. Chlorine is more readily accessible and can be just as damaging as a chemical agent, but I think people need it is understandable that you fear the unknown, and it is natural. But, we need to take big deep breath a step back, because the federal government, and state and local governments are paying attention to this now and we don't have to worry so much in a heightened state of vigilance. I'm concerned when 10 months and a year and a half from now when nothing is happening and we say, no threats, let's forget about it. Then we have to worry.
[Larsen:] I agree with that, Larry.
[King:] Do you? good. Well said. St. Catherines, Ontario, hello.
[Caller:] Hello there. I'm just wondering, the Taliban are known for their illicit drug trade and the government regulating. I am just wondering whether they can put biological weapons in the drug trade for people to inhale and use.
[Larsen:] I don't think that is a very likely scenario at all about putting it in the drug trade. I haven't heard of that, haven't thought about a way you would do that to have an effective delivery system.
[King:] Larry, are we overblowing this? Is the media giving it too much attention?
[Johnson:] Well, I think listen, if you can identify, there has been one person that has died from anthrax. I would like to know the number of people that have died from asthma attacks and heart attacks brought on by the media reports. Candidly, I being it is important that the media report it and report it accurately and as you are doing tonight, you are having a very balanced discussion hearing from a lot of voices. But we shouldn't make people think that it is the boogyman that is going to jump up and get them. There are enough other things in the world be afraid about without going overboard.
[King:] Tifton, Georgia, Hello.
[Caller:] Larry, my question is how long will the spores live and can they be removed from building?
[King:] Colonel.
[Larsen:] That is one of the problems. When the British tested anthrax weapons back in 1942, it took them about 40 years to clean up that island called Gruenard, off the coast of Scotland. That is why anthrax is considered one of the most biological weapons mother nature produced because that is the one that is very durable.
[King:] Colonel Larsen and Larry Johnson, thank you very much. We will call on both of you again. Very informative portion. As we go to break, before we tonight meet Senator Richard Shelby and Congresswoman Jane Harmon, still to come, Walter Cronkite and Bob Woodward, here is a portion of what Tom Ridge had to say today at his swearing in.
[Tom Ridge, Director, Homeland Security:] There may be in may be gaps in the system. The job of the office of homeland security will be to identify those gaps and work to close them. The size and scope of this challenge are immense. The president's executive order states that we must detect, prepare for, prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks. An extraordinary mission. But we will carry it out.
[King:] We now welcome two distinguished members of the Congress joining us: Senator Richard Shelby is a Republican of Alabama and is vice chairman of the Select Intelligence Committee and Congresswoman Jane Harman Democrat of California, a member of the Select Intelligence Committee and a ranking member of the subcommittee on terrorism, and homeland security. Senator Shelby, are you concerned about this anthrax thing?
[Sen. Richard Shelby , Vice Chairman, Select Intelligence Committee:] Absolutely. I think we should leave no stone unturned until we get to the bottom of this. I believe between the FBI and the Center for Disease Control, they can do it. And the sooner the better, because it will make a lot of people in America probably get to the point of panic and we don't want to do this. But we need to find out where it came from and what the solution is to it now.
[King:] Congresswoman, how do you balance that fear with trying to live ordinary lives?
[Rep. Jane Harman , Select Intelligence Committee:] There is no option, Larry. We are alive, and if we hide under our beds we become what the terrorists would hope to make us, which is, we end our style of life as we know it. And I am against that. Let me just say about this attack, though. There could be another one tomorrow, there could be something else on Thursday. This may be the beginning of a second wave of attacks, and rather than careen from one attack to the next, I think it is imperative that we give Governor Ridge, real authority starting tomorrow, if we can pass a law tomorrow, but certainly this week, so that he can force all of the agencies of the federal government, and I mean force, to comply with a national strategy plan that he needs to develop as quickly as possible, so that we understand, we Americans understand where our real threats are, how we are going to respond, how we are going to preempt, protect, et cetera, et cetera, and I don't think we are getting there.
[King:] Senator.
[Shelby:] I believe what Congresswoman Harman is talking about makes a lot of sense. I believe myself that some of us need to talk to Tom Ridge, Governor Ridge, and let him find out what he needs and we should give him the tools to do the job. I believe myself that he is going to need statutory authority. He is going to have to have a lot more power than he can get by an executive order.
[King:] Are you concerned, both of you, about the assessment of whether we are ready or not, whether the United States is ready for biological warfare Jane?
[Harman:] Well, I think some parts of our country are ready. I come from Los Angeles County as you know, Larry and we have a very good terrorist early warning group there and we have substantial public health capacity and a very good responder network that can identify these kinds of threats. Is the whole country ready yet? I don't think so. Should we be doing things like perhaps putting sensor in new buildings? That's the recommendation of Judith Miller in her new book "Germs" maybe we should. But again, consistent with a new threat assessment the one we have is four years old and a strategy that builds off that threat assessment so that we are spending our dollars wisely so that every agency of government is on the same page.
[Shelby:] Larry...
[King:] How prepared are we?
[Shelby:] I don't think we are that prepared, but we can get better prepared. We have, for example, what we call the "First Responders Program," where we are training people to deal with under the Justice Department auspices to deal with chemical and biological warfare. But we haven't done enough. As a matter of fact, we were able to double the budget this year. And I think we ought to look at it even for more, because now we realize, finally, that the threat of chemical and biological warfare is really real.
[King:] Where is all the money coming from?
[Harman:] Congress is spending a lot of money these days, Larry, as you've noticed. We've got $40 billion as a response to the horror of New York and the Pentagon, and a lot of that money could go for perhaps to Alabama where that training facility is that Senator Shelby mentioned. But it also needs to go into breakthrough drugs, into ways to recognize new chemical and biological agents, into new technologies. I'm for spending at least a billion or more dollars additional on some of these issues.
[Shelby:] Larry, what we have to do is do what we have got to do now to prepare and also to prepare the American people, and prepare our people everywhere to deal with any threats that we have. This is a different type of war. Is not going to be cheap. It is not going to be short. But it is one we have to win.
[King:] Knowing about red tape, Senator Shelby, do you think Ridge can put all these things together? Can information clear easily?
[Shelby:] That is going to be a problem, Larry. You raise something very central. I think we've got to knock down a lot of the regulations, perhaps some of the laws dealing with stove-piping information. The Congresswoman and I have both served on the intelligence committees. We know and we have seen this and seen the impediments. Governor Ridge is a very able man. He is I served in the House with him. I know him. He had a great career as a Governor. He has got an awesome responsibility. What we should do is give him the tools, whatever it takes, for homeland defense.
[Harman:] Let me add to that, Larry. I worked in a White House. I worked in The Carter White House. I understand the turf battles that are endemic to the place. Governor Ridge said today in his press conference "the only turf we should be worried about protecting is the turf we stand on." Lofty ideal. Won't happen. He needs tools now, because all the other Cabinet secretaries who have been in place for nine months are protecting their turf this evening. Tomorrow when he shows up for work, he may have less turf than he had today.
[King:] The president expressed concern over Congressional leaks. Senator Shelby, what do you make of that? That means people in your bailiwick and on the other side of the lips there in Washington are spreading rumors or giving information out.
[Shelby:] Well, we have had a problem with leaks. I have been one to push legislation, as you know, to try to come up with some other criminal penalty to tighten laws on leaks. have people killed. They destroy programs. And I believe that they need to tighten up, and we need to do something about people who really leak, because they are going to have our people killed.
[King:] Versailles, Kentucky. I'm sorry Versailles, Kentucky. Hello. Caller: Hi. I'm not so afraid what I have been informed of. But what I am afraid of is what I have not been informed of, hearing possibly that the World Trade Center that we knew that there was going to be a terroristic threat amongst that United States. And had the people at the World Trade Center known that, they would have not told them it was safe to go back to work. They would have said, "evacuate the building" had they known that there had been this possible threat made against the United States. The question is, should we have known, Senator Shelby?
[Shelby:] Well, we didn't know. And if we did know and if we didn't heed the warnings, then we've got problems. But we have had too many intelligence failures. The last one was the big one, but we have had some. I have talked about it on this show. I don't believe we can stand another one.
[Harman:] We have also had some intelligence successes, Larry. The millennium threat didn't materialize. I'm not excusing any failures that occurred on September 11th, but it is a tough line of work, the hardest target there is.
[King:] OK. Senator, do you by were a the way, do you both of you do you have a gas mask, Senator Shelby?
[Shelby:] I don't have a gas mask. I believe that everything is going to be all right at end of the day, if we stay alert. I might be wrong. But I'm not going panic. I'm going to fly. I'm going to go to work. And I'm going to go to the stores and I'm going to go to wherever I need to go. Because otherwise, if we hunker down and we hide, the terrorists win.
[Harman:] You bet.
[King:] What do you make of this the feds asking Hollywood for terrorist scenarios, Congresswoman? At the behest of the Army, an ad hoc group of top Hollywood filmmakers and writers convened at the University of Southern California to brainstorm about possible antiterrorist schemes. Is that a little science fiction or a good idea?
[Harman:] I think it's a good idea. These are folks who think about this all the time. Everyone invokes Tom Clancy. He thought of a lot of this before others of us did. But again, I think we need a national strategy. We can't ad hoc this anymore. We're going to careen from one threat to another threat. And the critical thing is that Governor Ridge be given power this week to reject agency budgets inconsistent with a national strategy and he finally compels this government to be integrated and coordinated, in the way that it prevents deals with terrorist threats and attacks.
[King:] We'll be right back.
[Shelby:] Larry, this is...
[King:] Hold on one second. We'll be right back. Let's take this quick break. Don't go away. Before we talk with Bob Woodward, Senator Shelby, are you telling the public, don't be wary, but don't be too wary?
[Shelby:] That would be good, Larry. Be alert. Be aware of possible attacks. But don't panic and don't hide. If we do this, we can rebuild our confidence. We will rebuild America and we can win this war.
[King:] Congresswoman, are you saying the same thing?
[Harman:] I'm saying the same thing. And I'm also saying to all the kids out there, your parents are concerned for you. But we will assure you that you have the opportunities in your life that we had in ours, and this will be a safer country once we get this threat assessment and national strategy in place, and people are aware of what we're planning to do.
[King:] Thank you, Senator Richard Shelby, Congresswoman Jane Harman. Joining us now from Washington my friend Bob Woodward, Pulitzer Prize- winning journalist, best-selling author, assistant managing editor of the "Washington Post." Where are we now? There's stories seem to be breaking every day. You have broken quite a few in this. We are under we're attacking, we've got anthrax how do we centralize this, Robert?
[Robert Woodward, "the Washington Post:] " Well, I think there are a couple at least there is one known that's comforting in all of this. Going back 10 years, when the first Bush was president, during the gulf war, I wrote a book about that, and went and looked, at all of the public statements, then-President Bush made about what he was doing in the buildup to that war and during that war. And it turned out, even though people thought a lot of it was just rhetoric, he was saying what he was doing. I have found in the first month of the new President Bush, if you look and listen to what he says, he is being quite candid, based on the information we have. He said this is going to be a long war, it is sustained, it is going to we are going to keep it going, it is going to have many parts, and so I I think in a way, the first guide on this oddly enough is what the president is saying.
[King:] You have a cowritten story on the front page today of the "Washington Post" that intelligence officials are warning Congress there is a 100 percent chance of retaliation to this military action.
[Woodward:] That was a couple days ago, and that is what some of the officials said in answer to a question. I think the position of the intelligence community is that there is a very high probability that there will be some sort of retaliation, something will happen. The problem in all of this I don't know that you watched and read the translation of what Bin Laden said after the attacks.
[King:] I did.
[Woodward:] The more I read that, the more I'm confused, quite frankly. There is a lot.
[King:] Because?
[Woodward:] Because what are his goals? What exactly does he want? Is it that he wants the United States not to support Israel? He wants the United States out of Saudi Arabia because somehow the infidels are contaminating the holy sites at Mecca and Medina? Is that what it is about? I'm not sure. Does he want to destroy the United States? Does want to convert the whole world to Islam? What are his capabilities? As we know, there are some of these Bin Laden Al-Qaeda cells in the United States. Are they sleeper cells, like those that were used in the September 11 attacks? We just don't know. And so the the first thing that has got to be done and I think this is kind of the uncomforting unknown what is the other side? What do they really want? What could they do? And I think we have very little information on that that is really good.
[King:] What about, Bob what does journalist do? The president is angry about leaks from classified briefings so he's limited the number of Congresspeople who will get those briefs. When you get a leak how do you measure what I should print or not?
[Woodward:] Whether it informs people, if it is going to get somebody killed, if it is going to disclose intelligence sources, we don't print it. There was an incident where we had something in a story that I had picked up, and one of the senior officials in the government called the managing editor at the "Post," Steve Collins, and said, "I'm going to make a national security argument that you not print this." He gave the reasons, everyone agreed, and it was not published. I think in a time of war, that is the norm if not the absolute rule for most journalists.
[King:] Let's take call for Bob Woodward. South Plains, New Jersey. Hello. Caller: Hi. I have a real problem with actually the media reporting on Osama Bin Laden, playing his cool speeches to America, and possibly giving hints of further destruction from his counterparts here in America. What is the problem you have with it? Caller: Pardon? What is the problem you have with it? caller: I think that we are playing into his hands, I don't think that a man like this should be given air time. I think basically maybe the media could report that he made a tape, and he is happy that he destroyed Americans, and that is about it. But giving him all this airtime seems to be honoring him. Bob.
[Woodward:] It is a number of historians would point out that we should have read Hitler's "Mein Kampf" much more carefully, because then you'd find out what he is up to and what the philosophy is behind it and how far he was willing to go to achieve his ends. And the idea that somehow by giving and I'm sorry I smiled at that but giving Bin Laden air time. I mean, he is not somebody who is running for public office. We need to understand him. And I kept reading that statement, that translation of it, going over it again and again, looking at the tape, because quite frankly I think there is much we don't comprehend in all of this.
[King:] Springville, Utah. Hello.
[Caller:] Hello?
[King:] Go ahead.
[Caller:] Hello? Yes, Mr. King. How are you?
[King:] Fine. What's the question?
[Caller:] The question is, I would like to know what the situation is her,e that we are going into this extreme terrorist move, to send all of 50,000 soldiers into a strange world that should have been cleaned up in the Iraqi part back in '91.
[King:] What's the question?
[Caller:] Papa George.
[King:] What's the question?
[Caller:] Sir?
[King:] What's the question?
[Caller:] The question is, I would like to know why that wasn't done.
[King:] Oh, we're going back to that. Why wasn't that done?
[Woodward:] Well, in the Gulf War it was a U.N. operation and the U.N. resolution simply said that we get the Iraqis out of Kuwait and the mission is accomplished. The mission was not to destroy Saddam Hussein. He had invaded Kuwait. There is much debate about it. There are a lot of people saying, "Gee, they wish the first President Bush had done more." But given the limitations under the U.N. resolution, they achieved what they set out to do. And to somehow extend it and say, "This is the dangerous person. We are going to go and stomp him out." A lot of people in the U.N. would not have supported that at the time.
[King:] What do you make of the anthrax story, Bob?
[Woodward:] I can't tell yet. It is as somebody said, if it was some sort of terrorist attack on the scale of what happened September 11th, it would have spread much more. It would not have been just directed at one building and a few people. And that now appears to be the case. But again, you never can tell. You have to follow every lead in this. What has happened to the world we live in, the threshold for dealing with the inconceivable the truly inconceivable has been extended, and so anything is possible and you have to look real hard.
[King:] How would you describe yourself? Are you, Bob Woodward, very worried?
[Woodward:] Yes. Because you can lay out a scenario. If you make the most pessimistic interpretation of what these people want to do, they are going to sequence a series of other terrorist attacks that probably will take different forms, have different delivery mechanisms, to bring about some form of chaos in this country. Clearly and this is the horror of September 11 they have capacity to do that. They know how to leverage the freedoms in this country against us. You have to be concerned about whether there are groups of people sitting around motels watching football games, who would program themselves for something on a given date. You know, it is totally a different environment. And so instead of being frightened or fearful, I think you have to be very creative and imaginative and try to figure it out. It is the toughest case. I have looked back at Watergate, and say, "In a sense, that was very easy compared to this." This is a stumper.
[King:] Thanks, Bob. We will be calling on you again. Bob Woodward, the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and best-selling author of the "Washington Post." When we come back we are spending the remaining moments with the dean of all of this. Maybe some comfort and some opinions on how we are handling it. Walter Cronkite is next. Don't go away. Joining us from New York, the dean of American broadcast journalists, Walter Cronkite. Thank you so much, Walter. What is the what is your read as to how well the media should or should not handle this anthrax story?
[Walter Cronkite, Journalist:] Well, I think so far it is handling it as well as we can handle it with the knowledge we have and the information we are getting. That is always the question in these matters: do we get enough information that we can do the editorial job of passing on that which the public needs to know. I think so far that we are getting that information.
[King:] You were in Italy when this occurred?
[Cronkite:] I'm afraid I was. I was in Florence the day that the September 11, and we got back here as fast as we could. But that was the first plane out was the following Sunday.
[King:] What was it like for you come back to New York?
[Cronkite:] Well, we came back, and we had a personal experience. We have an apartment down by the United Nations that overlooks the East River and looks downtown. You normally could barely see a corner of the World Trade buildings down there. When we came back just could see a great cloud of smoke and in the evening the red glow of fires still burning. But we opened our windows. The apartment had been closed for a day. We had to shut them instantly, the fumes were so bad. And we're probably three miles north of the World Trade Center.
[King:] Wow.
[Cronkite:] It was not pleasant.
[King:] You've seen many presidents in times of crisis. What's your assessment of President Bush?
[Cronkite:] I think he has been handling this situation extremely well. I think he is surprising those who did not think much of his presidency in the first place, but I think he is putting a lot of the fears about his leadership to rest. Seems to be doing quite a good job of it.
[King:] How about the public's reaction to all of this? I mean, you go back you remember Pearl Harbor.
[Cronkite:] Well, of course, it's much more severe than Pearl Harbor. Pearl Harbor, of course, was great shock to us, but it immediately plunged us into World War II, where we rather expected that some day we would be going. This was the catalyst that did it. We were shocked at the loss of our ships, and of course, at the loss of the great number of our military people, but they were military people., It was an organized attack by a foreign government. This thing is quite different from that. The great toll of lives taken in the civilian population, innocent people who had no thought, no concept of anything like this was about to occur, and then the of course the bravery of the firemen and police and the rescue workers. It has been a great, of course, national event that has ripped all of our hearts, all of our souls, all of our thinking.
[King:] Walter, you have been a strong opponent all your broadcast life of censorship. Is some censorship necessary now?
[Cronkite:] Yes. Very definitely, Larry. The censorship is necessary in covering the military. We should definitely be permitted to cover the military, with even the smallest of units. They can still take care of a reporter and a cameraman, maybe more depending on the size of the unit. But of course, anything that they report, anything they write, anything they put in their cameras in the way of tape, has got to be held for military censorship. The importance of their being there is that American people have the right to know they have the duty to know what their boys and girls are doing in their name, and it must be recorded. It can't be put out immediately without military surveillance, military censorship. But if they are there, they could get that story out eventually. A day later, two days later, a week later, a month later. Even if it's a year later, history will be preserved and we will know how we conducted the war, and with what efficiency we did it. We will know who heroes were, as well as perhaps those who did not do so well.
[King:] You think the public has the patience for the long haul here?
[Cronkite:] I think we do. I think the American people in their immediate reaction to this terrible tragedy have shown the stuff of which they are made. I do not see any reason why we are not ready for long haul. As everybody is saying, they are expecting some other attacks. That is going to strain our fidelity to the job at hand, but I think we've got it in to us do it.
[King:] Do you wish you were reporting now on a daily basis?
[Cronkite:] Sure. I miss being on the front lines of every story. This is of course the biggest story of our time.
[King:] Walter, are you feeling as well as you look?
[Cronkite:] Yeah, I'm still making it.
[King:] We love you. Stay around. Thanks, Walter. Always good seeing you.
[Cronkite:] Thank you.
[King:] Walter Cronkite. Once known as the most trusted man in America. The former anchor of "The CBS Evening News." We will come back, tell you about tomorrow night and talk with Aaron Brown. You are watching LARRY KING LIVE. Don't go away. Tomorrow night on LARRY KING LIVE, among many guests, Senators John Warner and Bob Graham. We turn the proceedings over to Aaron Brown now, who's in Atlanta.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] A mixed picture today for the European stock markets. As we have been reporting through the course of the morning here on AHEAD OF THE CURVE, nine of the 11 OPEC nations have come together and agreed to that they would increase oil production in an effort to bring the world price of oil lower. Lionel Barber of the "Financial Times" standing by in London with more on this story and, I'm sure, a different view as the "Financial Times" normally has. Good morning, Lionel.
[Lionel Barber, News Editor, "financial Times":] Good morning.
[Haffenreffer:] What do you make of this latest oil situation with OPEC?
[Barber:] Well, we are going to run a very big analysis in tomorrow's paper on the OPEC situation. It's a fascinating geopolitical story, really, with the Iranians on one side against the Saudi Arabians who were pressing for a production increase under American pressure. And what we have here is really a split in OPEC. This wasn't necessarily expected beforehand. The questions we're going to ask: One, was the American diplomacy in the run-up to OPEC a little heavy-handed and put the Iranians in a very difficult position? Two, at what point do we think that the price fall will feed through to the pump that's expected? And I think there maybe not until the summer and also not by very much. Three, who is going to perhaps cheat on the quotas which have been agreed in Vienna? And I think there, because there's a difference in the production cut sorry, production increase, that leaves some ample scope for some skirting.
[Haffenreffer:] Are there's some notorius cheaters out there that are going to be watched and sort of kept an eye on and reported on by the "Financial Times"?
[Barber:] Well, this is a family news program, so I think probably I don't want to mention any names there, but I think usually when you have, well, what is a cartel operating, and you have a situation where the two producers, the big boys, are in dispute, that leaves a lot of room for shall we say, some of the smaller ones to have some fun at the expense on the quotas.
[Haffenreffer:] All right. Lionel Barber of the "Financial Times," thanks very much for the insights. We look forward to the piece and the coverage by the "Financial Times." Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] We're marking the fifth anniversary of the Olympic Park bombing with a week-long series on the hunt for suspect Eric Rudolph. Well, today we profile the couple whose home video of the blast was played around the world.
[Unidentified Male:] This is where the party's at. Party of the century, baby.
[Art Harris, Cnn Correspondent:] Robert and Nancy Gee, enjoying the spirit of the 1996 Atlanta Olympics. They keep their video camera rolling to capture history.
[Robert Gee:] Folks were walking up to people they didn't know and just having a couple a couple bits of conversation and then moving on again and having a good time meeting different cultures.
[Unidentified Male:] Are you having a good time?
[Harris:] Just before 1:00 a.m., someone makes a call to 911.
[Unidentified Male:] There is a bomb in Centennial Park.
[Harris:] But that warning never gets passed on. 911 dispatchers are confused when they can't find a reference for Centennial Park. At 1:20 a.m., Nancy and Robert Gee are about 150 feet from what police now call the biggest pipe bomb in U.S. history. Gee's camera is running, but as usual, he holds it to the side, doesn't look through the viewfinder.
[Gee:] I don't remember the sound and the light so much as I remember the asphalt shaking. A shock wave rippled through the asphalt and then you hear the muffled boom almost immediately following that.
[Unidentified Male:] Let's go.
[Harris:] The bomb killed one woman and injures more than a hundred. The Gee's are lucky.
[Gee:] It was probably the density of the crowd that saved us.
[Harris:] He sees a T-shirt torn into bandages, a victim nearby covered in blood. They rewind, see they've caught the explosion on tape. They try to give their footage to police, say they're ignored so take it across the street to
[Cnn. Gee:] I was talking to Nancy without the camera held up, you know, to my eye. It was just you know about this position when the explosion went off.
[Harris:] They recall how they were first questioned.
[Gee:] They were all very curious as to how we had accidentally caught this tape so perfectly of the explosion.
[Harris:] His memories are bittersweet, he says: of the victims, frightened cops, families racing kids out of the park, the survivors
[Gee:] I'll always remember that as my favorite image of the night, you know, you dancing in the fountain. That was great.
[Harris:] And her favorite memory, she tells Robert, just being here with you. Art Harris, CNN, Atlanta.
[Mcedwards:] And tomorrow our bombing series is going to focus on Alice Hawthorne, who was killed in the Olympic Park bombing in Atlanta back in 1996. And on Sunday, "CNN PRESENTS" will air the documentary: "The Hunt for Eric Rudolph." That is at 10:00 p.m. Eastern. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] An important federal court case today for Elian Gonzalez, the 6-year-old Cuban boy who has been the United States for the last three months. The judge is expected to have a hearing on whether to agree with an INS decision to return the boy to Cuba, or to allow him to have a political asylum hearing. Joining us now is Jeffrey Leving, he is an attorney representing the interests of the boy's father in Cuba. Good morning, Jeffrey.
[Jeffrey Leving, Attorney For Father Of Elian Gonzalez:] Good morning.
[Lin:] What do you expect from today's hearing, any sort of decision?
[Leving:] Well, I believe that the judge will likely make a decision concerning whether or not he will dismiss the case for an alleged lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The government does have a pleading before the court in which they are seeking that the court dismiss this case for a lack of jurisdiction.
[Lin:] What do you think is your strongest argument going into this hearing?
[Leving:] Well, if the case is dismissed for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction, then at that point in time the court may not hear other motions. There is a possibility, a slight possibility, that the court could hear my motion on temporary custody because I believe the opposition will appeal this, and the child needs to be somewhere in the meantime, and I want the child to be with my client.
[Lin:] Jeffrey Leving, one of the questions that has arisen about Elian Gonzalez's case is the status of the boy himself. He has now lived with his family for the last three months. The argument has been made that, given the amount of trauma he has been through, he's better off at this point staying where he is.
[Leving:] Well if you read the pleading I filed with the court, the key pleading I filed, you'll see that that is not my belief, and that is not what I have in my pleading, and I do address and raise the issue of possible parental alienation in my pleading. I am concerned in the psychological stability and protecting the psychological health of little Elian.
[Lin:] Have you spoken with the boy?
[Leving:] I have not, but obviously my client has had contact with him, as he is his great uncle and loves him dearly.
[Lin:] Any sign of psychological trauma?
[Leving:] Well, obviously, I'm not a psychiatrist, but my opinion is, this boy obviously needs to stabilize, after all he's gone through, and I believe the best way for any child in his situation to stabilize is through familiarity, and familiarity in a situation like this is best met through stability through the surviving parent.
[Lin:] All right, Jeffrey Leving, representing Elian Gonzalez's father's interests. Elian Gonzalez's father still remains in Cuba. Thank you very much for joining us this morning.

[Stuart Varney, Cnn Anchor:] Tonight on
[Moneyline:] the Nasdaq slammed again and airline stocks plummet on the Big Board. Will this be worst year for stocks in a decade? We'll ask star strategist Abby Cohen. Dragging on the techs: Apple, after so-so news on sales. We'll ask CEO Steve Jobs whether his flashy new PCs will get the same reception in stores as they did today at Macworld. Once the boy wonder on Wall Street, now the white knight at Bank One: Can Jamie Dimon rescue a floundering giant? We'll have a special interview. And: high season for low-brow humor; A top-grossing trend sweeping Madison Avenue and Hollywood.
[Announcer:] This is MONEYLINE. Reporting tonight from New York, Stuart Varney.
[Varney:] Good evening, everyone, and welcome to MONEYLINE. Willow is off tonight. We have a great show for you tonight, including interviews with Abby Cohen and three leading chief executives, but first, our top story: techs in trouble again. The Nasdaq today tumbled for the second-straight session on big declines in Microsoft, Apple and Intel. All of these companies reported better-than-expected profits after the bell last night. But today, Wall Street looked behind those headlines and didn't seem to like what it saw. The result: The Nasdaq is now back in the red for the year. Greg Clarkin reports.
[Greg Clarkin, Cnn Correspondent:] A jarring sell-off of technology stocks as investors soured on the sector; analysts say some of the blame goes to Microsoft. They reported growth that slowed in its core PC business, a situation not expected to change any time soon. Microsoft helped pull the Nasdaq lower by 121 points, or almost 3 percent. But market watchers cautioned against reading too much into the drop.
[Clark Yingst, Prudential Securities:] Given the very strong move last week, it's our best guess on our trading desk that this is simply profit-taking on the good news. These stocks were ahead of themselves in the technical bases.
[Clarkin:] Microsoft shares tumbled almost 7 percent. Intel beat estimates, but with help from selling investments. Its stock fell as well. Veritas beat street estimates, but came in short of the whisper number. It plunged. Commerce One topped estimates, but not the lofty expectations of some investors. It fell sharply. And competitor, Ariba, slipped with it. The Dow slipped 43 points to close at 10696. The batch of blue chips posted earnings: Coca-Cola rebounding from a recent slump. Citigroup and Boeing beat estimates. But United Technologies, despite reporting a few pennies better than expected, lost ground in the market. And it was a brutal day for airline stocks: United fell. UAL has labor problems, and it said the second half of the year looks weak. American's parent, AMR, fell. And US Airways came in far short of earnings estimates due to higher cost. One of Big Board's bright spots was Bank One. It rose on details of its restructuring. All of these earnings report and the news leaves investors with lot to digest.
[Mary Farrell, Painewebber:] We have what was perceived as disappointing revenues on Microsoft, good earnings on Intel, on Apple's part. So you can see, there's really a lack of direction as the market's attempting to respond to what seems to be an ever- changing earnings climate.
[Clarkin:] Now, smack in the middle of all this arrives Mr. Greenspan. The Fed chairman will brief the Senate Banking Committee tomorrow on the economy. And with Wall Street spilt on whether the Fed hikes rates again next month, you can bet his 10:00 a.m. appearance on Capitol Hill receives a lot of attention Stuart.
[Varney:] You can bet on it, Greg Clarkin, thanks very much. Microsoft and Intel today were hardly alone on the list of big- cap Nasdaq losers. Apple lost more than 4 12 points4. As for WorldCom, down more than a point. And fiber-optic hotshot, JDS Uniphase tumbled more than 4 12, but it is rallying in after-hours trading. And chip-maker, PMC-Sierra plunged more than 18. Now, to the Dow industrials; lower today as well. But there were some notable winners there; Disney, for example4. Citigroup up more than a point after beating the street with profits. And Philip Morris was up 1 14. As for Procter & Gamble2 today. Now, if today's reaction to those tech profit reports was any indication, investors could be in for another rocky ride tomorrow. After the bell, IBM, beat second-quarter estimates by six cents a share. But like Microsoft, sales growth left a lot to be desired. Still, IBM shares jumped more than 5 12 points in active, after-hours trading. Bruce Francis has been crunching the numbers and he joins us now with the very latest Bruce.
[Bruce Francis, Cnn Correspondent:] Stuart, for this quarter, expectations were low, since many companies tied to mainframe computer had posted disappointing results. Still, Big Blue pulled off a big surprise with earnings that were better than expected. But on a conference call, the company wasn't boasting.
[Francis:] IBM said goodbye to a quarter to forget by turning in better-than-expected results. Cost-costing and a sought buy-back helped the company turn in net income of $1.06 cents a share, six cents better than expected. And profits increased over "99, if you factor out a special gain last year. But it wasn't because Big Blue sold more computers. In fact, overall, revenues were light by analysts" estimates and fell 1 percent from a year ago.
[Shebly Seyfafi, Ag Edwards:] They have generally been doing both, cutting expenses and buying back shares to engineer better bottom-line results. But we really need to see that top line grow, not only from the server category, but also from the technology area.
[Francis:] IBM found little to brag about in the quarter. PCs, which have been a drag on earnings for years, improved somewhat, but the company says it remains dissatisfied with the results. But IBM did note that the services business, plagued by a post-Y2K slowdown, reignited late in the quarter. In a statement, IBM's Louis Gerstner said: "Our outlook going forward is quite different from the one we faced in last three quarters and we continue to be very encouraged about the second half of this year." Shareholders could use some encouragement, too. The stock is down more than 22 percent from its high this year. On a conference call with Analysts, IBM says that the bloodletting in PCs should end this year, as early as the current quarter. But the company isn't raising the bar. Officers told analysts to stick with their current estimates for the second half of the year. And Stuart, that's for double-digit growth, but not a big change in the story there.
[Varney:] Fair enough, Bruce Francis, thank you. Well, the tech profit parade didn't stop at IBM. After the closing bell, Advanced Micro Devices also released its latest report. The chip-maker reported second-quarter results of $1.21 a share, seven cents higher than expected. AMD also announced a two-for-one stock split. However, in after-hours trading, its stock lost nearly 1 12, after jumping nearly four points during the regular session. Then we have Qualcomm, down more than two points in active trading. The telecom equipment-maker met estimates on 27 cents a share. But revenue came in at $714 million, and that was weaker than expected. Exodus Communications up more than two points in late trading8 in after-hours trading. It met already-lowered profit estimates of 10 cents a share. Immunex gained one-quarter point in late trading. It beat earnings forecasts by a penny on strong sales of its rheumatoid arthritis drug. But the big story in after-hours trading is JDS Uniphase, up 16 14. Late today S&P; said JDS replace will replace Rite Aid on the S&P; 500 index. So, where are corporate profits headed in the second half of the year? My next guest is not too enthusiastic. Abby Joseph Cohen of Goldman Sachs says third- and fourth-quarter profit growth will be below that of the first six months. Her outlook for the markets: no change in her forecast for the S&P; 500. The Wall Street bull is still forecasting 1575 by the end of the year; no change for the Dow industrials, 12600 by the end of 2000, a gain of nearly 18 percent from blue chip average currently stand. Joining with more on all this is Abby Joseph Cohen U.S. market strategist at Goldman Sachs. Abby, welcome back to
[Moneyline. Abby Joseph Cohen, Goldman Sachs:] Thank you, Stuart.
[Varney:] Is it conceivable, that, as far as Nasdaq is concerned if you're right, if it closes at 1575 on the year this would be the worst year for the Nasdaq since the early 1990s.
[Cohen:] We don't do any specific work on the Nasdaq, Stuart. But clearly, I think the broader market indexes will have good year, but not a great year. It's a year in which returns will be close to normal averages, as will volatility. And most investors are not accustomed to that.
[Varney:] It sounds like you're suggesting that technology when we look at the year as a whole will not shrine like older industrial companies.
[Cohen:] I think technology will do very well fundamentally. The earnings that are being reported are quite good. What is happening, however, is that the level of surprise positive surprise is much smaller than it was earlier in the year. Let's keep in mind that, in the first quarter, almost 80 percent of the technology companies in the S&P; 500 reported earnings above expectations; and that on an average of 18 percent above expectations. Now that technology companies are reporting good results, but not staggeringly good results, some of the stock prices are responding to that.
[Varney:] The thinking the chain reaction of thought, then, is that the economy is slowing because rates are rising. The Fed may raise rates some more. As the economy slows, profit levels profit margins come down. And that's where you get the profit outlook from?
[Cohen:] Well, there is concern that that is happening. Also keep in mind, there are some statistical phenomena at work. For example, the second half of 1999 was much stronger than the first half of 1999. So the year-on-year comparisons which what we use arithmetically for earnings get tougher as year goes on. By way, the deceleration in profit growth that we expect is not necessarily a bad thing on the intermediate and long-term outlook for the stock market. Stock prices usually do quite well with moderate profit growth as long as investors believe that that profit growth is durable. And over the next period of time, we think investors will regain that confidence, which is why we think stock prices will be rising before year-end and into the first half of 2001.
[Varney:] So if you were putting fresh cash into stock market right now, most of it would not go into technology.
[Cohen:] I would be looking for some of the areas that have suffered from benign neglect until recently. That would include some financial services stocks, including some of the banks that are performing quite well as companies, and yet their share prices remain stuck in the quagmire. We would also be looking at selected drugs and pharmaceuticals, biotech names, good-quality research companies, where the stock prices have not kept pace with what the companies have done. We see good values in many different sectors, including small and mid-cap stocks. We think there's also still good value left in the real estate-related securities.
[Varney:] All right, Abby Joseph Cohen, Goldman Sachs, always a pleasure, and thanks for being with us again.
[Cohen:] Thank you.
[Varney:] Still to come on MONEYLINE, CNET goes shopping on the Web and places its biggest purchase ever. The new media company buys its older online competitor, Ziff-Davis. Apple Computer unveils its latest version of the iMac. Chief executive Steve Jobs joins us with the new product and talks about his company's latest profit report. Plus, a financial house cleaning at Bank One. Jamie Dimon reveals his turnaround plans for the troubled bank and more, when MONEYELINE returns.

[Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] A suspected al Qaeda terrorist linked to the USS Cole bombing has apparently killed himself by accident. CNN's Brent Sadler has the story from Sanaa, Yemen Brent.
[Brent Sadler, Cnn Correspondent:] Thanks, Carol. An extraordinary sequence of events less than 24 hours ago when Yemeni security forces began encircling a house near Sanaa University here in the Yemeni capital, working on a tip-off from a landlord about a suspected al Qaeda terrorist hiding out in the city here. As police approached, they came under gunfire. They returned fire and in the ensuing confusion, the wanted man slipped away. His name and we can see a picture of him on the front page of September 26 that's one of the government newspapers here, one Samir Ahmed Mohammad al-Hada, a 25-year-old wanted in connection with the bombing of the USS Cole, that American destroyer that was the target of a suicide bombing in the port of Aden, which resulted in the loss of 17 American sailors. Now, this man, Ahmed Mohammad al-Hada, was blown up when he apparently attempted to throw a hand grenade at his pursuers during the chase. Now, throughout this morning, the Yemeni authorities have been working the scene and they're saying through police sources here that they came away with a series of evidence, including two pistols, a mobile telephone, a list of telephone numbers, books and documents, and that evidence, they say, is now being studied by both Yemeni investigators and U.S. investigators who are at this time in the Yemeni capital. Now, what makes al-Hada very interesting is that he has very important, it's alleged, connections to al Qaeda operatives, notably, two of his brothers-in-law. One of them is said to be one of the Pentagon suicide hijackers from September the 11th. The other brother-in-law, his name appears on a list of 17 suspects, al Qaeda suspects given out in an FBI worldwide terrorist alert only on Tuesday, an alert that was warning of the possible attack by al Qaeda against U.S. interests both here and in the United States. So the Yemeni security forces here claiming a significant success in this latest operation, an operation which continues to go after al Qaeda suspects in this country Carol.
[Costello:] Thank you for the update. Brent Sadler reporting live for us from Yemen this morning.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to look past Arizona and Michigan. What does the political landscape look like for both the Republicans and the Democrats? To get a lay of the land, we turn now to Gallup Poll's editor in chief. That's Frank Newport. Good morning, Frank.
[Frank Newport, Gallup Poll Editor In Chief:] Good morning, Daryn. In fact, we just finished polling last night. We polled Sunday and Monday night after the South Carolina primary this is nationally to see what impact all of it's having on Republicans and Democrats across the country, and there's some good news for both Bush and for McCain, we think, in what we're finding here. Let's show you first how registered Republicans across the country are choosing between Bush and McCain. The change came after New Hampshire there when McCain went up on that bottom line to 34 percent. But since there in three surveys we've conducted, not much change. Bush maintains his very comfortable lead over John McCain as the first choice for the nomination among Republicans nationally. South Carolina didn't have any impact either way on John McCain. But when we look at the favorable ratings of the two candidates, it looks as if George W. Bush may be taking a slight hit as he moves further to the right, at least as it's perceived, and is somewhat more critical, again, as is perceived. His favorable ratings have gone from 66 percent pre-New Hampshire to 58 percent in our poll as of last night down a little. John McCain jumped from 51 after New Hampshire to 67 percent as a lot more people got to know him, and he stayed fairly high. So, at this point, nationally, among everybody, Republicans and Democrats, McCain has a more positive image than George W. Bush. Now, on the Democratic side, there's not been a lot of there was a debate last night, but no real primaries have occurred since New Hampshire, and that top line is Al Gore. He's maintaining among Democrats a very comfortable lead over Bill Bradley. We'll see in March whether Bradley's able the break out of that. But we can look at the November hypothetical match-ups. This is, who would you vote for in November? among likely voters. And here we see McCain has a real edge. Bush beats Gore by just five points, but in our last three surveys since New Hampshire, we found that Senator John McCain beats Gore much more comfortably in this last poll, as you can see, by over 20 points. That's because John McCain is appealing to Independents and soft Democrats around the country as of this point. That's where we stand. We'll see what happens after the primaries today. Back to you.
[Kagan:] Frank, thanks for those latest numbers.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Joining from Washington, CNN'S Eileen O'Connor, how's closely following all this. I don't know of you heard it, Eileen. Maybe I heard it wrong, but Hillary Rodham Clinton, the senator from New York has just told us that she had no involvement in any of these pardons. She added that she never knew about Marc Rich at all. That's a quote from her. But then went on to say that people asked her, around Christmastime, to pass on requests for pardons, and that she did that. So that would indicate she did have involvement with the pardons.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, she was a senator- elect, Lou, and the word was out that and the president had made it clear that he was going to be granting pardon applications and was looking at pardon applications. He wanted to use the pardon power; it is a broad power, and it is designed to right injustice in criminal justice system. So in fact, he and his aides have actually gone to the Justice Department a few months earlier and asked them for deserving cases. So people were coming up to the president himself on rope lines and to other people, other Congressman and senators. And remember, Hillary Rodham Clinton was also a senator-elect as well as first lady. So it is likely that people and it does happen, it's happened in the past that people would pass her information and then she would then pass it on. Now, what she says is that she didn't look at that information, and then she passed it onto the White House Counsel's Office. Now, also, this is obviously, a hedge, in case there is some note from someone in the White House Counsel's Office that, you know, Hillary Rodham Clinton passed this on to us. What she's saying is I didn't look at it, I passed it on I'm not going to deny that Lou.
[Waters:] And Senator Clinton also said, repeatedly, that she was disappointed, saddened and disturbed when she heard about brother's involvement in two of those pardons, but drew a sharp distinction between that case and the two pardons granted as a result of work done by her Senate campaign treasurer, which she indicated done in the normal way, normal process, the way pardons are handled.
[O'connor:] Well, that is the way we understand it. William Cunningham is a lawyer who was asked to fill out and take forward these pardon applications. He is telling Associated Press we've been trying to reach him that he actually did not go through the White House, that he gave those applications to the Justice Department they went through the normal channel and that he never spoke to the White House or Mrs. Clinton about those applications. Mrs. Clinton also said that he never spoke to her about it. Now, the one thing, Lou, I will point out: that Hugh Rodham did, in fact, contact Bruce Lindsey, who's a White House counsel. But Bruce Lindsey sources close to the situation say that Bruce Lindsey did not know that Hugh Rodham was being paid to represent Carlos Vignali, and he only contacted Bruce Lindsey on the Vignali commutation of sentence. Bruce Lindsey says he knew nothing about the Almon Glenn Braswell pardon. So the president said last night and has said- sources close to him say that he has no recollection of any conversations with Hugh Rodham about these. But again, aides are going to be look through the files,the pertinent files, to make sure that there's no notation that he's just forgotten about Lou.
[Waters:] And by president, you mean former President...
[O'connor:] Yes, I'm sorry: former President Bill Clinton.
[Waters:] Bill Clinton. It's hard to it's easy to forget sometimes with all the headlines he's capturing. Eileen O'Connor, in Washington. Natalie, what's next?
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] So what does this mean to the congressional hearings regarding pardons, that we've been seeing, the past couple of weeks? Let's find out from CNN's Kate Snow, who's been checking in to that.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Natalie, a development to tell you about regarding Representative Dan Burton's committee. You'll remember that he is the chair of the government reform committee on the House side. He's been looking into, specifically, so far, the Marc Rich pardon. And I've just been told that they have now received the office of that committee has received a letter from David Kendall, who is the attorney for the Clinton Presidential Library, in Arkansas, that letter saying that they will send documents that have been requested by Dan Burton's committee. They are going to send documents concerning 12 people associated with the Marc Rich case. Now, that is not as much as what Representative Burton had asked for. The committee had requested that the library in Arkansas send over documents relating to anyone who had contributed more than $5,000 to that presidential library. The response, again, is that they will not send all of the information that was requested; they will send information only regarding those folks that they feel were most closely related to the Rich case: that includes Marc and Denise Rich and their children. Now, I'm told that in 15 minutes or so, the committee will put out a statement. Representative Dan Burton of Indiana will put out a written statement responding to this, and I'm told that that statement will include information that they plan to subpoena the director of the library foundation that is Skip Rutherford they're going to ask him to come to Congress and testify on March 1st, next week. The committee also looking into the potential that they could charge that gentleman with contempt of Congress. It's a complicated thing that takes several weeks to complete, but they could hold him in contempt for not having given them all the information that they requested Natalie.
[Allen:] And Kate, anyone there commenting, any members of Congress commenting, on the latest revelations about the pardons involving Hillary Rodham Clinton's brother?
[Snow:] Right, Representative Burton, Natalie, did comment last night in a written statement about them. He said that he plans to have his committee look into those matters, in addition to the Marc Rich case. Already they have sent out about four letters to Hugh Rodham himself, to lawyers for the gentleman that he represented in connection with getting them clemency. They're looking for information at this point. The committee has not decided whether they will invite Hugh Rodham, for example, to testify next week or how far they're going to take this, but they're certainly looking into it. And I can also tell you that, on the Senate side, the Senate Judiciary Committee had been looking into the Marc Rich case, the pardon issue, and they're also now considering this newest information about Hillary Rodham Clinton's brother. Senator Arlen Specter from Pennsylvania, who's sort of spearheading the Republican effort on that committee to look into these matters has asked his staff to start investigating just preliminary, they're asking staff to start making phone calls, perhaps sending out some letters, to gather information in with the expectation that perhaps the committee, the Judiciary Committee, on the Senate side, might also take a further look at this Natalie.
[Allen:] Kate, we thank you. How far are they going to take this: That's a question many may be asking on Capitol Hill, what the political fallout may be from these revelations, considering pardons. For that, let's talk more about it with CNN's Jeanne Meserve, who's in our Washington bureau Jeanne.
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Correspondent:] Natalie, thanks so much. And I'm with Susan Page, who is the Washington bureau chief for "USA Today." Susan, thanks for coming in.
[Susan Page, "usa Today":] Jeanne, good to be here.
[Meserve:] Was Hillary Rodham Clinton effective? Did she control the damage from this incident?
[Page:] Well, she tried to. And she made a start by standing up there and answering questions, and that always takes a public official a certain distance. But I do think these past two days have been very damaging for her. Before we've had allegations and controversy surrounding pardons that her husband gave, but they really came closer to her now: They involve brother and they also involve her campaign treasurer. So I think that sets up new questions a little closer to her personally.
[Meserve:] Some distancing from her husband here I detected. She said you're going to have to ask him, you're going to have to ask his staff. Is she intentionally doing that?
[Page:] Well, she'd like to because clearly this is a controversy that's really scarred him in his desire to build a substantive legacy. I mean, it certainly has been the big mark on his on his first month out of office. It's hard to distance yourself entirely from the president. You know, you could make the case that, for a senator-elect, it's perfectly appropriate to pass on pardon applications from your constituents. But for most senator-elects, you're not married to the guy who's going to make the decision, so it's a whole new set of complications particular to her.
[Meserve:] A couple of times, she tried to steer the conversation around to other topics. One of them was the Clinton legacy. What has this all done to that?
[Page:] Well, you know, I think we've always one of the arguments that Clinton defenders made during the impeachment controversy was that President Clinton was a good president substantively, although he had personal failings. And the problem for President Clinton when it comes to this controversy is it really goes to the heart of one of his powers as president. So it's harder to make that case.
[Meserve:] She was unflappable under very high stress. This is vintage Hillary Rodham Clinton, is it not?
[Page:] Well, you remember that early news conference she did as first lady, when the controversy was over commodities trading, where she wore a pink outfit and she sat in front of a large group of reporters for a long period of time. And she is unflappable, and that does serve her well as senator. But you've got to know this was a hard way to start a six-year term as senator: with controversy surrounding your husband and a Senate investigation by a committee of your actions and your husband's action. It's a tough way to start a new term.
[Meserve:] Susan Page, "USA Today," thanks so much.
[Page:] Thank you.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Republican Congressman Billy Tauzin's Energy and Commerce Committee, of course, is holding that hearing. And we are going to be speaking to him now live. Congressman Tauzin, Carol Lin at the CNN Center. Can you hear me?
[Rep. Billy Tauzin , Energy & Commerce Chmn:] Yes, good morning.
[Lin:] Well, as you heard from Kate Snow's report, you know very well that all five major networks have conducted their own internal reviews, have come up with their own solutions to the problem. And many of them match some of the expectations that you would have of the network executives, like not calling races until the polls close in that individual state. So why is it that you're holding these hearings when so many people are concerned about voting irregularities in the election, not so much the election coverage?
[Tauzin:] Well, because our jurisdiction is deals with the election coverage itself. And that's our job: to check into what went wrong that night. More importantly, we want to give the network executives a chance to talk about Voter News Service, the single source that they use to make these projections, and what they intend to do to make sure that the Voter News Service does a better job. We found out that the Voter News Service is using some very flawed models that produced, I think, the biases on election night. And that needs to get fixed.
[Lin:] But many of the many of the networks have already pledged that they're not going to be using the Voter News Service solely, that, in fact, CNN is looking outside for an independent source for its analysis. So is this testimony relevant then?
[Tauzin:] Well, CNN's the only network that has so far said they would use an additional source other than the Voter News Service. Keep in mind, for a good news story, the tenet of journalistic credibility is two independent sources. And yet, in this most important case of reporting the election of our president, everyone's using a single source that the networks own. If you're going to use only one and most of them are still going to use single source we want to make sure, in effect, that it's the best information available, that everyone in the country feel it's fair and objective. It is not, today. That source is using models that are 30 years old, have not been significantly updated, and now contain some real biases that we're going to produce at the hearing today.
[Lin:] Well, what evidence of bias do you have in terms of how it influenced the outcome?
[Tauzin:] Well, we have first of all, we're not saying it influenced the outcome of the presidential election. What we're saying today, as we did in the 1980s, that the early calls of the election in the East accurate or inaccurate while people are trying to vote out West, may have the effect of effecting voter turn out in parts of the country that are still voting. Certainly that's true in state where there are two time zones, as in Florida and Kentucky. And so getting these exit-polling reports while people are voting is of serious concern. If you're going to use them, we're saying, make sure they're good sources. Secondly, we're asking the networks to consider, as they all are considering, not even using these sources until after the polls are closed. Third, as Kate pointed out, we're actively discussing, again, as we did in 1985, a uniform poll closing time so that it might fit the networks' agreement.
[Lin:] Are you expecting that the will you be satisfied if the networks listen, pledge to take it under consideration? Or are you thinking that Congress is going to have to mandate many of these changes?
[Tauzin:] No, no. Congress has no business mandating content of reporting. We have no business, you know, legislating the way in which networks or reporters cover the news. That's not our function. That is a First Amendment right of the networks. We defend First Amendment rights just as vigorously as you do. We defend them and want them ourselves. We have to be able to speak freely, too. So we're going to defend your right to do it wrong if you want to. What we're simply saying is that: Why don't we try to get it right? And why don't you help us understand how we can get it right in the future?
[Lin:] All right. Well, Congressman Tauzin, we are committed to getting it right. And we will be watching, of course, as you conduct these hearings today.
[Tauzin:] By the way, CNN should be congratulated for using an external review source. You've done a good job of examining the problems that night. And I want to thank you for it.
[Lin:] Well, we appreciate it. Thank you very much, Congressman. And, of course, we want to remind our audience that you can watch the election coverage hearings right here on CNN beginning around 11 a.m. Eastern.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We begin this hour in Washington, where the investigation into the disappearance of Chandra Levy is moving forward on several fronts today. Police are preparing to search the apartment of Congressman Gary Condit for possible clues in that case. Meantime, a flight attendant who claims to have had an affair with the congressman will meet with representatives from the U.S. attorney's office. Joining us from Washington, our national correspondent Bob Franken Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Of course, the latest development is the fact that D.C. police say they are going to, in fact, search the apartment of Congressman Gary Condit the Washington apartment. You are seeing a live picture of it there. The D.C. police are going to do this simply because that they were offered by Congressman Condit's attorney, Abbe Lowell, in a news conference last night that, in fact, if they wanted to, they could cooperate, that a warrant wouldn't be needed. So, later in the evening, police officials decided and they told CNN that if the offer was there, why not? It could happen as early as today. This is what Lowell had to say.
[Abbe Lowell, Attorney For Gary Condit:] Not only has he allowed access to his apartment, some of you might know maybe some of you don't know that on the very first time he spoke to the police, he, the congressman invited the police where? To his apartment. It happened in May. They sat right there. This has not been anything but the congressman's attempt to be open.
[Franken:] But, of course, they didn't search that at the time, so the congressman has now said, through his lawyer, that the police are welcome. The police are going to take him up on that 10 weeks after the disappearance of Chandra Levy. Now, of course, this story has so many different aspects to it. And one of them concerns a woman who also claims to have had a romantic relationship with Congressman Condit, much like the one that Condit has now acknowledged to police that he had with Chandra Levy. The woman you are seeing here is Anne Marie Smith. She is the now- famous flight attendant who says that she too had that romantic relationship with Condit more importantly, that Condit asked her to sign a false affidavit that is to say, a sworn statement in which she would say under oath that she did not have a romantic relationship. Anne Marie Smith says that is a lie. Now, Condit's lawyers say that it was not like that at all. They just sent her an affidavit with those words and said at the top of it: "If you want to change anything, feel free." Now, that is the words that we got from Congressman Condit's side on this thing. Anne Marie Smith is expected to meet tomorrow with the U.S. attorney here was invited by the government officials to tell her story, so there can at least be an investigation into the possibility that there was some sort of illegal behavior. That is denied, by the way, by Condit and his attorneys. One other thing: The lie detector test that's been batted back and forth for several days now, the Levy family is saying that since Condit took so long to tell the truth about his relationship with Chandra Levy that he should in fact take a lie detector test. It's being pursued and pushed very hard not only by the Levys, but also by the attorney for the Levy family, Billy Martin.
[Billy Martin, Attorney For Levy Family:] As a good-faith gesture toward the family, take a polygraph. We're not accusing Congressman Condit of anything. We believe a polygraph would, once and for all, show the family that he has told the truth and has nothing to hide.
[Franken:] Abbe Lowell points out that many people consider lie detector tests unreliable. Nevertheless, he said if the police ask for one, then it would be something that they could discuss. The police thus far are noncommittal. Bob Franken, CNN live, Washington.
[Kagan:] And, Bob, thank you for the latest on that report.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Just days from now, 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez could be re-starting his life over again in Cuba. But while a father and son reunion appears to be drawing near, new efforts are being made to convince the elder Gonzalez to have a change of heart. CNN's Bob Franken joins us now from Bethesda, Maryland, where the boy's father is staying. Hi, Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, hi. It's raining here, as you can see. It was sunny a little while ago, when Juan Miguel Gonzalez decided he would leave the residence here and go down to the Cuban Interest Section. And although it wasn't stated that way, it was done with the knowledge that the two fishermen who rescued Elian Gonzalez from the ocean back in November would be coming to make a personal plea for him to go to Miami, a personal plea for him to stay in the United States. The fishermen finally arrived. They flew up from Fort Lauderdale and came right to the house and were really quite incensed that Mr. Gonzalez had not stayed.
[Sam Ciancio, Fisherman Who Rescued Elian:] Not yet, We had just got into town. We understand that he left a little while ago. But we're going to be camping out here and hopefully get a chance to meet Mr. Miguel.
[Question:] You're camping out here, in the street?
[Franken:] They said they just were going to stay here happily they're not with all the rain blowing around, but they said they were coming back later. Now a little while after they showed up and were thwarted, the attorney for Juan Gonzalez came out and said that probably they would be having a meeting.
[Gregory Craig, Attorney For Juan Gonzalez:] Mr. Gonzalez has agreed to meet with the experts that the government the panel of experts that the government has assembled for the purpose of trying to smooth and ease the transfer of custody from Lazaro to Mr. Gonzalez. And again we have to work out the details and the logistics of that. But there is no one more committed to doing in fashion that is easy and fast.
[Franken:] So it's really unclear whether in fact Juan Gonzalez will actually meet with the two fishermen. The fishermen say they're going to stay here as long as they can. They feel they've earned the right, after they rescued the son, they earned the right to have a meeting. And I think, as you can see, the weather has gotten prohibitive. So this is Bob Franken, CNN, live in Bethesda, Maryland.
[Hall:] Thanks, Bob. In Miami, the situation is calm as the Elian Gonzalez custody battle moves closer to a conclusion. CNN's Maria Hinojosa joins us from Miami's Little Havana section, where the boy has been staying with his relatives. Maria, what's going on there?
[Maria Hinojosa, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, the saga around the boy looks liking it's coming to an end, but today we've only seen little Elian Gonzalez just once and for a quick few seconds. His uncle great-Uncle Lazaro brought him outside and then took him back inside. What we have seen is a visit from a priest earlier today inside the home. But outside the home, the protesters continue what they say is their vigil, some of them remaining steadfast that they will not permit this boy to be taken. Some have said that they will form a human chain if anything happens to this boy that might remove him from the household. Others saying, though, that they are waiting to hear from the great-uncle, Lazaro. What will he do? If he hands the boy over calmly and peacefully, they say they will follow his lead. So the protest movement now, right now, is a very shifting situation. They are waiting to hear what Lazaro will say. Meanwhile here, there have been all of the demonstration canceled for this weekend. The only plans now is for Monday evening a prayer vigil to be held here. Reporting live from Maria Miami, Maria Hinojosa,
[Cnn. Hall:] Thank you, Maria. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Nicole Poole, Whittier, California:] Hello. My name is Nicole Poole from Whittier, California. My question is: I recently read an article about the USO and their involvement cheering the troops during World War II. I was wondering if their still active today, and if so, what sorts of projects they're involved in?
[Gen. John Tilelli , President & Ceo Of The Uso:] Well, Nicole, that's a great question. The USO today is as alive and well as it was during World War II. In a real sense, it is more active today that it was back then because there is so many more programs that the USO does around the world. And we do everything from the celebrity entertainment, to recreation centers, to family readiness centers, to airport centers, to mobile canteens. We do it in both the continental United States and we do it overseas. Celebrity entertainment is still a pillar within the USO deliverables. In a real sense, we think of celebrity entertainment as Bob Hope, who is an icon in the USO entertainment business. Celebrities volunteer their time. They go overseas. They entertain our troops. And what the troops get from it is more than entertainment.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Catherine Callaway, Cnn Anchor:] President Bush's decision to have the option of trying terrorists in military court, rather than in criminal courtrooms, is drawing some mixed reactions. Critics say that if implemented, the plan would put the constitution at risk. CNN national correspondent Eileen O'Connor now with more.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn National Correspondent:] First up to defend the idea: the vice president. People who enter the U.S. illegally and commit terror, he said, are a different kind of combatant, not just a criminal.
[Dick Cheney, Vice President Of The United States:] Now, they will a fair trial, but it will be under the procedures of the military tribunal, and the rules and regulations to be established in connection with that. We think it's the appropriate way to go.
[O'connor:] That could mean proceedings held in secret, either here or abroad, with different rules on the admissibility on certain evidence. Administration officials say whether it will be used will depend on factors like the sensitivity of the methods used to collect evidence, the location of the person when apprehended, the threat posed by the accused being so great as to justify a faster process. The attorney general says special times call for special circumstances.
[John Ashcroft, Attorney General:] And foreign terrorists who commit war crimes against the United States, in my judgment, are not entitled to, and do not deserve, the protections of the American constitution.
[O'connor:] The attorney general points out that a similar military commission was used by FDR in World War II, to try Germans accused of spying on U.S. soil. But defense attorneys say there is no excuse for stomping on the constitution.
[Stanley Cohen, Defense Attorney:] While it would make it easier for the Bush administration, and while it would make it cheaper and quicker, it would dampen, and in fact, do significant danger to our constitution.
[O'connor:] Critics argue there is a better way: an international tribunal established by the United Nations. That way, they say, the United States would stand with all others in this fight for justice. Eileen O'Connor, CNN, Washington.
[Callaway:] And we'll have much more on this controversy coming up in our next hour. We will talk with an expert about just how a military tribunal works, so stay with us for that. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] Deutsche Telekom's spending spree continues; together with its partner VoiceStream, it's buying Georgia- based cell-phone company Powertel for almost $6 billion.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] "Fortune" magazine's Janet Guyon has now more for us from live from London. And, Janet, what does Deutsche Telekom want with Powertel?
[Janet Guyon, London Bureau Chief, "fortune":] Well, David, Powertel really fills out the national footprint of VoiceStream. With this transaction, they'll get access to the Southeast of the U.S., Deutsche Telekom and VoiceStream will cover 88 percent of the U.S. So it will give them almost a national footprint, not quite, and that will make Deutsche Telekom one of four companies in the U.S. that has a national footprint, with AT&T; Wireless, Verizon Wireless and Sprint PCS. So it really just kind of fills out the map, so to speak.
[Haffenreffer:] Any idea where Deutsche might be headed next? There always seems to be speculation about this company.
[Guyon:] Yes, there does, but it looks to me as though they are, at the moment, pursuing a global wireless strategy. They have bought up some licenses in Europe; they've got these companies now in the U.S. It's actually a very good strategically, a very good deal because the technology of VoiceStream and Powertel is compatible with the technology in Europe, this is this GSM technology. So Deutsche Telekom will be able to offer corporate customers, in particular, global you know, global phones, global roaming; those phones already exist. This is the kind of thing that a lot of the wireless companies are talking about, but really will not be able to implement until third generation, the next level of wireless technology, is put into place.
[Romans:] OK. Janet Guyon, in London, thank you.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] The European markets right now are mixed ahead of the ECB decision today, but we are seeing some more pronounced losses in the Paris stock market.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] And Adrienne Roberts of the "Financial Times" joins us from the "FT"'s London newsroom. First off, a couple more hours maybe until we get an ECB announcement. What are the markets there expecting?
[Adrienne Roberts, "financial Times":] Well, there's no question that there's going to be an interest rate rise. What the markets want to know is whether it's going to be a quarter of a percentage point or half a percentage point. The stock exchanges generally are a little bit lower because nobody really wants to take any major financial position until they know what happens. And as you say, Christine, the decision comes through in a little under three hours. Bond market also slightly weaker, and the currencies hanging in there, but still very weak. Both sterling and euro are very weak. So it's basically a case now of, will it be 50 basis points or will it be 25? If it is 50, then it could be bad for bonds. If it's 25, it could be bad for the euro. It's rather a case of, damned if you do, damned if you don't for the European Central Bank, I think.
[Haffenreffer:] Well, we still do have the higher oil prices around the world right now. Is that helping to shape the ECB's decision, do you imagine?
[Roberts:] I think it must. Obviously, oil prices do pose a significant threat to inflation. I think that's one of the main sources. And, of course, with a weak euro, oil prices hit European importers twice. It's a sort of double whammy, because not only does the dollar price of oil go up but, as the euro weakens, European importers' purchasing power weakens as well. So they're kind of disempowered on two fronts there. So, obviously, I think the European Central Bank is going to be watching oil prices very closely in its decision.
[Romans:] So, is the ECB sort of hijacking the headlines this morning, or is there any corporate news you can tell us about?
[Roberts:] Well, yes to both questions. In the meantime, while we wait, a few things are happening. That planned merger between Suez Lyonnaise des Eaux, the big French utility company, and E.ON in Frankfurt appears to be taking shape. The "Financial Times" announced this morning that or published this morning that the holding company structure there has been thrashed out for that merger. And so now it looks as though, after 15 months of talks, that deal is coming together. It is not a small deal in terms of yesterday's market prices. The market cap of the merged utility company would be somewhere in the region of $70 billion U.S, so it's going to be significant, basically one of the biggest world players. The stock markets are not reacting very well in France, Suez Lyonnaise des Eaux's share price was down more than 5 percent earlier this morning. E.ON is trading more or less flat. I think the problem with Suez is that some people are thinking that perhaps it should be going back to core competencies instead of expanding on this sort of level. So there's a little bit of skepticism there still.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, Adrienne Roberts at the "Financial Times," thanks for the update.

[Franken:] Taliban frontlines in northern Afghanistan were especially hard hit today as the U.S. military-led campaign prepares to end its third week of airstrikes. CNN's Jonathan Aiken is on duty for us at the Pentagon today.
[Jonathan Aiken, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Bob, it appears to be the most sustained effort yet against the Taliban frontlines in the 21 days of the U.S. air war. A resident of Kabul called it the worst night ever. U.S. planes were busy on the Shamali plane, which is located north of Kabul, and they were said to be attacking Taliban frontline troops who were said to be dug in in the trenches and gun emplacements. Also hit targets in and around the western city of Herat and Kandahar in southwest Afghanistan, which has been a prime target for U.S. aircraft during this during the 21 days of this attack. Said to be quiet. CNN producers in the region said there were no attacks to be speak of overnight. You've been looking at video from the Bagram Air Base, which is a rebel-held base not far from the Northern Alliance frontlines with the Taliban. One Northern Alliance commander who witnessed the attack said he counted at least 20 bombs and said the U.S. effort was sustaining and that it lasted for most of the day. Military placements were said to be the target, but there are reports coming out of Europe that quote the person who runs an Italian-led emergency facility located at a nearby city of Hanawah, who said "there were civilian casualties as a result of the U.S. attacks". The Pentagon itself says it has no information on that report. In Kabul itself, reports from the city say that a sprawling Taliban military compound, which has been set up next to the along abandoned U.S. embassy in Kabul was a main target, as was a large ammunition dump on the eastern fringe of the city. Another reported case maybe of errant bombing to the United Nations, says one of its demining centers this is an area that helps this is a building where efforts are organized to help remove landmines from the areas in Afghanistan. The U.N. says that one of those demining centers in Kabul was hit by U.S. aircraft or by U.S. ordinance, rather, and that while no humans were killed, two mine- sniffing dogs were killed and a couple of vehicles were destroyed. Pentagon did get some good news too, Bob. The United Kingdom is committing about 200 British Royal Marine commandos to ground forces when that action finally gets under way in earnest. These are people from the 3 Commando Brigade the #3 Commando Brigade. They're said to be experts in mountain warfare. And Russia is also adding some ordinance too, committing 40 tanks and about 100 armored vehicles to the Northern Alliance effort. And in an effort to get the Saudi Arabians into the military loop, the U.S. the head of the U.S. military command, General Tommy Franks, paid a visit to Saudi King Fahd today Bob.
[Franken:] Jonathan Aiken at the Pentagon. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Laurin Sydney, Cnn Anchor:] What "The Mummy" has done for the box office, "The Producers" is doing for Broadway. The hit Mel Brooks musical dominated the nominations today for the Tony awards. Bill Tush has the story from Broadway.
[Bill Tush, Cnn Correspondent:] It was no surprise the musical comedy based on Mel Brooks' 1968 film "The Producers" would garner some Tony nominations, but set a record?
[Reba Mcentire:] "The Producers" has earned more Tony nominations, 15, than any show in Broadway history.
[Tush:] Reba McIntyre was joined by Eric McCormack, the Will of TV's "Will & Grace," at Broadway's legendary watering hole, Sardi's, for the announcement of the Tony nominations for 2001. "The Producers" was nominated for Best Musical, and another show based on a film "The Full Monty" also is in the category. A total of 10 nominations went to the musical about a group of unemployed steel workers who form a striptease act. Rounding out the Best Musical category, "A Class Act" and "Jane Eyre." For Best Play, the recently opened August Wilson saga "King Hedly II" is nominated with "The Invention Of Love," "Proof" and "The Tale Of The Allergist's Wife." Gary Sinise is up for Best Actor for his role in "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, " which also was nominated as Best Revival Of A Play. Some ladies that are best known for their work in television and film make up the list for Best Leading Actress In A Play: Juliette Binoche, "Betrayal"; Linda Lavin, "The Tale Of The Allergist's Wife"; "Proof"'s Mary-Louise Parker; Jean Smart, "The Man Who Came To Dinner"; and Leslie Uggams for "King Hedley II." Both stars of "The Producers" are nominated for Best Actor in a Musical, Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane. They are joined by: Kevin Chamberlin in "Seussical"; Tom Hewitt "The Rocky Horror Picture Show"; and "The Full Monty"'s Patrick Wilson.
[Eric Mccormick, Actor:] Best Performance By A Featured Actress In a Musical: Polly Bergen, "Follies;" Kathleen Freeman, "The Full Monty;" Cady Huffman, "The Producers;" Kate Levering, "42nd Street;" Mary Testa, "42nd Street."
[Tush:] With its record-breaking 15 nominations, the awards ceremony could be "The Producers"'night. One thing is certain: the musical's presence will dominate the night. The stars, Lane and Broderick, are set to host the June 3rd Tony telecast. Bill Tush, CNN entertainment news, New York.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Vice President Al Gore will be picking up a key though unsurprising endorsement today. He will do so in Grand Rapids, Michigan. And let's go there now live where CNN's Chris Black is standing by Chris.
[Chris Black, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Leon. Gore campaign officials say Vice President Al Gore is not feeling any pressure at all from the Democratic Party or its constituency groups to pick a particular candidate to be his running mate. So they say that gives him the luxury of some time to make a very careful assessment of the choice that Governor Bush makes and to decide whether or not he even needs to react to it. The vice president has said that he would like to pick someone who could be a full partner, as he was to Bill Clinton. This suggests that he will pick someone who he is philosophically compatible with and someone who can definitely do the job of president if that should be necessary, rather than someone who only brings some sort of political advantage to the ticket. The vice presidency has evolved over the last 25 years. The role has broadened considerably to the time when the vice president was just someone who represented the United States at foreign funerals. In fact, the vice president himself has changed the expectations for that role because he has played such a large role in policy development of the Clinton administration and been given such a large area of responsibility by Bill Clinton. The vice president selection process, however, has been very, very private, very much behind the scenes. He knows all of the candidates who are under consideration; knows them well, in fact. So he has been consulting one-on-one with Warren Christopher, the former secretary of state, who is heading up the selection process for him. As to the speculation about Dick Cheney potentially being George Bush's running mate, Gore campaign officials say that they think Cheney is a respectable person, has a great resume. They're not so sure, however, that it will help George Bush. They view Cheney as something of a throwback to the last Bush administration. Chris Black, CNN, reporting live from Grand Rapids, Michigan.
[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] All right, thank you very much, Chris.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] It's been brewing for weeks, and today it has happened. In a speech in Virginia, Republican John McCain lowered the boom on his party's Christian right. And in doing so, McCain painted George W. Bush as beholden to the likes of the Reverend Jerry Falwell and Reverend Pat Robertson, who McCain accused of corruption, intolerance and political failure. McCain spoke in Virginia Beach ahead of tomorrow's Virginia primary.
[Sen. John Mccain , Presidential Candidate:] I am a pro- life, pro-family, fiscal conservative and advocate of a strong defense, and yet Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and a few Washington leaders of the pro-life movement call me an unacceptable presidential candidate. They distort my pro-life positions and smear the reputations of my supporters. Why? Because I don't pander to them, because I don't ascribe to their failed philosophy that money is our message. Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right.
[Allen:] McCain called himself a proud Reagan Republican who would beat Al Gore in a general election. He said Bush is a Robertson Republican who would lose in November. Well, speaking to an audience in Washington State, Governor Bush declined to answer McCain directly. But a short time ago, he was asked by reporters about McCain's charges. Here's Bush's response.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] Sounds like Senator McCain has taken to name-calling needless name-calling. I'm a problem solver; sounds like he's a finger-pointer. I'm a person who's got a record of reform, a person that can proudly talk about educational excellence in my state. Senator McCain is someone who likes to castigate. I'm someone who wants to lead.
[Allen:] Bush also accused McCain of practicing what he called divisive politics and said what the Republican Party needs is a person, as you heard, who can bring people together. Well, joining us from Los Angeles is our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider. Bill, let's first talk about George W. Bush. We had him live here this past hour. He's not wanting, it seems, to talk any further about what happened at Bob Jones or the fact that McCain is really going on the attack now as a result of that.
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Well, this appears to be a surprise to Governor Bush. He has written a letter to the Catholic cardinal in New York explaining that he never intended to express any form of anti-Catholic bigotry. He clearly felt on has been thrown on the defensive by the experience in South Carolina at Bob Jones University and by the campaigning for him that's been done by Pat Robertston. But I think he was surprised by McCain's charge, which is clearly aimed at Virginia's primary voters tomorrow.
[Allen:] And how does George Bush move on from the Bob Jones University appearance and what happened afterwards, now? Can he do that even with McCain going so hard at him?
[Schneider:] He has to make it clear that his appearance at that university was not meant to endorse any policy. Ronald Reagan appeared there, Bob Dole appeared there, no one's had to endorse their policy, but it's suddenly become controversial in George W. Bush's case. He's got to distance himself from their views on and their intolerance of racial minorities, of Catholics, of other groups, and make it clear that he's not that kind of Republican, which is exactly, of course, what John McCain just said he was. He called him a Pat Robertson Republican.
[Allen:] And McCain is trying to, it seems, define what kind of Republican he is and who he represents, and whom he says George Bush represents. Is this going to be something that can help John McCain get Republican votes that he needs?
[Schneider:] Well, Natalie this is a high-wire act. It's a high- risk strategy on the part of John McCain, and what he's trying to do here is depict the leadership of the religious right as a special interest. One of the most interesting lines in his speech this morning was when he said Pat Robertson and his other leaders have turned good causes into businesses, and he accused George W. Bush of pandering to the religious right leadership. Now, he was very careful not to condemn social conservatives, their ideas, their causes. He himself is staunchly anti-abortion and has, for instance, supported almost all the religious right views on the issues, but he claims that their interests, their leadership, their organizations, like the Christian Coalition, are in league with George W. Bush because they're making a lot of money on this, and he's depicting them as just another case of special interest politics.
[Allen:] All right, it's been an interesting day so far and this is just the first day of the week. Bill Schneider, thank you so much. Well, for the Democrats, a non-binding vote in Washington State tomorrow could either boost Bill Bradley or serve as a nail in Bradley's coffin. In his head-to-head bouts with Al Gore, Bradley has yet to win. And for his part, Gore, this afternoon, is campaigning in Colorado. And CNN's Gary Tuchman is traveling today with the Gore campaign in Denver Gary.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Natalie, one day before the important Washington primary, Al Gore finds himself in the Rocky Mountain State with no plans to go back to Washington State before the primary. So why is the vice president here in Colorado right now? Well there is a primary in Colorado 11 days from now. But Gore also finds himself comfortably ahead in the polls in Washington State and doesn't feel the practical need to go back there before the primary. Today in about 15 minutes here in Denver at the Performing Arts Complex in the middle of the city, Gore will hold rally. There are a few hundred people here right now to hear Gore speak. He'll hold another rally in Colorado later today. He'll then fly to Arizona for a rally in Phoenix, and then finish the day in Los Angeles, California, a very busy day for the vice president of the United States. It was also a busy weekend. He did campaign in Washington State over the weekend. He walked a picket line with striking Boeing engineers and technical workers. He also held a rally at a Seattle high school where he talked about so-called Democratic values.
[Vice President Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] We have an opportunity to keep our prosperity going by expressing our values in the budget, doing the right thing instead of hemorrhaging the budget with a risky tax scheme aimed at the wealthy. Our values are fiscal responsibility, economic management that makes sense.
[Tuchman:] The people in the Gore camp have a quiet confidence about them. They feel they will be doing extremely well after tomorrow's Washington State primary, and even better a week from Tuesday after the primaries and caucuses in 13 states. This is Gary Tuchman, CNN, live in Denver.

[Octavia Nasr, Cnn Anchor:] And now to an unusual feline who seems to have more lives than any other cat.
[Shihab Rattansi, Cnn Anchor:] In human years, the cat you're about to see is a centenarian. Estonia's TV 1 finds out the secret to his longevity.
[Unidentified Tv 1 Reporter:] In the middle of Estonan, a small village in
[Ahto Veerlaid, Veterinarian:] The only serious disease jeopardizing his life is that he has glaucoma in his eyes. He has lost parts of his upper molar teeth.
[Unidentified Tv 1 Reporter:] Also, the cat is up in age. He is in good health. He can jump, eat by himself and is purring.
[Unidentified Female:] He is fond of egg and fresh milk. He is an old-minded cat who doesn't care about the modern pet food, as Whiskas, for example.
[Unidentified Tv 1 Reporter:] Thirty-one years old, Kiko enjoys purring, but every spring he loses his temper and chases dogs around the neighborhood.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the Nikkei continues to find fresh lows amid worldwide pressure. Dalton Tanonaka is standing by now in our Hong Kong bureau with the latest on Thursday's Asian market activity. Hi, Dalton.
[Dalton Tanonaka, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, David. The Tokyo market did slide another 17-year low. The Nikkei closing below the 11,000 level for the second straight session as weak economic numbers at home and abroad weighed on sentiment there. Other Asian markets opened with steep selling that turned into some modest buying. Seoul closed well off the day's low on strength in building giant Hyundai Engineering. It rose 15 percent, but more weakness in Hynix Semiconductor kept the KOSPI weaker. The chipmaker ended the day limit down at an all-time low ahead of a creditor's meeting postponed from Friday until Monday. Hong Kong Internet and telecom's firm Pacific Century CyberWorks hit two-year lows. PCCW is straining under the weight of massive debt, unable to shake off the gloom enveloping techs and telecoms around the world. But a bounce for China Mobile helped the Hang Seng close in positive territory. And that's a quick look at the market day here in Asia. Back to you, David, in New York.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, thank you very much, Dalton. Dalton Tanonaka in our Hong Kong bureau. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] A unique rescue operation is reporting success on the islands off the western coast of South Africa. Thousands of penguins saved from an oil slick are returning home. Penny Marshall brings us the sea birds' happy homecoming.
[Penny Marshall, Cnn Correspondent:] A sweet homecoming for the first of Robben Island's African penguin who today celebrated freedom on their oil-free beach. They're survivors of the largest-ever evacuation of coastal birds. A thousand previously oiled fledglings, now cleaned and marked in pink to prove it, were released today. This operation has cost more than half a million pounds.
[Unidentified Female:] We're doing extremely well at the moment. We've lost far less than 5 percent so far. And I think this is going to be hugely successful due to a lot of people, and I hope to be able to come back here before Christmas and see 20,000 penguins here again.
[Marshall:] 55,000 penguins were threatened by last month's oil spill here, 40 percent of the world's population. Whilst the oil birds were taken away to be clean, the oil-free penguins were relocated to clean waters 500 miles up the coast. It was hoped from there they would swim home to their Cape colonies. [on camera]: Scientists are certain that most of those have either made it back here or are on the way. Three of them were electronically tagged, and two of those, dubbed Peter and Percy, have definitely made it onto the island, swimming on average 25 miles a day to get here. [voice-over]: And more birds are steadily arriving. Exhausted after their epic swim, they're staying close to shore. It seems for the African penguin there's no place like home. Penny Marshall, ITN, Robben Island.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Once again, as we mentioned at the top of this hour, the latest CNN"USA Today"Gallup tracking poll does show George Bush with a solid lead over Al Gore: that lead maintaining now for five straight days. For more on what this may mean, we turn to the editor in chief of the Gallup Poll, Frank Newport, live this morning again in Princeton. Hey, Frank, good morning.
[Frank Newport, Editor In Chief, Gallup Poll:] Good morning, Bill. Let's look at a little long-term perspective. There's no question about it, that since the debates George W. Bush, generally speaking, when we aggregate our data, has been ahead of Al Gore: sometimes by not much, and it's still not a huge lead, but nevertheless George Bush generally has been ahead. We've taken it all the way back there to the pre-debate era a long time now, the end of September Gore was ahead slightly, and then you can see there were very close together. Each one of these data points represents about 1,800 interviews, and in fact, this last data point down here is over 2,000 likely voters included in this six- day average. And as you see, you can see George Bush maintaining a slight lead over Al Gore. Now, these are likely voters that we're talking about. I think it's always useful to talk about the importance of turnout. If we just isolate registered voters, you can see it's really too close to call. Bush just has a two-point lead in that point. What we're talking about here is likely voters: That is, not all registered voters vote. We all know that. Only about half, in fact, of the voting-age population votes. So when we make our estimate of the most likely voters, Gore actually gains a few points. That's not unusual. The Republican usually does have more of his supporters coming out. But it does isolate the importance of turnout for both sides, and that's a lot of what they're doing this week just to try to get their people to come out to the polls. That could make the difference. A couple of interesting facts in the election, a curvilinear pattern in terms of education. Look at this: Very interestingly, Gore is tied among that big, big group of Americans who just have high- school educations or less, typical for a Democrat. But Al Gore also wins among Americans with graduate degrees: law degrees, Ph.D.s and so forth. It's George W. Bush who does better with the people with at least some college or just a college degree. One other point, George W. Bush is winning based on the conservative vote. No question about. The biggest group of Americans call themselves conservatives. Bush is getting 74 percent of their vote. Actually, among those who call themselves moderates, Al Gore is ahead, and of course, Gore is ahead of liberals. The reason all this averages out to that slight lead for George W. Bush at this point, we can show you is, there are a lot of people who call themselves conservative. Like 43% call themselves conservative. About 43 percent call themselves conservative, and that huge lead he has there offsets Gore's lead among moderates and also Gore's strong lead among that smaller sliver of people who call themselves liberals. So, that's where the public stands at this point. We're monitoring it day by day. Back to you, Bill.
[Hemmer:] Indeed we are, Frank. OK, Frank, thank you very much.

[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] I will never go along with any plan to raid Medicare or turn it over to the HMO bean counters, shaking the foundation of health security for our seniors.
[Bernard Shaw, Cnn Anchor:] Al Gore offers a new chapter in his bid to be seen as the chief protector of Medicare.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] America today is in the midst of an education recession that can threaten our very future.
[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] George W. Bush offers a new catch phrase, hoping to persuade voters he'll be an education president.
[Shaw:] We'll chart the candidates' ups and downs in the polls and whether the momentum has shifted.
[Woodruff:] Plus, the political dance in a presidential battleground state that embraces diversity.
[Announcer:] From Washington, this is INSIDE POLITICS, with Judy Woodruff and Bernard Shaw.
[Woodruff:] Thank you for joining us. Well, while some political observers are buzzing about a possible rebound by George W. Bush, both he and Al Gore are talking issues on the trail today. For Bush, the topic is education. For Gore, it's Medicare. But in this close race, even discussions of the issues tend to include an attack or two, or more. We begin our coverage with Jonathan Karl, who is with the Gore camp in Florida.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] For the vice president, a new line of attack on Medicare and a chance to play to the crowd he'll need to take Florida, the largest battleground state of them all.
[Gore:] I'm fighting for the seniors of America, the people who have worked hard all their lives, paid their taxes, and deserve some peace and security in their older years. I will fight for you! I will fight for you! I will fight for your families!
[Karl:] Gore unveiled "Medicare at the Crossroads," a 74-page book filled primarily with previously announced proposals and attacks on his Republican rival.
[Gore:] And their plan would make seniors go beg the HMOs and insurance companies for prescription drug coverage, even if the HMOs don't want to provide it.
[Karl:] Gore's Medicare booklet summarizes his plans, including adding a prescription drug benefit and putting the Medicare surplus in a so-called "lockbox," to be spent only on the program and on paying down the national debt.
[Gore:] Some see that surplus as a piggy bank they can use for a tax cut that primarily benefits the wealthiest Americans at the expense of everyone else.
[Karl:] Gore also added some new details to his Medicare plans, including eliminating co-payments and deductibles for some preventative care services at a cost of $8 billion over 10 years, and steps to make it harder for HMOs to leave Medicare, including forcing them to sign up for two-year contracts instead of the current one year.
[Gore:] Here's my bottom line: tough new penalties for any HMO that tries to exclude or drop our seniors.
[Karl:] In a new criticism, Gore said George W. Bush's plan to give low-income seniors drug coverage could force seniors in some states to go to welfare offices to qualify. The Bush campaign dismissed Gore's charge as a "gross distortion." Gore's focus on Medicare comes after Republicans have spent millions over the last three weeks hammering his prescription drug plan. [Begin Video Clip, Rnc Ad]
[Narrator:] Gore's plan? When seniors turn 64, they must join a drug HMO selected by Washington.
[Karl:] Bush strategists say Gore's latest salvo on Medicare is a sign their attacks are working, forcing the vice president to respond. This is Gore's 11th trip to Florida since January. He has also spent nearly $2 million on television advertising here. The reason for the effort is simple. Gore's strategists think if they can win here, they'll win the election Judy.
[Woodruff:] Jonathan, why the focus this week on Medicare. Is it that they think the older voters are that important to Gore's doing well?
[Karl:] Well, they certainly think they're absolutely critical to doing well here in Florida and also in several of the other battleground states. They also believe that they've got a chance here that Bush has got some vulnerabilities on the Medicare issues. They believe that if Bush if Gore can talk about this issue, talk about what is wrong, in their view, with Bush's prescription drug plan, that they can win over those senior voters. Also tied into this, of course, is the Social Security plan, which they will be talking about as well this week.
[Woodruff:] All right. Jonathan Karl on the road in Florida, thanks Bernie.
[Shaw:] Now to Governor Bush and how his education theme is playing out in the Pacific Northwest this day. Here's our senior political correspondent Candy Crowley.
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Correspondent:] George Bush says jobs are plentiful, the Dow Jones is up, and the country is in a recession. He knew that would catch your attention.
[Bush:] America today is in the midst of an education recession that can threaten our very future. While many schools are doing well and Laura mentioned Austin High School, where our twin daughters went there are some, in the last 7 12 years, some schools have shown stagnation and decline. There are too many of our schools not meeting the challenge. Expectations are not high enough, performance is not strong enough, and our leaders are not bold enough to reverse this slide.
[Crowley:] The use of the word "recession" is an attempt to blunt Al Gore's strong suit, the booming economy, as well as to infuse a sense of urgency into the education issue.
[Bush:] When 68 percent of fourth-graders in our highest poverty schools cannot read a simple children's book, America faces an education recession.
[Crowley:] Returning to the classroom Monday, Bush pushed his $5 billion a year education program, which features a plan to allow parents of kids in failing schools to find another option, locally administered testing every year in every grade, and early and intensive reading instruction.
[Bush:] Just the other day, the secretary of education announced Gore's new three R's for American education: "relationships, resilience, and readiness." Now, that sounds nice.
[Crowley:] The Clinton-Gore administration, Bush charged, focuses on process, not children, regulations, not results. From here in Beaverton, Oregon, Bush moves onto Washington. Neither state has voted for a Republican presidential candidate in the last three elections. But within the numbers, the Bush camp sees a chance that their candidate could win here. And besides, if you take the electoral votes of Washington and Oregon, and add them up, they equal that of the electoral count in Michigan. And at this stage of the game, you have to keep every calculation open Bernie.
[Shaw:] Candy, education a Bush theme during the primaries, we all recall. But tactically, why a return to that subject now?
[Crowley:] Well, first of all, they're buoyed by the polls and believe that they are making headway by focusing on single issues day by day. Basically, they believe that education is a Bush strong suit and there's some polling that indicates that. When you're in a swing area, which Beaverton is here in Oregon, and you're trying to appeal to those all-important suburban moms, education is one of those issues that does it, that reaches out to them, and that's why they returned to it.
[Shaw:] OK, Candy Crowley in Oregon Judy.
[Woodruff:] Now, 43 days until the presidential election, and our daily tracking poll suggests Bush has had an upswing. Though the race is still neck and neck, Bush now leads Gore by three points in a CNN"USA Today"Gallup survey of likely voters. Now, that is a statistically insignificant margin, but no doubt a comfort to Bush, who trailed Gore by as much as 10 points in our survey last week. Our senior political analyst Bill Schneider joins us now from Los Angeles. Bill, is this a Bush gain or is it a Gore loss?
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Well, both. In the past four days, Gore has lost seven points and Bush has gained six. We're seeing that shift across the whole electorate: men, women, young voters, seniors, rich, poor, everybody. Maybe Gore's convention bounce is wearing off. You know, Judy, a kiss doesn't last forever.
[Woodruff:] That's right. Bill, what about Gore's, all of the talk last week about oil?
[Schneider:] Well, you know, it may have backfired. We know it didn't do Gore any good. Two weeks ago, we asked people which candidate would do a better job handling rising oil prices, and voters gave Bush a narrow edge. We asked the same question this weekend and got the same result, which means Gore certainly didn't gain anything from his move on oil prices. The timing of the move may have fed voters' suspicion that it was totally driven by politics. For the first time since the conventions, Gore had a bad week and Bush had a good week. Gore was forced to spend time defending himself against Bush's charges that he exaggerated how much his mother-in-law pays for prescription drugs compared with his dog, and explaining what he said was a joke that he was sung a union song as a lullaby when he was a child. He also raised $4 million at a Hollywood fund-raiser after denouncing the entertainment industry, which led Republicans to call him a hypocrite. Now, by comparison, Bush had a pretty good week: no gaffes, appealing appearances on "Oprah" and "Regis," and he stayed on his "cradle to grave" message all week, which is Bush's version of the safety net. You know, Judy, this thing could go down to the wire. A lot is riding on those debates. Bill, what about the voters? Are they paying more attention to all of this? Well, Judy, some are, and that could be a clue as to why Bush is making gains. A week ago, three-quarters of Republicans and three-quarters of Democrats said they were paying a lot of attention to the campaign. No difference. But that figure has now jumped over to 80 percent of Republicans, with no change among Democrats. Something is rallying the Republican base. Bush? Maybe. But maybe something else: perhaps a horrified realization that Gore really might win this election Judy.
[Woodruff:] All Right, Bill Schneider, thanks very much. And we will see you a little later Bernie.
[Shaw:] We're joined now by our political analysts: Bob Novak of the "Chicago Sun Times" and Ron Brownstein of the "Los Angeles Times." A double-barreled question: Why is this race so close? And how might it end? Ron.
[Ron Brownstein, "los Angeles Times":] Well, it is so close because you have, I think, two fundamental currents at work in this campaign that push in opposite directions. One is a general satisfaction with the way things are going in the country: the economy, crime, welfare. All of these things are moving in the positive direction. That benefits Al Gore as the incumbent party. On the other hand, you have a natural desire for change after eight years, reinforced by a lot of scandal and gridlock here in the especially in the second Clinton term. And that obviously helps the challenger, George W. Bush. Bernie, this is an extraordinary moment. This is the first time since 1980 that the lead has changed hands in Gallup poll after Labor Day, only the third time since 1960 that this has ever happened. We really are in unusual race between two candidates who are very closely matched at a time when the parties are almost at parity in the nation. And I think we're going to have some more twists and turns before it's over.
[Shaw:] Bob.
[Robert Novak, Cnn "crossfire":] This is really no surprise to people in both parties. Some of the old hands in the Gore party have said from the beginning that this reminds them very much of the 1960 race, which went back and forth continuously. And nobody really ever will know who got the most votes in that race. The I disagree with Ron to a certain degree, though. I think that what we have as to why it goes back and forth I think what we have here is two candidates who really disagree on the basic issue of the role of government. And they have a very strong base. Each one has a strong base: Bush for less government; Gore more for government. Now it's that other 10 percent, 12 percent, whatever it is in between, who is affected by things that really probably don't have anything to do with issues. It's gaffs. It's Gore looking pompous. It's Bush looking dopey. And that is why the good week, bad week is not just a figure of speech by reporters. It's something that really does affect the swing voter. But there is no doubt, this is not just a little blip. Just as there was a momentum for Gore after the Los Angeles convention, I think that there are several polls that show a momentum for Bush right now.
[Shaw:] Now, both of you, as being the journalists you are have in the backs of your notebooks information that sometimes you don't get a chance to impart. Ron alluded to upcoming twists and turns. What do you foresee?
[Brownstein:] Well, one thing that is very unusual about this race I think quite striking is the size of the battlefield. Both candidates, because they are relatively centrists, are proving capable of competing in states that the other side has usually considered their own. Look at today. Al Gore is in Florida, a state where the Democrats averaged less have 40 percent of the vote from 1968 through 1992. George Bush is in Washington and Oregon: states where the Democrats as Candy noted have won the last three campaigns. Bush is competing in Wisconsin, Iowa, West Virginia. Gore is adding Nevada to his buy list. And they're talking about possibly the DNC going on in Arizona and Colorado. I think one of the defining characteristics of this is just how big a battlefield. Sure, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio are important, but they're not the whole story anymore, because both candidates really can compete in a lot of different places.
[Novak:] The I think one of the interesting things, as many politicians told me, there can be no change in this race until the debates, because that's the next event. And we have the Olympics. Everybody is watching the Olympics. Number one, everybody is not watching the Olympics. That is first thing. And the second is, there can be changes. You yes, politics, you can have a good week or a bad week in between. I think that the number of states that are contested is going to is going to shrink pretty soon. Al Gore has made a valiant effort in Florida. But all my information is that Bush is back in the lead in Florida. And maybe he better abandon that and worry about those central states that are going to decide the election.
[Brownstein:] Gore has never demonstrated that he will really spend the money it takes to win Florida. He is close there. But he is letting Bush outspend him at least 2-1. And you know, it will cost a lot of money to really try for it.
[Shaw:] How are the Democrats reacting to Bush's movement?
[Novak:] I think they are very not happy about, because the some of the top people in the Gore campaign really expected to go into the debates six, seven points ahead, so all that Gore had to do was coast. I think that was unrealistic. So they are not happy about this at all. But nobody but I will tell you this, the quite frankly, the Democrats are less apt to panic than the Republicans. The Republicans are a little skittery. The Democrats have been through some hard times, so they are not panicking.
[Shaw:] Let's get away from politics. A very serious and regretful note: Over the weekend, Carl T. Rowan, 75 years old, a very famous American journalist and a friend former "Chicago Sun Times" syndicated columnist died.
[Novak:] Yes he was a colleague of mine in the Gridiron Club as well. He lived in two worlds, Bernie. He was a member of the Washington establishment, formerly ambassador to Finland, former sat with Lyndon Johnson's cabinet, a very prominent journalist, knew everybody in town. I mean, he was also a great battler for civil rights. He never gave it up. He was a courageous fighter in the South, exposing racism as a young reporter. And just recently, in recent years, he exposed corruption in the NAACP got a lot of criticism within the African- American community, but it was the right thing to do. He was a really, a towering figure. And he will be missed. And he was he was a lot fun at the Gridiron club, too. Sang from a he couldn't walk at the last meeting, but he sang played the part of Monica Lewinsky in the last show.
[Shaw:] I remember it. He came out on the stage. He was wearing a blue dress.
[Novak:] That's right.
[Shaw:] Bob Novak, "Chicago Sun Times," Ron Brownstein, the "Los Angeles Times," thanks very much. We are going to miss Carl.
[Woodruff:] Indeed, he will be missed. Thanks very much. That was great. And when INSIDE POLITICS returns: Is George W. Bush's assessment of the state of education in this country accurate? Our Brooks Jackson checks the facts.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Now for the latest on the Elian Gonzalez situation: another deadline is at hand in this case. About an hour from now, lawyers for the boy's Florida relatives and federal immigration officials will try again to negotiate an end to the impasse. Meanwhile, the family's attitude toward Elian's father may be changing. They initially wanted Juan Miguel Gonzalez to have supervised visits with his son. This morning, though, on CNN, a lawyer for the family said that Elian's father can stay at the relatives' house.
[Roger Bernstein, Gonzalez Family Atty:] From the very first day, when Juan Miguel asked Lazaro Gonzalez to take care of his boy, it has been extremely clear that they would welcome Juan Miguel into their home.
[Kagan:] For more now on the negotiations, let's check in with our Mark Potter, joining us live now from Miami. Mark, good morning.
[Mark Potter, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning. We're at the U.S. attorney's office, where, as you said, about an hour from now, the attorneys for Elian's relatives in Miami and government officials will resume their negotiations. This is the third day of negotiations; the first two last week failed to produce an agreement. Now, at issue are government demands that the family agree to turn Elian over to the boy's father, if the father comes to the United States or if the relatives lose their appeals in federal court. Looming over all of this, of course, is news today that Juan Miguel Gonzalez may soon file for a visa today at the U.S. intrasection in Havana. He's applying to come to the United States. Last night on Cuban television, President Fidel Castro read a letter from Juan Miguel Gonzalez, saying that he would come to the U.S. today alone if he could get a guarantee that he could take his boy back immediately to Cuba. Now, barring that likely unlikely scenario, he would then apply for visas for himself, his family, a group of medical specialists, teachers, even 12 of Elian's classmates, to come live with Elian until the appeals are completed.
[Pres. Fidel Castro, Cuba:] It should be understood that it is my right to create the minimum conditions required and to receive the support of Elian's classmates and teachers and a highly qualified people of my full confidence to help me in this task and my whole mission in America. Otherwise, such a trip would be senseless.
[Potter:] Now, in returning for Juan Miguel Gonzalez says before he agrees to come to the United States, he wants a guarantee that he will be able to take custody of his son. The INS, the U.S. government and the Justice Department are all in favor of that. But the attorneys for the Miami relatives are opposed to it, claiming it could emotionally harm the boy, such a quick transfer to the father. They are asking that an independent psychologist make the determination of what's best for the boy, of whether he should be transferred to the father's custody. An attorney for the father says Juan Miguel Gonzalez has no problem with discussions over how best to effect a transition in a humane and sensitive way, but he ultimately wants a guarantee before agreeing to come to the United States, that he will get custody of his son. This the Mark Potter, CNN, reporting live from Miami.
[Bill Hemmer:] Well, we thought at the end of last week we might have some movement in the case; hasn't happened. We'll see, maybe, possibly within 24 hours. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Krya Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Afghanistan is not only one of the most remote countries on Earth, it can also be one of the most dangerous. The Taliban government has arrested 24 aide workers and accused them of illegally promoting Christianity. Two of the aide workers are American women, and U.S. officials say they expect them to be treated fairly. Christian proselytizing is a crime punishable by death in Afghanistan. And joining us to talk about his personal experiences of danger in that country is Robert Pelton, author of "The World's Most Dangerous Places." Hello, Robert.
[Robert Pelton, Author, "the World's Most Dangerous Places":] Good morning.
[Phillips:] Do you find anything unusual about this, first off, about this case?
[Pelton:] Not really. This is, just part of an ongoing program by the religious police in Afghanistan to sort of cleanse or to fundamentalize Afghanistan.
[Phillips:] But what do you think that will happen to these aide workers?
[Pelton:] Well typically, if the past is any indication, they will probably be released. They're basically sending them a message. I don't think that they are going to actually be tried and punished inside of Afghanistan.
[Phillips:] Has it ever happened before?
[Pelton:] It's happened quite frequently. They frequently arrested outsiders or foreigners for breaking Islamic law, and typically there's a little bit of a cafafo, they're jailed for a few days, and then they're released with a warning.
[Phillips:] So why do you think that there shouldn't be a concern with regard to these workers?
[Pelton:] Well, there should always be a concern, of course. And also the new edict for the death penalty for proselytizing is fairly new. I think there should be concern, but I think there should obviously be some negotiation and understanding that it doesn't benefit anyone by punishing Christians under the Islamic law.
[Phillips:] Let's talk about your personal experience. As a journalist, you went over there. You met with the Taliban. You also met with Masud, the leader of the resistance party. Did you were you at any point ever fearful?
[Pelton:] Not really. I mean, you have to remember that the Talebs are not the elected government of Afghanistan, and the people in the north and the south are basically the same. They are very poor, devout group of people, who are very, hospitable to the foreigners.
[Phillips:] What was your conversation like with the Taliban?
[Pelton:] They were upset, because they were our allies in the '80s, of course, against the Russians, and they were very upset that we had now demonized them, even though they were the exact same people. Their brand of religious fundamentalism is not that extreme to them, but they live in an extreme country.
[Phillips:] So here you were talking with them, but you also wanted to get the other side, so you wanted meet with Masud and talk the resistance side of things. What happened when you told Taliban leaders that you wanted to do that?
[Pelton:] They welcomed it. The Taliban leaders are not trying to isolate themselves. They want the people to let them run their run their country as they see fit, and they've chosen obviously Islam as the basic tenets, but it's no different than places like Malaysia or Saudi Arabia, where there is a preponderance of Muslim's inside the country.
[Phillips:] Now tell me about the I understand that you were stranded in the Kashmir mountain, is that correct?
[Pelton:] Well I had to sneak into Afghanistan, so, I...
[Phillips:] So the Taliban was not happy then that you were meeting with Masud. You had to sneak back in?
[Pelton:] No, it was actually the Russians that were trying to keep me out of Afghanistan. They have a shoot-to-kill order along the border of Tijikistan, on the north there, and so I had to sneak into the north. It's very difficult to get into the north. It's much easier to get into the south, and actually there's tourists going into Afghanistan right now.
[Phillips:] So would you ever go back?
[Pelton:] I enjoy that country very, very much.
[Phillips:] Then again, I know you enjoy dangerous places, too. Robert Pelton, thank you so much for joining us.
[Pelton:] Thank you.
[Phillips:] All right. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Now, at this hour, the House of Representatives is set to debate the issues of human cloning. On the table, two competing bans on cloning, including one that makes it a federal crime. Joining us now is our medical correspondent Rea Blakey out of Washington Rea.
[Rea Blakey, Cnn Correspondent:] Leon, the controversial issue of human cloning hit the House floor with a fervor this morning, though the debate won't begin for a few hours. Representative Don Sherwood, Republican from Pennsylvania, launched the first salvo.
[Rep. Don Sherwood , Pennsylvania:] Mr. Speaker, the columnist Charles Krauthammer called legislation that we're going to consider today to permit cloning human embryos "a nightmare and an abomination." Well, it truly is. Some of those who support this proposal are so eager to clone human beings that they have taken to twisting the truth to promote their arguments. The latest thing they're saying is that cloned embryos are not really embryos at all. They said if you use body cells instead of sperm to fertilize an egg that really isn't an embryo. Mr. Speaker, that's ridiculous.
[Blakey:] CNN House producer Ted Barrett tells us the debate won't get under way until closer to 1:00, perhaps 2:00. Meanwhile, the House will spend time debating the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001, which was introduced by Florida Republican Dave Weldon. It would make it unlawful to perform or attempt to perform human cloning, to ship or receive for any purpose any embryo produced by human cloning. The penalties would include up to 10 years in prison andor a minimum $1 million fine. Then there's alternative legislation that will also be considered. It is proposed by Pennsylvania Republican Jim Greenwood. It would also ban human cloning but it would allow embryo cloning for research purposes, which, Leon, gets back to the stem cell debate, since that debate is focused on the stem cells available in the embryos. Now, a vote, again, is expected later today, perhaps closer to 6:00. President Bush, who is still deciding whether to lift the ban on federally funded stem cell research, does, in fact, support a federal ban on human cloning.
[Harris:] Thank you very much, Rea Blakey in Washington. Let's talk some more about this now, have, I guess, some debate on this. Congressman Peter Deutsch of Florida is the co-sponsor of the bill that would leave the door open for stem cell research and Congressman Dave Weldon, whose bill makes all forms of cloning a crime. Gentlemen, thank you very much for your time this morning. I want to start with you, Congressman Weldon. Why is it then that you think every single version of this should be made a crime?
[Rep. Dave Weldon , Florida:] Well, I don't think there's any way that you can prevent the creation of human clones without stopping it from the very beginning. We're talking about crossing a threshold here. We're no longer discussing using the "excess" embryos in the freezers for stem cell research. We're now talking about creating clones, creating embryos for destructive research purposes. And specifically, if you look at the National Bioethics Advisory Commission recommendations on stem cell research from about three or four years ago, they specifically imply that creating embryos for destructive research purposes is unethical. They imply that using excess embryos is an ethical thing to do. And so what we're really debating here is whether we want to jump over that line and start creating embryos for destruction.
[Harris:] All right, Congressman Deutsch, then why would you want to, if you will, jump over that line?
[Rep. Peter Deutsch , Florida:] Well, I think first of all the key in the sense of the debate, and Dr. Weldon and I agree on a great many things. Neither one of us want to see any human cloning and there's a very clear line where that exists. And the legislation that I support would absolutely ban human cloning as well and there's ethical and practical reasons about that.
[Harris:] And I can interrupt...
[Deutsch:] But I think you do...
[Harris:] I'm sorry to interrupt, but I want you to clarify one point, if you can, before you move on. When you say human cloning, do you mean therefore and thereby, embryo cloning as well?
[Deutsch:] Well, again, let's, and this is where a lot of Americans and a lot of members of Congress are going to have to learn a little bit of science. What is going on in the procedure, and again, he describes it as human cloning embryos. I think it's accurately described in the scientific community as somatic cell nuclear transfer. And let's talk, and we have to get into some of the specifics. You know, when we talk about an embryo, we talk about a sperm and an egg coming together to create an embryo with a potentiality of a unique human life. What this procedure is, is an egg of a mammalian species, obviously in the human situation a female, and literally taking that egg and taking out the 23 chromosomes in that egg and then taking a cell in a body, literally one of the trillions of cells that exist in a body, and taking out the 46 chromosomes in one of those cells and putting them in an egg, not for any purpose of human cloning, but somatic cell nuclear transfer. And the reason that it's done or that it is potentially done is related to the whole issue of stem cell research. The president and my friends and colleagues on the other side of the stem cell issue, including Dr. Weldon, have lost that debate because the American people understand really the potentiality. Again, it's an issue, it's a significant issue. But as he talked about the fact that in in vitro fertilization embryos are created that would be literally thrown out if not used for research. What this research is, the somatic cell nuclear transfer research is that once you have these stem cells, which literally have incredible potential. Just today, insulin stem cells were announced, you know, that they were actually developed in research in Israel, just literally yesterday. But that research has no application if you can't put it into people. And it's very similar to the issue of organ transplants. The stem cell research, this incredible potentiality to cure paralysis, to cure Parkinson's, to cure Alzheimer's...
[Weldon:] I'd like to respond to some of this.
[Deutsch:] ... literally, you know, the most horrific things in the human condition won't have any potentiality if you can't put them into someone. So this is not creating life, this is giving life.
[Harris:] Well, I want to give Congressman Weldon a chance to respond to that.
[Weldon:] What he is, the argument he is trying to put forward is that the technology that created Dolly, if you apply it to humans, that those human embryos that are created are somehow not human embryos. And there's no biological and no scientific basis to support his position. The position that he is arguing is like questioning whether Dolly is a sheep or not. The path they want to go down is to create thousands, millions of human embryos in the lab for destructive research purposes, no longer talking about using excess embryos in the freezers at the in vitro fertilization clinics. But now we're going to start creating embryos. I think that's a line that most Americans do not want to cross. I believe there is a lot of promising research that can be done without us creating human embryos for destruction.
[Harris:] You know, whichever way this goes I think we're sitting here and we're hearing this morning part of the problem that the public may be having with trying to decide which way they want to go on this issue. The talk, the jargon, if you will, is so technical that it's kind of hard to crystallize exactly what it is we're talking about here on each side. Is there any better way to communicate this, and I'm going to begin with you, Congressman Deutsch? Is there any better way to crystallize exactly what it is, the position that you're taking is actually proposing?
[Deutsch:] Well, I think, again, you're hearing a fairly good part of the debate right now. I think, you know, the people who have been trying to prevent stem cell research and I think Dr. Weldon is amongst those people and he should acknowledge it. I mean, you know, it's a very hard thing...
[Weldon:] I support stem cell research.
[Deutsch:] Right. But without stem cells which not with embryonic stem cells. So you keep mentioning the embryos that are going to be thrown out anyway dealing with infertility and you and I both know that you don't support using embryonic stem cells, which everyone in the scientist community is saying that have the best potentiality for research. And...
[Weldon:] No, my position is on federal funding.
[Harris:] I want to get from Congressman Weldon the final word on this then we have to go.
[Weldon:] My position is on federal funding. I have never proposed making embryonic stem cell research illegal.
[Deutsch:] Right, and the practical matter, as he well knows, is that the position he takes has the effect of banning embryonic stem cell research.
[Weldon:] That is not true. That's not true.
[Harris:] I think we're all beginning to get a bit of the germ of exactly what's been going on with this issue and the debate no doubt will continue and continue to be even we'll watch it. Congressman Deutsch and Congressman Weldon, thank you very much for your time this afternoon.
[Weldon:] Thank you.
[Harris:] Appreciate it.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] We do have a couple of financial numbers to report to you that have just come out. I've got them for you right now. Personal income and personal spending are out just a few moments ago. Personal income is up three-tenths of a percent; personal spending up four-tenths of a percent. Chris Huntington joins us now to tell us why all of this is important. How does this measure up, first of all, Chris, with analyst expectations this morning?
[Chris Huntington, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, both those numbers are one-tenth of a percent higher than what analysts were expecting. But they continue a trend that has been going on for a long time in the United States. And that is that Americans are spending more than they make. And how are we doing it? On credit cards. Credit card debt is exploding in this country. And it's one of big things hanging over the otherwise very solid consumer spending in this country.
[Mcedwards:] Well, and important for analysts to watch, too, because the theory is that it is that consumer spending that has been warding off a recession.
[Huntington:] Pretty much so. Consumer spending and the housing market have been doing more than their share to prop up the economy. And there is a lot of concern about the possible erosion of that spending. And, indeed, if credit card debt continues mounting the way it is, a lot of folks are concerned that that will simply be the shoe that drops.
[Mcedwards:] And as these numbers sort of inch up as they have been, can you make any conclusions about the financial health of people in the United States?
[Huntington:] Well, one thing that is happening is that both while incomes and spending are growing and, indeed, spending is growing a little bit faster they're not growing as rapidly as they did, say, last year. So, overall, the indication is clear that people are slowing down. The economy is slowing down. The worrisome sign, however, is that people are continuing to spend a little bit more than they earn.
[Mcedwards:] And, Chris, consumer confidence coming out later this morning?
[Huntington:] We get it at about 10:00 this morning Eastern time. That's expected to be about flat with where it's been for the last couple of months, essentially at depressed levels from where we were six months ago, but well above the levels of the last recession.
[Mcedwards:] All right, Chris Huntington, thanks very much. Appreciate it. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] An intense bombing campaign in eastern Afghanistan continues, and U.S. troops and Afghan ground fighters have teamed up to try and root out al Qaeda and Taliban forces believed to be regrouping in a remote mountainous region around Gardez. CNN's Brian Palmer has more on this offensive that's being called the biggest in Afghanistan this year.
[Brian Palmer, Cnn Correspondent:] U.S. military helicopters, Chinooks and Apaches, hugged the terrain near Bagram Airfield, a former Soviet base now being used by U.S. forces in support of continuing operations in Afghanistan. More than 100 miles to the south, battle rages in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan between Afghan forces supported by U.S. and coalition forces and al Qaeda and Taliban fighters.
[Major A.c. Roper:] Operations continue south of Gardez in Afghanistan. Firefights have been intense, at times in heavy combat actions. The exact size of the enemy forces occupying a series of cave complexes is not known. Afghan, U.S., and coalition forces are involved in eliminating al Qaeda and non-Afghan Taliban forces in the area.
[Palmer:] The operation began on Friday, Afghanistan time, with U.S. B-52 bombers striking al Qaeda and Taliban forces near the [inaudible] district of Pachtia Province. An Afghan ground offensive with 500 to 600 men, along with a smaller number of American troops followed on Saturday and met heavy resistance. U.S. B-52 bombers struck again on Saturday and on Sunday. This is believed to be the largest joint military operation this year. An Afghan intelligence official says it was months in the planning. Several residents of neighboring Logar Province said U.S. military recruited local commanders and fighters for the campaign. Brian Palmer, CNN, Kabul.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Now to the conflict in the Middle East: Secretary of State Colin Powell is pushing leaders there to make the most of what is still a shaky cease-fire. As Andrea Koppel reports, Powell is hoping to return to Washington with a better understanding of what both sides really want.
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn Correspondent:] Secretary of State Powell arrived in Jerusalem with modest expectations as to just how much he could achieve, yet, he says, determined to press Israel's prime minister for answers. In particular, Powell said, he hoped Ariel Sharon would better define what he told President Bush this week: that there would have to be quote "complete quiet for 10 days" before Israel would move forward to implement the next step laid out in the Mitchell Committee blueprint for peace.
[Colin Powell, Secretary Of State:] We hope we will reach a situation in the next few days, next couple of weeks, where everybody looking at it, including Mr. Sharon, will say it seems like we have reached a level of violence that's or a level of quiet and lack of violence that satisfies our requirements to move forward in a cooling- off period.
[Koppel:] The Bush administration believes that, in recent days, there has been a slight improvement in the level of violence. Still, two weeks after CIA Director George Tenet brokered this tentative cease-fire, Prime Minister Sharon is under tremendous political pressure at home to retaliate against Palestinian acts of violence. But following talks with Secretary Powell, Egypt's government insisted the Palestinians are doing their part.
[Ahmed Maher, Egyptian Foreign Minister:] We think Yasser Arafat is doing the most he can do. On the other side, we hope that the other side does the same because we still hear and see provocative words and provocative actions.
[Koppel:] And while Powell says he isn't bringing any new ideas, he said he hopes to work with the parties to lay out a timeline to fully implement the Mitchell Committee blueprint.
[Powell:] All of us believe that the Mitchell Committee report is the essential plan, the essential document that must be used to try to bring a resolution to this crisis. It gives us a clear road map ahead.
[Koppel:] Secretary Powell has made clear he doesn't view his mission here this week as a quick fix. Rather, he said, it's going to be a long, difficult process, one he likened, in his words, to going up a hill very, very slowly, one step at a time. Andrea Koppel, CNN, Jerusalem.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] The European markets, at this point, enjoying a nice bounce after that big bounce on Wall Street yesterday.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Anchor:] And Adrienne Roberts, of the "Financial Times," joins us from the "FT"'s London newsroom. Tell us, looks like U.S. spillover, there is other optimism in European markets. What's going on today?
[Adrienne Roberts, "financial Times":] There definitely is some spillover, I think. After four days of worrying about interest rates and the record low for the euro yesterday, the sun has come out again, everybody is feeling exuberant. I think the non-farm payrolls data and the PMI data today has created some quite optimistic feelings. I think most of the European markets also are expecting those numbers to come out softish. The rallies, basically, are being led across Europe by the tech and the telecom stocks. We have some tremendously strong performances coming through, Colt Telecom in London is trading more than nine percent higher, France Telecom is roughly six percent higher. We've got results today from Telefonica in Spain, not wonderful results, the net profit figures are actually slightly down on the same period last year, but the results are in the upper end of the expected range and also there is some understanding on the part of the market that Telefonica's South American expansion in the last year also has hit the bottom-line quite hard. But also Vodafone upgraded by Merrill Lynch recently, the outlook there that they are trading at about five percent higher. So it is right across the board, very strong performances.
[Haffenreffer:] The euro looks relatively steady at this point, the pound a bit higher in today's trading?
[Roberts:] That's right. Well, long at last the euro is, last time I looked, roughly above the 88.8 cent level. Of course, it hit a low of 88.4 yesterday afternoon. We don't know whether it is out of the woods yet. Of course, the next big potential stumbling block for the euro is late September, when Denmark votes on whether or not to join the European Union. Some economists are suggesting that if that is a no vote, the euro might be in for another high jump. Sterling also, of course, the problem with sterling is that it may be weak against the dollar, but it is still pretty strong against the euro and that's where a lot of the damage is being done to Britain's manufacturers. So, still, that's a fairly unsatisfactory situation for the
[U.k. Haffenreffer:] All right, Adrienne Roberts, at the "Financial Times," thanks for the update.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] While tens and thousands gather in L.A. this week, thousands also will gather in Memphis, Tennessee. They are paying tribute to the king there: Elvis Presley. Todd Morgan, creative services director of Graceland, has met a lot of folks who have come to town year after year. He joins us by telephone now from Memphis. Sir, good morning to you.
[Todd Morgan, Creative Resources Director, Graceland:] Good morning.
[Hemmer:] Tell us about this week. When will things really kick into gear, and how many do you expect?
[Morgan:] We have been in high gear all week, several days now, and the excitement keeps building.
[Hemmer:] The folks who come by there, what's interesting about these people? I'd imagine, based on the videotape we see from year to year, including what we are watching right now, is that they get quite involved?
[Morgan:] They do. Elvis's fans are very broadbased, it is all ages, all backgrounds, all parts of the world, yet they all seem like one big family. It is thousands of good friends, not thousands of strangers.
[Hemmer:] Anything new or unique about this year, Todd?
[Morgan:] Well, a lot of good stuff going on. Big news for us was the launch of our all-new Web site design: elvis-presley.com.
[Hemmer:] I think we have that actually. We will pull that up. And, as we do, why don't you keep on talking about that, Todd?
[Morgan:] A lot of Elvis's fans and admirers are on-line, and we are encouraging all of them to get hooked up, because it is a way to stay in touch with us and with Elvis fans all over the world, every day forever. And we have got lots of new features, and lots of new design and content, streaming video, lots more music and photography, and just everything that you could imagine. And we will just be increasing that content exponentially from now on, now that we have got this new platform. And a historic first for us will be tomorrow night, when we do the first ever live, vigil-cast on our Web site. We are going to take people all over the world live to the candlelight vigil from 8:45 p.m. Central time until 11:00. And it will be a chance for people all over the world to be here in a way.
[Hemmer:] All right, Todd Morgan, have a good week, OK?
[Morgan:] Thank a lot.
[Hemmer:] Best of luck to you. The first e-week for Elvis, meaning electronic. Todd, thanks.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] Now the case against Timothy McVeigh. Defense lawyers want to seek another postponement of the Oklahoma City bomber's execution, and they plan to talk it over with their client. McVeigh is scheduled to die June 11. A motion could be filed as early as tomorrow at federal court in Denver, and that is where CNN's Susan Candiotti is for us this morning Susan.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Colleen. Timothy McVeigh's lawyers are planning on meeting with their client on Thursday morning. They'll be going over paperwork they'd like to file on his behalf before trial Judge Richard Matsch, here in Denver. His lawyers say they're optimistic that McVeigh will sign off on a motion seeking to stop the June 11 execution. The decision to file, his lawyers say, is solely McVeigh's. They will be meeting with him for the second time since May 16, the date of McVeigh's original execution. Now this latest move came about as McVeigh's lawyers continued to pore over more than 4,000 pages of documents provided to them by the FBI, not previously turned over before the trial. His lawyers say that they need more time to review these documents. The Justice Department insists that the lawyers have had sufficient time to review all of these documents, and the Justice Department argues that there is nothing in those documents to cast any doubt on McVeigh's conviction. However, if indeed that motion is filed on Thursday, it could cast a doubt on whether McVeigh will be executed as scheduled June 11 Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] Susan is it clear yet what Timothy McVeigh wants? I mean, didn't he long ago drop any further appeals?
[Candiotti:] He did. As a matter of fact, last December, he waived his right to all further appeals, and even passed on a chance to seek clemency from President Bush. However, things change. We have had this admitted blunder by the FBI, in failing to turn over certain documents, and at the very least, McVeigh's lawyers have been able to convince their client to consider all of his options before signing off or waiving all further appeals. They want him to take a look at these documents and seek judicial review.
[Mcedwards:] All right, now help me out with the process a little bit here. What does the court do with this motion?
[Candiotti:] Trial Judge Richard Matsch has several options before him. At the very least, many legal experts say, he could ask the Justice Department to file a response to whatever the attorneys are expected to file. And then he also has the option of scheduling a hearing. Of course, all of this is expected to happen in rapid order.
[Mcedwards:] CNN's Susan Candiotti, in Denver, thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jim Moret, Co-host:] Hi everyone, I'm Jim Moret in Hollywood. Laurin Sydney is in New York. It's been a very Merry Christmas for Tom Hanks. Moviegoers put $41.5 million under his tree as they turned out to see "Cast Away." It's the best opening ever for a Hanks film. Mel Gibson, meanwhile, came in second for the holiday weekend with his comedy, "What Women Want." It earned another $21.5 million.
[Laurin Sydney, Co-host:] Helen Hunt was in competition with herself this weekend, co-starring in the No. 2 and the No. 1 films. Sherri Sylvester talked with one of Hollywood's hardest working women.
[Sherri Sylvester, Cnn Correspondent:] Helen Hunt is one woman who knows what she wants and that apparently is career overdrive. Since her jump from sitcom to silver screen, the Oscar- winning actress has been working nonstop with Oscar-winning co-stars. In this film, they're Marisa Tomei and Mel Gibson. Her next, "Cast Away" stars two-time winner Tom Hanks. Add "Pay it Forward" with best actor Kevin Spacey, and earlier this year "Dr. T and the Women" with A-list director Robert Altman.
[Helen Hunt, Actress:] Just try to find a movie that I'm not in. Go ahead, try, just try. [Begin Video Clip, "what Women Want"]
[Hunt:] Don't fall for a guy at work. Don't fall for a guy at work.
[Sylvester:] To prepare for "What Women Want." she watched "Woman of the Year," the 1942 Spencer Tracy, Katherine Hepburn film. Hunt did no other homework.
[Hunt:] I felt like what I could bring to it rather than a lot of homework was just a sense of fun, you know, just try to have fun on the set.
[Sylvester:] While there was fun to come, Mel Gibson was apprehensive early on about his first romantic comedy, fears Hunt says were unfounded.
[Hunt:] This is a guy who can play the depth of drama that he played in "The Patriot" and can do action movies and then do "Hamlet." I didn't think, you know, running around with me in a romantic comedy was going to be the thing that brought him down. I was not surprised. He did a good job.
[Sylvester:] She did bring him down to the ground while filming a kissing scene in a restaurant booth.
[Hunt:] You and I made out. And if I may, it was...
[Mel Gibson, Actor:] Sexy as hell.
[Hunt:] At one point, we twisted so much that I fell off the chair. So that wasn't so slick. Beautiful lyrical central moment bang.
[Sylvester:] Since the film is based on Gibson's ability to hear women's thoughts, it depends on perfectly-paced reactions. That required a third performer off camera. [Begin Video Clip, "what Women Want"]
[Hunt:] Oh, god, I looked at his crotch. I hope he didn't see me. Oh, I just looked at it again. Stop it.
[Hunt:] We would rehearse once where I would say the inner thoughts as well as what I am saying to him. And then this actress, on the second time through, would say the inner thoughts while I filled the time somehow.
[Sylvester:] Off screen, Hunt keeps her private life private, saying nothing about her separation just after their marriage. In interviews, she's all work talk but does laugh about a scientific study claiming men listen with only half of their brain.
[Hunt:] I kind of want to jump out of a window, but I'm trying to hang on. What are they doing with the other half? But really, what is it doing, just sitting there?
[Sylvester:] This season, the other half may be watching a Helen Hunt movie. Sherri Sylvester, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Moret:] Helen Hunt is not in one movie opening Wednesday, and that is "Traffic." Steven Soderbergh's drug war film is earning some of the best reviews of the year, just a few months after he hit it big with "Erin Brockovich." Paul Vercammen talked with the team caught in "Traffic." [Begin Video Clip, "traffic"]
[Unidentified Actor:] We need to take down one of these cartels.
[Unidentified Actress:] I want the principal witness against my husband killed.
[Unidentified Actor:] It's all about the money.
[Paul Vercammen, Cnn Correspondent:] Steven Soderbergh criss-crosses three tales of the drug trade in "Traffic". The director and "Traffic" are stacking up awards, including best movie by the New York film critics and five Golden Globe nominations. Soderbergh received nods for directing "Erin Brockovich" and "Traffic".
[Steven Soderbergh, Director:] Where were your hands?
[Vercammen:] Soderbergh filmed almost every frame of "Traffic" himself, often hand-held.
[Soderbergh:] The crew was very small, actually, and when you've got sort of the camera on your shoulder and you're just kind of running around, it felt like a huge student film.
[Vercammen:] "Traffic's" look is often raw, stripped of color, especially scenes where Benecio Del Toro plays policeman in Mexico.
[Sodebergh:] At some point we were like a bad country band doing some sort of southwest, you know, tour, you know, spending the night here, working the next day, then getting in the car and moving to another place to shoot a little scene.
[Vercammen:] Del Toro received a best supporting actor Golden Globe nomination. So did Catherine Zeta-Jones as the wife of a jailed drug trader living in San Diego.
[Catherine Zeta-jones, Actress:] She's not letting anybody bring down the walls of her palace or take away from her children something you know, that she never had. [Begin Video Clip, "traffic"]
[Jones:] I'm not bringing a child into the life that I was born up into.
[Vercamman:] Soderbergh and Jones agreed to incorporate her real- life pregnancy into the plot further raising the stakes for her character and increasing pampering on set.
[Jones:] It's the best it ever gets. You've got like at beck and call. You have them running around with stools and things for your feet, and ice packs for your ankles, and a little massage, shoulder massage here, and a toe rub there.
[Vercamman:] At home, that's Jones' husband, Michael Douglas' , job, and being dad to a baby boy. Do you change diapers?
[Michael Douglas, Actor:] Oh, sure. That's the easy part. You know, he's not eating solids yet.
[Vercamman:] In "Traffic", Douglas plays the nation's new drug czar.
[Douglas:] A very ambitious, conservative, squeaky clean, going to Washington, being indoctrinated into our government's drug policies, and then at the same moment discovering that his 17-year-old daughter is spun out of control on drugs. "Traffic's" different spins on the drug war are good bets to capture several Academy Award nominations. Paul Vercammen, CNN Entertainment News, Hollywood.
[Sydney:] "Survivor" captivates viewers this year. How big will reality TV be in 2001? And Ricky Martin knocks them dead on tour to promote his new album.

[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] We understand Ari Fleischer, the White House press secretary, has just come in to the Briefing Room. Let's listen in.
[Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary:] ...and that area included portions of the West Wing, the Eisenhower Executive Office Building and the North Lawn, including the press area here. The vehicle was inspected and it was cleared and all events resumed at normal pace and schedule at the White House shortly before noon. The president and the vice president were never affected at any time by this incident. And that is my statement on the matter dealing with the Secret Service this morning. Let me make a second announcement. The Senate just recently this morning also, in an important victory for Americans who believe in promoting conservation and exploration of America's energy supplies, voted by an overwhelmingly bipartisan 67-33 to secure agreement for the proposal President Bush made to develop America's energy resources in a conservation-friendly way in the Gulf of Mexico. Today's vote is a victory for all Americans who want to see environmentally responsible energy production to help protect consumers from wild fluctuations in energy prices and increase America's energy independence from foreign supplies of oil and gas. This vote shows that bipartisan consensus can be reached on a plan to address America's needs. The vote represents yet another example of how President Bush is working and will keep his word to balance the need to address our energy needs with local concerns. The president worked very hard with officials of all states in the Gulf of Mexico in development of that plan, and the president is pleased that an effort to overturn the compromise that he reached was not agreed to by a very overwhelming bipartisan vote in the Senate.
[Question:] Ari, who did the automobile in question belong to? And what was the nature of the material that caused the dog to react?
[Fleischer:] The automobile in question belonged to a staffer of a member of Congress who was here for a meeting with the president.
[Question:] Who was that?
[Fleischer:] That's a matter for the Secret Service. I'm not going to name whoever it was.
[Question:] Do you know what it was that the dog hit on?
[Fleischer:] It's unclear. I think the Secret Service might have more specific information on it. Obviously, what the dog hit on did not develop.
[Question:] Just one more question if I could follow-up real quickly. Have you been able to find out if this is the first time that a portion of the West Wing has been evacuated?
[Fleischer:] I'm not aware. I have not previously been asked that. I'll be happy to try to find out.
[Question:] Was the president in the Oval Office during the time that the car appeared?
[Fleischer:] No. The president was on the patio behind the Oval Office and then he had lunch with the vice president. They were initially out on the patio and they had their lunch in their routine office where they also do, the small dining room just off the Oval Office.
[Question:] In addition to your office, there was some suggestion that Condoleezza Rice's office, because of the proximity to the vehicle, was also evacuated. Can you confirm that?
[Fleischer:] As I indicated, the areas that were evacuated included portions of the West Wing. Those would be all the northern portions of the West Wing. In other words, any portion of the West Wing that had glass in the area where the vehicle was found, in the proximity the closest proximity to where the vehicle was found. The vehicle was very close to the gate so it was a lengthy distance from the vehicle to the West Wing. Nevertheless, the entire northern portion of the West Wing was evacuated. That would include the offices of the national security adviser. Also, of course, the North Lawn where many reporters were I'd like to thank the reporters for your cooperation with the Secret Service in agreeing to leave as quickly as you did and the Eisenhower Executive Office Building as well the northeastern portions of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building were also evacuated.
[Question:] Where did you go and where did the national security adviser go during this period of evacuation?
[Fleischer:] I went into the vice president's office and made some phone calls from there and then I met with the president down on his patio.
[Question:] Do you have any idea where Condi went?
[Fleischer:] I do not.
[Question:] How do they calculate this area that you were saying that they've calculated an area? We have these things happen from time to time.
[Fleischer:] Well, the Secret Service are some of the nation's leading experts in this type of protection for the people who are fortunate enough to work within these gates. And they made the determination about how many feet were necessary to evacuate from within the reach of that vehicle. And that is the reason why they evacuated these portions of the White House complex.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] different about this incident from others you've had other incidents in the driveway where the guy came out in the, you know, Michelin Tire-looking outfit to check things and...
[Fleischer:] It was the reaction of the dogs, which are trained in these matters.
[Question:] Was there another dog brought in for an effective second opinion or just this one dog? I'm serious about that.
[Fleischer:] I think you should double-check with the Secret Service. My understanding, it was a solo canine opinion.
[Question:] And do they know how experienced this dog was? Had the dog ever had a false...
[Fleischer:] You should ask the Secret Service that.
[Question:] And was the mansion at all affected by evacuation?
[Fleischer:] No, it was not.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] returned or is the Secret Service still going over it?
[Fleischer:] My understanding is everything was cleared and the owner took the vehicle back.
[Question:] In general, the cars which have congressional tags are not checked at the gate; as a courtesy they are allowed to drive in. And does this incident would that spark any reconsideration of that?
[Fleischer:] I cannot get into the manner in which the Secret Service asks for security purposes at the White House gates. I will simply say, as with all incidents, the Secret Service is always reviewing actions to make certain that the White House, the president, the vice president and all the guests are safe as always. And so, they always conduct a review and...
[Question:] Are those cars exempt?
[Fleischer:] You're asking questions about specific security matters at the White House, and you know those are not topics I can talk about.
[Question:] Because of this scare, is there a thought that there might be a change in how cars or what cars are allowed in the northwest driveway area?
[Fleischer:] As I indicated, the Secret Service always review their activities to make certain that they are taking all appropriate steps to protect people within the gates of the White House. And that'll be something the Secret Service, if they decide to look at, will look at.
[Question:] Will this have an affect on the president's decision about reopening Pennsylvania Avenue to traffic?
[Fleischer:] I think it's too soon to say if there'll be affect of this whatsoever. I don't see a connection.
[Question:] Yesterday when you said in the gaggle that on the Salvation Army story "that if people had checked deeper they would have seen it does not reach the senior staff level of the White House." Did you known then that Karl Rove and the number two person at the faith-based office had some involvement in this issue?
[Fleischer:] Keep reading.
[Question:] Oh, OK. "If people had checked deeper they would have seen that this did not even reach the senior staff level of the White House, comma, that the words, "firm commitment," were obviously a misread of the White House."
[Wallace:] As you hear, Ari Fleischer, the White House press secretary, addressing questions from reporters on other matters. He did, though, talk about the incidents surrounding this morning, the evacuation the partial evacuation of the north side of the West Wing. And also, the evacuation of the northeastern side of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. Ari Fleischer saying that the Secret Service determined this based on suspicions raised by a bomb-sniffing dog, about a car parked here at the White House on the White House grounds in the driveway.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] A Dick Cheney trip to the region might not happen. The vice president now says there is no way he can meet with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat before Wednesday's Arab summit. But that's not all that's still up in the air.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] Still no decision from the Israeli government as to whether Yasser Arafat will be allowed to travel to the Arab summit in Beirut. The Israeli prime minister has suggested to the U.S. vice president that it may be more important for Sharon himself to address the summit rather than Arafat.
[Ariel Sharon, Israeli Prime Minister:] I told Vice President Cheney that when one discusses the future and the fate of Israel, the most important thing is to hear first and foremost the position of Israel and its plans for the future.
[Nabil Abu-rudeineh, Yasser Arafat's Adviser:] The presence of President Arafat at the Arab summit is very important, and this decision is a crucial decision, and this would be decided within the coming 24 hours.
[Hanna:] Arafat's travel plans ultimately dependent on whether or not special U.S envoy Anthony Zinni succeeds in his attempts to negotiate a cease-fire. But even as Palestinian and Israeli security chiefs hold another round of talks, the violence continues, an Israeli woman shot and killed by Palestinian gunmen near a Jewish settlement in the West Bank, and shortly afterwards, a Palestinian police officer killed by Israeli forces who say they were fired upon. Another four Palestinians shot and killed by Israeli forces in a firefight near the Jordan border. In the West Bank city of Nablus, the funeral of a Palestinian who died in an explosion he himself detonated at an Israel army roadblock two days ago, and no sign here of any willingness to observe a cease- fire. "The intifada until death" is the chant. In another procession, prayers for peace. Traditional Palm Sunday celebration in Bethlehem, but the ongoing violence evidence that calls for further conflict at this stage ring more loud. Mike Hanna, CNN, Jerusalem.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Congressman Julian Dixon died Friday of an apparent heart attack. His funeral is today in California. Several of the Democratic elite are out attending that funeral, and CNN's Jim Hill is with one of them now Jim.
[Jim Hill, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Lou. We are here at the Julian Dixon funeral with one of the dignitaries attending, this is Congressman Charles Rangel, Democrat, New York, here on difficult circumstances. But what we'd like to ask you about is the speech tonight by Al Gore, whether he should concede or stop short of conceding, perhaps withdraw.
[Rep. Charles Rangel , New York:] Well, that's up to his advisers. I don't think there's any need for him to rush into anything if there's a possibility that electors may not be supporting George Bush and a could of those electors could be flipped, and that's a decision he has to make. I don't see where America is so anxious to close this saga until we fully appreciate everything that has taken place. One thing we know is that Al Gore got the popular votes. We had every reason to believe that he had them out of Florida as well.
[Hill:] You seem to be saying that you do not want him to out and out concede.
[Rangel:] Well, when the time is appropriate, and I'm not privy to the advice that he's getting from his lawyers. But if they said the time is not yet ready for him to do this, then I would strongly support it. You know, reporters have been saying that America is tired and Democrats are running away. We've never been stronger, and I think a lot of it has to do with the way we've been treated, the way we've been treated by the courts, and the way we've been treated by the people in Florida.
[Hill:] Can the country come together under these circumstances that you're spelling out here?
[Rangel:] I hope so. A lot of that has to do with the next president. He will have to make an extraordinary effort to be bipartisan. The Cabinet will have to reflect it. Meetings have to be held with our legislative leaders: a common goal and objective, even though it might not be as expansive as we would want. It can be done, but it's going to take an extraordinary effort. And the most important thing is how does it start. If it starts off on the wrong foot, it's going to be a very, very difficult two years, and people like Julian...
[Hill:] Well, the first step will be at 9:01 tonight when Al Gore makes his...
[Rangel:] Well, we don't know.
[Hill:] ... presentation to the American people. What do you think he will say?
[Rangel:] I haven't the slightest clue. The man has gone through a lot, and for those people who say that he should withdraw, they should walk in his shoes. I think it's a personal decision. It's a political decision. And we have to recognize that it just doesn't concern him; it concerns our Constitution, and it concerns the feeling of the American people.
[Hill:] OK, thank you very much. Congressman Charles Rangel, Democrat of New York, saying that Al Gore should perhaps not concede out and out in his speech tonight. I'm Jim Hill, CNN, reporting live from Los Angeles. Lou, back to you.
[Waters:] All right, Jim, thanks. Natalie, what's next?
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Well, a rally in Tallahassee today against the Florida legislature, which was prepared to name a slate of Bush electors. Let's see what they are going to do now, if anything. Here is CNN's Martin Savidge.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Natalie, before we get to the rally that is going on, we wanted to talk about the busiest place in Tallahassee. It's interesting that after some 30-plus days with all the activity in the courts and in the legislature, the busiest place now is the airport in a most bipartisan way, as the election campaign teams that have been camped out here in Tallahassee and the legal teams are trying to now leave. The Democrats apparently were given the orders from vice president himself to cease and desist, so they are making their plans to leave. Difficult to get out of town, though, these days for many of those political people, because the flights are all booked. As to the rally that is taking place right now, about 250 people have gathered to listen to Jesse Jackson speak as well as a number of other political people. This is primarily a rally in favor of the Democrats here, and it had originally been planned several days ago to protest against the actions of the Florida legislature; of course, with the ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court last night, it takes on a whole new meaning. And as you see by the signs, it is still very much in the belief that every vote counts and they would like to have every vote counted, as unlikely as it may seem at this particular point. Regarding the legislature in Florida here, the Senate did convene at 1:00 as they said they would, then immediately went into recess. Essentially, what the leaders are saying is they are going to wait to hear what the vice president has to say in his national speech tonight, so they have now not dissolved and that's the important thing to know they have simply gone into recess. They say that they are ready and able to immediately once more resume the process of affirming the slate of electors, that is the same slate that was approved by the House and the one that they could approve, which would essentially mean that there would be another slate of electors for George W. Bush albeit with the same names. And then finally, the Florida Supreme Court we have not heard anything from them as yet. We do know that the podium is out in front of the courthouse, although that's sort of de regur anymore now. It is possible and we have heard from spokesman Craig Waters that the Florida Supreme Court may have some sort of statement here today in regard of the case that was remanded back to them by the U.S. Supreme Court, although it's not clear exactly what the court may say. But if there is any sort of pins and needles left in this story, it is perhaps located in the building behind us, we will wait and see. In the meantime, as we say, many people here preparing to leave, perhaps even the justices planning to take some sort of vacation after all of this. Martin Savidge reporting live in Tallahassee.
[Waters:] And we are joined now by our CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider in Washington. Despite what Charlie Rangel out there in California just said about the possibility that a couple of those electors may be flipped, as he put it, this seems to be over, does it not?
[William Schneider, Cnn Sr. Political Analyst:] Well, you know, as the kids would say, this is so over, but it may not be entirely over in the sense that we don't know whether Al Gore is going to actually say, "I concede," because for him to say "I concede" carries an important message he would be saying, "I lost." I'm not sure he believes that and I'm not sure he is ready to say that. He doesn't believe he lost the election, he believes they didn't finish counting the votes and that eventually the votes may be counted and it may show that he did lose the election. So he doesn't want to acknowledge something that he doesn't believe. I think he will probably say he suspends his campaign, he withdraws, he is not going to be president of the United States, but he just doesn't want to say, "I lost," even though there's no hope for him at this point to become president except the possibility, remote as it is, for a couple of faithless electors to not vote for Bush, but to vote for Gore very unlikely.
[Waters:] We are all wondering what's going to happen next. I spoke with presidential historian Rick Shenkman about an hour ago and he said the founding fathers never conceived of a situation like this, where the courts would pick the president of the United States. So now it appears that the American people will have to somehow be given confidence that the systems of government are going to work for them.
[Schneider:] That's right. And there is every indication Americans know what this was all about, it was an election that was too close to call, essentially it was a tie. Gore led in the popular vote. The official vote count certified in Florida shows that Bush won that state and therefore leads in the electoral vote. Americans know that the margin of error of any vote count, whether it's by hand or by machine, is going to be greater in Florida than the margin of victory. So therefore, no method was perfectly reliable and they understand what the Supreme Court was trying to say, we should count all the votes, but there was no constitutionally acceptable way for to us do that. And therefore, there is always going to be a lingering cloud over this election result and the courts in the end had to resolve it, because there was no other way to do it.
[Waters:] And to effect that confidence, what does George W. Bush have to say tonight to compliment what Al Gore would say in order to get the country working as one unit again?
[Schneider:] Well, the first thing he has to do is offer reconciliation, he has to make a gesture to show that he is not going to regard this as sharply a defined partisan mandate. This is not Ronald Reagan in 1980, the electors the voters of the country were not saying that. It was a very closely divided election at every single level. Even the courts are closely divided over this election outcome. I don't think that's a vote for division, I think it's a vote for a government more or less of the center, and that's what Bush has to acknowledge. There's some evidence of perhaps irrational exuberance on the part of some Republicans who are excited by the fact that they will control the White House, the House and the Senate eventually, when Dick Cheney becomes vice president, for the first time in almost 50 years. Is that a big mandate to pass their agenda and to finally pay off conservatives? I don't think so. If they make that mistake, they are going to get their heads handed to them at the next election.
[Waters:] Bipartisanship is a hyphenated word we hear more and more. We just heard Trent Lott talking about it and all the issues that, not only both candidate campaigned on, but issues that are of interests to both parties, and issues that they could work on together. And we are also hearing that the Bush administration may have some Democrats in the administration. Does that really matter: that there are Democrats in a Republican administration?
[Schneider:] Well, symbolically, I think it makes a statement. I don't think it is going to heal the partisan division, because the issue is very fundamental. It's the principle that every vote must count. The election itself became the issue. This wasn't an election that was divided by a war or a Watergate scandal or a Civil War or anything like that. The division was not nearly as great on November 7 as it is on December 13. That is because the election itself became the issue. And that's got to be healed by the actions of the politicians. And I think that, most of all, George Bush has to make a gesture. And including Democrats in his government would be would go some distance toward reconciliation. But it's also going to be the style of government that he promotes and the program that he offers. Her can't offer he can't see this as a partisan mandate. That doesn't mean he has to be a weak president. I think he can be a strong and decisive president. For instance, all Americans want something done about prescription drugs. But the secret is to do it in a way that isn't harshly partisan.
[Waters:] Bill Schneider, CNN senior political analyst.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] There was the '68 comeback special. Could Elvis be making another comeback this year? A psychiatrist in Independence, Missouri says Elvis is alive, and as Maria Antonio from CNN affiliate KMBC reports, this doc claims to be in regular contact with the king.
[Elvis Presley:] I am going to straighten this thing out once and for all.
[Maria Antonio, Cnn Affiliate Kmbc Reporter:] This thing about Elvis living and secretly traveling the country...
[Presley:] I've been from Maine to Tennessee, Mexico from Waikiki.
[Antonio:] Is it just a song and dance?
[Unidentified Female Actress:] I can't believe this is happening.
[Presley:] I can't believe it either.
[Antonio:] Or would you believe he still walks and talks...
[Presley:] That's what you think.
[Antonio:] ... if the one saying they speak in person and by phone...
[Presley:] Goodbye.
[Antonio:] ... is this Kansas City psychiatrist.
[Dr. Donald Hinton, Psychiastrist:] I just heard from him on Sunday, twice on Friday. I hear from him on a regular basis.
[Antonio:] You hear from him how?
[Hinton:] On Sunday, it was by phone.
[Presley:] Twist the pretty things in your hair...
[Hinton:] I am speaking to Elvis Aaron Presley, the entertainer, which everybody believes died in 1977.
[Antonio:] This photo in a book supposedly shows Elvis after all the years and some plastic surgery.
[Hinton:] He has white hair now. He is 67 years old. He has given me things that can be tested that actually would have his DNA on them. For example, the good tooth, which is pictured in the book.
[Antonio:] A book the doctor says he co-wrote with Elvis. He goes by Jesse, the name of his twin brother who died at birth.
[Hinton:] I have been treating Elvis Presley for the several years.
[Antonio:] Hinton now speaks to groups about his once secret patient and about the book that explains how friends helped Elvis hide.
[Hinton:] This is all part of his plan for 2002.
[Antonio:] He means Elvis' plan to bring grieving fans out of the dark this year and tell them he faked dying to get away and get healthy.
[Hinton:] And people will think I am crazy or think that I have been tricked by someone.
[Antonio:] But Hinton's medical degree from the University of Kansas is no trick. He is a board certified practicing physician. Here is what Missouri's Board of Healing Arts told us by phone. "He is a currently licensed, is an M.D. His license was issued in Missouri 819 of 1993. It is current, active with no discipline." In other words, the Elvis story has not shaken Hinton's record. It is clear even if its timing isn't. Here is what he first told us in December.
[Hinton:] At the beginning of January, things will be happening and the truth will be coming out.
[Unidentified Male Actor:] And I think it's high time we met.
[Presley:] I agree.
[Antonio:] Now, it's past January, so we asked: Isn't Elvis going to show up?
[Unidentified Male Actor:] Around two-ish?
[Presley:] Around two-ish.
[Hinton:] He is not going to change his mind. I haven't had any inkling that he is going to change his mind, but there is some very powerful people that are still influencing him that, for reasons related to money, don't want him ever coming forward and telling the truth.
[Presley:] I've got double trouble, Christ as much as anybody else, oh, yeah.
[Costello:] Well, if that guy is your psychiatrist, I hope you were taking notes.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Feel like a movie? Here's Anna Hoven.
[Begin Video Clip, "enemy At The Gates") Unidentified Actor:] We need our heroes.
[Unidentified Actor:] Do you know any heroes? I know one.
[Anna Hoven, Cnn Correspondent:] In "Enemy at the Gates," Stalingrad is under siege, and the Russians make a young sharpshooter, Jude Law, the hero of a propaganda campaign to rally support. The Nazis send their top marksman, Ed Harris, to track him down. [Begin Video Clip, "enemy At The Gates"]
[Unidentified Actor:] How are you going to go about finding this young Russian?
[Ed Harris, Actor:] I'll fix it so that he's the one who finds me.
[Jude Law, Actor:] I don't stand a chance against this man.
[Unidentified Actor:] If you kill him, you can win the war for us.
[Hoven:] Based on a true story, "Enemy at the Gates" is rated
[R.  Unidentified Actor:] Stolen drugs, crooked cops.
[Unidentified Actor:] The price is $5 million. I think that's a nice round figure. You in? Are all cops bad?
[Hoven:] In "Exit Wounds," Steven Seagal is a cop who's investigating police corruption. He turns to a crime boss, DMX, to help him weed out the dirty cops. [Begin Video Clip, "exit Wounds"]
[Dmx, Actor:] See, a couple of your buddies wanted to keep one of their own drug dealers on the street. So rather than lose him, they framed Sean. I got to get him out of jail. I made my father a promise before he died. I promised I would always be my brother's keeper. I keep my promises.
[Hoven:] "Exit Wounds" is rated R. With "Now Showing," I'm Anna Hoven.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] For more discussion of the impact of the Time WarnerAOL deal and the fallout, I'm joined now by Jim Waggoner, market technology strategist at Sands Brothers & Company. It's great to have you back with us again this morning.
[Jim Waggoner, Sands Brothers & Company:] It's nice to be back.
[Marchini:] Gee, wow, last time you were here we were talking about the correction in Nasdaq stocks. What happened?
[Waggoner:] It certainly took place.
[Marchini:] It's over.
[Waggoner:] It's over, here and gone.
[Marchini:] Are you surprised by the market's very sharp rebound, and what do you make of it? Do you think there are fundamental reasons for a recovery now, or do you think it's just a bit of euphoria generated by a very large deal?
[Waggoner:] Well, it's probably a little bit of both. I think the announcement yesterday with AOL and Time Warner set in motion expectations for consolidation both vertically and horizontally in the business consumer space. Some of it's going to be realized, some of it's going to be speculative excess, but it certainly does set in motion corporate strategies and investment strategies for review.
[Marchini:] I walked in here about 3:00 this morning, and our producer, Nick Semensky, decided to have a little fun with me, and so when I asked him what was going on, he looked at me and he said: Well, Microsoft is now trying to outbid AOL for Time Warner. Of course, he was kidding, but how far-fetched is that little piece of humor, really?
[Waggoner:] Well, the question of Microsoft is a very, very interesting one, and, of course, some years ago Bill Gates was presented with the notion of the Internet and kind of scoffed at it. I think that's not the reaction he has today. So he's a little bit on the outside looking in, wondering where Microsoft's next step is.
[Marchini:] Where do you think Microsoft's next step is?
[Waggoner:] Well, I think, clearly, they have a giant step to take in order to match what AOL and Time Warner did yesterday. How they're going to handle it, of course, is obviously open to speculation, but I think they have to make a big move if they're going to be a player in this space. Nothing wrong with Windows and all of the software that they have, but if they want to be a player on the Internet, they've got to make a move, and I think they've got to make a move rather soon.
[Marchini:] All right. The other company that's getting a lot of scrutiny right now is Yahoo!. What, if anything, do you think Yahoo! is going to buy?
[Waggoner:] Well, it makes all the sense in the world. Again, it's the role model that AOL set: Yahoo! and others in the portal space looking for content, content, content across the board. There's plenty of it, and there are several companies out there that are large enough to satisfy that. So I think that the deal is open there. There are a number of companies that, of course, have been speculated in the press, and you can't rule out any one of them.
[Marchini:] Another one that keeps getting mentioned, of course, is AT&T;, which has spent billions of dollars, you know, basically to try to bet on cable systems being a great mode of transmission. Does it now need content too?
[Waggoner:] Certainly. It wasn't that long ago that AT&T; seemed to have the lead, seemed to be way out ahead, seemed to have everybody else in their rear-view mirror. It's changed, and changed very quickly. So AT&T; also has to make a move, whether it's immediately, or, as is the case with Microsoft, a little bit slower; that's certainly open to speculation, but they have to address the issue of content.
[Marchini:] All right. Meantime, what happened to this rotation we thought we were witnessing in the markets?
[Waggoner:] It rotated.
[Marchini:] It rotated back out.
[Waggoner:] It's the Internet age, it rotated.
[Marchini:] It rotated very quickly, and you came out of paper stocks, out of consumer cyclicals, which were protective, you know, stances for what we expected to be a strong economy with some Federal Reserve action to slow it down; and we're back into tech stocks again. How long do you think this is going to stick? And what are you doing with money, given that scenario?
[Waggoner:] Certainly. The one thing that we stress time and time again is that we don't really feel that the market is going to shift emphasis, as long as the fundamentals in the technology and Internet space are as strong as they are. It's fundamentals that are going to be driving this market, and fundamentals in the technology space are outstanding. So we saw the rotation, it's now back into technology. I do think that there's a bit of euphoria, quite a bit of euphoria, based upon yesterday's expectations in the marketplace. And if we don't see an immediate response, we don't see more takeover announcements, I suspect we'll get a settling in.
[Marchini:] Somebody's going to let the air out of that bubble.
[Waggoner:] Right.
[Marchini:] We've got a list up on the screen of some of the companies in which you are currently actively investing, including Chemdex, Entrust, Verisign, and Ariba.
[Waggoner:] Correct. This sort of gets around the issue of speculating on content, but we're still very, very much stressing the B2B space and also the Internet's security space; that's where Chemdex, in particular, in the B2B space, comes in very strongly; Entrust in the Internet security space has a long way to go. Everyone of these transactions, the recorded music, downloading of the recorded music over the Internet, which is a heart of the AOLTime Warner deal, really plays to that hand.
[Marchini:] So this some more trends worth watching. Jim Waggoner of Sands Brothers & Company, it's great to have the back with us to talk about the markets, and tech specifically. We'll see you soon.
[Waggoner:] Great, always nice to be here.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Workers and visitors at the San Francisco Zoo are breathing a little bit easier this morning. Police today found two koalas that had been taken from the zoo. The animals were discovered missing from their indoor quarters yesterday morning. And with the latest on how the koalas were found, we're going to go to Steve Chamraz. He's with out CNN affiliate KGO in San Francisco. Steve, good morning.
[Steve Chamraz, Kgo Reporter:] Good morning, Daryn. There are a lot of very happy here at the San Francisco Zoo this morning. The two missing koalas are back here at the zoo, and most importantly they are eating, we're told. Zoo officials got a wake-up call around 2:30 this morning, after the San Francisco police got an anonymous tip that the koalas were being held in a home near San Francisco's Candlestick Point. Police surrounded that house and animal control and zookeepers went in, took custody of those two koalas and brought the back to their home. A veterinarian looked over the koalas just a short time ago. We are told they are healthy and in good spirits, or as good spirits as koalas can be. And the younger one of the two, Leanne, she has already found her favorite napping spot. We're told that she is resting. The older one, Pat, she's about 15 years old. She is in some questionable health. She's a little more stressed out by what happened to her yesterday. She's, I've been told, pacing back and forth, which is what she likes to do to burn off stress.
[Kagan:] Is this a mother-daughter pair, Steve?
[Chamraz:] Excuse me?
[Kagan:] Is this a mother-daughter pair of koala bears?
[Chamraz:] These are I'm sorry, I can't understand what you're saying, Daryn.
[Kagan:] I know, it's a little noisy there at the zoo for you. You have a lot of company, we can hear in the background. These two koala bears, is it a mother and a daughter?
[Chamraz:] Yes, it's a mother and a daughter. The mother's about 15, the daughter's about 8 years old. And they're some of the only koalas here at the San Francisco Zoo that hang out together in a pair. The rest, I am told, all like to stay away from each other, but these two are very closely linked.
[Kagan:] And any idea, any more information about who might have taken them?
[Chamraz:] San Francisco police are looking for two people who were lurking around the zoo on Christmas day, asking zookeepers how they could buy koalas. That set some people off here. One of the zookeepers I spoke with this morning said she actually saw somebody on the roof of the koala area on Christmas day looking in the skylight. And we're told that's probably how these two koalas were taken out, through the skylight of the koala clutch, which is around us right now, yesterday morning.
[Kagan:] But now they're back home and secure and back in their environment?
[Chamraz:] They're back home, they're doing very well, and most importantly they're eating. Koalas have a very finicky diet. They only eat eucalyptus leaves, and most importantly the tenderest tips of the eucalyptus leaves. That's where they get their entire water supply from. So whoever took these koalas probably didn't know how to feed them or that they did not drink water. According to the zookeeper we talked with just a few minutes ago, if they had been gone another day or two, their bodies probably would have just wasted away because they have no store of fat on them. It's just the constant eating of eucalyptus that keeps them alive.
[Kagan:] Well thank goodness there was a happy ending to this one. The koalas are back home at the San Francisco Zoo. Steve Chamraz from KGO, thank you very much for that report.
[Chamraz:] Sure thing, Daryn.

[Lian Pek:] This week on EBIZASIA, tough economic times call for thinking out of the box.
[Unidentified Male:] Now I work at home, you know, in the mornings, if I have meetings.
[Pek:] But for the thousands who've already lost jobs, can the online world lead back to them?
[Unidentified Male:] It made more sense for me to, you know, look for it online.
[Pek:] Fresh ideas for the dot-commers survival guide in this edition of EBIZASIA. Hello, and welcome to EBIZASIA. I'm Lian Pek. With unemployment rates creeping every higher and the global economic slump dragging on, it's no wonder job insecurity is running high. But what doesn't kill you sometimes makes you stronger. Today's tough economic climate has inspired a new kind of work ethic. Rather than go out of business, some dot-commers have retreated to their own homes. As Andrew Brown reports, they've cut costs dramatically and are still keeping the dream alive.
[Andrew Brown, Cnn Correspondent:] Once upon a time, dot- commers wanted it all.
[Leslie Kenny, Founder, Dotlove:] We all wanted the chrome, you know, the nice new designs. It was important to look professional and look as if you were established.
[Brown:] No longer. Leslie Kenny, founder of the dating site, Dotlove, has closed her office in downtown Hong Kong and runs the company from home.
[Kenny:] Survival is really the name of the game.
[Brown:] The new economy was a gift to landlords. Start- ups spent huge sums of money on rent, paying for real estate they could not justify. [voice-over]: At one stage, the Finnish technology company OpenMobile operated out of a business center in Hong Kong. It paid around $1,200 U.S. a month for a tiny space that was under-utilized.
[William Lok, Consultant:] I'd go in at 9:00, basically sit there for the first few hours, and really not performing.
[Brown:] William Lok stayed at the office to give his company a physical presence in the local marketplace, but what the firm really needed was an employee able to deal with other time zones. Later, they let him work from his apartment so he could operate more flexibly. Still, Lok is staggered by the money he says the IT industry has thrown down the drain.
[Lok:] If you see any IT companies that have a big, huge office, a lot of waste of resources. And the overheads are just killing them.
[Brown:] Lok has now left OpenMobile and is building his own technology company. Since he doesn't have an office, he uses Starbucks for business meetings, and plans to remain low-profile until the tech market turns around. OpenMobile says it is still active in Asia and is using Singapore as a regional base. Leslie Kenny is adjusting to her new life, managing Dotlove at ultra- low cost. The company now only has four full-time staff and a team of 20 freelancers around Asia. All of them operate from home.
[Kenny:] Depending on how large we get and into which markets we push, we might decide to open an office; but I doubt that our office would be opened here in Hong Kong. I think that the lesson we've learned is that Hong Kong is too expensive.
[Brown:] Kenny expects Dotlove to be profitable in just six months, proof that there's no place like home. Andrew Brown, CNN, Hong Kong.
[Pek:] Working out of your home is one survival strategy, but there are other options. I delved into them with Larry Cambron, the head of Asian operations at our placement firm, Drake Beam Morin. If I could start up with Andrew's package, because we saw there how dot commers who are taking their businesses back home very ironically, that's the way most start-ups really started. I mean, that is a very valid proposition, is it not?
[Larry Cambron, Drake Beam Morin:] Absolutely. I think if you look at most industries over a period of history, you will find that perhaps they've gotten off to a great start, but then there will be a correction at some point. It doesn't mean that the industry is inviable or that it will not come back stronger than what it was in the past. But people with a passion for what they do are willing to step back and start again.
[Pek:] But until the industry actually comes back, what do all these people, who have developed so many skills for the new economy what should they do? Can their skills be put to good use elsewhere?
[Cambron:] Absolutely. We encourage them to certainly be flexible. In looking at employment in the near-term, don't think about employment in terms of 9:00 to 5:00, five days a week, including taking some short-term assignments which ultimately we have found can very definitely end up into long-term employment opportunities.
[Pek:] So, what they need is really a change in mindset, because IT skills really come in handy anywhere.
[Cambron:] Absolutely.
[Pek:] Now, for those who are still, you know, having very secure jobs, should they be looking as well? I'm sure a lot of people out there are very worried. Now, should they be looking out for something else as a safety net?
[Cambron:] Well, I wouldn't say they should specifically be looking for another job. What we would encourage everyone to do is to constantly be building their network. As we've discussed previously, most of our clients do find their next opportunities through networking. So, even if you feel secure in what you're doing now, looking at the long-term, it's better to keep building the number of people that you have contact with.
[Pek:] Now, every couple of days we're hearing of friends who get laid off or friends of friends, and the first question is, what sort of compensation did you get. Now, you've worked with a lot of tech companies which have had to downsize. Where are they coming from?
[Cambron:] Well, again, our experience and we're working with tech companies on regional agreements, where we're working with their departing employees across all of the region as well as globally and our experience is that the tech companies are being very generous. They certainly do not like the situation. They are looking forward to it changing. And there is also the potential for the opportunity that they will want to attract these same employees back when the business improves. And certainly the attitude of a departing employee toward their company will help to determine whether they will be interested in returning to that company when business improves.
[Pek:] So, what is a typical payout package then? I mean, in order to keep these people, you know, feeling positive towards their former companies.
[Cambron:] Number one, that the employees know that the company has done more than they are required by law. Individuals aren't impressed if they feel like, well, I was only given what the law requires the company to give. Typically, in this area of the world, it would be a month of salary for each year of service, and then if there is not a notification period, then they will also give them a month's additional salary.
[Pek:] Can they negotiate for more if they really wanted to? I mean, can people who are getting the axe or do they have power, have rights?
[Cambron:] Well, they can certainly go back to human resources in a company and say I don't feel like this is adequate or fair. But again, I will speak from our experience, that the companies have very much looked at the situation, they've looked at the market, what business practices are in this are, and at the very least they have met the general business practice and in many instances surpassed that.
[Pek:] So, people who are let go, what do they do to stay sane? I mean, do you suggest that they see job counselors?
[Cambron:] Well, basically, that's what we're all about, and it's a really different environment, particularly in the IT sector, where they've come from a number of years where employment was so available into an environment where employment is difficult. The key is for them to get focused and spend a lot of energy looking forward, not looking to the past. Attitude is critically important and they have to be able to deal with any negative feelings before they can move positively forward.
[Pek:] Still ahead on
[Unidentified Male:] It's still a very effective resource.
[Pek:] Is surfing the Web for a job everything it's cracked up to be? We check out the sites and speak to the experts, next.
[Unidentified Female:] They're pretty bad, but I have a feeling it's going to get better after the new year. The job market is really bad right now.
[Unidentified Male:] All my friends are still looking for jobs.
[Unidentified Female:] All my friends are out of work.
[Unidentified Male:] And I don't think it's the right time to ask for a raise.
[Unidentified Female:] No bonuses this year.
[Pek:] The labor market has definitely seen better times. For thousands of people, the Web seems like a convenient way to go shopping for a job, but seekers beware: it's not a quick fix. The experts say you still have to do your homework, prepare a resume, devise a job- hunting strategy. So how do you know you're on the right online track? I sat down with Nancy Valiente, director of Classified Advertising at Hong Kong's "South China Morning Post," who helped me navigate the ClassifiedPost.com. OK, so where do I start? How do I go about doing this? Step one?
[Nancy Valiente, Classified Advertising Dir., "scmp":] The first thing you should do is to register as a classified first user. Click on "new user," which brings you to our registration page, and fill in all the required information. You could register for ClassifiedPost.com e-mail alert, which is a very useful tool, and you hit "submit."
[Pek:] It says the jobs e-mail alert is really I will be alerted as to what jobs are out there. I don't have to log on to the site. Is that right?
[Valiente:] Yes. So, if there are any jobs that match your selection criteria, then we will send an e-mail to whatever e-mail address you typed in and we will notify you if there is a job.
[Pek:] OK, so now that I'm registered, I suppose step two is I go looking for a job.
[Valiente:] We have several tools on our site to look for a job. The most commonly used one is a job search by category. You can do a broad job search or you can do a narrow search. To do a broad search, you can type in something like IT, which is the sector your interested in, and it will give you a listing of all the jobs in the IT sector by company and we also show you the date that it was posted. This is very important, because it tells you how current the jobs are on our site. As a matter of policy, we keep the jobs posted online for no more than 30 days.
[Pek:] So how do we go about filling out the resume page?
[Valiente:] OK, to go to the resume page, log in to go to the "my career" section and go to "my resume." ClassifiedPost.com gives you the option to attach as many as three versions of your resume, because you could have enough skill sets to position yourself for a marketing position, or a business development position, or maybe you want one version of your resume that's geared for corporate IT position and maybe another one for a financial institution, also in the IT sector.
[Pek:] So, different ways of sort of marketing yourself as such.
[Valiente:] Exactly. Exactly.
[Pek:] So, is there any way of actually standing out in terms of an online application?
[Valiente:] Don't attach pictures. Don't use fancy graphics and things. Try to keep your resume to one or two pages. I think on average an HR practitioner, looking at resume, will probably spend 10 to 20 second when you are screening.
[Pek:] How can a job seeker protect his or her privacy?
[Valiente:] They have to be very selective in which sites they submit their resumes to. I think at the end of the day they must trust the brand, they must trust the company behind it. They should also take the time to look at the privacy policy and read through it, and really understand how the resume is going to be used.
[Pek:] Job sites may be relatively easy to navigate, but their effectiveness is another matter altogether. I caught up with some job seekers to find out whether their online searches are really turning up that dream job.
[Kenneth Lee, Job Seeker:] Basically, I'm looking for jobs in Hong Kong, Shanghai and San Francisco. So, basically it makes more sense for me to, you know, look for it online, because I mean, I cannot ask someone to buy me a newspaper in San Francisco and, you know, Fed Ex it over here for me to read it, right?
[Pek:] While there are obvious advantages to casting your net on the Web, many job seekers are getting increasingly disenchanted with online searches.
[Unidentified Female:] I tried, but not successful.
[Unidentified Male:] Not very effective at all, I'm afraid. It didn't give me the information I needed or the jobs I was looking for.
[Pek:] Another common complaint: dated postings, so you end up applying for jobs that have already been filled. While this isn't the case at one of Asia's leading portals, JobsDB.com, where ads are automatically dropped after one month, it's CEO, Samuel Sung, acknowledged that some unethical operators do engage in window dressing. That means they could be reposting old ads or copying dated ones from competitors.
[Samuel Sung, Ceo, Jobsdb.com:] We have clients actually complain to us and say we are job seekers applying for a position through other networks, but we only had our posting on your site. And sure enough, these postings appeared on other competitors sites.
[Pek:] What's worse, some sites may window dress to attract your attention because they're building a lucrative database and trading your personal details.
[Sung:] Let's say, if you provide the name of 1,000 candidates with a salary of $50,000 per month or more, it becomes a very valuable database to the credit card companies, or to insurance brokers for that matter.
[Pek:] But even if your prepared to risk Internet searches for the convenience and the potential rewards, there are no guarantees. In fact, according to a recent American survey, only 6 percent of company managers found jobs on Internet sites, compared with 61 percent who found work through networking. While there are no studies to say what the job hit rates are in Asia, employees do seem to think online recruitment makes their jobs far easier.
[Suk Chiu, Monster.com:] The time to hire is less. The cost to hire is less. It's 247. It's efficient. It could be automatic. Or the information could be tracked.
[Pek:] But for job seekers like Kenneth Lee, however he goes about looking for a job right now is pretty much irrelevant.
[Lee:] Right now, I mean, the economy sucks so, you know, the response rate hasn't been that great. I mean, I don't think it's a problem with, you know, online job search or reading a newspaper. It's just a bad economy right now.
[Pek:] Coming up on EBIZASIA, what will it take to turn help desk hell into heaven? We'll explain next. Navigating the mind field of tech support isn't always a pleasant experience, but some IT professionals are upgrading their service by paying more attention to the human touch. Kristie Lu Stout reports.
[Kristie Lu Stout, Cnn Correspondent:] Jacked into a network killing zone, Jay Chen can play up to eight hours of Unreal Tournament at one go. But his game slipped the day his new PC arrived without a sound card.
[Jay Chen, Online Game Player:] These online games, if you can't listen, if you cannot hear the footsteps, you get killed. So, that was my difficulty. I was getting killed all the time.
[Stout:] So he contacted the help desk and asked them to send over tech support.
[Chen:] They were two hours late, so that we means, on a workday, we have to sit at home and wait for them. They come, they're not able to fix the problem and make an appointment, again. And so we're just talking about weeks of wasted time.
[Stout:] The problem was eventually fixed, but it left a nasty mark.
[Chen:] There's not enough memory available to run this program, and I have 768 megabytes in my machine.
[Stout:] Chen can no longer log online without first shutting down his computer. [on camera]: It's a classic tale of help desk hell; tech staffers with the best intentions failing to fix the problem, and sometimes making it worse. Symptoms of bad support include high staff turnover, poor response time; and when the team starts to call end-users losers, a major attitude problem. [voice-over]: One net service's Web site features loser voice-mail from hell. One caller made the list for bungling the name of a popular e- mail program.
[Unidentified Male:] I've had a problem turning the Eudoria [sic].
[Stout:] Internet prank or not, it's still a slight to the less tech aware. Such unprofessional behavior has tarnished the sector. In fact, according to the Better Business Bureau, computer dealers have ranked among the top five sources of consumer complaints. But the IT community is beginning to take notice.
[Daniel Lai, President, Hkcs:] This is quite common, that our tech support doesn't seem to be a very important function within an organization. Daniel Lai is the president of the Hong Kong Computer Society, a nonprofit forum for local IT professionals that wants to maintain a code of professional conduct for its members. Conduct that includes technical expertise as well as the human touch.
[Lai:] It's not a competency or skill training. It's rather an attitude changing exercise. It's an exercise that would try to change the mentality of individuals so that they understand that why their job exists, it's because of the customer. It's because they are there to help the customer.
[Stout:] In an idea world, tech support desks wouldn't exist. But in the real world, we must make do with disappointing devices and subpar service, even in an era when the customer is king. Despite his frustrating help desk episode, Jay Chen says he would buy from the same vendor again, convinced that there is no better alternative. But perhaps there is a hidden perk to owning a bungled box.
[Chen:] My wife can't use this computer at all, so I have this computer to myself.
[Stout:] Kristie Lu Stout, CNN, Hong Kong.
[Pek:] And that's EBIZASIA for this week. We hope you found this look at jobs and the Net useful. And if looking, good luck. Tell us what you think of our program. E-mail us at EBIZASIA@CNN.COM. Next week, we'll check out sports online, from adventure

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Well, Queen Elizabeth waved her magic wand as only she can do today, and instantly, a couple of Hollywood legends became true-blue dames. Here's CNN's Judy Fortin.
[Judy Fortin, Cnn Correspondent:] Call her Dame Elizabeth. The queen honored the screen legend for her service to the entertainment industry and fund-raising efforts for AIDS. She emerged from the royal ceremony at Buckingham Palace in obvious awe.
[Question:] Can you tell us what this honor means for you today?
[Elizabeth Taylor, Actress:] It is the most exciting and I do not exaggerate day of my life. It totally came as a surprise to me. I had no inkling. It was just like, what? I can't believe it! It's like, me getting a dameship!
[Fortin:] The actress was born to American parents in London 68 years ago. She burst onto movie screens in the '40s as a child star in films like "National Velvet." Her beauty and violet eyes propelled her into roles in some 80 films, two Oscars, and into several Hollywood marriages, including two to the late Richard Burton. Today, Taylor reflected she wished Burton could have been there. The actress, who is recovering from hip surgery, says she and her four children will celebrate the honor with a lunch of roast beef and Yorkshire pudding.
[Taylor:] I feel wonderful, and world watch out!
[Fortin:] Also receiving the order of the British empire from Queen Elizabeth today was "Mary Poppins" and "Sound of Music" actress Julie Andrews.
[Julie Andrews, Actress:] She spoke first and she said it was a great thrill to see me here, that it was a great pleasure to see me here today, and I said, "Oh, your majesty you can't imagine what a thrill it is for me, too."
[Fortin:] The two dames, old friends, both share the same excitement about wearing the royal broach. Judy Fortin, CNN reporting.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We're also following a developing story out of the Middle East this morning. Just about two hours ago, a car bomb exploded near a crowded outdoor market area in the heart of Jerusalem. The bombing comes as Israeli and Palestinian leaders prepare to announce a deal to actually end a month of street fighting. For the latest on the attack and its implications, we go to Jerusalem bureau chief Mike Hanna. Mike, hello.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Jerusalem Bureau Chief:] Well, Daryn, at this particular point, it is being confirmed that two people were killed in the explosion, that police say was caused by a explosive device placed in a car near the Mahane Yehuda market in the center of Jerusalem. This a very popular venue, and one that has been the target of suicide bombings in the past. At least nine Israelis have been injured in the blast, but none of them seriously. The exact identity of the two dead not known at this particular point, although the chief of the Jerusalem police says that both the dead appear to be Israeli citizens. Well, the bombing came on a day on which there appeared to be an agreement reached between Israel and the Palestinian Authority to reduce the level of violence, and indeed to create a calm atmosphere in which attempts could be made to resume the flagging peace process. In the course of this day, the leaders were due to make public statements on the media in their respective areas, calling for an end to the violence, and pledging themselves to creating this atmosphere of calm. Well, these statements were never made, they were delayed and they were delayed, and then come the bomb blast in the center of Jerusalem. However, the Palestinian Authority president, Yasser Arafat, has released a statement calling for calm, calling on Palestinians to observe only peaceful protests. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak has, within the last few minutes, released a statement in which he says that it is a very serious attack against us. He says, in reference to the bomb blast in the Jerusalem market, he blames Hamas and Islamic Jihad militants. And he says the Palestinian Authority must accept the responsibility for the blast, as it is, he says, the Palestinian Authority that released Hamas and Islamic Jihad members in the course of recent weeks. So still, from Israel, an absolute assumption of blame, holding Islamic militants responsible for the blast. But there has be no claim of responsibility from any area. There has been no confirmation as to the identity from the police sources of who was responsible for the blast. It does appear, at this particular point, that both sides, according to Israeli officials, and according to the statement we have seen from Mr. Arafat, that the agreement that was reached earlier in the course of the day will still be observed, despite the attack or the bombing that occurred in Jerusalem in the course of the afternoon. In the next few hours, we will see if this is the case. In the course of the day, there had been signs that the agreement had reduced the level of conflict on the ground. Israeli tanks were seen withdrawing from areas that they had occupied in Palestinian territories. At the same time, Palestinian police were seen preventing demonstrators from attacking the Jewish settlements and Israeli outposts within Palestinian territories. So there had been signs that an agreement was having an effect on the ground. But on the dark side, too, yet another Palestinian killed in a clash with Israeli security forces in the course of the morning; another Palestinian, who had been wounded in the course of Wednesday's events, died in the course of the day. So, at this point, the situation still tenuous. Darkness falling here in Jerusalem on a day that had begun with a glimmer of hope that the conflict could end Daryn.
[Kagan:] Mike, as you said, it did start with a glimmer of hope, but does this latest violence bring into question whether the leaders that are brokering these deal actually have the power over their people to enforce them, and to calm the street violence?
[Hanna:] Well, that is the question that remains to be seen. The Israeli authorities had, for a number of weeks now, been warning of a possible bomb attack in the civilian areas of Israel. This warning followed what they said was the unjustified release of a number of Hamas and Islamic Jihad militants by the Palestinian Authority. And this warning had been in fact for a number of weeks now. So this had been an event that the Israeli authorities had foreseen, saying that the incessant round of conflict, together with the release of militants in Palestinian territories would result in some kind of bomb attack against Israeli civilian targets. However, for their part, the Palestinian Authorities have continued to maintain that the incessant round of conflict has been because of the actions of the Israeli government, in particular because of the actions of its security forces and the ongoing presence in Palestinian territories of the Israeli security forces, and of the Jewish settlements that the forces are there to protect. So each side continues to apportion blame on the other. And we have already, from the Israel's side, an absolute assumption that this bombing blast was carried out by Islamic militants, although there has been no criminal judgment, as yet, as to exactly what did cause the blast which led to deaths of at least two people unidentified people at present. But the situation does remain that it appears that both sides have committed themselves to observing the agreements that were reached in the course of the day. Whether they can enforce their followers on the ground to also observe that agreement, well that is something the coming hours and indeed the coming days will show Daryn.
[Kagan:] Mike Hanna in Jerusalem. Mike, thank you very much Bill.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] That explosion reverberated back at to the White House, which had been encouraged by the earlier news today that Palestinian and Israeli leaders were implementing the U.S.- brokered cease-fire. For the latest on that from the White House and the view there, Kathleen Koch, now, with us live. Hello Kathleen.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Bill. Well, the White House is hoping that the renewed opportunity for peace wasn't shattered this morning in Jerusalem. White House press secretary Jake Siewert says that President Clinton is condemning the violence, but that the facts of this bombing still remain unclear. Now, the White House is staying in constant contact with both sides to be certain that this doesn't derail this fragile truce. And, indeed, they are keeping their eyes on the prize here: that is peace in the Middle East. The White House is under no illusions that this process would be easy; though, earlier, officials had indeed been quite encouraged by the fact that this truce was reached between the two parties themselves with no broker not the United States, not the United Nations involved. One official is saying that this is the way the process is supposed to work. Now, President Clinton's invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat remains in effect; and the belief here is that such a meeting in Washington with the president could still be helpful. And the hope was that this truce could, perhaps, give renewed impetus to that meeting and improve the chances of some sort of concrete results out of a meeting with the president. But, clearly, until the concrete facts behind this bombing emerge, such hopes of a meeting, such hopes of real progress for peace may have to be put on hold Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right, Kathleen; Kathleen Koch at the White House, thanks.

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] An offer of help tonight for some of the refugees seeking political asylum after they were rescued from a sinking ship and who are now waiting aboard another in the South Pacific, near Christmas Island, near Australia. British businessman Richard Branson has offered to fly out all of the women, children and elderly among them. And he joins us now by telephone. Mr. Branson, thanks for joining us.
[Richard Branson:] Good morning or good afternoon, wherever you are.
[Frazier:] You are in Melbourne. Is that just coincidental or did you go there because of this crisis?
[Branson:] No, it's coincidental. We were celebrating the first anniversary of our Virgin Blue, which is one of our airlines down here. And I was out with all our staff last night. And a number of the stewardesses and captains said, "Look, you know, we've got the plane. We'll volunteer to fly the planes and go on the planes to Christmas Island and get the refugees as quickly as possible to New Zealand. And you know, why should they be stuck on a ship for another seven days?" And it just seemed to make sense. So we said to the Australian government, if they'd like us to do that, we've got planes standing by and we'd be willing to take off at the earliest moment possible.
[Frazier:] Let's back up a little bit and discuss this very generous offer. These are people who have been kept aboard this container ship. It's not a passenger ship by any means. And people are just there because they were rescued when their own freighter was sinking. But they're being kept on board, not being permitted to come ashore in Australia, because of a controversy surrounding their future?
[Branson:] Yes, I mean, I'm not going to get drawn into, you know, whether the Australian government is doing wrong or doing right. What we could simply believe is that there's no need for them to be kept on a ship for another week. And the complications the Australian government of putting them in a bus and taking them straight to our plane, I just don't believe red tape should get in the way of something like that. And they've been through, you know, a pretty miserable existence for some months. And at least the most needy of the people can be got to New Zealand within 24 hours.
[Frazier:] Indeed, now have you heard any kind of response from the Australian government, which has made it absolutely clear to this date that these people will not set foot on Australia soil? They want to send a very strong message to boat people?
[Branson:] Well, we know that John Howard, the prime minister, is going to make a response this afternoon. And you know, I honestly feel that setting foot, you know, by literally getting on a bus and going straight from the ship to the airplane, is not really setting foot on Australian soil. If they don't want them to set foot, they can I'm sure they can put a board across to the bus, so they don't actually touch the Australian soil. They just stay on the bus. So you know, we will be hopeful for a positive response. And if they don't want to do it on their Christmas Island, we'd be happy to do it in Barley or any of the other islands in the area. I mean, there are plenty of islands there are not Australian, which they could take them to, rather than letting them carry on this rather sad voyage.
[Frazier:] Indeed, yes, Christmas Island very close to Indonesia. Now many of these people of Afghan descent fleeing human rights atrocities, they say, in their country. Do you have any sense, Mr. Branson, how many of them might be the people you've offered to help women and children and elderly people?
[Branson:] Well, I mean, obviously we'd like to take all of them and I mean, initially, we've got a plane that's available, which can take about 200. And there's slightly more than 200 people. But we could always do a round-trip and you know, over two trips, take all of them there. But obviously, the priority should go to the most needy.
[Frazier:] And any sense of when Australia might come back with a response to your offer?
[Branson:] Well, they promised they'll come back early in the afternoon. We're about lunchtime here in Australia now. So you know, we would hope that within the next couple of hours, we'll have the response. And if we have a positive response, we'd hope to have the plane on the way to Christmas Island sometime this afternoon.
[Frazier:] Well, Mr. Branson, thank you for explaining that offer to us. Now you are known, of course, in England and in the United States for dramatic gestures in your personal, as well as your professional life. Here now the latest in that string. Thank you very much.
[Branson:] Thank you very much. Cheers. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome back, I'm Frank Sesno in Washington. We are awaiting a phone call from the vice president and his running mate, Joseph Lieberman, from the Naval Observatory, that is the vice president's residence here Washington, to Florida. In Florida, and if we bring you this picture now, you will see Gore spokesman Doug Hattaway hovering over a telephone, now walking away from it, so maybe we won't bring you the picture after all. This is a phone that will be presumably wired up via speaker to have on its end among others perhaps Dick Gephardt and Tom Daschle, Democratic leaders of the House and Senate respectively. Joining me here to talk up to this event John King and Bill Schneider, Bill Schneider, first to you. This is a very conscious display.
[William Schneider, Cnn Sr. Political Analyst:] Right, they are trying to rally the troops, not just Tom Daschle and Dick Gephardt, who are of course the leaders of the Democrats in Congress that they want to keep on board; but also, they want us to show it, it is a message to Democrats nationwide, don't give up. The fact that Bush has been certified in Florida is meaningless because all the votes have not been counted.
[Sesno:] John King, do we know what he is going to say?
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] We will hear from him directly tonight for about five minutes. What they wanted to do was they wanted that address from the vice president to go unfiltered to the American people, but they all realize, up until prime time tonight, this will be debated on news shows like this and around the country. So, the vice president, this a chance for him to thank Democrats for standing by him, to say informally in the setting, that all he is looking for is a full count of the votes in Florida, and that he believes this can be done in a week or two, without any stress on the system, if you will.
[Sesno:] Bill Schneider, while we wait for the Democrats, let's talk about the Republicans, let's talk about George W. Bush, and in particular, what George W. Bush has tried to convey to his supporters, both out in the land and his political supporters in Washington and beyond.
[Schneider:] What he has tried to convey is that he really has won because there has been, by his count I'm not sure if I can count all of these four times that he has won the vote. He certainly won the initial declaration on November the 14th, the week after the election in Florida, that was later amended with overseas ballots, and then again last night he was declared and certified the winner in Florida, but each case by a very small margin. And what Gore is arguing is, not all the votes have been counted. Now that's an arguable proposition in itself because Gore is saying that there are 10,000 votes in Miami-Dade and some in other counties that were never really counted. Well, they were counted by machine, but the machine rejected those ballots. Gore is saying they should be counted by hand.
[Sesno:] And last night, John King Here is Tom Daschle, as we see, before we launch into our next round. They are going to get miked up I am told. There is a microphone there, as you see, poised over the phone. Dick Gephardt and Tom Daschle in Florida, by the Gore campaign's invitation, to rally the troops, to make the case that there are literally thousands of votes not yet counted. The small picture of your screen there, that is the Naval Observatory, the vice president's residence. Let's see if we hear anything.
[Vice Pres. Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] Hey, guys. How are you?
[Sen. Tom Daschle , Minority Leader:] Hey, Mr. Vice President. We're just fine.
[Rep. Richard Gephardt , Minority Leader:] Hello.
[Sen. Joseph Lieberman , Vice Presidential Candidate:] Hello, Leaders. I'm here, too. Thank you.
[Daschle:] Hello, Joe.
[Gephardt:] Hi, Joe.
[Daschle:] We're down here...
[Gore:] ... you all going down to Florida to be a part of this whole effort.
[Daschle:] Well, we wanted to tell you that we've had the opportunity now to talk to so many of our colleagues over the last several days, and there is overwhelming support for your effort to ensure that we have a fair and full count. There's a recognition, of course, that we've got a lot of work to do to obtain that count. We're encouraged by the numbers that we've seen in Miami-Dade and Palm Beach and some of the other numbers around. And we were just given a new tally this morning that if we counted all of the votes that have already been counted in some of the recount, we'd actually be ahead by maybe nine votes. So we're encouraged by that. I think there's overwhelming support for your effort and a realization that if we completed the count, there is little doubt that you'd be ahead. So we wanted to come down and be as emphatic as we can that we support you in your effort, and we support this full and fair recount. In order to win, you've got to have the votes. We think you've got the votes.
[Gore:] Well, thank you, Tom. And, Dick?
[Gephardt:] Al and Joe, let me just add that Joe knows that we've been on many conference calls with the House Democrats.
[Lieberman:] Right.
[Gephardt:] And they have been entirely supportive and continue to be entirely supportive of going ahead with this contest for the purpose of finding out how everybody voted in this election. And our members, as you know, feel very strongly that we need to have a fair and accurate count. It's important for the country, and it's important for whoever is found to be, in the end, in the lead and to be the next president of the United States. And so we've been wanting to come here and to add our voice and to let you know that our members feel very strongly that this needs to be done.
[Daschle:] I will also say that our colleagues were impressed with your offer to count all of the counties, and to live with the results of that effort, and to have that concept endorsed by the Supreme Court also, I think, impressed a lot of our colleagues. As I have talked to a number of people, the fact that you've repeated it now a couple of times, is also, I think, an encouraging sign, that you're willing to live with the results, and so we are. We'd like to get on with it. We know we're working against the clock. It's important to get it done and we just want to applaud your efforts and thank you for caring on as you have so far.
[Gore:] Well, thank you both for your friendship and for your participation in this. Joe and I believe very strongly that every vote has to be counted. We hear statements on the other side quite frequently to the effect that we've had a count and a recount and another recount, but that's really beside the point. What we're talking about involves many thousands of votes that have never been counted at all. And if we ignore the votes that have been cast, then where does that lead? The integrity of our democracy depends upon the consent of the governed, freely expressed in an election where every vote is counted. I thought Joe was very eloquent when he asked the question, "How can we tell our children that every vote counts if we don't count every vote?" And that's really the principle involved here. And I want to make it very clear that this really is about much more than which candidate wins and which candidate loses. It is about the integrity of our system of government. And that integrity can only be assured if every vote that is legally cast is actually counted according to the law, the laws of America, including the laws of Florida. And that's really the principal that we're standing upon. And under Florida law, the law says, when votes haven't been counted, you go to court and say, look, here's the situation, take a look at it and do the right thing. And that's essentially what we're doing. I just appreciate all the hard work that you guys are doing. Joe is right here with me.
[Lieberman:] Just very briefly to both of you, our leaders, thank you very much for your support throughout this extraordinary and unusual time. You've been steadfast and correct in just the most encouraging way. And appreciate very much your taking the time to go to Florida and be right there on the scene and to report to us from the scene directly, as you have. As you know, Al and I feel that what we're doing here is right, and what we're asking for is fair, and that is just to count the votes that were cast. But I must say, as right as we feel it is, both not just for ourselves and the 50 million people who voted for us, but for the country and the system and the precedent we set here, it is very encouraging and important to us to have the kind of steadfast support you and the members of the two caucuses in the House and Senate have given us. I honestly can't thank you enough. And I guess I would just stress what Al has said, which is that what we're asking for today, not withstanding the certification by the secretary of state that occurred last night, which as I said last night was based on an inaccurate and incomplete vote, what we're asking for today, as our lawyers go to court, is exactly what we've been asking for from Election Night, which is, in this closet election in American history, that every vote be counted. And we are doing so in the courts of Florida today exactly according to Florida law and, more particularly, on a time schedule that was set by the justices of the Florida Supreme Court in their wisdom in the decision that they issued last week. So, thank you very, very much for your friendship. And we look forward to going forward together in answers to the country.
[Gore:] Before we go, let me just add one other point. This really is about the larger principle that I outlined. But I want you to know that, on a personal basis, I'm also very encouraged by what you said at the outset, that from your perspective there on the ground in Florida, if every vote is counted, there are easily more than enough to change the outcome and decide the election in our favor. It's about the principle, but there are more than enough votes to change the outcome, and that's an important factor as well.
[Gephardt:] One of the things we found here that I didn't know was that, if these votes are counted, under the Freedom of Information Act somebody can come here, a professor or some other academic, and count these votes in the days ahead. So if we don't find out who won and who had the most votes, we're going to find out later. Wouldn't it be a terrible thing for the country to find out a month or two months from now that you got the most votes, you already had the national popular vote by 300,000 votes in the country? How terrible would it be to find out that you also had the most votes in Florida and should have won this election.
[Daschle:] That is true especially given the fact that we've got 9,000 approximately that haven't been counted at all. We hear the Republicans talk a lot about how many times these ballots have been counted. Well, there has never been a real count of 9,000 votes in Miami-Dade, maybe 4,000 votes that were erroneously counted in Palm Beach. So you're down to about 100 votes plus or minus right now. With those 13,000 votes, what Dick has said is absolutely right, how tragic it would be to know that in January or February that you actually won by several hundred votes and we just didn't have an accurate count until then.
[Lieberman:] That is so correct because what we're about here is obviously to protect the right to vote and to have the votes be counted. But also to make sure that, again, this closest of all elections in American history, that whoever takes office on January 20 as our next president does so without clouds of doubt or anger hanging over his head.
[Gephardt:] Right.
[Lieberman:] And the way to do that is to make sure that all the votes are counted. Let's speak the fact, which is that Governor Bush is picking up votes in these hand counts, as well.
[Daschle:] You both are.
[Lieberman:] Right, absolutely, we both are.
[Gore:] Well, listen, to both of you, thank you for giving us a report from on the ground in Florida. And I'll be speaking this evening on the larger principles involved here, after the events in the Florida courts today and elsewhere. We look forward to seeing you both very soon. So thank you all very much.
[Gephardt:] Thank you.
[Daschle:] You're welcome, thank you.
[Gore:] Bye-bye.
[Lieberman:] Bye.
[Sesno:] Conference call there from the Naval Observatory, Gore residence, as it is labeled, with the vice president, Al Gore, and his running mate, Joe Lieberman, with Dick Gephardt, Tom Daschle there, the leaders from the House and the Senate on the Democratic side, they sort of rally the troops, a little bit of news at the top, according to them anyway, that if all those votes were counted, Al Gore would be nine votes ahead in Florida. It takes a little bit of special math there, but we will get you there. First to Bill Schneider here with me. Bill, this shows we're in a 24-hour news cycle. This was not an intimate little conversation. It could have happened anywhere, it happened on camera.
[Schneider:] It was a public event, clearly, and they intended this to be covered. It was a message to Democrats out there that the line of the Democrats' argument is that there are thousands and thousands of votes that have never been counted. To be precise, the machine looked at those votes and deemed them to be non-votes. So what the Gore campaign is arguing is, people voted, the machine couldn't read those ballots so people, individual human beings, should read those ballots because otherwise those voters are disenfranchised.
[Sesno:] John King, do the math for us.
[King:] Well, it is difficult math. If you take away if you count the Palm Beach hand recount, which the secretary of state did not count because it was not finished in time; if you count some of the votes that Miami-Dade County had picked up, a net gain for Vice President Bush 157 votes or so before they called off their hand counts, so those votes were never counted; and then if you accept the Gore argument on contesting changes made in Nassau County to the results, contesting some absentee ballots that they believe were not properly done in Seminole County; if you go around a little bit more math, they can present a scenario that says, see, if we win this challenge, we're now ahead by nines votes; and then we count 10,000 in Miami-Dade, and a couple thousand more in Palm Beach that they do not believe have been counted properly. As Bill said, the machines have counted those votes in Miami- Dade, no vote registered for president. The Gore people say, if you look at those ballots, you will clearly on most of them some marking. They want now the courts in Florida to do that. This was about convincing the country this is not a waste of time, that there are votes out there that could change the results, and that this is not a waste of time because now that Governor Bush has been certified as the winner in Florida, they are worried that even Gore supporters will say: Enough already.
[Sesno:] This is to counter what one Democratic pollster called and told me earlier today was we he calls this building presumption for Gore. They want to counter that I am sorry, building presumption for Bush. Let's go now and hear the Bush perspective. Eileen O'Connor is in Austin. A challenge to both the process and the public.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, it was. But you know the Bush campaign, Frank, is saying that this kind of conference call, this kind of argument from the Gore campaign, that these votes were never counted, they're say that's just disinformation. They were counted by the machines twice. And that, in many cases, they were counted by hand. And they're calling those manual recounts, not counting votes, but casting votes. They say that in those manual recounts, which they point out were done the majority of them in Democratic counties, with Democratic canvassing boards, that in that situation, the counters were divining the voter's intent. And that it wasn't necessarily the intent to vote for Al Gore. This is what the Bush campaign is saying. They are also saying their statement last night, the governor's statement last night, about moving on with the transition, about preparing to lead, and having won the electoral votes of Florida, and thus the presidency, was not presumptive. They are saying: How can that be presumptive after winning several times? Is what Mindy Tucker, one of the Bush campaign spokesman, just told me. You know, basically, it is also, they believe, not presumptive, but also preemptive. They trying, they believe, to coincide with what the public is saying. And they are e-mailing people public opinion polls that have been put out by various news organizations showing 6 out of 10 people polled saying that this should be the finality, that it should be over, and that Al Gore should concede. They also have been e-mailing out op-ed pieces. This is something that both campaigns have been doing throughout, by the way, is e-mailing poll results that bolster their argument. But the Bush campaign really believes that they do have the public on their side. And you know, it is interesting that you have two members of Congress, Democratic members of Congress, coming out there showing their support for the vice president. This is also something the Bush campaign has been watching very carefully.
[Sesno:] Let me jump in here, I am very sorry, I need to get you to Tom Daschle, who we understand is speaking right now at the microphones. Let's go down and listen. My apologies to our viewers and of course to Eileen, we had some audio problems there with Tom Daschle. We will try to work that out and bring that back to you. Obviously saw him just on the phone a few moments ago with Al Gore. He was giving his take on it there. We will try to get back to him when we can. We will take a break. On behalf of Eileen O'Connor, John King and Bill Schneider, thanks to you. I am Frank Sesno in Washington.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Let's get some insights on this helicopter crash in northern Afghanistan. Our military analyst Major General Don Shepperd, retired of the U.S. Air Force, joins us once again from Washington. And, General Shepperd, good to have you back.
[Maj. Gen. Don Shepperd , Cnn Military Analyst:] Good morning, Miles.
[O'brien:] All right. Let's take a look at some animation that we put together a little while ago, and I just want we can remind folks about the Marine expeditionary unit, the MEU as they're called, and just exactly how they're based and how they get into a region. They're based generally on a series of amphibious transport and aircraft carrying ships, and there's a whole fleet of helicopters that are a part of these MEUs. Among them are the ones in question, and we have a depiction here of some of these types of aircraft. Some of them attack. These are the big Sea Knights. And then, of course, there indicated a Sea Stallion. How much experience does the Marine Corps have flying these Sea Stallions, these Super Stallions?
[Shepperd:] Oh, they got a lot of experience in this airplane, Miles. It's a venerable old warrior, been around since the late 1970s. Now this E-model that crashed, the C-53E came on board, started coming on board I believe around 1981, and it's also scheduled for what they call a SLEP or a Service Life Extension Program. So they've got thousands of hours. It's very reliable. It operates in a very harsh environment, off these ships in the ocean, these small aircraft carriers as you put it, but it's been very, very reliable and a real workhorse.
[O'brien:] Let's take a look at another animation, which will give you another sense of its capabilities, and one of the keys on these particular types of helicopters, and I believe this is depicted here, is the cousin, which is the [inaudible] which is the Air Force version, but very similar type of helicopters. Airborne refueling off of C-130s, that is obviously a very useful thing for the military.
[Shepperd:] It is indeed. It extends the range and flexibility. You have essentially unlimited flexibility. You can refuel as many times as you can get gas from these KC-130s. In this case, the Marines KC-130, like the one that crashed earlier this month. But again, they can go very, very long distances. It's got about a four and a half hour range on its own, but when you put a tanker on it, it can go forever.
[O'brien:] Now, mentioning that whole concept of going forever, and we talked about this a little bit on the last segment, the issue of how much this operations is taxing the crews and the equipment. Is that a concern based on what you're hearing from sources in the military, is it time you know, the Marines after all are sort of pulling back at this juncture. Is that probably appropriate given the type of mission they typically train for?
[Shepperd:] Yes, this is a standard joint military doctrine. The Marines go in and seize an objective with light forces. That's what the MEU, the Marine expeditionary unit is about. They have seven of them spread around the world, about 2,200 men in each one of these MEUs. Now what they do is they rotate these MEUs. The 15th and 26th that have been in there now turn it over to the 101st Airborne Division that comes in for the long haul with heavier equipment and more men and equipment, if you will. Now they go back on the ships and float around the world waiting for the next hot spot. Some of them will get some time off with their families. But this up-tempo is something we've been doing for quite a while. It's very taxing, but that's what these men train to do and what they live for.
[O'brien:] Give us the array of possibilities as investigators try to figure out what happened to this particular helicopter.
[Shepperd:] Yes, three things likely. One, of course, is human error. Another is mechanical error. Another is, of course, enemy action. That's the three things that really can bring you down. It's looking right now, with the rhetoric that we are hearing out of the Pentagon, is that something went wrong mechanically and forced what they call a crash landing. In other words, something went wrong and he had to land right where he was, and didn't have a big, a lot of choices about where he landed. That's most likely what happened right now.
[O'brien:] Of course, this as you said is a three-engine helicopter. It would have to be something fairly drastic to force a crash landing, wouldn't it?
[Shepperd:] Well, it would but things can go wrong. These are enormously complicated, although reliable, machines. The loss of an engine would not likely force you down. It may most likely be something more than that. And again, you don't know what forces you down. It could be a bullet from the ground. It could be a missile from the ground, although no indications that happened. But it's something you have to be aware of all the time and anything can go wrong at any time. You can never relax in a military operation.
[O'brien:] And just to be clear for our viewers, this particular helicopter, its mission is not in the attack category. It transports troops, has some defensive capability, correct?
[Shepperd:] It has defensive capability, and I said earlier you could put door gunners. I'm not sure they do that on the E-version. It's a transport helicopter. I can lift its own weight. It can take, for instance, a Howitzer in, even a 26,000-pound light-armored vehicle. It can pick up an airplane. It can recover another helicopter its own weight, if you will. So it's very, very versatile. It uses the transport to get the Marines off the ship and on shore and then support them once they're on shore.
[O'brien:] And it's probably also worth pointing out as we look at this full screen, which has some of the statistics on this particular helicopter, I read somewhere this morning that it can, if necessary, carry up to 50 people.
[Shepperd:] Yes.
[O'brien:] It's a big helicopter.
[Shepperd:] Yes, actually 55 Marines with their combat gear. Now, of course, it doesn't say how far they will go. Depending on the weight, it reduces the range. But you can carry 55 men or Howitzers or a light-armored vehicle and it's a very, very versatile Sikorsky, an old workhorse there.
[O'brien:] And I'm putting you on the spot a little bit, but generally speaking it's your sense that these, over the course of time, have been fairly safe aircraft?
[Shepperd:] Very reliable, but again anything mechanical can go wrong at any time. Again, you can never relax. When you do relax in a military operation, something bad's about to happen.
[O'brien:] Major General Don Shepperd, some good words to end it with, and to remember. We appreciate your insights, as always, as our military analyst.
[Shepperd:] You bet. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] The federal judge in the Microsoft antitrust case has set a hearing for May 24th. The company wants a six-month delay to prepare its case against a breakup. More from CNN's Greg LeFevre in Redmond, Washington.
[Greg Lefevre, Cnn Correspondent:] Microsoft's first response was to ask the court throw out the Justice Department's demands to break up the software giant. Microsoft does offer to separate its Internet Explorer browser from the Windows operating system. At trial it said that could not be done. It would let PC makers customize the screen instead of adhering to strict Windows look, and it would reveal some of the operating system code so competitors could write software to run more smoothly on Windows machines.
[Mark Murray, Microsoft:] We are operating in good faith, and we're putting forward our best recommendation to the court on how to address the specific violations that the court raised, even though we disagree with those.
[Lefevre:] In a statement, the Justice Department scoffed at Microsoft's proposal, calling it "ineffective" and "full of loopholes." For example, Justice says Microsoft would still be able to retaliate against PC manufacturers and software developers who support non-Microsoft technologies. The case has clearly distracted Microsoft, but it's also cast a pall of uncertainty over an industry that, like it or not, depends on Microsoft to set its direction.
[Tom Boeder, Antitrust Attorney:] It makes it difficult not only for Microsoft but for Microsoft's competitors to settle down, to know where they're going.
[Lefevre:] But the rush to palm units and wireless Internet devices may make the desktop computer less relevant.
[Charles Hill, University Of Washington School Of Business:] The center of gravity in the computer industry is moving rapidly off the desktop, where Microsoft dominates, and on to the Web, where Microsoft does not have a dominant position.
[Lefevre:] Some contrarians quietly say a breakup might be good for Microsoft. [on camera]: Being forced to compete in the palm market, the database or the server markets all of which are dominated by their competitors might cause this company to recharge its competitive spirit. And Microsoft might emerge better off for it. Greg LeFevre, CNN, Redmond, Washington.
[Randall:] How might the Microsoft case affect both consumers and the overall economy? For some answers, we turn to Richard Wolffe, correspondent for the "Financial Times" of London. He has covered this case from the very beginning. Are you getting tired of it yet?
[Richard Wolffe, "financial Times":] No, but I'm looking forward to the end of it.
[Randall:] What do you think it will take to convince this federal court judge that the company should not be broken up?
[Wolffe:] Well, Microsoft is trying to say that a breakup will mess up the economy Microsoft has been a driving force behind the new economy and that a breakup will lead to untold damage. Now the judge the judge has got to make a really fine decision about what the impact will be.
[Randall:] Well, given, the judge's findings of antitrust violations against the company and given what the government has asked for, won't it take a very compelling case? And is the company capable of waging that kind of case?
[Wolffe:] So far, no. I mean, to be honest, its case in court has been pretty awful. In spite of all the lawyers it's got, it just hasn't met the standard that the Justice Department has set it. I think really what its best hope is is that on appeal and in possibly the Supreme Court it will find a better judge, a better a more favorable set of judges.
[Randall:] And what do you make of this public relations campaign by Microsoft, ads in newspapers and on TV? Who is that campaigning aimed at?
[Wolffe:] Well, Microsoft is talking to a bigger audience, an audience outside the court and really an audience that might affect the politicians who could ultimately have a say in this case.
[Randall:] Now, does Microsoft have a good point, that this would be detrimental to the interests of the U.S. economy? A breakup?
[Wolffe:] You know, nobody really knows. This case started in 1995, when Microsoft was late seeing the development of the Internet. We don't know what's going to happen to technology in 10, 20 years' time. And, frankly, if you look at the history of breakups, it takes that long to get them through. So the truth is we don't know.
[Randall:] And here is something we touched upon when you were here last, and that is the potential that Microsoft could be broken up and that some point along the way you have two huge monopolies.
[Wolffe:] That's absolutely true. You know, the truth is the breakup will totally disrupt this industry. It will open up new possibilities and new risks.
[Randall:] And what do consumers have to look forward to at this point, or is it all a state of uncertainty for all parties involved?
[Wolffe:] It's a state of uncertainty, that's true. But one of the interest things about this case is that Microsoft is already changing its behavior. One of its concession this week was that when you buy a computer you'll be able to see a different thing, whether it's an IBM, a Dell or a Compaq. At the moment, they all look the same. Maybe in the future we're going to see computers that actually look different.
[Randall:] And finally, Richard, do you see a brain drain from Redmond, Washington, given the state of uncertainty surrounding the company?
[Wolffe:] You know, that's quite possible. But Microsoft is already seeing some of that, because people are getting tempted by these great new dot.coms that are starting up. So, that's already happening to some extent.
[Randall:] Richard Wolffe, thanks very much. Thanks for coming in.
[Wolffe:] Thank you.

[Haffenreffer:] In ancient Hindu mythology, the God Indira cast a net that connected all parts of the Universe. In modern times, we've got Vint Cerf. Cerf and his partner invented not Indira's net but the Internet, originally a project for the Pentagon. As Mary Kathleen Flynn found out, the creator of the Internet has got big plans for his fast-growing creation, plans that reach all the way to the stars.
[Mary Kathleen Flynn, Cnn Correspondent:] Whether information comes through your phone line or satellite, Vinton Cerf is interested. He and Bob Kohn are the founders of the Internet. In 1973, they developed an idea to help military commanders communicate by land, air or sea. Later, with the invention of the PC and computer networks, the rest of the world got on their technology bandwagon. And Serf says, the net will soon encompass the whole universe.
[Vinton Cerf, Senior V.p., Mci Worldcom:] But the most exciting thing for me right now is an interplanetary-Internet design. I'm working with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory on extending the Internet, so it will work across the Solar System. The whole motivation behind this is to make sure that when we're doing research on the, you know, what's happening to the where did the Solar System come from, doing planetary research. We'll have a backbone communication network that will serve all those little robots that are out there flying past the planets or landing on them or flying past the asteroids.
[Flynn:] So something like the Pathfinder mission?
[Cerf:] A little bit like the Pathfinder mission, except for every one of the planets and satellites, we would expect to have satellites going around the various planets and moons, all communicating with each other across this interplanetary backbone, which, by the way, has to work very differently from our Earth-bound Internet, because the delays in the system are enormous, 20 minutes would be round trip time from Earth to Mars or more. And that's very different from the environment in which the original Internet protocols were designed.
[Flynn:] Cerf's brainchild would allow orbiting robots, balloons, satellites, unmanned spacecraft and perhaps humans themselves to talk to each other and to Earth. Cerf hopes it will be better and cheaper than the communications systems used in space exploration today. And he believes we are a lot closer than you may think to the interplanetary Internet.
[Cerf:] Less than 10 years, we expect to have the first two-planet system up and running between Earth and Mars before the decade is out.
[Flynn:] What else are you working on like that? Nothing that exciting.
[Cerf:] Actually, there are a bunch of things going on now. With Internet-enabled appliances, practically every appliance in the house, when you think about it, anything with any electronics in it, could be made more useful if it was on-line.
[Flynn:] But I'm also wondering about it from the point of view of disabilities. I know that you wear two hearing aids. You've won some awards for you're work, from organizations that care about the deaf. And I'm wondering, what do you think the Internet has done for people with hearing impairments or visual impairments, and how much more can it do?
[Cerf:] I have e-mails from many, many people who have felt freed by having access to the Internet. People who are otherwise bedridden, suddenly having friends that they can interact with anywhere in the world. They get to go places and see things that they couldn't otherwise see. For people who are visually impaired, there has been a lot of work done by various companies that make browser software, to make the network more accessible, to make sure that there is audio description of the content that's on the page. For people who are deaf, it's very important to have captioning for any sound that might be produced on that Web page. There's still a lot of work to be done.
[Flynn:] I'm wondering, as the Internet gets more and more multimedia, with full-motion video and all kinds of capabilities because of the broadband access, will it be even harder for people with disabilities to get all that there is out of the Web?
[Cerf:] I can foresee the day when you can essentially have a profile of what your needs are and the system adapts to that, so that it knows what it is that you need to eat or see or hear or touch.
[Flynn:] Well, what do you think are the most important contributions that the Internet makes to the world?
[Cerf:] Well, it's not so much that the net makes the contributions, as much as it is the people who use it that do. I know you know that, but I think it's important to understand that the net is simply a vehicle for people to communicate.
[Haffenreffer:] Coming up, low-tech meets high-tech in the world's finest museums.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] The Wizards could use Harry Potter to win a different kind of wizard. Peter Viles has the story.
[Unidentified Male:] At guard, from North Carolina, number 23, Michael Jordan.
[Peter Viles, Cnn Correspondent:] New Yorkers came not to boo Michael Jordan, but to praise him.
[Unidentified Male:] Michael Jordan is still the greatest basketball player of all time. There's no better place for him to return than the Garden. He's still the best, and he always will be the best. I mean, for him to come to New York tonight is a tremendous boost to all of us, to the league, to the city, and to all his fans around the world.
[Viles:] The Garden celebrities were in the house, as were more than 600 journalists, 200 of them from outside the United States. Pascal Giberne came to cover the great one for "Le Monde," in Paris.
[Pascal Giberne, "le Monde":] This guy is popular worldwide. In Spain, in France, and in Italy, everybody likes him. He's the best basketball player ever, so you have to like him.
[Viles:] The nature of Michael Jordan's greatness is that he always plays the game as if he has something to prove, but tonight, the stakes were higher than they've ever been. He had to prove that he belonged on the court. [voice-over]: Early on, Jordan showed flashes of the old greatness, blowing by Latrell Sprewell, for his first bucket since 1998.
[Unidentified Male:] Michael Jordan takes it inside, for his first two.
[Viles:] Then showing the old jump shot still works. But as the night wore on, this was not a pretty return. Michael rested more than he used to. He was rusty at times, as on this air ball; was often stifled by the Knicks' zone; and had a terrible night shooting, hitting just 7 of 21 from the field. And when the Wizards needed a big bucket down the stretch, the 38-year-old Jordan couldn't provide it.
[Michael Jordan, Washington Wizards:] I guess the difference is I'm a little bit older than what I was the last time I shot the ball. The game is a little bit different. My teammates are a little bit different. Obviously, the outcome tonight is a little bit different than what I wanted.
[Viles:] A lot has changed in 3 12 years. Jordan now wears the black and blue of the lowly Washington Wizards. True, the fallaway jumper still fell on occasion, but the famous intensity was on display, and Jordan did manage 19 points in a 93-91 loss to the Knicks.
[Doug Collins, Wizards Coach:] Well, Michael, he's so competitive. He's disappointed. He wanted to win this game tonight.
[Viles:] Which means the greatest player in NBA history left New York Tuesday night no doubt feeling that he still has something to prove. Peter Viles, CNN, New York.

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Shelley Walcott, Co-host:] Hi, I'm Shelley Walcott. Welcome to another day, another
[Newsroom. Andy Jordan, Co-host:] And a lot more news. I'm Andy Jordan. Let's get started.
[Walcott:] Our first stop: Mozambique, a nation counting the cost of a natural disaster.
[Craig Duff, Cnn Correspondent:] In addition to the thousands of families who have lost everything, the government estimates that the floods have inundated more than 300,000 acres of Mozambique's crop land. Over 120,000 family farms have suffered a total loss.
[Jordan:] Our "Science Desk" finds us in Texas, where we learn how a big discovery is leading to a big fight.
[Dan Corrick, National Park Service:] What did it look like? How did it live? How is it related to other dinosaurs? We won't be able to answer any of those questions if it just lays out there in the desert and slowly erodes away.
[Walcott:] From the battle over bones to the war over water in "Worldview."
[Patricia Kelly, Cnn Correspondent:] There's hardly a region in the world which doesn't have difficulties connected with water.
[Jordan:] Finally, we "Chronicle" the conflict and the controversy that was the Vietnam War.
[Bruce Morton, Cnn Correspondent:] In the field, in Vietnam, we learned the truth for a price: You cannot cover this war for any length of time, a colleague said to me when I first arrived, without having people you have come to know and like pretty well get killed. And that was true.
[Walcott:] In today's top story, we turn our attention to flood- ravaged Mozambique. The United Nations is urging the world not to walk away from that African nation, which it says needs more than $400 million to rebuild its damaged infrastructure. Before the floods, the former Portuguese colony had one of Africa's fastest growing economies. But weeks of torrential rain in February and March washed away almost all the country's gains. At least 640 people were killed and hundreds of thousands more were left homeless. An international reconstruction conference for Mozambique is scheduled to take place in Rome, Italy, next Wednesday and Thursday. The conference aims to raise the money needed to rebuild the country. With more on the flood's aftermath, here's Craig Duff.
[Craig Duff, Cnn Correspondent:] It will be a long time before many can put these images out of their minds: a nation battling a natural disaster. Now, weeks after the helicopter rescues and the flight to refugee camps, the long-term effects of the devastating floods in Mozambique are being tallied. Most visible is the infrastructure: highways, bridges and utilities heavily damaged. These roads on the outskirts of the capital city of Maputo have washed away and cleanup continues. In the countryside, sites like this are common: a maize field soaked and ruined where water lilies now grow. In addition to the thousands of families who have lost everything, the government estimates that the floods have inundated more than 300,000 acres of Mozambique's crop land. Over 120,000 family farms have suffered a total loss. Though flood waters have receded in some areas, it will be a while before many subsistence farmers can return to their fields.
[Joao Carilho, Dep. Minister, Agriculture And Rural Development:] I think that at least two months and maybe three for them to go back. There are a lot of preparations to do before, all the sewage system is to be recovered, the water supply system needs to be cleaned. All these things need to be prepared before people move back.
[Duff:] A study cosponsored by the U.N. Environment Program found agro-chemical spills in heavily flooded Chokwe town. It also determined that a cocktail of pollutants such as oils from service stations, dead animals and human waste could be an environmental hazard as people return to their homes.
[Boia Efraime, Exec. Dir., Rebuilding Hope:] The major problems we are facing now has to do with skin diseases, with respiration diseases, and we have already some cases of cholera, and a lot of cases of malaria cases.
[Duff:] Standing water continues to be a danger throughout the southern part of Mozambique. UNICEF reports that both malaria and diarrhea are on the increase. The World Bank estimates it could take up to $430 million to rebuild Mozambique and it will be years before the scars of flooding are no longer visible. Craig Duff for CNN, Maputo, Mozambique.
[Rudi Bakhtiar, Co-host:] Since he was rescued from the waters off the coast of Florida, Elian Gonzalez has captured hearts all over the world. The contentious battle over his fate continues, after a controversial move by the U.S. government that forcefully took him from the hands of his Miami relatives and returned him to his father.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Elian and his father spent another day hidden behind the trees on the banks of the Wye River. While the Coast Guard patrolled the waters to keep onlookers away, the legal battle over the boy intensified. Elian's father, Juan Miguel Gonzalez, went on the offensive Wednesday, against efforts by the boy's great uncle in Miami. In an emergency motion, the father called on the appeals court to explicitly give him the right to speak for his son, removing great uncle Lazaro Gonzalez from any legal standing in the case. The court is currently considering the issue of asylum for the 6-year-old. The motion sharply rejected as harmful. Legal efforts by Miami relatives seeking access to the child, it cited report by a government-appointed psychiatrist. Dr. Paulina Kernberg spent two and a half hours with Elian and his family on Tuesday. She concluded a reunion with the Miami relatives would not be advisable in their current state of mind. They would likely be disruptive. But a child psychiatrist who was present on the morning Elian was taken and is supportive of the Miami relatives disputes Kernberg's findings.
[Dr. Lydia Usategui, Child Psychiatrist:] She never saw Elian before the whole raid, she never met the family for an evaluation process, she never spoke to the psychologist that had been treating Elian, she never looked at the reports of the psychological testing that was available on Elian, and now she gets together for two hours and makes this recommendation.
[Snow:] Nearly 200 Cuban-American women dressed all in black held silent vigils outside the Justice Department, the White House and the Cuban Interests Section in Washington.
[Jordan:] Well, neck bones of what may be the largest dinosaur ever found in North America have been discovered in Texas. And those big bones are creating a big controversy in Big Bend National Park. It's located on the border with Mexico along the Rio Grande River. The park covers over 801,000 acres, where the river makes a sharp turn, or a big bend. But there's not much bending going on between two groups arguing about the dinosaur discovery. Charles Zewe digs into the dilemma.
[Charles Zewe, Cnn Correspondent:] In the vast and rugged Big Bend National Park, researcher James Carter found fossilized neck bones of a 68-million-year-old dinosaur.
[Prof. James Carter, University Of Texas At Dallas:] This is a very unique bone that has never been found before.
[Zewe:] Ten vertebrae of an alamosaurus, stretching almost 23 feet, were unearthed, along with new questions about how long dinosaurs lived.
[Carter:] These giant dinosaurs were thought to have died out about 30 million years before this large neck was discovered.
[Zewe:] Three vertebrae were taken to a university lab, where rock was chipped away and the bones reassembled. Based on just the neck bones, Carter, on the left here, laying next to the vertebrae, says the dinosaur was massive. While scientists are unsure exactly what the four-legged creature looked like, it probably resembled, they say, this giant sauropod from "Jurassic Park," except bigger, 100-feet long by 30-feet tall. Carter now wants to dig up the other vertebrae. But some Big Bend residents want any further excavation blocked. Jan Forte, co-owner of a rafting company in nearby Lajitas, accuses the National Park Service of allowing grave-robbing in a park where removal of a single pebble is prohibited.
[Jan Forte, Big Bend River Tours:] Why not leave it in its natural environment, build a display and let people come from all over the world to see this magnificent creature?
[Zewe:] Like the Dinosaur National Monument in Utah, where hundreds of bones can be seen in rock walls. Doing that, scientists say, could leave many mysteries.
[Dan Corrick, National Park Service:] What did it look like? How did it live? How's it related to other dinosaurs? We won't be able to answer any of those questions if it just lays out there in the desert and slowly erodes away.
[Zewe:] Or is stolen. Rare dinosaur fossils can fetch millions from private collectors. [on camera]: The National Park Service says it will decide by late summer what to do with the fossils. Whether they're taken to a lab or left in place, one scientist says that, in the end, they may well help fill in a missing page in the book of life. Charles Zewe, CNN, Big Bend National Park, Texas.
[Announcer:] You're watching CNN NEWSROOM, seen in schools around the world, because learning never stops, and neither does the news.
[Walcott:] It's sun and surf in "Worldview" today. And as we spin the globe, we make our way to Asia and points beyond. We'll cyber- surf through India, a nation making Web waves as its technology takes off. And we'll explore political ripples as countries around the world ponder what to do about a global water problem. And we'll take in a celebration of spring. That story takes us to Iraq.
[Bakhtiar:] We begin in Iraq, in classical times called Mesopotamia, meaning "land between the rivers." It was home to one of the world's earliest civilizations. It wasn't until the seventh century that it became known as Iraq. Modern Iraq came to be in the aftermath of World War I, gaining independence in 1932. Iraq is one of the world's leading oil producers and has used oil revenues to build one of the most powerful armed forces in the Middle East. It's strength was tested during the eight year war with Iran and the subsequent invasion of Kuwait in 1990. The latter aggression drew the U.S. and its allies into all-out war with Iraq. the Iraqi forces were defeated, but with that defeat came trade sanctions which have been detrimental to the country's economy. In spite of the country's predicament, the Iraqi people celebrated the coming of spring, masking worries of their dire circumstances. James Martone reports.
[James Martone, Cnn Correspondent:] Iraqis commemorating the beginning of spring, or Neyruz, a Persian word meaning "new light." Neyruz is a public holiday in Iraq. Iraqi Kurds like these say Neyruz also celebrates the legendary overthrowing of an ancient tyrant. Many Kurds in government- controlled territory say publicly that today's tyrant is the U.N. and U.S. and an embargo they say will also be overthrown. "If it does not end by itself, we will end it," says Kurdish merchant Kasar Ghareeb. But despite such public displays of defiance, Iraqis of all backgrounds admit privately that almost 10 years of economic sanctions have exhausted them. [on camera]: Some people here said that after so many years, they were accustomed to sanctions, but that that didn't make it any easier getting by on salaries worth as little as $1.50 per month. [voice-over]: They said life had become so expensive and inflation so high that even what were once the most inexpensive of pleasures a glass of date alcohol or water-pipe tobacco are harder and harder to pay for. There's dancing and laughter at this Neyruz celebration, but Iraqis say such fun now is overshadowed by worries over how to survive. "Somehow, we are always under pressure, always preoccupied," says 17-year-old Nora Samir, an Iraqi Christian. "Yes, we laugh and we dance, but not from inside." Emad Girgis is 32 years old. He's better off than many Iraqis. His salary as a repairman allows him to support relatives as well as his wife and son. "God is merciful and I thank him," he said about his 5,000-dinar- a-day income. That's about $75 U.S. a month. "This spring," he said, "that's a fortune not shared by many." James Martone, CNN, Baghdad.
[Tom Haynes, Co-host:] Water is one of the most common and most important substances on Earth. Throughout history, civilizations have risen where water was plentiful and floundered when water disappeared. The world's demand for water is constantly increasing, and this year demand is expected to have doubled from what is was in the 1980s. So how much water do people use? That's our pop quiz question today. How much water does a person use every day? Our answer is based on the average consumption in the United States. So what's your guess? Well, on average, each person in the U.S. uses more than 100 gallons, or 380 liters, of water each day. That really adds up, especially when you consider that, around the world, only 3 percent of our water is fresh, and part of that is tied up in glaciers and icecaps. Many parts of the world have a constant water shortage, so countries around the world are talking about the water problem. Patricia Kelly reports on one such recent meeting.
[Patricia Kelly, Cnn Correspondent:] This dance is supposed to simulate women washing laundry on a river bank. The reality is less entertaining.
[Ismail Serageldin, World Commission On Water:] We have a billion people who have no access to drinking water. We have safe drinking water. We have about 3 billion people who have no access to adequate sanitation.
[Kelly:] Disputes about water can lead to war.
[Bertrand Chartier, Green Cross:] Mr. Barak said to Mr. Gorbachev, even if we sign any peace agreement with the Palestinians, if the water question is not solved forever with the group, with everybody, we'll be at war in 10 years. And the same speech was made by Mr. Arafat and by the king, Abdullah.
[Kelly:] Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev joined delegates at this international water conference, attempting to put safe water and an increasing shortage of it worldwide at the top of the global agenda.
[Mikhail Gorbachev, Former Soviet President:] When God was creating the Earth, including rivers, and when God was giving certain direction to those rivers, he did not know that we would create nation states and national borders. And therefore, today, we have the problem of shared basins, shared water resources, and possible conflicts.
[Kelly:] Apart from war, more than 7 million people die every year of diseases caused by water shortage or polluted water. There's hardly a region in the world which doesn't have difficulties connected with water. Even Northern Europe may face supply problems with fresh water supplies polluted by fertilizers. The World Water Commission is urging governments to scrap water subsidies which encourage waste and turn to private investment to fix water problems. But that has its critics.
[David Boys, Public Services International:] We feel if the corporations end up owning and running water, that there will be serious harm in the developing world.
[Kelly:] Even as they attempt to raise public awareness, there are no easy solutions in sight. [on camera]: People and governments should be taught water must not be taken for granted. That, say delegates here, will help conserve supplies and make sure countries don't go to war for water. Patricia Kelly, CNN, The Hague.
[Walcott:] India is a land of extremes. It's the world's second most populous country, and also one of the poorest. It's home to about 900 million people. Many live in extreme poverty. Until recently, technology was a foreign concept there. Just 30 years ago, there were only an estimated 100 computers in the entire country. Today there are about 5 million. India's computer and software industry is one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy. The growth is changing the face of cities like Hyderabad, as Satinder Bindra reports.
[Satinder Bindra, Cnn Correspondent:] Once a small, sleepy town in South India, Hyderabad is in the midst of a major makeover. Transforming the area's economy are thousands of computer professionals. They make only a fraction of what their counterparts earn in the U.S., but last year these programmers exported $135 million of software. With so much skilled manpower, Hyderabad is beginning to attract investors. The U.S. alone has invested about $60 million here.
[Bindra:] Chandra Babu Naidu is the region's top elected politician, a man whose mantra is information technology. With U.S. help, Naidu recently set up a high-tech university to churn out more qualified programmers. Naidu also thinks of the poor. To take technology to the common man, he set up special cybercenters. Here, citizens can pay their utility bills, property taxes and even get their driving licenses. The scheme makes Naidu's government more accessible, and those who run the cybercenters have jobs.
[Unidentified Male:] I am also a part of the transformation that is taking place in the street. So, really, it feels good when something of that sort happens.
[Bindra:] Naidu says he now wants to use the Internet to spread literacy and health care.
[Chandra Babu Naidu, Chief Minister, Andhra Pradesin, India:] I'm going to build up Internet in all the villages. E-governments, e- commerce, all these things will be available for the common man.
[Bindra:] Naidu says his dream is only three years away. [on camera]: Many here believe in what Naidu is trying to do. They say if Hyderabad can play to its strength, developing Internet technology, it will quickly create wealth and help the region leapfrog into the future. Satinder Bindra, CNN, Hyderabad, South India.
[Announcer:] Teachers, make the most of CNN NEWSROOM with our free daily classroom guide to the program. There you'll find a rundown of each day's show so you choose just the program segments that fit your lesson plan. Plus, there are discussion questions and activities, and the guide highlights key people, places and news terms. Each day, find hot links to other online resources and previews of upcoming desk segments. It's all at this Web address, where you can also sign up to have the guide automatically e-mailed directly to you each day. It's easy, it's free, it's your curriculum connection to the news. After all, the news never stops, and neither does learning.
[Jordan:] Well, Sunday marks the 25th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War, a conflict that lasted more than a decade and cost tens of thousands of lives. With the war's end in 1975, Vietnam was left still divided into North and South. It then reunited a year later under communist control. Bruce Morton, who covered the war, offers his perspective and provides a clue to the answer to today's "Pop Quiz."
[Bruce Morton, Cnn Correspondent:] It was our longest war, but no one is quite sure when it started. John Kennedy increased the number of American advisers in what was then South Vietnam. Maybe that was the start. Perhaps the real start was earlier, when Ho Chi Minh freed Hanoi from the Japanese at the end of World War II. The Allied commanders asked what they should do. France's Charles De Gaulle said Indochina is French, and the Allies, on orders, drove Ho out. Ho didn't stop, of course. His army, led by Vo Nguyen Giap, laid siege to the French at Dien Bien Phu. Hell, one writer titled a book about it, in a very small place. France asked for American air strikes. Then-Vice President Richard Nixon was for it, but congressional leaders, including Lyndon Johnson, said no, and President Eisenhower agreed. It is wonderful history if you like irony. Johnson, who said no to bombing in the '50s, was the president who kicked the war into high gear in the '60s.
[Lyndon B. Johnson, President Of The United States:] Why must young Americans, born into a land exultant with hope and with golden promise, toil and suffer and sometimes die in such a remote and distant place? The answer, like the war itself, is not an easy one.
[Morton:] In fact, we now know Johnson himself was unsure why Americans were there but thought he couldn't just cut and run. One senator's suggestion: declare victory and leave. No one was wise enough to actually do that.
[Unidentified Male:] We wish to emphasize we seek no wider war.
[Morton:] Oh, but they did. They did. Three hundred thousand Americans, 400,000, 500,000 McNamara and the rest kept saying they saw lights at the end of the tunnel. The light, poet Robert Lowell wrote, is the light of an oncoming train. Vietnam destroyed Lyndon Johnson's presidency. Vietnam sent actress Jane Fonda to Hanoi to root for Ho Chi Minh, sent American youths into the streets to protest the war. "Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids have you killed today," one chant went. At the 1968 Democratic convention, anti-war protesters battled police in what a report later would label a "police riot." Republican Richard Nixon won the election, saying he had a plan to end the war. But it went on. The United States dropped more bombs on Vietnam than during all of World War II. It tried to kill the jungles with a defoliant called Agent Orange. Its victims included American soldiers as well as trees. And the government lied about how the war was going. And when reporters told the truth, the government said we lied. Keep the reporters away from the front, was a maxim during the Gulf War, a generation later. [on camera]: In the field in Vietnam, we learned the truth for a price. You cannot cover this war for any length of time, a colleague said to me when I first arrived, without having people you have come to know and like pretty well get killed. And that was true. [voice-over]: Almost 60,000 Americans died, and their families and friends still mourn at Washington's black wall, still leave mementos, sometimes cry. And then it ended. There was supposed to be a domino effect. Vietnam would conquer the countries around it: Thailand, Malaysia. Instead, those countries prospered while Vietnam stayed poor. They'd lost somewhere between one and two million people, maybe 300,000 missing in action, never to be found. But slowly, keeping the communist rhetoric, they changed. I was in Hue for the 20th anniversary of the war's end in 1995. The corporate sponsor of the holiday boat races was Pepsi-Cola, and you knew that things had changed. Vietnam and the U.S. have ambassadors in each other's countries now. American veterans tour Vietnamese battlefields and march in Memorial Day parades honored now, not despised. But think how many died. In Vietnam during the war, a soldier was a "grunt" and he didn't get killed he got "wasted." There was a lot of waste. Bruce Morton, CNN, Washington.
[Jordan:] Well, before Bruce Morton's report, we had a "Pop quiz." Here's the question again. Vietnam was a colony of which European country?
[Walcott:] The answer you've been eagerly awaiting is France. As we just saw, the '60s and '70s were a turbulent time when politics and emotion often couldn't be separated. The war in Vietnam prompted young people around the United States to mobilize and stand up for what they believed in.
[Jordan:] At Kent State University in Ohio, students opposed to the war staged a protest. When things turned violent, the National Guard was called in and shots were fired. Four students were killed and student activism took on a whole new meaning.
[Walcott:] Some say young people of this era are apathetic and uninterested in politics, or anything else for that matter. On May 4, the 30th anniversary of the shootings at Kent State, we'll look at the state of student activism, then and now.
[Unidentified Female:] How far would I go? Well, it depends on what you're talking about. I won't I mean, I wouldn't hurt anybody. I would never do anything that would put anybody else's life in danger or physically harm anybody, but I will do what it takes.
[Jordan:] And you can look for that story next week.
[Walcott:] And that wraps it up for us here today.
[Jordan:] See you back here tomorrow. Bye-bye.
[Walcott:] Bye-bye.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] In Iowa, weary residents have done all that they can to stave off the rising waters of the Mississippi River. The Mississippi is expected to crest tonight, but the question now: How long until the water recedes? CNN's Lilian Kim is in Davenport, Iowa, where the levees and sandbags are holding, at least for now. Lilian, what's the latest?
[Lilian Kim, Cnn Correspondent:] Kyra, the Mississippi River here in Davenport, Iowa is expected to crest later tonight. That's when the wall of sandbags behind me will be put to the test. It's the city's only protection from all-out flooding.
[Unidentified Male:] The crest may stick around for more than two days. If that happens, the dirt portion of the wall, I'm told, may get saturated and we may have some problems there.
[Kim:] Davenport is the only major city along the upper Mississippi without permanent flood protection. City leaders say they want to maintain open access to the river, a big economic generator for the town: about $100 million a year. For residents and business owners, dealing with rising waters is a way of life.
[Unidentified Male:] I just have to realize, without a flood wall, that we're going to have water. And I don't really feel I feel pretty calm about it.
[Kim:] Still, the people of Davenport can only hope that the makeshift levees will hold and the rising waters will soon subside.
[Unidentified Female:] The variables are certainly what's going to happen with the water level out there in the river and what's going to happen with our weather. And we hope that the dikes will hold. And if that happens, then we'll be OK.
[Kim:] The river here is expected to crest at 22.5 feet. That makeshift levee stands at 23 feet. Now, so far, the Midwest floods, which have been going on for several weeks, have damaged more than a thousand homes. Reporting live from Davenport, Iowa, I'm Lilian Kim Kyra, back to you.
[Phillips:] All right, Lilian, thanks so much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Want to go to the nation's heartland now, to Pierce Manufacturing. It's in Wisconsin, and they build fire trucks and other firefighting equipment. That's where we find our Jeff Flock talking with some of the workers about 911. Jeff, good morning.
[Jeff Flock, Cnn Correspondent:] Daryn, good morning to you. Perhaps you can see them in process here. This is the world's largest manufacturer of fire trucks: Pierce. It's part of the Oshkosh Truck Corporation. We're trying to get some sense of the heartland. It took place largely in the East, but it's fair to say these attacks six months ago really struck at the nation's heart. Joe has worked how long here?
[Unidentified Male:] 13 years.
[Flock:] Six months later, how is your life different?
[Unidentified Male:] My life hasn't differed much at all. I've seen other people's differ. but personally, as far as I can see and what I talk to people around here, it really wasn't changed that much at all.
[Flock:] Your support for the efforts now going on half a world away, U.S. military. Do you support that? Should that expand?
[Unidentified Male:] I totally support it. I believe we're doing the right thing. We have to do this, obviously. But I feel we could definitely be more aggressive in what we are doing, because we still are lose people overseas, and this shouldn't happen.
[Flock:] Joe, I appreciate your comments. I can tell you here at Pierce Manufacturing, where they make the fire trucks, they've got one they are now working on that is headed to New York to replace one of the many fire trucks that were lost there. And you've got headed all over this. This one looks like Redmond. Are you feeling a special kinship or perhaps loss based on happened on September 11, based on what you do here?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, I was very devastated when I heard the news. I was here at work and wasn't able to view anything until I was able to go home for the day. But being that my wife and I were expecting our last child at the time, it was tough to take.
[Flock:] What's the world that you've brought that child into now?
[Unidentified Male:] Well, it's a world that there are hard times, there are sick people, but there are just as many good people also. As we've witnessed, so many volunteers have come forward, volunteers for both the fire departments, EMTs, and also for the military. It's just constant.
[Flock:] We appreciate that. Thank you. Want to get to one more fellow before we get away here. And it looks like he's right in the middle of his this is where the last checks take place before these fire trucks head out. You are not only do you work here, but you're a firefighter yourself.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, I'm a volunteer for Greenville Fire Department.
[Flock:] How has it changed the way you approach disaster when you go out to face it in the field, knowing what perhaps awaits you?
[Unidentified Male:] It's changed the way we respond to calls now. Awareness. It's just made us more aware of a lot of things.
[Flock:] How do you feel about way the United States has responded?
[Unidentified Male:] I feel President Bush has done a good job in retaliating. I wish they could have done something sooner, because this has been known about, these people, and they knew who they were, and they could have got them before this all happened.
[Flock:] We are going to leave it there. I appreciate it very much. Thank you. We'll let you get back to the business of building fire trucks, which, of course, is what they do out here in Appleton, Wisconsin. Daryn, that is the latest, some sense of the sentiment in the nation's heartland. Back to you.
[Kagan:] Jeff, thank you very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] In California, hundreds of firefighters remain on the frontlines in the Western U.S. today. California is the center of today's battle. A big blaze at Castaic Fire is burning in Los Angeles County. Another fire in Northern California has taken a deadly turn. Two air tankers collided while dumping fire retardant on a brush fire in Mendocino County, killing both pilots. In the Castaic area in Southern California, firefighters are making progress in their bid to contain those flames. CNN's Ana Cuevas is following the story in Castaic. Ana, good morning.
[Ana Ceuvas, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Daryn. The brushfire has covered an area of about 1,800 acres. It's about 30 miles north of Los Angeles, and firefighters say they have it contained about 80 percent, and that number might increase later on this morning. They worked through the evening and in the early hours of the morning to try and take advantage of the high humidity and lower temperatures, which definitely helps them when it comes time to fighting these kinds of brushfires. The brushfire started yesterday a little bit after noon and spread quickly throughout the area. There was no report of property damage, with the exception of two homes. One traditional stand-alone home, the other one a trailer home. There were also reports of the only injuries reported were to crew members who reported heat exhaustion and were treated on-site. However, the biggest concern is the weather. One of the latest reports they're getting is temperatures today will probably be between 95-105 degrees, and the relative humidity between 9 and 15 percent, humidity being the key element in this whole brushfire equation. With us today, we have Rowland Sprewell from the L.A. County Fire Department, who is telling us that they are in the cleanup stages of the operation. Can you tell us a little bit about this?
[Roland Sprewell, L.a. Country Fire Department:] That's right, Hena. We are all but in the cleaning up stages right now, and in a phase what we call demobilization. And that is we're trying to turn loose a few of the crew members that we don't need at this point in time, some of the out of county strike team crews that we were utilizing yesterday as we were tightening up some of the lines out there.
[Ceuvas:] So it seems like you guys are pretty optimistic that you will be able to have this contained pretty much today?
[Sprewell:] Exactly. In fact, this is the best time to take advantage of the weather and so forth, tighten up our lines, complete our dozer lines. We were out there all night with our hand crews and dozer teams, completing the lines that we have around the fire, and we will continue to do that much throughout the morning hours before the temperatures begin to increase again. We're expecting today humidities to go very similar to what they were yesterday, to 9-15 percent humidities. And in this area of heavy brush, that's of particular concern as we saw yesterday.
[Ceuvas:] So at what stage is the fire right now?
[Sprewell:] Well, again, we're getting into the demobilization stage right now, where we start to release some of the crews and sort of wind things down. We will go through a process of what we call "cold trailing.: The hand crews will go there and they will walk the line. They'll turn over roots and so forth to make sure that the fire is not burning deep within and so forth, and continue making continuous water drops with the helicopter and making sure that everything is completely snuffed out.
[Ceuvas:] Thank you very much. That was Roland Sprewell with L.A. County Fire Department. And back to you, Daryn. Anna Ceuvas, in Southern California, thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] The World Trade Center used to be the tallest buildings in New York, and we know that, but that honor now goes back to the Empire State Building, but in Chicago, the Sears Tower is the nation's tallest. There has been concern in Chicago ever since 0911, and Jeff Flock at the Sears Tower this morning in Chicago. Jeff,good morning.
[Jeff Flock, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning to you, Bill. In some ways, you can't look at a skyscraper in the same way as you did before September 11th. Out here, in front of the Sears Tower, as you look up, it is a grand and imposing site. You know, a lot of people did not know that you see the antennas on the top of the building. If you counted the antennas on the World Trade Center and the Sears Tower, the Trade Center actually was taller. Now no question about the tallest building in the U.S.. It is the Sears Tower, and of course a lot of attention out here. Perhaps you can see those concrete barricades that have been put off in the distance. This is to keep any kind of vehicles from getting close at all to the tower. Off into the distance, perhaps also you see the lobby in there, and you see a backup before security. We have got some pictures inside at what the new security system looks like inside of the Sears Tower. You essentially have to have a building ID. You need to produce that. And it needs to be run through a card reader to make sure that it is a valid ID. Anything that you bring with you, like a purse or a bag, a satchel, anything like that, is searched, no matter who you are. That is the only way to get into this building. In addition to that, the Sears Skydeck, which of course is very a popular tourist attraction perhaps you see it to my left. The Skydeck has been closed as of September 11th, and they tell us, it will not be opened perhaps until the end of this month. And in terms of the new security, all of the new tightened security, which included by the way on Sunday, once they got word of the U.S. counterattack, a plan was put into place to immediately dispatch Chicago police here. The new security that is now in place here, they tell us is permanent. A new world here in Chicago and elsewhere. That is the latest from the U.S.'s tallest budding in Chicago. Back to you.
[Hemmer:] A new world indeed. Only four weeks later, too. Jeff, thanks, live in Chicago. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] There are a lot of other stories to tell, and we have one that concerns a very unique woman. It is a given that you have got to have two good hands to play sports, like my favorite golf or baseball or football, or any of those; right?
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Apparently not so. Take the case of softball player Samantha Eyman. Marcelo Ramon of CNN station WGN in Chicago has her story.
[Marcelo Ramon, Wgn Reporter:] If you're not watching closely, you will miss it.
[Samantha Eyman:] People don't even realize in softball games that, like, I do have one hand until like the sixth inning. They will be, like, wait a minute, you know, so it is kind of like they don't realize it.
[Ramon:] They don't realize because the one-handed varsity catcher from Stack High School is as good as any other in the conference.
[Bob Dillon, Samantha's Coach:] She's got a huge, strong arm, and sometimes when people look at her they say: Well, you know, maybe we could steal on her, maybe we could take the extra base or whatever, and they find out pretty quickly that that's not the case.
[Ramon:] Sam was born without her left hand, but for her, it's never been a handicap. She likes to call it an inconvenience. When she is not playing softball, Sam is helping other kids who have with similar inconveniences.
[S. Eyman:] I know of, like, a lot of people that when their kid is born with something different, that like they don't know what to do, and I want be there to help people know.
[John Eyman, Samantha's Father:] There was a girl here this morning that had a hand similar to Sam's, and she basically went through how she did the mitt change, and how she bats. And the mother said: Sam, please, can I keep your phone number and call you anytime. Sam said: Sure.
[Ramon:] Sam has never been one to feel sorry for herself, and always the first to take on a new challenge. She has been playing softball since she was five, and practiced being a catcher since she was a freshman outfielder. She was board with the outfield, and catcher is the second hardest position on the team. Sam is concentrating on softball now, but she has played volleyball, basketball, and run track, but never soccer.
[S. Eyman:] People are like, why don't you play soccer, it is just like, I never found it interesting, you know, because soccer doesn't, you know you don't need hands to play soccer or anything. I don't know, guess I did go for the challenge.
[Ramon:] Not only is Sam a competitor, but those who play with her say she is a delight, a motivator, and she gives them inspiration. Sam can't really see all the fuss, though, being one-handed isn't a big deal to her. In fact, she says, if someone offered her another hand she wouldn't take it, she wouldn't know what to do with it. But her parents know how far she has come.
[Pat Eyman, Samantha's Mother:] Never in my wildest dreams did I think she would accomplish what she has. For a parent, it is just amazing.
[Ramon:] Right now, Sam Eyman has her sights set on college ball; that and helping others overcome their inconveniences.
[Allen:] How about that, nice story.
[Waters:] Liked that story very much.

[Wolf Blitzer:] Tonight, Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh gives his lawyers the green light to delay his execution.
[Unidentified Male:] This decision was not easy for Mr. McVeigh. He had prepared to die.
[Blitzer:] Does McVeigh have a case? I'll speak with someone who prosecuted him, Larry Mackey, and with prominent criminal defense attorney, Robert Shapiro. Their father is dead. Their mother's in jail. Six children holed up in their Idaho home, with guns, and a pack of vicious dogs. And, when a president's daughter has a brush, or two, with trouble, is it any of the media's business? Or yours? Good evening. I'm Wolf Blitzer reporting tonight from Washington. There was a dramatic development today in the case of convicted Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh. His attorneys emerged from his prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, to announce he's had a change of heart. He no longer wants to be executed, at least not in 11 days as scheduled. Attorney General John Ashcroft says the Justice Department will vigorously oppose any further delay in that execution. That sets the stage for a legal showdown next Wednesday before a federal judge in Denver, and that's our top story. CNN's Susan Candiotti is standing by in Terre Haute with details. Susan, tell us what's going on?
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Good evening, Wolf. To no one's surprise, especially given his disdain for all federal law enforcement agencies, convicted Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh has now filed for a stay of his June 11 execution, he is charging the government with fraud, and for withholding information from him and his defense team on purpose. The man who was prepared to die just a few weeks ago, isn't any more.
[Candiotti:] Asking to delay Timothy McVeigh's execution, defense attorneys portray this as a question of fairness, not an issue of innocence.
[Richard Burr, Mcveigh Attorney:] Well, the test of our system is whether we can provide fairness, and integrity for the people who may have done or are accused of doing the worst things we can imagine.
[Candiotti:] The lawyers complained not only have the FBI failed to turn over all its documents before trial, it was still holding back information.
[Burr:] But it is quite clear to us, that people have been investigated carefully by the FBI and they have never produced one piece of paper, concerning those people.
[Candiotti:] The defense was clearly upset about one document turned over only a day earlier. Government sources say it was an old FBI interview with investigator on McVeigh's own defense team, but in an unrelated case, that had nothing to do with the Oklahoma City bombing. For the first time, McVeigh sounded contrite toward the bombing victims when he decided to fight the execution date, that now awaits him June 11th.
[Robert Nigh, Mcveigh Attorney:] His decision in no way stems from a desire to cause these people any additional pain, or trauma.
[Candiotti:] The Justice Department says there is nothing new in the document, to raise any doubt about McVeigh's guilt. It says it will fight to make sure his death sentence is carried out. Tonight, trial Judge Richard Matsch refused a defense request for a court order forbidding the FBI for interfering with a defense investigation, and he scheduled a hearing for next Wednesday, in Denver on that stay of execution, five days short of McVeigh's second date with the death chamber. Back to you, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Susan, only five days away from that hearing, next Wednesday, he will only have five days to make up his mind. Any indication how long Judge Matsch may deliberate before deciding?
[Candiotti:] We only know this: Judge Matsch has a reputation for not wasting any time, and with very little time to spare, he is likely to make a decision quickly, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Susan Candiotti in Terre Haute, Indiana thank you very much. Later in our program, we'll get two very different perspectives from former McVeigh prosecutor Larry Mackey and Criminal Defense Attorney Robert Shapiro. Meanwhile, in a New York courtroom today, prosecutors today wrapped up their case calling for the execution of Mohamed al'-Owhali. He is the Saudi and one of four people convicted this week in the 1998 bombings of two U.S. Embassies in Africa. He was found to have carried out the attack on the embassy in Kenya, which killed 213 people and injured thousands of others. A delicate standoff in rural Idaho: a rundown house, inside, six armed-children. Outside, a large pack of dogs. CNN's Lilian Kim picks up the story, live in Garfield Bay, Idaho Lilian.
[Lilian Kim, Cnn Correspondent:] Wolf, deputies spent all day trying to coax the children out of the home. But, still, no progress. Deputies say their strategy is to be patient. They say they don't want to arrest anybody; they just want to make sure the children are in good care.
[Kim:] Deputies say the six children holed up inside their home have guns and nearly 30 vicious dogs roaming on their property. According to neighbors, these brothers and sisters, aging from 8 to 16, have lived in seclusion for several years in primitive conditions.
[Unidentified Female:] They had to take care of each other and they wanted a simpler life. They wanted a life away from people, to hassle them. And they have to stick together.
[Kim:] So far, deputies have made only minimal contact with one of the children. The standoff began Tuesday when authorities tried to take the children into protective custody after arresting their mother, Joanne McGuckin, on charges of felony injury to a child.
[Sheriff Phil Jarvis, Bonner County, Idaho:] The 15-year-old son took exception to something that was said or something that was done, and bolted to the house, and told the children who were still in the house to get the guns. We figure the longer they wait, the calmer they'll get and we'll continue to attempt to convince them we are here to help them, not to hurt them.
[Kim:] Deputies are trying to communicate with the children through a loudspeaker. Helping them, a 19-year-old sister, who lives apart from the rest of the family.
[Blitzer:] As for the children's father, he had multiple sclerosis and died of malnutrition earlier this month. So, this family has been through quite an ordeal in recent weeks. Reporting live from Garfield Bay, Idaho, I'm Lilian Kim. Wolf, back to you. Lilian, I understand there is a clergyman a local clergyman who has some relationship with these kids. Any sense of sending him in? Or having him establish contact with these people?
[Kim:] This pastor has tried to help this family in recent years and throughout this incident he has been talking to them, over the loudspeaker. But the children have not responded to his pleas or the pleas of friends and family.
[Blitzer:] Lilian Kim in Idaho, thank you very much. Meanwhile in Northern Virginia, veteran FBI agent Robert Hanssen today pleaded not guilty to charges that he spied for Moscow. Hanssen is accused of selling U.S. secrets over a 15-year period. 14 of the 21 counts against him are "capital eligible," meaning conviction could lead to the death penalty. A trial has been set for late October. Timothy McVeigh has a change of heart. Did the government deprive him of a fair trial? I'll speak with former McVeigh prosecutor Larry Mackey, and the man behind O.J. Simpson's dream team, criminal defense Attorney Robert Shapiro. Also, presidential twins, caught, and caught in the spotlight is it fair? Stay with us. Welcome back. Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh has had second thoughts, and his lawyers have now filed for a stay of his execution. They claim the government cheated him out of a fair trial by withholding documents. To help us follow the legal twists and turns, I'm joined from Indianapolis by Larry Mackey, the former federal prosecutor in the Oklahoma City bombing trials. And from Los Angeles, criminal defense attorney Robert Shapiro. You may remember him from the O.J. Simpson trial. He's also the author of the new book, "Misconception." Gentlemen, thanks for joining us. Larry Mackey, I want to begin with you. You heard what the defense attorneys say, they need more time to review these 4,000 pages of documents. Don't they make a compelling case to delay this execution?
[Larry Mackey, Former Federal Prosecutor:] I don't think so. The law is very, very clear, that there is a huge burden that they have to sustain, and I think Judge Matsch next Wednesday will tell them remind them of the law. It is pretty clear in the filings today, that they cannot point to any documents to draw into question the legitimacy of that jury's verdict.
[Blitzer:] What do you say about that, Robert Shapiro?
[Robert Shapiro, Criminal Defense Attorney:] Well, first, I want to commend General Ashcroft for the stand he took last month. And what he said was the integrity of the system of justice was more important than Timothy McVeigh or any other individual. And I think that standard should still apply. If the defense has not had adequate time to review 4,000 documents, then I think it is proper they should ask the court and be granted the amount of time necessary for them to conduct their own review. I'm sure that Larry and General Ashcroft are very sincere in their professionalism that there is nothing in those documents. But the defense should have a chance to make their own determination, since we are facing the death penalty.
[Blitzer:] Larry, fair is fair, and the attorney general did ask for at least a one month delay if they say they need more time, and since the death penalty is such an act of finality, why not give them some more time?
[Mackey:] It is not as simple as that, and time is certainly not irrelevant. But 30 days is sufficient time to review the kinds of material that are in question here. The attorney general gave us his report to American people last Thursday, and, after careful review, assured them there was nothing in there that was material to McVeigh's defense. They are really asking for more than just time in which to continue that evaluation. They want this date put off indefinitely and they want an evidentiary hearing, in which they can explore or ask Judge Matsch to explore why it was the FBI took so long to disclose it. Those are entirely different questions. And, again, I predict that Judge Matsch will fall back on the rule of the law, and see this motion for what it is and ultimately deny it.
[Blitzer:] Robert Shapiro, as everyone knows, Timothy McVeigh has admitted planting the bomb, killing 168 people, including a lot of children. These families family members of the victims, they were anticipating closure. Isn't it unfair to them to keep them waiting longer?
[Shapiro:] Absolutely. It is unfair. It is unfair that they have to be victims of the most horrendous mass murder in history. But, our system of justice works on balancing, and, we have to balance the rights of the victims, and the people who are suffering as a result of their losses with constitutional rights to due process. And to the integrity of the system. And, General Ashcroft certainly has a lot more resources in being able to evaluate 4,000 documents, than Mr. McVeigh's lawyers do. And I think that, in balancing the two, that when we are dealing with the death penalty, that if the defense says they need a little more time, I think they should be entitled to it.
[Blitzer:] And on that point, Larry, if there was a mistake made here, it was a mistake by the FBI, in failure to provide all of those documents. If the families are going to grieve and are going to be unable to have at least some semblance of closure, shouldn't they focus their attention on the FBI for the mistake, rather than on the criminal defense attorneys who, after all, are simply doing their jobs?
[Mackey:] Well, they certainly hold Tim McVeigh responsible for killing their loved ones and that is paramount in their concerns and my concern as well. But the remedy for Tim McVeigh was the 30 days that Attorney General Ashcroft gave some a few weeks ago, so, there has been adequate time. That study has been done. Judge Matsch is familiar with nature of these materials, and if he thinks is there any reason that he needs more time, he will rule accordingly. Again, because of what it is and more precisely, what it is not, that is something that draws into question, that verdict, Timothy McVeigh's confession, again, I think this will be over fairly soon.
[Blitzer:] Robert Shapiro, if Timothy McVeigh were your client right now, what is the main argument you would make to keep him alive?
[Shapiro:] I can't answer that hypothetical question, because it is not a case that I would choose to be involved in.
[Blitzer:] The arguments that you heard from his criminal defense attorneys, in saying asking for this stay, from your perspective, seemed to make some sense.
[Shapiro:] Well, I just I have been very complimentary of General Ashcroft and the stance he took, but there is nothing magical about 30 days. It could have been 25 days, maybe it is going to take 40 days, maybe it will take another 30 days for the defense to feel comfortable that they have had adequate time to review the materials, and make their own conclusions. Their conclusions professionally may differ from the conclusions of General Ashcroft and his staff.
[Blitzer:] Larry Mackey, the defense attorneys came out of the prison today and suggested there still may be some person out there who was involved in this conspiracy against the Murrah Federal Office Building. If there is, wouldn't it make sense to at least try to keep Timothy McVeigh alive? Perhaps, he might have a change of heart and confess and point to a specific person?
[Mackey:] Well, if they said that, they haven't read his book, because he made absolutely clear that he acted alone on the morning of April 19th to detonate the bomb that he had built ending the lives of 168 people. There will always be in the minds of some people, the wonders of John Doe II and the complicity of others. But in the end, after working on that case for three years, after suffering through the courtroom through two trials, there is no doubt in my mind that everyone, criminally responsible for that act has been prosecuted.
[Blitzer:] We only have a second left, Robert Shapiro, but put on your legal expertise hat for a second and tell us, will Timothy McVeigh be executed on June 11th?
[Shapiro:] Well, I was asked this question when the execution was set for Wednesday, and it came out that documents were not turned over, and I think I was the only person who said he wouldn't be executed. My opinion remains the same. I think he is going to get a little more time to review the documents. And that the execution will be postponed again.
[Blitzer:] Robert Shapiro and Larry Mackey, thanks to both of you for joining us tonight.
[Shapiro:] Thank you.
[Mackey:] Thank you Wolf.
[Blitzer:] A heat wave has California teetering on the edge of blackouts once again. And the Bush girls get in trouble. Who needs to know? Stay wit us. Welcome back. Police in Austin, Texas today cited President Bush's twin daughters for violating state alcoholic beverage laws. Questions about the incident remain off limits at the White House. As CNN's Anne McDermott reminds us, all first families struggle to retain a little privacy.
[Anne Mcdermott, Cnn Correspondent:] Being president: well, presidents will tell you, it's swell. But first families don't always have it so easy. Ask Billy Carter. Ask Roger Clinton. But they said OK to the limelight; official offspring often do not. But the Bush girls don't have much choice, just as Teddy Roosevelt's daughter didn't have much choice, either.
[Helen Thomas, White House Press:] Alice Longworth Roosevelt Longworth, of course, made a lot of news because she was smoking at about 18.
[Mcdermott:] Sometimes, attention equals adoration. That's how it was for the Kennedy kids. Whenever we saw the children with the president, we could hardly resist writing about it. It conveyed such a warmth and wonderful feeling about family, and there was And sometimes attention is tough. Amy Carter was taken to task for bringing a book to state dinners, and Reagan's children raised eyebrows by dancing ballet and protesting their father's policies. But Chelsea Clinton was luckier. She was left alone.
[Lisa Caputo, Former Press Secretary. For Hillary Rodham Clinton:] But we really had ongoing conversation and dialogue with members of the national press and the White House press corps, and we really tried very hard to appeal to their humanity, and to them not as reporters, but as parents.
[Mcdermott:] The Bush girls were left alone, too, until recently. Well, actually, Jenna Bush is still left alone, by the University of Texas student paper. It's not, says the editor, as though she committed a felony.
[Marshall Maher, "the Daily Texan":] We have quite a few students, and we have quite a few misdemeanors going around in this town, so...
[Mcdermott:] So, where were the Secret Service when alleged misdeeds were going down?
[Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary:] The Secret Service has one mission, and that's to protect their lives.
[Mcdermott:] Now when it comes to protecting a reputation, well, as one observer advised, pretend you're always being watched, because you are. Anne McDermott, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Blitzer:] More on the first teenagers top of the hour. Former President Ford's daughter Susan Ford Bales is among the guests on "LARRY KING LIVE." Fallout between Ford and Firestone, the CEO of Bridge Firestone today asked the government to investigate the safety of Ford's Explorer sport utility vehicle specifically, a steering problem that he claims contributes to rollovers. The move comes a week after Ford announced it would replace Firestone tires on its vehicles over safety concerns. The Centers For Disease Control reports an alarming increase in new infection rates, especially for young gay African-American men. Worldwide, AIDS has claimed 22 million lives, with 36 million more infected with HIV. Tonight on the "Leading Edge," scientists have uncovered the fossils of what may have been the second largest dinosaur ever. The remains were discovered in Egypt's Sahara Desert. Paleontologists believe the 70-ton creature lived about 94 million years ago, millions of years before the more famous tyrannosaurus rex. Rolling blackouts were averted in California today after warnings power supplies could fall short. A Stage 2 power alert was issued for much of the day due to unusually hot weather and increased demand. Power was cut at several businesses that voluntarily curtail energy during high demand periods. As of today, your current version of Microsoft's popular Office software is obsolete. The company gave its new version, Office XP, a splashy debut at 100 separate events around the world. First-time buyers can expect to pay about $450 a copy. Upgrades start at around $240. Up next, I'll open our mailbag. Many of you are outraged over the media's coverage of President Bush's daughters. I'll share some of that with you. Welcome back. Time now to open our mailbag. Many of you reacted to our report last night on the latest troubles facing the president's daughters, and there are strong feelings. James writes: "The Bush kids are none of your business. It shows how low you are in reporting the news. Disgusting." Martha from Indiana, Pennsylvania writes: "Can't we find something more newsworthy than the perfectly normal activities of the president's daughters? They only did what I did 50 years ago, when an ID was not necessary." But Kathi from Port Townsend, Washington writes: "It is becoming increasingly obvious that these kids have a problem that is being given real short shrift by the media. Had this been Chelsea Clinton, I can just hear the howling about morality and bad parenting." Remember, I want to hear from you. Please e-mail me at wolf@cnn.com. And you can read my daily on-line column and sign up for my e-mail previewing our nightly programs by going to our WOLF BLITZER REPORTS Web site, cnn.comwolf. Please stay with CNN throughout the night. Art Linkletter is Larry King's guest at the top of the hour. Tomorrow night, I'll get reaction to the McVeigh appeal from two people who lost family members in the Oklahoma City bombing. Until then, thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. "
[The Point:] with Greta Van Susteren begins right now.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] John Rocker says he just lost his cool. The Atlanta Braves pitcher is now apologizing for recent controversial comments that he made about minorities, homosexuals and others, but is it enough to end the war over his words? For more now, here's CNN's Aram Roston on this story.
[Aram Roston, Cnn Correspondent:] It comes down to John Rocker's word then against John Rocker's word now.
[John Rocker, Atlanta Braves Pitcher:] You hit one home run in the big leagues, it doesn't make you a homerun hitter, obviously, and you make one off-handed comment like this without thinking, you just blurt it out, and in front of a reporter you blurt it out, you can't get it back. To make one comment like this doesn't make you a racist.
[Roston:] Rocker said he is no racist. The Atlanta Braves relief pitcher said his comments about New York City, which criticized gays, Hispanics and other minorities, were in part a response to the way he'd been treated by New York Fans. When he called a teammate a "fat monkey," he said it was locker-room humor. Those were just some of the comments he'd made in an interview with "Sports Illustrated" magazine, last month. He said if he'd heard someone else make the same comments as he had in "Sports Illustrated"
[Rocker:] I would think I was you know, was a complete jerk, like, you know, who the heck does this guy think he is, you know, mouthing off like this, you know.
[Roston:] Wednesday, he visited his hometown of Macon, Georgia. The mayor had already called for reconciliation.
[Mayor Jack Ellis, Macon, Georgia:] He is sorry about what he said, and he's sorry that he upset people, and he understands that.
[Roston:] Not everyone is so forgiving.
[Derrick Boazman, Atlanta City Council:] Racist, bigoted, homophobic, dangerous, incendiary speech, which has at its root the intent to inflict harm, as Mr. Rocker said.
[Roston:] Last week, Major League Baseball ordered Rocker to undergo a psychological examination, but there is still no word on the future of his career and whether his recantation and his apologies will save it. Aram Roston, CNN, Atlanta.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Israel has responded earlier today to attacks, with both military strikes and a diplomatic shun. Israel severed all ties with Yasser Arafat earlier today and launched retaliatory airstrikes on his West Bank headquarters. In Jerusalem now, CNN's Chris Burns is watching everything.
[Chris Burns, Cnn Correspondent:] Heavy armor backs up Israel's tough new crackdown on Palestinian militants, Some within 200 meters of Palestinian leader Arafat's headquarters on the West Bank. They underline Israel's message, that it given up on Arafat cracking down and is doing the job itself. Overnight, Israeli F-16s and helicopter gunships blast Palestinian installations on the West Bank and Gaza, after Palestinian militants kill 10 Israelis. Bombs and rockets fall near Arafat's compounds. Radar and radio facilities are knocked out, further paralyzing him. And another bombshell, this one political, the Israeli cabinet has declared Yasser Arafat no longer relevant and will break off contacts with him. The government also promises to go after to go after Palestinian militants, arrested suspects and confiscating weapons. The measures come hour after Palestinian militants ambush a bus filled with Orthodox Jews near their settlement on the West Bank. As ambulances arrived, they were caught in an ensuing gun battle. When it was over, 10 Israelis lay dead. In the wake of the attack, Arafat says he is shutting down the offices of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, groups the U.S., European Union and Israelis call terror organizations. Too little too late for the Israelis. Another casualty of the conflict could be the U.S.-led mediation effort. The U.S. envoy, General Anthony Zinni, has so far failed to stop the cycle of violence. A 15-month old Palestinian An uprising against Israeli occupation has left more than a thousand dead. Most of them Palestinians. Zinni is again pressing Arafat to crack down harder on militants. Palestinians say the Israeli attacks prevent them from doing that.
[Saeb Erakat, Chief Palestinian Negotiator:] There are those extremist elements in all types who want to sabotage the
[Burns:] The Israelis say they, too, want Zinni to succeed.
[Unidentified Male:] We hope there will a possibility to restore this effort to establish a cease-fire. But one thing must remain clear. We have to take all of necessary measures in order to defend our citizens.
[Burns:] For now, it appears military action is the most likely action, as diplomacy struggles just to stay alive. Chris Burns, CNN Jerusalem.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] The U.S.-China standoff was the first big test for the Bush administration. CNN's Major Garrett joins us now from the White House, where no doubt there have been quite a few smiles since yesterday Major, good morning.
[Major Garrett, Cnn Correspondent:] Probably a few smiles and probably behind the scenes a few high fives in the air. But publicly, Leon, the president and his top advisers say, "You know, we never thought this was a crisis. We never treated it as a crisis. We treated it as a serious event. "The president did focus, was engaged a lot. But we always knew at some point this would resolve itself. And we are glad it resolved itself. It took a little bit longer than we would have preferred." But it did resolve itself, most advisers say, without any long- due harm to U.S.-China relationship. And it's back on to the president's schedule, business as usual. In a few moments, the president will entertain several leaders in education to talk about parental empowerment. He will be introduced by Floyd Plank, who is an African American, a former member of Congress, and a powerful advocate for school choice, which is very high on the president's agenda when it comes to education. We are told by White House officials that the president is likely to take note of the fact that the 24-member crew is soon to arrive in Hawaii, also probably express his pleasure at that. And we're told also that at some point today, the president is expected to make a telephone call welcoming that crew to Hawaii, also expecting to get a photo of that. A still photographer will be allowed in to take a picture of the president on the White House phone making that call, Leon.
[Harris:] All right. Thanks much, Major. We'll get back to you in a bit. So stay tuned. Stand by there. Folks, you stay tuned. We will have live coverage of that event Mr. Bush is going to be at in just a moment. Expect it to begin sometime fairly soon. So make sure you stand by because we expect he will have some comments to make.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the ballots are being counted in Russia's presidential election and acting President Vladimir Putin is in the lead. But the key development is that Mr. Putin is well short of the vote needed to avoid a run-off election with the runner-up. And CNN's Mike Hanna now joins us with the latest from Moscow. Hi, Mike.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Brian. Well, it's tantalizingly close at the moment. The results that we have received so far with some one-fifth of the vote returned from throughout to Russia indicates that Mr. Putin has in the top 40s, still underneath that 50 percent that he needs to secure an absolute majority. But the votes being counted in the regions at the moment mainly coming from the Far East and Siberia. These figures generally tilted toward the Communist Party, which at the moment is making a surprisingly strong showing. That is Gennady Zyuganov of the Communist Party: Mr. Zyuganov with some 30 percent of the vote at this particular stage. So certainly the figures at the moment indicating that Mr. Putin is going to struggle to get that 50 percent margin. However, it is still too easy to tell at this stage exactly which way this is going, whether he will possibly face the second round of votes. We need to start getting the votes from Russia industrial heartland and the Urals. We also need to start getting the votes from the big cities like St. Petersburg, and of course, Russia's largest city, Moscow. Preliminary results incidentally from some of the big cities like St. Petersburg show that Mr. Putin has some 60 percent of the votes. Nizhni Novgorod, the third-largest city in Russia, shows that he has around 58 percent of the vote. So certainly once we start getting in these figures, it will become a much clearer picture. But at the moment, Brian, it is far too close to call exactly where we are.
[Nelson:] Mike, how long do you think it will take to either get some sort of a clear decision or to count all the votes?
[Hanna:] Well, at the moment, we are starting to get the polls coming in. Now I'm just told we have some 40 percent of the vote counted. The figures we're looking at the moment, a big increase here: Mr. Putin now up at 49.52 percent of the vote counted. Gennady Zyuganov is staying static at that 30 percent. What we are seeing now is that industrial heartland coming in, some of the big cities. This is now the big change that we are seeing. Moving up that percentage point, now just below the 50 percent margin. With the figures as they are at the moment, it does appear as though Mr. Putin may just tip the scale. But we need just a little bit more details from the heartlands to know. That will come, well, within the next hour, certainly within in the next two hours, Brian.
[Nelson:] Thank you. CNN's Mike Hanna reporting to us from Moscow, and we're expecting to hear from President Putin, if he becomes president, with a statement shortly after the announcement. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Wolf Blitzer:] Tonight, it was a surprise announcement.
[Dick Cheney, Vice President Of The United States:] I'm going to undergo a test tomorrow.
[Blitzer:] Word that Vice President Dick Cheney's heart is causing concern again. He may need a new device for his heart. I'll speak with Georgetown University cardiologist Dr. David Pearle about the procedure. It's a family tragedy that has gripped a nation. Andrea Yates is accused of drowning her five children. Tonight, I'll speak to her brothers, Andrew and Patrick Kennedy, about their sister and the impact this crime is having on their family. Good evening. I'm Wolf Blitzer, reporting tonight from Washington. Vice President Dick Cheney had a surprise announcement today. He revealed he's checking into George Washington University hospital tomorrow morning. Recent tests, he says, have shown an irregular heart rhythm. Normally, that would not be all that unusual. But given his almost 25-year history of heart attacks, doctors don't want to take any chances, and that's our top story. CNN White House correspondent Major Garrett joins us now live from the White House with more Major.
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Wolf, the vice president and his wife Lynn made the decision for him to go to the hospital on Saturday just last night. And right after that decision was made, top White House advisers decided how they would manage the story, and they decided the best person to break this news to the country was the vice president himself.
[Cheney:] It is called an electrophysiology study, and it is specifically performed for the purpose of determining the prospective risk for me going forward in terms of abnormal heart rhythms.
[Garrett:] Abnormal heart rhythms again. Doctors detected them two weeks ago, short flutters that Mr. Cheney says he can't even feel.
[Cheney:] I'm oblivious to these incidents when they occur, and they only last one or two seconds. It's just a short period of time when there's a rapid heartbeat, and then it stops.
[Garrett:] But intervention is required, just as it was in March, when doctors inserted a stent to enlarge a clogged artery. After Saturday's heart test, doctors will decide whether to implant a defibrillator, a device that will detect a rapid heartbeat and electronically slow it down. Mr. Cheney, 60, has already suffered four heart attacks.
[Cheney:] I look on this as an insurance policy. It may never actually be needed, but if it is, then it's obviously the right thing to do to have it implanted.
[Garrett:] The vice president will have to be sedated during the outpatient procedure. Still, he hopes to be back to work on Monday, but will heed his doctors' advice about how soon to return to a full schedule.
[Cheney:] The doctors have assured me there's no reason why either the procedure or the device that's being implanted should in any way inhibit my capacity to function as the vice president.
[Garrett:] Mr. Cheney maintains a heavy workload, heading up task forces on energy, domestic terrorism and global warming. And he's a huge player on defense and international policy as well. The vice president says President Bush urged him to take all necessary precautions, and one precaution he took was to announce the news himself, a move he said was designed to minimize media speculation and a feeding frenzy Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Major, how worried are they behind the scenes over there at the White House?
[Garrett:] Wolf, there are two concerns. One, vice president's office announced this afternoon that his arrhythmia, his abnormal heart rhythms, is ventricle in origin that's potentially serious, but I will leave it to a heart specialist to explain exactly why. The second concern: the vice president remains a sufferer of chronic coronary artery disease, and tomorrow's procedures will not change that. On the upside, White House advisers say the vice president has changed his habits. He exercises regularly, changed his diet and since the election has lost 25 pounds. What's more, they say, he receives top flight care constantly, and the combination of that good care and his changed habits they say augurs well for the future Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Major Garrett at the White House, thank you very much. Joining me now to discuss the vice president's condition, Dr. David Pearle of Georgetown University Medical Center, where he's director of the coronary care unit. He's in Boston tonight. Dr. Pearle, thanks once again for joining us. And let me get right to the question: how serious is this latest development?
[Dr. David Pearle, Georgetown University Medical Center:] Well, this is potentially a serious problem. Anyone with coronary artery disease and a weakened heart muscle is at risk of developing these irregular heart rhythms that can be potentially fatal. And the test the vice president has had so far is a warning signal. The test that will be done tomorrow morning is more definitive as to whether he will need the defibrillator.
[Blitzer:] Well, his doctors assume he will need one. Would that be something you would recommend to someone of his age? The stress factors, the heart condition, the history that he has?
[Pearle:] What we try to do is assess how great the risk of somebody having a potentially fatal arrhythmia is. The test tomorrow is the definitive one, but it sounds like, even based on the warning test, they have almost made the decision to put in the defibrillator, and certainly I would recommend it. It is a kind of a precaution so should one of these very dangerous, potentially fatal arrhythmias develop, the device, which is implanted under the skin, can potentially treat it, either by pacing or delivering a shock.
[Blitzer:] Dr. Pearle, how risky is the actual procedure of implanting this defibrillator into his upper chest?
[Pearle:] The risk of the procedure is very, very small. The device is about three inches in diameter. It fits under the skin, under the clavicle, but outside the rib cage, and then there are wires that lead into the heart. But placing the device itself carries very little risk. The worry is the underlying condition that it is being used to treat.
[Blitzer:] Vice President Cheney says he could be back at work as early as Monday. If he were your patient, would you want him back at work that quickly after this procedure?
[Pearle:] Well, I usually recommend that patients take a few more days than that. Among other things, his arm and upper body will be a little bit stiff and sore. Certainly if someone needs to talk to him as early as Saturday night, assuming this goes on tomorrow, he would be available. I usually recommend patients take a little more time than that away from work, though.
[Blitzer:] The fact that he is in such a high-stress job, is that something of concern? Should he step back a little bit and ease some of the pressures on him?
[Pearle:] It seems kind of common sense that high stress and adrenaline would potentially trigger some of these arrhythmias, but actually the data on it are not real strong, and such data, as there are, would suggest the real problem is when you are under a lot of stress that is outside your control you are working very hard, you don't want to do it, somebody is making you do it. Other people who enjoy their work, I think it is perfectly reasonable they continue doing what they love to do.
[Blitzer:] Dr. Pearle, thanks once again for joining us tonight. Appreciate it very much. And just minutes ago, the Democratic-led Senate passed sweeping patients' rights legislation designed to give Americans broader rights when it comes to their health care. It would also give patients the ability to sue their HMOs, this despite the threat of a presidential veto and following several attempts by Republicans to change the bill. The final vote tonight: 59-36. The bill now heads to the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, where the GOP leadership is hoping to rework it to restrict lawsuits. This week in Texas, a father buried his five children while their mother remained in jail, charged with their murders. Police say Andrea Yates told them she drowned her four sons and only daughter in a bathtub of their suburban Houston home last week. Russell Yates says his wife suffers from postpartum depression. It's an unimaginable tragedy. How does a family even begin to cope? Joining us now from Houston: Andrew Kennedy, he is a brother of Andrea Yates, and in Long Beach, California, Patrick Kennedy, he is another brother. And thank you so much for joining us. First of all to you, Patrick. I know that you spent some time with your sister Andrea in jail. How is she how is she feeling, how is she doing right now from what you could sense?
[Patrick Kennedy, Brother Of Andrea Yates:] Well, when I visited her on I believe it was Thursday or Friday, she is basically in a catatonic state right now. She doesn't respond to anything we say to her. She is basically a shell of the person I knew before this happened.
[Blitzer:] She when you asked her questions, she was just staring at you in a blank, is that what you are saying?
[P. Kennedy:] That's correct. It's like her eyes were open, but she is like 1,000 miles away. She looked at me, but there was just basically no response from her.
[Blitzer:] So you really get no sense that she can comprehend the enormity, the tragedy, what has happened?
[P. Kennedy:] I can't I honestly say that, Wolf, because I don't know what's going on in her mind right now. All I know is she stares and she heard what we had to say, and I don't know what she has to what she is comprehending of that.
[Blitzer:] Andrew, as you look back on this sequence of events that has unfolded, looking back on warning signs, were there real serious warning signs that everyone should have paid much more much closer attention to?
[Andrew Kennedy, Brother Of Andrea Yates:] Oh, are you asking if there were warning signs that what?
[Blitzer:] Were there warning signs that everyone should have been paying much greater attention to?
[A. Kennedy:] I think, you know, we did what we could. You know, we saw her getting despondent, and she had been had, you know, robot looks for a long time, but you know, she was treated as best we knew how.
[Blitzer:] Your sister, Michelle Freeman, has suggested in an interview that there was history, there were some other problems that not only with Andrea, but there was a history of depression in the family. What was she referring to?
[A. Kennedy:] Well, I've had problems with depression and so has Michelle.
[Blitzer:] But you've been, obviously, being treated with that, and Michelle has been treated with that as well.
[A. Kennedy:] Uh-huh. Correct.
[Blitzer:] Did you ever get a sense I know that there were reports that she had one suicide attempt. Today we're hearing of a second suicide attempt before the birth of her last child, the little girl, Mary. Tell us about what you know about those suicide attempts.
[A. Kennedy:] The first or second?
[Blitzer:] Either both of them. Start with first.
[A. Kennedy:] Well, the first one, she was at my father's house and she took some sleeping pills from my father, and my mother was there at the time. The second attempt also happened in my parents' house, and she put a knife to her throat in the bathroom.
[Blitzer:] Patrick, when were those attempts were they recently how many years ago, if they were years, did they occur?
[P. Kennedy:] Approximately a year and half ago, from what I remember. It was right after the birth of her first pardon?
[Blitzer:] Were they both about a year and a half ago?
[P. Kennedy:] Yes, it was I remember. I was here in California and I recall, I believe it was my mother had called me and told me she tried to kill herself, you know, by the overdose. And she also told me about an incident with the knife in the bathroom. And, yes, it was about a year and half ago, I would say.
[Blitzer:] What did she tell you about the incident with the knife in the bathroom?
[P. Kennedy:] Um, actually, she actually, my other brother told me about this. He tried to approach her and she basically was very standoffish and held the knife to her throat, telling him not to come any closer or else she would kill herself. That's the best I can recollect of that. And then, you know, she was put back into a mental institute for treatment right after that.
[Blitzer:] I want to take a quick break, but, Andrew, even though she had those two suicide attempts, she then went ahead and had Mary, the youngest, the six-month-old child. Was there ever any question in anyone's mind was this appropriate to go forward and have another child, given her mental state at that time?
[A. Kennedy:] I'm not sure, you know, if it was appropriate or not, if she was not on medication when she had Mary or not. I really don't know.
[Blitzer:] No one discussed that with you at the time?
[A. Kennedy:] I'm sorry?
[Blitzer:] I said no one at the time raised any questions about having Mary after the suicide attempts, after the depression was diagnosed, after her mental state was as we now know it was?
[A. Kennedy:] Yes, I mean, there was times, Rusty told me, where she was better at the house. I mean, Andrea sometimes was functional, and sometimes she wasn't, so...
[Blitzer:] Did you want to add something on that, Patrick?
[P. Kennedy:] Yes, I believe there was some concern about, you know, the frequency of her having children, but our family kind of let her make her own decisions. I mean, she had a husband and she I don't recall her ever complaining about anything in her marriage, or her childbearing activities, so, you know, I guess at that point we were just, you know, trusting in Rusty and the treatment that she had received up until that point.
[Blitzer:] All right, gentlemen. We have to take a quick break. When we come back, I'll ask Andrew and Patrick Kennedy about their brother-in-law, Rusty Yates, and we'll also talk about those five little children. Stay with us. Welcome back. We're continuing our discussion with the family of Andrea Yates. From Houston, we're joined by Andrea's brother Andrew Kennedy. And in Long Beach, California, another brother, Patrick Kennedy. Patrick, tell us about your brother-in-law, Rusty Yates.
[P. Kennedy:] I'm sorry. What was the question?
[Blitzer:] Tell us about your brother-in-law, Russell Yates. He seems so composed, so poised in the face of this horrible tragedy that he of course has suffered through. You obviously know him. You know him well, tell us about this man.
[P. Kennedy:] Actually, Wolf, I really don't know Russell that well. He came out to California with Andrea, I'd say probably between eight and 10 years ago, and I saw them for a day then. But most of my communication with Andrea and her family was over the phone. And it was always with her, it was her and I talking on the phone, so I really don't know Russell that well, to be I mean Rusty that well, to be honest with you.
[Blitzer:] But from what you heard from Andrea, did they appear to have a very good marriage?
[P. Kennedy:] She never discussed her marriage with me one way or the other.
[Blitzer:] What about you, Andrew? Did you get a sense that this was other than the depression, the suicide attempts, that as far as the marriage was concerned, based on what she told you or what you knew that it was a good, solid marriage?
[A. Kennedy:] Yes, it appeared to be a good, solid marriage. Rusty was and Andrea were private people and they didn't speak much about how they felt about, you know, a lot of matters.
[Blitzer:] The reason I asked, because in the current issue of "Newsweek" magazine, your other brother Brian is quoted in there, and I just want to get that quote out from what he says. He was asked about Russell Yates. He said: "You should ask our lawyer that question. I'd like to say some things be the truth will eventually come out." I was confused by that, and I wonder if there's anything either one of you, let's begin with you, Patrick. Do you have anything to say about what Brian said in that interview in "Newsweek" magazine?
[P. Kennedy:] No, I can't speak for any comments he might have made. I really can't.
[Blitzer:] What about you, Andrew? Did you want to elaborate on what Brian may have been referring to?
[A. Kennedy:] I think the comment was something spoken in anger. He was very close to Andrea and her children and he spent a lot of time with them, and I think it was just an angry moment. The kids spent a lot of time at my mom's house and my brother was living there, and so it was a tragic loss for him, too.
[Blitzer:] Patrick, the other tragedy that a lot of people speculate could have contributed to what happened was the tragic death of your dad, and Andrea was very close to your father. Tell us about her relationship with your father.
[P. Kennedy:] Well, she was the last child in the family, and I don't know if you know, but she graduated valedictorian of her high school class. She was a she excelled in sports, and she went on to get her nursing degree. She was just basically, you know, an angel of a child in my dad's eyes, from what I've gathered. And you know, he was very proud of her, and she was constantly trying to please him. And when he took ill, you know, she was over there helping him all the time, even though she had her own children to take care of. And my mother, you know, her health isn't the greatest either, so she just went out of her way to help, you know, anyone in our family, and neighbors, and basically anyone she saw that had a need. And when my dad passed on, she I talked to her that day, actually that night, when he passed away, and she was pretty despondent. She did blame herself somewhat that she could have done more, even though, you know, his illness was nothing, you know, sudden. I mean, his health has declined steadily for the last year, and we all saw this coming, but she did blame herself somewhat for I'm not sure for what. I was kind of taken aback when she made the comment to me, and I tried to reassure her that she did all she could, more than she should have. And I do remember that it kind of disturbed me that she felt that way.
[Blitzer:] Patrick Kennedy and Andrew Kennedy, unfortunately we are all out of time. Obviously, our deepest condolences go out to you and your family, and all of your loved ones for this terrible, terrible tragedy. The nation, of course, has been watching it so closely. Thank you so much for joining us this evening.
[A. Kennedy:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] Thank you. And did U.S. Marine Corps officers know maintenance records were falsified on a controversial aircraft? We'll have the latest on the investigation into the Osprey test program. And we'll introduce you to the winner of the largest state lottery prize ever. Welcome back. In other stories making news tonight: a Pentagon investigation finds a small number of Marine Corps officers were aware that the maintenance records for the controversial Osprey aircraft had been deliberately falsified and that they failed to report it. The officers responsible and their squadron commander could face disciplinary action up to and including court-martial. The report finds the record-tampering occurred after two fatal crashes last year that killed 23 Marines. One day after he was extradited to The Hague on charges of crimes against humanity, former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic is facing more charges from his jail cell. He was handed an expanded indictment based on newly-discovered mass graves. And for handing over Milosevic, several lending institutions and nations, including the United States, are pledging more than $1 billion to help reconstruct war-torn Yugoslavia. In California, the winner of a whopping lottery prize stepped forward today. A retired grocery clerk Al Castellano of San Jose claimed the $141 million jackpot, the largest single state jackpot in U.S. history. He opted for a lump sum, which amounts to almost $51 million after taxes. The home of tech stocks suffers a technical glitch. Details of a Nasdaq nightmare ahead on "The Leading Edge." Tonight on "The Leading Edge," a technology glitch brought the nation's No. 2 stock market to a halt today. About half of the trading on the tech-heavy Nasdaq was put on hold because of network outages. The market stayed open an extra hour to catch up. NASA is getting ready to probe the roots of life as we know it. A spacecraft is said to lift off tomorrow on a mission to study and photograph the oldest light in the universe, what is said to be the afterglow of the big bang. And that's all the time we have tonight. Thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. "THE POINT WITH GRETA VAN SUSTEREN" begins right now. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Catherine Callaway, Cnn Anchor:] Enron executives who have been in the pressure cooker lately may feel even more heat tonight. A report that was commissioned by the company's board of directors is scathing in its criticism of Enron management. It's known as the Powers report. And it was released just a short time ago. Our own CNN's Brooks Jackson is joining us now in Washington. He's been mulling over this report tonight. What's the latest, Brooks?
[Brooks Jackson, Cnn Financial News Correspondent:] Well, Catherine, good to see you again. The report says the problems at Enron could've been avoided and should not have happened. It accuses former chief executive Ken Lay of failing to do his job. Lay personally approved some of the controversial off the books partnerships that were at the heart of the Enron collapse. And the report says, "He bears significant responsibility for those flawed decisions." It says Lay, while earning $7 million a year, was functioning more as a director than a real member of management. The most severe criticism is aimed at one of Lay's deputies, Andrew Fastow, who set up those partnerships that hid huge debts and losses by Enron. Fastow collected $30 million in fees for the partnerships. And the report says he was not entitled to it. Fastow would not talk to the Enron investigators. A revelation in the report is that one of Fastow's underlings, named Michael Copper, also made a killing at Enron's expense. It said Copper "earned more than $10 million from a $125,000 investment" in one of Fastow's partnerships. It said Kopper wouldn't talk to investigators either. The Powers report was issued by University of Texas Law School Dean William Powers, who joined Enron's board in October, to conduct this self-investigation. It says the directors themselves who ordered the report had fallen down on the job themselves and should've prevented the abuses that were through more vigilant oversight. It says Enron's document shredding accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, "did not fulfill its professional responsibilities, collecting millions in fees, while making simple and not so simple accounting mistakes." Even Enron's outside law firm, Vinson & Elkins, is accused of failing to criticize Enron's failure to make more complete disclosures of its problem partnerships. And Catherine, this is, again, a self- investigation by Enron. It surely won't satisfy Enron's critics, but it will be used as a road map by the criminal investigators, congressional investigators, and lawyers suing Enron and their top executives.
[Callaway:] Brooks, did it really answer any questions or just tell what a lot of people already knew?
[Jackson:] Well, we are getting a much more detailed look at these partnerships that are the heart of the Enron problem. Now I want to stress this report did not deal with political contributions, lobbying, 401 [k] problems. Those are all outside the scope. It was supposed to focus on these key partnerships. And it did. We are going to be going over this report, myself and a lot of other reporters, looking for additional details in days to come.
[Callaway:] You know, we mentioned it was some 200 pages, a litany of blame here on this continued to snowball, with all the different the roadblocks that nothing no one seemed to catch it. It just kept getting bigger.
[Jackson:] Absolutely true. And again, as the report says, the board should have been more on the ball. Top management should not have allowed this to happen. Outside lawyers collecting huge fees really were not giving wise advice. And as you heard, a criticism of the accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, which was collecting fees not only for looking at these the accounting issues here, and making mistakes, but collecting fees for advising the company on its management as well.
[Callaway:] Brooks, thank you for breaking it down for us tonight.
[Jackson:] All right. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Between 1,400 and 1,500 rescue workers have been injured working in the ruins of the World Trade Center. But the rescue efforts are also taking a toll on four-legged rescuers as well. Here's CNN's Kitty Pilgrim.
[Kitty Pilgrim, Cnn Correspondent:] At the World Trade Center disaster site, heroes come in all shapes and sizes. Each one brings a unique and necessary skill.
[Unidentified Male:] My name is trooper Rick Scranton, with New York State Police K-9 unit. This is my partner, Theo. We generally leave where we are staying at 5:00 in the morning, and we get home anytime between 8:00, 9:00, and 10:00 all the time.
[Pilgrim:] SPCA, the law enforcement division that protects animals, has established an onsite medical unit especially for dogs. Between grueling shifts, canines are fed, bathed, and rehydrated.
[Unidentified Male:] I saw one handler come in here with his dog. The back legs were giving out on the dog. He rehydrated, and we gave him whatever care it needed. The dog actually pulled his handler back towards the pile. I never saw anything like that. I see that the dogs and the handlers worked as a team. They are like two trained soldiers.
[Pilgrim:] However, not all dogs are soldiering through piles of rubble. One special unit was brought in to provide emotional support to rescue workers.
[Unidentified Male:] Both of these dogs have been trained to pick up on trauma and goes towards it. So they pursue people they perceive as being in a state of trauma. We've been visiting a lot of firemen, police, and cleanup detail.
[Pilgrim:] They reach out to these dogs because it's OK to.
[Unidentified Male:] Does she need a new concept? But then, if I was laying at the bottom of that pile, maybe a dog would lift my morale.
[Pilgrim:] Like company of firemen, the bond between rescue dog and handler is tight.
[Unidentified Male:] We live with these dogs. These dogs go home with us every night. About 350 canine teams have been deployed to the disaster site. Working around the clock, they're joining the ranks of heroes. He's been a hero because he's been trying to find heroes.
[Pilgrim:] Kitty Pilgrim, CNN, New York.

[Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] Are the al Qaeda and Taliban fighters being held at a U.S. Navy base in Cuba detainees or are they prisoners of war? It is a critical question. And CNN's Barbara Starr says the answer could come from a federal court.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Correspondent:] It is these pictures showing detainees on their knees, shackled and eyes covered, that has sparked an international controversy, forcing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to defend the U.S. against criticisms of inhumane treatment.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary:] We know they're not coming from people who are knowledgeable. That's clear, because the treatment has been certainly appropriate.
[Starr:] The Pentagon says the detainees are getting culturally appropriate meals, medical treatment and are allowed to pray. A Muslim cleric will now visit Camp X-Ray. A sign has been posted, showing them which way to turn to Mecca at prayer time. The detainees are classified as unlawful combatants, not officially prisoners of war. The Pentagon says that is because the Taliban and al Qaeda are more terrorists than soldiers. Still, the U.S. legal position is that they are being treated in most instances as if they were POWs under the Geneva Conventions. But critics say the Bush Administration is playing nothing more than a word game.
[William Schulz, Amnesty International:] If it walks like a war, talks like a war, sounds like a war, has been called a war by the president and every network in the United States, then there might be reason to believe that those who have been taken into custody as a result of military action are, indeed, prisoners of war.
[Starr:] Amnesty International has expressed concern over the cells in which the detainees are being held, eight by eight chain link fence units which some call cages. Many are waiting to see the results of the current inspection by the International Committee of the Red Cross.
[Michael Noone, Catholic University Law Professor:] If the Red Cross says that these measures are not appropriate under the circumstances, the U.S. has a major problem, not that a court can intervene, but simply that there will be a general consensus that what the U.S. is doing is wrong.
[Starr:] The detainees now will be interrogated to see what they may know about future terrorist attacks or the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden. After that, they could face a military tribunal, the U.S. criminal court system or deportation back to their countries. Some could be held indefinitely. [on camera]: On Tuesday, a federal judge will consider a petition by former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and other civil rights advocates challenging the government and demanding that the detainees be brought before a court to face specific charges. Barbara Starr, CNN, the Pentagon.
[Costello:] And that court hearing begins at 11:00 a.m. Eastern and we will bring you all of the results.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Well, look here. We have a bunch of firefighters who, as you know, spend their lives saving lives, but in this case, they saved a whole bunch of cash money, it's a very unusual story. We are about to tell it to you.
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] It is. Let's introduce our guests here. Captain Gerry Ruzinski. Firemen Ken Hutchinson and Dennis Smith. Thanks so much. Who wants to tell us the story? You had a house fire and started looking through the attic, and you found what?
[Capt. Gerry Rusinski, Atlanta Fire Department:] What happened was, we were relieving a shift that was at the fire all night long, but the fire was pretty intense and so they were not able to go inside the building. When we got over there to relieve them, we were there to do a primary search of the building. Now, what was left of the building: the attic was gone, the ceilings were gone, and basically, the walls were barely standing. When we went in the front door, we noticed $20s and $50s, separate burned up. Well, we have ran into cash like that before in houses, and we didn't think that it was that big of a deal, until we started digging through the debris. When we hit about $100,000 in cash...
[Allen:] Oh, my word.
[Rusinski:] I called the chief and said, you better be come here. He said, I will be there in about 15 minutes. When we hit $200,000, I got back on the radio and said, you better get down here now.
[Allen:] Bring an armored truck.
[Rusinski:] When APD got to the scene, we had about $220,000 in cash. Everybody was standing inside the doorway and I said, hey, how about move out, so that we can clean up? They were standing on about $350,000 in cash there that they didn't know about.
[Waters:] Were you guys tempted at all?
[Ken Hutchinson, Atlanta Fire Department:] Of course. We knew that it was the right thing to do to turned it in.
[Waters:] And a lot of it was burned up?
[Hutchinson:] A lot of it was. The initial money we found was, and then, once we started digging and finding it, most of it was buried under stuff, so it wasn't charred, and it was still banded up from the banks and it was...
[Waters:] Dennis, isn't that stuff supposed to be found in a mattress.
[Dennis Smith, Atlanta Fire Department:] I you would think so.
[Waters:] Is this one of the oddest things that you have ever run across?
[Smith:] Probably a once in a lifetime type thing to find that much money in a house like that.
[Allen:] And apparently, the man who lived here has passed away and is worth $6.5 million, from looking at this home, you wouldn't have thought that this person was worth a fortune. Is that right?
[Waters:] So he had a lot in the bank. He just kept loose change around. What was the final tally?
[Rusinski:] We just did an estimate. We figure it was around $660,000. We thought it was probably hidden up in the attic, because it wasn't sitting on the floor. It was debris money, and then ceiling and flooring materials.
[Waters:] Didn't you say that the house had been vandalized?
[Rusinski:] Over the months, people have been breaking in, stealing his junk, because he kept a lot of...
[Waters:] Candle holders and things.
[Allen:] But they never found the money. Oh, boy. There is justice somewhere, isn't there?
[Hutchinson:] Millions of dollars right above their head.
[Waters:] Good job rescuing that money, you guys.
[Allen:] I hope that you got a $5 or a $10 or something as a reward. I guess not.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Old research is turning up new answers about the aging process. As CNN's Rhonda Rowland now reports, a genetic key now may control the development of certain diseases as we grow older.
[Rhonda Rowland, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] A single gene we all have may hold the cards to many diseases we develop in old age: Alzheimer's, cancer, atherosclerosis, arthritis. It's the P-21 gene. Scientists discovered it seven years ago, but all they knew then was that it killed cells. But now researchers at the University of Illinois-Chicago found to their surprise the P-21 gene may do a lot more.
[Steve Warren, Emory University School Of Medicine:] So far, it seems that there are a few genes that are kind of master switches, if you will, and this may well be one of them.
[Rowland:] It works like this: In each cell there are 23 chromosomes. The P-21 gene resides on chromosome 6. The gene influences a number of other genes by either turning them on or off. Scientists use the term "expressed."
[Igor Roninson, University Of Illinois-chicago:] When we further looked at the genes that are induced by P-21, we found a number of genes that are known to be expressed at a higher level in old cells and in old people.
[Rowland:] Which in turn may lead to the development of many age- related diseases. [on camera]: Now that scientists know more about what the P-21 gene does, other scientists and pharmaceutical companies can use the information to develop drugs against these various diseases. [voice-over]: But there's still another piece to the disease process puzzle. If we all have the P-21 gene, why do some people develop Alzheimer's while others suffer from arthritis?
[Warren:] Everybody has variations in their own genome, and that variation can lead to predispositions to certain kinds of diseases as well as protection.
[Rowland:] Environmental influences like charred meat or bad air quality can also contribute to the development of disease. But taken together, the mapping of the human genome and what we know about the environment will eventually, researchers predict, lead to new drugs to combat the effects of old age Lou.
[Waters:] I would imagine the drug makers are saying: there's billions of dollars here we can make off of something like this, if we can keep people from getting certain diseases as they grow older. What do they do with this information?
[Rowland:] You're exactly right. And now, probably, a lot of them are thinking about going to their laboratories and working with the P- 21 gene, and now that they have this target, the researchers say they're really halfway there, to developing something that could perhaps counteract the bad effects of P-21. Now with that they could, perhaps, slow down the natural biological process that leads to these diseases. So it wouldn't necessarily, Lou, get rid of these diseases, but just slow the progression, slow the development.
[Waters:] So what we're talking is about not necessarily curing old age. There's a lot of healthy older people, a lot of healthy really older people. It's a matter of preventing some of these diseases associated as we grow older?
[Rowland:] That's right, because we'll never cure old age. We're all going to get old. But hopefully what they can do is help us live healthier in our old age and delay the onset of these diseases so we have better quality lives. And the other interesting thing, Lou, with all of this genetic information they're getting, they're going to be able to get to the point where they can say to you: You're more at risk of developing arteriosclerosis or arthritis, and then they can tell you what you can do in your day-to-day life to reduce the risk of developing it.
[Waters:] In covering the story of aging in America, as I've been doing for the past 10 years, I have talked to many gerontologists who say this unit that we're walking around in, here, is capable of surviving 120 years on this planet. But it's been a matter, all this time, if you would really want that, because of the associated degeneration of the body in that period of time and that's what science is really concentrating on now.
[Rowland:] That's right, and in fact, it may get to the point where we may be OK about living to that age, because again, we'll have higher quality lives, we'll have sharper minds, we won't have as much disability. And that's what we all want.
[Waters:] Yes, we'll all grow old if we're lucky Rhonda Rowland. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] CNN continuing to follow up breaking news developments on a real rampage, a killing rampage out in the Sacramento area. Again, police now know about five victims, five people killed in the course of these attacks in two communities, two different locations one in North Highlands, which is just north of Sacramento and then a second location at Rancho Cordova, where an additional four people were killed. Again, what they are able to tell us so far is the person they are looking for is a man married to a victim at the first location. They say that police were called out there this morning, found the woman dead in her home, then went to the second location at Rancho Cordova, found two elderly people killed inside, a baby boy dead outside the home. In addition, they took a 9-year-old girl to the local medical center, UC Davis Medical Center, but unfortunately were not able to save her life and she died later, actually before she reached the hospital. Investigators are now looking for the suspect, a 27-year-old man believed to be married to the first victim in this case. There is a strong community of Russian immigrants, we're told by the local sheriff's department, in this area. And earlier, to KCRA, our affiliate in Sacramento, they heard some comments from people who happen to know the family involved. Let's listen to that.
[Unidentified Female:] I know these people. This is very friendly people, old people.
[Male Kcra Reporter:] So it's kind of a surprise to you that this has happened?
[Chen:] Again, a very brief statement made by one the friends of the victims in this case. She referred to very nice older people. She apparently was referring to the two elderly victims who were found at the second location, a man and a woman found inside that home. As well, we are told a baby boy found outside the home. And in addition, a 9-year-old girl who died en route to the hospital at UC Davis. Again, you see there was a great deal of emotion out at the scene. Police are quite concerned at this point because their suspect is still at large. They have describe him as a 27-year-old man married to the victim at the first location. They have named him as Nikolay Soltys. They say that he was seen at both locations driving a silver Nissan Altima. And because he was seen at both the locations, and given the family relationship between these two locations, they are quite concerned that he is the suspect, and they're very concerned that he may be armed and still would be quite dangerous. They are also quite concerned for a 2-year-old that they have not been able to account for. He's a member of the family, but at this point they don't know whether he's with the suspect or in some other completely safe location, unaffected by the tragedy of events that has occurred in these two attacks earlier in the day. They just haven't been able to locate the 2-year-old. They are very concerned for his safety. But they are also immediatel looking for Nikolay Soltys, the 27- year-old man in the silver Nissan Altima, and have advised the community to be on the lookout. AGain, this is an event that has drawn out a great deal of emotion in the community. Even with investigators follwoing this case, earlier KCRA spoke with Sergeant Jamie Lewis from the Sacramento Sheriff's Department from KOVR I'm sorry, our affiliate KOVR got this comment from Sergeant Lewis just a short time ago. Let's listen.
[Sgt. James Lewis, Sacramento Co. Sheriff's Dept:] Well, shortly before 10:00 this morning we responded to an address in North Highlands on I believe it's Scallop Court. At that time we found a female victim inside a duplex there who was pronounced dead there at the scene. Had some serious trauma to the upper torso. While we were in the process of investigating that, we received a call here at 10321 Millstation Road in Rancho Cordova. We have since learned that the victims in this are related to the victim over in North Highlands, that the suspect in both cases appears to be the one responsible for the homicides in both cases. He's been described as 27-year-old Nikolay Soltys. And I think he's 27, I'm not sure. He's been described as driving a silver Nissan Altima. At this scene we have two elderly victims in the house that have been pronounced dead. We have an infant on the front porch that has been pronounced dead. We have another child that has been transported to UC Davis Medical Center in critical condition. All of them appear to have sustained significant trauma. We don't believe at this point that it is gunshot wound related, although we don't know what the trauma is from. We also don't know what the motive for the attack is at this point, quite frankly. But we're certainly looking for help in locating Nikolay. We would consider him armed and dangerous. I wouldn't suggeste that anybody approach him, but if anybody has any information as to his whereabouts or where he may be, we need that information as quickly as possible.
[Question:] We heard something about necks being slashed, stab wounds.
[Lewis:] I'm not going to confirm any of the injuries to the victims at this point. That's all stuff that's exclusive to him at this point and that's something we won't release.
[Question:] ... where the suspect is?
[Lewis:] We have no idea. We've been searching the area. We've been contacting people that he knows, and that's why we're looking for the public's help, quite frankly.
[Question:] Relationship with the family?
[Lewis:] We believe that the victim in North Highlands is his wife. We're not really sure what the relationship is here with these folks. It's possibly mother, father, but we're not sure.
[Question:] Again, victims were...
[Lewis:] We have two elderly victims here at this scene. We have a 27-year-old female in North Highlands on Scallop Court. We have an infant here and we also have a 7-year-old child I think it was a female child that was transported to
[Ucd. Question:] Is this more of a family issure, possibly, as opposed to random?
[Lewis:] It appears as though that's the case. Again, we don't know for sure. We're still in the process of trying to iron out those details, quite frankly.
[Question:] Jamie, you thought that he was boyfriend of the woman up in North Highlands?
[Lewis:] We think he was actually the husband of the victim in North Highlands.
[Question:] OK, and then the child here was not their child?
[Lewis:] We don't know. This is just breaking, quite frankly. This started at just before 10:00. We got a call here to this address at just after 11:00. So it's all still unfolding as we speak.
[Question:] Did any witnesses see anything?
[Lewis:] Not that we know of, and that's something that we're in the process of doing right now. We don't really have I don't have a lot of those details yet.
[Question:] Ages of the children?
[Lewis:] This one was an infant, the other one was 7 years old, I believe somewhere around there. Don't know I think it was a female but I'm not sure.
[Question:] And you said there were other people injured, too, besides the ones that were killed.
[Lewis:] No. There was another victim in North Highlands.
[Question:] The 7-year-old is still alive?
[Lewis:] The 7-year-old was transported alive in critical condition.
[Chen:] Unfortunately, we have learned since that time of the taping of the interview with Sergeant Jamie Lewis of the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department, that that 9-year-old girl did die en route to the hospital. She arrived at UC Davis Medical Center and was pronounced dead on arrival. So now there is a total of five victims in this rampage. Again, the information is still quite sketchy. They rae looking now for the suspect, a man that they have identified as 27-year-old Nikolay Soltys. They believe that he is the husband of the victim found at the first location in North Highlands, which is suburb bedroom community of Sacramento. And they were called by the next- door neighbor of the victim at that location. The police were told that the woman had been stabbed. They arrived on the scene and found that the woman a 27-year-old woman that they believe is the wife of the suspect, dead when they arrived at her home in North Highlands. They were then called to a second location. There was a bit of confusion because there was an earlier report that there was a vehicle-pedestrian incident reported into the fire department, but when deputies arrived on the scene they found a terrible carnage inside the home. Two poeple killed inside, an elderly couple, man and woman. Outside the home on the walkway leading up to the home, a baby boy was found dead. In addition, they found a 9-year-old girl who was taken in critical condition to the hospital. She died on the way to the hospital, as we say, of her injuries. And the UC Davis Medical Center tells us that she died of stabbing injuries. Now, there has been some confusion about that as well. The woman killed at the first location was reported to have been killed in a stabbing incident. But the sheriff's department quite repeatedly said that they had some confusion about the other victims in this, whether the trauma involved was stabbing or some other brute force that was used. They are quite clear that it was not gunshot inflicted, in these injuries that resulted in the deaths of these people. But they were not entirely clear what had caused the deaths of these individuals and so therefore had not reported it. As well, we have told you there is a great deal of concern for a 2-year-old who has not been accounted for yet, who has not been located. They don't if the child is with the suspect. They don't know if the child was at some other location and is safe and sound at this point. They just have not been able to locate that 2-year-old and they are very concerned. He's a member of that extended family and they're very concerned about him at this point. In addition you see a number of people, great deal of emotion outside the location at Rancho Cordova. They are telling us from the sheriff's department there in Sacramento County that this is a community of a lot of Russian immigrants. And we understand that there's a history of Russian immigration to this particular community that has gone back for decades now. But the local sheriff's department tells not only is this Russian immigrant community quite significant, it's so significant that the sheriff's department actually has Russian translaters within their department because they want to be able to talk to people in situations like this. And of course those translaters have come in handy and they have followed up on this by bringing the translaters out to talk to people in the community, a number of them gathered. Right now, the most important thing is that there have been five people killed. The suspect remains at large, 27-year-old man, Nikolay Soltys, last seen driving a silver Nissan Altima. It is a community located near some highways, and there was a great deal of concern that given the amount of time that has already passed several hours now have already since the reports first came that that individual might have gotten away on the highways and could have gone in any direction, and might have been able effect quite a getaway at this point. The sheriff's department still advising people all around the northern California area to be aware and to be very cautious, because they do not know what the suspect in this case might do next. CNN is continuing to follow up on this still-developing story. As we get additional information we will bring that to you. We will take a break here, more coverage after this.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Janet Guyon is the editor-at-large at "Fortune" magazine, in their London bureau. She's basically looked at how Cisco got into the pickle it's in. Janet, tell us a little bit more about that.
[Janet Guyon, "fortune":] Deborah, in this week's issue of "Fortune," and also on our Web site, www.fortune.com, we have a bit story on Cisco that really explains how it got into this mess. One of the things that we are saying is that this is not some event that suddenly fell on top of the company. In fact, they made a lot of their own mess. They bet on a segment of the market, the CLECs, which you were talking about earlier, these new telephone companies that now are in trouble. So a lot of their equipment writeup that $2.2 billion writeup that they announced yesterday about 70 percent of that is coming from equipment that they had planned to sell to these new telephone companies that are either going under right now or really are slowing down their spending. And they could have seen that. They could have seen that slowdown last fall, when it really began, but John Chambers continued to be very optimistic about the market, continued to say they will continue to sell equipment to those new telephone companies and those sales just have not materialized.
[Marchini:] To the extent that this is a mess of Cisco's own making, are the markets making a mistake by generalizing it to a lot of other tech stocks?
[Guyon:] Yes and no. It is true there is a slowdown. It is true that there is a slowdown in the buying of telecom equipment, in part because of the dot-com falloff. So it can be generalized with some of the other companies. But you do have to look at the way in which Cisco has managed itself, and the way they've alienated some of the old-line telephone companies. John Chambers, in 1998, came out and said voice will be free it will all go over the Internet protocol network, and that is just not happening. So in some ways, they have alienated a potential customer base. So they don't have those old-line phone companies to fall back on, as Lucent does, as Alcatel does. So some of this is specific to Cisco.
[Marchini:] All right, thank you very much, Janet Guyon, "Fortune" magazine. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] The first of four viewing platforms opened today at the wreckage of the World Trade Center. It's providing the public with a closer look at the devastation at ground zero. Everyone, though, doesn't think it's a great idea. Here's CNN's Brian Palmer.
[Brian Palmer, Cnn Correspondent:] Over the past four months, the landscape of that now legendary patch of earth in lower Manhattan has changed dramatically from an apocalyptic sight of charred, scarred and shattered buildings to an almost level plain of rubble and dust. Now with a viewing platform at its edge for the public.
[Patrick Versage, Port Authority:] There is no structure anymore. There is no Tower one or two. The Vista Hotel. Our police building in 5, the commodities exchange in Building 4. U.S. Customs building in Building 6, or across the street there, Building 7. And part of Battery Park, you know, the World Financial Center, 1, 2 and 3, you know, is gone.
[Palmer:] Patrick Versage, a member of the Port Authority police department emergency services unit, has been there almost every day. First as a rescuer, then as a searcher.
[Versage:] In the beginning when there was some structures, we were doing void searches.
[Palmer:] Now as a sort of sentinel, or perhaps a witness.
[Versage:] I have seen two beautiful pieces of architecture basically come down to down to earth, down six levels. Basically, everything is just now concrete dust and steel. And day in and day out, we are coming in, trying to, you know, make some closures for the rest of the families here.
[Palmer:] It's a difficult routine that keeps the eight-year veteran of the force from his wife and two sons in New Jersey.
[Versage:] My 5-year-old is pretty sharp. He says, "daddy, I saw the two towers fall down." I'm like, "Yeah." And you know, "everybody OK?" And he was and I told him no.
[Palmer:] The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey runs the tunnels and bridges that link the two states, as well as the area ports and airports. It used to manage the Twin Towers. Thirty-eight of the Port Authority civilian employees and 37 of its police officers and commanders died in the attack, Officer Versage's colleagues and friends. Versage was inspired by a discovery made by ground zero iron workers, the remnants of giant I beams in the shape of a cross.
[Versage:] 9-11. The North and the South Tower.
[Palmer:] This cross Versage cut and shaped, and his vigilance at ground zero are his tribute to those who died on September 11. Brian Palmer, CNN, New York.

[Announcer:] Viewer Linda Loomis asks CNN, "There are the terms "mapping the human genome'and 'sequencing the human genome." What's the difference between mapping and sequencing our DNA? Or do these terms mean the same thing?
[Ann Kellan, Cnn Correspondent:] Linda, there is a difference between a map and a sequence. Think of the map as the big picture and the sequence as a very detailed look. Our human genome is made up of billions of chemical letters. Now, in those chemical letters are genes. These genes determine everything from how tall we are, the color of our eyes, the color of our skin to how well we fight diseases. Now, in a map, you get a look at the genes and generally where they are. We don't know yet all the genes on our genome. The sequence looks at each chemical letter and puts them in the right order, one after the other after the other. Now, this will help scientists find more genes, and it'll make it easier for them to figure out how these genes work and what they do. Now, this will help scientists figure out all the details about how we evolved, how we fight diseases, and knowing this will help us maybe get treatments for diseases much faster than we did before.

[Blitzer:] Welcome back. For the second straight day, Israel is the target of a Palestinian suicide bomber. The latest attack in downtown Jerusalem killed at least three Israelis and wounded about 40 others. Authorities also say the bomber was killed. Palestinian sources say the attack was carried out by the Al-Aqsa martyrs brigades, the military wing of Yasser Arafat's fatah movement. The Palestinian leader condemned the bombing. Just days before President Bush's visit to Peru, a car bomb attack near the American embassy in Lima killed at least nine people and injured 25 others. No Americans were among those killed. No one has claimed responsibility, but U.S. officials say they suspect Shining Path rebels carried out the attack. President Bush is scheduled to arrive in Lima on Saturday.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] I'm still going. I'm sure President Toledo will do everything he can to make Lima safe for our trip. You know, two-bit terrorists aren't going to prevent me from doing what we need to do.
[Blitzer:] More now on the deadly suicide bomb attack in Jerusalem. So far, there has been no Israeli military response, but the government did cancel a round of U.S.-brokered cease-fire talks with the Palestinians. CNN's Michael Holmes is covering developments in Jerusalem.
[Michael Holmes, Cnn Correspondent:] Wolf, thanks very much. Yes, this incident further hampers the efforts of U.S. special envoy, Anthony Zinni, as he tries to bring about a cease-fire here. This suicide bombing happened in a busy area of west Jerusalem, an area of commercial activity, shops and residential, as well. It's also, sadly, an area that has seen these sorts of attacks several times in the past. Now, responsibility for previous incidents in recent days here have been claimed by groups such as Islamic Jihad and Hamas. These are groups that are vehemently opposed to any sort of peace with Israel, and are opposed to these cease-fire talks. But today's bombing has been claimed by the Al-Aqsa brigade. That a splinter group, if you like, of the armed militia that is linked with Yasser Arafat's own fatah movement. Israeli government spokesmen seized on that to lay the blame for the day's events at the feet of Yasser Arafat. However, the Palestinian Authority president was quick to appear in public and condemn these attacks, and say that the Palestinian Authority will do everything it can to find those responsible. Meanwhile, cease-fire talks, which had gone on during the violence of recent days, did not go on today. A high-level meeting between Palestinian and Israeli security officials was meant to take place this evening. It was called off by the Israelis. However, a government spokesman this evening said that Israel was not going to support a unilateral cease-fire. That is, call for a cease-fire on their own without full Palestinian involvement. They did, however, say that that security meeting may well take place tomorrow, Friday, in Israel. Now, before this latest attack, there had been a sense of hope here, Wolf. A sense of hope that things were being achieved, and that the cease-fire process, if you like, was moving forward. But it's fair to say that here tonight the uncertainly has returned Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Michael Holmes in Jerusalem, thank you very much. Yasser Arafat's response to the bombing was not enough for President Bush, who called on the Palestinian leader to do more to stop the violence. Covering that part of the story is our senior White House correspondent, John King. He joins us now live John.
[John King, Cnn Sr. White House Correspondent:] And, Wolf, senior officials tell us here the decision on the Cheney meeting, whether Mr. Cheney will go to Egypt for that meeting Monday or Tuesday with Yasser Arafat, could be made, the final decision, as late as Sunday night. They want to assess what is going on. They want to hear more from the president's special envoy, Anthony Zinni. But the administration sent, in very blunt terms to Yasser Arafat today, a message. He must dismantle this group responsible for today's attacks and he must do more to stop the violence, and he must do it now.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Mr. Arafat must do more to stop the violence in the Middle East.
[King:] A Palestinian group called the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade took responsibility for Thursday's attack. Al-Aqsa is affiliated with Arafat's fatah movement. Senior officials say Mr. Bush deliberately added this line to a speech in Texas just after his call for Arafat to do more.
[Bush:] If you harbor a terrorist, if you hide a terrorist, if you feed a terrorist, you're just as guilty as the terrorists themselves.
[King:] Secretary of State Powell called Mr. Arafat from Air Force One, demanding that he publicly denounce the latest violence and immediately arrest those responsible if he wants the meeting to take place. The administration believes a Cheney-Arafat meeting just before next week's Arab summit in Beirut would: give Israeli Prime Minister Sharon political cover to lift travel restrictions on the Palestinian leader. Allow the vice president to make clear that Mr. Arafat must say nothing at the summit that might incite violence. Encourage the summit debate to focus on the new Saudi peace initiative, not public condemnation of Israel or the United States and allow Arab leaders to directly pressure Mr. Arafat to do what is necessary to reach a lasting cease-fire. At a morning Oval Office session, both the president and vice president said special Mideast envoy Anthony Zinni will make the final decision on the meeting based on progress in implementing security improvements required in the so-called Tenet plan.
[Dick Cheney, Vice President Of The United States:] He'll make his judgments based on whether or not Arafat is in fact implementing the Tenet. Not just promising to implement, but implementing Tenet.
[King:] The State Department upped the stakes on Mr. Arafat by announcing its designation of the Al-Aqsa Brigade as a foreign terrorist group.
[Blitzer:] John King at the White House, thank you very much. And of course, violence not strictly limited to the Middle East. There was that deadly car bombing in Peru's capital, Lima. And that raises serious questions about whether President Bush should go there, as he plans to do. We heard the president say he won't let what he calls "two-bit terrorists" stop him from going. The bombing happened very close to the U.S. embassy. Mr. Bush is scheduled to arrive in Lima on Saturday. Joining us now with his insight into what's involved in protecting the president is the former deputy assistant director of the Secret Service, John Libonati. John, thanks for joining us. This must be a nightmare for the Secret Service, protecting the president in Lima, following this bombing that just occurred outside the embassy.
[John Libonati, Former Deputy Asst. Director, Secret Service:] Well, I think it is not unique. I would point to the Secret Service's history of protecting presidents in what would be called high-tension areas. I would point to the recent trip of Vice President Cheney to the Mideast. I would point to President Clinton's trip to Bosnia, former president, then President Bush's trip to the area of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War. I think, certainly, one talks about heightened concerns. But I think the Secret Service my history, knowing it as I do would tell you that the service is always at a heightened concern over things like this. They've managed these things before. This is not unique. And I think they will use their history and their training and the countermeasures and intelligence to deal with it. And I'm absolutely convinced that the trip will go well and the president will be safe.
[Blitzer:] And you have been in a presidential detail. You know personally what it is like to protect the president. But at what point and it's happened I covered the White House does the Secret Service say to the president, "I know the political mission is important; you really want to go; but, Mr. President, we don't think it's a good idea"?
[Libonati:] Well, Wolf, I think you also know that once an agent, always an agent. So I'm going to maintain the policy of not speaking to the issue of recommendations. I think you have to draw a distinction between briefings and discussions with the appropriate intelligence agencies and White House staff and recommendations. And, again, I'm going to pass on the issue of recommendation and say that, clearly there will be discussions and clearly there will be briefings. But I think the service has a long history of providing protection in this environment. I think, as you know, that there is an advanced team that will be well armed with the appropriate countermeasures and intelligence. I think also the service has a long history of working, not just with domestic law enforcement intelligence partners, but with foreign intelligence partners. And I point to working with 67 organizations and agencies in the recent challenge they had with the Olympics and many of the challenges they have faced overseas, some of which I've mentioned before. So I'm quite confident that they're up to the task. They were ready for this. They were armed with the intelligence that goes with the history of that region. And there's no doubt in my mind that they will be focused and disciplined and successful.
[Blitzer:] Spoken like a true Secret Service officer. You once were. You still are.
[Libonati:] Always are, always will be.
[Blitzer:] John Libonati, thanks again for joining us.
[Libonati:] Thank you for having me, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Appreciate it very much.
[Libonati:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] And, as we first told you yesterday, the defense secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, has unveiled rules for the expected military trials of some high-ranking al Qaeda and Taliban detainees in U.S. custody. During the proceedings, which the Pentagon calls commissions, defendants will be presumed innocent. They will be provided with attorneys and won't be required to testify or implicate themselves. At the same time, they will have limited right of appeal. And standards of evidence will be looser than in regular civilian trials. Rumsfeld says the rules are fair to everyone involved.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Of Defense:] We have made every reasonable effort to establish a process that is just, one that protects both the rights of the defendant to a fair trial, but also protects the rights of the American people to their security and to live as they were meant to live: in freedom and without fear of terrorists
[Blitzer:] Earlier, I also spoke with the deputy defense secretary, Paul Wolfowitz.
[Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary:] We spent a lot of time trying to make sure that, on the one hand, they would meet standards of fairness, because that's the American way: to give people a fair trial. At the same time, we're in unusual circumstances with this war on terrorism. We have classified information we have to be able to deal with. We have information that may be collected on the battlefield. So the normal legal process really isn't adequate for some of the people we may have to try.
[Blitzer:] And for the full interview with the No. 2 man at the Defense Department, please be sure to join me tonight here in the CNN "War Room." That's 7:00 p.m. Eastern, 4:00 Pacific. And, in other news, it's been now more than two years since EgyptAir Flight 990 plunged into the Atlantic Ocean. Now the National Transportation Safety Board has released its final report on that crash that killed everyone on board. CNN's Kathleen Koch joins us now with details Kathleen.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] Wolf, this is a very controversial report that has been delayed several times, primarily because of concern that it could hurt U.S. relations with Egypt, one our key Arab allies. Of course, at the center of the debate are the actions of the co- pilot, Gamil al-Batouti, who was alone in the cockpit that October day in 1999 as the plane began to plunge toward the ocean.
[Mohamed Fahim Rayan, Egyptair Chairman:] What we are nearly 99 percent sure that there was something in that elevator system.
[Koch:] Now, the elevator is the movable, horizontal part of the tail that moves up and down, pointing the aircraft's nose up or down. The NTSB report released today says that it exhaustively looked at such scenarios, but found the crash quote "did not result from a failure in the elevator control system or any other plane failure." Investigators instead concluded that the airplane's movements during the initial part of the accident were the result of the relief first officer, Gamil al-Batouti's, manipulation of the controls. And the NTSB said, when the captain burst in, that his actions were consistent with an attempt to recover the accident airplane and the relief first officer's were not. Investigators do not speculate, though, on Batouti's motives, saying quote "The reason for the relief first official's actions was not determined." Egypt has said that it will formally appeal for reconsideration of the NTSB's findings Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Kathleen Koch reporting, thank you very much for that report. And we turn now to a very different kind of crash: In Phoenix, Arizona, a man is facing a variety of charges for leading police on a 40-minute chase in a stolen dump truck. The vehicle was involved in two accidents before it ran a red light and collided with a car. The truck flipped on its side and clipped a traffic light before coming to a stop. Police say the man behind the wheel may may have been on drugs. And when he takes a stand, millions of the faithful listen. But did Pope John Paul II go far enough in addressing the sex scandal in the United States? I will ask The God Squad's Monsignor Tom Hartman. And later: troubling activity after the World Trade Center tragedy and what New York is doing to stop it. Stay with us.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Miami, Florida has its first Hispanic police chief. Raul Martinez was appointed yesterday by the embattled city manager Donald Warshaw. Mayor Joe Carollo fired Warshaw last week in the wake of a growing public feud over the federal seizure of Elian Gonzalez. Meanwhile, the custody battle over the 6-year-old Cuban boy is heating up in the courts. And our Kate Snow has more on that part of the story.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Juan Miguel Gonzalez told a federal appeals court that the decision about where to raise his son Elian is his and his alone. And even if Elian did put a childlike signature on an asylum application, the father argues: "This 6-year-old could not have had the slightest understanding of the meaning of that form. The boy does not read Spanish, mush less English." Juan Miguel Gonzalez says, there is no conflict between his wishes and the wishes of his son. He is not being coerced by the Cuban government, and so his word should prevail over the views of his Miami relative, Lazaro Gonzalez. In fact, in a footnote, Juan Miguel attacks his uncle. He says Lazaro only visited Cardenas, Cuba once, in 1998, and, according to Juan Miguel, Lazaro paid no attention to Elian: "Lazaro slept during the day, went to the resort in the evenings and drank during the night." But an attorney for Lazaro Gonzalez says he had genuine feelings for Elian. In an angry court filing, the Miami attorneys accuse the government of denying Elian due process, they say, Elian has the right to apply for asylum independent of his father. The Miami attorneys insist there's a conflict of interest. While Juan Miguel wants to return to Cuba, they claim Elian wants to remain in the U.S. and would be in danger if he returned. "The harm that would befall Elian if he is returned to Cuba is clear," they say. "No freedom of expression, thought or speech, Elian will be forced to renounce his own mother and step-father in order to swear allegiance to the revolution." [on camera]: Both sides are scheduled to present oral arguments next week in Atlanta. Juan Miguel Gonzalez has asked the court for five minutes to speak directly to the three-judge panel. Kate Snow, CNN, Washington.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Back now to the situation on the Afghan-Pakistani border today, with that story we told you just a moment about the Taliban commander defecting and what that has meant. For the situation there, let's go to this report, filed not very long ago by CNN's Nic Robertson.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] Just before sunset, a Taliban commander crossed into Pakistan. He told us that the 25 soldiers under his command had been stood down. He told us that they no longer wanted to fight. He told us the administrator of Spin Boldak had told him so stand his fighters down. He said that he had paid his fighters off, and they had gone back to their families. This is perhaps an indication of deals that are possibly being struck between tribal commanders and the Taliban at this stage that the Taliban should surrender control of Spin Boldak, an indication perhaps as well that the deals being struck allow the Taliban to put down their weapons and return to their families. The commander had been assigned to Kandahar City. He recently reassigned to the border town of Spin Boldak. It's not clear whether other commanders in Spin Boldak have also stood down soldiers under their command. This is a developing situation. Deeper inside Afghanistan, in Kandahar itself, the situation there tense. Truck drivers who left there today told us that the road appears to be under Taliban control. However there are detours on the road to avoid sections of the road that the Taliban have now lost control of. Controversy over who controls those sections of road, possibly, according to Taliban officials, U.S. forces. According to tribal commanders here, tribal commanders now control sections of that highway. Certainly the truck drivers telling us, there are growing concerns inside Kandahar province, inside the city of Kandahar, about what it means to have U.S. troops on the ground so close to the spiritual capital of the Taliban. Nic Robertson, CNN on the AfghanistanPakistan border.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] Some consumer groups are focusing today on mpgs, miles per gallon. Their experts say fuel economy could be doubled over the next two decades, and all it lacks is some direction from Detroit. And joining us with more is CNN environment correspondent Natalie Pawelski. Natalie, what do you know about this thus far?
[Natalie Pawelski, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Donna, thanks in part to the big popularity of SUVs and minivans, right now in the United States average fuel economy is at a 20-year low. Today's report, from the environmentally-minded Union of Concerned Scientist and the Center for Auto Safety calls for dramatic improvements.
[Michelle Robinson, Union Of Concerned Scientists:] Our primary finding is that the auto industry can, using existing technology, produce a fleet of cars and trucks that achieves a fuel economy of 40 miles per gallon by 2012. That's a 75 percent increase over the current 24 mile per gallon fleet average.
[Pawelski:] The authors say that could happen without doing anything exotic, just by applying existing technology, things like making engines and power trains more efficient, cutting down the weight of vehicles. Car makers say that's unrealistic.
[Josephine Cooper, Alliance Of Automobile Manufacturers:] If you go into an auto dealer today, you can buy vehicles that get more than 40 miles per gallon. In fact, there are more than 50 different models that get more than 30 miles per gallon. But those vehicles are not what consumers are demanding today.
[Pawelski:] Today's report, which is called "Drilling in Detroit," calls for even bigger improvement if you factor in hybrid vehicles. They run on gas, but generate electric power as you drive them. The study's authors say with hybrids, you could be looking at average fuel economy of 55 miles a gallon by the year 2020. Fuel efficiency standards are set by Congress, and they've been frozen since 1985. The authors of this study, like a lot of environmental groups, are hoping to see some changes Donna.
[Kelley:] How likely are we to see some changes, then, with the price of gas going up and are hybrid cars getting a little bit more popular?
[Pawelski:] Hybrid cars are pretty popular. In a lot of places, in fact, they're selling out. And right now, you've got forces on Capitol Hill and elsewhere talking about forcing an increase in fuel economy standards. On the other hand, the most popular rides right now are the gas guzzlers: the SUVs, the pick-up trucks and the car companies say unless that changes, don't look for any grand increases any time soon.
[Kelley:] OK, Natalie Pawelski, thanks very much.

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] The Clinton administration is trying to lower expectations about next month's Moscow summit between President Clinton and President Putin. More on that now from CNN national correspondent David Ensor David.
[David Ensor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Jeanne, hopes are fading among Clinton administration officials of a grand bargain on nuclear arms at this upcoming summit or soon thereafter. The feeling is that Mr. Clinton can't really offer the kind of deep cuts in nuclear weapons that the Russians would like, due to rejections among U.S. military senior officials, and they don't believe that Mr. Putin is going to be able to offer the kind of amendments to the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty that the U.S. is seeking in order to be able to deploy a limited national missile defense. So what you are seeing around town is a kind of an effort to lower expectations. The sort of thing that we often see before presidential summits.
[Meserve:] So why go ahead with the meeting? Can they gain ground on other fronts?
[Ensor:] Yes, they feel they can. In fact, Sandy Berger, the national security adviser to the president, has just been in Moscow talking about a variety of different initiatives that the U.S. is thinking about trying to propose and perhaps talk about at the summit. The goal is to help Russia reduce corruption, to help it figure out what kind of tax reform, and land ownership reform would really get a market economy going there. The other thing is that, a senior official said last night, that they fear that Mr. Putin, while very popular right now, may have a rather short honeymoon with the Russian people, who are very impatient to see some improvement in their difficult lives. The other thing of course is that President Clinton wants to raise Chechnya.
[Meserve:] David Ensor, thanks so much.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] In London 50 years ago today, Queen Elizabeth II took over Britain's throne. Now a jubilee commemorates the event and marks the death of the king five decades ago. CNN's Diana Muriel joins us now live from London. She has got more on what the queen is doing on this golden anniversary. Must be a pretty big time over there, Diana.
[Diana Muriel, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Leon, it is the start of the official celebrations of the queen's 50th anniversary on the throne, her golden jubilee. Although it is a muted occasion, because of course today is the anniversary of the death of her father. But in London, the occasion was marked by two-gun salutes, the first one at Hyde Park, a 41-gun salute given by king's troops, royal horse artillery, and second one at midday, given by the honorable artillery at the Tower of London, down by the River Thames. The queen, though, was not in attendance. She ritually spends today at her private residence, Sandringham, which in the east of England, in Norfolk. But she did break with tradition today. She doesn't usually take on public engagements on this day, but she decided today to go to a nearby hospital at Kingslin, also in Norfolk, and visit a cancer ward at the McMillan Hospital there. She met with doctors, nurses and patients at the hospital, which is also very close to Sandringham. She has been staying at Sandringham with the mother, the queen mother, who hasn't been well in recent months. In fact, the queen mother has not been seen in public since last November. She did not attend the family Christmas celebrations at Balmoral in Scotland, as is her habit. And she has been reported as being ill, suffering from a cold, and loss of appetite. Although we do understand that in recent days, the queen mother, who is 101 years old, has recovered something of her health, although she is not yet due to take up any official public engagements. The queen, though, is about to set off on a very large tour. She is about to travel to Jamaica, New Zealand and Australia, all countries in the Commonwealth. She begins that tour on the 18th of February, and she will be returning to Britain on the 3rd of March. The queen will then undertake a very large program of events around the country. But the highlight of the ceremonies to mark the golden jubilee will be here at Buckingham Palace in June. There will be a pop concert held in the gardens at Buckingham Palace. We understand that Aretha Franklin has agreed to perform at that concert, and Buckingham Palace hopes that they will have Sir Paul McCartney, as well as Sir Elton John also performing there. And that will be the highlight, together with the fireworks display and various other ceremonies in the summer. Back to you.
[Harris:] All right, thank you very much, Diana Muriel. That actually makes sense, having Aretha Franklin over there, the queen of soul, to help the queen celebrate her jubilee.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] The parents of Danielle Van Dam say they want people to remember their daughter's life, rather than focus on her death. Damon and Brenda Van Dam are asking people to pay tribute to Danielle at a San Diego park where she used to love to play. Mourners have recently created a public memorial at the remote highway site, where Danielle's body was discovered, one month after she was abducted from her home. Plus the Van Dam's say they don't want Danielle's memory to be associated with such a sad place.
[O'brien:] Much of this week's news has come from the nation's courtrooms, from the continuing trial of Andrea Yates to the overturning of the convictions in the Abner Louima torture case in new York City. Lots of legal issues to discuss, and so why don't we do just that. We are joined in New York by Pam Hayes a criminal defense attorney and former state prosecutor, and here in Atlanta, we welcome trial consultant Andrew Sheldon. Good to have you both with us.
[Andrew Sheldon, Trial Consultant:] Good to be here.
[Pam Hayes, Criminal Defense Attorney:] Good to be here.
[O'brien:] Since we were just talking about the Yates case, and we'll begin ladies first with you, Pam, in New York. The Yates case, and now the insanity defense is a defense, which has been certainly talked a lot about, all the way back to John Hinckley and the Reagan shooting, and it's a discussion which always leads to the abuse of that defense. Could this be one case where it is clear that insanity was the cause?
[Hayes:] I think it's very clear. It's clear that she has her prior conditions. It's clear from what she was going through right before the children, and they have documented evidence to show that Andrea Yates was, in fact, a person who was insane at the time of the act. I think that this is one of the worst cases of criminal insanity that the system has ever seen, and I think it's very important that everybody watch so we can know that this isn't something that's sane. I know that's not the prosecutor's view, but I think from anybody who's listening, it's clear that this woman was not sane at the time she killed her children.
[O'brien:] Andrew I guess, first of all I'll ask you if you agree with what Pam is saying in the sense that this is, perhaps, as clear a cut case of insanity as could ever be brought forward into a courtroom. I guess the question would be, what is an appropriate punishment?
[Sheldon:] I think an appropriate punishment for somebody who is insane would clearly be some treatment first. I think to put her, to incarcerate her and to give her treatment would be extremely important.
[O'brien:] So, incarceration is not necessarily the way to go?
[Sheldon:] Well, I think hospitalization with incarceration would be a combination that would certainly be acceptable to that jury.
[O'brien:] What about, would there be a public outcry if that were, in fact, what was meted out here?
[Sheldon:] That's probably going to happen regardless. My guess is that the "not guilty by reason of insanity" plea is used so seldom, and this is such an atrocious event. As a matter of fact, all four of the cases you want to talk about this morning are insane in some way or other, that there will be a public outcry if there is anything short of an execution for example.
[O'brien:] I guess
[Hayes:] Oh, I think that
[O'brien:] These crimes, it's difficult to measure sanity when you're talking about acts that are so hard to even talk about in some cases. What about guilty but insane, or insane and guilty?
[Hayes:] Well, they don't have that type of split verdict in Texas. We don't execute and we don't find people who are insane guilty, because they're not guilty under our law. People who are insane do not form the requisite mental state to be able to do a crime. What they are doing is just completely off the wall and that's why you have a not guilty by virtue of insanity. In some jurisdictions, I think Delaware is one of them, they have guilty but insane, where in fact the person is incarcerated but before they're incarcerated, they are in fact sent to a mental institution. In this case, Andrea Yates is obviously a person who's going to have to be mentally confined or criminally confined in a mental institution for the remainder of her life. She's not going to get better, and for everybody who's worried that she's going to get away with this, it's not getting away when you're insane and you're in a state mental institution, and I think that's what is needed.
[O'brien:] Pam, let me ask you this in this case. Number one, do you really think she's a threat to society at large; and secondly, is there any punishment that a judge or jury could issue here that could possibly match what she has to live with?
[Hayes:] I think that she is a threat to society.
[O'brien:] You do?
[Hayes:] She's a threat to herself. This woman, unless she is on medication and she's forced to take medication as she's being examined by doctors in a safe and a confined place is a threat, and that's what happens to her. She went off the bandwagon and she killed these five innocent children. In terms of punishment, the public needs to know what a state mental institution is all about. I mean, it is a horrible place. I think given the choice, I would rather be in jail, but you know, that's something that we, the public, don't know that much about and we really need to find out more about it. So I think they should just keep her in the insane asylum for the rest of her life or a significant portion thereof.
[O'brien:] Andrew, what are your thoughts in all that?
[Sheldon:] Well, as a person who's got a legal background, as well as a psychological background, I guess I would rather be in a mental hospital than in a prison, if I had the choice. So I disagree about that. It's clear that in each and every one of these cases, there is some amount of what we used to call criminal insanity. In other words, people who are insane and are dangerous to others because they commit crimes.
[O'brien:] Is Andrea Yates a threat to society though?
[Sheldon:] She's there are at least two ways to look at that. One is that she is guilty to herself, I mean dangerous to herself, and she's clearly in the past been dangerous to others. Who can predict whether she would be dangerous outside her family? But she may be very dangerous to herself, and in many states, many jurisdictions, that's enough to commit her.
[O'brien:] All right, let's move on to Abner Louima, shall we? The Appeals Court at least to a layperson such as myself, seemingly stunning statements here. Two of the police officers will walk. They may ask for reinstatement as police officers on the NYPD. And Charles Schwarz, who is the so-called second person involved in this, along with Volpe who pleaded guilty or pled guilty, now faces a new trial. What's interesting about this is that the grounds on which he faces a new trial is that his lawyer supposedly had a conflict of interest. But this conflict of interest with the Police Benevolent Association was well known during the trial. Schwarz was even asked about it, and said you know, I know it's there but I still want this attorney to represent me. Isn't that enough to settle that issue for the trial, Pam?
[Hayes:] I think it's enough. Obviously I disagree with the Second Circuit's opinion, but they're the people who have to make this decision. In this instance, Mr. Schwarz attended what we call a curcio hearing. A curcio hearing examines the facts as to whether this person can give you an adequate and a sufficient legal representation, while the trial is going on, where he or she might have some outside interest. In this instance the only interest that Mr. Worth I think his name was had was that his firm had a PBA contract, and some of them were doing the civil matter. But he was barred, his firm was barred against doing the civil matter, and the courts said there are so many rights that a client can not waive, and those rights in this instance were one of them. I think it's ridiculous. I feel like no one ever thought they would come that way, and it just leads to a lot of dissension into a lot of people in a lot of communities feeling that the system is just not fair. You know, they're looking for an excuse.
[O'brien:] Andrew.
[Hayes:] They didn't even comment on the merit of the case.
[O'brien:] Andrew, what do you think about that? I mean this whole conflict of interest issue is kind of interesting inasmuch as it was quite evident during the trial that if you perceived it that way, it existed.
[Sheldon:] I think that this is going to be one of those cases, one of the situations where legal procedure causes some injustice, and I you know, from an outsider's point of view, not being in New York as close to it as Pam is, I think that if the judge's role is to really fly speck a trial to make sure that nobody's rights are infringed, that they've done that in this case.
[O'brien:] And it is not a judge's responsibility, I guess, an appeals court judge, to look at the big picture and what the impact of an additional trial might be, and whether in fact looking at that fly speck, ignores a greater truth. Andrew.
[Sheldon:] Well, the procedural rules that trials have to be, have to follow, are fairly strict. Yes, they need to look at the bigger picture. But in this case, they can't. They weigh the facts. They weigh the information that they are faced with, the grounds for appeal, and they have to make a decision.
[O'brien:] All right, our legal colloquy is over. We appreciate it both.
[Sheldon:] Thank you.
[O'brien:] Pam Hayes, Andrew Sheldon, our legal beagles this morning. We appreciate you joining us and helping us to understand the system that oftentimes if difficult to understand.
[Sheldon:] Thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] U.S. forces in the Arabian Sea have been trained to face constant danger, not all of which comes from the enemy. Some of the threats are actually posed on the flight deck before and after an assault. CNN's Walter Rodgers files another exclusive look behind the scene from the USS Carl Vinson.
[Walter Rodgers, Cnn Correspondent:] The deck crews aboard this aircraft carrier have perhaps the most dangerous jobs of all in the war on terrorism. They work in one of the most hazardous environments in the world. Life insurance companies don't even touch these youngsters. Forget the pilots for a moment, they're over Afghanistan getting shot at only for a matter of minutes. The launch and recovery crews often work like this 20 hours a day and then they come back again. It is the launch crews that send these jets down a catapult at 180 miles an hour. Pilots don't begin flying the plane until it's off the deck and over the water. They call themselves the shooters. This is not a benign workplace.
[Unidentified Male:] You've got live ordinance all over the place. Highly flammable jet fuel being pumped into jets all along the flight deck.
[Rodgers:] Sometimes you can't get out of the way fast enough witnessed this safety officer tripping over a bomb. And if you aren't careful you can get run over by an F-18. The landing signal officers decided this F-18 had to abort its landing for safety reasons. This F-14 lost its hydraulics, landing with no brakes. One officer calling it bad very, very bad. And all this happened in less than two hours. [on camera]: By day an aircraft carrier's deck is a frying pan. At night it's like playing blind man's bluff where the potential for tragedy increases by a factor of 10. Landing on a carrier is little more than a controlled crash using this steel arresting cable to stop a 20-ton jet traveling at 180 miles an hour in three seconds. These arresting cables are perhaps the most dangerous things on the deck.
[Unidentified Male:] If this cable parts as an aircraft arrests it, you're going to kill pretty much anyone standing in the OA, on either side, as that cable swings through.
[Rodgers:] Small wonder anyone who works out here gets hazardous duty pay. Still these launch and recovery crews say only when it ceases to be exciting will they leave the flight deck. Walter Rodgers, CNN, aboard the Carl Vinson in the Arabian Sea.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] But first, we begin in the upper Midwest where the drama is rising with the water line. Communities all along the Red River are scrambling to stack sand bags and contain the river, which has surged far beyond flood stage, and the threat of more rain and even more flooding is approaching. Joining us with the view from Grand Forks, North Dakota is our Jeff Flock Hi, Jeff.
[Jeff Flock, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning to you from Grand Forks. Of course, this is the community that was devastated in '97 and this, what you're seeing right here is some out fall of just how devastating things were in '97. The levee that you see being constructed back here, this is something that is now going well up beyond what they think the crest prediction is going to be, but they are still busy at this hour building this levee. What they do is dump trucks come in and line up and dump their loads of clay and dirt here out along the river and then this Caterpillar up on top packs it down and they've got an additional, perhaps, two, three, maybe even four feet in some areas of additional protection. We've got another camera out on the other side I think that kind of gives you a sense of what the levee looks like. As you can see, perhaps, the water is not yet all the way up on the existing levee. But they, frankly, do not believe the predictions that had been made by the National Weather Service and others of a crest of, they thought, 45 by the end of this week or perhaps into next week, 45 feet. Right now the river level is at about 43 feet and just to give you an indication of where the production now stands, it's about 50 feet in Grand Forks. They're taking it to 54 feet because they just don't believe it based on what they had been through. So they are right now, in any of the areas that need additional shoring, they're doing that now and at this point there is no additional new projection in terms of when the new crest might be because there's rain in the forecast tomorrow and into Thursday and they want to get a sense for how that plays all that into it before they come up with a new prediction for a crest. So right now we're at 43 feet here in Grand Forks. The earlier crest was projected to be 45 and this levee will take it up to 54, so a lot of margin for error, at least they think. That's the latest from Grand Forks back to you folks.
[Phillips:] Jeff, can you still hear me?
[Flock:] Yeah, sure.
[Phillips:] All the homes, I see all the homes behind the mounds of dirt there. Are those residents bailing out of there or are they sticking in there around?
[Flock:] No, in fact, they're not, Kyra. This house right here Rick, go ahead and show them. Give them a sense of what this neighborhood looks like. This is a neighborhood that was flooded in '97. This house right here, right behind us here there's a "Grand Forks Herald" photographer who lives in this house. He just went, left and went off to work. But no, these homes are full of people and these people are hanging here. But, of course, no one, you know, this time is watching this water rise and going ah, no, let's not worry about it. This levee is a testament to that, as to how seriously they're taking this.
[Phillips:] Yeah, some courageous people. Jeff Flock, thanks so much. All right, Jill Brown is following the conditions for us and gives us the latest on the Red River flooding. Oh, you've got the numbers up and ready to go, Jill.
[Jill Brown, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Kyra. Let's take a look at some of those numbers that Jeff had talked about. In East Grand Forks, 28 feet is the flood stage. As he mentioned, last he'd heard the report, the forecast was for 45 feet. This is what we have, the National Weather Service forecasting a crest Friday of 46 feet, and again, keep in mind, this is before we get this rain that we're expecting Wednesday into Thursday. Friday probably a dry day. So chances are these forecasts from Wahpeton into Fargo, East Grand Forks to Drayton may all change. It just depends on exactly how much rain we do get, and unfortunately it looks like it could be pretty heavy. This is the Red River, right along the South the North Dakota and Minnesota state line, flows from south to north and it's farther south that the heavier rain is expected. This, about a two day total expected to be over an inch, perhaps over two inches in some locations. Right now we have just a little bit of rain out here, from about Fargo to just south of Grand Forks. This is just the beginning. Really, our developing storm is still back here in the southwest. This low moving out and strengthening as it moves up into the plains will start to bring the heavier, more steady rain in during the next 24 hours. It looks like Wednesday probably our heaviest rain day, Thursday things winding down. Friday may be dry and then maybe more rain on Saturday. So let's take a look at it day by day. Watch that storm, right here. Heading into the northern plains, again, the rain will pick up. We have a little bit out there now, but there's much more and probably steady rain, probably heavy rain on the way. And then once this storm system moves eastbound, this next one to the west will come in and that's why we may have more showers back on Saturday after a one day break. So, a lot more rain on the way in northern plains. We'll continue to keep you up to date Daryn, back to you.
[Kagan:] Jill, thank you very much.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] These are critical hours for crew members of that crippled Russian nuclear sub still at the bottom of the Barents Sea, four days now and counting. The Russians have asked Britain for help in the efforts to rescue more than 100 sailors on board. CNN's Steve Harrigan by telephone now in Murmansk, which is on the northern edge of Russia. Steve, hello.
[Steve Harrigan, Cnn Anchor:] Bill, good morning. In this far-northern outreach, the port city of Murmansk, there is still hope; hope that some of the perhaps as many as 118 sailors still trapped 300 feet beneath the Barents Sea are still alive. But after now, with the rescue operation now in its fifth day showing no signs of success, but people here still hoping that all is not lost. We've seen them going to church today several times, lighting candles, praying together. The level of anxiety here is enormously high. This is a very emotional roller coaster ride for the people of Murmansk. When we've been talking to people on the street, interviewing them about what they think, it's not hard for people to break into tears during their conversation when they think about the families involved, the people who are waiting now on the sidelines, waiting for news of their loved ones. So far, the Russian government has kept those families away from the media, isolated them on board a nearby ship outside of Murmansk. So far, there is also a sense of resentment; resentment over the failure of a rescue operation now in its fifth day, and people here wondering about why aid from outside countries has been refused so long, and why now it's coming so late. Still, though, a sense of hope mixed with that resentment. People here hoping that some of those 118 sailors will be brought back to the surface alive Bill. Steve, is it discouraging at all to folks there who are getting the reports that no tapping has been heard on that sub?
[Harrigan:] Certainly we've seem, really, a decline here over each day. Initially. there was radio contact with the submarine. No word about any loss of life. That then degenerated into kind of coded messages pounded out back and forth. As late as yesterday, sailors were pounding out an SOS. But today there has been no contact at all. That has been acknowledged by the Russian government. So, really, many hearts faltering as far as that goes. One of the chief culprits for the problem, the Russians placing the blame on the weather. That water temperature is just about eight degrees, but there are very high winds, high enough to really endanger some of the rescuers. There are 22 military vessels out there trying to save these men, but the waves have been so high, they themselves have been in danger, and no sign of life from that submarine throughout day five of the rescue today Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right, Steve Harrigan again by telephone in Murmansk in northern Russian there. And for late word now on possible British assistance in the Barents Sea, we go now to the Ministry of Defense in London where we're joined by Mr. John Spellar, minister of state for the armed forces. Mr. Spellar, hello to you, and thank you for your time. And let's talk about this LR5 first of all. When could it be in the water and provide assistance?
[John Spellar, British Armed Forces Minister:] Well, it's arrived in Norway now and the ship that could carry it round will be docking tonight. And obviously we'll be talking with the Russians about how soon we can get there, and obviously the details of how it will be operational there. But we took the decision once we got the ship lined up to actually get the equipment further into the area so that it was pre-positioned so that as soon as there were some positive indications, we could actually be involved there. So it's not just the equipment, it's also a remotely controlled vehicle as well, and also, obviously, the crew to man it and backup medical teams as well.
[Hemmer:] You seem to indicate that you took action before the Russians requested official help. Is that accurate?
[Spellar:] Well, no, we put we wanted to make sure that we had equipment available, as readily available and as nearly available, in the event that the Russians would actually require it. I mean, obviously they've got a lot of their own equipment, and as your report said, that they've been constrained by weather conditions. Had they been able to use that equipment to conduct a successful operation, obviously that would have been fine. But in the event that they required additional equipment for this operation, obviously we wanted to be in a position to be able to respond. And we stand ready to do that and our people are engaged in discussions with them.
[Hemmer:] Mr. Spellar, what do you say to folks who wonder why the Russians did not request this help sooner?
[Spellar:] Well, I think that they've obviously got equipment for undertaking rescue from submarines. They've obviously conducted training exercises on this as well. And...
[Hemmer:] Yes, sir, I understand that. And I don't mean to interrupt, but it was apparent for the past few days that the Russian efforts had failed.
[Spellar:] Well, they've been trying with some pretty unfavorable weather to succeed in that. And, as you know, there was a briefing to NATO yesterday on their possible requirements. And so, therefore, there was a possibility that additional assistance may be required. That's why we've been getting stuff into position to be able to respond because we realize that time is very much of the essence. I don't think it's actually, you know, going to be too helpful at this stage to look at reasons why there's been any delay. What we've really got to do is get on as fast as possible in order to try and rescue these sailors in the submarine.
[Hemmer:] And, sir, the other issue we've heard throughout the week is compatibility between navies of different countries. The LR5, is it compatible with this Russian sub, to go down secure itself to the hatch, pressurize the water and hopefully remove those who have survived this ordeal?
[Spellar:] Well, our people have been looking at that and believe that that should be possible. Obviously, there's going to be more technical discussions taking place over the next few hours precisely to work out the final details between the experts. In the meantime, we want to make sure that once those are being resolved that we're not waiting for that, but that, in fact, we're getting the equipment as near as possible to the scene of operation to be able to respond as soon as that's required.
[Hemmer:] There's a Russian official who, today, is saying that there is oxygen on board that could last until the 25th of this month. That's another nine days from now. Do you believe, indeed, that there is enough oxygen to make it that far?
[Spellar:] Well, look, I'm not a technical expert and that's precisely why those discussions are taking place between the people who know this side of the business better...
[Hemmer:] All right, all right.
[Spellar:] ... so that they can give us the best advice. What we're doing is taking the necessary operational decisions to make sure that while those discussions are taking place that time is not being lost. And I'm very pleased that things are moving along now.
[Hemmer:] Well understood. Mr. John Spellar live from London, thanks for your time, sir. Much appreciate you taking time to talk with us today.
[Spellar:] Thank you.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Rising gas costs as a presidential campaign issue. Will one candidate pay a price on Election Day?
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] It's not all that obvious in this year's presidential race, not when one candidate is part of the incumbent administration and the other candidate used to be an oilman.
[Bernard Shaw, Cnn Anchor:] Bill Schneider on the political gray area at the pump. Also ahead...
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] My plan is Social Security plus, not Social Security minus; it's the best of both worlds, not the worst of both worlds.
[Woodruff:] How does the new Gore retirement savings plan compare to the Bush proposal? We'll check the facts. Plus...
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] We're in a usual spot to be able to....
[Unidentified Female:] Stop the execution of Gary Graham! Don't kill an innocent man! Don't kill an innocent man!
[Shaw:] The death penalty debate dogging George W. Bush more intensely on the trail.
[Announcer:] From Washington, this is INSIDE POLITICS, with Judy Woodruff and Bernard Shaw.
[Shaw:] Thanks for joining us. We begin with high gas prices and the potential fallout for Al Gore. Today, the administration continues stepping up its bid to be seen as leading the charge against possible price gouging. This as Republicans press their claim that the president and vice president share some of the blame for the problem. White House spokesman Joe Lockhart criticized the oil industry, saying its contention that federal clean air regulations drove prices up just doesn't wash.
[Joe Lockhart, White House Press Secretary:] None of this adds up, as far as we can see, to the kind of dramatic price rise that we saw over a very quick period.
[Shaw:] Lockhart urged the industry to cooperate with a federal investigation into possible price gouging. Across town, Energy Secretary Bill Richardson asked the OPEC ministers, who are preparing to meet in Vienna, to consider raising production to ease the price pressure.
[Bill Richardson, U.s. Energy Secretary:] Right now, our immediate task is to try to get more gasoline in the market, try to find out the reasons for this price differential and then act.
[Shaw:] Behind the urgency, a hard political reality: rising gas prices may be costing consumers a few extra dollars at the pump, but they could cost Al Gore on Election Day. Gas prices are up all over the U.S., but they're highest in two states that have the power to swing the fall election: Illinois and Michigan. According to the AAA daily survey of gas prices, a gallon of regular unleaded costs an average of $1.98 in Illinois, $2.13 in Chicago. Michigan is close behind, averaging $1.96 statewide, and $2.00 in Detroit a 50 cent increase since May. Illinois and Michigan are among the most competitive states this fall, and they hold a combined 40 electoral votes, 15 percent of the total needed to win. The fear among some Democrats: that the gas hike will take the luster off Gore's "never had it so good" campaign message.
[Stuart Rothenberg, "rothenberg Political Report":] A couple of percentage points could easily cost him Michigan and even Illinois. And this if this election is as close as many people think it will be, something like gas prices, high gas prices which won't fundamentally change the lay of the land, but could tip the scales slightly could really hurt the vice president.
[Shaw:] While the danger for Al Gore from the Midwest price spike is clear, just what caused prices to leap remains a mystery. Oil companies say two pipeline problems cut off supply to the region for several days, and so drove up local prices. But the pipeline firm says the most serious problem was fixed months ago, time enough for the market to adjust. The industry also blames regulations mandating cleaner-burning gas made with ethanol, which is more expensive to produce. But several cities outside the Midwest, including New York, also require the more expensive fuel, and prices in those cities haven't jumped nearly as much. And from Indiana today, a new effort to ease the high price of gasoline. Democratic Governor Frank O'Bannon says he is using his constitutional authority to place a 60-day moratorium on the state's 5 cents-a-gallon tax. The moratorium will go into effect on July 1, the height of the summer travel season. For the record, O'Bannon is up for re-election this year.
[Woodruff:] For more on the political ramifications of higher gas prices, we're joined now by our senior political analyst Bill Schneider Bill.
[Schneider:] Judy, what is the political fallout of soaring gasoline prices? Well, it's not all that obvious in this year's presidential race, not when one candidate is part of the incumbent administration and the other candidate used to be an oilman. Who do voters blame? Government or business? The answer: both. About equal numbers blame the U.S. government and oil producers like OPEC, followed by the oil companies. Very few blame environmentalists who demand cleaner fuel, or drivers who insist on driving gigantic gas guzzlers. Gore is vulnerable on this issue because he is the government. Just when Gore starts his prosperity and progress tour to tout all the good news, he gets hit in the face with this. The gas issue also reinforces an impression created by the Los Alamos fiasco: Does this administration know what it's doing?
[Bush:] There is no plan, it seems like to me, in Washington to increase the supply of crude oil or natural gas. There is no national energy plan.
[Schneider:] Bush says it's a problem of supply and demand. His answer: increase supply, internationally...
[Bush:] I don't understand why the administration can't get cooperation from countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Mexico who to open up the spigots to increase the supply of crude oil which would drop the price of crude. These are countries with which we should have enormous amount of capital. These are countries where it wasn't all that long ago that a President Bush helped Kuwait, or United States helped Mexico.
[Schneider:] ... and domestically.
[Bush:] ... recognize that our country better become less dependent on foreign crude. That's why I'm for the exploration of Anwar, that's why I'm for the exploration of natural gas which is hemispheric, it's not subject to price.
[Schneider:] Sure enough, Bush voters tend to blame the government while Gore voters tend to blame oil producers.
[Gore:] ... because I just learned that the big oil companies' profits for the first part of this year have just gone up 500 percent.
[Schneider:] And which candidate does the oil industry favor? Just look at the campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry: $1.5 million to Bush, less than $100,000 to Gore. So, Gore sees a convenient target.
[Gore:] I think the that all adds up to a need for investigation of collusion, antitrust violations and price gouging.
[Schneider:] People blame government and business about equally. So, who gets hurt? If people get mad at business, all they can do is complain. If they get mad at government, they can vote, and that's something for Gore to think about Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, Bill Schneider, thanks very much Bernie.
[Shaw:] Al Gore has more on his mind this day than high gas prices, or even his announcement of his retirement savings plan. He rushed back here to Washington on the chance he may have to serve in his role as president of the Senate. Our Chris Black joins us with details from the Hill Chris.
[Chris Black, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Bernie, Vice President Al Gore took a detour from the second week of his prosperity and progress tour to leave Kentucky, moving his speech up by 40 minutes, to fly back here and break what they think is a dead-even vote on expanding federal jurisdiction for hate-crimes legislation, or hate-crimes prosecution. The bipartisan amendment to the spending bill would increase the categories for federal prosecutors of hate crimes from the current three race, religion, and national origin to six. The new categories are gender, sexual orientation, and disability. The roll-call vote is going on right now in the United States Senate. Gore as the vice president gets to break tie votes, it's his one of his few constitutional roles. He came back from the campaign trail just a month ago to do the same thing, but in the end his vote wasn't needed. Today, as he talked to reporters on Air Force 2 flying back from Kentucky, he told them why he thinks this legislation is important.
[Gore:] I personally don't understand why it's so difficult to see that these crimes are really different. They're fueled by a force of hatred that is unnatural, and can lead the perpetrator to do horrible things, and unless that's singled out for punishment and identified for what it is, then we're not being true to ourselves in saying that's inconsistent with the United States of America.
[Black:] The vice president has been pushing an expansion of hate crimes jurisdiction in his on the campaign trail and President Clinton has been pushing this for three years. The president made some phone calls to wavering senators yesterday from Houston, but Republicans say it's not necessary. In fact, the Senate just approved in a 50-49 roll-call vote an amendment sponsored by Senator Orrin Hatch, which would have the Justice Department conduct a study on hate crimes Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, Chris Black reporting from the Capitol, thanks. And now to Gore's main event of this day, the formal unveiling of his retirement savings proposal. Our John King traveled with Gore to Kentucky.
[John King, Cnn White House Correspondent:] With the rollout of the new plan came a clear contrast.
[Gore:] My plan is Social Security plus, not Social Security minus. It's the best of both worlds, not the worst of both worlds.
[King:] The vice president calls his new program "retirement savings plus." It would cost $200 billion over 10 years and offer government subsidies to encourage workers to invest up to $2,000 a year in tax-free supplemental private retirement accounts. Couples making less than $30,000 a year would get $3 in government money for each $1 they contribute. Couples making $30,000 to $60,000 a year would get a one-for-one match from the government. And couples in the $60,000 to $100,000 income range would get 33 cents from the government for every $1 they invest in the 401 [k] -style accounts. Income limits for individuals would be one-half the amount for couples.
[Gore:] If you believe that we shouldn't have to choose between the Social Security you have earned, and the savings and investments you deserve, then join with me and we will win this fight.
[King:] Governor Bush takes a different approach. He favors allowing workers to divert a small percentage of their Social Security payroll taxes into private investment accounts. Those who choose this option would get slightly reduced Social Security benefits. But Bush argues earnings from the private account would more than make up the difference without creating the costly new government subsidy Gore proposes.
[Neil Newhouse, Gop Pollster:] It's those 45- to probably 60- years-olds who this is really geared toward. A big chunk of the electorate. They always they absolutely always vote. And right now, Gore has a significant deficit among those voters compared to where Bill Clinton was against Bob Dole.
[King:] The vice president's first stop on week two of his Progress and Prosperity Tour was aimed at making up some of that lost ground. Kentucky has just eight electoral votes, but is considered a bellwether in presidential politics. Bill Clinton narrowly carried the state twice, but Kentucky was solidly in the Republican column in 1988.
[Gore:] If you believe that America can be better off still in terms of our affluence and in terms of our spirit four years from this day, then I want your vote.
[King:] Gore advisers acknowledge Governor Bush got a head start in appealing to voters worried about retirement savings, but they predict the vice president's plan will have more appeal in the end. [on camera]: And as that competition unfolds in the months ahead, both candidates are facing criticism that their plans do little to deal with the financial crisis facing Social Security in about 25 years as more of the baby boomers retire and the system begins paying out more than it's taking in. John King, CNN, Lexington, Kentucky.
[Shaw:] And we have an addition to our lead story about those high gas prices in certain Midwestern states, especially Illinois and Michigan. Vice President Gore this afternoon said that he is asking for a meeting of governors most affected. The vice president is asking the energy secretary, Bill Richardson, and EPA administrator Carol Browner to contact governors of states most affected by those high gas prices. The vice president wants a meeting so the federal government and the states can work together and come up with solutions. Still ahead here on
[Inside Politics:] Al Gore's plan to help retirees.
[Gore:] It does not come at the expense of Social Security. It comes in addition to Social Security. We will protect Social Security.
[Shaw:] The nuts, the bolts of Gore's plan and a look at how it differs from the Bush proposal.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] A lot of people here in the U.S. have closely been following the role and the situation of women in Afghanistan, and the Taliban collapse may signal the dawn of a new era for Afghan women. But our Brianne Leary found that many women are still following some of the Taliban's strict guidelines.
[Brianne Leary, Cnn Correspondent:] Although it may not look like it, the dust has begun to settle in Afghanistan's fourth largest city, Jalalabad, since the Taliban fled about two weeks ago. Businesses are up and running, television too, and music is back with a vengeance. Things in this rather tense city seem to be getting back to normal, with one exception. [on camera]: For westerners, one of the most reviled aspects of the Taliban regime was forcing women to wear this: the burka. Blue seems to be the most popular color. [voice-over]: When an Afghan girl reaches puberty, her family gives her the traditional coverall. From then on, her identity is hidden from the outside world. But now that the Taliban has been all but destroyed, why do the women here still cling to the burka?
[Haji Baryialy, Jalalabad Governor's Brother:] Burka is part of our culture. Taliban didn't bring burka to Afghanistan. Afghan women carried it for a long time. This is their choice. Nobody will force them. In the past also. Nobody forced them.
[Leary:] That's one Afghan man's belief. But how do women feel? Adila, a schoolteacher here in Jalalabad, explained why she continues to wear the burka. "It is not by force," she says, "because we read the history about it in our book in the time of Kalif Abbas. So it's tradition. Now, we are used to wearing it. Otherwise, when we go outside without it, we feel like we wear nothing." But in today's Afghanistan, wearing a burka or not isn't simply about freedom. It's about freedom of choice, something women the world over can relate to. Brianne Leary, CNN, Jalalabad.

[Bill Richardson, Energy Secretary:] The president will do everything within the power of the federal government to ensure that Americans have the fuel they need to heat their homes.
[Judy Woodruff, Co-host:] Al Gore's new oil initiative becomes even more of a political football now that the president has agreed to tap into the nation's oil reserves.
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] Let me say that I think it's time to stand up to the apologists for big oil.
[Gov. George Bush , Presidential Candidate:] The reason why Florida is going to vote for this team is because they don't want flip-floppers as the president of the United States.
[Woodruff:] We'll have the latest from the campaigns on oil and politics, and whether they mix. Plus, a political "Play of the Week" that's sealed with a kiss.
[Announcer:] From Washington, this is INSIDE POLITICS, with Bernard Shaw and Judy Woodruff.
[Woodruff:] Thank you for joining us. Bernie is on assignment. The Clinton administration says the president has decided to dip into the nation's oil reserves to help the American people. But, a day after Al Gore recommended the action, critics are accusing Mr. Clinton of trying to help Gore's presidential campaign. We begin our coverage of this new action and the reaction with our senior White House correspondent John King John.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Judy, not since the Persian Gulf War, 1991, has the government authorized release of oil from its 571-million barrel strategic reserve, but President Clinton signed off on doing just that earlier today. The announcement was made by the Energy Secretary Bill Richardson. This, a very heated policy debate within the administration; many of the president's senior advisers in disagreement over this. Obviously it's become a very hot political debate in the Congress and on the presidential campaign trail as well. In making the announcement a short time ago, though, the Energy Secretary Bill Richardson said the president made this decision for one simple reason: He says supplies are down, prices are up.
[Richardson:] The intended result of this exchange is simple: to increase oil supply. The temporary infusion of 30 million barrels of oil into the market will likely add an additional 3 to 5 million barrels of heating oil this winter, if refineries could match higher runs and yields seen in the past.
[King:] Now, technically, this is a swap; the companies that buy this oil from the government would be required to replace it once oil prices fall so the reserve would get the oil back. So, the administration saying this is not a big deal, it's an exchange or a swap program, designed to deal with a temporary crisis. Republicans, though, from George W. Bush to many of the GOP leaders in Congress saying this: a political ploy. They say the president is trying to help the vice president as the election and the winter approaches. Secretary Richardson said, that's not so.
[Richardson:] This is not political. The president wants to help the American people get home heating oil and have enough heat in their homes. We have extremely low home heating oil stocks; low crude oil stocks for the winter, especially in the Northeast area, and the reason that we are doing this is not for price, but to deal with disruption. To deal with the problems of extreme shortages.
[King:] Now, Republicans rushing to note that this is a major flip-flop, in their words, from just months ago when both the president and the vice president said they thought it was a bad idea to tap the strategic reserves. Administration officials don't dispute that. They say, when oil was about $25, $28, approaching $30 a barrel, the administration did not think it was a wise idea. But in the past week, they say, the price has reached $38 a barrel; came down a little bit today to about $33 a barrel. They say the president and the vice president changed their mind. Even those who opposed tapping the reserve in the top ranks of the administration said, in the end, they decided to go on because they couldn't come up with a better idea Judy.
[Woodruff:] And John, is there a downside in all of this for the administration?
[King:] Well, there's a threat if the markets don't react. This is not enough oil not enough to increase supply by so much that, by the laws of supplies and demand, prices would automatically fall. This, perhaps a penny or so here or there. This is more about psychology, showing the markets and showing the OPEC cartel that the administration is willing to intervene in the energy markets. If it does not increase supply and drive down prices, Secretary Richardson said the president would consider authorizing even more, but that would only increase the controversy. So there is a risk here that, if this doesn't work, the president will have very few options facing him and the election will be approaching; and, once again, people will be questioning the vice president about what he would do.
[Woodruff:] All right, John King at the White House, thanks very much. Well, Al Gore played up the oil issue again today, and the president's decision to follow his advice helped fuel his argument. Our Jonathan Karl is covering the Gore campaign.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] The Gore campaign applauds the president's decision to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. But Gore aides are not surprised by the move. And the decision won't stop Gore from continuing to pound big oil. Earlier in the day, Gore listened to the stories of people in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, concerned about rising oil prices.
[Unidentified Female:] But what really concerns me is, oil reflects into gasoline, gasoline reflects into groceries, it reflects into clothing, everything; everything is going up because of this, not just fuel.
[Karl:] He also launched a pointed attack on his rivals.
[Gore:] Let me say that I think it's time to stand up to the apologists for big oil. I reject an agenda that is of big oil, by big oil, and for big oil.
[Karl:] Gore didn't mention those "apologists" by name, but his campaign made it clear he was talking about George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. A woman in the hand-picked audience did too.
[Unidentified Female:] So, of course, Governor Bush being a big oil man, he isn't going to do too much about it.
[Gore:] No comment.
[Karl:] Campaign officials are accusing the Bush campaign of proposing solutions that would benefit the oil industry, specifically Gore's proposal to open up Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, something Gore strongly opposes.
[Gore:] We do not have to sacrifice our environment and our environmental treasures in order to satisfy the appetite of big oil companies to go into new areas.
[Karl:] The Gore campaign says drilling in Alaska would be a financial windfall for the oil industry in general and, in particular, the Halliburton Corporation, Dick Cheney's former employer. Just seven months ago, Gore opposed opening up the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, calling it an ineffective way to increase supply. Today he explained his change of heart.
[Gore:] At that time we had pledges from OPEC that they would increase production to bring down the price and stabilize it at lower levels; they have not followed through on those pledges. The situation is very different today.
[Karl:] It was Gore's first press conference in more than two months; 31-minutes long, it covered a range of topics, including the state of the campaign.
[Gore:] This is very much out there to be won or lost. This is a jump ball right now. It is an extremely close, hard-fought race.
[Karl:] In the face of charges that tapping the reserve is a political move designed to give his campaign a boost just 6 12 weeks before an election, the vice president has a response: He says, for families and for small businesses struggling with rising fuel prices, the current situation is an emergency that justifies an emergency response Judy.
[Woodruff:] John, I just asked John King at the White House about the potential downside of tapping the petroleum reserve; namely, that if prices if supplies don't go up and prices don't go down, there's a limit to how much more oil the administration can turn to. What do the Gore people say about that?
[Karl:] Well, that's something we may not even find out about for another month-and-a-half, until after the election is over. You know, he's going to do these test sales these test sales would happen over the course of a month; test sales that Gore, today, called for six or seven or five million barrels at a time; and today, the administration talking about 30 million barrels. We may not know the true impact of this until after the election.
[Woodruff:] All right, John Karl on the road with Vice President Gore, thanks. A short while ago, George W. Bush commented on the Clinton administration's decision to tap into the emergency oil reserves.
[Bush:] It's a bad idea because these petroleum reserves need to be used in case of war or major disruption of energy supplies. This is an administration that has had no energy plan. Their own secretary of energy said that they got caught unawares about the world situation. And I am I believe that the vice president has made this decision, with the president's support, to achieve short-term political gain.
[Woodruff:] Bush spoke in Florida, where he hammered on the oil issue and Gore earlier today. Our Candy Crowley is on the road with Bush.
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] Winter energy costs don't move the political meter much in Florida, but George Bush thinks Al Gore's support for tapping into the nation's Strategic Oil Reserve is something he can run with anywhere.
[Bush:] He has flip-flopped on the issue; and the reason why Florida is going to vote for this team is because they don't want flip-floppers as the president of the United States.
[Crowley:] The Bush camp thinks the oil issue works at many levels for the Republican nominee. First, they say Al Gore now supports what he once opposed. Coming less than two months before an election, the change gives Bush another verse in his long time refrain that Gore will say and do anything to be president. And second, Bush thinks the idea is a bad one designed to make up for faulty policy.
[Bush:] The Strategic Petroleum Reserve should not be used as a for short-term political fix for somebody whose administration has been asleep at the switch.
[Crowley:] Bush was in Florida for another round in a surprisingly fierce battle here. Wooing the state's powerful senior vote, he promised to put major money behind government and private medical research.
[Bush:] As president I will fund and lead a medical moon shot to reach far beyond what seems possible today and discover new cures for age-old afflictions.
[Crowley:] Bush wants to pump $67 billion in new money into research at the National Institutes of Health over a 10-year period. That figure includes doubling funds for the National Institute of Cancer.
[Bush:] It is amazing and hopeful to think that one day people might speak of cancer the way we speak of polio or small pox. We cannot begin to calculate the lives spared and suffering avoided by these cures and the genius behind them.
[Crowley:] Bush would also make permanent a tax credit given to encourage private research, something Bush says the Clinton administration promised but never delivered. The vice president has said that he would support a program similar in size to the Bush proposal. [on camera]: The fact that less than two months before an election George Bush has returned to Florida for the second time in two weeks is a political message in and of itself. This is a Republican-leaning state run by Governor Jeb Bush. It was once considered a certainty in the Bush column. It no longer is. Candy Crowley, CNN, Sun City, Florida.
[Woodruff:] Still ahead on INSIDE POLITICS, sizing up this week on the campaign trail. We'll talk to E.J. Dionne and Ramesh Ponuru. 46 days before the election, our daily snapshot of the presidential race looks pretty familiar. Al Gore leads George W. Bush by eight points in today's CNN"USA Today" Gallup tracking poll of likely voters. As we close this week, the results look much as they did last week, with Gore's support hovering near the 50 percent mark and Bush's backing in the low to mid 40s. And joining me now to talk more about the race, E.J. Dionne of "The Washington Post" and Ramesh Ponuru of "The National Review." Gentlemen, thanks for being with us.
[E.j. Dionne, "washington Post":] Good to be with you.
[Woodruff:] First thing that we want to talk about is this announcement from the president today that he is going to dip into the petroleum, the oil reserves. E.J., does this help Al Gore? Is it a wash? Where are we on this question?
[Dionne:] I think mostly it doesn't hurt. I was struck in the discussion earlier in the show, is this political or will people like it? Well, sometimes something can be political and people can like it. And I think in this case the administration wants to make sure that it gets as little blame as possible for high oil prices, which after all undid an earlier Democratic administration run by Jimmy Carter. And so I think the idea is they do something. If prices come down at all, they can claim credit for it, whether or not this little move had a lot to do with it, and if prices don't come down, at least they'll do something, and they'd be stuck with that problem anyway.
[Woodruff:] But, Ramesh, is there some we were talking with the correspondents earlier. Isn't there some risk in here, because if prices don't move, what do they do next?
[Ramesh Ponuru, "national Review":] Absolutely. I mean, we're now in a position to test this argument that Gore has been making that if we did this, the price would come down. If they don't come down and it doesn't seem likely that this move will bring them down I think he's got a problem on his hands.
[Woodruff:] E.J., if George W. Bush is arguing, as we've been hearing, that this is something that should be saved for a time of national crisis, that nation our security is not at stake. Are voters going to listen to an argument like that? Does that resonate with them?
[Dionne:] Well, you know, it's actually an interesting philosophical argument. It parallels a bunch of other philosophical arguments that got joined this week about what is the role of government. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is a very big government investment to collect a lot of oil for some purpose for the country. And the question is, what purpose? The Republicans say we only do this kind of big government thing if it's about national security, at least in this instance, whereas the Democrats are saying, no, this can serve like a social purpose. They often they almost want to use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve as if it were the federal reserve, where we could use some of this oil to nudge prices a little bit and we can make things better. And the proof will be partly in what happens to supply and the price. But I think in principle, most Americans probably take a pragmatic view, if it helps, they don't mind if the government puts this oil out there.
[Woodruff:] Ramesh, what about the week overall? George Bush has been out there. He's not only been on "Oprah." He's been on "Regis Philbin," the talk show circuit. He's been on the attack. Has he helped himself this week?
[Ponuru:] I think so. I mean, I think it's not necessarily entirely reflected in the polls yet, but I think a lot of Republicans are taking heart. You know, there had been some worrying, a lot of worrying, although interestingly enough not so much in Austin, not really there's never really been signs of panic there. And a lot of Republicans across the country, they're seeing Bush on the attack. They're seeing him get the endorsement of the Fraternal Order of Police, which Clinton got last time around. And they're seeing him every day explain why Gore's plans on prescription drugs and on Social Security are not going to work, and I think that's going to have an effect.
[Woodruff:] Is that is any of this throwing Gore off-stride, E.J.?
[Dionne:] I don't think it's thrown Gore off-stride yet. He threw himself off-stride a little bit with this problem he had with the dog's prescription versus his mother-in-law's prescription.
[Woodruff:] His mother-in-law.
[Dionne:] I think if there's a new subliminal ad, it will have the word dog in it this time. And that was Gore's problem, and I think that's a good warning to Gore, because he can't afford to make a lot of mistakes like that. On the Bush side, Gore has actually forced Bush to run the campaign that Gore wanted him to run, and now we actually have a much more important election, because we're really having a big argument about what's government's role in providing prescription drugs and how should the government do it and should it do it through Medicare or should it do it through some other kind of plan through the private insurance companies. And Social Security privatization? Bush has been very quiet on this very big proposal, and this week he actually came out and defended it.
[Woodruff:] But Ramesh, some Republicans have asked whether George W. Bush can win this election if he's focusing primarily on issues, worthy, though, they may be?
[Ponuru:] Well, sure. I mean, the conventional wisdom has always been the issues favor the Democrats, and so you have to make it a personality contest. But I'm not sure that's entirely true. I don't think that the Bush campaign thinks it's true, either. I think that they've got they think they've got potential winners on issues like tax and Social Security, and I think they think they can make the prescription drug thing boomerang on Gore by making seniors think they're going to have higher premiums to pay, I mean, which is clearly true, and that that the Gore plan would stop medical innovation.
[Dionne:] Actually, it's not clearly true in the sense that this is a subsidized premium for a lot of seniors who can't afford any insurance now, and that's the kind of debate that's going to be joined. But the one area where I disagree is I think the Bush campaign really has, if not panicked, radically changed its strategy, because the Bush campaign really wanted to win this on character. Their whole convention said that they didn't want to fight about issues. They wanted to talk about integrity in the White House and bringing us all together. Now, it's a much sharper debate about issues, and I think in the long run that's good for the country. But I don't think it's a campaign that the Bush folks wanted to run in the first place.
[Woodruff:] All right, gentlemen, we're going to have to leave it there. E.J. Dionne, Ramesh Ponuru, thank you both for coming in on a Friday.
[Dionne:] Good to be with you.
[Woodruff:] See you both soon. Thanks a lot. And there is much more ahead on this edition of INSIDE POLITICS. Still to come
[Joe Lockhart, White House Press Secretary:] Who do you expect would you go to if you were running for office, other than your friends?
[Woodruff:] The first lady's supporters and their overnight stays: Brooks Jackson takes a look at the list. Plus, how are the presidential hopefuls faring on television? A look at coverage and the jokes. And later, taking a cue from the silver screen: the campaign trend that is earning a "Political Play of the Week." We will have more of the day's political news coming up, but now a look at some other top stories. A court in Great Britain today ruled that doctors may separate conjoined twins, despite the parents' objections. The operation means one of the girls will certainly die. ITN's Lawrence McGinty has the story.
[Lawrence Mcginty, Itn Reporter:] Lawyers representing the parents left the court of appeal disappointed that they'd lost and that the operation to separate the twins can now go ahead. They had wanted nature to take its course and God's will to prevail.
[John Kitchingman, Family's Lawyer:] They must now consider whether to take the case to the House of Lords or to the European Court of Human Rights. No decision has yet been made.
[Mcginty:] The officials solicitor, who's acting for the weaker twin, Mary, said he, too, is considering an appeal.
[Laurence Dates, Lawyer For "mary":] This has no happy solution so far as she is concerned. And as I said, I have wanted to make sure that all the arguments that could be advanced on her behalf are considered by the court.
[Mcginty:] This drawing of court photographs shows how Jody and Mary are joined at the lower abdomen. Facing each other they may look similar, but they're not. Mary, the weaker twin, has an enlarged heart that doesn't beat properly. Her lungs are rudimentary and cannot inflate to breathe. Jody has a healthy heart and lungs. Indeed, it's her circulation that's supplying Mary with oxygen, keeping her alive. In court, Lord Justice Ward, the senior judge, says separating the twins would inevitable result in Mary's death. But he was wholly satisfied that was the least detrimental choice. [on camera]: The operation would be doctors coming to Jody's defense and removing the threat of fatal harm to Jody caused by Mary's draining her lifeblood. It would be a killing, but a killing in self- defense. [voice-over]: But to the archbishop of Westminster, who made a submission to the court, today's decision could be a dangerous precedent.
[Cormac Murphy O'connor, Archbishop Of Westminster:] A precedent might be set in English law that might allow an innocent person to be killed or lethally assaulted even in order to save the life of another. If such a precedent has been set, then I would have grave misgivings about this judgment.
[Mcginty:] But leaving the court this evening, Lord Justice Ward told ITN that today's ruling would not be a precedent.
[Lord Justice Ward, Appeal Court Judge:] This is such a unique case, the circumstances are probably never likely to be repeated again.
[Mcginty:] It was, in his own words, an impossible decision to make, but he and two fellow judges had to make it. Lawrence McGinty, ITN, at the Court of Appeal.
[Woodruff:] A warning by computer chipmaker Intel leaves the Nasdaq market grappling with large losses. Intel shares took a dive today after the chipmaker said that its third-quarter revenues would be below expectations. The market did recover slightly, as investors began buying old-line financial and drug stocks. When INSIDE POLITICS returns: Hillary Clinton issues a counter- challenge to her Senate rival on the subject of soft money. The White House today released a list of the first family's overnight guests since Hillary Rodham Clinton unofficially launched her Senate bid last year. The move came in response to questions about whether contributors to Mrs. Clinton's campaign were rewarded with stays at the White House or Camp David. Our Brooks Jackson has been looking at who is on the list and whether they were big donors.
[Brooks Jackson, Cnn Correspondent:] Steven Spielberg made the list. He and his wife Kate Capshaw-Spielberg were recent guests of the Clintons at the White House, according to a list released Friday. And they also gave a total of $30,000 to Hillary Clinton's political committees, since she started running for the Senate, public records show. But the first lady's biggest donor did not make the list. Money manager Jack Dreyfus has not been a recent White House guest, yet he's given $250,000 to her committees. The White House Friday released a list of 361 persons who have been guests at the White House or Camp David since July 1st of last year, when the first lady began her "listening tour" of New York. Most of those on the list gave nothing, but several did, and the White House said that shouldn't be surprising.
[Lockhart:] Who do you expect would you go to when you are running for office other than your friends.
[Jackson:] Among the guests who were also big donors: old friend Erskine Bowles, former White House chief of staff. He and wife Crandall gave $52,000 total. Other big donors who were recent guests: Richard and Lisa Perry, more than $58,000; S. Daniel Abraham and wife, $54,000; Philip Levine: $35,000; Kenneth and Jill Iscol, $33,000; Haim and Cheryl Saban, $32,100. But the vast majority of the first lady's biggest financial supporters were not on the list of recent guests, including the 10 largest donors. And most of those who were guests did not give anything. Former CNN President Rick Kaplan was a guest but gave nothing. Former CBS anchorman Walter Cronkite also was a guest, also gave nothing. And many of the guests who did give were not major contributors, like musician Quincy Jones, who gave $2,000, and comedian Chevy Chase, who also gave $2,000. The White House did not release the date any of the guests stayed, so it's not possible to compare those dates with when donations were given. The campaign manager for Mrs. Clinton's Senate opponent, Rick Lazio, issued a statement saying, quote, "We demand that Mrs. Clinton release the dates. New Yorkers deserve to know if she was there getting to know these big donors or if they were merely renting out these taxpayer-owned monuments like a cheap motel," end quote. The Clinton campaign issued a statement saying, quote, "There has not been any quid pro quo for contributions, and less than 1 percent of the campaign's contributors have stayed overnight," unquote Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, Brooks Jackson, thanks very much, appreciate it. Now another matter involving money and Mrs. Clinton. CNN's Deborah Feyerick has an update on the moves toward banning soft money in the New York Senate race.
[Deborah Feyerick, Cnn Correspondent:] Speaking to a thousand well-heeled suburban women, Hillary Clinton accepted part of Rick Lazio's debate-night challenge, urging her Democratic Party not to buy anymore soft-money radio and television ads.
[Hillary Clinton , New York Senate Candidate:] All it will take to do this is one word from Mr. Lazio: OK. So, how about it Mr. Lazio, OK?
[Feyerick:] Soft money collected by political parties can by donated by anyone in any amount. Four million dollars have been spent on Mrs. Clinton, less than half a million on Lazio. The two sides were close to a deal, then came a sticking point: Lazio wants a total soft money radio and TV ban that includes independent groups like unions.
[Rep. Rick Lazio , New York Senate Candidate:] This is New York's opportunity and my opportunity, and frankly Mrs. Clinton's opportunity, to make a statement about our commitment to campaign finance reform.
[Feyerick:] Clinton's campaign spokeswoman says the talks between the two sides Thursday covered soft money ads only from the major Republican and Democratic parties and not independent groups.
[Hillary Clinton:] The Lazio campaign told my campaign that they didn't expect the labor unions and the truly independent entities, like labor unions or NARAL or the Sierra Club, to be included in this.
[Feyerick:] But a Lazio spokeswoman tells CNN they should be included, and that after Mrs. Clinton pulls all soft money ads. Then they've got a deal. Only once before, in the 1998 Senate campaign of Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold, has a candidate renounced soft money. Feingold's opponent did not. What kind of impact would a ban in the New York race have?
[Matt Keller, Common Cause:] I think the effect it would have would be a longer-term effect, a more positive effect on other campaigns, where people could say, well, you know what? They did it in New York, why can't we do it in Nebraska? Or why can't we do it in California or Texas?
[Feyerick:] Both sides accuse the other of double talk. With six weeks left until voters head to the polls, by the time the two work out the details the election could be over. Deborah Feyerick, CNN, New York.
[Woodruff:] Well Mrs. Clinton decided to launch her Senate bid in the aftermath of the Monica Lewinsky scandal and the president's impeachment. A new book, "The Breach" offers some insight into her state of mind, Mrs. Clinton's, during that during that period, and the turmoil within the administration. The book's authors's, Peter Baker, shares some of what he learned about what was going on inside the White House at that time, beginning with the president's struggle.
[Peter Baker, Author, "the Breach":] In private, he was consumed by this. He was obsessed by this, as anybody might be in the same circumstances. He spent hours thinking about this in private. He fumed about it. He was angry. Aides would find him in the Oval Office sometimes distracted, playing with the old campaign buttons he kept there as a collection. He would watch television late at night and make late-night phone calls to friends and fume about the things that people were saying. So there really were two presidents during this period.
[Erskine Bowles, Former White House Chief Of Staff:] And I thank you from the bottom of my heart.
[Baker:] Erksine Bowles felt devastated and betrayed by the president. He was not only the president's chief of staff, he considered himself a good friend, maybe the best friend the president had in the White House. He walked in the State of Union in the aftermath of the first story about Monica Lewinsky, and he told people, he said, I'm going to be smiling when I walk down the aisle, but inside I'm going to be dying.
[Clinton:] I did not have sexual relations with that woman.
[Baker:] When the president told Erskine the story isn't true, and then to discover seven months later that he had lied, Bowles felt very, very betrayed. He wouldn't work on the damage-control effort. He wanted nothing to do with it. He tried to get out of the White House as soon as he could without piquing Clinton on the way out. But he just couldn't work for him anymore. And his betrayal was really symbolic of the way a lot of the staff felt. Al Gore really very deliberately absented himself from this whole matter to the extent that he really could. This was nothing but trouble for him from any perspective. If he said anything publicly or even privately that created even the slightest bit of distance between him and the president, he would be seen as furthering his own ambitions at the expense of Clinton. If he defended him too strongly, he risked damage with the public, which didn't want to see somebody like Clinton defend. And so there was no good way. And the only way to get through it was to keep out of it as much as possible.
[Gore:] To voice a strong support for my friend the president, and I'm not going to get into anything else. So thank you all very much.
[Baker:] I think for Gore this was quite a devastating moment, because this was endangering not just Clinton but him and everything that the party and the White House had worked for for eight years, seven years. A moment of indiscretion on the part of Clinton and his subsequent attempts to cover it up had thrown all of that into jeopardy. And I think he just thought that it was time for Clinton to act more responsibly and to take into concerns other than his own, to realize that many people were relying on him. So when it came to the impeachment several months later in December of 1998, he walked as the president was watching the vote, and he said, it's not fair what they've done to you. And then he went out on the White House lawn, of course, and said...
[Gore:] ... to a men I believe will be regarded in the history book as one of our greatest presidents.
[Baker:] That line has come back to haunt him. Hillary Clinton's distancing was actually really and genuine and personal. She wasn't talking to the president for an awful long time. She was very hurt by this. They went up to Martha's Vineyard following his grand jury testimony. It was a very, very chilly couple of weeks. And so she kept distance. But it wasn't a political distance, it was a personal distance. And in the end, she politically did come through for him. She made calls, she appeared on the Hill to rally House Democrats on his side. But it was done only after a long period of nursing her own wounds. What I was fascinated was by on the very day the Senate was voting on whether President Clinton should remain in office, Hillary Clinton was at the White House meeting with an aide about her Senate campaign. Literally, her campaign for Senate began the day the trial ended. And that's, of course, appropriate in a way, because, in fact, her popularity, her resurgent position with the American public was born out of her position as a victim, if you will, as much as she hates that.
[Clinton:] He is the right person to be the first president of the 21st century: Al Gore.
[Baker:] If Al Gore wins and if Hillary Clinton wins, President Clinton is going to see that as a vindication for him, a sign the public still stands with him and that the impeachment was nothing but an illegitimate partisan hatchet job. And he hopes that history will see it the same way. And he may be right.
[Woodruff:] That was Peter Baker, the author of a remarkable new book. "The Breach." Just ahead, adding up to the TV hits: the serious and comedic mentions of George W. Bush and Al Gore.
[Gore:] My father was one of the first commissioners of labor in the state of Tennessee. And our family came into public service by that route. And, you know, I still remember the lullabies that I heard as a child. [singing]: Look for the union label. It's just...
[Woodruff:] Vice President Al Gore says that comment to the Teamsters Union on Monday was a joke, one that he says he has told at many labor events over years.
[Gore:] If if somebody didn't get the joke, then I you know, I can't maybe I better tell better jokes then. But that but that was a joke. You know, nobody sings a lullaby to a little baby about union labels. OK?
[Woodruff:] The George W. Bush campaign had questioned Gore's credibility over the song, nothing that the "Union Label" jingle was written in 1975, when Gore was 27 years old. Gore spokesman, Doug Hattaway, had responded to the criticism by telling reporters that Gore was actually referring to a 1901 union song. Hattaway now says that that was an incorrect assumption. Well, joke or not, the union label story made the rounds on the late night talk shows this week. As the campaign progresses, both candidates are likely to find their flubs and foibles turned into monologue material on the late night circuit.
[Begin Video Clip, "the Tonight Show With Jay Leno") Jay Leno:] Oh, Al Gore is in trouble again. You know, we love Al. But I you know, he does tend to exaggerate. He was in Vegas the other day and he told the Teamsters told the Teamsters that his mom used to sing him a song when he was a little kid. [singing]: Look for the union label... You know that song?
[Kevin Eubanks, Band Leader:] Oh, yes, right, right.
[Leno:] He says it's a childhood lullaby his mother would rock him to sleep. [singing]: Look for the union label. The only trouble is, the song was written in 1975, when Al was 27 years old! You know my favorite thing yesterday and all of the politicians do it, it's not just Bush like when Oprah asked him what's his favorite gift to give, he said his favorite gift to give was a kiss to his wife. Oh, shut up. Any guy's been married more than three years, you got a good laugh on this one. Let me tell you, if it's your wife's birthday, and your only gift is a little kiss, well, that kiss is going to have to hold you for a long, long time.
[Begin Video Clip, "the Late Show With David Letterman") David Letterman:] George W. Bush, it looks likes now, he's really going to jump start that George W. Bush presidential campaign. He has shifted into overdrive. He has supercharged that campaign ticket. It looks like he's going to now select Dick Cheney. So, we'll get as his running mate, we'll get some of that Dick Cheney mania, ladies and gentleman Dick Cheney.
[Begin Video Clip, "politically Incorrect With Bill Maher") Bill Maher:] Al Gore urged President Clinton today to tap the strategic petroleum reserve to force down oil prices. And Bush immediately attacked him about this. Bush said the reserves are only used for emergencies, like when he used the Reserves to get out of Vietnam.
[Begin Video Clip, "late Night With Conan O'brien") Conan O'brien:] An article in speaking of politics in this month's "Vanity Fair" speculates that George W. Bush may suffer from Attention Deficit Disorder. That's what they're saying. That is right. Yes, the article also speculates that if Al Gore is elected, we'll all suffer from Attention Deficit Disorder. So I thought...
[Woodruff:] Well, to find out how comedians and members of the news media are dealing with the candidates, I sat down a little while ago with Robert Lichter of the Center for Media and Public Affairs, and Stephen Hess of the Brookings Institution. And I began by asking Lichter about his study of late night talk shows and which politicians are favorite targets.
[Robert Lichter, Center For Media And Public Affairs:] Well, Bill Clinton is the undisputed king of late night comedy. He has gotten more jokes this year than either Gore or Bush Jr. In fact, Bill Clinton just passed the 5,000 mark in the total number of jokes about him since he became president. Nobody else is even a close second.
[Woodruff:] What about among between the two candidates? In fact, you have got a chart we can show here. This is should be showing January of this year through the end of August. And you can tell us a little bit about that.
[Lichter:] George Bush has won the race for the late night talk show host. And since the general election started in September, there have been three times as many jokes about George Bush as Al Gore. So that I am not sure that is a race that he wants to win, but he is well in the lead.
[Woodruff:] And I understand now we were talking just before the interview that just in the first two weeks of September, Bush has been mentioned more than ever.
[Lichter:] Yes, about 70 jokes in two weeks, and just over 20 votes jokes for Al Gore. Of course, it was a funny time for Bush between his off-color remarks into the microphone and mispronouncing subliminal. The late night talk shows hosts loves gaffes. That is what they really go after: gaffs and personal foibles.
[Woodruff:] And they have had some ammunition.
[Lichter:] That's right. And Bush has had plenty to feed them.
[Woodruff:] All right, that is late night television. Now, Steve Hess, you have been looking at the network and evening news shows and PBS. And what are you seeing for this last week?
[Stephen Hess, Brookings Institution:] Well, I'm seeing, as Bob shows the number of jokes going up, I am showing the number of stories about with substance in it going down over the first two weeks. The horse-race stories are going up. So you see a descending line on substantive stories, an ascending line on horse-race stories. Now, of course, part of that relates to the fact that it's a close election. The closer the election, the more horse-race stories you are going to get. And some of it I think relates to the fact that we have become a very poll-dominated news media. Now we track every single day we have a poll. And some, of course, have to do with the peculiarities of a particular election; 1992, of course, was the: "It's the economy, stupid." So that was a substance issue. That was way up. And 1996 wasn't a very close election, Dole versus Clinton, so the horse-race stories were way down. But what is potentially troubling here, Judy, is that usually it's in the first month, September, that you get your policy stories. And then, almost a switch turns and, in October, you get your horse-race stories. So if we are not getting the substance stories now, when are we going to get them?
[Woodruff:] Robert Lichter, from your perspective, is it is this the kind of thing where do the late night talk shows, the daytime talk shows, the Oprahs, the Regis Philbin, where does all that fit in to how the public is learning about these candidate right now?
[Lichter:] Well, there's no question that we are becoming a talk show campaign at this point. The polls show that eight years ago, a quarter of the public said they got news about the candidates from the late night talk shows. This year, a majority of the electorate gets that kind of information. And I think, to some degree, the journalists are driving the candidates into the arms of the talk show hosts literally, in the case of Bush and Oprah with abbreviated sound bites, horse-race- driven coverage. The only place the candidates get a chance to try to show themselves off as human beings who can complete more than about an eight-second sentence on air is in these talk shows.
[Woodruff:] Steve Hess, Robert Lichter, thank you both. Fascinating stuff. And after all the talk about getting the widest possible television audience for the presidential debates, NBC says that it will not carry the first debate, except on the West Coast. The network says it has a contractual obligation to carry a baseball playoff game on October 3, when the first debate is scheduled. It will carry the vice presidential debate and the second presidential debate, but baseball also could prevent its coverage of the final debate on October 17. ABC, CBS, CNN and several other networks will carry all debates. Just ahead, improving on an old campaign tradition. Our Bill Schneider explains. From talk shows to campaign stops, there has been one common thread in the actions of Al Gore and George W. Bush; and that's caught the eye of our Bill Schneider Bill.
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Judy, they used to say, tax, tax, spend, spend, elect, elect. Well, times have changed; and now it's, kiss, kiss, vote, vote, elect, elect. Whoever wins the kissing primary wins, if not the White House, at least the political play of the week.
[Unidentified Female:] I think I'm dreaming.
[Schneider:] ... Very literally.
[Unidentified Female:] Now I really think I'm dreaming.
[Schneider:] They even kiss nonvoters.
[Bush:] This is heaven. All kinds of babies to kiss.
[Schneider:] Remember all those great kisses in the movies? Like this one in "Gone With the Wind"? Or the really hot one in "From Here to Eternity"? What makes for a great movie kiss? We consulted an expert.
[Larry Sutton, Associate Editor, "people" Magazine:] What we found is that it's not the length, it's usually what builds up to it, what leads up to that moment in time.
[Schneider:] Same thing in politics.
[Sutton:] Well, the Al and Tipper kiss was a cinematic moment, they had everything going for it. It was unexpected. You expected a little kiss; you didn't expect a big, boom, plant-one-right-on-the- lips kind of kiss.
[Schneider:] Round one of the kissing primary went to Al Gore. But Gore didn't do so well in round two; the one on "Oprah."
[Oprah Winfrey, Talk Show:] OK no kiss? I was hoping for something like...
[Schneider:] Bush saw an opportunity, and this week he seized it.
[Winfrey:] Thanks for the kiss.
[Bush:] It's my pleasure.
[Schneider:] The commentators did not fail to notice.
[Jay Leno, Host, "the Tonight Show":] What is it with kissing and politicians? You got Bush kissing Oprah, you got Al Gore all over his wife. See, I miss Clinton already, at least he did all his kissing in the privacy of the Oval Office, you know what I'm saying?
[Schneider:] Round two of the kissing primary goes to Bush, who was careful not to take things too far.
[Regis Philbin, Talk Show:] He gave Oprah a kiss, but he wore my shirt and tie.
[Schneider:] Think Bush can score a comeback in the debates next month? There is more than one kind of kiss after all. The Olympics think they have everything. But they don't have competitive kissing. That's reserved for politics, and for the political play of the week.
[Woodruff:] Sure, Bill...
[Schneider:] That's for you.
[Woodruff:] You shouldn't have, Bill.
[Schneider:] Well, it's part of the political tradition.
[Woodruff:] It's a good ad for Hershey's. Thanks a lot. I gave him my cheek, but he didn't take it, all right. Bill Schneider, thanks a lot. That's all for this edition of INSIDE POLITICS. But, of course, you can go on-line all the time at CNN's allpolitics.com. In these weekend programming notes: House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt will be the guest tomorrow on "EVANS, NOVAK, HUNT AND SHIELDS," that's at 5:30 p.m. Eastern. Whitewater independent counsel Robert Ray will be among the guests on "LATE EDITION," that's at noon Eastern on Sunday. Also on "LATE EDITION," Republican vice presidential nominee Dick Cheney. I'm Judy Woodruff, with a kiss. "WORLDVIEW" is next.

[Bernard Shaw, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you, Jan. Presidential candidate Al Gore is in Las Vegas at this hour, addressing a women's health forum at the University of Nevada.
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] ... earlier, and Andre Agassi was part of that conversation, it's always good to see the greatest tennis player ever in history...
[Shaw:] Vice President Al Gore in Las Vegas at the University of Nevada addressing a women's health forum. Now back to Jan Hopkins in New York.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] After a week of bargaining in the Maryland mountains, the coming hours may be telling for the Camp David peace talks. President Clinton is set to leave the negotiations in about 36 hours for an overseas trip, and he's pushing hard for an agreement before he boards Air Force One. CNN's Kelly Wallace begins our coverage.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] The latest photos released from the White House show a solemn-looking Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak talking with President Clinton Sunday night, and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright walking hand- in-hand with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, the only word from the leaders coming from Mr.Clinton himself. In an interview with the "New York Daily News," he says, quote, "There's been some progress, but I can't say I know we'll succeed...It's really hard. It's the hardest thing I've ever seen." Harder, Mr. Clinton says, than trying to resolve differences in Northern Ireland and the Balkans. Both Palestinian and Israeli sources agree with the president's assessment. Israelis say the gaps on the key issues remain wide. Avrum Burg, speaker of the Knesset, spoke with Prime Minister Barak Monday.
[Avrum Burg, Knesset Speaker:] It is very, very difficult. We are not yet touching the hard core of the issues, the symbolic items of the with the potential crisis elements there. And the prime minister is not yet optimistic.
[Wallace:] Palestinians say there's been some progress on issues. Jerusalem remains one of the toughest to resolve. Palestinians want East Jerusalem to be the capital of a future Palestinian state.
[Iyad Sarraj, Palestinian Commission For Citizens' Rights:] Simply no, no Palestinian leader can go back to the Palestinians, to the Arabs and Muslims, and say that, I come back to you without Jerusalem. It's impossible.
[Wallace:] Another issue: the fate of Jewish settlements. These Jewish settlers traveled from the West Bank to rally near the Camp David talks.
[Unidentified Female:] We came here to basically give our prime minister a message that we don't like the business that he's been doing here, deciding to give our homes away.
[Wallace:] The White House is working against its own deadline trying to get an agreement before Mr. Clinton departs Wednesday for Japan to attend a summit of the most industrialized nations.
[Joe Lockhart, White House Press Secretary:] The plan is to complete this process before the president goes.
[Wallace:] But if there is no agreement in the next two days and the president doesn't change his schedule, he will have to make some decisions: whether to leave the leaders and their negotiating teams behind at Camp David or schedule another round of talks. Kelly Wallace, CNN, reporting live from near Camp David, Maryland.
[Phillips:] The peace summit is taking place in a serene mountain setting, but half a world away it's helping generate new political convulsions. Here's CNN's Jerusalem bureau chief Mike Hanna.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Jerusalem Bureau Chief:] Demonstrators in Gaza making their position clear, calling for the release from Israeli custody of Palestinians they regard as political prisoners. This just one of the many issues being discussed by the negotiators at Camp David. Evident in this demonstration, support for Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. But his negotiating partner, Prime Minister Ehud Barak, faced strong opposition in an Israeli protest Sunday night. The organizers of the protest against the Camp David talks say it was the largest demonstration ever held in Israel. There was more opposition to Mr. Barak in the country's Knesset or parliament Monday, where a no-confidence motion was introduced by one member. Many parliamentarians objected to a no-confidence debate taking place while the prime minister was out of the country, and only six people in the 120-seat Knesset voted. However, said some members, the question of no-confidence would again be raised when Mr. Barak returned.
[Yuri Edelstein, Israel B'alyah Party:] The prime minister, in order to strike a deal, needs a strong parliamentarian support. It was possible to organize it. Now I think it's too late. And once he comes back, he'll face a no-confidence vote here.
[Unidentified Male:] The Knesset say it clearly: We don't agree with you.
[Hanna:] The speaker of the Knesset says Israel is now in the eye of the storm.
[Burg:] We are waiting to see what will come out of Camp David. If there will be an agreement, it's a different political setup in Israel. If there won't be an agreement, it's, again, a different political setup in Israel, and everybody now is waiting.
[Hanna:] And while waiting, many Israelis have taken a position in support of or in opposition to the government of Ehud Barak. [on camera]: Regardless of the outcome at Camp David, the prime minister will return to an Israel that is as if not more divided than when he left. Mike Hanna, CNN, Jerusalem.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Chen Shui-bian, elected Taiwan's next president over the weekend, ending a half-century grip on power by Taiwan's Nationalist Party. Mr. Chen, in the past, has come out in favor of Taiwanese independence from China.
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] But the president-elect in the last two days has been softening his stance towards China. Nervousness about tensions with the mainland depressed Taipei's stocks; they closed down two percent, and it could have been worse. The trading relationship between China and Taiwan is crucial for both sides. And for more on that aspect of the story now, we are joined by telephone by CNN's Mike Chinoy in Taipei. Mike, it's good to have you with us. And for starters, there had been a lot of fear that this candidate, having espoused the sort of sovereignty or independence of Taiwan in the past, might invite a strike from China. Does anyone think that that's still likely, given his most recent words on the subject of Taiwanese independence?
[Mike Chinoy, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Deborah, there was a lot of heated rhetoric from Beijing in the run-up to this campaign, threatening military action if Taiwan moved towards independence. The Chinese government clearly trying to frighten voters into rejecting Chen Shui-bian. Now that the voters here have ignored Beijing's threats and voted him into office, the Chinese seem to be moderating their rhetoric; the tone since the election has hardly been friendly, I would call it "terse and icy," but it has been very cautious, the Chinese saying they will watch and study carefully what Mr. Chen says and does. And his pronouncements since the election have been very conciliatory. On Monday, here in Taipei, he called for a peace summit with Beijing, and he said that he would even be willing to discuss the issue of one China; that's the thing that most concerns the government in the mainland, and Beijing has said that if Taiwan moved toward independence, it would attack. Mr. Chen qualified that, however, by saying he would be willing to discuss one China as an issue rather than as a principle. Beijing has always said it wants to establish the one-China principle as the basis for negotiations. But what all of this means is that Chen is trying to reach out, trying to move beyond his traditional support for independence for Taiwan, and the critical question is whether or not, as each side jockeys in the wake of the election, they can find some kind of framework or formula that will allow them to begin talking, and that's going to mean both sides moderating their position. Chen has begun that process, and the question now is whether there will be any reciprocal gestures from Beijing.
[Haffenreffer:] Mike, is there is it your impression that this will likely be and continue to be talking between Taiwan and China alone, or is the U.S. likely to get involved here?
[Chinoy:] The U.S. role in this has been to encourage moderation on both sides. American officials from the unofficial U.S. institute here in Taiwan have been in touch with Mr. Chen. Senior American officials, U.N. Ambassador Richard Holbrooke and others are in Beijing this week. The message on both sides is: cool it and try and get talks under way. The Chinese's government in Beijing, of course, has been very suspicious of the United States during the height of its rhetorical blasts that accuse the U.S. of encouraging Taiwan independence. But in fact, ultimately, this is going to be something that Taiwan and China have to work out, and for both sides, it's very difficult. Mr. Chen has a kind of visceral support for Taiwan independence, and an overwhelming majority of people here, even if they don't favor formal independence, certainly want Taiwan to remain separate from mainland China and certainly don't want to see reunification with the mainland. Now, Taiwan is so much more advanced economically, it's a democracy, and people here say that even though there's a common Chinese heritage, there's very little in common at this stage of the game. So the question is whether they can find a way to bridge the gap enough to talk. Mr. Chen has offered some additional carrots to the Chinese. He's offered to lift restrictions on direct trade and communication across the Taiwan Straits, and he's proposed meetings even before he takes office. And the ball's now, to some degree, back in Beijing's court to see whether the Chinese will find enough of an opening there to respond constructively.
[Marchini:] All right, we know you'll keep us posted. CNN's Mike Chinoy, reporting now from Taipei. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] A researcher based in Lexington, Kentucky says that he's assembled a team that will try to impregnate 200 women somewhere in the world with eggs containing cloned human DNA. A public announcement is scheduled for tomorrow in Washington, but CNN medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen is there already with the details Elizabeth.
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] You know, Donna, this really is case of truth being stranger than fiction. This is news many dreading. Two scientist, one American and one Italian, says that in November, they will impregnate 200 women, with what would be the world's first human clones. Let's look at who these two scientist are. One of them, Dr. Panos Zavos, is A former professor from the University of Kentucky, and the other, who you see on the left there with the white mustache, is Dr. Severino Antionori, and he's Italian. He actually, you might remember him seven years ago, he helped a 62-year-old woman get pregnant. And these scientists say, hey, if we cloned Dolly the Sheep four and a half years ago, that technology can work for human beings as well. And they say that what they are going to do is these here we see Dolly. And they say it worked for Dolly, it can work for people, too. They say they have 200 couples who were unable to conceive on their own. So instead, they will use cloning to help them have children.
[Dr. Panos Zavos, Cloning Researcher:] We are talking about the development of a technology that can an give infertile and childless couple the right to reproduce and have a child, and above all, complete its life cycle. This is a human right, and should not be taken away from people because a group of people have doubts about this development. We have no intentions and I emphasize that we have no intentions to step over dead bodies or deformed babies to accomplish this. We never did in the past, and have no intentions of doing this while we attempt to develop this revolutionary and yet magnificent technology. Thank you.
[Cohen:] Now that's Dr. Panos Zavos, testifying to Congress in March. Now you'll notice that he said, we're not going to have nay dead bodies, no one is going to get hurt here, well, other scientists and bioethicists said, you know what, wherever we've tried to clone animals, first of all, it took many, many tries. It took nearly 300 tries to get Dolly. And on the way, scientist have created many, many deformed animals. And so these bioethicist say it would horrifying to try this in human beings.
[Art Caplan, Univ. Of Pa., Bioethicist:] Put aside whether it's good to be a clone, whether it's odd to be a clone, whether it's strange to be made in someone else's image, the way this science is right now, not working with well in animals, you absolutely don't want to do in people, it's just barbaric human experimentation.
[Cohen:] Now, Dr. Zavos says that they will screen the embryos before they implant them into women, and they Claim that they won't have deformed babies.
[Kelley:] Elizabeth, are these 200 identical clones, or will they be 200 different clones?
[Cohen:] They will be 200 different babies, if all of them are born. The way that it works, these are 200 couples, and they have not been able to have children on their own, they would take DNA from either the mother or father and turn that into a clone. So you would get 200 different babies, each of whom would be a clone of the mother or the father.
[Kelley:] OK, so the clone is that of the mother or the father. What if they needed some help? Would they try to take a clone of somebody else?
[Cohen:] No, because the way the that cloning works is it doesn't really matter if you've been infertile in the past. The way that it works, let's say you were going to, God forbid, clone me, you could just scrape my skin and you would get enough DNA, you would take that DNA, you would put it into a human egg where the DNA has been taken out of that egg, and then that is turned into an embryo. So you have an embryo, that Instead of having DNA from a man and a woman, you would just have my DNA. You would then implant that embryo into a women's uterus. It could be me. It could be any women really; any surrogate could carry that baby. And then you would have a baby Elizabeth Cohen, theoretically, nine months later. Now it's important to notice, you don't snap your fingers and get a clone of me who is 35 years old, you would have a baby who would be 35 years behind me, but would look just like I did as a baby.
[Kelley:] OK, so that's a little bit of how it works, but it sounds like you don't need much to get the DNA that you need.
[Cohen:] No, theoretically, you really don't. I mean, all the cells in our body have the DNA that you need. If you scrape my skin, you would have the DNA that you need.
[Kelley:] Elizabeth Cohen, thanks very much. And stay with CNN for much more on this story. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] It was 14 years ago today that another failed space mission claimed the lives of seven astronauts. Since the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, surviving family members have worked to create an education-oriented memorial to the crew. CNN's space correspondent Miles O'Brien takes us inside a Challenger learning center.
[Unidentified Female:] Space Lab, this is mission control. I have a message for the
[Miles O'brien, Cnn Space Correspondent:] They are 8th-graders...
[Unidentified Female:] Mission Control, this is the Space Lab...
[O'brien:] ... too young to remember, but just the right age to reap the rewards of a mission born in tragedy living on as a tribute to a lost crew.
[June Scobee Rodgers, Founder, Challenger Center:] We couldn't let that mission end in the loss of the Challenger. We all came together and said, let's continue the mission for the Challenger crew, and it continues to this day.
[O'brien:] The students were too intent to notice June Scobee Rodgers watching in the wings. Like a proud mother, she beamed as she saw the simulated space flight unfold.
[Rodgers:] These kids are walking out of here realizing they were a success. They had their own mission and it was a great mission for them. So it works.
[O'brien:] June was a new widow when it all began. Her husband, Dick, was commander of the Space Shuttle Challenger on January 28th, 1986. He and six others, including teacher Christa McAullife, perished in the explosion little more than a minute after launch.
[Unidentified Male:] Challenger, go with throttle up.
[O'brien:] With $1 million in seed money, June, a classroom teacher herself, along with the other surviving relatives of the crew began the Challenger Learning Centers, a place for middle-school children to role-play a mission as astronauts and controllers, learning about math, science and teamwork, even though it doesn't feel like learning. Was this a lot of fun?
[Unidentified Female:] Oh, I had a lot of fun doing this. I would come to this center anytime.
[O'brien:] Really?
[Unidentified Female:] This is a great center.
[O'brien:] Right now, there are 38 challenger centers in the U.S., Canada and England, and there are plans in the works to launch another dozen by the end of next year. The idea is a big success, but when June Scobee Rodgers first embarked on this challenge, that was by no means a foregone conclusion.
[Rodgers:] No, there were few times when I wanted to turn away and say, I can't do this, especially when I walked into a room full of media ready to hear the story about what Challenger Center was going to be. After a while with the Challenger Center, I was afraid to turn away because I'd be a failure, always be labeled the wife who was a failure.
[O'brien:] But now there's no chance of that. Publicly and privately June has found a way to succeed. She is happily remarried to retired Army General Don Rodgers and they live comfortably in Chattanooga. So much in her life is good it helps her endure the heartache that lurks beneath.
[Rodgers:] There is always that morning when you wake up on the 28th where you think about that tremendous loss. I am so blessed, though, because I've had a beautiful life since then. So those are hard days, and my children and I always talk to each other and I often talk to the other families, but then we go on and we celebrate how far we've come.
[O'brien:] How far they have come and who knows how far these children will go. Miles O'Brien, CNN, Chattanooga, Tennessee.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Dick Cheney and Joe Lieberman sparred less night on energy policy, abortion, taxes, Medicare and Social Security. But the only debate of the campaign between the Republican and Democratic vice presidential candidates was rather mannerly, even congenial. And the two running mates won praise for that. One U.S. senator telling CNN the winner tonight was the American public.
[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Richard Stengel is the managing editor of Time.com, the "Time" magazine Internet site. And earlier this year, Stengel was a senior adviser for presidential candidate Bill Bradley. And he joins us now from New York with his analysis of the vice presidential debate. Mr. Stengel, these guys were so polite to one another, you got the impression that they might even go out to dinner together. You think that was all pre-orchestrated or genuine?
[Richard Stengel, Managing Editor, Time.com:] Well, I think they knew that it wasn't going to be to either of them to be critical. You know, if it was a movie if it was a high school movie, I was cast Joe Lieberman as your favorite high school teacher and Dick Cheney as the stern but kindly principal. And that's certainly the way they behaved with each other.
[Hall:] Well, they definitely got into issues. Let's take a look at some of those issues right now that are important to the American voting public. The issue of abortion, and let's hear what the two candidates had to say about that.
[Dick Cheney , Vice Presidential Candidate:] Gov. Bush and I have emphasized, while we clearly are both pro-life, that is what we believe, that we want to look for ways to try to reduce the incidence of abortion in our society. Many on the pro-choice side have said exactly the same thing. Even Bill Clinton, who has been a supporter of abortion rights, has advocated reducing abortion to make it as rare as possible.
[Sen. Joe Lieberman , Vice Presidential Candidate:] But let me say, more generally, that the significant difference here on this issue is that Al Gore and I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose, and our opponents will not. We know that this is a difficult, personal, moral, medical issue, but that is exactly why it ought to be left under our law to a woman, her doctor and her God.
[Hall:] Richard, what about their responses?
[Stengel:] Well, you know, Andria, the vice president's job is to echo the main guy, and that's basically what they're doing. I mean, they took the standard textbook Democratic and Republican positions, you know, that the Democrat is for a woman's right to choose and the Republican is basically against abortion. So I think they were trying to put it the best face on it, but basically they are echoing the positions of their party and their principles.
[Hall:] Of course, yesterday, the big news out of Yugoslavia affected their opinions. Let's see what they had to say about that.
[Cheney:] With respect to how this process has been managed most recently, we want to do everything we can to support Mr. Milosevic's departure. Certainly, though, that would not involve committing U.S. troops.
[Lieberman:] I'm very proud on this night, as it appears that Milosevic is about or has fallen, of the leadership role the United States played in the effort to stop his aggression and genocide in Bosnia and Kosovo.
[Hall:] Of course, the news out of Yugoslavia today that he has, indeed, according to recognition by Russian leaders. What do you think about their responses?
[Stengel:] You know, it's a win-win situation for both of them. In a way, Dick Cheney was both a good advocate for George W. Bush. He was also an excellent advocate for George Bush, President Bush, that is, because he in effect said that George Bush, the president, set the table for what happened in Eastern Europe. But it's good news for both of them and Dick Cheney and George W. Bush were supportive of the administration of Kosovo. It's a win-win.
[Hall:] So common ground there. And now, closer to home, the issue of Social Security.
[Cheney:] Well, the reform we would like to offer is to allow our young people to begin to take a portion of the payroll tax, 2 percent of it, and invest it in a personal retirement.
[Lieberman:] Al and I have committed to putting that Social Security surplus in a lockbox, not touching it, and that's what allows us to keep Social Security solvent to 2054. Our opponents have an idea for privatizing Social Security that will jeopardize Social Security payments to recipients.
[Hall:] Richard?
[Stengel:] Again, it is the regular boilerplate. I still wonder, by the way, what a lockbox is; that sound like something from the last century. But no, they were you know, Dick Cheney is saying, look, he's appealing to the so-called wired workers, young people who think Social Security won't be there for them, and they want to say: Look, you'll get a bigger rate of return in the market. You've already benefited from the market. And Joe Lieberman is still there's a little bit of a Mediscare thing going on there; he's appealing to seniors, to classic Democratic voters and saying: Look, nothing is going to change. It will be there for you. Don't worry.
[Hall:] And Richard, just a yes or a no, do you think the debate changed anyone's mind on how they were going to vote?
[Stengel:] No.
[Hall:] Richard Stengel, OK, from Time.com, thanks for joining us on EARLY ADDITION.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] CNN correspondent Jeanne Meserve has spent the last several hours at Federal Emergency Management Agency. These are the people who, Jeanne, are dealing all the time with disasters. Bring us up to date on what is going on there now.
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Correspondent:] Judy. the National Inter agency Emergency Operation Center is up and running here as it is often at times of disaster. We went up and looked at that a couple of hours ago. There are about 40 people up there. They represent 28 different government agencies and offices, also the Red Cross and Salvation Army. What they do is try to figure out what local and state officials need to help them deal with a disaster situation and they have already made some moves today. They have dispatched urban search and rescue task forces. Four have been sent to the Pentagon, four are en route to New York City. Another four have been activated, three of those in California, one in Missouri. The last time I was able to speak to an official here they were trying to figure out how to get them to New York City. Apparently it was going to take a military airlift because of course there is no commercial air traffic at this time. Each of those task forces consists of 62 people, and about 60,000 pounds of equipment, that is medical gear, tools, dogs, food. The idea is they are supposed to be able to be self-sufficient for 72 hours at a stretch. They provide a wide array of services. They will do search and rescue. They can shut off utilizes. They can check the structural integrity of buildings. There are a total of 28 of these task forces around the country. We have been told that the other 16 have been out on alert status, but they have not yet been activated and given orders to move. In addition, disaster mortuary affairs teams, four of them have been sent to New York City, three to the Pentagon. There are 30 people on each of these teams. They help take care of the bodies after they have been extricated from the wreckage. Also there are disaster medical assistant teams four to New York, three to the Pentagon, 35 people on each of those teams. Those would be doctors, nurses and paramedics to help of course with the medical situation. I should mention that the director of this agency, Joe Allbaugh, was not in Washington when these events took place. He was at Montana at a conference of the National Emergency Managers Conference. This is all the state emergency directors from around the country. He of course immediately made moves to get back to Washington. We believe he is now on his way here. Judy, back to you.
[Woodruff:] All right, Jeanne Meserve, telling us about the teams of experienced people who are being deployed from FEMA, that is the nickname for the Federal Emergency Management Agency headquartered here in Washington. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] The United States government still doesn't know if Osama bin Laden is dead or alive. But his half brother says bin Laden is alive and well. We get more on the alleged terrorist mastermind and his wealthy Saudi family from our own David Ensor.
[David Ensor, Cnn National Security Correspondent:] Osama bin Laden's wealthy family, a powerful Saudi dynasty, officially cut him off and disinherited him years ago. But the ties of blood are not so easily severed. Sheikh Ahmad Mohammed, son of the same mother, grew up admiring his big brother Osama.
[Ahmad Mohammed, Bin Laden's Half Brother:] He is my brother, I know him. I lived with him for years. I know how much he fears God.
[Ensor:] Sheikh Ahmad told CNN's Rula Amin the family has its own information that Osama bin Laden is still alive, or was as of three weeks ago. He says he does not believe Osama could be behind the attacks of September 11th.
[Mohammed:] I can't say. The way I know him, no way. He wouldn't.
[Ensor:] Of course, the way Sheikh Ahmad and his mother see Osama bin Laden is in stark contrast to the way most of the world does.
[Peter Bergen, Author, "holy War Inc.":] There's overwhelming evidence to show that bin Laden was behind the September 11th attacks. If his family chooses not to believe that, that's just how families operate.
[Ensor:] Ahmad Mohammed and his mother last saw Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan at the wedding in January of 2001 of one of Osama's sons.
[Mohammed:] He loved his family and friends' gatherings. He especially adores his mother. First comes God and then his mother.
[Ensor:] At the wedding, Sheikh Ahmad says his brother Osama told him that it was not true, as widely reported, that he had kidney disease, requiring kidney dialysis to live. The bin Laden family officially denounced Osama in the mid 90's, when he attacked the Saudi royal family for allying itself with the U.S. against Iraq. But none of his blood relatives have been on television with an interview until now. And Ahmad Mohammed knows him far better than most. A look at the family tree helps explain why. The patriarch, Mohammed Bin Laden, had at least 11 wives; four at a time under Muslim law. But he kept divorcing and remarrying, fathering well over 50 children. Osama bin Laden's mother is Hamida Ganem. Some know her as Alia. A Syrian, she is now married to a man named Mohammed al- Attas. First, Hamida had Mohammed Bin Laden's son, Osama, then she married al-Attas and they had four children, including Ahmad Mohammed. Osama and his four half siblings grew up together in their mother's house.
[Rula Amin, Cnn Correspondent:] Did you go to the movies?
[Mohammed:] When we were very young when we used to go to Beirut, Osama was 12. He used to take us to the movies, but then that was the end of it. Since he turned 14, he stopped going to the movies.
[Amin:] What movies did you see?
[Mohammed:] Cowboy, karate movies.
[Ensor:] At 14, Osama became too religious, his brother says, to go to movies anymore. Osama bin Laden has been quoted as saying his father never married his mother. In his words, that it was "not a Koranic union." Such temporary unions with concubines were common in those days for wealthy Saudis, say Syrian and Saudi observers.
[Ali Al-ahmed, Saudi Institute:] She was not a wife. She was a not a wife. She was not married to father of Mohammed bin Laden.
[Unidentified Male:] But the father, nonetheless, accepted him as his son?
[Al-ahmed:] Yes yes, he did accept him as a son.
[Ensor:] Osama bin Laden was promised his share of his father's millions, but saw little of the patriarch, who died when he was 11 years old. As a result, his mother shaped him more than anyone.
[Dr. Adil Najam, Boston University:] The mother was supposed to be more liberal than many of the other bin Laden wives. So it is surprising how he turned out.
[Mohammed:] It's my mother who is worried most, God be with her. She is the most worried about him. Twenty- four hours she is worried about him, concerned for him. She is the only one who is constantly thinking of him more than any of us.
[Amin:] She watches the news?
[Mohammed:] She's an expert now, more than any media person. She watches all the news on all the different TV channels. We get her all the newspapers, the interviews. She's always discussing it.
[Ensor:] The bin Ladens' $5 billion company was founded by Mohammed bin Laden, here with then Saudi King Faisal. He made a fortune expanding the grand mosques in Mecca and Medina and building roads and palaces for the Saudi royal family. The bin Laden Group, now headed by Bakr bin Laden on the right, has had partnerships with Motorola and General Electric. Family members own apartments in this upscale Boston building. They've given millions to Harvard University for a chair in Islamic studies. When the planes hit the twin towers, it was also a disaster for the bin Ladens. Two dozen of them were living in the U.S., according to a family spokesman. For their own safety, the Saudi government quickly arranged for a charter jet, out of Boston's Logan Airport, to spirit them out of the country.
[Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, Saudi Ambassador To U.s:] His majesty felt it's not fair for those innocent people to be subjected to any harm. On the other hand, we understood the high emotions. So with coordination with the FBI, we got them all out.
[Ensor:] Since then, the bin Laden family has agonized over whether or not to publicly denounce their brother's activities.
[Bergen:] I think you just have to understand the nature of Saudi society. This is a very private family, it is a very closed society. Information is very hard to get hold of. And their natural tendency is basically to sort of stonewall.
[Najam:] Osama has actually attacked the single biggest asset that the family has. The single biggest asset of the family was, until now, their name, bin Laden. Because that was a name that would open doors. That was a name that spelled power. And, unfortunately, now that is a name that spells terror.
[Ensor:] Though Ahmad Mohammed says he cannot believe his brother Osama committed the crimes of September 11th, he does want Americans to know he does not approve of him.
[Mahammed:] What happened was terrible. Any Muslim wouldn't accept this. In our religion, this is not permitted.
[Ensor:] This interview, in which a brother speaks out for Osama bin Laden is not something, we are told, that the bin Laden family or company wanted to happen. And it may increase the pressure on a powerful dynasty to speak out against the terrorist in their midst. David Ensor, CNN, Washington.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Two Palestinians died following fresh clashes with Israeli forces in the West Bank and Gaza Tuesday, bringing the total number of casualties to more than 135. CNN's Jerrold Kessel reports that hopes of peace are fading as the violence continues.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] No let-up in the clashes, this one in Hebron on the West Bank. The Israeli army says it's gearing up for prolonged confrontations and hardening positions on both sides on how to break the cycle of violence.
[Saeb Erekat, Chief Palestinians Negotiator:] It's independence and freedom we're seeking from them. We want to be equal partners. We want to be equal neighbors.
[Gilead Sher, Chief Israeli Negotiator:] There is an agreement within reach, but it won't be a dictated agreement to Israel. It won't be agreement that is achieved under fire.
[Kessel:] With the confrontation coming as close as this neighborhood on Jerusalem's southeastern outskirts, Israelis are having difficulty adjusting. Not long ago, a peace settlement with the Palestinians was said to be in sight. Now, they're told, the future is full of conflict.
[Chemi Shalev, Israeli Political Analyst:] Most people have sort of given up hope on the peace process, on the one hand, and don't believe in a solution by force, on the other hand. So we have now this great centrist bloc which doesn't really know what to do with itself.
[Kessel:] Against the backdrop of that uncertainty, Israeli political uncertainty, Prime Minister Ehud Barak still seeking to shore up his position by co-opting the right-wing opposition under Ariel Sharon. But it's a struggle. Mr. Sharon and his fellow Likud leaders are holding out for the right to veto any new direction Mr. Barak might seek either on the battleground or at the negotiating table.
[Sylvan Shalom, Likud Knesset Member:] We will not let him play with us. We will do everything to knock him down if the negotiations will not succeed. It's not that we're going there to save the Barak regime. We will join only if it will be an emergency.
[Kessel:] Mr. Barak pays little heed to critics who say Mr. Sharon's inclusion would be the death knell for the peace process. He insists this is an emergency. "We cannot force the Palestinians to make agreements with us," the Israeli leader says. "But that forces us to stand forcefully for our position, and to stand together," he adds. [on camera]: Beyond the violence and the political maneuvering, two looming deadlines. Next Monday, the Israeli Knesset reassembles to determine the fate of Ehud Barak's minority government. And two weeks after that, on November 15th, the mini-Palestinian parliament is slated to decide on a long-delayed declaration of a Palestinian independent state. Jerrold Kessel, CNN, Jerusalem.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] Now to the cover story of "George Magazine." Joining me is Ann Louise Bardach, special correspondent for "George." She's been in contact with people closely connected to Juan Miguel Gonzalez. She has interviewed Cuban President Fidel Castro, and she has traced the lives of the others on that ill-fated boat with Elian Gonzalez. And, Ms. Bardach, nice to have you with us. There were two other survivors on that boat. What's happened to them?
[Ann Louise Bardach, Special Correspondent, "george Magazine":] They're living in Hialeah and they both have jobs at Metro Ford.
[Randall:] Who were they?
[Bardach:] They were actually more or less strangers on the boat. They knew Elian's mother's boyfriend, but not the other people because on the boat was basically two extended families.
[Randall:] Tell us what your research turned up vis-a-vis the rallying cry by the Miami relatives that Elian's mother came to this country in a quest for freedom, therefore Elian should be able to stay in the United States.
[Bardach:] Well, according to friends and family that were the closest to Elizabeth, she was pretty apolitical and she was pretty much a small-town girl who didn't have much curiosity. She didn't even travel much in Cuba. She came to the states for one reason only, and that's to be with her boyfriend Lazaro who came back from Miami to get her. But he was no longer able to live in Cuba because he was always in trouble with the law. He had a lot of problems in Cuba. In order for her to be with him, she had to be with him in Miami. Otherwise, they say she never would have left. And she was unable to leave her son Elian because this is a child she had had seven miscarriages previously and just was very bonded with the child.
[Randall:] So you're saying this was not the political statement that the Miami relatives would have people believe?
[Bardach:] Well, her best friend said and it's in the story is those were not her sentiments, those were not her ideals, she was never a dissident. In fact, Elizabeth Brotens Rodriguez was, in fact had a job in the Communist Party in Cardenas, was pretty active. She represented her union of workers in the local Communist Party.
[Randall:] With whom did Elian Gonzalez live in Cuba?
[Bardach:] Most of the time with his father because Juan Miguel and his new wife and Elian's brother had a large place on Calle Cocilla. And Elizabeth and her boyfriend really, basically, had one room. And so, most of the time, he was with the father, but also of course with his mother and other relatives, because in Cuba you also live with grandparents, and the extended family is very important.
[Randall:] What kind of family situation would this boy have on his return to Cuba?
[Bardach:] Well, they have a pretty nice house by Cuban standards, Juan Miguel and his wife, Narsy. I mean, Elian has his own bedroom. It's actually air-conditioned, which is pretty rare. He has his brother. He will go back to his schoolhouse which has around, I guess, 25 students in the class. He will be in school, and he'll probably, you know, eventually become a Young Pioneer which is the juvenile level of the Communist Party.
[Randall:] You are well aware of the charges, again, by the Miami relatives and others, I must say, that once this boy goes to Cuba, assuming he returns to his native land, that he'll be in line for some kind of re-indoctrination into the communist way of life. Is there anything to that?
[Bardach:] Well, both sides are arguing and spinning. I mean, Juan Miguel and the Cuban side is arguing he's been brainwashed for the last five months, that when he arrived in Miami he asked to speak to his father and gave his father's name and number. And we saw after four months he's on video saying, I don't want to go back to Cuba. So they're arguing he's been brainwashed in Miami. Now, the Miami relatives will say that the father will brainwash him against them. Well, the father feels that his own son was turned against him. And one thing that is certain is, by all sides, everybody agreed that Juan Miguel was a devoted, doting dad.
[Randall:] In 15 seconds, do you see anything positive in the way of U.S.-Cuban relations coming out of this situation?
[Bardach:] I do. I think everybody is going to take a good look at this, and I think that our ideas of the black and white situation, that Cuba is this Stalinist gulog and that Miami is the land of freedom. I think we're going to start seeing much more gray about both of those areas, and we're going to see that, you know, the freedom of speech is questionable in both places, and that, in some ways, Miami and Havana are mirror universes of each other.
[Randall:] Ann Louise Bardach of "George Magazine," thanks very much. Thanks for coming in.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Well, just a few moments ago, the Bank of Japan decided to raise interest rates for the very first time in 10 years.
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Andrew Stevens has been following the story from our studios in Hong Kong, and joins us now live. Hello, Andrew.
[Andrew Stevens, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Deborah. Well, certainly, a day of high drama in Japan today. And the Bank of Japan winning a very high stakes game against the government over whether or not to raise interest rates. The Bank of Japan, as we know, about 20 minutes ago, half an hour ago, said they would raise the overnight call rate by about 25 basis points. The markets had been factoring this sort of rise in. But it certainly is a major victory for the Bank of Japan Governor Hayami, who has been saying quite stridently for the past three or four weeks, that it is time to end this interest rate policy, zero interest rate policy. The it was imposed in February last year because it reflected the emergency conditions in the economy. That has since improved quite dramatically. If I can just quote to you a line from the text from the Bank of Japan saying over the past 1 12 years, Japan's economy has "substantially improved." And one of the key points here is that the Bank of Japan had been very worried about deflation. They're saying that the signs of deflation are now receding and this is a very key reason why they can now raise interest rates, saying at present, Japan's economy, I'm quoting this: "Japan's economy is showing clearer signs of recovery and that this gradual upturn, which is led by business fixed investment, is likely to continue. And under the circumstances, the downward pressure on prices, stemming from weak demand, has markedly receded.? So the Bank of Japan being quite bullish, if you like, on the fact that deflation is moving out of the system, that there is no longer an emergency in the Japanese economy, and therefore it's time to raise rates against, very much, the wishes of the government. As I said, in fact, just before that announcement came out, there was word that the government had actually asked the Bank of Japan to delay that decision for a month, which would have effectively meant leaving rates unchanged for the month. The government has been saying all along, it's just too early. They just don't know whether the economy can sustain it. So Governor Hayami out on a limb, but certainly confident in his assessment so far.
[Haffenreffer:] Andrew, the reviews on the wire services, so far, have been somewhat mixed. I guess the fear being here, that this early an interest rate increase could hamper the momentum that the Japanese economy has begun to build. Is that a fear that you're hearing about? Obviously, the timing of this is what is important.
[Stevens:] Indeed, David, well, certainly that's what the government has been playing on. And speaking to individual economists, you do get a very mixed reaction. Some saying it's better to play it safe, the fact that you could leave it another month to get a clearer picture of the economy. Some very big numbers coming out. I think it's on September the eight, which is the second quarter GDP numbers, which will give, obviously, a very good snapshot of what's happening in the economy. So there is a certain amount of fear, but, as I was saying before, it's a deflationary story in it was really an emergency situation which brought the Bank of Japan to impose that policy in February last year. And those emergency conditions no longer exist. And if you speak to most economists, they would agree with that. Now the question is, is the economy strong enough to sustain it? And if you look at the Economic Planning Agency today, which is a government economic think-tank, if you like, they were actually saying that, as far as the economy is concerned, yes, it could sustain it. It's a sentiment story. If the markets take it negatively, if there's a drop in sentiment, that is where the rub is going to be, that is where you could see the economy start spiraling down again.
[Marchini:] Even though this action was somewhat expected, Andrew, Japanese stocks closed up nearly one percent. How are people thinking this rate hike is likely to effect capital flows into or out of Japan and into or out of the United States?
[Stevens:] Well, to be honest, Deborah, I mean, it has been factored in. I think what we have seen over the past two weeks, this ongoing spat between the Bank of Japan and the government, which was also over an independence issue as well. So both were backed into a corner. The Bank of Japan had the problem that if it didn't raise interest rates, that its independence from the or the credibility of its independence would be actually tarnished. So the markets have been factoring a rate rise in. Most people have been expecting 25 basis points. As you said, the Nikkei was up about one percent today. So, as far as capital flows go, not expected to be a lot of damage done there. Also important to point out that the Bank of Japan has been making it quite clear that this really is a one-off step, moving it away from these emergency conditions I keep talking about. It's not the start of an interest rate cycle as yet, or so far that we can see. And certainly there would need to be quite a lot more evidence to suggest that the economy is strengthening quite rapidly.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, Andrew Stevens, in our bureau in Hong Kong, we'll check back in with you a little bit later on this morning, talk a little more about this breaking news story.

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] There is new violence to report in the Middle East. An Israeli helicopter fired missiles at a van today in the West Bank, killing a senior member of Fatah, the political party associated with Palestinian Authority president Yasser Arafat. Three other people in the van were injured. Two women passersby were also killed. The Israeli defense forces says the attack was in response to recent ones by Palestinians against a site called Rachel's Tomb. Orthodox Jews today protested an Israeli military ban on an annual prayer gathering there. All of this as President Clinton prepares to meet with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat at the White House, where our Major Garrett is standing by Major.
[Major Garrett, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, good day to you, Frank. This attack does change the tone and substance of this meeting which is about to convene here at the White House within the hour. U.S. officials concede that this will further inflame Israeli and Palestinian tensions and also reinvigorate what they expect to be a very strong push from Mr. Arafat for the U.S. to support a so-called international buffer zone force to separate the Israeli defense forces from the Palestinians in the occupied territories. The U.S. has made clear it has no interest in endorsing such a concept, which will today's discussions all the more difficult. The top agenda item for the president is to encourage Mr. Arafat to do everything to he can to reduce violence, to encourage him not to respond to this latest attack and to try to implement all of the understands reached at Sharm el-Sheikh in mid-October Frank.
[Sesno:] All right, Major, thanks very much.

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] The death toll in Tuesday's crash of an Air France Concorde has risen to 114, with the news a short time ago that a fifth body has been found in the wreckage of a hotel damaged when the plane plowed into it. Investigators looking for a cause of the disaster, meanwhile, are now narrowing their focus. CNN's Tom Mintier has the story.
[Tom Mintier, Cnn Correspondent:] There are so many questions and few answers. French investigators looking into the crash of Air France Concorde flight 4590 have issued their first report, a report that seems to direct the focus on the ill-fated Concorde's tires and left-side engines. This video, taken by an amateur photographer, clearly shows the left side of the Concorde moments before impact. Fire is visible not only from the engines but forward, near the fuel cells in the wing of the plane. It is possible a tire may have ruptured the fuel tanks when it blew out on takeoff. American Bill Lightfoot knows all too well what may have happened. He was aboard an Air France Concorde flight in 1979. A tire blew and sent debris through the wing that ruptured the fuel tanks.
[Bill Lightfoot, Concorde Passenger In 1979:] It was a ragged hole, and there were sort of a air-equipped or stainless steel hoses pushing us, protruding up, things coming out of the wing, and lots of fluid coming out.
[Mintier:] That fluid was highly-explosive jet fuel. In this photograph of the Concorde in Paris, you can see the plume of flame behind the aircraft. Bill Lightfoot knows a bit about aviation. He's a vice president at General Dynamics. When he flew the Concorde, he was an aircraft consultant. At first, the flight crew ignored his concerns that something was wrong, until he confronted the co-pilot and held his head to the window for a look.
[Lightfoot:] He got very excited. He says, "mon dieu," and turned sort of ashen.
[Mintier:] In French, "mon dieu" means, "oh god!" While it may be too early in the investigation to fix blame, French investigators have already focused on the tires. Their first report indicates that the tire debris was found on the runway and along the path leading to the crash site. [on camera]: Air France has suspended its Concorde flights until further notice. British Airways, the only other airline flying the Concorde, resumed flights the day after the accident here. The final results of this investigation could determine whether the Concorde is still safe to fly on, or for that matter, even fly. Tom Mintier, CNN, Paris.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] The president and the first lady, Laura Bush, have just arrived at this event that will draw attention to the plight of Afghan women and Afghan children expected to sign the Afghan Women and Children Relief Act of 2001. Mr. Bush there at the National Museum of Women in the Arts. We will shall listen for both of the first couple. A quick dip in now, to hear what's happening in Washington.
[Ferita," Afghan Exile:] ... my children ask me when they will see their father again. Today, I cannot tell them. I hope to be reunited with my family in our homeland so that my children can have a different kind of future, the same kind of future that all people on this earth want for their children. I have two boys. My husband and I have taught them that women are equal, and I want them to grow up in a country that treats us that way. After 25 years of suffering and sacrifice, my people finally have international attention and hope for the future. I have hope because of the legislation being signed today. I also have hope because of the talks last week in Bonn and the place that women are taking in our new government. Now, we need a humanitarian task force that monitors and supports the rebuilding of Afghanistan. I ask the American people to remember my voice and my story and the millions of women I represent. Together, we can restore women's full participation, so that women can work side-by-side with our Afghan brothers in rebuilding our country and giving our children a different kind of tomorrow. No one has done more to give rise to our dreams than the first lady, Mrs. Bush. Two weeks ago, Mrs. Bush met with a group of us Afghan women who were in town with the Vital Voices leadership training program. She listened to our stories with compassion, as mother, as a woman, and she told us she would support us and our families. I want to thank you, Mrs. Bush, for your radio address about the plight of Afghan women. When you spoke, the world listened. It is my great honor to introduce the first lady of the United States, Mrs. Laura Bush.
[Laura Bush:] Thank you very much and thank you for your beautiful words.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Thank you all. Thank you. For several years, the people of Afghanistan have suffered under one of the most brutal regimes brutal regimes in modern history, a regime allied with terrorists and a regime at war with women. Thanks to our military and our allies and the brave fighters of Afghanistan, the Taliban regime is coming to an end.
[Hemmer:] Clearly, this has been an issue for the White House since the very beginning of this conflict, trying to draw attention to the plight of women in Afghanistan, and the children. That is why the two-pronged approach one military, one humanitarian was set out at the very beginning of this conflict. The president at this point will sign into law a relief act for Afghan women and children. He made mention of the U.S. commitment long term, saying they have learned the mistakes of the past and quote "will not leave until the mission is complete." He also talked about the new government ushered in in about ten days time; December 22 is the date Hamid Karzai will take control in Kabul. The president moving some youngsters out of the way there. We will see him sign that act into law. Certainly, some of the words we've heard for many weeks now: Strongly rejecting the Taliban way, he says, strongly rejecting their treatment of women and children; their attitude is wrong, for any religion their attitude wrong for any culture. Such the words went today for the president. The first lady spoke before him, and we hear from a leading Afghan woman, there in Washington, with the introduction of the first couple. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] Years of war in Afghanistan have hurt that country's most innocent, the children. Hundreds of thousands are living without homes, without parents. CNN's John Vause visits an orphanage in Kabul, where the young still live in harsh conditions.
[John Vause, Cnn Correspondent:] In many way, these children are the poorest of Afghans, just some of the 1 million orphans in the country who live in appalling conditions. Here at the Tahir Masqan Orphanage, one of two in Kabul, the toilets and showers don't work, the children use a bathing center once a week. The main meal of the day, potatoes and beans. It's been that way for months. "For about five or six months, the children haven't eaten fruit," says Mohammed Zahef Fazil, the director of the orphanage. "The children have many dietary problems." They sleep 12 to a room, with nothing more than a thin blanket against the winter chill, and it will become even colder here in the coming weeks. There is no real medical care, either physical or emotional to deal with the years of trauma. Many of these children, though, aren't even orphans, sent away by their families because the conditions here are often better than at home. Baha Wain is 13 years old. His six sisters and two younger brothers still live with their mother. Still these children seem surprisingly happy, like eight-year-old Shama Hamod who says he wants for nothing, possibly because he knows no better. He's been an orphan almost all his short life. "A bomb was dropped on our house many years ago" he told me. "My mother and father were killed." After being told of the hardships of these children, Hamid Karzai visited the al-Wadin Orphanage, the children from Tahir Masqan were brought over, crammed onto two old trucks for a chance to see the new interim leader face-to-face. Karzai promised these children more food and warm clothes for winter. [on camera]: It may not seem like much, but like almost everything else that Hamid Karzai has promised, there's little he can do without international aid, and if it doesn't come, perhaps the hardest thing he must do is explain why to these children. John Vause, CNN, Kabul.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] We turn our attention now to the Enron investigation and the apparent suicide of a former Enron executive. For more on that, we go to Houston, Texas, and CNN's Fred Katayama hi there, Fred.
[Fred Katayama, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi there, Fredricka. Well, police in Sugarland, Texas, just outside of Houston where John Baxter lived, are combing through the suicide note that he left behind. Baxter was formerly the vice chairman of Enron, and he was found dead 2:30 Wednesday morning with a single gunshot wound to the head. A 38- caliber revolver was found nearby. Police are not revealing where they found the suicide note or the contents just yet. The body has been delivered to the Medical Examiner's office, and police hope to hear back from the examiner the results of the autopsy in a few days' time. Now, Baxter's name came up in the memo left behind by the whistleblower, Sherry Watkins. Watkins had said that John Baxter has questioned the accounting practices of Enron with its then president. And so he is seen as a potential whistleblower. Friends of Baxter, whom I spoke to, described him as having been rather disappointed, even depressed over the past few days. Some people speculating he has suffered a lot of stress, because he has been named in some of the shareholder lawsuits out there, and congressional investigators had been trying to talk to him. Over in Washington, the White House says it will review a set of federal contracts signed between signed by Arthur Andersen and Enron. There are more than 100 such contracts valued at about $60 million. The head of the Office of Management and Budget, Mitch Daniels, initiated the probe into those federal contracts. Now, there are a lot of losers when we're talking about Enron, the employees were fired, the shareholders who lost billions of dollars. But as for the employees, a lot of them were promised severance payments, and many of them haven't gotten a single dime.
[Janice Hollaway, Former Enron Employee:] I feel betrayed. I'm angry. I'm upset. I mean, all of the, you know, normal emotions that anyone would feel at being promised something and not getting it. And you know, I signed a contract, and also the contract precludes me from filing for unemployment, and I've been afraid to do that.
[Katayama:] Instead, she joined a team of ex-Enron employees in a class action suit. Richard Rathvon was laid off too, but he is taking a rare novel path. He teamed up with 20 other former employees to try to win back millions owed in bonus pay. They're not filing suit, but forming a committee. They want a say in the bankruptcy proceedings, alongside the banks and other bigger creditors.
[Richard Rathvon, Former Enron Employee:] The employees are not focused as a group. There is misinformation that is going around by e-mails from one employee to another. Again, setting up a committee would give us a single voice, and it would give us access real-time to accurate and timely information, and that's absolutely critical in our ability to protect our claims.
[Katayama:] Legal experts say at best, the employees may get pennies on the dollar they're owed. In bankruptcy proceedings, unsecured creditors, like shareholders and employees, are last in line. But Rathvon's lawyer says a committee is better than a class action suit.
[David Mcclain, Mcclain & Siegel:] If you're not at the table, you can't negotiate. And at the end of the day, the employees have some of the largest claims that exist in this case, and they are just simply divorced from the process.
[Katayama:] The committee option worked for 18,000 laid off workers of Ames Department Store. In 1990, they won $24 million in vacation and severance pay. In Enron's case, however, it may be extremely difficult for its former employees to get anything at all. Enron's debt is so huge and its assets are shrinking so fast that there may be no money left once the bigger creditors, like the banks, get paid Fredricka.
[Whitfield:] All right, thanks very much Fred Katayama coming from Houston there on the ever-changing Enron debacle. We'll continue to follow that thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Kurtz:] Welcome back to RELIABLE SOURCES. We sat down in New York with Jon Stewart, the host of "The Daily Show" on Comedy Central. Stewart and his team of intrepid reporters have been keen observers of the presidential election with the coverage they've dubbed "Indecision 2000." Let's take a look.
[Jon Stewart, Host, "the Daily Show,":] Now last week's debate in New Hampshire was one of the first times voters had a chance to see how the candidates stacked up against each other. "The Daily Show" was there in force with exclusive team coverage that included brand new custom-made jackets.
[Vance Degeneres, Correspondent:] What will happen tonight? Will it be a well-mannered love-fest or a roll-in-the-mud, knock-down-drag- out slug-fest? One can only hope for low blows galore.
[Unidentified Male:] Senator Thompson, given Governor Bush's relative inexperience, how tempted do you think he will be to use one of his lifelines tonight?
[Sen. Fred Thompson , Tennessee:] One of his lifelines?
[Unidentified Male:] Fifty-fifty or call a friend.
[Stewart:] And now the next president of New Hampshire.
[Unidentified Male:] I have a foreign affairs question from the millennial edition of "Trivial Pursuit." Who became the hottest pop star to come out of Iceland in the mid-1990s?
[Sen. John Mccain , Arizona:] To come out of Iceland?
[Unidentified Male:] Out of Iceland, that's right. The hottest pop star. Iceland, don't dodge the question. What do you have against Iceland, Senator?
[Kurtz:] And joining us now, Jon Stewart. Welcome.
[Stewart:] Thank you very much. Happy to be here.
[Kurtz:] All right. You make fun of honest, hardworking, public- spirited journalists. And you make a lot of money doing it.
[Stewart:] Yes.
[Kurtz:] Don't you feel a little guilty?
[Stewart:] Yes. Shame is a better word, Howie. I feel shamed by what we have to do to make a living. And I don't sleep well at night. No, I mean, we try and focus where we're going. There are definitely times where we miss the point or throw something out there that is probably crasser than we would like. But for the most part...
[Kurtz:] It's only television. It's cable.
[Stewart:] ... Yeah. For the most part, though, it's also, it's the world of humor, which you know, I always find it interesting where because your show, which I watch quite frequently, is always great because it's you and Bernie, and then it's let's say three reporters. And you guys are always bringing up these points about how the world of media is covered and...
[Kurtz:] Ethics. Standards.
[Stewart:] ... ethics and the whole thing. And all the reporters go off. And the final question is always, "So do you think the media really went over the line on that issue?" And they're all the conclusion is always this, "No, I thought we did a pretty good job. Yeah, I thought we were good, yeah." You know, it's always that. I think what the problem is actually is that on an individual level they don't realize the aggregate of what it is to the American public that for a particular network's resources it may not be overwhelming. But when you tie it all together, it is.
[Kurtz:] Talking about that aggregate...
[Stewart:] Yeah.
[Kurtz:] ... what is it about the news business, all the many sins? We could spend an hour-and-a-half...
[Stewart:] Right. Right.
[Kurtz:] ... that most ticks you off?
[Stewart:] I've got the time.
[Kurtz:] That gets under your skin? What ticks you off about the news business?
[Stewart:] I think it's that, you know, look, this is just purely from a viewer standpoint. It's that I guess I have in the same way that people get angry about the government not performing up to a higher level. I think there's sort of a level of integrity that we expect from public figures, fair or not, whether it be the news or the government, that maybe isn't being reached because they're functioning like entertainment. It's sort of this weird blending...
[Kurtz:] Odd indictment coming from you.
[Stewart:] ... No, no, no, it's not, because I'm in entertainment...
[Kurtz:] Right. You're unabashed.
[Stewart:] ... But clearly, though, I don't have a higher mandate. My mandate is make it funny. And if it's not funny, no one has to watch it. And...
[Kurtz:] And you're gone.
[Stewart:] ... quite frankly, even when you make it funny, no one really watches it. Sorry. But the...
[Kurtz:] But we wrap ourselves in the 1st Amendment...
[Stewart:] ... That's what I'm saying.
[Kurtz:] ... and then we stick microphones in people's faces.
[Stewart:] You wrap it in the 1st Amendment. I mean, the whole idea of sort of journalism having a higher mandate than just a regular entertainment show, my point is that you function by ratings in the same way that we do. And that's I think what is the crux of the difficulty is that you have I mean, you've got 24 hours to fill a day, not just you, but Fox, but all these 24-hour news networks. Jerry Lewis, you know, he does that one day a year. And even that by hour 13, they're bringing on a guy who's doing the glasses and making the things. So...
[Kurtz:] So it's this relentless...
[Stewart:] Right.
[Kurtz:] ... vacuum. You can't have dead air, right...
[Stewart:] Right.
[Kurtz:] ... You've got to have something on.
[Stewart:] Can't have dead air, and...
[Kurtz:] You think pushes it more toward the entertainment side of the ledger.
[Stewart:] ... Entertainment, and in some respects, what happens is the bar of responsibility gets lowered. In other words, I mean, the examples just in this past year, right after the Columbine incident, a terrible tragedy, those kids were on TV during a hostage crisis. That's not right-to-know. That's not 1st Amendment. That's endangering the lives of people in a hostage crisis. And it's not responsible to be able to I remember right after Columbine, I read in the paper and I don't mean for this to come off in any way as so critical. I have a great respect for a lot of the people that do the stories. But there was an article in the paper about who was first breaking the Columbine story.
[Kurtz:] Right. You beat somebody else by 16 seconds.
[Stewart:] Right. And I just thought, but that wasn't a question...
[Kurtz:] You think it's kind of heartless?
[Stewart:] ... Not only does it seem, it seems like you're forgetting what you're doing. You're forgetting that what you're doing is trying to give people an impartial analysis, an informative version of the day's events. You know, I don't think they should ever take a camera to a tragedy victim's house and say, "How do you feel?" Because you know what, until you're going to get an answer that's not some version of "terrible..."
[Kurtz:] Right.
[Stewart:] ... that's not news. Of course.
[Kurtz:] And it's intrusive, and all those other things.
[Stewart:] And it's intrusive. And it's prurient. And I don't think it's reasonable.
[Kurtz:] How about the great pageant of democracy, the presidential campaign?
[Stewart:] I quite honestly believe that the fishbowl has created fake candidates, that it's now it's all theater, it's all entertainment, and that they are using focus groups in the same way that my show uses focus groups, and the same way that CNN probably uses focus groups. They're using polls to that same extent. It's a weird melding of the same tools that entertainment follows. But people in the public arena in that sense should have a higher mandate...
[Kurtz:] In the same sense...
[Stewart:] ... than what we use.
[Kurtz:] ... you probably can't get elected president unless you're good on television
[Stewart:] I mean, that started with the Nixon-Kennedy debates. As soon as Nixon started sweating, that was the end of his campaign that year.
[Kurtz:] They looked better on radio. You did an event in New Hampshire where you...
[Stewart:] Right.
[Kurtz:] ... assembled a big panel, and you beat up on the likes of Sam Donaldson, Claire Shipman, Jonathan Alter. I think you had a pretty good time.
[Stewart:] But we had no idea we were going to be beating up on them to that extent.
[Kurtz:] Well, but do you think that journalists are unusually, or some would say pathetically, thin-skinned about having the camera turned and having their conduct on trial?
[Stewart:] I think they're not accustomed to it. And what was interesting to me was as soon as we flipped the tables, they began acting as candidates act, testy to a certain extent, a big evasive, sort of evasive.
[Kurtz:] What do you mean sort of defensive?
[Stewart:] Sort of defensive. Not you. You are a paragon of virtue.
[Kurtz:] Give me some quick takes. Let's run through some names. Larry King.
[Stewart:] Trend-setter. Will be having babies past Anthony Quinn's age, probably until about 140. Pretty soon, his kids, they'll take over. It will be a dynasty. All the young Kings will soon take over.
[Kurtz:] Ted Koppel.
[Stewart:] The man.
[Kurtz:] Yeah?
[Stewart:] Pure and simple.
[Kurtz:] Big fan?
[Stewart:] I'm a huge fan of Koppel's. I really loved the stuff he did this summer with the hour-long specials. But I think he's terrific. And "Nightline" is one of the shows I like the most.
[Kurtz:] "60 Minutes."
[Stewart:] You know, they set the trend for these unfortunately, they set a trend that "Dateline" and "2020" have jumped on and somewhat perverted.
[Kurtz:] How's that?
[Stewart:] And that's the difficulty. Because they use scare tactics, where "60 Minutes" not so much. When you turn on "2020," have you ever seen a promotion for that? "Do you know what's in your laundry room? Could it kill your children? It might."
[Kurtz:] But that's become the game now. They scare people into watching?
[Stewart:] They scare people, scare people into watching. I truly believe that that's what's going on. I don't think maybe it's necessarily cognitive. But that's what it's become. And that's what the shame is, is that it's the question of this interview with Elian Gonzalez is a great example of just crazy. I mean, you know, what's next...
[Kurtz:] Diane Sawyer on
[Abc. Stewart:] ... a hard-hitting expose of the kid from "Jerry Maguire"? This is a 6-year-old boy. You don't do interviews with 6- year-old boys. And to call it a visit, you know, that's what your aunt does. She visits. She pinches the cheek. This is not that's not a subject. I think in some respects people are just trying to be first rather than being good.
[Kurtz:] OK.
[Stewart:] And I think that's a real danger.
[Kurtz:] We'll put you down as a critic of ABC and Diane Sawyer...
[Stewart:] No, no, no, but again...
[Kurtz:] ... in that instance. All right.
[Stewart:] ... in that instance, I think the pressure to get ratings has overwhelmed what is a really strong industry of very intelligent people.
[Kurtz:] Bob Dole, star commentator this year on Comedy Central.
[Stewart:] Wonderful man.
[Bob Dole, Former U.s. Senator:] I don't want two debates a week, as Al Gore suggested. I mean, nobody would be watching. But...
[Stewart:] I honestly, I would only watch because to me Al Gore is like the Yule log. I mean, he puts me out... ... He is so it's when you have you know like when you have like a white noise machine...
[Dole:] Well, not only that, when he gives a fireside chat, the fire goes out, right?
[Stewart:] Exactly. He, just wonderfully dry sense of humor. And wonderful dancer. Oops... ... No, he's I've had a wonderful time with him.
[Kurtz:] But you're going for the celebrity, for the big name, to get people to watch your show.
[Stewart:] Absolutely. But here's the difference. I'm a fake journalist. We're not actually really reporting on things.
[Kurtz:] We're going to use this tape in the future.
[Stewart:] Yeah, please. Believe me, no, I'm a comedian. And we're on level above strippers on the show business ladder. So believe me, I know my place.
[Kurtz:] Comedy Central's Jon Stewart, host of "The Daily Show," turning his critical lens on us. Up next, reporting from the White House, Leonardo DiCaprio, the furor over his ABC News interview with President Clinton.

[Sen. Tom Daschle, , Senate Majority Leader:] But the continued success I think is still somewhat in doubt.
[Sen. Robert Byrd , West Virginia:] Where is the end? Where is the end?
[Bill Press, Co-host:] Tonight, Democrats on the war path. Is it right for them to be taking on the president while we're still at war? And start your engines. Is the government trying to take away your SUV?
[Announcer:] Live from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Robert Novak. In the crossfire, Democratic Congressman Eliot Engel of New York, a member of the International Relations Committee and Republican Congressman John Sununu from New Hampshire, member of the Appropriations Committee. And later, Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club and Jerry Taylor from the Cato Institute.
[Press:] It's CROSSFIRE. Thanks for joining us. For five months, nobody dared criticize President Bush on the war on terror, but those days are over. Democrats, led by West Virginia's Senator Robert Byrd, have opened fire. How can we say the war in Afghanistan is such a success, they ask, if Osama bin Laden's still on the loose? And with American troops now in Afghanistan, the Philippines, and the Republic of Georgia what's the new game plan, if there is one, and where does it end? Republicans say that's just one step short of treason. How dare anybody criticize the war effort when there are American troops on the ground overseas. There you've got it tonight. Tonight, welcome to the war over the war. Bob Novak.
[Robert Novak, Co-host:] Congressman Eliot Engel, not all Democrats are criticizing the president. And I'd like to get testimony from a Democrat who has a perfectly safe district, who is a very shrewd politician, and unlike most of us, was a war hero. Let's listen to Congressman Charlie Rangel of Harlem.
[Rep Charles Rangel , New York:] I don't think it serves the country well to be critical of the president, especially in time of war. And indeed, I think we're fortunate to have a president that has been able to bring together so many friends and allies against a terrorism that struck us.
[Novak:] Now Eliot, I'd like to know where you line up? Do you line up with Senator Byrd, the great master of the pork barrel, the former wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, or with Charlie Rangel, the brown star winner from New York City?
[Rep. Eliot Engel , Intl. Relations Cmte:] Well let me say, first of all, I think that members of Congress have an absolute right to question. That's what we're elected for. I don't think anybody is criticizing the president. I, as well as the entire Congress and the Senate, support the president in his war about terrorism. But I think when we're talking about the pocketbook and we're talking about the budget, as it relates to the war on terrorism, I think that members of Congress have a right to ask questions.
[Novak:] So I you line up with Bob Byrd, rather than Charlie Rangel?
[Engel:] Well, I line up with Bob Byrd in asking questions. I may not agree with everything he says, but he certainly has the right to ask these questions, as do all members of Congress.
[Novak:] One of the things that Senator Byrd said, he seemed to have some concern that we were going after terrorists, we being the United States, we're going after terrorists, all over the world, wherever they might be. He thought that that was excessive. I'd like to you tell us which terrorists you wouldn't go after, since it isn't wise to go after all the terrorists? Just me give a little list of the terrorists, who under the Byrd rule, you would not go after?
[Engel:] I think we have to go after all the terrorists.
[Novak:] Oh, you disagree with Byrd on that then?
[Engel:] Well, I think that we have to go and destroy the terrorist cells wherever they are. I was not one of the Democrats who criticized the president for his axis of evil remarks.
[Novak:] That's going to take a long time, right?
[Engel:] Well, I even think we should add countries to the axis of evil, like Syria.
[Novak:] OK, so you would disagree completely with Senator Byrd that Senator Byrd's main proposition?
[Engel:] No, Senator Byrd was questioning about where we're going to get the money to do all this. You know with these huge tax cuts, we don't have money. And this is a problem. Which will we choose, the tax cuts or fighting the war on terrorism?
[Press:] Congressman Sununu, candidate for senator from New Hampshire, welcome.
[Rep John Sununu , Appropriations Cmte:] Thank you.
[Press:] I think I'd like us to start on a point that I'm sure you and I agree on. I mean, Senator Lott today, came out and said how dare Senator Daschle question anything about this effort, while there's troops on the ground? I mean, I remember under President Clinton, Republicans criticized the presence of troops in Bosnia. They criticized the presence of troops in Kosovo. I never called them traitors at the time or suggested they were. Surely you agree that it's OK to question an ongoing war effort, without the being labeled a traitor? Is it allowed? Sure. Is it bad policy, what Senator Daschle was talking about? Is it bad politics? I think that's true as well. We have Senator Byrd saying well, you know, we may be deployed too far. We've got to look at reigning in. We have Senator Daschle saying let's go, let's move, let's get Osama bin Laden. Of course, we're going to go after bin Laden. Of course, we're going to go after anyone in al Qaeda or the Taliban that hasn't been brought justice. But at the same time, the president was unequivocal when he first laid out our priorities in this war. It will take time. We will be in more places than Afghanistan. We know al Qaeda has had cells in the Philippines, in Sudan, in Somalia, in Yemen. We've seen already seen activity in those places. And that's got to continue. Well, I guesss that's the question is where are we going? And is there, in fact, an exit strategy? Or do we just keep going until we, I don't know, run out of countries? Let's listen to Senator Byrd from the wild and wonderful state of West Virginia. Here's Senator Byrd.
[Byrd:] Now we're talking about going into Georgia, the Republic of Georgia. And now it's Yemen. Where is the end? Where is the end?
[Press:] And he doesn't even mention the Philippines, right? I mean, so as a member of Congress, are you just giving a blank check to keep sending troops to any country he thinks of, for as long as he wants to?
[Sununu:] We're supporting, as a member of the Budget Committee, the president's priorities he laid out in the state of the union. National security and winning the war on terrorism, homeland security, and getting the economy moving right back here at home. There is no question it's going to take better technology, additional unmanned aircraft surveillance, F-22s, munitions that we used in Afghanistan.
[Press:] The question is any country he wants to, sending troops without consulting with Congress, you don't care?
[Sununu:] No, it's not a matter not consulting with Congress. And the president has consulted with Congress. Secretary Rumsfeld has consulted with Congress. It is a matter of achieving the objectives that he laid out very clearly in the week after September 11. We need to strike at al Qaeda. We need to destroy their ability to wage terrorist acts against the United States or our allies, wherever they may be, destroying their facilities, taking out their leadership, taking out their command and control. That's what winning this war on terrorism is abou. And if it means moving further afield into the Philippines, supporting them technically, or into Somalia or Sudan, that's going to be supported by the Congress.
[Novak:] Congressman Engel, I don't quite understand where you're coming from, because I guess I gather from our last one other change you don't agree with Bob Byrd that we can't go into all these places where there are al Qaeda elements, whether they're in Georgia or Yemen. And surely, you know that we can afford to go after them. We the United States ran huge deficits during World War II to finance that war. But I'd like you to listen to what the president himself said yesterday in Charlotte, North Carolina.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Doesn't matter how long it takes, as far as I'm concerned. It doesn't matter if it's a month, a year. Al Qaeda, the people who killed thousands of United States citizens, the thugs who want to challenge freedom wherever it exists, those who use religion in the name of murder will be brought to justice.
[Novak:] Now Mr. Engel, I know in your district there's no chance a Republican can eveb run. I think they would put him in jail if he runs in that district of New York City, but tell me what you disagree with what president said?
[Engel:] I don't disagree with going after terrorists. And I don't disagree with the need for the United States to take the lead. But you know, even Senator Bunnig, who's a Republican, was questioning how Osama bin Laden got away and Sheik Omar got away. Members of Congress and the Senate have a right to question. There's no blank checks. There's no just following the leader. Yes, the president is our leader and we follow him in the war against terrorism, but we have a right to question the directions that that's going. That's not unpatriotic, particularly when we have the power of the purse. That's what the people elect us to do. We're not going to just write out blank checks. We want to know what it's going for, where is the next move, and what the administration wants us to do. So it's not being disloyal. It's simply of matter of saying we want to know and we have a right to question.
[Press:] Isn't that a point, Congressman Sununu, as Senator Bunning said, I mean, this thing started out, October 10 it was when we started bombing, we were going to get Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda. And we were going to get Mullah Omar and the Taliban. And as Senator Bunning says, we're spending a billion dollars a day, right? I mean, that's what, $360 billion a year. Don't we have and we don't even know where these guys are. How can you call it the question is how can you call it a success?
[Sununu:] We're not spending a billion dollars a day. I'm not quite sure where you got that number.
[Press:] Said Senator Bunning.
[Sununu:] Well, Senator Bunning knows we're not spending...
[Press:] But my question, how can we say it's a success in Afghanistan if Osama bin Laden is still on the loose, doing evil somewhere and we have no idea where he is?
[Sununu:] Without killing Osama bin Laden, I think there won't be a capstone to this, a finality to this. And that's why the administration is committed to getting that job done.
[Novak:] I think we're all agreed we have to get Osama bin Laden. Thank you very much, Congressman John Sununu. Thank you, Congressman Eliot Engel. Coming up next on CROSSFIRE, the White House says no, but powerful senators want to make your SUV, would you believe it, fuel- efficient. Is nothing sacred?

[Karuna Shinsho, Cnn Anchor:] In August, South Africa will host a United Nations conference on racism and intolerance. But the U.N. has already come out with a host of recommendations for governments around the world to consider, including those in Asia. This week's cover story looks at the pressure building on the Hong Kong government to tackle what activists say is a much-ignored issue, racial discrimination.
[Shinsho:] Harinder Veriah was a Hong Kong lawyer. Last year, she was admitted to a local hospital after suffering a convulsion. Her husband, Martin Jacques, tried to find out what the doctors were doing to treat his wife.
[Martin Jacques:] It was worse than talking to a brick wall. I turned to Hari, and I said, a fat lot of use that was, and she said to me, I'm at the bottom of the pile here, and I was incredibly shocked. And I said, what do you mean? And she said, I'm the only Indian, and everyone else is Chinese.
[Shinsho:] The following morning, Harinder was dead. Jacques says the hospital refuses to investigate his wife's claims, and the government denies any problem exists, but Jacques believes racism against his wife was real.
[Jacques:] Hari used to suffer, speaking and understanding Cantonese as she did, frequently people would walk past her on the street and say in Cantonese to her "black bean
[Shinsho:] It's not clear how widespread such behavior is in Hong Kong, where ethnic minorities make up only a few percent of the total population. But one of the territory's legislators says the government hasn't been doing enough to find out.
[Cyd Ho, Legislative Counselor:] There is no statistic, no concrete figure, because the administration would not want to find out the truth. That is our major grievance. Then, even though in the last few months, it contracted A.C. Nielsen, a consultation company, to conduct a survey on the discriminatory situation in Hong Kong about race. However, they did not pinpointedly to ask the minority. Instead, they asked a lot of members from the majority who, of course, obviously thinks that discrimination doesn't exist in Hong Kong.
[Shinsho:] We took our camera out onto the streets for an informal survey, but reaction to whether or not people felt discriminated against was mixed.
[Unidentified Male:] They just tease us with different kind of names, and they don't respect us. I don't think racism exists in Hong Kong. Because, it's like, lots of my friends are not from Hong Kong, but they still got a job, and their boss are good to them. I don't think racism exists in Hong Kong.
[Shinsho:] The Hong Kong government agrees. According to a written statement to CNN from the Home Affairs Bureau: "We consider that all forms of discrimination, including racial discrimination, are wrong. Having said that, we must point out that Hong Kong has never known any of the more extreme forms of racial discrimination. No one in Hong Kong has ever been lynched or dragged behind a car because of the color of his or her skin." It goes on to say, "We recognize that there is room for improvement and are not by any means complacent. But we believe that our record in that regard compares well with that of other jurisdictions. Indeed, it is one that might justly be envied." But Hong Kong Against Race Discrimination, which represents the interests of some 14 groups, say discrimination against ethnic minorities in the territories, though not extreme, is still pervasive.
[Ravi Gidumal, H.k. Against Race Discrimination:] I think for the average darker skin minority in Hong Kong, you're looking at issues related to public transportation, where taxi drivers won't stop for you, whether people won't sit with you on the bus, or whether a minibus will similarly just drive right past you. Whether it's in accommodation. Prospective landlord would just turn you away from their properties, and tell you to your face that they won't rent to you because of the country of origin, or your racial background. Whether it's employers, again, denying you work. Or in some cases, once again, blatant reasoning that they want white skin people or Chinese people to work for them, and not brown people.
[Shinsho:] Not only are local activists unhappy, the United Nations also condemned the Hong Kong government just last month for what it called, "its failure to extend prohibition of race discrimination to the private sector." The U.N. says the territory has an obligation to implement anti- race discrimination legislation. But for some, legislation isn't the only answer.
[Ho:] Even though we have a piece of law passed to regulate against certain conduct, but if it is not from the free choice and not from the heart from the majority to respect the other ethnic minority, then a piece of legislation could only bear deterrent effect. But that might not help our harmony, the society with a positive approach.
[Shinsho:] Others say a law that has too many teeth might actually backfire.
[Gidumal:] We don't want to have things like the affirmative action- type policies put in place, because we don't think they're necessary. We don't want a law to be so harsh that people start to resent it. We want it to be educational, as other laws are. In fact, our own perspective would be that to start off with, you would even have a warning-type system put in place. Subsequently, you put in mind the fines. If you make it too harsh, people will resent it, and you'll achieve nothing.
[Shinsho:] And for Martin Jacques, who lost his wife to what he believes is racist behavior, legislation would be no consolation. He's returned to London with his 2-year-old son Ravi. But he still hopes legislation outlawing racial discrimination will prevent others from suffering a similar fate. The hospital where Harinder Veriah died said there was absolutely no discrimination against her. The hospital says a foreigner concluded she died of natural causes. Meanwhile, Hong Kong's Home Affairs Bureau says it's currently revisiting the question of a law against racial discrimination on the part of private individuals and organizations. It says it hopes to reach a conclusion in early 2002. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] WinStar Communications reported a slightly smaller loss than Wall Street expected after Thursday's closing bell. And today RCN is expected to post a loss.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] For more insights this morning, we're going to cruise across town to the Times Square area where Sasha Salama is standing by at the Nasdaq marketsite Sasha.
[Sasha Salama, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, David and Deborah. Thanks very much. WinStar,
[Wcii:] This is a company that provides broadband services that's high-speed Internet access and it blew past Wall Street expectations. WinStar reporting a loss, but it was a loss of $2.06, 33 cents better than Wall Street had expected. WinStar also boosted its revenue guidance for the full year, saying that it will come in revenues will come in at the high end of analyst estimates. WinStar said on the conference call that the reach of its broadband network will grow five-fold over the next year and a half. And there you see, year-to-date, the stock has come under pressure. It's in a very popular area, though broadband, high- speed Internet access, so the prospects, say analysts, look bright for WinStar. Also looking bright, Pixar, the movie studio coming in with results that beat the Street. PIXR is the symbol. Pixar coming in with 53 cents a share. That was eight cents better than First Call estimates. And one big reason for the better-than-expected results: Toy Story 2. That was a big hit for Pixar. Steve Jobs, who, of course, co-founded Apple but also heads Pixar, said that Toy Story 2 will be released on home video for the holiday season this year. Pixar boosted earnings guidance, by the way, for the full year. PIXR should be a mover to the upside. And finally, RCN is reporting results today. RCN provides local as well as long-distance telephone service. It also provides cable TV and high-speed Internet connections. Those are the broadband connections. The stock's been under a lot of pressure. Last time around, it posted a larger-than-expected loss. We'll be watching closely this time. Nasdaq 100 futures on the plus side not by much, and we've got that unemployment report to get through. David and Deborah.
[Haffenreffer:] Sasha, we understand that yesterday was the lightest volume day on the Nasdaq all year.
[Salama:] It certainly was, and that actually bodes well for the bulls out there. If we were seeing any kind of declines we saw a small advance yesterday. But if we saw any kind of heavy-volume days on declines, or days when we saw almost a negative market breadth, that would bode negatively. But lots of analysts are saying that the fact that we're seeing light volume actually bodes well for a possible upturn in this market that's here to stay.
[Haffenreffer:] We'll see. Sasha Salama, thanks very much. s TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] And now to the Middle East summit in Egypt, where this morning there is talk of progress toward ending the violence in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. For more, we're joined by CNN's Walter Rodgers, who is live right now in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. Hello, Walter.
[Walter Rodgers, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Linda. Indeed, it does appear, in the waning hours of this summit, we may have something of a breakthrough. The indications appear to be that President Clinton has persuaded the parties to come to an agreement, a mutually acceptable agreement on ending the violence and arranging a cease-fire between Israel and the Palestinians. That cease-fire was the Israelis' principle demand here, but it appears as though the Palestinians may have gotten their way as well. Nabil Shaf, a member of the Palestinian delegation here, has indicated that there will be, or the Palestinians believe, also part of this package will be lifting the lifting of the siege, the Israeli blockade of the Palestinian cities. Also, there is to be, we are told by Mr. Shaf, an independent commission, a panel, which will look into the causes of the violence, that was a prerequisite for Yasser Arafat to leave this summit with some kind of victory. And we're told that the panel will be, panel members will be decided by President Clinton, as well as the United Nations secretary-general, Kofi Annan. So it appears to have something of an international composition. Mr. Clinton only got about three hours sleep last night. He met until nearly 4:00 in the morning, and then he decided to call a recess. He was back at work in less than three hours. The president of the United States meeting principally with the Arabs who are at this summit. The Palestinians have said that President Clinton is actually negotiating for the Israelis here. Yasser Arafat has been mightily unhappy throughout this. His principle demand seems to have been that the Israelis live up to commitments made at previous summits.
[Yasser Arafat, Pres., Palestinian Authority:] Looking at the honest and accurate implementation of what has been signed here in Sharm el-Sheikh with Mr. Barak and there in Washington, in Kava, in Wye River, everywhere.
[Rodgers:] The summiteers met for 16 hours yesterday. They tried to scale a grevious mountain of grievances and harsh words. Twice the summit broke up on the ministerial level. There were shouting matches between the Palestinians and the Israelis. At one point, the Palestinians were calling the Israelis murderers. Still, the climate has improved this morning. A short while ago, I spoke with Jordan's King Abdullah, and I asked His Majesty the outlook for the summit. He held two royal fingers in the air and said: We're keeping our fingers crossed. So it does look like there may be a positive outcome here yet Linda.
[Stouffer:] Well, Walter, just to be clear, so Yasser Arafat and Ehud Barak, do they ever actually see each other, meet face-to-face?
[Rodgers:] Oh yes, they actually saw each other. They shared lunch at one point. I wouldn't say it was a warm or friendly meeting by any stretch of the imagination, but they were in the same room together. Most of the negotiating, however, was done by the Americans shuttling back and forth between Israel and the Palestinians. And we are expecting a final plenary meeting perhaps within the next hour or so, which may bring Mr. Arafat and Mr. Barak together one last time, that's not clear. But yes, they did see each other and they did chat briefly, although not in an overly friendly fashion at one point yesterday Linda.
[Stouffer:] I would imagine so. Walter Rodgers, live in Egypt, thank you very much for that.

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] Democrat Al Gore and his running mate, Joe Lieberman, are in Tampa, Florida for an early-morning campaign event. We want to let you listen in live to Al Gore.
[Vice Pres. Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] We want to honor you, we want to listen carefully, and we want to tell you what we believe is the right thing to do to get our country moving in the right direction. We've got a big choice to make this November, and the choice is one that will have big, fateful consequences for the direction our country goes in the future. The Supreme Court's going to be picked, we're going to have decisions on the minimum wage, on the budget, on health care, the environment, education, all across the board. Now, to start with the economy, the other side has been saying that the way they look at it we are worse off today than we were eight years ago, but I don't think so. I don't think so because, back then, after they tried their approach, we had the biggest deficits ever in history and the debt had been multiplied by four times and we had high unemployment and it was a time of great stress. And you gave us a chance to bring some change. And since that change came in, we turn the biggest...
[Stouffer:] You've been listening to Al Gore speaking at a firehouse in Tampa, Florida at a campaign event on this Labor Day, speaking in part about the important decisions the next president will have to make as voters choose just who they will vote for in the presidential election. Well, of course, Labor Day is the traditional time when the presidential campaign hits high gear. Both candidates today have several events. We plan to take you live to more Gore events as the day continues. And, of course, Texas Gov. George W. Bush, the Republican candidate, has several campaign events today, too. We will take you live to those throughout the day here on CNN as well.

[Michael Holmes, World News:] A United States immigration official accused of spying pleaded not guilty at a hearing in Miami, Florida. The case of Mariano Faget is provoking new diplomatic tensions between Cuba and the U.S. CNN's Miami bureau chief John Zarrella reports.
[John Zarrella, Cnn Miami Bureau Chief:] During a jailhouse interview, Mariano Faget, a 34-year veteran of the INS, vehemently denied he was a spy for the Castro government.
[Mariano Faget, Accused Spy:] Absolutely not, sir. I am not a spy. I would not do that to the country that I love, which is the United States.
[Zarrella:] At his arraignment on espionage charges, Faget's attorneys stuck to that position.
[Diane Ward, Faget's Attorney:] We entered a plea of not guilty, and in this particular case I know it's a very adamant plea of not guilty.
[Zarrella:] Faget does not deny he passed classified government information, but he insists it was simply to help a friend and business associate, Pedro Font. [on camera]: Federal agents deliberately gave Faget phony information about an alleged defection of a high-ranking Cuban. Twelve minutes after he got the information, Faget passed it along to his friend, Font. Faget insists he passed the information because he thought Font's life might be in danger. [voice-over]: Font was scheduled to meet that same afternoon in New York with Cuban government officials.
[Faget:] I was afraid that my friend for 30 years was going to be put in harm's way some way by being set up or somehow brought into this defection.
[Zarrella:] Faget didn't know it, but the call was being recorded by the FBI. Based on the government's indictment and supporting evidence, the case against Faget is built around that call and one other he made, but nowhere is there evidence Faget received money for information or was ever sympathetic to the Castro government. Federal agents first took notice of Faget 15 months ago. U.S. officials were monitoring Cuban diplomat Jose Imperatori when Faget showed up for a drink with Imperatori at a Miami hotel. A little more than a week ago, Imperatori was kicked out of the United States for alleged spying. John Zarrella, CNN, Miami.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to switch on our live camera in Washington where Energy Secretary Bill Richardson is commenting on the high gas prices. Let's listen to what he has to say.
[Bill Richardson, U.s. Secretary Of Energy:] I had already formally accepted Senator Warner the invitation to testify before his committee, so...
[Question:] Why do you believe there was no espionage involved in this case?
[Richardson:] Well, first, so far, there does not appear to be espionage involved. But this is being determined by the FBI investigation. I'm pleased that the FBI has authenticated the disks as the correct ones. That has taken place. I'm pleased, too, that it appears that they did not leave the X Division. I'm pleased that there does not appear to be espionage. I'm pleased that they're gotten fingerprints on some of the wrappings. So the investigation is proceeding, but there's still more questions that need to be answered.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, could you respond to what you know is a wide discussion about the effects this might have on your political career?
[Richardson:] I don't even think of my political career. I don't even think about any speculation about any future office. I just want to do my job, I want to conclude this investigation, I want to deal with oil prices. So the politics of it we need to get the politics out of this. This has become too partisan. And I did not utter one partisan word in that hearing, and that's what I intent to do.
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you.
[Richardson:] In other words, not to utter a word.
[Waters:] That's Energy Secretary Bill Richardson wrapping up his day after a rather tense are we going to pick up?.
[Richardson:] There may be price gouging, there may be collusion, but we have to get the facts, and that's what the FTC investigation is doing. We believe that there to get the facts that's what they are doing. We believe that there are some unexplained answers, such as why is it 38 cents more to produce gasoline in Chicago and Milwaukee when it costs 2 cents to produce reformulated gasoline? Why the disparities between Chicago and Milwaukee and the rest of the country where prices are relatively lower and more stable? So those are questions that need to be answered. This is the EPA's bailey wick and we will work with the Environmental Protection Agency. I envision meeting with some governors very soon with Carol Browner to discuss this issue and see how we can work together with the states to get gas prices down. We got to get these prices down because, in Chicago and Milwaukee, they're too high. And there are unexplained reasons for it and we have to have aggressive action to make sure they stabilize.
[Question:] But no RFU waivers you see?
[Waters:] OK, there we have it, Bill Richardson expressing the sentiments of many folks in the Midwest and asking the same questions they're asking about the high price of gasoline, the secretary saying its in the bailey wick of the Environmental Protection Agency and to do with this reformulated gas regulation ordered by the Congress. The secretary, as I was saying earlier, has just stepped outside of a hearing room where Republicans were demanding his resignation because of the Los Alamos nuclear secrets: the loss of the hard drives and then the rediscovery of the hard drives and the lack of security there at the Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory. Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, a Democrat, said at that hearing that Richardson had shown contempt for Congress by not showing up at a first hearing called by the Congress and would never again, in the senator's words, "receive Senate approval" for government office. As you know, Bill Richardson had been named as a possible running mate for Al Gore in the upcoming presidential upcoming election for president and vice president of the United States. That apparently is in jeopardy if the Republicans have anything to say about it.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Some of this country's heritage is in grave danger of becoming history. The place where Abe Lincoln drafted the Emancipation Proclamation is one of these places.
[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] That's right. And today, the National Trust for Historic Preservation releases its list of the 11 most endangered places. CNN national correspondent Bob Franken is at one of them this morning. Hi, Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Good morning, Carol. And behind me is Anderson Cottage, which you probably have not heard of if you're like most of us. And that's exactly the point. But Leon told us just a moment ago this was Abraham Lincoln's retreat. This is where Abe Lincoln would come three miles by horseback from the White House to think, to work, to write the Emancipation Proclamation, as Leon pointed out. It's in a 14-room cottage, still on the Soldiers and Airmen's grounds, the retirement grounds here about three miles from the White House in Washington 14-room cottage. It's in disrepair, says the Historic Preservation Organization, and needs some sort of money put aside to improve a building that does now have so much history, but it's being used right now as an office building and allowed to fall into disrepair. As I mentioned, there are a 11 structures and monuments and different organizations around the country that are on this year's 11 endangered list. They include everything from the Anderson Cottage to the Dwight Eisenhower Medical Center in Leavenworth, Kansas. Although it's named after President Eisenhower, it was originally a Civil War veterans hospital. They also are including all the historic neighborhood schools in the United States; ones that are being brought down, replaced, perhaps, by more modern schools. And with that goes a lot of history. Also included on the list, the Hudson River Valley, the entire valley so historic, the home to so many artists being overtaken by sprawl and industrialization. In Pittsburgh, there is the Fifth and Forbes market area. That is a business area that includes many buildings that were put up during the early 20th century. They are coming down, the trust says, because of an entertainment center that is going up there, and they want to, in fact, stop that. The entire island of Nantucket in Massachusetts is also named. It's being overtaken by development. The Okeechobee Battlefield, which was the site of a tremendous battle with the Seminole Indians, that one is being overtaken by development; the Red Mountain mining area in Colorado; the Santa Anita Racetrack, so famous as an art deco racetrack near Los Angeles which was the home of so many movie stars, is being modernized, and the trust believes that its character is being taken away. There's Valley Forge, and then there's the Wheelock Academy, which was a school in Oklahoma for Choctaw Indian women, also being overtaken by development. The trust says that history must be preserved, that once you get rid of the past it can never be returned. It's going to make a big deal today of trying to come with its announcement, to try and overtake the developers who want to get rid of some of the history, they say. The developers, of course, say you can't stop progress Carol.
[Lin:] Well, progress is the matter of a definition. Thanks so much, Bob.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Here car news now, shifting gears to safety on the road. Crash tests results on five new vehicles are out today. Here's how they stack up in testing: In the small car category, the Subaru Impreza, Mitsubishi Lancer and the Volvo S-40 all earned a good rating, but the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety calls the Impreza a best pick. The new Dodge Ram also went from a poor rating last year to good this year. And the new Kia Sedona minivan earned only an acceptable score. Kathleen Koch at the Vehicle Research Center in Greene County, Virginia with more on the crash test dummies. Hey, Kathleen, good afternoon.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] Good afternoon, Bill. Well, you know, when you look at these smashed, mangled vehicles, these five vehicles, a couple of things come to mind. First of all, it's hard to believe that all this damage occurred in just a 40-mile-an-hour off set front-end crash test. And secondly, that every single one of these drivers, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, would have likely walked away with only minor injuries. Now, Adrian Lund, who is the chief operating officer for the Insurance Institute, is here to tell us first of all about this vehicle, the Volvo S-40, the most expensive of the five. How did it do?
[Adrian Lund, Chief Operating Officer, Insurance Institute For Highway Safety:] Well, overall, the Volvo S-40 did a good job protecting the occupant. The one thing, we do see a little more intrusion than we'd like to see in the floor panel, and we saw some high forces on the dummy's right leg. So might be a severe sprain or maybe even a broken foot or something like that. But overall, good protection for the occupant.
[Koch:] Now, let's look at the crash test for this Subaru Impreza. And that was one of your best picks. Tell us what made the difference in that particular vehicle? And I know what our viewers are seeing right now is basically the off-set test; it hits barrier that it crushes in somewhat, hits it at 40 miles per hour, and does pretty well. What makes this better than the Volvo?
[Lund:] Well, what's better about the Subaru is the the occupant space is maintained just about as well as you can. If you look closely down there at the floor board, you'll see that there's almost no intrusion, even in the foot well area. All the dummy numbers were quite low. There's lots of room for the restraint system to protect the occupant from serious injury.
[Koch:] Now, the Mitsubishi Lancer also did quite well, got a good rating, and even did somewhat better than the Volvo. What does it say that vehicles like that, made by Mitsubishi, made by Kia actually perform better than the vehicle that's $6,000 to $8,000 more expensive than they are, the Volvo?
[Lund:] Well, I think the story here is that obviously the Volvo was a good performer, but you don't have to pay top dollar to get a safer vehicle. Subaru Impreza is our top-rated small car now, and the Mitsubishi Lancer is also a best pick performer.
[Koch:] Now, how unusual is it that all of your vehicles get the good or acceptable rating? Does this happen often?
[Lund:] Well, this is uncommon, but it's becoming more common fortunately. What the crash testing has done is manufacturers pay more and more attention to designing vehicles to protect occupants in off-set frontal crashes. So the result is, we are seeing vehicles that do well in our tests.
[Koch:] Mr. Lund, with the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, thank you very much. And if any of our viewers have any questions about how these five automobiles fared, or, say, how their vehicle might have passed tests, they can go to the Web site at www.highwaysafety.org and check it out. Back to you, Bill.
[Hemmer:] Good deal. Kathleen, thanks. Kathleen Koch reporting there.
[Koch:] You're welcome.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Now to a big question a lot of us ask ourselves as we approach January 1st, how can we stretch our dollars in the new year? Terry Savage is a personal financial columnist for "The Chicago Sun-Times" and the author of the savage truth on money. She joins us from Chicago now with some ideas. Terry, you left Miami, you went north?
[Terry Savage, "chicago Sun-times":] No, I'm still in Florida. I'm smarter than that. It's too cold in Chicago for the next week or so, Miles.
[O'brien:] I was given some bad information. I apologize. Anyway, that's good, you've got a lot of wisdom there. I'm gathering because you've got "Quicken" and "Microsoft Money" over your shoulder, we are going to talk about paying bills online, tracking finances online. I've been doing this for years and years. It's the greatest. How many people are doing it? Do we know yet? Is it really getting to the point where it's getting some serious market penetration?
[Savage:] Yes, it's gaining momentum. I can pay my bills right from down here if I just log onto a computer, and that's what's so neat. I'm not just talking about banking online, which is going up, and checking balances to see if you're overdrawn. I'm talking about paying bills. You know, the most thankless and time-consuming task is writing checks. So about every bank has now set up online banking, where you have your account, they'll help you do it. It's really relatively inexpensive. At Bank One, it's $4.95 a month for unlimited. Fleet Bank has it. Bank of America. Every bank will let you set up to pay bills right from their Web site. It's so easy, and so inexpensive and so safe. Portals, like here, MSN Money, pays bills online. You can is sign up for the bill-payment service there, Yahoo! finance. You know that more than 400 billers ranging from Macy's and Bloomingdale's to your credit card companies and utilities allow you to pay bills online. The biggest one, U.S. Postal Service this is surprising they have a really sophisticated online bill pay service. You get three months free, and then I think it's $6.95 a month for 20 bills. The most astounding thing about this is you can pay just anyone, not just your major credit companies, but if you owe your sister-in-law money from that shopping trip, you can send a check to anyone. It's very easy to do, and I'll talk to you in a minute about how safe and secure it is. But let me take you to another level. Yes, you saw "Microsoft Money" and "Quicken." They're the to two popular personal finance softwares, and they have come out with new programs for 2002. And you can track everything about your personal finances, all of your accounts. You can see your spending with the click after mouse. So you not only do your bill paying, but you actually write checks, right on line, check all your accounts, take a look at your spending. This makes it so easy. You give every single check a category. Yes, you can still write paper checks. You can do it at your bank's Web site and download it into your "Quicken" or "Microsoft Money," which helps you at tax time. This should be your New Year's resolution, to start bill paying online. It's really fantastic. The next thing coming up is online bill presentation. Now at all those bank Web sites, you can elect to have your bills presented there, no more bills in the mail. And the U.S. Postal Service System has got the absolute latest thing. They will e-mail you. In your regular e-mail, you can set up a special e-mail account. This charge account bill is here. You can look at the bill itself and click to pay it securely right through your e-mail system. So this is the way to do the bills for the new year.
[O'brien:] And I assume that perhaps there's a generational divide here; younger people are doing this more than older folks, safe to say?
[Savage:] Absolutely not. What we find is and I've been talking about this for years and doing it as you have the people who have the time, people who are sitting around at home, and that includes a lot of older people or those who have a lot of assets and they want to watch them because those personal finance softwares give you a way it look at all of your investment accounts and your credit card accounts as well, everyone is doing it. Now I want to insure you that it is safe. First of all, your bank stands behind every single transaction. So there cannot be fraud that costs you any money. It's secure. Have you a pin number. Think about the times you call up at midnight and order from a catalog. You are giving your credit card information from a stranger and home address and phone number. Banking online is secure, it's safe, it's guaranteed by your bank, it's inexpensive and in some cases it's free for the first three months. It makes it easier for to you stay organized. I know I sound like a commercial for it, but you have done it. Once have you tried it, very rarely will you write a paper check. But you can. When you download information into your computer, it will come through as a check and you insert the payee name.
[O'brien:] All right, you are preaching to the choir in this corner, but hopefully folks will listen up and try. It works for me, too. All right, Terry Savage, we appreciate that. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] And as you might imagine, the equity markets are also open for trading in Europe this morning.
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] The latest numbers now and more from Todd Benjamin in our London bureau. Hello, Todd.
[Todd Benjamin, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Deb. London's up about half percent. Now, that's despite British Telecom coming out with third-quarter pre-tax profits that were certainly at the bottom end of expectations; they were down 24 percent, and the stock is off like 17 percent today 16, 17 percent. The market rather shocked by those figures. BT blames increased competition in the U.K., especially in the fixed-line side, and just too many people under its payroll. As a result, it actually plans to cut its payroll by 10 percent in its management ranks, or some 3,000 managers are to go over the next six to nine months. So BT's stock really getting hammered today, and, of course, it had been a darling last year. In terms of the overall markets, as I mentioned, the FTSE is just up about a half percent; the Dax is up a third of a percent; now, Paris is up almost 1 12 percent; and Zurich is up a quarter percent. In the currency market, the dollar is about a half-yen stronger against the Japanese currency, the euro is little changed, and the pound is a third-cent weaker against the greenback Deb, Dave.
[Haffenreffer:] Todd, Wall Street basically gearing up for a quarter-point interest-rate increase by the Federal Reserve today. What's the anticipated reaction in the European markets?
[Benjamin:] Well, I think the reaction will really follow what happens on Wall Street. If, you know, if Wall Street has a fairly muted response, and a lot of it already seems to be built into the market, given the rally we had yesterday, then I think that, you know, Europe, tomorrow, will basically take its cue from Wall Street's close, because, of course, Europe will already be closed by the time the decision is announced. But, in general, I think most people here are expecting that the Fed will move by a quarter point. There's only an outside chance they feel that they'll move by a half point.
[Marchini:] All right, Todd, thanks a lot.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Think self-improvement and most imagine diet and exercise. Think self-advancement, and you may consider the latest trend in beefing up the muscle between your ears. In tonight's cover story, CNN's Doctor Sanjay Gupta explores the options of getting smart.
[Doctor Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] The operators of these machines say they may make me smarter. I'm wired up, bombarded with flashing lights and having my brain waves scanned. Here at the mind spa in Atlanta, they use biofeedback so-called "mind machines" and even a music dome to make the brain focused, fast and efficient.
[Robert Dallas, Dallas Research The Mind Spa:] And then I put the positive in the center of your head.
[Gupta:] First, my brain waves are examined.
[Dallas:] What you see in your case is you've got a lot of activity in the full spectrum. What I would work on is maybe your high beta being a little more dominant.
[Gupta:] Next, I'm given glasses. The flashing lies are supposed to stimulate my brain and increase my level of beta waves which were associated with heightened attention.
[Dallas:] The change is permanent. It's definitely permanent. Now, we do have people come back for follow up sessions after they've completed a pretty comprehensive program, maybe 6 months later or a year later but that's just because we so easily get back in the mental rut.
[Gupta:] Intelligence researcher Robert Sternberg is more skeptical about the longevity of these types of mind enhancing systems.
[Robert Sternberg, Yale University:] There are different kinds of things you can do that temporarily increase the effectiveness with which you use the intelligence you have.
[Dallas:] Down in here, you notice the beta is much more even. It's much more balanced with everything going on over here. You don't see any of this spiking. With practice, of course, the idea is that then you would get to the point where you could, that state would be more available to you. The brain could choose it.
[Gupta:] Scientifically valid or not, the mind spa has a devoted clientele.
[Unidentified Female:] I can run over if they're free you know if they have a space, I can jump in and get on a piece of equipment for a half an hour and then it is like being rejuvenated.
[Gupta:] Another controversial option Ginko Biloba, an herbal product widely claimed to enhance cognitive function. Experts disagree about how well it works, how much you should take, and how long it lasts, but a number of studies show it can provide at least some benefit in clearer thinking. And then there are stimulants. Some, like Ritalin, are available by prescription to people with ADHD. They are tightly regulated because they come with certain risks, such as addiction. There is also a class of drugs widely discussed on the Internet known as nutropics or "smart drugs." They are said to improve cognition without the side effects of stimulants. But experts say there's not enough scientific evidence to support their use. Most nutropics are not FDA approved and not available in the United States. [on camera]: But getting smart doesn't necessarily involve drugs or a trip to the mind spa. Studies show that you perform your best when you are well rested. well fed, and relaxed. Dr. Sternberg says your brain is like a muscle.
[Sternberg:] If you exercise your intelligence you will increase it. So the best single thing you can do as an adult is to read challenging material, to write, to solve puzzles. play chess, but it's to keep using your intelligence.
[Gupta:] From students to executives, intelligence does matter. As measured by IQ tests, it is the single best predictor of individual performance at school and on the job. And while there is no single best method, for most people willing to put in the effort, experts say it is possible to get smart. Dr. Sanjay Gupta reporting.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the price you pay for a broad range of products and services rest in the hands of 11 oil cartel members meeting in Vienna. That's the same group who, just a year ago, cut production and caused the price of oil skyrocket to a nine- year high. CNN's Brent Sadler joins us now live from Vienna. He's got the latest word on what's happened so far in those meetings and what we should expect from here Brent.
[Brent Sadler, Cnn Correspondent:] Thanks, Leon. Well, by most accounts here in Vienna, OPEC is going through some pretty tough decision-making right now. There is, in fact, something of a split between member states, those 11 member states, of OPEC. On the one hand you have the Saudi Arabians, the Kuwaitis, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria, and others trying to raise production levels to something about 1.7 million barrels of crude oil a day. Now, that might have eventually this year some impact on the amount of money you pay for your gas in the United States. On the other hand, you have more hard-line countries, now led by Iran, which are saying there should be no production cuts whatsoever. In fact, this meeting should have started here at the OPEC headquarters in Vienna about midday local time. That's been put back to several hours from now. And I've just heard from the Saudi delegation here, which is working furiously behind the scenes to try workout some sort of compromise along with other member states, that this meeting could well drag on another day. So some very serious difficulties here going on right now. Now also, the Iranians and the Iraqis the Iraqis, you must note, are not part of the quota system because of United Nations sanctions there have been some reactions, adverse reactions, as a result of what those member states say are sustained U.S. pressure against member states, they say particularly the Persian Gulf nations of Saudi Arabia and their neighbors in the Gulf. Now the Iraqis are particularly anxious angry, in fact, that they say that U.S. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson made a call, an important call, they say, before the first formal session got under way here, and that had raised the hackles of those member nations that don't want to see any increases. This is what the Iraqi oil minister, Dr. Amer Rasheed told me a short time ago.
[Amer Rasheed, Iraqi Oil Minister:] But some members are under such great pressure from the American administration that they have to concede to that pressure to a certain degree. The dilemma for them is, if they concede to what the Americans want, that means a total collapse of the prices. There will be a slump in the oil market, and there it is damaging their economies. How much they can concede without damaging their economies? This is the problem.
[Sadler:] Consensus building is still going on here, and a decision, an agreement, is not being ruled out, though, by the end of the day. I'm Brent Sadler, CNN, reporting live from Vienna.
[Harris:] Thank you, Brent. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] How is the economy doing? That's the question on everybody's mind this morning, with the government set to release first quarter economic growth figures. Joining me this morning to take an assessment of policy and policymaker's impact on the economy is Greg Valliere, Charles Schwab Washington Research Group and David Jones, Aubrey G. Lanston. Nice to have you both with us.
[Greg Valliere, Schwab Washington Research Group:] Great to see you.
[Marchini:] And I'm going to start by asking just a very simple question. We're expected to see very slow economic growth. What are the odds it will turn into a recession?
[David Jones, Aubrey G. Lanston:] I think very low, Deborah. The best bet I would have is that, you know, we're just going to skirt it. We're going to be growing, maybe, in the first three quarters of the year around 1 percent. Perhaps a little bit below 1 percent in the first quarter, a little bit above in the second quarter if auto producers stick with their increased production schedules, at least. Third quarter will still be weak, less than 2 percent. But, you know, maybe by the fourth quarter we'll see the delayed affects of the Fed rate cuts in terms of a little bit of growth and Greg is the expert on this, but maybe, just maybe, Congress will finally get around to passing a tax cut by then.
[Marchini:] What do you think Greg? How close did we get to recession?
[Valliere:] We got close, but I think we dodged the bullet. The consumer didn't totally hibernate. Inventories have been worked off and, as David said, I think by the fourth quarter we could be back on our feet. I think all the stars will be in alignment, including the impact of the tax cut in the fourth quarter.
[Marchini:] The consumer didn't hibernate yet, but if you look at the jobless figures, which you're starting to see initial jobless claims over 400,000, which is consistent with the rising unemployment rate, help wanted advertising down, people seem to be staying unemployed longer. This is where it really starts to hit home with consumer behavior right?
[Jones:] Well the story, Deborah, is that in a very unusual way we're in a window here. You can say from maybe April to June, the issue is whether the business sector, inventory correction and the capital spending boom-bust can work their way through before the consumer finally realizes that maybe their job is in jeopardy. Greenspan has talked about this earlier in the year. He said the question is, can we get an adjustment pretty well finished before consumer confidence crumbles, and I will make a small bet with you. You know, I don't bet much money, Deborah, but the bet I would make is that no one, either inside the Fed or outside, really knows exactly where we're going to be six to 12 months from now, except to say this three-month period is going to be critical in determining where we are. The risks are still very much on the downside, but that business sector adjustment has to take place faster because of the information technology revolution and other things; and we have to keep that consumer from giving up or we really will go into recession.
[Marchini:] Greg, by historical standards, the Fed moved quickly to cut interest rates here 2 percentage points from January through today. But was it too little, and did it come too late? Did the Fed blow this call?
[Valliere:] Well, I'm reluctant to debate any one of David's stature about the Fed. But I do think there are a couple of things that the Fed has done in the last few months that warrant some criticism. First of all, they really got blind-sided late last year; in November, in particular. I was out seeing some of the country's biggest institutional investors, mostly in Boston, who were all telling us right after Thanksgiving that the economy hit a brick wall. The "Beige Book" came out in early December, detailing economic conditions from the Fed, didn't indicate any problem. I think the Fed had a disastrous meeting on December 19 when they didn't cut rates. So, really you had the country's big financial institutions ahead by four, six, eight weeks ahead of the Fed in seeing where the economy was going.
[Marchini:] David?
[Jones:] Well, I have to agree that the Fed was behind the curve. Actually, I would say they've been behind the curve in the first three rate cuts this year. But the fourth one, I have to give Chairman Greenspan and his fellow policymakers a lot of credit for the mid- April rate cut. You can actually look at how the financial markets respond earlier in those earlier cuts, perhaps, coming too late. Perhaps not being as aggressive as they should be. What happened? Stocks went down. Bond prices went up and yields down because investors continued to expect the economy would weaken with the Fed behind the curve. But Greenspan did get it right. A pleasant surprise in the fourth cut. Stock rallied, the yield curve steepened as bond investors begin to think maybe recovery is on the way, perhaps even a wage cost price acceleration could happen at some point.
[Marchini:] Very quick question to both of you. David, then Greg. Do we get a quarter-point cut at the main meeting?
[Jones:] Yes, and maybe another one in June.
[Valliere:] I think we've ended the 50-basis point stretch; now we're going to get smaller cuts, and maybe a couple more.
[Marchini:] All right, sit tight both of you, and I hope our audience will as well because we'll be hearing more from these gentlemen in a moment on AHEAD OF THE CURVE. Back in a moment. Welcome back. I'm talking with political economist Greg Valliere and economist David Jones. And, Greg, I'll start with you. We saw the Federal Reserve fail to act on interest rates, even as the stock market was tumbling. The market started to rise and there the Fed is cutting interest rates at the latest turn. What, if any, role do you think the stock market plays in the Fed's deliberation?
[Valliere:] I'd have two issues, Deborah. First of all, is it in the Fed's mandate, in the Fed's charter, to react to the stock market, to have stock investors looking over their shoulder if the market gets too high or too low? No. 2: I see a huge inconsistency here. If the Fed is going to tighten aggressively when the markets are surging, shouldn't they ease aggressively when the markets are tumbling, as they were last fall? It seems inconsistent just to have it one way.
[Marchini:] Why bail out the stockholders, David?
[Jones:] Well, it's a love-hate relationship I think the Fed has with respect to the stock market. They love the stock market as an indicator of whether their policy is behind the curve, when stocks were still going down, or even with the curve. They also need the stock market, Deborah. We cannot get a recovery in this economy and the stock prices go up and operate through the wealth effect to increase spending. They hate it because they don't like to be perceived, particularly Chairman Greenspan, as easing policy to bailout stock investors who happen to be imprudent in loading up too much early last year and then losing it all as the year progressed.
[Marchini:] David, what do you think the stock market's telling the Fed now?
[Jones:] It's that the Fed is even with the curve not ahead of the curve, but at least the Fed, in cutting rates four times, is even with where they should be in terms of easing enough to give us a chance, at least, for some recovery later in the year.
[Marchini:] Greg.
[Valliere:] Yes, I think that the market has been pleased. But the market has to realize that the Fed is still the only game in town. Tax policy, fiscal policy, is constipated. We're not getting enough out of Washington to stimulate the economy on the tax side. So, sadly, the Fed's the only game in town. And I think, even though we'll come out OK by the fourth quarter, we've gone through a lot of pain in the last 12 months that may have been unnecessary.
[Marchini:] And perhaps avoidable. Greg Valliere, Charles Schwab Washington Research Group and David Jones of Aubrey G. Lanston. Thank you both for being here this morning.
[Jones:] Thank you.
[Marchini:] Back to Jason at CNN Center for a look at what's coming up. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] The White House is about to weigh in on a politically charged debate now raging in the Northwest. It's over one of the region's most cherished symbols: salmon. The Clinton Administration plans to announce its opposition to the removal of four dams along Washington's Snake River. The move would help restore fish stocks, but would also hurt those who live and farm along the river. Gina London has the story of a similar situation along another river one year later.
[Gina London, Cnn Correspondent:] The boaters and anglers have returned to enjoy the renaissance of a river. One year ago this month, the Edwards Dam across the Kennebec in Augusta, Maine was demolished, the first hydroelectric dam in the U.S. ordered breached by the government against its owner's wishes. The removal allowed for the return of at least 10 species of migratory fish. The dam removal affects 18 miles of the Kennebec stretching from Maine's capital city in the south to Waterville in the north. Scott Davis is a river guide who's fished the Kennebec for some 20 years.
[Scott Davis:] I spend a lot of time out here. You can ask my wife that. Well, I see a whole new reborn river. Stripers weren't here, your herring, your sturgeon your salmon, your fish life, the wildlife. There's just so much more right now than there ever used to be with the dam removed. There we go. Nice fish. Pretty, aren't they?
[London:] Since the removal of the Edwards Dam here a year ago, at least 25 other small dams around the country have also been taken out, and more than a dozen are slated for removal this summer and fall. [voice-over]: Advocates say hydropowered dams are responsible for most of the renewable energy in the U.S. Removing too many could create a bigger environmental problem.
[Mike Swiger, Hydropower Attorney:] For every 1,000 kilowatt hours of electricity that are lost from hydropower, we have to replace that with fossil fuels.
[London:] The trick, both sides agree, is to examine each dam's usefulness on a case-by-case basis so the current trickle of removals does not turn into a haphazard torrent. Gina London, CNN, Augusta, Maine.

[Milken:] Does anyone like hamburgers? Does anyone like cheese?
[Beverly Schuch, Host:] Michael Milken's day to day life now revolves around health, his own and that of others. He has hired Beth Ginsberg as chef and food guru and given her a difficult task, to make junk food tasty and healthy.
[Milken:] So, Beth, what are we going to go to work on here?
[Beth Ginsberg, Co-author, "the Taste For Living Cookbook":] We're going to make brownies today.
[Schuch:] After eating nothing but steamed vegetables for two years, Milken realized a couple of things. One, that he hated steamed vegetables. Thanks to Beth Ginsberg, his joy of life was restored by her invention of healthy junk food.
[Milken:] It's good. OK, what do you think?
[Unidentified Child:] Can we lick the bowl?
[Milken:] OK, can we lick the bowl? All right.
[Schuch:] Secondly and most important, he was still alive despite the doctors' dire predictions. So Michael Milken began to preach.
[Milken:] Good to see you. Yeah, I was just talking about diet.
[Schuch:] His cancer fighting organization CaP Cure now sponsors everything from golf tournaments to marches on the capital, all dedicated to increasing research and spending on prostate cancer.
[Milken:] Welcome. Thanks for coming.
[Schuch:] He and Beth Ginsberg have collaborated on a cookbook, hoping to change the ingredients, but not the taste, of classic American food like hot dogs, French fries and pizza.
[Ginsberg:] They believe that a high soy, low fat diet, you know, can help decrease tumor growth. So that's what the base of this book is.
[Schuch:] Perhaps the most significant aspect of CaP Cure is Milken's sponsorship of high level scientific conferences. He is the prime mover and focal point of all the far flung elements of prostate cancer research and funding.
[Milken:] At this conference, we have 10 of the leading pharmaceutical companies in the world, 30 of the leading biotech companies in the world and 250 representatives from the leading universities in the world.
[Schuch:] In 1998, for instance, for the fifth year in a row, he assembled the world's top cancer specialists in Lake Tahoe, Nevada.
[Unidentified Cancer Specialist:] And I guess the take home message from this is that tofu has a lot of benefits but that we need to know more about the food supply.
[Andrew Grove, Chairman, Intel:] I think it is doing an immensely useful job of accelerating and energizing prostate cancer research. Before CaP Cure, prostate cancer was a back waters disease.
[Schuch:] Do you know how much it's going to cost to cure cancer?
[Milken:] I feel it costs $100 billion. If we would invest $100 billion in five years I think we would solve this problem.
[Schuch:] But that's
[Milken:] We've been trickling it out at $2 billion a year last year. It sounds like it's going to take 50 years at that rate. Now, the march, the cancer march which occurred in September 25-26, 1998, 600 cancer organizations coming together, the vice president of the United States kicking off the rally, representing eight million people in America who had cancer and are alive today.
[Schuch:] But you also know that throwing money at a problem does not necessarily solve it. You've got to ferret groups. You're among doctors and scientists who don't communicate with each other. You've got problems that have contributed to it not being solved at this point so...
[Milken:] You've just defined the issues that we had to start addressing in 1993. We have to get the biotech and pharmaceutical companies talking to the university science center scientists. We have to get patients involved in their own treatment. We did a study and found that the average person would spend 10 times as much time shopping for a car as they do talking to the doctor about cancer. The only thing that compared to the amount of time they invested in their cancer treatment was picking a carpet cleaner. We had many outstanding scientists, but in a study of biologists, we found that only 5 percent of our country's leading biologists ever thought about working in cancer. So we had to go recruit 'em. Five years of recruiting has brought thousands of scientists to work on cancer, has moved the ball along in basic cancer research far, far along.
[Schuch:] Milken and his family have donated more than $50 million to the fight against prostate cancer. It's part of a long tradition of philanthropy which began long before he became a household name. Even as a young man, Milken used to tutor inner city kids and he hasn't lost his touch.
[Milken:] But you know how to add, huh? Do you know how to subtract?
[Unidentified Child:] Yes.
[Milken:] OK, let's see here together. Are you ready?
[Schuch:] When PINNACLE returns, from the highest pillars of corporate America to prison, the history of the Milken saga. In the early '80s, Milken and friends were on top of the world. His employer, Drexel Burnham Lambert, was the most profitable brokerage on Wall Street. Almost singlehandedly, Milken built Drexel's huge business in high yield bonds, called junk bonds. Drexel's annual high yield bond conference became known as the predator's ball, a lavish conclave held at places like the Beverly Hills Hotel. Milken proved to be, as some fund managers called him, the greatest bond salesman in history.
[Milken:] The issue of society, politics, what people believe in will determine greatly what the products are and what the success is of companies in the future.
[Schuch:] Selling these bonds previously thought undesirable, he made fortunes for himself, his colleagues and his clients, which include some of the most famous names in American business. Ted Turner, Carl Icon, Ronald Perlman, Craig McCaw and Steve Wynn all used Milken's ingenious, complex financing methods to build their business empires. [on camera]: What did they say to you when they came to you?
[Milken:] Well, they talked to me about their dreams. I had such a fantastic job. During the day we traded securities but by 2:00 in the afternoon, I could listen to people's dreams and ideas. And I used to get a lot of complaints telling me I was crazy, why do you want to go listen to this person with this new idea? But it allowed you to see the future through their eyes.
[Schuch:] All these industries that were created and companies were created by something called colloquially, junk bonds.
[Milken:] They were always legitimate and I think the issue is you call them what you want, but they're the American Dream. They're what's provided us the opportunity to grow.
[Schuch:] You can say that it doesn't bother you that people call you the junk bond king?
[Milken:] They've called me a lot of things in my life and I think names people give you aren't how you label yourself. You know, I have a mission today and my mission is focused on health care and education. I had a mission for really 20 years and that was how are you going to get capital to businesses?
[Schuch:] In 1989, one of the names they called Michael Milken was criminal. The government indicted him on 98 counts of securities laws violations and he plead guilty to six counts. In 1990, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison and fined more than $1 billion. Still, he remained a billionaire while powerhouse Drexel Burnham went bankrupt. Ten years later, Milken has never publicly discussed his guilty plea, but his lingering sense of pride in what he created is apparent.
[Milken:] I think you first have to have a self image and be true to yourself. No matter what happens to you in life, the question is are you true to yourself and your beliefs and have you done what you wanted to do? Life is not fair.
[Schuch:] After serving 22 months in prison, Milken was released, put on probation and permanently barred from the securities industry. He acted as a business consultant until 1996. The SEC continued to scrutinize and investigate his work, asking the court eight times to extend his probation while investigating consulting fees he received for deals involving news corporation MCI, New World Communications and Time Warner Turner Broadcasting. His parole finally ended in March of 1998.
[Milken:] So much of life is sharing it with another person.
[Schuch:] His admirers have said that someone like Michael Milken only comes along once every 500 years. You'll learn where he came from, when PINNACLE returns. As a child, Michael Milken used to help his father, an accountant, do tax returns. Even at 10, meeting his father's clients, he had said he noticed the difference in motivation between people who worked for others and those who owned and operated their own businesses. One of the cardinal rules at Drexel was only back owners who put their own money into the company. Milken says he's still the same now as he was in his childhood, intense, visionary, private and full of new ideas. [on camera]: When did you have your first capitalist experience as a kid?
[Milken:] Well, I was the block captain for the American Cancer Society, raising money for the American Cancer Society.
[Schuch:] Boy, have you come full circle.
[Milken:] So my early experience was non-profit. When I did that, I did not know one person that had cancer. It was, you know, something to do to go to the neighborhood and try to raise dimes for that cause. I grew up in elementary school and polio was the issue. My father had had polio, but he died from cancer.
[Schuch:] Not surprisingly, Milken was a brilliant student in high school and college. He went to Berkeley during the '60s. Instead of becoming a political radical, he says he became a financial revolutionary.
[Milken:] It was really when I came home when I was visiting my parents in August of '65 that my life really had a fundamental change. And on August 11th, 1965, Los Angeles was on fire and the Watts riots began.
[Schuch:] And how did that affect you? You were in a middle class environment.
[Milken:] I had spent a lot of time in South Central, Los Angeles. My father's had clients down there and I used to go when I was a little boy and visit his clients. I participated in speech tournaments, tutoring down at USC and to me, it was like next door. And to see armored personnel carriers on the streets of the city where you grew up, I didn't have to go to some foreign country, they were here in Los Angeles.
[Schuch:] And what was the definitive change from that in your life?
[Milken:] I met a man who burned down a building that he worked in. He had no savings. I couldn't understand what his thought process was. He worked in this building and when he woke up in the morning there would be no job and he had no savings. And he told me he didn't feel part of America, there was no American Dream. He wasn't part of that business. There was no opportunity for him or his children. And in the heat of the evening, it was his way of striking back. I concluded that we never had a democratization of capital, that people actually did get money based on who their parents were or what they looked like, not what their abilities were and I switched to business two weeks later at Berkeley.
[Schuch:] With the intention of?
[Milken:] Providing access to capital. I concluded that there was a number of things going on in the '60s, and I'm a baby boomer. Everything you read about baby boomers, I'm part of that group.
[Schuch:] You were a hippie?
[Milken:] I was a hippie by New York standards, not by Berkeley standards. I was considered pretty straight by Berkeley, but everything is relative in life. And I did have an assignment in 1964. One of my first financing assignments was raising money to get people out of jail at Berkeley.
[Schuch:] Milken went on to get his MBA at Wharton in Philadelphia. He took a job with Drexel in New York when that old white shoe firm was on its last legs. He commuted five hours a day from Philadelphia to Wall Street. He traveled so early in the morning that he had to wear a surgeon's light on his head in order to be able to read the reams of research on the bus. That research became the backbone of his spectacular success on Wall Street. Fund managers said he knew his bonds so well he even knew the name of the chairman's cat.
[Laura Milken:] He still has that same energy that he's always had. He's just doing different things but he's still very active.
[Schuch:] The Watts riots so altered his life that he chose the start date, August 11th, to get married so he'd never forget. He married his childhood sweetheart and they had three children.
[Milken:] I'm just a hopeless romantic. I've always been one. But this book I prepared for my wife for one of her birthdays, and so what we tried to do was get people who knew Laura each year write a letter to her and a note and then captured pictures from that year. This was us at the high school prom, this is a fraternity party at Berkeley, this is on our honeymoon in Hawaii, and this is later when we were on a cruise. So it gives you a chance to look at yourself at different points in your life.
[Schuch:] And so the once and perhaps future master of the universe, Michael Milken, lives like the rest of us, day to day. The difference is, he knows it. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Anchor:] Good evening again, everyone. Maybe there will come a time when news like today doesn't cause that faint sick feeling in our stomach. Maybe as the war goes on and there are the inevitable casualties, it will somehow feel routine. It does happen. It happened in Vietnam, and it probably happened in World War II, so maybe it will happen again. But I hope not. Three more Americans died in Afghanistan today. The fact that it was an American bomb that killed them is an important fact, but not the critical one at all. The critical fact is that they were out there in a perfectly hellish place doing what their country asked them to do. They weren't drafted into this mess. They volunteered. And whatever you may think of the war or the politics, or the various battles over civil liberties and national security, whatever you think of those things, it doesn't change a single thing about today's news. It is terribly sad, and all of us grieve a little tonight for men we didn't know and for families we have never met. Now the facts of the day. Five soldiers in all were killed, three of them, Americans, when a satellite bomb exploded nearby. Twenty more Americans were wounded, so were 10 opposition fighters. One of the wounded, Hamid Karzai, the Pashtun commander chosen to lead a transitional Afghan government. He suffered only minor injuries. And from the White House today, another warning to Yasser Arafat. The president saying, you must act now to stop terrorism. From Israel, more evidence it won't be easy another bomber and more bloodshed. But also today, this: The space shuttle Endeavour lifted off incredibly tight security in Florida heading for a rendez-vous with the International Space Statin. The first mission since the 11th of September. The breathtaking sight, no matter how many times you see it. There is also news of anthrax tonight, real and fake. And we'll talk with the brother of the brother of the pilot whose plane crashed into the Pentagon. The family, as Larry mentioned, has been in an unpleasant dispute with the government over a burial plot at Arlington National Cemetery. On matters other than war, we'll take a look at the Green River murder case in Seattle. A man was formally charged today in what may have been the worst case of serial murder in the country's history. And we'll end the program tonight with a very important lesson for any of you thinking of making this your life's work: never mention a former girlfriend on the air. They and you know this is true have pictures. But that's the end. For now, we begin, as is our custom, with a whip around the world and a check on the correspondents who are covering it all tonight. We start at the Pentagon, and Jamie McIntyre. Jamie, the headline from you, please.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Military Affairs Correspondent:] Well, at the Pentagon tonight, Aaron, they are mourning the loss of three of the Army's finest soldiers three Green Berets from Fort Campbell, Kentucky, dead because of that errant bomb. And, as you mentioned, 20 other Americans wounded. Eighteen 18 Afghan friendly fighters wounded as well. Was it human error or a malfunctioning bomb? The Pentagon still doesn't know.
[Brown:] Jamie, back to you very shortly. To the mountains of Afghanistan now, where the search for Osama bin Laden and others goes on. CNN's Ben Wedeman is there. Ben, a headline, please.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Aaron. It appears that anti-Taliban forces have begun to move against al Qaeda positions in the mountainous Tora Bora region south of Jalalabad, an area some believe where bin Laden might be hiding.
[Brown:] Ben, thank you. Back to you as well. Kelly Wallace at the White House, the Middle East on the president's mind. Kelly, the headline, please.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, Aaron, President Bush sending maybe his most forceful message yet to the Palestinian leader, saying now is the time to show leadership and crack down a terrorism. Yasser Arafat sending a message as well on this day, saying give him a chance to show what he can do Aaron.
[Brown:] Kelly, thank you. Two sides of the anthrax story, one fiction, one almost science fiction. Each plenty frightening. Susan Candiotti working the anthrax story. Susan, you have to make two stories into one headline.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Good evening, Aaron. I'll try. The fiction part of the headline: a suspect believed to be behind hundreds of anthrax hoax letters caught when he made a big mistake. The headline we all wish was science fiction has to do with anthrax that's all too real. That letter to Senator Leahy finally opened today no hoax here Aaron.
[Brown:] Susan, thank you. Back with all of you shortly. We have said often in the early days of the bombing, in particular, that for all the high-tech weapons the United States has, war remains an imperfect business. We said that when bombs accidentally hit civilians, or civilian targets, and we remind you of that tonight. These high-tech gizmos that can hit a single car in a traffic jam, and more often that not, do, can also fail. One may have failed today. And when that happens, the consequences are awful. Three American special op soldiers dead tonight, hit by a bomb they had called in for. Back to the Pentagon and CNN's Jamie McIntyre. Jamie, good evening.
[Mcintyre:] Well, Aaron, they call these smart bombs, but they say they're not genius bombs. Even the best technology, they say, fails succeeds at best, about 85 to 90 percent of the time. That's a pretty good batting average, but not perfect. And tonight the Pentagon is trying to figure out what went wrong with this one today.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Of Defense:] The coordinates could have been wrong, in the first instance. They could have been transmitted incorrectly. They could have been received incorrectly. They could have been put into the fire control system incorrectly. And many other things could also have happened. There could be a bent fin on the weapon.
[Mcintyre:] It's the second time an errant 2,000-pound has hit too close to friendly forces. Five U.S. special forces have been awarded purple hearts for injuries from a similar accident last week, near Mazar-e Sharif.
[Unidentified Male:] Pull back. Pull back at this time. Hey, guys, let's get out. Heads up! There's shrapnel inbound! Shrapnel inbound!
[Captain Paul, U.s. Army:] I didn't hear anything. And all of a sudden I didn't hear an explosion or anything. It was just all of a sudden I could feel myself flying. And like I said, everything was brown. Once I hit the ground, my first thought was I just laid there in a little ball, because I was thinking OK, now something is going to land on top of me.
[Brown:] Jamie, before you wrap up, stand by for a second, because we have a very narrow window to talk with our pool reporter, who is traveling with the Marines in Afghanistan. The pool reporter now is ABC News correspondent David Wright, and David joins us on the phone. David, good morning to you. What can you report?
[David Wright, Camp Rhino, Afghanistan:] Aaron, I just heard that report there, and I can tell you that two of the dead bodies of the American soldiers were brought here to this base near Kandahar a U.S. Marines base, and given what military honors the soldiers here could. The other soldier, we're given to understand, died en route to another medical facility elsewhere in the region. And as many as 20 Afghan soldiers also received some first aid treatment, some of it just triage, and they were sent the more serious cases to other medical facilities elsewhere. Some of the lighter cases were treated here and released. And it was a pretty heavy scene for the Marines here. They have been busy setting up this base. And for some it was the first time it really hit home, just how serious the situation here is.
[Brown:] David, how long have you been in, now?
[Wright:] Not very long. We got in late last night, under cover of night. And the sun is just breaking in this part of the world, so I estimate we've been here for just a couple of hours. So we're just getting... Sorry?
[Brown:] I'm sorry. I was going to ask if you could feel the difference before these deaths occurred and after, among the Marines that you're traveling with?
[Wright:] No. All we can judge is by what one the soldiers told us, which is that one soldier said, you know, it had seemed before this that it was almost like a football game. They were setting up their base here and they were in a pretty lighthearted mood. And it feels pretty secure in this base, I must tell you. When they saw those two dead soldiers, he said, you know, it really hit home exactly how serious this is. Many of these soldiers, as you can imagine, are young boys who are just facing their first combat duty. So, it's a first opportunity for them to see this part of the world. And it really hit home for them...
[Brown:] David...
[Wright:] Just the seriousness of this mission.
[Brown:] I'm sorry. David, we've got about 20 seconds left. You've been in and out of the country a lot. Does it feel significantly different to be with an American unit now?
[Wright:] It's very different to be with an American unit, a lot more restrictions on our mobility. And on the other side, a sense of the U.S. mission here. You know, it will be interesting to see exactly what we are able to see with them. They are, of course, very concerned for our safety. And so they're keeping us on a very tight leash, as you can imagine.
[Brown:] David, we're concerned for your safety, too. You've been a friend. David, thank you. David Wright, who is the pool reporter traveling with the Marines, on the telephone from outside of Kandahar. Let me go back to the Pentagon. Jamie, I'm going to ask you to do something that's terribly unfair, for which I apologize. Go ahead and put a button on the story you were telling about the bomb that accidentally killed the Americans today.
[Mcintyre:] Well, the only thing I would add at this point is that we do want to make note of the fact that this errant bomb also wounded Hamid Karzai, the man who has just been picked to head the interim government in Afghanistan. Although Pentagon officials described his injuries as a flesh wound he was up talking and seen in public the Pentagon believes he's just fine, but it was a close call there.
[Brown:] Jamie, thank you. And again, sorry to interrupt you that way.
[Mcintyre:] That's quite all right.
[Brown:] We appreciate it. Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon. A little more on this now. We're joined now by retired General David Grange, former special ops guy. The general joins is from Oak Brook, Illinois. It's nice to see you again. GEN. DAVID GRANGE,
[U.s. Army:] Aaron.
[Brown:] Essentially, an inevitable reality of war, what happened today?
[Grange:] Absolutely. For 30 years I've been a part of the service, there was fratricide, friendly fire incidents, in every conflict I'm aware of. It's an integral part of the face of battle. It's going to always be there.
[Brown:] When something like this happens, what happens at the Pentagon? What sort of investigation will take place, can take place? Will they ever know what happened?
[Grange:] Well, there will be an investigation through the chain of command, in the field all the way up through Central Command, and then all the way back to the Pentagon. Not so much as a witch hunt, but to find out what went wrong so it can be corrected. And like the secretary of defense stated earlier, it could have been a technological problem, with a bent fin. It could have been just something went wrong with the navigational system of the munitions. It could have been human error, from the ground controller on the ground calling in the location for the enemy target, or the transmittal of that into the munition delivery system on the aircraft by the pilots aboard. Any technological advances that we had and we have many, we lead the world is subject to the human factor. And the human being is the strongest and weakest part of any system.
[Brown:] When they call these strikes in we don't necessarily have to be specific on this one, because I'm not sure we know precisely the detail but when they call these strikes in, how close are they, or how close might they be to the target?
[Grange:] It depends on the munitions. It depends on a delivery system and the angle of attack. It varies on the size of the bomb a 500-pound bomb, 2,000-pound bomb, they have what's known as danger close. And usually you don't bring it in closer to the friendly forces. And let's say danger close may be 600 meters, for this particular munition. Unless you're in a heavy fire fight, you may bring it in closer. I have done that in Vietnam. I've had people with me wounded from that in Vietnam. But it was the only way to kill the enemy, which were hugging our position. But those that call in fire know are trained in those distances.
[Brown:] David, thank you. General, thank you. David Grange, joining us from Illinois tonight, thank you. We did get our best look today yet at what the Americans are living through, the kinds of things that David Wright was talking about in the pool report, at that base outside of Kandahar. Now, we've heard the words from David earlier, and from others who have been part of the pool, and they've been terrific. But pictures always help tell these sorts of stories. We've got some tonight. Here's CNN's Walter Rodgers.
[Walter Rodgers, Cnn Correspondent:] Two U.S. Marines on a hillside in southern Afghanistan, as the sun sinks below the horizon. A cobra attack helicopter flies northeast toward Kandahar, while Marine infantry beds down here. Those on post take up positions in their machine gun and mortar nests. This is alpha company. Each Marine has night-vision goggles to scan the horizon. Kandahar is somewhere out there, though they are too far away to see the nightly bombing. Sergeant Jerry McPherson briefs his men.
[Sergeant Jerry Mcpherson, Marines:] The thing about the desert, is there's a lot of dead space out there that you don't really see, just looking. It's real deceiving.
[Rodgers:] Another Marine checks out his.84-millimeter disposable antitank rocket, again, under his sergeant's mothering.
[Mcpherson:] At nighttime you really the sights
[Rodgers:] These Marines are protecting the base from which other units have launched forth toward Kandahar. They have been left behind. Privately, they grumble they're being left out of the fight because, they say, the politicians in Washington don't want any Americans bloodied.
[Mcpherson:] It's like kind of like a boxer, you know, trains for 20 years and never fights a fight.
[Unidentified Male:] We trained for this, and we want a piece of the action. That's what grunts are. That's what we've been known for: going in, fighting, kicking some butt, as you can say.
[Rodgers:] Instead, they stand under the stars and bond in trenches, like soldiers have always done, and tell stories to keep their morale high.
[Unidentified Male:] One guy though he saw a puma, but what it is, it's like a fox, or some type of wild dog. And I always thought a puma was a cat, so I don't think he saw a puma.
[Rodgers:] In these pictures, taken only by starlight, they talk about what concerns them most.
[Unidentified Male:] The only thing I can think about is making it through this alive, and go home and see my wife and kids.
[Rodgers:] By dawn's first light, other Marines closer to the air base are already shaking off the cold, and vowing they would never fall asleep at their posts.
[Unidentified Male:] Staying awake is a matter of discipline. If you fall asleep on watch, you let your buddies down.
[Rodgers:] These Marines did have a full, 100 percent alert last night, everyone scrambling in the dark to grab their M-16 rifles and to get to their fighting holes. It turned out to be a false alarm. Someone said it might have been one of the stray camels that wanders through this camp at night. Walter Rodgers with the U.S. Marines, in the southern Afghan desert.
[Brown:] To the northeastern part of the country, the battle goes on there in the foothills of the area called Tora Bora. Anti-Taliban forces advancing on the ground, U.S. bombing from above. Some concerns among the Mujahedeen about how close those bombs are coming to them. But there is reason to believe they are having the desired effect. We're hearing reports of serious casualties among al Qaeda, including reports a son, one of many, of Osama bin Laden, may be among the dead. CNN's Ben Wedeman is covering the search for bin Laden. Ben, good evening.
[Wedeman:] Good evening, Aaron. According to one source in the Eastern Alliance, which is the anti-Taliban coalition in this area, as man as 12 al Qaeda members have been killed in that fighting. And there are also unconfirmed intelligence reports that one of the sons of Osama bin Laden has been killed. Bin Laden is believed to have as many as three wives and a least a dozen children. Now, this is just the latest in a variety a long list of members of al Qaeda who have either been captured, wounded or killed. Mohammed Atef, one of top lieutenants in al Qaeda, is also reported to have been killed. Wounded, Ayman al-Zawahiri, also one of the top lieutenants a 50-year-old former surgeon from Egypt, said to have been wounded. And that comes just a few days after the reported capture of Ahmad Omar Abdu Rahman, who is the son of Omar Rahman, who is being held in U.S. prison for involvement in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. All this comes as the Eastern Alliance is building up as many as 3,000 troops to go over those al Qaeda forces in the tunnels and caves, in the very rugged Tora Bora area. There, advances being accompanied by intense U.S. bombing, by B-52s and other aircraft. Just a little while ago this morning, we saw a B-52 fly overhead. And in fact, just a few minutes ago we saw another aircraft, not quite sure what kind that was, flying north from the Tora Bora region. So clearly, this is a new front, a very intense front. And the expectations are that fighting will intensify, today and in the coming days Aaron.
[Brown:] One or two things, here. On these reports of people who may or may not have been injured, give us your best sense of the quality of the sourcing here.
[Wedeman:] Well, unfortunately, the intelligence is rather hard to confirm. Some of the sources are from these anti-Taliban forces, which we know in the past, have sometimes made rather exaggerated claims which... true. In other cases, for instance, the capture of Rahman, that is confirmed by U.S. forces. So it really depends what the source is, where it's coming from. But certainly, there's no question that the al Qaeda leadership infrastructure is suffering from what's now more than a month of bombing. And now, basically, the collapse almost the collapse of the Taliban Aaron.
[Brown:] Ben, thank you. Ben Wedeman in Jalalabad, on the search for bin Laden tonight. Still ahead on
[Newsnight:] an arrest in a case of anthrax letters that weren't, which didn't make them any less frightening or the suspect any less dangerous. That story and more, as NEWSNIGHT continues, on Wednesday.
[Brown:] There's a bit of evidence tonight that Yasser Arafat may be trying to put terrorism back in the box. Palestinian police say they've placed the leader of Hamas under house arrest. Then again, the leader in question is already terribly ill and confined to a wheelchair. The move came after a warning from the White House about what needs to be done, and another suicide bombing, that shows just how tough this could be. CNN's Kelly Wallace joins us tonight from the White House, where she's got the duty. Kelly, nice to see you again.
[Wallace:] Nice to see you, Aaron. Well, that latest suicide bombing at a downtown hotel in Jerusalem, leaving the bomber dead and six injured. And, Aaron, it comes on a day when the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, sent a message to President Bush. His message: give him a chance to show he is cracking down on Palestinian militants. That message, delivered in a letter to the Norwegian prime minister, which the prime minister delivered to President Bush during their meeting today. Well, the White House says the president's views are not changed by that letter, and that the president continues to believe, as he forcefully stated today, that the onus is on the Palestinian leader to do everything in his power to find and arrest all suspected terrorists.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Mr. Arafat must show leadership and bring those to justice, who would use murder as a weapon to derail peace and destroy innocent life. He must show leadership. Now is his time.
[Wallace:] And there are signs of growing frustration as well in the United States Congress. The House and the Senate both passing today nonbinding resolutions calling on President Bush to suspend ties with the Palestinian leader if he does not crack down on Islamic militants. Now, Mr. Arafat, for his part, is appealing to the international community to pressure the Israelis to refrain from attacking Palestinian targets in response to the weekend's suicide bombings. The Norwegian prime minister, speaking to reporters, following his meeting with Mr. Bush, said that he spoke with the Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, and he urged the Israeli leader to refrain from the further attacks.
[Kjell Magne Bondevik, Norwegian Prime Minister:] I urged Prime Minister Sharon to end attacks on Palestinian targets, to give Arafat a chance, to test him so he can deliver what he has promised. And the president and I also agreed on this matter.
[Wallace:] Now, the White House, for its part, continues to say little publicly about this issue, other than that Israel has a right to defend herself. But also, that the Israelis must realize there will be repercussions to their actions. One senior official saying, look, we keep reminding the Israelis there will be a tomorrow. And as for tomorrow, Aaron, we know that the U.S. envoy in the region, retired Marine Corps General Anthony Zinni, is expected to meet with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. It would be the first meeting between the two men since the weekend suicide bombings Aaron.
[Brown:] Kelly, thanks. Kelly Wallace, on the lawn of the White House tonight. Developments tonight on two sides of the anthrax story: the one involving anthrax and the one that doesn't. Police caught the man they say mailed out hundreds of letters claiming to be filled with anthrax a dangerous man with harmless letters. Then there's the letter mailed by who knows who. This one, so deadly, but so full of promising evidence, it's taken quite a while to figure out just how to open it. CNN's Susan Candiotti is working both sides of the anthrax story tonight. And she joins us again from Washington. Good evening to you, Susan.
[Candiotti:] Good evening, Aaron. First, that deadly anthrax letter to Senator Patrick Leahy. Recovered 19 days ago, scientists finally opened the envelope and started carefully extracting the deadly spores inside, more than they've ever recovered before. Tonight, CNN has learned the letter is still inside the envelope. However, a source says scientists have gotten just enough of a peek inside to get an early indication the letter does indeed appear to be at least similar to the letter sent to Senate majority leader, Tom Daschle. It's hoped the letter will be removed tomorrow. Now, on to an anthrax hoax. Hundreds of letters that claimed to hold anthrax did not. Tonight authorities have their hands on the man they suspect is responsible. He didn't count on a female store clerk paying attention to those famous "wanted" posters.
[Unidentified Male:] No question about it. He was a dangerous individual who is now behind bars.
[Candiotti:] Aware Waagner liked to use Kinko's computers, U.S. Marshals blanketed Kinko's nationwide with his mug shot on the FBI's "Ten Most Wanted" list. It paid off. A Kinko's employee in the Cincinnati suburb of Springdale, Ohio recognized him. She called federal Marshals, who rushed in local police.
[Chief Mike Lagge, Springdale, Ohio Police Dept:] When the officers entered, he started to exit.
[Candiotti:] He didn't get away. Authorities say Waagner was armed and had $10,000 stuffed in his pockets. The FBI calls Waagner the prime suspect behind more than 500 anthrax hoax letters, sent to clinics performing abortions, since October. One message read: "We deliver deadly bioweapons. We are going to kill you. This is your notice. Stop now or die." Planned Parenthood received hundreds of those letters with fake anthrax.
[Gloria Feldt, Planned Parenthood Federation:] Clearly, he has a network. And he is the head of the snake. The rest of the snake is still out there.
[Candiotti:] Waagner escaped from an Illinois prison last February. The FBI suspects he's behind a string of robberies, and found a pipe bomb in his abandoned car, Labor Day weekend. Almost two weeks ago, another abortion opponent, Neal Horsley, says he got a visit from Waagner in Georgia, and taped their conversation.
[Clayton Waagner, Suspected For Anthrax Hoax:] I did the anthrax scares with the abortion clinics. I did all of them.
[Neal Horsley, The Christian Gallery:] You did them all?
[Waagner:] Every single one...
[Horsley:] While he was here, he had Fedex packing slips, with the of addresses of Planned Parenthood offices and the numbers of Planned Parenthood Fedex accounts. And he brought those items because he intended for people to know that he had done the anthrax mailings.
[Candiotti:] Waagner appears in court tomorrow in Cincinnati. Authorities say if convicted of the charges they anticipate filing, Waagner could spend the rest of his life in prison Aaron.
[Brown:] Susan, thank you. Susan Candiotti in Washington. When we come back, a pilot who died a hero on the 11th of September, and his family's fight to have him buried as one. We'll talk to his brother, when NEWSNIGHT continues. Charles Burlingame died on September 11. Though precisely how he died we don't really know. He was the pilot on the plane that was hijacked, and crashed into the Pentagon. But of course he was more than that. He was also a brother and a husband. He flew Navy jets for 8 years, was in the reserves for 17. Tonight his family is in a dispute with the government about his burial at Arlington National Cemetery. It is a complicated story and Captain Burlingame's brother Brad was kind enough to come in tonight. Nice to see you.
[Brad Burlingame, Brother Of Charles Burlingame Iii:] Thank you. Aaron: This is all in play right now and people all over Washington are talking about it. Essentially there's a rule that says unless you're 60-year-old...
[Burlingame:] As a retired reservist, unless you reach the age of 60 you are ineligible to be buried at Arlington.
[Brown:] And, speaking now as the U.S. government, why should that rule be changed?
[Burlingame:] We respect the rules. My family grew up in the military and growing up with a chief master sergeant who instructed those rules on a daily basis we were very respectful of them. But we think that September 11 is an extraordinary circumstance. Frankly, I think the rule is wrong and I believe that there are legislators on Capitol Hill who feel that way as well, particularly the senators that we have been working with, and I think eventually that rule may be changed. But September 11 was an extraordinary day. And my brother was killed in an extraordinary manner and it's those circumstances that we believe warrant an exception.
[Brown:] There was, I gather this has been kind of a negotiation, sort of an uncomfortable to apply here, but the Pentagon, or the Army, or the cemetery, all of these people offered up a compromise of sorts. Why not accept it?
[Burlingame:] Well, it's not a compromise. What is available to us, is that our brother would be buried with my father and mother. And in some ways that's appealing us to. That's sacred ground for us at Arlington. That option for us would be available if he was not involved with September 11 at all. If my brother had died in his living room at home that option would be available. Again, I think it is because the fact that he died the way he did, knowing that he was in combat literally with those terrorist on the plane trying to protect not only the aircraft, his passengers, his crew members, but we actually have resources that lead us to believe it may have prevented him from the terrorist from taking that plane into the capital or the White House as well. That these were extraordinary measures my brother was put under and it is those circumstance that warrant his being considered for this.
[Brown:] Tell me one thing, I know that Senator Allen has been helpful in this, others. Tell me where the process is, at least as best as you can understand it.
[Burlingame:] It is still being developed. I have great trust that it will be worked out. Senator Warner, Senator Allen, Senator Santorum, Senator Specter, senators from California where I'm from, Congressman Frank Wolf, other congressman have been trying to make this happen. I do know that Senator Allen, specifically and notably, whose office has been working tirelessly in this regard, has reached out to the White House, and I know that Senator Allen's office is in contact with them, and I believe that that outreach will result in success. But I want to go back to something about that option, about his burial with our mother and father. One of difficult choices about that is that in order to do that, his wife, his widow Sherry, my sister-in-law, she would have to relinquish her privileges to be buried with her husband. The stories I have heard that that may be unprecedented in the history of Arlington and it is something she still anguishes to this day and has not relinquished to this point.
[Brown:] You know, I think can, all of us here, can only hope it works out in a way that makes the family happy. The family has obviously suffered enough. And our condolences to you and your family members and thanks for coming in.
[Burlingame:] Thank you, Aaron.
[Brown:] It's nice to meet you.
[Burlingame:] Nice to meet you.
[Brown:] Thank you. We'll continue in a moment. Prosecutors in King County, Washington, suburban Seattle today, formally filed aggravated murder charges against Gary Leon Ridgeway, a man now suspected of being the Green River Killer. As many as 49 women died in the Seattle area over a long period in the 80s. This has been enormously difficult for investigators, but they now believe they have the break they waited a long time for. Thomas Guillen teaches journalism these days, but back a few years ago when I first met him, he was a reporter at the "Seattle Times" and literally wrote the book on the Green River investigations. He joins us from Seattle tonight. Nice to see you. Are you surprised they finally made an arrest?
[Thomas Guillen, Associate Professor, Seattle University:] Yes I am. I thought it was going to go unsolved like Jack the Ripper, or the Zodiac case of San Francisco. And they didn't have a lot of evidence, so I was surprised they made an arrest.
[Brown:] Were they, up to this point, and as you know, I've been out of this story now for 10 years sins I left there, were they ever close to making an arrest of anyone?
[Guillen:] They made several arrests. They just couldn't build a case around it. This gentlemen they rested they thought he was one of the top suspects. They had a lot of circumstantial evidence against him, and I believe they would have charged him back in 1987, when they served the search warrant, but they just didn't have any physical evidence.
[Brown:] And for people who might not have been following the case in the last few days, what made the difference? What made the case?
[Guillen:] When they went after him in 1987 they served a search warrant and were able to get a saliva sample and other evidence and when DNA came along and the technology advanced, they went ahead and did some tests on that saliva, and came up with a match to a young lady named Karen Christiansen, who is on the list of victims and two other young ladies, and then a fourth one, they charged him with circumstantial evidence.
[Brown:] And again, for people who have not followed the case, all of the victims or almost all of them, at least as I recall it, were prostitutes who worked around the airport and thereabouts?
[Guillen:] A good number of them were prostitutes, but a good number were simply teenagers who were lost, dysfunctional, running away, lived the street life, near drugs and prostitution, so they became targets, too.
[Brown:] Have you talked to police about this, in the last couple days?
[Guillen:] No, I haven't. Basically I've been in the background, getting information on some of the, possibly, more victims post-1984.
[Brown:] And you know a lot of these cops. They must be off the wall, excited that they finally, after all this time, 15, 16 years believe they got their man.
[Guillen:] They are very excited. They're jumping up for joy. And I hope it all pans out. They've got him on 4, hopefully they'll find the evidence to link him to two more of the cases, and I think everybody has to be reminded, though, that there's a judicial system and they have to be careful with that. And hopefully he is the man, but they are very excited.
[Brown:] I bet they are. Thomas, nice to see you again. We see you're doing honest work, teaching these days. We appreciate your time, tonight. Thomas Guillen joining us from Seattle, tonight. In a minute, the risky business of learning, learning English under the Taliban, that is. NEWSNIGHT on Wednesday. We found a story in Afghanistan that is really about simple acts of courage. It is a story that tells you a lot about the people involved, and a little bit about the importance of United States, even in a remote corner of the world. It's reported for us, tonight, by CNN's Jason Bellini
[Jason Bellini, Cnn Correspondent:] Sadika Almadi sees her school, and it is her school, as a way out. Out of the fate she refuses to accept, a life knitting carpets. [on camera]: Is it boring? Yes, it's really boring. But what you can do?
[Bellini:] The Taliban only let boys attend school, and only then to study the Koran, so two years ago, Sadika became a self-taught teacher. She opened her own school for English in her home.
[Almadi:] There is the newspaper. All of
[Bellini:] You give tests? [voice-over]: Boys and girls secretly attended, until the Taliban discovered her, shut her down and beat her father.
[Almadi:] And they want to punish me also. But my father didn't let them punish me. He said for the Taliban, I'm proud of me my daughter is teaching English.
[Bellini:] Her father is proud, but also practical. Has no job, he needs his daughter's help. [on camera]: When you're making carpets, do you dream about things? What do you think about?
[Almadi:] I'm thinking about my knowledge, and I always when I knit a carpet, I'm very absent about because I lose my knowledge, and in this situation we have to knit carpet.
[Bellini:] Under the Taliban, most girls rarely left their homes. Sadikah was no exception. When she wasn't reading, teaching or knitting carpets she would sometimes listen to music or watch movies. Forbidden activities under the Taliban. [on camera]: Did you have to keep these hidden from the Taliban?
[Almadi:] Yes, I hide from them.
[Bellini:] Where?
[Almadi:] Under the ground.
[Bellini:] Under the ground?
[Almadi:] Yes.
[Bellini:] Where under the ground?
[Almadi:] On our hall yard.
[Bellini:] Really, can you show me?
[Almadi:] Yes.
[Bellini:] You kept your music where?
[Almadi:] Here. Besides the musical cassettes there under the ground.
[Bellini:] Her courses bring in some income, but not enough to save her from the carpet loom. When she has a little extra money she spends it on books. Expanding horizons of her mind make it that much harder to accept societies expectations. [on camera]: What kind locket?
[Almadi:] Gold locket.
[Bellini:] From boyfriends.
[Almadi:] No, I don't have any boyfriends.
[Bellini:] Why not? Why no boyfriends?
[Almadi:] I don't like. My parents got me and get got.
[Unidentified Male:] She sees now I'm engaged by my parents to someone.
[Almadi:] But I'm not happy about this. I'm so nervous.
[Bellini:] Do you know him? Have you met him?
[Almadi:] Yes, he's my cousin.
[Bellini:] Have you ever been outside of Kabul?
[Almadi:] No.
[Bellini:] Sadikah's dreams have no boarders.
[Almadi:] Also, I like a lot to be a flight attendant.
[Bellini:] A flight attendant?
[Almadi:] Yes, because of, I want to travel a lot, and meet interesting people.
[Bellini:] Teaching makes it all seem possible. Perhaps helping her to forget what's next door to her classroom. The carpet loom Jason Bellini, CNN, Kabul, Afghanistan.
[Brown:] When NEWSNIGHT returns, two moments frozen in time, December 7 remembered today. Just a stone's throw and a million years from September 11. Imagine what it will be like, 60 years from now, when survivors of September 11 gather to remember those attacks. And then think what it must have been like today for the people who gathered aboard the USS New Jersey. They came to commemorate the 60th anniversary of Pearl Harbor, on the 85th day after September 11. Invitations billed the annual event as a discussion of both days. And it's hard not to think of one when you think of the other.
[Unidentified Female:] ... and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
[Rep. Robert Andrews , New Jersey:] Eleven years ago we started this event as a way to say thank you to the Pearl Harbor generation. I look at this event as inspiration. I hope our generation can rise to the occasion the way the Pearl Harbor generation rose to its occasion and rid the world of a terrible scourge.
[Dominic Gentile, Pearl Harbor Survivor:] We heard this bombings, and we said boy, that's a hell of a way for the Army, Air Force to have maneuvers on Sunday mornings. Because we were right next door the Hickam Field. And as they dropped the bombs, they swung around and the next thing you know, they start straight for us, so I was on one of the destroyer that was on fire. And a sailor came, rushed up from below decks. So, to stop him from jumping overboard, because at that time the water was on fire, I pulled him and he pulled and the only thing that remained in my hand was his skin. His flesh was burned. He jumped overboard you know so he burned to death. We picked up the sailors that were wounded and burned and the Marines and brought them to the hospital. And we worked for a couple days, we didn't get to take a shower for about 3 days, and that's when I started shaking. I looked in the men's room and looked in the toilet and saw what I looked like. You would be believe it. I was black, my clothes were all bloody and black from the smoke.
[Andrews:] I think that the World War II generation are the heroes of the present, not the heroes of the past. They have a lesson to teach us about casting aside your personal feelings and personal ambitions and doing what your country needs you to do. It's a lesson that those firefighters and police officers learned in New York City which is why they went into the buildings when they were collapsing.
[Gentile:] When I saw that, saw the plane hit, I really felt real awful. Then the smoke and all, it reminded me of Pearl Harbor. The Arizona and everything, the other ships that were burning. And I just figure, you know, this is it, just like you did in Pearl Harbor. I said, this is it. I feel, like I said, I feel sorry for the ones that found these burned bodies and had to smell them, because they will never get rid of that smell. That smell will stay with them the rest of their lives.
[Andrews:] December 7, 1941 was the beginning of end for Naziism. I think that we will look back and see September 11, 2001 as the beginning of the end for terrorism. The country rallied after Pearl Harbor and it became invincible. And I see the same thing happening now with respect to terrorism.
[Gentile:] As a nation right now, we're kind of united. You see everybody flying flags. The best thing that I remember that day is our flag flying in front of the hospital. And I went, that's my early memory of Pearl Harbor.
[Brown:] Anniversary two days from now. That was the work of NEWSNIGHT producer, Katherine Mitchell. Nicely done. When we come back, well let me just say, get out your pencil because we have a very important email address for you to write down. We will be right back. Finally tonight, I just want to say that it is not about me. Well, actually, it is about me, but it is not about my feelings. It is about your feelings about me. You with me? Here we go. One of our beloved staff members here at NEWSNIGHT discovered that the "Atlanta Journal Constitution," which is sort of CNN's home town paper, by the way, is running an on-line poll to find out which CNN anchor is the sexiest. I'm not kidding about this. There is Bill Hemmer, you can see him there, Nic Roberston, John King, Larry is there, for goodness sakes. But little old me, the guy featured in "People" and "TV Guide," guest on "The Daily Show," soon to be sitting next to Rosie, where am I? Nowhere, that's where not even listed. Couldn't vote for me if you wanted to. Now I don't mind losing, well actually, I do mind losing, but this is unfair. And I hope you'll agree, not because I am desperate to be considered the sexiest anchor at CNN, Larry wins that, it's just a matter of principle. And then one other note. Have you ever heard the expression, "be careful, they have pictures?" It turns out to be true. On Friday's program on the Beatles I mentioned the only four high school dates I had. I mentioned Nancy and Diane, Marsha, and I mentioned Christina. Christina was watching. Christina laughed. Christina had pictures. Girls save this stuff, guys. So, since I blindsided her, it seemed only fair to my friend and producer David Bohrman, that I get a taste of my own medicine; 1965, I was a geek even then. Had dark circles, she was adorable, and smart, and still is. Not just for saving the picture, but knowing that we would probably use it. We'll see you tomorrow at 10:00.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Polls will be open across the country today. In some places, the polls have been open for an hour or are opening right now. Republican George W. Bush is predicting victory in several key states; his campaign tone has already shifted to the November election. Democrat Al Gore could score a 15-states sweep today; he's also turning his attention to the fall, taking on the Republicans in his current stump speeches. Now, those 15 states represent more than half the delegates needed for the Democratic nomination. And on the Republican side, voters in 13 states will cast ballots today.
[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] This day is certainly critical for Republican John McCain. The Arizona senator says he's optimistic, despite polls that say George W. Bush will benefit the most in today's voting. CNN's Jonathan Karl has been on the campaign trail with McCain.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] The insurgent is looking for yet another upset victory, his biggest yet.
[Sen. John Mccain , Presidential Candidate:] We are going to send a message from California to the country and to the world that we are taking the government out of the hands of the special interests and the iron triangle and give it back to the people of this country.
[Karl:] In the face of polls that show him trailing in most of the big Super Tuesday states, John McCain is upbeat.
[Mccain:] I'm very optimistic. We're very excited, and I think people are beginning to realize I'm the only one that can beat Al Gore.
[Karl:] McCain dedicated the final day before Super Tuesday to California, a state where only Republican votes count when it comes to winning delegates. His aides concede McCain is unlikely to win that battle. McCain has been deluged with negative advertising in recent days from his rival and from an independent group financed by two Texas allies of Governor Bush.
[Mccain:] If they can put millions of dollars into this campaign, they can destroy and hijack ever campaign, and that's why we've got to send a message, not only to Governor Bush and his Texas cronies, but to America that California will not allow our elections to be bought by Texans; take your dirty money and bring it back into Texas.
[Karl:] McCain backed up those words with a complaint to the Federal Election Commission. Bush denies any involvement with the ads. In Los Angeles, McCain said he is fighting for more than his party's nomination.
[Mccain:] I, as a person whom not only engaged in a candidacy for the president of the United States, but also am trying to change the direction of my party.
[Karl:] McCain's top aides say that is a battle that will continue, even if McCain loses his party's nomination. As difficult a challenge as McCain faces today, it only gets tougher from here. Today's races are in several states where McCain is strongest, including New England, and he has also had the resources to compete with George W. Bush with television advertising. After today, the battle moves to the South, where George W. Bush is stronger and McCain begins to have troubles, potentially, with having the resources to keep up on the television advertising Carol.
[Lin:] John, what are you hearing from McCain's own aides about the future of the campaign?
[Karl:] Well, McCain's aides are predicting that they will do better than expected today, that they will they think they've got a really good shot at winning New York, doing very well in Ohio. But I spoke to one of his top advisers, somebody who is usually very, very upbeat, and he said, although we'll do better than expected today, it may not be enough to continue on much further because we start to run into problems with delegate math. They're worried that George Bush, winning all these delegates in California they can see that they don't have really a shot here of winning the Republican vote in California that puts all 162 delegates right in George W. Bush's camp. They say they begin to face a problem of: Can they get enough delegates to win the nomination?
[Lin:] That's right. It all gets down to the math, Jonathan Karl. We'll get more from the campaign, the McCain campaign, in the next hour of EARLY EDITION when we speak with John McCain's communications director.
[Harris:] Well, we turn now to the Bush campaign. This day could be a big step for him in locking up his party's presidential nomination. Let's go now to CNN's Patty Davis. She's in Austin, Texas, where Governor Bush is going to be awaiting the voting results today. Good morning, Patty.
[Patty Davis, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right. Texas Governor George W. Bush camping here in Austin, his home, attending to state business today. He'll watch for the results here in Austin of Super Tuesday. Now, he campaigned yesterday in California, Super Tuesday's big prize with 162 GOP delegates. Although somewhat subdued, George Bush is fighting a lingering cold, his voice raspy, his campaign pulled out all the last-minute stops yesterday, from San Diego to Long Beach to Los Angeles to try to convince voters to get out and vote for their candidate George W. Bush. Only registered Republican votes now count toward awarding those GOP delegates here in the state, and Bush has the edge here in California, a double-digit lead over John McCain among Republicans. He's also leading in Georgia and Ohio. Now, Bush, who still gets questions about whether he's angry from his visit to Bob Jones University in South Carolina several weeks ago, preached tolerance in Los Angeles at the Simon Wiesenthal Center.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] Tolerance can never be assumed and it always must be taught. We must teach our children to respect people from all walks of life. We must teach our children to respect people whose skin is of a different color. We must teach our children to respect those whose ancestry or religion may be different from their own. And finally, we must teach our children they're one we are one nation, one people, all of us Americans.
[Davis:] Now, the Bush campaign getting down to the business of getting out the vote today, nine states, two million phone calls going out between yesterday and today. Also, a blip of pro-Bush hand- delivered mail. I'm Patty Davis, CNN, live in Austin, Texas.
[Harris:] All right, thank you, Patty. Now, when it comes to the number of delegates at stake today, three states are the biggest prizes. Let's take a look at them right now: California is the biggest one, 367 delegates there Democratically, and 162 for the Republicans; New York is next with 243 Democratic delegates, and 93 Republicans; and then comes Ohio, it chooses 146 Democratic delegates and 69 Republican delegates. And as we now turn to the Democratic candidates, Al Gore is showing in today's contest could effectively knock Bill Bradley out of the race. As CNN's Gary Tuchman reports today, Gore's stump speeches indicate that he may already be shifting his focus to the general election.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] Bill Bradley's native state was Al Gore's last state for Super Tuesday campaigning.
[Vice Pres. Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] Missouri has a chance to make a decisive statement about the Democratic nomination. I ask for your vote and your support in the vote tomorrow here in Missouri. I ask for your help to be the Democratic nominee.
[Tuchman:] The vice president's late Monday night rally in St. Louis, Missouri followed a hectic day of campaigning in New York City, where the candidate who says he is not taking anything for granted in the Democratic primaries nevertheless continued to concentrate his attacks on the Republicans. He blasted George W. Bush during a stop at a hospital in Brooklyn.
[Gore:] Under his leadership, the state of Texas now ranks 49th in health insurance for children, and health insurance for woman, 50th, 50 out of 50.
[Tuchman:] He spoke to traditional Democratic constituencies, meeting with American-Jewish leaders in Manhattan.
[Gore:] The United States must have an absolute, uncompromising commitment to Israel's security and an absolute conviction that Israel alone must decide the steps necessary to ensure that security.
[Tuchman:] And he also spoke to a gay and lesbian group.
[Gore:] It is an unparrelled opportunity in this election of the year 2000 to build a future where all Americans are seen for who they really are, not because of who they fall in love with.
[Tuchman:] Fifteen states, and American Samoa hold Democratic presidential contests on this Super Tuesday. And Al Gore takes great comfort in the fact that in not one of those places is he behind in the polls. So which one of those 16 places will Al Gore spend what is likely to be his most successful night as a presidential candidate? None of them. Instead, he's coming home here to the state of Tennessee. The vice president will fly from St. Louis to Nashville late this morning. He'll stay at a hotel across the street from Vanderbilt University. When he gets here, he has a short event with union workers, and then he'll take it easy much of the day and watch election returns for what he expects and hopes will be a very good evening. And tomorrow, he'll go to Carthage, Tennessee, very close to here, to visit his mother, and then he hits the campaign trail once again. Leon, back to you.
[Harris:] Well, Gary, once he does hit the campaign trail, where does he go to?
[Tuchman:] Well, as you know, we have another sort of Super Tuesday, a mini Super Tuesday, a week from today when states like Florida and Texas and Tennessee go to the polls. But there are some contests in between there. Al Gore will head on Wednesday to Michigan and Minnesota. Michigan has Democratic Party caucuses is this Saturday; Minnesota has caucuses this Sunday.
[Harris:] All right, Gary Tuchman reporting live this morning Carol.
[Lin:] Well, Bill Bradley is ignoring the polls. In fact, he remains optimistic about his chances. CNN's Pat Neal is with the Bradley campaign in New York. Pat, what's giving him hope?
[Pat Neal, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, in fact Bill Bradley has been more upbeat in the last several days than we've seen him for weeks on the campaign. And right now, he is out trying to make a last-minute pitch to voters. He is stopping by polling place. And despite those gloomy predictions, Senator Bradley has been full of energy, he spent the last campaigning time here in New York, which is like a second home to him. He played basketball for the New York Knicks and then represented nearby New Jersey in the Senate. Bradley and his team thought New York would be his, but the polls show the vice president leading Bradley here in New York by about a two to one margin, and across the country Bradley trails in virtually every state that has a primary or caucus today. Even so, Bradley pushes own.
[Bill Bradley , Presidential Candidate:] Don't listen to the polls and pundits, go to the polls and vote your convictions, vote your heart, vote for the future this country; if you share my dream make it your dream and help me make it our dream.
[Neal:] For 14 months, Bradley has been pushing his big ideas, including universal access to health care for all Americans and sweeping gun-control, including the registration and licensing of all handguns. But not having won a single contest to date, Bradley does not appear to have connected with the core Democratic groups, of African-Americans, women, and unions which are standing firmly for the vice president. Despite the fact that some around him are preparing an exit, they say, Bradley said he's the only one who can do that. And for right now, Bradley plans Wednesday to take a day off and for now, publicly, the campaign says they'll head Thursday, to Florida, which has a contest on March 14, but of course everything could change after tonight. Pat Neal, CNN, reporting live from New York.
[Lin:] We'll hear more from the Bradley campaign, next hour, when Eric Hauser, Bradley's communications director joins us.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] President Clinton, this morning, expected to announce a multimillion-dollar plan to promote equal pay between men and women. From the White House live now, here's Chris Black watching this. Chris, good morning.
[Chris Black, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Good morning, Bill. Within the hour President Clinton will be joined by women's soccer star my Michelle Akers to highlight the issue of wage discrimination against women. Ms. Akers and her teammates are boycotting training now because of a compensation dispute with the U.S. Soccer Federation. Even though the women's team has been more successful than the men's, winning the world cup and an Olympic championship, they are paid less. White House officials say the president invited her here today because the wage dispute highlights a bigger principle and a bigger problem. The Department of Labor says that women still only earn 75 cents for every dollar earned by a man. So, to address that inequity, today the president will propose a $27-million increase in education and enforcement of federal laws that require employers to pay men and women equal pay for equal work. Ten million dollars of that will go to Equal Opportunity Employment Commission to train 3,000 employers in equal pay laws and hire 1,000 new inspectors to identify and respond to wage discrimination. The balance of the 17 million will go to the Department of Labor to train women in occupations in which they have been traditionally under-represented, particularly high technology. The president will also today endorse legislation that will toughen federal laws that allow women to collect punitive damages if they have been the victims of wage discrimination. Now, the president has proposed many of these initiatives before, particularly last year, and they went nowhere in Congress. But White House officials say that many of these issues, particularly those involving health care and education, are important to voters, and they're hoping that public pressure will convince the Congress to end Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right, Chris Black from the White House, thanks.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Well, as you can see from the futures market, the prospects are for a rally on Wall Street at today's open, especially at the Nasdaq market, where we saw big gains yesterday.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] And our Fred Katayama is standing by there now with a preview. Hi, Fred.
[Fred Katayama, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi there, David. Hi there, Debbie. Indeed, the Nasdaq 100 futures are trading sharply higher and a lot of that is due to Microsoft, which came in with its profits after the closing bell. Well, Microsoft topped Wall Street's reduced estimates by a nickel, coming in with profits of 46 cents a share, those profits amounted to $2.2 billion. The real story here was revenues, revenues grew $150 million more than expected to $5.8 billion. Now, all that excited investors and sent Microsoft shares as high as $55 in after-hours trading. Now, the reason why analysts became bullish was because of Microsoft's forecast. Microsoft said it is not lowering its expectations for the following quarter and that had some analysts forecasting revenues growth of 12 to 13 percent for the December quarter. Microsoft also said it could boost its profit estimates for the fiscal year 2001 by a few cents. Now, driving Microsoft's sales was sales of its new operating system software, Windows 2000. Well, that came sort of as a surprise to analysts, who thought that Windows 2000 wasn't faring as well. Quite a different story, however, at Microsoft's one-time nemesis, the PC-maker Apple Computer. Apple disappointed Wall Street. Its earnings came in one penny shy of Wall Street's already reduced estimates at 30 cents a share. Now, keep in mind, that analysts' previous prior to Apple's warning had expected Apple to report profits of 45 cents a share. Profits for Apple rose 35 percent to $170 million, but the problem is: Apple warned that the next quarter would disappoint, saying that it is lowering its revenues expectations and it is cutting its profits forecast for the fiscal year to $1.10 down from $1.25, and it cut its sales forecast down to $7.5 billion. Now, the problem here at Apple are slowing sales. Slowing sales for its brand-new G4 Cube computers, those are those stylish computers in clear plastic, those are slower than expected. Also there is slowness in Apple's stronghold, its education market. Apple said it sold fewer computers to schools. As a result of this, Apple said it would take action next spring, it plans to put out introduce a cheaper G4 Cube and introduce the next generation Mac OSX operating system next year. David and Debbie, back to you.
[Marchini:] All right, Fred, thanks a lot.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] Turning overseas to the aftermath of that devastating volcano eruption around Goma, Congo. It's terrible. International relief agencies are trying to get food, water and other supplies to the thousands of people left homeless by last Thursday's eruption. Tim Ewart of I-TV News is in Goma with more on that.
[Tim Ewart, I-tv News Correspondent:] The volcano, Mount Nyiragongo, was still boiling and rumbling, still menacing those living in its shadow. But refugees who fled are pouring back, trudging across lava that still burns underfoot. Edu Mohima led us to the place where his home stood until last week. The area is now a wasteland. [on camera]: You have lost everything.
[Edu Mohima, Volcano Victim:] Yes, all things. The clothes what I wear here is all what I have.
[Ewart:] Only the clothes that you are wearing.
[Mohima:] All of them, but
[Ewart:] As people picked through the wreckage, there is a growing anger in Goma, a resentment that the world is not doing enough to help.
[Unidentified Male:] Very angry again. We are here, but, see, we're missing something to eat. We are going to sink, and then our sink is burning with the fire.
[Ewart:] Some supplies are being distributed. Here by a local church, but little in the worst-affected areas. Relief efforts appear to be concentrated across the border in Rwanda. [on camera]: Of course, the people of Goma need food and clothing and most urgently fresh water, but their homes are gone forever. This part of town is beyond salvation. The lava has become part of the scenery. [voice-over]: The shell of what was Goma's Cathedral stands forlornly amidst the rubble. Houses have been destroyed, livelihoods ruined. Nonomer Sensi ran a thriving restaurant and dance club now buried under the lava. "I am destitute" he says. He is not alone. Congo's new army of the homeless face a desperate future. They have come back to a place that offers only misery. Tim Ewart, I-TV News, Goma.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] The long-awaited ruling in the Microsoft antitrust case could come as early as today. Microsoft filed its final papers on Tuesday, a day ahead of schedule, and now Judge Jackson is free to issue a decision that could split the company in two. Microsoft calls the break-up plan extreme and unenforceable and, as Steve Young reports, the software giant's last response was short but not sweet.
[Steve Young, Cnn Correspondent:] In its final brief in the case filed earlier than expected, Microsoft got in one last scalding zinger at the government. The short brief says, "Microsoft's employees... many of whom are engineers... would be unable to certify that they understand the revised proposed final judgment because it is, in many respects, so vague and ambiguous as to be unintelligible."
[Harvey Saferstein, Antitrust Lawyer:] It sounds like the timing, as well as the tone, of the brief is such that Microsoft is saying: Let's get on with it, we're tired of this, we're getting beat up, let's go to the court of appeals.
[Young:] The brief says the government has agreed only to cosmetic changes. It claims the government has confirmed it seeks to regulate the matter in which Microsoft designs its operating systems. It says, in fact, that the revised proposed final judgment is worse than Microsoft originally thought by confirming that certain provisions are more extreme than they might appear at first blush. In its wind up, the remarkable Microsoft brief says, quote: "Faced with the prospect of certifying that they understand something that they do not, many Microsoft employees might choose to resign instead." It's now possible Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson could enter the breakup decree as soon as Wednesday.
[Saferstein:] All Judge Jackson has to do is sign it and get it onto the, in effect, to the Court of Appeals and to the question of whether there is going to be a stay of any of this judgment pending appeal.
[Young:] The Justice Department said Microsoft ignored the extent of its legal violations and grossly exaggerated the government's breakup proposal. Microsoft's final brief came several hours after its chairman testified on Capitol Hill before the Joint Economic Committee, skirting the whole subject. So did they, in a new form of, don't tell, don't ask. [on camera]: Microsoft's chairman will try bending more influential ears while he is in Washington. He'll join other software CEOs in meetings Wednesday with the Commerce and Treasury secretary's and the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission behind closed doors. Steve Young, CNN Financial News, Washington.

[Unidentified Male:] Please raise your right hand and repeat after me. I, George Walker Bush, do solemnly swear.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] I, George Walker Bush, do solemnly swear.
[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] His job began with that simply oath. Now Mr. Bush is nearly 100 days into office. The Bush White House will observe the 100-day mark on Monday, though it does actually happen over the weekend. Today the president was looking back on his own performance over these 100 days with CNN senior White House correspondent, John King, asking some tough questions today. John, what did you hear from the president?
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Joie, the president's term, "pretty darn good." That's his assessment of the first almost-100 days in office. Mr. Bush saying he thinks he's making considerable progress on the domestic agenda, the signature issues there, of course, tax cuts and education reform. But the president has raised some eyebrows, not only here in Washington but around the world with some remarks about Taiwan in the past 24 hours, as he gives these 100-day interviews the president publicly saying that the United States would defend Taiwan if it were attacked by mainland China. Now, that's a break from 20 years of U.S. policy. Past presidents have been deliberately vague on that issue, in part, not to encourage pro-independence forces in Taiwan. In part, to keep the Chinese a bit confused about just what the United States would do. So I asked the president about this today, some concerned raised in Washington. Even some consternation raised that he had said this. The president insisted that he was sticking by that policy, that the United States would defend Taiwan. But he also added some additional remarks. Clearly, the president wanted to take a little step back so not as to encourage pro-independence forces excuse me in Taiwan from doing anything that might antagonize Beijing.
[Bush:] I have said that I will do what it takes to help Taiwan defend herself, and the Chinese must understand that. Secondly, I certainly hope Taiwan adheres to the one-China policy, and a declaration of independence is not the one-China policy. And we'll work with Taiwan to make sure that that doesn't happen. We need a peaceful resolution of this issue.
[King:] Now, Mr. Bush, insisting his comments about defending Taiwan are no big deal, no major break. But if you ask around town, just about everybody disagrees. They say it has been a careful practice, and a deliberate practice of past presidents, now dating back for more than 20 years, to be deliberately ambiguous. Top aids here at the White House say the president believes what he said and has no hesitation about saying it.
[Chen:] John, we have a question from our morning on-line editorial meeting, one of our viewers who wanted to post a question to you. C.J. Mosca: "I would like to ask the president how heavy a role economics and trade played in his handling of the China hostage situation." Did you guys get into that in your conversation today?
[King:] Not directly, and we've talked to the other senior administration officials about that, though. They insist the president handled the standoff as an isolated incident. His top priority, as the president did say in the interview, was to get that crew home. But of course, you can hear the president in the entirety of the interview there's moves in Congress right now because of the anger over the standoff to maybe cut off trade relations, or at least impose sanctions. The president, making clear he wants to continue that trade relationship, that he believes it's good for the U.S. economy, good for U.S. farmers, good for U.S. manufactures. He also believes in time, more trade with China will encourage more freedoms in China.
[Chen:] Our CNN senior White House correspondent, John King, with us from the White House lawn today. You can hear more of what President Bush had to say at 5:00 Eastern this afternoon, right after this program on "INSIDE POLITICS." We'll carry all of John King's interview with the president. And if you are away from your TV, you can see the whole interview at our Web site. We've also got a video calendar that shows highlights of Mr. Bush's first 100 days in office, beginning with the inauguration. You can click on many of the days and watch what happened on those days. Just log on to cnn.com. The AOL keyword is "CNN".

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] After 13 years of iron-fisted rule and 12 days of refusing to admit defeat at the polls, Slobodan Milosevic is now stepping aside. Vojislav Kostunica is now ready to be sworn in as Yugoslavia's new president. CNN's Brent Sadler joins us live now from Belgrade with the very latest on this. Hello, Brent.
[Brent Sadler, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Linda. Good morning. Yes, another momentous event expected today after a dramatic turnabout in Slobodan Milosevic's 13 rule, years of autocratic rule here. Mr. Vojislav Kostunica, the president elect of Yugoslavia, expected to be sworn in in just a few hours from now. Some procedural things to take place between now and then, a constituent assembly of the federal parliament assembling to verify mandates from the September 24 election and also possibly by the end of today, although unlikely, we understand at the moment, a new federal parliament. But certainly by the end of the day the opposition is expecting the president elect, Vojislav Kostunica, will be the new president of Yugoslavia. This was clear very much in the sense of the opposition's minds after the overnight announcement by Slobodan Milosevic that he was finally admitting defeat on that September 24 election, that he was stepping aside, acknowledging the victory of Mr. Kostunica. But Mr. Milosevic made it clear he was not bowing out of politics altogether. He said he was going to take a little bit of time off, be able to see his son Marc, or rather his grandson Marco and then he intended, he said, to return to the political scene as head of the Socialist Party of Serbia and to be a main voice in the opposition to Mr. Kostunica'expected new administration. Now here to discuss this more I'm joined by the editor of "Nin " magazine here in Belgrade, Mr. Stevan Niksic. Isn't Mr. Kostunica going to be very able to very quickly be able to get a parliament that will work with him?
[Stevan Niksic, Political Analyst:] I hope so. As you can see, everything was quickly in the last few days and there's no reason for this kind of speed to be not to continue in that fashion. Everything will function in just a couple of days.
[Sadler:] What about the situation with regards to the Montenegrins? What if he fails to get the support he needs from Montenegrin politicians?
[Niksic:] The Montenegrins are now, they find themselves in a completely different situation. They have realized now that in Serbia Mr. Kostunica had a victory and they would have to adjust to that new situation.
[Sadler:] All right, thank you very much, indeed, Mr. Niksic for joining us. That's the latest here in Belgrade. I'm Brent Sadler, CNN, reporting live from Belgrade.
[Stouffer:] Brent, thank you very much. Well, the unfolding events in Yugoslavia have brought a smile and a frown to President Clinton. CNN's John King joins us live from the White House this morning with more on the President's mixed reaction. John, what can you tell us?
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Linda. Well, the President likens this to a dark cloud being lifted not only from over Yugoslavia but from over all of Eastern Europe, he says. The United States on the one hand applauding the Russians, giving the Russian government some credit here for convincing Mr. Milosevic to step down, clear the way for the new president to be inaugurated. However, President Clinton and the entire U.S. administration also raising concerns that the Russians appear to be open for a continuing role for Mr. Milosevic in Yugoslav politics, something the White House says is unacceptable.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] I think it would be a terrible mistake for him to remain active in the political life of the country. That is not what the people voted for. And I believe that we cannot ignore the action of the War Crimes Tribunal. I think we have to continue to support it.
[King:] Now, with the inauguration of the new president today, do not look for an immediate warming in U.S. relations with Yugoslavia. Mr. Kostunica was a fierce critic of the Kosovo air war. He has been critical of the Hague War Crimes Tribunal, Mr. Milosevic under indictment before that tribunal. Still, U.S. officials say, with this democratically elected government, the United States will join the movement of the European nations to lift most of the economic sanctions imposed against the Milosevic regime Linda.
[Stouffer:] Well, John, if Mr. Milosevic does not go completely away, how will that affect all these sanctions decisions from the U.S. and the European Union?
[King:] It will make the decision, especially by the United States, the United States expects the European countries to move rather aggressively to lift sanctions. The United States will face a tricky thing in that it has told democracies in the past that they must turn over any indicted war criminals and it is apparently not going to be the case. Still, though, economic sanctions expected to be lifted. Look for these sanctions to stay in place, those on businesses controlled by chronies of Mr. Milosevic. The United States worried that as he loses power, they may try to loot the country as they move out Linda.
[Stouffer:] But, John, what could come next? How far would the U.S. go in order to see Mr. Milosevic tried on war crimes?
[King:] Publicly, the U.S. position will be that he must be turned over and turned over as soon as possible. However, privately they say priority number one is to remove him from power. That has been done. The key priority now will be to make sure that he does not assume any role in a new government or even a leadership role in the Serbian Nationalist Party, the Socialist Party, excuse me, in Yugoslavia. Still, they must make the public case for him to be turned over. However, they see no prospect in the short-term that he will be.
[Stouffer:] OK, John King at the White House, thank you very much, and we'll be seeing you a little bit later because if you have any questions about the situation in Yugoslavia, you can e-mail CNN's John King at wam, that's at cnn.com. Now, he'll answer your questions in the nine o'clock Eastern hour of CNN SATURDAY MORNING so we invite you to stay tuned to that. Well, there is a historic upheaval in the Balkans. The world is watching with awe and some apprehension as Yugoslavia moves toward democracy. Well, to put all of these changes in a bit of perspective, we're joined this morning by Stojan Cerovic, a Balkans expert with the U.S. Institute of Peace. We appreciate you being with us today, sir. And first of all, I'm hoping you can tell us in the coming days what will this new president have to do?
[Stojan Cerovic, U.s. Institute Of Peace:] Well, he will be doing many things. It's in the first place, he has to restore law and order, to stabilize the country, to get control of the military and the police and he will make sure that Milosevic is out of the political life. I don't believe that Milosevic will be able to play any role in the political life of Serbia in the future, although I'm not sure that he'll be handed to Hague very soon. But then I don't think that there is any room that he'll be able to keep any kind of power in Serbia. I think that he's definitely out.
[Stouffer:] But do you think Mr. Milosevic maybe saved himself by conceding when he did yesterday?
[Cerovic:] No. I think that he'll be simply forced out. He may have some ambitions to play some role in the future. He may he still is the president of his Socialist Party and legally or in theory, if you like, he really might try to keep some impact on the events. He surely still enjoys the loyalty of some people probably in the police and in his parties. But then this was really a sort of revolution and things are going very quickly in this situation and we just get a new rules of the game before just changing their minds very quickly and Milosevic will simply lose any impact, any influence. I think, that is, we'll see in time the new Serbia and no room for Milosevic in this situation.
[Stouffer:] And Mr. Cerovic, I'm hoping you can give us some perspective on the people of Yugoslavia. After all the euphoria of the last few days, when will the people start to see real changes in their every day lives?
[Cerovic:] Well, it will take some time and it will for the people to feel real change in their every day life, it will take probably a year. But I do believe that these sanctions lifting and some support from abroad can make a change and can contribute to get some sense of stability and even slow prosperity. I think the Serbs really do need something like that in the moment and that's why this lifting of sanctions really are important. I think that the people really need some sense that they immediately benefited out of this, I would say, heroic accomplishment of the last few days.
[Stouffer:] And the world will be watching to see what happens. Stojan, Cerovic, we appreciate your time and perspective today. Thank you.
[Cerovic:] Thank you.
[Stouffer:] And coming up in our next hour, a different perspective on the political upheaval in Yugoslavia from Prince Alexander. He's the crown prince of Yugoslavia and he plans to join us from New York.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Right now, we want to hear from CNN's Washington bureau chief Frank Sesno. He has been talking with public officials about all of the legal wrangling that is going on Frank.
[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] An acute sense of the clock, Natalie, on both sides of the aisle here in Washington more impatience than anything else among Republicans and a sense that this plea for patience from Al Gore today and this evening among the Democrats is critical. Joining us now: J.C. Watts, congressman from Oklahoma, joining us from Norman, Oklahoma and also a Republican conference chairman. Thanks very much for a few minutes of your time.
[Rep. J.c. Watts , Oklahoma:] My pleasure, Frank.
[Sesno:] All right, let's start by I want to by asking you the key contention of Democrats today is and I am going to quote Dick Gephardt here that there are thousands of votes not counted or counted and ignored. And at this late date, with this narrow a margin, even now, they should have not be overlooked. Has he got a point?
[Watts:] Well, Frank, this will not be the first time that ballots have been thrown out. I think in the 1996 elections, there was about 150,000 ballots that were not counted. The ballots that I think Mr. Gephardt is referring to, those ballots were counted in the machine count the first time, the second time. The machine spits them out because they're incomplete or they don't make any sense. Then they went to the hand count. And they hand counted those things a third time. And each of those times the first time with the machine, the second time with the machine, the third time with the hand count Governor Bush has won.
[Sesno:] If I may, many of the votes they're talking about many of the ballots they're talking about 10,000 or so in Miami-Dade County have actually not been counted by hand. And if they were, it was suspended when Miami-Dade suspended its count. The question to you is
[Watts:] But, Frank, I think it's important to note that Miami- Dade, the governor board there, they chose not to proceed with the hand count based on what the Florida Supreme Court ruled about a week ago. So they were following or there were still rules in place to govern that based on what the Supreme Court of Florida said.
[Sesno:] They chose not to proceed based on the Supreme Court, because they wouldn't have the time to complete the recount. The question I have for you then is this.
[Watts:] But that was their decision.
[Sesno:] Does this place you and your party in the difficult position of defending uncounted or undercounted ballots?
[Watts:] No it doesn't. You know, we have said Governor Bush has said we have said all along that we feel like the military ballots there were military ballots thrown out that we felt like they should have been counted. It's just not, you know, ballots that were counted that Mr. Gore think were that they might have been favorable to him. There are other ballots thrown out as well or not counted. Again, I think this is making a mountain out of a mole hill. Based on the rules that is in place, there has been three different counts. Governor Bush has won on all three counts. And I think it's time for us to move on.
[Sesno:] So long as Democratic support holds as it appears to be holding for the moment behind Al Gore, and so long as the courts are considering elements of this, is it not basically a fact that this thing cannot be called, and you and the rest of us just have to live with it?
[Watts:] Well, I've heard some of the Democrats say today that, you know, America is a nation of laws. They recite the rule of law. Well, based on the laws that are in place, based on the laws that the governing officials in state of Florida that they have to govern this election, they have done their job. They have done what was required of them by the Constitution, by the Florida by Florida law. I don't I think what we see, Frank, this is not about the law. This is about trying to continue to manipulate to try and get enough votes that Mr. Gore will be the winner. And, again, I just don't see how he continues to try to drag this thing on, or why he wants to drag it on, considering the different counts that we've had over the last three weeks.
[Sesno:] Congressman, when do you think that this is going to be resolved?
[Watts:] Well, Frank, don't make any Thanksgiving plans for next year. I hope pretty quickly. I think the American people's tolerance level, I think, is going to start wear pretty thin. I think it's this whole process is probably wearing on the last nerve of the American people. I hope that the vice president will do what's good for the country, and you know, say that this thing is over. It has been won fairly. The election has been certified in Florida. And hopefully, we can move on.
[Sesno:] Congressman J.C. Watts, thanks very much.
[Watts:] Thank you.
[Sesno:] Appreciate your time. And so, Natalie and Lou, that is just a sampling of what we're hearing here in Washington: that, of course, from the Republican side of the aisle. And we are hearing that comment and that general tone pretty much uniformly from the Republicans here in town and from the Democrats just as uniformly the case that has been made today by Dick Gephardt, Tom Daschle in that rather extraordinary and very public conference call with Al Gore and Joe Lieberman that this thing is not over yet, that patience is in order, and that there are these votes that are either uncounted, undercounted or may be even miscounted. So on and on it goes.
[Allen:] All right, Frank. And we also learned from Dick Gephardt earlier today that you might even have an academic come in and count all those ballots once everything is over.
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] And the Democratic argument, of course, is: We should know the results now rather than later.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Now to a story out of the world of sports that still echoes in the sporting world today. That's the firing of Bob Knight from this past weekend. The Indiana coach returns to campus today for a student forum where he will address students later tonight. He's also been defending himself in the media. John Giannone of CNN Sports Illustrated has a look now at both sides of the Knight saga.
[John Giannone, Cnn Correspondent:] On May 15, Bob Knight signed a 94-word open letter insisting he would abide by the zero tolerance policy that threatened his regime at Indiana. As it turns out, Knight says he couldn't even define the phrase.
[Bob Knight, Fmr. Indiana Basketball Coach:] I asked the vice president of the university as recently as last Thursday. I said, can you explain "zero tolerance" to me? And he looked me right in the eye and said, no, I can't.
[Christopher Simpson, Indiana Univ. Spokesman:] It's difficult to call the code nebulous let me rephrase that. It is difficult to define "zero tolerance" as nebulous when we've simply put it in writing and put it down and the coach has agreed to it. I don't know what's nebulous about that. But I know what Bob Knight told Myles Brand, I know what Bob Knight has told many people on the senior staff at the university and some of the trustees, is: Do you think I can live within the guidelines? Well, of course I can. And he said that repeatedly. So I don't know that there's any dispute there.
[Giannone:] Knight disputed many of the claims the university used in explaining the dismissal. Tops among them, the alleged verbal confrontation in late July with the school's legal counsel.
[Knight:] I did not scream at her, I did not yell at her, I did not use profanity, I did not talk in a voice any higher than I'm talking to you now. If that is interpreted by anybody as abuse, that's their interpretation.
[Simpson:] The conversation denigrated to the point where she described it to me as being initially unnerving, later intimating and borderline threatening. The coach was rude, and she said he was profane. At the end of that conversation, she said to the coach, this is not productive, there's no need to continue. And the coach said, then I think you should leave.
[Giannone:] As for the last straw incident last Thursday in which Knight grabbed and scolded a 19-year-old freshman student, Knight remains defiant and unapologetic.
[Knight:] What I did with that student was simply try to teach him something about manners. And I said I'd do it tomorrow and I'll do it the next day.
[Simpson:] The fact of the matter is, inappropriate physical contact was something that specifically was forbidden under the guidelines, and there was inappropriate physical contact, in our opinion.
[Giannone:] In Bloomington, I'm John Giannone.
[Hemmer:] And we mentioned, Coach Knight's going to address the students at IU later tonight, planned for 7:00 Eastern. And we plan live coverage of that when it happens.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] All those smart people out there, they're charting ripples in the "cosmic microwave," which seem to support the explosive big bang theory. Now, all day, we've been reading about this story in the newsroom, all of us, and we couldn't understand it. So, we said, Ann, get down here and explain this to us in, oh, about a minute and a half. And she said, no problem. Ann Kellan is here.
[Ann Kellan, Cnn Science Correspondent:] No problem. We're talking about something only a handful of scientists really, really understand. Physicists came up with a theory in the 1980s how the universe was born and how it evolved, and it's called the inflationary theory. Well, with the help of powerful telescopes and highly sensitive detectors, scientists are proving so far that their theory is right. That's really exciting for them. Three teams of scientists have released similar findings about what they call "cosmic microwave background." Now, basically, what they're looking at are microwaves floating around in our universe now that date back to the big bang. Yes, we're looking at 14-billion-year-old microwaves, which is when they say the big bang occurred. That massive explosion that scientists say started it all created intense light and heat, namely, ultraviolet radiation. Conditions were so hot back then, the subatomic particles that existed, like quarks and electrons, couldn't even come together to make atoms, it was that hot back then.
[Allen:] So, OK. Got that?
[Kellan:] I got that.
[Allen:] So, what are they seeing exactly and where do they go from here? Your typical...
[Kellan:] OK, so right, we have it's like a soap opera here. So, we are seeing these subatomic particles that are so hot and they're floating around. Then, 300,000 years after the big bang, things started to cool down a little. So, that's where the subatomic particles started to congeal, and that's where we get the atoms and that's where we start to see the galaxies and everything forming. OK. So, the scientists start using these instruments today, and they start detecting this ultraviolet heat, which has now calmed down and become microwaves, and they're looking at that and detecting those now.
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] OK. OK.
[Kellan:] All right. So, the sky is we have pictures now. Now they've taken pictures of what the say the sky looked like way back when. All right? We're going to take a look at these pictures. They say this is the early universe. And what we are looking at right now are blobs of plasma, gases of plasma that eventually turned into galaxies and stuff. You might say that these are the universe's early baby pictures, and it gives an idea of how the universe took shape. Now, the cool thing is that scientists had to put this theory they put together this theory back in the '80s, and now these images are confirming that they were right. The blue areas are a little cooler than the redder areas, but it's very hot. What you are looking at is a really, really hot area, and much hotter than our universe is today.
[Waters:] My head is about to explode.
[Allen:] You did a good job.
[Kellan:] I'm trying.
[Waters:] Well, I have a quote from an astronomy professor who says it's always been theoretically compelling, he said it's on very solid experimental grounds. So, we're not going to get to the bottom of this today.
[Kellan:] No, no. There's a lot more they have to do. And basically what they're saying is that the universe is flat, OK? And that it...
[Waters:] We've heard that before, haven't we?
[Kellan:] And that it's expanding. After the big bang, it started expanding. And now looking at these ancient microwaves, they're able to it's helping them determine that, hey, we were pretty right on.
[Allen:] All right.
[Kellan:] Does that help?
[Allen:] That does help. It's intriguing.
[Waters:] Sounds like a big project.
[Allen:] And we'll be back with more in about 10 years.
[Waters:] OK. Watch for Ann Kellan in another 10 years.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] The Western Wildfires are still burning, and now you can add arson to the list of problems facing firefighters. Fatigue and wind also remain the worst enemies, at least for now. Here's the latest, fire coordinators in 13 states where major fires are burning now hope forecasts of cooler weather will bring relief, but the weather remains unpredictable, so much so in fact that Idaho's governor extended the state of emergency for another month. And, in South Dakota, the National Forest Service says it believes man and not nature started a blaze that grew to more than 62,000 acres. Meantime, 500 fresh firefighters join the battle lines this morning. Our Greg Lefevre has their story.
[Greg Lefevre, Cnn Correspondent:] With more fires burning than available firefighters to put them out, the Pentagon is sending in the troops. Five hundred fifty soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division at Fort Campbell, Kentucky went into training on the Valley Fire Complex in western Montana. They will be assigned, just as civilian fire crews, in teams of 20.
[Sgt. Maj. Kenny Adams, U.s. Army:] With these military teams broken down as small as they are, I think these crews can be very effective in a lot of different roles.
[Lefevre:] They join more than 16,000 firefighters already on the Western fire lines. Training started in Fort Campbell, with additional instruction here. The soldiers will learn how to operate Forest Service water pumps.
[Unidentified Male:] You'll be using ear plugs all of the time.
[Lefevre:] And chain saws and hand tools.
[Adams:] Out here, we are being trained by the firefighters, but our noncommissioned officers are insuring that the soldiers have the right equipment, at the right place at the right time.
[Unidentified Male:] We're here to help the nation in any way we can, and I think it is good that we can come out here and help support the firefighters.
[Adams:] Our soldiers are physically fit, they've got strong backs, but they've never fought fires before. And yet, this training is paramount, you know, for these soldiers to get out there and safely help isolate and contain these fires.
[Lefevre:] The soldiers will be under the individual command of their military officers with operations directed by the U.S. Forest Service. [on camera]: The soldiers will be followed by more Army troops from Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and Marines from Camp Lejeune. In all, 2,300 military are expected on fire duty in the next two weeks. [voice-over]: The men and women will most likely start with mop- up duties, a job now considered critical. With winds and lightning reigniting so many fires, no fire is considered out unless it is cold. Now the Clinton administration has also instructed the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Interior to bring in some civilian help as well, middle managers, we understand, will be assisting the field operations in this place and others around the West, and that will free up more trained firefighters to head to the front. Leon, back to you.
[Harris:] Well, Greg, these fires have been burning out of control for so long now. At some point, don't they run out of forest out there to burn?
[Lefevre:] You would certainly think that. The situation is this, that, of course, there is plenty of forest, but many of the fires, in particular the Scalcoho fire, which is just to the east of us here, is beginning to turn back onto itself. There are so many fires in so many places, some of them are beginning to run into each other. And while they're not considered officially contained, a lot of these fires are now burning back into what they call black areas and perhaps extinguishing parts of themselves Leon.
[Harris:] All right, good deal. Thanks much, Greg Lefevre reporting live this morning. Be safe out there.

[Glenn Van Zutphen, World News:] Protesters on the Puerto Rican island of Vieques say they will not back down despite an expected raid by United States government agents to evict them from a bombing range. CNN's Mike Boettcher is in Vieques and has our report.
[Mike Boettcher, Cnn Correspondent:] Even with the threat of imminent arrest, Vieques protesters weren't backing down. They were, in fact, reinforcing bringing in more food, water and influential support. About 20 Catholic priests and nuns, led by Puerto Rican bishop Alvaro Corrada del Rio, came ashore with what the protesters hoped would be substantial political provisions the full backing of the Catholic Church. They got it.
[Bishop Alvaro Corrada Del Rio:] We will continue to stand with the people of Vieques, who are ready not to stop. Once we are arrested, we are going to move even in a greater scope of civil disobedience in Puerto Rico and in Vieques walking with the people of Vieques who have requested this from us.
[Boettcher:] A U.S. congressman even came to give support. Luis Gutierrez, a Chicagoan of Puerto Rican ancestry, insisted the White House should rethink any plans for a raid on the squatters of Vieques.
[Luis Gutierrez, U.s. House Member:] The president has to understand that he will have to accept, whether he wishes or not, moral responsibility for any injustice that occurs here and any breaking of the peace.
[Boettcher:] There was a federal presence, but less than in previous days. Two Navy ships which had been anchored off Vieques weren't there Wednesday. Only a lone Coast Guard cutter and a Navy helicopter kept vigil over the rebellious island. Mike Boettcher, CNN, Vieques, Puerto Rico.

[Woodruff:] We promised you a discussion on the upcoming vote tomorrow by the International Olympic Committee and whether to grant China the 2008 games. But we're going to wait a moment and do that and first go to our Candy Crowley who's back here with me. Candy, they're voting on the floor. What's going on?
[Crowley:] Well, we got a vote. This may be the start or the end of it. The bets are that what's happening here is they are taking a vote on the rules, that is under what rules do you debate, you know, what amendments will be brought up, how long you debate, and you know, how many votes there are. So they're voting on the rules. The Democrats don't like them. Democrats say, "We have enough Republicans. We have enough Republicans to kill the rule." If and should that happen, Republicans have said, "Fine, then that's it for the bill." Now, they can get a discharge petition, the Democrats can. But that's going to take some time. And what it really means is that for now, campaign finance reform would get pulled off the floor, we'd probably revisit it come fall and you hear a lot of screaming.
[Woodruff:] Reform in the form that John McCain and Shays-Meehan wanted?
[Crowley:] Yes, yes, absolutely.
[Woodruff:] All right, Candy Crowley. We'll certainly come back to you for an update before this hour is over. As we promised a moment ago, the debate over the Olympic Committee vote tomorrow. Members of the committee are in Moscow right now to choose a host city for the 2008 summer games. This is the last big IOC meeting for Juan Antonio Samaranch, who is retiring after 21 years as committee president. Beijing is considered the favorite among the five cities competing to host the games, but human rights activists and some members of Congress have lobbied IOC members to vote against Beijing. The debate over Beijing's bid mirrors the political debate right here in Washington over U.S. relations with China. And joining me now with a view on tomorrow's vote, James Lilly, who is the former U.S. ambassador to China. We are also going to be joined by Democratic congresswoman Nancy Pelosi of California, but she's over there on the House floor doing what Candy Crowley was just telling us about, and that is voting on campaign finance reform. So Ambassador Lilley, I'm going to turn it to you. You're going to have the floor all to yourself. When let me just ask you first, when the White House announced that it was not going to take a position on this, did that in effect give a green light to the IOC to say yes to Beijing?
[James Lilley, Former U.s. Ambassador To China:] No, it doesn't. It says that the United States, unlike what we did last time, is we're not going to take a position. Last time, as you know, the Chinese lost by two votes. They blamed it on us. They turned very mean, racist propaganda. These dinosaurs turned out all this invective against us. We don't have to appease these people, but you don't gratuitously insult them. This should be decided on the basis of the facilities. Do the Chinese have the clean air? Do they have the room? Can they handle the media? Is the traffic manageable? If they can do it and they're the best at it, give them the Olympics. The fact that they're getting it has a political cut to it. It's a double-edged sword. Negatively, it feeds their nationalistic fervor. It can turn them into nationalistic fanatics. On the other hand, it could open up their whole system to close scrutiny, and this will make it much harder for them to crack down. So I would say on balance, it's probably going to be a positive thing for China and for the world.
[Woodruff:] Well, you already moved into answering the question I wanted to ask you, but let me just put it out there about human rights. I'm sure you are aware the new Amnesty International report shows that China executed more people in the last three months, something like 1,780 people, than it executed in the past three years. Why is giving the Games to China going to be an incentive for them to improve this human rights record?
[Lilley:] I don't think there's a connection. I'm sorry to say that, but I don't think there's a connection between their executions and winning the Olympics. The decision was made a long time ago that China would be part of the international community. The U.N., the World Trade Organization, the WHO, World Health Organization, and the Olympics they're part of the community, like it or not. You judge it on the ability of China to perform what the committee demands of them. That they have a poor human rights record, there is no question. I was there at Tiananmen, I know this personally. They have shot these people, they have a strike-hard campaign, they are trying to stop corruption, they are doing it by Draconian means; this is the way they handle things. To change this or to alter it or influence it, you bring them into the world, you expose them for the rule of law, you expose the executions and this has an influence for sure over time.
[Woodruff:] All right, former...
[Lilley:] One more thing Judy. There probably won't be war before 2008, either.
[Woodruff:] They're probably what, sir?
[Lilley:] There probably will not be war in the Taiwan Strait before the year 2008; that gives us a seven-year period.
[Woodruff:] Well, that opens up a whole new set of issues we don't have time to get into now, but let me just thank you, former U.S. Ambassador to China James Lilley. As I said, we were to be joined by California Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. She was called on the floor of the House to vote on campaign finance reform. Ambassador Lilley, thanks for being with us.
[Lilley:] Thank you.
[Woodruff:] A quick reminder: CNN plans live coverage of tomorrow's announcement of the host city for the 2008 Summer Olympics. Our coverage begins tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. Eastern. The president and the polls. Is Mr. Bush gaining or losing ground with the American people? We've got some new numbers when INSIDE POLITICS returns. And are Americans divided over stem cell research? A look at public opinion and political realities coming up.

[Jack Cafferty, Cnn Anchor:] So the big question, at least for right now, is could could Major League Baseball strike out this season? Spring training camps already in full swing. Fans turning out for the exhibition games, but will their support be enough to sustain the Major Leagues as we know them? Many Major League baseball teams are struggling financially, and as CNN's John Zarrella reports now, some might not make it.
[John Zarrella, Cnn Correspondent:] The Montreal Expos are an endangered species. By next season, there is a very good chance they will be extinct, contracted out of existence.
[Scott Strickland, Expos Pitcher:] It's a bad situation, and you have got to make the most of it, and what are you going to do, cry about it?
[Zarrella:] In this, case the bottom line, not the chalk line, is what counts, and the Expos are baseball's bleakest franchise. So Major League Baseball, complaining of a balance sheet in the red, plans to toss Montreal and at least one other financially poor performing club, yet to be named. The Minnesota Twins were on the top of that TBA hit list, which drew the sarcastic ire of Minnesota's governor during congressional hearings on the state of the game.
[Jesse Ventura, Governor Of Minnesota:] I bet you we will be taken off the list if we agree to build a new stadium. I bet, you know, magically, other team will appear on the list, then, to be contracted, rather than Minnesota.
[Zarrella:] And just what is the state of the game? That depends on who you ask. If you ask baseball's commissioner...
[Bud Selig, Baseball Commissioner:] In spite of the fact that the game has probably never been more more popular, we have some very significant problems.
[Zarrella:] According to ownership, only five teams, led by the Yankees, were in the black last year. And overall, baseball's 30 teams lost $518 million, despite revenues of three and a half billion, almost triple the 1995 number.
[Andrew Zimbalist, Economics Professor:] That's a 17 percent growth rate per year in revenue. That means demand is growing at 17 percent a year, and Major League Baseball is proposing to reduce supply. That makes no sense.
[Zarrella:] A lot of what's going on in baseball is confusing. The lame duck Expos no longer have an owner. The team is run by Major League Baseball, which bought the Expos from Jeffrey Loria, who, in turn, purchased the Florida Marlins from John Henry, who then went out and bought the Boston Red Sox. Got all that? As for the players, well, the collective bargaining agreement has expired.
[Alex Rodriguez, Texas Rangers:] What I don't want to see happen is another work stoppage. I know the players don't want it, the owners don't want it, and I know the fans definitely don't want it.
[Zarrella:] But don't worry, both sides promise the only strike you'll see is the one called by an umpire. Now next year, there may be a very different look in Major League Baseball. No Montreal Expos, the Florida Marlins, who play the Expos here today, on the bubble. They could be the other team out of existence in a year or two. And of course spring it's spring hope springs eternal. And if you are a fan of the 30 clubs, you want your team to be competitive. But the reality is, according to Major League Baseball, since 1995, the bottom 15 of 30 teams, the bottom 15 revenue producing teams, have only won five of 224 play-off games. Now if you're in New York, there's no problem. The Yankee's $120 million payroll and the Mets $100 million payroll. Both teams expected to be competitive, and have a real shot at a subway series this year. This is John Zarrella, reporting live from Jupiter, Florida Jack.
[Cafferty:] John, thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Investigators looking into the crash of a chartered plane in Pennsylvania are already at a disadvantage. Several key pieces of evidence are said to be either in poor condition or nonexistent. CNN's Carl Rochelle reports on the problems.
[Carl Rochelle, Cnn Correspondent:] Sources close to the investigation of the charter plane crash say, a preliminary transcript of conversations between the crew and air traffic controllers indicates the crew of the plane first declared an emergency as they were turning on to course for a second approach to the Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania airport. Moments later, the crew reported they had lost one engine, then about a minute later, loss of the second engine. The left engine came back on line but only briefly. Controllers tried to direct the plane to the final approach course, but the sources say, it continued turning to the right. NTSB officials indicated controllers were offering help to the stricken plane.
[Unidentified Male:] Indeed, they did try to be helpful to the crew during their last minutes.
[Rochelle:] Sources say that help included pointing out highways, including part of the Pennsylvania Turnpike that could be used for an emergency landing. But when the crew asked about their altitude, controllers couldn't help much because the plane was already so low that the radar signal was spotty. Investigators believed the crash occurred about four minutes after the emergency was declared. The investigation is begin hampered by the lack of any information on the cockpit voice recorder, which was found to be blank.
[Unidentified Male:] We have no data recorder, and we also do not have the voice recorder, which might of explained to us some to the conversations between the crew during this last part of the flight that would have helped us in understanding what happened here.
[Rochelle:] The plane was not equipped with a flight data recorder. Officials said that cockpit voice recorder didn't work, apparently, because it was receiving the wrong voltage. Investigators must now rely on secondary information such as radar data and witnesses to the crash. Investigators are going to try to go in this morning and retrieve the two engines from the crash site. They're looking at that. They're looking at fuel. They are looking at whether there is a mechanical problem that caused the engines to shut off. Those are the things they're concentrating on. But the lack of clear data from the cockpit voice recorder and the lack of a flight data recorder altogether means that this is going to be an incredibly tough problem to solve. I'm Carl Rochelle, CNN, reporting live from Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
[Lin:] Carl, thank you.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] As the recounts continue and the lawyers prepare their Supreme Court briefs, let's get an update on the candidates and where they stand. Covering the Bush campaign in Austin Texas is CNN's Eileen O'Connor. And in Washington, Patti Davis is with the Gore campaign. But let's first start with you, Eileen.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, there Governor Bush will be coming back sometime today around 3:30, is what we've been hearing, although we're not entirely sure from his ranch in Crawford, Texas, about 90 minutes north of here, where he has been relaxing since Thanksgiving. But he has been in touch with his lawyers who are, of course, preparing their briefs for the Supreme Court. Although we do have some reaction from the Bush campaign about those accusations by the Democrats, that they orchestrated these demonstrations and continue to orchestrate these demonstrations going on in Florida. Mindy Tucker, from the Bush campaign, is saying that, you know, the Gore camp needs to realize that there are a lot of people in America who are becoming upset with the way these manual recounts are being conducted. And she says look, basically these people are realizing that they're not there, that they're not producing accurate results, that they're subjective. And she also said that, you know, the Gore campaign accusations about these demonstrations, that they're orchestrated ring hollow because Jessie Jackson also held early demonstrations in the early days of this. And she said that, you know, the Democrats should apply the standard evenly. Now but, top priority, of course, is preparing that case for the U.S. Supreme Court. The Bush attorneys are working on their briefs. They have to file those by Tuesday. They say that it's really a basic argument, that they are looking when the Florida state Supreme Court decided to mandate that these manual recounts be conducted and that the deadline is tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. and that they be included in that certified total the Bush campaign says basically, the court will have to decide did the Florida state Supreme court overstep its authority.
[George Terwilliger, Bush Campaign Attorney:] While the circumstances may be unprecedented, the law is not. The law is very settled in this area. Courts in our country do not run everything. And the question really here is who should run the election in Florida and establish deadlines and decide when the votes need to be counted and finality obtained, the courts or the legislature?
[O'connor:] Now, good news for the Bush campaign. Vice presidential nominee, Richard Cheney, was released from hospital yesterday and, as he said that he will be under no limitations. Doctors also said at the hospital that this was a minor incident, that they have repaired the clogged artery in his heart and that he also will be able to get back to the work of strategizing on a possible presidential transition at any time. I'm Eileen O'Connor reporting live from Austin.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Thanks, Eileen. Let's go now to CNN's Patti Davis. She's with the Gore campaign in Washington this morning Patti.
[Patti Davis, Cnn Correspondent:] Leon, Vice President Al Gore is here at the official residence in Washington. We haven't seen him in a couple of days. But if he decides to venture out today, this is what he'll see. There's quite a noisy demonstration going on across the street. Bush supporters out there with their signs. And, in fact, their numbers have grown to several hundred in about the past 15 minutes or so. Now, across the street from them are the Gore supporters. They number about quite a lot this morning. Their numbers have come down a bit, obviously, these people exercising their First Amendment rights, exercising their right to give their opinion. Now, as for the U.S. Supreme Court argument scheduled for Friday, Democrats say that it could and should give Vice President Al Gore some political cover to continue his battle. Of course, the election could be certified on Sunday. If George W. Bush wins, they're saying that would give Vice President cover to continue on in making his case. The Gore legal advisors are hoping also that involvement by the U.S. Supreme Court could help tone down the rhetoric and the emotion.
[Kendall Coffey, Gore Campaign Attorney:] We believe that the U.S. Supreme court will follow all the existing precedent and validate the role of the state Supreme Court of Florida in determining questions of state law. But what I think is a real positive for the whole country is that both sides will have their day in court very quickly and that we will have, in effect, the highest court in the land speaking to the issue. And I think that will give everyone great comfort and further validation in the outcome.
[Davis:] And to give you an idea of what's going on inside the official residency of the vice president, keeping a very close eye on developments. And there is no no talk of concession at this point. In fact, we're told that yesterday, he was meeting with his aides to talk about the transition if he does, indeed, win this election Moy Neal, the person who's leading that transition; William Daley, his campaign chairman; they're both are leading the charge in Florida; Alexis Hermann, his labor the labor secretary for Clinton; Joe Lieberman. Also Hadassa and Tipper there. So, he is hard at work here inside the vice presidential mansion. I'm Patti Davis, CNN, live in Washington.
[Harris:] All right. Thanks, Patti. It sounds likes she's at a football game or something there. Well, now that this case has made its way all the way up to the Supreme Court, it's raising lots of questions. And joining us now is professor David Ryden of Hope College. He's the editor of the book, "The U.S. Supreme Court and the Electoral Process." He joins us now from Grand Rapids, Michigan. Good morning. Thanks for coming in and talking to us today about all this.
[David Ryden, Professor, Hope College:] Good morning.
[Harris:] Now that this we're going to be seeing some action in the Supreme Court, what is the history of the court's I don't want to use the word "interference," but the court's, I guess, influence over the electoral process? Has it has it happened before?
[Ryden:] It has and certainly you know, really in the last 30 or 40 years the court's really been pretty active in terms of getting involved in the electoral process. Up to the 1960s, it pretty much took a hands off approach. But since then, there have been a number of areas where the court has been, I would say, central in terms of it's involvement in shaping how the electoral process actually operates.
[Harris:] Now, I read that you didn't think that the Supreme Court would take up this case that the Bush camp has brought before it. So you, like the rest of us, was quite surprised.
[Ryden:] I did not. I confess to having read that one wrong.
[Harris:] Now well then now that it has made it there, how why first of all, why do you think the court did agree to hear the case and what do you think is going to happen there?
[Ryden:] Well, far be it from me to be too confident in my predictions, given yeah how wrong many of us were on the first question. But my reading of it is simply that this the court looked I mean, one of the lessons we all ought to take away from the last few weeks is that it's how political the legal process is and how much law and politics are really bound up together. And we tend to think of courts as somehow insulated from politics or operating in a political vacuum. And I think the Supreme Court's decision to take this case on really ought to debunk that notion that they look at the political consequences, you know, riding on the legal issues at stake and, given the really, the integrity of the selection method for the highest national officer at stake, that they maybe viewed it as necessary for them to take an extraordinary step to, kind of, render their put their stamp of approval on the process.
[Harris:] Well, you bring up consequences. I want to hear your thoughts on the consequences for each of the two men involved here. Now that they have involved the courts, many people are they're taking some heat from different quarters...
[Ryden:] Yeah.
[Harris:] ... for having done so. Whom do you think is damaged most by this?
[Ryden:] You know, I don't know who comes out of this stronger. I mean, I think I think Americans the partisans, the probe the hard core Bush and Gore backers, they're in this for the duration. You know, they want their candidates to take every legal step possible. But, in terms of the more casual man-on-the street, I think they're maybe running out of a bit of patience. And the more this turns into a legal food fight, the more I think both candidates are damaged. Regardless of who the winner is, I think he comes out in pretty weak shape in terms of being able to govern.
[Harris:] Well, if he loses this food fight, you think this is it for Al Gore? You think this is the end of his career?
[Ryden:] I tend to think so. I mean, I you know, my spin on this is really the reason Al Gore is really hunkered down, is going to take every legal step possible I mean, on the one hand, he's I think he genuinely thinks he's probably gotten more votes in Florida. But I also think his mindset is it's going to be awful difficult for him to come back four years from now and to be a viable presidential candidate after what he's been through the last few weeks.
[Harris:] After what we've all been through.
[Ryden:] Yes.
[Harris:] Professor David Ryden, thanks much for your time and your thoughts this morning. Appreciate it.
[Ryden:] Thank you very much. Thanks.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] The war crimes trial for Slobodan Milosevic began this morning. In the opening statements, the U.N. prosecutor accused the former dictator of Yugoslavia with "medieval savagery" and "calculated cruelty," while Milosevic, who has refused to recognize the legitimacy of the court, sat quietly in the courtroom. CNN Chief International Correspondent Christiane Amanpour is live in the Hague with more details this morning good morning, Christiane.
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Chief International Correspondent:] Good morning, Paula. And it certainly is an extraordinary and certainly historic moment. This is, of course, the most important war crimes trial since Nuremberg after World War II, and everybody is watching this trial to see how it proceeds. Slobodan Milosevic, who is being held personally accountable as one of the main people responsible for the Balkan wars had a historic encounter today with the chief prosecutor, who started by saying, "this will be this tribunal's most important case," and she said we must pause to remember those terrible scenes that we witnessed over the last 10 years of war in the Balkans, a 10 years in which a new term was coined, "ethnic cleansing, and the means of war were beyond the legitimate means of war, the cruelty that was employed is now being held to account. She insisted that this was a trial of one individual, not a trial of collective responsibility for the whole Serbian people, and she said that this is not a debating chamber, it's a trial chamber, addressing specifically Slobodan Milosevic's penchant so far to just stand up and make political statements, and she is hoping that this trial proceeds in a proper criminal fashion Paula.
[Amanpour:] It could last about two years. This is a trial which is, in fact, is a combined trial for alleged crimes committed during three Balkan wars. Kosovo, Croatia, and Bosnia. There are some 66 different charges with which Milosevic is indicted, ranging from crimes against humanity, to the most serious crime against international law, and that is the crime of genocide. Also violations of the Geneva Convention, and the laws and customs of war. There are going to be at least several hundred witnesses called, including what the prosecutors say will be insider witnesses, people who were close to Milosevic, high-ranking military, she said diplomats, and, indeed, government officials who she believes will be able to bolster her case. For his part, Slobodan Milosevic is saying that this is politically-motivated trial, biased against him and all the Serbian people, and that he was just defending the Serbian people during those 10 years that he was president of Yugoslavia, and before that, president of Serbia Paula.
[Zahn:] All right. Thanks so much for that report. Christiane Amanpour. Interesting to note that Slobodan Milosevic is apparently wanting to call Prime Minister Tony Blair and former president, President Clinton to speak, and we are told the likelihood of that happening is just about nil. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan:] If a military tribunal is good enough for wayward American troops, why isn't something similar good enough for suspected terrorists? And tracking detainees: how much does Congress need to know?
[Unidentified Male:] Need for Congressional oversight and vigilance is not, as some mistakenly describe it, to protect terrorists. It is to protect ourselves.
[Kagan:] Also, culture clash in Saudi Arabia. Should women in the U.S. military abide by local custom and cover up when off base? Find out why an Air Force pilot is suing to take it off. Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. Another great audience behind me and all around me, and we're glad to have you at home with us as well. This is
[Talkback Live:] "America Speaks Out." I'm Daryn Kagan. The question today: Are your rights and mine as well being violated by the administration's war on terrorism? Congress is on the case. You might have seen this live, earlier on CNN, as Attorney General John Ashcroft was making his case, saying the world is a different place now, defending military tribunals for accused terrorists, and the rounding up of possible suspects in the aftermath of 911. Here to talk about that: Karen Pennington. She is a Dallas attorney who is representing several detainees that have been rounded up since September 11. Also, Paul Kamenar. He is senior executive council of the Washington Legal Foundation. Welcome, and thanks for joining us here on
[Talkback Live. Karen Pennington, Attorney:] Thank you, Daryn.
[Paul Kamenar, Washington Legal Foundation:] Thank you.
[Kagan:] Karen, I want to go ahead and start with you. I know you have a number of stories of what has happened to a number of your clients. But tell me the story of the client, in particular, who voluntarily went in for questioning because he thought he had information that might be helping investigators looking into the hijackings of 9-11.
[Pennington:] That client is a Jordanian Palestinian who has been married to a U.S. citizen since June of 2000. He believed that he had information which was valuable to the FBI, and he was convinced by his U.S. citizen wife to voluntarily go forward and call the FBI 1-800 tip line on September 14 of this year.
[Kagan:] Can you tell us what that information was?
[Pennington:] He was recruited for flight training in Dallas, and met in a restaurant with two men he identified as Saudi pilots. When he was shown pictures of the suspected bombers, he was identified one of the persons that he saw as the pilot of the second plane that crashed into the World Trade Center, Marwan al-Shehhi.
[Kagan:] So he believes he actually met with one of the men who was on one of those flights.
[Pennington:] He does.
[Kagan:] And he was trying to help. But what happened to him, and where is he now?
[Pennington:] He was questioned by the FBI for many hours, and then was given a polygraph. He never had an attorney, never...
[Kagan:] Is it a polygraph that he failed? How did he do on that?
[Pennington:] Well, he was told that he failed. In speaking with expert polygraphers, regarding the testing that was done of him, I believe that there were some questionable aspects of that. But since I wasn't present and because he was wasn't represented by an attorney through this, it's rather hard to say.
[Kagan:] Now, given all this, isn't it possible, Karen I know it's your job to defend your client, and you want to believe innocent until proven guilty. But some of the coincidences here he was meeting with somebody who was connected to these people. Officials believe he failed the polygraph. Is it actually possible that he is the kind of person that officials should be detaining right now?
[Pennington:] They have never made any charge like that. They've never tried to talk to him at any point past September the 15th. And he has been jailed in Denton, Texas, and is in INS custody since September the 14th, even though he is married to a U.S. citizen.
[Kagan:] And what are you told, that he could be there for how long?
[Pennington:] Indefinitely, until they either deport him or until or until the petition that his wife filed for him is approved, or until his family can come up with the $15,000 bond that has been set for him.
[Kagan:] Which is out of their limits of resources right now?
[Pennington:] Yes. This is a Texas country family, and it is outside their reach.
[Kagan:] Paul, let's bring you in here. You're a lawyer. You went to law school believing in the system. You hear a story like this does this make your lawyer skin cringe?
[Kamenar:] Not at all. I don't know the facts of this particular case, but it sounds like this particular person is one of 550 individuals that are currently in INS custody because of INS violations. Since September 11 or, actually, as of now, there are 600 in custody. Fifty have been charged with actual criminal charges, totally legal.
[Kagan:] But do the math there. That's a lot of people. Only 50 of 500 or 600 that haven't been charged?
[Kamenar:] No. But the other 550 are being held on INS immigration charges, which sounds like this is what this particular case is, such as: you overstayed you student visa. Any number of violations, the INS has the authority to detain you or put you out on parole. And in this case, they're offering a $15,000 bond, which is not unusual. They could actually hold him indefinitely, if they wanted.
[Kagan:] And you don't have a problem with that.
[Kamenar:] Actually not.
[Kagan:] He's married to a U.S. citizen.
[Kamenar:] That doesn't make him automatically a U.S. citizen. You have to look at each case. There may be a problem in this particular one. But I'm going to tell you that if it is, this is certainly the exception and not the rule.
[Kagan:] But in general, you agree with the attorney general. These are different times, the world has changed and the rules need to be cracked down on.
[Kamenar:] Absolutely. You need to be aggressive and at the same time, respect civil liberties. And I think the attorney general and I think most American people the polls show this is doing a good job of walking that fine line.
[Kagan:] Before we even started this show, our audience had questions and comments on this. We're going to go right to the audience and Jacob, from Texas.
[Jacob:] Yes, I'm just kind of wondering. I mean, all along, our government, this INS deal about holding a on visa violations, all the government is finally doing is doing the job that they should have been doing in the first place, using our tax dollars for what they're supposed to be doing.
[Kamenar:] Exactly.
[Kagan:] Karen, do you want to jump in on that? Our audience seems to be very supportive of that, that this is just what the government is supposed to do, not just to protect U.S. citizens, but to keep the people here who are supposed to be here, and the people who aren't supposed to be here, well, send them home.
[Pennington:] The U.S. Constitution protects everybody who is present in the United States, not just U.S. citizens. And the question that...
[Kagan:] Hasn't the attorney general been very clear that all everyone is not equal right now? U.S. citizens right now have different rights than those who are not U.S. citizens?
[Pennington:] And I call into question whether that is going to lead to the erosion of rights under the U.S. Constitution, for all of us that by eliminating or reducing the rights of certain groups in the United States, then it becomes easier to divide everybody into this group should be entitled to rights, and because of this issue, these people should not. And instead, under the U.S. law, it is clear that everybody in the United States is protected by our Constitution.
[Kagan:] Back to the audience.
[Unidentified Male:] This is Bill from Kansas Bill.
[Bill:] Well, is the particular case you talked about, are there some INS problems with your client? Or have those been brought up at all?
[Kagan:] Karen, what is his INS status?
[Pennington:] He is a visa overstay, because he did enter on a tourist visa. And then, just like many, many of the clients I have in the immigration court, he is married to a U.S. citizen. And under the law in general, he is now required to return to his home country and wait for her to petition for him...
[Kagan:] What does that mean, "under the law in general"? Isn't the law kind of specific about what you're supposed to do? You're either supposed to be here, or you aren't supposed to be here?
[Pennington:] Well, but it listen, in many circumstances, people enter as tourists. They meet U.S. citizens, they fall in love and they marry.
[Kagan:] Don't many of those people follow the rules? Without being disrespectful, it kind of sounds like, I'd go, "Mom, the other kids are doing it." And she would say, "I don't care about the other kids. I only care about this specific situation."
[Pennington:] And so what you're saying is that nobody in the United States should have the right to marry anybody who is not a U.S. citizen?
[Kagan:] No, but isn't it possible to do it in a legal, proper way, that you come under a visa and you get married, and you go through the proper channels? You're much more familiar with the whole immigration process than I am, obviously, so you would know.
[Pennington:] This is not an uncommon circumstance at all. And in fact, one of our immigration judges in Dallas married a woman from Columbia, who was a visa overstay.
[Kagan:] Even the judges are doing. OK, let's go back to the audience Megan.
[Megan:] Hi. I was just wondering, what was he doing in the United States prior to his visa overstay? And is this just a way so can he stay here longer? I mean, what is his purpose?
[Pennington:] I wish that I could have his wife on right now. She says that he has treated her better than any American man she ever dated. Every time I talk to her, all she does is cry and say that she misses him so much, and she loves him so much, and that she regrets ever having advised him to go to the
[Fbi. Kagan:] That's right, is was her idea in the first place. Karen, before we let you go, I want to ask you quickly about this other situation, where the attorney general is saying that it's OK in certain situations for the government to listen in when attorneys talk to their clients. Have you faced that? And are you told if that's going to happen?
[Pennington:] Whenever that client, or others of my detained clients call me from the jail, in those circumstances, as soon as they come on the line, a recording comes on and says, "this call is being monitored." Those, it's clear that they're being monitored. There are also indications that my communications in general on my other phones are being monitored as well. And on those, there's no indication. It's just problems that we have with the phones, and sounds that we hear.
[Kagan:] It is... Yes, we're going to get to you in a second, because you're staying. But Karen needs to leave, and I know this is a difficult time, and I know you've taken on some difficult cases. And, Karen Pennington, I do want to thank you for taking the time to join us today and explaining your case, and how you see the issue. Coming up next this is going to make for some interesting conversation, here. We have the president of the ACLU and Georgia Congressman Bob Barr. Is it possible they could agree on an issue? We will talk about that. We also encourage you to get into our chatroom here and send in those e-mails. We'll be putting them on the air. Stay with us. Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. We continue our conversation, and now move on to military tribunals. Joining us now, Georgia Republican Congressman Bob Barr and Nadine Strossen, president of the American Civil Liberties Union. OK, welcome to both of you. Congressman, I'm going to start with you. Military tribunals...
[Nadine Strossen, President, Aclu:] I lost my sound.
[Kagan:] Can someone help out Ms. Strossen, so we can help here with some sound, there? While we wait for her, let's go ahead and talk to Congressman Barr. Congressman, first of all, good afternoon. It's good to see you.
[Rep. Bob Barr , Georgia:] Listen, it's great to be with you, and I really enjoyed the debate in the prior segment.
[Kagan:] Anything you want to add to that, before we move on to military tribunals?
[Barr:] No. other than the fact that I have very little sympathy for those who are in this country illegally, for whatever reason. While it may be the policy not to... ... always remove them immediately, I really don't have any sympathy for people who are here illegally and say, as you said, "well, everybody else is doing it." So I don't think that's a real appropriate case for us to worry a great deal about.
[Kagan:] All right, let's move on to military tribunals. Your name pops up, interestingly enough, as somebody who, in certain cases, is not comfortable with that idea. And as one of the more conservative members of Congress, I think some people were surprised to see that criticism come from you.
[Barr:] The very name of what we're talking about here, military tribunals, answers the question, to me, of when we can use these sorts of mechanisms. And in the three circumstances that we might be faced with, we can use them in only two. The third one, we can't. The first one, in which military tribunals, or whatever mechanism the president, as commander-in-chief, wants to use, is combatants overseas. Anybody that we come in contact with, and comes under our control as a combatant of a foreign nation or force, that's hostile to us, we should be able to take whatever action the president wants against them: shoot them on sight, hang them, shoot them while trying to escape whatever the military situation calls for. The second situation is in which we find ourselves, if we were in a state of war. If we are in a declared state of war...
[Kagan:] Which we're not right now.
[Barr:] Which we are not right now that's very, very important. Then the president would also be able to convene military tribunals, because he would be operating as the commander-in-chief. And if we were to find foreign combatants, that is, terrorists, in this country, he would be, I think, entirely within bounds of constitutional authority and precedent to treat them as harshly as he sees fit.
[Kagan:] So, just to cut to your main criticism, is your basic discomfort with this that we are not in a declared state of war, and if we were, you'd be more comfortable with what the president has planned for military tribunals?
[Barr:] Absolutely. If we are now in a declared state of war, then the Constitution Bill of Rights does prevail, because it applies not only to citizens, but all persons. And we have to be respectful of it.
[Kagan:] But do you understand what the president and what the Justice Department is dealing with here? They say they don't want to capture some terrorist and have to bring him back and put him on a regular trial. The security issues are a nightmare. Even evidence could be a nightmare, because you're going to have to present things that you don't want the public to know about.
[Barr:] Well, of course what I'm saying is, we don't have to bring anybody back here. If we get somebody overseas, keep them overseas and deal with them there. We don't have to deal with them here in the States. In every circumstance in recent history though, in which we have captured terrorists in this country and have dealt with them, some very heinous people, like Timothy McVeigh, our justice system has worked. And while we may find it cumbersome at times, while we may find it slow at times and heaven knows, as a former prosecutor, I've found that it does work. And I don't think that we can just ignore it, simple because we don't want to declare war. I think we ought to declare war these terrorists, and I think we should have done it on September 12th.
[Kagan:] And what's the problem? Why hasn't that happened, Congressman?
[Barr:] That's a very good question, because I introduced a resolution just a few days after the attacks on September 11 that would have declared war. I think it's the appropriate force of action...
[Kagan:] I'm sorry, I have to interrupt you for a second. If you could just stand by, I think we have some breaking news. Want to toss it up to Joie Chen. We'll get back to our discussion in just a moment. We will go back to the news desk as soon as there is more information. We'll be able to do both, monitor the situation in Indiana and also, continue our conversation right now on military tribunals. Congressman, if you're still with us. Are you?
[Barr:] Yes, ma'am.
[Kagan:] OK, hang on. We have a question for you from John. John, where are you from?
[John:] Wisconsin. Congressman, if not a military tribunal, then what? You said to leave them there and deal with them there. What are you suggesting?
[Barr:] For those overseas, that ought to be up to the commanders in the field who are in charged of our military operations, taking their directives on both policy and procedure from the commander-in- chief, from the president. What I suspect the president would do, operating through our military leaders, is to set up some form of tribunal, such as we have seen mentioned in the November 13 executive order, that would provide some form of basic due process for those who are captured. And if the punishment if their acts warrant the death sentence, then to mete that out overseas. There wouldn't be any reason to bring them back here, stateside.
[Kagan:] All right, Congressman, we have fixed our problems with the ACLU Nadine Strossen. Nadine, can you hear us now?
[Strossen:] I am. I'm so sorry I missed the rest of the discussion.
[Kagan:] It was fascinating. You missed good stuff, but we'll give you a chance to catch up, OK?
[Strossen:] Great.
[Kagan:] We're talking about military tribunals do we have go to break? Did I just hear that? No. OK, we don't have to go to break yet. A chance for you to get your two cents in, here the ACLU stance on them?
[Strossen:] Well, it's not only the ACLU stance, but interestingly enough, many respected conservatives, including "The New York Times" columnist William Safire, have also been highly critical of these tribunals. In fact, a number of the critics include national security experts and Justice Department prosecutors, who say they are counterproductive...
[Kagan:] Nadine, based on what? Instead of just saying they're bad. What is the basic problem with them?
[Strossen:] Well, the basic problem is that they violate fundamental human rights. And therefore, our allies are refusing to extradite for trial in the United States, actual terrorism suspects. And that is far more important, that we be able to try those people, than that we round up the thousands of people who are suspected only of immigration violations in this country. The proceedings would be secret. They would have absolutely no legitimacy in the eyes of the world. We would be defeating the very aims that we say we're seeking to serve namely, to promote democracy, the rule of law and human rights, internationally. Prosecutors an experienced prosecutor wrote in "the New York Times" this morning that it's counterproductive to try these people so quickly and so secretly because then you are not able to get the maximum amount of information from them that could help to yield clues and and lead to to lead to people who perhaps are even more involved or other people who are involved in terrorism.
[Kagan:] Congressman, maybe you maybe you could I want to get the Congressman's take on something that you brought up, Nadine. There is a kind of a basic process problem here with some countries. It might not be the United States that finds the suspects. It might be other governments, and they hold on, stand by one more time. We have some more information. So we're going have to Nadine and the Congressman stand by. Joie, you have more information on the situation in Indiana?

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Today's report comes as Federal Reserve officials meet in Washington. The Federal Open Market Committee is trying to decide whether the economy needs another interest rate reduction. Peter Viles of CNN Financial News is keeping watch. He joins us now Peter.
[Peter Viles, Cnn Correspondent:] Natalie, that report you just mentioned on consumer confidence certainly a factor for the Federal Reserve to take into consideration today, the lowest reading, as you said, on consumer confidence in four years. This meeting now been going on for about four hours. Alan Greenspan came to work, as he almost always does, just about 8:00 this morning without any fanfare. But this is a special day and a special meeting, a two-day meeting: We'll hear the results of this meeting tomorrow, sometime around 2:15, if tradition holds. And the Federal Reserve considering whether to cut interest rates again. Remember, the Fed cut rates the first week of January in a surprise no meeting then, they cut them after a conference call on the telephone. They are expected to cut rates again tomorrow because all month long we've been hearing negative news about the economy the theory behind cutting rates: It makes the cost of money cheaper, it makes consumers go out and spend on big-ticket items, and it makes businesses more likely to spend on expansions, new plants, new stores that mean new jobs. So the expectation after this consumer confidence number is for another interest rate cut, probably a half a percentage point Natalie.
[Allen:] Love the slow-motion picture of Greenspan coming into work there, Peter. Question for you: Will the Feds have any more economic reports to pour over before they make a decision?
[Viles:] They sure do. And Greenspan is known to love to dig through these numbers, but tomorrow morning the government will issue a major report on how much the economy grew in the fourth quarter. Most economists believe the economy was still growing, maybe at about a two percent annual rate in fourth quarter. We'll know for sure tomorrow morning at 8:30, and the Fed will know for sure. Also a report tomorrow on new home sales, which have been holding up pretty well. The real estate sector of the economy has been holding in there, consumers continuing to refinance, continuing to buy new homes. January was a great month to refinance homes, as interest rates fell. So we'll know tomorrow if the real estate portion of the economy is still holding up, and the Federal Reserve will know as well when it makes its decision on interest rates.
[Allen:] Peter Viles, thank you, Peter, in Washington.

[Mark Shields, Co-host:] He is Republican Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
[Shields:] Chairman Jesse Helms, Ronald Reagan one of your favorite presidents and Bob's said that Mikhail Gorbachev, leader of the Soviet Union, is the kind of man you could do business with. I'm asking you right now, is the president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, the kind of man the United States can do business with?
[Sen. Jesse Helms , Foreign Relations Committee Chairman:] Not yet.
[Shields:] What do we need to see from him?
[Helms:] Well, we need to hear more from him than we've heard. And we need to watch where we are sending our money and how much of it, for what purpose. We got a lot of things to straighten out with Mr. Putin.
[Shields:] Do you see him, his administration, his policies and his country as being a threat in any way to the United States vital national interests?
[Helms:] Of course, they have very much so. Very much so, if they decide to be so, and that's the reason we need to be careful.
[Novak:] Mr. Chairman, several of the foreign policy analysts in this town, say that the Russians are preparing have in operation SAM-10 and SAM-20 anti-ballistic missiles. Could you tell us what you know about that and how you regard it?
[Helms:] Can't do it, because all I know I got on the fourth floor of the Capitol, and we're not suppose to speak about it. But we need to watch that. We need to be mindful of it.
[Novak:] What do you think, Mr. Chairman, of the agreement reached in Moscow between President Clinton and President Putin on missile defense?
[Helms:] I don't think anything of it, and I think it's a showboat thing. The president is trying to come home with some sort of legacy and he didn't make it there.
[Novak:] Does it do any damage?
[Helms:] Well, it may. But nobody's confident that it won't.
[Novak:] Do you think, sir, that President Clinton is going to move forward with a missile defense program that would be a protection for this country?
[Helms:] No, sir.
[Novak:] What do you think of that program that he is proposing?
[Helms:] Well, I haven't seen the details of it, but I know that he is not going to do enough to protect the American people, and that ought to be left to the next president of the United States, whomever he might be.
[Shields:] Chairman Helms, the United States policy toward North Korea has been based, in large part, upon the perception and judgment that North Korea is a rogue nation. And this week, given the summit meeting between the leaders of North Korea and South Korea, is it time to revisit that and take another look at whether, in fact, North Korea deserves a second look?
[Helms:] Carefully. And if you'll let me add a little something, I have two good friends in North Carolina, Ruth Graham, who is the wife of Billy Graham, and her son their son, Franklin Graham, and both of them have been working with the people in North Korea.
[Shields:] On feeding them?
[Helms:] Beg your pardon?
[Shields:] On feeding them?
[Helms:] Yes, and other things. And I believe that they have had an effect in what his happening now. I certainly hope so, because if this is the result of some of their works, then I have high hope for it.
[Shields:] Well, toward that end and with that in mind, there's been some discussion in this administration, the White House, of easing sanctions towards North Korea. Should that be on the table?
[Helms:] Well, where is the table located and where is when is the decision going to be made? It's too early to tell. Nobody can answer that question today with any common sense.
[Shields:] But you are encouraged by the...
[Helms:] Oh, certainly,. I think everyone is.
[Shields:] Is it in any way a vindication of the Clinton policy?
[Helms:] I don't think so. I think that it's been in the making. I think a lot of outside people and I mentioned the Grahams have been working with the people and the leadersm particularly of North Vietnam North Korea, excuse me, and I would be inclined to think that they've had more effect than anybody in our government.
[Novak:] In that connection, Mr. Chairman, we have 37,000 U.S. troops in South Korea had them there for half a century. Do you think it is the time to consider removing them?
[Helms:] Yes, sir, it's time to consider it. And after deliberation, we can determine whether it's time to bring them out. It's too early for anybody to say we ought to bring out bring them out now.
[Novak:] What would be the determining factor? Whether the North Koreas are less of a threat now than they were before?
[Helms:] Well, it depends on whether this is just a temporary lull. If it's a temporary lull we'll have to leave the people there for a while, but if it's for real, Bob, then we ought to make plans to bring those folks home.
[Novak:] Sir, the there is a visiting Western diplomat in Washington at this moment, and he is very unhappy with you because you are...
[Helms:] Only one?
[Novak:] Only one. Because you are blocking, he says, the approval of the international criminal court convention, saying that it shouldn't apply there should be exceptions, shouldn't apply to American troops. I understand his position is that, if we're a law-abiding country, if we're not a rogue nation, we don't have anything to worry about from the international criminal court.
[Helms:] Well, I don't agree with him and I think he's wrong, and he's got a host of folks he doesn't like, if he just checks the list of people who are supporting me in this, including the majority leader and John Warner, right on down the line.
[Novak:] Do you worry, sir, that, by not participating in this international criminal court, the United States would be standing and you would be standing in the way of prosecuting the war criminals in Serbia and Iraq and elsewhere?
[Helms:] Not at all. I just want to protect our soldiers, our military personnel over there from being mistreated.
[Novak:] So do you think you can still prosecute the war criminals, even if your exceptions are in there?
[Helms:] Well, we certainly did it before, you know.
[Novak:] Are you you're not against the international court entirely, you just don't want it to apply to the U.S., is that...
[Helms:] Well, I as constituted, I don't like it.
[Novak:] In entirety.
[Helms:] That's right.
[Novak:] You're the ambassador to the United Nations, Richard Holbrooke, just this week has come out saying that the present peacekeeping procedure of the UN is inadequate and we should have there should be a formalized procedure for some military control over that procedure, not just civilian control. Do you agree with that?
[Helms:] Well, I certainly do. And that doesn't mean I agree lock, stock and barrel with Richard Holbrooke. But a lot of thinking needs to be done and not left to a president. And I'm not going to attack President Clinton on the judgments that he made. But it's a way that we ought to follow and study and make whatever arrangements that need to be made that can be justified.
[Novak:] What about some kind of military supervision or whatever?
[Helms:] Yes, sir.
[Novak:] OK, we're going to have to take a break, and when we come back we'll talk to Jesse Helms about Cuba, and we'll talk a little domestic politics as well.
[Shields:] Senator Jesse Helms, no one has ever accused you of being an uncritical admirer of President Bill Clinton. In fact you said in an earlier broadcast that he was not a good commander in chief on the Novak show. What is there in George Bush's George W. Bush's background that suggests he would be a good commander in chief?
[Helms:] Well, I think he's proven himself as an executive as the governor of Texas, and of course I've visited with him on a couple of occasions, and we've gotten down to the nitty-gritty about things that he believed in and I believe in and so forth. But I think he'd be a great president.
[Shields:] Nothing particular experience in his background.
[Helms:] Not that I know of.
[Shields:] And on that, you've discussed things with him, but I was just thinking, on China you and he disagree; he was for U.S. intervention in Kosovo; he's for keeping Bosnia troops in Bosnia, no deadline. How does the Republican chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee going to get along with the Republican president, if George W. Bush does win? Some areas of disagreement, right?
[Helms:] Well, one thing he understands is that this is a tripartite form of government: the executive, the legislative and the judicial. Bill Clinton does not understand that. He thinks he's the king, and he makes decisions and he expects you to follow, and I'm not going to follow a lot of things that he did. President Bush and I hope he will be President Bush he understands that. And I think he will work well with Congress and that'll be a novelty, certainly since 1992.
[Novak:] Mr. Chairman, one of the decisions that President Clinton did make was to send Elian Gonzalez back to Cuba. And since it looks like the court appeals are not promising, is there anything that can be done to prevent that from happening?
[Helms:] I guess not. I talked to the attorney general, Janet Reno, at the outset and I told her we had as she knew that we had courts all over the land handling custody disputes, you know. And she listened very politely, and then she said, Senator, I know how you feel and I appreciate that, but I don't agree with you. Which was my signal to anticipate that she would do exactly what she did.
[Novak:] Do you think, sir, that before President Clinton leaves office in the remaining few months he will make an attempt to normalize relations with Cuba?
[Helms:] Well, I don't know how he's going to normalize relations with a government that's headed by a communist tyrant. Now they try to make all sorts of comparisons between Cuba and other countries, China, for example, but Cuba doesn't have anything to govern it except Fidel Castro. And I talked not so long ago with his daughter about that. And she agrees with those of us who feel that it's time for Castro to get out of there. It never was time for him to be in there, as far as I'm concerned.
[Shields:] Senator Helms, the Republican party, in the late '80s, deserved and earned the reputation as being the tough on communism party. And yet when it comes to China, all the Republicans seem to go weak in their knees. What happened?
[Helms:] Well, not all of the Republicans.
[Shields:] Well, tell me about what happened to your party.
[Helms:] Well, I don't think it happened to the party; it happened to individuals who are making a mistake in my judgment. Of course, they think I'm making a mistake by opposing.
[Shields:] All right. This week we've seen disclosures at Los Alamos of breaches of security of enormous dimensions. What should be the consequences for the people in charge, including the secretary of energy?
[Helms:] Well, I can't specify what should be the consequences of that, except whoever was lax, whoever made the mistake, it ought to be dug out, dug in, laid out, so the American people can know what happened. That's probably not going to happen. But that is a tragic thing, and the trouble about it is, that we don't know how much we've lost. That's what bothers me.
[Shields:] Well, on that very subject: former Senate Republican Leader Howard Baker and former Democratic Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Lee Hamilton of Indiana have been appointed as an investigating team. Do you have confidence, knowing both men, that they'll get to the bottom of this?
[Helms:] I know they will do the best they can. Lee Hamilton I've worked with on many occasions. Howard Baker is one of my best friends, and he was majority leader, as you know, of the United States Senate. And I think they'll do their best. And they are both competent men.
[Novak:] Mr. Chairman, Madeleine Albright is just finishing her fourth year as secretary of state. You have a good personal relationship with her, but I want you to put on your hardboiled hat...
[Helms:] All right.
[Novak:] ... and tell me give me a grade on how you would grade her as secretary of state? Performance?
[Helms:] Well, I'll give her A for effort. She has tried hard. She's worked hard. She hasn't answered as much mail as she ought to, not only to me, I have to dig up and call up down there and fuss and fight and everything else to get answers to simple questions. But she has tried and she is a dedicated lady. But I have an idea that she'll be glad when next January rolls around herself.
[Novak:] She has been one of the things she's still dealing with is the Middle East. What do you think of the role of the United States in getting a Middle East settlement if it means more aid for Israel and other countries in order to effect a settlement perhaps with Syria?
[Helms:] Well, I'll tell you that minister over there who proposed to sell a lot of fighting equipment, military equipment, yesterday, I think it was, or one day this week, I am worried about him and I think they're giving away too much. I'm one who has felt that Israel is the best ally we have in that part of the world and I try to view it, suppose we had to have that there was no Israel and we had to have the warships and airplanes and the troops and everything else to protect our interests in that part of the world. It would be expensive. But I am amazed by what's going on in the giveaway in Israel right now of property.
[Novak:] You believe they're giving away too much?
[Helms:] Yes. I don't think there's any question about it. And this business where they're going to sell planes and whatever to China, I just don't understand that. And I think we ought to maybe just cut off the foreign aid to make up for the difference in what...
[Novak:] All cut off all foreign aid...
[Helms:] No, no. Just let him...
[Shields:] Make up the difference.
[Helms:] ... let him pay us for the plane he's selling to China.
[Novak:] We're going to have to take another break, and when we come back we will have "The Big Question" for Senator Jesse Helms. "The Big Question" for Senator Jesse Helms. Mr. Chairman, the Republican Party is supposed to be the pro-life party, but Pat Robertson, the president of the Christian Coalition, has said he could accept Governor Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania, a pro- choice Republican, as the vice presidential running mate. Could you except Governor Ridge?
[Helms:] Well, I like Pat Robertson. He's been a friend for a long time, but he's not speaking for me on that.
[Novak:] You couldn't accept a pro-choice running mate on the ticket?
[Helms:] I could not accept that one.
[Novak:] Why particularly that one?
[Helms:] Well, he's been out front. He's been out front, and I just am pro-life strongly enough that I want somebody who is at least willing to listen, and I don't think he would be.
[Shields:] But you would consider a pro-choice running mate if you thought that that running mate was open to debate discussion?
[Helms:] Well, you have to answer a question like that with the word "whom." You know, who's it going to be? I've got a lot of friends, as the saying goes, who are pro- choice, and we don't fuss and fight about it, but somebody who is that sensitive about the thing and so outspokenly in favor of abortion, to put it bluntly, I would have to take a back seat on that and say, no thanks.
[Shields:] Jesse Helms, thank you for being with us.
[Helms:] Well, thank you.
[Shields:] My partner and I will be back with a comment in just a moment. Bob, Pat Robertson, founder of the Christian Coalition, has said he could support pro-choice Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge as George Bush's running mate, but Senator Jesse Helms made it clear that the choice of Tom Ridge will leave him cold and maybe even outside the tent.
[Novak:] He was he left no doubt about that, Mark. He left no doubt how much he likes Madeleine Albright. He said he gives her A for effort, which for a conservative Republican in a Democratic administration is OK. But in the time that Bill Clinton has been in office, Jesse Helms has not softened on him. He says he thinks President Clinton thinks he's a king; can't get around with him; doesn't understand the American government; he left no doubt on that, either.
[Shields:] He left no doubt, Bob, in fact this week of the Korean summit, with North Korea and South Korea and good news, maybe even a thaw over there in that peninsula, Chairman Helms was reluctant to give any credit to the administration of Clinton in any way in fact gave more credit to Billy Graham's wife and his son than he did to any American U.S. policy.
[Novak:] That's unusual. I'm going to make a personal observation, that you certainly are not associating with, Mark...
[Shields:] Thank you, Bob.
[Novak:] ... but I consider Jesse Helms one of the great Foreign Relations Committee chairmen of all times, because he doesn't work for any of these international organizations and the Council of Foreign Relations. He is trying to represent the American people. Sometimes I might disagree with him. I agree with him most of the time, but I think he's a great chairman because he is for the American people, not some international group. I'm Robert Novak.
[Shields:] I'm Mark Shields. Coming up in one half-hour on "
[Reliable Sources":] Should the media pay so much attention to vice presidential speculation? And tonight, at 7 Eastern, the "CAPITAL GANG" discusses the shake-up in the Gore campaign and the candidates' plans for the budget surplus with Republican Senator Paul Coverdell.
[Novak:] And be sure to join us next week when our guest will be Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts. Thanks for joining us.

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] Al Gore walks a fine line on the campaign trail, mindful of the threats on his right and his left. Also ahead
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] But while George Bush is on fire, his aides are steaming.
[Sesno:] Candy Crowley on the Bush campaign and new charges of dirty politics.
[Unidentified Male:] Four, three, two, one...
[Narrator:] It is the rain that we...
[Sesno:] A very controversial blast from the past now is echoing on the airwaves in Campaign 2000. Plus: We'll go in the trenches with Democrats and Republicans as they fight the political ground war.
[Announcer:] This is INSIDE POLITICS with Frank Sesno in Washington and Judy Woodruff reporting from Pittsburgh.
[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you for joining us. Bernie is on assignment. It is raining here in Pittsburgh but Al Gore has just arrived at this rally Carnegie Mellon University and you can you hear behind me this is a big and exciting crowd. All part of the vice president's effort today to regain lost ground in this battleground state of Pennsylvania and in neighboring West Virginia. Our Jonathan Karl reports on Gore's day and the dual nature of his campaign strategy.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Even as he draws some of his biggest and most energetic crowds, Al Gore finds himself struggling to wage a two-front war in the closing days of the campaign.
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] Because I want to fight for you. I want to fight for your family. I want to fight for West Virginia.
[Karl:] On his right flank Gore courts undecided voters, portraying himself as a fiscally conservative advocate of limited government and balanced budgets.
[Gore:] As president I will not add to the number of people doing work for the federal government not by even one position.
[Karl:] On his left flank, he courts disillusioned liberals tempted to vote for Green Party candidate Ralph Nader by ramping up his us-versus-them populism.
[Gore:] If the big oil companies and the chemical manufacturers and the other big polluters were able to communicate a message to this state, they would say vote for George Bush or, in any case, vote for Ralph Nader. They would say, whatever you do, don't vote for Gore.
[Karl:] As evidence that a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush, Gore's aides point to a new ad by a Republican group allied with Bush. [Begin Video Clip, Republican Leadership Council Ad]
[Ralph Nader, Green Party Presidential Candidate:] Al Gore is suffering from election year delusion if he thinks his record on the environment is anything to be proud of.
[Karl:] The ad conveniently leaves out Nader's even harsher criticism of Bush, but it's an indication that Republicans believe and Democrats fear Nader's support in a handful of swing states could drain enough from Gore to tip the scales in Bush's favor. But while Gore courts party liberals and Naderites in big rallies, he uses more formal policy speeches to tout his moderate new Democrat roots.
[Gore:] I have a simple approach to the Internet economy: government should keep its hands off no burdensome government regulations; no new tariffs on Internet transmissions; and a moratorium on taxes on the Internet.
[Karl:] Gore used this speech in Western Pennsylvania to propose new tax credits for corporations who invest in research and development. [OFF-MIKE] Schedule for the United States is in part a road map for the threat posed by Ralph Nader. Gore plans two trips over the next week to Minnesota, a state that hasn't voted for a Republican presidential candidate since 1972. But thanks to support for Ralph Nader, suddenly Minnesota is up for grabs Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, John Karl, thanks a lot. Back on the trail for you. Now to George W. Bush. Today he is focusing on the battleground state of Michigan. One new poll there shows Bush trailing Gore by just two percentage points. Another shows the two candidates are dead even. Our Candy Crowley reports on the battle for Michigan and new evidence that the presidential race is getting nastier.
[Crowd:] No more Gore! No more Gore!
[Crowley:] The crowds are big and upbeat, the candidate revved up, oozing confidence.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] He trusts government. We trust the people. He trusts the federal government. We trust you with your own money to be able to make the right decisions. It is the fundamental difference in this campaign, and it's the reason why we are going to win this election because of that.
[Crowley:] But while George Bush is on fire, his aides are steaming over a series of taped phone calls the Democratic Party is making across Michigan. One features a Texas woman whose husband died four years ago in a nursing home. [Begin Audio Clip, Michigan Democratic Coordinated Campaign]
[Unidentified Female:] When George W. Bush ran for governor, he promised to improve the quality of life for nursing home residents. But Governor Bush broke that promise when he signed legislation that weakened nursing home standards.
[Crowley:] Bush communications director Karen Hughes slammed the phone calls as the exploitive use of an elderly woman's tragedy, wrong on the facts, despicable, and, she says, typical.
[Karen Hughes, Bush Campaign Communications Director:] This is an officially sanctioned ad that proves that Vice President Gore's campaign will sink to the absolute depths in their effort to do anything and say anything to win election.
[Crowley:] Gore aides say the phone messages are absolutely accurate and fair. And while they were on the subject, they had a complaint of their own: this ad suggesting the Clinton-Gore administration made deals with China that put the U.S. in danger. [Begin Video Clip, Aretino Industries Ad]
[Narrator:] In exchange for campaign contributions, Red China was given access and sold vital technology that will now give China the ability to threaten our homes with long-range nuclear warheads.
[Crowley:] Now showing in a number of battleground states, the ad is an echo of one of the most famous political ads of the TV age. [Begin Video Clip, Johnson Campaign Ad, 1964]
[Narrator:] Five, four, three, two, one, zero. These are the stakes!
[Crowley:] The Gore people say those people responsible for the 2000 ad are "shadowy special interests" trying to save George Bush. Other Democrats suggest the ad comes from friends of their favorite enemy: Newt Gingrich. In truth, it's not clear who put this out. But their political persuasion seems obvious. The Bush campaign says there is no comparison between Democratic phone calls and the anonymous TV ad, which it is trying to track down.
[Hughes:] Governor Bush condemns those type of anonymous attack ads. Our campaign has called this morning our campaign political strategist, Karl Rove, has called the individual who was quoted in the newspaper about that ad and urged that group, whoever they are, to pull down that ad.
[Crowley:] At the end of the day, after the attacks and the counterattacks, the accusations and the explanations, one thing is quite clear: A very tough, close election is coming to a head. Candy Crowley, CNN, Benton Harbor, Michigan.
[Woodruff:] We'll have more from Pennsylvania a little later in this hour. Now back to Frank Sesno in Washington.
[Sesno:] Thanks, Judy. And we'll be back to you a bit farther down in this hour. But more now on some of that state-by-state combat under way in campaign 2000. This is an interesting one. A new Minnesota poll, underscoring what Jonathan Karl reported a bit earlier: Bush and Gore running neck-and-neck in that state. And Ralph Nader is a factor there a big one with 10 percent support. In Ohio, Bush appears to have gained some ground. He leads Gore by eight points in a new survey of likely voters in the Buckeye State. And given the closeness of this presidential race nationwide, the campaigns and their allies are stepping up their efforts to get out the vote. We have two reports from the trenches now, beginning with CNN's Brooks Jackson.
[Unidentified Male:] So we'll go to eight and you go to 10.
[Brooks Jackson, Cnn Correspondent:] It's not all TV. This year, the Republican Party is pouring record amounts of money into activities like this, mobilizing volunteers to do old-fashioned precinct walking: knocking on doors, shoe-leather politics.
[Unidentified Male:] We're passing out information for the Bush campaign and a couple of others.
[Jackson:] This is Orange County, California, a Republican stronghold in a state where Al Gore is leading. But that hasn't stopped Republicans from budgeting nearly $15 million on ground-war activities here.
[Gerald Parsky, Bush California Chmn:] Historically, people have said that California can only be won by raising money and buying TV. And we stepped back and said: That's not the way to win, and that we wanted a full-scale, grassroots, volunteer effort.
[Jackson:] Republicans say they are spending three to four times more here on ground-war activities this year than in previous elections. This mail-piece promoting Bush's Social Security plan is going to more than three million California voters, targeted by computer. Overall, GOP officials say 30 million pieces of mail will arrive in voters' mail slots by Election Day.
[Unidentified Female:] Hi, my name is Julie, and I'm a volunteer with the Republican Party.
[Jackson:] And telephones.
[Unidentified Female:] Hi, we're just calling to contact registered Republicans. And we're wondering if you were going to go out and vote on November 7.
[Jackson:] The ground war includes massive calling. [on camera]: Night after night, thousands of telephone calls are going out to registered Republicans from 130 California call-centers like this one. And this is by no means the largest. [voice-over]: In the week before Election Day, these volunteer callers will be reinforced by millions of additional calls from commercial phone banks. And everything is centered on a huge push planned for Election Day: to get Republicans to the polls.
[Stephen Fossati, Gop Volunteer:] We're asking them to help get out the vote, help get out the vote, come out on Election Day, to help other people get to the polling stations if they can't get there themselves, drive people walk precincts and try to get Republican candidates elected.
[Debbie Mccall, California Director, Gop Victory 2000:] We have currently sort of signed on the dotted line 40,000 volunteers. And our goal is to deploy 20,000 25,000 volunteers on Election Day.
[Unidentified Male:] Someone need a partner?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes.
[Jackson:] This sort of thing is going on in state after state. The national party says it's sending $35 to $40 million to state organizations for ground-war activities, more than double anything seen before. And that's in addition to what state parties raise on their own.
[Fred Meyer, Chairman, Gop "victory 2000":] All these things are things that are in the 1, 2, 3, 4 percent range as far as their impact is concerned. But that can easily be the difference between winning and losing an election, especially in a close election like this one.
[Jackson:] Republicans have discovered what organized labor concluded after the 1996 campaigns: TV can't do it all. Voters respond better to the personal touch.
[Mccall:] I think the ground activities make a difference because voters are more inclined to trust their neighbors, their friends, you know some average citizen that they're working with, their kids are going to school with. You know, it's not all about what they're saying on TV. Brooks Jackson, CNN, Los Angeles.
[John King, Cnn White House Correspondent:] This is John King in Seattle, Washington.
[Unidentified Male:] How are you doing this morning?
[King:] The Democrats' ground war begins before dawn, the volunteer army courtesy of organized labor. It is this hands-on, face-to-face contact that union leaders believe will convince union workers to turn out and vote, and to support the Gore-Lieberman Democratic ticket.
[Unidentified Male:] You've got my vote, no problem.
[King:] Not that it's always successful.
[Unidentified Male:] Geez, we got a few Republicans around here.
[King:] National AFL-CIO president John Sweeney is on the front lines in the campaign's finals days; this visit to a Seattle shipyard another reminder that the ground war will be critical in an extremely close presidential race. [on camera]: Washington is the nation's fourth-most unionized state and a critical laboratory in organized labor's new hands-on political strategy. But it's also one of a handful of surprises in this year's campaign: a traditionally Democratic stronghold in presidential politics that is proving much more competitive than the vice president and his allies in the labor movement would have hoped. [voice-over]: Oregon, Iowa, Wisconsin and West Virginia are also getting ground-war reinforcements because of Governor Bush's surprising strength in traditionally Democratic states. Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri and Florida are labor's remaining key targets in the final days. Those 10 states have more than 5 million union workers and offer a combined 139 electoral votes, more than half of the 270 needed to win the White House. For months the national AFL-CIO has had 900 field coordinators across the country; 300 more are being deployed this week for the final stretch and local unions are being asked to add thousands more to the get-out-the-vote effort.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm calling on behalf of the Iron Workers Local. I'm calling in support of Al Gore for president and Ron Klink for U.S. Senate.
[King:] So labor phone banks like this one in northwest Pennsylvania are calling and recalling union workers, and the local Democratic headquarters is packed with volunteers. Fighting a ground war is meticulous, sometimes monotonous, work.
[Unidentified Female:] How many more of these do you need?
[King:] Signs are one weapon, mail another; but there's no substitute for the candidate.
[Ceil Connors, Afscme:] I can't tell you how many telephone calls I got you know, Bush has been here twice, we've got to get Al Gore here.
[King:] Labor's leaflets paint a sharp contrast between Governor Bush and the vice president.
[Unidentified Male:] Would you like information on where the candidates stand on health care?
[Kind:] But there is mounting worry in states like Washington that Green Party nominee Ralph Nader is the biggest threat to a Gore victory.
[Andrew Stern, Service Employees International Union:] Our home- care workers can't afford to wake up our nurses can't afford to wake up and have George Bush as their president. So that, to me, is the question that we should ask the Nader voters: can they live because this is not about protest votes anymore, this is about electing the president of the United States.
[King:] So every day brings another work site visit.
[Unidentified Male:] Going to the workers, going to our membership to talk about the issues.
[King:] Another leaflet, another face-to-face encounter as labor puts the finishing touch on an unprecedented effort to tilt campaign 2000 in the Democrats' favor. John King, CNN, Seattle, Washington.
[Shaw:] And still ahead on
[Inside Politics:] keeping tabs on the numbers in the presidential race. We'll have the latest polls and talk with pollsters about those many differing results.

[Announcer:] Live from Washington, this is INSIDE POLITICS with Judy Woodruff. Vice President Cheney leaves the hospital, trailed by questions about his health and ability to serve. As the president keeps promoting tax cuts, we'll look at bottom line for families and for Democrats. And, on this day after the California school shooting, the search for solace, answers, and a different kind of political debate.
[Sen. Charles Schumer , New York:] This is not about the right to own guns. It's about being responsible once you do.
[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you for joining us. His clogged artery has been cleared. He is out of the hospital, and now, Vice President Dick Cheney is back at home. As he prepares to return to work, Cheney may have political recovery on his mind, given the drumbeat of questions about his heart condition. We begin our coverage of Cheney's health with our senior White House correspondent John King.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] The vice president thanked his lead doctor and headed home from the hospital. And the president welcomed word his point-man would soon be back at the office
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] This country needs his wisdom and judgment, and he's the kind of man who listens carefully to his body, and he is not going to put himself in a position where he gets very sick. Any time there is any doubt as to whether or not he needs to see a doctor, he will see a doctor.
[King:] In a statement, the White House said EKG and cardiac enzyme tests were normal, meaning no new heart attack and no work restrictions were placed on the vice president. But it was another reminder that a man the president relies on for so much has a history of serious heart disease. Cheney is 60 years old, has suffered four year attacks over a 23-year span, and had quadruple artery bypass surgery in 1988. Monday's angioplasty was to reopen an artery that had been operated on after his most recent heart attack last November.
[Dr. Stuart Seides, Cardiologist:] I think that there is a high likelihood, no one can ever say a certainty, but a high likelihood that there may be recurrent events that additional procedures may be required, and the degree to which that punctuates his term in office, and the degree to which that punctuates or effects the management of the current administration, nobody can say for certain.
[King:] On a typical day, the vice president exercises for 30 minutes before work on a stationary bike or elliptical trainer, arrives at the White House to join the president for a 7:30 a.m. national security briefing. The days are crowded with back-to-back meetings to plan and sell the Bush agenda, and the vice president tends to leave the White House and head home about 7:00. Selling the Bush tax cut has been one major Cheney task, and there is a key house vote on Thursday.
[Scott Reed, Republican Strategist:] The good news is for Republicans, all these building blocks are in place and the agenda is moving forward, and so if he has to take some time now, it's not going to derail things.
[King:] In the hours after being released, we're told the vice president went home to the vice president's official residence, checked up on some renovations being done there, helped his wife Lynne unpack some boxes. The Cheneys moved in just last week. Placed a few phone calls to friends to say he was feeling fine, first lady Laura Bush stopped by for a little tea. Soon after she left, the vice president retired to his study and sent top here aides an e-mail, says he'll be at work first thing tomorrow Judy.
[Woodruff:] John, even though they are saying that his recovery is coming along as would be expected, this seems like a fast return to work. Was there any pressure on him to come back tomorrow?
[King:] No pressure at all. In fact, I spoke to senior officials here this morning who said it would be fine with the president and the top staff if the vice president decided he wanted to take the rest of the week off, perhaps come back on Monday. It's a difficult political balance. They know that if he comes in tomorrow morning, as he now plans, some will say he's rushing thing. They also know that if he stayed home for a few days, others might question whether this was more serious and whether he had the stamina to compete for the job. The vice president says he wants to come to work and deal with it. And he says his doctors have told him that it's not the work that affects him. He has a serious heart condition. He may have to go back for more treatment in the future, but it is not linked to stress or to working long hours, he says. It's just simply a condition he's had for some time and has to deal with.
[Woodruff:] All right, John King reporting from the White House. Thanks. This latest hospitalization puts more pressure on the vice president to tell all about any future incidents as quickly as possible. CNN's Candy Crowley has more on Cheney's health and the matter of disclosure.
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] The White House, the doctors, the patient all say things are OK. The worrisome part is that's pretty much what they always say when the powerful are less than healthful.
[Robert Dallek, Presidential Historian:] Presidents, vice presidents cannot show weakness. You must not be seen as incapable of performing your duties, and so what you have got to do is put up the boldest front possible and say, well, my health is fine.
[Crowley:] There is no evidence that Dick Cheney is anything other than fine, but it is what they said in November.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] He sounded really strong, and informed me that as a precautionary measure, he went into the hospital. He was feeling chest pains, and it turns out that subsequent test, blood tests and the initial EKG showed that he had no heart attack.
[Crowley:] As it turns out, Cheney did suffer a mild heart attack in November, though initially Bush was told otherwise. The confusion and Cheney's refusal to release all medical data has created a suspicion that's also fueled by history. Grover Cleveland had jaw cancer. John F. Kennedy had Addison's disease. Ronald Reagan nearly died in the hours after he was shot. Vice presidential candidate Tom Eagleton was taken off the McGovern ticket in 1972 when it was disclosed he'd undergone electroshock treatment for depression. And the late Paul Tsongas ran for president as a cancer survivor, but later had a recurrence of cancer, which eventually killed him. History is full of presidents and politicians who lied about, hid, or only partially disclosed some very serious health problems.
[Dallek:] Well, I think there is a feeling if you show that you have some kind of a limitation, that the public will the impulse of the public will be to reject your leadership; that you are going to lose your credentials, so to speak, as an effective leader.
[Crowley:] Bill Bradley had a minor heart condition that flared during his presidential campaign. For a day or two, the story overtook his campaign and obliterated his message.
[Eric Hauser, Former Bill Bradley Aide:] In our case, and I think it is often the case, much more is made of the issue than medically is warranted. Bill Bradley is healthy as a horse, was, is. His minor heart condition had no effect on the campaign, and so forth. So you are reluctant in some ways to get into an issue that more gets made of than should.
[Crowley:] When Bradley's problem recurred, his campaign did not disclose the event until it was asked by a reporter. The cost them another day of questions about whether they were being forthcoming. Dick Cheney comes to office at a time when keeping even the tiniest details of his health record private may no longer be politically viable. Over the years, reporters have become increasingly aggressive, and vice presidents have become increasingly more important Judy.
[Woodruff:] Candy, they acknowledge openly, as they must, the vice president has a heart problem, has a history of heart problems, why not release all this information?
[Crowley:] Well, you know, there is a problem with the privacy. There's always I mean, we are talking about the most private things that happen, and they usually happen between a doctor and a patient. And there is a feeling certainly with this president, and with this vice president, obviously, that some things ought to remain private. But you know, countering that, of course, is this is a public figure who has a very no one forced into running as vice president, who has a very important job, and the public has a right to know. Just those little details that maybe health reporters might look at and say, well, here's what this means, but as yet, they haven't been convinced of that.
[Woodruff:] Is his absence even for a day or two having affect on the administration, other than obvious concern for his health?
[Crowley:] Well, I think, you know, when you have the president out pushing his budget plan and what we're leading with, of course, on this show is that Dick Cheney has been released from the hospital, that in itself is a problem.
[Woodruff:] All right, Candy Crowley. We want you to stick around, because we have another important story that we're going to talk about in just a minute. But now, we are joined by CNN senior analyst Jeff Greenfield. Jeff, how much pressure is there on the vice president right now to put those medical records out there?
[Jeff Greenfield, Cnn Senior Analyst:] Well, I think there's more pressure because of the history in this particular case. If you look back to when Dick Cheney was selected as George Bush's running mate, it's very clear that they were far less than forthcoming. They did not put out the kind of information Candy just alluded to that would have allowed health reporters to look and make an independent judgment. All those statistics on cholesterol, triglycerides, injection fractions, all that stuff that for you and I might not mean much, but to a doctor or a health reporter would mean a lot. And because of this constant lowballing that all White Houses and politicians do the fact that he's now been in the hospital a second time since the election I think puts a lot of pressure on us to say, look, you've got to not raise a credibility issue, especially as part of an administration that is trying to draw a contrast in honesty and openness with the last one.
[Woodruff:] Well, is there a way, Jeff, given their privacy concerns, where they could put some information out and then keep other information back? Say, release all the heart-related information?
[Greenfield:] Of course. That's why the privacy issue, while it's in general legitimate, is really a non-starter in this case. If you were to draw a graph, and try to figure out what belongs in the privacy part of anybody's health records and what doesn't, the capacity of somebody to do a job is as close to a no-brainer as you can get. That's the kind of thing the public must have a right to know, particularly given the history Candy cold us about, of presidents and candidates who have been let's be polite less than candid. I mean, Franklin Roosevelt ran for a fourth term when everybody who looked at him knew he couldn't live out the year. John Kennedy's Addison's disease was hidden from the public. So that in this case, it's not like some kind of private, personal matter that's none of the public's business. This is the definition of what the public's business is.
[Woodruff:] And, Jeff, you know, we all talk about how unusual Cheney is that he plays such an extraordinarily important role in this administration. Does it make a difference if someone at his level is away for a few days?
[Greenfield:] Well, you know, I I always think that people in power tend to exaggerate their indispensability. But the broader question, if I may, is that that if a generation ago somebody told you the vice president had a health problem, the general response of the public would be vice president who? But over the last 25 years there's been a sea change in what the vice president means. And in this administration, maybe it's because George Bush is our first MBA president, you've got, in a sense, a chief operating officer. And so the whole image of the Bush administration, which has been, I think, enhanced by, again, the contrast with how the Clinton administration began. As opposed to this dorm room all-night seminar, you've got a smooth, on-time, efficient operation. The fact that the second-in-command, which is what Dick Cheney is, may have a health issue, is a more serious issue than it would be in a in, say, an administration from 30 years ago.
[Woodruff:] All right. Jeff Greenfield in New York. Thanks very much.
[Greenfield:] See ya!
[Woodruff:] And now we want to follow up on a controversy that arose during the 2000 presidential campaign which some had dubbed "Debategate." Today a federal grand jury in Texas indicted an employee of the Bush campaign's primary media consultant. The charges stem from the release of the Bush camp's debate preparation material to a political ally of Al Gore. CNN's Jonathan Karl joins us with that story Jonathan?
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Judy, as you well remember, that was one of the great mysteries of campaign 2000. When, in the heat of the fall campaign on September 13th, a tape containing 60 minutes's worth of George W. Bush's debate preparation session and 120 pages of debate preparation materials landed on the doorstep of Tom Downey, who was the person in charge of preparing Al Gore for the upcoming debates against George W. Bush, suddenly appeared. Now, this prompted investigation. It prompted charges and countercharges. If you remember, there were suggestions from the Bush campaign and from republicans that democrats had actually somehow gotten into their offices, the offices of Mark McKinnon, their media consultant, and sent these tapes off to Downey. There were countercharges from the democrats that somehow that the Bush campaign did this as effort to set Downey up and to set the Gore campaign up. Well, now the mystery seems to be a step closer to being resolved. The person indicted is Yvette Lozano, who was an employee of Maverick Media, the company run by Mark McKinnon, the top media consultant for George W. Bush. Lozano, 30 years old, was a junior member of the staff there, not somebody of authority within the Maverick Media, but she has been charged with three counts, including mail fraud, false statements to the FBI, and committing perjury before the grand jury that's been investigating this matter. If convicted on all these charges, Lozano could face up to 15 years in prison and $750,000 fine. Now, as you remember, there were these charges that if Lozano was involved, that somehow the Bush campaign was also involved as an effort to say ha ha, the Gore campaign's got this tape. They did this in an effort to set them up. Well, this indictment specifically says that neither the Bush campaign nor Maverick Media had anything to do with this. Quoting from the indictment, it says quote "defendant Lozano would and did conceal her activity from Maverick Media, the Bush campaign, and others." As a matter of fact, what the indictment does is it portrays Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon's company, as the victim in this case, not as a coconspirator. Now, that said, Judy, you also remember when this was going on back during the campaign and in the days afterwards, that Mark McKinnon stood by Lozano, said that she had absolutely nothing to do with this, compared her to Richard Jewell, who, of course, was charged with the Olympic Park bombing case only to later to be exonerated. This was the situation. They are still standing by her to some extent. You know, Lozano was at Bush campaign headquarters on election night. They've stood by her all along. I've spoken to several people who were involved in the Bush campaign and Maverick Media who say they knew this was coming because they knew the grand jury was gearing up for something. But they are still surprised, and one person very close to Lozano at Maverick Media told me: You know, it looks bad, but we're all human. And she told us that we that she had nothing to do with this, and until I see firm evidence, I'm going to believe her. That said, looking at the indictment, veterans of the Bush campaign believe that they may have been wrong all along about this Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right. Jon Karl, reporting from the Capitol here in Washington. Thanks very much, Jon. Now, I want to bring back our senior political correspondent Candy Crowley, who of course, covered the Bush campaign throughout the election year. Candy, so evidently, what was going on is she just wanted to help Al Gore, or was she hoping to catch the Gore campaign in some theft of Bush debate preparation?
[Crowley:] Well, one must assume that right now she's still saying that she didn't do it, which is what she told the Bush campaign and Maverick Media all along. And it remains unclear whether she acted alone, or whether someone on the Democratic side, or some other Republican said, you know, let's do this. So, the motivation is unclear, whether it was simply to help the vice president that's what the indictment seems to indicate that that was her motivation. But more than that, for the Bush people while this is a disappointment, because they did, from Karen Hughes on down, say that they believed in Lozano's innocence and felt that she was being framed in the Richard Jewell scenario. That while this is not a wonderful thing to happen, at the time there was talk that perhaps Mark MacKinnon, the chief media consultant, was working that somehow he was involved, and somehow Karl Rove was involved.
[Woodruff:] He is a former Democrat, MacKinnon.
[Crowley:] He is a former Democrat. So, you know, it could have been much bigger, and all along the Bush campaign also said now we have a clip from late September said that there was just no way that could happen in the Bush campaign.
[Karen Hughes, Bush Communications Director:] I can assure you that any implication that any senior member of the Bush campaign would have been interested in helping Al Gore prepare for his debate is just ridiculous. These are my friends and colleagues, these are the people I've worked with tirelessly for three years almost now to from the I date that back to the first time the governor had a press conference when he was asked about running for president. We have worked tirelessly since that time to help elect him president, and I can assure you that none of our senior campaign team officials are interested in helping Al Gore prepare for his debate with Governor Bush.
[Crowley:] So, while this is perhaps a blow to have Lozano be indicted, and it does appear given the specificity of this indictment, that they do have the goods. While it's a blow to the Bush White House, because they did believe in particular Maverick Media the fact that, you know, the higher-ups have apparently been completely exonerated from this has got to be a big plus. But as you saw, they never actually doubted it.
[Woodruff:] They have to be deeply, deeply feeling deeply, deeply betrayed by this?
[Crowley:] Yes, absolutely.
[Woodruff:] All right, Candy Crowley, thanks very much. I appreciate it. The nation asks, "Why?" A day after another deadly school shooting, the latest in a live report from Santee, California coming up on INSIDE POLITICS.

[Laurin Sydney, Cnn Anchor:] You may never find a Hannibal Lecter toy on the market, but lots of other movie characters jump from the big screen to the store shelf. Bill Tush reports from a trade show where tomorrow's toys make an early appearance.
[Bill Tush, Cnn Correspondent:] Where else in the world would you find grown people proudly sporting Teletubby name tags? It's the licensing show.
[Charles Rhotto, President, Lima:] Licensing is taking all these great characters and logos and trademarks and sayings that we know and we see all over and that have been with us for years, and the new ones, and putting them on products
[Tush:] And while walking the floors at New York's Javits Center, the convention's home, might look like a lot of fun after all, who wouldn't want their picture taken with the Taco Bell dog? to the suits here, it's all business.
[Diane Stone, Advancestar.com:] As of this year, this show is one of the 200 largest trade shows in the United States, so...
[Tush:] And it just keeps getting bigger?
[Stone:] Just keeps getting bigger.
[Tush:] Think about it. In its four years in America, "Pokemon" is a billion-dollar industry, and here comes the next Japanese invasion.
[Al Kahn, Ceo, 4kids Entertainment:] Yugioh is a concept that again comes from Japan...
[Tush:] OK.
[Kahn:] ... and it was introduced about three years after "Pokemon" in Japan, and it became and has become the No. 1 program, the No. 1 property for kids 10 to 14 in Japan.
[Tush:] And if he catches on, Yugioh will be everywhere.
[Unidentified Male:] Put him on a beach ball, on children's bedding, you know, even on wallpaper.
[Tush:] It goes on and on. How many places have you seen this little green guy? [on camera]: And of course, you've been coming to this show for years, when it was a little tiny licensing show.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, you know, it's the darndest thing, Bill. This is actually, believe it or not, the very first time I've ever been to the licensing show.
[Tush:] Just your image comes.
[Unidentified Male:] Yeah, you see my picture a lot.
[Tush:] The Jim Henson Company brings out Kermit to draw attention. Universal creates an Egyptian bazaar to promote "The Mummy," complete with... [on camera]:... an Egyptian belly dancer. Where are you from?
[Unidentified Female:] Brooklyn.
[Tush:] Talk about bellies. All 700 pounds of this guy came to promote the Super-Duper Sumos, a new television show. It seems everyone has something to sell.
[Unidentified Female:] We license Jordache, Nick & Nora and Dollhouse, and then we launch under the proprietary brand-name Fad.
[Wally "famous" Amos:] Aunt Della is very resourceful.
[Tush:] So what does she do?
[Famous Amos:] She said, "I can't make chocolate chip cookies, but I can make chocolate chip cookie dolls," and so Aunt Della made Chip and Cookie.
[Tush:] Even Famous Amos knows the licensing show is a place to make some "dough." Bill Tush, CNN Entertainment News, New York.
[Sydney:] You just knew Bill had to say that. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] More violence today in the Mideast to report. The fighting has spread on streets where profits once walked, tanks now rumble. The total of dead and injured climbs again. President Clinton is calling for peace. He wants Israeli and Palestinian security officials to meet with the U.S. He spoke with leaders from both sides over the weekend. Let's get a closer look now at what's going on in the West Bank and Gaza. Joining us from Jerusalem, CNN's Jerrold Kessel Jerrold.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] Leon, good morning. This day had been billed a turning point day, either it would turn to further escalation, or perhaps the two sides would be able to reign in the fighting on the ground and bring it under control. And the way it started, it looks as if perhaps it was tapering off, but now in the last hour or two, there have been a spread of violence, and this seems to be taking over and seems to be the feature of the day for the fifth straight day. This the scene in Gaza, in the Gaza Strip, where young Palestinians took over the rooftop of an Israeli outpost at a junction there. And the Israelis have apparently abandoned the lookout post on the top of that outpost. The Palestinians clamored over the outpost, tour down the Israeli flag there; but Israeli soldiers elsewhere in that outpost or nearby began to open fire, and several of the Palestinian demonstrators at that point are reported hurt. There also reports elsewhere in the Gaza Strip of gun battles raging and also in Galilee, within Israel itself, is the Israeli-Arab citizens have again, for the second straight day, taken to the streets and engaged in battles with Israeli police. This an ominous development, the Israelis say, in the West Bank, an Israeli civilian has been shot and killed. He had driven his car across over the border between Israel and the West Bank, and he was shot and killed there, and that brings to well over 30 at least the number of people who have died in this, the worst series of confrontations between Israelis and Palestinians in several years. And the violence does not seem to be tapering off. Prime Minister Ehud Barak had warned Yasser Arafat again this morning, saying that he expects that Israel expects that the Palestinian leadership to reign in the violence. Saying it was within Mr. Arafat's powers to do so, and it could lead to the end of the peace process, if he doesn't do so. The Palestinians say that it's not their the provocation came first from Israel. Israel has been using excessive force to quell the violence. Mr. Arafat saying: Move your troops out of the area of Palestinian towns and villages. And it remains that not just a standoff, but the violence continuing to gather steam here on this fifth day. Jerrold Kessel, CNN, reporting live from Jerusalem.
[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you, Jerrold.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Before all the questions of what happened in Florida, there were a lot of questions on election night about what was taking place in Missouri; questions now being raised by Senator Kit Bond of Missouri, let's go ahead and listen in.
[Sen. Christopher Bond , Missouri:] To me this is prima facia evidence that there was a scheme underway to have the voting polls kept open in the democratic areas. With me is Thor Hern, an attorney who was monitoring that process and participated in overturning the order of the court. But in that process we found other acts of apparent, willful dereliction at least dereliction of duty, when dozens of ballot boxes are left unguarded. When we hear evidence that judges may have improperly allowed unregistered voters to vote; when we hear of a number of the activities that went on, I think the evidence points very strongly to a major criminal enterprise. And if this, in fact, happened; if there is evidence of it, I believe prosecution of those who committed any of the acts in the conduct of a conspiracy to defraud voters should be brought to justice. I turn now to Thor Hern for a statement he might want to make.
[Thor Hern, Lawyer:] Thank you, senator. We found, in overturning the court decision that was issued at the 11th hour trying to keep the polls open, that a lot of irregularities may well have occurred that invited or allowed fraud to be perpetrated in the course of this election. For example, we have just been informed, even today, that the city of St. Louis police department found a voting machine in the 3900 block of Olive that was abandoned on an empty lot. This is the kind of mischief that we certainly think happened and encouraged vote fraud. When the polls were extended we were grateful that we were successful in promptly winning the court of appeals overturning that order. But it does appear, from everything we've seen...
[Kagan:] We've been listening to a news conference from Missouri. That was before that gentleman, that was Senator Kit Bond calling for an investigation into what happened with polls in Missouri on election night. Before all this focus on Florida, of course, there was a focus on Missouri when there were motions taken to court to keep polls open. The senator there saying that he believes that polls were kept open too long. Of course, there was news made, history made in Missouri on election night when, for the first time ever, a dead man was elected to Senate. That was Mel Carnahan, the governor who was killed some weeks before the election took place. And in his place, the current governor has said that Jean Carnahan, his widow, will take his place and will serve in the U.S. Senate. Of course, that's Republican Senator Kit Bond calling for an investigation as to what took place and how the election was carried out on Tuesday.

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] At this hour, the new American president is trying to build his own friendship with a seasoned pro, the prime minister of Britain. The setting for this first-ever summit between George W. Bush and Tony Blair, the presidential retreat at Camp David, Maryland, the site of numerous historic meetings. Both sides say they hope the meeting will deepen the allies' special relationship. With a military honor guard standing at attention, Mr. Bush welcomed his guest to the mountain retreat after Mr. Blair's short helicopter ride from Washington. The meeting is President Bush's first with a European leader. Joining us now to tell us what we can expect from this summit, White House correspondent Major Garrett. Major? Not really a summit, just a bilateral meeting, right?.
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right. Not a summit, more a meet-and-greet session for two very important leaders of a very important relationship, one that helps define all the U.S. policies and British policies throughout Europe and many parts of the world. And we have an early read on how things are going, Stephen. Just a few moments ago, reporters shouted some questions to the U.S. president and the British prime minister. Mr. Bush telling reporters that the meeting with Mr. Blair was going well. For his part, Mr. Blair said the meeting was going excellent, which is exactly the kind of appraisal British and U.S. officials hoped to have. The agenda of this meeting is really three-part, and they're all interrelated to a certain degree. Obviously, the issue of Iraq; the British and the United States joining forces last week to deal with Iraqi radar sites near the capital of Baghdad, shooting at them, sending missiles in their direction, a joint U.S.-British activity that, both governments say, has helped degrade some of Iraq's ability to track those coalition fighters. Also, the issue of nuclear proliferation. Clearly, an issue that both countries are alarmed about, and not only in Iraq, but other parts of the world, and that relates to the issue of missile defense. United States has made it clear to both the British and European allies and the Russians that it will develop and deploy a missile defense system. Several months ago, that was a bone of tremendous controversy between our nation and those countries, but it's become less so in recent days and recent weeks, as the Europeans and the Russians have said they're more interested in the idea, understanding quite clearly that the United States is going to deploy that system and move on as it sees fit Stephen.
[Frazier:] Major Garrett, thank you, coming from the White House today.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] A very unusual fight over faith here. A religious battle in Ohio over one man's desire to pray behind bars. Now, he not a prisoner, Dawoud Kareem Muhammed. He is suing the state for one million dollars. We point out quickly here that he says the prison where he works as a guard violates his First Amendment rights by refusing to let him pray at work. His suit filed in federal court in Cleveland on Wednesday also says he was denied entrance to the prison seven times because he was wearing an Islamic skullcap. Joining us to talk about the case today is Dawoud Kareem Muhammad and his attorney Avery Friedman. We want to also say here to our viewers that we contacted the Grafton Correctional Institution that is named in the lawsuit, but officials declined to comment on this case publicly. Mr. Muhammad, could you explain what you were doing that got you in trouble at work?
[Dawoud Kareem Muhammad, Muslim Prison Guard:] The problem is, Joie, that there is a I would say a a struggle jihad, a religious struggle between the Muslims and the state of Ohio, whereas due to a riot in '93 where it throws bad light on the Muslims. And this has been ongoing and...
[Chen:] But the upshot of it is that you would like to carry out your prayers and they don't want to you to do it?
[Muhammad:] Right. This is right.
[Chen:] And you were doing it in a closet, as I understand it?
[Muhammad:] Closet or store room. It was an area where they stored things. And, yes, when it was discovered that I was praying there then the locks were changed.
[Chen:] Gentlemen, I want to get you some questions from our Webchat audience. Kimberly Kinnear was asking here, "Was he praying on his break or during the time that he should be working?" Mr. Friedman can you talk to us about that?
[Avery Friedman, Attorney:] I'm sorry, I didn't hear the question.
[Chen:] Was he praying on his break or during the time that he should be working?
[Friedman:] Well, the prison provides for smoke breaks but they prohibit prayer breaks. If I'm understanding the question, I can't hear you quite well. The difficulty is that once they found out he was a practicing Muslim and because of their feelings toward Islam, they not only changed the locks on the closets where he prayed, but they also barred his entry when he was wearing a skullcap under his cap. Now, if you are Christian you may can wear a crucifix under your uniform, but if you are Muslim you are not permitted to wear the skullcap under your uniform.
[Chen:] Another question, James P. Wicks asking, "Were you praying out loud for everyone to hear, Mr. Muhammad?"
[Muhammad:] No, my prayers were done in seclusion and they were not said out loud, no.
[Chen:] I don't want to be rude, can I ask how long, how much of the day you spend at the prayers? I know there are a number of them that a good Muslim is required to do a day. How much of your workday was spent doing this?
[Muhammad:] I'm the rec officer at the institution. I shut down Rec. every day about 3:15. I have 15-20 minutes to get over to D-1 to help count. I am there by myself, so I make my Salat at that time. The third Salat that I make is during the evening when we close Rec. at 8:00, when I am there again by myself. So, it not in any way interferes with the institution.
[Chen:] Mr. Friedman can you talk a little bit about the circumstance? Mr. Muhammad made mention of it earlier, that there had been previous concerns about Muslims inside this particular correctional facility, and his feeling that this might be contributing to why he has encountered this problem within his workplace. Is there sort of impression that Mr. Muhammad as a Muslim or a particular kind of Muslim, might therefore be some sort of troublemaker?
[Friedman:] In fact there is huge confusion in America between devout Muslims practicing Islam and black Muslims. Because of a prison riot Mr. Muhammad has suffered an anti-Islamic prejudice and as a consequence he has not been free to practice. That is guaranteed under the First Amendment, and in fact in this case, the United States government, the EEOC found the penitentiary guilty of violating civil rights laws, the Islamic Consulate of America put them on notice and they continue to violate the First Amendment and the Civil Rights
[Act. Chen:] Again we want to tell our viewers that we did ask the Grafton Correctional Institution to speak about the case, but officials have declined to do so. We want to thank Dawoud Kareem Muhammad, as well as attorney Avery Friedman for being on with us and taking your questions today. Thank you, gentlemen.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Well, bargain hunters helped to lead a recent rally for tech shares, but market watchers say the sector can't really recover until its earnings do. Bruce Francis has more.
[Bruce Francis, Cnn Correspondent:] The bottom for tech stocks has been hard to spot, and it will remain elusive, analysts say, until tech earnings stop their decline and turn around.
[Ashok Kumar, Us Bancorp Piper Jaffray:] There is an increased possibility that instead of a recovery in the second half of this year, we could be looking into a recession and if that's the case, we have not seen the worst of the stock market.
[Francis:] The tech earnings outlook continues to get dimmer. According to First Call, tech company pre-announcements are running 77 percent ahead of the fourth quarter's record setting pace and 81 percent of those pre-announcements are negative, also a record. Those warnings are cutting deep into projections. Originally, analysts expected first quarter tech earnings to increase 4 percent. Now, they are expecting a huge 32 percent decline. For the second quarter, projections for a 2 percent increase have turned into a 30 percent decline. For the third quarter, an 11 percent increase has turned into an 18 percent decrease and it gets worse.
[Chuck Hill, First Call/thompson Financial:] In the last two weeks it's spilled over into the fourth quarter. I mean, just in a couple weeks, we've gone from 15 percent growth expected in the fourth quarter down to 6.
[Francis:] With timid consumers and corporations and tapped out telecoms and dot-coms, tech spending is in the doldrums.
[Hill:] So whether the Fed does a half a point or three-quarters of a point is immaterial to these kind of problems.
[Francis:] Another layer of concern for tech companies, the strong dollar, which makes high-tech exports pricey just where tech companies are looking for growth.
[Kumar:] For companies such as Intel and Compaq and Dell and a lot of the large IT companies, they get over 60 percent of their revenue from international market. To Europe, represents 40 percent of the revenue mix and then Japan and Asia Pacific's, all those currencies are weak against the dollar.
[Francis:] As for Intel, Kumar believes that the chip giant won't reach its 1999 revenue levels until 2003. Bruce Francis, CNN Financial News, New York.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Let's go back to Carol in New Hampshire, the vice president now. I think we've got the gremlins worked out now Carol.
[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] All right. Well, you always have to worry about gremlins here on the campaign trail, especially in New Hampshire, where things could get very unpredictable. We're going to go back to Connie's Kitchen in Hudson, New Hampshire, to see if we can connect with the vice president. Mr. Vice President, can you hear me?
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] I can, Carol. Good morning.
[Lin:] Oh, good morning. I was just wondering if you thought the coffee there was as good and as strong as your finish in Iowa.
[Gore:] Well, it's good, it's strong, and I'm very grateful to the people of Iowa for the surprisingly-large victory last night. But you know, even as it even as the sun comes up here I'm campaigning in Hudson, New Hampshire, at Connie's Kitchen and concentrating on the primary a week from today.
[Lin:] Well, I understand, Mr. Vice President, that your strategy is now shifting in New Hampshire, talking more about the economy?
[Gore:] No, it's the same message all across the country, and yes, the economy is a big part of it. I think we need to keep our prosperity going, but I also think we need to make some sweeping changes by bringing revolutionary improvements to our public schools and expanding healthcare to all Americans in a step-by-step way, starting with health care for every child within this presidential term.
[Lin:] Well, it's hard to ignore the economy in New Hampshire since the state has done pretty well, and many people here talk about the Clinton effect in creating jobs and in creating developments here. Are you going to be asking the president to campaign for you? He did pretty well here in New Hampshire.
[Gore:] Well, I have to win this on my own, and before this campaign is over with no doubt that he will be helping me on the campaign trail. But I'm campaigning about the future and what we are going to do in 2001, and for the last seven years I have worked alongside the president in helping to bring a big change to New Hampshire's economy you're right about that. Whereas New Hampshire was losing 10,000 jobs a year eight years ago, now New Hampshire is gaining 16,000 jobs a year. We went from the worst recession since the 1930s to the strongest economy in the history of our country. And the formula that has produced that change and progress is one that I'm advocating.
[Lin:] And it's a formula that both you and the president came up with, so why not just ask President Clinton to come up here? All we're hearing out of the White House is that he's more than happy to help you.
[Gore:] Oh, well, he has been helping, and of course he's giving his State of the Union Address, this week, and it's not as if he doesn't have a full-time job.
[Lin:] At the same time, Vice President, the Bradley campaign clearly very disappointed about results out of Iowa, and they are now promising a much more aggressive campaign. Are you expecting the senator to go negative?
[Gore:] Well, they've been telling people that, but, you know, I don't think the people of New Hampshire want that, expect that or really have any desire to go through that. But you know, I'm just I won't respond in kind if he if he continues negative attacks. I'm going to focus on the issues, and I think that's what people want. We should be talking about our future, not launching personal attacks.
[Lin:] So does your offer to debate twice a week with Bradley still stand then?
[Gore:] Absolutely. And in fact, we're going to have a debate tomorrow night.
[Lin:] All right, well, we'll see you there. CNN is carrying that live. Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President, for joining us.
[Gore:] Thank you, Carol.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] In Cincinnati, it's been relatively quiet following yesterday's indictment of a white police officer accused in the shooting death of an unarmed African-American teenager. CNN's national correspondent Bob Franken is here now to tell us how the community is reacting. Good morning, Bob so far, so good?
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] So far so good, Brian. Officer Stephen Roach, who is the focus of all this, is now going to be assigned a desk job after he's been indicted by a grand jury. He remains, still, the center of tension in Cincinnati.
[Unidentified Male:] Bring in the people. We need to organize in here.
[Franken:] At a church near the spot where policeman Stephen Roach shot and killed 19-year-old Timothy Thomas who was unarmed...
[Unidentified Female:] Come on, all you young people.
[Franken:] ... protesters were urged inside, away from the convoys of police in their riot gear. The grand jury charged officer Roach with a misdemeanor homicide charge, negligent homicide, an unintentional killing, and obstruction of the investigation, another misdemeanor maximum penalty for both; a nine-month sentence. The mother of Timothy Thomas, Angela Leisure, had been calling for peace ever since violence broke out last month following the death of her son. But now, she called the grand jury action a slap on the wrist.
[Angela Leisure, Timothy Thomas' Mother:] But I can't sit here and say that my whole entire heart is for peace right now, because that's not how I feel. I'm not going to lie to the public. And I'm not going to lie to myself. That is not how I feel. My feelings are borderline rage.
[Franken:] But county prosecutor Mike Allen insisted the grand jury had done its job in the face of intense pressure.
[Mike Allen, Hamilton County Prosecutor:] I know that emotions are running high over the tragic death of Timothy Thomas. But the case against officer Roach cannot be decided or based upon emotion.
[Franken:] Emotions were running high. But at almost the very instant the prosecutor ended his news conference, a major storm hit Cincinnati a rain storm. Officials feel the deluge may have discouraged an immediate violent reaction to the grand jury announcement. And earlier in the day, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft announced a full-scale investigation into the conduct of the Cincinnati Police Department. Local officials were unsure whether that had any effect on reaction here to the grand jury decision. Now, officer Stephen Roach's attorney says he is disappointed that he was indicted by the grand jury, but is thankful, he said, that at least the grand jurors recognize that this was not an intentional killing. Roach is going to turn himself in. He's expected to, Brian, later today.
[Nelson:] All right, thank you, CNN's Bob Franken in Cincinnati. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] Right now, we want to take you to Modesto, California, as we have heard from time to time, the parents of Chandra Levy speaking. [Joined In Progress]
[Dr. Robert Levy, Chandra's Father:] We've got help from good people, and people are giving us a lot of and prayers and faith,. and help boost us up, and you know, hopefully some of the someone will have some leads or tips that will help the work on it. The police are not really searching the woods, but they are still working on things. And the FBI, I know is working hard.
[Question:] When they talk about the scaling back that will continue through this week and when Chief Ramsey talks about the 5050 chance of the case being solved...
[Levy:] Yes, well it's just odds. It doesn't mean anything, really. It's just every individual person.
[Susan Levy, Chandra's Mother:] I went ahead and tried to contact some air patrol. And I don't know if they got my e-mail. But I did call them yesterday, and I know they have meeting on thus day night at Langley Air Force base, their national headquarters, which in Alabama. And if they need to if they could help, I would appreciate it. And I am not giving up, but my heart aches, and our heart aches, and it's very hard. It's very hard. Everyday is very hard. And we just wonder if anyone is out there and has our daughter, please reconsider, let her go. Let her come home to us. Take care of her and bring her home.
[Question:] Dr. Levy, I asked this question to your wife over the weekend. I'd like to ask the question to you in your words. Your son Adam, how has your daughter's disappearance affected him?
[R. Levy:] It's really hard on him. He's trying to function. He's staying around to comfort us. And it's just tough on him. But he has good faith, and he has faith that will find her and bring her back. So that helps keep us going.
[Question:] The police are now saying as of today they came out publicly to say that Congressman Condit was not a central figure in this investigation, that they would not ask for another polygraph. How do you feel about that?
[R. Levy:] That's what they think, so.
[Question:] Would you like to see them continue?
[R. Levy:] I would like to see them look at everything. I don't know if they have. They certainly, you know, doing things 12 weeks later, I'm not sure you can get the same facts you would have gotten early on, so.
[Question:] Any questions that you would like to still see asked?
[S. Levy:] We want to continue with the prayers and ask God and faith to bring her home. And as far as questions, we can't come up with anything right now publicly at this point, OK.
[R. Levy:] Thank you.
[Question:] Talk to us for a moment about the support you're receiving. We do see a lot of neighborhoods and friend come over. You had a friend in town from Ohio over the weekend. Can you talk about that?
[S. Levy:] She's wonderful. She's a very good friend of mine, has a very big practice. She's a psychotherapist. We're like sisters and without the support of my friends, both across the country, and friends that are here, got together and had a barbecue, and took our horses and rode a little bit. For a moment, I had a sense of normalcy. But life isn't normal, as you know. We've had neighbors and friends across the town that have been very supportive. And at times like this you really find what's important. You know that your friendships are important, most important thing, along with your family and your health. Those are what really is important. This stuff is kind of superficial.
[R. Levy:] We've got to keep the faith going, too.
[S. Levy:] Yes.
[R. Levy:] Thank you.
[S. Levy:] OK, bye.
[Kelley:] Mr. and Mrs. Levy, parents of Chandra Levy, who's been missing for more than three months now. They did have a friend of the family in over the weekend, a psychotherapist, said that they went and rode horses, had a barbecue, tried to have some sort of normal life. but as Mrs. Levy said, there's no normal life. And they have found out very painfully what's important in life. She said friends, family and health, and how it's been difficult on Chandra Levy's younger brother, too. They're getting help from good people, they felt like, disappointed that 12 weeks later that they might not get the same facts from the police investigation when requested late in the game, they felt, and they said that the FBI was working hard, and that they were still looking for hopes, and prayers and leads. And they were asked about the odds. Of course, as the odds go, the longer she is missing, perhaps the odds are not as goods at finding her. And as her father said, they're just odds, doesn't mean anything. Yesterday, Mrs. Levy had said, when we showed you her comments yesterday here on CNN, that she was talking about perhaps the National Guard, that the Civil Air Patrol to check in with them, or she had sent an e-mail, and she wasn't sure if they had gotten it. She said every day is very hard, and pleading, please, if you have her, then let her go.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] Many of you will take part in a day after Thanksgiving tradition today. You'll be hitting the malls to get those big sales. For more on the traditional opening of the holiday season, let's turn to Marnie Maclean of CNN affiliate WCBV. She's in the Boston suburb of Braintree good morning, Marty.
[Marnie Maclean, Wcvb/braintree, Massachusetts:] Well, good morning, Donna. You know, I know some economists are predicting a very sluggish economy this holiday season, but I have to tell you, the people coming out to this mall this morning are certainly doing their part for the economy. The K-B Toy Store opened at 5:00 this morning, and there was a line forming to get in as early as 3:00 a.m. Now, when people get to the store, they have to wade into another line to get in. They are armed with flyers and giant plastic bags, which they certainly need, because these people are filling up. These are serious shoppers looking for bargains, and these early-bird shoppers say they are certainly getting a lot of bargains by getting up early this morning. And I just grabbed a couple of them, so we're going to chat with Sharon Joseph and Tarrin Fryer. Sharon, I've got to ask you, I can't imagine getting up before sunrise to go shopping. Why are you here so early? SHARON JOSEPH,
[Holiday Shopper:] Well, my sister has eight children, and I figure that instead of her coming out this early in the morning she has a month-old baby that I'd come out and tackle the situation ahead of time and do it for her.
[Maclean:] So how did you find it in there?
[Joseph:] It wasn't too bad. We got here early enough. We got up at 4:30. We're about 15 minutes away. So we came with a plan ahead of time, got here, got in line, and they opened up about 5 minutes to 5:00, let us in, and then we knew exactly where to go.
[Maclean:] Tarrin, you have got three giant bags here. Tell me about some of the stuff you got. TARRIN FRYER,
[Holiday Shopper:] Well, we got holiday Barbies, some Monsters, Inc. things, and a lot of Barbies, because there's a lot of girls. So...
[Joseph:] And the Holiday Barbie.
[Fryer:] We bought a Holiday Barbie, and the Volkswagen Barbie toy that...
[Maclean:] Now, is there one toy that everybody in there is going for any hot toys?
[Fryer:] I think it was the Volkswagen Barbie for the Barbies. It seemed like all of the people that were going in had that, and the Barbie Bungalow. It's like a cottage for Barbies.
[Maclean:] I think it was the Barbie Dreamhouse when I was about 10, you know, five or six years old. What about the bargains, though? Getting here this early, are you really saving a lot of money?
[Joseph:] Definitely, because I notice doing comparison shopping, which I think everybody is doing now, they open up at 5:00 in the morning, so you have more time to get here. And then you can get the better bargains that early.
[Maclean:] I want to ask you too. A lot of economists are saying it's going to be a difficult holiday season, with September 11, and the slow economy that it's going to affect people's holiday shopping. Is that affecting you?
[Joseph:] Well, I think because of the effects of September 11, which was devastating, nobody was prepared for that. I think we'll all be affected in some way. But I was smart enough, and I know with my sister's eight children, that I saved up a little earlier, so I would have had to plan ahead of time.
[Maclean:] So you're all set. It looks like you should have everything you need.
[Joseph:] For the most part. We have a lot of birthdays, so we still have one next weekend, so I still need to go shopping for that. But I think we'll do a little bit more along the way, but for the most part, I think I conquered everything today.
[Maclean:] I'm guessing you're one of the favorite aunts.
[Fryer:] The favorite aunt.
[Maclean:] The favorite aunt. Thank you both so much.
[Fryer:] Thank you.
[Maclean:] So that's the story here in Braintree, Massachusetts. The K-B Toy Store opened at 5:00 this morning, and lots of people are taking advantages of all of the bargains. Reporting live in Massachusetts, I am Marnie Maclean Donna, back to you.
[Kelley:] Marnie, have you had a chance to look at any of the flyers in addition to the toy store, or any toys or any other stores there? How much does it take of a bargain to get these people to lure them in this early in the morning? Is it 20 percent off, 30 percent? What are they offering?
[Maclean:] You know, I saw one of one of those scooters, those popular scooters, and they said normally it's like $79.99, and if you got here before 11:00 this morning, I think it was $20 or maybe even a little bit less. So there are, on certain things, some deep discounts. And this Holiday Barbie that Sharon was just showing me Sharon can show it this normally they tell me is about $40, but if you spent $100 in the toy store today, you got this for free. So clearly, the stores are going to be are doing some very deep discounting in order to get people in.
[Kelley:] All right. Marnie Maclean of WCVB thanks very much happy shopping when you finish working. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Tuesday's critical Israeli election is pitting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak against the right-wing hawk and former Israeli defense minister, Ariel Sharon. Barak is running a distant second in the latest opinion polls. We get more on this now from CNN's Christiane Amanpour, who is in Tel Aviv.
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Correspondent:] Israel buries it dead: Two men killed in drive-by shootings on Thursday. And the Palestinians lay to rest one of their young men, shot and killed the same day. In response, Israel has again blocked off Palestinian towns and villages in the West Bank. And against this backdrop, the Israeli election campaign continues. Prime Minister Ehud Barak continues to pay the price at the polls. Although he is trailing badly, he tells CNN that Israelis must be prepared for the pain that comes with making difficult concession for peace.
[Ehud Barak, Israeli Prime Minister:] However tough, we are suggesting the right solutions for the country and that we should be ready for it and even take certain price of pain in order to have them. But they are the real solutions to our problem.
[Amanpour:] On the campaign trail, Barak met enthusiastic crowds, young people and others holding rallies for prime minister on this day. He even got a much-needed boost from former U.S. President Bill Clinton. Hugely popular here and eager to keep the peace process on track, Clinton gave a interview to Israeli television.
[William J. Clinton, Frm. President Of The United States:] I can't say enough about how much I respect the risk that Prime Minister Barak is taking. I do not believe that they have caused the this intifada.
[Amanpour:] Barak's opponent, Likud Party leader Ariel Sharon, has declined all request for interviews ahead of the election. But on the campaign trail, he had this to say.
[Ariel Sharon, Likud Party Leader:] Look, I think that President Clinton is admired here in Israel. But to say that for the Israeli citizens to elect the prime minister that they will decide upon.
[Amanpour:] And with just a few days until Israelis vote, Sharon maintains a 20-point lead in the opinion polls. Still, Barak says that he's the man who will walk the extra mile and take the risk for peace. [on camera]: Is the risk worth perhaps the sinking of your political career?
[Barak:] Let me tell you, I don't take myself so seriously as to pretend that I am more important than the future of this country.
[Amanpour:] A future that he believes he can secure. Christiane Amanpour, CNN, Tel Aviv.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] One thing you may not know about Norwegians, they are experts at the dangerous job of removing land mines. They have their work cut out for them in Afghanistan. Our Ben Wedeman has the story.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Correspondent:] Inch by tedious inch, a Norwegian mine clearer probes the dust for deadly explosives. One U.S. Marine has already been wounded by a mine. No one at Kandahar Airport is willing even to guess how many mines lie just below the surface here. The Norwegians have been in other hot spots, but they say nothing is like this little corner of Afghanistan.
[Maj. Tregve Anger, Norwegian Army:] Down here, we have mines from many battles, so we have mines from the Russian
[Wedeman:] The Norwegian unit found more mines like this in a day at Kandahar Airport, than they found in six months in Kosovo. Their job is a little safer thanks to these special Israeli-made boots. They may look unwieldy, but the Norwegians swear by them.
[Lt. Henning Olsen, Norwegian Army:] I trust them. I have been walking. I tried them in Kosovo, and stepped on anti-personnel mines over there and stepped on some anti-personnel mines a couple days ago. So I'm not afraid walking with the shoes.
[Wedeman:] The boots distribute the wearer's weight, so much so, they showed us, you can walk on an egg without breaking it. But not all mine clearing is like treading on eggshells. These machines flail the ground to a depth of 25 centimeters, almost 10 inches; the chains will set off any mines. But even with such intense work, say the Norwegians, it will take more than a year to clear the airport of mines. Ben Wedeman, CNN, Kandahar, Afghanistan.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] The strikes in Afghanistan are the latest evidence of a problem plaguing the country as it tries to rebuild. In response to security concerns, the Afghan government is trying to offer some reassurance to its citizen and to the world. CNN's Brian Palmer is in the capital city of Kabul, and he filed this report.
[Brian Palmer, Cnn Correspondent:] Interim government Chairman Hamid Karzai wanted to talk about rebuilding his shattered nation.
[Hamid Karzai, Interim Government Chairman:] With that cash money, we're immediately are capable of sending moneys straight to all the provinces of Afghanistan, for the restoration of schools and hospitals.
[Palmer:] But on the media's agenda, events in Kabul over the past few days in which two people have been killed and several injured. Karzai addressed questions about security in Kabul, and law and order, but offered few new details about these events, Thursday's murder of a government minister, or the most recent incident, a shooting involving members of the International Security Assistance Force, or ISAF, that patrols Kabul. One person died in that shooting, which happened in the early hours of Saturday morning. British paratroopers say they came under fire, and returned fire. Residents say members of the security forces fired on their car, a taxi taking a pregnant woman to the hospital, without provocation. [on camera]: The taxi was here. Family members of the man that was killed say the shots were fired from that tower over there, they say, by members of the International Security Assistance Force.
[Nasrullah, Victim's Uncle:] They just want to hide their mistake by claiming someone fired at them.
[Palmer:] Both Chairman Karzai and the spokesman for the security force say the matter is under investigation. Both deny that these events are signs of greater instability in the city of Kabul, or in the interim government.
[Lt. Colonel Neal Peckham, Isaf Spokesman:] As far as the overall security conditions are concerned, we have not sensed any change of mood within the city whatsoever. We are going about our business. We have not changed in any significant way our force profiles, and the city is perfectly calm.
[Karzai:] The cabinet is fully, fully united. Every member of the cabinet exactly acted as an Afghan minister, not as a party minister.
[Palmer:] Karzai also said that he might ask the international community to expand the mandate of the security force to allow it to take a more aggressive law enforcement role. The 17-nation force now operates under strict rules of engagement that do not permit its solders to disarm citizens bearing weapons. And there are many weapons in many hands across the country. Some progress has been made in the investigation into the killing of the civil aviation and tourism minister, Dr. Abdul Rahman, at the Kabul Airport. The government announced the arrest in Saudi Arabia of two men accused of the killing. Perhaps one step, with many, many more needed toward bringing stability to this fragile and fractured country. Brian Palmer, CNN, Kabul.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] You're looking at an exterior shot of the New York Stock Exchange, where the market will open again today just about an hour and nine minutes from now. That is exactly where we find Bill Hemmer right now, as he will be talking to some of those traders coming to work who probably have a giant case of whiplash from what they experienced on the markets yesterday. What is it? The largest single drop ever on the Dow.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Correspondent:] Relative to points indeed you're right, Paula; 684 points yesterday, about a 7 percent drop for the Dow Jones Industrial Average. And, Paula, I can tell you yesterday normally traders do not talk to the media; they don't talk to reporters, because their companies simply will not allow them. Yesterday, though, they were sharing their stories, their emotions and their feelings at a very human level. Today, though, a different story. Many people still telling us they can't talk and won't talk, because those regulations from their big companies are still in place. One person who will, though, is Russ Martorana. He is here on his way into his work this morning appreciate you taking time out today.
[Russ Martorana, Stock Trader:] You're welcome.
[Hemmer:] It appears to me that things are somewhat calmer than yesterday. There is less tension, and you think that is not a good thing. Why?
[Martorana:] Well, we have a tendency in this country to be very resilient too quickly, and I think that that could be a mistake. At this juncture, we really have to focus and keep our resolve, not just from the presidency down, but individuals. Common workers have to be focused in an attempt that we can't just let our guard down. That's exactly what they want. Terrorism thrives on the fact of complacency. They're not going to attack when everybody is on their guard. They wait for your guard to be down like a sucker punch. Anything that something like that has to be maintained, and it's critically important, because we've it seen time and time again the USS Cole, the first bombing, embassy bombings, the millennium everybody was so concerned about. But you'll notice that all of these events happened well after when we were all back to feeling a sense of normalcy. Sticking your head in the sand isn't the answer. We really have to whether you're at an airport or a library or on the Staten Island Ferry or in a zoo, be attentive, be focused. Assume we're in treacherous times, and history does repeat itself. There's no reason to think that this can't and won't happen again unless each and every one of us does something.
[Hemmer:] Russ, in your line of business you were here yesterday, you're back again today...
[Martorana:] Yes.
[Hemmer:] ... people coming back to work. We talk about normalcy. We are far from it at this point. But just having the markets open yesterday appeared to give a lot of people a sense that it's a good thing. Despite the enormous point loss, it was a good thing.
[Martorana:] Yes, it was a good thing. If you take it out of context, it was the greatest point loss in history, but in terms of percentages, there have been probably 15 days in history that have been worse than this. And given the state of the nation, this is an unprecedented crisis, we're in. The airline industry virtually at a near crash in itself. It was a little bit too much for the market to bear just as it was for those towers. But like the towers, we will the towers will eventually rise again, and so will the markets. But the key is as those things better, our resolve and our focus can never be diminished, because that's where we're most vulnerable. And I just want to say to everyone just be very focused.
[Hemmer:] Russ, thanks.
[Martorana:] Thank you.
[Hemmer:] Good luck today, all right?
[Martorana:] Thank you very much.
[Hemmer:] The markets will open again in about an hour's time from now. Susan Lisovicz on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange Fred Katayama uptown in Times Square from where we are. We will check in with both now Susan, first to you and good morning.
[Susan Lisovicz, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning. Well, smoke still permeates the trading floor where I am standing one week after the horrific attack on the World Trade Center just a few blocks away, but there is an argument being made that today's open and today's trading session will be just as important as what happened yesterday. And the reason is that we had a big sell-off not a catastrophic sell-off the biggest point loss ever, but far from the biggest percentage loss, not even in the top 10. There is a sense that there was order, there was stability, that the systems worked. And there is a hope among many of the traders here that there could have been a washout, that in fact we could be taking the time we could be in a position now where we could make a floor for what happened yesterday, and there may be an attempt to make a comeback, a rally at the open. Now, having said that, there was more than emotional damage that occurred yesterday. We had some of our biggest companies warning that what happened in the past week is going to hurt their third quarter profits. Among them: American Express, Citigroup, United Technologies, all members of the Dow 30. And this comes during what we call "confession season," when many companies warn that their numbers are not going to make what the investment community expects, and this, of course, comes at a time when the economy is shaky to begin with. However, many traders that I talked to were deeply heartened and encouraged by what they saw yesterday, that there was no panic. And they are hoping that we will find a floor after what happened yesterday back to you.
[Hemmer:] Susan, thank you. Again, the opening bell an hour from now. To Times Square and the Nasdaq exchange and CNN's Fred Katayama this morning Fred, good morning to you.
[Fred Katayama, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Bill. Well, this wall behind me yesterday was a sea of red, but as you see here today, right now you see this flicker of green. That's a premarket indicator for the 100 largest stocks indicating that it's in positive territory. So the Nasdaq may open flat, just slightly higher at their open. Trading could be a bit less active than yesterday, because a lot of traders are off for the Jewish New York, Rosh Hashanah. Now, we're seeing further signs of fallout from the attack on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. Oracle, the database software maker, says it expects its corporate software business will continue to be weak. It says revenues from its software licensing division could fall as much as 15 percent compared to the same period a year ago, because business was disrupted. Well, we're hearing a different story from eBay. The online auctioneer says it is still sticking with its forecast for the third quarter, even if you include the results of business on the days following the attack on the World Trade Towers. And also good news from Papa John's that's a pizza restaurant chain. Papa John's saying that it now expects its earnings third quarter profits to be in the middle to upper middle part of its range of forecast. The reason being, it says sales at its franchise restaurants were better than expected. So there's a little bit of glimmer of hope, although there are still a lot of people worried about how the markets will react today, given if you look back at history, often on the second day following a cataclysmic event at the start of trading, we do see the markets they tend to end the day lower. We'll see what happens here at the Nasdaq today back to you, Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right, Fred, thank you very much Fred Katayama, Susan Lisovicz much appreciated. Back here on Broad Street, the security is still tight and the smoke still in the air, but the tears here, Paula, have not gone away. They will be with us for a very, very long time back to you.
[Zahn:] Sorry to hear that. All right. Thanks so much, Bill. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] Public health authorities are grappling with what they believe is the first death attributed to West Nile Virus in the south. The virus spread to the deep south this summer but until now, all of the fatal cases were confined to New York and New Jersey. CNN's national correspondent Martin Savidge looks at how health officials are stepping up their battle against an invisible foe.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] One day after the first confirmed death this year in the nation from West Nile Virus, health workers in Atlanta intensified efforts to battle the mosquito-spread disease. Crews dispersed insecticide pellets into standing water where the bugs breed. According to health officials, the death of the 71-year-old woman earlier this month is the first-ever human fatality in the state of Georgia. Authorities declined to identify the victim, saying only she was admitted to hospital July 31st with encephalitis-like symptoms. But it wasn't until Friday morning, six days after her death, that the Centers for Disease Control confirmed that it was West Nile Virus. The victim reportedly lived in the heart of downtown Atlanta, near the park built to celebrate the Olympic games in 1996. Saturday, health workers focused on communities near the park and areas surrounding elderly housing, spreading information as well as insecticide. Older residents and children are believed to be most at risk for the disease.
[Mayor Bill Campbell, Atlanta, Georgia:] This is no time for panic. It's a time for caution, it's a time to understand the necessary ingredients as to how we can protect ourselves.
[Savidge:] Until now, the West Nile Virus had only shown up in the state in animals, mainly birds. But health officials say at least 6 other people in Fulton County surrounding Atlanta are being tested after showing symptoms of the disease. Still, officials downplay the danger.
[Adewale Troutman, Fulton Co. Health Dept:] In a given area a very, very small percentage, perhaps 1% of the mosquitoes are actually infected with the virus. If a person is bitten by an affected mosquito, the chances of becoming ill is very, very small.
[Savidge:] Monday, Atlanta area health officials will meet to compare notes with health experts from New York city. From 1999 to 2000, at least nine deaths and 73 other cases were reported in the New York city and New Jersey metropolitan areas. For now, Georgia residents are being encouraged to roll down their sleeves in the battle against a bug that has suddenly become more than just a nuisance. Martin Savidge, CNN, Atlanta.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Who don't dream about a new car? Motor City is ground zero today for car enthusiasts worldwide. Detroit is hosting once again the North American International Auto Show. Our Ed Garsten is there, probably having more fun than he should be allowed. We will allow it just this one time, Ed. Good morning.
[Ed Garsten, Cnn Correspondent:] Daryn, every time I cover one of these things, I come home, and my wife says: I don't even want to hear it. She can't get another new car this year, and there are so many cool cars, slick cars, retro cars out here in the floor, the 600,000 square of Cobo Hall in downtown Detroit. Already this morning we have seen some interesting introductions, Ford finally, after a four-year absence, introducing its production model of the return of the Thunderbird. We have also seen BMW introduce its Mini, or reintroduce its Mini. And Mercedes came up with three new cars in it C-class, which if you can imagine a Mercedes for about $30,000, there's going to be one coming out this fall. A whole family of them. I want to bring in, Csada Csere, who is the editor of "Car & Driver" magazine. What have you seen that you like so far?
[Csada Csere, Editor, "car & Driver":] Well, I think new Mini is really an intriguing car here because it starts a new niche. What we have got here is tiny little car in which the emphasis is not on fuel economy, but it is performance and fun to drive at a relatively low costs. And we haven't seen a lot of that these days.
[Garsten:] I think one of the brands we have seen really try to change its image is the Cadillac. We are going to show you some pictures. First of all, a concept car called Vizon, tell you us about that.
[Csere:] Well, the Vizon is actually a luxury SUV. The car will go into production in a couple of years in a little bit more subdued form. But the idea is this is a car-based SUV, not a truck-base SUV. So it will ride and handle better than the truck-based ones, but still offer all the utility and four-wheel drive that people want.
[Garsten:] A little while ago here at the GM display, where we are standing, we saw them roar in with a big, black truck, the Cadillac Escalade EXT, that is a production vehicle that they are going to make. What is going on with Cadillac?
[Csere:] Well, a couple of things, they are trying to change their image, and get more with it, number one. Number two, they are trying to get into niches where nobody is really. In fact, Lincoln Blackwood came out a couple of years ago with this luxury pickup truck type, and the Escalade EXT is a little bit like that, except it is different because it has got a pass-through between the bed and the back seat. So you can actually fold down the back seat and this pass through and get something really long into it, or fold it up and get four passengers and a shorter luggage space. But it is another niche where nobody is there, and Cadillac wants to get that business.
[Garsten:] I assume that Cadillac is working really hard to try to lower its demographic?
[Csere:] Well, it is critical. Their average age is a little bit high. And with every new product, that is going to be the goal, to bring it down. That's one of the reasons they are jumping into these SUV areas because the demographics are lower there than the big full- size traditional luxury sedans.
[Garsten:] The fabulous success of the PT Cruiser, which we saw introduced here last year, everyone thought this was going to be a retro show. Has it turned out that way?
[Csere:] Well, there is a little bit of retro coming up, and we haven't seen all of it yet. Nissan is going to be introducing a new Z-car pretty soon, in about an hour. Tomorrow morning, we are going to see the return of the Mazda RX-7. So there is a certain retro theme going on throughout the show. We even saw it in something like the Chrysler Crossfire, which is a concept car. It has got this rib running down the middle of the cab that essentially splits the windshield. It looks like an old-fashioned sports car from the '30s and '40s. So retro is still a strong theme.
[Garsten:] All right, Csada Csere, thank you so much. We want to also tell you that two awards were announced this morning, the North America Car and Truck of the Year. The car of the year was the tell us, Csada, do you remember what it was? I remember what it was: the PT Cruiser. And the Truck of the Year was a surprise, the Acura MDX, SUV it is live TV, folks, we are trying for you. We will bring you the cars throughout the day here at the North American International Auto Show. Back to you. Daryn.
[Kagan:] Well, Ed, let's put you on the spot here for a second, your wife won't want to hear about it when you get home. If you could take any car home, what was your favorite that you've seen so far?
[Garsten:] I really like that T-Bird. It reminds me of when my brother and I cruised around in his '57 T-Bird rag top. It would bring back those old days. And it really is a beautiful car. I would be happy to take one home. My wife is getting the payments ready.
[Kagan:] There you go, Ed Garsten, thank you very much for that look at the auto show.

[Jim Moret, Co-host:] Hi, everyone. I'm Jim Moret in Hollywood.
[Laurin Sydney, Co-host:] And I'm Laurin Sydney in New York. And, Jim, it's that time again. Set that alarm. Only a couple more days until Oscar nominations are announced.
[Moret:] Can't wait. "American Beauty" picked up some Oscar momentum today with the announcement of the Writers Guild Award nominees. Screenwriter Alan Ball is among the contenders. In the original screenplay category, he will go up against Paul Thomas Anderson, writerdirector of "Magnolia." Also recognized for original scripts were "Being John Malkovich," "Three Kings" and "The Sixth Sense."
[Sydney:] In the adapted screenplay category, "The Talented Mr. Ripley" will try to outdo the talented John Irving, who adapted his "Cider House Rules." Among the other nominees: "The Insider," "October Sky" and "Election."
[Moret:] We'll find out who's in the club and who got the snub on Tuesday morning. Join us for the nomination-day special: "WHO WANTS TO BE OSCAR WINNER," with live coverage of the announcement from Academy headquarters in Beverly Hills. It of course all begins at 8:00 a.m. Eastern, 5:30, Pacific. Meanwhile, the Writers Guild did not forget "Election" and "October Sky," but there's no guarantee with Oscar, however. He sometimes neglects films that come out earlier in the year. Paul Vercammen reports on the underdogs hoping to be remembered.
[Paul Vercammen, Cnn Correspondent:] "Shakespeare in Love" hit theaters late in 1998, built an audience in early 1999, and won the Academy Award for best picture over "Saving Private Ryan," a summer release.
[Robert Osborne, Film Historian:] It certainly helped "Shakespeare in Love" last year, because early in the year, "Saving Private Ryan" opened and everybody thought it had a lock on the Oscar. And then late in the year, they started seeing this "Shakespeare in Love," and saying, oh, I really like that movie, and that's when they were marking their ballots. So it can be very, very helpful.
[Vercammen:] The prevailing Hollywood theory: Cast your Oscar bait, such as "American Beauty" and "The Insider," into the last four months of the year. "The Talented Mr. Ripley, "The Green Mile," "Cider House Rules," and "The Hurricane" all debuted in December. They were fresh in Academy Award voters' minds when the nomination ballots recently came out. Will this spell an Oscar snub for "October Sky," out in February, "Election," May... [Begin Video Clip, "election"]
[Unidentified Actress:] When I win the presidency, that means you and I are going to be spending a lot of time together.
[Vercammen:] ... and "Limbo" June, all featuring critically acclaimed performances?
[Unidentified Male:] For a small film like an "Election," open early in the year, people see it, they forget it with all the others, because it doesn't have that big staying power and that big impact.
[Vercammen:] The last three best picture winners are December releases, "Titanic" and two Miramax films, "Shakespeare" and "The English Patient." Miramax chairman Harvey Weinstein gets credit for successful campaigning.
[Danny Boyle, Director:] He actually sees the Oscar as a way of marketing the films. So he'll work hard to get his films Oscar nominations, Oscar buzz, whatever it is, because he wants people to see the film.
[Vercammen:] Studios try to ensure their Oscar hopefuls are seen by Academy voters by shifting shipping video tapes, both early releases and end-of-year offerings.
[Kevin Smith, Director:] There's no possible way you can get to all these movies that are in even limited release since the advent of the screener, where now you can watch everything in the comfort of your own home, and that's kind of not the way movies were designed to be watched, so the whole process seems kind of corrupted.
[Vercammen:] Last decade, as the screener campaign heated up, early releases, "Silence of the Lambs," "Braveheart" and "Forrest Gump" won best picture. And some critics want summer release "The Sixth Sense," and Haley Joel Osment to follow this year. The race is wide open.
[Tom Sherak, Domestic Chairman, Twentieth Century Fox:] This year, there's a lot of films, but there's really nothing that you can say, "That's it." And I think that's kind of going to be kind of fun as the Academy votes, and then what happens when the nominations come out.
[Vercammen:] Maybe Academy voters will remember films seen before December. Paul Vercammen, CNN Entertainment News, Hollywood.
[Sydney:] "The Eyes of Tammy Faye" will soon be staring at moviegoers. Lions Gate Pictures plans to distribute the documentary about the former PTL queen, which was a hot ticket at the recent Sundance Film Festival. Sherri Sylvester on a story that might seem stranger than fiction.
[Tammy Faye Bakker-messner:] Jokes have kept me alive.
[Sherri Sylvester, Cnn Correspondent:] OK, that's tempting, but additional punchlines are not required. There is plenty of humor in a new documentary on Tammy Faye Bakker-Messner, starting with the title, "The Eyes of Tammy Faye."
[Unidentified Male:] So you've never done pictures without those eyelashes?
[Bakker:] No, and I never will. But that's my trademark. I don't think you guys would have been interested in big hips or fat ankles.
[Sylvester:] Tammy Faye believes that the eyes are the windows to the soul, so much so that she collects the eyeglasses of dead friends and relatives.
[Bakker:] I like to put them on sometime and think, you know, mom would look through these.
[Sylvester:] The filmmakers go beneath the Maybeline for a revealing look at the one-time preacher's wife.
[Fenton Bailery, Co-director/producer/"the Eyes Of Tammy Faye":] Twelve years ago, with the PTL scandal, we watched the spectacle of Tammy Faye's amazing fall from grace, but what people didn't know is the real person underneath that and how it was that that came to be.
[Bakker:] The finished product made me cry so hard. Thank God you live life in increments, or you couldn't stand it. But when you see it all together, you really can't stand it.
[Sylvester:] A quick refresher course here. Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker left their PTL ministry in 1987 amid a sex and money scandal. He spent five years in prison on fraud charges. [BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, 1987]
[Jim Bakker:] We love God, and if God wants up, he'll put us up; if he wants us down, he'll put us down.
[Sylvester:] The documentary suggest that the Bakkers were prejudged in the court of public opinion and suffered a miscarriage of justice. The couple divorced, both remarried, and Jim was reluctant to take part in the film.
[Bakker:] I said, Jim, I was married to you for 30 years, and I said, if the shoe were on the other foot and you were wanting me to do this, I would be glad to do it for you, and come to find out, he was having a problem with his wife over it.
[Sylvester:] Jim Bakker did do the interview and is now back at the pulpit. Tammy Faye is off to make a country music album with drag queen Ru Paul.
[Bakker:] He's in drag, and he says, I am too.
[Sylvester:] He narrates the documentary, and she is heard singing background vocals. So what are moviegoers to make of all this?
[Bakker:] I hope they come out not being so judgmental so quickly. I hope that they come out thinking for themselves. America is a land of very intelligent people.
[Sylvester:] Her son's reaction to the film was hardly cerebral.
[Bakker:] Jamie all of the sudden says to me, "Mommy, you're going to have to excuse me, but I'm really sick. I've got to go throw up."
[Sylvester:] To fans, Tammy Faye's face is still one to watch. Sherri Sylvester, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Announcer:] The divine "Miss M.," Bette Midler, starts touring and starts touting two new films. And a tour that's just starting: the reunion of Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young.

[Shields:] Welcome back. President Clinton delivered his 8th count them State of the Union Address, and painted a vision for America.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] Every child will begin school ready to learn, and graduate ready to succeed.
[Shields:] He scolded the Republican-controlled Congress for not keeping up.
[Clinton:] For too long, this Congress has been standing still on some of our most pressing national priorities.
[Shields:] Among the president's initiatives was this
[Clinton:] I propose a plan to ensure that all new handgun buyers must first have a photo license from their state, showing they passed the Brady background check and a gun safety course before they get the gun.
[Shields:] Kate O'Beirne, is this not a popular agenda from a popular president?
[O'beirne:] Mark, it's an unpopular proposal from a disgraced president. A few weeks ago, Bill Clinton was talking about a proposal to reduce gun crimes that George brought support, enforced the tough laws already on the books something his administration hasn't done. Now he's abandoned that to help Al Gore by giving him a Bradley-like sort of proposal. The intensity on the gun issue is on the side of the gun rights people. And if this new threat energizes them, he could actually help the Republicans keep the House.
[Shields:] Margaret Carlson, 65 to 30, favorable job rating in the country Bill Clinton has right now, 92 to 5 favorable rating among Democrats. Is he a help to Al Gore?
[Carlson:] I want to see George Bush have to defend the concealed weapon against the Gore-licensed gun owners in the general election, and Texas; then he's going to have to be out there depending that. Listen, we all think these State of the Union messages are too long, it's like State of the Union, the miniseries people like these; they like the laundry list of programs. They like what Clinton has done. The disgraced president has a job approval rating of 65 percent. And you will see the candidates coming back right where Clinton lives for the general election.
[Shields:] I say this, Margaret is absolutely right on the concealed weapons. George Bush hasn't mentioned it once during this entire campaign. He's not boasted about it in "The Texas Miracle." What about the State of the Union, Bob? You've seen a few.
[Novak:] This was a everybody wondered what would happen if you ever had a big surplus and a liberal president. What they'd do is having, by one count, over 90 new initiatives, and a program for America which says, nobody has is people have a chance to succeed. Everybody has to succeed. But I was disgusted with it. But I'll tell you what was more disgusting: two very able senators Senators Susan Collins of Maine, Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee with a terrible response, did not mention the surplus, did not mention the tax cuts terrible.
[Hunt:] Well, I had one disappointment, Mark. And that was he spoke for an hour and 30 minutes. Had he gone for another 79 minutes, he could have been the first president to give a State of Union over two days, and I realized I was disappointed in that. I was pleased, though, Bob after the State of the Union, he said it was 61 promises. It's up to 90. I think by next week, we'll clearly be in triple digits.
[Novak:] He's still working it.
[Hunt:] Bob, there is no demand for smaller government, I'm sorry.
[Novak:] Well, that wait a minute, I just want to respond if that is true, it's a shame for the American people. If they like that, it's a terrible thing.
[Shields:] They are all the moral lepers. All right Margaret.
[Carlson:] And actually, he is allowed to do one more State of the Union, and make it a two-hour one, yes. Well, we learned tonight, you hate the working man, and the common man should not succeed. Thanks, Bob.
[Novak:] I say everybody can't succeed. Everybody can't succeed.
[Shields:] THE GANG will be back with outrage of the week.
[Announcer:] Our reviewer outrage of the week is from John Ludtke. He writes, "It is an outrage that no presidential candidate has proposed a population policy for this country, even as we encourage developing countries to develop such policies. Our annual growth rate is almost three times that of most developed countries, 10 times the rate of Europe, and we have the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in the industrialized world. Given the environmental burden we impose by our consumption habits, I believe this American formula for Earth's destruction deserves at least a campaign mention."

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] As the recount continues in Florida, you heard our Jonathan Karl say both Democrats and Republicans are keeping a careful watch over that procedure. And there have been allegations of irregularities at the polls, and at least three voters have filed lawsuits asking for a new election. The election observers for the Bush and Gore campaigns addressed the issue this morning here on CNN.
[James Baker, Observer For Bush Campaign:] I haven't heard any allegations of fraud or that sort of thing. I've heard some suggestions that a ballot was confusing, a ballot that a Democratic elected Democrat election supervisor approved, a ballot that the former which had been used in prior elections. So I think we need to back off here a little bit in terms of threatening lawsuits, filing lawsuits and hurling charges.
[William Daley, Gore Campaign Chairman:] Oh, already there's been suits filed. And I would imagine this will continue for a while, as it should. The heart of our democracy is the election and people participating in the election. And as we move forward, some will try to create an air of crisis. There is no crisis, and that would be inappropriate and unfortunate if people try to do that.
[Kagan:] And now for a little more perspective on the recount in Florida, we're joined by Jan Baron. He is a former FEC attorney. He also served as general counsel of the Republican National Committee from 1989-1992. Mr. Baron, good to see you. Thanks for joining us.
[Jan Baron, Former Fec Attorney:] Good morning.
[Kagan:] First of all, did you have a chance to hear Pat Buchanan's comments this morning. Now even he is saying he thinks a lot of the votes that came in for him in Palm Beach County actually were intended for Al Gore.
[Baron:] Well, that's going to be the $67,000 question here. Fortunately for Florida, they have a pretty good procedure in place under their laws. And they have, like many other states, a two-step process. The first step is what's called a recount, and that's going on right now. That is a fairly mechanical, mathematical process where they literally retabulate all the ballots that were cast on Tuesday.
[Kagan:] And that was called for because a state law that says that if less than one-half of 1 percent difference between the two candidates, then you have to go ahead and recount. What if we go through this whole thing again and it's still the same way?
[Baron:] Well, we will have new figures released, according to Florida election officials, late today, and then we will compare the numbers that they released after the first count. There is a period of time of about 10 days in which the candidate or any voter in Florida can take a further legal step, which is to file a contest or to contest the election results, which they can do by filing a complaint with a trial court in the state of Florida.
[Kagan:] And we're already getting word of some of those lawsuits being filed. If somebody does that, what is the burden of proof? What do they have to show in order to bring about some kind of action?
[Baron:] Right. Well, they have to show two things, and they have to prove it just like you would in any trial that goes on around the country. The first thing that they would have to prove is that there was something that went wrong, a misadministration or an error of some sort.
[Kagan:] Does it have to be malicious?
[Baron:] It does not have to be malicious. I mean, mistakes happen and they would have to show that there are mistakes. If something that malicious did occur, if there was some fraud and there have been no allegations of fraud thus far then that evidence of that type of malfeasance can be presented as well. But the second step is really the critical thing and usually the most difficult element to prove in these types of contest. And that is that the plaintiff has to demonstrate that there's a clear reverse result from the mistake or the fraud, that the election will come out differently. So it's one thing to come in and prove that there was confusion or that there were mistakes, but the second element here is to prove that because of this confusion or because of the mistakes, certain votes clearly should be counted in a different way; either they should be counted because they were not counted before or they should be taken from the column of one candidate and put into the column of another candidate.
[Kagan:] So this will...
[Baron:] And that requires very convincing evidence.
[Kagan:] Real quickly, is there, then, precedent of an election being thrown out and then having maybe not on a presidential level but having an election all over again?
[Baron:] There is not any that I'm aware of in Florida and that is unusual. The last time I have heard of such an instance was in 1975 with the election for senator in the state of New Hampshire. And that's a slightly different legal procedure, but the United States Senate declared that the 1974 election in New Hampshire was inconclusive and they required New Hampshire to have a new election for senator.
[Kagan:] I think the word you used there, "unusual," would certainly be applicable in this case. Jan Baron, thanks for stopping by and giving us some perspective. Really appreciate it.
[Baron:] My pleasure.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] A real-life drama has been unfolding in Colorado Springs, Colorado. It ended exactly one hour and fifteen minutes ago with a peaceful surrender of the remaining two Texas fugitives. Originally, there were seven who escaped from a Kennedy, Texas, prison six weeks ago. Four escapees were captured, and a fifth committed suicide in Woodland Park, Colorado, Monday. The final two fugitives, Patrick Murphy and Donald Newbury, gave up this morning after giving an interview to a Colorado Springs TV anchor. We are going to bring you that interview in its entirety in just one minute, but first we want to go to CNN's Frank Buckley, who is at the scene of the surrender. Frank, how did it unfold?
[Frank Buckley, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Carol, the fugitives were discovered staying at this Holiday Inn motel sometime yesterday. Police confirmed their location within the hotel, and at approximately 10 p.m. last night, negotiations began with Patrick Murphy and Donald Newbury. At some point, the two fugitives asked for an interview with a local television station. They asked that the interview be broadcast live. Police asked broadcasters and CNN not to broadcast it live. CNN honored that commitment, but shortly after the interview began at 3:29 a.m. local time, both men gave themselves up and were taken into custody, ending the hunt for the so-called Texas Seven, the men who broke out of a Texas prison in early December. So that is the situation here right now Carol.
[Lin:] All right, Frank Buckley, we want you to continue to stand by because we have some questions more questions about exactly how the situation unfolded. But as we promised, we want to show our audience the interviews in its entirety, both of Patrick Murphy and Donald Newbury, who surrendered on the condition that they be able to speak to a local TV anchor. The TV anchor is Eric Singer of KKTV. And we begin now with the interview with Patrick Murphy.
[Patrick Murphy Jr., Escapee:] I was actually up for parole when I made the decision to join in this escape, OK, and what would force me to do this was the penal institution and such. The way Texas has things set up is that I felt that my life on the outside I would eventually become an outlaw again anyway because of the parole stipulations and such. We I felt that by trying to make this statement, maybe we can make more people more people aware that there is a definite wrong within the penal system of the state of Texas, and that, you know, we would hope that the you know, maybe our what we're doing here would open the eyes of the people, OK. If you have some questions you feel free to answer them now I mean ask them.
[Eric Singer, Kktv Anchor:] Many people are wondering how did the Texas Seven decide on Colorado? How did you decide, what took you on that journey? How did you decide on Colorado? I understand, when I was listening to negotiations, you were talking about a snowstorm you were involved in. Why don't you elaborate on that?
[Murphy:] OK, what happened was, really, Colorado was just a random pick OK. We had to drive out of the Texas snowstorm that hit right at Christmas Eve in the Amarillo area, and we had to drive through the blizzard for hours, and literally, Colorado was just a random pick.
[Singer:] Now, when you arrived in Colorado, where did your journey take you?
[Murphy:] I believe our first stop was Pueblo area.
[Singer:] Yes, and then you went from Pueblo to?
[Murphy:] To we went straight to Woodland Park.
[Singer:] When you were in Woodland Park, obviously the "Texas Seven" America's most wanted. Your pictures are up everywhere. How exactly did you blend in? What kind you were up there several weeks. How did you blend in? How did you, you know, hide try to be a sort of chameleon within the community?
[Murphy:] Well, that was rather we joked about often, but it was really just by downplaying ourselves and changing our hair color and such.
[Singer:] Now, tell me, you're talking about the fact that you were changing your hair color and such. You were trying to blend in. What exactly was your day to day life? Obviously, it's going to be a lot difficult and different than it would be for me.
[Murphy:] Day to day life was, you know, we tried to remain as calm as possible at all times, but vigilant. It would be difficult to get into that right now.
[Singer:] Now many times we had talked to several people in the Woodland Park area, and they had said that they had seen many of you out in the community. They had said hi to you. Obviously, they had also said the fact that you attended Christian meetings; that you tried to blend into the community. Tell me a little bit about that.
[Murphy:] OK, yes, we attempted to be as friendly and as neighborly as we could. As far as the Christian meetings were, that was only one man and he was the man who committed suicide. That was part of the cover, I guess, you could say. You know, we were trying to He was trying to pass us off as a like a church work crew traveling around.
[Singer:] And the decisions within the group to blend into the community was there anything specifically that they had talked about to blend?
[Murphy:] No, the things that we did we just played by ear day to day.
[Singer:] You were talking about dying your hair. Like when we've seen these seen the people, I mean, what color hair do you have now?
[Murphy:] I guess it's kind of a blondish-red, you know, with very dark roots because my hair is growing out fast.
[Singer:] That's right. And you had dark hair, as I recall, in some of your pictures?
[Murphy:] Yes.
[Singer:] All right. Well, we are we have about five seconds left. So if you could go ahead and just wrap up however you'd like so that way you can immediately go outside and honor your commitment.
[Murphy:] OK, I want to say thank you very much. The authorities here have been very professional in our dealings and, hopefully, like I said, maybe this will open eyes in some people is that the penal system is does have problems within it.
[Lin:] That was Patrick Murphy. Now, a moment later he handed the phone to fellow fugitive Donald Newbury. And here is that interview.
[Donald Newbury, Escapee:] ... the way I see it is I had to make a statement. Our judicial system in the state of Texas has really gone to pits. We're receiving 99 years for a robbery for $68, nobody injury injured. There's no proof that a gun was used in the robbery, other than an unreliable witness that picked out several IDs and everything before, which created a statement through information of my priors and everything else that apparently the prosecutor had given to him, which is strictly against the law as well. We have a Texas ranger. He admitted in trial that the evidence was tainted. Yet, I received 99 years. The same day I went to trial, there was a man that cut another man's nuts off during an aggravated robbery of a convenience store and got 40 years. I don't see how the system is actually working. It's fallen. I don't hold it against the administration or the officers involved in what we're doing. I've done crime you've got to face the music. But there's got to be something within reason in the state of Texas. They're giving kids so much time that they will never get to see light again. Their life is gone. Now all they are is a roach in a cage. Things have to be changed. There needs to be more rehabilitation in the system down there. You know, I can't couldn't even go to college. Oh, Lord, you can't go to college. Come on, where's the rehabilitation when you can't even help yourself? The whole thing from the beginning, from our self-extraction from the unit, that was done very peacefully as possible. We hurt the officers very little. There was only the ones that resisted. It could have been a bloodbath; we could have been out of there in 30 minutes instead of 2 12 hours. We took time to take these people and do it gently instead of 30 minutes. We are not trying to start a big bum rush, but I have a feeling that the fences are fixing to be rushed hard, because of the time they're given. And even if you do make parole, the way they've got the system set up, it's going to make you fall. I've been told to quit my jobs, and stuff like that, by parole officers. What kind of system tells you, look, you're doing good, you're earning $8 an hour, you know, you just got out the joint quit your job. I don't understand it. The system needs to be checked. It needs to be rebuilt, reconstructed. I'm not saying do away with it or nothing else; I'm just saying make something that will work. The Texas system's not working. I had to threaten to beat my attorneys beat my attorney up so I could get another attorney, because my first attorney had spent three months and hadn't even come talk to me. What kind of judicial system gives you a defense that won't even show up? All right hello?
[Singer:] Hello, I'm here.
[Newbury:] All right.
[Singer:] I'm here, I'm listening to you. I just didn't want to interrupt you.
[Newbury:] All right, that's pretty much what I've got to say, is we had a statement to make that the system is as corrupt as we are. If you're going to do something about us, well, do something about that system, too. It is going to take the public, and it's going to take a lot of screaming and hollering. And the reason I am stepping out these doors tonight is not from fear because I had been set for the last 40 days to die. I am stepping out of these doors with the sole purpose of honoring the person I love and to keep my voice in the media. I am going to start writing, I'm probably going we're both going to do it. We're going to keep screaming, we're going to start trying to get something changed. Something's got to change. You're killing people. Now are we killing people that did something wrong? You're tearing families apart. There's one incident where a guy got paroled. He got dressed up to go out and see his mother and stuff out there, and they turn around and turn him back in, sent him back to his unit. What kind of mental anguish, what kind of cruelty is that? That's the same as public hangings, except you are tearing up families too.
[Lin:] Right after that call, Donald Newbury and Patrick Murphy fulfilled their commitment to police, walking out of their hotel room and surrendering. We now go back to CNN's Frank Buckley, who is standing by at the scene of the surrender. And, Frank, I understand that you're about to speak with a federal agent who was involved in this standoff.
[Buckley:] We have with us Special Agent ATF Special Agent Tom Mengan. First of all, are you satisfied with the outcome of the negotiation here?
[Tom Mengan, Atf:] Absolutely, we're happy with the peaceful outcome, that these two violent individuals surrendered themselves, no shots were fired, and no one was harmed.
[Buckley:] Can you give us a sense of the preparations? We've all seen the live television interviews that were taking place. We've seen the final outcome. Can you give us a sense, now that it's over, of some of the preparations that were underway and how this could have gone another way?
[Mengan:] I mean, as you could tell, the negotiations were exhausting. For over five hours, negotiations were going on with these two individuals. It was a lot of manpower, a lot of man-hours.
[Buckley:] And there were, needless to say, special weapons and tactics officers deployed. Can you tell us how much they knew and what kind of preparations they had made?
[Mengan:] Again, this whole Holiday Inn was surrounded by tactical teams. The Colorado Springs tactical unit, the FBI tactical units, and negotiators are to be commended by this successful outcome. I think both individuals had nowhere to go. I think the noose was tightening around their necks. With all the media attention they were getting, they had nowhere to go, nowhere to hide.
[Buckley:] We learned yesterday that that through interviews with the fugitives who are already in custody, that these fugitives, the final two fugitives, did, in fact, have some weaponry we were told at least a dozen weapons between the two of them. Had is there any evidence, upon looking at the room, that they were, in fact, armed?
[Mengan:] Presently, ATF and Irving authorities are drafting a search warrant for that room. We fully anticipate to recover firearms. Yesterday, we did recover the firearm of the slain officer, Officer Hawkins. And again, I think just because today one chapter closed we have a murder investigation to deal with, and we have some fugitives that need to be extradited back to Texas to face those charges.
[Buckley:] That is new information about the police officer's weapon being located. We hadn't heard that yesterday. Can you tell us under what circumstances?
[Mengan:] The firearm was located in the Jeep Cherokee.
[Buckley:] OK, thank you very much, Special Agent Tom Mengan. Also joining us now is Brian Rackham; he is the News Director of KKTV television. This is the television station that Eric Singer was working for, that broadcast this interview live. First, Brian, can you tell us what went into your decision-making as to whether nor not to allow your reporter to participate in this?
[Brian Rackham, Kktv News Director:] Well, I had covered one of these before as a radio reporter, a situation very similar to this, in the early '80s, and it ended much the same way. And we thought about it, and we felt like the thing to do was to try and save lives. And I also felt it was a legitimate news story. And so we went down to the hotel, and we watched during the negotiations, and they offered up a couple of scenarios. One was a face-to-face meeting that did not happen, and then finally, the telephone scenario, that ended peacefully. And I think it ended well. I think Eric acted responsibly. And I think that, you know, fortunately, those lives were saved.
[Buckley:] You can be our eyes and ears inside of the room where the negotiations were taking place.
[Rackham:] Yes.
[Buckley:] I heard you earlier during this drama, as it was unfolding, say that you couldn't say much about the negotiations and the tenor of what was happening. Can you give us a sense now of what was being said back and forth, and how was it going in there?
[Rackham:] Well, you know, I think the real heroes in this are the negotiators, who set this all up to where if they got their interview, they would give up. And that's throughout the entire evening, the idea was to keep steering them toward nonviolent outcomes. They were talking about everything from movies to some of their road adventures getting stuck in the snow and they vented a lot. And I think the the idea was to try and outlast them. To get them to get tired and use up all their energy talking and commiserating about their trials and tribulations. And generally speaking, it was not a violent situation. They seemed very lucid, didn't seem drunk. I think they were resigned to the fact it was going to end, but they had some defiance in them. And the negotiators successfully wore them down. And then Eric came in and it ended peacefully.
[Buckley:] CNN made an editorial decision not to broadcast the interviews live. You opted to go for the live broadcast tell us why.
[Rackham:] Well, I think it had legitimate news value, especially in this community. I think people wanted to know. I think it's very legitimate to find out what they were thinking and what they were saying. I also feel that the value of saving lives and ending the situation peacefully was very important, as well. We're citizens in the community. And it's certainly up to every journalist's individual choice, but I think we made the right decision.
[Buckley:] With your reporter Eric Singer did he volunteer for the assignment? Was he selected? Did you counsel him that this could be dangerous? Can you give us a sense of that sort of discussion?
[Rackham:] He was selected, as I understand it requested. And we did talk about that. But I was quite confident we would not be placed in the line of fire. I mean, police officers aren't going to do that. But if we could offer some assistance and also, of course, get a story which was an incredible story, we would do it.
[Buckley:] When you say that at one point a face-to-face was offered up, is this was a request from the fugitives or...
[Rackham:] Well, I'm not sure. They were talking about possibly having one of the fugitives give up, go into one of the conference rooms, and interview with Eric, and then the other one would see it on television, and he would give up. As it turns out, they decided to do the telephone route and do it together.
[Buckley:] Are you satisfied with the outcome?
[Rackham:] Oh, I'm very satisfied with the outcome, and I think that it was handled very well by law enforcement. And it was a last resort on their part, and they weren't comfortable doing this. And in many ways we weren't either, but you know, I think it was necessary, and I think that in the end the most important thing is that those two people, you know, didn't kill themselves or get shot.
[Buckley:] Brian, if you could stand by for a second, Carol Lin has a question for you, and I'm going to sort of translate since you don't have an IFBN. Carol, go ahead.
[Lin:] Frank, I'm wondering if you could ask Brian, since this interview was a condition of their surrender, did the federal agents tell him and his reporter that there were certain conditions that they not ask certain questions? Did the federal agents have a role in what kinds of questions their reporter asked?
[Buckley:] Carol Lin is asking did the federal agents prohibit or in any way limit the questions that Eric Singer could ask...
[Rackham:] No, no, there were no ground rules. The only ground rule was that we would give them five minutes. And you know, they were there to offer suggestions on how they might steer them to try and give up, but they wound up not doing that. So, no, they didn't control the editorial content of what we did I mean, other than the fact that they were allowed to speak their piece, which I thought was pretty interesting news in itself.
[Buckley:] In a situation like this, you could end up becoming agents of the police, in a sense, if in fact they fed you questions, asked you to do something. With your counsel to your reporter, what did you ask or suggest to your reporter, or was this something that Eric simply, on his own, decided how to conduct the interview?
[Rackham:] I think Eric and I both knew as journalists, the number of years we've been in the business, that how to handle ourselves in a situation like this. And people can say we were used. I don't know. I don't I think that we got a story out of this situation, and I think that it ended peacefully. And so I don't really have a problem with what we did.
[Buckley:] OK, that is Brian Rackham, the news director here at KKTV, in Colorado Springs, which played a dramatic role in bringing to an end the search for the final two fugitives Carol.
[Lin:] Thank you so much, Frank Buckley, reporting live from Colorado Springs. And at the bottom of the hour, we'll talk with Colorado Springs Police Lieutenant Skip Arms, who was at the scene during the negotiations with the fugitives. EARLY EDITION will take a quick break and we'll be right back.

[Bobbie Battista:] The passion...
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] I love you.
[Battista:] ... the memories...
[Clinton:] Harry Truman's old saying has never been more true: If you want to live like a Republican, you better vote for the Democrats.
[Battista:] ... the promise.
[Clinton:] For the first time in decades, wages are rising at all income levels. The average family's income has gone up more than $5,000. And for African-American families, even more. Now, my fellow Americans, that's the record. Or as that very famous Los Angeles detective, Sgt. Joe Friday, used to say: "Just the facts, ma'am."
[Battista:] The man who rode into the White House on the economy rides out on the same horse.
[Clinton:] My fellow Americans, are we better off today than we were eight years ago? Yes, we are.
[Battista:] But is it still "the economy, stupid" or is Bill Clinton Al Gore's biggest issue? Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. Well, President Clinton lit up the Democratic National Convention last night with a speech that had some people wishing they could vote for him again. But will the passions he stirred motivate people to get behind Al Gore? Here to talk about it today, Cynthia Tucker, a CNN convention analyst, an editorial-page editor for the "Atlanta Constitution"; and Blanquita Cullum, a conservative radio talk show host for Radio America. Welcome to both of you. Let's listen to a little bit of the president's speech first.
[Clinton:] Eight years ago, when our party met in New York, it was in a far different time for America. Today, after seven and a half years of hard effort, we're in the midst of the longest economic expansion in history. Today, we have gone from the largest deficits in history to the largest surpluses in history, and...
[Battista:] All right, Blanquita, no matter what you think of the guy, you have to admit he is a master speaker.
[Blanquita Cullum, Radio America Talk Show:] He gives a great speech, he gives great speeches.
[Battista:] That may be his best legacy.
[Cullum:] Yes, well, you know, and the thing of it is, I sat there in the speech too and I was watching the party faithful there saluting their guy. And, frankly, you know, you get mesmerized because he has a lot of charisma, a lot of charm, and it's ironically, after it was over, they had a presentation of this Broadway play, "The Music Man," which was, ironically, I thought an interesting choice about a guy who's a con man and how everybody gets mesmerized by the guy. And I thought, he is the original Music Man. I was watching him and I thought, you know what? I think I can play the trombone. But it's only afterwards that you realize that a lot was missing from the speech. But while you're watching it, I mean, the guy has got a lot of style.
[Battista:] Cynthia, what did you think?
[Cynthia Tucker, Cnn Convention Analyst:] I thought it was a very good speech. I didn't think it was a brilliantly written speech. It didn't have a lot of memorable turns of phrase that we'll remember for years to come, but it was very well-delivered. And Blanquita is right, at least about this much: Bill Clinton has a remarkable charisma. You looked at the faces of some of those delegates and you knew that they wished he was the nominee this time around.
[Battista:] Did he set out to do what he accomplished to do, Blanquita? I mean, is it about the economy?
[Cullum:] No, it's more than the economy. And, frankly, there was a lot about the economy that was missing. I thought that was an interesting shot because I couldn't decide whether he was a guest on the "Howard Stern Show" sitting in the Green Room. But it was very clever how they had all of the different captions underneath it. I think that he came out and he did accomplish the fact that he did a glory speech for himself, but I'm not sure that it wasn't such a great speech that Al Gore is going to have a hard time being able to, you know, dump the basketball through the hoop after this one. He just clearly does not have the charisma that Bill Clinton has for all his flaws. I think people are weary of his flaws, but at least they're charmed by him.
[Battista:] Cynthia, what do you think? Is it about the economy? I mean, it's obviously what he had to put out there and try to give Al Gore the credit for it.
[Tucker:] Well, to a large extent, it absolutely is about the economy. The problem is that many American voters do not give Al Gore any credit for the economy. They give Bill Clinton a lot of credit for the economy, but they don't give Al Gore any credit. So one of the things that Bill Clinton set out to do last night was to remind voters that Al Gore played a very big role in helping create the economic prosperity we have today. For example, there was a very important vote early in Clinton's presidency where he had to have a tax increase in order to start getting rid of those terrible deficits. Not a single Republican voted for it so it came down to a tie in the Senate. Al Gore had to go in and cast a vote to break the tie to pass that tax increase that led to the prosperity we have today. So Bill Clinton was very good and very forthright about reminding voters of that.
[Cullum:] But I've got to tell you, I don't think anybody should be sitting there looking and patting the guy on the back for raising our taxes. How many of you are sitting there having to work extra jobs, sitting there going through headaches when the IRS comes around the three most horrible words in the English language, the Internal Revenue Service? Remember that, also, Al Gore was the guy that was negotiating some of those terrible IMF loans going to Russia where the money just went to pay off the Russian mob. I mean, people need to be looking at this realistically. And, in fact, you know, I guess the problem with Al Gore is that because of his lack of charisma, people have looked at him through this time as nothing more than a ribbon cutter. And, ironically, I would like the American people to be more aware of some of the terrible things that Al Gore did, whether it's the Buddhist temple, whether it's sitting there and saying he couldn't remember whether he'd outreached to people illegally from his office because he drank so much tea he had to go to the bathroom. I mean, e-mails and so forth. So, you know, I think that part of the problem is that we don't know enough about Al Gore.
[Battista:] You mentioned the IRS. I should let you know we have about 100 CPAs in the audience today.
[Cullum:] Are they nodding with me? I mean, how many of them tried to call the IRS [OFF-MIKE]?
[Tucker:] Those CPAs make their living because of the complexity of IRS rules. Give me a break. The CPAs are probably sitting there applauding the
[Irs. Battista:] Let me...
[Cullum:] I think that they could do a little bit better with a little less tax burden. They're booing.
[Battista:] From a strategy standpoint, it seems to me that he mentioned Al Gore I think like once near the beginning of the speech, and then it was like a long time...
[Cullum:] Right, 30 minutes later. It was 30 minutes later.
[Battista:] ... yes, before you heard Al Gore's name again.
[Cullum:] I can't make out whether that was really better for Al Gore or worse for Al Gore. In some ways, you know, he's helping Al Gore by distancing himself from him. In fact, as you recall, the president was not supposed to go on any morning shows or the first lady so that they didn't come in looking like they were going to hog all the attention. And why is that? Why is Al Gore so afraid of Bill Clinton? Because he needs to, one, stay away from the corruption, and two, he has so much more charm that too much of his charm is going to really make Al Gore look stiff.
[Tucker:] Bobbie, I think Blanquita is right right on the second point but not on the first point. It is absolutely true that when you compare Al Gore and Bill Clinton, Al Gore cannot stand up to Bill Clinton's charisma. And so, that's one of the reasons you put Bill Clinton on Monday night, so Al Gore's speech is separated from it by a few nights and so you don't have quite the direct comparison. But Al Gore's problem is not the scandals associated with Bill Clinton, especially the Monica Lewinsky problem. Most voters do not blame Al Gore for that. Al Gore's problem is not Bill Clinton. Al Gore's problem is Al Gore.
[Cullum:] I don't know, Cynthia.
[Tucker:] The problem is that Al Gore does not inspire the Democratic faithful. The problem is that most people don't find Al Gore very charismatic or likable. That's the problem that Al Gore...
[Battista:] Hold on, Blanquita. I have to I've got to take a quick break, and we'll come back and talk more about Al Gore. And as we do, some e-mail to us. Steve in Indiana says: "The Clinton speech had more I than he." And Philip in Maryland says: "President Clinton did a great job articulating why this election is so crucial and why Al Gore must be elected in November. I am better off than I was eight years ago and I enjoy living like a Republican." We'll be back in a minute. As we do, please take part in our TALKBACK LIVE online viewer vote at CNN.comTALKBACK. Today's question: Is Bill Clinton an asset or a liability to Al Gore? We'll be back after this.
[Clinton:] The biggest choice that the American people have to make this year is in the presidential race. Now you all know how I feel.
[Battista:] We're back, and Cynthia, you were talking about how you didn't think Bill Clinton was Al Gore's problem, that Al Gore was his own problem. And that, you know, I think the thought probably is that he's going to have to focus more on the issues out there, because he does have an image problem and he doesn't have quite the charisma of other presidential candidates, shall we say. And Blanquita, I think you wanted to answer that.
[Cullum:] Absolutely. Well, you know, and the other thing is I think one of the issues that was missing from that and clearly, I think that George W. Bush has addressed and I think the American people really want they want a guy that's not going to lie to them. They want to know that they have decent Oval Office, a clean Oval Office. I think that's why they tried to bring in Lieberman; I don't think it's going to make a difference. But when people saw Dick Cheney and they saw George W. Bush together, they felt like, OK, thank god, the adults are back. We looked at Bill Clinton as kind of Peck's bad boy. And we but finally, you know, people are becoming beleaguered, and it's coming, push comes to shove, you need someone who is honest, decent, who's going to respect the constituency that put him there, who's going to serve as a commander in chief. And for crying out loud, you know, it would be nice to know that we have a White House that has an American desk and a State Department...
[Battista:] Well, you know, George W. Bush had a Peck's bad boy problem, too.
[Tucker:] Absolutely.
[Cullum:] Yes, but he outgrew it. He outgrew it, thank god. And the fact of the matter is we never saw Bill Clinton ever outgrow it. And I'm glad to know that we've got a guy right now who has who's certainly come up in front and he said, that's over, and he's put his life on the line. And believe me, I think you've got a press out here, those of us included, are going to be watching him like a hawk. So I would be willing to give some new blood a chance.
[Tucker:] For heaven's sake, Bill Clinton is not on the ticket and Al Gore is very much a grownup. That may be Al Gore's problem: He's too much the grownup. He's dull, he's boring, he's a policy wonk. But Al Gore is decent, honest, has no hint of scandals involving his personal life, his family life.
[Cullum:] The Buddhist temple.
[Tucker:] He has a good strong marriage. He's a loving father. Al Gore does not have the personal morality problems that Bill Clinton has.
[Cullum:] Well, unless...
[Tucker:] Far from it, and he didn't he didn't wait until he was 40 to grow up, either.
[Cullum:] Unless unless you consider that he can't figure out whether he created the Internet; whether or not he knows the difference in a fund-raiser at a Buddhist temple when people are walking around who are given vows of poverty and contributing $5,000; unless you consider the fact that he doesn't know whether or not calling from a man who had been a senator for eight years, that it's illegal to be calling for donors from your office I mean, making deals and welcoming Chinese dictators with 21-gun salutes. I think Al Gore did a little bit more than be a ribbon-cutter. That's why I say Al Gore may have a great marriage, and I think probably Tipper is his greatest asset. But frankly, we can have someone more than has a good marriage. I want to know someone who's honorable and decent and won't make crooked deals.
[Tucker:] OK, and Al Gore is honorable and decent. He just needs to communicate that to the American people.
[Battista:] Let me take a phone call from Dan in Massachusetts. Dan.
[Dan:] Good afternoon. How are you?
[Battista:] Good. How are you?
[Dan:] Doing wonderful, thanks. I guess the question was, is Clinton an asset to Gore? It's funny, because he really should be the biggest asset at this point. After eights years of prosperity and reasonable peace, it's ironic that Al Gore has to struggle to get away from this guy. And I just think there's he can make all the nice speeches and smile and feel our pain, but it's to get hard to believe after eight years of contrition for one issue or another. And I think Al Gore is going to have should have an easy time. It's a good time for the country, but it's amazing to me that Al Gore will still have to reinvent himself again after being vice president for eight years.
[Battista:] All right, Dan. Thanks very much. You know, one of the other things that was missing from the speech last night that Bill Clinton did not make any references, to getting out there on the campaign trail for Al Gore. Remember, we heard that, Ronald Reagan say, I would be a foot soldier in George Bush's army. We didn't hear anything like that last night at all, because that's still up in the air, too, I think, as to what kind of role...
[Cullum:] Well, you know, it's like Al Gore is saying, thank you, do me no favors. Please, don't help me.
[Battista:] But the caller the caller does make a point. I mean, just how long does contrition last?
[Tucker:] Well, I don't think Al Gore's problem has anything to do with Bill Clinton's contrition or lack thereof. The reason that Bill Clinton doesn't need to be on the campaign trail with Al Gore is because he overshadows him. Again, the speech last night Bill Clinton is charismatic, he's charming, the voters warm to him very easily, but instead you want the voters to take a good hard look at Al Gore. Al Gore is weak in voters' perceptions on the leadership issue. They believe he's right on the issues, they don't believe he's a strong leader. Al Gore doesn't need Bill Clinton on the campaign trail with him, if because if Clinton is out there, Al Gore never gets out from under his shadow and establishes himself as a strong leader.
[Cullum:] And the other part of it, I think you are right on that because, frankly, people look at Bill Clinton and Al Gore together they see that team that went out and campaigned connected at the hip and they see this guy, and they look at Bill Clinton, they still see Monica. Now, clearly there were a lot of other things that were wrong during this administration, and Al Gore has got to be smart enough to figure out that he doesn't need that tie-in. It is clearly there.
[Battista:] I have a couple more e-mails here. Mike in Texas says: "Bill Clinton could have picked Dan Quayle as his running mate and still won two terms. I am anti-Clinton, but can still be mesmerized when he speaks. When he's done, I come to my senses."
[Cullum:] Right. There you go...
[Battista:] And Jeff...
[Cullum:] Hello, he can play the trombone, I thought it was incredible that they had the music man above the con man, I said that's it, they got it themselves.
[Battista:] On the other hand, Jeff in Washington says: "Like him or hate him, it was a great speech. Why elect a person from another party? If it ain't broke, done fix it."
[Cullum:] But it's broke.
[Battista:] I have well, that's what we are debating. I've got to go to a break again here quickly. Cynthia Tucker, Blanquita Cullum, thanks very much for joining us once again.
[Tucker:] Thanks, Bobbie. Pleasure to see you.
[Battista:] And we will be back and we'll go to the audience in just a minute. Let me get the audience in here quickly. I can't see your name because your hair is on it Erika.
[Erika:] Hi. I think he's an asset for two reasons: number one, he was an asset at the convention because he gets the Democrats riled up, and just like the one lady was saying, being that he was on yesterday, and we have three days to get ready for Al Gore, I think that was a good tactical move. I think he gets the Democrats excited and the public excited about the election, and just generally about because he is such a charismatic speaker. And more generally, he is a president who has done so much for an economy and he is a Democrat, which is kind of the irony of this whole campaign, is that we're coming in with a successful economy led by a Democrat, and that's going to be great to come in with Al Gore.
[Battista:] Let me go to Scott here quickly.
[Scott:] I think Bill Clinton is an overshadowing figure, and it's going to be very difficult for Al Gore to separate himself from that shadow not only the bad things that Clinton has done, and been alleged to do, but also the good things that he's giving himself credit for doing.
[Battista:] We're looking at live pictures here in Michigan where the president is about to pass the torch, if you will, on to Al Gore officially, and we will be taking that event live as soon as it gets under way, which looks like it will be momentarily. Let me bring in Torie Clarke, former campaign press secretary for the Bush-Quayle campaign; also former New York Lieutenant Governor Betsy McCaughey Ross; and actress Sharon Lawrence, she is a member of the Creative Coalition, a grassroots political organization of artists. Welcome to all of you.
[Torie Clarke, Former Bush/quayle Campaign Secretary:] Thank you.
[Betsy Mccaughey Ross, Former N.y. Lieutenant Governor:] Thanks, Bobbie.
[Sharon Lawrence, Actress:] Thanks, Bobbie.
[Battista:] Before we get interrupted, let me get your assessments quickly of that speech last night, Torie.
[Clarke:] Boy, when in Hollywood an absolute stunning performance. But the thing I was thinking when I was watching it last night and this morning was Bill Clinton made a very compelling case for another four years of Bill Clinton, it was all about his accomplishments, his legacy. And if I were Al Gore, I would be thinking today, what am I going to say to top that. You know, that was all about Bill Clinton. And think about the last several days, second time in the last several days leading up to Al Gore accepting this nomination, who is on the front pages of the newspapers? And it's Bill Clinton.
[Battista:] Betsy.
[Ross:] Clinton anointed Al Gore as the steward of Clintonian prosperity, and assured the nation that if they want more years of prosperity, record employment, elect Al Gore. We have 22 million new jobs and a record 4.08 annual growth rate unprecedented since 1979.
[Battista:] And Sharon I was going to say, let me get Sharon in quickly, because from a professional showman's point of view, how would you rate it?
[Lawrence:] Well, I think there's no question that it was brilliantly delivered and certainly compelling, and I agree that it does pass the mantle on to the Democratic nominee. It's not just Bill Clinton's accomplishments or platform, it was the Democratic Party's accomplishments and platforms, and Al Gore had a hand in that, he made decisions that helped move this country forward not just in the economy, but in social issues as well.
[Battista:] I'm sorry, Torie, go ahead.
[Clarke:] No, I was going to say, again, I think the take-aways I mean, if you did a word count there were probably as many about Hillary Clinton as there were about Al Gore. I really was struck by the sense of, OK, we've had a great team for a couple of years, we've and we've run the Super Bowl, we're going to let the J.V. team in right now. I don't think it was as ringing an endorsement of Al Gore as Al Gore would have liked, and I think it sets up a real challenge for Al Gore going forward to make the compelling case why Al Gore and not another four years of Bill Clinton.
[Ross:] I disagree.
[Clarke:] You know, being a staffer, I think about, you know, how many people are going to be watching Thursday night versus how many people were watching last night.
[Battista:] Let me...
[Clarke:] And just think about what the pundits will do if the ratings are lower Thursday night than they were last night.
[Battista:] Let me I have to interrupt here. I'm so sorry. We'll take you to that live event now in Michigan, where the president and Al Gore are appearing.

[Bobbie Battista:] Coming up on TALKBACK LIVE...
[Sen. Richard Shelby , Chairman, Intelligence Committee:] It was a debacle. It was massive failure.
[Battista:] Did U.S. intelligence fail the American people?
[Rep. James Traficant , Ohio:] After all these years, you mean to tell me our intelligence network cannot locate and infiltrate Osama bin Laden's organization?
[Battista:] Also, a man on a mission.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary:] As we all know, there are a lot of things others can do, but there are some things that the secretary of defense has to do.
[Battista:] Just what is it Secretary Rumsfeld has to do in person right now in the Mideast? TALKBACK LIVE is next. Did a lapse in U.S. intelligence leave the U.S. vulnerable to attack?
[Sen. Robert Torricelli , New Jersey:] I think we know that there undoubtedly was a failure to track these people into the country, observe them while they were here, and at the same time obviously there were foreign intelligence problems as well.
[Battista:] Also is Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld asking permission or laying out the plan as he meets with Middle East leaders?
[Richard Armitage, Deputy Secretary Of State:] I think they, like many others, want to know exactly what we're up to, and I think Secretary Rumsfeld will explain that very well.
[Battista:] Saudi Arabia, Oman, Egypt, and Uzbekistan: What will the U.S. defense secretary ask of them? What might they want in return? Good afternoon to all you, and welcome to "
[Talkback Live:] America Speaks Out." In a few moments, we will look at how and why the September 11th terrorists slipped by U.S. intelligence, and whether the CIA, FBI and other agencies are up to snuff. On the plane to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia this morning, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld hinted that the U.S. might not be entirely in the dark about where Osama bin Laden is hiding out. Before we get to that, though, let's find out more about Secretary Rumsfeld's overseas mission. Along with Saudi Arabia, he is planning visits to Oman, Egypt and Uzbekistan. Joining us in Tashkent, Uzbekistan now by videophone is CNN correspondent Alessio Vinci. Alessio, if you could tell us the significance of the secretary's trip to Uzbekistan.
[Alessio Vinci, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Bobbie, Uzbekistan is a very important country in this region. It has the largest standing military, some estimates say about 80,000 troops here. It has also an extremely well-equipped former Soviet air bases. Uzbekistan was part of the Soviet Union. And back in 1970 between 1979 and 1989, when the Soviet Union tried to invade Afghanistan, they were using Uzbekistan as their major launching pad, staging ground. And therefore, those bases are still here, and indeed the secretary of defense is trying to come here to try to forge a new military alliance with Uzbekistan and eventually be able to substation in this country if the U.S. military would require so some some troops. The president of Uzbekistan, Islam Karimov, has already agreed to allow airspace to be used by the U.S. military aircraft. So far we have no information, however, whether Karimov has agreed to allow ground troops to be stationed here in Uzbekistan. Of course, Uzbekistan is also very important, because it has a short border with Afghanistan. However, as I said, those military bases two in the south, on the border with Afghanistan, and one here in Tashkent could be extremely helpful if the U.S. were to decide to put some ground troops here in Uzbekistan Bobbie.
[Battista:] On the on the other hand, Alessio, what are the concerns in Uzbekistan about possible retaliation from Afghanistan if they aid the West?
[Vinci:] There are great concerns here, Bobbie, because, first of all, there is a terrorist group here called the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, the IMU. You may recall that a couple of days after the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush, addressing the Congress, mentioned the IMU as one of the terrorist groups connected to the al Qaeda
[Battista:] Overall, Alessio, how does the power in Uzbekistan as well as the people, how do they feel about this war on terrorism and in particular Osama bin Laden? Do they feel like the United States is going after the right culprit?
[Vinci:] Yes, definitely, they do think so. I would say as far as the government and the president is concerned, one must remind you that this is pretty much a totalitarian country. Islam Karimov was a former Communist Party boss. He has been elected president in 1991 and he's remained in power ever since, running this country and ruling this country very much with an iron fist. Imagine, there are no opposition parties in this country. Religious freedom is extremely tight, if you want. There is not much that people can worship outside government-sanctioned -sanctioned mosques. And of course, there are no independent media as such, and nationwide, only a few television stations across the country. So the as far as the president is concerned, he has said that he is willing to help the U.S. fight the war against terrorism, because he's hoping also to be able to get rid of the IMU, the Islamic terrorists that have been threatening him at the same time. As far as the people are concerned, it's a bit different. It's very this is a country where people don't really have much say. There are no real opinion polls that indicate whether the people are behind this military operation in Afghanistan. However, we have been able to speak to many people here while we've been here this week, and most of them are telling us that they do support a military operation against Osama bin Laden, against the terrorists groups, against in Afghanistan. They pretty much understand that is a war against a terrorist group and not a war against Islam, Bobbie.
[Battista:] All right, Alessio Vinci, thank you very much for joining us. And with us now is CNN State Department correspondent Andrea Koppel, Andrea, why the other three countries now: Oman, Egypt, Saudi Arabia? What are the what are their concerns?
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, it's different in each country, Bobbie. In Saudi Arabia, obviously, there is a large U.S. air base there. It's called Prince Sultan, and that also is the home to a big command-and-control center that the U.S. could use should it decide to take military action in Afghanistan. However, I'm told by various U.S. officials that they probably wouldn't want to use Prince Sultan to launch any kind of attacks against Afghanistan because it's too far away. This would be the sort of thing, if the campaign were to extend to broaden beyond Afghanistan into other parts perhaps in the Middle East, that obviously Saudi Arabia would be well-situated. In Oman, they also have a large air base there in the southeastern corner. They also border Saudi Arabia. They would be able to accommodate larger U.S. aircraft. We're talking about B-52s and long-range bombers, and I'm told also that the Omani government is more accommodating at the moment and would would consider this type of an operation. Finally, in Egypt, our understanding is that it isn't so much about military that Secretary Rumsfeld will be talking with the government there about as much as it is intelligence. The No. 2, bin Laden's No. 2, came from Egypt. He's now believed to be in Afghanistan. But obviously, the Egyptians have gathered a tremendous amount of intel that they could provide to the United States, perhaps more than what they've done thus far. There's also a footnote to that. You just heard Alessio say that one of the things that we heard from the Uzbeki government is that they would try to keep a lid on the press there. There's very positive public reaction among the Uzbeki people to trying to nip out the al Qaeda terrorist network. But in Egypt, the press is portraying a much different story. I'm told by one Arab journalist who reads the local papers every day, he said that there's a lot of inflammatory language there, not really buying what the U.S. is saying, that this was a terrorist attack launched by these al Qaeda terrorists and in fact throwing out stories like this was something that was remote-controlled and may have been linked in some way or another to the Oklahoma City bombings. So perhaps Secretary Rumsfeld will also be talking to the Egyptian government about clamping down a bit on the media. It is a state-controlled media there.
[Battista:] Getting intelligence cooperation out of Egypt, I would think, might involve some negotiation, but basically the secretary has said that he is not negotiating with these countries. So is he basically spelling out a plan and saying, you're either with us or you're against us? And while you're while we're talking here, Andrea, let me just point out that the president is returning to the White House at this hour in Marine One there, landing on the White House lawn. He was in New York earlier today to address a group of schoolchildren at an elementary school in the city. So anyway, Andrea, go ahead.
[Koppel:] I would say that yes, obviously, the message continues to be you're either with us or against us. But again, in each country, Secretary Rumsfeld is going to have a different mission. The U.S. is going to need different things from different countries, obviously. If this does escalate into a military confrontation, various countries can provide different air bases, whether it be in Uzbekistan, right next door to Afghanistan, or farther away in the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf with Saudi Arabia and Oman. Egypt again is looked at as a big partner in terms of the intelligence-gathering and the intelligence-sharing that could help to find out where the al Qaeda cells are located and how they're getting their money and things of that nature Bobbie.
[Battista:] And when is the secretary expected back and will we we'll hear about the results of this trip?
[Koppel:] Well, we have our military affairs correspondent, Jamie McIntrye, who's traveling with him, and I'm sure as usual he'll do a wonderful job in telling us about what's happening on the ground during Secretary Rumsfeld's trip. But it's supposed to last about four days, Bobbie, so it's a real whirlwind swing through both Central Asia and the Middle East. You could also say that perhaps the fact that Secretary Rumsfeld is making this trip now, that the U.S. is leaning increasingly toward taking some sort of military action, and that is why you would want to have the secretary of defense make this type of a trip.
[Battista:] All right. Comments from the audience here quickly. Robert, go ahead.
[Robert:] Hello. It would seem that each of these countries has their own security agency, obviously, and they've been collecting data for years on terrorists: especially if you have a terrorist in your own backyard, like Osama bin Laden, they've got lots of information. And I believe that they already know he's guilty, and I think that diplomatically it's not possible for them to say so. They would look bad in the world. They need some time to be able to get their own people behind them, because some of these governments are unstable. How long do we give them, what's a reasonable amount of time that we give them, and then we say, look, if you're not going to be on our side, then get out of our way.
[Battista:] And Andrea, that sort of begs the question also: Is it intelligence, do you think, or military commitment that's more important to the secretary?
[Koppel:] I think both are equally important to the secretary, Bobbie. Intelligence, because this is a worldwide network. We've heard the administration say that over and over again, and it isn't as simple as saying we're going to bomb Afghanistan and that will be the end of the al Qaeda terrorist network. It has cells literally, as we've seen, in this country, all over the world, and so you need each country to be sharing the intelligence that it may have, whether it be Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, any of these countries so that you can help to nip out the intelligence. But if this does move on to military operation as it looks increasingly as if it will, then you're going to need different military help from a variety of different countries right now, because the focus is on Afghanistan and the Taliban and Osama bin Laden and his network. We're talking perhaps more about countries in Central Asia. All right, Alessio Vinci and Andrea Koppel, thank you both very much for joining us. And again, we saw the president, commander in chief arriving back at the White House from an earlier trip to New York on this day. We'll take a break and be back in just a moment. Don't go away. Still ahead on "
[Talkback Live:] America Speaks Out": did U.S. intelligence let the country down?
[Shelby:] We've got to have better agents. We've got to solicit and train some of the best and brightest for human intelligence.
[Battista:] You mean the U.S. intelligence community doesn't already have all that? Why not? Welcome back. On the plane to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia today, as we mentioned earlier, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he has a little bit of a handle on the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden, but doesn't have the coordinates. Beyond the location of bin Laden, the question on the minds of a lot of people is where was U.S. intelligence when terrorists were planning their attack on America. We have brought in some experts for you. Stanley Bedlington spent 17 years as a British police officer in the Middle East and Asia. He has worked for both the U.S. State Department and the CIA, where he was a senior analyst in the office of counterterrorism. Ron Kessler is an investigative journalist and author of several books, including "The
[Fbi:] Inside the World's Most Powerful Law Enforcement Agency" and "Inside the CIA." And Frank Gaffney is a former assistant secretary of defense and currently director of the Center for Security Policy. Gentlemen, welcome to all of you. Secretary of State Colin Powell admitted yesterday that the United States had a lot of signs that these attacks might happen but they were never able to put together enough information to prevent them. Is that a failure of intelligence, Stanley?
[Stanley Bedlington, Former Cia Counterterrorism Official:] No, I don't think so. This was not a failure of intelligence so much as a systemic failure on the part of the U.S. government. It's failure of airport security. It's a failure of immigration. It's a failure of law enforcement. And of course, there is a certain element of intelligence failure, too, but I think it's grossly unfair to assign the blame to the
[Cia. Battista:] Frank, do you agree with that, or if you don't, who do you think should be held accountable?
[Frank Gaffney, Former Assistant Defense Secretary:] Well, I think it certainly was a systemic failure, and I think that the failure of intelligence was real and predictable. The problem that you describe, Bobbie, is endemic in intelligence work. It's almost always the case that there's information available that afterwards looking back you can understand was the relevant information. It's the challenge of parsing out what's called the signals from the noise that is the art of intelligence. I just think that the systemic problem with respect to American intelligence has been we haven't been bringing to bear the human assets both in terms of overseas undercover operatives penetrating these close-knit cells, a very difficult and very dangerous job, and here at home, where we need desperately to improve the quality of analysis and particularly the language skills that we can bring to bear to parsing out the noise from the signals.
[Battista:] At the same time, Ron, it's just one of those things where you go, you know, what what signs did we miss? I mean, how could this happen?
[Ron Kessler, Author, "inside The Cia":] Well, first of all, you know, it's really a failure by all of us, because we all were aware of these terrorist acts that had been committed on us. We were all aware of the threats. We read about them in the newspaper. We read that bin Laden said he was going to kill Americans. And yet, none of us reacted the way we should have in those respects. Think of how difficult it would been to penetrate the inner circle of Hitler during World War II. Penetrating the inner circle of bin Laden is probably 10 times more difficult, because, first of all, of course, you have to be from the Middle East, you have to be a Muslim. And also, these people are not often willing to die for their beliefs, but they expect to die for their beliefs. And they don't care about money. There was $5 million reward on bin Laden's head and yet nobody turned him in. That doesn't mean that we can't do much, much more. We can and we have to. But to say that it's a failure, implying that we automatically should have known this as if we could just turn on a TV set and see this happening, is unfair and shows a misunderstanding of how intelligence works and how law enforcement works. Because you you know, just think of how difficult it would to detect a bank robbery. That's a very simple example. Obviously, bin Laden was a known target. We were trying to penetrate. But you can't simply say, because a crime occurred, therefore, it's a failure of our government.
[Battista:] Well, let me try to try to, the audience and myself, wrap ourselves around this just a little bit more. When you guys talk about a systemic failure within the agency or agencies, there was an op-ed piece in "The Wall Street Journal" yesterday or today by Herb Meyer, who worked for the CIA under Ron Reagan, and I it was a fascinating op-ed piece, and it talked about how, you know, the agency used to be in a more offensive mode and then turned into more of a defensive type of agency. And I'm wondering if you could explain that a little bit and why he thinks that's at the root of the cause.
[Gaffney:] I...
[Battista:] Yeah.
[Gaffney:] I would offer...
[Battista:] Go ahead, Frank.
[Gaffney:] ... if I may, the essence of the problem is, as Ron was just saying, there's almost nothing you can do to protect an open and free society all the time against every possible threat. That doesn't mean that if you fail to see those threats coming, that's not a failure. But what I think Herb Meyer is saying and I'm delighted that you've called people's attention to it this very important essay is when it was World War II and the OSS, or when it was the height of the Cold War under Ronald Reagan, the determination of the president and his intelligence chiefs was to go on offense, to take the fight to these enemies, in the course of which you learn more about them, of course, but also are bent on trying to prevent them from being able to operate effectively against you. And that's what I think really needs to be done here, and we need some new leadership, I think, at the CIA as well as presidential direction to make that kind of transformation.
[Battista:] Stanley, I think the reason that, you know, the agency has gone through this sort of back-and-forth between being offensive and defensive is that when they are offensive that kind of drives Congress crazy, doesn't it? I mean, should they have more powers and more leeway?
[Bedlington:] Bobbie, you've made a very important point. If you go back to 1995, there was somewhat of a furor that took place in Guatemala. A lot of blames was attached to the agency for recruiting, quoteunquote, "villains." And from that point onward, the agency stepped back somewhat from recruiting the sort of people it ought to be recruiting. If you don't recruit villains, then you won't get the information you require. This has been a major failing. The other point I would like to make you mentioned human intelligence. If you look at budget for the CIA or for the intelligence community allocated by President Clinton the counterterrorist community, there was $11.2 billion for this year. The vast majority of that money went for cybersystem protection and also for building protection. Only a very relatively small amount was allocated for human intelligence collection.
[Kessler:] Bobbie, can I say something?
[Battista:] Go ahead, Ron.
[Kessler:] At the FBI they get thousands of threats a year. They can't pursue them all. They in addition have been restricted in a very nonsensical way when it comes to wiretapping. It doesn't mean that anybody wants to infringe on civil liberties or break the Constitution. But when you have to get a court order each time you tap a particular phone as opposed to following the individual, it means that a terrorist for example can go to one phone, then get a disposable cell phone, then go to a pay phone and each time FBI has to get a new court order. Obviously, by the time they get a new order that person is on to another phone. It's simply a matter of keeping up with the technology, and yet there has been opposition to allowing the FBI to do that.
[Battista:] I have to take a quick break, here, as we do a couple of e-mails. Terry in Colorado says, "We reduced our spending on intelligence since the end of the Cold War. Why are we surprised when diminished resources result in intelligence failures?" James in Florida says, "The failure was letting these people in the country in the first place and not questioning why they were here. If someone does not support democracy then they should not be allowed in this country." We will be back in just a moment. Welcome back. We have a number of questions and points I want to get to. I'm going to go to Tom in the audience. You have a good question. Go ahead, Tom.
[Tom:] My question was, I was wondering if the CIA or any covert organization had a think tank group of guys that maybe sit around and try to conceive of ways that terrorists could cause harm to the United States. It is apparent to most of us that nobody had an idea that they would take planes loaded with fuel and fly them into these buildings. It seems to me that they part of the CIA's job would have been to anticipate any way possible, because it just seems like it was way too easy for them to do.
[Battista:] I may be wrong, but I think in that report on terrorism didn't they they actually did anticipate this scenario and they didn't want to put it in the report because they thought people would be so horrified by it and they didn't want to put that idea out there. Is that true?
[Kessler:] I think that is probably true. But the main responsibility for preventing terrorism is with the FBI and the FBI in the late '80s did try to come up with a program for protecting different industries and in the end they couldn't get the funds. I think the power industry is the only one they finally focused on. So again, this is something that needs to be addressed. Resources have to be increased and there has to be more focus on protecting the
[U.s. Gaffney:] Bobbie, I think a lot of work is done trying to game out these threats. I think there is in fact what they call a red team that has been assigned to do this on an ongoing basis. But I think one of the lessons that I hope all Americans take away from this 11 September experience is we have as a country accepted and in fact, established as a matter of policy the idea that being vulnerable is a good thing. It started in 1972, when we decided we wouldn't to protect ourselves against ballistic missiles. It didn't much sense if we weren't going to do that to defend ourselves against airplanes and bombers. And it flowed from that, that civil defense and even defending our airspace against these kinds of threats were just considered to be too hard. We have to get away from that, and I am very heartened by the effort the president has announced to work on homeland defense and I think both improved intelligence in terms of the CIA looking inside and the federal bureau of investigations looking inside is an indispensable part of enhancing our security and ending this deliberate and crazy policy of vulnerability.
[Battista:] Let me just clarify what you mean by looking outside the agency. That is a little like what they did in earlier times, also, like they took the best brains from the areas of finance or police work or computer science.
[Gaffney:] This was the point that Herb Meyer was making.
[Battista:] And they're not doing...
[Gaffney:] What I meant is they're looking outside of the country. But he is saying, when you go on offense, you look outside of the government and the intelligence community for people with skills and contacts and capabilities that you really need for offensive intelligence operations.
[Battista:] Stanley, they have not been doing that because of money, for the most part?
[Bedlington:] I don't think that it is a question of money. I think it is a question of I left the agency six ago but I think it is a question of trying to satisfy the values of the community at large in terms of recruitment.
[Kessler:] I think it is also important to remember that despite the fact that Herb Meyer made some good points in that points, that the CIA in the old days was not anything that we want to go back to, nor go back to the FBI in the old days. Because the CIA in the old days would try to carry out these plots against Fidel Castro, for example, to try to get rid of his beard, all these silly, foolish things which got nowhere and just got everyone in a lot of trouble. The same with the
[Fbi. Battista:] Then again, taking people out preemptively is getting a lot more support after what happened on September 11th.
[Kessler:] Definitely. There has been much more of an aggressive approach, but it needs to be focused and within the law, as opposed to the old days.
[Gaffney:] It does have to be within the law, obviously, but I think that the world would have been a lot better off if people like Fidel Castro had not afflicting his people and a great many others around the world through these three past decades. The point basically is this. I think we need an intelligence capability that is part and parcel of the offensive power projection, if you will, of this country. And you will need capabilities that we don't have today, partly because of money but I think mostly because we have not and Stan can attest to this we have not valued the human part of intelligence adequately for a long time. We have been investing instead on very sophisticated technical means of monitoring arms control treaties and doing other kinds of intelligence collection, which all have their place but not at the expense of the old-fashioned business. We are absolutely clear it is a very difficult business to do the old-fashioned job of intelligence, but it has to be done in this kind of environment.
[Battista:] Let me go to Jackie in the audience here, quickly. Jackie, you wanted to react to Tom.
[Jackie:] Right. In comment about what Tom was saying about having a think tank and a CIA think tank: the mere fact that this country is built on freedoms and civil liberties and the fact that anybody can come into to this country and enjoy those freedoms and civil liberties these terrorist hate us for that very fact, that we do have freedoms and we do have civil liberties. Although they are willing to come in here, take advantage of our freedoms and civil liberties, learn what they need to learn about taking out our planes, and taking out our buildings and everything like that and then go back to where they came from and use those tactics against us. I don't know that given the fact that we pride ourselves on these freedoms and civil liberties that we will ever be able to 100 percent eradicate these people from doing this, or else we diminish our entire country.
[Bedlington:] Can I respond to that?
[Battista:] Yes. Go ahead.
[Bedlington:] It is a very major point, trying to make the collection of intelligence compatible with civil liberties. I can tell you from my own personal knowledge that every office now in the CIA has in it a lawyer who is specifically assigned to that particular office in order to look at operations and make then certain they are quite compatible with the laws of this country.
[Battista:] Sheila is on the phone in Tennessee. Go ahead, Sheila.
[Sheila:] Hi, Bobbie. I am concerned that Congress will not pass the laws that John Ashcroft needs to fight terrorism. In one sense this will be like a Vietnam. We'll have to fight with one arm tied behind our back because we are so afraid we're going to offend civil liberties.
[Battista:] I don't know that...
[Gaffney:] That's a real concern. It's related, I would say, Bobbie, in the sense that the federal bureau of investigations, FBI, has got to be able to do some of the things that we were talking about earlier without permissions, without legal authority that does not exist today. For example, following the terrorist no matter which phone he is using to wiretap and monitor his conversations and his plans. John Ashcroft and indeed our law enforcement authorities more generally are really being handicapped. That has to be fixed.
[Kessler:] Another example of how the FBI is hampered. A few years ago there was a terrorist group that sent a courier to Florida. There was information that he was a courier. The FBI followed him, found out that he was going back and forth to the Middle East. Took photographs, found out that he did associate with other terrorists and yet they could not get a wiretap on him, because there was not enough probable cause. That is something also that needs to be addressed. If we really want to find out what these people are doing and really want to be ahead of the curve, we have to have the means to allow the FBI to their job.
[Battista:] Let me jump in with this e-mail here, because I sort of felt the same way. Tom in Texas says, "Some of the hijackers were on the FBI and the CIA watch list, and known to be associated with Bin Laden. Why did we even have a list, let alone a watch list? And if they were known associates, why were they allowed to stay in this country? Should we not find out who was not watching those on the watch list?" I understand what he is saying. If they were on a watch list, why were they not under almost constant surveillance?
[Kessler:] There was a two-week lag between the time they came in and the FBI learned that they were here and the actually bombing or attack. So the FBI had not had time to find them. People object to the idea of a standard identification card that would be foolproof or close to foolproof, and that is something that really is needed to try to keep track of people that come into the this country and then disappear. And again, there is no reason to think of that as an infringement on civil liberties any more than it is to have a driver's license and have to show that as identification.
[Gaffney:] Bobbie, can I make a related point?
[Battista:] Quickly, Frank. I've got to take a break.
[Gaffney:] It's very important. The president met with Muslim groups over the past two weeks. One of them has recently urged its members not to talk to the FBI. That is the kind of noncooperation that can undermine our FBI's ability to do its job. It shouldn't be supported, let alone dignified by the president giving them his company.
[Battista:] I'm glad you mentioned that, because we didn't get to talking much about info sharing. But Stanley Bedlington, Ron Kessler, and Frank Gaffney, thank you all very much for enlightening us today.
[Bedlington:] Thank you very much.
[Battista:] We keep hearing, the time is near, time is up, the time has come. In a moment, talking war with Major General Don Shepperd. Stay with us. Joining us now is retired Major General Don Shepperd. He is the former head of the Air National Guard and a CNN military analyst. General Shepperd, good to see you. We should start by first saying that the administration says there are not on anybody's timetable but their own, so we understand that. But we have also heard the word imminent used by British Prime Minister Tony Blair, that an attack is imminent. We have heard the administration make hints toward the fact that an attack could be coming at any time now. What does that mean, imminent? Does it mean two days, two months or what?
[Ret. Major General Don Shepperd, Air National Guard:] Well, we don't want anybody to know. But here are a couple of things that are very important. We could have struck within hours from the United States, from air power that is already in the Gulf and from the Navy ships in the area. We did not. We wanted to amass the intelligence to make sure that when we're going after something we go after the right thing. We will strike at a time and place of our choosing. And when they say imminent, I think everybody can fill in the blanks. It will be fairly soon.
[Battista:] Well, we maybe I should say, how much will we necessary know about that when and if it happens?
[Shepperd:] I think we need to steel ourselves for something. We have been warned that this will be different, and yet all of us are still thinking about Desert Storm, where we woke up and we saw the initial attacks going on. We may not see that this time around. This may be a much lower-level conflict with not a lot of bombs going off. It may be done by special forces, and it may be stretched out for a long period of time. So we have to be we have to get ourselves used to the fact that this could be totally different from anything we've seen before, and much longer and protracted.
[Battista:] Let ask you something from a strategic and psychological viewpoint. When does it become a negative thing for leaders to keep saying that something is imminent and then we all wait and keep waiting and biding our time?
[Shepperd:] We talk about centers of gravity. And currently the center of gravity the important thing to the Taliban and the terrorists are Bin Laden himself and the Taliban leadership. The center of gravity for them against us is American public opinion, American patience, and of course world public opinion. We must be very careful and thoughtful about what we do so we are not perceived as going in to change a regime and establish a puppet regime of our own. So we are going to be very careful and our patience is going to be tested. Imminent may mean again, it may mean within the next couple of days, couple of weeks, couple of months. But whenever it comes, it's going to protracted over a long period of time. And we're all thinking Afghanistan. This may be much more wide sweeping in many more places than we're imagining.
[Battista:] Questions from some veterans in our audience. William, go ahead.
[William:] Thank you. As a veteran who has studied military history, it seems to me that every time you read about guerrilla warfare, terrorism warfare, the only successful route is destroy the base of operations, i.e. the Taliban. Are we planning on doing that?
[Shepperd:] That's really an excellent question. Our president has been very careful not to say that the Taliban is a target. But again, I can fill in the blanks for myself. When he says if they don't turn Bin Laden over they are going to suffer the consequences, that is not very mysterious to me. We must be careful that we do not play their game. We want to play our kind of war. We don't want to get in a protracted person-to- person guerrilla warfare where we have to go in and root them out cave by cave. That is playing their game. This is going to be, I think, much more high tech and conducted much more intelligently than we have perceived so far. Time is on our side, not theirs. Remember, when they are hiding in those caves they are not attacking Americans in this country, so it also serves a purpose to make sure that they are worried and in their hideouts.
[Battista:] Since the Secretary of Defense is in Uzbekistan and we certainly know the crucial role of Pakistan in this, can you comment a little bit on their importance and how much we hopefully can rely on them?
[Shepperd:] Because of where Afghanistan is, the surrounding area is very important. Who would have thought in their right mind that we would be flying through the airspace and perhaps even operating out of the bases of the 'Stans, the former soviet Republics Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, even Kyrgyzstan. Unbelievable. Pakistan is very key. But they have a difficult problem in their own country; the actions by President Musharraf have been nothing short of heroic. But he has to balance those against public opinion in his own country. We do not want to lose the relationship with Pakistan. We don't want to see that regime tumble. But remember, Pakistan is the only country left with relationships with the Taliban, and that is very important that we be able to talk to them through someone else. So it is very, very important and key that we maintain that key relationship.
[Battista:] Joan, comment or question.
[Joan:] I really wonder if we can trust Uzbekistan. We know that the Russians used Uzbekistan as a base and we know what happened to the Russians. They got clobbered by Afghans. Should we feel that we can truly trust Uzbekistan? We don't want to make the same mistakes that the Russians made.
[Shepperd:] I remember two sayings. One of them is President's Reagan's
[Battista:] Let me go to a final comment from Jiad in our audience. He is from Jordan. Go ahead.
[Jiad:] Yes, my comment is that I have said earlier that a lot of the U.S. government intelligence, let's put it this way. They are dealing with the problem of the terrorism and many problems that are surrounding us today. Just like Muslim doctors, as we mentioned earlier, treat common cold. They go after the symptoms instead of going after the cold. We go back to the point of addressing the Palestinian-Israeli issue. That has to be addressed and it should have been addressed since 1967, where it has been used and abused as an excuse for some of these terrorists throughout the world.
[Battista:] I am completely out of time. General and Jiad, thank you very much. General Shepperd, we appreciate you joining us, as always. Thank you. Thanks to all of you in our studio audience and you at home. "
[Talkback Live:] America Speaks Out" will return tomorrow at 3:00 with CNN legal analyst Roger Cossack filling in for me. Join us then.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] The South Carolina State Senate is expected to start work tomorrow on proposals to remove the Confederate battle flag from on top of the state capitol building. The debate over the flag has prompted outcry from many different places, including the world of sports. CNNSPORTS ILLUSTRATED's Johnny Phelps now with more.
[Johnny Phelps, Cnn Correspondent:] The Confederate flag has flown over South Carolina's state house since 1962. For some, it's a symbol of slavery and racism. For others, it signifies southern heritage and a way to honor those who died in the Civil War. In July, 1999, the NAACP called for a national tourism boycott of the state until the flag is taken down. And the organization has called upon the sports world to take a stand as well.
[Lonnie Randolph, Naacp:] Black athletes have always been an extremely important part of the social agenda and the social fiber of America and the struggle that African-Americans have faced.
[Phelps:] More and more sports figures have chosen to become involved. Clemson football coach Tommy Bowden, men's basketball coach Larry Shyatt, South Carolina basketball coach Eddie Fogler and football coach Lou Holtz all took place in a march calling for the flag to be removed.
[Maurice Stanfield, Sports Talk Radio:] You see that flag on the state house, and it's almost like a form of slavery. When you look at that flag you think: Oh, it is forgotten. It's not forgotten.
[Phelps:] The New York Knicks, who have held their post-season training camp in Charleston, South Carolina since 1991, decided in February that they would go elsewhere until the flag comes down. The ACC asked its member schools to stay in North Carolina during its men's college basketball tournament in Charlotte to avoid spending money in South Carolina. And Serena Williams' father says she will likely boycott a tournament in Hilton Head, South Carolina later this month because of the flag issue.
[Glenn Mcconnell, South Carolina State Senate:] The athletes, obviously, are saying we don't want to come to the South Carolina now and play if all are going to fly the battle flag. Well, they, first of all, need to understood why we fly it. Second, they need to understand that there is no future in either side trying to perform a knockout on the other.
[Phelps:] South Carolina has already lost an estimated $10-$20 million in hotel and convention business because of the NAACP boycott. Not everyone is interested in taking a side in the flag debate. In an article in "Sports Illustrated" last week, Tiger Woods said, "I'm a golfer, that's their deal, you know?" The president of the Darlington Raceway has said his track does intend to get involved, but plenty of others are voicing their opinions about the flag and South Carolina is feeling the effects.
[Tom Turnipseed, Attorney:] I think the influence of athletics involved with these sanctions, and the boycott about the Confederate flag on our state house are critical here, and I think they are going to be a determining factor.
[Phelps:] I'm Johnny Phelps.

[Catherine Callaway, Cnn Anchor:] In New York, federal air safety investigators say that they have found no evidence of sabotage in the crash of American Airlines Flight 587. A cockpit voice recorder offered no evidence of an explosion, but did indicate that the pilots complained about the turbulence of another aircraft just before the crash. The crash into a New York neighborhood killed all 260 people on board. Five people on the ground are missing and presumed dead. CNN's Kathleen Koch now has the latest on the investigation.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] The first up close look at New York's newest ground zero.
[Unidentified Male:] What you have is you have three homes, one, two and three, and then a fourth. These three are demolished from the aircraft's impact.
[Koch:] Impact was violent.
[Unidentified Male:] You know, the nose of the aircraft, the forward section of the aircraft came down in this manner in this area.
[Koch:] Investigators think they're coming closer to a possible cause, focusing on why Flight 587's tail fin fell off, landing in Jamaica Bay seconds before it crashed. NTSB investigators at the crash site say a look at the tail section minus the fin shows metal mounts and bolts that hold the fin were still attached to the plane's body. But the graphite composite material, where the fin attached had been ripped apart. Investigators say repairs had been made to one of the mount fittings 13 years ago.
[George Black, Jr., Ntsb Board Member:] The left center fitting was found to be delaminated. It was repaired by the manufacturer.
[Koch:] The tail fin was discovered in almost new condition and showed no signs of being struck or broken off by another object. So American Airline mechanics are checking the tails of the 34 other Air Buses in its fleet. Other possible causes? Turbulence from the wake of a larger Japanese airline 747 that took off before Flight 587. The planes ended up, at one point, just 85 seconds apart and investigators say a 12 mile per hour wind could have blown dangerous turbulence into the path of Flight 587.
[Marion Blakey, Ntsb Chairwoman:] I think what you see in this pattern up here is consistent with wake turbulence. That is accurate.
[Jim Mckenna, Aviation Analyst:] Well, I don't believe that the NTSB investigators are looking at a wake turbulence encounter as the cause of this crash. More likely they're looking at that as a possible contributor, a triggering event.
[Koch:] One factor increasingly ruled out as a potential cause, the engines. A more careful listen to the cockpit voice recorder shows that they were still running and attached to the plane when the crew reported they were losing control of the aircraft. Kathleen Koch, CNN, New York.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Bad news at Microsoft helped pull down the Nasdaq, the index now just 161 points above its lowest close of the year.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Courtney Smith, president and chief investment officer of the company that bears his name, is here with his Wall Street forecast. Good morning.
[Courtney Smith, Courtney Smith & Company:] I was named after the company by the way, just joking.
[Haffenreffer:] Microsoft shares really took it in the chops yesterday, down more than 12 points on the day, it is now just above its 52-week low, cheap enough to buy?
[Smith:] No, no, I'm not a big fan of owning Microsoft, and in fact I doubt I am going to own this company for years, and there's really a couple of major reasons. First of all, this is the company that has basically is going to be the Philip Morris of the next 10 years. This is a company that is now being beset by legal problems from the Department of Justice and 19 states. This has really opened the door that everybody can now sue them, you've got the rest of the states, you're going to have their competitors suing them, you're going to have foreign governments suing them, you're going to see class-action lawsuits, and as far as I'm concerned, why do I want to own a company, although it is a great company, that has such litigation risk? It's just too difficult, too risky for too little reward. The second problem is that they're being attacked from all angles. You know, we may be able to start using cell phones and personal digital assistants and cable modems and all kinds of ways to be able to access the productivity tools we need in our business through Linux, cable modems, whatever, we don't necessarily need to have a Microsoft products to do that. So they're being they are having to fight a war on multiple fronts, and it's very difficult to win that kind of a battle.
[Marchini:] You think they're going to be so hamstrung in their basic business that makers of other operating systems like Linux, and those who basically help distribute it, like RedHat will prosper?
[Smith:] Yes, I do. Not that I want to buy Red Hat.
[Marchini:] Oh, why not?
[Smith:] Well, I don't think the Linux companies I think there is a little smoke and mirrors there in a way too, these are help desks masquerading as companies, so I'm not convinced that's the greatest, you know, business model either. I mean, I think they are a little overvalued as well. But the point is that you've got a company that is being attacked from all fronts, and it is very difficult to win in that environment.
[Haffenreffer:] Four point four decline yesterday for the Nasdaq composite, Microsoft getting some of the blame, I guess, for sparking it, much of a surprise in that decline?
[Smith:] The surprise was obviously the size of the decline is always a surprise, but I had been bearish going into the day. I'm actually bullish coming into today, I think we'll probably see an up session in the market over the next several days. And we're starting to put in a bottom I think in the Nasdaq, but it's not quite there yet, we're going to probably stagger around and see some volatility over the next week or so.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, what's the reason that you say we're about to call a bottom in tech stocks?
[Smith:] Because the biggest cure for a bear market is a bear market, and that is to say that one of the key reasons why we saw the Nasdaq hit so hard was that there was $25 billion worth of stocks sold by insiders, mainly tech stocks, mainly stock coming out of lock up from IPOs a year ago. Twenty-five billion dollars of new supply? Hey, this is a market based on supply and demand, there was an incredible amount of supply coming out. Once you have lower prices, that supply doesn't come out anymore.
[Marchini:] All right, but the anecdotal evidence suggests individual investors are not buying on the dips.
[Smith:] Absolutely right, but if I can get rid of $25 billion worth of supply, it doesn't take a lot of buying to start to move the market up, but that's going to take a few weeks, we need to get a little confidence back in the market that this isn't going to be a 1987 washout, or a 1973-74, you know, bear market for people to start to say: Hey, wait a minute, OK, this is pretty cheap stock, maybe I'll buy Microsoft or, you know, VA Linux or whatever, you know, but they'll start to come in and buy some of the names that have been premiere names over the last year or so.
[Haffenreffer:] If we believe that the Nasdaq has just about found a bottom, what are your favorite technology stocks to be getting into?
[Smith:] You know, I think that you've got to stay away from the big bellwethers right now.
[Haffenreffer:] Stay away from them?
[Smith:] Stay away from them for this reason, most of them are overvalued, that's why we had the Nasdaq down as much as we had, we ran them up too far last year, now we've got to build some value back. But you can buy companies like Helix Technology, this is a company with 90-percent market share, it has a 50 PE, OK, which is still not exactly a cheap stock, but it's growing earnings at over 100 percent a year. So I would argue that is a much better buy than, say, a Cisco or an Intel or a Lucent or Microsoft.
[Marchini:] On your list of picks there I see General Motors, that's not a tech company, is it?
[Smith:] Ah ha, I'm working on a whole theory of companies of what I'm calling transformers, and these are companies that are being transformed by the Internet, yet are not considered dot.com companies. General Motors, for example, came out and they have moved all their procurement on-line. They have come out and said: That is going to save us five percent of our cost structure. Now, that doesn't sound like a lot. But there is two things to remember: That is five percent of $138 billion that they are going to be saving, and that translates into $3.20 a share. Now stop and think about that. Here's a company that right now Wall Street is saying is going to earn $9.20 a share, and I'm saying there's another $3.20 a share that Wall Street isn't factoring in because of the Internet. This is a company that may, you know, obviously the economy I think is going to be a little bit slow, so that's not going to help the earnings, but the fact is is that the Internet is transforming General Motors in a very positive way. And I don't think Wall Street is factoring that in. So that's why I'm over in General Motors, it's a dot.com stock without people knowing it.
[Haffenreffer:] Stealth dot.com. SMITH; Exactly right. Courtney Smith, thanks for coming in this morning.
[Smith:] My pleasure.

[Unidentified Male:] A still picture stops time.
[Unidentified Female:] A good photograph pains to tell you something about the person. When you start to go through frame by frame, the person becomes alive.
[Announcer: The Reagan Years:] A LIFE IN PICTURES, with anchor Perri Peltz.
[Perri Peltz, Cnn Anchor:] A picture tells you so much about a person. You can read someone's hidden thoughts, feel their moods, even peer into their heart and soul. The editors of "Life" Magazine have assembled the life of former President Ronald Reagan in pictures, an awesome undertaking. After all, whether he was in Hollywood, Sacramento or Washington, Ronald Reagan made his living in front of cameras. For the next hour, we'll follow the editors as they open a treasure trove. The pictures that tell the story of our 40th president. We begin in just a minute.
[Peltz:] Ronald Reagan was born 90 years ago. Cameras had been around for some time, but family photographs still were rarities, something reserved for special occasions. By finding these old pictures, "Life"'s editors also found something else, a man of destiny. We begin with the early chapters of Ronald Reagan's life.
[Barbar Baker Burrows, Picutre Editor:] Here it is, this is fun.
[Robert Andreas, Editor:] I wonder if he did play the guitar?
[Robert Sullivan, Writer:] We are always paranoid about the first photo meetings, because the lives of famous people are chronicled more fully once they become famous.
[Burrows:] Very handsome.
[Andreas:] Oh, yes.
[Sullivan:] So you never know what will be there in the early years of Ronald Reagan's life.
[Burrows:] I'm a sucker for the christening gown pictures. We had hundreds of contact sheets that we had housed and I started to go through all of them and spotted this picture which I had never seen before. When you find something like that, it makes your whole week.
[Peltz:] Born February 6, 1911, Reagan may have been officially christened Ronald, but even then his family called him Dutch.
[Sullivan:] There are six different stories as to how he got his nickname. We go with the one from his memoir. In the moment of his birth, his father said he makes a lot of noise for a little Dutchman. They weren't well off; they moved a half dozen times by the time Ronald was 10. Mostly, they lived in small, very rural towns in Illinois, finally settling in Dixon.
[Unidentified Female:] Good morning, welcome to the Reagan boyhood home.
[Sullivan:] Dixon remains a small town.
[Unidentified Female:] OK, I guess we can go now.
[Andreas:] So, did all this stuff check out about the father?
[Sullivan:] He painted his childhood in his first memoir; his term was Huck Finn idol.
[Andreas:] There was a thing in his own memoir where he talked about, that his dad wouldn't shrink from clobbering him.
[Sullivan:] It wasn't a Huck Finn idol, and he knew that. Two pages after he used that term, he was talking about finding his father face down in the snow passed out. They had shielded him from his dad's alcoholism. That obviously is painful, if not scarring, to a kid that age and you can see it in the photographs. He was a more serious kid than you might have anticipated.
[Peltz:] His mother's church proved a refuge from his unhappy home.
[Doctor Lamar Wells, Reagan High School Friend:] You were some dude when you had the knickers. Boy, I though I was the bee's knees, too.
[Peltz:] Doctor Lamar Wells was one of his Sunday School students.
[Doctor Wells:] He was a good teacher. He knew what boys wanted to hear. I'm not talking about girls. He knew about football.
[Burrows:] Yes, you have to do the football, but the cheerleading has so much energy and it's so much fun. Pictorially, visually, I've never seen it before. But we only have, what is it? Five spreads.
[Peltz:] Dutch wasn't just popular with the boys.
[Burrows:] I would really like to find out about this woman.
[Mrs. Lamar Wells, Reagan High School Friend:] I had a cousin that went to school with him and she was really quite thrilled with him but he didn't give her time.
[Sullivan:] He dated Mugs Cleaver, most famously, during this period.
[Burrows:] And it's funny, because when I was going through the contact sheets and editing, I didn't know who she was.
[Dr. Wells:] She was a really nice gal. I thought he should have married her, but what did I know about love and marriage at this point.
[Peltz:] To supplement the family income, Reagan worked for $15 a week at Dixon's local park. Over the course of seven summers, he pulled no fewer than 77 swimmers from the Rock River rapids.
[Burrows:] I mean, it's possible, but I can't believe that in one town, all those people would be dead now.
[Peltz:] At 18, he left Dixon for a small religious school, Eureka College. Academics were not his priority.
[Sullivan:] His phrase was, while he was getting by with the grades, I did cop the lead in most of the plays.
[Peltz:] And served as president of the student senate, wrote for the school paper and played varsity football. Reagan graduated from college in 1932 at the height of the Great Depression: Twelve million Americans, 25 percent of the adult population, were out of work. But not Dutch Reagan. Against all odds, he landed a job as sportscaster for WHO, one of the most far reaching radio stations in the Midwest. His specialty? Baseball Republicans-creations.
[Sullivan:] Ronald Reagan's radio station would be getting the Western Union of the results of the game, and then, he would bring it to life. They would use pencil taps for the crack of the bat. It was taking something and turning it into gold.
[Peltz:] Exotic stuff for a boy living in the Iowa dust bowl.
[Hugh Sidney, "time" Magazine:] Here's Dutch Reagan. You could feel it, you could smell it, you could taste it. His voice rising every one of those plays, and then he'd described the crowd. And on those Saturday afternoons for a young boy like myself out there in on Iowa so far away from the rest of the world, it was just a thrill.
[Burrows:] Here, this is a wonderful picture. Look at this.
[Peltz:] In 1937, a friend of Reagan's arranged a screen test for him at Warner Brothers. To his astonishment, they hired him on the spot. The matinee idol look he cultivated in those early days wouldn't change for the next 60 years, with one small exception.
[Burrows:] The art director and myself spent two hours around midnight one night trying to figure out when he changed his part. He changed his part from the left side to the right side and it was either 1938 or 1939, because by 1940 it was always on the right-hand side. One of my favorite and your favorite, "Dark Victory."
[Andreas:] Yes, Bette Davis and Bogey. [Begin Video Clip, "dark Victory"]
[Bette Davis, Actress:] Hello, everybody.
[Ronald Reagan, Actor:] Oh, what a party.
[Davis:] Glad to see you're still on it.
[Sullivan:] Bette Davis thought him a silly boy. He was not a drinker and he wasn't a womanizer. He was a Boy Scout in Gomorrah.
[Peltz:] On screen, as in life, his stock in trade would always be heroes.
[Unidentified Male:] In more than 50 films, only once would he play the villain.
[Sullivan:] It just would have been impossible for that guy with the sunny disposition to play that far against type. So, whether he was a radio broadcaster or a second banana to Errol Flynn, he was a good guy.
[Andreas:] "Rockne." He played the Gipper which turned out to be his nickname.
[Reagan:] Ask them to go in there and win just one for the Gipper.
[Burrows:] Famous scene.
[Andreas:] Very credible performance in "King's Row."
[Reagan:] Where is rest of me?
[Peltz:] Considered his finest performance, "King's Row" made Ronald Reagan a household name.
[Unidentified Female:] He was known for charm and good looks so it's not surprising that he had all these fans. I went to Dixon, Illinois in 1950 to be part of Ron's homecoming celebration.
[Peltz:] Zelda Moltz was president of Reagan's movie fan club.
[Unidentified Female:] I saw him in a movie called "Smashing the Money Ring" he played a character called Brass Bancroft, Secret Service agent. He has this habit of leaning up against a door with this glint in his eye and I said, oh, my isn't he cute?
[Peltz:] Soon after seeing that film, Zelda wrote him a letter, and he wrote back.
[Unidentified Female:] The wrist watch came as a Christmas gift one year.
[Peltz:] Establishing a correspondence, at times, surprisingly personal, which would span more than 50 years.
[Unidentified Female:] I would tell him what my day was like and what I did. I would send him cards and at one point, he came into the city and called me, and the my mother answered the phone and she was so excited, and she said, please, do me a favor, call back, I'm too nervous to talk.
[Peltz:] Reagan may have had many female fans around the world, but by 1940 his heart belonged to only one: fellow Warner Brothers star, Jane Wyman.
[Unidentified Female:] I will tell you, once they met one another and the publicity machine got going, there was no question they would be stars; every single week they were putting out another press release about Jane Wyman and Ronald Reagan; they were the ideal Hollywood couple.
[Burrows:] There's certain people that were covered in a way that made them more natural. I think Ronald Reagan was more of in the Hollywood mode. It does make it more difficult visually. I mean, there's some beautiful pictures, but the intimacy is lacking. The one with Jane Wyman at the swimming pool, which is it's obviously posed but it's absolutely beautiful.
[Peltz:] With the birth of Maureen in 1941 and their adoption of Michael in 1945, the Hollywood press was touting the Reagans as the perfect family. They weren't. Tensions between the couple were growing over Reagan's new obsession: the Screen Actors Guild.
[Sullivan:] He rises in the ranks to the point where they elected him their president. All of this is going on when the big issue facing SAG and all of Hollywood, are the anti-Communism crusades out of Washington.
[Reagan:] I would hesitate or I would not like to see any political party outlawed on the basis of its political ideology, because we have spent 170 years in this country...
[Sullivan:] It was all about politics and she was just fed up with spending a life with this political junkie. She wanted to live a Hollywood life.
[Burrows:] The minute you see one photograph that says it all, you are amok; you see one looking off to one side and the other turning in the opposite direction. There's body language there.
[Unidentified Female:] This is a card that I received at the time that Ron and Jane were breaking up and made me cry actually. "I'm sorry Zelda, but right now time won't permit a letter; just keep your fingers crossed and pray that Jane will realize she loves me." It's not really signed, but I know the handwriting. He came home one day and she said get out. Who wouldn't be shattered by that he still believed he was in love.
[Peltz:] Actress Patricia Neal was one of those who witnessed Reagan's suffering.
[Patricia Neal, Former Actress:] I was there for New Year's Eve and he came up and he said
[Peltz:] Then another blow for Reagan: his acting career stalled.
[Reagan:] Well Bonzo, I never did thank you for saving my life this morning.
[Sullivan:] "Bedtime for Bonzo" was one of his better roles, because they were really drying up.
[Peltz:] The bright spot in this period: Nancy Davis, a wealthy, socially connected contract player at MGM. She was mistakenly included on a list of Hollywood Communists in 1949.
[Sullivan:] So she came to the head of the Screen Actors Guild, Ronald Reagan, and she said, can you help me this? And they fell in love. The issue went away. Communist was just not on her resume. She was absolutely devoted and dedicated to this man from the minute the spark struck.
[Peltz:] One love story was over, but a new one was about to begin. One career was winding-down, but destiny was waiting. We'll see it all, in pictures, when we return. Believe it or not, there's a period of Ronald Reagan's adult life when they're aren't many pictures. This was his time of transition. Not surprisingly, it was a troubled time. But these years turned-out to be vitally important, for the man and ultimately for his country.
[Unidentified Male:] A couple things left in this section; otherwise it seems all right to me.
[Andreas:] The photographic possibilities are immense, and the stories that we can tell will be immense. Obviously, when we come to these projects, other people have done books on them; a life that huge doesn't go unnoticed, so see we have to try to figure out a way to do it a little differently.
[Reagan:] Here's great news about two wonderful Beraxo hand cleaning products.
[Peltz:] The early 1950s was a difficult time for Ronald Reagan.
[Sullivan:] His career was going down the tubes as a movie actor, so it's this sort of murky period of transition and it wasn't clear what would become of Ronald Reagan.
[Peltz:] Reagan was forced to hawk hand soap on television, sell beer in print ads and perform in Las Vegas cabarets.
[Burrows:] It was a greeting card that he sent out to people. I don't think we it in our files in our search all over the place somebody had actually kept this greeting card in their files.
[Sullivan:] An MC for some dive in Vegas chillingly called The Last Frontier. I mean, what must he have felt like that week?
[Reagan:] I would like to introduce my family. This is my wife Nancy.
[Nancy Reagan:] Good evening.
[Reagan:] And our daughter Patty.
[Nancy Reagan:] Say hello, honey.
[Patty:] Hello.
[Sullivan:] He agreed finally to take a TV job. Back in those days if he went to television, it was seen as death to your movie career, but he took a took with General Electric hosting GE Theater.
[Peltz:] Ronald Reagan was not only the host of the show; he was also the star. Acting in many of the screen plays with numerous guest stars including James Dean and Reagan's wife Nancy Davis.
[Sullivan:] GE was a very important time of his life. That was the transition.
[Burrows:] One would think that there would be ample photography from that time period. Well, we were up against a brick wall we found the picture of chair which says GE on the back which is a perfect opener.
[Reagan:] Well, as you can see, our new home is beginning to take shape. Nancy and I thought you might like to see how its coming along.
[Peltz:] Reagan was paid a salary of more than $100,000 and given a GE-built house of the future, perched high atop the Pacific Palisades. His new found wealth was forcing this working class Democrat to reconsider his political views.
[Sullivan:] With every day that went by, he was further from the poverty of Dixon, Illinois and closer to the richness of a Hollywood movie star. He lived among rich people and he became appalled at how much the government was taking from him once he reached the 91 percent tax bracket. He was paid to be host of the show, but he was paid to also be an ambassador for General Electric; he would go among these blue collar workers and tell them that they were being taxed too much by the government. This GE gig, which looked on paper like it was hosting a television show, was actually training ground for a future president.
[Peltz:] "Hellcats of the Navy" was Ron and Nancy's only Hollywood movie together. Even though it's a movie, you can see the reality in it, you kind of know something is going between them in real life.
[Burrows:] This is great with Angie Dickinson.
[Andreas:] "The Killers." The only time plays a villain and there he's giving her a facial massage.
[Peltz:] "The Killers" marked a dramatic end to Reagan's movie career and a new beginning for his political one.
[Reagan:] Most of us had wonderful dreams when we were children about what we wanted to be when we grew up.
[Peltz:] As General Electric Theater became more popular and television more influential, Reagan became one of the highest paid political lecturers in the country.
[Sullivan:] In the very early '60s, he switches from the Democratic to the Republican Party. He was already way out on the right-wing of the Republican Party. He was a conservative Republican when he signed up.
[Reagan:] Thank you and good evening. The sponsor has been identified, but unlike most television programs, the performer hasn't been provided with a script.
[Peltz:] In 1964, Reagan gave a ringing endorsement to free enterprise, while attacking communism in a speech supporting Barry Goldwater called A Time for Choosing.
[Sullivan:] That absolutely made his political career.
[Burrows:] There were no real photographers there. We decided to have one of our photographers actually shoot from the video.
[Reagan:] There can be no real peace while one American is dying in some place in the world for the rest of us.
[Burrows:] They didn't know that was going to be the speech of a lifetime.
[Peltz:] Ronald Reagan was suddenly a star in the national political arena.
[Burrows:] I love this picture because he's popping up out of the convention floor and it's just so wonderful. Just, you know, so energetic and fun.
[Lyn Nofziger, Former Reagan Adviser:] There were some wealthy Republicans in California, who were looking for a basically conservative candidate to run against Pat Brown, and they were attracted by this speech and they went to Reagan and urged him to run.
[Bill Ray, Former Photographer, "life" Magazine:] And actually drove him down to his kickoff speech in Orange County; just Ronnie and me in a rented Mustang driving down to Orange County, and there he was with his little index cards; he was an out of work actor reinventing himself. He would get out there and the people reacted to him and they loved him.
[Arena:] I suppose that icon and smile was part of the magic and the guy was a photographer's dream. You couldn't take a bad picture of him.
[Burrows:] Now we are getting into the days where we have "Life" going out and shooting, the whole set of pictures was just a wonderful inside look at the family.
[Ray:] I got to his house in Pacific Palisades and we'd shoot some pictures around the pool with Skipper and Nancy. I would say, Ronnie, is there any chance of going out to the ranch and doing some pictures with a horse and he would say, well, Bill, do you want me to ride English or Western a photographers dream.
[Burrows:] Everybody discusses the family situation that he was never around but as I look through the photographs, I saw the family man.
[Ray:] As a photographer, it's just about perfect, it's the ideal family, isn't it?
[Peltz:] Reagan in 1966 still seemed to project the image he crafted in Hollywood in the 1950s.
[Ray:] I'm convinced that Ronald Reagan got up one spring morning in 1954, he looked out the window and he saw the Buick Roadmaster with the four portholes, he looked at the window and saw his hair, and says, this is it; this is as good as it gets. I'm staying right here in 1954 and he did.
[Arena:] We can take out the back story about when he became afraid of flying and just say Reagan had a deathly fear of flying.
[Unidentified Male:] What I would like to do is just get the same size but just a little darker or with a little more contrast maybe.
[John Loengard, Former Photographer, "life" Magazine:] He took the first prop stop tour of the state. I found him very stiff in front of the camera in front of the still camera. In front of movies, cameras, he was fine, he was used to it, but still cameras, he was a little weary. And there he was, swapping jokes with his advisers, and suddenly guffawing in front of me.
[Burrows:] According to John, John suspects that he hadn't flown in a long time.
[Andreas:] He was afraid of flying.
[Burrows:] He had this incredible fear of flying.
[Loengard:] I figure that what I photographed was not a man who was happy and confident he was winning, I think I was photographing a man who was trying to stave off a panic attack.
[Andreas:] Start with Lyn Nofziger, the long time so that it's clearly a Nofziger moment.
[Burrows:] This is quite something because Lyn Nofziger is in it and these people followed him to the White House. And that's why I liked this photograph so much. There is a sense of intimacy.
[Nofziger:] I had been out with him two or three times in the spring of '66 after I went to work for him and I said, there's something out there. I think you're going to be elected governor and I think you could even be president some day.
[Peltz:] In 1966, Ronald Reagan, former actor, television host and reform Democrat, was elected Republican governor of California in a landslide victory.
[Unidentified Male:] Do you solemnly swear that you will support and defend the Constitution of the state of California?
[Reagan:] I do.
[Peltz:] The state had a new conservative governor. But it was the 1960s. The country was struggling with the Vietnam War, campus unrest and turmoil in the inner cities, and as the nation's largest state, California was in the eye of the storm.
[Jerry Brown, Frm. California Governor:] Reagan came in, and he was the white hat standing against all these disruptive force that were threatening the American upper class or middle class even or white working class.
[Burrows:] And the student demonstration in Sacramento.
[Andreas:] Right, outside the capitol building.
[Helene Van Damm, Frm. Reagan Secretary:] All the aides said he should just stay in the office and not go outside. Reagan wouldn't abide by it. He says no, they come to see me. I go and see them. And he went out there angry as can be. He says now, permit me to speak, too, and he got his words in.
[Sullivan:] I think the run for the presidency began the day after he was elected governor.
[Burrows:] Here it said everything. You had the date. It's the Republican National Convention and you just know I mean, it just really sets the tone.
[Peltz:] At the 1968 Republican National Convention, Ronald Reagan made a bid for the nomination for president.
[Reagan:] Thank you.
[Peltz:] It was unsuccessful, but there was no denying that Reagan was on a clear path to the White House. He had traveled a long way from Hollywood.
[Edwin Meese, Frm. Attorney General:] One of the interesting things about Ronald Reagan, who had spent so much time in Hollywood, was that he was able to balance that part of his life and the Hollywood career was kind of a thing of the past, and he concentrated his time and efforts on his new career which was being governor of California.
[Peltz:] A career that now, with Nancy by his side, seemed his destiny.
[Burrows:] This is the theme that carries throughout the book. This is the greatest love story of all time, besides Antony and Cleopatra. We've got a great love story.
[Peltz:] And for Ronald Reagan and wife, Nancy, this fairy tale was just beginning. Next, Ronald Reagan's White House years when A LIFE IN PICTURES returns. As we've seen, "Life" magazine's editors struggled to find pictures for the years of Ronald Reagan's transition from actor to politician. But they had a completely different challenge once he entered the White House. It was an eight-year photo-op. Instead of asking, what can we put in? They agonized over what to leave out.
[Burrows:] The presidential years are so rich, you know. Everything was so well documented.
[Peltz:] When Ronald Reagan stepped into the role he will be most remembered for, the cameras loved him more than ever.
[Dirck Halstead, White House Photographer, "time" Magazine:] Ronald Reagan was a star. There was just no two ways about it. He carried himself with this incredible dignity. He had this smile that was infectious. His eyes would twinkle. He knew all about showbiz. He was the consummate actor. The resonance really was sort of like a movie star's trailer and he would come out of the trailer and hit his marks.
[Unidentified Male:] The president of the United States.
[Halstead:] The simple fact is he played his role so convincingly that he totally convinced his foes that he was going to persevere.
[Burrows:] Doing a biography of somebody who is very important, you have to capture all the elements of their life, its ups and downs and it has to be presidential but you also want it to intimate.
[Andreas:] I love it.
[Burrows:] He was president of the United States for eight years. How do we put that into a capsule? I like that. I like everything, OK? There isn't enough room in the book. I wish this had been a bigger book.
[Peltz:] With this embarrassment of riches comes the challenge of sorting out the images that best tell the story of Reagan's eventful years at White House.
[Andreas:] So, here we are at the beginning of presidency. This is a great starter. What's this one from?
[Burrows:] That was in 1980 during the campaign. He was in Birmingham, Michigan. You know, it's so patriotic. Anyway, we go back in time. of course, that's the opener. We go back to '78, I think that is, back at ranch before he starts campaigning.
[Andreas:] He loves those ranches.
[Burrows:] He does.
[Peltz:] From 1976 to 1980, Ronald Reagan spent most of his time at his ranch Del Cielo in Santa Barbara, where he prepared new strategies for the presidential campaign.
[Sullivan:] He spent a lot of time touring the country, doing his old GE stuff, you know, shaking hands, asking people what their problems are and again, he narrowed his themes to taxation and anti- communism.
[Andreas:] This is one of my favorite pictures in the whole book.
[Burrows:] That was taken where he was born, in Tampico, Illinois and he was born right above the First National Bank.
[Andreas:] Uh, oh.
[Burrows:] Campaign.
[Andreas:] What do you think? I like it. You want to show the exhaustion.
[Meese:] He spent every day, virtually, going from town to town. He would have meetings in town halls and restaurants, sometimes even in people's homes and it was a very people oriented campaign, and he went on from victory to victory from that point on until he successfully got the nomination.
[Burrows:] This is wonderful, right after the debates Carter hugs his wife, Rosalyn, and Nancy and Ron hugging.
[Andreas:] There you go again. I think and some people think it maybe sealed Carter's fate.
[Burrows:] That was it.
[Reagan:] There you go again.
[Sullivan:] The presidential campaign is largely being dictated buy an Ayatollah in Iran. As long a those hostages are held, Jimmy Carter's support drips away and Jimmy Carter's talking about how there's a malaise in the land and Joe Six-Pack is saying, what, is Jimmy trying to blame us for this hostage thing? You know, I'm going to vote for Ronnie.
[Peltz:] The debate did seal Ronald Reagan's fate and ultimately led him to victory. He became the 40th leader of the American people.
[Burrows:] And of course, now the inauguration.
[Reagan:] I, Ronald Reagan, do solemnly swear...
[Unidentified Male:] ... that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States.
[Reagan:] ... that I will faithfully execute of office of president of the United States.
[Peltz:] For Ronald Reagan and his political family, known as the Kitchen Cabinet, January 20, 1981 was the culmination of a lot of work.
[Reagan:] So help me, God.
[Van Damm:] We worked years, literally around the clock, every waking moment. So then when it finally comes tomorrow to the culmination, to election day and you win, it is not just an exuberant experience that it was worth it, but it's also, total utter relief and almost like a breakdown.
[Meese:] The president and Nancy Reagan attended each of the balls that night and, of course, when they came to the California ball, that was a great event because this was in a sense coming home
[Diana Walker, White House Photographer, "time" Magazine:] I remember when they came in, and, I mean, they just sparkled and he with that wonderful smile, very handsome, and she in some I think it was white and it had sparkles.
[Halstead:] All of sudden, here were all of these mink coats, sable coats, designer stuff. I mean, it was the California Republicans marching in.
[Sullivan:] It was a stunning change in style. I mean, you had the Carters in there for four years and they're wonderful people but they're almost Spartan people.
[Halstead:] I've been going to White House dinners now since the Kennedys, so I have seen every permutation of how the White House entertains. I must tell you, the absolutely rock bottom was during the Carter years. There were paper cups. There were paper plates. There was this cheap wine. There was no open bar. It was just awful.
[Sullivan:] With Reagan, I mean, as "The Wall Street Journal" reported at the time, the booze is back. From a Republican standpoint, it was sort of a return of Camelot. There was problem with that. The problem was that as Reagan is presiding over a country that's got this kind of economic misery, high unemployment, high inflation, they're dancing at the White House.
[Burrows:] I think in the entire book, this is my very favorite picture. Or at least...
[Andreas:] This one?
[Burrows:] Yes. It's Diana Walker shot it and it was Walter Cronkite's last interview before he retired as the CBS anchor and this is Doug Benjamin, who was vice president of CBS. They're just doubled over with something that's so funny and you went to be part of it.
[Walker:] The president was telling a joke. Now, I have asked every single one of those people in that picture what the joke was. Now, they say they can't remember.
[Meese:] I can't remember the joke. There were number of jokes that day.
[Burrows:] Nobody seems to remember, so maybe it was a little off color. This is the first day in the Oval Office and Jim Baker is in this picture, Mike Deaver, Jim Brady. What makes this picture so special is you know that's the moment where he first sat down at his desk and imagine what his thoughts were.
[Halstead:] From the very first moment that Ronald Reagan came into office, he projected this incredible aurora of hope and possibility. It was like a breathe of fresh air because suddenly all of this malaise, the clouds just disappeared and everything was possible.
[Peltz:] Then, only nine weeks into Reagan's presidency, John Hinckley raised his gun.
[Unidentified Male:] The White House has confirmed now, just in the last few minutes, that President Reagan has indeed been shot.
[Burrows:] This was secret service agent who was protecting him, and next here is down on the ground. It's almost like, a news reel. You know, you see one, two, three as he's being shot. You see the secret service agent as he's turning around, realizing what happened and there he is down on ground.
[Halstead:] I've been present now at three assassination attempts. First, there is disbelief that what is happening is happening. And then, time slows down.
[Meese:] I went immediately to the hospital, and it just happened the president saw all of us as he was being wheeled from the emergency room to the operating room. And he saw all of us there and he said in his typical fashion, who is minding the store?
[Van Damm:] It was so amazing the humor he kept not one time, why me It was him and that's the way it is and now let's go on.
[Peltz:] The assassination attempt gave President Reagan a boost in popularity, leading to what was called the Teflon presidency.
[Halstead:] After that, anything Ronald Reagan said people totally bought and what happened, Congress just passed everything he asked for. All of a sudden, they were stuck with budget which was an accident because the guy got shot.
[Andreas:] I love this picture.
[Burrows:] Tax cut, in 1981, Dirck Halstead.
[Andreas:] It speaks so eloquently of tax legislation.
[Burrows:] What's interesting about this, here's a picture that would probably be boring but because the mist. It was such a beautiful, beautiful morning. Oh, there's a great one that Diana Walker took of Reagan just laughing his head off with the queen.
[Andreas:] What in God's name is she wearing? Did she get dressed in the dark?
[Walker:] It was 1983. Queen Elizabeth came to California, and it never stopped raining. I mean, pieces of Santa Monica were falling into the ocean. The president and Mrs. Reagan were giving her a dinner, and she stood up to toast the president and she said, as I remember, I knew when the Puritans came to the New World that they brought with them many of the customs of my country, but I had no idea they brought the rotten weather, too. And the president just threw his head back and roared.
[Andreas:] And this, I happen to know, is I think it's at Camp Lejeune.
[Burrows:] Beirut bombing.
[Peltz:] On October 23, 1983, 241 American Marines were killed by a truck bomb in the Beirut compound. The president accepted full blame for the tragedy.
[Walker:] There was this memorial tribute to them and it was even worse because it was raining, and there was something just so very, very sad and I think you can see it on the Reagans' faces.
[Burrows:] And then, of course, then you go into...
[Andreas:] Speaking of reelection.
[Burrows:] Yes, Nancy at the GOP convention while Bush and President Reagan are in their hotel room waving back. So, the moment is almost simultaneous here.
[Andreas:] We have this wonderful Oval Office.
[Burrows:] Pete Souza.
[Pete Souza, Frm. White House Photographer:] I had this idea of trying to show the Oval Office from a different view that nobody had every seen. I thought it really showed the somewhat loneliness of the presidency.
[Burrows:] Well, this was where he was writing his speech at Reykjavik. It was not a high point and Pete Souza remembers.
[Souza:] That picture was taken in Iceland after the Reykjavik Summit with Mikhail Gorbachev, and the summit had not ended well. So, they had to frantically at the last minute rewrite the speech, and this is in the holding room at the Keflavik airport.
[Peltz:] Reagan's life-long crusade against communism reached its turning point at the Reykjavik Summit, held in October 1986. Though Margaret Thatcher called Mikhail Gorbachev a man we could do business with, President Reagan was not willing to give in to any conditions.
[Souza:] Gorbachev wanted Reagan to give up the strategic defense initiative and Reagan said no. And I think maybe Gorbachev had a greater appreciation for Reagan standing on his principles.
[Burrows:] And this was the Washington Summit and that was Geneva when they first met and it's interesting to see the body language and the interpreters and everything and here we are, a couple of years later in Washington, and you see the warmth of the two coming together.
[Andreas:] Exactly.
[Walker:] They were very good at making really terrific photo opportunities and this is one. I mean, there they are in their red, white, and blue. I mean, it looks almost like a Busby Berkeley musical.
[Burrows:] And then, of course, the Dirck Halstead's last moment in the White House.
[Halstead:] It was just me and the Reagans and he is telling jokes again. Just as the Bushes car came up to the front door, I crouched down from behind and took the picture.
[Burrows:] And the farewell after the.... Ken Jereski.
[Andreas:] This is terrific. Passing the torch here.
[Souza:] The last day of his presidency, after the inauguration, the Reagans came to the East side of the Capitol where the Marine helicopter was parked and we took off and I remember the pilot flew around the Capitol one last time and then went over to the White House and flew over the White House, and President Reagan is looking out the window and he says to Nancy, well, there's our little bungalow down there, honey.
[Peltz:] An incredibly powerful image. In a minute, pictures from the twilight: Ronald Reagan's legacy. A LIFE IN PICTURES comes right back. By the time Ronald Reagan left office, the world had changed dramatically. But what no one could foresee were the changes soon to affect Ronald Reagan's life and define his final years.
[Reagan:] Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.
[Burrows:] Remember in the '80s, when he made that famous speech, tear down that wall, and here he is in 1990 chipping away at it. It's a wonderful way to open up the legacy chapter.
[Sullivan:] He comes out of the White House, and from the ranch in California, he watches the fall of communism across Eastern Europe. He watches democracy spread West and he knows he's had a lot to do with it.
[Burrows:] And then part of the legacy that ties right in is Gorbachev, and that was after the two retired, basically, and the Gorbachevs came out to California and visited the ranch. Years later, I mean, they have remained friends. This is Kennerly's shot, the presidential library first, which I think that is such a wonderful it should be a spread.
[Andreas:] This is terrific.
[Burrows:] All the presidents together at the dedication of the Reagan Library in 1991. And what's wonderful about it is of all of them, Reagan is looking at us.
[Andreas:] They're also in chronological order.
[Burrows:] Yes, it makes the picture. It's just wonderful.
[Walker:] I would think in terms of his legacy, you certainly would have to have a picture of he and Mrs. Reagan together. It was always my impression that this were very much in love, and it was quite a partnership.
[Souza:] You know, a lot of people think he relied on her so much. Well, she relied on him, too. I mean, I think he gave her a world that she never would have expected to experience.
[Halstead:] As a photographer you couldn't miss how really powerful their relationship was. She had this gaze, this adoring gaze, that was on him all the time. She was the sunshine in his life.
[Sullivan:] It's all looking good, and very, very, very quickly, it's over. It's clear to his doctors in 1993 and confirmed for everyone by 1994 that he has Alzheimer's and almost immediately after, Reagan hand writes his letter to the American people, essentially telling they won't be hearing from him again. Basically, it's the old radio man signing off.
[Peltz:] President Reagan closed his letter with this message: "I now begin the journey that will lead me into the sunset of my life. I know that for America, there will always be a bright dawn ahead. Thank you, my friends. May God always bless you. Sincerely, Ronald Reagan." "Life" magazine's book, "Ronald Reagan: A Life in Pictures," had to be ready for an April 2001 publication date, so there was no way to include the latest pictures of Ronald Reagan's life. Despite the passage of time, despite the ravages of Alzheimer's disease, and now his broken hip, somewhere deep down, the spirit of the Gipper is still there. Thank you so much for joining us for this special report. I'm Perri Peltz. Good night.

[Larry King:] Tonight: He's a real-life legal eagle turned courtroom novelist. Dream Team attorney Robert Shapiro joins us in L.A. And then Oscar winner Ben Kingsley talks about starring in a movie called "Sexy Beast." Plus, his hit series "Arliss" takes a behind-the-scenes look at big-money sports: actor and comedian Robert Wuhl. And, he was Al Gore's leading point man in Florida during Election 2000: former Secretary of State Warren Christopher, reflecting on politics, personalities and chances of a lifetime. They're all next on LARRY KING WEEKEND. We begin tonight's roundup of great guests with Robert Shapiro, friend, attorney, author. His new book, "Misconception," co-written with Walt Becker, just published, caused fame for the renowned member of formation of the Dream Team for O.J. Simpson. Robert Shapiro sent me a copy of this book when it was in Galley. I got a chance to read it. I really loved it. For a first effort, I thought it was extraordinary. Why fiction?
[Robert Shapiro, Author, "misconception":] I wanted to use my real-life experiences, but have a little dramatic license with them. And so the characters are fictional, but the people who read it seem to know and recognize the people in the book.
[King:] Who came up with this idea of dealing with the really heady issue of abortion as you treat it in this book?
[Shapiro:] It Walt Becker is a screenwriter. And he was writing a novel at the time. And he was working with Greg Davis, who was producing films. And they were both in the same building where my law firm, Christensen Miller, is located. And they called on me one day and said, "You know, we have an idea for a movie. But we really need to get some real legal drama into it. Would you be interested?" We started talking about it, and I said, "You know, I think it's a great idea. But I'd really like to take a shot at writing a novel with this." And Walt was writing a novel. And so, two and a half years ago, we started this project...
[King:] Now how did it work, writing fiction as two people who does what?
[Shapiro:] You know, it's a collaboration. First, we developed the storyline. And then we outlined the chapters, had the lead characters, and each of us took a crack at putting it on paper. And...
[King:] So you might have written two pages, he might have written the next three? I mean, it worked that close?
[Shapiro:] Yeah. It's very, very close. We worked on a on a daily basis on this. And he would do a writing, I'd do a rewriting; I'd do a writing, he'd do a rewriting. And at the end, we came up with a controversial legal thriller.
[King:] And a wonderful read. I must tell you...
[Shapiro:] Oh, thank you.
[King:] ... it's a page turner for a first time out. You ought to consider writing more. I hope you do write more.
[Shapiro:] I'm going to try. It was a wonderful experience, a great learning experience, a tremendous discipline. But also, on top of a read, I think what I wanted to get across was to be a facilitator for an issue that hasn't been discussed yet.
[King:] Which is?
[Shapiro:] And that issue is the potential for abuse of the RU- 486, and in this case, as a murder weapon. In Louisiana, nominee to be the Surgeon General of the United States gets involved with a female patient. She becomes pregnant. She has a miscarriage, which turns out to be the result of the RU-486. And he gets tried for murder in Lafayette, Louisiana. And it raises a moral issue that is going to take place, and a legal issue that will take place, but hasn't yet. And that is if it is not against the law for a mother to have an abortion against the wishes and desires of a father, is it, or should it be, against the law for a father to cause an abortion against the wishes and desires of the mother? And it seems like a simple answer. But when you start to think about it, it becomes very, very complex.
[King:] How did you choose that title?
[Shapiro:] We wanted to do two things. Number one, I wanted to talk about the misconceptions in the legal system. For example, the presumption of innocence here's a doctor, he goes on trial, he has no presumption of innocence. He is assumed guilt. The assumption of guilt takes over. We just saw in the Brazill case, in Florida, a 13-year-old tried as an adult. Did he have a jury of his peers? These are the misconceptions that we deal with on a day-to-day basis. How does a lawyer represent somebody who he may believe is guilty of a crime? Or she in this case, the lawyer is a female defense lawyer. So that was part. And the second part was Walt Becker and I wanted to use a play on words for the birth process...
[King:] How do you like inventing characters?
[Shapiro:] I think it's terrific. Obviously...
[King:] You feel like a chess master, right? I mean...
[Shapiro:] You know first of all, you're going to see and I think you saw in the book certain characteristics of...
[King:] Sure.
[Shapiro:] ... people that are known in the public.
[King:] Course.
[Shapiro:] Whether they be media, people in Congress, people in the FBI. So it's very interesting. It allows you to express yourself in ways that you couldn't do because of attorney-client privileges...
[King:] Course, you also had a bestseller, with your real-life book on the...
[Shapiro:] Yes. Yeah.
[King:] ... O.J. Simpson trial, right? So I mean, obvious you went from one to the other. Was this more fun?
[Shapiro:] This is much more fun. The first one was a tremendous burden.
[King:] Reportorially.
[Shapiro:] It was yeah and it was trying to free myself of things that had been said, things that took place letting my spirit and my belief in the legal system and explaining the difference between legal justice and moral justice, which people had a great deal of difficulty with. In this book, you're pretty free to do anything you want. But what I wanted to do and Walt and I were committed to is even though it's legal fiction, it's legal reality. This is not legal fantasy.
[King:] Should make a good movie.
[Shapiro:] You know, everybody who's read that says this. For some reason, people in the motion picture business are a little bit afraid, I think, of the issue of abortion...
[King:] Really?
[Shapiro:] ... and the controversy with this. But there is a prominent actor and actress who are very, very interested in playing the lead roles.
[King:] That can usually get it done.
[Shapiro:] So, we'll see. First we want to get on the bestseller list.
[King:] It deserves it. We'll be right back with more Robert Shapiro. The book is "Misconception," co-written with Walt Becker. If you don't like it, something wrong. We'll be right back. Want to touch some other bases with Robert Shapiro. The new book is "Misconception." You recently had a case involving an asylum or Chinese what happened?
[Shapiro:] You know, first of all, I'm so honored to be on the same show with Warren Christopher. And I had a chance to meet with the Secretary before this show. And I was discussing this. I represented one of the largest leaders of Chinese dissident group in the People's Republic of China. His name is Zhang Hongbao. And he has a group called the Zhong Gong, very similar to the Falun Gong, which is an exercise meditation group. He had one other element to it. He had an economic element, which dealt with health and well being. And the People's Republic of China became very, very concerned that these groups would eventually have political power. So they outlawed in 1999 the Falun Gong as an evil cult. And they were doing the same thing with the Zhong Gong. And he was threatened with all types of political persecution, including death. So he left China. And he went around the world, and he ended up in Guam, entering illegally with a fake passport. And he was detained by the United States government. And he sought political asylum. For 13 months, he was in custody when I came into the case. Because his political asylum application which should have been granted, because clearly, he was...
[King:] He was under threat.
[Shapiro:] ... he was under threat the judge said, "I'm going to grant this." And then, the People's Republic of China sent letters to the United States government, saying that he is wanted for 20 rape cases. The judge, obviously, became very concerned, and asked that the State Department and the Library of Congress look into this. Both then...
[King:] Wow.
[Shapiro:] ... and came back with an analysis which said, probably the charges that have been filed on their face are fraudulent. They are certainly very suspicious. And this is a common tactic that is done by the Chinese Communists for political dissidents. In any event, he is denied asylum before I come into the case. But he's granted wrongful withholding; that is, he can't be sent back to China. Both sides appeal. And he asks for release on bond. He's not going to go anywhere, because they're going to kill him if he goes back to China; that's the last place he would go. And for some reason, the United States government, at that time, would not acquiesce to the release.
[King:] So what did you do?
[Shapiro:] I came into the case, and I went to Washington. And I started talking to political leaders. And eventually, we were able to get the support of then Majority Leader Trent Lott, who sent the letter to Attorney General Ashcroft.
[King:] And?
[Shapiro:] And as a result, two days after the United States plane was released from China, Zhang Hongbao came back to Washington that night, so...
[King:] He's a free citizen now?
[Shapiro:] He's here. Both sides are still appealing. But it's very clear to me that he will remain here. He's anti-Communist, pro- American. And quite frankly, it's one of the best things I've ever done, as you're aware.
[King:] You're proud of this.
[Shapiro:] Yeah, very proud of it.
[King:] We're going to have somebody going to be arrested in the Bakley murder? Who knows?
[Shapiro:] Who knows? You know, one of the things...
[King:] You only got less than a minute.
[Shapiro:] One of the things is we shouldn't speculate. Let's not let's give him the presumption of innocence.
[King:] How about...
[Shapiro:] And thank you very much for calling it the Bakley murder, not the Blake murder case, which...
[King:] Yeah. She was killed. Yeah.
[Shapiro:] Exactly right.
[King:] Robert Shapiro.
[Shapiro:] Always a pleasure, Larry.
[King:] The book is "Misconception," written co-written with Walt Becker. And you will really like this one. And next, one of my favorite actors, Ben Kingsley. Don't go away.
[Begin Video Clip, "sexy Beast") Unidentified Actress:] Your cigarette, you have to put it out.
[Ben Kingsley, Actor:] Cigarette? What, this? No, I'm not going to put it out.
[Unidentified Actress:] You must.
[Kingsley:] Why is that?
[Unidentified Actress:] If you don't we can't take off.
[Kingsley:] Well that's your problem, isn't it. It's your move.
[Unidentified Actress:] I'm afraid you can't...
[Kingsley:] Now, I'm not going to put it out, you're just going to have to wait until I finish this; simple as that.
[Unidentified Actor:] Why don't you just put the cigarette out?
[Kingsley:] What's that, sancho? Do you want me to cut your hands off, use it as an ashtray? Yeah, I'll put it out, provided you're prepared to let me stub it out on your eyeball. I'll put it out; agreeable?
[King:] We now welcome to LARRY KING LIVE one of my favorite actors and extraordinary talent, Ben Kingsley. He's won the Oscar, of course, for "Ghandi." Appeared in such great movies as "Schindler's List," "Searching for Bobby Fisher" he even appeared with me in "Dave." He was he was OK in that. And he stars in a new movie called, "Sexy Beast," which they're describing as neon noir. What is, Ben, "Sexy Beast" about? And is it you?
[Kingsley:] Wow. I'm I think "Sexy Beast" is a bit like "Hydra"; you know, it has many heads. And they're not quite sure which one occupies that title at any given time. There's several sexy beasts on the on the in the film, you know. And the baton seems to be passed from one character to another.
[King:] Basically, it's about?
[Kingsley:] It's about basically it could have taken place 2,000 years ago, inasmuch as it's about tribal honor. And if you if you refuse to honor a certain tribal code, then the tribe will turn against you, will alienate you, will exile you, will destroy you. And my job on behalf of the tribe and they happen to be British criminals is to elicit the services of one man who can do this job for us, and no other man can. And I'm sent to recruit him from retirement. And it's that struggle to get him back into our tribe.
[King:] Who plays that role?
[Kingsley:] Ray Winston plays the man I have to get back to London to do this job.
[King:] But you could have set it in any time...
[Kingsley:] I believe so, Larry...
[King:] ... at any time?
[Kingsley:] ... because it because the it's so well written that the characters are archetypal. And I love archetypal mythology. And it's like it's like an ancient Greek myth. It takes place on the Mediterranean anyway, in this great, white blast of white light throughout most of the film.
[King:] Set in what time period?
[Kingsley:] 1999, 2000, you know...
[King:] Now.
[Kingsley:] Now.
[King:] Yeah.
[Kingsley:] Yeah.
[King:] And the title?
[Kingsley:] "Sexy Beast."
[King:] Was it always that title when you got the script...
[Kingsley:] Always that title. That's a kind of expletive in England.
[King:] Oh, really?
[Kingsley:] Yeah. And it can be used descriptively for someone you find dangerously attractive and sexy.
[King:] The British made...
[Kingsley:] "Oh, sexy beast," yeah. Yeah.
[King:] Opening in the United States?
[Kingsley:] In about two well, on the 16th, I think it is, of this month, maybe a little earlier.
[King:] When you say, "neon noir," does that mean this is a small hit? In other words, it's...
[Kingsley:] I haven't...
[King:] ... designed for a genre?
[Kingsley:] I haven't come across this phrase.
[King:] That's what it said here. Film is described as neon noir.
[Kingsley:] Well, I couldn't hear it from better lips than yours, which is the first time I've heard it.
[King:] First time I've heard it...
[Kingsley:] I like it. It's very catchy, neon noir. I think it probably means it's an extremely contemporary film noir.
[King:] How do you select your roles? I mean, is there a method do you...
[Kingsley:] There is.
[King:] ... say, if I like it...
[Kingsley:] There is a method. I mean, I can't always apply it, because sometimes I have to work. Because I've got four children, et cetera, et cetera. If I recognize the man, or if I'm curious to know more about the man, then I'm well on the way to saying yes to the role. Now, Don in "Sexy Beast" is an extremely violent, dangerous character. But there's something about him that I recognized, and something about him that made me very, very curious.
[King:] Do you enjoy evil parts?
[Kingsley:] You know, where I find Don was very playable was that instead of playing the evil, I played his wound. Because his wound was is what triggers his rage attacks. His wound is, "I love you; why don't you love me?" It's the sort of classic wound of unrequited love.
[King:] So the evil person doesn't look in the mirror and say, "I'm evil."
[Kingsley:] Strangely enough, there are scenes in this film where I act in the mirror. And that was a very interesting exercise. I shave, and I come out with this stream of invective into the mirror. I've never done that before; I found it quite frightening.
[King:] Was "Anne Frank" I don't want to say fun to do well done...
[Kingsley:] It was...
[King:] ... I mean...
[Kingsley:] It was...
[King:] ... did you enjoy doing it?
[Kingsley:] I did it in Prague, which had a profound effect on me, anyway; being in that city, and the people I met. I worked with Robert Dornhelm, who's an extraordinary, gifted director. And Anne Frank, Hannah Taylor-Gordon, is one of the greatest leading ladies I've ever worked with in my career centered, gracious, intelligent, generous, and totally gave herself to a very harrowing journey throughout the film privilege.
[King:] Was a perfect script.
[Kingsley:] A privilege, privilege to do it.
[King:] Certainly gave us a new view of that story. Our guest is Ben Kingsley. His new film is "Sexy Beast." He's never disappointed me. Back with more after this. [Begin Video Clip, "sexy Beast"]
[Unidentified Actor:] I've not got lots of money. I got enough. I'll do anything not to offend you. But I can't take part. I'm not really up to it.
[Kingsley:] Not up to it?
[Unidentified Actor:] No, I'm not.
[Kingsley:] I see.
[Begin Video Clip "sexy Beast") Kingsley:] Are you saying no?
[Unidentified Actor:] No.
[Kingsley:] Is that what you were saying?
[Unidentified Actor:] Not exactly.
[Kingsley:] What are you saying?
[Unidentified Actor:] I'm just saying thanks, and all that. Thanks for thinking of me. But I'm just going to have to turn this opportunity down.
[Kingsley:] No, you're just going to have to turn this opportunity yes.
[King:] I'll tell you how good Ben Kingsley is. He played a man I knew. You played Meyer Lanksy.
[Kingsley:] Did you know...
[King:] And Bugsy. I knew Meyer in Miami Beach. You had him down.
[Kingsley:] Good heavens.
[King:] That was just the way Meyer was.
[Kingsley:] That's the best review I've ever had in my career.
[King:] That was him.
[Kingsley:] I had letters from his family, from his widow and from one of his nephews, I think...
[King:] Son is dead.
[Kingsley:] That's right.
[King:] Yeah.
[Kingsley:] Who said, "You honored him, and we were very pleased with your performance." I breathed a...
[King:] Did you like that role?
[Kingsley:] ... huge sigh of relief.
[King:] Did you like that role?
[Kingsley:] I did. The great patriarch, a man who clearly was brought up in the Shtetls, was used to pogroms, was used to learning that if you do not look after your own, no one else will. And I'm sure that, again, rather than play the criminal, I played I played...
[King:] Sure.
[Kingsley:] ... the patriarch, the man who learned through adversity to look after his own.
[King:] When you get a role like "Ghandi," one of the problems with that, I guess, is can you every surpass that?
[Kingsley:] It's it was clearly an extraordinary collection of events. It was my first major feature film. I worked with an astonishingly gifted director. And in turn, receiving the Academy Award was a key into a career that I honestly didn't think I would have. Because I was I was very happy in the theater, which I now...
[King:] You were a stage actor.
[Kingsley:] I was a stage actor. I scarcely returned to it. Because I find that the camera and its scrutiny, and the technique of acting for the camera, forces me to be as economic as I humanly, possibly can in light of...
[King:] Opposite of theater.
[Kingsley:] ... stillness. Stillness, stillness, stillness. So I often speculate as to whether how I would feel if I was standing on Sunset Boulevard, and somebody said to me, "Ben, you see that chap over there? He played Ghandi," I'd feel sick. I'm so glad it was me. I am...
[King:] So...
[Kingsley:] ... glad it was me.
[King:] ... even though you're always compared to it, and...
[Kingsley:] Well...
[King:] ... even though they'll say, "Well, whatever you do, it'll never be `Ghandi.'"
[Kingsley:] Well, he was such a completely unique silhouette, anyway. You know, there are no there are no he's not a genre. There are no roles like him, you know, that walk around...
[King:] That's right. What do you use for reference?
[Kingsley:] ... scarcely clothed, and, you know, and...
[King:] How did you did you play him as less than big?
[Kingsley:] Again, if you are if you are offered an heroic role, like Otto Frank completely heroic man, a great patriarch, a mensch, as I would say. And the I played him as the greatest dad in the world, not a holocaust survivor. And with all my roles, I try and I try for example, if the man is supposed to be supremely good, look for the flaws, look for the...
[King:] Did you look for a flaw in Ghandi?
[Kingsley:] Absolutely. Yes, and Simon Wiesenthal all the great all the great and wonderful men that I have played. I think it's respectful to them and honest to them to acknowledge that it's the flaws that make us; it's the cracks that make us...
[King:] You've had some great roles.
[Kingsley:] I have. I have. I hope I haven't thrown too many of them away.
[King:] Do you miss the theater?
[Kingsley:] The last thing I did was "Waiting for Godot." I loved doing it.
[King:] Tough.
[Kingsley:] I did that four years ago tough play lyrical, extraordinarily...
[King:] Did you understand it?
[Kingsley:] Greatest I did. It seemed to be utterly relevant to where we are right now in the 20th century. We seem to be waiting for something. We don't quite know whether technology is going to give us the answer, whether our gurus are going to give us the answer, whether mass organized religion is going to give us the answer, whether we'll find the answer in our diet, in studying the ecology boy, are we waiting for something.
[King:] You will take small roles, then? Because you're one of those rare a leading-man character actor, Academy Award winner who's also can be the fourth or fifth star of a movie.
[Kingsley:] I'm very happy to do that if I've if I if I know that I'm going to love the company of my fellow actors, as I did recently in Baltimore. I didn't play a huge part in "Tuck Everlasting." I played the part of the devil. And he's a he's a very, very strong, recurring theme in the film. And I had the most wonderful time playing him.
[King:] How about "Schindler's List?"
[Kingsley:] Harrowing.
[King:] Tough to do.
[Kingsley:] Very, very tough, pushed me pushed me to the edge of my patience on many occasions.
[King:] I'll bet. "Sexy Beast" is it going to receive well, do you think? Are you good at guessing how a picture will be received?
[Kingsley:] So far, in England and Europe and at the Toronto Film Festival, it has done extremely well. So...
[King:] It's been an honor having you with us.
[Kingsley:] Oh, sir, you're very kind. My honor, too.
[King:] Ben Kingsley the new movie is "Sexy Beast." We thank him very much for joining us. One of my favorites, Robert Wuhl he stars and is executive producer of the hit on HBO, "Arliss." He's next. Don't go away. [Begin Video Clip, "sexy Beast"]
[Unidentified Actor:] I've had enough of this crime and punishment bollocks. Well, maybe...
[Kingsley:] I won't let you be happy! Why should I? Friday, the Groverner you'll be there.
[Unidentified Actor:] I won't.
[Kingsley:] You will
[Unidentified Actor:] No, I won't be there.
[Kingsley:] You will! You missed the Roundtree!
[Unidentified Actor:] No.
[Kingsley:] Yes, Roundtree!
[Unidentified Actor:] No.
[Kingsley:] Yes, Grovener!
[Unidentified Actor:] No, Don.
[Kingsley:] Friday!
[Unidentified Actor:] I won't be there.
[Kingsley:] You will!
[Unidentified Actor:] No, Don.
[Kingsley:] Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes!
[Begin Video Clip, "arliss") Unidentified Actress:] Arliss, forgive us for surprising you. We have something to tell you.
[Unidentified Actress:] Something important.
[Robert Wuhl, Actor:] Rita, would you excuse us.
[Unidentified Actress:] No, Rita can stay. This concerns her too.
[Wuhl:] What's wrong? What did she do?
[Unidentified Actress:] Wrong nothing. Everything is wonderful. I'm retiring.
[Wuhl:] Sorry?
[Unidentified Actress:] Not now, but in a few months.
[Wuhl:] In a few months? I thought after last night everything was just fine.
[Unidentified Actress:] It's fine. Wonderful.
[Wuhl:] Great! Then why...
[Unidentified Actress:] Oh, my God, they're having a baby!
[King:] Next, one of my favorite people, Robert Wuhl the actor and comedian. More than that, he did a lot of writing for the Academy Awards when Billy Crystal hosted them. He won Emmy Awards for that writing. Robert Wuhl stars and is executive producer of HBO has a lot of great things. My favorite is "Arliss" the behind the scenes look at the high pressure world of big money sports. Are you surprised, how long has this been on now?
[Wuhl:] We're going into our sixth year.
[King:] This was a role of the dice wasn't it?
[Wuhl:] Yes, it was originally supposed to be a six episode miniseries. And it had branched out and we broadened the show and it went much deeper with character and the stories and it's gotten better every year.
[King:] Do you base it on anyone?
[Wuhl:] Not one person, no.
[King:] Where did you get the idea, where ideas ever come from, to do a thing about an agent?
[Wuhl:] This was 1991 and Michael Toland had approached HBO with an idea about doing a "Spinal Tap" of sports events like the super bowl and Wimbledon. And HBO I had done a lot of work with so they approached me and I said, Mike, I don't want to do this, I've seen this. But I'd like to do a 6 episode miniseries, a satire on the world of sports and tell in through eyes of one and that should be a sports agent. This is pre-Jerry Maguire, too.
[King:] And so "Arliss" was born. Anyway you pick the name? I love the name.
[Wuhl:] Well, I wanted a unique name because like Lee Steinberg or Orrin Tellum are the only unique names. And when I wrote the name down Arliss, because I new of an actor Arliss Howard, I realized I could make dollar signs with the s's. That's really all it was.
[King:] And the show has evolved, has it not, in into deeper subjects than it started with.
[Wuhl:] We started as a big broad comedy, and we still have big funny. I'm first and foremost a comedian, but to me comedy has always been one of the two masks under drama comedy and tragedy.
[King:] They are close.
[Wuhl:] Yes, it's all drama, so when you get into some morality plays, when you get into the issues and I can explore those issues on HBO. I don't have to be PC. I can tic off advertisers because there aren't any. And we got into abortion, we got into steroid abuse, but we won two awards this last year: One for domestic abuse about a client who was a long time friend who I find out is a wife beater, and from the Alzheimer's Federation because we did a show about Ed Asner who played a long time baseball announcer who was starting to suffer from Alzheimer's.
[King:] I loved every "Arliss". That may be my favorite, but it's hard to say but that was extraordinary.
[Wuhl:] He was wonderful. I called Ed and he and his wife he and his watch the show. I knew his wife was a big fan. We started shooting on Monday. On Thursday I called him and said, Ed, you're playing this part and she said, Ed, you're playing this part. And he had to learn a lot. He had to do a lot in that and it was also based on my experiences with my father in law who suffered from Alzheimer's at the end of his life.
[King:] You brought my friend John Miller in too.
[Wuhl:] I did indeed.
[King:] Not bad. Do you is this a year to year thing? Do you have to wait every year for HBO to say we're a go because there was a rumor a year ago you weren't a go, and you panicked.
[Wuhl:] Three years ago we were canceled.
[King:] Time flies.
[Wuhl:] Three years ago we were canceled.
[King:] You were off?
[Wuhl:] Never officially, but it was happening. And all the e- mails it was the beginning of the people who used e-mail. If it happened now it wouldn't make a difference, but e-mails and people wrote in and called in, and Chris Albrecht really went to the mat for the show. And now this week we are having this retrospective.
[King:] Yes you are, right?
[Wuhl:] Yes, part of the Toyota Comedy Festival on Tuesday night in New York City they are doing a tribute to "Arliss." And all the cast is going to be there.
[King:] That's great. You get shifted around in the promo department when they have "The Sopranos" and "Sex in the City" and "The Costas" and "Gumbo," right. You feel like they don't promote you enough be honest.
[Wuhl:] Well, yeah.
[King:] They should promote you more.
[Wuhl:] But at the same time we are the third highest rated series in the history of HBO just behind "Sex in the City" and "The Sopranos" in the history. Sure, you would like to get a little more but I've also learned that before I got into this, I never realized that sports isn't treated with the same respect.
[King:] It's the monkey department.
[Wuhl:] It's real interesting. And the show is really not about sports, it's about characters in the world of sports which is totally different. And of course our characters have branched our. Sandra was just great.
[King:] Ben Bradley used to tell me that "The Washington Post" looked often at the sports pages as the comics. That's why sports writers get away with a lot.
[Wuhl:] Did you ever notice sports writers doesn't have an opinion about anything?
[King:] No news writer could have an opinion about the secretary of state on page one. With a sports writer...
[Wuhl:] Always have an opinion.
[King:] But you were also a terrific stand up comic and you're quite an actor. Hey, I remember "Batman."
[Wuhl:] They're all successful.
[King:] You were in the really successful.
[Wuhl:] I was in the first one. Tim Burton gave me a great part. I've been very fortunate to work with great people.
[King:] Does this now limit you? Do you not get calls to do other things?
[Wuhl:] Well my time, because I'm so control of the show. I'm involved in every facet of it. They used to joke I control the ply of the toilet paper on the show.
[King:] Do you write it?
[Wuhl:] I supervise all the writing.
[King:] Direct some?
[Wuhl:] Yeah, direct some. Again as executive producer you supervise and I'm in the editing room constantly and in the mixing stage.
[King:] Was it always from the get go, the idea that you would use real people in the series?
[Wuhl:] No, it happened as part of casting. In the first episode we had a part of a team owner and we said why don't we just cast Jerry Jones, see if he'll do this. And so we did that we said using, you know, HBO, I like the blur of the line. It gives great texture. It's nothing new. Lucy did it. Lucy had William Holden and John Wayne.
[King:] Not every week.
[Wuhl:] No, but Fred Allen might have Jack Benny step in. So this is not a new concept. Donna Reed would have Don Drysdale and Colfax show up. But it was great for our thing because them for texture. You can't ask them to carry plot, I mean, they're not actors.
[King:] Wonderful texture, including Shapiro was on.
[Wuhl:] Bobbie Shapiro has been on a couple times.
[King:] We will be back with more of Robert Wuhl, the actorcomedian who stars and is the executive producer of terrific HBO series "Arliss." They are going to do a retrospective of it Tuesday in New York. You'll be there for that.
[Wuhl:] I'll be there.
[King:] We will be right back with more of Bob Wuhl after this. [Begin Video Clip, "arliss"]
[Ed Asner, Actor:] Some of you might have noticed I've made a few errors lately. Not that I've been drinking on duty, anyway no, the doctor calls it Alzheimer's. Now it doesn't mean I'm getting ready to go in the home just yet, but it's just going to get worse. And you fans, people I love deserve to have the best. So, this is going to be my last call. I just want you to know that I've loved every moment of it. Even during the rain delays.
[Begin Video Clip, "arliss") Wuhl:] I am going Edmonton to present an offer to a client, no matter how big, no matter how small.
[Unidentified Actor:] Hockey is a religion in Canada. You better not let anybody know what you're doing up there. Gele seems happy with the extension, so why...
[Wuhl:] Why? Because I don't give a
[Unidentified Actor:] What about your Mercedes?
[Wuhl:] That's entirely different.
[King:] You've worked in films. You were in "Bull Durham," we said "Batman," you were in "Good Morning Vietnam." Would you like to do more movies?
[Wuhl:] Of course. I like working with great people. Those movies you mentioned, it's Barry Levinson, it's Ron Shelton, it's Tim Burton. I've been very fortunate.
[King:] You like writing too though, right?
[Wuhl:] Oh, I love writing.
[King:] You're sort of like an everyman. And when someone is that it's hard to pin it down, don't you think? Multi-talents often have problems.
[Wuhl:] Yeah, I suppose, but as long as I'm collaborating with something great I mean, with "Arliss" I get to do the best of all worlds because I'm a story teller at heart and I get to tell these stories anyway I want to tell them and it's everything. I get to do a half hour independent film a week and it's just, to have the people come up to me, I had Neil Simon stopped me on the street in New York City, this is one of my heroes and he stopped me on the street and he said, you're doing good work. And I said the best thing is Neil, I said I don't have to write down to the audience. He said enjoy that while you can. And then the other day David Milch from "NYPD Blue" I met him at a mixing stage...
[King:] Not at the track?
[Wuhl:] No, it was at the mixing stage and he said I really appreciate what you do, because whether you realize it or not, what you're doing on HBO, you and the other shows is you're really pushing the envelope for the networks. And I said I realize it but the first thing is the story.
[King:] You also got to almost make love to Cynthia Sykes, Katerina Witt, Andrea Thompson. You write yourself good deals.
[Wuhl:] It's good to be the king.
[King:] Good to be the king. There was one critic who got a little angry at you.
[Wuhl:] Mushnick.
[King:] What?
[Wuhl:] Mushnick.
[King:] Mushnick's a critic does Mushnick ever leave his house?
[Wuhl:] I don't know.
[King:] He just sits there and watches television all day. Somebody said that the shows were a little harsher, tougher.
[Wuhl:] Darker, they are darker, yeah, they definitely are darker.
[King:] That was done by design.
[Wuhl:] Yeah, oh sure.
[King:] Mushnick in new York doesn't like the show.
[Wuhl:] Oh, no. He talked about how the show was at one point he goes, it's a show that takes advantage of women. And the show he was talking about was one we just won the thing on domestic abuse about. It's very bizarre. He is a moralistic person.
[King:] Did you let it bother you?
[Wuhl:] Only in the sense, you can't let it bother you totally, but you take everything a little bit personally.
[King:] The television critics have almost no effect. Because it's a free medium.
[Wuhl:] Right, but they do have effect with
[Hbo. King:] It's a pay medium.
[Wuhl:] It's a subscription so if the subscribers like you then they'll stick with you longer, but we've had a great champion, Marvin Kitman. Karen James has been wonderful.
[King:] By the way, HBO, and we are part of that same family, it is AOL TIME WARNER, they give you more liberty than anybody could, right?
[Wuhl:] Oh, of course, of course.
[King:] Driving NBC nuts. You have no language barriers?
[Wuhl:] No, it's not language and we use language and we have some nudity although none this year really. It's more subject matter. It's the stories you can tell. You don't have to be PC. You can take the other side. You can take the unpopular, you can take the realistic side. You can take, it's not you can go into areas that you're not going to go into, that athletes do beat their wives and they get away with it. And athletes also get women pregnant and you have to pay for abortions. They do get away with it, and you can go into that area.
[King:] You going to touch things like "Law and Order" taking actual real cases and sort of fictionalize them?
[Wuhl:] Well we do it anyway. All the agents rat out their clients. I'll talk to agents and they'll rat them all out. They tell me all these stories, and I say gee, that's a great story. We'll twist it around, we won't make it the same sport, we won't make it the same type of person but we use the same basis.
[King:] Have most athletes cooperated?
[Wuhl:] Oh everybody, otherwise they wouldn't be on the show.
[King:] Clemens, you get everybody.
[Wuhl:] Clemens was great. Roger is an old friend to begin with. And they trust us now. They say that the toughest thing to get in advertising is a brand name, and now it's become a brand name.
[King:] Get Barry Bonds?
[Wuhl:] Barry's been on a few times.
[King:] When does "Arliss" start shooting again?
[Wuhl:] We wrapped shooting, we premier next Sunday night, 9:30 on HBO following "Sex in the City."
[King:] OK. That's right, you were I'm lost in time. So I didn't make it this year. I'll make it next year.
[Wuhl:] You'll make it this year although you're in the retrospective.
[King:] I am?
[Wuhl:] Yes, you are.
[King:] Thank you, Robert
[Wuhl:] Thank you, Larry.
[King:] Robert Wuhl, an old friend and deserving of all this success. The star and executive producer of "Arliss." "Arliss" debuts nest week and they get treated at the Toyota Comedy Festival in New York on Tuesday. Next is Warren Christopher, former secretary of state, thanks for joining us with Robert Wuhl. We'll be right back. [Begin Video Clip, "arliss"]
[Voice Of Computer:] Good morning. You are headed West. The temperature outside is 3 degrees centigrade.
[Wuhl:] "Ootside," "ootside" my ass. How far am I from Jasper?
[Voice Of Computer:] You are 240 kilometers from Jasper.
[Wuhl:] Kilometers! This isn't France.
[Voice Of Computer:] Bonjour!
[Wuhl:] No, no, English, English, English!
[Voice Of Computer:] Shhh. Lower volume. No need to shout.
[Unidentified Actress:] Michael's office. Hello?
[Wuhl:] Rita, talk to me! Talk to me!
[Voice Of Computer:] You are about to run into a deer.
[Wuhl:] Aaaah!
[King:] We now welcome to LARRY KING WEEKEND an old friend and extraordinary American public servant, Warren Christopher, the former secretary of state and author of a terrific new book, "Chances Of A Lifetime." These are personal reflections and impressions of leaders and event that shaped the second half of the 20th century and you knew most of them, right?.
[Warren Christopher, Former Secretary Of State:] I did, Larry.
[King:] In fact, did you know everyone you write about in the book?
[Christopher:] Yes, I know all the people I wrote about.
[King:] Where did you start in government?
[Christopher:] I started really with Pat Brown here in California, the Edmund G. Pat brown who was governor from 1958 to 1968.
[King:] Who beat Nixon in '62.
[Christopher:] Had such a tremendous career here. Really launched California in the great prosperity we have now the water plan, the education plan.
[King:] Amazing guy.
[Christopher:] He was an amazing guy.
[King:] Did you always go back between private practice and serving government?
[Christopher:] Yes, I did. It was one of the lucks of my life that I was able to go in and out, Larry. I was able to combine a private practice with public service.
[King:] Now, some of the great people that you include in this, I was reading through the clip notes at the beginning of the book, you cover everyone from FDR down, right? Pretty much. You start with Pat, right?
[Christopher:] When I was growing up FDR was president so I saw something of him at that time. Of course that was before I was in government.
[King:] Who surprised you?
[Christopher:] Well, I think probably the person that surprised me the most was William O. Douglas. I law clerked for William O. Douglas right after law school. That was a tremendous experience and he surprised me so much, Larry, by being a bit chilly to me when I was working for him, and distant, but then when I left his employment he could not have been more generous and helpful to me in my career.
[King:] He was also as Supreme Court justices go, public, right? He would probably have appeared on this show?
[Christopher:] He probably would have. You know he wrote 20 books or more. He traveled around the world during the summers so he was a very public man and the time of course was rumored to be President Roosevelt's choice for vice president.
[King:] Was he brilliant?
[Christopher:] He was one of the most brilliant people I've ever worked for, Larry. He worked so fast, some thought too fast. It just came out of the end of his pen almost perfect prose.
[King:] And very strong on the environment, was he not?
[Christopher:] Very strong on the environment, very strong on the First Amendment. Probably the greatest defender of the First Amendment that we've had in the last half century.
[King:] Does a clerk learn a lot? Or do they give the clerks a lot of leeway?
[Christopher:] From my standpoint it all went one way. I learned from him, I learned from my fellow clerks and I learned from the other justices. It really made a great difference in the rest of my career because they kept recommending me for things. I was a fellow from California, sort of a non-crazy fellow from California, and so they recommended me.
[King:] Now, you worked in the Johnson, Carter and Clinton administrations, as well right? For Johnson doing?
[Christopher:] I was deputy attorney general, the number two spot at the attorney general period. That's the last days, the last two years of Lyndon Johnson.
[King:] Working under?
[Christopher:] Working under Ramsey Clark.
[King:] Another outspoken...
[Christopher:] Extraordinary man.
[King:] Progressive man. Still going at it.
[Christopher:] Still going at it, right.
[King:] Our guest is Warren Christopher, the former secretary of State with an extraordinary new book, "Changes of a Lifetime." Boy, he's had them. Don't go away. Our friend Michael Beschloss said about this book and the author: "Warren Christopher is the kind of public servant the founders imagined, a man of principle, integrity, modesty, loyalty and public spirit." Did you like working with Johnson?
[Christopher:] I liked it very much. He was a powerful, big man, and I think history will be kinder to him than they were right after he left. What he accomplished, Larry, in the civil rights field is just awesome to me, getting out legislation through in the mid-1960's when the country was still segregated, is really an enormous accomplishment. Of course, he will always be shadowed by Vietnam, but nevertheless I think he was a tremendous president in so many ways.
[King:] You were deputy undersecretary under Carter, right? Of State?
[Christopher:] I was deputy secretary of State, the number two spot.
[King:] Under Carter?
[Christopher:] Right.
[King:] And Carter, in fact, as was reported, recommended you strongly to Bill Clinton?
[Christopher:] He did. He did.
[King:] And Bill Clinton did you know Clinton well?
[Christopher:] Well, I had worked for him during the period leading up to the election. I had helped him choose his vice presidential candidate, Al Gore. These stories are all in the book. It's a book driven by people and events. It's not a policy tome.
[King:] How is history going to treat Clinton?
[Christopher:] Better than I think people feel right now. You know, the worst time to judge a president, Larry, is right after he leaves office. Johnson and Carter were rated down at that time.
[King:] Truman, way down.
[Christopher:] Way down. So, you know, I regret that Clinton gave so much ammunition to his critics as he left, but I think he will be known as a president who, in terms of domestic economy and in terms of what he did internationally and economic terms, very, very impressive.
[King:] Couple of other things. Any reflections back on what you might have done differently in Florida for Gore?
[Christopher:] No. I don't think that anything that we did could have changed things. Obviously, we would like to have one more vote in the United States Supreme Court, but you know, we pressed that as hard and as far as we could. A number of things have come out of it that are quite impressive, how America accepted that result, our institutions are so strong, and one of the things that is going to come out of it, Larry, is we are going to have a reform of our voting procedures in the states of the country, and that's important.
[King:] The comics who say Bush was elected 5-4, are they right?
[Christopher:] Well, that what an extraordinary Supreme Court decision that basically took the issue away from Florida, took the issue away from counting, and finished the matter up there. I think probably Justice John Paul Stevens, the senior justice on the court, was right when he said: "We may never know who won in Florida, but we know who lost, and that is the judges of the United States who will be regarded for some time as being partisan."
[King:] What do you think of the proposal to end the ABM treaty and build a shield?
[Christopher:] Larry, on that, I have an iconoclastic viewpoint. I think we ought to find out if we can do it before we undergo all of the foreign policy disadvantages, take on all the cost of deciding to build it. Whether we can actually do that, whether we can succeed, I'm not sure. Hitting a missile with another missile is a very awesome thing to try to achieve.
[King:] Do you have, Warren, a favorite among the extraordinary people you write about? Is there someone that just jumps out?
[Christopher:] Well, you know, that's very hard to say. Among the world leaders, putting the United States leaders to one side, Yitzhak Rabin, who I have worked so closely within Israel, was the real favorite of mine. You know, a stern man, a taciturn man, but there was a sense of confidence he had, and I think we are seeing how much we miss him now in the Middle East.
[King:] And Clinton was very close to him, right?
[Christopher:] Clinton was very close to him. I was with Clinton at the moment we heard that Rabin has been assassinated, and I must say I've never seen anything affect Clinton quite so much. I could just see really the effect on him. Maybe he was thinking that, you know, this is one of the costs of being a world leader.
[King:] Is that problem insoluble?
[Christopher:] No, I don't think it's insoluble, but it's going take some time. You know, some progress has been made, Larry. Look at the fact that there is treaty between Jordan and Israel, which is, you know, standing the test of time. Israeli troops are out of southern Lebanon, so there are lots and lots of problems, and this is a huge setback. I must say I think it was not wise for the United States to try to stand down on this. I think we need to be involved there. Presidents have for 40 years.
[King:] Is Colin Powell a good choice?
[Christopher:] Colin Powell is a very good choice. He has a great chance to be a distinguished secretary of State, and he ought to be able to do better on Capitol Hill than I did, because he's a general.
[King:] Your career is stands on its record.
[Christopher:] Thank you.
[King:] Warren Christopher, the former secretary of State, and the book from "Scribner's" is "Chances of a Lifetime". Thanks for joining us on this very special edition of LARRY KING WEEKEND. Good night.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] A suspected, young gunman remains on the run in the nation's capital and gates to the city's National Zoo are closed today after yesterday's shooting there. At this hour, an 11-year-old is clinging to life and six other teens have bullet wounds. Gun-control supporters say it's more proof that kids and guns don't mix. Kathleen Koch with the story now from Washington.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] The gates of the National Zoo are locked. A lone bouquet of flowers rests at the entrance where, Monday evening just after 6:00, shots rang out.
[Unidentified Male:] I saw a whole bunch of dudes start running. Everybody started I was on my way out and I heard three gunshots, and everybody started running back down that way. So everybody started running.
[Koch:] Caught in the crossfire, seven children, ages 11 to 16, attending the annual Easter Monday African-American celebration. Most will recover. Critically injured but improving, an 11-year-old boy shot in the head who remains hospitalized. Police say it all started with an altercation inside the zoo between two groups of teenagers.
[Chief Charles Ramsey, Washington, D.c. Police:] These groups have been in conflict for a good part of the afternoon going at one another. But is wasn't until they were put out of the zoo and they were standing on Connecticut Avenue, one group on the west side of the street, one on the east side of the street. They started throwing bottles back and forth, and then someone pulled a gun and began firing into the crowd.
[Koch:] Police say they have good leads on a suspect: An African-American male in his late teens, 5'8" to 5'10" of slight build, wearing a dark jacket and baggy blue jeans. Several rewards have been offered for any information that would lead to the arrest and conviction of the person responsible. [voice-over]: The city's mayor insists the shooting is proof more needs to be done to keep guns out of the hands of young people.
[Mayor Anthony Williams, Washington, D.c:] We've got to get kids and guns separated from one another. They don't go together. That's obvious.
[Koch:] The zoo hopes to reopen Wednesday, assuring families the shooting was an isolated incident. Kathleen Koch, CNN, Washington.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] To Connecticut. To Governor John Rowland talking about the latest anthrax case, a 94-year-old woman, confirmed inhalation anthrax. The latest from that state now facility.
[John Rowland, Governor Of Connecticut:] We're also working with the two postal facilities, both in Wallingford and also in Seymour. Wallingford Postal Service was checked as early as late as November 11 for anthrax, and got a clean bill of health. The facility the Wallingford facility, and the Seymour facility are being examined even as we speak. I will be getting those results fairly soon. We've encouraged the employees, about 1,500 postal employees at both Seymour and Wallingford, to get the antibiotic treatment, to come to the facility. We have our personal there, and the postal personnel, and also have hospital personnel as a precaution to treat all of the employees from those two facilities. And, I underline as a precaution. There's been concerns that anthrax is contagious from one person to another. It is not contagious from one person to another. So no one at Griffin Hospital is in danger of anthrax from the patient that is there, or from anyone else that's been affected. We have no other cases, we've got no other reports of people with the symptoms. We continue to be very concerned, and we'll reach out to people in the community, encourage them to come to the hospital to call their local doctor, to take the antibiotics if they would like peace of mind. I'm very pleased with the work of the postal officials who have been diligent in working with their employees, both last night and also early this morning. We're obviously focussing on the mail, because that has been the cause of other anthrax scares in the past, and we have no other reason to believe that a 94-year-old woman would have contact with anthrax. Again, no other theories at this point. The FBI and the CDC continue to to work. We're just going to spend the rest of this day reaching out to those employees and even the firemen that have been to, for example, have been to the Wallingford post office responding to calls over the last several weeks. We encourage those people to be treated as well. Again, as precautions. There is also a hair salon that was visited by the 94-year-old victim. I shouldn't say victim. 94-year-old woman who has been affected, the patient, and we are also treating people there, and again, as precaution. And we really have no other locations that the patient has visited. Having said that, I would be happy to take your questions and give you as much information as we have. This is an extraordinary circumstance. I want to thank the CDC for their immediate response, and our local law enforcement. I have been in contact with the first selectman of Oxford, of Seymour, and of Wallingford, the mayor, and I've talked to them about the precautions that we're taking, and the investigation continues. And our thoughts and prayers are with the the 94-year-old woman and her family as she continues to battle this disease.
[Question:] Governor Rowland, let me ask you this
[Rowland:] Tom?
[Question:] In terms of the FBI, what are you hearing from the FBI? Because sometimes it seems a little vague as to what they are doing.
[Rowland:] I'm not sure anything is vague by design. They clearly are trying to find any traces of anthrax using the swab methods, and working with CDC at the house, trying to trace the whereabouts of this of the woman over the last several weeks, and granted, at her age, she has not traveled a great deal. So, that's why the suspicions lead directly to the possibility of mail, cross-contamination of some sort.
[Question:] How about, if I may, just one more question, about when you first heard about it,
[Rowland:] First aware of it yesterday. Actually, the woman went in on Friday to Griffin Hospital and, again, the medical technicians there picked up on the anthrax issue, tested her at the time. The information then goes to the department of public health. We began the tests, I believe, on Sunday, and then Monday, we got those results, and then immediately began reporting those to
[Cdc. Question:] Why did it take that long? If she went into the hospital Friday, the tests don't take that long for the preliminary reports.
[Rowland:] That long from the hospital?
[Question:] That long for you to find out about this.
[Rowland:] We were notified as soon as our public health folks had a positive indication, and then we contacted the
[Cdc. Question:] Do we know at this point whether they visited either of the postal facilities?
[Rowland:] We have no indication of that. But as I said, the investigation is continuing. We've treated the postal employee that delivers the mail to the patient from Oxford.
[Question:] Governor, it is unusual for people who have achieved major birthdays or anniversaries to get greetings have their Congressman or their United States senator. Is it possible she got a birthday greeting from Senator Dodd or something like that?
[Rowland:] I'd say, Mark, pretty much anything is possible. It's rather extraordinary if you think about a 94 year old woman in Oxford, Connecticut getting anthrax. It's extraordinary as well, the poor woman from New York. The medical medical personnel who was affected and died last month. That source is unknown as well. So perhaps the FBI can patch together this information. I know that I'm sure they're comparing information from both cases, and hopefully they'll come up with a source. But again, this is all new territory for everyone in this field, and we don't know much.
[Hemmer:] John Rowland, the governor. He mentioned the word extraordinary, said it three or four times by my count. And clearly, it is a huge mystery. A 94-year-old woman in a small town of Oxford, Connecticut, just a town of about 2,000 people in the southwestern part of that state. Admitted last Friday to a hospital, testing this week, and five different tests, apparently, confirmed inhalation anthrax. As the mystery continues, Michael Okwu standing by with one of the doctors who knows a bit more about this as well. Michael, good morning. What are they saying there in Derby, Connecticut?
[Michael Okwu, Cnn Correspondent:] Very they are hopeful that I think it would be fair to say that doctors here are cautiously hopeful. I'm standing, now, with Doctor Quentzel who is the chief of infections infectious diseases here at Griffin Hospital. And Doctor, so much of our discussion this morning has been been how mysterious this case is. Does the medical team here also feel the same way? Do you regard this as a mystery?
[Dr. Howard Quentzel, Griffin Hospital:] Well, I think that it's it came as a surprise to us, because of the patient did not have any identifiable risk factors. However, I think we had a high index of suspicion because of the previous cases that have been occurring recently. And so, I think that from pretty soon after the patient was admitted, at which time the blood cultures were identified as a positive for bacteria, that could be consistent with anthrax, the suspicion was there.
[Okwu:] Now, blood cultures are taken all the time when people feel some sort of illness. Did you look for anthrax, given the fact that we've had all of these other cases around the country, or was this bacteria so conspicuous to you as being anthrax?
[Quentzel:] Yes, I think the patient presented with nonspecific symptoms, with no epidemiologic factors that would have suggested anthrax, so this was not something that was suspected on admission. Certainly, the subsequent day, when the day the blood cultures, which had been done as a routine, turned up positive, that's when the suspicion began.
[Okwu:] Clearly, she is in critical condition right now. Can you talk to us a little bit, at all, about what her prognosis is?
[Quentzel:] I really can't disclose that. I think that, as you should, she is remains in critical condition in the intensive care unit.
[Okwu:] OK. Has she spoken to doctors? Were you in the position to be able to speak to her, and if so, what, if anything, was she able to say to you, or provide you, by way of any clues, to how she came in contact with anthrax?
[Quentzel:] Earlier on in the admission, she was able to communicate, and we were not able to ascertain any risk factors, anything that would suggest where she might have acquired this.
[Okwu:] Okay. Dr. Quentzel, I appreciate your time.
[Quentzel:] Thank you very much.
[Okwu:] Clearly again, nobody here at the hospital wants to talk, necessarily, about what her prognosis is. They are again are guardedly optimistic, hoping that she will pull through. But at this point, again, she is in critical condition and we'll have more for you as this case develops. Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right, Michael. Thanks. Michael Okwu there, in Derby, Connecticut. There along the shoreline. And we should point out, in many cases of inhalation anthrax, the fatality rate is extremely high, but we'll track that. A look at the latest numbers now on the anthrax case that we have followed now for the past two months. With this mornings confirmation, the number of definitive anthrax cases nationwide is now at 18. Of those, four have died, seven of the remaining cases involve the inhaled form, and seven involve cutaneous, or skin, anthrax. But clearly, as we have said many times, inhalation anthrax is the most serious case. And a 94-year-old woman, right now, is being looked at as many questions surface about what happened there. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Unidentified Cnn Anchor:] That's as frighten a scene as you will ever see. Again, this is going on now in two cities. We have a report that there's a fire at the State Department as well and that is being evacuated. So we've got fires at the Pentagon, evacuated, the State Department, evacuated, the White House evacuated, on the basis of what the Secret Service describes as a terrorist threat. We have two explosions, two planes hitting the World Trade Center here in New York. And what this second explosion was, it took place about part of the south that would be the south tower has apparently collapsed. We don't know if that was from the impact of this first plane that hit it or whether something else has happened there. We'll work on that. Our Washington bureau chief Frank Sesno is on the phone. Frank, what are you hearing?.
[Frank Sesno, Cnn Correspondent:] Aaron, I just drove past the Pentagon across the 14th Street Bridge which is now choked with traffic. We're beginning to hear emergency sirens and rescue personnel standing out across Washington. There is a gigantic black billowing cloud of smoke that is rising over the Pentagon. You heard Jamie McIntyre a moment ago describe where that was coming from. I can also tell you that local radio and addition to talking about evacuations as we've heard at the Pentagon, the White House is reporting that the Capitol building has been evacuated and the Treasury Department has been evacuated. Washington, DC, the nation's capital is exceptionally tense and clearly taking steps as if it is virtually under siege here. We don't know specifically, as you said, what has taken place at the Pentagon, but this is very serious, striking at heart of the national government. And as John King was explaining...
[Unidentified Male:] Frank, it's Aaron, I need to interrupt you for a second. Again, there has been a second explosion here in Manhattan at the Trade Center. We are getting reports that a part of the tower the second tower, the one a bit further to the south of us has collapsed. We are checking on that. We are also told that the Sears Tower in Chicago has been evacuated, and what I can't tell you on that is whether there was something specific that happened there, whether there was an attack on that building, yet, or whether there was a warning or whether there was a threat of some sort or whether that's simply precautionary. What we can tell you is that just in the last several minutes here, two or three minutes, a second or a third I guess, technically, extraordinary event has happened here in lower Manhattan. You can see this extraordinary plume of smoke that is or was at least the second tower the World Trade Center. Or perhaps three, four minutes ago you could from where we were standing see the second building that is just a bit to the south of the first building, but you can't see it anymore, it is covered with smoke. A large plume of smoke also coming still from the first tower, where the first plane hit at about 8:45. We can, by the way, if we can cue the tape, we can show you the second attack, or at least the second explosion in the Trade Center that occurred at about 9:15 Eastern time. As you can imagine there you can see to the right of your screen a plane coming in. We do have a report of a hijacked American Airlines plane. It comes into the south side and then boom. You can see the fire coming out the front or the north side of the building, I guess that would be the northeast side of the building. And then just in the last several minutes there has been a second explosion or at least perhaps not an explosion perhaps part of building simply collapsed, and that's what we saw and that's what we're look at as smoke now just covers lower Manhattan. Almost as far to the end of Manhattan island as you can get is where the Trade Centers are. The Sears Tower in Chicago has been evacuated and we continue to check on the circumstances there. The Pentagon, the State Department, and the White House have been evacuated in Washington as well. The president has we can show you now what happened just a few moments ago at the Trade Center. Watch the building to the left, to the back of those two building. This is just a few minutes ago. We don't know if something happened, another explosion, or if the building was so weakened it just collapsed. But we have a one of our producers on the phone, and I didn't get the name, so why don't we just go ahead. Are you there?
[Rose Arce, Reporter:] Yes. This is Rose Arce calling from New York.
[Unidentified Male:] Rose, tell me what you know.
[Arce:] Just a few minutes ago we saw there's a portion of the building where the first plane struck and it seemed to be buckling inside itself, almost as if the top of the building was going to fall. Shortly after that, to people, it's hard to tell whether they were being pushed or they physically approached themselves, the sort of the river side of the building, would be the west side of the building, and appeared to jump from the top floors, just under where you see the smoke and fire.
[Unidentified Male:] That is extraordinary. The South Tower, the World Trade Center has collapsed. Again, tell me how long ago was it that you saw this?
[Arce:] This must have been about five minutes ago, and prior to that, you could see heads popping out of windows right beneath where that big, gaping whole is, so there appeared to be people alive right below where the crash point was and were trying to find some way out of there. And just as the thing started buckle you saw them plummeting from that top floor.
[Unidentified Male:] Right, and perhaps this is stating the obvious, we apologize for that, but obviously people were already at work here at the Trade Center when this happened. We don't know how many people have been hurt in all of this. We have no idea at this point, as you look at an aerial shot coming from I guess that would be coming from the south of the Trade Center, or what is at least the Trade Center behind those huge plumes of smoke. All airports across the country, every airports in the United States has been shut down as the FAA and the government tries to figure out exactly what has happened, what is at risk, what is not, who is behind it, are there more explosions, more attacks yet to come. Here in New York, trading on the New York Stock Exchange has been suspended, at least for now. All bridges and tunnels coming into the city have been shut down as the police try to clear the way. We can tell you, as we were coming in, perhaps an hour ago, there was a convoy I can't think of a better word a convoy of fire and police trucks racing down the west side highway, and this is in the middle of rush hour. Obviously, every available fire unit here in Manhattan has been brought to the Trade Center. Outside of the White House, John King, our senior White House correspondent John?
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Aaron. They have pushed us even further back away from the White House now and there are more than a half dozen fire trucks. Some of the Secret Service now patrolling the perimeter in Lafayette Park, which is directly across from the White House have automatic rifles drawn to keep people away from the park, and they're policing back and forth. You can probably here additional fire apparatus arriving on the scene. Senior White House staffers who were evacuated, all they could tell us is that they were told that there was a credible threat on the White House as well, and that they were told to evacuate the premises. What we do not know is whether or not the vice president and the national security team have stayed inside of the White House situation room. We know that they were directing and monitoring operations from there, as of just about 15 minutes 15, 20 minutes ago. But the White House staff, the executive office building staff, and all of the office buildings around, including the Treasury Department and some government and some non-government office buildings, people have been evacuated out into the street, and again, the secret service now putting up yellow police line tape, and some of them patrolling Lafayette Park with automatic rifles, which is a scene quite extraordinary here across from the White House.
[Unidentified Male:] John, tell us as best as you can, what the government's national security apparatus will do right now? I mean, what do you guess is happening and where is it happening?
[King:] Well, I don't want to guess at all, but from the White House situation room, a president or a vice president can direct a war, can direct a full scale world war. The White House situation room is where all information, it's acceptable to all information from the United States military, from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, from the Federal Aviation Administration in this case. The White House situation room is prepared just for situation like this, unfortunately, to be prepared in a time of crisis for the president to monitor incoming information and to direct any U.S. military or nonmilitary emergency response. The White House situation room is a bomb shelter for that matter. That part of the White House is a bomb shelter. Whether or not they have stayed in there is unclear. We know in the past that would be the routine. We just do not have the direct answer as yet because most of the staff, if not all of the staff, has been evacuated from the premises.
[Unidentified Male:] So I gather you're just not being able to get any calls into the building right now, or at least not getting them answered at this point?
[King:] Calls you get into the building are not answered at this point. And more fire apparatus showing up now as we speak. We saw most of the senior staff come out. We have not seen the national security staff that we would recognize, anyway, but I should note there are other gates from the White House. We are on the north side...
[Unidentified Male:] John, you are being drawn out by the sirens. Allan Dodds Frank of our bureau here in New York joins us on the phone. Allan, where are you?
[Allan Dodds Frank:] Hi, Aaron. Our colleague Jennifer Westhoven also arrived. She was closer to the building. I am just south of Canal Street, about 10 blocks north of the World Trade Center. Just Before 10:00, parts of the building began peeling away. People started screaming Jennifer tells me, because she was a little closer to the building that the police began yelling, run, run, and thousands of people started running away from the buildings as they were falling. That was, of course, followed by an onrush of ambulances and special police vehicles. Some people have told us though I can't confirm this that dozens of stories of the building have fallen away, maybe down as low as the 30th floor.
[Aaron:] And again, just because we lost a little bit of the beginning, where are you physically now.
[Franks:] I am just out of the Holland Tunnel in downtown Manhattan, perhaps 10 to or 15 blocks north of the World Trade Center.
[Aaron:] Got it. The pictures that our viewers are looking at was that collapse of the south tower a few minutes ago.
[Franks:] Correct.
[Aaron:] Here in New York.
[Franks:] Yes, and moments after that, people began running towards us. Jennifer Westhoven, who is normally at the stock exchange, was only about five blocks away, and she saw the same thing.
[Aaron:] Allan, thank you. Let me go to one of New York's deputy mayors.
[Randy Mastro, Former Deputy Mayor, New York:] Former deputy mayor.
[Aaron:] What are you hearing, Randy.
[Mastro:] I only know what I have seen on television. I have tried to talk to some friends...
[Aaron:] Hand me there we go. Hand me the microphone. There we go.
[Mastro:] I only know what I have heard on television and tried to speak to some friends, and obviously, phone lines, communication is difficult. You know, nothing prepares you in life for a senseless tragedy like this one. But there is no city better prepared to deal with such emergency situations than New York City.
[Aaron:] Tell me, based on the plan, what is happening 30 blocks away.
[Mastro:] Sure. Mayor Giuliani established early on an Office of Emergency Management to coordinate all of the government agencies involved, so you have coordinated leadership of police, fire, health, all of the city agencies responding to that emergency. They have planned for this kind of event. Unfortunately, this is not a unique concerns in the life of New York City or our country. Tragedies like this...
[Aaron:] It may not be a unique occurrence, but it is a very rare and extraordinary one.
[Mastro:] It is extraordinary, and therefore, in New York City, we have coordinated response, and they're responding now and providing every help that they can under these extraordinary circumstances.
[Aaron:] Hang on one second. We have a report now of an explosion on Capitol Hill, and we are checking that out. We have a report of a plane crashing at the Pentagon, the Pentagon being evacuated. Fire on the Mall in Washington, the State Department evacuated, and we have all flights shut down across the county as officials sort out what is happening here. Randy, back to you for a second. If I recall this correctly, there is what was called a bunker, the mayor's bunker, for these sorts of events, in the Trade Center, correct?
[Mastro:] There is an Emergency Management Center at the Trade Center.
[Aaron:] Clearly, the mayor is not there.
[Mastro:] I have not spoken with the mayor, so I don't know his physical location, but I do know that that coordinated emergency response started immediately. It's something that the city prepares for, and it's something that under these tragic circumstances, the city is doing everything it can do to respond.
[Aaron:] How much of the plan changed after the World Trade Center bombing, in '93.
[Mastro:] There was no coordinated city response. There was no Mayor's Office of Emergency Management. Rudy Giuliani established that. It's been one of the hallmarks of his tenure. And unfortunately, there are circumstances like this one where that coordinated effort has to come into play and is coming into play now.
[Aaron:] If you can, stay with us for a little bit.
[Mastro:] Sure.
[Aaron:] I suspect other questions are going to come up. I want to go through again what we know here at this point and also point some things that are not insignificant that we don't know. And one of the things we don't know is we do not now know how many fatalities there have been, and how many injuries there are. We can only surmise that this has been catastrophic, a catastrophic event here in New York, both Trade Center towers hit. One of them appears to have collapsed. How much of it collapsed? These are very large in any case, we cannot tell you how many injuries, how many fatalities there have been. This is one of those situations that is extraordinary chaotic. Even in the best of planning, I think it's fair to say that it is chaotic. And officials are trying to do many things at one time. We have on the phone a pilot who witnessed these planes crashing into the World Trade Center. Sir, can you tell me your name? John, can you hear me?
[Pilot:] Yes, I can.
[Aaron:] John, tell me what you saw.
[Pilot:] This morning, we were at midtown Manhattan in a 31st floor of a building facing south. We saw a 767 flying low down the center of Manhattan Island, heading towards downtown Manhattan. At about maybe 20 blocks north of the World Trade Center, we saw the plane veer to the left and fly directly into the north side of the south tower.
[Aaron:] So, this was the second plane that hit the tower, correct?
[Pilot:] No, this was the first plane.
[Aaron:] Got it.
[Pilot:] This was the 767.
[Aaron:] John got it hang on. Kate Snow's on Capitol Hill. Kate, what can you tell us about the events there.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] I am a couple blocks away from the Capitol right now. I can tell you about a half hour ago, the Capitol building itself was evacuated. It was a little bit chaotic. Everyone was running out of the building. People ran a couple of blocks away. Now have now been pushed back by security. We're within two blocks of the Capitol. I did see a plane, about a half hour ago, circling over the Capitol. Now whether that may have been a Air Force plane, it's unclear. But that seemed to be the reason, according to security guards that I talked with, towards the evacuation of the Capitol. They had seen something or heard something suspicious. They evacuated the Capitol and the surrounding buildings, the office buildings at least on the House side, where I am standing. There are three office buildings. Those have also been evacuated. We're seeing members of Congress who are walking by us here on the sidewalk.
[Aaron:] Kate.
[Snow:] Go ahead.
[Aaron:] Kate, I am sorry, and if you said this, I apologize, and I apologize to viewers too was there, to your knowledge, an explosion at the Capitol?
[Snow:] No, sir, there was not. I can see the Capitol from here, and everything looks to be fine. There was, however, Aaron, a sound about five minutes ago that sounded like some sort of explosion, and everything is in close proximity here in Washington. It could be that that may have been something that happened at the Pentagon. We're not very clear on that. But we did hear a sound. We heard something that sounded like a loud boom about five minutes ago.
[Aaron:] And Kate, you are, again, about how far away from the Capitol building itself?
[Snow:] I am standing on Pennsylvania Avenue, which is the main artery in Washington, D.C., and I'm about two blocks away from the Capitol. I did just see a spokesperson, by the way, for the speaker of the House, Mr. Dennis Hastert, who tells me that Mr. Hastert and others leaders have been evacuated into what he called the secure location. It's not clear where exactly they are, but they have been put somewhere secure.
[Aaron:] Because we can't see it at this point, give me a sense of what is looks like there? Are there many, many people on the street?
[Snow:] Yes, the sidewalks people are calm. I think most people really don't really know what is going on. Most people haven't been watching the news. But the sidewalks are definitely full of people, where, normally, at this time of the morning, there wouldn't be that many people out here. And as I say, I have been passed by numerous members of Congress and staff who I know well have been coming past me, asking me what has been going to.
[Aaron:] Kate, why don't you hang around here and continue to report on that. For those viewers who are joining us, at about 10:20 Eastern Daylight Time let me just briefly recap attacks on two American cities: New York and the capitol, in Washington. It began at about 8:45 Eastern time, when a plane crashed into the World Trade Center. That building that was the building hit first and then about a half an hour later, a second plane and I a not sure if we have the tape available if we do, we will show it to you you can see the second plane coming in from the right side of your screen going into the tower itself. This is an extraordinary and troubling piece of tape. The Justice Department is now being evacuated. The second attack on the Trade Center occurred about a half an hour or so after the first one. We have a report, CNN has been told, that an American Airlines 767 jet was hijacked out of Boston today. We don't know which of those two planes hit the tower the second time. Within the last 10 minutes or so, the south tower, or at least a portion of the south tower, has collapsed. CNN's David Ensor joins us from Washington. David, where in the Capitol are you now?
[David Ensor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Aaron, I'm in our bureau, but I have on the telephone with me Barbara, who is the wife a friend of mine and who is an eyewitness to exactly what happened at the Pentagon. Barbara, can you hear me all right?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, I can hear you.
[Ensor:] Well, what exactly did you see? Let's look at the Pentagon now, as you describe what exactly happened at the Pentagon this morning?
[Unidentified Female:] As we were driving into town on 395, there was an exit. We were trying to get off of the exit for the Memorial Bridge. On the left-hand side, there was a commercial plane coming in, and was coming in too fast and the too low, and the next thing we saw was a go-down below the side of the road, and we just saw the fire that came up after that.
[Ensor:] How large was the explosion.
[Unidentified Female:] It was large.
[Ensor:] Was there a sound as well.
[Unidentified Female:] We that I can't verify, because the windows were up in the vehicle.
[Ensor:] Was it clear to you what had happened?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, definitely.
[Ensor:] So you believe it was a commercial airliner that was hitting the Pentagon?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, and I'm not sure exactly where the Pentagon, where it was in relationship top where the plane went down. You know, but it was relatively close to one another. Whether it hit any of the Pentagon, I am not sure.
[Ensor:] How low was the plane?
[Unidentified Female:] When it was coming down?
[Ensor:] Yes.
[Unidentified Female:] It was coming on less than a 45 degree angle, and coming down towards the side of the of 395. And when it came down, it just missed 395 and went down below us, and then you saw the boom the fire come up from it.
[Ensor:] Were you able to see what kind of plane, or what airline it belonged to?
[Unidentified Female:] No, I did not see what kind of an airline. I just assumed because we were so close to the airport, that it was coming in to land.
[Ensor:] But it seemed awfully low to you?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, and fast.
[Ensor:] How big was the fireball?
[Unidentified Female:] I'm spatially challenged at times, and it was pretty big.
[Ensor:] What did you think was happening?
[Unidentified Female:] I know that that hit the ground and exploded.
[Ensor:] Were you frightened yourself?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, everybody stopped the cars, and we all got
[Ensor:] All right, well, thank you very much. I appreciate you talking to us. Aaron, back to you.
[Unidentified Cnn Correspondent:] David, thank you. CNN's David Ensor in Washington. CNN's Brian Palmer joins us on the phone from here in Manhattan. Brian, why don't you begin by telling me where you are.
[Brian Palmer, Cnn Correspondent:] We are in front of the criminal courthouse after being pushed north slightly. We watched one of the towers of the World Trade Center disappear from the skyline. It basically folded into itself into a plume of gray smoke. A crowd of thousands of people dashed up Broadway, followed by emergency services personnel. That's what we know. We are watching the plume of smoke and debris just sort of lost across lower Manhattan, and people are lining up at this pay phone behind me, trying to find out whether their relatives are safe.
[Unidentified Cnn Correspondent:] Let me just briefly go to Randy. Randy, just look out there and tell me what you are thinking, when you see what now appears that at least part of one of the landmark buildings in this city, one of the most recognizable buildings in the country is gone.
[Unidentified Male:] It's the kind of moment you hope will never come. When you have been in government, when you care as much about this city and this country, as a mayor like Rudy Giuliani does, it's a moment you pray will never come, and you pray for the families of anyone affected by this tragedy. But as a city, you know, we come together, and our emergency services provide every support they can in the face of such a senseless tragedy.
[Unidentified Cnn Correspondent:] It's it is an unbelievable scene as you...
[Unidentified Male:] Incredible.
[Unidentified Cnn Correspondent:] ... look down. I mean, we stand here at some point every day looking out at this city this time of year. It's extraordinarily pretty, and we see those two buildings high above lower Manhattan, and you look out there today, and you see this gaping hole in one of them. This plumes of smoke that continue to pore from the scene, and you know, that there is nothing behind, that second tower, or at least parts of it gone. We are joined now, one of our affiliates, WYNW, in their coverage here in New York. Well, we will we'll try and make that connection again. In two cities now, and there are a lot of pieces of information floating around. We need to try to button up some of this. We had a report earlier that we now we believe that we can tell you it was not correct, that there was an explosion at capitol. There was none as we now believe. There was no explosion at the Capitol. There air travel routed to Canada has been international flights going into the United States or into Canada, guys, into the United States, international flights headed for the United States are being sent to Canada now to airports there, as all air traffic in the United States has come to a halt. The FAA has shut down every airport in the country. And to our knowledge, and we're this is to the best of our memory, that has never happened before. We're starting to get some pictures of the scene from the ground here in Manhattan. Again, this all started almost about an hour and a half ago, I guess, a little more than that. This is a live picture of the scene now. We have crews on the ground, and they've been trying to get tape back, so we can show you the situation on the ground. As you can imagine, literally, thousands of police, fire, rescue officials have converged on the scene. There are, and we don't know how many injured to be tended to, to be taken to hospitals, and we continue to check hospitals to find out how many, the extend of injuries. We do not yet know how many fatalities. There is the scene. This is taped now from WABC here in New York. Their crews shot this picture, as you see, fire trucks, and firefighters, rescue personnel at the Trade Center about 30 blocks from where we are right now. And you can see these huge columns of smoke coming off of the front tower, and then a bit from the back. As you see, again, the crews working their way towards the tower themselves. It was 1993 that I suspect many of these same firefighters converged on these very same towers after the bombing in the garage level. Help me with this. But I am pretty sure it was in the garage, right, when a Ryder truck came in and blew up in the garage. I am not sure if it was A Ryder truck, but a truck came in and blew up in the garage and that was in 1993.
[Unidentified Female:] We heard a big bang, and then we saw smoke coming out, everybody started running out, and we saw the plane on the other side of the building, and there was smoke everywhere, and people are jumping out of the windows over there. They're jumping out of the windows, I guess, because they are trying to save themselves. I don't know. And I don't know. Everybody just doesn't know where to go. They won't let everything is blocked out. They are telling us to get out, but there is nowhere to go, and then I heard another plane was hit. And if you go by there, you can see the people jumping out of the window. They are jumping out of the window right now. Oh, my God.
[Unidentified Reporter:] All right. Ma'am, thank you.
[Unidentified Cnn Anchor:] That is one of the witnesses to this extraordinary. These extraordinary events this morning here in New York. Again, and I know that for many of you, you have heard this a lot. But I think it's important, as people join us, as they do, in moments like this. They are coming in all of the time, that there had been attacks in two American cities, New York and in Washington. The trade centers here in New York have been hit by airplanes. In Washington, there is a large fire at the Pentagon. The Pentagon has been evacuated. And there as you can see, perhaps the second tower, the front tower, the top portion of which is collapsing. Good Lord. There are no words. You can see large pieces of the building falling. You can see the smoke rising. You can see a portion of this the side of the building now just being covered on the right side as I look at it, covered in smoke. This is just a horrific scene and a horrific moment. The president, who is in Florida today, is en route back to the White House. He took off a short time ago. The White house itself has been evacuated on the basis of what the Secret Service says was a credible threat on the mansion itself. We believe now that we can say that both that portions of both towers of the World Trade Center have collapsed. Whether there were second explosions, that is to say, explosions other than the planes hitting them that caused this to happen, we cannot tell you. Rose Arce, one of our CNN producers, is on the phone with us. Rose, what do you got.
[Rose Arce, Cnn Producer:] I'm about a block away, and there were several people that were hanging out of the windows right below where the plane crashed, when suddenly you saw the top of the building start to shake, and people began leaping from the windows in the north side of the window. You saw two people at first plummet, and then a third one, and then the entire top of the building just blew up, and splinters of debris are falling on the street. Where I am right now there's a thick plume of smoke and you can see crowds of people, including emergency workers and police officers. running from the scene screaming. And there's a school nearby, where there were kids in the school yard. That has been emptied out and they're running up the street now too. The whole sort of the neighborhood, I would say, several blocks up, is covered by this almost powdery smoke, little tiny pieces of building you can see just floating in the wind around it. It's almost like a huge cloud had kind of enveloped that part of lower Manhattan.
[Unidentified Male:] All right. It is just one of those awful moments that you need to look at for a minute or two to absorb exactly what has happened. Two of the most recognizable buildings in the city of New York have been attacked and both of them appear to have collapsed, at least in part. The second of the two collapses taking place just a moment or so ago, perhaps two or three minutes ago. There are also, apparently, coordinated attacks that have taken place in Washington on the Pentagon, the State Department has been evacuateed. Just a few moments ago, as we said, and perhaps 20 minutes after the first tower collapsed, we turned around and saw what looked like sparks falling, and then the top part of tower number one collapsing. These are shots from the ground of that scene.

[Dalton Tanonaka, Cnn Anchor:] As we reported earlier, the run-up to the Philippine elections saw scattered violence and growing fears of problems on voting day. CNN's Maria Ressa is in Manila with an update of the situation. Maria, any reports today of trouble or irregularities so far?
[Maria Ressa, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, actually, there were reports of both, Dalton. Shortly before the polls opened, at least five people were killed this morning, make this the most violent elections in recent years. That brings the death to nearly 70 people in the three months of campaigning leading up the elections. Violence, intimidation, vote fraud, vote buys, these are really hallmarks of Philippines elections in the past, and then continue to be, as we've seen in the elections today. However, the most dominant complaint that we saw in the polls today were really hordes of people that looked through the voters list, who claimed they registered to vote, but they did not find their names on the registration lists, so they could not vote today. Many of them angrily told CNN that they felt cheated of that right. Overall, the mood in the polls was really reflected in the uncertainty in the country today, and that was conversation and suspicion.
[Tanonaka:] Maria, when are results due, and when will the election they be validated?
[Ressa:] Well, the counting began a little over three and a half hours ago. This is a very tedious process here in Manila. Everything is done manually. The teachers and the volunteers who are counting claim they will go as long as it takes, many past midnight tonight. The first unofficial results are going to be due in about a week's time, and then the actual official results, according to the Commission on Elections, will not be announced until a little over two weeks from today.
[Tanonaka:] CNN's Maria Ressa, thank you. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] A short time from now, Downey's hearing on drug charges gets under way. This case stems from the actor's Thanksgiving weekend arrest at a Palm Springs resort. For a look at what's coming up in the hearing, we check in now with CNN's Paul Vercammen, who is in Indio, California Paul.
[Paul Vercammen, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Joie, Robert Downey Jr. is expected to arrive within about the next 15 minutes, and he'll take a walk inside this superior courthouse, where his attorneys are expected today to ask for a continuance in this case. They want to look at some of the evidence. Also the prosecutor has told me that she has no problem with them asking for the continuance, and she'll go along with it. We will, of course, have live coverage of this in just about 15 minutes Joie.
[Chen:] Paul, why would they need to have a continuance here? Explain that to us.
[Vercammen:] Here's what's going on: Downey's attorneys want to look over the drugs that were allegedly in his hotel room the night that he was arrested. There are also some other issues here. I believe that they are having some trouble with one of the witnesses in the case. And so they're just trying to buy more time to look over all of the this evidence.
[Chen:] Paul Vercammen, reporting to us from Indio, California.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] As we can see, Buffalo, New York is getting socked by a huge snowstorm. In fact, it's a record-setter. CNN's Holly Firfer is following the story for us. She is in Pembroke, which is very close to Buffalo. Holly, give us the latest.
[Holly Firfer, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, this is as far as we could get, because the roads are still closed heading over into Buffalo. The airports are still closed. The snow may have stopped in this area, but the temperatures are dropping. And the clouds behind us are pretty ominous. They are saying that they are expecting about a couple more feet of snow, possibly over the next eight days.
[Paul Clark, W. Seneda Town Supervisor:] If at all possible, please just stay home, because, obviously, it is not very safe out there. It is going to be very slow. And let the crews do their work. And we will get everything buttoned up for the weekend, hopefully.
[Firfer:] Hospitals have asked volunteers with four-wheel-drive vehicles to bring staffers to work. Residents are being advised to shovel the snow from rooftops and carports to prevent collapse.
[Richard Gradle, Buffalo Resident:] I've been plowing snow for 35 years. And this is the worst I have ever seen it.
[Firfer:] Two deaths have already been attributed to the storms that have forced government officials to declare a state of emergency. According to city officials, the budget for snow removal this year has already been blown. Officials here add that at least this storm had good timing, that it's a holiday week and many schools are closed and businesses are not open as well. So people don't necessarily have to venture out. And I want to add that they did break a record here: 73 inches of snow in one month. Wolf, that's over 6 feet. And they say more snow may be on the way.
[Blitzer:] Seventy-three inches. And most of the inches, I think about 72 of those inches have come since Christmas Eve. And you are saying that another 2 feet are expected? Is that what you are reporting, Holly?
[Firfer:] That is what they are saying. Over the next eight days, they are expecting more and more snow. We got about a foot or so this afternoon. And they were saying it may kick up a little bit again. So we just kind of have to wait and see. It's that lake-effect movement. So we don't know yet, but that's what they are saying.
[Blitzer:] All right, we love that lake effect, that Lake Erie effect. I grew up in Buffalo. It is nothing. It's a piece of cake. Everybody in Buffalo can handle that snow quite well. A quarter of an inch here in Washington, D.C., the city would be paralyzed. Holly Firfer, enjoy the snow in the sun-and-fun capital of the United States: Buffalo, New York.
[Firfer:] Thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Dr. Gary Annunziata, Eisenhower Medical Center:] ... after age 60 have them Only 5 percent of people who have them ever develop a symptom or bleed from them, so 95 percent never have anything related to that.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] 97-year-old patient in the ICU unit, as a medical professional, what concerns you at this point or what encourages you?
[Annunziata:] Stability of vital signs. That's the most important thing with bleeding. If someone begins to bleed, their heart rate begins to increase to pump blood around faster because there's less of it. The blood pressure begins to drop, they begin to look pale and they begin to sweat. And those are early signs of bleeding, in addition to the signs of actual blood coming from somewhere. And he's shown no signs of that. And since he's been here now and stabilized, there's been absolutely no further bleeding.
[Question:] Do you expect him to remain hospitalized for a week still?
[Annunziata:] Yes, I would estimate that. And it's a low process of reassessments and re-examinations and blood tests. And as he progresses, we get him up and move him and start doing other things.
[Question:] Has he started to do that yet? Has he started to be in a position to do that yet or no?
[Annunziata:] Yes, just about.
[Question:] Has he done it yet or is he will you try to...
[Annunziata:] He will this afternoon.
[Question:] Is a week's time common or [Off-mike]
[Annunziata:] That's about common. It does vary from patient to patient. Someone sicker could stay here longer.
[Question:] Is he eating normally? Is that part of the routine?
[Annunziata:] Yes, that will start today.
[Hopkins:] Has he been awake and alert most of the day?
[Annunziata:] Yes.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] talking?
[Annunziata:] Not a lot.
[Question:] Has he cracked any jokes?
[Annunziata:] No.
[Question:] Can you describe...
[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] You're listening to Dr. Gary Annunziata. He's attending 97-year-old Bob Hope in Rancho Mirage, California. Bob Hope hospitalized just yesterday for treatment of a gastrointestinal bleeding condition. The actor's condition being given as critical but now stable. Doctors there suggesting that an upgrade to Bob Hope's condition is pending, telling reporters there's been no additional bleeding, and Bob Hope has started eating. His wife Dolores, a wife of 65 years, has been at his side throughout this entire process. So some encouraging words there from the hospital, those attending Bob Hope. We'll be back after this.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] How are emergency crews getting food and supplies where they are needed most? Well, joining us with some answers and more on the crisis in Mozambique is Peter Bell. He is the president of the relief organization CARE USA, which is involved in the effort in Mozambique. Sir, thank you for taking the time to come and talk with us.
[Peter Bell, President, Care Usa:] I'm glad to be here.
[Hall:] Aid relief is a process-by-process phase-by-phase process. What phase are you at now?
[Bell:] The immediate, the heroic rescue, is just coming to an end, and we're getting into the emergency relief phase. And then increasingly we'll be getting into rehabilitation.
[Hall:] Now, this tragedy has been dubbed enormous by proportion. How do you get your arms around the elephant?
[Bell:] You just can't get your arms around it. It's huge. The only thing that I've seen in recent years that's comparable to it is what occurred in Central America with Hurricane Mitch.
[Hall:] Now, I understand that CARE has had a presence in Mozambique since 1986, so you've really seen this country grow incrementally. How far will this flooding set the country back?
[Bell:] This will be a tremendous setback, and it's really very, very sad, because for 16 years Mozambique went through a horrendous civil war in which a million people were killed. And for the last several years, since 1992, the country has been at peace. Last year, the economy actually grew by 10 percent from a very low base. But now this is an enormous setback.
[Hall:] And what you're looking at is really people just just hanging on to survive. We heard from Catherine Bond that there are issues of fuel, of clean water, of even encampments. What what are you going to do now to try to facilitate those particular issues?
[Bell:] Well, there are up to a million people who have just been totally wiped out. Most of those people have nothing today. So now we will work with them. CARE will work initially to provide food. We will concentrate over to coming weeks and months also in providing sanitation and clean water and taking preventive measures so that infectious diseases and epidemics don't set in.
[Hall:] And this is important. How can people help CARE? Hope can people help the people of Mozambique?
[Bell:] People could help most by making a donation to CARE at 1- 800-521-CARE or through our Web site, www.care.org.
[Hall:] Peter Bell, we wish you the best in your efforts there.
[Bell:] Thank you very much. We're going all out. It's a horrendous situation.
[Hall:] Thank you so much.

[John King, Cnn Sr. White House Correspondent:] As the government tries to piece together the events of September 11, a lot of work going on overseas involves very sensitive work by U.S. intelligence agencies. For some of the latest developments on that front, we wanted to bring in now our national security correspondent David Ensor David.
[David Ensor, Cnn Correspondent:] John, well, one thing I should perhaps tell you first, and that is that U.S. officials tell me, is that there is some evidence that Taliban officials have been in contact over the last few years with members of the Russian mafia, not only to discuss, as has been previously reported, the drug trade, getting opium and heroin out of Afghanistan and into Western markets, but also to discuss possible weapons purchases. So that is something that obviously will be getting some more attention from the U.S. intelligence. As Paula mentioned a moment ago, the president will be at the CIA today. And he's going go there to give a pep talk of sorts, but CIA officials say although they can see there was, by definition, an intelligence failure on September 11, no pep talk really is needed. Morale is high. They are galvanized by the attacks. The president will be going to see the counterterrorism center at the CIA. It's just not intelligence people there; it's also FBI, State, Defense Department and others. There's a frantic pace, I'm told. A much larger staff than before is working 24 hours a day and seven days a week. There are mattresses on the floor outside some of the offices. And a former snack bar has been taken over as a place for naps an overnights. The smell of take-out pizza is said to go through the hallways, although I must confess, they are not allowing reporters into those hallways since the attack. So much new equipment has been brought into place, that there are walkways through it, and they have been given some sort of semihumorous names in the terrorism center. There's the "Osama Bin Lane," "Ghadaffi Court," "Abunidal Avenue," "Saddam Street," "Basque Boulevard." Well, you get the idea. There is also a new slogan that I'm told has been adopted by the counterterrorism center at CIA, and it's a quote from Todd Beamer, the young man who died on one of the jets that was the one that went down in Philadelphia, and that quotation is, "Let's roll." Critics have charged in the past that the CIA had too few officers who could blend into places like Pakistan and Afghanistan, Arab countries. But officials say, while that is true, it's less true than it was five years ago. In the last five or six years, for example, the number of Arabic speakers nearly tripled at the CIA. The intelligence work, there is various kinds. First, where is the information collection. Where is bin Laden, where are his top lieutenants? Where is the Taliban's Mullah Omar, for example? Then there are military issues, much of it handled by the DIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency. What targets would hurt Al Qaeda? Is anyone left in the Afghanistan terror camps? Where have they gone to? Monitoring communications, obviously, and that is handled by the National Security Agency. Another key part the work now is liaison relationships with other intelligence agencies. The most important of all at this point is obviously the Pakistani Intelligence Service, ISI. But Russia is offering complete cooperation, and of course, because of their past work in Afghanistan, their past attempt to control the country, they know a lot about it. Britain, Israel, Saudi Arabia, also very important, and then of course there are covert activities. We heard the report in the British press that an SAS unit, a British military unit, came under fire outside Kabul. I think you can assume, John, that there are representatives of a number of intelligence services in Afghanistan already.
[King:] And we have heard in recent days from the Northern Alliance, the opposition in Northern Afghanistan, they say they say they're in increasing contact with the United States. Do we believe those assertions to be true?
[Ensor:] We know that they're true. We know they're true here, and we believe that they may be true on the ground as well. Certainly, the representatives here have been in fairly frequent contact with policy makers and intelligence officers.
[King:] David Ensor, our national security correspondent, thank you for that update on the often difficult tracking of intelligence operations overseas. Paula Zahn, now back to you in New York.
[Zahn:] Thanks, John. And To fight this new war against terrorism, many people are worried our elected leaders may trade away some of our freedoms for our safety. And there is a precedent for just that, as CNN's Garrick Utley found out.
[Garrick Utley, Cnn Correspondent:] If all the flags, the stars and bars across the land, stand for one transcendent belief, it is to defend the freedoms under attack, including the freedom from fear. [on camera]: Which brings Americans to that central question being debated across the country, and which will be decided in Washington: To preserve the freedom from what happened here September 11th, which individual rights are the nation prepared to trim, to compromise? [voice-over]: Those who have been detained, more than 350, are not the first. Back in 1798, when the young United States feared attack, Congress passed emergency laws allowing the detention and deportation of foreigners without evidence or trial. In the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln suspended that most basic ride of habeas corpus.
[Randolph Mclaughlin, Pace Law School:] That gives individuals who are being detained the power to come into the court and say, "I'm unlawfully detained. You shouldn't hold me any longer."
[Utley:] In World War I, socialists who tried to persuade Americans to peacefully oppose the draft were convicted under the espionage act. The case reached the Supreme Court, where Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes issued his famous opinion: that the defendants had no more right to oppose the draft in war time than a person had the right to shout, "fire" in a crowded theater.
[Mclaughlin:] The courts had bent over backwards in those periods to give the executive branch and the legislative branch the latitude it needs to function, and to shut down the problem.
[Utley:] And so the Supreme Court also upheld the internment of 120,000 Americans of Japanese descent during World War II. Were they a security problem, or merely guilty by ethnic association?
[Announcer:] Calling the House un-American Activities Committee to order...
[Utley:] And then, in the early years of the Cold War, there was the guilt by association of those caught up in the McCarthy investigation of communist activities in the United States. Throughout history, Americans have found that some inalienable rights have been more inalienable than others. Still, when the founding fathers drafted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights more than 200 years ago, they guaranteed freedoms that remain broader than in many other democracies. In France today, citizens are required by law to carry national identity cards, which the police can inspect at any time. In Germany, citizens are required to register with local authorities when they move to a new address, and from age 16, they, too, must carry a government-issued identity card. [on camera]: Of course the United States is not Germany. It is not France. But at the same time, it has not been above or beyond re- balancing the scale between basic human rights and basic human security. [voice-over]: So now, the nation searches again for that balance, decides which rights will be buried in order to preserve other rights in this new war. Garrick Utley, CNN, New York.
[Zahn:] So the question is, should the United States require its citizens to carry national ID cards? Joining us right now, Congressman George Gekas, who chairs the House Immigration Subcommittee. He joins us this morning from Washington. Welcome, sir. Good to see you.
[Rep. George Gekas , House Immigration Subcommittee:] Nice to talk to you.
[Zahn:] Thank you. So in all honesty, do you believe a national ID system would have prevented the terrorist attacks of September 11th?
[Gekas:] Probably not. As a matter of fact, the debate on the national ID has reached a public fervor and public debate status, but it does not penetrate the sense of Congress, it seems to me, who will be hesitating to move toward a national id.
[Zahn:] At this point in Congress, what is the biggest where is the strongest opposition coming from, on what point?
[Gekas:] Almost everyone to whom you speak in the Congress feels first that it is not necessary, because the real problem is port of entry to keep terrorists from coming into our country, or identifying those who are already in, who could fake a national ID card, if we had that, or have other ways of dodging the authorities. So the focus is on preventing terrorists from getting into our country, and to investigate and prosecute those who we find are already in the country.
[Zahn:] Congressman Gekas, you raise an interesting point, because it is true, is it not, that these cards are only as good as the documents on which they are based on?
[Gekas:] Exactly. We believe that those of us who have opposed ID nationally across the spectrum of years here, believe that they're more subject to fraud than almost any other kind of documentation that we have already seen, as part of the terrorist picture.
[Zahn:] All right, but clearly, you have some colleagues who think this is a good idea. Can you communicate to us what their selling points are on this?
[Gekas:] They believe, I believe, that a national ID card would be able to crystallize the awareness of the entire citizenry as to who might among them be possibly a suspicious character, or one who requires further scrutiny. But we go back again, we believe that that would be, many of us, a fruitless kind of endeavor, while still, while trampling on the rights on individual citizens. We believe that the fraud elements and the terrorist activities can go beyond the ID card, and it would turn out to be completely useless.
[Zahn:] So as the nation continues to bait this in, and clearly, it hit a raw nerve with many Americans, can you give us a sense before you leave us this morning where you think Congress does stand on this issue?
[Gekas:] Yes.
[Zahn:] Could legislation fly? Could it pass, that would require a national ID?
[Gekas:] To give you one idea, the anti-terrorist package that the Judiciary Committee, which I'm a member, is contemplating, that proposed by Attorney General Ashcroft and the president, does not have any kind of provision in it that calls for a national ID. Rather the thrust is on the search warrants, and surveillance and port of entry tightening up charitable institutions that are fronts for terrorists. Not a word, not a provision having do with national
[Id. Zahn:] So another piece of legislation would have to be created. Do you see any appetite for that at all in Congress?
[Gekas:] I see in appetite, in fact, no discussion in Congress to proceed with hearings on a national
[Id, Zahn:] It nevertheless is something that it caught the attention of Americans, and I know the public is debating it.
[Gekas:] The public is debating it ferociously. We are recipients of inquiries all the time. And in fact, I have said, even though Congress is not moving towards it, it is clearly a part of the public debate.
[Zahn:] Congressman Gekas, we appreciate your insights this morning, we appreciate your dropping by. Thank you for your time.
[Gekas:] Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Larry King:] Tonight: Critics call it Bill Clinton's unpardonable pardon. Congress wants to know why the outgoing president gave notorious billionaire Marc Rich a last-minute legal pass. Joining us in Washington: the chairman of today's House hearings on the pardon, Republican Congressman Dan Burton; and a key committee witness, Jack Quinn, attorney for Marc Rich and former Clinton White House counsel; in New York, Republican Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who brought the case against Rich as a U.S. attorney 18 years ago; also in New York, the Empire State's former Democratic governor, Mario Cuomo. Back in the nation's capital: GOP Congressman Christopher Shays, a member of the Government Reform Committee; in Jacksonville, Florida, a man who pursued Marc Rich as part of his job with the U.S. Marshals Service, the former New York Police Commissioner Howard Safir. Plus, we'll get perspective from Bill Plante, White House correspondent for CBS News, and Hugh Sidey of "Time" magazine. And they are all next on LARRY KING LIVE. Good evening. We begin with Jack Quinn, attorney for Marc Rich, who testified for 9 12 hours today. What was that like?
[Jack Quinn, Attorney For Marc Rich:] It was a long day. It was a long day.
[King:] Tough day?
[Quinn:] It was a tough day, but it was a fair day.
[King:] Did anything surprise you?
[Quinn:] No. You know, the committee I think had the right and the obligation to ask the questions they did. I had made a commitment that I would cooperate fully and promptly. And so I was pleased to be there to do that. It was a long, long day. And as Chairman Burton will tell you, you know, from time to time, I needed to take a five-minute break and go down the hall.
[King:] Have you spoken to the president President Clinton since this?
[Quinn:] Just once. I spoke to him early the week following the pardon. And we had a relatively brief conversation in which he affirmed to me that he had made this decision on the merits and expressed a concern that we make sure that people understood the basis for the application and the merits that were before him.
[King:] Do you think he should go on somewhere and explain his pardon?
[Quinn:] You may know from my past appearances and experiences about this that I feel very, very strongly about the prerogatives of the presidency, not this president, but of the office of the presidency. I respect the right of the committee to call all the witnesses it wants to, to try to determine what the basis of this pardon was. But I do think that it is inappropriate in this system of government to call a president and question him about a decision he makes on war and peace, on foreign policy or pardons.
[King:] Should he do a different venue: go on a program?
[Quinn:] It is not my call to make.
[King:] OK.
[Quinn:] What I can tell you about this is that, to the bottom of my heart, I know certainly that this case was presented to him by me on the merits, not not on the basis of relationships...
[King:] Favor. Relationship, OK.
[Quinn:] Favors, gifts, contributions. And I know, based on the dealings that I had with him, that he had devoured this pardon petition, that he had really thought carefully about the arguments I made. And I believe that he made the decision based on the arguments before him.
[King:] Did he listen to arguments on the other side, to your knowledge?
[Quinn:] Well, to my knowledge, there was a significant debate within the White House. There were people on the other side. I believe he heard from people who opposed granting the pardon. And I believe he heard from people who were in favor of it certainly me. But I also believe and I think this very important that he believes he had the advice and recommendation that he needed from the United States Department of Justice. And I believe that what he understood that advice to be played an important role in the decision he made.
[King:] You, then, did not circumvent?
[Quinn:] I certainly don't believe I circumvented. I in point of fact, on at least one occasion and I believe more I encouraged the White House Counsel's Office to seek the views of the Department of Justice. I did so because I believed that, because of a course of dealings I had had with the department over a period of about 14 months, that the department was sympathetic not to the notion of a pardon, but sympathetic to the notion that we had presented to them legal arguments about the flaws in this case and that the Southern District of New York ought to reconsider it.
[King:] Couple of other things, and we it is hard to get into the myriad of all of it. In essence, though, you are saying that this should have been a civil matter.
[Quinn:] Yes, sir.
[King:] That the matters he is being accused with, other people were accused of in similar fashion civilly.
[Quinn:] That is correct.
[King:] And they went after him criminally.
[Quinn:] That is correct.
[King:] Don't decision likes this made a lot in Justice and at Internal Revenue: This guy is criminal; this guy is civil? Isn't that made every day in prosecuting offices?
[Quinn:] Well sure. But in this case and you are right, it is complicated. And I'm not going to begin to try to explain it in this show, although if you give me the opportunity, I would be glad to.
[King:] Would you come back one night? And I will do a whole a whole explanation of the case.
[Quinn:] I certainly will. I would love to do that. This case arose out of a complicated series of oil transactions that occurred during the time when we had price controls on oil. And, in essence, what happened was that Marc Rich and major United States oil companies, including Arco, had linked domestic transactions to foreign transactions in an effort, admittedly, to circumvent those price controls. I think they were trying to do so lawfully. But what they tried to do was to find a way to get the real value out of a price of oil.
[King:] And they were charged with racketeering.
[Quinn:] Well, they... That was the straw that broke the camel's back. This case could not have been brought today as a RICO case, because the United States Department of Justice in 1989 and 1990 adopted as a matter of policy that cases like this couldn't be brought as racketeering cases. And that, by the way, was the subject of repeated criticism in the editorial pages, particularly of "The Wall Street Journal."
[King:] At the time?
[Quinn:] At the time.
[King:] All right, a couple of other quick things: Is Marc Rich coming back to America?
[Quinn:] Larry, I would not have embarked on this project if I did not believe that he would come back.
[King:] So he is now, that is the whole purpose: to come back, right?
[Quinn:] That was certainly my understanding.
[King:] And what do you make of Denise Rich taking the Fifth?
[Quinn:] I don't know what to say about that. You know, I this is my surmise, my speculation: that her lawyers want her, if she is going to provide testimony, to do so under some grant of immunity. But what I can tell you is that I for myself, I made the decision to cooperate promptly and fully. I have made that commitment as recently as this evening before this show to the chairman to continue to do so.
[King:] We will meet the chairman now. Thanks, Jack.
[Quinn:] You bet.
[King:] Thanks for coming over.
[Quinn:] Oh, thank you.
[King:] I appreciate it. It was a long day.
[Quinn:] You bet.
[King:] We will meet that chairman, Congressman Dan Burton of Indiana, right after this.
[William J. Clinton, Former President Of The United States:] I did what I thought was right. And I still think that, on balance, it was probably the right decision. I wish we had more time to work it. But you should nobody else needs to be called about this. I am responsible for it. And I take responsibility for it.
[King:] As we appreciated Jack Quinn coming over, we appreciate Congressman Dan Burton as well, the Republican of Indiana, chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform. Any comment on what Jack Quinn just said?
[Rep. Dan Burton , Chairman, Government Reform And Oversight Committee:] Well, he was a pretty good witness. I don't agree with what he did or some of the methods that I believe were employed in trying to get this pardon for Mr. Rich. But I don't have anything personally against Mr. Quinn.
[King:] But he was being a lawyer, wasn't he?
[Burton:] He was being a lawyer. Oh, boy, was he ever.
[King:] That's what lawyers are supposed to do.
[Burton:] Right. He presented his side of the case to the people that he thought were necessary to get this pardon for Mr. Rich, and he was successful.
[King:] Congressman, where does it all go, since last night on this program Attorney General Ashcroft said a pardon is constitutional, you can pardon a president can pardon whoever he wishes?
[Burton:] Well, we want to find out..
[King:] Period.
[Burton:] Well, that's right, and we're not going to contest that. That's a constitutional right that the president has. All presidents do, and we hope they'll exercise it in a judicious way in the future. But let me just say about Mr. Rich, we want to find out if there was any kind of a quid pro quo. One of the troubling things that we found yesterday and today was that Mrs. Rich, the former Mrs. Rich, has taken the Fifth Amendment. And her attorney said she gave a very, very large amount of money to the Clinton library, and she was also a big contributor to the Democratic Party. We want to find out if that was all her money, whether or not Mr. Rich may have given money to her to be given to Mr. Clinton.
[King:] Even let's take worst-case scenario,
[Burton:] Oh, sure.
[King:] So where do you go with this? Let's say that did happen.
[Burton:] Well, what we're trying to find out is, first of all, was there anything done that shouldn't have been. If it was, then we need to make sure those who did it were held are held accountable. But...
[King:] So charges could still be brought?
[Burton:] Right. But secondly, I think the American people have a right to know. You know, when we had the 14 Puerto Rican terrorists who were pardoned, who killed policemen in New York, who blew up innocent civilians in restaurants and had the largest armored car robbery in history, we held hearings to let the people know why they were pardoned. And the same thing is true of Mr. Rich. And it's done for a purpose. First of all, we have the responsibility to find out when there's wrongdoing or what looks to be wrongdoing in government. And second, we need to let future administrations know that there's a procedure to be followed before they pardon somebody. Obviously, the president can pardon anyone he chooses, but there's a procedure that would have probably negated the possibility of Mr. Rich getting this pardon if they had just followed it.
[King:] In retrospect, should you have investigated Caspar Weinberger's pardon? He was going to be forced to a trial where tapes would have been played.
[Burton:] Well, you and I talked about this before, and Caspar Weinberger never fled the country, never tried to hide any documents as...
[King:] Tapes would have been produced at his trial that might have linked higher-ups.
[Burton:] Well, I suppose that's a possibility, but...
[King:] He got a pardon, but he was never investigated.
[Burton:] He was prepared to go to trial and that was a decision made by the president at that time. I was not chairman, so I can't really comment. But...
[King:] In retrospect?
[Burton:] In retrospect, would I have investigated that, I'd have to look at all the facts, but I wouldn't have ruled it out. But I don't I really don't believe Caspar Weinberger tried to avoid prosecution. He was prepared to go to trial if necessary, and I think he would have been acquitted.
[King:] Does it trouble you, congressman, if Mr. Quinn is correct that people doing what they did in 1983, in 1989 would not have been charged?
[Burton:] Well, I'm not so sure that that's the case. The two attorneys for the U.S. attorneys office in New York said there have been some changes, but they said that the RICO statute that they talked about and some of the other things may not have been applicable today that were then. But the tax fraud case would have been applicable. I mean, this man ran off by hiding $100 million and had a $48 million tax liability, the largest tax case in history.
[King:] Do you are you going to give immunity to Mrs. Rich?
[Burton:] Well, we want her to testify, and she may have been a victim of all this, dragged in, and we want to find out, because I've heard she's a pretty nice lady. But what we want to do is we want to have her testify. So what I'm prepared to do if she will not if she's going to continue to exercise her Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination is to immunize her, and then, of course, she'll have to testify.
[King:] So, that's the plan.
[Burton:] I think that will be the plan. We hope she'll reconsider. But if not, we'll talk to the Justice Department about immunizing her and...
[King:] Still think it would be wrong to call President Clinton?
[Burton:] I don't think we should call President Clinton or question him publicly about what he did. He should explain it, I think, thoroughly to the American people. But unless we find something that looks like wrongdoing on his part, quid pro quo if you will, then I don't think there's a necessity to call him.
[King:] When do you reconvene?
[Burton:] Well, it's going to be a couple of weeks. We I just once again got my subpoena authority today. So we'll try to get documents voluntarily. If we don't get them, we'll subpoena them. And that'll probably take two or three weeks, and then we'll take a look at the evidence.
[King:] We'll see you back here.
[Burton:] OK, buddy.
[King:] Congressman Dan Burton, chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform. We'll meet the man who brought the case, Mayor Rudy Giuliani. He was then U.S. attorney for the southern district of New York. He's next. Don't go away.
[Eric Holder, Former Deputy Attorney General:] Although I always acted consistent with my duties and responsibilities as deputy attorney general, in hindsight, I wish that I had done some things differently with regard to the Marc Rich matter. Specifically, I wish that I had ensured that the Department of Justice was more fully informed and involved in this pardon process.
[King:] We now welcome Mayor Rudy Giuliani of New York to LARRY KING LIVE. He brought the original case against Marc Rich. Were you shocked at this pardon, Rudy?
[Mayor Rudy Giuliani , New York:] Flabbergasted. I heard about when I was in Washington a couple of weeks ago, and I think a reporter came up to me and said, "Do you know President Clinton has pardoned Marc Rich?" And my first reaction was, cannot be, must be a mistake. Presidents don't pardon fugitives, certainly not someone who's been on the No. 1 list for the FBI on and off for about 17 years. So yes...
[King:] Were you impressed...
[Giuliani:] So it took it took me about a day to actually absorb the fact that the president of the United States actually pardoned one of our most notorious fugitives.
[King:] Were you impressed with anything Jack Quinn said tonight in regard to the way...
[Giuliani:] No. I I actually...
[King:] ... there were flaws in the prosecution and the like?
[Giuliani:] No, I actually think the more that the Clinton people discuss this, the more questions they raise about how unusual and strange this whole process is. You have to know, Larry, that I've worked in the Justice Department for more of my life than I have been mayor of New York City. I've probably recommended or seen 2,000 pardon recommendations, passed them along to President Ford and President Reagan. This pardon for all the kind of rhetoric that goes on, there's no explanation for this pardon. You don't pardon a fugitive. And...
[King:] I know you you you brought the case against Michael Milken and tried to get him pardoned.
[Giuliani:] Yes, Michael Milken pleaded guilty, Michael Milken went to jail, Michael Milken paid a huge fine. And then he allegedly, you know, you can make an argument that he straightened his life out. And I've supported many pardons like that. I think the pardon process is important. I think the questions the former president has created here put in doubt the pardon process. And it's not just your focusing on the Marc Rich pardon. He did about 50 that he didn't run through the Justice Department. And some significant number of these or not significant number some number involved campaign contributions. So there were some very serious questions raised here. But getting back to Marc Rich, some of the things left out earlier is Marc Rich was accused of trading with Iran during the hostage crisis in violation of the Trading With the Enemy Act. Remember the hostage crisis?
[King:] Yes.
[Giuliani:] American lives were at stake. This man was doing business with Iran, allegedly, during that period of time. He ran away for 17 years, renounced his American citizenship, and evaded the FBI, the United States Marshals Service, and flouted American law. So I don't understand how a president can give there is no argument that can be made for a pardon. A pardon happens when a person has done their time, paid their dues to society and allegedly straightened themselves out. This man just ran away.
[King:] Do you have any read and Denise Rich, his former wife, she sued him, got a lot of money. .. adultery.
[Giuliani:] On other side of this, you have a pardon that has no explanation. There is no you can make them up, but there is no honest, straight explanation for this pardon. On the other side, you have over $1 million in campaign contributions to the president, to the first lady's Senate campaign and to the Democratic Party, and now the possibility of contributions to the president former president's library fund. Somebody has got to look into this and figure out what the heck happened here.
[King:] And...
[Giuliani:] This is not something that just should be brushed under the rug.
[King:] And what, Mr. Mayor, do you with it when you do find out, since you can't change the pardon and you don't want to change presidential pardons?
[Giuliani:] Well, I don't you know, there are a lot of things you can't change. It doesn't mean you don't figure out why they happened. President Ford was called before the Congress to explain his pardon of President Nixon. You couldn't have done anything about that. But the Congress and the American people had a right to know the reasons that President Ford had for pardoning him. So, you know, you have here a pardon without explanation. And you have very large multimillion dollar campaign contributions. That is worth taking a look at. I mean, I don't I don't think anybody can say it is unreasonable for the Senate and the House to want to figure out what happened here, if for no other reason than to vindicate in the future the president's awesome power and important power to pardon. I should emphasize: I agree with pardons. I think pardons are a good thing. I think they do indicate when people have paid their price to society, straightened themselves out. And some of the pardons that the president gave were justifiable. But you have this one. You have the one in California with the guy who was pardoned and is now still under investigation. So the Justice Department is involved in the situation that maybe he has been pardoned for future crimes, which is creating a real legal problem, because the president bypassed the Justice Department process on numerous occasions in those last couple of days.
[King:] Yes.
[Giuliani:] And somebody has got to figure out what happened here.
[King:] Thank you, Mayor. Always good seeing you.
[Giuliani:] Thank you, Larry. How you doing?
[King:] You, too. How you feeling?
[Giuliani:] I'm feeling good. And I want to know where you bought that shirt.
[King:] I got it from I got it in New York! OK?
[Giuliani:] I bet you got it in New York. It looks like a New York shirt.
[King:] Where else? See you in spring training.
[Giuliani:] All right. I'm looking forward to it.
[King:] Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the mayor of New York. Next: Governor Mario Cuomo and Congressman Christopher Shays will go at it. Still to come: Howard Safir, the former police commissioner of New York, and then journalist Bill Plante and Hugh Sidey Linda Tripp tomorrow night. Don't go away.
[Rep. Henry Waxman , California:] The Rich pardon is a bad precedent. It appears to set a double standard for the wealthy and the powerful. And it is an end run around the judicial process. Think about it for a minute. One week, Marc Rich is on the Justice Department's list of the 10 most wanted. And the next week, he is given a presidential pardon.
[King:] We now welcome Congressman Christopher Shays, Republican of Connecticut he is a member of the House Committee on Government Reform and Mario Cuomo in New York, the former Democratic governor of New York. Congressman Shays, what can happen with your investigation? I mean, you are not going to unchange the pardon. Nor do you want to, right?
[Rep. Christopher Shays , Government Reform Committee:] A number of things can happen. One, we can examine the process of how this pardon was given and make recommendations to any future president: what they should do and how they should follow it, and why Bill Clinton got himself in such trouble. We can also look at how there was a breakdown in what I call the revolving door. I mean, Mr. Quinn shouldn't have been asking the president for a pardon. There was an executive order that was signed when President Clinton took office that said: Don't lobby the government the executive branch for five years if you have been in the executive branch.
[King:] And that is lobbying.
[Shays:] In my judgment, it was clearly lobbying.
[King:] Congressman Governor Cuomo, do you agree that the committee has a right to look into this and should look into it?
[Mario Cuomo , Former New York Governor:] Well, there is no question the committee has a right to look into it. And they probably can't do a whole lot of harm looking into it. I'm not sure they are going to do any good. I think we ought to get some basics clear here. I must be very confused about what the pardon power is. A long time ago, in 1787, when we put the Constitution together through the founding fathers, the whole question came up as to whether or not the kinds of questions that are being asked now should be asked with respect to pardons. Should the people have the right to know whether or not the individual was contrite, whether or not the process was followed? And the founding fathers decided against that. And they said: No, we are going to resist what was done by seven of the 10 states then that had pardon power. We're going to give an absolute political prerogative to the president. He will never have to explain it. And he will use it for his own political purposes. And so Washington, Adams gave pardons guess what? to traitors. Jefferson gave pardon to seditionists. Jimmy Carter gave pardons to fugitives. Who were all those people who ran away to Canada instead of serving?
[King:] OK, Congressman Shays...
[Cuomo:] And, you know, that was...
[King:] All right, hold it.
[Cuomo:] That was the pardon power. And it always has been.
[King:] OK. Congressman Shays, how do you respond?
[Shays:] Well, the governor is making a number of assumptions. He's making an assumption because they didn't write it in the Constitution, Congress doesn't have the obligation to look at abuses when they take place. And this was a clear abuse.
[King:] But if they clear power of pardon... Even if you said, "Don't abuse it," a president can do anything he wants.
[Shays:] The governor needs to let me finish. The bottom line to this is that we have a constitutional responsibility to look at this process. And we are an investigative committee. We are not a legislative committee. We are not an appropriating committee. This was a felon who fled and spent over 17 years in Switzerland. He traded with our enemies. He cheated the government of $48 million. He attempted to hide income of $100 million. And we need to look at it. We need to understand how it could happen.
[Cuomo:] May I ask...
[King:] But so what, if the next president can pardon anyone he wants?
[Shays:] But, see, my judgment is, if we put focus in on this, the next president is going to be a little more careful.
[King:] Fair enough, Mario?
[Cuomo:] No, no, not fair at all. First of all...
[Shays:] What's not fair?
[Cuomo:] Well, let me tell you what's not fair here, Congressman. First of all, you forgot about the presumption of innocence. You have very glibly said all day long that this man committed crimes. He was never convicted of anything, unless you believe that an indictment is equivalent to a conviction. I mean, how dare we sit around saying he did this, he did that because he was accused of doing those things? Let me finish, please.
[Shays:] Sure. Sure.
[Cuomo:] You know, of course you have a right to look. But the Constitution made it very clear that the Congress has no role here. If you want to pass a constitutional amendment and I understand another Republican, Arlen Specter, says: Let's have a constitutional amendment. Well, that was rejected by the founding fathers. Maybe the country will feel differently now. Maybe the legislature, the Congress should have a voice. But you were specifically ruled out. Now and all this nonsense about there are no grounds here. You had two professors who said that this wasn't a proper accusation, that there was no tax violation, the RICO statute has been abandoned. Now, I'm not saying I would have given a pardon. And the accusation that the president was doing business with Jack Quinn, the best and smartest politician we've ever had, who surely...
[Shays:] I think you're getting carried away here.
[Cuomo:] ... who surely must have known...
[King:] All right. I've got to get a break.
[Cuomo:] .. how vulnerable he was.
[King:] I've got to get a break guys. Governor, I hate to interrupt, but I've got to get a break. We'll be right back with Congressman Shays and Governor Cuomo. Don't go away. We're back. Congressman Shays, Governor Cuomo says change the Constitution.
[Shays:] No, he didn't say that. He said...
[King:] He said, if you want to, change it.
[Shays:] Right. He said we didn't have a responsibility to look at this. We have a constitutional responsibility to look at waste, fraud and abuse, and this was a gigantic abuse of the power of a pardon. And I happen to think that if it was all right for a previous Congress in the Government Reform Committee to look at Marc Rich in '91 and '92, demanding to know why President Bush hadn't brought him back from Switzerland, and they were so outraged with that. And it was bipartisan; we were all outraged. This is even more outrageous. He did commit a crime. He fled. He was a fugitive. As soon as he fled, he became a fugitive, which was a crime.
[King:] You would have to admit, Governor Cuomo, it don't look good?
[Cuomo:] Of course not. It doesn't smell good, and that's a very relevant point. When you accuse the president of having done business with Jack Quinn, what you're saying is he didn't understand how vulnerable he would be. He did a favor for Jack Quinn. It wasn't a good legal argument that Jack Quinn gave him. Bill Clinton was dumb enough to do a favor thinking he might not get caught at it. That's absurd. Now, look, and the congressman says...
[Shays:] Nobody's making that claim.
[King:] He didn't say that.
[Cuomo:] Of course, but congressman look, Mr. Congressman, you say...
[Shays:] My name is Chris.
[Cuomo:] ... that there was an abuse. OK. No, you're a congressman and I respect you, and you're a terrific congressman incidentally. And you say there is an abuse. How do you define "abuse"? There are no criteria. There are no was it an abuse for Jimmy Carter to...
[Shays:] Let me ask you a question. ... to pardon all the fugitives? Was that an abuse? Let me just tell you what an abuse is. For President Clinton to be elected and his first act on January 20th, '93 was to say that people who work for the White House will not lobby the White House when they leave. And that's revolving door. And Jack...
[Cuomo:] Oh, so it's not the pardon. Oh, I see what you mean. OK.
[Shays:] No, I didn't say that.
[Cuomo:] The ethical question you mean.
[Shays:] No. You always like to put words in people's mouths.
[Cuomo:] Oh, no. I'm sorry.
[Shays:] This is one part of a very terrible situation. He shouldn't have been lobbying the president. He shouldn't have been hired to give this man a pardon, and that was an abuse. And I almost think the president gave Jack Quinn a pardon. And what he did was he basically said the rules no longer apply, and he ripped up the regulation and now allows...
[King:] I think what Governor Cuomo is saying he may not have done it, but under the Constitution, the president can pardon anyone.
[Shays:] He can, but if he pardoned Timothy McVeigh, are you saying we shouldn't look at it? Of course, we should look at it. We want to know why.
[Cuomo:] No, you...
[King:] All right. He's got a point, doesn't he, Governor Cuomo? Pardons Timothy McVeigh, would you look at it?
[Cuomo:] I have no objection to looking at it, and I have no objection to your proposing a constitutional amendment. But let's make it...
[Shays:] I'm not proposing a constitutional amendment.
[Cuomo:] Well, another Republican did. I wouldn't have any objection to you're being consistent now as Republicans and saying, let's go back and take President Bush's pardon of Caspar Weinberger and let's look at that, too, because this was a man you know, what contrition was involved? Why did you do it a month before a trial? And if you wanted to inquire, but you're wasting time...
[Shays:] You know what...
[Cuomo:] ... because you can't change it unless you ask for a constitutional amendment. And you it's like the electoral college. We can talk about it forever. It's not going to change. Now one other thing, John McCain said something today that was very interesting. He said, yes, maybe it's a bit of a vendetta by the Republicans. Another Republican appeared tonight on this program, or earlier today, and said, look, it's nice to beat them up a little bit, because we weren't able to get him when he was president. And that's that's sad that we're spending all this time...
[King:] But Congressman Shays hasn't said that...
[Cuomo:] ... just beating no, not Congressman Shays.
[Shays:] You know why Bill Clinton has got himself in so much trouble, people are constantly defending him, and they're saying we shouldn't look at him because we should have looked at someone previous. And I think if people had stood up on the Democratic side of the aisle and said, Bill Clinton, what you're doing is wrong, he might not have done this stupid pardon.
[King:] All right...
[Cuomo:] Are you really saying you didn't look at Bill Clinton for his eight years? Are we kidding or what? How much did you spend looking at him?
[Shays:] What we needed were some Democrats to look at him as well and hold him accountable.
[Cuomo:] Why? Why? Republicans are pretty good at looking at people.
[King:] OK, guys. We're going to do a lot more on this. Governor Mario Cuomo, thank you. Congressman Christopher Shays, thank you. We'll get the thoughts of Howard Safir, the former New York City Police commissioner. He was chief of operations for the U.S. Marshall Service from '78 to '90, and he headed the pursuit of then fugitive Marc Rich. We'll be right back.
[Rep. Bob Barr , Georgia:] It's like it's like Keystone Kops. But I don't think it is. I think the president knew exactly what he was doing. You didn't request information, so you could probably say, I don't know. In other words, ever heard of the concept of deliberate ignorance? Well, maybe not. Most prosecutors have.
[Eric Holder, Former Assistant Attorney General:] I will stand here and have people say that I have made a mistake, and I'll debate that.
[Barr:] You don't think...
[Holder:] But you are now implying that I have done something that's essentially corrupt.
[Barr:] Well...
[Holder:] And I will not accept that.
[King:] In a couple minutes, we'll get journalistic point of view from Bill Plante of CBS and Hugh Sidey of "TIME" magazine. We're going to spend those minutes with Howard Safir, good friend and former New York City Police commissioner, looking relaxed in Jacksonville, Florida. He was chief of operations for the U.S. Marshall Service, headed the pursuit of fugitive Marc Rich. Why was he so hard to get?
[Howard Safir, Former New York City Commissioner:] He was hard to get because he had a great deal of influence in a lot of countries, and we were pretty much restricted to just a few countries where we could apprehend him. He had Bolivian passport, he had a Spanish passport. The Israelis were very clear they weren't going to help us apprehend him. So it was very difficult to get him, plus he had a lot of money.
[King:] Mayor Giuliani said he was shocked at the pardon. Were you?
[Safir:] I was outraged. I was outraged because this sends a message to the criminals around the world that if you have influence, if you have money, if you have access, that you can put out a sign that says "Justice for sale."
[King:] But what do you do, Howard, with the as Governor Cuomo said, the president can pardon who he wants to pardon. Period.
[Safir:] But how can he pardon a fugitive, and then you look at the money that's been contributed to the Democratic Party. And the message that this sends that if you have a lot of money, you get a get-out-of-jail-free card. And that is exactly what happened with Marc Rich. You know, Marc Rich is one of those people who considers himself a citizen of the world, inconvenienced by the petty laws of nations. And the message that this sends is outrageous.
[King:] But nothing be done about it, right?
[Safir:] Oh, nothing can be done about it now. You know, one of the things that I find frustrating is, when you are a fugitive hunter, you can make a thousand mistakes. You can wait forever for the fugitive to make one. And then you got him. But there is an endgame now because he is no longer a fugitive.
[King:] Jack Quinn said he would not have taken this case if he did not fully believe that Marc Rich was coming back to the United States. He thinks he is going to come back. And President Clinton said the attorney general the new attorney general, Mr. Ashcroft who was here last night can prosecute him civilly.
[Safir:] I absolutely believe that he will never come back to the United States. He has said often that he doesn't really consider himself an American citizen. He has no ties to the United States. The reason he wanted this pardon is so that he could travel around the world without looking over his shoulder.
[King:] Howard, are you hinting at or saying bribe here? Are you saying quid pro quo? What are your feelings? We don't have facts yet.
[Safir:] We don't have facts. What I'm saying is the appearance: the appearance of fugitive's ex-wife contributing over $1 million to the Democratic Party. You are talking about an individual, when I did a spy exchange in 1986, he had a lawyer from East Germany offer $225 million for him and Pinky Green if the prosecutions were wiped out. Well, we told them at the time: Justice is not for sale. The appearance is very different now.
[King:] Now, you have called him a bad guy. Will you tell us how bad? What because Jack Quinn said what he did, what he was charged with doing in '83, in '89 would not be a crime.
[Safir:] Well, I have heard a lot of attorneys including my former boss, Rudy Giuliani disagree with that. But he is a bad guy from the perspective, he committed the greatest tax fraud in the history of this country. And while our hostages were being abused and being tortured in Iran, he was trading with them.
[King:] Did you ever come close, Howard, to, as they say, nabbing him for want of better term, kidnapping him?
[Safir:] Well, we call them extraordinary renditions. But we...
[King:] That is a great term.
[Safir:] Well, and we have been very successful at it. But, unfortunately, when I went to Switzerland, and we had a plan set up, the Swiss police found out about it. And, as a result of that, they told me that if we did anything, they would arrest us.
[King:] Because would you have been committing a crime on Swiss soil, right?
[Safir:] Exactly, because the Swiss did not recognize these as crimes under their law. I tried to get the Israelis to help us, as they have helped us often. But a general who is a very good friend of mine in the Israeli police told me: "Officially, we are going to help you all we can. As your friend, don't waste your time."
[King:] He was not extraditable from any of these countries?
[Safir:] He was not extraditable from Switzerland. If we could have got him in Germany or in France or in England, we could have got some help. But we missed him by a couple hours in England.
[King:] And, finally, Howard, everyone is saying how smart President Clinton is, and certainly how politically adept he is. Why do you think he did this?
[Safir:] Well, that is what is perplexing. Here is a very intelligent man, who is very worldly, knows a great deal about the criminal justice system. He's a lawyer. That is the question. And I think that is what the Congress has to find out.
[King:] Howard, always good seeing you. Are you feeling well?
[Safir:] I'm feeling great. Thanks, Larry.
[King:] Thanks Howard Safir, the former New York City police commissioner. He was chief of operations for the U.S. Marshals Service. We are going to take a break and come back and meet two of the best journalists around: Bill Plante of CBS and Hugh Sidey of "Time" magazine. "Chris Rock" will be here Monday night. Don't go away.
[Quinn:] While you may disagree with the president's decision, I believe the facts establish that I represented my client's interests fairly, vigorously and ethically. I carried out this representation keeping both the Department of Justice and the White House informed.
[King:] We now welcome Bill Plante, CBS News White House correspondent, and Hugh Sidey of "Time" magazine, Washington contributing editor, author of "The Presidency" column, covered the presidency for more than three decades. So the first question to both of you, since you know this president and covered him so well: Why does the Bill Clinton saga, Bill, continue?
[Bill Plante, Cbs News:] Because he is always in there. He had an interest in this. I don't believe for a minute that he was persuaded somehow by Jack Quinn to grant this pardon. There is evidence that was brought out today in the hearing that he was doing his best to facilitate it. Obviously, there were people that he wanted to please with this: maybe not Mr. Rich, maybe somebody else. Who knows?
[King:] Hugh, what's your read?
[Hugh Sidey, "time":] Well, Larry, my first reason, I suspect there is a big wad of money out there that we haven't uncovered, that...
[King:] Follow the money.
[Sidey:] Follow the money, yes. Let's see where that goes. But also, you know, in America, we like rascals. I mean, this is a bad boy. And he does all these outrageous things.
[King:] You're talking about the president.
[Sidey:] The president! And goes out and smiles and he can away with it. Somebody said he is still an adolescent. He's a teenager. He can violate he can break all the rules and then they forgive him. And there is some truth to that.
[King:] Is this a time where he is not getting away with it, Bill?
[Plante:] Well, I have got to think that this is a public- relations disaster which he and the people around him did not anticipate. Look, here you take a guy who is one of the most unsympathetic characters you can imagine: an international fugitive who is full of money and who represents the concern that everybody has about money being able to buy justice, money influencing the criminal justice system. You heard it today in those hearings from African-American members of Congress, saying: Some of my constituents, relatives are sitting in jail wishing that they could get out.
[King:] The congressman from Maryland.
[Plante:] Yes.
[Sidey:] Well, I disagree with some of that, by the way. My only disagreement is with these people who say: Look, got money, you can buy your way in. You couldn't have done it with Ike. You couldn't have done it with Reagan or Bush or Carter. You couldn't have done it with any of those. I'm absolutely convinced it has to come from the top down. Bill Clinton, in some ways, is a lawless human being. He has done it in his personal ways. He has this elegant facility to talk about major social issues. And it is good. Let me tell you, he is right. And then in his personal life, he violates all the rules. Now, you as somebody said, we need a psychiatrist for this.
[King:] But he doesn't pardon Michael Milken, who served his time, pled guilty and has done so much good since he has been out. It doesn't seem he doesn't pardon Webster Hubbell.
[Sidey:] Follow the money, Larry! Follow the money. There's more dough in here.
[King:] Michael hired the wrong lawyer.
[Plante:] Yes, Webb Hubbell may be facing some more problems. And maybe that is the reason he didn't pardon him. Who knows? But he looked into this at great length.
[King:] Should Bill Clinton explain it in some venue, Hugh?
[Sidey:] Yes, yes if he can. You know, the problem...
[King:] He may not be able to.
[Sidey:] He may not be able to. I you know, I have been through this with Nixon. I have been through it with Teddy Kennedy. There are thresholds over which people cannot pass in explaining things that are embarrassing. I don't know whether he can say: Look, I did this.
[Plante:] I would disagree with you. I don't think he has to.
[King:] Governor Cuomo says he doesn't have to.
[Plante:] The pardon power is absolute.
[King:] You mean it will just go away?
[Plante:] It's a oh, it won't go away. But I'm saying he doesn't have to explain. There is no reason that he has to explain.
[King:] But for public relations, should he? If you were his PR director, he came to you for PR advice, what would you say?
[Plante:] Well, leave the country for a while.
[Sidey:] No, no, no.
[Plante:] How can he be tampering with the Constitution, Hugh? It's an absolute right, the power that he has.
[Sidey:] We are talking about what is ethical. We are talking about not what is illegal. We are talking about what is right. And this is a constitutional provision which is... I understand that.
[King:] It's pretty clear. He can pardon who he wants to.
[Sidey:] I understand that, but you you nobody that I heard today, Democrat or Republican, said it was right. Everyone disagrees. Mario Cuomo was about the only fellow that seemed to think it was...
[King:] No, he said he wouldn't pardon him.
[Sidey:] Well, yes, but see, this is...
[Plante:] This is the
[Sidey:] Sure, OK.
[Plante:] ... which is written into the Constitution by the founding fathers.
[Sidey:] Bill, does that make it right?
[Plante:] I don't I don't think that's the point.
[Sidey:] Yes, it is.
[Plante:] You and I can believe what we want about what he did, but he had the right to do it.
[Sidey:] I don't argue. I don't argue.
[Plante:] And there's no reason, I don't think...
[Sidey:] But we're talking public relations, are we? We're talking about what's out in the country.
[King:] Yes, I asked a PR we'll take a break and come back with Bill Plante and Hugh Sidey. We'll try to draw them out a little in the remaining moments. Don't go away. Before I asked what happened to Eric Holder today, Bill wanted to add something in the PR vein.
[Plante:] Bill Clinton is a young man. He's 54 years old. He's got probably a long life ahead of him in which he can shape how he is remembered by history. He'll write about his time in office. He'll probably right about this. And in 10 or 20 or 30 years, there will probably be a very different view of him, just as there is of President Eisenhower, of President Nixon, of President Truman.
[Sidey:] I'm beginning to think this idea of having a young president is a bad one, because he gets a second term and he's going to be with us forever. I'm sick of it.
[King:] Hugh, what do you make of the beating Eric Holder took today?
[Sidey:] Well, he's too much involved and it's too vague, and there he is, he's trapped.
[King:] Do you have questions about him or do you think he's trapped?
[Sidey:] Yes, I do have questions about him. I think he was Clinton's man, and I think he smelled this idea that he might be attorney general, or at least be mentioned for it. And I think he got trapped in this and probably it's over his head.
[King:] Now, Bill, you said earlier you don't think it was Quinn convincing Clinton. You think Clinton convinced Clinton?
[Plante:] Oh, I'm sure that Jack Quinn had a part in it, but I think that based on the testimony that we heard today and we've heard about before, which was that Mr. Clinton was involved in pursuing this, he got memos and letters from his friends, from Denise Rich, from Beth Dozoritz asking that he do this this went back several months he seemed inclined to pursue it, according to some of the memos we heard today.
[King:] Jack Quinn said tonight on this program he would not have taken this case if he thought Marc Rich wasn't coming back to this country, and he thinks he is coming back. Howard Safir thinks he isn't coming back.
[Sidey:] I don't think so either.
[King:] Not coming back.
[Sidey:] No, I just think it's too difficult. He says he wants to walk down Fifth Avenue and see his friends. Listen, he's going to see a lot more enemies, I suspect, than people that are outraged by this. I don't know what the polls show, Larry. Maybe you know better than I do...
[King:] I don't know...
[Sidey:] ... but I can't imagine that very many people support this.
[Plante:] How much more unsympathetic a public figure could you make?
[King:] Well, could he make a case for himself? Could he do a like do a massive interview?
[Sidey:] I suppose he could.
[King:] Maybe we can go over to Geneva and talk to him.
[Sidey:] Well, yes, sure, do it. See what he says.
[King:] I mean, this is the message
[Sidey:] But he can't answer it, Larry. He can't answer it.
[King:] Why did he run?
[Sidey:] Why did he why did he
[Plante:] You can answer it. You can say anything you want. But will anybody believe it? Will anybody care?
[King:] What's where's the committee going to lead to, do you think, Bill?
[Plante:] Oh, the committee is using this to to put this all out in the open.
[King:] Get him some more.
[Plante:] Get him some more. I mean, I understand I'm not questioning the motives of anybody who was on tonight, but there are a lot of people on that committee who just hate Bill Clinton. This is another opportunity to stick it in and turn it. I'm not suggesting that he's right. But this is not all this is not all about good government.
[Sidey:] Yes, but Bill, Bill, Bill, there's something out there. You know that. We've been following these things, and when you don't have the big piece, you kind of sense it. And I'm telling you, there's something out there we don't know, and I think it's money. Big money. Where...
[Plante:] But how do you think they're going to find out? I mean...
[Sidey:] Well, let's give them a try.
[King:] Clinton has trumped them all these years and they just won't let go of it, and he's given them he's given them ammunition.
[Plante:] Well, yes, I think there's something to that.
[Sidey:] It's kind of sad, Larry, in some ways. You know there's a good guy inside Clinton that's struggling to get out, and just about the time he makes some decent public gestures, then one of these things comes up and he ruins it. I don't understand it.
[King:] Do you dislike him, Hugh?
[Sidey:] No, no, he's pleasant when you're around. He's distant. I don't know that anybody really knows him that well. But the fact of the matter is that some of his speeches, some of the things before Congress have been wonderful: his ideas and that. And then it's this personal kind of arrogance in which the rules don't apply to him that just drives everybody nuts.
[King:] We will not see his like soon. Thank you, Bill.
[Plante:] I think a lot of people are hoping that's the case.
[Sidey:] OK, Larry.
[King:] Tomorrow night on LARRY KING LIVE, Linda Tripp. It never stops. Monday is Chris Rock, and next one day next Wednesday, rather, the secret longtime companion of the late Charles Kuralt, Pat Shannon. And don't forget, we want to hear from you. Check out my Web site, cnn.comlarryking. Hope to hear from you. Stay tuned for my man, Bill Hemmer, and "CNN TONIGHT." See you tomorrow night with Linda Tripp. For all of our guests in Washington, good night.

[Robert Novak, Co-host:] Tonight, he's taken the lead on Congress' Enron investigation. But should the chairman of the Energy Committee take himself off the case? And the Clinton gifts, will they give Republicans yet another Clinton investigation?
[Announcer:] Live from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Robert Novak. In the CROSSFIRE, Republican Congressman Billy Tauzin of Louisiana, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee. And later, Democratic strategist Victor Kamber and Republican strategist Alex Castellanos.
[Novak:] Good evening. Welcome to CROSSFIRE. Congress today finally found an Enron executive it could like. No, make it, love. Sherron Watkins, the Enron executive who warned her bosses of big trouble ahead, testified before Congress for the first time, specifically before a subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which is headed by our guest, Congressman Billy Tauzin. She was hailed as a heroine, a Houston Joan of Arc. Congressman Ed Markey of Massachusetts gallantly offered her the protection of Congress, if what's left of the Enron ruling class makes life hard for her. But is that a proper function of Congress? Actually, what are the 11 Congressional committees investigating Enron really up to? Fact-finding for legislation? Digging up new abuses? Brow beating the Enron guilty? Or just getting face time on national TV? Bill Press and I will seek the answers from Chairman Tauzin Bill.
[Bill Press, Co-host:] Mr. Tauzin, good evening. Believe me, I have no love for the Enron executives, but it seems to me that even the Enron executives deserve a fair trial and a fair investigation. Mr. Chairman, you've been accused of leaking Enron documents and spinning them negatively. You said last Sunday on television that Mr. Skilling may have put himself in legal jeopardy. Have you lynched these guys before you've heard all the facts Congressman? Are you giving them a fair shake?
[Rep. Billy Tauzin, Chmn. Energy & Commerce Cmte:] Oh, absolutely. In fact, I think we're the only committee in Congress that is working bipartisan. John Dingell, the ranking Democrat, and I got together at the beginning of the investigation to make sure that our staffs were working together jointly, we're sharing information, and basically digging the facts out as we find them. Look, the facts speak for themselves, Bill. These guys are in deep trouble. And as we overturn more and more information, I think the FBI and SEC have a lot to work with now.
[Press:] Well let's tell us how deep trouble they're in, congressman. We know there's a lot of phony financial dealings going on here. Do you see any criminal activity? If so, on the part of whom? Who are the villains here?
[Tauzin:] Well, I mean today Sherron Watkins identified the culprits, as she called them, the Skilling, the Fastow, Coppers, Rick Buy and Causey, both of whom got fired today.
[Press:] Criminal?
[Tauzin:] Well, here's the question. If putting together financial transactions, that have no other purpose but to deceive investors is not financial fraud, I don't know what is. And if people knew they were doing that, and that's a question the criminal investigators have to prove, yes, indeed there could be criminal charges.
[Novak:] Mr. Chairman, I agree with you on one point. Your hearings are bipartisan. I couldn't tell the Republicans from the Democrats, because all of you just got on your high horse and a high
[Tauzin:] On the contrary, I've had members of my committee come to me even today and say, "This has been the most informative educational series of hearings we've had in a long time." Not only are we being educated as to what went wrong at Enron, but I can promise you, presidents of corporations across America right now are rethinking the way they manage their corporations, and what they know and they don't know. Boards of director members are rethinking their responsibility about what questions they should ask about the managers, and what they should know about the way the managers are handling the business of the corporation. And a lot of people in corporate America are beginning to think seriously about their responsibilities to investors, the owners of the corporations in America. And even more importantly, there's lot of accounting firms thinking hard about their role in this affair. And I can guarantee a lot of people are nervous tonight about whether or not they're going to be in trouble with this.
[Novak:] Mr. Chairman, pardon me for my naivete. I've only been here for 45 years. And I didn't know that the function of Congress, the congressional committees, were to make corporation executives and accounting firms nervous. I thought it was to write legislation. And if you're going to get facts to write legislation, weren't you questioning the wrong people, these sorry executives from Enron? Shouldn't you have experts from totally outside of the accounting firms to find out what kind of legislation might be useful to protect the public interests?
[Tauzin:] Well, actually, Bob, that was our hearing last week. We conducted a major full committee hearing, inviting accounting professors from the greatest schools in America, from Chicago, from Texas, and New York, and other places. We invited people from the investment banking industry and analysts to come and tell us about what's wrong with that sector. We got some great advice about how we can improve the accounting standards and how we can make better rules of disclosure. And that's our next step is literally to begin changing those rules and those standards, so that even the things that Enron did that were legal, that ended up deceiving or hiding facts from investors, we might make sure in the future are not proper.
[Press:] Well congressman, you know, the Enron executives may be treated like pariahs today, but they were yesterday's sweethearts, congressman. And nobody seemed to have had a bigger love affair with them, this being Valentine's Day, than you did. In 1989 to 2001, you received $6,464 from Enron and a whopping $57,000 from Arthur Andersen, which is more than any other member of Congress. Congressman, John Ashcroft recused himself from any Enron investigation. Why haven't you? And maybe, or why shouldn't you? Not maybe, why shouldn't you?
[Tauzin:] Well, your network has been a big supporter of mine over the years and so has NBC and ABC and CBS. But with the 14 years, I suppose, that they've helped me as much as some of those other firms that helped me. And...
[Press:] Well, I hope we haven't done as much wrong as Andersen and Enron?
[Tauzin:] Well, but remember we had to call you on the carpet, because you messed up the call of the election so badly. The projections you and our networks made with that projection system you had, may have even influenced the outcome of the election. You remember we had some pretty tough hearings about it?
[Press:] But can you be an honest broker, having taken all that money from...
[Tauzin:] Well, I'm asking you, were we an honest broker with the networks? Did we hammer you when we thought you were wrong? See, the bottom line is, it doesn't matter whether you've been friend or foe. If you come before our committee having done something wrong or called into question the laws or statutes, or standards in this country, we're going to take you to task. And that's the way it ought to be. It doesn't matter whether you indeed supported any member of my committee or not. And by the way, Enron supported the top 15 people they supported in Congress. You won't find my name on that list. By the way, 8 of the 15 were Democrats. You know, they spread that largess around. That doesn't matter to me. My job is to take them on when they do it wrong, including the networks. And we've done that.
[Novak:] Mr. Chairman, I was fascinated by today's hearings with Sherron Watkins. Several of your colleagues called her a whistle- blower, but is she really Joan of Arc when she didn't she sent anonymous letter to Kenneth Lay? She didn't go the SEC? She didn't go the FBI? She didn't go to Billy Tauzin and the Commerce committee? Some whistle-blower. Haven't you gone a little bit overboard on the deification of Sherron Watkins?
[Tauzin:] Well, we careful not to call her whistle-blower, in fact.
[Novak:] Ed Markey did.
[Tauzin:] Yes, some people did, but she's very much different from a whistle-blower. And you're correct, Bob. What she did, however, was what I would hope a good employee or officer of every corporation would do. And that is, take to it the top when you see something going wrong. Advise the leader of the corporation if he doesn't know what's happening in his corporation. Give him advice on how to come clean.
[Novak:] And not go to the SEC?
[Tauzin:] Well, no, she's done that. I mean, when the leader of a corporation refused to do it, when he refused to take her advice, in fact I called it the last clear chance to save his corporation, when she told him what was going on, told him what he ought to do to come clean and straighten it out, and he wouldn't do it, then she's come forward to investigators, not just our committee, but to those with the FBI and the SEC who were investigating the case.
[Press:] All right, Mr. Chairman, thanks so much for joining us tonight.
[Tauzin:] Good to be with you guys.
[Press:] Please come back. There's a lot more to talk about. OK, and when we come back, you thought the Clintons had gone away? No, they're back again and still in trouble over White House gifts. We'll unwrap them and debate them when we come back.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Amid the casualties occurring daily in the Middle East, there are doctors tending to the sick and wounded. A group of Israeli physicians in a Palestinian village recently told CNN's Jerrold Kessel why they treat all patients.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] Dr. Ralph Guggenheim from Tel Aviv examines Ana, a Palestinian baby. Her mother is worried because she's been suffering from stomach pains. Dr. Guggenheim is a member of Israeli Physicians for Human Rights. Deir Istiya is a Palestinian village of 3,000 people. The Israeli doctors, Jews and Arabs, are here to conduct a morning of clinics in the village that's been cordoned off for weeks by the Israeli army amid the unrelieved Palestinian Intifada uprising against Israel. There's a small clinic, but health facilities are rudimentary. During the prolonged crisis, they've become entirely inadequate, difficult for doctors to come here, or for the villagers to get out to hospital in nearby Palestinian towns. Grovail Jaffa looks totally content, but she was born after a nightmare nighttime journey. Trying to avoid army roadblocks, it took her parents three hours to reach hospital normally, they point out, a 15-minute drive away. "I was in very bad shape," says Jaffa's mother. "I could not wait to get there. We made it just in time."
[Dr. Han Gal, Israeli Physicians For Human Rights:] I don't have to tell you what is the meaning of home delivery, or actually road delivery in her case, for the welfare of the baby.
[Kessel:] In anticipation of the visit by the Israeli doctors, the villagers had bulldozed an improvised entrance through the army roadblock. Their welcome is very warm.
[Gal:] As a physician, we can't let ourselves to live in a place that human rights, that children rights, are abused.
[Dr. Ahmed Masarawa:] It's very important for us that every man and woman can get the medicine, medical care, even in the worst situation.
[Kessel:] Basic medicine is distributed on request or when prescribed by one of their colleagues. The drugs are mostly samples or donations the doctors have personally managed to collect.
[Masarawa:] We haven't enough, no, we can't give everyone.
[Kessel:] They also know their treatment is but a drop in the ocean, says one top surgeon.
[Dr. Rafi Walden, Israeli Physician:] From the American point of view, it may not be a very critical contribution, but I think it's a moral contribution to the understanding and peace among the two people.
[Kessel:] The problem runs deeper, says Dr. Walden.
[Walden:] The French say, A la guerre, come a la guerre, which means, in time of war, it's time of war. I don't think it is true to say it now, even in these times. I think the Israeli government must make the necessary arrangement to provide medical treatment. Whatever the political condition might be, whatever the security condition might be, medical treatment is something which should not be prevented, in no way.
[Dr. Ephraim Sneh, Israeli Deputy Defense Minister:] I accept what the Israeli doctors say, and I encourage them to let us know where and when something is wrong, because we have to rectify it. But have to look why, why we cut off those [inaudible]? Why we make those checkpoints on the roads of the West Bank and Gaza? Because we have to protect ourselves against the guerrilla war.
[Kessel:] Although one of the things that has brought them here, say the Israeli doctors, is the wish to fulfill the Hippocratic oath to serve people everywhere, they also say they know politics is not far away. In fact, for many of them, it's the heart of the matter. [on camera]: What's it about? This is about medicine, human rights, politics.
[Dr. Ruhma Marton, Israeli Physicians For Human Rights:] It's human rights, politics, and then medicine.
[Kessel:] Health matters are not Deir Istiya's only problem. Sporadic clashes on the edge of the village between Jews and Israeli soldiers and people from nearby Jewish settlements have led to many olive trees being uprooted. The olive orchards, a central factor in the village economy, are being used, Israel says, as cover for attack on passing cars.
[Unidentified Male:] I saw both of them. The settlers used their hands to break the branches, and the Israeli bulldozers to, to, to, to, to, to, to get it up from the roots.
[Kessel:] The village mayor talks of the attitude towards the visiting doctors.
[Mayor Nafez Mansour, Deir Istiya:] We see [inaudible] between political and medical treatments. This is the human hearts because we are not we are not against the Israeli [inaudible], we are against the [inaudible], the occupation. If the occupation is finished, I think that two people can be live together in this holy land.
[Kessel:] Mutaha Mansour is a teacher. During the clinics, he's helping to translate between doctor and patient.
[Mutaha Mansour, Palestinian Teacher:] This is hopeless [inaudible]. Hopeless [inaudible].
[Kessel:] Han Gal is the chairman of this Israeli physicians' association.
[Gal:] We are softening the people heart. By coming here I reduce the friction, I believe that I reduce the friction between the two nations. Just yesterday she had no example of a good [inaudible] Israeli. And today, by meeting with us, I think that [inaudible] she would say to her family, You can negotiate with some of the Israelis.
[Mansour:] I agree with him. We can negotiate with some of them. But we need [inaudible] situation [inaudible], not for a short period [inaudible] political situation. [inaudible] our life [inaudible] as you see now.
[Kessel:] Their effort, the Israeli doctors say, is directed as much at fellow Israelis, a challenge to the collective national conscience.
[Marton:] In spite of our education, like doctors, to fight all kinds of diseases, what we really have to fight is what people are doing to people.
[Kessel:] A warm thank you as they depart. But what remains here when they leave is not only nascent hopes for coexistence but the current somber reality of Israeli-Palestinian confrontation. Jerrold Kessel, CNN, Deir Istiya, on the West Bank.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] Despite all the twists and turns of a presidential primary season that threw a scare into both major party front-runners, we're back where we began, with Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore. It was that kind of Super Tuesday for each man.
[Bill Bradley , Former Presidential Candidate:] We been defeated, but the cause for which I ran has not been.
[Randall:] On the Republican side, Texas Governor George W. Bush also had a Super Tuesday to saver, as he put Senator John McCain's presidential drive into reverse.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] We were challenged, and we met the challenge. We were tested, and we were equal to the test.
[Randall:] Bush won every major state. His victories in New York, Ohio, Georgia, Missouri and California made his losses in New Hampshire and Michigan distant memories. John McCain on Tuesday showed strength only in New England, and facing a next round of primaries that includes Bush strongholds Texas and Florida, McCain accepted a sign that read, end of the road.
[Sen. John Mccain , Presidential Candidate:] And I'm truly grateful for the distinct privilege of even being considered for the highest office in this, the greatest nation in the history of mankind.
[Randall:] And so the fall match-up of the two major parties: Where do Al Gore and George W. Bush go from here? And what now for Bradley and McCain voters? We pose those questions to a pair of distinguished political pollsters. From Atlanta, Republican Whit Ayres. And here in Washington, Democratic pollster Peter Hart. Gentlemen, welcome to you both. Peter Hart, let's first look at some numbers that you helped put together for "The Wall Street Journal." Experience and ability to be president: George W. Bush and Al Gore. What do the numbers say?
[Peter Hart, Democratic Pollster:] Well, what they really say is there's a huge stature gap for George W. Bush. Simply put, what we find is that Al Gore has a big 47 to 30 lead. But more important than that, voters see him as filling the chair of the president. They see George Bush as having a lot of room that he has to grow into.
[Randall:] Whit Ayres, what do you make of those numbers? And does Governor Bush indeed have a task of convincing people he is ready to be president.
[Whit Ayres, Republican Pollster:] Well, it doesn't surprise me that you'd have an incumbent vice president who has an advantage on experience. On the other hand, the voters are really disgusted with what's gone on in Washington recently. And who's better able to fix what's gone on in Washington? A man who's entire career has been outside of Washington, or a man like Al Gore, who's been at the very center of so many of those aspect of Washington that have disgusted so many voters? If the election gets defined on that basis of who can clean up Washington, I think Governor Bush wins on that criteria.
[Randall:] Now, the vice president clearly will use the ethics issue against Gore, trying to him to a president he will say has a lot of ethical baggage. Peter Hart, tell us about the numbers on that issue.
[Hart:] Well, interestingly enough, it's sort of dead even on that, with Gore having a slight 37 to 35 advantage in being honest and trustworthy. And Whit is absolutely right when he says there are a lot of voters that are trying to look beyond where we are, what's the next chapter. But, they're also looking for somebody who's going to deal with the central issues, and those, I think, work to Al Gore's advantage on Social Security and education.
[Randall:] And, Mr. Ayres, what do you make of those numbers?
[Ayres:] Well, first of all I'm not at all sure that the issues of March will be the issues of October. It's a long, long way to the election. But I do think one of the issues that has grown over the last few years in importance around the country is education. I think Governor Bush has a strong record on that. He's very comfortable talking about it. And I think once you start focusing in on education, he's going to do very well on that issue.
[Randall:] And, Mr. Ayres, does George W. Bush now need to retool his message, especially in trying to attract John McCain voters?
[Ayres:] Well, you know, there's so much conventional wisdom out there that suggests Governor Bush has gone too far to the right, and the conventional wisdom is just wrong. What matters is not the perspective of the pundits but the perspective of the voters. And all the indications are that the voters perceive both George W. Bush and Al Gore to be equidistant from the center. You've got, whether it's California exit polls or a "Washington Post" poll recently, a third of the voters think George W. Bush is too conservative, a third Al Gore is too liberal. That's a wash in my book, and I think they're going to be very, very close and very, very competitive for John McCain voters.
[Hart:] And what isn't a wash, Whit, is the fact that Al Gore comes out of the primary with a very united party behind him, and George W. Bush has some work on uniting his party. And that's going to be an important factor, coming months.
[Randall:] Mr. Hart...
[Ayres:] There's no question Peter's right on that.
[Randall:] Go ahead.
[Ayres:] There's some work to be done, and I fully expect John McCain and George Bush to get together and put their shoulders to the same wheel.
[Randall:] Mr. Hart, is there come concern in the Democratic camp, in the Gore camp, with the numbers of Democrats and independents who voted for John McCain this primary season?
[Hart:] Not surprising that it happened. It's mainly independents, but I think what it does say is that vote is going to be very much up for grabs. And you're going to have to be able to talk to both character and values that the McCain voters cared about but also talk to the issues that McCain talked to. I honestly believe that the McCain voters have to be won over, or else we'll see a smaller turnout.
[Randall:] Mr. Ayres, how important to George W. Bush is a McCain endorsement?
[Ayres:] Well, I don't know that a McCain endorsement is critical, but certainly getting McCain voters is critical. Peter's exactly right about that. And they are very much up for grabs right now. But I continue to believe that if the election gets defined as who's the better candidate to reform Washington, Governor Bush will eventually have an advantage on that measure.
[Randall:] Mr. Hart, there was some very harsh rhetoric in the race between Al Gore and Bill Bradley. Even when Bradley dropped out of the race, he was not exactly voicing a full-throated endorsements of the vice president. You alluded to the fact earlier that you think that the Democratic Party is in much better shape than the Republican Party coming out of this primary season, but, in fact, does Gore need to convince Bradley that he deserves a weighty endorsements?
[Hart:] I don't think that's his problem, because you see Democrats voting overwhelmingly for Al Gore against George W. Bush and it's not a problem, where you look at the Republicans, they are less certain at this stage of the game. Does he need to talk and have a good conversation with Bill Bradley? Absolutely. But Al Gore wants to be president. You can see it in his every pore. And I have no doubt he's going to do what he needs to do in order to win this election.
[Randall:] And both of you, address yourselves to the strengths of your candidates as you see them Mr. Ayres.
[Ayres:] I think that Governor Bush has a strong record outside of Washington, which is critical. He's got a strong record as a chief executive, which I think voters will deem to be critical for the presidency. I think he's got a strong record on many of the issue, like education, that are very important to people. And fundamentally, I think he's a likable candidate. A lot of people downplay that, but that's one of the reasons why Ronald Reagan was so popular. And I think ultimately voters are going to decide that George W. Bush is a good, decent human being who truly want to do the best thing he can for the country. And I think that matters.
[Randall:] Mr. Hart, are you sold?
[Hart:] I'm not quite sold, Whit. Sorry about that. But I'll tell you about Al Gore. Al Gore, I think, number one, fills the chair. And that means that people feel comfortable that he can handle the job terribly important, critical consideration. Secondly, he's got a marvelous economy working for him. And the third thing that is there is the issues, both the education, Social Security and the raft of Democratic issues that are working this election.
[Randall:] Mr. Hart and Mr. Ayres, thank you very much. When we come back, the view from the road that ended in Sedona. Stay with us. Welcome back. With me now, from "USA TODAY," national correspondent Tom Squitieri, proud new father of baby Gabriela; and from "Time" magazine, well used to the rigors of being a parent, Karen Tumulty. And I welcome you both. Tom, you were with John McCain at Sedona, Arizona when he said he was suspending his campaign. Were you convinced by his assertion that the Republican Party is his home, a home he loves?
[Tom Squitieri, "usa Today":] I am convinced by that. There's a small, small, small factor of his team that want him to go on and run as an independent. And I think in his heart he would like to in the sense of carrying on his message, but he is a Republican, and he believes in the party, that he can change the party, if he stays in it, to adapt it. He's going to have a high price for George W. Bush to come over and support him. I think he sees that as his way to move the party.
[Randall:] Karen, does Al Gore assume automatically he will get the Democratic voters who went for John McCain in the primaries?
[Karen Tumulty, "time":] Not at all, not at all. And really, these McCain voters are sort of the jump ball of the rest of this election season. It was interesting to hear in his victory speech I was there Tuesday night in Nashville he immediately made a play for the McCain voters by name by comparing his own evolution on the campaign finance issue to Senator McCain.
[Randall:] Clinton would have named each one, of course.
[Tumulty:] Right.
[Randall:] Now, Karen, let's look at the issue of ethics, because it seems clear that the Bush campaign is intent on tying ethical baggage they will say is claimed by President Clinton to Al Gore. Now tell us what you know about what's going on in the Bush campaign in this direction.
[Tumulty:] Well, and not just President Clinton's ethical baggage but Gore's own ethical baggage, and particularly how what role he played in the fund-raising scandals. It was interesting that both campaigns, the first strategy session they had after winning the nomination at party headquarters was with the research people not the money people, not the message people, the research people. And research in politics is a euphemism for digging up dirt on the other guy.
[Randall:] And, Tom, what do you make of these "Wall Street Journal" numbers that Peter Hart was citing a moment ago that when it comes to character and trustworthiness, at this point, Gore has better numbers than Bush?
[Squitieri:] That's interesting, because I think people have really not associated Gore with the, quote, "Clinton-Gore scandals." And you can be sure that George Bush will try to be hammering at that. The report that came out late last week about the campaign finance stuff that Janet Reno should have had an independent counsel, the Republicans are salivating over that, because that gives them an opportunity to open that door.
[Randall:] Now wasn't it just a few months ago that George W. Bush was leading either Bradley or Al Gore by double digits?
[Squitieri:] Double digits.
[Randall:] And now we have two major polls within the margin of error. What does that mean for Al Gore and George W. Bush, Karen?
[Tumulty:] These poll numbers are just astonishing if you look at where the two candidates were a few months ago. And I think that what it says is that Al Gore has come through his primary season in a stronger position and that George W. Bush has, in fact, been weakened and damaged by his primary challenge. And, you know, he has eight months now to make it up, but he's definitely starting out in a much weaker position than any of us thought he would.
[Squitieri:] It's even a deeper hole yes, Gene for Bush, when you look at the state-by-state polls, because the big states, California and New York, they're already strongly in favor of Gore. And it looks like the elect will come down to the Rust Belt right now, New Jersey across to Michigan. And that generally can favor a Democrat.
[Randall:] Now what do you think about the question of George W. Bush having to retool his campaign, or does he run as the same George W. Bush who ran in South Carolina?
[Squitieri:] No, he needs to retool. I mean, he had painted himself into a right-handed corner down in South Carolina, and just as the Republicans will use campaign finance, Gore is already thinking about using, you know, the flag, the Confederate flag-waving right- wing Republicans. And that will tend to isolate Bush off from the center, where those voters in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Ohio, et cetera are located.
[Randall:] Karen, what happened to the compassionate conservative who was going to unify rather than divide?
[Tumulty:] Oh, you'll be hearing a lot from him again. He's unpacked his bags and he's out again. But I do think that a lot this is going to be a very bitter, very nasty campaign. And Al Gore's strategy is going to make George W. Bush look scary, and George W. Bush's strategy is going to be to make Al Gore look sleazy.
[Randall:] But is Bush a better candidate because of the primary season and the challenge from McCain? And is Al Gore a better candidate because of the challenge from Bill Bradley, which ultimately eroded?
[Tumulty:] Well, again, George W. Bush was damaged and certainly damaged in the polls by this campaign. But he learned a very important lesson, which is that this election like this nomination is not going to be handed to him, and he's going to have get out there and work for it, which he wasn't doing a few months ago.
[Randall:] Tom.
[Squitieri:] I think Gore comes out stronger because of the test from Bradley. He learned how to adapt early and was consistent with his attack and messages. Bush was all over the place and really doesn't know what he's going to go from here.
[Randall:] Do you take these numbers at face value today showing a neck-and-neck race if the election were held today?
[Tumulty:] Well, I would say especially since they are within the margin of error we've got eight months to go, but I have a feeling that this is starting to look like it is going to be a very close election.
[Randall:] And if it's going to be slash and burn, Tom, how long before we realize that?
[Squitieri:] I think that we'll start seeing it early in June, late in June, and then really after the convention.
[Tumulty:] I know. I say...
[Randall:] Karen?
[Tumulty:] ... well what time is it now?
[Randall:] Karen and Tom, thank you very much. And, Tom, congratulations to you and the wife on the baby.
[Squitieri:] Thank you very much. Everything you said was true.
[Randall:] All the best.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] The energy crisis is the focus of our "Ask CNN" this morning.
[David Walsh:] Hi. My name is David Walsh from Santa Anna, California. And my question for CNN is: How do energy crises occur? And why do all the other states have power, while California is in a state of emergency?
[Greg Lamotte, Cnn Correspondent:] The basic reason the energy crisis has occurred is the fact that the economy of California over the past five years has grown dramatically. As part of that economic growth, it has become extraordinarily thirsty for more electricity in the state. Well, California is the first state in the nation to go into deregulation of its utilities. It passed deregulation in 1996. Part of the deregulation called for the utilities to have a cap on the price that they could charge to consumers, that was a consumer protection that was put into the legislation. They were supposed to have that cap in place until the year 2002. What's happen in the interim is energy prices have risen dramatically over the past year or so. The utilities are saying they are having to eat the cost because they can't pass those costs on to consumers. PG&E; and Southern California Edison, the state's two biggest utilities, say they are about $10 billion in debt. That is affecting their credit rating, and it is making it more difficult for them to buy energy from power generators. And, in fact, many of the out-of-state power generators are reluctant to sell energy these days to California utilities because they're afraid they are not going to get paid.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We want to interrupt because we're just now getting some tape in from the White House where George W. Bush is making some comments this morning with Dick Cheney at his side. We're going to go there right now. This tape is just now coming into us.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] And we'll agree on things, we won't agree on things, but we'll always agree that making sure every child is educated is of national importance. It is a major priority. There's a role for the federal government, there's a role for state government, there's a role for local governments and part of our discussions and eventual legislation will recognize those roles. And I'm so honored that the senators came over and members of the House, the leadership that's going to help carry legislation. I believe the best way for the vice president and I to help the legislative process is to discuss issues in a frank and open way, and that's the beginning of a process here. So thank you all for coming. I'm honored you're here.
[Question:] Mr. President, Senator McCain yesterday said that he has a mandate. Do you agree with him that he has a mandate...
[Bush:] I'm going to meet with the senator tomorrow night to discuss issues of concern for him. I suspect one of them might be campaign funding reform. But I'll let you know how the conversation goes. I'm confident it's going to be friendly and productive. John and I are friends. I remember we debated the issue several times. I think you might have been there. And I think there's a need to discuss good campaign funding reform and we will.
[Question:] Mr. President, how much of the sticking point for Democrats do you think your school choice or voucher program is? And are you willing to give ground in order to get a broader deal?
[Bush:] I think that there is consensus on a couple of things: One, accountability is the cornerstone for reform. And secondly, in order for there to be an accountability system that's got merit, there has to be a consequence, and that's what we're going to discuss. Representative Miller from the state of California understands that accountability is crucial for success, and so does Boehner, and I hope the senator I haven't had a chance to speak specifically with Senator Kennedy; I'm about to. But we've got a measure and there needs to be flexibility at the local level to make sure that local folks can chart their path to excellence. But in order for an accountability system to work, there has to be consequences. And I believe one of the most important consequences will be, after a period of time, giving the schools the time to adjust and districts time to try different things if they're failing, that parents ought to be given different options. If children are trapped in schools that will not teach and will not change, there has to be a different consequence. None of us at the federal government should try to impose a school voucher plan on states and local jurisdictions. That's not the prerogative of the federal government, as far as I'm concerned. But to the extent that the federal government spends money, we ought to expect good results and good consequences. I can't tell you want a pleasure it is.
[Press:] Thank you.
[Harris:] This is some tape, as we just said moments ago, that we were just getting in that was being fed into us directly here at CNN. We were expecting President Bush to outline exactly what he's going to be introducing with his education reform plan. The details are still to come. However, the emphasis is going to be placed on accountability and consequences. He also you heard him just say a few moments ago that parents ought to be given different options if the schools are not performed up to par. Let's check in now with CNN's Eileen O'Connor. She's actually been talking with some parents and some students and educators about this sort of thing. Eileen, good morning.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Leon. Well, one of the things that President Bush is talking about is expanding funding for charter schools. And that would give parents and students choice; also introducing a voucher program so that if public schools didn't meet certain testing standards for three years in a row, then the parents would be eligible to have $1,500 in a voucher given to them. They could then take that, use it for tuition, or perhaps use it for tutors or for transportation purposes to another school. And with me is Frazier O'Leary, who is the English teacher honors English teacher of this 11th grade classroom. Thanks for joining us, Mr. O'Leary.
[Frazier O'leary, English Teacher, Cordozo High School:] It's nice being here.
[O'connor:] Mr. O'Leary, could I ask you what do you think the voucher program would do? Would that, in fact, give accountability and improve schools?
[O'leary:] I think the voucher system might be a good idea, depending on the planning of it. It seems to me that what they're talking about, a three-year program where they're going to find out whether the students have reached certain levels, and then they're going to move them and give them a voucher to go to other places. I don't know what those other places are. We have charter schools in the city whose standardized scores are no higher or even less than the public schools. And the vouchers, if there's $1,500, $1,500 is not going to get our students to any of the prestigious private schools in the area. And I don't know what the voucher would take them to.
[O'connor:] The average tuition for those private schools is about $15,000, correct?
[O'leary:] I'm sure it's at least that much.
[O'connor:] Also, in terms of raising standards, how do you think what do you think should be done as the best way of raising standards? Is it by making people reach certain test scores, or is it by also investing more in these schools right now?
[O'leary:] It seems to me that if President Bush is talking about being compassionate and he's talking about working with education first, that the schools that need the most help are the schools that should get the most funding. We have students who are minority students, Asian student, Latino students, African-American students who are lower-income students. And all want to be successful in life. And I we would like to have as much help from the federal government as possible to help them raise their scores. We have teachers who care about them and we would like to have as much support as we could get.
[O'connor:] One of the parents told me that she finds that sometimes that a lot of the parents have trouble getting involved, and she might find herself as being one or two parent in a PTA meeting. Do you think that's also an obstacle, perhaps the trouble for some parents to be involved, and that makes the school more than just a school for these children and therefore, really, a safety net for these children?
[O'leary:] Parent involvement is definitely a problem that we face every day. It would be nice if we would have as many parents as students at PTA meetings. I think we offer a place for students to feel safe, to get their education and prove themselves. Some of them come from homes that aren't necessarily the most functional, and we are able to provide services that they don't have outside of the school. It's I think it has to do with walking in someone's shoes. I mean, a lot of the politicians and people are always talking about what they're going to do to improve this and improve that, but they need to come to the school and see what's happening in real life rather than just talking about some fantasy land.
[O'connor:] Now, while the concern here is that perhaps by this voucher program could in fact siphon off funds from some of these programs that Mr. O'Leary was talking about. Well, the argument that the Republicans are also making, though, is that this would, in fact, improve these schools, force schools to improve and help these students in the long run Leon.
[Harris:] All right, so the debate begins. Eileen O'Connor reporting live this morning from Cordozo High School in Washington. Thanks much. We'll talk to you later on.

[Colleen Mcedwards, World News:] United States and European Union officials say they have made little progress in resolving trade disputes. U.S. president Bill Clinton met with EU leaders at a summit in Portugal. But as CNN's Major Garrett reports, the leaders did find common ground on another global issue.
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] The U.S. and 15 nations of the European Union agreed on a common plan to fight the AIDS epidemic in Africa, a rare burst of consensus at a conference defined by trade and arms control disputes.
[Bill Clinton, U.s. President:] We have made a joint commitment to do more to try to help developing nations deal with
[Aids. Garrett:] The plan calls for increased financial aid, new educational programs and lower prices for AIDS drugs. The AIDS virus is cutting a deadly swathe throughout sub-Saharan Africa, where 23 million are infected. That's 70 percent of the world's AIDS cases. In South Africa, 1 in 10 have the virus. Experts predict 26 million AIDS cases in sub-Saharan Africa by 2003.
[Clinton:] Some countries are hiring two employees for every job on the assumption that one of them will die of
[Aids. Garrett:] The U.S. government recently declared AIDS a national security threat.
[Samuel Berger, U.s. National Security Adviser:] This is not only an epidemic of major proportions, this runs the risk of seeing country's implode, seeing instability and war.
[Garrett:] European nations have for years demanded more action from the Clinton administration to combat the worldwide spread of AIDS. But experts say the international response has been disappointing.
[Debrework Zewdie, Hiv/aids Coordinator, World Bank:] Nobody has put up a good enough response to the epidemic.
[Garrett:] Frustrated U.S. AIDS activists disrupted Vice President Gore's campaign rallies until the president asked Congress for more money and took steps to lower the cost of AIDS drugs. [on camera]: No one here expects the new U.S. and European efforts to stop or even immediately slow the spread of AIDS in Africa. But experts are encouraged that the issue now enjoys a newfound promise and that, they say, is the first step to reversing the virus's deadly and destabilizing march across Africa. Major Garrett, CNN, Lisbon, Portugal.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Federal agents in Kansas City are searching for cancer patients who may be the victims of a cruel drug scam. A pharmacist is accused of diluting chemotherapy drugs in order to save money. Peggy Breit of CNN affiliate KMBC picks up the story now.
[Peggy Breit, Kmbc Reporter:] They poured through records, collecting many on paper and copying off information from computers. The agents started their probe just three weeks ago, because of information from a pharmaceuticals rep.
[Jeff Lanza, Fbi:] What brought this case to light was pure math realized in talking to a doctor's office that was prescribing this drug that they were actually prescribing more of this drug than could have possibly come from this pharmacy.
[Breit:] Testing on the cancer drugs received from the pharmacy showed investigators disturbing information.
[Lanza:] The allegations are that the drugs were diluted to less than half-strength; in some cases almost zero strength. And, of course, with very expensive chemotherapy drugs like this, the cost of each prescription would go down to the pharmacist a great deal. Several hundred dollars per dosage could be saved by the pharmacy by diluting these drugs.
[Breit:] Forty-eight-year-old Robert Courtney is the owner of the pharmacy facing federal charges in regard to diluting the cancer drugs. Now agents are turning their attention to potential victims.
[Lanza:] The FBI and the FDA are very concerned about the health risks that are posed by this dilution of the strength of the drugs.
[Nelson:] That report from Peggy Breit of CNN affiliate KMBC in Kansas City. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Now to the economy and interest rates. Federal Reserve policy makers are meeting today, and economists are predicting that Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan and company will cut interest rates for the fifth time this year. For the latest on that, let's check in now with CNN's Deborah Marchini. She's at the Financial News Desk in New York good morning, Deb.
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, Leon. Good to see you. Well, that's, indeed, correct. The expectation is that the Federal Reserve will move for the fifth time this year to cut interest rates by one-half percentage point. Perhaps of more interest to the markets is what the Fed says in the statement announcing any rate cut. Up until now, the Federal Reserve has said in each of its rate cuts that the conditions in the economy were weighted more toward a slowdown, the risks were weighted toward a slowdown. If the Fed changes that stance in any way, it could lead investors to believe this may be the last rate cut for a while Leon.
[Harris:] If memory serves me correctly, the last cut that we saw didn't really have that much of an impact on consumers. What about this time around?
[Marchini:] Again, the impact is likely to be muted, and it depends on exactly who are you. For example, if you're about to buy a home and you're looking at an adjustable-rate mortgage, well, when short-term interest rates come down, a new adjustable-rate mortgage rate will come down as well. The introductory rate will come down as well. The other big winners here are people with home-equity homes. They're tied to the prime lending rate, and when the Fed moves, typically, banks lower their prime lending rate. Automatically, home- equity loan credits go down. But if you've got credit-card debt or an existing fixed-rate mortgage, you don't necessarily see any relief as a result of this.
[Harris:] All right. So if that's the case, then is this the last cut we should expect to see for some time, or should folks just sit tight and wait for another one to come down the road?
[Marchini:] Leon, that is the million-dollar question, and we don't know the answer. We will have better idea, though, I guess about 2:15 p.m. Eastern Time when the Federal Reserve releases that statement. The key phrase that's in there, the one to look for, is the one that says the risks are weighted mainly toward conditions that may generate economic weakness in the foreseeable future. That is Fed speak toward we're learning toward cutting interest rates some more if we think we have to. If they say anything different from that, watch out.
[Harris:] OK. Good deal. Thanks for the warning. Deb Marchini. And thanks much for sticking around a little later for us this morning. We'll see you later on. Well, the interest-rate cuts and the slowing economy can effect your financial future. A financial planner is going to join us in just a few minutes to talk about that and give you some tips. So he'll be taking your e-mail questions for that. Send them into us now. The address you see up there on the screen is morning@cnn.com. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Varney:] Tonight, a record run that's leaving even the most bullish tech investors breathless. Score another point for the new economy: compelling evidence that a more productive worker can indeed help keep this great expansion going. And a MONEYLINE special report about a problem that could affect the quality of your health care. Why some say medicine does not pay? First, though, the top story of the day: a one-two punch from the backbone of the Internet. After the closing bell, Cisco Systems hit Wall Street with news it loves to hear: better-than-expected profits and the ninth stock split in Cisco's history. Investors jumped on the news: The stock gained more than six points in very active after-hours trading. And if those gains hold up tomorrow, that would make Cisco the second-most valuable company after Microsoft. Bruce Francis now on the power behind Cisco's profits.
[Bruce Francis, Cnn Correspondent:] Cisco's balance sheet blazed with the wildfire growth of the Internet itself. Revenues surged 53 percent to $4.35 billion. Profits, excluding special items, were up 49 percent to $906 million, or 25 cents a share. Despite what it called a slow start to the year, Cisco shook off the Y2K slowdown that has hurt other tech companies, and it avoided product problems like the one that tripped up archrival Lucent.
[Patrick Houghton, Technology Analyst, Sutro & Co:] Cisco has got the opportunity here to become a Nortel- and Lucent-size company we're seeing with this quarter with 53 percent year-over-year growth. Just to put that in perspective, this is the eighth quarter that they've had accelerated growth rate. And this is and it get harder every time you had another billion dollars to the top line.
[Francis:] Cisco continued to go on a buying binge during its second quarter, even snapping up a profitless optical networking company, Cerent, for some $7 billion in stock. And on a conference call, CEO John Chambers vowed to continue that binge, warning, though, that "We are buying companies sooner than we like, before they're clearly profitable." That makes acquisitions more risky than before, at a time when rapidly changing technology makes those deals necessary. But overall, analysts see few risks for Cisco and continued strong performance for one of technology's most reliable stocks.
[Peter Andrew, A.g. Edwards:] Where else are you going to go? Cisco has got the size. It's got the execution track record and the management team that I think knows what the future holds. And they're aggressively positioning themselves to benefit from that.
[Francis:] Cisco's after-hours gains make it the world's second- most valuable company in terms of market cap, at $452 billion: just behind Microsoft and ahead of get this General Electric. Not bad for a business that this month is celebrating its 10th anniversary as a publicly traded company: just 10 years ago, Stuart.
[Varney:] It's a knockout, isn't it? But who competes directly with Cisco?
[Francis:] Increasingly you see Cisco competing with Nortel and Lucent, much bigger companies in terms of revenue. But in the highly competitive area of optical networking will probably be where the game is decided.
[Varney:] Watch that stock tomorrow. Bruce Francis, thanks. Now even before the Cisco news, the mood was clearly bullish on Wall Street. For the first time in three sessions, both the Dow and the Nasdaq took part in the buying. The Dow industrials recovered some of yesterday's lost ground, up 51 at the close, 10,957. But while the Dow's gains were modest, the Nasdaq's were again spectacular. That index climbed 105 points, one of its biggest point gains ever. The new record high for the Nasdaq is 4,426. That puts the Nasdaq up nearly 500 points since the beginning of February. That is just six trading sessions ago. Rhonda Schaffler has more on that.
[Rhonda Schaffler, Cnn Correspondent:] For investors weary of worrying about inflation, today's stronger-than-expected report on worker productivity provided some relief and reason to buy stocks.
[Larry Wachtel, Prudential Securities:] It kind of comes under the heading of "you can have it all." You can have rapid growth while at the same time productivity does limit the inflation spiral.
[Schaffler:] Investors flocked first to those stocks behind the new economy: technology issues. The Nasdaq powered its way to a third-straight record. Even more impressive, the Nasdaq is up 14 percent in the last seven trading days. Analysts say high-growth techs are a safer bet in a higher interest rate environment.
[John Manley, Salomon Smith Barney:] You want to own big liquid stocks so you can sell them later on if you have to. They have to be big so everybody owns them so they don't underperform. At the same time, you have to have good growth longer term and very good positive surprises short term. It's the perfect recipe for tech.
[Schaffler:] Powering the tech sector today, healthy gains from Qualcomm, IBM, Microsoft and WorldCom, as well as CMGI. Blue chips also muscled higher, helped by gains in everything from retailers to drug stocks and financials. JP Morgan, Citigroup and American Express all gained ground.
[Alan Skrainka, Edward Jones:] I think there's very good value in the financial stock if you're a patient investor. They're going to remain under pressure as long as the Fed is taking action to hike rates.
[Schaffler:] Small caps also rallied, boosting the Russell 2000 into record territory for the sixth time this year, an encouraging trend analysts say the market needs to continue powering higher. Rhonda Schaffler, CNN Financial News, New York.
[Varney:] And now to the news that ignited that stock rally and may be the best evidence yet of a so-called "new economy." Productivity, how much a worker produces per hour, rose 5 percent in the fourth quarter. That is the fastest pace of growth in seven years. And labor costs now there's a key inflation gauge down 1 percent. Many believers in this new economy say that the strong productivity is what allows expansion with little or no inflation: just the kind of scenario the bond market absolutely loves. The 30-year Treasury issue soared nearly a point-and-a-half. That drove the yield down to 6.22 percent. But traders say the Treasury's planned buyback also played a role today. But shorter-term Treasuries far more subdued. The 10-year did go up 932; the five- year, though, was down three ticks and the two-year was off just slightly. There was another reason for that huge rally in the 30-year bond: Bill Gross, and rumors speculation really that the Pimco fund manager was snapping up long-term debt. Mr. Gross had traders talking last week as well when he said the bear market in the 30-year is over. All right, joining us now from Newport Beach, California, Bill Gross, the biggest bond buyer in the U.S. Bill, welcome back to the program.
[Bill Gross, Founder, Pimco:] Thank you, Stuart, nice to be here.
[Varney:] I have to ask you, are if indeed you are one of the biggest if not the biggest player in the Treasury market. You run $180 billion. Do you in fact have the power to move the market with your trades?
[Gross:] I don't think so. You know, the Treasury this week is offering $30 billion to $35 billion worth of new issues, and the $1 billion to $2 billion that we might buy certainly is significant but it's not enough to move the market.
[Varney:] Would you confirm that you were indeed a significant buyer today of longer-term Treasuries.
[Gross:] Yes, we've been buying. We bought close to a billion dollars worth of long bonds, and we've been buying for the past four weeks based upon this great Treasury shortage that the market now senses.
[Varney:] Let's look at the fundamentals for a second. Are you sure that the Fed is going to continue raising interest rates bearing in mind these productivity gains?
[Gross:] Well, that's my sense. The productivity gains are important, and they give the Fed some room not to raise rates. But on the other hand, the CPI and commodity prices, oil and the like, have been moving higher, and the stock market as well is an important indicator for the Fed. So my sense is, is that Alan Greenspan and the Fed will be raising rates in March and will be raising rates perhaps one or two more times in the balance of the year.
[Varney:] Now, when the yield on the five-year and 10-year Treasury securities is higher than on the 30-year Treasury, everybody knows that's called an "inverted yield curve."
[Gross:] Right.
[Varney:] And traditionally, that's supposed to point toward a recession. Do you think we're heading toward a recession?
[Gross:] No, I don't. I don't think it follows typical cyclical patterns of indicating recession. I think the inversion this time around is more of an indication of a lack of supply on the long end of what we call the "Treasury curve." What that means is that the Treasury, because of the surpluses that are being generated by the government, is now in the process of issuing fewer long-term bonds and in fact buying back perhaps $30 billion worth of long-term bonds. And that has created a technical and structural situation which may persist for some time.
[Varney:] If the surplus persists for many years to come, do you think we'll get to the point where they start buying back the 10-year as well as the 30-year?
[Gross:] Well, Larry Summers has indicated that his range is between 10 and 30 years. So if the 30-year bond gets down to ridiculous levels and we're getting close to that point relative to some of the alternatives then certainly the Treasury has the option to move in closer to the 10-year area or even inside of that. So, that's a possibility. And for those that are continuing to point toward lower and lower long-term yields, they should consider that option.
[Varney:] Last real fast question, does it worry you, does your position worry you, Bill, that you can sometimes move the market with your stock trades and also by what you say in the media? You worried by your influence and your power?
[Gross:] Well, I have to proceed on the basis of what's best for my clients, and that I will do. I again don't think that the power that is suggested is really there. It's a trillion several- trillion-dollar market, and Pimco's $180 billion is a small piece of that.
[Varney:] Bill Gross from Pimco, we thank you very much for joining us. Thank you, sir.
[Gross:] Thank you, Stuart.
[Varney:] Here's what's still ahead on
[Moneyline:] cigarette makers under legal fire yet again, this time accused of rigging prices for decades. Can the industry handle the latest assault? We're going to talk to analyst Martin Feldman about the future of the tobacco sector. He joins us next.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Now back to the big question of this hour: Is Enron the next Watergate? As a corporate scandal, Enron has it all: secret partnerships, inflated profits, inflated egos. Even though Congress threatens to sue the White House over records of contacts with Enron, it has yet to become a full-blown political scandal. But former Nixon White House counsel John Dean suggests Enron could be another Watergate. In a recent article, he writes, "Not since Richard Nixon stiffed the Congress during the Watergate has a White House so openly and arrogantly defied Congress' investigative authority. Nor has any activity by the Bush administration more strongly suggested they are hiding incriminating information about their relationship with the now-moribund Enron, or other heavy-hitting campaign contributors from the energy business." And John Dean now joins us early from Los Angeles. Welcome. Good to see you.
[John Dean, White House Counsel:] Good morning. Thank you.
[Zahn:] So what do you know that Congressional investigators don't know about any culpability on the Bush administration's part?
[Dean:] I don't know anything they don't know. What I do know and what's evident to me as somebody who's been there, done that, if you will, is the way this is being handled by the White House right now on request for very simple and nondetailed information at all about Vice President Cheney's energy group. I don't understand, frankly, why he's taken this hard-line stance that he has. It's very difficult for me to accept that it's a matter of principle, because he will take a lot of heat for the position he's in, and he's ultimately, I think, going to lose in court, and people are going to say, hey, what is going on here?
[Zahn:] As you know, the vice president has made it abundantly clear that he feels these request erode executive privilege. Let's quickly replay an interview that our own John King did with him just a weekend ago.
[Dick Cheney, Vice President Of The United States:] This is about the ability of future presidents and vice presidents to do their job. And they've always had the capacity in the past to get honest, unvarnished advice, to have people come in and speak the truth without fear that what they say will appear on the front page of newspapers the next morning. And we need to preserve that principle.
[Zahn:] And why don't you think that principle should be preserved?
[Dean:] Well, Paula, with all due respect to the vice president, what GAO is asking for is not the unvarnished statements of anybody to the president or the vice president. They're merely asking for who met with that committee and where they met and their names, and this name, ranks and serial number. It's not the content of the conversations even involved. So there's even a misrepresentation going on as to what's requested. Not only that, but they're denying that the GAO has authority they've had for 80 years to request this kind of information. This raises questions in my mind.
[Zahn:] Do you have a problem with Vice President Cheney and members of his staff having met with people from the energy business?
[Dean:] Not at all. They certainly have a right to do that. What they don't have a right to do is, one, is to do it in a illegal fashion, if you will, and that illegal fashion is, if indeed the industry was involved in his task force, then there's a law that applies that. It's called the Federal Advisory Committee Act. It's been in commission since 1972, and it's there so outsiders can see what kind of advice is going in to making a policy. It's a very fundamental law, and it's one that we can't even tell if it was honored or not, although the vice president's office said it was not. It intentionally set up the committee not to have that kind of law apply. And we don't know, because no one will answer any questions as who did what and when.
[Zahn:] Would you be satisfied if the White House just eventually offers this list of names, or do you want to know about the individual testimony of these players at these meetings?
[Dean:] Well, I don't want to know any of this. I'm a spectator, but what I saying is somebody who has sat on both sides of Capitol Hill, if you will, or both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, the Congress does have a right to this kind of information. They asked for something that is noninvasive, if you will. So it really raises a lot of questions as to why the gauntlets hat been thrown at this point when it really doesn't make sense to do so. The vice president has already told the Congress that he did indeed meet with Enron, or his staff did, on at least six occasions. This is what's being asked for across the board. So why he can't give it for the others is a mystery.
[Zahn:] All right. What you're saying, though, is the vice president is entitled, as is the president, to executive privilege. But you're saying the GAO is not asking to violate that, they just want the names of people who participated in these hearings.
[Dean:] That's right.
[Zahn:] And you respect the right to right to the administration's right to executive privilege.
[Dean:] I do, but only the president has the right to executive privilege, not the vice president. It's never gone that far. It's really a uniquely presidential privilege, and the president himself must invoke it, and there has be no invocation of executive privilege here. What they've said is, we challenge GAO's authority to even ask for this information. That's different than executive privilege. What this appears, Paula, to me to be is the first step of a cover-up. This is way you start it. You stall, you stall, you stall. You try to get something like this to go on until it is no longer an issue, until something intervenes and replaces it, or the issue becomes moot for some other reason. That's the early signal here.
[Zahn:] That's a strong indictment. What suggestion is it that anything is being covered up here?
[Dean:] Not an indictment at all. All I'm doing is saying if you look at the facts, and the practice. That's the way done in the past. Certainly the way we did during Watergate was to try to stall everything, and this is a stalling action.
[Zahn:] John Dean, we leave it there this morning. Appreciate you getting up at this ungodly hour to join us. Let's turn to Bill Schneider in Washington this morning. He had an opportunity to listen to some of what Mr. Dean has just said. This is a powerful charge, a charge of a potential cover-up at the White House. He's not the only one saying this. What do you make of it?
[William Schneider, Cnn Sr. Political Analyst:] I make of it that because it's coming from John Dean, it takes a special seriousness, because he was at the center of the Watergate controversy. He is famous for having warned President Nixon, "There's a cancer growing on the presidency." And in a sense, he's echoing and maybe reissuing that same warning here to Vice President Cheney and by implication to the president, that this has the appearance of what was done in Watergate. That was a great crime that drove a president out of office. So this ratchets up the seriousness of the Enron controversy and the dispute between the president and Congress quite considerably.
[Zahn:] Bill, help us understand something this morning. If John Dean says he respect's the president's right to executive privilege, and he just thinks the vice president should be coughing up the names of his staff and the Enron executives that attended these energy task force meetings, what could possibly be the smoking gun there in just the people list?
[Schneider:] He doesn't know. He says he doesn't know what the smoking gun is. All he's saying is, they're behaving as if this is covererup. That's just an implication, they're behaving as if they have something to hide. The administration says we have nothing to hide. So the question then is obvious. If they have nothing to hide, why don't they reveal this information? Congress has scaled back the scope of its request through the now a lawsuit from the General Accounting Office. They simply want to know the names and dates of the people that the administration spoke to. They don't want all the detailed notes of the conversation. So to me, it's a mystery. To me, it's a mystery, to Mr. Dean, what the White House is hiding here. All he's saying is they are stalling as if this were a cover up. They are behaving the same way the Nixon White House did in my day, which was almost 30 years ago.
[Zahn:] Need a brief answer to this one. Any reaction to this charge from this charge from John Dean?
[Schneider:] I haven't heard any. It hasn't been reported. I don't think the article has been published yet. It's at the White House.
[Zahn:] Yes, it's actually on the Web page, and apparently, it's going to get published someplace this weekend. But certainly the White House has got to be concerned about the perception of this being exhibited in public polls that show the American public thinks that something is being hidden here.
[Schneider:] That's right, the American public definitely thinks that they're covering something up. At this point, the president is still very popular. They don't think the president did anything wrong. The most striking thing that John Dean just told you is there may be something done here illegal. He used the word "illegal." He's an attorney and that's very important coming from him. He cited an act, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which might have been violated with the testimony of these energy executives. I haven't heard that before. But for him to use the word "illegal" means they could be covering up law breaking, and that of course is very serious.
[Zahn:] And, Bill, as you were speaking, I just learned that our producers did get in touch with the White House just moments ago, and they have no comment on this John Dean editorial. SCHNEIDER Yes. Thanks for coming in this, Bill, appreciate it.
[Schneider:] Pleasure. OK. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] And we're going to take you back live now to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Currently speaking: Mike DeWine of Ohio.
[Sen. Russell Feingold , Wisconsin:] ... constitutional power to grant pardons in the closing day of his administration with an eye toward making recommendations about the process by which the Justice Department reviews requests that the president exercise his power. We might also consider proposals for a constitutional amendment to limit the president's power in some way, and I, frankly, don't think that a hearing done in the heat of public and press attention to a particular controversial pardon granted by a single president in the last days of his office is really the best way to give a proposed constitutional amendment the full scrutiny it deserves, but that certainly is a legitimate purpose for a Senate hearing. I do believe, however, that holding a hearing simply to add the public outcry over certain pardons or to launch attacks against the president or people in his administration is an appropriate use of our oversight authority. And so, I'm a little disappointed at the title of this hearing, "President Clinton's 11th Hour Pardons." That sounds like a hearing designed for public relations effect, not for a balanced and forward- looking inquiry about an important constitutional power of our nation's chief executive. And I do want to recognize that the chairman said, both as I heard on the Today Show and at the beginning of the hearing, that his purpose here is to look to the future, and I do appreciate that. I have concerns about certain of the pardons myself, as I will discuss in a moment, but we do not have the power in this body to undo President Clinton's pardons subject to any of the points that the chairman was making about technical legal issues, and so I hope that this hearing is more than just an opportunity for senators to criticize our last president. I do not think the hearing is presented for that purpose and, again, I hope and assume this will not be such a hearing are consistent with the spirit of cooperation and bipartisan that we should be trying to create in this new evenly divided Senate. Now, another purpose of this hearing might be to look at those most recent pardons and see if any lessons can be drawn concerning our criminal laws in this country. While they haven't received the attention of the Rich pardon in the media, 20 of the so-called 11th hour pardons involved people who received harsh, mandatory minimum prison sentences for minor nonviolent participation in drug trafficking conspiracies. Mandatory minimum sentences impose irreversible, tragic consequences on many people in this country, particularly young people and their families. So I hope this committee will examine that issue at some point this year and perhaps learn from the people who were involved in these cases about the human dimension of mandatory minimum sentences and whether they are actually succeeding in accomplishing what their proponents predicted and hope to accomplish. As I look at my friend Mr. Holder, who I think did a superb job in his position, I'm reminded of the role of the pardon in the clemency power vis-a-vis the awesome power of the federal government to execute people and the role that might play, if there are questions of racial disparities, as have been suggested, if there are questions, perhaps, of innocence, if there are questions, perhaps, of inadequate legal representation. The notion of a constitutional amendment would allow the Congress to override by a super-majority the judgment of a president that somebody's life should be spared certainly gives me pause. So, Mr. Chairman, while I'm not entirely comfortable with the potential tone of the hearing, I do believe that legitimate questions have been raised about the pardon of Marc Rich, in particular, and for me, as for many senators and many Americans, suspicions about this pardon arise from the fact that Marc Rich's ex-wife, Denise Rich, was a larger donor to the Democratic Party. Not just a large donor, a huge donor. According to press reports based on the research of the Center for Responsive Politics, Ms. Rich donated $867,000 to Democratic Party committees during the Clinton presidency and most of that was, of course, soft money. She also donated $66,300 to individual Democratic candidates in hard money. She also contributed $450,000 to President Clinton's Presidential Library fund. These kinds of numbers can't help but raise some questions about this pardon. But let me also say that they put a question squarely to the members of this committee and the Senate as a whole: Will you do what it takes to end this corrupt soft-money system that allows contributions of this size to the political parties? This is a system that is now providing at least an appearance of corruption, and not only at our legislative process, not only at our political conventions, but now in the very heart of our criminal justice system. There are members of this committee who have consistently filibustered our attempts to ban soft money. I'm happy to note that Senator Specter has consistently supported reform. But for other senators who have blocked reform, let me point out that filibusters in 1994 and 1996, 1997, and particularly in 1998 and 1999, when the House had passed a campaign finance reform bill and prevented us from changing the law, basically allowed it to be possible for Denise Rich to make these very large contributions and to raise at least the appearance of impropriety with regard to something as sacred as the pardon power. And remember, these same questions are going to be raised, and raised legitimately, about anyone that President Bush pardons during his term, if friends, family or associates of the persons pardon turned out to be contributors to the Bush campaign or to the Republican Party. So while there may be nothing that we can do about the Clinton 11th hour pardons, there is something that we very clearly can do as a Congress to address the suspicions that some pardons have been or will be based on improper influence, and that of course is to pass campaign finance reform when it comes to the floor of the Senate next month. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Sen. Arlen Specter , Pennsylvania:] Thank you, Senator Feingold. Senator Kyl?
[Sen. Jon Kyl , Arizona:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a couple of comments. First of all, the president obviously had his reasons for granting these and other pardons. We're not going to know what those reasons are unless the president himself tells us. The only other way that we could learn is if there is a criminal investigation based upon the information that has come to public light so far, information which does indeed raise serious questions about the possibility of improper influence. But I think that our hearing today needs to focus on two other potential actions. One is a constitutional amendment, which I find no justification for and frankly don't see the need for, simply because there may have been one abuse of discretion in this case. There is, however, a secondary, and that has to do with statutory reform of the procedures within the Justice Department, which are currently regulated by internal Justice Department regulations which are on the public record. I find that, based upon Mr. Holder's testimony, that he did not acquit himself or the Justice Department well in this case. According to his written testimony, he knew that the regular procedures had not been followed. He knew why it was important that those procedures be followed. As the number two person in the Department of Justice, he had a responsibility to see that procedures that were important were followed. And in my view, and I'll be anxious to hear from Mr. Holder here, there is nothing that justified his inaction in this case. He was asked by Mr. Quinn, according to his testimony, what his position would be on the pardon of Mr. Rich this the day before the Clinton administration ended and according to Mr. Holder's testimony: "I told him that although I had no strong opposition, based on his recitation of the facts, law enforcement in New York would strongly oppose it." So he had a sense that this would be a very controversial pardon. He understood at that time that technically Mr. Rich was not eligible for a pardon under the regulations of the Department of Justice, and he also had to know that the procedures that the failure to follow the procedures were a deliberate attempt to avoid those procedures because of the likelihood that a pardon would not be recommended if the procedures were properly followed. My view is that Mr. Holder should have said to Mr. Quinn at that moment, "You haven't followed the procedures. You need to follow the procedures. You know what they are, Mr. Quinn. You need to file with the pardon attorney. And I'm going to call the president and warn him against taking action in this case, because we haven't vetted this request, as is the normal case and that there are dangers in moving ahead with this pardon in the absence of such vetting." That would have been the proper course of action, and I can find nothing that would have excused Mr. Holder from following that course of action. So my suggestion here is that we also focus on the possibility of legislating a set of procedures, which the personnel of the Department of Justice would have to follow in the event they became aware of a potential pardon, procedures that would ensure that the pardon request is handled in the proper way. That way, at least we could avoid the kind of problem that occurred here, unless a president was blatantly willing to proceed against the recommendation of his own Department of Justice. I'll be anxious to get the witnesses' views on whether such changes in procedure would be a good idea, at least to resolve these kinds of issues in the future. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Specter:] Thank you, Senator Kyl. Senator Durbin?
[Sen. Dick Durbin , Illinois:] Thank you very much, Senator Specter. I will not defend the pardon of Marc Rich. Marc Rich is hardly a sympathetic figure. Charged with a serious violation of law, Mr. Rich chose to flee the United States and renounce his American citizenship. The circumstances surrounding his pardon involving campaign contributions certainly raise the appearance of impropriety, if not much more. But it is curious to me that the issue of the presidential power to pardon is being considered today by this committee with the assumption that this action by former President Clinton was the only controversial pardon in recent memory. Senator Specter has even suggested that former President Clinton be called before this committee. Well, in the interest of balance, fairness, and in the spirit of bipartisanship, should this committee also call former President George Bush to explain why on Christmas Eve 1992 he issued a pardon for former Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and five others, who had been convicted of lying to Congress in the Iran-Contra controversy? It's unlikely that former President Bush will be called or his actions even scrutinized by this committee. It appears that in our investigation of the presidential right to pardon, in looking forward, as Senator Specter suggests, we can only reflect on one former president at a time. But if we're sincere about amending the Constitution or reforming the laws relating to pardons, the committee should not confine its inquiry to one action by one president. If this hearing is about genuine reform, it should be opened and balanced. It should consider the use of the presidential pardon historically by presidents of both political parties. If it is about a parting shot at former President Clinton, then I have to agree with President George W. Bush, "It's time to move on." Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Specter:] Thank you, Senator Durbin. Senator Sessions?
[Sen. Jeff Sessions , Alabama:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The power to pardon is a legitimate power. It's one that ought to be exercised with great care. I believe in the role of the pardon attorney. We had hearings here earlier on the Puerto Rican terrorist pardons, which I thought was breathtakingly inexcusable by the president. And I believe I suggested to Mr. Adams that I didn't see how he could remain in office as a pardon attorney, turning down on a daily basis people who committed very minor crimes, who lived a life of success and contributed to their community, they not get a pardon, and we pardon people who are convicted of violent crimes and major crimes...
[Kagan:] We're going to dip in here a little bit to the Senate Judiciary Committee and to their hearings and bring in our Bob Franken to get a little perspective here. Bob, one of the points being brought up by I think by Senator Kyl was the role of Department of Justice, who, in at least during the House hearings, the House government reform hearings, Eric Holder, the deputy attorney general at the time didn't come out looking great in this matter as well.
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, Holder's going to be saying the same thing today that he said last week, which is that he was not really in the loop that much on this matter. And of course, the Republicans are saying, well, he should have been, it should have been the normal, very detailed Department of Justice procedure. Of course, others have pointed out that the president has the right to go that route or to do as he did in some of these cases and make the decision individually. Another point here: I've noticed now that several of the Democratic members on this committee are really picking up a theme that is reverberated throughout Democratic circles in particular, and that basically is enough is enough. The Democrats are trying to perhaps tap into a feeling that Bill Clinton has been knocked around enough, the Republicans have made their point, and that it's time to perhaps move forward. So you keep hearing that: You heard it from Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois, you heard it earlier from Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, who managed to turn all this, by the way, into a discussion about his campaign finance reform that he's cosponsoring with John McCain. So you're getting an awful lot of politics here, and it begins to look like this pardons issue is going to get enmeshed in partisan politics.
[Kagan:] Well, and Bob, what exactly is the point of these hearings? Is it just to bash Clinton, to talk about what went wrong, or are some of these senators actually considering doing something like changing the presidential right to pardon whoever he or, perhaps in the future, she pleases?
[Franken:] Well, Senator Specter is suggesting a constitutional amendment which would give Congress 180 days after a presidential pardon by a two-thirds vote the ability to overturn that. Now, of course, the Constitution is very, very difficult to amend. As a matter of fact, he calls it the Mondale amendment, because in the 93rd Congress, many, many moons ago, Senator Walter Mondale of Minnesota made that proposal and Senator Specter is making it again. As you know, Senator Specter is somebody who likes to put out ideas out there and just see how they reverberate. He is also the one who has put out the possibility that because of the procedure that is used in the Marc Rich pardon that it's not valid just about everybody shot that down by the way.
[Kagan:] The ideas and the discussion continue. Bob Franken, thank you very much. The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing will continue as well. Also at the top of the hour, we are waiting the start of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. They are looking at the issue of what went wrong on network news services on election night, on November 7th. We will be bringing you those hearings as well.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] A tough week for the Nasdaq last week, down by 5.8 percent. Could have a deal brewing, though. About.com is reportedly in serious talks with the media company Primedia about joining forces. For details, we go right to Sasha Salama, who's over at the Nasdaq Marketsite. Hi, Sasha.
[Sasha Salama, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, David. Thanks very much. That's right. An "old economy" company, namely Primedia, which publishes magazines like "Seventeen," possibly getting together with a "new economy" company, About.com. BOUT is the ticker symbol of this information-content Web site. So keep an eye on that stock today, it could be a mover. "The Wall Street Journal" says that Primedia is reportedly in advanced talks with About.com to take it over. In fact, "The Journal" gives chances better than 50-50 of the deal actually going through. And it would reportedly be a $700 million stock deal. We will see if there's anything to this, but in the meantime we are expecting some activity in BOUT, which, as you can see, has been under severe pressure from both its high on the year and year to date. We have got a few companies reporting today in the new-economy arena, losses expected from all of them. One of them, Expedia that's the travel site spinoff from Microsoft. We're also expecting results from BarnesandNoble.com and eToys today. Later in the week, we get Qualcomm and Priceline.com. That's Thursday. And tomorrow we get Earthlink David.
[Haffenreffer:] All right. Sasha, thank you very much.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Well, today's edition of the "Washington Post" has a glimpse of how new freedoms are affecting people in Mazir-e-Sharif. Northern Alliance forces retook the northern Afghan city Friday, ending more than two years of Taliban rule. There are already signs of the advent of a more tolerant form of Islam. The "Post" reports women have been seen without veils in public and have been worshipping at mosques. Authorities are planning to reopen schools and the city's TV station is preparing to go back on the air.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] That didn't take very long, did it? Well, maybe the same thing is happening in Herat. The Northern Alliance is claiming that they have taken control of that city. However, the Taliban is claiming the exact opposite of that. Let's check in now with our Kamal Hyder. He's in Kandahar. He's got the latest on the situation for us hello, Kamal.
[Kamal Hyder, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Leon. The Taliban are saying that Herat is still with them. They said that they spoke to their personnel in Herat and they said that it was within Taliban control. Also, some news coming out, the Taliban having launched a counter-offensive in Badivish and taken some area. Now, apparently all over Afghanistan you see the redrawing of the front lines, and as the situation stands at the moment, it would mean the 1997 front lines between the Northern Alliance and the Taliban Leon.
[Harris:] Well, then, Kamal, if you're saying the Taliban is mounting counter-offensives then I suppose, has there been any evidence at all of any defections? We've been seeing evidence now that the Northern Alliance has taken over some major supply routes into the Taliban. Any evidence that the Taliban will might be weakening at any point?
[Hyder:] Well, the evacuation, forced evacuation or strategic evacuation from Mazir-e-Sharif was a severe blow to the Taliban. Losing territory south of Mazir-e-Sharif would be critical to the Taliban because that is their logistical supply line through Bamian. They have a very torturous route, and pulling out such a large force from the north entails its own problems. Right now for the Taliban, the only option is to withdraw as many forces from the north without heavy attrition. That seems to be the case at the moment for the Taliban. As far as defections are concerned, we have no evidence here to suggest that any Taliban have started to defect in large numbers. They say they remain committed to fighting this war and they say that the overall withdrawal from the north is a strategic withdrawal because they cannot hope to keep that without logistical supply lines Leon.
[Harris:] Interesting. Kamal Hyder reporting live for us this morning from Kandahar, Afghanistan. Thank you very much. Stay safe.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] New developments, legal developments, and maybe a new time-frame in the international tug-of-war surrounding six-year-old Elian Gonzalez. The Justice Department had given his Florida relatives a noon deadline, Eastern time, to file for an expedited hearing. And a short time ago, we learned that they have filed that motion. That means the case languishing a near limbo since Thanksgiving is on the fast track to a resolution. From Miami now, Susan's Susan Candiotti with us now to bring us up to date from Southern Florida. Susan, good morning to you.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, Bill. We are standing outside the home where Elian Gonzalez has been living for four months now, the home of his great-uncle, as we are here to tell you that we have now learned that attorneys representing his Florida relatives have now filed a 37-page appeal with the circuit court of appeals in Atlanta, asking that court for an expedited appeals process and to set oral arguments. Now, is this a complete acceptance of the Justice Department's ultimatum to the attorneys? Well, one of the lawyers told me that, quote, "we will accept the government's terms if we have to," even though Attorney Linda Osberg-Braun called those terms "coercive." The Justice Department says that it has no comment as to whether it has yet received a copy of this appeal filed this morning. And we do not, therefore, know whether the attorneys have complied in full to all the dates set out by the government. You will recall that the government said that if these attorneys did not agree in full and tell the Justice Department of its intentions by noontime today, that the Justice Department will revoke Elian Gonzalez's temporary status on Thursday. Now we also asked the attorneys if they lose all of their appeals, in fact, will the boy be handed over?
[Candiotti:] Will they turn the boy over to authorities if every appeal in the state exhausted?
[Linda Osberg-braun, Gonzalez Family Attorney:] The family will obey the law.
[Candiotti:] Is that a yes?
[Osberg-braun:] The family will obey the law. They will do what's legally required.
[Candiotti:] The attorneys representing the family of Elian Gonzalez are planning a news conference in just a few hours from now to announce their intentions. And though, we hope by then to learn more details about exactly how they have replied to the Justice Department ultimatum Bill.
[Hemmer:] Susan, it's said to be expedited. Give us a time frame. What does "expedited" mean in a case like this? Days, weeks, months? How does that shake down, possibly?
[Candiotti:] Under an expedited schedule as set out by the Justice Department and more or less agreed to by the attorneys, who say they agree in principle, it would shave probably about a month from the process. So, that it would take one to two months instead of two to three months, the attorneys say and the Justice Department says. So, we will have to wait and see whether how this all passes out.
[Hemmer:] That, we will. The calendar does await. Susan Candiotti, live Miami this morning Kyra.
[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] The deeply personal drama of the six- year-old boy has stoked nationalistic rhetoric on both sides of the Florida Strait. Cuban President Fidel Castro has often condemned the refusal to return the boy. But this weekend, he sharpened the accusations and sinister predictions. CNN Havana bureau chief Lucia Newman has more on that Lucia.
[Lucia Newman, Cnn Havana Bureau Chief:] Hello, Kyra. Well, last night in a national broadcast address, President Fidel Castro said that he expected that the Elian case would be resolved in about three weeks, and that he was convinced that the court in Atlanta would rule for the child to be returned to his father and to Cuba. But President Castro also warned that this was a very dangerous moment. And he said that the child's Miami family and members of the exile community could kidnap the child or even take him to another country to prevent him from returning to Cuba. And then the president made allegations which went even further.
[Newman:] "They are capable of killing the boy before returning him safe and sound to his country," he said. The Cuban leader was referring to members of the Cuban-American community, who vowed to do everything in their power to keep the child in the United States. "They are desperate," said Castro, "they've lost the battle both legally and morally and are politically destroyed. What will they do now?" The Cuban leader gave a detailed account of what he called "clear and consistent attempts" by the boy's Miami relatives to pressure the child and distance him from his father. President Castro says he thinks the Miami relatives' last legal options to keep the boy will be exhausted within a few weeks.
[Fidel Castro, President Of Cuba:] We are seriously concerned the boy could be intentionally harmed, both mentally and physically. We don't rule out the risk that he could be deliberately made sick, even contaminated with some incurable disease as an act of revenge against the father and Elian's Cuban family.
[Newman:] President Castro appealed to U.S. authorities to take measures to safeguard the child, as the high stakes international custody battle intensifies. And speaking of high stakes, President Castro is furious about an interview with the boy given to a U.S. television network. The president called this a, quote, "repulsive and monstrous attempt to manipulate U.S. public opinion Kyra.
[Phillips:] Lucia, what more have you heard from Elian's father?
[Newman:] Elian's father hasn't said a word in public for weeks now, Kyra. We do understand from the Cuban government that he is very upset that an interview was given was arranged with his son with a television network in the United States without his consultation, without his permission. And he has said, of course, through his lawyer in the United States that he is willing to go to the United States at a moment's notice if and when he is given assurances that it will be to pick up his child and bring him back here to Cuba Kyra.
[Phillips:] Lucia Newman, thank you. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] A new development in Chandra Levy investigation. Let's go to our Bob Franken, standing by in Washington Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] This is the response from the lawyer for Congressman Gary Condit to demand from the Levy family that Condit be administered a lie detector test. The family feels, said the statement from the Levys, We need to be assured the congressman is telling the truth. This comes in the wake of the acknowledgement by Congressman Condit, to police officials, that he had a romantic relationship with Chandra Levy. This is the response from his lawyer Abbe Lowell to that. We understand the Levy family wants to do all it can to find Chandra, but police have stated they are fully satisfied with Congressman Condit's cooperation and with the answers to every single question that they have posed. The police have also stated that Congressman Condit is not a suspect. In light of Police Chief Gainer's statement those made on Saturday night surely, the time has come to focus less on Congressman Condit and more on the 99 other people police have identified who might be as helpful in providing information that could find Chandra. The 99 other people to whom they refer are the people that the police say are among the 100 that have been interviewed. Those, we're told by police sources, include a large number who were in the exercise club where Chandra Levy was last seen, as she canceled her membership, on April 30. Others have been colleagues and friends, both here and in Washington. In any case, that's the statement. Not a direct response to the request for a polygraph test, but just something that they understand that the police have satisfied with the questions and the answers they have gotten from Congressman Condit.
[Kagan:] Bob, that would sound like a thanks, but no thanks, that they don't plan on doing that right now.
[Franken:] I think only a no thanks.
[Kagan:] Bob Franken, in Washington, thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] The Olympics have a new boss. The International Olympic Committee has elected Jacques Rogge of Belgium to an eight-year term, replacing Juan Antonio Samaranch, of Spain. The two met with reporters in Moscow, including our Patrick Snell, who's there.
[Patrick Snell, Cnn Correspondent:] Colleen, that's right: the Samaranch era has officially come to an end after 21 years. Now all eyes will be focusing on the 59-year old orthopedic surgeon from Belgium, Jacques Rogge. Out of all the candidates, in terms of sporting politics, he was perhaps the man with the least experience but his very, very widespread reputation is of being a smooth diplomat; an IOC problem solver, if you like; and a man widely credited with organizing the phenomenally successful Sydney, Australia, Games last year. Rogge has a great sporting background himself. He competed in the '68, '72, and '76 Olympic Games, as a sailor, and also played rugby for his country, and is today happy to share center stage with the outgoing president, Juan Antonio Samaranch and a really lovely touch when he presented Samaranch himself with an Olympic Gold Medal for his own achievements. Absolutely typical of the man smooth talking and a very, very popular decision. Now a word about the rivals he beat. Rogge in the second round of voting, he won. He totaled 59 votes. That was well clear of his closest rival, the South Korean politician Un-yong Kim, who got 23 votes. That's one clear of the Canadian lawyer, Dick Pound. So the new IOC president, the Belgian Jacques Rogge Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] All right, thanks very much, Patrick.
[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] And our next guest is Melinda McKay. She's the senior vice president of a company called Jones Lang LaSalle. This is a firm that did an Olympic study on the long-term impact that cities who've received the Olympic Games are able to benefit from. And they've gone back and studied Sydney, Atlanta, Barcelona, and Seoul. So we now introduce Melinda McKay. Let's talk about Beijing. First of all, thank you for being with us, Ms. McKay. Why the study and who paid for it very quickly.
[Melinda Mckay, Jones Lang Lasalle:] The study was done based on the fact that I was actually in Sydney last year, and I was seeing firsthand what was happening in the markets, the sort of infrastructure developments that were occurring and I thought it would be very interesting for our clients to actually take a look at what happened in past host cities and see if there were any consistencies across that.
[Nelson:] Summarize what you found.
[Mckay:] We found that although there are certainly short-term economic gains to be had from the Olympics between $3 billion and $17 billion, depending on which of the past four host cities you look at. But really, the long-term legacy is in the change to the urban form of the city. At least the past four Olympic host cities have really used the Games to revitalize rundown urban areas.
[Nelson:] All right and what would be the biggest example you'd like to point to?
[Mckay:] I would take the Sydney experience, because as I said before, I was seeing it first hand. They essentially turned the Olympic Village from a munitions dump it was an unusable industrial front into the world's most environmentally friendly suburb. And if you take the Atlanta example, they spent $1 billion on capital works as a result of the Games and have revitalized the downtown area.
[Nelson:] In Atlanta, there was a change, in a sense, to the infrastructure around the Centennial Park, which was created to honor the Olympics. But by and large, some people may question whether all of this was worth the millions and millions or maybe I should say billions of dollars that are poured into getting the Olympic Games. Does it really balance out?
[Mckay:] I really do think it does, if you just take a pure look at the net economic gain that is measured from the Olympic Games and it, as I said before, ranges between $3 billion and $17 billion, and that's just the short-term gain; you've got the long-term changes to the urban form, which are just tremendous.
[Nelson:] For residents of Beijing, if the city goes ahead and keeps its promises, what should residents be seeing by the year 2008 to their city?
[Mckay:] The Beijing of 2008 will definitely be significantly different from the city that we see now. Beijing is spending $12.2 billion on environmental improvements and antipollution measures. They're spending $3.7 billion on transport infrastructure. They are turning their Olympic Village the Olympic Green into a 200-acre park, and they're surrounding that by a nature park as well. So there are very exciting changes that we'll see for Beijing.
[Nelson:] Thank you very much for taking the time to talk to us this morning, Melinda McKay, from Jones Lang LaSalle, and we appreciate your being here.
[Mckay:] Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] Another very busy day for the president, Mr. Bush up at Camp David plotting strategy for the war on terrorism. He plans to speak with his top national security advisers, also to speak with his economic team in the days ahead. Our Kelly Wallace is in Hagerstown, Maryland near Camp David and joins us now with the latest good morning, Kelly.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Good morning, John. Exactly, President Bush to begin his day meeting and talking with his National Security Council staff. Using modern technology, though, it will be a video conferencing meeting up at Camp David with the president, we understand, Chief of Staff Andy Card, National Security Advisor Dr. Condoleezza Rice and Commerce Secretary Don Evans, other members of the national security team obviously joining the president via video conferencing to talk about the latest on military planning Also, the diplomatic, diplomacy continuing. The president already has spoken to some 24 world leaders. He'll have meetings this week with Canadian Prime Minister Jean Cretien and also the prime minister of Japan. We know also on Friday that he spoke with the leaders of Nigeria, Oman and Turkish President Sezer and we are learning today that Turkey is pledging some public support for the United States, allowing the U.S. to use its air space and bases to transport any aircraft to respond to those deadly terrorist attacks now just about 11 days ago. Also, the president, John, focusing on the economic front. His radio address today, the president expected to talk about concern about the economy, the impact the attacks have had on the economy. But to show, John, this sort of new bipartisanship in Washington, the president's speechwriters as well as House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt's speechwriters have been talking. Dick Gephardt will be doing the Democratic radio response. Both the president and Congressman Gephardt will be focusing in their radio addresses about how members of Congress working together to try to give the economy a boost in the weeks ahead John.
[King:] Well, Kelly, as they promised to work together to help give the economy a boost, any sense of the specifics and any sense at all of the timetable? One thing we learned in recent days with the Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, he urged lawmakers, including the president, wait a couple of weeks. But obviously a very rocky week on Wall Street. Any sense of superficially what we will see and when we will see it?
[Wallace:] Yes, no specifics. Really it appears the word coming down from Federal Reserve Board Chairman Greenspan to sort of hold back a little bit has law makers and the administration holding back. But publicly they're definitely trying to sort of get out the message that A, the economy is certainly hurting, but that the president and the law makers are working on it. So you're likely to see continued discussions, increased government spending, as you noted, $5 billion of that $40 billion emergency aid package already on the way to start helping people in New York, Virginia and Pennsylvania. Also, continued talk about additional tax cuts, a capital gains tax cut, maybe some type of payroll tax cut. So things seem to be in the discussion stage but you're certainly seeing law makers and the president, John, trying to sort of use sort of the public arena to calm people down, get people confident again about the economy, let them know that work is being done behind-the-scenes John.
[King:] All right, Kelly Wallace keeping track of the president near Camp David, Maryland. We'll check in with you a bit later.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] School shootings in the United States have become all too frequent. It was near the end of school last year when a student opened fire on his classmates in Conyers, Georgia, about 25 miles east of Atlanta, six students were wounded in that shooting. None killed however. For the first time, the mother of the shooting suspect has spoken with a reporter. Reporter Mark Winne from CNN affiliate WSB in Atlanta with the story.
[Mae Dean Daniele, T.j. Solomon's Mother:] I think he totally, totally had a break down and totally released every frustration, every darkness, every anger every demon, everything thing that hurt.
[Mark Winne, Wsb Reporter:] He lives now in a youth detention center, accused in the shooting of six at Heritage High. But once, he lived here, a room with pinkish walls, perhaps almost as plain as those of his cell.
[Daniele:] There's no expression, there is no emotion. He has his music. That was his expression.
[Winne:] No posters on the wall.
[Daniele:] No posters.
[Winne:] Who picked the paintings?
[Daniele:] I picked the paintings because they had scenes of water. And T.J. loves water. This is exactly like he had this room.
[Winne:] Spotless.
[Daniele:] Spotless.
[Winne:] She says, once she was proud of it, now she sees it as a symptom of a son who didn't express what was inside, including the pain.
[Daniele:] A deep-seated problem that finally erupted.
[Unidentified Male:] One of our friends and his foot was bleeding, and he good shot in the foot. Everybody was screaming, they got a gun, they got a gun. There were six students that were inured.
[Winne:] Beyond a room too neat, his mother admits now there were warning signs missed.
[Daniele:] There has been very concrete ones.
[Winne:] Start before the move to Georgia.
[Daniele:] North Carolina was very good for T.J., star baseball player. Loved to play baseball. We did the transfer to Georgia in the 8th grade. One of the first things we did with him was to sign him up in the baseball league. T.J. walked up to take his time at batting tryout, and they would pitch to him and he would stand there.
[Winne:] She says, eventually, he told her he just didn't want to play.
[Daniele:] The first indication that we had that he just was not happy with baseball is what we thought at first. In the 8th grade, whenever we did the transfer, we started noting the changes from all Bs, Cs, to a few Ds. In the ninth grade, we started to see Fs.
[Winne:] She says, T.J. had been on Ritalin for years. There had been learning problems before. But by the shooting, the grades were worse than ever, and they knew he would not pass tenth grade. But...
[Daniele:] We actually started to back off of him with the grades. To have pressured him anymore would have put additional frustration on to him.
[Winne:] She recounts two school incidents, one a call from a counselor about a year before the shooting.
[Daniele:] She had two students that did come forward and say that T.J. had told them that he did not want to live.
[Winne:] She says T.J. told her he never said it. They were joking. But she took him straight to Rockdale Mental Health and a social worker.
[Daniele:] Her exact words to me were: This is the sanest person I have talked to all day.
[Winne:] Then, February '99 another call from school.
[Daniele:] A student had reported seeing T.J. with a gun at school.
[Winne:] She says he cut school early, maybe for the first time ever, and did not come home until midnight. But...
[Daniele:] He denied having a gun.
[Winne:] You believed him?
[Daniele:] I do believe him.
[Winne:] You still believe he didn't have a gun that day?
[Daniele:] I still believe he did not have a gun that day.
[Winne:] She says they did many things right as parents.
[Daniele:] Religious education once a week. Once a week Boy Scouts every Thursday night. We would hunt together as a family. We camped together as a family. These were routine activities.
[Unidentified Male:] T.J. and I fished almost every weekend or every other weekend. He loved to fish. T.J. was fun to be with.
[Winne:] Still, something went wrong.
[Daniele:] I honestly did not see it. I honestly did not see it.
[Waters:] That was Mark Winne from CNN affiliate WSB in Atlanta with that story.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] If you had $20 million to spend on a trip, where would you go? How about space? Our guest this morning says he's planning to take a multimillion- dollar ride on the Russian space station Mir, possibly next spring. He'll become the first tourist in orbit. Dennis Tito joins us live from Moscow. And if our viewer will also allow us to be patient with the delay here, we'll continue. Dennis, hello to you.
[Dennis Tito, Whilshire Associates:] Good morning.
[Hemmer:] Tell us, why is this so important to you in order to spend the kind of cash that could be spent on this?
[Tito:] Well, it's been a long-term dream. I first became fascinated with space when Sputnik was launched in '57. I was a senior in high school. I went on to study aerospace engineering. After graduating, I went to Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena and worked for five years on various space missions, and I've been fascinated with space since then. So it's been a life-long passion.
[Hemmer:] As you describe yourself, a former rocket scientist. But you know all too well the history of Mir. It's 14 years old, it has not had many gold stars in the past few years. Are there concerns from you about the health of the space station?
[Tito:] Actually, there isn't. Those problems are well understood and will not repeat. It's an old space station, but that also is an advantage because it's well-tested. And I'm very confident that there won't be problems when I'm aboard.
[Hemmer:] Dennis, do you believe this is strictly a sightseeing tour for you, or with there be science involved as part of your objective to go through with this?
[Tito:] Well, I believe it's not only it's somewhat of sightseeing tour. I want to look at the Earth from 250 miles. But it's also, as I see it, a spiritual experience. But I do want to assist in performing scientific experiments. My background is scientific and I think I can add some value.
[Hemmer:] You're 59 years of age. I understand you work out regularly. Any concerns of the physical demands of what it may take to go through training?
[Tito:] No. I've undergone some testing that took me on G forces that are about 2 12 times what I would experience in flight. So since I was able to deal with that as well as deal with weightlessness in a parabolic flight, I feel very confident that I'm well-conditioned for this flight.
[Hemmer:] Spring 2001 that's the target. What are the chances this is pulled off?
[Tito:] I think it's pretty high. I'm right near the end of my, you know, medical testing, and so far so good. The remaining testing are things that I've already had tested at home. So I think it's a very high likelihood.
[Hemmer:] We wish you the best of luck. We also should mention that you founded the Wilshire 5000 Total Market Index, so you know stocks as well. And do us a favor, Dennis. If you go, take a lot of pictures, OK? We'll come back and talk about it.
[Tito:] OK, thank you.
[Hemmer:] Thank you, sir. Dennis Tito live in Moscow. We will track that for sure.

[Kate Snow, Cnn Anchor:] The red carpet has been rolled out, the guest list finalized. Now all that's left is for the envelopes to be opened. The Academy Awards will be handed out tomorrow night, as you probably well know. Our own Leon Harris is just outside the Kodak Theater, the new home of the much-anticipated ceremony. He joins us now with a bit of a preview. Leon, how are you doing out there?
[Leon Harris, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey, doing OK, Kate. As a mater of fact, your timing is perfect. I mean, right before you came and tossed it to me, the sun was all covered up by clouds. Just because you mentioned the Kodak Theater and the Academy Awards, what happens? God cues the clouds and they run away, and now we can see now, we got a great shot here. You get a really good look at how things are shaping up outside the Kodak Theater. Take a look down here, you look in here, right behind me is perhaps 500 feet of the most glamorous space that you're ever going to see in your life, beginning in about 24 hours from now, when people start arriving here at the theater for the show. You should see the crowds on the sidewalks already. And they can't even see it from where they're at because of the barriers, but they are still piling up, about maybe 10, 15 people deep on the sidewalks here. Lots of things going on outside, but quite a bit going on inside, because this is a very special year. Because for the first time this is the first time it's going to be held here in Hollywood in decades. So this is a very special moment here for a lot of folks here in the Academy. And also a special moment for my guest who's joining me right now, the man who designed the Kodak Theater, David Rockwell. Now, your home, your new home here basically is going to be getting a lot of attention beginning tomorrow. Are you ready for this? Are you excited, nervous or what?
[David Rockwell, Kodak Theater Architect:] Well, there's no way, if you think about the amount of attention it's going to get, you just have to go totally numb. So I'm just out here having the time of my life, and the project's been really as close as I can imagine to a dream come true for an architect.
[Harris:] Now, listen, speaking as an architect, I know you said that we were talking off camera you told me you designed this place with the Academy's help, with the Academy in mind. Now, are they using it the way you thought it was going to be used now that you've seen them actually take control of the property inside? They're not dressing it up the way that you wanted to have them dress up?
[Rockwell:] Well, it's an interesting question. We designed it with the Academy each step of the way, trying to figure how you take a live theater, in which people are going to have a wonderful experience, and have that translate to the TV screen. What are the components? And when I go in there and see the shots today and see what they're doing, it's actually beyond our expectations, and it's really, really thrilling.
[Harris:] Well, listen, we can't get inside. They won't let us in. We have got credentials and everything. You've been inside. You tell us, what's going on right now?
[Rockwell:] Well, they're rehearsing right now. So when you walk in, actually, they're rehearsing a Cirque du Soleil number, which looks breathtaking. And it's one of the things that I think is going to be special about the broadcast is the audience and the performers will really relate intimately, because of the way the house is set up.
[Harris:] That's been talked about quite a bit as well, because now because of that intimacy, that means there's going to be what some 1,800 fewer seats than there had been in the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion?
[Rockwell:] Well, first of all, I'm thrilled that people want to come see the theater. And the size has really been dictated by the Academy in order to create an experience that is intimate enough that it will be a different kind of experience. And not only is it intimate between performer and audience, but if there's ever been a building built that's about communal celebration and about celebrating this amazing creative community, it's this theater. So the audience and the rest of the audience has an incredibly intimate relationship. And I think that will be transparent to people watching it on
[Tv. Harris:] All right, well, we'll see how it looks tomorrow evening on television. Thank you very much, David Rockwell.
[Rockwell:] Thank you. Come see us.
[Harris:] Good luck. All right. At least we'll try to see it. I know I will. I'll be sitting right here on the outside. Daryn gets to go inside, but that's a different story. But listen, we're going to stay here and we're going to keep you folks posted on exactly how things are shaping up here. But for now, let's go back to you in the studio, Kate.
[Snow:] Hey, Leon, Daryn told me she's going to wear red tomorrow. So I have to ask you, what are you wearing?
[Harris:] I'm not wearing red, I can tell you that much. You will never see me in red!
[Snow:] Is it a black tux?
[Harris:] Yes, I have it it's a tux. I won't tell you what kind of tux it is, or what color tux it is. How's this for a tease? It's probably something you haven't seen before.
[Snow:] All right. Well, we'll tune in for that tomorrow night. I know you're doing a special tomorrow night at 7:00 Eastern. Thanks so much, Leon.
[Harris:] That's right. Good to see you.
[Snow:] Have fun.

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Rudi Bakhtiar, Co-host:] Thanks for making NEWSROOM part of your Tuesday. I'm Rudi Bakhtiar.
[Tom Haynes, Co-host:] And I'm Tom Haynes. We begin today with a head count in the
[U.s. Bakhtiar:] In "Today's News": Census 2000. Why is this population survey so important?
[John Thompson, Census 2000:] It's used for deciding where to put schools, where to put hospitals, how to put roads in, community services.
[Haynes:] "Your Health" is the focus of Tuesday's desk. Today, the added benefits of being buff. Sure, it can make you look good, but how else can lifting weights benefit your body?
[Dr. Barry Franklin, William Beaumont Hospital:] As your muscles get stronger, the load on your heart actually is less.
[Bakhtiar:] In "Worldview," dealing with a difficult past and a unique way of coming to terms.
[Cyndy Fujikawa, Actress:] And I feel like I knew him but I didn't.
[Haynes:] Then, power in numbers. We "Chronicle" the Latino community and its new importance in U.S. politics.
[Jorge Ramos, Anchor, Univision Network:] Eight years ago, we didn't have access to almost any presidential candidate. Now-a-days, we have the two most important candidates speak Spanish. We have almost continuous access to them.
[Bakhtiar:] In today's top story, stand up and be counted. Starting this week, Census forms are being delivered to 98 million U.S. households. Why is it important to fill them out? Results help determine such things as where schools are built and how people are represented in Congress. On March 1, 1790, Congress authorized the decennial U.S. Census. Article 1, Section II of the U.S. Constitution states: "Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers. The actual enumeration shall be made within every subsequent term of 10 years."
[Kenneth Prewitt, Director, U.s. Census Bureau:] One hundred percent of the American population gets what we call short-form questions. It's only about six or seven questions. It takes about 10 minutes to fill the form in. One out of six, then, the other 17 percent of the population gets long-form questions. They get about 50 more questions. And that has to do with information on a large number of topics: housing conditions, education, occupation, veteran status, disability, travel to work for planning, say, energy, or planning transportation programs.
[Bakhtiar:] In the past, the U.S. Census Bureau has been criticized for inaccurate headcounts.
[Prewitt:] Take a city like San Antonio. We estimate that we missed about 40,000 people in San Antonio in 1990. About half of those were children, so they lose out on their school construction, on their text book purchases, because they're planning for one size of school enrollment and they get a different size.
[Bakhtiar:] For an in-depth look at the national count we have two reports, beginning with Jonathan Aiken.
[Jonathan Aiken, Cnn Correspondent:] The Constitution requires the United States to take a good, long look at itself every 10 years through a census. But other than changing the size and shape of congressional districts every decade, what's in it for you in filling out the form?
[John Thompson, Census 2000:] It's used for deciding where to put schools, where to put hospitals, how to put roads in, community services.
[Aiken:] The census is also how $185 billion a year is distributed to the states based on population. [on camera]: So if you don't fill out your census form, Congress doesn't know where you live, and then your state doesn't get as much money as it should from 25 major federal programs. [voice-over]: Sixty-three percent of Medicaid allocations are distributed using the census. And federal grants and programs ranging from foster care to food stamps, job training, even the number of 911 operators in your area, are all determined by the census, which is also used for things the government doesn't provide.
[Bryan Boulier, George Washington Univ:] They're also used by firms for making their own planning decisions about where to locate facilities; for example, whether it be factories, whether it be shopping malls, stores.
[Aiken:] The census has been criticized because it doesn't count everybody. It's estimated in 1990 it missed 5 million people, roughly 2 percent of the population, including, advocates say, many of the homeless.
[Steve Cleghorn, Community Partnership For The Prevention Of Homelessness:] The census, I think, had taken a street count which seemed very, very low to those of us who were working with homeless people.
[Aiken:] Now, the homeless themselves are being recruited as census takers, and the agency is reminding all Americans the information on census forms goes to no other federal agency: not the INS, the FBI, CIA, even the IRS. Jonathan Aiken for CNN, Washington.
[Frank Buckley, Cnn Correspondent:] Church and state work together at this mass at St. Joseph of the Holy Family in Harlem, where Brother Joel Magallan, an advocate for Latinos, preached the importance of completing U.S. government census forms this year. The efforts at St. Joseph's, part of a national effort by the Census Bureau to use churches and other community organizations to help increase the number of responses to the 2000 Census, which dropped to nearly 65 percent in the 1990 Census. And officials believe the church may be an especially effective way to reach new immigrants, who might otherwise be afraid to fill out Census forms.
[Rev. Phillip Kelly, St. Joseph's Of The Holy Family:] That you would be able to trace back to a household or to a place who was there, how many people were there, and that somehow that would be used in terms of deportation or recrimination.
[Buckley:] But the use of churches and religious leaders is only one of the ways the Census Bureau is reaching out. For the first time ever, the Census Bureau is also spending money to engage in a full-scale advertising campaign. [Begin Video Clip, Census 2000 Ad]
[Announcer:] Fill out your census. It helps determine public funding for emergency equipment.
[Buckley:] T.V. ads, a part of the $160 million campaign designed to show the importance of reflecting an accurate count of different communities; figures that help to determine how much money a community receives from the federal government. In the Queens Borough of New York, where officials say a third of the population is immigrants, the 1990 Census undercounted, according to the borough's president, and thus left Queens under-funded.
[Claire Shulman, Queens Borough President:] All of the things that people need to survive, we supply it, no matter where they're from or whether or not they are here illegally. So it's very important that we get an accurate count.
[Buckley:] A count that is just beginning. Most U.S. households expected to have a census form in hand by the end of March. Frank Buckley, CNN, New York.
[Bakhtiar:] In a CNN"USA Today"Gallup poll taken last month, 83 percent of those questioned said the census was useful, while 14 percent said the census was a waste of money.
[Haynes:] These days, weight training is for everybody, just check out any gym you go to. And when you think about it, it makes a lot of sense. After all, there are three basic components to fitness: flexibility, endurance and strength. Now, working out with weights and doing resistance training can help tone muscles, and strengthen your cardiovascular system. In today's "Health Desk," Holly Firfer pumps up the volume.
[Holly Firfer, Cnn Correspondent:] There are no doubts about the benefits of exercise. For years, science has shown moderate aerobic exercise, just 30 minutes a day, three to four times a week, can lower your blood pressure, cholesterol levels, and weight, reducing your risk for a heart attack and stroke. Now, the American Heart Association says, weight lifting and resistance training can do the same.
[Dr. Barry Franklin, William Beaumont Hospital:] Resistance training can actually improve cardiovascular function, and it can do that by reducing the heart rate and blood pressure response to lifting or carrying objects. As your muscles get stronger, the load on your heart actually is less.
[Firfer:] You don't have to lift a lot of weight to get the benefits. Doctors recommend just a single set of eight to 15 repetitions, using eight or 10 different exercises, two to three times a week with light weights, can do the trick.
[Rich Boggs, Ceo, Body Pump, Inc:] Women are always conscious of "I don't want to be big." That is not what happens at all. People who work out regularly with Body Pump look very lean, very toned, not big.
[Dr. Bob Goldman, American Academy Of Anti-aging:] But in essence, if their arm is this big, but there is a lot of fat around it, and they lift weights and they resistance train, their muscle diameter will actually get smaller because they will lose the fat around the muscle and then they'll have lean muscle mass.
[Firfer:] And pumping iron isn't just for the young.
[Franklin:] Especially with respect to older people, it has tremendous implications in terms of keeping people functional, keeping them able to cope with independent living. And last but not least, it reduces the potential for osteoporosis, which of course is a major problem, especially for older women.
[Firfer:] But before you get too pumped about pumping up, consider these warnings: the older we get, the more brittle our bones may become, and lifting weights that are too heavy can cause joint damage and broken bones. And doctors also say, people with preexisting heart conditions, like an irregular heartbeat, valve problems, or uncontrolled hypertension should be evaluated before starting any kind of exercise. Holly Firfer, CNN, Atlanta.
[Announcer:] Teachers, make the most of CNN NEWSROOM with our free daily classroom guide to the program. There you'll find a rundown of each day's show so you choose just the program segments that fit your lesson plan. Plus, there are discussion questions and activities. And the guide highlights key people, places and news terms. Each day, find hot links to other online resources and previews of upcoming desk segments. It's all at this Web address where you can also sign up to have the guide automatically e-mailed directly to you each day. It's easy, it's free, it's your curriculum connection to the news. After all, the news never stops, and neither does learning.
[Bakhtiar:] In "Worldview" today, our upcoming stories will help you realize the importance of families and the roles and relationships which make up these special groups. We'll learn about a Japanese- American actor with a hidden past his story told today through his daughter's eyes. And we'll check out China, where siblings are becoming more and more rare. China is a huge country in Eastern Asia. It covers one fifth of the continent. Only Canada has more territory. It's probably a good thing the country is spacious. China is the largest country in population. Over one billion people live there. That's about one fifth of the world's population. China's burgeoning population has prompted its government to strictly enforce a one-child-per-family policy. But the plan isn't foolproof. Rebecca MacKinnon explains.
[Rebecca Mackinnon, Cnn Beijing Bureau Chief:] It's Saturday dance class at the Beijing Children's Palace. Twelve-year- old Li Ang has no plans to go professional, but his parents think dance lessons will give him poise and confidence. "We didn't have these opportunities when I was growing up," says his mother. "Now we're in a position to bring him up well. We can't let him lose out." Neither Li Ang nor any of his classmates have brothers or sisters. They're products of a one-child-per-family policy, strictly enforced in China's cities for 20 years. Many adults call them "little emperors."
[Yang Kia, Child Psychologist:] Everyone will be an only child and they'll all be selfish.
[Mackinnon:] Some believe this new "me" generation could chafe at China's authoritarian government.
[Kia:] When families had a lot of children, kids were told to obey authority and not to ask why. Only children are likely to be more skeptical about authority and less likely to believe propaganda.
[Mackinnon:] Only children were almost nonexistent when these folks were young. Back then, having lots of sons and grandsons was the only form of old age insurance. Today's one-child policy and the rise of these "little emperors" in China's cities would not have been possible without pensions, insurance and retirement homes. Seventy-eight-year-old Zang Fu Qin says she's not dependent on her grown children because she has a pension and plans to move into a retirement home when she gets too old to move around. But in the countryside, it's a different story. Insurance or pensions are rare and people still rely on sons to support them in their old age. So in most places, peasant farmers are allowed to have a second child if the first one is a girl, who, according to Chinese custom, will join her husband's family when she marries.
[Gu Baochang, Population Council:] In the past with the high birth rates, if you had a daughter as the first- born, you could keep having children until you had a son. But now the country does not want you to have more children. Those who have a daughter as the first-born and second-born regret it. They want to guarantee that one of those children is a boy.
[Mackinnon:] The result is that China's orphanages are filled with baby girls, many abandoned by parents who failed to have a son and want to try again. Another deadly consequence: higher infant mortality rates for baby girls. An increasingly skewed ratio of boys to girls in many parts of the Chinese countryside has alarmed authorities. [on camera]: Chinese officials admit the problems caused by the one-child policy will be hard to solve without a nationwide insurance and pension system so that China's peasant farmers no longer have to rely on their children for support in their old age. But the question is: Where will the money come from? [voice-over]: Right now, 10 percent of China's population is over 60. But in the next 25 years, that percentage is expected to double because another result of the one-child policy is that fewer children will be born as older people live longer.
[Anella Heytens:] You basically have one child supporting, you know, two parents and four grandparents. So in the future, that is going to be a problem because, you know, you're not going to create enough funding to fund the aging of the population. Which means that China's "little emperors" had better enjoy the pampering while it lasts. When they grow up, they could have a heavy load to pull, and a lot of taxes to pay. Rebecca MacKinnon, CNN, Beijing.
[Haynes:] More now on the relationships between child and parents as we take a trip back in history. You may have heard about internment camps in the U.S. in early World War II. Thousands of Japanese citizens living in America and thousands of their American- born family members were sent to internment camps on the West Coast. That period of time is represented in the movie "Snow Falling on Cedars." Other films and plays also touch on that incarceration. Today, Stacey Wilkins reports on one woman's search into the past and her reflections on her Japanese heritage.
[Stacey Wilkins, Cnn Correspondent:] Actor Jerry Fujikawa is a familiar face. From "M.A.S.H." to "Chinatown," even a Jerry Lewis movie. The Japanese-American character actor's Hollywood career spanned 35 years.
[Jerry Fujiwawa, Actor:] Perhaps now we could see the famous blimp.
[Wilkins:] But behind the smiling face on the big screen, there was a secret life of pain and struggle.
[Cyndy Fujikawa, Actress:] And I feel like I knew him, but I didn't not really.
[Wilkins:] Cyndy Fujikawa tells the story of her father in the one-woman play "Old Man River." The 38-year-old actress later worked with Emmy Award-winning director Allan Holzman to capture her family's story on film, a story her father took to the grave.
[Allan Holzman, Director, "old Man River":] She found out the same time that her father was married before that she had a sister who she, you know, never knew of before.
[Wilkins:] The story began during World War II. Separated from his Caucasian Wife, Jerry Fujikawa was sent to the Manzanar internment camp. His wife left him, taking their children with her. After the war, Fujikawa started over with a new wife and a new family, including Cyndy and her two brothers. He would never see his first family again. His secret would remain buried more than 20 years, until one day when Cyndy's mom let it slip.
[C. Fujikawa:] Oh, yes, your father was married before the war 1939, wasn't it, Jerry? And he had two little boys and a little girl, too. Well, the little boys are both gone now, honey. They both died. But the little girl is probably still alive somewhere, and we don't know whatever become of her.
[Wilkins:] The search was on. Cyndy spent the next 11 years writing letters, searching for the sister she never knew. Her perseverance finally paid off when she located her stepsister Terry in Alaska. But it was too late for Jerry Fujikawa. He died in 1983 without ever having seen his oldest daughter all grown up, and both daughters together. [on camera]: Cyndy Fujikawa is still searching. She recently went to Japan to track down more relatives her father never knew. [voice-over]: Accompanied by fiancee Dennis Murphy, they tracked down relatives who still live near Hiroshima. She continued the search in Tokyo looking for more facts about his forgotten family, and more missing pieces of her father's and her own lost Japanese heritage. Stacey Wilkins, CNN, Atlanta.
[Haynes:] It's back on the U.S. campaign trail today for "Chronicle" as the electoral process runs its course. Delegate votes for 19 percent of the U.S. population are up for grabs today in six states. There will be six primaries and two caucuses because Texas Democrats hold both primaries and caucuses. Of those, Mississippi, Tennessee and Texas will have open contests. This means any registered voter can vote in any contest. Florida, Louisiana and Oklahoma will have closed contests, meaning voters have to cast ballots within their own registered parties. On this day, 26 percent of delegate votes needed for the Democratic nomination are at stake, and 33 percent of the delegate votes needed for the Republican nomination are on the line. One of the states voting today, Florida, has a large delegate chunk, and the state's large Latino population will be pivotal. Maria Hinojosa looks at how Hispanic media are factoring into the 2000 election.
[Maria Hinojosa, Cnn Correspondent:] If it's not the music, it's the food. Whether they've been here two years or two generations, Miami's million-plus Latinos like the flavor of home. So when it comes to politics and the two Spanish-speaking candidates for "el nuevo presidente," Latino voters seem to want Latino reporters asking the questions.
[Jorge Ramos, Anchor, Univision Network:] One of the most serious problems, as you well know, of the Hispanic community is the incredibly high dropout rate of its students.
[Hinojosa:] The United States' estimated 30 million Latinos are plentiful in several important vote-getting states, like California, New York, Texas and, of course, Florida, where this weekend's Calle Ocho Festival drew potential voters more focused on Cuba than on campaign finance.
[Unidentified Female:] They normally focus more on the cultural issues. They talk a lot more about Cuba and, you know, the people that are Hispanic are looking at things that have to do with their country.
[Hinojosa:] That means the presidential candidates are talking often to Jorge Ramos, the anchor for Spanish-language Univision, the fifth largest network in the United States.
[Ramos:] Eight years ago, we didn't have access to almost any presidential candidate. Nowadays, we have the two most important candidates speak Spanish. We have continuous access to them.
[Hinojosa:] "El Nuevo Herald," which reaches more than 79,000 readers in south Florida, has tripled its number of national political reporters.
[Jeanette Rivera, Political Reporter, "el Nuevo Herald":] I think for the longest, we were ignored, phone calls were never returned, or we would get a message on our machine three days after the fact.
[Hinojosa:] This time, it's the other way around.
[Vice President Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] Well, I'm the one worried about getting more access now, not Univision or Telemundo or the others. I'm seeking them out.
[Hinojosa:] Now, the Spanish-language media say not only are they getting more attention from the candidates, but so are Latino issues.
[Rivera:] Readers want to see more stories about immigration issues, about health care issues, about education.
[Hinojosa:] If the Spanish-language media helps the candidates reach the nation's 6.5 million Latino voters, the payoff can be big. In the last presidential election, Latino voters helped Bill Clinton become the first Democrat to win the state of Florida in two decades. Maria Hinojosa, CNN, Miami.
[Haynes:] Now, journalism is not the only arena in which Latinos are making their presence known. They make up the fastest growing ethnic group in the United States. Coming up this May, we'll examine this issue in "Viviendo en America" It's a series we first brought you last fall. We'll take an in-depth look at the language, culture and politics of Hispanic Americans. And we'll bring it to you May 1 through the 5th. That's "Viviendo en America" right here on NEWSROOM. Rudi, back to you in the newsroom.
[Bakhtiar:] Thanks, Tom. Finally, we have a special birthday greeting to deliver. No, not to anyone in particular, but to the piano. Three-hundred years old and still going strong, the piano has gone through many incarnations over the centuries. From harpsichord to keyboard, Bruce Morton walks us down a musical memory lane.
[Bruce Morton, Cnn Correspondent:] You know Washington's mall. But if you visited this week, you might hear something new: the sound of music, curator Patrick Rucker playing Chopin, part of an exhibit three stories underground, celebrating the 300th birthday of the piano. That's an 1850 square piano, by the way, the kind people had in their homes before they had uprights. This is the baby, a Grand piano made by Bartolomeo Cristofori in Florence in 1722. Just three left. This one doesn't play anymore. It was different from the harpsichords he'd made. Strings got hit, not plucked, which meant you could play loud or softly.
[Patrick Rucker, National Museum Of American History:] I think Cristofori set out to try to increase the dynamic range of keyboards, and of course that's why we call them pianos, because it could play both soft, piano, and forte, loud.
[Morton:] It was a big hit. Serious composers Beethoven, Mozart wrote for it. Star players Franz Liszt, Frederick Chopin were the rock stars of their day. Grand pianos got bigger: iron frames, 88 keys instead of 60-some, led by American companies like Chickering and Steinway. Listen to Liszt on this Steinway Grand. At the same time, piano makers aimed at the home with squares and uprights, and this darling sewing kit, makeup table and practice piano did everything but make the toast.
[Rucker:] By the end of the 18th century, it was very much a toy of the nobility and the wealthy. But by the 19th century, it was taken up with a vengeance by the middle classes, and into the 19th century many piano manufacturers had a goal of a piano in every home.
[Morton:] The piano kept evolving: player with the notes on rolls of paper. This one doesn't work, but there's Scott Joplin on tape to remind you of this old sound. Duke Ellington played this white Steinway Grand. You can hear him, too. Irving Berlin gave the museum this one. He learned to play on the black keys only. The key of C all white keys is for people who study music, he said. And his piano has a lever so he could change key without changing the keys he hit. This is Liberace's rhinestone piano. Do not attempt to fix the one in your house up like this. So happy 300th, piano. You've kept changing keyboards may be next but you keep on making wonderful sounds. Bruce Morton, CNN, Washington.
[Haynes:] OK, tell everyone you played the piano.
[Bakhtiar:] Yes, I used to play the piano.
[Haynes:] She's dying to tell you she plays the piano.
[Bakhtiar:] Used to play the piano; don't play it anymore, ever since I started working on
[Cnn. Haynes:] No time, yes.
[Bakhtiar:] And on that note, we'll say goodbye.
[Haynes:] See you guys later. Take care.
[Bakhtiar:] Bye.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Afghan soldiers leaving their posts, young men avoiding military recruitment. Some of the reports and some of the information coming from CNN sources that could be signaling a possible decay within the Taliban regime. In Quetta, Pakistan, about 80 miles east of the border with Afghanistan, that's where we find CNN's Nic Robertson again with the latest on the state of the Taliban. Nic, hello.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] Bill, those reports coming to us throughout Thursday that it's within the Taliban ranks, monitoring posts, checkpoints along the road not being manned, the indication being that some low-level and mid-level Taliban soldiers are not turning up for duty. Also, reports, as you say, that people are trying to escape, desertion: refugees from Kabul here in Quetta report leaving Afghanistan because they were trying to avoid being called up for the army. Also, United Nations officials reporting that on the border with Iran, that some fighting-age Afghans trying to flee to Iran are being turned back by Taliban officials. But very hard to get accurate confirmation of all these reports at this time, but certainly talking to Taliban officials today, they said that they couldn't confirm or deny these reports. They did say that around their stronghold of Kandahar they felt that they still had substantial support at this time. But they said their government, the Taliban government is concerned about these reports. Now in a few hours time, two delegations from Pakistan will be going to Afghanistan. They will include a Pakistani government delegation, a delegation of Pakistani diplomats and a delegation of senior Pakistani Islamic clerics, clerics that have been allied, allied with the Taliban in the past. Now, the Pakistani government saying that it will deliver a message to the Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar, telling him that he must hand over Osama bin Laden, the Pakistani government saying that this really is a last-ditch effort, and what they want to do is make sure that they try every diplomatic opportunity before this crisis could turn into a military conflict rather than a diplomatic standoff Bill.
[Hemmer:] Nic, we've talked about a lot. Update us now on what you're getting on the refugee situation.
[Robertson:] Again, statistics still very hard to accurately verify for U.N. officials. They tell us their estimates are still in the region of 10,000 to 20,000 people across the border. They would still like Pakistani government officials to allow them to set up monitoring posts close to the border. They are still working on setting up setting up potential refugee camps. There are fears of a million people perhaps coming to Pakistan; 400,000 are their estimates headed may head toward Iran in the West. Northwards, they say, maybe 100,000 Afghan refugees will head northwards into countries there. And today, the United Nations issuing a call for half a billion dollars, money they say that may need in aid. I mean, the big problem here, close to the border, are the very desert-type conditions. They say they need places with plenty of war Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right, Nic. Nic Robertson, where it has fallen night in Quetta, Pakistan. Nic, thanks to you.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Breaking news. We go to the Middle East right now, where we are continuing to follow the story of Israeli helicopters firing missiles in Gaza City. As we understand it, this moment, continuing strikes are going on right now as we are bringing this story to you. We are told that Israeli helicopter gunships fired missiles at targets in Gaza City. This, we got news of this just about 20 minutes ago. And we're told it's in response to a bomb attack on a Jewish settlers' bus in which two Israelis were killed. We were also told children were aboard of that bus. We do not know the condition of the injured at this time, and just that we know that two Israelis were killed in that bomb attack. Now we are told from our Tom Mintier, who we are trying to get on the line right now we've been losing our cell signal with him that the helicopters fired at least 12 missiles, and the continuing strikes are happening right now. Obviously, more than a dozen missiles at this time. The strikes have been going on in areas near Palestinian president Yasser Arafat's seaside office, and the headquarters of his Fatah faction. The office of one of Arafat's security services was also apparently targeted. At this point, we know if any immediately reports of casualties or damage in this aerial assault. We do know that the helicopter strike appeared to knock out electricity in parts of Gaza City. The population there, as we understand, is about one million people. Once again, Israeli helicopters firing missiles in Gaza City. The crisis in the Middle East goes on. As you can see here by our pictures that there, that the strikes are continuing at this moment. And we hope to bring Tom Mintier to you as soon as we can get him on the line. We are having a hard time of getting him by cell phone, as you can tell. We're going to take a quick break. We'll be right back.
[Phillips:] Back to our breaking story in the Middle East, where Israeli helicopters have been firing missiles in Gaza City. We're going to bring in our Tom Mintier now, who joins us by cell phone. Tom, can you tell us what's the latest, with regard to possible casualties, what targets? We're looking at a live picture right now.
[Tom Mintier, Cnn Correspondent:] All right, we have no idea on the of number of casualties yet from the position we're in. We do what the targets were. The Preventative Security Building Has been hit and totally destroyed according to Palestinian sources. The helicopter is overhead right now. I can hear it. And also, I have seen anti-aircraft trying to shoot down this helicopter. I see a flair off in the distance. There are about three different locations in downtown Gaza City that have been hit in the last half hour. The Fatah headquarters was hit and heavily damaged, and the second Fatah headquarters in the northern part of the of Gaza City has also been hit. But the helicopters are continuing to hover. They're continuing to fire their missiles. And you can see a red dot glowing across the sky, and then it burns itself out, and then about three seconds later, then you hear the explosion. You can hear in the distance, the rumble of explosions, as other targets being hit by other helicopters, than the one that's hovering right above us in the building we're standing in.
[Phillips:] Tom, you're in a safe place, though, right? You are not concerned about where you are right now?
[Mintier:] No, I am not really concerned where I am right now. I am in an 11th-story building that's probably not on the target list. So I can simply stand here and watch the action 360 degrees around the city. I was watching from one side of the building when it started, and then it they moved tie second target, and put about six or seven missiles on that. That was a Preventative Security Building, which we are which we were told completely destroyed, and then they hit a couple of other targets in the center of the city, near Yasser Arafat's office, and then one in the northern part of the city, that's been hit by three missiles just in the last two minutes.
[Phillips:] And this is in response to the bomb attack on the bus that happened today, where two Israelis were killed?
[Mintier:] That's correct. The Israeli cabinet and the security cabinet met earlier this afternoon, and announced they would indeed retaliate against the Palestinians, blaming Yasser Arafat's Fatah Party for this bomb explosion a school bus. That was coming out of a Jewish settlement this morning here in Gaza, and was hit by a roadside bomb. Now there were two adults killed on this bus. One was a female, a schoolteacher. The other was a man. But there were 10 people injured, including five children. So there are a lot of angry people right now that have been demanding that Ehud Barak take some sort of action, and the action they've been demanding is happening right now.
[Phillips:] Tom, did Yasser Arafat come right out and say he was not responsible for the bomb attack on the bus?
[Mintier:] Within about three to four hours after the attack, his spokeswoman did come out and say, that they had nothing to do with it, they weren't responsible for it, didn't know about it. And just before the attack happened on Gaza City, Mr. Arafat's spokesman issuing another statement, calling on the United States to intervene to try to stop this attack that is currently under way.
[Phillips:] There were a couple of other groups, unknown groups, that are claiming responsibility. Do you know anything about those groups?
[Mintier:] No. There were as many as three groups, and for the most part, nobody had heard about these groups at all, that claimed responsibility for bombing the bus. As you can expect in a situation like this, when somebody hears of something like this happening, they jump forward and claim responsibility, and that may be what happens here. Because one of the groups that claimed responsibility in their note said that, you know, that it wasn't the other group that did it, we did. So that was going on throughout the day today from as far away from Damascus and Beirut.]
[Phillips:] Now I am seeing black spots in the live picture here. Are there areas where the strikes have knocked out electricity in parts of the city?
[Mintier:] I would say that half of Gaza City right now is without electricity, including the building that I am standing on. As you look through the center of the city to the beach, it is just a sea of darkness where this area of strikes are taking place. Right after the first missile fit hit, a large section of the city went without power. The outlying areas, areas that apparently are not on the target list, still do have lights on. You can see street lights on the city. You can see a few cars moving around, but in the area where the military, the police and the government are located, it is extremely dark right now. The only light The only light you see is from the missile as they make their way down.
[Phillips:] And, Tom, you said that there is one chopper that is launching these missiles right now, is that correct?
[Mintier:] There is more than one. I would there is at least three gunships that are involved in this strike against Gaza City, because I can see I don't hear the one that was over atop of me right now. But I saw another one launch a missile right in the northern part of the city, and it was different than the one that was attacking the central part of the city. So there was at least two, if not more than that.
[Phillips:] What do you know about these gunships, Tom? What do they look like? How big are they? How powerful are they?
[Mintier:] Well, I think for anybody who is sitting on the ground where this missile is striking, they're very powerful. We can't see them, but we can only hear them. And you hear now on the roof another missile is making its way down on the city.
[Phillips:] And who's firing do you know have you received word of who is firing back on the choppers?
[Mintier:] All I could see is the red tracers in at least three different locations of anti-aircraft attempting to shoot down the helicopters with no success. The helicopters have simply been moving at free will around the city. There was only, you know, a token resistance of anti-aircraft, nothing like what was happening that night in Baghdad. I only saw two or three anti-aircraft positions where the red tracers could be seen going up in the air.
[Phillips:] Now the areas near Palestinian President Yasser Arafat's office is where this is, is that right? And the headquarters of his Fatah faction also?
[Mintier:] Well, the building where you are seeing the live picture from is probably eight or nine blocks away from Yasser Arafat's headquarters. Now the Preventative Security Office, this was an incident that occurred on Saturday morning, where officers from Preventative Security made an attack on the settlement and killed two Israeli soldiers in an attack in the early morning before he was killed. He was a member of the Fatah Hawk faction, a faction that really has not been very active for some time, and only just this past weekend involved in any kind of military operations that we knew of.
[Phillips:] And right now, you have confirmed that Arafat's security services, that building, has been just completely destroyed by the missile attacks?
[Mintier:] Yes, that building, I could see from here, took about half a dozen or seven missiles that were all centered in the same area. And we received telephone confirmation from someone on the grouped that that building, indeed, was completely destroyed. This was the Preventative Security Building.
[Phillips:] All right, Tom Mintier with the latest, as Israeli helicopters right now firing missiles in the Gaza City area, in response to a bomb attack on a Jewish bus, which happened earlier today, killing two Israelis. We'll check in with more as this breaking news continues.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Well, from "Mayberry" to "Matlock," Andy Griffith has been a TV fixture for years now.
[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] You're starting to have a little Southern accent. I heard it. North Carolina's favorite son is being featured in a new exhibit at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill. Rick Armstrong of affiliate WRAL reports.
[Laura Baxley, North Carolina Collection Gallery:] People visit the gallery. They know that Andy Griffith is a graduate of the university. And we often get questions about him and his career.
[Rick Armstrong, Wral Reporter:] These images may answer many of the questions visitors have about Andy Griffith, what he looked like as a boy growing up in Mount Airy, North Carolina, the roles he played as a member of UNC's Playmakers Repertory Company.
[Baxley:] And it's a great shot, because he's in full costume. And if someone hadn't told me it was Andy Griffith, I probably never would have known that.
[Armstrong:] Mostly, the photographs and artifacts tell the story of a career born on this campus, where Griffith was forced to remap his career goals.
[Baxley:] In fact, he disliked his sociology class so much that he walked out and took an F in it. And that of course pretty much ended his dreams of becoming a Moravian minister.
[Armstrong:] Griffith took to the stage as an actor and comic. One routine became a record. [Begin Audio Clip, "what It Was, Was Football"]
[Andy Griffith, Actor:] And what I seen was this whole raft of people a-settin'on these two banks, and a-lookin'at one another across this pretty little green cow pasture.
[Armstrong:] The record inspired a character, which inspired a play, a movie, even a comic book. From stage to film and then to TV, Griffith's career inspired coloring books, trivia games, even a restaurant chain.
[Baxley:] And I think one thing that will stand out most is a can of Andy Griffith Navy Beans.
[Armstrong:] And people, especially North Carolinians, bought the beans and watched the shows, because Andy was, and still is, one of us.
[Baxley:] He never forgot the fact that he was from North Carolina. He was never afraid to announce that fact and even incorporate it into a lot of his characters.
[Nelson:] Well, Barney, it was nice to see Barney again, too.
[Phillips:] Exactly, Don Knotts was one of my favorites. He was he's terrific.
[Nelson:] That exhibit, you were going to say?
[Phillips:] Runs until August 22. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Announcer:] THE POINT WITH GRETA VAN SUSTEREN. Target Osama bin Laden, at the center of the bullseye. But is he really cornered? Is he really bottled up?
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] I don't know whether we're going to get him tomorrow or a month from now or a year from now. I really don't know, but we're going to get him.
[Announcer:] "Flashpoint": Is the hunt nearly over?
[Unidentified Male:] We don't know what we don't know.
[Announcer:] What the special forces on the ground need to do. Jerry Falwell did it. So did Bill Maher. And so did he.
[Unidentified Male:] Anybody who blows up the Pentagon gets my vote, a pathetic attempt at a joke. Clearly, a sarcastic remark.
[Announcer:] Tonight, the backlash against bad taste, bad timing and bad judgment. Just who is going too far? "Flashpoint": politically unpatriotic? THE POINT, now from Washington, Greta Van Susteren.
[Greta Van Susteren:] Take a look around. You see flags in front yards and on cars, signs proclaim the country stands united. There is no doubt it, patriotism is in. But is tolerance in as well? "Flashpoint": politically unpatriotic? THE POINT'S David Mattingly explains what I mean.
[David Mattingly, Cnn Correspondent:] On September 11, shortly after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, history professor Richard Berthold said something he continues to regret.
[Richard Berthold, Professor:] Anybody who blows up the Pentagon gets my vote, a pathetic attempt at a joke. Clearly, a sarcastic remark.
[Mattingly:] It was a remark he uttered in front of not one, but two freshmen lecture classes at the University of New Mexico. A double case of what he admits was bad taste, bad timing, and bad judgment.
[Berthold:] I just said something that was incredibly callous. And people have this anger, you know, what can I do with this anger? Well, that little son of a bitch. And bingo, you focus it on me.
[Mattingly:] What followed was a furious backlash of national criticism, more than 1,000 hate e-mails, letters demanding his firing, death threats.
[Unidentified Male:] This right here?
[Mattingly:] And the threat of violence from a biker in his own driveway.
[Berthold:] He came charging at me screaming obscenities. And I ran into the house, which seemed like the sensible thing to do at the time and never heard from him again. But it was kind of a wake-up call.
[Mattingly:] A wakeup call, a reality check, a harsh demonstration of the limits of free speech in a time of war.
[Gregg Easterbrook, Senior Editor, "new Republic":] The whole point is that free speech must be free, but it cannot be without cost. You can say what you want and then you accept the consequences.
[Mattingly:] Among those paying a price, ABC's Bill Maher.
[Bill Maher, Comedian:] We have been the cowards lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That's cowardly.
[Mattingly:] Maher apologized, but may not be back next season. The comment infuriated advertisers and local affiliates. Louisiana Congressman Republican John Cooksey also had to apologize for his remarks in a radio interview. He said "if he's got a diaper on his head and a fan belt around that diaper on his head, that guys needs to be pulled over and checked." Both comments were brought to the attention of the White House.
[Ari Fleischer, White House Spokesman:] It's a terrible thing to say. And it's unfortunate. And that's why there was a earlier question about has the President said anything to people in his own party. There are reminders to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do. And this is not a time for remarks like that. It never is.
[Mattingly:] Untimely remarks also from Jerry Falwell, who blames secular activities of "pagans, abortionists, feminists, gays, gays and lesbians" for making America a target.
[Jerry Falwell, Chancellor, Liberty Univ:] Right living promotes a nation to greatness. Violating God's principles brings a nation to shame. I didn't say like I should. That's why I apologized.
[Mattingly:] And the list goes on. Cartoonist Aaron McGruder, his comic strip "Boondocks" dropped by two New York newspapers after satirizing the U.S. government. Columnist Dan Guthrie of the Grants Pass Oregon "Daily Courier" fired, after accusing President Bush of hiding in a Nebraska hole during the attacks.
[Clarence Page, "chicago Tribune" Columnist:] When terror does it work, it inspires many people to overreact in all kinds of ways. And that includes overreaction to statements that they don't agree with.
[Mattingly:] And objectionable statements abound. ACTA, the American Council of Trustees and Alumni published a list of 115 comments it considers unpatriotic made on 30 college campuses in 17 different states. Near the top of the list, the comment from Richard Berthold.
[Berthold:] It shows how this has gotten out of hand. I mean, that remark has no importance whatsoever. It's only important to demonstrate that there's a university professor in New Mexico, who at least for a day, was a jackass.
[Mattingly:] Berthold has sent apologized for his remarks. He's agreed to no longer teach freshman level classes. And he's accepted a reprimand from the university, but it's still not nearly enough to satisfy some of his critics.
[Bill Fuller, New Mexico State House:] I want him to be either I want him to retire, or I want the university to fire him. One or the other.
[Mattingly:] Representative Bill Fuller of the New Mexico State Legislature leads the push to kick Berthold off the state payroll. Fuller, a retired army colonel, has two sons in the Army. The oldest works at the Pentagon.
[Fuller:] If you read the Constitution, you'll see that the freedom of speech, what it says is that you cannot be imprisoned for what you say. And it doesn't say a thing about you can't be fired. We encourage you continue to fight for this professor's termination.
[Mattingly:] Three months after September 11, Fuller still gets anti-Berthold letters and phone calls.
[Fuller:] These are the positive letters.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Mattingly:] Berthold himself continues to get calls and letters. Thought most now, he says, are of a more supportive tone like this one. "Bad taste and being a jerk are rights we must protect."
[Berthold:] Yes, well you know, that's essentially the message I was trying to put out. And bad taste, I don't know about being a jerk, but bad taste is certainly an American value.
[Easterbrook:] The nature of free speech, the whole reason we have it, is that there isn't a right or wrong, but there is a free debate about what ought to be right or wrong.
[Mattingly:] And since September 11, it seems no one is exempt from criticism anywhere on the patriotic spectrum. Young Aaron Pettit was suspended from his Cleveland high school for posting pro-war material on his locker. He had go to court before he could go back to class. The president of Harvard University was also criticized when he called on academia to support military service.
[Lawrence Summers, Harvard Univ. President:] When we honor public service, it's particularly important to honor all forms public service, including the service of those who wear uniforms.
[Mattingly:] And remember, the ACTA list of unpatriotic statements? That too has been soundly criticized and labeled a black list.
[Page:] We Americans, like anybody else, will turn our anger on each other. So, you know, anybody who disagrees very sharply or offers contrasting view may find themselves chilled.
[Mattingly:] As for Richard Berthold, the backlash has chilled his lectures, as he is careful now to avoid making more provocative statements.
[Berthold:] I can't eat much more crow on this one than I already have. I admit over and over, these were the words of a unthinking jerk.
[Mattingly:] Yet after 29 years of teaching, he's thinking about retirement. The career he loves put in jeopardy by an act of ill- timed and inappropriate sarcasm. David Mattingly, CNN.
[Van Susteren:] Remember freedom of speech. My guests have gotten some rude reminders about how valuable that particular right can be. And they will join me in a minute. It's one thing to have your foot in your mouth all the way up to your kneecap, but it's another for someone to demand you be fired because they are offended by your comments. We met Dan Guthrie in David Mattingly's piece. He used to be a columnist for "The Daily Courier" newspaper of Grants Pass, Oregon, until he wrote a certain column. And Ken Hearlson is a political science professor at California's Orange Coast College. His suspension for controversial statements will be over in January. They join us now. Welcome, gentlemen. And let me go first to you, Ken. Ken, what happened to you?
[Ken Hearlson, Political Science Professor:] Well, what happened basically was in the classroom on September the 18th. I was making comments about terrorism against America, terrorism against the Israelis and the Jewish people, and citing instances from the Holocaust and what the Nazis did to the Jews, and instances what's happening in Sudan again where the Christian Dink and Nubian tribes are being wiped off the face of the earth by the Islamic Republic of Sudan. And Muslim students took offense to that. We've had some heated debate, but I've heated debate in my classroom before. Matter of fact, many, many times on controversial issues. I'm considered controversial on campus because I'm a born-again Christian conservative, but I believe in the First Amendment that everybody has the right to speak in the marketplace of ideas, especially in a classroom.
[Van Susteren:] You know what's interesting, Ken, is that one of the things that I heard that you were accused of, is of blaming the Muslim students personally for the hijackings. But then I read on doing more research, that there was a recording of your class. What was what did recording reveal?
[Hearlson:] Well, recording was done by actually an international student, who didn't quite understand the class and myself and the speech. So I allowed her to tape it. She gave it to me. I gave it to my attorney and the investigating attorney for the Coast Community College district. And basically, the tape and the transcripts, if you've looked at them, all the allegations that I called the Muslim students terrorists, Nazis, rapists, oh you name it there was everything but the kitchen sink, were all falsified. There was no statements made.
[Van Susteren:] And that's what I've read. So I don't quite get why the university suspended you, if what I have read is that a tape recording said that the accusations made against you were false and an exaggeration?
[Hearlson:] Well, I believe that, my own personal belief and my belief in my wife and my attorney is that and the belief of Thor Halbertson and Fire, who's really representing me as well, as a great organization is, they wanted to take away my First Amendment speech rights. And...
[Van Susteren:] All right, go ahead.
[Hearlson:] And that by trying to use this as a means to fire me, they could eliminate me as a controversial conservative from this secular taxpayer-paid school.
[Van Susteren:] All right, let me go to Dan now. Dan, you wrote a column in which you accused essentially President Bush of hiding in a Nebraska hole on the day of September 11. Is that essentially what you wrote? Why did you write it, if so? And what happened?
[Dan Guthrie, Newspaper Columnist:] It wasn't only Bush that I was talking about. It was Bush and our congressional leaders all took a powder on 911. His was especially embarrassing. You could see photos of him TV footage, first fleeing to Louisiana and then to Nebraska. I waited for Wally Ivans and some other columnists with guts to comment on what he'd done. And nobody did. So I stepped forth and wrote a piece headlined, "When the Going Gets Tough, the Tender Turn Tail," in which I said he skadaddled. Skadaddled is an old Civil War term describing those who turn tail under pressure. That's what he did. I won't apologize for that.
[Van Susteren:] You will not apologize?
[Guthrie:] No.
[Van Susteren:] OK, I'm not asking you to apologize. I mean, that's not what the discussion is about. But Dan, here's what I don't understand, is that when you submitted your column, I assumed that there's an editorial staff that goes over them before it actually makes the paper, right?
[Guthrie:] Yes, I didn't sneak this in at the last moment. It went to our city editor and our editor and was approved without change.
[Van Susteren:] OK, good. Is your city editor and your editor, were they bumped from the newspaper like you were?
[Guthrie:] No. The editor wrote quite a fine editorial apology in which he said it was not appropriate for someone to write such irresponsible criticism of our President.
[Van Susteren:] But after letting it hit the newspaper, right? After letting, I mean...
[Guthrie:] Oh, yeah.
[Van Susteren:] ...I don't know whether anyone thinks it should be in or shouldn't be in. Your editor didn't get bumped like you did, but essentially OK'd to it go in the first place?
[Guthrie:] No, he did OK it there were hundreds I don't know how many people, objecting to the column in e-mails and walking in the door, and canceling subscriptions. That's the usual recourse of certain folks. And the publisher was the one really affected by this. So he put heavy pressure on the editor, who wrote an editorial, and said this was not appropriate criticism. You know, the funny thing is if it had been Clinton, and I had called him, after his escapades, a fat pervert, that would have been entirely appropriate and responsible criticism.
[Van Susteren:] Dan...
[Guthrie:] But, this was a different person.
[Van Susteren:] What are you doing for...
[Guthrie:] We're in a conservative area.
[Van Susteren:] Dan, what are you doing for a living now? I mean, have you been blackballed from the business?
[Guthrie:] I've am living on unemployment and thinking and reevaluating life myself, my position in it.
[Van Susteren:] One last... One last question, Dan...
[Hearlson:] Greta?
[Van Susteren:] Go ahead, Ken.
[Hearlson:] Greta, I just want to tell you, I support this man. I love President Bush. I voted for him. I support him. I think he's a great president, but I believe with all my heart he has the right to do this. This is his opinion. And we all have right opinions. We do not have to agree with each other. And to fire him and get rid of him was an injustice to the Constitution, an injustice to Dan.
[Van Susteren:] Gentlemen, thank you both for...
[Guthrie:] I appreciate that.
[Van Susteren:] Right, well, you got some help there, Dan. You got Ken supporting you and you probably also got the First Amendment right there with you. My thanks tonight to Dan Guthrie and Ken Hearlson.
[Guthrie:] Thank you, Greta.
[Hearlson:] Thank you.
[Van Susteren:] There's no question about Harvard University president Lawrence Summers patriotism or commitment to public service. He used to be the U.S. Treasury secretary. But as David Mattingly reported, when Summers paid tribute to those in the military who "risked their lives in support of our values," he caught some flack from students. Two of them join me. Yi-ping Ong is a graduate student in philosophy. And Eric Beach is a senior with a concentration in social studies. Yi-ping, first to you. Why can't the president of Harvard University give his opinion that we should support our soldiers and sailors?
[Yi-ping Ong, Harvard Student:] I absolutely agree with him that we should support everyone of our servicemen and women. They're very valuable to us and we honor them for the job that they're doing. I do think, though, that right now, we're requiring them to carry out a bombing campaign that has killed, in the latest estimates, up to 3,700 Afghani civilians. And there are questions about this. And there are inquiries to be made. And he has no right to...
[Van Susteren:] But Yi-ping, it's the question, not whether you agree with him, just with Dan and Ken just before you, but the question is why can't the president of Harvard make this statement that he supports it? Why don't you let him make that? What's your objection?
[Ong:] Well, I think the main point is that as the university president, he has the role of leading a community whose commitment is to the truth, not to any particular political agenda. And he needs to be fostering a dialogue and a critical inquiry into matters of the truth, and not into any single act of the government.
[Van Susteren:] But that is his opinion, And he does have a First Amendment right, You don't challenge either one of those, do you?
[Ong:] It's not about the right, Greta. It's about the fact that he's the president, representing a community of international students, many of whom do not or may not take an American view on this. And he doesn't represent the diversity of views at our institution, nor the commitment that we have to truth, whether or not it happens to support a government policy.
[Van Susteren:] Eric, your reaction to President Summers?
[Eric Beach, Harvard Student:] Well, Greta, I'm surprised that President Summers has taken this approach also. It's something I'd expect to hear from a politician, not from a university president. I think it's similar in its effect to the types of responses we've been hearing from the U.S. government, from people like Attorney General John Ashcroft, who have been saying that if you're not completely 100 percent for us, then you're against us, which to me is a ridiculous attitude, that there needs to be room on both sides here for an understanding and a different view. I think that Larry Summers promoting this view, as a majority view, is just not the place of a university president to be doing that.
[Van Susteren:] You know, Eric, I'd be highly critical of President Summers if he were clamping down on your right and your fellow student's rights to have your views. And what I'm having a little bit of trouble let me ask you, has President Summers said in any way or intimated in any way that you students don't have a right to your opinion on this?
[Beach:] He hasn't it's not a question of whether he's censored us to say, per se, which he hasn't. What he has done is said this is the role which Harvard University should be taking. He said Harvard University should be supporting the troops. Harvard University should be supporting this conflict, which he said has no moral ambiguity, which I think that's completely false. Any type of a conflict where you have 3,700 civilians that have been killed. Mind you, these are civilians. They're not troops. They're not people that were in combat. They're innocent civilians in Afghanistan. It's also a conflict, excuse me just one more thing, it's also a conflict which the U.S. is facing possible war crime charges, for the prison so-called prison revolt, which they bombed. And with those sorts of things happening, it's just not true to that say that this conflict has no moral ambiguities.
[Van Susteren:] Yi-ping, one last question to you. When President Summers speaks, is he saying that this is his opinion or is he saying this should be your opinion?
[Ong:] Well, absolutely it's a very good question, Greta, because he represents the university to the public. And when he says that Harvard University has the obligation to get behind a certain political agenda, he is representing me. And I think he's representing me unfairly.
[Van Susteren:] All right, my thanks to both of you, Yi-ping Ong and Eric Beach, both Harvard students, for joining me this evening.
[Ong:] Thank you.
[Beach:] Thank you, Greta.
[Van Susteren:] THE POINT will be right back. Don't go away. General David Grange joins us from Madison, Wisconsin. Of course, the general is a former ranger and as well as a Green Beret. General, thank you very much for joining us this evening. And I've got to ask the first question, with regards to going after Osama bin Laden, snatch and grab, what is that?
[Retired General David Grange, Cnn Military Analyst:] Snatching a person is going in after a prisoner, going in after a specific person that you want very badly. An example would be Noriega, an example would be Carlos, the old terrorist from the '70s. It may be someone like Escobar down in Colombia. That is where you go in and do a lot of planning to go in and snatch an individual, hopefully alive. You kill usually everybody around him. If you wound that particular person, you wound him, to bring him out. Many times they die.
[Van Susteren:] And I assume that these are special teams that actually make up these sort of snatch and grab teams. What do you look for when you're trying to find someone to be part of one of these groups?
[Grange:] Well, first of all, the people that are trained to do this, it sounds snatch and grab almost like a quick stop, but it's nothing like that. It takes intensive planning. The people that do these operations are trained very well in the special operations community. Very dedicated to this type of a mission. They're deadly with their weapons.
[Van Susteren:] And you know what? I'm sorry, I got to cut you off. We've got to go because Larry King is up next, general. Short show tonight. Good night. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Anchor:] Out on a rainy afternoon here in New York, Martin Savidge is on a Coast Guard cutter. The Coast Guard is patrolling the harbor, securing the harbor here in New York. Marty, good evening good afternoon.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn National Correspondent:] Good afternoon to you, Aaron. We are onboard the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Campbell. This is actually, by the way, the hangar that is inside it. It actually is capable of telescoping out onto the deck, and is also capable of handling not only Coast Guard helicopters, but Navy helicopters as well. We'll take a walk out onto what is the helicopter pad, and then I think you instantly see sort of where we are. This is the New York Harbor area here. You look off in this direction, you can see the Verrazano Bridge. That is the bridge that connects Staten Island with Brooklyn. Also, essentially, it is the embarkation line that signals the beginning of New York Harbor. New York Harbor, obviously, could be a potential target for further terrorism. That is the reason that the Coast Guard is here. This vessel is sort of the on-scene command vessel for a number of other Coast Guard vessels that are out in this area. Usually New York Harbor is very busy. There are about 120, maybe 140 ships a day that would normally transit through here; these are not normal times. The port was shut down for two days immediately after the World Trade Center was attacked, and now that shipping has reopened, they're only getting about 20 ships a day. Farther out to sea is another perimeter of Coast Guard vessels about 10, 12 miles away. They initially will stop commercial vessels heading this way. They board them, they go through the cargo, look at the manifest and will also go over the credentials of the crew. If they are cleared, they are then escorted here and moved farther on to their berthing positions inside of New York. A number of vessels have been turned away because they didn't meet those requirements. Some have diverted to other ports, others have simply gone back out to sea. Also we have noted that the Coast Guard vessels out here, many of them are armed. This vessel, for instance, has a 76-millimeter cannon on the foredeck; it has always been there. But other senses other pieces of armament have been added 50-caliber machine guns. Some crewmembers now sporting M-16 rifles. Most of the Coast Guard vessels out here have been armed as well. Now, many people may think that's a difference from the way the Coast Guard normally offers or operates. That is not really the case. The Coast Guard is multi-tasked. They do many things, including law enforcement, search and rescue, as many people know, and national defense and home defense. Historically, home defense has been a major role for the Coast Guard, something that dates all the way back to revolutionary times. It is a role that they are playing now here in New York; a role they say they are well-prepared and trained to carry out, and a role that they are willing to carry out for as long as necessary Aaron.
[Brown:] Marty, thanks. What struck us the other Sunday when we were out there is back behind you in Staten Island they have a command center that looks like an air traffic control center, only it deals with the ships coming into the harbor series of radar screen, computers, the whole thing.
[Savidge:] That's right, they have that in place. One of the concerns, obviously you may look out, see the weather is deteriorating here. There have been forecasts of heavy rains coming into the area and heavy winds; perhaps some of the heaviest rains that New York has seen. Despite that bad weather closing in, the Coast Guard is prepared for it; they have alternate plans. They will be in place Aaron.
[Brown:] Marty, thanks; Marty Savidge aboard the Coast Guard Cutter Campbell in the harbor of New York. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] United Nations officials hope to negotiate the release of some 350 peacekeepers still being held hostage by rebels in Sierra Leone. It has been two weeks since the peacekeepers were taken hostage. Some captives freed over the weekend are now waiting to be moved to safety. Reporter Robert Moore from Britain's Independent Television News with the latest now from Sierra Leone.
[Robert Moore, Itn Reporter:] British forces in Freetown continue to operate well away from the front-line. But their presence does appear to have stabilized the situation and provided the U.N. with some desperately needed breathing space. It has even allowed soldiers of the spearhead battalion to engage in some more relaxed activities with local children. Sierra Leone has known only war for nine tears, and the idea of professional, highly- disciplined soldiers generating good will is entirely novel. It is a sharp contrast with the wild militia, mercenaries and rebels, many drunk and on drugs, who have been the cause of so much of the suffering. It has left whole swathes of countryside abandoned, villages empty, a people forced to retreat to the relative safety of the bush, victims of widespread looting and pillaging. And as some of their peacekeepers were limping back from the frontline, the U.N. faces the daunting task of putting this country back together again, even though hundreds of other U.N. troops are still being held hostage by the rebels.
[David Wimhurst, U.n. Spokesman:] Some of them may have fallen sick, malnourishment, dehydration a possibility. So we are very concerned about their state, and we would like see them moving in to Liberia, as soon as possible, for release.
[Moore:] But at least the U.N. have the reassuring presence of the British, including these gurkers attached to the parachute regiment, and out on patrol in the jungle, surrounding the airport. [on camera]: Seven days after deployment and British soldiers are now acclimatized, and preparing for several more weeks out here. They have made a difference. They have bolstered the U.N. force, but given the chaos in Sierra Leone, that's no guarantee of an enduring peace. [voice-over]: But the arrival of more U.N. reinforcements is certainly a boost for this deeply troubled peacekeeping mission. Robert Moore, ITN, Sierra Leone.

[Cossack:] In 1994, David Egelhoff died in an accident shortly after being divorced. With no will, his ex-wife received $46,000 as the listed beneficiary on his life insurance policy. Well, his children sued. But yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the former wife. All right, Bill, tell me what happened. You represent Donna Egelhoff.
[William Kilberg, Atty. For Donna Rae Egelhoff:] Yes.
[Cossack:] She was the wife, and then got divorced of the deceased gentleman.
[Kilberg:] Right.
[Cossack:] And somehow, he apparently, either on purpose or whatever the reason was, never got around to taking her name off as the beneficiary.
[Kilberg:] Right.
[Cossack:] She receives the money. The children sue.
[Kilberg:] The children from prior marriage sue. Donna Egelhoff was the beneficiary both of a life insurance policy and a pension plan, actually a 401 [k] plan. And she remained the beneficiary prior to the divorce and after the divorce.
[Cossack:] Now, how long were they divorced before the policy before these events took place?
[Kilberg:] They were divorced about four months. But the proceeding, the divorce proceeding went on for almost a year prior to that time.
[Cossack:] Was there any other documents that he had changed to remove her name as beneficiaries...
[Kilberg:] No.
[Cossack:] ... or was this these were just the only ones that he had just never done it.
[Kilberg:] He had not done it. Nor in the divorce proceeding, had they obtained that is called a qualified domestic relations order. That's an order which you can obtain, in a divorce proceeding, which would then be filed with your benefit plan, and could divide up the assets. You could give a portion of them to one beneficiary, a portion to another. you could change beneficiaries. But you'd have to do that pursuant to that order, which is actually a very, very simple document.
[Cossack:] Wasn't done.
[Kilberg:] Wasn't done.
[Cossack:] Laura, what about this? This is one of those states rights federal issue a state-versus-federal-government issue, isn't it? The question of whose law is better or supreme?
[Brill:] Well, it is in a way, Roger. But it doesn't have the same implications as some of the constitutional questions that the Court's been grappling with recently. This case has to do with a federal statute that relates to employment retirement plans. And that statute specifically says that it is preempting state laws that are inconsistent with it. And I think this Washington statute was inconsistent, because the federal statute says whoever is listed on the plan documents gets the plan. And the husband hadn't changed his plan document. So it really helps employers to administer things in a simple way without having to look at all sorts of different state laws, and resolve inconsistencies.
[Cossack:] OK, what's the rule that we take away from this, Richard? I mean, what have we been taught?
[Bernstein:] Well, I think...
[Cossack:] What advice do we have for divorced husbands and wives now?
[Bernstein:] Well, get a lawyer and make sure you change your beneficiary, if that's what you really want to do. But ARISA is a problematic statute...
[Cossack:] ARISA tell us what ARISA is?
[Bernstein:] ARISA is a statue that deals with...
[Cossack:] A federal statute.
[Kilberg:] A federal statute that deals with pension benefits. It was written 27 years ago. Parts of it are very confusing. Parts of it, such as the preemption provision, is very broad. And Congress hasn't revisited it in 27 years. And the Supreme Court has taken about 20 of these case, tiny little issues, because the lower courts disagree. And this is just another one of them.
[Cossack:] Would you say that the ruling now, as it stands from the United States Supreme Court, is that documents that bare even an ex-wife's name and this is one is four months old, but it could have been four years is still going to be valid? What would happen, Bill, if, for example, in this situation, the husband would have remarried? Or wouldn't have been deceased? Would have remarried, for forgotten to take his wife?
[Kilberg:] If he had remarried, things would have been quite different, because ARISA has provisions that specifically deal with a marriage situation. In other words, he would have had to gotten the permission of his new wife to name someone other than his her.
[Cossack:] All right, what would have happened if they would have been divorced four years, instead of four months?
[Kilberg:] Wouldn't have made any difference.
[Cossack:] So the presumption is, as always now, or the laws, the United States Supreme Court is saying, stands now that whatever's on those papers, we are not going to go behind those papers?
[Kilberg:] Right. What the Supreme Court said in essence is that a state law, which tries to bind ARISA cover plans, life insurance plans, health insurance plans, pension plans, to specific rules, other than those set forth in ARISA itself or in the plan document, are invalid.
[Cossack:] All right. That's all the time we have for today. If you got one thing out of BURDEN OF PROOF today, remember this: You'd better make sure that you have the right names and the right people as the beneficiaries on those documents. Or, they won't go to the right people. Thanks to our guests. Thank you for watching. Today on "
[Talkback Live":] A minister accused of presiding over the beatings of his children at his church is arrested in Atlanta. Send Bobbie Battista your e-mail and tune in at 3:00 p.m. Eastern time. We'll be back tomorrow with another edition of BURDEN OF PROOF. We'll see you then.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] The view from the experts on the fine points of casting a ballot. But will their opinions bring an end to Florida's election controversy? A weekend at the ranch and Governor Bush's latest efforts to map out his future. And why lawmakers at Florida's statehouse may be critical players in ending the electoral impasse. From CNN Center in Atlanta, this is a special report on the Florida vote. Hello, I'm Joie Chen. Thanks for being with us. We begin this hour with the latest developments in another day of legal wrangling in this heated political battle. This time, it's all playing out in a Leon County, Florida courtroom. The judge in the case heard familiar arguments from attorneys from both sides the Gore camp yet again pushing for yet another recount, and the Bush camp pushing against it. But this time, they called witnesses to back up their cases. Testimony is to resume Sunday morning at 9:00 Eastern. And there is late word from Tallahassee that plans for a special legislative session to discuss picking Florida's 25 electors may be on hold. The president of Florida's Senate state Senate says that he has no plans to sign a proclamation on Monday, which he would have to do for the session to take place. George W. Bush, meantime, met today with his running mate, Dick Cheney, and two Republican congressional leaders. They discussed the details of his transition to the presidency. And we are still awaiting word from the U.S. Supreme Court on whether the justices will intervene in the Florida recount. The ruling could come at any time. The judge in the Leon County case we just mentioned faces a crucial question: to count to recount or not to recount. Today, witnesses for the Gore and Bush campaigns gave a tutorial of sorts on the voting process itself. CNN national correspondent Gary Tuchman has more on their testimony tonight Gary.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] Joie, in a hot crowded courtroom in Florida's state capital, a judge is poised to make a decision that could affect the whole world. The Al Gore legal contest is under way.
[Tuchman:] This noted four-letter word uttered in court was not Gore and was not Bush.
[Unidentified Male:] When he punches out that hole there, that is called the chad.
[Tuchman:] The chad, the definition of which was unknown to most before Election Day, was front and center in testimony in the first day of Al Gore's challenge of the presidential election results.
[David Boies, Gore Campaign Attorney:] The certified results reject a number of legal votes and include a number of illegal votes.
[Tuchman:] Roughly 1.1 million votes trucked in from Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties are now in vaults in this very same courthouse. The Democrats want the judge to decide to start counting some of the ballots. With that end in mind, they called a voting equipment consultant to the stand, who said many voters were thwarted from voting for president because of faulty equipment.
[Unidentified Male:] If in fact the machines are not cleaned out on a regular basis, and there's chad buildup, and therefore, the voter may not be able to push down as firmly.
[Tuchman:] Chad buildup is something Governor Bush's lawyers believe is overstated, and they also doubted a claim made by the consultant, who brought his own voting machine to court, that the rubber under the punch holes get hard over time.
[Unidentified Male:] Have you ever changed the rubber strips in your machine? No, I haven't. Would you now vote for president, please, without trying to make a dimple? Sure. Did it work? Yes, vote for number five.
[Judge N. Sanders Sauls, Leon County Circuit Court:] You don't have to say who you voted for.
[Tuchman:] There were occasional laughs during the nine-hour hearing, but also anger and frustration. Mr. Bush's attorneys said they doubted so much chad would be piled up to affect the vote, so one of Mr. Gore's attorneys did a rather theatrical demonstration.
[Unidentified Male:] You ever seen somebody after they get through voting go ahead and shake it up a bit, so that they get all the chads moved around? Have you ever seen anybody do that? No, I have not. Plaintiffs call Professor Nicholas Hengartner.
[Tuchman:] The Democrats also called a statistician to the stand, who testified he felt a much higher percentage of punch-card ballots were without presidential votes than other ballots. And then it was the Republican team's turn to call witnesses. Judge Charles Burton is the head of the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board. Democrats wanted his board to count dimples or indented chads as votes for president. He testified that was not their sole criteria.
[Judge Charles Burton, Palm Beach County Canvassing Board:] My rationale, quite honestly, was we saw so many cards with multiple impressions in the first row that, by virtue of seeing one impression, we felt or at least I know I felt that this voter obviously had no problem punching out their votes, and by virtue of just having one in the first column, that did not show a clear indication of an intent to vote.
[Tuchman:] Judge N. Sanders Sauls will reconvene his Tallahassee courtroom Sunday morning at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time. In the often leisurely world of jurisprudence, this was a rather intense day nine hours in court. There was a short half- an-hour lunch break, two other short breaks but it was hot, it was crowded, and this situation was certainly intense. People realize the magnitude of what's going on inside. Now the judge planned an going even later tonight, but he then said that a couple of his aides did not have a chance to have lunch, so he called it a night. He gave them some mercy. But the judge has said, "This trial will last no longer than 12 hours." So if he's right, it will all come to an end tomorrow. And if it ends tomorrow, we could find out tomorrow if yes or no if he will count. Joie, back to you.
[Chen:] Yes, hot and tired it was a Saturday and a holiday season after all, Gary. How did the two sides feel that they did after all was said and done today?
[Tuchman:] Joie, it was almost like one of the debates. After the debates, all the spinners come out and try to spin you. And as soon as this came to an end today, the Republican spinners, the Democratic spinners came out, and they all said they thought their side did very well. But of course, it will be up to one man not a jury, but one man, the judge here in the circuit court in Tallahassee to make that final decision.
[Chen:] Gary, I know that going into the U.S. Supreme Court hearing, there were a lot of people lined up very early for an opportunity to be in. And at other hearings as well, we know that the general public had lined up and shown a great deal of interest in attending these hearings. What about the hearing today? I saw a lot of suits in there, but were there a lot of regular people who wanted to hear and see what was going on inside?
[Tuchman:] What they did they had 30 passes available, which were split between the news media and the general public. A few members of the general public were in there, but not nearly the amount of people who wanted to get in there got in there. And also the news media not everyone could get in there. They had an overflow room in the courtroom to watch it on TV, but it's a very small courtroom and it literally was jam packed. There wasn't one seat available for anyone to sit in. So a couple of members of the general public, but most of the general public who wanted to get in ended up outside.
[Chen:] They could have watched it on TV. Gary Tuchman for us in Tallahassee tonight. And keeping up a confident air while the wait goes on, Governor Bush forges ahead with his plans for his presidency. CNN's senior political correspondent Candy Crowley is in Austin at this hour Candy.
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] Joie, as Gary mentioned, no surprise the Bush team thinks they had a very good day in that Leon County courtroom. The governor himself actually does not have cable TV out at his ranch in Crawford, but in fact, he was otherwise occupied.
[Crowley:] No chad here. Just Dennis and George and Trent and Dick. The Bush transition in exile let the cameras roll again Saturday, recording the opening of a session at the Bush ranch about next year's legislative agenda.
[Rep. Dennis Hastert , House Speaker:] It's time to start the plan to get those things done. You just don't do them at a turn of a nickel or just in a second's knee jerk. It takes some time. It takes some planning.
[Crowley:] Casual Saturday dress, but beyond that George Bush and Dick Cheney sitting around a table with Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott and House Speaker Dennis Hastert looks a lot like a Republican leadership meeting in the Oval Office, which is part of the point. The other part is the need to begin to put people and priorities in place.
[Governor George W. Bush , Presidential Nominee:] I do want to continue to talk about tax relief particularly given the fact that there's some warning signs on the horizon about our economy. And I believe the agenda that we'll be bringing to the Congress is one that will help the economic growth of the country.
[Crowley:] Members of Congress didn't get much face time in the Bush campaign. It was counter to the Texas governor's strategy of running as an outsider against the status quo. But even if the election isn't over, the campaign sort of is.
[Bush:] Well, I'm soon to be the insider. I'm soon to be the president.
[Crowley:] But the ferocity of the courtroom battle in Tallahassee is the undertow that pulls at the certainty exuded by the Bush camp. Sometimes you feel it, as when George Bush described a Friday phone call to Louisiana Democrat Senator John Breaux.
[Bush:] I knew it might put him in an awkward position that we had a discussion before the before finality has, you know, finally happened in this presidential race.
[Crowley:] Bush described the conversation as a comfortable discussion about the general state of things. And given the general state of things, that must have been a mighty interesting conversation Joie.
[Chen:] Candy, how well does he know folks like Speaker Hastert? Has he had much communication with him prior to all this?
[Crowley:] He's been on the phone with him. But no, we really you know, as I said, we didn't see them that much. And George Bush really other than the time that his father was running for re- election is not a creature of Washington, though he well understands its ways. So he would not have sort of been at places where Dennis Hastert or Trent Lott might have been. They showed up every once in awhile obviously, Dennis Hastert in Illinois, Trent Lott in Mississippi along the campaign trail, but not that much. So this is really as much a sort of sizing up each other as it is getting the agenda out there. But they need him, and he needs them. And he, in fact, talked about the fact that there will be differences between Republicans; between George Bush, who has had a different agenda than some in Congress, and Congress, who sometimes doesn't like what George Bush has had to say. So there is a lot of sort of bipartisanship that has to go on. But there's also some healing that has to be done within the Republican Party should George Bush become President.
[Chen:] CNN's Candy Crowley with us from Austin, Texas, this hour. Waiting out this weekend in Washington, Vice President Gore's low-key agenda included coffee with his wife and lunch with his college roommate. CNN's Jonathan Karl joins us late now from Washington Jonathon.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Joie, that college roommate lunching with the Vice President was his one-time Harvard classmate, Tom Jones, now better known as the actor Tommy Lee Jones. We're told the lunch went good, but the Gore team is far less optimistic about what happened down in Judge Sander Sauls' courthouse, where the pace was far too slow for comfort. As one top Gore aide said, when we're counting ballots, we're in good shape. When we're not, we're in bad shape. And today was yet another day where no ballots were being counted, and more importantly, where there was no clear indication when or even if they ever will be.
[Gore:] We're making quiet progress.
[Karl:] But transition talk aside, Gore's aides are nervously watching developments in Florida, worried that time is running out as his court case drags on.
[Boies:] Every hour makes a difference. Every day makes a difference. But having said that, I think we are on track.
[Karl:] Gore's top aides privately concede that the vice president, who is on somewhat of a legal losing streak, desperately needs a legal victory soon. They are looking for a court order to immediately start the counting of those 14,000 disputed ballots.
[Boies:] If you manually look at these punch-card ballots, you will discover hundreds and hundreds of votes, where the intent of the voter is clear, that have not been counted.
[Karl:] The Gore team hopes Judge Sander Sauls will rule on their recount request Sunday. If he rules against them, they are prepared to appeal. But they are also keenly aware that by then, it may be too late to get the counting done on time. There's a reason for Gore's low profile as he awaits action by the Florida court and by the U.S. Supreme Court. As one top advisor said, court decisions over the next 24 to 48 hours will tell the tail. Anything else right now is just a side show Joie.
[Chen:] Jon, looking at Mr. Gore today and comparing his image with that of Mr. Bush Mr. Bush meeting with some figures who could be key in a transition, who could be key in a future administration that he might have Mr. Gore almost looks as though he's still campaigning, making stops in the coffee shop.
[Karl:] Yeah, and that was a very quick stop outside the residence. Really, the vice president's having some of those very same meetings, but he's not inviting the cameras in. I mean, the vice president over the last several days has been meeting with Roy Neil, who is heading up his transition team. He's having regular meetings with Bill Daley, his campaign manager, regular meetings with Alexis Hermann, who's talked about as a possible chief of staff in a in a Gore administration. So that stuff is going on, the quiet progress towards a potential transition. But there's a real sense on the Gore team that really, their fate is not in their hands right now. Again, the next 24 to 48 hours awaiting these court decisions, that will be that will tell the tale. That's what will tell what's going to happen. So they're not as interested in some of the image making that we see going on in Austin. Clearly, George W. Bush trying to set the tone that he is preparing to go to the White House, that he clearly believes he won the election, and that he is preparing to take control in Washington. The vice president knows that he can have time to fight that battle and to project those images after these court decisions. But right now, there's really a sense of almost shrugging their shoulders and saying, "Well, we'll see what happens."
[Chen:] Has anybody talked about like a drop-dead time, if we don't have votes started to be counted by Tuesday, or Wednesday, or whatever, there's no way this can be done?
[Karl:] Well, that drop-dead date seems to keep moving back. I mean, earlier the Gore team had said that if the ballots weren't being counted by this weekend, there wouldn't be time to count all of them. Now they're not saying that. Now they're saying that even if you had a decision Monday or Tuesday to start counting the ballots that you could just bring in more people to do the counting. They say there's only 14,000 disputed ballots. Those are the only ballots they want counted. They say they could do that in a day or two. But, of course, the drop-dead deadline down in Florida is December 12th, which is the date that the state must confirm its slate of electors to the electoral college. So the Gore team still thinks they have some time. But remember, it was just a couple of days ago that they were saying, if we don't start counting by the weekend, it's over. We can't count. Now they're backing away from that, because here we are at the weekend, still not counting ballots.
[Chen:] CNN's Jonathan Karl for us from Washington. How are the men who would be President handling themselves during the long wait? Ahead on this CNN special report, taking the pulse of the nation, and the view of our senior political analyst Bill Schneider. We'll be right back.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] "All the news that's fit to print," that's the motto for the "New York Times." For years, "The Times" has rejected romance, or what's known as personals, but that is changing now. "Making the Moost of It" tonight in Jeanne Moos in the search for love in black and white.
[Jeanne Moos, Cnn Correspondent:] You know times have changed when the newspaper that reported "Men Walk on Moon" now prints "Men Seeking Women" or even "Men Seeking Men." [on camera]: Yes, I'd like to place a personal ad if I could. [voice-over]: They call "The Times" "the old gray lady." Well, the old gray lady is ready for romance. "Extra! Extra! Easy on the eyes news junky... [on camera]: Seeks playboy paperboy."
[Unidentified Female:] Can't say "playboy," ma'am.
[Moos:] I can't say "playboy?"
[Unidentified Female:] No, you cannot.
[Moos:] "The Times" is picky about its personals. The not-so-gray "New York Observer" spoofed the "New York Times" personals even before they began, but "Timesmen Make Me Hot" would never make it into the real thing, as we discovered when we placed our own ad. [on camera]: "Let's get ink-stained together rolling in all the news that's fit to print."
[Unidentified Female:] No. You can't say stuff like that. No, it's suggestive. I can't take it. This is a very conservative paper.
[Moos:] And here Republicans think it's liberal. Media critics from publications that already run personals tease "The Times."
[Michael Wolff, "new York" Magazine:] You wait for about half a century, and then you do what everyone else is doing.
[Moos:] Women far outnumbered men in this first batch of personals, and many were over 50.
[Jason Gay, "new York Observer":] Not exactly a young swinging crowd just yet, but that could change.
[Moos:] Maybe not the swinging part. When we weren't allowed to say "seeks playboy paperboy," we had to rewrite. [on camera]: "Playful paperboy."
[Unidentified Female:] Playful? I don't think you can say "playful" either.
[Moos:] Eventually she relented. But if you're a "bad boy" looking for a "dirty girl" or you "need discipline," place your ad elsewhere. If you find all those initials confusing, "The Times" provides a helpful legend. [on camera]: P confused me a little bit. "Professional." I thought it was Protestant. [voice-over]: We finally settled on "let's get ink-stained together... [on camera]: Reading all the news that's fit to print." Instead of "rolling in it." [voice-over]: Most newspapers aren't rolling in ad revenue these days. But we don't know if that's why "The Times" started running personals, because no one from the paper would talk to us about the subject. Our ad finally ran.
[Gay:] Well congratulations, because when I read these on Sunday, I thought that was definitely the raciest of the bunch, and that sort of jumped out at me.
[Moos:] You didn't call my...
[Gay:] No, I didn't. I didn't.
[Wolff:] If you get responses to that have you gotten any?
[Moos:] Half a dozen, two of them former paperboys, but we'll never know if they're fit to date. Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.

[Bobbie Battista:] Why can't they all get along?
[Rep. Richard Gephardt , Minority Leader:] I think what we're seeing this week is the end of what we thought was bipartisanship.
[Rep. Dick Armey , Majority Leader:] I personally don't believe Mr. Gephardt will suffer miss bipartisanship a whole lot, because he didn't avail himself to the opportunity to experience it personally.
[Battista:] As Congress prepares to vote on the president's tax cut plan, Democrats are crying, "No fair."
[Sen. Tom Daschle , Minority Leader:] They were not going to allow any alternatives to their version of the tax cut.
[Unidentified Male:] Up until now, the president's view has been "My way or the highway."
[Rep. Jennifer Dunn , Washington:] I think the Democrats who are saying that this is the end of bipartisanship will be back to fight another day.
[Battista:] Are Republicans reaching out to, or stomping out, the opposition? Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. Well, sometime in the next hour or so, the House is set to vote on President Bush's tax cut proposal. We will, of course, keep abreast of that for you. So let's introduce our first guests before they have to run off and vote. We are joined by Congressman J.C. Watts, a Republican from Oklahoma, and Representative Nita Lowey, a New York Democrat. Good to see both of you.
[Rep. Nita Lowey , New York:] Thank you.
[Rep. J.c. Watts , Oklahoma:] Thank you, Bobbie.
[Battista:] Congresswoman Lowey, let me start with you. By all accounts, the president this part of the president's tax cut proposal is going to pass the House. Is all of this happening just a little fast for you and some Democrats?
[Lowey:] This is so important for our country, and I really thought that there was going to be a new day, that we were going to have civility, that we were going to work together in a bipartisan way. The Ways and Means Committee didn't even have hearings. We don't have a budget. I support a tax cut, but in the context of a balanced budget. We don't have a budget. There is no balance. And here we are, we're having tax cuts. It doesn't make sense. In fact, you can predict the surplus as well as you can predict those 24 inches of snow that we were going to have in New York last week.
[Battista:] Congressman Watts, why the rush?
[Watts:] Well, Bobbie, let me just add that there were actually hearings in Ways and Means. Today, the Democrats are going to be able to offer a substitute, which means they can offer their package of taxes. We're going to have a vote on it. And I don't think it's a rush to say we're going to give six pennies of every dollar that comes into Washington back to the American people, the people that created the surplus. Give it back to those people to say, "You can use it to buy school clothes for your kids, buy new appliances, buy food, help pay car insurance. Do what you need to do with it." Six pennies of every dollar is what we're giving back. And so the budget is the 94 cents that's going to stay here in Washington. We're going to fuss and fight and argue about how that 94 cents is spent, but we're proposing that we give 6 cents back to the American people.
[Battista:] I'm thinking that a lot of Americans are because we kind of polled the audience here a few moments ago, most of them certainly want a tax cut, but they don't want to rush too much on it. Normally, don't you set the budget out before you start talking about tax cuts? I mean, have you circumvented standard procedure here a little bit?
[Watts:] Well, Bobbie, what we're doing is we're going to say what we're saying is, let's take six pennies of every dollar that comes into Washington. Let's take that off the table. You know, the budget is prepared around that 94 cents that's going to be left in Washington. You know, that the budget, you know, under last year's rules, we are still actually under a budget. But what we're doing I think it brings about fiscal responsibility to say, we're going to take 6 cents off the table. We're going to leave 94 cents in Washington, D.C. This is nothing new. This is very important to the American people. It's very important that we give tax relief to allow for job security, economic growth. Sixty-eight percent of the economy is driven by consumer spending, so it's not too fast, it's not too much, it's not irresponsible to give people their money back so they can spend it into the economy.
[Battista:] Representative Lowey, where is that 94 cents enough, and where's that 6 cents coming from?
[Lowey:] Oh, look, we support tax cuts. The Democrats support tax cuts. In fact, they support one-third tax cut, one-third investments in education, health care, and one-third of paying down the debt. It took us 20 years to get out of deficit spending. We don't want to go back to that time again. And all we are saying is, let's put together a budget. Let's make sure that we have sufficient funds to invest and protect Social Security, Medicare, put in place a prescription drug plan to make sure we keep paying for investments in education and after-school programs Head Start, child care, paying down the debt, which will lower interest rates. What's the rush? We should be working together, putting a budget in place, and make sure we have money at the bank. You talk to Robert Rubin, former secretary of the Treasury. There are dozens of economists who are saying, let's make sure the surplus is real so we have enough of the resources that can continue to pay for the investments that the American people want. They want to modernize our schools. They want to make sure every child has the best education they can. That's all we're saying. We support tax cuts but in the context of a balanced budget.
[Battista:] On issues this big then, are you saying that there is no coalition building going on at all behind the scenes?
[Lowey:] Coalition building? What's happening with the Republican leadership is they're saying it's "My way or the highway." We weren't even allowed to vote on a substitute until today. We were going to have one vote on the Republican plan without giving us an opportunity to vote on the substitute. I guess something happened and they finally said, "OK, we'll give you that vote." But let's make sure that we have the money in the bank. The American people are saying, first is education. They want to make sure we have modern schools, enough computers, that we have after-school programs, that we have funds to train and retrain our teachers. Education is the key. And unless there are resources for education, Social Security, Medicare, prescription drug benefits, protecting our environment, the American people don't want a tax cut that will go to the few and not really be directed to the majority of American people.
[Battista:] Congressman Watts, getting this through the House may be the easy part here. What happens when it gets to the Senate? Is it going to slow down a bit?
[Watts:] Well, Bobbie, let me first address some of the comments that my good friend from New York has made. She talked about Secretary Rubin and what he has said. I talked to the current secretary of the Treasury yesterday. He told us, he said that at this time last year in the 2000, during this time in the year 2000, there was $40 billion sitting over in the Treasury. Today, the same time, there's $74 billion over in the Treasury. We've got plenty of money to do what we're trying to accomplish here. And let me encourage everybody to take off their Republican and Democrat caps and just go back to '93 and '94 when the Democrats controlled the House, the Senate and the White House. They did not cut our taxes, the increased our taxes. They took more money from the American people, put more taxes on Social Security benefits, put taxes on energy issues I mean, on energy for the American people, which many seniors are dependent on. That's what they did. We became the majority. We paid down the debt. We put more money in education. We put more money in national security. The president has reached out for the first time in the last eight years. The president of the United States went to the Republican retreat, the Democrat retreat, where we talk about different policy issues. No president has done that in many, many years. He's had Republicans and Democrats both over at the White House to visit with him. We are allowing the Democrats today to offer a substitute to vote on their version of tax relief. And we're going to let the members vote on it. We're going to offer our version of tax relief and allow the members to vote on it. And we'll see what happens. But, you know, this is fair taxation, fair tax relief. It's going to affect over 60 million women, over 16 million African- Americans, over 15 million Hispanics. It's going to give them some of their money back. Six pennies of every dollar we're giving back to the American people to allow them more money to help them pay their bills every month. What's bad about that?
[Battista:] Let me get some of the American people in on this since that's your sales audience. Let me take a phone call first from Janice in California, then we'll go to the audience Janice.
[Caller:] Yes, thank you, Bobbie. I wonder if the two Congress people up there, they're so young, but I wish they would go back and do a little research in history. If they go back, I think they'll find that trickle-down economy first tried by Calvin Coolidge and Andrew Mellon from 1925 to '29 didn't work. We all know the results of that. The stock market crashed and we had a horrendous depression. Then along comes Reagan trying the Reaganomics, who, by the way Calvin Coolidge was his idol. That didn't work then. And so I'm wondering...
[Battista:] I'm guessing that they do remember or are familiar with that.
[Caller:] Well, they're very young. All they have to do is go to their library or anyone in the audience just research it. Trickle down doesn't work.
[Battista:] What about the history of this sort of tax cut?
[Caller:] The history...
[Battista:] Go ahead, Congressman Watts.
[Watts:] Well, Bobbie, I would say to the gentlelady and bless her heart for calling me young. You just made my day. I don't remember Calvin Coolidge. I remember who he was, that he was the president of the United States at one time. But I can tell you what. Back in 19 40 years ago when John Kennedy, when he offered tax relief, revenues grew. Twenty years ago, when Ronald Reagan offered tax relief or passed a tax bill, revenues grew. But what happened is, Bobbie, you can't allow your revenues to grow at double allow revenues to double but allow spending to triple. You know, that's where we got the deficits from. That's where we ran up the debt. You know, it has been proven there is a proven track record that giving tax relief is good for job security, is good for economic growth, but it's also a track record to prove that I don't care how many times revenue grow, if revenue increases more than they grow, that's bad. And so I disagree with the gentlelady to say that if we give the American people tax relief, that that's not going to be good for job security and economic growth.
[Battista:] Well, Congressman Lowey, Carol in Texas e-mails us: "Bush did this in Texas, and we have a budget shortfall this year. Do the math."
[Lowey:] Well, exactly that. And when we had that major tax cut by Ronald Reagan, we've been digging out of deficit spending for the last 20 years. And in the last eight years, because of the wise policies of the Clinton administration, we've had a healthy, strong economy. And I just want to make it very clear again that I support tax cuts. But we need a budget. We need to make sure that we have sufficient resources to invest in education, protect Social Security, protect Medicare to make sure there's enough money for investments in the military. Let's do a budget, and then let's put those tax cuts in the context of a balanced budget.
[Battista:] I've got to take a quick break here, and we'll continue with our two Congress people. Before we go to break, though, remember when President Bush remarked that his tax cut plan is neither too large nor too small but just right? Well, tell us what you think on the TALKBACK LIVE online viewer vote at cnn.comtalkback, AOL keyword: CNN. We'll be back in two minutes. A Republican group says it's taping radio ads using clips of a speech by President John Kennedy to support President Bush's tax cut plan. The Issues Management Center says JFK used the same arguments to cut taxes in a 1962 speech that President Bush uses now. A live shot of the House of Representatives as we continue here. Charlie Rangel there, a congressman, as debate continues on President Bush's income tax proposal. The vote should be coming up shortly. But let me go to the audience and get some opposing opinions. Ben, what do you think?
[Ben:] Well, it seems like both the Democrats and the Republicans have proposed a tax cut: the Democrats, $900 billion; the Republicans, $1.6 trillion. Why don't we just split this pizza in half and get this economy moving and get on with the show, and the public can spend the money and things will be better for all of us two or three years from now? Let's go.
[Battista:] Could it be that simple, Congressman Watts?
[Watts:] Well, it's not that simple, but the gentleman, I think, makes a good point in saying that, you know, we're going to get tax relief. The American people are going to get tax relief. What we're trying to do in our package is we're trying to reduce rates over the next 10 years. We're going to go from five rates down to four rates. Everybody benefits from that, everyone that pays taxes. We're going to eliminate the unfair marriage tax. It is unfair, in my opinion and in the opinion of Republicans to say that if two people decide to get married, just because they say "I do," they have to pay $1,400 more in taxes. We think it's unfair to say that if you own a business or a farm, that when you die, that you have to give half of that business or farm to the government. That's unfair. We're going to raise that per-child tax credit from $500 to a thousand dollars so anyone that has kids, you know, they get a higher tax write off for children. These are things that will make a real difference in people's lives as they try to pay their bills every month. And that's what we're trying to accomplish, help them pay their bills.
[Battista:] Representative Lowey, is the momentum building for the other aspects of this tax package like that?
[Lowey:] I want to make it very clear again that the Democratic package includes reduction in the estate tax, expanding the unified credit. It includes getting rid of the marital tax penalty, which I agree is fair. It includes an across-the-board tax cut. We just want to be sure that the money is in the bank, that the surplus is real. We don't want to go back to those days of deficit spending. We want to continue to pay down the debt so that we can lower interest rates, so young couples can afford a home. The difference here is not between a tax cut and no tax cut. It's between working together in a responsible way, putting a budget together, then making sure that we have everyone's best wisdom putting together a tax cut that will have investments in education, that will provide a real prescription drug benefit, that will preserve Social Security and Medicare, that will pay for our military. Our budget expert gave me a briefing, another Democrat, showing this isn't even a $1.6 trillion tax cut, it's a $2.6 trillion tax cut. So to say on hand you're going to preserve Social Security and Medicare, that's not real. Let's put the budget together and then work together. J.C. and I can could work together on a tax cut that would help working families in this country.
[Battista:] Let me...
[Lowey:] And, in fact...
[Battista:] I was going to say, let me take a few more comments from the audience here. And then you've touched on something, Representative Lowey, about working together, and we'll talk a little bit more about that issue of bipartisanship. Let me take Cathy on the phone from Michigan Cathy.
[Caller:] Hi. I think the deficit, it wasn't caused by the tax cut in the '80s. It was because of the Democrat spending. That's what the deficit in the '80s was caused from. President Bush right now has 70 percent set aside for Social Security and Medicare, which the Democrats failed to mention. And then the 30 percent is for the tax cut. And the Democrats always seem to use scare tactics, class warfare, rich against poor, black against white, men against women. You know, I am for this tax cut. Now they're talking the budget, we need a budget first. It seems they delay, delay, delay the Democrats.
[Battista:] All right, Cathy, thank you. And to Mike in the audience.
[Mike:] I just wanted to make the point that since the current tax structure is so progressive, the people with the most money are going to benefit greatest when there's an across-the-board tax cut because that's going to be regressive. People who need the money most are the people that are going to get the least. That's the largest segment of the population. So you're returning more money to the people who really don't need it quite as much as the ones who do.
[Battista:] Final...
[Lowey:] I have to agree with you.
[Battista:] Let me get final comments from our congresspeople here. Representative Lowey, you go first.
[Lowey:] Well, I would just say that the last speaker is absolutely right. And when you talk to people in the highest incomes, they understand that the people who need the tax cut most are those who are going to work every day trying to balance their family budgets, trying to purchase a house, trying to pay for the kids' education, trying to make sure that they have the money they need for everyday needs. So what we're saying is put together a budget. Let's make sure that this tax cut is going to help those who need it the most. And then I would hope that we can work together, not rush this through, not go back to the days of deficit spending, and let's work together in a bipartisan way getting that budget in place, and then putting a responsible tax cut in place in the House and the Senate so we can get those dollars back to working families.
[Battista:] Congressman Watts.
[Watts:] Well, Bobbie, we've got a targeted tax cut. We target people who pay taxes. We don't target anybody in or anybody out. If people pay taxes, we give them tax relief. Last year, we had about 32 million people that got tax refunds that don't pay any taxes. And now we're fighting to say the people that pay taxes, we shouldn't give them any of their money back through marriage relief, through eliminating the death tax, by raising their per-child tax credit, by reducing the tax rates. We're taxed from the time we get up from the time we go to bed at night. And people are overtaxed, they're overcharged. We ought to take some of their surplus, pay down the debt, you know, build national security, put more money in education, have a prescription drug benefit. But at the same time, give some money back to those people that pay the bills every month here in Washington and at home.
[Battista:] Got to take a quick break. When we come back, we'll talk about ways that Congress can get together if that's possible, if they ever have, on things. We'll be back. Seventy-nine percent of poll respondents said they think the wealthy will benefit most from President Bush's tax plan, 12 percent think it will be the middle class, and four percent think it will be the poor. I wanted to get quick reaction from our Congress folks about this issue of bipartisanship. The tax plan isn't the only issue that the Democrats are charging the Republicans are kind of running through. There was that repeal of the ergonomics bill that went through pretty quickly and some complaints about that. And some of the e-mails all of the e-mails we're getting are like this: Brian in Florida says, "There never was and there never will be bipartisanship. Democrats did not practice it when they were in power and Republicans should fall for this Democrat media trap. Bipartisanship is an excuse for lack of commitment to core principles." Congressman Lowey, your reaction?
[Lowey:] Well, I think it's very disappointing that people in this country don't have the confidence. And may they don't have the confidence in bipartisanship because we don't have bipartisanship now with the Republican leadership in the House. For example, you referred to worker safety legislation. After 10 years of studies, after studies of the National Science Foundation, all of a sudden yesterday, worker safety was wiped off the map, one hour of discussion, when Democrats asked, pleaded with the Republican leadership to let us have a couple more hours. The Senate debated worker safety provisions for 10 hours after 10 years. We were given one hour and now all the people who go to work every day, 64 percent are women, people who sit at a desk with repetitive motions can't get the support they need. And, in fact, employees and employers have been working together in many corporations. It cost employers $20 million. Let's prevent that. Let's work together.
[Battista:] Congressman Watts, go ahead.
[Watts:] Well, Bobbie, this legislation that we defeated yesterday that we repealed, that President Clinton signed by executive order four days you know, within a week of when he left office, didn't give us any opportunity to discuss it or talk about it. And what that ergonomics legislation, what it did, it was anti-job creation and it was anti the economy. I mean, there was ridiculous things in there that says that if somebody works at a grocery store and they lift a turkey that's more than 15 pounds, that was bad. It just made no sense for small business. You know, this you know, Nita and I, we are bipartisan, we get along. We love each other. But the fact is bipartisanship doesn't mean that you have to use the Democrats' ball, the Democrats' bat, the Democrat rules, the Democrat officials, the Democrat fields. And they put their own fans the stand. There are legitimate differences. We have differences on taxes. They believe the money should stay in Washington. I believe it should go back to the American people. There's a real difference on education policy. I mean, I think it's healthy for us to have those discussions, those debates. But this tax relief package is good for the American people, good for job security, good for the economy, paying down the debt, prescription drug benefits. This is a good package.
[Battista:] All right, we know you both need to go, and we appreciate your time on a busy day. Thanks very much, Representatives Nita Lowey and J.C. Watts.
[Lowey:] Thank you.
[Watts:] Thank you.
[Battista:] And we'll be keeping an eye on that tax vote as well for you. Still ahead, Julianne Malveaux and Ramesh Ponnuru will join us. We'll be back. Welcome back. Joining us now, syndicated columnist and economist Julianne Malveaux; she is the author of "Wall Street, Main Street and the Side Street: A Mad Economist Takes a Stroll."
[Julianne Malveaux, Syndicated Columnist:] Hi Bobbie.
[Battista:] Hi Julianne. Also Ramesh Ponnuru, senior editor of the "National Review." Ramesh, good to see you, too.
[Ramesh Ponnuru, "national Review":] Thanks.
[Battista:] Well, Julianne and Ramesh, did anyone hear any clues of bipartisanship there between our two congresspeople? It's like they love to talk about how bipartisanship they are, and then they retreat to their opposite corners.
[Malveaux:] You know, what you've got from this administration Mr. Bush has certainly lowered the temperature on vituperativeness. As J.C. Watts said, he's invited Democrats, African-Americans people who didn't vote him into the White House. But after I eat your food if you, you know, kick me in my behind, that's not bipartisanship; and frankly, that's what's been happening. He has all the veneer of, let's all get along, but it's his way or the highway, even after we've all sat down and talked.
[Battista:] Ramesh.
[Ponnuru:] Well, I don't know if that's a fair statement. I mean, you know, if you look at Bush's education plan, for instance, a lot of Democrats have said, you know, that's essentially a democratic plan. I mean, that's a Democratic Leadership Council plan with, you know, one or two modifications on it. Bush has been quite open to democratic ideas; he's been talking to Democrats. It's not the case you know, he's never promised that everything he proposes is going to have the backing of Dick Gephardt and Tom Daschle, but that's not same thing.
[Malveaux:] But to shove this tax plan down the American people's throats, to rush it without having a budget there that's not only not bipartisanship, that's also not democratic.
[Ponnuru:] With a small "D," that is. The tax cut has been debated substantially in its current form for a year and a half now. When, you know, when one of the arguments for the tax cut is that you have economic difficulty and you need to pass the bill quickly, I'm not sure that there's an argument for continued delay and, you know, just dragging this progress out.
[Malveaux:] Ramesh, I'm not...
[Ponnuru:] The problem here is you know, the Democrats have been complaining they haven't had a chance to really talk about their alternatives. It's taken them forever to come up with their alternative. Until basically last week all they had was a vague plan where they said, 13 on new spending3 on this, 13 on the other thing but that wasn't a bill. And that's not Bush's fault, that they took so long to get together.
[Malveaux:] There have been several alternatives that have been proposed, including one that says, give every working person $400 it would still cost $900 billion; it's not cheap, but it would be much more progressive, small "P." It would be much more egalitarian; it would give poor people and middle income people a lot more money. There are alternatives out there. This Bush thing has only been introduced within a couple of weeks as well. So I don't think it's reasonable for you to say the Democrats don't have a plan.
[Ponnuru:] Well, let's also keep clear that this isn't the end of the process. I mean, you have to have the Senate pass it; you'll have a conference; it will be passed again by the full Congress in its final form. You know, it's just not the case that we're going to pass a tax cut this week...
[Malveaux:] So why not start out with... ... why shove it down people's throats?
[Ponnuru:] There will be further opportunities for debate; it isn't being shoved down anybody's throat.
[Malveaux:] But Ramesh, they're trying to circumvent the usual legislative process.
[Battista:] It is going to hit quite a slowdown when it gets to the Senate I think; but, you know, how much of this is sour grapes because the opposite party is not in the majority any more? And, I mean, there is a certain amount of whining that goes along with being the minority party, I mean, is that true?
[Ponnuru:] Bipartisanship in Washington is a partisan subject. I mean, the charge that the other side isn't being bipartisan and that you're being bipartisan is a partisan weapon. That's, you know, that's just the way Washington works.
[Malveaux:] At the same time, I don't Bobbie, I wouldn't concede democratic whining just yet. I think that people have gone out of their way in any number of ways to be open to Mr. Bush. I mean, I thought it was remarkable that the Congressional Black Caucus sat down with him, given that 90 percent of the African-American community voted against the man. People do want to work with the administration, but they don't want to feel as if their voices don't count at all. You're right, this will slow down the Senate. Democrats have a much better presence and more power in the Senate; but I still am not clear about the ways that the process is being circumvented, and I wouldn't call complaints about that whining.
[Battista:] I meant that in a loving way.
[Malveaux:] I know.
[Battista:] Go ahead Ramesh.
[Ponnuru:] That's another example of partisanship. I mean, Julianne, you're saying that it's not real bipartisanship when Bush meets with the Congressional Black Caucus, but it is bipartisanship when the Congressional Black Caucus meets with Bush. I mean, it's a ludicrous, partisan double standard.
[Malveaux:] You can call it a double standard if you want to; what I'm saying here is that he clearly is in a cat-bird seat. I did give credit, if you listened, but I don't think you did because you didn't want to hear me give Mr. Bush the credit that I gave him at the beginning for lowering the temperature. I maintain I'll give him credit for that. I think his speech, you know, the other week was well-delivered; I think that he throws the softballs and he makes people feel good about being American people. I do concede that. At the same time, you can make me feel as good as you want, but if you put a shiv between my ribs with the taxation and with any number of other things, I mean I'm not going to end up feeling that good. I'm not going to walk away whole.
[Battista:] Let me go to the audience quickly, here Ron.
[Ron:] Just had a comment about what is the purpose behind the tax cut? Are we trying to alleviate a perceived burden on poor folks or middle income folks, or are we trying to jump-start the economy? And I think if it's the later, then Ramesh's comments about going ahead and getting it down may have a little more weight.
[Malveaux:] Well, when the economy was expanding during the campaign, the issue was not at all about expanding or jump-starting the economy; the issue, in Mr. Bush's mind, as he put it out there, was giving people some money back. The fact is, now the focus has shifted and people are looking at what's going on with the economy since growth has slowed so much, and to see what we can do with that. But the fact is that a tax cut that favors the upper income does not kick-start the economy. If you put money in little people's hands if you give somebody, you know, $40,000 they're not necessarily going to go out and buy a car, but if you give a working person $200, they are going to put it on food or something else. So that's how you kick-start the economy. Consumer spending is 23 of our economy.
[Battista:] Let me ask you this: this fast-track that the president's pursuing with this tax plan and the ergonomics bill and all these various things is there going to be a price to pay for that down the line? Is Congress going to dig in Democrats going do dig in their heels and we'll see just a total return to gridlock and...
[Malveaux:] You know, I mean, I think that people will sell a lot of wolf tickets, but practically speaking, both parties are going to be judged by what gets done. So people can say that people will be alienated by this fast-tracking, but if things come up if education comes up next, Ramesh is right. There are people on both sides who care about education. Nobody's going to get anything if they say, "Well, we're going to dig our heels in on education because we're mad about the tax cut." That's just not going to work.
[Battista:] Ramesh?
[Ponnuru:] Well, I mean, there's a whether there is gridlock or not is going to depend on the strategic calculations of the party. I mean, if, for instance, the Democrats decide that their best ticket in 2002 is to prevent Bush and the Republicans from accomplishing anything, then they are going to try as hard as they can to hold the line and make sure nothing passes. And, at the same time, if they do that, Republicans are going to try to make sure that they get blamed for it. But I I don't think it's going to be a matter of sort of tit for tat on what's happened on the tax cuts. It's going to be a cold-blooded calculation.
[Battista:] Let me go to a couple e-mails. Reader from Louisiana says: "This is the time for the Democrats to show some cooperation. The tax plan is a good one but since the Democrats didn't write it, they're going to try to destroy it." Clayton says: "I say let President Bush and the Republicans have the tax cut. If after four years we're back to deficit spending and our safety-net programs are in trouble, out go the Republicans and in go the Democrats." Meredith, from the audience.
[Meredith:] Yeah, I don't believe that this tax cut is being shoved down anybody's throat. In fact, there was a democratic representative on here early who was actually talking about a different form of the tax cut, but the Republicans and Democrats are both presenting a tax cut, period. And I don't believe that it's being shoved down anyone's throat.
[Malveaux:] Well, Nita Lowey talked about a different kind of tax cut. People are in favor of cutting taxes. They are not in favor of a tax cut that will primarily go to people who are earning over $100,000 a year. We're also not in favor, most people are not in favor of a tax cut that's going to cut Social Security, going to erode the you know, the efficiency of the Social Security system or Medicare. So those are the issues.
[Ponnuru:] That's just a scare tactic.
[Malveaux:] It's not a scare tactic at all.
[Ponnuru:] Nobody could credibly shown that it's going to harm Social Security or Medicare.
[Malveaux:] He's taking money that ought to be going into the Social Security fund with that tax cut. And you know it.
[Ponnuru:] Social Security surplus is completely protected and you know that, Julianne.
[Battista:] I have to take a break. We'll be back in just a minute. More e-mails Jeanne in Michigan says, "My income tax refund out of this plan is a joke. Of course, if I had an income of $100,000 a year, I'd be delighted." Jerry in Illinois says, "When I did my taxes this year I don't remember saying if there's anything left over, just keep the change." Let me go to a senior citizen, Earl, is in the state of Texas. Earl, on the phone with us.
[Caller:] Hi, Bobbie.
[Battista:] Hi, Earl. Go ahead.
[Caller:] I have a serious question about the prescription drugs. If senior citizens don't have the money to pay their drugs buy their drugs, they can get sick end up sick or maybe even die. If you take the money and buy their food I mean, their medicine with it, they don't have the food, they can get sick, end up in the hospital and die. I want to know why this is not even on a slow track, but the tax cuts are on a fast track. Now, I'm not against tax cuts, but if they're going to put money in the fat cat's hands first, why aren't they going to put the prescription drugs in the senior's hands?
[Battista:] Right.
[Caller:] And I want to know...
[Battista:] You're asking whether this plan is going to help folks like you.
[Malveaux:] Well, Bobbie, he's actually raised up a question that Nita Lowey raised earlier: why not have a budget first? The gentleman is talking about something that many, many seniors feel is terribly important: this whole issue of a prescription drug benefit. There are several plans for it, a Democrat plan, a Republican plan there are differences in the cost. That has budget implications. If you make some budget decisions you might be freer to make certain kinds of tax decisions. That's why you do a budget first. You don't go, in your personal life, and say: Gee, I think I want a new car so I'm going to buy one, and then I'm going to figure out if I can afford to may my mortgage. That's backwards and that's what we're doing this time around.
[Battista:] Ramesh?
[Ponnuru:] Well, the thing is, I mean, if you look at what Congress does when it's got a pile of money that hasn't already been hasn't already been sent back in form of tax cuts, it spends it. I mean, the last six months of last year, Congress spent $561 billion new dollars because it had the money. There wasn't any huge deliberation: should we do this? It just sort of happened because the money was there and the different spending committees just went at it. If you don't cut taxes beforehand, you're not going to have any spending control. So in that in this case, in the case if the way Congress acts, it actually is important to do the tax cut first.
[Malveaux:] Ramesh, you know, who did that spending? You you had a Republican Senate, you had a Republican Congress. I think you're making my argument. Let's do what we need to do... Let's make sure we have a budget first.
[Ponnuru:] The incentives for Congress if the money's on the table, is to spend it. That's why you've got to cut the tax first. And you're right, a lot of it is the Republicans. But that's they're responding to the incentives, the way Congress acts, the way Washington is set up to act.
[Malveaux:] I fiscal common sense says: let's see what we need to do. You've got an education plan that's going to cost money. You heard the president talk about raises. Raise this, raise this. He also talked about cutting very critical departments, and you've got economic slowdown, unemployment nudging up, and you're going to cut the Labor Department? I don't think so. Let's do a budget, then let's talk about tax cuts.
[Battista:] Are we putting Washington and fiscal common sense in the same sentence?
[Malveaux:] Actually, no, but I just thought I might try that.
[Battista:] OK. Tom, in the audience, go ahead.
[Tom:] Yes. Before you make a budget, you have to realize how much money you have to spend, the same as you would your personal budget. The government has to know what they need to do with their money and how much money they have and everything before they can make those decisions.
[Battista:] Why does the government get to operate differently though?
[Ponnuru:] What you said was exactly right. I mean, you have to have the tax cut in order to put...
[Malveaux:] You don't have to have a tax cut at all, Ramesh. You know, you don't have to. Bobbie, one of reasons the government does operate differently is because much of this so-called surplus that people are already spending is something that's being projected over a 10-year period. So we part of the projections that have come from the Congressional Budget Office are based on a set of assumptions that are, as Nita Lowey said, possibly as faulty as the weatherman assumption about how you get 24 inches of snow. I think that many people feel confident about the budget assumptions to the next three, four years. I don't think you do 10- year weather projections or 10-year budget projections to try to figure out what's going on. It makes sense to go slow on this.
[Ponnuru:] But the cost of the tax cut is being done on a 10-year basis, too. I mean, if you want to talk about it on a five-year basis, then you're talking about a tax cut that isn't, you know, one point six trillion, or two trillion, or whatever the democratic scare number is these days.
[Malveaux:] Scare number? This is the number it's the number that your president put out... Your president put out these numbers it's these are not democratic scare numbers, these are numbers that are coming directly from the Republicans! Don't blame tax cut... ... implications on the Democrats.
[Ponnuru:] You are not listening to me, Julianne. Let me know when are you done.
[Malveaux:] I was listening, but I didn't like what I heard. I say it's absolutely wrong.
[Battista:] You know what, Tom in the audience wants to respond too, but I have to take a quick break, so Ramesh, we will come back to you and Tom after this. Let's take a quick check of our poll here. The question was: what do you think of the president's tax proposal too big, too small, just right? Fifty-one percent are saying "too big," 12 percent are saying "too small," 37 percent are saying "just right." Ramesh, I interrupted you as we went to break.
[Ponnuru:] Well, I was just making the point that, you know, people complain that the surplus is based on a 10-year projection, but so is the projection of the cost of the tax cut. I mean, you can't say on the one hand, oh, it's too big, because it costs $1.6 trillion or even higher and then say, well, we can't trust these surplus projections. It's the same set of numbers we're talking about. I mean and by any stretch of the imagination, when you've got again, based on these same projections, you got $22.3 trillion of revenue coming in over the next 10 years, and you're saying you can't take even 5 to 6 percent of that, and give it back to the taxpayers? I just don't think that's credible.
[Malveaux:] Ramesh, you are repeating J.C. Watts' line...
[Ponnuru:] Well, because it happens to be true.
[Malveaux:] No, it doesn't happen to be true. It's the talking point that the Republicans are putting out there. The fact is this: we don't know what the numbers are. Even if you look at some of the projections, I reject the notion you're cutting it in half. Look at the declines in the tax rate. You see them going at a rate that's not at a 50 percent slant rate. So, you're wrong about that. You are just wrong about that.
[Battista:] Tom, quickly. What do you want to get in there?
[Tom:] Sounds to me like they are saying that, you know, I want to have a new car so all my friends will like me, so I buy the new car and worry about how I am going to pay for it later. You are going to have to manage your money about what you got coming in, and what responsibilities you have to match it up to.
[Battista:] All right, Julianne...
[Malveaux:] Absolutely, Tom!
[Battista:] Julianne Malveaux and Ramesh Ponnuru, thank you both very much for joining us.
[Malveux:] Oh, it was a pleasure, Bobbie.
[Ponnuru:] Thanks.
[Battista:] By the way, you can find out how the president's tax cut plan would effect you on "BURDEN OF PROOF." E-mail Greta and Roger at burdenofproof@cnn.com tomorrow at 12:30 Eastern. Then join us at TALKBACK LIVE for this week's edition of Friday free-for-all. We will see you then.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Morning News Co-host:] There is a new Miss Teen U.S.A. now. Her name is Jillian Parry. She's from Newtown, Pennsylvania. Jillian won the crown last weekend. She's got a busy year straight ahead for her, and she's live today in New York. Good morning to you.
[Jillian Parry, Miss Teen U.s.a:] Good morning. How are you?
[Hemmer:] I'm doing just fine, thank you very much, and congratulations as well.
[Parry:] Thank you.
[Hemmer:] In your family you're the third of four girls and you...
[Parry:] Yes.
[Hemmer:] ... had a very interesting thing growing up. You helped to raise seeing-eye dogs. How did that work?
[Parry:] Well, we started raising seeing-eye dogs when we saw an article in the newspaper. We were going to get a dog but we didn't know if we could handle the responsibility. So we thought if we raised the dog for a year and it didn't work out, we could give it back. But we fell in love with the program when we tried it, so we raised about 13 dogs...
[Hemmer:] Is that right?
[Parry:] ... and we're going to raise another one this year.
[Hemmer:] Oh, that's super, good deal. Over the next year I know you're going to be talking a lot and especially to the young kids. What's going to be your message when you go to what's expected to be at least 100 schools over the next 12 months?
[Parry:] Well, the Miss Teen U.S.A.'s official cause is education and drug-prevention awareness. So I'll be working closely with the D.A.R.E. program, speaking to classrooms around the country.
[Hemmer:] And how old are you?
[Parry:] I'm 18.
[Hemmer:] You're 18. Headed for college next year, right?
[Parry:] Yes, I am. I'm a freshman at Penn State this year.
[Hemmer:] All right, good Penn State, OK. And what are you studying?
[Parry:] I'm majoring in biobehavioral health. It's biology, psychology and genetics all rolled into one.
[Hemmer:] What do you think can come out of this, Jillian now the fact that you've won and you're off and running?
[Parry:] Well, I'm looking forward to having a lot of fun but also doing a lot of hard work that will hopefully make a difference for everybody.
[Hemmer:] And what kind of example do you hope to set?
[Parry:] Definitely a positive role model who believes I believe in my cause a lot, so that's what's going to help me the most, because I believe in education, I believe in staying in school, and obviously I believe in staying away from drugs, and I really want to help.
[Hemmer:] All right. And you say you just entered this just for fun...
[Parry:] Yes
[Hemmer:] ... now you're the winner. That's great. Hey, enjoy your year, congratulations again.
[Parry:] Thank you. Thank you very much.
[Hemmer:] Jillian Parry, Miss Teen U.S.A., live in New York, thank you.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Now on
[Wolf Blitzer Reports:] deadly impact. The first photographs of the September 11th attack on the Pentagon. How much is enough for victims of September 11th? I'll ask Kenneth Feinberg of the government compensation fund why he's boosting the pay-out. Operation Anaconda: the aerial pounding goes on, despite high winds and swirling dust. And weather's bad boy is back, with drought and flooding in his bag of tricks. Should you be afraid of the forecast? I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. Topping our news alert: never- before-seen photos of a day Americans will never forget. Dramatic new pictures taken at the very moment a hijacked airliner slammed into the Pentagon, erupting into a huge ball of fire. These pictures, obtained by CNN, were taken by a security camera at the west side of the building. We will have more on this in a moment. U.S. these are new images coming into CNN only moments ago as well, of the war in Afghanistan. U.S. warplanes pounded al Qaeda and Taliban forces in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan earlier today. Officials say it was some of the heaviest bombing in Operation Anaconda. More troops and helicopter gunships are being rushed to the front lines as bad weather moves in. Much more on the fighting as well, in just a few minutes. And with no end in sight to the violence and killing in the Middle East, President Bush has just announced that he's sending his special envoy back to the troubled region. Mr. Bush says retired General Anthony Zinni's mission will be to try to help end the escalating violence. The move comes amid fresh attacks by both Israel and the Palestinians today. A videotape was released today of an American missionary couple held hostage for months in the jungles of the Philippines. Martin and Gracia Burnham were seized last year by a Muslim rebel group the United States says is linked to al Qaeda. In the tape, obtained by the Reuters news agency, Martin Burnham is seen reading a rebel statement.
[Martin Burnham, Hostage:] I, Martin Burnham, and my wife, Gracia, both U.S. citizens, were taken as captives on May 27, 2001 at the Dos Palmas beach resort, in Palawan, by the al-Hayda Khitol Islamia, or the Abu Sayyaf group.
[Blitzer:] More now on a new series of incredible pictures of the attack on the Pentagon in September. They were taken at the very second a hijacked American Airlines jet crashed into the building. Our military affairs correspondent, Jamie McIntyre, is over at the Pentagon, with the pictures as well as the story behind them Jamie.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Military Affairs Correspondent:] Well, Wolf, witnesses told me the day that this happened that the plane, the American Airlines plane flight 77, came in extremely low. But I'm not sure I realized how low it was until I saw these sequence of pictures that CNN obtained from a that were taken by a Pentagon security camera. The sequence shows the plane coming in so low, it can't be seen in the sky, and then erupting into a huge fireball on impact, just the way the witnesses described it to us. But it's hard to see, but if we can go back to the first frame, we might be able to take a look and see precisely where the plane is on the ground. Right in this area that has been circled it's difficult to see. But it's so close it looks like it's right on the ground, just a few feet off the ground. That's not inconsistent with some witnesses who told us that day that a car antenna had been snapped off, by the plane coming in so low. So, this sequence of pictures, again, taken from a security camera. The Pentagon had them. They were turned over to the FBI, but we have obtained them today. And they're the first time we've seen publicly what, up until now, had only been described by eyewitnesses. Now, the plane also came in at a kind of 45-degree angle. Much of it was reduced to just small fragments by the force of the impact. There were only a few large pieces of wreckage that could be seen outside the Pentagon the day this took place. And again, just to remind people, there were 189 people killed. That was 125 on the ground at the Pentagon. There were 64 people on the plane, including the crew and the five hijackers Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Jamie, you were at the Pentagon that day on September 11th. What time did you get there? Did you see any of this yourself?
[Mcintyre:] I didn't. My first realization that this had taken place was when I actually saw it on CNN. My producer, Chris Plant, had just arrived at the Pentagon, moments after this had happened, and was filing by cell phone. And I looked up on our own monitor as I was making calls about the World Trade Center and saw the report that something had hit the Pentagon. It was at that point I ran out to check for myself. I didn't see it, I didn't feel it.
[Blitzer:] Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon, thanks for getting those pictures. Appreciate it very much, as do our viewers. And let's turn now to the war in Afghanistan the war that resulted as a result of those September 11th attacks. U.S. warplanes today carried out some of the heaviest airstrikes in Operation Anaconda, the allied offensive against al Qaeda and Taliban forces, in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan. CNN's Martin Savidge is near the front lines and he has the latest developments.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Wolf, U.S. and coalition forces may have a new enemy on the horizon, and it has nothing to do with al Qaeda or Taliban forces. It is the weather. It is turning bad, and turning bad in a hurry. Here in the Bagram area, it is expected to bring freezing rain, the possibility of even snow and high winds. In the upper elevations, for Operation Anaconda, where it's being waged in eastern Afghanistan, that is going to mean snow. They already have snow on the ground. That you seen. More snow is going to make it difficult not only for the troops that are maneuvering on the ground, but especially for any sort of air reinforcement. And all of this operation is being reinforced from the air, whether it be supplies, new troops coming in. And then there is the CAS, the close air support, that has been a vital backbone of the military operations, and supporting those soldiers that are on the ground. The bad weather expected to last about 36 hours perhaps up to three days. Meanwhile, Operation Anaconda did push forward, according to military officials here. They say that in the last 24 hours, coalition forces have killed another 100 Taliban or al Qaeda fighters. They also say that on their side there have been no casualties, unless you except a sprained ankle and several cases of altitude illness. They also claim that they have captured a number of al Qaeda and Taliban fighters. They won't say exactly how many, or whether they surrendered. But they will say that they are under interrogation. Keep in mind, they have said that over the past few days since this operation began, several hundred Taliban and al Qaeda fighters have been killed. Meanwhile, they have upped the number of fighters they believe that they were originally up against, now saying it was over 1,000 Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Martin Savidge, thank you very much. On the scene in Afghanistan. More assessment of the war at 7:00 p.m. Eastern tonight in the "CNN WAR ROOM." Our focus: Can al Qaeda regroup in Afghanistan and attack U.S. forces? Please join me then. And you can participate by going to my Web page, cnn.comwolf. Click on "send questions." I'll try to ask those questions to our panel. For the first time in a year, Iraq held talks with the United Nations today on the possible resumption of weapons inspections. The move comes as the Bush administration continues to debate whether Iraq should be the next target in the war on terror. Our senior U.N. correspondent, Richard Roth, is covering the talks.
[Richard Roth, Cnn Correspondent:] Iraq and the United Nations aren't often on the same page, even when it comes to the location of an arriving foreign minister. Choosing a different entrance than some expected, Naji Sabri, Iraq's foreign minister, made his way to the first face-to-face meeting between Iraq and the U.N. Secretary-General in more than a year. Sabri is relatively new in the job, but his prior media experience in Baghdad produced a more cordial photo opportunity to the world than other traditional tense U.N. encounters. During their talks, the U.N. leader had only one priority
[Kofi Annan, U.n. Secretary-general:] We will be pressing for the return of the inspectors.
[Roth:] And U.N. officials said the Iraqi delegation focused on disarmament with Secretary Annan. Baghdad has said it wanted to talk, after being branded part of an axis of evil by President Bush.
[Unidentified Male:] I think these talks with the secretary- general are serious. And they're serious because they don't really have any place else to go.
[Roth:] As an indication both sides were ready to get down to arms business, for the first time, the U.N.'s chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, was at the table. And so was Hussam Amin, a senior Iraqi disarmament expert. For more than three years, weapons inspectors have been unable to probe whether Iraq might be rebuilding a program of weapons of mass destruction. After the morning session, some optimistic words.
[Naji Sabri, Iraqi Foreign Minister:] We started our discussions with the secretary-general within a positive and constructive atmosphere.
[Annan:] So far, so good.
[Roth:] Many U.N. diplomats and analysts question Iraq's sudden interest in talking with the U.N. again. In Washington, the U.S. secretary of state.
[Colin Powell, Secretary Of State:] They say, "trust us." No, we're not going to trust them. They agreed to have inspectors come and verify this. They agreed to this 10 years ago.
[Roth:] The secretary-general said he prefers a diplomatic solution instead of widening the conflict in Iraq.
[Blitzer:] Richard Roth, covering the situation involving Iraq at the United Nations, which he does so well. Thanks for joining us. A new shift in U.S. policy toward the Middle East, announced just a short while ago by President Bush. After months of watching the violence escalate day by day, the president said he's sending his envoy, Anthony Zinni, back to the region in a new bid to try to stop the fighting between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Here's what the president had to say.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] I'm deeply concerned about the tragic loss of life and escalating violence in the Middle East. This is a matter of great interest to the United States and all who want peace in the region and the world.
[Blitzer:] Earlier today, Israeli forces took aim at an office where Yasser Arafat had been using just moments before it was hit. Meanwhile, in the West Bank, a Palestinian suicide bomber blew himself up near a Jewish settlement. Our Jerusalem bureau chief, Mike Hanna, has been tracking the violence. He filed this report just a short while ago.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Jerusalem Bureau Chief:] This massive Israeli offensive is continuing from dusk till dawn and in between, using F-16 fighter aircraft, combat helicopters, tanks. The government of Ariel Sharon is making good his words that he will hit the Palestinians hard. In the course of the day, Israeli forces have struck at a number of Palestinian targets, both in the West Bank and in Gaza. In the West Bank city of Tulkarem, the Israeli forces there have reoccupied the city, conducting house-to-house searches. Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat says that the Palestinians will not stop what they want to achieve, and that is an independent Palestinian state. This, despite the fact that a missile came very close to Yasser Arafat's offices in the West Bank city of Ramallah. This, while he was meeting an envoy from the European Union. Palestinian attacks too, continue against Israeli targets. In the West Bank settlement of Ario, a Palestinian suicide bomber killed himself and injured nine Israelis. And another would-be bomber was detained before he could detonate the explosives he was carrying in a Jerusalem neighborhood. Palestinians remain defiant. They say they will continue their attacks against Israeli targets, while the Israeli attacks themselves continue. Voices from the outside, from the European Union, from the United Nations, from the U.S., for both sides to tamper down this conflict. But neither side apparently, prepared to hear. Mike Hannah, CNN, Jerusalem.
[Blitzer:] And joining now us with their insight on the crisis in the Middle East, Ken Adelman. He's the host of Defensecentral.com, former director of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. And former U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Richard Murphy, also a former ambassador to Syria, assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs. Thanks to both of you for joining us. Ken Adelman, first to you. This new, more even-handed approach we're seeing the past couple days from the Bush administration toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict Secretary of State Colin Powell coming down hard on Ariel Sharon, the prime minister of Israel, in addition to Yasser Arafat. Now sending the envoy, Anthony Zinni, back to the region, even though Yasser Arafat, presumably, has not done what the administration earlier wanted what do you make of it?
[Ken Adelman, Fmr. Dir. U.s. Arms Control And Disarmament:] Well, I generally support the Bush administration, as you know. But I don't understand what bashing Sharon at this point would really do. What would they want Sharon to do? Sharon cannot stand there and watch his country being attacked any more than we can stand there and watch our country being attacked, without doing something. Israel lives in a sea of hatred, hostility and trouble, that are fostered by the Arab countries all around them. And they continue even our friends, the Egyptians and the Saudis, our so-called friends continue to fuel that hate. So they really hold up as heroes these martyrs, who aren't martyrs at all. They are suicidal maniacs.
[Blitzer:] Ambassador Murphy, what's your take on what the administration is now doing?
[Richard Murphy, Council On For. Relations:] It's a wise decision to send Zinni back. If he gets back in the next few days, it would be about the same time as the vice president arrives in the region. And the Arab interlocutors he'll be talking to, presumably about Iraq, and what we're going to do about Iraq are going to come right back at him. What are you going to do about the Arab-Israeli situation? What are you doing to tamp down the fighting between the Israelis and the Palestinians? So, it's a wise, tactical decision.
[Blitzer:] Speaking of Iraq, you know, there's a big debate going on inside the government, outside the government should the U.S. target Saddam Hussein? Richard Pearl, the former assistant secretary of defense, quoted in the new issue of "The New Yorker," as saying, "The moment Saddam Hussein is challenged effectively, he's history." Do you agree with that?
[Murphy:] I just don't know. And I'd be surprised if anyone knows that. That's an assumption which simply can't be made at this point in time.
[Blitzer:] Well, Ken Adelman has made an assumption that that's true, because I've seen the articles you've written.
[Adelman:] Right. And it's quite clear that what we saw in 1991, at the Gulf War, is that the Iraqi soldiers are not willing to die for Saddam Hussein. And that was before the Iraqis got much weaker. We got so much stronger, and we announced that we're playing for keeps. So, I don't see the kind of fighting that we didn't see, even in the Gulf War, in the first place.
[Blitzer:] But Ambassador Murphy, can the U.S. effectively fight on two fronts in Afghanistan, as well as Iraq not only militarily, but diplomatically, and keep that coalition together?
[Murphy:] Militarily, I think we're posing this at a time when it's not clear how long it's going to take us with al Qaeda. So it may well be that this is a sequential involvement. First you finish off al Qaeda, then you think seriously about Baghdad. But, that said, we are presumably looking for a way to foster opposition inside Iraq, to build up the opposition that's outside Iraq, or up in Kurdistan. And both those jobs are going to take some time to accomplish. So it's not a matter of fighting a two-front war.
[Blitzer:] It's not going to be easy, also, logistically. We'll put up a map and show our viewers the region that we're talking about. There's the war going on in Afghanistan, over here. But in Iraq, limited air facilities that might be available. Saudi Arabia may or may not, Kuwait may or may not. Turkey may, or may not, be anxious to help the United States in this kind of a war.
[Adelman:] Well, I would say No. 1, that the United States has 1.4 million men under arms, OK?
[Blitzer:] And women, too.
[Adelman:] And women, under arms, but the men in combat. We have a gigantic military force. We are using, at the most, 1,000 in Afghanistan right now. We have lots more. No. 2, I do not think we're going to need an enormous force to go and eliminate Saddam Hussein. I don't think the Iraqis like Saddam Hussein any more than we like him. No. 3...
[Blitzer:] Some have suggested, Ambassador Murphy, 200,000 U.S. troops for a full-scale frontal invasion.
[Murphy:] What I know is in '91, we never encountered the really trained Iraqi forces. They were kept back to defend the regime.
[Blitzer:] The so-called Republican Guard.
[Murphy:] Still in existence. How effective they'd be, I don't know. But they know they're doomed along with Saddam Hussein, so I don't expect them to just raise the white flag and walk away, as some of the al Qaeda have done.
[Adelman:] But Ambassador Murphy makes a very good point. They are not necessarily doomed, unless they fight for this man. So, if you announce right ahead, we are playing for keeps this time. If you want to lose your life to fight for Saddam Hussein, go right ahead. But if you don't, you can surrender, just like the armed forces of Iraq surrendered in the Gulf War.
[Blitzer:] We have to leave it, unfortunately, right there. Ken Adelman, Richard Murphy, always good to have both of you on the program. Thank you very much. And our Web question of the day is this: can the United States military conduct a war in Afghanistan and a war in Iraq at the same time? You can vote. Go to cnn.comwolf. While you're there, let me know what you're thinking. There's a "click here" icon on the left side of my Web page. Send me your comments, and I'll read some of them on the air each day. Also, that's where you can read my daily on-line columnwolf. He stayed silent after a legal loss. Now a victim sodomized by a policeman speaks out.
[Abner Louima, Victim Of Nypd:] I had hoped, after all these years, I would have been able to go on with my life.
[Blitzer:] Learn why Abner Louima's life is on hold once again. And later, the man with surprising news for September 11th victims. Learn about it when Ken Feinberg joins me here, live. An unprecedented transplant: will it lead to barren women having babies? And keep an eye on the long-term forecast. El Nino's back. First, the news quiz. Who gave El Nino its name? Scientists at the National Weather Service? Peruvian fishermen, Christopher Columbus or the explorer Balboa? The answer, coming up.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] There is an old Scottish proverb that says, twelve highlanders and a bagpipe make a rebellion. But if that's the case, then what you suppose 10,000 bagpipes would make? Here CNN's Jennifer Eccleston, who files this report from Edinburgh, Scotland.
[Jennifer Eccleston, Cnn Correspondent:] Huffing and puffing and blowing themselves into the record books, a small army of kilted crusaders armed with the pipes and drums besiege Scotland's spired capital, Edinburgh.
[Magnus Orr, Parade Organizer:] The Scottish bagpipe is one of these great world icons. And there so many Scots that live around the world that, you know, have just come back just to take part of in this big event.
[Eccleston:] Some 10,000 took part in the big event, pipers and drummers from these shores and beyond, not all of them Scots, but all enthusiast, some from as far away as Canada, Australia and the United States, 22 countries in all. In all shapes, sizes and stages of life, they paraded their piping prowess in this, the world biggest ever pipe-and-drum parade. [on camera]: The festival here in Edinburgh isn't just about breaking a word record; it also helping to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Mary Curie Cancer Charity. [voice-over]: Britain's Prince Charles, among other celebrities here, trumpeting the cause. But the stars of the day are the pipers themselves, and the culture behind the spats, the sporin, and yes, those kilts.
[Orr:] It's, you know, wearing the kilt and playing the bagpipes, it's part of your identity.
[Eccleston:] And that to the delight of locals and tourists alike.
[Unidentified Female:] There's something for everyone, for the people that are not from Scotland.
[Unidentified Male:] To finally get here, and to be here and to be in this environment is really awesome. Brilliant. It's great. Absolutely wonderful. Great day.
[Eccleston:] In so many songs, stories and poems and festivals like this one today, the Scots celebrate their beloved pipe. With that, they have kept the instrument alive at home and across the globe. Jennifer Eccleston, CNN, Edinburgh, Scotland.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] High temperatures and gusting winds are making it really tough for Australian firefighters trying to protect the capital Sydney. Stephanie Kennedy has the latest on the fires ravaging that region.
[Stephanie Kennedy, Cnn Correspondent:] The feared southerly winds finally kicked in late this afternoon. Seventy kilometers per hour, driving the front towards homes. Enormous flames swept through the Blue Mountains National Park, Springwood in its path. Fire officers on some trails had no choice but to pull back. Neighbors banded together to save this house in Bee Farm Road, using whatever they could lay their hands on.
[Unidentified Female:] It's just a spark off this. You know, people are in danger. It's still going down there, look. Yes, I know. I tried getting down there but I nearly died in the smoke.
[Kennedy:] Then the water bombers save the day. Fire officers had been expecting the worst.
[Unidentified Male:] There is a massive fire moving towards them. Back burning has now been completed to almost Wentworth Falls, which alone is a Herculean achievement.
[Kennedy:] Residents spent another day nervously waiting. Long- term residents say this is the worst fire they've seen in more than 20 years.
[Unidentified Female:] We're ready to go if we should have to go and make a move. We don't really want to. We want to save our homes. It's all we've got and all our treasures and possessions are here.
[Kennedy:] Late yesterday, it was the turn of hundreds of Kurrajongs residents to evacuate.
[Unidentified Male:] The two fires are converging, I think. That's the worry.
[Kennedy:] Back burning overnight saved their homes, but fire chiefs concede it will be days before these fires are extinguished.
[Chen:] There you go. And that was Stephanie Kennedy reporting for CNN from the outskirts of Sydney.

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Anchor:] Part of the war on terrorism like any other war involves propaganda, information. Among other things, the Bush Administration is considering using the Voice of America to broadcast messages to the Afghan people. More on that from Donna Kelley in Atlanta. Donna, good afternoon.
[Donna Kelley, Cnn Correspondent:] Aaron good afternoon to you, and in this current crisis the U.S. may be using some old tricks to garner new objectives. The Bush Administration is preparing to launch a possible media campaign in an attempt to convince the Afghan people that U.S. military action will be targeting Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, not the innocent people of Afghanistan. Psychological warfare is when one side uses brains instead of bullets to affect the moral of troops and citizens with an intended outcome. You may have heard of the infamous Tokyo Rose radio propaganda of World War II. This sultry, Japanese radio propagandist taunted our troops in the Pacific by mixing the era's most popular tunes, while telling the American troops they'd lose the war, and their wives back home. In Afghanistan, it's really not clear what role psy ops, or psychological operations, could play. Some tactics, like air dropping leaflets, would clearly have limited value in a country with a 29% literacy rate. Elsewhere, some psychological operations have a mixed reputation at best. You may remember in 1989, when U.S. troops laid siege to capture Panamanian general Manuel Noriega. One of their weapons was American soldiers showing reporters a portrait of Hitler hanging in dictator Noriega's home. A U.S. army colonel later admitted psychological warfare experts had planted the fuhrer's portrait and a voodoo altar to be shown on TV. During the Gulf War, an Iraqi government propaganda broadcaster nicknamed "Baghdad Betty" warned American soldiers that Bart Simpson that cartoon character of course is making love to your wife. The use of underage, illustrated cartoon characters did not work and clearly caused no anxiety within the ranks of American troops. Joining us now from Little Rock, Arkansas is General Wesley Clark, He is a CNN military analyst and he is the former NATO Supreme Commander in Kosovo. General Clark, nice to see you again. GEN. WESLEY CLARK
[Fmr. Supreme Nato Commander:] Nice to see you too, Donna.
[Kelley:] Let's talk about these operations, what do you think could work in this situation? If the literacy rate is low, leaflets may not be effective.
[Clark:] Well they may not be. You have to find some way to reach the target audience if the target audience is the Afghan people, then there are still radios in Afghanistan. You have to be able to get on that radio frequency. You have to override whatever broadcasts are there, I guess. And you have to put out information that will influence them. Normally we find the best influence is the truth, and it is not only the easiest to portray, but it is also the most convincing. Particularly in a place that is starved for news as Afghanistan must be today.
[Kelley:] A couple of points that we found, speaking of broadcast, General, let's take a look at those, the U.S. message is going to try to emphasize over the next couple of weeks, as they try to intensify the message on radio and television. Any U.S. action against terrorism is not an attack against Islam or Muslims. The brand of Islam practiced by Osama Bin Laden and his followers is an aberration from mainstream Islam. The United States is one of the biggest aid donors to Afghanistan. And the United States understands that the greatest majority of Afghan people are not harboring Bin Laden. Effective, how do you get that across then?
[Clark:] I think they are very important messages. It depends on, as I said what the target audience can say. One of the most important ways to get this across in a country like Afghanistan is word of mouth. And if this message, these four messages, these themes get picked up by the mullahs in Pakistan and passed back into Afghanistan, word of mouth, that's probably as effective as we can get. They can be broadcast by radio, dropped by leaflets, they could be said by other nations on their own short wave radio broadcasts from their own home. It would be great to have Islamic nations broadcasting the fact that they supported what the American activities were. And that they did not view American actions as actions directed against Islam. So it will be variety of voices, a variety of means against the messages that are targeted there to go to the Afghan people. But it is very important to reinforce these messages from as many different venues as possible. And then see you got to see what the results will be..
[Kelley:] And sometimes they've even used pictures on leaflets to try and help, and certainly in their language. Quickly, General if you can, tell us while you are trying to get messages across, in this case, what about that might be used against U.S. troops. What's the training to go against that, to counter Psy ops?
[Clark:] Well, the messages coming against the U.S. troops will be difficult for anybody there in Afghanistan to project, because they didn't know where the troops are or what they are receiving. But they would probably be sending message against the American people at home. It would be to make us doubt the urgency of the cause or the rightness of it, or portray the wrongs that supposedly have been done to Islam in a way try to try to change the terms of the conflict. So that it would appear we weren't going after terrorists but that we were instead trying to go after a group of people for their religious beliefs..
[Kelley:] General Wesley Clark, our CNN military analyst, not to have you with us. Thank you very much. Aaron, back to you.
[Brown:] Donna, thank you, General thank you, too. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Announcer:] Live from Washington, this is INSIDE POLITICS with Judy Woodruff.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] The truth is, energy production and environmental protection are not competing priorities.
[Announcer:] President Bush tries to put an eco-friendly spin on his newly unveiled energy plan. But, opponents still are piling on, with a load of coal, and a load of criticism.
[Rep. Richard Gephardt , Minority Leader:] This is an energy report that offers no short-term relief to these folks on the West coast who need relief now.
[Announcer:] We'll tell you how the interests of two big states are colliding over power. Plus: a nuclear surprise in the Bush energy plan, and the danger it may pose.
[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Thanks for joining us. President Bush began today to promote his new energy policy, in much the same way as he pitched his tax cut: with appeals to Americans outside the Washington beltway. But, this plan may prove to be a far tougher sell, in a climate where consumers and Democrats are saying, what can you do for us right now? So, as our senior White House correspondent John King explains, Mr. Bush's speech in Minnesota often seemed aimed at countering his critics.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] It was a glimpse, in the president's words, into the energy future and a look at careful politics of selling a controversial plan. First, make the case short-term energy concerns or proof of a long-term crisis.
[Bush:] If we fail to act, this great country could face a darker future. A future that is unfortunately being previewed in rising prices at the gas pump and rolling blackouts in the great state of California.
[King:] Closed with an effort to disarm the many critics.
[Bush:] The truth is: energy production and environmental protection are not competing priorities.
[King:] In the middle of the president's speech and 163-page report, proposal after controversial proposal. An easing of government regulations to encourage new coal and nuclear power plants. New government powers to clear the way for thousands for gas pipelines and electricity transmission lines. New oil and gas exploration in Alaska and other federal lands, now off limits because of environmental concerns. Outside the vice president's house, one of many protests as administration critics made their case that coal is dirty; nuclear power dangerous and drilling in pristine wild reserves, destructive.
[Dan Becker, Sierra Club:] The president is trying to misrepresent his plan; he's trying to spread a thin veil of energy efficiency to hide a cesspool of polluter giveaways.
[King:] The president's backdrop was a model of energy efficiency. A combined heat and power plant in St. Paul, Minnesota that uses a mix of coal, natural gas, oil, and wood chips to provide low-cost heating, cooling, and hot water. But such facilities are rare, and that fit with the president's message. He says the country has no choice but to rely on fossil fuels for now, while investing in technology like this to change the future. To that end, the administration proposes: Four billion dollars in tax credits to purchase energy-efficient vehicles. Expanded tax incentives for producing electricity from alternative sources like methane gas. Using royalties from Arctic drilling to finance tax credits for wind and solar power projects. And more money to help low-income Americans insulate their homes and deal with high energy costs. But the president noted that California is a leader in the conservation movement, and said its rolling blackouts are vivid proof that efficiency alone won't work. And the fight now moves to the Congress, where the president has to deal not only with critics who don't like what's in this long-term plan, but also with many Republican allies with are already grumbling the president hasn't done enough to deal with big country's immediate energy concerns Judy.
[Woodruff:] John, clearly more of an emphasis on conservation than we expected after listening to Vice President Cheney a couple of weeks ago. Why?
[King:] Well, the administration says the proposals would have been in there all along, but the administration had hoped for was a bit more political coup, if you will. They had hoped that those proposals, and mostly the tax incentives about $6.3 billion over ten years would get more headlines today and be a bit of surprise. Many of them, however, were leaked over the past week to 10 days to deal with the criticism of that speech, as you mentioned; that speech in Toronto when Vice President Cheney made clear in his view, conservation was only a very small part of a long-term energy policy.
[Woodruff:] All right, John King at the White House. For every one of the 105 recommendations in the Bush-Cheney energy plan, there seemed to be a myriad of critics, ready to step up to the microphone today. Our Jonathan Karl has more on the political reaction.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] The environmental group Greenpeace protested the White House's energy plan by dumping a truckload of coal on the vice president's doorstep.
[Andrea Durbin, Greenpeace, Usa:] This plan is a dirty solution. It provides dirty answers and it takes us backwards.
[Karl:] Across town, a coalition of more moderate environmental groups, including the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council, also vowed to defeat the plan, launching a 12-city advertising campaign. [Begin Video Clip, Television Ad]
[Unidentified Male:] Bush's big supporters clean up, while we're cleaned out.
[Karl:] The theme was echoed on Capitol Hill, where Democrats set up a war room and promised an all-out drive to defeat the central elements of Bush energy plan. Virtually every attack included a reminder of the administration's ties to the energy industry.
[Gephardt:] We think the president's plan makes the wrong choices for America and for the American people. It was crafted behind closed doors with a lot of input from energy executives.
[Rep. Brian Baird , Washington:] George bush, Dick Cheney, and their merry band of oil CEO's are Robin Hoods in reverse.
[Sen. Paul Wellstone , Minnesota:] I'm not a Senator for oil companies. He may be a president for oil companies. I'm a Senator from Minnesota.
[Karl:] Democratic strategists believe an energy crunch will hurt this president the way energy crisis in the 1970s hurt President Carter. But Republicans, who are by and large lining up in support of the Bush plan, say Democrats will suffer if they stand in the way.
[Sen. Frank Murkowski , Alaska:] If they vote against it, and you've got $3 a gallon gasoline, and their constituents are saying, oh, you didn't vote for any relief, well, we're going to hold you accountable.
[Karl:] Democrats declared some aspects of the Bush plan, including drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, dead on arrival, an assessment Republican leaders privately agree with. Democrats also continued to slam the president for doing nothing in the short-term about high gasoline prices. But they had little to offer in the way of immediate solutions besides investigating potential price gouging by oil companies.
[Sen. Tom Daschle , Minority Leader:] I think there has to be an investigation as to why the prices are high. We can't possibly solve a problem we don't understand. Why are prices going up as high as they are? Why are the oil companies making the profits they are?
[Karl:] The harsh rhetoric obscured significant areas of bipartisan agreement on issues ranging from the development of new electrical power lines and natural gas pipelines to tax credits for conservation,for the use of renewable energy Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, Jonathan Karl reporting from the Capitol, thanks. As Jonathan mentioned, former President Jimmy Carter knows a thing or two about paying a political price for energy problems. And today, he is joining other Democrats in criticizing the Bush energy strategy. In an op-ed piece in "The Washington Post, " Carter accuses Bush administration officials of distorting history to promote the oil industry. Carter writes: "No energy crisis exists now that equates in any way with those we faced in 1973 and 1979. World supplies are adequate and reasonably stable. And, Carter writes, quoting again, "Some officials are using misinformation and scare tactics to justify such environmental atrocities as drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge," end quote. Joining us now to answer questions about the Bush energy plan: the Secretary of the Interior, Gale Norton. Madame Secretary, thank you for being with us. And if you could first address what former President Carter said: drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, ANWAR, atrocity.
[Gale Norton, Interior Secretary:] That's one of the recommendations that we're putting forward at this time. It's something that, really, Congress has to decide whether to go forward with that. What the administration is doing is looking at the ways in which that might be done in an environmentally responsible way, so that we can allow Congress to determine if that's one of the ways in which they want to look. I think the key point is that this is the most likely place for us to find a large supply of oil for our long-term future, and I think we at least need to, in the current situation, seriously think about a place that has the largest probable site of oil anywhere in this country.
[Woodruff:] What about President Carter's statement that the energy situation today in no way equates with what was going on back in the '70s when you had OPEC and you had a war between Iran and Iraq and a much greater global disruption than what you have today?
[Norton:] There's certainly a high degree of concern today. We know that since 1998 the average U.S. family is spending 25 percent more on energy. We're seeing great concern about $3 a gallon gas in some parts of our country. We know that the prices for heating oil going up affect those who are at the lowest end of our economic ladder. And when we see the potential for the effect on jobs, even though we might have some dispute about how this ranks in comparison with 1973, I think our real concern is what we do today and what we do tomorrow.
[Woodruff:] And secretary, let me ask about another part of the plan. The energy report notes the value of drilling in the coastal regions off the shores of the United States. And what the president has done is, in effect, throw this to you and to the commerce secretary for a decision. Now, the governor of Florida, the president's brother has urged the administration, has urged your department not to renew drilling leases off the coast of Florida. Where is that headed?
[Norton:] Certainly, we see that off-shore production is a very important source of supply for us. And it's currently happening in the western gulf region, Gulf of Mexico, and the neighboring states there are generally very supportive of that and it's something that we do plan to continue because that's an important source for us. As we look at environmental concerns that are coming up through our study process for an area that is about 100 miles off the Florida coast, for the most part and some parts further than that. That area is one that that will continue to consult with the state of Florida as we make a decision later this year on whether to go forward with that.
[Woodruff:] But it sounds like you're leaning for toward doing it.
[Norton:] We're Looking at all options right now for energy. This is one that, frankly, was voted on by Congress to allow it to go forward. It was proposed by the prior administration, and so it's something that was already on the table and in progress when this administration came in.
[Woodruff:] Let me ask you about nuclear power. Now, among other things, this reports is proposing to double the number of nuclear reactors at power plants that are already licensed by the federal government. But, at this point, there is no place to store them. As you know, there's been a location at Yucca Mountain in Nevada for 15 years. The Democrats and Republicans have been arguing over that. How can you build more nuclear power plants if there is no agreement over where the waste goes?
[Norton:] Nuclear power is something that currently supplies 20 percent of our electricity in this country. I think that's something that most people really don't understand is how large of a supply we have already been utilizing and how much that is become a routine part of our electricity industry.
[Woodruff:] But I'm asking about the waste.
[Norton:] Yes, we do have waste as an issue that has to be tackled. It's something that we take seriously to tackle as a future issue and that's something that we will have to be a carefully thought out process over the coming years.
[Woodruff:] But,to say now this is something that should be done without resolving that is that I guess I'm asking is that somewhat misleading to suggest that it can be that building more nuclear plants can be a solution when know there is no place to put the waste?
[Norton:] We can look, I think, at expansions to places that are our current nuclear plants. And to look at those places at those sites where we are currently storing the waste. Obviously, that's not the ideal solution. We really do need to have a long-term solution to it. And it is something that that we have to have. But it's something that we also should not put off for the next 20 or 25 years. It's something that we ought to begin tackling now.
[Woodruff:] As secretary of the interior, you I know you were you heard what the vice president had to say a couple of weeks ago when he said conservation may be a good personal virtue, but it's not going to be a centerpiece of this plan. Today, the plan says, as I read it, it says the environment will be an important part I'm sorry, conservation will be an important part of our overall energy strategy. Which is it and was the vice president wrong or misleading when he said what he did?
[Norton:] Conservation is an important part of our strategy. It's not the only solution. We have to have both sides of it. We have to increase supply and reduce demand. Both of those have to happen. And it cannot be just one or the other. And that's why this report has been a comprehensive report looking at both sides. We want to be environmentally responsible and see that we're putting in place conservation measurings. We've already directed I've directed my department to conserve energy. The other agencies are following through on the president's directive to do that. We're looking at ways of using alternative technologies at using the real technological innovations that are available to us in this century. And to try to have that in service of both conservation and in service of finding sources of energy both of those are going to be areas that we will be expanding.
[Woodruff:] All right. well, Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton, we thank you very much joining us.
[Norton:] Thank you.
[Woodruff:] Appreciate it. And now we are joined by the by former Clinton administration Energy Secretary Bill Richardson. Bill Richardson, is the president moving in the right direction with this proposal?
[Bill Richardson, Former Energy Secretary:] The president is moving in the right direction in the area of more supply and more production. We do need more power plants, more natural gas pipelines. He's not moving in the supply direction in an environmentally sensitive way, where I believe that he needs to do more is in the area of energy efficiency and conservation. Two big elements were missing from this conservation plan: an emphasis on more fuel-efficient vehicles and restoring some air conditioning standards that were left in play by our administration which would reduce electricity by 30 percent by the year 2010. That means about 130 less power plants; nonetheless, it's a start. Judy, this is a very tough issue. I had to face it for two years. Hopefully, what will emerge after all the politics and the bickering and the priority debates will be a comprehensive plan that balances more production with conservation equally. Right now, the president's plan is too weighted toward production, not enough on environment and air quality and conservation.
[Woodruff:] Well, let me just ask you about a statement. The plan starts out flat out by saying America in the year 2001 faces the most serious energy shortage since the 1970s. Is that correct?
[Richardson:] No, I disagree. We have a lot of serious energy challenges. We have production problems. We have transmission generation facilities. We've got gasoline prices at a $1.70. A year ago they were $1.49. There is no question we've got some energy challenges, but it's because, Judy, in the last eight years our economy grew by 35 percent. Our energy demand grew by 15 percent. Those are the challenges we have. But to attack those challenges, you've got to have a combination policy of production and energy- efficiency conservation, equally supply and demand.
[Woodruff:] Well, when you say production needs to be you agree even as a Democrat that production needs to be a significant part of this. When you hear the Interior Secretary Gale Norton saying, as she did a moment ago, that the U.S. has to look at building more nuclear power plants. Is that the waste issue needs to be addressed, what's your reaction?
[Richardson:] I think nuclear power has to be debated and has to be part of the energy mix. But I would say that before we start talking about licensing new plants, we got to deal with the Yucca Mountain issue, which is: Where do we store the waste from the 50 states that has accumulated, that because of a number of reasons, has not been stored anywhere. I don't think the answer is interim storage. I think the answer is based on science. That determination should be based on science at the end of this calendar year. Whether Yucca Mountain in Nevada is ready to take this nuclear waste. There is some water problems. There is other environmental problems. But first, let's deal with the nuclear waste which is a serious problem, high-level waste.
[Woodruff:] But I understand their talking them to be talking about doubling the number of reactors at already licensed, not newly licensed, but already licensed nuclear facilities.
[Richardson:] Well, I would disagree with that. I think the first step has to be: deal with the existing nuclear waste, and then have a full debate on nuclear power. It does reduce greenhouse gas emissions more than other energy sources. Nonetheless, the public has to be comfortable with this. The nuclear energy industry has to convince the public of its safety, of its environment safeguards. That hasn't happened. But nuclear waste, dumping all the waste into a repository taking it from the 50 states is critical before we start talking about building new plants.
[Woodruff:] What about the question of, Bill Richardson of drilling offshore, whether it's Florida or other parts of the United States? You I believe you were here you heard me asking Secretary Norton about the president's recommendation that she, as the secretary of the interior and secretary of commerce, should take a hard look at this. Is this something that makes sense?
[Richardson:] Well, we did approve in the past interior department some of that off-shore drilling off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico and Florida. I think that's environmentally safe. There is off-shore oil in California and off the coast of Florida that I've hoped that the Bush administration doesn't change. I think that would be a catastrophe. We do need to drill for more oil and gas and petroleum in the lower 48 and Rocky Mountain states. But let's do in an environmentally sensitive way. I'm also a little concerned, Judy, about an imminent domain issue, building more power plants in the West for an administration that cares about property rights, I'm concerned that yes, we need to build more power plants, but we have got to bring local communities in the states as part of the debate.
[Woodruff:] When they point out that not a single oil refinery has been built in a generation, they talk about natural gas distribution hindered by an aging and inadequate network of pipelines, aren't they really pointing a finger at the administration you served in for the last eight years?
[Richardson:] Well, yeah. They're blaming everybody else. That's not going to be helpful. There hasn't been a refinery built in this country since 1982, when Valero energy did it in Corpus Christie. So, this has been an endemic problem. I think what has to happen now, Judy, is the energy companies that are doing well and I want them to do well should engage more of their research into exploration, into building more refineries. We need them. But let's do this in an environmentally sensitive way. We made a lot of positive strides on air quality. Let's not banish all those good laws aside. But we do need to drill more. We do need more production, more supply, but let's have equally conservation. And let's engage OPEC too. The Bush administration is not playing this game. They should.
[Woodruff:] All right. Bill Richardson, Energy secretary under President Clinton. Thank you very much; appreciate it. Well, does the president's energy plan go far enough? Will it help ease prices at the pump this summer? Representatives Billy Tauzin and Robert Wexler square off in the "CROSSFIRE" at 7:30 p.m. Eastern. And later tonight, a CNN special on the energy crunch, including a report on whether grassroots conservation makes a significant difference. That's at 10:00 p.m. Eastern. The president's energy plan was of special interest to people on the West Coast, and the details fell short in the eyes of some. Straight ahead...
[Gov. Gray Davis , California:] I fault the president for not providing California with any immediate relief. California is the only state in America that faced blackouts and astronomical electricity prices.
[Woodruff:] California's governor delivered his response to the White House plan and shared a few suggests for improvement. Also ahead...
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] California has two Democratic senators and a Democratic governor. Texas has two Republican senators and a Republican governor. What's driving the two great Sun Belt states apart?
[Woodruff:] Bill Schneider on how two states that appear so similar can be so different. And later: a second chance for nuclear power. The once-maligned energy source gets new respect from the White House.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] U.S. and Afghan troops declare Operation Anaconda a success. The coalition forces say they have seized control of the Shah-e-Kot valley. They are now on the hunt for enemy forces trying to melt back into the mountainside. Our Nic Robertson is in Gardez, with Shah-e-Kot valley, with the lay of the land. Nic, hello.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] Daryn, we've just returned from Shah-e-Kot. What we found there was a large village area filled with mud-built compounds and houses, which have been extensively destroyed by an air assault, by the bombing of the last few days. Also, we saw a few bodies of dead Al Qaeda and Taliban in their fighting defensive positions on the outskirts of the village. When we were there, U.S. and Afghan forces were there. Afghan forces entering the village overnight. And in the early hours of the morning, they came from the north in one offensive, and from the south in the other direction, meeting in the middle, teaming up along the way with the U.S. special forces. Now what the commanders there told us was and what they have been telling us, was that in the last six days, there has been little accurate or sustained fire coming from that village area. And in their the offensive today, we saw little ground action, if you will, little evidence that the had really been a heavy fight on the ground. What they did tell us was that they surrounded the village from the mountains, and coming up from the plains of the site of the valley, the valley of the village, and as they move in on the village they believe that some Taliban and Al Qaeda escaped into the mountains, but little evidence, Daryn, there had been heavy fight on the ground or very many dead Al Qaeda or Taliban there to see.
[Kagan:] Nic, what not efforts to go into the caves, the caves that were a big benefit for Taliban and Al Qaeda for fighting? But as I understand, there are booby-traps with land mines and other explosives.
[Robertson:] Well, certainly talking with the commander of the U.S. special forces, he says his next mission was to regroup, resupply the troops up there on the mountain site and then scour the area around Shah-e-Kot Valley for these caves in portions, where Taliban and Al Qaeda might be hiding. Throughout the time, we were in the village and valley of Shah-e- Kot, helicopters were cris-crossing the area, looking for any Taliban and Al Qaeda who may have been hiding, and high on the mountain ridge line towards the east, which is one of the directions the Taliban and Al Qaeda may have fled in, were Canadian forces and also U.S. troops maintaining positions there, trying to stop Taliban and Al Qaeda moving out towards the east, and going further east around the area of the town of Khowst, which is between Shah-e-Kot Valley and Pakistan. Security, we are told, has been stepped up there in that area in an effort to try and stop those Al Qaeda and Taliban elements reaching Pakistan. So what is happening now is the area is being scoured, and security on the periphery of the Shah-e-Kot Valley is being stepped up.
[Kagan:] As you mentioned, all these the areas, Nic, I think people might have an image of one battlefield, but really Operation Anaconda is spread over an area that is 60 square miles.
[Robertson:] It's been spread over a massive area. It's focused very much on the area and the village of Shah-e-Khot, because is was that village it is believed that Taliban and Al Qaeda had their strong hold with the caves and camps dispersed around the area. In the early days of the operation, Afghans with U.S. special forces tried to enter the area from the south and from the north and northwest. They also on the eastern and western flanks of the operation had blocking forces to try and stop the Taliban and Al Qaeda from getting out that way. An Afghan commander we talked to today said what they had done on this offensive was to encircle the village on the valley area and then move in. But he did say that some Taliban and Al Qaeda have managed to escaped. These mountains, range of the villages, at about 8,500 feet. The mountains go way, way up, to about 1,200 feet. And for some of the elements who are familiar with that area, because they would have been some of them, familiar with the Mujahedeen caves that were built there. There are many ways in those mountains for people familiar with the mountains to egress out of the area and escape, and that appears to be what some of those elements who've been in that village have done.
[Kagan:] Nic Robertson in Gardez, Afghanistan. Nic, thank you very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com Success

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] French Prime Minister Lionel Jospin is promising help to farmers, hit hard by the scare over Mad Cow Disease. He says France may have to handle the crises on its own, if the European Union does not grant direct aid to these farmers. Finding a cure has also been a major concern among European countries; some researchers in Slovenia say their work could bring revolutionary progress in diagnosing and treating the disease. TV Slovenia has more.
[Viko Luskovec, Tv Slovenia Correspondent:] Diagnosing the Mad Cow Disease with animals and humans is very time- consuming. Reliable tests require demanding an extensive laboratory checks and could be done after death. Scientists are there for making every effort to find better tests for diagnosing this disease, since the available methods do not allow for fast and early detention. In Slovenia, special mono-clone antibodies have been developed, which may represent a new revolution in the field.
[Dr. Vladka Eurin Serbec, Slovene Institute For Blood Transfusion:] The advantages of this discovery are particular in the fact that our antibodies allow the introduction of the fast, simple and low-cost test for determining prior based diseases with animals and humans.
[Luskovec:] The main problem of current tests is that they can hardly differ between healthy and infected. The Slovene mono-clone anti-bodies recognize and infect them with a relatively great precision. By using this anti-bodies, the test itself takes less than two hours, while existing tests require two days; their practical value can become even greater.
[Serbec:] Our plans for the future include the development of tests which could be used during the lifetime of an individual. This means that the test could be used for a routine sifting method with animals and later with humans.
[Luskovec:] A diagnostic test based on highly specific monoclone anti-bodies could begin a new chapter in this field. Scientists are looking for tests which could help determine diseases during the lifetime of individuals. That means that such a disease could be diagnosed, based on blood or tissue samples. However, the main goal to develop an appropriate cure still seems to be far away. This report was prepared by Viko Luskovec for TV Slovenia for CNN World Report.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Experimental gene therapy programs are under scrutiny after the Food and Drug Administration shut down all such studies at a major university. One patient died while taking part in a study of a liver disorder. CNN medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen spoke with other participants in that study who hope this and other genetic experiments will continue.
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Eighteen-year-old Jesse Gelsinger died last fall after receiving an experimental treatment called gene therapy. His doctors had hoped the treatment would cure his disorder. Four months later, the Food and Drug Administration shut down the experiment and all gene therapy trials at the University of Pennsylvania, and that makes Tish Simon mad. She has the same disease, called OTC deficiency, for which there is no disease.
[Tish Simon, Gene Therapy Trial Participant:] The people who live with this disease on a daily basis have nothing to hope for. This was the hope, and they're taking it away.
[Cohen:] In gene therapy, researchers actually replace the gene that's causing the disease. People with OTC deficiency have a faulty gene that makes ammonia build up in the body, often leading to brain damage and death. The FDA cited several reason for halting the experiments, including the researchers failed the notify the FDA in a timely fashion about the deaths of two monkeys in the study and about some side effects in humans. Janie Sheedy, another participant in the experiment, also says the trials should continue. Her four sons all had the defective gene, all died before they were three days old.
[Janie Sheedy, Gene Therapy Trial Participant:] I'd do it again in a heartbeat. It was they took such good care of me there.
[Cohen:] She doesn't blame the doctors.
[Sheedy:] I don't think that they could have in any way predicted what happened to Jesse Gelsinger, and I think it was a complete shock and a pretty big devastation to them.
[Cohen:] At the Senate hearing, today, Jesse Gelsinger's father says he feels the researchers acted irresponsibly, adding that before his son entered the study researchers down-played possible risks.
[Paul Gelsinger, Jesse Gelsinger's Father:] When lives are at stake, when my son's life was at stake, money and fame should take a back seat. The concern should not be on getting to the finish line first but making sure no unnecessary risks are taken, no lives filled with potential and promise are lost forever, no more fathers lose their sons.
[Cohen:] Also at the hearing, an official from the National Institutes of Health said that before Gelsinger's death, researchers doing studies similar to the one that the University of Pennsylvania reported that there had been 39 adverse events, in layman's terms, 39 events where something went wrong with patients. But then after Gelsinger's death, researchers said there had in fact been 691 adverse events. The NIH spokeswoman said that's a clear violation of the rules and her agency will be doing an investigation Natalie.
[Allen:] Elizabeth Cohen in Washington. Thanks, Elizabeth.

[Cafferty:] The Andrea Yates murder trial begins the morning in Houston, Texas. The question is, how do you go about convincing a jury that a mother didn't know right from wrong when she methodically drowned all five of her young children. Attorney Dick DeGuerin successfully defended a woman accused of killing two of her seven kids, and he joins us now from Houston to talk about the possible strategy on the part of Andrea Yates defense lawyers in this upcoming trial. Mr. DeGuerin, nice to have you with us.
[Dick Deguerin, Defense Attorney:] Thanks, good morning.
[Cafferty:] From a legal point of view, severe case of postpartum depression, severe enough to justify the murders of five children. Is that a long shot in the courtroom for her lawyers?
[Deguerin:] I don't think the lawyers should concentrate only on postpartum depression. That's only a very small part of the picture. This women had a long history of descent into insanity, and what they have got to do, what the lawyers have to do, is portray, through facts, through people around her, through the medical records, what happened to her.
[Cafferty:] What is it in her background, in your opinion, that might be strong enough to overcome the impact on the jury of the deaths of five innocent children?
[Deguerin:] Well, first, you have to understand that most people would say right off the bat that this women must have been crazy to kill her children. So, they have got a leg up on that. It's going to get into a battle of the experts, there are paid experts on both sides, and what the defense has to do is portray a woman that, not only because of her medical condition, but also because of her circumstances, did not know that her conduct was wrong, by showing that she was delusional, by explaining what delusions were what they are, and how strong they can be.
[Cafferty:] She has a history of apparently portraying herself as a bad mother, obviously something that the defense lawyers could use to begin to shore up the kind of a case that you're talking about here.
[Deguerin:] Well, she has a history, also, of attempted suicide, of hospitalization, of being heavily sedated, and then not taking her medication. In fact, just two weeks before this happened, she was taken off her anti-psychotic medicine. It was a great mistake on the part of the doctors.
[Cafferty:] You successfully defended a woman, as I mentioned in the introduction, who had apparently set about the task of killing all seven of her children. Two of them did ultimately die, but at her trial, you were her lawyer, and she wound up getting probation. Tell us a little about your strategy in that case, and how it might or might not apply in the case of Andrea Yates.
[Deguerin:] Well, I think it is very similar because what we did was we established the factual background. We showed how she had been mistreated by her husband. She and the children had both been sexually and physically abused by her husband. She was destitute. She had no place to turn, and in addition, she had been diagnosed with not postpartum depression, but with a split personality, paranoia, schizophrenia. And so she had a history of severe mental illness, as well as a factual basis for it.
[Cafferty:] The jury in this trial upcoming will not doubt be shown pictures of the crime scene. Each of the children drowned in the bathtub. How do you how do you deal, as a defense attorney, with the impact those kinds of horrific images are likely to have on a jury?
[Deguerin:] Well, it is going to be terrific, and that's why probably the prosecution is going to start off with that. There's a videotape that the officers took when they first arrived on the scene. There will be still pictures, and the prosecutor will describe how she must have held her children under water while they struggled until they died. It is going to be a terrible, prejudicial picture that the jury is going to have right out of the box, and that's why it is going to be so difficult for the defense to overcome.
[Cafferty:] Do you think there's any chance that that her defense will prevail? Can she win this trial, do you think?
[Deguerin:] Yes, I think she can. It is going to be very difficult, and it's really too close to call right now, but the truth is that no mother in her right mind would have done this. That's a simple fact that is going to be hard for the prosecution to overcome. But then again, they have got a hired gun, a paid expert, that is going to come in and testify, goes all over the country testifying, who was able to convince the jury that Jeffrey Dahmer, who ate his victims, was sane. So, that guy is going to be pretty persuasive.
[Cafferty:] What about the strategy, and we hear that this may be a part of the defense's case to bring her husband, Russell, into the trial and to suggest that, perhaps, she is not entirely culpable in the deaths of the kids, that perhaps there's something more that he might have been able to do. He could of or should have seen this coming, that based on his knowledge of her past and her past medical history that, perhaps, he didn't do enough. Is that something you might expect to see during the trial, and how successful a ploy might it be?
[Deguerin:] Oh, I don't think it's a ploy at all. I think the lawyers need to show the factual background, not only of the husband, and what went on in their home, and very few people know what goes on behind closed doors, but also all of the people around her. Her friends, her relatives, those who should have noticed how crazy she was becoming.
[Cafferty:] So you expect that he and other family members will be will be brought into this as well, right?
[Deguerin:] Oh, I think so. I think clearly he'll be a witness, and others that were close to her who saw what was going on, saw her descent into madness.
[Cafferty:] All right, Mr. DeGuerin, we are going to have to leave it there. I appreciate you joining us on "American Morning." Thank you for your time. Dick DeGuerin, an attorney, joining us from Houston, Texas at the start of the Andrea Yates murder trial. You can see live coverage of the opening statements of that trial here on CNN. That is scheduled to happen at 11:30 Eastern time this morning.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] U.S. President Bill Clinton wrapped up his visit to India with an appeal for reduced tensions in south Asia, and stronger ties with Washington. Speaking at the stock market in Mumbai, formerly Bombay, Mr. Clinton stressed, quote, "that friends don't have to agree on every issue." Earlier, he administered polio drops to an infant girl and urged tougher action against AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis. The president's next stop: Pakistan, a visit expected to last only five hours. CNN's John Raedler reports.
[John Raedler, Cnn Correspondent:] Pakistan, a country of 135 million people, as many as two-thirds of them illiterate, average income less than $2 a day, the economy crippled by debt and by sanctions. Pakistan is also the world's newest declared nuclear power. What does it most hope to achieve during President Clinton's visit? Relief from U.S. sanctions imposed in response to Pakistan's nuclear program and more recently in response to its military coup.
[Abdul Sattar, Pakistani Foreign Minister:] So we hope that we will have an opportunity to explain to President Clinton the implications and consequences of these sanctions, how these are setting back our own hopes for return to economic stability and for return to good governance.
[Raedler:] Regarding its nuclear program, the Pakistani government says it will accept only those restraints that every other government accepts.
[Sattar:] But on a nondiscriminatory, universal basis, Pakistan is ready to join any nuclear and missile restraint program. I say on a nondiscriminatory basis because we don't believe it is fair that Pakistan should be singled out for any special restraints.
[Raedler:] What room is there for President Clinton to make progress on that most intractable of issues that divide Pakistan and India, namely Kashmir?
[Sattar:] President Clinton has displayed unique qualities to bring parties in a conflict to the negotiating table. So we hope that his great qualities will be in play when he visits south Asia and he will exercise these qualities to bring Pakistan and India into a conflict resolution mode. [voice-over]: As for Pakistan's new military regime restoring Democratic rule, the foreign minister says there will be local district elections later this year. But national elections will have to wait until certain "objective criteria" have been met, such as fixing Pakistan's perilous economy. John Raedler, CNN, Islamabad, Pakistan.

[Tim Taylor, London:] Hello, my name is Tim Taylor. I'm from London, U.K.. And my question is: Why are all dollar bills the same color and the same size?
[Thomas Harris, Deputy Director, Bureau Of Engraving & Printing:] That's a very good question, Tim. It's one that we hear quite frequently here at the bureau. It would be difficult to determine exactly why the decision was made in the beginning, in 1929 when the notes were standardized. However, when one looks at the infrastructure in the cash system, it's easy to see the investment of hundreds of millions of dollars and processing equipment for transit authorities or vending operations or cash systems all over the world, including ATM dispensers. As for the color, the green and black the traditional green and black colors of U.S. currency is now a symbol of stability, and is an expectation that the American people have.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the government is also about to tell us what airline passengers already know: that the service is less than perfect, even after the nation's carriers promised to upgrade service. A report comes from the Transportation Department's inspector general in less than four hours. And we are joined by a travel expert, Terry Trippler, in Minneapolis. Terry, I wonder if you've been flying lately because you got a chance at least to peak at the preliminary reports. What are we likely to hear?
[Terry Trippler, Travel Expert:] I think what we're going to see is something similar to the interim report that came out in June of last year: improvement, but a long way to go. And I think that's what we're going to have happen again. We're going to see this noon.
[Lin:] Well, let's touch on at least some of the promises that the airlines said that they would try to work on. For example, when I go ahead and I book my ticket, am I guaranteed that the airline is going to quote me the cheapest fair?
[Trippler:] That's a tough one, Carol. They have promised to do that. Some of the airlines are making pretty good on that promise. Other ones aren't doing too well. Basically, where the problem lies is in these last-minute Internet fares that they have that there are some passengers claim they're not being told about. So there needs to be some improvement on that area.
[Lin:] All right. Well, what are are they going to be able to tell me or will they tell me if the flight is oversold as I book my seat?
[Trippler:] If you ask, from what I gather, they are telling you if the flight is oversold. What we find happening on this one is, once the passenger is finding the flight is oversold, they book on that flight because they want to get voluntarily bumped and get the miles and the money and the meals, etcetera. So that one sort of backfired on them.
[Lin:] All right, let's say they lose my luggage. How long is it going to take for me to get it back these days?
[Trippler:] They claim they'll do it in 24 hours. Luggage complaints are up. And, of course, we recently all have seen the film of where the luggage handlers were playing basketball with people's packages, his luggage. That did not help. Complaints are up. They're going to have to do a better job on luggage.
[Lin:] All right, well, also, I find myself more often than not sitting on a plane, getting ready to taxi the runway, and suddenly everything comes to a halt. And I'm told that it is problems with air traffic control or something that really doesn't mean much to me as a passenger. Am I going to be told, or should I be told am I being told why I'm being delayed specifically?
[Trippler:] Well, they say they are telling you. And here's where the big problem lies. And these are the complaints that I am receiving by the literally hundreds per day in e-mails. People feel they're not being told the truth. They're not being told before they board the aircraft that there's a possibility that they'll be delayed. I mean, people are boarding aircraft I did, I boarded one, went out and sat at the end of the tarmac. I was there long enough to qualify to vote in that precinct. They've got to do a better job on this. Get out of the gate. Get off the ground.
[Lin:] So if they're not quite meeting the promises that they said that they would keep to Congress, does this mean that Congress will or should go ahead with legislation to force the airlines to give better service?
[Trippler:] Well, Carol, I think that, as soon as this report is issued, that we're going to have people lined up all the way around the Capitol to file a bill for passenger-rights legislation. Already we have one or two of the 1999 bills that have been resurrected. Those were bills that were put aside when the airlines promised to do a better job. Yes, I think the airlines, unfortunately and I'm a free-enterprise person but, unfortunately, I think the airlines have forfeited their right to operate without some type of government intervention. I think it's inevitable. It's got to happen.
[Lin:] Well, and some airlines are going to say that so many factors are out of their control: like weather and now labor problems. Delta's pilots are expected to announce today what they voted on Friday: whether they're actually going to go on strike.
[Trippler:] That's right. And we're talking Northwest now, Delta. Before the year's over, we're going to be talking to American and United. And I disagree with the airlines there. I believe those are in their control. Weather, I understand. Labor: Come on, airlines, let's get it together.
[Lin:] All right, thank you very much for that preview. It really makes you want to hit the road, doesn't it? Thanks, Mr. Trippler.
[Trippler:] Thank you.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] The federal government is moving to ease gridlock at the nation's airports during the heavy travel season this spring and summer. The administration is announcing a plan to keep air traffic moving during thunderstorms. But weather isn't the only problem. The FAA predicts the skies will become much more crowded over the next 10 years. The number of jetliners will jump by more than 2,000 to about 6,400. We get more on today's plan to reduce flight delays from CNN's Kalin Thomas-Samuel.
[Kalin Thomas-samuel, Cnn Correspondent:] Nowadays, air travel often involves more time on the ground than in the air: You wait to check in, wait at the gate, and even wait on the runway.
[David Swierenga, Air Transport Association:] Delays are the number one problem for the airline industry. When aircraft are delayed, even though it may not be the airlines' fault, our customers tend to focus on us, the airlines.
[Unidentified Female:] I just felt really out of control. You know, you have no control of flights and it's really frustrating.
[Thomas-samuel:] The FAA recently predicted one billion people will be flying by the year 2010. That could mean more planes in the air and more delays. [voice-over]: Delays that could be prevented by the Clinton administration's spring 2000 initiative.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] First, better communications will let pilots and passengers know promptly whether they can expect a delay measured in minutes or in hours. Second, centralized air traffic decision-making will let us respond better to the really big storms that can stretch the length of the East Coast or from Houston to the Great Lakes. Third, new technology will help FAA and airline experts use air space more efficiently.
[Thomas-samuel:] The plan also calls for the FAA to seek permission to use U.S. military airspace and Canadian airspace when necessary.
[Jane Garvey, Faa Administrator:] The key has been bringing industry together with government to really look at some of these issues.
[Carol Hallett, Air Transport Association:] And if the plan works, and there's no reason why it should not, it will certainly help to eliminate a lot of delays that are related to weather or equipment. It has great potential for making flying a more enjoyable experience.
[Thomas-samuel:] The program takes effect on March 12, just in time for spring and warm-weather storms.
[Chris Mcginnis, Travelskills.com:] If it succeeds in reducing delays that happen during storms, the passengers are going to benefit immediately.
[Thomas-samuel:] But industry officials say the biggest decrease in delays would come from a complete modernization of the air traffic control system, something that won't happen until Congress approves the pending $40 billion FAA budget bill. Kalin Thomas-Samuel, CNN, Atlanta.

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] Traditional handicrafts used to be a big part of celebrations of the Chinese New Year. But folk art fell out of favor when the country began to modernize. Now the winds of change are blowing again. China's CCTV reports on the rising demand for a breath of the past.
[Han Bin, Cctv Correspondent:] This Lunar New Year, craftsman Liang Jun is having one of the busiest holidays of his life. Every day he makes as many traditional pinwheels as he can for the festival markets. But he still can't keep up with the booming demand. Jun makes them himself with bamboo slices, yellow clay and colorful paper, but his are no ordinary pinwheels. As many as 100 wheels can be added to one pin, and they sound unusually loud when waved through the air or blown by the wind. The 65-year-old man learned the craft from his grandfather. Ever since, this magic sound has been a part of his life.
[Liang Jun, Artisan:] My only hobby is making the pinwheels. I want to make them special.
[Bin:] Liang Jun recalls that when he was a child there were over 300 colorful types of traditional handicrafts shown at the New Year's table fairs. Today, no more than 30 can be found. Most have disappeared due to a lack of care. However, with the rise of living standards and lifestyles, more and more people are desiring a little reminder of the past. [on camera]: Liang Jun and many other traditional craftsmen are introducing their wares to the locals at an ongoing fair during the spring festival. They're doing this to make their handicrafts popular among today's people, especially the younger generations. [voice-over]: At this department store in Beijing's busiest downtown commercial center, these craftsmen are displaying their old- style homemade crafts. The event has attracted scores of customers, and also aroused great interest in the traditional ways of celebrating the spring festival.
[Unidentified Female:] Although children know about holidays like the new year and Christmas, they know little about these old things. These traditional handicrafts are actually very attractive to them.
[Bin:] Liang Jun is busier making the pinwheels these days. He will even sacrifice his family reunions on New Year's Eve to show his handiwork at a temple fair, yet he feels happy for he knows that his pinwheels will enter more family homes, bringing happiness and good luck to many people. This is Han Bin of China Central Television for CNN WORLD REPORT.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] And it's time now to take a look at markets around the world starting with Dalton Tanonaka in Hong Kong. Hi, Dalton.
[Dalton Tanonaka, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, David. Japan's leading semiconductor maker is joining the growing crowd of chipmakers cutting jobs and revising earnings forecasts. Toshiba revealing plans to cut 10 percent of its global work force, 19,000 people, most of which will come in Japan. The chipmaker also substantially lowered its financial target for this fiscal year now forecasting a net loss of $950 million. Investors pushed Toshiba's stock price up more than 5 percent in anticipation of the restructuring. Rival Hitachi also saw its stock price power higher. The tech sector in Tokyo overall, also helped by the powerful rally in the U.S. Friday, boosting the Nikkei this day by nearly 1 percent. Other financial markets in the region began the trading week with positive moves. Technology stocks helped spark a strong rally in Hong Kong. The Hang Seng picking up more than 1 percent. And a similar story in South Korea where most techs and telecoms moved higher, the KOSPI closing more than 1.5 percent stronger. And that's the quick look at the market day here in Asia. David, back to you in New York.
[Haffenreffer:] All right. Thank you very much, Dalton. Dalton Tanonaka in our Hong Kong bureau. Right now we do have S&P; 500 index futures to the upside by 4.2 points, keeping us roughly 5 points above the so-called fair value line, indicating we could see a higher open for us today on Wall Street which is welcome news to come on the heels of a Friday up day. All right. Following an up day on Friday for the markets as well, many market watchers hoping to see some back-to-back gains before to be convinced that they really will stick. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] The music of the Beatles certainly has touched generations, and the death of a man so much a part of that phenomenon is being felt among the young and the old. Sherri Sylvester live this morning from the Beatles star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame there in Hollywood. Sherri, good morning.
[Sherri Sylvester, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Bill. We're on the corner of Hollywood Boulevard and La Brea Avenue here in Hollywood, and I want to show our viewers something, because we learned that George Harrison loved gardening. The Beatles star in is on this island, this beautiful island, with lots of lush, tropical flowers all around it, and it's separated from the other stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, and if we can pan down here, we can see The Beatles star, and some of fans have been by this morning, delivering candles, and flowers and some mementos. Now this particular doesn't look like much, but actress Jill Hennessey just came by and dropped off note, which I won't open, because it's her private not of thanks, but she didn't have her makeup on or anything. She just ran over when she got the news, and she wants to leave her own little message in honor of George Harrison. And we also have with us today, another fan who happens to be visiting, Miss Joan Flint from Manchester, correct? Now tell me a little bit about when you heard the news of George Harrison's death, and how you found the star this morning.
[Joan Flint, Beatles Fan:] Well, we were just watching CNN this morning and when it came on, I just couldn't believe it. You know, I knew he had been ill, but didn't realize he was that ill. I saw him a long time ago, in 1963, in Olden, which is a town where I come from outside, and I'm just a not that you could hear what they were singing, because of the noise, the screams of the girls. Around 1963, yes.
[Sylvester:] Tell me a little bit about that, about that concert, what your memories where.
[Flint:] Absolutely fabulous. We cued for hours outside, you know, couldn't move like, and it was just fantastic. Inside, I think they were good, as we said, we couldn't from ourselves screaming. It was just madness, it was just wonderful.
[Sylvester:] What kind of impact did the Beatles have, particularly in England?
[Flint:] You wouldn't believe. I mean, it's just back from the very first recording, everybody went mad for them. I don't think anyone under the age of 21 didn't go mad for the Beatles. It was brilliant.
[Sylvester:] If you don't mind me asking, how old were you, Joan, when you saw them?
[Flint:] About 15, 16.
[Sylvester:] So tell me what you brought today. You brought a flower, just all I could get at 6:00 this morning. I've been wondering down the walk, looking for The Beatles tribute, and this is all I could get, I'm afraid at that time in the morning. We came out, couldn't find it, and went back to the hotel, came out again half a later to find... Can you tell what you liked about George Harrison in particular?
[Flint:] He was, I don't know, he was a good songwriter. I don't think there was one record that he did that I didn't like. I must admit, I didn't follow him as much in the last few years, but he was good, he was the quiet one, and that's really all I remember about him.
[Sylvester:] Thank you very much, Joan, for joining us. We want to say that one of the items here on the Walk of Fame says "Here Comes the Sun." Of course, George Harrison was a very prolific songwriter, as well as guitarist. He's being remembered today for his music, and also for his spirituality and for his sense of humor. He died here at Los Angeles yesterday at 1:30 in the afternoon at the home of his very close friend. George Harrison was a very private man. His wife and his son were by his side. We don't know if there will be a public funeral for George Harrison, but we know that many fans including Joan Flint are celebrating his life today. Sherri Sylvester reporting from Los Angeles. Bill, back to you.
[Hemmer:] All right Sherri, thanks much there, on the West Coast. George Harrison arguably one of the most influential musicians of all time. Let's talk with Anthony DeCurtis of "Rolling Stone" magazine with a look at Harrison and The Beatles and thereafter. Anthony, good morning. Nice to have you with us.
[Anthony Decurtis, "rolling Stone":] Good morning. Thank you very much.
[Hemmer:] George Harrison, the name comes to mind, and you think of what?
[Decurtis:] Well, certainly, you start thinking about, he one of the architects of The Beatles sound, he was one of the people that there's a reason why the songs lived as long as they have. They each have a very distinct sound. Harrison is a guitar player, always played in service to the song, even when he wasn't writing them. He was underestimated by fans often, but never by musicians, a very influential guitar player. And then you had somebody who made an impact introducing Eastern culture, and Eastern music and spirituality to the West, and somebody who did the concert from Bangladesh, which set the template for benefit shows, which continues to this day, so he made a lot of impacts in, unfortunately, his short life.
[Hemmer:] Couple of things on his personal life. He was described as the quietest Beatle. He was clearly the youngest Beatle by a couple of years, and they say he came from the most stable family background. Have you been able to gauge how that influenced him in his life?
[Decurtis:] Well, George really was somebody who he was the youngest Beatle. In fact, Lennon initially didn't want to let him in the band because too young. He thought that his age he wasn't 15 yet, and you know Paul was 15, John was 16, and they felt they wouldn't be able to get girls because George was too innocent looking.
[Hemmer:] They were in the band to get girls originally anyway.
[Decurtis:] Absolutely.
[Hemmer:] Sir Paul called him his baby brother, too.
[Decurtis:] Paul introduced to John, and Harrison got in on the strength of playing. John heard him play and said, all right, I guess we will carry him along. That attitude, you know, carried over, and it eventually came to be a little bit frustrating for Harrison.
[Hemmer:] Michael Okwu did a great piece in the life of George Harrison this morning. And there was a quote in there that said, George Harrison saying he never had a career strategy, never plotted out his life as a professional musician. He just wrote songs when he wanted to.
[Decurtis:] Yes, I mean, at the Harrison really felt that The Beatles were a very chaotic and unsettling situation, and once he got free of it, he decided he would live life exactly as he wanted to. So he would make records, and be public, and go out and do interviews, and then he would disappear for a long periods, and you know, he never got on the treadmill again. He just refused to do that.
[Hemmer:] You know, we have now lost 50 percent of the fab four. Do you remember 1980 and the death of John Lennon, and how did Harrison react then?
[Decurtis:] Harrison was upset by John's death. In many ways, even though they a little bit of contentious relationship at times, George idolized John, and even when there were moments of anger between them, he always respected him. So John's death both upset from that standpoint. And back in the '60s, George was afraid of violence being executed against the Beatles. He afraid of The Beatles being assassinated literally back in 1966, so when it happened to Lennon, it was just shocking for George on all those levels.
[Hemmer:] Anthony, kind of difficult question to get inside the heart of mind of someone else, but how do you believe that spirituality that he led in his life and believed in his life contributed to others, how do you think it helped in the final days of his struggled with cancer?
[Decurtis:] I think it was essential to his survival, as essential as it was throughout his life. You know, he believed in reincarnation. He believed that all things must pass. He wrote a song called "The Art of Dying." The idea that every soul is on a journey to perfection was something that was simply a fact for him. So, you know, he could joke toward the end of life that he was approaching death. Had a song on a guy name Jewels Holland a friend of his. It's a song that George actually cowrote with son Donny, and actually performed on. And for the publishing credit he listed "RIP Limited." You know, he was not one to be squeamish about that, because he felt that everybody was traveling down the road that he was traveling down. So it was essential to his perspective.
[Hemmer:] Thanks for sharing, Anthony.
[Decurtis:] Thank you so much for having me.
[Hemmer:] Anthony DeCurtis, "Rolling Stone" magazine, his thoughts looking back on the life of George Harrison and the impact on The Beatles and the rest of society. Have a good weekend, Anthony. Many thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to go ahead and turn to politics now. Two more of President Bush's Cabinet choices are expected to win Senate confirmation today. And the Senate Judiciary Committee could vote on the president's most contentious nomination: John Ashcroft as attorney general. CNN national correspondent Bob Franken joining us now from Capitol Hill. He has the latest. Good morning, Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning here on Capitol Hill.
[Kagan:] Hill.
[Franken:] Where, of course, as you've just pointed out, there's going to be the Senate Judiciary Committee vote today, quite likely, on John Ashcroft. And the vote the only real question is whether it will be a 1010 split partisan, or whether there will be a couple of Democratic defection. In either case, once the committee is through, the nomination of John Ashcroft will go to the Senate floor. Republican leaders are going to try, by the end of the week, to get it through the Senate. There is a consensus that, number one, he will in fact ultimately be confirmed. Two, that there will 30 to 35 Democrats voting against him. The latest ones to announce, now: Pat Leahy, yesterday no surprise; Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York no surprise. But there will be still enough votes for him to be confirmed as attorney general after all the controversy, by the time the dust settles. Now, one of the big controversial figures for a while was Gale Norton. And she is going to be confirmed easily now, probably today, as the secretary of the Interior. She, of course, raises the ire of the environmental groups. They consider her a real danger to the environment. But that controversy is over, at least for now. She will be confirmed. Also, an easy confirmation will be the new head of the environmental Protection Agency, the former New Jersey governor, Christie Todd Whitman. No controversy there. So Daryn, I know you keep a score card. Sports fan that you are, you can check off Norton and check off Whitman, and get ready to check off Ashcroft Daryn.
[Kagan:] I'm all ready for that. Thank you very much for talking to me in terms I can understand, Bob. Very good. Bob Franken, on Capitol Hill, giving us a sports rundown on politics, thank you.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] First though, a check of history here from "CNN 20," looking back at the case of Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas.
[Unidentified Male:] Professor, do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god?
[Prof. Anita Hill, University Of Oklahoma:] I do.
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] Anita Hill had accused Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of highly inappropriate behavior when she had worked for him at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Suddenly, there we were on live television being treated to these incredibly graphic descriptions of what Clarence Thomas had allegedly done to Anita Hill.
[Hill:] After a brief discussion of work, he would turn the conversation to a discussion of sexual matters. His conversations were very vivid.
[Greta Van Susteren, Cnn Legal Analyst:] The one thing that sort of troubled me and what was never really examined at the time was that these charges were stale. It happened a long time before, making it virtually impossible to verify. And I always wondered if we were fair when we allowed stale charges to be presented against Clarence Thomas. Now, on the flip side, this is not a criminal case. And this is not a simple run-of-the-mill exercise. We're talking about a justice for the United States Supreme Court.
[Franken:] Clarence Thomas, of course, ultimately became a justice but he will always be remembered as the justice who went through this process, what he called the high-tech lynching.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Well, if you're like me, you do not enjoy the frenzy of holiday shopping at the mall. Many people often seek solace by dialing up and logging on to the World Wide Web. But with literally a world of choices at your fingertips, how you can separate the weak from the chaff is a problem. So let's turn to a man with some answers. He is a technology editor for "Yahoo!" magazine. Don Willmott, he's joining us from New York this morning. Don, good to see you.
[Don Willmott, "yahoo! Internet Life" Magazine:] Happy holidays.
[O'brien:] Same to you. We've got a lot to cover, a lot of wood to chop, e-wood to chop anyhow.
[Willmott:] Right.
[O'brien:] Amazon.com. This is a site which anybody who's been on the web probably is relatively familiar with. What's new this year is you can get the best seller and you can get a cordless drill. It's changed, hasn't it?
[Willmott:] Yeah, over the past couple of years, Amazon.com has expanded into about nine, 10, 11 departments. So it's become kind of a one-stop shop on the Internet. And that makes it really convenient. So if you're thinking of Amazon.com just for books, well, yes, but also music, kitchen gadgets, patio furniture. It can be really a fast way to shop if you've got a list of a wide range of presents you want to get all at one place.
[O'brien:] Well, let's get a shot of it up there. It's a very familiar place. How do you rate it just for usability as we look at the welcome site, which is very common? You can search for books. And as I see down here, you can buy yourself a Palm III XE handheld. Is it easy to navigate around there?
[Willmott:] Outstanding. Amazon.com basically invented the multi- department online store. And it's basically the best designed online store around. Easy checkout. One-click shopping. You can actually just go through there and never really have to fill out your name, address, any of that stuff, once you load it in once. They really know what they're doing. And their shipping is also excellent.
[O'brien:] And toys also on the list, right?
[Willmott:] Yeah, Amazon merged with Toys "R" Us after last season when ToysRUs.com did so terribly online. So now Amazon.com is in fact a giant toy store as well.
[O'brien:] Interesting. All right, let's move along. If you're interested in finding, say, the best fruitcake in the world, the place to go is Chefshop.com, correct?
[Willmott:] We gave this site a nod because it's actually quite educational. You can...
[O'brien:] And by the way, I'm not kidding about this fruitcake. There's a Trappist Abbey fruitcake here featured. Are you familiar with this thing? I'm not a fruitcake fan.
[Willmott:] No, but I guess it comes with a blessing.
[O'brien:] Anyway, go ahead.
[Willmott:] I was going to say that it's a very educational site. You can order olive oil for your friends, but also learn one heck of a lot about olive oil while you're shopping. It's well written, deep editorial content, so kind of entertaining to shop there. It's sort of the J. Peterman of food.
[O'brien:] Ah, so a little story with each and every item. And I'm sure if that fruitcake could talk, it would tell a story. Let's move along to the next one. Electronics. Now, it's interesting because over the years there have been a lot of sites that have evaluated computer hardware and software, not as many in the consumer electronics field. This is changing now, isn't it?
[Willmott:] Well, it has to change because you know there's 1,000 digital cameras, 10,000 DVD drives out there. It's really hard to shop. So you need a site that can sort that out and help you figure out what it is exactly you're looking for. So we definitely like 800.com also because as the name suggests, there's a human being at the other end of the phone if you need to talk to someone. This can be
[O'brien:] Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, wait, Don, Don. That's a news flash.
[Willmott:] Yeah.
[O'brien:] A human being at the other end of the line?
[Willmott:] This is something to look for when you're shopping online. The last thing these sites want to do is talk to you in person because it costs them a lot of money to do so. So that's why we gave this site an extra credit because in fact there is good human technical support should you need it.
[O'brien:] All right, all right, that's good to hear. It's kind of a quaint notion in this day and age to have a real person on the other end of the line.
[Willmott:] Right.
[O'brien:] All right, let's say you're just stumped and you're just not a very creative person. No names mentioned here, of course. And you just can't figure out what to get your sweetie or whatever. And is this Red Envelope the place to go? I mean, there's some ideas there anyhow.
[Willmott:] Yeah, Red Envelope used to be called 9-1-1 Gifts, which connoted you suddenly realize, oh, gosh, tomorrow is someone's birthday and you could rush a gift. It's evolved a little bit since then. They have a lot of very elegant $50 to $100 kind of gifts, good for corporate gift giving, and also some really unique and entertaining race car driving lessons, golf on an exclusive course, spa treatments, those kind of really, really special gifts that show you put a lot of thought into it or at least thought to go to that site anyway.
[O'brien:] Or if your budget doesn't permit that, we're looking at some holiday lilies and berries for 30 bucks. Not bad. All right...
[Willmott:] Not bad.
[O'brien:] ... Checkout.com is a place if you're into music. And what sets this one apart? A lot of music offerings on the web certainly.
[Willmott:] A lot of people shop for music at Amazon.com or CDNow, of course. This site has deeper editorial content and communities. It's a real kind of Internet field here because there's a lot of chats and discussions. Kind of a good place to get some advice about what to buy your children, your friends, if you don't know exactly what it is they might like, or you know they like one thing. And they like that, what else might they like? This is a good place to get that kind of information.
[O'brien:] All right, and briefly, you found a couple of clinkers, actually quite a few clinkers. And just to mention a couple of them, BlueLight.com, which is the K-Mart offering...
[Willmott:] Right.
[O'brien:] ... that's a clinker. Priceline.com, you know, Bill Shatner's deal. What is it about these sites that makes them bad? Is there any common thread throughout them?
[Willmott:] Actually, all the big department stores that you know Wal-Mart, K-Mart on the web, they're new to the web. And unlike Amazon, they weren't built up from the ground up for the web. And it's taken them a long time to sort of get the hang of what it means to put a store online. Sears and Penney's both we slammed for just bad navigation, incomplete information, a lack of choice. They're moving quickly to improve that because they've gotten a lot of this feedback. So we'll hope that they'll catch up to sort of the online excellence that we see at a place like Amazon.com.
[O'brien:] All right, undoubtedly we will be hearing from them. Don Willmott, who is with "Yahoo!" magazine, technology editor there, thanks very much for being with us on
[Cnn Sunday Morning. Willmott:] Thanks.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Let's get started, though, in the meantime, with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld at NATO headquarters today, taking stock of the war, and warning of more terror to come. Our national correspondent Bob Franken is at the Pentagon this morning.
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, and the secretary who oftentimes conducts the briefing you just discussed, as we know in Brussels, meeting with the defense ministers, the deputy defense minister deputy defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz and the vice chairman of the joints chief of staff, Peter Pace, General Peter Pace. He will be holding a briefing with more about the war effort in Afghanistan. Of course, sort of the macro discussion. The larger discussion with the defense ministers in Brussels, and Rumsfeld in the news conference that was concluded talked about the continuing need for all the countries to work together in this continued global fight against terrorism. Talked about the fact that the world if we quote him has significantly changed since September 11th. And he went on to say that there will be continuing efforts, shifting alliances as the targets of the efforts against terrorism go on. Afghanistan, he says, will be relatively easy. And there was a discussion the defense ministers, according to Rumsfeld, about the United States continuing campaign for an aggressive effort against biological weapons, chemical weapons, the nuclear weapons the weapons of mass destruction.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secy. Of Defense:] The nexus between states with weapons of mass destruction and terrorist networks raises the danger that September 11th could be a preview of what could come if the enemies of freedom gain ability to strike our nations with weapons of increasingly greater power.
[Franken:] And as far as the current war is concerned, the one in Afghanistan, he is echoing the defense secretary is what a lot of people are saying, that the hard work is really yet to come, the tough and dirty work, as the secretary put it. The battle around Tora Bora still goes on, even though on the ground there are many reports that most of the Al Qaeda troops surrendered, there is still the search for Osama bin Laden. In another part of the country, there's the search for the Taliban leader Mullah Omar, and that involves going cave to cave, very dangerous work. The country that is a dangerous country, with all the land mines. Many have been there for decades. Many of them just laid, the possibilities of sabotage, booby traps, that kind of thing. One little piece of good news. There has been a report earlier in the day that an aircraft had been shot at by a missile, a stinger missile, on the ground. It turns out now officials believe it was not a missile at all. It was really just the kind of lights and tracer bullets that are part of the post-Ramadan celebration. That's the latest. That takes a tiny bit of the edge of off of today's reporting, but as the secretary said, there's plenty of edge there.
[Harris:] All right, thanks, Bob. We understand that briefing should be getting under way at the Pentagon in about 10 minutes or so, and we'll come back to you guys there in just a bit. Now, U.S. officials are interrogating Al Qaeda prisoners captured in the battle of Tora Bora, and they're hoping these interrogations lead to Osama bin Laden. Our Nic Robertson talked with some of the prisoners, and found that investigators may have a difficult job ahead of them.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] Some moan in pain, others read the Koran, and still others can only be seen when they roll over in their blankets on the crowded floor. All were captured on the Tora Bora mountains, but some claim not to be Al Qaeda members.
[Unidentified Male:] Believe me, a lot of people in the mountains, they don't know even the face of Osama bin Laden. He is such a person that is mobile. Maybe he is here. Maybe he is out. No one knows.
[Robertson:] He says he is a doctor, and came here three months ago because he thought, if there was a war, Afghans would need help. He describes fleeing the local hospital when the Afghans turned on him a month ago.
[Unidentified Male:] They asked me to escape, and they saw the people surround the hospital with gun, and I saw some people were killed in front of me, so they forced me to escape, and the only chance was only for us through these mountains.
[Robertson:] He talks of the intense bombing in the mountains, and of how they decided to flee four days ago.
[Unidentified Male:] Then they discover us and they start firing at us by the Apache. A lot of people killed, 25 or maximum, and plenty of people injured. I have injured my back. I have injury to my left flank, and it was by antiaircraft guns.
[Robertson:] Fourteen prisoners are crowded in the tiny room, a mixture of Arabs and Pakistanis. Few want to identified, and aside from Doctor Said, only this 18-year-old Kuwaiti was willing to talk. He says he came to Afghanistan to join the jihad six weeks ago. "What's done is done," he says. "I don't have anything to say to my parents." But he does want to go home. [on camera]: True or false, these accounts are likely to be heard by investigators, trying to piece together Osama bin Laden's whereabouts. If true, then many more Arabs could be on run in these mountains. If false, then prisoners like Dr. Said could remain captive for a long time to come. Nic Robertson, CNN, near Tora Bora, Afghanistan.

[Deborah Wang, Cnn Anchor:] China has barred a U.S. warship from docking in Hong Kong next month. The ban on the USS Inchon appears to be linked to the standoff between the two nations over the U.S. spy plane held on Hainan Island since April 1st. And it comes despite an agreement between Beijing and Washington on the return of the aircraft. Rebecca MacKinnon has more on the deal.
[Rebecca Mackinnon, Cnn Beijing Bureau Chief:] Finally, Beijing and Washington agree they have a deal on how the United States can take its plane back.
[Zhu Bangzao, Foreign Ministry Spokesman:] The U.S. side will send a rented commercial Antonov 124 cargo plane to China to take back the disassembled EP-3.
[Mackinnon:] The United States and China still disagree on what caused the collision between the EP-3 surveillance plane and a Chinese fighter jet. Last month, U.S. negotiations began talks on the return of the U.S. plane. They broke down on the second day, each side giving a different account of happened. Then, last week, China's foreign ministry claimed an agreement on dismantling the EP-3 had been reached, but the Pentagon denied a deal.
[Zhu:] After my initial remarks, the United States, mainly the Pentagon spokesman, said that he was not aware of the situation, and that the United States side had not made any proposal. That confused me. You should ask the U.S. side why this happened.
[Mackinnon:] Western diplomats say it happened because the Chinese side announced a deal before the United States was ready. Why?
[Jia Qingguo, Peking University:] Both sides have domestic political interests to be considered.
[Mackinnon:] After releasing the crew without a full apology from Washington, observers say Beijing had a political need to have the first and last word on how the plane will be returned.
[Jia:] Most people probably also realize that there is very little the Chinese government can do in getting a better deal, given the fact that the United States is much stronger than China.
[Mackinnon:] U.S. officials say that, technically, it could take a month or longer to dismantle and transport the EP-3 on the Antonov plane. But China's foreign ministry spokesman says just how long it takes to get the plane back depends on Washington's attitude. Rebecca MacKinnon, CNN, Beijing.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Well, there's a lot of information now to absorb in just a little amount bit of time, which seems to be a pattern in this post-election period. To help us out with that, we've got two insiders joining us now: in Washington, former Supreme Court clerk Paul Clement, and also joining us this morning from New Haven, Connecticut, Akhil Amar. And these two gentlemen were clerks, now, to were former clerks for Supreme Court justices. Clement Mr. Clement I believe you were with Justice Scalia.
[Paul Clement, Former Clerk To Justice Scalia:] That's right.
[Harris:] And Mr. Amar, you were with Justice Breyer, correct?
[Akhil Amar, Yale University:] When he was on the first circuit.
[Harris:] Got you. Now, rather than asking the two of you to help us decipher exactly what this means, because we're going to get that all day today, as we got last night, I want to ask you all about the process by which you think these gentleman and ladies came to this conclusion that they did. It seems as though there quite a bit of dissension here, and there might have bee some very passionate arguments going on here. Beginning with you, Mr. Clement: How do you think that whole process worked out?
[Clement:] Well, I think part of the reason that we waited until very late last night to get these opinions from the court is because the process of writing dissents and going back and forth between the per curiam opinion and the various dissent takes some time because even those who wrote the majority opinion, or joined the majority opinion, wanted the opportunity to, at least, respond to the dissents or see what the dissents had said before they put the final touches on their opinions. So I think that was what was going on all day yesterday was back and forth, with various opinions circulating. That's a process that usually takes place over a couple of weeks, and I think it was all going at hyper-speed last night, going back and forth, back and forth, all evening.
[Harris:] Yes, but if all that was going on, Mr. Amar, do you think we should have seen more unanimity among the judges, because it seems as though every single person seemed to have a different opinion.
[Amar:] Well, the bottom line of the case in its resolution was five to four, and that was the same bottom line as we had with the stay that was issued over the weekend. And when I came on CNN over the weekend, I said if it's going to be five to four, when this five to four, the five better have very persuasive reasons that are going to stand up to the judgment of history. I've taken a look at the opinion. I have my doubts about whether the five, who I am sure are acting in absolute good faith but I do have my doubts about whether this decision really stands up when analyzed by its logic, by its resonance with text, history and structure of the Constitution, and it's conformity with precedents that are actually in the neighborhood. It's a bit of a stretch.
[Harris:] OK, if you can, quickly, give me the very best reason that gives you that doubt. And then I want to get Mr. Clement's response to that.
[Amar:] OK, the basic idea is that the recount had some imperfections, some genuine imperfections. That's absolutely right, but whether those imperfections are an inequality violation of the Constitution, when the underlying count itself was probably infected with much greater inequalities inequalities that actually had racially disparate impacts and that disproportionately hurt people in poor precincts equality is a very deep Constitutional issue, but this case relies on a rather Pickwickian and odd and, literally, unprecedented view of the equality. There's no case out there that I know of, having taught constitutional law for 15 years, that's really close to this one on its facts and the text, history, instruction of the Constitution and logic. If you're going to have this rule for a recount, why not for original counts?
[Harris:] Let me get your response to that Mr. Clement: What's your view of that?
[Clement:] Well, they only had one issue in front of them, so there may have been other equal protections lurking out there in the woods, but they only had this one issue of the recount before them. And seven of the justices, not five, found some equal protection problem with the recount procedures. Justice Souter, for example, in his dissent said that when you actually got down to the level of saying that different counties with the same ballots were counting the same kind of chad or hanging chad in different ways, there was no absolutely no state interest in that differential treatment. And I think equal protection, especially in the context of a fundamental right, like the right to vote, is a well-established principle in our jurisprudence. And although the court may take a hit in the short run as people say five-four on the remedy, and this was very political, I think, in the long term, the equal protection holding of the court will stand the test of time.
[Harris:] Well, we're going to see about that.
[Amar:] We shall see, we shall see.
[Harris:] Yes, we shall see and just one of the many interesting questions both raised and solved by all this and many are saying maybe nothing's gotten solved. We want to thank both of you gentlemen for your time this morning, Paul Clement and Akhil Amar, thanks very much. We'll have to talk to you all later on about this and some other things, too.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] As we've mentioned, we have viewers joining us from around world on CNN International, and so they, like us here in the U.S., are getting a giant civics and elections lesson on this. Let's go to a real classroom where they really study this stuff. Let's bring in our Jeff Flock, who is at Drake University, in Des Moines, Iowa. Jeff, good morning.
[Jeff Flock, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning to you, Daryn. The class is American Electoral Process, and I guess it doesn't get any better than this in terms of having the nation and the world be your textbook. The professor is Arthur Sanders. He's let us come in this morning to get a sense for were these students are. And I guess my first question is to you is, as you watch this unfold, even as late as this morning, does it worry you what you're seeing?
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, not at all. I think this illustrates an interesting point: that the American people aren't ready for a drastic conservative or a drastic liberal change. That we're somewhere in the middle.
[Flock:] I want to get a sense for where people are coming from. Hands? On a wide shot, perhaps. Gore supporters? Hands? And Bush supporters? OK, typical college campus, maybe skewing a little bit to the Democratic side. Is this a problem? Are your views based on partisan feelings, or are they independent of that?
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, no, they're pretty independent on whoever wins this election will eventually become president.
[Flock:] OK, solve this for us. How should it come out? Give me a sense for how this ought to work out.
[Unidentified Female:] It ought to just be off the votes that we've already taken and we should just recount them and get an accurate number.
[Flock:] Well, does anyone have a problem with this recount, though? We seem to have a couple of recounts. Some people say we ought to quit the recounts, what do you think?
[Unidentified Male:] I think that a recount is in order in Florida. But they need to do it everywhere in all the counties. That's the only fair way to do, to make sure that the Republicans and the Democrats are satisfied.
[Flock:] Anybody else got an opinion on this, on the notion of hand recounts? Is there a problem with having hand recounts only in some counties and not others? Yes, go ahead, sir.
[Unidentified Male:] What major problem I have with hand recounts is there is no standard. In each county they count them differently. In one county, they started counting them one way, stopped, changed it, and then changed it again. If you're going to have hand counts, you need to have some kind of standard, uniform way of counting what the thing is, instead of trying to figure out what the intent of the voter was.
[Flock:] I've got to ask you about the process. Is anybody either disgusted or energized by this process one way or the other?
[Unidentified Female:] No, I think that this teaches us a lot about it, and it's really good that this is happening so the people can really get a sense for what's going on.
[Flock:] Professor Sanders, you're about, I'm told, about two, or a week or two behind in your typical syllabus, but this has been an extraordinary opportunity, hasn't it?
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, yes no, I don't mind being behind, since we're leaning more about the way American politics works and doesn't work, and what the warts are and what the good things are, than you could possibly imagine before planning a course.
[Flock:] Do you think these students have a concept for how big a deal in history this is?
[Unidentified Male:] As much as you might expect from college students who are just learning about what this is like in history. But, yes, I do think they have a good sense of that.
[Flock:] Far backs, I should ask you directly: Do you have a sense for the gravity of what's going on here, or do you feel that, do feel it's all...
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, definitely. Being a journalism major, I feel that this is a big step for American journalism, and then also for American politics.
[Flock:] How are we doing American journalism?
[Unidentified Male:] I believe that we should just end this. I am concerned with what other people are thinking in other countries because they don't understand our electoral process, and I think that's a big problem, and many Americans don't understand electoral process, and I don't know what we should do about it.
[Flock:] I'm going to have to make that the last word. Thank you so much, Professor, appreciate your letting us come in here and listen. The class is American Electoral Process. Boy, we're all getting an education these days. That's the latest from Iowa. Jeff Flock, CNN, reporting live.
[Kagan:] Jeff, thank you very much. Can you imagine what the final exam is going to be like in that course?
[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] This is an A.P. course this time around.
[Kagan:] Absolutely.
[Frazier:] And remember, that was Iowa, too, where all of this started with the Iowa caucuses, about a million years ago.
[Kagan:] Yes, it seems about ten years ago, exactly.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Good evening. I'm Bill Hemmer live in Atlanta. You've just heard from the staff tonight; in a moment, you'll hear from our panel. What difference, if any, have the five members of Gary Condit's team made on this story? And what about the political, the personal and the legal future for the Democratic congressman? We'll examine it all this evening, but first, live in Modesto is CNN's Bob Franken with us this evening. And Bob, I heard three things from these people tonight: They defended their boss to the hilt, no one ever asked them any details about what happened, and they all think well, pretty much all of them think he should take a shot at running again.
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, except for one, Jackie Mullen, who says that it's just not worth it. She was quite emphatic about that. That of course is similar to the sentiment expressed also on LARRY KING LIVE on Monday night by Chad Condit, that a career in politics is looking uglier all the time.
[Hemmer:] We have a couple of soundbites here that we want to pull for our viewers, Bob, at this time. The first one from Jackie Mullen, the woman you just referred to, about whether or not Gary Condit should have come out at an earlier time. We will listen to it, play it and come back and talk about it. [Begin Video Clip, "larry King Live"]
[Jackie Mullen, Condit Staffer:] I would have like to have seen him go out in the very beginning and say to the media, "I'm not going to talk about this. I have nothing to say to you folks, you know." This is something that's between me and my family. This is private." But I wish he would have said, "I'm not going to talk to the press."
[Hemmer:] So then, the question begs, would it have made a difference in hindsight, Bob?
[Franken:] Well, in hindsight, that's what he really said by not saying anything, saying that I've got nothing to talk about. He did he did put out a couple of paper statements, as we call them, not submitting to interviews, but just saying this has nothing to do with the search for Chandra Levy. And of course, what Jackie Mullen is suggesting that he should have done early on. He tried to do during his interviews last week, and they really turned around on him. People just believed he was not being straightforward.
[Hemmer:] Bob, do we know why these members came forward on "LARRY KING" tonight? Who put them up to it? Was it their decision, did they run it past Gary Condit? Do we even know?
[Franken:] We do know that Gary Condit and his advisers are still sitting there trying to figure out some way to turn this around, that is why Chad Condit went out on Monday night. There was quite a bit of a debate within the Condit camp about whether he should do it. Quite a few of the advisers didn't think he was ready for prime-time, but after it was over, they thought that well, maybe he did better than his father. Now come members of the staff. I can tell you that they've been making polite inquiries the last couple of days about what would be the response if they wanted they wanted to be interviewed, and of course the response was, "you bet," and so you saw the results of this tonight. But no, none of this is just happening spontaneously.
[Hemmer:] And of our members on our air here on CNN, Bob, no one asked the congressman about specific details over the past four months. A quick soundbite again, Bob, and we will come back to you in a moment. [Begin Video Clip, "larry King Live"]
[Maggie Mejia, Condit Staffer:] I don't feel that what he does is any of our business, outside of the federal level, and his staff assistants.
[Larry King:] Did it upset you?
[Mejia:] Well, yes, of course. Yes, of course, it did, it upset all of us. It hurt. It hurt because all of us was being attacked, and it's like a mother defending her child, and vice versa.
[King:] You feel that close to him?
[Mejia:] Yes, I do. I wouldn't be working for him and I wouldn't be today against doctor's orders if I didn't feel that strongly.
[Hemmer:] It may strike some, Bob, as quite curious as to why no one would approach the congressman and ask him anything about the details. Do you find it a similar way or not?
[Franken:] Well, quite frankly, I think that a lot of times people just decide to take things on faith, or to just not know. They were willing to go out and accept the congressman's assurance that there was nothing, there was no affair between him and Chandra Levy. I should point out that was the same claim that Congressman Condit was making before his fellow members of Congress, and then we learned in his third police interview that he had admitted to investigators that he had had an affair with Chandra Levy, and the staff members can claim they can claim anyway that they were surprised. Sometimes that's called deniability.
[Hemmer:] So then what happens next? What is the latest move in this chess game that has been played really in many places on "LARRY KING LIVE" throughout this week?
[Franken:] Some of us are calling it the "LARRY KING LIVE" strategy. Well, we will have to find out if there are any other surrogates out there, we will have to find if the congressman decides he wants to do still another interview trying to set things right. Of course, everybody would like to interview Mrs. Condit, his wife Carolyn Condit. I can't even tell you if that's a possibility right now, but certainly everybody is trying for that interview. And of course, the congressman also has to decide what he wants to do politically. Does he want to stay in office, is this part of an effort to try and turn the political fortunes around? Is he considering resignation? Most think that's unlikely. A lot of people believe it's likely he's giving serious thought to the possibility of not running again the next time the election comes up.
[Hemmer:] You raise all good questions and issues. We'll get to them all this evening. Bob Franken, stand by there live in Modesto. Also with us this evening, Greta Van Susteren is live in Washington, we will speak with her momentarily. Also, Bill Schneider in Washington as well to talk about the political fallout. Tonight on Capitol Hill, CNN's Kate Snow will give us that perspective momentarily, and we will also talk with CNN's Jeff Greenfield momentarily here as our special report on the Gary Condit political future continues right after this quick break. Stay with us. Once again, welcome back to our special look, "What's Ahead for Gary Condit?" We are going to take you live to Washington and introduce our panel again. Greta Van Susteren, host of THE POINT here on CNN is with us live. So too is Bill Schneider in Washington and Kate Snow is up on Capitol Hill. And as always, Bob Franken at his location in Modesto, California. Quickly, want to go around the horn here. Greta, first to you. What did you make of this tonight, and does it have any measurable impact at all?
[Greta Van Susteren, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, it's hard to really understand in an hour what these people are really all about, but let me give you my basic observation having watched them. They seem like very nice people who are very devoted to their congressman, they're very familiar with all the good works he has done as a congressman, and they admire him. However, what they didn't talk about, and for obvious reasons, is what we in America may see as perhaps his dark side. He is he has done some things that are very disappointing to constituents and to other Americans, but understandably, they like him, they admire him, they saw his good things, and they are willing to give him somewhat of a pass on some of the darker things that he's done.
[Hemmer:] And I want to talk about some legal matters that we touched on tonight in a moment, Greta, but to Bill Schneider. Does it make a difference or not?
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Look, what we are looking for is explanations, explanations of well, there are really two mysteries at the heart of this. One is what happened to Chandra Levy, that's the important one, and the other is the mystery of Gary Condit's behavior. What Larry was looking for in these interviews tonight was, what's an explanation? Give, please, you're his staff, give us some explanation for his behavior, because most Americans and, according to the polls, most of his constituents have concluded, sadly, that he was more interested in keeping his affair secret and protecting that than he was in finding Chandra Levy. That's a very negative sort of conclusion, so Larry was saying, is there some other explanation? But they didn't really give it.
[Hemmer:] We did not get that deep, you're right. Kate Snow, to you, why would aides go on national TV and defend their boss and virtually defend themselves in certain cases?
[Kate Snow, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Bill, it's interesting, because it's something you almost never see here in Washington. I mean, I don't know if people have a sense for this, but as a reporter you typically call an office and you are put in touch with a press secretary, you don't get to talk to those people that we saw on "LARRY KING LIVE" tonight, you don't get to talk to the person who works at the front desk, or the person who has been the member's personal secretary. Those people are off-limits completely, so I think what they were probably trying to do and some Democratic aides have told tonight that this is a wise thing for them to do is to soften their image, put out some people who are real, who can tell real stories and come across maybe a little bit better than Gary Condit did last week.
[Hemmer:] In a moment, Kate, I'm going to have you frame up a picture for us for Washington going back to work next week with Gary Condit in toe. Before we get to all that, though, Mike Dayton, the top aide, was on with Larry King tonight. He talked about possibly making false statements at one time that he now regrets. Quick listen to that now. [Begin Video Clip, "larry King Live"]
[Mike Dayton, Condit's Top Aide:] I made denials, I made emphatic denials, you know, perhaps, hindsight, you know...
[King:] In retrospect?
[Dayton:] No, but I mean, I'm saying I always say what I believe to be true. I mean, you have got to put yourself in my shoes. I'm getting calls at 8:30 in the morning, D.C. time, it's 5:30 out here, and I get a call from a reporter saying she's going to air a story, you know, right then, that these two are dating, and I've never even, you know I've heard of this woman, but I don't even put them together, I don't even know who she's talking about, so obviously I'm going say no.
[Hemmer:] If nothing else, an interesting revelation tonight, Greta. Legally, is it binding? Could it get him in trouble? Or do you look at things like the watch box that was mentioned tonight and Anne Marie Smith, the flight attendant, also?
[Van Susteren:] I think, you know, of course, the prosecutors are always suspicious of everything associated with this case. My observation is that he seemed like a nice guy, once again, but incredibly naive as to the personal of his congressman, and I really think that he really does like his congressman, and that perhaps he and his colleagues feel like they have been under siege by the media. They feel much like they have been the subject of the investigation, subject of the media, like their congressman. Do I think he got into legal trouble with that? No. Do I think that the made statements he thought were true at the time? Probably. Do I think any prosecutor would ever waste time or money on that? No.
[Schneider:] You know, Bill, there was an interesting comment by one of the women on his staff, which was revealing. She said: "I feel like a mother defending her child." That's just how powerful she felt. It was an emotional connection there, and it was just that personal.
[Hemmer:] And one also wonders, given that response that Greta was just talking about to Bob Franken out in Modesto, clearly it would make a difference, at least in public perception, if some of these matters were clarified, would it not? After all, again tonight, we heard some defensive posture at times, did we?
[Franken:] Well, we did, but what the strategy clearly is here is to try and paint a picture of Gary Condit as the good guy, as the guy who is in fact, being mistreated. They're pressing all the buttons. I can tell you that as one of the people that they complained about who hangs out outside Congressman Condit's office, it's really quite a friendly relationship, actually. There's a lot of banter that goes on between reporters and staff members. But they are trying to take advantage of the fact that demonizing the media is oftentimes very successful if you're trying to defend yourself. And presenting Gary Condit as somebody who is severely misunderstood is clearly what the staff members were sent out to try and do tonight.
[Hemmer:] Yes, Bill Schneider is shaking his head, yes, and I know sometimes it can backfire as well. Can I put you guys on hold just a second here. We're going to move on to another issue quickly here. And clearly, the Condit staff members have taken a strategy, as we mentioned, to deliver their message through the national media, CNN and Larry King included. Tonight, Howard Kurtz of CNN's "RELIABLE SOURCES" examines now whether or not the strategy in place is working.
[Connie Chung, Abc News Anchor:] Did you kill Chandra Levy?
[Rep. Gary Condit , California:] I did not.
[Howard Kurtz, Cnn Correspondent:] From the moment his interview with Connie Chung was over, Gary Condit's political stock has been plunging faster than the Nasdaq.
[Unidentified Male:] It may have been possible to have a worse performance, but I can't imagine how. Condit committed public relations hari-kari on national television. You normally expect someone to put their best foot forward; Condit put his foot in his mouth and didn't take it out for 30 minutes.
[Bill Press, Host, Cnn's "crossfire":] I thought he should have just been honest with the American people, admitted that he'd had an affair with this woman, and then moved on.
[Kurtz:] Condit didn't fare much better in his sit-downs with "Newsweek," "People" and a Sacramento TV station, drawing criticism even from such Democratic stalwarts as House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt and California Governor Gray Davis. Even his own advisers complained, no names attached, of course, that he hadn't stuck to the script, which called for a show of contrition. [on camera]: Once Condit bombed so badly in his brief media blitz, he needed a new PR strategy, and fast. With his support crumbling, his team decided to send out the surrogates. [voice-over]: First up: Attorney Abbe Lowell, gamely defending his client's performance.
[Abbe Lowell, Gary Condit's Attorney:] He did it as part of a process to start talking to his constituents, and it's wrong for people to sort of do this like it was a movie, thumbs-up, thumbs-down.
[Kurtz:] That, however, isn't how the media world works. And the polls were a disaster: 60 percent of those in a CNN-"USA Today"-Gallup survey said they believe the congressman was involved in Chandra Levy's disappearance. Condit's wife, Carolyn, has been conspicuously silent. She even looked unhappy on the cover of "People." But another Condit was willing to face the cameras on his dad's behalf.
[Chad Condit, Gary Condit's Son:] The fact of the matter is, Gary Condit has been forthcoming with law enforcement folks from the very beginning. And there is no honor in kicking somebody when they are down.
[Kurtz:] Tonight the Condit camp tried to fill the void, dispatching a half-dozen staffers to stand by their man on "LARRY KING LIVE." Another Democrat, Bill Clinton, relied heavily on surrogates to defend him during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. But Clinton was president, far slicker than Condit, and his intern wasn't missing.
[Hemmer:] Howard Kurtz is with us now, host of "RELIABLE SOURCES" up in Washington. Howard, good evening to you.
[Kurtz:] Hi, Bill.
[Hemmer:] Let's talk about the story, as it is being driven, possibly, by the cable news networks, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC included. There's something strange about waiting for an attorney to come on with Larry King at 9:00 to deliver us the latest news. How does this work, this symbiotic relationship that we see today in American politics and in American news?
[Kurtz:] Well, I've said all along that this is a legitimate, compelling human drama that ought to be covered, but the excess and the relentlessness with which all the cable networks are now feasting on this tragedy, all of them included, creates this void, and something has to fill the void. So if Gary Condit won't come out, we see his son, we see his staff. We see his lawyer. They may not add much, but they provide a piece of programing which all the commentators can then analyze and dissect afterwards.
[Hemmer:] We talked a lot about the media this evening so far with our panel. We heard a little bit about it too during Larry King's show tonight. Another one of the Condit staff members now, talking about the media and the role they play in this. Quick listen now.
[Pat Austin, Condit Staffer:] We're in our office and they're outside our office every day, all day. Even when we're not there on the weekend. We have constituents that come in and out of the office, and they occasionally stop these people and interview them. A lot often we have seen them if a person, and they come back in and tell us. And if the person tells reiterates the fact that they like Gary Condit, they don't want to talk to them.
[Hemmer:] Truth be known, Howard, on big stories like this, the Levys, the Condits use us, we use them. Is there a way you see to strike an effective balance, when it comes to this, or is this just the way it is?
[Kurtz:] Well, in a hyper-competitive environment, you do see a lot of excesses. You've seen some mistakes. Certainly, Congressman Condit helped drive the story by refusing to talk for three long months and not having a lot of good answers even when he did give a round of interviews in that brief media blitz. I think the only reason that there isn't more of a backlash against the press on this story, the way there was in the Monica Lewinsky saga, is that we finally found a figure who's less sympathetic to the public, even than journalists.
[Hemmer:] So you think if he came cleaner with Connie Chung, this might be a different issue right now?
[Kurtz:] I think if Congressman Condit had given some interviews, gone on TV, held a press conference in the early weeks, well before Connie Chung, the whole tenor of the story would have been different. It certainly would have been a big story, but not quite this feeding frenzy that we see today.
[Hemmer:] Hindsight's perfect, isn't it? It's 20-20. Howie Kurtz, thanks for staying up late with us tonight. Much appreciated.
[Kurtz:] Thank you.
[Hemmer:] Let's bring in CNN senior analyst now, Jeff Greenfield, live in New York, for his perspective tonight. It's been an interesting strategy, Jeff. What's your take on it. based on what you've seen tonight?
[Jeff Greenfield, Cnn Sr. Analyst:] Well, if you assume that these staff members, whether they went out on their own or were asked to, are reflecting what Congressman Condit and his people would like, you begin to see the outlines of a political strategy, should he try to hold on his seat namely, remind people of another Gary Condit other than that evasive, highly unpleasant figure we saw with Connie Chung, a caring congressman, a man who is a friend to the high and the low alike. Second, draw a very clear line between his private life, which is embarrassing, and relevant matters for the public. And third, remind the people back home, these are all people who have worked for his constituents, that he is a congressman who has served them and who should be judged on that, and not on that tarnished private life. It was sort of interesting that every time we got into the area of the stuff that embarrassed Gary Condit, the staff members themselves either didn't want to talk about it or were extremely uncomfortable.
[Hemmer:] Your show is coming up in 14 minutes time. You've been around American politics nearly your entire adult life. The perspective you're taking tonight, rather curious, how you rehab an image, huh, Jeff?
[Greenfield:] It's a very cold-blooded look at this. If you assume if you're Gary Condit and your media blitz crashed and burned and your son has gone out and defended you, your staff has gone public you know, the question we're going to be asking, a couple veteran political operatives and a journalist is: are there any tools of the political trade that Gary Condit can use to survive, or is this beyond repair? That's what we'll be talking about in about 12 or 13 minutes.
[Hemmer:] You got it, watching the clock, you're right. CNN, "GREENFIELD AT LARGE" follows us tonight. Jeff, thanks. Our panel is back shortly. Kate Snow, Greta Van Susteren, Bill Schneider and Bob Franken will talk about it again when we come back here. Stay tuned. Once again asking the question: what's ahead for Gary Condit tonight on LARRY KING LIVE. If you saw it here on CNN, five members of Gary Condit's staff gathered tonight and talked about their service and their work with the congressman. Our panel, live in Washington. Bill Schneider is there, so is Greta Van Susteren. Kate Snow is on Capitol Hill and Bob Franken, as always, it appears now, is hanging out in Modesto, California. Kate, let's go to you now. On the whole issue of redistricting, they're going to shuffle some areas of the country and change things around for voters, which may have a direct impact on the very district that Gary Condit serves. What's happening here?
[Snow:] In fact, Bill, I just got a phone call during that commercial break with some very interesting information, which is we knew that some of these maps you know, every 10 years they have to redraw the Congressional lines in every state to account for new population shifts and growing numbers and that sort of thing. They're redrawing all of the 52 districts in California. We thought the maps were going to be coming out soon. I've just learned that they have been coming out today to the members themselves. In other words, Democratic members in particular, were getting copies of what their district is going to look like after redistricting. Now, I just talked to a Republican member whose district borders actually, a spokesperson for him whose district borders on Gary Condit's and follow me if you will, if his district changes, that could possibly reflect what's going to happen to Gary Condit's district and it sounds like what we thought was going to happen is indeed happening, that they are changing Gary Condit's district, they are moving it, they're taking the northern border and they're moving it north and adding more Democrats to his district. This will have an impact presumably because these will be new voters, many Democrats, these are Democratic areas, Bill, that they're adding into his district, but these are people who never voted for Gary Condit before. So the speculation is perhaps those voters will only know him as someone who has been involved in a scandal.
[Hemmer:] And we've been taking the pulse, certainly, on voters. Bill Schneider, jump in.
[Schneider:] What is important is that one of his staff members said on Larry King tonight, we know the Gary Condit that others don't know. We know him personally, others the only know him through the media. That was the reason they said they went on Larry King. There's a message there and it has to do with the strategy that Jeff Greenfield just talked about. What they're saying is, so do his constituents. They know a Gary Condit who is a attentive to his constituents and who does his job. And people who know him, they are saying, feel differently about him. From what Kate just reported, they're putting a lot of people in this district including Democrats, who don't know Gary Condit, who can only judge him from the media and that puts him at a very serious disadvantage.
[Van Susteren:] You know what the problem is, Bill. It is almost like the staff that was on Larry King tonight were trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. In spite of all the good things that he has done, this is a terrible stain and of course the voters will get a chance to make a decision whether to send him back to Congress or not, should he choose to run. But the fact is that this is a terrible problem that he's got to overcome.
[Hemmer:] You know what I'm wondering, Greta, Bill, Bob, Kate. You all can jump in on this, are we making too big of a deal out of one person in the House that has 435 members? Gary Condit after all is just one of two hundred some Democrats.
[Van Susteren:] We may be making a lot out of it, Bill, but the problem is in many ways we have been through a similar story, only this story is worse because the young woman is missing. This is not just a run-of-the-mill story. This is a highly significant story with grieving parents out in California wondering where their daughter is that they sent to Washington.
[Hemmer:] First to Kate and then to Bob. Quickly, Kate.
[Snow:] Bill, there are a lot of folks a lot of Democrats, I should say, who are concerned about just that because, in fact, leader Gephardt, the Democratic leader here in the House said last week, it makes us look like a bunch of bums, all this focus on Gary Condit and his interview last week he thought made them look bad, reflected poorly on Congress as a whole and takes attention away from those 434 other members of the House. So that's definitely a point.
[Hemmer:] Bob, jump in here.
[Franken:] Of course, Greta is making comparisons too to the situation with Bill Clinton and I think something that has to be noted is that there's a huge difference between this controversy and the one involving President Clinton and that was the fact that if Bill Clinton wanted to, if he felt like it, he could distract attention away from this by bombing somewhere. Gary Condit is just a single member of the House of Representatives, of course doesn't have anything like that power, but because of the special circumstances of this story, it has become almost as large in terms of a news story as the Bill Clinton saga was 3 years ago.
[Schneider:] Well, remember, Bill Clinton lied to the American people and I think that was very much on Gary Condit's mind when he decided he wasn't going speak to the press, which he didn't for almost 4 months. He was essentially relying on Clinton's precedent of separating public and private behavior, saying, my private behavior is not relevant to my public performance, and we heard the same thing from his staff tonight. The difference is, there is a woman who has disappeared at the heart of this and his private behavior is certainly relevant to her disappearance and the question is, why how can he explain, what the police say, is his uncooperative behavior?
[Hemmer:] And the police were out today. Police Chief Ramsey was on a talk show this morning in Washington, D.C. talking about how they've been literally, paraphrasing his words now, pulling teeth to get the truth from Gary Condit. We will listen to him and talk about it when we come back here. Chief Ramsey today.
[Charles Ramsey, Chief, Washington D.c. Police:] It is up for people to decide whether or not that's forthcoming. That's the whole issue. If you ask a question you will get an answer. It's not necessarily an answer thought that's going to really help you. It's been very difficult in interviewing the congressman, and I think that people had a chance for an hour to see for themselves exactly what we've been going through.
[Hemmer:] Greta, how about that? How did that strike you today? We heard him today being more candid than we have in some time.
[Van Susteren:] It depends on how it's packaged. The congressman had four interviews. If you listen to the chief he said, see, it took four interviews and we are still not getting enough information. If you listen to his lawyer, he packages it differently, he says, look, we talked to them four times. How many times do you want us to talk to him? So it is a question of packaging and of course the police chief is unhappy and Abbe Lowell says we can't do any more. We have given them everything.
[Hemmer:] We have about a minute here. Kate and Bill, I want to get an idea from you guys right now, what you have in your mind in terms of an image on Tuesday after the Labor Day break when Congress comes back to Washington, when Gary Condit comes back to Washington. Kate, what are you thinking?
[Snow:] Well, I know that they've all been talking about not everybody but a lot of folks have been talking about this. Members talking to each other, they're all on vacation, Bill, they've been on vacation all August. Some of them are in Israel, some of the members in other trips overseas. So they're very spread out. But I do know that Dick Gephardt, the minority leader, who made those comments last week, has talked to some of his colleagues. He has indicated that he wants to see what others think, what the other leadership people and what the whole Democratic caucus thinks about what they should do with Gary Condit and whether they should take any action. They could try to remove him from committees or do something like that, but it's unclear whether that's going to happen. I think we are going to see a lot more of the same, of cameras following him all over Capitol Hill.
[Hemmer:] Quickly, Bill Schneider, go ahead.
[Schneider:] He will be treated as poison by his colleagues and that will continue. I see only one way that he can turn this around. He more than any other figure along with the Levy family, has to be committed to finding Chandra Levy. Because unless she's found I don't think there's anyway he can resuscitate his career.
[Hemmer:] And I Bob Franken shaking his head. Bob, go ahead.
[Franken:] Just very quickly, on of the reasons there's such a feeling that he's going to say something in the next few days about his political future, because that could affect the reception he gets when he goes back to Washington, assuming he goes back.
[Hemmer:] Bob Franken, Kate Snow, Bill Schneider, Greta Van Susteren.

[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] APEC leaders meeting in China depart from their economic agenda and issue a declaration condemning the September 11 terror attacks in the U.S. The 21 members called for U.N. leadership in anti-terrorism measures. The APEC summit was the largest gathering of world leaders since the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. CNN's Andrea Koppel joins me from Shanghai with more on this second two-day meeting, that is Andrea.
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn State Department Correspondent:] Good evening from Shanghai, Martin. It is the end of the APEC summit now, at least as far as the official meetings are concerned. But on the sidelines President Bush should just be wrapping up his meeting with the Russian President Vladimir Putin about now. They're expected to have a press conference shortly. But CNN has learned that during that meeting the president is expected, or was highly likely, to raise with the Russian president the fact that the United States will withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty by the end of the year. This would have been a six- month notification that's required under the terms of the treaty. According to one senior administration official who spoke with CNN, once you pull the trigger on the withdrawal notice, there is no ambiguity left. You've got to get serious. The relationship with the between the U.S. and Russia prior to September 11 was somewhat strained over whether or not the Bush administration would proceed with a missile defense system. In order to do so, the Bush administration says it will have either aggregate or amend the ABM Treaty. Now, in addition to the meeting between Presidents Bush and Putin, earlier in the day the APEC leaders the Asian-Pacific leaders signed off on what's known as a joint declaration the Shanghai accordance, it's known here. And in it they agreed that they were going to combat terrorism around the world and that this was something that all 21 economies needed to band together in order to fight. The person who greeted the whole, and essentially unveiled this joint declaration, was the host of this year's summit, President Jiang Zemin.
[Jiang Zemin, President Of China:] We condemn in the strongest of terms the attack as an affront to peace, prosperity and the security of all people, of all faiths, of every nation.
[Koppel:] Now, in addition to condemning terrorism around the world, the statement also says that this is something that, since September 11, has affected the economies of the world, whether it be in the transportation industry, in tourism and what not, and that there needs to be solidarity among the Asian-Pacific countries in order to try to revitalize the economies that have suffered not only in the West, but also here in the East. Now, following President Bush's press conference and dinner this evening with the Russian president, Martin, he is going to be heading back to Washington, where his aides say he'll be continuing this global coalition building and the fight against terrorism Martin.
[Savidge:] Thank you very much Andrea. CNN's Andrea Koppel in Shanghai.

[Schaffler:] And it's time now to get some "Predictions." We start, as always, with Myron.
[Myron Kandel, Cnn Financial Editor:] Well, Rhonda, I've been saying the summer rally is here, and then it goes, and it comes. For a time this week, it looked like we were going to have a nice resumption of the summer rally. And then we had the uncertainty on Friday as a result of the jobs report. I still think that there's strength in this market for a solid summer rally, not an explosive one, but a solid one in the month of August. I get a little worried looking father ahead about a pullback. But that's in the future. Right now, despite ups and downs, a very volatile market, I'm still looking for a decent summer rally.
[Schaffler:] We're running out of summer, Myron. But we still have August. Todd.
[Eberhard:] I think the summer rally, as I said earlier, is going to be a lot colder than summer when it finally gets here. But we will get it. And the one prediction I will throw out is that the Fed will do a quarter point on the 21st.
[Schaffler:] Nick.
[Sargen:] I agree with the Fed. But I think that's priced in. So I think this summer could take vacation. I think all the action heats up after Labor Day. And it's which way does the economy break? Down the road, I think professional money managers want to put money to work. So I think later on this year we might get a rally. I don't think it's right now.
[Schaffler:] John.
[Manley:] I think we get a good productivity number next week. And that's sort of an indication the long-term is still intact. It's a question of slogging through summer or winter or whatever. But long term, it will be proved to be intact. We'll see a good number.
[Schaffler:] If the Fed comes through, will there be less slogging?
[Manley:] The more the Fed does, the better it is. But they can't treat the direct problem. They just have to keep the patient alive. But eventually, it will heal itself.
[Schaffler:] And when we look at an economy and the market healing itself, any thoughts on how this market will be by the end of the year? Investors still don't seem to have that confidence.
[Manley:] No one has confidence in the numbers. But that's the point. They go from no confidence to some confidence. That's what I think makes the market do well. So I think the market could be 10 or 12 percent higher by the end of the year.
[Schaffler:] OK. I got an extra prediction from you, John. That is it for this edition of MONEYLINE WEEKEND. I'm Rhonda Schaffler. Drop us an e-mail at MONEYLINE.WEEKEND@CNN.com. We'd love to hear your questions and comments. And you have a great weekend. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Now to news from overseas, this morning, a number of voices being heard there in the crisis in the Middle East. More intensive efforts now under way to end nearly two weeks of deadly clashes between Israeli security forces and Palestinians there. Let's go live, now, to Jerusalem. CNN's Ben Wedeman once again with us where again the situation continues today. Ben, more violence or less than what we've seen in the past few weeks?
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Correspondent:] Bill, there is not quite the level we have seen in the last two weeks, roughly. But there still is violence. We are hearing from the Palestinian village town of Tulcaram that one man has been killed and two wounded in clashes there. And there reports, also reports of other clashes elsewhere. This is usually the time of day when these things happen. Usually mid-afternoon, local time, of course, is when the clashes break out. One piece of information that we have received from Palestinian officials, not yet confirmed by Israeli sources, is that the Israeli army at the moment has placed cement blocks on many of the roads leading from the areas under exclusive Palestinian security and civil control to the areas under joint control where the Israelis have security presence and the Palestinians are in charge of the civil authority. Now this, of course, has not, as I said, been confirmed by Israeli officials, but the Palestinian official, senior Palestinian official, I spoke to was very angry about this development. He says that this will complicate the situation at a time when many people, diplomats and others, are trying to calm down the situation. He described this as a move that is contrary to all the efforts being made by Kofi Annan and other international diplomats. Now, today, we have seen intense activity on the ground. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has met with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak as well as Yasser Arafat, the leader of the Palestinian Authority. Both of those meetings, in fact, unscheduled, very much a surprise. So, there may be some movement forward on that. Also, in the region, is the European Union Security Chief Javier Solana, who met with, also, Arafat and Barak, And before leaving to Egypt, he made the following statement.
[Javier Solana, European Union Envoy:] We are trying to do our best. And the visit that I'm doing to the region is for that purpose. We are trying to see how we can help to scale down the violence. And therefore, that the situation of tension and, therefore, to return to what is the dream of everybody, to try to negotiate a permanent peace. That is what we want. And with that we want to help.
[Wedeman:] So, diplomacy is still alive and well and kicking. But, with news of more clashes, there is some question now, on the horizon. I'm Ben Wedeman, CNN, reporting live from Jerusalem.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] We want to update you now on a breaking story that we just got in from Manhattan. You're looking at live pictures from Manhattan, from the East Village, where the wall of a building there has collapsed. Firefighter officials say that three people, perhaps, could be trapped in the rubble. This according to New York City Fire Department. And almost 200 firefighters have been called onto the scene, 47 units responding. This is a four-story commercial building at 14 2nd Avenue. Apparently this collapsed wall went into a small courtyard next to Houston Street in the East Village of Manhattan. You're looking at the scene right there. We will continue to keep you up to date on this breaking news story out of Manhattan. Just a note: Yesterday a building collapsed in Brooklyn, killing at least three people there. Let's go to Natalie now with more.
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Cecilia Cox is on the line with us. Ms. Cox, were you a witness to what happened?
[Cecilia Cox, New York Fire Department:] Hello.
[Allen:] Yes, what can you tell us about what happened?
[Cox:] What I can tell you is that a four-story, commercial building in the lower east side section of Manhattan has a side wall that has collapsed into the interior of the building.
[Allen:] What kind of you say commercial building. What did this house?
[Cox:] We're hearing that it was a commercial establishment that stored large antique artifacts, such as large wrought-iron doors, masonry pieces, large signs, things that are irreplaceable. As a matter of fact, I'm hearing that it's called the establishment is called Irreplaceable Antiques.
[Allen:] We actually see that on our screen right now in these live pictures. Thank you.
[Cox:] Yes.
[Allen:] Any idea why it collapsed? Was this a construction project?
[Cox:] No, it's very early in the initial stages of this incident, and unfortunately we will have to do a brick-by-brick search to make sure that all of the occupants are safe and accounted for, and to try and get some sense of exactly what caused this.
[Allen:] So we've been saying that maybe up to three people could be trapped inside. Any ideas...?
[Cox:] Initially, there was a report of three unconfirmed people that were unaccounted for. But I'm just getting some information that's telling me that there are 10 people with minor injuries, and these people that were initially thought missing have been accounted for.
[Allen:] I assume these people were they all people that were injured, were they working?
[Cox:] Yes, they were workers for this store.
[Allen:] Do you know if any passersby were hurt as well?
[Cox:] I'm sure that I'm hearing that all 10 people had something to do. They either worked there or were working in the initial area. They were workers. They weren't civilians or shopping in the area or anything.
[Allen:] Cecilia Cox of the New York Fire Department, we thank you for talking with us, again, confirming for us that doesn't believe there's anyone trapped in the rubble, but there were 10 people injured when this wall collapsed in Manhattan today.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] For once, finally, the stock markets got the green light. At least it's a go signal, however temporary. Investors just seem to be waiting to jump on any good news. First Dell Computer started the upward momentum yesterday, by reassuring investors that it will meet its first quarter forecast. Then Alcoa, the first Dow component to report, beat consensus estimates on first quarter earnings. On top of that, Yahoo! got a coveted buy rating from Lehman Brothers. But will all this euphoria last? CNN's Deborah Marchini joins us live now from our financial news headquarters in New York Deborah.
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Hi, Colleen. And as always, the answer is that depends. The futures markets this morning are signaling some selling pressure at the open. We could see maybe a 50-point drop in the Dow, and Nasdaq futures are down about 19 points. But that could change. At 8:30 Eastern time a little more than an hour from now we're going to get key economic report. It's the government's first official look at the economy in March: It is the unemployment report. The unemployment rate is supposed to tick up by.1 percent, to 4.3 percent, which is still pretty near a 30-year low. About 58,000 new jobs are expected to have been created in the month of March. That's a pretty weak report. Now what the markets are hoping to see is weak job growth, but not a weak enough economic picture that would signal recession. Weak job growth, of course, would result in a rate cut, presumably, by the Federal Reserve, perhaps before the Fed's next official meeting in May. Now, Alan Greenspan is going to be speaking in public today, but his topic is the importance of education, and we are told he will not be taking questions. So it's pretty clear the Fed chairman does not want to give us any hints today about where interest rate policy may head Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] All right, Deborah, tell us more about Agilent. I understand they're cutting salaries of their employees as a way of containing costs. How unusual a move is that?
[Marchini:] It's becoming less and less unusual. The vast majority of companies that are found in economic trouble in these times have chosen to cut payrolls, to cut jobs, or at least to announce plans to cut jobs. What Agilent is doing is interesting: They're going to impose a temporary, across-the-board, 10 percent salary cut so that they won't have to lay anybody off. Agilent is that spin-off of Hewlett Packard. It makes testing and measurement equipment. And it really says that business turned bad just in the last four to six weeks, much more than they had expected. They're having trouble with customers like big communications firms. And that trouble is showing up in other places. We have two warnings this morning, one from Sycamore Networks, one from Extreme Networks, and they're both cutting staff by 13 percent and 12 percent.
[Mcedwards:] All right, CNN's Deborah Marchini, in New York, thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Paul Vercammen, Co-host:] Hi, everybody. I'm Paul Vercammen in Hollywood. Laurin Sydney is in New York. Clint Eastwood is in Washington defending small business owners. He appeared before a House subcommittee Thursday, complaining that lawyers have exploited the Americans With Disabilities Act by filing lawsuits left and right. Eastwood himself was sued for failing to provide full disabled access to his California hotel. He says business owners should get 90 days to comply before facing an expensive and unnecessary legal battle. The actor maintains in his case the alleged violations were nonexistent.
[Clint Eastwood, Actor:] They claimed that some employee told them we didn't have handicapped bathrooms. Well, the truth is we did have handicapped bathrooms, but some employee this mythical employee they couldn't identify and none of the employees could identify the plaintiff, so it just went on and on and on.
[Vercammen:] The Screen Actor's Guild is upset over this magazine ad which attempts to make light of the current strike over commercial fees. The ad taken out by Ridley Scott's commercial firm depicts a pair of breasts, above the head, "This is what SAG means in South Africa." It's intended to promote the Scott's company, which claims it can shoot commercials abroad, bypassing the strikers. SAG calls the ad racist and sexist.
[Laurin Sydney, Co-host:] David Duchovny has solved a mystery worthy of his show, "The X-Files." He will return as Agent Mulder for an eighth season. He will be working less though, appearing on six to 11 episodes of Fox's sci-fi series. At the same time, Duchovny has settled his lawsuit against the network's syndication unit. Sources tell "Variety" that Duchovny's overall deal may be worth more than $20 million. CBS executives announced their fall lineup yesterday in New York, and while they may be betting on Bette Midler to launch a female- friendly block on Wednesday nights, they also will be getting a shot of testosterone up their sleeves with the return of "The Fugitive." Michael Okwu has more on CBS'fall schedule.
[Begin Video Clip, "bette") Bette Midler, Actress:] I love him, but I just don't know if I should do
[Tv. Unidentified Actor:] You did "Seinfeld."
[Midler:] Oh, but that was "Seinfeld."
[Les Moonves, President, Cbs Television:] We have a lot that's new. We have Bette Midler appearing in her first television show. [Begin Video Clip, "bette"]
[Midler:] But really, if I keep taking these guest spots, pretty soon I'll have my own series, and then I might just as well kill myself.
[Michael Okwu, Cnn Correspondent:] CBS unveiled seven new shows on its fall schedule, but it has most odds on "Bette."
[Moonves:] Big scoop with Bette. I've been asking her for five years, saying please! And I think it finally was the material. She finally found the script that's about Bette herself, on stage and off.
[Christine Baranski, Actress:] You have to tune in for Bette Midler and then just stick around for us.
[Okwu:] "Welcome to New York," a TV newsroom comedy with Christine Baranski, joins the "Bette" show on the list of newcomers.
[Heather Paige Kent, Actress:] We got a new show, yeah!
[Okwu:] Heather Paige Kent headlines "That's Life" with Paul Sorvino.
[Anthony Clark, Actor:] It's called "Yes Dear." It's Monday night, 8:30.
[Okwu:] "Yes Dear" is CBS'new season answer to the popularity of "Everybody Loves Raymond" and "King of Queens."
[Mike O'malley, Actor:] We play brothers-in-law married to sisters.
[Okwu:] Jean Lousia Kelly and Liza Snider star with Anthony Clark and Mike O'Malley.
[Unidentified Actress:] Awesome time slot, right before "Raymond." Which is good. Which is great.
[Moonves:] We have "The Fugitive" coming back to television.
[Tim Daly, Actor:] That'd be me.
[Mykelti Williamson, Actor:] That would be Tim, yes. And I am Lieutenant Phillip Girard, I'll be chasing Tim.
[Okwu:] Craig T. Nelson gets on the cops' case in "The District," based on the real-life trouble-shooter Jack Maple.
[Craig T. Nelson, Actor:] He came into different police departments all over the country and reorganizes them and restructures them.
[Okwu:] And Marg Helgenberger and William Petersen team up in "
[C.s.i." Marg Helgenberger, Actress:] It stands for crime scene investigation, so we are a group of criminologists that work the graveyard shift in Las Vegas.
[William Petersen, Actor:] These are the guys that come in on most cop shows on television, these are the guys that come in right when the scene ends. [Begin Video Clip, "judging Amy"]
[Tyne Daly, Actress:] For your information, you are not the only judge I know.
[Okwu:] The legal dramas "Judging Amy" and "Family Law" got called back for a second season, as did "City of Angels," which had some surprised.
[Blair Underwood, Actor:] With no question, the reason we are back now is because of the audience. The audience, they mailed letters, they wrote, they called, they e-mailed.
[Okwu:] And for an audience, a network will take a safe "Bette." [Begin Video Clip, "bette"]
[Midler:] Danny!
[Danny Devito, Actor:] Hey, babe, great show.
[Okwu:] Michael Okwu, CNN Entertainment News, New York.
[Vercammen:] And it's a safe bet that Pamela Lee will be back next fall with her syndicated series "VIP." Easy Pamela Lee fans, now the show winds up its season this week with a special guest star, a guy once assembled at a cost of $6 million. Sherri Sylvester visited the high price co-stars on the set.
[Unidentified Male:] Action! [Begin Video Clip, "vip"]
[Pamela Anderson Lee, Actress:] Dad, is there something you want to tell me?
[Lee Majors, Actor:] Yes, watch the road.
[Sherri Sylvester, Cnn Correspondent:] Pamela Anderson Lee is not the love child of celebrities, but she has cast Lee Majors as her father in her syndicated series, and this "VIP" sees a family resemblance to his one-time wife.
[Majors:] Someone said, you know, if you and Farrah had, had a child, maybe that's what it would look like. And when she turns around, with her hair in the back, it kind of resembles the ex. [Begin Video Clip, "vip"]
[Lee:] I'm armed.
[Majors:] Now, wait, listen.
[Sylvester:] Lee's "VIP" is a kind of high crimes in high heels descendent of "Charlie's Angels." But when she was a kid, Lee was drawn to the majors.
[Lee:] I just actually talked to my dad today, and I was like, "Dad, you know who is playing you?" And he's like, "Who?" I'm like, "Lee Majors." He's like, "That'll do. That'll do. That's a good one. That's great." Because we grew up watching "6 Million Dollar Man," "Fall Guy." [Begin Video Clip, "vip"] Oh, my God, He's not double 00 dad. He's the "6 Million Dollar Man."
[Sylvester:] Majors, now 61, recently finished a sitcom for the BBC, continuing a long run in television.
[Majors:] That would have been my eighth television series, and starting back with "The Big Valley" in the '60s, "The 6 Mill" through the '70s, and "The Fall Guy" through the '80s. I've about run out of gas, but I still like working. [Begin Video Clip, "vip"] Well, this isn't something you can fix with a ribbon and a bracelet.
[Lee:] Dad, you just said that I was clever.
[Majors:] All the action shows that I've done over the years, they you have to almost stay in shape automatically, and I was always a physical person as far as playing sports.
[Sylvester:] Lee, who knows a thing or two about staying in shape, plays up her physical attributes in this campy crime series, which she produces. [Begin Video Clip, "vip"]
[Lee:] ... before it's too late.
[Lee:] After, you know, the "Baywatch" and the "Barb Wire," I wanted to kind of take that image and say it's ridiculous, it was just silly, and so I think I get to do that with this show, and I think and I've always wanted the show to be campy, and wacky, and a little out there.
[Sylvester:] Mission accomplished. The show does well in syndication and its high camp factor does draw a number of celebrity guests. Majors' episode airs this weekend during May sweeps. Sherri Sylvester, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Sydney:] Disney hopes to capitalize on dinosaur mania with their new animated feature. And a fascinating documentary on a ground- breaking baseball legend.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Military investigators are looking for the cause of a deadly crash in Arizona. An Osprey aircraft carrying 19 Marines went down last night during a training mission. CNN military affairs correspondent Jamie McIntyre has details.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Correspondent:] The Marine V-22 tilt-rotor aircraft crashed at night at an airport just northwest of Tucson, Arizona, where it was supposed to land and refuel after conducting an exercise to practice evacuation of civilians. All 19 Marines onboard were killed. Some eyewitnesses say they saw the V-22 take a nosedive and think it may have caught fire before it crashed. The pilots were wearing night vision goggles, which can limit peripheral vision, but officials don't yet know if that was a factor in the crash. The V-22 Osprey is new technology for the Marines. Only five production models have been delivered so far. It takes off like a helicopter but then rotates its propellers to fly like a plane, twice as fast and twice as far as older helicopters. Prototypes of the V-22 crashed twice in the early 1990s. The only other fatal accident was in 1992, when a faulty design caused the engines to catch fire. Seven people were killed when the aircraft plunged into the water near the Quantico Marine base. The Bush administration tried to kill the program, citing cost and safety concerns. But President Clinton resurrected it in 1993, and experts predict this accident, no matter how tragic, is unlikely to derail the V-22.
[Greg Seigle, Military Aviation Journalist:] If it's a mechanical failure of some sort, they will correct it. They will field this aircraft. It's too late in development to turn around and stop now.
[Mcintyre:] In development for more than a decade, the V-22 Osprey is just now going into full production. The Marines plan to buy 360 V-22s to replace aging Vietnam War-era CH-46 twin rotor transport helicopters. [on camera]: This latest crash with its death toll of 19 Marines will again raise questions about whether the V-22 is battle-tested technology. But first investigators will have to determine if the crash resulted from a mechanical malfunction, or the most common cause of aviation accidents, pilot error. Jamie McIntyre, CNN, the Pentagon.
[Hall:] Part plane, part helicopter, the Osprey is a multimission aircraft jointly in development with the U.S. Navy, Marines and Air Force. The turboprop aircraft has rotors attached to wings that pivot upward, allowing it to take off and land like a helicopter. Introduced back in 1989, it can fly at speeds more than 300 miles an hour and at altitudes up to 25,000 feet. The Osprey is designed to carry up to 24 troops, two pilots and one crew chief. The Marine Corps' version will eventually be used as an assault transport for troops, equipment and supplies, designed to operate from ships or land. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] A car bomb in Jakarta, Indonesia killed three people earlier today. The apparent target, the Philippine ambassador to Indonesia. He survived.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Political turmoil has prevented the kind of recovery that many of Indonesia's neighbors have enjoyed. Hugh Carnegy, of the "Financial Times," has been looking at that development. He joins us now from the "FT"'s London newsroom. And Hugh, what can you tell us on this front?
[Hugh Carnegy, World News Editor, "financial Times":] Good morning. Well, this bomb this morning, it may not be related directly to Indonesia's own problems. The president of Indonesia said he suspects that it's to do with a separatist struggle going on in the Philippines. Because it was apparently targeted at the Filipino ambassador. But what I think it's done is just added to the political fragility that people sense in Jakarta at the moment. Indeed, the market, the rupia, the Indonesian currency was weakened a bit by this bomb attack this morning. And it comes at a time when the political in Indonesia is looking rather shaky and the president, Abdurrahman Wahid, is today been in a meeting with senior political leaders to try and settle the political background so that they can get on with economic reforms, which are rather lacking at the moment. And, of course, Indonesia is a key country in the whole Southeast Asia region. It's actually the world's fourth-largest country by population. But, as you said, the economy has not really picked up lately, there's still a lot of reforms to be done, there's still a lot of bad debts in the banking system, for example, that haven't really, that haven't been unwound. So people are anxious to see Indonesia begin to get its economic act together, and that would require political stability. And these type of bomb attacks don't exactly help.
[Marchini:] Is Indonesia alone in the region as regards the political and economic problems?
[Carnegy:] Well, there has been some worries, I think, more widely spread in the region that the recovery from the great crisis of a couple of years ago has faltered somewhat. And we've seen that in countries like Thailand as well, and further away, in the Philippines itself, and elsewhere. But, as I say, Indonesia is such country, being such a large and strategically placed country in the region. And people are looking to see economic reform take root in Indonesia. There was a new agreement with the IMF yesterday, and so the loan program from the IMF is going ahead to back these reforms. But we still haven't really seen the economy begin to recover in the way that would give us a drive for both Indonesia itself and a knock-on effect in the region as a whole.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, Hugh Carnegy, the "Financial Times," thanks for joining us this morning.

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] It was a late night for President Clinton, who spent more than 40 minutes revving up the crowd at this week's Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles. Mr. Clinton offered a triumphant review of his nearly eight years in office and served up high praise for the man who's been at his side. For more now on just what the president had to say, we go to CNN's Gina London, who joins us live from Los Angeles today. Gina, good morning.
[Gina London, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, good morning, Linda. That's right, I'm here at the Staples Center, where it all took place last night. This really was a sort of last hurrah for President Clinton as he faced this adoring crowd. Now he did get emotional at times. He actually thanked the American people for giving him eight years of a job that he said, in his words, "was a joy." But he really revved up the crowd, Linda, when he talked about taking credit for the booming economy. He used the Republicans' words against them by quoting Ronald Reagan back in 1988.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] I ask you, let's remember the standard our Republican friends used to have for whether a party should continue in office: My fellow Americans, are we better off today than we were eight years ago? We're not just better off, we're also a better country. We are, today, more tolerant, more decent, more humane, and more united. Now that's the purpose of prosperity.
[London:] And, of course, Mr. Clinton made it very clear that Al Gore is going to carry on that prosperity because he supports those economic policies. In fact, as president of the Senate, he cast the deciding vote to implement some of those policies.
[Clinton:] We sent our plan to Congress. It passed by a single vote in both houses. In a deadlocked Senate, Al Gore cast the tie- breaking vote. Now, now, not a single Republican supported it. Here's what their leader said. Their leader said our plan would increase the deficit, kill jobs, and give us a one-way ticket to a recession. Time has not been kind to their predictions.
[London:] Now, all in all, many analysts actually considered it a classic Clinton campaign speech. The Republicans said, from their point of view, it was less about handing the baton to Al Gore and more about beating the drum of Bill Clinton. But Al Gore and Joe Lieberman were watching on the campaign trail in St. Louis, and they called it a success. Meantime, however, back here at the Staples Center, even while the president was giving a speech, there were some protests and some clashes of those protesters with police. There had been a concert in the fenced off area around by the Staples Center, and then some protesters tried to climb the fence, some small fires erupted. And the police, in full riot gear, were called in. They came in to try to disperse the crowds, actually pulled the plug on the concert. And we understand that there were some rubber bullets that were fired, some pepper spray that was emitted. And there were several arrests, although there were no major injuries that we've heard reported. So it was quite an evening here at Staples Center, of politics, protesters, and, of course, the president Linda.
[Stouffer:] Gina London, live in Los Angeles.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] And when the vice president arrives in Jordan today, he will be greeted by Crown Prince Abdullah and one of the most prominent members of Jordan's ruling family. Queen Noor, who has long been a voice for peace and women's rights, talks about the importance of that visit. Queen Noor was here in New York last week, to celebrate International Women's Day at the U.N., and I had the opportunity to talk with her.
[Queen Noor, Jordan:] Well, I do believe, whether you're talking about women or you're talking about poverty eradication, disarmament, the issue of land mines. When you're talking about peace and security, whether in the Middle East or elsewhere, where I've seen progress made, it's been people coming together, taking leaps of faith in one another and working hard to transcend their own personal self- interests to achieve a common vision and common goals. I learned from that was reinforced by my husband. That had, perhaps, started as a young person growing up in the United States with the Civil Right Movement and issues that were important to me as a young girl. But my husband helped me take that to a whole other level and looking at his struggles over so long for peace in the Middle East. And never letting up, no matter what the obstacles. And today this lesson is more important than ever before, of his. Never in the face of seemingly hopeless odds giving up on the faith that we can have that together we can advance the process of peace. It is clearly in the interest of all of us. It just there are times when it it takes an example like his and other other heroes of our world today to remind us that we cannot give up. And in Afghanistan, we have an example of of progress and transformation, God willing, that's taking place. I hope and pray that, in the Middle East, women, their children, their families, who have been suffering so much over the last several years, in particular, are also going see a glimmer of of light and hope in the future.
[Zahn:] It wasn't that long ago that your husband, King Hussein, once stood in the Rose Garden and shook hands with Yasser Arafat, Yitzhak Rabin, President Clinton, and everybody hoped, at that time, that that was going to be the agreement that would bring peace to the Middle East. That hasn't happened. Can you even imagine how much that would break your husband's heart?
[Noor:] I it breaks all of our hearts to see how much regression has taken place from those hopeful days. They we knew they weren't the end of a process. They were the beginning of a new process, but a much more hopeful and constructive process. And that process has suffered considerably. I I don't think of it in terms of how it would break his heart, but I think constantly of the example that he set in a in bringing people together, in addressing seemingly intractable crises with a positive spirit and with a determination to promote dialogue, rather than violence. In a time like this, I I hope that that many in our in our region take remember those examples and and and will not lose heart. And I think we see progress in the worst of all of what has happened. We see it among moderates in on both sides. This horror at what has taken place, and this determination to stop the killing and to to work for a peaceful resolution.
[Zahn:] Have you ever thought about becoming in any way politically involved in the process? Has anybody asked you?
[Noor:] I I think that my contribution to the political has always been through my humanitarian commitment, and I have always believed that true security, the underpinning of most of these political policies and objectives, is, in fact, only guaranteed only achieved by addressing the fundamental needs and aspirations of people, on the individual, the village, the national and, ultimately, the regional basis. And so my work in that sense that of a humanitarian politician, as it's often been described. And that's as political as I care to get.
[Zahn:] Good for you. At least you know that going in. Great to see you.
[Noor:] Thank you so much, Paula.
[Zahn:] Thank you very much for your time. That, of course, was Queen Noor of Jordan. We really appreciated her dropping by and spending some time with us. 9

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Well, today it is a tale of two capitals, one that is reeling one that is cartwheeling. Let's go now to Kate Snow at her post on Capitol Hill, who has the latter side with her hello, Kate.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Hi, Miles. That's right, I'm joined by Senator John Breaux, a Democrat from Louisiana, who has been sort of integral in some of the debate on Capitol Hill, been working very closely with the White House. Let me start, you're a Democrat. It's a good day to be a Democrat.
[Sen. John Breaux , Louisiana:] Yes, it is.
[Snow:] Tell me what has the reaction been within the Democratic Party?
[Breaux:] I think regular pleasure, the sense that Jim Jeffords is someone who has worked with us on many issues in the past as a moderate Republican. I think he's going to feel more comfortable within the Democratic Caucus. I think he'll be able to play a leadership role on issues that he cares about, like health care and education. I think he felt he wasn't able to do that within the Republican Party. So he should feel much more confident.
[Snow:] We've got some strong statements already, one of which from Senator John McCain, about the Republican Party and how they handled Senator Jeffords. Do you think that they mishandled the situation?
[Breaux:] I think that you cannot threaten people in order to get them to vote one way or the other. I think that's a serious mistake. I think you have to be able to allow for different opinions within each party. And I think I'm a moderate conservative Democrat within the Democratic Party. But I don't feel threatened. I don't feel like I'm out of place. And I have very warm relationship with Tom Daschle and all of our colleagues and feel like there's a home there.
[Snow:] The White House is invited you over on numerous occasions. Should they have done with same with Jim Jeffords?
[Breaux:] I don't know what, really. I think Jim Jeffords is not so much changing because he feels like he was snubbed as much as he feels he's more comfortable on the Democratic side. It's an issue thing. It's a principle thing I think with Jim.
[Snow:] What happens to you now? The Democrats regain the majority. But you have often sided with the White House on things like the tax cut. What happens to your role?
[Breaux:] I think that the Senate is still going to be obviously very close. I think the idea is to try to find ways to get results in a bipartisan fashion. It's very difficult when you just have one party get things done only one way. I think we are going to have a lot of compromises. I think Tom Daschle realizes that. And I think it will be something that will work very well.
[Snow:] Does the agenda change right away now?
[Breaux:] I don't think it really changes that quickly. I mean, it's going to be an opportunity for things like patients' bill of rights, like Medicare reform I think, to come to the floor of the Senate, perhaps faster than it would have. But I think that Senator Daschle will take this very cautiously. And I think that's the right approach.
[Snow:] You are about to go on a recess for Memorial Day. I expect that all the changes will start to come into play after you get back?
[Breaux:] After we get back, I think. I don't think anything is going to happen until after the recess. I think Tom Daschle is going to take things slowly. I think he's going to try and have a very smooth transition. This is not a time to gloat or try and kick people in or kick people out. It's trying to make government work. And I think Tom is committed to that.
[Snow:] Thank you so much, Senator John Breaux...
[Breaux:] Thank you.
[Snow:] ... from Louisiana, a Democrat joining me on the fly, about to head over to a meeting with his fellow Democrats and Republicans. Also, a meeting now, we expect to hear from Republicans Majority Leader Trent Lott after that meeting breaks up. Back to you in Atlanta.
[O'brien:] All right, CNN's Kate Snow on Capitol Hill with Senator John Breaux. Daryn?
[Kagan:] And let's get more now on Senator Jeffords' defection from the Republican Party. Let's bring back our senior political analyst Bill Schneider once again in Washington Bill, hello again.
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Hello, again.
[Kagan:] while Senator Jeffords' move is a break for the Democrats, it certainly is not a free pass. It's not like they've been given a blank slate to do whatever they want in Washington, they still face incredible challenges.
[Schneider:] They still have just 50 votes in the Senate with 49 Republicans and one independent. So, still incredibly closely balanced. But what they do have is more control over the agenda because they have the committee chairmanships. They have the majority leader of the Senate. And those are the positions from which you can control procedures, rules, timing, and what is going to happen with the president's nomination. So they have power, but they don't have any more votes.
[Kagan:] And what kind of issues do you expect the Democrats to take advantage of that?
[Schneider:] Oh, there are lots of issues where they are going to try to force the president to be bipartisan in fact as well as in word, issues like the president's energy plan where they are unhappy with the lower emphasis on environmental protection. Missile defense, a lot of Democrats don't care for that. They like to gear him more towards a prescription drug plan that the Democrats favor rather than one that the White House favors. HMO reform, the judges that the president nominates. And everyone of those, the president is going to have be really bipartisan. So far, bipartisanship has been more of a gesture. The way the White House has approached it is to pick off a few conservative Democrats like Zell Miller and a couple of others to vote with the Republicans. Can't do that anymore. Now he is going to have to deal with oh, my God liberal Democrats, because they're in control.
[Kagan:] Bill, if nothing else, today's news is a reminder that the Senate and other governmental bodies are not static beings. They change and they evolve as they go, sometimes at moments when we don't expect it like today, besides elections. But it's a reminder that even this split right now 50-49-one is not forever...
[Schneider:] No...
[Kagan:] ... Look ahead to other changes that the Senate could be facing.
[Schneider:] Well, look, you know have election next year. Both parties are desperately grappling to try to become the real majority party. Neither party really has the majority right now, but the Democrats can claim more seats than the Republicans. The 2002 is going to be a crucial election. There are a lot of important seats up. The Republicans are struggling to regain their majority now. You have Strom Thurmond, another single individual who is 98 years old. And no one knows how long he is going to be able to continue to serve in the Senate. Last year, we had a couple of crucial deaths that made a difference. Paul Coverdell in Georgia was replaced by Zell Miller, a Democrat. Mel Carnahan, the candidate in Missouri, died. And his wife on a big sympathy vote beat John Ashcroft and took that seat for the Democrats. So, you know, somebody once said, "History is the product of profits, random events, and madmen." We are seeing that now.
[Kagan:] Probably not necessarily in that order either.
[Schneider:] Right.
[Kagan:] What about the voters out there who aren't maybe as fascinated with the political process and how it works, but they just want to see something get done. Are things more likely to get done this way or less likely to get done with the split of Congress?
[Schneider:] Well, divided government does often make things harder. We are going to have divided government now. The Republicans do not control everything. It wasn't so easy even with the 5050 split because 50 votes does not control the United States Senate, even 51 with Dick Cheney. You need more support than that in order to be able to shutdown debate, override a presidential veto. So control of the United States Senate has always been a euphemism. The president is just going to have make more of a gesture to compromise, more to reach out to Democrats. It's going to be a little bit tougher. There's no question about it. But it's now now bipartisanship is no longer a gesture. It's a requirement.
[Kagan:] Bill Schneider in Washington. Bill, thank you. Your insights have been fascinating all morning long. Thank you so much.
[Schneider:] My pleasure. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Karuna Shinsho, Cnn Anchor, Asia Tonight:] Indonesian security forces say they've uncovered a mass grave in the northwestern province of Aceh. Separatist guerrillas say the cite contains remains of 48 civilians abducted by police over the course of several weeks. Meanwhile, the military has stepped up security after 15 bombs exploded in the provincial capital Banda Aceh Thursday; no one was injured. The renewed unrest comes as the country celebrates Independence Day. As Maria Ressa reports, many Indonesians are hopeful their president will usher in a new era of peace and prosperity.
[Maria Ressa, Cnn Correspondent:] Independence Day has special significant for Indonesia's President Megawati Sukarnoputri. After all, her father, Sukarno, led Indonesia to independence 56 years ago and became its first president. The challenges for his daughter, the nation's fifth are daunting. Separatists, religious and ethnic violence, a series of bombings, an economic crises, turmoil has defeated three presidents in as many years, all leaving a public craving stability. "I hope the country will move forward and be peaceful," says this housewife. But certainly the markets have given Mrs. Megawati high marks. Her economic and political moves the past week have pushed the currency, the rupiah, to its strongest point in nearly a year. UMAR JUORO, CENTER FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES; I think it's good for the country and there's some kind of positive expectations in the near future.
[Ressa:] Still reminders of the problems ahead: In Aceh, where rebels have been fighting for a separate state since the mid-70s, police say they found a mass grave with the bodies of 48 civilians. The military claims they were killed by rebels. Rebel say they were killed by soldiers. This week Mrs. Megawati apologized for the human rights abuses of the past and inaugurated a new law giving Aceh autonomy; that seems to have had little effect on the ground, where law and order seems tenuous at best. [on camera]: Still, by nearly all account, Mrs. Megawati's performance as her nation's leader has exceeded initial expectations, getting her government off to a good start. The question now is: Can she sustain it? Maria Ressa, CNN, Jakarta.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] The next chapter in Florida's post- election drama will be written in just a few hours in a Tallahassee courtroom. That's where a circuit court judge will issue a pivotal ruling on whether Secretary of State Katherine Harris can certify the election, while ignoring the results of ongoing manual recounts. Harris has said she will not accept any more recounts. Yesterday, Florida's Supreme Court ruled hand recounts can continue, but did not say whether Harris must accept the results. Hand counting of ballots began last night in Palm Beach County and is expected to continue today. A hand count has been underway in Broward County since Wednesday. Ninety of Broward's 609 precincts have been reviewed so far and Al Gore has picked up 21 additional votes. In Florida official count, there Gore trails George W. Bush by 300 votes. Overseas absentee ballots must be certified by midnight tonight. County officials expect about 2300 of them, they will be counted tomorrow. Once that is done, Secretary of State Harris, barring any court intervention, plans to certify this election. Yesterday's unanimous ruling by the Florida Supreme Court allowing manual recounts to continue is being viewed as a major victory by the Gore campaign, but the Bush camp doesn't see it that way.
[William Daley, Gore Campaign Chairman:] The legal hurdles have been cleared. The counting can resume in Palm Beach, continue in Broward, and be reviewed in Dade. We urge these counties to conduct these recounts as quickly as is possible. The delays have been largely the product of lawsuits filed by Republicans or erroneous legal opinions from the secretary of state. With these obstacles gone, we hope that the counts can be finished in the next few days.
[James Baker, Observer For The Bush Campaign:] I wouldn't characterize it as a setback. It does mean that the counties can go forward with the count. We've made very clear our problems with that manual count, with the lack of standards, with the lack of uniformity, with the problems for human error and, indeed, even mischief. Now we will have some counting, that's true, but I don't think you could characterize that as a setback.
[Hall:] With Florida's Supreme Court giving the green light, Palm Beach County hand counted ballots well into this morning. Both Palm Beach and Broward counties are forging ahead with their manual tallies. Despite the Bush campaign's fight to stop the counting, we have reports from both counties. First CNN's Mark Potter in West Palm Beach, Florida.
[Mark Potter, Cnn Correspondent:] After getting word from the Florida Supreme Court it was free to resume the manual recount, the Palm Beach County canvassing board got right to work. It estimates it could take six days to complete the countywide hand count with Democratic and Republican observers standing by. When it finishes, the board will present the results to Florida's secretary of state, Katherine Harris, and expects another legal fight.
[Charles Burton, Canvassing Board Chairman:] Whether it is Broward or Palm Beach or whatever county concludes first and submits those votes, Secretary Harris has already indicated that she is not going to accept them, so that will be the next round of litigation.
[Protesters:] No more Gore!
[Potter:] The manual recount is clearly controversial. Outside the building where the count will be underway, Republican supporters held a noisy protest, arguing the vote has already been counted.
[Protesters:] We want Bush!
[Potter:] Earlier in the day, Democratic protesters held their own rally.
[Protesters:] Every vote counts!
[Potter:] In this Democratic county, they favor the manual recount, arguing a fair count has not yet been done. [on camera]: Coming up next on the court docket in Palm Beach County is a Friday morning hearing on whether it would be legal to hold a new countywide presidential election. Some residents who have filed lawsuits here claim that is the only remedy for what they say was a confusing ballot that cost them their votes. The Republicans strenuously oppose a new election. Mark Potter, CNN, West Palm Beach, Florida.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] It was bound to happen and did after only two days.
[Unidentified Male:] The amazing Gorenac ladies and gentlemen, he is here one time only to help the people of Broward County. This is one vote for Al Gore.
[Candiotti:] A carnival atmosphere outside and overhead as inside workers continue the serious work of recounting ballots by hand. The painstaking process conducted without incident until mid-afternoon, then a GOP attorney with a process server burst into the canvassing board.
[William Scherer, Republican Attorney:] You are acting in defiance of a directive from the secretary of state.
[Candiotti:] They delivered an order forcing the panel into court Friday.
[Scherer:] I would like to advise you and request, on the basis of the rule to show cause, that you stop counting hand counting these ballots.
[Candiotti:] He left and the board kept right on counting.
[Charles Lichtman, Democratic Attorney:] Garbage, does that sound about accurate? It does to me.
[Candiotti:] Democrats called the action grandstanding.
[Lichtman:] This looks to me like a very desperate measure by the Republicans.
[Candiotti:] The canvassing board sent its lawyers flying to court and got an emergency hearing Friday morning. They'll ask a judge to throw out the subpoenas and the GOP lawsuit now that the Florida Supreme Court gave the green light to another recount in Palm Beach County. The sole Republican on Broward's canvassing board, who is against all this, admitted their work may be in vain if the secretary of state rejects their results.
[Jane Carroll, Supervisor Of Elections:] If that decision of hers is final, then yes it would be a waste, but if it should be overturned, it is good that we have continued to make progress.
[Candiotti:] So far, no huge shift of votes in favor Al Gore. However, Democrats claim the final tally isn't in yet.
[Unidentified Female:] It can change the balance.
[Candiotti:] That could be wishful thinking. The legal and political maneuvering are far from over and so is this recount, not expected to end before Monday at the earliest, we think. Susan Candiotti, CNN, Broward County, Florida.

[Jim Moret, Cnn Anchor:] Hi, everyone. I'm Jim Moret in Hollywood. Laurin Sydney is on assignment. Some of the biggest names in entertainment are expected at a major awards show this weekend, the Golden Globes. Sherri Sylvester is in Beverly Hills with a preview Sherri.
[Sherri Sylvester, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Jim. As you can see, preparations are well under way for the 57th annual Golden Globe Awards. We're here in the ballroom of the Beverly Hills Hotel. A lot still has to be done. They've got the setup. They're clearly checking the microphones to make sure those acceptance speeches are loud and clear. The tables don't quite look as nice, without the tablecloths and the flowers and, of course, the stars around them, but we are assured that everything will be ready by Sunday night.
[Sylvester:] Expect the unexpected at the Golden Globe awards. The Hollywood Foreign Press prides itself on creating the kind of party atmosphere that loosens the tongues of would-be winners. That said, "American Beauty" could be golden with six nominations, including best picture, best director and best actor, Kevin Spacey.
[Kevin Spacey, Actor:] We never thought that, you know, we would find ourselves in a place like this, but we always believed it was one of the most extraordinary screenplays we have ever read.
[Sylvester:] Other contenders for best actor in a drama: Russell Crowe lands one of five nods for "The Insider," Matt Damon one of five for "The Talented Mr. Ripley. " [Begin Video Clip, "the Talented Mr. Ripley"]
[Matt Damon, Actor:] I always thought it would be better to be a fake somebody than a real nobody.
[Damon:] The stuff that normally comes across my plate is pretty standard one, two, three, hike Hollywood filmmaking, and this was something I'd never seen before.
[Sylvester:] "The Straight Story," likewise, gave Richard Farnsworth an unusual ride. Denzel Washington credits director Norman Jewison for his work in "The Hurricane."
[Denzel Washington, Actor:] He trusts and he loves the actors, and he protects the actors, and you just feel like you're in this nice cocoon, where you can really just stretch out and take chances.
[Sylvester:] Ringside for the best picture race: "The Hurricane" takes on "Mr. Ripley," "American Beauty," "The Insider," and "The End of the Affair." The directors of all five of these films compete for best director. Best actress nominees include "Beauty's" Annette Bening and "Affair's" Julianne Moore. Hilary Swank's gender-bending role in "Boys Don't Cry" was singled out, along with Meryl Streep's turn in "Music of the Heart," and Sigourney Weaver's performance in "A Map of the World. "
[Sigourney Weaver, Actress:] It took me places I hadn't been before as an actor. which is a great feeling.
[Sylvester:] Comedies are often slighted by other awards shows. Not so here. "Being John Malkovich," "Analyze This" or "Man On the Moon" could be named best motion picture comedy. "Toy Story 2" and "Notting Hill" are also honored.
[Julia Roberts, Actress:] It just feels good. You know, I just know that I am making the right decisions in every way.
[Sylvester:] Julia Roberts may add a Globe to her People's Choice award. She's nominated for "Notting Hill." Sharon Stone's turn in "The Muse" puts her among best-actress hopefuls, along with Reese Witherspoon in "Election," Julianne Moore, in an ideal husband, and Janet McTeer in "Tumbleweeds." Jim Carrey won last year. "Man on the Moon" is his best actor encore. Robert De Niro is a contender for "Analyze This," Rupert Everett for "An Ideal Husband." Applause as well for Hugh Grant in "Notting Hill" and Sean Penn's "Sweet and Lowdown" performance. The 57th annual Golden Globes may be remembered for other stories. Michael J. Fox is expected to attend. His nomination for "Spin City" preceded an announcement that he will leave the series. And Barbara Streisand will take center stage as the recipient of the Cecil B. Demille Award for her contribution to entertainment. And joining me now live is Helmut Voss, who is president of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association. This is his big party Sunday night. And you were telling me during the package that you know where some of the stars are going to be sitting. Could you give us a little preview of the tables?
[Helmut Voss, President, Hollywood Foreign Press Association:] In our line of sight, that one long table standing in the middle is the one reserved for the Cecil B. Demille Award winner, which this year, will be Barbara Streisand. And she'll have her guests sitting there with her, and probably Shirley MacLaine, and John Travolta. And the table next to that, right smack in the middle there, will be Tom Cruise's table.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] George W. Bush is heading back to the White House after one of the longest presidential vacations in recent times. He's going to find Washington to be a different town today, as the new budget reality sets in there. CNN White House correspondent Major Garrett is awaiting Mr. Bush's arrival. Let's check in with him now. Major, hello. I believe that the president get it is back at 3:00 eastern, is that correct?
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's correct. About 3:00, we expect the president to land here and get back to work. As you said, spent a great deal of time in Crawford, Texas, a hot locale in Texas. Working not only on the ranch, of course, where the president ran, did a great deal of bass fishing, also cleared an extensive nature trail. But as White House aides like to point out, he did real presidential work as well, delivering a nationally-televised address on stem-cell research, traveling around the country to talk about his budget priorities, and also picking a new head of the joint chiefs of staff. All of these things were accomplished during the summer break for the president. But as you said, Leon, the president comes back to Washington facing new budget realities. He also has a clear set of priorities he wants to accomplish before Congress adjourns sometime before Thanksgiving. Among those, getting a defense budget he finds to be agreeable. Also pushing education reform, and boosting education spending. Of course the faith-based initiative, and progress on a patients' bill of rights, hoping to get that legislation to his desk. But the budget is really the big issue politically here in Washington for the president. As White House aides look at this budget fight, they really see it as one part of a much larger conversation in the country about the course and the future of the economy. The White House believes, as long as the president is focusing on improving the economy, he has the upper hand in the budget, because as Democrats argue about certain programs and dollars and cents here, the president will say the tax cut is good, it will help the economy, and that will be the overall message the president takes to Congress dealing with the budget Leon.
[Harris:] All right, thank you very much, Major Garrett at the White House. We'll talk with you some other time. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] There certainly are plenty of questions, but so far few clear answers in the debate over high gas prices. Some drivers in the Midwest are paying more than $2 a gallon. At a congressional hearing in Chicago yesterday, oil industry and ethanol producers blamed one another for the soaring prices. Oil producers say that using ethanol to make cleaner gasoline is costly and complicated. Meanwhile, ethanol supporters say the oil industry is trying to sabotage their product. While they squabble, how are these high gas prices affecting consumers' choices when it comes to buying cars? Joining us from New York to talk about that is Jerry Edgerton. He is senior writer for "Money" magazine and specializes in automotive coverage. Jerry, good morning. Thanks for joining us.
[Jerry Edgerton, "money" Magazine:] Good morning. Glad to be here.
[Kagan:] A lot of SUV addicts out there. And confession time, Jerry: I understand that includes yourself.
[Edgerton:] That does include myself. I own one and have defended them in the past. You mentioned Chicago and $2 gas. We're starting to get reports there that they are falling off on sales and even showroom traffic on SUVs there, and that's the first time we've seen that. Up till now, we haven't seen much fallout. So it could be that $2 is the magic point where people start to rethink this a little bit.
[Kagan:] Well, I know you've written about how money how you can really save money if you save on your gas mileage. We made up a graphic using some information that you put together. Now, this is the idea that if gas was even cheaper than it is in Chicago, $1.50 a gallon, explain to us really how much you can save if you get your gas mileage down just by five miles per gallon.
[Edgerton:] Well, you yes, you can save $270 if you're a typical driver, and even more if you're a long commuter; in other words, if you drive maybe 25,000 miles a year. So it is it's not huge numbers, but it is a substantial savings, and I think people are starting to think about this a little. And also, there's some social pressure out there. It's not only am I going to save money, but are my neighbors going to think I'm a fool for driving a gas-guzzling hog like this?
[Kagan:] You mentioned that it is starting to affect consumers' choices when they buy cars. If you're in the market for a car and gas mileage is your number one priority, what are some vehicles that folks should look at?
[Edgerton:] Well, we've talked here about the Honda Civic HX, which I think is the best high-mileage choice. You get about 38 miles to the gallon if you have manual transmission, 36 with automatic. The Civic is a very, very good small car. And if you don't care about driving a small car and you care about mileage, that would be my choice.
[Kagan:] And what if you are a little bit taller person like myself and don't fit into a little Honda so easily?
[Edgerton:] Here I've chosen the Chevrolet Impala, redesigned this year, and especially, again, if you're a long-haul commuter. It gets 32 miles to the gallon on the highway. And so that's a pretty good pick, and it's a very comfortable car.
[Kagan:] And my partner here can't help but notice that you have a Beemer up on your choices.
[Edgerton:] I do have a Beemer. And the Beemer was my choice this year for best-buy luxury car in the earlier edition. And it happens that it is one of the best-mileage cars in the luxury class. You do have to buy premium gasoline, so you might not save that much money. But probably Beemer owners aren't aimed at saving money that much anyway.
[Kagan:] That's not top on their list. Now, what if you just can't if you're an SUV junky and you can't break the habit and you want that type of car but you are concerned with gas mileage?
[Edgerton:] That's right. What we're saying, maybe you should shift down to a little smaller SUV, and I think that's what we're going to be seeing, in fact, that people will be shifting down. Our pick here is the...
[Kagan:] Some examples, yes.
[Edgerton:] Our pick here is the Subaru Forester, which gets about 24 miles a gallon. It's a very good, small SUV, all-wheel-drive, and a good pick. But we may see some as well shifting down from the very biggest sport utilities, like Ford Excursion and Chevrolet Suburban, to just mid-size like Ford Explorer and Chevrolet Blazer.
[Kagan:] And as we wrap, simple tips? As you shop for cars, make sure you ask the dealers and you check, which, in recent years, a lot of people haven't even looked what the gas mileage is.
[Edgerton:] People haven't looked. I think they're going to be looking more.
[Kagan:] Go ahead and take a look. Jerry Edgerton from "Money" magazine, thanks for your important tips this morning.
[Edgerton:] Thanks for having me.
[Kagan:] We appreciate it Bill.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Like that 528.
[Kagan:] Yes, I bet you do.
[Hemmer:] Fill 'er up.

[Karuna Shinsho, Cnn Anchor:] Sharp divisions on two key issues are polarizing delegates at the UN Conference on Racism, in South Africa. Today's meetings dealt mainly with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the question of reparations for the slave trade. For more on both issues, we go to Charlayne Hunter-Gault, in Durban Charlayne.
[Charlayne Hunter-gault, Cnn Correspondent:] Karuna, the conference here is still engaged over the language that many feel is inflammatory and offensive to Jews, Israel and the Israeli state. There is language saying that the Israelis have committed genocide against Palestinians and calling for a international war crimes tribunal. There are many delegates here that believe that this issue, while important, is overshadowing many other issues here, and it is taking up a lot of the energies of the conference. During a press conference last night, the Israelis complained bitterly about the language, and there were demonstrations outside of the press conference reminiscent of the demonstrations that have gone on from the beginning of the eight-day meeting, here in Durban. There are also other voices that are insisting on being heard, and those are voices both inside and outside this conference.
[Unidentified Male:] At one level, this is mere semantics and politics, but at another, very real level, it is more than that; it is very substantive, because it is those commas, those punctuation signs, and those words that will determine whether or not colonialization continues in the 21st century.
[Unidentified Female:] We have a better forum now to air abuse, to end positive. Watering down to the grass roots this means nothing. It's noble, the idea of it, but I feel sometimes that with international law, it's so hard to enforce, especially in countries that are really violating these basic human rights. You can't tell people, Listen, be nice to this person, you know? One person has to change, and in that change, you get the dominoes thing.
[Hunter-gault:] The conference has four more days to go. During this period, the official delegates will be doting Is, crossing Ts, and trying to come up with a some kind of consensus that will to lead to a plan of action to take into consideration all of the issues that have been hidden here, as well as those that have been out on the table Karuna.
[Shinsho:] Thank you, Charlayne Hunter-Gault, in Durban, South Africa. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Now we want to go to Washington, where the State Department's headquarters is about to get a new name. A short time from now, the complex will be dedicated as the Harry S. Truman Building. Joining us from our Washington bureau, John Truman, a nephew of the late president. Mr. Truman, good morning. Thanks for joining us.
[John Truman, President Truman's Nephew:] Good morning.
[Kagan:] An appropriate selection, the State Department headquarters for your grand uncle?
[Truman:] I think so. I believe it recognizes the fact that he was one of the great presidents of the United States, and that his greatest achievements were in the foreign policy area. So I think it's appropriate to name the State Department headquarters after Uncle Harry.
[Kagan:] Uncle Harry. We have played a trivia game about your Uncle Harry in the newsroom here yesterday. The question was: How many buildings or monuments in Washington are named after Harry Truman? Up until today, the answer: none.
[Truman:] None.
[Kagan:] I missed it. It was a trick question, I thought. But are you surprised, though Bill, my co-anchor, did get it right. We have to say that for the record. Are you surprised that, up until this point, that no buildings have been named after Uncle Harry, as you call him so affectionately?
[Truman:] It's OK. This is the best tribute I think that there could have been given to President Truman. So it was worth the wait.
[Kagan:] So why now? Why do you think, after this long wait, they are giving him the name of the State Department headquarters?
[Truman:] Well, I think President Truman, while he was in office, was not popular as the years went on. But after he left office, I believe that recognition of his greatness has grown. And my understanding is that this was done by the Congress of the United States, unanimously. So I think there is bipartisan recognition of the fact that he was a great president. And he constructed the foreign policy that carried the United States through the Cold War, and I think this is recognition of that.
[Kagan:] Well, congratulations to you and your family. It will be a special day indeed. John Truman, nephew of President Harry S. Truman, thanks for joining us this morning.
[Truman:] Thank you.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Our next guest knows all too well about biological warfare and those who wage it. Richard Butler is the former chief weapons inspector for the United Nations. He oversaw the efforts to dismantle Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, including its chemical stockpile. Good to see you again. Welcome.
[Richard Butler, Fmr. U.n. Chief Weapons Inspector:] Good to see you, Paula.
[Zahn:] I know it would be irresponsible for us to try to hype this anthrax story, but there are so many questions that we need to address. OK, government officials have basically told us that this particular strain potentially came from a lab in Iowa.
[Butler:] Right.
[Zahn:] We also know it was a strain that researchers all over the world had access to.
[Butler:] Right.
[Zahn:] How do you travel with this stuff.
[Butler:] Well, anthrax comes in the first instance as dried spores. Scientists then work on it and use it for research purposes, or to make chemical weapons. That bit gets harder. The particle size becomes very important, if it's to be a useful I said chemical, I meant biological, to be a useful biological weapon, particle size is quite important.
[Zahn:] Can you explain to us the the smaller...
[Butler:] Well, if it's too small, it won't do the job of getting into the lungs and killing a person. If it's too large, it will fall to the ground and won't be dispersed in the air in the way that a person wanting to deliver a biological weapon would want it to. Particle size is critical to the effectiveness of this stuff as an awful weapon. I hope that puts it the simplest.
[Zahn:] Yes, OK, so we know that three people got sick from this anthrax, the spores. it will fall to the ground and won't be disbursed in the air the way a person delivering a biological weapon would want it to. Particle size is critical to the effectiveness of this stuff as an awful weapon. I hope that puts it the simplest. Paula: so we know three people got sick from this anthrax the spores.
[Butler:] Right.
[Zahn:] What does it suggest to you, that they were these larger particles then? I know there was a lot of speculation.
[Butler:] That they were the right size, that they were the right size to do that job. What I understand, Paula, is that what has been detected in Florida was synthesized. In other words, it didn't occur in nature, so a person did this.
[Zahn:] Now the attorney general wouldn't go that far this morning, but a lot of other people are saying exactly what you're saying this morning. I asked him the question whether it was organically grown or whether it was manmade, and he said it is simply too early to tell, but his suspicions are the latter.
[Butler:] Right, well, I will defer to him. The advice he is getting, obviously, is telling him to be cautious. But my belief is that this didn't occur in nature, OK, that someone synthesized and made this, a person did it. Then the question becomes, who is that person? Was it a terrorist, or just some loony out there, thinking because of the tragedy I shouldn't call it a tragedy, because it's more than that the outrage of one month ago today that this provides an interesting background to scare people. And so, I mean, there are people who would do that. We don't know. And I think it's critical for us to be very careful about finding out exactly who did this.
[Zahn:] How do you get this stuff? We know there are a bunch of scientists that left the Soviet program when the Soviet Union dissolved. We had a guest the other day that said 7,000 of them are working for a lot of different foreign countries on biological weapons.
[Butler:] But there are two different questions, two different parts to the good questions you just asked, how do you get the stuff? There is the stuff itself, and there is the know-how to make it, to make it into a weapon. That's where the scientists come in. And there are a lot of them around, including some disaffected and unhappy people from the former Soviet Union. That is true. The material itself, the raw material, is actually distressingly easy to obtain. When you obtain it, it is in an inert and undangerous form. It then has to be transformed into a weapon or for some other scientific purpose. So there is the material and the know-how. The material is easy to get.
[Zahn:] All right, so explain to us the know-how that would have been required to get these spores inside the AMI building. Are they microscopic? Do you see them inside the letter?
[Butler:] It seems it may have come in a powder form. That's the residue that was apparently on the computer keyboard of poor Mr. Stevens who died. There was a letter apparently that came to the mail room with a powder in it. It could be done that way, or it could be dispersed through the atmosphere, for example, through the air system of the building. You need the material. That's easy to obtain. It is much harder to then make it into a weapon, and that's where you need scientific know-how. And then finally...
[Zahn:] You are telling me whoever did this knew a fair amount about how to turn inert anthrax into a biological weapon.
[Butler:] Then they have to deliver it. The FBI is looking into it. They obviously need to know exactly what kind of transformation of the material took place, what kind of anthrax this was, then they need the delivery route, and hopefully that would tie back to persons who did this.
[Zahn:] And as I understand, that's pretty pro forma, because they have this particular strain typed. It is a matter of matching it up with different labs around the country who have access to it? Is it as simple as that, or is it more complicated?
[Butler:] It should be relatively straightforward, and the sample laboratory from which scientists obtain the basic raw material is quite a public one, and it should have records of which persons, which scientists sent for the basic raw material. This should be a trial there that would be able to be followed and lead hopefully to the culprit.
[Zahn:] Are you confident the culprit would be found?
[Butler:] Reasonably. Reasonably. Unless, now it gets darker, unless it was terrorism, unless it did have something to do with the people that turned the aircraft into missiles a month ago today, and that they obtained chemical weapons from another source, such as Iraq. Then I think it would be much harder. It would be more complicated, a darker scenario, and much harder to get to the bottom of.
[Zahn:] Attorney General Ashcroft also in my conversation with him would not confirm in a "Miami Herald" report, which is saying that Mohamad Atta, one of the suspected hijackers, actually had a subscription to one of the publications, one of the tabloids that AMI published.
[Butler:] So, that connects him to
[Ami. Zahn:] Right.
[Butler:] Whenever you are looking at the criminal activity, you need motive, means and opportunity. Maybe that subscription suggest a motive on his part, that he had some weird interest in AMI and its publications, or hatred for them or whatever, but it would appear to be a link, yes.
[Zahn:] And Mr. Ashcroft acknowledged that this morning, and I guess the FBI will continue to look into it. Right. Mr. Butler, as always, good to see you. Thank you for your insights.
[Butler:] Nice to see you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Today could mark the beginning of the end of the battle for the White House.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Linda has details on that front. Good morning, Linda.
[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] David, you laugh, you've heard that before, have you? Thank you both very much. Well, many observers, including those in the Gore campaign, are calling it Gore's last battle. We what to show you live pictures of where it will all take place, the Florida Supreme Court. Things are very quiet there now, but things will heat up considerably in just a few hours; that's when attorneys for Gore will ask the justices to reverse a state judge's decision to deny any further hand counts of Florida ballots. At stake here: 14,000 under votes from heavily Democratic counties, enough to tilt the election in Al Gore's favor. In the Gore team's 50-page brief, his attorneys argue Americans must be assured Florida certified the rightful winner. They write this, quote: "This case does not involve a dispute over election technicalities or formalities. It involves the most fundamental question an election can pose: Which candidate got more votes?" But Republicans counter with this, quote: "The best exercise of this court's discretion would be to decline this appeal and bring an end to the many weeks of election discord and uncertainty." Justices in Tallahassee will listen to 30-minute arguments from both sides. They're expected to rule as early as tomorrow. Also today, the continuation of two trials involving allegations of collusion between Republicans and election officials to alter absentee ballot applications in two Florida counties. The suits were filed by Democrats in Seminole and Martin Counties. The plaintiffs in both cases accuse Republican leaders of revising thousands of absentee ballot applications, and say the ballots should be thrown out. The Martin County case adjourned about 12:30 this morning after midnight. It will reconvene at 8:00 a.m. today. The Seminole County case recessed shortly after 7:00 last night, and will be back in session at about 1:00 this afternoon. The proceedings in both cases cannot take place at the same time because many of the attorneys are actually involved in both of the lawsuits. Now, as we set that aside for a moment, regardless of what happens in any of the court cases, the Florida Legislature may hold the trump card for Governor Bush because state lawmakers meet at noon tomorrow. They will consider designating the state's 25 electors and presumably they would go for Bush. Republicans hold a wide majority in the state house. They say this special session is necessary to make sure Florida is not left out of the Electoral College. But many Democrats in the Florida Legislature accuse their Republican counterparts of abusing their power.
[Lois Frankel , Florida House Minority Leader:] Sadly, I have to say that I believe this is orchestrated, and the only thing missing from the proclamation today was the post mark from Austin, Texas.
[Stouffer:] And now we go to Austin, Texas, we want to check in with CNN national correspondent Tony Clark, who's been following the Bush campaign. Also in Washington D.C., CNN's Eileen O'Connor is there with the Gore camp. But Tony, let's start with you. What's the latest from there?
[Tony Clark, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, Linda, this is obviously, as you say, a very big day for the courts. The Bush campaign going to be watching this very closely. In the Florida Supreme Court, they will argue that if the court overturns the decision by Judge Sauls, the circuit court decision, they will be going against the U.S. Supreme Court's guidance, they will be overturning the decision, and they will be reverting to a November 26th deadline day for certifying the votes, and they say that's the sort of thing that the U.S. Supreme Court put in question. Attorney Ben Ginsberg said the Bush position before the Florida Supreme Court today is clear.
[Ben Ginsberg, Bush Campaign Attorney:] All the ballots in both counties were counted, not only on election night, but also in the first recount, and also in a second recount in some instances. The point is, is to now adopt a different set of rules, as the Gore campaign is asking the Florida Supreme Court to do, does change those rules. The imposition of dimple ballots, something never before used to count votes in Florida, is what the Gore campaign's asking, and that's something new and different, indeed a change in the rules.
[Clark:] As for Gov. Bush, he is closely watching the court activities. He believes an end is near. He's planning for a new administration. He says he's got most of the positions, White House positions, he knows who he wants in those, and he's moving right along for potential Cabinet positions Linda.
[Stouffer:] Tony, thank you. And as we talk more about what will happen in the Florida Supreme Court, we want to hear the other side of things. Eileen O'Connor is following what the Gore campaign is up to. Eileen, what are the saying there?
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, they are saying that this is the final stand, advisers, legal advisers to the vice president, say that this challenge before the Florida State Supreme Court for them is it. And they do believe, though, that they will prevail. They say that Judge Sanders Sauls had actually misinterpreted some parts of the statute, in their opinion, and they do have a firm basis in both fact and law to overturn his decision. They believe that they are not changing rules, that a manual recount is actually called for under the law and that this former Florida State Supreme Court decision actually calls for that manual recount to occur in Miami-Dade County, and that it was stopped prematurely, they believe, and that what they would like to do is have the Florida State Supreme Court reorder that count in Miami-Dade County, and also the disputed ballots in Palm Beach County, in which they believe the standard was set too high for counting those ballots. The Gore campaign also believes that if the Florida State Supreme Court does rule in their favor then, and orders these recounts to take place, they believe that, given the right resources. this can occur and they can complete the recount by December 12th, which is the date that the collectors are to be sent up to Washington. They also, though, are opposing that Florida legislative session. They say that, let this play out in the courts, that the Florida Legislature is just trying to intervene prematurely, and there is no need for that. And that by doing so, they would be discounting the votes of some 6 million Floridians Linda.
[Stouffer:] Eileen, thank you. And Tony Clark is standing by for us now too. I want to get to what both campaigns are saying about the Seminole and Martin County cases. The Democrats are making a pretty controversial charge to the ballots there. Tony, what are they saying from the Bush camp?
[Clark:] Well, they're pleased the legal team is very pleased with the arguments that they were able to make in circuit court yesterday. The interesting thing, they say, though, is, in regard to the Seminole County case, well in fact both of these cases, they say that vice president has tried to distance himself from those cases, saying, well those were brought by somebody else, but then they say they can see the Gore campaign's fingerprints on them, the ties there, and they say it is hypocritical of the vice president to say over and over again he wants all the votes to count, and then try to throw out votes on what they describe as a technicality. They say that there was nothing illegal that was done there, there was no problem with the ballots themselves, it was just the request for the ballot that in Seminole, didn't have the right members on them Linda.
[Stouffer:] Thank you, Tony. And Eileen, I'm sure the Gore camp has a response to that, those charges that Gore may be being a bit of a hypocritical here. What are they saying at that point?
[O'connor:] Well, they say no, but that the they're not been hypocritical, that this is about not counting Democratic ballots, again, that the Democrats were at an unfair disadvantage, and that they were not allowed, or their Democratic Party operatives, like the Republican Party operatives, were allowed to fill in those voter ID numbers. In the Democratic case, they said, they weren't given that opportunity, and therefore, a lot of applications for Democrats for absentee ballots were thrown out, and so they weren't allowed to vote. And so they say, in this case, it again is about not counting ballots. It's now in this case about not counting Democratic ballots Linda.
[Stouffer:] Eileen O'Connor, in Washington, Tony Clark in Austin, thank you both very much.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] One of the color commentators for the XFL is Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura. And according to a new poll, it's not going over too well with folks who live in Minnesota. We head to Minneapolis now to hear more about the survey from Jim Ragsdale, a political reporter with the "St. Paul Pioneer Press." That paper has angered Ventura with it's new comic strip, "Ventura Land." Good to see you, Jim.
[Jim Ragsdale, "st. Paul Pioneer Press":] Nice to see you.
[Phillips:] All right, so what do you think? Do you think that Ventura is a good commentator?
[Ragsdale:] Do I think he's a good commentator? Well, you're the broadcast experts, what do you think.
[Phillips:] Oh, gosh. I have to remain nonpartisan. Come on, Jim.
[Ragsdale:] So do
[I. Phillips:] All right, well, let's talk about the article that you wrote and some of the shots that were taken at Ventura. Why are Minnesotans embarrassed about this?
[Ragsdale:] Well, the polls showed two things, sort of like the way Clinton's number were. On one had, people were generally satisfied with the job he was doing as governor. Those numbers haven't really dipped at all. On the other hand, they were pretty they are questioning why he is doing this XFL thing. And those numbers are pretty high.
[Phillips:] Do you think this is going to affect his credibility as governor?
[Ragsdale:] Yes, I do think so. I think, nationally, it will affect his credibility and make it harder for him to be taken seriously as a national political figure. But, you know, that time will only tell that. That could change over a period of years.
[Phillips:] But he's always sort of been known as a rebel and kind of going against the tide. So you would think this is pretty much common character for him?
[Ragsdale:] Well, that's true. I guess, you know, if he were doing something that were politically rebellious, that would be one thing. But he's basically, you know, making a lot of money doing some broadcasting when a lot of people in Minnesota feel he should be here doing his job.
[Phillips:] Well, there's been a lot of criticism that the XFL is sort of trashy, I guess you could say. Now, the governor pretty much stayed focused on the game, right? He didn't really go off on the cheerleaders or any of that kind of stuff.
[Ragsdale:] Yes, after two games he has stayed focused on "X"s and "O"s.
[Phillips:] Now, Jim, do we have any idea how much money he's making doing this?
[Ragsdale:] No, he will not tell us. People have made estimates, but no one really knows, and there is no law in Minnesota requiring that he disclose. So unless he chooses, has a change of heart there are bills in legislature to require him to disclose, but those probably will not get very far.
[Phillips:] Could this become an ethical issue, you think?
[Ragsdale:] Well, it already has. There are people who say that he has used the office to enrich himself in kind of a different way than you might have expected in the past. I mean, he's not acting asking road contractors to give him money, he is essentially becoming a bigger celebrity by virtue of his political fame and sort of cashing in on that. And he says it's simply his right as an American citizen to do what he wants to on his own time.
[Phillips:] Jim Ragsdale, "St. Paul Pioneer Press," who did the story about the poll, thanks for joining us and talking a little trash with us.
[Ragsdale:] No trash here.
[Phillips:] All right.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Let's go ahead and get the latest on the Navy spy plane crew. Debriefing will continue today for the 24 crew members who are now in Hawaii. That's also where we happen to find our Rusty Dornin, who is at Pearl Harbor this morning Rusty. Good morning once again.
[Rusty Dornin, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Daryn. It's close to dawn here in Hawaii. The crew members will be preparing for a second day of intensive interviews at the Pearl Harbor Naval Air Station. The first day, the priority was medical examinations. And the initial reports are that they are all in great health, which was as expected. Also, they were all given cell phones, which enabled them during breaks between the interviews and medical exams, they were able to call their family and friends and let them know how they're doing. And they were also given Internet access too as another form of communication. Press clippings as well. They apparently haven't had time to read too many of them, but were given press clippings of the accounts of their ordeal over the past few weeks and seemed rather surprised over the intense scrutiny of their families, or the concern expressed by the families and that sort of thing. But this is the second day of interviews. Much has been discovered in terms of through the debriefings, according to Pentagon sources, about what actually happened during the collision, that the plane was flying straight, level on autopilot when from under the left wing flew the navy jet fighter, which then collided with propeller. Now, the investigators will be getting each and every detail of what happened from every crew member, from every angle of what they saw and heard and did that day. Now, there hasn't really been much press availability actually, there's been no press availability to the crew members since they landed. Lieutenant Shane Osborn did give a brief statement when he came off the plane. There were a few speeches and that sort of thing. But we are hoping before they leave for Whidbey Naval Air Station tomorrow that a few of the crew members will step forward and give us statements and perhaps answer some questions. And that's not iron clad. But we're kind of hoping that will happen. So another day of interviews, questions, and then they get ready to go to Whidbey Island and meet up with their family and friends, Daryn.
[Kagan:] A much-awaited homecoming indeed. Rusty Dornin at Pearl Harbor, thank you Leon.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Well, tomorrow the crew does return to their home base in Whidbey Island, Washington, where that homecoming ceremony is planned. Let's go there right now. Our Brian Cabell is standing by Brian.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] Leon, big day tomorrow, as you well know, about 10,000 people expected down at Whidbey Island. They're opening up the base. Normally it's closed. But they're inviting the public to come down three hours beforehand, 10,000 people expected down there. Very short ceremony really we're told, only about an hour. But in the meantime, excitement has been building all week. And we're in the Daily Grind today. That's a big breakfast spot here in town. With us right now, Dennis Gonsatti. A lot of the Navy employees come down here regularly, don't they?
[Dennis Gonsatti, Daily Grind:] Right. We get mostly a lot of Navy wives come in. We've got a play area for the children. So they like to come down and get together just to get away from the base a little bit and sit and talk.
[Cabell:] The 24 men and women, do you consider them heroes?
[Gonsatti:] Oh, definitely, definitely, particularly the pilot. The more we learn about the way he conducted the plane and got it out is just amazing. And he was in the service I guess just a short time. So it's truly wonderful.
[Cabell:] Over to a table over here to talk to a couple of people. One, you're retired Navy, is that correct?
[Unidentified Male:] No. I'm not.
[Cabell:] What do you do here?
[Unidentified Male:] I'm a paint contractor here on the island.
[Cabell:] Did the United States learn anything from this incident?
[Unidentified Male:] I think they have. I think they learned that the Chinese could be hard to deal with and work with. I think that's one of the big lessons they've learned. And maybe they will handle things maybe a little bit differently next time.
[Cabell:] What about the plane? Does the plane have to come back to the United States?
[Unidentified Male:] think more the principle of the thing, getting the plane back, more than anything. I don't think it has to come back. But I think it's just the principle that it should come back because it's ours.
[Cabell:] We have a schoolteacher over here. You know one of the 24. Correct?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, do.
[Cabell:] Who is that?
[Unidentified Female:] Jeff Vignery is an acquaintance of mine from church. And it was a relief yesterday to see him on TV, to know that he's back sound and safe.
[Cabell:] So it's a very personal thing for you and I guess for the entire community. Why is that? Is it just because the Navy base is here and so you have contact with them regularly?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, I think it is because it's a Navy community. Being a Navy wife, seeing any squadron come home is an exciting experience. Any homecoming is exciting. But this one is especially good because of the situation.
[Cabell:] Where is your husband right now?
[Unidentified Female:] Right now he's in Turkey doing Operation Northern Watch.
[Cabell:] Have you talked to him about this incident?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes I have.
[Cabell:] What does he have to say about it?
[Unidentified Female:] He's excited to see the guys back as well.
[Cabell:] Have we learned has the United States learned anything from this incident, anything about China, anything about relations with China?
[Unidentified Female:] I think that definitely I think that our country has seen that diplomacy can work. And I think also that it has brought the country together. It's brought the together the country behind the president. I think people have seen that President Bush has been able to bring this difficult situation to a successful ending.
[Cabell:] Were you ever worried that the men and women might not come back?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, I was very worried. And being a Navy wife, I can say I'm especially happy that the patience of the United States has paid off because of course we all wanted to see them come home safely. But I think the United States kept their stand and did not have to compromise their position.
[Cabell:] Let me ask you, sir, did President Bush do a good job?
[Unidentified Male:] I think he did a fantastic job, fantastic.
[Cabell:] Was you impatient ever? Was there ever a desire on your part to see action more quickly?
[Unidentified Male:] Well, during the last day or two, I started becoming a little impatient. And I think he was too. But I think everything worked out wonderfully.
[Cabell:] Could this have gotten more serious than it did?
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, it sure could have. I believe it could have.
[Cabell:] But you didn't want to see it exacerbate in any way?
[Unidentified Male:] No, not whatsoever. I'm just glad things worked out the way they did.
[Cabell:] Thank you very much. So, once again, tomorrow the big day, 4:00 here in Washington. And, again, we'll have a fairly short ceremony, but a lot of excitement, a lot of jubilation expected. I'm Brian Cabell. Back to you.
[Harris:] All right, thanks, Brian. And as we heard, the 24 crew members are scheduled to leave Hawaii tomorrow for their return to Whidbey Island. And we will carry Saturday's homecoming live right here on CNN beginning at 6:00 p.m. Eastern. And that will 3:00 p.m. Pacific local time there.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Of course, that was not the only warning after the bell, chip maker Intel warned about fourth-quarter sales.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] And that was the biggie. For more on that and other stocks this morning, Jennifer Westhoven's standing by at the Nasdaq marketsite. Hi, Jennifer.
[Jennifer Westhoven, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning. And what a surprise that that warning from Intel really isn't taking down the Nasdaq in the way that you might think it would, and in the way that warnings over the past few weeks really have battered the Nasdaq. This morning you have the futures trading higher. Now, of course, the details coming from Intel that the fourth- quarter revenue will be just a couple of percentage points above Q3 levels. It was supposed to be four to eight percent better. So it's a warning, it's looking like we're going to come in between $9 and $9.4 billion on Intel's top line I'm sorry, that was the expectation, between $9 and $9.4 billion. Now they're saying they expected coming at about $8.7 billion. Now they are saying that they think their gross margins will be intact, so that's a little bit of solace to the investment community. Plus, they're saying that their costs should be lower than expected. One other negative, they're talking about their interest in other income; that may selling something, you know, a little bit, you know, irrelevant, kind of an extra, too much going on here. But remember, in the past, Intel had convinced analysts to include this as part of their standard results. So when this goes down, it's a little bit of bad news for Intel. Still it's not really hurting the market overall, and there is some talk that, you know, we've had warnings from Motorola, from Apple and from Gateway. Motorola, of course, just recently. We also had those negative comments on Microsoft from Goldman, yet, still, yesterday, we only closed down slightly lower on the Nasdaq, and some analysts are saying that perhaps we are at least really starting to find the bottom. It has been so ugly lately with the Nasdaq trading at nearly half of its all-time high. So that's one of the small rays of hope people are looking at. The Internet sector, though, looking fairly ugly this morning. We have some bad news in areas. Priceline, for instance, says they will cut 48 jobs, which is 11 percent of their workforce. They might take charges in the fourth quarter for this, they're have a restructuring there. Look at a chart and this down 98 percent from its high, and they are also saying they are indefinitely postponing B2B insurance and cell phone services. Back to you.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, thank you, Jennifer. Jennifer Westhoven at the Nasdaq marketsite.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] For many of those injured September 11, the healing has been a slow and painful process. Many survivors talk of gaining strength through faith and through family. CNN's Jonathan Aiken is back again with one such story.
[Jonathan Aiken, Cnn Correspondent:] Lieutenant Colonel Brian Birdwell was watching television in his Pentagon office the morning of September 11.
[Lt. Col. Brian Birdwell, Pentagon Survivor:] My morning Coke had kicked in, and I had to go to the men's room right after we watched the plane go into the second plane hit the tower.
[Aiken:] He never made it back.
[B. Birdwell:] I was returning. I had only had taken three, four steps out of the rest room, and then the explosion and the concussion had occurred.
[Aiken:] American Airlines Flight 77 had just crashed into the Pentagon. He was 40 yard away.
[B. Birdwell:] I heard the sound, then the concussion knocked me down, and that's when the fireball comes through. I do not recall seeing fire coming at me, whether I was laying on my back or otherwise. I remember I am trying to get to my feet to get up, and I'm on fire.
[Aiken:] As the first alarms were sounded, Colonel Birdwell fought to stand up and get back to his office.
[B. Birdwell:] As I struggled I mean, I didn't wait to call out to my Lord and Savior, I, you know, I because I knew I was in bad shape. And without, you know, God's help, I was not going to get out of here. But I, you know, cried "Jesus, I am coming to see you." Mel Birdwell was home-schooling their 12-year-old son Matthew when a friend called her and told her a plane had hit the Pentagon.
[Mel Birdwell, Wife Of Pentagon Survivor:] So I knew that if he were in his office, that he was standing at the Throne of God, because there is just no way he could have survived it. Because where the plane hit was three windows from his window, from where his desk was.
[Aiken:] While plumes of smoke rose from the Pentagon, Brian Birdwell collapsed under a corridor sprinkler, which doused the flames that had burned almost half of his body. He wound up at Washington Hospital's burn unit, tended to by his wife, and Dr. James Jeng, a burn specialist and Navy reservist who himself would be on call for military duty by the end of the day.
[Dr. James Jeng, Washington Hospital:] They attacked the Pentagon. These are my fellow soldiers and sailors, and so from that point of view, yeah, it's a big deal.
[Aiken:] And so was a visit from President Bush two days after the attack.
[M. Birdwell:] And the president comes in, and he says, "Colonel Birdwell," and he salutes. And he Brian attempts to return the salute, and the president sees that he is returning the salute, and he stands there and he holds his salute with tears in his eyes.
[Aiken:] After months of therapy, Lieutenant Colonel Birdwell wears compression gloves that reduce the scarring, protect his hands, and make it hard to use a fork.
[B. Birdwell:] My mom used to teach, you know, how you hold your fork between your middle and forefinger to, you know, to eat properly. Well, now I have to stab, you know, like some untrained or ill- mannered person, and so it looks like I don't have any manners, but I got to do it to eat, so.
[Aiken:] Therapy has helped. So has their faith.
[Unidentified Male:] Lieutenant Colonel Birdwell and his wife Mel are here with us this morning.
[Aiken:] The Birdwells went to church on Thanksgiving, but it was the congregation that gave them thanks.
[Rev. Michael Easley, Immanuel Bible Church:] These are the finest people I have ever known in my life. Men and women who serve our country and who love Christ are a very unique combination.
[Aiken:] Out of the hospital now and home for Christmas, the Birdwells begin to rebuild their lives. The memories will no doubt linger, and under those gloves will be scares that could take years to heal. And on Christmas, their faith will bring them to the meaning of the holiday, and the holiday will bring them back to the normalcy they crave so much.
[M. Birdwell:] Spending the day together.
[B. Birdwell:] Football.
[M. Birdwell:] And football.
[Aiken:] Jonathan Aiken, for CNN, Washington.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] It's a little on the breezy side, maybe. But an absolutely gorgeous day down there in Augusta, Georgia, just down the road here, as the 64th Masters gets underway today.
[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] A lot of eyes on Tiger Woods. Sports writers say that he is the most dominant favorite for the tournament since the heyday of Jack Nicklaus. Woods has finished either first or second in 10 of his last 11 tournaments, and golf experts say that recent changes in the fabled Augusta course seem to favor Tiger Woods' style. So we're going to quickly check the Master's leaderboard from our cnnsi.com site. It'll show you that Tom Lehman is 4 under par and Steve Jones and Dennis Paulson are tied in second place, and they are 2 under.
[Waters:] We'll keep up to speed on that. With the 95 golfers who have teed off this morning, six are amateurs. And CNN's Jim Huber profiles one of them: a young man who may be golf's next boy wonder.
[Unidentified Male:] Oh yeah. Good hit.
[Jim Huber, Cnn Correspondent:] He seems the true definition of a phenom, a young man so gifted he is playing in the Masters just six years after picking up a golf club for the very first time. Aaron Baddeley is just 19, American by birth, Australian by destination, but he soon will belong to the world.
[Aaron Baddeley, Amateur Golfer:] A little 19-year-old from Australia is playing at Augusta, so like you so many people dream of this and I dream of it and how much you get doing it, so it's just phenomenal.
[Tiger Woods, Professional Golfer:] Aaron has a lot of game, hits the ball very well. I said this at Bay Hill when I was he asked, that he hit the ball better than I did at the same age, there's no doubt about it.
[Baddeley:] Tiger is definitely the benchmark at the moment for golfing and I want to be better than the benchmark. He's a great player and he's playing great and I want to be better than that.
[Huber:] He's the first amateur given a special invitation here since 1976, attracting attention by upsetting the likes of Colin Montgomery and Greg Norman and winning the Australian Open last November. Norman has become a close friend. The two of them and Jack Nicklaus played a practice round at Augusta on Tuesday.
[Greg Norman, Professional Golfer:] We kind of struck up a pretty good relationship in the fact that not like a father figure, but a respect fellow peer respect. One thing I admire about Aaron is he's not afraid to ask a question. He wants to know, he wants to learn, he wants to understand, and he's probably he reminds me a lot of myself.
[Baddeley:] I can't speak kindly enough of Greg. On or off the golf course, or as a friend, he's a professional in everything that he does and he's a great role model for anyone, and it's just great and to have someone like that there and his family I can't speak high enough of Greg and his family.
[Huber:] Though he seems destined for the stars, his young feet appear firmly planted in the turf.
[Ron Baddeley, Aaron's Father:] I've always played things down a little bit rather than build them up from a very early age from when he had won the club championship back at his home and before then, so we have always sat down, talked about things after every event and before and life in general, and we have a pretty good relationship with each other and as a family.
[Norman:] I am very high on him. I think he's got a great head on his shoulders. His attitude toward himself, I think, is very, very good. His attitude toward the game is very, very good. And his play ability at the game physically is very, very good. So he has it all in front of him.
[Huber:] And that remarkable game gives Aaron Baddeley great confidence, he knows exactly what he wants.
[Baddeley:] If your goal is just to make the cut and you make the cut, you've achieved your goal, so what's there to do on Saturday and Sunday? I want to play, take it one hole, one set at a time, one round at a time, and then to going into Sunday, if I'm in contention on the back nine, I want to win the golf tournament.
[Huber:] Baddeley will play several more stops on the American tour this year, including the U.S. Open before sitting down next fall with his parents and his coach to decide his professional future. His fate, however, may have already been decided. From the Masters in Augusta, I'm Jim Huber.
[Waters:] And late word from Augusta is that young master Baddeley is plus 7 after 14 holes. I imagine there's some nerves associated with the first day of the Masters, but he's got another day to make the cut.
[Kelley:] Right. Lots of talent and maybe getting a lot of experience now.
[Waters:] We wish him well. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] W0e cannot know every turn this battle will take, yet we know our cause is just and our ultimate victory is assured. We will no doubt face new challenges, but we have our marching orders. My fellow Americans, let's roll.
[Tucker Carlson, Co-host:] President Bush takes his case to the nation. But can Congress roll out legislation to lift the economy and make airports safer? This is CROSSFIRE. Good evening, and welcome to CROSSFIRE. In his speech to the nation last night, President Bush described Americans as returning to life as normal. Going to church, he said, taking in baseball games. The president didn't say getting back to partisan bickering, but they are, at least on Capitol Hill. The debate over the economic stimulus package is sizzling. Democrats describe their version as vital medicine for ailing industries. Republicans slam it as a pinata party for special interests. Meanwhile, party leaders in Washington have spent of the last week trying to sort what happened in Tuesday's election: Republicans wondering how they could have lost the Virginia governorship, Democrats reeling from a baffling defeat in the New York mayor's race. Attacks, recriminations, pitched battles: That's the state of political war in the capital city these days. Who's winning? Joining us in the "CROSSFIRE" tonight, two grizzled political veterans: Democrat strategist Kiki McLean, and her counterpart in the opposing trench, Republican Ed Gillespie Bill Press.
[Bill Press, Co-host:] And let's just start out by saying that Ed is more grizzled than Kiki.
[Carlson:] By appearance anyway.
[Kiki Mclean, Democratic Strategist:] I take the first thing I take issue with Tucker tonight on.
[Carlson:] Won't be the last.
[Mclean:] Exactly.
[Press:] All right, Ed Gillespie, let's start with last night's speech. I mean, I'm a true American. I watched my president's speech last night. I went into it feeling really patriotic. I came out of it feeling used. I mean, he said nothing new. He made no new announcements. He repeated the same old theme as he's been using since September 11th. In fact, in some cases the very same sentences that he used in his speech to Congress over a month ago. So if we're getting back to politics, that was just an old- fashioned campaign speech, wasn't it?
[Ed Gillespie, Republican Strategist:] No, it wasn't, Bill. The fact is there's been a lot that's occurred since he gave the joint session speech in terms of obviously the anthrax developments and other domestic home-front terrorism activities that people are concerned about. And I think the president has dual roles here. He has to not only wage the war against terrorism in terms of international relations and military attacks, but he also has to wage it on the home front and make sure that the American people understand that they may be terrorists but we don't have to be terrorized. And we ought to approach it that way, and that's smart.
[Press:] Well, when you think of presidents or leaders leading a nation during a time of war, you think of Franklin Roosevelt, you think of Winston Churchill, you think of statesmanship. And what do you hear from the lips of George Bush? It's "Let's roll." Bring them back dead or alive. They can run, but they can't hide. I mean, wouldn't you let's just put partisanship aside. Wouldn't you have to admit that this guy sounds more like a sheriff or he sounds more like a football coach than a president?
[Gillespie:] Bill, actually let's role is inspirational when you think of the context. Think of the men and women on that plane who gave their lives to save those of others who were civilians in their ordinary course of their daily events taking a plane they thought to see friends. And they stood up and they defeated these terrorists at the risk of their own lives. And saying "Let's roll," that's inspirational. That's...
[Press:] That's inspirational, but not in front of 5,000 partisans in Atlanta.
[Gillespie:] And there's a reason that his numbers are so high, which is that he has been a very effective leader. You may not like you may wish he had more soaring rhetoric and oratory, but the fact is his plainspokeness is resonating with the American people. He has found his voice, and they like it.
[Mclean:] The tragedy of others is not the defense of mediocrity in one speech performance by the president. The reality is I've got to give President Bush a lot of credit for his speech to the joint session. It was spectacular. As an American, I was proud. It motivated. It gave me an idea of where he wanted to go. Last night's speech, which was touted by his staff to everyone as being the speech that was going to instruct us, give us some idea of what to do here's where they've been blowing it. They themselves at the White House have said we've had too many voices speaking. We have alerts going out from John Ashcroft. We have Tom Ridge holding a press conference over here. We have Condoleezza Rice giving instruction
[Carlson:] Wait. There was so much in that I can't even address it all, but we'll have time later in the show. Let me get to what really happened in Washington last night, and that was, of course, up in the Senate in the Finance Committee. Democrats have been pretty good since September 11th, on the wagon. They went on a bender last night. They lost control of themselves. I want to read you a list of some of these some of these special interests goodies Democrats proposed throwing out to their pals in the agricultural sector. This is in the economic recovery package, the package to help us get back on track after the attacks: money for apple growers, apricots, asparagus, bell peppers, cherry, cauliflower, cantaloupe, cucumbers, lemons, melons, peas, rum, strawberries, tomato...
[Mclean:] Tucker, it sounds like a well-balanced diet. I don't know what your problem is.
[Carlson:] Let me get to my favorite. Hold on.
[Mclean:] Let's talk about lets talk about the 16 Fortune 500 corporations that get the tax break...
[Carlson:] Slow down. Slow down...
[Mclean:] ... in the Republican stimulus plan.
[Carlson:] I want you to listen to Tom Daschle's explanation for my favorite. That's money to poultry growers for chicken waste. Listen to Senator Tom Daschle defend this atrocity.
[Sen. Tom Daschle , Majority Leader:] Poultry waste and waste of all agricultural products is something that continues to threaten our country.
[Carlson:] There you have it, Kiki. You thought it was anthrax. You thought it was al Qaeda. No, it's chicken waste.
[Mclean:] Tucker, here's the thing. You know what, it's great for humor and you're having a wonderfully humorous moment.
[Carlson:] He said it.
[Mclean:] But the... But the reality is that our agricultural, the threat to what's going on in America, with agricultural resources and what happens to the economy, it's important and it plays a role. Tell me that that's any more important or less important than the 16 Fortune 500 corporations who get over $7 billion back in the Republican tax- break version of this stimulus.
[Carlson:] Let me answer that.
[Mclean:] Tell me that. Explain it to me.
[Carlson:] Let me answer it with words...
[Mclean:] I'd love to know.
[Carlson:] ... from your leader in the Senate. That would be Tom Daschle...
[Mclean:] This is an audition for David Letterman.
[Carlson:] Yeah, that's right. Listen to this.
[Mclean:] I can tell. This is an audition for David Letterman.
[Carlson:] It's the all-important bison industry. Listen to Tom Daschle. The bison industry, they need help, too. Here he is.
[Daschle:] The bison industry is probably in its worst set of economic circumstances in the last two to three decades.
[Carlson:] Now, you beat up on tax breaks to IBM. At least IBM's a real company. The bison industry?
[Mclean:] You don't think that for somebody who represents the state of South Dakota that the bison industry and agriculture is important?
[Gillespie:] Kiki...
[Mclean:] I mean, Tucker, here's the amazing thing about this is that when you look at the versions of the stimulus...
[Carlson:] That you're defending it is the amazing thing.
[Mclean:] No. Let me raise something about the stimulus thing. What's really interesting is that the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, a Republican, sent a letter to Tom Daschle, the Democratic leader of the Senate today. Or he may have sent it yesterday. I don't know the exact day he sent it.
[Carlson:] He said, "Go Bisons!"
[Mclean:] But he sent no, he sent a letter to Tom Daschle where he basically flat-out said and I'm paraphrasing the block between economic recovery in America is you. You want to talk about partisan politics and who's really trying to take it down, that's a perfect example.
[Gillespie:] Kiki, you may be able to convince us that the tax break for chicken manure is chicken salad, but you're not going to convince us that it's going to create a single job. I'm sorry.
[Mclean:] I think you're talking about one element, and what I'm talking about, I'm talking about
[Press:] I just want to say somebody on this show has to defend chicken poop. All right?
[Mclean:] Bill, you know what...
[Carlson:] Not
[I. Press:] Not I. All right.
[Mclean:] ... credit for taking on the hard jobs. Come on.
[Press:] Moving right along, though, this chicken manure subsidy is nothing, as Kiki has been trying to say, compared to the economic stimulus package that passed the House of Representatives, which has all these sweetheart tax breaks for the big corporations in America, which they can use for anything they want: executive bonuses, longer vacations for their bosses, golden parachutes. Nothing to do with September 11, a point made by Congressman Robert Menendez of New Jersey. Please listen up to some good sense.
[Rep. Robert Menendez , New Jersey:] A corporate tax cut isn't going to give us enough smallpox vaccine for every American. A corporate tax cut isn't going to improve our intelligence operations. A corporate tax cut isn't going keep our food and water safe from bioterrorism, and it isn't going to help keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of terrorists.
[Press:] So without having to defend chicken manure, you can't defend these corporate tax cuts either, can you?
[Gillespie:] Oh, I absolutely I can.
[Mclean:] Ed's been doing it for years. He'll be happy to.
[Gillespie:] First of all, I don't necessarily disagree with what I don't disagree with what Menendez said. We should do all those things...
[Press:] Well, then why don't you spend the money on that stuff?
[Gillespie:] We should do that too, but the fact is, Bill, we need to make sure that as we wage this war against terrorism, we do all the things he talked about, but that we also make sure that our economic stability is in place and that we're creating jobs. You may hate to admit this, Bill, on the left side of the liberal spectrum, and Kiki, but the fact is jobs are created by companies and corporations: those are who hire people, and pay their money and pay their salaries. And to help them do that is actually good economic policy.
[Mclean:] Wait a minute. There is there is an estimated half million people out of work as a result of September 11th. Do you mean to tell me that a company out of the Fortune 500 roster or the 16 together who get over $7 billion in tax breaks off of this deal are actually going to turn around and make sure they hire some of these people?
[Gillespie:] Yeah, I think they're going to use it to hire and they're going to create jobs with it.
[Mclean:] And are they going to pay are they going to pay insurance premium coverage for all those unemployed people?
[Gillespie:] According to one economic analysis, there are 300,000 jobs that would result from the proposal of the president...
[Mclean:] I hope
[Press:] All right. And let's say where a lot of those out-of- work people are. They're in the airline industry. They're in the hotel industry. They're in the rental car industry. None of them are helped in this House bill, Ed. This House bill eliminates the alternative minimum tax for the biggest corporations. Not only that, it says they can go back 15 years and recoup all the taxes they paid over the last 15 years. That is highway robbery, Ed Gillespie. You've got to admit it.
[Gillespie:] Bill, there's bipartisan support for repealing the alternative minimum tax, because it's an anachronistic tax law that ends up actually penalizing companies for performing well, and what we ought to be doing is rewarding people for performing well so they can hire people and create jobs in this economy. That's the way the economy works.
[Mclean:] The House leaders that are pushing this ought to be ashamed of themselves, because to pass this on the coattails of September 11 as though this is a remedy for September 11...
[Gillespie:] No one said it's a remedy for September 11. What people said is that we've got to rejuvenate this economy...
[Mclean:] But that's part of the stimulus package. That's part of the stimulus package.
[Gillespie:] ... that's an important part of keeping our quality of life where it needs to be.
[Carlson:] Now, Kiki, defend this: Charles Krauthammer had a fascinating and I think what will become an very influential piece in this morning's "Washington Post," in which he said, look, we all agree that our reliance on foreign oil, particularly Saudi Arabia and all Gulf oil is a problem. We don't want to be reliant on a part of the world that's this unstable. Here we have an opportunity to drill in the Arctic, a region where we could be getting up to a million barrels of oil a day, and environmentalists because they love the furry critters who live there are stopping this. This is, in wartime, offensive. It's absolutely right.
[Mclean:] No. Here's the whole thing. This is again Republicans trying to push their issues on the coattails of September 11, which I'm really offended by, because the reality is, the experts in the oil industry will actually admit to you that the footprint that occurs up there will take 10 years before we get to it and, in fact, will only give us about a 10-year supply. It is a drop of oil, it's not a barrel of oil in solving our problem, and it's not going to go anywhere. It actually doesn't do anything.
[Gillespie:] ... level of import from Iraq, for God's sakes. I mean, we rely on Iraq right now.
[Mclean:] No, it in no way balances off the dependency that we have.
[Carlson:] Kiki, I think you know the things you just said are purely speculative and theoretical. But even...
[Mclean:] Not true! Those are reports from oil companies...
[Carlson:] Hold on. OK, I'll grant you that they're true.
[Mclean:] This is good, Tucker.
[Carlson:] Is it not during wartime our duty, our patriotic duty to conserve oil, true, but also to increase our domestic supply of oil and therefore reduce our foreign dependence as much as we can? And so, for the sake of the Caribbean, you're going to stop this?
[Mclean:] If President Bush is having the success he and his White House say he is with the coalition around the world, I don't think we are going to be in danger in this particular instance.
[Gillespie:] ... why don't we have a vote on it?
[Mclean:] What we have to do is make sure that we have a long-term plan and not a band-aid to the plan that causes bigger problems in other ways. So the concept that a whole energy reliance program can be found in the Arctic is ridiculous, and it's setting up false expectations.
[Carlson:] Nobody is even suggesting that.
[Press:] Guess what, there are lots of other issues we didn't get to yet, and we're going to get to as many as we can, just hold your fire for a second. When we come back, there's still a lot of fallout over what happened this week in New Jersey and Virginia and New York City. We will give Ed Gillespie and Kiki McLean a chance to read the political tea leaves when we come back.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] We're a different country that we were on September the 10th, sadder and less innocent. Stronger and more united. And in the face of ongoing threats, determined and courageous.
[Press:] Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. Most Americans are united behind the president in the war against terrorism, but we learned this week that unity doesn't necessarily stand to domestic politics. A Republican won in New York City, but Democrats won two big governor's races, in New Jersey and Virginia, which raises the stakes for the next year's congressional elections. Will Democrats be able to repeat and expand their victories in New Jersey and Virginia, or can Republicans build on their success in New York? Yes, it's political season again, with Republican strategist Ed Gillespie. He's already decided George Bush is headed for a second term. And Democratic strategist Kiki McLean, who says he might as well start packing his bags now. And at least, I didn't call you grizzled.
[Gillespie:] Appreciate it.
[Press:] Tucker.
[Carlson:] So you are, Bill... Now, Kiki...
[Mclean:] You can't offend me.
[Carlson:] You are ungrizzled.
[Mclean:] Thank you. That's the kindest thing you've ever said to me.
[Carlson:] Well, now I'm going to be mean. Two weeks ago, Mark Green up 16 points in New York. Of course, on Tuesday, out of nowhere comes this billionaire Bloomberg, beats him, pretty shocking for your party in a city that's five to one Democrat.
[Mclean:] They had a Republican incumbent mayor.
[Carlson:] That's true, but still it's... So, what does the party do? And this is a trend you'll recognize, it blames the consultants. And here, I want you to listen to your party chairman, Terry McAuliffe. This has got to be one of the most Stalinist things I've heard in a long time. He's getting mad at two consultants, Bill Napp and Doug Shawn, who did work for Bloomberg. Quote: "I'm very upset about Democratic consultants who've made all their money representing Democrats and then turn around and represent Republicans and attack our candidates. If I had anything to say about it, people who partake in those activities will no longer get any money with this committee, no business with this committee." I mean, that's not American. That is so so...
[Mclean:] Every business decision, OK, Bill Napp and Doug Shawn and other consultants in other races earn a living off of it. They are professionals. Every business decision has repercussions. They made a decision, knowing that there may be some in our party, including the leadership, our Chairman Terry McAuliffe, who has every right to say who will or will not work for the Democratic National Committee and earn a living from that committee. And in fact, in this case he said unlikely that those two will. My guess is of off all Bloomberg's money and the $50 million he spent to win that one mayor's office, they'll be fine. I'm not worried about...
[Carlson:] ... a little bit more specific here, though. What they did was produce an ad that accused... Hold on, hold on, but Terry McAuliffe pointed out specifically an ad that he was offended by. And it was an ad that pointed out Mark Green race-baited. So, here you have two Democrats pointing out the race-baiting of another Democrat, and all of a sudden you're not allowed to do that?
[Mclean:] Let's make it clear. No, they are perfectly allowed to do that, but they shouldn't expect...
[Carlson:] But they are being punished by the party that's supposedly against that sort of thing.
[Mclean:] They are being punished because they went to work for a Republican and they attacked a Democrat, and that's totally legitimate. And I'm sure the RNC Chair Gilmore would have done the same thing if the tables were turned. It's perfectly legitimate, but like I said, I'm not really worried about their refrigerators going empty...
[Carlson:] ... that's the headline.
[Press:] Obviously, the political consultants are not the issue or not the story of what happened last Tuesday. The story is, you got your clock cleaned in New Jersey big time, and you lost one of the big red states, Ed, your state of Virginia. Now, I'm going to make it easy on you. I'll give you a choice. Did you just have lousy candidates or is it because the old Republican message of lower taxes and less government is just getting so stale that nobody will buy it any more.
[Gillespie:] Lousy candidates.
[Mclean:] Take it easy.
[Press:] Given that choice, I told you.
[Gillespie:] The fact is that both these candidates in New Jersey and in Virginia on the Democratic side had run statewide before, and they had all the signs and all the markings of second-time statewide candidates. Our candidates in those states were first-time candidates, and they showed all the signs of first-time candidates. And I have to tell you, as a political consultant, I do think they ran disappointing campaigns. I'm not one to blame the candidates. But this is not in any way a tea leaf to be read for future elections, whether it be in '02 or '04. It doesn't reflect the president's number. These candidates ran on local issues, New Jersey and Virginia. Mark Warner ran to the right well, certainly of tucker, not quite of me but on guns and on other issues, and he ran a very finely crafted campaign for the state of Virginia. You have to give him credit. But this is not a harbinger, like we saw in 1993 when Bill Clinton's numbers were so down, there was intensity on the Republican side of the aisle. These guys ran on Republican issues.
[Mclean:] Wait, Ed, you did see a phenomenal support for a Democratic domestic agenda. And it's interesting, because I actually think some tea leaves happened, and I don't think it's necessarily a huge statement about George Bush. But I do think when you saw how both the New Jersey and Virginia: Not only did the base vote turn out, but it coupled with a suburban vote around a message. And it is an economic message, which is a legitimate one, and I think you'll see Democrats have more success with it.
[Press:] Here's what I don't I understand the spin. These were just local issues, Ed. But in 1993, this very same three state, cities city and states we're talking about went from Democrat to Republican. And the Republicans crowed and says this is the first chink in Bill Clinton's armor. Now, why in the year 2001 aren't Democratic governors in Virginia and New Jersey and let's face it, a Democrat as mayor of New York, no matter what his label is why aren't they the first chinks in GEORGE BUSH'S armor?
[Gillespie:] No, they're not. Again, for the reasons I mentioned. Clinton's numbers were low. The president's are high right now. Do I get to answer the question? You guys know
[Mclean:] But I definitely think the demonstration of support for where Democrats are on an economic message and where this country is going to go in the future, I also think both of these candidates in New Jersey and Virginia talked about the future. And the Republican nominees were definitely fighting the past.
[Carlson:] Wait a second. What candidate for any office doesn't talk about the future?
[Mclean:] I've got news for you. Schundler wasn't doing it...
[Carlson:] OK...
[Mclean:] ... and in Virginia Earley wasn't doing it.
[Press:] Touche.
[Carlson:] He was talking about a brighter future. In any case, now this is I want to...
[Mclean:] OK, come on, Tucker. Give me your best shot.
[Carlson:] I want to wrest a difficult admission from you, and that is that you were completely wrong, you and other Democrats, in your characterization of...
[Mclean:] Ask my husband: I am never wrong.
[Carlson:] ... of George W. Bush as a foreign policy lightweight. This hard to remember now, but a recurring theme during the campaign that this guy is not someone whose fingers should be trusted anywhere near the button. He just didn't have the gravity of, say, Al Gore. And I just want to read to you I mean, I could offer you a thousand ways to refute this now ridiculous point. But just as one minor example, this week he meets with Tony Blair, Jacques Chirac. Just today, he meets with the foreign minister of Morocco, prime minister of India, prime minister of the Czech Republic, and the foreign minister of Saudi Arabia. And no one doubts he did a fine job with each. Isn't it time to admit that was totally wrong?
[Mclean:] Well, he's doing what he should do, and we're also not through this crisis. And I hope as an American that he does a terrific job, and I think there's some things he's done very well. Even Al Gore has said that facing this crisis in America, this election of last year is long over, and George Bush is his commander in chief. But let me point out this: that the crisis isn't over and we all as Americans hope well for him. I think that for anybody, including members of his own team, to try to bait for judgments and conclusions already may be may be setting things that shouldn't be.
[Press:] Quick last word, though.
[Gillespie:] There is a strong contrast here, though, with the kind of leadership that President Bush is showing right now and the kind of speech that Bill Clinton gave on Wednesday at Georgetown University, in which he basically said that we are getting what we deserve in this terrorist attack because of the past history of the United States. It was despicable, and the media ought to report about it and they ought to talk about it more than they have.
[Mclean:] ... he's out of office. He's gone.
[Gillespie:] He ought to stop talking like that anyway.
[Mclean:] He's gone.
[Carlson:] That's Kiki McLean, Ed Gillespie. Thank you both very much. We have talked about a lot of issues. Bill Press and I will be back in a moment to sweep it all up, hopefully not under the rug, in our closing comments. Be right back. For those of you who just can't get enough of CROSSFIRE, you are in luck. Bill and I will be back here for a special Sunday edition. Our guests: House Minority Whip Nancy Pelosi and Republican Senator Richard Shelby. It's another lively CROSSFIRE opportunity at a special time, 5:30 Eastern Sunday. Don't miss it.
[Press:] Sunday.
[Carlson:] Sunday. You know, Bill, of all the people hurt in September 11, at least we know the bison farmers are going to do well. Do you know how we know that? Because, as Kiki McLean pointed out, they are from South Dakota and so is Tom Daschle. So he's keeping his pals, the bison farmers he's keeping them.
[Press:] You know what, Tucker, I'm in favor of using the whole bison. And I'm in favor of using the whole chicken, Tucker. And if you capture all that energy available from manure, you can save ANWR, Tucker. You don't have to...
[Carlson:] You know, the fact that you are defending that. It just I'm not sure what it shows.
[Press:] Well, I'll tell you what, that's a gift for you because even though I'm going to be here Sunday, I'm not going to be here all next week. I'm going to be on my book tour, promoting...
[Carlson:] We're going to miss you.
[Press:] ... "Spin This" but then I'll be back after selling one million books. So from the left, good night for CROSSFIRE. I'm Bill Press.
[Carlson:] From the right, I'm Tucker Carlson. Join us again Sunday night for another edition of CROSSFIRE. See you then.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] A look back at this day in 1984 and the assassination of Indira Gandhi.
[Mike Chinoy, Cnn Correspondent:] I was awakened in the middle of the night by a phone call from my producer, telling me that news had just come in that Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had been shot. She had been killed by her bodyguards, who were Sikhs, and they had done so in retaliation for her decision to launch a military assault on Sikh separatists who had occupied a temple in the holy Sikh city of Amritsar some months before. This was their vengeance. And as a result, angry mobs took to the streets in New Delhi, targeting Sikhs, and generally burning and looting. Delhi was in absolute chaos, chaos which continued for two or three days. In all, 3,000 people were killed in those first couple of days. Covering it was a nightmare, because these were mobs that were completely out of control. When they saw a TV crew, they went at you: in some cases, chasing our crews with swords up and down the city streets. It was a reflection of the anger and also of the enormous position that Indira Gandhi had in India.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to give you another kind of forecast of the week ahead now. I am joined by markets editor Sasha Salama who's going to tell us what to look out for in the statistics on the economy, and some market news as well hi.
[Sasha Salama, Cnn Markets Editor:] Good morning, Deborah. We do have a pretty big week on the economic front, with especially the consumer going to be the center of attention, consumer spending, to be more specific. What we're looking for is productivity for the first quarter. That comes out tomorrow. That's a favorite of the Federal Reserve. And, of course, we're just a week away from that May 15 meeting of the FOMC, where it is expected that the Fed will continue to cut interest rates, especially after getting that unemployment report out on Friday, which showed a lot more weakness in the job market than had been expected lots of jobs lost, and the rate of unemployment rising to 4.5 percent so productivity tomorrow. Coming up on Thursday, we've got weekly jobless claims, which, this past week, surged to a higher level than had been expected same-store sales for the month of April and retail sales Thursday and Friday very important because consumer spending receiving a lot of attention in the wake of what's being called by many a corporate profits recession. The consumer so far has held up fairly well. But with all the layoffs in various industries, the big question is: Will the consumer really continue to hold up in terms of spending? Also, a key report out Friday is wholesale inflation: producer prices for the month of April. And we're not expecting to see any big revival in inflation on that front. So that's what's coming up on the economic calendar. In terms of the corporate news calendar, some stocks to watch today include 3Com. The maker of computer networking equipment trades on the Nasdaq COMS. The company is expected to announce a second round of layoffs "Wall Street Journal" saying that the layoffs could come as early as today, part of a goal of cutting about $1 billion in costs annually. And this would be after 3Com laid off 1,200 people just in February. So that's one stock to watch.
[Marchini:] Not a very positive development there. OK, Sasha Salama, thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bruce Steinberg, Merrill Lynch:] Over the last couple of weeks, the data that's come in from the consumer, from the retail sector, has been very strong. That's new information. It shows that consumer spending was still going awfully strong as the year ended. And until consumer spending begins to slow down, rates are going to tend to be going up.
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Well, we know that to be true, don't we. At least that's the expectation, starting with maybe a couple of rate hikes, early this year.
[John Defterios, Cnn Anchor:] And the Federal Reserve concerned about labor right now, as well, and the rising cost of labor going forward, perhaps with the unemployment rate going below well below four percent in the year 2000. Let's join bring in Christine Romans and see the impact of the very wealthy consumer after the stock market gains and what sort of impact it's going to have on Fed thinking at the start of February Christine.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, it's interesting. This week, starting tomorrow, actually, we're going to get a really clear picture of what went on with the consumer in the month of December. That's when we're going to get same-store sales from lots of these major retailers, tomorrow. And analysts are telling me they expect them to be very good, they expect growth of between five and 5 12 for same-store sales during the month of December, and that round out a very strong picture of the consumer in the fourth quarter. Now, is this a recipe for a retail rally in the stocks? Well, that remains to be seen, but some of the some of the factors that are at play, here: TeleCheck said that December sales jumped 5.8 percent; that's a strong performance. The first quarter shows some seasonal strength, actually, for stock prices. Late December to mid- March is the best appreciation, historically, for stock prices of retailers. So, that's a positive that's coming up. And incomes continue to grow, jobs remain abundant, and all kinds of retail analysts and economists say that that's a very important combination for the consumer, who still feels wealthy and is willing to go out there and spend some money. Now, that said, it was a big rally, last year, for the S&P; retail index. It was a big sell-off for the S&P; retail index, yesterday, the retailers not faring well at all in the down-draft that wiped across Wall Street, yesterday. Kohl's, however, actually not doing as badly as some of the others16. It's interesting, J.P. Morgan actually put out a buy recommendation on this stock, yesterday. It's at a $82 price target. Other analysts telling me that Kohl's is well positioned as a pretty diversified retail store in this environment. Home Depot down 6 1116; it is a Dow component. Dayton Hudson, that's the parent of Target, which is a pick of a couple of traders or8. Wal-Mart, which is also in the Dow, down 2 12. And Sears up 1 12. It actually had some upbeat things to say about its fourth quarter. So those are how some of them fared, yesterday. There are a couple of different retail analysts, yesterday and early today, who are telling me that this sector does look pretty good for the first quarter, some seasonal strength, perhaps. Even with expectations for Fed rate hikes, they say the consumer was undaunted with three rate hikes, last year, and they expect that to continue at least through the first part of this year.
[Marchini:] As long as the jobs hold up. What would have to happen to the market before that wealth effect that has been so helpful to consumer spending went away.
[Romans:] It would have to be at least 10 percent before we can start talking about what would happen, we'd have to see a decline of at least 10 percent. We're not there yet, although we are it is not too soon to say that we could be in the midst of trying to put together a 10-percent correction in these markets. But these analysts tell me that the consumer really is undaunted until you have a sustained down-draft and you in October, when we saw a real correction in the S&P; and in the Dow, you didn't see the consumer back off.
[Defterios:] Yes, they jumped right back in as a buying opportunity.
[Romans:] Exactly, exactly.
[Defterios:] Thanks very much for that, Christine.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the Pentagon now seems fairly confident the Chinese did not get their hands on sensitive information from the spy plane, or at least anything that will be particularly useful. CNN military affairs correspondent Jamie McIntyre has that part of the story for us. He takes it now from the Pentagon Jamie.
[Jaime Mcintyre, Cnn Military Affairs Correspondent:] Well, Leon, Pentagon officials are being careful when they say that they're confident that at least the most highly-sensitive and supersecret material on that plane was destroyed by the crew. They got an indication from the crew that they were able to complete their checklist. But the plane itself and the equipment on board is still something that the United States wants back, and still something that China could benefit from if it kept the plane and took it apart. Meanwhile, we've gotten new details about the harrowing minutes that followed the collision over the South China Sea between the EP-3 and an F-8 Chinese fighter. Pentagon sources say that the plane, once it was hit, plunged 8,000 feet in a period of about five minutes, and the reason that they are able to determine that is because it was that long after the collision before a mayday was sounded. So, the best that the Pentagon can put together is that it took them about five minutes to get control of the aircraft, and the reason is the plane was suffering from much greater damage than initially realized, including it had no flaps, no air speed indicator, and the pilot was essentially flying it with very little control. But during the next 10 to 15 minutes, when the Pentagon figures the plane they regained control of the plane, and it was coming in for a landing, again, with those very difficult flying conditions, the crew was apparently able to destroy the most sensitive information and equipment, according to a standard checklist of procedures that they're required to go through. Then when the plane landed on the ground, about 20 minutes after the collision, the crew was forced from the plane by armed Chinese personnel, but Pentagon officials would not say if that was specifically at gunpoint. Some discussion among retired pilots on the Internet about whether the crew should have considered ditching the plane, bailing out, letting it go into the ocean. The Pentagon insists that its policy is to put the safety of the crew ahead of possibly compromising classified information, and that whether the plane could have been ditched, given its crippled state, is also somewhat problematic. The pilot did, really, almost a miracle landing in being able to land the plane safely despite the fact of not having control of the flaps that are used to slow down the plane, and having no air speed indicator, only a ground speed indicator. A very remarkable landing; all 24 crew members are safe and in China Leon.
[Harris:] And Jaime, you bring all of that up and you show us all the damage this plane has sustained, and it's hard to believe that this plane can actually even be returned to the U.S. I know they're asking for it to come back, is it even possible to do?
[Mcintyre:] Oh, absolutely. The plane can be repaired, and that's what would have to happen. It would have to be repaired and put together. In fact, the Pentagon points out that back in the early '70, a Russian plane which had a catastrophic problem on board and had to land in U.S. territory in the Alaska, a reconnaissance plane that was doing a survey of ice floes, the U.S. assisted in getting the plane repaired, giving it fuel. It never boarded that plane, and allowed it to go back to the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War. So, they're citing that as a precedent of the kind of treatment that they expected to get from China after this accidental collision in midair.
[Harris:] Understood. Jaime McIntyre at the Pentagon. Thanks TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Afghanistan's ruling Taliban are already engaged in a military battle with other Afghans. CNN's Chris Burns is in Northern Afghanistan with the opposition group known as the Northern Alliance. Chris, what's the latest from there?
[Chris Burns, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Paula, there's more fighting reported along a front, about 30 miles north of the capital Kabul. The Northern Alliance claims to have taken several villages, killed six Taliban fighters and seized a number of weapons and ammunition. The Taliban not saying anything about that. No way to confirm it independently, but the Taliban does admit that they have lost some ground in the north, somewhere north of a very strategic town called Mashar Ar-Sharif. Now if that town is taken by the Northern Alliance, they will have consolidated quite a bit of their holdings up in the north, and they would then move on toward the capital. The capital being important not only for the Northern Alliance, but also potentially for the United States. There is a very important military former Soviet military base that is just north of Bagram. That is just north of the capital, Kabul. That could serve as a base for U.S. operations against any potential terrorists targets within Afghanistan. So progress as seen by the Northern Alliance, which would very much like to be an ally and play a role in any kind of a U.S. action. On the humanitarian side, a dire situation developing. The United Nations saying it will resume its shipments to the north and east. That is where the Northern Alliance holds a lot of territory. They pulled their workers out of there in the last week or so, after the attacks in the United States, fearing war breaking out here. They're now resuming those shipments. However in the south, they're complaining that the Taliban have seized some 400 tons of food, and seized control of their offices, their communications, apparently putting themselves on a potential war footing Paula.
[Zahn:] Chris, it is not clear here what kind of help the Northern Alliance is enjoying at this moment. Can you confirm whether any of the people you've talked with have said that they're getting any intelligence help from the United States?
[Burns:] Yes, what I'm getting from sources within the Northern Alliance is that they're exchanging information from the United States, as high as the State Department and national security department level on a nearly daily basis. That's what they are telling me. And if that is true, it must have to do with intelligence. They're also of course hoping that eventually they'll get some kind of aid. They are getting cheap weapons ammunitions from the Russians. After all, all of their hardware here is former Soviet hardware, so they do need that from the Russians. As far as intelligence, they're hoping to get more of that from the United States, perhaps even material aid, and most of all, when you talk to commanders, and we talked to commanders on the front, they say what they need more than anything else is U.S. airpower Paula.
[Zahn:] All right, Chris Burns, thank you so much for that update. It's time for me to head directly back to Washington D.C., where John King is standing by. I don't know whether this caught your ear, John, but he was saying what the Northern Alliance needs is material aid from the United States. Is there any reaction from the administration on that, if it is likely to come, and if so, when?
[King:] No promises as yet anyway of any direct U.S. aide to the Northern Alliance, although U.S. administration officials were quite optimistic yesterday, when they heard word that there were continuing discussions and intensifying discussions between the Northern Alliance and Russia about Russia offering military supplies to the Northern Alliance. So that is one thing to watch in the days ahead. And here in Washington, we're all watching the economy this morning. Outside the White House today after breakfast with the president, we saw Republicans and Democrats alike, the Congressional leaders, in a bipartisan spirit, promising to work with each other on an economic stimulus package in the days and week ahead. Here the Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, Democrat on the right, the Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi, Republican on the left. Now as they debate what the government should do to try to help the struggling economy, one voice they will listen to quite closely is one of the Federal Reserve board chairman Alan Greenspan. He will be on Capitol Hill this morning, offering his assessment of the economic impact of these tragic terrorist strikes and awaiting the chairman, CNN's Financial News Tim O'Brien Tim.
[Tim O'brien, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, John. The chairman will be testifying behind closed doors. In fact, it isn't even testimony. It's more of brain-storming session. The economy has been soft for a long time. The problem has been corporate spending, down with corporate profits, and as a result, business not been investing in factories and equipment, which is good for economy, instead, laying off workers, which is bad for the economy. Throughout all of this, consumer confidence and consumer spending, which accounts for two-thirds of the economy, has been quite strong. It's been the mainstay of the economy. Now there are indications that consumer confidence is on the way down. This is even before the September 11th strikes. Without that, we could be headed for a recession that is both deep and wide. So what to do? The questions that Greenspan will be discussing with senators will turn not only on what to do, but when to do it. Greenspan testifying last week said, if we move too quickly, it could have inflationary pressures and hurt down the road. So what to do, and when to do it, that's the topic this morning.
[King:] Tim O'Brien on Capitol Hill for us. We will check in later today to see what people are saying about what Mr. Greenspan said behind closed doors.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Well, there is another live picture of the White House, where we await the vice president. And here he comes out to the microphone. We heard from Gore Gore's running mate Joe Lieberman a few moments ago, saying they continue to fight. Let's hear.
[Al Gore Vice President Of The United States:] I don't really have an opening statement. If you want to ask any questions, feel free.
[Question:] Mr. Vice President, sir, is this the last battleground, sir? If you lose at the Supreme Court of Florida, will you concede?
[Gore:] Well, the effort I have under way is simply to make sure that all the votes are counted. And when the issues that are now being considered in the Florida Supreme Court are decided, that'll be an important point. But I don't want to speculate on what the Florida Supreme Court will do.
[Question:] Realistically, would you say the odds are against you now?
[Gore:] I don't really feel that way, no.
[Question:] Do you feel like an underdog?
[Gore:] Well, you know, I've felt that way for two years now. But I don't feel anything other than optimistic. And the team down in Tallahassee feels that way also.
[Question:] Mr. Vice President, you said last week that you thought your chances were 50-50.
[Gore:] Yes, I'll stay with that. I'll stay with that.
[Question:] Even after the court rulings have gone against you consistently the past three or four days?
[Gore:] Well, I think the U.S. Supreme Court ruling was neutral. It may have even been slightly favorable to us, in the sense that it gave a clear road map to the Florida Supreme Court. But those are things that the lawyers can tell you more about than I can. I just don't want to accept your premise that they've all been negative. I don't think the U.S. Supreme Court decision was negative.
[Question:] Why do you...
[Gore:] And as for the other decision yesterday, everybody knew from the start that that was going to be ultimately decided by the Florida Supreme Court.
[Question:] Do the votes in Seminole and Martin County count, the absentee ballots?
[Gore:] Well, there were more than enough votes to make the difference that were apparently thrown into the applications for ballots were thrown into the trash can by the supervisor of elections there, apparently, even though they were missing the same number that the Republican Party workers were allowed to come in and fix the other applications with. So I don't want to speculate on what remedy might be. I'm not a party to that case or the Martin County case. But more than enough votes were potentially taken away from Democrats, because they were not given the same access that Republicans were. Remember, according to what's come out in that case again, I'm not a party to it, but I've read about it. Apparently the Democratic Party chair was denied the opportunity to even look at the list of applications, whereas the Republican Party workers were allowed to roam around unsupervised inside the office, and bring their computers in, and fix all of the valid applications for one side even as the Democrats were denied an opportunity to come in, denied a chance to even look at the applications and those applications were thrown out. Now, that doesn't seem fair to me. And apparently in Martin County, they were able to go in and take all the applications home with them. So, you know, that's a...
[Question:] ... talk about the black votes being discounted there?
[Gore:] Excuse me, say that what?
[Question:] The black votes that were discounted. Wasn't Jesse Jackson and the NAACP saying that the black votes were discounted in Florida as well?
[Gore:] Well, I am very troubled by a lot of the stories that have been reported about a roadblock on the way to one precinct, questions raised about various activities there. I do not have a personal or firsthand knowledge of those events. But whenever there are problems of that kind alleged, they are deserving of attention.
[Question:] Will you meet with Jesse Jackson...
[Gore:] I talk with him regularly, of course. And I have worked with him closely. I have spoken with Kweisi Mfume and Julian Bond. Penda Hair, who is a head of the effort by the NAACP against voter suppression, has been in touch with our people. But I have no knowledge of those activities. I want to say to you clearly that, in my opinion, whenever you have allegations of those kinds, that is a matter that the entire country ought to take seriously. They are not part of the ongoing court action, and I don't want to mislead you on that, but I certainty want you to know that I think that they're serious allegations.
[Question:] ... you are not party to the suits in Seminole and Martin counties, but how will what happens there affect your decision to continue or to concede?
[Gore:] I don't know. I don't know what'll happen there. I think that those two cases are likely to travel the same route as the case that went into Judge Sauls' court and will end up in the Florida Supreme Court.
[Question:] Will you hang on while that happens?
[Gore:] Well, look, I'm not going to speculate on what the outcome will be, what the remedy might be, depending on that outcome. Those are hypotheticals on top of hypotheticals, and I'm just not comfortable dealing with a hypothetical like that. I do think that it's likely that all of the current controversies will end up being resolved, one way or another, in the Florida Supreme Court. And that's been predicted for a long time now, but... Momento. Aqui.
[Question:] Thank you. Gracias. What do you make of the fact, sir, that the American people don't seem to be outraged that not all the ballots have been counted?
[Gore:] Well, actually, you know, I spent a lot of time debunking the importance of public opinion polls. Every once in a while, I see one that I like.
[Allen:] Al Gore, this afternoon stepping out of the White House, where he's working today, saying he remains optimistic. Just like last week, he still believes he has a 5050 chance in this battle. "Are the odds against you?" he was asked. "I don't feel that way, no." He also commented on the hearing that will take place in the Seminole, Martin County cases regarding those absentee ballots. And he also talked about, as you heard, troubling allegations about African-Americans being denied the right to vote in Florida. He said he would meet with Jesse Jackson on that issue as well. Let's go to CNN's Jeanne Meserve with the Bush camp in Texas. He did not give, Jeanne, the wish of the Bush-Cheney team: that he would concede as Mr. Cheney said it was time for him to do and wouldn't even take the question when asked if he loses before the Florida Supreme Court, if he concedes then wouldn't take that one.
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Correspondent:] I don't think, Natalie, they really expect him to either make that move or say definitively when he will. I think they feel ultimately still he may have to. The Bush campaign is more optimistic than it has been, given yesterday's Supreme Court's ruling excuse me yesterday's court rulings in Leon County Circuit Court and the U.S. Supreme Court ruling. But optimism here quite tempered, because they have been up and down and around and through on this roller-coaster. And they know things could still change. One of the things that you heard the vice president talking about are these cases in Seminole and Martin County, which involve absentee ballots, where Republican officials were allowed to come in and modify the applications for those ballots. You heard what the vice president had to say. Let me tell you a little bit about what the Bush campaign is saying about that. They feel quite strongly that the law is on their side on this case. And they feel that the remedy that is being cited in that case that is, the throwing out of 15,000 absentee ballots is really quite radical. But what they really point to is the public-relations problem this case presents for the Gore campaign. Even though Gore is not a party to it, the gentleman who is pressing it has been a major contributor to the Gore campaign. And the Bush people maintain there was some coordination with some of the Gore advisers. And they say: How can how can the Gore people or his supporters be talking about the ballots here on the basis of applications problems, when, in the same instance in fact, during this brief press opportunity we just had you hear the vice president talking about the need for every single vote to be counted? They think there is a very basic and fundamental contradiction here. They don't think the American public will buy that all these ballots should be tossed. And, as I said, they really feel that the law is going to be on their side on this one Natalie.
[Allen:] All right, Jeanne Meserve. And we will provide live coverage of that hearing the Seminole County cases tomorrow here on CNN. Let's go to CNN's Jonathan Karl, who's been covering the Gore campaign there in Washington. Some rumblings from Democrats around Al Gore that they're not as confident as they have been but Al Gore surely presenting an optimistic face today, Jonathan.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, absolutely. In fact, the direct quote, I believe was: "I don't feel anything but optimistic." That is what the vice president is saying down there, striking a far more defiant tone than we heard even from his running mate on Capitol Hill, Joe Lieberman, who has had meetings on both the House and Senate side with Democrats, reassuring them that this case is almost over, asking them to stand with the vice president as he makes his final appeal to the Florida Supreme Court. But the vice president expressing not only interest in his case before the Florida Supreme Court, but in cases that he is not party to as he mentioned, talking about the Seminole County and Martin County, involving absentee ballots, the vice president making the point that those cases involve more than enough ballots to sway the election. He reminded reporters there that he is not a party to those lawsuits, but he surely showed a command of the facts of those lawsuits and a great deal of interest in them, and did nothing to distance himself from those lawsuits also talking about the reports of the disenfranchisements of African-American voters in Florida, again something of which he has not taken a party to in any lawsuits. But he said of those allegations quote "The entire country ought to take seriously those allegations" so the vice president certainly not sounding like somebody ready to concede, striking an optimistic pose, and also a slightly defiant one, saying he is ready to pursue his legal options.
[Allen:] Jonathan Karl in Washington. Thank you, Jonathan.

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Andy Jordan, Co-host:] And welcome, everybody. I'm Andy Jordan. Monday finds NEWSROOM with a full agenda. Here's the rundown. We begin with an ending the wrap-up of the G8 summit.
[Marina Kamimura, Cnn Tokyo Bureau Chief:] Front and center of G8 efforts in Okinawa, a slew of initiatives aimed at leveling the playing field between the world's richest and poorest.
[Jordan:] From talk of talks to waiting to exhale in today's "Environment Desk."
[David George, Cnn Correspondent:] The American Lung Association says there are hundreds of studies confirming the impact pollution has on health.
[Carolyn O'neil, Cnn Correspondent:] Oh my God! I'm sorry. They've got my notes!
[Jordan:] "Worldview" gets up close and personal on Kangaroo Island. Finally, music legend Johnnie Billington gives us a taste of the Monday blues.
[John Sinclair, Blues Historian:] I think they should have people like that all over the place, taking the blues to the kids and explaining it to them.
[Jordan:] In today's news, two summits and one world leader. From Japan to Maryland, President Bill Clinton is doing double duty. His presence at the G8 summit in Okinawa was overshadowed by his hand in ongoing Mideast peace talks at Camp David outside of Washington. The president rushed back to the summit Sunday to assess where the talks stood at day 13 and counting. He spent last night finding out if the talks had progressed since he left last week for the G8 summit. This side note: It took 13 days in the 1978 Camp David talks for Israel and Egypt to hammer out a peace deal. Under a news blackout he imposed, President Clinton found himself keeping mum when his counterparts at the G8 summit in Japan asked him about the progress of Mideast talks. Marina Kamimura tells us what the leaders of the world's major industrialized countries were able to discuss.
[Marina Kamimura, Cnn Correspondent:] Front and center of G8 efforts in Okinawa, a slew of initiatives aimed at leveling the playing field between the world's richest and poorest.
[Yoshiro Mori, Japanese Prime Minister:] Including the development problem, needless to say, cannot be resolved by G8 countries alone, and therefore we would like to cooperate with countries that are not participating in this G8 grouping.
[Kamimura:] A task force to bridge a digital divide, a pledge to curb the rate of infection from diseases such as HIVAIDS by 2010, a G8 endorsement of a goal to push for universal education by 2015 and a promise to work harder on past promises for debt relief. The U.S. and Japan backed the goals with money, $300 million from the U.S. for a school lunch program for the developing world and $15 billion from Japan to better spread technology. With no looming financial crises to nurture and keen to bury criticism that they've ignored the plight of the less fortunate for too long, the G8 were eager to dub Okinawa the development summit.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] This is the first time, at least in my experience and this is my last G8 conference that there has been such a systematic focus on the developing world, on the problems of disease and the digital divide and education.
[Kamimura:] Traditional G8 issues such as trade and economics also got the nod, including a pledge to kick-start another round of talks on liberalizing global trade by the end of the year. And as the G8's original economic agenda continues to expand into the security realm, North Korea became the topic of the day, recent overtures, including talks with Russia's president, quote, "warmly welcomed." [on camera]: Critics say all the promises in the world mean little without any action. But leaders of the developing world were invited to bring their concerns directly to the G8, and that's something that's never happened before. Marina Kamimura, CNN, Okinawa, Japan.
[Jordan:] Well, depending on where you live, you may be experiencing smog alerts. Cities issue these alerts when the pollution level rises enough to bother people doing outside activities. But pollution can be much more than a bother. It can be a serious health hazard. Especially for the elderly. Today we focus on measuring pollution. It's often measured in parts per million, or ppm. A part per million is the same as four drops of ink in 55 gallons of water. And just as that ink spreads out and colors the water, pollution spreads through our air. David George has our "Environment Desk" report.
[George:] Researchers with the Health Effects Institute in Massachusetts studied the air in America's 90 largest cities for over seven years. They found that only a tiny rise in pollution was enough to hike the death rate among old people by 1 percent; not a huge increase, but...
[Dan Greenbaum, Health Effects Institute:] When you apply that across the whole nation to 250 million people, then you are talking about a substantial increase over time in deaths related to something that we can prevent; that is, air pollution.
[George:] The scientists studied pollution from vehicles, smokestacks, construction sites, even road dust, and concluded that a pollution increase of only 20 micrograms per cubic meter of air was enough to cause potentially fatal health problems in the elderly. [on camera]: A cubic meter of air would fill a box about this wide and this high and just about as deep. Now, as far as that 20 micrograms of pollution that the report mentions, think of it this way: Take one of these pieces of candy. It weighs about one gram. Chop this piece of candy up into a million microscopic pieces, take 20 of those million pieces on your finger, flick out into that box of air in front of us. That's all the extra pollution those scientists are talking about. [voice-over]: Later this year, the Supreme Court will hear a case challenging the EPA's authority to impose air pollution standards, which industry says are too strict. The American Lung Association says there are hundreds of studies confirming the impact pollution has on health, but more study is needed to determine just how and why air pollution causes some people to get sick and others to die.
[Ronald White, American Lung Association:] We certainly have some leads as to how these particles are causing these effects, but we don't have the exact mechanism identified by the science just yet.
[George:] The Massachusetts researchers also caution that their study won't answer whether there's any level of air pollution that is safe for the elderly. David George, CNN, Atlanta.
[Jordan:] Well, we have more on the environment in our "Worldview" segment. Our stories today take us to South America, Asia and Australia. In the Land Down Under, we'll meet a mammal that's a marsupial and a macropod. Can you guess what it is? In Turkey, we turn our attention to the chimpanzee. And we'll also travel to Brazil to discover the diversity of wildlife there.
[Shelley Walcott, Co-host:] We begin in South America, home to the amazing Amazon River. Its the second longest river in the world. Only the Nile in Africa is longer. This important waterway is 4,000 miles long. That's 6,437 kilometers. And get this: It carries more water than any other river more than America's mighty Mississippi, China's Yangtze and Egypt's Nile put together. The Amazon River basin includes the world's largest tropical rain forest. It contains an incredible array of wildlife from alligators and anacondas to parrots and flesh-eating piranha. In fact, it contains a wider variety of plant and animal life than any other spot in the world. Gary Strieker takes us on a journey to the Amazon River.
[Gary Strieker, Cnn Correspondent:] In the Amazon Basin, people have always counted on the abundance of life in these waters. Compared to just a few dozen species of fish in European rivers and lakes, the Amazon has more than 3,000: an incredible diversity that scientists are just beginning to explore.
[William Crampton, Mamiraua Project:] The jaw's opening up. It looks like a prehistoric monster. And in this region so far, I've found 400 or so species of fish, and that could represent one of the most diverse fish faunas on Earth.
[Strieker:] In the western Brazilian Amazon, the Mamiraua Reserve embraces a vast rainforest, a unique area transformed every year by floodwaters rising up to 12 meters, some 40 feet. In Mamiraua, everything depends on the ebb and flow of the river system. [on camera]: Most conservation work in the Amazon seems focussed on the rainforest and its wildlife, but here scientists are taking much of their research underwater, studying life in these rivers and lakes. [voice-over]: One study has found that as much as 90 percent of biomass underwater here consists of electric fish.
[Crampton:] I've got two electrodes at the bottom. These are electric fish. They're passing by the electrode at the bottom. That's a medium-frequency species.
[Strieker:] This kind of research produces new information about the food chain that supports major commercial fisheries in the Amazon.
[Galia Ely, Mamiraua Project:] One clean, pink, very pink animal. It's a calf.
[Strieker:] In another project, researchers study pink river dolphins, capturing and marking nearly 200 of them and tracking some with radio transmitters.
[German Soler, Mamiraua Project:] River dolphins are in great danger...
[Ely:] All over the world.
[Soler:] ... all over the world. And this is one of the few populations that are doing fairly OK in the Amazon basin and Orinoco basin.
[Strieker:] What they learn here about these animals is essential data for conservation plans to guarantee their survival and could help to save endangered populations of river dolphins in Asia. Other studies in Mamiraua focus on turtles and caimans, animals that were nearly wiped out by poachers and are now making dramatic recoveries under protection in the reserve. And researchers are trying to find ways to save endangered river manatees. After their mothers were killed by poachers, these orphans were raised in captivity and will soon be released back to a river system that is very fragile against human exploitation but still teeming with life like no other. Gary Strieker, CNN, in the Mamiraua Reserve, Brazil.
[Tom Haynes, Co-host:] Today's "Wild Kingdom" examines the plight of the chimpanzee. Chimpanzees live in areas ranging from the dry grasslands to humid rainforests. In their normal habitats, they can live between 30 and 40 years. Chimps' natural enemies include leopards and large eagles. But man is the biggest threat to the mammal. In some areas of the world, chimps are hunted for food or even captured for use as pets. In the 1970s, a shrinking chimp population led to restrictions on the international trade of the animals. Despite those restrictions, the illegal trade continues. In turkey, conservationists are less worried about poaching within their nation's borders. That's because their fight is with smugglers bringing the endangered animals into the country. Mary Pflum explains.
[Mary Pflum, Cnn Correspondent:] Meet Sansler and Kinali. They're the latest additions to Turkey's recently established chimpanzee habitat at Istanbul's Bosphorous Zoo. They're also symbols, officials say, of Turkey's ongoing primate problems. Both were smuggled into Turkey from Africa and put up for sale on the black market.
[Allison Cronin, Science Director, Monkey World:] It's horrific. What happens in the wild is that to get one of these babies away from their mothers they actually have to shoot and kill the family group to take the baby away. It's a nationwide problem. We're actually finding baby chimpanzees and monkeys all across Turkey.
[Pflum:] Allison Cronin is the science director of Monkey World, a primate rescue center based in Britain. For the past two years, she and her husband, Jim, have been lobbying to stop the monkey business in Turkey. But sales of the animals continue. At fault, says Bosphorous Zoo owner Faruk Yalain, are African sailors who reportedly bring primates to Istanbul's Central Harbor in suitcases aboard small ships.
[Faruk Yalain, Owner, Bosphorous Zoo:] The guilty are the African people. They bring them without showing the customs, etcetera.
[Pflum:] Turkish officials say they try to follow the CITES agreement, an international treaty which prohibits the sale of endangered animals, chimpanzees included. But no national law in Turkey forbids the sale or ownership of primates. [on camera]: It doesn't take the average observer long to figure out why people are willing to pay thousands of dollars for a baby chimp. They are adorable. But in a matter of five years, this chimp will be six times as strong as me and capable of throwing me across a room. [voice-over]: Even if Turkey succeeds in cracking down on the number of primates imported, what's to become of the animals already there? The Turkish government wants to establish an endangered animal refuge in 2001. In the meantime, they're turning to private zoo owners like Yalain for help. But Yalain says his primate quarters are full. Sansler and Kinali got in when the going was good. It seems other primates in Turkey are out of luck. Mary Pflum for CNN, Istanbul, Turkey.
[Jordan:] Next stop, the Land Down Under: Australia. You probably know it as the site of the year 2000 summer Olympics. But there's more afoot than sports. Australia is known for its exotic animals. Today we visit an island off the coast of South Australia: Kangaroo Island. Its name gives away one of its most intriguing inhabitants. The kangaroo is a type of furry mammal known as a marsupial. The female has a pouch for carrying its young. The kangaroo is also a macropod, a word that means "large foot." There are 55 species of macropods, all of them native to Australia, New Guinea or nearby islands. Today we head to kangaroo island to meet a menagerie of mammals. Our tour guide is Carolyn O'Neil.
[O'neil:] The landscape is a patchwork of tiny towns, wilderness and farmland forming Australia's third largest island. It lies off the coast of South Australia, about a half-hour flight from the city of Adelaide. Kangaroo Island has one remarkable feature after another.
[Craig Wickham, Adventure Charters Of Kangaroo Island:] Yes, a lot of people say that it's everything they expected all of Australia to be. You know, there's lots of open space, all the wildlife they're expecting.
[O'neil:] While 4,000 people live on Kangaroo Island, animals dominate: 800,000 sheep are raised here and there are 251 recorded species of birds. Look high into the trees and you may spot one of the island's 5,000 koalas. This famous marsupial sleeps 20 hours a day and eats exclusively from the gum or eucalyptus tree. [on camera]: And, of course, there are kangaroos on Kangaroo Island, an exciting sight for first-time visitors. In fact, there are so many here, the drivers have to watch out for them. Oh my God. I'm sorry. They've got my notes. [voice-over]: And obviously not afraid to approach humans. The temptation to touch is hard to resist. It's an ongoing struggle balancing the enthusiasm of visitors without disrupting the animals and their natural behaviors. A drive to see one kind of animal often leads to sightings of others.
[Wickham:] A wallaby is simply just a small species of kangaroo.
[O'neil:] We also spotted this prickly creature, the echidna, or spiny anteater. It's an egg-laying mammal. Then on to Seal Bay Conservation Park.
[Unidentified Male:] I was shocked. They're just everywhere. And they're big. But it's quite impressive. I didn't realize you could get that close.
[O'neil:] Carolyn O'Neil, CNN, Kangaroo Island, Australia.
[Announcer:] You're watching CNN NEWSROOM, seen in schools around the world, because learning never stops, and neither does the news.
[Jordan:] Well, the blues is experiencing a resurgence in popularity around the world. It is also alive and kicking in Mississippi, thanks to one man working to keep the soul of America alive in the Delta.
[Walcott:] The Mississippi Delta has produced some of the greatest blues musicians of our time: artists like the late, great Muddy Waters and Howlin'Wolf, and living legends like John Lee Hooker and B.B. King. The Delta is also home to another great bluesman, who's as authentic and unspoiled as his surroundings. His name is Johnnie Billington. Known as Mr. Johnnie to his friends and neighbors in Lambert, Mississippi, Mr. Johnnie is a Delta original. The 64-year- old musician and singer was born in nearby Clarksdale. He taught himself how to play the guitar and sing the blues while still in his teens. While still a young man, Mr. Johnnie moved to Chicago. He ran an auto repair shop by day and at night performed with blues greats like Muddy Waters and Earl Hooker. Mr. Johnnie returned to his Mississippi roots in 1977. Since then, he has taken on something perhaps even more challenging than the professional music scene. Every day after school, Mr. Johnnie gathers local kids to teach them the basics of the blues through his Delta Blues education program. The goal is to encourage kids raised on hip- hop to reclaim their Delta heritage.
[Johnnie Billington, Blues Teacher:] The reason that kids, I think, should learn about it is because it's an inheritance of their ancestors, started the blues. It's kind of like planting a tree. And the tree grows up, it's just one branch. But if the tree grows and gets grown, it grows out on many branches, grows off of that root. So my idea has been, as it goes, is to try to keep the root alive. And if you don't keep the root alive, the whole tree dies.
[Walcott:] Besides a lesson on roots, the music classes also keep kids in this economically depressed area of the South out of trouble by keeping them off the streets and, as Mr. Johnnie would say, keeping guitars in their hands instead of guns. The music lessons are free of charge, funded by private and public grants. The students play on donated instruments, some almost as big as the kids themselves. They gather every weekday afternoon at Mr. Johnnie's school a small club located on an all-but-abandoned street in downtown Lambert. [on camera]: Looks like some children have been here.
[Billington:] Yes, well, that was some of my idea when I came over here, is to try to at least make it look a little bit better by convincing the city, the mayor's office to let's at least buy some plyboards and board up the windows and let some kids come in and do some painting.
[Walcott:] Mr. Johnnie travels all over the Southeast to teach kids about the blues. He often brings along his band of teenage bluesmen to perform. His work is earning him rave reviews across the Southeast.
[Sinclair:] Yes, I think they should have people like that all over the place, taking the blues to the kids and explaining it to them; not only how to play it, but what it's about and where it came from and what it meant historically; the whole thing, you know. To transmit this to a generation of youths, particularly of today's world, it's quite a remarkable achievement.
[Billington:] Get those big, old scarf off your head, boy, you ain't going to freeze to death.
[Walcott:] Mr. Johnnie has raised seven children of his own, but he says his family is much bigger than that because he often acts as a surrogate father to the kids he teaches.
[Billington:] What we talk about is when we go to a store, you all are supposed to do what? Wait until what? Yes, but what about we out of town? See, remember I tried to teach you all that? We out of town, you all walk out the store and somebody grab you, and then what am I going tell your mamma when I get back to Lambert?
[Walcott:] Mr. Johnnie's work hasn't gone unrecognized. He was awarded master folk artist status by the Mississippi Arts Commission in 1993. And in 1995, he received the W.C. Handy Keeping the Blues Alive in Education Award for excellence in the blues industry. Mr. Johnnie knows his work is uncommon, since most blues preservationists are white. In fact, for every Johnnie Billington, there are probably 100 more white blues promoters, authors and DJs.
[Billington:] The only thing blacks own, actually, originally owned in America, he owns the blues. And yet they're kind of letting that kind of slip through their fingers.
[Walcott:] For his part, Johnnie Billington has managed to keep the blues torch lit in Mississippi. Many of his former students have gone on to become professional musicians. And all have received a precious legacy: the gift of music from their ancestors.
[Announcer:] Teachers, make the most of CNN NEWSROOM with our free daily classroom guide to the program. There you'll find a rundown of each day's show, so you choose just the program segments that fit your lesson plan. Plus, there are discussion questions and activities, and the guide highlights key people, places and news terms. Each day, find hot links to other online resources and previews of upcoming "Desk" segments. It's all at this Web address, where you can also sign up to have the guide automatically e-mailed directly to you each day. It's easy, it's free, it's your curriculum connection to the news. After all, the news never stops, and neither does learning.
[Jordan:] Jack Nicklaus was the last one to do it, and he did it back in 1966, when he was 26. Well, this is 2000 and the man of the moment is a 24-year-old named Tiger. Over the weekend in Scotland, he became the youngest golfer ever to win all four tournaments making up golf's Grand Slam. As Don Knapp tells us, fans of Tiger Woods are in awe.
[Don Knapp, Cnn Correspondent:] About the only difficulty Tiger Woods had on his way to winning the British Open was getting past a swarm of enthusiastic fans. They may be golf fans at St. Andrews, but many across the United States are simply Tiger Woods fans. [on camera]: Is that your Tiger?
[James Wilmore, Amateur Golfer:] That is my Tiger.
[Knapp:] James Wilmore, a hair stylist, was playing at San Francisco's Presidio Golf Course about the time Tiger Woods was finishing up in Scotland.
[Wilmore:] Golf is 90 percent mental and 10 percent physical, and he's about 100 percent mental.
[Knapp:] San Franciscan James Deslaurier, an Internet worker, says Tiger Woods is a new image for golf.
[James Deslaurier, Tiger Woods Fan:] I think he's definitely broken away from kind of the mold of the typical golfer, you know, the growing up we always thought of golfers as old, fat guys, right? And now he's this he's a true athlete.
[August Laia, Internet Worker:] I think the best thing is he's a gentleman. You know, you see a lot of sports stars today they can pretty much do anything they want, and he's taken the high road. I think that's the best thing he's done for the game.
[Knapp:] New Yorker Patricia Grayson has become a Tiger Woods golf fan.
[Patricia Grayson, Tiger Woods Fan:] And I think that the fact that golf is the sport that he's involved in as opposed to perhaps basketball is an indication that, again, people of color can transcend just basketball and entertainment.
[Knapp:] Golfer Bill Butler is a sporting goods salesman in Los Angeles.
[Bill Butler, Sporting Goods Salesman:] He can play great golf, and that makes it anybody can do probably anything. If Tiger Woods can play great golf, I mean, why can't I play great golf, or why can't I be a good salesman or whatever?
[Miguel Castro, Computer Worker:] More people are playing, you know, minorities, women. It's just lifted the game up, bigger purses for everybody. It's great.
[Knapp:] And apparently a lot of fans trying to follow his example. Don Knapp, CNN, San Francisco.
[Jordan:] Well, it was a big weekend for sports fans and for the athletes, too. Tiger Woods wasn't the only one celebrating. As the young golfer grabbed another trophy, a cycling hero was also triumphant. Lance Armstrong won his second Tour de France. The cancer survivor dominated the big race, crossing the finish line more than six minutes ahead of his nearest competitor. And it's time for us to roll on out of here. We'll see you back here tomorrow. Have a great one.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] You don't have to be a psychologist to know that Elian Gonzalez and his family are under tremendous stress. But a clinical psychologist who has met with both sides of the family has become more concerned with the recent turn in events. Dr. Lourdes Rigual-Lynch joins us now from New York. Dr. Lynch, good morning.
[Dr. Lourdes Rigual-lynch, Clinical Psychologist:] Good morning.
[Phillips:] Let's begin with why you are more concerned.
[Rigual-lynch:] I'm more concerned now because it appears to me that Elian's emotional state is deteriorating, and that's because the environment around him has become increasingly tense and conflicted. And, you know, the tension has to be communicated to the little boy. And in this whole process, the child is getting lost in the process, unfortunately.
[O'brien:] Let's talk about the videotape. You've seen the videotape. His mannerisms, it seems so constructed. He's very passionate, he seems very angry, and what he says on the tape, "Dad, I do not want to go to Cuba, if you want, stay here, but I'm not going to Cuba." Now, he talks about not going to Cuba but never once does he mention, I don't want to be with my dad.
[Rigual-lynch:] That's correct, and I think that's something that needs to be underlined, you know, as an important point in terms of the video, that nowhere in the video does he say he does not want to return to his father. But the fact is that, you know, he says that he doesn't want to return to Cuba. And I found that video very upsetting, and it's just another point that states that, you know, this child is really being subjected to all kinds of things that are not good for him. That was very unhealthy for him.
[Phillips:] You've met with both sides. Did the Miami relatives coach him and tell him to do this? Were they in the room telling him what to say and what to do?
[Rigual-lynch:] I really don't know. I can't you know, I can't project anything on that. All I know is that in that video, Elian presented as very different from what we had seen of him before. You know, before, he was always active, playful. And in the video, it was like a different child, you know, he was very angry with the finger wagging, and, you know, it seemed like a completely different child.
[Phillips:] Unnatural performance.
[Rigual-lynch:] Yes.
[Phillips:] In regard to Elian losing his mother, doesn't a child usually automatically want to be with his or her father if they lose their mother?
[Rigual-lynch:] Well, I believe, you know, when the child loses his mother, which is really one of the most traumatic events that can occur in a child's life, especially at that age, it is natural that he should be with the surviving parent, someone who he has bonded with all of his life. And as a matter of fact, Elian, you know, used to spend most of the time with his father in Cuba. He was living with the father during the week. So he was very close to him, and he was also very close to his current stepmother, the father's current wife, and they're both loving and affectionate people, and this child really needs to be in a more stable environment. The environment he's in right now is very unstable, and it doesn't lead to any kind of healing. And I'm very concerned about that.
[Phillips:] So you think the father's motives are very sincere, and there's definitely a healthy relationship there?
[Rigual-lynch:] That's definitely the impression that I had upon meeting with the father and his current wife, yes.
[Phillips:] What is going to happen to Elian, do you think, when all this affection, all these gifts, all this attention goes away?
[Rigual-lynch:] I think all these gifts and all of that attention actually are very distracting to him. I don't think that they're really that important. I think the most important thing is that he has the love of his family, and that he's able to be in an environment that is stable, that is peaceful, where he can begin to heal the traumatic loss of his mother's death.
[Phillips:] Dr. Lourdes Rigual-Lynch, thanks for joining us this morning. Definitely some new perspective that we needed.
[Rigual-lynch:] Thank you.
[Phillips:] Thank you. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Air Force One touched down in Tanzania, eastern Africa earlier today, the final leg of President Clinton's three-day trip to sub-Saharan Africa. Mr. Clinton announced yesterday that Washington will provide $20 million in assistance to the continent. CNN senior White House correspondent John King standing by now live now in Arusha, Tanzania, traveling with the president, with more John.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Well, Bill, considerable "turmoil," the term used by a U.S. official here with President Clinton. The president had hoped to come here to Tanzania to witness the signing of a historic peace agreement ending the seven- year-old civil war in Burundi. Instead, we're told significant complications in the negotiations. Some interim document will be signed today, but diplomats here on the scene and U.S. officials traveling with the president say it will not address the key issues such as a cease-fire, if and when that would take effect; the organization of a transitional government that would be necessary; also other details. Some of the rebel groups not even involved in these negotiations, so diplomats on the scene saying that document that will be signed today will be, in their view, meaningless. U.S. officials saying that's not case. They say that it is progress just to lock in any progress made so far in the negotiations. They also say Mr. Clinton came here out of respect for the former South African President Nelson Mandela. He is shepherding these talks, has been doing so for two years now. He asked Mr. Clinton to come here and Mr. Clinton, of course, will take part in these discussions today. At issue now, 200,000 people killed in this seven-year-old conflict. The Tutsi minority runs the army and the government now in the Burundi. The Hutu rebels, they had elected a democratic leader seven years ago. He was overthrown by Tutsi paratroopers. U.S. officials insisting this will not be a failure, but obviously a disappointment as the president here in Tanzania to witness the peace negotiations for Burundi. John King, CNN, reporting live from Arusha, Tanzania.
[Hemmer:] All right, John, thank you, as the day about to end there in eastern Africa.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Well, it is no secret more and more women are dropping out of the work force these days to be full-time parents. Our two guests did, before dropping back in with their new book entitled "And What Do You Do?" Loretta Kaufman and Mary Quigley are the authors of this book, a new chapter for these former stay-at-home moms, and they join us from our New York bureau. Thank you, ladies, for joining us. LORETTA KAUFMAN, CO-AUTHOR, "AND WHAT DO YOU DO?": Thank you. MARY QUIGLEY, CO-AUTHOR, "AND WHAT DO YOU DO?": Thank you.
[Allen:] Well, the title of your book, "And What Do You Do?: When Women Choose to Stay Home," kind of tells me that it's still difficult for women to make the decision to end their careers for now, Loretta?
[Kaufman:] Yes, that's very, very true. We identified a group of almost 8 million women who have chose to stay home and to be at-home- moms and another 5 million, and it was another 5 million that work part time excuse me and it was not an easy decision for them to make. These women are incredibly conflicted, but they have made a decision that we feel has to be validated and we try to celebrate it in this book.
[Allen:] And most of them are happy with their decisions?
[Quigley:] Absolutely, there is a period where it takes a period of adjustment, but ultimately and that's what our book tells, people have been there, done that, made this transition, that they are happy. It gives them what we call inner peace and outer peace, control over their lives and a sense of fulfillment in all your roles as a woman, not just as a title on the door.
[Allen:] Well, you talk about validation, is part of the reason that you felt compelled to write a book entitled "And What Do You Do?" is because society isn't still where it needs to be in accepting women's choice to return to the home?
[Kaufman:] Yes, and that's exactly what we are saying. Women should have choice, and unfortunately there is still a stigma for these women who are staying at home and we feel that there are role models that are quite old. These are not some souped-up versions of June Cleaver. These are women that are out there doing incredible things in their community and in their family.
[Allen:] Why do you think it is that we still aren't there as a society? Why are women frowned upon, or if they're looked down upon, because they decide to dedicate themselves to their family first?
[Quigley:] I think it's because women, you know, especially younger women have grown up with feminism as a mantra and they are told that work, that they will work, that they should succeed in work. But, motherhood, or parenthood, devoting yourselves to children is not touted as a career choice, as an admirable choice. A lot of people say it quietly, but it's not something that you read about in books or magazines and say, hey, this is a great choice to make.
[Allen:] One of your chapters is entitled "Unexpected Rewards From Choosing to Stay at Home." Share those with us.
[Kaufman:] Well, women are learning some wonderful things about themselves. This down time, what we call our down time is a period for women to discover things, new talents, new creative ideas. We have found women that were CPAs that found out that they were really very artistic individuals and they used the time to develop new skills and perhaps even use those when they go back to the work force, and that is truly the point of our book. Many of these women take a down time knowing it's just a period of time in their life and they could have 20 years to return to either a new career or the career that they once had.
[Allen:] Was there a particular instance that caused you to write this book? Loretta, for you, was there a particular case in point in your own personal story of giving up a career?
[Kaufman:] Yes, there was. My husband was a corporate executive on a fast track and I just felt somebody had to be at mission control. And I did have part-time jobs while my children were growing up, but it wasn't really a career. And it was at age 50 that I actually got a Master's in journalism and Mary Quigley was one of my journalism professors, though I admit I'm older than Mary is. And I have now had I am now taking my turn, and my husband is supporting me the same way that I supported him and I think that's terrific, and we met many women with similar stories.
[Allen:] And, Mary, what do you want if this is a support book in some respects for women who have chosen to put their career on the back burner, what's the main message that you have, or advice you have for them coming out of this book?
[Quigley:] The main message is, do it, take you know, sit down, take a pen and pencil, figure out if you could do it economically and then prepare yourselves and emotionally it will be difficult, but ultimately, as we said, the unexpected pleasures there's a great joy. This is a one-time only offer to raise your kids, they grow up so quickly. You take 10 years out, 15 years out, 45, 50, you can go back to work and still have a great time for a career ahead of you if that's what you choose. But we want we should celebrate this choice, especially with Mother's Day coming up, this is a choice that should be celebrated, not that should be politically incorrect.
[Allen:] And very quickly, how would you advise women who stay at home to answer the question, "and what do you do"?
[Kaufman:] We would like to hear them say that I'm a mother, I'm a wife, and I feel very comfortable in what I am doing.
[Allen:] Loretta Kaufman, Mary Quigley, the book is "And What Do You Do?," thanks for joining us.
[Quigley:] Thank you, thank you.
[Kaufman:] Thank you very much.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Judge Sander Sauls describes this whole process, "like getting nibbled to death by a duck." He is, of course, talking about the barrage of legal motions and arguments blitzing Leon County Circuit Court. National correspondent Gary Tuchman is covering the court action in Tallahassee, and he hopefully is going to sort it all out for us. Hi, Gary.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning to you, Carol. While George W. Bush works to betray a sense of calm in Texas. There is no such sense of calm among his attorneys here in Florida. Because they are battling two different judges in this courthouse, judges who have the authority to possibly swing this election to Al Gore. Last night inside this court, a judge set this Saturday as the date for the beginning of trial of Al Gore's contest against the 2000 election. But in the meantime, Judge N. Sanders Sauls has ordered that all disputed ballots from the Miami County Miami-Dade County and Palm Beach County immediately be brought here to Tallahassee. He has set the deadline for 12:00 noon this Friday. They will come under police escort. They will arrive here. Now, the Gore side has said it needs all these ballots counted, 13,500 ballots from Miami-Dade County, or actually 10,500 ballots I apologize from Miami-Dade County that were never counted by hand because the Miami-Dade County Canvassing Board stopped count; and 3300 ballots from Palm Beach County, which were counted, but the Gore side says were not counted liberally enough, they were not counting dimples liberally like they were in Broward County. They need all those ballots counted. The judge said, at this point, he has not decided if those ballots will be or if they won't be counted. He says it will depend upon the evidence. But he did order that once the ballots get here on Friday, the day before that, a hearing Thursday, which is tomorrow, will be held, a hearing to discuss standards for how to count those ballots, if hanging chads should be counted, if dimpled chads should be counted, if indented chads should be counted. So the judge, basically, is saying we want to everything in place if I do decide to count the ballots. Either way though, the Gore side says it might appeal the judge's decision not to start an immediate count. It might appeal to the Florida Supreme Court, but that decision hasn't been made just yet. Meanwhile, another judge in this very same building here has set Wednesday, this coming Wednesday for a trial, in the case of a citizen against Seminole County, Florida. Seminole County is accused of having Republican workers fill out missing data on voter registration cards after those voters voted for George W. Bush. In a worst case scenario for the Bush side, about 4,700 Bush votes could be thrown out. However, Bush attorneys say it is all a hyper-technicality and this is a ridiculous case. So there's a lot going on here in this courthouse right now for the lawyers on both side. Carol, back to you.
[Lin:] Gary, but in theory, the ballots are ready to be counted, and they could be counted as soon as Saturday, if that standard is set; right? Gary Tuchman? All right, we lost the audio signal. My apologies.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We move on now to the latest on the Mideast Peace Summit. The White House says President Clinton is getting into the substance of the issues facing Israeli and Palestinian leaders. CNN White House correspondent Kelly Wallace joins us once again from Thurmont, Maryland, which is near Camp David, where that summit is being held Kelly.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, Leon, we should get some sense, underline the word sense, and some, rather, of how this second day of the talks will proceed at a briefing by White House press secretary Joe Lockhart about two hours from now. But as we've been reporting all morning, all sides have agreed to a virtual news blackout. So getting any real details about what is being discussed behind closed doors is going to be very, very difficult. The only time we saw the leaders yesterday was just before they went behind closed doors for their first three-way meeting. We saw President Clinton, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, taking a walk in the woods, if you will. The three leaders looked very happy to be there, Mr. Clinton stopped and told reporters that they have agreed not to answer any questions or make any comments. Mr. Clinton, also before that walk in the woods, met separately with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, he also had a meeting with the Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak. And then last night he had separate meetings with each of those leaders once again. Then all the leaders and their negotiating teams got together for dinner. The White House describes the talks as informal and constructive, said they got off to a good start with a good atmosphere. But has also the White house is also saying that they are engaged in serious discussions and that they are getting to the substance of these issues. Now we do know, senior administration officials tell CNN that President Clinton is prepared to force discussion about possible compromises as the talks proceed. One of those compromises focuses on Jerusalem. Both sides are claiming ties to the holy city. The compromise would leave Jerusalem mostly in Israel's hands but would carve out the portion of East Jerusalem, dominated by Arabs, for the Palestinians. Again, that is just one of many very thorny and difficult issues these leaders need to resolve if they are going to put an end to their half-century old conflict Leon.
[Harris:] Kelly Wallace, in Thurmont, Maryland, thanks much.

[Bill Tucker, Cnn Anchor:] First, in today's "CNN 20" report, the end of a quagmire in Afghanistan.
[Unidentified Correspondent:] These Soviet soldiers, the last getting out of Afghanistan, are the lucky ones. Fifteen thousand of their comrades didn't, were slain by a Muslim insurgency that couldn't be quelled. The Soviets, humiliated by the U.S.-armed but disorganized guerrilla resistance, are completing their withdrawal from the backward country after nine futile years. Columns of heavy armor that in the end proved ineffective in the rugged mountains of Afghanistan were loaded on trains for the trip back into the Soviet Union at Termez. The Soviets said the last of their garrison at the Kabul airport pulled out on a big Soviet Ilyushin 76 transport, leaving the defense of the capital completely in the hands of the well-armed but questionably-disciplined Afghan army. But Soviet sources say a crack team of about 20 paratroopers is staying behind indefinitely to rescue Afghan leader Najibullah if his government falls. The Soviets privately say they think the present Marxist regime can hold onto power for about four more months but agree with westerners who claim that Najibullah eventually will flee or be forced from power. [on camera]: In Moscow, the Communist Party daily "Pravda" blasted former leader Leonid Brezhnev for having sent troops into the Kremlin's southern neighbor in the first place, saying the military threat was overrated, saying the nation's newly-invigorated parliament should have a voice in any future Soviet decision to intervene abroad. Steve Herr, CNN, Moscow.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Italy's prime minister Monday promised a full investigation into Sunday's disaster at a campground for the disabled. At least, 12 are dead and 22 others injured after flash flooding in the southern town of Soverato. CNN Rome bureau chief Gayle Young has more.
[Gayle Young, Cnn Correspondent:] As the death toll mounts in southern Italy, so, too, does criticism over the country's lax building codes believed ultimately responsible for the disaster. Rescue workers are still sifting through tons of mud and debris, trying to account for the missing. Officials say a torrent of water engulfed the campsite where dozens of handicapped campers, some of whom were confined to wheelchairs, and their caregivers were sleeping in rickety wooden bungalows.
[Egidio Vitale, Camp Director:] I was one of the lucky ones. I reached the roof and was surrounded for four hours by water.
[Young:] Deadly mudslides have become a yearly phenomenon in parts of Italy. Geologists say illegal construction is eroding hillsides. Critics wonder how a campsite was allowed on a narrow stream bed. Since the camp's records were washed away, authorities don't know for sure how many people were at the site when it was hit by the flood before dawn Sunday. Anxious family members helped in the search, desperate to find loved ones who may have been at the campsite. Officials say they doubt any of the missing are still alive. Gayle Young, CNN, Rome.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] In the bottom right hand corner of your screen you see the futures markets telling us we're likely to see a tech stock bounce at the open of trading today on news that Hewlett- Packard is buying Compaq. Let's see what impact it's having on stocks overseas. First to Lisa Barron with a look at the Asian markets. Hi, Lisa.
[Lisa Barron, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Deborah. Well, the announcement by Hewlett-Packard that it will buy rival Compaq Computer provided a badly needed boost to tech stocks in Asia. Taiwan's Quanta surged nearly 6 12 percent3 percent, China's largest computer maker, Legend Holdings, clicked up more than 1 percent and Japan's Toshiba powered up more than 5 percent and that helped boost the broader markets. Tokyo's Nikkei rose 3.5 percent, Taipei's Weighted index gained just under 1 percent and Hong Kong gained 2.15 percent. There has been some progress between American International Group and the Hyundai Group on the purchase of the South Korean company's financial units. AIG has offered new terms for Hyundai Securities allowing minority shareholders to buy between $40 million and $80 million of new shares, according to "The Wall Street Journal." The paper cites unnamed sources from AIG saying that it would be the final offer and should Hyundai Group turn it down, the buyers would walk away. Investors hope this could lead to a finality, driving shares of Hyundai Securities up more than 6 percent in Seoul trade. That's the business today here in Asia back to you, Deborah, in New York.
[Marchini:] All right, Lisa Barron in our Hong Kong bureau. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jeff Greenfield:] The new videotape from the group believed to have sponsored the September 11th attacks on America, with a new warning: The terror will not stop. That warning guaranteed to add more anxiety to a nation still unsettled by the attacks of a month ago. We're going to talk about what that attack might have done to America's traditional sense of confidence, but first, at about 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Al-Jazeera TV, the Qatar-based outlet that often airs tapes from the Taliban, broadcast a tape from Suliman Abu-Ghaith, threatening more attacks on the United States unless the United States changed its policies on the Middle East and Islam. Joining me to talk about this and about the prospects for America's recovery, two U.S. senators who share a common link: They are both decorated Vietnam combat veterans. And they share common responsibilities: Both are members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Republican Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Democrat John Kerry from Massachusetts. They join me from Washington. Senator Hagel, that tape didn't exactly assume responsibility for what happened, but sure didn't deny it. If al Qaeda is still is the group that the United States must pursue, tell us the link between the strikes in Afghanistan and trying to roll up a multinational terrorist organization.
[Sen. Chuck Hagel , Nebraska:] Jeff, the president laid it rather clearly a couple of weeks ago when he said that the al Qaeda network, obviously the centerpiece of what we are dealing with, is just but one part of this international conspiracy made up of radical fundamentalists that threaten Western civilization. And they are connected. And that's why the multifaceted, multipronged attack on terrorism is going to be required diplomatic tools, economic tools, humanitarian tools, military tools in this international coalition to go after it. And it will require a sustained commitment by all free nations of the world to destroy it. Eventually we will destroy it.
[Greenfield:] Senator Kerry, the U.S. says that it's not targeting Osama bin Laden. Why not?
[Sen. John Kerry , Massachusetts:] I think he's not specifically targeted in the context of a bomb being dropped at this moment in time. He is certainly a target and an objective of this entire mission, there's no question about that. But there's no expectation that these early days of military operations are going to get him except by happenstance. So he is not specifically targeted.
[Greenfield:] OK. Let's talk about beyond Afghanistan. President Bush said again today that the United States is not going to distinguish between terrorists and the nations that might harbor them. Your colleague, Senator McCain, went a lot further. Let me show you what he said. He said: "Iraq is the first country, but there are others Syria, Iran, Sudan who continue to harbor terrorist organizations and assist them. I believe invoking the U.N. Charter is the first step in preparing and I emphasize if necessary attacks on other countries that may continue to feel they can with impunity harbor terrorist organizations who continue to inflict acts of terror on Americans and our property." Senator Hagel, if we are serious about draining the swamp, doesn't that pretty much indicate that at some point we are going to have to attack not just Afghanistan but the nation states that harbor groups like al Qaeda and other groups?
[Hagel:] I think it's very important that we take this one step at a time, Jeff. There's a great amount that we don't yet know and understand about these networks. We must be very sensitive and careful not to get too far out front of ourselves. This is a phased, processed effort. This focus on the objective at hand, dealing with bin Laden, dealing with the center of the al Qaeda network being in Afghanistan, is where we are directing the international coalition focus. And that's appropriate. Beyond that, we have to be careful, because this international coalition is very fragile, and we need to keep that coalition together. Any further instability in the part of the world that we're in now, where we are focused the Middle East, Afghanistan, Central Asia is something that is not in our best interests. So there is much yet to be learned and understood, so I think we must be cautious that we take this one step at a time.
[Greenfield:] Senator Kerry, before we take a break, I want to ask you about something the president said today. He was once again quite exorcised by leaks coming out of the Congress, and he's made it clear he's going to limit what the administration tells to Congress. Is that an appropriate response to these leaks?
[Kerry:] Jeff, I'm outraged by the leaks, as are a lot of my colleagues. I mean, it's simply unacceptable for any United States senator to release classified information. It's essentially putting people at risk. It's a breach of the security interests of the United States. And a lot of us are deeply upset by it. But I think the president is overreacting. I mean, the fact is the administration also leaks at times. What was leaked was, in fact, stated on national television by Attorney General Ashcroft. And we're not able to function as a United States Senate: Certainly as a member of the Foreign Relations Committee or a member of the Intelligence Committee or Armed Services Committee, it's impossible to do your job and make the judgments we need to make as representatives of the American people with respect to this policy. So what the president has he's going to do simply will not work as a policy. It's imperative for us to find a balance in this. And I think our colleagues need to be reminded by the leadership and they certainly will be reminded by this warning from the president that the behavior is simply unacceptable, which is it is.
[Greenfield:] All right, we're going to take a break. And a little later in the broadcast, we're going to ask about that case of anthrax in Florida. But when we return, we're going to talk with Senators Kerry and Hagel about the country's sense of confidence in itself, in a minute. When Osama bin Laden said on his tape that America is filled with fear, millions must have wanted to say no. But there is no doubt that what happened a month ago goes beyond massive death and destruction, beyond human and economic loss. What we have also lost, at least for now, is that traditional American sense of ease. Just consider what's happened in the past week or so. October 2nd, concrete barriers surround Chicago Sear's Tower after a false report of a terrorist attack. The next day, Greyhound shuts down its entire service after a passenger slashes a driver. Six die in the crash. The day after that, a Russian airliner from Tel Aviv to Siberia explodes over the Black Sea. An accident? An attack? Yesterday, an American Airlines jet is escorted to Chicago's O'Hare Airport by two F-16 fighter jets after a mentally ill passenger rushes the cockpit. Also yesterday, Florida health officials say the anthrax exposure that killed a Florida man may well have been deliberate. Today, three Metro Rail stations in Washington, D.C. were shut down after reports that a passenger sprayed an unidentified liquid during a struggle with a police officer. That liquid is now suspected of being a cleaning solution. So what is all this doing to America's traditional sense of confidence and strength? Are there specific things the government needs to do, that we need to know and that we need to do? With us again from Washington, Senators John Kerry and Chuck Hagel. Senator Hagel, if every mentally ill airline passenger or every outraged airline passenger can bring an airplane back to an airport under F-16 escort, if a false rumor can shut down a metropolitan subway system, you can begin to see this this costs I don't even know how we can calculate it. How it seems to me that you could say that is in some ways as serious as what happened on September 11th. I mean, are you are you concerned with the long-term impact on the United States of that kind of behavior?
[Hagel:] Well, of course, we are all, Jeff. But it seems to me that we need to put a couple of things in perspective. One is the shock, the reality, the rawness of what happened just four weeks ago today is obviously still with us. And that means that it is with us cerebrally, intellectually, subconsciously. That high state of alert and concern has all of us and all of our institutions on a state of alert and an edge that we normally don't have nor is natural. We will find our center of gravity here. We will get our institutions in place. Our populations, our civilization, as we know it, will start to adjust. Doesn't mean we give up liberties. But there's no question: We're going to have to make some changes in policy and law enforcement, in everything we do, in our immigration laws, in our foreign policy, our sanctions, our trade, everything. And we'll get that back to a point where there is some perspective and some balance. Yes, we're concerned: We all are when we see these kinds of reaction, but I think it's fairly natural.
[Greenfield:] But Senator Kerry, it occurs to me that you and your colleagues in Washington, you know, you get a problem defined and you can pass a piece of legislation to try fix it. There's environment's threatened, you can pass a regulation. People are suffering, lack of civil rights, you can put in federal troops. This one is a dilemma that is literally in the minds and the spirits of 280 million people. What has the government got what can the government do about that kind of crisis?
[Kerry:] Well, Jeff, let me let me first of all, we can make a lot of decisions correctly and remain united in our collective will to respond to this. And we can offer the leadership that the nation needs and wants. The world now understands they're not denying guilt. They're not suggesting that this is a conspiracy, the United States against them. They are not they were great rumors all across the Arab world that Israel was behind this previously. So all of the Arab world, particularly the legitimate Muslim world, should take note that they are essentially accepting guilt and promising more. That puts completely to rest the notion of anyone else, of Israel or anything else. So the legitimate Muslim community has to now join in this global effort.
[Greenfield:] But forgive me, senator, but how does that help Americans?
[Kerry:] Well, I want to come back to that. I want to come back.
[Greenfield:] OK.
[Kerry:] I just I thought it was very important, Jeff. I'm not trying to I think it's really important, though, to make that point, because that offers us, I think, a unity globally that ought to give a sense of confidence to the American people about where we're heading. Now, the second things is there's a lot we can do. We can do the airport security and make it, you know, as strong as it possibly can be, travel security. There's much that we can do as we go forward in immigration, in the knowledge of who our neighbors are, and communities could be stronger in strengthening our health care response to any kind of crisis and give people a sense of confidence about this. I think, in addition to that, there is a real distinction, Jeff, between a sense of unease, as you've described it, and confidence about the ultimate outcome. I think Chuck and I and others have a great sense of confidence about the ultimate outcome, but we're going to have to go through some tough transitions here. We're going to have to face perhaps some difficult moments.
[Greenfield:] One of the...
[Kerry:] And...
[Greenfield:] I'm sorry, senator.
[Kerry:] No, go ahead.
[Greenfield:] Well, I just want to, because the time is short, I wanted to ask Senator Hagel one of the reasons we invited both you and John Kerry here is that you both experienced danger in a much more direct way than, God willing, most of us will ever know. In terms of the front lines, coming home, what can you tell us about emotionally surviving the front lines? Senator Hagel.
[Hagel:] One of the things it does, and I think to each of us and I think each American, probably each citizen of the world community, part of the world that appreciates the dignity of man is going through a self-analysis, a self-inventory. What's important in your life? What do you think is most important about who you are, your family, others? That's the first response, reaction at least I saw when I came home from Vietnam. I think others did. And I think America is going through that right now. And and we will find that, and that's good. I think that's very good. Sorry we had to go through what we had to go through to get there. But history is rather replete with these kinds of things. They come once or twice every 100 years. That's what's happening.
[Greenfield:] All right, Senator Kerry, when you hear people say, I'm stocking up on Cipro, when you know about people of great means saying, I've got my private jet parked on the runway, I'm getting in shape so I can run down flights of stairs, which literally a couple of people are saying, what's your response to that kind of an attempt to privatize security?
[Kerry:] Well, I think individuals are obviously going to respond that way. That historically has always been true. In every kind of crisis, Jeff, you know, in every war, certain people with certain access and certain means have, quote, "taken care of themselves." But I think the lessons of most of these confrontations are the kinds of lessons we learned in the streets of New York: firefighters rushing into a building, police officers giving their lives, countless numbers of volunteers coming forward, untold millions of dollars raised to help victims and respond. And I think if you look back across the history of our nation and other countries that have been under siege look at the blitz in Britain, look at the difficulties that Jews went through in the Holocaust and all through Europe and in history. I mean, if you read the tea leaves of history, they tell you that there is an incredible reserve of strength in citizens everywhere. The folks who founded this country, the difficulties of what I've just been reading John Adams, as many of us have this summer, and you see the despair in the founding fathers at one period of time as they lost battle after battle. And George Washington was driven, you know, away from New York and our objectives. But they staid at it. They understood there was a larger goal. Every American understands that goal here, and I believe we will ultimately persevere because of that and because of our, just the fundamentals of who we are.
[Greenfield:] Thank you very much, Senator John Kerry. Thank you very much, Senator Chuck Hagel. My thanks to both of you. When we come back, we're going to hear from Pulitzer Prize- winning journalist and author Bill Broad on what to fear, or maybe not fear, on that anthrax story in a minute. When we talk about what has unnerved America, nothing since the attack itself has been more unsettling than the stories of a possible anthrax attack in Florida. To talk about that and the greater threat, if there is one, Pulitzer Prize-winning science writer William Broad of "The New York Times." He's co-author of "Germs: Biological Weapons and America's Secret War." Mr. Broad, let's turn to Florida. We've already heard that some of these stories turn out not to be true, the mysterious gift from an intern. What do we know? What do we not know?
[William Broad, "new York Times":] Well, we know that one person died from anthrax spores that he inhaled through his nose. We know that another guy had spores in his nose as well. He we don't know whether or not he was developing anthrax. He was put on antibiotics right away. So we know just really the beginning, just the inkling of a scientific detective story. We don't know that much.
[Greenfield:] But everything we've heard in the past about
[Broad:] No, no. This this sounds like if you can't rule out natural causes at this point. But it looks like crude bioterrorism. You know, somebody who sent something through the mail, somebody who doused something in the building. I mean, this is not your doomsday scenario, where you have crop-dusters coming down. Clearly, the federal authorities have checked and have OK'd the area outside the building. It's clean. The problem is in the building itself. You know, we've in the book that we've done, we write about crude bioterrorism. It happens. It happened in the United States in '84 and 700 Americans got knocked flat on their back. It's not that hard to do, to do a small incident like that.
[Greenfield:] Last Friday, "Nightline" did a fictional scenario of a bio-attack, and what their premise was a terrorist went into a subway with vials of jars of anthrax, threw it onto the tracks so that the jars broke. The subway trains then carried anthrax throughout all the subway system. That is that plausible?
[Broad:] That's that's a serious issue. That's something that the U.S. government studied very carefully in the '50s and '60s. They did tests in Manhattan. They went out and put germ simulants, you know, germ weapon mock germs that they put in the subway system and test for that kind of thing. It stirs up the air as the trains move, and that's an issue.
[Greenfield:] But the way, you mentioned 1984. Just to set some people's minds, I guess, at ease. What happened back then briefly?
[Broad:] It was an attack by a religious cult in Oregon. They spread salmonella germs on salad bars, devastatingly simple. People didn't die, but they some of them felt like they wish they had. You got incredibly sick. Many people went to the hospital, and it was done as a field trial for trying to sway a local election. These people, the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh and his followers, wanted to take over the county.
[Greenfield:] Let me ask you what I asked one of the senators about privatizing security. Are you stocking up on Cipro, you've got gas masks at home?
[Broad:] No, no, I don't. This is my strong feeling is that this is a case of collective security. We're going to sink or swim together, and the federal government as you may not love them for everything we've witnessed lately. But they're the ones that can do the stockpiling, they're the ones who can take the big-picture precautions. Cipro isn't going to save you. You're not if a germ attack occurs correctly, a widescale one, it will be stealthy. You know, we're going to have to rely, better or worse, on the government to come up with the big-picture answers on this.
[Greenfield:] Speaking of which, I'll ask this quickly, and if I can get a quick answer, that's great. Your big concern is smallpox, and I've heard people say and I've heard you and others well, why don't they just make a vaccine, hurry up and make it, and we'll all get vaccinated? I got vaccinated for smallpox. Why can't we all do it again?
[Broad:] Right. Right, right. They're working on it. They're making the vaccine. The problem is that one out of every about 13,000 people have complications. A few people die, you know, when you do large-scale vaccinating. So you want to be very careful. The smart thing that the government is doing is stockpiling this stuff, getting it in secret locations, having it ready in case there is an outbreak. It's very unlikely that there would be. I mean, most people judge that terrorists don't have their hands on this stuff. There's only two known sources, declared sources in the world: one in the United States, one in Russia. So there's highly unlikely there would be an event. You have to weigh the costs and benefits. The health costs, you know, could be quite high for an event that might never happen.
[Greenfield:] All right, my thanks to Bill Broad of "The New York Times," whose words will also serve as our final thought for the night. I'm Jeff Greenfield. Thank you for watching.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] You probably know Actresses Anne Heche and Ellen Degeneres were long time companions and that Heche has now married a man. Tonight Heche told Larry King sexual abuse as a child made her insane. And Degeneres was a way out. [Begin Video Clip, "larry King Live"]
[Heche:] In Ellen there was a human being that was being open about who they were, sharing it with the world, being brave, being strong in who they were as a human being. Now I had been raised with a big fat liar who destroyed his family because he was afraid to be who he was, in my opinion. So here I met somebody who is glorious in their ability to be who they were and tell the world and I found that to be very attractive. It was not, oh gee, you're a woman. It's, oh my God, there's a human being that is telling the truth.
[Hemmer:] Anne Heche is seen by many as a symbol of bisexuality. In tonight's cover story, a group of people not so well know talked about their experiences. From New York, here is CNN's Maria Hinojosa.
[Maria Hinojosa, Cnn Correspondent:] Tom and Amara are a loving couple in their early 30s.
[Amara Willey:] Did you say when you were going in today?
[Hinojosa:] She works in a public library. He's a computer security expert with a recently published book.
[Willey:] I like what you did with the cover.
[Hinojosa:] They're also both bisexual.
[Tom Limoncelli:] It's the freedom to do and think and feel the way you want and the freedom to be true to yourself, really.
[Willey:] I think what you're talking about is sort of a spiritual thing. It is a connection of two people's souls.
[Hinojosa:] They've been connected for 10 months, but years ago, each struggled to accept the term, bisexual.
[Limoncelli:] When I was dating I a guy I thought I was gay. When I was dating a woman I thought I was straight and it was actually funny because I finally came to start using this label and I was so excited that I had told my friends that I came out to them as bisexual and they said yeah, Tom, we know. That would be why we've all seen you dating men and women over the last couple years. So I guess they knew and were more comfortable with the label than I was.
[Hinojosa:] Which is why they watch the Barbara Walters Anne Heche interview carefully and critically.
[Limoncelli:] She gave a very good definition as bisexual, as someone who she described herself as someone who likes the person -falls in love with a person, not a particular gender and then said that she's not bisexual.
[Hinojosa:] Which upset them both a lot. They're active in bisexual support groups helping others to understand. [on camera]: So when you hear Tom saying some days I've got my boy days and my girl days, what goes on for you? Are you kind of like, well, wait a second, I'm a girl and I'm with you and so I want you to just like have a lot of girl days now?
[Willey:] Well, I suppose I have my boy days and girl days, too.
[Limoncelli:] Every day is my Amara day.
[Willey:] That was the right answer.
[Hinojosa:] For Donna Redd and Jenna there aren't a lot of right answers. Donna came out as lesbian when she was 15, but then things changed.
[Donna Redd:] As years went by and I met and fell in love with a man, like, oh, no, this is not right. Snap out of it, I'm a lesbian woman and you're afraid to get that lesbian gold card taken away.
[Hinojosa:] Married to that man now for 21 years, she calls herself a lesbian identified bisexual.
[Redd:] Whoever you involve yourself with it is about being comfortable, being happy.
[Hinojosa:] Jenna is happy identifying as bisexual, but not everybody she knows is happy about it. Especially her gay friends.
[Gina Gibbs:] You go the whole way, you are riding the fence. Come join us. Identify as guy or lesbian. Don't be in that middle ground. I'm trying to get the good of both worlds. In reality I got a lot of the bad of both worlds. Heterosexuals saying choose, and gays saying choose.
[Hinojosa:] Bisexuals say the only real choice they have is to follow their hearts. And for them, their hearts aren't attracted to gender but to people. The saying in the bisexual community goes that the plumbing is unimportant. Maria Hinojosa, CNN, New York.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] We begin now, again this hour, in Los Angeles, where a gruesome death, followed by months of lurid revelations, have led to a murder and manslaughter trial against two attorneys. Opening statements under way at this hour. Eric Horng, now, and the very latest in Los Angeles.
[Eric Horng, Cnn Correspondent:] Diane Whipple's death in January 2001 shook the city of San Francisco. The images of a hallway soaked in blood. The accounts of the brutality of the attack. Whipple, a 33-year-old college lacrosse coach, was mauled outside her apartment by one, perhaps two, huge dogs that weighed more than she did. The owners of the animals, Marjorie Knoller and her husband Robert Noel. Knoller, who says she attempted to shield Whipple from the dogs, claims the Presa Canarios, named Bane and Hera, were never aggressive to humans in the past.
[Marjorie Knoller, Dog Owner:] That only happened after, unfortunately, Miss Whipple hit me in my right eye, and then he became aggressive towards her.
[Horng:] But the victim's domestic partner says Whipple had been bitten by the dogs on one previous occasion.
[Sharon Smith, Whipple's Domestic Partner:] I believe that they knew that these dogs were dangerous. And I believe that, because these dogs had lunged at people before. They had bitten people before.
[Horng:] The two dogs have since been destroyed. Knoller and Noel charged with involuntary manslaughter and possession of an animal that killed a human being. Knoller, who was with the dogs at the time of the attack and says she was dragged down the hallway by the male, is also charged with second degree murder. Complicating the case, the couple's relationship with this man, Paul Schneider, serving life in prison for attempted murder in an unrelated case. Knoller and Noel, who are both lawyers, represented Schneider, and prosecutors say the three were involved in a ring to sell attack dogs.
[Hemmer:] Yeah, Eric, before we let you go here. No one in the state of California has ever been convicted for the actions of their dog. What are you hearing from legal analysts about who may have the larger hurdle in this case, defense or prosecution?
[Horng:] It's true, what you say. No one in the state of California has actually been convicted of murder for the actions of a dog, and it could be a tough sell for this jury. But the prosecution feels they've got a strong case, based on the number people they say have had violent encountered with these dogs. They've also got testimony from Diane Whipple's domestic partner, who is going to testify that Whipple, a month before she was killed, called her domestic partner on the phone, and said that she actually had been bitten on a separate occasion by these dogs.
[Hemmer:] All right, Eric. Eric Horng live in L.A. We'll be in touch throughout the afternoon. Again, opening statements continue there in Los Angeles.

[Moret:] Drew Carey and Julia Louis-Dreyfus told no lies at the Hollywood premiere of "Geppetto" last night, at least not according to their noses. Carey, who plays Geppetto, was playing around with his Pinocchio pal while co-stars Julia Louis-Dreyfus and usher arrived. The new ABC version of that classic tale gives it a musical twist.
[Julia Louis-dreyfus, Actress:] It was really fun. I had a wonderful time doing it. It was very exhilarating. It was fun to sing new music and it's fun to do something that the kids can watch.
[Drew Carey, Actor:] I like to take chances and I don't want to look like an idiot. But you can't take chances unless you look like an idiot every once in a while. So, in this case, I took a chance, I didn't look like an idiot, so it all worked out.
[Sydney:] Good advice. Dule Hill isn't really a presidential aide; he just plays one on TV. The actor who tapped his way from the Broadway stages to "The West Wing" is riding high with his role on the hit TV show. Michael Okwu reports that Dule Hill is a SHOWBIZ TODAY "Star of Tomorrow."
[Begin Video Clip, "the West Wing") Martin Sheen, Actor:] Charlie, you a good poker player?
[Dule Hill, Actor:] No, sir.
[Sheen:] Excellent. Get your money out and take a seat.
[Michael Okwu, Cnn Correspondent:] In the White House drama "The West Wing," he's at the president's side almost all the time. Meet Charlie, aka Dule Hill, the personal aide to President Bartlett, played by veteran actor Martin Sheen. [Begin Video Clip, "the West Wing"]
[Hill:] The president would prefer a sandwich. He says he wants beef, pastrami, sliced steak.
[Okwu:] Although the show's pilot originally had no African- American characters, Hill was a late addition to the cast. He's since seen his character rise from a low-level job applicant to the president's close aide. A current story line has Charlie romancing the president's daughter. [Begin Video Clip, "the West Wing"]
[Hill:] Let's go.
[Unidentified Actor:] No, why don't you go, all right?
[Hill:] Come on guys, you don't know who this is, you don't want any trouble, be cool. Being a young actor, being a black actor, and being able to get good writing, good scripts to enact, it's a lovely thing. [Begin Video Clip, "the West Wing"] My name is Charlie Young, jack *ss. And if that bulge in your pocket is an eight ball of blow, you'll spend your spring break in a federal prison.
[Okwu:] The actor says he's learned a lot about the nature of Charlie's job after meeting with one of President Clinton's staffers.
[Hill:] Well, the person's name is Chris Ensco. He's the real personal aide to the president. When I met him, I realized how important the job was and how powerful it is.
[Okwu:] As it turns out, "The West Wingers" have plenty of fans in the West Wing.
[Hill:] The staffers are really big fans of the show. I don't think Mr. Clinton has had a chance to really watch the show. I would hope that he didn't have the time to, but the staffers are pretty much they're really big fans of it. They watch the show all the time.
[Okwu:] The son of Jamaican parents, Hill was raised in New Jersey, where he trained as a tap dancer. He was the understudy for Savion Glover in "The Tap Dance Kid," and reteamed with Glover as cast mates in the off-Broadway production "Bring in Da Noise, Bring in Da Funk."
[Hill:] There's nothing like tap dancing. It's such a soulful thing.
[Okwu:] President Bartlett's right-hand man seems to have gotten a leg up on this acting thing as well. Michael Okwu, CNN Entertainment News, New York.
[Sydney:] Musical birthday wishes today to Four Seasons lead singer Frankie Valli who is 63. Engelbert Humperdinck did you know his real name is Jerry Dorsey and he is 64. And we feel good about James Brown turning 67.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to begin on Capitol Hill, where numbers are being crunched right now and the Bush administration is feeling the squeeze. Democrats say President Bush must reassess his spending priorities. This, amid government reports that the federal surplus is evaporating. Let's get a closer look now at the issue of priorities and politics. We turn to our congressional correspondent Jonathan Karl, standing by now live on Capitol Hill hi, Jon.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Leon, we're going to be in for a very noisy, very contention fall season up here on Capitol Hill because since Congress went on its August recess, what's happened is that federal budget surplus has essentially started to evaporate. Dramatically lower estimates of what the surplus will be coming from both the budget office at the White House and up here on Capitol Hill, so Democrats are calling the president to account on this. The democratically controlled Budget Committee will be having a hearing this week, calling in the White House's budget director to ask him what has happened to this budget surplus and what is the plan? Democrats obviously say that what is primarily at fault here is that tax cut that Republicans, with some Democratic support, pushed through on Capitol Hill. But Republicans are saying that the overall reason up here that we have a dwindling surplus is because the economy is sputtering and they say the solution to an economic downturn is not to talk about scaling back a tax cut that's already passed, but to actually talk about passing additional tax cuts. So, Leon, as Congress tries to find the money to pass the 13 spending bills that fund everything the federal government does, look for Republicans to talk about the need possibly to push for further tax cuts to get the economy moving again.
[Harris:] All right, Jon, but you're talking now about Congress having to get its priorities together and moments ago you broke the story about one particular senator who may be rearranging his priorities. What's that one now?
[Karl:] Well, that's right. CNN's political unit learning that Phil Gramm, who, by the way, is more than almost anybody up here on Capitol Hill an advocate for Republicans of tax cuts, he has announced or is expected to announce at 2:30 today that he will not seek reelection when his term is up. His term is up in January of 2003. He'd be up for reelection next fall. He is going to announce, we are told. He has told his political associates back in Texas that he will not run for reelection. Phil Gramm has been a fixture up here on Capitol Hill. He was first elected back in 1978 as a Democrat, a conservative Democrat from Texas. He later switched parties in 1983, actually resigning from his seat at that point, running in a special election again as a Republican and then getting elected to the United States Senate back in 1984. Gramm had been expected to run again. As a matter of fact, we asked him about rumors that he may retire. Just before, the day that Congress left on its recess I sat with Phil Gramm for an interview on the congressional subway here on the Senate side of the Capitol building and asked him if he'd be retiring. This is what he said back then.
[Sen. Phil Gramm , Texas:] Some day I'm going to retire. The alternative is to eventually retire or die in office. I don't think I want to be around here when I can't do the job. But it's my plan right now to run again. I don't, I think I'm at the peak of my influence in the Senate and so I'd rather be in the majority than the minority.
[Karl:] Now, you notice, of course, that he said my plan at this time is to run again. Obviously his plans, if CNN sources are correct, have changed. Phil Gramm's office will only say that he is, indeed, holding a press conference at 2:30 up here on Capitol Hill and it is a press conference to announce his political future. Now, again, CNN has learned, CNN's political unit, having sources in Texas saying that Senator Phil Gramm is going to announce that he is not going to run for reelection.
[Harris:] All right, nice work, Jon. Jonathan Karl on Capitol Hill this morning.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] The European markets are mixed this morning. We are seeing Frankfurt move quite decidedly lower. Adrienne Roberts, out of the "Financial Times," joins us now live from London. Adrienne, what's dragging on stock prices this morning?
[Adrienne Roberts, "financial Times":] Well, Deborah, once again I suppose it's the uncertainty. We've got a European Central Bank interest rate meeting coming up this afternoon and also I think like any good parent, Alan Greenspan yesterday gave the market what he thought was good for it, rather what it wanted. And so I think that's also dragging down a little bit. A strange mixture of stocks on top at the moment, mostly old economy names. We're seeing health care, transport, oils doing all right, and all the normally loved ones, the telecoms stocks, the tech stocks, and the electronic stocks are trading either nowhere really or slightly lower.
[Marchini:] Frankfurt, in particular, losing a lot of ground, down 1 14 percent. I gather there were some results from Bayer that were not too positive.
[Roberts:] Yes, well, it's been a mixed bag. They are basically I think the key there was higher raw materials costs. Some aspects of the results were very good indeed, operating profit is up there and Bayer is expecting double-digit growth in sales for the whole year. The health care side, and particularly pharmaceuticals, did very, very well. I think in the last quarter, the health care side was up about 40 percent operating income. The problem came in with the chemicals side, the raw material costs higher, and I think the operating income there was up only about 4 percent, but the company believes it can do better, it believes import costs are going to drop in the future. Actually, analysts weren't too unhappy about those results. So the share is now trading about 2 12 percent higher.
[Marchini:] Higher? OK, because it was down earlier this morning when we checked. Another company, DaimlerChrysler, it seems that investors are re- evaluating that one after some more negative news yesterday. They're waiting for some statements from the company?
[Roberts:] Well, we've seen a fair amount of detail there. We know there's going to be a major shakeup. Obviously, as we saw from the results a few weeks back, the Chrysler operation in the U.S. is the weak link in the profits there, Daimler's been doing better. So what they've basically announced, we've got a replacement for the CEO in Wolfgang Bernhard, who is with Daimler. We've got a replacement president, Diter Zetsche, who is replacing Jim Holden. They're talking about a wide-ranging strategic review, they're talking about looking at manufacturing, they're looking at purchasing. And one aspect I suppose that is potentially disturbing, they're talking about increased savings. I don't know what the manpower implications are there, whether there are going to be job cuts, we don't know about that yet, but whatever the case, there are going to be major changes; shareholders happy about that, the stock trading about 3 12 percent higher.
[Marchini:] Currency markets stable ahead of that European Central Bank meeting you mentioned. We do have euro, though, under 86 cents. Really no prospect that the ECB will hike interest rates?
[Roberts:] Well, most economists don't think so. There's this issue, you know: Is the European Central Bank going to use interest rates as a tool to support the euro? Most people think that they won't and most people think that that would be a bad idea. They feel that once you use one instrument for one goal and the ECB should be using interest rates to control inflation, people don't think there's enough inflationary pressure at the moment to justified an increase. Having said which, there hasn't been an increased in more than a month and people are saying that, you know, economists do believe that there might be a rate increase later in the year. So ECB keeping the market guessing, but the bet at the moment is that they're not going to move.
[Marchini:] All right, thank you, Adrienne Roberts, reporting live from the "Financial Times" in London.

[Shihab Rattansi, Cnn Anchor:] One half of the U.S. Latin-American population is Mexican, followed by Puerto Ricans and Cubans.
[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] And with rising number of Latinos in the U.S., American popular culture is absorbing much from Hispanic traditions. Cubavision reports.
[Amarilis Orta, Cubavision Correspondent:] Natacha Stevanes is a Puerto-Rican who has lived in the United States for more than 18 years. Most of the time, she has worked in films and television. She is a producer and independent writer, and part of a generation that struggled for the unity and difference of Spanish- speaking filmmakers within the U.S. movie industry.
[Natacha Stevanes, Filmmaker:] When you start putting things together, sometimes you feel you neither belong here nor there. It's an imaginary space. It's like I said before, it's an island. Latinos live in an isolated island between two larger or smaller islands. It's a virtual space that deserves more discussion on who we are, where we are, what it means to be a Latino in the United States.
[Orta:] Like many others, Natacha has decided to look at the reality of Latin immigrants that walk down the streets of United States face-to-face. So, in her work, there are disappointments, dreams and prospects in trying to raise Hollywood's myth of a perfect society. More than 30 million Latinos live in the United States today. For many reasons, some of them have been forced to immigrate to a foreign country with a foreign language. However, that community that preserved its culture and identity despite the distance, continues to live and dream. Experts say that in 20 years, one out of six U.S. citizens will be of Hispanic dissent. Spanish is spoken in all U.S. cities, and could be considered a second national language. It's taught in schools and universities, and many TV network broadcast programs in that language.
[Unidentified Male:] Sometimes you find the broadest sample of Latin American spirit in a U.S. city than perhaps you can in Latin America. And this contradiction to me is very interesting.
[Stevanes:] I think that the survival of Latinos in the United States is partly based on preservation of their identity, culture and language.
[Orta:] We could then speak of a U.S.-Latin spirit with a persistently dual nature, given by the active participation of Latinos in the country's culture and language. Perhaps new words will be created to define the impact provoked in U.S. society by the most dynamic Latin features in the movies, salsa, corporal expression, their way of dressing and inter-mixture of races. This report was made by Amarilis Orta from Cubavision International for CNN WORLD REPORT.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] It has been often said the vice president is just a heartbeat away from the Oval Office. Usually that means the president's heart. But today it's Vice President Cheney's heart that is the issue. Mr. Cheney now at George Washington University Medical Center to undergo a heart test that should last one or two hours. CNN medical correspondent Rea Blakey is on the scene and she has the latest for us Rea.
[Rea Blakey, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] The test Vice President Cheney said he would be undergoing is called an electrophysiology study, or EPS. In this test, several catheters are run through the femoral vein or sometimes the arm to the heart, where they're used to stress the electrical system of the heart. The goal is to see if irregular heartbeats are produced. If so, there may be a need for an implantable defibrillator, similar to the size of a pacemaker.
[Dr. Stuart Seides, Washington Hospital Center:] It's a device that is implanted in a patient that can detect abnormal, usually rapid heart rhythms and deliver an electric shock to the heart that can right the rhythm and often save the patient's life.
[Blakey:] Doctors were alerted to Cheney's irregular heartbeats when they were detected by a portable heart monitor he was wearing. Although he didn't feel the abnormal rhythms, doctors were still concerned.
[Seides:] It's been well documented that patients like that who do not have defibrillators run the risk of sudden death sudden cardiac death at a rate that far exceeds those who have the defibrillators.
[Blakey:] Cheney has had four heart attacks from 1978 to November 2000. In March, he had a catheterization to open a possibly blocked artery in his heart.
[Seides:] There have been trials that have shown that implanting defibrillators in patients like that can improve their prognosis.
[Blakey:] Experts estimate about 25 percent of people who've had a heart attack need an implantable cardiac defibrillator, or ICD. The American Heart Association says in 1998, 26,000 patients received defibrillators. Again, the American College of Cardiology says that these defibrillators are 99 percent effective at avoiding sudden death from arrhythmia, which is what apparent the doctors believe the vice president is suffering from. You'll recall, as we mentioned just moments ago, the vice president arrived here at George Washington University Hospital within the last two minutes. He looked quite well this morning. He didn't seem to linger very long, stepped right inside the hospital. As we mentioned, he's had four heart attacks since 1948 and he does have chronic coronary artery disease. The doctors have indicated, by way of the vice president's office, that these tests today are not an indication of a progression of his heart disease, that, in fact, this is basically a result of the many heart attacks that he has already had. Dr. Douglas Zipes, who is the president of the American College of Cardiology, says if, in fact, the vice president is implanted with this particular defibrillator, it would be like having an emergency room in the vice president's chest. Thus, this particular machine would continuously regulate, Miles, the vice president's heartbeat so that if an arrhythmia occurred, the machine would immediately correct the heartbeat and the vice president very likely would not even know that the machine had actually kicked in Miles.
[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Rea, clarify something here. Is it a pacemaker or is it not a pacemaker? I think the vice president used the term pacemaker plus. I think he might have coined a phrase there. I've read somewhere where it might be a pacemaker and a defibrillator, sort of, you know, two things in one. Why don't you clear that up for us, please?
[Blakey:] Quite frankly, you're absolutely right. I believe he coined the term, as well, pacemaker plus. What he was referring to was the fact that this defibrillator, and depending on the type that may potentially be implanted, we don't know yet until the doctors do this EPS test. But depending on the type that might be implanted, it basically may simply be a defibrillator that, in fact, charges the heart when the heart beats too fast or it may have a dual function like a pacemaker to slow the heart down, I'm sorry, to speed the heart up if it's beating too slowly. The more dangerous of the arrythmias is the type that we believe the vice president has, which is where the heart beats too quickly. If the heart betas too slowly, basically a person would become dizzy, perhaps confused, lethargic. If it betas too quickly, the heart can't pump enough blood through the system. And so depending on what the doctors find during the EPS study, then we'll know exactly which type of defibrillator and, i.e., pacemaker-plus, that could be implanted in the vice president's chest.
[O'brien:] All right, that cleared it up for me. Thank you, Rea Blakey. Hope it cleared it up for you at home, as well. We'll be checking in with her all throughout the morning, of course. Rea Blakey at George Washington University Hospital.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Well, Congress took up the issue of airport runway safety today. At a hearing on the subject, debate centered on runway incursions. These are incidents where a person, vehicle or plane creates a collision hazard by being where it's not supposed to be. Looking at airports recording the highest number of major incursions: Los Angeles International is first. Chicago's O'Hare International is second, and Charlotte, La Guardia and Phoenix round out the list. Joining us now with more is James Fallows, journalist and author of the book "Free Flight." We thank you for being with us.
[James Fallows, Author, "free Flight":] My pleasure.
[Allen:] How dire is this problem of runway incursions?
[Fallows:] I think as a safety factor it's not that dire. I believe that in the last decade or so there hasn't been anything which was on the verge of actual collisions at runways, and airlines in general are extremely safe. I think the way to think of it, though, is as one more sign of the congestion that's affecting the airport system now. The congestion on runways that causes these incursions is the counterpart of the congestion that the passengers feel when they are trying to drive in and find a place to park. More traffic is going through too few sites, and that's the result.
[Allen:] And the bottom line we keep hearing, James, is that the airlines are saying, well, yes, we've got more airlines coming on and on, but others have got to keep up with the infrastructure. Congress is listening to this problem today. Is there a solution that's anywhere in the near future for fliers?
[Fallows:] I think that there's a short-term solution and a larger-term, outside-the-box solution. The short-term one is one the Federal Aviation Administration has proposed. Over the next 10 years, they are going to add more runways, better controls, both on the ground and in the air, to make it possible to have somewhat more planes fly safely at somewhat a closer schedules, but that's going to add even if everything they propose goes through, the FAA predicts that the airports will be more congested in a decade. I think the out-of-the-box solution is finding ways to use the thousands of smaller airports around the country that are close to where people actually live and work.
[Allen:] That makes sense. Let's get a live chat question now from John Roebuck: "So much times is spent in the planes before takeoff. Why not spend more time in the airport?"
[Fallows:] Well, I guess it's a close call, which is more pleasant: being on the plane or being in the airport itself? But I think there's a very crucial point the questioner brings up, which is that NASA, the space agency, has found that the actual speed of air travel has gotten slower and slower in the last decade, because people spend more time in the airport, in the airplane, something other than actually going where they need to go. That's again why NASA has been pushing this plan to make it easier for people to fly, say, from Savannah to Wichita nonstop, rather than changing through Atlanta and Dallas, a different kind of a small plane that can do that.
[Allen:] James Fallows, thank you for joining us.
[Fallows:] Thank you.

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] Here in the United States, Starbucks coffee the houses, the coffee houses rather have become something of a fixture. In order to keep that growing and keep that latte flowing, the company is looking overseas for its growth, especially to the Pacific Rim. CNN's Lisa Barron looks at Starbucks' latest grand opening.
[Unidentified Female:] Three, two, one, please pull.
[Lisa Barron, Cnn Correspondent:] Pour your heart into it. That's what U.S. coffee giant Starbucks says, it's doing with its expansion into Hong Kong, and further afield in Asia.
[Howard Schultz, Starbucks Coffee Company:] At Starbucks, we really have emerged as one of the leading consumer brands to come out of North America, and now we're embarking on a real milestone for the company, beginning with the fact that, globally, outside of North America, we feel that the largest market for the company, outside of North America, is the Pacific Rim and Asia. And as a result of that, we have got a big push on.
[Barron:] A push that will launch nearly a Starbucks a day all this week. The first Hong Kong store, located just minutes from the stock exchange, opened on Tuesday, the day after the coffee chain opened its flagship store in Seoul. Wednesday brings Hong Kong's second outlet, in the heart of the Causeway Bay shopping mecca, while Starbucks Shanghai will open its doors to the public on Thursday.
[Schultz:] Despite the language difference and the difference in culture, the need for human connection in the world we live in today is greater than ever before, and coffee is such a social beverage that the relationship we've built between our customers around the environment, in what we have called the third place between home and work is as relevant in Hong Kong as it is in our home town in Seattle.
[Barron:] But in Hong Kong, as elsewhere in the region, coffee- touting competitors have already set up shop. Still, analysts say, given its track record, Starbucks moves in with almost guaranteed success.
[Henry Lee, Hendale Asia:] Starbucks has proven to be a very exportable brand. Starbucks at this point is a global brand, and most global brands that have expanded into Hong Kong do quite well.
[Barron:] Starbucks says this is just a start. The long-term plans are to have 20,000 stores worldwide, most of them outside the United States, and with the U.S. close to saturation, Asia could be the hottest market on the horizon. Lisa Barron, CNN Financial News, Hong Kong.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Want to move to other end of country right now, President Bush heading up to Milwaukee, to flesh out his health care agenda today. CNN's John King from the White House now, to tell us what the speech is all about. John, good afternoon.
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Good afternoon to you, Bill. This is a speech that will get some attention for how different it looks, if you will, since September 11, the president not putting much time into focusing on key domestic items on his policy agenda. He, of course, has been overwhelmed by the War on Terrorism, the homeland security debate here in the United States, dealing with a somewhat contentious argument with Democrats in the Congress over the struggling U.S. economy. Mr. Bush today will pull together many ideas he has touched on in the past, but never has he given as president what aides describe as a comprehensive view of what he believes the federal government should be doing when it comes to health care. In the president's new budget, more than $300 billion in proposed funding. Mr. Bush in that speech in Milwaukee will talk about three themes: affordability, accessibility, and accountability. Mr. Bush will highlight some tax credits in his speech that would allow either individuals or families to get a tax credit if they have to go out and buy their own health insurance. He will also highlight more than $1 billion in funding that goes to local community health centers around the country. Mr. Bush says that's critical to make health care accessible to low-income Americans who don't have insurance. And the president on the accountability front will talk about trying to reach agreement this year with the Congress on an issue that fell apart; negotiations collapsed late last year, the so-called HMO Patients Bill of Rights. The president will also talk about more medical research, some of that geared to the War on Terrorism, more biomedical research. All of this part of the president's effort to focus attention early in this new year on his domestic policy agenda, all more important because it is a Congressional election year, because Democrats and Republicans in the Congress want to turn back now to many of the issues, like health care, that put aside late last year after the events of September 11. So the president is outlining his views today knowing full well domestic issues like economy and health care will be much of the focus this year in the United States Congress Bill.
[Hemmer:] John, thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We've got to check other financial matters from corporate earnings to consumer prices, Wall Street is watching the numbers today and so is our guest, "Chicago Sun-Times" personal finance columnist and author, Terry Savage joins us again. Thanks for sticking around, Terry. All right, now that the markets have actually started trading in New York right now. Any expectations right now?
[Terry Savage, "chicago Sun-times:] " Well, no surprise. The futures markets are down and so we will see the actual stock prices down at opening. Again, it's not so much the earnings that's reported as the outlook for the future, which is a little bit of disappointing. Plus, stronger-than-expected growth in the economy. Consumer prices, though not up as much last month as they were in May, still higher than analysts had expected. Housing starts a little bit stronger. Now you think that's great news about housing.
[Harris:] Yes.
[Savage:] It means consumers are still spending. It is good news It's what's keeping the economy from plunging into a recession. Yet there's a fear that today, Alan Greenspan will look around and say, "Oops, a whiff of inflation and consumers seem to be doing all right. Maybe we're not going to cut the interest rates again." That's exactly what the Street is really watching today.
[Harris:] And is that exactly what you're expecting him to say today?
[Savage:] No, I think that he'll keep it is a secret. We have some more reports out before they meet again. We'll have tomorrow. We'll have leading indicators. We'll have another peek at consumer sentiment. They things seem to change almost weekly, certainly from month to month. And I think the Fed will wait until the last minute to make a decision on another rate cut. And then the question is, will that one be the last cut? And of course, Wall Street loves lower interest rates. So we're all hoping that he'll cut again.
[Harris:] All right, at end of the day, if I have to ask you which one do you think would make out better, stocks or bonds? What do you think that it will be?
[Savage:] That's a tough one. I don't think you can paint off stocks in the same brush. I think there are enough stocks that have backed off here, that there's certainly some opportunities to buy. And don't forget, if interest rates go up, bond prices will fall. So bonds are not always the safe haven. When rates go up and you could buy a $1,000 bond with a much higher interest rate, nobody will give you $1,000 for your lower interest rate bond. So please don't think they're equal that bonds are safer than stocks. What I would like to say to people who are getting those 401 [K] statements is, just stick with your plan. Look, if these earnings reports will change next quarter. What you're trying to do is invest for the long term.
[Harris:] I'm glad that you got that one word in there about the 401 [K] s. I wanted to ask you about that. We're going to take off right now. Thank you for sticking around with us this morning. Terry Savage. I want to advise folks that as we said, Alan Greenspan's comments will begin hopefully in about a 28 minutes or so. And our Lou Dobbs of "LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE" is joining us for coverage of that. So make sure you stay tuned.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] As national attention focuses on the plight of one 6-year-old immigrant, a much-larger case that involves hundreds of deaths remains mostly ignored, and the underlying issues largely unresolved. CNN's Jennifer Auther has that story.
[Jennifer Auther, Cnn Correspondent:] Many Latinos say the INS policy of returning illegal immigrants from countries other than Cuba is a double standard. One example: 12-year-old Veronica Quevedo made it safely to the U.S. from Guatemala in 1995. But the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service detained her. Now she faces deportation.
[Veronica Quevedo:] I don't have that much attention like Elian Gonzalez.
[Auther:] Quevedo joined her parents in Southern California. They fled the violence in Guatemala back in 1989, leaving Veronica, then a baby, with grandparents.
[Quevedo:] My grandparents cannot take care of me no more, because they're always sick.
[Auther:] Initially, the family attorney did not seek political asylum.
[Helen Sklar, Quevedo's Immigration Lawyer:] In light of the ruling of the 11th Circuit in the Elian Gonzalez case, my position has changed.
[Auther:] The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals is keeping Elian in the U.S. through mid-May while it decides whether he can apply for asylum. That leaves some Latino activists from L.A. to New York City resenting the Cuban-American lobby.
[Angela Sanbrano, Central-american Resource Center, Los Angeles:] We have hundreds of young children that are being deported everyday. The Elian case is an example of how the Cuban lobby basically gets away with murder.
[Juan Figuerna, Puerto Rican Defense & Education Fund, New York City:] The other Latino leadership will use this as a way of saying: Hey, look, you did this in this case. Well, what about my issue?
[Auther:] The INS declined to be interviewed for this story. [on camera]: But an INS spokesman explained the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1965, passed during the cold-war era, allows Cuban exiles to apply for permanent U.S. residency, which generally is automatically granted. [voice-over]: Not an option for the Quevedos. Hugo and wife Veronica Quevedo have had three boys born as U.S. citizen's, but the parents' applications for U.S. residency have been pending for years now. The family won't discuss its plans if only young Veronica is deported. Jennifer Auther, CNN, Fontana, California.

[Dobbs:] On Wall Street today, stock prices moving higher, second day in a row for a rally. The Dow, back-to-back triple-digit gains, despite economic signs showing some signs of weakness. A solid profit report from Procter & Gamble, however, sent the Dow up 157. The Nasdaq gained 20 points. The S&P; 500 rose 16. And Christine Romans, who covers the markets, is here to tell us what is going on.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Financial News Correspondent:] And after the bell, Disney came out and beat the Street's expectations. It is trading higher as well. So maybe that will help the Dow tomorrow, like Procter & Gamble helped it today. Procter & Gamble shares up four percent, almost a two-year high for P&G.; And also, you had United Technologies and the defense stocks rallying sharply. Donald Rumsfeld out there saying major military spending upgrades are going to be needed. PNC Financial Services also up, erasing some of its recent losses earlier this week. That company said it was restating some financial results and it rallied two points today after losing some ground before. Now Tyco also, the most actively traded stock again here today, up about 30 cents. Talks that Honeywell may be interested in Tyco's assets helping there. But Elan Pharmaceuticals, at the bottom of your screen there, very choppy behavior today. It closed down about a point after see- sawing. Its investors still questioning how it books its licensing fees as revenue. Now, they say on Wall Street, as goes January, so goes the rest of the year. January was down, Lou, down about one percent for the Dow; worse for the S&P; 500. We've got to wait another 11 months to find that out.
[Dobbs:] Well, since we didn't get the January effect, how about February?
[Romans:] Well, the last three Februarys, Lou, have been down. And they have been painfully down, a couple of those. So, we'll have to see if we can break that streak, perhaps.
[Dobbs:] OK. Well, we get to start the process
[Romans:] Right.
[Dobbs:] Christine, thank you very much. Coming up next, I'll be talking with Joe McAlinden of Morgan Stanley Investment Management about the direction of this market. Stay with us.

[Carlson:] Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. It's a yellow day in America. That's the official word from Homeland Security Chief Tom Ridge, who today announced a new security alert system that rates the risk of terrorism by color. Green means very little threat. Red means head for the hills. Yellow indicates a significant risk of terrorist attacks. And yellow is where we find ourselves today. So now you know. Feel safer? The administration is hoping you do. Critics scoff, saying the color wheel approach is a formula for hysteria, rather than vigilance. Joining us, long time CIA officer and best selling author Bob Bayer and retired colonel Randy Larson, who was the director of the Anser Institute for Homeland Security. And here, Bill Press.
[Press:] Colonel, I think this whole color-coded thing is total nonsense. I mean, so a couple months ago, John Ashcroft says we're on the highest possible alert, which I guess under the system is red. And now as Tucker just said, Tom Ridge and by the way, that ended yesterday. And today, Tom Ridge says we have this whole new system. And now we're yellow. I hadn't noticed, frankly, anything change overnight from red to yellow. But my question to you, so the next level down would be blue, which is guarded. So I'm an American citizen. What am I supposed to do differently when I'm told we go from yellow to blue?
[Randy Larsen, Anser Institute:] Several things. First of all, yellow is a good place to be right now because you can't focus so much on the colors. And you know, you got 45 days to put your comments in, just like you did. And they're going to have a way to review it to go back. Look what it says under yellow. Checking communication systems with other jurisdictions to make sure. Reviewing your plans if you're an emergency planning business. Those are things that I hope my emergency planners are doing out there. This is more aimed at those police officers that have been working too many 12-hour, seven-day shifts.
[Carlson:] Now Bob Bayer, no offense or anything, but of course you're against this. You're a CIA guy. And CIA guys are experts. It's like the chef at the restaurant doesn't want anybody into the kitchen to see what he's doing. You don't think the public has a right to know, but the public does have a right to know, doesn't it?
[Bob Bayer:] No. There's nothing we can do about these vague threats. They are winning the battle. They are terrorizing us. We should be terrorizing them, not the other way around. We're playing right into their hands. This is the problem I got with it. And they're going to be playing with this system. They're going to be sending false information, defectors other people so we go up to red. It weakens the government. It embarrasses the government. And then when we're down to blue, they're going to hit us. I know the way these guys think.
[Press:] I still want an answer. I'm not a law enforcement expert. I'm an American citizen. I'm being told by my government that it's no longer yellow. I can relax a little bit. I'm now blue. What do I do? I didn't do anything differently between yesterday and today when we went from red to yellow. This stuff is just kaka.
[Larsen:] It's because the system we had before wasn't sufficient. All we had was be on alert or nothing. And all we had was the high alert. We need a system, like we've had in the military, like we have for weather systems and tornados and hurricanes. We've got to be able to go up and we've got to be able come down. As a citizen, if you get a red alert you probably better not come to work that night.
[Press:] Can I ask a real dumb question.
[Larsen:] Sure.
[Press:] I mean, why isn't every terrorist alert a red alert? What is a green terrorist alert? When they throw water balloons or what?
[Larsen:] Green is not. And believe me, we're not going to be green, I don't think, for several years. You can probably take that one right off of there. I hope we could get to guarded some day. Yellow means, we are at war today, Bill. We're at war against a vicious enemy. And the American people need to know yellow. Now we start getting intelligence information, it's probably going to crank up to orange. My concern is if it goes up to red. I agree with you, red gets real tough on our economy. What are you going to do if the Super Bowl's coming up, and all of a sudden, they go to red?
[Press:] We've been in red for two months.
[Carlson:] Now wait a second.
[Larsen:] No, it wasn't red. It's why we didn't have a good system.
[Carlson:] Now Bob Bayer, that's right. You heard Colonel we did have a good system. And I think the analogy with hurricanes is a good one. Look, we have a national system that predicts hurricanes and tells people when they're coming. Isn't this what you last time you were on, you said we need a national system. Here we have one.
[Bayer:] He asked you to meet with the police and the FBI and the CIA, who know how to do their job. But if they have something specific, if we have a license plate, a single person that we know, yes, fine. Put the alert out. Let the citizens go out and look. But this general alert gets everybody excited for a long time. Then they start to ignore it. And a year from now when they make an alert, everybody's going to ignore it.
[Carlson:] You don't you think the government has the ability, and you would know, to discern between phony disinformation from abroad and real threats?
[Bayer:] No. This is the whole problem is right now, every crank and kook in the world is coming out of the woodwork, making threats. And the government doesn't know what to do about it. So what they do is put a blanket threat out there, in case something happens.
[Cya. Press:] Colonel.
[Larsen:] No, you can't tell police officers that the condition is orange and not tell Bill, because the police officer's going to go home and tell his wife and kids. And that wife's going to call Bill's wife.
[Press:] All right. I want to take that one more step. You can't tell Bill without telling terrorist a, b, c. So you put out the word nationwide. We've gone up to red because we hear there's an attack on a nuclear plant. What are they going to do? These guys are not dumb.
[Larsen:] Welcome to warfare in the information age, Bill. And second of all, that may act as a deterrent. They may think we've broken a code. We know where they're coming.
[Press:] Send them somewhere else.
[Bayer:] Look at this nuclear threat in New York a couple months ago, where there was this report of a bomb, a nuclear bomb. What if we had gone out in the press and said, and to the whole world, and said there's a nuclear bomb in New York. The city would have emptied. It was a false report. It was from a fabricator. He didn't do it.
[Carlson:] And that is exactly right. And that's not at all what's being suggested by Tom Ridge. The idea is that the general threat will be characterized so that when people are on the subway and there is a package ticking in the corner, they don't think, well, perhaps someone left an alarm clock. They suspect maybe it's a bomb. And isn't that helpful that people would be vigilant and alert?
[Bayer:] No. Done this for 20 years. We had a threat every day in Beirut about a kidnapping. We knew there was a kidnapping.
[Carlson:] But that's Beirut. I mean, that's little. I mean, it's by definition, right?
[Bayer:] Yes, but we're not getting far away with 911.
[Larsen:] A system like this, we've used the military for years. It's been very effectiev. For not only military officers, but for their dependents.
[Press:] I want to tell you why I have so much confidence in our government today. Because you know, post 911, we've been on our toes. And our government agencies have been doing their job. But we learned that yesterday, because yesterday, in the mail, a flight school in Florida got from the INS two visas that were applied for by the two terrorist terrorists, Mohammed Atta and his cohort, both of whom flew those planes into the World Trade Center. They were mailed in their name by the INS one week ago, and arrived on the day11. We don't know what we're doing. The color system proves it. And the visa proves it, doesn't it?
[Larsen:] The color system has nothing to do with that story.
[Press:] It does indeed.
[Larsen:] It does have to do with something...
[Carlson:] Of course, it doesn't.
[Larsen:] We got to get better at sharing information. We got a long way to go in sharing information between intelligence and law enforcement. But I tell you, there's another debate that you and I can have about that firewall between intelligence and law enforcement, because I don't know how far we want to lower that. We start talking about civil liberties, but we need to lower the problem.
[Carlson:] Bob Bayer, quickly.
[Bayer:] It's a sign of weakness. It's a sign of weakness if we go to this color coded system and the terrorists know it. They look at us as being weak. What we have to do is turn the tables onthem and move against them, and show that we're not weak. This thing is it's just...
[Carlson:] And we can't do both. At least, we can acknowledge there's a threat and take action against terrorists.
[Bayer:] Well, what action have you taken today, now that you know we're in a yellow threat?
[Carlson:] Well, we're having a show on the very subject. I'd say Bill Press and I are doing our part to fight... You didn't do anything.
[Press:] I tell you, I'm only having one glass of wine with dinner tonight, because we're in a yellow threat. So there.
[Bayer:] Good plan.
[Press:] And red, just a glass of water.
[Bayer:] Just wine.
[Press:] All right, thank you, gentlemen. Randy Larsen, thanks for coming. Bob Bayer, good to have you back again. Be alert. Now when we come back, you've heard him speak. You've heard him laugh. But you're not going to believe what your president did today. When we come back, we'll go to the videotape and sing along with George in our picture of the day. Can't miss that.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Glimmers of hope compete this hour with fears for the crew of the sunken submarine Kursk. Stymied up to now in its rescue attempts, Russia has finally asked for outside help and NATO nations are stepping up. Also today, the Russian Navy says the air supply on the Kursk may last longer than earlier believed. At the same time, though, the Russians say tapping sounds from the hull of the sub have fallen silent. CNN's Mike Hanna is in Moscow. He's following the latest developments for us Mike.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Natalie, what caused the Russian change in mind in accepting assistance? According to a senior Russian Admiral, it was the direct intervention of Russian President Vladimir Putin. This following a phone call with U.S. President Bill Clinton. The senior admiral has told Russian television that following this telephone call, President Putin phoned the chief of the Navy, Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov, and ordered him to accept whatever offers of assistance had been made. Well, whatever the reason, assistance is on its way. This in the form of a British submersible rescue vessel, the LR5, here seen arriving in the port of Trondheim, the Norwegian port. That's aboard a giant Russian Antinov and Trondheim is probably the closest port that can take aircraft of this size. From Trondheim, the British vessel will be put on board a ship to be taken to the rescue area. This will take a period of time, a couple of days, and probably it will not be before late Saturday that the British vessel is able to be deployed. But the Russians say that their rescue efforts will continue, and they are continuing attempting to use their submersible rescue vessels to attach themselves to the hull of the submarine lying over 300 feet below the ocean surface. As yet, there's been no success, but the Russians say they are going to continue attempting to do so. This despite continually deteriorating weather conditions which has led to high swells on the surface, very strong currents, and minimum visibility on the bottom of the ocean, weather conditions that the British rescue team are also going to have to deal with, Natalie.
[Allen:] Mike Hanna in Moscow. Thanks to you, Mike.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] New medical data suggesting another big step in the treatment of heart disease. With more on the potential for a breakthrough there, Rhonda Rowland is with us to talk about stents and where we have gone. Good afternoon to you.
[Rhonda Rowland, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Good afternoon. I think everyone has heard about stents thanks to Vice President Dick Cheney, who had one put in. And doctors are meeting right next door here at the American College of Cardiology meeting. And they are so excited about a new generation of stents. They are calling them amazing, too good to be true, some of the early studies described as landmark. What they are talking about are drug-coated stents. Stents are actually bathed in medications and they slowly emit these medications when they are inserted in the artery. Now here is why this is important. There are thousands of heart patients out there who get balloon angioplasty. And we do have some pictures to show you how this works. And what happens is the artery, they block up. You're seeing the balloon going in there. It is pushing open the artery. It's leaving behind a stent, which is a little metal scaffold. But what happens in 20 percent of patients is scar tissue forms over that particular stent. In fact, that is what happened with Vice President Dick Cheney initially. Now, the stent that's showing the most promise among these new drug-coated stents is one that is bathed in a drug called rapamycin. This is typically used to treat kidney transplant rejection. And in two studies, they are rather small, one which followed patients for two years, another for six months. There was a zero percent failure rate. That is, it worked in 100 percent of the patients. They did not have to go back to the operating room and there were no deaths. So, as you can see from hearing that, Bill, it sounds really quite promising in the early going.
[Hemmer:] And as you point out, the key about a stent is to make sure that tissue does not grow back around it which could lead to additional clogging or further clogging.
[Rowland:] Exactly. And so what these particular medications do is they kill off the cells so they are they cannot form this new scar tissue. And as we mentioned, one of the drugs being used is one that treats kidney transplant rejection, Bill. They are also looking at cancer treatment
[Hemmer:] And one would assume though with the technologies improving, that certainly, processes like these could become more popular possibly in more people.
[Rowland:] Oh, exactly. In fact, the doctors are telling us that patients are already coming in asking for these new stents, but they are not available yet. They are still experimental. But if larger studies look as good as these early ones, Bill, they could be available next year.
[Hemmer:] Got it. Good news to hear. We'll keep our fingers crossed and see if they continue to make more progress. Thank you, Rhonda. Much appreciated. Rhonda Rowland on the medical beat for us. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] As we told you, there is some disturbing news for the Bush family this morning. Noelle Bush, the 24-year-old daughter of Florida Governor Jeb Bush, was arrested yesterday in Tallahassee and charged with prescription fraud. She allegedly tried to buy the tranquilizer, Xanax, at a drive-though pharmacy using a forged prescription. Brian Cabell has more now from Tallahassee.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] The telephone call for Xanax came into Walgreens late Monday night. According to a store employee, the prescription sounded suspicious, and they didn't leave a quantity. "I called the answering service of the doctor," the employee said, "another doctor called back and said it was a fake and to bust her." And that's what police did. They arrested 24-year-old, Noelle Bush, as she waited alone in her car at the drive-up widow. According to the police report, Bush appeared shaky during the interview, but calmed down considerably after being placed under arrest. She was jailed briefly at Leon County Jail before being released. Noelle, who has appeared on the campaign trail with her father, graduated from a Tallahassee community college a couple of years ago and attended Florida State for one year. She was due to start a new job on Tuesday. Governor Bush, for his part, issued a written statement saying: "We ask the public and the media to respect our family's privacy during this difficult time, so that we can help our daughter." Residents here in Tallahassee seem inclined to grant that request.
[Unidentified Female:] I believe that it is a family matter, but as a public official, he does owe us some sort of explanation for his actions as well as the actions of his family members.
[Unidentified Male:] It is really hard, particularly in a goldfish bowl, and I think we ought to let the family work that out.
[Cabell:] Ms. Bush reportedly faces arraignment tomorrow here in Tallahassee. As for possible penalties, if she is found guilty or pleads guilty it is a felony here. It is a possible five-year prison term, but officials say that will not happen in this case. Ms. Bush has no criminal record. In all likelihood what she will face is possible probation and a court-ordered drug diversion program Anderson.
[Cooper:] Brian, is Ms. Bush still in custody at this point?
[Cabell:] No. She is with her family. She has been with her family yesterday, and as the governor has said, he hopes the media and the public will just leave them alone and solve this as a family. But she will apparently be in court tomorrow.
[Cooper:] All right. Brian Cabell in Tallahassee thanks very much.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] Many experts have been concerned by the increased use of prescription medications to modify behavior in children. But as our medical correspondent Steve Salvatore reports, there is a new trend which may be even more alarming.
[Steve Salvatore, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Ritalin and other stimulants are other often used to treat children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Antidepressants called Selective Sarontonin Reuptake Inhibitors, or SSRIs, are also used for behavior modification. In the nine-year University of Michigan study, the number of stimulant prescriptions increased four fold, from 2.7 percent to 10.7 percent among 6 to 14-year-old. And the number of SSRI prescription also increased, from 0.1 percent to 1.7 percent. And both the dose and duration of treatment of the two therapies also increased. But most alarming to the researchers was the number of children on both of the drugs at the same time.
[Dr. Jerry Rushton, University Of Michigan:] Combined use was something that really was a new phenomena in 1990, because these drugs were just coming on to the market, just starting to be used for children and adolescents. In 1998, 30 percent of the children who are on SSRIs were also on a stimulant.
[Salvatore:] Raising concern about safety.
[Dr. Harold Koplewicz, Nyu Child Study Center:] Clearly, further research is needed on how effective this is, and also, what the combination will do as far as side affects.
[Salvatore:] There are some limitations to the study. Because the researchers only counted the number of prescription written, without knowing the diagnosis of each patient, they could not provide an explanation for the trend.
[Rushton:] It may be that children were under-recognized, underdiagnosed and missed in the past, and now they are receiving a diagnosis and treatment subsequently. The other main hypothesis or concern is that this represents overprescription or inappropriate prescription. [on camera]: Although the study population was large, involving more than 27,000 patients, it was limited to North Carolina Medicaid recipients only. Experts say more research is needed determine if this study represents a national trends. Dr. Steve Salvatore, CNN, New York.

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] People in South Korea are embracing a movement to teach young people about sex. Sex has been a taboo subject between parents and their children as a result, educating youngsters about sex was left up to the schools, but times are changing. South Korea's Arirang Television tells us how the country is becoming more liberal when it comes to discussing sex with its children.
[Sohn Jihun, Sk Arirang Tv Reporter:] The story about the birds and the bees is something many Korean parents say they are uncomfortable telling their kids. In this conservative society, when the time comes in a child's life to hear that tale, the adults might either avoid the topic or tell only a part of the story, at least that used to be the case.
[Koo Sung-ae, Director, Neil Women's Center For The Youth:] Adults of the past would force their own knowledge about sex to children in a one-sided way, but there's now a realization this won't work. The focus of today's education is on what the children want to learn about, which is a very significant change.
[Arirang Reporter:] Along with Koo, the media and the Internet, as well as a growing number of civic groups, have been partners in working to get the truth out in the open.
[Jihun:] Some of most prominent changes on viewing on sex and education can be seen in the classroom. Students are no longer made to simply absorb conventional theories on sex. Instead, they're encouraged to play an active role in learning about the once taboo topic. Sex-ed no longer means watching videos on the reproductive system during gym class on a rainy day. The lessons shared and learned these days cover a range of issues, including abstinence, the use of contraceptives, and sexual abuse. A popular teaching method is role playing.
[Unidentified Female:] I think it's very helpful because I can use it in real life.
[Jihun:] Says a student at the Congel Girls High School. According to Koo, the noted expert, the perception of sex among young Koreans is still distorted, mostly from false information shared among peers, and sex as a tool for rampant commercialization. What will turn the tide, she argues, will be adult role models, and who better than the parents? She believes children, in their day to day lives, have to see how their parents love and care for each other in order to get a wider concept. Inevitably, this should start a chain reaction of kids taught in the open wait, growing up to teach their own kids, and so on to future generations. Sohn Jihun, Arirang TV.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] We begin this hour in the Middle East where a U.S. envoy is talking peace but a pair of car bombs earlier today may speak volumes. The separate attacks rocked downtown Jerusalem and underlined the efforts of the U.S. envoy, holding his first meetings today with Israeli and Palestinian leaders. CNN's Ben Wedeman is in Jerusalem with more. Hi Ben.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, hello, Kyra. Those bombs went off just eight-and-a-half hours between them. The first one at about 12:30 local time in an area of Jerusalem that is normally packed with young people going to bars and discos. This morning at 9:00 a.m., another blast went off on the Jappa Road, one of Jerusalem's main thoroughfares. That bomb it was a car bomb. The car was packed with explosives, mortar shells, bullets as well as nails to maximize the causalities. However, there were no casualties no dead, at least. Around more than 20 people were treated for shock. Two others were treated for injuries caused by flying glass. The police completely cordoned off the area because that car also contained explosives that were thrown over a huge area of the downtown of downtown Jerusalem and they spent hours trying to defuse those explosives. There was one controlled blast that rocked the area about an hour-and-a-half, two hours after that. The blast this morning was claimed by the Islamic Jihad. Now this blast comes as U.S. Undersecretary of State for Middle Eastern Affairs, William Burns is in the Palestinian West Bank town of Ramallah where he's meeting with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. And this afternoon he will meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, trying to move along a peace process that is definitely in very bad shape at the moment Kyra.
[Phillips:] Ben, before we let you go, another story that happened yesterday. How can we forget that videotape from the wedding reception where the floor caved in? What's the latest with regard to the investigation on that?
[Wedeman:] Well, the investigation is ongoing. Currently, nine people are in police custody, being questioned in relation to that. Those include those people include the owners, the contractors who built the building in the beginning, the man who designed the floor system that was in that building as well as the contractors who renovated the building three months ago. Apparently they knocked out some important supporting walls and columns, which may have led to the collapse of that. Also, over the last two days, there have been more funerals for those who were who died in the collapse. And recently the Jerusalem Police Chief said that they were still trying to find out the whereabouts of one man who was not accounted for from that collapse Kyra.
[Phillips:] All right. Ben Wedeman thanks so much.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Henry Waxman, the minority member of the ranking democratic member of the House Government Reform Committee asking questions directly of Beth Nolan, John Podesta and John Lindsey to Beth Nolan was there any quid pro quo for the presidential pardon? Beth Nolan's answer was no. John Podesta said the decisions were made on the merits. Any legal wrongdoing, Mr. Bruce Lindsey, the answer: no. That's the line of questioning before the committee now.
[Rep. Henry Waxman , Ranking Member:] ... anything that would have violated the law. Isn't that correct? That's the testimony of all you. And that was also the testimony of Eric Holder and Jack Quinn, who testified us before us last time. If anyone was in a position to detect the existence of a quid pro quo or wrongdoing, it would have been one of you three, isn't that correct?
[John Podesta, Former White House Chief Of Staff:] I think that's fair.
[Beth Nolan, Former Counsel To President Clinton:] I think that's right.
[Waxman:] OK. Let's go to the Marc Rich pardon, and I want to ask about this pardon. Ms. Nolan, Mr. Rich's application was received at the White House in December 2000. Is that correct?
[Nolan:] I don't really I remember a discussion about it in December. I don't remember seeing it until somewhere around Christmas, either late December or maybe early January.
[Waxman:] Did you get a chance to form an opinion as to whether this pardon should have been granted?
[Nolan:] I formed an opinion very quickly that the pardon should not be granted.
[Waxman:] And did you convey your view to the president?
[Nolan:] I think that I know I had a discussion with John Podesta. I'm not sure when it first came up with the president, but I would have conveyed it the first time it did. I don't remember talking about it right away.
[Waxman:] Mr. Podesta, did you form an opinion of whether Marc Rich should receive a pardon?
[Podesta:] Yes.
[Waxman:] And what was your view?
[Podesta:] I thought he should not receive a pardon, that if there was any problem with his indictment, that a proper remedy was to come back and handle it through judicial channels.
[Waxman:] And, Mr. Lindsey, you've already testified you thought the pardon should not have been granted because Mr. Marc Rich was a fugitive. Is that right?
[Bruce Lindsey, Former Assistant To President Clinton:] Maybe technically not a fugitive, but that he was out of the country and had been for 17 years.
[Waxman:] Did the president know of your views?
[Lindsey:] In the process, he did. Again, we had scheduled meetings with the president in which we discussed pardons. The first time that the Rich pardon came up in one of those, and Mr. Podesta believes it was on the 16th I wouldn't argue with that, I don't know that to be a fact but whenever it came up, yes, he knew my views.
[Podesta:] Just to be clear about that, I think that was the first time when I was present, but I was out of the country for a couple of days the previous week, and I don't know whether there were meetings held or not.
[Lindsey:] Yes, again, I can't tell you which date or when we first discussed it. We had a series of meetings in late December, early January on pardon matters. Whenever the Rich pardon came up, I think each of us expressed our views.
[Waxman:] You're the three top advisers to the president. And each of you came to the conclusion this pardon shouldn't have been granted, and you communicated that to the president, so he knew it, presumably. Ms. Nolan, why do you think the president granted that pardon?
[Nolan:] The president was the president, sir. And I even had that discussion with him on the 19th, because we were in some heated discussion about one of the pardons, and I said, "Look, my job is to tell you what I think about this and to tell you what my best judgment about it is, but I know who's president and who's not." And he got to exercise the pardon power.
[Waxman:] Mr. Podesta, do you have a view...
[Podesta:] Well, I think he laid that out in his op-ed piece. I think that, you know, I'm sure there were a variety of factors. I think that the fact that this happened at the end, on the 19th, I think the fact that he heard from Prime Minister Barak, Shimon Peres and others, didn't mean that we were doing this that this was a significant U.S.-Israeli issue, but those were men he respected. And they were asking him to look at it. And I think that he felt obliged, having heard from a number of people who he respected, asking him to take it under serious consideration, that he did that. And I think that, based on that, he looked at it, he bought the arguments. They're arguments that obviously the three of us didn't buy, but he bought them. I think that, again, the process could have been done better. He could have heard more from the Justice Department, as I think he's acknowledged. But he made the decision, I believe, on the merits of the case as he understood it and based on all those factors.
[Waxman:] Well, did you, during this process of deliberations up to the president making his decision, were you aware, did you become aware of the fact that Denise Rich had made significant contributions to the Clinton Library?
[Podesta:] No, I was not aware of that.
[Waxman:] And, Mr. Lindsey, were you aware of it?
[Lindsey:] I may have been aware that she was a supporter. I don't know if I had any sense as to whether she had actually given money or what, but, yes, I think I probably was aware that she had indicated that she would be supportive of the library.
[Waxman:] And, Ms. Nolan, did you...
[Nolan:] I was not aware.
[Waxman:] Or that she'd given to any of these campaigns? Were you aware of her financial involvement in politics?
[Nolan:] No. I think I understood that she was somebody who was generally a supporter, but I wasn't aware of any specific contributions.
[Waxman:] Do any of you have any evidence to suggest that the Rich pardon was part of a quid pro quo for contributions to the campaigns, to the library, to Mrs. Clinton's efforts, to the Democratic National Committee?
[Lindsey:] No, sir.
[Podesta:] No.
[Nolan:] No, sir. Mr. Waxman, if I can say, too, when I said that the president did it because he was the president, I don't mean to suggest in any way that I think he did it just because he could. I agree with Mr. Podesta that the president believed there were valid reasons to do it, to grant that pardon, that I disagreed with and his staff did, but he was entitled ultimately to make the judgment about it.
[Waxman:] Thank you. Mr. Lindsey, I'm particularly interested in your role regarding the Rich pardon. As I understand it, you were a consultant to the Clinton Library. In this role, you certainly had an interest in the success of the library, isn't that correct?
[Lindsey:] Yes, I wasn't a consultant at the time, I was still in the government. But since then, I am now a consultant to the Clinton Library.
[Waxman:] And I presume that you had an interest in making sure the library received adequate funding?
[Lindsey:] Yes, sir, I've been involved with the library since the initial discussions five or six years ago.
[Waxman:] Is it fair that among those affiliated with the library, you were the president's closest adviser with the most regular contact with him at the White House, at that time?
[Lindsey:] I'd hate to argue among who is the president's closest adviser, but probably with the most regular contact, yes.
[Waxman:] And did the subject of Ms. Rich's contribution to the library come up in your discussions with the president about the Rich pardon?
[Lindsey:] Never.
[Waxman:] The major theory of wrongdoing that we're investigating, is that President Clinton issued the Rich pardon in order to get funds for the library. Even the suggestions about Cheryl Mills seem to give us a hint that, because she was on the board of the library, maybe she was trying to influence the president's decision. It's hard to see how this pardon was done to benefit the library, if you had that concern about the library in mind and you were even advocating to the president not to grant the pardon.
[Lindsey:] Well, that's correct. And also, if you look, you know, there were other people who were probably more significantly involved in the library, who are advocating on behalf of other pardons Michael Milken, Leonard Peltier that we did not grant. So if you were to accept that as a premise, there were better cases, if you will, for that. It didn't happen in those cases, and it didn't happen in this case.
[Waters:] Henry Waxman asking if the Marc Rich pardon had any direct benefit for the Clinton Presidential Library. The answer, so far, No. The Government Reform Committee hearing will continue after a break.

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Anchor:] In this everchanging story, the one constant seems to be the work that goes on at ground zero, 24-hours a day. It is a warm day, very warm for October, day New York, supposed to get to mid 80s, and make things a little bit difficult, but a whole better than it was on Monday when it was cold and wet. Michael Okwu is on duty ground zero for us today Michael.
[Michael Okwu, Cnn Correspondent:] Aaron, good afternoon. That's right, the forecast says it is 80 degrees and sunny in New York, but it is partly cloudy in lower Manhattan, it will be cloudy quite some time. The smoke continues to rise, now 23 days after the attack, and it continues to rise. Just moments ago we saw a plume, a very recognizable of yellow smoke rise into the sky. Of course there was a lot of material in Twin Towers. We don't want to speculate might that might have been. But where there's smoke there is fire, there's often fire. I spoke with rescue worker moments ago, a member of the Heavy Equipment Operator Union, who told me that the area underneath the rubble is like his words now "an underground coal mine fire." In fact, while we were on the phone, he said that a huge fire broke out beneath the rubble. He said there's such concentration of heat, such very intense pockets of heat underneath the rubble that when the air hits it, it often smolders, and it can ignite. The fact is that are very difficult conditions that the rescue workers have to negotiate, and the fact that it is 80 degrees today will certainly not help them. Some extraordinary numbers from New York city comptrollers office. The first estimates say that the attacks will cost $105 billion, with a b, over the next two years. Here's how it breaks down, $45 billion for the buildings lost and the taxes paid on them, and between $45 and $60 billion for the lost economic activity over the next two years. In addition to that, they say that the city could lose 115,000 jobs this year, but some of those jobs could be offset by new jobs caused by the crisis, new jobs such as those in security, construction and in the clean-up effort. In the meantime, the rescue workers continue to work around and inside the site. They say that they are reaching cavities where they hope there may be a lot of people a lot of people who are down there. They said that those cavities were such that they believe that they were cavities where many of the people who were trying to flee the attack might have run into. Of course, there's still 4,986 people missing and presumed dead. The last remaining search-and-rescue teams from FEMA will be departing on Saturday. There are of course local and state teams, as far as we know, who will continue to be working the site until we here differently Aaron.
[Brown:] Michael, thank you. Michael Okwu at ground zero. Think about those numbers for a second, $105 billion costs for what happened in a heartbeat in lower Manhattan three and a half weeks ago Judy.
[Woodruff:] Aaron, I can tell you, we continue to watch the work going on at ground zero in awe, what those people are doing. And speaking of that, here in Washington, we've been telling you a lot of about what Congress is doing in the way of dealing with anti- terrorism measures, legislation, but we can also tell you that we've taken timeout to think about ways to recognize some of the heroes who emerged from the events of September 11th. And for more on that, we go to Jonathan Karl, our congressional correspondent John.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Judy, there's a thing called the Congressional Medal of Valor. It's the nation's highest award given to public safety workers, so it may seem a no-brainer that those who died on September 11th, the firefighters, the policemen and women, and also the medical personnel who died on September 11th will be given this Congressional Medal of Valor. But there is a hitch, the Medal of Valor is so conclusion that is limited to only five individuals per year who can receive it, so there's action now, broad action in Congress for support, across party lines, to eliminate that limit of five individuals, and to give that award. that congressional Medal of Valor, to every firefighter, medical personnel, police officer who died on September 11th in connection with the attacks.
[Rep. Vito Fossella , New York:] Out of that devastation, out of those acts of hatred and violence, the United States of America, Congress, along with the president, says that those men died heroes, and as I say, words and medals can't bring them back, but the heart of this nation, the soul of this nation, the Congress of this nation insist all those brave men and women willing to risk those lives, those indeed who did give their lives, we really say thank you.
[Karl:] New York City officials say that there 343 firefighters alone who died in connection to the September 11th attacks. Of course many more police officers and medical personnel as well. Congress can't officially grant the Medal of Valor, because it is awarded as recommended by a National Medal of Valor review board that gives the recommendations to president who actually makes the honor, so what this legislation has been proposed would do, would be to eliminate that limit so that they can all get the Medal of Valor and also recommend to that Medal of Valor review board that those individuals who died on September 11th in connection with the attacks, those rescue workers be given the award Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, Jonathan Karl at the Capitol. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Tucker Carlson, Co-host:] Tonight, Osama bin Laden. Should he be taken dead or alive? If alive, should he be put on public trial? This is CROSSFIRE. Good evening and welcome to CROSSFIRE. If you thought O.J. was big, imagine the trial of the new century: The United States versus Osama bin Laden. It would be great for ratings but would it be good for America? All of a sudden, it's a real question. The American and Northern Alliance forces closing on the strong the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar. With a $25 million bounty on his head, bin Laden may not be able to hide much longer. What happens if he is captured? Some academics and civil liberties groups insist bin Laden should be tried in open court, a la O.J. Others the Bush administration very much included say a military tribunal is as close as he will ever get to trial. What do we do with bin Laden now? Both sides are represented here tonight. Joining us from Detroit, defense attorney Geoffrey Fieger. And from New York City, Ann Coulter, a legal reporter for "Human Events" magazine. Sitting in here for Bill Press this evening, the capable if mistaken Peter Fenn Peter.
[Peter Fenn, Guest Co-host:] Well, thanks a lot, Tucker. I hope I'm not mistaken. Ann, I hope you had a good turkey day yesterday.
[Ann Coulter, Attorney:] Yes, I did, thank you.
[Fenn:] Good, good, good. Well, we will make you a little indigestion here, maybe, in this in this edition of CROSSFIRE. Let me let me ask you this question. Isn't a trial really bin Laden's worst nightmare? All the truth coming out, the the whole al Qaeda organization up in front and for everybody, the whole world to see? I mean, isn't this precisely what would bring down these terrorists?
[Coulter:] No. I think death will bring them down, and I think what is what will happen. That's the whole point here, to kill them. And we will kill them. And you know I don't really care what Osama bin Laden wants. I mean, these arguments that if we kill him we will turn him into a martyr, I I just think this is a never ending argument. We have- our objective is to kill him and we kill him. And that is apparently what our Green Beret forces are doing right now with all of these crazies. I mean, it was it's really a wonderful opportunity. They've all concentrated themselves in one place right now, despite the nay saying of of American journalists suggesting they should be allowed to surrender or allowed peaceful passage. We are at war with people who are crazed fanatics, who want to destroy the Great White Satan. And they're all in one and a bunch of them are in one place right now. So we need to kill them and we are killing them.
[Fenn:] Well well there's a lot of them. But there's no question that probably he will go the way of Adolf Hitler in the bunker. I think we all might agree with that. But let me take you about back about a half a century to a to a memorandum from the president of the United States in January of 1945 talking about Nuremberg. And what he says and I don't know if you can it see on your screen. But what it says is: "After Germany's unconditional surrender, the United Nations could, if they elected, put to death the most notorious criminals, such as Hitler or Himmler, without trial or hearing. We do not favor this method. This would encourage the Germans to turn those criminals into martyrs." Isn't that precisely what we don't want to do with bin Laden? Turn him into any kind of martyr?
[Coulter:] Well, I'd really like to put him a zoo, so little children can go and throw things at him. But I don't think that's going to happen either. I am pretty confident they're going kill him. And I do think I mean, that statement does militate for what I'm saying, which is to kill all these other fanatics who are running over there. I mean, there's a much stronger argument it seems to me even more than killing conscripted German soldiers to be killing these crazies, you know, fleeing from Pakistan and other countries to go fight for their beloved Taliban. These are these are the equivalent of Hitler. Not even of a German soldier. These are the fanatics who want to kill us, to destroy the Great White Satan. There is no reforming them. There's no changing. They aren't just, you know, doing their jobs, even. These are precisely the people we want to kill, including Osama bin Laden.
[Carlson:] Now, Geoffrey Fieger, answer this. Well, let me...
[Geoffrey Fieger, Defense Attorney:] What Ann Coulter just is nonsense. I mean, the word kill came out of her mouth more times than I think out of Osama bin Laden's.
[Carlson:] OK. Well, here. Let me give you let me give you a framework, Geoffrey Fieger, to answer that question. Why shouldn't we kill him? And what precisely as a lawyer, why don't you tell me specifically what rights Osama bin Laden has?
[Fieger:] Sure. He has the rights if we want to really what we are talking about is a is a wholesale attack by Mr. Ashcroft. Really, he's behind it, and some of the radical right on some of our constitutional protections. This has to be looked at in context, Tucker. This is in the context of last week Mr. Ashcroft saying that conversations between accused and attorneys would be listened into, violating the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth amendments to the Constitution. Now they're talking about these secret military courts. Only last week Mr. Ashcroft felt necessary also to say that he was going to start going after Oregon doctors who helped patients end their suffering.
[Carlson:] Now, now, wait.
[Fieger:] No, you have got to look at this in context.
[Carlson:] No, I'm not. My question to you is fairly simple. Very simple. What rights does Osama bin Laden have? You appear to believe he has rights. What are they?
[Fieger:] I think our rights in terms of protecting...
[Carlson:] No, his rights. His rights.
[Fieger:] Forget his rights. What we are more interested in is protecting our freedoms and if we are not willing to to show the rest of the world that our judicial system works and that what we are fighting for are the freedoms that we are going to provide to everybody, then we are as bad as they are. If we are willing to get down into the mud and say we will do everything just like you do it then what how are we better than them?
[Carlson:] You are not answering my question.
[Fieger:] Yes, I am.
[Carlson:] Let's just put one finer point here.
[Fieger:] Yeah, I am answering it.
[Carlson:] U.S. forces are in the process as we speak of killing members of the Taliban.
[Fieger:] And I don't think we are ever going to be in the situation of having to try Osama bin Laden.
[Carlson:] And that may be. But please, let me just ask you the question.
[Fieger:] But I will tell you, we have a thousand people...
[Carlson:] Hold on.
[Fieger:] ...in jails in the United States...
[Carlson:] I understand that. But let me...
[Fieger:] ...who are subject to these problems.
[Carlson:] Oh, please. Please. We are killing members of the Taliban and al Qaeda.
[Fieger:] Right.
[Carlson:] But there there seems to be this hand wringing over the idea of killing Osama bin Laden.
[Fieger:] I don't have any hand wringing.
[Carlson:] The head of al Qaeda.
[Fieger:] No, there's no hand wringing over that.
[Carlson:] So you have no problem with him being executed just summarily.
[Fieger:] Of course I have got a problem with that. I think we...
[Carlson:] Why?
[Fieger:] We didn't do it at Nuremberg. We took the entire Nazi leadership and we put them forth before an international tribunal and it was filmed and we gave them at least a semblance of due process. There were defense attorneys. It wasn't what was proposed now with these secret military tribunals, no unanimity in the sentence, the evidence can be illegal, the the sentence can be handed down virtually without anybody doing any cross-examination. That type of thing why do we want to involve ourselves in that? I thought we are above that. I thought that's why we are over there fighting. If we are like them, then we're not we shouldn't be over there.
[Fenn:] Here's here's the best example, Ann, of exactly what Geoffrey is talking about. Adolf Eichmann 40 years ago, a televised trial first one in the in the civilized world, 15 weeks of testimony, 3,500 pages of his detailing exactly the horrors and atrocities of killing six million Jews. And and you know, that trial which resulted in his death if we are talking about killing somebody and resulted also in something very much more important, and that is the whole world understood the atrocities and that we will never forget happened. Why would that not happen if we tried al Qaeda?
[Coulter:] I don't think al Qaeda's motives are particularly complex. I can tell them to you right here. They want to destroy the Great White Satan. I don't think I really need to hear that said 17 times over 15 weeks. And I do find it interesting that the only people Geoffrey Fieger wants to kill are little old ladies with Alzheimer's. But you can't just go around and say that, you know, everything you like is in the Constitution.
[Fenn:] Geoffrey, you might want to jump in there.
[Coulter:] And there is no attorney-client privilege in the Constitution. Lawyers waive it all the time. This is as for the taping of for national security purposes.
[Fieger:] What? What law school did you go to?
[Coulter:] Well, attorneys waive attorneys waive attorney- client all the time. For example...
[Fieger:] How about due process of law? How about the right to counsel?
[Coulter:] To get their fees or if they are sued for malpractice. There's no mention of the attorney-client privilege in the Constitution.
[Fieger:] Did you go to law school?
[Coulter:] And to say that's an excellent point. I must reconsider my position. And to say that we are going to have certain processes that are required for, you know, particular sorts of prosecutions, OK, one of them is a military tribunal. That happens to be one of the processes.
[Fieger:] No, it isn't.
[Coulter:] It's one that has always been used in wartime, going back to the Revolutionary War, including, you know, under the god liberals worship, Franklin Roosevelt. The Supreme Court upheld military tribunals for
[Fieger:] Excuse me, Franklin Delano Franklin Delano Roosevelt wasn't the president during the Revolutionary War. And that was a...
[Coulter:] I said, including in every armed conflict. It was July 31st, 1942.
[Fieger:] And that was an act...
[Coulter:] And the Supreme Court said in ex-party queren that even an American citizen can be tried in a military tribunal.
[Fieger:] We had declared war under those circumstances.
[Coulter:] The same way we have here.
[Fieger:] It was done and it was done with the Nazi saboteurs actually entering American soil. And it was done only once.
[Coulter:] Right. That wasn't the logic of the Supreme Court.
[Fieger:] That doesn't justify...
[Coulter:] They didn't say you need a declaration of war. All they said was an armed conflict. And they cited the Revolutionary War and they cited the War of 1812.
[Fenn:] I'm not too interested, guys, in redoing the Revolutionary War.
[Coulter:] No, I'm just saying in every armed conflict you have military tribunals.
[Fenn:] Well, especially when you've got military folks. But here's the here's the situation right now, Ann. You have for two and a half years, you conservative lawyers were all over Bill Clinton. Oh, my God, we had to have the rule of law.
[Fieger:] Right.
[Fenn:] We are a government of laws, not of men. How many times did you guys say that?
[Coulter:] Right, we are very proud of that.
[Fenn:] Are we ready to throw- I know you're very proud of it, but now you seem to want to throw it out the window when it comes to due process, in something that could seriously reflect on the United States.
[Coulter:] No, but that's what I'm saying. There we are we are not throwing anything out the window. Just because liberal lawyers who want to kill little old ladies with Alzheimer's don't like something doesn't mean that, you know, it's a constitutional right not to have it that way. This is what I'm trying to convey. In every armed conflict, we have military tribunals to try any belligerents. All we need is the intent to commit a belligerent act. Unfortunately, in my opinion, President Bush's order for military tribunals of terrorists in this country does not apply to citizens. According to the Supreme Court it can apply to citizens. It did in 1942 against Herbert Hans Halt. He was an American citizen and the Supreme Court found no, he came to American soil not wearing a uniform with the intent of committing a belligerent act. And we're in an armed conflict, he gets a military tribunal. The Supreme Court decided in two days. These guys were tried in about five days and executed.
[Carlson:] That's right.
[Coulter:] That is due process.
[Carlson:] Now Geoffrey Fieger now Geoffrey Fieger, let me let me ask you something. You hear again and again and again our current condition compared to Nuremberg or the Eichmann trials and those held up as examples of what we ought to do to Osama bin Laden because it will show that we're advanced, that as you put it we are not like them, we're above them, et cetera et cetera. But both those cases I mean, Nuremberg took place a year after the war ended. Eichmann almost twenty years after it ended. And isn't that the point, that we're still at war? And why should we when the Supreme Court says we don't have to give a megaphone to our enemy in war? Why should we allow Osama bin Laden...
[Fieger:] Who said we are at war? First of all, I don't know what you define as a war.
[Carlson:] Oh, but...
[Fieger:] But we've had terrorists on our soil.
[Carlson:] There are actually planes at the moment with American insignias bombing Afghanistan. If that's not war, I don't know the word.
[Fieger:] I understand that. We've been well, we've been in conflict in Korea and Vietnam, but we didn't feel the necessity of start pulling in people in military courts. We've had terrorists before. We've had domestic terrorists, we've had foreign terrorists. In fact, we just tried this summer several terrorists who were abducted out of Pakistan and accused of the World Trade Center bombing in 1993. And we didn't have any problem with putting them on trial in Manhattan and convicting 10 of them and sentencing them to prison for the rest of their lives. Since when do we now have to start in this time with Mr. Ashcroft and Mr. Bush and their cronies constraining? And really, believe me, the dangers here aren't so much Osama bin Laden or some terrorists over in Afghanistan. The dangers here are what they had can do to Americans and people who are legally here in America and people who are going to be held subject to these military tribunals because we have got a thousand people in jails right here in the United States and those are real problems.
[Carlson:] OK. And we've also got a whole other segment of CROSSFIRE in which you can discuss all that. We will also ask the question, does Osama bin Laden and others who seek to destroy the Constitution have a right to be protected by it? We'll get to that when we return in just a moment.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] If the option to use a military tribunal in time of war makes a lot of the sense. We are we are fighting a war, Terry, against the most evil kinds of people. And I need to have that extraordinary option.
[Fenn:] Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. I'm Peter Fenn, sitting in for the turkey-loving Bill Press. And that was President Bush arguing for a military tribunal. We all hope the question is not if, but when will we track down the modern-day Adolf Hitler. Tucker and I are cross-examining two fine lawyers: from the right, Ann Coulter, who wants military tribunals dispensing swift justice; and from the left, Geoffrey Fieger, who is concerned about civil liberties and the Bill of Rights. Tucker.
[Carlson:] Geoffrey Fieger, the order creating these military tribunals, as you know, specifies that they apply only to non- citizens. American citizens cannot be tried in military tribunals as it stands.
[Fieger:] Yes.
[Carlson:] Now, I'm hoping against hope to an answer to a very simple question I've been asking all week, which is: do foreigners have the same rights under our system as American citizens?
[Fieger:] Great question, Tucker. Next week I fly to Sarasota, Florida, to represent a German national who is accused of murder in Florida for murdering an American citizen. And of course he has every single constitutional protection that is afforded to any other citizen under Florida law and under the United States law. And anybody who thinks otherwise doesn't know what our judicial system is all about. And our judicial system, Tucker, very simply, is as integral a part of our freedoms, our system of protecting the accused as our right to vote. And anybody who thinks otherwise...
[Carlson:] Oh, I understand. Anyone who thinks otherwise OK. I understand that. So you're saying to me that if Osama bin Laden was taken into custody, he needs to be read his Miranda rights, afforded an opportunity to contact his attorney perhaps you and and afforded all the rights of anybody else who lives under the American Constitution.
[Fieger:] I'm saying that we are better off as a country if we do that.
[Carlson:] No, no. The question is...
[Fieger:] Let me tell you one other problem we're going to have.
[Carlson:] Are you saying yes? No, no. Please. Please answer the question. You're saying...
[Fieger:] I'm saying we're better off.
[Carlson:] As I understood you no, no. You said that it's required that non-citizens have you just said they have the same rights as citizens do. So...
[Fieger:] Arrested on arrested on U.S. soil that's right, they do.
[Carlson:] Oh.
[Fieger:] That's right. Now, overseas, there's another thing. What Bush does with them overseas I can't have much of control over. But I tell you this. We are going to have real problems with other countries for instance, the 15-member European Union will not extradite any and if they could find real members of al Qaeda, they won't extradite them back here to the United States if we don't promise not to execute them. Spain right now has eight members...
[Carlson:] That's a longstanding and this is a problem that's been going on for many years...
[Fieger:] Well, that's not a problem that should be a we should recognize that if Spain is holding eight members who maybe actively participated in the September 11th plot and and won't give them to us because of our systems here in in providing for constitutional protections or at least not executing them. I think that we've got to recognize that we are part of a world community. We are not a law unto ourselves.
[Fenn:] Let's make that point, Ann, and see where you'll take it. Mary Jo White is doing a great job prosecuting in regular courts terrorists affiliated with the World Trade Center, with the bombing of the embassies. Now the question is, do you favor secret trials? Do you favor trials where people aren't confronted with the evidence? Do you favor trials where lawyers are not to be chosen by defendants, and they may not even have a lawyer that they that they would like? Are you favoring trials here with no right to appeal? Is that is that where you're going?
[Coulter:] I favor military tribunals, and I wouldn't say there is one way in which Mary Jo White's prosecutions were really not all that smashingly successful and that is none of them did get the death penalty. That was also under that lawless president who was more interested in Monica under the desk than, you know, protecting America's borders.
[Fieger:] You're obsessed.
[Coulter:] But this idea that due process requires all criminal procedures and that you must have a grand jury, you must have a trial by your peers and you must have proof beyond a reasonable doubt, I mean, it's just crazy and you know it's crazy. Civil trials don't have that. Criminal contempt proceedings don't have that. Bankruptcy proceedings don't have that. The fact that something is not a criminal trial doesn't mean there's not due process. If any of our boys do something wrong in waging this war, they'll get a military tribunal. They'll be court martialed, they'll have everything you just said applies.
[Fenn:] Our our State Department...
[Coulter:] And I don't see al Qaeda trials should be treated differently.
[Fenn:] This is...
[Fieger:] You don't even understand that. If if our boys are accused of a crime, you don't simply get a secret military tribunal. You get court-appointed you get lawyers, you get cross-examination.
[Coulter:] You don't get a grand jury indictment. You don't get you don't get a trial by your peers. You don't get proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
[Fieger:] That isn't what what is would being proposed, Ann.
[Coulter:] You don't get a jury.
[Fieger:] Ann, let me just ask you...
[Coulter:] As you don't in a contempt proceeding either. You don't get it in a bankruptcy proceeding. You don't get it in a civil court proceeding.
[Fieger:] What do you think...
[Coulter:] The idea of due process is not that everything must be tried by a jury of your peers. It's a crazy idea.
[Fenn:] What are we fighting for over there, then? What are fighting for over then if not the protection of due process of law and the freedoms we hold dear? What are we fighting for?
[Coulter:] Right. And military tribunals are due process.
[Fenn:] One final question. Here's here's let me just make this one point, Ann, and that is right now, as you speak, the State Department has criticized other countries for having precisely these kinds of military tribunals.
[Fieger:] Right.
[Fenn:] So the problem is that what's OK for those folks may not be OK for us. But let me ask you one very simple question. You have written, and I quote, "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity."
[Coulter:] Yeah, that was a good one.
[Fenn:] Now, I just have one very simple question. Who is "they"?
[Coulter:] The sentence before that sentence says who they are. And that is the terrorists, the people cheering and dancing in the street.
[Fieger:] Convert them to Christianity?
[Coulter:] The ones we happen to be killing right now. Thank God for the Green Berets.
[Fieger:] What's the difference between you and bin Laden?
[Coulter:] And moreover, before we do... Let me say, not only do I think George Bush should should expand the military tribunals to citizens in this country who have come to commit acts of war against us, but I think he ought to consider expanding it to liberal lawyers. Military tribunals for liberal lawyers.
[Carlson:] Now, Geoffrey Fieger, in just the in just the 15 or 20 seconds we have left, tell me. Would you if you got a call by satellite phone from, say, routed through al Jazeera from Osama bin Laden, "Will you represent me, Geoffrey Fieger?" Would you represent him?
[Fieger:] No, because he will never make it back to the United States. They'll kill him before he gets here and I will never have to face that. But would I represent some of the terrorists here? Probably not, because I get a choice. But I think they should be, and it's my duty to. Whether I do it personally is another problem.
[Carlson:] OK. Geoffrey Fieger, thank you very much. Ann Coulter, thank you.
[Coulter:] Thanks.
[Carlson:] Peter Fenn and I will be back in just a moment, neither of us facing a tough choice about whether or not to represent Osama bin Laden. we still have much to talk about. We will tell you about it when we come back with our closing comments. See you in a moment.
[Fenn:] Well, Tucker I wore this bow tie in your honor because I thought maybe Ann Coulter might confuse us, you know, and answer the wrong question. But her last her last comment really really put me out. I'll tell you. The notion that you're going convert these countries to Christianity. What could make them angrier? If you're trying to bring this world together, why come out with a statement like that?
[Carlson:] Well, first off...
[Fenn:] Kill them, convert them. And it wasn't off the cuff. She's obviously written...
[Carlson:] First off, I'm not sure it would make them any more hostile. But she essentially lost her job over that comment. Notice that the huge outcry when she says that whereas Osama bin Laden all day long: Kill the Christians and Jews. And Geoffrey Fieger gets on his high horse and lectures us about his rights.
[Fenn:] No, but he isn't defending Osama bin Laden. I mean, the idea is you take the high ground. And when you do stuff like...
[Carlson:] Osama bin...
[Fenn:] Why wouldn't you take the high ground on on military tribunals?
[Carlson:] Because we are at war with him. And it if you really wanted to time warp, we can take the guy and read his Miranda rights. I mean, it's ridiculous.
[Fenn:] From the left, I'm Peter Fenn. Good night from
[Crossfire. Carlson:] And from the right, I'm Tucker Carlson. Join us again on Monday for another edition of CROSSFIRE. See you then. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] All right, Chad, and stick around. We're going to come back to you in just a minute and talk about the weather with regard to the wildfires in the West. Now, the Army and Marines are being called up to help fight the wildfires out West. Forty-two major wildfires are burning today across parts of several states in the West and South. Washington State firefighters are facing some of the worst conditions and a front is bringing cooler temperatures but it's also ushering high winds. Crews on the front lines say they're bracing for gusts up to 40 miles an hour. Around a hundred homes are now threatened in the eastern part of the state along with Washington State. Oregon is facing the worst of this fire season. CNN's Gina London joins us now from Ruch, Oregon. She's right there at the camp where all the firefighters come in and out. Hi, Gina.
[Gina London, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Kyra, that's right. A bustle of activity 247 here because, of course, the fire fighting goes on throughout the evening. Now this base camp for the Quartz fire, which is one of 11 fires going on in Oregon right now, is used almost as a city that supports and has an objective of fighting the fire. There are 2,300 firefighters that operate out of here, along with the support staff. And to tell us a little bit more about that, now joining me is Malcolm Hiatt. He's with the Oregon Department of Forestry, but you're also one of the directors of this camp. Tell me a little bit about what happens here.
[Malcolm Hiatt, Oregon Department Of Forestry:] Well, what we have to do is we have to set up telephone lines so we get started with our ordering, then we have kitchens and showers and sleeping areas. This camp is so spread out, we even have our own bus system to shuttle crews between their sleeping areas, the kitchen and showers and things like that. We have, like you said, 2,300 people here today and we're still going today so we're stretching out and getting more fields in the area that we're creating suburban-like areas with more kitchens, more showers.
[London:] I think it's incredible to imagine that there are these camps all over the different fire sites around the West. And that you were saying to me yesterday, when we were talking, that there's just almost as much water being moved here as there is up on the line.
[Hiatt:] It certainly seems like it. Of course with all the kitchens and showers, we're not plumbed into anything. They're all field units and so we have to bring in the fresh water to those units and we have to take the gray water out.
[London:] How many different divisions or agencies are operating this? I mean this is really an intense systematic kind of approach to all of this?
[Hiatt:] Yes, we have representatives here from the BLM, the U.S. Forest Service. We also have Oregon State Police. We're working with the local county sheriff's office, emergency management.
[London:] Of course that BLM is the Bureau of Land Management. Thank you very much, Mr. Hiatt.
[Hiatt:] Thank you.
[London:] Malcolm Hiatt, again, from the Oregon Department of Forestry, Kyra. And I want to let you know, too, that in addition to the existing crews that are already here, we understand that there are going to be throughout the day some 300 members of the National Guard coming here to also give their assistance. Reporting live in Ruch, Oregon, I'm Gina London. Back now to you, Kyra.
[Phillips:] All right, Gina, thanks so much. Well, let's check back in with Chad to find out if it's going to get any easier weather wise for those firefighters out there fighting the fires Chad.
[Chad Myers, Cnn Meteorologist:] Easier after it gets harder, unfortunately, because there's a cold front coming through. In fact, you can find it right here on the weather map and not a drop of rain. I'll switch you back to the other map. Here's the radar. And if there was any rain coming down at all, you would see it on this map because obviously you see it down here across the southeast. Dallas all the way over to Texarkana heavy rainfall. But it's not coming down with this cold front because it's just so dry. It's so hot and dry and even with the moisture coming off the Pacific, it wasn't enough to kick off any significant thunderstorms and so there you have it. Even by Saturday afternoon, the cold front moves to the east, absolutely dry. No rainfall in the forecast there for at least another three to four days, but it is on the way after that. More on that a little bit later. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Some good news for fans of the Denver Broncos. They're going to get a new stadium August 25th. They will open up some what are calling the New Mile High. But like with many stadiums, they have sold the rights to a company, and at least one newspaper in Denver is none too happy about that. It is fighting back. Let's get more now from reporter Heidi Hemmat from our affiliate KUSA.
[Heidi Hemmat, Kusa Reporter:] "The Denver Post's" decision to call the new stadium Mile High Stadium despite the official name on the sign is getting a mixed reaction on the street.
[Unidentified Female:] I kind of like Mile High. I always did.
[Unidentified Male:] Mile High was the old Mile High Stadium. Invesco's the new one. That's what it should be called.
[Unidentified Female:] I think it's a good decision, because all the readers know it by Mile High Stadium.
[Unidentified Male:] If they do that, that will be wrong.
[Hemmat:] But "The Denver Post's" editor says the response they're getting is overwhelmingly positive. He points to the poll on their Web site as proof they're doing what the readers want, and 72 percent agree.
[Gene Amole, Columnist, "rocky Mountain News":] People want us to be called Mile High Stadium.
[Hemmat:] Denver native Gene Amole has been a newsman for nearly 60 years. A columnist for "The Post's" rival, "The Rocky Mountain News," he believes "The Post's" motives are less than pure.
[Amole:] They're involved in a newspaper war with my paper, "The Rocky Mountain News," and any way, anything they can do to separate themselves in the public mind from United States and to diminish what we and what we do, that's what they're going to do.
[Kagan:] That was KUSA's Heidi Hemmat. For more on this and more of "The Post's" perspective, let's bring in "The Denver Post" editor Glenn Guzzo, who's with us on the phone. Glenn, hello.
[Glenn Guzzo, Editor, "denver Post":] Good morning. How are you?
[Kagan:] I'm doing just fine. Boy, people are really upset about this in Denver, aren't they?
[Guzzo:] Well, people are pretty, pretty decisively in favor of calling the stadium Mile High and it has been a source of anger.
[Kagan:] Officially it's Invesco Field at Mile High, and your paper has come to the decision you're not going to use that in your newspaper. How did you come to that decision?
[Guzzo:] We basically said we're going to adopt the language of the people, that the public by all accounts is at least two-thirds in favor of calling Mile High. When you're in any kind of public discussion, you will find people referring to it routinely as the New Mile High or Mile High or the new stadium. Seldom do they use the phrase Invesco Field. In this case, we think that the public's language is familiar enough, clear enough and positive. It's not antagonistic or destructive.
[Kagan:] And you're trying to reflect, it seems to me, the anger and the frustration that fans have. Like, oh, my gosh, is everything for sale, including the name of the places where we go go witness our sports events?
[Guzzo:] Well, you know, there is widespread anger about that across the country. It really came to a head with Mile High here in Denver, and we're treating it as a unique circumstance.
[Kagan:] But the paper does refer to Coors Field and you do use Pepsi Center.
[Guzzo:] Yeah.
[Kagan:] How do make how do you justify that?
[Guzzo:] Well, Mile High really is a unique circumstance. Coors Field and Pepsi Center have two different situations here, where both of those were built primarily with private money. Mile High was funded 75 percent by public taxpayer money. The second thing is there was no public outcry for Pepsi, for Pepsi Center or Coors Field to be named anything else. There's an emotional attachment to Mile High that has everything to do with the tradition: the location, the facility and the fact that the taxpayers are paying the bill here and they don't feel like they've been heard.
[Kagan:] I understand the public outcry, I understand the anger, but Glenn, is it good journalism? I mean, the name of the place is Invesco what is it again? it's Invesco Field at Mile High. As a journalist, is it not your paper's job to reflect what's out there? That's the name of the place.
[Guzzo:] Well, it's public language we're adopting. I think it's good journalism when you serve your public well. I think it's also good journalism to make sure that you're clear. And what we've done is explained what we're doing to folks. Also what we've done is said that we will use the phrase Invesco Field when clarity demands it: for instance, references to the signage, references to direct quotes or official documents, references to the naming rights controversy. In those situations, Invesco Field has to be used.
[Kagan:] All right, we'll be tracking it. Glenn Guzzo from "The Denver Post," thanks for talking with, and we'll also be watching "The Denver Broncos" as they open their season there on actually preseason on August 25th as well. Thanks for joining.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] It's been a rough week for peace in Northern Ireland. Now Northern Ireland's largest Protestant party says IRA weapons are in the way of lasting peace. CNN's Nic Robertson joins us live from the Ulster Unionist convention in Belfast, where a very important meeting has just ended. Nic, what can you tell us has been the outcome?
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, the importance of the meeting here today for the leadership of the party was to shore up their leadership within the divided ranks of the party. They seem to have effectively stifled the voices of dissent within the party today. They had a fairly unanimous support for the motion they put forward that says all issues in the future before the party gets back into any power-sharing government would come back to be debated by this 860-person council. That was a key issue in winning support there. One of the other contentious issues today was the debate over the change in the name of the police force here. The party most of the party objects to the change in the name from the Royal Ulster Constabulary to a more neutral name. That police force is a mostly Protestant force. They have put that issue on hold, but they have also put it into their debate on the review of the peace process that would be starting here in the coming weeks. By putting that question along with the disarmament issue into the debate into the review process, that all the political parties here will now be entering into, will likely lengthen that review process. So this means effectively it will take a fairly substantial amount of time before the new Northern Ireland power-sharing assembly can be reconstituted, get all the parties back into it, get it up and running again. I'm Nic Robertson reporting live from Belfast, Northern Ireland.

[Announcer:] Next on PEOPLE IN THE NEWS, the girls screamed, the band made rock and roll history. But the youngest Beatle never sought fame and fortune.
[Alan Clayson, Author, "the Quiet One":] He was the one that was the least keen on stardom. But at the same time, he was the one that was the most self-contained about it.
[Announcer:] A gifted guitarist, not always known for his talent of writing memorable songs.
[Jimmy Tarbuck, School Friend:] He was a great songwriter in his own right, and perhaps a little bit overshadowed.
[Announcer:] Overshadowed, maybe, by John and Paul, but thought of as family.
[Paul Mccartney, Former Beatle:] He's such a brave lad. To me, he's just my little baby brother.
[Announcer:] The musical journey and life of George Harrison, now on
[People In The News. Daryn Kagan:] Welcome to PEOPLE IN THE NEWS. I'm Daryn Kagan. On Thursday afternoon, George Harrison died quietly at a friend's home in Los Angeles. Cancer took the life of the former Beatle, who was just 58. The news came as no surprise to many, as Harrison had been battling recurring cancer all year. But his death still jolted fans everywhere, those who gently mourned the passing of a musician, the social activists, and the reluctant star.
[Martin Lewis, Beatles Historian:] George was an integral part of The Beatles. One of the things that he did was, he was very responsible for their sound.
[Kagan:] Few clues to George Harrison's incredible success can be found in his early years in Liverpool, England. He was born February 25, 1943. His parents were a bus driver and a homemaker. George was the only Beatle whose young life had been fairly undramatic.
[Clayson:] He was the one that was least keen on stardom. He was the one that was least but at the same time, he was the one that was the most self-contained about it. He I suppose he I suppose he I think a lot of it was to do with a secure family background. I mean, the other three Beatles came from what can be described, I suppose, as broken homes.
[Kagan:] In Liverpool, a teenaged George rode the bus to school with a kid named Paul McCartney, who was a year and a half older than George. The two loved guitars and the same kind of music. Paul introduced his younger friend to the Quarrymen, a band that included Paul and another Liverpool lad, John Lennon.
[Unidentified Male:] Paul introduced him to John, and Harrison got in on the strength of his playing. You know, John heard him play and said, OK, well, all right, I guess we'll carry him along.
[Kagan:] George may have been young, but he was the most talented guitarist of the bunch. He was allowed to join, and in 1960, the band became The Beatles. No one, especially George, could have guessed what was to come.
[Lewis:] He was driven by his passion to be a musician. It wasn't, How can I become famous? It was, How can I play music? What can I do that will give me pleasure? So when the fame came with the music initially, it was great, of course, lots of people were listening to the music. But among The Beatles, he was the one who enjoyed least all the mass adulation, and the frenzy did not give him pleasure.
[Kagan:] In February of 1964, The Beatles appeared on "The Ed Sullivan Show." The Fab Four became the most popular band in America. That's the same month, by the way, that George Harrison turned all of 21.
[George Harrison:] I don't really fancy 21, I much rather like 20, you know, it's sort of a nice round figure and all that.
[Kagan:] It was about this time that Harrison started experimenting with songwriting and The Beatles with movie making. During the making of "A Hard Day's Night," Harrison met a young model named Patti Boyd, who had one line in the film. The two married in 1966. Harrison sought more of a private life. He complained about the touring, even felt that The Beatles' safety might be at risk.
[Anthony Decurtis, "rolling Stone" Magazine:] Back in the '60s, George was afraid of violence being executed against The Beatles. He was afraid of The Beatles being assassinated literally, you know, in 1966. So when it actually happened to Lennon, it was just shocking for George on all those levels.
[Kagan:] The band's last live concert was in San Francisco in the summer of '66. With his wife, Patti Boyd, Harrison developed an interest in Indian mysticism, an interest that soon influenced the music of The Beatles.
[Alan Light, Editor In Chief, "spin" Magazine:] I think the single thing that George brought was his interest in and his introduction of Indian music, Eastern music, into rock and roll. I think any exploration of non-Western music in pop was a direct result of George Harrison picking up a sitar and getting interested in Indian music and meditation and leading The Beatles to India in 1966-67. That's a pretty revolutionary thing.
[Kagan:] Patti Boyd not only encouraged her husband's interest in India but inspired one of The Beatles' most successful songs, "Something," written by Harrison.
[Peter Castro,"people" Magazine:] It was a beautiful love song. It was written for Patti Boyd, who he was madly in love with at the time. And it's a melody that is timeless. Frank Sinatra, actually, called it the greatest love song of the last half century.
[Kagan:] "Something" stopped the charts in the U.S. Other songs penned by Harrison, like "Here Comes the Sun," proved to be big hits too. But there still was reluctance to record Harrison's songs.
[Lewis:] He grew up in the big shadow cast by John and Paul, but in a sense the sibling rivalry made him a better songwriter. He strove to equal them.
[Kagan:] The Beatles split in 1970. Harrison would say the biggest break in his career was getting into The Beatles, and then added the second biggest break was getting out.
[Castro:] He was very frustrated. I mean, it's no accident that he came out with "All Things Must Pass," and at the time that was a triple album, which was almost unheard of at the time. And it was sort of his way of saying to The Beatles and the rest of the world, This is the material you would have gotten had these people, had these two, John and Paul, allowed me to write more songs.
[Kagan:] Of the former Fab Four, Harrison scored the first solo heat with the release of "All Things Must Pass." It included the single "My Sweet Lord." But Harrison lost all the royalties on that song when a court later ruled that the song was based on The Chiffons' "He's So Fine." In 1971, Harrison organized two benefit concerts in Madison Square Garden. The cause, poverty relief for the people of Bangladesh.
[Lewis:] The concert for Bangladesh brought together Eric Clapton and Bob Dylan and Leon Russell, big rock stars of their day. He was the first, the pioneer, of that sort of thing.
[Kagan:] Harrison followed up the success of the fund-raising efforts and the subsequent recordings made from those concerts with another smash release, "Dark Horse," in 1974. Its dark theme reflected a troubled personal life. His marriage to Patti Boyd soon ended. He later married his second wife, Olivia, who gave birth to their son in 1978. Harrison enjoyed sporadic success in his last 15 years. He had a solo hit in 1987 with... [Video Clip, "my Mind Set On You"] ... and he teamed with veteran rockers Bob Dylan, Roy Orbison, and Tom Petty and others to form The Traveling Wilburys. He even dabbled in record and film producing, funding the Monty Python film "The Life of Brian."
[Lewis:] He really was a true Renaissance man in that his interests encompassed a lot of areas. But he never went screaming for the credit.
[Kagan:] The man who never courted publicity found himself in the spotlight for reasons unrelated to any of his business or charity efforts. He was treated for throat cancer in 1998. Harrison blamed it on smoking.
[Jimmy Tarbuck, School Friend:] He used to play his guitar, and he'd have a cigarette on one of the strings. You know, when they tie the string to the top of the guitar and the strings would be loose, he'd sometimes have a cigarette. And he was a heavy smoker when he was younger.
[Kagan:] In 1999, Harrison survived a near-fatal attack while on his sprawling estate in southern England. An intruder stabbed the musician, puncturing Harrison's lung. For much of his career, he had worried about attacks from deranged fans, a fear that deepened with the assassination of John Lennon in 1980. With Lennon's death and now that of Harrison from cancer, only two ex-Beatles remain.
[Mccartney:] Even when I saw him last time, and he was obviously very unwell, he was still cracking jokes like he always was.
[Announcer:] Coming up, lead singer Bono reflects on Harrison's place in music history and his influence on U2...
[Bono, U2:] You know, we claim him as Irish, you know.
[Announcer:] ... when PEOPLE IN THE NEWS continues.
[Kagan:] Welcome back to PEOPLE IN THE NEWS. This week, I sat down for an exclusive interview with U2's Bono. It was a candid talk about the loss of musical legend George Harrison. But it was also a celebration of Harrison's music and influence. The Beatles changed the world of music and set the stage for superstar bands to come, groups like U2. This week, the music world lost a legend in George Harrison. What can you tell us about the man and the musician?
[Bono:] Well, he didn't like U2 very much.
[Kagan:] You know that?
[Bono:] Yes, yes, I do know it. But we loved him, we really did love him. And, I mean, The Beatles, you know, wrote the map for a group like U2. And he was a quintessential part of it. And, you know, brought a special songwriting genius that's easily overlooked. And I think there's a sort of unknowable quality, a kind of mysterious quality about his music which made him a very attractive character and gave The Beatles an extra dimension, really.
[Kagan:] You mention the songwriting. Paul McCartney and John Lennon get so much credit for the songwriting, for what made The Beatles. But when you look at some of the gems that George Harrison came up with, it really is remarkable, he does really leave a songwriting legacy.
[Bono:] You know, we claim him as Irish, you know. I think three of The Beatles are sort of Irish, and because Liverpool was, you know, across the road from Dublin. A lot of people emigrate to Liverpool. And I think there's a certain melancholy in the Irish that you hear in George Harrison's songwriting. And, I mean, he's his is the only one that I think Frank Sinatra covered.
[Kagan:] "Something in the Way."
[Bono:] Yes, "Something in the way she moves," I mean, it's funny, because when you hear his music played now on the radio today, it's sort of overwhelming sadness. That was already in the music, but now you sort of now it's his death kind of almost allows you to surrender to.
[Kagan:] And you can identify with that, and not just as musician but as being Irish as well?
[Bono:] Yes, I mean, I do. I mean, for us, they're The Beatles are untouchable, and we still look to them as models of what can be achieved when four people get into a room and start experimenting. And...
[Kagan:] And much like you guys, four guys who got together young and went so far, took over the world.
[Bono:] Yes, and they were mates, and before they were a band, the same as U2. I'm not it's kind of sad that two of them are gone now. And I think we have to be very it's always worth reminding ourselves just how lucky we are to be alive at a time when we grew up with The Beatles.
[Kagan:] Can you give me any examples of how you can see influences of Beatle music in U2's music?
[Bono:] Just being in a band, just, you know, a garage band, you know, when you're in a band, it's like it's you against the world, and if you come from a neighborhood in Dublin or Liverpool, and you come to America, and you discover the roots of soul music and blues and stuff that may or may not have influenced you, but certainly has opened your ears and eyes up. It's a you know, they were the first to do that.
[Kagan:] Now, something you share in common with George Harrison, he was a man who saw his fame, who saw rock and roll as a platform to go something beyond, to look at problems of others, to look at causes that some people might not seem as popular or worthwhile. Do you admire him for that?
[Bono:] Well, I can remember, as a teenager, he you know, I heard about the floods in Bangladesh via George Harrison. I mean, that's just...
[Kagan:] He was ahead of his time.
[Bono:] ... that's just the way of the world, isn't it? You know, when you're a teenager, you're not watching the news, and so it takes sometimes somebody that you look up to or whatever to just to turn you on to a particular problem and what we might be able to do about that problem. So the concert for Bangladesh was way ahead of its time. I think, I mean, I think it probably wore him out, these benefit things do, and he's probably been asked to do I know I am all the time, you know, you know, you have to be very careful about these things. You only get a few punches every year to make a point like that. And but it went whenever he could, he did.
[Announcer:] When we return, how the rest of the world remembers George Harrison...
[Unidentified Female:] I grew up with The Beatles. I loved The Beatles. They brought me so many happy memories.
[Announcer:] ... as PEOPLE IN THE NEWS continues.
[Mccartney:] To me, he's just my little baby brother. We grew up together. I'm devastated, obviously, like everyone else. He had a long battle with his cancer, and but I saw him two weeks ago, and he was full of fun like he always was. [Begin Video Clip, "hard Day's Night"]
[Unidentified Actor:] What would you call that hair style that you're wearing?
[Harrison:] Arthur.
[George Martin, Beatles' Producer:] George is a wonderful man and a fine musician. But most importantly, I think he was a very loving person, full of humor. And I don't think he really wanted to be a famous person. [Begin Video Clip, "hard Day's Night"]
[Unidentified Actor:] So this is the famous Beatles.
[Martin:] I think he wanted to do his own stuff by himself.
[Tony Blair, British Prime Minister:] We grew up with The Beatles. You know, their music, and the band, the personalities of the band were the background to our lives.
[Unidentified Female:] I grew up with The Beatles. I loved The Beatles. They brought me so many happy memories. And I feel so sad, and I've been crying a lot today. I think some of the time his contribution, musically, was overlooked, and that now that people recognized what he actually did give.
[Unidentified Male:] He wrote with great, great sensitivity. I think he wrote about things that really cared.
[Martin:] Because, I mean, we've known it had been coming for a long while, but still doesn't prepare you for the day when it actually happens.
[Mccartney:] We just had so many beautiful times together that that's what I'm going to remember him by, a lovely guy who's full of humor. As I say, even when I saw him last time, and he was obviously very unwell, but he was still cracking jokes like he always was. And he'll be sorely missed. He's a beautiful man, and the world will miss him.

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Tom Haynes, Co-host:] Hello. And welcome everyone. I'm Tom Haynes. Your Thursday show begins with a look at today's lead story: meetings between the United States and China. How do things now stand? Stay tuned to find out. Then, our "Daily Desk" heads to the gas station for a preview of this summer's prices at the pump. Following that, "Worldview" lands in Russia for a little cyber gaming. Finally, we get an earful as we continue our look inside the National Security Agency. First today, officials from the United States and crew met in Beijing to discuss the collision of a U.S. Navy surveillance plane and a Chinese fighter jet. But the White House said the meeting was not productive and that "no new ground was reached." Neither the United States nor China appears willing to compromise its position. China blames the U.S. for the collision and portrays its fighter pilot Wang Wei as a hero. The U.S. says Wang Wei is responsible for the accident. China demanded an end to U.S. surveillance flights off its coast. The U.S. delegate said those flights will continue and within a matter of days. There also has been no progress on returning that U.S. EP-3 surveillance plane. The U.S. wants the plane back, but China refused to discuss the issue during Wednesday's meeting. U.S.-China relations have taken a beating lately. Wednesday, the United Nations Commission On Human Rights blocked consideration of an American proposal to condemn China's human rights record. The U.S. proposal denounced Beijing for several reasons, including its repression of the Falun Gong spiritual movement. As the United States and China debate over the EP-3 surveillance plane, the Bush administration is approaching a deadline to decide what, if any, weapons systems to sell to Taiwan. China considers Taiwan a breakaway province that should be reunited with the mainland and it opposes the proposed sale of weapons. Jamie McIntyre reports on what such a transaction could mean for the region.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Correspondent:] The goal of U.S. weapons sales is to ensure that Taiwan's military is able to defend the tiny island of 23 million against an invasion from mainland China, while not emboldening Taiwan's leaders to the point where they invite an attack by declaring independence. China has announced a 17 percent increase in defense spending, and is pointing more short-range missiles at Taiwan, which it regards as part of China. To counter that threat, Taiwan wants to buy as much advanced U.S. weaponry as it can.
[C.j. Chen, Taiwan Rep. To U.s:] The People's Republic of China has been increasing its deployment of missiles across the Taiwan Strait, and at the same they have been acquiring new weapons.
[Mcintyre:] But sources say the Pentagon has decided Taiwan's military is not ready for, and doesn't immediately need, state-of-the art Aegis destroyers, which have advanced radar and air defense systems. Instead, sources say, the Pentagon favors selling Taiwan four Kidd-class destroyers built for Iran in the 1970s, which could be outfitted with upgraded electronics to improve defenses against planes and cruise missiles. Also, sources say, to counterbalance China's new ships and submarines, Taiwan will likely get U.S. submarine-hunting P-3 aircraft, as well as help in augmenting it obsolete fleet of four World War II vintage submarines. Only problem is the U.S. only has nuclear subs, which it doesn't sell. So a deal might have to be brokered with a third country.
[Larry Wortzel, Heritage Foundation:] The United States hasn't made a diesel sub for 40 or 50 years. I think that a Dutch and a German consortium have suggested they work with an American company to build them for Egypt.
[Mcintyre:] Sources say the Pentagon is also recommending against selling Taiwan the new improved version of the Patriot missile defense system. [on camera]: The thinking seems to be that if the U.S. holds off on selling Taiwan Patriot missiles and Aegis destroyers, it may end up with more leverage. The not-so-subtle message to China's leaders is stop the threatening build up of missile, or the U.S. may sell Taiwan technology to neutralize them next time around. Jamie McIntyre, CNN, the Pentagon.
[Haynes:] The United States Energy Department predicts gasoline prices will remain relatively high this summer, but not quite as high as last year. The law of supply and demand has much to do with the gas price fluctuations and hikes. The world has a limited supply of fossil fuels, which include oil. And, as David George reports, the more scarce the supply, the higher the cost.
[David George, Cnn Correspondent:] The Energy Department expects gasoline to average a $1.49 a gallon across the country this summer, four cents lower than last year`s average of a $1.53. But and this is a significant but the government`s projections, quote: "presume no disruptions in gasoline production or distribution. "
[Mark Rodekohr, Energy Information Agency:] There is going to be supply tightness. Inventories are relatively low. That means there is some risk of short-term price increases.
[George:] In fact, the Energy Information Administration`s report states the case even more strongly. "The probability of a real gasoline price increase this summer," it says, "is high." Here`s why the DOE says gasoline stockpiles are at about nine billion barrels below last year`s levels, which were, in the Energy Department`s words, "sharply below the year before. " Refineries are expected to be running at 96 percent capacity this summer, the government says. A figure that doesn't leave much leeway if something goes wrong. Even if everything goes right, the DOE estimates U.S. domestic gasoline production will average 8.48 million barrels per day this summer while total, daily, average demand will increase to 8.59 million barrels. That`s a daily gasoline gap of about 100,000 barrels. The Energy Department says the U.S. will import an average of 230,000 barrels of gasoline per day this summer, giving OPEC and other international producers a continuing say in the cost of getting around America in the summertime. David George, CNN.
[Haynes:] So how much will you or your parents wind up paying for gasoline this summer? Well, you can calculate your costs with our fuel calculator at CNNfyi.com. Meantime, in "Science Desk Extra" today, we continue our look at energy. This time our focus is nuclear. Many, including some law makers on Capitol Hill, say there's no better time than the present to build more nuclear power plants. Kate Snow tells us why.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Inside the North Anna nuclear site an hour north of Richmond, the generators roar 24 hours a day. Two reactors produce enough electricity for a quarter million Virginia homes. Nationwide, nuclear plants provide roughly one-fifth of the country's power and supporters say that number could grow.
[Joe Colvin, Nuclear Energy Institute:] It's amazing what a little shortage of electricity will do for your view on what's needed for the future.
[Snow:] The nuclear industry is sensing a shift. For the first time in decades, politicians talk openly about using nuclear power to diversify America's energy supply.
[Colvin:] This is an industry today that is not the industry that it was 20 years ago. This is an industry today that is operating these plants safely, reliably, competitively, and at performance levels that exceed any other source of generation that we have in the United States.
[Snow:] On Capitol Hill, support for nuclear power is in part a response to constituents. Nuclear plants operate in 31 states.
[Sen. Bob Graham , Florida:] I think it has changed, and it's changed in part based on personal experience. One of the reasons that I have been a supporter of nuclear is because we've had such a good experience in Florida where we have three nuclear farms and they contribute about 20 percent of our total energy supply.
[Snow:] And with the Bush administration backing nuclear power, it's no longer as politically dangerous for members of Congress to be pro-nuclear. Vice President Cheney first endorsed the idea on a talk show. "If you want to do something about carbon dioxide emissions," he said, "then you ought to build nuclear power plants." It's been nearly 25 years since the last commercial reactor was ordered, 1978, one year before the accident at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island. That incident prompted fears about public safety. The industry was accused of financial mismanagement. Then in the mid-'80s, the Chernobyl disaster. In the '90s, nuclear power companies worked to soften their imagine, but critics say that's only part of the reason for nuclear energy's rebirth.
[David Lochbaum, Union Of Concerned Scientists:] If it's fought in the public domain, nuclear power will lose, so they have to fight it behind closed doors, where there's a better chance of winning
[Snow:] The top six operators run about half of the nation's 103 nuclear reactors. Those six contributed more than $1 million to federal candidates in the 2000 elections, about two-thirds of that to Republicans. Opponents of nuclear power contend the politics have changed but the danger hasn't.
[Paul Gunter, Nuclear Information & Resource Service:] Right now, we believe that we're in more danger with the nuclear power industry than in the earlier days when public concern focused on construction programs, because now is the time that the industry is seeking new bottom lines that pit profit margins against safety margins.
[Snow:] Industry officials insist the plants are safe, but they also have concerns.
[Unidentified Male:] This is a storage location for all the fuel that's been burned at North Anna since it went into operation in 1978.
[Snow:] Right now, plants store their own high-level radioactive waste, either in pools or in dry containers. [on camera]: The federal government was supposed to take control of commercial nuclear waste in 1998, but that didn't happen. One thing both pro- and anti-nuclear forces agree on, if there's the political will to build more nuclear reactors, there must also be the will to deal with the waste. Kate Snow, CNN, Capitol Hill.
[Haynes:] Next week the search for energy continues when we present Powering the Planet. We'll head to the Golden State to check out so-called alternative energy sources.
[Unidentified Male:] Renewable energy is much harder than people realize. The only thing holing renewable energy back right now are the economics of not having a sufficiently large market. It's not the technology itself.
[Haynes:] Also, remember our recent story about the fight over whether to drill for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge? Well, we'll dig a little deeper into that debate with experts on both sides of the issue and we'll find out how our use of fossil fuels like oil may be affecting our environment. A U.N. panel says the earth is heating up and people are at least partly to blame. Is this a problem for only future generations to worry about? No, according to experts. During this century, average temperatures are expected to rise by more than six degrees Fahrenheit. So what are you and your friends willing to do about it? Would you carpool or would you be willing to drive one of these things? We'll have answers and more questions, all coming up in Powering the Planet, airing on April 23. In "Worldview," technology and tradition get our attention today. We'll visit Russia to learn about a trendy new high tech game that's becoming all the rage. We'll also explore the role of nuns and a lifestyle that's challenging but fulfilling. And we'll head to China, where technology and tradition blend in a new setting the mission, to save movies from the past for the future. Movie making in Hong Kong has reached new heights with the release of "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon." The film stars Hong Kong actor Chow Yun-Fat and was shot on location in mainland China. The action packed martial arts romance ran away with a handful of Oscars at this year's Academy Awards, including best foreign language film. In our next report, we learn the lengths Hong Kong is going to preserve its greatest cinematic works.
[Matt Walsh, Cnn Correspondent:] To the untrained eye, this is just an old, black and white Hong Kong movie. But to film buffs "The Sable Cicada" is a classic housed at the territory`s newly opened Film Archive. More than 3,000 original cinema reels of Hong Kong made films are stored in the building. They range from the silent movies of the 1930s to modern martial arts epics. Hong Kong has made at least 10,000 movies since the early 1900s, so it does seem surprising that only now an archive has been set up.
[Cynthia Liu, Hong Kong Film Archive Director:] We should have been opened a long time ago. But I think there are, of course, historical reasons: The awareness of the government and also the film industry people of the importance of preservation is less in the past. But in the 80s, film researchers began to be aware that we are losing our films. Whenever we want churn out publications, whenever we want to look at some films made in the past, it is so difficult to find a print.
[Walsh:] But collecting films hasn't been easy. Either prints are lost, or found in such poor condition they`re unwatchable. The archive is well supported by the film industry. Most of the reels come from former producers and generous patrons. But there`s also another very important source of contribution.
[Liu:] In the past Hong Kong movies are distributed all over the world, especially to Chinatown theaters in the states. And the films are kept there. Although they don't give it air conditioning, but because of the weather in San Francisco, which is relatively dry, the film copies are kept very well.
[Walsh:] But for those who work at the archive, it`s not only films they`re preserving, but the life and times of Hong Kong.
[Liu:] We have compiled a 13 minutes video program with the first image, moving image of Hong Kong made in 1898, a year when the Edison camera man from the states came to Hong Kong to make some documentary. You could actually see the street scenes of Hong Kong, the government house of Hong Kong at that time. And, also, we had some documentaries made in the 30s. You could see some of our streets, the peak, the harbor back in the 30s.
[Walsh:] And for each movie they find, a moment of Hong Kong`s past, and a part of film history, is restored and kept forever. Matt Walsh, CNN.
[Rudi Bakhtiar, Co-host:] Next, in "Worldview," we ponder the pious life of nuns. Most Roman Catholic orders of nuns have different requirements for permanent membership, but they all require years of preparation. First, a woman begins a period of spiritual training called a novitiate. During this period, which could last several years, she becomes thoroughly acquainted with the obligations of religious life, after which she takes her first vows. A few years later, she takes her final vows, where she promises to give up possession of world goods, obey her superiors and remain unmarried. These vows may be simple vows or solemn vows. One who takes the solemn vow is then called a nun. But over the years, fewer and fewer women are seeking that way of life. Brian Cabell has the story.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] It certainly is not a life for everyone. It requires celibacy, a total devotion to God, a forsaking of most material goods.
[Meg Hunter:] Our society promotes a culture of power and money and sex. And being a sister is not any of those things.
[Cabell:] Easy to see why the number of nuns in the United States has declined precipitously in recent decades. There were almost 180,000 in 1965, only about 85,000 in 1998: a 53 percent decline, and still dropping. The church is now actively seeking aspiring nuns. Laypersons, for example, are invited to Sacred Heart Monastery in northern Alabama for weekend retreats. It's an opportunity for women to learn about monastic life, and maybe choose that life for themselves.
[C'helle Vann:] Well, at first, it was kind in agony because I you know, that biological urge to have children. And there are things that are attractive about having one person to be exclusive to and one person to be exclusive to you.
[Cabell:] And yet these women will tell you the urge to give up their outside lives can be overwhelming. Claudia Davis is a psychiatric nurse.
[Claudia Davis, Psychiatric Nurse:] And no matter how busy I stay, how many friendships I have, how much how many good things I do, there is a part of me that only is fulfilled in this environment.
[Nuns:] And lead us not into temptation.
[Cabell:] There are role models for the aspiring nuns. Young nuns, such as Sister Therese, who herself once had doubts about joining a monastery.
[Sister Therese Haydel, Benedictine Nun:] I grew up very scared any time the thought or the reality of becoming a sister came up, because of how people would react or respond.
[Cabell:] The declining number of nuns nationwide has had a dramatic impact on Catholic schools. Here at Sacred Heart School, for example, Sister Therese is the only nun who is a full-time faculty member. The other teachers are laypersons. [voice-over]: It gets back to numbers. There are fewer nuns today. And they are getting older average age: 69.
[Sister Karen Ann Lortscher, Benedictine Nun:] Over the centuries, there have been rise and falls rises and falls through religious life: times of boom years and times of decreased numbers. But it has endured.
[Cabell:] The religious life has endured, even amid social turmoil and changing values.
[Dorothy Boozer, Nun:] I think God is still calling the same number of people he has always called. But they don't take the time to sit and listen and hear that call and try to understand it.
[Cabell:] Brian Cabell CNN, Cullman, Alabama.
[Shelley Walcott, Co-host:] Our next story takes us to Russia, where we get a closer look at a piece of technology that the most Web savvy teens may now be trying to get their hands on. It's called Cybiko, a small handheld wireless contraption that looks a little like a transistor radio. But the Cybiko is far more sophisticated. It can do everything from send e-mail to play music and games. Steve Harrigan reports on why Cybiko is the latest rage everywhere except the place where it originated.
[Steve Harrigan, Cnn Correspondent:] This wireless Gizmo built in Taiwan and selling out in U.S. stores is a triumph of Russian design: It's called the Cybiko.
[Unidentified Youth:] If you're inside it goes through walls at up to, like, 150 feet and you can e-mail whoever is in your area you can talk to them directly and you can play with them directly.
[Harrigan:] The ultimate networking device for teens, each Cybiko talks to the next, passing messages over what can become a vast, informal ad hoc network.
[Unidentified Youth:] We know a few people who had them and we all decided to get it for our graduation.
[Harrigan:] Cybiko is the creation of David Yang, a 32-year-old Chinese-Armenian who now has a partnership with America Online, corporate parent of CNN. Yang says building a team to develop the game in the West would've taken two years and millions of dollars. In Moscow, he did it in six weeks.
[David Yang, Ceo, Cybiko:] Everybody who is in high tech in the IT business knows that the level of brains here.
[Harrigan:] Brains willing to work cheap. At least one new game for Cybiko is developed and released every day. Salaries for those who test the games are less than $1 an hour, but no one here is complaining.
[Unidentified Female:] You play interesting games all day, plus there's a lot of nice boys around.
[Harrigan:] Cybiko is not marketed in Russia. At $100 a piece, the machine is considered too expensive, even for those who designed it. Steve Harrigan, CNN, Moscow.
[Haynes:] In "Chronicle" today, the latest in our series of profiles on the National Security Agency. That's the U.S. government branch that identifies and deals with threats to the United States. Today, we meet a man with one of the most crucial jobs at the NSA. He's known simply as "the listener." David Ensor has more.
[David Ensor, Cnn Correspondent:] It could be any office building, but Everette Jordan's workplace is one of the most unusual in the country. He cannot take his office keys home. He must punch in a code to get them each morning. Everette Jordan is a spy, but not in the way you probably imagine. Everette Jordan listens.
[Everette Jordan, National Security Agency Linguist:] That particular style is called "rocking," called rocking on a word. And so you'll hear a word that you don't quite get, and you go back and forth over it a couple of times until you get it.
[Ensor:] He demonstrates with a Russian news broadcast, but the conversations he listens to, picked up by the NSA's worldwide array of powerful surveillance technology, could involve a Russian general, an Iraqi nuclear scientist or a terrorist.
[Jordan:] You have to listen for for irony. You have to listen for sarcasm, for tension. You have to listen for rhetorical statements being made. You also have to listen for humor.
[Ensor:] He is a gifted linguist: fluent in Russian, Spanish, French, German, Arabic. What does he listen for? First and foremost, for threats to the
[U.s:] Have you ever had the sense that you translated something that was of critical importance to U.S. national security?
[Jordan:] Absolutely. There have been many cases, and that's one of the fun things about being a linguist, knowing that the work that you have done has gone right downtown to the president of the United States.
[Ensor:] Have you ever found yourself listening to an American, a U.S. person, on a tape?
[Jordan:] No.
[Ensor:] And what do you do, what are the instructions you never have?
[Jordan:] No, I haven't.
[Ensor:] What are your instructions in the event you should find yourself listening to an American, a U.S. person on a tape?
[Jordan:] We have very strict protocols toward handling that those sorts of situations, and really we erase the thing, but we also report that thus and such has happened.
[Ensor:] To say NSA employees are security conscious is putting it mildly. Everette Jordan is the first NSA listener ever to give a television interview. Everywhere we filmed in the vast NSA complex, employees were warned. Most heeded the warning. [on camera]: Most of your colleagues would probably not be willing to give an interview like this.
[Jordan:] You got that right.
[Ensor:] Tell us why not. What would be the downside for them?
[Jordan:] One of the ways that we're very successful is that the work that we do is very quiet, and in some cases, actually in many cases, our work force has been indoctrinated not to draw attention to themselves, because in some cases they would have they would be travelling on official U.S. government business, and to sit here in front of a camera as an NSA employee is is something like killing one's career.
[Ensor:] But after appearing at job fairs and recruitment drives for the NSA, Everette Jordan is not living in the secret world anymore.
[Unidentified Female:] We have noticed a high-frequency hearing loss in the high decibels.
[Ensor:] The price of years of listening past the pops and screeches on surveillance tapes is frequent hearing checks, and some minor hearing loss, but Everette Jordan, though he hopes soon to move into management, says he wouldn't have wanted any other career up to this point: protecting the nation with his ears and his gift for languages. David Ensor, CNN, Fort Meade, Maryland.
[Haynes:] Tomorrow, more on the NSA with a look at how the agency screens potential employees and tries to protect itself against traitors. That's tomorrow, right here on CNN NEWSROOM. We'll see you then.
[Announcer:] CNN NEWSROOM, here for you 12 months a year. And it's free. Educators need to enroll once a year And it's easy. In the U.S., call 1-800-344-6219; outside the U.S., 44207-637-6912; or on the Internet at turnerlearning.com. CNN NEWSROOM is part of Cable in the Classroom, a service of the cable television industry and your local cable company. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] Bob Franken is up on Capitol Hill today. Bob, talk a little bit more to us, if you would, about the Tommy Thompson hearing and what we might expect out of that one today?
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] The hearings that are going to be conducted here are going to be dominated by Ronnie White. Now, you are asking, who is Ronnie White? Well, he has been a significant figure within the last year or so in the political career of John Ashcroft.
[Franken:] He's a Missouri state Supreme Court judge, the first African American on that court. But Ronnie White did not become a U.S. federal judge. And now he's the main witness for the forces resisting the John Ashcroft confirmation as U.S. attorney general. They say Ashcroft engaged in death penalty politics when he led the '99 fight against White's confirmation, a fight that drew charges of racism. Ashcroft insists his issue was not race but White's so-called "pro-defendant" judicial record. Then-Sen. Ashcroft focused in particular on the case of James Johnson, who went on a rampage in 1991, murdering four, including the wife of county Sheriff Kenny Jones. Ashcroft cited White's Supreme Court dissent against the death penalty for Johnson. White wrote that Johnson did not have adequate legal representation. But for Ashcroft, that dissent represented a fatal flaw in White. [Begin Video Clip, Oct. 5, 1999]
[Sen. John Ashcroft , Missouri:] We don't need judges with a tremendous bent toward criminal activity or with a bent toward excusing or providing second chances or opportunities for those who have been accused in those situations.
[Franken:] Now, civil right organizations say that what happened was that when John Ashcroft decided to take this on, he was actually trying to take advantage of the fact that there might be racial prejudice, which could contribute to his reelection chances. Ashcroft and his supporter will say, again, today that it nothing to do with that, it had to do with judicial philosophy. And of course, there are other hearings, Jeanne. There is that Interior Department confirmation hearing with Gale Norton. She is really kind of a flashpoint too for the environmentalist to say that her philosophies, her conservative environmental philosophies could cause serious problems to the water and air and of the United States Jeanne.
[Meserve:] Bob, let me ask you a little bit more about Ashcroft. Yesterday, a Democratic senator, Zell Miller, said he will be voting for Ashcroft. Does that make these hearings virtually irrelevant? Are there now 51 votes for confirmation?
[Franken:] Well, only if, in fact, all the Republicans would vote for Ashcroft, which is considered a good possibility. But today's hearing is really going to determine a lot. If, in fact, Ronnie White would touch some sort of nerve and would cause an uproar over Ashcroft's conduct, that could change the equation. Of course, so far, Ashcroft has been quite successful in taking all these incendiary charges against him and maintaining his calm and, quite frankly, not losing any ground at all.
[Meserve:] And Bob, let me ask you also about the Tommy Thompson hearings, and what's likely to come out of those.
[Franken:] Well, Tommy Thompson is not of those who is considered really one of the most contentious candidates for being on the Cabinet. But he has been a very controversial governor in Wisconsin. He has various social policies that have offended the various interest groups, who have positions on these. And he is going to be the person, when confirmed, who would administer most of the social policies, as the head of the massive Health and Human Services Department. So there is going to be quite a bit of controversy. But everybody expects he will be confirmed.
[Meserve:] OK, Bob Franken, on Capitol Hill, thanks so much.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Now let's bring in our White House correspondent, Kelly Wallace. Kelly, what are they saying at the White House now, several hours after the tape was released, and after some debate inside the administration, about whether this was a good idea?
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn Correspondent:] Judy, the sense we are getting from the administration is they definitely think it was a good idea, that the president, when he first saw the tape back on November 30, all indications were that as long as it wouldn't compromise intelligence gathering and as long as the tape was determined to be authentic, that it should be released to the American people. Certainly one goal, Judy, some U.S. officials saying, that putting this tape out could put to rest any doubts that might still exist in the Arab and Muslim world. And the administration definitely heartened by the fact that this tape does appear to be playing in the Arab and Muslim world. We know that the Al Jazeera network carried it live this morning at 11:00 a.m. Eastern time when it was played here in the United States. We also know that the Middle East Broadcasting Satellite Corporation and the Abu Dabi Satellite Corporation also playing portions of the tape. So, Arabs and Muslims around the world seeing the tape, looking at some reaction coming in. Some saying it shows that bin Laden is culpable in the attacks, others saying, one quote here, "it is a fabrication, the film was made to condemn Osama bin Laden." So, it is hard to say. But again, one goal certainly to try to put to rest any doubts that may still exist. And also, Judy, to strengthen the resolve in the United States for a war against terror that is likely to go on for some time. And as you have been watching throughout the day, looking at reaction of Americans, that certainly appears to be the case, that this tape definitely strengthening the resolve of Americans to support this war against terror Judy.
[Woodruff:] Kelly Wallace reporting from the White House. Thank you, Kelly. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] As students head back to school, Education Secretary Rod Paige heads across the country to sell the president's educational reform plan. Mr. Paige is in Atlanta today, and he is with us right now. We've got a couple of students...
[Rod Paige, Education Secretary:] Yes.
[Lin:] ... who have some questions for you in just a moment.
[Paige:] OK.
[Lin:] But first, let me welcome you.
[Paige:] Thank you. Thank you.
[Lin:] Earlier in the broadcast, we were talking about a federal appeals court decision regarding three Caucasian students who were suing to get into the University of Georgia potentially precedent setting here. And I'm just wondering from the administration standpoint, do you think that there is still a role for these point systems these racial preference systems to diversify student bodies across the country?
[Paige:] Well, as that works its way through the courts, what we would prefer are systems that provide access to all students. We know that this is a nation that's very diverse. And we need systems that represent what the nation looks like.
[Lin:] So is that a case for racial preferences a point system that might favor minority students who might not otherwise go to that university?
[Paige:] More deserving students, which would be preferred, and deserving students of all races.
[Lin:] We were talking with a "Time" magazine education reporter. And what she is saying is really the hot topic amongst parents out there, is this move towards charter schools. That there is this growing trend of parents in communities taking control of their child's education and sending them off creating schools in their own communities, where they dictate the curriculum. Do you think charter schools will then offer a choice to parents in communities that, say, a school voucher system does not?
[Paige:] Well, we think that expanded form of choice is a necessary condition for effective schooling in the United States of America. And charter schools provide a greater access for parents and an additional choice. We think it's a good thing and we support charter schools.
[Lin:] Over vouchers?
[Paige:] Well, we support charter schools. We support all kinds of choice mechanisms. And we don't necessarily have to have one or the other or this over that. We think that systems that provide parents with expanded opportunities parents need good information about what's going on in schooling, and they need alternatives ways to do different things. And so charters provide that. We support that.
[Lin:] You are certainly exercising the choices across the country.
[Paige:] Yes. I think it's a great trend.
[Lin:] In the meantime, we've got a trend here at CNN. We're raising the next journal the next journalists of tomorrow.
[Paige:] Oh, my goodness.
[Lin:] With us right next to you is Ashley Hayes.
[Paige:] Hi, Ashley.
[Ashley Hayes, Student:] Hi, how are you?
[Lin:] She is with the Cab School of the Arts.
[Paige:] Yes.
[Lin:] And Brittany Stevenson she is with Grady High School. And you have some questions for the secretary.
[Hayes:] Yes, Secretary, I was going to ask you under the there is no child is left behind plan with the national standards of accountability that you're talking about developing.
[Paige:] Yes.
[Hayes:] Do you also see a move towards a nationally standardized like curriculum to make sure that these learning objectives are accomplished?
[Paige:] Absolutely not. We think that this is a state-by-state issue. Each state should set its own standards about what students in that state should learn, know and be able to do as a result of education in that state. It is a state responsibility right now. And so we support local control and flexibility, and that conflicts with a national curriculum. We don't support that.
[Brittany Stevenson, Student:] Also, Mr. Secretary, I know in your no child left behind plan, you guys have a plan to implement a standardized test nationwide.
[Paige:] Yes.
[Stevenson:] Many kids do not like taking standardized tests. And what way could you get the kids more interested in taking the standardized test or make them feel more comfortable?
[Paige:] OK. Let's deal with the nationwide concept first. It's not actually nationwide. It is state by state. Each state would have its own test aligned to its own standards. And the purpose here is just to determine what has been achieved by each student relative to the standards. And so we want to know how each student is progressing. And that's the reason that's the reason. None of us like tests. You know, we don't like we have to take a test for our driver's license.
[Hayes:] Yes.
[Paige:] We have to take a test to get admitted to universities. But it's necessary to have that kind of information.
[Stevenson:] Also I wanted to know minorities don't perform as well on these types of standardized tests or testing in general. What is your position to make them or how are you going to go about making minorities perform better on these tests? Or what is your goals and aspirations to help us
[Paige:] Well, the information that we have, and we think it's some pretty good research, shows that minorities perform well when instruction is good and also when they take high quality courses, like you are taking. The AP courses advanced placement courses and taking advanced courses are in math and science and social studies and things like that. When the instruction is good, minorities perform very well. So what we want to do is enhance the quality of teaching.
[Hayes:] OK. And with the growing number of students who speak English as a second language in this country, and who also might not have parents at home who speak English, how can we make sure that they get an education that's equal to all of the other average English speaking American students?
[Paige:] Well, first of all, the goal of most of an instruction would be English fluency as early as possible. And so we want to provide them with the type of instruction and also the type of environment that promotes that. We like to see them also stay fluent in their native language, so they can have multiple languages. But our instruction is aimed at having English fluency be achieved as early as possible.
[Lin:] Brittany Stevenson, Ashley Hayes right now are in a test of time, unfortunately. Mr. Secretary...
[Paige:] They're going to be great, aren't they?
[Lin:] They got an A as far as I am concerned.
[Paige:] Yes.
[Lin:] Congratulations.
[Hayes:] Thank you.
[Stevenson:] Thank you.
[Lin:] Mr. Secretary, thanks for joining us this morning.
[Paige:] Thank you.
[Lin:] You're a good sport.
[Paige:] Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jason Carroll, Cnn Anchor:] Navy admirals still have not heard from Commander Scott Waddle as they continue their probe into last month's submarine collision off of Hawaii. While his attorney tries to cut a deal for a testimony testimonial immunity, crew members from the USS Greeneville continue to answer questions about exactly what happened on that fateful day. CNN's Martin Savidge has the details for us.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] The model of U.S. Navy attack submarine Greeneville was just three words repeated over and over by its commander, Scott Waddle: safety, efficiency, backup. Said one crewman on the witness stand, If you don't know these words, you're not on Greeneville. But the court of inquiry seems to be using the commander's own words as a checklist against him. On safety, testimonies revealed reputed orders from Waddle hurry the crew from safety procedures. Efficiency, the court's admirals again and again questioned the crew schedule that, in their eyes, appeared rife with last-minute substitutions and haphazard fixes. And backup, that, the admirals say, failed when an unqualified sonar operator was left unsupervised. When several of the crew said they had no idea how the accident could have happened, it prompted one admiral to say, quote, "I get a sense they're somewhat in denial." So far, the man who might have many of the answers, the sub's captain, isn't talking and won't, according to his attorney, unless the Navy grants Commander Waddle immunity. Thursday, Waddle's attorney gave the Navy a letter, outlining what issues he might address on the witness stand, saying Waddle's testimony was critical to determining the cause of the accident that left nine people missing. Quote, "without his testimony, there will be a number of facts that the court of inquiry can reach only by surmise or speculation," the letter said. The letter also touched on the international pressures surrounding the case, saying Waddle's testimony would, quote, "bring closure to the families of those lost on board the Ehime Maru."
[Charles Gittins, Scott Waddle's Attorney:] I think it's important because the families need to hear from him. It's important because this investigation can't possibly be complete without his testimony.
[Savidge:] Navy sources say Commander Waddle's testimony isn't essential to figuring out what went wrong. But any investigation without the words of the man in command could be publicly perceived as less than thorough, especially in Japan. Martin Savidge, CNN, Pearl Harbor.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Now a story of a mother who had a different idea of how her son needed to get an education. In November of last year, an American photojournalist familiar with Pakistan took her six-year-old son there with her. Deborah Copaken Kogan and her son Jacob personally delivered food, school supplies and money that Jacob's school had donated to Afghan refugee children. And now, a glimpse of the experiences that she captured with her home video camera.
[Unidentified Female:] Well, what's going on in the country right now?
[Unidentified Boy:] There's a war.
[Unidentified Female:] Are you confused?
[Unidentified Boy:] Yes.
[Unidentified Female:] It's been a lot of flying. Do you know how many hours of flying it's been so far?
[Unidentified Boy:] How?
[Unidentified Female:] We've been traveling for over 29 hours. And you haven't slept for most of that time. This man's trying to find us a taxi.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Unidentified Boy:] We hope that the paper and pen bring color and happiness to your class. We send you our best wishes.
[Unidentified Female:] We have papers. And these are composition books. Yes. And this is writing paper here. We want peace. We need your and world support. We hope that the world will help to bring peace. We don't want war anymore. Did you write that yourself?
[Unidentified Girl:] Yes.
[Unidentified Female:] Very nice. We can take this home with us? Yes. Tell me what you thought about this camp today?
[Unidentified Boy:] Sad.
[Unidentified Female:] Sad? Why was it sad? What was hard and sad about it?
[Unidentified Boy:] Well, it was sad because some of their faces were really dirty.
[Unidentified Female:] Right.
[Unidentified Boy:] And...
[Unidentified Female:] Why do you think that is?
[Unidentified Boy:] Because they don't have, like, showers.
[Unidentified Female:] Right. Did you see any running water there at all?
[Unidentified Boy:] No.
[Unidentified Female:] What do you think, huh? Jacob... Do you like this one?
[Unidentified Boy:] I don't know.
[Unidentified Female:] I can't see a thing. I can't see anything.
[Unidentified Boy:] I'm from Afghanistan.
[Unidentified Female:] From which city in Afghanistan.
[Unidentified Boy:] From Kabul.
[Unidentified Female:] And when did you come here? Do you know what year?
[Unidentified Boy:] Yes. Four years ago, I came here.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you hope to go back to your country?
[Unidentified Boy:] Yes. I want because all of us, we want to go to our country. It is our country. There I was more happy because it was our people. We had a lot of fun there.
[Unidentified Female:] Tell me about his name. It's Osama. Do you think you're ever going to forget that name?
[Unidentified Boy:] No.
[Unidentified Female:] What was your favorite day that we had?
[Unidentified Boy:] The fun part was giving all the supplies because, like, you know, fun.
[Unidentified Female:] Do you think peace will ever come to their country and they can go back home?
[Unidentified Boy:] Yes. Do you?
[Unidentified Female:] I hope so.
[Unidentified Boy:] I hope so. But it might not, but I hope so.
[Kagan:] Deborah Copaken Kogan is the author of "Shutterbabe: Adventures in Love and War" based on her professional experiences years before her trip to Pakistan with Jacob. And she joins us now from our New York bureau. Hello. It's great to get to talk to you.
[Deborah Copaken Kogan, Author, "shutterbabe":] Hi. How are you?
[Kagan:] I have got to tell you, I was on the plane to somewhere a couple of weeks ago and I actually read your piece in "O" magazine.
[Kogan:] Oh, really.
[Kagan:] And I had to think, you know, in this day and age when a lot of mothers don't even let their kids in America play in their front yard, here's this woman who hauls her kid off to Pakistan and that part of the world. A lot of people must have told you that you were nuts to do that.
[Kogan:] Yes. Well, a lot of people did tell me I was nuts, but then again, we were living in New York City right after September 11 and it felt nuts to live there, too. So, safety is a relative term and it certainly felt very relative at that moment and time. And I guess the emotion of everything that was going on and, plus, feeling unsafe in my own home. I just thought, well, let's go. Let's deliver this money ourselves.
[Kagan:] And we should explain. I don't know if we did a good enough job at that, but that Jacob's school was raising money to try to help Afghan children have school supplies and such and you just kind of figured, well, let's go deliver it.
[Kogan:] Right. Well, it became a little bit controversial in the school where some of the parents were saying why are we raising money for Afghani refugees? Isn't that like raising money for the enemy? And I just thought, having covered wars myself, my God, that is really the wrong way to think about war. The real victims of war, as always, are the women and the children, the society, the schools. Everything that's normal about a place becomes abnormal and we, you know, why not reach out and help them?
[Kagan:] And you never really know who you are going to meet along the way and not necessarily know the significance. I understand through your travel with Jacob you actually came across Danny Pearl.
[Kogan:] Yes. It was one of those odd circumstances where Jacob happened to be in the bathroom of the hotel in the men's room and he'd been in there for quite a while. So I grabbed the nearest person I could find and it was Danny Pearl. And I said can you just go in there and check on him, see if he's OK.
[Kagan:] Did you know him or you just recognized him as an American?
[Kogan:] No. He was just an American guy. Go in and check on my kid. And he came out and he said, oh, he's fine. He was laughing. And we had this strange 20-minute conversation about, oh yes, we're here covering the Pakistan side of the story, the safe side. Kabul had just fallen. All the journalists were running into Kabul. And here we were, the journalists staying in the hotel to do something safe. And the irony, of course, is crazy.
[Kagan:] So how long would that have been before Danny went missing?
[Kogan:] Well, that was November. I remember him telling me that his wife was three months pregnant at the time. So, he went missing in, when, January?
[Kagan:] Yes, January.
[Kogan:] So three months before hand.
[Kagan:] It must give you chills when you first heard the news and later how it ended.
[Kogan:] Yes. It doesn't make sense. This is not a man that was running to be a cowboy journalist at all.
[Kagan:] And certainly what you were trying to do, I don't imagine you trying to be a cowboy mother or cowboy journalist yourself. You had another thing in mind, not just to help the children, but I think to open your own child's eyes to the world.
[Kogan:] Absolutely. Absolutely. You know, growing up in America, we have borders on either side of us. We don't really know what's going on outside our borders as much as let's say a French kid or somebody growing up in Africa. We as a country can be very isolationist and I really have always thought as a mother, it's important that I show my child what's going on in the world, how he can help.
[Kagan:] And so you were trying to teach him. I'd be interested to know, since you were a photojournalist who has traveled this part of the world long before you became a mother, what did you learn through your child by revisiting?
[Kogan:] What I learned was, when I used to cover wars, I used to cover what we call the bang bang, running off and shooting the gunshots and the bombs going off. And really, what you focus on when you're with your child is the trauma that happens to mothers and children throughout the world in war zones. And you really focus on it and you really feel it because you are also a mother with a child. And going in there, mother to child, talking to other mothers, especially some of the women who had just gotten out of Afghanistan after the American bombing campaign started, women who lost their children, five-month-old babies on their way out because of the cold, one little girl who had lost her mother in the American bombing, you really start to feel what it's like for these kids.
[Kagan:] And what about Jacob? What's his next assignment?
[Kogan:] His next assignment is second grade.
[Kagan:] Cleaning his room.
[Kogan:] Yes. Exactly, cleaning his room.
[Kagan:] Very good. Which might be more difficult for some six- year-olds than making it to Pakistan.
[Kogan:] He did, indeed. He kept a journal. Well, you know, I yanked him out of school to do this so I thought, well, I better be a little bit of a teacher and make him do some sort of assignment every night.
[Kagan:] Very good. All right, cracking the whip even in Pakistan.
[Kogan:] Exactly.
[Kagan:] Deborah Copaken Kogan, thanks for joining us.
[Kogan:] Thank you so much. I really appreciate it, Daryn.
[Kagan:] I appreciate your story.

[Dalton Tanonaka, Cnn Anchor:] Three days of meetings are being held over Iraq's decision to stop oil exports to Turkey. Iraq cut the flow last month as part of a larger campaign to protest United Nations' economic sanctions. Turkey says it's lost $40 billion in trade revenue since those sanctions took place 11 years ago. CNN's Jane Arraf reports on what's at stake on the Habur border crossing in southeastern Turkey.
[Jane Arraf, Cnn Correspondent:] On this road, southeastern Turkey meets northern Iraq. The highway, a lifeline that binds the two neighbors. The trucks rumbling through this section of the ancient silk route are carrying crude oil from Iraq, hundreds of million of dollars a year of cut-rate oil in a deal between the Turkish and Iraqi governments. [on camera]: There are hundreds and hundreds of these trucks, waiting to cross the border to load up on Iraqi oil for Turkish Refineries. Ankara says the trade is as essential to Turkey as it is to Iraq. [voice-over]: The U.N. has no part of this oil trade. The supplies go directly to the Iraq oil fields to Turkish tankers through the Kurdish- controlled northern Iraq, where Kurdish authorities take a cut. The U.S. wants it stopped. But to do that, Turkey says, would be suicide. It says this region, where it has waged a war with Kurdish guerrillas for 15 years, is a breeding ground for unrest. Turkey says it has lost tens of billions of dollars in trade with Iraq since the Gulf War. Most of it came through this border. Sometimes the oil slows to a trickle, but on this day, the line of trucks to Iraq border stretches eight kilometers, five miles back. Ramazan Dahl has been waiting in line for five days. "If I had any other choice would I do this job," he asked. "We're coming here because we have to. If we didn't, we'd starve." It's 40 degree Celsius. There are now showers, and hardly any food or water. There is such a surplus of trucks, when they aren't waiting in line for the border, they are waiting for their turn to get into line. "There are 15,000 trucks in this area," says Marat Marin. "The most I can get from a trip is 150 million lira, and that's not enough." That's less than $150 dollars, the only income he'll get for a month. Alil Hajar, who's bringing diesel from Iraq, complains he has to pay almost a third of the $500 he'll get to the Turkish government. Turkey said there's no way the U.S. could compensate it for stopping the border trade. It says, in fact, it doesn't need to crackdown. The money goes into a Turkish-controlled account, which Iraq uses to buy supplies, like televisions and steel pipes, goods permitted, though not checked by the U.N. This Muslim country said it would be wrong to deprive fellow Muslims in Iraq of goods they need, and wrong to prevent people here from trying to make a living. Jane Arraf, CNN, the Habur border crossing in southeastern Turkey.

[Fredricka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] Now, on to the ongoing effort to stop terrorism worldwide, Operation Anaconda. In an apparent change in strategy, al Qaeda and Taliban forces are taking refuge deep inside the remote caves of eastern Afghanistan, posing a challenge to U.S. forces fighting from the ground. CNN's Bob Constantini joins us from the Pentagon with the latest on the military offensive there. Good evening.
[Bob Constantini, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Fredricka, they are hunkered down. That's the way it was described to us. Now, the weather in the Shahikat valley in eastern Afghanistan improved today, but a U.S. military spokesman says hold- out enemy forces have not been firing from the caves and tunnels there and in any other way really showing themselves.
[Constantini:] Frustrating attempts to hit the enemy harder, the Pentagon says al Qaeda and Taliban fighters are not moving back and forth in the open as they had done previously. It's unclear how many remain, but Afghan reinforcements were rushing to the scene to help fight the enemy forces lodged in mountain positions.
[James Woolsey, Former Cia Director:] It's curious and very interesting and in some ways fortuitous that we're able to take on a large number of these fighters, because they were flooding back into the area where we were already attacking.
[Constantini:] The effort to eliminate the hold-outs has now been slowed, with the U.S.-led forces preferring to wait out what Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld admits is a well-supplied enemy.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary:] I don't believe they are getting reinforcement or supplies. They do have a very large cache of supplies and weapons and ammunition inside those caves and tunnels. So they are not without ammunition or food or water.
[Constantini:] Military leaders who hoped Operation Anaconda would be over this weekend now suggest it could take many more days. On Monday, U.S. helicopters were hit by ground fight, and in ensuing battles, eight U.S. troops were killed. But since then, the American military has been more cautious, with no major casualties.
[Lt. Col. Ron Smith, Commanding Surgeon, Joint Task Force:] We have seen a lot of low-velocity injuries to their arms and their legs. That is probably the main thing that we've had.
[Constantini:] But the dangers of Afghanistan were in evidence once more to U.S. allies, as the bodies of three Danish and two German peacekeepers were sent to Germany. They were killed Wednesday trying to diffuse an old missile in Kabul, part of their peacekeeping duties. Afghan interim leader Hamid Karzai is asking for more international peacekeepers to stabilize his country. British forces lead that contingent now, and the Bush administration remains reluctant to commit U.S. troops to that long-term engagement Fredricka.
[Whitfield:] All right, thanks a lot, Bob. Now, early this morning, one Pentagon official said they weren't sure how many ants are in there unless they disturb the ant hill. This evening, are Pentagon officials saying anything more about whether they know just how many al Qaeda or Taliban forces there just might be bunkered down?
[Constantini:] They aren't exactly sure, but they still believe they may have at least 200, 300 forces inside there at this point. They can't say for certain, because again, they are not seeing them come in and out or run from cave to cave. They are hoping at this point to maybe flush them out, perhaps with the weather getting better, with some aerial assaults on those caves Fredricka.
[Whitfield:] All right, thanks very much, Bob Constantini from the Pentagon this evening. Anaconda

[Larry King:] Tonight, she was half of the world's most famous lesbian couple ever. Anne Heche, tabloid target, survivor of unspeakable shame, and she says she's not crazy anymore. And she's the guest next on LARRY KING LIVE. It's a great pleasure to welcome tonight a return visit. It's always nice to see her. Anne Heche, the author of one of the most honest, extraordinary, outspoken autobiographies ever written by anyone in show business, titled "Call Me Crazy." It's gotten tremendous reviews. It's going to climb to the best seller list. How did you pick that title?
[Anne Heche, Actress:] Well, thank you for that introduction.
[King:] No, I meant it, Anne. Now, how did you pick that?
[Heche:] Oh, I mean, for so many reasons. One, I wanted to beat everybody else to the punch. I certainly know what's been written about me in the press. I, although I was never diagnosed as being crazy, I went crazy. And I wanted to be honest about it and tell why and tell it how...
[King:] Why did you want to write the book?
[Heche:] Oh, wow, for a myriad of reasons. I mean, one, I wanted to tell my story and get to a place where I could move on from the darkness in my life and find light and joy and peace and balance in the now. So, that was mainly what it was for. And of course, in the journey of writing a book, there are a million reasons why I realized I was writing it. One, I wanted people to be able to understand that once you talk about something you can get on the other side of it.
[King:] To release it?
[Heche:] I believe so, yes. You know, you say you're helping other people or you want to help other people and you honestly come to terms with the fact that you're only helping yourself, but at the same time, I wanted to talk about stuff that people don't talk about so that maybe they would talk about it. So as I say, they don't maybe they could save themselves from going crazy.
[King:] So you get the feeling of helping people?
[Heche:] Well, I don't know.
[King:] You hope it does.
[Heche:] I have in the past I have in the past understood that in being honest about certain things in my life, I've helped other people be honest, because they think that it's OK when somebody else admits what they've been doing. You know, it helps other people. It certainly helps me when other people are honest about the journey in their life. It inspires me.
[King:] So when you write something like that, it's cathartic too.
[Heche:] Oh, heck, yes. And I mean, difficult; it's cathartic, sure. But you have to relive you know, I relived a lot of stuff writing this book so that I could say goodbye to it.
[King:] Were there times you said, "maybe I shouldn't be doing this?"
[Heche:] Yes. I wrote the book in Italy with my now fiancee. And...
[King:] He was with you while you were writing?
[Heche:] He was with me, yes. And I was we stayed in a 400- year old farm house, and sure there were times when I would come up from downstairs and say, "I don't know if I can do this. I don't know. This part is too difficult." There were times when, obviously the book is about the sexual abuse that I endured as a child and getting on the other side of that abuse. And there were some times when I relived things that I did not know I would be able to get out of if it weren't for Coley. I don't think I would have been able to.
[King:] Coley, your fiancee?
[Heche:] My fiancee, yes.
[King:] Are there things and you don't have to tell us that didn't get in?
[Heche:] Sure, oh, yes. There are some things that didn't get in because I didn't think they were anybody's business. I have had very public relationships in my life. I have had very unpublic relationships in my life. But I didn't think this was not a book about me telling the details and the nitty-gritties of my relationships that everybody wants to know about. It was about a journey of all of my relationships, the abusive patterns that I had in my life, the things that I encountered through different relationships and the journey of that.
[King:] We will get into a lot of it. Do you take offense that people think that this was published to time with Ellen DeGeneres' television show?
[Heche:] Oh, I don't even take offense because it's so ridiculous. The publishing world couldn't...
[King:] They decide when they're going to publish, right?
[Heche:] Yes, yes. I mean, I wrote the book very quickly, but and that's one of the reasons why it's coming out so soon. But we couldn't have known then when Ellen's show was coming out. And I want her show to do well. We're creative women. And she has so much, so much to give on television. I hope she does great. And I think she would think the same about me in this book. She knew I was writing this book, and she was very supportive of that.
[King:] And you think she would like reading it?
[Heche:] I think that she would like that I told my story finally.
[King:] Because you've kept it in all of these years?
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] Now, let me quote something just from the flap. "I believe that many people may think I went insane. I do not believe I am insane. I believe I went through a period of my life that was insane, and it lasted 31 years." Thirty-one year insanity trip?
[Heche:] Sure. And when, you know, always going along with sanity too. Thank God I had the sanity going right along side the insanity. But sure, 31 years until I could say goodbye to it.
[King:] Did you ever feel schizophrenic?
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] Were you treated?
[Heche:] No, I never told anybody. I was in therapy for years and I never told anybody.
[King:] Why?
[Heche:] I was a perfect hider. I was raised to hide. I was raised to pretend. I was raised to always tell everybody that everything was fine, and even though I was in therapy for years I never told anybody that I had another personality. I never told anybody that I heard voices and spoke to God. I never told anybody any of it. I thought it would have to be something I would have to keep secret forever.
[King:] And even in therapy it didn't make you come out with it?
[Heche:] No.
[King:] Did the therapists ever say, "It would be good to let this out to people?"
[Heche:] The therapists didn't know. The therapists knew about my abuse. The therapists knew about my family history. The therapists knew about the shame I was enduring. The therapists knew about all the different things I was going through to get the shame out of me, but the therapists never knew to the extent of the world that I created to get out of the shame of my abuse.
[King:] We're going to cover a lot of bases with Anne Heche. This is an extraordinary book, "Call Me Crazy." Don't go away. [Begin Video Clip, "six Days Seven Nights"]
[Heche:] Oh my God, now what?
[Harrison Ford, Actor:] We go on three. One, two...
[Heche:] I can't! You go! Save yourself!
[Ford:] I'm sorry.
[Heche:] For kissing me?
[Ford:] No. For this.
[Ellen Degeneres, Actress:] I don't know if you've heard of her, but she's an up-and-commer, and this is her big break. I hope she does well. Anne Heche, ladies and gentlemen!
[King:] We're back with Anne Heche. She said Ellen DeGeneres is just part of this book doesn't come in until page 210. So this is told autobiographically and chronologically, right? You take us through?
[Heche:] Yes, yes, I take you through my life definitely.
[King:] Born and raised where?
[Heche:] All over the place, but born in Aurora, Ohio.
[King:] Why did you move around so much?
[Heche:] My dad well, we were told we were moving for my dad's job. But we I don't know we were moving we moved to go after my father. Wherever he went, we kind of went.
[King:] What did he do?
[Heche:] Well, he didn't really do much of anything, but we only discovered that after we moved to wherever it was that he was always going to.
[King:] What was his source of income?
[Heche:] He said well, he was a choir director. But I don't think me made much on that a week. He said that he was involved in a business of gas and oil. And he said that until the day he died. But he never was involved in the business of gas and oil ever.
[King:] Mother loved him?
[Heche:] I believe she loved him, sure. Sure, she stayed with him. Would not divorce him and waited until he died, and that was a marriage of 26 years.
[King:] And you were the youngest of four?
[Heche:] Four, yes.
[King:] How early on were you abused?
[Heche:] I believe before I could speak.
[King:] You would trace it back that far? What's your earliest memory?
[Heche:] I have physical memories of crying out for something and not being able to form words. And the way that I remember my abuse was through well, through different sessions of therapy. But I didn't believe anything until I was 18 years old, except that I could fly down the steps. And it was the one memory I had. And when I showed up to therapy for the first time, I said, "I remember that I can fly down the steps. And if you don't believe that I did for real, and it wasn't in my mind, then you shouldn't be my therapist." And from that point on, I started to go into my life and discover what had really happened.
[King:] So when you think back, was there pain, or have you forgotten it?
[Heche:] I relived the pain. I certainly haven't forgotten it. I think as a child you protect yourself. I protected myself by creating another world. I think other children do different things.
[King:] Did that lead to you being an actress?
[Heche:] I think everything in my childhood led me to being an actress.
[King:] But I mean, being other people, as a desire to want to be someone else?
[Heche:] Oh, heck, yes. I not only wanted to leave the planet, I wanted to be anything other than who I was. And so did my family. We all wanted to we were poor and we wanted to be rich. We were, you know, homeless and we pretended we had a home. We were...
[King:] Pretenders?
[Heche:] ... great pretenders.
[King:] What does a girl make of it it's hard to ask when a father is abusing her? She loves her father, right?
[Heche:] Well, I think every girl wants her father's love, yes.
[King:] Daddy's little daughter. Is this an extension of love? How does a girl 8, 9, 10, 11 view that?
[Heche:] I think as love. I think that's the only way you can view the abuse. And that's part of what I think makes you crazy, because you're receiving abuse and being told that it's love. And that complexity of thought is insane making. You try to make it right in every way that you can, because you know that it's not right.
[King:] Have you talked to any of your sisters about it?
[Heche:] I have as an adult, very little, but I have. I don't know if I ever did as a kid. I don't remember ever.
[King:] Your mother?
[Heche:] As an adult. I talked to my mother in my mid-20s.
[King:] Is she still living?
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] How is she handling all of this? Is she happy you wrote the book?
[Heche:] She was very encouraging of me writing the book. Is she happy about it? No, I would not say that my mother is happy about it. I don't think any mother would be happy about it.
[King:] But she encouraged you to write it?
[Heche:] She encouraged me to write it, yes.
[King:] It says a lot about her.
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] Anne Heche is our guest. The book is "Call Me Crazy." This is LARRY KING LIVE. Don't go away. We're back with Anne Heche, actress, writer, director, author of "Call Me Crazy." As one would say, what a life. How did you break away from that, by the way?
[Heche:] What?
[King:] That where did you had to break into acting somewhere. You had to leave this to sometime, to go somewhere.
[Heche:] I had to leave my family, you mean?
[King:] Yes.
[Heche:] I finally I started working in dinner theater when I was 12 years old to make money for the family, and that's how I made my break into oh, the whole world of understanding that pretending could make you money. And that was when I was 12. But I left when I was after I graduated when I was 17 and I was offered a job on a soap opera after I was seen in a high school play in Chicago.
[King:] How did you react to your father's death?
[Heche:] Oh, God. I think my initial response was that I was heartbroken. There was a lot...
[King:] You were how old?
[Heche:] I was 13. There was a lot of mixed emotion around my father at that time. We had just found out that he had AIDS. He had been lying about it for a couple of years. Of course, thinking that he had AIDS made the entire family think if they had AIDS, because in '83 AIDS whether or not anybody knew about the abuse, that wasn't the point. In AIDS, you could from touch, you could get it if somebody kissed you. You could get it you know. There was so much fear around his death. There was so much shame around his death. But of course, there was sorrow and there was confusion. And there was...
[King:] What city were you in then?
[Heche:] New Jersey. We lived in Ocean City, New Jersey right down the shore from Atlantic City at that point.
[King:] And it was known he died of AIDS? The family knew it was AIDS? The people around knew...
[Heche:] Well, we were told he never admitted it. He was in complete denial until the day he died.
[King:] Do you think he got it from a gay relationship, or from a relationship with transfusion or what? In 1983, who knew.
[Heche:] Oh, I know we know he got it from his gay relationships. Absolutely. I don't think it was just one. He was a very promiscuous man, and we knew his lifestyle then.
[King:] With men and women?
[Heche:] I think my father was a sexual addict. I think he saw everybody as a sexual being. But I think at that time he was living a very flamboyant homosexual lifestyle. You know, at that time there were bath houses where the whole trick was how many can you do a night. You know, there is no question of what he was doing at that time.
[King:] Did you know he was going to die?
[Heche:] Oh sure. I mean, a year before he died, he was collapsing on the sidewalk and saying, "I'll be right back. It's only hepatitis, don't worry." You know, he was withering and...
[King:] Back to how you felt. You said it was confusing. You felt loss?
[Heche:] Sure, I felt loss, sure.
[King:] Didn't you have anger, too?
[Heche:] Anger didn't come until years later. Anger and the understanding that I can be angry and embrace my feelings of "screw you, dad." You know, what a jerk. That stuff was not what I felt when I was 13. I, one, did not acknowledge what had happened to me when I was 13. I didn't know what had happened to me. Our family life was very confusing on very many levels, and the sexual abuse was not in the priority of things to be dealing with. We were trying to pay our rent. You know, we were trying to understand what AIDS was. We had a whole bunch of other stuff that we had to worry about.
[King:] But you said you hid a lot of things. Would the neighbors have said, "There goes a fine family?"
[Heche:] Oh, absolutely.
[King:] In other words, you were proper and...
[Heche:] Oh, we were proper. We looked nice. We always were sweet to everybody. Nothing was ever wrong with us. We sang in church on Sunday mornings. We were blonde-haired and blue-eyed and sweet and happy and friendly and pretended we had money. We were everything that anybody wanted to be. We were big fat liars, though. We pretended well.
[King:] Did the parents fight a lot?
[Heche:] No, I can't say they did. Near the end, they did. We had moved in with another family when we were finally kicked out of our last house. And sure, there was a lot of fighting and screaming then. But my mother was a good Christian woman. She did not confront her husband. She didn't ask questions. She didn't scream. She didn't yell. It was not that until the end, you know, until the last couple of years.
[King:] What do you think this dysfunctional upbringing did to you?
[Heche:] It made it made me a writer.
[King:] And all of the things it involved, there has been some pluses out of it. I mean, how people rebound is amazing.
[Heche:] I always think there are pluses from what you live through. I mean, that's been a conscious place in my life.
[King:] The downs that come up.
[Heche:] Yes, if you can look at them as that. I've always wanted to heal my life. I always wanted to see the good side of life. I've always wanted to see the good in everything that happened to me. And I am I could not be happier with who I am right now. I couldn't be happier with what I've been able to accomplish in my life. There are I mean...
[King:] I mean, you are a successful person...
[Heche:] Well, thanks.
[King:] ... out of a very unsuccessful upbringing.
[Heche:] Yes, and maybe that's part of it. May be that's how I learned "Oh, I don't want to do that. Well, golly, I don't want to do that. Well, gee whiz, I hope I don't do that."
[King:] I'm going to make it.
[Heche:] I am going to make it, and I'm going to make it to my vision of what love is. And I'm going to it's not only about success, it's about I'm going to get to the place where I know there is something better than this.
[King:] And you're at that place now.
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] And we will ask about that. Anne Heche is our guest. Her book is "Call Me Crazy." We will be right back. [Begin Video Clip, "beyond Suspicion"]
[Unidentified Actor:] Aaagh!
[Heche:] Oops. Listen, it was really nice to meet you and I will tell Augie that you dropped by.
[Unidentified Actor:] Well, you white trash piece of
[Heche:] Mr. Mason, don't make me ask again please.
[King:] You also had, as you described when you told your mother about your childhood and the like, an encounter with God. You describe it as that. Explain. Did you find religion?
[Heche:] No, as a matter of fact I went through a big period of my life where I rejected religion. I was raised in a very, very strict Baptist upbringing that changed into Methodist. It changed into anything very devout, Christian, always. And what that, I think translated, to me as, as an adult well, my mom pretty much said it, "I'm here to love Jesus and then I'm going to get into heaven." And my whole journey, whether I suffer or don't suffer or whatever it is, my journey is about getting into heaven. So because of how what my relationship was with my mother, which was not a loving relationship, I set about my life to become Jesus, I think. She loved it that Jesus performed miracles and Jesus was the son of God and Jesus was everything that's loving. And in the meantime, I'm getting raped by my father and she's doing nothing about it. I wanted to become that thing that she loved. And I set about my life to do it, unconsciously, however that happens and however those things form in your life, I ended up in the streets of New York one day crashing to the ground, literally felt like something knocked me over. And all of a sudden I was talking to God and being told by God that I was his daughter. There was no pretending. There was not this is my imagination. I was not on drugs. I hadn't had a drink. It was the middle of the day and I'm on the sidewalk having a conversation with God, going, "oh, my whole life is worth it. See, I am a child of God." I became everything that my mother always said she loved. And set about then for the next five years trying to understand what that was, all at the same time, thinking I was absolutely crazy.
[King:] Are you a believer now?
[Heche:] In what?
[King:] God.
[Heche:] That means defining God I think a little bit more.
[King:] I mean do you think there is something larger that us?
[Heche:] I think there's a consciousness that we all a part of, whereas, two is greater than one and together that energy is bigger than what I can be.
[King:] What do you think that event was that day in New York then, in retrospect?
[Heche:] Well, it wasn't only one day. It was five years of my life.
[King:] What it began...
[Heche:] It began that day, do I know what I have no idea. That's why I say, call me crazy. Is it crazy? I don't know. It is the thing that happened in my life that I believe is responsible for my survival of my life. And if it didn't happen and I didn't believe that I was loved, I might have gone a different route and not been here anymore. I think that I created another world of love for myself to survive my abuse.
[King:] So you were living two lives?
[Heche:] Absolutely.
[King:] One life in here and another life that is schizophrenic, is it not? Well, without the unless you didn't have it whacko dreams and didn't know where you were.
[Heche:] Unless I...
[King:] You always knew where you were, right?
[Heche:] Always. I was always very conscious. I was Anne the actress and...
[King:] So I could be with you; we could be having we could be having dinner and you could be totally somewhere else?
[Heche:] Oh, now. I would always be exactly present.
[King:] But where was the other part of you?
[Heche:] Right here. I was always here, both of me, all at the same time. Always, that's why nobody ever knew. I didn't need to tell you that I was this child of God, here springs love.
[King:] But were you thinking I am this child of God, here springs love?
[Heche:] Absolutely. It was who I believed I was. What?
[King:] No. Yes, I am the child of God, yes, I will haves tomato sauce?
[Heche:] That's right.
[King:] So it all converged at once?
[Heche:] Yes, yes.
[King:] And you never told a therapist this?
[Heche:] No. They would have thought I was crazy and then what would happen? Then I would be locked up and couldn't have my career.
[King:] They would have helped you though, don't you think. A good therapist is not going to turn you in for what? You're not...
[Heche:] I was being helped in therapy. I was healing my abuse in therapy. So I felt like I was being helped on the level that I needed to be helped on. And when that was ready to heal, I was ready to say goodbye to the fantasy world I had created. They were very merged. What I didn't now is that in therapy I was healing the very thing that created the world that I was escaping to. So it all did work out.
[King:] Did you eve feel it would affect you as an actress, getting better? That you may not be able to pretend as well, anymore?
[Heche:] No. My life was always a priority to me beyond my career, even though I was a workaholic and loved my career. I knew I wanted to heal my life. It's the thing that I was committed to from the time I was 18.
[King:] So it had no effect on what you did?
[Heche:] As a matter of fact, I could tell I was getting better.
[King:] We will pick up on that and lots more with Anne Heche. The book is "Call Me Crazy." This is LARRY KING LIVE. Don't go away. We're back with Anne Heche, actress, writer, director, author of "Call Me Crazy." Did you ever come close to marriage?
[Heche:] Sure. I was 20 years old. I had moved in with a guy when I was 18. He was 11 years old than me. He asked me to marry him when I was 20. I came close to marriage a lot of times. Sure, because I turned myself into whatever anybody wanted. Why wouldn't they want to marry me?
[King:] Now you...
[Heche:] I had become the thing!
[King:] You were the Stepford wife.
[Heche:] I was. I was. And yet, it was in any form that it was. It wasn't that I was the Stepford wife, I was whatever wife you wanted. If you wanted to take me on the road because you were in a great band and I I would be the groupie. If you were an intellectual and you wanted to write books, I would be a poet. I would turn all of myself into whatever you wanted.
[King:] When you started to be a movie star, and you were dating. And now you're still this way, right?
[Heche:] Yes, yes, sure.
[King:] Did you get a quote...
[Heche:] I mean, hopefully I'm getting better as the years are going on, and am healing myself.
[King:] Did you get a reputation around town as...
[Heche:] No, because I wasn't promiscuous. It wasn't that. I wasn't a promiscuous girl. I was here's the other side of that. The other side is not only will I make myself what you want, I will be committed to you until the day I die.
[King:] You will be monogamous?
[Heche:] Yes, I was monogamous.
[King:] You were weird.
[Heche:] Thanks.
[King:] Was Steve Martin a serious relationship?
[Heche:] Absolutely, absolutely. Oh, Steve was lovely. Steve was intellectual. Steve was funny. Steve was...
[King:] Bright.
[Heche:] I mean, bright, yes.
[King:] Why didn't you get married?
[Heche:] Because I knew that it wasn't right, because I was...
[King:] So you broke that one off too?
[Heche:] I was compartments of me. I that was not his fault. But I was compartments of Anne. I was not ready at 24 years old to be Mrs. Steve Martin. But I loved the relationship. But I wasn't me at all. And in the meantime, I'm thinking I'm somebody else and dealing with the abuse of my life. And marriage, it just it was not right.
[King:] Have you remained friends with him?
[Heche:] No, unfortunately not.
[King:] Do you think he will be shocked by this book?
[Heche:] Shocked about the subject matter? Yes.
[King:] You never revealed this to him, did you?
[Heche:] Steve knew Steve was actually a huge encourager of my writing. He sat me down at a computer and he said, "You know what, your family stories need to come out." And the first movie I ever wrote with Steve was called "Between The Sheets." And it was about incest and he knew. He knew, and encouraged me to...
[King:] Why do you not remain friendly?
[Heche:] I don't know. I think it's very difficult when one person leaves somebody and the person being left doesn't want to be left?
[King:] You left him?
[Heche:] Yes. And it was...
[King:] Do you ever think that as a mistake?
[Heche:] No.
[King:] When you first met Ellen and that started, was that strange to you? Was that your first relationship other than men?
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] Was that strange to you?
[Heche:] No.
[King:] You're an adult.
[Heche:] No, no, you have to...
[King:] And suddenly you're feeling affection for someone you of a gender you never felt affection for?
[Heche:] See, that was never a big deal to me. And nobody will ever understand that. Now, you have to understand...
[King:] I will try.
[Heche:] ... hopefully, I'm going to OK, now I'm going to therapy and I'm growing up and I'm healing my life. So all of this stuff is hopefully getting better and getting better. As you go through different relationships you find people who are mirroring back different things that you need and shape your life and form you, even though I always think you're meeting your parents. But some of things that you do in relationships are pick somebody who is different than the last person. At least they're different, and then you think that's a great thing. I dated an alcoholic, then I was dating somebody in AA. And I thought, "Well, they've got to be different. And that's not the case you know, I didn't date men and then I was with a woman and think, "oh, well that's going to be perfect." But there were, I think, there are some elements to that. The most different I could find is always what I was looking for. And in Ellen, there was a human being that was being open about who they were, sharing it with the world, being brave, being strong in who they were as a human being. Now, I had been raised with a big fat liar who destroyed his family because he was afraid to be who he was, in my opinion. So here I met somebody who was glorious in their ability to be who they were and to tell the world. And I found that to be very attractive. It was not, "oh, dear, a woman." It's "Oh, my God, there's a human being who is telling the truth." And that was what my journey was too.
[King:] Were you surprised?
[Heche:] About what?
[King:] About finding this?
[Heche:] In the world, at that time?
[King:] In this human being at this time?
[Heche:] I was surprised that a human being like that existed. It to me was my dream come true. Right back with Anne Heche, the author of "Call Me Crazy." Call me crazy if this book isn't a major best seller. Don't go away.
[Unidentified Male:] Stick around, Ellen, stick around!
[Begin Video Clip, March 4, 2000) Heche:] Ellen is to me the embodiment of both male and female. I think that's what our why our energies connected so quickly and so easily, because I've always felt in my being that I'm both male and female, maybe a little more maybe a little more balanced out than most.
[King:] We're back with Anne Heche. When you were on this program last time with Ellen and Sharon Stone, you did that wonderful movie together for HBO...
[Heche:] Thank you.
[King:] ... I asked you if you missed men, if you missed heterosexual love. And you said, "No, because it's all in Ellen."
[Heche:] Right.
[King:] What changed?
[Heche:] What changed?
[King:] Yes, what changed?
[Heche:] Well, Ellen and I fell out of love. And I broke up with her.
[King:] You are the breaker-upper, aren't you?
[Heche:] Well, I don't think of...
[King:] Did anyone ever drop you?
[Heche:] No, and I hope it doesn't happen.
[King:] What was falling out of love like?
[Heche:] Heart-breaking and miserable and sad and confusing and upsetting. And what was it like for me? Let's see. I had withered myself into nothing. I was 90 pounds. And until I got the wakeup call, I was standing outside, fell out of my face, broke my nose and couldn't remember my name, but could remember that I had a girlfriend named Ellen DeGeneres. I was lost I had diminished myself...
[King:] What happened?
[Heche:] ... in that relationship.
[King:] Why?
[Heche:] Why?
[King:] I mean, you were so happy, and again, maybe to the outer world. But anyone who saw you two together, had to say this was real.
[Heche:] Yes, and it was. And there were other parts of it that the world didn't see. And those things were sad and hurtful and upsetting.
[King:] Why was it so hard to end it?
[Heche:] Because I loved her, because she loved me.
[King:] But you said you were falling out of love?
[Heche:] Well, I think that's what happens when you are not getting your needs met in a relationship, and you're trying to get your needs met and it's not happening. And you're neglecting yourself and you're neglecting your needs.
[King:] Did that send you spiraling back?
[Heche:] Did what the need for...
[King:] The breakup of that relationship, the confusion over why this happened?
[Heche:] Did it send me spiraling back to what? It brought me here is me, OK. And I went, "I better pay attention to what's going on with me. I'm hiding." I'm hiding. I was 90 pounds and flat on the ground.
[King:] How did she take it?
[Heche:] Well, from the time I was flat on the ground, I think she was scared, knew more than she wanted to know about what I had been hiding. Ellen was aware of my insanity and aware of my abuse, aware that I had been hiding it from the world, and that it was eating me up. In order to keep all of that hidden, I had to do a lot of other hiding too. I stopped acting. I moved out of L.A. I became what I thought was the perfect wife. I wrote a movie for my wife. I directed my wife.
[King:] You appeared here and loved it.
[Heche:] I appeared here and every single thing that I did and this is what's so hard I did because I loved her. All of me and all of that could not exist in the same relationship.
[King:] Were you, according to the "Observer," the villain of this? I mean did the tabloids and others make...
[Heche:] ... the "Observer."
[King:] Did they make it that you left her, you were the...
[Heche:] Well, I did leave her.
[King:] So, did you...
[Heche:] Does that make me the villain?
[King:] Yes, did...
[Heche:] I don't know. I was also trying to take care of myself and understand that I needed to make choices to make myself happy. And sometimes that difficult. But when you're in a relationship that doesn't work, I was not about to stay in a relationship that felt abusive.
[King:] What now has come to this turning point? We met your fiancee. Seems like a great guy.
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] How did all of this come about coming from out of that to where you are now?
[Heche:] Well, I had to put to rest, as I say, my insanity. I had to see it for what it was. I created another world for myself to exist in, a fantasy world, where there was only love. And that was the world I had created to survive my abuse, and I needed to say goodbye to that world.
[King:] How did you do it?
[Heche:] Well, I drove to the desert, still hearing voices of God, thought that I was going to find love on the planet that I was from. And the planet that I was from that was all love was called the Fourth Dimension. And I went to get on my space ship and go there. And once I got there...
[King:] The spaceship in your head?
[Heche:] Well, I didn't think it was in my head. I thought it was landing and I thought I was going to get on it. And I went to find it. No kidding.
[King:] A real spaceship?
[Heche:] Well, I thought so, yes. Until I didn't think so, until I realized it was all in my head. And I looked at it and I looked at the life I had created for myself...
[King:] Out in the desert?
[Heche:] Out in the desert.
[King:] By yourself?
[Heche:] I thought I went to the ends of the earth. I truly, truly went to the ends of the earth, yes, by myself. And I looked at this world, this Fourth Dimension, this world of love and I looked at this world I had created for me, Anne Heche, the actress, the person who wanted to be here, the person who wanted to be on this earth, the person who believed in love, who could trust that love was here, who could trust that I wasn't going to be abused anymore, that I was going to take care of myself. And I said thank you to that world, thank you for helping me survive my abuse goodbye; I'm ready to be here now.
[King:] And then drove back.
[Heche:] And then I spent a night in the hospital. My friends came to pick me up and I drove back.
[King:] Admitted yourself to the hospital?
[Heche:] Oh, no, the cops took me to the hospital. I don't want to go into all of the details. You've got to read the book...
[King:] No, but they yes.
[Heche:] ... did I voluntarily go to the hospital? No, I went to the hospital thinking it was stopping point on my way to my spaceship. No, I went crazy.
[King:] This is loony bin time, right?
[Heche:] Sure, to anybody looking. It made perfect sense to me.
[King:] But yet you worked yourself out of it.
[Heche:] Yes. I needed to. You always have to choose, I think, your sanity.
[King:] We will be right back with Anne Heche. Don't go away. [Begin Video Clip, "volcano"]
[Tommy Lee Jones, Actor:] All right, we know that stuff is lava. What do I do next?
[Heche:] You have got to evacuate the West side. This thing is going to burn throughout the city until it hits the ocean.
[Jones:] The West side, there is a million people.
[Heche:] There are going to be a million dead or homeless people if we don't evacuate. This is going to destroy everything it touches.
[Jones:] All right, he is still breathing. Can you grab this arm?
[Heche:] Sure.
[Jones:] Grab that right there. All right, let's get this guy out of here.
[King:] We're back with Anne Heche. Before going to the hospital, you went to some family home, right, somebody's home.
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] Did you know them?
[Heche:] No.
[King:] You just knocked on the door?
[Heche:] Well, it's much more complicated than that. But I don't know if I want to tell you all of that. There are certain things that ended up in the papers...
[King:] You don't have to. This ain't court.
[Heche:] It's not that. It's just that there one, I can't explain all of what happened in Fresno unless you know the story that leads up to it. But there were steps along each thing that happened in Fresno that were things I had to live through in order to see the connection to my fantasy world. And all of those things were specific to things that had happened in my childhood.
[King:] Were you at the end of the ropes then?
[Heche:] I think that I was at the bitter, bitter end. I was in place where I was ready to leave this planet on my spaceship.
[King:] Did you turn to drugs at all?
[Heche:] Did I turn to drugs that day?
[King:] Yes, or around that time?
[Heche:] Yes. I took a hit of ecstasy after I woke up in the morning, was told to get in my car again, by God, in my opinion who I call Chunas. I did not call God.
[King:] Called what?
[Heche:] Chunas, which was my word for God, that was the joining of the female and male in God. OK. And I spoke to Chunas all of the time for five years. We shared a language, the whole thing. I woke up in the morning. I was told to get in the car and go to the desert. Turn here, turn here, here you're going. I had no idea where I was going. And I was told along the way very many different things. One of those things when I got out of my car was take a hit of ecstasy. This is the thing that gets you on the ship. There is no shame here. There is no shame, there is no shame, there is no shame. In my world, there was no shame.
[King:] What did it do for you, if anything?
[Heche:] Nothing. I was so far gone by that point, you know, by the time i took the pill, I was waiting for my spaceship. So you can imagine what it did for me was absolutely zero, except that I didn't have to live in shame. And that was the message of everything I had created for myself.
[King:] It was also a crazy time for you when you were doing "Donnie Brasco," right?
[Heche:] Well, when I was doing "Donnie Brasco" was when I was finished shooting "Donnie Brasco" was when I first had my conversation with God on the sidewalk. So it was from that time to Fresno of last year which is almost a year to date, that I was living in this dual world.
[King:] How did you meet your fiancee? And what part does he play in Anne Heche today?
[Heche:] I say in my book that Coley met me on the other side. The last part of my book is called "Love the Other Side." I needed to get rid of the insanity to get sane, and Coley met me on the sane side.
[King:] How did you meet him?
[Heche:] I hired Coley to be a cameraman for the documentary that I was shooting on Ellen last year.
[King:] The documentary, was that eventually shown?
[Heche:] No, it was I left as soon as we got off the road. And I left Ellen as soon as we got off the road...
[King:] It was never finished?
[Heche:] I know it has turned into nothing, right.
[King:] But Coley was a cameraman?
[Heche:] Coley was a cameraman and an editor.
[King:] You interviewed many cameramen and hired him?
[Heche:] I interviewed different people for different jobs. He was recommended by the producer and he was great at what he did. And he had shot a documentary that I looked at where he interviewed people beautifully, and I needed somebody who could talk to people on the road. He shot it beautifully, which was also what I needed, and also was an editor. So I liked everything about his talent and brought him on the road.
[King:] When did it get to more than that?
[Heche:] A month after Fresno.
[King:] What happened?
[Heche:] I called Coley to ask him if he wanted to go to a play with me? I had lived in a very isolated world for three-and-a-half years. And after I broke up with Ellen I was ready to be in the world. I was so alive. I wanted to see everything. I wanted to go to concerts. I wanted to go to plays. I wanted to go. I wanted to go to restaurants. I wanted to see things that I hadn't seen before. I was like starved. And Coley was always doing fun things on the road, and Ellen and I would do what we did and then Coley would always come in the next morning and go, "Oh, we went out dancing last night. Oh, what fun we had. Oh, oh." So a month after Fresno, and I was looked through the papers and said, "Oh, I want to go that play." I called information and said, "Hi, Coley, it's me. Want to go to a play?" "Who?" "Oh, it's Anne Heche." "Hi." "Your ex-boss." "Want to come to a play with me?" And he said, "Well, I'm going through something." It sounded emotional. I said, "Well, what's up?" He said, "Well, I just broke up with my girlfriend." And I said, "Well, I know what that's like. Why don't we go out for drink."
[King:] You both broke up with your girlfriends?
[Heche:] Yes, we did.
[King:] Why him? Why did you call him to go to the play?
[Heche:] Coley was a person who always was calm, loved the world, loved being in the world. His energy was so centered and so focused always, on the road. It was something I had never witnessed really before, somebody who was so present.
[King:] There is a term for this, called well within himself.
[Heche:] Oh, yes.
[King:] We will be back with our remaining moments with Anne Heche, the author of "Call Me Crazy." Don't go away. [Begin Video Clip, "if These Walls Could Talk"]
[Heche:] I made one hell of a big mistake. Could you forgive me for making a mistake, friend? My best friend, could you forgive me for making a mistake?
[King:] When you getting married?
[Heche:] Very soon.
[King:] Do you have a date?
[Heche:] Yes, yes.
[King:] Are you giving it out?
[Heche:] We will be married before this airs.
[King:] That's soon.
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] Thank you. Well, this is airing on September 6.
[Heche:] I will be married before that.
[King:] Well, that's great.
[Heche:] Thank you.
[King:] That's nice.
[Heche:] Thank you.
[King:] Are you excited?
[Heche:] I yes.
[King:] Do you know that was a fair question that this is it, it?
[Heche:] Did I know when I met Coley?
[King:] Do you know now that this is it, it, that there's no more women, no more men? This is it?
[Heche:] Yes. Yes, I know that. I would not be getting married if I didn't know that.
[King:] This is a big step for you?
[Heche:] Yes, I'm getting married.
[King:] You dumped him and you're getting married.
[Heche:] I know it, yes. Yes.
[King:] Did Coley have any hesitation?
[Heche:] About what?
[King:] About a relationship based on he met you when you were with Ellen.
[Heche:] No, he did not. No, he's not that kind of guy. He was very understanding that I would have been with Ellen. It wasn't there was nothing about him that was like, "Oh, you've been with a woman, what does that mean?" He is an extraordinary individual.
[King:] Do you want children?
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] What about career? Do you want to stay active?
[Heche:] Of course, of course.
[King:] You do.
[Heche:] Yes, I just made a deal with Warner Brothers.
[King:] To...
[Heche:] Because I want to do a TV show next year. I feel like I've dumped my drama and now I'm ready to have my fun. I'm going to do a comedy.
[King:] A sit com?
[Heche:] I think it might be a combo. I will say humor show, because I don't know if I'm quite sit com girl, but yes, we're going to do a comedy.
[King:] And Coley is supportive of all you do? And he continues to be a photographer, right?
[Heche:] Oh, he continues to do what he is doing, absolutely. We're good partners with each other.
[King:] And you want Ellen's show to make it?
[Heche:] Heck, yes.
[King:] There's no do you ever talk?
[Heche:] No. Ellen and I don't talk, but heck, yes, I want her show to be successful. I mean she's a brilliant comedian.
[King:] Do you regret anything, Anne? Do you regret maybe not had this sooner or realizing...
[Heche:] Which sooner?
[King:] The life you apparently have now? Do you...
[Heche:] Oh, no. I love that I'm 32. I love it. I don't think I could have had it any sooner. If I had wanted it sooner, I would have created it sooner. I think one of the things that is so extraordinary now is that I can actually form sentences about what I want and then create them. I had to live through a lot of life to get to the place where I am now. I had to see truths and work through shame, and I'm very grateful for every step that I took. I don't think that I could have handled it sooner. I love where I have, I love it.
[King:] You are good at it, though, aren't you?
[Heche:] What?
[King:] I don't want to say faking it. You were good at living the role you had taken and publicly you were good at it? You were a good actress.
[Heche:] Sure I was good at it? I was a good actress, but I was also a good at understanding that I could achieve what I wanted to achieve and my first and foremost goal in my life to get healthy with what had happened to me. And I was good at working toward my goals. I was good that was why I became a movie star. I was dedicated. I was dedicated to becoming a healthy women, even when I had another personality in me. I was dedicated to finding my sanity and finding love. And I think I was good at that.
[King:] How's your relationships now with your sisters and your mother?
[Heche:] Little to none.
[King:] Really?
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] That's sad, or not?
[Heche:] To me, I feel like I'm finally in a place where I've embraced it; it's not sad. It's healthy for me.
[King:] For you. The whole family was that way and you feel you're better off.
[Heche:] I feel that way, yes. It got very, very painful for me every discussion that we had. And I kept wondering why I continued to pick up the phone for the pain.
[King:] Do you ever fear turning back?
[Heche:] To what?
[King:] I mean, do you ever fear it coming back?
[Heche:] No, she's a part Celestia of my world?
[King:] No, crazy coming back?
[Heche:] Oh, no, it's all a part of me. I wouldn't be here without it. As I said, I think I wouldn't even be alive without my insanity. I'm all here. She was a part of me allowed me to survive. The whole world and insanity was a part that allowed me to survive.
[King:] Are you going to write some more?
[Heche:] I hope so.
[King:] Because you like writing, don't you?
[Heche:] I love it, I love it. A novel next, maybe.
[King:] And a television show and a movie coming?
[Heche:] Yes, I have "John Q" coming out in February with Denzel Washington.
[King:] I'm in that movie.
[Heche:] What?
[King:] For five seconds.
[Heche:] For goodness sakes. Not with me.
[King:] No, that's where he takes over the hospital, right.
[Heche:] Yes.
[King:] What script that is.
[Heche:] I know. Isn't that awesome. I look forward to see it.
[King:] Thanks, Anne.
[Heche:] Thank you.
[King:] Anne Heche, the book: "Call Me Crazy." I'm Larry King. Next time we will try to draw her out. Thanks for joining us and good night. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Announcer:] From Washington: EVANS, NOVAK, HUNT & SHIELDS. Now, Robert Novak and Al Hunt.
[Robert Novak, Co-host:] I'm Robert Novak. Al Hunt and I will question the new chief federal drug enforcer.
[Al Hunt, Co-host:] He is Asa Hutchinson, director of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.
[Hunt:] Mr. Director, there increasingly is a view in America that we imprison too many people for mere possession; that those prison sentences are too long and they unjustly penalize African-Americans. Fundamentally, do you share those concerns?
[Asa Hutchinson, Dea Administrator:] Well, I think we ought to always be looking at our criminal justice system to make sure it's fair and that it's going after the right targets. When you look at imprisonment for mere possession in the federal system and federal prison, only 5 percent are for possession, of the drug cases. The rest are for trafficking. And many times they'll plea bargain down to possession. In the state system, it's more like 27 percent that is possession. And I think that it's fair to look at that and to see the reasons for that. But what we've done in terms of our drug enforcement policy, we've had some successes. When you look at cocaine, the fact that we've reduced it by 75 percent, use of cocaine, over the last 15 years. That's a success.
[Hunt:] But after you two or three years from now, after you've been DEA director for three years, would you hope that we will have more or fewer people in prison because of mere possession, as a percentage of those who...
[Hutchinson:] Well, I would hope that it would be fewer, first because there's less drug usage. But secondly, I think that whenever we look at actions like drug courts, I'm a strong proponent of drug courts that balance the treatment side of it with the accountability puts a penalty over their head that goes through the criminal justice system. They have drug testing. And they don't go to jail if they're non-violent first-time users. And I think that's an appropriate direction to go if we can concentrate on the treatment for those type of offenders. But I think the fact is that in our prison system we are primarily going after the drug dealers.
[Hunt:] One final question, on this trend, you this week said that California Prop 36, which does not legalize drugs certainly but it does mainly it really does decriminalize possession, that that could be a model for the country if you made some adjustments for drug testing and more rehab centers. Is that really the model you would like to take the Bush administration, the direction to really decriminalize possession?
[Hutchinson:] No, absolutely. I don't think we should decriminalize our drug offenses in this country. I don't think that Proposition 36 decriminalizes. What it does, it operates in limited fashion, as the drug courts do, which is to, rather than send them to prison, a user, they concentrate on the rehabilitation side and the treatment side. I don't think they're effective as drug courts because you don't have the drug-testing component, you don't have the accountability. And I think that they're subject to misuse. But I think that they certainly do not decriminalize. I think drug courts work better, and that's the model that I would prefer.
[Novak:] Mr. Hutchinson, in the war on drugs, you would think that all of the lickings that your side has taken, you ought to be suing for peace right now. You have been losing the war on drugs, haven't you?
[Hutchinson:] Well, I think you've got to define what winning and what losing is. I think that we have a tendency, Bob, in this country, to judge our entire anti-drug effort different than how we judge other social problems. If you look at teen violence if you're not reducing the statistics, should you throw in the towel and say we're not going to engage in this social problem anymore? Or if you have an increase in child abuse, do you say we're losing that and you don't want to remedy that problem? When it comes to drug use in this country, you win by reducing the dependency on drugs, helping young people to make the right decisions, reducing the addiction and the availability of it. That's winning, and I think that we have made progress and we can make some more.
[Novak:] Several years ago, a few years ago, there was a seminar of all of the former DEA directors, in fact, even before it was called the DEA. And they agreed on one thing, that there never really has been a war on drugs. There never have been enough resources devoted to that war. Do you think you can get in this, with a tight budget, more resources devoted to that war?
[Hutchinson:] Well, I think that there will be more resources in the education arena to help people make the right decisions, as well as in the treatment, which is important. There will be more resources in the law enforcement arena. Everyone in law enforcement knows that it's important to enforce the drug laws of our country and it sends the right signal. But that, ultimately, we're not going to make the biggest difference in society on that side. We keep the finger in the dike; we keep the floods from coming in. But we've go to teach our folks to make the right decisions, have stronger character and to reduce their dependency on it. I think you've got to put this in perspective. You can have success, and I think we have success, but it's not going to be something that we're going to set a timeline of five years. And there's not going to be absolutely a new drug that comes on scene that we've got to wrestle with.
[Novak:] As far as providing more resources, sir, we received a missive from the Democratic National Committee just before we went on the air. And it said, "Hutchinson repeatedly voted against anti-drug efforts, tried to cut 900 DEA agents as a member of the House of Representative." Asa Hutchinson voted to cut 900 agents from the DEA, true?
[Hutchinson:] I don't think that's accurate. I certainly don't remember any votes like that because I've been very engaged on the speaker's task force, Drug-Free America. And what I was concerned about is that the DEA agents have been reduced somewhat in the early '90s before I came to Congress. And what we've done is to reengage in that effort, both from the enforcement side but also by putting more money into the community coalitions that bring communities together and helps them to develop a strategy to reduce drug use in the community both in law enforcement and from an education standpoint. So what I try to do in Congress is to approach from all arenas and work with the speaker and my colleagues on this.
[Hunt:] Mr. Director, we've had this incredible effort to affect the drug supply, the interdiction efforts, and yet the price of heroine and cocaine, which should be rising if that's the case, instead is falling. The purity of heroine, I'm told, is doubled. That really is a failure, isn't it?
[Hutchinson:] Well, it's a problem and it's a concern. And I'm not standing here saying that we've got all of the answers. But I know that whenever you reduce cocaine and heroine coming into this country that you're ultimately saving lives. And that it's a mistake to say that a consistent, long-term approach to this does not make a difference. And whenever you look at the number of heroine addicts that we have out there today, the harm-reduction side of it, the legalization side is not the right direction to go. We do have we've had great success in reducing heroine, but there is an upsurge.
[Hunt:] But you have to make tradeoffs with limited resources. And basically, would you like to see a greater emphasis on the question of supply and punishment or on demand and treatment? I mean, you have to make some choices. Which direction do you want to move more in?
[Hutchinson:] Well, I don't think that you can separate those two. For example, Robert Downey, Jr., in California, is going through, under Proposition 36, a rehab program. But why is he going to a treatment program? It's because of an arrest. And so, law enforcement ties into education. Law enforcement ties into the rehabilitation side. That's what, put in the criminal justice system, makes the drug courts work. And so, I think it's a mistake to get into the battle of supply side versus demand debates. Invest money where it works. The president's talked about a parent corps enlisting parents and encourage them to engage in this issue with the young people. The community coalitions, which brings in the law enforcement community and the treatment side. I just came back from a Club Drug conference in Chicago, and I asked them to raise their hands who are here. And you had treatment people, you had law enforcement people, you had education folks there all together working on this issue. And that's the right approach.
[Novak:] Mr. Hutchinson, Senator McCain and many other Republicans and a good part of the conservative movement wants to have more freedom in the export of encryption devices by the United States in the world. In the previous administration, the DEA and the FBI was opposed to that on the grounds that this helped the drug barons. Whose side are you on on this?
[Hutchinson:] Well, I'm for making sure that we have a technological advantage over the drug traffickers. Whenever they encrypt their communications, it makes it very difficult to get the intelligence that we need.
[Novak:] So you'd put controls on the export of encryption devices.
[Hutchinson:] Well, I think that you have to have sufficient controls that allows law enforcement to do their work. So you want to be competitive with other countries in our technology. And what is my recollection is that Congress did allow increased availability of encryption.
[Novak:] Limited, limited, yes.
[Hutchinson:] Law enforcement, you know, shouldn't be necessarily saying that's a bad idea. We've got to keep up with it. We've got to keep that advantage.
[Novak:] We have to take a break. And when we come back, we'll ask the director of the Drug Enforcement Administration the difference between crack cocaine and powder cocaine.
[Hunt:] Mr. Director, in your confirmation hearings, you came out against racial profiling. And yet, a lot of drug trafficking really is associated with particular groups, Dominican or Mexican drug traffickers for instance. Doesn't the DEA, to be effective, have to do some racial profiling?
[Hutchinson:] I don't think so at all. And even if there was a little bit of an advantage to law enforcement if there was some type of profiling ultimately it undermines what law enforcement is trying to do and it's counter-productive. Certainly, whenever you have a specific criminal activity being conducted and you've got a suspect, you would use race as an identifying characteristic to apprehend that suspect, and that's appropriate. But for a profile to say, these are the people that we need to look at real closely, and race being a part of that to determine a law enforcement procedure, that undermines what we're trying to do.
[Hunt:] You also said that you were for reducing the disparities between punishment for crack cocaine, which is punished more heavily and is used more by African-Americans, and powder cocaine, which is more of a white drug. Why reduce it? Why not just eliminate the disparity?
[Hutchinson:] The reason for that disparity originally, which really got out of proportion, that violence was associated with the crack cocaine usage, and so the mandatory minimums kicked in at a lower stage. I believe that that should be reduced. You ask about why we just can't eliminate it completely, and I think that there was some rationality for it. That's not what the sentencing commission, I believe I'm correct in saying this, recommended. And I don't think we've achieved that. I think that you can reduce that disparity, and I think we need to work together to get that done. But I don't know that we'll be able to completely eliminate that disparity.
[Novak:] Mr. Hutchinson, President Bush has developed a warm relationship with the new president of Mexico, President Fox. But are you and your agents really comfortable right now with Mexico as being free of corruption between the government and the narcotics dealers?
[Hutchinson:] No, we're not comfortable that Mexico is free of corruption. I do believe that we have a great opportunity with President Vicente Fox and we have a growing confidence with the leadership there. But it takes a long time to change the foundation and the institutions in the country. That's one of the reasons that Mexico's taken the steps to have some embedded units for their narcotics groups that we can work with closely. They are checked on in terms of polygraphs. That eliminates or reduces the potential for corruption. We're actually helping to train those through the DEA and our resources. So I'm very optimistic about a growing cooperative relationship. And we need that when we're trying to put these projections together that cross the borders.
[Novak:] Just two years ago, Mr. Hutchinson, your predecessor, Thomas Constantine, sent a 20-page statement to the Senate in which he told of, quote, "unparalleled levels of corruption within Mexican law enforcement agencies," end quote. He said that the corrupt police protect Mexican criminal organizations that lead the world in distributing illegal drugs. That's two years ago. Can things really change that much in two years?
[Hutchinson:] Well, the attitude is changed by the administration. They have assisted in some extraditions. They've arrested the governor of one of their...
[Novak:] So those conditions don't prevail anymore?
[Hutchinson:] No, like I said, if you can't change that circumstance in two years. And so we don't go in their naively saying that we can work with all of the authorities, that corruption is not a problem, because it is. But it helps whenever the top of government sets the right standard. And I think Vicente Fox has made is making some progress in the drug problem a priority. We hope that we can get this down and channel it so that we can have more cooperative efforts at the lower level of law enforcement in Mexico.
[Hunt:] Mr. Hutchinson, as you know, voters in a number of states, principally in the West, have noted to enable citizens to use marijuana, supposedly for medical purposes. The Supreme Court has said that federal rules, federal laws, however, trump that. But you're a great believer in devolution and states rights. Whatever you think of the use of marijuana for medical purposes, in that philosophical principal, don't you think people in those states should determine whether they want to use marijuana for medical purposes or not?
[Hutchinson:] Well, we have it's been consistently a violation of federal law. And I think that what's important...
[Hunt:] I'm saying shouldn't state law trump federal law?
[Hutchinson:] No, I don't think that's not consistent with the supremacy clause of the Constitution. And so, no, I don't think that. Obviously, we want to work and, you know, consider the direction and guidance of some of the prosecutors there in California. And no one wants to deny an elderly patient or someone with pain of having adequate pain medication. But the scientific and medical community that we've always listened to have not come to us and said you need to provide a medical use for marijuana. They say there's not legitimate medical use for marijuana. And so, that's the direction we have. And so, we're going to have to work through exactly the strategy in California how to deal with that issue. It's important to remember, when you've got methamphetamines, you've got OxyContin problems, you've got heroin on the increase, we've got our hands full. And that's one just part of the problem.
[Novak:] Just briefly before we take a break, Mr. Hutchinson, Plan Columbia is putting a lot of American money and a lot of American effort into Columbia to stop the narco-terrorists, the guerrillas supported by the drug dealers. Can you look me in the eye and say that any of this has succeeded in stemming the flow of drugs from Columbia?
[Hutchinson:] I can look you in the eye and say we need to give this a chance to work.
[Novak:] It isn't working now, though.
[Hutchinson:] Well, I think it is working to stop reducing the money that the narco-traffickers gain. And I think it's starting to work to build and strengthen a very old democracy in South America. The intent and justification for our initiative should not be to stop the flow of drugs coming to our country. I hope that's a side benefit, but that's not the justification in my view for the Plan Colombia. We've got to strengthen that democracy and their dependence to the narco-traffickers of the drug money is what we're trying to reduce, hopefully as a side benefit to America here.
[Novak:] Well, we'll take another break. And when we come back, we'll have "The Big Question" for Asa Hutchinson. "The Big Question" for Asa Hutchinson, director of the
[Dea:] Mr. Hutchinson, officials of the Clinton administration contended that the beginning of addiction was found through tobacco smoking, cigarette smoking. So it was very important for the anti-drug efforts to concentrate on tobacco. Do you agree with that?
[Hutchinson:] I think we should separate the anti-drug messages. I don't think you should mix tobacco or alcohol that are legal substances out there, although regulated...
[Novak:] You don't think it leads to illegal addiction?
[Hutchinson:] I didn't say that. I said I don't think you should mix the messages. I think it's a separate message for cocaine, for marijuana, for drugs that don't have the beneficial purposes or that are legal in some context. They're totally illegal. They are extraordinarily harmful compared to those other legal substances. Even those, you know, those are harmful as well. So you should separate the messages, in my judgment. I think it's important.
[Hunt:] Sir, a quick question, you just left the House of Representatives. You were an impeachment manager in the Bill Clinton impeachment trial. From what you've seen, do you think that Gary Condit is fit to serve as a member of the United States Congress?
[Hutchinson:] Well, you know, Al, I left the political arena and came over to the enforcement arena, and I'm not going to commit on Gary Condit. I think that all of America wishes that would go away and certainly that we'd be able to find Chandra Levy. But beyond that, I'm concentrating on my job in the drug enforcement arena.
[Hunt:] I'm not going to get a Gary Condit answer out of you.
[Hutchinson:] No, I think that what we're doing is extraordinarily important. And we talk about the policy. I want to think about the lives that it impacts, and I think it's important.
[Hunt:] I want to thank you in your first week for being with us. My partner, Robert Novak, and I will be back in a moment with a comment or two. Bob, Asa Hutchinson offered a very balanced approach to the drug war today; very effective, as a matter of fact. I think down the road there's going to be some warfare between Asa Hutchinson and John Waters, the drug czar in the Bush administration, who really is a lock-'em-all-up-and-throw-away-the-keys.
[Novak:] Now, I was fascinated that he said the approach of the Bush administration and Plan Columbia was to save Colombian democracy and in the process cut down on the drugs coming out of there. The Clinton proposal project was entirely different. It was to keep the drugs out of Colombia and in the process, if possible, save Colombian democracy just the opposite.
[Hunt:] This is a conservative Republican who was impeachment manager, who was endorsed in his confirmation hearings by all of the House Judiciary Committee Democrats. This is going to be a real star, Bob.
[Novak:] Very different than the DEA director for most of the Clinton administration, Tom Constantine, a cop's cop, a professional policeman, law and order guy. Not a politician, very blunt. He would say that the Mexicans were corrupt. He didn't care what the State Department said. It's going to be very interesting, isn't it? Asa Hutchinson, a very sophisticated politician, whether he says the same. I'm Robert Novak.
[Hunt:] And I'm Al Hunt. Coming up in one-half hour on "RELIABLE SOURCES," did the press pin down Congressman Condit or get used in his PR full-court press? Plus, a conversation with Amy Wallace of Los Angeles Magazine about the investigation that took down a Hollywood heavyweight, Variety's Peter Bart. And at 7:00 p.m., the "CAPITAL GANG" on the shrinking surplus, the last term of a conservative icon and Gary Condit's primetime debut. Plus, an introduction to George McGovern, war hero.
[Novak:] That's all for now. Thanks for joining us. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] Leaders of the most industrialized nations plus Russia have reached common ground on some but not all issues of the summit that unfolded amid violent street protests in Genoa. Police there reportedly arrested 93 people this morning in a pre-dawn raid on buildings used as protest headquarters, they say. Up to 100,000 demonstrators took to the streets during the G-8 summit, protesting what they say are the negative effects of global trade. But after the summit wrapped up today, there was a surprise move forward on the U.S.-Russia nuclear arms issue, after a meeting between President Bush and his Russian counterpart, President Vladimir Putin. CNN's John King has details of that.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Progress after months of stalemate. The two leaders emerged from their second meeting in a little more than a month with an agreement for intensive negotiations on missile defense and nuclear arms.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] We are basically saying the Cold War is forever ever, and the vestiges of the Cold War that locked us both into a hostile situation are over, and we are exploring the opportunity to redefine the strategic framework for keeping the peace.
[King:] Russia accepted a key U.S. demand, talks aimed at setting aside the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty, which forbids the research and testing critical to Mr. Bush's goal of building a missile defense system. In return, Washington embraced a key Putin priority: talks aimed at major reductions in U.S. and Russia's nuclear arsenals. That linkage brought a breakthrough.
[Vladimir Putin, Russian President:] We have come to the conclusion that two of these issues have to be discussed as a set, as one set.
[King:] The U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal includes 7,200 warheads. Russia has about 6,000. Both nations have already agreed to cut back to no more than 3,500 warheads by 2007, but Mr. Putin, eager to save scarce Russian defense dollars, has talked of slashing the number to as low as 1,500.
[Bush:] Let me start by saying how optimistic I am that it's about the possibility of reaching accord.
[King:] Progress and talks with Russia stood in contrast to a G-8 summit stalemate on global warming. European leaders and Japan wanted the final communique to endorse the Kyoto treaty on climate change, but Mr. Bush blocked consensus. He says mandatory cuts in greenhouse gas emissions would punish the U.S. economy and promised frustrated fellow leaders he would soon propose an alternative. The summit was marked by two days of demonstrations that sometimes turned violent, and some leaders complained all the attention overshadowed due commitments to fight AIDS and poverty in Africa.
[Tony Blair, British Prime Minister:] You measure the amount of coverage, the protests and Africa. Well, would it be a ratio of 10 to one in favor of the riot? I mean, the world has gone mad when that's the case. These are the important issues.
[King:] Mr. Bush also voiced displeasure at the protesters, but left his first G-8 summit on a high note. [on camera]: The surprise agreement for negotiations with Russia should at least temporarily quiet the president's European critics on missile defense. Still, Mr. Bush remains under heavy pressure from key allies to give ground and break the stalemate over global warming. John King, CNN, Genoa, Italy.
[Frazier:] We are going to spend some more time on this now talking with Ron Brownstein, a political correspondent for "The Los Angeles Times," who joins us from Washington. Ron, thank you for coming in today.
[Ron Brownstein, "los Angeles Times":] Hi, Stephen.
[Frazier:] This meeting was a surprise, this meting with President Putin, but the two leaders seem to be characterizing it in slightly different ways.
[Brownstein:] Well, I think there are some in my mind, some questions about where exactly this negotiation will go on a few fronts. First of all, President Bush has said repeatedly and his deputy defense secretary, as recently as a week ago, before Congress, that he envisions his pursuit of missile defense putting us in conflict with the Antiballistic Missile Treaty within a period of months, not years. And you know, the history of arms control negotiations are not that they are real speedy exercises, and you wonder, are they saying they are going to delay whatever they want to do on the testing side until they have some sort of a broad agreement with Russia. I doubt that. Secondly, senior administration officials have said here domestically within the last few weeks that they are not really looking for a successor to the ABM treaty, in terms of a very detailed road map of what is and what is not permissible. They want a much more broader leeway, so again, you have to sort of wonder, I think there are going to be question that are going to be asked when the president returns, what exactly is on the table here and what kind of a negotiation are they entering into.
[Frazier:] You have to wonder too what President Putin gets out of all this, this new linkage now, tying the work on the missile defense shield to reduction of nuclear stockpiles. There is a reduction already pretty heavily planned, they are going to cut it in half by five years from now.
[Brownstein:] Well, again, you know, we'll have to see exactly what they can and do not agree to on missile defense. What is clear is that the European allies and even Tony Blair, the prime minister of Britain, who has been the most conciliatory toward President Bush, have made clearly that they are really concerned about Bush moving forward unilaterally to abrogate the ABM treaty. They want whatever is done to be done with the approval of Russia. So, there is a certain amount of leverage there for the Russian government in these negotiations, in that Bush has his own allies sort of leaning on him to be conciliatory toward their views. Again, you know, it's one thing to start a negotiation. We will have to see if they can reach an agreement. But you know, it's worth remembering, this is the idea that President Bush laid out during the campaign. I mean, he did talk about both moving toward missile defense and in case of lack of negotiation, unilateral reductions in American nuclear arms. So, this is very much the vision that he laid out as a candidate.
[Frazier:] Still, though, it does make some European leaders queasy. I mean, they are very comfortable with this idea of deterrence, you know, the vulnerability to a reprisal strike deterring the first strike that has worked for 50 years.
[Brownstein:] Well, not only that, but you know, when I watched the protests this weekend in Italy, it did make me wonder what would happen if Bush does go ahead at some point in the next year and unilaterally abrogate the ABM treaty. I mean, in the early '80s, when Presidents Carter and then Reagan wanted to introduce the Pershing II missiles into Germany, you had enormous street protests in Europe, really gave rise to the nuclear freeze movement. And I wonder, given what we saw this weekend over the somewhat abstract issue of globalization, whether you would not, in fact, see intense protests that will put a lot of pressure on these European governments if the American administration decides to pull out of the ABM treaty at some point.
[Frazier:] Did you get the sense as I did, Ron, that all of these protests are linked to what we are talking about now, that whether it's talking about missile defense or global trade, that perhaps the people in the streets were objecting to this idea of a new world order, which is really dictated by American ideas?
[Brownstein:] Well, you know, there really is as best we can tell from all of this, really, you know, virtually every meeting now faces this level of protests. It's a wide range of disputes and a wide range of protesters, you know, from sort of pacifists and church groups to labor groups to more anarchical elements of the movement. So, yeah, I mean, to some extent, there is a basic objection to the attempt to integrate the world economy into a lower barrier trading block that would allow and in fact, does allow Western companies and Western values to move across the globe, and of course, the answer of the G-8 leaders is, this is the way to improve living standards. Look at what has happened in Asia, look at what has happened elsewhere. This really is the only opportunity for the poorest of the poor, and by protesting against that, you are protesting against their opportunity to make gains in the future.
[Frazier:] Ron Brownstein, thanks for those insights tonight. We will watch and see what's happening in the coming days, because that includes a meeting of the president with Pope John Paul II at the pope's summer residence.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] Reports that Congressman Gary Condit has submitted to a private polygraph test have done little to end criticism over his conduct in the Chandra Levy case. Condit's attorney said yesterday that Condit passed a lie detector test. However, authorities are expressing dissatisfaction over the results. CNN congressional correspondent Jonathan Karl joins us from Washington. Jonathan, hi.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Hello, Donna, and meanwhile the search for Chandra Levy continues rather intensively here in the Washington, D.C. area. The police have continued their search of abandoned buildings in Washington, D.C., and also looking into parks around the area. Police searched through the 2,800 acre Rock Creek Park which is the largest park in Washington, D.C. It's also a place that is just a couple of blocks away from where Chandra Levy's apartment was. They were searching there explaining their process to CNN..
[Lt. Ralph Neal, D.c. Metropolitan Police:] Today we are basically searching the area looking for any clues or evidence that would help us with this investigation involving the missing intern.
[Question:] What kind of things might you be looking for?
[Neal:] Any kind of clues, any type of clothing or anything that she may have been wearing that day, or such as a pocketbook or identification, any personal belongings that she may have had on her.
[Karl:] And police still report that those searches, as they go on both in the parks and in the abandoned buildings, have continued to turn up negatively. Meanwhile you mentioned Congressman Gary Condit the California Democrat his lawyers entered a major public offensive yesterday to try to dispel any doubts they are cooperating with police on this investigation. Abbe Lowell, Mr. Condit's attorney, pointed out that he's done all he can do. He said that he's turned over his phone records, he has agreed to interviews, he's agreed to have his wife interviewed, he's had his staff interviewed. And of course he has taken that private polygraph test with which Mr. Lowell said was with one of the nations foremost experts on lie detection.
[Abbe Lowell, Condit Attorney:] Mr. Colvert, who you will find is one of the people in this country deemed one of the best experts in polygraphs has told me that the charts were so clear, that the results were so solid that they are such the kind that anybody looking at them will come to the same conclusion.
[Karl:] Through their attorney, the Levy family has dismissed that polygraph test. The police are not as completely dismissive but they say it would have been much better if they had been there and had known about the test and they had participated in it.
[Asst. Chief Terrance Gainer, D.c. Metropolitan Police:] Examiner who Mr. Lowell says, does have a good reputation, he's very experienced, but I've never been involved in a polygraph in all these thirty some years of policing and homicide investigations where the polygraph examiner didn't want to know the facts of the case. And generally the honest facts of the case, quite frankly, are given by law enforcement authorities. So this is a bit self-serving. However, he didn't have to take the polygraph examination. We will take that information like we take everything and we will examine it and see how it helps the case.
[Karl:] Police have not given up on the idea they could still find Chandra Levy alive. One of scenarios they are still working on is that she could have intentionally disappeared and she's altering her appearance to that end. They have put out computer generated images that would show what Chandra Levy might look like if she were intentionally disguising her appearance. As that goes on here are some of those pictures right now which they have distributed both in pamphlets and there you see, on their Web site, showing what Chandra Levy could possibly look like if she were intentionally disguising her appearance. Donna, that's the latest here from Washington.
[Kelley:] Jonathan, do you have any more reaction from the Levy family to that private polygraph? You mentioned it along with the police, but any other comments from them?
[Karl:] Nothing new today from the Levy family. As you know yesterday their attorney dismissed the polygraph because it was done by a private source. The police were not present, the questions were limited, et cetera. But the Levy family also saying it's excruciatingly painful for them to them to watch television as they watch these searches of abandoned buildings and parks, looking for possible remains of Chandra Levy. Mrs. Levy, Chandra Levy's mother, said this was basically another day in hell having to watching this search possibly for the body of Chandra Levy. They are of course very much hoping that she will still turn up alive.
[Kelley:] From Washington, our Jonathan Karl. Thanks very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] Well, from bison to pigs, we now move on to silkworms. They are a delicacy for many people in South Africa, but their use goes far beyond being a good food staple. As South Africa's SABC explains, they are proving to be a great source of income.
[Sabc Correspondent:] The species commonly known as the mapani worm has long been a source of protein to indigenous people. More recently, these sun-dried caterpillars have become a delicacy, appearing on the menus of some Johannesburg restaurants. While these succulent larvae are only useful as a food source, there are other interesting creatures that share the habitat provided by the mapani tree. The gonameto roof of ranare is covered in spiky hairs, which makes it unfit for human consumption. But along with its cousin, banameta pastica, found on fallen trees, these African silkworms spin cocoons of high-quality natural fiber. So strong is the resin that binds the silk fibers, the cocoons can be fatal if eaten by cattle. They get caught up with the contents of a cow's stomach and eventually unravel, causing digestive problems. But in parts of South Africa's northwest province, the dicrena, as they're known locally, have become a source of income. For the past three years, Robert Mabuwa has been part of a research project into the production of wild silk. Initially launched by the counsel for scientific and industrial research, the project is now administered by the community. Spotters have been hired to find areas where the dicrena are plentiful and families are paid to collect uninhabited cocoons only. Women are then paid to clean the cocoons. Then it is up to Robert Mabuwa and his assistant to begin the degumming process, transforming the rough cocoons into strands of silk.
[Robert Mabuwa, Silkworm Research Project:] This is now our final stage of in
[Pich:] And that one?
[Mabuwa:] This one? This one has been done,
[Pich:] Local women have been trained as spinners and weavers, and this is where most of the value is added to the product. African silk has a wonderful natural color, and there is a high demand for it worldwide.
[Hazel Hele, Knitter:] It is our own African silk, it grows in the wild, and somehow it has an emotional appeal as well as the actual luxury of it. And it dyes the most beautiful colors, really those rich, jewel, earth colors, which are lovely.
[Pich:] But it is very much a cottage industry at present, because it depends on the availability of cocoons. Populations of the ganameta vary from season to season and no one knows why. Entomologists are concerned that the cocoons aren't always empty when collected thus threatening the moths that reproduce the species.
[Ruan Veldtman, University Of Pretoria:] Because as soon as there is an added value connected to these things, they can become overexploited.
[Pich:] In the meantime, this marriage between textile technology and role ingenuity is providing a foundation for an enterprise that may become a viable commercial project. I'm Jessica Pich, within South Africa, for CNN WORLD REPORT.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] With all of this changing so rapidly, ever more urgent now the need to put together an interim government in Afghanistan, particularly in the north. One key component to that, we are told, is the former king of Afghanistan, Mohammed Zahir Shah. CNN's Jim Bittermann has more on him.
[Jim Bittermann, Cnn Correspondent:] With the Northern Alliance on the streets of Kabul, the political future of Afghanistan looks to be sealed in short order. But advisers to the former Afghan king hope not.
[Zalmai Rassul, Adviser To Former King:] We have the experience of the past. If you want it bring durable and just peace in Afghanistan, all sector of the Afghan society should be involved. One side can not work in Afghanistan.
[Bittermann:] The former king's advisers worry about the former president, Burhanuddin Rabbani. Rabbani's rule was considered ethnically divisive. Some say it led to his downfall and gave rise to the Taliban. And since September 11, the king's advisers blame Rabbani for frustrating their efforts to form a broad-based, post- Taliban government. Once more, aides to the king were shocked that after negotiating assurances from the Northern Alliance six weeks ago that its military forces would not enter Kabul until a political structure was in place a deal negotiated by Rabbani's interior minister the interior minister himself turned out to be one of the first people to enter Kabul Tuesday.
[Rassul:] We were surprised by the fact that they entered into Kabul. We need to discuss with them to see now what's going to happen. Maybe there were pressured, maybe there was difference among them. I don't know. But that's true that they had promised to not enter Kabul
[Bittermann:] The former king is following the lead of United Nation's diplomats, hoping as they do that a broad representative government can be formed so that the ethnic divisions which plagued Afghanistan in the past can be avoided now. [on camera]: In a statement issued on the eve of the Muslim holiday of Ramadan, the former Afghan king urged his people to unify, remain calm and avoid vengeance. He promised to return to his homeland soon and that representatives of all Afghan people will be brought into government. [voice-over]: But the planning for more enlightened politics for Afghanistan was taking place even as Kabul and other cities were falling into the hands of supporters of Rabbani and the Northern Alliance, realities it seems, which could put in jeopardy the high- mighted hopes. Jim Bittermann, CNN, Rome.

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Tom Haynes, Co-host:] Your week-ending NEWSROOM is under way. I'm Tom Haynes. Let's take a look at the rundown. Making headlines, it's not over yet. The recount continues in the U.S. presidential election. Moving on to "Editor's Desk," we find ourselves hanging with a Hollywood hottie. Up next in "Worldview," we profile the life of a saint. In "Chronicle," we make our way back to politics American style. We'll meet some young people getting a very special civics lesson. Confusion and controversy surround election 2000. The balloting process in Palm Beach County, Florida comes under fire as recounts of votes cast in Florida's Tuesday election gets under way. But that's only half the problem. With the ballots in Florida recounted, Republican candidate George W. Bush now holds only a slight lead, down from an advantage of almost 1,800 votes Wednesday. Still, it could be days, possibly weeks, before the presidential election is decided. Absentee ballots from overseas could trickle in for another week. And concerns are mounting about possible voting irregularities and ballot confusion in several Florida counties. Voters in Palm Beach County say a confusing ballot may have led them to accidentally vote for Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan when they meant to vote for Al Gore. Protesters want a revote because of that and because more than 19,000 ballots were tossed out for having more than one presidential candidate selected. At stake, of course, are Florida's 25 electoral votes. The candidates who get those votes will claim more than the 270 needed to be elected president. Now, despite Al Gore's claim that he won the popular vote, millions of ballots still need to be counted to determine who won a plurality. Brooks Jackson has that story.
[Brooks Jackson, Cnn Correspondent:] It's Al Gore's biggest talking point.
[Vice Pres. Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] Joe Lieberman and I won the popular vote.
[Jackson:] He claims he's won the popular vote, and supporters echo that.
[Joe Andrew, Dnc National Chairman:] Democrats won the popular vote in the race for the White House.
[Jackson:] Saying it gives Gore moral authority to press a legal challenge in Florida.
[William Daley, Gore Campaign Chairman:] And more voted for Al Gore than Gov. Bush.
[Jackson:] But it's not true not yet. There are still millions more votes to be tallied before it's clear who won the popular vote.
[Curtis Gans, Cmte. For The Study Of The American Electorate:] 1.1 million outstanding ballots in California, absentees, that haven't been counted; 900,000 that haven't been counted in Washington; 400,000 that have been impounded in New York you can only begin a count today and about 300,000 votes in Oregon under that all-mail system that they're having trouble getting a final count on. And then there are scatterings of votes in other places, including Alaska, whose votes are highly incomplete. There are more than enough votes to close a 200,000-vote gap.
[Jackson:] Gore does lead in the unofficial tally of the popular vote, but by a narrow and changing margin. On election night, he was running behind by half a million votes.
[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] This is the raw vote total at this hour with...
[Jackson:] The next day he led by a quarter-million. Thursday afternoon, his lead over Bush had shrunk to less than 200,000 votes out of more than 100 million counted for all candidates. But those are just unofficial totals gathered by the news media, subject to change due to recounts or late tallied absentees. In 1996, the unofficial totals being reported the morning after Election Day showed a total of nearly 93 million votes cast for president. But weeks later the final, official vote tally showed well over 96 million votes were actually cast. That's nearly 3 12 million additional votes. President Clinton's winning margin changed significantly when all the votes were counted. Morning-after totals had him beating Bob Dole by just over 7,760,000 votes. His official winning margin turned out to be more than 8 million, a change of more than 440,000 votes. This time, a change could go either way.
[Gans:] Absentee voters are, in general, tend to be more upscale and therefore likely to be more Republican. On the other hand, the bulk of the absentee is in the West Coast, and particularly in California, and that tends to be a little more liberal. So we don't know.
[Jackson:] And we won't know not for a while. This one is still too close to call. Brooks Jackson, CNN, Washington.
[Haynes:] Some voters in Palm Beach County, Florida say confusion over the presidential ballot contributed to the unprecedented turn of events in this election. In light of that issue, the largest ballot publisher in the nation is pushing for a nationally standardized ballot, which it says would eliminate any uncertainty in future elections. Ed Garsten on the politics involved in universalizing the system.
[Ed Garsten, Cnn Detroit Bureau Chief:] After wading through the rhetoric of the campaign and coming to a decision, how reliable is the method used to record the vote?
[Candice Miller, Michigan Secretary Of State:] There are a number of communities that are not so affluent that even in Michigan where they're still using the old the great, big, old machines, you just pull down the lever. There even are some communities I think we have a couple hundred yet in Michigan that just use paper ballots.
[Garsten:] According to the chairman of Fidlar-Doubleday, the nation's largest manufacturer of ballots, the two most popular systems are the punch card, just like the one used in Palm Beach County, Florida, and the optical scan system, where voters fill in a space and the ballot is read and recorded after sliding through a scanner. The latest method uses a computer touch screen.
[John Elliott, Chairman, Fidlar-doubleday:] You choose your candidates for the various offices and issues at hand. If I want to vote it, it votes right away. And within a minute, it's downloaded.
[Garsten:] With a variety of voting modes out there, and the potential for confusion, Michigan secretary of state, as well as Fidlar-Doubleday, favor a single, standardized system.
[Miller:] If people were to move from one municipality to the next, if they were familiar with the equipment it would be a help, I think.
[Elliott:] With a standard it's important that we bring a reliability at all times to the voter, and one that's friendly to them.
[Garsten:] But a standard might be difficult to achieve in a nation of thousands of jurisdictions. Take Michigan.
[Miller:] Village clerks, county clerks, city clerks, to the extent that we have about 1,700 various voter registration lists all being maintained in different systems out there. And having some uniformity has been quite a political discussion here in Michigan as well about how elections are run.
[Garsten:] Fidlar-Doubleday says no one method seems to favor a particular party. But if there was only one reliable system, the nation's voters might not have had to wait so long to find out who won. Ed Garsten, CNN, Mount Clemens, Michigan.
[Haynes:] In our "Editor's Desk" today, we'll begin with a pooch pop quiz. Now, you can try to guess the names of some famous dogs in pop culture now. Can you identity them from these clues? The University of Georgia's mascot, "The Jetsons' " dog, Charlie Brown's dog, and some Disney spotted dogs. Well, the answers are: the University of George mascot, which is, of course, the bulldog; "The Jetsons' " dog Astro; Charlie Brown's dog snoopy; and some Disney spotted dogs, those "101 Dalmatians." Of course, that's only a start. There are lots of famous dogs, like Taco Bell popular chihuahua. Today you'll meet a new dog, one you might not have heard of yet. Anne McDermott explains he's wiggled and waggled his way into hearts everywhere.
[Anne Mcdermott, Cnn Correspondent:] Cute toys. But wait, that's Mr. Winkle and he's for real. Lara Jo Regan, who owns Mr. Winkle, says some mistake him for a cat or koala, but he's all dog. Or is he an alien? or a bedroom slipper?
[Lara Jo Regan, Mr. Winkle's Owner:] Oh, that's great.
[Mcdermott:] Regan, a Los Angeles-based photographer, says Mr. Winkle is her best friend and favorite subject. Mr. Winkle has lots of patience for posing, and now he has his own calendar. Look for it on the Mr. Winkle Web site.
[Regan:] I felt that I really had to share him with the world.
[Mcdermott:] And the world, it seems, has been waiting for Winkle. They ogle him. They e-mail him.
[Regan:] "My name is Katie and I'm in the sixth grade."
[Mcdermott:] Katie e-mailed Mr. Winkle to let him know that, even though she loves her own dog, she chose to write a school paper on Mr. Winkle.
[Unidentified Female:] When you see him up close, you fall into Winkle-mania.
[Mcdermott:] Now, Winkle-mania has its downside: all those baths and those blowers. And then there's Clark the cat, who's getting a little bit jealous of bunking with a superstar. It wasn't always this way. When Regan found Mr. Winkle a few years back, he was abandoned, abused, and she took care of him.
[Regan:] Just a minute, just a minute, almost ready.
[Mcdermott:] But she never could get that tongue of his to stay in his mouth. The vet says it's just too big, which makes mealtimes a merry mess. And then there's that lurching gait of his, probably a reminder of those ugly early days. But there's something rather gallant about this stoic little creature and his determination to run with the big dogs. What does Mr. Winkle do for Miss Regan? He makes her happy.
[Regan:] Forget Prozac, just look at Mr. Winkle.
[Mcdermott:] Is there a Mrs. Winkle somewhere out there? maybe a litter of wee Winkles somewhere down the road? Maybe, but Regan doesn't seem to care. After all, there is only one Mr. Winkle. Anne McDermott, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Haynes:] We head to the United States to examine the life of one of the newest saints in the Roman Catholic Church in "Worldview" today. Her work has touched the lives of many others around the county. Many say her life was one of divine guidance.
[Shelley Walcott, Co-host:] Early this month on November 1, Roman Catholic churches celebrated All Saints Day, a holy day commemorating the blessed. A saint is defined as one officially recognized especially through canonization as preeminent for holiness. To canonize is to declare a deceased person officially a saint. Today in "Worldview," we focus on a new saint, Katharine Marie Drexel. After more than 30 years of investigating the two miracles required for sainthood, Drexel has been deemed a miracle worker by the Catholic Church. However, the sisters in her order not only want the world to know about the powers of her divine intervention, but rather what they see as her greatest achievement, proving that God is color- blind. Kyra Phillips has the story.
[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Correspondent:] Images of the civil rights era echo through the words of Martin Luther King and the actions of Rosa Parks. But before the civil rights movement even began, there was Katharine Marie Drexel.
[Unidentified Female:] She was a civil rights leader, and quietly.
[Phillips:] But her impact was profound. In 1858, Katharine Drexel was born into one of the most powerful families in America. The Drexel banks and railroads made her family one of the wealthiest in the country. And her father, Francis Drexel, was a one-time partner of J.P. Morgan. Katharine Drexel lived a life of wealth and privilege. But her parents also gave her strong religious faith and a moral sense of obligation to those less fortunate. Traveling across the country on the family railroads, Katharine witnessed injustice and indignities that would touch her soul.
[Unidentified Female:] There wasn't anyone doing anything for those poor people, for the African-Americans, the Native Americans.
[Phillips:] When her father died, she wrote in her journal that she would no longer live the life of a millionaire. Instead, this 29- year-old American heiress would give up her $20 million inheritance to become a nun, live a life of poverty, and use her family fortune to educate African-Americans and American Indians. Sisters Inez and Thomasita are two of the last living nuns who worked with her as she battled against racism and forged a future for the poorest and most underprivileged children in America.
[Unidentified Female:] She would go on to say, you must become 101 percent better than any teachers so when you train the children in school, you will lift them up to become 101 percent better than any white child.
[Phillips:] One of those children was jazz great Lionel Hampton, who would be the first black musician to integrate the Benny Goodman Band; Dr. Norman Francis, who would earn 22 honorary degrees and become president of a university; and Dr. Marie Allen, who's education would help save American Indians from a deadly disease. Drexel began by building this quiet convent nestled among the trees in Bensalem, Pennsylvania. And she founded the Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament. Together, they headed west to Window Rock, Arizona, to this impoverished and humbled Navajo reservation. Rooted in Catholic values, and sensitive to the native heritage, Drexel built St. Michael Indian School and began her mission to provide social justice.
[Unidentified Female:] My parents brought me to school and my father said, You see that black woman in a dress? And I had never seen a nun or non-Indian, spoke only in Navaho. And he says to me, that lady, that woman in the black dress is going to take care of you. She's going to teach you.
[Phillips:] And Marie listened.
[Unidentified Female:] Here with Navajo Nation special diabetes program.
[Phillips:] Dr. Marie Allen is educating her people about diabetes, a disease that plagues the American Indian reservations. Over a 10-year period, some 90 percent of students are graduating from St. Michael Indian School and going to college. From the Western reservations, Drexel took her cause east, to the Louisiana Bayou. She and her sisters came to New Orleans in 1915, building a school just for African-Americans. The racial hatred only fueled Drexel's perseverance. Xavier School would soon become the first black Catholic university in the country, recruiting young students like Norman Francis, who worked as a shoe-shine boy but wanted an education.
[Norman Francis, President, Xavier University:] There was no segregation on this campus, but I just have to walk across the street to catch the bus to go to the movie, and I sat back of the bus. I came back, got off the bus, crossed the canal, and then I was back in an oasis where I was treated as a decent human being.
[Phillips:] An oasis where Dr. Norman Francis is now president.
[Francis:] Xavier reaffirmed that I was like anybody else, that I was going to be educated. And Katharine Drexel's mission was to educate for leadership. I'm fulfilling what her dream was: prepare for leadership.
[Unidentified Male:] Make sure you carry the scope properly.
[Phillips:] Xavier University sends more African-Americans to medical school than any college in the country. And thousands of graduates are becoming scientists, scholars and musicians. Did the sisters have rhythm, Lionel?
[Lionel Hampton, Jazz Musician:] Do they, oh, do they have rhythm.
[Phillips:] When you feel the rhythms of the great Lionel Hampton, you feel the spirit of Katharine Drexel.
[Hampton:] They taught me how to play the drums.
[Phillips:] Drexel and her sisters helped Lionel Hampton overcome discrimination and find his gift.
[Hampton:] They teach you to be brothers and sisters. And when you go by God's rule, you ain't got no time for discrimination.
[Phillips:] Lionel Hampton graduated from Drexel's school and went on to earn platinum and gold records. He was the first African- American in the Benny Goodman Band. And he'd play the drums the sisters taught him with another jazz great, Louis Armstrong. They played for Pope Pius
[Xii. Hampton:] Louis Armstrong called forgot and called the Pope "Pops."
[Phillips:] He called him Pops, huh?
[Hampton:] Yes. I said, no Louis, that's the holy father.
[Unidentified Female:] Here's a man who didn't take a gift and just keep it to himself, but he allowed himself to share it with everyone.
[Phillips:] This is why Sister Terry joined Katharine Drexel's mission in inner-city New York. She wants her students at St. Borromeo in Harlem, where Drexel built yet another school, to find their talents and follow their dreams just like Lionel Hampton. [on camera]: What's so empowering about music and singing worship songs?
[Unidentified Female:] I think because, for African-Americans, it's always been a way to express, it's always been the deepest way for us to verbally say what's on the heart.
[Phillips:] When Katharine Drexel died at the age of 97, more than 500 sisters were teaching in 63 schools on American Indian reservations and in African-American communities. Now, Pope John Paul II is declaring her a saint, the highest recognition a Catholic can receive. But it's not just for her extraordinary works. There are two required miracles for sainthood. And after an intense investigation by the Vatican and dozens of medical experts, the pope has proclaimed Katharine Drexel's intervention miraculous.
[Unidentified Male:] This infection was so great that it ate away two of the bones in my right ear.
[Phillips:] In 1960, Robert Gutherman developed a severe ear infection. He was 14 and going deaf. His doctors said there was nothing they could do.
[Unidentified Male:] The treatment was of no help. The pain was excruciating.
[Phillips:] With medical science powerless, this devoted Catholic came to the Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament to pray for a miracle. Shortly thereafter, Robert says his agonizing infection went away. His doctor was astonished.
[Unidentified Male:] He wrote down, "His body is reconstructing anatomy." Next to that he wrote, "Is this possible?"
[Phillips:] In 1993, Amy Wall's doctor asked the same question...
[Unidentified Female:] Is that a real four-leaf clover?
[Phillips:] ... because this 7-year-old wasn't supposed to hear her parents' laughter. She was born deaf.
[Unidentified Female:] She had bilateral nerve deafness, which means she was equally deaf in both ears and there was nothing we could do about it.
[Phillips:] So this family, too, prayed to Katharine Drexel for a miracle. [on camera]: Wow, so you got a miracle?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes. I can't explain it.
[Phillips:] And neither could her doctors. They said Amy's hearing was suddenly restored.
[Unidentified Female:] She did a miracle to help me hear.
[Phillips:] What the Vatican says are miracles are now drawing millions of people to Drexel's crypt, searching and praying to a woman who the Catholic Church is declaring a saint. But to the people she taught and the people she helped, Katharine Marie Drexel was always a saint, and the real miracle was her life.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm sorry she's going to be a saint because of a miracle, a physical miracle. We believe that she was a saint long before that.
[Unidentified Female:] Sister Katharine's words were always, trust in divine providence. It will go on, the work will go on.
[Haynes:] Well, protests and lawsuits, confusion and controversy over the future of the U.S. presidency. As the drama unfolds in Florida, more and more people across the nation are wondering how the country got itself into this mess in the first place. Well, Anne McDermott found out everyone has an opinion.
[Mcdermott:] The election was supposed to be a standard civics lesson for Mrs. Reed's sixth graders. Instead, it's left them just as confused and upset as all the grownups.
[Unidentified Female:] It's kind of weird what's going on right now because this has never happened. This is like is it exciting to you to see this whole process happening?
[Mcdermott:] Well, in a way. He was watching TV election night and Gore was leading and then the commercial break came, and then...
[Unidentified Male:] I went away and then Gore had when I came back, Gore had less votes and I was like, OK, what just happened?
[Mcdermott:] Some of these kids say what ought to happen is abolish the Electoral College.
[Unidentified Female:] I think the electoral votes shouldn't really count, because what's the whole point of voting?
[Mcdermott:] But he says the electoral votes should count in certain circumstances. [on camera]: So if it's good for your candidate, it's a good system?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Mcdermott:] What if it's bad for your candidate?
[Unidentified Male:] Then it's a bad system.
[Mcdermott:] Several children suggested Gore and Bush become co-presidents. But this kid figures that won't work.
[Unidentified Male:] Gore wants to win, but Bush wants to win too, so they're going to fight until there's, like, nothing left to do. So it's just it's crazy.
[Mcdermott:] So they turned to the class assignment: writing about the election. This student began her paper by writing, "Something weird is going on." Anne McDermott, CNN, Newhall, California.
[Haynes:] And so here we are, three days after an election in the United States and still no president-elect. It may sound like a national crisis, but truth is there's really no reason to panic. The United States has faced turmoil at the top before, and some way, somehow, things have always been resolved. Bruce Morton puts it all in historical context.
[Bruce Morton, Cnn Correspondent:] It's funny, of course. The late-night guys love it. [Begin Video Clip, "the Tonight Show"]
[Jay Leno:] Man, and what is it down to, just a couple of votes? Boy, wouldn't it be great if this whole thing wound up being decided by Elian Gonzalez's crazy relatives? Uncle Lazarus and the crazy fisherman, we got the final vote right here!
[Morton:] But it isn't just funny. Oprah's worried. [Begin Video Clip, "the Oprah Winfrey Show"]
[Oprah Winfrey:] But we're live in Chicago on November 9 and we are leaderless. Aren't we still shocked?
[Morton:] And some of us are.
[Unidentified Female:] There's a lot of problems with counting and exactly how many votes are actually valid and whatnot, and it just makes me think that, whoever they elect, is that really our president or is it a counting mistake?
[Morton:] Nowadays, everything is instant. But elections used to be slow. And even then, the U.S. always muddled through somehow. Abraham Lincoln was murdered. His vice president, Andrew Johnson, was impeached in a country bitterly divided at the end of the Civil War. But power passed smoothly. Andrew Jackson won the popular vote and the electoral vote but not a majority. And the House elected John Quincy Adams president. Power passed smoothly. And Jackson won the presidency four years later. Same with Grover Cleveland, won the popular vote, but the Electoral College went for Benjamin Harrison and Cleveland got elected four years later. When Richard Nixon resigned the presidency something that had never happened before in 1974, people said this will be bad for the country. But it was only bad for Nixon. The country, under Gerald Ford, was calm. It was the same Nixon who, when he lost a very close election to John Kennedy in 1960, did not pursue vote fraud charges in Illinois but accepted the results. This time, well, everyone's talking about it.
[Teresa Chappel, Republican Elector:] If I was on the other side, I probably would say, yes, the popular vote. However, it is the Electoral College in this country that elects our president and I think that should hold.
[Morton:] They'll debate changing the system for next time. But the odds are this election will be decided under the law, fairly calmly, no coups, no national collapse. And if we need a temporary president, somebody to mind the store while the lawsuits get settled, I know just the guy, and so do you. You know he'd love to be asked. It absolutely beats being the spouse of a famous senator. Bruce Morton, CNN, Washington.
[Haynes:] And stay with CNN NEWSROOM. We'll be watching just like you will. Have a good weekend, and we'll see you back here on Monday.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] We are just hours before a key court ruling that could determine the fate of that highly popular Internet music swapping site called Napster. It's a federal appeals court decision. And it's expected to announce it today. And it will pertain to whether or not Napster violates copyright laws. CNN's James Hattori has more now on what is at stake.
[James Hattori, Cnn Correspondent:] Perhaps befitting the Napster case, the three-judge court of appeals will post its decision on the Internet early Monday.
[Dan Goodin, "industry Standard" Reporter:] I think the entire technology world is watching this case and waiting to see what happens.
[Hattori:] The issue is, should the Napster music file swapping service be shut down because it violates copyrights of music companies like Universal, Sony, Warner and EMI? Napster users copy songs over the Internet without paying royalties. Last July, a federal court granted an injunction stopping Napster, but the order was stayed on appeal until now. The appellate court could affirm the injunction, putting Napster back in jeopardy. It could overrule the lower court allowing Napster to remain in business. In either case, the copyright trial would go forward. Or the panel could send the case back to the lower court for clarification. Despite the legal uncertainties, Napster has continued its astonishing growth, doubling in size to more than 50 million users in less than 2 years. One of the original plaintiffs, BMG Music, whose artists include pop signer Christina Aguilera, cut a deal, agreeing to invest in Napster if it starts a fee-based service that pays royalties. The other big music companies in the lawsuit have so far rejected Napster's settlement proposals.
[Goodin:] These companies would much prefer to own the distribution and catalog service rather then to have to have Napster, a brand new sort of new media company, own it.
[Hattori:] But all bets are off once the 9th Circuit Court issues its decision. Rather than face continuing litigation, a costly trial, there may be added incentive to reach a settlement to capitalize on Napster's huge popularity and user base. James Hattori, CNN, San Francisco.
[Mcedwards:] All right, so if Napster gets nixed, where are you going to go? CNN's interactive correspondent Allison Tom is here to show us some of the sites where you might be able to...
[Allison Tom, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right. A lot of them are already out there. So if people are concerned about Napster going away, some people are already using many sites. So we're going to walk you through a couple of them.
[Mcedwards:] Sure.
[Tom:] The first one is Newtella. Now, this is a peer-to-peer type of base sharing information. So what you'll find here is that you download an application onto your computer, and then you'll be able to share information, but not just music. You'll also be able to share pictures, photos, audio, video files, a whole bunch of different kinds of applications in addition to just file-swapping with songs. So you'll see that there's a lot of people who will use this just to do that. And it's with everybody: anyone's who connected.
[Mcedwards:] And it's free too? I mean...
[Tom:] This is free.
[Mcedwards:] Does it work the same way?
[Tom:] That's correct. Some of them, of course, are not. They might have some sort of fee-based charge that they might use. But, in general, most of them are free. Now, another we're going to take you to is Aimster.com. This one is a sharing tool that really enables you, again, to use songs, pictures, video, a whole bunch of different kinds of applications. And what's different about this one is they have a buddy list. So a lot of people who are on it might know who they're exchanging information with. So rather than just being a stranger somewhere around the world, it'll be actually you or I or somebody else than you know. So it's a way to kind of protect some of the information that you're exchanging.
[Mcedwards:] Got you. And I'm going to profess my ignorance here a little bit. I mean, do these other sites work in the same way that Napster works?
[Tom:] Very, very, very similar. They're not quite as friendly. They're not quite as user friendly as Napster. Napster has become so popular because of its ease of use and because it's so easy to do to: to download and everything. But most of these will walk you through. So it's not entirely difficult. But you will have to just get into it a little bit more. And this is the last one we're going to show you: iMesh.com. What's different about this one, as well, is that when you download this and again, this is a free one similar to the others that we showed you it's very easy to install. And what'll happen is that if you're downloading a song, for instance, it will still continue to download this even if that person on the other end logs off. So, it'll try to find that song from somebody else or it'll continue with the original person that you were downloading the song from.
[Mcedwards:] Is there a way to tell, in advance of this court decision that's coming down, I mean, what how what the extent of usage has been on Napster and these sites? Are people are people rushing to try to get this?
[Tom:] Absolutely. And especially because of the concerns that Napster might be shut down today, a lot of people this past weekend have been downloading quite frequently. So a lot of people have been going on. People have been doing this all throughout the court hearings, because they're concerned of that and not being able to get it. But with these kinds of Web sites, you see that no matter what, there are still a lot of different ways that people can exchange information.
[Mcedwards:] But, if there's if there's a court ruling that is against Napster, what might be the implication for some of these other sites?
[Tom:] That has yet to be decided.
[Mcedwards:] That's the question, isn't it?
[Tom:] We really don't know. Exactly, that's the big question, because a lot of these sites have been watching very closely as to what happens: whether it's going to be that they can continue exchanging information like music or not. So...
[Mcedwards:] What if what if somebody feels I don't know, maybe feel a little bit moral about it and wants to pay? I mean, is there a place they can go where they actually pay for the music they download?
[Tom:] Sure. And some like MP3.com, for instance, some of them: They are copyrighted, you know, songs that you can download. And some of them you do pay for. So it really depends on certain Web sites. Now, a lot of places if you go to like CDNOW, a lot of these music Web sites, you do have to pay for certain ones. And, of course, you can't actually burn them onto your own
[Cd. Mcedwards:] Right. Right.
[Tom:] So there are still certain things like that. And if Napster does get shut down, maybe they'll change more into what we're expecting, into a fee-based type of system.
[Mcedwards:] OK, Allison interactive correspondent Allison Tom bringing us up to date on that. And that ruling, it's from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. It's expected at about 1:00 Easter Time Eastern time, rather. You can read the decision online if you like at the court's Web site. It is www.ca9.uscourts.gov.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Keeping you "Ahead of the Trend" this morning: American Express is expected to report its second- quarter earnings today. Here with a preview of just what to expect from the Dow component is Meredith Whitney, brokerage analyst at First Union Securities. And they kind of tipped their hands on this one, Meredith, didn't they?
[Meredith Whitney, First Union Securities:] Yes, they did. They preannounced last Monday, so there's not going to be a lot of new news here. There will be another conference call at 5:00 today. But they discussed most of the material issues last week, which was the biggest surprise was that they were going to lay off about 5,000 people. And this has been a company has not done bad in the past.
[Marchini:] Does that tell you things are really looking worse than anybody thought?
[Whitney:] I think, actually, it's a good sign, because it tells me that the company is coming to grips with what it needs to do. It has got the most expensive operating infrastructure of any of the card companies, and I think addressing those issues of cutting costs. And I don't actually 7 percent of the work force is enough. It's a step in the right direction. But this business model is so leveraged to transaction volume. And people just are not spending. Certainly, corporations are not spending the way they had. So volumes have dried up. There was another issue that they had a $826 million write-down that's 7 percent of their book value relates to high yield. That relates back to their credibility. This is the third write-off for them.
[Marchini:] Yes. Is that one of the things? And are there other items that you'll be looking to press or hear more about in the 5:00 conference call?
[Whitney:] The most interesting thing for me tonight will be the model at American Express is changing dramatically. Ten years ago, if you wanted to buy a fur coat at Neiman Marcus, you would use your American Express card. And the way the company makes the most money is by their network fees so the discount that they charge a merchant for using their card services. Today, that market is really saturated, so new growth in the company comes from grocery stores. They make materially less when someone buys a 12-pack of toilet paper at Costco than a mink coat at Neiman Marcus. So the discount revenues which is the money they make off the merchants, their highest profit vehicle has changed dramatically and has dropped considerably over the last several years.
[Marchini:] This being a financial services company, one might have expected that after a half-dozen rate cuts by the Federal Reserve, the stock would be trading closer to a high. In fact, it's closer to a 52-week low. It what finished on Friday at 34 at $38 roughly. And the low was $34. What's the prognosis?
[Whitney:] I would argue that the stock still has to go lower. The reason why the stock is up at $38 today is because there is massive take-out speculation. And the company is attractive on two levels. It's got capital, which is a big factor going forward as more and more bank consolidation requires more companies to have greater capital bases. And it's got this very heavy expense structure.
[Marchini:] It is huge, though. Who would buy it? And would Sandy Weill sell?
[Whitney:] I think that Morgan Stanley would be interested, because it's got half the operating structure that American Express has. And it needs the capital. But Morgan Stanley has troubles of its own with the rest of the brokerage universe. People speculate AIG just because it's a big high-multiple stock. But I don't think it's going to get bought anytime soon. And if it does get bought, I can't imagine it gets bought for more than $34 or $35 a share. So at $38, there's not a lot of outside.
[Marchini:] No, there sure isn't. Meredith Whitney, brokerage analyst at First Union Securities...
[Whitney:] Thank you.
[Marchini:] ... providing us with a fascinating look inside American Express today. Thank you.
[Whitney:] Thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Karuna Shinsho, Cnn Anchor:] A new publication is making waves in Taiwan, and ruffling political feathers. Critics pan "Next Magazine" as tabloid fluff. But fans say its mix of gossip and scandal provide an entertaining alternative. Mike Chinoy visited Taipei and met the man behind the magazine.
[Mike Chinoy, Cnn Correspondent:] A new issue of "Next Magazine" rolls off the presses in Taipei, injecting a dose of scandal, crime and sex into Taiwan society. "Next" is the product of Jimmy Lai, a brash media tycoon from Hong Kong whose racy publication there offended the territory's establishment and angered the Chinese government. Now, fed up with Hong Kong, Lai has pulled up stakes and moved to Taiwan.
[Jimmy Lai, Publisher, "next Magazine":] Taiwan is definitely a very exciting place for us. It's a place for democracy here, and we think it is the future of China.
[Chinoy:] Even in a society with perhaps the freest press in Asia, with an estimated 6,000 magazines already on the market, Jimmy Lai and "Next" are testing the limits. [voice-over]: The first issue of the Taiwan version of "Next" in May featured a cover story on the love life of President Chen Shui-Bien's daughter, and sold out all 275,000 copies within hours. "It tells us what we not supposed to know, says this reader. I like it.?
[Pei Wei, Editor, "next" Magazine:] We were the only magazine to run the story. Others were afraid to cover some aspects of the first family, but we used this story to tell our readers no topic is off limits for us.
[Chinoy:] "Next" still features the coverage of fashion, entertainment and celebrities that dominate many other local magazines, but it stands almost alone in dishing out dirt on secretive tycoons, powerful gangsters and top politicians.
[Lai:] We still carry a maverick rogue, so to speak, thinking of picking up some dirt.
[Chinoy:] While sails remain brisk, there's some doubts about the public's continuing appetite for such fair. "Their articles are one-sided and sensational and stir things up," says this woman. "I don't like it." If enough powerful interest here don't like it, Lai says he is aware of his own safety could be at risk.
[Lai:] A lot of people caution me about this, I think definitely we have to be careful.
[Chinoy:] Jimmy Lai built his publishing umpire on taking risks, gambling there's room in Taiwan for a muck-raking magazine like "Next." Mike Chinoy, CNN, Taipei.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Talks go into their second day at Camp David. There, President Clinton is hosting a Middle East summit between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. CNN White House correspondent Kelly Wallace is in Thermont, Maryland. That is very close to Camp David. She joins us with more. Kelly, good morning.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Daryn. At this hour, President Clinton is expected to be meeting with his Middle East policy team at the presidential retreat at Camp David to map out this second day of the summit. We should get a little bit a little more information from the White House in a briefing which was scheduled for just about an hour from now. But details are really in short supply about what is going on at this summit. All sides have agreed to a news blackout hoping to keep every option that is being discussed behind closed doors. We did, though, get a sense of the mood yesterday, at least before the first three-way meeting began between President Clinton Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. We saw the two Mideast leaders engage in a playful tussle, each one deferring to the other to go into the building first. Eventually, Mr. Clinton stepped in and played the role of mediator. Now, Mr. Clinton had two separate meeting yesterday with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and he also met separately twice with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. Then, last night, the three leaders, along with their negotiating teams, enjoyed dinner up at Camp David. White House officials describe the talks as informal and constructive, but they do say that the leaders are engaged in serious discussions and that they are getting to the substance of the issues. Of courses, the issue that must be resolved, the most difficult, the thorniest issues in this conflict, questions such as the fate of more than 3 million Palestinian refugees and the future of Jerusalem. As for what's going on behind closed doors, again, we really don't know. We do know, according to Israeli sources, that Prime Minister Barak was coming to this summit with a new document to present to the Palestinians. We also know, according to senior administration officials, that the president is prepared to try and force the leaders to discuss some possible compromises as the talks proceed. But, again, as for what is really happening, we just don't know Daryn.
[Kagan:] And in this case of a news blackout, you're perfectly excused. Kelly Wallace, thank you for standing by near Camp David. I'm sure if any news leaks out of there, you will have it for us. Thank you.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Is the Taliban supreme leader dead or alive? U.S. warplanes strike a compound where he was thought to be staying. We're going to have the latest live from Afghanistan to the Pentagon. Good morning. Thank you very much for joining us this morning. Good to have you with us. It is Wednesday, November 28. From New York, I'm Paula Zahn. Here are some of the major questions we're going to be looking at at this hour. Is Mullah Omar dead? U.S. warplanes hit a site where he and other Taliban leaders may have been. Also, terrorists in America how has the U.S. avoided other major terrorist attacks? Are the attorney general's strict new measures getting the job done? And in New York at ground zero, is the air hazardous? First, the latest headlines. For that, we turn to Bill Hemmer, who's standing by in Atlanta with our war alert good morning, Bill.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Correspondent:] Paula, good morning to you. Here's what's happening. The Taliban saying an area bombed yesterday by U.S. warplanes was not a leadership compound. They say Taliban leader Mohammad Omar was not there and that Omar is safe and unharmed. U.S. planes were acting on intelligence reports that Taliban and al Qaeda leaders might be in the compound southeast of Kandahar. Precision guided bombs were dropped and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld followed that action from central command headquarters in Florida.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Of Defense:] There has been an attack on, from the air, on a leadership compound southeast of Kandahar and I suspect they may very well end up showing some pictures of that tomorrow.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Any word if any notables were hit there?
[Rumsfeld:] It's, again, we're not physically in the compound and whoever was there is going to wish they weren't.
[Hemmer:] Regarding al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, a Taliban spokesman said earlier today, "We do not know his whereabouts. He is not in our territory." A search is on in the Indian Ocean for a crew member of a navy warship, the USS Russell about 740 miles southwest of India when a morning roll call revealed that Petty Officer Second Class Randy Glenn Witaker of Texas was missing. A search of the ship turned up no sign of Witaker. The ocean waters are now being searched. The federal government detaining nearly 600 people in the investigation that began after the attacks of 9-11. Most are accused of violating immigration rules and the attorney general, John Ashcroft, said that about 100 are charged with federal crimes.
[John Ashcroft, Attorney General:] The Department of Justice is waging a deliberate campaign of arrest and detention to protect American lives. We're removing suspected terrorists who violate the law from our streets to prevent further terrorist attack. We believe we have al Qaeda membership in custody and we will use every constitutional tool to keep suspected terrorists locked up.
[Hemmer:] About half of those who are charged with federal crimes are now free on bond. Two aid workers recently airlifted out of Afghanistan say they were well treated by the Taliban during months of detention. Heather Mercer and Danya Curry among eight aid workers left in a jail south of Kabul, freed by local people and then taken out of Afghanistan by U.S. helicopter. The Taliban charged them with preaching Christianity. They talked last night with CNN's Larry King.
[Danya Curry:] They really did treat us well, and even some of us, told us we were like their sisters and treated us exceptionally well considering. I mean I was angry at how I saw the Afghan women being treated, but I've fully forgiven them in my heart because I don't think they fully understand what they were doing.
[Heather Mercer:] My heart is in Afghanistan. The Afghan people are some of the most amazing people I've ever met and it's going to be a process. There's a lot to talk through, a lot of decisions to make, like Danya said. But I do hope to be a part of seeing this nation rebuilt, for sure.
[Hemmer:] President Bush, you may remember, on Monday welcomed Mercer and Curry home during a White House meeting. The two women are said to have then gone shopping. Not a bad place to go to get back to normal. Also in Washington, Senate Republicans say they want to give working Americans and their companies a holiday from Social Security taxes. Senator Pete Domenici proposing the payroll tax be suspended for the month of December as part of an economic stimulus package. The 12.4 percent tax, split evenly between the worker and the company in that plan. The tax holiday would cost about $38 billion. A lot more on this throughout the days and weeks ahead. Now back to New York and Paula, see you again in about, oh, 25 minutes time.
[Zahn:] All right, look forward to it. Thanks, Bill. As you just heard, the Pentagon says airstrikes hit a Taliban leadership compound at a time when Taliban supreme leader Mullah Mohammad Omar may have been there. CNN Pentagon's Bob Franken traveled with the secretary of defense yesterday Bob, good morning. What more can you tell us now?
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, it's interesting, while he was there and while he wasn't appearing in front of cameras during his tour of the central command, which is headquartered near Tampa, he slipped into a room and watched live televised images of the compound that was about to be hit. Now, according to Rumsfeld, that they don't know who they got, if anybody was in there. You heard just a moment ago when he was talking to reporters on the plane as we flew back. But various sources at the Pentagon say that intelligence on the ground had suggested that Omar would be there. They don't know if he was. A spokesman for Omar, as you know, has said that he is safe and unharmed, that it wasn't a leadership compound. What happens in these cases is that it sometimes takes a day or two for the intelligence sources to go back and sort out just who was there. Recently, one of the top Taliban al Qaeda leaders was found to have been killed in one of those bombing raids on a leadership compound and so there's some expectation here. But absolutely no new evidence yet Paula.
[Zahn:] I'm sorry, Bob. I was getting a little interference in my ear. I didn't realize you had wrapped it up there. Thanks so much. Check back in with you a little bit later on this morning. We we've reported, the Taliban is denying its leader is dead or injured. Let's go back to Afghanistan, where CNN's Christiane Amanpour joins us now from Kabul Christiane, what's the latest from there?
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, the latest is really from Pakistan on this particular issue that you're reporting, and it's the Pakistan, the Afghan ambassador to Pakistan who's been saying, again, that Mullah Omar has not been hurt, that he is "safe" and that this attack by the United States, they are claiming, was not on a leadership target. Of course, we have absolutely no way of confirming the claim. We also have no way of confirming what the U.S. hit there because, as you know, Western journalists are banned from Kandahar under the Taliban and there are almost no journalists able to see what the U.S. military is doing. So this is extremely difficult to pinpoint this very important matter that obviously everybody is very interested in, including, of course, the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden. Now, it's very unclear where he is, of course. U.S. forces looking for him, trying to tighten the noose against him. The Taliban representative again saying today that Osama bin Laden is not in areas under Taliban control. This contrasts with what both Northern Alliance officials here in Kabul feel. They feel that Osama bin Laden is probably somewhere in the Kandahar region or, indeed, in Jalalabad, and according to what the public statements coming from the U.S. are, that's what the U.S. thinks, as well. So we're still waiting and watching to see what was the result of that hit last night Paula.
[Zahn:] All right, Christiane, thanks so much for that update. So, with the fate of the Taliban's leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar, still in question, we ask Larry Johnson, formerly a member of the State Department's Office of Counter-Terrorism how Omar's death might impact the future of the Taliban. Larry Johnson joins us now from Washington. Welcome back. Good to see you this morning.
[Larry Johnson, Former State Department Official:] Hi, Paula.
[Zahn:] You know hi. You, no doubt, have heard what Bob Franken just reported out of the Pentagon, that intelligence sources there are saying that Omar was on the ground at the time of this attack. If he was killed, what next? What does that mean?
[Johnson:] Well, if he's killed, this is, again, further taking apart the leadership that has allowed al Qaeda to be a force in the world. And I think we have to draw the parallel with what happened in Nazi Germany when we saw their key leaders, Hitler die, when Goehring was taken into custody and others. Once that leadership falls apart, it is very difficult for those, you know, the troops to go forward. So this is going to be important. It sends another important message. During the Gulf War, the United States, by sticking to the agreement we made with the international community and leaving Saddam Hussein alive, it was perceived in that part of the world as weakness on our part. I think the question of U.S. weakness is going to be done away with now. They recognize that once you stir us up, once you kill our people, we're going to come after you and we're going to eliminate you. And Mullah Omar can bargain all he wants, but his days are numbered.
[Zahn:] Have you gotten any special insights this morning from any of your contacts about the effectiveness of that bombing?
[Johnson:] Just the folks I was hearing from last night were quite ebullient in their reaction to what was coming out, pretty happy. They thought if they didn't get Mullah Omar, they got some other key lieutenants and when you take apart leadership, it's not like these folks are a football team with four starters sitting on the bench ready to spring into action. When you take out the upper crust, you're really causing them some damage.
[Zahn:] We also know at the same time that General Tommy Franks has talked about U.S. forces concentrating or paying very special attention to two specific areas in Afghanistan, the area of Jalalabad in eastern Afghanistan and then, of course, that area around Kandahar.
[Johnson:] Sure.
[Zahn:] By his isolating those two areas, does that indicate to you that you think U.S. forces are any closer to closing in on Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda members?
[Johnson:] Yes, they're closer just by definition. As the Northern Alliance has spread its control around the country, as the Taliban has collapsed, naturally you're not going to go out and try to hide out in an area that you don't control because it makes it much easier to catch you. So that it's just, they're following the log they're using a combination of things, the logic of the situation as well as an enormous intelligence effort. I think we need to understand that the combination of human and technical sources that are being applied, when you know where the target areas are and you can bring those to bear, these folks don't realize what they're up against right now. They have grossly underestimated the United States and they're going to, I won't say live to rue the day, because I think they're going to die before they get to rue the day.
[Zahn:] Larry Johnson, as always, good to have your perspective on the air. Thank you so much for your time this morning.
[Johnson:] Thanks, Paula.
[Zahn:] Now, for his analysis, let's quickly turn to CNN military analyst Major General Don Shepperd, who joins us from Washington this morning. As we just maintained good morning, General the U.S. military focusing, of course, in on that Kandahar area for bin Laden and the Jalalabad area. What do you make of that effort?
[Maj. Gen. Don Shepperd , U.s. Air Force, Cnn Military Analyst:] Well, Paula, we've heard this term tightening the noose and it's been over used. But that's exactly what's happening. We are focusing our sensors and our intelligence on smaller and smaller areas. The northern portion of the country is in Northern Alliance and opposition hands. Now we're working on the southern part. And what you're seeing is the combination of human intelligence, the combination of military, the combination of other agencies, read that the CIA, saying this is where people are, this is where he is and going after them. It's, you can't move on the face of the earth without leaving a trail right now and that trail is leading to more and more key individuals.
[Zahn:] What information do you have this morning specifically on the question of whether Mullah Omar is dead or alive after this strong bombing campaign?
[Shepperd:] Pretty much the same as Larry Johnson. It's going to take a while to sort this out. One of the dangers there, of course, is you get into the Elvis syndrome. You do this bombing, you blow people and things apart and you never know for sure. That's one of the dangers of this. But it definitely, because of where it is and who we're dealing with and the secrecy that they want around and the mystery they want around their high leaders, we may not know for some time whether we've got him or not. But if we didn't get him this time, we'll get him next time.
[Zahn:] And if we ultimately get him, what kind of retaliation might the United States expect for his killing?
[Shepperd:] Paula, for sure we've been threatened with retaliation, but more important than that, we've already been hit. You can always find a reason to do nothing because you're afraid of what retaliation might take place. If we took that kind of view, we wouldn't even have a country. We'd still be under British rule. We are going after these people, as the president and secretary of defense have said, in a wide net. It's going to be a long, deep and wide war and we're seeing evidence of this now. Wherever these people gather, whether it's the people themselves or people that finance or train or house them, your next visitor may be the U.S. and coalition military or a 2,000 pound bomb.
[Zahn:] Another concern that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld now has expressed is his concern about what he described as mounting lawlessness in Afghanistan and he said the U.S. military faces a long and difficult fight even in towns and cities already seized by the Northern Alliance. How concerned are you about that?
[Shepperd:] I'm concerned, as is everyone concerned about that. The stabilization or the control of areas such as the northern part of the country is always in doubt. A lot of people have escaped. A lot of people have changed sides. They still have access to weapons. They may have weapons hidden. You can find them over a period of time attacking each other, as has happened before, or attacking other forces in the area. It's going to be a dangerous place for a long time. The important thing is to establish a government and establish the rule of law in Afghanistan and get on with the future of the country, hand it back to the Afghan people. It will be a long and difficult military, diplomatic and political journey. Hopefully it'll end in the right way.
[Zahn:] I think everybody is keeping their fingers crossed out there. General Shepperd, as always, good to spend some time with you this morning. Appreciate it.
[Shepperd:] Thank you.
[Zahn:] Still to come, the price of freedom is the attorney general doing a good job to protect against more terrorism? Also ahead, the World Trade Center cough and why some are now uttering the term lawsuit in a very clear voice. A little bit later on, the American flag and messages for Osama bin Laden. Those stories and more when we come back. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] We've been following a breaking news story, this morning, in East Orange, New Jersey, where a fire broke out in a dormitory at Seton Hall University. With us now on the telephone is CNN producer Dana Garrett with more details Dana.
[Dana Garrett, Cnn Producer:] Good morning, Carol. It is calm now at ton Hall University, though there are still emergency vehicles parked outside of Boland Hall, which is a residence facility, freshman residence, where a fire broke out at about 4:30, this morning. University officials confirm that three people died in that fire. They cannot confirm that they are students here, although that is their assumption; there's no other there are only resident students that live in that hall. The interesting thing, the sad thing that some students have reported, this morning, to us is that there had been a number of pranksters doing fire alarms before finals week, and so when the students this morning heard the fire alarms go off, many of them just felt that it was another prank and didn't pay attention. And then, obviously, smoke started filling the dorm they realized that it was serious and started to leave the building. Twenty in addition to the three fatalities, 25 students were injured, suffering from smoke inhalation to burns. They were all transported to area hospitals. And as I said, things are have calmed down at this point now and parents will be arriving on the scene, I'm sure, concerned. We will have regular updates, and when we have more we will get back to you.
[Lin:] Dana, are firefighters still going through the dormitory, looking for more victims right now.
[Garrett:] The university says that they are trying to confirm that everybody was out of the building. They evacuated the residence. There still are firefighters on the scene, though the fire is out, but they still continue to search the building to make sure that they can account for all the residents that lived in that facility.
[Lin:] Any word yet as to where the fire started?
[Garrett:] The fire began on a third-floor commons area. One of the students told me it was like a lounge area. But they at this point do not know how that started. But it didn't appear to be in a dorm room but more in a commons area.
[Lin:] And you have it confirmed that potentially the three students who died perhaps died because they didn't respond to the fire alarm?
[Garrett:] Well, there's no way to tell that right now. They there was very little information about how the students die except for the fact that they did die in the dorm, not in the hospital. But that is just one of the sad things that we are hearing is that many of many students said that many of them had just ignored the fire alarms when they first heard them, so, you know.
[Lin:] All right, Dana Garrett, CNN producer out on the scene of Seton Hall University. Twenty-five students injured, at least, and at least three dead. The search is under way for more victims.

[Brooke Alexander:] Hi, I'm Brooke Alexander in New York City with a whole new year of musical merriment stretching before us on WORLD BEAT. Coming up, out with the old, leveling a landmark in music history. In with the new, announcing this year's Grammy nominees. And can Creed continue their award winning streak? The last two Grammy ceremonies have been dominated by a single artist, first, Lauryn Hill, and then Carlos Santana. Will the trend continue this year or will the treasured trophies to musical merit be spread more evenly? Well, the first clue lies in the nominations, so let's go to Serena Yang in Los Angeles.
[Serena Yang, World Beat:] Thanks, Brooke. Well, the 43rd annual Grammy race is officially underway with this week's announcement of the nominees for the award show's biggest categories. [voice-over]: An all star lineup of artists was on hand to announce 12 of the Grammy's most notable categories, reflecting a diverse year in music, with a cross section of 25 artists winning three or more nominations.
[Michael Greene, Naras President/ceo:] We've got all walks of life, I mean, from Paul Simon and Steely Dan, to Marshal Mathers, Eminem, Beck in the middle.
[Greene:] You know, last year we had Santana, Lauryn Hill the year before. There's traditionally been like one artist that has been the odds on favorite to take home multiple Grammy awards. I just don't think that's true this year.
[Yang:] For Texas-based R&B; trio Destiny's Child, who collected a total of five nominations, the shower of Grammy attention caps a sparkling year.
[Beyonce, Destiny's Child:] Our year 2000 has definitely been a roller coaster and the great thing is it's just, the roller coaster is just going up and up and up and up and now we're nominated for four Grammies. Our album has sold eight million. We have the number one single. "Independent Woman" has been number one for eight weeks. We had four number one singles this year. We, I mean so many accomplishments and definitely to start off 2001, it started off perfectly with the Grammy nominations. We couldn't ask for anything.
[Yang:] Other leaders among the nominees were Dr. Dre with five and controversial rapper Eminem with four.
[David Foster, Producer/songwriter:] I was particularly glad to see Eminem get the recognition that I think that he deserves whether you agree or not with his lyrics, and I'm a parent, and I happen to not like what he says. But I think he's brilliant.
[Yang:] Shelby Lynne and Papa Roach led an especially eclectic field in the best new artist category, joining Brad Paisley, Jill Scott and Sisqo.
[Sisqo:] Artists really went for it this year. I think instead of just kind of, you know, putting out music for their fans and what have you, I think they were really, artists were really focusing on trying to create quality music that will be accepted by all people, you know, not just their fans. I can attest to that myself. I have a pretty strong fan base with Drew Hill but I definitely tried to step outside of my fan base to try to capture a Grammy.
[Yang:] Madonna's music became a candidate for record of the year, as did 'N Sync's chart topping hit "Bye Bye Bye."
[J.c. Chasez, 'n Sync:] I know that I grew up watching the Grammies and watching my heroes on the Grammies, you know. So it's pretty, it's a pretty big deal, you know? It's kind of like one of the top notch shows out there, you know? There are a handful of shows, you know, that you really hold, you know, special and, you know, this is a committee, you know? It's voted on by your peers, by people who understand music and your hope, you know, and these are the people that you're saying, you know, this is my contribution to music, you know, and these are music connoisseurs listening, you know, to your stuff going, OK, this guy, they're onto something. And so it's pretty important to have that. I guess, you're seeking that approval, in a way.
[Yang:] This year's nominations also reflect notable comebacks by long time absentees. Steely Dan's first studio album in 20 years grabbed three nominations, including album of the year for "Two Against Nature."
[Donald Fagen, Steely Dan:] I don't know, this last album, "Two Against Nature," really kind of, as far as I'm concerned, really buries all the other records and if you really want to get a sense of what it's, you know, we're about, it's really all contained in this CD.
[Walter Becker, Steely Dan:] Probably the best thing would be to get, take all of the old Steely Dan albums, throw 'em away...
[Fagen:] Yeah.
[Becker:] Get the new one, absorb that and then buy the old ones again and...
[Fagen:] That's what I would suggest as well.
[Becker:] ... and reexperience them in the context of the new one.
[Yang:] Don Henley's solo return swept up three nominations for his comeback album, "Inside Job." And Bon Jovi rounded off a successful comeback with two nominations, including best rock album for "Crush."
[Jon Bon Jovi:] Thematically, I think it's interesting because it's about guys that are very comfortable in their shoes. They're not trying to keep up with fads or fashions and being rather proud of what they've accomplished and where they hope to go and not making any bones about it.
[Yang:] And to round off a good year for veteran rockers, U2 scored two nominations for their single, "Beautiful Day."
[The Edge, U2:] We've always experimented, you know? We've always tried to do different things with the sound of the band. But with this record, we've tried to keep the essence of what it is to be a rock and roll band at the forefront and I suppose that is a radical sound now. There's not that much of that around, certainly in the charts.
[Yang:] Outside the mainstream nominations, Yousou N'Dour's critically acclaimed album "Joka " was nominated for best world music album. Canadian fiddler Natalie McMaster was among the nominees for best traditional folk album and Joanne Shenandoah led the nominees in the first ever Grammy category for Native American music. [on camera]: More than 10,000 members of the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences vote for the winners in 100 different categories. Of course, WORLD BEAT will continue to follow the awards process and we'll bring you a special show from the Grammy awards ceremony here in Los Angeles in February. I'm Serena Yang handing you back to Brooke in New York.
[Alexander:] The start of a new year is a quiet time for new releases, but let's see what is raising the tempo in the studio of our music critic, Luke Crampton. Here are the inaugural "Fresh Cuts" of 2001.
[Luke Crampton, Cnn Correspondent:] Former Escape vocalist Kandi Burris has been the most successful R&B; songwriter of the past few years, penning numerous hits for the likes of TLC and Destiny's Child. Still only 24, this prodigious songwriter, singer and producer's maiden album is a sugar coated mainstream delight showcasing her savvy pop, hip hop and R&B; instincts.
[Crampton:] Sting contributes five new compositions to the Disney soundtrack to "The Emperor's New Groove." Mixed results ensue. Two jolly cuts are interpreted by Tom Jones and Eartha Kitt, with Sting performing the remaining songs with an unusual lack of melody. Charm is restored with a guest appearance by Shawn Coven and a polished instrumental score by John Debney. Having reigned supreme in the U.S. over the past year, the best country music album of 2000 is now set for international exposure. "I Hope You Dance" affirms Lee Ann Womack's position as a new country queen blending traditional and contemporary strains with remarkable ease and superb song selection. I'm Luke Crampton. Those are the "Fresh Cuts."

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] More people but that is the expectation. Right now I want to check in with Christiane Amanpour for the latest reaction from Britain and before I get to that, Christiane, I wanted your reaction to part of an interview I did with King Abdullah earlier today where I asked him a series of questions as to what role he thinks U.S. policy in the Middle East might have played in the U.S.'s vulnerability attack and at one point in the interview he said, if peace had been achieved in July or an accord had been reached in July of 2000, this might not have happened. Do you have any thoughts on that?
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Paula, it's clearly anti-American feelings in the Middle East have been on the rise since the intifada which started in Israel in the territories eleven months ago. This is clear. Moderate Arab countries have warned the United States that this was happening and that is has been happening and Arab leaders have seen their people take to the street over the months of the intifada demanding that something be done on behalf of the Palestinians and also you've had guests on your programs this morning, notably Dennis Ross, the former Middle East peace envoy and chief negotiator who confirmed that anti-Americanism has been on the rise and those kinds of sentiments are more pronounced now than they have been perhaps ever. On the other hand, the same people, Dennis Ross and other experts on these matters say that it is not necessarily about there not being a peace agreement. They point out that in 1993, when the first attack was conducted on the World Trade Center building, that that was at the height of the peace process when it had just started really. The Oslo process and the governments of the Middle East, the United States, were all fully engaged, including the Palestinian, in trying to come to a peace agreement. Many, many people believe that despite the anti-Americanism that is palpable now on the streets of the Middle East, that it is not about having no peace agreement, that the terrorists who planned and meticulously carried out this catastrophe they believe would have done it peace agreement or no peace agreement because they are against the peace agreement in any event. They have spoken out clearly against the Oslo process, Paula.
[Zahn:] Christiane, if you would ... come back to you for more British reaction to the massacre that was unleashed yesterday. Right now I want to go to the floor of the Senate where the junior senator from New York is addressing her colleagues.
[Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton , New York:] Chuck has and all of our colleagues in the House, by the strong support we've received from the President, and I am very grateful. We've expressed our appreciation. Chuck and I will be going to New York this afternoon with FEMA and we could not ask for more than we've received in the immediate aftermath of this horrific attack but we are by no means any where near the end of what it will take to continue the search and rescue efforts. We are finding people even as we speak. Yet we know that there is a very grim task ahead. To do everything we can to find every person. To account for every single person who went to work. That's all they did. They went to work on a beautiful September day in New York. We will also stand united behind our President as he and his advisers plan the necessary actions to demonstrate America's resolve and commitment, not only to seek out an exact punishment on the perpetrators but to make very clear that not only those who harbor terrorist, but those who in any way, any aide or comfort whatsoever will now face the wrath of our country and I hope that message has gotten through to everywhere it needs to be heard. That you are either with America in our time of need or you are not. We also stand united behind our resolve as this resolution so clearly states to recover and rebuild in the aftermath of these tragic acts. You know, New York was not an accidental choice for these madmen, these terrorist, these instruments of evil. They deliberately chose to strike at a city which is a global city. It is the city of the 21st century. It epitomizes who we are as Americans and so this, in a very real sense, was an attack on America, on our values, on our power, on who we are as a people and I know because I know America that America will stand behind New York. That America will offer whatever resources, aide, comfort, support, that New Yorkers and New York require because the greatest rebuke we can offer to those who attack our way of life is to demonstrate clearly we are not cowards in any way whatsoever. I hope that within a short period of time, Senator Warner, we see scaffolding on the sides of the Pentagon. After we finish the search and rescue and recovery work that is being carried out heroically there, I hope we all see a clear signal that we are rebuilding. That our defenses are more resolute than ever and I hope similarly that lower Manhattan has the same kind of image to project because the reality will be that we are rebuilding and reconstructing and making clear that just as our military might is unchallenged and uncowed, so is our economic, our social, our political values epitomized by New York.
[Zahn:] All right, there you see it, the junior senator from New York, Hillary Clinton, pointedly talking about what needs to be done to confront these terrorists that launched these multiple attacks against the U.S. yesterday, making reference to the abominable spirit of New Yorkers and the collective strength to rebuild. Not making a reference to what President Bush just made an announcement of which is requesting immediate funding from Congress to deal with the rescue efforts and the cleaning up of the debris. So that is the very latest from here. Daryn, I want to go back to you and just make one more quick note about what rescue workers are telling us. Once again, they have every reason to believe that two people trapped in the rubble will be rescued. That they will be found alive and if that is true, that would bring the total to 11 of all of the victims who have been successfully brought out of this these horrendous ruins.
[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] And Paula, as those efforts go on in New York City, I'm sure thoughts and prayers from across the country and around the world go in to those rescue workers trying to save more lives. Another development in this story. Earlier this morning CNN received word that there were possibly planes in Canadian airspace and, of course, this would go against the shutdown of airspace across the U.S. and Canada. Let's bring our David Ensor. He's in our Washington, D.C. bureau. David, do you have any more information on these planes? Were they flying and perhaps do they have permission to do so?
[David Ensor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, we understand from Canadian sources that the planes are compassion flights but we have not been able to get confirmation of that from U.S. officials. We should have it soon. The feeling is that these planes are probably no threat to anyone but that has not been finally nailed down yet, Daryn. What is happening in the U.S. intelligence community and over in law enforcement is, of course, a tremendous amount of work. They are being flooded with all sorts of data intelligence gathered, but also received an unsolicited, countless e-mails and faxes are being sent to agencies from the White House to the CIA, claiming credit for the attacks, if credit is right word, threatening future attacks. Much of this information officials I have spoken to say looks pretty wacky, but they are not able to eliminate any of it. every lead is going to be checked. So there's a great deal of work to do. Now the information that they have so far still leads U.S. officials to believe that those involved in these attacks will likely be proven eventually to have links to the group led by Osama bin Laden, the fugitive Saudi terrorist who is apparently living in Afghanistan. However, the net has been spread wide. They are not ruling out other possibilities. There are some experts who say that the sophistication and highly coordinated nature of this attach suggests strongly that some kind of state sponsorship might have been involved. Officials, U.S. officials saying there's no evidence of that so far. However, they're not ruling it out. Some of these outside experts saying that pointing out that Iraq appears to have had some sort of a role in the Rumsi Usaf matter some years back and that some involvement by Iraq cannot be ruled out. U.S. officials saying they have no evidence of that, but they are spreading a very wide net indeed. Now they, officials are confirming that there were a couple of intercepts, presumably voices, spoken voices connected with the bin Laden group after the attacks that occurred yesterday, talking about how successful they were. They're not happy that that information got out and you can expect at the briefings that the closed-door briefings of the House and Senate that will occur that are scheduled to occur later today with the FBI, CIA and other leaders, briefing members of Congress, that there will be a strong appeal to them to avoid leaks of any kind of information about the investigation. There's a great deal of concern about that. That is a major concern as they go forward from here Daryn.
[Kagan:] David, I imagine that's going to be a tough balancing act. On one hand to keep up the integrity and investigation. As you mentioned, you don't want leaks to go out and yet this country is going to be so hungry for information and will only feel comforted if it knows that an investigation is moving forward.
[Ensor:] Well, that's right. The law enforcement and intelligence authorities of the country want it clear they're doing their jobs, that they are making progress, that they are gaining Intelligence. At the same time, they don't want to compromise their investigation which is in early stages when it could easily be compromised. So its going to be a difficult balancing act, as you say, and I nonetheless expect that we will be learning more as the day processes as to what they've got so far Daryn.
[Daryn:] A very good reason to check back with you at a later date, later hour. Thank you very much, David Ensor in our D.C. bureau Leon.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Alright. We've got a lot on deck for you this morning. We're continuing to cover every aspect of this story this morning. We have a number of live press conferences that are going to be getting underway any minute now. We're keeping our eye right now on one in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, which is just south of Pittsburgh, which is the site of one of those plane crashes. The FBI's going to be having a briefing there. They're also expecting the FBI to have a briefing at Boston's Logan Airport. So we'll keep an eye on those as well and we have also learned that Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, the company that occupied some 50 floors of one of those towers at the World Trade Center and has lost so many employees there. They are going to be having a press conference this hour as well. So we're going to have coverage of all three of those conferences for you and we understand that President Bush is going to be meeting with congressional leaders and we will have live coverage for you of that as well. So much more is coming up in just a couple of minutes. We'll take a break right now, but we are back with more in just a bit. But in the meantime, we want to give you a look at this in the aftermath of this attack. We've heard so many stories from those who witnessed the devastation in New York and in Washington, and here now is a look at how one man experienced it.
[Dr. Mark Heath:] My name is Mark Heath. I'm a cardiac anesthesiologists at Columbia Presbyterian at 168th Street. We saw two planes fly into the World Trade Center. I thought that they would need all hands on deck. So I jumped into some scrubs and I grabbed some medical stuff and just grabbed
[Unidentified Male:] Maybe leave the keys if the car so they can move it if they have to.
[Heath:] Is there a staging area?
[Unidentified Male:] They're evacuating the whole area.
[Heath:] Yes, but they have people who are hurt, right. They have to pull them out.
[Unidentified Male:] The estimate is we probably lost 400 firefighters.
[Heath:] Oh my God.
[Unidentified Male:] And God knows how many thousands of people.
[Heath:] So you want me to wait back here.
[Unidentified Male:] Stay away from any other high-rise building.
[Heath:] OK. Station up right here, OK? Why don't we set up? We were instructed by a fire chief to set up staging area right there. And the second building came down. I did what I could, got behind a car. I hope I live. I hope I live. It's coming down on me. Here it comes. I'm getting behind the car. Everything went black. My eyes are open unless I've been blinded, it's black as night. Just that brief, I was behind a car. I tried to smash a car window so that I could climb into the car and get some fresh air, but I couldn't break the window, so I sort of went down into the gutter under the car. I'm sorry I came down, I just had to help people. I apologized for my family for going down and trying to help, because I really didn't think I would make it out. I have to go find people who need help, because I don't think I'm one of them. You okay, sir.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Heath:] OK. Can I just get a toot up the respirator? Can I get a toot? I just need a couple of breaths. It was hard to see. Everybody's eyes were full of dust and stinging so it was actually quite hard to see anything.
[Kagan:] We're going to interrupt this piece right now. We want to take you live to State Department. This is Richard Boucher taking questions and giving answers from reporters. Let's listen in
[Richard Boucher, State Department Spokesman:] But it's as each mission looks at a security situation, where does it feel safest, where does it feel its vulnerabilities are? Are there vulnerabilities we can correct by local actions and things like that. And I would say that the other thing around the world is our missions have been asking host governments for support and assistance in all sorts of things, closing down streets, adding more guards, adding more patrols, you know, having visible police presence, things like that, and in every single case we've gotten the support that we've asked for Betsy.
[Question:] Some countries have offered assistance to this country, and you know, teams of people to help and in the rubble of the World Trade Center and things like that. Has the U.S. responded to this? Have we accepted or rejected any offers?
[Boucher:] We've been passing on all that information to the Federal Emergency Management Agency to make sure they know what's available from overseas sources. There's indeed an you pouring of offers, specialized teams, just a whole lot of different things, equipment that people around the world have. I think we leave it to the federal authorities to sort of sort it out, figure out if there's stuff that we find would find useful. There's also, as you know, been an outpouring of support and assistance in the United States among our own people in terms of giving blood, or teams from the country coming to help with the search. I'm not sure that's necessary. But let the appropriate federal authorities sort it out. I'm not aware we've asked for anything at this point Terry.
[Question:] They said there's a accumulating mound of evidence and very soon the government may make a decision on what they should do. Are you steering away from the general assumption that this is bin Laden related? When he talks about the evidence, is that pointing any other direction that you can share with us?
[Boucher:] I'm not steering you in any direction whatsoever. I'm not into this. We're not pointing fingers. We're not saying, who done it? We will do it carefully. We will maintain the ability to collect information and not reveal the sources of it. And we will sure make the decisions in a careful manner at the right time. And I'm not intending to steer you toward, away or any direction whatsoever. I'm not driving that car.
[Question:] Return to Washington, did the secretary have telephone contact with the president?
[Boucher:] No, they didn't actually talk until he got back to Washington. Rich Armitage, of course, the deputy secretary was here, was working with the entire national security team. And the secretary talked to Mr. Armitage numerous times throughout the day. They can talk when they need to and this works out for both of them, just didn't happen to be the case yesterday..
[Question:] You said no warning that led to the closing of 50 embassies.
[Boucher:] No particular warnings. There's obviously worldwide threats.
[Question:] That's what I wanted to know. Have there been any new warning that lead to new concern about subsequent actions?
[Boucher:] I think the warning that we've issued before in terms of the Trade Center second warning update, we did last week. Those are also still apply. I don't have any new information on that.
[Question:] Richard, the king of Morocco canceled the trip to Muritone and the king of Jordan was also on his way here and also returned home. Is there any possible relationship between that and this event, in the sense that there's a dichotomy between the government that condemn the attacks and the people in streets who are all supporting it?
[Boucher:] Once, again I'm really down here to tell you that we can't the secretary can't brief right now. I wasn't coming to deal with the dichotomies in the world. I really don't feel I can do that right now. The two windows look like early afternoon or later in the afternoon. So between now and the end of the day. I'm sorry. I don't want to get us all...
[Question:] Some have to go back to offices.
[Boucher:] I don't want to get back here at some time, because I speculate at this point. I got to talk.
[Question:] Not before 1:00 or 2:00?
[Boucher:] Can you give us a half-hour warning?
[Question:] Yes, we'll give you as much warning as possible. And a half hour seems more than reasonable. OK, thank you.
[Kagan:] We are listening to Richard Boucher, State Department spokes,am. We'll wrap up what he had to say in just a moment, but while he was speaking, we got some very important information to us here at CNN. Word from the FAA, of course you're aware that flights were apparently or possibly supposed to resume across the U.S. at Noon Eastern, 40 minutes from now. The FAA saying now, that is not going to happen. They are not going to clear the hold on flights across the U.S. We don't have word on when the next deadline be as to when flights might resume. But very importantly, the FAA saying that those flights not resume across the U.S. 40 minutes from now, as was originally scheduled Leon.
[Harris:] That's going to complicate matters for quite a few people, because I heard reports this morning that people had been driving from city to city to catch ahead, to get ahead of their travel plans for the day to perhaps get to the city they were leave on their connecting flight on out of, so now it's going to complicate matters even further for them. So we're keep eyes on that, and report to you the latest details as we get there here. In the meantime now, let's check in with our Kate Snow, who is on Capitol Hill Kate.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Leon, Congress been in session for just over an hour, both the Senate and the House. The House taking little break right now. But on both sides, in both chambers, what we are hearing and what we are seeing is raw emotion for members of Congress. They are talking about the horrific events of yesterday. There are themes emerging. One theme that the Congress is unified, that there are no party lines here anymore. These attacks were attacks on the U.S.'s freedom. They were acts of cowardice, and a Congress is prepared to fight whoever is responsible.
[Rep. Richard Gephardt , Speaker Of The House:] Make no mistake, this was an act of war against the United States, and all of our people, and we will not be divided. All of us, the president, the Congress, and the American people, are today and will be tomorrow and in all the tomorrows totally and completely united in our determination to begin the process of healing and to take swift action, to see that the people who committed this horrible crime are properly punished. May god shed his grace on this great and wonderful country and all of our people.
[Snow:] Dick Gephardt getting standing ovation for his comments echoed in the Senate chamber by Senator Daschle and Senator Lott. Senator Charles Schumer, the senior senator for New York, also spoke to a short time ago. He smoke very emotionally. He talked about his daughter, who goes to school in a building right next door to Twin Towers, and for two hours he and wife struggle to find her, weren't sure of her whereabouts, then the others missing in New York city.
[Sen. Charles Schumer , New York:] Every one in New York right now knows somebody who is missing. I know a call, someone from the 104th floor, works for the good firm of Cantor & Fitzgerald. We can't find hardly anybody from that firm, he called his parents, told them he loved them, and they haven't heard from him since.
[Snow:] That emotion leading up to a vote later tonight. We expect to hear from every senator and every House member today about these terrible events, but they are voting on this. This is resolution, a joint resolution of the House and the Senate bipartisan. It says the Senate and House of Representatives condemn in the strongest possible terms the terrorist. It talks about extending deep condolences. "We are certainly the United States. People will stand united. We commend the heroic actions of the rescue workers, volunteers and state and local officials." This resolution goes on to thank foreign leader and individuals who have expressed solidarity with the United States. It says, "We are Committed to support increased resources in the war to eradicate terrorism, and talk about supporting the president and declares September 12th, 2001 should be a national day of unity and mourning. And when the Congress adjourns today, which we expect later on this evening it stands adjourned out of respect to the victims of the terrorist attacks. Leon, back to you.
[Harris:] Thank you very much. Kate Snow on Capitol Hill. You know, many are going to withhold the process of mourning until the process of finding out who is inside that building is complete. Let's go up now to New York now. Paula standing by on the roof Paula.
[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Thanks so much, Leon. We have talked so much this morning about how New Yorkers are shattered by the loss of life here. We certainly don't understand the magnitude of the tragedy just yet. But I want to check in with Gary Breece right now, who is the executive director of the International Association of Fire Chiefs. Welcome. Thank you very much for joining us this morning, sir.
[Gary Breece, Exec. Dir., Intl. Association Of Fire Chiefs:] Good morning.
[Zahn:] What I want to say, is just based on the reaction I've gotten from people in the street, the news that in many ways has hit New Yorkers the hardest is that some 260 firefighter and police officers are believed dead; 260 perhaps of the initial 400 firefighter that were sent into the line of duty. We the city of New York has lost its fire chief, as well its deputy fire chief. What kind of message do you have for the rest of the country today about the kinds of risks you all take take in take on day in and day out?
[Breece:] The firefighters of this nation are doing exactly what firefighters are supposed to do, setting aside their own grief, their own passion, and beginning to search for survivors. That's the message we need to deliver to the American public today, is that the fire service is moving forward to do everything that possibly can, to identify, locate and rescue survivors.
[Zahn:] I understand that. And I understand the enormous commitment all of you make to the jobs, and yet talking with one of our reporters earlier this morning, Gary Tuchman, who is talking about how, and indeed, this enormous loss has to affect the morale of the firefighter who still have to go to work and deal with the gruesomeness of this tragedy here.
[Breece:] It affects every firefighter in the nation. We have now on the ground in New York City 12 urban search-and-rescue teams that beginning the work of organizing the rescue efforts to assist the New York city fire department. This is a tremendous effort, well beyond anything ever attempted in the past. If you back to Oklahoma City, you recognize that it took us working 24 hours a day working in a five-story building 10 days to clear that site. The enormity of this situation in New York City is beyond anybody's imagination. But you can rest assured that the fire service will not rest until every potential survivor has been located and a rescue attempt has been made, and as many casualties have been lee moved from the situation as possible.
[Zahn:] This horrible loss comes on the heals of New York City losing many, many other firefighters here to catastrophes. Have you given any thought to setting up any kind of fund for the family members of those who have been lost?
[Breece:] Those discussions are initially taking place right now. But quite frankly, we are focused on providing as much assistance as we can to both the New York City fire department as well as Arlington County fire department for the Pentagon rescues. We have two sites that going on with 16 urban search-and-rescue teams, and thousands of firefighter working on both of these sites.
[Zahn:] All right.
[Breece:] That's the first priority today.
[Zahn:] All right, Gary, you just mentioned the 16 urban search- and-rescue teams. Give us this to the best of your knowledge what they will confront, and not only the rescue operation part of this, but the cleanup.
[Breece:] Well, the biggest factor we're working against right now is time. About 90 percent of the survivors come out in the first 24 hours. And we're on that time deadline right now. That's why it's so important that the teams are organized, get into begin, working as quickly as possible, work with the firefighter in New York City now, and get the rescue attempted and succeeded. The longer we go into this rescue effort, the less chance of recovering survivors. We will stay as long as any potential at all for rescuing survivors.
[Zahn:] I know you've looked at the same pictures I have. I have been sickened for over 24 hours now. I know you guys always have hope, you will find folks in, in debris. But when you look at these horrific images, are you surprised so far nine folks have been rescued including six firefighters and three police officers, and possibly two civilians very shortly?
[Breece:] No. We're not surprised at all that so few rescues are being made.
[Zahn:] I'm actually suggesting the opposite. The fact that 11 people could potential I will be found alive. I mean, we know that nine have already been rescued and two are in the process of being rescued. It seems a miracle that those of looking at this debris the tons and tons of debris. Well understand that we don't know exactly where those rescues came from in lower Manhattan. We don't know if they came from the World Trade Center buildings themselves, or surrounding building. There's probably 10 or 15 buildings that surround the World Trade Center that need to be searched, that are partially collapsed, so there's plenty of opportunities to find both rescuers and civilians. Gary, before we let you go, any final thoughts as to what your colleagues have experienced and will experience in the weeks to come? All right, essentially, we lost Gary Breece, but I think he's given us very good insight into how seriously the firefighters approached their jobs, how willing they are to take on the risks they do, and how willing they will continue to be, to go into this rubble of this massive tragedy, to attempt to rescue folks. I think the most important point Gary just made, that the majority of the your rescues, or 90 percent of them, will happen within 24 hours of the initial impact of an explosion or a fire, and we continue to wish the New York City fire department and all these urban rescue teams that have come here to help out very good luck indeed as they go about this dreadful process of trying to find people alive, and that tons and tons of concrete and cement, and what some folks have likened this morning to nuclear winter. Daryn, that's it from New York for the time being, and we'll come back to you later. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Ralitsa Vassileva, Cnn Anchor:] Images of horror, of devastation, of grief are effecting people around the world.
[Jonathan Mann, Cnn Anchor:] And for Americans living abroad it has been especially hard. Jim Bitterman reports.
[Jim Bitterman, Cnn Correspondent:] Four thousand miles and an ocean away, worshippers in these distant pews were in no less shock than if they had been looking on from the streets of lower Manhattan. In this globalized world with its globalized terror, you can be an American in Paris and be just as grief stricken. Church man knew people came to grieve together and used the moment to warn against letting the wrong emotions carry the day.
[Rev. Pierre Whalon, Bishop Elect:] Yes, we need to go find these people. And we need to deal with them with justice. Not
[Bitterman:] In the end, it was more than just a shared empathy Americans do. Those who's lives led them to Paris are often exactly the sort of people who know New York, who know Washington and fear for friends left behind. Expatrioted but still patriots. Some of whom believe their homeland has been too disengaged from world affairs.
[Joe Smallhoover, Paris Attorney:] I really hope that it brings us out of isolation. You cannot make peace worldwide. You cannot have peoples living together if they don't communicate. And the only way to do that is to come out of isolation and work together.
[Bitterman:] The priest at the Episcopal cathedral here remembered the words of Douglas McArthur at the end of World War II, " [I] f we will not devise a more equitable system than war," the General said, " [A] rmageddon will be at our doors." [voice-over]: But the words that echoed longest after the prayer service was over were the ones that came at the very end. Words most in the church had learned from childhood. But in the now and forever less innocent world words who's meaning will never be quite the same. Jim Bitterman, CNN, Paris.
[Mann:] We leave you this hour with some of the images, the words...
[Vassileva:] The sadness and grief from people around the world.
[Unidentified Male:] I can only say that all of those who have lost their lives, and indeed those the related and have loved ones who have lost their lives are very much in my thoughts and prayers.
[Unidentified Female:] I react to the families hearing the news. How their lives are never going to be the same. And I feel their pain. I saw that building collapse and I broke down in tears. I was just sobbing because this is pain. This is human suffering.
[Unidentified Male:] We are here to lay some wreaths, some flowers and to also show our sympathy in Action so that the American people understand the Palestinians are not their enemy.
[Jim Rodgers, Lord Mayor Of Belfast:] On behalf of the citizens of Belfast, I would like to extend our deepest condolences to the people of the United States of America following the terrible atrocity.
[Pope John Paul Ii:] My hearts and sympathy is with the American people subjected to human terrorist acts which have taken the lives of thousands of innocent human beings has caused unspeakable sorrow in the hearts of all men and women.

[Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] Israel is pressing forward with widespread attacks on Palestinian targets after six Israeli soldiers died in an ambush earlier this week. CNN's Jerrold Kessel is in Jerusalem this morning with the latest developments there good morning, Jerrold.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Carol. And, indeed, Israel pressing on relentlessly with its counter strikes, revenge attacks, if you like, after the killing of those six soldiers. But even apart from this Israeli military action, which has been rather extensive during the night and early this morning, there's been a potentially an important political development within the last hour and that is the arrest by Palestinian security officials of the three members for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. That's a ultra nationalist group. And they're held, those suspects are held responsible for the killing back in October, four months ago, of an Israeli cabinet minister. Now, the reason this is important or potentially so is that Israel had been demanding and saying that Yasser Arafat would remain penned up in the town of Ramallah, in his headquarters there on the West Bank, unless he arrested all those responsible for the killing of that Israeli cabinet minister. If this is, as Palestinian security officials are confirming to CNN, that they have made these arrests overnight, early this morning in the town of Nablus to the north of Ramallah, if that does satisfy the Israelis, it could be the first key tentatively put in the lock of that metaphorical door which has been surrounding Yasser Arafat and keeping him penned up in the town of Ramallah on the West Bank Carol.
[Costello:] All right, Jerrold Kessel reporting live for us from Jerusalem this morning. Thank you.

[Sydney:] OK, what happens when a little boy from an English coal- mining town, surrounded by a macho dad and brother, decides to put down his boxing gloves and strap on ballet shoes? The answers lie in "Billy Elliot," a highly-anticipated new British film starring an Academy Award nominee and a talented young newcomer. Mark Scheerer taps out the details.
[Mark Scheerer, Cnn Correspondent:] He knows he'll never be "Rocky," so he takes a swing at "Swan Lake." [Begin Video Clip, "billy Elliot"]
[Unidentified Actress:] Why don't you join in?
[Scheerer:] In "Billy Elliot," the 11-year-old title character, played by Jamie Bell, has a hard enough time living in a northeastern English coal-mining town torn by labor strife. The last thing he needs is for his dad to find out he's taking ballet lessons. [Begin Video Clip, "billy Elliot"]
[Unidentified Actor:] You, out, now!
[Scheerer:] Bell, the now-14-year-old whom director Stephen Daldry and the film's producers found after a lengthy search, turns out to have had a similar background since taking up dance at age 6.
[Jamie Bell, Actor:] Eventually, the boys at school found out, and they kind of said the usual hassle, like, "poof," "ballerina boy," "tutu girl." And they used to do, you know, that stupid thing where they kind of do that. And they kind of do that and then they kind of do that. They did that and all the rest of that kind of thing. But them saying that just gave me more determination to do it, because I wanted to prove to them that it wasn't just for girls, it was for boys, as well. [Begin Video Clip, "billy Eliot"]
[Julie Walters, Actress:] This will sound kind of strange, Billy, but for some time now, I've been thinking about the Royal Ballet School.
[Bell:] Aren't you a bit old, Miss?
[Walters:] Not me. You. I'm the bloody teacher!
[Scheerer:] Julie Walters, who earned an Oscar nomination opposite Michael Caine in "Educating Rita," plays Billy's dance teacher. She says she studied a British documentary about small-town dance teachers, and also observed the one who actually teaches the young actor, Jamie Bell.
[Walter:] She's ancient, for a start. And she'd say: "All right, class, we're getting ready to start now. In position." So she'd get them all in position. And then she would switch on a tape recorder and there would be a French woman saying, "le premiere positione,". And that was it. She'd never do anything else. And occasionally, she'd do a stretch, you know, a bit of a wheezy old stretch down with them and things like that. But she never she couldn't dance at all.
[Scheerer:] "Billy Elliot" vents his frustration and anger through the soles of his feet. Does he silence all his foes by making it to the Royal Ballet School? We're not telling. But Jamie Bell didn't exactly silence his.
[Bell:] I think they just got fed up with picking on me. And I think they just got a bit bored, so they moved on to somebody else. I don't think they've changed or anything.
[Scheerer:] Mark Scheerer, CNN Entertainment News, New York.
[Sydney:] Tomorrow on SHOWBIZ, Joan Allen contends with controversy as the vice-presidential candidate in her new film. And Tim Meadows is super suave, as he brings his "Ladies' Man" character from the small screen to the big one.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] And now, another developing international story: at least four people are dead, about two dozen injured in a high-speed train derailment north of London. Authorities say the train was traveling at 115 miles an hour when it jumped the tracks around noon, local time. in Hatfield. CNN's Tom Mintier has the latest for us now from the crash site. Tom, what do we know?
[Tom Mintier, Cnn Correspondent:] Lou, this is the third major rail disaster in Britain in as many years. Unlike the previous two, the casualty list is not as long. There are four confirmed dead right now and 26 seriously injured, seriously injured enough to be taken to the hospital. There was a total of 80 people that were hurt. Most of them were treated at the scene, here in Hertford where the accident happened. Normally, the journey is a quick one from King's Cross in north London to Leeds at speeds reaching 120 miles an hour, but less than 15 minutes after this journey started, it ended tragically with three of the cars coming off of the track going down into an embankment. One witness said that the rail car that is used as a buffet car, the top was entirely ripped off. Most of the people, by the time emergency services came, were on the side of the track sitting on their valises, or on their bags in a stunned atmosphere. What one passenger said, he said, he heard a loud bang, and the next thing he knew, the carriage was off the track.
[Unidentified Male:] I heard a loud bang. I felt the vibration throughout the whole train and the vibration got worse and worse. You can sense the train slowly going out of control. But the driver seemed to, sort of, catch it and it just slowed down in time until it got to a halt before it hit anything, before it lost control of it.
[Unidentified Female:] I just grabbed the hand of the man in front of me and just let if happen. I honestly didn't know what was going on and I didn't know what was going to happen. But everything is fine in our carriage. So, I'm just very grateful.
[Unidentified Male:] There was a big bang and I can only liken it like a very heavy air turbulence and then really followed by a pretty fast deceleration. So, you bounce along quite a bit. You obviously realize you are off the rails at that time. There was one jolt and then a few seconds later, sort of multiple jolts and a window two seats up from me smashed, so, a stone had hit and the whole thing shattered and then a, probably, jolt of about 30 seconds, something like that, then ground to a halt.
[Mintier:] The investigation is still continuing. But the police and fire officials say that they have already made a complete search of the area. And they don't say that they're expecting to find any other victims. One other interesting thing, normally, when a train derails, the front cars go off. In this train derailment, the back cars went off Lou.
[Waters:] Tom Mintier, north of London.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We are going to go ahead and start with the situation in Colorado, beginning with the capture. The nationwide hunt for seven armed prison escapees in Texas is now over. The police have their men. The last two fugitives were taken into custody just hours ago. Patrick Murphy Jr. and Donald Newbury surrendered peacefully. They did that after they gave an interview to a Colorado Springs television anchor. The two men had been holed up at a Holiday Inn. We are going to bring you parts of that interview that aired on Colorado television and here on CNN in just a bit. But first, let's go our Frank Buckley who is spent a long night in Colorado Springs, Colorado, following the latest on the situation. Frank, good morning.
[Frank Buckley, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Daryn. The fugitives are in custody. The manhunt that began on December 13th is over. It ended after a six-hour long standoff at the Holiday Inn here in Colorado Springs, where the two fugitives were inside a room. They were discovered at about 10 o'clock last night. That's when negotiations began with them between the police. At some point, the police brought in a television anchor person, as you say, and the interview continued with him. They made a an arrangement in which each person would get to speak with the anchor person for five minutes. And then they gave themselves up. It they did, in fact the fugitives changed their appearance from their appearance that we had seen on the mug shots that had been circulated for quite some time. Both Patrick Murphy and Donald Newbury had it was believed to have they it was believed that they had done their best to try to change their appearance using hair dyes. And they, in fact Murphy talked about this during his interview with the television reporter, saying that the fugitives joked among themselves about how they looked different. They used hair dyes and used other methods to try to conceal their identities. Now, the two that are in custody, Murphy and Newbury, join the four others: George Rivas, the alleged ringleader of the group, Michael Rodriguez, Joseph Garcia and Randy Halprin, who are all in custody. A fifth person, Larry Harper killed himself, according to police, during the stand-off that occurred on Monday here in Woodland Park, just outside of Colorado Springs, about 20 miles away. One of the people who has reacted to what has happened is the mother of Aubrey Hawkins. He is the Irving police officer Irving, Texas, police officer who was killed during an armed robbery of an Oshman's Sporting Goods store in Irving, Texas. This was on Christmas Eve. It was believed that the fugitives were involved in that. And they stole, according to police, tens of thousands of dollars and a number of weapons. And during that armed robbery, Hawkins, who responded to the scene, was shot to death, shot 11 times, and then run over by a car. Hawkins' mother earlier responded to some of the comments made by one of the fugitives who talked during his interview about the fact that he wasn't able to get rehabilitation in a prison facility.
[Jayne Hawkins, Mother Of Slain Officer:] He's talking about rehabilitation in the prisons, and awe with him, you know. He wants all this rehabilitation. Then I suggest he go to work and not commit a crime and get in the prison system and expect us to educate them. They can go to work. They can seek financial aide. There are many ways to get an education without expecting the prison system to do it for them. And, you know, I mean, if they make one mistake and they are able to rehabilitated, I think our system will take care of that.
[Buckley:] So the fugitives are also saying, during their interview, that the reason they came to Colorado was completely a random choice. They said that they were driving up through a snowstorm from Texas, and they decided just to go to Colorado. First going to Buffalo, Colorado, then January 1st, according to police, they believe they arrived in Woodland Park. And Woodland Park, again, is there's an RV park, where they spent the next three weeks, between January 1st and January 27th, when the first arrests occurred Daryn.
[Kagan:] Frank, a couple of questions for you here. First, Officer Hawkins' gun, I understand that they found it with these two fugitives?
[Buckley:] That's well, we hadn't been told that the gun was found. Yesterday, we asked authorities if that gun had been recovered. We were told that, no, it hadn't been. In fact, we now know that after, I guess, the law enforcement officials have had a better opportunity to look at these weapons, we were told today that, in fact, Officer Hawkins'

[Begin "on The Shelf Cd's") Warren Haynes, Gov't Mule:] We try and mix everything together in a new fresh sort of way and come up with a new voice, so to speak, but not by looking around us, but by looking backwards.
[Mark Bryan, Musician:] There's some different sides, different musical styles maybe than I've come across before, or actually it's everything I've done, but collaborated on to one record, so it's got some variety.
[Ag, Rapper:] It was at this point where I said I should get it for me, you know what I mean, where both worlds can relate I can be a mediator, you know that I mean, give them the party, give them the serious, give them the conscience, but at the same time give them what's me. [End "on The Shelf Cd's"]
[Moret:] With a debut album and a hit single, a young music maker named Sammie is beating back comparisons to other single-name child stars before him like Stevie and Michael. Rachel Wells caught up with the Miami-based seventh-grader at a New York photo shoot.
[Sammie, Singer:] A lot of people say I have a old soul, and it trips them out just to be with me, and they forget that I'm just a 13- year-old boy.
[Anglia Baxter, Sammie's Mother:] He's still very much a kid, but I think everyone sees first that he's very mature for his age and as a kid. His vocabulary is very raw and he could pretty much and relate and talk to anyone on almost any level.
[Rachel Wells, Cnn Correspondent:] When did you know this is what you really like to do? Do you remember?
[Sammie:] I wanted to be a professional at the age of eight, because I did my first performance in the school, in the cafeteria and stuff, and kids were going crazy. I mean, I did real good. I got a lot of attention from there on out. I was like, hey, I can get used to this, you know, being in the spotlight and things.
[Wells:] What is "I Like It"? What is it? What is that little song about?
[Sammie:] "I Like It," it's just a fun song really, saying how you like to spend time, or you see this girl and every time she looks at you you're like, "oh yes!" I love making videos because it's like your day, Sammie day! I mean, everything you want, you got. You got the fruit basket, and then you got somebody fanning you and cleaning your face every time your sweat drips. And it's just a lot of fun. It's hard work, also. You do one scene like 40,000 times until you get it, like, perfect.
[Wells:] Let's talk about the album itself. What is "From The Bottom To The Top"?
[Sammie:] It means a lot of different things. I mean, one, the bottom is Miami. So I would say, coming from Miami all the way to the top of the map. It also means that I'm coming from like the average, original, normal kid to, like, the biggest superstar of the world.
[Wells:] What about those who say the stardom at a young age man, you could be a flash in the pan? Is there some sort of pressure like, I'm a kid, I'm only 13?
[Sammie:] No, I don't think I'm going to be one of those overnight things, something happened to Sammie and Sammie is not big anymore, because I have more than one dream if music doesn't work out. I still want to be a biologist, or a cartoonist, or a football player, or a basketball player million things million other things to do.
[Wells:] Rachel Wells, CNN Entertainment News, New York.
[Moret:] That's all we have for now, but tomorrow on "SHOWBIZ THIS WEEKEND," Bill Tush talks to "American Beauty"'s Kevin Spacey on Oscar's red carpet. That's 10:00 a.m. Eastern right here on CNN. In Los Angeles, I'm Jim Moret. We leave you now with more music from Sammie. Have a great weekend.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Universities often charter planes to trips to sports games; this in order to cut down on lost time and to cut down on money as well corporations do the same thing. But CNN's Charles Feldman, a pilot himself, reports that some of the regulations that govern commercial airlines do not apply to the smaller fleets.
[Charles Feldman, Cnn Correspondent:] Just why a Lear jet charter flight carrying famed golfer Payne Stewart crashed in South Dakota in 1999, killing Stewart and five others, remains somewhat of a mystery. Although the National Transportation Safety Board has determined that the probable cause of the accident was the flight crew's incapacitation, following the loss of cabin pressurization, the NTSB has not been able to determine why the de-pressurization occurred in the first place. And why is that? Because the 23-year-old aircraft was not required to be fitted with a flight data recorder the way big airliners are.
[Jim Hall, Former Chairman, Ntsb:] So, we ended up with what was a very important investigation, without having the information available to the board to make recommendations to prevent an event like that from occurring.
[Feldman:] The business jet fleet in the United States has just about doubled in the last decade; some 7,000 of these small jets now fly either for hire from charter companies, or as part of a corporation's very own aircraft fleet. But the federal aviation regulations that govern the large commercial airlines, regulations on everything from pilot training to aircraft safety systems don't always apply to the expanding business jet fleet.
[Hall:] Training is an important issue in that area and I think the board would like to see training get more attention, and see an increased use of simulators on these type of aircraft, similar to what we see with scheduled air service and the larger aircraft operating in that service in the United States.
[Feldman:] Business jet travel is no longer just for the CEO. An estimated 50 percent of passengers on business air craft are now middle managers. Mark Cobza's construction company in Florida uses this business jet to transport engineers and executives to various sites.
[Mark Cobza, Ceo, Aerial Companies:] Performance in our business means everything; it saves our executives time, and it also saves customers time and money.
[Feldman:] Time, yes, but what about safety? The safety record of business jet is apparently roughly equal to or even better than the scheduled airlines, but that may change. More and more companies are chipping in to buy a piece of a business jet, a practice called fractional ownership, often cheaper than chartering a jet. But these corporately owned plans operate under less stringent rules than do charter flights for hire. Nevertheless, some point out that there is more to safety than government regulations.
[Jack Olcott, National Business Aviation Assn:] It's also a culture. Business aviation, use of jet airplanes for business travel, adopts a very stringent culture of training, of maintenance...
[Feldman:] Aviation technology may be leaping far ahead of aviation regulation. [on camera]: Some new business jets coming on the market are certified to be flown by just one pilot, as opposed to the two pilot crews currently mandated for most commercial airliners. The question is: just because a jet plane can be flown by one pilot, does that mean that it should be? Charles Feldman, CNN, Los Angeles.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] In just a few hours we're going to get a handle on how Americans are earning, spending and saving.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] If they're saving at all these days. Here now with details on that data is Christine Romans.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Correspondent:] More numbers to crunch. And it's been so interesting after yesterdays numbers. At the end of the day, the market was able to, really, I don't know, rationalize it a little bit, and you saw only a modest Dow loss and actually a Nasdaq rally. So yesterday's data was very, very important, in terms of psychology in these markets. We're going to get more data today, and it almost looks as if it's going to take on heightened importance all of the data today, because they're looking to see whether it confirms or contradicts what we heard yesterday. And what we heard yesterday, of course, is that the U.S. economy continues at a very robust pace. And there are some signs there of inflation broadening out beyond just the oil sector. What we get today is data on earning and spending. Among them, personal income, it is expected for the month of March to increase six-tenths of a percent, and consumption is expected also up six- tenths of a percent. The Bridge Survey has it up five-tenth of a percent, but the Reuters poll has it up six-tenth of a percent. So we're looking for about an equal gain in income and spending there for the month of March. Now, there's other data that comes out as well, more minor data, all for the month of April, including the New York National Association of Purchasing Management Survey, this is a smaller regional survey that is seen, sort of, as a precursor. It gives people an idea of what might be coming up for the national report. There's the Chicago Purchasing Management Index, it's just like that New York one, but only for Chicago. And the University of Michigan Sentiment Index, this is going to be a final reading for April on that one and the last time we heard 110.2. Some are looking for maybe that one to pull back just a little bit. But what they're going to be looking for, obviously, are more signs of inflation, particularly in that Chicago PMI; there is a price component in that one. Oil prices have come off just a little bit from the last time this report was taken, so maybe it will pull back. But it is interesting. You look at what some of the expectations are for the Prices Paid Index, of that Chicago Purchasing Managers Index, and J.P. Morgan has an expectation for 72, a pullback because of the lower oil prices. But they know anything over 50 on the index signals more prices going up than down; 72 is quite a bit over 50.
[Marchini:] Oh yes, quite a bit. And that's the big concern here, because the Chicago Purchasing Managers is a pretty good predictor of the National Association of Purchasing Management. And that prices paid component will be the first look at prices in April, right?
[Romans:] Exactly. And, remember, this is all going to go into what people think about May 16. We've got more and more people now saying 50. We talked about this yesterday. The data if the data supports it, more people are going to start thinking 50, as opposed to 25. And even J.P. Morgan, Merrill Lynch, both raised their expectations for May 16 yesterday to 50.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, Christine, thanks very much.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Inside Afghanistan forces are building. As many as a million to a million and a half Afghan refugees are fleeing that country fearing military strikes. The United Nations has announced the construction of new camps, one which could take as many as 10,000 people. That is just a drop in the bucket because the U.N. is also saying they could expect refugees at a hundred different points all along the Pakistani border. It's a question of where people are going to come out of that country. So we've got Kyra Phillips at the big map. She's going to explain more about what these people are going through and where they might be coming out of Kyra.
[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Carol.
[Lin:] Morning.
[Phillips:] Well, the refugee crisis has been building for decades, first with decades of fighting and then in the last few years drought has added to their misery. Let's take a look at the animation here. It's getting harder for them to get that help, too. Relief organizations have been forced from the areas that the Taliban controls. This only leaves a small portion of the country where they're allowed to deliver help. Now the orange highlighted part of the map is the area that's under the Northern Alliance control and it's only 5 percent of the country. Now by expert estimates, the fears of a pending military strike could push more than three million people to flee from the country. But how are these refugees getting out? Well, the Pakistani border is or the Pakistani border is officially closed, but we're told that the largest numbers of people are making their way through the Khyber Pass and that's located right here, as you can see on our map. And this now this 33-mile strip here west of Kabul is very difficult to cross. At one point the pass is only three yards wide and it makes for very rough conditions. So just how are these refugees able to survive? Well joining me now is CNN's medical correspondent Rea Blakey. Good morning, Rea.
[Rea Blakey, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Good morning, Kyra. The physical toll on these people can be quite severe. The humanitarian medical group, the Doctors without Borders, says even before the evacuation their evacuation from Afghanistan and that was immediately following the September 11 attacks, there was widespread malnutrition, there were outbreaks of scurvy, which we haven't heard of in the U.S. in millennia it would seem. There's cholera, measles. The circumstance is extremely dire there and that's even before the attack, so you can imagine the stress that it would put on a human body physically to have to make its way across what could be very difficult mountainous terrain.
[Phillips:] Those physical conditions, Rea, what exactly do they go through? What are the symptoms?
[Blakey:] Well, what you're going to probably see will be a great deal of stress on the immune system, quite frankly. Many of the displaced people will endure walking daily marathons, walking for days, maybe even weeks to reach one of these camps. They will be burning up a very limited amount of physical fuel that they have. As you mentioned, a drought there has been going on for about four years now which basically means that the reserves the body has are pretty much depleted. These folks are running on empty, many of them only with the clothing on their backs. The housing circumstances there will be very limited. It will be difficult for them to stay warm during the winter, and so we're talking about the possibility of mass starvation, even though food supplies are on the way, and the possibility of epidemics from things like cholera and measles sweeping through a crowded camp.
[Phillips:] Now how long could someone survive under these conditions, Rea, and does age play a part here?
[Blakey:] Age will be a very important determinate, but there are other things as well. Obviously the extremely young and the extremely old are always the most vulnerable in a population like this. Immediately, the food supplies will be a general distribution, but it's very likely that there may be distributions specifically for the extremely young and the extremely old. Those people will be extremely vulnerable. The issue really becomes how does one individual's personal physical being deal under stress. And again, these are people who have seen some 20 years of war, 4 years of drought, it will be extremely difficult for many of these folks not only to make the trek but to survive once they're in the camp conditions. It will be tough.
[Phillips:] And, Rea, I've got to ask you this, the human spirit, just the will to survive obviously plays a huge part here.
[Blakey:] It absolutely will and I think that will be a huge determinant. Obviously there are going to be a need for medications like oral rehydration. There will be a need for a large number of antibiotics to fight things like pneumonia, which will definitely come as the winter encroaches. But again, the human spirit oftentimes shows us many things that we don't anticipate medically or physically. And so the will to survive, which obviously many of these people do have just because they've endured the conditions they have, could play a very large role in whether or not they're able to see next spring healthy and well.
[Phillips:] That would be the good news. Rea Blakey, thank you so much. All right, Leon, back over to you.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] All right, thank you, Kyra. We'll check back with you a little bit later on. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] Well, U.S. officials regard Osama bin Laden as a prime suspect in the attacks against Washington and New York. He's believed to be in Afghanistan. And early on Wednesday morning local time, news of explosions in the Afghan capital, Kabul. Soldiers from the ruling Taliban say the explosions seemed to come from a low-flying helicopter firing rockets. The United States swiftly denied any involvement, and CNN's Nic Robertson, who was in Kabul, reported that a rebel group had claimed responsibility for the attacks. A spokesman for the Taliban government denied that his country allowed bin Laden to strike from its territory.
[Abdul Salam Zaeef, Taliban Ambassador To Pakistan:] We in Afghanistan do not allow Osama bin Laden to use Afghanistan's territory to launch attacks against any country around the world. We took away all communication devices from him, and he does not have any communication with anybody outside of Afghanistan. In any case, we will conduct our own investigation and find out what happened, and we denounce this terrorist attack, whoever is behind it.
[Mcedwards:] And while denouncing the attacking, the ruling Talibans say that they are going to conduct their own investigation. Now Osama bin Laden, number one on the FBI's most wanted list. There's a $5-million bounty on his head. As we mentioned, believed to be hiding in Afghanistan. And for more on Osama bin Laden, let's go to Jeanne Meserve who is in Washington right now Jeanne.
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Correspondent:] Colleen, senior administration officials saying in briefings today that they are confident that Osama bin Laden was behind today's events. Why are they saying that? Well, we're going to talk to one of the experts, one of the few Western journalists who has actually met Osama bin Laden, Peter Bergen, writing a book on the man now, also our terrorism analyst. Thanks a lot for coming in. Intelligence sources have said repeatedly today they had no hint that this was coming, but you say there was, in fact, some foreshadowing at least.
[Peter Bergen, Journalist:] The bin Laden organization has a tendency of subtly insinuating actions in coming weeks. If you think back to the Africa embassy bombings, the two American embassies that were bombed in 1998, bin Laden had a press conference in Afghanistan two months before the bombing talking about good news in coming weeks, and then the embassy was bombed. If you remember the USS Cole attack last year in Yemen, there was a videotape floating around the Middle East in which bin Laden was wearing a Yemeni dagger, which he's never worn in previous photographs. One of his aides said we should attack military targets, U.S. military targets in Yemen. And there has been a videotape floating around the Middle East just recently, a two-hour tape, which lays out both bin Laden's general views and the tactics of his organization, and on the tape, bin Laden claims pretty directly responsibility for the Cole attack and says the victory in Yemen is just the beginning, calling for attacks on American targets. So he definitely implied in the videotape future actions. As a result of those implications, the United States took some efforts in the Middle East to there was a security warning in Saudi Arabia. The embassy in Yemen was closed temporarily. FBI agents investigating the Cole were pulled out of the country. But, clearly, there was no indication that something was going to happen here.
[Meserve:] You said this tape was floating around the Middle East. What do you mean?
[Bergen:] Well, it was floating around in several it emerged in Kuwait in June. A newspaper got hold of it. But then after that, it was put on the Internet, and it was widely accessible on the Internet. I was able to pull up my own version. And the tape is quite interesting in terms of the the things that bin Laden says on it and certainly the implication of future plans.
[Meserve:] Why is he the prime suspect in this particular series of events?
[Bergen:] Probably you've got to ask yourself who has the motive and who has the capability. Obviously, he has the motive. He's hated the United States for a long time. And he seems to have the capability. This was, obviously, a very sophisticated operation. You needed people who were willing to commit suicide. We've seen suicide attacks by his organization in the Africa bombing, in the Cole bombing. And, also, you needed commercial pilots.
[Meserve:] Did he have those, or did he train them, recruit them?
[Bergen:] We we know that in the past he's had commercial pilots on the payroll. He's had his own plane. He flew around from Sudan to Afghanistan. He was flying from Kenya to Sudan when he lived in that country. So he had at least two pilots capable of flying commercial jets at that time. Now whether he was able to get four is an is an open question.
[Meserve:] Now I heard some other terrorism experts citing some other possible suspects today. They named Iran, Iraq, and possibly some Palestinian factions. Would you cross all of those off your list?
[Bergen:] Well, I'd hate to cross anybody off the list, but I think in terms of the Palestinians Palestinians have been very directed at Israeli attacks. If this was a Palestinian group, why would why didn't they just fly a plane into Ariel Sharon's residence? Iran has been looking for much closer links with the United States.
[Meserve:] Quickly, can they find him, can they punish him, as has been promised by the president of the United States, or is that going to be a very difficult task?
[Bergen:] It's very hard to find somebody. You need information not about yesterday or even today. You need information about two hours from now, and that's very difficult information to get about, certainly, a particular individual.
[Meserve:] Peter Bergen, thanks so much for joining us today. And a note about Washington. Coming in here a few hours ago, the city was absolutely silent. It's very eerie. There's little traffic. There are few pedestrians. Parts of the city cordoned off. The only thing that is there in great numbers: police. They are out in great force this evening here in the nation's capital. Jim, back to you.
[Jim Clancy, Cnn Anchor:] OK.
[Mcedwards:] All right, Jeanne. Thanks. We want to actually show you some of that exclusive video here on CNN. We showed it to you about 20 minutes ago.
[Clancy:] A different angle.
[Mcedwards:] Yeah. Let's see it again.
[Clancy:] Shows this is the second plane. Watch carefully from the left.
[Mcedwards:] That plane hitting the World Trade Center about 20 minutes after the first one. The first one hit just shortly before 9:00, about 10 minutes to. Again, that's a reverse angle, one that we've not seen before.
[Clancy:] And you look and, earlier, we could hear the sounds of the people in Battery Park looking on, just screaming, just seeing more of this horror unfolding in their city that led to the destruction of a landmark of New York this day and perhaps has forever changed the way Americans are going to look at whether or not they're isolated from the issue of terrorism. This has changed a lot.
[Mcedwards:] Yeah. As one member of government said earlier today, the days of talking about terrorism for the United States, he said, are over.
[Clancy:] There's a lot of reaction from all around the world, reaction coming in the form of shock, dismay, and sympathy for the American people. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon declared Wednesday a day of mourning in Israel. Flags there are going to be flown at half staff, and emergency rescue units are being sent to the United States.
[Ariel Sharon, Israeli Prime Minister:] The fight against terror is an international struggle of the free world against the forces of darkness who seek to destroy our liberty and our way of life. I believe that together we can defeat these forces of evil. At this most difficult hours, all Israelis stand as one with the American people. Our hearts are with you, and we are ready to provide any assistance at any time. The government of Israeli has declared a day of mourning tomorrow as we bow our heads and share in the sorrow of the American people.
[Clancy:] It's important to note, too, Israel has been on a heightened state of alert. Now, at the same time, Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat denouncing the attacks, calling them a crime against humanity.
[Yasser Arafat, Palestinian Authority President:] It's very difficult for personally for anyone to speak about what has happened. It is not only against the Americans. It is not only against the American people or against the American government. It's against the in the whole international human being. It's unbelievable. Unbelievable. I am sending my condolences for President Bush, for his government, for his American people, for this unbelievable disaster that happened. This is touching our hearts, and it is very difficult to to explain my feeling, my pain. God help them. God help them. God help them.
[Clancy:] Arafat offered help in tracking down those responsible. Several radical Palestinian groups, including Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, have denied any involvement.
[Mcedwards:] All right. Let's talk a little bit now about the reaction in Europe. European leaders unanimous in their condemnation of the attacks. British newspapers all carried pictures on the front page of their morning edition. Messages of condolences and expressions of support poured in.
[Tony Blair, British Prime Minister:] This is not a battle between the United States of America and terrorism but between the free and democratic world and terrorism. We, therefore, here in Britain stand shoulder to shoulder with our American friends in this hour of tragedy, and we like them will not rest until this evil is driven from our world.
[Vladimir Putin, Russian President:] It is an impudent challenge thrown down to all humanity. At least to civilized humanity. What has happened today once again emphasizes actuality of Russia's proposal to unite efforts of the international community to fight with terrorism, with this plague of the 21st century. Russia experienced terrorism. That is why we exactly understand the feelings of the American people. Addressing the people of the United States on behalf of the people of Russia, I would like to say that we are with you and we share and feel your pain in full. We support you.
[Jacques Chirac, French President:] It is with enormous emotion that France has just learned of these monstrous attacks. There is no other word that have struck the United States of America. And in these unbelievable circumstances, the entire French people, I can state, are with the American people. I express our friendship and our solidarity in this tragedy. I assure President George Bush, of course, of my total support. France, you know, has always condemned terrorism and condemns it unequivocally and believes it must be fought in every way. That is why I'm asking you to excuse me immediately. I have to return to Paris.
[Gerhard Schroeder, German Chancellor:] This is a Declaration of War against all civil societies. Whoever helps these terrorists or protects them goes against all fundamental values on which the coexistence of nations is founded. The German people support the American people in this hour that is so difficult for the people in the United States. We remain strongly committed to the United States of America.
[George Robertson, Nato Secretary General:] An act of unspeakable violence took place today, and this is a moment where people are reflecting on the nature of that tragedy and standing firm against that kind of violence and with the people who have suffered from it.
[Guy Verhofstadt, European Union President:] I want to express in the name of the European Union our entire solidarity with United States, with our American friends, and with the American people, with our allies.
[Mcedwards:] Well, perhaps you can imagine how much the attack on the World Trade Center is under. Global financial markets already feel fearful of recession and, of course, some of those markets around the world are open now. Richard Quest in London has been monitoring the situation there for us Richard.
[Richard Quest, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Colleen. This was, of course, an attack right on the very heart of the world center for capitalism, so it's not surprising that as soon as the news became clear, there were very sharp falls in share prices across Europe, and that's been seen again in Asia overnight. Let me update you briefly. Tokyo's stock market is down around 6.2 percent. In Hong Kong, the market there down also around 9-12 percent following on from what was seen in Europe. The U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill he's in Japan at the moment and is to return to the United States. He's had discussions not only with the chairman of the Fed, Alan Greenspan, but with the various securities regulators. Their key goal now, of course, to restore confidence in the system, to maintain confidence in the business and markets of the United States, and to do that, the Fed has made it clear it will pump whatever money is necessary or needed into the system. I understand that discussions have taken place about not only providing cash to ATMs, to banks across the United States where there may be massive withdrawals of cash from people worried about being able to have access to funds, but also the Fed will be standing behind companies, banks in the in case there's some form of credit crunch. That's what could cause the recession in the
[U.s. Mcedwards:] CNN's Richard Quest thanks very much in London. Jim.
[Clancy:] President George W. Bush is trying to calm and reassure the people of the United States as well as his nation's allies. In a televised address, he said America was looking for those responsible for these attacks and those who harbored them. This is the full text of his address. [Televised Address By United States President George W. Bush] All right. We were listening there to President Bush as he spoke directly to the nation from the White House. Clearly, they're trying to allay some of the fears people may have about financial markets and other things, conveying a deep sense of what had happened in the day, a deep sense that he was facing a complete change in the way the U.S. is going to have to deal with one of the major threats it faces: terrorism. For his part, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell rushed back to Washington from South America. He told reporters U.S. officials had received "no specific warnings," in his words, in advance of the attacks.
[Mcedwards:] You also heard the president making a point that America will be open for business, as he said, including the Pentagon. The rescue-and-recovery effort, though, continuing into the night at the Pentagon where American Airlines Flight 77 crashed. CNN's Bob Franken joins us now with more on that Bob, how's it looking there this evening?
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, you know, it's interesting. It's 15 hours more than 15 hours since the plane crashed into this side of the Pentagon. You can see in back of me there's still smoke. The fire is still burning. As a matter of fact, the various firefighters are still in what they're calling a defensive position. They haven't really attacked the interior. They're going to do that with the break of the light of day. They're going to literally peel back the walls, they're saying. They're going to peel back the walls and go in there and take a very aggressive stance and finally be able to put out a fire, I said, started about 15 hours ago and was witnessed aghast from some people who were driving from the highway right over there.
[Mike Walter, "usa Today Live":] I looked off. I was you know, looked out my window. I saw this plane, a jet, American airlines jet coming, and I thought this doesn't add up. It's really low, and and i saw it. It just went I mean, it was like a cruise missile with wings, went right there and slammed right into the Pentagon. Huge explosion. Great ball of fire. Smoke started billowing out. And then it was just chaos on the highway as people either tried to move around the traffic and go down either forward or backwards. We had a lady who was in front of me who was backing up and screaming, "Everybody go back. Go back. They've hit the Pentagon."
[Franken:] There's still no official estimate of casualties. We're being told now by one of the local fire chiefs that there could be between 100 and 800 deaths inside. Of course, we know there are about 65 people on the plane that actually crashed into the building here. The Rumsfeld the Defense secretary held a briefing just a few hours ago, and he was not really able to give any details on casualties.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Of Defense:] There there cannot be any survivors. It just would be beyond comprehension. The there are a number of people that they've not identified by name but identified as being dead. And there are a number of casualties, but we're the FBI has secured the site, and the information takes time to come. People have been lifted out, taken away in ambulances, and the the numbers will be calculated, and it will not be a few.
[Franken:] Now it's very, very important to the Pentagon that it reopen tomorrow. The Defense secretary said he was determined that at least some of the services would be conducted here. There will be an opening of this building, but individuals should check with his supervisor to find out exactly whether he or she should come to work. And some of the work that will certainly be going on today will be very preliminary planning at least of the ultimate retaliation, once they can figure out who it is they're going to retaliate against Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] Understood. Bob Franken at the Pentagon tonight. Thanks very much Jim.
[Clancy:] As the United States tries to come to grips with what has happened this day, the magnitude of the tragedy, thousands of people, more than 300 firefighters' families trying to deal with this problem, victims perhaps in their thousands, all trying to deal with missing people or people that are known to have died in the violence. Among those victims, in the attack on the Pentagon, a person perhaps familiar to many of you CNN viewers, Barbara Olson, an attorney. She was frequently a commentator here on CNN. Her husband is U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olson. He says she called him twice on her cellphone from inside the aircraft telling him that it had been hijacked by men with knives. Barbara Olson was not originally scheduled to take that flight, but she delayed her travel plans to have breakfast with her husband on Tuesday, his birthday.
[Mcedwards:] And this is really disturbing as well. A man on board one of the doomed planes actually called his mother as the aircraft was being hijacked. Mark Bingham was a passenger on United Airlines Flight 93 that was en route from Newark, New Jersey, to San Francisco, called his mother in the Bay area minutes before the plane crashed near Pittsburgh.
[Relative Of Victim:] ... that "I love you very, very much, in case I don't see you again"... CORRESPONDENT; He said that? ... that "The plane has been taken over by hijackers," and and then I said, "Well, we love you very much, too, Mark. Let me go get your mother."
[Alice Hoglan, Mother Of Victim:] I got on the phone, "Mark," and he said, "Hi, Mom. This is Mark Bingham." He gave me his last name. And he said, "I want to let you know that I love you, and I'm I'm flying and" I think he said, "I'm in the air. I'm calling you on the air phone of the airplane."
[Correspondent:] In his seat.
[Hoglan:] I presume so. He said, "I I want you to know I love you very much, and I'm calling you from the plane. We've been taken over. There are three men that say they have a bomb," and I said, "Well, who are they, Mark?" and he said he repeated that he loved me, and he said, "I" I don't think he said, "I don't know who they are." He just he he became distracted there as if someone was speaking to him, and he said, "It's" something to the effect that "It's true" and and then the phone went dead.
[Clancy:] Authorities in New York City not giving up hope of finding more survivors. CNN Producer Rose Arce is on the scene in Lower Manhattan Rose.
[Rose Arce, Cnn Producer:] I'm right across the street from Two World Trade Center which is still surrounded by a plume of smoke, and in the foreground, you can see where a building on Vesey Street is still on fire. But, for the first time tonight, we're actually seeing rescue workers inside Two World Trade Center. All day, they've been behind barricades being pushed farther and farther back because of falling debris, and and now, for the first time, they're actually on the cat walk that surrounds the it's like right above the first story of World Trade Center with only about maybe seven or eight floors of the building left above them. It's just been shaved off at the top, it's completely black, and the windows are dark, and there's really no sign of anything going on in there, but they're walking around in there. They're going through the windows, and it looks like they have some access at least to what is the second floor now of the building and are looking around inside there. You can you can see some flashlights. You can see some of them walking around.
[Clancy:] Rose, you're describing the situation there for us very well, but there's no power in the area, is there, and this is, indeed, a very dangerous operation, isn't it?
[Arce:] Yes, there is. There actually is power in one building across the street. I don't know if it's a generator or...
[Clancy:] All right. We were talking...
[Arce:] The entire area is only lit up by emergency lights. It's virtually a ghost town in Lower Manhattan, you know, except for just the area right around where the plane hit the building and where there is debris and, as I said, for the first time, an active rescue operation.
[Clancy:] How many people are in the building? Any idea?
[Arce:] As far as rescue workers, I've only seen maybe half... [Off-mike] ... like I said on this cat walk, and then down on the ground, there are just hundreds of firefighters that have reached here for the first time and are trying to clear through the debris of the adjoining buildings. There's also a triage center that's been set up across the street from Two World Trade Center where you can see several dozen people getting oxygen with there's some flying glass there's a thin flying glass in the air that seems to be getting in people's eyes, so they're... [ ... trying to clear them.
[Clancy:] All right. Rose Arce, CNN Producer, down at the scene in Lower Manhattan.
[Mcedwards:] And, you know, all day, the the Red Cross has been calling on people to donate blood, to get out there, give blood because so many people have been injured. Jeanne Meserve is in Washington now, and we want to hand it over to her for a moment to talk about the Red Cross, how emergency services handle this kind of thing. Jeanne, away you go.
[Meserve:] Well, Colleen, people in Washington and in New York and all across the country want to help in a situation like this, and this afternoon, the Federal Emergency Management Agency said the way to help was to contact the Red Cross and give them blood or give them money. And here with me today is Shelly McCaffrey. She's a Red Cross volunteer. Thanks for coming in.
[Shelly Mccaffrey, American Red Cross:] Hi. Thank you.
[Meserve:] First, let's talk about the blood situation. How does it look right now? Have you gotten a lot of donations?
[Mccaffrey:] We have had a wonderful response, and the truth is blood donations are going to be needed in the long run. This is going to be an ongoing problem for many months. So it's important that people call 1-800-GIVE-LIFE and make an appointment and keep their appointment. And, again, this will be many months.
[Meserve:] And the people in Missouri can give blood, and it will be as helpful as people in Greater New York.
[Mccaffrey:] Exactly. Sure. They can contact their local blood region. Make an appointment close to home, and if they call that 1- 800-GIVE-LIFE, they can make that through that number.
[Meserve:] Why is the need for blood going to last for months? One can understand weeks, certainly, but months.
[Mccaffrey:] Right. Again, even if we use the blood that we have right now, it will need to be replenished, and it will it will be ongoing. We're going to have many, many months and, of course, we don't know what's going to happen. We are still in the middle of hurricane season, and the Red Cross will be there through all other disasters, including this one. So it's so important to keep that blood supply going and to make sure that Red Cross is there to save lives every day through the next few months or however long it takes.
[Meserve:] But what about the cash donations? Are those flowing in to you as well?
[Mccaffrey:] Yes. It's wonderful to see the response of the American people at a time like this. It's so traumatic and people want to know how to help, and the truth is turn to the Red Cross and be there for us so that we can be there for the American people. People can donate by contacting their local chapter. That's really the easiest way to go about it. Call the local chapter. Look it up in the phone book. Or contact the Red Cross at 1-800-
[Help-now. Meserve:] You were mentioning that your Web site has just been flooded with people who want to help.
[Mccaffrey:] Right. It's wonderful, and in response to that flooding, America Online has also instituted helping.org in order to help the Red Cross and to funnel some of those donations through their Web site as well. So if you're having trouble with the Internet, that's another option to go in addition to redcross.org. But, again, contacting the local chapter really is the most important way and the most effective way to get that donation to the Red Cross.
[Meserve:] What about people who want to volunteer their time?
[Mccaffrey:] That's also a wonderful way to help out. However, the Red Cross has trained volunteers. It takes many hours of training. We want to make sure that we have the right people in the right place at the right time ready to go whenever needed. So, again, contact the local chapter. Look it up in the phone book. Make that call. Tell them that you want to volunteer. And they will put your name into our network of 23,000 volunteers nationwide. They'll give you the training, and then when you are needed, you will be called upon.
[Meserve:] We've been talking today over and over about how unprecedented these events are. For the Red Cross, is this also unprecedented?
[Mccaffrey:] Absolutely. It's such a traumatic incident, to have something like this happen right on the American soil, and we've been receiving such support from our international sister societies. It's just been it's just been incredible. It's so traumatic for the American people, so emotional, and and so deeply trying, but, of course, we will rise to the occasion.
[Meserve:] Tell me about that international support.
[Mccaffrey:] Right. The American Red Cross has been receiving calls of condolence and offers of support, whether it be financial or material, from our sister societies, the British Red Cross, the German Red Cross, and it's so it's so amazing to experience that international support. In the same way that those other countries are supporting President Bush and are supporting the American government, we are also receiving that same support, and right here in America, it's so wonderful to see the people rally around that Red Cross, that symbol of help and hope that is the same worldwide.
[Meserve:] Shelly, before we leave, why don't you once again give the the phone numbers, the Web sites so people can contact you if they want.
[Mccaffrey:] Sure. Everybody can contact us at 1-800-HELP-NOW to make that financial contribution. That's also available in Spanish, 1-800-257-7575. Or people can contact us at redcross.org or helping.org to make that online secure contribution. If people want to give blood, 1-800-GIVE-LIFE or contact that local chapter.
[Meserve:] Shelly McCaffrey of the Red Cross, thanks so much for joining us here today.
[Mccaffrey:] Thank you.
[Meserve:] Our coverage of the day's events and the aftermath will continue in just a moment. Stay with
[Cnn. Clancy:] A day of unimaginable horror in the United States. A hijacked airliner smashes into the north tower of the World Trade Center in New York.
[Mcedwards:] Minutes later, another jet slams into the south tower.
[Clancy:] U.S. President George W. Bush is promising now that he's going to find the perpetrators, as terrorist attacks on U.S. landmarks change the very landscape of American life.
[Mcedwards:] All right. We're going to continue on here. I think we're supposed to have a little animation there, but let's keep going.
[Clancy:] All right. I'm Jim Clancy.
[Mcedwards:] And I'm Colleen McEdwards. We're going to continue CNN's coverage of the most devastating terrorist attacks ever to take place on American soil. Continuing that coverage for you right now. It is now thought that several thousand people may have perished in New York and Washington on Tuesday. This is the new New York City skyline let's show it to you right now with an eerie void where the World Trade Center used to be. The twin 110-story buildings collapsed Tuesday after hijacked airlines crashed first into one tower, then into the other.
[Clancy:] A short while ago, we received pictures of that first plane that hit the north tower.
[Mcedwards:] Actually, we don't have those pictures right now. We're just getting things sorted out here. Bear with us. But 18 minutes later in a terrorist operation of extraordinary precision, a second airliner hits the south tower, and we've been showing you video of that from a couple of different angles. Hundreds of people ran for their lives. Debris showered Lower Manhattan.
[Clancy:] Well, you know and as we look at the skyline now, Colleen, and see it darken, and we've hard reports that, yes, there are some rescue crews that have gone down into that area that are looking for some of the debris. There's only about eight stories or even less remaining of World Trade Center building number two.
[Mcedwards:] CNN's Deborah Feyerick reporting even that cadaver dogs haven't been able to do their jobs there because that coating of dust is so thick.
[Clancy:] Looking like a nuclear winter.
[Mcedwards:] Yes.
[Clancy:] After this devastating strike and audacious strike involving a hijacking of four separate airliners in one single day for the cases that we know about, those hijackers were using knives or cardboard cutters, utility knives, actually a razor blade perhaps in plastic, perhaps that's the way that they got them through the security checks at airports, but an incredible day.
[Mcedwards:] And, actually, you know, one of the one of the things we've been hearing later this evening is that there was even maybe cellphone calls coming from that area. So still lots to sort out in New York. But, right now, we want to go to CNN's Bill Hemmer who's got a look at at the day's terrible events. Let's look.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Correspondent:] Eight-forty-five a.m. East Coast time. An airliner smashes into the north tower of the World Trade Center. Minutes later, 9:03 a.m., a second jet slams into the south tower.
[Eyewitness:] You can see the people jumping out the window. They're jumping out the window right now.
[Hemmer:] Officials in New York closed airports around the city. Tunnels and bridges shut down. At 9:30, President Bush tells the word the U.S. has been hit by an apparent terrorist attack. Within 10 minutes, the FAA shuts down every airport in the country, the first time this has ever happened. Nine-forty-five, an explosion at the Pentagon after another plane slams into the headquarters and the symbol of the U.S. military. Ten o'clock, New York City, the south tower of the World Trade Center collapses, raining debris on to the street. Less than 30 minutes later, as evacuations continue, the north tower falls.
[Eyewitness:] Here it comes. I'm getting behind a car.
[Hemmer:] In that same half-hour, back in Washington, part of the Pentagon collapses. Further west, outside Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, a plane crash reported in Somerset County. Plans go into effect to protect the government, much of Washington is shut down. Federal buildings and the White House are evacuated. Members of Congress point to the possibility the attacks are the responsibility of Osama bin Laden, a Saudi millionaire blamed for other terrorist attacks. As part of emergency measures, the president cuts short his trip in Florida, first making a stop in Louisiana declaring the United States will hunt down and punish those responsible. He's later flown to Nebraska where he convenes with security officials. One-forty-four p.m., a state of emergency declared in Washington, D.C. Two U.S. Navy aircraft carriers and five other warships leave Norfolk, Virginia, headed to the New York City area. The FBI says it believes the four missing planes were hijacked and is working on the assumption the morning's events were a coordinated terrorist attack. Then about 6:00 Eastern Time, explosions rock Kabul, capital city of Afghanistan. The White House denies this was any sort of retaliatory strike but rather part of the ongoing civil war in that country. Bill Hemmer, CNN reporting.
[Clancy:] We have all witnessed over and over again in person or even on television in the United States or around the world the incredible images of the tragedy that unfolded in Washington and New York City this day. Some of us are better than others at expressing the emotions that those images draw out of us. One of those who is good at it, indeed, is Garrick Utley. He joins us now from his city, New York.
[Garrick Utley, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Jim, I feel like most of our colleagues here today, even those those of you who have been watching this for, what, nearly 16 hours, what can words really say? The fact is we've been watching those images, those pictures, and perhaps we forget that behind each camera and each image, there's a camera person, a man or a woman who was there near the Pentagon or here in Lower Manhattan. They were standing there. They were on the front line today. They didn't flinch. What we want to do now is share again some of these images but also with the words, the thoughts, and the experiences of that person who took those pictures. He's camera operator Tom Nuchio, and here's what he saw and what he lived through today.
[Tom Nuchio, Camera Operator:] When I started filming the Trade Center towers this morning, I thought I had woken up in a nightmare. The flames, all these people running, trying to get out of Manhattan already. Then the first tower collapsed. And day turned to night. A man turned up covered in soot, still carrying his briefcase. People were crying. Some just stood not knowing where to go. I kept thinking about my family, my colleagues, whether they were all right, whether I would see them again. It felt like the end of the world. Then I looked, and the second tower collapsed. It was gone. It looked like an exodus. People were coming out of nowhere covered in towels. A bar man closed his bar in front of his. Today, there would be no business as usual, although somebody started to clean his fire escape around Wall Street. After we saw this woman call her family, we called ours, too, to let them know we were OK. People stopped to tell us what they saw.
[Eyewitness:] ... people running, their hair on fire. People were jumping out of the World Trade Center. Jumping out because they don't know what to do. So, I mean, they're dead by doing that.
[Nuchio:] This man was taking this boy away from the scene.
[Eyewitness:] Their parents work in the big building.
[Nuchio:] This couple was reunited and fine. We were invited into a hotel on Wall Street, which was serving food in a makeshift room. We met the lucky ones, too. This man overslept and didn't get to work on time. He worked on the 78th floor of the World Trade Center.
[Eyewitness:] From what I understand, my whole office is dead. Everybody died up there, jumped out, were burned.
[Nuchio:] When we got to Wall Street, the stock exchange was closed. The police were blocking our way. We found a policeman two blocks away from the World Trade Center who was guarding a piece of one of the planes. He was waiting for a forensic team to come and pick it up. I felt the nightmare was just carrying on. When we got closer to the World Trade Center, policemen were getting more and more nervous. Then we finally saw it through the smoke. The remains of the World Trade Center looked like a broken fence. It felt like covering a volcano eruption, dust everywhere inches thick, pieces of people covering the ground from the buildings. Again, it was 3:00 in the afternoon on Broadway. It felt like a very bad horror movie. On the way back to the office on the empty highway out of town, I thought about all this senselessness, about these terrible acts, and about the freedom to do evil.
[Utley:] The pictures, the thoughts, the experiences this day of camera operator Tom Nuchio. Truly one of the real reporters on the front line of this tragedy. Back to you, Jim and Colleen.
[Clancy:] All right. Garrick Utley, thank you for that. Well, we want to show you once again some of the video in case you've just tuned in. Video that is coming to light as the day wears on. That an angle of the second plane as it plowed into the World Trade Center. That videotape perhaps because the cameraman was trapped down there on Lower Manhattan and couldn't make his way out just coming to us now. Terrifying. Awesome. So much pain in a picture of what happened this day in New York City and, indeed, the pictures have been non- stop.
[Mcedwards:] That being United Airlines Flight 175. Sixty-five people on board that plane. Jeanne Meserve is watching things in Washington for us tonight. Let's go to her for the very latest Jeanne.
[Meserve:] Colleen, President Bush started his day in Florida but returned to the White House just as the sun was setting. The arrival designed to show that the United States leadership will not be cowed. A short while later, Mr. Bush addressed the American people the world from the Oval Office. Let's listen to his full address.
[George W. Bush, President, United States Of America:] ... America. I, unfortunately, will be going back to Washington after my remarks. Secretary Rod Paige and lieutenant governor will take the podium and discuss education. I do want to thank the folks here at the Booker Elementary School for their hospitality. Today we've had a national tragedy. Two airplanes have crashed into the World Trade Center in an apparent terrorist attack on our country. I have spoken to the vice president, to the governor of New York, to the director of the FBI, and I've ordered that the full resources of the federal government go to help the victims and their families and to conduct a full-scale investigation to hunt down and to find those folks who committed this act. Terrorism against our nation will not stand. And now if you join me in a moment of silence. May God bless the victims, their families and America. Thank you very much.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Well, let's get a bigger picture on what we can expect today here in the United States and what is happening around the world. John Spencer of Instinet is joining us. Instinet is an after- hours electronic trading system. Good morning, John.
[John Spencer, Instinet:] Good morning, Carol.
[Lin:] All right. So what can what are you seeing in terms of after-hours trading? What's being sold and what's being bought?
[Spencer:] Well, before I move on to that, I think it's probably first of all worth mentioning that yesterday was a very big and important day. It was the day that the global financial marketplace welcomed back the New York stock exchanges. And the big news is that everything really worked very, very well. Some 2.83 billion shares changed hands on the New York Stock Exchange. That's a record day. And nothing went wrong. So that's the that's the really important news from yesterday. In terms of the prices and the downward pressure that occurred yesterday in New York, that was not so unexpected. Although the Dow Jones fell by some seven percent, in 1987, in the October crash, the Down Jones fell by 22 percent in one day. So it was a significant drop, but no more than that. Indeed, if we were to take a three-week trend-line projection of the downward pressure before last Tuesday's cataclysmic events, we might have expected the prices to be somewhere around where they are today.
[Lin:] John, I'm trying to get you, frankly, to divine the future, though. I mean, you're seeing after-hours trading activity. What sort of activity are you seeing and what kind of an indication will it be in terms of how the U.S. markets do today?
[Spencer:] Well, before I attempt to divine the future and making predictions is always a hard thing to do what we say was that most of the sell pressure yesterday occurred in the first hour, where the big drop occurred. All the pent-up sell orders of the last four days, when the markets in the States were closed, happened early- on in the market. Over the rest of the course of the day, there was a gradual downward pressure. When prices went too low, people were in the market buying again.
[Lin:] So what does that tell you?
[Spencer:] That we'd anticipate that what that tells us is that most of the immediate sell pressure has left the market. It tells us that actually last week's events, terrible as they were, are a one-off event. The market is now beginning to really perform in line with the underlying economic and financial trends. So there's nothing unusual or unexpected. And indeed, if we look at the markets in Europe and in Asia, they rose yesterday. After the U.S. markets opened, they saw the extent of the downward pressure, realized there was no panic, so European markets yesterday rose across the board between two and four percent.
[Lin:] So given the uncertainty of any military action by the United States or the Western Alliance, what do you think the market is going to be focusing on today?
[Spencer:] Well, clearly, risk aversion is high on the agenda. People don't want to be exposed and have very large long or short positions in the marketplace. So people are being cautious and careful, and I think that's only to be expected. The issue is, really, is if there's a sequence of further geo- political military events arising as a consequence of last week's events. And if that happens, then clearly, this will have a very negative effect on the marketplace.
[Lin:] How do you factor in previous military strikes? For example, before the Gulf War started, the U.S. markets took a plunge. And then after the strikes and clearly, they were successful at that point the markets shot up double-digits almost 20 percent.
[Spencer:] Well, I think they shot up at that point in time because people were aware that there was a very strong likelihood of an early success and they realized that the effect on the oil price would not be excessive. It's important to note in the current situation, there doesn't seem any likelihood that there's going to be a big pressure to increase oil prices. So it's a little bit of a different situation today. The key difference today, of course, being that there is anyway strong underlying downward economic pressure on the markets which occurred before last week's event and have been going on for some months now.
[Lin:] All right. So any predictions? One last time, I'll try to tempt you to look into the future in your crystal ball, John.
[Spencer:] Well, as Mark Twain said, I never make predictions, and especially about the future. I'm afraid that's my philosophy, too.
[Lin:] All right. Thank you very much. John Spencer with Instinet. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] And it is time now for e-mail questions on the U.S.-Russian summit.
[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] CNN White House correspondent John King and Moscow bureau chief Jill Dougherty are covering the summit. They join us now from Ljubljana, Slovenia, to answer your questions. Hello to both of you.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Good morning.
[Jill Dougherty, Cnn Moscow Burerau Chief:] Hi, there.
[Nelson:] Good morning, or good afternoon to you guys, I should say.
[Phillips:] John, let's start with you. We've got an e-mail here. Dale wants to know, "What kind of assurances can President Bush expect from Mr. Putin that future economic aid to Russia will not be wasted on corruption?
[King:] Well, that's certainly one of the questions for this meeting. Well, let's be clear up front, this is a two-hour meeting. Neither side expecting any major breakthroughs. Most of the attention has been on the security issues, missile defense, the planned expansion of the NATO alliance. But certainly the Bush administration a much more skeptical view than the Clinton administration when it comes to Western economic aid from the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund to Russia. And this administration, before it agrees to support future aid or any increases in aid down the road, does want some direct assurances from the Putin government. The administration says much of the aid in the past, most of it during the Yeltsin years, but also during some of the Putin years, has been wasted, and the U.S. administration believes there's a great deal of corruption still.
[Nelson:] OK, let's take this next e-mail to Jill. The question is, "Will President Bush attempt to put at ease Putin's concerns over the planned missile defense shield?" That comes from Sirontos Fotopoulous. I believe that's right Jill.
[Dougherty:] Well, definitely that is what Mr. Bush is here to do. He is going to try to assure Russia that this plan is not a threat ultimately to Russia. And from the Russian perspective, they want to hear a lot more details, because what they are afraid of is that this plan is so ultimately perhaps so massive that it could be a threat to Russia. So what they really want to do, I think both sides, is to get down to some brass tacks, as much as you can on this plan, because it is still obviously a work in train, but a work in progress, but try to pin down as much as they can. The Russians said right off the bat, they want to get as much information from Mr. Bush as possible.
[Nelson:] All right, thanks, Jill. We're going to take a phone call right now from Georgia, and Joe is on the line. Joe, go ahead.
[Caller:] Ah, yes, thank you very much. John and Jill, specifically, how much taxpayer money is going to Russia each year? And why should American taxpayer money go to Russia if they don't support us on things like the missile defense system?
[King:] Well, very little direct U.S. money...
[Dougherty:] Well, you know, if I could answer that...
[King:] Go ahead. Go ahead, Jill.
[Dougherty:] Go on, John. Yes, there exactly...
[King:] No, you go, Jill.
[Dougherty:] ... I think we're about to say the same thing. There is very little money now that is going from the United States directly to Russia. A lot of that money is going into programs for to stop proliferation, to stop chemical weapons, things like that. It's not aid any more. So that, I think, is one misconception. And, of course, there was some IMF money, but much of that is directly given to various programs. The Russians would look at it, they say, We don't want your money right now, necessarily. They're trying to pay off debts. But they what they want is investment. And that's their job right now, to bring in the laws to attract that investment, otherwise they never will have any investment coming from the West, significant.
[Phillips:] John, you want to add to that?
[King:] Well, Mr. Putin said in his remarks before he came here, that one thing he did hope to speak to Mr. Bush about is opportunities for further investment in Russia. And Mr. Bush has said, all his remarks about what he believes to be an energy crisis or certainly an energy problem in the United States, says he's looking for new places for the United States to develop energy resources. That's one area where these two leaders could find common ground. And Jill is right, the direct aid to Russia, direct U.S. aid to most countries around the world, started drying up in the early Clinton administration if not even sooner. The focus in recent years has been on direct U.S. business investment. Most businesses in the United States would say they want to see more assurances from Russia about the court system, the legal system, the corporation system, before they feel more confident to go in with even more money.
[Phillips:] Now, you both two both of you, rather, could probably comment on this one. It comes from Portland, Oregon. James wants to know, "What happens if Putin and Bush do not hit it off?" Jill, you want to start?
[Dougherty:] If they don't hit it off, well, it looks as if they already have begun to hit it off. And obviously they're not going to be bosom buddies right from the beginning. But the idea is that they will at least try to, as they've been saying, look each other in the eye, try to get an idea of where the other man is coming from, and find some common language. And that is why they're going to be taking this little walk in the park together and having a meeting trying to get a the measure of the other person. But it's not supposed to be necessarily the old, let's say, Bill Clinton-Boris Yeltsin show any more.
[Nelson:] All right...
[King:] These leaders have no they...
[Nelson:] Go ahead, John.
[King:] Go ahead, Brian.
[Nelson:] All right, the...
[King:] I was going to say, these leaders have no choice but to develop a business relationship. The question is whether they develop a personal relationship.
[Nelson:] OK, well, the cause of all this confusion is the satellite delay for our viewers there...
[Phillips:] We all have respect for each other, too.
[Nelson:] Right. We've got another e-mail question for both of you. Let's fire it off to you first, John. It comes from Larry Clark. It says, "President Bush has expressed an optimistic outlook for Europe and Russia, but the press focuses exclusively on areas where there's a difference of opinion. The press should emphasize those areas where a better future for the entire world is what is important." So from a reporter's point of view, does this man have something concrete there? Has he got a...
[King:] Well, this the viewer certainly has a point. He has a point that we should focus on areas where there are agreement. This was President Bush's first trip to Europe, so one of the reasons we have focused on the disagreements is because there have been obvious protests against the U.S. president, the European Union issuing a sharp statement, excuse me, criticizing his views on global warming. Other leaders, the president of France, the chancellor of Germany, raising direct criticism and skepticism of the missile defense plan. So certainly they do get the headlines, just like the great tackles in a football game, you know, get shown on the television set. But there are some areas of agreement. Mr. Bush, like his allies in Europe, wants more trade. Mr. Bush supports NATO expansion and European Union expansion. So there are some notable areas of agreement, and perhaps we should do a better job of talking about some of them as well.
[Phillips:] This one comes from Mary in Maryland, and we kind of got a chuckle from this e-mail. "I've been wondering how translators handle President Bush and his poor grammar and misuse of words, et cetera. Do they translate what he says, or what they think he meant?" Jill?
[Dougherty:] Well, I think that's a question for John.
[Phillips:] John, respectfully, will you take over?
[King:] Thank you so much. The Bush Mr. Bush himself concedes that on occasion he is linguistically challenged. He did have a flub the other day. He referred to Africa as a nation. Of course, Africa is a continent of many nations. The White House would call this a slip of the tongue, not a voice of inexperience. Mr. Bush makes jokes about this himself. But from time to time, he gets himself in a little trouble. As he puts it, sometimes his tongue gets out ahead of his brain.
[Nelson:] All right. Want to thank you both for joining us this morning, and thank you to our viewers for sending in the calls and e- mails. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Good evening. We begin tonight with the latest Hollywood mystery: Who killed actor Robert Blake's wife? This past weekend, Bonny Bakley was shot in the head shortly after the couple had dinner at a restaurant in Los Angeles. Police so far have searched Blake's home, but no suspect has been named. Tonight, Blake's attorney, Harland Braun, talked with CNN's Charles Feldman in L.A. Here now is part of that exclusive interview.
[Charles Feldman, Cnn Correspondent:] Let me ask you first of all, how Mr. Blake is faring under these very trying circumstances?
[Harland Braun, Robert Blake's Attorney:] It's difficult. He had a high blood pressure the other night, we took him to the hospital. He's back, staying with friends. He's been discussing the case with my investigator, Scott Ross, and me. And he's getting night's sleeps now, He's sleeping well.
[Feldman:] Is he distraught in a sense that most husbands would when a wife is killed? They didn't live together, after all.
[Braun:] Well, this was an unusual relationship. He married her because she gave birth to his daughter, and he felt an obligation to his child to marry the mother. It was very old-fashioned. It wasn't an easy relationship. They didn't even live in the same house. She wasn't in Los Angeles a good part of time. But they were getting along better, so call it more like a friend being killed.
[Feldman:] When you say it wasn't an easy relationship, what do you mean by that? What's your understanding of what that means?
[Braun:] Well, because she obviously was out to get pregnant by a celebrity. She thought it was Christian Brando at first, and then it turned out to be Mr. Blake. He obviously felt that he was tricked into a situation like this, that he then had obligations that he didn't voluntarily assume towards the child, and that he was very vulnerable because she could take the child away any time she wanted to.
[Feldman:] There are people who would take everything you've just said her history, the relationship that she had with him, a rocky one, their living, or non-living arrangement and say: that's a pretty good motive, is it not, for him to kill her.
[Braun:] You know, a lot of people have motives. A lot of people dislike each other, and obviously this wasn't a loving relationship. In fact it could have been acrimonious at times. That doesn't mean you kill someone.
[Feldman:] How do you think the LAPD at this time view your client?
[Braun:] I would think that they have a chart. And the problem is, is they have they always look at possible suspects. So, the last person with them, a person who's married to him or a boyfriend, a person who's had an acrimony with them. So they obviously looked at Robert as a potential suspect, initially. Then when they come up with no evidence that he was the perpetrator, they have to look elsewhere.
[Feldman:] What did the police because they searched his house, of course. You say they didn't take the documentation that you were asking him to focus on. What did they take?
[Braun:] They searched both houses and they didn't take any of this. They took a couple of his guns, they took some miscellaneous bills not very much, for an eight-hour search. I was sort of surprised they didn't take more. Before the search occurred, I met with the investigators and I said, "When you go and do the search, here's what you look for in addition to the regular stuff. You should look for letters she has. You should look at her letters that she sends to people. You should look at her business practices. You should look at anything about her past business because that may give you a clue that there's someone else."
[Feldman:] Do you think that they still view him very much as at least one suspect?
[Braun:] I think what they realize now is that they call him a witness. That means, because given his proximity to all these events, physical proximity, and their investigation, they have no evidence that he's the perpetrator. So they basically said at this time he's a witness. Now, they always keep an open mind, but they were not going to come up with anything else. What this case is probably going to happen, unfortunately, it's going to be one of those unsolved mysteries in Hollywood.
[Hemmer:] Again, attorney Harland Braun with CNN's Charles Feldman earlier today. An autopsy has been completed, however, the LAPD has sealed it until further analysis is done. Also, toxicology results could take another six weeks before they are completed as well.

[Marina Kolbe, World News:] Japan's Mount Usu volcano has erupted, as scientists have been predicting. The volcano is on Japan's northernmost island Hokkaido. We are joined now by CNN's Tokyo bureau chief Marina Kamimura for more on the eruption. Marina.
[Marina Kamimura, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Marina, Mount Usu finally indeed erupted after keeping residents in the area on edge for days now. The eruption occurred just less than an hour ago. That's just shortly after 1:00 local time. As you can see, there is smoke billowing out of the volcano. We're told by authorities that the smoke is now reaching 2,700 meters into the atmosphere. That's about 9,000 feet into the air. So far, there are only reports though of smoke and small rocks coming out of the volcano. No reports of lava or anything like that, although authorities say that magma coming up to the summit of the volcano had triggered this initial steam eruption that we saw about an hour ago. In terms of the emergency effort, the rescue effort, relief efforts on the ground right now, according to the National Broadcaster, one of the towns there are three towns located at the base of this volcano. All of the residents of one of the towns have now been told to evacuate. Actually, there were some 10,000 people evacuated out of the area earlier this week. But as I just mentioned, we're now being told that all of the residents of one of the three towns have been asked to leave the area as well. Marina.
[Kolbe:] Now Marina, I understand that Mount Usu last erupted in October of 1978, and it killed two people. Could you tell us more about that last eruption and how they were able to contain the number of deaths?
[Kamimura:] OK, actually it killed three people. That was in October of 1978. And that followed a previous eruption in 1977. It was quite similar to this in at that time there were small rocks and ash that came spewing out of the volcano. But then, as in now, authorities had evacuated many of the residents to safer areas. And the reason three people were killed was that there were actually mudslides. What happened is that there was snow on the mountaintop, just as there is now. So this is a concern this time around as well. And the snow melted, triggering these mudslides and demolishing about 200 houses that stood in the way. Marina.
[Kolbe:] CNN's Tokyo bureau chief Marina Kamimura reporting. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Sentencing hearings begin next month for Nathaniel Brazill. He is the Florida teenager convicted on a second- degree murder charge yesterday in the killing of his favorite teacher. Here is the verdict being read out loud in court.
[Unidentified Female:] Division V state of Florida vs. Nathaniel Brazill, defendant. Verdict: We the jury finds as follows: "As to count one, we find the defendant guilty of second-degree murder with a firearm, a lesser included defense, as contained in the indictment. We find that the defendant possessed, carried and fired a firearm in committing second-degree murder. As to count two, we find the defendant guilty of aggravated assault with a firearm as charged in the indictment. We find the defendant possessed or carried a firearm in committing aggravated assault." And it's marked "yes." "So say we all, the 16th day of May 2001, West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida." And it's signed by the foreperson, Mr. Simmons.
[Lin:] By going with the lesser charge of second-degree murder, it gives the judge in this case much wider latitude in terms of Nathaniel Brazill's final sentencing. I'm not sure if that piece of tape actually captured that moment in the courtroom which has been widely described as being incredibly emotional. Let's go right now to Marc Shiner. He was the prosecuting attorney in this case. He joins us this morning. Good morning, Mr. Shiner.
[Marc Shiner, Prosecutor:] Good morning, ma'am.
[Lin:] Can you describe what that moment was like as the moment was leading to hearing the actual verdict? What was the mood, the tension in the courtroom like?
[Shiner:] The tension was extremely high. It was obvious to everyone that this was an extremely emotional case from the very beginning. Everyone in that courtroom has lost something very valuable to them. Our community has lost something. And the tensions were the highest they can be at that point. It was a really, really tough moment for everybody.
[Lin:] You know, here I am talking to you the prosecutor. You know, people typically have a traditional picture of what a courtroom victory is like, with handshakes going all around. What do you say to people as they congratulate you in this case?
[Shiner:] It's not really proper, because absolutely nobody won in this case. No matter what the verdict was, whether it was first- degree murder, second-degree or something lesser, it would have made no difference. Every single person involved in this case, our community, our state, even our nation, we all lost. This is a terrifying incident that occurred and hopefully never gets repeated ever again.
[Lin:] So how is that sentiment likely to be reflected in the judge's final decision in Nathaniel Brazill's sentencing?
[Shiner:] We trust the judge. The judge is a learned judge who's been on the bench for a long time. He's seen all kind of tragedies in his career. And we expect him and fully have confidence in the court and Judge Wennet that he'll do the right thing.
[Lin:] What do you think the right thing is? What is the appropriate sentencing in this case?
[Shiner:] It wouldn't really be fair for us to prejudge that now. There's a lot that goes into a recommendation that we're going to make. We first need to talk to the Grunow family who suffered the most in this case. A lady lost her husband. Two young children lost their dad. He had a very close-knit family, with his mom and brothers and sisters. We need to talk to them and then do some soul-searching within ourselves to determine what we feel the proper sentence is at this point in time.
[Lin:] Is it a pretty wide berth that the judge has to rule on, based anywhere from, you know, no time or time spent already up to 25 years? What is the range here?
[Shiner:] The recommended range that the judge generally has to follow is roughly 22 years up to life in prison and somewhere from that end all the way up to life. And that's completely up to the judge.
[Lin:] So when you talk about soul-searching in this case, are you saying that you have the option of going to the judge and you yourselves asking for a little mercy on his part?
[Shiner:] We certainly do have an obligation and a right to make a recommendation as to what we feel the proper sentence will be. The final call rests solely with the judge. And the family of Mr. Grunow has a right to be heard in how they feel. And Mr. Brazill's family have a right to be heard. And, hopefully, that will occur.
[Lin:] All right. I know this has been a very tough case to prosecute. We are going to get the other side right now. Thank you very much, Mr. Shiner, for joining us. Robert Udell was Nathaniel Brazill's defense attorney. And he joins us this morning from Stuart, Florida. Good morning, Mr. Udell.
[Robert Udell, Attorney For Nathaniel Brazill:] Good morning.
[Lin:] What was that day like for you, that the moment that the verdict was read?
[Udell:] Well, somewhat like Nathaniel, I was slightly confused. We weren't sure what verdict she had read. Then, when we heard it, like Nathaniel, I thought: not too bad. This could have been worse. We were relieved that, you know, there is at least a light at the end of this tunnel.
[Lin:] You know, when I was looking at the videotape of Nathaniel's reaction, I'm not sure quite how to read it. He looked at first perplexed. And then he looked, frankly, extremely annoyed. I'm not sure what followed. What is your read on how he really felt at that moment and what he understood of the verdict?
[Udell:] Well, I'm telling you, he originally was not sure what he had heard. My ear was right next to his ear and I wasn't sure what the verdict was either. Then, when I think the words got through to his head, he was trying to figure out what it all meant. He wasn't annoyed. He was relieved.
[Lin:] Relieved. What are the options that you see the judge having here? And what's your prediction in the sentencing?
[Udell:] Well, we disagree with the state. We think the judge can go as low as three years and up to life. At the same time, we understand that Judge Wennet is going to impose a significant term of imprisonment. What that term of imprisonment is, we'll have to wait and see.
[Lin:] Does Nathaniel have to serve time in a state prison, or is there an option of serving it out in a juvenile facility?
[Udell:] Well, as of right now, he would be sent to the Florida Receptionist Center [sic], where all persons convicted and serving time as adults serve their sentences. We understand that Governor Bush has a bill presently before the legislature to change that. Whether or not it would effect Nathaniel, we don't know.
[Lin:] As you look back on this case and your courtroom strategy, what do you think was the turning point for the jury: why they opted to go with second-degree and not first-degree murder?
[Udell:] Well, I think they accepted the fact that Nathaniel clearly did not go to the school with the intent of harming or killing Mr. Grunow. I think they reached the conclusion that, whatever his intent, it was not formed until that four-second period before the shot finally rang out. And they concluded that that was not enough time to premeditate, form the intent, and then reflect upon it.
[Lin:] Do you have any regrets about putting your client on the stand?
[Udell:] None whatsoever. You can't try an accident case without putting your client on the stand. This is not New York or Boston or Philly. Nobody down here believes in the presumption of innocence. Nobody down here believes in the Fifth Amendment right not to be compelled to testify. Jurors down here, if you are innocent, expect you to look them in the eye and tell them that.
[Lin:] Well, it is it sounds like your understanding that Nathaniel will have to serve a certain amount. And it could be a fair amount of time in this case. Have you prepared him at all for that possibility and what his time may be like behind bars?
[Udell:] Well, he's had one year in jail. You know, I don't know what better preparation he could get. No. He's 13 years old. You know, we've talked to him about 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, 40 years. These are all life sentences to a 13-year-old. Nothing we could say to him would prepare him for this.
[Lin:] And if it goes to the worst-case scenario, do you expect any sort of clemency, mercy from the governor of Florida? Will you be going to him then?
[Udell:] Well, we're going to let the legal process take its natural course. We'll let Judge Wennet impose sentence. We'll follow the appeal to the 4th District Court of Appeals. We'll see how they rule. And then when we see what the bottom line is a year down the road, we'll see what avenues are open to us at that time.
[Lin:] All right, thank you very much, Robert Udell, Nathaniel Brazill's attorney. The little boy is now 14 years old. And sentencing is scheduled for June 29. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] The Israeli-Palestinian peace talks are gathering momentum in Washington with President Clinton and Secretary of State Madeline Albright now involved. Our State Department correspondent Andrea Koppel is also involved. She's here with us this morning to give us a live report Andrea.
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Leon. We're at the start of day three of these high stake peace talks, which are supposed to run until Saturday, but could easily last even longer. Today, Secretary of State Madeline Albright will head out to Bolling Air Force Base to continue separate talks with Israeli and Palestinian negotiators. Both sides all too aware of the fact this could very well be the Clinton Administration's final push for peace before President Clinton leaves office next month.
[Koppel:] The meeting lasted 45 minutes, part pep talk, part information gathering. President Clinton and his advisers squared off across from Israeli and Palestinian negotiators. Everyone in the room aware the president's time is short and the issues complex.
[P.j. Crowley, White House Spokesman:] As always, we're prepared to help to do whatever we can to support the peace process, move them closer to an agreement, but what we do from this point on will really depend on the progress that they make during the course of this week.
[Koppel:] But after two days of talks, both sides seem to have quite a different opinion as to just how things were going.
[Shlomo Ben-ami, Israeli Foreign Minister:] The feeling is that these were very, very serious negotiations with a spirit that may lead to the conclusion of an agreement, if we maintain the same spirit throughout.
[Saeb Erakat, Palestinian Negotiator:] I don't want raise anybody's expectations. We are having very, very serious discussions, but at the same time, we're facing measured difficulties and serious differences.
[Koppel:] The very same differences and difficulties faced during weeks of unsuccessful negotiations at Camp David last July, now further complicated by months of bloody clashes. Those so-called "final status issues" at the heart of any final peace deal include: the borders, or how much land there'd be for a Palestinian state; sovereignty over Jerusalem, including the Old City; the right of return for Palestinian refugees; and the fate of Israeli settlements built on captured Jordanian and Egyptian land. The challenge for U.S. mediators sequestered with both delegations at Bolling Air Force Base this week to make enough progress on these issues to warrant bringing Yasser Arafat and Ehud Barak together with President Clinton for one last try. The message from the Clinton administration: As long as there's a shot at peace, Leon, they'll be on the job until January 20 Leon.
[Harris:] Is that shot they're taking there at peace being complicated at all by this mixed up picture of the Israeli prime minister's race right now?
[Koppel:] Yes, in some ways, it is. I mean, both President Clinton's departure and the possible departure of Ehud Barak in early February certainly affecting the negotiations here in this way. Ehud Barak's campaign, both 17 months ago and right now, are based on the fact that he wants to deliver a peace deal to the Israeli people. If he is able to do that, Leon, that's only going to help his prospects at winning reelection. In addition, the man he's running against, Ariel Sharon, is a hard-liner Likud member, who has said all along that he would be much tougher on the Palestinians than Ehud Barak. So that is, as well, weighing on the minds of the Palestinians here Leon.
[Harris:] Nothing is ever simple. Nothing is ever simple there. Andrea Koppel, thanks much, we'll talk to you later on.

[Greta Van Susteren, Co-host:] Today on BURDEN OF PROOF, 25 years after the murder of a Greenwich teenager, Connecticut prosecutors prepare a case. And a former neighbor, a teen himself at the time of the killing, will be tried in adult court.
[Mickey Sherman, Attorney For Michael Skakel:] Michael Skakel's been convicted in the public, same as Richard Jewell was. And I choose that analogy very carefully. Everyone assumes he's guilty. A jury trial will expose the evidence to the public, to the local and national public, and they'll see what the evidence is and what it's not, and they'll separate all the BS from the truth.
[Dominick Dunne, Journalist:] I think there's great satisfaction for the Moxley family after all these years that, number one, Michael Skakel was indicted; and that, number two, the judge ruled that there was enough evidence to go to trial; and number three, that she decided that he should be tried as an adult and not a juvenile.
[Announcer:] This is BURDEN OF PROOF, with Greta Van Susteren and Roger Cossack.
[Van Susteren:] Hello and welcome to BURDEN OF PROOF. Roger is off today. A superior court judge in Stamford, Connecticut has ruled that the state's case against Michael Skakel will be transferred to an adult court. Skakel, now 40 years old, is accused of killing a neighbor in October of 1975 when Skakel was 15 years old. The body of 15-year-old Martha Moxley was found bludgeoned to death on the lawn of her family's Greenwich home. Prosecutor Jonathan Benedict said a date for Skakel's presentment had not been set, and that there would likely be a probable cause hearing in the case. Joining us today from Hartford, Connecticut, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal. And from Atlanta, criminal defense attorney Ed Garland. In New York, "Newsday" reporter Leonard Levitt. Here in Washington, Elizabeth Nuland, Brian Jones and Katherine Dunagan. In the back, Alex Puzy and Chris Kenny. Len, let me go first to you. You've covered this case for a number of years. What's the reaction in the community, the fact that this case is now apparently going to be transferred from juvenile court to adult court?
[Leonard Levitt, "newsday":] Well, I can't tell you the reaction of the community. I can tell you the reaction at the "Greenwich Time" and the "Stamford Advocate," and that is a feeling of great satisfaction. This case, of course, has tormented everybody in Greenwich and Stamford locally, and I think it's now the endgame.
[Van Susteren:] Len, take me back. Give sort of a outline for us the prosecution evidence against Michael Skakel.
[Levitt:] Well, they have what we've seen at a probable cause hearing is not their full case. What we do know is that they have people who say that Michael confessed to them, to the killing. We have a neighbor and friend who says that Michael told him he was in the tree above which Martha's body was found the night of the murder at that time, masturbating in the tree. But we don't know a lot of what the prosecution's case is because they have not presented their strongest case as of yet.
[Van Susteren:] Len, there's going to be a lot of discussion about these statements. They're made by people who I think were in some sort of drug rehabilitation program with Michael Skakel many, many years ago. But let me go to the evidence. Let me ask you a question about is there any physical evidence that might not have a reason to lie or exaggerate that ties Michael Skakel to this horrible murder?
[Levitt:] I don't believe that they have physical evidence. I think that's going to be one of the problems of the case. And there are problems with the case. There was supposedly going to be DNA evidence, but I'm not I don't believe that they have DNA evidence.
[Van Susteren:] Well, let's go to the telephone. We're joined by Mickey Sherman, who is the lawyer for Michael Skakel. Mickey, first of all, let me ask you a question: The ruling to transfer it to adult court, is that a ruling that can be appealed at this point? And if so, do you intend to do so?
[Sherman:] Good question. It's probably appealable. We haven't really made that call at this point. It's too early. We just got the decision yesterday. So we'll check into that and make our move and make our options known very soon.
[Van Susteren:] What would be the argument, though, against making such an appeal? I would think that that would be something you would that you would do after you look at everything.
[Sherman:] In all likelihood that's the case. But then again I don't want to unduly delay this thing. I really don't. We're as anxious to get this case resolved as anyone is. And there's also some benefit in having a jury trial. I'd rather have a proper cleansing. I'd rather have the validation that you get when a jury looks at all the evidence and says, not guilty.
[Van Susteren:] Mickey, have you spoken to your client since the decision came down yesterday? And if so, what was his reaction?
[Sherman:] His reaction was the same as mine: mildly disappointed, but by the same token, focussed on getting this case over, getting an acquittal, whether it be a jury trial or a court trial.
[Van Susteren:] You also have pending a motion to dismiss the charges. Now, the judge who ruled that the case shall be transferred to adult court didn't reach that particular motion. And that motion's based on the statute of limitations. What is that motion and who's going to rule on it?
[Sherman:] Well, we actually just filed that motion merely to file it and made that quite known to her. We did not expect her to rule on that motion. That was basically by agreement. So that was no shocker to us. And that will be heard by whatever trial judge winds up with this case in the very near future.
[Van Susteren:] All right, let's go to the attorney general for the state of Connecticut. Let me back up. We don't have the attorney general. He's not joining us. Let me go back to Len. Len, what do we know about this superior court judge. Has it been assigned to a new judge?
[Levitt:] I don't believe it has yet. So far as I know, this decision just came down yesterday, and I don't believe that they've selected a judge.
[Van Susteren:] Mickey, one of the issues in the case is statements, statements that are allegedly made by your client a number of years ago. And Len mentioned that the prosecution tends to use it. What's the thumbnail sketch of the defense response to those statements?
[Sherman:] It's not a thumbnail response, it's a cross- examination. I don't want to start characterizing what they said. It's available on the Internet in any number of sources, the cross- examination, the direct examination. I'd rather let people just log on on the Net and judge for themselves. I kind of put my foot in it by naming them as liars at that little press conference, so I'm shying away from characterizing them anymore, at least outside the courthouse.
[Van Susteren:] All right, let's go to Ed Garland down in Atlanta. Ed, you've been a defense attorney for a number of years. We've seen your work in some famous cases, including recently the Ray Lewis. What do you make of the fact that this case has been transferred from juvenile court to adult court?
[Ed Garland, Defense Attorney:] Well, I'm sure it's been well briefed. There's something fundamentally unfair, it seems to me, that the law that applied to the accused at the time of the alleged crime and the treatment he should receive is being taken away from him. And that seems to be a denial of equal protection and due process.
[Van Susteren:] Well, wait, Ed, Mickey makes a point. And we lawyers always much prefer a jury because that's 12 over a juvenile court judge, who is only one. I mean, in some ways, you know, facing a jury you have 12 chances that someone might be maybe you get all 12, but you need one to hang a jury. What about that?
[Garland:] Well, I know that Mickey enjoys a jury more than just a judge, as a trial lawyer does. And I agree with him. He may well be able to expose the deterioration of memory, the lack of the accuracy of memory, the motive and other things that destroy this case in front of a jury. And if a judge is leaning one way or the other, you don't have as many opportunities to present your side. So I agree with Mickey. If I were in his shoes, I'd want a jury.
[Van Susteren:] All right, we're going to take a quick break. Up next, a look at the evidence in this case a quarter century after the crime. Don't go away.
[Dunne:] The main thing is the golf club murder weapon that belonged to his mother. He and his brother, Tommy, were the last people to be seen with her. I mean, I think that after all these years, that there certainly was enough evidence that they came up with after the grand jury for the case to go to trial.
[Van Susteren:] More than 25 years after the body of teenager Martha Moxley was found on the lawn of her family's home, the murder case is finally heading to trial. Connecticut prosecutors will be using evidence which is a quarter-century old. But will 21st century forensic technology aid their case? Let's go to John Moxley, the brother of Martha Moxley, who was murdered back in 1975. John, what's your reaction to the case being transferred from juvenile to adult court?
[John Moxley, Brother Of Martha Moxley:] Well, my mother and I are both, you know, very happy with the decision and, you know, very much appreciative of all the efforts from the state of Connecticut for us. You know, we couldn't be you know, it's a milestone for us and it's a step you know, it's not an end in itself, but it's a step in the right direction.
[Van Susteren:] John, do you think the case has been ignored for 25 years or I mean, what does your what do you and your mother sort of think about the fact that it's been 25 years and the case at least still hasn't gone to trial?
[Moxley:] Well, I think you know, I really can't tell you what happened during the first 10 years because my father was alive and he's the one that handled it and I really wasn't that involved. But in '88 when my father died, my mother and I, you know, got more involved on a day-to-day basis. And I can tell you since '88, '89 that I think that, you know, the Greenwich police have done everything that they possibly could, or they've, you know, they've put in a sincere effort. I think, you know, Frank Garr has been fabulous, stayed with it all the time. And if you talk to him, you'll find out that this is something that he's not being told he has to do, it's something that he wants to do. And I think it's the same way with, you know, everybody we've met recently in the state of Connecticut's law enforcement.
[Van Susteren:] John, let me ask you sort of a difficult question. Michael Skakel, like any other accused, is entitled to a fair trial with a presumption of innocence. Do you think that a jury can be found in light of all the publicity over the years that can presume Michael Skakel innocent and look at all the evidence?
[Moxley:] Sure. I mean, you know, I yes, I do. You know, that's all we want, too, is a fair trial. And we've got a lot of questions. The grand jury was secret so we don't know everything that came out in that. When they had the probable cause hearing in juvenile court, we heard things that we'd never heard before. And, you know, we've got new questions that we'd like to see answered. Michael, by his own words, puts himself at the right place in the right time. We always knew the golf club came from his house. We always knew that there was, you know, some infatuation with Martha. But it's Michael's own words that put him in the right place at the right time. So, I mean, we want him to explain that.
[Van Susteren:] Let's go to Dick Blumenthal, the attorney general for the state of Connecticut. Dick, explain to us how it's sort of this bizarre situation. Here's a 40-year-old man who is accused of committing a crime when he was 15, was a juvenile. What's with Connecticut law that we're sort of struggling with this? What do we do with this situation.
[Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut Attorney General:] Well, remember first that the law applied here is the Connecticut law that was in effect at the time of the alleged murder; that is, the statute that provided for a transfer from juvenile court to superior court, a court of general jurisdiction, at the time that the murder allegedly occurred. So the judge applied that law and said, you know, we don't have a facility where this 40-year-old man could be kept if he is found to have committed this crime.
[Van Susteren:] Well, let me ask you another question, then. We've seen so many cases where they're pushing down the age of these trials. What if and let me say hypothetically Michael Skakel had been 8 at the time of this alleged murder. Would it make a difference to you now in terms of whether he should be tried as an adult or a juvenile?
[Blumenthal:] It would very definitely make a difference, because the statute then in effect provided he had to be at least 14 years old if the case was going to be transferred. But there are two very practical ramifications of this transfer. One is, as has been mentioned, there will be a jury, but it will be public, as would not have been the case if it had been a juvenile proceeding. So I think there's a very important public interest that's been vindicated by this decision. And the second, obviously, is that there will be the possibility of some punishment. If he had been tried as a juvenile, the longest that he could have been committed is four years, and that in a juvenile facility. There is none that could have accommodated him. So, really, a trial would have been a nullity in the event it had not been transferred. So I think the judge sort of applied not only the statute, but a common sense approach as to what the legislature would have intended. And, of course, now we see all the time that children or people who are under the age of 14 or 12, in many states, are transferred to courts of general jurisdiction.
[Van Susteren:] Ed, do you have the sense that trying this man as an adult is the right thing? I mean, set aside sort of the hairsplitting we do with the statutes. Should he be tried as an adult or a juvenile?
[Garland:] It makes sense to me. It doesn't seem to do any good to kind of hide it in a juvenile court proceeding and not expose it to the public. And in that environment, given the high publicity, you'll have a hard time being able to get a fair jury. But I assume, if the judge is careful, he eventually can.
[Van Susteren:] All right, Len, the issue of a fair jury. How much how saturated is the public in Greenwich with this case?
[Levitt:] It's very saturated, there's no question about that. But I agree with John Moxley. I don't think there should be any problem, though, in getting a fair jury.
[Van Susteren:] Over the years that you've been the reporter gumshoe, so to speak, on this, you've talked to people. Have people fixed opinions on guilt or innocence at this point before hearing the evidence?
[Levitt:] No, I don't think so. I think that, you know, the case itself Tommy was a suspect for many years. I think Michael Deserves the presumption of innocence. I think we're learning new things about the case with every new revelation. And if I could just pick up on something that John Moxley said, I think we're going to see now the role that was played by Detective Frank Garr in this case that we have not seen before. A number of people have taken credit for solving this case Mark Fuhrman, Dominick Dunne and I think we're going to see now that it was a lone detective who was denigrated by a lot of people who hung in there year after year, even fighting his own superiors on this thing, and finally brought the case to where it was.
[Van Susteren:] All right, we're going to take a quick break. Trying a case with the news media breathing over your shoulder: We'll talk about that when we come back. [Begin Q&a;]
[Q:] Why was a Colorado ski lift operator sentenced Wednesday to 90 days in prison?
[A:] He was convicted of negligent homicide for a skiing collision that killed a Denver man in 1997. [END Q&A;]
[Van Susteren:] Welcome back. Ed, let me go to you. Mickey Sherman is a defense lawyer, high- profile case. Any advice? I mean, in terms of high-profile cases, what do you do as a defense lawyer?
[Garland:] Well, you're very careful about what you say, because the first thing that happens to you if you make a mistake is you see it played back to you on the evening news. I think, secondly, you have to know what it is you intend to say before you start talking. And, thirdly, you have to keep from being sucked in to issues that you're not prepared on and don't want to talk about.
[Van Susteren:] All right, Dick Blumenthal, you've had your share. You're the attorney general who's been on the tobacco case, Microsoft. What advice do you have for the prosecutor?
[Blumenthal:] Well, I think essentially more or less the same as is given to the defense attorney: Think before you talk, before you act, you know preparation. There is just no substitute for thorough and comprehensive foresight based on preparation. And I think that being very, very cautious in what's said publicly. particularly on the courthouse steps in a case like this one where the evidence at best will be a challenge to use in a conviction. And certainly there'll be all kinds of appeals. So I think caution in public statements is very much called for.
[Van Susteren:] Dick, do you have cameras in the courtroom in Connecticut.
[Blumenthal:] We have them where judges permit them. There's no right to a camera in the courtroom. There is no right, obviously, in federal courts or in our courts of appeals without, also, special permission.
[Van Susteren:] Len, what has Michael Skakel been doing since this case has sort of come back up on the radar screen?
[Levitt:] I think he's been trying to get money from his father. I don't think he's been doing much of anything. It's been a tough road for him now. You know, he's in divorce court with his wife. His wife just announced last year that she was going to divorce him. I don't think he has a job. I think he's hurting.
[Van Susteren:] Has he had any sort of form of employment in the last, you know, 20, 25 years?
[Levitt:] Oh, yes. He worked for Joe Kennedy up in when he was running for governor. He work for Citizens Energy whatever committee he had up in Boston. And then they had a falling out. And I don't know that he's done anything since of subsequence. I think he's hurting.
[Van Susteren:] Ed, you know, we're just getting little pieces of what the evidence is, but it seems like that there's no very little physical evidence linking Michael Skakel other than a golf club, for which I assume many people had access. So it seems to focus on statements that he allegedly made to people in rehab. What is a and that it was some time ago. What does a defense lawyer do with those statements?
[Garland:] Well, a defense attorney is going to attack memory where that has been degraded, accuracy and credibility, motive, whether these people in the facility were suffering from mental illness, drug use, whether they had a motive or dislike for the defendant. They will be a fertile day there as well as, can they actually remember? Do they actually know what their mind is now telling them they think they know? It's a fertile field for attack and reasonable doubt can be generated on that kind of testimony.
[Van Susteren:] Ed, what's the advantage to the defense, the fact that some of them, at least, testified at an earlier proceeding under oath and it's contained in a transcript at this point?
[Garland:] Well, that obviously will be used as a prior inconsistent statement if they contradict that. It also allows the defense attorney to know what to expect of the testimony, if they don't grant him an interview.
[Van Susteren:] Dick, I think it's a pretty tough case if it turns out for the prosecution no physical evidence, no fingerprint, no blood, no DNA, nothing short of statements. I think that's a tough case for a prosecutor, is it not?
[Blumenthal:] It is a tough case. I think the prosecutor has made clear, Jon Benedict, who's a very able, vigorous prosecutor, that he regards it as a challenge. But I do think that there will be a fair trial. I don't think people, the jury pool, has really made up its mind on this case for exactly that reason: the evidence simply suggests that there are two sides to this story.
[Van Susteren:] All right, that's all the time we have for today. Thanks to our guests and thank you for watching. Today on "TALKBACK LIVE," Super Bowl surveillance tactics: How Tampa security combed for criminals before the kickoff. Tune in at 3:00 p.m. Eastern time. And tonight on "THE POINT," harsh words from his former Senate colleagues as John Ashcroft prepares to take over the Justice Department. As attorney general, what can we expect? And what will happen with the Microsoft case? Tune in at 8:30 p.m. Eastern time. And we'll be back tomorrow with another edition of BURDEN OF PROOF. We'll see you then.

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] President Clinton offered more words of regret today in regard to the 1950 No Gun Ri incident in Korea, but he stopped short of a formal apology. A group of survivors and family members are furious, saying the U.S. Army has whitewashed the incident. The leader of the group says President Clinton's remarks are too little and too late.
[Chung Eun Yong, No Gun Ri Victims Group:] President Clinton's apologies is only natural, but lacking in substance and very late.
[Meserve:] Meanwhile, the Pentagon reversed itself yesterday and acknowledged U.S. troops were involved, killing and injuring an unknown number of civilians. The U.S. fought China in the Korean War, but now veterans from each side are working together in search of answers. CNN's Beijing bureau chief, Rebecca MacKinnon, explains.
[Rebecca Mackinnon, Cnn Correspondent:] They were once bitter enemies. Now, U.S. and Chinese veterans of the Korean War are healing old wounds.
[Unidentified Male:] We fought each other in the past and now we are friends.
[Mackinnon:] More than 50 years after the Korean War began, U.S. veterans are hoping the Chinese they once fought can give them clues about what happened to the U.S. soldiers still listed as missing in action. [voice-over]: Thousands of Americans were captured in Korea, then taken to prisoner camps, some of which were managed by the Chinese. A top U.S. Defense Department official brought six veterans to China in search of information about roughly 6,000 U.S. soldiers still unaccounted for. They were not given access to any Chinese documents on the Korean War, but were shown some useful clues at a military museum.
[Robert Jones, Deputy Assistant Secretary Of Defense:] We found some information there, some photographs of POWs being taken in the field. We found some dogtags, which had been taken in the field. We found some dog tags, which we feel are very, very important for us to examine and to follow up on.
[Mackinnon:] Getting even this far wasn't easy. The Chinese still call the Korean War "the war against American aggression." Vincent Krepps lost his brother, Richard, in a Korean prisoner of war camp.
[Vincent Krepps, Korean War Veteran:] I have sort of given up my hate. We don't ever want to fight each other, or ever go back to Korea and fight again. It just wasn't worth it.
[Mackinnon:] Touring China's ancient capital and toasting each other's health, veterans on both sides say they hope their grandchildren will know better than to fight one another again. Rebecca MacKinnon, CNN, Beijing.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to take a few minutes now to discuss what's shaping up as a key issue in election 2000, the question of access and cost of health care in this country. Joining me here in Staples Center, Dr. Janice Nelson of the University of Southern California, who's also a candidate for a congressional seat this fall. In Washington joining us, John Emling, from the National Federation of Independent Business, along with Dr. Gigi El-Bayoumi, an professor at the George Washington University Medical Center. Dr. Bayoumi, you're in the trenches. You're there every day. I don't know if you recall that during the Republican convention when former President Ford was taken to the Hahnemann University Medical Center, the attendant doctor on the following day when George Bush stopped over said he had talked to George Bush, gave George Bush an earful of what doctors are looking for in the upcoming policy debate, if there is to be such a thing. What is it that doctors want out of the U.S. health care system?
[Dr. Gigi El-bayoumi, George Washington University:] Well especially from an academic institution which is really suffering and feeling the Medicare cuts that are subsidizing medical higher medical education, what we want is to be able to treat all of our patients equally and to be able to give them all the best possible care. We have two types of patients that come in, the very sophisticated patients that have Internet access, that have all the information in the world, great insurance that will cover what they need. And then we see patients who have advanced stages of diseases, such as cancer, breast cancer, cervical cancer or prostate cancer because they didn't have the insurance to get the preventive care. We want to be able to take care of patients and give them the very best that this excellent medical system offers. We also want to make sure that we can train physicians for the very sophisticated technologies that are coming out. You know, we now have technologies that are being developed to deliver medications to one cell on a cell-by-cell basis, in nano technology. But can we train these physicians when we're getting budget cuts to academic medical institutions? So those are the two big issues that I, as an educator, I, as somebody who's in the trenches, face on a daily basis.
[Waters:] Dr. Nelson, what can the politicians do about needs such as those? You're a Democrat. You're running for office. That should be pointed out as we address Al Gore's health care policies. What are they?
[Dr. Janice Nelson , California Congressional Candidate:] Well top of the list is a patients' bill of rights, which we have been trying to fight to get through Congress and signed into law for the past several years. Also, a prescription drug benefit as part of Medicare is very important to the Democratic agenda.
[Waters:] And, Mr. Nelson, I would assume that everyone wants access to health coverage for all Americans. It's just a matter of how to go about it, is it not?
[John Emling, Nfib National Health Care Specialist:] Well that's exactly right. From the small-business perspective, NFIB members, your family farmers, your doctors, as a matter of fact, shopkeepers and local contractors, lack access to affordable health care coverage under the current system. What we're looking for is free-market based solutions that provide them with greater choice, that give them more affordable options to obtain health care coverage.
[Waters:] So what are you going to tell the viewers and the voters who say, we've heard all this before, we heard this back in 1992 when they were debating national health care policy?
[Emling:] Well, NFIB members overwhelmingly and repeatedly reject moves toward nationalized health care for a number of reasons, as well. The fact of the matter is that any country that currently has a socialized system, they are experiencing large failures. For instance, it's easier for your cat or dog to receive an MRI here in America for a patient to receive an MRI in Canada. There's waiting lists in excess of two months currently. So certainly what we need is more free-market approach, association health plans allowing small-business owners to ban together across state lines to purchase health care coverage, expanded medical savings accounts, tax credits for the working uninsured, tax deductions for the self-employed, free up the marketplace to empower the consumer, the small-business owner to make more affordable decisions for their families...
[Waters:] All right, that's a rather long laundry list. How are you going to accomplish it?
[Nelson:] I have to disagree with that. We I think the private sector has failed more on large. I think the problem right that we're seeing is the 45 million Americans that don't have health care insurance because it's unaffordable. And right now, it's really a matter of public health and it's a matter of decency. It's interesting. The international Health Organization recently rated the different health care systems throughout the country throughout the world, and two countries, Canada and Britain that have socialized medical systems, rated higher than the United States of America. And the reason for that is they have a system. I'm not saying that socialized medicine is the answer. It certainly is not. And I think the private sector still has a place to play in the role of providing health care, but we have to start valuing health care in the system and start looking at it from a totality of all the different...
[Waters:] We'll see how Al Gore...
[El-bayoumi:] And let me just add this. Oftentimes we look at high technology as being the marker of the best medicine. A lot of what we see is preventable. We're talking about vaccinating people, we're talking about pap smears and mammograms. This is not necessarily on the high end of technology, and it makes sense to pay now rather than to pay much higher prices later...
[Waters:] Thank...
[El-bayoumi:] ... and to give access to all.
[Waters:] Thank you all. I knew we would need a lot of time for this, and I'm sure this health care debate will be a major part of this upcoming presidential election campaign. Dr Bayoumi, Mr. Emling, Dr. Janice Nelson, thank you all.

[Karuna Shinsho, Cnn Anchor:] United Nations Secretary-General Koffi Annan says AIDS is spreading in Asia at what he calls a frightening rate. He made the comments at special U.N. assembly dedicated to battling HIV AIDS. For more on special session we go to New York, and Richard Roth Richard.
[Richard Roth, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, all the major players in the battle against AIDS are gathered here at the U.N. General Assembly for an unprecedented three-day event. It is the first time the U.N. General Assembly, all 189 countries, are committing a special session to a health issue. In this case, AIDS. But with 22 million already dead and 36 million infected by the HIV virus, government leaders say, they know they have to do something. They admit they have been late to this issue in this crisis. A U.N. ceremony unveiled an AIDS quilt this morning in New York to kick off the three-day event. Secretary-General Annan, flanked by the general assembly president, were there. This honors all of those who have lost lives, and for those who are unaffected by the disease. Various world leaders are here for this three day event. It's not called a summit. There are 20 African heads of state here. A lot of European countries not represented by their leading political figures. The United States is sending Secretary of State Colin Powell, who is here. All of these leaders got together for a breakfast and talk between some of them, and then they filed into the general assembly session, where they heard Secretary General Koffi Annan issue again a call for funding. He wants a $7 to $10 billion global fund to fight AIDS. So far, he has got less than half a billion; the latest contribution from one of the world's richest men, Bill Gates, and his wife and their AIDS foundation. The United States has given $200 million so far. European countries have also contributed some monies. AIDS activists say it's all not enough. Secretary General Annan focused his remarks toward the end of his speech on the vulnerable groups who are a source of division here at the conference. Should those who are infected by the disease from the high- risk group categories gay men, HIV those drug users, IV drug users, and also prostitutes should those people be covered by the targeted declaration of commitments here? Secretary General Annan addressed those groups and said everybody, in effect, is under one tent.
[Kofi Annan, U.n. Secretary-general:] We cannot deal with AIDS by making moral judgments, or refusing to face unpleasant facts, and still less by stigmatizing those who are infected and making out it is all their fault. We can only do it by speaking clearly and plainly about the ways that people become infected, and about what they can do to avoid infections. And let us remember, that every person who is infected, whatever the reason, is a fellow human being, with human rights and human needs. Let no one imagine that we can protect ourselves by building barriers between us and them. For in the ruthless world of AIDS, there is no "us" and "them."
[Roth:] Nations from the Islamic ranks Pakistan, Iran, Egypt they are more concerned about the language in this draft, of commitments, regarding those high-risk groups. They don't think there should be any discussion or language about men having sex with men; that shouldn't be included. Right now, the president of Ghana is speaking to this general assembly session. Most of the early speakers are from Africa. They have sent their senior leaders. Of course, that is where the problem is the greatest, sub- Saharan Africa. It is an epidemic in some countries Botswana, Zambia, Zimbabwe, U.N. estimates one in five people are infected with the disease. It's a national emergency many countries. A lot of African leaders have been slow in reacting and putting a lot of resources and recognizing the degree to which their countrymen and women are in effected by this problem. Some have now started to shift their positions and recognize the gravity of the situation. This conference is dedicated designed to focus that kind of momentum, to wake those who haven't exactly come around on this issue Karuna.
[Shinsho:] Aside from raising more money, what else is expected to come out from the session?
[Roth:] I'm sorry, can you repeat that, Karuna?
[Shinsho:] Yes, aside from raising more money to fight AIDS, what else is expected to come out of this session?
[Roth:] Well, they would like political momentum. Also in hallways, we're having leaders of drug companies. Those AIDS activists are also meeting. It is designed to bring everyone together. The U.N. is known for a lot of talk, but they believe they can spur momentum and to get people discussing and talking things. The big issue is going to be, who is going to manage all the money that is going to funnel in here, if they indeed get the seven billion. Right now, they only have half a billion dollars. There is various U.N. agencies, some struggling for control. Some say they want the money. The U.N. is not as exactly been known as a smooth bureaucracy when it comes to handling these types of global issues. That is also going to be discussed here. There are world leaders, and leaders of various U.N. agencies are going to hold several roundtable discussion. It is still a starting point, but the U.N. thinks it's, according to its targets, can make a dent in AIDS, through prevention-treatment program increases.
[Shinsho:] And we hear Asia isn't representing there at A high level. What does it say about the commitment from this region to fighting AIDS?
[Roth:] That it's stills going to be slow in some countries, that it takes time, as it has, it has been 20 years since AIDS has been around, but for the Security Council, which called it already, that AIDS was international threat to peace and security, that this is what it takes to get attention, conferences like this. This is the fact that Africa has sent leaders, unlike some other countries in some other regions is important. Some of the fastest growing rates are in other regions, though the total numbers are low. The Caribbean, Eastern Europe, and Russia have some of the seen the biggest jumps in AIDS. All right, Richard Roth reporting from New York. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] We have been bringing you Operation Happy Holidays all this morning. It's a look at some of the Marines, specifically in Afghanistan, what they're doing on Christmas Eve in Kandahar. CNN's Bill Hemmer is with the group there. Bill, just watching your segments, I can't help but be so proud of these men and women over there. I know you feel the same way.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, great point, Miles. Yes, dead on. I thought it quite deeply over the past few days. We can talk more about that in a little bit, but you hit the nail on the head. Cpl. Jose Martinez is with us now, Miles. He's from Vista, California.
[Cpl. Jose Martinez:] I'm 22.
[Hemmer:] You're 22. You have been out since when?
[J. Martinez:] August 13.
[Hemmer:] So you were at sea when the attacks hit New York, Washington, western Pennsylvania is that right?
[J. Martinez:] That's correct.
[Hemmer:] What did you feel as you look back on that time? And what did the others in your 15th
[J. Martinez:] At first, it didn't hit me. I couldn't believe it at first. The reaction I saw with other Marines was some of them where hurt more than others, seeing how they had family members in the Twin Towers. So we had a big formation, and we were told to start prepping, because we had to do what we had to do.
[Hemmer:] You've got a daughter at home. You've also got a wife back in Vista, California. How long has it been since you've seen your wife?
[J. Martinez:] August 13, so it's going on five months.
[Hemmer:] I guess the more appropriate question is how long has it been since she's seen you?
[J. Martinez:] It's the exact same time.
[Hemmer:] Today, Corporal, your wife, Monica, and your daughter, Marisa, who is five years old, are standing by in Vista, California. Monica, if you can hear us, here in Kandahar, Afghanistan, over the roar of that C-130 in the background, your husband has chosen you to offer the first comment, the first thought, the first question. So you are on the spot now, Monica. Go ahead, fire away, from Vista, California.
[Monica Martinez:] Hi, how are you doing?
[J. Martinez:] How are you doing, baby?
[Monica Martinez:] I'm doing good. I miss you so much, baby. Merry Christmas.
[J. Martinez:] Merry Christmas to you too, baby.
[Monica Martinez:] How are you doing?
[J. Martinez:] Who is all there?
[Monica Martinez:] Look, this is Cassandra. This is Maria's baby.
[J. Martinez:] How is everything at home?
[Monica Martinez:] Everything's doing good. Everybody misses you a lot. We all love you, and we can't wait for you to come home. Everybody is here to say hi to you, everybody in your family.
[J. Martinez:] I'll be home soon, don't worry about that.
[Hemmer:] They're telling me your whole family is gathered there in Vista.
[J. Martinez:] Merry Christmas, Happy New Year's, I love you all.
[Unidentified Male:] We're waiting Hey, Peppers, how are you doing? I know it's hard. Take care. We're all waiting for you here. Keeping everybody calm as much as I can. Your new niece is waiting for your. She is 10 pounds, 21 inches. We just got her ears pierced. She is really looking forward to seeing you. Take care of yourself. We're waiting for you. Bye.
[Monica Martinez:] Say hi to papa.
[Marisa Martinez:] Hi, Papa.
[Monica Martinez:] Say "I miss you."
[Marisa Martinez:] I miss you.
[Monica Martinez:] Show him your teeth. Smile, show everybody your teeth. Come on, baby. Marisa lost another one of her teeth. Smile. Smile, Marisa, you're on
[Tv. Unidentified Male:] Hello, son, this is your dad. I'm here, and I'm thinking about you. This is my best Christmas present this year. Take care of yourself, son, and I'm thinking about you all the time.
[J. Martinez: Unidentified Female:] Have a good Christmas...
[J. Martinez:] I love you, Mom. Passing it back and forth.
[Marisa Martinez:] Hi, Papa. I love you. I miss you.
[J. Martinez:] I love you too. I miss you too.
[Unidentified Female:] Hi, Pepe. I miss you.
[J. Martinez:] How are you doing?
[Unidentified Female:] I love you. I hope you come home soon.
[J. Martinez:] I'll be home soon enough.
[Hemmer:] This sounds like one crowded house. Tell us about your family, Corporal.
[J. Martinez:] Basically, my whole family's in Vista. Right now, my wife is staying with her mom, which is approximately 1 12 miles from where my parents live. And my brother lives about two blocks away from my parents. And now my sister and my new brother-in-law, who is back from the rear in the battalion, live a couple of blocks away from the house too. So we're all gathered around.
[Hemmer:] It sounds like a big, crowded house, and that's a really good thing during the holidays. Why don't you give us another greeting to your family back there and tell them about how you are doing out here.
[J. Martinez:] Well, don't worry about me. I can take care of myself. I'm doing fine. I just wish everybody a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, and I'll get home soon as they let me get home. Don't worry. That's pretty much it.
[Hemmer:] To the Martinez family, please, the final words to Jose, here in Kandahar.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, I want to say that we're all very proud of him, and we love him and we miss you a lot, and we're all waiting for you to come home. And we hope to see you soon. We love you. Take care of yourself.
[J. Martinez:] I love you.
[Unidentified Female:] Take care, Pepe, I love you. Merry Christmas. Merry Christmas. I can't wait for you to come home.
[J. Martinez:] Happy New Year.
[Unidentified Male:] Come on home.
[Unidentified Female:] I love you.
[J. Martinez:] I will be home as soon as I can. I love you too, baby.
[Monica Martinez:] We'll all be here waiting for you.
[J. Martinez:] Don't worry I'll be home as soon as I can.
[Monica Martinez:] I can't way. I love you, baby.
[J. Martinez:] I love you too.
[Hemmer:] You have a great family.
[J. Martinez:] I know I do.
[Hemmer:] Thanks, Corporal. Merry Christmas to you. Thanks for doing this.
[J. Martinez:] Thanks to you guys.
[Hemmer:] I'm sure for your family, it was great for them to see you. Spirit continues, Miles, live in Kandahar. Back to you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] President Bush said today that he regrets the decision to keep the White House closed to public tours throughout the holiday season. But he said the move was necessary to do what he called rather in what he called "these extraordinary times." For more on that and the rest of this President's day, let's join CNN's White House Correspondent Kelly Wallace hi, Kelly.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Hi there, Judy. Well, on this day we saw the President defending the administration's decision not to allow Americans to come here for public tours during the holiday season. We also saw the President make the case that the campaign against terrorism would take on and be included in other countries, on other fronts, against other targets, not just in Afghanistan, the President making that point during an Oval Office meeting with President Arroyo of the Philippines. Mr. Bush praising President Arroyo for her work in the fight against the Muslim militant group, Abu Sayyaf, which operates in the Philippines. Mr. Bush saying he will give President Arroyo anything she needs in this fight against terrorism in her country. President Arroyo indicating she believes her military, her country's military could handle Abu Sayyaf, but still the two countries pledging more economic and military assistance, the U.S. providing training and other advice to the Filipino troops and also more economic aid. Now it was during that Oval Office meeting when a reporter asked the President this question, this reporter asking why is it OK for the President to urge Americans to get on airplanes and go about their normal business, and it is not OK to open up the White House for public tours? Well, here's how the President responded to that question earlier this afternoon.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Laura and I regret that the public tours aren't going on, particularly during the Christmas Holiday Season. I know a lot of Americans look forward to touring the White House during this period of time, but we're in extraordinary times. And as I said yesterday, evil knows no holiday.
[Wallace:] And then we saw the President just a short time ago over at the Justice Department, renaming the building in honor of Robert F. Kennedy, the late Senator, the 64th Attorney General. This would have been Robert Kennedy's 64th [sic] birthday, the President there with members of the Kennedy family, Attorney General John Ashcroft. The President noting that America is facing a difficult time in this campaign against terrorism, a time when Americans definitely remember the spirit of Robert Kennedy and his stance against evil. And, Judy, as you know Attorney General John Ashcroft, really one of the most prominent people in the administration, who has often said that this campaign, the administration's campaign against terrorism is very much like Robert Kennedy's campaign against organized crime in the 1960's. So an interesting event there, Judy, as you noted, different political philosophies there, the President and the Kennedy family, but today joined together. Judy, back to you.
[Woodruff:] It was enough to make political junkies have their jaws hanging open.
[Wallace:] Yes.
[Woodruff:] Kelly Wallace, thanks very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Suicide bombings in Jerusalem and in Haifa this past weekend killed more than two dozen people. And Israel responded with a fierce barrage aimed at Palestinian targets. Many of those killed in Jerusalem were teenagers who were out for a night on the town. Marty Kirschenbaum's son Jason was wounded. Jason was on his way to Burger King with some friends when that explosion went off. Marty Kirschenbaum then flew to Jerusalem from New York to be with his son. And he joins us, along with his other son, Jason's brother, Joshua. Thanks for your time today, gentlemen. Can you give update on your son's condition? How is he?
[Marty Kirschenbaum:] He seems to be much better now. And hopefully in the next couple of days we will be getting out of the hospital.
[Harris:] Can you give us an idea of the extent of his injuries?
[Kirschenbaum:] Well, he's got a broken arm, and he had seven pieces of shrapnel in his leg and in his arm. One piece is still in his arm, and hopefully we'll be able to operate within the next two weeks.
[Harris:] Which explosion was it that Jason was injured in? Was it the suicide bomber, or was it the explosion by the car bomb that went off a few minutes later?
[Kirschenbaum:] It was actually I believe two suicide bombers, and he got hit with both of them, one in his leg, and the other shrapnel went in his arm, and the pieces we have some pieces they're actually bolts. He had seven bolts in him like this.
[Harris:] Let's see that. Can we get the camera on those? These were bolts that were packed in the bomb.
[Kirschenbaum:] Right, I have six of them in my hand here. These were taken out of arm and out of his thigh actually, and there's still one in his arm.
[Harris:] When you consider the size of those, and you can compare those to the size of bullet slug, it appears, Jason is very, very lucky to still be alive. Well, Joshua, when you talked with brother, what did he tell you about what happened?
[Joshua Kirschenbaum:] He still is in shock from what exactly happened, and I think he's just realizing now exactly what really happened, and I think it will take a couple of weeks to recover from this.
[Harris:] Let me ask you this. As I understand it, he's just he's a student there studying. He's an American who happens to be there studying. Does this change the way that he thinks now about this conflict between Palestinians and Israelis, or does it change what you and your family feel about it at all? What do you think?
[J. Kirschenbaum:] Well, I think, he of course it changes him a little bit. He was involved in the incident. I think he has a different outlook now on the whole situation. I think he's more involved in the situation now, and he's every bombing he's concerned about everybody, the injured, the noninjured, and I think he wants the whole thing to be settled, the peace to work out and everything like that.
[Harris:] Well, we sure do wish your family well, and we will try to stay on top of your story and we will continue to follow Jason's development, Joshua.
[M. Kirschenbaum:] Can I just say something.
[Harris:] Sure, go ahead, quickly if you can.
[J. Kirschenbaum:] OK, I believe that we need to have peace in this region, and I think we need to do it quickly. The thing that I see as a problem and lot of people here see, there's nobody to go to peace with, and we don't see anybody who's a peace partner for us. And my as for my son, I think it's a terrible tragedy. I hope the United States and the other people will do something to stop this terror, and whatever needs to be done, like they do to the Taliban, they should do it to Arafat. Marty Kirschenbaum, we understand your sentiments. Joshua Kirschenbaum, thank you very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Thousands of U.S. sailors return home today about 8,000 miles from Afghanistan after their duty in the war on terror. This morning the aircraft carrier, the Theodore Roosevelt, it's called the TR in the military, steamed back into port in Norfolk, Virginia. And Bob Franken there to witness some numerous, I'd say hundreds of happy family reunions, if not thousands. Hey, Bob, good afternoon good site.
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Good afternoon. They also call it the big stick, for the obvious reason. The USS Theodore Roosevelt, the massive aircraft carrier, which is coming back after more than six months at sea, six months with 5,500 crew members separated from their families until this morning. About 15,000 were here. We witnessed the reunions, the happy reunions, the hugs, the kisses, the happiness, the tears of happiness, after six months of separation, loneliness, anxiety. Particular anxiety because this deployment came just a few days after the September 11th attacks, and so people were so fearful. The one thing that they spoke so warmly about was their ability this time to communicate constantly by email. Everybody would say the same thing, "Thank goodness for technology." But, that's of course not the same thing as touching and feeling and saying, "I love you," and that happened many, many times. And, of course, so many of the children were here. So many of them seemed to be overwhelmed by it all, but some of them were not.
[Unidentified Male:] Hey, can I say something?
[Franken:] You sure can.
[Unidentified Male:] My feeling and my mom's coming back, there's no word that can express it in the whole entire dictionary.
[Franken:] Have you tried to come up with some?
[Unidentified Male:] Yeah, and there's none.
[Franken:] How about, "I love you?"
[Unidentified Male:] That's one.
[Franken:] Yeah, that was one we heard quite a bit, Bill. Now the big bummer of the day? Well that would be those that's what's being felt by those who are still working on the ship. There is a skeleton crew, so their reunion is going to be delayed Bill.
[Hemmer:] Well that young man was absolutely charming. We saw it back here in Atlanta and said, "Wow, we've got to stick that on once again."
[Franken:] That's right. This man has a future in television. "Can I be on TV?"
[Hemmer:] That, and a whole lot more. Good to see the reunions again Bob, thanks. Bob Franken, live in Norfolk. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Britain has been hard hit by protests over rising gas prices and the government there is taking a hard line.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Lionel Barber, of the "Financial Times," joins us now from the "FT"'s London newsroom. And Lionel that hardline is leaving, actually, Tony Blair in a bit of a tight situation.
[Lionel Barber, News Editor, "financial Times":] You bet. We've sent our reporters around the country this morning to check on the fuel depots, and I have to say that we're still looking at a very grave situation and paralysis. Tankers blocking the entry, we're going to see a big protest in the center of London. And meanwhile the pumps are running dry. And it's beginning to affect all sorts of sectors in the economy, transport, taxi drivers, you can't get errand cars, and also the a even newspapers. Meanwhile, the government has yet to invoke its emergency powers and the most they've got is 60 tankers coming up this morning, which is not a lot.
[Marchini:] At what point do you think Britain completely runs out of gas, if this keeps up?
[Barber:] Well, I think we're talking a matter of two or three days. I mean, it is as bad as that, unless the oil companies can persuade their own drivers to brave these lines of protesters. But there is a genuine popular sense of outrage at the high prices of gas and reflecting a general mood across the continent. And whereas the French government bought off the strikers last week, Tony Blair is adopting almost a Margaret Thatcher like attitude, i.e. we're not giving in.
[Haffenreffer:] Lionel, we have just received some confirmation this morning that Chase Manhattan Bank is, in fact, buying J.P. Morgan. One of the companies that is out there, frequently mentioned as a company looking to do some buying, is Deutsche Bank. But we do have a banker telling Reuters this morning that Deutsche Bank will not make a counteroffer. How is this playing out in the European markets?
[Barber:] Well, at the moment, everybody's looking for a Deutsche Bank move, because we think, we're checking this out, that they were certainly very interested in buying J.P. Morgan. But the Chase-Morgan deal looks a great deal. It creates a juggernaut on paper, big cost savings. And Chase has actually been very good at digesting and managing these big mergers. On the other hand, Rolf Breuer of Deutsche is absolutely committed to entering what they call the bulge bracket of front-line investment banking, and is looking definitely for, I think, for a purchase in the States.
[Marchini:] So we could see, perhaps, them take a look at Lehman or Goldman Brothers or Bear Stearns, you think?
[Barber:] Well, there aren't many left. I mean, in Wall Street, you guys are really consolidating over there. I mean, obviously, Lehman is a possible name and Bear Stearns.
[Marchini:] All right, very good, Lionel Barber, of the "FT," we thank you.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Three days of summit talks in Moscow between President Clinton and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, are under way. Their discussions are expected to focus on changes Washington wants and Moscow opposes in a 1972 arms-control treaty. Mr. Clinton's Russian visit follows a week-long trip to Europe, where he traded ideas on a variety of issues with other world leaders. CNN's Chris Burns has more on that.
[Chris Burns, Cnn Correspondent:] Begun by President Clinton as brainstorming sessions between American and European leaders, this meeting on progressive governance added heads of state from South America and South Africa. They talked about how advanced and developing economies should adapt to an increasingly globalized and technological world without losing sight of social and environmental concerns lofty ideals with the hope of bringing practical results. The leading issues: how to bring about freer trade, fight pollution and AIDS, spread technology to poorer nations, boost education, and get more of the world plugged into the Internet.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] I believe we ought to try to have Internet connections with printers in all the poorest villages where we're trying to get children into schools and give them modern education, because, for example, the entire Encyclopedia Britannica is now on the Internet. And if we if you have a printer and a computer in a poor village, you don't have to be able to afford textbooks anymore. And it's a far more efficient way for government to spread universal information.
[Burns:] Clinton sought to give the high-level talk shop a forward look. A network of experts will meet in Portugal next month, and the Group of Eight leaders will discuss these issues at their summit in Okinawa later in July. [on camera]: One leader who stayed away was British Prime Minister Tony Blair. President Clinton said he understood, adding progressive governance and the Third Way are pro-family. Chris Burns, CNN, Berlin.

[Karuna Shinsho, Cnn Anchor:] Rainy weather did not dampen spirits at Hong Kong's Annual Dragon Boat Festival today. It's a holiday that's celebrated by Chinese communities all over the world, but it's also a major sporting event for corporations here in Hong Kong. Lisa Barron has more.
[Lisa Barron, Cnn Correspondent:] Even a heavy downpour couldn't dampen the mood of corporate Hong Kong. Rain or shine, the Dragon Boat Festival is an annual ritual that few of the territory's movers and shakers would miss.
[Simon Moseley, Goldman Sachs:] The rain does not cause any problems at all. Last year it was blistering hot. This year its rain. We're here every year, and we want to take part.
[Barron:] The Dragon Boat race marks the Tuen Ng Festival, which commemorates the drowning of noted Chinese poet Chu Yua in the third century b.c. But on Stanley Beach most of the participants and the party- goers on the scores of corporate junks lining the race course have other reasons for being here.
[Anthony Stalker, Merrill Lynch:] I'd like to think we're striking a blow for middle-aged fat men, middle-aged professional fat men. SILVAN COLANI, LTG It gives them an opportunity to...
[Tim Murphy, Prudential:] You race for about 10 minutes, come in second to last like we did, and then drink beer all day.
[Barron:] Although not everyone so readily admits that.
[Moseley:] We do not drink anything. In fact, these are empty Heineken cans here.
[Barron:] And you haven't had a drink at all?
[Unidentified Male:] No, ma'am, we didn't. We don't drink.
[Barron:] Participants say even concerns over the stormy economic forecast aren't affecting the spirit of the event. [on camera]: Does corporate sponsorship get affected by the downturn in the economy?
[Moseley:] We think that this is a fair and very appropriate way of getting 40 to 50 people from Goldman Sachs out here for a very good day without spending an enormous amount of money.
[Barron:] Very diplomatic.
[Moseley:] Very diplomatic? Thank you. [voice-over]: And it's one day at least when blowing the competition out of the water takes on new meaning.
[Matt Adler, Clifford Chance:] Its certainly more about having fun, especially for my team.
[Barron:] Lisa Barron, CNN, Hong Kong.

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] It's pandemonium in Russia, where two adorable pandas are on loan now from China, just for the summer. This is a visit aimed at improving relations between the two countries. But already, there's a problem, satisfying the panda's need for bamboo. Here's Tim Rogers.
[Tim Rogers, Itn Reporter:] They have come as ambassadors on a mission, to win the hearts of Russians. And so far, they've been doing a good job thanks mainly to the antics of Ben-Ben, the more playful and the younger of the two pandas, who is the star of their first unofficial viewing at Moscow Zoo. Inside and out of the public gaze, his female partner, Wen-Wen has thought only for a panda's main desire, her next meal. [on camera]: The pandas' arrival is meant to illustrate the thawing in relations between Moscow and Beijing. And while the Russians are clearly delighted to have them here, they nevertheless present something of a problem: and that's how to satisfy their voracious appetite. [voice-over]: The problem is getting hold of the pandas' staple diet, bamboo. They eat 50 pounds a day, and the only region in Russia where bamboo is grown is more than 1,000 miles away. So the zoo is having it flown in especially. But the pandas appearance has taken months of careful negotiations between Russia and China. And whatever the cost, diplomacy and a panda's needs come first. Ben-Ben and Wen-Wen are only loan, and they'll be returning to China in August. By then, the diplomats hope it'll be mission accomplished. Tim Rogers, ITN, Moscow.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] It's Mardi Gras, one big one final day before the beginning of Lent down there.
[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] More than a million people have poured into the streets of New Orleans to celebrate this Fat Tuesday. And among the big parades rolling through the streets today: Zulu and Rex. And joining us now on the phone is the governor of the Zulu, Curtis Woolridge. Hello, Governor.
[Curtis Woolridge, Governor Of Zulu:] Hello! How you doing there?
[Phillips:] Obviously not as good as you, my friend.
[Woolridge:] Oh, we having a great time over here. I can't hardly hear you, but we're having a great, great time over here.
[Harris:] Your Zuluness, can you describe the scene you're seeing right now?
[Woolridge:] Come back with it?
[Harris:] How about describing for us what you are seeing, because we can't see it.
[Woolridge:] Well, the best thing I can tell you right now: We having a good time. I'm the governor Zulu 2001. And we just having a great, great time.
[Phillips:] Hey, Governor, in addition to having a great time, why don't you tell us about those coconuts? A lot of people don't know why you hand those out.
[Woolridge:] We hand the coconuts out here as a condition of New Orleans-Louisiana, the Mardi Gras. So we having a good time handing out coconuts over here. So that's about the best I can tell you right now because there is so much noise there is so much noise, we can hardly hear what you are saying. But come on back. I'm going to try to stay with you as long as I can.
[Harris:] All right, we will let the governor get on with his bad Zulu self. Let's take a look take a shot here. Look at this crowd here. It is amazing. And it's early.
[Phillips:] Hey, I you see all the horses there? That is the New Orleans Police Department, their mounted patrol. Now, these guys and women are very well known. They have oh, it is the Zulu parade.
[Harris:] We're being told this is the Zulu parade.
[Phillips:] OK. Oh, that's my bad because the mounted patrol comes out there, they're like incredible crowd control. And they keep everybody from, you know, going nuts. So I guess it's kind of hard to decipher between the two. I apologize about that.
[Harris:] Yes. Well, it's moving kind of slow. Is that the way it goes down there?
[Phillips:] Things move very slow. It gives people more of a chance to party and get a taste and see the parades and the people. And, now, you know, in addition to coconuts, they toss out all kinds of sweets and candy and necklaces and...
[Harris:] Which would explain the children we see there in the crowd.
[Phillips:] Exactly. They sometimes even toss out lingerie.
[Harris:] Oh, you see, that's why I am asking that because, see, some of the time, some of the stories I have heard about these parades, Zulu or otherwise, I don't think you want to have kids around there.
[Phillips:] Yes, it get gets pretty crazy.
[Harris:] Beautiful picture there, all right.

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Shelley Walcott, Co-host:] Happy Monday and welcome to CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Shelley Walcott. A lot ahead today. Here's what's coming up. President Bush hits the ground running his first week in office. We'll take a look at what he's got planned. Then, in "Environment Desk," new homes near Atlanta that could save owners a lot of money. From the suburbs of the U.S. to the wilds of Russia, "Worldview" zeros in on the wolf. And in "Chronicle," a high school band in a high-profile performance. The United States presidency changes hands, creating a weekend of beginnings and endings, parties and protests. President George W. Bush was sworn in Saturday as the nation's 43rd president. A controversial yet smooth shift in power this weekend. Former President Clinton bid farewell to a position he's held for eight years, placing his executive responsibilities in the hands of his replacement, President George W. Bush. In his 14-minute inaugural address, President Bush promised to unite America and lead with civility and compassion.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] I will live and lead by these principles: to advance my convictions with civility, to pursue the public interest with courage, to speak for greater justice and compassion, to call for responsibility and try to live it as well.
[Walcott:] A three-hour parade followed the inauguration ceremony and a series of inaugural balls followed that. And while thousands of Americans cheered Mr. Bush on his big day, thousands more protested vigorously, creating what one presidential historian called the largest inaugural protest since Richard Nixon took office in 1969. The upcoming week will be busy for Mr. Bush as he gets down to business on education, the economy and tax cuts. During his first full day in office, President George W. Bush picked up more support for his huge tax cut plan. Mr. Bush is proposing a 10-year, $1.3 trillion tax cut. Patty Davis has more now on the tax plan and the Democratic senator who's agreed to support it.
[Patty Davis, Cnn Correspondent:] On his first full day in office, a big boost for President George W. Bush and his $1.3 trillion tax cut plan. Georgia Democratic Sen. Zell Miller plans to co-sponsor Bush's tax cut with Republican Senate Banking Chairman Phil Gramm.
[Andrew Card, White House Chief Of Staff:] I'm thrilled if Sen. Gramm has found a Democratic co-sponsor. We expect a lot of Democrats to support our plan because it's the right thing for America.
[Davis:] Miller's spokeswoman said, quote, "He campaigned on the fact that he wanted to be bipartisan, and he wanted to be a tax- cutting senator just as he was a tax-cutting governor, and this is a great opportunity to do both." Miller, a Southern moderate, was the first Democrat to say he'd vote for John Ashcroft, President Bush's controversial nominee for attorney general. The bipartisanship on one of Mr. Bush's top priorities could help the new president has he begins to push his legislative agenda on Capitol Hill.
[Stuart Rothenberg, Rothenberg Political Report:] George W. Bush has made a big deal about reaching out, and this is the first success. This is the a Democrat is now onboard the tax proposal, and it suggest other opportunities for Bush, and it suggests that Bush has some appeal to Democrats.
[Davis:] But Bush's tax plan still has a long way to go. Democrats say it would outspend the budget surplus.
[Sen. Tom Daschle , Minority Leader:] Whether it's divided in pieces or offered in its entirety, I think the key question is, what is the entire package cost. We can't afford a $1.6 trillion tax cut that we don't have the resources for that.
[Davis:] The new president will have to woo Democrats. And he may not get his entire plan through the closely divided Congress. Now, though, he's one Democrat closer to his goal. Patty Davis, CNN, Capitol Hill.
[Walcott:] Cold weather and soaring energy costs. For many Americans this winter, its an expensive combination. Heating bills can soar into the hundreds of dollars each month and not everyone can afford to keep their home as warm as they'd like. Now some homebuilders near Atlanta, Georgia are constructing houses to combat the elements, homes that will help stave off heat during the summer months and keep the cold air at bay during the winter. Brian Cabell reports on this initiative.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] They are five so- called "Earthcraft" houses being built near Atlanta; homes that are environmentally friendly and guaranteed to save owners up to $100 or more a month on energy costs. Sure, most have energy-efficient appliances, the washer, dryer, dishwasher and air conditioning units. But at least equally important, builders say, is the way the house is constructed, with heavy-duty insulation, mastic to seal leaks on ducts, sealed light fixtures, rubber seals around doors.
[Jim Hackler, Earthcraft House Program:] Typically on most homes, and this is even new homes, that a third of your heating and cooling costs are lost because of leakage.
[Cabell:] One other vital component these homes feature to prevent leakage: double pane windows with a special glass that deflects some of the sunlight. All this adds to the cost of the homes, maybe 2 percent at most, but designers say it's well worth it in the long run.
[Tom Falik, Homebuilder:] So the overall cost of one to 1 to 1 12 percent is amortized very easily by the energy savings that the homeowner will have over the first couple of years of the house.
[Cabell:] Are home shoppers ready for more energy-efficient and slightly more expensive houses? Clearly some are.
[Unidentified Female:] We did buy a solar home and paid extra, and have enjoyed it thoroughly. Up front, it's all done at once. And if you tried to add it later, it's going to be far more expense than it would be if you did it in the beginning.
[Cabell:] That's the attitude homebuilders are counting on. The numbers are huge, 700 Earthcraft homes being built in Atlanta, thousands more similarly green being constructed across the nation. Brian Cabell, CNN, Atlanta.
[Walcott:] In "Worldview" today, we check out the environment, business and politics. Are world tour takes us to Russia to spotlight religion and a Jewish revival. More from the region as we focus on the call of the wild and wolves. We also journey to Jamaica for a bit of history and culture. But first we focus on Iraq and Kuwait. It was 10 years ago that U.S. President George Bush led an allied attack to liberate Kuwait from Iraqi invasion. Now as the son of the former U.S. president becomes commander-in-chief, our Jane Arraf looks at the view from an old adversary.
[Jane Arraf, Cnn Correspondent:] In a region that understands dynasties, George W. Bush following in his father's footsteps to the White House is no surprise. But in Iraq, the name Bush is synonymous with war. This woman struggles to remember what she was doing in 1991 until a neighbor prompts her: "the Bush War." In the Gulf states, which went to war to free Kuwait, then- President George Bush was a hero. In Iraq, he was a villain, a legacy literally set in stone at Baghdad's government owned Rashid Hotel. The hotel was hit by U.S. cruise missiles in 1993 after an alleged Iraqi plot to kill the former U.S. president. [on camera]: Iraq denies the plot, but says the United States has been trying to get rid of President Saddam Hussein for years. [voice-over]: One familiar face in the new U.S. Cabinet, Gulf War Gen. Colin Powell, is again talking about unfinished business with Iraq.
[Tariq Aziz, Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister:] What business does he have with Iraq, you see? If he wants to continue the aggressive policy which the previous administration, in which he was the chief of staff, took against Iraq, it's up to him.
[Arraf:] Officials are ridiculing plans for increased U.S. support for the Iraqi opposition.
[Aziz:] Let them spend more money on those crooks. If they have a surplus in the American budget to spend on those people rather than spending it on health care or education in the United States, let them spend that money.
[Arraf:] Iraq says it doesn't matter to the government here who's in the White House, but the issue is so sensitive it won't let journalists ask Iraqis what they think of the new U.S. president. Iraq, though, will be keeping as much of an eye on the new U.S. administration as the administration is on Iraq. Jane Arraf, CNN, Baghdad.
[Walcott:] We open our eyes now to the natural beauty of Jamaica, an island nation in the West Indies. Located 480 miles or 772 kilometers south of Florida, Jamaica is the third largest island in the Caribbean Sea. Its capital and largest city, Kingston, serves as the country's chief port. Jamaica was a British colony for about 300 years, becoming an independent nation in 1962. The island's economy thrives on production of bauxite, bananas, sugar and other manufactured goods. But tourism is also an economic cornerstone. Jamaica's pleasant climates and beautiful beaches attract more than 850,000 visitors each year. Kalin Thomas-Samuel tells us why.
[Kalin Thomas-samuel, Cnn Correspondent:] Jamaica's lush landscape is filled with challenges for the adventurous traveler. One of the island's most popular attractions, Dunn's River Falls in Ocho Rios. You don't just look at these waterfalls, you climb them. About 2,500 tourists a day take on the challenge of 600 feet of slippery rocks. Many visitors come from cruise ships.
[Merle Wilson, Manager Dunn's River Falls & Park:] It is a good thing for Jamaica. Tourism is our major foreign exchange arena. So cruise ship visitors are very special to Dunn's River because we're really the reason why they come here.
[Thomas-samuel:] People of all ages make the trek. All you need is an experienced guide, the right shoes, a bathing suit or lightweight clothing and a sense of adventure. There are a few breaks along the way for taking pictures, and just about everybody makes it to the top.
[Unidentified Female:] Scary, but it was very great. I love Dunn's River Falls, I love Jamaica.
[Wilson:] I am sometimes surprised when I see some persons climbing the falls because all the falls different sizes. It's a very exhilarating experience, one like that.
[Thomas-samuel:] Now, if you're not quite ready for the rushing waters of Dunn's River Falls, there are more peaceful waters. Here in Montego Bay, the Martha Brae River allows you to sit back and enjoy the view. [voice-over]: This gentle waterway takes its name from an Arawak Indian who refused to reveal the location of a gold mine to Spanish invaders. Legend says she drowned herself in this river and took the Spaniards with her. Drowning in fun and relaxation is the theme these days. Tour guides, or captains, as they're called, add to the experience by offering tidbits about Jamaican history and culture; for instance, explaining how Jamaicans use the leaves of a pimento tree.
[Unidentified Male:] If you have an upset stomach, you just chew on the leaf.
[Thomas-samuel:] We drift by a souvenir stand and stop for a refreshing drink of coconut water. Jamaicans say it cleanses the body. You can even buy a souvenir made right on the raft. [on camera]: Where'd you learn to do that?
[Unidentified Male:] Just right here on the job.
[Thomas-samuel:] On the river?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Thomas-samuel:] A serenade is a nice finishing touch towards the end of the trip.
[Unidentified Male:] Lavender blue, dilly dilly, lavenders green. When I am king, dilly dilly, you shall be my queen.
[Thomas-samuel:] In the evening, over on the West Coast in Negril, watching the sunset at Rick's cafe is a long-standing tradition.
[Unidentified Male:] People will drive as far as from Montego Bay and Ocho Rios, which is sometimes three and four hours, to come and see us. We are packed all the time.
[Thomas-samuel:] While guests wait for the sun to set, they enjoy some of Rick's Jamaican cuisine and rock to the rhythms of Reggae music. The more daring visitors can dive from cliffs 50-feet high. But the locals outdo them all by climbing even higher and jumping from the trees.
[Unidentified Female:] I heard so much about it. It's everything they say.
[Thomas-samuel:] And it Jamaica, the fun doesn't depend on the weather.
[Unidentified Male:] I've seen 250 people toast a cloudy, rainy sky at the very moment that the sun should be hitting the horizon. Doesn't matter, man. In Jamaica, everything cool, man.
[Thomas-samuel:] Kalin Thomas-Samuel, CNN, Negril, Jamaica.
[Tom Haynes, Co-host:] The Soviet Union fell apart in 1991. What remained was Greater Russia and 10 former Soviet republics. After the breakup, Russia claimed those republics to be part of the new commonwealth of independent states. But ethnic disputes soon emerged among those who didn't want to be part of the new Russian federation and tensions ensued. To lend moral guidance, the Russian Orthodox Church reestablished itself after years of communist repression. Since then, other religions have also reemerged. Steve Harrigan reports on a religious homecoming of sorts.
[Steve Harrigan, Cnn Correspondent:] As newborn baby Mark Segal and his family left Russia for the United States, Jews in search of religious freedom. Now they've come back to Moscow to celebrate Mark's bar mitzvah.
[Unidentified Male:] I feel it's really like my home.
[Harrigan:] A community whose members often tried to hide their identity in the old Soviet Union or emigrate to the West is taking on a new, much more public role at home.
[Berl Lazar, Chief Rabbi Of Russia:] The numbers are incredible. Today we believe that we are in touch with over a million Jews.
[Harrigan:] Russian President Vladimir Putin helped unveil a $12 million Jewish community center on the same site where a synagogue was bombed twice and burned once in the last 10 years. the ex-KGB colonel called decades of state persecution absurd.
[Vladimir Putin, Russian President:] People were forced to study their own language underground in secret. Who will live in such a country?
[Harrigan:] Hebrew lessons are out in the open today, but not all Jews welcome the government's embrace. Rival factions say Russia's new chief rabbi was hand-picked by the Kremlin.
[Pinchas Goldschmidt, Chief Rabbi Of Moscow:] We see a very long tradition Russian tradition not only communist, a very long Russian tradition of trying to control and influence religious groups.
[Harrigan:] If that tradition still exists, the methods have certainly changed, from open violence just a few years ago to smiles and handshakes today. Steve Harrigan, CNN, Moscow.
[Rudi Bakhtiar, Co-host:] More from Russia as we turn to the wild kingdom. We look at one of the largest members of the dog family, the wolf. Wolves typically live in sparsely populated northern regions such as Alaska, China and Russia. They're experts at hunting, preying mainly on large animals, including deer, elk and moose. Wolves resemble large German shepherd dogs in appearance. Their fur ranges from pure white in the Arctic to jet black in the subarctic forests. These predators live in groups called packs, which have anywhere from eight to 20 members. The packs social order involves a dominant hierarchy in which each wolf holds a certain rank. High- ranking called dominant wolves dominate low-ranking members, or subordinate wolves. But high rankings aren't enough to protect these animals from human predators. Gary Strieker explains.
[Gary Strieker, Cnn Correspondent:] In his backyard, Mikhail Stardadupsev has a few orphans: five wolf pups he found in a den when they were only a few days old. He likes to give them his dog to play with, though the dog seems to know the wolves would probably eat him if they were a bit older. Mikhail has been a forest ranger in southwestern Russia for more than 50 years. And he says he likes wolves, but he admits he's killed many of them in his time, including the mother of these pups. He's got a small wolf exhibit in his tool shed, a kind of testimonial to his affection for these animals. He says "the wolf is like a sanitary cleaner in the forest preying on sick and weak animals. It's necessary to have them around," he says, "but when there are too many, some of them must be killed." That's been the policy in Russia for hundreds of years. Killing wolves allows prey animals like deer and wild boar to multiply. And that's what human hunters want. The government still pays a bounty to anyone who kills a wolf outside protected reserves. But officials in Moscow say there are still too many wolves in Russia; at last count more than 44,000 of them across the country. Nearly 13,000 wolves were killed last year alone. But officials claim that's not enough to keep them under control. They say there's no money for the transport, fuel and weapons to do the job. But there's a growing movement in Russia, influenced by new ecological thinking in the West, that would give a greater role to wolves in these forests, allowing a natural balance between wolves and their prey. But wildlife biologist Andre Poyarkov says many Russians are still deeply afraid of wolves, and he expects the annual wolf kills will continue, even increase. Mikhail says he'll release these wolves back to the forest, where they'll have to take their chances against bounty hunters like all the others. Gary Strieker, CNN, Bordanesz, Russia.
[Walcott:] Well, it was a big weekend for the new U.S. president. The inauguration didn't stop at President Bush's swearing-in. The rest of the day included a parade, a church service, and parties, parties, parties. We sent our Washington NEWSROOM correspondent Mike McManus to the inaugural balls to find out what the young people hope can be accomplished in this new administration.
[Mike Mcmanus, Cnn Correspondent:] President Bush's inauguration speech centered on an issue familiar with his campaign.
[Bush:] Our unity, our union is the serious work of leaders and citizens and every generation. And this is my solemn pledge: I will work to build a single nation of justice and opportunity.
[Mcmanus:] Fritz Brogan is a 16-year-old very familiar with the issue.
[Fritz Brogan, Age 16:] It's time to celebrate. It's been a long and arduous race, but it's over.
[Mcmanus:] He's from Fort Lauderdale, Florida, ground zero in the election recount. Brogan celebrated inauguration night in the nation's capital at the Florida inaugural ball.
[Brogan:] A lot of people's toes were stepped over during the election. Many people thought that their right to vote was sacrificed. But I think, together, George W. Bush can do a great job of bringing America back together.
[Mcmanus:] Brogan is a Bush supporter and was active in his campaign for president. The high school sophomore even started his own Web site specifically for teenagers interested in the Bush-Cheney ticket.
[Brogan:] The Internet's the one thing that unites youth. Pretty much everyone out there has a computer and e-mail address, so I was able to contact kids from across the country, even across the world.
[Mcmanus:] Bringing two deeply divided political parties together may be top on the president's list. But as with any leader, success will not be measured by promises. Young voters are looking for results. Are you going to hold him to those promises?
[Brogan:] I will hold him to his promises, yes.
[Mcmanus:] Other young partygoers were more interested in the new president's campaign promise of reforming the U.S. education system.
[Bush:] Together we will reclaim America's schools before ignorance and apathy claim more young lives.
[Katelin Sullivan, Age 18:] Every student should have the opportunity to attend whatever school is the best for them, fits them the best, their style of learning.
[Jamie Blosser, Age 16:] I like his point about not leaving anyone behind. Every child should get an education no matter, you know, if they're rich or poor and where they live. I think that's so important.
[Mcmanus:] Another point of interest was President Bush's thoughts on the slowing economy.
[Bush:] We will reduce taxes to recover the momentum of our economy and reward the effort and enterprise of working Americans.
[Chris Rood, Age 21:] It's important to me because I so I have a job when I'm older, you know, keep a job and have a family.
[Mcmanus:] These young people assembled for the inauguration said they were excited about ideas the new administration bring to Washington, but also know there are challenges ahead for Both 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and Capitol Hill. President Bush echoed those challenges at the end of his speech.
[Bush:] This work continues, the story goes on...
[Mcmanus:] Michael McManus, CNN NEWSROOM, Washington.
[Walcott:] With all the pomp and ceremony we see on TV surrounding a presidential inaugural, you can imagine the excitement of actually attending one. But what if you're in the high school band and the Presidential Inaugural Committee asks you to perform for the new president? Our Jason Bellini reports the words "excitement" and, yes, "nervousness" take on a whole new meaning.
[Jason Bellini, Cnn Correspondent:] For the bands marching in the inaugural parade, the day started early in a parking lot at the Pentagon. Thirty high school and college bands were chosen by the Inaugural Committee for the honor of performing for the new president. I followed through the day a band from Papillion-LaVista High School in Omaha, Nebraska. If you're a band that made it all the way to here, you know that you're among the best of the best. So as bands were warming up, they checked out one another. The band travelled 25 hours to get to Washington, D.C., most not sleeping very much along the way.
[Unidentified Male:] We're going to be going over to the National Mall.
[Bellini:] With over 70 members, they were a handful for their band director.
[Unidentified Male:] Whatever I tell you to do, we need to do right away, OK? Any questions at all? Mr. Keller, I got a question. Do you know where the Pepsi band is staying?
[Bellini:] How are these kids behaving?
[Unidentified Male:] Excellent.
[Bellini:] Yes?
[Unidentified Male:] Excellent. You bet. Couldn't be better.
[Bellini:] No tomfoolery on the bus?
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, none whatsoever, no, no.
[Unidentified Female:] Oh God, no! Oh God, no!
[Bellini:] You wouldn't tolerate that?
[Unidentified Male:] No, exactly.
[Bellini:] 11:00 a.m., the bus left the Pentagon, driving to the Mall. Security extraordinarily tight for the parade, police blocked off streets for the convoy of band buses.
[Unidentified Female:] Did you know really if we just like ran a red light? Oh, this is tight.
[Bellini:] Most of the band saw through their bus windows their nation's capital for the very first time.
[Unidentified Female:] I thought I was never going to see the White House.
[Bellini:] No one informed them beforehand that the Mall didn't have a Gap or Bloomingdale's.
[Unidentified Female:] I was so ready to go shopping. That's a mall? We were going shopping. No, there's no mall. Are you joking?
[Bellini:] Their coming here wasn't just a big event for them and their parents, but also for the community back home. Their band, thus their community, was on the map today.
[Unidentified Female:] We had little kindergarteners. They were into like money and they gave us money for the trip $13 in pennies. In pennies. That is the cutest thing.
[Bellini:] Around 11:50 a.m., the inaugural ceremony began. The bus driver turned the radio to it. From the bus to a holding tent next for hot chocolate and more time to mingle with the other bands. Tim Koklinsky asked to borrow my camera for a little while to do some interviews of his own.
[Unidentified Female:] Where are you all from?
[Unidentified Male:] Nebraska.
[Unidentified Female:] Nebraska? Oh.
[Unidentified Male:] I don't know. I choose a new color like every two weeks, pretty much. I told you when we started out on this that this would be one of the most important things that you do in your life. And I'm not kidding.
[Bellini:] After the pep talk, honor turned into a nightmare of mud, frigid rain and we feet before they got their chance for face time with the new president. You'd think they'd be charging the buses as soon as they came into view, but the Papillion High School Marching Band stays in formation, does one last number for itself and their bus drivers this time. They're good, they know it, now they're going home. Jason Bellini, CNN NEWSROOM, Washington.
[Walcott:] That's a memory that's going to last a lifetime. Now this show's a memory. We'll see you tomorrow. Bye-bye.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the markets will again be on economic watch, third-quarter productivity figures are expected to be revised lower. The consensus estimate is for a growth rate of 3.5 percent annually. Economists forecasting an upward adjustment to unit labor costs to 2.8 percent. The report is due an hour before the opening bell, and so if those expectations are fulfilled, it will mean basically less output, more inflation.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Well, Alan Greenspan says he'll be ready to act if the U.S. economy slows down too fast.
[Marchini:] Greenspan's credibility among investors extends around the world. So, how are his words being received in Europe? Janet Guyon, of "Fortune" magazine, joins us from London. And we saw a rally yesterday, Janet, they're giving it back a little bit today. How much of it was the Greenspan effect?
[Janet Guyon, London Bureau Chief, "fortune":] Well, a lot of it, Deborah, was the Greenspan effect. I mean, when this man speaks, the markets move. And that's true across the world. We've seen that in Europe. We saw that yesterday in the U.S. He has an extraordinary effect on the markets. People were watching that speech in New York yesterday looking for every little tea leaf to read. Was he going to talk about inflation? Was he going to talk about growth? The fact that he emphasized economic growth as opposed to inflation suggested to a lot of people that an interest-rate cut could be in the works early next year. So Greenspan has an extraordinary effect on the markets around the world, much more than any probably almost any single individual.
[Haffenreffer:] Janet, we talk about Greenspan's credibility around world, what about his popularity?
[Guyon:] Well, I'd say he's a pretty popular guy. I mean, after all, he's been the guy who's really monitored economic health around the world. I mean, we've had an extraordinary expansion. We've had a couple of bumps in the road. You know, two years ago, with that crisis in Russia that spread to a credit crisis across the world. I mean, Greenspan steered us out of that pretty well. So I'd say, I don't think popularity is not the main thing here, but certainly credibility and the sense that there's a strong wise hand on the economic tiller so to speak.
[Marchini:] Janet, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe Europe has what it considers to be a similar strong wise hand at the head of its central bank?
[Guyon:] No, Deborah, here in Europe, we've got a lot of opinions. Wim Duisenberg is the head of the central bank here, he's a Dutch men, and of course the euro's less than two years old, as is that bank. So it's got some growing pains, and what we see in Europe all too often is a kind of competing agenda. We have Duisenberg saying one thing about growth and interest rates and inflation, and some of the finance ministers from the various European countries saying other things. So there aren't really clear signals, at least thus far, out of the European Central Bank about how they view economic growth and inflation. Now, that's those public statements. Now if you actually read some of the reports from the ECB, and read those, they do paint a slightly different picture. They do seem to have more of a consensus. But the public statements between the ECB and some of the finance ministers of the various countries does lead to a lot of confusion in the market over here, or has done over the last year, and that's partly reflected in the low value of the euro, quite frankly.
[Marchini:] All right, Janet Guyon, "Fortune" magazine.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome back to the Philadelphia and the Comcast First Union Center, here live. Again, pictures of these balloons here. And just to get your facts and numbers in order, 150,000 balloons planned to be hoisted on the ceiling here of the convention center, the world's largest balloon drop ever. Again, that will go down beginning Monday, three days away from the start of the Republican National Convention here in Philadelphia. That's a lot of hot air in those balloons. Speaking of hot air, we're now joined this morning by two people who follow this stuff for a living: Kate O'Beirne of the "National Review" is a political analyst on CNN's "INSIDE POLITICS," also a panelist on CNN's "THE CAPITAL GANG." And Mike Murphy, senior campaign adviser to Rick Lazio, Republican Senate candidate in New York. He's also a former adviser to Senator John McCain. No hard feelings about that hot air comment, all right? Kate to you first. Ladies first in this case. Back in 1986, the soccer moms are seen as such a critical group. Is there a soccer mom group in this election? And if so, who are they?
[Kate O'beirne, "national Review":] Well, one critical group, Bill, it seems to me, are younger blue-collar males between the ages of 18 and 35. They are typically Democratic in their sentiments, but they are not supporting Al Gore. And the fact that these young blue- collar men aren't at the moment, don't like Al Gore, have decided, it seems, that they don't care for him, contributes to the huge lead that even the recent CNN poll shows George W. Bush enjoys among men.
[Hemmer:] Are you saying they're being pushed away by Al Gore in favor of George W. Bush, or is something about Bush they see in him as well?
[O'beirne:] I think there's some evidence that they're being pushed away by Al Gore. Many of them are union workers. A number of polls are showing that George W. Bush and Al Gore are tied among union members. Some of these younger men, I think, are figuring, look, they're both wrong on some issues important to us. Both Al Gore and George W. Bush both support free trade agreements that the unions typically oppose, so then they begin to look at other issues. And look at Michigan. A lot of these fellows believe in gun rights. Some of them are culturally conservative. There's something about George W. Bush in fact, the Teamsters president, Jimmy Hoffa, tells associates that he likes George W. Bush as sort of a guy's guy. And Jimmy Hoffa himself hasn't warmed to Al Gore.
[Hemmer:] All right, that's the men issue. I want to go to Mike Murphy on this one. There is actually a bumper sticker circulating in some parts that says, "W. Stands for Women." So apparently George W. Bush is scoring points with women voters thus far. Why is that?
[Mike Murphy, Gop Strategist, Lazio Senior Adviser:] I think Governor Bush has done a good job of laying out an agenda that's compassionate and conservative as he says, compassionate conservatism. So he's taken some of the edges off traditional conservatism and is resonating with people. I think they know he cares about children, he cares about public education, but he's open to new ideas and new solutions, not letting the teachers union and the status quo, you know, feed us failure for another 20 years. So Bush has been able to combine the innovative new ideas that comes from American conservatism with a softer edge and a record in Texas of caring about people who are often left behind. I think people find that very appealing, women included.
[Hemmer:] It sounds like a contradiction, especially if you look at 1996: Bill Clinton, 54 percent of the female vote; Bob Dole had only 38 percent. And we'll continue to track that. Quickly, Kate O'Beirne, to minorities: Hispanics have been very popular for George W. Bush in Texas. Can he spread that success in other parts of the country, especially California?
[O'beirne:] He's certainly going to try to because it would be critical to his efforts in California. For a Republican, as you rightly note, he has enjoyed terrific Hispanic support in Texas. The Latino vote in California is a different vote. Obviously those voters don't know George W. Bush as well as Hispanic Texas voters were able to observe him. He was very popular following his first time. But he's certainly going to make a big play. And in doing so, in reaching out to those Latino voters, he's also signaling independent voters, underscoring the point Mike just made: I'm a different kind of Republican, I'm going to go to different constituencies, I want to broaden the appeal of my party, I'm open to these other issues, I want to include you. And that's a I think that's an attractive message to those independent voters who aren't partisans and are watching for that kind of openness.
[Hemmer:] We'll see if that sticks. Back to Mike Murphy quickly. I mentioned you work with Rick Lazio, senior adviser of his campaign against Hillary Clinton. This week, Hillary Clinton said, I want to debate Rick Lazio anytime, anywhere. When and where? is the question now.
[Murphy:] She is going to get her wish. We're very shortly going to be announcing a whole series of debate initiatives. There will be debates. We're looking forward to them, and people can look at Lazio.com to keep an eye on when and what we're doing. But there are going to be debates and we're looking forward to them. It's about time that we engage on issues and get out of the attack campaign the Clintons are running in New York and let voters see who's really from New York and for New York.
[Hemmer:] And we're out of time. Mike Murphy, Kate O'Beirne, hope you get down to Philly. And if so, we'll see you then, OK?
[O'beirne:] We'll see you there.
[Hemmer:] All right, good deal.

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] George W. Bush's running mate, Dick Cheney, is expected to be released from George Washington Hospital some time this weekend. Cheney underwent angioplasty treatment yesterday after suffering what doctors called a very slight heart attack. CNN medical correspondent Rhonda Rowland explains the treatment process.
[Rhonda Rowland, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] When a patient is rushed to the hospital with escalating chest pain, the first step is to determine if there's been a heart attack. It's done simply with sophisticated tests that look at enzymes in the blood. If the patient is stable, the next question faced by the doctor and patient: Should aggressive treatment be given immediately, such as angioplasty or heart bypass surgery, or should an exercise stress test and a wait and see approach be used? Mr. Cheney's doctors say minor changes were seen after a second stress test, or EKG, was given. So doctors went forward with a heart catheterization. In this common procedure, the patient remains awake while a catheter is threaded through the groin into the heart. Dye is injected so any blockages in the arteries can be seen on an X-ray. If there is a blockage, which was the case with Cheney, balloon angioplasty can be used to open it.
[Dr. Randy Martin, Emory University:] Angioplasties in a bypass vessel, a little bit more technically difficult, and that's that's certainly but it is certainly routinely done. And it's designed to do what the bypass was: to open up that vessel and reestablish blood flow.
[Rowland:] When angioplasty is used, cardiologists typically use tiny mesh devices called stents to prop the artery open. Results from a major scientific trial called TACTICS show patients who receive therapy right away, like Cheney, reduce their chances of death, heart attack, and rehospitalization by about 20 percent over the next six months.
[Dr. Christopher Cannon, Brigham & Women's Hospital:] In patients who get the current state-of-the-art treatment with platelet blockers and medical treatment and stents during the procedures that they had a significant improvement in their outcome.
[Rowland:] The first 24 hours is a critical time for patients who have procedures to open blocked arteries. They may suddenly close and another procedure, or surgery, may be needed. Rhonda Rowland, CNN, Atlanta.

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] We are going to take you now to Columbia University in New York. Vice President Al Gore is making a campaign stop there today. He is talking about the economy, an issue he believes works for him in this election. Let's listen in.
[Vice Pres. Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] ... heard me say in the past what respect I have for Bob Rubin and what a joy it was to work with him so closely during the last eight years. Let me also say it's great to be back at Columbia just five months after my daughter Karenna's law school graduation. Secretary Rubin and I were talking just before we came out here, and this is really a privilege to have a chance to, once again, be with him because we worked together to get the fundamentals right; to make sure that our economy headed in the right direction. And we faced some hard choices and we picked the hard right over the easy wrong. I've come here today to talk about the choices that our country faces now. Because just 19 days from today, Americans will choose not only a new president but a whole new future for our country. Some have suggested that with a strong and growing economy, the stakes are somehow lower in this election. I believe the opposite is true. We now have a greater chance than at any time in our lifetimes to create the America of our ideals. If we don't make the right choices today, that chance could slip right through our hands. And so on November 7th, we face one of the biggest choices America has faced in half a century, a choice of priorities; a choice of values; a choice as fundamental as prosperity itself. Will we seize this moment to extend the prosperity and share it widely? or will we just lavish more on those who need it least and threaten our economic gains? Will we make the right choices and the right investments to keep our economy growing? or will we bust the budget and short-change the future for a massive tax cut for the few? This is about more than numbers on a spreadsheet. All Americans created this prosperity, and I want to make sure it enriches all Americans. And I want to make two simple points today. The economic policies my opponent has put forward in this election are not just unfair, they are unsound and they would hurt our economy. Thanks to the hard work of the American people, the entrepreneurial spirit of our businesses, and the right economic policies, America has put its house in order. Instead of sky-high deficits, we have record surpluses, and opportunity as vast as the New York skyline. Instead of high unemployment, we have 22 million new jobs, and the lowest unemployment in 30 years. The lowest African-American and Latino unemployment in the entire history of the United States. It wasn't easy to get here. And I don't believe our future prosperity is preordained. I don't believe we can take liberties with it or take it for granted. Our families have worked too hard, and come too far, to just throw it all away. Yes, we've come a long way, but that's not what this election is about. I am asking for your support not because of how far we've come, but because of how much farther we can go together.
[Meserve:] Al Gore speaking today at Columbia University, saying that on November 7th, election day, the country faces a big choice, whether, he says, whether to seize the moment to extend and expand our prosperity, or lavish more on those who need it least and squander our economic gain. He criticized the economic proposals of his opponent, George W. Bush, calling them "unfair, unsound," and also saying they would hurt our economy. For his part, Republican George W. Bush today accused the Gore campaign of trying to scare senior citizens about his plan to reform Social Security. Speaking in suburban Detroit he defended his goal to let what he called "the rising generation" of younger workers invest part of their Social Security payroll tax.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] It's irresponsible for the chairman of the Democratic Party, and for Vice President Gore to stoke the fears of seniors, while ignoring the hopes of younger workers. A true leader does not try to pit grandparents against grandchildren.
[Meserve:] Bush will talk more about his economic agenda on CNN's "STREET SWEEP." That's at 4:00 p.m. Eastern, 1:00 Pacific.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Gillette, Colgate and Avon, all multinational firms, will report earnings before today's opening bell.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] And here now to give us a preview of that group's outlook is household products and cosmetics analyst Carol Warner Wilke of Credit Suisse First Boston. Good morning to you.
[Carol Warner Wilke, Credit Suisse First Boston:] Good morning.
[Marchini:] Welcome.
[Haffenreffer:] This early part of the day here. This has been an interesting sector of late. And these are obviously all household names that people know. Are you generally expecting strong reports from these companies?
[Warner Wilke:] Once again, it's going to be a mixed quarter. Over the past several years, almost every quarter there are at least one or two companies that pre-announce either a sales or earnings or both shortfall. And this quarter has been no different. So it's going to be mixed, and I think what we've come to expect is just hoping that the companies will come in as expected for the ones that haven't pre-announced. So nothing rip-roaring, just trying to get through without any more disasters.
[Marchini:] These are multinational companies, as we noted in your introduction. To what extent have their sales been hurt by the valuation of the currencies? particularly the weak euro? because when you bring your profits back they're worth less.
[Warner Wilke:] It's actually been a problem for about three years, and particularly with euro this year. For example, Gillette's currency hit this quarter will probably be minus five. A lot of the companies...
[Marchini:] What does that mean, minus five?
[Warner Wilke:] Minus five percent off the top line.
[Marchini:] Wow.
[Warner Wilke:] So the reported sales might be flat. If you took out the currency hit it may be up five. But it's been an issue all along. Sort of started with the Southeast Asian blow up, and then there was Russia, then Brazil. So it continues to be a challenge for them.
[Haffenreffer:] In general, Gillette, are they doing OK? Let's see, we've been hearing about them quite often, mostly in the form of earnings warnings of late.
[Warner Wilke:] I think they're making some progress. I think that the concern is still going forward, what's going to be their consistent sales and earnings growth rate? This quarter they did announce back in May that sales were going to be lower than expected because of the euro and some, you know, competitive challenges. So they're better than they were a couple of years ago, but I still think there's some work to do.
[Marchini:] All right, interesting company is Avon, because of its sort of policy of selling on an individual basis rather than the traditional retailers, where a lot of women purchase make up. How have they adapted?
[Warner Wilke:] Well, one of the things they are planning to do in the U.S. to sort of broaden their audience and not just be direct sellers, they're planning to link up with the retailer and actually do a store-within-a-store to try to, you know, get to other customers that aren't interested in going directly. Also, sell on the Internet, so you can go in, log on, and purchase Avon products. You can use a representative or you can not. And actually, outside the U.S., they do a lot of franchising. So it's not solely direct selling, but it's a matter of balancing the different channels.
[Marchini:] The company really has changed, has it helped?
[Warner Wilke:] Yes, so far, it's helped. I mean, this is a company that in the past has had some pretty rocky times. But this year, so far, their results have been very strong and they've actually been pretty much the best performer on a sales and earnings basis in the space.
[Haffenreffer:] We've got Alan Greenspan talking to Congress today down in Washington. He's doing his best to slow down the U.S. economy. Are you expecting slower growth out of this sector in third and fourth quarters this year?
[Warner Wilke:] If the U.S. economy slows, it's really not as much of an impact on these companies because of what they sell. Certainly in developing markets, if the economy is slow, it's a big problem. But for this group, no. They have enough other challenges to deal with. But a slowing U.S. economy isn't going to impact them significantly.
[Marchini:] Besides Avon, do you see another big winner in this group?
[Warner Wilke:] Estee Lauder has been one of the best performers, and consistently ever since it's been public. It's top line grows, typically, eight to nine percent on a reported basis. So no matter what the euro is doing, their top line growth is very strong. And their earnings grow faster. So that's really been the best one overall. They've got a phenomenal business model and a great portfolio and management.
[Haffenreffer:] We had a list up of many of the stocks in the sector a moment ago. And the only winner on there is Avon, on a year- to-date basis. Are we likely to see any turnaround for the others any time soon?
[Warner Wilke:] I don't think anytime soon. You know, there are a lot of still challenges ahead. I think that the fact that there have been so many misses just in general really took away a lot of the appeal for this group. You used to buy them because they always nailed the earnings at a quarter and we've seen more often than not, they're not. So it's really on a company-by-company basis. Avon's had a great six months, their recovery is continuing and the stock's reflecting that.
[Marchini:] Carol Warner Wilke, Credit Suisse First Boston, we thank you for being here this morning.
[Warner Wilke:] Thank you.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] For more insight into the Middle East summit, former State Department Spokesman James Rubin joins us now from London. Mr. Rubin, thank you for being with us.
[James Rubin, Fmr. State Department Spokesman:] Thank you.
[Woodruff:] First of all, is Ehud Barak's hand weakened at this summit because of the lack of support he has in his own parliament?
[Rubin:] Well, on the surface, I think that's obviously true. But I think if you look below the surface, you might find Ehud Barak unshackled. The coalition he put together included a lot of parties whose support for the peace process was always in question. Prime Minister Barak believes, as best as I can tell, that he was elected to make some dramatic changes in the peace process. And if this summit was already a moment of truth, it's now an even bigger moment of truth because the only way that Barak can cut through this is to do what some have suggested, which is to pursue an agreement, to obtain the agreement by making the necessary compromises, but have, through a series of compromises, achieved what no Israeli prime minister has ever achieved before, and that is a real possibility of the end of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and take that agreement to the people of Israel. And if he wins in a referendum there with the same kind of margin he won the prime ministership, then the coalition partners who have been the obstacles to peace, both during his term and in previous terms, will fall by the wayside.
[Woodruff:] So can something meaningful come out of this summit given the turmoil back home for him in Israel?
[Rubin:] Absolutely. And I think, arguably, Judy, something more meaningful can come out of it, because if he had gone to Camp David with the baggage of knowing that various centrist parties or right- wing parties that were part of his coalition were going to oppose him, he might have felt compelled to avoid compromises that would have been necessary to get an agreement with the Palestinians. Without those parties as part of his government, he's now free to do what he, a former general, a former chief of staff, a man elected to pursue peace, thinks is the right course, and then take that agreement directly to the people, circumvent this constipated political system that can't decide whether it's for peace or against peace because, as you know, during Prime Minister Netanyahu, the previous prime minister's term, the coalition fell apart because he was against the peace process.
[Woodruff:] So just to clarify, James Rubin, you're saying you believe most the Israeli people do want an agreement.
[Rubin:] Well, some of the polls I've seen already today show that a majority, a significant majority not a huge majority, but a significant majority think he should go to Camp David and pursue the course necessary to get an agreement. And that is the roughly the same majority that voted for him as prime minister. The problem is in their parliamentary system where these smaller parties get an unreasonable share of control.
[Woodruff:] All right, James Rubin, we appreciate your joining us from London. Thanks very much.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] After weeks of speculation, Japan's biggest wireless phone company has confirmed plans to buy a stake in AT&T; Wireless.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Janine Graham sums up the day in Asia from our studios in Hong Kong. Good morning, Janine.
[Janine Graham, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, David and Deborah. Well, after months in rumor mill, it's finally a done deal, wireless giant NTT DoCoMo is taking a 16-percent stake in AT&T; Wireless for $9.9 billion. The alliance with AT&T; Wireless gives DoCoMo its first foothold in the lucrative U.S. market. In return, AT&T; Wireless will gain access to DoCoMo's wireless technology and services. And DoCoMo is the world's biggest wireless company by market cap. And DoCoMo shares jumped 3 13 percent ahead of the announcement. On the broader market, the Tokyo Nikkei average advanced nearly 1 percent, helped by bargain hunting. But other key markets stayed in the red3 percent to its lowest level since May, and Taipei tumbled more than 1 percent. And Gateway's profit warning and signs that holiday sales of electronics and computers in the United States may fall short of expectations renewed fears that the tech sector may face more weakness ahead. Well, the United States is Taiwan's biggest export market. Well, David and Deborah, back to both in New York.
[Marchini:] All right, thank you, Janine. Janine Graham reporting live from Hong Kong.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] It was a pretty grim day in international markets after the damage on Wall Street Friday. All the markets in Asia fell as investors looked for direction. David rather, Michelle Han is summing up the day from Asia, now, in Hong Kong. Hello, Michelle.
[Michelle Han, Cnn Correspondent:] Deborah, good morning to you. Well, the Tokyo market was closed today for a public holiday, but those open for business fell back on the heels of Wall Street's drubbing Friday over a stronger-than-expected jobs report. In Hong Kong, the key Hang Seng Index raised three percent of its value. Market heavyweights China Mobile giving up 5 12 percent. Punters fear China Mobile may be paying too much to buy seven wireless mainland networks; the company announcing Monday it's borrowing $1.5 billion from eight Chinese and international banks to help finance those purchases. New-listing subway operator Mass Transit Railway Corporation bucked the trend and put on nearly 6.5 percent as retail investors bet there is still more upside on the stock. Taiwan's weighted index slid 2 14 percent, investors shrugging off news that the government will allow securities investment trust firms to manage stock investments on behalf of clients as of Wednesday. Now the region's biggest loser, South Korea. The KOSPI closed at the session's low, giving up three percent. Samsung Electronics and SK Telecom, each off more than five percent. South Korean shares dropped over three percent despite word that U.S. auto giant General Motors and Italy's Fiat would talk with troubled Daewoo Motor about buying its assets. Sinopec, China's biggest oil refiner and petro-chemicals producer, launches its global share offering Monday. And Deborah, back to you.
[Marchini:] All right. Thanks a lot, Michelle. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Joining us this hour from Houston is Bobby Hanners. He is the grandson of Bob Lambert, the Arizona man that Gary Graham was convicted of murdering. And Hanners is among those who feel that justice has been served. We thank you for joining us this morning, Mr. Hanners. I would assume that you feel quite differently than Bianca Jagger just expressed, in terms of her feelings about what happened last night?
[Bobby Hanners, Grandson Of Bobby Lambert:] Yes I do.
[Harris:] How do you feel this morning?
[Hanners:] I feel relieved that finally it is over and justice was carried out.
[Harris:] What did you make, then, of all of the commotion surrounding all of this and the presence there in that room in the witness room there outside the death chamber of people like Bianca Jagger and Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson?
[Hanners:] I don't understand because, you know, he was found guilty in a court of law, and you know, beyond a doubt, you know, the jurors voted 12-0, you know, that he did commit this crime.
[Harris:] I know you say you felt that justice was being served, but can you tell us what it was like being in that room? What was running through your mind, because I am guessing you never sat and watched a man die before?
[Hanners:] That's correct. I was thinking about my family back home and I was thinking, you know, of my grandfather, you know, why his life was taken like it was. You know, if Graham were to ask him, you know, for the money, my grandfather would have given it to him, he didn't have to kill him.
[Harris:] Did it trouble you at all that Gary Graham was declaring his innocence up until the last moment?
[Hanners:] Yes, because he showed no remorse, you know, even for the crimes that he admitted to doing. You know, his eyes, you know, they were just evil, he had so much hatred and anger.
[Harris:] So why was it so important was it really important for you on a personal level to be there and see that?
[Hanners:] Yes, it was closure for me and, you know, very seldom did you hear anything about the victim, it was always about Gary Graham, and you know, the people trying to convince, you know, the American people that this was an innocent man and Texas was going to execute him, and you know, he was not innocent.
[Harris:] Speaking of convincing, did this episode change your mind at all going into it about the death penalty?
[Hanners:] No, not at all.
[Harris:] It didn't change your mind going into it at all?
[Hanners:] No.
[Harris:] What does this mean for your family now, where does your family go from here?
[Hanners:] To try to close the book and remove the dark cloud that has been over us for 19 years and just to move on and finally, you know, let my grandfather be at peace.
[Harris:] Bobby Hanners, we thank you very much for your time this morning. We wish you and your family well.
[Hanners:] Thank you.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Now to our other top story this morning: That's the latest on the Elian Gonzalez matter. At this hour, a federal appeals court in the city of Atlanta is hearing arguments on whether to grant an asylum hearing for the 6-year-old Cuban boy. The outcome could mark a major turning point in the custody battle. CNN's Martin Savidge now live outside the federal appeals court just about two blocks from us here in Atlanta. Marty, good morning.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning to you. And it appears that all of those that are participating in the court proceeding today have now arrived, are in place inside of the courtroom here at the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. There is a large crowd actually, it is a relatively large crowd of demonstrators on hand. Most of them were cheering as the attorneys representing the Miami relatives made their presence known here. There were also the relatives themselves that made their way into the courthouse. There was also booing that came from that same crowd as they watched Gregory Craig enter the building. He is the attorney for Juan Miguel Gonzalez, Elian's father. The street has been closed here to allow for the demonstrations. For many people, this is the day in court that they have been waiting for.
[Savidge:] Now, the question is, when is this court going to rule? It's a very good question to ask. Those who observed the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in the past say that it has never ruled from the bench, meaning never ruled on the same day that a hearing has been held. And they also say that even on very simple matters, the court has taken days to decide. Of course, in the case of Elian Gonzalez, is anything but a simple matter? Court watchers warn that it could be weeks or even months before a decision is rendered. Reporting live, Martin Savidge, CNN, Atlanta.
[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Martin, thank you.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] It has happened again. In the past 36 hours, six people have been attacked by sharks off the Florida coast. Today's attacks, one involving a 17-year-old girl, happened just miles from a series of attacks yesterday near Daytona Beach. Three surfers were bitten during a competition at Ponce Inlet. A spectator caught a couple of the sharks on tape here you see. Two of the wounded were treated for cuts on their feat. The other underwent surgery for a hand injury, Reporter Jennifer Morton from Central Florida News 13 joins us from New Smyrna. That's the scene of two other attacks Jennifer.
[Jennifer Morton, News 13 Reporter:] Well, Donna, here in Volusia County we've had three shark bites on area beaches here today. Now, all of those victims are in area hospitals. Their injuries are not life-threatening at this point, but that is an immense number of shark bites here for our area. So far, there's been six this weekend. Now, today all the victims have been surfers. Two victims were teenage girls, and a third a 32-year-old man. All three were taken to area hospitals with injuries to their feet and legs. Now, all of the attacks happened several miles from each other: two right here in New Smyrna Beach this afternoon, one just a few miles to the north. That one happened earlier this morning before noon. One of the victims' boyfriends helped to rescue her.
[Scott Love, Shark Victim's Boyfriend:] ... caught a wave. She came off her board. She went to say something to me, and then she screamed, and she's like, she started yelling. And I jumped off my board,
[Morton:] Now as you can see, even in this late afternoon sun out here, folks are still out here at the beach. They're not letting the sharks scare them away. In fact, the beach patrol has told swimmers out here don't go out in the ocean any farther than knew deep for the rest of the day today to decrease the that chances that anyone else could be bitten by a shark Donna.
[Kelley:] Jennifer, you say that they're telling them not to go out past knee-deep, but parts of the beach were closed earlier and yesterday. Are they still or is the beach completely open?
[Morton:] Well, the normal procedure around here and what's happened in these particular cases is the beach patrol shuts down an area until they feel the sharks have vacated that area beach. Then they'll reopen them. So those that were closed yesterday and those other than this one we're at here today are now reopened, and of course, people can go back in knee-deep water here this afternoon.
[Kelley:] Jennifer, is it normal to see sharks in this area?
[Morton:] Well, it is normal for some bites to occur in our area. About 12 people were bitten in Volusia County last year, but this number, six in a weekend and I think we're up to 17 total this year our numbers that are not accustomed to lifeguards here in this area and they are concerned about it. Normally it's bait fish in murky water and attacks by misinterpretation on the shark's part. But lifeguards here are now saying this number is getting a little high and they are concerned, and they're not really sure why.
[Kelley:] What about Labor Day coming up? Are they taking any extra precautions there if extra tourists come in?
[Morton:] Well, absolutely, we do expect big crowds here in this area over the Labor Day weekend. Lifeguards normally boost their patrols, and of course, I'm sure the lifeguards that will be out here and the beach patrol as well will be keeping their eyes, as they always do, open for sharks.
[Kelley:] Jennifer, thanks. Jennifer Morton, who's with Central Florida News 13, appreciate it. There have been a string of shark attacks this summer. Is it common or is there another reason behind these attacks? Joining us on the phone from Gainesville, Florida is George Burgess. He's a shark expert from the University of Florida. Mr. Burgess, hello.
[George Burgess, Shark Expert, University Of Florida:] Hi there, Donna.
[Kelley:] Are we seeing more shark attacks or are we kind of normal for the number?
[Burgess:] Yeah, we're actually somewhat lower than we were last year, but of course, having a number of attacks over two days like this is quite unusual. Undoubtedly, part of the situation is the fact that there was a surfing competition there, which means there's more people out there. And of course, surfers are the No. 1 group that get grabbed because of their actions, are provocative.
[Kelley:] You know, I was seeing earlier, Mr. Burgess, that the director for surfing competition said when he saw the three attacks that happened yesterday at the competition, he said that this inlet was known for sharks, but he said they were more aggressive than in the 30 years that he'd lived there. Are they more aggressive currently? Do you have any updates on that?
[Burgess:] Well, there's no way to determine whether things are aggressive or more aggressive, because that's not something you can measure. But shark attacks generally are situations involving hot, and the more people you get in the water, the more sharks you get in the water at one place, the more possibilities of these sorts of things. And certainly, when you have a surfing competition, that means you've got more people in the water. We know that much.
[Kelley:] Are they attracted to people?
[Burgess:] Not attracted to people. They're attracted to food items, which are normally schooling fishes. Reports from yesterday indicated that there was a lot of schooling fish in the water, and so probably there's a larger number of sharks in the area as a result of these schooling fishes. And throw in lots of surfers splashing their feet around and you're going to get these grabs on the leg.
[Kelley:] Yeah. We saw some pictures from Anclote Key, Florida earlier, where it looked like there were pretty large schools of sharks. Is that the way they travel, and do you think that the number of sharks is higher this year than it has been? Are we seeing more of them?
[Burgess:] Well, it's difficult to say. We do know that shark populations are increasing as a result of fishery management procedures, but they've got a long ways to go to get back to where they were.
[Kelley:] Now what does that mean? Let me interrupt you, I'm sorry. What is fishery management? What is that? And when you say that, what does it mean?
[Burgess:] Well, sharks over the last 10 to 15 years have been overfished as a result of too much fishing pressure by both commercial and sport fishermen. As a result of that, there are regulations in place, both at the federal and state level, to try to get sharks back up to a more normal level. So those regulations are beginning to kick in and we're starting to see more sharks than we had in the past. But we've got a long way to go to get them back to where they were in the 1970s. So I rather doubt that the populations have had a huge increase. What we're seeing here, I think, are the sharks aggregating around schooling fishes. And if you throw humans into the water splashing around, as occurs in surfing competitions, you've got the increases increased chances of having attacks.
[Kelley:] Well, real quickly then, you know, the beach patrol is telling some of these folks don't don't go in past knee-deep. Is that what you'd recommend? Is that still safe, for a person to go into the water knee-deep?
[Burgess:] I think you're OK doing that, and I think Volusia County's efforts are right on. I think you need to look at each area of the beach and keep an eye out. If there are sharks in the area, you want to pull people out. And if the sharks aren't in the area, you can allow them back in the water. I think that's a legitimate action.
[Kelley:] All right, our shark expert, George Burgess from the University of Florida. Sure appreciate your time and information with us. Thanks.
[Burgess:] Glad to be here, Donna.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] As Palestinian police round up those suspects, Jerusalem's young adults are trying to come to terms with the weekend's violence and the bloodshed. CNN's Chris Burns reports this morning grief turning now to rage.
[Chris Burns, Cnn Correspondent:] Teenagers mourn their fallen friends at ground zero. This time from a triple bombing that struck the heart of Jerusalem, killing mostly young people on a night out. It struck many Israelis in the heart. This older woman screams that she's lost three family members in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Far right Israelis gather here, chanting for hard-line Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to resign. One protester carries a sign reading no Arabs, no terror. Another takes to a balcony with a dark twist to a well-known song. A more subtle act of defiance, an Israeli flag scrawled with we shall not surrender. Teenage witnesses return to remember.
[Unidentified Female:] Around me I see my friends on the floor with
[Burns:] Workers pick up the pieces of buildings, windows and flesh. Following Judaic law the tiny remains are gathered for burial. Comrades laid to rest,a soldier killed in the attack. The wailing sometimes drowns the chanted prayer for the dead. The soldier's sister asks who's going to take care of father and mother. We had so many plans together before she is overcome with grief. The guns bid her brother farewell. In a hospital Hia Miller visits her son, 18-year old Nathaniel. He tells his Rabbi how two friends were seriously wounded by nails and bullets packed inside the suicide bomber. Bullets rained on Nathaniel, but only one entered his hip.
[Hia Miller:] I just look at that and I think one here and four here, and one there, and here he is. That's all I can say. I just I feel I just gave birth to him again. That's how I feel really.
[Burns:] Here at Jerusalem's ground zero thoughts turn to where the next bombing could be. Hospital officials say they're bracing for more attacks and more victims as Israelis try to carry on despite the fear. Chris Burns, CNN, Jerusalem.

[Bill Clinton, Fmr. President Of The United States:] It's amazing to me. Now, I haven't seen the report. All I've seen is the news stories. But I can tell you, you know, I didn't do that.
[Bill Press, Co-host:] Tonight, as Republicans prepare to release a scathing report on the Clinton pardons, did the former president do anything wrong? Then, why some are seeing red over a basketball team called the "Fightin'Whiteys."
[Announcer:] Live from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Robert Novak. In the crossfire, Republican Congressman Bob Barr of Georgia, member of the Government Reform Committee and Julian Epstein, former chief Democratic council to the House Judiciary Committee. And later, radio talk show host Victoria Jones and of the Salem Radio Network, Mike Gallagher.
[Press:] It's CROSSFIRE. Thanks for joining us. Well, he's been out of office 14 months, but some people just can't stop talking about Bill Clinton, like chairman Dan Burton, who will release a report tomorrow on those messy last minute Clinton pardons. Burton's report, already leaked to "The L.A. Times" and "New York Times" and CNN, among others, accuses Clinton of encouraging half-brother Roger to offer pardons for sale. And it claims that many pardons, including that notorious one given fugitive Marc Rich, bypassed the standard Justice Department review and went directly to the Oval Office, again on Clinton's orders. President Clinton today laughed off Burton's report as ridiculous. And so tonight, back to Pardongate. Did Clinton or any of his family break the law? Will Burton's report serve any purpose, other than giving Clinton-haters one more thing to chew on? Bob?
[Bob Novak, Co-host:] Julian Epstein, I know it's hard to discuss this, when we've already had Bill Clinton, who says, "I didn't do anything." You know, we can't we always believe what Bill Clinton says. But I'd just like to read you something from the report. And we'll put it up on the screen. "President Clinton encouraged," this is according to the report, "President Clinton encouraged Roger Clinton," his brother, "to capitalize on their relationship. At the beginning of his second term, President Clinton instructed Roger to use his connections to the administration to gain financial advantage." And the report goes on to say that Roger earned or acquired hundreds of thousands of dollars in representing these pardon seekers. That's a scandal, isn't it?
[Julian Epstein, Fmr. House Judiciary Counsel:] Well, again, I think this just shows you "shows how amateurish this report is and it's really this is keystone cops all over again. The evidence that they show for President Clinton directing his brother to cash in on his presidency was like five times removed. It was a friend, of a friend, of a friend said that Roger Clinton told him that the president told him this. I mean, this is the type of stuff that would make someone laugh in a court of law. The fact of the matter is, this report, Bob, is another cowardly, cheap shot against the president by a committee that has had a long history of making accusations that it couldn't back up. Remember, the principle thesis of this hearing was that there was a quid pro quo for the pardons, that these pardons were paid for with campaign donations. If you notice that this accusation, the committee has entirely backed off of it. The U.S. Attorney is not looking at this. And it's time for principled Republicans. I think, and I think you're a principled Republican. I think Bob Barr's a principled Republican. I think it's time for principled Republicans to stand up and eat a little bit of crow here. The accusations that were made against the Clinton administration have the committee is backing down from them now. The committee has fallen on its face, so what it does is it reverts to the secondary issues about Roger Clinton and these other matters, as basically a way of covering its own butt, and it's failed to produce evidence for its accusations.
[Novak:] I don't know if you've even seen the report, Julian.
[Epstein:] I have.
[Novak:] I have gone through it. I think it's very shocking. And I knew that you were going to say, gee, they didn't have any justification for what they said. And the chairman was on this network just about two hours ago and let's listen to what he said.
[Rep. Dan Burton , Govt. Reform Chairman:] All of it is documented. None of it is just made up. We have documentation for everything that's said in that report.
[Novak:] And I went through the report and there was documentation. It wasn't five times removed on the Roger Clinton accusation. It was a report from somebody who had talked to somebody who talked to Clinton. That's just once removed.
[Epstein:] Somebody who talked to Roger Clinton.
[Novak:] Yes.
[Epstein:] Yes, and that's the evidence for the fact that the president said something to Roger, somebody who was never in the room?
[Novak:] Yes.
[Epstein:] Well, let me tell you, Bob, if that's the evidence with which the conservatives and the Republicans in this committee want to use to produce a piece of fact, that's why time after time after time it's not credible...
[Novak:] You know what you're acting like? You're acting like a lawyer.
[Epstein:] No, I know. What I think it is is I think that this is shifting sands. What happens is you can't produce evidence for the accusations. You shift to other attenuated things that are basically meaningless as a way of covering yourself that you couldn't produce evidence for the principle reasons for the hearings.
[Press:] Congressman...
[Rep. Bob Barr , Govt. Reform Cmte:] Bill, I know you're going to deal with the facts.
[Press:] Congressman Barr, it's been a whole week since you've been on CROSSFIRE bashing Bill Clinton. I just I don't know what took you so long to get back, but I want to pick...
[Barr:] I only come when I'm invited, Bill.
[Press:] And we love having you. I want to pick on this report that Bob and Julian have been talking about, and read you the quote from the report that makes it this is the most explosive charge, that Bill Clinton encouraged his brother, half-brother to go out and make money using trading on the president's name. And here's what the report says, "Bill Clinton had instructed him that since this was the last term in office, Roger should find a way to make a living and use his relationship with the president to his advantage." Now that's not Bill Clinton it says there. It's not Roger Clinton it says there. It's not George Lock, who's a former state senator in Arkansas who says that. It's an attorney for George Lock, who says that George Lock told him that Roger told him that Bill Clinton told him. This is pure hearsay. You know that, Bob Barr. And it's one source four times removed. And you will hang the former president on that?
[Barr:] Bill, you know, I could go through any report and pick out one instance that such as you're citing, where the evidence doesn't back up the point that the other side is making. But there is as Bob has said, and certainly you respect Bob and his research abilities, he went through that report as I have done. And time after time after time, there is very clear evidence what you have here, Bill, let me I know you'll find this shocking, you have a pattern of abuse of office that is not only typical of the Clinton administration, but endangers international security. You ever heard of a fellow named Harvey Wian?
[Press:] Endangers our national security?
[Barr:] Harvey Wian?
[Press:] Can we stick to this point here?
[Barr:] No, no, no. It is very much on point. When you have somebody like Marc Rich, okay, who would who has worked against our nation's national security interests, who has worked against the national security interests of other nations, who is pardoned for no apparent reason...
[Press:] Congressman, let me save you the rebut. I've never defended the Marc Rich pardon, but I want to come back to what Chairman Burton said on our air, that everything is documented.
[Barr:] And it is.
[Press:] That is a lie. This is not documented. Congressman...
[Barr:] There are instances there where people in Alabama very the talk...
[Press:] May I please repeat?
[Barr:] ...that talked with Clinton. Talked with him, Bill.
[Press:] Look, this is the most explosive charge of the whole report.
[Barr:] Maybe to you it is, maybe to you it is.
[Press:] Oh, no, I'm sorry. This is the headline. This is the one Dan Burton talked about on our air. He sent his document.
[Barr:] That's exactly...
[Press:] And I want to come back to the fact. I mean, if this were "The National Enquirer," okay, but this is a congressional committee, a committee of the United States Congress. And you would condemn a former president based on what one guy said, another guy said, another guy said, another guy said. Shame on you.
[Barr:] No, Bill. What I do is I condemn a former president for pardoning adversaries of our nation, people who have laundered $100 million for the cartel, putting them back on the street. That's what I condemn him for. And you ought to also.
[Novak:] Julian Epstein, I think the most serious charge is that Jack Quinn, the lobbyist, Democratic lobbyist, former chief of staff for Al Gore...
[Epstein:] Went with Eric Holder.
[Novak:] Yes, and went to Eric Holder, the deputy Attorney General, and they colluded to keep this out of the normal track. Let me read again from the report. And we'll put it on the screen. "Jack Quinn...and Holder worked together to ensure that the Justice Department, especially the prosecutors of the Southern District of New York, did not have an opportunity to express an opinion on the Rich pardon before it was granted." That is a shocking charge. And I think it's undeniable, isn't it?
[Epstein:] No, again, and I think this shows the amateur hour nature of this report. And again, I point out the fact, and I'm going to answer the question, I point out the fact that you and Mr. Barr keep avoiding the fact that this committee has fallen on its face and has not been able to back up its central accusation for holding these hearings, which is quid pro quo.
[Barr:] Well, part of the reason was, people were taking the Fifth Amendment.
[Epstein:] Secondly, there is no obligation of Jack Quinn to go to the Southern District of New York. The way things normally happen is in the pardon process, you go to the pardon office. The pardon office will then consult with the U.S. Attorney. The reason that they didn't go to the pardon office in this instance, and the answer to your question, the reason why Eric Holder said go to the White House, is because they were taking a note out of the George Bush handbook when they pardoned Caspar Weinberger.
[Novak:] Oh, Julian.
[Epstein:] The rule is on pardons, can I tell you why, before you shake your head? The rule is...
[Barr:] I'm surprised.
[Epstein:] ...if nobody's been convicted and if nobody served jail time, the pardon office doesn't hear the case. The pardon office testified to that, but you wouldn't learn that from reading the report because the report omits that.
[Press:] Now here's what I find interesting, Congressman Barr. All this stuff is thrown out there, and yet congressman Burton said today, he's not going to answer to any criminal charges be pressed against the former president. So once again, all the wild charges and no follow-up. Why not? And isn't it because you know there's not enough evidence? All you've got is a pure political hatchet job? So you throw it out there, get the headline, smear the president and do nothing about it.
[Barr:] Bill, go back to Civics 101. It is not the job of Congress to prosecute. It is the job of the executive branch.
[Press:] Recommend, congressman. He doesn't even recommend that that's just what I said.
[Barr:] What we do is gather evidence and lay it before the American people. And the evidence in this case indates a shocking disregard for the judicial and our national security process.
[Novak:] We're out of time.
[Epstein:] The committee has repeatedly recommended to the Justice Department. They thought they didn't in this case, which is more evidence that they backed down from the central charge.
[Novak:] Julian Epstein, thank you very much. Congressman Bob Barr, thank you. Next on CROSSFIRE, the fighting whites, is that the proper answer to using Redskins, Braves and Indians as athletic nicknames?

[Bernard Shaw, Cnn Anchor:] A truckload of ballots arrives in the Florida capital paving the way for another courtroom collision over who won the White House.
[Sen. Joe Lieberman , Vice Presidential Candidate:] It threatens to put us into a constitutional crisis which we are not in now by any stretch of the word.
[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] The Gore camp takes aim at the Florida legislature's step toward intervening in the presidential tug- of-war.
[Gen. Colin Powell, Fmr. Joint Chiefs Of Staff:] Thanks for having me and congratulations, Governor on your success in your election.
[Shaw:] Colin Powell is brought in to reinforce George W. Bush's claim of victory.
[Woodruff:] We'll help you follow the legal and political moves on both sides and the ways this election stalemate may end.
[Announcer:] From Washington, this is INSIDE POLITICS with Judy Woodruff and Bernard Shaw.
[Woodruff:] Thank you for joining us. Well, many people couldn't help but be reminded today of the infamous O.J. Simpson Bronco chase, as they watched hours of live television coverage of a single moving vehicle. This time, of course, it was a rented truck, which arrived in Tallahassee, Florida a little more than an hour ago packed with nearly a half million ballots from Palm Beach County. Those ballots are pivotal in the presidential election impasse as we head into several new rounds of legal and political clashes. We'll have complete coverage of all the latest developments. We begin with the Gore campaign, its contest of the Florida vote count and its dispute with the Florida legislature. Here is CNN's Jonathan Karl.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Emerging from a White House meeting with Vice President Gore, running mate Joe Lieberman waged the latest Gore campaign public relations offensive, this one aimed at Jeb Bush and the Republican-controlled Florida legislature.
[Lieberman:] I am very disappointed and disturbed about the continuing movement by the Florida legislature, now encouraged by Governor Jeb Bush, to consider choosing their own slate of electors after almost six million people in Florida voted on Election Day.
[Karl:] As the Florida legislature takes steps to possibly bypassing the courts and appoint its own set of electors, Vice President Gore's team smells blood.
[Lieberman:] This action by the Florida legislature really threatens the credibility and legitimacy of the ultimate choice of electors in Florida. It threatens to put us into a constitutional crisis, which we are not in now by any stretch of the word.
[Karl:] Public indignation aside, the Gore team claims the legislature's action will present what one top aide called a tremendous opportunity to score points in the court of public opinion. As Jeb Bush publicly supports the steps taken by the Florida Legislature, the Gore team is in overdrive, portraying the move as what another aide called a brazen power play by the Bush brothers. But as the Gore team aimed its public indignation at the Florida legislature, most of its legal might is aimed at getting a speedy recount of approximately 14,000 disputed ballots from Palm Beach and Miami-Dade Counties. In a petition with the Florida Supreme Court, Gore's legal team asked for an immediate counting of the disputed ballots, arguing that they are almost out of time a point made by Gore's top lawyer in Florida.
[David Boies, Gore Campaign Attorney:] One of the things that we are doing is we're getting close to the end, and we're trying to focus on those issues that we think can be resolved easily and quickly because we're going to run out of time.
[Karl:] Meanwhile, the quiet but deliberate work towards presidential transition continues. The vice president had his second meeting in two days with his transition-in-waiting team, including long-time friend and adviser Roy Neel; Labor Secretary Alexis Herman, mentioned by Gore aides as a top candidate for chief-of-staff; Leon Fuerth, considered the leading candidate for national security adviser; Charles Burson, Gore's current chief of staff; and Katie McGinty, a long-time adviser on environmental issues. Behind the scenes, Gore campaign chairman Bill Daley has been busy working the phones on yet another front, placing calls to potentially nervous Democratic governors and members of Congress in an effort to keep the party unified in support of the vice president Judy.
[Woodruff:] And Jonathan, is that effort successful and as you answer that, tell me about the symbolism of Joe Lieberman stepping out in front of the White House today?
[Karl:] No question, clearly an effort by the vice president's team here to show the vice president in a presidential setting, to have vice presidential candidate Joe Lieberman come out and reinforce that message. As far as Bill Daley's effort to keep the party onboard, so far they are doing well, but they know that time is running out on that effort as well. The most nervous Democrats right now have simply been encouraged by Secretary Daley to stay quiet about this, to not come out and criticize the vice president; and right now you see some of the most nervous democratic governors in the South, representing conservative states that were taken by a wide margin by George W. Bush, simply not commenting on the issue at all. And that's exactly where Vice President Gore's team wants those Democrats who may become wobbly on this to be to simply not be out there criticizing the vice president. They know it will become very difficult, though, Judy, after this weekend as we really get into the home stretch here.
[Woodruff:] All right, Jon Karl, thanks very much Bernie.
[Shaw:] George W. Bush stepped up the profile of his transition operation today with the help of a would-be cabinet member known for his gravitas and star power. CNN's Candy Crowley reports on Bush and his meeting with Colin Powell.
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Sr. Political Correspondent:] For all the effort to make this look normal, the whole transition scene is awkward. We know it, they know it.
[Powell:] I look forward to our conversations this afternoon on matters of international affairs and foreign policy and also to discuss transition issues. And I'd like to add congratulations, governor, on your success in your election.
[Crowley:] One of the world's most open secrets is that Colin Powell may have any seat he wants at the Bush table; but he hasn't been asked.
[Powell:] But I never expected that the governor would reach that point in his deliberations until after this matter had been resolved.
[Crowley:] "This matter" being the presidency to which they are transitioning.
[Gov. George W. Bush, , Presidential Candidate:] When the counting finally stops we want to be prepared to lead this nation. That's what we were elected to do. And as far as the legal hassling and wrangling and posturing in Florida, I would suggest you talk to our good team in Florida led by Jim Baker.
[Crowley:] Bush's role is to project certainty while his lawyers deal with questions to have the presidential look while the Florida legislature and the courts deal with chaos. A macromanager, Bush largely gives the thumbs up or down to his legal team while letting them wage the Florida ground war. As for efforts by Florida's legislature to begin the process of picking its own set of electors, the Bush camp wants as much distance as it can get.
[Question:] In Florida, with the special session of the state legislature, are you concerned that this has the appearance of a partisan power play to short circuit the courts?
[Bush:] You know, here's my view: I've won three counts and I think it's time to get some finality to the process.
[Crowley:] Bush strategists say they have made, quote, "no effort" to prod or otherwise influence the Florida legislature. It's their thing, insists the Bush camp. The problem, of course, is when the Florida legislature is dominated by Republicans who can basically have their way and your brother is the governor of the state, there is only so much distance you can get Bernie and Judy.
[Shaw:] Candy, any concerns by Governor Bush or staff members about the word going around that he's appearing to be too laid back?
[Crowley:] Well, you know he, basically, every time we see him he gets asked that question. In that photo opportunity that you saw, Bush kind of laughed off the question, he's used to hearing that. Dick Cheney was asked that question when he gave a news conference at about transition yesterday and he said, look, you know, there are phones in Crawford. Sometimes, you know, he's criticized for being too aggressive in putting out, you know, cabinet potentials, at least in a picture. He's too aggressive in talking about transition, and then they say he's too laid back. So from the Bush campaign point of view, he's sort of, you know, is, you-know-what if you do and you-know-what if he doesn't.
[Shaw:] Yes, we do know. Candy Crowley, thank you Judy.
[Woodruff:] Well, more on the Florida legislature, and we'll be talking with two members of the Florida state Senate. Plus, still ahead on
[Inside Politics:] carrying a cargo central to the election standoff, the latest on moving two counties' worth of ballots to the state capital.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] The president-elect, Vojislav Kostunica, is now speaking on Serbian television. We're going to check in on that.
[Vojislav, Kostunica, President-elect Of Yugoslavia:] ... diplomatic activities and a kind of opening of this country. And it is very important also the opening of the Europe to our country. We hope that Monday there are good opportunities for lifting the sanctions. Replacability of the power is very good test for democracy, so I think we did the first test. So the change happens now, but it should have happened earlier if the other side showed more understanding. And if it could have happened earlier, I'm sure that all the troubles would have been avoided. For example, the situation like Poland is quite possible. The communists lost, and after that they came to power. Here, everything happened with delay. Yesterday and today, I had a lot of contact, even with those who were authorities, represent the power in this country, in republic and both in federation, and that proves the fact that the change of power happened. And I had some meetings also with army officials, and I expect meetings even with Mr. Milosevic. I received an invitation to participate in the first session of republican parliament from Mr. Tomic...
[Waters:] Vojislav Kostunica, the president-elect of Yugoslavia, speaking on Serbian television about replacing what he calls, "the civility of power." "We passed the first Democratic test," he said. Now he hopes for the restoration of an opening to rejoin the European community. We're going to Serb television now.
[Kostunica:] Talking in general, is there any aspect of social life that is more important than the education?
[Question:] I will add that the law, you are a lawyer, and the law is also a very important aspect.
[Kostunica:] That's true. Law guarantees something that is important, equal rights to all. It brings security, the equal life brings security. It allows you to plan something for tomorrow. That is very important. And that's what our law lacked. It was full of relativity, of some simply ad-hoc deciding depending on one moment or some party's interest. Law must become something which is beyond every politics.
[Waters:] Serbian television continuing with its interview of the president-elect, Kostunica, who said earlier that he hoped the sanctions, now, would be lifted; and the president of the United States, speaking simultaneously while Kostunica was being interviewed on Serbian television, saying the United States and the rest of the international community must do something immediately to reward the Serbian people for, as he put it, their heroic effort to unseat Milosevic. As far as Milosevic is concerned, the president said it is unclear what the Russian intentions are regarding the future of Milosevic. Until there is a clear and unambiguous restoration of democracy, then and only then can the international community restore can and will restore those sanctions.

[Wolf Blitzer:] It's noon in Washington, 9:00 a.m. in Los Angeles, 6:00 p.m. in Vienna, Austria and 7:00 p.m. in Jerusalem. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks for joining us for this 90-minute LATE EDITION. We'll get to our guests shortly, but first, our top story. Here in Washington there are only four weeks remaining in the 106th Congress. Legislators are negotiating critical spending bills with the White House in order to prevent another government shut down. CNN senior White House correspondent, John King, joins us now with details John.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Well, Wolf, the budget battle, an annual ritual in Washington. Of course, the Congress sparring with the president. This one, though, all the more important. Just four weeks schedule left in this congressional session, as you mentioned. Just 57 days until the election to pick a new president and to decide which party will control the Congress heading into next year. Still unresolved, not just how much government will spend next year, but what will it spend it on, how will the Congress and the president agree to spend the federal budget surplus. Issues like prescription drug benefits for seniors still on the table, Republican plans for tax cuts. So much unresolved that both parties out on the Sunday shows today pointing fingers. The number three man in the House, the Whip, Tom DeLay. He says as American people watch this unfold, if they wonder why things aren't already resolved, Mr. DeLay says the president is to blame.
[Rep. Tom Delay , Majority Whip:] The administration has already telegraphed a train wreck. Podesta, the chief of staff, Lockhart, all the administration has said they'll will go to the election if they don't get what they want. There is only one person that can shut down the government, that's the president of the United States, just like he did in 1995.
[King:] Now no one seriously expects there to be a government shut down, but the Democrats out in full force today as well. The Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle, saying if the Republicans are looking for someone to blame, maybe you they should look in the mirror.
[Sen. Tom Daschle , Minority Leader:] Republicans have been the ones who have delayed. We have 13 appropriation bills, as you know. Only two of them have been signed into law, 11 have not been signed into law, some have not even left the subcommittee. So the Republicans are themselves, their own worst enemy in terms of schedule. This schedule has been grossly mismanaged from the very beginning. We have not done a number of things we should have done a long time ago.
[King:] Now these warring parties will come together here at the White House, on Tuesday. The president meeting with bipartisan congressional leadership. One of your guests, Senator Trent Lott, the majority leader among them. The president will make clear, we're told, that he would like some bipartisan compromises. He would like to pass an increase in the minimum wage. He would like to get that prescription drug benefit for seniors. But we're also told that in a meeting with the Democrats only last week, the president made clear that he understands this is an election year. We're told he turned to Dick Gephardt and Tom Daschle at one point and said, you tell me what you need me to do and I'll do it. So the election's overshadowing the annual budget fight. This the last budget battle with the president and the Republican Congress Wolf.
[Blitzer:] John King at the White House, thanks. And joining us now to discuss the Republican legislative agenda and the budget battle with the White House is the Senate majority leader, Trent Lott of Mississippi. Welcome back to LATE EDITION. Always good to have you on our program.
[Sen. Trent Lott , Majority Leader:] Glad to be back, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Well, I want to get to all of that stuff about the budget and the eventual so-called train wreck, if in fact that happens. But some other developments in the world today. OPEC agreeing to increase oil production. The price of oil is, as you know, this past week was $34 almost $35 a barrel. That's the highest in some 10 years, and it's obviously going to have a dramatic impact as weather here in the United States gets colder. Is there anything the U.S. Senate to do to try to reduce the price of gasoline, heating fuel, other oil-related products?
[Lott:] Well, this problem has just begun. I think it's going to get worse as we go into the winter. I think the price of home heating fuel is going to be very high and probably going to be some shortages. Because of the cost, they haven't been filling up their reserves. Look, the administration said months ago that we were caught napping in this area, that OPEC has run up the price, it's created problems. But it's bigger than the current shortage or high prices. We don't have a national energy policy. A lot of what we need could be supplied domestically. But we've allowed ourselves to get dependent on these OPEC countries that can cut down the supplies, can drive up the cost anytime they want to. And, Wolf, the worst part of all is we're getting like 500,000 barrels a week, I guess it is, from Iraq. So we're getting oil from Iraq, which we're refining and then using to put in our planes to fly over Iraq to try to keep them from causing all kind of havoc in the Middle East. The insanity of not having a national energy policy, of being dependent on these foreign countries, is a real problem. And this 800,000 barrels that they're talking about it's less than 1 percent of the world's needs. You've got strikes going on in France, and they're problems in Great Britain. You know, this is a serious problem.
[Blitzer:] So you're saying the U.S. should take the initiative in preventing Iraq from exporting any oil, even if the money they get all goes for humanitarian purposes?
[Lott:] I'm just saying that it shows the hypocrisy. Here we are more or less pleading with them to keep supplying us with oil while we're refining it and using it in airplanes to have over-fly to keep them from attacking the people in their own country or their neighbors. What I'm saying is: We shouldn't be dependent on these OPEC countries. Obviously, they're wanting to make more and more profits. I think it's dangerous for us to be dependent on them the way we are. We do have a petroleum reserve, but it's for national emergencies. What I am saying is: We should have more oil and gas usage in this own country our own country. Natural gas is very clean. We've got clean coal that comes out of a lot of places in this country, nuclear power. But the president vetoed a bill that would have dealt with a place to put nuclear waste. We have a major problem here. And one of the things I'm expecting a Bush administration is, we're going to step up and address the needs of this country's energy problem.
[Blitzer:] All right, let's go back to the big issue, which is on your agenda right now, and that's, namely, the next four weeks passing these appropriations bills, these spending bills, to avoid another government shutdown. John Podesta, the White House chief of staff, was asked earlier on "Fox News Sunday" whether or not he had a message to deliver to you. And this is what he said.
[John Podesta, White House Chief Of Staff:] Senators accusing of us of engineering a train wreck, as you know, as near as I can tell, the engine's still in the roundhouse and the boxcars are still on the siding. It's pretty hard to have a train wreck if the train's not moving.
[Podesta:] There's a lot work that needs to be done partly because so little has happened in this Congress.
[Blitzer:] Obviously putting the blame on you, the Republican majority in the Senate and the House, for delaying these spending bills, setting up potentially the kind of disaster you don't want to occur.
[Lott:] Well, surprise, surprise. You know, John King told the story that really sums it all up. This is all about partisanship and politics at the White House. The president says, tell me what you want, we'll do it. In the Senate, we have faced delays, roadblocks, all kinds of efforts to stop us passing appropriation bills. We have already done nine, we'll get tenth one done this week, but they certainly haven't been helpful in that effort. We need to get work completed and we will. You're talking about funding for education, for veterans, for agriculture, defense, so these are very important issues we need to find a fair middle ground. We need to come to a conclusion, we need cooperation, we haven't been getting that from the White House by the way.
[Blitzer:] You're going to be meeting with president on Tuesday,..
[Lott:] Yes.
[Blitzer:] ...the bipartisan leadership going over to White House. What are you going to tell the president?
[Lott:] Well, it's good to hear from you Mr. President, I hadn't heard anything from you two months, you know for seven and a half years, for better or worse. We did communicate on how to get our work done and that has stopped other than calling about his trade interests, there's not much communication. But what I will say as Mr. President, you know, we're for reforms, we are for finding middle ground that will allow us to do a number of these issues and we've got a long list of things that will intend...
[Blitzer:] All right, we're going to get to some of those specifics.
[Lott:] So, we'll work with him, we have to, I mean he's the president, and we're the Congress, but we are co-equal branches, and we'll have to see how we can come together.
[Blitzer:] You know that when used go with Newt Gingrich when he was Speaker, he use to leave those White House meetings and he would acknowledge that the president is a charming fellow and used to be able to run roughshod over him. Are you going to allow the president to do that to you?
[Lott:] No, we're not going to do that. I'm from across the river there, I know him well and we have a very common background and I've been meeting off and on with him now directly as majority leader for four years. You know, a lot of things may happen, but I wouldn't be seduced by him.
[Blitzer:] The spending caps, these are the levels that people want. There's a front page story in "The New York Times," you probably saw it this morning saying that you're ready to go above that $600 billion spending cap, in fact there's a quote...
[Lott:] Not from me.
[Blitzer:] Well, Slade Gorton, the Republican from Washington state is up for re-election this year. He's quoted in "The New York Times" as saying, quote, "the caps are irrelevant, nobody pays any attention to them anymore," end quote. Is he right?
[Lott:] The caps are not irrelevant, we may have to go above them for a number of reasons and one of them is his particular bill. He's got an important bill, the Interior bill, it's parks and lands in it. But, we've got major fires out West. It's probably going to cost us in emergency assistance, FEMA assistance.
[Blitzer:] That's not part of the caps, the emergency spending.
[Lott:] Well, but you're either going to have to raise the caps or you're going to have to say, this is an emergency which we have to vote to designate. It'll be about a billion or a billion and a half in damages out West, fires cause in my opinion in a lot of ways, because of the bad policies of this administration. You know, the ideas of Gore as you shouldn't even have trees removed from forests that are diseased or downed, so there will be some areas where we're going to have to agree to go higher. In fact on education, Republicans in the Congress have our education numbers $300 million above where the president is. We think that's a high priority. We think that for a variety of reasons we need to put some more money into education. We have a particular housing problem, we have section 8 housing where we've got to come up with more funds than we knew at the time we did the budget, and it's a significant amount. So it's a matter of being realistic, but finding fair common ground, and not expected the president expecting us to just collapse to his positions, we will have to concede some, but I hope that we'll stand our ground too.
[Blitzer:] Is it fair to predict that if all the spending bills are not passed, you will support continuing resolutions, the stop gap measures that will keep the government going at last year's funding in order to prevent what most people say was a disaster for the Republican Party, the 95 government
[Lott:] And by the way, I was not a part of that, I was not majority leader at that time and didn't think that was particularly wise at the time, there's no use going back to that and pointing fingers at it. Here, I have a little different attitude than a lot of people. A lot of people are saying and the White House, the Democrats think, oh, all we got to do is threaten to keep him here, and they'll give us whatever we want. My attitude is, look let's keep working. If we reach the end of the fiscal year and we haven't got all of these bills done, let's pass short term or medium extension of the continuing resolution and let's keep working.
[Blitzer:] All right.
[Lott:] If we need to stay here, we'll stay here. There will be no government shutdowns because we'll keep sending continuing resolutions till we get our work done.
[Blitzer:] And presumably the president will sign this.
[Lott:] I hope he will and if he doesn't, than he's the problem, not us.
[Blitzer:] Let's talk about some of the specific issues, the House Speaker Dennis Hastert says he's ready to go along now with an increase in the minimum wage by a dollar two years. You ready to support the administration on that?
[Lott:] As long as it is connected to small business tax relief and we don't wind up doing it in such a way that it costs people that are entry level, low income, cost them their jobs or really hurt or put small businesses out of business. I think if we put them together, we can get that done.
[Blitzer:] What about a patients bill of rights. As you know, the Democrats almost passed it the last time, they lost by one vote, but now there's a new Democratic Senator Zell Miller of Georgia. Could be a 50-50 tie and you know who would break that tie on a patients' bill of rights.
[Lott:] Well look if they're willing to work with us..
[Blitzer:] For our viewers who may not know, it would be the vice president, who's the president of the Senate. You don't want Al Gore to come in and break a tie like that.
[Lott:] It won't come to that. I hope they will work with us, there's been a conference going on with the Speaker involved, conferees in the House and Senate, they've made some real progress. I think we should continue to try to come up with a reasonable program that will have reasonable requirements of HMO's, give patients the protection they need, give doctors input, but we should focus on appeals within these managed care facilities and outside, if those appeals don't work out, liability is still there. The question once again is, do the Democrats and Vice President Gore want an issue, or do they want results? If they want results, we can get it done. I talked to one of the supporters of the patients' bill of rights this morning that's kind of on the other side and I said, you know, if we did this or that or the other could we make this go forward. He said, yeah, I think we could do that. So that's the question, do they want to continue to have roadblocks on getting work done? Or do they want real reforms on a whole variety of issues, including patients' rights with managed cared?
[Blitzer:] What about permanent, normal trade relations with China? This has been delayed, as you know, for sometime. It is supposed to come up for a vote in next couple weeks or so. Some of your Republican colleagues want to attach some amendments, what they call riders. Senator Fred Thompson of Tennessee wants an amendment that would, in effect, force the bill to go back to the House, where it could be in trouble. Once again, he wants to make sure China doesn't export weapons to Pakistan and other developing nations.
[Lott:] Well, first of all, Wolf, surprise, surprise. The Senate might make a little change to what the House did and have to go back for the House to have to consider
[Blitzer:] But that would, in effect, delay it for a long time.
[Lott:] Well, look, it was delayed so that the Senate, hopefully, would complete its appropriations bills. But because of the roadblocks that the Democrats threw up with hundreds of amendments, filibusters, just absolute delays of every kind, we didn't get them all done. The other thing I was trying to do was to work out some agreements to consider the Thompson issue separately. It is a very important issue. China is involved in nuclear weapons proliferation. They have been involved with Pakistan, other countries, I suspect even North Korea, providing very dangerous technology and materials to these countries. We should not ignore that. Neither should we ignore their record of human rights andor religious persecution. Having said that, the opponents of the bill have blocked every effort I've made, sometime even with the support of Senator Daschle, to try to come up with a way to handle it separately, the Thompson issue. We have not succeeded. So we're going forward. We're going to do the China trade bill this coming week. Senator Thompson will offer an amendment. I will support that, because I think it's very important. And I'm not going to be on the record saying that we shouldn't watch and monitor what China does with nuclear weapons proliferation. I don't think most senators would want to do that. But I think when the smoke clears late this coming week, hopefully, but not later than early the next week, we'll get over the hurdles, get over the filibusters, get over the amendments. We will pass the China trade bill by a wide margin. I have concerns about it, but what we're trying to do is to open up the Chinese markets. That is in interest of American jobs, automobile workers in America, farmers, business industry. I hope they'll trade fairly with us and that the WTO will do its job, which, by the way, they're not doing with our European allies.
[Blitzer:] All right, Senator Lott. We have to take a quick break. We have a lot more to talk about, including more issues. Just ahead, Governor George W. Bush changes his campaign style to regain his lead among voters. We'll ask Senator Lott about Bush's new role as the supposed underdog when LATE EDITION continues.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Imagine losing a child, though not through accident or death but through a sudden unexplained disappearance. A new program in California is hoping to solve the mystery of thousands of missing children. And CNN's Rusty Dornin says the first step is a DNA database.
[Rusty Dornin, Cnn Correspondent:] Four-year-old Nikki Campbell rode her bike down the street to a friend's house in 1991. Her family never saw her again.
[Ann Campbell, Mother Of Missing Child:] No, I don't believe we will ever bring her home alive. But I do know that she's out there somewhere and that we can bring her home someday.
[Dornin:] So nine years after her daughter was kidnapped, Ann Campbell swabbed the inside of her mouth extracting saliva. In the first-of-its-kind program, the DNA will then be compared with DNA from unidentified bodies held at coroner's offices throughout California.
[Lance Gima, Dna Lab Director:] Just like in fingerprints, we'll do a search of a profile from the remains against the file that's been put together from the family members' DNA profiles and hopefully get a match and identify the source of the remains.
[Dornin:] The program, funded by adding $2 to the $8 death certificate, officially gets under way in January. Already coroners throughout the state are preparing.
[Ken Holmes, Marin Co. Coroner:] When he have an unidentified person, we take small amount of tissue and freeze it for potential DNA sampling.
[Dornin:] Building both sides of the database will be a slow process. It could take years. To be truly successful, other states need to adopt similar programs. On one side, DNA must be gathered from unidentified bodies, and then relatives must be found. [on camera]: The state will be taking DNA samples from family members of the 3,000 missing in California. But the priority will be the families of the missing children.
[Nelson::] One hundred fifty of the 2,000 unidentified remains in California are children.
[Campbell:] I just love this picture.
[Dornin:] Ann Campbell knows there's the chance that one of them is her Nikki.
[Campbell:] It will just bring closure, and it will make me happy in a sense because I'll know something.
[Unidentified Female:] He was 4 years old. This November, he'll be 22. That's a lifetime, and all I need to know is where he is. And if this will help any of us, I will do it 150 times a day.
[Dornin:] For some, knowing the worst is better than the endless uncertainty. Rusty Dornin, CNN, San Francisco.

[Larry King:] Tonight: One of TV's most popular talkers has a news job. Leeza Gibbons is in Los Angeles. She'll take your calls. But first, the debate over the debates: Will Bush and Gore square off on the same stage at the same time? Bush campaign senior adviser Ari Fleischer joins us from Austin and in Nashville, Gore campaign senior adviser Ron Klain and then perspective on all of this from David Gergen, editor-at-large for "U.S. News and World Report," and a White House adviser to four presidents and famed presidential historian Michael Beschloss. It's all next, on LARRY KING LIVE. One program reminder you will be hearing a lot about it all week but Friday night on this program, for the full hour, an exclusive interview with Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia. We begin with Ari Fleischer, the Bush campaign senior adviser. He's in Austin Ron Klain, the Gore campaign senior adviser: He's in Nashville. Yesterday, Governor Bush came up with idea of three debates: "Meet The Press," with Tim Russert, another one on this program, and then one of the Presidential Commission debates. What was behind that are, Ari?
[Ari Fleischer, Bush Campaign Senior Adviser:] Well, it was simple, Larry: We want to debate. And we thought that, by choosing debates that Al Gore is already on record having said that he accepts including yours he said that to you on your show, live we thought would it be easy: that we could agree with Gore and the debates should be able to begin. That is why we chose them. They'll afford us we'll have large prime- time audiences. And we hope that Al Gore will be there.
[King:] Now, Ron, I remember when the vice president was here: On many occasions, he was always insisting on debating anywhere. And he always wanted to debate. So what is his difficulty with this concept?
[Ron Klain, Gore Campaign Senior Adviser:] Well, his difficulty with this concept is pretty simple, Larry. Governor Bush has said he wants to have debates that the most number of people can watch. We take him at his word on that. The three Presidential Commission debates are on all the networks, available to all the people. What we would like to see is do those three debates, and then, Larry, have Al Gore and George Bush come on this show in addition to those three national debates, not instead of one of those debates, like Governor Bush is proposing.
[King:] And is he saying that, if they did all three, he would definitely do this show, and he would do a "Meet the Press," and he would do any of the others? There would be a lot of debates if Bush agreed to three Commission debates?
[Klain:] We would love to see a lot of debates. And we love to see a debate on this show specifically, Larry, in addition to those Commission debates. But I think it's important. Obviously, Larry, this is a wonderful show. And Al Gore had a historic debate with Ross Perot on this show. But even that debate only got about 13 million people to tune in. The National Commission debates have drawn between 40 and 90 million people. And what the Bush campaign hasn't explained yet is why they want to get rid of those debates to add a LARRY KING debate. Why can't we have the Presidential Commission Debates and a LARRY KING debate on top of it?
[King:] Ari, why not the more the merrier?
[Fleischer:] Well, Larry, as you know, the vice president gave his word. He said that he accepted your debate. He accepted Tim Russert's debate. He never announced all these new conditions they have put on there. You know, they just have to disagree with everybody. Even when we agree with them, it is not good enough. All of sudden, they have changed their position. Now, your show is going to be made available to all the other networks.
[King:] That's correct. And so will the "Meet the Press" show.
[Fleischer:] All the debates. We your feed, I understand, is going to be made available to all the networks same with "Meet The Press." All Al Gore has to do is show up, and we're going to have tens of millions of people watching. It's up to Al Gore. If he meant what he said his credibility is on the line. Otherwise, why on Earth did he tell you he accepted? When he said to you: I accept, Larry, he didn't say what Ron just said. He didn't announce those conditions. This is a new position taken only...
[Klain:] Because, Ari, no one could imagine...
[Fleischer:] Wait a minute. Wait a minute, Ron. This is a new position taken by the vice president only after Governor Bush called his bluff and accepted the invitation to debate on
[Larry King. King:] Ron?
[Klain:] Ari, no one could imagine that George Bush was going to do something that no one in the past 12 years has done that his father didn't do, that Bob Dole didn't do which is run from the Presidential Commission Debates. We wanted to do a LARRY KING debate. We want to do a "Meet the Press." We want to do a lot of debates. But you still have not answered the question, Ari, why
[Fleischer:] Ron, hold on a second. It's...
[Klain:] Ari, let me finish. Let me finish.
[King:] Let Ron finish, Ari then you go.
[Fleischer:] Go ahead.
[Klain:] Why won't Governor Bush just agree to the three Commission debates? And then let's do LARRY KING in addition, "Meet the Press" in addition, "This Week" in addition, all kinds of shows in addition to those three debates that everyone in America can watch. Why not, Ari?
[Fleischer:] Because I think that when Al Gore said: I accept "Meet the Press," I accept LARRY KING, we took him at his word. And obviously, we are finding his word is a very changeable thing.
[Klain:] Well, well, let's...
[Fleischer:] Well, you just said it's never been wait a minute, you just said it's never been done before.
[King:] All right.
[Fleischer:] In 1996, the Commission offered three presidential debates. Clinton and Gore accepted only two. So you are the ones who started down this road. You have paved this road. You set the precedent of turning down Commission debates. In fact, the reason you didn't go in 1996 to the St. Louis debate was because the president had a fund raiser instead that he wanted to go to. And the vice president didn't disagree. The next night, the president went to United Nations. So you turned the Commission down yourselves.
[Klain:] You still haven't explained you still haven't explained why you won't take the three Commission debates and add to them. And I'll tell you why: because Governor Bush can't explain his tax plan that doesn't add. He can't explain his prescription-drug plan that has no funding for it. He can't explain all of his positions. So you want to have debates on outlets which the "Washington Post" this morning said had much more limited audiences than the Commission debates. You can't explain why you want to run from the Commission debates, and have these debates instead of the Commission debates, instead of in addition to the Commission debates.
[King:] All right. One of the other sides they're not taking a position for us, because I'm out of this. This is at a network level. I'm not involved in any discussions, Ron is that when you do have an exchange of people sitting next to each other without formalized rules like: You have one minute. You have 30 seconds to respond...
[Klain:] Sure.
[King:] ... you get more meaty, because they can cross-question each other. So if there are direct issues to be brought up as we proved in South Carolina, as we proved with Perot-Gore you can really get into them in a setting like this, as opposed to a more formalized your-30-seconds-are-up. Do you agree with that, Ron?
[Klain:] Absolutely. And that is why we are anxious to have a debate on this program and other shows like this one, Larry. The only real difference between our campaign and the Bush campaign is we want to have those debates in addition to the nationally televised, available-to-all-Americans Presidential Commission Debates, not instead of those debates. And Governor Bush can't explain why he wants to get rid of the Commission debates and put these debates in instead.
[Fleischer:] Larry, what
[King:] All right, without getting repetitious, what is going to happen, Ari? Are you going to sit down? The commission has invited everybody this week. Yet Bush said yesterday: That is my final answer. Are there going to be any kind of meetings, Ari?
[Fleischer:] Well, we are going to meet of course with the Commission to discuss the debates in St. Louis that the Governor is going to be there. And if Al Gore keeps his word on that, we expect he will be there, too. But this does come down to: What does it tell the American people when Al Gore gives his word and won't keep it? He didn't have any of those conditions at the time. He, with a great emphasis and was hotdogging it bragging to people that he has accepted all these debates including yours and including Tim Russert's. Al Gore shouldn't have said it if he didn't mean it. And if Al Gore doesn't mean it when he talks about something as simple as a debate...
[King:] All right.
[Fleischer:] He is also not likely to mean what he says about prescription drugs.
[King:] Is it...
[Fleischer:] So forget about it right after election or marriage penalty relief. When he gives his word, people have to know he means it.
[King:] All right. Without...
[Fleischer:] And what you hear from Al Gore is not what you are going to get.
[King:] Without getting repetitious, Ron, would it be safe to say that in this kind of format, Gore has excelled?
[Klain:] I think that he does well in this format. I think Governor Bush does well in this format, too. I think it would be very exciting to have the two of them on this program, Larry, and have an exchange of the sort you describe. The person whose word is in question here is Governor Bush. He said he wanted debates to be seen by the maximum number of American people. And now he's running from that, just like he ran from his pledge...
[Fleischer:] And Ron, all Al Gore has to do is show up. Just let him show up and we'll have huge audiences there.
[Klain:] ... just like he ran from pledge just like he ran from his pledge, Ari, not to run personal negative ads. On CNN, he made the pledge one day, broke it the next day...
[Fleischer:] Ron, why won't he just show up?
[Klain:] ... just like he ran from his pledge to pay
[Fleischer:] All the vice president has to do is honor his commitment.
[Klain:] No, Ari, the fact of the matter is we have made commitments to this show, to a number of other shows, and to the Commission. And you guys...
[Fleischer:] And then you walked away from them.
[Klain:] No. We're
[Fleischer:] And then you gave your word, and you are not keeping it?
[Klain:] ... all of those commitments. You won't match our commitment to do the nationally televised debates, because you don't want to defend your plan, Ari.
[King:] One other Ari, any comment on...
[Fleischer:] Larry, we are going to have...
[King:] I'm sorry. Go ahead.
[Fleischer:] We're going to have a record-breaking number of debates. Governor Bush has accepted three presidential, two vice presidential, which is more than Clinton and Gore did in 1996. That is our offer. And we think that is a great offer for the American people to hear a fair discussion of the issues.
[King:] We will talk about our historians.
[Fleischer:] We want to have it in a variety of formats and settings.
[King:] We'll talk about it with our historians later. But any comment, Ari, on that expletive deleted that Governor Bush had happen to him today with Mr. Cheney on stage in Naperville?
[Fleischer:] Larry, obviously, that was a remark that was intended privately for his running mate. The governor did not mean to have it shared with the public that was gathered in front of an open microphone. That was a private remark intended for his running mate.
[King:] OK, on that note, we will discuss that a little more later. We thank Ari Fleischer and Ron Klain a lot to be heard from this. Thank you for a very lively debate about the debates!
[Klain:] Thank you, Larry.
[King:] Ari Fleischer and Ron Klain. When we come back, David Gergen and Michael Beschloss. Don't go away.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] My opponent said he would debate me any place, any time, anywhere. I said fine, why don't we just show up at NBC with Mr. Russert as a moderator, or why don't we show up at LARRY KING and discuss our differences?
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] What's needed is to respect the right of the American people to see these debates on all the networks, in prime time, the way it has been done since 1988.
[King:] We now welcome to LARRY KING LIVE, in Boston, David Gergen, editor at large "U.S. News & World Report," he's professor of public service at the JFK School of Government at Harvard, and was an adviser in the White Houses of Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton; and in Washington, Michael Beschloss, the famed presidential historian, ABC news analyst, as well as commentator for "The News Hour With Jim Lehrer." I mentioned to Ari that little snip that occurred today with Governor Bush speaking in Illinois, here is what happened, and then I will get the thoughts of our two guests. Watch.
[Bush:] There's Adam Clymer, a major league
[King:] All right, gentlemen, they were referring to Mr. Clymer, a reporter for "The New York Times," and you obviously know the word that was expletived expletive deleted I can't even say it. David, does it mean anything, or is it a blip in the night?
[David Gergen, "u.s. News & World Report":] It's a blip in the night, but never get near a live microphone, Larry, with...
[King:] OK, we lost David a little there. Michael, is it yes, I got you now. Michael, does it mean anything?
[Michael Beschloss, Presidential Historian:] It sounds as if David is so afraid of a live microphone that he made sure that his was dead for a moment. But I think it is a hazard for candidates you know, even Ronald Reagan in 1984, you remember, when he was about to give a Saturday radio address and he was testing the mike. He made what he thought was a joke and said, "I'm about to sign legislation to outlaw the Soviet Union forever, we begin bombing in five minutes," he thought it was a joke and it went out over loudspeakers, reporters heard it, and it was a blip in that campaign, but like this one, it didn't change many votes.
[King:] David, what does does this cause any problems at "The Times"?
[Gergen:] No, I don't think so. But you know, that I don't know why he was sort of going after Adam Clymer. I don't know what the context was. Adam Clymer has been reporting, as you know, on the Nixon story just here a few nights ago, about whether Nixon had been beating his wife and taking drugs.
[King:] All right, Michael, what do you make over the debate over the debates?
[Beschloss:] Well, we have never really seen it done this way before, Larry, you know, there is always a negotiation over debates and it almost never happens the way everyone expects at the beginning. Even in 1976 when Gerald Ford challenged Jimmy Carter, renewing the tradition of debates begun in 1960 with Kennedy and Nixon, there was an argument between the two sides particularly over what would be the subject of the first debate. The Carter people did not want that to be foreign policy, they thought that would favor Ford. But we have never had a situation in which a candidate has proposed that two of the debates be on shows like LARRY KING LIVE and "Meet the Press." If this is his final offer, that is something that's a departure. But the interesting thing is that the commission which we think of as having sort of an official status, that's only been in business for 13 years and it's not particularly licensed.
[King:] David, that commission is not official in any way is it?
[Gergen:] It is not official, Larry, but it does have a lot of standing. As you know, there were for three elections in a row we had informal arrangements with the presidential debates up through the
[King:] But...
[Gergen:] ... short list, for example
[King:] Let me interrupt you, David, and we are going to fix David's microphone, it's a little in and out there. So let's take a break and get David all straightened out, and we'll be right back. Leeza Gibbons still to come, don't go away. OK, Michael Beschloss, how are they do you think they are going to resolve this since Bush said yesterday it's his final answer?
[Beschloss:] Well, if it's his final answer, I think you will have a situation which if Gore feels that it's so much to his advantage to be in debates he may accede to this, or you may have a situation which George W. Bush's mind changes later on. President Bush, interestingly enough, never liked what the commission suggested either in 1992. As late as the 22nd of September, President Bush had not yet agreed to the commission schedule of debates against Bill Clinton, and actually the first one was supposed to be held in East Lansing, George Bush the elder did not attend, Bill Clinton went and sort of kicked around the empty chairs and said, I'm here, where is my opponent? And that was where this character chicken George which began appearing at George Bush's appearances, said why will you not debate. At that point, Bill Clinton was ahead by 1 point, polled by about 15 points, and the result was finally that George Bush a week later said, let's have four debates in October.
[King:] David Gergen, we were part of a history-making thing together with that Perot-Gore debate, a debate that Al Gore suggested called me about and then Perot was invited, Clinton agreed, we understand you and others were opposed in the White House. It turned out to be, according to Bill Clinton, the thing that changed NAFTA. Why wouldn't Gore want to appear forget just this show in a setting in which he is extremely good?
[Gergen:] Well, I happened to before that day, Larry actually, the vice president came to
[King:] Or Tim Russert and he do this show, one or the other, and then the other...
[Gergen:] And Tim Russert exactly. So I think that I think that right now the governor is and I try to be sympathetic with him on a lot of things
[King:] How do you think Michael, how do you think the public's going to react?
[Beschloss:] I think I guess I disagree a little bit with David, because I think we in Washington see a huge difference between the commission debates and a debate on LARRY KING LIVE or "Meet the Press." I think if there are three debates in different venues, I think the public will feel that George W. Bush did subject himself to debates. They might not be as sensitive to it as we are.
[King:] By the way, isn't it, Michael a debate like this one or Russert, there are no rules, there's no such thing as you have one minute to speak, you have 30 seconds to respond. Isn't that, in a sense, kind of gutsy to do that?
[Beschloss:] It is, and it's one of the objections that there have always that have always been made against, you know, what we thought of as presidential debates, because to an extent they're joint press conferences. There's a big ability for a candidate to deliver a sound bite. And interestingly, the big departure from that was suggested by Bill Clinton in 1992. He was the one who suggested for the Richmond debate let's have a town meeting where the candidates can walk around. The Clinton people thought that the Bush people would turn that down flat, because that was not exactly George Bush Sr.'s national venue. But they thought that Bush could do better and they agreed.
[King:] And do you think, David, we'll wind up with a little bit of both?
[Gergen:] Yes, I do, Larry, and I think that Governor Bush has a point about having a different kind of format. But the Gore people and the presidential debate commission will have a very serious point. As you well know, Larry, CNN will make your program available to
[King:] Right.
[Gergen:] But the networks will not carry it, and they particularly will not carry NBC. Now, ABC is not going to
[Beschloss:] And I might say and could I say, Larry, I think if that does happen, I think that might be a compromise that we end up with, and I think David has suggested a very good one.
[King:] Thank you both very much. We're sorry. We had a little trouble with David's microphone, but we were able to understand 99 percent of what he said.
[Beschloss:] Everything that was important.
[King:] David Gergen and Michael Beschloss, thank you both very much. Leeza Gibbons is going to be the new host of "Extra." She starts tomorrow night. She's here tonight. She's next. Don't go away. She was drifting in television wasteland, host of "The Leeza Gibbons Show." The show gets canceled. Makes one appearance as the host of "LARRY KING LIVE," bam, becomes the managing editor of "Extra." The revamped show debuts tomorrow night. Congratulations.
[Leeza Gibbons, Host, "extra":] Thank you, Larry. It was clearly sitting in your seat...
[King:] That did it.
[Gibbons:] ... that did it.
[King:] The "Extra" people watched and went berserk.
[Gibbons:] They said, "We want that girl."
[King:] The ups and downs of television, very low period when you were dropped, right?
[Gibbons:] You know, it was bittersweet clearly. I...
[King:] What was the sweet?
[Gibbons:] Well, the sweet was I think new beginnings are very exciting. You know, that old age is so true: Every new beginning comes because of some other beginning's end. This was the end of my time not only at "The Leeza Show" but at Paramount, where I really grew up in broadcasting. I'd been there for 16 years 16 years. "The Leeza Show" was...
[King:] A kind of a relief?
[Gibbons:] Not a relief. It was time. It was time. We were very proud of what we did at "The Leeza Show." We had seven seasons. That's unheard of, especially at a time when talk went through a pretty good beating, and sometimes I think a well-deserved beating. And we were protected under the umbrella of NBC. Once the show went out into syndication, those are shark-infested waters, and we made a choice not to change what we did to be competitive, to maybe get more time. Maybe we couldn't have, but we didn't even want to go down that road.
[King:] Were you surprised that it was dropped?
[Gibbons:] Not altogether surprised. I think the environment was changing. You know, the television audience is never wrong. That's what I believe. And you know, I think there could have been things we could have done. There could have been more support in certain areas. But I saw this on the wall, for sure.
[King:] Was there any thought to go more tabloidish?
[Gibbons:] Never.
[King:] Never.
[Gibbons:] Never.
[King:] And you would have refused if that was suggested?
[Gibbons:] Well, you know, I have to give credit to everyone involved. That was never even dangled. I mean, it may have been somewhere layers back that, well, we could do better if we did this. You know, good storytelling is good storytelling: The nature of following topical news is that, I mean, you know, it's scandalous enough, it's sensational enough. You don't need to change your approach to have compelling stories.
[King:] So what happened? How did "Extra" how did that come along?
[Gibbons:] This is a great opportunity for us.
[King:] How did it happen?
[Gibbons:] Well, it happened I guess the way the way all these transitions happen.
[King:] You got a call?
[Gibbons:] Got a call, and they're a 7-year-old program. They very much wanted to redirect what their format was, to freshen up their look, and believe me, this show is knew from bottom to top. New logo, new graphics, new music, new format. We've divided the newsroom into five units, and the units will be specialists covering things like medical stories in our "Extra" segment, covering relationships in "Sextra." We have...
[King:] "Sextra"?
[Gibbons:] Yes. I didn't come up with the titles, but you'll remember it now.
[King:] Sure will.
[Gibbons:] When you see the women from "Sex and the City" on the cover of "Time" magazine, you know that this is something that the American public is very interested in. We are the first truly interactive news magazine in that we have a a van, a gigantic Winnebago, I guess, outfitted with a tracking system where viewers will be able to direct where we go. We have kind of our own action reporter, Steve Santagati, who will be out there. And you know, you can log on and say, "Do this, do that, ask this, stay here."
[King:] We'll get into a lot of it. Are you a hired hand or are you part of the production now?
[Gibbons:] Well, in television...
[King:] You're managing editor. What does that mean?
[Gibbons:] I'm certainly one of the voices that is directing this revamp of the show. It would have been uncomfortable for me to be involved at any other level. We are very like-minded, and I'm not I'm not the executive producer of the show. We have a really talented team of people, both the creative team and the technical staff. We were walking through today with what's going to happen on the show tomorrow, and it's very, very exciting.
[King:] Who produce "Extra"?
[Gibbons:] Lisa Gregorisch-Dempsey is overall handling reality programming at Telepictures.
[King:] And what company?
[Gibbons:] It's a Telepictures show, and my...
[King:] How many stations?
[Gibbons:] And my production company is based at Telepictures, which is one of the reasons I wanted to do to take this assignment as well, to give me opportunities to produce and develop
[King:] How many stations carry it?
[Gibbons:] It's about 90, 95 percent of the country.
[King:] Back with more of Leeza Gibbons, starting tomorrow, and her old show is still on in reruns, right?
[Gibbons:] We just wrap up. I mean, the dovetailing was unbelievable.
[King:] You go off in one, on in the other.
[Gibbons:] Exactly.
[King:] Should be on starting tomorrow. Most times "Extra" plays is what? early fringe? Is that what they call it?
[Gibbons:] It's access and fringe, right?
[King:] Back with more of Leeza Gibbons on this edition of LARRY KING LIVE, after this. [BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "LEEZA"]
[Gibbons:] When they admit that they're guilty, do we have to have like, like Gacey spent what? 15 years on death row?
[Unidentified Female:] Right.
[Gibbons:] And why...
[Unidentified Male:] Gacey wasn't the one who set up the appeals. Gacey didn't set up those appeals. Those appeals were set up by the court, because the courts know that...
[Gibbons:] But he but a jury said...
[Unidentified Male:] ... that the government's wrong on a regular basis.
[Gibbons:] ... we want him put to death. A jury said, we want him put to death.
[Alan Dershowitz, Defense Attorney:] Leeza, you're pandering.
[Gibbons:] It took so many years.
[Dershowitz:] You're too smart for this.
[Gibbons:] I should be a defense attorney.
[Dershowitz:] No, no, no.
[King:] Lest you think Leeza Gibbons is just some really pretty face, she has a bachelor of arts in journalism from the University of South Carolina, reported local news, co-hosted "PM" magazine in Dallas, worked on "Two on the Town" in New York. Eventually co- anchored "Entertainment Tonight," host and co-producer of her on daytime talk show, and now, the new host and managing editor of "Extra." The revamped show debuts tomorrow, of course, the day after this Labor Day. Are you an anchor on this or do you get to do mixed interviews and stuff which you like doing, or are you just reading?
[Gibbons:] It's a solo-anchored show. I very much want to be involved in all the segments. We have a celebrity pop culture segment called "The X Factor." I suspect I'll be living in that segment as well as some consumer reporting as well. We have an attorney, Mike Bryant. We're doing "Mike Checks," where he goes out and looks into all kinds of consumer- related stories.
[King:] This is a daily magazine?
[Gibbons:] A daily magazine.
[King:] That's what it is. Sounds like a magazine.
[Gibbons:] And we'll have a daily radio component as well that I will be doing.
[King:] A radio version of it?
[Gibbons:] We'll be doing entertainment minutes that come on at the morning, which I've done radio for over a decade now.
[King:] And what time each day do you do this?
[Gibbons:] We do it unless something breaks, the show is put to bed in the early afternoon.
[King:] So something being an entertainment kind of story breaking?
[Gibbons:] Well...
[King:] What does "Extra" cover?
[Gibbons:] It covers, you know, like the units that I told you. It...
[King:] Would it cover a thing like the debates we just talked about tonight?
[Gibbons:] Likely. I'm wanting to look into this notion of: Is Geraldo running for governor or not, for mayor or not, and should we talk to former mayors and see how people feel about it? We may cover politics. We may cover consumer medical, health, fitness, beauty, and certainly pop culture and celebrity will be a portion of it. But it will not be the whole half hour.
[King:] All right, what's it like to step into an entity that's already been around seven years? You know, this is not I mean, it's new but it's still "Extra."
[Gibbons:] Well, I think that the challenge for this for me was to recreate and to reinvent. And I think as women, we understand that totally. This is something that we do every time we have a baby. We understand change. Every month, we understand change. And that is really the thing, I think, that feeds our soul the most. And that was exciting for me. But also, Larry, to be very honest, you know what it's like to be a working parent. I have three children: 11, 8 and 2. They are my priority. This was a very doable schedule for me.
[King:] You can go in and do it every day.
[Gibbons:] Go in and do it, take them to school, be a hands-on parent with them in the afternoons. And surely, you know, you don't get all of what you want but you do get we all get our must list; we don't get our shoulds. This was a must for me.
[King:] What does your husband do?
[Gibbons:] He is a hyphenate. He is an actor, architect, writer, composer. He does a little bit of everything and does it all quite well.
[King:] In Washington, you say something like that, it means a guy out of work when you're doing many things.
[Gibbons:] No, no. No, he...
[King:] He's not a house husband?
[Gibbons:] He's not a house husband, although he has a separate detached office on our property where he does his work and his painting. And he runs a company called Parabounce. They make a one-man helium balloon. I'm telling you, this guy is all over the place.
[King:] I can tell, yeah. I know a lot of guys...
[Gibbons:] You should do it. Katie Couric did it. Lee Iacocca did it.
[King:] What? Go up in a balloon?
[Gibbons:] When up in a Parabounce.
[King:] Of course, I grew up with a lot of guys. Not one wanted to make helium balloons. None of the guys on the corner in Brooklyn were very interested in...
[Gibbons:] They weren't doing that in your neighborhood?
[King:] Never came up. Never...
[Gibbons:] In the neighborhood?
[King:] Yeah, it wasn't
[Gibbons:] It is the First Amendment and I think Jerry has defended himself quite brilliantly on that issue. I do think, however, that we have evolved. The state of our industry has evolved to a place where kind of mean-spiritedness is somehow accepted. And there is a little bit of this notion of a culture of cruelty that we have. It's not created and take responsibility for it, because we're each responsible for what we take. You know, if you put yourself in charge of your own happiness and your own values, you'll be in very good hands. We are each accountable for what we take from the universe, from television. But I do think what's acceptable has changed. And, you know, for me watching it, I can watch it as entertainment. I can think that it's benign.
[King:] Do you resent anything Senator Lieberman is saying about your industry?
[Gibbons:] Not resent, no. I mean, again, I think that everyone is entitled to have...
[King:] Do you fear a government too much government involvement?
[Gibbons:] Yes. I think most people who, you know, who depend on this business and who believe in its power, you know, there is, I think, that danger.
[King:] All right, you're also getting involved in you don't just do a show; you testified before Congress on behalf of children, right, child abuse?
[Gibbons:] Yes.
[King:] What got you into that topic?
[Gibbons:] From the time I was in the sixth grade, Larry, I knew that I wanted to be involved in this industry as a storyteller. And also, I grew up with parents who instilled in me the notion that, you know, to really live a life, you have to participate in life. And so I've always thrived on being a bit of an advocate, sometimes and activist. But really, it's very selfish because, you know, if you look at successful people, what they one of the qualities of a successful person is feeling like they're part of something bigger, feeling like they can contribute. And it's all the lens that you look at at life through. And so by being involved in that way and feeling that I can be productive and have a meaningful existence, it's just a it's a better life.
[King:] Of all the abuses and there are a lot of abuses in life none worse than child abuse. Agreed?
[Gibbons:] Agreed.
[King:] I couldn't think of one thing worse.
[Gibbons:] I can't think of anything more heinous.
[King:] Yet the say it is a curable thing and that some people who abuse their children can get better. Have you found that to be true? The University of Texas has done major studies with it.
[Gibbons:] I think...
[King:] Most abusers were abused.
[Gibbons:] Exactly. And what I find is that it is at the core of so many of our problems in society: teen pregnancy, drug abuse, dropout, delinquency, low self-esteem. A lot of those things, once you begin to research, there is almost always or often, I will say, an incident of sexual abuse. And clearly, those kinds of people who are victimized by their parents, they aren't all going to grow up to be pedophiles, absolutely not. But if we continue to not support children who tell or not arm children with information to know where to go, to know where the boundaries are, those children don't know those people become adults, they don't know where the boundaries are. I think we're letting a lot of kids down.
[King:] Leeza Gibbons is our guest. We're going to include your phone calls. And starting tomorrow, you'll see her as the new co the host and managing editor I was going to say co-host. Leeza shares with no one. Host and managing editor of "Extra." Wednesday night, Dr. Laura will be here. On Thursday night, Mike Wallace and Merv Griffin. We're going to talk about a new book that Nancy Reagan is releasing on letters to and from her husband. And then Friday night, Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia. We'll be right back with Leeza Gibbons. Don't go away.
[Gibbons:] Don't we roll the dice every day? For instance, I've had all the tests done...
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Gibbons:] ... on my baby so far.
[Unidentified Male:] Why? Why do you have the tests done?
[Gibbons:] And like you, my husband and I had controversy within our family over this. He said, "Well, what if we find out the baby does have Down's?" And it meant a different thing to me than it meant for him.
[Unidentified Male:] Why did you have the test?
[Gibbons:] Because I wanted to be prepared for what might happen, what I might need to supply that baby with. If you have a baby with a learning disability or with a physical challenge, then you need to parent that child differently.
[Unidentified Female:] You need to educate yourself. Right.
[Gibbons:] To educate yourself.
[King:] Calls in a moment for Leeza, who, by the way, was on the syndicated show business show, "Entertainment Tonight," for 10 years. Here's a sample of her "E.T." anchor work. And check out the hair.
[Gibbons:] Oh-oh. The ingredient that you mentioned are top talent and a good script. And that's what everybody is touting, really. I think though the real story of "Steel Magnolias" took place behind the scenes. It's the story of some famous women who got along famously. Oh, no. And how about the Southern accent?
[King:] Where was that? Was that the style? That was your voice, right?
[Gibbons:] Who knows. It could have been just that I, you know, arrived into town, this redneck. And I use the term very affectionately because I'm still recovering.
[King:] You're from South Carolina.
[Gibbons:] From South Carolina. And I remember hitting town and they said, "You know, maybe we'll just sent you to a little bit of a, you know, wardrobe consultant and kind of a, you know, a fashion and beauty consultant." I first of all, it was the style. And you girls have to admit it, we all had our hair very close to God. But, oh, my gosh, I went the extreme.
[King:] What did Mary Hart say?
[Gibbons:] She had it, too.
[King:] East Patchogue, New York, as we go to calls for Leeza Gibbons. Hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry.
[King:] Hi.
[Caller:] Hi, Leeza.
[Gibbons:] Hi.
[Caller:] I would just like to say, Leeza, that I think you would have been wonderful a wonderful co-host with Regis.
[Gibbons:] Oh.
[Caller:] I really do. I think you would have been great. I've been saying it all along. You're just wonderful.
[Gibbons:] Oh, well...
[King:] Was there any inquiries made along those lines?
[Gibbons:] Oh, that's a lovely compliment. You know what? I first of all, the lucky person who gets to sit opposite from Regis, what a great gig. And I was able to fill in for Kathie Lee a time or two and I know what a wonderful shop that is and they're all terrific there. My life is here and my family is here, and it was never something that made sense for me just...
[King:] In other words, even if offered, you wouldn't have moved to New York?
[Gibbons:] No, I'm based here right now.
[King:] Is it a kind of thing, just in thinking about, you'd like?
[Gibbons:] Oh, love, love. I mean, you know, he's exciting to me. He evolves.
[King:] Great guy.
[Gibbons:] He continues to reinvent. The show is brilliantly produced. I mean, it's a great gig for somebody.
[King:] San Diego for Leeza Gibbons. Hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Leeza. I used to watch you a lot on "Entertainment Tonight." Is there any chance you'll be going back on "Entertainment Tonight," because I really, really loved you on that show?
[Gibbons:] Oh, thank you. Well, not now.
[King:] She's a competitor now in a sense.
[Gibbons:] Not now.
[King:] Do you consider that competition?
[Gibbons:] Well, in the sense that in many markets, we're on at the same time period. We're going to...
[King:] Different shows, though.
[Gibbons:] Such an entirely different show, especially now that we've reinvented. But I'm very close with people at "E.T." where I worked for over a decade. And, you know, they're just down the street.
[King:] That's the longest running what has made that show successful?
[Gibbons:] It hit at a time when it was truly innovative. The technology was brand new. No one had ever seen anything like it. They understood the format, they knew what they were doing. And it grew at a time right when MTV was happening, "E.T." was happening. And our culture was ravenous for all things celebrity. And it became the brand.
[King:] Let's talking about something a little difficult. Your mother has Alzheimer's.
[Gibbons:] She has been diagnosed for about a year. She's at the she's at probably the end of the first stage, as I understand.
[King:] Which is? What's the first thing that happens?
[Gibbons:] Well, mom actually is one of those remarkably strong women, and she is the one who kind of shook all of us in the family into paying attention and getting out of denial, which so often happens.
[King:] She knew something was wrong?
[Gibbons:] She ran that house, and she had paid the house the bills like two or three times the same one that month. And so she said to my father, "You know what? Something's going on here."
[King:] Where do they live?
[Gibbons:] They live in South Carolina. And...
[King:] So she paid the same bills over and over?
[Gibbons:] So she knew. In fact, it must be unbelievably frightening. Her mom is still alive and has dealt with this as well.
[King:] Really?
[Gibbons:] So I suppose for mom, it must just be terrifying in those moments of quiet solitude to fast forward and think what might be coming for her. But I'll tell you, first of all, the science is remarkable and the research is very helpful. And mom has taken control of this and has emerged both of them. I mean, it's such a beautiful love story. I look at the Reagans and I think of my parents, because it's just the gender has switched in terms of who's the caregiver.
[King:] Is it getting worse and worse? I mean, it is degenerative.
[Gibbons:] It's degenerative, yes. She right now is very, very steady with it. She's doing all the right things. She clearly still has awareness of everybody in our family. And if we have anything to do with it, she will stay at that...
[King:] And there is new drugs, right?
[Gibbons:] Wonderful drugs. And they're learning so much more about, you know, why it happens. And we're just very optimistic.
[King:] Why did it go public?
[Gibbons:] You know, my mother has always taken charge of her life and she's not one to hide. And we really took her lead on it. I wanted to do an episode of the Leeza show about it and I called and I said, "Mommy, you know, how do you feel about if I mention this?" And she was: "Well, not only that, but I would like to contribute." She marched herself down to the studio in South Carolina. She did a direct to camera. My mother's a I mean, broadcasting to her speaking to a camera can be very unnerving for people. And she was I went through that show in tears out of respect and awe for my mom.
[King:] How old is she?
[Gibbons:] She's a young woman. She's 64, which she'll die because she always tried to keep it a secret. Tell you anything but her age. It was always a secret. Mom, you're 64, honey. You look beautiful.
[King:] We'll be back with more of Leeza Gibbons. She hosts "Extra" starting tomorrow. Don't go away.
[Unidentified Male:] We proudly welcome to the Hollywood Walk of Fame Leeza Gibbons.
[King:] Tons of people going to be watching tomorrow when Leeza Gibbons takes over as the host and managing editor of the revamped "Extra." London, Kentucky, hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry, Leeza.
[King:] Hi.
[Caller:] My question is, Leeza, being an election year, do you think the government should pose any type of regulation on types of shows on television, or do you think it should be up to the individual to turn it off and watch what they want to?
[Gibbons:] I don't I'm not in favor of the government regulating but I am in favor of the government informing us about the content of programs so that we can make choices and take back the power in our own households. And we've tried and we've had this chip and that thing and, you know, this labeling and that labeling. We haven't quite gotten the information that we need that parents can decipher and that's actually useful for parents who where both are working and where, you know, they need to understand what's available. I mean, my gosh, you know, how many programs are available? Hundreds of programs. We just need better support. We don't need the government to step in and fix it; we need the government to help us fix it.
[King:] Any movie I mean, you play yourself in movies. I do that, movie cameo hits. You ever been offered a part as a part not Leeza?
[Gibbons:] I have.
[King:] And?
[Gibbons:] And it's too scary for me. I...
[King:] You don't want to do it?
[Gibbons:] There may be a chance where it would be the right kind of thing. I value what actors do. I am not an actor. You know, but there may be something that would be interesting or that would be...
[King:] You'd have to be throughout the movie, though, because if you're on just once, it ain't going to work. You have to be Leeza. To be believe you, you'd have to be on in a part that is not just one scene.
[Gibbons:] Well, maybe...
[King:] They're not going to believe you're someone else.
[Gibbons:] Yeah. Maybe I would need the total makeover for that, then.
[King:] Do you fear aging?
[Gibbons:] Fear, no. I...
[King:] Do you worry?
[Gibbons:] I respect it. I think there's nothing more attractive than someone who emotionally accepts that our beauty, our youth, our vibrancy is a temporary gift. Appreciate when you have it, treasure it, and women in particular. It's very unattractive to me to hear women always negating their looks or and as a mother of a daughter, I know how destructive that can be. But I don't fear it as long as, you know, I can be productive, as long as I can...
[King:] Would you be anti-plastic surgery? See, this is to said to women and not to men, part of the unfairness of society.
[Gibbons:] Are you anti-plastic surgery?
[King:] I'm scared to death of it.
[Gibbons:] Why?
[King:] Because
[Gibbons:] I'm claustrophobic, and if they told me they could do this and I my big fear is: Oh, my gosh, what if I would have to get my eyes done and I'd have to have patches over my eyes? I can't get facial because I can't I'm so claustrophobic.
[King:] So you can't do this.
[Gibbons:] Well, if I get to the point where things are really, you know, fried, died, lay to the side and sagging, I'll go get therapy for the claustrophobia.
[King:] Back with our remaining moments with always got a cure back with our remaining moments. Don't go away.
[Gibbons:] I'm Leeza Gibbons sharing your weekend. Hope you're having a good one. Jerry Seinfeld lends a helping hand. We'll tell you why. Stand by for that. Right now, Carlos Santana, Rob Thomas, their hit, "Smooth," to start out the top 10.
[King:] Get in one more call for Leeza. Seattle, hello. Seattle.
[Caller:] Yes. This is Julie Paulette and I want to ask Leeza what she thinks of tabloid reporting. And when she covers celebrities, will she be engaged in some of this herself?
[Gibbons:] Oh, my gosh, thank you very much for the question. No. I know where the line is. And I take very seriously the fact that celebrities would consent to allowing us into their lives. I mean, clearly, there are situations were celebrities make news. And we will on "Extra," as I have throughout my career, report on whatever news the celebrities are making. But when it comes to asking permission for an interview and being invited on a set, I can't imagine taking advantage of that opportunity and somehow manipulating it just to make a better story.
[King:] Someone from "Survivor" is a regular on your show?
[Gibbons:] Yes, we have a survivor on "Extra." Dr. Sean is going to be reporting medical news. And he...
[King:] Come on, Leeza, this is a...
[Gibbons:] He's an authority.
[King:] Good grab here, Leeza, go.
[Gibbons:] It's a good grab, isn't it?
[King:] Yes.
[Gibbons:] But he's very interested in telling stories about health and fitness and medical cures: Is it real? Is it not? And he's taking it very seriously as are we. You know, it's an unproven thing as with many of the opportunities that the survivors are having.
[King:] Good idea, though. What did you make of that show?
[Gibbons:] Oh, man, it was it just had so many lessons to teach us. It was an incredible mirror of society.
[King:] You believe that? Even though there were cameras right there and they knew the cameras were there?
[Gibbons:] Well, it's more about what the audience about how the audience responded. I don't think anyone predicted that the audience would get what it needed out of this show, which is what we got. And then the afterlife for these people...
[King:] Amazing.
[Gibbons:] ... all the opportunities.
[King:] And why isn't "Big Brother" working?
[Gibbons:] I guess you could make arguments that the house guests aren't as compelling. Or you could make arguments that it's too much of it. Who knows? Who knows?
[King:] What do you make of reality television, period? There's going to be more coming.
[Gibbons:] Well, as a producer of reality television, I'm thrilled.
[King:] Is "Extra" regarded as reality television? I regard it as magazine...
[Gibbons:] It's that's a news magazine. But at my company, we produce reality TV. In fact, well, these don't really come in that category but we just finished up a show with Delta Burke for "Lifetime." We're calling it an untalk show talk show. She's fabulous to work with. And we did a program for MTV called "Teen Court." But I'm really excited about it and hope we get a chance to produce...
[King:] Using real-life people in real-life situations.
[Gibbons:] This is putting a camera in the deliberation room. This is a program that really exists in L.A. County.
[King:] And she'll be here Wednesday. How's Dr. Laura going to do?
[Gibbons:] You know, they say that they sent out tapes to stations and that there was a you know, if you believed what you read in the trade, that there was good response to Dr. Laura. She certainly has a large following within her radio community. Who knows how long? But, you know, it's always interesting to bash a show before they've ever rolled off any tape, but you know, she certainly needs to be accountable for a lot of what she's said, I think.
[King:] Thank you, Leeza. Good luck.
[Gibbons:] Thank you, Larry.
[King:] Not that you don't need it.
[Gibbons:] Well, always good to have it.
[King:] Leeza Gibbons. She takes over tomorrow night as managing editor and host of "Extra." I love saying this. Check your newspapers for time and station. Goes back a way, but it takes us back. CNN "NEWSSTAND" is next. Thanks for joining us. I'm Larry King. For Leeza and the whole crew, good night.

[Colleen Mcedwards, World News:] The United Nations is trying to determine whether bodies found in Sierra Leone are those of peacekeepers. The remains were discovered about 80 kilometers from the capital, Freetown. Some of the victims were wearing Zambian uniforms. Sierra Leone soldiers buried the bodies on Tuesday. CNN's Ben Wedeman reports.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Correspondent:] Mysterious human remains in no-man's land. Government soldiers say they know to whom these bones belonged.
[Unidentified Male:] These are the bones of the United Nations peacekeeping force that were here.
[Wedeman:] The UN officials in Freetown want to thoroughly examine the remains before they come to any conclusions, and that won't be easy.
[David Wimhurst, Un Spokesman:] Well, even if we had IDs, they wouldn't be very good because these are skeletal remains largely. We don't ourselves have forensic capability. We have checked in Freetown, and there is no forensic laboratory available, which makes our task somewhat more difficult.
[Wedeman:] One day earlier, an amateur cameraman filmed the bodies before they were buried. Their uniforms were from the Zambian Army, which is serving with the UN peacekeeping force. But that's not confirmation the dead were actually UN troops. The rebels have stripped many of the UN peacekeepers they captured of their uniforms and their weapons. At the front, UN paraphernalia is a common sight, as are dead bodies. [on camera]: I see you have a UN helmet.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Wedeman:] Can you tell me where you got that?
[Unidentified Male:] I captured it from a rebel this morning.
[Wedeman:] Trying to sort out the dead, the UN is having a hard enough time looking after the living. There is growing concern about the condition of the approximately 280 peacekeepers still in rebel hands. Those who have been released have been shielded from the media, but they report that conditions in captivity are not good.
[Wimhurst:] Generally speaking, it was not a pleasant ordeal for them, as you can probably understand. They were held against their will in difficult and trying circumstances.
[Wedeman:] Sierra Leone has been one of the UN's most trying peacekeeping missions. [on camera]: In the last month, four peacekeepers have been killed and nearly 500 taken hostage. To many people here, the UN peacekeeping force simply isn't up to the task of keeping the peace. Ben Wedeman, CNN, Freetown.

[Mary Matalin, Co-host:] Tonight, noted journalists Bob Woodward and Joe Klein on Bush does he have the experience to be president?
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Nominee:] I will challenge the status quo, he is the status quo.
[Matalin:] Gore will voters ever fall in love with him?
[Tipper Gore, Al Gore's Wife:] It's not "The Dating Game," you know, you don't have to fall in love with Al Gore, I did that.
[Unidentified Male:] Article one is adopted.
[Matalin:] And Clinton should Republicans apologize for impeaching him?
[Announcer:] Live from Washington: CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press; on the right, Mary Matalin. In the CROSSFIRE, Bob Woodward, "Washington Post" assistant managing editor; and in New York, Joe Klein, Washington correspondent for "The New Yorker" magazine.
[Matalin:] Good evening, and welcome to CROSSFIRE. The candidates kicked off the final full week before Election Day campaigning in unlikely key states. Governor Bush, appearing on Jay Leno tonight, will stump in California, a Democratic stronghold where Al Gore's lead has shrunk. The vice president along with his running mate Joe Lieberman was in Wisconsin also closing out the campaign in traditional Democratic states. The electoral map is up for grabs as national polls continue to show a race too close to call, but with Bush holding the lead, he is up 3 in the latest "USA Today"CNNGallup poll, it's dead even in the ABC News poll, Bush by 1 in the "Washington Post" poll, and Bush up by 3 according to MSNBC-Reuters- Zogby. In the final stretch, two men who cannot possibly be president in 2000 may determine who will be. Ralph Nader refused to back down to Democratic charges of egomania, and President Clinton rode to the rescue of Democrats urging he pump up the base by bringing his own special brand of the party gospel to black churches and radio shows. So, on the final lap, will bashing Bush close the gap for Gore? Is ignoring Gore a risky choice for Bush? And will any candidate ever compare to Clinton? Bill Press will be spinning all week in CNN's election special, "THE SPIN ROOM," with Tucker Carlson at 10:00 p.m. So joining the CROSSFIRE homestretch huddle tonight, the former public servant and current commentator extraordinaire, former White House spokesman Joe Lockhart. Welcome, Joe.
[Joe Lockhart, Guest Co-host:] Thank you. Good to be here. Bob, there's a great debate here in Washington now, what the president's role should be. You've been watching this for a while. What should the president do, what shouldn't he do, and how should he what should he go about doing over the next couple days?
[Bob Woodward, "the Washington Post":] Well, I don't know, but, I mean, the reaction always to Clinton, as you know as well as anyone, is who ever meets him and who ever listens to him feels better about himself or herself because of the encounter. Now, he can't transfer that to Gore, but somehow Gore has to figure out in the last week of the campaign, how is he going to go out, talk to audiences and the audiences will say, gee, I really kind of like that guy, or I have a positive feeling. You were running Tipper Gore saying it isn't "The Dating Game." But being president, as you know, working in the White House to a certain extent is "The Dating Game."
[Lockhart:] Well, there is another great debate now about "Esquire" magazine and an article about the president, and let me just say for the record that there was an ironclad agreement between "Esquire" magazine and the White House me at the time that this article wouldn't come out until after the election. They sent us a letter saying it would be in December. So, how do you feel about when your brethren break a promise like that? But more importantly, there are there have been several long articles about the president where there has been passing references to impeachment. Why is the media so obsessed? Why do they go right to that and only discuss that issue?
[Woodward:] Well, first of all, Clinton is obsessed with it, as you know, and Clinton really brings it up himself. And in this "Esquire," I think your complaint about the article is exactly right and right on target, it is the December issue and normally that comes out in mid-November. Now it's the end of October and they are distributing it around. But it's one of those things where Clinton goes to the soft tissue of the issue and says, when are the Republicans going to apologize I think it's going to be a long wait.
[Lockhart:] Let me ask you a media question, which is Gore's running as the Democrat, Bush as the Republican. Do reporters apply the same standard to two of them, or is it, as it appears to me, Gore is somehow held to a slightly higher standard? When he makes a mistake it's there is something devious in it. When Bush misspeaks, well, he's just he's inexperienced, he's a bit of a bumbler.
[Woodward:] Well, as you know, the best reporters really play it straight and I think there are lots of really good reporters who don't let their ideology get in the way or their own predisposition. But I think Gore is getting a straight shot as is Bush. I think Gore's big problem is that he's got to present himself as the real candidate he is, which is a blend, some Republican, some Democrat. He is a new Democrat, but he is running as kind of a traditional Democrat and people sense they say, well, where is the Gore we saw who did lots of Republican things like supporting the let's get the deficit down.
[Matalin:] Bob, while we're trying to fix Joe's mike there, I want to ask you something since you have been through quite a few "Esquire" covers with quite a few of us in this town. And, Joe, we feel your pain, I've also been there when I told my principle not to get involved in this. But this cover of "Esquire" that has everybody all abuzz you are not a psychologist certainly, but what would possess a person, a president to take such an unpresidential pose?
[Woodward:] Well, I suspect, and Joe can answer this, they took lots of pictures. It's like when they get somebody picking their nose and you say, well, why would somebody pick their nose when they're in front of the camera he may have been in front of the camera 20 minutes or a half hour.
[Lockhart:] Much longer than that, he was there for, I think, a half an hour to 45 minutes, so it's...
[Matalin:] Well, Joe is not responsible for this, but...
[Woodward:] But it's the worst cover for Clinton and it's the worst cover for Gore...
[Matalin:] Right.
[Woodward:] ... because it essentially says, I am basking in self- contentment, and people who don't like the president want him to feel his own pain.
[Matalin:] Well, Joe Klein in New York, joining us...
[Joe Klein, "the New Yorker" Magazine:] Hi, Mary.
[Matalin:] How are you, darling? We are happy you are here.
[Klein:] Fine.
[Matalin:] We have been talking about the "Esquire" piece, and why don't you give your commentary on that cover that everybody is abuzz about, hardly presidential, not Joe Lockhart's fault, but what you have been in the mind of this president and have actually written a more definitive peace than this. What possesses him to even want to tell his story to "Esquire" magazine?
[Klein:] I think he wants to tell his story to everybody at this point, because he feels that his true story hasn't gotten out over the years because of all of the scandal coverage. You know, the reason why Clinton talks about impeachment so much, why reporters are so obsessed by impeachment is because Clinton talks about it. When I interviewed him extensively this summer, he kept on raising it and he kept on raising the great right-wing Republican conspiracy. He is pretty obsessed with that. I went in there trying to do a piece about the substantive record of the last eight years and I was surprised by how much he wanted to talk about how angry he was at Republicans, how angry he was at the press. That having been said, I don't know whether the Republicans owe Clinton an apology, or whether Clinton should be asking for the apology, but the Republicans owe someone an apology because, I mean, they diverted the country for a good six months for a vindictive stupid act you know, the outcome of which was clear from day one.
[Matalin:] Joe...
[Klein:] I mean, I think...
[Matalin:] You are showing your stripes here, buddy. Let me just ask you...
[Klein:] No, no, no, no. Mary, I think that everybody, most people, the vast majority of people in Congress were in favor of censuring the president for the things that he did wrong, but that didn't happen because of a few extremists, especially in the House, people like Tom DeLay, and they allowed the country's business to be diverted by this nonsense and that is why they owe an apology.
[Matalin:] OK, can I let me ask you something, you know what? I am not an extremist, there is a lot of us who are part of the vast right-wing conspiracy who actually think that a president lying under oath is something worth bringing some closure to. But let's move on, because we're really talking about Clinton...
[Klein:] Well, how about a president lying under oath about the kind of thing that, you know, the vast majority of people who engage in such activity lie under oath about?
[Matalin:] OK, guess what? Guess what? Clinton, although he can never be president again, sure would like to run, and Bob Woodward's colleague here had a very interesting thing to say about him this weekend on "Meet the Press," that he was born to run, he loves to run, he'd love to run for president himself this year, he'd love to run against Hillary for the New York Senate Race. What is it about this man that you have studied so deeply, I mean, is there what running makes him tick.
[Klein:] Well, I think, that he is probably the most adept politician that I have ever covered and but there is a tendency on our part to overdo that. I mean, one of the things that I learned in looking over the last eight years when I studied them really closely was that there were a lot of times that he made decisions, especially on the economy, where immediate political considerations were pushed in the background and he did things that would have been considered were considered impolitic, you know, bailing out Mexico, the deficit reduction program in 1993, supporting free trade in a party that essentially opposes it. I don't think that Clinton gets enough credit for that stuff, but that is because he will slip up at times and allow himself to be photographed the way he was in "Esquire" and allow himself to rant about a right-wing conspiracy that I don't believe exists, Mary, by the way, I don't know if you remember, but you should let me know if I'm wrong.
[Lockhart:] Let me do a public service now and talk about the candidates who are actually running for president this time. Joe Lieberman is now openly questioning Governor Bush's readiness, his experience. This is what he had to say yesterday on one of the Sunday shows.
[Sen. Joe Lieberman , Vice Presidential Candidate:] Look, it's a big job, and with all respect, if you look at his record, if you look at his plans, if you look at his experience, if you compare them to Al Gore's record, experience and plans for America, maybe some day, but not now, now, George Bush is not ready to be president of the United States.
[Lockhart:] Well, obviously, that was today, but how important is experience? And when you are weighing it up as a reporter, shouldn't it be hour important than something like likability? And last, will the tactic work?
[Woodward:] Well, first of all, the issue of inexperience has been in the air about Bush since he announced his candidacy. And the question always was, in the campaign, will there be events or will thing happen, will George Bush go on television and someone will ask him about HUD? And he will say: Oh, I haven't seen the movie, instead of recognizing that that's...
[Lockhart:] That's a pretty low standard for electing president.
[Woodward:] No, but the idea is: Would there be things that would visibly occur that would cause people to say: Wait a minute he has only been in politics six years? Unfortunately for Gore, those issues have not arise that often in the campaign.
[Lockhart:] Or has the press missed them?
[Woodward:] Well, I think the press has been tough on both candidates. And I there is a factor here of and really is worth spending half a minute on, that when Gore makes a mistake, it's almost like he is playing a video of what he thought he saw, namely he went down to Texas with the head of FEMA, turns out it didn't happen. And it was related with such authority that when it turned out to not be true, people said: Wait a minute, what goes on here? When Bush makes a mistake, it's about policy and about numbers, and quite frankly, we think we have better memories than we are able to deal with policy and numbers.
[Matalin:] All right, there is experience and there is experience. We are going to to talk about what kind of experience voters want when we come back. And, at the end of show, or after our show, if you want the inside political scoop, we are so delighted that Bob Woodward, himself, is going to do our chatroom on cnn.comcrossfire. Don't miss this and stay tuned for more of the star-studded journalists and Joe Lockhart.
[Lockhart:] Welcome back to CROSSFIRE, I'm Joe Lockhart sitting in for Bill Press. There's just eight days to the election, and this race is as tight as any presidential campaign since 1960. The primaries, conventions and debates haven't settled it. What are the important undecided voters looking for over the next week, and who's to blame for a lackluster campaign: the candidates or the media? Two veteran reporters and best-selling authors help us put it into perspective. Tonight, Joe Klein from "The New Yorker" and Bob Woodward from "The Washington Post." Joe, there are real differences between the candidates in this race, from health care to taxes, patients' bill of rights. Why are so many voters complaining that they don't feel like they have a choice? Have the media let down the voters in this campaign?
[Klein:] I think the candidates have let done the voters. I feel a little bit let down. I mean, the media's always easy to blame, Joe, as you know. But I was very optimistic at the beginning of this campaign because both of these candidates came out with a series of really sophisticated, really rigorous and sometimes courageous position papers. But they haven't delivered on those, in part because the issues we're talking about, things like Medicare, are so complicated that it's difficult, you know, for most of my colleagues at "The New Yorker," for example, to tell the difference between the two. You know, in the case of Medicare, for example, Bush, I believe, has a far more sophisticated and responsible position than Gore, but he was not able to defend his own position in the debates, which I found kind of disappointing. On Gore's side, I think that there's a larger issue, and it isn't the issue of likability. I mean, you know, that's a red herring. The real issue in Gore's case is character. It's who he is. He's a guy who showed up with a different personality in the second debate from the first debate, and I think that that's what causes people to have pause here. Who is this guy? Can we trust him to lead us under pressure?
[Lockhart:] But the press focuses so much on process. You wrote earlier this year that reporters love staff shakeups but endure substance. And we have a Pew research study that says that 50 percent of people get some to most of their information from late-night comics, and people under 30, that number guess up to 80 percent. Doesn't that indicate that somehow the media isn't giving the voters what they need?
[Klein:] It may indicate can we blame the voters every once in a while for their phenomenal apathy? I mean, Joe, these are very good times. There isn't a war or an economic recession on the horizon, the kind of thing that would get people really roused and interested, and there isn't a candidate who isn't speaking in a way that doesn't seem market tested and canned, the way, say, John McCain did last winter, when people went out to vote in droves in New Hampshire and Michigan. So I think that, you know, we're only the messengers. And, yes, we could do more about substance from time to time, but in my reading of the coverage of this campaign, I think we've been more responsible than we have in the last couple.
[Matalin:] Bob, Joe let me paraphrase a very important final question the voters will be asking themselves that Joe mentioned. Can Gore lead under pressure? A colleague of yours, John Harris, yesterday in "The Washington Post," a very long peace which revealed a lot, and namely that Gore labors doggedly but not necessarily efficiently. He doesn't delegate, he goes into minutiae. There are at least a half a dozen people quoted, not by name of course, but all agree, quote, "He always needs to prove he knows more than anybody else in the room." The result of that kind of leadership, as Harris reported, is often disarray. So these attacks on Bush's leadership style, he gets people together, he forges a consensus, he gets things done, what's so good about Gore's leadership style, according to this piece?
[Woodward:] Well, a little bit of contest of ideas is not a bad thing in the White House. So it's OK. I think there's a positive side to the John Harris story, namely that Gore is out there, intimately involved in the details, getting them in his head. But at the same time, I would agree with you. I read that story. I thought it was a very powerful peace, because it said Gore will labor over things, then he's the, to a certain extent inside the White House, the Gore we saw in first debate, raising his hand, sighing, wanting to be at the center of things, wanting to be the one who comes up with the brilliant idea. But, at the same time, you can't look at Gore and know Gore as a lot of us do and not realize that he is capable of being president and leading.
[Matalin:] But we are looking at we are looking at the issue and the question of temperament and judgment and those presidents that have been less than best educated, from George Washington through Abraham Lincoln they thought Andrew Jackson was a hick, those guys FDR second rate intellect, I think somebody said about him those presidents were the best because they had good judgment. They knew how to bring people together. They knew how to make decisions. Don't we aren't we spending too much time on this campaign talking about some intellectual process as opposed to your ability to have the kind of temperament that a leadership that office requires?
[Woodward:] Well, but the buck does stop in the Oval Office and the buck has to get there with lots of information and lots of ideas and you don't want a president who is tuned out or not interested in the policy debates because those are absolutely critical issues. And I you know, probably the biggest difficulty Gore has in the coming eight days is getting a fair hearing. He should demand a fair hearing himself and kind of get off some of these sound bytes and the cliches and the consultant driven message and come out and talk personally about why he wants to be president.
[Matalin:] So much to discuss, such a little time.
[Woodward:] I know you are not convinced but who expected you to be?
[Matalin:] No, I'm not even remotely convinced, although we appreciate your joining us. Always impressive, and you're not working in the White House anymore. Joe Klein, you are wonderful to join us, wish you were here. We are all going for dinner after this. But not Bob Woodward. He's going to stay and do the chatroom, so stay tuned for that after Joe and I finish with our closing comments after this quick break. Stay with us.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Correspondent:] Coming up at the top of the hour, a special report: "Countdown to Election 2000." We'll take a close look at the presidential race eight days and counting. We'll talk with the Democratic political strategist James Carville and with his wife, CROSSFIRE's own Mary Matalin. Also, we'll hear from our correspondents on the campaign trail and get the latest poll numbers from our own Bill Schneider. Please join us tonight and every night for "Countdown to Election 2000," right after CROSSFIRE's closing comments.
[Matalin:] OK, friends and viewers, a very special treat. Don't miss it, your chance to get the inside story on campaign 2000, "The Washington Post"'s Bob Woodward takes the CROSSFIRE on-line right after the show at CNN.comcrossfire. Joe, fabulous, wonderful, you were great.
[Lockhart:] Why thank you.
[Matalin:] I would much rather discuss with you than fight with you as has been the past.
[Lockhart:] It's a little bit easier this way.
[Matalin:] But that doesn't mean I have agree with you and I disagree with this point that your party is trying to make: that people out there consider 25 years of experience in Washington the only kind of experience they want to see in the Oval Office. Bush has led, brought people together in a myriad of experiences and they have been successful.
[Lockhart:] I don't think that that's the only kind of experience. But Joe Klein wrote a very good piece and it talked about all the difficult decisions the president had to make to keep this prosperity going and I think voters should go out and read that story and imagine George W. Bush sitting in those meetings, having to make those critical decisions, and if they are as uneasy as I am, having watch it up close, then I think they will vote for Gore.
[Matalin:] You know what? You are about to be a one percenter, so you should be happy that George W. Bush is going to the next president because will you be able to keep so much more of what you earn.
[Lockhart:] From the left, I'm Joe Lockhart sitting in for Bill Press. Good night from
[Crossfire. Matalin:] Bill Press will be on "THE SPIN ROOM" at 10:00. Don't miss it. From the right I'm Mary Matalin. Join us again for the rest of the week on more CROSSFIRE.

[John Metaxas:] If you haven't felt the squeeze of higher electric bills yet, perhaps you should brace yourself. The energy research director of Public Citizen joins us to talk about the future of the energy market and how you can lower your electric bills. And, thinking of renovating? We'll tell you what home improvements will give you the most bang for your buck. Plus, Hollywood is helping to boost the value of some old comic books. We'll tell you how you can cash in on the superheroes. Ahead on
[Your Money. Announcer:] This is
[Your Money. Metaxas:] I'm John Metaxes. Welcome to YOUR MONEY, where our goal is to help you made more, save more and do more with your money. We begin today with a look at the rising cost of energy. If you've noticed the jump in your electric bill recently, you're not alone. Energy prices have been climbing, and summer consumption is not solely to blame. Deregulation has a lot to with the rising costs, and although it was meant to save consumers money, many argue deregulation has backfired. Lauren Thierry has more.
[Lauren Thierry, Cnn Correspondent:] Consumers across the country are getting a surprise in the mail, a warning from their electric company that their bills are going up. San Diego, California was the first to feel the surge. Electric bills there have more than doubled.
[Michael Shamus, Utility Consumer Action Network:] I think people are at a loss as to what's happened, why this is happening and I guess most importantly, what are their options? And right now, people are feeling, pardon the pun, powerless.
[Thierry:] Here's what's happening: As a result of deregulation, several states have ordered utility companies to loosen their monopoly on generating and delivering power. Those companies now deliver power only. They have to buy it from an independent company, along with other competitors. This is supposed to lower prices, but demand is outpacing supply. Consumers are angry, electric companies are supposed to inform them that they have options. The electric companies say they are still having a tough time getting the message through.
[Michael Clendenin, Con Edison:] Deregulation is still evolving here in New York State. There are many other companies now, about 22 just here in New York City, which are alternatives to Con Edison. And we have a retail choice program if people choose to use another provider. But that market place is still evolving and we're just beginning to see the impact now.
[Thierry:] So far, 25 states, including the District of Columbia, have deregulated the energy industry; 18 more are considering it. But that may all change, California is facing a crisis, nearly running out of power on several occasions. That state has cut the price cap on wholesale electricity twice this summer to bring prices down. So, as you cool off this summer, the heat over deregulation rises. That's YOUR MONEY, I'm Lauren Thierry, CNN Financial News, New York.
[Metaxas:] Energy Secretary Bill Richardson said Thursday California's power problems are a warning, that the nation's electricity system must be modernized to meet growing demand and market pressures of an increasingly competitive and deregulated industry. Joining me now to talk more about the impact of deregulation on consumers, and what you can do to fight high electric bills is Charlie Higley, energy research director at Public Citizen. And, Charlie, welcome back to the program.
[Charlie Higley, Public Citizen:] Thank you very much John.
[Metaxas:] You've been a long critic of the deregulation process. Is there anything that consumers can do now that this processes in motion? Anything that consumers can do to bring their electric costs down?
[Higley:] Well, first off, if you want to save money, you can use your air conditioner less and instead use a fan, or you can not open your refrigerator has often, or if your electric water heater is on don't use as much hot water. Those are the three largest energy users in the typical household. But you also should be writing legislators and telling them to protect you by passing strong utility laws so that you're not faced with these blackouts and high price hikes in the future.
[Metaxas:] What are some of the political aspects of that, that you'd like to see enacted?
[Higley:] Well, we've been long critical of the move toward deregulation, and we often think that this industry would be better left with strong regulation in place with improvements. Regulation also brought us nuclear power, so it's not the panacea. But leaving it in the hands of for-profit suppliers is not the solution either. As we're seeing, prices are going skyrocketing high, and there's a the large energy companies are making money hand over fist, and it's coming directly out of consumers pockets. So...
[Metaxas:] That being said though, there is deregulation and you have to keep up with it. Many consumers are now getting notices from their utilities that they have a choice, a choice to perhaps change carriers if they want. How do you go about assessing that choice and making a decision?
[Higley:] It's very difficult now. Even if you're to stay with your original utility you've been buying power from for years, they may have sold off all their power plants, and they may now be buying a power on the spot market, and so you may be subjected to high rates. This is what's happening to customers in San Diego and in New York City. But if you change suppliers, you have a very difficult time reading through the literature to determine whether or not you're going to save any money, and you have to look through all the fine print, because you very well could be exposed to price increases, should the cost for fuel or other things go up, as it has. So it's very difficult for consumers to compare and to shop, especially given the volatility in the markets today.
[Metaxas:] What can consumers learn from the telecommunications experience, and I'm thinking about such abuses as slamming and also the confusing nature of many of the rate plans that seem to change every six months?
[Higley:] That's right. The conditions are the buyer has to beware. And unfortunately even if you just did nothing, you could still be exposed to these high prices. So the electricity consumer's in a real disadvantage right now, and again that's all due to the bad legislation that's been passed in the various states that allowing this to occur.
[Metaxas:] One of the reforms that you're trying to push is community choice. Tell us how that works and how political activism perhaps can improve your electric bill.
[Higley:] Community choice occurs when a community decides through a public process that they would like to have the city buy power on the citizen's behalf. And by getting everybody together in a buying group, the citizens of the community can go out and shop for, hopefully, for a better deal then what they could on their own. And the real benefit of community choice is that, again, through a public process the community decides it wants to do this, buy power on behalf of everyone. Then everyone is automatically included in the buying program. And if you want, you can opt out and go choose electricity on your own. But since everyone is included, then most people are going to be assured of saving some money. So that's our favorite form of what is known as aggregation, were trying to increase the buying power of consumers. There are other forms, but this one brings in the most people the easiest.
[Metaxas:] All, right Charlie Higley, thanks very much for joining us.
[Higley:] Thank you very much, John.
[Metaxas:] Well, coming up, if you can't afford a new house perhaps remodeling is a good alternative. We'll tell you how to go about it. And if you're renovating for the sake of re-sale, we'll tell you what home improvements will give you the most for YOUR MONEY.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Baseball's World Series moves from New York's Yankee Stadium all the way over to Shea Stadium tonight. Some folks think New Yorkers are making too much of their series.
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] But as CNN's Jeff Greenfield will tell us, the return of the Subway Series after 44 years is about more than just baseball.
[Unidentified Female:] Let's go Yankees!
[Unidentified Male:] You know what the "Mets" stands for? My Entire Team Sucks. JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SENIOR ANALYST
[Pete Hamill, Writer:] The new New York, the New York that has been here for five or six years, which is an extraordinary city better than, in my opinion, than it was in the '50s because at least we're hitting race straight on, which we didn't do in the '50s. I mean, so what you see is Pakistani guys with Yankee caps; you see Chinese guys with Mets caps. That's the kind of passports all immigrants always brought here what my father brought here, what the Italians and the Jews brought here.
[Joe Torre, New York Yankees Manager:] And being a kid brought up in Brooklyn, again, I was spoiled because we always had the Dodgers and the Yankees or the Giants and the Yankees or Giants and somebody, the Dodgers and somebody. But this means something and to me it's exciting and I think the city, being as excited as they are right now, it's supposed to be this way.
[Greenfield:] So, to end where we began, what does a New Yorker, caught up in the midst of all this self-congratulation, say to the rest of America?
[Hamill:] Celebrate them. New York went through its humiliation. It was not flat on its back; it got up to one knee and then it stood and took the count and then it came back. You get up and you go on. And I think that's part of what these two teams represent.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] There's a new leader of New York City's Roman Catholic Archdiocese. The Vatican says that Pope John Paul II appointed Bishop Edward Egan of Bridgeport, Connecticut to that position. Bishop Egan replaces Cardinal John O'Connor who died last week of complications from brain cancer. CNN's Maria Hinojosa now with a look, a closer look, at the new spiritual leader of New York's more than 2 million Catholics
[Maria Hinojosa, Cnn Correspondent:] For 12 years, Bishop Edward Egan has quietly led the spiritual life of 360,000 Connecticut Catholics, but in New York, he will lead a church of 2.4 million who are increasing diverse and increasingly divided. He must be politician, CEO, a spokesperson for Catholic doctrine.
[Tom Drohan, Archdiocese Of Bridgeport:] In expressing his own opinion, he is a man who has reverence for the church, reverence for its traditions, and very honestly will be working in sync with the pope.
[Hinojosa:] Bishop Egan worked at the Vatican for 22 years. In Connecticut he is credited with creating a strong regional catholic education system.
[Unidentified Male:] He's like a nice person, you can talk to him. I mean, he's like a regular person, he's nothing big. He's real nice.
[Hinojosa:] He has raised millions for Catholic Charities, like this youth center, providing direct services like food and re-creation and counseling.
[Richard Stone, Inner City Foundation:] He's very interested in helping people in need. The number of organizations that are run directly by the diocese of Bridgeport, many of which we support through Catholic Charities: food kitchens and everything, you know he's helped to improve those.
[Hinojosa:] But like his predecessor, he is likely to confront controversy over the church's positions on social issues.
[Stone:] He's conservative and committed to supporting the accepted views of the Catholic church, and of the teachings of the church and of any directives from the pope.
[Hinojosa:] As Vicar of Education for the New York church in the mid-1980s, he suggested the public schools try these solutions to teen pregnancy: "Try decency, try chastity, try Western civilization," the bishop said in 1987, "or keep up the other method and wait for AIDS to put an end to us all."
[Matt Foreman, Empire State Pride Agenda:] Bishop Egan basically reflects exactly what Cardinal O'Connor said about AIDS, about gay people, about all a host of issues, and that is largely an insensitive and divisive approach to human behavior.
[Hinojosa:] The leader of New York's church has traditionally been a Cardinal, so it is likely the pope will soon grant Bishop Egan that title as well, further increasing his influence and stature. Maria Hinojosa, CNN, New York.

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] We take you back now, though, to our top story today, the surrender of the last two of the Texas fugitives. If I can remind you, what happened in late December, Christmas Eve, as police tell it, those seven fugitives who had escaped from a South Texas prison walked into a sporting goods store in Irving, Texas, that's the Dallas area, and, as police tell it, they took guns, they took money, and they also shot a police officer there to death. Now we're joined this morning by Jayne Hawkins. She is the mother of that police officer who was killed there, the mother of Aubrey Hawkins. Ms. Hawkins, thank you so much for being with us today.
[Jayne Hawkins, Mother Of Slain Policeman:] You're welcome.
[Stouffer:] I'm wondering if you can first tell me how you're feeling right about now?
[Hawkins:] Well, I feel elated and relieved that and safe.
[Stouffer:] When did you first hear of the developments overnight, as police located those final two fugitives? and what did you think?
[Hawkins:] Well, I'd gotten up so early every morning to do news shows that I was very asleep by 10:30 last night. And so I didn't find it out until a Denver radio station called me this morning and told me.
[Stouffer:] And you must have been watching and hearing that unusual television interview that they gave. And both men have complaints about the Texas system, what happens in the prison sentencing. Do you have an ear for any of what they had to say?
[Hawkins:] Well, I think they're behind me 100 percent in that the Texas criminal Texas prison system is as corrupt as they are. That's one quote, I think Newbury said that.
[Stouffer:] In what way? What are your complaints then about the system?
[Hawkins:] Well, you don't have enough time.
[Stouffer:] OK, what, in particular, struck you though about what they said during that unusual interview?
[Hawkins:] Well, I'm not exactly sure which one you're speaking of. The Denver radio station played something for me when I was almost asleep this morning. That's all I've heard. Since then, I've done nothing but talk to news people. If he's talking about rehabilitation in the prisons and woe is him, you know, he wants all this rehabilitation, then I suggest he go to work and not commit a crime and get in the prison system and expect us to educate them. They can go to work, they can seek financial aid, there are many ways to get an education without expecting the prison system to do it for them. And, you know, I mean, if they make one mistake and they're able to be rehabilitated, I think our system will take care of that.
[Stouffer:] And, Ms. Hawkins, any thoughts on what you hope happens next to these fugitives who surrendered this morning, also the others who are in custody? What do you hope they face in the system from here on?
[Hawkins:] Well, my hope is that the state of Colorado will not have to bear the burden of supporting these people until they can extradite them to Texas. Because it is a it is a Texas problem. And they need to be removed from Colorado very quickly, stop spending the Colorado people's money, our money, and let's get on with it and do whatever we're going to do with them.
[Stouffer:] Jayne Hawkins, thank you so much for your thoughts today. Condolences on the death of your son.

[Marina Kolbe, World News:] Hello, welcome to this Millennium edition of WORLD NEWS. I'm Marina Kolbe at the CNN Center in Atlanta. Coming up, we will examine one of humanity's greatest mysteries, past, present and future the human brain. But first, a look at our top stories. United States officials are downplaying a glitch in the peace talks between Syria and Israel. Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak and Syrian foreign minister Farouk al-Sharaa did not officially meet Monday after the talks opened. CNN Jerusalem bureau chief Walter Rodgers takes a look at the early sticking points and what's at stake for U.S. president Bill Clinton.
[Walter Rodgers, Cnn Correspondent:] President Clinton took Israel's prime minister Ehud Barak and Syria's foreign minister Farouk al-Sharaa for a walk in the woods, trying to create a tranquil environment for these peace negotiations. It apparently did not work. The walk was the only time the three men met face to face the first day. A scheduled three-way meeting Monday night was canceled. An administration spokesman said the president and Secretary of State Madeline Albright decided the Israelis and Syrians were not yet ready to sit down together. Earlier, State Department spokesman James Rubin anticipated the difficulties.
[James Rubin, State Department Spokesman:] I think it's fair to say the Charles Dickens novel "Great Expectations" is not the novel that is being read by the negotiators and the working-level officials. We do not expect to be able to achieve a core agreement in one round of negotiations.
[Rodgers:] The first day's talks had the president meeting individually with the Israeli leader, Prime Minister Barak insisting Israel's security needs must be addressed first. Syria's Foreign Minister al-Sharaa's priority was quite different. The Syrians are insisting Israel must first commit to a full withdrawal from the Golan Heights, all the way back to the 1967 borders. No progress to report, said one administration official. There is much at stake here for Mr. Clinton, who hoped to cap his presidency with a Syrian-Israeli peace treaty. But this second round of talks apparently got off to a rocky start. [on camera]: All sides acknowledged a sense of urgency here, that there is a political opportunity not to be missed. But that sense of urgency is apparently not translating into either side making tough decisions contrary to its national interest. Walter Rodgers, CNN, Shepherdstown, West Virginia.
[Kolbe:] After several delays, the European Commission is submitting final papers to open its legal case against France over the country's ban on British beef. But as CNN's Christian Mayna reports, the legal solution to the crisis may be more than a year away.
[Christian Mayna, Cnn Correspondent:] Slicing through the European beef crisis will be a slow process. The European Commission hopes that where diplomacy has failed, the law will succeed. But it will take time. The European court in Luxembourg is expected to take at least 18 months to reach a final ruling on France's beef ban. Until then, the import bar remains.
[Jonathan Faull, European Commission Spokesman:] As for the question whether we might ask the court to expedite its procedure, that decision will be taken only when we have had an opportunity to see the French response to the action which the commission will bring.
[Mayna:] Commission officials are said to be pessimistic about their chances of obtaining an interim injunction to lift the embargo. The issue is further muddled by France's own court action against the commission for endangering its consumers. This leaves France in the position of being both the accuser and the accused during its six-month presidency of the union, which starts in July. Of the 15-nation EU, only France and Germany have kept a ban on British beef. Germany has escaped action so far because its government has blamed slow parliamentary procedures for the delay. Christian Mayna, CNN Financial News, London.
[Kolbe:] Croatia's opposition is poised to put an end to a decade of nationalist rule by the party of the late president Franjo Tudjman. [voice-over]: Early results from Monday's parliamentary elections give a coalition of social democrats and liberals a solid lead over Tudjman's Croatian Democratic Union. Opposition leaders are pledging to fight corruption and reduce Croatia's 20 percent unemployment. Tudjman's hard line and nationalism alienated many Western nations leaving Croatia politically and economically isolated. The ruling party was quick to concede defeat.
[Mate Granic, Croatian Foreign Minister:] The Croatian Democratic Union was practically 10 years in power, and definitely the voters didn't accept some of our mistakes, and that's the results of the election. Congratulations for the winners.
[Kolbe:] Granic added that he plans to run for president in the January 24 elections. Cuba, for the first time, has acknowledged a New Year's Day flyover by an anti-Communist pilot. [voice-over]: Ly Tong dropped pamphlets Saturday urging Cubans to overthrow President Fidel Castro. In Miami, he surrendered his two-week old pilots license to U.S. authorities. No formal charges have been filed against him. An official Cuban newspaper accuses the U.S. of tolerating illegal acts against Cuba. The editorial says the U.S. has violated international law. [on camera]: And the international dispute over a young Cuban boy is heating up. The lawyers for U.S. relatives of 6-year-old Cuban refugee Elian Gonzalez say the child wants to see his father in Miami. [voice-over]: Tens of thousands of Cubans demanding the boy's return marched in Santa Clara Monday. Elian was found floating in the Atlantic in November. His mother died trying to escape Cuba, and as CNN Havana bureau chief Lucia Newman reports, a U.S. group on a visit to Cuba is echoing their demand.
[Lucia Newman, Cnn Havana Bureau Chief:] The head of the U.S. National Council of Churches traveled to the coastal town of Cardenas to meet with the father and grandparents of 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez.
[Joan Brown Campbell, U.s. National Council Of Churches:] This is a very loving family. We are more convinced than we ever were that this boy belongs with his family.
[Newman:] The council, which represents 35 Protestant and Orthodox churches with 52 million members, wants to use its influence to help resolve a custody dispute which has turned the little boy into a political symbol on both sides of the Florida straits. The child was taken to live with distant relatives in Miami after he was rescued at sea, clinging to an inner tube. His mother and 10 others drowned when their boat capsized trying to get to the United States. The boy's father insists Elian wants to return home but is not allowed to express himself. "He's being pressured by the relatives there and by politics," says Juan Miguel Gonzales. "They practically don't let him communicate and talk with us." Dr. Campbell was received at the boy's school with a prepared program of poems and chants calling for Elian's return. Both Cuban and U.S. religious leaders say the boy belongs with his father, but that the issue is not political.
[Campbell:] I think what we have to do is help our president see that the issue is a moral one and that the concern is humanitarian.
[Newman:] The U.S. religious leader promised to push for a quick resolution. [on camera]: The U.S. National Council of Churches has, in fact, offered its services as an intermediary. It says it's willing to bring the boy back to Cuba and hand him over to his father. [voice-over]: Lucia Newman, CNN, Cardenas, Cuba.
[Kolbe:] And when CNN's Millennium 2000 coverage continues after the break studying how we cope with an ever-increasing barrage of sights and sounds. And time now for a quick check of the world weather outlook. Here's Guillermo Arduino. In our ongoing coverage of Millennium 2000, we now take a closer look at the source of what makes us most human our intelligence. The brain is the most complex organ in the human body, a biological mechanism of amazing ability and power that still holds mysteries for science. CNN's Michael Holmes takes us inside the human brain.
[Michael Holmes, Cnn Correspondent:] "I think, therefore I am." The words of 17th century philosopher Rene Descartes succinctly describing what makes human beings unique among life on earth our ability to think, to reason, to invent and to adapt.
[Nasa Mission Control:] Lift off of the space shuttle Discovery.
[William Greenough, University Of Illinois:] Intelligence, I think, is the ability to handle successfully anything that your environment may throw at you.
[Holmes:] And as we enter the new millennium, our environment is increasingly throwing more and more at us. The most obvious job our brains have is processing the enormous amounts of sensory information that bombard us.
[Greenough:] Everything that we know from studies of animals suggests that the brain is very, very well adapted to capturing and storing information from the stream that's flowing by us. So that we're able to, sort of, parse the stream of all of the things that we're seeing and hearing and experiencing through our various sensor modalities. Clearly there's something very special about the human brain that allows us to do that.
[Holmes:] The brain is a three-pound package tucked safely within our skulls. Billions of nerve cells communicating with each other in a complex web of electrochemical connections. The largest portion is the cerebral cortex, the center of reasoning, planning, problem-solving, voluntary movement, language and writing, as well as processing sensory input. The second largest area of your brain is the cerebellum, which controls muscular coordination including walking and speaking. And the brain stem, it controls the most basic functions of life your heart and your lungs.
[Greenough:] In everyday interactions with the world, you would glide smoothly between using one set of structures for one thing you were doing at this moment to another completely different set of structures.
[Holmes:] Scientists are only beginning to completely understand the full power of the brain, the complex interplay of chemicals and electrical impulses between individual nerve cells, activity we don't even think about.
[Greenough:] In everyday behavior, most of what the brain is doing at any point in time is actually stuff that you're not conscious of.
[Holmes:] It's morning. The sun rises, and so does most of the world. You may have been asleep all night, but your brain has not.
[Michael Posner, Director, Sachler Institute:] It's a very active organ, and it's never inactive. That is, even if you're at repose and not thinking hard about anything, some areas of the brain are quite active.
[Holmes:] On the road, you're concentrating on the car in front of you while your brain focuses on a whole lot more evaluating your senses, what you see, hear and even feel through the steering wheel, and reacting based on motor skills physically ingrained in your brain when you learn to drive.
[Greenough:] The region of the cerebral cortex that specifically deals with the muscles of the body called the motor cortex is altered when we learn a motor skill.
[Holmes:] In fact, all learning, formal education or day-to-day experience, alters the structure of the nerve cells in your brain.
[Posner:] Learning, in fact, changes brain systems. We know that. It can change sensory systems, and it can change the connections between neural areas.
[Greenough:] There are changes in the relationships among all of the pieces of tissue that make up the brain that are, as best we can tell, dynamically adjusting themselves moment to moment.
[Holmes:] At every moment of every day, our sensors are being flooded. The sights, the sounds, the smells, the textures of our environment all flow into our brains, where they are then filtered by a structure called the thalamus. Now, that information is then processed and stored in our brains as memories, and you weren't even aware it was happening.
[Greenaugh:] One of the things that really does contribute to human intelligence, human adaptability to a complex world is the enormous human capacity for memory.
[Holmes:] And you draw on those memories at all times as well. You may think talking to a friend is simple, but your brain is working hard, triggering memories stimulated by what you're hearing and seeing, choosing an appropriate response and causing the physical movements of speech. We're rarely aware of what it takes to do what we think are simple tasks.
[Greenaugh:] When you do something you're aware of, like pitching a baseball, your body does all kinds of things that you're completely unaware of that prevent you from falling flat on your face.
[Holmes:] Another example. It's a cold day, a little like today. Perhaps you feel your fingers or toes start to go a little numb. Well, that's a sure sign that your hypothalamus is working, regulating your body temperature, constricting the blood vessels in your extremities, and sending the blood to where you need it most to survive. Standing on a sidewalk next to a busy street, you'll of course hear plenty of traffic noise. But where you'd hear a screech of brakes, or a blaring horn, your body will likely respond with a jolt of adrenaline, preparing you for possible danger. [voice-over]: That's, in part, the work of the almond-shaped structure known as the amygdala, which processes emotions like fear and anxiety.
[Greenaugh:] Most people assume that the brain is a, sort of, passive organ, that it just, kind of, sits there and thinks, and they have no idea what an active, dynamic place the brain would appear to them if they could get inside of it and look around it when it's working.
[Holmes:] The ability to thrive in a complex environment with a variety of fast-paced visual and social stimulations is a hallmark of human intelligence.
[Greenaugh:] We've created an enormously complicated world compared to the world that we evolved in. The remarkable thing really is that we have a brain that is capable of handling this, that's been able to take on this enormous challenge and deal with it successfully. And we are the only species that's done so.
[Holmes:] New technology and research has shown the brain is a remarkably complex and dynamic organ. And as we head into an even more complex millennium, our brains will be up to the challenge. Michael Holmes, CNN.
[Kolbe:] And coming up, we'll have market update and more WORLD NEWS right after this short break. Time now to update world financial markets. Here is Todd Benjamin at the financial desk in London with our WORLD BUSINESS TODAY EXTRA. Todd?
[Todd Benjamin, Financial News:] Hello, Marina. Europe's markets are slumping on the first full day of trading for the millennium. Zurich and London have started up again after the New Year's break, but the leading indices are all heading sharply lower as rising bond yields and a fall in the Dow Industrials take their toll on the markets. Bond yields are rising as investors begin to worry about interest rates. Influential Wall Street strategists are now predicting that the U.S. Federal Reserve will raise rates by as much as a full percent point by the end of the year. Here are the levels for you. London's FTSE 100 is at 6775. That's down over 2 percent, while Frankfurt's DAX is slipping 17 points at 6605. A 179-point loss also for Paris' CAC 40, and the SMI in Zurich is falling harder, down almost 3 percent. Well, leading software maker Baan is plummeting in Amsterdam this Tuesday. [voice-over]: The stock is down 28 percent after the company warned its fourth quarter losses will widen. The business management software maker also is to cut its workforce by 4 percent. Those cuts start at the top. Baan's CEO is stepping down. But the investors are less than impressed. One analyst said the company's statement looked like a hidden profit warning. [on camera]: And Racal Electronics is going up despite all the downness in the market today, up 8 percent, after French defense concern Thomson-CSF confirmed weekend press reports that it is seeking a tie-up with the British company. Thomson-CSF says it wants a "mutually acceptable deal." Thomson-CSF shares are 2.5 percent higher in Paris. Well, Tokyo celebrated the first trading day of the new millennium by closing above the 19,000 mark for the first time in a year and a half, and there was no sign of the widely feared millennium bug on the trading floor. Investors, instead, chose to follow the lead from the United States and the tech-based NASDAQ, which has chalked up another record overnight. The closing number for the Nikkei average 19,002. And over in Hong Kong, the Hang Seng fell on those interest rate fears. Index closed over 1.5 percent lower. Well, that's it for this business update. I'm Todd Benjamin in London. We'll have sports and world headlines right after this break. Stay with us.
[Kolbe:] Let's turn now to sporting news. Here's Pedro Pinto with the latest scores and highlights. And recapping our top story. [voice-over]:.peace talks between Israel and Syria are set to resume in the United States. On Monday, the Israeli prime minister and Syrian foreign minister did not hold talks because of a dispute over the agenda. The U.S. secretary of state is set to meet with both leaders individually. [on camera]: And that's all for this millennium edition of WORLD NEWS. I'm Marina Kolbe in Atlanta. For all of us here at CNN and our staff around the world, thank you for watching. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Karuna Shinsho, Asia Tonight:] The Bush administration plans to send officials to consult with Asian leaders on the proposal. Major Garrett is standing by at the White House. Major?
[Major Garrett, Cnn Correspondent:] Good day, Karuna. Yes, the president intends to send a high-level delegation of State Department and Pentagon officials to Asia and to the European capitals to consult with leaders around the world, key U.S. allies about this proposal to create eventually downstream a missile defense system not necessarily a shield, but a system that would protect the United States, its troops stationed overseas and any allies who wanted to join in on sharing the costs for that proposal. But the first thing the president is going to have to do, especially in world capitals, is persuade leaders that it's time to put aside the sort of Cold War mentality that pervades, rather, the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty because to do what the president wants to do, that treaty will either have to be scrapped entirely or at least changed dramatically. In a speech yesterday at the National Defense University here in the Washington area, the president said it was time to do exactly that.
[George W. Bush, U.s. President:] We must move beyond the constraints of the 30-year-old ABM Treaty. This treaty does not recognize the present or point us to the future. It enshrines the past. No treaty that prevents us from addressing today's threats, that prohibits us from pursuing promising technology to defend ourselves, our friends and our allies is in our interests or in the interests of world peace.
[Garrett:] Now the president said in that speech also that there is no longer a Cold War standoff between the United States and the former Soviet Union, no longer massive arsenals of nuclear weapons poised and pointed at one another. Instead, the threats are more are smaller and come from potentially rogue nations like North Korea, possibly Iraq, possibly even Iran in the years to come and also the possibility of a accidental launch, which means there needs to be a system that can intercept those fired missiles either from land, from sea or, quite possibly down the road, through the air. That is the overall scope of the president's program, but he has a sales job to do around world and to the U.S. Congress. Karuna?
[Shinsho:] Major, despite all of that, though, there weren't many specifics outlined in the plan. Why is that?
[Garrett:] Well, because they're not quite ready yet, Karuna. They're not quite ready on a technological basis. There has been about $100 billion of U.S. taxpayer funds already devoted to creating a missile defense system. The results have been mixed so far. Even the Pentagon acknowledges that. And the administration doesn't know what it's going to do on the other side of the equation dealing with the entire question of nuclear arsenals. The United States has about 7,200. There have been proposals suggested to drop that number even to 1,500, but the Pentagon isn't quite ready to sign off on that. Neither is the president, and no one quite knows exactly how much this type of system would cost. So no specifics about cost, no specifics about dramatically reducing the size of the nuclear arsenal here in the United States and no specifics about when and how exactly the system would work. Those are yet to come, but the president wanted to set the broad outlines of this policy and make it clear in capitals around the world he is going to move forward as fast as technology and money from Congress will allow. Karuna?
[Shinsho:] Major, you mention technology. There were a number of glitches earlier in the system. Have those been resolved or not yet?
[Garrett:] Not yet entirely. There have been some tests that have been complete failures, utter disasters from the technical end for that matter, a political point of view. Some more recent tests, however, have proved more successful. But this is very complicated technology. The Pentagon readily acknowledges that. It's like hitting a bullet in space with a missile fired either from a ship at sea, from an airplane using a laser that technology is way down the line or from land-based systems. All of this is closer to theory than practice. But the president believes that the technology can be found, that it's worth investigating and that he intends to find out just what works as soon as possible. Karuna?
[Shinsho:] OK, Major, thank you. Major Garrett, reporting from the White House. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Announcer:] "Falling Apart." It began seven years ago with a handshake and a promise. Now it's all unraveling. The deepening crisis in the Holy Land. Did the peace process ever stand a chance?
[Prof. Edward Said, Columbia University:] You can create agreements like Oslo. You can go for another five years. You can give Nobel Peace Prizes. You can have ceremonies and so on and so forth. But the reality is that occupation is occupation.
[Uri Savir, Israeli Negotiator:] I still think it will succeed. What we see now is not Oslo. It's the alternative to Oslo.
[Announcer:] "The Fate of the Wild." Natural resources versus natural beauty, the battle lines are drawn over Alaska's bounty.
[Ken Boyd, Director, Alaskan Oil And Gas Division:] I think it's time to open ANWR to oil and gas exploration and development.
[Mark Potter, Cnn Correspondent:] So when you hear someone say, "Let's go there and drill for oil," what's your gut reaction?
[Jamie Rappaport Clark, Director, U.s. Fish And Wildlife Service:] No way. That can't happen.
[Announcer:] With sticker shock at the gas pump and politicians scrambling, an oil-hungry nation eyes a pristine wilderness. But is the reward worth the risk? "Off Track." They're off. And then they're gone.
[Randy Shrider, Dog Racer:] If you have one that made it three years, you've done well.
[Announcer:] A $3 billion industry rides on their legs. But what happens when their racing days are through?
[Kathy Slobogin, Cnn Correspondent:] You just trusted that he would find homes for these dogs?
[Shrider:] Right. I had every reason to believe that he would.
[Sherry Cotner, Volunteer In Placement Of Greyhounds:] They are being dumped into research labs in huge numbers.
[Announcer:] CNN & TIME with Jeff Greenfield and Bernard Shaw.
[Jeff Greenfield, Co-host:] Good evening. How often have these words been uttered over the last half- century, "New violence in the Middle East, hopes for peace dimmed by bloodshed"? For every handshake you've seen on the White House lawn, for every promise of peace you've heard, there is a sense these days of just another chapter in a very long, dispiriting story.
[Bernard Shaw, Co-host:] As gun ships and angry mobs take the place of diplomacy and cooler heads, are we seeing the end of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process? The situation in the Middle East certainly is not what the framers of the Oslo Peace Accords had in mind back in 1993. And yet there are those who say that violent confrontation and disappointment are the only things that could have come from the Oslo pact. Here's Charles Glass.
[Charles Glass, Cnn Correspondent:] The violence that has pitted Israeli against Palestinian for the last two weeks did not surprise Edward Said.
[Said:] I think it will go on for some time.
[Glass:] The Columbia University literature professor and former member of the Palestine National Council has from the beginning criticized the American-backed peace process as doomed to failure.
[Said:] I think we were misled by the Americans. We were certainly misled by our leaders. And above all, we were misled by the Israelis.
[Glass:] In 1993, when Oslo was announced and its details were released, some of its details were released, you condemned it then. Do you feel exonerated now?
[Said:] It's not that I feel exonerated. I'm filled with a tremendous amount of sadness because I think a lot of people had hope.
[Glass:] Hope for peace was what the Palestinians and Israelis who secretly negotiated in Oslo, Norway, seven years ago promised their two peoples.
[Unidentified Male:] Mr. Savir, can we stop you just for two seconds?
[Glass:] Uri Savir led the Israeli diplomatic team.
[Savir:] There is no perfect peace. I can tell you that in the Oslo negotiation that I was involved in, we had a very clear understanding that what counts is not the balance of forces, but the balance of interests.
[Glass:] The accords allotted the Palestinians some autonomy in parts of Gaza and the West Bank. But it left many issues, including the return of Palestinian refugees and East Jerusalem, for future discussion. [on camera]: What happened to that optimism that came immediately after the Oslo Peace Accords in 1993?
[Said:] Well, I think the optimism was manufactured as part of a great public relations stunt whereby these warring parties were brought together as if equals by Clinton on the White House lawn in September of '93. In fact, the Palestinians were at their lowest ebb. Basically what came about was the extension of Israeli occupation rather than the end of it by different means. This way, the Palestinians would be part of rule of the West Bank and Gaza under Israeli tutelage. The armies would remain in different places. The settlements would remain. There was nothing said about the stopping of settlement building. It was quite clear that it was an untenable situation. It would take only time before it would unravel.
[Savir:] It's very easy at this point to come and say, "I told you so." Anybody who wants to engage in a non-risky peace process in the Middle East should try and make peace between Canada and the United States. An agreement that says from an Israeli point of view, it was our first open operative declaration that we don't want to run the lives of the Palestinians. We don't want to occupy the West Bank and Gaza, or most of it. We need our security interests taken care of.
[Said:] When you have to every time go through an Israeli checkpoint and submit to searches and have to have a permit to move from one end to the other of your own town, that's not giving up control. This is why one of the most surprising things today is Israelis say, "Why are the Palestinians so ungrateful?" And Palestinians say, "Ungrateful for what? For continuing to control us in this way?"
[Unidentified Male:] Mr. Clinton, how is it going, Mr. Clinton?
[Glass:] President Clinton sees the United States as the honest broker in the Middle East. If the United States is not used as the broker between these two sides, where else can you go?
[Said:] Well, there is the United Nations. And let me just say something about the honest broker because the image of the United States that is being sort of broadcast by the candidates and by President Clinton is unacceptably dishonest. The United States has backed Israel. Israel is a sacred cow in American politics. Clinton, whose knowledge of the Middle East is based on his born again Christian basically fundamentalist Zionism he doesn't know anything about the Arab world has decided the Palestinians should have accepted because he wanted it, Barak wanted it, and that's it.
[Savir:] There is no administration in the world that has helped the Palestinian cause so much like the Clinton administration by trying to lead and help the Palestinians into peace with Israel.
[Yasser Arafat, Chairman, Palestinian Authority:] For this, we have spent all these nights and days.
[Glass:] Uri Savir and Edward Said disagree as well about Yasser Arafat. Savir defends him as a brave negotiator.
[Savir:] Arafat in the middle of negotiations had to make certain decisions related to Hebron, for instance. Thank Arafat and Rabin. The decision Arafat had to take in Hebron was a tough one. Because of the issue of the holy places in Hebron, it remained under our jurisdiction. I saw him sitting there for two, three hours not saying a word. And you saw this person was torn between the feelings of his people and the necessity of peace with us. And I rarely saw such a solitude. And he took the right decision.
[Glass:] Professor Said's criticisms of Arafat for running a brutal and corrupt bureaucracy have resulted in some of his books being banned in areas under Arafat's control. Most of all, Said condemns Arafat for responding more to Israel and the U.S. than to his own Palestinian people.
[Said:] I think his greatest mistake, for which I don't think there's any excuse, is that he never really took his people into his confidence. But had he appealed to his people and said, "Listen, this is the situation. It's dire. And I need your help," I'm sure that his people would respond. I think that's what he hasn't done.
[Glass:] Even now.
[Said:] Even now. He hasn't I mean, he is a symbol of sort of Palestinianism in a way. And it's a paradoxical thing. He's a tragic figure.
[Arafat:] Mr. President, thank you, thank you, thank you.
[Glass:] To Said, Arafat's tragedy is that by accepting Israeli settlements and continued occupation of parts of the West Bank and Gaza, he is divorcing himself from the demands of his people.
[Said:] I don't think there's a Palestinian alive today who would accept anything less than, number one, a full Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories, every inch of them. That includes the settlements. It includes Jerusalem, East Jerusalem. It includes the settlements in the West Bank and Gaza.
[Glass:] What's your prediction now?
[Said:] But I think some kind of security arrangement will come about on the ground. And then I think we're in for a period of long unsettlement. I think Palestinians realize that there has to be a new strategy to deal with Israel, that we can't go along as we did in the last seven years signing papers and hoping for the best. I mean, you can paper it over. You can create agreements like Oslo. You can go for another five years. You can give Nobel Peace Prizes. You can have ceremonies and so on and so forth. But the reality is that occupation is occupation. I think that there can be no peace, in my opinion. It's very simple. Peace has to be made between equals.
[Savir:] I still think it will succeed because what we see now is not Oslo. It's the alternative to Oslo. But whenever we'll get back to the table, if it's in one month or one year, I assure you it will be on the basis of the agreement signed in '93.
[Announcer:] Coming up on CNN & TIME, gunfire rips through a peace process. Anger flares in the Middle East. But who is fueling the flames?
[Johanna Mcgeary, "time" Correspondent:] If Arafat thought there was a logic in calling Palestinians to the street, it's gotten way beyond him at this point. Rage is feeding rage.
[Announcer:] As CNN & TIME continues.

[Larry King:] Tonight a political legend who butted heads with the heavyweights. Highlights of our interviews with the late House Speaker, Tip O'Neill, next on LARRY KING WEEKEND. Thanks for joining us. Tip O'Neill, Democrat of Massachusetts was one of a kind, an incredibly shrewd politician, an amazing storyteller. Had the gift of gab the man was Irish after all. Tip O'Neill was a guest on this show only 14 times. His first visit, June of '85, LARRY KING LIVE was just two weeks old. O'Neill was speaker of the House and he and President Reagan were going at it over aid to the Contra rebels in Nicaragua. But despite their many policy disagreements the two men enjoyed a unique friendship. [Begin Videotape, June 21, 1985]
[O'neill:] Well this is the way a democracy works. We can argue and we can have a disagreement with regards to philosophy and policy and things of that nature. But there's no reason why I should dislike you. What the president says to me, after 6:00, sure after 6:00 we're friendly, we don't talk politics. He's a very personable being to be with.
[King:] What do you talk when you don't talk politics?
[O'neill:] Oh, last Sunday night, I was at the Ford Theater, his wife, Millie and myself, and it was talk about the show or you just talk you may pass the time a day, you may tell a story. You talk about some mutual friend, the things of that nature.
[King:] Do you still tell each other jokes?
[O'neill:] Oh sure.
[King:] And you don't let that feeling effect the feeling of what you might say on the floor.
[O'neill:] I would have to say that in the Congress of the United States, some of my closest and dearest friends are across the aisle. They are republicans. It's one of the things that amazes the people of the world.
[King:] It does.
[O'neill:] You go to many of the countries around the world and the minority stands at one end of the room and the majority stands at the other end of the room, and they don't speak to each other. We'll go across the sea to Russia or we go to Ireland, or we France or we go to Australia, Sylvio Kante is one of my dearest friends, and his wife Dorinne, and Millie are the closest of friends. They can't understand it how he can be of one party and one philosophy and I can be another party, another philosophy. And yet probably of all those traveling, we're the closest people together. But that's the way a democracy works.
[King:] Why don't you put on the gloves more with Ronald Reagan?
[O'neill:] Oh we put on the gloves with him, but they call him the Teflon kid, it just doesn't stick to him.
[King:] It's not your fault.
[O'neill:] Not our fault, as a matter of fact, the press of America, the media of America really love the president of the United States. You see their press conferences, all they do is throw up softball to him.
[King:] You think that he gets a break from the media?
[O'neill:] Oh there's no question about it. I have a press conference every day, they don't handle me in the press conference the way they handle the president of the United States. It's kid gloves.
[King:] Because they like him?
[O'neill:] That's one of the reasons. They like him, yes. He's a very personable individual, and they like it when they go over and stroke him. The President of the United States is a very important person, the most important person in the world, and they thrill when he calls them by first name and things like that. Sure they're soft on him, there's no question about it. And the truth of the matter is that the media of America hasn't had these squalls that have been around him.
[King:] A first guest on this show when it debuted last week was Mario Cuomo of New York and there are more people talking about him, I guess than any other democrat of late. Even Richard Nixon said he thinks Cuomo will be our nominee, do you?
[O'neill:] Well we've got a lot of good candidates out there. Cuomo is one of the good ones. I have to say, Gary Hart, I suppose is the front runner. Why do I say he is the front runner, because he had a thousand belly aches the last time, so he starts with a huge block over anybody else. But we've got some excellent candidates from the governors of America and from the members of the House and the Senate. We've got a young fellow in the house by the name of Gephardt. He's a candidate for the president of the United States.
[King:] Is he?
[O'neill:] Not many people know him right now, but you watch him. He's going to be a strong man.
[King:] Who do you think they'll nominate the other side?
[O'neill:] Well I would have to say the closest would be Vice President Bush. I would think that he would have the inside. And if the president puts any weight towards that, then he should win it easily. If the president were to sit it out, that would be a kind of a disclaimer that I'm not satisfied with this man. And they may go to a much more conservative man.
[King:] Kemp?
[O'neill:] And then you have to say that Jack Kemp, well Jack Kemp is a runner in there.
[King:] Do you like Kemp?
[O'neill:] Kemp, well I've always liked Jack. He had some mean things to say about me a week ago, I thought was very unfair. And so I guess I can say some mean things about him. He was a quarterback with a pretty good arm and he had to have the play sent in by the quarterback. I wouldn't know whether we would want a president that couldn't call his own plays.
[King:] When someone says something vituperative like that about you, or you about him, and you run into him tomorrow, what happens.
[O'neill:] Well he came in to apologize to me. I said, Jack you and I have been friendly for years, we're sport buffs. We meet each other around the nation, football games, ball games and things like that. He said I want to apologize, I never saw the letter that was sent out. It was fund-raiser. I said I can't believe that they'd send a fund-raiser out with your name to it, being very, very critical get rid of Tip O'Neill, the wild spinner. But it was more than that, it was really vicious. And he said, well I want you to accept my apology. I'm telling you that I never saw the letter, and it was a mistake. And had I sent it out my office sent it out without my permission. I just couldn't believe it. But in politics it's a long life, and you forget your enemies.
[King:] Do you think about age a lot?
[O'neill:] I never think of age at all.
[King:] Don't?
[O'neill:] No, never.
[King:] You don't think that you know, you're close to, meeting the Man?
[O'neill:] I never give that a thought. I think I lead a pretty good honorable, decent Christian life, to say that word. And I'm satisfied with my life, and I get through early, the day before last and ran out and played nine holes of golf all by myself. Sometimes I putt better when I'm alone. And I had a pretty good round, I'm happy. There's no problem, my wife and I will be married 44 years on Saturday, and it's her birthday and it's Father's Day. What can you say. You married the same woman for 44, and you wake up every day and you love her more than you did the day before. And you love your family and your grandchildren. Millie says I get more happiness and satisfaction, more attention to my grandchildren. I think that may be true. Because a sad part of my life, where I was away so much in the field of public life that Millie was the strong mother and father of the family.
[King:] Is that an area you missed?
[O'neill:] Well that's the area that anybody in public life I always tell the new members when they come down. Bring your family down, bring your family down. You know, you can be on this town and you may go out and have a drink or you may have a late supper. You may go and play gin with the boys or something like that. But when you get off, back to four empty walls, and your family is at home. This is a terrific feeling.
[King:] You should have brought your family down?
[O'neill:] Well I tried to, but things were different. When I came here the salary was $12,500 a year. We had five children. They were all young. I really couldn't afford to bring them down at that particular day.
[King:] Do you still have now you are 72 even your critics will say you have devoted your life to this country, whether they agree with you or not. Do you still have Potomac fever? I mean, do you still get a kick walking into the Capitol of the United States?
[O'neill:] I want you to know I get a thrill every time I ride down Pennsylvania Avenue towards the Capitol and I see the Dome of the United States Capitol. It thrills me.
[King:] It's never a commonplace?
[O'neill:] Not me, I'm telling you there are three things in my life that thrill me: see the cadets at West Point marching on the field, and when I go over to see the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. And I see the Capitol of the United States, the Dome, there's the feeling that I have of the greatness and I portray within myself a love for the country. Let me say this to you. Fifty years in public life, the greatest country in the history of the world, the leaders of the world, we're the greatest legislative body in the world. We'll always be that as long as we recognize the rights of one another across the aisle. As long as we respect them for their thoughts and their ideas and their philosophy, and as long as they respect those who disagree. This nation is great. Why is it great? Because we are the voice of the American people and we respond to their will. I leave with no rancor in my heart for anybody. I leave with just the love and affection for this great body. I'll always be a man of the House of Representatives. But always first, I'm an American and so proud of this body. Thank you, I love you all.
[Unidentified Male:] My parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker, is did this revolutionary tax bill pass on a voice vote tonight?
[O'neill:] The chair would answer in the affirmative. There were no member on either side that stood for a role call. Does the chair want to challenge does the gentlemen want to challenge the chair? The chair would say that he looked with deliberation, and there was no member that's staying there. And your own aide stayed down there in the well and looked for somebody. Now don't accuse the chair of doing something that he didn't try extra-exceptionally to be fair and honest with.
[King:] Tip O'Neill spent 50 a half century in public service. Needless to say, he'd seen a lot of public opinion polls. In August of '86, shortly before his retirement, O'Neill had a 63 percent approval rating. I asked him: Why such high marks? [Begin Videotape, August 6, 1986]
[O'neill:] I'm a liberal and a progressive liberal. There are people who talk about saving the whales, and clean water, and things of that nature. But I'm a gut democrat. I believe in the economy of the area. I believe that there should be jobs out there that people should be able to take care of their family. We want for our family a better living than we've had, better education than we've had. We want a home over their head. We want to be able to say, in the twilight of the career that they are protected and taken care of. And those are the basic things that I have fought for, that my party fought for through the years. Some people think they're old hat. But while I was being criticized, I stayed with my philosophy all the way along the line. And the pendulum swings in politics, and the pendulum is swinging back that way.
[King:] Is the Reagan does that amaze you, his popularity? How do you view it?
[O'neill:] It's unbelievable. I've told the story so many times, I think I told on your about the going through the sausage factory. And the little lady stuffing the sausages, and she said Mr. Tip, I voted for you all my life. I love you. She says, but don't be mean to our president. She had nothing in common with the president, no question in my mind she voted for the president. I find that everywhere I go. They say, Tip I'm going through the airports we love the President of the United States. They don't like his philosophy, they don't like his programs. They know his trade bill today they beat us; 78 percent of America believe that the textile industry should have some type of protection. You talk about Central America, Nicaragua; 73 percent of America think the president is wrong. On cutting back on the health programs, and cutting back on the educational programs, 70-75 percent of America say he is wrong. But they love the man. There is no question. It's a phenomena.
[King:] You can't beat likability than.
[O'neill:] No, well it's, it's the style that he has, it's the mannerisms that he has. And one thing is, they think he's a take charge fellow.
[King:] When we come back, Democrat O'Neill matches political wits with Republican Alexander Haig. Stay tuned.
[O'neill:] That's what people elect us for, to weigh the consequences of the various policies. You as members of this Congress, I trust and hope that your voting your conscience on this matter, not the election of a foe. If you are doing this, if you are voting your convictions with the eyes of the next election, you don't belong in this august body. Because we're all Americans and we should vote our conscience. My personal opinion is this. You deliberately stood in that well before an emptied house and challenged these people, and you challenged their Americanism. And it's the lowest thing that I've ever seen in my 32 years in Congress.
[Sen. Newt Gingrich , Georgia:] Mr. Speaker, if I may reclaim my time. Let me say, first of all, the fact...
[Sen. Trent Lott , Missouri:] Mr. Speaker, I move that we take the speaker's words down.
[King:] Tip O'Neill's next appearance on our show was in November of 1988, just days before the presidential election. The match up that year was George Bush versus Michael Dukakis. Our match up, the democratic former House speaker versus GOP former Secretary of State Al Haig. [Begin Videotape November 2, 1998]
[O'neill:] I've been following American politics for 50 years, and nobody alive today has been any closer than I have. I've watched every campaign since Al Smith. This is the dirtiest campaign that I've ever seen. This brings a racial overtone to it. I have a letter right here, the picture of Willy Horton that they passed out there the other day. It's just absolutely a disgraceful situation. Why do they do it? When they are talking about Mike Dukakis doesn't know Willie Horton from a bucket of snow or a cord of wood, never saw him in his life. That all goes at the lower level. It's like accusing the president of the United States of doing something that the parole board does. They haven't let off it. That's was sleazy, that's mean, that's undercurrent showing a black man to bring racism into a campaign and it is wrong.
[Alexander Haig, Former Secretary Of State:] Well if it were that it would be wrong, Tip...
[O'neill:] It is that and it is wrong.
[Haig:] Believe me, you know George Bush and I know George Bush. He hasn't got a bigoted bone in his body. And in the Maryland case where the state chairman put out the letter that the speaker is referring to, George Bush immediately disassociated himself from that.
[O'neill:] Of course he but that's the great thing. You know, how many times did you see a guy twist an ankle and say he's sorry in a football game?
[Haig:] Oh...
[O'neill:] The coach had no control over it.
[Haig:] Tip, would you compare this campaign to the job they did on Bob Bork, a man I've known for over 20 years who is one of the key jurists in the...
[O'neill:] He's not running for President of the United States. That's a...
[Haig:] But the job done by him?
[O'neill:] That has nothing to, that has nothing listen, no job was done on anybody in America worse than me by the mean, by those who had no character...
[Haig:] No you had your share.
[O'neill:] They were the selfish people of America.
[Haig:] But that's why we're compatible, because I had mine too.
[O'neill:] Hold up the finger in the dyke so that they couldn't cut the Social Security program. And they couldn't cut all those programs...
[King:] Both of you guys but you get into the public trough, you've got to expect a little of this. But, you will admit the Horton thing was overplay wasn't it overplay Al?
[O'neill:] Larry let me say this to you.
[Haig:] I think it was overplayed by some local enthusiasts, and I thought George Bush would be the first to say that. You know...
[O'neill:] The overtone there is all of the way, talking about little, the "L" word, the "L" word. You know, I have never heard liberalism demeaned so since before the war, when the dictators and the Communists and the Fascists used to say, democracy is liberalism and Capitalism. I haven't heard the word liberalism liberal, I'm a liberal, and I'm proud of it. I put 50 years in public life. And when I started off in public life, 50 percent of America was impoverished, 25 percent were unemployed, eight percent of America had pensions, and three percent had health insurance. And only the elite went on to college. And we changed it all. The Democratic Party, we were the agents for liberalism, and I'm proud of liberalism. And to demean it like that, demeans an awful lot of people who made America a great nation.
[Haig:] Tip I'm pleased that you feel that way, and the facts are that the liberalconservative label today means very little in classic terms. The real difference between a liberal and a conservative is that the liberal is optimistic about the perfectibility of man. That's the classic version of the liberal.
[King:] The liberal is optimistic.
[Haig:] And it's strange today that...
[King:] Pretty good definition.
[Haig:] ... and it's strange today that the democratic party is the party of big government, high taxes, big brother in Washington who is going to tell us how to do things. And the conservatives have become the advocates of the original liberal banner.
[O'neill:] I don't agree with that.
[Haig:] And that's the hypocrisy of modern labor.
[O'neill:] No I don't agree with you, whatsoever. I know how I became a liberal. I became a liberal probably at the knees of the nuns in the parochial school, when they taught me the greatest sermon that was ever given, the Sermon on the Mount. Take care of the poor, and take care of drink to the thirsty...
[Haig:] Of course.
[O'neill:] And I am my brother's keeper, and when I broke into politics, America was like what it was. And I finished 50 years of public life and proud of the dream that I had.
[King:] Stay tuned for more of our interviews with the one and only Tip O'Neill.
[O'neill:] What am I proud of most of all? I've seen America change. I've seen Middle America, middle class develop. I've seen the American dream come true, and I've played a part of it. The leader as you know opened the session and introduced me Hi Mikala how are you darling? That's an O'Neill for you.
[King:] A few days before the 1990 mid-term election, we asked Tip O'Neill to join us once again. Topping the agenda, the Bush administration's relationship with the democratic congress. O'Neill had very strong thoughts then about White House Chief of Staff John Sununu. [Begin Videotape, November 5, 1990] Sununu doesn't get along with the House.
[O'neill:] Oh the House members don't like him, on both sides of the aisle. As a matter of fact, they have their Conference, they are at the summit and he and I are not in the summit. Well I can remember sitting down with the Reagan people. And Don Regan who was the president's man was there would say to him, you said over there when we need you we'll ask you. This is a conference between the members of the Congress, the democrats and the republicans. Sununu should have been there for his advice not to be running the conference. And the members are very, very much upset with him.
[King:] Was Reagan a better mover of people than Bush?
[O'neill:] Oh Reagan was unbelievable. George Bush's leadership is just unbelievably, just...
[King:] All right, another example, Reagan spoke when he wanted the public to react...
[O'neill:] Let me when the KempRoth bill came up, that was the original tax bill that made the rich of America wealthier than they were. The liberals in my party didn't want me to bring it to the floor. The power of the speaker is tremendous. I got 50 to 60 thousand letters a day from all over the nation 8,000 from my own district, which is a very liberal district. This is a democracy, the people have spoken. We want you to give the Reagan bill its opportunity. And so we gave the Reagan bill its opportunity. Here is the President of the United States out there advocating a summit talk he had agreed to. Democrats and Republicans, their leadership of both parties, he couldn't even get a majority of his own party. Sure he didn't get a majority of the democrats, they weren't going to vote with him when he couldn't get a majority of his own party. But if that had been Reagan, and Reagan put out the call, I want the members of Congress on my side of the aisle to vote with him, there would have been 50,000 telephone calls and telegrams and personal calls from all over the nation. The Congress responds to the will of the American people. And George Bush has not been showing that leadership. No question about it, Ronald Reagan had but Ronald Reagan had great leadership ability.
[King:] Bush has more ability in governing.
[O'neill:] Well he knew more about the government. Nobody went to the government better prepared than he did, a businessman, a member of Congress, head of the CIA, head of
[King:] Who sits well for your party? Is Cuomo going to get it?
[O'neill:] Well I think Cuomo is going to be very good, but we've got some excellent candidates out there. That's one of the questions I get when I'm out speaking to the college students or I'm out at a commencement. Are the Democrats going to win, have the democrats gone by? I say, that's the same thing we used to ask in 1950 when Harry Truman was president. The democrats had been president for 20 years. When are we going when are you going, when are the republicans going to win? The democrats are going to win when they show a man with leadership. We nominate a man with leadership, the American public says, he has more leadership ability than the republican has. And I think Cuomo has tremendous leadership ability. And if I think of tomorrow he were running against George Bush. In the eyes of the American people, who would be the better leader for the nation, I just think that Bush would be overwhelmed.
[King:] You do, despite his success thus far in the Persian Gulf, a success you applaud and give him an A-plus.
[O'neill:] I think it's been terrific as to how far that he's gotten. Where do we go from here? The American boys that are over there, they want to know why they are there. Are we there for oil, are we there to stave an invasion for the Saudis, are we there because there is a real evil man over there who destroyed millions of his own people with a poisonous gas? Are we over there because there is a man who has a possibility of getting the nuclear bomb; we can't let him get that?
[King:] Any big upset tomorrow?
[O'neill:] This has got to be proven to the American people. One of the things the American people love, the way Bush handled, but he's kind of stopped dead. It's gone off the front page.
[King:] When we return, Tip O'Neill's battle with cancer.
[Ronald Reagan, Former President Of The United States:] Ladies and gentlemen, I think you know, Tip and I have been kidding each other for some time now, and I hope you also know how much I hope this continues for many years to come. A little kidding is, after all, a sign of affection, the sort of thing that friends do to each other. And Mr. Speaker, I am grateful that you have permitted me in the past, and I hope in the future, that singular honor, the honor of calling you my friend.
[King:] In 1991, Kitty Kelly wrote an authorized biography of Nancy Reagan. The controversial book alleged that Mrs. Reagan had had clandestine affairs, and that she used astrology to set the president's schedule. When Tip O'Neill appeared in May of that year, I asked him about that book. [Begin Videotape, May 7, 1991] Are you surprised with all that's going on, the Kitty Kelly books and the Inquirers and everybody's and everybody's involved in everybody's life.
[O'neill:] You know, I went to the Women's Press Club a year ago, and I sat next to Kitty Kelly. Now I didn't know who Kitty Kelly was, but she kept saying what about Nancy Reagan? My stock answer was I have never met a first lady and I've known them all since Bess Truman that wasn't a credit to the nation. Personally I like Nancy. I think she is a lovely lady. I think she did a great thing when she threw out all those years of old china that didn't match and put in new china. But apparently that's the way you make a dollar. You know, I'm happy, Larry, when I wrote up my book, I said I'm not thinking about the personal life. My book is only going to be about the public life.
[King:] But are you annoyed that everybody seems to be caught up in the personal lives of other people? Does it bother you? There was a period in politics where no one was interested in that.
[O'neill:] Do you really think people are interested in that?
[King:] Maybe they're not.
[O'neill:] They must be, she's making $5 million and it's No. 1 for the third week in a row.
[King:] I'm not interested, but people are interested.
[O'neill:] I'm not. I know I wouldn't bother.
[King:] Well you and I aren't; we're alone.
[O'neill:] By the way I have to look and ask somebody if I got a credit in the book, for sitting next to her at dinner.
[King:] Oh my yeah, if she was sitting next to you, you might have gotten credit. Of course O'Neill had not come on the show to talk about Kitty Kelly's book. No, earlier that day he had gone before Congress to ask for more funding for cancer research. O'Neill was a cancer survivor, and I asked him about living with the disease and beating it. [Begin Videotape, May 7, 1991] Now the cancer you had was what?
[O'neill:] Well I had a colostomy. I was out watching Boston College play Notre Dame at Notre Dame, and gee I had terrible cramps in my stomach. And I don't know what happened. I came home, flew in. And told Millie about it, and went to bed. Got up about 3:00 in the morning; she called my son Chip and they took me over to Sibley. The doctor said, well, I don't like what I see, but I'm not an expert on this. I'll give you some sleeping tablets and a painkiller. Come in Monday morning. And sure enough, stayed at Sibley about a week, and finally wound up at Pragerman Wilmans with Dr. Wilson.
[King:] I remember very well. We spoke because the same time as the heart surgery. You had your surgery, we were phone-mates.
[O'neill:] Right, right...
[King:] But you licked it, it was beaten.
[O'neill:] Well I licked it and everything was fine.
[King:] Then what?
[O'neill:] I'll never forget, the doctor came in and he said to me, I have good news and bad news for you. I knew exactly what he meant. I knew exactly. He said, we've got the cancer cleaned, but he said, you're going to have to wear a bag, and I almost died. But, it's something that...
[King:] And that was three and a half years ago.
[O'neill:] That was three and a half years ago.
[King:] Now what?
[O'neill:] Now well about a year ago, to be perfectly truthful, I couldn't button my shirt. Millie said to me, you're gaining too much weight, you're gaining too much weight. I was up to see Dr. Krasnow up on the hill. And I said my wife says I'm gaining weight, but I'm actually losing weight. He put his hand up here, and he said Dr. Tim Eberline, the man up in Boston, the cancer man. Dr. Wilson had died. He said, I want you to go up there tomorrow. I went up there and they found a couple of things as large as olives. And they cut them out...
[King:] Which was when?
[O'neill:] Just in February of last year, not this year, last year. And I go back every month and we've got couple of great doctors up there. And they've been giving me chemo and they've got them under control.
[King:] Cancer effects both parties.
[O'neill:] Oh no question about that.
[King:] I heard that. How does chemotherapy effect you? How do you handle it?
[O'neill:] The doctors are absolutely, they are amazed...
[King:] That your...
[O'neill:] I no effects whatsoever.
[King:] You're not wearing a wig?
[O'neill:] No, no, no, not at all. The interesting thing the doctors they just can't believe it. They said, no problems only part is I can't sleep.
[King:] How old are you now?
[O'neill:] Well I will be 79 years old on December 9, and I will be 50 years married on June 17. I'll be with you in apple blossom time. I'll be with you to change your name to mine. One day in May, I'll come and say, happy is the bride that the sun shines on today. What a wonderful wedding there will be. What a wonderful day for you and me. Church bells will chime, you will be mine, in apple blossom time. Momma, I love you, as much as the night [OFF-MIKE] we were married. Sometimes an event strikes us with such drama and surprise that it exceeds our ability to absorb it. This is what happened today in the terrible destruction of our country's space shuttle. The space shuttle carried on its side the flag of the United States, and those who served on her served us, the American people.
[King:] Tip O'Neill witnessed a lot of history during his 24 years in the U.S. House of Representatives. The event that touched him most deeply: Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech.
[O'neill:] I was there for the great speech that he made; I'll never forget it, either, because it was a tremendously hot summer's day and Jim O'Hara from Detroit and Jim Roosevelt, who are members of Congress, got a bus and about 25 of us went down and we sat right to the left of him. As you look up, he came over and shook hands with all of us. I've heard a million speeches in my life, and "I Had a Dream" [sic], that was the greatest that I ever heard. That was a beautiful, beautiful speech.
[King:] Were you involved in making his birthday a national holiday?
[O'neill:] Very, very much so. I was speaker of the House when that was made, and Corinne came in to see me. Now, the question on how we were going to get it made...
[King:] By asking very involved sometimes a speaker can be very involved in something, and...
[O'neill:] Well, I was very involved on this one. The question was there was no question we could pass the bill, is was how you got the rule to the floor. You get the rule to the floor with an open rule, but then they can attach all types of amendments around it and it would kill it. If you brought it in with a closed rule, then no amendments could be authored to it, which the rules committee did; at her behest and my behest it passed and became the legal holiday.
[King:] Tip was mentioning to me before we began that he watched Governor and Mrs. Conally and Frank Mankowitz last week discuss JFK and the events of November 22, 1963, and I know that you hold the seat the seat you held in Congress was the seat that John Fitzgerald Kennedy held, that you knew him since he was a boy. What do you think happened that day?
[O'neill:] About two weeks before he went down to Texas, I was visiting. And we were talking about the program, how things were going in the House things weren't going good in the House, as a matter of fact. He, in his conversation, said to me, you know, my nominee, or the nominee will be Goldwater, and he'd bring us into war. I said, Jack, what are we in now, Mr. President? He said, no, no; I'm going to bring the troops home as soon as the election is over.
[King:] He definitely said that to you?
[O'neill:] Oh, no question about it. I put it in my book and, as a matter of fact, there are those people that question it. Now they have records where he wrote to the U.N. and people and they have found records that...
[King:] Did you fear his going to Texas?
[O'neill:] I feared him going to Texas; I said it's ridiculous. He said, I've got to straighten out the party down there. He said, there's a difference between oh, I can't think of the old senator's name...
[King:] Yarborough.
[O'neill:] Yarborough, who...
[King:] Governor Connally denied that, he said...
[O'neill:] Well, that's what the president said to me, there's problems between Conally and Yarborough, and he said I've got to straighten them out. Well, anyway, I remember the day of course everybody remembers the day and where they were I was in my office in Boston. And Kathy O'Brien and one of the other congressman's secretaries came running in, she had worked for me; she said, I heard the president was shot. I can't believe it. I call "The Boston Globe" and I said, may I speak to Bob Healy. And so the girl said, this you Tip? I said, yes. She started to cry. She says, he's dead; he's been shot. So I'll never forget it. I always believed the Warren Report. I talked to Jerry Ford about it, I talked to Hale Boggs about it. There was no question. One day I said to Hale, I remember reading a piece in the paper that they had found a stray bullet. He said, probably so. But he says, there's no question; he says the authenticity of the Warren Report is absolutely correct. Well, a couple of years later Kenny O'Donnell ran for governor; I was with Eddie McCormick. And he Eddie McCormick defeated him for the nomination quite easily and he had a debt of $50,000 of $60,000. Well, I was a fund-raiser and I was a leading figure in the party in Boston and Massachusetts in those days. Some of my friends came to me and they said, poor Kenny, he owes $60,000, can you help him out a little bit? So we ran a fund-raiser, got him off his $60,000 straightened it out. That night we went to Jimmy's for supper. Kenny O'Donnell and his wife, Dave Powers and his wife, my Millie, Leo Deal and his wife and Joe Maloney and his wife. And in the conversation we started to talk about what happened down there in Dallas. And Kenny said, I was in the sixth car with Dave. And he said, I'll always remember he says, there was a bullet came over the fence. A bullet came over the fence. And Dave says, I'm absolutely agreeing with it. I said, you didn't say that in the Warren Report. You didn't say that in the Warren Report. I said, You denied it that you said there was only one bullet. So the FBI came to us, they asked us to tell that story. They didn't want to disrupt the family. I said...
[King:] Now wait a minute; if that's true...
[O'neill:] No, let me tell you the rest of the story. So Dave said, absolutely, a bullet came over the fence. The FBI said to us, no, you heard echoes, there was only one bullet and don't upset the family. So he said, I went and testified. I said I wouldn't have testified that way in 1 million years! I would have told them what I thought I saw or what I thought I heard. Anyway, it gets back I'm writing the book again and I call Dave on the telephone. I said, Dave, I'm going to put in my book on the chapter of Kennedy our conversation with Kenny and you, how do you feel about it? He said, Tip, I say the same thing today I said that night that's in polar opposition to what I said to the
[Fbi:] no question I heard a bullet shot...
[King:] Then why don't...
[O'neill:] So from that time on, I always believed that there was a conspiracy... ... that there was somebody else. And, as a matter of fact, Congressman Stokes did a pretty good job.
[King:] You appointed that committee, right? Stokes headed it. Stokes now has said, let's release all the materials...
[O'neill:] Oh, I'm for that; I'm for that.
[King:] Why don't you go see the movie?
[O'neill:] I just you know, every time I see on television the president getting hit, I get sick. I had a love and an affection for the man...
[King:] So you can't go, emotionally?
[O'neill:] I just really, I can't go emotionally.
[King:] You believe there was a plot?
[O'neill:] Oh, there's no question that he didn't do it by himself, in my opinion.
[King:] Recently, evidence has emerged to support O'Neill's conspiracy theory: a U.S. government scientist studied audio tapes from the JFK assassination and concluded there was very likely a shot fired from the grassy knoll. When we come back: his thoughts on Bill Clinton.
[O'neill:] Listen, whether it wins or loses, I'm not going to shed any tears. This is the president's bill; if the Republicans want to cheer and clap if it goes down, that's all right with me. I'm not going to worry one way or another. I'm just sick and tired of the White House now trying to put the onus that it's up to Tip O'Neill to pass the bill; it's not up to me to pass the bill, it's not my bill, and I had nothing to do with writing it.
[King:] Tip O'Neill served a record 10 years as speaker of the House, and during most of that stint a Republican was in the Oval Office. As you might expect, O'Neill was delighted by Bill Clinton's presidential win in '92. It put the Democrats back in the White House for the first time in 12 years. [Begin Videotape, November 25, 1992] What would be the first thing, if Bill Clinton called and, by the way, has Bill Clinton called you?
[O'neill:] Well, it was very interesting; during the campaign they called me four times, and each time they'd say, are you available for the call from the governor? And I'd say I'm available, and never did get the call. The fourth time they called me, they said, are you available for the governor, and I said, no I'm not available for the governor. I said, I think I'm going on LARRY KING one of these nights, and I want to go on LARRY KING saying, he's not looking for an old-hat Democrat like Tip O'Neill for any advice. He's got the election won. So actually I've known him through governors' meetings. First time was in '80 after Carter had been nominated we had the big dinner the following day for the big hitters, and he was the speaker, and he was excellent. Then, very interestingly, down at the party my daughter ran in Atlanta for Turner she introduced me, and said here's the next democratic president of the United States and, sure enough, she was right. But I've met him at functions along the line.
[King:] What would be the first piece of advice you'd give him?
[O'neill:] First piece of advice that I would give him would be, stay close to the Congress; that would be the first thing. The Congress, as I look at it and I've talked to so many of them they're aching to be part of a team. George Bush, he proud of the fact he had 38, 39 vetoes out there. Politics has been the art of compromise since the days of the Greeks; never once did he ever compromise. He would chip away, chip away, chip away and finally when the bill had nothing left in it and it got to his desk, he would sign it. Well, I am shocked to find out that Tom Foley had only seen the president something like three times in four years. When Reagan was president, we used to go over there every Tuesday morning; not for our advice, but as a courtesy that he would...
[King:] Reagan met with congressional leaders?
[O'neill:] All the time. Every at least once a week.
[King:] So you would tell Bill Clinton: Meet with the people?
[O'neill:] Oh, listen, he has got to work with the democratic Congress, there's no question about it. And not only the democratic Congress, the nation's in tough shape; Democrats, Republicans know that. The people know it. And they're just dying for a program to be able to work with the president of the United States.
[King:] You're going to be 80 years old in two weeks. Do you wish you were in the hunt?
[O'neill:] No, I've had my day...
[King:] I mean, now with all this excitement...
[O'neill:] No, no, no; I've had it, you know what I mean. I used to say, how long is Reagan going to hang around, how long is McCormick going to hang around? Then one day Millie said to me, hey, how long are you going to hang around? You used to be complaining about hanging around too long...
[King:] You don't miss it?
[O'neill:] Oh, I missed it at first. You just don't walk away from 50 years, of which I had 26 in the legislative leadership you just don't walk away. But I used to miss meeting the press at half past 7:00 in the morning and meeting every columnist in America at noontime, being honest with them and going back and forth. Did I miss it? Sure I missed it; but now I don't miss it. As a matter of fact, I did a record, and I do some speeches for Harry, and I'm in the process of writing a book...
[King:] Another one?
[O'neill:] Another one, yes.
[King:] You need the money, right?
[O'neill:] No, no, no; as a mater of fact, I can truthfully say that I've given to the poverty of America this year over $50,000, something I never thought I'd be able to do.
[King:] Is it true you had the lowest net worth in the House?
[O'neill:] No question about it; no question about it. Never had my head out of water for 50 years. Oh, but it's a great democracy and thank God for Random House and their book!
[King:] Tip O'Neill was a master at spinning tales, and we'll have one of his favorites when we return.
[Ronald Reagan, Former President Of The United States:] This is a nation where the speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives aspires to someday be ambassador to Ireland. Tip, what about day after tomorrow?
[O'neill:] Your charm, your humor, you wit sometimes when I get up in the morning, I say, don't let it get you, old boy.
[King:] As I mentioned at the top of this program, Tip O'Neill was a terrific storyteller, and during his next-to-last appearance on LARRY KING LIVE, he shared one of his favorite tales.
[O'neill:] Well, in 1956 I was appointed by Sam Rabin to go to the dedication of the statue of John Barry. Now, if you went to a parochial school like I did, you know that John Berry is the father of the American Navy. If you went to a public school, you'd probably believe that John Paul Jones was the father of the American Navy. Well, went over, Millie and I, and we landed in Dublin, and it was about five days before the dedication. State Department said, what would you like to do; I said I'd like to go down around Clark city, where my grandpeople had come from and see if I could locate some relatives or something. So we drove down and we stopped, of course, and kissed the Blarney Stone. And the driver we saw the bells of Shandon and rang the bells of Shandon. And the driver's taking us around the countryside, and he stopped the car and he said, that's our local hospital. Well, I said, what's so interesting about that, every community has a hospital. He says, in 1929, Henry Ford came to Ireland. His first visit, he was in the hotel. Knock on the door, a group of men, and they said, Mr. Ford, we want to welcome you to Clark city, the home of your mother and father, your first visit. We're building a hospital and we thought, perhaps, in memory of your mother and dad you'd like to make a donation. And very graciously Ford sat down and he wrote out a check for $5,000 and he gave it to them. The following day the "Clark Courier" came out, blazing headline that said, "Henry Ford Donates $50,000 to Hospital." That afternoon, knock at the door, same group of men. They came in they said, Mr. Ford, we're grateful for the $5,000, we're sorry about the mistake that the newspaper made, but tomorrow they'll make a correction. And Ford said, give me my check back. So they gave him his check and he tore it up and he said, what does it cost to build a hospital? And they said $50,000. And he sat down and he wrote a check out for $50,000; he says, here, have this in memory of my mother and father, on one condition and those Irishmen didn't care what the condition was. He says, over the portals of the hospital I want the inscription that I have in mind. What is it my Ford? And the inscription reads, I came among you, and you took me in. So when I get a nice, warm welcome somewhere I tell them the Henry Ford story and say I'm very grateful; I came among you and you took me in.
[King:] That is a great...
[O'neill:] The driver told me that story, and that was in 1956 I first heard that story.
[King:] By the way, the hospital that Henry Ford funded is still there in Ireland, and bears the requested inscription. Tip O'Neill died in 1994. The man who believed that all politics is local left a national legacy. We conclude our retrospective on the former House speaker with scenes from his funeral. What a guy. Thanks for watching; good night.
[Joe Moakley, Former Congressman:] Tip, you left a marvelous legacy. You've helped so many people, you've enriched so many lives. You've made this country a better place to live. You are certainly always my friend like no other. Mr. Speaker, the world is going to miss you, I know I already do. So God bless you, my dear friend. Goodbye until we meet again. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Pawelski:] Welcome back. Diesel fuel is under fire for its contribution to pollution. The EPA is calling for changes that would help clear the air, and maybe help save a few lives. But the oil companies say the government is asking for too much, too fast. Maria Hinojosa reports.
[Maria Hinojosa, Cnn Correspondent:] Out of a small storefront in the South Bronx, Yolanda Garcia is waging a battle for clean air.
[Yolanda Garcia, Community Activist:] Our children would like to play baseball. They can't because they can't breathe.
[Hinojosa:] In the windows, students model gas masks. Extreme, perhaps, but Garcia lost her 24-year-old son to asthma.
[Garcia:] My legacy to my son is to help try to mitigate what's wrong, so that no other children or young people have to die the way he did.
[Hinojosa:] Far from the South Bronx, men and women in suits discuss the same issue at an EPA hearing in Manhattan.
[Unidentified Female:] It would be accurate to refer to New York as the asthma capital of the world.
[Hinojosa:] Activists from doctors to lawyers testified the exhaust from diesel fuel is polluting the air, contributing to rising asthma rates in U.S. cities.
[Margo Oge, Environmental Protection Agency:] Anyone that has ever driven behind a bus or a truck is familiar with the smell of the diesel fuel, and familiar with the cloudy emissions that come out from those trucks.
[Hinojosa:] The EPA is asking for a 97 percent reduction in sulfur in diesel fuel by 2006.
[Richard Kassel, Natural Resources Defense Council:] Just as removing lead from gasoline was the key to cleaning up cars in the mid-1970s, removing sulfur from diesel fuel will be the key to cleaning up diesel trucks and buses in the coming decades.
[Hinojosa:] Oil company executives asked for more time.
[Red Cavaney, American Petroleum Institute:] We are concerned that the agency's diesel sulfur proposal risks too much by going too far, too fast.
[Hinojosa:] And he warned the move would raise trucking costs, and as a result, consumer prices.
[Cavaney:] This is going to be a very, very expensive adjustment.
[Hinojosa:] New York City has good reason to be concerned about diesel emissions and their possible link to asthma. According to the New York Department of Health, hospitalization rates for asthma in the city are three times higher than the national average. And here in the South Bronx, that rate is eight times as high. [voice-over]: Statistics with which Yolanda Garcia is all too familiar.
[Garcia:] They're taking the breath away from us.
[Hinojosa:] For CNN EARTH MATTERS, I'm Maria Hinojosa.
[Pawelski:] In Iceland, Keiko the killer whale is making longer and longer visits to open ocean. His keepers say it's just a matter of time before he leaves his enclosed bay for good. Rudi Bakhtiar reports.
[Rudi Bakhtiar, Cnn Correspondent:] It's not unlike taking a dog for a walk. The Ocean Futures staff who is overseeing Keiko's return to the wild in the Westman Islands of Iceland have begun luring him out to the open seas. They call these ventures "ocean walks."
[Charles Vinick, Ocean Futures:] We're continually adding new stimulation to him. We're adding new experiences for him. And we're letting him explore his own environment in a way that allows him to be comfortable in it.
[Bakhtiar:] During these ocean walks, Keiko has been conditioned to follow this particular vessel. The longest walk so far was last week, 30 hours on the open seas. Keiko actually went off on his own for two hours, but returned when the staff gave the signal.
[Robin Friday, Ocean Futures:] Through the whole process, we've always allowed Keiko's response to dictate to us what our next steps are, and it will be the same thing through this.
[Bakhtiar:] The walks are just another stage in expanding Keiko's horizons, as well as his swimming and hunting capabilities. He spends most of his time in a bay where his original holding pen is located. Already, his new lifestyle is changing his physiology. He's developed a lot more muscle, and his dorsal fin has changed positions from all of the swimming. [on camera]: So far, Keiko has crossed paths with other whales but has not interacted with them. That will be the next step, getting Keiko to interact and integrate with other orcas. [voice-over]: Ocean Futures says that when Keiko does eventually go off on his own, they will keep a small support group in the Westmans for up to two months in case he changes his mind. They have also equipped him with a satellite tracking device that will help them monitor his whereabouts for about another year. For CNN EARTH MATTERS, I'm Rudi Bakhtiar, in the Westman Islands, Iceland.
[Pawelski:] Later on EARTH MATTERS, big bugs battle in a championship wrestling match. But next, a dramatic landscape, a peaceful native community: efforts to protect this centuries-old culture.

[Allan Chernoff, Cnn Anchor:] OK, thank you very much Brian and the futures are pointing to a dramatically higher open and Jennifer Westhoven is standing by here. Our morning market call, Jennifer looking a little better for the Nasdaq today.
[Jennifer Westhoven, Cnn Markets Editor:] It sure is, and Nasdaq traders who are bullish can thank Larry Ellison for that because that really seems to be the key to what is going on this morning. Oracle really carrying the day. It's interesting because the market, of course has been slipping a lot lately. Yesterday, old economy stocks, blue chip stocks, kind of stabilized, but the Nasdaq down another 2 percent still lots of concern there. Still, Oracle's good news is really offsetting this continuing parade of bad news that we are getting or negative news. Solectron is a big contract manufacturer. They came out OK, they almost made estimates, but they had warning their sales were also disappointing excuse me, not a warning, but their sales were seen as very disappointing there. Also American Airlines AMR is their parent company, of course, and they also are the parent of TWA now. They came out, too, and chimed in right behind Delta, which on Friday was talking about weak earnings. So these two companies saying that the big cutbacks in business spending mean fewer executives are traveling and they're going to make fewer dollars.
[Chernoff:] But the focus this morning likely on Oracle, a ray of hope in that technology desert.
[Westhoven:] It is they are still working there. But it's interesting that the market is shaking off the negative news that's out there and saying, you know, we've heard enough, at least for this morning. So, the question is going to be the bounce that we see this morning after that opening bell, how broad will it be and how high will it go? Will it be able to carry up the other software companies and then, of course, the other thing that the market will be watching for is the numbers from the housing market. They'll need to stand up for Oracle to really this bloom on the rose, shall we say, from Oracle, to really keep its leg going through the market today.
[Chernoff:] The housing numbers, really, will tell us how the consumer is doing and that's critical to the state of the economy.
[Westhoven:] Right and let's take a look at those numbers. You take a look at the forecast, it's expected to pull back slightly to about 1.59 million units on an annualized basis, but I'll show you a graph of this. Even though it has been pulling back a little bit lately, still very strong. You look at those sort of weak numbers back there in 2000, and this is considered a very strong market. Even auto sales have kind of tailed off a little bit lately. Before, that was also seen as a positive strength, too.
[Chernoff:] OK and Jennifer, in fact, the futures we have on our board now for the Nasdaq, 100 accounting for fair value. That would indicate a rise of about 47 points in the Nasdaq 100 this morning.
[Westhoven:] Yes.
[Chernoff:] That would be a powerful open.
[Westhoven:] Maybe we'll get away from that 1900 level that's been scaring a lot of traders lately.
[Chernoff:] Right. Everybody looking for back above 2,000 on the Nasdaq...
[Westhoven:] Right.
[Chernoff:] ... composite
[Westhoven:] Right.
[Chernoff:] Jennifer Westhoven, thanks much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] On to the fight against weather and the slow moving winter storm that is leaving a trail of the white stuff stretching, as we mentioned, from Alabama north to Virginia. Just round one for a lot of folks, round two could be on the way, and Sean Callebs, that's the news for you. More snow on the way to where you are standing in Columbia, South Carolina.
[Sean Callebs, Cnn Correspondent:] Rather than round one, round two, it has just been a prolonged round one for us here out in South Carolina. What we are seeing right now is pretty much what has been going on the last hour or so. The snow has been coming down not real heavily, just very steady. The wind picking up time to time. But let me show you the way the roads are here in Columbia, the capital of South Carolina. Right now, we are getting a dusting that is really over the ice that has been covering much of the road here throughout the day. Plows are out. Salt trucks are out. Sand trucks are out. They are doing what they can to try and keep the interstates, the main roads here in South Carolina as clear, as passable as possible. Now, we spoke with Governor Jim Hodges just a short while ago, and he said there have been 1,400 traffic accidents in South Carolina in the past 24 hours alone, including two fatalities, and despite their best efforts, the weather seems to be winning at this point, and they are urging people not to go out unless they absolutely have to.
[Jim Hodges, Governor Of South Carolina:] The biggest challenge, I think, is making sure that we keep people off the highways, because that's where our biggest problem is. It's not as much the danger of people freezing, as it is people getting out on the highways and trying to drive when they shouldn't be.
[Callebs:] And the big problem for us, when the snow hits the South like this, people really aren't experienced in driving in these kind of conditions. We have seen a lot of people fishtailing. There have been an inordinate number of fender-benders all throughout the South, and so if you are not used to being out in these kind of conditions, suddenly you throw yourself into them, it's very difficult, very difficult indeed. And as you mentioned, Daryn, apparently it's not going to be letting up any time soon. The governor, the people here in South Carolina hope that the conditions continue to, perhaps, improve over the next 24, 48 hours, and maybe by the weekend, some of this starts to melt and the conditions become passable, become safe. All state employees are off today, and at times, the state has had to use the National Guard to get four wheel drives out to get people where they just simply haven't been able to leave their homes to get to more accessible areas. That's the very latest from Columbia Daryn, now back to you.
[Kagan:] I tell you what, Sean, you just sit there and you keep listening, because I am going to get your forecast for you.
[Callebs:] Okay. I'll listen. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] And now more finger-pointing on Capitol Hill today where a Senate panel, now investigating the huge Firestone tire recall, held hearings. Joining us now is CNN's Carl Rochelle, who has been monitoring the hearings Carl.
[Carl Rochelle, Cnn Correspondent:] Jeanne, the hearing is into its second panel now and there is a bit of finger pointing. The first panel this morning was Secretary Slater of the Department of Transportation, and the administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Senators wanted to know why they didn't know more sooner about this, but they also heard a request from the NHTSA and the DOT folks for more money and more authority to deal with a situation like this in the future. But the interesting point Firestone is testifying right now. Now, last week, Ford, at one of the hearings on Capitol Hill, tried to point the blame almost directly at Firestone and Firestone hadn't accepted much, blaming Ford for part of the problem. Listen to testimony this morning now as John Lampe of Firestone sort of shifts some of that blame, or tries to shift some of it, to Ford.
[John Lampe, Bridgestone/firestone:] We take full responsibility, senators, when a tire fails because of a defect. We firmly believe, however, that the tire is only part of the overall safety problem shown by these tragic accidents. If we are really concerned and we are about consumer safety, we will leave no stone unturned.
[Rochelle:] And Lampe said they should investigate the relationship between the vehicle and the tire and the inflation of it, clearly saying they believe Ford is also partly at fault.
[Meserve:] And did Ford have any response to that?
[Rochelle:] No response from Ford today, but last week Ford said that they had to pry the information, pry the data out of Firestone, implying that Ford Firestone was not very helpful in helping them come to grips with the problem. And we will hear from Ford later today. They probably will rebut this.
[Meserve:] Carl Rochelle, thank you.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] More perspective, now, on the current summit that has ended. From London, Rosemary Hollis, head of the Middle East program at the Royal Institute of International of Affairs. We welcome you to our program today. The first question is quite blunt: What are we to make of this peace agreement, and will, indeed, it take hold on the ground?
[Rosemary Hollis, Royal Institute Of International Affairs:] Well, it's less that a peace agreement. It's is, at best, a cease-fire and President Clinton didn't even call it that. What is to be hoped for, which was the most that could be hoped for, is that you a pull-back of Israeli tanks from the entrances to Palestinian towns in the West Bank and Gaza, which is where the Palestinian youth have been confronting the Israeli troops. That will reduce the number of flash points, but it won't necessarily control the extremists on both sides who are not happy with the peace process, period.
[Hemmer:] Given all of that, there is a lot of criticism throughout this entire matter to the leaders and especially Yasser Arafat. How much sway does he hold with the Palestinian people?
[Hollis:] Well, it's a bit chicken and egg. He can't go out too far on a limb from his own population because he simply loses the power to deliver them if something is agreed. Over this whole issue of Jerusalem, which came up and was a sticking point at the Camp David summit July, that was what if he had some element of sovereignty over the Muslim holy site to take away on Jerusalem, it would have been easier for him to sell some of the unpalatable elements of the deal under discussion. I say unpalatable from a Palestinian perspective. From an Israeli perspective it was extremely generous, but that's not the same thing.
[Hemmer:] Given all of that, how do you proscribe to the idea that there was legitimate skepticism coming out of this summit in Sharm el- Sheikh?
[Hollis:] I think there's a great deal of skepticism coming out of Sharm el-Sheikh because, for one thing, it's not clear that the Palestinians on the street believe in the peace process and have any patience with the idea of getting back to that process. They want to know what, down the line, they get out of this and they're not impressed so far. I think that on the Israeli...
[Hemmer:] Pardon the interruption here just in the interests of time, part of the agreement out of Sharm el-Sheikh was that the leaders would, indeed, talk to their people and do it publicly. How long before we see and hear that?
[Hollis:] Before they talk to their people publicly?
[Hemmer:] Correct.
[Hollis:] Well, Arafat, on return to Gaza has already made a statement which enables him to say, that, if there is not compliance on the other side, then it's not his fault. Which is not auspicious, frankly. It suggests that whatever goes wrong with implementation, both sides are going to blame the other.
[Hemmer:] Rosemary Hollis from London; we apologize for the satellite delay here, it's out of our hands, but we appreciate your time and your thoughts today. Thank you very much.
[Hollis:] OK.

[Mark Shields:] Welcome to CAPITAL GANG. I'm Mark Shields with Al Hunt, Robert Novak and Margaret Carlson. Our guest is former Republican Congressman Vin Weber of Minnesota. It's good to have you back, Vin.
[Vin Weber, Former Congressman:] It's great to be here, and I'm especially happy because I know Bob Novak had to leave his Earth Day activities to be with us.
[Shields:] It isn't easy being green, Bob. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan surprised and delighted markets in-between its regular meetings. The Federal Open Market Committee dropped short- term interest rates by 12 percentage point, or 50 basis points, and stock prices rebounded from a slump. The Fed statement said, quote: "The risks are weighted mainly toward conditions that may generate economic weakness in the foreseeable future," end quote.
[Roger Ferguson, Vice Chairman, Federal Reserve:] The downward revisions to earnings expectations have hit the stock market hard since last fall, and declines in equity wealth could begin to show through more forcefully to consumption spending. All in all, I think it is too early to have a strong conviction that the economy is reaching the end of this period of quite slow growth.
[Shields:] Bob Novak, well, it turned out that Alan Greenspan has triggered a new burst of economic growth.
[Robert Novak, "chicago Sun-times":] Unfortunately not, and Governor Ferguson had it right. He said that things are tough. We are in a bad economic situation, no little because the Fed was behind the curve. They were seeing the inflation behind every door when there wasn't any, and the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain, Dr. Greenspan, was making a lot of mistakes. The worst thing about the Greenspan standard is everybody agrees he should have eased, even this time, a little earlier, but he didn't because the central banks don't ease when the markets are going down. They only ease when they're going up a little bit. It's a lot of hokum and nonsense, and we ought to stop giving him a free ride on bad policy.
[Shields:] Was it a bad idea to cut it...
[Novak:] You didn't listen to what I said.
[Shields:] I know!
[Novak:] He should have done it but... And he shouldn't have tightened for all those weeks when there was no inflation.
[Shields:] Vin.
[Weber:] Well, I largely agree with Bob. I think...
[Shields:] That's it!
[Weber:] I think this action is appropriate, but I do agree that Alan Greenspan waited too long. I think the real question that policy makers have to think about is not just, are we into a recession here, but are we really in the middle of a global deflation, anything like that. You know, Japan is in trouble, a lot of countries in South America, like Argentina are in trouble, still got relatively slow growth in Europe, and of course our country is right on teetering on the edge of recession. If indeed, we are in anything approaching a global deflation, then Bob is absolutely right. The Fed didn't act soon enough, or they didn't act strong enough. And nor have the Federal the equivalents of the Federal Reserve in Europe and other parts of the world.
[Shields:] Now, Al Hunt, the confidence index is coming back. I mean, I see polls of people in business, business executives, unlike our commentators and analysts here, who say that they are actually bullish and optimistic about the future. And I've just heard
[Al Hunt, "wall Street Journal":] You know, we've tried so hard to educate Bob. Bob, you ought to read "The Economist." This will explain to you.
[Novak:] A lefty...
[Hunt:] If you think "The Economist" is a lefty publication, you're that's where you're coming from.
[Novak:] That's right.
[Hunt:] ... but the more problematic thing is some of these chicken littles I won't mention any names four or five months ago said, by April and May things are going to terrible, Mark. They said it was just going to be awful, and Greenspan made a huge mistake by not cutting those rates back in November and December. And I know you've been away for a while, so you kind of missed on what's been going on. I think actually Greenspan is managing this thing quite well. We are not in any kind of a terrible recession, as those people predicted four months ago. In fact, the market has gone down some, so there's clearly some weakness, but it's quite a mixed picture. Companies like IBM, and Apple, and Microsoft had very good profit reports this week and most importantly, AOL. But I think there are also some other there are some alarming things. I mean, the huge, hot stock of a year ago, Cisco the company was supposed to be so big, had a terrible week, and I think Greenspan is responding appropriately, Bob.
[Shields:] Margaret, who is right here?
[Margaret Carlson, "time" Magazine:] Well, you know, Greenspan bided his time and then he surprised the market and created what I think is some rational exuberance in that the market went up. What Ferguson said was he wasn't worried about the economy overall, he is worried about a decline of, quote, "equity wealth," which is exactly what you're worried about, Bob.
[Novak:] That isn't what he said. That isn't what he said.
[Carlson:] He said precisely "equity wealth."
[Novak:] No, he said...
[Carlson:] .. which is the sense that people in the market have lost this euphoria they had about incredible gains over the last decade.
[Novak:] Can I, Margaret, just tell you what he said.
[Carlson:] The average person haven't made...
[Novak:] Just let me intervene for one second, please.
[Carlson:] OK, I will, Bob.
[Novak:] All right.
[Carlson:] Now, you remember, next time, I would like to interrupt.
[Novak:] Yes, I just want to say what he said was that the tremendous loss in equity wealth, and it looks like it my impinge on the real economy. That's what he said.
[Weber:] I get, Margaret if I can have my say I get a little tired of people sneering at the stock portfolios. For the average person getting ready to retire in the next year or so, maybe got a kid ready to go to college, equity wealth is the economy. And to say that that doesn't matter to us, that all these people that have been depending 60 percent of American households now invested in the stock market in one mechanism or another that we don't care about it because that's just the stock market...
[Carlson:] No.
[Weber:] ... is denying what the real economy is.
[Carlson:] Many households are, but the bulk of stocks are in the hands of a very few people, and the average family hasn't benefited over the last decade from this boom.
[Hunt:] Let me just tell you something. You are a lot smarter than I am. You know what, markets do two things. They go up and they go down, and I'm sorry, you're not going to be able to change that. But I must say, Bob Bob, you have potential for growth. Because I'm so pleased that you praise Governor Ferguson, because you had quite a different view of him several weeks ago...
[Novak:] I just...
[Hunt:] ... and I want to tell you, I'm just so glad that you quoted him glowingly. That shows you can grow.
[Novak:] I just tried to quote him correctly, because Margaret got it wrong. Let me just say this, that Vin said something very, very important that most of you probably didn't understand, and that is there is a global deflation going on, it's very dangerous, and there's one way to fix it immediately...
[Shields:] What is that, Bob?
[Novak:] ... and that is to fix the price of gold.
[Shields:] Oh, boy!
[Novak:] If the price of gold were to be fixed, you would immediately have a rise in prices around the world and an increase in equity wealth.
[Hunt:] Vin, you ought to get a presidential candidate to run on that. Don't you think that would be exciting? Don't you think that?
[Shields:] ... let's just ask one question, don't you think follow on Margaret's point don't you think so much of the stock market thing was people buying stocks, rather than investing in companies? I mean, they were buying Al makes the point about...
[Carlson:] Yahoo!
[Shields:] Cisco and Yahoo! I mean, people didn't know what they did, or anything of the sort. And it turns out that Cisco had short of a shell game going.
[Novak:] That's so ridiculous, Mark.
[Shields:] It's accurate.
[Novak:] The idea that if you put in a stock and hope it will go up, you're making a bad instead of investing in a company, that sounds like a socialist would say that. And you're not a socialist.
[Shields:] Thank you so much, Robert.
[Hunt:] Those are the sort of people who invest in sometimes Lloyd's of London.
[Shields:] Oh no, I don't know anybody that silly. CAPITAL GANG will be back with fruitless U.S.-Chinese talks.

[Jason Carroll, Cnn Anchor:] It's a battle against the elements, and possibly an arsonist, in Florida, where firefighters are trying to tame a number of wildfires along the Gulf Coast. Reporter Brian Goff with WTVT joins us now live from the town of North Port, where the battle is being fought on several fronts. Good morning to you Brian.
[Brian Goff, Wtvt Reporter:] Jason, North Port is on the southern end of Sarasota County. It butts up against Charlotte County. And right on this county line yesterday, an arsonist got to work and set seven different fires. It obviously couldn't have happened at a worst time.
[Goff:] Here in North Port, the fires were unexpected. While attention was on the big brushfire on the Carlton Reserve, an arsonist struck neighborhoods. It happened quickly.
[Unidentified Female:] I'm like "stop it, there's no fire coming over here" 25 minutes later, it's right outside my door.
[Goff:] The Delfas lost everything. Others were luckier, and even as they were being ordered out, they stayed.
[Unidentified Male:] They'd run us all off, but I've got spray the roof down. This is all I've got.
[Goff:] In Charlotte County, nearby, the story was much the same: again, an arsonist again, a destroyed home.
[Unidentified Male:] I would see all this and think it would take a couple hours maybe 15 minutes, or something. It was quick.
[Goff:] The authorities are infuriated that someone is starting these fires while resources are tied up elsewhere.
[Unidentified Male:] Knowing full well that every piece of the fire-fighting equipment, pretty much, in the south end of Florida is already being used somewhere else.
[Goff:] So far, no one has been injured in any of these fires.
[Carroll:] Brian, my mother lives down in Port Charlotte, and she's always talking about this arsonist. Any word on that investigation?
[Goff:] Jason, so far, the authorities are, obviously, saying they're investigating it, they're looking for the arsonist. They, obviously, want to bring him or her into custody, but the fire investigators the people who normally lead up in an arson investigation are too busy putting out those fires, running from place to place, and on top of that, they've spent countless hours at the bigger fire. So they're just at the end of their wits, in terms of their resources. Presumably, they'll get to it in a more concentrated fashion if there are no more fires today.
[Carroll:] And Brian, very quickly, what about that big fire that we learned about yesterday? Any word on how that is going?
[Goff:] Well, yesterday 4,500 acres had burned over. Today, there was a small growth in it: It's at 5,000 acres now. They've got it almost contained. It's burning in more of a wilderness area, although, on the edges, some homes are threatened. But they're managing to keep that thing under control. They would have been able to do it a lot better and more quickly had they not had all these arson fires yesterday. But that fire is still going. It started because of a controlled burn that got out of control. That wasn't arson.
[Carroll:] All right, Brian Goff, coming to us from our affiliate WTVT, thank you for joining us this morning.
[Goff:] OK, Jason. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] People affected by this week's quake are no doubt considering how they're going cleanup and fix the damage. If you're in the Seattle area or live in an earthquake-prone region, questions are ever present about earthquake insurance.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] And joining us now to answer your e- mails is Michelle Rupp. She is an independent insurance agent in Seattle, who, as I understand it, Michelle, you've actually lived through a few of these earthquakes in Seattle, correct?
[Michelle Rupp, Independent Insurance Agent:] Yes, I have. I'm sorry, I can't hear you very well.
[Harris:] I'm sorry.
[Rupp:] Could you ask me that question again?
[Harris:] All right, I'm sorry. Yes, we've got to get that earpiece out there straightened out. But I understand that you are an earthquake nut and you've lived through a couple of earthquakes out there in Seattle is that right?
[Rupp:] Yes, I have. Three of them, actually, but this was the toughest.
[Harris:] Really?
[Rupp:] And the scariest.
[Kagan:] Where were you, and how did you do?
[Rupp:] I was at my office, and because we have earthquake kits under our desks, immediately we all dove for cover under our desks, with our heads resting on our earthquake kits. So we got to ride that out.
[Harris:] Now, since you introduced the concept, explain to those of us who may not be as familiar with these things.
[Kagan:] The Ohio in you.
[Harris:] That's me what the heck is an earthquake kit and what should you have in it?
[Rupp:] Well, at the office, we have water, food, some blankets, little warmers, a flash light, light sticks, and that's about it a little first aid stuff. Just in case you get stuck in your office, you have you some water, some things to sustain you. You really should have a kit that will last sustain you about 72 hours, in case help doesn't come for that long.
[Kagan:] And all this, of course, is part of the preparation, and part of that, too, is having the right kind of insurance, in case you have some damage to your home. We're both homeowners; we both have homeowners' insurance, so we're covered, right?
[Rupp:] Well, not necessarily.
[Harris:] How do you know if you...
[Rupp:] Regular...
[Kagan:] ... if you're covered or not for an earthquake?
[Rupp:] Well, first of all, you need to speak with your agent, because it's not I don't think most of us well, most people don't want to be looking into their contract and reading their contract right now. I suggest this is a time to call your agent. Most people don't have it unless they've specifically requested it.
[Harris:] Yes.
[Rupp:] So that's something you need to really pay attention to, particularly after this kind of a disaster.
[Kagan:] How much more expensive does that make your policy, if do you think in advance and get it.
[Harris:] That exactly what I was going to ask, yes.
[Rupp:] Generally speaking, it can be fairly expensive. It can double the price of your insurance policy.
[Kagan:] It really can.
[Rupp:] Very much so. And it depends on what kind of house you have. If you have brick, which is much more susceptible to brick falling off of a home, it's going to be much more expensive than, for example, a wood-frame home. And if you live on a hillside that has a tendency to come down, you're also going to be paying more money for that.
[Harris:] Now, is this something that most people in Seattle do have or would have, do you know?
[Rupp:] Not really. Actually, they say about 20 percent of the people have it. Even after the Northridge earthquake in California, lots of people started buying it, and then as the time progressed, they dropped it, because it is expensive.
[Harris:] Let's say now you've been lucky enough to come through with your home not being damaged, but this has been a good scare, and you decide you want it. Is now the time to shop for earthquake insurance I would imagine the prices would be rather high, since the insurance companies are looking at all these damages or it would be better to wait?
[Rupp:] Well, the problem is is you're not going to be able to buy it right now. Most companies put some kind of moratorium on earthquake insurance anywhere from 10 days to 30 days. And if we get any aftershocks, that will keep extending. So you're now going to be able to but it, but it's a good time to shop it and start educating yourself about how much it's going to cost.
[Harris:] Yes, and it strikes me as sort of like the issue that comes the discussion that comes after every hurricane: You know, we talk to folks along and some people inland who gets stuck or get stung by what happens with the hurricane, they never even think about it.
[Kagan:] They never think it's going to hit.
[Harris:] Yes, now, do people, when they buy places, I guess, in the West, do they find that out automatically? Is that kind of information available immediately to people, whether or not they are in an earthquake zone?
[Kagan:] Just like a flood zone when you buy a house around here.
[Harris:] Yes, right.
[Rupp:] Unfortunately, it's not available, even to those of us who sell insurance. Various companies have that kind of information available. But once again, I think it's something people should think about, because you simply can't get it for any price. And I think people should take a clue, because if an insurance company who wants to make money from you is not selling you earthquake insurance, it's because they're pretty darn sure if we have one, you're going down.
[Harris:] Yes.
[Kagan:] Yes.
[Rupp:] So pay attention to that.
[Kagan:] Michelle, we have a question from one of our viewers, from e-mail, so we're going to put that on the screen. We'll read it to you, and then you can answer back. Question here, "Is earthquake coverage in Washington modelled after the California policy? Does Washington policy cover damage to driveways, sidewalks, exterial wall services, Sheetrock and plaster?" That's kind of specific.
[Rupp:] Well, every policy varies. Unfortunately, there's not any general answer to any of that. This is a time when you need a good agent, and you need to discuss those issues with your agent. This is the time to call them and talk extensively about those things before it happens. Everyone's concerned after, but before it happens, ask every question you can, because again, you get what you pay for in insurance, and something some coverages are broader than others, some policies are broader than others. So again, talk, again, with your agent.
[Kagan:] Very good. Very educational.
[Harris:] Yes, we'll keep an eye on some more e-mails to see if we get any other good ones in later on.
[Kagan:] Very good. Michelle Rupp, thank you so much. Glad you came through the earthquake OK. Thanks for the information.
[Harris:] Thanks, and be careful out there. All right.
[Rupp:] Thank you.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] We begin in the Middle East, where deadly clashes between Israeli forces and demonstrators are now in their fourth day. The worst violence in four years has now claimed at least 27 lives and left hundreds injured. It began last Thursday, after opposition leader Ariel Sharon visited a disputed religious sight in Jerusalem. CNN's Mike Hanna reports the violence continues to spread and threatens an already fragile dialogue for a permanent peace.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] Spiraling violence through the Palestinian territories, here in the West Bank town of Nabalis, an attack on a Jewish enclave known as Joseph's Tomb, sharp-point ammunition is being used by both Palestinians and Israelis, and another person wounded as the casualty toll continues to increase. And among the dead, an Israeli border policeman. Outside the town, Israeli tanks move into place, as a series of confrontations begins to look more like a full-scale war. Running gun battles, too, in the Gaza Strip. And a Palestinian police outpost is struck by what appears to be an anti-tank missile. For the first time, violence erupts within Israel proper, Arab Israelis expressing their physical support for the Palestinian cause. And amidst the chaos, an assistance by the Israeli government that the peace negotiations should continue.
[Sholomo Ben Ami, Acting Israeli Foreign Minister:] The peace talks, now close to the last moments of decision, remain a major and main objective. We should not allow the tragic clashes of the last days to derail the process.
[Hanna:] But Palestinians say the conflict in the streets is a result of public frustration with a peace process in deadlock.
[Unidentified Male:] Some of the same people are supporting the peace process and they will continue to that, but of course they want results from this peace process.
[Hanna:] And the cry among the Palestinian demonstrators that they are fighting a final battle to liberate Jerusalem, and in particular the Muslim holy sites that they insist were defiled by the visit of an Israeli opposition politician last Thursday. [on camera]: It's a battle that's moved dangerously from the negotiating table into the streets. [voice-over]: The Israeli government continues to maintain that it is continuing to restore order, and its security forces showed no signs of withdrawing from the borders of the Palestinian territories. The Palestinian protesters give every indication that they will continue to confront and fight their cause. And as night falls in the West Bank, the gunfire continues to echo. Mike Hanna, CNN, Ramallah, in the West Bank.

[Zaeef:] ...the natural resources of Central Asia rather than Osama. America wants to replace the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan with a pro-American government in Kabul. Therefore, America wants to snatch from the Mujahideen the Muslim people of Afghanistan the right to have a government based on what we believe in. Aggression has been launched against our sovereignty and independence and a global dictatorship is being unleashed by American under the cover of defending democracy. It is only following its politically-motivated goals. The fact is that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan rendered imminent services both to people of Afghanistan and the international community. In Afghanistan, there was no security. People's honor, property and life was not safe. We give them security and protected their lives and honor. The world was suffering from illicit drugs. We rooted out poppy cultivation in Afghanistan completely. We did this service without asking anyone for remuneration, but these reports seem to be not acceptable to American
[Question:] They say that 400 Americans are in Afghanistan. Is this true or not true?
[Zaeef:] No. Not immediate relatives, but people of Afghanistan have been murdered who are in generally all relatives of In this mosque, which was demolished by American
[Question:] Other countries have now offered their commitment to join America in sending combat troops against Afghanistan, including Australia, which is promising to send special forces commanders to assist the Americans. Does the Jihad extend to those countries? And what messages do you send to the leaders of such countries, such as the prime minister of Australia who are promising now to commit combat troops to assist the Americans?
[Zaeef:] I think it will be a shame for all these countries that they are all aligning against a weak and a destroyed Afghanistan to destroy it furthermore. I think only America is in it for that.
[Question:] Does the war extend to those countries who are promising now the smaller countries who are promising to commit troops? Does the Jihad extend to them?
[Zaeef:] Anyone who enters Afghanistan, we will be fighting against them, because but the first our first enemy is American.
[Question:] Will you extend the war beyond your boundaries? Or will you keep the war within Afghanistan itself? Yesterday, you said that you would check with the authorities to see whether the Taliban has lifted the restrictions on Mr. bin Laden. Can you give us any information on that?
[Zaeef:] There was, as you know, restriction on him, on his speech and everything. Now, only a partial restriction is lifted that on his speech. But there is still restriction on him to use the side of Afghanistan against any country. This is not allowed here there is a ban on him. I think that the last question, because it is raining one more.
[Question:] The French The U.S. said that it used anti-bunker missiles. What is the effect?
[Zaeef:] He is, of course, the French journalist now under detention, and there is investigation about him. So this
[Question:] About Mohammed Mullah Omar
[Zaeef:] He is alive.
[Question:] He is alive right now?
[Zaeef:] Yes, yes.
[Question:] Sir, U.S. troops are heading toward Afghanistan. They say they have deployed ground troops. What is your comment about this?
[Zaeef:] When the American enters Afghanistan, there will start the real war, not now. No one has no one has no one now has defected. There is a press report that the Americans attacked
[Lin:] What was once a rare event a news conference by the Taliban has now become a daily occurrence. There you heard from the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan claiming that there have been dozens of civilians killed in the latest round of airstrikes by the U.S.-led forces the most intense night so far in this week-long campaign more than a dozen civilians in three different cities Kabul, Kandahar and outside of Jalalabad. Fresh reports in claiming also that several houses have been destroyed. They are saying that the real war will begin when American troops actually set foot inside of Afghanistan when this air campaign is over. They seem to be expecting ground troops and they are saying that America is thirsty for more bloodshed. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] Animal rights activists are on a crusade to stop what they see as the cruel treatment of livestock in Belgium cattle markets. Belgium's animal rights organization, the Global Action in the Interest of Animals, says cows are tortured. We get the story now from Belgium's Way Press International. And another warning, you may find some of the pictures in this report disturbing.
[Unidentified Way Press International Correspondent:] This is the Brussels cattle market, long after the early morning trading. The floors are being swept and washed clean. The few remaining animals are loaded onto the waiting trucks. But however peaceful these cows may seem now, they have, at one time or another, been witnesses to the most cruel aspects of human nature. This footage was shot with a hidden camera by members of GAIA, a virgin animal welfare organization that has long been campaigning against cruelty to animals. In the course of the press conference, GAIA strongly condemned the market organizers for what is perceived as gross negligence on their part. Despite the explicit scenes depicted in the video footage, the reaction for the market organizers was excessively muted, to say the least.
[Paul Thielemans, Anderlecht Cattle Market:] These images, indeed, are very hard, and it looks like that there is bad behavior by the merchants; but in fact, it is simply an occasional accident. We have taken all our dispositions until next week to make sure that this couldn't happen any more.
[Michel Vandenbosch, Gaia President:] Each time went there, we witnessed severe hitting and beating of poor animals with broken legs, being beaten up lying down, agonizing, dying even in blood.
[Way Press International Correspondent:] Another very worrying aspect is the involvement of adolescents, and sometimes, even children, in this hostile violence. The profession may well be handed down from father to son, but the type of behavior depicted here by the younger generation, clearly needs to be stomped out altogether.
[Theelemans:] It makes no sense to make people believe that this is the normal way of organizing these live cattle markets. It is not reality, it is media, it is a way to manipulate people.
[Vandenbosch:] The market's organizers can still not guarantee that legislation is being respected, and strictly respected, so there is one answer in order to force them to change, and to force them to prove all guarantees, and that is to close down the markets until, until they can prove and guarantee that they respect all legislations.
[Way Press International Correspondent:] It is perhaps not surprising that death threats have been issued against the president of GAIA, but whoever the perpetrators may be, one thing is certain: a way must be found to put an end to this terrible suffering. For this CNN WORLD REPORT, this is Way Press International in Brussels.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] You know, we've been talking about shark attacks for the longest now, but get this: an Orlando, Florida teenager now recovering from an alligator attack. Edna Wilkes escaped with an injured arm after she was saved by her friend now best friend no doubt Amanda Vallis. Let's get the details now from Central Florida News 13.
[Unidentified Female:] She's my best friend. She was my best friend before this, but still, it's like I owe her my life.
[Kelly Teague, Cfn13 Orlando, Florida:] Edna Wilkes can't say enough about her friend Amanda.
[Unidentified Female::] She came back, and she gave me her raft, her boogie board, and she helped me swim.
[Teague:] The teens were both swimming with a group of friends in little Lake Conway Saturday night, when a gator grabbed Edna's arm and pulled her underwater.
[Unidentified Female:] I just heard her screaming, and every time I heard a scream, I would just get this shock through my body, and I never want to feel that feeling again.
[Teague:] Instead of climbing out of the water, Amanda helped pull her friend to the shore.
[Unidentified Female:] I knew that I was risking my life, but I didn't really care.
[Teague:] Edna says for the past five years, she's never thought about twice about swimming in the lake.
[Unidentified Female:] We've never seen one the whole time that we have lived there, and just came out of nowhere. [on camera]: In all, three alligators were pulled from Little Lake Conway less than 24 hours after the attack. The smallest, just 2 feet, and the largest was over 11 feet long. [voice-over]: As for Edna, she has a broken arm and a deep cut of the hand that she used to pry open the gator's mouth. Still, Edna knows that the attack could have been much worse, if it wasn't from her friend, Amanda.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] With an ocean view, food stands, arcade games and other amusements, the Santa Monica Pier in Southern California can be a carefree place to head for the Fourth of July celebration. Not this year though, it was the site of a gunfight and a hostage standoff. CNN's Jim Hill is in Santa Monica. Jim, tell us what happened?
[Jim Hill, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Lou, a man who's described as a very hardcore gang suspect is now in custody, charged with 15 counts of kidnap and four counts of attempted murder: all from a shootout and a hostage crisis that unfolded on the Santa Monica Pier: this famous tourist attraction you see behind me in Santa Monica, just west of Los Angeles here along the coast. Now this began about 1:00 in the morning and ended about five hours later with the suspect, identified as 25-year-old Oswaldo Amezcua, taken into custody, climbing through a window in an arcade and being led away by police. Police say he is a gang member who was wanted, sought on a warrant charging him with three separate killings. He along with a man police described as an accomplice had been confronted on the pier shortly after 1:00 in the morning west coast time. One suspect, the alleged accomplice, was taken into custody without incident. However, police say Amezcua ran into the arcade and took 15 people hostage. Those people were released little by little in small groups during the morning as negotiators talked with the suspect. Finally, at about 20 minutes to 7:00 west coast time, the last two hostages were released. Negotiators convinced the suspect, Amezcua, to come out, which he did as we reported. He laid on the ground and was taken into custody. Now this was a very tense situation, not only because he was armed with at least one handgun and had fired at police, wounding three of them, wounding an innocent bystander; none of them seriously by the way, but he was a suspect in three separate killings. And police say he is a known gang member and what they describe as a very hardcore gang member. All of this, of course, happening early in the morning, the Fourth of July, a day which usually sees crowds of people, throngs of people, really, here at the Santa Monica Pier. But really a dark cloud over it today Lou.
[Waters:] Any chance those folks will be allowed back around the pier before the day is over?
[Hill:] Well at this point police had roughly 100 people who were not directly involved in this, but who were on the end of the pier, essentially blocked from leaving by all of this. Those people who spent the night on the end of the pier, waiting for all this to conclude have finally been allowed to go home. Police are continuing to sweep the pier for evidence and so forth. We're not sure at this point if they're going to have their normally festive amusement park-type activities on this Fourth of July. But I'm sure a lot of people here, including the Chamber of Commerce, certainly hope that's the case.
[Waters:] All right, that's the story, CNN's Jim Hill on the Santa Monica Pier.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] In a turnaround announced today, accused FBI turncoat Robert Hanssen has agreed to plead guilty to spying for Moscow. That means Hanssen will escape the price paid by the agents he betrayed that is death. CNN justice correspondent Kelli Arena has the latest on the FBI spy scandal Kelli.
[Kelli Arena, Cnn Correspondent:] Joie, after weeks of negotiating, a plea agreement has been reached between the accused spy Robert Hanssen and the government. That is according to one of Hanssen's lawyer, Preston Burton. Sources CNN as part of that agreement Hanssen will plead guilty in exchange for life in prison without parole. Those sources also say Hanssen will be required to sit with interviews with the FBI and the CIA so they can determine the extent of his activities.
[Jonathan Turley, George Washington University:] What the government needs is to know how much damage was done. Much of the damage from someone like Hanssen is below the water line. You don't know where the ship is leaking until he shows you. So what the government wants from Hanssen is information, his cooperation, and how bad this got during his period of being a spy.
[Arena:] What's more, a source with knowledge about the case tells CNN, Hanssen's wife, Bonnie, will be allowed to receive some benefits under his government pension. Details of the plea agreement will be made public on Friday at Hanssen's plea hearing. Until then, the agreement remains under seal. For a little bit of background, Hanssen a 25 year FBI veteran has been detained in an undisclosed location since his arrest on February 18. Now the government accuses him of passing U.S. secrets to Moscow for 15 years in exchange for $1.4 million in cash and diamonds Joie.
[Chen:] All right, CNN's justice correspondent Kelli Arena reporting to us from Washington this afternoon.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] A hostage ordeal in Orlando, Florida, entered its third day with the suspect shooting at a police robot. However, authorities say they're still talking with the man, and they're still hopeful. CNN's Mark Potter joins us from Orlando with the very latest. Mark, what's happening?
[Mark Potter, Cnn Correspondent:] Good afternoon, Kyra. Police here at the command post say they are still negotiating with the hostagetaker, but add that there are no imminent signs that the three remaining hostages will be released voluntarily. 41-year-old Jamie Petrone, an ex-convict, is still holding a 41- year-old woman, a 16-year-old girl, and an infant in a house that he raided on Saturday, as he was fleeing police who were chasing him in connection with a convenience store robbery and murder Friday in Pompano Beach, Florida. This morning, Petrone's attorney, Spencer Seigel, was here, talking with police and relatives. Over the weekend, he made a public plea to his client to come out of the house, but that never happened. Still, about an hour ago, police said they still had hopes, this matter could be resolved.
[Capt. Steve Jones, Orange Co. Sheriff's Dept:] I am sure that he wants to, you know, be able to get out of this whole situation. So we don't know what is going through his mind. We have told him, release the hostages, come out and let's take care of everything. His attorneys, you know, everybody has, you know, basically we have made all of the pleas on TV. So he knows that. Basically, the ball is in his court.
[Potter:] Police say they have met all of Petrone's demands, they have sent food and other items into the house. They also, yesterday, released an audiotape of Petrone apologizing to his family members for this situation. Police say that he has promised on a number of occasions to release the remaining hostage, but so far he has shown no signs of actually doing that. Kyra, back to you.
[Phillips:] All right, Mark Potter, live in Orlando, thank you.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] Escalating tensions in the Middle East have prompted President Clinton to cancel all of his travel plans for today to stay in Washington and monitor the crisis. A short time ago, Israel sent warnings of possible retaliation to Syria and Lebanon, after Hezbollah guerrillas ambushed and captured three Israeli soldiers who were on patrol along the Israel-Lebanon border. CNN's Jerrold Kessel is in Jerusalem with the latest Jerrold.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] Gene, escalating tensions, escalating rhetoric, too. Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian authority president, returning from a trip to Spain, where he had been attending an international gathering, back in his headquarters in Gaza just moments ago landing and accusing Israel of escalating what he called tensions escalating violence against the Palestinian people, against the whole Arab people, against the Muslim world. That statement from Yasser Arafat, as the Israelis for their part stoke up tensions by providing a warning to the Lebanese and the Syrian governments in the wake of the kidnapping of three of their soldiers along the northern border on the between Israel, Lebanon and Syria. Apparently, Hezbollah guerrillas from inside Lebanon kidnapping those soldiers. A build up of Israeli troops in that area, as Israel struggles first of all on a military level to try to locate the whereabouts of the kidnapped soldiers but sending warnings to Lebanon and Syria that it holds them responsible for the welfare of those soldiers and for reigning in Hezbollah. Israel at the same time, just as Arafat, as Yasser Arafat has done in his statement now, appealing to the world community, Israel saying the world community had underwritten the international agreement by which Israel withdrew its forces from south Lebanon after its long occupation in May and saying the international community was honor bound to try to intervene and prevent any violations of that accord. Yasser Arafat saying now that the international community should intervene to try to stop what he calls this escalating violence by Israel against the Palestinian community and against the Arab world. So both sides stepping up their rhetoric, just as the violence and tension get stepped up on a number of fronts now.
[Randall:] Thanks, Jerrold. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak is planning a news conference at his country's defense ministry today at 2 p.m. Eastern time. We're planning to bring it to you live.

[Larry King:] Tonight: a show you can't afford to miss! Wall Street is in a tizzy and Main Street is kind of tense. What should you be doing with your money right now? In New York to talk dollars and economic sense, financial planner Suze Orman, best-selling author of "Nine Steps to Financial Freedom." Maria Bartiromo of CNBC's "Market Week" and "Squawk Box", author of "Use the News." CNN senior financial correspondent Allan Chernoff, and you know him from "MONEYLINE." From CNBCs' "Business Center," Ron Insana; his new book, "The Message of the Markets." And Joseph Battipaglia, chief investment strategist for Gruntal & Company; they are all next on LARRY KING LIVE. Good evening. The Federal Reserve Bank spoke today, but a lot of investors didn't like what they heard. The Fed cut key interest rates a half percentage point, stock prices nose-dived, the Dow Jones Industrial dropped more than 238 points closing at its lowest level in about 2 years. Nasdaq plunged nearly 94 points, and that set a 28- month low. We will start with Suze Orman. What's going on?
[Suze Orman, Financial Planner:] Well, that is a good question. I have to tell you, I'm not sure anybody really knows. We have a danger signal here now. You know, last time, Larry, I sat with you January 2nd they lowered interest rates January 3rd and we saw the markets for the next few weeks sky rocket. All of a sudden we have a lowering of interest rates today, and the markets go down with it. I can't truly remember when the last time that has ever happened. I think people really are looking for the earnings of the market, they are buying this market on the news of the stocks, not on news of the Feds, and the Feds didn't give them at all what they wanted to hear today by any means.
[King:] Allan, let's go from the initiative of, the question asker is dumb here. I am dumb. OK? What is if now I can buy a home loan for 7 percent instead of 7 12 percent, why does that mean that Phil across the street sold his stock?
[Allan Chernoff, Cnn Financial Correspondent:] Well, two different things we are talking about here. Certainly, the lowering of interest rates is great for the housing market, no doubt about that. And in fact the economy is looking not all that bad thus far. The stock market, as Suze pointed out, is or worried much more about corporate earnings, and that's where the real problem is. People on Wall Steet are talking about a recession in corporate profits, not yet a recession in the economy. Only a few forecasters are saying we are having that right now. So, it is corporate profits that really count, and thus far, Wall Street does not see the light at the end of the dark tunnel in terms of corporate profitability.
[King:] Then why, Maria, were interest rates even the announcement being important?
[Maria Bartiromo, Cnbc's "market Week":] Well, Larry, I think you have a couple of things going on. First of all, today, the market was down because of disappointment over the rate cut. Now, the...
[King:] Why?
[Bartiromo:] Now, the majority of people on Wall Street expected that we would see the Fed cut rates by 50 basis points, but there was a much bigger hope in the market. A lot of people hoped that it would be a more aggressive cut of 75 basis points. So when we actually got a smaller cut than the more optimistic hope, stocks sold off. The reason why people wanted a bigger cut than we actually saw because this economy has slowed down quite substantially, and they now are questioning whether the Fed is actually in control here. They are saying to themselves, wait a minute, for a decade, the Fed was having this perfect economy, growing not too fast, yet not too slow, and all of a sudden, we see company after company saying that earnings will not make what people are expecting, then we see layoffs galore, we see the stock market falling out of bed. There is a lot of negatives happening, so Wall Street investors, money managers, really wanted to see the Fed be a lot more aggressive than that 50 basis points. That is the bottom line.
[King:] Joe, who is wrong? The investor or the Fed?
[Joseph Battipaglia, Guntal & Company:] Well, I don't think either one of them is wrong. The Fed is going about administering interest rates in the way they know how, looking at the economy as it stands, the strength of the dollar, and some of the underlying fundamentals of a 20-year bull market that has created great wealth in this country. On the other side of the coin, there are those investors who have been in the market for quite sometime, and have seen corrections come and go, and they have been staying the course, and that is why investor confidence is still staying relatively powerful. But what we are seeing, though, are those who essentially want to trade the market and are relatively newer to investing who expect more from the market sooner, running way from this market at this point, which is too bad, because I think right now is the moment of great opportunity as an investor, as it opposed to moment of great distress. And now, unfortunately, there are two many running for the exits. And I think that's part of the bottoming process.
[King:] Ron, is this a semi-unwarranted panic?
[Ron Insana, Cnbc's "business Center":] Well, I don't know, Larry. I mean, I think the stock market has seized upon a couple of different issues, some of which you have already heard about, but we're also in the midst of a historic unwinding in the stock market of excess valuation. Analysts, investors, got very, very euphoric about the prospects for stocks to continue growing at a 20 percent compounded annual rate forever. So, they bid stocks up to astronomical levels. When you have an investment boom go bust, it gets to be a fairly complicated process. I think that's why the stock market was so disturbed today by the Fed's half-point cut. They wanted more. They needed more to get the Fed to stop the bleeding on Wall Street, which many investors fear could spread to Main Street over the next several months.
[King:] So Suze, if they had cut it three-quarters of a percent today, we'd have seen market go up? There's no doubt in your mind to that.
[Orman:] I'm not sure that's true, either. I have to tell you, we may have seen it spike up and then maybe it would have come down again. I think it's really bottom line here is earnings. I think possibly we wouldn't have seen the carnage that we saw today, Larry. But we might not have seen the run-up that we did on January 3rd.
[Bartiromo:] Yes, I think, Larry, the thing that investors really want to see right now is good news from corporations. I mean, they want to see companies come out and say, yes, business is improving, and yes we have seen an increase in orders over the last month or so, and, yes, we have seen more confidence on the part of our customers. At this point, every company we speak with, every CEO we have on, they all say we can't tell you what we are expecting in the second half of the year. We don't know when business is going to turn. So, that's the crux of it. It is the fact that earnings are just not there.
[King:] Allan, is this a good time or bad time, then? What is it?
[Chernoff:] Well, clearly, for corporate America right now, it's going through a bit of a bad time. I was going to say, Maria pointed to the issue of visibility. That's the new buzzword on Wall Street, and companies are saying they simply don't have much visibility. Wall Street certainly wants to have assurances. It wants to know exactly what's coming up, and in fact, it got used to that. Now, corporate America is not providing that visibility, and as a result, investors are afraid to buy stocks right now.
[King:] Let me take a break, and we're going pick up with Ron and then with others, and I'm going to quote a critique, a strong critique of what everybody is doing tonight in the current issue of the "New Yorker" and get our guests to comment on it. We'll be including your phone calls as well. This is LARRY KING LIVE. The panel has just begun. Don't go away. We'd like to have everybody's opinion on this, but I'll start with Ron Insana, since he's mentioned in the article. There's an article in the current "New Yorker" by James Surowiecki in which compares the way this is covered. So, this zeros in on Maria, Allan and Ron, by the networks, and it has sort of like Ron Insana in a Irwin Allen disaster film. He's standing on the floor and everything is going to pot. And James writes: "The funny thing was nothing really seemed to have provoked any panic. Oh, people were apparently worried the Japanese banks were going under, but we've known that for a very long time. So, what was going on? People were selling because other people were selling. They were afraid because they were being told that everyone was afraid. Watching CNBC those two days provided a lesson in how pointless minute-by-minute coverage of the stock market is. It distorts the way the market works, helps turn what should be a diverse, independent- thinking crowd of investors into a herd acting upon a single collective thought. In this case, sell. As a rule, the more information markets have, the better. But often what CNBC and the other pillars of market information journalism offer is not information, it's noise" Ron.
[Insana:] Well, you know, Larry, we hear these criticisms oftentimes during periods of particularly difficult market activity. It's really a shoot the messenger mentality. It's just not true that CNBC or any other television network causes the sell-off. The market was going down before we began to discuss it. I mean, the ingredients for the sell-off were there. There was a development with respect to Japanese banks on the Monday that this writer is talking about. A rating house decided that some of these some 19 Japanese banks might be less creditworthy than they were before. We saw some very large sell programs in Europe that knocked bank stocks on that continent down rather sharply. It spilled over to the United States, and yes, we discussed it on a minute-by-minute basis. We don't fan the flames up or down. We keep hearing this people, you know, and people who suggest that the media are responsible for movements in the markets fail to remember that in the 1600s in Holland, there was a mania over tulip bulbs, and the prices went to astronomical levels. There was no television. There was no television in 1929 when the stock market went up and crashed. It's not us.
[King:] But Joe, as an observer, as an outside observer, in a sense, is writer right in saying nothing's bad? In other words, there's no reason for people to be selling other than other are guys selling. So the media fuels it.
[Battipaglia:] The economy has slowed fairly significantly in certain sectors. The stock market correctly has withdrawn itself, has pulled back because of that slowdown to lower valuation points. Interestingly enough, though, Larry, in 1998 and '99, Ron made this great point off camera, while we were talking about the Internet and the questions were raised in the media as to what about these valuations? Can this be so? Let's look at history. Nobody heeded those remarks either as the market propelled itself higher. Now, I will take some blame onto analytical community, too, that's where I come from. No matter what the analysts said, capital was flowing, surging into telecom and to the IPO dot-com environment, and overriding anybody's sense of reality and they pushed it up as far as they can go and eventually, those things do not sustain themselves, and they collapse on themselves, and that's why you hear that reader and writer saying, hey, they were selling, so I should sell and that begets more selling. But eventually, the capital, the real capital will find a place to enter a market, and then turn things around once again.
[King:] And the key, Suze, is when does that happen?
[Orman:] Well, it happens on an individual level more than on a whole level because you see, Larry, each one each one of us has our own individual timing when it comes to the market. And if you're going to enter this market and you have three years until you need this money and you're waiting until this market turns around, you could be in serious trouble. And this market may turn around here, but I don't think we're going to see it happen very quickly. Please keep in mind...
[King:] So, are you saying don't sell, don't buy? What?
[Orman:] I think you cannot I know you want to make it that simplistic, but you can't.
[King:] Well, it's buying or selling or nothing; right? There's only three choices.
[Orman:] No, because, what are you buying and what are you selling? What do you own? What is your time period? What is your risk factor? How much money do you have? What do you need? We are not this herd of cattle where everybody needs to buy, everybody needs to sell. If you're young and you're in your 20s and you want to start or 30s or even 40s and you have 10, 20 years and you want to start nibbling, nibble. But not with everything that you have. People have to learn that it's not an all or there isn't a universal fix.
[King:] Marie, let's try to break this down to a human being. Let's take a 43-year-old bus driver in Hialeah]. He's got two kids, makes $53,000 a year, had $38,000 in the stock market, which is now worth $26,000, in mutual funds. What does he do?
[Bartiromo:] Well, for starters, he needs to ask himself how much risk he wants to take on. He needs to...
[King:] He's down from $38,000 to $26,000 in savings.
[Bartiromo:] So, he doesn't want to take on much risk at all?
[King:] Correct.
[Bartiromo:] He wants to ask himself when does he need the money? What is he really trying to achieve? Is he trying to buy a house in one year or is he trying to get this money to pay for an infant's college in the next 15 years? He wants to ask himself what areas of this economy are actually seeing growth as opposed to slowdown? Where precisely is he looking to invest? There are a lot of questions that go into it. Now, I am of the belief that the individual out there is actually not throwing money at things that they do not understand, and is actually using the news and using the information out there to make smart investment decisions. The fact is we are right now experiencing a very slow economy, and a slowdown from what we have been seeing. You look at the numbers that we get every month. GDP one year ago was at 5.6 percent. Today, it's zero or possibly negative. So, we've really seen a halt in things.
[King:] Allan, who helps our bus driver?
[Chernoff:] Who helps our bus driver?
[King:] Yes, who does he turn to?
[Chernoff:] Well, you really would hope that he'd turn to the Federal Reserve today, but apparently that didn't happen. Let me give you an analogy because the economy that Maria referred to really, to turn it around, it's kind of like a supertanker. You can't turn it around very rapidly whereas the stock market behaves more like speedboat. It moves up and down very, very rapidly. A lot of investors, obviously, have gotten tossed out of that speedboat. And today, it seems that Captain Greenspan was throwing them a life preserver, but apparently a lot of people didn't want to grab on to that life preserver.
[Bartiromo:] Can I add just one thing here? You know, you mentioned noise, Larry, and I just want to say that today, there has been a tremendous information explosion. There is so much information on CNBC, so much information on CNN, on Fox, in newspapers, in the financial press. Today, information has become commoditized, and the fact is that the best item that an investor has going for them is his or her own judgment because we have seen all of this information, and, of course, there is going to be noise when there is a lot of information.
[King:] Ron, that judgment can get confused, though, if he's watching 17 different people give 17 opinions; right?
[Insana:] Absolutely, and I think, you know, this where partly becomes incumbent upon the individual to educate him or herself with respect to the reality of the marketplace for one, the reality of the economy, and what bits of information are true over time. You know, there is there are, I should say, a lot of movements within the market over the course of a year that some of which mean something and some of which don't. But we know from basic market history what's important, interest rates and corporate profits, sometimes war, although that happens very infrequently. We know that the markets move in waves, and we know how the markets behave at certain stages of their maturation process. There are bits of information, solid bits that we talk about quite frequently, that individuals can use to their advantage. They have to be as informed, though, as the people they're listening to in order to make sound judgments.
[King:] Let me get a break and when we come back, we'll pick up with Joe and I'll ask the simple question, what's wrong with just cash? We'll be right back. Joe Battipaglia, I know investment strategists may not like this, but what's wrong with just Treasury notes and deposit accounts and CDs?
[Battipaglia:] There is nothing wrong with them. In fact, that is one of your asset classes. It's stocks, it's bonds, it's cash, and depending upon what kind of risk profile the investor has, and what kind of economic situation we face, we will use that in the mix, so the income-oriented investor actually did very well over the last year-and-a-half, because bond prices went up, and they had an accretion of value. The balanced portfolio approach gave them less of a downside in this market, so indeed, cash has a place, but I want to add one thing, Larry, that's important here. Investors and the providers of information should not be insulated from one another, and there is a great intermediary in there, and that's the advice giver. Let's not look past those who work up the analyses of what's going on and make it simple for the investor to use, make it direct to their particular needs. That's important to point out here.
[King:] Is that what you do, Suze, right?
[Orman:] That is what I do. And you know, now we are doing it more via the television networks than through books, newspapers and magazine articles. But the investor out there, the bus driver, they do need somebody at this point in time, to ask something too, Larry, because I have to tell you, they are confused and they don't know who to trust. The time you learn about your money is not when the markets are going down, you learn about your money in good times, and in bad times so when something like this happens, at least you have a plan. You know, when we were on on January 2nd, you looked at me and said, Suze Orman, what would you would buy right now? And that day, I looked at you and I said the QQQs. They were at 52. Three weeks later, they were at 67, they were up 30 percent. Today, they are down at $40 a share, but were we on again three weeks later to say to everybody, sell them! But common knowledge should have been, Larry, my God, I'm up 10 percent, I'm up 20 percent in two weeks of course, you sell! So, we have to put common knowledge to our money as well, besides just these statistical facts about money.
[King:] Allan, sometimes it seems to the observer that you are never wrong. Because every day, there it's like the weather forecast. You are never wrong. You were wrong, but you were never wrong. Every day, there is a new explanation for what happened yesterday.
[Chernoff:] Larry, you know, there is an old saying on Wall Street: bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered, and I think what Suze is talking about is you don't want to be too greedy, you don't want to be a pig, that's very important. On your other note, the equation between stock market strategists and weather forecasters well, I often joke about that myself, because so many strategists on the Street, like Joe, have been extremely bullish as you have seen, the stock market has been declining quite a bit. They continue to believe that the market eventually will recover, and the emphasis is on "eventually." A lot of investors simply need to have patience.
[King:] Ron, if I had a horse racing handicapper here, I would ask him to tell me who is going to win first tomorrow at aqueduct. Can you tell me a stock to buy tomorrow?
[Insana:] That is absolutely not my job, Larry. I'm a journalist who reports on the movements of the markets this is where we have to very finely define the role of the players that you are describing here tonight. Suze and Joe give advice to investors.
[King:] Right. You report?
[Insana:] I report financial news. If I went out and offered advice, I would be violating the call of my profession. That is not what I do. I could tell people very well what happened, we can help handicap what will likely happen in future, based on information we have now.
[King:] What do you think of the handicappers?
[Insana:] Well, listen, I mean, some have very good track records, some have terrible track records, and some are right in the middle, and you know, it is our job to find the best, and offer those people to our viewers, as we have tried to do over the years. Some are very honest, some are unscrupulous I mean, you know, the world is...
[King:] Oh?
[Insana:] ... somewhere in between the middle.
[King:] You mean, recommending stocks that they have their own interest in?
[Insana:] That happens from time to time. You know, not fortunately, we found ways to weed those people out, and we force people to disclose their positions when they talk to us on CNBC, so the investor, the viewer, is always aware of the potential conflict that might exist.
[King:] We'll get our panel's opinion of the tax cut. We'll be taking your phone calls as well right after this. Maria, is the tax cut a good idea for this economy?
[Bartiromo:] Well, I think at this point, investors haven't really taken that into consideration, because we haven't seen anything materialize. We won't see anything materialize for a couple of years. At the end of the day, lower taxes are a good thing for investors, for consumers. It's just putting more money in their pockets, just like lower interest rates are a good thing. I am of the belief that eventually these efforts will take this economy out of a slump, and the stock market as well.
[King:] Joe, do you agree with that?
[Battipaglia:] Tax rates need to come down, there needs to be change in the tax code. Unfortunately, this plan was conceived during strong economic activity, and was just meant to balance out the books between what they spend and what they take in. Now we are at a point where a stimulative package might be more beneficial, but we are stuck in a political logjam. If the Republicans push for a faster cut with bigger implications, the Democrats say we are going to be deficit spending, and the Democrats don't want to get behind a tax cut, because they fought it for a long time. So, the tax cut is not going to have the effect it would otherwise have.
[King:] Suze?
[Orman:] You know, the tax cut just scares me a little bit, because a lot of it, I think, was based on a lot of the capital gains coming in from the market, the wealth in the market, and how that translated to surpluses later on. Have they all gone away? What is the money there? Is it not? I do think we need a tax cut, I want a tax cut. But and I don't like this thing about yearly checks on it, because there are things about that that doesn't make sense either, but I think we need one, I don't think we have the right one in place at this point in time.
[King:] Allan?
[Chernoff:] Larry, it is not a quick fix for the economy, and clearly it's not going to be a quick fix, because we have to wait for the Senate to actually pass...
[King:] Assuming that it does.
[Chernoff:] Right, and that certainly will take time, according to what a lot of senators are telling us right now. But it is not likely to be the quick fix for this huge economy, just like these interest rate cuts don't immediately turn the economy around. It takes time.
[King:] Ron?
[Insana:] Well, I think, Larry, you know, at this point in the economic cycle, you can't overstimulate the economy. I think, given that the stock market bubble has burst we criticized Japan in the early 1990s for not cutting interest rates and taxes quickly enough I don't see any downside to tax cuts right now economically. There is a lot politically that people can talk about, but interest rates and taxes probably should come down to support the economy, as the market deflates here.
[King:] Do any of you think we are in a recession?
[Insana:] Yeah.
[Unidentified Male:] I do not.
[King:] Who's saying yeah? Who said yeah?
[Insana:] I did, Ron. I did. I think the manufacturing... Yeah.
[King:] I want to get a break, we'll pick up on that. We'll also start including viewer phone calls, we will re-introduce our panel if you have joined us late. This is LARRY KING LIVE. Jennie Craig will be with us tomorrow night. We'll be right back. We are back. Let's reintroduce our panel, have a question on recession, then go to calls. The panel is Suze Orman they are all in New York best-selling author, financial planner, now out: a revised updated version of her number one "New York Times" best- seller, "The Nine Steps to Financial Freedom." She also wrote the current best-seller, "The Courage to be Rich." Maria Bartiromo is CNBC's "Market Week" with Maria Bartiromo host as well as "Squawk Box" as she has an upcoming book, "Use the News." Allan Chernoff is CNN senior financial correspondent and the senior correspondent on CNN's "MONEYLINE." Ron Insana is co-anchor of CNBC's "Business Center" and author of "The Message of the Markets." And Joe Battipaglia is the chief investment strategist for Gruntal & Company. Now, Ron, you say that we are in a recession.
[Insana:] Well, 20 percent of the economy, Larry, is definitely in a recession; manufacturing has been suffering now for over six months, and that is a big chunk; the consumer side of the economy is holding up relatively well. But you know, one of the points we make in the book is that the markets are telling us that the risk of a general recession is in fact very real. The stock market has come down dramatically in the space of a year, profits continue to contract at major corporations. That is a precursor to an overall recession. We are very close to the zero line on economic growth, as Allan Greenspan told us, which means we are very close to an overall recession.
[King:] Who disagrees with that; Joe?
[Chernoff:] I will. I would like to say that there is no doubt we are in a profits recession, and that is two consecutive quarters of declining profits. In terms of two consecutive quarters of negative economic, well, that's a little different because thus far, we haven't even had one full quarter of negative economic growth.
[Insana:] But, Allan, slowing from a growth rate of 5 percent to a growth rate of zero, we're splitting hairs.
[Chernoff:] We're slowing down. No doubt.
[Insana:] That's almost a recession, if not a real one.
[Chernoff:] But parts of the economy are holding up.
[King:] Joe, are we in a recession?
[Battipaglia:] No, we are not in a recession. What I see is that the consumer has great buoyancy because they have kept most of the wealth created over past 20 years. We are essentially still in full employment. The manufacturing side of the economy moved quickly once they had evidence last year of this deceleration that the fellows were talking about, so they cut their production schedules quickly, laid off workers unfortunately, and are letting those inventories come down very quickly.
[King:] Why keep going up?
[Battipaglia:] What does it mean? Ultimately, is that is the economy has demand out there, to consume these products across the board for more materials since media goods to finished goods; and ultimately production goes back on stream the latter part of the year, and the service side of the economy our economy, which is the majority of economy, continues to move along, because frankly we need all those services.
[King:] Let me start including some phone calls; Boise, Idaho, for our panel. Hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry. I basically had a question of right or wrong. It seems that most investors depend on analysts. Why didn't they warn us at the March top when it seemed obvious to those of us who could read a quarterly or annual statement, there was always recurring, one time write-offs every quarter; inventory buildup; Cisco had less revenues a year ago...
[King:] Suze and Joe, why didn't you tell us? Suze first.
[Orman:] I have to tell you, I did tell you; I told you on your show, Larry. I started saying on January 21 of the year 2000, I started saying, sell, sell, sell; went on your show twice and said, do not have more than 40 percent of your money in the market, and of that, only 25 percent here, and of that, only a few percentage points in technology stocks. So, I have to tell you I did. But that doesn't mean I was right or wrong, it was because it made common sense. Alan Greenspan came out and this is what I would say to the caller: why do you need an analyst to tell you when to sell, when the fact of the matter was, truthfully, Alan Greenspan himself told you he was going to start to raise interest rates?
[King:] I don't want to be like anti-God here, but Joe, what makes Greenspan why is he law and order?
[Battipaglia:] Well, because he seems to have the biggest stick right now, to apply to you economy, plus he's had great success with it. He was the one in '87 that stepped into the market, and provided liquidity to let the stock market recover from a deep plunge.
[King:] So, is he at fault when it goes bad?
[Battipaglia:] No. I don't think you want to assign blame that way. It is too easy. But I will tell you the factors that caused me to miss last year's downturn was that interest rates moved higher than I thought they should have, and a plus-50 basis points to end it out. He was being too defensive in his position. Secondly, energy prices broke through $30 a barrel; I didn't expect them to stay there, and of course, they went on to $35. And if that wasn't enough, we had an election that supposed to be over in one day, took 36 days and I think that took the country off its consumption path, off its normal look and really set us back, set us back significantly.
[Bartiromo:] I just want to add, Larry, to underline what we are talking about right here, because earlier when Suze was talking to the bus driver, just a few minutes ago, she said that you probably want to speak to a professional. The fact is, that most of the strategists and analysts got it wrong in the year 2000. Underlying my point that judgment is the investor's and the consumer's best friend.
[King:] It gets down to you.
[Battipaglia:] On the other hand on the other hand, Larry, again, it is time in the market, not timing the market, because I have been on the show with you before Larry, when we had the Asian crisis, when everyone thought, now we are going right down the chute. And I said then, that the market was going to work meaningfully higher and that the best course of action was to stay the course. And if you look back over the history of the reports, on the market, you will find many strategists and analysts who have called it properly, relative to their groups and the coverage and have given the investor the insight to buy on the dips, which has made them successful as investors over the longer term
[King:] San Antonio, hello.
[Caller:] Good evening, Larry. I have a question for the panel, and it has to do with the psychology of the market, and in particular, President Bush's effect on the market. You know, back there in the campaign, we heard about this tax cut was needed because the economy was so good. Later on, we heard well, we need a tax cut because the economy is so bad. Now, last week, we hear, well, the economy is not that bad after all, and it seems to me that Bush has been so adamant about this tax cut that he has waffled, in regard to the health of the economy and this in turn has affected the market.
[King:] Good question. Allan, is it a self-fulfilling prophecy, in a sense?
[Chernoff:] Well, it has had a little bit of effect. I think what the president had been talking about, clearly, was politically motivated; he was trashing the economy when he was running for the presidency, now he's not trashing the economy anymore, and it is not because of the economy has suddenly improved, it is politics, Larry.
[Insana:] By the same token, Larry, we have to point out, if you go back to early 1993, late 1992, Bill Clinton was saying bad things about the economy, then to pass a $16 billion stimulus plan. Richard Gephardt, the House minority leader, in December, talked about the recession, he used the R-word before George Bush did, so they are playing politics with the stuff. I think it is all right for the president to acknowledge a slowdown, because it gets people to act to turn things around.
[King:] We'll be right back with more, and more phone calls. This is LARRY KING LIVE, don't go away.
[Begin Video Clip, "the Tonight Show") Jay Leno:] In fact, I'm coming to work today. I'm on
[King:] Everybody is having fun with it. By the way, Maria Bartiromo, we congratulate you. The on March 30th, "Market Week" celebrates its first year anniversary.
[Bartiromo:] Thank you very much, Larry.
[King:] Congratulations.
[Bartiromo:] I appreciate that. Thank you.
[King:] Killingly, Connecticut, hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry.
[King:] Hi.
[Caller:] I'd like to ask the panel, how low can interest rates ultimately go? And also, if the Democrats hinder the tax cut, won't that further erode confidence?
[King:] All right. Who wants to grab that? How low, how low can it go?
[Chernoff:] Well, the Fed funds rate actually fell as low as 3 percent back in 1992. So the Fed still does have room to cut. There's no doubt about that.
[Bartiromo:] Yeah, I think that you really have to be watching the data that comes out, watch the consumer, see if the interest rate cuts are actually working, pushing them to take out more loans, pushing them to buy a house, buy a car, and actually get this economy moving again. So I think in some cases you have to wait and see exactly how much lower they can go.
[Insana:] Hey, Larry, I think they're going to go as low as it takes to turn the economy, until the Fed's satisfied that the economy turns.
[King:] Daytona Beach, Florida, hello.
[Caller:] Good evening, Mr. King.
[King:] Hi.
[Caller:] I just have two short statement and a question of your panel.
[King:] Sure.
[Caller:] I keep hearing financial advisers talking about the fact that this interest rate cut is going to put a lot of money in your pocket. Well, I'm living on Social Security, a senior citizen, living on Social Security, and CD investments, which I just rolled over. And instead of putting money in my pocket, I have just lost several hundred dollars this year because of the low interest rates. I would like to ask the panel, what am I supposed to do in the position that I'm in as a senior citizen?
[King:] Suze, what does do?
[Orman:] Yeah. What you should do is that when you have an economy where you think interest rates are going to come down, rather than either keeping your money in money market funds or short-term CDs like one year or one-year Treasury bills or notes, or two years go out longer term and lock up an interest rate. You know, there are still people out there who bought 30-year Treasury bonds 30 years ago that are still getting a seriously nice interest rate.
[King:] Well, a senior citizen would have a lot of confidence to buy a 30-year Treasury bond.
[Orman:] No, but you know, there is I have to tell you, I don't have a problem right now if one was to buy a two-year Treasury note or a 30-year Treasury bond. As interest rates come down, the value of fixed-income vehicles go up. He could ladder. Never do everything with all of your money. There's nothing to say that you can't put 20 percent of your money in a two-year, 20 percent in a three year, four year, so that no matter what happens you are protected. But we tend to do all or nothing, and that's when we make a mistake.
[King:] Manteca, California, hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry. This is for Suze. I guess you just answered my question. I'm a single person, and after 30 years of retirement here, I put all my eggs in one basket. And so I've lost quite a bit of my money. What I know what you said earlier in the show. Do I hold on or just see what happens? Or and I'm pretty well-diversified.
[King:] All right. What do you do now? If your stocks are going down and down and down, do you get out?
[Orman:] It depends can you tell me what that basket is? Can she tell me what that basket is?
[King:] Yeah. What's the basket, ma'am?
[Caller:] Well, it was about 300,000. I have no debt. I'm single.
[Orman:] 300,000 in what, though.
[Caller:] It was.
[King:] In what?
[Caller:] It was in, oh, Verizon, Microsoft, Lucent.
[Orman:] All right. Here's our problem: The Nasdaq, which many of those stocks are involved with, is down 63 percent as of today. For it to get back to the 5,000 area, that would be almost 150 to 170 percent increase. Even if we went up 30 percent a year, it would take possibly five years...
[King:] So?
[Orman:] ... to get up there. So you have to decide, does it make sense for you to take your losses now, maybe offset and use some tax ramifications there for yourself, and diversify into something that maybe will give you an income? Or are there strategies that you can do with the stocks that you own to provide more income for you? It's hard, because this is where I would think that...
[Bartiromo:] Can I can I make a point also, Suze?
[Orman:] Yeah, yeah, go.
[Bartiromo:] I think that when you're investing in stocks, you also have to ask yourself, does this story still make sense to me? I'm not sure when you bought those stocks, but when you bought those stocks, there was a reason that you bought those stocks. You were looking at growth rates, you were looking at the potential for these businesses. Just like when you're buying a home, just like when you're kicking the tires on a car, you need to revisit that story. That's why companies report earnings every quarter, so that we have a quarterly report card from these companies to see if this story is still intact. Make no mistake, markets change, environments change, business change, and economies change. So you have to revisit the question and ask yourself if these investments still make sense. And frankly, if they do still make sense, maybe do nothing.
[King:] We'll take a break and be right back with more. Time flies. Don't go away. Philadelphia, hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry.
[King:] Hi.
[Caller:] Suze, when you talk, you really make people understand. I just wanted you to know that, and I wish you had your own financial program. But my question is...
[King:] Well, give her a minute. She'll get one. They're growing every day.
[Caller:] Oh, I hope so. I know they're watching her, definitely.
[King:] What's the question?
[Caller:] Well, I wanted to ask the panel and this is for Suze as well I just recently have taken 70,000 out of the market, and I want to know if it would be wise to pay off my home with it.
[King:] Ah-hah. Good idea?
[Orman:] I love that idea. I have to tell you, I don't know how old you are, but I am a firm believer in owning a home outright. I believe that nothing makes a person feel more powerful than owning their home outright. You cannot live in a stock certificate. I love that.
[King:] Can we assume that all of you, by the nature of the business you're in and we'll start with Allan that you do well yourself? That you know things we don't know?
[Chernoff:] Well, I think we share a lot of the knowledge. I mean, we're the as Ron said, we're the people delivering the news. So of course, we're informed on what's happening with regard to the economy and the market.
[King:] So do you have bad days, too?
[Chernoff:] Bad days regarding what?
[King:] Investments.
[Chernoff:] Well, I mean, I don't think any of us Ron, Maria and myself we're not active traders. We all have very strict rules.
[King:] Oh, you're not.
[Chernoff:] We don't do that sort of thing. I mean, we have to be extremely careful about what we invest in. So, that's really not necessarily a very applicable question.
[King:] Well, that's good for the public to know. I'm glad to hear that. Ron, is that true? You watch what you...
[Insana:] Oh, absolutely. Larry, look oh, gosh. Listen, it's a much better life not to have the Securities and Exchange Commission calling you to see what you were doing in your personal portfolio while you were on talking about stocks on television. You know, we're very, very strictly limited in what we can do.
[King:] Monitored?
[Insana:] Absolutely. We have to tell CNBC what we're doing. They have 48 to 72 hours to determine whether or not it's a suitable investment. We have to hold for a minimum of four months if we buy something like an individual stock.
[King:] Wow. Allan, you have the same with CNN?
[Chernoff:] Well, that's very true, Larry, and in fact, Ron and Maria and myself, we were colleagues over at CNBC for quite a few years. So I certainly still do live by all those rules, and we do have strict rules over here at CNN as well.
[Bartiromo:] In fact, Larry, that's the reason why you'll often hear us on CNBC say that GE is the parent of this network, because we all own General Electric. That's our 401 [k] plan. And the reason that the reasons that Ron mentioned these strict guidelines is the reason that I actually do not trade at all. I think it's a gray area for anyone who's actually coming on television and talking about companies and deciding what stocks to talk about.
[King:] And Allan, you have to do the same about AOL Time Warner, right?
[Chernoff:] I guess that's the case, Larry, yes.
[King:] Palm Coast, Florida, hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry. My sense is that the very large investors are causing the markets swings. I don't hear about many small investors taking money out of their 401 [k] s or IRAs. What does your panel think?
[King:] Joe, we've heard that for years. It's the in-men that do this; true?
[Battipaglia:] Well, clearly, on a day-to-day basis, the large institutional investor can swing a market and if there's consensus among them that the interest rate cut wasn't enough, for example, they can push the market hard and down quickly. However, the money behind many of those institutions are indeed the public's money through mutual funds, and those managers have to be prepared for liquidation should they come because of a bad time in the market or they need to reshift their portfolios because they think they're in the wrong place. And quite honestly, there's an added pressure that existed for the last five years that was that the expectations for performance was so high, as Ron alluded to earlier, that these fellows worked that much harder to get performance, and that is something that's just not sustainable. So yes, they do have an influence on the short-term market fluctuation.
[King:] Centralia, Washington. Hello. Centralia, are you there? OK, I ought to hit the button, Hello.
[Caller:] Hello, Larry. My question is for the panel. I'm in my late 60s and I'm in a 401 [k] plan at work, and what suggestion do they have that I could do? I'm a little bit worried, too.
[King:] Joe?
[Battipaglia:] Well, first we have to identify what the investments are on the 401 [k]. That's essentially a bucket where these assets are lied or resident, but what are they invested in. And then the next thing we have to talk about is what are investment goals? What are your personal goals for spending? What kind of coverage do we have for that spending? So, we have a lot of questions to answer before we can make that choice, and it's important that you know exactly what your 401 [k] is invested in before going to the next step.
[Insana:] You know, Larry, I have never been a big fan of really simple explanations about how individuals should allocate money in their portfolio, but there is a great old rule of thumb that you subtract your age from 100 and that tells you the amount of stocks you should have percentage amount of stocks you should have in your portfolio. If you're 70, they suggest 30 percent because your ability to make up losses after you've stopped working becomes very limited. Now, obviously lifespans are extended. People need to provide more for themselves, but it's a decent rule of thumb. it doesn't hold true in every case, but something to think about.
[King:] Let me get a break and we'll hear from Joe and get a prediction from each of our panelists about tomorrow. Don't go away. A limited time. Joe, you were going to say?
[Battipaglia:] Yes, the good news in all of this is that the American households in the aggregate actually have diversification. Essentially, a third in real estate, a third in cash and fixed income securities, and a third in equities, so that they're not feeling the pain, as it would appear, by what happened in Nasdaq that will give them resilience to be spenders.
[King:] Mountain View, California, quickly. Hello.
[Caller:] Hello, my question is for the panel. When you sell stock and realize a gain, you have to report that as income and you pay capital gain taxes. However, when you sell at a loss, you're only allowed to declare $3,000 year. Is that ever going to change?
[King:] Suze, is that fair?
[Orman:] Well, I don't know if it's fair or not, Larry, but you can always offset losses against gains. So, if you had $50,000 of gains and you had $50,000 losses, depending, they could offset. So, it's only $3,000 if you have limited to $3,000 if you have no gains. But remember, if you're claiming a $10,000 loss, you carry it forward for years to come until you've used it all.
[King:] Let's go around the group. Maria, worse before it's better?
[Bartiromo:] You know, Larry, I'm sorry, I think it's a little silly to make predictions about what happens tomorrow over the near- term. I think over the long term, you have to remember when you;re a share holder in an equity, you are a shareholder of a company. You have to ask yourself if you want to be owning a stake in that company. Does this company make sense to you? Is it going to grow earnings? I believe that I am bullish on America over the long-term. That's my prediction. Long-term could be 10 years.
[King:] Allan.
[Chernoff:] Well, Larry, some of the traders I spoke with today in my preparation for "MONEYLINE" were saying that they think tomorrow there could be a short-term bounce, but let's keep in mind that we are in a bear market. It's very difficult to shake a bear market mentality. We've had these bounces, and they have turned out to be selling opportunities. So, very tough to shake that bear market mentality. We need to see better news from corporate America, really, for markets to start really moving higher.
[King:] Ron.
[Insana:] Well, I think the safe thing to say is that we're going to experience more bouts of extreme volatility until the Fed's interest rate reductions take hold. And so, day-to-day, as everybody said, is kind of a fool's game, trying to predict which way the market goes. But the volatility will probably stay at the extreme levels that we have seen in the last several months.
[King:] Joe.
[Battipaglia:] My colleagues are making me seasick here, but what drives markets, ultimately, is fundamentals, and what I see are very strong fundamentals: declining interest rates, no one will argue that. Inflation rates are coming down fairly dramatically. This is a $10 trillion economy that is outstripping all others. It will be back and back with a vengeance and on top of it, there is $2 trillion in money funds that can come back into this marketplace when the opportunity presents itself.
[King:] And Suze, quickly, are you as optimistic as the rest?
[Orman:] I don't know what will happen tomorrow. Do I think it will get worse before it gets better? I'm sorry to say I do.
[King:] Thank you all very much: Suze Orman, Maria Bartiromo, Allan Chernoff, Ron Insana and Joe Battipaglia. What do you think of tonight's show? Log on to our Web site and let us know. Send in your questions early for tomorrow night's guest, Jenny Craig. All you have to do is go to cnn.comlarryking. We thank all of our guests. We thank you for joining us well. See you tomorrow night with Mrs. Craig, and don't forget on Friday night Tony Randall and Jack Klugman. "CNN TONIGHT" is next. Good night.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] The polls close in South Carolina in just under two hours. The results of this day's voting will tell us a lot about the shape of the Republican presidential race and perhaps how it is likely to end up. If George W. Bush manages to stop John McCain's New Hampshire momentum, the Texas governor could be well on his way to the GOP nomination. If McCain gets the turnout he needs to win in the Palmetto State, the air could go out of the Bush balloon even more quickly than the money he is spending. And today, we, of course, focus on South Carolina and its high- stakes GOP Primary. For some answers on what it all means, we turn to Kurt Anderson, a former political director for the Republican National Committee, now a political consultant; and Tony Fabrizio, who served as pollster and chief strategist for Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole in 1996. He too is a political consultant. Neither man is aligned with a presidential candidate this year at least not yet. Have we in the media at all overstated the importance of South Carolina, Mr. Anderson?
[Kurt Anderson, Former Rnc Political Director:] No. In fact, a lot of us in the Republican Party kept thinking, well, this won't be South Carolina's year. And as it turns out, it very much is South Carolina's year. I think it's a clear situation where if McCain were to win South Carolina, he would be he would be the clear favorite for and maybe well on his way to the nomination. And so it's almost higher stakes for Governor Bush. But it has all come down to South Carolina in some regards.
[Randall:] Mr. Fabrizio, does a win in South Carolina automatically put the winner in the driver's seat with states like Michigan and Arizona coming up?
[Tony Fabrizio, Republican Consultant:] In the Bush case, a win in South Carolina means that Bush now needs to win in Michigan as well. If he wins in Michigan, I think that clearly puts him in the driver's seat as we head on to March 7th. McCain, if he wins today, I think, as you said in your intro, deflates the Bush balloon significantly. And I think we could see some serious defections from the Bush campaign starting early next week. And McCain would go on to win Michigan.
[Anderson:] I think if McCain wins today. he's the likely nominee. I think if Bush wins today, a lot is riding on Michigan. And I think the nature of Michigan is that McCain could actually lose today in South Carolina and win in Michigan.
[Randall:] Given the elements it would take for a John McCain victory in South Carolina, how would the Republican Party establishment look at that victory?
[Anderson:] South Carolina is teed up perfectly for Governor Bush in every respect. It's a Southern state, it really is an establishment-controlled state, and it's also a state where they tend to go for the most conservative candidate who can win.
[Randall:] So if McCain wins in South Carolina, Tony Fabrizio, what would that tell the party establishment?
[Fabrizio:] It would tell the party establishment at some level that there is a resiliency of McCain's message and that the focus will be on the number of independents and Democrats that McCain has attracted to this party or have attracted to vote for him. And I think what it would also do is it would undermine forever the power of the establishment in South Carolina, which has been sought after in every presidential contest in the last 20 years.
[Randall:] Whether McCain wins or loses in his quest for the nomination, given how he is attempting to do it, outside the Republican Party establishment, will the face of the GOP have changed because of his efforts, Mr. Anderson?
[Anderson:] I'm not certain about that. I mean, a lot of the McCain approach, obviously with his reference to reform and all of that, really does appeal to there's a huge element in the Republican Party who feels like every four years they wake up and it's Groundhog Day all over again, where we're running the same campaign, whether it's from '92 or '96. And there's really a huge disaffected element that is tired of being told how to vote. So I'm not sure that it will change it all that much.
[Randall:] Mr. Fabrizio?
[Fabrizio:] I look at it, and I say that at the end of the day, while McCain's message tapped into a vein among Republicans, an anti- Washington vein inside Republicans, there is a deep anti-Washington vein in Republicans. And just because we control Congress, everybody presumes that Republicans love Washington. I think McCain tapped into that and was able to reach across the aisle to Democrats and independents. I will tell you one thing that will change. And that is because Bush has had such a hard challenge, you'll notice that Bush in the national polls has started his lead has been cut against Al Gore. And that is as a result of George Bush redefining himself not as a compassionate conservative but as a conservative, period.
[Randall:] There has been go ahead, Mr. Anderson.
[Anderson:] Well, I'm not entirely certain on that. I think that the huge irony of this campaign to me is this: The Bush campaign, which has an unprecedented amount of money and I give them absolute credit for that and has all the everything going in their favor, has really ended up in a situation where whether or not they get pulled out of the fire in South Carolina and Michigan is whether or not they can galvonize the conservatives and the pro-lifers and those groups who are really doing the heavy lifting for them to try to save them in South Carolina and Michigan right now.
[Randall:] Has this very divisive battle in South Carolina been good for the Republican Party, Mr. Fabrizio?
[Fabrizio:] These primaries are always good for the Republican Party. They're good for any party. I think what it does is it allows people to choose who they want to lead their party. Because whoever we choose at the end of the day is going to be the leader of the party. I think what we've seen is that John McCain message of reform and anti-Washington and anti-politician has resonance. And I think the party powers that be will take note of that and look for that in the general election.
[Randall:] Mr. Anderson?
[Anderson:] I think it's always good when have you a competitive primary. I know everybody gets upset because people are hitting each our, but there 's so many people that it looks like may come out and vote in South Carolina today, and I think the same will happen in Michigan, and voter participation is something that we all are concerned about. And I think it's a huge plus for the party to have this many people voting in their primaries.
[Randall:] Now there has been so much harsh rhetoric in this campaign, especially in South Carolina. But when it comes to issues, don't McCain and Bush really share much more than issues on which they disagree, Mr. Fabrizio?
[Fabrizio:] Oh, I would say that if you had to put what they believe against each other, you'd probably find out that they stack up close to 90 or 95 percent. And I think what you're seeing is a focus on the things where they don't agree totally on: the tax plan, Bush saying he's a reformer with results, McCain saying he's really the reformer. And so the real the difference are very, very they're more shades of gray than they are anything else. Although, the Bush people have been successful in tagging the McCain people as being more like Al Gore and Bill Clinton in their approach to tax cuts than they are Republicans.
[Randall:] If McCain does not manage to win, both in South Carolina and the nomination, will there be a lesson there, Mr. Anderson, for Republicans who try to take on the party establishment?
[Anderson:] Well, I think the lesson will be that he almost did it. And I think it will probably be a positive lesson. And I think that it's really a healthy thing. I mean, whether or not all Republicans agree with John McCain on every issue, it's been a tremendously healthy thing to say, hey, there's a lot of new blood in this party. There's a lot of people who aren't just the same old people who could get involved and maybe have some success.
[Fabrizio:] I take exception to that. I think today's results are going to be very telling. I think John McCain did an excellent job in New Hampshire and he won Republican votes. If George Bush is successful today, it will be by and large because he was able to beat John McCain handily among Republicans. And I think the lesson that will be learned is that John McCain had a message of reform and anti- Washington that attracted new people to the party, Democrats and independents, that didn't become Republicans. They just voted in our primary.
[Randall:] Now what's the potential problem for a George W. Bush, who's had trouble attracting independent support. And in states where there's crossover voting, Democratic support. Is that a problem for the full?
[Anderson:] Well, I think a problem for this campaign for him has been that the argument was, why are you for Bush? Well, I'm for Bush because he's going to win. And that's not enough to sustain you through any campaign. And that really I know they've talked about other things, but that's what's come through. If you ask the average voter, well, why are you for Bush? Well, he's the winner, isn't he? And they didn't put enough behind that to hold him up. Once it didn't become obvious that he's the winner, what did he have to fall back on?
[Randall:] Mr. Fabrizio, you get the final word on this.
[Fabrizio:] I think that the important lesson of 2000 is John McCain's candidacy shows the power of message and not the power of inevitably. And I think John McCain's message was so powerful that it overcame money and inevitability and has the front-runner basically on his knees in South Carolina.
[Randall:] Mr. Fabrizio and Mr. Anderson, thank you very much.
[Fabrizio:] Thank you, Gene.
[Randall:] We know you'll be tuned to CNN tonight at 7:00 p.m. Eastern time. In a moment, once the corner has turned in South Carolina, will there be a bit more attention on the Democratic race for president you remember, Al Gore and Bill Bradley? Stay with us. Given the political spotlight of the past few weeks, a line from Monty Python seems appropriate: Now for something completely different the Democratic presidential campaign. And there is no one better suited to talk about that than Democratic consultant Mark Seigel, also a professor of political science at George Washington University. Well, professor Seigel, what's the South Carolina race done to the Democratic race for president? Some say it's disappeared from the radar screens.
[Professor Mark Seigel, Democratic Consultant:] I think it's done two fundamental things. One, because there is no intervening political variable for the Democrats between February 1st and March 7th, all attention did switch to the Republicans, which made it extremely difficult for Bradley to sustain any interest in his candidacy.
[Randall:] So bring us up to date on the race? Where does it stand at the moment?
[Seigel:] The next series of contests in the Democratic Party are going to take place on March 7th in 15 states, 15 very, very important states. And Bill Bradley, unlike John McCain, didn't have a chance to sustain momentum, to win anything between New Hampshire and those March 7th states. And he looked like at one point he was going to have a real chance in the Northeast, in New York and New England and Maryland and even possibly in Washington state and California. And very few people think that's the case now.
[Randall:] Not long ago, Bradley was talking about taking his fight for the nomination all the way to the Democratic national convention. But particularly speaking, isn't March 7th do or die for him?
[Seigel:] Yes, and I think his own people realize that. The Democratic Party has 18 percent of its delegates selected ex officio their party leaders, and they're overwhelmingly for Al Gore. Bill Bradley arithmetically as of March 7th almost won't be able to have that nomination, even if he wins every delegate from that point on. I think if he doesn't win significantly in the Northeast and some places outside of the Northeast on March 7th, then I think on March 8th he'll probably withdraw from this race.
[Randall:] Is there at this point a conventional Democratic Party wisdom about which candidate Al Gore would like to face least if he's to be the nominee?
[Seigel:] I think in terms of conventional wisdom, we've heard a lot of not wanting to run against John McCain.
[Randall:] Is part of that mind-gaming?
[Seigel:] I don't think so. I think it's probably genuine, because it's unpredictable. We don't know what kind of candidate he would be in a general election. And he does he did obviously there was great support among independents in New Hampshire, maybe today in South Carolina as well, and he may have some attraction for Democrats. But fundamentally, what South Carolina has done is it's forced George Bush, who I think will be the inevitable nominee the eventual nominee of the party, to spend his time reinforcing his Republican base, that is, his right-wing bonafidees. And if Al Gore has been running a campaign for 60 percent of the electorate, George Bush has been focusing on 40 percent of the electorate. It's going to be very, very hard for him now to jump back into the center, and the longer this race goes on among Republicans, the more difficult it will be.
[Randall:] When did this competitive race between Al Gore and Bill Bradley turn, in most people's minds, into an Al Gore race? What is it that the vice president did and when did he do it to make this happen?
[Seigel:] He defined himself in a very positive way, what he would be. And simultaneously, Bradley's message was unclear. I mean, he was saying things like, we have to think big on issues like race and poverty, but Al Gore is perceived to be someone who's a leader on the issues of race and poverty. This is the this race has the structure of a challenge to an incumbent, and Bradley really has given the Democrats no reason to fire their leader, Al Gore.
[Randall:] In a few seconds, will the Democrats get at least a share of the spotlight now with South Carolina having been completed or it will be completed in two hours?
[Seigel:] Yes, on March 7th and March 8th, Al Gore will be the nominee of the party, and then we'll start fighting a general election campaign against the Republicans.
[Randall:] Mr. Seigel, thanks very much.
[Seigel:] Pleasure.
[Randall:] Thanks for being with us. When we come back, we'll go to South Carolina and talk to Lee Bandy of "The State" newspaper, so stay with us. To Columbia, South Carolina now, and Lee Bandy of "The State" newspaper. Lee, you know that state well. Who's voting today and in what numbers?
[Lee Bandy, "the State":] Well, I know that the independents are turning out in large number, and of course, as expected, the Republican are turning not huge numbers. But there are not that many Democrats turning out, and that bodes ill for John McCain.
[Randall:] If Bush wins today, Lee, what will have done it for him?
[Bandy:] He ran the right kind of campaign in South Carolina. You cannot run in a Republican primary down here without appealing to the Republican vote. You cannot win the Republican primary down here appealing solely to independents and Democrats.
[Randall:] So in the end, the firewall will have withstood the test?
[Bandy:] It has withstood the test, and Bush can go on.
[Randall:] Lee, are there lasting lessons to be drawn from this campaign in South Carolina this year, if George W. Bush does what the pre-election polls said that he would do and win the primary?
[Bandy:] Well, it couldn't get any better than this one. It was a good, hot contest and very close. But even though the Republican Party establishment down here pulled another one out of the fire for their candidate, a lot of problems still remain in the Republican Party down here. This race left a lot of sharp divisions and wounds.
[Randall:] And were there new demographics at work in South Carolina this year? And does that bode does that have a message for the future?
[Bandy:] Well, the ground definitely has shifted here, and the voters are more mainstream and we have lot of independents. The greatest growing sector in this state is the independents.
[Randall:] And how would you characterize South Carolina's role this year, Lee, when all is said and done?
[Bandy:] I think, again, South Carolina has settled the contest.
[Randall:] And do you think the message will translate itself to Michigan and Arizona and states beyond?
[Bandy:] Well, I'm not as familiar with Michigan, although I understand the polls up there show McCain leading Bush. What kind of bump Bush will get out of here is not certain, but I would think that Bush needs to continue winning. But South Carolina has always sent the candidate on to the nomination, and it's going to be interesting to whether it does again this year.
[Randall:] Lee Bandy of "The State" newspaper in South Carolina, thanks very much, Lee.

[Begin Video Clip, February 11, 1993) Bernard Shaw, Cnn Anchor:] President Clinton's new nominee for attorney general, Janet Reno, has said today her first priority will be to curb violent crime. If confirmed by the Senate, the veteran Miami-area prosecutor says, she will bring to the job firsthand experience in crime fighting.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Washington Anchor:] Bill Clinton, he made a point repeatedly of saying he is going to have a cabinet that looks like America. In other words, not just a cabinet of middle aged or elderly white men. He's going to have African-Americans, Hispanics and he's going to have women. [Begin Video Clip, February 11, 1993]
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] She possesses one quality most essential to being attorney general: unquestioned integrity.
[Janet Reno, Attorney General:] I want to let people know that crime doesn't pay.
[Blitzer:] She got the nomination and Bill Clinton had his female attorney general. The first time in American history a woman was going to become the attorney general of the United States. I liked Janet Reno because she was feisty, she was smart, she was aggressive, and she was, in a sense, controversial so she was always a good guest for me to interview. But she was a no-nonsense and still is a no-nonsense attorney general. She wants things to move in the direction she is moving. [Begin Video Clip, February 11, 1993]
[Reno:] I will work with all the administration to end racial, ethnic and gender discrimination and disharmony in America.

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] Our political snapshot for you now: The latest CNN"USA Today"Gallup poll shows the race for the White House neck-and-neck, as it has been in recent days, Vice President Al Gore leading George W. Bush by 3 percentage points, 47-43 percent, with a margin of error of 4 percentage points. That, of course, makes it a statistical dead heat.
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] The shift in the polls and reaction in the Bush camp to the tight numbers is the subject "Just in Time" today. How is the Republican candidate honing his message and how worried are his advisers? Joining us from our sister news organization is "Time" correspondent James Carney. Thanks a lot, Jay. Bush had a big lead. It's evaporated. What is he doing? How is he retooling to regain some traction?
[James Carney, "time" Correspondent:] Well, what he's doing, Jeanne, is returning to the formula he used after he was shellacked by John McCain in the New Hampshire primary, and that is to return to what he calls events with real people, what are known as town hall meetings. He's going to take questions from real people in events in key battleground states and try to sort of soften his image. His advisers feel he had sort of stepped back from that and was giving speeches set, canned speeches in front of a lectern and had sort of given up reminding voters of one of his primary selling points, which is that he's a likable, accessible candidate.
[Meserve:] And ads? What are those going to look like?
[Carney:] Oh, they'll look a lot different. The ads are going to be very negative. Contrary to some information we were hearing last week, there's no intention by the Bush campaign to give up their attacks on Al Gore's credibility. Bush has a problem. He's trying to thread a needle here. He's trying to do something that history says is very difficult, which is beat an incumbent president when times are better, perhaps, than they've ever been before. And with Gore at least putting on a pretty good show of not being a robot and achieving higher marks from the voters in the polls as to where he stands on the issues, Bush has to take Gore down a little bit. And that's what the advertising from both the Bush campaign and the Republican National Committee will do. They'll go after his character and his credibility.
[Sesno:] Jay, the piece in the magazine "How Bush Lost His Edge," is the title this week a quote from a senior adviser to Bush saying," Everyone thought we were so good we were going to walk away with this thing, even we started believing it." That's an extraordinary thing.
[Carney:] Well, the Bush campaign took to even as it professed not to believe in polls, took to sending out even on its Web site poll results as they came in because they were so glowing. And remember, George W. Bush has led against Al Gore for most of the year and a half. And during the summer, especially, as the Republicans gathered in Philadelphia, that lead expanded dramatically. They were coasting and they looked like they were running a good campaign, and, in fact, Bush did run a good campaign after the primaries. But suddenly, Gore came alive and Bush came a little unglued, as we all know from some of the mistakes he's made in the last few weeks.
[Meserve:] Jay Carney, "Time" magazine, thanks so much for joining us.
[Carney:] Thanks for having me.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] Along with the presidential campaign, House and Senate races are being hard-fought as well this year. One of the most closely watched Senate races is in Virginia. That is where the incumbent Democrat Charles Robb is in a tight contest with another former governor of Virginia, Republican George Allen. Our congressional correspondent Chris Black takes a look at the election, which will help decide which party controls the Senate.
[Unidentified Male:] On your mark, get set, go.
[Chris Black, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Senator Chuck Robb of Virginia is struggling in his own marathon. A come-from-behind race against his own low-key style and a gregarious opponent: the popular former Republican Governor George Allen. Just months ago, Robb looked like a certain loser. But polls show he has closed the gap with the help of an onslaught of television advertising aimed at key voting blocks, like women.
[Sen. Chuck Robb , Virginia:] I've always supported a woman's right to choose.
[Black:] In the choosing days of the campaign, Robb's future hinges not only on the turnout of women, but also African Americans, who makeup 15 percent of the state's voters. Robb raised the stakes by attacking Allen for racial insensitivity.
[Robb:] I am proud to stand with those who speak out and oppose bigotry, hatred, intolerance.
[Black:] But Allen is fighting back.
[George Allen  Virginia Senate Candidate:] We reach out to everyone reach out to all people if they pay taxes, work for a living, if they care about their families.
[Black:] Allen has effectively cut into Robb's political base in northern Virginia, making more than 60 appearances there since Labor Day. He calls Robb a do-nothing senator. A charge that some say has been effective.
[Mark Rozell, Catholic University:] Robb has not done a very good job of articulating exactly why his incumbency is so important to Virginia and what it is that Virginians will lose if Chuck Robb is not going to be their senator any more.
[Black:] The moderate-to-liberal Robb says Allen is hiding his conservative positions on issues like gun safety.
[Robb:] The problem here is just getting enough people who are not familiar with your record to know that there are important differences and the choice they make will make a difference in their lives.
[Black:] Chuck Robb has another problem: since he lived here as governor, Virginia has become a lot more Republican, leaving Robb the only Democrat holding state-wide office. [voice-over]: And with George W. Bush polling strongly here, Allen is expecting some presidential coattails.
[Allen:] I think that the people of Virginia are much more, in their hearts and their minds, much more comfortable with George Allen and George Bush than they are with Chuck Robb and Al Gore.
[Black:] Robb is hoping to convince Virginians to split their tickets, urging them to give him the handsome Marine who married Linda Bird Johnson, the president's daughter, 33 years ago, a third term in the U.S. Senate. Chris Black, CNN, Richmond, Virginia.

[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] So my call to Congress is, get to work and get something done!
[Robert Novak, Co-host:] Tonight, Congress gets to work. But will lawmakers ever agree on best way to stimulate the declining economy? Is the answer more tax cuts or more government spending? This is CROSSFIRE. Good evening. Welcome to CROSSFIRE. The American economy was staggering before September 11th, but since then it looks like a freefall, and more bad news came out today. Consumer spending last month fell 1.8 percent, the steepest drop in 14 years. Manufacturing activity dropped for its 15 month in row. So where is that economic stimulus Congress started talking about seven weeks ago? It's stuck in partisan and ideological disputes. President Bush just declared he want a stimulus bill on his desk ready for signing by the end of November, 21 29 days from now. And the Democratic-controlled Senate Finance Committee will take up the issue next Tuesday. But the Republicans want more tax cuts and the Democrats want more spending. Who is right? Who will prevail? We are asking Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the senior Republican on the Finance Committee, and Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, the assistant Democratic floor leader. Bill Press.
[Bill Press, Co-host:] Senator Grassley, good evening.
[Sen. Chuck Grassley , Iowa:] Good evening, Bill.
[Press:] Senator, let's start you are picking up where the House left off with this economic stimulus package. That bill came out the House costing $100 billion and it was of full of tax cuts for more tax cuts for the wealthiest people in this country and for the country's big corporations. Wouldn't you have to agree, to start off tonight, that the House bill is way too big and way too loaded with corporate tax cuts?
[Grassley:] I think what I would say about the House bill is that it's not realistic in a proposal that is going to get to the president. I think the Senate has a capability of such a realistic proposal, because we have the capability of getting together a bipartisan proposal. And I have been working with Senator Baucus now for a long, long time several weeks now to put together a bipartisan package as we put together a bipartisan package last April and May with the first tax cut of this year. But the Democrat caucus will not let him negotiate with me. And so we are going to go to a markup next Tuesday...
[Press:] OK.
[Grassley:] That will probably be partisan and there's no way a Democratic partisan package can get through the Senate any more than a Republican partisan package can get through the Senate
[Novak:] Senator Senator Dick Durbin, what we are talking about now, of course, is not I think you can be we can all be honest with each other. You are not talking about stimulus package. That's just what's underneath that is your real desire for a redistribution of income and big government. You can agree with that, can't you?
[Sen. Dick Durbin , Illinois:] Bob, you know, your opening on this show suggested a decline in consumer spending. But when I meet with business leaders and labor leaders in Chicago, they all agree that's the problem: overcapacity, not enough consumer confidence, not enough consumer spending. They say if you are going to help the consumers, get the money to them quickly. Do it in a fashion where the people who need the money receive it in a fashion as quickly as they can before the holidays, and don't do anything that will jeopardize the long-term economic situation. I'm afraid that the Republican bill that came out of the House and the one suggested by my friend Senator Grassley just doesn't meet that test. If we are going to take the payroll taxes of American workers that are going into the Social Security trust fund and put them into an economic stimulus package, why under Senator Grassley's bill would we give 44 percent of the tax cuts to people in the highest one percent of American wage earners? That just isn't fair. It isn't fair to the workers who are paying these payroll taxes and it won't stimulate the economy.
[Novak:] So...
[Grassley:] I can answer that I can answer that question. He asked a very good question. 80 percent of the of the tax benefits that go in our tax bill to individuals will go to small business, and the reason for doing that is because small business creates 70, 80 percent of the jobs in America. So what we have got to do to help this economy is not worry about helping just unemployed as much as we have to do that in this bill but what the unemployed need is a good-paying job.
[Novak:] Senator Senator Durbin, I want you to answer Senator Grassley's comment that the that you are one of the inner circle Democratic leaders there, you and Tom Daschle run the show and the new majority. I want you to respond to what he said, that they won't let him negotiate with Senator Baucus, the Democratic chairman of the Finance Committee, and the fact that you cannot get a straight Democratic bill passed in the Senate.
[Durbin:] The Chuck Grassley is correct. You can't get a bill that is strictly Democratic or strictly Republican through the Senate that will require 60 votes. And there's going to be negotiation and bargaining, there's no doubt about it. But what Senator Grassley failed to mention to you is that there is a $25 billion tax break in this bill for the largest corporations in America. 16 corporations, over $7 billion in tax cuts. Those are not small businesses, those are major corporations. How can you take money out of the Social Security trust fund and send it to the largest corporations in America?
[Press:] Senator? Senator, I'm going to have to interrupt you only because we have a microphone problem. It's apparent with both your microphone and the microphone of Senator Grassley. Let's take a quick break. We'll fix those problems and we will be back to debate the stimulus package being taken up now by the United States Senate. We will be right back.
[Sen. Tom Daschle , Majority Leader:] It would be a very, very sad commentary on the priorities of this administration, were they to say that giving out a handout, a new tax cut to a big corporation is more important than the security of 280 million Americans.
[Press:] OK. The mikes are fixed. So welcome back to CROSSFIRE and a good old-fashioned political debate over what's the best way to stimulate the economy, which badly needs it. A debate that's breaking down in the Senate along party lines. "The answer is more tax cuts," says Republican Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa. "Not so, the answer is more help for workers hardest hit by the recession," says Democrat Dick Durbin of Illinois. Senator Grassley, the heart of your bill or one of the main components of your bill is to repeal something called the corporate alternative minimum tax, which was passed back in 1986 when, it seems to me, that Congress wisely said that no matter how clever their tax lawyers are, corporations at least have to pay some tax every year. Now, why is it suddenly a good idea to get rid of that tax?
[Grassley:] Well, first of all, before I answer your question, there is one thing about this debate on tax cuts that there's no dispute about, until unless Senator Durbin has got some problems with it, because there's bipartisan agreement to accelerated depreciation, bipartisan agreement to giving tax rebates to low-income people and also a bipartisan agreement on expensing. Now your question on alternative minimum tax is directly related to how it impacts. It impacts corporations that are already low in income, hit with the alternative minimum tax. So what you are doing in a time of recession when when corporations don't have any income, then you are taking further income away from them. And what you want to do is at a time of recession, you want to put more money into the economy, not take money out of the economy.
[Press:] Come on, Senator. That's a myth, you know that. There are no strings attached to this. There's no requirement that they invest this money that they are going to get. They could use it all for executive bonuses. I mean, Fred Wertheimer, the head of Democrat Democracy 21, called this the "War Profiteering Act of 2001." That's exactly what it is, isn't it?
[Grassley:] Well, then, if that doesn't satisfy you, let me say this: we are doing we will end up doing for the corporate alternative minimum tax the same thing that we did with the alternative minimum tax for individuals in the tax bill the president signed in June. Senator Baucus and I worked it out so that there would be a hold harmless so you don't give people a tax benefit on one end and take it away from the other. Now where is the economic stimulus if we were to do that?
[Novak:] Senator Senator Durbin, I would like to get to this question of whether when we get into a recession and we are in a recession the best way to function is to spend a lot of money on public works, infrastructure, or to give tax cuts. I would like to I would like you to listen listen to some words of wisdom from one of your colleagues
[Sen. Trent Lott , Minority Leader:] We need growth in the economy, we need it quick. We don't need an infrastructure jobs program that will begin to create and produce jobs in six months or a year or two years.
[Novak:] Now isn't isn't you are sophisticated enough to know, sir, I'm sure, that Japan has just about paved over that country with public works for last ten years it has been unable to get out of a continual recession. It's known all over the world that public works won't stop recessions. Why don't the Democrats understand that?
[Durbin:] I think, Bob, that you I hope will you concede the fact that investment in America's infrastructure, particularly at this time when we're trying to protect and defend America against terrorism and bioterrorism, is hardly a waste of money. What's been suggested on the Democratic side, for example, is to put some money and investment in our effort against bioterrorism. Allow me to draw this parallel. President Bush has said, let's give $300 million to state and local public health agencies to fight bioterrorism. $300 million. Under the Grassley and Republican bills for economic stimulus, more than four times that amount $1.4 billion in tax cuts is being given to one corporation, IBM. Now, you have got to put it in perspective.
[Novak:] Wait a minute, Senator.
[Durbin:] If we want America to be safe from bioterrorism, it means investing in infrastructure, making certain that law enforcement and public have the money they need to defend this country.
[Novak:] Now that was a you are talking about the retroactive aspect of that bill, where they went back and gave a certain corporations got an advance the retroactive aspect is out of the Grassley bill. Why do you bring up those red herrings?
[Durbin:] That particular provision is in the bill that came out of the House of Representatives.
[Novak:] Yes, but it's not in the Grassley bill, is it?
[Durbin:] Frankly what we are dealing with here is really an uncertain script from the Republican side.
[Novak:] Well, wait a minute. Let's be fair.
[Durbin:] Let me just give you let me give you one example: Secretary of Treasury Paul O'Neill called the House Republican version of stimulus "show business."
[Novak:] Senator.
[Durbin:] Show business, Bob. You are familiar with show business.
[Novak:] Senator, I why do you do see, that's what bothers me about politicians, because why don't you play on a fair field? You're dealing with your the man's bill who is sitting next to you, Chuck Grassley's bill, which is supported by the administration not the House bill. So why do you bring up the stuff that has no chance of getting anywhere in the Senate?
[Durbin:] Let me just tell you, Bob, it is painful for to you to acknowledge the fact that if we're going to do what is necessary to get this economy moving again, we should be giving the hard-earned dollars in the Social Security trust fund back to the people paying payroll taxes.
[Novak:] Wait a minute.
[Durbin:] The folks that are unemployed, the folks that need help with health insurance those are the people who will spend the money to reinvigorate this economy. That may be redistribution of wealth from your point of view. It's simple economics from my point of view.
[Grassley:] Mr. Durbin is sure...
[Press:] Go ahead, Senator.
[Grassley:] Sure on the fringe of his own party. Because as I said before in this program, there is no dispute on the fact that we ought to encourage investment by corporations through accelerated depreciation and the fact that we ought to have a tax rebate, the fact that we ought to have some more expensing.
[Press:] Senator.
[Grassley:] Those things are a given.
[Press:] Yes, Senator, we know that. But we are not we are not talking about the things you agree on. This is CROSSFIRE. We are talking about the things you disagree on.
[Grassley:] I'm saying he is disagreeing with most members of his own party...
[Press:] Well, let me mention something...
[Grassley:] ... on this business of accelerated depreciation.
[Press:] Let me mention something else that you disagree on. There is somebody missing in your bill, as I read it, Senator. And those are all the workers who lost their jobs after what happened on September 11th. Some of them still not back at work. And you know, in Senator Baucus's plan he has extended unemployment benefits, he's got extended health insurance for those workers. You have zero in there. Why are you just favoring the big corporations and leaving the workers the hardest hit out of your bill?
[Grassley:] That's absolutely wrong. We are accepting an increase in unemployment compensation of 13 weeks. We are we are going to have money in our program for helping people pay health care costs.
[Novak:] OK. We are going to have to take a break. Another break. And when come back, we will ask Senator Grassley and Senator Durbin whether or not the Congress is going is using the terrorist crisis to go on a spending spree.
[Press:] President Bush says he wants an economic stimulus package. The Senate is getting ready to debate it. We are debating it tonight with two senators: first, Democrat Dick Durbin of Illinois and Republican Chuck Grassley of Iowa. Bob Novak.
[Novak:] Senator Durbin, I remember not long ago you were so worried about dipping one inch one iota into the Social Security surplus. Now because of this crisis, the Social Security surplus is gone. The whole array of surplus is gone. I am the number crunchers say there is a $50 billion deficit already for this year. But the worst part is that you had agreed after September 11th you Democrats with the president for a $686 billion budget for this year. I am told now it could go up to $740 billion. You are on spending spree, aren't you?
[Durbin:] Well, let me tell you, Bob. We responded to our president. He came to us after September 11. He asked for $20 billion to wage the war against terrorism. We gave it to him. He asked for $20 billion to help rebuild the devastation in New York and the Pentagon. We gave it to him. He asked for money to help deal with the airlines that were facing bankruptcy. We gave it to him.
[Novak:] But you were going to go on.
[Durbin:] Did we in fact invade the Social Security trust fund? Yes, we did.
[Novak:] But you've gone well...
[Durbin:] But I think our national security is more important.
[Novak:] You have gone well beyond that, Senator Durbin. That's what I said. You are you are going 60 billion that's a lot of money over what you agreed. You are putting all kinds of new spending in.
[Durbin:] What we are finding, Bob, is you fight the war against terrorism and bioterrorism, that you can't be stingy in protecting America. Whether we are talking about law enforcement or public health agencies to deal with the anthrax problem or other threats, America expects us to rise to the challenge. I'm prepared to do it. When it comes to this economic stimulus, I don't want to spend the Social Security trust fund on the wealthiest people in this country.
[Press:] Senator Grassley, I would like get you to respond to another idea that's been floated a bipartisan idea by Senator Patty Murray and by Senator Olympia Snowe and that is to declare ten days off of state sales tax, to give every state the option of saying for ten days around this holiday season, you are going to have ten days when you don't have to pay any state sales taxes, and the federal government will reimburse the states. Isn't that best tax cut you heard of?
[Grassley:] On the demand side, if it would take place of the rebate checks, it probably would be a good exchange. But I think that we are probably going stick more to the traditional.
[Press:] No, no, Senator. The wealthiest people already got their rebate checks, and your bill gives now a rebate check to the people who never got it the first time around. But I'm talking about across the board, everybody, rich and poor, no state sales tax for ten days. Wouldn't that put a lot more money into the economy right away than your tax cuts to big corporations?
[Grassley:] The answer is yes, from the standpoint of just putting money into the economy. But if you want to create...
[Press:] That's what it is all about.
[Grassley:] If you want to create- no! Accelerated depreciation is to get corporations to buy machinery to be more productive so that they create jobs, both on the end of the creating of the machinery, as well as making their company more productive.
[Novak:] Senator Durbin Senator Durbin, I think one of the most unique functions of what apparently the whole Congress is doing is to give tax rebates for people who don't pay income tax. But what you what that is going to do is it's going to produce a lot of people buying cigarettes and beer and lottery tickets. Do you really believe that is going to stimulate the economy?
[Durbin:] Bob, your impression of people at low income levels is not a very good one. I think you are going to find is that these folks are going to be investing in a lot of basics for their families and for their children, beyond cigarettes and beer. I think that we ought to be helping these families. The problem with this economy is overcapacity. We need more consumption. You put dollars in the hands of consumers that will spend them. And I think that's what will start sparking some growth in this economy.
[Novak:] All right. Let me let me ask you something that really I think is baffling. You are you are proposing that part of this stimulus bill be a federal COBRA program that is, a program for people whose health insurance has run out and left their jobs. Can you be I mean, that is going to be helpful to those people. But how in the world does that stimulate the economy? That is do- gooding social welfare, isn't it?
[Durbin:] I don't call it do gooding. If you have got a family trying to live on unemployment insurance with a less than a thousand dollars a month and they are facing an average health insurance bill in the private market of $600 a month, you know what is going to happen. They are going to cancel their insurance, their kids aren't going to get care they need...
[Novak:] How does this stimulate the economy?
[Press:] Bob, hold on. Hold on.
[Durbin:] And they're going to show up at a hospital needing care and it's going to become a charity case paid by everyone.
[Press:] Senator Grassley, we are just about out of time. I just have one last question for you, because the essence of your bill I think is, again as I see it is the same old trickle-down theory. You give the tax cuts to the rich and the corporations and some of it is going to trickle down to the poor. Alan Greenspan says that only 18 percent of Bush's big tax cut to rich earlier this year which of course you championed ended up going into the economy. Why is it going to be any different this time around?
[Grassley:] Well, you are you are arguing against the Democrat approach of giving rebate checks. Republicans accept that there needs to be something done on the demand side, because we think that there out to be a balanced tax bill. But obviously you don't think it ought to be balanced. You all think it ought to go to the demand side. Don't you think it's very good to invest something in America for the future, look to the long term, not just look for the short term?
[Novak:] We're out of we're out of...
[Grassley:] And another thing. I hope you feel it's wrong like on this cobra situation, that that...
[Novak:] OK, we have we have to...
[Grassley:] That issues would not be on the agenda wouldn't be there if it wasn't for the September 11th incident.
[Novak:] Senator Chuck Grassley, Senator Dick Durbin, thanks for a very interesting debate. We would like to have you both back again. And we will continue the debate on closing comments, Mr. Press and I will.
[Press:] You bet. Bob, you know, I think I finally figured out the difference between you and me, and that is that I believe there's a higher human motive than greed. You know, I didn't look at the World Trade Centers falling and say, "How can I make money off of that disaster, and get a bigger tax cut?"
[Novak:] Well, I I resent that insult. Because what I'm talking about is Democratic capitalism, which has a great religious component, it's helping others and it's not being cheap politicians trying to curry favor with the poor by throwing money away which will not stimulate the economy.
[Press:] The cheap politicians are those who keep throwing money to the rich. That's their only answer to everything. They already did it in June. Now they want to give the rich even more money, and the corporations too. It's outrageous.
[Novak:] You and Karl Marx, Bill.
[Press:] The War Profiteering Act of 2001. From the left, I'm Bill Press. Good night for
[Crossfire. Novak:] From the right, I'm Robert Novak. Join us again next time for another edition of CROSSFIRE. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] And finally, we look at some motherless puppies in Greece who got a second chance at life, thanks to a loving potbellied farm mate.
[Ralph Wenge, Cnn Anchor:] Star TV Greece now with this unusual story of love between hog and dogs.
[Demie Hadji, Star Tv:] They are happy to be adopted. The four puppies were born a month ago in the mountainous village Peretina in the south. Before they opened their eyes, though, their mother abandoned them. They might be abandoned, but they never missed the motherly love. A pig that gave birth a few days before the dog decided they belonged to her, so she decided to feed the puppies and take care of them as if they were her own children. The caring pig gathers straw and places it around the babies in order to protect both the piglets and the puppies from the cold.
[Giorgos Kiosses, Farmer:] The pig gave birth first, and some time later the dog gave birth. The dog got scared, so the puppies were left with the pig. She put all the newborns together, she feeds them, they grow up together and there's no problem at all.
[Hadji:] The puppies seem to believe that the pig is their mother. Anyway, this is the only mother they ever new and they adore here. The piglets don't seem to care about the puppies' presence, and the mother seems to forget that she gave birth to only five babies. All that matters is that now she has nine.
[Loannis Lazarou, Farmer:] The pig gave birth and she took under her protection the four puppies the dog left. They eat together, they grow up together, and of course they sleep together without any problems.
[Hadji:] The puppies and the piglet share their mother's milk, and they enjoy each other's company. Sometimes, though, the little pigs throw the puppies over, and they, not having much of a choice, go on playing instead of eating. The pig is protective and does not allow strangers to come close to her nine children, both natural and adopted. The farmer who owns the pig and the rest of the villagers comment on the unique family closeness and enjoy observing day after day these nine babies grow up. From Athens, Greece, this is Demie Hadji of Star Channel for CNN WORLD REPORT.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Rescue teams in London are trying to find anyone who may be trapped inside a collapsed building. The structure is a mix of businesses and apartments and apparently gave way during renovations. Rescuers are using thermal imaging now to try and locate the missing under the rubble. They say it is going to be a long, tedious process. Let's check on that process now with CNN's Fionnuala Sweeney. She is on the phone now from London Fionnuala.
[Fionnuala Sweeney, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, indeed, the police at this moment are using very sensitive audio equipment. All journalists and photographers in the immediate vicinity have been asked to move away because they don't want to pick up any unnecessary sound. They're still trying to detect any sign of life in this collapsed building. What is known is that three people were recovered from the building earlier: a man, a woman and a 14-month-old baby. They are in shock, but are in otherwise good condition. A woman passing by when the building collapsed suffered cuts and bruises and has been taken to a hospital, where she is in stable condition. The health and safety executive here gave a statement a short time ago saying they weren't in a position to gather evidence as to how this building collapsed. But it is known that the local council recently approved renovation to the building. And part of that work involved the removal of a supporting wall. We do know that renovation was under way at the time. But as yet, we have no knowledge as to how much of that work had been carried out. It's being described as a serious accident. The building is in very bad condition the police, fire brigade, emergency services moving very, very slowly and trying now, as I speak, to determine whether there is any sign of life underneath that debris.
[Harris:] Fionnuala, any idea how many people were either in those collapsed units or how many are in the building as a whole?
[Sweeney:] Well, the shop that is at the front of the building there were two shops. And it was being made into one building. That's the work, we understand, that was taking place. Above the shop, there were something like five flats. And there were a number of people in the flats at the time. The work now is concentrating on trying to locate any builders who may have been there at 8:30 local time this morning when this building collapsed. But at the moment, the police say that while they have been looking for up to as many as five people underneath the debris, they have still not detected any sign of life, despite the use of sniffer dogs. Right now, they're trying to send a text message to a builder's mobile phone in the hope that if anyone is underneath that debris, that they will be able to receive it.
[Harris:] Interesting. All right, thank you very much, Fionnuala Sweeney, updating us on that collapsed building there in London.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the presidential candidates are keeping a low profile as the battle for the Florida vote nears a critical deadline. But their supporters are out in full force revving up the public relations campaign. We have two reports for you. Tony Clark is covering the Bush campaign in Austin, Texas. But first, CNN's Chris Black with the Gore campaign.
[Chris Black, Cnn Correspondent:] Vice President Al Gore got in another kind of licks heading out for an ice cream cone at a neighborhood shop in Washington with members of his family. But on this holiday weekend, his lawyers and campaign operatives are preparing to contest the Florida election results after certification, arguing every vote should be counted.
[George Mitchell , Fmr. Senate Majority Leader:] The overriding objective for all concerned should be a full, fair, and accurate count of the votes because in our democratic society, the will of the people is and ought to be, in the words of the Florida Supreme Court, the paramount consideration.
[Black:] Gore campaign lawyers say they are certain to contest the results in Miami-Dade where the recount was canceled; in Nassau, where a machine recount showing a Gore gain of 52 votes was thrown out; and almost certain to contest Palm Beach County results. They are charging county officials are ignoring the standards set by the court for judging ballots.
[Doug Hattaway, Gore Campaign Spokesman:] We totally expect to file a contest under the Supreme Court's guidelines by the end of Monday at the latest.
[Black:] So far, Democrats are standing with the vice president with some members of Congress lending a hand in the public relations war complaining GOP-organized demonstrators caused Miami-Dade to stop counting votes.
[Rep. Alcee Hastings , Florida:] What happened in Dade County is stunning. It smells. There's something drastically wrong when bullies can override ballots. That to me doesn't sound like the America that I know.
[Black:] Campaign officials say the gains Gore is making in Broward County prove they should contest the results in other counties. And, they say, by scheduling a hearing for Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court has done the campaign a favor by giving them a few more days to make their case for a recount of all the ballots in Florida. Chris Black, CNN, Washington.
[Tony Clark, Cnn Correspondent:] This is Tony Clark in Austin, Texas. Governor George W. Bush arrived back in Austin to the cheers of supporters who encircled the Governor's mansion. Though the demonstrators' signs called for Vice-President Gore to give up and Bush to become president-elect, the Bush campaign has made public no plans to declare victory, or conversely, to begin challenging election results once Florida's votes are certified Sunday night.
[Don Evans, Bush Campaign Chairman:] We won the count twice and, you know, I think we'll win it again a third time tomorrow night.
[Clark:] Campaign Chairman Don Evans and strategist Karl Rove thanked supporters for coming out Saturday. Meanwhile, Bush lawyers were preparing their briefs for the upcoming legal battle in the U.S. Supreme Court and changing the arena for their state court battle over counting military ballots.
[Mindy Tucker, Bush Campaign Press Secretary:] There are counties where the Democrats are still very active in keeping the canvassing boards from going forward, and even when the canvassing boards decide to go forward, the Democrats are protesting those votes. So, instead of filing suit against all the counties here in one in Leon County, we're going to the individual counties where we haven't been able to get action yet.
[Clark:] In addition to the courtroom press on the counties to reconsider excluded military votes, the Bush campaign upped the public pressure, bringing out Medal of Honor winners to make their case.
[Ron Ray, Medal Of Honor Recipient:] I believe that actions must be taken immediately by our county canvassing boards to insure that our servicemen and women are treated fairly in this voting process. Anything less is totally, totally unacceptable.
[Clark:] Demonstrations have become a key factor in this public relations war. While Bush supporters in Florida have been accused by Democrats of trying to disrupt the recount process, Saturday's marchers in Austin trying to show an anger over the recount isn't limited to Florida. [on camera]: And once the vote is certified in Florida, feelings here, as well as in Florida, will likely grow even stronger. Tony Clark, CNN, Austin, Texas.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] In Israel, Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza, Israelis and Palestinians are trying to stop the violence and restore calm during a 48-hour period ending at 10:00 Eastern tomorrow morning. Now that point in time is being described as a goal, not as a firm deadline, but steps are being taken to lower the tensions. In a significant step, Israel reopened a border crossing with Gaza to commercial traffic and pulled back some tanks on the West Bank. CNN's Jerrold Kessel is in Jerusalem. Let's go to him now for the very latest and see how things are shaping up today Jerrold.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] Leon. And tensions do seem to have dropped considerably and basically it has been remarkably quiet on the West Bank, other than, we're just hearing over the last half-hour, a gun fight developing near the town of Nablus between a group of Jewish settlers, perhaps on a hike there we heard, and with Palestinian gunmen from within that Palestinian- controlled town, and not yet clear exactly the shape of this event, this incident that has broken out. But it has been against the grain of the events this morning which have been very much a different lowering of the tension and a different spirit, very much in the keeping of the Sharm el-Sheikh summit, the atmosphere at the end of it, and the attempts of both sides to implement what they committed themselves to undertake at that Sharm el-Sheikh summit.
[Kessel:] A quiet change in tone to the bitter Palestinian-Israeli relationship early in the day. Palestinian traffic flows past now sidelined checkpoints. Israel had also overnight lifted some of the concrete barriers, which cut Palestinian towns in the West Bank off from each other for the past week. Israel also reopened a border crossing that allows goods in and out of Gaza, though Palestinians, including tens of thousands of day workers, are still not permitted to enter Israel. The border crossing from the West Bank to Jordan and Gaza's International Airport are also again open after being closed for a week. And with the Palestinian leadership recommitting itself to controlling violence, signs that three weeks after the eruption, the two sides could be hauling themselves back from the brink. Possibly, but not all potential friction points have been eliminated. For instance, this Palestinian village north of Jerusalem continues to be cordoned off by Israeli troops. Israel says two shots were fired at two tanks stationed on the southern outskirts of Jerusalem, the fire was not returned, Israel says. And on Wednesday evening, a bus with Jewish settler families in the Gaza Strip was hit by a powerful roadside bomb. The bus was protected and there were no casualties. Still, after that incident and amid declarations from grassroots Palestinian leaders that protests within their cities will go on, there are residual Israeli doubts that Yasser Arafat can totally reign in the kind of angry demonstrations that have precipitated the clashes with Israeli troops. "We may still see days of fire ahead, it is an emergency situation yet," said Israel's prime minister, Ehud Barak in a speech Wednesday night. Mr. Barak again appealed strongly to the right wing opposition, under Ariel Sharon, to join an emergency unity government. Whether there is that emergency government could depend very much on the shape of events in the West Bank and Gaza, whether they become more violent or whether the relative calm continues to hold. But it does seem as if it is still too early to say whether a corner has been turned in this confrontational mode that has enveloped the Palestinian-Israeli relationship over the last three weeks. Jerrold Kessel, CNN, reporting live from Jerusalem.
[Harris:] All right, thanks, Jerrold.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] While we were listening to Tom Ridge, the Senate majority leader, Tom Daschle, also met with reporters. Kate Snow is on Capitol Hill to bring us up to date on what's happening and what's moving in Washington. Kate, good morning.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Bill. Some new evidence this morning that we're learning about of contamination of anthrax just a trace amount found in an area that accesses a freight elevator in the building called the Senate Hart Building. If we look at the map, that building is up in the top left of your screen. That is the building where Sen. Tom Daschle's office is. But what's interesting this morning is they found this new trace near this elevator in a different part of building, the southwest corner of the building; Tom Daschle's office is in the southeast corner of the building. Sen. Daschle, speaking a short time ago, said that he is concerned about it, but he thinks the situation is under control.
[Sen. Tom Daschle , South Dakota:] I am very confident that we will be able to seal it in a way that will provide us with complete confidence that we can access the rest of the building without any hazardous exposure. And I think it is important we get under way and get that job done.
[Snow:] That Hart Senate Office Building remains closed this morning, so that they can get to work on decontamination, the senator suggesting that that might happen over this weekend. As far as people being exposed to anthrax, the good news is the number remains at 28 people. There are, however, about 400 people as a precaution who have been put on 60 days worth of Cipro, the antibiotic. Dr. John Eisold, speaking a short time ago the Capitol physician about whether or not if you're on that full 60 days of Cipro, does that guarantee that you won't get sick?
[Dr. John Eisold, U.s. Capitol Physician:] I am confident that nobody will. Has there ever been a clinical study on human being that will answer that for me? I'm doing it now.
[Snow:] A bit of a startling statement from John Eisold. But he also went on to say, Bill, that he too believes the situation is being handled very well. He commented also on a journalist who, we understand, is in the hospital near here, in Maryland, Dr. Eisold saying that that journalist has symptoms, certainly, but no proof that that journalist has actual anthrax. And he noted that they are watching a lot of people who have flu-like symptoms. And it is the flu season; it could just be that they have the flu. They are taking extra precautions, just to be sure Bill.
[Hemmer:] We're going to talk about the flu season in a moment. There is some good news. Some of those offices will reopen today. Is that correct on the house side, anyway?
[Snow:] That's right, in fact, two of them already opened, at 9:00 Eastern time. So just about an hour ago, Bill, they opened up two of the House office buildings. One remains closed down. On the Senate side of the campus, one of the Senate building is opened today, the other two still shut down.
[Hemmer:] Slowly, slowly, we say. Kate, thanks again. You mention the flu, Kate Snow, on Capitol Hill. Let's bring in Dr. Sanjay Gupta to talk more about that. We're coming into that season. Flu-like symptoms are said to accompany infections or exposures to anthrax. How do we discern for people between the two?
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] It's an excellent question, Bill. I've talked to a lot of doctors about this. I'm not sure there is a good way absolutely to be sure, unless you get tested, whether or not it's a flu or it's anthrax. I guess that brings up two things. One is try to prevent the flu. Get your flu vaccine; it's still a good idea to try to prevent the flu. The second thing is, if you are truly concerned about it, get tested. Incidentally, it's a lot easier to rule out the flu. A simple swab test comes back within 15 minutes to say that you don't have the flu. That will be another piece of information which you can use.
[Hemmer:] So go ahead and do it is still the medical advice.
[Gupta:] Get the flu shot.
[Hemmer:] We continue to trace the source of this letter: where it went, who is in contact with it, did the anthrax leak out of these letters. You did a rather interesting experiment last night, at CNN. You put baby powder into an envelope. We have some videotape we can show our viewers. Take us through what you were trying to see throughout this process.
[Gupta:] Like you said, we took some standard powder and a standard envelope. I sealed it just like I seal any other envelope. I tried to recreate maybe what would happen with some gentle manipulation of the envelope. Certainly, you can see some of the powder coming right out of that. Bill, some of that's coming out of the sides, as you would expect. Some of it's also coming right through the paper. I made some calls about that, to figure out what are we talking about here, just in terms of size. And the talcum powder granules that are in there, Bill, are about 30-40 microns in size. Compare that to the anthrax spores we've been hearing so much about, about 1 to 5 microns in size. Those are the ones that cause the inhalational anthrax.
[Hemmer:] Considerably smaller.
[Gupta:] Even smaller. The size of the pores in the paper is about 100 microns in some of the standard papers. Certainly, it's not surprising that both the powder and the anthrax spores could can get not only through the sides, but through the paper itself, as that demonstrates.
[Hemmer:] As you have mentioned many times, as a frame of reference, a single human hair is roughly 100 microns.
[Gupta:] Exactly. Exactly. Very small things here.
[Hemmer:] Nothing scientific there, but interesting.
[Gupta:] Just wanted to show it could happen. We've been talking about it a lot.
[Hemmer:] Thank you, Sanjay. It's the flu season: Beware.
[Gupta:] Absolutely. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] We've got a considerable number of retailers due to report results today. That'll give us some picture of the consumer environment going forward. We look to hear from Barnes & Noble and Borders, expected to show a loss in the first case and for Borders, no profit. We'll also get Claire's Stores, Tommy Hilfiger, American Eagle Outfitters, Men's Warehouse, Bombay Company, Claire's Stores, and even PETsMART. Markets editor Jennifer Westhoven is here. She's the got the eye on some other things investors will be watching for today hi.
[Jennifer Westhoven, Cnn Markets Editor:] Hi. Well, we finally got some of the economic data that the markets have been waiting for all week, plus all the talk about Alan Greenspan speaking tonight. But let's just start off with those numbers because we're going to get those first. The first number coming this morning is the weekly jobless claims. Now, there's the forecast for 388,000. And that is a survey of economists polled by Reuters. And you can see, it's just a slight uptick from last week at 380,000. Now, the main trend here that the economists are talking about is, they're hoping that this will be the third straight week where the number does not touch that 400,000 mark, where we're seen as backing off from that, with the idea behind it being that the economy may be putting in a little bit of a rebound. They want to see the number of layoffs slowing down. They want to get the sense that corporate America is finally thinking they've laid off enough people and cut enough. Even if it falls a bit below that, that seems to be OK. That's one of the things that the economists are talking about. After that, though, we get new house new home sales for April. Now, here also you're seeing a little bit of pullback. But March was seen as extremely strong. There you see over a million units on an annualized basis. But March was seen, again, as very strong. So the slip-back is not seen as a problem. Housing is really seen as one of the core areas in the economy that has held up. That's been one of the areas. That's why, you know, the Federal Reserve, in fact, can say: We think that there still is growth, that things are OK. And it's one of the main reasons why, in fact, many people think we have not slipped into recession. Let's get to that speech. Now, of course, the Fed chairman has not spoken for quite some time. I'll just tell you what Ian Shepherdson, who is the economist at High Frequency Economics says. He said he has been remarkably quiet and that tonight's dinner, which is at the Economic Club in New York, is the right occasion for Mr. Greenspan to tell the markets whether or not his view on the economy has changed at all. Now, many in the markets think that the Fed has become less gloomy about the economy. But here Mr. Shepherdson is emphasizing the fact that we're only really getting that sense from parsing out these statements. And that could be seen as over-analysis. They really want to get a sense from the chairman of Federal Reserve himself about what he thinks. They'll also be listening for any talk about inflation. And any of this, of course, because it's coming at 8:20 Eastern time tonight, we would probably first see it in the Asian markets.
[Marchini:] Right now, the question for Mr. Greenspan, basically: folks trying to figure out what the next rate cut is going to be, if it's a half point or a quarter when the Fed policy makers meet in June any ideas?
[Westhoven:] Well, that sounds like what they're going to be listening they're going to be listening for words like "inflation." They're going to be listening for words like "rebound," how much that he thinks that's OK. It's also going to be so difficult, because he always speaks in what's known as "Greenspan speak" and "Fed speak."
[Marchini:] Yes.
[Westhoven:] So you're going you can bet that there will be a lot of people sitting up tonight watching this on, you know, whatever way that they can watch it and parsing out those words to get a real sense of what they think probably lots of economists' comments we'll be looking for tomorrow morning.
[Marchini:] All right, thank you, Jennifer. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Terry Keenan:] Hello, everyone. I'm Terry Keenan. Welcome to MONEYWEEK, where we try to keep you ahead of the investing curve for the week on Wall Street. The Internet world is on full-scale alert, following a series of crippling shutdowns in the past week. Computer hackers took down numerous Web sites, including CNN.com, Yahoo!, Amazon.com, new issue Buy.com, as well as eBay, and the online trading firm E*Trade. The Clinton administration will meet with Internet leaders next week to discuss these cyber-attacks, and the FBI has launched a criminal investigation.
[Janet Reno, U.s. Attorney General:] We're committed to taking steps to ensure that e-commerce remains a secure place to do business, and that the Internet and cyber-technology can be the true benefit for the future that we all think it is, in terms of learning, communication, commerce and the opportunity to bring the world together, rather than split it apart.
[Keenan:] Although the attacks did not compromise data, experts say they could undermine consumer confidence in the Net. In fact, the Dow plunged 258 points on Wednesday, in part on concerns about the series of shutdowns. Joining me now is an Internet expert that says there are real vulnerabilities on the Net, especially with online investing: Ryan Jacob, of Jacob Asset Management Fund joins us now. And, Ryan, you say this last week was a real wake-up call for investors.
[Ryan Jacob, Jacob Asset Management:] It really was. I think people kind of got lulled into a sense of security, when in essence, the Internet is really a public network, and situations like this will probably happen from time to time.
[Keenan:] How serious were these attacks?
[Jacob:] They were serious. They brought down some of the most robust, largest sites in Internet today, so it's not something to be taken lightly. I think what investors and consumers have to realize, though, is this wasn't an infiltration situation, where the servers were broken into, and files were changed or stolen. It was really more of a frontal attack.
[Keenan:] A lot of people were under the impression that these companies had a lot of different protections, encryption devices, and all sort of software to protect their sites. How come they failed in these instances?
[Jacob:] Well, this attack was surprisingly very simple, yet effective, and that is, in essence, sending so many fake requests to the sites that it, in essence, stopped the pipes, and really, didn't allow other people to access, and they had denial of service, and really so it happened a little bit before the servers and really as people were trying to funnel in to these sites to gain information or to do a transaction. So in that sense, it was somewhat simple: Send in a lot of traffic, block up the pipes, and really shut everyone else out.
[Keenan:] We saw Yahoo! plunge on Monday, the day that it was shut down for a couple hours, but it rebounded. Were there any losers by week's end because of this?
[Jacob:] Not really. I think it adds to the heightened volatility we've seen in sector. People are very sensitive. And obviously, this is a very serious issue, and it deserves the amount of attention it's received. I think over time, it will become hopefully not as common and more of a periodic event that, again, will just bring more attention to the fact that the Internet is public and for everyone.
[Keenan:] You say sites that are most vulnerable, at least to the perception they may not be secured, are the transaction-oriented sites, such as E*Trade.
[Jacob:] Sure. Well, these are the sites that really will be affected from a business standpoint. Investors really will lose money, in essence, being able to buy and sell a particular security, have access to their account, and also for the reason that people do have their money with these companies, and if hacker were to get in and start fooling around with balances or able to get access to sensitive information, it could have a very, very serious impact. So far, that hasn't been the case. And security setups today are very, very good. But again, you know, with the kind of disruptions we've seen, it heightens that awareness.
[Keenan:] Any companies that will cash in on the heightened sense of security need for security?
[Jacob:] Well we'll see a number of, you know, Internet security software companies, hardware vendors that offer solutions to really rectify, not only these problems, but others that may crop up as well, and Internet companies in general will spend more money on these services, because they just can't afford to have their sites brought down for lengthy periods of time, and you know, again, this will make them redouble their efforts.
[Keenan:] Any names you'd be looking at?
[Jacob:] We're not really too positive on a lot of these companies, not because they won't see a benefit from this, but rather security is a tough market to really handle, and one that's very, very competitive and ever changing. So for us, it's a little too dynamic, and not that there aren't good investments out there, we generally steer clear of some of those names.
[Keenan:] Buy.com hit on day it went public. Will that hurt its image with investors?
[Jacob:] Probably not. It probably got them a little more publicity than they already would have gotten. So I mean, it won't and, again, you know Buy.com will, I'm sure, you know, increase their systems, be able to handle this problem in the future, and really, again, just make sure their site is as secure as possible. For a new Internet company, that's even more important before they've really gotten that recognition and confidence from consumers.
[Keenan:] OK, thanks a lot, Ryan.
[Jacob:] Thanks.
[Keenan:] We appreciate it, Ryan Jacobs.
[Jacob:] And just ahead, it's one of the most widely recommended stocks in the world. We're going to tell you why our "MONEYWEEK" insiders say Cisco Systems is still headed higher in the days and weeks ahead. So stay with us.
[Keenan:] A torrid rally in the tech stocks continued this past week, as investors moved their money out of bonds and blue chips stocks and into the technology sector. One of the standouts: Cisco Systems. It moved to new highs, following a strong earnings report. This week's insiders say that Cisco and other tech stocks will continue to move higher next week and beyond. Joining me now, Craig Ellis of Orbitex Management, S.G. Cowen's Charles Pradilla, and Rick White of Neuberger Berman. And, gentlemen, welcome. Rick, let me start with you. The Nasdaq powering higher. Another week, another record, led by Cisco. CS First Boston says Cisco could now become the next trillion-dollar stock the first trillion-dollar stock. Big, big that's what I say. You laugh, but that's the way we're going. What's going on?
[Rick White, Neuberger & Berman:] I think what we saw this week was really a continuation of what we have seen over the last nine months was a real disparity in the market, where technology has powered forward based on some of the underlying operating trends in those businesses, which continue to be very favorable. And then you've seen weakness in sort of financial and cyclical components in the market. Also companies that have favorable business trends, but I think the Federal Reserve looms over these companies as a potential overhang on how well the stocks can do.
[Keenan:] And, Charles, is money clearly coming out of these traditional companies and going right into the Nasdaq?
[Charles Pradilla, S.g. Cowen:] Well, it sure is. I mean, I think the risk is that old economy, the non-tech stocks and the Dow, are under interest rate pressure, either valuation-wise andor asset allocation-wise, and the looming Fed rate increases are not good for them. Many of the Nasdaq stocks are bulletproof, because a lot of the action that's taking place is swaps of expensive pieces of paper, mergers and acquisition. And the venture capital money that's coming into what is a technological revolution is largely interest rate insensitive. Now I'm not saying that 10 percent Fed funds wouldn't beat up a few of these guys, but a difference the between 5 and 6 percent Fed funds for these venture capital guys who are looking for 10 to 20 or 30 times on money, it's not very significant.
[Keenan:] And for the companies, they get the equity capital. They don't have to borrow.
[Pradilla:] That's right. They're really not at the window with the prime, and they're not issuing bonds.
[Keenan:] And, Craig, what do you make of this continuation of the explosive move we've seen into the tech sector?
[Craig Ellis, Orbitex Management:] Well, I think you've got chip stocks running on global economy bounces, and the concept of global economies continue to go up and it's a good place to get a lot of leverage. It's a cyclical play. And also you've got a pretty dramatic rotation in terms of what the Internet means to the investment community. Now it's about business-to-business, b-to-b, b- to-b, b-to-b here it over and over.
[Keenan:] Beat over the head, right.
[Ellis:] When you get hit so many times, you know, you should go do something about it. So all these new software names that have come into the marketplace are capturing a lot of attention. And there's lots of names in Nasdaq that are not bulletproof. I mean, Amazon's bouncing around, in and out, in and out, but you really haven't made a lot of money there. I mean, look at Dell Computer, it's fell off. So there are lots of issues hovering around some sectors of the tech space.
[Keenan:] Charles, how do you play it, though? You like Cisco, but can get more bang for your buck elsewhere?
[Pradilla:] Sure, I mean, there are a number of brand new enterprises. It depends what your risk tolerance is. I mean, I own Cisco because I don't know enough to buy these others. And it's clearly I mean Cisco is to the Internet what IBM was to the mainframe in the '50s and what Intel was to the chips. And dominant companies in a commerce-transforming revolution do well. Maybe you don't get 20-fold, but you don't have the risk and you don't have to have the technical expertise to own Cisco now. Rick, where are you playing the Nasdaq? What sectors?
[White:] Well, actually, I'm starting to lean against the Nasdaq here because I think when you look at the environment, I don't I absolutely concur that it's transformational, the Internet is transformational, and it's going to affect business, how it's been done, and it's going to affect all our lives personally. But I think that at the end of the day we're buying stocks, not the underlying business conditions. And today, it's not a surprise that technology's a revolution. I think when you look at returns that have inured to the tech sector over the course of the last 12 or 18 months, it gives you a sense that there's quite a bit discounted in today's prices. So I think I'm being very careful about incremental commitments to the technology sector. Actually, I'm sort of starting to wallow around in basic America.
[Keenan:] OK. All right, well we're going to break. But when we return, Alan Greenspan could move the markets in the coming days. We're going to tell you what you need to know. And a bit later, taking part in the launch of Windows 2000. Alan Greenspan will take center stage next week, when he delivers his twice-yearly Humphrey Hawkins testimony to Congress on Thursday. Investors will certainly be trying to determine what the Fed has in store for interest rates. Also of particular concern next week, the latest readings on inflation. Monthly PPI and CPI reports are due out on Thursday and Friday. A modest rise of.1 and.2 percent respectively are expected. Long-term interest rates this past week were all over the map, but they did move back above 6.25 percent on the 30-year bond. Rising rates are impacting everything from car loans to mortgage rates. In fact, mortgage rates have been steadily rising over the past year. In the last two months alone, the average rate on the 30-year fixed mortgage has moved from about 7.8 percent all the way up to 8.4 percent. And that is the highest level since March of 1995. Charles Pradilla, is Alan Greenspan getting what he wants? Are his rate increases starting to have an impact?
[Pradilla:] Not yet. He's confounded everybody. The longevity of the expansion, the high level of consumer confidence and the wealth effect of a lot of people making money in the market, and he hasn't made a dent. But he will. It's a very bad bet to go against Greenspan. He controls all the money and he can change the rules. He will win, and this time next year I believe we will be growing at least one percentage point less than we are now, somewhere about 3 to 3.25 percent. But I don't think he knows, I don't think anybody here knows, I don't know how many times he's going to have to raise short- term rates to succeed.
[Keenan:] Craig, what do you think? Is the Fed behind the curve?
[Ellis:] I think the world will continue to confound Alan Greenspan. I think this technology that's driving the communications infrastructure around the world in investment will continue to drive global economies. I will give you this prediction: I think industrial commodity prices will continue to rise. I will wager that oil prices are going to rise at the pump. I think there are going be market pundits who are going to declare that this is the end of the world. And if you look behind, you're going to have to ask yourself, what's driving it? And it's the strength of economy. And the moral of the story is if you track interest rates right in here and you'll lose as an investor. And I think you've got to stay invested through these periods.
[Keenan:] Rick, if you know, if Alan Greenspan is confused by the world, he has to be totally confounded by what's going on in the bond market lately. What in the world is the bond market trying to tell us?
[White:] Well, I think the bond market is actually giving you a somewhat contrary opinion to the ones that were expressed right now, as we've seen a rally in the long end of the curve and interest rates have come down. And I think that's really because of two reasons. The first is technical in nature, in that the Treasury said there's going to be reduced supply long in the long end. And I think the other is fundamental. And what it is saying is that Greenspan is getting, after what we've seen, is some cyclical pressure here and will raise interest rates. And the bond market is confident enough that the inflation will not reignite in a secular sense. So I think what the market is telling you is there is going to be some slowing over the course of the next six to eight months. The market is usually ahead of the economic statistics in these kinds of events, so I would definitely keep an eye on that bond market. The curve's inverted. That tells you things are going to slow.
[Keenan:] OK, well when we return, predictions, including a look at a couple of stocks our insiders say will make you money in the days and weeks ahead. OK, time now for predictions. And joining our MONEYWEEK insiders is our financial editor, Myron Kandel. And, Myron, another week, another record on the Nasdaq.
[Myron Kandel, Cnn Financial Editor:] Well you know, we really have this bifurcated market, which has really been surprising. I think the Dow stocks have been oversold, so I expect them to bounce in the next week or so. But after that, I'm looking before the end of March, certainly, I'm looking for a pullback that could be as much as 10 or 15 percent. So short term, I'm more optimistic on the blue chips, but after that, I get a little worried.
[Keenan:] And nearing correction territory on Dow.
[Kandel:] Yes.
[Keenan:] Rick, predictions?
[White:] I think that the pressure that we've seen on certain traditional America old economy America has made a lot of stocks very interesting values. So I think that by the end of the year, I think we're going to see interest rates a little lower than 6 percent, I think we're going to see a rally in the energy sector, and I think some of the consumer stocks that have been hit, companies like Carnival Cruise or Cendant, probably going to be a lot higher by the end of year.
[Keenan:] And you like the oils as well.
[White::] That's right. I think you can almost pick them in the oils.
[Keenan:] OK. Craig, your prediction?
[Ellis:] I think the global GDPs across the world are going to be higher than people think. I think they're going to continue to drive higher. I think interest rates will not be the thing that holds this market back, just the same story as in 1999. I think you're going to have to make some rotations. But beyond that, I think you want to be fully invested in some of these new technology sectors.
[Keenan:] Any names?
[Ellis:] I think the software space is very, very compelling, whether it's Oracle or some of the new names, such as Tibco or Active Software, and I think some of the new telecom companies are emerging in this world. Telespy Cellular, a pure-play cellular on Sao Paulo, Brazil, we would be all over that, and for you value players, go look at AT&T.; AT&T; does something with Microsoft sooner rather than later.
[Keenan:] Charles, you have the last word.
[Pradilla:] Well, I think that Greenspan engineers the soft landing, and that sometime by the latter part of this year the long bond the 30-year Treasury is around 5 34, and that in context, we're going to have an explosive latter part of the year after some kind of a speed bump before the summer.
[Keenan:] OK, somewhat in agreement with Myron there.
[Pradilla:] Yes.
[Keenan:] OK, thanks, gentleman. And thanks to Charles Pradilla, Craig Ellis,
[White:] White, and of course Myron Kandel, who'll be back with us next week. And just ahead, opportunities in the new-issue market. A pair of stocks going public next week that are expected to post some impressive gains. We'll tell you which ones to look for when MONEYWEEK returns.
[Keenan:] Time now for a look ahead to next week and what investors can expect in the coming days. Our Susan Lisovicz is here with the last word. Susan, give us the preview?
[Susan Lisovicz, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey, Terry, lots of things for investors to watch out for. As you mentioned, Alan Greenspan testifies before Congress on monetary policy. In addition, a few key economic numbers due out. Thursday, the producer price index for January will be released. On Friday, we'll get the consumer price index. On the IPO front: Choice One Communications, a provider of broadband data and voice telecom. It's hoping to raise about $139 million. IPO experts say this stock will likely rally when it begins trading. Another new issue expected to go higher: Internet Loan Company Lending Tree. And finally, expect plenty of hype when Microsoft releases Windows 2000 on Thursday. The official launch will take place at the Windows 2000 conference and expo in San Francisco. But consumers can attend launch events throughout the country, courtesy of Microsoft. You'll be able to access Windows 2000 programs and compatible hardware products. By the way, Windows 2000 will set you back $319 exactly Terry.
[Keenan:] And a long-awaited release. Microsoft shares were weak in the last week, so it will be interesting to see how they perform next week with that release.
[Lisovicz:] Absolutely. Michael Dell also one of the keynote speakers, in addition to Bill Gates.
[Keenan:] OK, we'll be looking for that. Thanks a lot, Susan. Susan Lisovicz, And for more on Windows 2000, be sure to tune into the MONEYLINE NEWS HOUR with Willow Bay and Stuart Varney. On Thursday, MONEYLINE will have a CNN exclusive interview with Microsoft's chairman and CEO Bill Gates. That is on
[Moneyline, 6:] 30 Eastern, weeknights on CNN and CNNfn. And be sure to join me, Bill Tucker and Daryn Kagan for "In the Money," weekdays at 11:00 a.m. on CNN and CNNfn. On Monday, we're going to take you to the toy fair here in New York with a preview of this year's hottest toys. And that will do it for MONEYWEEK. I'm Terry Keenan. Thanks for joining us, and have a great weekend.

[Leanne Angell, Mayodan, North Carolina:] Hello, my name is Leanne Angell and I'm from Mayodan, North Carolina. I'd like to ask CNN what it's like to be an astronaut.
[Cady Coleman, Nasa Astronaut:] Being an astronaut is a very, special job. Not many people get to do it, and it's I feel like it's a great privilege to have this job. Not every day is magical. Not every day is spent in space. I like to tell kids that I spend every day learning things. And we spend a lot of time training, practicing, repeating things over and over again, making sure that when we really get up to space, we really understand what's going to happen and how to deal with it if it doesn't happen right. Some of the practicing is sitting in a classroom, just like school kids do across the country. I spend every day learning something new, and I feel like I could learn about anything and it would help me in my job as an astronaut.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] On to the issue of Iraq. Iraq's deputy foreign minister, Tariq Aziz, today said that Iraq is anticipating and preparing for a U.S. assault. But this morning, that same country is sending its foreign minister to New York to meet face to face with United Nations officials for the first time in over a year. But is all of this simply a diversion to hold off any possible U.S. military action? Well, joining us now is a man that knows an awful lot about all of this, Richard Butler, a former U.N. weapons inspector himself in Iraq, our ambassador-in-residence, though today he is not quite in residence. He is in his hometown of Sydney, Australia good morning, Richard. Do you miss us?
[Richard Butler, Former U.n. Chief Weapons Inspector:] Good morning, Paula. I sure do. I don't miss those reports of snow that's coming down the pike, especially as I was surfing this afternoon, but I sure do miss you guys. And you've got a lot of interesting stories on your hands right now.
[Zahn:] Yes, we do. Let's have you walk us through this dance that is expected to happen later...
[Butler:] Right.
[Zahn:] ... today at the U.N. This happens at a time, when the U.S. government now has satellite pictures showing the Iraqis have turned trucks that were meant for humanitarian use into military trucks.
[Butler:] Well, Paula, the Iraqis have had three years to do such things, three years without inspections, and throughout that period, they have claimed that they have no weapons of mass destruction. I want to say very simply that's a lie. And as Colin Powell has said very often, if that is the truth, why not have inspectors come back and look and see and prove to the world that you don't have any of those weapons? Well, here they are today at the U.N. talking about having inspectors come back. That's a real wrench for them, because Saddam's deepest interest is in keeping weapons of mass destruction and, therefore, not having inspectors. So why are they doing this? Paula, they are doing it, because they are scared stiff of U.S. military action, and this is a ploy to try to head off that action by saying, hey, wait a minute. We are going to come back under the law. We are going to have inspectors come into our country. That's what it's about.
[Zahn:] But, Richard, realistically how much time can the Iraqis buy here?
[Butler:] I don't think very much, and the devil will be in the detail. You see, Kofi Annan, the secretary general, has made clear that there is only one subject on the agenda, which is that you come back you, Iraq, come back into conformity with the law, and the law says they must be inspected and those weapons of mass destruction removed. What Iraq will do is say, OK, we are prepared to do that, but we want to know exactly what those inspections will look like, what will be the rules. In other words, they will start, I think, that same game they have played with my team in the past, a sort of shell game, where through procedural and other devices, they will seek to prevent the inspections from being effective. That's what the U.S. has to watch out for, because if it looks like the secretary general or the international community is going to allow Iraq to have inspections, but inspections which are useless, some would say worse than useless, then that will be a serious problem. I don't think they'll get away with it. They are going to try it, but the short answer to your question is that, no, I don't think it will work.
[Zahn:] All right. But how much does it hurt the Iraqis' case that this information has become public now, 24 hours in advance of these important high-level meetings, that they have converted these trucks into trucks of wartime use potentially?
[Butler:] Well, I think it does hurt their case, but let's not be too sanguine about that. This sort of information has been around for a very long time, but Iraq has had sufficient supporters political supporters to try to water it down or dismiss its significance. Some will argue that this information has come to light on the eve of these talks and is therefore in some way an attempt to prejudice the, you know, the outcome of those talks. The politics of this are very complex. Now, they had clarified somewhat since September 11, and certainly in the Iraqi mind, the president got their attention with his State of the Union speech, when he made very clear that the U.S. is not going to sit back and wait for countries like Iraq, declared to be part of the so-called axis of evil, to develop weapons of mass destruction. That if it's seen that they have them, the U.S. will take action first. Now, in the meantime, it has been made clear that before that action takes place, there will be one more attempt to get serious inspections back into Iraq. This is what we are seeing unfold today. Will it work? Will it result in serious inspections? Will it hold off U.S. action? I strongly doubt it, because Saddam's first and basic interest is in keeping his weapons of mass destruction, and frankly I think whatever inspections are agreed to, it probably won't be real.
[Zahn:] Well, we are going to be watching this very closely from here at CNN Richard, good to see you again. We are very jealous that you have been surfing, but we can't complain too badly about the weather here.
[Butler:] Well, I'll be back with you soon, I hope.
[Zahn:] Travel well. Thank you, Ambassador Richard Butler...
[Butler:] Thank you.
[Zahn:] ... for your preview of what might happen at the U.N. later today. Preparing for U.S. Assault

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] To the average listener, the Supreme Court hearing was a historic moment. But legal minds are working overtime to dissect the details of yesterday's hearing. We have two perspectives on the case this morning. Viet Dinh is a professor of law at Georgetown University Law Center and Heather Gerken is an assistant professor of law at Harvard Law School. Also, you are both former Supreme Court clerks. Welcome this morning.
[Viet Dinh, Former Supreme Court Clerk:] Good morning.
[Heather Gerken, Harvard University:] Thank you.
[Phillips:] Viet, let's start with you. Let's start with the arguments and let's talk about Ted Olson's arguments. He, of course, is arguing on behalf of Bush. How do you think he did?
[Dinh:] I think he did very well. He is one of the seasoned Supreme Court advocates and he was very deliberate and very conversational and engaged the Justices in the questions that they had. He was a bit slow on picking up on the constitutional argument, the Florida constitution argument that was suggested by Justice Scalia, but I think that once he grabbed onto it, he took it and ran with it and did very, very well.
[Phillips:] Interesting, Heather, I guess if we wanted to talk about Laurence Tribe, he's pretty much the constitutional guru, wouldn't you say? How do you think he did with regard to that?
[Gerken:] He did a wonderful job, as usual. I mean one of the things about watching Larry Tribe is he's able to spin constitutional theory on his feet, which is exactly what you want to be able to do when you're in front of the Supreme Court.
[Phillips:] Viet, Justice O'Connor was the first Justice that had a question, right out of the box. Did that surprise you used to work with her. Did that surprise you?
[Dinh:] Oh, no, not at all. She is usually the first person in any given Supreme Court term to come out with an opinion and so it is not surprising that she asked the first question here. She does have things on her mind and when she does, she asks the question very directly. That's a good thing for the counsel because they would know almost immediately what troubles her about the case and give a chance in order to convince her and since she's usually in the middle of the Court, that is a very, very important opportunity.
[Phillips:] I remember a comment being made, I couldn't remember if it was O'Connor. I remember it was a female voice saying to the attorneys, you know, we're still trying to be convinced on why you should be here. Heather, let's start with you. Do you think the attorneys did a good job of convincing the Court that they should be there in front of them?
[Gerken:] I think that they did convince the Court that there's a federal question here and so I think the Court actually, my guess is from the argument, and you can never really tell, is that the Court feels comfortable going forward with this. The question just is how are they going to rule on it now that they've got the question in front of them properly.
[Phillips:] Viet, what do you think?
[Dinh:] I agree with Heather that I think the Court, if not unanimously, then significant, with a significant majority, will find that this is a federal question. The harder question is the key question in this case, whether the Florida Supreme Court overstepped its bounds of the judiciary into the province of the legislature and that is close not because of any political division, but simply because of a difference in judicial philosophy. But judicial activists would like to think that what the Florida Supreme Court did was in the normal method of interpretation, though the conservatives would think that they overstepped their bounds. And so it is strictly a difference of jurisprudence, if you will.
[Phillips:] All right, one last question, quickly. Heather, maybe you can just answer this before we wrap up. How likely do you think this case will get kicked back to the state level?
[Gerken:] I think that it's very, I think the Supreme Court is going to issue a final decision one way or another, so I don't think it's going to go back to the Supreme Court in the state level, although right now the truth is the game is still in Florida and so what's going on in the lower courts there is going to have a huge impact on this election.
[Phillips:] Heather Gerken, Viet Dinh, always a pleasure. Thank you both very much for getting up this morning.
[Dinh:] Take care.
[Gerken:] Thank you.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We turn to our political coverage and time to look at the winners and losers as the presidential election gets ever closer. And to do that, it's our weekly visit with our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider, who, of course, is in Washington, D.C. Bill, good morning.
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Good morning.
[Kagan:] First, let's start with a winner. And believe it or not, I guess you're saying Pat Buchanan is a winner this week. How does that work?
[Schneider:] Well, remember the guy who won the jackpot on "Survivor"?
[Kagan:] Yes.
[Schneider:] He wasn't very popular, but he got the money. Pat Buchanan is a survivor, and it looks like he may get the money. The staff of the Federal Election Commission recommended that Buchanan get $12.6 million in federal funds earmarked for the Reform Party candidate. But he still has to survive an immunity challenge. Namely, the other Reform Party candidate who claims the title says he'll take the matter to court. How is Buchanan doing? Our latest poll shows him at 1 percent of the vote. With $12.6 million, maybe he can double or even triple that support.
[Kagan:] Well, keeping the "Survivor" theme, the tribal council has had a problem figuring out how these debates should be shaped.
[Schneider:] That's exactly right.
[Kagan:] And how would you say who's winning and losing that discussion, Bill?
[Schneider:] Well, the debate over the debates is essentially over and George W. Bush has lost. Bush abandoned his effort to bypass the three scheduled debates and impose his own schedule. When Gore didn't buy it, Bush tried to challenge Gore's credibility. Instead, he challenged, really, his own credibility, and that's not good, because people thought that Bush was more reluctant than Gore to engage in debates. The debate over debates took attention away from Bush's own substantive policy proposals. So wise heads in the GOP told Bush, drop it, and he did. There will be debates.
[Kagan:] And with our twist of the week, George W. Bush has been giving a lot of grief over recent months to Al Gore about his efforts to reinvent himself. But now it looks like the shoe is on the other reinvention foot.
[Schneider:] Well, look who's reinventing himself. Governor Bush is running now as the self-described underdog. He has a new campaign slogan, "real plans for real people," he has a new more accessible campaign style, speaking directly with voters in Q&A; sessions. It worked for Bush before after he lost the New Hampshire primary. Our polling shows that Bush has the advantage on leadership skills and vision while Gore has the advantage on issue. For most of this year, voters said leadership skills were more important than issues, and Bush was winning. But since the conventions, issues have become more important and Gore has caught up. Bush has got to get the voters to focus more on the candidate's personal qualities because that's where his strengths lie.
[Kagan:] Bill, you bring up those poll numbers. George W. Bush really isn't an underdog. This thing is still a dead heat. It's just that George W. Bush is not this overwhelming front-runner that a lot of people expected him to be.
[Schneider:] That's right. We're seeing Gore at 47, Bush at 44. That's a very narrow lead for Gore. In fact, it's within the margin of error, so we call that a dead heat; Ralph Nader just at 2 percent and Pat Buchanan at 1. Maybe the money will help.
[Kagan:] It can't hurt, let's put it that way.
[Schneider:] Oh, sure.
[Kagan:] Bill Schneider in Washington, thank you.
[Schneider:] OK.

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Correspondent:] Members of Congress, let me break quickly here, met with the president, and they are speaking now.
[Rep. Dennis Hastert , House Speaker:] .. people are out there trying to save lives. The workers, rescue workers and all those folks that are around-the-clock, doing their very best. Of course our sympathies are with the families, all those who have been victims of this terrible, terrible act. Now is the time for government to move forward. We are in complete agreement that we will work together, that we want to share information, that we will be ready to move on whatever the president suggests. And we will get through the debate, and the actions of Congress in a bipartisan way to make that happen. But as we said last night, when somebody takes this country for granted, when it violates the people of this nation, and the sovereignty and freedom of this nation, this Congress stands united, shoulder to shoulder to do the right thing to stand up for America, and do the legislative work and process that we need to do, and we confirmed that with the president today.
[Sen. Tom Daschle , Majority Leader:] On a bipartisan basis, I think it is accurate to say that we literally and figuratively stand shoulder to shoulder in our appreciation of the job ahead. It is to help the victims, to care for the families and punish those responsible. With a single-mindedness of that appreciation we began our work this afternoon, on a united bipartisan, bicameral basis we will be passing a strongly worded resolution this afternoon. We will work with the administration to allocate resources, and to dedicate whatever strategy may be required to fulfill our obligations. It is our strong desire to do this not as Republicans or Democrats but as Americans. We will continue to demonstrate that desire as we consider whatever other actions may be required in days ahead.
[Hastert:] Thank you.
[Daschle:] Thank you.
[Brown:] The congressional leadership having met with the president coming out to talk briefly with the press. First the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, followed by Majority Leader of the United States Senate, Democrat Tom Daschle. Kate Snow joins us now from Washington. Kate good afternoon.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Good afternoon, Aaron. We heard echoed there much what we've been hearing ever since yesterday when Congressional leaders started to come out and talk with us and say, look, we are united, we stand behind our president, we're going to give him the support he needs. House members have been filing in while they've been talking, filing in behind me here into the chamber. They are about to get a briefing as we speak from the FBI director Mr. Mueller, and also from Attorney General John Ashcroft. The FEMA director, Joe Allbaugh had also talked about coming to brief Congress, we imagine he may be here as well. They are having these briefings behind closed doors, all members of the house, inside the House chamber being briefed. That FEMA briefing will be especially important, Aaron. One of the big questions looming on Capitol Hill, although people would rather not have to discuss this, a big question will be how to pay for everything you see going on in new York, at the Pentagon, Pennsylvania. Who will pay for all of this. I talked to the Budget Committee Chairman of the House, Jim Nussle, just a few moments ago. He tells me, it's not likely they will give the president a blank check. But on the other hand there is unanimous support, bipartisan support, to help the president with what he needs, to give the money needed to help with immediate needs, with recovery, with rescue, with rebuilding perhaps parts of the Pentagon. Democrats, some of them, are cautioning they will be a little cautious about giving over too much, and destroying the budget of the government. There was a lot of discussion about the U.S. Government's budget before all of this happened.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] When Attorney General John Ashcroft heard about the FBI paperwork problem, he responded by delaying Timothy McVeigh's execution from next week to next month, and that delay has many upset. CNN's Martin Savidge is in Oklahoma City, and he joins us now with more on that now Martin?
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Donna, news of the delay struck a real blow to the people of Oklahoma City. Like Timothy McVeigh himself, this whole community had been preparing for his execution. Upwards of 200 actually, almost 300 family members had planned to watch his death on closed-circuit television at a facility out near the airport, and there were about 10 other victims' family members that were going to be in Terre Haute, Indiana on Wednesday in person to watch him die. All of that now has to be rescheduled. Paul Howell lost a daughter in that blast. He says whenever the new date is set, he will be in Terre Haute, Indiana.
[Paul Howell, Father Of Bombing Victim:] It's going to be pretty tough, you know. I don't like to ever see anybody get killed, but this man if there's ever been anybody in the world that needs to do it, he's the one that needs to be executed.
[Savidge:] News of the delay rolled into Oklahoma on Thursday night. It was really very much like an emotional wave, and it came at a time when the city was in the middle of a sports celebration. Governor Frank Keating explains.
[Gov. Frank Keating, Oklahoma:] Everybody thought, well, this guy has waived his appeals, this guy has confessed, what is this all about? And we were celebrating a central hockey league championship downtown. Everybody was jumping around having a grand time celebrating a city victory for the Oklahoma City Blazers, and then this came up. So it's been a real bad nightmare.
[Savidge:] Tomorrow, here in Oklahoma City, as for the rest of the nation, it will be Mother's Day, but it has a very painful meaning in this community. There were 19 children that were killed in the blast, all of them under the age of five. There were also 30 children that were made orphans by the explosion, and 219 children lost as least one parent. It will be a very difficult day, but one of many for Oklahoma City Donna.
[Kelley:] Marty Savidge in Oklahoma City, thanks.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] After last week's crash of Alaska Airlines Flight 261, Boeing is asking all airlines to voluntarily inspect planes belonging to that MD-80 series. Of specific interest is the jackscrew that controls the plane's horizontal stabilizer. Carl Rochelle watching the story, live now from Washington with more on this Carl.
[Carl Rochelle, Cnn Correspondent:] Bill, they were burning the midnight oil in Seattle yesterday evening as Boeing workers were trying to get out this inspection request. It's a recommendation that the airlines who operate that whole series, which goes from the DC-9, the MD-80, on up to the new Boeing 717, which is still that same, basic model. Here's what they want: They want them to check the horizontal trim stabilizer trim, jackscrew and nut for wear, test the trim- indicating system and shut-off controls, inspect the lubrication of the jackscrew assembly, check the general condition of the mechanical stops of the trim assembly, and check the general condition of the jackscrew assembly. We were just showing you what the jackscrew works like. It is a threaded screw much like a garage door opener jackscrew. As it turns, it causes the horizontal stabilizer to go up and down. The horizontal stabilizer is what controls the up and down pitch of the nose of the airplane, and it is also used to stabilize the aircraft in fright so the crews can get it into configuration and sort of hold it there the way it is. What is driving this is a recovery early yesterday by salvage workers off the California coast in the Pacific, the site of the crash, of a two-foot long section of a jackscrew. This is the jackscrew that they found, and if you look carefully at it, you can see metal wrapped around it. That indicates that it may have pulled out, snatched out of something, or something may have wrapped around it, jamming. That could be the problem. That is what investigators are looking at very carefully as they try to determine the cause of the crash of the Alaska Airlines plane. But FAA officials tell me that the action by Boeing is considered prudent, the airlines moving forward on doing this. American Airlines says they hope to be done in about a week; Delta Airlines working on theirs, hoping to be done in a week or so; Alaska Airlines already working on theirs. There are roughly 2,000 of this particular aircraft worldwide in the fleet, 1,100, 1,200 operating domestically in the United States. They are checking all these aircraft, and the report from each of them so far indicate that they haven't found any problems in working on these airplanes. I'm Carl Rochelle, CNN, reporting live from Washington.
[Hemmer:] All right, Carl, thank you.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] It happens every spring. Thousands of high school and college kids converge on a variety of hotspots for the ritual that is spring break. Their fun in the sun includes binge drinking and plenty of other outrageous behavior. No curfew, no parents, and ultimately no rules. But the good times can turn deadly. Last year, there were four alcohol-related deaths during spring break. Author Hank Nuwer has written about alcohol abuse among young people, and the so-called wrongs of passage. He joins us now from Indianapolis. Thanks very much for being with us. You know, a lot of parents out there are trying to decide if it's OK to let their kids go on spring break this year. What should they know?
[Hank Nuwer, Author:] Well, overall, the probability of dying in a Florida or Mexico or Texas spring break is low, but you can educate yourself ahead of time to know that binge drinking can be a problem. I think of the word "binge" in terms of beliefs. What does your son or daughter believe about alcohol? The "in" being influences. Who's the person going with? And the "in" being intentions. What does he or she want to do when they get there? The "g" being the good habit that you installed since the young person was young. And the "e," the education, knowing exactly what your son or daughter plans to do when they're there going often a Web site with them and looking if they tell you that there for beer, bungee jumping and bikinis, you know you've got some problems.
[Cooper:] Well, exactly, how do you define binge drink drinking? I mean, how much alcohol, and how short a time, and how big a problem is it?
[Nuwer:] Well, the experts will say, in the last three or four weeks, if you're a male and you've had five drinks in one consecutive sitting, or if you're a female and you've had four drinks, but the problematic reality is that a lot of people are having nine, 10, 11 drinks, or are basically not drinking during the week, and will do something crazy like have 21 drinks on their 21st birthday which will take the blood alcohol level way up to lethal levels.
[Cooper:] Alcohol consumption has become sort of a right of passage in a lot of these spring breaks, and in fact, a lot of tour companies profit from it. I mean, they are actually promoting this kind of stuff, aren't they?
[Nuwer:] Sure, they are giving out free passes. There are places where people are going to be called party central or tequila rock that, you know, all these activities center around alcohol. Basically, we try to reach with social norms programs, and so on, try to reach the uncommitted student, the student who's going there to have a good time, but not necessarily to vomit and pass out, and to educate that person to kind of be in control of their peers, to go toward that middle group, to have them use common sense.
[Cooper:] Two young high school girls died in 1999 in Cancun, Mexico, alcohol-related deaths. How accelerated is the problem, how worse is the problem when the students are going overseas, when the students are going to another country?
[Nuwer:] Well, I think one of the big problems is after something goes wrong, getting the person back to the United States and getting proper treatment in a hospital that may not have air conditioning or proper facilities is a problem. A student from Utah, for example, decided to go swimming in a lagoon near Cancun at 4:00 in the morning, and was attacked by a crocodile, and suffered severe bites, and fortunately was able to get his arms around the mouth of the crocodile. Getting that person back to Utah for treatment, this Weber State student, was very, very problematic. Also, with all the balcony falls that we're seeing in Mexico with the lower balconies, which are there for the view, not for safety, a father has tracked 49 fatalities from falls since 1978. That's a problem as well.
[Cooper:] All right, Hank Nuwer, thank you very much for joining us this morning. We appreciate your comments Jack. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com Hotspots for Spring Break

[Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] Okay, we have more details now on that kidnapped American reporter. CNN State Department Correspondent Andrea Koppel reports on efforts to find Daniel Pearl.
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn State Department Correspondent:] The saga began last Wednesday in the bustling streets of Karachi, Pakistan. That's where Daniel Pearl, a 38-year-old American journalist with the "Wall Street Journal," was digging into the case of Richard Reid, the man best known as the alleged shoe bomber.
[Richard Murphy, Committee To Project Journalists:] According to his wife, he had gotten a tip that some sources with one of the Islamist militant groups fighting in Kashmir was willing to speak to him.
[Koppel:] Pakistani police say the last time anyone heard from Pearl, he was on his way to interview a member of a well known militant Islamic group. He was alone, without a translator. By Friday, Pakistani authorities had launched an interagency investigation and a team of FBI agents joined the hunt.
[Brig. Mukhtar Ahmed, Pakistani Provincial Secretary:] We're trying to establish contacts with as many people as we come to know of it.
[Koppel:] Suddenly, on Sunday a previously unknown group calling itself the National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistani Sovereignty sends an email addressed to a number of Pakistani and U.S. newspapers. The group claimed Pearl was an American CIA officer and provided these photos, including one with a revolver pointed at his head, as proof they had Pearl in custody. Pearl was being held in very "inhumane circumstances," the email said, "similar to the way that Pakistanis and nationals of other sovereign countries are being kept in Cuba by the United States." Instead of ransom, the group made a series of political demands Pakistani prisoners in Guantanamo, Cuba must be returned to Pakistan; Pakistanis illegally detained by the FBI in the U.S. must be given access to lawyers and family members; and that the former Taliban ambassador to Pakistan, now in U.S. custody, be released. In an unusual move, the CIA publicly denied that Pearl has or had ever worked for the agency. By Monday, the State Department issues a travel warning to Pakistan for all U.S. citizens and Secretary Powell calls Pakistan's president for an update.
[Richard Armitage, Deputy Secretary Of State:] Well, we have been very closely involved with the authorities in Pakistan. Their intelligence authorities, their law enforcement people and their army are looking everywhere, trying to resolve the fate of this missing reporter.
[Koppel:] And if nothing else, that is what Pearl's employer, the "Wall Street Journal," hopes to convey to whomever is holding Pearl captive, that he's not a spy, just a journalist who was trying to do his job. Andrea Koppel, CNN, at the State Department.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Well, as we transition into the new year, it's a good time to get your financial house in order. This morning, we'll get some money dos and don'ts from Lauren Young. She's a senior writer for "Smart Money" magazine. She joins us from New York this morning. Good morning, Lauren.
[Lauren Young, Senior Writer, "smart Money" Magazine:] Good morning, Kyra.
[Phillips:] All right, let's kind of start with the obvious here. Not a time to sell your stocks, definitely a time a buy to buy. What are some of the bargains out there?
[Young:] Bargains, definitely in the technology sector. I mean, the average technology stock is down 30 percent in the year 2000. So, there's a lot of good stuff out there, but you do need to be ready to stick around for the long haul.
[Phillips:] Well, what would be some of your picks?
[Young:] Some of the things we like are some of the larger blue chip names. I think that obviously some of the Ciscos of the world, even Microsoft, are things that you should be looking at to have as a core of a long-term portfolio, not something that you need for the next 12 months or 18 months.
[Phillips:] Well, definitely not a time to buy a house right now, right?
[Young:] No, we do believe that the economy is slowing, and I don't want to sound like a doomsday person here. But, one thing you do need to think about is: Can you afford to take on a debt to buy a new house? Now, the other good thing about waiting is that housing prices do tend to lag the stock market by about two years. So, we could see some real bargains out there as soon as the market shakes itself out.
[Phillips:] All right, I like this one. You say be nice to your boss.
[Young:] Be really nice to your boss. I hope mine's watching. No...
[Phillips:] Me too.
[Young:] Important is that, well, we've seen layoffs. Montgomery Ward laid off a slew of people last week, and we don't think that's going to end. And having a job is obviously one of the best ways to pay your bills. So, it's really important to figure out where your company's going and, you know, try and be ahead of the trend. If they're thinking about layoffs, maybe you should start getting your resume ready, and sending it out to some other people.
[Phillips:] So public service and retail sectors, you think those are two of the key areas?
[Young:] Yes. Well, obviously, with retail stocks doing terribly, retail companies are not doing well and, as a result, you will see some layoffs in that area. Again, service companies too could be hit by a round of layoffs.
[Phillips:] So, obviously, you've got to have a cushion of cash. What about reevaluating your 401 [k]. Is that a good idea too?
[Young:] Yeah, Kyra, I'm glad that you brought that up. Your 401 [k] is really, obviously, a core asset for you. And a good way to raise cash is actually to do it in your 401 k] plan. That means, if you need some money. Let's say you should have about a three-month cushion, if you do lose your job, or if some major financial disaster strikes. A 401 [k] is a great place to do that. But, you should also be looking at your asset allocations seeing, you know, what areas of your 401 [k] did well last year, what might not have, and, you know, realigning it for the year 2001.
[Phillips:] So, what are you sort of recommending then? For example, mine is very aggressive.
[Young:] Aggressive is good, as long as you don't think you need the money any time soon, and you look pretty young. I'm assuming you are. So...
[Phillips:] Oh, Lauren, thank you.
[Young:] You're welcome. So, you know, but for people who are nearing retirement, this is a very important time, and we are really in a pivotal sea change in the economy to think about what are my goals in the next year? Am I going to retire? Am I having a child? Am I buying a new house perhaps? Lots of things to think about. And this is the best time to do it in January, you know, along with losing weight.
[Phillips:] We had to throw that one in, right?
[Young:] Yes.
[Phillips:] Do you think the do you think the markets need an interest rate cut or just a big boost of confidence right now?
[Young:] Oh, I think an interest rate cut would actually give a lot of confidence to Wall Street about where the market is heading and where the Federal Reserve chairman thinks the market is heading. I also think that it could spur some economic spending, which is obviously what drives our economy and that's really important. We've seen consumers, you know, draw back a little bit, and we do need to boost that quite a bit.
[Phillips:] All right, here are some obvious ones. Watch out for credit cards, of course. Look at your financial house. New income market, why don't you talk a little bit about that?
[Young:] OK, well, I think that there are new ways to play the market. I mean, everybody has been so reliant on the stock market for so long and, you know, the fixed-income market actually did quite well last year. Bonds are not bad. I mean, they sound stodgy. They sound boring, but let me tell you, they deliver a solid return, pretty much year after year, and we've been telling our readers to go out and look at the fixed income market, particularly at the longer end. You can buy treasury strips. If you go onto our Web site, we'll tell you exactly how you should do it.
[Phillips:] Boy, in the past, people said steer away from bonds, at least in the past couple of years, right?
[Young:] Right. Yes. It has not been one of the better markets for bonds. But, we did see coming out of the last slowdown, the fixed income market pick up very nicely. And we do think that, and again, you know, we're not saying put all your eggs in one basket, but you could get some return from some from government treasuries.
[Phillips:] All right, Lauren, and your final tip was stop spending. OK, how the heck are we going to stop spending? Come on.
[Young:] Tell me. I'm going on vacation next week. I know, but listen, I was just telling someone downstairs that I think it's really important she had bought a new house, maybe she doesn't need to furnish the entire thing on a credit card right now. I think it's really important for people to reevaluate. In this economy, we are in a slower climate. What you can actually afford and do you need, you know, another black turtle neck sweater or do you need a new car? I think people have to kind of realign what their expectations are for spending. And I don't think it's so hard to do, if we all do it together. But I, you know, it's hard. But, stop spending. You don't need you don't need that new television set.
[Phillips:] All right, Lauren Young, we'll hit the outlet malls then. Thanks for joining us this morning.
[Young:] Thank you.
[Phillips:] Great tips.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Our top story is D-Day, as in decision day, in Washington. The issue there: trade relations between the U.S., the world's largest economy, and China, the world's most populated nation. Well, several undecided lawmakers jumped off the fence yesterday, throwing their support to the trade bill. The vote is expected to come this afternoon. And CNN's Kelly Wallace reports President Clinton has been working hard to get it passed.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn Correspondent:] President Clinton calls it the most important decision lawmakers will make this year. After months of nonstop lobbying by the White House, the House of Representatives votes today on permanent normal trade relations with China. Until the end, Mr. Clinton made public and private appeals, trying to influence undecided members from the podium....
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] The consequences of this vote will be felt after I am no longer president.
[Wallace:] ... and calling fellow Democrats still on the fence to the White House for some personal lobbying. Democratic backers of the measure, which waives the annual review of trade with China, claim they have tremendous momentum. More undecided lawmakers in their party publicly endorsed the bill, saying it will open up China's markets to U.S. goods.
[Rep. Allen Boyd , Florida:] It came down to the fact that this is good for all of America. This is good for the American capitalist and the American worker.
[Wallace:] But opponents continued their final lobbying blitz, hoping to convince the remaining undecideds the deal would be a big blow to American workers.
[Rep. Peter Defazio , Oregon:] It is about job loss in America, it is about U.S. capital and multinational capital fleeing America to access and exploit cheap labor in China. It's not about selling them anything.
[Wallace:] The White House expects Republicans to deliver at least 150 votes, and Democrats are aiming to come up with 70. The magic number needed for passage: 218 votes. And there is more and more optimism here at the White House. President Clinton told reporters last night after a fund- raiser he thinks the China trade vote will pass. But between now and that vote later this afternoon, he is keeping his scheduled open, making himself available to work the phones or meet with lawmakers trying to do whatever he can to put one of his biggest legislative priorities over the top. Kelly Wallace, CNN, the White House.
[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Well, from the White House let's go to Capitol Hill to get a count of those lawmakers. That's where we find CNN's congressional correspondent Bob Franken this morning. Bob, what is the count for the vote today?
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, they're about 10 votes shy of the 218 they need to go over the top. A lot of those are undecideds. A lot of them are people who say, look, if you really, absolutely need me, Mr. President, or if you really need me, Mr. Republican leader, we'll go along with you. But, if we can vote against it, that will mean we won't have to displease our constituency; that is to say a heavy labor district constituency, perhaps. So there's that kind of thing. It's a reality of whipping, which is what they're doing right now. The leaders are trying to whip the members into their column on one side or the other. There are about four different sides represented here: Democrats who are going along with the president, supporting this. There are Democrats who are going along with organized labor, about two-thirds of the Democrats, in opposing it. There are Republicans who are going along with their leaders in business and supporting it. And the Republicans who have questions about China, mostly conservative Republicans, they are opposing it Pat Buchanan-type Republicans. So there's whipping going, to use that term we've gotten to enjoy a little bit, all over the place. But it looks like the ones who are whipping for the legislation, Carol, are going to succeed.
[Lin:] Well, Bob, you'd know the answer to this: Is this really about being undecided or is there a little horse trading going on in the background?
[Franken:] Well, of course there's some horse trading going on, by which we mean, the person says, look, I really need a new water plant in my area, or I need a new pipeline, that kind of thing. That is a reality of legislative trading. But a lot of people, honestly, are trying to decide what this means in principle, or, more importantly, what this means politically.
[Lin:] All right, Bob Franken covering the debate and the vote today on Capitol Hill.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] The other big story we are tracking today is the nasty and cold and snowy weather in the Midwest. We have on the phone with us right now Paul Keep. He is with the newspaper in Flint, Michigan, and he is joining us. Paul, are you with us?
[Paul Keep, Editor, "flint Journal":] Yes, I am.
[Kagan:] What's the name of your newspaper?
[Keep:] We're the "Flint Journal." And as I understand it, the weather's so bad you guys weren't even able to publish? That's right. Normally, being an afternoon paper, we'd be running our presses right now. And they have not been running and we're not sure we're going to be able to get the staff into the building to run them.
[Kagan:] So it's a matter of getting the people there because the roads are so bad?
[Keep:] Right. We got about 14 inches of snow in parts of our county, and the county, Genesee County, that we're in has been declared in a state of emergency and the officials are saying, do not go on the streets or you'll be ticketed.
[Kagan:] And we're showing we've been showing pictures while we've been talking to you. I think this is mainly from around the Detroit area. But it does show how treacherous the roads have been.
[Keep:] What's ironic is now we've got sunshine and it's a beautiful day. But overnight, the winds and everything else just whipped into a frenzy.
[Kagan:] And how unusual is it for a paper like yours not to be able to publish?
[Keep:] Well, we're a daily paper. We're almost 125 years old. And we think there were a few days in the 1950s that a strike may have caused us not to publish, but no one so far has found weather-related closure.
[Kagan:] Really? And how ironic, too, being in the news business. It's a huge story, we've got a big story to report.
[Keep:] Right. And we have probably about 15 or 20 of our 120 people in the newsroom that managed to get in, including myself. And we are reporting and we're putting some of our coverage on our online sites, so we're still publishing.
[Kagan:] That was my next question. Do you have a Web site?
[Keep:] Yes we do.
[Kagan:] What is it so we can tell our viewers?
[Keep:] Well, it's www.mlive.com.
[Kagan:] Mlive...
[Keep:] And there's a "Flint Journal" portion of that Web site that belongs to us. And we're trying to get a story about the weather on there as we speak.
[Kagan:] Very good. Well, we'll let you go. I know you have your challenges, but it was very interesting to talk with you and we wish you well getting the paper back online and getting everybody into work and, of course, staying safe in the meantime. That was Paul Keep with the "Flint Journal" in Flint, Michigan talking about how bad the weather was. They're not publishing their paper today. They can't get all their folks in.

[Augustine Costin, Victim's Father:] Of course, they held the head, they were holding his father's head when the blood was coming out of the father's head and asked the man to stop kicking him.
[Bobbie Battista:] Rough play on the ice, one dad is dead, the other accused of manslaughter after a fight breaks out during their kids' pick-up hockey game in Lynnfield, Massachusetts.
[Martha Coakley, Middlesex County District Attorney:] The altercation grew out of the criticism between two adults about what was occurring on the ice.
[Gerard Butler, Prosecutor:] During this game, some of the children were checking one another, and the defendant became enraged.
[Costin:] How would you like to see a father being killed and seeing that the man is killing him, pleading to stop hitting my father, don't hit him anymore. It's a terrible thing.
[Unidentified Male:] When it is over, like, a hockey game like that, or hockey practice, whatever it was, you know, it seems almost ridiculous.
[Battista:] Though this incident is extreme, the question remains: Have the stakes become too high in youth sports, and why are some parents turning their competitive fire into sideline violence? Michael Costin, a 40-year-old father was buried yesterday, allegedly beaten to death by another dad during their son's pick-up hockey game. Mourners made a point of saying that it is time for parents to take a good look at themselves and their competitive instincts. If you haven't seen it for yourself, you have heard about the way that some parents behave when their children play at sports. We will let you tell some of those stories today. But first, here to talk about this with us are Bob Katz, a writer who addresses youth sports, he is working on a book called "Crunch Time For Dad: Fathers, Sons and Organized Sports." Also with us is Gregg Heinzmann, director of the Youth Sports Research Council at Rutgers University. And on the phone with us is Tom Grilk, a friend of Michael Costin's. And, Tom, I'd like to start with you. You were not at this game where this incident occurred because this was just a pick-up match, correct?
[Tom Grilk, Sean Costin's Coach:] That's correct.
[Battista:] But you are a friend or were a friend of Michael Costin's?
[Grilk:] That's right, and I have coached his children in hockey and in baseball and as recently as right now. Sean, his youngest boy is a member of a baseball team that we have going here in Massachusetts.
[Battista:] And your reaction to all of this? You had to have been just incredibly shocked.
[Grilk:] Of course. It was one of horror, first that just the fact that such a thing could occur, and then that we lose someone who was a lovely gentleman to whom we all entrusted our children from time to time at various games, and ultimately a reaction of great sorrow and great worry as we look forward. The direction for all of us here is to put the anger behind us and try to move forward and do what we can to help a woman who now has four little kids to raise, she of some 70 years of age.
[Battista:] Whether extreme or not, Tom, do you see a lot of incidents or do you think there is an increase in the incidents of violence in kids' sports?
[Grilk:] One sees occasional outbreaks of anger or too much emotion on the part of some parents. I don't see it very often. One should see it never, but I've never seen it break out to this degree. I suppose there's a lesson for all of to us learn to restrain ourselves and to be more modified in our approach to this kind of thing, and I'm sure that many of us will try to do that very thing.
[Battista:] What do you think then was at the core of this incident?
[Grilk:] Nothing that has anything to do with children's sports, I'm sure. I don't know what was in the head of the person who did what he did, but it had to go well beyond anything to do with sports, the kind of thing that could have happened on a street corner or in a bar or anywhere else. It was human emotion, not children's sports that were at work here.
[Battista:] Well, maybe that's the problem, you know, rage, uncontrolled rage, we see that in a number of areas in our society today, whether it is on the road or on airplanes, anywhere, you know, that we can lash out at somebody we don't know.
[Grilk:] I'm sure that's true, and it happens in the roads through the anonymity of looking through the glass of your automobile rather than being right next to somebody. And I think that this one played out initially in the same way with someone yelling over the glass at a hockey rink rather than being right next to somebody. Unfortunately, it devolved into what it turned into was someone being dead, and one of the things we are talking to our kids and all the other kids about is what happens when a little bit of anger suddenly erupts into a horror like this, they need to learn to deal with that kind of anger in a very different way.
[Battista:] All right, Tom Grilk, thanks very much for joining us today. We appreciate your time.
[Grilk:] Happy to do it.
[Battista:] Bob, we all know that there is nothing new about parents overreacting to their children's sports activities, but you think there's something else at work these days. What do you mean?
[Bob Katz, Writer:] I believe there is. And I do want to commend the gentleman who just spoke, that I'm sure there were a very distinct set of circumstances that led to the tragedy at the ice rink in Reading. That said, this is, as I believe the gentleman suggested, an opportunity to assess and maybe re-evaluate some of the dimensions of youth sports, whether or not this particular incident can be causally linked to a larger phenomenon. My it's my belief that we are in a culture now that is awash with the metaphor of sports, sports as the living symbol of how to succeed and by inference how to succeed in life. It's a notion that's promulgated, you know, most obviously by sportscasters and sports pages, but more than that it's trickled down or up, if you want to say that, to the business community where you see corporate executives blithely attributing sports metaphors as being fundamental to their company's fourth quarter or third quarter success. The point being that success is that sports is the metaphor for success and that parents are increasingly buying into that concept and then I believe erroneously applying it to what ought to be a far more innocent endeavor, namely games for 8, 9 and 10-year-olds that are organized but ought to have a focus that has absolutely nothing to do with adult definitions of achievement and success.
[Battista:] Gregg, you don't necessarily agree that there is an escalating trend in the number of incidents in violence in sports, but at the same time do you agree with what Bob has just said about the culture that we are living in?
[Gregg Heinzmann, Youth Sports Research Council:] Well, certainly there are a number of things going on in society that should make us all concerned. You know, I just happened to copy out of today's newspaper the list of what's on today's talk shows as entertainment for our daytime viewers and some of the topics are absolutely disgusting. So there definitely is a moral decline. But some of the things Bob says are right on target, and I read his op-ed today and I think it's excellent. We need to kind of give some shape to this syndrome he's talking about which is what sports psychologists call identification. It's the strong emotional love that we have for our children, and as a new parent myself I understand this. It's difficult for people who don't have kids to really understand what we are talking about, but I have a quick story to tell you that kind of illustrates what I mean. A few years ago, my wife and I had a birthday party for my 3- year-old and we took her out to one of these restaurants where they have the arcade and the games for the kids and they serve pizza. They brought out the birthday cake for my 3-year-old to blow out the candles, and someone said, close your eyes, cover your eyes. Well, after awhile, as you might guess, she wasn't doing very well I challenge you or any adult to try to blow out birthday candles without being able to see the cake but the point I'm trying to make is when she struggled and had difficulty doing that, my reaction as a parent was to step in because I felt the humiliation that she might have been feeling not being able to do that that's what we talk about when we say identification so I blew out the candles.
[Battista:] This identification that you are talking about, is this something new or do you think that this is something that's always been in our youth sports culture?
[Heinzmann:] No, it's always been there and it doesn't apply just to sports, it's a generic term that describes the strong emotional love and bonding that parents have for their children. And when a father perceives that his son is being unfairly treated or even physically abused out on the ice he tends to react in ways that we find unfathomable, and I'm not trying to justify this behavior. I wasn't there and I don't know what happened, per se, but if you understand this concept a little better it starts to explain why this might have happened.
[Battista:] I want to bring another voice into the conversation now. On the line with us is Richard Lapchick, who is founder and director of Northeastern University Center for the Study of Sport in Society. And I think there are a number of people out there, Richard, who do think that this is an escalating trend, that there are more and more incidents of it and that sooner or later it was going to come to something like this.
[Richard Lapchick, Center For Study Of Sport In Society, Northeastern University:] Well, I would be one of those people. We get reports at least on a monthly basis of some form of parent getting involved either with another parent, with a coach, with a high school principal, with an umpire and that's not talking about coaches getting involved in physical violence. There's a story breaking right now as we speak in Miami about an assistant coach of the Police Athletic League baseball team in Hollywood, Florida, who punched an umpire and broke his jaw. And he's surrendering this afternoon being charged with a felony. And the sad thing is that when I hear stories like this, I'm no longer surprised by it, because we hear them so often. And I think that in a lot of ways what happened in Reading was an inevitable consequence of the escalation of violence that's taking place across our society. And you know, we see more violence in the workplace, we see more violence in educational institutions. The parents of children are going to be subject to that violence as they're growing up as, you know, our high school students now, there are 2,000 acts 2,000 students assaulted every hour of every day according to the National Education Association in high schools. Well, those high-school kids are going to become parents at some point and...
[Battista:] Let me ask you, where do you think all this rage is coming from?
[Lapchick:] Well, I think that part of the rage had been there for a long period of time but had been expressed in much more subdued ways. But as violence has become more acceptable in certain parts of our society and a kind of normal response, and it cuts across I think one of the important things about Reading is that this happened in an affluent community. I think there had been misconception that a lot of the youth sport violence was taking place in urban areas, which was never really true. It's taking place across economic and racial and geographic lines. And I think that there are a lot of people out there who just, as Bob and Gregg have both said so much in their own children, that they, you know, go beyond this identification and take on forms that as Gregg said that we would never of in other circumstances in our life, but in this particular emotional moment gets swept away with a response that is almost unpredictable for the individual but just happens.
[Battista:] I've got to take a break at this particular time. Baseball hall-of-famer Jim Palmer will join us just a little later in the show. Also, as we take a break, please take part in our TALKBACK LIVE online viewer vote at cnn.comtalkback. Today's question: Have youth sports become too competitive? We'll be back in just a second. In January, police in Washington were called after a coach broke a parent's nose with a head-butt after a wrestling match between 6-year-olds. In April, a former police officer in Pennsylvania was convicted of soliciting assault for offering a 10-year-old Little League pitcher to hit an opposing player with the ball. And in May, the father of a hockey player put an official in a headlock during a high school tournament in Texas and had to be forcibly removed from the rink. All right. Let me get the audience in here a little bit. Joey's on the phone from Wisconsin Michigan rather. Joey, go ahead.
[Joey:] Yes, I just want to say that I think the dynamics of winning versus losing in children's sports should be left out. The magnitude of winning is way out of control. They're trying to make major leaguers out of kids, and that is no fun for the kids.
[Battista:] Bob, how do you do that? How do you downplay the winning and losing aspects of sports?
[Katz:] Well, I'm not an expert on the dynamics of how to structure the games. I think it's obvious to any parent or casual observer that situations like intensified playoff competitions and inner-town or even inner-state rivalries certainly takes the games in the wrong direction or intensifies it sometimes way past the point where parents or children are able to adequately cope with it. But the caller makes a point that interests me a lot, and it's something I alluded to briefly in The New York Times op-ed I wrote today, which is that for children the games, whereas they might say that they have that they want to win, as indeed they all do, ultimately the values they most aspire to are having fun, making friends, gaining if only inch by inch increasing competency with the various skills that they're pursuing. And it is oftentimes, and too oftentimes, the adults who who place on top of this their value system that places winning for most.
[Battista:] Well, let me ask...
[Katz:] One of the things OK.
[Battista:] Are the parents let's discuss that here momentarily. Are a lot of these parents living vicariously, Gregg, through their kids?
[Heinzmann:] I suppose that that is occurring and it's something we need to be concerned about as educators and people who are concerned about youth sports. Bob hits it right on the head, though. The incident up in Massachusetts was not a championship game obviously. It was a pick-up game, which makes it even more inexplicable. But the fact of the matter is to begin to look at the solutions to these problems, one of the things we need to do is differentiate between professional sports and youth sports. Professional sports in its pure form is a business, it's entertainment. People's livelihoods ride on wins and losses. Too often parents and others use that model and place it on top of youth sports, and their functions and their purposes are totally difficult. As Bob says it's supposed to be an opportunity for kids to have fun, to socialize, to make friends, et cetera.
[Battista:] Yes, we just got an e-mail on that, as a matter of fact. It says: "As a former National League umpire I am well aware of the violence in sports. Professional players and umpires show tempers on the field. It does not give a good example to our youth and adults."
[Heinzmann:] Clearly they want to be like Mike, to coin a phrase.
[Battista:] Right. We'll talk to Jim Palmer a little bit more about that when he gets down here. But let me go to Trisha, who had an interesting comment, too, about causes here.
[Trisha:] I was just thinking on a larger scale there's so much at stake in sports with scholarship available to children who are excelling at a certain sport, and you know, even millions of dollar contracts that are offered to these children. So the parents want to get their children a higher education or get them million-dollar contracts, so they push and push and push and push.
[Battista:] Let me have Richard comment on that, about how much the pressure of college scholarships plays into this.
[Lapchick:] Well, it's definitely a factor, but I think what we try to do in our programs at the center at Northeastern is we do work with parents in our urban youth sports program, let them understand that the odds against a youth sport player getting a college scholarship for sports are a thousand to one. The odds against them making it to the pros are 100,000 to one, that this is not that this is an unrealistic dream for them to pursue, not to discourage them from becoming fine athletes, but to make sure they understand that they have to have a balance life, including balancing academics and athletics, if they want their children to be successful.
[Katz:] If I can just interject.
[Battista:] Yes.
[Katz:] To follow up on what Richard said, I think it's true that only the most diluted of parents even for a flicker of time comes to the belief that what they are training their son or daughter for is Olympic glory or the big leagues. But many, many, many parents have bought into the idea that sports are indeed an accurate indicator, sports as played at the youth level, can indicate the child's aptitude for some future success and possibly glory. And it is that what I believe to be largely mistaken belief that is adding fuel to the fire that is always there when parents watch from the sidelines as their kids are engaged in oftentimes heated or perilous sort of contests. Do you agree with that, Gregg.
[Heinzmann:] Well, Bobbie, to some extent I do. I was thinking about another issue here, and that is that is we missed an opportunity up here in Massachusetts to educate the kids who were assembled about the proper way to handle a dispute. Not only did they witness a violent act, but those coaches and those parents missed an opportunity to teach those kids by example that when you have a disagreement with someone, you talk it out and you resolve it in a peaceful, nonviolent way. So not only were they witnesses to this horrible act, but there was also a missed opportunity there, and I think that's equally regrettable.
[Battista:] Let me go to the audience quickly Richard.
[Richard:] My point in regards to what the students had, as a former teacher for 13 and a half years, I had one child go to the NFL. And all these other people that wanted to get out there and they said, you know, Mr. Solar, why is it? Why can't I go out? I said, no, you've got to be here in algebra II. I would go to the coach and ask him, hey, look, this guy, oh no, Mr. Solar, you can do that. So if anything, teachers also need to be put up against that idea, hey, this is far more important, getting your education, and not just leaving it to the child, because the child is under pressure from the coach and even parents.
[Battista:] Yes, good comment. We'll talk about who's responsibility it is to tone it down. And, Richard Lapchick, we thank you very much for joining us today. We'll be back in just a moment. An assistant baseball coach with the Hollywood, Florida Police Athletic League turned himself into police today and was charged with breaking an umpire's jaw. Orlando Lago was accused of punching the umpire after disagreeing with a call during a high school baseball game. Welcome back. With us here in Atlanta now is Rob Stearns, the national sales manager for Star 94 Radio. Rob has two children and he is the business manager for his son's baseball league. On the phone with us is also Barry Mano, who is founder and president of the National Association of Sports Officials. Rob, let me start with you. What has been your experience with this whole, you know, idea of youth sports and violence whether or not it's escalating.
[Rob Stearns, Parent/former Coach:] Well, your topic is very timely. It's right on the money. I thoroughly enjoyed the first 30 minutes of the show just getting all the different takes. And I think unfortunately, it's the state that society is in now, with all the pressure. All the people who spoke earlier made very excellent points. You know, in my experience, I'm here as the sole member of the I'm the coach, so I'm trying to give a little bit different perspective. It all depends where you start out, what kind of objectives you have and where you set your bar, as far was what expectations you create for the parents and the kids. As we talked a little earlier, there's various different levels of competition. If you choose to go to the highest levels, you know, there's a certain price you have to pay there, not just in monetary costs, but as far as level of competition.
[Battista:] Yes, I don't think people realize that it isn't just Pop Warner football anymore if you're a kid who wants to play football. It's you know, like we were saying, it's a year-round activity now. It's not just seasonal, and this includes camps, and it includes schools and it includes going to Europe to compete, things like that. I mean, it's really youth sports today seems to be better funded and better organized, for better or for worse.
[Stearns:] Well, we oftentimes you know, I'm in my mid 40s and I remember as a kid I would go to the block or the cul-de-sac, grab some friends, get a whiffle ball and we would play supervised sports. You don't see that much anymore, unfortunately. There's umpires, and there's got to be referees and officials, which in some ways is good. It keeps the kids busy. As a parent of the 14-year-old, he's off the Internet a little bit, and he's but not in the malls. So you know, organized group sports is a good thing. There a lot of positives, but certainly we're pointing out today some of the negatives that exists.
[Battista:] Barry, let me get you in here. Do you think that we're seeing an increase from your perspective in violence, or is it a change in the type of violence?
[Barry Mano, National Association Of Sports Officials:] No, we're certainly seeing an increase here at the National Association of Sports Officials. In the old days, things happened of an untoward nature, but there really wasn't an organization that an official could go and report it. Generally, you wouldn't report it to the league, because the league didn't want that kind of problem, and it's reported that you ended up not getting more assignments, if you will. Now that here, we're getting more reports. On a quantitative basis, certainly there are physical assaults against sports official than at any time, and we've been in business for 25 years.
[Battista:] What do you see when you see a parent who's about to lose it?
[Mano:] Well, you know, We only have so many options, frankly. I mean, we can police the game, we can handle and adjudicate the game because we have the rule book giving us the authority, but with respect to fans and parents, it's not so easy, especially at the lower levels, because you don't have formal security in place at those levels as you do in high, school college and professional. So our job is a lot tougher if they are asking us to somewhat serve as a policeman for the fans and the parents in the stand. If they want us to do that, then they need to give us more tools to be able to handle that. One of the tools is the league has to adopt a policy and some now do where the fans and the parents have to sign a contract. If they have bad behavior, they are going to be ejected from the league and not permitted to attend any games for a year. And they have to make it stick. Those kinds of things give us the tools to do what we have to do.
[Battista:] You know what, would you have done that, Rob, as a former coach, if you'd had to do that?
[Stearns:] Ban the parents?
[Battista:] Yes, or ban the kid and the kid too. I mean, I hate to penalize the child but...
[Stearns:] You know, each situation is different. If somebody is eliciting behavior that's inappropriate, you definitely have to lay the law down. There's no question. It starts with the coaches. It goes to the umpires, then the commissioners, the board members. There's like a whole, you know, hierarchy in youth sports. And if they all can get together on the same page and lay the law down, it surely would be helpful.
[Battista:] To the audience here, quickly to the audience, and Heather?
[Heather:] I was just going to say that, as horrendous a story as this is, I'm afraid that it is not going to be the last story we hear like this unless we do something. Because being a high school and college athlete myself, I know many stories of fellow teammates who were physically abused and verbally abused you know, tremendous stories because their parents didn't feel that they performed well enough during that game that night.
[Battista:] Let me ask Greg and Bob quickly we don't have that much time about whose responsibility they think it is to keep this under control and to keep this from escalating.
[Heinzmann:] Go ahead, Bob.
[Katz:] It's my feeling it's completely the parents' responsibility. It's the parents' responsibility to come to a broader understanding and pass it on to their children: that life is not a win-lose situation; that life is much more nuanced and complex; and that games are simply games; and there are games that can be fun, can be educational. And that should be enough for parents and child alike.
[Battista:] Gregg.
[Heinzmann:] I think we all have a responsibility, Bobbie. But, you know, we've talked about a number of different things here. First of all, the lack of free play nowadays is a function of how society has changed over the last 25 years. I agree we used to come home after school and throw the books down and go out and play in front of Johnny's house. But now we have more parents working. We have more single-parent homes. And as a result kids, the latchkey kid syndrome is a very real phenomenon. That puts a lot more pressure on our recreational programs in the different towns around the country to meet the demand for healthy, wholesome activities for kids. But I'm not sure they are deriving the same benefit, because when we played, we used to resolve these disputes. We used to choose the teams. We used to make the rules. And now that's all being directed by adults for better or for worse. Also, you know, we have two- to three-million volunteer coaches in this country. You've brought up at least half a dozen examples here on your screen. We need to keep it in perspective. I'm not sure this a rising tide of violence. I'm not even sure it is a wave. But yet, one incident is enough to make us all concerned. And we are all responsible.
[Battista:] All right. Gregg Heinzmann and Bob Katz, we thank you very much, both of you, for joining us today. We've got to take another break. Former baseball pitcher Jim Palmer will join us next. Welcome back. We are talking about parents behaving badly during their kids' sporting events. And joining us now is baseball Hall of Famer, pitcher and Cy Young Award winner, Jim Palmer, as you know. He is currently a spokesman for the acid reflux disease awareness. And we were just comparing notes on that since we both suffer from that. Good cause, I'll say that.
[Jim Palmer, Hall Of Fame Pitcher:] Yes.
[Battista:] Are you, Jim, as a professional athlete, are you shocked by any of this about, you know, what you are hearing about a possible escalation in violence in youth sports and that kind of thing?
[Palmer:] I think that it's kind a microcosm of our society. Where I stand, I certainly wasn't here the first couple of minutes. I mean, there was not a whole lot of violence when I played little league. But I have seen it. I mean, part of getting prepared for the baseball season was to play basketball at the local YMCA. And I saw people throw balls in people's face, and do things that you don't normally do under normal conditions at least not people that I saw in my walk of life. And people react to either the stresses or whatever of athleticism, or athletic conduct, or whatever, a lot differently. But I think we see it, at least I see it, where people overreact to a lot of situation whether it's road rage, or now, you know, now we probably even have e-mail rage.
[Battista:] Right. Air rage, we have air rage. We know that too.
[Palmer:] Exactly.
[Battista:] You said a few minutes ago obviously you didn't see a lot of violence. But what was it like for you, as an obviously gifted athlete which I am sure you were picked out, you know, when you were younger- I mean, or did you just come up the regular way I mean, playing pee-wee baseball.
[Palmer:] Pretty much came I was adopted at birth in New York, so I never played organized baseball until my father passed away when I was 10 years old and we moved to California. And I actually started playing before little league. When I was 10 years old, I played in a league called the Golden State League. Instead of being from 9-12, which is what little league is or maybe now even 8-12 I played from 10-13. And I wasn't very good. I played third base, hit about.184, pitched one day, and kind of like it. But I moved to Beverly Hills, California, played little league when I was 11 and 12; pony league when I was 13; move to Arizona; played Babe Ruth American Legion; and then signed at 17, and was in the Major Leagues at 19. But I think back, I think that one of the most important things that I learned whether it was in the minor leagues playing for Cal Ripken Sr., who was my first manager or my parents. They were first of all very supportive, went to all my games. No. 2, Cal Sr. told me: Listen, we are going to teach you about baseball. We are going to teach you how important the fan is. But we're also going to teach you about teamwork and about having fun. And I worked for a little league down in Palm Beach Gardens in Florida. And I have worked for him for about three or four years. And they are pretty good. And I have a good friend of mine, Mike Adams is a golf pro at PGA National is one of the top 100 teachers I mean, does a terrific job with these kids. He teaches them discipline. He teaches them, you know, how to play the game; but the most important thing is that he teaches them to have a good time. So everybody is there because they want to be, not because of peer pressure, not because of I mean, maybe they feel like that is. But the bottom line is, is that I think the most important thing I tell them and the most important thing that I think I maybe missed at a Major League level, and even in the Minor League, is that I was and even in amateur baseball is maybe I wasn't having as much fun as I should have.
[Battista:] Yes, and not enough emphasis on that. Too many too many coaches and parents trying to be Vince Lombardi with 8 year olds, which is, you know, a great coach, but maybe not for an 8-year-old.
[Palmer:] Well, I have I have a 33-year-old daughter. Jamie lives up in Boston now, and she started playing softball when she was 10 years old. And I went for the first couple of games and she was having a great time. Not very good at it. They were learning how to play, as most of the kids in that time. And I went back about a month-and-a-half later we'd been on the road, and because of the fact that I was playing baseball and the games were in the late afternoon when I was at the ballpark. I finally had a chance on an off-day to go to one of her games, and they were winning. They're beating everybody. But the coach had figured out if you don't swing at the ball, you could walk. And they were winning but nobody was having fun. And I went up to the coach afterwards and I said: "Something's wrong here. This is not about winning." I mean, that's a byproduct of learning how to play, how getting along with other kids. All of the things that what amateur sports was supposed to be about and I think a lot a lot of coaches get it and a lot of don't. I do Little League World Series, did it for ABC for about 13 out of the last 15 years. And the amazing thing is that these kids come up to Williamsport, play on the Wide World of Sports, play under the most intense situations all the way to get to Williamsport. And I've seen them crying. I saw one kid pitch a no-hitter...
[Battista:] There's no crying in baseball.
[Palmer:] I know, yes. But I saw him pitch a no-hitter on Wednesday night and on Saturday give up 21 runs in the first three innings. He's on the mound crying. His dad was the coach. So there's a lot of things that go on that maybe shouldn't go on. But I think probably the most important thing that I ever learned is that you've got to enjoy what you're doing, whether you're you're it's your avocation when you're older or when you're young. And it seems like sometimes that's missing from the from the equation.
[Battista:] I've got to take another break. I'll come back to Wendy's comment in just a second. All right. Let me take a phone call from John in Florida. John, you've been a ref, I guess, in amateur sports.
[John:] Yes, I'm a high-school official and we also do Pop Warner football.
[Battista:] OK. So your comment?
[John:] Well, we're talking about talking about violence as far as fans go and the parents and all go, right?
[Battista:] Right.
[John:] And predominantly we don't have much of a problem on the field with kids. For the most part, it seems like the kids are out there they're intent on playing. What's important to them is not really winning or losing. It's game time, getting a chance to actually get out there and play. Right, but the fans, it seems like, the parents are the ones that really get hot under the collar out there. Like give you an example, last year we were at a Pop Warner football game and the home team was losing, and the fans got very irate about it. They started coming down out of the stands and going toward the field and everything. It was a regular high school-type football field with track around the outside of it. And they were pressing the field. Now the field supervisor should have moved them back at that point and quieted them down, but they didn't. And in football we don't usually have a whole lot of personal interaction with the fans, because we're in the middle of the fields and they're up in the bleachers. But everybody's got to leave the field at some time. We've got to go out of the stadium some time. And we really we really narrowly avoided getting mobbed getting out of there.
[Battista:] Right, right.
[John:] We had several people got rocks thrown at them. One guy got his rock hit with a rock. Somebody cut loose with a pistol shot at us.
[Battista:] Oh my gosh.
[John:] Yes, so we...
[Battista:] John, let me move on here quickly because I'm running out of time, but I understand where you're coming from on that and that's pretty extreme. We got a fax a few minutes ago that says that the toughest meanest athletes are glorified and children learn from that. And I wanted to Jim Palmer to comment on that because that's part of the culture that we live in today, that cult of celebrity, I think, and it doesn't teach children well.
[Palmer:] No, I think, you know, whether you're talking about John Rocker or any situation, I think we all have to take responsibility for our actions, and I think that that's a lesson to be learned: you know, whether you're a professional athlete or you're an amateur athlete, whether you're a, you know, just a quote a "normal person" or not is that you have to be responsible. And I think a lot of times in sports you are treated differently. People come up to me and I know that I can make a difference in their life by being nice to them. But there was a guy, Mike Marshall, one of the great relief pitchers, and he said: "I'm not going to give you an autograph because you should be getting your autographs from your school teachers because they're going to teach you a lot more than I could ever do."
[Battista:] Right, very good.
[Palmer:] And for some reason, people and you know, he was a kinesiologist and...
[Battista:] But does this include being a role model? Because, you know, I can remember when Charles Barkley famously said, "I don't want to be a role model, I shouldn't have to be a role model." I mean, there's a lot of pressure on athletes...
[Palmer:] But he also you have to understand now, my interpretation of what Charles Barkley said was "I don't want people emulating me; they should emulate your parents." And I think what Charles was trying to say was that your parents on a daily basis have a much better chance of being a role model than any athlete. And my point is I try to conduct myself where people will say, you know, I want to be like Jim Palmer. But people don't really know me. If I'm living in a home, I'm a youngster growing up, who do I really want to emulate? I want to emulate my parents. And they want to give me, they want I mean, my parents did it. I mean, they gave me support. They talked to me about education. They talked about not being rude, being polite, being kind to other people, being caring: all of the things that are important as far as I'm concerned. And I probably wouldn't think that way if it hadn't been for my parents.
[Battista:] Yes. I've got to take another break. We'll be back. I promised Wendy I think a couple of segments ago that I was going to come back and get your comment or question, and I didn't get to you go ahead.
[Wendy:] My daughter went to the World Series last year, and we had nothing but fun. Our girls were out there to play and have fun playing. That's what the coaches emphasized, was having fun, and I think when a team is having fun, they're winning. And if they are not, they're not doing well, and they're down on themselves, and I think that it's the parent's responsibility to keep other parents in control, the coach's responsibility to not yell at the girls and just have fun.
[Battista:] All right. Wendy, thanks very much. If we have time, we can throw up those full screens we have with some advice for parents. No, we don't. OK, Jim Palmer, thank you very much for being with us. I appreciate you stopping by. Rob Stearns, thank you, and thank you all for joining us. We'll see you again tomorrow for more TALKBACK LIVE.

[Colleen Mcedwards, World News:] Fierce fighting is reported in Sri Lanka, where Tamil Tiger rebels are now within sight of the strategic city of Jaffna. The rebels are within a kilometer of the city limits, and they say they are ready to recapture their former capital. A rebel radio station is urging civilians to leave the city. Hundreds of people are said to be taking that advice and fleeing. We are joined now by CNN's Satinder Bindra, who is in the capital of Sri Lanka. Satinder, what information are you able to give us?
[Satinder Bindra, Cnn Correspondent:] Colleen, most of the military information is under very strict censorship. But the proceedings in Sri Lanka's parliament are not subject to censorship laws, and the leader of the opposition, Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe, just a few moments ago made a statement. Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe has said he's very concerned now about the safety of some 40,000 Sri Lankan troops which are in the north. He's also said there are nearly 500,000 civilians in the Jaffna peninsula. He said in Colombo, there is great concern about their safety. Over the past few days, the secretary-general of the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross have express grave concerns about the safety of these civilians that are trapped there. I can tell you that fighting there has been intensifying. We have reports here there's heavy mortar fire in the region. Casualties on both sides are mounting, and Sri Lanka has just sent in more troops to the region. There are concerns here in Colombo, concerns which were raised in parliament about the racial harmony of the country. The Tamil Tigers are Tamil by origin. Most of the troops are Sinhala. So if anything happens in the north, people now in Colombo are fearing a terrible racial backlash here in Colombo. The government has stepped up its work on that front. But Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe now again warning the government that they should do something on this front to maintain a racial harmony in the country. Colleen?
[Mcedwards:] Satinder, are you able to say anything else about the nature of the fighting, how it's being carried out?
[Bindra:] What I can say about the fighting, Colleen, is that it's on the ground. There is mortar and artillery attacks from both sides. Sri Lanka has also been using air power. It says that air jets have been pounding rebel forces for the last two to three days. Yesterday, we were allowed to report that the Tigers were holding on to their positions. Today, we cannot tell you where exactly the Tigers are, at least from here in Colombo. Colleen?
[Mcedwards:] And Satinder, just remind us, if you would, of the significance of Jaffna for the Tamil Tigers.
[Bindra:] Jaffna has great significance, Colleen, for the Tigers. They held Jaffna until 1995, then the army wrested control of that town from the Tigers. Now the Tigers desperately want to take control of Jaffna. They see it as their cultural capital. The Tigers would like to make Jaffna the capital of their independent homeland. So if they do recapture it, it will be a great psychological victory for them. At the same time, it will be a great defeat for the Sri Lankan troops. So Jaffna is a huge prize for the rebel forces. Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] CNN's Satinder Bindra. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Tipper Gore may, repeating, may, follow in the footsteps of former first lady Hillary Clinton, now a U.S. senator from New York, you know that. There is speculation Tipper may run for U.S. Senate seat in Tennessee vacated recently by the or soon to be, anyway, Fred Thompson. Several sources telling CNN that Tennessee Democrats hoping to persuade Gore to run for the Senate seat once held by her husband. It is not clear, however, if she wants a political career of her own. All good questions. Let's go to Candy Crowley to get some answers, if we can, in Washington. What's the buzz on this, Candy?
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, you know, it's a fun thing to talk about, it's a Friday, things are sort of politically pretty slow. Look, here is what we know. Exactly what you said, that there are some people in Tennessee that would love to see her run. Why? Because the person the Republicans are putting out, at least one of them is Lamar Alexander, and he has very high favorability in the state. What the Democrats want, they'd like to get that seat back. It used to belong to Al Gore, went to Fred Thompson. So what they need is, you know, a pow, a wow, and certainly Tipper Gore would be that. The question, of course, is how would Tipper Gore feel about this? And that's the one thing we haven't been able to answer. We have been only told by people very close to her that she is considering it, which of course is what you say when someone asks you, hey, would you consider this. She is not known as particularly loving the political life. On the other hand, there is a lot of appeal to this. She is definitely charming. She is someone that brings brought a lot of pep to the campaign trail and to her husband in the 2000 election. So it has certainly caused some buzz here. Our producer, Dana Bash, talked to Senator Hillary Clinton earlier, who said that she talked to Mrs. Gore this morning, and that if Mrs. Gore chose to run, she would support her. I will also tell you that Harold Ford, who is a congressman from Tennessee, who has been eying that race, said that if Mrs. Gore got in, he wouldn't. What we're missing here is how Mrs. Gore feels about it.
[Hemmer:] Yeah, no question. Is this somewhat of a trial balloon possibly, see how the public reacts to this?
[Crowley:] Oh, you know, I don't know. I mean, it's so hard to tell because you are getting it from all sides. Certainly, they didn't knock it down. Look, one of the things that we know about the former vice president is that he himself is contemplating another run for the presidency in 2004. He and the people around him have been on this, what they call a to be seen but not necessarily heard campaign. So they have him out there, and you have seen him increasingly over the past couple of months. This is another way to have him out there. I'm not suggesting that they are the ones, they're making it up, but what's the harm in thinking about this, and certainly the people around the Gores are delighted, saying, oh, can you imagine, we'll have a Clinton and a Gore in the Senate, you know, that kind of thing. So it's hard to know exactly what the motivations of all involved are.
[Hemmer:] Candy, do you have a gauge of the popularity level for the Gores in Tennessee? We know they bought a house recently in Nashville. And we also know that Al Gore failed to win his home state while running for president back in the year 2000. Curious to know if you have been able to pick anything up on that?
[Crowley:] Look, you know, one of the things that the former vice president said in his concession speech in 2000, is, look, I have some fence mending to do. I need to go back home. It was a huge disappointment to them. He was one of only two, I believe, presidential nominees who lost his own state. The other was Senator George McGovern who lost South Dakota. So that is a huge embarrassment, and it hurt him. I mean, the attention was on Florida, but Tennessee was sort of a personal blow. So Gore has spent a lot of time down there. He is teaching down there. He has gone across the state. He has met in little groups with former supporters. He has done some fund-raising. So he is trying. I mean, as one of his the people around him said to me, look, if you can't win your home state, how can you run for the presidency. So there has been a definite major effort, as promised, by Al Gore to be in his home state of Tennessee and mend some fences.
[Hemmer:] Yeah, well, clearly since we are in the land of speculation right now, I'm just getting word, Candy, you may be aware of this, that Tipper Gore apparently has canceled her appearances today travelling in California. She is going to go back to the state of Tennessee. Who knows.
[Crowley:] Who knows? It's fun to talk about it. And she may again, as I say, you know, the problem is she has never shown a lot of great passion for the political world. So it's hard to know what she is thinking.
[Hemmer:] Hey, thanks, Candy. Makes it interesting, right?
[Crowley:] Absolutely. Absolutely.
[Hemmer:] Candy Crowley live in D.C. Many thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Another look at the results of the Super Bowl murder trial right here in Atlanta. After four weeks of trial and testimony, two suspects, Joseph Sweeting and Reginald Oakley, yesterday in court, as you can see, were declared not guilty of murder charges. Ray Lewis, the Baltimore Ravens football star, faces a misdemeanor conviction of obstruction of justice. And so far no other suspects have been named in this case. Joining us now is Roger Cossack, CNN's legal analyst, taking a look at the aftermath of this case. Roger, was this just a bad case to begin with or poorly prosecuted?
[Roger Cossack, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, I think the answer to that is A and B, yes on both counts. I think it was a bad case to begin with and I'm afraid I have to criticize the prosecutor in this case, this was a very poorly prosecuted case. And if you want to look at irony, you find out and you look back and you say: You know, the only one that ended up with any conviction in this case was Ray Lewis, who ended up pleading guilty to a misdemeanor obstruction of justice, and testifying against that other two. That was the deal the prosecutor felt he had to make, with a week to go in the trial, to even try and get a conviction against the others. And look, he failed on both counts.
[Lin:] That's right, and Roger, as we can see, Ray Lewis, back at practice in Baltimore, with the Baltimore Ravens. So what happens if the police continue this investigation and they find more suspects, this, once again, goes back to trial? How this case was prosecuted, does that taint any future case to be prosecuted in Fulton County?
[Cossack:] Well, first of all, you have to remember there's double jeopardy. You can never come back and try any of these three again for anything having to do with this murder. They've been on trial, they were found not guilty, that's double jeopardy. And Ray Lewis was dismissed, so he can't be tried again. Now there...
[Lin:] But in the case of new suspects?
[Cossack:] No, if you come up with new suspects, those people, of course, could be tried and the same evidence could be used. But, you know, it's hard to believe that they could try anybody with the evidence that we saw, at least, presented in court. Now, of course, that was only presented toward the two people that were on trial. But, you know, those witnesses were not very good. Apparently they at least the prosecution gives the implication that they said one thing when they were having meetings with the prosecution but when it came time to get up on the witness stand, put your hand on the Bible, and swear to tell the truth, they couldn't identify anyone and never could put the murder weapon in anybody's hand; including their star witness, Ray Lewis.
[Lin:] Yes, well, you saw the news conference, yesterday with Fulton County District Attorney Paul Howard. It sounded like sour grapes. He was asked if he felt that two men two guilty men were set free. He said yes, and he's been criticized now by Sweeting's attorney for saying something that was completely inappropriate and insulting to the jury. Would you agree?
[Cossack:] Well, you know, I'm a poker player and after every hand, there's always one statement that's made. You know, the winners tell you how they did it and the losers cry deal. So I think it is a little sour grapes. I mean, look, if he he just didn't have any evidence. I don't know where this guy was going with this case. I don't know what he was told in private. We have to assume that he must have thought he had some evidence. But I must tell you, if I was a citizen of Atlanta, and the mayor of Atlanta, I think I'd want to be talking to this prosecutor and say: Now tell me exactly why you spent all this money with apparently very little evidence to prosecute these three guys. I'd want to know.
[Lin:] And I wonder if he would talk then about all the pressure from a high profile murder investigation right after the Super Bowl here in town.
[Cossack:] You know, prosecutors aren't just supposed to cave in to pressure, that's just the way it is.
[Lin:] Yes, well said. Thank you very much Roger Cossack.
[Cossack:] All right.

[Karuna Shinsho, Cnn Anchor:] It's now more than a year since a Swiss environmentalist disappeared while on a trip to the Malaysian state of Sarawak. Bruno Manser had been campaigning on behalf of the Penan, a forest-dwelling people whose environment is threatened by logging. Manser was last seen heading into dense jungle to meet with Penan leaders. He never made it. Journalist Ian Williams tried to find out why.
[Ian Williams, Cnn Correspondent:] The sound of the rain forest, logging companies are slicing their way deeper and deeper into the Sarawak's last untouched areas. They are after the biggest and the tallest trees they can find, though they destroyed dozens of others in the process. They advance down muddy paths, bulldozed into the dense jungle, only pausing when there's nothing more worth cutting down.
[Unidentified Male:] The areas are finished so we are moving on. We are going to a new area. We are going over there next, where the rain is falling, where the white clouds are.
[Williams:] Over there, under the clouds, is home for the Penan, one of world's last remaining groups of forest nomads.
[Melai Na'a, Village Headman:] The logging company accused me of arguing with them. They say I am always complaining about land. One manager threatened to call in the army and the police. He said they'll shoot all of you. Everyone in the Pantif will die.
[Williams:] Bruno Manser knew this jungle. The Swiss environmentalist was trusted and respected the by the Penan. We met Kuyu and his family as they prepared a male of wild boar and giant lizard. they explained how Bruno had given them hope, urging them to stand up for their rights.
[Kuyu Aka:] He also advised us to take a harder line with the loggers and set up blockades to force those people to come and talk with us. That's what we hoped.
[Williams:] Few of their hopes have been real ideas. Armed with blowpipes and darts to hunt for food, many continue to live a seminomadic existence. But with the loggers encroaching further and further on to their customary land and no legal protection, the number of truly nomadic Penan has declined to a thousand at most, a tenth of the total. The old skills do still pay off, but it is a struggle to live off of the diminishing forest that once provided all of their needs. Many are desperate.
[Na'a:] Look at these people. They all have been here. Now there is no more medicine left in the jungle. It is finished. Everything is finished medicines, palm shoots, wild boars, all finished, food from the jungle, finished.
[Williams:] Though the jungle is dense, the Penan did find Bruno Manser's last campfire, beside a river, then his track disappeared in a area close to where logging companies were moving in. There isn't any evidence of foul play, but over the years, Bruno Manser was an acute irritant to the authorities, who accused him of stirring up trouble. One of his last publicity stunts two years ago was paragliding over the house of Sarawak's chief minister, who was hosting a garden party. He was deported. And the logging went on. Most of it by companies well connected to the Sarawak government, who have little time for the Penan or for Bruno Manser. Over lunch, Mr. Wong he told us that Bruno Manser had given the Penan false hope, but logging had saved them, by bringing roads to the interior, but then the environment minister has reason to applaud the loggers. He owns the substantial stake of one of Sarawak's biggest logging companies, which has been awarded a license to log large areas of the Penan's customary land. [on camera]: And you wouldn't accept the conflict of interests?
[Unidentified Male:] No, there's no conflict of interest. I am not a minister in charge of forestry. I am not a minister of forestry. I am a minister of environment, protecting the environment as a whole.
[Williams:] But it does effect the environment?
[Unidentified Male:] No, it doesn't effect. For me, it is not effecting the environment, providing you log it properly.
[Williams:] The logging it is relentless. Soon, there will be insufficient forest to sustain any type of nomadic lifestyle. The Penan are losing their battle. Bruno knew that when he sneaked back last year. There are those who still hope he will reappear, and at the head of the last desperate wave of protests. As time goes by, that's looking increasingly unlikely. Ian Williams, ITN, Sarawak.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] In Southern Oregon, a heated battle over water rights is showing no signs of cooling down. Once again, protesters are venting their anger at the federal government over the closure of some headgates at the Klamath Falls irrigation project. The move was made to protect some endangered fish, but farmers say that they are suffering because of it. The latest now from reporter Vince Patton. He's with our affiliate KGW.
[Vince Patton, Kgw Reporter:] The farmers called their small ladder the "12 steps to freedom."
[Farmers:] All right!
[Patton:] With it, they climbed the fence to the headgates.
[Unidentified Male:] A tiny step for freedom, but it's a start!
[Unidentified Female:] I'm excited. My mother-in-law is over here with me! I'm so proud of her!
[Patton:] They're convinced that 100-year-old legal documents prove that canals were to be returned to private ownership years ago, after they were built and paid for.
[Unidentified Female:] It's our property. They are trespassing right now on our property.
[Unidentified Male:] Once you see what's going on over here and everything is going all right, I think it's a good idea to be over here.
[Patton:] The Bureau of Land Management stood firm at the canal, but relented and unlocked the gates others had scaled.
[Farmers:] We want Tim! We want Tim!
[Patton:] Sheriff Tim Evinger, Klamath County's only elected official to brave this throng, walked into a hero's welcome.
[Unidentified Male:] God bliss you, Tim. You are doing the right thing, man.
[Patton:] The sheriff says he came to show support.
[Tim Evinger, Klamath County Sheriff:] Just keeping it peaceful here, right?
[Patton:] And he says if the protesters prove their landownership claim in court, he will gladly evict the federal agents.
[Evinger:] As long as everybody is peaceful and nobody gets in pushing or shoving matches or any threat to public safety, again, it looks like another successful disobedience.
[Patton:] And so the farmers have gained 30 yards and established a new boundary against the very edge of the headgates. The question is: How long it will last? In Klamath Falls, Vince Patton, KGW, Northwest NewsChannel 8.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Rudy Giuliani has been catching flack over a shooting involving the NYPD, but recent polls show the mayor with a slight lead over Hillary Rodham Clinton in the race for the U.S. Senate. CNN's Frank Buckley caught up with Giuliani on the campaign trail.
[Frank Buckley, Cnn Anchor:] New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani marched his campaign into upstate New York...
[Unidentified Male:] Senator, you've got my vote.
[Buckley:] ... where he was greeted enthusiastically in the Republican stronghold city of Syracuse.
[Mayor Rudy Giuliani , New York City:] I have a real connection to this place. This is a real, authentic candidacy for the Senate, not something, you know, strictly by someone who moved in a couple of days ago virtually and is kind of like reading what political analysts tell her to say.
[Buckley:] Giuliani referring to his opponent for the Senate seat, first lady Hillary Clinton, who has campaigned frequently in this region, making at least 14 trips and spending at least 26 days in central and upstate New York since last summer, despite conventional wisdom that says that voters in this region favor Republicans, something that wasn't lost on several upstate leaders, including this congressman, who urged that Giuliani campaign, to begin spending more time upstate.
[Rep. James Walsh , New York:] I told him people want to know you. They want to get a feel for you personally. People are, you know, they're very receptive, but they need to get put the name with the face and hear what he has to say.
[Giuliani:] I believe in lowering taxes. And if I were a United States senator, I would work very, very hard to lower your taxes.
[Buckley:] While Giuliani has also visited the area a few times over the past several months, this is his first extensive campaign swing through upstate New York.
[Giuliani:] I mean, I can't think of an administration that's been more difficult on northern New York than this administration.
[Buckley:] Giuliani using the occasion to rip his opponent's husband, President Clinton, blaming him for high heating oil and gas prices. Giuliani saying he was better suited to fight for New York in Washington than the first lady.
[Giuliani:] I have the freedom and the independence to speak up against policies of the president's that hurt New Yorkers the way this policy has hurt. And whether that's different from than opponent o5r not, I mean, that's up to her to talk about.
[Buckley:] While Giuliani aides concede that Mrs. Clinton has campaigned upstate more than Giuliani has, they quickly point out that their man has been busy being mayor of New York City. And it's his record as mayor, they believe, that will ultimately appeal to voters throughout the state. Frank Buckley, CNN, Syracuse, New York.

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] George W. Bush tackles Social Security. Is his proposal more about ideas than details?
[Brooks Jackson, Cnn Correspondent:] Those details that George W. Bush isn't giving are important. Depending on the approach, proposals like his can be expensive or painful.
[Sesno:] Our Brooks Jackson on the potential costs of Social Security reform. Plus
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] I believe you deserve a guarantee that Social Security will be there for you.
[Sesno:] The vice president weighs in, as the "third rail" takes center stage in election 2000.
[Announcer:] From Washington, this is INSIDE POLITICS, with Judy Woodruff and Bernard Shaw.
[Sesno:] Thanks very much for joining us. Bernie and Judy are off today. The two presidential candidates locked horns today in a pattern that is becoming increasingly familiar: First, George W. Bush proposing significant changes to shore up Social Security, and within hours Al Gore denounced the Bush plan and pushing his own proposal. Today's duel began in California, with Bush's plan to let workers wager part of their government lifeline on the often-volatile stock market. First, CNN's Candy Crowley.
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] George Bush thinks young workers should be able to take a small portion of the money they pay into Social Security and invest it.
[Bush:] A worker who invests even a limited portion of his or her paycheck could over a career end up with hundreds of thousands of dollars for retirement.
[Crowley:] Not since Barry Goldwater has a party's presidential choice proposed a major change in Social Security, and with good reason. Conventional wisdom goes this way: Seniors and near-seniors don't want the system changed, and they vote, which is why, as he spoke of his six principles for reform at a California senior center, George Bush said this one
[Bush:] Let me put this as plainly as I can: For those on Social Security or close to receiving it, nothing will change.
[Crowley:] Not once, but twice.
[Bush:] Let me say this again: For those who are retired or near retirement, there will be no changes at all to your Social Security.
[Crowley:] Bush's other principles: The Social Security surplus must be for Social Security only, Social Security payroll taxes must not be increased, the government must not invest Social Security funds in the stock market, and reform must preserve disability and survivor benefits.
[Unidentified Female:] Nice to see you.
[Bush:] Good morning, thanks.
[Crowley:] First, that voters will see Bush's proposal as a sign of bold leadership. Second, that he can raise his voice above the din to reassure skittish seniors. And third, that aging baby boomers and their children believe what their parents and grandparents did not: that there are few better long-term investments than the stock market.
[Bush:] Al Gore, who calls these bipartisan proposals risky, has a substantial amount of his money invested in the stock market. If he's building his own retirement security in the market, why does he object to young Americans doing the same?
[Crowley:] Bush aides also believe they can make inroads among low-income Americans with this plan, offering up a way to build wealth, which they can retire on or pass on to their children. Bush aides say that the Bush offered very few details because this is merely a framework and that the details need to be worked out on a bipartisan way, lest this plan befall the same fate as the health care plan of Hillary Rodham Clinton, which saw no bipartisan agreement and was picked to death by people who didn't like one thing or another Frank.
[Sesno:] Well, Candy, we all know what the stock market's about. It can go up, it can go down over time. Presumably, it goes more up than down. But how do Bush's advisers address the issue of possible losses under a plan like this?
[Crowley:] Well, basically, they say the idea of losses is minuscule. They point out that not since the Depression has there been a 20-year period in which the stock market has not shown a return on investment. Bush himself said, look, no day-trading. There will be no single investments. They have in mind more government-approved mutual funds. He says that in those details there will be government regulations and requirements for the safety and the security of whatever is invested in.
[Sesno:] And is he saying whether these funds will be invested by the individual or by the government?
[Crowley:] Well, the individual gets to choose. Now whether you pay all your payroll taxes and somehow you direct someone within the government system to put them into this or that fund or you actually get that money and you invest it yourself is one of those details that they just haven't put out there yet. They really do believe that, first of all, there's some cover here, as you know, political cover. The more details you put out, the more there is for Al Gore to fire on. And secondly they also believe that if the plan is to have any chance in Congress, should George Bush become president, that there needs to be a bunch of Democrats and Republicans on board so that they can all take the fire for whatever seems to be inpalatable.
[Sesno:] All right, Candy Crowley on George W. Bush on Social Security, thanks. In suburban Philadelphia, meanwhile, Al Gore had plenty to say about the Bush proposal to retool Social Security. But Gore's critique centered on a single word you've heard it before: risky. CNN's Jonathan Karl is with the Gore campaign in Ambler, Pennsylvania. Hello, Jonathan.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Frank. That's right. You know, Gore's central argument here is that Bush's ideas on Social Security would put at risk the federal government's largest and perhaps most popular program by subjecting it to the ups and downs of the stock market.
[Gore:] I believe that we have to maintain Social Security as a bedrock guarantee of retirement security. On top of that foundation, people can and should build more: savings, investments, IRAs. But you shouldn't have to roll the dice with your basic retirement security. And you shouldn't have to pay for others who do so.
[Karl:] Now in the past, Gore has criticized Bush for pursuing what he call a "secret plan" that would undermine Social Security or alternatively talking about a risky scheme. But today, Gore was positively restrained, avoiding all those buzz phrases he's used in the past, and promising to have a civil debate on the issue, even as he took apart Bush's plan.
[Gore:] We're not talking about a minor difference here. We're talking about a fundamental difference on the most successful social program in the entire history of the United States of America. Why not have a debate on the future of Social Security, how to reform it? What is the right way? What is the responsible way? That's an issue that is important enough to the future of our country that we ought to have a debate on it.
[Karl:] Now Gore's aides acknowledge that he was more restrained today in his attacks, that he was less negative, that he was trying to keep a more positive tone, again, even as he was drawing those contrasts. But they say that that sharper edge that we've seen from Al Gore will not be gone for long, that this is a long debate. They Look forward to the debate on Social Security, and in fact they will pick it apart for the months to come. As one of his senior aides said, the vice president will take apart this plan bit by bit by bit. And after three or four months, the plan will be ripped to shreds. That a quote from one of his senior aides. On another footnote here, Governor Bush had talked about how Vice President Gore has investments in the stock market, and that why should Gore invest himself but not allow others to invest? The vice president's campaign saying here that the vice president does not have any holdings in the stock market, does not have any money, whatsoever, invested personally in the stock market Frank.
[Sesno:] Jon Karl, thanks very much, with the Gore response. As we mentioned, it was Governor Bush who sparked today's debate with his plan to reform Social Security. But the changes Bush are proposing raise several questions that the candidate didn't answer. CNN's Brooks Jackson looks at the nuts and bolts of some of the options being floated.
[Morton:] Those details that George W. Bush isn't giving are important. Depending on the approach, proposals like his can be expensive or painful. Example: The plan offered by a bipartisan group of senators, including Republicans Gregg, Thompson, Thomas and Grassley, and Democrats Breaux, Kerrey and Robb. Under this bipartisan plan, payroll taxes would stay as they are: $12.40 of every $100 in taxable wages, half paid by employees, half by employers. Under this plan, $2 of that would go not to the government but into "individual savings accounts" owned by workers, to be invested in diversified funds of stocks or bonds. The advantage is no new taxes or spending. The disadvantage is major cuts in the level of future Social Security benefits provided by current law. For anyone now below age 62, future cost of living adjustments would be held down, reduced half a percentage point per year. Additional "longevity" cuts would be triggered if the trend to longer life spans continues. No wonder the sponsors have been called "the pain caucus." Bush avoids talk of pain, more of how he'd pay.
[Robert Greenstein, Center On Budget And Policy Priorities:] In the absence of any more detail, it simply looks like the numbers don't add up until he provides more detail on how could he finance a plan like this.
[Morton:] And avoiding any future cuts in basic Social Security benefits would cost a bundle. Just look at another so-called 2 percent plan: [voice-over]: Harvard economist Martin Feldstein has proposed an add-on plan: In addition to the $12.40 now going to Social Security for every $100 of taxable wages, the government would pay an added $2.30 into private retirement accounts to be invested in mutual funds. The advantage is a guarantee of no cuts in future retirement benefits, which would actually increase some. The disadvantage is a huge new expanse, $81 billion in the first year alone, according to Feldstein's own projections, growing every year to $117 billion a year within 30 years. [on camera]: Bush has rejected the pain-free, add-on approach and left the door open for cuts like those proposed by the pain caucus. But doing nothing also involves either pain or cost. [voice-over]: Left alone, the Social Security trust fund runs out of money in 37 years, according to latest official projections. At that point, benefits would have to be cut 28 percent to avoid a tax increase, with even greater cuts in years after that. Vice President Al Gore has proposed increasing some benefits and using general tax revenues to keep the system going until the year 2050.
[Gene Steuerle, Urban Institute:] Neither candidate wants to give much in the way of details. The truth be told, during campaign time, candidates try to identify who they're going to help.
[Jackson:] There is no pain-free, cost-free solution to the Social Security problem, but now at least the trade-offs are about to be debated in the most public way possible: a presidential campaign Frank.
[Sesno:] Brooks, something that once upon a time was a good idea or so some thought was Daniel Patrick Moynihan's notion of reducing the way the government calculates inflation, because they say it's overstated, that would reduce the cost of living adjustments and save some money. Whatever became of that?
[Jackson:] Well, some reductions have been made. In the way the CPI is calculated it doesn't quite overmeasure inflation the way it used to. There is still some overstatement of inflation there. But on the other hand, you could argue that for old people, medical costs and medication costs both of which increase at more than the CPI are a bigger part of what they spend. So it may not be the cost of living for an older person.
[Sesno:] Not part of either candidate's calculus right now?
[Jackson:] Not right now, no sir.
[Sesno:] OK, we'll see, we'll watch. Brooks, thanks. And when we return, good intentions, or just good politics? We'll have more on the long-running struggle over the future of Social Security.
[Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan , New York:] This is not political, Social Security should never be political.
[Sesno:] Next on INSIDE POLITICS, a debate that has burned some candidates and buoyed the careers of others.

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] Now, the other story we've been following all weekend long. People in Cincinnati, praying for the city's rebirth following days of violence and years of tension between the police and the black community. CNN's Brian Palmer is there. He files this report.
[Brian Palmer, Cnn Correspondent:] At Cincinnati's New Prospect Baptist Church, songs of joy and praise on Easter, a holiday of rebirth and renewal. Just day after the church grieved for Timothy Thomas, a young black man shot by white Cincinnati police officer, Pastor Damon Lynch preached a sermon of biblical justice from the book of John, turning it into a lesson on contemporary social justice.
[Rev. Damon Lynch Iii, Pastor:] We need to have a resurrection.
[Palmer:] Joining Lynch were city officials and the Reverend Al Sharpton, the New York activist.
[Rev. Al Sharpton, Civil Rights Activist:] If you are saved in Cincinnati today, you need to be dealing with wicked people that shoot unarmed men.
[Unidentified Male:] God is working in Cincinnati, and he's working in the world. But everything happening for a reason.
[Unidentified Female:] If the powers-that-be are listening and will respond in a positive way, we will have no more of this killing, no rioting, no more of the problems that we face here in Cincinnati.
[Palmer:] At the Cathedral of Saint Peter in Chains, a predominately white Catholic church across Central Parkway, a dividing line between black and white, a traditional Easter sermon, with an acknowledgement of the city's wounds.
[Daniel Pilarczyk, Archbishop Of Cincinnati:] On this unique day in the history of our local church, we also hope for new life for our civic community. We pray that the questions that have been raised by the events of these last days and the trials that we and others have experienced, will prove to be the jumping off point for an extended new life, an extended Easter for our city.
[Unidentified Male:] There's unrest, and hopefully today, it will change.
[Unidentified Female:] I don't want it to be an unsafe city. I don't want people to hate one another. So, I want to see it stop. I want to hear what other people have to say.
[Palmer:] Members of both churches, black and white, say they hope Cincinnatians will act on these fine Sunday words during the difficult days and weeks to come. Brian Palmer, CNN, Cincinnati.

[Lou Water, Cnn Anchor:] And now the information that we get every day. every single day, another tip on how to lose weight, and every day we gain more weight.
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Yes we are. And some are blaming the American Dietetic Association for that. They're holding their annual meeting this week, and here's Elizabeth Cohen with the story.
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Correspondent:] Here at the 83rd annual meeting of the American Dietetic Association, a symposium on heart disease is sponsored by the pork industry. A big gala celebration was sponsored by the beef industry. A nutritional symposium opening day Kellogg's. And that, say critics, is a problem.
[Dr. Andrew Weil, Author, "eating Well For Optimal Health":] I think the ADA has taken money from a lot of the big manufacturers in the food industry and, consciously or unconsciously, that, I think affects the content of the information they put out.
[Cohen:] He points to literature distributed by the ADA. "Chocolate: Facts and Fiction," for example, is supported by a grant from Mars, Inc., the chocolate company. The fact sheet on pasta, supported by a grant from the National Pasta Association. The one on milk, supported by the milk industry.
[Margo Wootan, Center For Science In The Public Interest:] It's hard to criticize your friends and even harder to criticize your funders.
[Cohen:] The ADA says it gets only 9 percent of its money from the food industry, and the money doesn't influence their message.
[Kathleen Zeiman, American Dietetic Association:] We don't endorse foods. We don't endorse any kinds of foods because we believe strongly that all foods can fit in a healthy diet.
[Cohen:] She says its true Americans keep getting fatter, but it's not the ADA's fault. She points, instead, to societal circumstances.
[Zeiman:] There's sabotage everywhere you go. Every movie theater, gas stations giant portions in restaurants.
[Cohen:] And she blames Americans themselves.
[Zeiman:] The messengers have delivered the information. It's really the personal responsibility of the individual to make those changes.
[Cohen:] The ADA's message is this
[Zeiman:] At the American Dietetic Association, we preach the philosophy that there are no good or bad foods, just bad diets.
[Cohen:] Book author Dr. Andrew Weil says this message doesn't work.
[Weil:] It simply adds to the confusion. It does not give people helpful, practical advice. It's too generic.
[Cohen:] Dr. Weil says the ADA doesn't get more specific about which foods to eat and which to avoid for fear of angering sponsors and biting the hand that feeds them. Elizabeth Cohen, CNN, Atlanta.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] As we mentioned, hundreds of U.S. Marines in Kandahar are now on high alert. Even so, they're making the best of this holiday so far from home. CNN's Bill Hemmer is there too.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Correspondent:] For the U.S. Marines in Kandahar, Afghanistan, the holidays won't necessarily be happy, but they will be busy. In fact, when the sun goes down, oftentimes the activity picks up at a greater clip. Giant cargo planes come in, land, and dump more supplies and more cargo almost every 30 minutes throughout the entire night. When the Marines first came here 11 days ago, they had no heat, no running water, no electricity. Still, on this day, they are absent of those amenities, but with each plane that arrives and with each passing day, certainly the conditions improve for the better. As for the holidays, there was a midnight mass on Christmas Eve late Christmas Eve for those who want to attend. There are other religious services scheduled on Christmas Day. But as for the Marines here, the holidays will not come without their work continuing. The Marines are staying busy. With the U.S. Marines in southern Afghanistan, I'm Bill Hemmer, CNN, reporting.

[Roger Cossack, Co-host:] Let's go up to Capitol Hill and join Senator Tom Daschle.
[Sen. Tom Daschle , Minority Leader:] Good afternoon, everyone. As you know, Senator Jeffords has now decided to make "independent" not just his hallmark, but his official party designation as well. For 26 years in Congress, Senator Jeffords has been an independent voice for the people of Vermont and a champion for the environment, for education and children, especially children of special needs. His passion for these issues and his courage in seeking bipartisan consensus on them has earned him great respect on both sides of the aisle. We know that he will continue that work, and it is clear that he will continue to enjoy that abiding respect. Senator Jeffords' decision obviously produces some changes. The historic 50-50 Senate now becomes history itself. This will be America's first 50-49-1 Senate. What does not change with this new balance of power is the need for principled compromise. This is still one of the most closely divided Senates in all of our history. We still face the same challenges. Bipartisan, or I guess I should now say tripartisanship, is still a requirement. With his eloquent words this morning, Senator Jeffords spoke for many members of this Senate. This Senate will be called upon to resolve fundamental questions about education, about energy, the environment, about choice, possibly about the future of the Supreme Court, and many other issues. The American people have different and passionate opinions on all of these questions. They deserve a Senate in which their opinions can be honestly expressed and openly debated through their elected representatives. We haven't had enough of that sort of debate lately. We hope and trust that Senator Jeffords' courageous decision will advance that spirit. If it does, both parties will benefit from Senator Jeffords' move. More importantly, the American people will benefit. We had a trial run as the majority party back in January. During those 17 days, we held hearings and expedited the confirmation of President Bush's Cabinet choices. Some of the president's nominations, like many of the issues that we deal with in the Senate, were controversial, but we conducted the hearings efficiently, and I believe fairly. As long as we are in the majority, we intend to govern in that same spirit. One of the first things that I did after I was elected Democratic leader more than six years ago was to go home to South Dakota and call on an old friend, a farmer who was deeply involved in serving his community. His name was Dick Reiners. I asked Dick on a cold December day what advice he had for me in my new job. He told me two things. First, he said, "Never forget where you came from, remember the land that made you who you are." And secondly, and now pointing to his grandchildren on the kitchen wall, he said, "Give them hope. Give them hope." Dick Reiners passed away that very evening. That was the last advice he ever gave me. It was the best advice I could ever have. For more than six years, I have attempted to follow Dick's advice, and I will continue to do so as the Senate majority leader. I believe in the most heartfelt way that I can express today that we can make this closely divided Senate work for the American people. My colleagues in leadership, Senator Reid and Senator Mikulski, and all of my caucus who have now just met, are determined to work with the president, with Senator Lott, and with every member of this body Democrat, Republican and independent to see that it does.
[Daschle:] I'll take a few questions.
[Question:] Senator, when you become the majority leader, life won't exactly be a bowl of cherries. It will be a lot sweeter, no doubt. But the Republicans can still make your life difficult, as you on occasion have made their lives difficult. Do you expect them to use some of the same tactics that you've used to try to get their way, as you did to get your way?
[Daschle:] I think it's too early to talk about my expectations. I will simply say that the tone that I've attempted to create, I believe will hopefully help set an environment within which we can get things done. We know that we have a divided government Republicans in the White House and now Democrats leading the Senate, Republicans in the House. The only way we can accomplish our agenda, the only way that the administration will be able to accomplish their agenda, is if we truly work together in now, I guess, what we would call a tripartisan manner. And that's my intention.
[Question:] Senator, would you expect President Bush now to soften his thorough-going conservative agenda?
[Daschle:] Well, I will leave his decisions to the president. Obviously, I stand ready to work with him. I intend to make a call to the president this afternoon in the hope that I can reach out and express my hope that we can work closely together on issues for which there is agreement, resolve those differences in those areas for which there is not.
[Question:] As Senate majority leader, which changes do you expect, if any, when you revisit the education bill?
[Daschle:] I think it's too early to talk about specific legislative approaches at this point. It will be my expectation when we come back, assuming that we will be in the majority, beginning the work period upon the conclusion of the Memorial Day recess, to complete the education bill. Obviously, we will be unable to complete it this week. But my sincere hope is that we will complete it as soon as we get back.
[Question:] Do you think that President Bush is now going to have to compromise with you more than he has done in the past?
[Daschle:] Well, I think it's important that we all recognize the value of compromise, the urgency of compromise, and the real practicality of compromise. We can't dictate to them, nor can they dictate to us. This must be bipartisan or tripartisan spirit, or it can't be achieved.
[Question:] Are there any items that you would like to see on the agenda now that you have this control [OFF-MIKE]?
[Daschle:] Well, we will certainly talk a lot more about our agenda as soon as we come back. Again, as I said, my expectation is that the first important issue to be taken up will be education. We'll complete that bill. The second bill will be the Patients' Bill of Rights.
[Question:] You've already criticized the budget resolution as a, quote, "nuclear bomb," and on virtually every issue on the Bush agenda, you've ticked off a variety of criticisms while you were in the minority. As the majority now, don't you have an obligation to try to moderate that Bush agenda?
[Daschle:] Well, we have always had an obligation to do what we think is right. That's what we've done in the past, and we're going to continue to do so. Now, I think we have more tools at our disposal to ensure that that happens.
[Question:] Senator Daschle, will Senator Jeffords be offered a committee chairmanship? And, if so, which?
[Daschle:] We're not in a position to talk about committee chairmanships. Obviously, as most of you know, the power-sharing organizational resolution will be null and void with this decision. Senator Lott and I will have to negotiate a new organizational resolution. And it would be my hope and expectation that we will do that in the coming days.
[Question:] How important is it to take care of your membership? ... campaign finance reform, is that a top priority for you?
[Daschle:] Campaign finance reform has always been a top priority, and it would be my hope and, again, my expectation that we could finish campaign finance reform this year. Senator Lott had already indicated that he will send the campaign finance reform bill to the House. Obviously, if it hasn't been done when I become majority leader, that will be one of the first things I do.
[Question:  Daschle:] We were just given a report by some of the members of the Finance Committee. They are beginning negotiations again this afternoon, as I understand it, at 2 o'clock. I have expressed the hope that we can continue these negotiations fruitfully. I have no desire to bring some artificial or expeditious close to these discussions. We should stay here as long as it takes to get a good bill. I don't know how long that will take. I have no desire to leave, necessarily, until we finish our work. Thank you all very much.
[Cossack:] That was Senator Tom Daschle speaking from Capitol Hill. Let's go to Candy, our own Candy Crowley, now for some reaction. Candy, they talked about the first hundred days of George Bush. That did turn out to be the honeymoon, didn't it.
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Correspondent:] It did turn out to be the honeymoon. What interests me about what we just heard from Senator Daschle is there really has been for these 100-plus days some argument within the Democratic Party between the more liberal element that really believes that their strength is in opposing what comes down the pike from Pennsylvania Avenue. There have been others that say, "We've got to get something done here. We can't oppose everything because we look like the nay sayers, and that'll backfire." So it's a difference between those who want to appeal to the party base and say, "No, no, no, no, no, no," and those who want to, you know, continue to reach into the middle of America for votes and say, "Let's let's moderate and get something done." Certainly, I would say that the tone of today's speech just now by Senator Daschle is one of, "OK, let's work and get something done." We'll see in the days ahead how that actually pans out.
[Cossack:] Yeah, that interested me, too, Candy, because you certainly had that feeling that this was not someone who was gloating over what happened, but also recognizes the fact that, you know, "We still have to be very conciliatory. It isn't, like, you know, we're 10 runs ahead. We're maybe one person ahead."
[Crowley:] Well, sure. And look, the practical matter right now is that the votes really haven't changed. Jeffords is going to vote no differently now that he's an independent than he did when he was a Republican. So we're still talking about a Senate that can be cherry- picked on either side around any other bill. So everybody's got to be careful. And also, you don't want to come out on a day like today and at least be see gloating in public.
[Cossack:] OK, Candy. Let's take a break. How will Senator Jeffords's departure from the Republican Party impact the federal bench and the Supreme Court? Stay with us. Let's find out about that. Welcome back to BURDEN OF PROOF. We're talking about the impact that the leaving of Senator Jeffords will have on at least the federal bench, the United States Supreme Court and other legal matters. And joining us to discuss those issues from Capitol Hill is Congressman Anthony Weiner, a Democrat from New York, Congressman Howard Coble, a Republican from New York excuse me, from North Carolina. Excuse me, Congressman.
[Rep. Howard Coble , Judiciary Committee:] You're excused, Roger.
[Cossack:] And also from Chicago, law professor Steve Lubet. Let's go right to you, Congressman Weiner. First of all, you just heard Senator Daschle speak. Your reactions to what he had to say?
[Rep. Anthony David Weiner , New York:] Well, it's going to be a dramatic change in this town in who controls the momentum, who controls the agenda. I think you're going to see immediate changes on the Judiciary Committee. I think the role of the American Bar Association will be restored. They've already canceled two confirmation hearings. I think Ted Olson's confirmation is now in serious question. I think Senator Jeffords will be much more at home in the Democratic Caucus, but more importantly, I think the American people are going to get what they really want, which is a closely divided government with checks and balances on both sides of Capitol Hill.
[Cossack:] Well, Congressman Coble, talk about checks and balances on both sides of the Hill, now you have what some are referring to as sort of a tripartisan effect. You have a Democratic Senate. You have a House that is still being led by the Republicans, and a presidency that is led by the Republicans. What impact will Senator Jeffords make leaving make in terms of the relationships between the House and the Senate?
[Coble:] Well, Roger, in an effort to be humorous last night, I said Senator Jeffords is going to change parties tomorrow. He's going to become a Republican. I said that, of course, with tongue in cheek. I don't know that it's going to result in much of an impact as far as the way he votes. Jim Jeffords is pretty much his own man, and I think his voting pattern probably won't change that much. But the fact that he changed his affiliation will have an obvious impact upon the Congress. Now, I've seen many party switches since I've been in the Congress, but none has had the impact that Jeffords's switch will have chairmanships shifting. It's going to be it's going to impact the Congress significantly.
[Cossack:] And what about the ability for the House and the Senate to be able to work together? I mean, obviously, it was much better when you had a Republican Senate and a Republican House. Now that's gone.
[Coble:] Well, I believe we'll still be able to do it. Since we assumed our role in the wheelhouse of the ship in '95, Roger, pardon my modesty, but I think we've governed very well. And we've had some help from our Democrat friends. We've had Welfare reform. We've had capital gains tax reduction. We've removed the earnings cap that adversely affected working seniors. We corrected the marriage penalty. We're going to get rid of the estate tax. These things have been done under our leadership, with some Democrat help. And I don't see that that is going to change drastically.
[Cossack:] Congressman Weiner, some of the issues that the your fellow congressman has just ticked off are not necessarily those that would be on the Democratic agenda, though. You suddenly find yourself now in a position in the Senate where the Senate is where your party is going to have the power. And as we all know, at the end, when they have these these times when the Senate and the House have to get together and work out a bill, it's not going to be coming from just one side. It's going to be coming from two sides. How is that going to affect legislation?
[Weiner:] It's extraordinary important. I mean, the fact of the matter is that we're controlling the agenda in the Senate. And one of the things that Senator Jeffords has great interest in is the environment. He has been in stark contrast to the the previous head of his party, George Bush. I think it's going to change the debate enormously. It's also going to empower Democrats on both sides of Capitol Hill. We are no longer bit players in this drama. Every vote is going to be needed to put together bipartisan bills. And I think that's going to be good for the American people, as well. They're fundamentally a middle-of-the-road population, and I think now that truly, with the Senate in the Democratic hands, we are a legislature that I think's going to represent them.
[Cossack:] All right. We've talked a little bit about what's going to happen with legislation, about how both sides are going to have to be able to, I suppose, work together even more. When we come back, let's talk about some of the nominations that may be up there already or maybe maybe even to the Supreme Court. Stay with us. Welcome back. We've been talking about what the fall- out's going to be from the defection by Senator Jim Jeffords from the Republican Party to become an independent. Let's now talk about what some of the judicial and legal fall-out will be. Steve Lubet, what about what who can we expect to be nominated to the Supreme Court that we wouldn't have seen before, or even to the federal benches?
[Steve Lubet, Law Professor:] Well, what you'll see is that any nominee to the federal bench will have to get through the Judiciary Committee, which is going to have a majority of Democrats. That means that there will be a real trend toward moderation. Extreme right-wing conservative ideologues probably won't get through. I think you can count out Antonin Scalia as Chief Justice if Chief Justice Rehnquist resigns, maybe looking at someone more like Anthony Kennedy for the Chief Justice.
[Cossack:] Will the procedures as to how how judges are nominated or how how they actually get on the bench will they will that change at all?
[Lubet:] Two things are going to change. One is, of course, the Judiciary Committee has to approve a candidate before the nomination goes to the floor. And that means that the majority of Democrats will have to approve every nominee. And there's also what they call the "blue slip" process, which means that a senator from the home state of a nominee can put a hold on that nomination. It will never go to hearing, and it will never be called. Now, when the Republicans were in control, it seemed like they weren't going to extend that privilege to the Democrats. Now that the Democrats are in control, Democratic senators will be able to blue- slip candidates and have lots of influence that way.
[Cossack:] So this this Jeffords defection will have a major impact on the form and the future of the judiciary in America.
[Lubet:] It's a sea change in the way that nominees are going to be approved by this Senate and this president.
[Cossack:] All right, let's go back to Candy for a while. Candy, looking awfully good there in Vermont, with the looks like the beautiful water behind you. Candy, listen, what about a what about legislation? Is this going to affect what legislation is even brought up?
[Crowley:] It does affect what legislation is brought up. It again, it doesn't change the votes because Jeffords is going to vote like he always did, and there's and Tom Daschle, you know, said, "Look, this is still a 50-49-1 Senate." So that's there's not a lot of margin for error. But look, when you're the majority in the Senate, Senate chairmen have extraordinary powers. They're very powerful people. They can decide what legislation to bring up. For instance, you've already had apparently Ted Kennedy saying, "Well, I want to deal with the patients' bill of rights when I become chairman. That'll be my next thing I want to deal with." It may be that the White House doesn't want to deal with that right now, but that's what the chairman wants up there, and that's what he puts out. You know, that's what he hands over to the majority leader, now a Democrat, so...
[Cossack:] So the...
[Crowley:] ... yes, it has a it has a huge effect on what goes onto the floor. It does not have necessarily a huge effect on how it's voted once it's on the floor.
[Cossack:] All right, but what gets there and when it gets there, it has a huge effect.
[Crowley:] Absolutely.
[Cossack:] All right, let's go back now to Congressman Coble. Congressman Coble, you've heard Steve Lubet say earlier, he said that perhaps we are not going to see that kind of conservatism or conservative nominees be put forward for the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary because of this one change in the Senate. Do you agree with that?
[Coble:] Well, let me say this first about the Judiciary Committee, Roger. Anthony and I each sit on the House Judiciary Committee, and we sit on the subcommittee, of course, Internet and Intellectual Property. And we deal consistently with the Senate Judiciary Committee. I have enjoyed good rapport with Chairman Hatch. I have enjoyed good rapport with the ranking member, then ranking member Senator Pat Leahy, who will, of course, become the chairman. So I don't think that that's going to be a drastic change the way we have done business at the committee level.
[Cossack:] All right, let me go now to Congressman Weiner in our few seconds left. Congressman Weiner, do you think that we're going to see a different type of nominee from George Bush than we would have before this change?
[Weiner:] If the president is smart we will. I mean, he's not going to want to have bloody fights that lead to nowhere, so I think he's going to nominate more moderate, middle-of-the-road judges, and I think the country will be at a better place for it. I mean, it's going to change in so many ways. We're going to see prescription drug coverage debated earlier than the Republicans wanted. Things like the minimum wage are going to be forced onto the president. He's going to have to learn to play to play with the Democrats nicely or not get a lot done.
[Cossack:] All right, I'm afraid that's all the time we have for today. Thanks to our guests, and thank you for watching. Join us again tomorrow for another edition of BURDEN OF PROOF. We'll see you then. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Mr. Bush is moving forward today; he meets British Prime Minister Tony Blair. CNN White House correspondent Kelly Wallace has that part of the story. Kelly, there's probably a pretty good reason they're doing this at Camp David: a time to get personal with one another.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That is exactly right, Carol, because President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair have spoken on the telephone two times, but this will be their first face-to-face meeting, and it is being billed as a get-acquainted session, but also a chance for the two men to start talking about tough issues such as what to do about Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and a proposed U.S. nuclear missile shield.
[Wallace:] President Bush, in his news conference Thursday, said he was anxious to meet the British prime minister.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Britain and the United States have got a special relationship; we'll keep it that way.
[Wallace:] Tony Blair shared a special relationship with former President Clinton, and analysts predict even though Mr. Blair and Mr. Bush don't have as much in common, they will still develop a strong bond.
[Charles Kupchan, Council On Foreign Relations:] I think that Blair will probably be able to strike a good, cordial relationship with Bush in the sense that one of Bush's assets is that he is an affable and warm person who is able to get along even with people of different political persuasions.
[Wallace:] The two men meet at a time when European and Arab allies are increasingly critical about U.S. and British air strikes against Iraq. Among the issues on the agenda: crumbling support for United Nation sanctions against Iraq, U.S. plans for a controversial missile defense system, trade disputes between the United States and the European Union and the struggling Northern Ireland peace process. Another issue to discuss: Europe's plan to create its own defense force, something the Bush administration wants to make sure does not undermine
[Nato. Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser:] We believe this is a good thing as long as it is consistent with the enhancement of NATO. We believe that we share that goal with the British.
[Wallace:] The meeting with Tony Blair follows Mr. Bush's talks with the Canadian prime minister and his visit to Mexico last week.
[Lin:] Well, Kelly, since they've already talked twice on the phone, do you have any sense of the personal relationship they have been able to build so far? Have they hit it off?
[Wallace:] Apparently it seems they have hit it off. We understand those two phone conversations have gone quite well, so well that one British official is saying the two men have already established somewhat of a personal rapport before they even meet face to face. And what is interesting, both sides say these are two men who really value personal relationships, two men who are results oriented, pragmatic, so there's a lot of optimism that the two leaders will, in fact, develop a strong relationship over the next couple of years Carol.
[Lin:] It's certainly much to talk about Kelly Wallace at the White House.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] We saw an earnings warning from Oracle after yesterday's closing bell. It's depressing that stock significantly. But the pressure on the Nasdaq futures does seem to be easing. Joining me to talk about Oracle's announcement and to put it into market perspective is Andrew Barrett, technology strategist at Salomon Smith Barney. It's great to have you here again. Thanks so much for coming.
[Andrew Barrett, Salomon Smith Barney:] Thank you, Deb.
[Marchini:] First of all, Oracle's warning. What Oracle says is weakness and information technology spending in the U.S. is to blame, that there's an economic slowdown. If that's the case, presumably not only bad for Oracle, but for a lot of other companies as well.
[Barrett:] Well, this is really no surprise. I mean, we saw this when we saw Sun. And they said there was a dramatic shortfall in the last month of this quarter. And I think that's the important take- away here. Larry Ellison stated last night that the first two months of the quarter were fine. It really fell off a cliff. And this is what we're seeing with a lot of these high-tech companies. Larger corporations that are spending are just putting things on hold saying, Let's see where the economy is going."
[Marchini:] We have got Oracle down four and a half, and the stock closed up yesterday...
[Barrett:] Right.
[Marchini:] ... before the announcement. Oracle is now down four and a half to sixteen and seven eighths in pre-market. Does it look like a buy to you at that price?
[Barrett:] From a valuation level, most of the enterprise software stocks are coming into that historical troughing period where they get them. We can look at companies like Siebel or People Soft in that front. So from a valuation perspective, it looks very attractive. We need to see where the economy is going first before we can back up the truck and say, Let's start buying. Investors want a little more visibility.
[Marchini:] Yes, that's why we saw we just had them on the screen a moment ago. Not only PeopleSoft and Siebel, but BEA Systems and Microsoft got hit after hours as well. You feel it's a little bit too soon then to buy?
[Barrett:] A little bit too soon. It's interesting that Microsoft's being hit, though, because Microsoft's sort of the anti- Oracle and where one is doing well typically at the expense of another. So it's interesting that investors are taking the shares of Microsoft down. That's probably a little unwarranted this morning.
[Marchini:] OK, the last time you were here, you predicted accurately that the Nasdaq would continue to slide. It has really taken a header. What's your prediction now?
[Barrett:] We need to get through pre-announcement season because we're in that season right now. And so the first two weeks in March is when all the companies are going to get all their bad news, their dirty laundry, and lay it out on the table. And it looks like, unless we get Fed intervention some time today, we're not going to get Fed intervention until the 20th of this month. So, I still see a sliding Nasdaq. Probably not meaningfully between now and pre-announcement season. The 20th could be a good time to start to come back into these names, particularly if we get better economic data.
[Marchini:] Do you think this index might go back to 2000 or lower?
[Barrett:] That would be scary.
[Marchini:] Yes.
[Barrett:] That would be scary. I mean, it's it's it's a possibility. We didn't think it would retest new lows, given in January, you started to see the Fed behind it. And it finally would act like a safety net. And clearly given the concerns that we will continue this slowdown throughout the balance of this year, that's what's sending it down. So, it's a possibility. I hope not, but it's a possibility.
[Marchini:] You think nothing short of another Fed rate cut is going to help this sector?
[Barrett:] That's what we need. We'll need a rate cut from Alan Greenspan. We will need a fiscal stimulus from the Bush administration. And that's what we think it's going to take to get the economy back on track.
[Marchini:] All right, the last time you were here, you also had a recommendation on EMC software. You liked the stock. After that it warned, caught a lot of people by surprise because that was the last stock everybody thought would go. How do you feel about it now?
[Barrett:] We had to lower our growth rates slightly in the entire space. We went from 25-percent to 20-percent growth. That's not draconian, and the stock is more than factored into this. Is EMC immune to a slowdown in spending? Of course not. But I think it's going to be a little more insulated than some of the other names in here. I think it's a safe area to go. And I think from a valuation standpoint, this stock very rarely looks good from a valuation standpoint. This is a good core name, and investors should be buying.
[Marchini:] This is a company that's going to be there for a while. We'll just take a longer-term view.
[Barrett:] Absolutely.
[Marchini:] What else are you looking at right now? What else do you think has a sufficiently depressed valuation and decent prospect, even if the economy takes some time to recover?
[Barrett:] Well, what you want to do is you want to focus on big cap. And when you look back at over the last 30 years, the industry that tend to recover first, when we do get a recovery, it tends to be within storage. We talked about EMC and Data Networking. I think Cisco is a big name that we all know. But, hey, it's at a very attractive valuation. Even going so far to say companies like Nortel are fairly well positioned right now. More aggressively, we like the shares of CheckPoint Systems. It makes Internet security software. So when we get the "I Love You" virus and the Anna Kournikova virus, this is the company that's going to come in and help you out with that.
[Marchini:] I'd love to know who you think is going to be the rest virus, but we're out of time. Andrew Barrett Salomon Smith Barney, great to have you here. Thank you.
[Barrett:] Anytime. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[John King, Cnn Anchor:] New developments in the U.S. deployment overseas. Senior administration officials confirming to CNN that U.S. special forces have conducted operation within Afghanistan, inside the borders of Afghanistan over the past several days. Now, this is obviously very sensitive information. We are always careful about what we report about U.S. troop deployment because we do not what to put anyone at risk. We did this reporting after reports in the Pakistani press and in this morning's "USA Today" as well, saying that U.S. special forces had conducted operations inside Afghanistan. Again, senior U.S. official confirming to CNN. In the words of one senior official, that U.S. and British special forces have participated in operations, quote, "in the region and, yes, in country," meaning Afghanistan in recent days. Now, the headline of that "USA Today" article suggests that these forces were trying to hunt down Osama bin Laden. I asked a senior official about this information, the official was very reluctant to discuss the details of this, but did steer us away from that, saying, quote, "remember, we have an intelligence deficit here." That meaning the United States government has little information on the whereabouts of bin Laden and on exactly what type of support he might have, meaning armed people with him. This official suggesting that this was very much part of a routine special forces deployment that takes place almost always when U.S. troops are deployed overseas. Special forces do such things as go in and just take a look at terrain, hunt possible access roots, look for places where targets for airstrikes perhaps, or places where helicopters could land. So again, we are very sensitive about reporting this information, but we do have confirmation from senior U.S. officials that some special forces operations involving U.S. troops and, we are told, British special forces have taken place in Afghanistan in the past several days. Now we want to turn to Christiane Amanpour in the region for more developments on another breaking story: A Pakistani delegation went into Afghanistan to ask the Taliban once again to release and turnover Osama bin Laden. Christiane joins us now with the latest on that diplomatic mission Christiane.
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, John, CNN has talked to a senior Taliban official in Kandahar, which received this delegation from Pakistan, and the word is that the mission failed. There were two objectives from the Pakistani point of view: one, of course, to reemphasize to the Taliban that they really must get serious about what's demanded of them; and the other, to try to get them to at least release those eight international workers who are there, aid worker, including two Americans, who are charged with trying to spread Christianity in Afghanistan. Taliban officials saying that the delegations met with Mullah Omar, the leader, but that the missions failed. And that is basically what we know. We understand that the Pakistani delegation is coming back now, and we hope to get a fuller briefing from the Pakistanis when they get back here to Islamabad.
[King:] Christiane, obviously, there has been pressure on the United States from Pakistan and from moderate Arab nations not to make targeting the Taliban part of this operation, to perhaps go after Osama bin Laden, but to not try to force a regime change. Any sense that perhaps this will change the sentiment in the region now that the Taliban has once again, this the second time in two weeks now, said no to the request that it turn over bin Laden?
[Amanpour:] It may do, but, you know, I'm hearing and feeling from the Pakistani very senior officials who I talked to that it's not necessarily that they don't want the Taliban targeted, but what they don't want is a purely Northern Alliance anti-Taliban regime to takeover in Afghanistan. What especially the Pakistanis are concerned about is that whatever happens, they don't get a regime in Afghanistan that is hostile to Pakistan. So they're more looking for a broad-based new alliance, but they do very clearly say that the Taliban are becoming and have become a major liability.
[King:] And, Christiane, we are reporting now that we have confirmation from senior U.S. officials that some special forces operations involving U.S. and, we're told, British forces have taken place inside Afghanistan over the past several days. You have covered many military deployments, this not a surprise to you, obviously trying to get a sense of what is being reported and what is being talked about in the region in that regard?
[Amanpour:] Well, yes, indeed, we do expect these operations to take place, and we also expect not to know much about them. And to that end, of course, we ask officials here today, very senior officials, and we basically got absolutely nothing from them, just a "no comment" or "I have nothing for you" on that. Again, this is not just surprising, but there was speculation that this would be taking place at some time.
[King:] Christiane Amanpour in the Pakistani capital of Islamabad. Again, the headline from Christiane: A Pakistani delegation turned down in yet another diplomatic effort to try to get the Taliban to turn over Osama bin Laden, also to release some Western aid workers the Taliban is holding.

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Anchor:] We'll try and fill in some of the military blanks. We go back to Chicago, former General David Grange, who's background is in special operations. And our background is in audio problems. We hope we fixed them. General, thanks for sticking around. I had asked, I think earlier, if there needs to be conventional assault of some kind to pave the way for these special ops units, smaller units to come in on the ground. I think that's where we were. GEN. DAVID GRANGE, U.S. ARMY
[Brown:] Just a the viewers might not be familiar, the Northern Alliance is the opposition group in Afghanistan, in opposition to the Taliban. Who establishes the basis? Is that a special ops function, or is that something that proceeds? And are the bases hypothetically here in Afghanistan, or are they in Pakistan or somewhere else?
[Grange:] Well, you're going to see a series of bases, all the way from the United States and Europe to this region. They have what's known as intermediate staging bases, and then you have forward operating bases closer to the target area. So there will be a combination of these. They'll be set up by the Armed Forces, the different services within our Armed Forces, as well as you'll some work done by advance special operating forces. But it must be realized that we can launch from Europe or from the United States without the bases if need be. But what this gives us the capability for sustained operations over the long haul.
[Brown:] It's just much more logistically complicated if you're a thousand or 1500 or 2000 miles away to get these soldiers what they need.
[Grange:] Well, that and once, an operation starts, the resupply requirement, moving of wounded personnel, those that you capture, it's going to require bases closer to do this operation optimally.
[Brown:] And again, in these hypothetical battle plans, for lack of better word, who goes in first? Do the Rangers go in first who would be the first special ops group in?
[Grange:] Well, that all depends on targeting. I think you will see an information warfare campaign first, plus other bases set up.
[Brown:] And are these unit we talk about the Green Berets and we talk about the Rangers and the Navy Seals, are the all essentially trained the same, or are they all expected to perform different functions?
[Grange:] Well, the United States Armed Forces has these different type of special operating units to give us a broad range capability by air, land or sea. So, again, it's going to depend on a type of missions, whether they be raids, you may see Rangers; if it's setting up unconventional warfare you'll see Green Berets; if there's targets near water you may see Navy Seals. So and the Air Force supporting all of them. So it's really going to depend on where the targets are located and what the mission's going to be.
[Brown:] And do we know enough about that at this point to make even an intelligent guess about that, or is this whole mission question so vague right now it's hard to know?
[Grange:] Well, it's probably a need to know. I would imagine a lot is known, a lot of it's going to be covert or clandestine in nature, and we shouldn't know. So it will come out when we're the time is right.
[Brown:] General, I think we'll still be asking those questions. Nevertheless, thanks for joining us.
[Grange:] My pleasure. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Now let's return to the Middle East crisis. A few minutes ago on this show, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres told us that Israel intends to keep its troops in several West Bank town until the Palestinians turn over those responsible for the killing of an Israeli government minister last week. The U.S. has told Israel to get out of the Palestinian territory, and these latest tensions could jeopardize U.S. efforts to keep the support of moderate Muslim nations, such as Egypt. With Egypt's perspective now, we welcome Nabil Fahmy. He is Egypt's ambassador to the U.S., and he joins us from our Washington bureau this morning. Welcome.
[Nabil Fahmy, Egypt's Ambassador To U.s:] Morning, Paula.
[Zahn:] First of all, your reaction to some of what Foreign Minister Shimon Peres had to say, in particular, the fact that Israeli forces will not retreat from the six West Bank towns until some of the Israeli demands are met.
[Fahmy:] Well, I didn't see the whole program, but I did see that part. It's I would have to say regrettable. I think it's important for both sides, in spite of the tensions, in spit of the problems, to fully respect the obligations they took upon themselves, pursuant to the agreements reached between them, and reoccupation of areas a or areas where Israeli forces have withdrawn is something which is not useful. That is not to say that both sides don't have things to do. I think both sides do have things to do, but we should not exacerbate the problem by reoccupying territory.
[Zahn:] Well, what is your level of confidence in Yasser Arafat right now? Will he do the things that the United States government is asking him to do?
[Fahmy:] He has already arrested a large number of people who are accused of having participating in the assassination. He is going to prosecute them, and he has publicly stated that he opposes what happened, he condemns it. Let's test it and see.
[Zahn:] Even your own president said in "Newsweek" magazine this week of Mr. Arafat quote "Arafat can't make a decision alone or the people around him would leave him. Mind you, Arafat has some terrible people around him, like Barguti." Do you agree with President Mubarak?
[Fahmy:] I understand what the president was conveying to you. The fact is that we support peace in principle; it's not about personalities. He was also making the point that President Arafat has to work with the people around him and has to lead them. We call upon President Arafat to lead his people, to bring them in line in the peace process. We apply the same standard to everybody, but still believe that can do that.
[Zahn:] This happens at a time, of course, where Israeli right- wingers took to the streets yesterday to demand that Ariel Sharon get rid of Yasser Arafat in this diplomatic process. What do you make of that?
[Fahmy:] You don't choose your adversaries; you don't choose leaders for other sides. We have to worked this issue. Arguing about radical solutions, calling for getting rid of a leader here or a cabinet minister here is, frankly, absurd, and it will not help the peace process. This is really becoming an immoral situation. People are dying on both sides, and we are debating about who should lead and who should not lead. It is time to get back to the basics, get back to the negotiating table, work for peace.
[Zahn:] Your country of course has had to deal with Islamic fundamentalism and a lot of attention last week was paid to the FBI's most wanted list of 22 men on that list, seven were Egyptian. There is more than any other country on the list. Why is that?
[Fahmy:] Well, we are a big country, and we have, of course, in our communities criminal elements as everybody else does. You have terrorists here in America. Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist. In Europe, you had the Red Brigade, the Red Army in Japan. Batter Meinhoff Germany. I don't deny that some of them are Egyptians, of course, but it is the same country that produced for the world a secretary general of the United Nations, four international courts of justice jurists, and three Nobel Prize winners in 20 years. So it is a big country, we have good people and bad, and I can tell you very confidently, the widespread majority are good, solid people, and those are the list are all on our own wanted lists. They are not people that we condone or we've accented. They all have court verdicts against them. So we are working this issue, and we have for the last 10 years. And frankly, if people had been working with us, we may not have witnessed some of these problems.
[Zahn:] Well, let me ask you this, everyone is saying that of course Egypt is crucial to this coalition working towards terrorism. Do you have any concerns about the length of this campaign that might unfold? Of course Pakistan has expressed concern about that. Where is Egypt on that?
[Fahmy:] From our own experience, it is going to be a sustained effort. It will be multidimensional. Military will be one aspect of it, not the whole story. This will go on for some time now, and we will need public support, both in the U.S. and internationally. To do that, you have to deal with many, many issues, and you have to be careful in terms of how you use the military, because when you witness a large number of civilian deaths, if that occurs, God forbid, people will question that. We are working from civilized societies, and it is always more difficult for civilized societies to accept loss of life than terrorists. So Egypt is going to be there front and center, no ifs, no buts, but we will be there with wise council and full support.
[Zahn:] What won't Egypt do then?
[Fahmy:] We will not take rash decisions. And we will not agree with people who want to fudge the issues, mix subjects. We want to keep things on focus, going after terrorists. That is what everybody agrees upon. That is what the story is all about.
[Zahn:] Ambassador Fahmy, thank you very much for your perspective this morning.
[Fahmy:] Thank you for having me.
[Zahn:] We appreciate it.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] In Montana, fire officials say, strong winds will likely slow efforts to contain a spreading wildfire in Glacier National Park. The 48 thousand-acre blaze in northwest Montana has only been about 5 percent contained. CNN's Thelma Gutierrez is tracking firefighting efforts from Columbia Falls, Montana. Thelma, what do you know at this late point?
[Thelma Gutierrez, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Donna, as you had mentioned, this fire is only 5 percent contained, 48 thousand acres have already burned. And right now the temperatures are heating up and the winds are starting to pick up, and that is a potentially lethal combination for firefighters out on the line. Right now there's 1100 firefighter who've flown into Montana from all over the country. The Bureau of Indian Affairs has 233 people out here to help in that effort. Chadeen Palmer a spokesperson. Chadeen, can you please tell me about some of the people on your tribal crews?
[Chadeen Palmer, Fire Information Officer:] OK. We have several tribal crews here, including Blackfeet Hot Shots, the Rocky Boy Hot Shot, and we also have a hot shot crew from Arizona, the Geronimo Hot Shots.
[Gutierrez:] Now, you had mentioned that you expected this to be a very bad day, possibly a red flag warning would go out. Can you explain what that means?
[Palmer:] Yes. A red flag warning is issued when the winds exceed 25 miles per hour. When that occurs,
[Gutierrez:] During that time the fire's allowed to burn?
[Palmer:] Yes. There's not any safe way that we can send any crews in or any ground support in, and so it's necessary for us to call everybody back in.
[Gutierrez:] Right now were about 15 miles away from the fire, there are 37 homes that are surrounded. Can you describe the conditions in the North Fork area, and what you're doing to try to protect those homes?
[Palmer:] OK, we've had a structure protection unit go in. They have wrapped the homes in a protective covering, which is more or less like a foil wrapping. The entire structure is wrapped. We have also wrapped wooden bridges. When the fire comes through we have done back burning efforts as well, which removes any fuel that's surrounding the structures when the fire moves through, the when the fire reaches the area that the fuel has been burned out and the structures are wrapped, then it's able to pass through without burning down the structure. We have also wrapped wooden bridges when the fire comes through. We have done back burning efforts as well which removes fuel that surrounding the structures when the fire moves through, the when the fire reaches the area that the fuel has been burned out and the structure are wrapped then able to pass, too without burning down the structure. `
[Gutierrez:] And you've said you've gone back and you have actually seen that those structures are left standing because of this material here. It is not cheap material, is it?
[Palmer:] No it's not. It's about $300 per hundred foot wrap.
[Gutierrez:] And it's very labor intensive.
[Palmer:] That's right.
[Gutierrez:] And that's going on right now in North...
[Palmer:] That's correct. And we are also doing some of the Lake McDonald area, which would be in the southeastern portion of the fire to where the fire's headed.
[Gutierrez:] Can you tell me what the outlook is for the fire right now? Forty-eight thousand acres have already burned and each day around noon the winds start to kick up, which makes that a very difficult effort out here.
[Palmer:] Yes, it is. And we have no prediction of where we might reach containment. If there's a lot of country out there that's in the way of the fire then it's going to burn then we just can only do our very best, which we are doing. We have a lot of experienced people here. And mother nature will do her best to see what she until she runs out of fuel.
[Gutierrez:] All right, Chadeen Palmer, for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, thank you very much for joining us. Again, 48 thousand acres have burned. No homes thankfully have been destroyed. We understand that three structures have burned, but those structures are outbuilding, not homes. And thankfully, no injuries. Donna, back to you.
[Kelley:] OK, Thelma Gutierrez from Columbia Falls, Montana, thanks very much.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Well, Honda and consumer electronics powerhouse Sony helped the Japanese market end the day higher today.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Dalton Tanonaka sums up the day in Asia for us now from our studios in Hong Kong. Good morning, Dalton.
[Dalton Tanonaka, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, David. Good morning, Deborah. Several major Asian markets opened the week with strong performances. Tokyo closed more than one percent higher after Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori hinted that the government may consider market-boosting measures. Leading the winners there were major exporters Toyota and Sony, both making hefty gains on the weakening yen, as their products become less expensive overseas. The Japanese currency fell to a 17-month low against the dollar at 119.39, but it later strengthened a bit to settle at 118.94. Wireless giant NTT DoCoMo wasn't part of the Nikkei's move higher; it lost a half percent, as investors sold that stock ahead of a new share offering announced last Friday. The company will be floating 460,000 new shares to raise nearly $7 billion for overseas investments. In Hong Kong, the Hang Seng closed flat, but heavy selling hit Pacific Century CyberWorks. That Internet and telecom company tumbled more than 7 12 percent due to worries that Britain's Cable & Wireless will be unloading up to 7.7 percent worth of those shares by the end of next month. That's when a lock-up expires. Heavy overseas buying fueled a rally in South Korea. The main Kospi Index advancing nearly two percent2 percent. Chipmaker Hyundai Electronics Industries shot up more than 12 12 percent. And that's our Monday look at the markets here in Asia. Back to you in New York.
[Marchini:] All right.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, thank you very much, Dalton.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] The Defense Department's decision to release photos of detainees at Guantanamo Bay has turned into a public-relations setback in Britain. There, the government is standing firm in its role as a staunch U.S. ally, but the British media, at least some of them, are stoking public criticism. CNN's Sheila MacVicar has more from London.
[Sheila Macvicar, Cnn Correspondent:] The pictures, shot by a U.S. military photographer, first published on the U.S. Department of Defense Web site, captured British front pages: orange- jumpsuited detainees kneeling on stones, their senses muffled, blacked-out goggles over their eyes, earmuffs blocking sound, masks, heavy mittens. Britain's prime minister had asked for time while conditions at Camp X-Ray were investigated. But British newspapers reached their own conclusions. This was sensory depravation, humiliation said "The Mirror," torture said "The Mail."
[Anne Clwyd, Human Rights Committee:] They're horrific pictures. And I think it's right that, on occasions like this, if we think they are doing something wrong, which we don't agree with, like with any good friends, you say to them: "Hey, this is not right. We don't agree with that. Will you please attend to it?"
[Kate Allen, Amnesty International:] We would say that there is some very cruel treatment going on here and that what is happening is that we are seeing something that looks too much like revenge and not like justice.
[Macvicar:] U.S. officials say these are the most dangerous people in the world. An their treatment, they say, has been fair.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Of Defense:] The fact remains, the treatment is proper. And there is no doubt in my mind that it is humane and appropriate and consistent with the Geneva Convention, for the most part.
[Macvicar:] The British government has rejected accusations that it is letting its American allies abuse the detainees. A spokesman for the prime minister said the U.S. administration says these photos were taken shortly after the detainees arrived at Guantanamo. The prime minister's office has received assurances, said the spokesman, that detainees were not kept shackled or hooded while in their cages. [on camera]: In a further effort to head off a transatlantic growl, a spokesman for the prime minister said today that British officials who visited Camp X-Ray over the weekend have been able to speak freely with the three British detainees, and the detainees had no complaints about their treatment. [voice-over]: It will be up to the International Committee of the Red Cross to determine if conditions at Camp X-Ray, as the U.S. administration insists and the British government apparently now agrees, are within the requirements of international law. Sheila MacVicar, CNN, London.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] "BUSINESS UNUSUAL" is just ahead, but first the top story: reports of a Kenya Airline airbus going down in the ocean. We want to go now to Hugo Baas. He is the spokesperson for KLM Airport Airlines, and he's on the telephone with us now. Sir, what can you tell us?
[Hugo Baas, Klm Royal Dutch Airlines:] Well the information we have at this very moment is very early information, so it might just during the night change, of course. Burt as far as we know at this very moment, it involved 5KQ 1131 on its way from Abidjan to Lagos. It carries 169 passengers and 10 crew members. Shortly after takeoff at 21:08, the aircraft crashed in the sea, and it could be possible involved in a sand storm. It involves an aircraft
[Hall:] That was Hugo Baas, the spokesperson for KLM Airlines. And again, a Kenyan Airlines air crash, reports of 169 people, 10 crew people on board. We will keep you up to date on this breaking news story at the top of the hour, "BUSINESS UNUSUAL" comes up for you right now.

[Tumi Makgabo:] This week on
[Inside Africa:] a look at the art of moviemaking on a continent with a rich history of storytelling. From Cairo in the north to Ouagadougou in the west, we'll review the successes of African actors and producers and take an in-depth look at the problems they face. Then we'll take you to Hollywood and see how actors from Africa are faring. That's the African film industry spotlighted in this special edition of INSIDE AFRICA. Hello, I'm Tumi Makgabo. Welcome to INSIDE AFRICA as we examine the film industry on the Continent. We'll be getting to that in a minute. But first, African leaders ended their annual summit in Moussaka this week, agreeing to forge a new alliance and chart a new course. The organization of African unity is being retired. In its place, the African Union. Jim Clancy examines what's ahead for the new union.
[Jim Clancy, Cnn Correspondent:] What was called the finest summit of the organization's African unity was a reinvention of decades old dreams and marked a watershed of ideas, past and future. The procession of heads of state included some of Africa's most visible democratically elected leaders. Libya's Muammar Qaddafi basked in the spotlight, amid credit for pushing the notion of a union forward and suspicions Tripoli's oil money had bankrolled at least some of the official African enthusiasm.
[Kayode Soyinka, "africa Today" Magazine:] This is the kind of information Qaddafi, you know, has. You know, but that, as it may, I believe that when you have someone like the president of Nigeria, Thabo Mbeki in South Africa, the two countries working hand in hand now. So many projects in the Continent, Muamar Qaddafi is not a problem.
[Clancy:] Qaddafi urged the conference to forge a union that was not based on European or U.S. ideals, but Africa's own values. For his part, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan urged African leaders to make fundamental changes to shape a true African union.
[Kofi Annan, U.n. Secretary-general:] The AU has today by and large focused on political issues. And I would hope that this transformation into a union will bring the leaders to such a focus on economic and social issues.
[Clancy:] The U.N. leaders said ongoing conflicts posed the greatest challenge to stability on the Continent. And he urged Africans to work together to resolve their differences and put their own people first. The former foreign minister of Ivory Coast Amira Assi was elected to help steer the transition toward the new African Union. Many challenges remain. While some see the African Union as a natural progression, many fear the haste to make a formal declaration could backfire. It is a new beginning, but few expect Africa to stride gracefully into the future if the people of Africa must carry the heavy baggage of decades of corruption, conflict and misrule along for the ride. Jim Clancy, CNN.
[Makgabo:] Africa is rich in the art of storytelling. And it's helped to create a growing film industry. But while many African moviemakers have gained a measure of success on the Continent, so far, international fame has eluded them. Dancers welcome participants to the fourth international festival of the doll country. The annual event celebrates the art and culture of East African countries, gulf states, India, Pakistan and islands of the Indian Ocean. The highlight is the screening of movies, speeches, documentaries and videos. And there was no short supply of African films, with producers and directors looking for a market for their products.
[Unidentified Male:] For me, that was the point of victory.
[Makgabo:] This was the latest in a series of film festivals, displaying the work of African moviemakers. Back in March, the stadiums and cinema of Burkina Faso's capital Ouagadougou were packed to capacity, as some of the best work from the continent was presented on the big screen. The state of the African film industry was also discussed. The message, moviemaking on the Continent is evolving into something worth watching. But there are still debates about the pace.
[Haile Gerima, Director:] To make a film in Africa is just a luxury, once in a lifetime to some filmmakers. Some of the best filmmakers that make only one, two, three.
[Makgabo:] The problem is not the work, as African producers are now turning out Hollywood quality films like "Lumumba," one of the films screened in Ouagadougou. It tells the story of the charismatic Patrice Lumumba, the first Prime Minister of what is today the democratic republic of Congo. Its producer is Haitian born Raoul Peck, who's lived and worked in Congo.
[Raoul Peck, Producer:] "Lumumba" is a film which was aimed at the world audience. It was not just for African or for Haiti, where I come from, or from the Third World. So it's a way for me, film is exchanging something.
[Makgabo:] Many filmmakers on the Continent believe they have a responsibility, not just to entertain, but to tackle social and political issues. Ivorian producer, Roger Ngoan M'Bala did just that in "Adanggaman," one of the movies that won acclaim in Ouagadougou. It looks at Africa's contribution to the transatlantic slave trade.
[Roger Ngoan M'bala, Producer, "adanggaman":] It factors entire history, we have to talk about it.
[Makgabo:] Movies like "Adanggaman" and "Lumumba" are attracting attention abroad. A film critic of "The Chicago Tribune" wrote, "the political drama "Lumumba" was as polished as any Hollywood production." Most African filmmakers have not captured the international market needed for their products. Some blame the lack of funds and resources.
[Peck:] So it's not a matter of your own, you know, desire, your own work, your own energy. It's just you cannot do it alone.
[Makgabo:] This problem is not unique to sub-Saharan Africa. Even in Egypt, once the movie capital of the Continent, the industry is suffering. Production has dropped from 100 movies a year to about 25. The veteran Senegalese producer, Ousmane Sembene, believes there's still hope.
[Ousmane Sembene, Producer:] I know the Africans are conscious of their own problems, but they are the only ones who can resolve their own cinemagraphic problems.
[Makgabo:] And for years, Sembene has practiced what he's preached, confronting the problems head on. He releases at least one film every two years to coincide with the Ouagadougou festival. His work this year, "Fakile," examines the changing role of women in Senegal. Who knows? Perhaps you'd be seeing at the box office near you. Well, Africa's diverse and breathtaking views have attracted dozens of Western filmmakers. One place that's been the site of several movies is a desert town in the south of Tunisia. Scenes from a worldwide blockbuster movie were shot here back in the 1980s. And as Sylvia Smith reports, the international attention is helping to boost the country's film industry.
[Sylvia Smith, Cnn Correspondent:] The droids and pod races are gone, but the site still carries reminders. Some of the most memorable scenes from "Star Wars" were shot here. And now, other film companies are discovering this great expanse of desert. Scouts from as far as France and the Ukraine have made the trek.
[Ziad Bebbebi, Tunisian Producer:] Following the success of "Star Wars," Tunisia decided to promote itself as really good place for shooting films.
[Smith:] Tourism is also on the rise here. "Star Wars" fans from all over the world are discovering the desert near Tozeur, in southern Tunisia.
[Unidentified Male:] We came to see the "Star Wars" sets and locations. We're on a trip in the desert to see where the films were shot.
[Smith:] But "Star Wars" isn't the only movie shot here. "The English Patient" also used this surreal setting.
[Bebbebi:] Since "Star Wars" was shot in Tunisia, desert becomes very popular in the following countries. And we have many production companies interested to shoot in Tunisia, documentaries, videotapes and full feature films.
[Smith:] Many visitors want mementos. Mostly from "Star Wars." And some go to great lengths to get them. Blockbusters like "Star Wars" have made hundreds of millions of dollars for Western companies. Now one enterprising Tunisian has found a way of making the film pay long after the shooting is over. Scrap can be very precious if it comes off the right movie lot.
[Unidentified Male:] It took eight days to get everything over here, like this feeder here. We used trucks, cranes, tractors and vans. It cost over 9,000 U.S. dollars just for transport.
[Smith:] The more recognizable the piece, the greater the value.
[Unidentified Male:] There are companies who come back to rent the same pieces if there's a sequel being filmed. Then there are the fans from all over Europe and even America that come here with huge containers.
[Smith:] The town of Tozeur itself has prospered. Thanks to the desert's appeal to the film industry. With a growing need for extras, scene-makers, and engineers. Not to mention camel handlers. This set is from the latest "Star Wars." But don't think we're going to tell you what happens. You're just going to have to wait. For CNN's INSIDE AFRICA, this is Sylvia Smith in Tozeur, Tunisia.
[Makgabo:] And speaking of waiting, still ahead on INSIDE AFRICA, Kenya provides the backdrop for a new film about a woman fighting sanctuary in Africa. Stay with us.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Some questions have arisen in the wake of the threat of terrorism here in this country about just how safe the U.S. food supply is. For the latest on that, let's go to my colleague, Jeanne Meserve in Washington. Hello, Jeanne.
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Judy. U.S. officials emphasize that there is no specific terrorist threat against the food supply that they are aware of. But, nonetheless, there is concern.
[Unidentified Male:] I am more fearful about this than anything else.
[Meserve:] In 1984, the nation's only bioterrorist incident involving food: Followers of the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh contaminated restaurant salad bars in Oregon with salmonella. Hundreds fell ill. The risk of another nonconventional attack via the food supply was studied by the Clinton administration.
[Dan Glickman, Former Agriculture Secretary:] Let me simply say that the problem is immense as are the consequences and the effort we need to protect from it.
[Meserve:] The fact that the food system is so huge and so interconnected amplifies any contamination, intentional or otherwise.
[Carole Tucker Foreman, Consumer Federation Of America:] When I was at USDA, we had an unintentional contamination with chemical polychlorinated biphenyls. By the time we caught it, it had spread to thousands of pies and cakes and 28 U.S. states and eight foreign countries.
[Meserve:] From farm to fork, experts see vulnerable points in the food system including imported food. The amount of food shipped into the U.S. has quadrupled in the last decade. Much of it is produced under safety standards less stringent than those in the U.S. And only a small fraction of it is inspected. Experts see a risk here of intentional contamination with E.coli, salmonella, or even botulism. Those same contaminants or chemicals could be put into food processed here, experts say, because of lax security and inadequate inspection. Government officials argue the U.S. has the safest food system in the world. And industry says new precautions are being taken.
[Gene Grabowski, Grocery Manufacturers Of America:] Adding extra security guards, making the security staff more visible, some places, where necessary, adding security cameras.
[Meserve:] But there is no dispute that the food security system needs to be further enhanced because of the consequences any terrorist attack could have on public health and on public fears. Judy, as one expert said to me, you can choose not to fly. You can not choose not to eat back to you.
[Woodruff:] Jeanne, you realize you're just giving us all one more big thing to worry about.
[Meserve:] Sorry that isn't my intention.
[Woodruff:] I know. All right, Jeanne Meserve reporting from Washington.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] One of our participants in this morning's online editorial meeting was concerned about the spread of the West Nile Virus. Nelson Piquet asked: "Now that the West Nile virus has been found in the metro Atlanta area, how soon before we see a case in humans?" In metro Atlanta, actually, very close to my own home, a hawk was found to have the virus. And in the Florida panhandle, a man fell ill from what is believed at this point to be the virus. Right now, he's undergoing some tests about that. The virus has been found in several other animals in Florida and in a bird in South Georgia. Mosquitoes spread West Nile by feeding on the blood of infected birds. CNN medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta joins us now with more on this story and the spread of it. Sanjay, explain it to us, what this virus does to the brain.
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Correspondent:] Right. Well, one of the things that people are worried about the most is the actual virus getting into the brain and specifically affecting some areas around the brain stem. The virus will actually pass through what's known as the blood-brain barrier, getting into this area and starting to cause swelling in this area. That's known as encephalitis, and that can be a real problem. That can eventually lead to death. That's to be distinguished from what is known as meningitis, which is actually a swelling on the outer part of the brain, over here. So when people are worried about West Nile virus, Joie, that's what they're worried about.
[Chen:] All right. Sanjay, we've got a question from the Web chat audience right now. Let's take a look. Kimberly Kinnear asking: "Is the virus contagious?" That is, is it contagious human to human?
[Gupta:] Right. It's not. It's not contagious human to human. It's not contagious bird to human. It's contagious mosquito getting the virus from a bird and then a mosquito biting a human being. That is the only way that they have found that this virus is actually transmitted. So not to be fearful of other humans that have the virus, not to be fearful of birds that have the virus.
[Chen:] Is that unusual? Does that happen often, that you need the mosquito for the transmission?
[Gupta:] There's all sorts of different viruses that do use mosquitoes, in particular as a vector, whereas the hosts in this case, birds and human beings are totally immune to that.
[Chen:] Dr. Sanjay Gupta from our medical unit. Wear the bug spray. Thanks very much.
[Gupta:] Exactly.
[Chen:] Don't be too afraid to go outside.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] A man-made tragedy is the focus of growing anger and pain in Russia. President Vladimir Putin will fly to the town that is home to the Northern Fleet today as the nation there gets ready for an official day of mourning. Our Mike Hanna picks up our coverage, joining us now live from Moscow Mike.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] Leon, a national day of mourning has been declared to be held Wednesday in Moscow. Flags will be lowered to half mast throughout the country as the people remember the 118 crew members of the submarine Kursk. Recovery operations are continuing on the submarine, although this is now being carried out by Russian teams alone, the international segment of what had been a rescue operation preparing to depart. But the Russians say they will continue until all the bodies are recovered from the submarine Kursk, to be taken ashore for burial. The relatives of those who were aboard the submarine are gathering near the port city of Murmansk. They will meet later in the day with President Vladimir Putin, who is on his way there to express his condolences personally to all the relatives. But given the great amount of public criticism over his government's handling of the disaster, Mr. Putin is likely to face some searching questions from the relatives of those who are dead Leon.
[Harris:] All right, thanks, Mike Hanna, reporting live from Moscow this morning.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Two leading newspaper companies are merging.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] And if all goes well, the deal will put some of America's top newspapers under one corporate roof. With more ink on the making of this new inc., here's Christine Romans.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Correspondent:] Chicago is really a Tribune town. You know, the beautiful Tribune Tower sits right there in downtown, overlooking the Chicago River, and now it's going to be a Tribune and Times Mirror town because it looks as though TMC and TRB, those are the ticker symbols of Times Mirror and the Tribune company, are going to be joining forces. The "LA Times" announcing on its on-line edition or reporting, rather, in its on-line edition that they will be coming together in a deal worth $6.38 billion or $6.46 billion, depending on which report you take a look at. These are two newspaper companies that together will be the third largest newspaper company in the country behind Knight Ridder, which owns Gannett, and also behind what's the number two? Anybody remember off the top of your head?
[Marchini:] No.
[Romans:] Completely blanked out.
[Haffenreffer:] Gannett and Knight Ridder.
[Romans:] Gannett and Knight Ridder, that's right. OK, sorry. So GCI is one ticker symbol there; KRI is the other ticker symbol. And TRB, $8.8 billion is its market cap; it owns the "Chicago Tribune," the "Florida Sentinel" papers, 22 TV stations, and the Chicago Cubs. And that stock actually we're closely watching that one lately. Newspaper stocks, in particular, had a nice run-up through the end of the year, but then at the beginning of this newspaper the index of newspaper stocks, at least, has come off significantly, and some of these stocks are trading near their 52-week lows; among them, TMC, which is the Times Mirror company, $5.3 billion is its market cap; it owns "LA Times," "Baltimore Sun," the "Hartford Current," and the "Long Island New York Newsday." So it will be very interesting to see what happens what kind of regulatory issues there might be with this kind of a merger, considering the fact that, now, this a merger of this magnitude would include a television station in the LA area and the "LA Times." So that could be...
[Marchini:] Well, clearly, they think the stocks are cheap, having run down.
[Romans:] Yes, perhaps, yes.
[Marchini:] Thanks, Christine.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Some farmers and ranchers are seeing red over a court ruling that allows gray wolves to stay in Yellowstone National Park, but environmentalists say, the decision is a victory for endangered wild life. CNN's Rusty Dornin now looks at that controversy.
[Rusty Dornin, Cnn Correspondent:] Wild and elusive, wolves in Yellowstone National Park will stay that way. A federal appeals court upheld the reintroduction of the gray wolf, guaranteeing them the right to roam free.
[Marsha Karle, Yellowstone National Park:] We're thrilled that the court agreed that the reintroduction of wolves was done legally, and that the wolves will not have to be removed from Yellowstone.
[Dornin:] After a 60 year absence from that part of the Rockies, 30 wolves were reintroduced in 1995 in Wyoming and parts of Idaho. Ranchers were furious, fearing attacks on livestock. The American Farm Bureau filed suit. In 1997, a federal judge ruled the wolves should be removed and stayed the order until a higher court could decide. Ranchers say this latest decision is just bad economics.
[Erik Ness, American Farm Bureau Fed:] It's bad news for ranchers and consumers, because the consumers at the end of this chain of food. We're out there trying to produce food. The federal government, in cahoots with the Clinton administration, is trying to put us out of business.
[Dornin:] While a victory for environmentalists, it's bittersweet: Canadian wolves were imported to help build up the population, and that, say some, sold the native population down the river.
[Bill Curtiss, Earth Justice Legal Def. Fund:] The bad news is the secretary can trade away the health of the wolves as a species in order to protect a certain population; that may not benefit wolves in the long run.
[Dornin:] About 120 gray wolves now roam Yellowstone. For park visitors, the benefits have been hearing the call of the wild.
[Karle:] There's nothing like walking outside at night on a winter night and hearing the howl of the wolf. It's something that was missing from here for many, many years, and is something that we welcome back with open arms.
[Dornin:] Rusty Dornin, CNN.

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] In another story making news, Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh faces execution next month and Attorney General John Ashcroft said last hour he will allow the execution to be shown on a closed circuit television feed for survivors and victims' families to actually watch it. Well, CNN's Gary Tuchman is in Oklahoma City for reaction to that announcement Hello, Gary.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, there, Linda. Two days ago, John Ashcroft was here in Oklahoma City. He toured this, the Oklahoma City bombing memorial, and he also met with 100 survivors and family members of the victims who were very united in what they wanted, and today, John Ashcroft gave them most of what they asked for. On May 16th, 2001, the scheduled date of the execution of Timothy McVeigh, 10 of them will be allowed to personally watch the execution at the U.S. penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana. That's up from eight. That was the original number. Now it will be 10. In addition, the rest of the family members of the victims and survivors who want to watch will be able to watch a closed circuit feed that will be provided here in Oklahoma City.
[John Ashcroft, Attorney General:] The transmission to the victims in the Oklahoma City area will begin at the same time the curtain is opened for viewing by victim witnesses in the execution facility. All witnesses will see Mr. McVeigh on the execution table and they will be able to hear any final statement Mr. McVeigh makes.
[Tuchman:] This will be the first execution by the federal government in more than 38 years. The last time the federal government had an execution was March of 1963. So much of what the attorney general said today will serve as guidelines for future federal executions. Now, Timothy McVeigh had agreed to do some television and newspaper interviews before his execution, but today the attorney general shot down the concept of any on camera interviews. John Ashcroft says that Timothy McVeigh can do interviews on the telephone but he only gets one 15 minute telephone call per day. That will not be expanded. So if he wants to do interviews it will have to be on the phone with that one 15 call per day and that is also something the family members here in Oklahoma City wanted, no on camera interviews for the man who is the worst mass murderer in U.S. history, Timothy McVeigh. Back to you.
[Stouffer:] Gary Tuchman, thank you very much.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] The U.S. is about to get more involved in the Middle East. As we just reported, American envoy Anthony Zinni returns to the region today with the goal of getting Israelis and Palestinians back on the road to peace. Vice President Cheney, meanwhile, is in Yemen, after stops in Jordan and Egypt, consulting America's Mideast allies about possible military action against Iraq. As for how to deal with Saddam Hussein, at his news conference yesterday, the president said all options are on the table. Joining us now from Washington, former national security adviser under President Clinton, Sandy Berger. Welcome. Good to see you again, as well.
[Sandy Berger, Former National Security Adviser:] Good morning.
[Zahn:] Good morning. So, Sandy, we just heard a couple minutes ago in our news alert President Bush used some of the harshest words he's used so far in relationship to the Israelis. How much of that harsh rebuke do you think has to do with the fact that his vice president is in the region trying to drum up Arab support for possible action against Iraq?
[Berger:] Well, it's quite clear that Secretary Cheney is going to have a difficult time getting attention focused on Iraq in the midst of raging conflict in the Middle East. But I think we need to get Zinni there. I think he's arriving today. Get the parties back into a discussion of the security steps that have to be taken, initially for a cease-fire, ultimately for, on the Palestinian side, destroying the infrastructure of violence, which would be met on the Israeli side by reciprocal steps of withdrawal. And then ultimately there has to be a bridge towards a political process to deal with the Palestinian issues in a reasonable time frame.
[Zahn:] I don't know whether you were able to catch what a Palestinian negotiator had to say in Mike Hanna's piece running up to this, but essentially that there is nothing to talk to Mr. Zinni about unless the Israelis retreat from the Gaza Strip and other occupied territories.
[Berger:] Well, emotions are running very high on both sides, Paula. But we don't need preconditions or ultimatums here. The fundamental fact here is that there is no military solution to this set of issues, to this problem. The Palestinians are not going to drive Israelis away through violence. Israel is not going to crush three million Palestinians into quiescence. So we need, through the auspice through the good offices of the United States and others to bring the parties together for initially the purpose of implementing security steps leading to the Palestinians undertaking to dismantle the infrastructure of violence and on the Israeli side withdrawal from its latest incursions, easing the pressure on the Palestinians. And then there must be a pathway forward to resolving the future of the Palestinians.
[Zahn:] So what is it you make of the sudden reengagement, though, on the Bush administration's part? What is driving it besides what we just discussed with Mr. Cheney?
[Berger:] Well, we have a great deal at stake here in the United States. Our ally and friend, our moral and political and strategic commitment to Israel, which is under enormous pressure; the carnage that is taking place on both sides; the radicalization that takes place as this conflict escalates and another generation of hateful young people emerge; the consequences this has in the region for regimes Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and others; the war against terrorism, whatever we might want to do in Iraq. All of these are, pivot around what happens in the Middle East. We cannot afford to not engage actively. The parties cannot disengage by themselves. They cannot break this death grip by themselves. There must be U.S. participation and I'm glad Zinni's back and I hope that he has the kinds of instructions that not only will deal with the immediate security issues, but that will provide a pathway forward to deal with the future of the Palestinian issues generally. Because without that, I think it is less likely that the Palestinians will, in fact, turn their guns on the killers within and arrest them and destroy the infrastructure of violence rather than have those guns directed towards Israel.
[Zahn:] Your former boss, President Clinton, threw out the idea yesterday of sending some monitoring troops just like what happened in the late '70s. Is that a good idea?
[Berger:] Well, I think President Bush has also talked about, or at least Secretary Powell, about monitors on the ground that would be able to provide some degree of reassurance with respect to compliance, implementation of the cease-fire. You know, the Palestinians and the Israelis have agreed at least five times to a cease-fire. The problem has been those steps have not been implemented. So monitors on the ground, I think, could be useful, as a part of a process.
[Zahn:] OK. Sandy Berger, we're going to have to leave it there this morning. Again, Thanks for joining us on
[American Morning. Berger:] You're welcome, Paula.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Ford is shutting down its Dagenham car-making assembly line in Britain, cutting jobs, but it is investing dollars in an engine plant there.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Ford calling the performance of its European unit, "totally unacceptable." Ed Crooks of the "Financial Times" joins us from the "FT"'s London newsroom this morning. Ed, these job cuts were not unexpected, no?
[Ed Crooks, Economics Editor, "financial Times":] Hi. Good morning. No, not at all. In fact, we've been carrying the story in the paper, in fact, for months now, predicting that this was going to happen. I mean, basically, as you say, that that's really the heart of it, Ford saying that the results from their European operation have been unacceptable. They've been earning margins, I think, of less than one percent on what they've been doing in Europe. They've been very, very unhappy with the performance. Obviously, it's a difficult market; there's severe overcapacity in the European car market and so on. But Ford have really thought right. We've got to grips with this. We've got to do something. And in particular, what they seem to be doing now is sort of rationalizing production across their European plants, so that, as you were saying, car making essentially is going to be taken out of Dagenham, which is just outside of London. It's going to stop making the Fiesta small car, and that's going to go to Cologne in Germany and Valencia in Spain. But Dagenham won't close as a plant, and it, in fact, as you were saying, it's going to get $600 million of new investment, create 500 extra jobs in making diesel engines. And essentially, it's going to be a hub, certainly for Europe, possibly even for world-wide production of Ford's diesel engines. And so that's really the hope, that by concentrating activities on specific plants, they can enhance profitability, enhance margins and really improve quite substantially those results in that very difficult European market.
[Marchini:] We just heard new well, there was the announcement came at a news conference this morning, and the question basically is: Have we learned anything else as a result of what Ford's had to say?
[Crooks:] Well, no, really, they're concentrating on what's going on in Britain at the moment; this is the news conference, as you say, which is happening in London right now, in fact, as we speak. But I think certainly the key to it and the other thing they're saying, is that this is, by no means, the end of their European restructuring. There's quite a lot more they're going to want to do, more along these similar lines of focusing activities, cutting costs, really trying to improve profitability substantially. And so I think the indications are today that we are going to be hearing a lot more about that in the weeks and months to come.
[Haffenreffer:] I'm sure details will continue to follow. Ed Crooks, at the "Financial Times," thanks very much, and have a good weekend.

[Tush:] We decided we're going to show you how to dress for the Oscars. Why not start feet first.
[Rosie Mennem, Jimmy Choo Shoes:] Right.
[Tush:] Jimmy Choo, one of the best known shoe designers in the world.
[Mennon:] Yes.
[Tush:] And you're one of the designers of Jimmy Choo. This is Rosie Mennem. See, we showed you the shoe that she hand painted.
[Mennem:] Yes, I did.
[Tush:] Which I never heard of.
[Mennem:] Really?
[Tush:] Yeah, I mean
[Mennem:] I guess it's pretty unusual.
[Tush:] But so, what? Every pair is one of a kind?
[Mennem:] They are. They're all totally unique because even if I had to copy, I could never do exactly the same. But I try not to copy any way. I want every piece to be an individual work of art.
[Tush:] So this starts out as just a plain black Jimmy Choo shoe.
[Mennem:] Yeah.
[Tush:] And then you paint it, and there it is. And of course, you have these. Well, we see a lot of those.
[Mennem:] Yeah, they're our main thing.
[Tush:] Rosie told me that she can't say who's been in here, who's been looking.
[Mennem:] No, we've had a lot of
[Tush:] We're going to have to wait until Sunday night. That's all there is to it.
[Mennem:] I'm afraid so.
[Tush:] Now do you sell the shoes to the people or are they loan outs?
[Mennem:] They are. They're with our compliments, yeah.
[Tush:] Oh, do they get to keep them or do they have to give them back?
[Mennem:] They keep them, yeah.
[Tush:] Yeah, it's worth getting nominated for an Oscar for that, right? OK, so how many pairs of shoes do you think you have in here? Let me put these over here. Excuse me.
[Mennem:] It's about 200 pairs of shoes.
[Tush:] Well, do you do the bags also? Excuse me for standing in front of you.
[Mennem:] Yeah.
[Tush:] Look at that. Isn't that nice.
[Mennem:] Yeah, that's a [shin Audrey's] swirl design.
[Tush:] Are we allowed to talk about prices?
[Mennem:] No.
[Tush:] No, we're not going to talk about prices. All right, Rosie, thanks a lot.
[Mennem:] Thank you.
[Tush:] We're going to move on and I guess start working our way up, so to speak. OK?
[Mennem:] Yeah, and I've got to get back to painting.
[Tush:] Oh, go right ahead. Don't let me hold you up. We're going to go find some stars that are nominated for Oscars this year, that have actually worked with each other before.
[Mennem:] Oh.
[Tush:] It's, you know, that six degree of separation game. It's at the Oscars, too.
[Sylvester:] There are fewer than six degrees separating these nominees. No Kevin Bacon needed. Although in a pile of 13, he links Oscar hopefuls, Tom Hanks and Ed Harris.
[Tom Hanks, Actor:] I never actually was in the same room on a movie with Ed. I was in another room on a headset, pretending I was on the far side of the moon, but I did see him on occasion on the lunch line. And I nodded to him in the make-up trailer once or twice.
[Sylvester:] Harris joins Joan Allen in "Nixon." Allen's onscreen with Laura Linney in "Searching for Bobby Fisher." Here's Linney with Harris in "Absolute Power" and "The Truman Show." Linney cross- examines Francis McDormand in "Primal Fear."
[Laura Linney, Best Actress Nominee:] She comes in, she puts down her coffee and you know, she's ready to work. You sort of know. She's very straightforward and extremely kind and so good at what she does.
[Sylvester:] Marcia Gay Harden joins McDormand and Albert Finney in "Miller's Crossing."
[Harden:] He would say, "Darling, I don't want to play the old soldier with your butt." And then he would give me these precious jewels of advice about how to behave in film as opposed to theater.
[Sylvester:] Harden spotted Ellen Burstyn in the "Spitfire Grill." Burstyn played Julia Robert's mom in "Dying Young." The two reunited when Roberts won a pre-Oscar honor.
[Julia Roberts, Best Actress Nominee:] She quoted a line to me from our movie. And I laughed so hard because it was a line that was very funny to me at the time. And I think we had joked around about it. And she was right there on my same wavelength.
[Sylvester:] Link Roberts back to Harris in "Stepmom," Jeff Bridges back to Burstyn in "The Last Picture Show." That's Bridges with Joan Allen in "Tucker." Bridges and Benicio del Toro in "Fearless."
[Benicio Del Toro, Supporting Actor Nominee:] He takes pictures on the movie set, you know. And he makes these books after every picture.
[Sylvester:] Del Toro met William Dafoe on "Basquait." Dafoe knows Juliette Binoche from "The English Patient."
[Juliette Binoche, Best Actress Nominee:] Intelligent, full of talent, creative, lovely man.
[Sylvester:] Back up to Benicio with Harris in "China Moon." And the most obscure link: Benicio to Javier Bardem.
[Javier Bardem, Best Actor Nominee:] I worked with him in a movie called "Olem Balls" and I thought, "Who is this guy?" This is a great actor. And that was eight years ago.
[Sylvester:] So on Oscar night, there are no competitors, just old friends. Sherri Sylvester, CNN entertainment news, Hollywood.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Now to a high profile crime in Los Angeles. Police are investigating the shooting death of actor Robert Blake's wife. And they've questioned the former "Beretta" star as a witness. CNN's Hena Cuevas has the details.
[Hena Cuevas, Cnn Correspondent:] Police in Los Angeles searched the home of actor Robert Blake for several hours. According to the L.A.P.D., the search was part of the ongoing investigation into the shooting death of the television actor's wife, Bonnie Bakly. Police say Bakley was found in the front of her husband's car Friday night with a gunshot wound. According to police, Blake told him he and his wife had dinner had this Italian restaurant in an upscale Los Angeles neighborhood, leaving around 9:40 p.m.
[Don Hartwell, Los Angeles Police:] Mr. Blake returned to the restaurant believing that he had left some properties while he was dining there and retrieved the property and came back to the vehicle. And upon his return to the vehicle, he discovered that his wife was injured.
[Cuevas:] According to Blake's attorney, the actor went back to get his gun, which he had been carrying at his wife's request because she believed somebody was stalking her.
[Harland Braun, Blake's Attorney:] When he sat down, he had the gun in the waist band. And he said, "I put it down on the seat." And he put his sweatshirt over the seat. When he left, he just forgot and you know, like anyone who leaves an umbrella.
[Cuevas:] Police say Blake told them after he found his wife, he ran to a home across the street to get help. Bakley died at a nearby hospital. Police say Blake is not considered a suspect.
[Hartwell:] He was interviewed like any witness should be interviewed, but he wasn't questioned. He was interviewed as a witness to the crime.
[Cuevas:] So he's a witness, not a suspect?
[Cuevas : So He's A Witness, Not A Suspect? Hartwell: He's A Witness At This Time. Cuevas):] Could that change?
[Hartwell:] Oh, anything could change.
[Braun:] They can view him as a witness and that someone from her past is involved in this. And hopefully, they can figure it out, who it is.
[Cuevas:] Braun alleges Bakley was involved in some questionable business schemes in the past and feared for her safety. Robert Blake gained worldwide fame with the 1970s detective series "Baretta." He started acting at age five and found movie success with his portrayal of killer Perry Smith in the 1967 film "In Cold Blood." [on camera]: Blake's attorney said the actor won't be spending the night at home. Because he suffers from a blood pressure condition, he's checked himself into a local area hospital, where he will spend the night. [voice-over]: The couple's 11-month-old baby is staying with relatives. Hena Cuevas, CNN Los Angeles.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Now for a closer look at the "Code Red" worm, we're joined by Declan McCullagh. He is the Washington bureau chief for Wired.com. We appreciate your time this morning. How are you?
[Declan Mccullagh, Wired.com:] Hi, there. Pretty good, thank you.
[Harris:] All right, let me ask you about this red worm. We've been looking at different elements of this and we saw the map earlier this morning of how it spreads around the world. Who's most concerned right now, is it governments or business right now?
[Mccullagh:] A little of both. I wrote an article for Wired.com, I think it was last week, that talked about how the U.S. Commerce Department was having some problems with the Code Red worm itself. It had, it took some of its sites off line because they were worried about attacks by the Code Red worm. The Defense Department a week ago took a lot of its sites off line. This is a problem that worries government. They don't want their computers that are running the Web sites for dot-mil and dot-gov agencies to be carriers or infectious agents for this worm.
[Harris:] All right, now, we're not trying to be out here screaming, you know, the sky is falling and all that, but how bad could this really get?
[Mccullagh:] Well, this worm is actually not that bad. You can get rid of it by rebooting. What could be easier?
[Harris:] Yes.
[Mccullagh:] There is, but like your report said, if someone wanted to do something harmful, it would be very easy. The worm, instead of just propagating itself and sending along its message "hacked by Chinese" could do something really damaging. It could delete files. It could erase Web servers or it could send your company's confidential information out on the Internet.
[Harris:] Well, let me ask you this, considering the possibility here that we may all dodge the bullet this time around, enough companies may get the message in time and governments as well and go out and reboot and remove it from their sites or from their computers. But if it remains somewhere in any computer in the world, will it come back again? We're seeing now it's reemerging this time around.
[Mccullagh:] Right. The worm is dormant for the last 10 days of the month or so and then when the first day of the month comes around it uses Greenwich Mean Time. And so as of 8:00 Eastern, it's going to start its 20 day propagation process again. So what's going to happen until everyone running these Microsoft Web servers gets the upgraded, which was released by Microsoft a month and a half ago and actually just clicks on that and installs it and fixes the problem, yes, this is going to come up at the first of every month. It's the silliest thing.
[Harris:] Well, is there any way to find out who did this, who started the whole thing?
[Mccullagh:] No, it's a small worm. It doesn't, it has not left much of a fingerprint. There's, it only infects Web servers or it only defaces Web servers that are in the English language. And so that and the message makes folks think that its origins are in China. It also attacks the White House dot-gov site. Maybe this is a political protest. We don't know. But all indications point to its origin in China, but we don't have a clear answer on that one.
[Harris:] Well, such is the state of the information age. Declan McCullagh, we thank you much for your expertise this morning and good luck down the road.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] The Bush administration is asking the Supreme Court to uphold an affirmative action program designed to help minority-owned businesses win federal government contracts. Justice Department lawyers filed a legal brief yesterday, defending Transportation Department regulations which offer racial preferences in some instances. The administration defends the constitutionality of the program, saying that it's aimed at redressing the effects of discrimination, and ensuring a level playing field. President Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft have expressed opposition to affirmative action in the past. Ashcroft stressed that the Supreme Court filing is a defense only of the Transportation Department provisions, and does not address an other affirmative action laws. Former Vice President Al Gore today is making his first foray back into politics since the elections. Gore and former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander are leading a bipartisan workshop at Vanderbilt University in Nashville for young people interested in politics, but the session is closed to the public. The no-press rule is becoming standard for Gore. Journalists were not allowed to observe classes that he taught this year at universities in New York and Tennessee. And for more now on the big political stories of the week, we go live to Washington. And joining us is CNN political analyst Ron Brownstein. Hi,Ron?
[Ron Brownstein, Cnn Political Analyst:] Hi, Donna.
[Kelley:] Nice to have you join us today, talk about this a little bit. Let's talk about President Bush and his stem cell research decision. Our senior political analyst gave him the play of the week for that, saying that this was compromise that, you know, nobody was real thrilled, but not very angry about either.
[Brownstein:] Well, I think that he did come up with a decision that left him in a very strong position to the way this debate goes from here. As you suggest, it's compromise that neither side is entirely happy about, both people who want to be more restrictive in research and more permissive, but it may leave both unable to reverse him. The conservatives who want to be more restrictive in what the federal government support probably didn't have votes begin with. And after this, they're going to be see some of their allies more reluctant to take on Bush. We saw that in the surprisingly supportive comments of some of the leaders of the religious conservatives. The Democrats may want to push for a more permissive federal approach and more expansive approach towards funding research, but I suspect they're going to find that most of the Republican allies they would actually need to go ahead with that are going to be very reluctant to slap Bush in the face by voting for something that in effect repudiates what he did after he gave them some of what they wanted. So I suspect that both sides are going to have live with this for quite a while.
[Kelley:] And they were saying that it's not political decision. What do you think?
[Brownstein:] Well, I do think that he tried to grapple with many calculations here. But certainly, it does reflect, I think, what we've seen on a number of issues this fall, a certain sense among the Bush team that they have to be begin to reach out and begin broadening their base. He's done very well at holding the support from the people who voted him last year. The polls suggest he's made less progress at converting those who didn't vote for him. And this is one, I think, decision where you can see him beginning to reach out or trying to reach out to that share of the electorate that has not supported him in the past.
[Kelley:] Ron, let's talk about Al Gore. We mentioned him as we were getting into your. Let's talk about that a little bit. We have a couple of polls for to us look at here. CNN"USA Today"Gallup Poll talked to all registered voters and they asked whether or not you want Al Gore to run for president again. And 42 percent said yes they did. 70 percent, if they were Democrats only there as you see. But 42 percent of all of the voter and 51 percent said no. Those are pretty strong numbers, don't you think?
[Brownstein:] Yes, I mean look, this is really all of these numbers and another result in your poll which I think we'll talk about, showing Bush and Gore still at 48, 48. These numbers go together. We still have a very divided electorate. Gore's numbers among Democrats wanting him to run again is pretty good for a guy who's gotten a lot of criticism from party insiders since the election, saying that he, in effect, squandered the strong economy and the good hand that Clinton had left him in many ways. 70 percent saying they want him to run is pretty good.
[Kelley:] Of Democrats.
[Brownstein:] Of Democrats. But on the other hand, it suggests that he hasn't really made lot of progress with anybody else. In the same way that the 48 to 48 number suggested Bush hasn't made a lot of progress. I mean to me, I look at this whole poll and it says not a lot has changed since last election when we had country divided almost exactly in half.
[Kelley:] We have some pictures there of the former Vice President there in Spain. I actually have Gore 49 percent and Bush 48 percent, but we're very close there. And the sampling error is plus or minus four percentage points of the registered voters choice for president between Gore and Bush. Also, they talked about in our same poll, August 3 to 5, about other choices for nominee. And behind Al Gore was at 32 percent was Hillary Clinton at 19 percent. Then we went Bill Bradley, Lieberman, Kerry, Daschle, Edwards and Biden. Who looks strong to you in that line up?
[Brownstein:] Well, I think Hillary Clinton is very unlikely to run. I mean, the last politician who gave as high profile a promise not run during a term was Pete Wilson when he got re-elected governor of California. He turned around two years later and tried to run for president. It was a disaster. None of his donors would contribute. None of his supporters would back him. I think she would end her career if she tried to run in 2004. After that, I think it's relatively thin field. The Democratic field is very top heavy with senators. Senators don't do that well running for president. Only two men have ever gone directly from the U.S. Senate to the presidency, but probably the strongest person in that field would be Joe Lieberman because he has national name ID as Gore's running mate. He's already said though that he won't run against Gore. The field really pivots around Gore. If Gore runs, it's a very different race than if he doesn't. If he doesn't, it's probably wide open.
[Kelley:] And of course, it's super early in the game. Just personal preference, your commentary on the beard? A lot of people are talking about the beard on Al Gore.
[Brownstein:] You know, I think it only goes to prove that all those Democrats who thought that he'd been shipwrecked on a desert island for the last eight months were right. I mean, people are sort of wondering where he was. I don't suspect that we'll see him Iowa, in New Hampshire if he runs again in 2004 with the beard, but the fact that we're talking about it, you know, suggests that part of his problem is that sense among voters not really comfortable with who he is, that we're always seeing new Al Gore, much as there always was new Nixon. And that is an issue for him.
[Kelley:] Yes, well, our other people just saying he's on vacation, you know. Let him have some...
[Brownstein:] Chill out.
[Kelley:] Yes.
[Brownstein:] Let him relax.
[Kelley:] Yes, Ron Brownstein....
[Brownstein:] Let him kick back.
[Kelley:] ...of "The L.A. Times." Thanks. Always nice to have you chat with us. Thank you.
[Brownstein:] Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan:] Right now, we want to take you live the House of Commons. This is British Prime Minister Tony Blair answering questions, right now referring to the treatment of Al Qaeda prisoners by the U.S. Let's listen in.
[Tony Blair, Prime Minister Of Britain:] ... British officials will see those people from Britain, but there should be no doubt about two things. First of all, as I say, we're dealing with very dangerous people. Secondly, however, we are civilized people, and we will treat prisoners in a proper and humane way.
[Question:] Mr. Speaker, further to the right honorable gentleman's question, however, given what we do know already, would the prime minister make clear, for the British citizens are concerned, his views as to them being
[Blair:] As I say, let us just wait and see exactly how they have been treated. And let us remember, in the transport of these prisoners of course, you know, it's important not to say anything that prejudices their defense to the charges that have been made against them. But I don't think anybody should be in any doubt that the members of the Al Qaeda network are highly, highly dangerous people. And it would be unsurprising, frankly, if there were strict measures of security taken with them. Having said that, of course, they should be properly, humanely treated in exactly the way, frankly, that the Taliban wouldn't treat their prisoners.
[Question:] Mr. Speaker, the entire House is united in wishing to see those responsible for the appalling atrocities of September the 11th brought to justice, but would the prime minister recognize and would he stress this to the Americans in particular, that to maintain the global opinion, which has been so successful in the fight against terrorism, we must demonstrate that our values remain above those who seek to destroy them?
[Blair:] Of course, but with respect, I think you should listen to what I've been saying over the past few minutes. Of course, it is correct that we make sure that people are humanely treated. That is true. That is precisely why a British team will visit those people that claim to be British citizens. The International Red Cross will see these people. We understand that they are indeed being humanely treated, given proper medical advice, given proper food, given proper allowances for their own religion, to shower properly, to exercise properly and so on. And I simply repeat, it is important we get to the actual facts of how this group of people, 50 in number, are being treated, rather than simply taking instantaneous reaction to reports in the media.
[Question:] Following his answer to my honorable friend from
[Blair:] The justification is for the very reason I gave a few moments ago. There are still pockets of resistance by the Taliban. The discovery just today that is emerging now of the conspiracy to kill American troops in and around a particular American camp, with the discovery of a large number of weapons and ordnance, is an indication of how this campaign is not over yet. But I simply say to my honorable friend, when I met the representatives of the new interim government in Afghanistan put together by the United Nations, they regarded the actions of American, British and allied troops in Afghanistan as a liberation of the people of Afghanistan. I do say that they believe that, as a result of the defeat of the Taliban, their removal from government, people in Afghanistan have, for the first time in years, got the prospect with a decent future. War is a bloody and difficult business. We should carry it on until we have squeezed out the last remaining remnants of the Taliban, but then our task is also, as we will show at the Tokyo conference soon, to reconstruct Afghanistan and give it a proper future.
[Question:] Mr. Speaker, in a week when Etta Trollyweights have become a reality at the three-star Blackmore Victoria Hospital, can I draw the prime minister's attention to the remarks made by the parliamentary undersecretary Nobel Hunt at a recent conference, when he said the national health service has two years it win back public confidence or other forms of funding will be considered. Can I ask the prime minister is he agrees with undersecretary on the timing issue, and can he tell this house, what are these other forms of funding that are under consideration?
[Blair:] Mr. Speaker, first of all, in relation to the National Health Service, of course it's important that it wins back confidence, which is why the report from the modernization board last week, which said people by people such as the royal colleges, the Royal College of Nursing, the British Medical Association, that report was very clear indeed that the NHS is making progress, that most of the indicators are now moving in the right way. Of course there will be big pressure over the winter. But the fact is there are more beds now, more nurses, more doctors and the waiting lists are coming down. So in respect to alternative systems of funding, while he knows what we believe, we believe, as indeed is the case with Denmark, where I gather the shadow health spokesman has been, that it should be funded out to general taxation, but the alternative of course is the proposal of his own party, which is to force people to pay. And yes, I'm afraid it is, which is to cut public spending. They can point their fingers as much as they like. But the proposal of the Conservative Party is to cut public spending and to force people to pay. And that is the difference between a party that believes in the National Health Service, free at the point of use, and a Conservative Party that will cut spending and charge people.
[Question:] The government has recognized the problems for the seaside resorts, owing to the decline of the domestic tourist industry, and the urgent need for regeneration. Can the prime minister therefore tell me what funding will be made available to regional development agencies so they can implement their coastal strategies that they're currently drawing up to help regenerate seaside resorts, such as Markham?
[Blair:] Mrs. Speaker, I can't offhand give exact level of funding for the Markham, or indeed for the coastal resorts. But she is right in saying the regional development agencies don't have a specific in order to encourage areas of development on coastal resorts. But of course she's right in saying that the regional development agencies do not have a specific agreement in order to encourage economic development in areas like here that means in the coastal resorts. And of course, there is additional finance being put into tourism at the moment. But I think she will agree with me that it is necessary to coordinate this on a regional basis, and what would be very unfortunate is if we took the proposals of the party opposite and abolished the regional developmental agencies.
[Question:] If the prime minister were to shortly ban the counsel tax payers suffer would be receiving bills of around 1,000 pounds, a staggering 60 percent increase since the prime minister took office? And as my constituents reflect on the...
[Kagan:] We are paying a little visit on Democracy there British style. Fascinating look into how they are handling things at the House of Commons. British Prime Minister Tony Blair standing up and taking questions from the member of the House of Commons. We dipped in at the point he was answering questions and defending the treatment of detainees currently being held at Guantanamo Bay, at the U.S. Naval base there. There are about 50 detainees there right now that have been brought over from Kandahar. And it is believed there have been reports that perhaps as many as 10 of those could be British national, although that report has not been confirmed yet. Also, you heard the prime minister defend the continued bombing in Afghanistan, and we just we thought we would hang out there and listen to his defense. Interesting look at Democracy British style. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Dalton Tanonaka, Cnn Anchor:] The International Olympic Committee will decide in Moscow who will host the 2008 Summer Olympic Games. Now the global event can turn out to be a boom or bust experience for cities chosen to host. CNN's Geoff Hiscock examines how previous venues have impacted economies.
[Geoff Hiscock, Cnn Correspondent:] Whichever city wins the right to host the Olympics in 2008, Friday's announcement is just one step along a difficult road. The Olympic experience can be fantastically successful for a country's global profile. Seoul in '88 and Barcelona in '92 did wonders for South Korea and Spain. Likewise, Australia's tourist industry continues to reap the benefits from Sydney 2000, with visitor numbers from the U.S. up 15 percent. But playing host can also be financially crippling. Montreal's overspending in 1976 left citizens paying off its debts for years. The reality of staging the modern Olympics means investing billions of dollars. New sports facilities and athlete villages have to be built; transport links put in place or upgraded. Sponsors and VIPs expect the best treatment, and journalists want high-speed, trouble-free communications. And the paying public? They want great atmosphere, easy access, good facilities, and the chance to get home without too much hassle. If Olympic organizers can meet these goals, they are halfway to success. And the long-term payoff can be very rewarding. Apart from a city's new stadiums and transport, there is the boost to jobs, to the tourism and construction industries, and spin-off benefits to education, health and medicine. Australia spent about $1.5 billion on the 2000 Games in Sydney. Greece will spend about the same on Athens in 2004. Already, a new report estimates that the Sydney Games will create 100,000 new jobs over a 12-year period and will add more than $4 billion to the Australian economy. That's the business challenge facing Friday's winner: delivering the 2008 Games without breaking the bank. Geoff Hiscock, CNN, Sydney.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] You can see that PaineWebber did get a nice rise in yesterday's session, but it could...
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] I was going to say, nothing compared to what is going to happen today. UBS, Union Bank of Switzerland, offering to pay $12 billion, which is roughly a 49- percent premium, for PaineWebber, which is the number-four U.S. brokerage firm.
[Haffenreffer:] Our next guest believes Europe is currently a safer haven for investors, perhaps he can shed some light on the benefits of this trans-Atlantic deal.
[Marchini:] He is chief investment officer Alan Brown, of State Street Global Advisors, joining us from Boston. Good morning to you. The specter has been raised as to whether this is too much money for PaineWebber, what do you think?
[Alan Brown, State Street Global Advisors:] Well, good morning. It certainly is an extraordinarily high premium, but the reality is that there are just very few companies that are that kind of size left for European players to go after, so they are going to come on a high premium.
[Heffenreffer:] They certainly are. And at this point, a lot of investors are wondering what will be the next, perhaps, U.S.-based brokerage company to be snapped up. Any speculation on the front?
[Brown:] Oh, I don't think I would want to try that one, no.
[Marchini:] But, fair enough to bet that there will be another?
[Brown:] Yes. I think we are going to go on seeing a tremendous amount of consolidation in the financial services business on both sides of the Atlantic.
[Marchini:] Without pushing you too hard, Merrill Lynch is still single, is it too big to buy?
[Brown:] That is a big one for people to buy, that is going to cost a lot.
[Marchini:] As far as potential acquirers, Deutsche Bank has been mentioned as one, can you think of any others?
[Brown:] I would think that Deutsche Bank has probably still got enough to digest after its Bankers Trust acquisition.
[Marchini:] We're also hearing this morning, switching gears just a bit over to the airlines, that American Airlines' parent company, AMR, is, I guess, making a bid for Northwest Airlines. Northwest apparently not pleased with the offer all that much. So the negotiations continue, but, is the airline sector something that you are intrigued by?
[Brown:] That was actually something of us surprise to me. I wasn't particularly expecting any major news between carriers here in the United States. There is always a desire for Europeans to be able to link with U.S. carriers, but, of course, the regulatory authorities don't make that very easy.
[Haffenreffer:] It may not be a done deal, since there seems to be some disagreement in the price, at least according to what's being reported by the "Washington Post." Dominating today's trading likely to be the reaction to some positive earnings reports in the Internet sector, and the genetic engineering, et cetera, sector as well. Of course, we had better than expected reports from both Yahoo! and Biogen. Talk to me about Yahoo! first and how significant their report was.
[Brown:] Well, I think it is significant, largely because these companies are on such astronomically high ratings that there really is no room for any disappointment. We have seen how these stocks can be punished savagely, at the moment they go off the growth path that investors are anticipating. They really need to be able to keep this up quarter in, quarter out.
[Haffenreffer:] Do you think this is an Internet story or simply a Yahoo! story?
[Brown:] I am still extremely concerned about the levels of valuations in the Internet sectors. These companies are going to have be able to continue to grow at three, four, five times the rate of the market for decades in order to be able to justify the kind of priceearnings multiples that they are on. And in the Internet world, that represents, you know, 10, 15, 20 product cycles. Who on Earth knows whether they can do it? I think we should remember that the beginning of the last century there were well over 200 car manufacturers here in the United States, today there are three, one of them is owned by Germany. It's all very easy to pick the winners after the event, but can you pick them before?
[Marchini:] You talk about growth. Biogen surprised folks with a penny more than expected on strong sales of Avonex, but there are people who think that the Multiple Sclerosis drug doesn't have that much more growth left in it. What are your thoughts?
[Brown:] I think I would go with that view, probably. I think I would accept that.
[Marchini:] And one more question, you have not been afraid to use the "R" word, and by that I mean recession. Do you think Mr. Greenspan has overdone it?
[Brown:] I think Mr. Greenspan just has the most impossibly difficult job in trying to engineer a soft landing. We've had the economy growing now for an extended period of time, well above its long run growth potential. The idea that just with interest rates alone you can engineer a nice soft landing to a two, two and a half, three-percent growth path for awhile seems to me increasingly implausible.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, Alan Brown, from State Street Global Advisors, good to see this morning. Thank you very much.
[Brown:] Thank you.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] We also want to know what you think about the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. Our on-line question at this time asks: "Do you believe the Taliban knows the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden"? So far, 81 percent overwhelmingly say yes, just about 19 percent say no. Cast your vote online 24 hours a day at cnn.com. And for AOL users the key word as always is CNN. Across the border from Afghanistan, Pakistan emerging as a major player in that region. A country with a sizable minority in poverty, but also a prospering middle class. With a look at the wide divergence of political views among the people there, CNN's Christiane Amanpour hit the streets of Islamabad.
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Correspondent:] Years of economic neglect and corruption have dragged nearly a third of Pakistan's population below the poverty line, the perfect breeding ground for Islamic extremism. Which is now on display at anti-government, anti-U.S. protests, well-orchestrated by the hard-line Islamic party leaders. "Whoever is friends with America is a traitor," yells this crowd. Just fighting words? Maybe, but nearly half of the country is illiterate. One million students are enrolled in religious schools that proliferate in an inadequate education system. [on camera]: Pakistanis are mad about cricket. In fact, it's probably the only thing all social classes here have in common. And now, the vast, silent, and moderate majority hope this crisis will help loosen the foothold that's been gained over the years by the hard-line minority. [voice-over]: The Saulat family belongs to the upper-middle class. They are religious, but also progressive and professional. They believe education is the key to a better future here. Haseeb is a vice president at Pakistan's largest private bank, and Saadia has her own parenting magazine.
[Saadia Haseeb:] The girls in our society can do anything they want, professionally speaking. They can get into any kind of profession they want to. And we can see women now these days everywhere in just about every profession.
[Haseeb Saulat:] The very vast majority in this country, those who have their own point of view. And they are not at all involved into any sort of extremism. They have no desire to create lawlessness in the country.
[Amanpour:] This family takes vacations abroad and has fond memories of the United States.
[Haseeb Saulat:] we still remember our visit to Manhattan, and this is the place where we were standing on the World Trade Center, on the rooftop, with an excellent view.
[Amanpour:] The Saulats believe engaging with the world is the best bet for a bright future. And right now, like many Pakistanis, they are just thankful for a crisis that has brought that chance a step closer. Christiane Amanpour, CNN, Islamabad.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Republican delegates in Philadelphia saw Independence Hall and that famous cracked bell, but this is L.A., home of hip rather than history. Here's CNN's Bruce Morton.
[Bruce Morton, Cnn Correspondent:] What will the delegates do with the rest of their time? Ask Angelyne, on billboards here since the '80s, famous for being famous, who says the city is...
[Angelyne, Celebrity:] A crossroads of the world, don't you think?
[Morton:] Maybe. If you want to spend money, come here.
[Unidentified Male:] Welcome to 2 Rodeo, Beverly Hills. You have arrived.
[Morton:] Probably. They have shops where you need an appointment, shops that will kill your credit card in seconds, shops well, Bijan has done a window for you. That's something. You could go to Mann's Chinese. I mean, will delegates have as much fun at the meetings as these folk, wandering amongst the handprints, the names of the famous? And you can track them down, these shining stars.
[Unidentified Male:] If you're interested in taking a tour with us, our next tour is departing right now. This is a two-hour tour going to Beverly Hills, Bel Air, Rodeo Drive, Sunset Strip, showing you about 40 to 50 stars' homes.
[Morton:] Driving around Bel Air, we saw a lot of trees. The stars are green maybe, ecologists all, or maybe they just know you can't peek at them if the green trees grow and grow. Sometimes you get in. This is Zsa-Zsa Gabor's house. We didn't get in. We found the tape in our library. What else? Lots of good restaurants, many expensive, many owned by you guessed it Wolfgang Puck. And then..
[Unidentified Male:] Chili dog, no onions.
[Morton:] And then there's Pink's. Chili dogs since 1939, and folks still stand in line to buy them. If you want something unusual, try Venice Beach: jugglers, musicians, a woman reading Tarot cars. Listen up, Mr. Gore.
[Unidentified Female:] And you're coming into a fulfillment of the project that you started in July.
[Morton:] He started before July, of course, and she's talking about fulfillment in the spring. But hey, inauguration day in Washington could be spring-like, couldn't it? And that, of course, is what this city by the sea is all about. You can go watch them make movies. This was the set of "Six Days, Seven Nights." You know what they make here movies, sure. But what they really make are dreams. The girl riding in on the bus can win an Oscar. Dreams, Mr. Vice President: Why wouldn't a candidate want to come here to the place where dreams are made? Welcome, delegates, Mr. Gore. Bruce Morton, CNN, Hollywood.

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] We begin with U.S. President Bill Clinton's attempt to sell his anti-missile defense plan to Europe and Russia. So far, he is not succeeding. Mr. Clinton's plan could touch off a new arms race: That's the concern of European leaders. German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is the latest to object. Mr. Clinton argues that the U.S. must finds ways to counter possible emerging nuclear threats, like North Korea. Although his missile plan is unpopular, Mr. Clinton Friday was awarded Europe's top prize for statesmanship. In a ceremony outside the cathedral at Aachen, the prestigious Charlemagne Prize was draped around his neck. In his acceptance speech, the president said Russia must work hard to preserve its hard-won democracy.
[William J. Clinton, President Of Russia:] Russia has stayed on a path of democracy, though its people have suffered biter economic hardships, political and criminal violence, and the tragedy of the war in Chechnya, which yet may prove to be self-defeating because of the civilian casualties.
[Meserve:] In a surprise move, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposes that Moscow and Washington work jointly on a nuclear defense against so-called "rogue nations." He aired the plan in an interview with NBC Thursday. U.S. officials say the idea of a shield to protect both countries from missiles does not appear to be new, but it does indicate that Mr. Clinton will be sitting down with a very different kind of Russian leader on Saturday. Our Moscow bureau chief, Jill Dougherty, reports.
[Jill Dougherty, Cnn Correspondent:] The Moscow summit between presidents Vladimir Putin and Bill Clinton will not be the kind of bear-hug get-together Boris Yeltsin used to like. This time, Mr. Clinton is going to meet a different Russian leader who wants to build a different country and a different relationship with the United States. Mr. Putin, inaugurated as Russian president just a month ago, by nature doesn't waste time on small talk. He's moving quickly, trying to maximize his post-election honeymoon. The American president may be hoping for progress on arms control issues, but the Russian president seems to be taking his cue from the early Clinton days. "It's the economy, stupid."
[Sergei Rogov, Usa/canada Institute:] Without long-term restructuring of Russia's foreign debt, simply no economic recovery is possible because today we pay 40 percent of the federal revenues to the foreign creditors.
[Dougherty:] On the nuclear front, President Putin took the initiative from the United States. He succeeded in pushing the START II arms control agreement through parliament something Boris Yeltsin in six years was unable to do and a few days later, the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. The ball, he now says, is in the U.S. court. Russia wants significant further missile cuts. The U.S. is considering a controversial proposal to build a national missile defense system. Even if a compromise could be reached, Moscow questions whether it should be a deal with Bill Clinton.
[Rogov:] The question is, can Clinton respond positively and can Clinton deliver as a lame-duck president?
[Dougherty:] But the U.S. has its own worries about Russia: Moscow's conduct of the war in Chechnya and a recent raid on a media company that's raising concern over President Putin's respect for freedom of the press. [on camera]: Whatever the results of this summit, it marks a shift in U.S.-Russian relations: the end of a personalized, sometimes romanticized view of each other, the beginning of a new pragmatism. Jill Dougherty, CNN, Moscow.

[Mary Matalin, Co-host:] Tonight, taking stock of the stock market. Is the worst over? Is there any reason for investors to be nervous? And what would an economic downturn mean for Al Gore and George W. Bush?
[Announcer:] Live from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Mary Matalin. In the CROSSFIRE, in New York, James Cramer, co-founder and contributing editor to TheStreet.com. And in Seattle, Bill Fleckenstein, president of Fleckenstein Capital.
[Matalin:] Good evening, and welcome to CROSSFIRE. Wall Street rebounded today after Friday's record-breaking rout. An institutional buy-back made up for the individual panic sell-off of last week. which marked the worst week in Nasdaq history. On Friday, both industrials and technology stocks plunged with Dow posting its biggest one-day point drop and Nasdaq plummeting a record 25 percent. But today, though the market had been expected to decline, after a day of fluctuating prices a late-session surge produced record gains with tech stocks leading the comeback and industrials pushing higher. The ripple effect was worldwide. Foreign markets tumbled overnight, although European markets appeared less fearful than their Asian counterparts that Wall Street's bulls are going bear. So, with the world's eyes on Wall Street, CROSSFIRE asks, are we in the middle of a tech-laden correction or an across-the-board crash? Has the fast-charging bull run its course or are more happy days still ahead? And, as in all things, are there any campaign 2000 political ramifications? We turn to a bear, a bull, and a Bill.
[Bill Press, Co-host:] And actually I'm a bull, too, James Cramer, but I'm a nervous bull today. And I want to start asking about Nasdaq. I mean, on Friday we saw the largest point drop in the history of the Nasdaq. Today, the largest single-day gain in the history of Nasdaq. Isn't that fact alone enough to say that you can have no confidence whatsoever in this market?
[James Cramer, Thestreet.com:] No, I believe and I was a heavy buyer on Friday that one-third of the stock market of the Nasdaq has already bottomed and is going right back up, one-third's groping for a bottom, and one-third is just groping for oxygen, and you can have every one of those.
[Press:] Yes, but what if you're in the bottom one-third? But look, James...
[Cramer:] Well then you're in the wrong no, look, the major the major Nasdaq stocks came back, came back strong. The companies with earnings that are real are coming back. The companies with no earnings are not coming back.
[Press:] But even if you look at this recovery today, Nasdaq is still down 29 percent below what it was on March 10, the high of this year. So isn't the trend, Jim, definitely down, despite these ups and downs?
[Cramer:] No, look, we had a very orderly sell-off until last Friday, which was anything but orderly. But we've had a series of pull-backs in the last 18 years, all of them look in some way, shape or another like this, which just hit a lot of the institutions. And some individuals panic. Cooler heads prevail, people come in, get an opportunity to buy the dip, and it works. Maybe it shouldn't, but it works and it worked again.
[Press:] But does it work, I guess the last question for you in this round, does it work for the individual investor? When you have such wild swings, is it something the individual investor can come up with? Let me ask you to listen to a quick bite here from a a quick remark from Paul Cardillo, who's a market strategist, and just listen up to what he had to say about that?
[Cramer:] All right.
[Paul Cardillo, Market Strategist:] This is really a great wake-up call, a wake-up call to all those novices that have come aboard in the past three or four years buying stocks Internet, reading all of these stories, looking at chat rooms and whatnot gee, I wonder where all those guys are today?
[Press:] Bad news for individuals?
[Cramer:] Give me a break. The individual has done very well here. There are people who got margined, there are people who borrowed way too much money. And they got hurt, they got killed. But the individual is much smarter than that gentleman certainly gives them credit for, and the individual doesn't need a wake-up call. It was the institutions that were too long going into Friday. I've got to tell you, I don't think the individual is done investing one bit. I think he's back, he's going to stay back, he's smarter than ever. I just don't buy it.
[Press:] All right.
[Matalin:] All right, Mr. Fleckenstein, you do buy or you do sell it, more precisely. You've been a bear for a lonely bear for four years. And I don't usually call on the Clinton administration to back my opinion, but this is what his Treasury secretary had to say in response to Friday's rout. This is Larry Summers.
[Lawrence Summers, Treasury Secretary:] The fundamentals of our economy, the basic picture that's brought us to the best combination of unemployment and inflation in 30 years, the factors that have led to that, those are things that are very much in place.
[Matalin:] So, Mr. Fleckenstein, he says the fundamentals are in place. And I would say, even after this rout, forgetting about today, Nasdaq and Dow are still left higher after the evaporation of paper profits than they were only a couple of months ago. We're still OK, aren't we?
[Bill Fleckenstein, President, Fleckenstein Capital:] Well, you're right about the fact that the market is definitely higher, and the points that Mr. Summers made are precisely the points you'd expect him to make. And really at the moment the economy is fairly fine. The inflation rate's picked up, but it's not at astronomical levels. The problem with the stock market and I think Jim and I might even agree on this part of it is in my opinion prices are completely detached from the underlying businesses. Remember, shares are fractional ownerships of businesses. People that have been successful in exploiting the opportunities in the market in the last few years have been able to say, well, I'm not worried about valuation. And that has worked. The question is: Are we going to go back to looking at shares as fractional ownerships of businesses again, or are they going to just be pieces of paper that are kited higher? And some folks we have watched a lot of speculation out of a lot of pie-in-the-sky-type companies. But most people aren't aware that even great companies like Cisco, just to pick one, sells at 30- some-odd times revenues. And if we went down the list, we'd find the many of these fine companies are selling at such absurd prices to revenues, much less earnings, that if we're going to value them as businesses again they could fall a lot further. Will they or won't they? We don't know yet.
[Matalin:] But, Mr. Fleckenstein, isn't that just the point? We're still fledgling and groping around ourself to understand the Internet economy? And isn't this shake-out good? Because those fledgling Internet companies that are without profit will either fold or they'll they'll take longer to get to maturity before they go to an IPO. Isn't that good? And isn't that how the market fundamentals work? We're just in a different kind of economy that we don't quite know yet?
[Fleckenstein:] No, I don't think we're in a different kind of economy. I mean, let's face it, the Internet has provided a revolutionary aspect to lots of different businesses, but that's always been the case with technology. I mean, we can talk about every technological invention since the printing press and various different ones I mean, even air-conditioning was a big deal because of what it allowed where it allowed factories to go and things like that.
[Cramer:] Bill, Bill, you know I've been on opposite sides of you when it comes to this valuation argument. Isn't it true that if we were to use traditional metrics that you would have cashed out of Cisco 200 point ago? You would have left Intel 100 points ago.
[Fleckenstein:] That's absolutely right, Jim. And that's why I made the point that people that have successfully said valuation doesn't matter have been able to do well. And the question is: Have we broken the back of speculation, not just washed out the dot.coms and the biotechs? But one place where you and I might disagree is I think the level of speculation in margin debt that the individual investor has layered on, and credit card debt and second mortgages and things like that, might be high enough that while they are able to buy today's dip, maybe they can't. I mean, if the level of debt fores their hands some, then at some point you're going to force these things to be businesses again.
[Cramer:] I wouldn't be surprised if margin debt went down during the month of April and that we saw a peak in margin debt in March and that this whole move was just taking out those speculators and it's a healthy shoot-out.
[Press:] I want to let me ask you see if we can get to the bottom line as a layman here. Jim, start with you, I mean, what is the message? Is this a time to buy or sell?
[Cramer:] Look...
[Matalin:] And what should we buy?
[Press:] Yes.
[Cramer:] I've been saying on my site that you have to buy quality, that nothing has changed. I've been saying for three months, take money off the table. Take money off the table. It's gotten too crazy. Well, geez, you know, the time to sell has happened. Now it's time to look at bargains. There are bargains everywhere. There are bargains in drug stock, bargains in computers. I see bargains in food stocks. I was buying International Paper today. I mean, you know, I see a lot to like.
[Press:] But are there any buys left, as Bill was just talking about, in these high-tech stocks, or has the bubble burst in the dot.coms that everybody's been so giddy about for the past three years?
[Cramer:] Well the dot.coms you can buy some of the dot.coms when they change through their the cash positions. Bill and I the two things that Bill and I have to agree on, one is that there are a lot of companies that have in the old economy that have gotten to the point where there's actually reason for managers to be able to buy those companies in leveraged buy-outs, they're so cheap...
[Fleckenstein:] I agree.
[Cramer:] And then the second...
[Fleckenstein:] I agree.
[Cramer:] ... you know, the dot.coms have gotten so crazy that they represent no value even down here.
[Press:] Bill, go ahead.
[Fleckenstein:] Yes, Jim and I agree on that. And, I mean, there are stocks in the real economy that are cheap, and I agree with everything he said basically on those last two points. But there's a corollary to that, and that is that a lot of the dot.coms at the margin, as they built put in hardware and software and all these other things like that, helped put a tailwind behind some of the Ciscos of the world. I'm not picking on Cisco. I don't have an ax to grind there, but I'm just using it as an example. So it's possible that if a lot of people own these stocks because they were backdoor Internet plays that had real fundamentals. So, I think that if the dot.com, IPO and funding environment dies or slows down dramatically, it can impact the rest of technology. But I think the real point is, is are these things just pieces of paper that are going to be kited higher, or is valuation going to matter more than it has? I don't know yet. But I do know that if it's going to matter more than it has...
[Press:] We want to know.
[Matalin:] But, Bill, look...
[Fleckenstein:] If I knew the future, I wouldn't be here.
[Matalin:] Bill, can we pick up on Jim's earlier point and this might just be a healthy thing that this shakeout shook out individual speculators who are the ones who make these crazy dot.com purchases. But the institutions, as we saw today, are sitting on a lot of capital, which is what you recommend be liquid, half capital, and they put their capital back in. Doesn't that stabilize the market, getting these little crazy investors out and big institutions in?
[Fleckenstein:] Well, I think there's certain aspects of what you said that I would agree with. I mean, knocking out speculative marginal companies is part of capitalism. People that got overextended are not going to be very happy to have been knocked out. They're not going to think it's very great. But I think there is a quote-unquote "healthiness" to what happens. It's the way the markets work. But I'm just not so sure that there aren't more people that are more leveraged than most people think. The anecdotal evidence that I've seen suggests maybe they are. And maybe Jim's right, they're not.
[Cramer:] But, Bill, these prices some of these stocks have come down so much, you know people have been slaughtered. People have been slaughtered. You know, some of the stocks are down 75, 80, 90 percent. They're obviously just being sold out from underneath the speculators by the brokerage houses trying to get back their collateral.
[Fleckenstein:] I agree with you, Jim. I mean, there has been a lot of that. But then I've heard enough stories about, you know, wire houses that we won't mention their name of, where they send out say, 50,000 calls and 70 of them have been met 70 percent have been met. So that danger still might be there.
[Press:] All right, gentlemen, we're going to have to take...
[Cramer:] It's still in the heavily speculative stocks.
[Press:] All right, we're going to have to take a break. And when we come back, of course politics has to enter into a CROSSFIRE debate about anything. When we come back, if the market crashes will Al Gore crash too? Welcome back to CROSSFIRE and a wild ride on the stock market roller coaster. The meltdown of 2000 just last Friday and the miracle recovery already today. So is it a reason for confidence in the market or a warning to get out while you can? And would a market tumble change politics 2000? Tonight, market and politics with bull James Cramer, co-founder and contributing editor of TheStreet.com, joins us from New York; and bear Bill Fleckenstein, president of Fleckenstein Capital, out in Seattle Mary.
[Matalin:] Mr. Cramer, I'm going to switch to you for just a second. And I don't want to expose you, but you did volunteer in your pre-interview that you're a big Democratic contributor. So let me ask you this. Your colleague Mr. Fleckenstein says that if this is a downturn and he says that it is it's not going to be pretty. It's going to be most unpleasant. As you know, your candidate Al Gore is running his entire campaign other than attacking George W. Bush on taking credit for this recovery. If he takes credit for the recovery and there's a downturn, isn't he going to have to take the blame for the nonrecovery?
[Cramer:] Mary, I've got some bad news for your thesis. OK, first of all, this is the most perfectly timed sell-off for Gore. Here's why: Consumer spending will notch down a little bit. That will get Greenspan, who is the man who has been ratcheting and ratcheting and ratcheting up rates, gets him off the back of this market, which allows the market to kind of gently go back up. And by November, all- time highs once again and Gore's in. Sorry, that's the way it's going to be.
[Matalin:] All right, follow-up question and you're not as even remotely as sorry as I'm going to be if that's what actually happens but Alan Greenspan has said that this miraculous recovery in the economy is the result of an unexpected surge in technology from the attendant surge in productivity. So what does any Al Gore or Bill Clinton should they take credit, or should the risk-taker and the worker be able to get the credit for this?
[Cramer:] Look, I mean, if you want to give credit to someone, give credit to Bob Rubin. I mean, we once we got the government out of the business of borrowing a lot of money, you saw how rates could go lower and that reliquified the whole nation. I don't think anybody can take credit one person can take credit for this recovery, though, because a lot of what's happened is it's just American business reclaiming the mantle from Japan and Germany just through sheer intellect, guts, power, whatever you want to call it. But it's been a remarkable renaissance, and I don't want any politician to take credit for it.
[Press:] Bill Fleckenstein, let me come to you while we're talking about politics here. I know that the common wisdom, as Mary just articulated, is a downturn in the market, rather, is bad for Al Gore. But let's be honest. If you look historically, market goes up, market goes down. It has little impact on presidential elections, isn't that correct?
[Fleckenstein:] You guys are the political experts. I suppose. And I don't know I think what you're getting at, though, is my belief is if I'm right and if Jim's right, he'll be right but if I'm right, and we've burst the back of the speculation, it's going to be more severe. The stock market has never been more intertwined in the economy than it is today, not just the amount of people that are involved in the market but the way employees are paid in stock options, the CPAs...
[Press:] OK.
[Fleckenstein:] ... the attorneys take stock options, all that. So it will have more of an impact if it happens.
[Press:] But if you're right and if it's going to be as bad as you foresee that it's going to be, it still, I would argue and I would like your response to it, that it's a time when people are going to look for a steady hand, namely an Al Gore and not for somebody who needs on-the-job training, namely a George Bush, right?
[Fleckenstein:] You know, I don't have any idea. I'm out of my league. I have enough trouble doing what I do for a living much less pontificating on politics. Ask Jim, he knows about that stuff.
[Cramer:] Look, if he's like his dad, I mean, Bill, you and I were trading during the period when his dad was president. Man, it was tough to trade everything. We were taking every single day could have been a crash. There was always a lot of disinformation coming out of the administration about everything from credit cards to savings & loans. You know, I don't know what the Republicans always had the edge on us in terms of the stock market, because, boy, I tell you, I have no desire to go back to that regime.
[Press:] Jim Cramer, let me ask you this question, just again as a layman. You just talked about disinformation. I've been listening watching television all day today. There are so many experts in this economy on this market. They all start out by saying, we don't know what's going to happen, and then they tell you what's going to happen. And some say buy, some say sell, some say stay in and hold, some say get out. How does a layman know who the hell to believe?
[Cramer:] OK, I think if you step back from all the talking heads on TV and you just buy quality companies and you sit back and say, you know something? Intel is a great company. Microsoft, maybe when the Justice Department has finished its work, will be a great company again. Sun Micro, a lot of the companies that Bill may think are too high because they are pieces of paper but we know are going to generate excellent profits, if you take a longer-term perspective on those, you'd do quite well. And forget the talking heads. Half the time, the talking heads are looking at the chart of the stocks and they're just too nervous.
[Fleckenstein:] Well, you know, that's a good point, because I think too much of what people have been doing is looking at the chart of the stock. And I think that while buying quality companies is a fine strategy, I still think one needs to look at the price you can pay. And I think probably Jim and I can sit down and find bunches of quality companies that actually trade a fair price...
[Press:] OK.
[Fleckenstein:] ... But a lot of the household names trade at extremely ridiculous prices.
[Cramer:] Oh, but you remember...
[Press:] Go ahead.
[Cramer:] ... there's a whole part of this economy that is so cheap that I cannot believe the managers aren't going to Chase Manhattan bank right now and getting loans and taking over the companies.
[Fleckenstein:] They probably are.
[Press:] Whoa, whoa, wait a minute. Are you suggesting that people ought to borrow money and buy stocks? I mean, that's isn't that irresponsible?
[Cramer:] No, I think managers should go get leveraged buy-out loans, because some of these companies are selling two or three times cash flow, and they're presuming that the economy is going into recession. I don't see that going to happening.
[Press:] Bill, borrow?
[Fleckenstein:] Well, I will agree that some of these are cheap. I don't think it's a very good time to do an LBO, because I got a different outlook on what the market may do and how that will impact the economy. But if Jim's right, then they can go do those LBOs. I think...
[Press:] But...
[Fleckenstein:] I think it will make things more dangerous, but we'll see if they do it.
[Press:] But, Jim, I want to come back. Let's talk about individuals. You're not suggesting it's wise for individuals to borrow money and...
[Cramer:] No, no...
[Press:] ... use that money to buy stocks?
[Cramer:] ... I am so anti-margin it's scary. I mean, I'm like a throwback to the guys in the '30s. I think margin is the bane of all evil for this market. And all these speculators who used it to the hilt, they're vaporized.
[Matalin:] All right, Mr. Cramer, you might be a great investor, I don't know about political skills, given your candidate for the fall. Mr. Fleckenstein, thank you for joining us and go get bullish. And when we come back, the more bull from Bill and Mary. Stay with us.
[Press:] Mary, I hate to get political, but when the market is shaky like this, it's the last thing we need is some ridiculous across-the-board gigantic tax cut scheme. I was glad to see while I was away that your candidate reversed himself and met with some gay Republicans. I hope he now reverses himself and dumps that ridiculous tax cut plan of his.
[Matalin:] He always had gays on the campaign. The gays that wanted to meet with him in the primary were supporting another opponent. I'm glad you brought up taxes, this wonderful tax cut that will continue to fuel the economy. I would have loved to have bought today. This is a great buy day. But you know what I was doing? Writing checks to Uncle Sam not to Nasdaq. We are paying a greater percentage of the GDP in taxes than we have since World War II. The top 20 percent of earners pay 65 percent of the taxes. You want to continue fueling this economy, give the money to the people who will put it back into the economy.
[Press:] And the last no, the last thing we should do is giving tax cuts to people who don't need it, who don't deserve it and who don't even want it now.
[Matalin:] Don't deserve it?
[Press:] This is a time...
[Matalin:] Don't deserve it?
[Press:] ... as John McCain said, to fix Social Security, fix Medicare, to fix the roof...
[Matalin:] You who work hard out there don't deserve it.
[Press:] ... while the sun is shining. From the left, I'm Bill Press. Good night for
[Crossfire. Matalin:] I missed you anyway. From the right, I'm Mary Matalin. Join us again for the rest of the week for more CROSSFIRE. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] The story of Elian Gonzalez continues to brew. The fight over the future of that boy moves to Washington today. American relatives of the Cuban boy left their house in Miami this morning. They are scheduled to take off shortly from Miami on their way to the nation's capital. This comes after what is described as an emotional meeting between Elian and his Cuban grandmothers in Miami last night. CNN's Tony Clark has that story.
[Tony Clark, Cnn Correspondent:] Elian Gonzalez raised his arms in a victory sign after returning to his great uncle's home from the reunion with his grandmothers. His U.S. relatives felt it was a victory as well.
[Marisleysis Gonzalez, Elian's Cousin:] I have more feelings that I had before, and now I feel that, he's more to this side than to that side.
[Clark:] The two competing sides in this international custody battle came separately to the home of Barry University President Sister Jeanne O'Laughlin, with demonstrators outside, and each side feeling fear and distrust. Yet that fear seemed to disappear when the grandmothers saw their grandson.
[Sister Leonor Esnard:] When Elian saw his grandmothers, they were elated, they picked him up, and they just hugged him, and they were like shaking a little bit. And he was at ease, although he did not speak much at that point. But they were thrilled and they just kept hugging him and kissing him and saying: We're so glad to see you!
[Clark:] The long-awaited reunion almost didn't happen. Some members of the Cuban American National Foundation were next door to the reunion site at the invitation of the neighbor. The grandmothers wouldn't leave the airport to come to the reunion until the foundation members left the neighbor's house.
[George Fowler, Cuban American Natl. Fdn:] The message to your viewers is that, you know, that Fidel Castro is controlling this situation as far as the grandmothers is concerned, and is telling them what to do, and this is proof of exactly that.
[Clark:] And once the reunion was underway, there was another problem. A cell phone was taken away from one of the grandmothers, ground rules for the meeting prohibited them. The Cuban government filed a protest with the State Department over the incident. The reunion broke up after about two hours, the Immigration Service called it a victory for everyone involved. But the reunion, though, did not solve this dispute, in fact it may have firmed up both sides' resolve to try and win it. Today, both sides are in Washington lobbying Congress over bills designed to either make Elian either a U.S. citizen or give him U.S. residency. And here at the federal court in Miami, the Immigration Service is expected to file its response to the relatives' claim that he should not be sent back to Cuba. Tony Clark, CNN, in Miami Leon.
[Harris:] All right, thank you, Tony.

[Terry Keenan:] Just ahead on the MONEYLINE weekend edition, it is finally over. George W. Bush will be the next president of the United States. We'll find out how his proposals might impact your portfolio. And the PC slump claims another victim: Microsoft delivers its first profit warning in more than 10 years. And buying Proctor & Gamble? We'll tell you why one of our Wall Street experts is hot on this stock.
[Announcer:] This is the MONEYLINE weekend edition with Terry Keenan.
[Keenan:] Hello, everyone. We begin with the victory of George W. Bush, the Texas governor winning the White House five weeks after the election. Bush promised to unite the country and win the respect of all Americans. Perhaps one challenge facing the new president will be the slowing economy, as well as a turbulent stock market. Stocks remained turbulent this past week, as a flood of new profit warnings swept the Street, from Compaq Computer to J.P. Morgan. Microsoft also warned that quarterly revenues and earnings would come in below analysts' expectations. The company blamed slowing demand for PCs. Hear you see the sell-off in Microsoft. Compaq also blamed weak PC demand for its expected shortfall. J.P. Morgan blamed the weak financial markets. And General Motors announced a major restructuring and said its fourth-quarter earnings would fall far short of forecasts. Time now to bring in our team of market experts. With us this week, Bob Reitzes, the hedge fund manager with New Castle Partners; Todd Eberhard, he is president of Eberhard Investment Associates; and David Jones. you know him, chief economist at Aubrey G. Lanston. And, gentlemen welcome. Bob, let's start with the markets, because Wall Street wanted to see a Bush victory, but it was classic "buy the rumor, sell the news" this week.
[Bob Reitzes, New Castle Partners:] Right, so I mean, I think in your introduction about Microsoft, all these preannouncements, you have on the one hand, you know, a Republican administration, tax cutting, lower rates, followed on the other hand by horrible earnings and how bad does it get. So I think now the negativity is outweighing all the other positives. I think next week, and David can comment on it more, but I think next week what the Fed has to say will be very important for the market. We may have a rally if that gets some good news on that.
[Keenan:] Yes, David, if the Fed has the election out of its way what happens next week?
[David Jones, Aubrey G. Lanston:] Well, I think Chairman Greenspan wants an orderly process here, so I see them moving to a neutral directive, recognizing the downside risks in the economy. But I don't think the Fed's going to move quickly in the direction of a rate cut. My guess is it could be March of next year perhaps before we get the first one. But once it starts, we could get as many as three after that.
[Keenan:] And we might be in a recession by then.
[Jones:] Well, the Fed could well be behind the curve this time, because I think they feel we're in a soft landing. The Street is looking more at a hard landing. I think the Fed is talking more about a soft landing possibility.
[Keenan:] And, Todd, one of the reasons the Street's looking at that is these earnings misses. They're not misses by a penny or two, they're misses by a mile.
[Todd Eberhard, Eberhard Investment Association:] Well, they are. Companies across the board and everybody has their excuse but the numbers are not being missed by one or two cents. But I hope you're wrong that it's March, I'll tell you that, only because I think Wall Street does expect something, not in December but the meeting after, that maybe a quarter point, so it shows the Fed is trying to stay up with the curve and not be behind it.
[Keenan:] Bob, how are you positionings yourself in this market environment?
[Reitzes:] Well, in the stock pickers 101, which I was reading last night, I think you want to own companies where they take advantage of interest rates coming down, like Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae. You want to own drug companies, the ones where you have bulletproof earnings. You want to own consumer nondurables, P&G; maybe, Kimberly. And you want to own stocks of that ilk, and then you might get a little bit more gutsy on King Pharmaceuticals, ICN, these types of stocks that are a little bit off the fringe which have some interesting earnings upside.
[Keenan:] And, you know, for the fifth, sixth, seventh time, I don't know which one it was, but people were saying we put in a bottom on the Nasdaq at 2500. It doesn't look like maybe we did now.
[Reitzes:] Well, I'll tell you, there's a lot of Nasdaq stocks out there some of them which we own. I mean, I'd be more, as I've been on this show, I'd be more than happy to go over every stock on my portfolio if it would help on Monday. But there's a lot of Nasdaq stocks that may have bottomed and that you never you when to buy them, like Intel, for example. The whole world knows the PC industry is lousy. We know the first quarter's going to be lousy and possibly the second quarter. However, we start getting easier comparisons in the second half of next year. It is a capital item. Maybe we have some new applications. And more importantly, one of the things there's going to be two things that are going to change next year. Microsoft's going to have a new OS, operating system, Whistler, that could change things. And the second thing is that you have now the ramifications of Y2K, where you had this major buying that's over and you might see corporations starting to upgrade their PC base.
[Keenan:] OK, we are going to take a quick break. Another thing we will have in the new year is a new administration in Washington. We'll take a look at Bush and the economy and find out what the new year may hold for investors. Political analyst Greg Valliere joins us up next. A bit later, we will take a look at the top stock picks of our team of experts. Don't go away.
[George W. Bush, President-elect Of The United States:] I was not elected to serve one party but to serve one nation. The president of the United States is the president of every single American, of every race and every background. Whether you voted for me or not, I will do my best to serve your interests, and I will work to earn your respect.
[Keenan:] President-elect Bush giving his victory speech in Austin, Texas, this past Wednesday. That speech, of course, followed a concession by Vice President Al, Gore who lost the state of Florida despite numerous court battles. So what lies ahead for the next president? Joining us with some insight is Greg Valliere. He's the political analyst at Charles Schwab Washington Research Group. And Greg joins us from Washington. Greg, welcome back.
[Greg Valliere, Charles Schwab Washington Research Group:] Great to see you.
[Keenan:] And congratulations, because you said this is basically how it was going to shake out. What's the buzz down there? Is the new president going to get an inauguration gift from the Federal Reserve in terms of lower interest rates?
[Valliere:] I think so, eventually. I think the mood right now, Terry, is one of tremendous relief in this city. I mean, this could have been worse. It could have dragged into early January. You and I could have been talking about President Denny Hastert on January 20th. There were all sorts of horrible scenarios, and it ended as well as you could hope for. And I think for the next few weeks there will be a bipartisan mood. Beyond that, though, I think that legislatively we're not going to get a lot done. I think if there's any stimulus coming from Washington to help this very feeble economy, it comes from monetary stimulus, not from any big new tax cut.
[Jones:] Greg, this is David Jones. On that subject, do you think there can be some kind of bipartisan compromise where Bush, though, is strong? Let's say he accepts some version of it gets some version of the tax cut through, but only if he accepts Democratic spending ideas. So, is it does it mean it's a complete dead end here, or is there some chance on the fiscal side? My view is that that will have some bearing on how Greenspan behaves, particularly with regard to how soon he gets into these rate cuts.
[Valliere:] Absolutely. I think, David, you're not going to get a big, sweeping across-the-board tax cut. That's very unlikely. But there's some ideas that the Democrats, I think, would go along with, estate-tax reform, something on the marriage penalty, maybe some savings incentives. So I think a modest tax cut can make it. I don't see anything in the next two years that would really hurt this tremendous budget surplus story. The numbers are just going to get bigger and bigger.
[Reitzes:] Greg, Bob Reitzes, how are you doing?
[Valliere:] Hi, Bob.
[Reitzes:] Two questions: One, make a guess. Who do you think is going to be the secretary of Treasury, No. 1. And No. 2, in addition to any fiscal reform, what do you think about Medicare and any kind of bills, Medicare, pharmaceutical industry?
[Valliere:] Well I think on the first one you need somebody who has some market savvy. There's been talk about Bill Archer, the outgoing ways and means chairman. But I think a Wall Streeter. In fact, I heard David Jones saying Roger Ferguson, the vice chairman of the Fed, would be a wonderful choice or Bill McDonough from the Fed. I think somebody who could get along well with Greenspan...
[Reitzes:] I think David Jones was saying David Jones, right?
[Valliere:] Well, sure, sure.
[Jones:] I whispered that on another CNN show, but I think Roger Ferguson I'm glad to hear that you agree with that...
[Valliere:] Oh, he'd be great.
[Jones:] ... because I think the Bush administration needs a good relationship with Greenspan, and they're not necessarily starting off on the right foot, particularly on this issue of tax cuts.
[Valliere:] Absolutely, so to keep Greenspan happy is a big, big priority, as we've seen in the last eight years. Very quickly on your other question, I think that Social Security reform or Medicare reform looks real tough with Congress this divided. I'd be happy to see a modest tax cut make it.
[Eberhard:] Greg, Todd Eberhard. Just a quick follow-through. The first 100 days is supposed to be a honeymoon. It doesn't seem like it'll happen, but what's the first thing he's going to try and get through Congress at this point, do you think?
[Valliere:] I think, Todd, probably something on education, something that everyone can agree on. I think he can't do anything very controversial at all. If he went right away with some huge tax cut, I think that would be the exact worst thing that you could possibly plan.
[Keenan:] All right, Greg, we are out of time. Nice to talk, though, on concrete terms and not just hypotheticals for a change. Have a good weekend.
[Valliere:] You, too.
[Keenan:] Just ahead, we will preview some of the key events for the coming week. We're going to take a look at plunging mortgage rates as well. Just where is this U.S. economy headed? A recent rally in the bond market has helped to sent mortgage rates to their lowest level in 18 months. The average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage fell this past week to 7.42 percent. As for the outlook for overall interest rates, it may become clearer next week. That is when Fed policy makers meet. The meeting is on Tuesday. There is of course some speculation that the Fed will cut rates, either at this meeting or in the next couple months. As for the other events to watch next week, we get housing starts for the month of November, due out on Tuesday. On the earnings front, look for results from Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter. Palm is also slated to reported quarterly results later in the week. And, David, we're getting all this anecdotal evidence from the retailers that Christmas is incredibly soft. There's discounts galore out there. What do you think the chances are that we would slip into a recession in the first quarter?
[Jones:] They've doubled, Terry, from maybe 20 percent to 40 percent in my view. So there is a danger here. My guess is we're playing with the lower end of the soft-landing range, maybe around 2 percent here. But that's dangerous territory. If you drop below 2 percent, you start to get into that hard-landing territory, where the economy cannot grow fast enough to create enough jobs to hire all the people coming into the labor force.
[Keenan:] Todd, do you agree? And does the labor situation kind of mask all the underlying problems in the economy? Because, I mean, unemployment's still at 4 percent.
[Eberhard:] Unemployment looks great, but as David and I were speaking prior to the show, what we're seeing is it's a self- fulfilling prophecy. The more you talk about the R word, the R word, the R word, it actually could actually happen, just based on that alone. But I am concerned about potential bankruptcies, credit-card delinquencies and all the other numbers that we're going to be seeing probably growing in the next number of months. But unemployment looks great. So on that basis you could certainly argue no recession in sight.
[Keenan:] Bob, what do you think?
[Reitzes:] I think David and Todd are both right. I think we're going to see a very difficult period. If I were going to bet, I would say less than 2 percent growth, and I think the Fed is going to have to take some strong action. I'm not in the ability to predict the rate cuts, but I think that Greenspan is going to have to be very, very let's say more liberal than he would have wanted to be. I think the what you're seeing in terms of the cuts, in terms of earnings and sales is just I think it's happened so quickly it's almost breathtaking.
[Keenan:] David, can you do that without hurting the dollar and without setting up a whole ripple effect?
[Jones:] No, and that's exactly the problem. And he's caught already. Once you turn that virtuous cycle that we were in for 10 years strong dollar, attractive foreign money into our dollar assets, including equities, strong growth, low inflation once you start to weaken that, and oil prices were the first villain to start to change that, and now the credit problems coming is coming in and then the dollar, that's like the nail in the coffin. And I think the dollar has had it. And I think it will weaken. I think it will tend to keep inflation higher than it should be. It's not going to be a runaway situation, keep the Fed from easing as fast as it should. So I would completely agree that the Fed, once it starts, it may be a bit late. But the economic consensus is two quarter-point cuts. I could say three or four once they start, if this situation doesn't deteriorate in terms of rate cuts.
[Reitzes:] The one thing just, if we have a second, the dollar has been abnormally strong the last few years. To see it weaken a little bit, at least in terms of at least for the companies that we own or that we follow, I think they would find that quite to their liking. And I think the economy could help it. And so, therefore, I think a stronger a weaker dollar, obviously it's a balancing act, is not that horrible.
[Keenan:] OK, we're going to take a quick break. But when we return, we'll get some stock picks from our MONEYLINE weekend pros. Don't go away. Time now for some stock picks that can weather the economic slowdown. We'll start with Todd Eberhard. Todd, what do you like here?
[Eberhard:] Boy, talk about a difficult assignment. Some of the stocks that we're looking at and actually you sort of talked about it a little bit one is Proctor & Gamble I think is an excellent company at this point, where you do have potential with the dollar, as well as just people have to buy their products. You know, recession is recession if it happens. But other companies as well in the area, such as, like, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, those companies we think are the tried and true consistent performers and will continue to do well, especially with an aging population.
[Keenan:] They've already had a great year, though.
[Eberhard:] I think they're going to continue to have one. They've really bucked the trend of the markets, and I think that's going to continue if these markets remain either flat or down, which they seem to be at this point.
[Keenan:] All right, Bob.
[Reitzes:] Merck's been my best-performing stock this year, so I'm going to push American Home, which hasn't done quite as well. But, no, I agree with Todd. Basically consumer nondurables, and you can pick them, but I like the drugs because they have better growth rates than the Proctor & Gambles, although we own those. I like the Fannie and Freddie because they benefit from lower rates, and I'm going to I might be a little Buffet-esque and buy some tech stocks that are beaten up, like I think Sandisk could be a very interesting stock to have here. And I don't know how much time I have, so I can go through the other 35 stocks.
[Keenan:] No, give us two more.
[Reitzes:] I'll give you two more then. I think Vitesse could be like it's a French stock no, it's a U.S. stock. I think it could be extremely interesting because it plays into this whole broadband expansion. I think one other stock that looks interesting is SunTrust. It's I won't say a sleepy old bank because they could be watching, but, it's in fact, it's in your backwoods in Atlanta. But it's something like at 10 times earning. And these banks benefit when the rates go down from the spread. And that's how they make motion of their money. And I think you have the financials and the consumer non durables always lead stocks out of the recession. Am I right? Do you agree with that?
[Jones:] I do agree with that, especially with interest rates heading where they are. Sooner or later, those are the places that will do well.
[Reitzes:] So we must be wrong. we've got two people agreeing.
[Keenan:] Right, right. OK, and just ahead we're going to wrap it up. We'll get some predictions, including a prediction from David Jones on who will be our next Treasury secretary. OK, time now for predictions. Let's start with Todd Eberhard Todd.
[Eberhard:] You always come to me with the hard ones to start these things. Predictions at this point, I think the Nasdaq has seen the bottom going back a week or two. We think it's going to remain pretty flat and be a slow curve on the upside, but this year, 2001, I'm going with your prediction from last year is that we're going to see actually an up Nasdaq about 18-20 percent. And on the other side, we think rate cuts are coming in a quarter point. About six and a half weeks from now we think it's going to happen, and then two or three more for the rest of the year.
[Keenan:] The first one in late January?
[Eberhard:] I believe so.
[Keenan:] OK Bob.
[Reitzes:] I think we're going to have a lower dollar. I think we're going to have rate cuts, and I think the Nasdaq will rally and be very strong, at least by the second half of next year and we'll bite our nails through the first half.
[Keenan:] OK and, David, you gave us one idea for Treasury secretary, but I know you have a few more up your sleeve.
[Jones:] Two from Wall Street: Walter Shipley, former chairman at Chase, and they're now talking a bit about Sandy Warner, who is involved in of course that merger, the J.P. Morgan-Chase merger. But I still would stick with my Roger Ferguson, Fed vice chairman as the smartest move that Bush could make, particularly with respect to his relationship with Greenspan.
[Keenan:] So you don't think it's necessary to have somebody from Wall Street?
[Jones:] No, remember, we've had good ones from Wall Street Rubin, and I would say Douglas Dillon going back a bit further. But we've also had some problems from Wall Street. I'll leave them nameless.
[Keenan:] All right, thanks, gentlemen, as always. That's going to do it for the MONEYLINE weekend edition. Have a great weekend everyone.

[Mary Matalin, Co-host:] A new attorney general, a new pardon for Dan Rostenkowski and a new license plate for the presidential limo. Tonight, a look back at the week in politics.
[Announcer:] Live, from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Mary Matalin. In the CROSSFIRE, Democratic strategist Peter Fenn and Republican strategist Susan Molinari.
[Matalin:] Good evening, and welcome to CROSSFIRE. Both the president and president-elect bestowed some serious holiday cheer today. Clinton granted 59 pardons, including one for former Democratic powerhouse, Chicago Congressman Dan Rostenkowski. While Clinton was letting people go, Bush was bringing them in, naming three more top administration posts: attorney general, environmental protection agency, which he will raise to Cabinet level, and the Republican National Party chairman. The news-packed day capped off a week of transition activity of both the outgoing and the incoming which we review now with our two veteran Washington watchers. How's the Bush transition shaping up? How's the Clinton era closing down? And what's coming up in the new political year Bill.
[Bill Press, Co-host:] Susan Molinari, I thought President-elect Bush was doing pretty well with his Cabinet appointments until today, when he decided or were maybe he was forced to throw a bone to the conservatives, and appointed John Ashcroft as attorney general. Now let's see, first of all he puts Colin Powell at defense, pro-choice, and Christie Whitman, pro-choice, at EPA and then he puts the anti- choice, anti-Roe v. Wade as the nation's chief law enforcement officer. What is Bush trying to do, have it both ways?
[Susan Molinari, Republican Strategist:] I think Bush is trying to do something that I know is foreign to a lot of Democrats in this town, and that is appoint the best people to the best jobs. John Ashcroft is someone who is very well-respected in this town, has a history of being in important positions, and frankly, did something that I know does probably, stymie a lot of people sitting around this table. He did the classy thing, when an election was called and he could have contest it.
[Press:] He did a classy thing in that case, but I do contest your statement that he is best person for the job.
[Molinari:] Why?
[Press:] I think the President-Elect Bush not only alienated women with that appointment, but minorities as well. We remember Ronnie White, on the Supreme Court of Missouri, John Ashcroft led the opposition, alienated African-Americans in this country, if I may finish, because he said this guy was soft on crime. This is a judge who affirmed the death penalty 41 times, and now Bush rubs it in the face of African-Americans by putting him as AG.
[Molinari:] I have to say something, this just makes me so mad. We had an opportunity several years ago to watch somebody, a president, appoint the first African-American to the Supreme Court and Democrats in this town screamed, and complained, and kicked and not once did a Republican look at people and say, you're doing that because he's black. I mean that is just outrageous to say that because someone opposes somebody, that it is on racist terms or that it should disenfranchise the entire African-American population.
[Press:] But it did. You can't deny that it did, and now he puts him in as AG.
[Molinari:] But there's no basis to that. I mean, there's no bias to that. Were you sitting here saying let's give Clarence Thomas a break because he needs to be in an important position to sort of break ethnic stereotypes, no.
[Press:] To use your phrase, he was clearly not the most qualified person in the country for the job.
[Molinari:] Oh, please. Mary jump in.
[Matalin:] I have never said seen grosser, divisive, racist, tactics than the ones that occurred in this campaign. That James Byrd chain ad was the most despicable thing I've ever seen and all your party is about now, instead of applauding on these incredible let's talk about what a good job Bush has done. Instead of applauding these breakthrough appointments that are diversity on merit, all the Democrats are doing is saying they're political ploys.
[Peter Fenn, Democratic Strategist:] Listen, affirmative action is supported by the new secretary of state, condemned by the new president. This appointment of the next attorney general will do more to set back affirmative action, do more to harm civil rights. Here is a guy who is the Christian Coalition's choice. He would not go for tobacco funds to states to help kids, educate them against tobacco. He has been, one of the most strident, Susan, and you know this, on abortion. He would not even allow a were woman's right to choose for rape and incest. This is somebody who I think will be a very political attorney general, in contrast to what the vice president the president-elect is now saying. This guy will go after Roe v. Wade, and I think I think that George W. Bush will rue the day he made this appointment.
[Matalin:] Do you ever see anything outside...
[Fenn:] ... will rue the day he made this appointment.
[Matalin:] This is so absurd, Peter. Do you ever see anything or your party outside the realm of politics? This man is an esteemed governor, an esteemed attorney general, an esteemed senator. He has a great record and is a man of great integrity, who did a class act in that case.
[Fenn:] He did do a class act when he gave up in his concession speech...
[Matalin:] Do you see the world through any...
[Fenn:] No, no, no. But...
[Matalin:] Let me finish. Do you see the world through any other spectrum except abortion, abortion, abortion?
[Fenn:] No, listen, I can talk to you about other things. I can talk to you about his beliefs on separation of church and state as well. But here is a guy let me say this that George Bush says is guided by principle, this appointment guided by principle, not politics. This is all politics, this appointment. The look, the Jerry Falwells of the world were livid. And what are they going to do? They're going to put in Christie Todd Whitman at EPA, and they're all going, oh, my god...
[Molinari:] First of all...
[Matalin:] That's another stoke of genius.
[Molinari:] That's what this is all about. This is about Democrats sitting down at the end of the first week and saying: Oh, my gosh, we have one of the most diverse Cabinets. We have people who are moderates. We have people who are every ethnic and racial group, who are leading this country...
[Matalin:] Gender. Qualified, qualified.
[Molinari:] And then all of a sudden you see somebody and you say, OK, now here's how we can go on the attack and spin for this week and try to bring the president down.
[Press:] Susan, one thing I won't let you do is put my words in my mouth, OK, because I have applauded all the Cabinet members so far, except Ashcroft. And I want to talk to you about one that Peter just mentioned, because the conservatives have really been grousing about Christie Whitman. They didn't want her as a running mate. They didn't want her as a part of the Cabinet. Gary Bauer was on IP yesterday "INSIDE POLITICS," I'm sorry; that's what we call it. And here's what he said about that appointment. Let's listen.
[Gary Bauer , Former Presidential Candidate:] Appointing her is like waving a red flag in front of the people that stuffed the envelopes, rang the doorbells and made George Bush president. It would be like Al Gore giving, again, a pro-life governor a major position in his administration.
[Press:] Now, on environmental issues, she may not be perfect, but she has done a great job in New Jersey protecting coastline, a great job in New Jersey protecting open space. I think she's a damn good appointment to EPA. What do you say to Gary Bauer?
[Molinari:] Well, I say the words that Governor Bush said when he was taking, you know, announced that he was going to accept Al Gore's concession, and that is that he was not elected to represent one party. He was elected to represent one nation. And I think that his appointments thus far show that he is a man of his word, and he's keeping basically the same philosophical spectrum, the compassionate conservatism, that philosophy he led as governor.
[Press:] I would also like to point out that we think it's her many appearances on CROSSFIRE that actually got here this job.
[Molinari:] You know, where were you guys? Charles Krauthammer had a great article today in "The Washington Post" that said, you know, Bill Clinton won by one percentage point more than George W. Bush. He didn't win a majority either. And I didn't hear anything. Maybe I missed that one show when you were all out there saying, President Clinton, when are you going to appoint, you didn't win with a majority either.
[Press:] Bush promised the Democrat in the Cabinet or he didn't say that precisely to reach out, and everybody has been talking about there are going to be Democrats in the Cabinet. I'm just asking where is it and when.
[Matalin:] Well, maybe it's coming. I mean, you know...
[Fenn:] He's saving he's saving the best for last, Bill.
[Molinari:] Wait a second.
[Fenn:] He's saving the best for last.
[Molinari:] We know that he's met with Senator Breaux, who said he's not interested. We know word has gone out between members of the Senate and the House of Representatives to Democrats, don't you dare accept an appointment because we can't afford to lose one member because we're in such rough shape right now. So, I mean, I think that has a lot to do with it. Party leadership in the Democrat Party are keeping them all on a nice tight rein.
[Matalin:] Well, and of course, all these appointments are made on merit, and we're still looking for a meritorious...
[Fenn:] No affirmative action for Democrats...
[Molinari:] And when he did come around?
[Fenn:] Right?
[Molinari:] Yes, second term. So in Bush's second term maybe he will find a Democrat.
[Fenn:] I wouldn't wait for that. There's not going to be one of those.
[Molinari:] Maybe in Bush's second term he'll find a Democrat that's worthy.
[Press:] Second term?
[Matalin:] Let's talk about, you are playing politics, playing politics. The president, the outgoing president OK? let's talk about the outgoing transition. He just can't stop. You know, even a cursory reading of the papers or watching of the news, just this week we're going to show you a couple of things about the economy. The figures released yesterday by the government show a 2.2 percent third- quarter growth. This is anemic. It's down from the previous quarter's 5.6 percent growth. The Fed this week switched their strategy from controlling inflation, to preparing for a downturn in the economy. The Nasdaq is worth half its value since March. We have exploding energy costs. We have eroding consumer confidence. And when George Bush, president- elect, raises the specter so citizens can prepare, can become aware and prepare...
[Fenn:] Prepare?
[Matalin:] ... for this downturn in the economy, the president sends out his attack dogs, and
[Fenn:] You mean Chicken Little, the Chicken-Little approach, the sky-is-falling approach? Here is listen...
[Matalin:] You're-telling-the-truth approach.
[Fenn:] Mr. Bush, the elder, the 1.6...
[Matalin:] Poppy.
[Fenn:] Poppy, as we're fond of calling him is, with the $256 billion deficits that started that off, as opposed to
[Matalin:] Could we get into the 21st century?
[Fenn:] Well, we are here with $250 billion surpluses. Look, this economy is the strongest it has ever been. To come out and say: Oh, oh, the economy is in trouble! Oh, everything is going down! Oh, things are doing terrible! And that's why I need a $1.6 trillion tax increase, which is what he wants.
[Matalin:] It's called stimulative.
[Fenn:] Stimulative? Oh, it is a stimulative for the rich. We have been through this. It is not going to happen. Even Dennis Hastert, who now gets a little slap on the wrist from
[Press:] Susan Molinari, George Bush wants the market to tumble so he can sell his $1.3 trillion tax cut.
[Molinari:] Oh, he's not. Absolutely not.
[Press:] And that is why he is using recession word, he and Cheney both.
[Molinari:] What a absolutely not. I think he does want to do two things. I think, one, he wants to prepare people, so that when he makes the big sell for this tax cut, people understand exactly why. And number two, I hope one of the reasons why he is doing it is that, when it starts to happen after he takes the oath of office, you will obviously see that a lot of it developed all of it developed while President Clinton was finishing out his term. And I think that is absolutely justifiable. But you know what, Mary, the problem No, that is absolutely not true. The economy doesn't react that way. But this all goes back to a bigger story, which I know we are going to touch on. And that is that President Clinton will not leave the stage.
[Press:] We are going to we will touch on that and a lot of other stuff when we come back.
[Molinari:] I hope so.
[Press:] And, meantime, yes, indeed, they are still counting votes in Florida. Are there going to be any surprises when we know what the tally really is? When we come back. Welcome back to CROSSFIRE and our end-of-the-week political wrap-up. Yes, just when you thought safe to go back to Florida, hanging chads are back and ballot counting has resumed, this time by reporters from state and national dailies, who are examining all the ballots from all 67 counties to see what the real statewide tally was. So will it surprise us? Will it cast a cloud over the Bush presidency? Or will it show that Bush won it fair and square? Debating the week's political news tonight with two insiders: Republican strategist Susan Molinari and Democratic strategist Peter Fenn. I'm not sure it's a compliment to be called an insider.
[Molinari:] Veteran Washington insiders: It makes us sound very old, very inside-the-Beltway.
[Matalin:] Wise. Very wise.
[Molinari:] Thank you, Mary.
[Matalin:] OK, wise guy.
[Fenn:] OK, wise guy, right?
[Matalin:] Before we regurgitate Florida for the hundredth time, let me just I can't this is so funny. Elvis just couldn't stand it this week. With all the, you know, attention away from him, he goes on and does the most profoundly petty thing I've ever heard. He puts on the presidential limo, or is about to put on the presidential limo, these vanity plates that are popular in the District of Columbia, "Taxation Without Representation." Now forget about their pettiness. Bush is against this, and he's going to have to remove it from the presidential limo the hypocrisy of this. For eight years, the president did nothing about statehood in the District of Columbia and in fact he had his own Department of Justice argue against those citizens who were trying to bring statehood in the District of Columbia. You'd think in his final hours there would be a reduction of the hypocrisy quotient no.
[Peter Fenn, Democratic Strategist:] So you're for statehood for Washington.
[Matalin:] I'm not. I'm not I say the Constitution precludes it, but I'm saying this president had not only did he have an opportunity and didn't do anything about it, he sent his Justice Department to argue against it. And now he's running around he's running around bedecking the next president's limo.
[Fenn:] Listen, he's taken more interest in the District than any other president. And one of the things, I live in the District. So I hope, I hope, that those license plates stay on that car when George W. Bush comes to town on the 20th of January. And I hope that we can come to some kind of an agreement where folks like me are not disenfranchised, where I have a voting representative in the House of Representatives, where I have voting representation...
[Matalin:] Then why did Clinton why did Clinton send the Justice Department vote against it? And anything that's good that's happened in the District is because of Tony Williams, not because of the president.
[Fenn:] Tony Williams is a good fellow too.
[Matalin:] Great mayor.
[Fenn:] And I think we may find the president living in the District of Columbia.
[Matalin:] There is that, there is that then put it on his own car.
[Molinari:] [OFF-MIKE] answering the question.
[Press:] Susan, the license plates the license plates are symbolic. But on the gut issue, I mean, you would have to agree that it's not fair for people who live in this District not to have a vote.
[Molinari:] And I don't have a problem with that at all. I do agree with that. But you know what? I haven't been president of the United States. I'm not doing this as sort of like a nan-a-nan-a-nan- a, a laugh set.
[Fenn:] Well, it has to pass the Congress.
[Molinari:] But you know what? It has it's not just. It's all of this. It's it's, you, know Terry McAulliffe. It's, you know, Bill Clinton saying, I'm not leaving, and if I do I'm making sure that my fingerprints are all over this town when I go.
[Press:] Well, I just have to tell you he is president until January 20th: Deal with it. Now I want to go back to Florida. There is this counting taking place in Florida. The Associated Press, "Washington Post," "The Miami Herald," "L.A. Times," "Wall Street Journal," I don't know who and all else, they've got their reporters in there, and they're sitting around the table, and they are looking, going from county to county, looking at these ballots. First of all, wouldn't you have to agree that for history's sake, if not for the president's sake, it is important that somebody count all those ballots, undervotes and overvotes, to find out what the statewide tally really was?
[Molinari:] No, because there are states throughout this country that have had undervotes. There was, what, 1.5 million undervotes in this country. And forget about all the machines that never work in I mean, you would have to do this in every state, in every area to really find out the integrity of how this all went, not the of least of which was. I remember watching this very station, when Mary Matalin challenged the early call on Florida. And we'll never know how that affected the people who were voting in the panhandle or on the West Coast, will we?
[Press:] Well, there is a reason why they're counting Florida...
[Molinari:] So if we're going to do revisionist history.
[Press:] There is a reason why they're counting Florida and not the other states: because Florida determined the outcome here. And isn't the fact...
[Molinari:] Because it failed. Because the news...
[Press:] May I ask my question before you answer it? Isn't the fact that you don't want to know the final vote tally because you know it is going to show that Al Gore won?
[Molinari:] That's not true at all.
[Press:] It may be.
[Molinari:] It is because there have been problems all along the line. When the networks call an election before polls are even closed in a state, well then I don't know that we're ever point to find out with all the mistakes that were made who should rightly be president of the United States. And at this point in time, why aren't we coming together to say, it is now time to move forward, support this president and support this Cabinet?
[Press:] Because maybe he didn't win.
[Matalin:] Get over it: Bush was elected.
[Molinari:] What are you going to do if he doesn't?
[Fenn:] This is absolutely right. He's going to be inaugurated on the 20th of January. The vote count the vote call was eight minutes before 8:00, so they had all of eight minutes on that, and in the western part of Florida...
[Matalin:] People standing in lines, driving to polls, 15,000 votes, Peter, 15,000 votes.
[Fenn:] First of all, this is look, here's where we are now on this. We are, after everybody said, oh, gee, all these absentees are going to come in around the country and George Bush will win the popular vote. We're at 540,000 votes now nationwide for Al Gore. We're going to have a situation I predict, I may be wrong, but I predict that we're going to have a serious change in the vote totals in Florida, and it is going to be shown that Al Gore, if they all the votes were counted, and counted fairly, with any standard you want to put out there because these are votes...
[Matalin:] How would you know, count it fairly?
[Fenn:] Well, because these are votes where...
[Molinari:] That have been in boxes, that have been shoved, poked...
[Fenn:] The chad was loose. The chad fell out. My only point I mean, look we the American people are simply going say after this is all over OK, the system was screwed up, and we got somebody in the White House. We'll stand behind him. He is our president, but they will forever know in history that not only did he win, Al Gore, the popular vote but he also took the electoral vote.
[Matalin:] You know, this idiocy of the popular vote this is also the man who you see, we don't have a popular vote schedule here. We have an Electoral College. It's that's what our country was founded on.
[Fenn:] Thank God for you.
[Matalin:] Can I point the situation for you. This is man who could not win his home state, could not win his sitting president's home state, lost Democratic state that hadn't been lost to Democrats in an open seat since 1928. And here is a guy who could not even he does not have enough control over the party that this sitting president installed his own guy, Terry McAuliffe, Susie alluded to him earlier, to take over the party. He is just poof. He's gone. Don't talk to me about that. But let me ask this you before we run of other time.
[Press:] Is this a question or a speech?
[Fenn:] I was going to say.
[Matalin:] Well, this notion that Al Gore is some martyr here, that...
[Fenn:] It is kind of a bummer when you win the election and then you don't get inaugurated.
[Matalin:] He didn't win. He didn't win. Get over it. Get over it.
[Fenn:] Can I play my song now?
[Matalin:] Yes.
[Fenn:] There you go. Merry Christmas, Mary.
[Matalin:] We wish them a Merry Christmas, and we'll give you our own personal you, you our own personal season's greetings when we return for our closing comments. Stay with us. The debate doesn't end, it just goes online. Peter Fenn and Susie Molinari take your questions after the show at cnn.comcrossfire. And then, of course, you won't want to miss spin.
[Press:] "SPIN ROOM" at 10:30.
[Matalin:] "THE SPIN ROOM" at 10:30.
[Press:] No rest for the weary, here.
[Matalin:] Speaking of spinning and spinning out of control, every economic indicator suggests a downturn, including Alan Greenspan. The Fed decided this week they're not going to fight inflation anymore. They're going to prepare for this downturn, and in the face of this Bill Clinton says Bush making people aware of it and telling them to prepare for it is playing politics. This is a guy whose legacy building to last dog dies. Just have some integrity.
[Press:] Mary, let me just say something. If Alan Greenspan were worried, he would have cut interest rates this week. He did not. This a very strong economy. The Dow is up 148 points today. The Nasdaq is up 176. This economy needed to slow down. It has a little bit. For anybody to talk about a recession is very irresponsible, and George W. Bush is going to have to learn...
[Matalin:] No one is talking about a recession.
[Press:] ... that when he speaks people listen. He's has to be more careful.
[Matalin:] Oh, please.
[Press:] From the left, I'm Bill Press. Good night for CROSSFIRE. Have a great holiday weekend.
[Matalin:] And from the right, I'm Mary Matalin, also from CROSSFIRE. I'll be up watching "SPIN ROOM" tonight with you, preparing, and continuing to wrap my Christmas presents.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] The Christmas crunch is definitely on now. Santa's helpers have only today and tomorrow to wrap up their shopping. Let's see how the shopping day is shaping up. Easy for me to say, I guess. In the Big Apple, the shopping day is shaping up well. CNN's Deborah Feyerick, I guess you could say she drew the short straw on assignments today. Deborah, are you you doing OK out there?
[Deborah Feyerick, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, you could definitely say that. It's a little brisk out here. You can see 5th Avenue is decked out in all its glory. You've got wreaths on the lampposts, and the Plaza Hotel also decked out. Bergdorf Goodman just across the street I don't know if you can make it out there are more than a hundred wreaths on that one building alone. All the windows have a lot of great displays in them. This is a very busy area, and shopping shoppers are hoping to come out and buy a couple of last-minute Christmas gifts, but the stores are really banking on today because of the long weekend. It means more time for people to be out buying. It also means good news for the stores themselves because, right now, sales have been a bit slow. We spoke to one man who is the head of the International Shopping Center. He was off on his way to Christmas, so we na we snagged him yesterday before he went off on his trip.
[International Shopping Center Manager:] We've got two extra days this year, and that's going to make a tremendous difference for consumers. Everybody's out right now, and there's going to be an extreme amount of delayed shopping going on this week.
[Feyerick:] Now hot on the list this year are DVDs, electronics, CDs, books, and temperatures are actually going to be helping the situation today. It is so cold out here that the only place to be is inside shopping, looking at things, getting things on sale. This area will be packed. You may even be able to hear some of the music just behind me, and if Carl will swing around this is FAO Schwarz, the famous FAO Schwarz. This place will be filled with children, with parents. It's just a lot of fun to come here. You can see one boy already getting his picture taken. And we're going to take you inside in the next hour Miles.
[O'brien:] Oh, Deborah said inside with a little glint in her voice. Nice and warm in there. And we hope to see you in there very soon before you turn into a Popsicle. And for those of you who are oh, Deborah, have you done your shopping? Have you done all your shopping?
[Feyerick:] Yes. I'm pretty good. I haven't sent my cards out yet but have gotten gifts well, I've gotten most gifts, not...
[O'brien:] Yeah. I'm kind of loose on the cards...
[Feyerick:] I've gotten some gifts.
[O'brien:] ... and I need time during the before the millennium or so. All right.
[Feyerick:] There you go.
[O'brien:] Well, for those for those of you in search of that perfect last-minute gift, we've got some help for you. If you're like me, you're probably thinking you can go maybe to the pharmacy and buy a shower head or something. But Dennis McCafferty is an editor at the "USA Weekend" magazine, and he joins us from Washington with some more creative tips, shall we say. Dennis, thanks for being with us.
[Dennis Mccafferty, "usa Weekend":] Thanks for having me.
[O'brien:] All right. You're in a bind at this point if you haven't done your shopping.
[Mccafferty:] Absolutely.
[O'brien:] The pharmacy is limited. What what should one do at this point? The Internet is out, right? It's too late to get anything shipped. What can you do?
[Mccafferty:] It very well could have been too late a month ago.
[O'brien:] Yeah. Exactly. What should we do?
[Mccafferty:] Well, the key is that you need to make the last- minute gift not look like a last-minute gift. Anybody can buy fine food, for example, any time. You can go to the local gourmet grocery and pick up a fine box of clementines and some gourmet coffee. But what you want to do is add a little creatively, add a little pizzazz. Take that gift, and put it in a hiding place in the house somewhere, and then tie a string to it, and then lead the string throughout the house, weave it around the house, and then connect the other end of the string to the person your significant other's bedpost with a note saying, "Follow the string anywhere for a nice breakfast this morning on Christmas morning," and...
[O'brien:] So that that would be that would be a gift with a string attached then. Yeah.
[Mccafferty:] That's true, but it's a fun gift. It shows that you put some creativity into it. And when they find the gift at the end of the string, then you also include with it, "And here's a year's supply of fruit-of-the-month from Harry & David's," or "a year's supply of gourmet coffee from Starbucks," and then it makes it seem as if you put in a lot of thought into what was really a last-minute gift, and it will be a gift that will give throughout the year.
[O'brien:] All right. Of course, your significant other might catch on to all this and realize you hadn't done anything about this. So what what about, let's say, offering up your time? That's always a nice gift, assuming you follow through.
[Mccafferty:] Absolutely. The gift of time is a wonderful thing when it comes to kids. My brother, for example, is building a backyard pond with his son, my nephew. My brother has a great interest in landscaping. My son has a my nephew has a great interest in marine life. So this is a way to combine their interests, to bond together, and have the gift of time, and then they'll end up with a great pond in their backyard when they're done.
[O'brien:] Of course and that is something that's kind of hard to start when they're the ground is kind of frozen, so it is something that...
[Mccafferty:] Well, yeah. It's obviously, this would be more of an IOU sort of gift.
[O'brien:] Right. Any other thoughts for to make it look like you've been thinking when you really haven't?
[Mccafferty:] Well, yes. There's always the gift of travel. My wife and I, for example, just got back from New York City for an anniversary gift that I gave to her for two days and two nights in New York City. You can do the same for a ski resort weekend, for the beach. I think the main point here is is that you need to, again, put some creativity, put some thought into it, so it doesn't seem as if you did it the last minute. If you take all the logistical planning off of your gift recipient's list, you do all the planning, you book all the restaurants, you do all the travel arrangements, I think that is more of a gift to them when all they need to do is be there when the taxi arrives and then whisk them off to wherever you're going to send them.
[O'brien:] All right. Dennis McCafferty, thank you very much. It is...
[Mccafferty:] Thank you.
[O'brien:] ... the 11th hour, but Dennis has proven that it isn't too late to look fairly respectable when it comes to the gift-giving opportunities. Thanks for being with us.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We want to check in on the recent slide on Wall Street. President-elect George W. Bush will meet today with top U.S. business leaders to discuss signs that the economy is slowing. Our national correspondent Tony Clark is in Austin, Texas where that closed-door meeting will be held. Tony, who's coming over to talk with the president-elect today?
[Tony Clark, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, Daryn, it's really a who's who from the business community, from economics community, from consumers. It's a whole range of people that the president-elect wants to hear from. He said yesterday, in fact, that he is, in his words, "worried" about an economic slowdown and wants to feel the pulse of the economic community. These are people who, in the words of Ari Fleischer, who is the press secretary for President-elect Bush, they are the people who live and breathe the economy and would have both the best idea of the current assessment of the economy and anything that can be done in the short-term to try and keep the economy strong, prevent a recession from occurring just as President-elect Bush is preparing to move into the White House. Among the list of people that are attending today's conference, Michael dell, the founder and head of Dell Computers; Steve Forbes, "Forbes" magazine, but more importantly perhaps he is a former presidential candidate, Republican presidential candidate, and a proponent of the flat tax; Ken Lay from Enron; Craig Barrett from Intel; Jack Welch from General Electric; and Richard Wagoner, the president and CEO of General Motors. There is a whole host of people like this, this caliber of executive that's coming. The meeting starts in about 2 12 hours. It will last for two hours, the officials, the executives giving their views of the status of the economy, but also the president-elect talking about his proposal, his tax cut proposal that was so much a part of his presidential campaign, the president-elect saying that he feels now more than ever before that a tax cut is warranted. He will meet tomorrow over at the governor's mansion with industry officials, executives from high-tech industries, and then prepare, use that information, prepare his administration for whatever economic situation is that they face Daryn.
[Kagan:] Tony Clark in Austin, Texas, thank you very much Leon.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] All right, let's go to Capitol Hill again where the 107th Congress comes to order today. In about two hours, senators are going to take their oath and their place in history. Our congressional correspondent Chris Black joins us now. She's got the latest from there. Chris, Good morning.
[Chris Black, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Good morning, Leon. The 107th Congress will be the most evenly divided Congress in decades. The Republicans barely hold a majority in the House of Representatives and the Senate is divided evenly, 5050, for first time in 120 years. The numbers tell the story. Neither side has enough votes to pass major legislation without some help from the other side. But getting from here to there is another matter. So far, the House Democrats are very upset that the House Republican leadership has refused to change the ratios on House committees to reflect the narrower Republican majority. And in the Senate, the two Senate leaders, Trent Lott and Tom Daschle, are still in negotiations over how they will share power in this Congress. And Republican senators, particularly those who are sharing committees now, are very reluctant to give up any advantage they now hold over the Democrats. But today, Leon, is a day for celebrating, not politics. Every single member of the House and Senate takes the oath of office today, including the most famous freshman in the Senate: Hillary Rodham Clinton. And keeping with tradition, Mrs. Clinton will be escorted into the Senate chamber by Chuck Schumer, who is now the senior senator from New York. But no so traditional, the new senator from New York will be hitching a ride to the Capitol with the president of the United States. Bill Clinton, her husband, and their daughter Chelsea will watch the ceremony from the visitors' gallery in the Senate chamber. And then afterwards, the president will go with her to the Old Senate chamber for what is a traditional reenactment photo. Now, Mrs. Clinton is 97th in seniority in the 100-member Senate and normally would have to wait her turn. But because of security concerns, she's been moved to the head of the list so that the president can have his picture taken and get back to the White House Leon.
[Harris:] And that happening now might just ruffle some feathers. We'll be talking about that coming up next hour with a writer from "Roll Call" magazine. Thanks much Chris Black on Capitol Hill. We'll talk to you later on.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak has postponed his visit to Washington this week amid persistent violence between Israeli troops and Palestinian demonstrators. The violence on the ground is now escalating into air attacks. For the latest, we go now to CNN's Mike Hanna in Jerusalem. Hello, Mike.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn News Correspondent:] Hello, Miles. Well, there's been an apparent reduction in the level of violence in Palestinian territories on Sunday. Israeli police have sealed off areas under Palestinian control, preventing access to civilians, and Palestinian police have attempted to prevent protesters from reaching Israeli checkpoints. The last eight days of violence has seen hundreds of people injured, and a number killed. Israel insists that Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat must accept responsibility, and it has demanded that he immediately end the conflict.
[Haim Ramon, Israeli Cabinet Member:] If President Arafat cannot control them, or worse, if he allowed to do so, all the negotiation between us and Chairman Arafat is under a big, big question mark.
[Hanna:] But Palestinians insist that the conflict results from Israeli intransigence, particularly in regard to the Israeli refusal to release political prisoners.
[Saeb Erakat, Palestinian Negotiator:] We really urge the Israeli side to expedite the
[Hanna:] Mr. Barak now facing problems on several fronts, an escalation of conflict in southern Lebanon, an area that he's due to withdraw from within coming weeks, internal dissent in the country's Knesset or parliament, where his coalition government is clinging to a slim majority, and indeed, the ongoing violence in Palestinian territories. He's got to deal with all of this while attempting to keep the lagging peace negotiations on track. Mike Hanna, CNN, reporting live from Jerusalem.

[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] "He is prepared, and is ready for his execution;" the words of Timothy McVeigh's attorney describing the Oklahoma City bomber's state of mind, in the final hours of his life. CNN's Bill Hemmer is in Terre Haute, Indiana, where McVeigh was moved this morning to a cell next to the execution room Bill.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Correspondent:] Marty, hello again from Terre Haute. News coming to us now from the highest court in Washington: the Supreme court has denied an appeal to have the execution videotaped tomorrow morning. A lawyer, operating in a separate manner, unrelated to McVeigh's case, had appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, trying to get a videotape for his own client which he said, which showed that lethal injection was cruel and unusual punishment. However, the appeal has been denied. There will be no videotaping of the McVeigh execution tomorrow morning. Having said that, McVeigh right now is in his holding cell. It is the final destination, the final place where he will spend his final hours before he is to die tomorrow morning. McVeigh was brought to that holding cell before the sun came up here in Terre Haute by a transport van here on the prison grounds. Prison guards escorting McVeigh, say he was cooperative, and the 20 minute procedure went without any problem. They also say McVeigh was taken into the area secured, and again, he stays there at this time. Late word today, though, does indicate a break of procedure. We had been told earlier that McVeigh will have no radio and no television inside that holding cell. But now it appears the warden has conceded and given McVeigh a small television with cable privileges for his last night, again, before he is to die tomorrow morning. Also, two of McVeigh's attorneys met with McVeigh, separated by a pane of window, a window glass separating the two, earlier today and the attorneys came and spoke with reporters a short time ago, characterizing how McVeigh was feeling and what he was thinking during that meeting.
[Rob Nigh, Mcveigh Attorney:] He will have final words. His mind over the last weekend has been to prepare for his execution tomorrow. He had prepared previously. He had indicated previously and he's never changed his thinking on this, that he prefers to be executed than to spend lengthy life in prison, without the possibility of a release. And he still feels that way.
[Nathan Chambers, Mcveigh Attorney:] He is in amazingly good spirits. He's pleasant to talk to. He continues to be affable. He continues to be rational with his discourse. He maintains a sense of humor. He I know after the move in the middle of the night, he was able to sleep for a couple of hours. He intends to sleep again tonight. I don't know how a normal person who is less than 24 hours from death is supposed to react, but I would say his his attitude and demeanor is very good.
[Hemmer:] Both attorneys, Chambers and Nigh, again indicating they plan a meeting with McVeigh behind the prison walls tomorrow morning for a short time before McVeigh is led to the execution table. Meanwhile, outside the prison, we do expect a number of protesters to assemble later this evening. CNN's Jeff Flock about three miles across town with one part of that protest, and joins us now with an update for what's happening. Jeff, hello.
[Jeff Flock, Cnn Correspondent:] Indeed, hello to you too, Bill. We are preparing for a march at the prison this hour. Perhaps you see in the ground behind me as the folks walk around. This is what will lead the march, Uncle Sam, and signs that say, "Stop Me Before I Kill Again." That's another one. Here's one down there: "WWJD, What Would Jesus Do?" Susan Carter, who's helped organize this march. You presume Jesus would not be killing today on behalf of the federal government.
[Susan Carter, Protester:] I certainly do presume that, yes.
[Flock:] What do you hope to accomplish. What message are you trying to send?
[Carter:] We need to be a visible presence out there to say "no" to the death penalty in all cases. We're not supportive of it.
[Flock:] What is the group going to do when it gets to the prison? What does it want to accomplish there?
[Carter:] Well, the march itself, the act of the march, with our signs and our banners, will show the people that are willing to take this fairly arduous walk out there, the conditions aren't so great to stand up and say, they're against capital punishment.
[Flock:] Susan Carter, we'll have to stop there. We'll be checking with you throughout this evening, as the march gets underway and as the park, gets underway. I do want to report to you, Bill, real quick, we're down to Voorees Park, which is where the pro-capital punishment group is. A smaller group there, but a group there as well. These two groups wanting to make their voice known throughout this entire process. And we'll be watching. Bill, back to you.
[Hemmer:] All right, Jeff. Jeff flock from across town here in Terre Haute. 14 hours now and counting to the execution of Timothy McVeigh. It will take place tomorrow morning, 8:00 a.m. Eastern time here in western Indiana. Marty, back to you back in Atlanta.
[Savidge:] Thank you, Bill.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] And we are seeing a bit of a turn around for the European major indices overseas now, with two of the four trading with declines at this hour. Vivendi seems to be several steps closer to wrapping up a takeover for Seagram. Lionel Barber, of the "Financial Times," joins me now from the "FT"'s London newsroom. Good morning, Lionel. What's the latest on this front?
[Lionel Barber, News Editor, "financial Times":] Well, I think Mr. Messier, who's the head of Vivendi, hopes to wrap this deal up in the next few days. The news is that the share price of Vivendi is not responding very favorably. And I think there's some questions about whether he's overpaying for Seagram, $35 billion, around that price tag. On the other hand, Vivendi is saying: We're going to get a good price for Seagram's drinks. So it will all be right on the night.
[Haffenreffer:] But isn't that standard, that the acquirer's shares generally do head lower or is it more of a pronounced decline?
[Barber:] It's fairly strong. I mean, I think, really, it's what people are saying in the market. You're right, on big acquirers, often the shares do go down. But this is a big price tag, and remember, it's the price tag that Rupert Murdoch really wasn't prepared to countenance earlier this year in looking at Seagram.
[Haffenreffer:] Got a question for you coming off your front page of your edition today that the financial services industry in Europe is coming under a bit of scrutiny by lawmakers there.
[Barber:] I think this is a very big story that we've put on our front page in the "Financial Times" today in the international editions. This is a new initiative to appoint a special group of experts, led by a man called Alexander Lampulusy, who is really one of the architects of European single currency. So look at the financial services regulation in Europe. It think that there is the potential now to create new rules which will be governing some of these big mergers of banks and insurance companies. Also the potential for a new super regulator in Europe to take over some of the responsibilities for looking at systemic risk in the banking sector in the Eurozone. I think one of the reasons you're getting this change is just the simple competitive impact of the euro, globalization making cross- boarder merger activity in Europe much, much greater than it has been in the past, in a sense that you need a new rules-based system, which is really comprehensive to encompass that.
[Haffenreffer:] Would this also include cross-sector mergers like between banking and insurance companies as well?
[Barber:] Well, I spoke to Mr. Lampulusy earlier this year about this, when he was sounding out governments. And I think that's certainly on his mind. If you look at, for example, the potential in France and in Germany for that kind of cross-sector activity, we don't have any rules to govern this. We don't have any sense of, well, if they merged to that, say one of these big investment banks from the States, Goldman or Morgan, put two big entities together, well, how is it going to work? what are the risks involved? and what about a kind of single-regulatory framework? We don't have that at the moment.
[Haffenreffer:] Interesting topic. Lionel Barber, of the "Financial Times," thanks for joining us this morning.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] The latest now from India, where rescue teams in the earthquake-ravaged western part of that country have pulled a 13-year-old girl from the rubble. The girl from the town of Bhuj said that she survived six days without food, water and fresh air, and she did that by praying. Our New Delhi bureau chief Satinder Bindra has her amazing story.
[Satinder Bindra, Cnn New Delhi Bureau Chief:] Emotion overcomes the Turkish rescue worker moments after he pulls out a 13-year-old girl in perhaps the most dramatic rescue in the quake- shattered city of Bhuj. Preanta Tucker spent six dark, dreary, lonely days under tons of debris.
[Unidentified Female:] I yelled, I screamed, I asked for my family, I asked for my mom, I asked for my dad; still, no one answered me. Then I used to cry; still no one answered my calls or came to me.
[Bindra:] Preanta Tucker was asleep when the quake struck. Just moments before her father had asked her to wake up, but she insisted on sleeping through because it was her day off school, a decision that left her trapped. She remembers those last split seconds. As she puts it, everything came crashing down, and then darkness. But she says she never lost hope.
[Unidentified Female:] I always I would make it out, and would always pray. I always prayed to God, please rescue me.
[Bindra:] She lived on those prayers, and had no food, water or fresh air for six days. Tucker's prayers were answered when two rescue workers crawled into the narrow space where she was trapped.
[Unidentified Male:] We did go in there and we saw two dark girl's eyes coming out of some corner.
[Bindra:] Within minutes of being rescued, Tucker was rushed to the army hospital. Here, news of her escape from the clutches of death has made here an instant celebrity. Tucker then met her family, all of whom survived.
[Unidentified Male:] I've been telling everyone my daughter died and I will never get her back; I now look what God has given me.
[Bindra:] Doctors say except for a few scratches on her legs Tucker is in perfect shape, just dehydrated. Tucker says she now looks forward to going back to school and oh, yes, she's feeling famished.
[Unidentified Female:] I'll eat anything; I'm starving. I haven't eaten anything for five days. I'm just very, very hungry.
[Bindra:] With so much death and destruction in Bhuj, everyone has been hungry for good news. It seems they've got some, at least, with Tucker's dramatic rescue. Satinder Bindra, CNN, Bhuj.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] It is called the Candace Law, and it is now in effect in Colorado. This afternoon, Governor Bill Owens signed the measure to ban so-called rebirthing therapy in that state. The new law stems from the death last year of 10-year-old Candace Newmaker. A therapist says that Candace was making little progress in a behavioral treatment program, so the therapist decided to use the unconventional rebirth technique. Now, in our morning, online editorial meeting, you asked: "What is rebirthing?" Here's what we know about this case. The girl was wrapped in a flannel sheet to simulate a womb as adults pushed against her, with pillows, for more than an hour. Now, these adults urged Candace to emerge re-born and bond with her adoptive mother. Doctors say, though, that the child died of asphyxiation. The Candace Newmaker case is now being heard by a jury in Colorado. Two therapists, Connell Watkins and Julie Ponder, are charged with reckless child abuse. Defense lawyers argue that Candace's death was an accident. Joining us now from Denver to talk about the Candace Newmaker, the case and Colorado's new Candace Law, is Republican Representative Debbie Stafford who is in the Colorado State Assembly. We appreciate your being with us. I understand that you were really a key to getting Candace's Law in place and geting it signed today. Can you talk to us a little bit about the law?
[Debbie Stafford , Colorado State Representative:] Yes, Joie. I really began to watch this case early on, and people that were concerned in the community came to me and really began to understand that we didn't have any laws to protect children or to protect the innocent victims who don't have a voice until it came to the point of injury or death. Candace's Law is designed to prohibit the type of rebirthing therapy that would involve restraint, that could have the potential also for physical injury, ultimately resulting in injury or death.
[Chen:] But I mean, is there something specific in this law that makes it different from, say, something against child abuse or physical assault. Does it specifically say, "rebirthing technique," or specify the particular methods that were involved in Candace's death?
[Stafford:] Yes, it actually says that you cannot use any rebirthing technique in therapy that involves restraint or anything that provides a potential risk for physical injury. And so it makes the type of therapy against the law. In other words, therapists who practice this will no longer be able to practice in the state of colorado. If they do and we find out about it, they will in fact have legal consequences.
[Chen:] All right, we do have a live chat under way where there are many questions about Candace's case. "Is the mother of Candace," and I guess that would be the adoptive mother of Candace who brought her out to Colorado for the treatment, "being held responsible in any way?" This is from Candace Gleason.
[Stafford:] Well, I'm not an expert as far as all of the legal ins and outs that are happening, but, yes, the adoptive mother does in fact have charges being brought against her. I probably will direct you to somebody within the court system to give you more direct answers as far as the charges and all of that is working for her, but yes, she does have charges being brought against her as well.
[Chen:] OK, we have another question from our live chat from Michelle Michelson: "Has rebirthing been proven effective for anyone?" There are other rebirthing techniques as well, as I understand it?
[Stafford:] Yes, there are rebirthing techniques that are not invasive in the way that the case was for Candace. In particular, I know I have been told of some therapists who use techniques where maybe somebody has gone through a rebirthing process in water. More likely, the cases that I have heard that are successful are with consenting adults. Apparently, there have been some successful testimonies in court. I am not an expert on rebirthing therapy. The folks that I have spoken to have not had positive experiences, but I have been told there are some who have had the good experience. But their limit of time was only a few minutes and in Candace's case, it was 70 minutes and so, I can't, myself, speak to you so far as the successful cases.
[Chen:] Representative Debbie Stafford in the Colorado State Assembly, Candace's Law signed today. Thanks very much for being with us.
[Stafford:] Thanks.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] And it's time now for our Monday morning look at politics and election 2000. Joining us from Washington with his latest list of winners and losers is CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider. Good morning, Bill.
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Good morning, Carol.
[Lin:] So, who gets a thumbs up today?
[Schneider:] Well, Al Gore finally had a good week. He got an enthusiastic endorsement from Bill Bradley, and that could help Gore reach a couple of constituencies where he's been weak and Bradley's been strong; mainly men and independents. Gore also hopes that Bradley's endorsement will help keep liberals on board and keep them from defecting to Ralph Nader. In his endorsement, Bradley said that Gore has a more progressive agenda than George W. Bush, and, he added, it's not even close. Bradley's message for liberals: a vote from Nader is a vote for Bush.
[Lin:] Well, that's an interesting endorsement, sort of like the old saying, no such thing as friends or enemies, only interest in politics, Bill?
[Schneider:] That's exactly what's going on there.
[Lin:] All right, well, a little bit of a thumbs down in the headlines for a city not a person this time around, huh?
[Schneider:] The city of Philadelphia. The shocking videotape of a police beating has embarrassed the city that's about to host its first national convention in over 50 years. Now, whatever the provocation, the police behavior captured on this videotape was highly unprofessional. Now, that incident involved a criminal suspect. What Philadelphia is going to get at the convention is protesters, some of them professionals, deliberately seeking to provoke a confrontation with the police. They want inflammatory pictures like this one, like Chicago in 1968. It gets the media attention. And of course police brutality is the most polarizing issue imaginable. Philadelphia has to ensure that that doesn't happen, which means a better trained police force than the one we just saw.
[Lin:] Boy, how is the GOP going to handle this, Bill? I mean, this must be their worst nightmare on the verge of their convention.
[Schneider:] It certainly is because they remember what happened to the Democrats after 1968. It was a very dramatic series of pictures that played over and over again in the news, and it did incredible damage to the party and to the ticket.
[Lin:] Well, maybe we'll see lots of shots of the Liberty Bell. What do you think?
[Schneider:] Well, that's what they're hoping for.
[Lin:] All right, you got a twist for us today?
[Schneider:] Well, I certainly do. A surprising twist we reported earlier in that New York Senate race: the allegation cited in a new book that Hillary Rodham Clinton once made an anti-Semitic remark. Now, Carol, there are a lot of questions here. Mrs. Clinton and the president firmly deny that she ever made that remark. The credibility of the source is questionable. The Clinton campaign, as we reported, released copies of a handwritten letter he wrote to Mrs. Clinton three years ago in which he begged her forgiveness for telling lies about her. Also, this remark was made 26 years ago. Why didn't it come up before? Why have other authors failed to report it? Is there a statute of limitations after 26 years? And finally, I think there is a question of relevance. Is there any reason to suspect, from her record or from her behavior over the past quarter-century, that Mrs. Clinton is a bigot, that she exploits prejudice for political advantage? This is the dark side of politics: personal destruction at its worst.
[Lin:] And timing is everything sometimes in these things. Thanks so much Bill Schneider. For much more from the campaign trail, check out our political Web site. The address is cnn.comelection2000.

[Laurin Sydney, Cnn Correspondent:] Martin Lawrence and Danny DeVito go head-to-head in the new film "What's the Worse that Could Happen?" Lawrence plays a thief, and Devito, his billionaire victim. But things take a wickedly comic turn as the two funnymen play a game of one-upmanship. CNN's Paul Vercammen has more on the comic crime caper.
[Martin Lawrence, Actor:] Look, you caught me fair and square, but how about I walk out here, nothing taken, nothing harmed? How does that sound?
[Danny Devito, Actor:] You stay right where you are, or I shoot you in the head. How does that sound?
[Paul Vercammen, Cnn Correspondent::] So begins the vicious cycle of thieving and plotting and revenge in "What's the Worst that Could Happen?" starring Danny DeVito and Martin Lawrence.
[Lawrence:] This is not the movie that's going to save the world. but go out and get a few laughs and just have fun with it.
[Vercammen:] DeVito's character, the cut-throat businessman, takes a ring from Lawrence as the common thief.
[Devito:] Well, I didn't actually steal. Like here, this is a different thing. A guy comes into your house to steal from you. It's OK, you can do anything to that guy. That's not stealing. That's getting even.
[Vercammen:] But time for true confessions. Lawrence admits, as a child, he once ripped off a candy bar.
[Lawrence:] It had peanuts and raisins in it. And I bit into it, and as soon as I bit into the chunky, do you know, I felt bad. And I took a half a chunky back to the store and it was I. I was him, he is I, I stole it. They said, wait here for the cops. I said, kiss my
[Vercammen:] John Leguizamo played Lawrence's scheming accomplice, a master at phony accents. [Begin Video Clip, "what's The Worst That Could Happen"]
[John Leguizamo, Actor:] How much for the whole building?
[Unidentified Actress:] I'm not sure.
[Leguizamo:] Don't they know? That's how we lost the last translator.
[Vercammen:] Bernie Mac, Martin Lawrence's real-life pal, is in on the heists. [BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "WHAT'S THE WORST THAT COULD HAPPEN?"]
[Lawrence:] Man, I feel like I'm getting robbed by everybody tonight.
[Bernie Mac, Actor:] I'm supposed to be a friend of Martin, but this is the first movie I've ever been in with him. What kind of friend of that? I haven't even been on Martin's television show. He ran for six years, seven years. Did he ever invite me? Never.
[Vercammen:] "What's the Worst that Could Happen?" takes many hair-raising turns. [BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "WHAT'S THE WORST THAT COULD HAPPEN?"]
[Lawrence:] I'd like to say, power to the people. Let's rise up.
[Vercammen:] Paul Vercammen, CNN Entertainment News, Hollywood.
[Sydney:] And "What's The Worst That Could Happen?" heads to theaters this weekend.

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Anchor:] Recovery crews at the World Trade Center and people who live nearby are concerned about what might be in the air and all that ash that's up there. CNN's Brian Palmer has more on that.
[Don Carson, International Operating Engineers Union:] A lot of these buildings are going to have to come down.
[Brian Palmer, Cnn Correspondent:] The crane and heavy equipment workers of the International Operating Engineers Union will bring them down. Don Carson runs their hazardous materials program.
[Carson:] This is potentially a hazardous waste dump with all the chemicals.
[Palmer:] Materials used to build and run the twin towers asbestos and fiberglass for insulation, freon for air-conditioning were released into the air when they collapsed, along with smoke from burning debris.
[Carson:] We've concluded that there are some spots where we have found some elevated levels of asbestos above the allowable limits.
[Palmer:] Stirring up concern about the health effects of breathing tainted air. [on camera]: This is a pretty amazing advantage point here.
[Carson:] There's a lot going on here, but you can see the smoke, and that's the concern about having the respiratory protection.
[Palmer:] It's unpleasant, but not dangerous, say city, state and federal environmental authorities.
[Mayor Rudy Giuliani , New York:] It is monitored constantly and it is not in any way dangerous. It is well below any level of problems and any number of ways in which you test it.
[Palmer:] But independent studies from around ground zero show concentrations of pollutants higher than official samples.
[Dr. Stephen Levin, Mt. Sinai Hospital:] There's virtually no chance that people living in the community or people working in offices nearby the site will develop the scarring lung disease that asbestos can cause in occupationally exposed workers.
[Palmer:] Residents still worry about other pollutants. Alon and Blake Vaknin, eight months pregnant, watched the first tower collapse from their apartment a block away, then fled with their daughter, Maia.
[Blake Vaknin, Resident:] A random sampling of air might show nothing but a small percentage, but that small percentage throughout the whole day, and then maybe it increases, decreases, increases, decreases, increases, decreases. You know, I'm pregnant. I don't want my baby to it just concerns me.
[Palmer:] The Vaknins say they won't be moving back any time soon. At ground zero, where experts are concerned about workers, precautions are taken. The rubble is hosed down to control dust. Respirators are issued to all workers. But that doesn't mean they aren't at risk.
[Carson:] They're working 12-hour shifts day after day. These adverse health effects won't show up two, three, four, five years from now, and as I said, we're going to have a secondary tragedy here if that's not addressed.
[Palmer:] Carson does say that if safety procedures are followed long term, the potential threat should be low.
[Bill Rapetti, Crane Operator:] I take my clothes off. I put them in a plastic bag before I get home and I wash them separately.
[Palmer:] Recovery workers say the hazards are part of the job.
[John Powers, Local 14, Iuoe:] You've got to kind of trust the people that are here to monitor it and look after you. Honestly, the only answer is, no matter what, this is going to have to be done.
[Palmer:] And what needs to be done, the dirty, dangerous job of clearing rubble in the hope of finding remains, giving the families of those killed at least some small measure of peace. Brian Palmer, CNN, New York.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Health officials in the U.S. are trying to ease the fears of people seeking flu vaccines. CNN medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen takes a look at the vaccine shortage and what's being done about it.
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] In Israel, flu-shot clinics have been in full swing for weeks.
[Unidentified Female:] This year, we received half a million of units of vaccination. There is for everyone.
[Cohen:] And the same in Germany and throughout Europe. But in the United States, it's a different story. Most clinics aren't expected to start giving out flu vaccines until sometime in November. The vaccine's the same in the United States, Europe and Israel, so what happened? One reason, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration shut down vaccine manufacturing at Parkdale Pharmaceutical for safety violations. Parkdale was one of four companies making vaccine in the United States. And the FDA issued citations against another manufacturer, Wyatt Bearse. A company spokesman said they got a late start in production while they corrected the problems. Another reason, manufacturers all over the world say this year's strain of flu grew very slowly. According to one U.S. manufacturer, Europeans set space in their factories to compensate for the slow- growing strain, but American producers did not.
[Jim Robinson, Aventis Pasteur:] The only way we can increase the number of doses is to increase the number of days in our program. When we do that, it means the doses come out later in the year.
[Cohen:] So what does this delay mean? Partly it depends on when the flu season hits this year. Once it's given, it takes about two weeks for the shot to work.
[Dr. Walt Orenstein, Cdc:] This year, we will need to be vaccinating into December and maybe even into January.
[Cohen:] Experts acknowledge that if the flu season peaks in December, that could be a problem. But most years it peaks between January and March.
[Orenstein:] For most flu seasons, getting vaccinated in December should be adequate to protect.
[Cohen:] The Centers for Disease Control urges everyone over age 65, pregnant women and people with chronic medical conditions to get flu shots. Those who are young and healthy can get flu shots, too, if they want, but because of the delay this year they might be told to come back at the end of the vaccine season to let others get shots first. Elizabeth Cohen, CNN, Atlanta.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Arab leaders from across the Middle East are gathered in Cairo right now to discuss the future of peace in the region. And joining us now is Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies. She joins us from Washington. Ms. Bennis, thanks for being with us.
[Phyllis Bennis, Institute For Policy Studies:] Thank you, Brian.
[Nelson:] At that conference in Cairo, the Arab nations seem to be walking a fine line. On the one hand, they're blaming Israel for the violence in the Middle East and on other hand they're avoiding any real distinct rupture with the U.S. and also avoiding trying to knock the peace process off of the table. What's your assessment of what the summit will achieve?
[Bennis:] I think the Arab governments are faced with a very difficult challenge. On the one hand, this is period in which the environment in which they're working is one where they have very strong constraints on their freedom of operability. They're more dependent than ever on the United States, militarily for some of them, financially for others. And they cannot afford a break with the United States. In earlier summits, say 10 years ago, there was another superpower in the region contending for influence. That's no longer the case and they can't afford to break with the United States. On the other hand, they're dealing with populations who have access to more information than ever. There is now for the first time a 24-hour news station in the Arab world. People know what's going on. They see the Palestinian causalities. They see the vast disparity of power between the helicopter gunships and tanks mounted with machine guns of the Israeli military versus the stone throwers and a few old rifles of the Palestinian side. And the pressure on the governments from The Arab street is growing enormously. So they have to walk this very fine line. They have to respond to the mass pressure. These are very unstable regimes, some of them, and they can't afford to allow the demonstrations and the protests in their own countries to get out of hand. At the same time, there is no question but that they are fully dependent on the U.S. strategic presence in the region and that means they have to accept, if not fully endorse enthusiastically, the possibility of a return to the Oslo process.
[Nelson:] At the end summit, are we going to dismiss it as simply an exercise in hand-wringing?
[Bennis:] I'm afraid what we're going see are very strong words and very weak action. There will be great expressions of support for the Palestinians. The only real action I would anticipate is significant amounts of financial support will begin to pour into the PLO and the Palestinian authority. But, we're not going to see a cut off of oil. We're not going to see a return to the Arab boycott. We may see a slowing of the existing trade and diplomatic relations, but countries like Jordan, which is about to sign a free trade agreement with the United States in just a couple of days, countries like Egypt which received two billion dollars a year in U.S. aid, they're not about to cut their relations with Israel. They're not about to challenge U.S. strategy directly.
[Nelson:] All right, thank you for take the time to talk to us Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies. She joins us from Washington. Thank you.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] Well, for a lot of American workers Labor Day is no holiday at all, including those of us who are working away here. And figures show that workers in the United States today are putting in more hours than they were a decade ago. The International Labor Organization says that Americans worked an average of 1,978 hours last year; that is up from an average 1,942 hours in 1990. And joining us now to talk about some of the hot jobs of the future is Diane Strahan. She is the senior career adviser with careerbuilder.com. Diane, thanks for being here.
[Diane Strahan, Careerbuilder.com:] Thank you. Maybe you can start by telling us what a senior career adviser does at careerbuilder.com.
[Strahan:] Well, actually, we really take a look at some of the trends that are happening both from an employer perspective and a job- seeker perspective to make sure that we're providing the right services that really meet then needs of the marketplace today.
[Mcedwards:] All right, so where are they, these jobs of the future?
[Strahan:] Well, you really don't have to look far into the crystal ball to see the emerging jobs of the future. A lot of them are already on the scene of today's business. We're currently in an economic slump, but when we pull out of that we're still going to find that technology professionals and health care professionals and other specialized job functions are going to continue to rule the day.
[Mcedwards:] Why technology? Why health care?
[Strahan:] Well, we have to keep in mind we have just gone through sea change of jobs in the '80s and in the '90s, and most of this is a result of the prosperity that we've had over the last eight years and the technology boom. And you also need to take a look at the macro economic trends that are happening, because we have an aging of Americans and we also have a declining number of people in the workforce. And the tech boom is still here and strong. So technology and health care are going to remain really important sectors.
[Mcedwards:] Diane, just I want to interrupt you there on the technology issue, because a lot of people interested in this. You say the technology boom is still here and strong, and I think no one thinks that the technology jobs are going to go away over the long- term. But short-term, my goodness, there have been some awful, awful layoffs in the technology sector. So is that still where people should be looking?
[Strahan:] Well, you mentioned a really good point, technology has been hit hard, but we still are almost a half a million engineering and technology workers short. Right here, I live in D.C. market, and before working at careerbuilder I worked 10 years at MCI, and we've been hit really hard with WorldCom, Windstar and Teligent layoffs. So what job-seekers are going to need to do is be very flexible. They may not be able to get a job in the telecommunications sector, but they might be able to get a job in telecommunications, but in a different sector. So we're recommending that job-seekers focus on three things: one, really make sure that they can wear a number of hats, develop their skills beyond what their current job titles are today; two, you know, be indifferent to what sector you're working in because you might need to change sectors; and three, be a little flexible on your geography, because you might not thoroughly be able to get a job in L.A., but you might be able to get one in the West Coast somewhere.
[Mcedwards:] Any jobs you see as becoming obsolete?
[Strahan:] Well, we have some interesting things happening, we are going through a transformation of jobs. You know, before we had lots of telephone operators, and today we have telemarketers. Before we would have, you know, our friendly neighborhood butcher that we go down the street for, and now that same person's back on the scene, they just might be a gourmet meat specialist at Sutton Place. So we need to keep in mind that we are going through this transformation of jobs, and there's some new exciting job titles that are on the front. When you take a look engineering, for example we were just talking about technology we had a whole plethora of engineering titles come into the scene with software engineers and hardware engineers. In the future we'll have tissue engineers, where we really focus on the bioengineering of skin so we can manipulate cells and grow skin and tissue. We see other changes happening where we had janitors, and then today we have sanitation engineers. Well, tomorrow we're going to need technology recyclers because we have a lot of unused computer equipment that we're going to need to figure out what to do with because it has mercury and lead and other toxins that can impact the environment. So there are going to be some new jobs on the front and there are going to be some jobs that are passe, like postal workers that just need to change and transform to deal with the new electronic communications of the future.
[Mcedwards:] All right, Diane Strahan, we've got to leave it there. Thanks very much for your time today. Appreciate it.
[Strahan:] Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Two people are dead and two others are missing and presumed dead from tornadoes that slammed into Fort Worth, Texas. This morning, authorities have closed off the downtown business district in Fort Worth, which took a direct hit from one of two twisters. The tornadoes struck yesterday just after the evening rush hour. John Pronk, a helicopter pilot for our affiliate WFAA, surveys some of the damage.
[John Pronk, Wfaa Helicopter Pilot:] We're on the west side of downtown. We're hovering over the Montgomery Ward store. It's also a major distribution center for Montgomery Ward. This is really where the westernmost devastation of this tornado began yesterday evening. It's just unbelievable looking down at these large 18-wheeler trailers that they look like toys, thrown every which way. The large warehouse, you can see, is heavily damaged, as the tornado moved eastbound, next hitting a large warehouse, where we understand is where one fatality did occur. As the tornado continued on towards the Trinity River, it struck the Cash America building and a large church right next to it with a large amount of damage occurred. As the tornado's path continued on eastbound into the downtown area, it struck several of the large office billings, taking out 70, 80 percent of the Glass panels in the large office buildings.
[Kagan:] And that report from the sky came from our affiliate WFAA, Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Time to talk election 2000. Our CNN senior political analyst, Bill Schneider, waking up in Los Angeles this morning. Bill, you had such a good time there at the convention you went back for more.
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] That's right. I actually went back to the Nixon Library because yesterday was the 40th anniversary of the first-ever televised campaign debate and they commemorated it at the Nixon Library. It was the Kennedy-Nixon debate of 1960.
[Kagan:] Well, I want to ask you a question about being in Los Angeles. Did you see George W. Bush on "LARRY KING" last night? He came out and said, I'm going to win California.
[Schneider:] Well...
[Kagan:] Good luck?
[Schneider:] ... that's a bold notion and, look, anything can happen, but at the moment he's running behind in California. And a lot of Republicans here in California are worried that he'll write off California, because it's not just the presidential election at stake, but California has over 10 percent of the seats in the House of Representatives and there's a real ground trench warfare to control the House. So if Bush were to write off California, a lot of Republicans would be very, very angry.
[Kagan:] You have a lot of fans out there, Bill, a lot of e-mail sent in for you to answer, so let's get to them right away.
[Schneider:] OK.
[Kagan:] Our first e-mail, the question: "What role will foreign policy have in this election? Which candidate do you believe has the best plan?" It's not necessarily like to offer your opinion, but the foreign policy debate here.
[Schneider:] Well, I'll try to be analytical.
[Kagan:] OK.
[Schneider:] And I'll tell you that international affairs is not a real big issue in this campaign. Americans feels as if the country is secure. Both candidates are talking about a missile defense plan, although Gov. Bush's plan is far more ambitious and comprehensive than the one Vice President Gore is talking about. The voters really aren't too engaged in world affairs at the moment. It's a very odd election. I mentioned I was down at the Nixon Library and they were commemorating the 1960 debates. Those debates, everything was about the Cold War, everything was about the life-and-death struggle with communism. It was unbelievable. They even talked about civil rights in that context, that if we didn't give all our people equal rights, then how could we hold our face up before the world. Other countries would say we're not living up to our ideals. The atmosphere has completely changed. On the question about the, you know, the difference between them, I'd say, basically, the similarities are more striking than the differences. Yes, Bush has a more ambitious missile defense plan, but basically both are free- traders, both talk about America being a world leader. I think hat the Republicans are a little bit more unilateralist, the Democrats are a little bit more multilateralist. Republicans point to the Gulf War as the model of an international policy that they want to follow and the Democrats look at Kosovo as the sort of thing where we did it in concert with other countries. In both cases, we led the way but we didn't take a lot of risks. And, you know, the bottom line is, Slobodan Milosevic is clinging to power and Saddam Hussein is still in power after 10 years.
[Kagan:] Bill, our next e-mail is coming to us from farther up the West Coast in Fossil, Oregon, the question about Independents: "The Bush campaign was on the Sunday talk shows following the primaries, which were won by John McCain, ridiculing the Independents and calling us trouble makers. Now the Bush campaign is courting our votes. Does Bush think we've forgotten that tongue lashing?"
[Schneider:] Well, that's a big problem. Both side are courting the McCain vote because Republicans didn't go for John McCain except in a couple of states like New Hampshire. And they were angry that not just Independents but Democrats were invading their primary. Now, of course, Independents are a crucial swing vote in this campaign. They were swinging to Al Gore, now they seem to be maybe coming back a little bit to George W. Bush. That's the difference between a primary and a general election. They don't want Independents invading their primary space, but in a general election everyone competes for the Independent vote.
[Kagan:] Our next e-mail is from Oakland, California, in the bay area. A good question. We've talked about this: "If George Bush does not win, who is the Republican front-runner for 2004? Is it John McCain? If Gore loses, who would be the Dems' front-runner?"
[Schneider:] Oh, some speculation?
[Kagan:] Yes.
[Schneider:] Well, that's always fun.
[Kagan:] You're in that business.
[Schneider:] Then, you know, if Bush loses, then we enter my favorite stage of the campaign, which is recriminations.
[Kagan:] Ooh.
[Schneider:] Remember, the Democrats lost three times in a row with Carter, then Mondale, then Dukakis, and they basically concluded, you know, people aren't buying what we have to sell, and they had to change what the party was all about. Bill Clinton did that. If the Republicans now lose three times in a row, with the elder Bush, then Bob Dole, then the younger Bush, they're going to face the same kind of crisis. They're going to have to basically take McCain's advice even if they don't take John McCain himself. McCain said in the primaries, the Republicans can't win if all we have to offer is a conservative message because it's not the Ronald Reagan era anymore. We can't just sell that. He said...
[Kagan:] And real quick, if Gore loses?
[Schneider:] And if Gore loses and Hillary wins, who do you think will have the biggest national following? Hillary.
[Kagan:] Really, Hillary Clinton for president in 2004?
[Schneider:] It could happen.
[Kagan:] You heard it here first or maybe not first, but early on.
[Schneider:] OK, thanks.
[Kagan:] Actually, Kyra's too.
[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Yes, that's true.
[Kagan:] Good to see you.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] And with more on everything that's going on in Florida, let's give it over to our Bill Hemmer in Tallahassee, also, CNN's Brian Cabell is also in Florida there. Bill, you take it from here.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Correspondent:] OK, Daryn, thank you very much. We went to bed last night, late last night, trying to get word from West Palm Beach as to what was going to be the latest from that county. We woke up early this morning only to find out that, indeed, Palm Beach County will count all the votes over one more time starting tomorrow, on Monday morning. It got rather heated and rather contentious last night. The canvassing commission, a three member board, did meet with reporters late last night to announce their decision. A small sample, now, of what was happening in West Palm from last night.
[Unidentified Canvassing Board Member:] This is obviously very unprecedented and under normal conditions, I would automatically reject the idea. But due to the fact that this is something of national importance, I feel that it is something to consider and that it's something we should do.
[Burton:] All right, my only thought was not that we shouldn't do it or should do it, but we, before proceeding and because of the importance, we ought to seek those, at least the opinion of those with the expertise to advise us. I'm not...
[Roberts:] Well, I, I, again, I'm sorry that I...
[Burton:] I would simply feel better making a more informed opinion rather than a rash opinion.
[Roberts:] I don't believe this is an I'm not giving an opinion. I'm asking for a vote. I don't believe we need an opinion on what we should do because we are here in Palm Beach County. I represent the people of Palm Beach County and I believe the people of Palm Beach County deserve I represent all the people in Palm Beach County and I believe all the people in Palm Beach County deserve to have, as well as the people in the United States, deserve to have an answer and this is the way I see best fit to get that answer. I'd like to call the vote, since I made the motion.
[Burton:] Are, well, just a last comment on the motion and it is the Chair's opinion, and the Chair has indicated all along that this board has worked long and hard to be fair, to be open, to try and determine the true intent of the voters in this election. As I indicated, this canvassing board serves as a neutral body.
[Roberts:] Absolutely.
[Burton:] Its function is ministerial in nature and you are calling the vote and that's fine. I've made my point.
[Hemmer:] That's the canvassing commission late last night in Palm Beach County and certainly while a lot of us get a whole new education on American civics, there is a lot of attention being given to Palm Beach County. However, it is not the only part of Florida that needs to be talked about. In Volusia County, that's near Daytona Beach on the Atlantic side, CNN's Brian Cabell tracking things from there. They will start a recount today on this Sunday. Brian, good morning to you.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Bill. In fact, they are starting at this hour, 184,000 votes to be hand counted in this building behind me starting about now. They'll go about 14 hours today, 14 hours tomorrow and probably eight or 10 hours the following day on Tuesday. They have about 100 counters that are coming in on overtime. They will have Democrats and Republicans looking at each team to make sure everything goes smoothly. They have law enforcement, all together about 250 people involved. Now, they were supposed to have started this yesterday, but it was delayed because the canvassing board was counting for the very first time the write-in votes.
[Judge Michael Mcdermott, Chairman, Canvassing Board:] The only thing we talk about is for United States president, the only oval filled in is for a write-in and the voter has written in Cheney- Lieberman.
[Cabell:] Some of the votes, as you can see, were rather peculiar, to say the least. In any case, after all these write-in votes were tallied, six more came up for Vice President Gore, one more for Mr. Bush. So the margin has been cut by another five. Democrats and Republicans were watching this procedure the whole time. The Republicans, in fact, had a camera. Also, a camera was in a room adjacent to this, watching the 184,000 ballots to make sure that they stayed secure. Now, the reason this recount has come about is because Democrats were concerned about some irregularities. On election night, on Tuesday night, the computer suddenly subtracted 16,000 votes from Vice President Gore. Those were quickly restored. But that raised some question. That was some damaged software. Also, the day after the election, a precinct worker brought in a bag with a few votes. Those should have been turned in the day before. And then on Friday when they opened the vault, some bags were found to be open, not entirely secure. So again, some questions, but officials say the vote here has not been compromised in any way.
[Dave Byron, Volusia County Spokesman:] At the end of the day, what's really important is did we count all the votes and did we count them accurately and I believe that we have at this point and I believe that when the manual recount takes place and that's completed, I believe that's what the conclusion is going to be.
[Cabell:] So again, Bill, 184,000 votes to be counted. They hope, they expect, they have to have it done by Tuesday afternoon at five o'clock. Back to you.
[Hemmer:] Yeah, Brian, pretty interesting history in your part of the state, in Volusia County, given their election history, and again, we want to point out there is no evidence of fraud in the state right now, but clearly there are questions about the system and how it works. Are officials going to many lengths right now to explain to people how, indeed, they're going to try and make up for those system errors?
[Cabell:] Yeah, they are, and the very fact that each voting team of two counters will have a Democrat and Republican watching all day long, and they've had yesterday with the canvassing board they had three Democrats on one side, three Republicans on the other. So they are trying to make certain this is out in the open, this is entirely fair and any questions that will be raised will be recorded by these Democrats and Republicans. So this doesn't mean there will be no lawsuits, but no objections will be raised during the counting procedure right now, but they may be raised later on. One other thing, Bill...
[Hemmer:] All right, Brian. Brian, yeah, please. Go ahead.
[Cabell:] This all could be stopped, of course, on Monday. They could be stopped in midcount if the Republicans are granted an injection against this recount. So they could get halfway through this recount and stop on Monday.
[Hemmer:] All right, Brian Cabell. Watch it for us. We'll be in touch, Brian. Thanks to you. And one other note from overnight, the Associated Press is reporting in Polk County, that's in the center part of Florida near Orlando, they have conducted their own recount. They went through about 50 percent of their precincts. They find that George W. Bush gains 104 votes in that county. Where does this all go? Where does it all end? We'll follow it, certainly, hour by hour here in the Sunshine State.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] It's a hard-line treatment for hardcore drug addicts and though those participating in the program are not exiled in Siberia, they might as well be. CNN's Steve Harrigan looks at an unusual method of rehab that's the result of desperation, disillusionment and a little bit of disgust.
[Steve Harrigan, Cnn Correspondent:] It's a Siberian clinic, where you can eat lunch, have a smoke, or read the Bible, all with one hand. That's because the other hand is chained to a bed.
[Unidentified Male:] The only time they unlock us is to go to the bathroom.
[Harrigan:] The handcuffs are to prevent Pavel or any of the 20 other young men from taking heroin. Roman's last high came six days ago, just before his father brought him to the free clinic.
[Unidentified Male:] I haven't slept in six days. Anyone who's addicted knows what it's like, sweat, first hot then cold, pain in the legs, the craving.
[Harrigan:] But there is little sympathy for the addicts, not even from their own mothers.
[Unidentified Female:] If they beat him they are right to beat him, he needs to be beaten to be turned into a human being.
[Harrigan:] All the families have tried traditional rehab programs at hospitals and failed. The handcuffs, they say, are a last resort.
[Unidentified Female:] I tried to do my best to have my son alive.
[Harrigan:] The clinic was founded by three Yekaterinburg businessmen, not to make money, they say, but to clean up their hometown.
[Unidentified Male:] Unlike any other country in the world, we are solving the drug problem.
[Harrigan:] In a city known for its powerful Mafia gangs, the businessmen are solving the problem in their own way. Yvegeny Roitzman, jewelry salesman and clinic founder, explains.
[Yvegeny Roitzman, Clinic Founder:] There used to be thousands of drug dealers in this neighborhood. People were afraid to leave their house. So we got 500 strong guys in expensive cars and blocked it off. There were raids, beatings. We made them terrified to sell drugs here. We didn't ask anyone. We just did it.
[Harrigan:] They didn't ask anyone how to treat drug addiction, either. For that, they drew on their own experience behind bars.
[Roitzman:] Handcuffs are the only thing that works. They make you think about your mistakes.
[Harrigan:] He should know: all three of the clinic's founders are convicted criminals. Steve Harrigan, CNN, Moscow.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Authorities in Detroit say they've arrested a former Navy serviceman in connection with the strangulations of several prostitutes. Officials say the suspect could be linked to other killings around the world. Jennifer Donelan from our affiliate WDIV has the story.
[Jennifer Donelan, Wdiv Reporter:] The yellow tape around the railroad tracks on Detroit's southwest side was just the beginning. Beyond the tape were the bodies of three women, all prostitutes and, police say, all strangled to death, including 33- year-old Kelly Hood of Detroit, a divorced mother of three killed three weeks ago. Police nabbed their suspected serial killer, John Eric Armstrong, near this very same place police say he was set to kill again.
[Chief Benny Napoleon, Detroit Police:] Serial killers kill. That's what they do. They're not going to stop until they get caught. They move from place to place.
[Donelan:] The arrest in Detroit led investigators on a worldwide trail of murder. Police say Armstrong was a U.S. Navy sailor traveling on the USS Nimitz. Police allege he moved from port to port on a killing spree, strangling his victims to death. Beyond the three murders in Detroit, Armstrong is linked to the murder of a prostitute in Dearborn Heights. Police have also linked him to murders in Virginia, Washington State, Thailand, and suspect him in murder in Pearl Harbor, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea and Tel Aviv.
[John Bell, Fbi Special Agent:] A lot of that will be done by the FBI through our legal attaches offices. We have 38 legal attaches offices scattered around the world. We'll cover leads with the local police departments.
[Donelan:] While the investigation into the murders reaches an international level, back in Detroit, people who live near the yellow tape say they're relieved it's over.
[Unidentified Female:] This is terrible and I'm glad that, you know, they finally caught him. You know, now we can all walk back on the streets like we used to.
[Kagan:] Again, that story coming to us from Jennifer Donelan of WDIV. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Reuters news service reported that two people were killed when U.S. war planes hit an area of caves and tunnels in eastern Afghanistan today, known, they say, as a hide-out of Osama bin Laden. Joie Chen now with more on cave warfare and its possible role in the conflict thus far. Joie, good morning again.
[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] Good morning, again, Bill. We have heard from a number of experts who have been on the ground and thoroughly study the situation in Afghanistan. The defense officials acknowledge that there are at least hundreds, probably thousands, though, of caves and tunnels, and aqueducts among the mountains and deserts of Afghanistan, and many of which can certainly serve as hiding places for the Taliban or anyone else who may want to hide there. CNN military analyst, Retired Major General Don Shepperd is here with us to talk about this. And General, certainly from your experience in Vietnam, you know what it is to face a formidable enemy that goes underground.
[Major General Don Shepperd , Cnn Military Analyst:] Indeed, they can sneak up from underground and jump on you and they can do it day or night. At a trip last year, I was with a group in Vietnam and we visited the Vin Mot tunnels, where a whole city of almost 5,000 people existed underground for major portions of the Vietnam War. We also visited the Cu Chi tunnels which came up within about a mile of the base where I was stationed and we didn't even know those tunnels existed. They are something again, in the way of a complex.
[Chen:] Well, Afghanistan, we understand, t is a maze of tunnels going back to Alexander the Great's time, which they initially used to bring water resources to the surface. But some of these things have been developed into elaborate cave and tunnel networks. I want to take a look at some graphic pictures. First of all, we do want to mention, that some of the experts say the networks case, found primarily in southern Afghanistan, also in eastern Afghanistan as well. The Taliban, of course you know, has a stronghold area at Kandahar. Let's show you some of the animations of how U.S. forces might be able to find someone hiding in the cave. Imagine if you were, maybe a group of Taliban fighters, you see them depicted here, maybe two, maybe more. A couple guys sitting underground in one of these caves. Maybe they built a fire to keep themselves warm. At that point, a reconnaissance plane might come in, you see there, depicted here as a predator, one of the unmanned probes that can go along, it can detect the heat of the fire using thermal detection devices, that actually can detect heat from underground. Now the drone's controllers would then be able to call in bombers that would come in, say the form of the B-2 bomber, and then, the B-2 can attack the target with those big Bunker Buster bombs. We have heard about those, 5,000-pound bombs that are able to penetrate deep underground. These were first established at the time of the Gulf War when they knew they had to go after Saddam Hussein's forces deep in these bunkers underground. Now it might be of some use here. General, as you look at these things and you analyze that situation, I guess for a lot of people, the notion that the Taliban can hide underground in these tunnels seems almost impossible to locate. How can you find them in thousands and thousands of tunnels?
[Shepperd:] You described it very well. There are two types of tunnels: The natural tunnels, which are used are the tunnels that have been dug out which have been use for irrigation for centuries, back to Alexander the Great and later the Mongol time when people hid. And you can hide in those almost at will. But the military tunnels that the Taliban and others have dug are much more formidable. They are deep. They are well defended. Some even have steel doors as well as brick floors. And have you to know exactly where the tunnel is. In other words, you see the opening to the tunnel, but then where does it go? Left or right? Extend, then left or right? You have to be able to get the bomb in where it is. This is a formidable target with thousands of these over the countryside.
[Chen:] Certainly will become a topic of much conversation. In the end though, you are probably still going to need ground troops?
[Shepperd:] Could be indeed. We will do as much as we can from the air but there will be a lot of Special Forces involved in getting people out of these tunnels, Joie.
[Chen:] Major General Don Shepherd, our CNN military specialist. Thank you very much.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We are going to start today with yet another new computer bug that is out there, it is biting its way through computers this morning. And Internet users, the warning is out for you. Experts say this new virus is smarter and even more destructive than the virus from a couple of weeks ago, called the "Love Bug." CNN's technology correspondent Rick Lockridge joins us now, he has more on this new computer bug. Rick, good morning.
[Rick Lockridge, Cnn Technology Correspondent:] Good morning. And I think we should take a moment right now to contemplate just how lucky we are that this happened now instead of before the "Love Bug." Because this worm is much more destructive and it's much stealthier than the other one. If this one had hit first we would be having a real crisis. The "Love Bug" was bad enough, but I think there would be an awful lot of people around the world and certainly in this building, whose computers would be sleeping with the fishes this morning if this one had hit first. Let's show you what to look out for. First of all, when you open up Outlook, and it's only on Microsoft Outlook, if that's the e-mail program you use, you open it up. And you see one of these: a little paper clip icon, you know you have a mail with an attachment. Now I've sent this one to myself, this is a simulation, this is not the real worm. So you open it up and on the subject line here's another give away. It will have "fw," as in forward, somewhere on the subject line. So, so far, I know I could be at risk. Now I look down to see what the attachment was, and I see that the attachment name is something that the the worm has gone into my computer and taken a word out at random that I already had in my e-mails somewhere. We deal with a lot of scripts here, so it's picked the world "script" and it has attached this suffix ".vbs." That's very important, if you see.vbs then you know it could be the worm. Now if I were to double click on this, which I'm not going to because you shouldn't, and it were to happen to be the worm, then what would happen next would be: it would go into my computer; it would e- mail copies of itself, changing the name in every instance, to everybody in my Microsoft Outlook address book; then in would go into my computer or my system, if I was connected to a network as I am here, and it would rename all of my files after itself and reduce the size of every one of those files to zero bytes. Meaning it would erase, effectively erase all of my files, I would have nothing left on computer except the files that were open at the time I double clicked. And I would have to go all the way back to square one and reinstall Windows and I would lose everything else on my computer in the process. So if I were to see something like this and I didn't know that it was just some simulation that I put up for you, I would go right up here to this very important X icon in Microsoft Outlook, which is where you should always head when you get an attachment you're uncertain about. And I'll hit it, and I'll delete that file. And then it will go into the deleted files folder and I can go back and further delete it if I wanted to. But for me, I know that I'm pretty safe at this point. So you want to take those steps to find out if you've got it and then you want to delete it Daryn.
[Kagan:] Rick, I know after the "Love Bug" a lot of folks went out and they got one of those anticomputer or, I mean, antivirus programs. Is that going to help in this case?
[Lockridge:] Well, you should have, of course, antivirus software already installed. If you had one on your computer, it would not necessarily have picked up this one. So you should go to one of a number of sites, Symantec among several others, and you should look for latest version of their software which you can download, in most cases, for free. And it will help identify whether you have one of those culprits somewhere on your hard disk. Rick Lockridge, thanks for all the words of warning. We will be very careful and just go for the delete, the big X. Thank you.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] In California Ruben Montoya is his name, and he should be mighty thankful that he is a bit of a pack rat.
[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] That's right: Otherwise, he wouldn't have such a big bank account this morning. CNN's Anne McDermott explains.
[Anne Mcdermott, Cnn Correspondent:] Want to be rich and regal, or just rich and richer?
[Bill Gates:] Absolutely.
[Mcdermott:] Well, you could win the lottery. Ruben and Michelle Montoya did back in September, and he even checked his ticket when the results were announced, but somehow he thought he'd lost.
[Ruben Montoya:] I missed it.
[Mcdermott:] Wednesday, he check it again when lottery officials warned that there was just one day left to claim the $11 million prize. So you held onto a ticket for six months that you thought was a losing ticket?
[R. Montoya:] I don't know, I just...
[Michelle Montoya:] He likes to keep things.
[R. Montoya:] I'm a pack rat.
[Mcdermott:] Well, good thing: Otherwise, your wife might have made you go on Regis.
[Regis Philbin, Host, "who Wants To Be A Millionaire":] He's won a million dollars.
[Mcdermott:] Of course, Montoya would have had to appear on the show 11 times in a row.
[Philbin:] Won a million won a million won a million won a million.
[Mcdermott:] Not necessary now he's got it, but he doesn't know how he's going to spend it: yachts, cars, jewels? Well maybe. Or he could do as a former lottery winner did.
[Unidentified Male:] Play Lotto and boogie down: It's party time.
[Mcdermott:] Well, it took awhile, but now it's party time here too. And the Montoyas agree with California lottery officials, who say you can't win if you don't play. And they add, you can't win if you forget to cash in. Anne McDermott, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Mcedwards:] People around the country checking their old tickets now. I can hear it: I can hear the wallets opening, the cookie jars opening.
[Lin:] Yes, and I'll bet his first investment will be a personal organizer.
[Mcedwards:] Absolutely.
[Lin:] He knows what he's missing out on.

[Shields:] Welcome back. "Beyond the Beltway": Secretary of State Colin Powell's Asian trip included his first visit to Vietnam since combat service there as a young officer. The climax was a visit to China intended to improve U.S.-Chinese relations after months of tension.
[Colin Powell, U.s. Secretary Of State:] I think we moved the ball forward. There are still some outstanding issues to be resolved and some places where we don't have full agreement.
[Shields:] References to human rights were stripped from Secretary Powell's taped speech to the Chinese people. Joining us now is CNN State Department correspondent Andrea Koppel, who covered the Powell trip. Thanks for coming in, Andrea. Did Secretary Powell accomplish anything of real significance in China?
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn State Department Correspondent:] Well, he did; but you have to remember that the sights were set fairly low from the start of the trip, and that is that he went to China to say that the chapter, the EP-3 spy plane incident is behind us, and now we can look forward to the visit of President Bush in October, and that this is not a relationship that is going to be based solely on conflict that we actually want to find ways to work together.
[Shields:] What about the stripping, though, of all reference to human rights in the taped speech that Secretary Powell that Chinese authorities just absolutely expurgated it?
[Koppel:] Well, that was actually it was an interview that was done on Chinese Central Television...
[Shields:] Right.
[Koppel:] ... and this was they were asking him about his book, about his tour in Vietnam and what not. And, certainly, the State Department was under the impression that the entire interview would be aired. I don't necessarily think that we should be surprised that his comments on human rights were taken out of the broadcast statement, especially when you think that three years ago when President Clinton was there there was this live press conference that he held with China's president and he did address a number of human rights issues.
[Shields:] Yes, that's right. Bob?
[Novak:] Andrea, did you get the impression from the Chinese government that they wanted to improve relations too? That after all the pounding and the yelling, when they let these people that had been imprisoned on charges of espionage probably trumped up, but they had been in prison. Did you get the idea that they really wanted to lower the decibel level themselves?
[Koppel:] Absolutely. China's president, the premiere, every leader that Secretary Powell met with did everything but embrace him to their bosom. This was a very important trip for China because it wants and it needs desperately to improve its economy. And the way to do that is to have good relations with the United States. And they also want to have a very successful APEC this is that economic regional meeting that takes place every year. They're the host of it in October, which is why President Bush is going there. So they want to have had a good meeting, and they know that they need to have had a good relationship with the U.S. leading up to it.
[O'beirne:] They care so desperately, Andrea, but not enough to significantly improve the human rights situation. Are they does Beijing just sort of separate that out at though and pretend it's unrelated to the kind of relationship they want with the West?
[Koppel:] Well, they know how to handle the U.S. And they know that if you give the U.S. a couple of released dissidents ahead of a trip, that that sort of takes the air out of the argument. And that's when they did, just, literally three days before secretary Powell arrived there.
[O'beirne:] And those friendly gestures can go on forever because presumably all they need to do is snatch some other Americans off the streets, hold them for a while and then release them.
[Novak:] I don't think those were Americans, Kate.
[O'beirne:] Well, naturalized citizens, or ones who legal residents here who are none of them belonged in jail, Bob.
[Novak:] One was a green card holder.
[O'beirne:] And he they did hold her husband and son, too, who were, of course, American citizens. And none of them, of course, belonged in jail. But they could be doing these endless friendly gestures, couldn't they?
[Koppel:] Absolutely. And certainly what they're going to continue doing with the U.S. is talking about improving their human rights record and, at least the short term, that seems to have satisfied the Bush administration. Secretary Powell said that they're going to renew, they're going to re-open the human rights dialogue which had been on hold since the bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade back in 1999 during the Kosovo conflict.
[Carlson:] Talking works so well for them, I don't know why the Chinese would ever change their behavior because they get away with whatever they want to get away with, and we want to keep trading with them, so it reinforces the worst behavior on their part. Reporters at the White House tend to think of Secretary Powell as the great dissenter in the administration that he's really not in favor of an isolation. He would have kept the Kyoto Treaty, ABM he's still for it; he truly wants to engage in the world. Are we at the White House not as sophisticated as those of you at the State Department where, you know, Powell is totally on board. He's not, in any way, against any of these administration policies. And I have this follow up: Why was Secretary Powell on the floor with the microphone at dinner?
[Koppel:] OK, well I'll answer that in a second. I think that it's natural and we've seen this before in previous administrations that the secretary of state as the United States' top diplomat, is the one who has to deal with all of these governments and make nice. I do think that it is common knowledge that Secretary Powell is somebody who was more reluctant than others in the administration about taking a more, what some have called, unilateralist or isolationist approach towards these various treaties. And certainly he's the one who's trying to to try sort of middle ground with the Japanese on the Kyoto warming treaty and with the Russians on the ABM Treaty. Now, to answer your other more important question...
[Shields:] The musical.
[Koppel:] When he was in Vietnam this was for the southeast Asian Regional Forum, the annual meeting. And there's a tradition that all the foreign ministers put together some sort of skits, whether it's singing and dancing, whether it's reading a poem. And Secretary Powell sang "Old El Paso" with the Japanese foreign minister, who happens to be a woman. And so he was down on the floor because he was shot and dying, and his true love, foreign minister...
[Carlson:] What a ham!
[Novak:] I can't imagine...
[Shields:] Do you remember what Warren Christopher did? No, go ahead.
[Novak:] Well, I was going to say I can't imagine John Foster Dulles doing that. Just briefly, there was a totally different mood, it seems like, in Vietnam less tension than it is in China. Relations are generally good with Vietnam, aren't they?
[Koppel:] They are. And within a couple of weeks, I think sometime in early September they're supposed to sign the Vietnam Free Trade Agreement. This is a very different period in our history, and what better way to exemplify that than the fact that you have a former U.S. soldier who served two tours of duty in Vietnam who goes back as the top U.S. diplomat that is Secretary of State Powell to improve the relationship with Vietnam?
[Shields:] Andrea Koppel, thank you so much for being with us. The gang will be back with the "Outrage of the Week." Thank you. Thanks a million.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Heart transplants are often very expensive, and drugs don't always work. Now, researchers may have found a third alternative for folks with bad hearts. Doctors are experimenting with advanced pacemakers. And as CNN medical correspondent Rhonda Rowland reports, early reviews are quite positive.
[Rhonda Rowland, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Only two weeks ago, nurse Donna Lavai could not walk to the end of this hall to do her rounds.
[Unidentified Female:] I was so out of breath. I would walk down the hall and my legs were like rubber.
[Rowland:] Several nights, she was forced to do her rounds in a wheelchair.
[Unidentified Female:] Hello.
[Rowland:] Lavai has heart failure. Over the last decade, her heart weakened due to high blood pressure. Until now, the only two treatments for the condition were medication or a heart transplant. But doctors told her they may have something better, an experimental therapy: a new kind of pacemaker
[Dr. Angel Leon, Crawford Long Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia:] I'm very excited. When I first heard about it, about this development, in the first few patients in which it was done, I didn't believe it in the least bit.
[Rowland:] The new pacemaker uses three wires, or leads, which are threaded into both sides of the heart to help it pump more efficiently.
[Leon:] This is the actual pacemaker device.
[Rowland:] Researchers say it could help about half of all heart failure patients, those with a conduction delay or faulty electrical system. [on camera]: It's unlikely this type of pacemaker will cure heart failure, and it's too early to say if it will be an alternative to heart transplants or make transplants unnecessary. But the pacemakers appear to be improving the patient's quality of life dramatically. [voice-over]: Improvements so dramatic that three pacemaker manufacturers are racing to get their devices approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
[Unidentified Female:] Hi sweet, boy. How you doing?
[Rowland:] For Donna Lavai, the pacemaker's allowing her to do what she loves: taking care of patients.
[Unidentified Female:] I've been able to walk up and down the halls without any trouble. Everybody tells me my color's better.
[Rowland:] Her heart may never be 100 percent again, but for now she can pick up the pace. An important question that needs to be answered is if heart failure patients with the pacemakers will live longer. In the pacemaker study that's furthest along, patients are being followed for just six months. That's not enough time to see that is time to see improvements in quality of life, but longer studies will be needed to see if the pacemakers actually extend life Bill.
[Hemmer:] Giving some folks some hope on this anyway.
[Rowland:] Oh, definitely. HEMMER; You mentioned three companies manufacturing, racing right now to get their product to the market. Sounds like there could be a whole lot of money made in this. If that is the case, how much would it cost a patient who would want a pacemaker surgery such as this? Well, it's about $12,000 for a heart failure patient to get one of these pacemakers implanted. To put that in perspective, a hospitalization for heart failure is $6,000. So two hospitalizations would cover the cost of a pacemaker. But most of these patients have multiple hospitalizations, so certainly patients would be ahead by getting the pacemaker. And also here, Bill, to just give you some figures, there are about four-and-a-half-million Americans with heart failure, so that's a lot of pacemakers. And, also, on top of that, they expect the number of people worldwide who will get pace makers to double or triple.
[Hemmer:] Wow, OK. Big market.
[Rowland:] Definitely.
[Hemmer:] Rhonda Rowland, thank you.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] The U.S. second court of appeals has overturned the conviction of three of the former New York police officers involved in the Abner Louima sodomizing case. We have on the phone with us right now Sanford Rubenstein. He is Abner Louima's attorney. And we'd would like reaction from you, Mr. Rubenstein.
[Sanford Rubenstein, Louima Attorney:] Well, first of all, this has two parts. Apparently, what has happened is the circuit court overturned the civil right conviction of police officer Wiese, and that will be a new trial, and Abner Louima will totally cooperate with the federal authorities with regards to their efforts in a new trial. It also appears that the conviction of three police officers for conspiracy to obstruct justice was also overturned. It's not clear if they offered a new trial to
[Kagan:] And why do you think it's split like that?
[Rubenstein:] Well, there were two separate convictions, one for the assault, and the civil right's violation, and one for conspiracy to obstruct justice.
[Kagan:] And just help us in understanding this case. The three officers on the second part of that, do they were they convicted on any other charges?
[Rubenstein:] One of them was officer Wiese, who was convicted on the civil right violation.
[Kagan:] So he will have new trial.
[Rubenstein:] On the civil rights violation, that is clear. However, it's not clear, and I have to read the decision, because I haven't seen it yet, with regard to the disposition of the conspiracy to obstruct justice conviction of the three police officers, one of whom was officer Wiese.
[Kagan:] Certainly, I'm sure you read the arguments by their attorneys why they were fighting this, and what the appeal was based on. Can you tell us what that was?
[Rubenstein:] I haven't actually seen the decision. Apparently, there were issues involved with regard to effective counsel and issues involved with regard to pretrial publicity that the circuit court of appeals ruled on in making their decision.
[Kagan:] Are you disappointed by this overturn?
[Rubenstein:] The process of justice moves on. And if this is what the court of appeals rules, then so be it, and there will be a new trial with regard to the civil rights violation that officer Wiese was initially convicted. and Abner Louima will totally cooperate with the federal authorities in prosecuting that case again.
[Kagan:] All right, Sanford Rubenstein, thanks for joining us by phone, Abner Louima's attorney. Appreciate it. Once again, the second circuit court of appeals in New York has overturned the convictions of three of the officers in the Abner Louima case. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com Former N.Y. Police Officers Involved in Louima Case

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Well, are you feeling lucky? If you think you can flip a coin and see heads 26 times in a row, or dial a phone number at random in Britain and reach Queen Elizabeth, you may be ready for the "Big Game," let's try it. On the other hand, you may care more about the jackpot, which is $350 million now. More about the jackpot and the odds against winning it, which are 76 million to one. That's certainly the case for the millions of folks who, in some cases, are standing in line for hours for the chance to risk hundreds, even thousands of dollars on a dream. With the largest jackpot in U.S. lottery history up for grabs just hours from now, "Big Game" ticket sales are expected to reach 30 times the usual volume. Most of those players have a pretty clear notion of what they might buy if they won, but if you're at a loss, may we suggest barnesandnoble.com? The on-line bookseller is worth an estimated $302 million, easily within the budget of a "Big Game" winner. Or how about his and her Boeing 777s? Those state-of-the-art wide body commercial jets go for $160 million apiece, take two. If you're into self-improvement, consider a Harvard education for yourself and 2,546 friends. Four years at Harvard cost about $137,400.
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Well, some of the busiest "Big Game" ticket sellers are the ones near the borders of states that don't have the game. CNN's Gary Tuchman joins us now from Ringgold, Georgia, just a ping-pong ball's throw from Tennessee. Meeting a lot of folks today, Gary?
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] A lot of excited folks. A lot of people who think they are going win today, Lou. And we are in Ringgold, Georgia, the Golden Gallon convenience store where customers are hoping to strike gold. $350 million has brought out hundreds of Georgians but more Tennesseans because as you said, we're a ping-pong ball away from Tennessee. So, thousands of Tennesseans have driven from all over the state to places like this right on the state line to try to win the "Big Game" lottery. Seven states have the "Big Game." In alphabetical order they are: the state of Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, and Virginia. The odds of winning this, 76 million to one. To give you an idea of what that means, 76 million to one would also be taking 26 quarters, throwing them in the air, and having them all land on heads at the same time. Try that when the newscast is over, you will find it will not happen and if it does, you should play the "Big Game" because you're a very lucky person. Lots of people here think they are lucky, they ladies drove all the way from Nashville, Tennessee. How many miles is Nashville from here?
[Unidentified Female:] Like two and a half hours. Two fifty.
[Tuchman:] You have to know the answer to that question, you can't win the "Big Game."
[Unidentified Female:] Like two hundred and fifty.
[Tuchman:] OK, how long did it take you to get here?
[Unidentified Female:] Almost four hours.
[Tuchman:] How much money did you spend on your ticket?
[Unidentified Female:] Ten bucks.
[Tuchman:] Only ten bucks? you drove that far?
[Unidentified Female:] Uh-huh.
[Tuchman:] OK, well, actually that's pretty good because the odds are 76 million to one. Think you have any chance of winning?
[Unidentified Female:] Sure.
[Tuchman:] You do?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes.
[Tuchman:] Because you heard what I just said about tossing the quarters in the air, you have 26 quarters you want to toss?.
[Unidentified Female:] I have a better chance of winning now that I have a ticket in my hand instead of not having one.
[Tuchman:] A valid point, but do you think you have a possibility of winning?
[Unidentified Female:] Sure, everybody does.
[Tuchman:] How will you feel tomorrow though, when you hear the numbers and you find out that it's likely not yours?
[Unidentified Female:] Disappointed, I guess.
[Tuchman:] Ladies, thanks for joining us, hope you have a nice time in Ringgold, Georgia. We have the manager over here, Sherry, come on over here for a second. How crazy has it been today, Sherry?
[Unidentified Female:] It's been massively crazy.
[Tuchman:] And it was crazy last Friday too, because the drawing is every Tuesday and Friday. Friday was for 200 plus million. Today 350 million. I bet you're expecting it to get pretty wild later.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, it's been wild every day since last Thursday.
[Tuchman:] Do you like this? Is it good or bad?
[Unidentified Female:] It's good, it's good for our business.
[Tuchman:] OK, an enthusiastic person, thank you very much for talking with us, Sherry. So you can imagine, right now it's pretty crowded here. There are about 25 people inside this small store and by the time this store sells its last "Big Game" ticket at 10:45 Eastern time tonight, they're expecting it to be standing room only. Lou, back to you.
[Waters:] Did you get your ticket, Gary?
[Tuchman:] Lou, believe it or not, I haven't gotten it yet. But I have a policy: one ticket, because it's all you need to win. It only costs a buck, so you don't feel bad when you lose.
[Waters:] There you go, Gary Tuchman, down at the Golden Gallon in Ringgold, Georgia today, on assignment. If you've done the math, you know the "Big Game" is taking in a lot more money than it's paying out. So where does the rest of the money go? It varies, state to state, but schools are among the big beneficiaries, and so are the students. More on that from Jerry Carnes of CNN affiliate WXIA in Atlanta.
[Jerry Carnes, Wxia Reporter:] Alyssa Paetau just finished her sophomore year at Georgia Tech. This biology major is working an on-campus job to help her pay for housing and books. She doesn't have to worry about tuition. All of Georgia's multimillion dollar dreamers are paying for that. Lottery sales are currently paying for more than 141,000 students to attend Georgia colleges by way of the Hope scholarship. In Alyssa's case, it made what would've been a financial struggle easy.
[Alyssa Paetau, Georgia Tech Student:] Yes. I have a lot of friends from South Carolina and Alabama who are extremely jealous of my Hope scholarship, and they're like: man, I live just 10 minutes over the border and you get Hope and I don't, it's just not fair.
[Carnes:] Even though Georgia participates in the "Big Game" lottery with seven other states, money spent on tickets here goes toward education here. Thirty-five percent of each dollar spent pays for college scholarships. New equipment and more. As the "Big Game" jackpot soared from 250 million to now over 300 million, total lottery ticket sales topped in Georgia topped $75 billion last week. That's $26 million generated for education in Georgia in one week. It's nearly double the 15 million generated by the lottery in an average week.
[Paetau:] It's incentive for me to work hard and keep my grades up here.
[Carnes:] In a few months, Alyssa Paetau will leave Georgia Tech to study respiratory therapy at the Medical College of Georgia. But don't think she'll leave her Hope scholarship behind, the lottery will pay for her tuition there as well.
[Waters:] And we have more good news for Alyssa and students like her: lottery officials tell us "Big Game" tickets are selling at a rate of 12,000 a minute in Georgia alone.
[Allen:] Well, it turns out the vast majority of lottery players don't bet their mortgages, or even their milk money. A Gallup poll found 39 percent of Americans spend $4 or less on lottery games in any given month, 25 percent spend between $5 and $9, 29 percent spend between $10 and $29, and just 6 percent spend $30 or more. Slightly more than half of folks earning less than $25,000 a year play lotteries, but among those earning $25,000 to $45,000 a year the figure is higher, 61 percent. It's highest of all, 65 percent, among folks who earn between $45,000 and $75,000 a year.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] A court-ordered field test has been taking place in Texas today, designed to answer questions about the final moments of the 1993 Branch Davidian siege in Waco. The tests could prove whether federal agents fired shots at the Branch Davidian compound, charges authorities persistently have denied. CNN national correspondent Tony Clark joins us now live in Fort Hood, Texas, near the site of the simulation. Tony, what's happening there?
[Tony Clark, Cnn National Correspondent:] Andria, the test has concluded, and now we're simply wait to hear from the attorney, the U.S. Attorney, and one of the attorneys for relatives of the Davidians to come out a little bit later this afternoon and talk to us about what they saw, what the results may be from the test. The test was taken took place on a firing range that's behind me about 15 or 20 miles. It was a ways away. We were not allowed to be able to be close to see it, but we expect to, either later tonight or some time tomorrow, to see a videotape. The tape is to be compared with a tape made on April 19th, 1993. That FBI infrared tape shot at the back of the compound, the Branch Davidian compound, shows flashes of light. The U.S. Attorney and the FBI have consistently said that those flashes of light are simply a reflection off debris or water or some anomaly. But attorneys for relatives of the Davidians that were killed say it was simply gunfire, gunfire that the FBI denies took place. So that was the whole basis for today's test. There were two aircraft put up in the air with infrared cameras. Soldiers on the ground fired weapons, there was debris on the ground. And an analysis of the tape shot today, comparison, if there are any flashes on that, with the April 19th tape may answer the troubling question, was there gunfire? Were there FBI agents at the back of the Davidian compound firing at the Davidians some years seven years ago? Tony Clark, CNN, Fort Hood, Texas. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] It appears the quality of U.S. airline service is declining, despite recent promises by the nation's carriers. A new university study finds the number of passenger complaints soared last year. CNN's Carl Rochelle takes a look at the numbers.
[Carl Rochelle, Cnn Correspondent:] If you think flying the airlines got worse last year, an annual review of airline quality says you were right.
[Brent Brown, University Of Nebraska:] We actually saw a dive in the overall quality in the last quarter, while the airlines were supposed to be working on their plans, implementing their plans for service improvement.
[Rochelle:] The airline quality rating is based on a review of on- time performance, how often baggage is mishandled, and how frequently passengers are bumped from flights. Of the 10 airlines surveyed: Southwest rated best, followed by Continental, Delta, Northwest and Alaska Airlines. US Airways, number one last year, plunged to 6th place in 1999, followed by American, America West, Transworld, and, for the second year in a row, United was in last place.
[Brown:] You can see that consumers are just fed up. The consumers are fed up with poor service. The consumers are fed up with all aspects of service quality.
[Unidentified Male:] I just don't like the way that you get packed i, like, basically into a plane. Taking a bus is actually more comfortable nowadays.
[Unidentified Female:] About a year ago, I was stuck 24 hours in San Juan, Puerto Rico, and they kept telling us that they would put us in the next plane.
[Rochelle:] The Air Transport Association says, the data may not give an accurate representation of passengers' experiences.
[David Fuscus, Air Transport Association:] You're talking about a few thousand people that complained directly to the Department of Transportation, that's out of 640 million passengers last year. So statistically that's not a very good number.
[Rochelle:] With consumer complaints up 130 percent last year, according to the researchers, the have said it is time for a new initiative for a passengers' bill of rights, a bill that was considered last year by Congress, but not passed. I'm Carl Rochelle, CNN, reporting live from Washington. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Back here in New York City, the president just emerging from his meeting with various business leaders from across the country. We will listen here live.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] And I want to thank the business leaders from not only New York, but others who have come from around the country to discuss the state of the nation, and we've had a very frank discussion about the state of our economy. I think there's no question, we all agree, that the events of September 11 shocked our economy just like it shocked the conscience of our nation. But like those terrorists, they can't affect our soul, they can't affect the greatness of America. We all believe that the underpinnings are there for economic recovery and we all must do our part. The federal government has a role to play. Today, Secretary Paul O'Neill testified at Congress saying that the administration believes that we ought to have $60 to $75 billion more dollars of stimulus to encourage consumer confidence, to enhance business investment, as well as to take care of displaced workers. I have shared that with the business leaders here. They understand that there is a role for the federal government, a strong and active role, and I assured them it's a role that we intend to play. I know there are people hurting in America. There are people who have lost their jobs. But I assured these leaders that our government will do everything we can to get our economy growing, to make it as strong as possible. I am saddened by the sight of the World Trade Center, once again, but through my tears, I do see a much better future for the country. This is a great nation. It's an entrepreneurial nation. It's a nation that has got such generous and kind people. The business leadership here has contributed $150 million to a variety of funds here in the New York City area to help people, the victims. It speaks volumes about what America is about. And I want to thank everybody for coming. I'm now going to ask Ken Chenault to say a few words. Ken?
[Ken Chenault:] Thank you, Mr. President. This has truly been a very productive meeting. On behalf of all of us here I want to thank you for your outstanding leadership. The job of a leader is to define reality and give hope. And you are defining this new reality, and you're acting in a very positive way to bring us forward. And you are giving us a great deal of hope through your leadership.
[Bush:] Thanks, Ken.
[Chenault:] And we thank you. Your team is moving very quickly and decisively on a range of actions to help stimulate the economy. And I think what's important is, what happened here is a very close partnership that exists between the private sector and the public sector, because we are all in this together. It's important, I think, for the American public to understand that the long-term fundamentals that we have in our economy are strong. We have some short-term challenges, we have a number of specific actions that you are putting in place that we have confidence will restore the economy, will restore the growth for our nation. And Mr. President, your leadership has been outstanding on every level. You have the support of everyone in this room. You have the support of the American people. You have the support of our friends around the globe. We will not succumb to this evil. We believe in the American promise, and we will do everything to build on that promise.
[Bush:] Thank you, Ken. Betsy?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, I would just echo, a very, very productive discussion, a lot of very good ideas raised. I would also echo what Ken said. You have been an incredibly inspiring leader. We are very supportive of the initiatives that you have put forward. And we are totally committed to working together and to working with you to keep our economy strong.
[Bush:] I appreciate it, thanks. I would be glad to take a few questions.
[Question:] What more [Off-mike]
[Bush:] You bet. I know we need to provide more tax relief to individuals to boost consumer confidence. We've just finished passing out $40 billion of rebate checks. They were completed by October 1 of this year. There's going to be tax relief started next year as a part of the package that the Congress and I agreed to. We believe there ought to be more to make sure that the consumer has got money to spend, money to spend in the short term. Secondly there needs to be business relief as well, to encourage investment. And finally, there needs to be a displaced worker package. We've got to recognize that, as a result of September 11, folks have been laid off and we need to make sure they're able to survive until this economy gets going again. And I got to tell you, I had a great conversation with the leadership of the Congress yesterday. We're coming together on a plan that I believe needs to get passed as quickly as possible.
[Question:] Mr. President, is this going to eat up the rest of the surplus for the year, and does it matter?
[Bush:] Well, as I said in Chicago during the campaign, when asked about, "Should the government ever deficit spend?" I said, "Only under these circumstances should government deficit spend if there's a national emergency, if there's a recession or if there's a war." You know, we've now got a reason to do what it takes to not only provide security at home, to do what it takes to win the war on terrorism, we've also got to do what it takes to make sure this economy gets growing so people can find work. You know, we've got the basis for growth. We're an entrepreneurial nation. There's a lot of small business growth in America. You know, by and large, the banking system is very solid. The energy prices are reasonable. And now, we just got to be aggressive and make sure we do what we need to do at the federal level to provide a kick start to give people reason to be confident. And we will do that. And this isn't a Republican idea or a Democrat idea. It's an American idea, and it's the right time for us to come together to get it done.
[Question:] Mr. President?
[Bush:] Yes, ma'am?
[Question:  Bush:] Yes, but, you know, we'll leave all that talk up to the statisticians. You're asking me about statistics. And we've got people who count numbers there in Washington, D.C., and that's fine. Here's my attitude: One person laid off is one person too many. And therefore, we've got to do what it takes to make sure that that person who got laid off is able to find work. I'm not going to dwell on the past. I'm looking forward, and I believe we've got a fantastic opportunity to invigorate this economy and to assure the business leaders around America that the government is playing a very active role and that we will take the steps necessary to provide growth and stimulus. And that's why I believe we need additional stimulus beyond some of the spending that we've already put in place to the tune of about $60 billion to $75 billion. We'll let the accountants come up they call it want they want. There's no question that the economy has been affected by September 11.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] explicitly signed off on that $60 billion to $75 billion...
[Bush:] No, they have not yet, but they do understand we need to have a range that, as you go into a debate or discussions about how to stimulate the economy, first and foremost it's important to come up with a total figure so that we don't undershoot or overshoot the mark. And they do recognize that some of the actions that we've all taken together, including the $40 billion supplemental, plus the $15 billion for the airline, will have a positive affect on economic growth, and I do believe they recognize there needs to be more. And so, one of the things that I'm doing is providing the leadership necessary to try to set the parameters on what the definition of more is. Again, I want to repeat we've just finished with $40 billion of rebate from the tax package we agreed upon earlier in the year. Plus, we'll have about $70 billion in the rate reduction starting next year. And so what we're looking at is how to bridge into next year.
[Question:  Bush:] Yes, that's a very good question. I finally got one no, anyway... Yes, we did. I can be very specific, just like I have been. They do believe we need to stimulate the economy through boosting consumer confidence with some of kind of money in the hands of consumers, and there's a variety of ways... Excuse me? I'm sorry. There's a variety of ways to do that. There's rebates, there's acceleration of the tax cuts are the two most effective ways to do that and we discussed both of those. Secondly, we discussed a variety of options for corporate relief. One, we talked about ways to encourage investment through expensing [sic] of depreciation. Some people thought we ought to look at one- time ITCs, investment tax credits. People talked about the idea of corporate tax relief. And so we did have specific discussions about ways to make sure that our economy continues to grow. And I am most grateful for the input that we have been given here. It has been incredibly helpful. The thing I come away with is that these are men and women dedicated to America first and foremost. They're dedicated to the workers that work for their company. They're dedicated to providing security for their workers so they can go to work feeling safely. And they love their country, and they're going to do what it takes to join all of us together to recover from this awful incident of September 11.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE]?
[Bush:] Well, I think the average American must not be afraid to travel. We opened Reagan Airport yesterday for a reason. We think it's safe and that people ought to feel comfortable about traveling around our country. They ought to take their kids on vacations. They ought to go to ball games. The mayor wants them to come to the Yankee games, of course.
[Question:] The World Series.
[Bush:] The World Series, yes. No question he's an incurable optimist. But people ought to listen, we ought to be aware in America. We are aware. How can you not be aware that we've entered into a new era? The imagery is vivid in people's minds. But nevertheless, Americans must know that their government is doing everything we can to track down every rumor, every hint, every possible evil-doer. And therefore, Americans ought to go about their business, and they are beginning to do so. The load factors were up on the airlines, which means more people will be going to hotels and restaurants. I fulfilled my promise last night to take the mayor of Washington, D.C., for dinner. I did, Morton's Steakhouse. We had a nice slice of beef, plus I paid.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE]?
[Bush:] He's visiting with our friends. As you know, we put together a broad coalition of nations that are interested in joining us to battle terrorism. And Secretary Rumsfeld went over to visit with the leaders of a group of nations to share with them information, to discuss the determination of our nation. People need to be able to look us in the eye and know that when we say that we're in this for the long run, that we're going to find terrorists and bring them to justice, we mean it, that this is a nation see, it's hard for people around the world to understand the resolve of America. They may hear my speech occasionally. But they need to look in the eyes of members of my administration and hear them say that not only is this president resolved, but America is resolved to route out terrorism, to make sure that legitimate governments can survive as we head into the 21st century, and to make a strong stand for freedom. And Secretary Rumsfeld is going to do a fine job of delivering that message because he knows exactly how I feel about the mission we have ahead of us. Thank you all for coming.
[Hemmer:] A rather energetic, sometimes playful President Bush, with his comments before reporters and opening statement, following his meeting with about 30 leading executives from the business world here in the U.S., saying the economy needs a kickstart, it's been in shock at this point, saying the economic stimulus package now being worked on at the White House may extend anywhere from $60 to $70 billion. When asked how would he initiate kickstarting the economy, he talked about more tax relief, boosting consumer confidence, and also quite mindful of those who have lost theirs jobs, saying one person laid off is one person too many. Kelly Wallace from the White House with us here today in New York as the president arrived earlier today. And, Kelly, surprise out of here? Anything there?
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] No, the news here was the size, the 60 to $70 billion stimulus, first time you've heard the White House attach itself to a dollar figure. The White House definitely wanting to make sure that it's big enough, again, to sort of give a kickstart in the short term, but not to big to sort of jack up long-term interest rates.
[Hemmer:] Last hour, Kelly, listening to Tom Daschle, the Senate majority leader, talking about a $50 billion figure. If you look at these two numbers being throw out there, they're not too far off.
[Wallace:] They are not too far off, and obviously, they will work together. The other interesting thing, not a lot of specifics, as you saw from the president. He talked in general, increasing consumer confidence, maybe more tax rebate checks going out in the mail, increasing business confidence, maybe some corporate tax breaks, helping laid-off workers. No real specifics. It's a different sort of world now, Bill. There is this bipartisanship in Washington. The president met with congressional leaders yesterday. The sense is the White House and Democrats, Republicans, wants to work together, come up with a plan together, and get bipartisan agreement.
[Hemmer:] And quickly, Kelly, how much concern is there for a timeframe right now, given the current climate?
[Wallace:] Well, you heard the president, he wants something as quickly as possible, and it sort of does two things. One, it does is sort of a psychological thing. It sort of sends a message to consumers and businesses, help is on the way, and then of course we get more money out to people. The more money they spend, the more kick to the economy.
[Hemmer:] Kelly Wallace, here in New York. Kelly, thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jim Moret, Cnn Anchor:] Tonight, another air tragedy. Alaska Airlines flight 261 plummets into the Pacific just miles from the California shore.
[Catherine Callaway, Cnn Anchor:] Eighty-eight people were on board, and an armada of boats is searching the dark waters right now for any sign of life. Continuing our coverage of this tragedy, I'm Catherine Callaway at the CNN Center in Atlanta.
[Moret:] And I'm Jim Moret reporting from Los Angeles. The crash happened just over four hours ago. That's when authorities say the plane disappeared from radar. Airline spokesmen say pilots had reported a mechanical problem with the plane and had requested an emergency landing at Los Angeles International Airport, which they had just passed. Their flight originated in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, a daily flight to San Francisco. This one was to have continued on to Seattle. We are slowly learning more about the plane, an MD-83, part of the MD-80 series. These are pictures of the actual plane involved taken in 1997. The spokesman for the airlines says that particular plane had just been serviced. From the crash scene, word is that at the moment there are no signs of survivors. Relatives of those on board are being urged to phone this automated number, 1-800-553-5117, you see it on your screen. About two hours ago, a U.S. Coast Guard captain briefed reporters, stressing that they are far from giving up hope of finding survivors. Here's what he had to say about the ongoing search.
[Captain George Wright, U.s. Coast Guard:] There's nothing we can say to make this easy, but I wanted to make sure you knew that our thoughts and prayers were with every family member involved. We have a massive search and rescue effort ongoing as we speak. Now, the charts behind me depict the area. It's about 3.1 miles north of Anacapa Island, which is off shore here in Southern California. And when I say massive, I mean we're pulling out every stop to get resources on scene. Currently there are four Coast Guard helicopters, one Coast Guard C-130. Now, the Coast Guard C-130 is a large airplane that is coordinating the air search and rescue effort to coordinate patterns we look at and to keep any aircraft apart from each other. There are two Coast Guard boats on scene and a Navy ship. That's not it, though. We've called out all resources. There are seven Coast Guard cutters en route to the location and another Navy ship. So we have every resource we can muster either on scene or en route. We are searching for survivors. The water temperature is about 58 degrees. We're going to search for survivors until there is zero chance of finding anybody from this tragedy alive. And every resource is out there to find people. We're actively searching for survivors. And I think at that at this point we'll open it up for questions.
[Question:] We're on live right now. How long can you keep up this effort to try to find the survivors? I mean, it's been a couple of hours now. I mean, theoretically, I know you have a lot of hope, but theoretically, how long can you really keep this up?
[Wright:] We'll keep this up until there's zero chance of finding anybody alive. And in 58-degree water temperature, people can survive. And there's been miracles. So we're not going to quit until we're positive that there's absolutely no chance. And we're at we're also backfilling. That's when I told you the how many cutters were on scene and planes are on scenes. These seven Coast Guard cutters en route can keep out there just as long as we have to to make sure we find survivors.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE]... reports from two to seven bodies have already been recovered. Can you fill us in on what you've been able to find out there as far as other than debris?
[Wright:] I'd like to emphasize that we're searching for survivors, it's a search and rescue case. There has been a victim it's my understanding there has been a victim recovered. And it's difficult for me to say anything more. As you know, this is a far way away from my current location, and that's all I'd like to say about that.
[Question:] You're currently calling it still a rescue operation, but as far as things like a salvage operation goes, what kind of depths are we talking about in that area?
[Wright:] Absolutely, it's a search and rescue operation. And our whole rescue coordination center has been focused on getting survivors. As far as anything else down the road, we're looking at it, we're making sure we have vessels en route that can recover wreckage and debris. And but right now, we're still focusing on survivors.
[Question:] Captain, do you have any idea how...
[Callaway:] That was George Wright of the U.S. Coast Guard. Also a few moments ago, we heard from Alaska Airlines spokesman Jack Evans, who brought us up to date on the latest from the airline.
[Jack Evans, Alaska Airlines Spokesman:] Alaska Airlines flight 261 from Puerto Vallarta to San Francisco went down in the water late this afternoon approximately 20 miles off Point Mugu, California. The flight carried a total of 83 passengers. That's a change from before, 83 passengers and five crew members, two of whom were pilots, three of whom were flight attendants. The crew radioed a problem with stabilizer trim, and the plane was diverted to Los Angeles. Flight controllers lost radio contact with the aircraft at approximately 4:36 P.M. Pacific Standard time, and the Coast Guard was dispatched. The plane, an MD-80, had no history of stabilizer trim problems. The tail number is 963. The full tail number is N-963-AS. It was manufactured in 1992. Some of the background on that aircraft itself, let me provide that to you as well. The aircraft was powered by two J as in John, T as in Tom, 8, D as in David, Pratt and Whitney engines, and as I told you before, the aircraft was routinely serviced yesterday, as early as yesterday, as recently as yesterday. I still haven't found out exactly what kind of servicing occurred, but I will have that information for you as soon as possible. It also went through two major checks, an A-check on January 11 of this year, and last year at this time, about, a C-check, which is a more extensive check. It is one of 35 MD-80s that Alaska Airlines operates out of a fleet of 88. Just some general information on the MD-80. It's one of the most successful airplanes in commercial aviation history, as well as the 737, which is the other aircraft type we operate. Douglas Aircraft, McDonnell Douglas and Boeing, have delivered 1,191 MD-80s from 1979 to 1999, and more than 1,180 of those are still in service with more than 50 domestic and foreign airlines. The first MD-80, then known as a DC-9 series 80, or Super 80, made its initial flight on October 18, 1979. Less than a year later, on September 13, 1980, SwissAir took the first delivery. The airplane entered passenger service the following month, and TWA took delivery of its first MD-80, an MD-82, on April 18, 1983. Some of you asked for information on previous fatal accidents that Alaska Airlines has experiences, so let me read those to you, and I will have this information in printed form for you shortly. We have experienced two fatal accidents since 1970. Both involved Boeing 727 jet aircraft. The first occurred on September 4, 1971, and it occurred when a controlled flight hit a mountain slope in Juneau, Alaska, about 28 miles west of the airport. All seven crew members and 104 passengers on that flight were killed. The second occurred on April 5, 1976, when a Boeing 727 operated by Alaska overran the runway after landing in Katchekan, Alaska. One of the 50 passengers on board later died of a heart attack.
[Moret:] That was Jack Evans, spokesperson for Alaska Airlines, spoke with us in the last hour. Flight 261, Alaska Air, crashed off the coast of Point Mugu. Jennifer Auther is at the Point Mugu Naval Air Station now with the latest. Jennifer?
[Jennifer Auther, Cnn Correspondent:] Jim, as soon as Alaska flight 261 disappeared, officials here at Point Mugu Naval Air Station were notified. They immediately sent up a P-3 O'Ryan surveillance aircraft, also an HCS-5, that's a helicopter combat support unit, along with an HH-60 Sea Hawk helicopter. Those are equipped with night vision capabilities. They are calling this a search and rescue even now, as we are able to tell you that several bodies have been recovered from the waters here. These are waters that are about 58 degrees, 450 feet deep 450 deep in some feet deep in some places. This is 25 miles off the coast of California near an Anacapa the Anacapa Islands. Now, officials here at Point Mugu Naval Air Station tell us that there were no military maneuvers going on, no aircraft going on, that would have interfered with the Alaska Airlines' pilots' efforts to turn the MD-83 around and head back to Los Angeles International Airport, which is about 25, 30 miles south of where I'm now standing. That number of seven Coast Guard cutters has gone up to eight, three helicopters, as we mentioned, U.S. Navy aircraft, and two Navy ships are part of these efforts to find and hopefully recover survivors. Right now, we are told that the search will continue. The U.S. Coast Guard is heading up this search, and the Navy is prepared to stick it out all the way. Jim?
[Moret:] Jennifer, clearly the search is continuing off the coast some distance from your location. You're at the naval air station. Is there any indication that the efforts are growing as the night progresses?
[Auther:] From where I'm standing, you can't see with your own eye whether or not the efforts are growing. But from what I am told, they are pulling out all the stops on this one in hopes of finding survivors. You won't find anyone here who is not calling this a search and rescue effort, who is not making sure that they mention the name the word "survivor."
[Moret:] CNN's Jennifer Auther, reporting live from Point Mugu Naval Air Station, just up the coast from Los Angeles. Let's go back now to Catherine Callaway in Atlanta.
[Callaway:] Greg LeFevre is at the airport in San Francisco and joins us now. That flight was going to make a stop in San Francisco. Tell us what you saw upon arriving there.
[Greg Lefevre, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Catherine, of course while the searchers the search and rescue operation continues down there in Southern California, the attention there is, of course, to the victims or the potential victims of this crash. Up here, the attention turned right away to the living, that is, to folks left behind. The first thing that happens here is that the flight 261 is taken off the board, that is, the arrival board reduces by one flight. So 261 as we arrived here was being taken off the board. Then the airline pages people who were waiting for this flight. Now, here at San Francisco International Airport, this flight was coming into the international terminal. People don't wait at the gate, they wait outside a customs area. Passengers land here, they go through customs, and then once large waiting area. It's about 125 feet wide by about 75 feet. And it's usually very busy. So the paging sometimes is not heard. In this case, the airline and the folks at the airport sent people, their employees, through the crowd looking for people who were waiting for flight 261, asking people, Are you waiting for Alaska 261? If you are, come with us. We understand that about four people were informed in this manner and went to a room that Alaska Airlines set aside for just such an occasion. Now, we have been told by a spokesman here at the airport that about 25 people have now assembled, or assembled earlier this evening, in this room. That consisted of family and friends, we are told, and airport and airline staff. Now, who among these support staff what is it that these people do? Some of them are clergy. Earlier this evening, we saw a clergywoman being escorted through the international terminal here by an airport employee to one of these areas. There are also grief counselors and mental health workers who come over from San Francisco Inter I'm sorry, San Francisco General Hospital, and San Francisco General is the major trauma center here in San Francisco. So there is counseling that goes on there. On top of that, the airline dispatches what it calls CARE teams to every stop along its route where passengers from this plane would have been destined, not just here in San Francisco and in Seattle, which was the ultimate destination of flight 261, but also other areas along the way. Now, we heard earlier from Alaska Airlines spokeswoman Cindy Fraser, and she talked briefly about this process. Here's Ms. Fraser.
[Cindy Fraser, Alaska Airlines Spokeswoman:] The for anyone meeting someone off that flight, particular flight, 261 from Puerto Vallarta, they asked them to they do inform them that there has been an airline incident, and would they please come to a specified area.
[Lefevre:] And we understand that the airline will have people here all night long for folks who have may have picked up the word late and come to see if there is something for them here to learn. Catherine, back to you in Atlanta.
[Callaway:] And this flight was heading on to Seattle? I'm assuming that the same thing is being done there in Seattle.
[Lefevre:] Well, the airline tells us that is true, that they do have a CARE team there at Seatac in Seattle.
[Callaway:] And has the activity there this has been several hours now since the crash has it seemed to slow down, or has it increased over the last hour or so?
[Lefevre:] It swelled some shortly after in the late afternoon hours, but now it is reduced to very little activity, if any at all.
[Callaway:] All right. Greg LeFevre reporting to us live from the airport in San Francisco. And CNN's continuing coverage of the crash of flight 261 will continue after this break.

[Michael Holmes, World News:] Weeks away from Taiwan's presidential inauguration, it is not exactly smooth sailing for the island's new leaders. CNN's Mike Chinoy reports on a new attack from a familiar source.
[Mike Chinoy, Cnn Correspondent:] He doesn't take office until late May, but Taiwan's president-elect, Chen Shui-bian, is already facing his first political storm as China has ended a period of relative restraint and launched a vicious verbal assault on his running mate, vice president-elect Annette Lu. "A lunatic," "scum of the Chinese nation" and "the disgraceful face of Taiwan independence" are only some of the insults coming from Beijing. The source of China's anger, a series of blunt statements by Vice President-Elect Lu, long an outspoken supporter of independence for Taiwan.
[Annette Lu, Taiwanvice Pres.-elect:] They want us to accept reunification, but 90 percent of Taiwanese would oppose it. That's just a fact. Twenty-first-century leaders shouldn't have to follow 18th century concepts. Look at Europe. Countries there split up all the time. China's not happy that we are seeking to join the United Nations, but we are going to keep trying anyway.
[Chinoy:] For Chen Shui-bian, who has toned down his own once-strong backing for independence in the hope of improving ties with Beijing, the vice president-elect's outspoken remarks have created a major headache.
[Andrew Yang, Taipei Inst. Of Strategic Studies:] This is a very delicate situation. He's repeatedly saying that he has to be cautious. Therefore, anytime those remarks over the Taiwan's position as well as the cross-strait relations certainly are counterproductive to Chen Shui- bian's position.
[Chinoy:] On the streets, few people here seem to take China's bluster seriously. What worries them more, though, is whether the incoming president can control his closest aides.
[Chu Yun-han, National Taiwan University:] People expect that not the president-elect himself, but also all his important aides and especially his vice president will follow the same line.
[Chinoy:] Chen Shui-bian insists he still wants to reach out to mainland China, but with Beijing calling his vice president "a lunatic whose views will lead Taiwan to catastrophe," finding common ground across the Taiwan Strait isn't going to be easy. Mike Chinoy, CNN, Taipei.

[Stuart Varney, Cnn Anchor:] Tonight on MONEYLINE, investors frazzled the day after an extraordinary session on Wall Street. But if they were looking for a convincing rebound, it didn't happen.
[Willow Bay, Cnn Anchor:] Is the worst over for techs? That could depend, in part, on a crucial earnings report from Yahoo!, the first dot.com to post first-quarter profits.
[Varney:] Techs and the Internet the buzz at the White House today: President Clinton hosts the powerbrokers of the new economy, including the biggest economic guru of them all.
[Bay:] And gender warfare in the workplace feminist Shere Hite on her controversial new book, "Sex and Business."
[Announcer:] This is the MONEYLINE NEWS HOUR. Reporting tonight from New York, Stuart Varney and Willow Bay.
[Bay:] Good evening. Well, the day after not as memorable.
[Varney:] But certainly volatile, as investors braved through yet another choppy day of trading. The session was anything but cheery. Investors started on shaky ground, after yesterday's volatile swings which took the Dow and the Nasdaq down more than 500 points during the session. Add to that a White House conference with some of Wall Street's biggest players today and investors had plenty to keep an eye on.
[Bay:] By 12:00, the Dow industrials were off more than 160 points and ended up closing at 11033, down 130 points on the day. Now to the Nasdaq, investors there were holding their breath at the open. The index plunged 140 points in the first few minutes of trading, but the action changed course and the Nasdaq jumped more than 137 points. By the close, it was up just 20. Rhonda Schaffler has more on the volatility in tonight's STREET SWEEP report.
[Rhonda Schaffler, Cnn Correspondent:] Another day of selling on the Big Board a bit more cautious than yesterday's chaos. But by the close, a better than 130-point drop. Investors drifted back to technology stocks on the Nasdaq, seeing some bargains lying in the dust of Tuesday's debacle.
[Terence Gabriel, Idea Global.com:] We've got a lot investors out there who are nervous here. There's been margin calls perhaps that have been pressuring some of these high-flying stocks. But we've also seen some dramatic recoveries off lows and some deep declines in some stocks that make them look relatively attractive.
[Schaffler:] Biotechs led the Nasdaq's recovery. Amgen, Genome Therapeutics and Biogen all closed slightly higher, as did Oracle. But Microsoft shares continued to decline, investors patience apparently wearing thin, even with the company and the government agreeing today to speed up proceedings in the antitrust trial. Techs also rebounded strongly on the Big Board. Hewlett-Packard, IBM and Texas Instruments all closed higher, while Micron Technology surged 14 12. The market took some comfort from comments out of White House conference on the new economy. Goldman Sachs' strategist Abby Joseph Cohen said she remains quote "enthusiastic" about stocks. And Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan made it clear the Fed is not targeting stock prices with its rate hikes. Back on Wall Street, traders turned their attention to the prospects of corporate profits. Shares of Coca-Cola took a beating, after the company lowered its growth rates, prompting Goldman Sachs to trim earnings estimates. But Sears issued a rosy forecast. The country's number-two retailer said it anticipates a record first quarter earnings report. Shares of Sears closed up more than 7, and Advanced Micro Devices shares ended higher by more than $6. The chip maker saying it excepts to report record first-quarter sales. Although today looked like a return to the versions of Dow and Nasdaq of old, market watchers say the real test will come with the earning season. Salomon Smith Barney's Marshall Acuff said earnings will be a test to the old and new economy stocks as profit growth is expected to be strongest for tech firms Stuart.
[Varney:] All right, we see first those numbers next week, I think, right?
[Schaffler:] Correct.
[Varney:] Fair enough, Rhonda Schaffler at the Big Board. Thanks, Rhonda.
[Bay:] Today's small bounce for tech stocks still leaves the Nasdaq off more than 17 percent from its record high set just last month, deep in a correction. Charles Molineaux is standing by with more on today's action from the Nasdaq marketsite Charles.
[Charles Molineaux, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Willow. And strategist say it's much too soon to can close the book on yesterday's "hellacious" swing by technology stocks. But today's bouncy ride over a range of 280 points with a positive close was encouraging. The Nasdaq composite plummeted at the outset, as strategists blamed this on overseas investors following up yesterday's wild ride. But a tech rally kicked in, took the composite up, then lost steam then inched up to a 20 point gain to close. A return is under way to some tech names, those with good fundamentals and earnings expectations. Internet stocks gained on the day. Web security company Verisign surged 8.6 percent, and of course we have news from an Internet bellwether, Web portal Yahoo!. Yahoo! Lost ground, 1 percent during the day, then after the close reported earning better than expected and revenues much better. And as they have done before, investors sold on the good news, and the stock is now down another $5 and has been in after-hours trading. And speaking of earnings, chip stocks rallied after, as we heard, Big Board company Advanced Micro Devices predicted good results, so for that matter did Microchip, which was up by 12 12 percent. Rambus and Applied Materials surged for a second day, after a series of positive analyst comments about chip equipment makers. Again, this was a selective rally. Stocks that went up only slightly outnumbered those that went down. Computer stocks, financials and telecoms all fell. But biotechs climbed nicely out of the basement, up 6 percent, and we saw big-cap biotech Biogen was up 9.8 percent. And Sequinome saw one of the biggest gains on the Nasdaq today, up almost 39 percent. Now market watchers say tech stocks may yet retest the lows of yesterday's sell-off, but today's Nasdaq performance shows investors are ready to buy tech. Now investors are looking ahead to the latest employment report from the Labor Department. That's coming up on a Friday, and yes, we have more tech earning news due out next week. A lot of reports are on the plate Stuart, Willow.
[Bay:] Charles Molineaux, at the Nasdaq marketsite, thank you.
[Varney:] Now one tech stock that could drive tomorrow's trading is Yahoo!. After the bell, the Web giant ignited the first-quarter reporting season with blockbuster results, Yahoo! reporting better- than-expected profits, fueled by especially strong revenues. Bruce Francis crunched the numbers for us, and he has this report.
[Bruce Francis, Cnn Correspondent:] Yahoo! raked in the revenues during the first quarter, $228 million in all, at a time of year that's traditionally slow for advertising, which provides the bulk of Yahoo!'s sales. As for profits, Yahoo!'s net income soared 257 percent to $63 million. Net revenue grew 120 percent to $228 million. That enabled Yahoo! to report profits of 10 cents a share, 1 penny ahead of expectations.
[Michael Graham, Robertson Stephens:] I think it's really impressive that Yahoo! was able to post 228 million in revenue. That's 13 percent sequential growth. That's the same growth in revenue that they posted sequentially Q4 over or Q1 or Q1 over Q4 last year. So I think it's a pretty amazing number from Yahoo!.
[Francis:] Yahoo! credited expansion on a number of fronts, from opening a service in Argentina to expanding content on wireless phones. Yahoo! also hinted at good news to come, telling analyst to crank up estimates of operating margins by 2 percentage points. On the wild wild Web, Yahoo!'s, two main nonfinancial barometers, registered users and page views, have been strong and steady, growing more than 166 percent in the past year, a trait that's much admired on the street. Good news couldn't be more welcome to the Internet investors. Yahoo!'s stock is down 34 percent from its peak. Investors have been preoccupied with stories about the wobbly financials of companies such as Peapod, CDNow and DrKoop.com.
[Arnie Berman, Wit Soundview:] Yahoo! couldn't be more different than those companies. It has more popularity, more traffic than anybody else, and at this point, doesn't really have a problem with cash burn; it's got a problem with huge cashflow. It's really a cash machine.
[Francis:] Huge, indeed. Yahoo! now has more than a billion dollars of cash on the books, enviable, even by old economy standards. The company says it's looking forward to coming Web shakeout so it can gobble up some promising properties. And as we mentioned, after-hours trading, Yahoo! is down now more than $4.50, but as Charles said, that's not uncommon, this trading pattern.
[Varney:] Did I get this right? The cash on hand has gone from $240 million to $1.1 billion?
[Francis:] A huge jump. It really is a cash cow now. And they intend to put this to work, for expanding the business, perhaps even for acquisitions. All right, Bruce Francis, thanks very much.
[Varney:] Now another person listening to tonight's Yahoo! conference call, Internet analyst Lise Buyer of CS First Boston, and she's going to join us later with her outlook for the Internet giants and a good deal more.
[Bay:] Coming up on MONEYLINE, the street lights up the hot donuts sign for Krispy Kreme's IPO, but barely throws Met Life a bone.
[Varney:] Plus, Nabisco responds to a sweeter offer from financier Carl Icahn. The question is, will the company bite on this one?
[Bay:] And from courtroom opponent to honored guest, Bill Gates visits the White House as the Microsoft trial goes to the fast track.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Well, on the economic front, investors are puzzling over the Fed's rate cut campaign. They'll hear from the horse's mouth this afternoon. At 2:00 p.m. Eastern, the Fed releases minutes from its June 27 meeting. The minutes will be more closely watched this time around because the Fed snipped interest rates by just a quarter point. Most economists had been expecting a half point cut. Also out this morning, weekly jobless claims. They've remained fairly low considering all the layoff announcements. The four-week moving average last week fell to its lowest level since mid-March. This week, expect a slight increase in the number of new faces on the unemployment line. In corporate earnings news, a healthy combination of shopping, doughnuts and wrestling. Krispy Kreme, just crossing the wires moments ago, it earned a dime a share in the second quarter, a penny better than expectations. In the same period a year ago, the doughnut maker earned 7 cents a share. Companies reporting this morning include Barnes & Noble and the WWF. After the bell, we'll get results from Barnes & Noble rival Borders as well as VA Linux and Novell. Well yesterday we saw quite a rally on Wall Street one day after a sell off. Vince Farrell is Chairman of Victory SBSF Capital Management and he's here to tell me what he makes of yesterday's rally.
[Vince Farrell, Chairman, Victory Sbsf Capital Management:] Unfortunately, Deb, I don't make too much of it. You know we're still trying to figure out whether the March-April lows will hold. Now I think they will even though the earnings estimates have fallen off a cliff and stocks are actually more expensive now on a pe basis than they were then at roughly comparable prices. We're that much closer to an economic recovery. Story just before this you mentioned the 25-basis point cut, some were expecting 50. The thing that I admire about Greenspan is that he stays the course. He did 25 the last time, another 25. I think he fully anticipates that the past will be the prologue to the future, that interest rate moves take one year to work their way through the economy. I don't know where people get the idea it was six months, it's always been one year. January of 2001 is when he started to lower rates, I think the economy will start to recover in the first quarter next year. He anticipates this and I think it's actually a vote of confidence in that program that it was a 25 basis point cut. So I do think the economy is going to recover. Stock prices typically lead a recovery. We're not there yet. They're not ready to lead so we're still slogging through it.
[Marchini:] OK, Vince Farrell, we'll be back to you shortly. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] We do anticipate, back here in the U.S., President Bush at Camp David this weekend, leading a videoconference with his National Security advisers this morning. Our White House correspondent, Kelly Wallace, details, quickly now, from nearby there in Camp David, waiting for that radio address, are we not, Kelly?
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Yes, we are, Bill and expecting some more tough talk from President Bush in that radio address. As you noted, following up on Nic Robertson's report, the White House, the Pentagon not commenting on reports that the Taliban fired anti-aircraft fire at an American plane. Not really a surprise there, not commenting on operational details. But the administration, Bill, definitely saying that it will not negotiate with the Taliban over anything, including the release of these eight western aid workers. And we will listen to the president in this radio address. Listen to his words, listen to them closely; they do give an indication that the president is putting out there that military action could not be very far away. Let's listen now.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Good morning. Today, I want to update Americans on our global campaign against terror. The United States is presenting a clear choice to every nation, stand with the civilized world or stand with the terrorists. And for those nations that stand with the terrorists, there will be a heavy price. America is determined to oppose the state's sponsor of terror. Yet, we are equally determined to respect and help the men and women, those regimes oppressed. Our enemy is not the Arab world. Many friendly Arab governments are themselves the targets of extremist terror. Our enemy is not Islam, a good and peace-loving faith that brings direction and comfort to over one billion people, including millions of Americans. And our enemy is not the people of any nation even when their leaders harbor terrorists. Our enemy is the terrorists themselves and the regimes that shelter and sustain them. Afghanistan is the case-in-point. Its Taliban regime has made that nation into a sanctuary and training ground for international terrorists, terrorists, who have killed innocent citizens of many nations, including our own. The Taliban promotes terror abroad and practices terror against its people, oppressing women and persecuting all who dissent. The Taliban has been given the opportunity to surrender all the terrorist in Afghanistan and to close down their camps and operations. Full warning has been given and time is running out. The Afghan people, however, are the victims of oppression, feminine and misrule. Many refugees from that unfortunate are on the move and sadly, many Afghans are on the verge of starvation. American respects the Afghan people, their long tradition and their proud independence and we will help in this time of confusion and crisis in their country. American has long been the largest source of food and humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan. This week, I announced an additional $320 million in aid to the Afghan people, to those within Afghanistan and those who fled across borders. Despite efforts by the Taliban to disrupt these critical aid shipments, we will deliver food and seeds, vaccines and medicine by truck and even by draft animals. Conditions permitting, we will bring help directly to the people of Afghanistan by airdrops. This aid will help Afghans make it through the upcoming winter. For the longer term, I urge Congress to make funds available so that one day, the United States can contribute, along with other friends of Afghanistan to the reconstruction and development of that troubled nation. Helping people in great need is a central part of the Jewish, Christian and Islamic traditions, as well as many other faiths. It is also a central part of the American tradition. Even as we fight evil regimes, we are generous to the people they oppress. Following World War II, America fed and rebuilt Japan and Germany and their people became some of our closest friends in the world. In the struggle ahead, we will act in accordance with American ideals. We are offering help and friendship to the Afghan people. It is their Taliban rulers and the terrorists they harbor who have much to fear. Thank you for listening.
[Hemmer:] The weekly radio address from the president at Camp David this weekend, talking about three fronts the diplomatic, the military and the humanitarian. On the diplomatic front, the president saying, "Our enemy is not the Arab world. Our enemy is not Islam." We have heard that repeatedly, the message from not only the president but also Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister. On the military front, the president saying and quoting now "full warning has been given. Time is running out." Relative to the humanitarian situation, the president, again, referring that food drops are a strong possibility to the Afghan people, again, a reference to Japan and Germany during the Second World War. Back to Kelly Wallace near Camp David. And Kelly, it is remarkable and in almost every speech that we hear, this address is always brought up our fight, our war is not against Islam, it is not against the Arab people. That is a drum that will continue to be beaten by this president and many others, correct?
[Wallace:] Absolutely, Bill. You are definitely right. It is something we have heard repeatedly and will continue to hear. And it is a message that the administration definitely wants to get to the people of Afghanistan, the people of neighboring countries, such as Pakistan, to try to make the case over and over again, that this is not a campaign against Islam, against Muslims and not against the people of Afghanistan but against terrorists and those who harbor them. And Bill, as you noted, I just want to point, it is the first time President Bush has used these words, that "time is running out." You've heard the president repeatedly talk about that the Taliban, they must adhere and comply with his demands or they will face the consequences. He has said that he's not going to set any deadline, that it will be his decision about when the U.S. will act, when the U.S. decides that is the appropriate time. But, he did, for the first time, say time is running out. I talked to an administration official about this, the significance of these words. This official saying, "Look, this part of a continuum. You have heard and you have seen us doing a variety of things on the military front, the diplomatic front, the humanitarian front." As you noted, he said it is an indication that time is running out. When I said, should that mean that military action could be imminent, this official not responding. But clearly, the fact that the president is saying this for the first time, the president making it very clear that the Taliban, that they must adhere to these demands or they could face some action very, very soon Bill.
[Hemmer:] Point well noted, Kelly. Kelly Wallace near Camp David. Again, the president there throughout the weekend but he will, we know, have meetings with his security advisers throughout the weekend. For more on that, here now is Kyra.
[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Today, President Bush will also be spending some time debriefing his defense secretary today. Donald Rumsfeld got back to Washington early this morning, after visiting key leaders in the Middle East and Central Asia. CNN's Kathleen Koch is at the Pentagon and has more. Good morning, Kathleen.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Kyra. And I'm sure that one of the topics of their discussions this morning was this report form Afghanistan that the Taliban may have fired either anti- aircraft missiles or surface-to-air missiles at some sort of aircraft that was spotted in the air over Kabul, over the capital. We're getting a firm "no comment" on that, of course, from the Pentagon. No confirming, no denying as to what the aircraft may have been or whether it belonged to the United States. Many possible explanations it possibly could have been an aircraft belonging to the Northern Alliance, which opposes the Taliban and operates out of Northern Afghanistan. Another possibility that it might have been a U-2 spy plane. The U.S. does have some operational over Iraq that have been there really performing routine surveillance since the Persian Gulf War. However, those fly at an altitude of 70,000 feet and generally, only perhaps a trail from a U-2 plane on a very clear day, that would be the only thing that would be visible to the naked eye. But most likely, a possibility is that it is one of these drones or unmanned aerial vehicles that the United States has confirmed that it is using over Afghanistan. If you remember, just two weeks, one of them was lost over northern Afghanistan. Though, the Pentagon would not confirm that that had been shot down. So that's a likely possibility but no confirmation or denial of that here. Also, the assessment of Secretary Rumsfeld's trip is that it was a success. His last two stops being in Turkey and Uzbekistan. And a particular victory in the dealings with Uzbekistan that the United States was able to secure permission for U.S. cargo planes, helicopters and troops to use one of the air bases there for humanitarian reasons, for airdrops and rescue missions. That is significant because Uzbekistan does border Afghanistan on the north. That will be very useful in the future Kyra.
[Phillips:] All right, Kathleen Koch, thank you so much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Former President Reagan is scheduled to undergo surgery today, as we just told you. He fell at home yesterday, breaking his hip. CNN's Greg LaMotte has more on Mr. Reagan's mishap and what will happen during his operation.
[Ronald Reagan, President Of The United States:] So help me God.
[Unidentified Official:] Congratulations, sir.
[Greg Lamotte, Cnn Correspondent:] Friday afternoon, 89-year-old Ronald Reagan, the 40th president of the United States, broke his right hip in what was described as a simple fall in his Bel Air, California home. His wife Nancy was said to be with him when that fall occurred. Reagan was rushed to St. John's Health Center in Santa Monica, California. It's a private hospital and ironically is the same hospital complex where Reagan's daughter Maureen is being treated for cancer. Mr. Reagan was said to be in good spirits, good humor, alert and in stable condition. A family spokesperson says Reagan, who at the age of 69 was the oldest person elected president, will have surgery Saturday when a pin will be inserted in his broken hip. Reagan's fall has occurred less than a month before his 90th birthday, February 6th. He was born in 1911. Reagan, who is the only former actor to have been elected president, released a letter to the nation in 1994 disclosing his Alzheimer's. He has rarely been seen in public over the last five years. He no longer travels to his offices in Century City. Greg LaMotte, CNN, Santa Monica, California.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] For the first time in its history, the National Football League is preparing to use replacement officials in its games. After more than a year of talks, the NFL decided to lock out its game officials, who are demanding a significant pay raise. Replacements, mostly from the NFL, Europe and the Arena league are being brought in. To give us some perspective on all this, we are joined by Chuck Smith, a nine-year NFL veteran who played defensive end for the Atlanta Falcons and the Carolina Panthers. First time in history it's hard to know where the road map is here, but how would the NFL players feel about it? How important is it to them and would they honor the picket lines?
[Chuck Smith, Former Nfl Plater:] I think right now it's important with the NFL players, I think what is going on with the players, the players have just had a hard camp, it's been a long summer. Right now the players aren't too concerned about referee's lockout. But one thing they will be concern about, the first time that sways a game, the NFL players will be concerned.
[Waters:] So, this is we are going into preseason games now and what kind of a test will that be?
[Smith:] It is a definite test. The referees will me under scrutiny. Every little thing they do will me under scrutiny, so they have to be on point. There is going to be a fine line between making a call and not making a call. Everyone is going to watch them. Also, these referees have to look at next time, trying to get the job that the guys who are going to go on strike are trying to get. So there could be some tension there. So when they try to come back, you know, you are taking the livelihood off man's plate. Anything can happen then.
[Waters:] You bet. Here, in our live chat, a question for Chuck Smith: "What kind of training do the officials go through. How much does that training cost?" What is behind the pros?
[Smith:] The NFL referees are the most highly-trained referees in the world. They have to make split decision calls at any second. The NFL referees, they are in shape, they work out, they jog, they train just like players, but they also are professionals and they have jobs. So looking at it, they come out to the camp, they sit in the sun, they sweat, they go out there and work on their skill all summer long.
[Waters:] These replacement guys don't do that?
[Smith:] I won't say these replacement guys don't do that, but these guys aren't the number one guys for the National Football League, you know, you are going with the best and now you are going to a second tier referee, so there are going to be a few changes.
[Waters:] OK, 400 percent increase, that is what the referees are asking for. It seems like an awful lot of money.
[Smith:] Well, I think it sounds like an awful lot of money, but the NFL is a billion dollar industry. It is big business. The National Football League needs to step up, pay the referees. These guys go out and do a great job week in and week out. They need to step up. They should be compensated. Everyone else in the league is making lots of money, the owners are getting money, the players are getting money, everyone's getting money. I think the National Football League referees are the best in sports right now. I think they deserve everything they get.
[Waters:] We have more live chat? We do. We have one here, "With replacement referees can we expect the same level of competence?" I think you pretty much answered that question, but you want to give it another shot, say it a different way?
[Smith:] If you ask some of the players, they will say they are all incompetent, but when you look at these new referees, how can you sit here and say that these refs will be any better than the other refs. These are the second-tier refs. They are guys these are wannabes. These are scabs, let's keep it real, these are the guys who want to be NFL refs. They are college guys, they are arena guys. They won't be as good. For referees there is a fine line between making that call. And these guys are going to have to make that call and stand on it. There could be repercussions for being a bad scab later. So, looking at it like that, these guys have a great opportunity, but there is nothing like the NFL referees.
[Waters:] Do you expect this to be settled quickly?
[Smith:] I expect it to be settled quickly. The NFL is a great product. Everyone knows what they are going to put on the field. No one wants to see second rate. The players have busted their butts all summer, who wants to see second-rate refs? Come on, NFL, get us the refs. We want some football, let's get it.
[Waters:] I can do that job.
[Smith:] No, you can't so that job. Are you are in shape.
[Waters:] Well, I could be in shape. Give me the call, I'll get to work. Chuck Smith, thanks.
[Smith:] Thank you.

[Bernard Shaw, Cnn Anchor:] Basketball legend Irvin "Magic" Johnson has announced he is infected with the virus that causes AIDS and he is retiring from the Los Angeles Lakers. Johnson made that announcement two days ago at The Forum in Inglewood, California with the same grace we have come to expect from him on the court in victory or in defeat. Because of the HIV virus are that I have obtained I will have to retire from the obtained I will have to retire the Lakers today.
[Magic Johnson, Former Basketball Player:] Because of the HIV virus that I have obtained I will have to retire today.
[Mark Mckay, Cnn Sports Anchor:] He was in Los Angeles and he got up before the media and announced what the rumors had been. He confirmed the rumors that he was HIV positive.
[Johnson:] For the kids, that's why I am going to be a spokesman for this HIV VIRUS.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Terrorists might find the monuments in our nation's capital tempting and relatively easy targets. That's the conclusion of a newly released study. The report, detailed in today's "Washington Post," lists several frightening scenarios where terrorists could easily destroy national monuments, particularly those on the Mall. The report was funded by the National Park Service, charged with keeping the monuments safe. It makes a case for augmenting the Park Service budget. Of greatest concern to the authors of that study, the vulnerability of the Washington Monument. The 500-foot obelisk sits in the middle of L'Enfant's wonderful mall, a global symbol of our glorious republic. And today, it gleams a little brighter inside and out after the completion of a $10 million restoration campaign. The official restoration celebration is scheduled for tomorrow, Independence Day eve. Joining us with more on what's new at the 115-year-old tribute to the father of our nation is Lisa Mendelson with the National Park Service. Lisa, thanks for being with us.
[Lisa Mendelson, National Park Service:] Good morning.
[O'brien:] Before we start talking about the restoration effort, let me just ask you about this study which came out in the "Washington Post" this morning, this independent study. How much concern is there within the ranks of the Park Service about the vulnerability of these monuments to terrorism?
[Mendelson:] The National Park Service is entrusted with the care and protection of national monuments like the Washington Monument and other parks throughout the country. We've worked closely with our National Park, United States Park Police with the study and we have already begun, as you can see behind me with the white jersey barriers to implement some recommendations that match those of the study.
[O'brien:] Well, it must be a difficult balance because on the one hand, the very nature of the Mall and the monuments is that they're free and open to the general public and in so doing you necessarily create a security risk, don't you?
[Mendelson:] That's absolutely correct. However, visitors should feel comfortable coming here. We have Park Police out and about. The Park Police presence is one of the key elements in maintaining that security.
[O'brien:] So what should be done about it? Do we need more security out there, more people?
[Mendelson:] The National Park Service works very closely with the National Park Police and we will begin to and we will continue to implement some of the recommendations that were made in the study and again, a key component of that is, in fact, staffing.
[O'brien:] All right, let's go on to the more fun stuff, talking about the restoration. This $10 million campaign, which was partially funded by the retailer Target, if anybody has been watching it over the past year or so would have been, it's very obvious to them that this has been underway because of the huge scaffolding that was erected around it. Is this unprecedented in the history of the Washington Monument, this level of restoration?
[Mendelson:] That's correct. The Monument has had several other restorations in the '30s and in the '60s, but nothing as extensive as this three-year, three-phase, $10 million project.
[O'brien:] Well, aside from the obvious, there was some work sort of re-pointing the thing, adding, you know, fixing the masonry. What was being done inside all the while?
[Mendelson:] On the inside, as visitors will see for the first time on July 31st when we reopen to the public, new exhibit areas were installed. The observation level at 500 feet where the windows allow visitors to have terrific views over Washington and the surrounding area, those areas were improved for visitor enjoyment, and as well, the 193 commemorative stones that line the walls of the Monument on the stairwell throughout the Monument, those have been cleaned and conserved by National Park Service conservators.
[O'brien:] And you maintained the stairwell, can you still scale the Monument on foot if you choose to do so?
[Mendelson:] Indeed, you can, accompanied by a National Park Service ranger. We offer walk down tours.
[O'brien:] Checking your pulse all the way, I guess, huh?
[Mendelson:] Absolutely.
[O'brien:] All right, just briefly tell us about the celebrations in store for tomorrow.
[Mendelson:] Tomorrow, the National Park Service, the National Park Foundation and Target Stores will celebrate and commemorate this, the conclusion of this three year project at 10 o'clock here on the Washington Monument grounds. That will be followed Wednesday, Independence Day, by a spectacular fireworks display, a family oriented variety show on the Sullivan stage and a parade along Independence along Constitution Avenue. That, too, is supported through a generous donation from Target Stores and the National Park Foundation.
[O'brien:] All right, we're just about out of time, Lisa, but I've got to ask you, what has become of that wonderful scaffolding arrangement?
[Mendelson:] The scaffolding was a very utilitarian tool for the Park Service to undertake the work that we did and it was rented from the contractor and the contractor now has it somewhere in his possession.
[O'brien:] All right, I figured somebody would buy it and erect it somewhere in the Midwest or something. All right, Lisa Mendelson with the Park Service, good luck with the celebrations and good luck making it safe. Thank you very much for being with us on
[Cnn Sunday Morning. Mendelson:] Thank you.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Campaign financing: It is shaping up to be a hot-button issue in this year's elections, but a congressional campaign in Illinois has managed to combine it with an issue that's even more controversial: gun control. Here's Lisa Price.
[Michael Curtiss , Illinois Cong. Candidate:] We reached out and got the most politically-incorrect weapons we could find.
[Lisa Price, Cnn Correspondent:] Forget the $1,000-a- plate dinners. Michael Curtiss, Republican candidate for Congress in Illinois' 17th district, has gone the way of firepower fundraisers.
[Curtiss:] This is a.45 caliber, compact.45 caliber pistol...
[Price:] Raffling off guns like these...
[Curtiss:] The rifle up on top is a semiautomatic Bulgarian copy.
[Price:] ... To raise money for his political campaign.
[Curtiss:] It was a way of making a statement, too: Hands off, this is my Second Amendment right to bear arms.
[Price:] Up until recently, Curtiss made his career as a small- town doctor, but last spring, he decided he could do greater good as a politician. A newcomer to the race, the district's political veterans believe he'll end up with less than 10 percent of the vote. He calls himself a patriot and is against abortion, U.S. trade policies and, at the top of the list: gun control. [on camera]: While many of the residents living in Illinois' 17th district believe in the right to bear arms, there are still those who believe the Michael Curtiss for Congress campaign has crossed the line.
[Unidentified Male:] I think a lot of his views are very far from the middle, which is where I tend to travel. It's almost appalling that a candidate's raffling off handguns to finance a campaign.
[Price:] Not even the NRA has supported him. At five dollars a ticket, Curtiss says the raffle has so far raised about $30,000.
[Ed Tibbetts, "quad-city Times":] Among some Republicans, the fact that he's raffling off guns is not going to be such a big deal. Now, when you get more towards the middle of the road and the left side of the political spectrum, I think that'll raise some eyebrows.
[Price:] That's precisely what Curtiss aims to do. Though he is the dark horse candidate in the primary, he says the raffle has not only added money to his campaign but, in his words, "magic." Lisa Price for CNN, Rock Island, Illinois.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Back in this country, now. In Salt Lake City, the judging scandal that has rocked the Winter Games, leading now to calls to scrap the current skating judging system and replace it with a new format. Rusty Dornin now, live in Salt Lake, to give us a preview of what they may do here if all the I guess the new rules pass muster. Hey, Rusty, good afternoon. Good morning to you in Salt Lake.
[Rusty Dornin, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Bill, you know a lot of folks all week long after the controversial skate had been calling for major changes in figure skating, to overhaul it. Well, lo and behold, those proposals were announced yesterday by the International Skating Union, and it is a revolutionize it could revolutionize the way they score and judge the events. Already some folks are saying, of course, it doesn't go far enough. But, first of all, there will be 14 judges that will be judging each and every event, instead of 9. Out of the 14, 7 of those scores will be chosen at random by a computer, and those will be the scores that are computed to figure out the winner. No one will know who the 7 are out of the 14. Now, the International Skating Union feels that this is one way to put a stop to vote blocking and behind closed door deals and that sort of thing, because no one will know if their vote will count or not until after the competition and after the votes have been tallied. Also, figure skating, from its very beginnings, has always used the 6.0, the perfect score. That's how the skater starts out and then, as each mistake goes on, the scores are deducted. Well, now, they will start from zero, and they will accumulate scores. So that when they do a performance, and they do double axels, let's say, that's given a certain number of points. They do a triple axel, that's given a certain number of points. Then that's multiplied by how each judge feels they performed on that element. That's more like how they score diving. Of course, it is a subjective sport. There will always be criticisms about the way things are judged. But at least one former Olympic skater says it looks like that things are getting a bit better.
[Oksana Baiul, 1994 Olympic Gold Medalist:] It is unfortunate what happened here, and we all have to go through that. We have to support our skaters, and when we're on the ice, we're doing the best performance which we could do. But, when we're off the ice, it's not up to us to decide. So, I think the decision they made last night, it's worthwhile trying.
[Dornin:] Now the controversy, of course, that prompted this big overhaul was the supposed misconduct by the French judge Marie-Reine le Gougne, who, now keeps flip-flopping on what she says happened. It's really turning into a he said-she said thing. Originally she said that she was pressured by her own skating federation. I spoke to the skating federation president yesterday, who denied he had any involvement, that he never pressured her, that other people must have been involved in it. She ended up telling the French press that she actually voted in good conscience, and that she felt the Russian pairs deserved to win the gold medal. So, it will be interesting to see, after all of this, what ends up coming out, if we ever really hear the truth about what happened. In the meantime, as far as this judging overhaul, that will be voted on at the International Skating Union congress in Japan, in June. Bill?
[Hemmer:] Hey, you know, Rusty, when this was going down all last week, we asked countless people how they would change the skating side. you might remember it. We were asking former Olympians to tell us how they'd change it. They seemed practical. Have you gauged whether or not many people would go for it?
[Dornin:] Well, I the people I've spoken to say, "you know, it is a start." It's a you know using the 14 judges. I had heard that suggestion from a couple of different people, and then taking these the 7 or half of the judges' scores randomly, I'd heard that from a couple people. But, I think there are also some skaters out there, and coaches, who say it still doesn't go far enough. It's still not going to stop, you know, the lack of credibility that's really seems rampant in the sport right now.
[Hemmer:] Is this still the buzz out there in Salt Lake or have things, let's say have they tempered down a little bit, Rusty?
[Dornin:] Well, I think we're buzzing about it. I thin folks on the ground are trying to enjoy the Olympic venues. Of course, getting excited about the women's figure skating tonight.
[Hemmer:] That's true.
[Dornin:] Michelle Kwan takes to the ice.
[Hemmer:] You got it.
[Dornin:] So, it's dying down.
[Hemmer:] And men's and women's hockey later in the week. Good deal. Rusty, thanks. Talk to you later. Stay warm. Rusty Dornin, live in Salt Lake.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to begin with the opening of a new chapter and the end of a long and bitter fight for the White House. George W. Bush has officially assumed the title of president- elect with a call for reconciliation and unity. We have live reports this morning from national correspondent Tony Clark he's in Austin, Texas; Eileen O'Connor at the Bush- Cheney transition office in McLean, Virginia; and our Patty Davis at Vice President Gore's residence in Washington, D.C. We're going to start with Tony on what George W. Bush plans to do as this his first full day as president-elect. Tony, good morning.
[Tony Clark, Cnn National Correspondent:] Good morning, Daryn. Busy day for President-elect Bush, but not a particularly public day for the president-elect. Over at the governor's mansion right now, this is about the time of day that he usually gets his intelligence briefing from the CIA, Andrew Card arriving there a short time ago, Andrew Card his designated chief of staff during a Bush White House. And then about an hour from now, there will be a prayer service at the Terrytown United Methodist Church. That's the church the governor and Mrs. Bush go to when they are in Austin. Three ministers speaking today. Among them the pastor from the church that they attend when they are in Dallas, Texas. The president-elect saying as he begins a new administration he is looking for divine guidance, as he said in his speech last night.
[Gov. George W. Bush , President-elect:] With God's help, we as a nation will move forward together as one nation, indivisible. And together we will create an America that is open so every citizen has access to the American dream; an America that is educated so every child has the keys to realize that dream; and an America that is united in our diversity and our shared American values that are larger than race or party. I was not elected to serve one party, but to serve one nation.
[Clark:] Staffers are working on his schedule for here in Austin before he goes to Washington over the weekend for a meeting with President Clinton, Vice President Gore. At this point, no news conferences scheduled, no announcements of key positions and no celebration. I talked to some of the key staff members last night after the president-elect's speech and they had just come back from Florida. Many were tired. And the fact that George W. Bush is the president-elect was something that still was very difficult to sink in Daryn.
[Kagan:] Tony, tell us a little bit more about this prayer service. You told us that this is the church where Mr. and Mrs. Bush usually go when they're in Austin, Texas. Was this a service set up specifically to as a celebration to mark the occasion?
[Clark:] It is specifically for the president-elect, his staff members, family members and the like. And it is and it's just for them, it's not a public service. And it was designed to set the tone. As I say, he mentioned seeking God's help in his speech last night, and it is sort of the first step that they want to take first very public step that they want to take in setting the tone, the mood, the direction for a Bush administration Daryn.
[Kagan:] Tony, thank you very much. Tony Clark in Austin, Texas. And we will be covering that prayer service in the next hour. Also, if the president-elect speaks, we'll bring you his comments live as well. Now to Vice President Gore, who gave his concession speech last night. He has a tough few weeks ahead of him. For more on that, let's bring in our Eileen O'Connor, who actually, it's Patty Davis. Patty Davis standing by in Washington, D.C. Patty, good morning.
[Patty Davis, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Daryn. Vice President Al Gore began his speech last night with a joke, saying that he had just called Texas Gov. George W. Bush, now the president-elect, and said that he wouldn't be calling him back again this time. But it was obviously a highly emotional moment for the vice president as he steadied himself visibly, taking a deep breath before he began speaking, doing what he knew he had to do, and that was call it quits in his White House bid. It was a softer and humbled Gore who spoke to the nation. And he called on the nation to rally behind the new president-elect.
[Vice Pres. Al Gore , Former Presidential Candidate:] Some have expressed concern that the unusual nature of this election might hamper the next president in the conduct of his office. I do not believe it need be so. President-elect Bush inherits a nation whose citizens will be ready to assist him in the conduct of his large responsibilities. I personally will be at his disposal, and I call on all Americans, I particularly urge all who stood with us, to unite behind our next president.
[Davis:] As he left the Old Executive Office Building next to the White House after that concession, supporters cheered him along with wife Tipper and the Liebermans. He touched his hand to his heart to show those supporters how he felt, some shouting, "Gore in four." Now, afterwards, he returned here to the vice presidential residence. He had a party with his campaign staffers. And as Tony said, he will meet with the new president-elect, Bush, here in Washington come next Tuesday to talk conciliation, to talk healing. The meeting that Al Gore has asked for all along will finally come true now under a little bit different circumstances, being that he won't be the next president of the United States Daryn.
[Kagan:] Patty Davis in Washington, D.C., thank you very much. Now if you'll remember, because of the question of how the election was going to work out, the transition funds, millions of dollars, were not released to the Bush-Cheney team, so they went ahead and set up their own privately funded office. And that's where we find our Eileen O'Connor this morning. Eileen in McLean, Virginia. Eileen, I imagine very soon they'll be moving out of those offices.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, they will, Daryn. Day by day, they say, they'll be moving out; 21,000 square feet, but still it wasn't really enough space. Vice President-elect Dick Cheney arrived here earlier this morning, very early this morning, to get right down to work. You could say that they have actually already hit the ground running, because they've been running for several weeks. As you know, they raised money themselves to set up a transition office. They have 1,100 jobs to fill that require Senate confirmation; more than 5,300 other jobs to fill. Transition experts say, though, Dick Cheney, being the clearly a very experienced player, a person who's dealt with transitions before, has worked in several administrations, knows what needs to be done. But still it is a daunting task.
[Craig Fuller, Bush-quayle Transition Coordinator:] These are people that have worked together for some time, but all of a sudden the territory is a little different, the desks are a little different, the computers are a little different, and they've got a mountain of paperwork in the form of resumes from people who want to come into government. So it's a daunting task that faces them. On the other hand, what I call the "Cheney factor" helps a lot. Secretary Dick Cheney, Vice President-elect Dick Cheney, has a lot of experience in Washington serving presidents, serving in cabinet posts himself. He knows how to run a transition, and putting him in charge of this was a very smart thing to do.
[O'connor:] And as you know, Gov. Bush has also been meeting with the man that he has said will be his White House chief of staff, Andrew Card, over these last few weeks. And they have been going over lists and lists, they say, of personnel. Clearly there are, as I said, thousands of jobs to fill, but they say they are well on their way and they will be prepared. This afternoon, in fact, they will be getting those keys to the federal office space that they have available downtown Washington. They'll be handed over from GSA officials in a little ceremony here in the Briefing Room that's just been set up with Secretary Cheney and Clay Johnson, who's the executive director of the transition. He's the guy who makes the all the trains run on time, who gets the computers set up, et cetera. And then, also, they will be taking advantage of some $5.2 million in transition funds Daryn.
[Kagan:] Eileen, as we mentioned, the offices where you are right now in McLean, Virginia, the Bush team went ahead and raised private funds in order to finance that. Would you happen to know if there's any of that money left over? And where does that money go now that they'll be able to use the federal funds?
[O'connor:] Well, it's not unusual, you know, for private funds to be raised. In fact, the Clinton-Gore administration in 1992 raised private funds, but they only had raised $1.3 million, possibly a little more, by now. But most of that will have been used up. And they likely will also use up all the federal funds. You know, there's a lot of expenses. There's travel expenses, there's communications. This pays for everything all the way down to postage, so it's quite a lot. And, you know, in terms of those resumes that they've been dealing with, they've actually online gotten like 18,000 the other day, but even more coming in, 20,000 as of yesterday.
[Kagan:] Very good. Eileen O'Connor in McLean, Virginia, thank you very much. We've been talking this morning that President-elect Bush and he talked about it in his speech last night trying to reach across party lines. He will face the challenge, though, of working with a divided Congress. Let's check in now with Kate Snow, who is covering that latest reaction from Capitol Hill. Kate, good morning.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Daryn. Last night, most Democrats agreeing that they thought Al Gore had done a very good job with his speech. They said that both Bush and Gore had struck the right tone. They felt they were paving the way for Democrats and Republicans to work together. This morning, some Democrats, though, some indication that perhaps more liberal Democrats may have felt that Al Gore didn't go far enough in his speech last night. Just a short time ago on CNN, House Minority Whip David Bonior said that he feels that they need to keep counting the votes in Florida.
[Rep. David Bonior , Minority Whip:] One thing I was mildly disappointed in last night with the president-elect was not recognizing the need to deal with the electoral reform problems that we saw in Florida but that go on all across this country. The franchise is a very important thing. The vote is an important thing for millions of people. It is their way to express themselves. And there's a lot of bitterness over what happened here. He needs to address that. He needs to dig deeper to understand that in order for him to really bind the wounds that are out there in the country.
[Snow:] And Republicans on the Hill acknowledge that there is going to be some bitterness among their Democratic counterparts. Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott addressing that yesterday here. He said it's going to be hard to bring people together. But Republicans feel that there is enough bipartisan consensus that they can get some legislative items passed.
[Rep. Dick Armey , Majority Leader:] We have legislation, if it has good standing with the American people, such as repealing the death penalty, repealing the marriage penalty, things of this nature, things we can do for prescription medicines for senior citizens, improving our education. We do these jobs right we'll get good bipartisan support. And we have an opportunity to work together. George Bush is a person who reaches out across the aisle. He'll be a good example before us. He'll be a good encouragement to us.
[Snow:] Vice President-elect Dick Cheney met with Republicans here on Capitol Hill yesterday, spent much of the day here. He met with moderate Republicans. And Sen. Trent Lott said he has plans to come back to the Hill soon and meet with Democrats as well. Kate Snow, CNN, live, Capitol Hill.
[Kagan:] Kate, thank you very much.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Osama bin Laden says he has nuclear weapons. The U.S. says they're not sure whether that's true. In the war zone, all roads lead to Kabul. Taliban opposition forces move toward the Afghan capital. And the results are in from Florida again. A comprehensive study says George Bush won the election fair and square. And good morning. Thanks so much for being with us this morning. Hope you all had a good weekend. It is Monday, October 12. From New York, I'm Paula Zahn. Coming up in this hour, we're going to try to answer some of today's big questions does Osama bin Laden have nuclear weapons as he claims and if so, why hasn't he used them? We're going to talk with bin Laden's official biographer about his recent interview with the suspected terrorist. We will also talk with former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger about al Qaeda and its nuclear capabilities and what the U.S. can do about that. And a little bit later on, revisiting the Florida election only to confirm what we knew all along. So was the recount a waste of our time and money? Did the campaigns over play their hand? We're going to speak with author Jeffrey Toobin and CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley. Also, some surprising new words from an old U.S. foe. We're going to bring you a portion of Christiane Amanpour's exclusive one- on-one interview with President Khatami of Iran. First, though, we want to bring you the latest headlines. And for that, let's turn to Bill Hemmer, who joins us from Atlanta with our war alert.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Correspondent:] Paula, good morning. On this Monday, here's what's happening. Reports of a military move on Kabul now. Anti-Taliban forces say they are under orders to advance on the Afghan capital. Reports indicating they've already captured several key cities, including Herat in the west and Mazir-i- Sharif in the north, as of Friday. CNN journalists have seen hundreds of Northern Alliance troops heading toward the front lines today. Both sides are trading artillery fire along the fronts. Also, opposition sources telling CNN a Taliban ambush has left three journalists dead. French media identified two of the journalists as Johanne Sutton and Pierre Billaud. The third journalist not identified at this point. All were riding in a Northern Alliance convoy at the time of that ambush. New estimates this morning on the financial cost of war. A report in the "New York Times" saying the U.S. government expects to spend more than a billion dollars a month. That figure expected to rise even as more U.S. forces are deployed in the region. At home, the Pentagon has had to pay the cost of National Guard and Reserve air patrols and airport security. Now, to anthrax. Trace amounts have been found in five more Senate offices all inside the Hart Office Building. Lieutenant Dan Nichols is the spokesman for the U.S. Capitol Police.
[Lt. Dan Nichols, Capitol Police:] By all indications, this is a cross-contamination issue, that other mail has come into contact with the original Daschle letter and now that's why we're following the pattern of the mail throughout the Hart Senate Office Building to determine if there are other areas that we need to identify and remediate.
[Hemmer:] And the CDC says trace amounts of anthrax pose no health risk. Spores have been found now in nine Senate offices in the Hart Building. A new report on the disputed 2000 presidential election does conclude that George W. Bush would have won even with a statewide recount in Florida. The University of Chicago conducted a six month study for CNN and seven other media organizations. President Bush won Florida in the official count by a margin of 537 votes. New violence in Northern Ireland has claimed another life. Police in Belfast say a pipe bomb exploded in the hand of a Protestant teenager as he tried to throw it. He later died of his wounds. A Protestant activist says the teen had picked up a device thrown by Catholics. The fighting broke out yesterday. Twenty-four police officers are reported injured there. Also, baseball slugger Mark McGwire calling it a career at the age of 38. McGwire turned down a $30 million offer from the St. Louis Cardinals, citing injuries. Back in 1998, McGwire set a new record of 70 home runs in one season and this year Barry Bonds beat that record, 73 home runs in the season that we saw just completed. Big Mac out, on a good note, though, and a good guy, too Paula, back to you. Another update in 25 minutes. We'll talk more about the military at that point.
[Zahn:] See you then, Bill.
[Hemmer:] OK.
[Zahn:] Thanks so much. In Afghanistan, after weeks of near stalemate on the ground, Northern Alliance troops this morning are making some major advances. Columns of forces aligned against the Taliban are on the move and headed toward Kabul. Thos comes after a string of strategic advances across northern Afghanistan over the past 48 hours. The escalated fighting is extremely dangerous for the journalists inside the country. Three reporters were killed overnight in an apparent ambush by Taliban forces. We have a lot of ground to cover. Let's begin with Matthew Chance. He is near the front lines north of Kabul good morning, Matthew.
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Paula, and confirmation from the defense officials of the Northern Alliance that what we've been witnessing throughout the course of the day local time here is, indeed, an advance towards the Afghan capital, Kabul, perhaps an attempt to capitalize on the gains that you mentioned in the west and in the north of Afghanistan. They've been telling us about their territorial gains here north of the Afghan capital. They're saying their forces have moved some three kilometers, about a mile and a half down the road towards Kabul. They also say they've captured about 31 Taliban fighters and a number of Taliban checkpoints around the strategic Bagram Air Base, although they say the mountain, of course, that overlooks Bagram is still very much in Taliban hands. Throughout the course of the day, we've been seeing hundreds, if not thousands of troops of the Northern Alliance move down the road towards Kabul, bolstering those front line positions of the Northern Alliance. They've, of course, been followed, as well, by tanks, heavy artillery, armored personnel armed personnel carriers as well. We also managed to get pictures earlier today local time of what appear to be Western military advisers. They're the first shots we've managed to videotape of these advisers. It's an open secret that British and American special forces are here apparently coordinating U.S.-led air strikes on the Taliban front lines here north of the Afghan capital. Throughout the course of today, we've been seeing B-52 bombers and other fighter bomber aircraft of the coalition dropping their ordinance quite intensively on those Taliban front lines, even though Washington has expressed its concern, its reticence about a Northern Alliance advance into the city of Kabul itself. We are seeing this sort of limited support for this advance across the Shamali Plains. For their part, the Northern Alliance say they will advance, but they will not enter Kabul itself, preferring to wait instead, they say, for some kind of broad-based ethnic, ethnically broad-based political agreement to be in place for a future government before they actually enter the Afghan capital itself. So we're watching that situation very closely, indeed Paula.
[Zahn:] So, Matthew, what is their expectation? Is it a matter of days, do they think, or weeks before they actually go into Kabul?
[Chance:] It's difficult to say, isn't it, because the losses of the Taliban have been so dramatic. Their rule has essentially collapsed across northern and parts of western Afghanistan almost in the past few days. It's difficult to say how quickly or how slowly this advance will take place. Certainly there have been, according to Northern Alliance officials, some significant advances that I mentioned to you earlier there towards the Afghan capital. If they do stand outside the gates of Kabul, as they've said they would, waiting for some kind of political agreement, that could take weeks, even months for the United States-led coalition, for the international community to get round the table, bring all the parties together from all the different ethnic groups the Uzbeks, the Tajiks, and, of course, the Pashtuns, who are the biggest ethnic group here in Afghanistan to agree on some kind of power sharing arrangement for the future government of Afghanistan. Who knows when that's going to happen Paula.
[Zahn:] Matthew, we reported at the top of this broadcast that you lost three of your colleagues in an ambush. What kind of precautions are you taking now?
[Chance:] Well, it's, of course, a very volatile situation. When you're in a position where the front lines are moving quite rapidly, of course, they can move one way or the other. One minute you may be covering an advance by the Northern Alliance forces deep into Taliban controlled territory, the next minute you can see all those Northern Alliance forces running in the other direction, screaming, "Get back! Get back!" So it's a very volatile situation here. Obviously these unfortunate journalists got caught up in the middle of it.
[Zahn:] Matthew Chance, thanks so much for that update. We will be checking in with you throughout the morning. As Matthew just reported, most indications on the ground point to an expected assault on the capital of Kabul. The question is when. We don't know exactly when that might happen, but the Bush administration is sending signals it would prefer the Northern Alliance hold off. CNN's senior United Nations correspondent Richard Roth explains why Richard, good morning.
[Richard Roth, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, good morning, Paula. A bit of a quiet break on a Monday morning here in the midst of a week of tumult here at the annual debate at the general assembly. Unprecedented security levels here, and inside the U.N. building today, one of the most important meetings. The so-called six plus two group Russia, U.S. and the surrounding countries on the Afghan border areas. This group has had its major differences on Afghan's future Afghanistan's future, especially between Iran and Pakistan. Now, they are ready to speak with one voice in a statement today, calling for unified, politically balanced, multi-ethnic government there, a theme echoed in yesterday's general assembly session by British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw.
[Jack Straw, British Foreign Minister:] The future of Afghanistan must be put into the hands of the Afghan people. There must be no more great games with Afghan people the pawns. No more regional rivalries with Afghan people the victims.
[Roth:] More than 80 countries lost citizens in the disaster at the World Trade Center site two months ago. So while they work on a political solution for the future Afghanistan, the nations of the world that came here to the general assembly session remember what happened in New York two months ago. President Bush, Secretary General Annan paying silent homage to the victims Paula.
[Zahn:] All right, Richard, we're going to leave it there for now but continue to check in with you throughout the morning. Thanks so much. Osama bin Laden claims to have both chemical and nuclear weapons. That word came in published reports over the weekend. The comments appeared in an interview given recently to a Pakistani journalist at a secret location in Afghanistan. Western reaction is skeptical. There are also reports that 10 Pakistani nuclear scientists met with al Qaeda and the Taliban, talking about the potential of working on a nuclear weapons program. "USA Today" quotes U.S. officials as saying several of those scientists agreed to work on the project but, of course, they said they needed the permission of the Pakistani government. But even the president of Pakistan says he does not believe bin Laden has nuclear weapons. In a little bit, we'll be talking to the journalist who conducted that interview with Osama bin Laden. But first, let's turn to Sandy Berger, the former national security adviser to President Clinton. He joins us from Washington with his perspective on al Qaeda and its potential to unleash weapons of mass destruction. Good to see you again. Welcome.
[Samuel Berger, Former National Security Adviser:] Good morning, Paula.
[Zahn:] How seriously do you take these reports that Osama bin Laden has either chemical or nuclear weapons?
[Berger:] Well, after September 11 I don't think we can afford to rule out any possibility or option. But I think it is unlikely that bin Laden or al Qaeda have nuclear weapons. We know that they have sought to acquire weapons of mass destruction of various types, that they have experimented with chemical weapons. But to actually have a usable nuclear device, I think, is unlikely.
[Zahn:] I'd like to quickly replay a small part of what Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had to say about this very specific issue yesterday as he hit the talk show circuit.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Of Defense:] It means that one has to assume that they either have them or they will get them unless they're stopped. And it does not take a genius to understand that if they have them or get them at some point in the future, that they will be perfectly willing to use them.
[Zahn:] So how does that affect U.S. strategy at this point, Sandy?
[Berger:] Well, first of all, I absolutely agree with what Secretary Rumsfeld has said. This has certainly demonstrated the absolute venality to use such weapons were they to get them. I think it means, number one, we have to do everything we can on the intelligence side to determine what their capabilities are. Number two, we have to obviously continue the unrelenting assault on this group to try to disrupt it and destroy it, because we do know that they will use weapons of mass destruction if they have them. We have to increase our detection capability, our teams here in the United States that have the capability of diffusing and disarming nuclear weapons should one be introduced to the United States. We can't, we have to assume here that this is a possibility in the future. I don't think there's any evidence that I have seen that they have these, this nuclear weapons capability at this stage.
[Zahn:] How concerned are you about this report in "USA Today" about these 10 Pakistani scientists actually sitting down, and one scientist in particular, with al Qaeda and Taliban members?
[Berger:] Well, there, you know, we have to be very concerned about cooperation between Pakistani scientists or other scientists that may have been working in WMD, weapons of mass destruction programs that might be purchasable or acquirable by Osama bin Laden. I think General President Musharraf has made very clear that he is, intends to exercise the greatest degree of control to assure that security of his nuclear weapons and to make sure there is no cooperation between his operations, his weapons, his nuclear operations and al Qaeda.
[Zahn:] Given the opposition to this American and coalition campaign in his country, what degree of confidence do you have that President Musharraf can maintain control of his nuclear weapons program?
[Berger:] Well, he has apparently taken further steps in the past month or so to secure his nuclear arsenal. There are not, the nuclear weapons that Pakistan has are ones that obviously they seek to maintain for their own deterrence, for their own purposes, and they have every incentive, obviously, therefore, in maintaining their security.
[Zahn:] A final question for you. As you no doubt heard on some of the talk shows yesterday, a lot of people throwing out the idea well, if Osama bin Laden really had nuclear weapons or a dirty bomb he would have used it already. What do you say to them?
[Berger:] Well, again, I don't think that we can be complacent or take anything for granted here. I think this is all the more reason why we have to be unrelenting in our effort here to destroy and dismantle this operation with great intensity.
[Zahn:] As always, good to have your insights. Thank you so much, Sandy Berger.
[Berger:] Thank you.
[Zahn:] Appreciate your time this morning.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] President Clinton is meeting today with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat in an effort to move along those Middle East peace talks. CNN White House correspondent Major Garrett is at the White House with more on this meeting. What are you expecting today, Major?
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Carol. Palestinian Chairman Yasser Arafat arrived in Washington late last evening. He's due here at the White House 9:30 this morning. The president has set aside about an hour and a half for the meeting, and the atmosphere in the Middle East peace talks, at least the Israeli-Palestinian track, are grim. There's essentially two tracks to the negotiations going on here in Washington, one about the so-called interim issues. That's the Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and the handover from Israel to Palestinians of prisoners. Well, the Palestinians pulled out of those talks yesterday, saying the Israeli concessions were not nearly enough. The other track of the Palestinian-Israeli peace process deals with what are called final status issues. That's the status of Jerusalem, the final boundaries of a new Palestinian state, and other issues. Those talks are continuing, and it's those that the president hopes to jumpstart today. Yesterday, the president was asked about the prospects for a final status peace agreement. He said he's still working on it.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] I think we are making steady progress. We're we've seen the narrowing of some of the gaps, but I don't know that we're ready to have the final meeting yet.
[Garrett:] U.S. officials are not pleased with reactions from Palestinian Chairman Arafat or Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak yesterday. Both accused each other of foot dragging, both accused each other of negotiating in bad faith. The president spoke with Mr. Prime Minister Barak yesterday for about 45 minutes here at the White House in preparation for his meeting with Arafat. The White House does hope it can find some hope in restarting the peace talks with Arafat today, but right now officials are not very optimistic. Major Garrett, CNN, reporting live from the White House.

[Unidentified Female:] I will introduce each of the media witnesses individually. I will let them make their statements. And then you will have the opportunity to ask questions. We'll start with Karin Grunden with the "Terre Haute Tribune- Star." Oh, did you guys OK. I lied. They have an order that they have arranged within the media pool. And I'll let each of them introduce themselves as they go.
[Question:] And spell your names.
[Byron Pitts, Cbs News:] Yes, ma'am. Good morning. I'm Byron Pitts from CBS News: B-Y-R-O-N-P-I-T-T- S. Timothy James McVeigh died with his eyes open. When the curtains came back, he made eye contact with his people who came to support him. When the curtain passed the media center, Mr. McVeigh seemed to look up and intentionally make eye contact with each of us. Then when the curtain passed, the room where the victims' relatives were and survivors he turned his head to the right and made eye contact with them. He did not speak. But Mr. McVeigh did make a write out a written statement that the warden passed out to each of us. I'll read it to you now. It reads and this is written by Timothy McVeigh by hand: "Final written statement of Timothy McVeigh. Out of the night that covers me, Black is the Pit from pole to pole, I thank whatever gods may be for my unconquerable soul."
[Pitts:] "In the fell clutch of circumstance, I have not winced nor cried aloud. Under the bludgeoning of chance, my head is bloodied but unbowed. Beyond this place of wrath and tears looms but the horror of the shade and yet the menace of the years finds and shall find me unafraid. It matters not how straight the gate, how charged with punishment the scroll. I am the master of my fate. I am the captain of my soul." He signs it at the end, June 11, 2001. Thank you.
[Shepard Smith, Fox News Channel:] I'm Shepard Smith from Fox News Channel. We were taken in as a group.
[Question:] Spell it, please.
[Smith:] S-h-e-p-a-r-d Smith, the Fox News Channel. We were standing at a glass window about 18 inches from his feet. He was wearing sneakers, you could see that. There were sheets up to here and folded over. His hands were down. He looked straight at the ceiling. When the curtains opened, to his left were his representatives. He sat up as much as he could in that chair and looked toward his window and nodded his head like that. Then came toward the media window where there were 10 of us, plus five people from the prison, plus two media representatives as well. He seemed almost to be trying to take charge of the room and understand his circumstances, nodding at each one of us individually, then sort of cursory glance toward the government section. He lay there very still. He never said a word. His lips were very tight. He nodded his head a few times. He blinked a few times. Then when we were told that the first drug was administered, his very tight lips and his very wide eyes changed considerably; his lips relaxed, his eyes relaxed, he looked toward the ceiling where there happened to be a camera staring right at Oklahoma City. And at that point his eyes seem to roll back only slightly, his body seemed to relax, his feet shifted just a bit. There was the administration of one drug and then another, and after the last drug, there was a very slight movement here. It was like standing on the other side of a glass wall and looking directly at a hospital bed. Tim McVeigh right at us, his hair very short, almost yellow. The only change between the prison jumpsuit shot that we all knew so well and today's Tim was he seems to have aged a little bit, and he chose to say nothing.
[Linda Cavanaugh, Kfor-tv Reporter:] My name Linda Cavanaugh, c-a- v-a-n-a-u-g-h. I'm with KFOR-TV in Oklahoma City. The last time I saw Tim McVeigh was in the courtroom in Denver. He had changed markedly. He was paler, he was thinner, and he did not have the same look of arrogance that he had in the courtroom in Denver. Today, when we came in, his head was almost shaven, as they have described. He was laying flat, but as the windows, as though you were in a bed and you were trying to see what was over the edge of it, he strained his neck to look at us. His lips were partly open, his eyes were open and when they started administering the drugs, he began staring at the ceiling. After the first drug was administered, his lips began turning a little bit paler, his skin became pale. After they administered the next drug, it appeared that he was breathing through his mouth for the first time, as though he was trying to control his breathing. He took two or three breaths like that and then from that point on for the next several minutes, when the final drug administered until he was pronounced dead, there was no additional movement from Timothy McVeigh. It was very orchestrated, clinical procedure. I think it went fairly much as they had planned it. The marshal who was in the room and the warden who were in the room stood with their arms crossed in front of them, seldom looking at Timothy McVeigh. And the atmosphere in the press room was one of almost wonderment at what was transpiring in front of you: watching a man die. The procedure began when they said, "We are ready. You may proceed." At that point, they began the execution process. It culminated when the warden pronounced him dead at 7:14.
[Susan Carlson, Wls Radio, Chicago:] My name is Susan Carlson. I'm a reporter with WLS Radio in Chicago. When we walked in the room, we saw him just a few feet in front of us, and he was wrapped tightly in a white sheet. And he almost looked like a mummy. And he deliberately lifted up his head and looked at one of us each by each. He took the time to make eye contact with each of us. And he was slowly nodding as he was looking at each of us across the room, the media witnesses, and the relative and the victim witnesses who were in a room adjacent to us. After he looked at everybody, he put his head back down and he stared straight up at the ceiling. And his eyes did not move from that position for the rest of the procedure. In fact, I didn't even see him blink once after they started administering the drugs. And he died with his eyes open. As he laid back in position and they started administering all the drugs, his breathing became a little more shallow. At one point, he filled up his cheeks with air and then just kind of let it go. But I don't believe that was his last breath. There was still some shallow breathing that followed. His skin began to turn a very strange shade of yellow towards the end. And he remained extremely rigid. I think as a reporter, you cover a lot of things and we've seen dead bodies, but the most chilling part of this was the fact for me at least that he took the time to look up and look at each of us in the eye and there was almost a sense of pride as he nodded his head, laid back down, and seemed very resigned to his fate. He didn't have anything to say, but his poem the written statement that he handed to that he handed out before that he wrote before he passed on indicated that same sense of pride, that this was what had to be done, what he did and what happened to him today was all part of his plan, and he seemed very content and very resigned to the fact that he was going to die and he did not fight it and he almost looked proud of what had happened. At this point, we're going to open it up for questions.
[Question:] Did the execution start at exactly 7:00?
[Unidentified Female:] Aren't we going to do the rest of the people?
[Carlson:] Originally, it said we were going to do four people and then questions.
[Unidentified Female:] Well, I think we should do everybody.
[Carlson:] Absolutely.
[Rex Huppke, Associated Press:] My name is Rex Huppke, r-e-x h-u- p-p-k-e. I'm with the Associated Press. Let me give you a better idea of sort of the time line of how things unfolded. The first thing that we heard in the room, through the speakers, which were in the ceiling, was the warden's voice, saying "Testing one, two, three." He was checking the feed to Oklahoma City. That happened at about 7:02. We heard his voice come back on about a minute later, saying, "Having little trouble with the video, just like I said, OK?" Now, the curtains were still drawn, so I can't say for sure if he was speaking to McVeigh or not, but it sounded like it. The testing went on, then his voice came on again at about 7:05. Again, he said the same thing, "Testing one, two, three." And then we heard him say, at 7:06, "We're ready." Then the curtains were pulled. As they've described, McVeigh looked he looked first towards his lawyers or towards his witnesses which included his lawyers, and he kind of shook his head towards them. Then, he looked at the media and kind of bounced his head towards each one of us. And then he looked over to his right towards the victim witness room, which was a tinted glass pane so he couldn't see into it, but he looked over and he sort of not real dramatic, but he sort of squinted a little bit, like he was trying to see through the tinted glass to see if he could see anything. At 7:10, they announced that the first drug had been administered. At that point, he was still conscious, it seemed. His eyes were open and blinking a little bit. Very slowly, his eyes stopped moving. And his head was really perfectly lined up; he wasn't to one side or the other, he was very rigid and straight up and down; and the eyes just sort of started to slowly move back just a little bit. The second drug was administered at 7:11. Then, at that point was where we saw some of the not really spasms, exactly, but you saw a couple of heavy breaths and then that was, by and large, it. There was a little stomach movement. And at 7:15 they announced that the final drug had been administered I'm sorry, at 7:13. Then at 7:14, the warden came on through the speaker again and announced that he had died.
[Nolan Clay, "the Daily Oklahoman":] I'm Nolan Clay, and that's n- o-l-a-n c-l-a-y. I'm with "The Daily Oklahoman," Oklahoma City. I just have a few more details. The poem was the "Invictus" poem, that British poem that was written in the 1800s. We all had a copy of it off the Internet. I compared it to the written statement that was given to us. I'll see if we can get copies to the people. Can you make copies of this [inaudible] OK. At the top, it says final written statement of Timothy McVeigh. His signature is this scribbled thing that sometimes Mr. McVeigh would write, and it has June 11, 2001. We compared it to the poem. It seems to be word-for-word, punctuation and all that. Let me give you a few more details. The warden at one point said, "Marshal, we are ready. May we proceed?" And then the marshal picked up a red phone and said, "This is the U.S. marshal to the Department of Justice Command Center. May we proceed?" Something was said back to him. And then the marshal, who was Frank Anderson, said, "We may proceed with the execution." McVeigh was wearing a white T-shirt. The sheet came up to right about here. You could see the shoulders. The I.V. tubes looked to be yellow and gray. They came from a slot in the wall behind us. He did look to be hooked up to an EKG machine. There was a black line. And he did stare straight up, his eyes dying with his eyes open is correct. His eyes did roll back slightly. I also saw the gulping breath, where his cheeks bubbled up. And I saw that twice. And I'll be glad to answer any questions after everybody is done. And anybody who wants to see me, I'll go through more detail.
[Karin Grunden, "terre Haute Tribune-star":] I'm Karin Grunden k- a-r-i-n, Grunden: g-r-u-n-d-e-n. from the "Terre Haute Tribune- Star." And I'll provide you a few additional details as well. When we walked into the room, the curtain was closed. It was a bluish-green curtain. And a metal railing that came out from the wall kept us back from the window about 18 inches. There was a little bit of whispering among the guards right before this happened, some whispering in the room. As the time got closer, again, we had the "testing, one, two, three" from the warden. And a correctional officer explained to us that they were checking the feed from Oklahoma City. And they also mentioned that, "We will be testing again," is what the correctional officer told us, "They're having some problems in Oklahoma City with the video feed." When they got that straightened out, the warden again said, "Testing, one, two, three. We're ready." And you could hear the sound of the curtain opening at that point. The white sheet was up to his chest and he was also laying on a white sheet. There was a white sheet draped on the gurney. The warden and U.S. Marshal Frank Anderson both had earpieces in. They were standing next to each other. The warden did say, "Inmate McVeigh, you may make your last statement." At that point, there was silence. At that point, the warden read the sentencing information. And then the red phone was picked up after the warden said, "Marshal, we are ready. May we proceed?" The marshal responded, "Warden, you may proceed with the execution." And, as others described, he looked around. He did swallow and puff some air and you could see his chest moving up and down. The warden did look at Timothy McVeigh. His eyes blinked a few times, and then they remained open. And I'll let someone else go ahead.
[Kevin Johnson, Usa Today:] My name is Kevin Johnson with "USA Today," j-o-h-n-s-o-n. I'll take you outside the execution chamber a little bit. We were dropped off on, I guess, the main entrance. We walked up a path to a 13-foot-high chainlink fence topped by razor wire with a couple of heavily-armed guards out front. And then we were ushered in. I thought perhaps the most remarkable part of it was, as other people have suggested here or have said here, reported here, that his eyes, his line of sight followed the roll of the curtain from right to left, passing first the attorney's window or his witnesses' window, then ours, past the government witnesses, and then past the victim witnesses from Oklahoma City. As others have stated, he did strain himself from the gurney to look at each window. And as others have reported here, he did make eye contact with each of us, or at least tried to do that. Once that happened, though, it was relatively unremarkable in the sense that he of his expression. He moved his head back and never moved it from that position, staring straight at the ceiling. His eyes became increasingly glassy, almost watery as the process went on. However, before the first drug was administered, I think we all saw these couple of deep breaths, quick swallows, and then a fluttered breath from his lips. And then not much movement after that, perhaps a slight chest movement, as others have reported here before. Toward the end of the process, sometime before the warden pronounced time of death, it wasn't clear or at least any signs of breathing were not visible to us. And he appeared, again, as others have reported, to his eyes were completely glassy at that point. And his skin color turned from almost a very, very pale when we first saw him to a light, light yellow. His lips also turned that color as well.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] Federal agents today discovered what they are calling a drug tunnel near the Arizona-Mexico border, and in it they found millions of dollars worth of cocaine. The tunnel runs from a house in Nogales to the city's sewer system houses about 34 of a mile from the border. Joining us now on the telephone line from El Paso, Texas: Rog Maier of the U.S. Customs Service. Thanks for being with us, sir. Can you describe this tunnel? We've seen some of the pictures of it, but describe it to us.
[Roger Maier, U.s. Customs:] Certainly. The actual part of the tunnel that was constructed through the earth is much like an animal burrow running approximately 25 feet from an existing sewer into the home. There was some crude lighting in there but this is not a very advanced form of engineering at all. It's a real crude type of tunnel, similar to what an animal would burrow.
[Chen:] Or something like a prisoner I mean, you would imagine a prisoner digging out of prison from the pictures that we're seeing here. How far underground are we talking about?
[Maier:] This is only a few feet underground. At the most, six feet, and certainly closer as it approached the home.
[Chen:] Is this something, like an adult man could stand up inside of this thing?
[Maier:] No, someone would actually have to crawl through it or possibly tie the drugs to a sack and then have it pulled through the tunnel.
[Chen:] Now, we're seeing a picture here of some of the bricks, we believe, of cocaine. Estimated wholesale value of $6.5 million in bricks found inside.
[Maier:] Yes...
[Chen:] Lined up? Piled up? What?
[Maier:] 198 bricks were found in the home, leading us to believe that this was an active tunnel, still being used very recently. Most drug organizations would not allow more than 800 pounds of cocaine to be sitting unattended for a long period. Once they get it into the country they do try to move it quickly to the cities in inner America.
[Chen:] Now, I mean, how do they do this? Is it clear that somebody just hand-dug this, hand-shoveled this?
[Maier:] That's what it appears and that's what the history has been in Nogales. This is the sixth time since 1995 that authorities like customs have found a drug tunnel in Nogales. There is a wash a drainage ditch that ruins underneath Nogales, Arizona, running directly into Nogales in Northern Mexico. Smugglers use this covered drainage ditch to bring the drugs into the country, then they go into these side sewers. And from those sewers, they actually dig, physically dig, into homes and businesses. As I said, this is the sixth time that Customs has been involved in this type of a seizure in Arizona in the Nogales area.
[Chen:] Did you all get a tip on this? Is that how you knew it was there?
[Maier:] Well, it was part of an ongoing investigation. Our agents, Customs special agents, had been working for a time, and Monday they acted upon the case and tried to actually do a knock-and- search, but there was no one home. But the physical evidence indicated that there was smuggling activity occurring. They were able to obtain a federal search warrant and executed the warrant Monday night, making a substantial seizure. And this is a big seizure for Customs. Last year in Arizona we seized about 4,800 pounds of cocaine, so more than 800 in one shot is a pretty good pretty good day's work for Customs.
[Chen:] I need a quick answer from you here on this. All due respect, if it was this easy for this to be done, if they've done it so many times before, isn't there a possibility that there are lot of other holes, like Swiss cheese, under your border there?
[Maier:] Well, that is a possibility and we're certainly pursuing that possibility aggressively. And, of course, we're always asking the public to let us know if they see any unusual activity because if something weird is going at their neighbor's home, we'd like to know about it.
[Chen:] Or underneath your neighbor's home.
[Maier:] Or underneath, exactly.
[Chen:] Roger Maier of the U.S. Customs Service. That would be your tax dollars at work.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Well, on the heels of that big rise here in the U.S. yesterday, the Asian markets gained overnight. The Fed's quarter-point rate hike on Tuesday surprised nobody, really, and many investors are now betting that the Fed is nearing the end of its sequence of increases.
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Lorraine Hahn wraps up the day in Asian markets from our studios in Hong Kong. Hello, Lorraine.
[Lorraine Hahn, Cnn Correspondent:] Thank you very much. As you're right, Wall Street gains cheered Asia on today. In Japan, we saw some selling in the high-tech issues, as well as the Internet stocks; for example, Softbank saw its share price drop 10 percent. Traders say that the upside will be limited in Japan ahead of the March 31st year-end book closing. The news in Japan, DaimlerChrysler and Mitsubishi nearing a deal for the German-U.S. automaker to buy an estimated 33-percent stake in Mitsubishi, which is struggling under $16 billion of debt. DaimlerChrysler, of course, will get a much-needed foothold here in Asia. Still, Mitsubishi stock fell 1 14 percent today. Apparently, the market has sort of priced in any such alliance. Now, drug firm Sankyo saw its share price drop six percent today after U.S. drug maker Warner-Lambert pulled its diabetes drug Rezulin from the shelves. Now, Sankyo saying that it's still going to sell Rezulin, at least in Japan. Overall3 percent. Here in Hong Kong, the interest-rate-sensitive index powered ahead despite a good chance come Friday we will have high interest rates, much like the United States. The Hang Seng index rose two percent. Traditional old-economy stocks are leading the way up today, HSBC gaining 2 14 percent, Hutchison Whampoa up two percent. Finally, in Korea, two computer memory-chip makers saw their stock prices soar today as investors consider them undervalued compared to their rivals, and they were Samsung Electronics and Hyundai Electronics. Also4 percent on the day. That's a quick check for Asia, back to you in New York.
[Marchini:] All right, Lorraine, thank you so much. Tech stocks like Nokia are leading European markets higher this morning, the lone exception being London.
[Haffenreffer:] It is time now for our first visit of the day to London, where Todd Benjamin is standing by with this update. Good morning, Todd.
[Todd Benjamin, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Dave and Deb. That's right, all the major markets are higher today following Wall Street's sizable gains, with the exception of London. It was higher in the early go, but it's fallen off now; it's now down half percent perhaps on some worries that interest rates could head higher here, either because the underlying economy has strength or perhaps the U.K. budget, which was just announced yesterday, some folks are worried that perhaps that could also lead the Bank of England maybe to raise rates. But right now, as you said, London's down half a percent. The Dax is up three-quarters of one percent. Now, Paris is up one percent, and Zurich is up just over a half of one percent. Currency markets really dull this morning: The dollar is little change in the Japanese currency; the euro is basically unchanged against the greenback; the pound is slipping this morning, it's off a third of a cent against the dollar. Now you mentioned technology. Of course, the Nasdaq's big gain yesterday spilling over to Europe today. The Noyer market, which is Germany's equivalent of their Nasdaq, it's up some three percent. To give you a flavor of how stocks are doing here on an individual basis, for instance, SAP, the big software company which also trading U.S., it's up better than 3 12 percent; Lagardere in France, which is media to missiles2 percent; Oxford Gliko Sciences, this is a biotech that just got rolled yesterday after the big sell-off in the U.S., it's up today some 16 percent after it revealed it had some 800 patent applications and that some directors were buying the stock. In terms of the telecoms, Vodafone's down just over one percent, British Telecom is flat, but France Telecom is up three percent; of course, all those telecoms trade in the U.S. Oil in the early go, first trade out of London was at $25.45 a barrel; that is down some 27 cents from its previous close. And of course, the latest numbers came out from the American Petroleum Institute and they were surprised, a pleasant surprise for those wanting to see lower oil prices. The market was expecting an increase of just a million barrels in crude stocks, but they rose by a better- than four-million barrels, and therefore, oil prices are heading down this morning. Back to you in New York.
[Marchini:] Really briefly, Todd, Chase was up in after-hours trading on a stock split and a dividend hike. Would did you see any price action in it this morning?
[Benjamin:] Well, you know, it was higher slightly in Frankfurt, but I got to tell you, I've called Instinet twice now, and there's still no price action. But a lot of these U.S. stocks kick in about a half-hour from now, so I'll give them another call, and if we get some price action on it I'll tell you what it is in the next update about a half-hour from now.
[Marchini:] Terrific. Thanks, Todd. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] Tensions in the Middle East are spreading. Hezbollah guerrillas, today, took three Israelis captive along the Israeli-Lebanon border; this, after 10 straight days of violence between Palestinians and Israeli security forces in the West Bank, Gaza and many sites in Israel. Watching the situation for us from Jerusalem, CNN's Jerrold Kessel Jerrold.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] Gene, no change in the last hour on the situation on the ground, but tensions, certainly, rising as the Israeli army built up some forces in the Lebanese border, apparently with a view to backing up what Prime Minister Ehud Barak had warned Lebanon and Syria that Israel would undertake forceful action, if necessary, after he issued those warnings to Lebanon and Syria to reign in Hezbollah. And that statement issued by Mr. Barak coming after the confirmation that three Israeli soldiers had been kidnapped, apparently by Hezbollah guerrillas in southeastern Labanon on the border with Israeli on the occupied Golan Heights in the northeastern corner of Israel. And this situation has led to escalating tensions with uncertainty added over and above the ongoing tension of those 10 days of confrontation between Israel and the Palestinians in the West Blank, Gaza, Jerusalem, and even within Israel itself. Israel operating now on these very much on these two fronts of handling the Palestinians, and now this challenge thrown down in a very dramatic challenge by the Hezbollah guerrillas, by kidnapping three soldiers. The soldiers were on an operational patrol along the border fence; Hezbollah apparently came in, cut through the fence, kidnapped the soldiers, made their way north. And over the last several hours before the onset of darkness, Israeli gunships, including helicopters and also war planes, were in the area and, according to reports out of Lebanon, attempting, evidently, to cut off any escape routes of those guerrillas who had kidnapped the soldiers into northern Lebanon, perhaps toward Syria. The Israelis have been firing on cars traveling out of the area. According to reports from Lebanon, a number of people injured as several of those cars were strafed from the air. But, as of now, no reports of any new developments on the whereabouts of those three soldiers. Israel has been operating on another front, trying to get international pressure on Beirut and Damascus; Israel saying that the unilateral withdrawal of its forces back in May, after the long occupation of south Lebanon, was in accordance with the United Nations resolution, with the international community supporting that withdrawal and underlying its support for peace and quiet on the Lebanese border, an incident which Israel says has now been violated by Hezbollah and insisting that the world community weigh in with action against Beirut and Damascus. But whether there is influence to be brought to bear on those two capitols and whether, in fact, if there is, they can bring influence to bear on Hezbollah another matter indeed. In the meantime, the tensions grow a pace on all fronts Gene.
[Randall:] Jerrold, if Ehud Barak is talking about decisive action, is there likely to be some kind of critical mass among the Israeli people for him to carry through on that threat?
[Kessel:] Sorry, Gene, can you just repeat that again? I didn't get the end of your question.
[Randall:] Yes Jerrold, do you see a good bit of public pressure on Ehud Barak to carry through with this threat of decisive action now that these three Israeli soldiers have been captured?
[Kessel:] Mr. Barak is under enormous political pressure; one should not underestimate that. The pressure, perhaps, self-created, himself because, as well as that public pressure because, let's not forget that earlier today, before dawn, he tried to it was projected, to reduce the tensions, the friction with the Palestinians by withdrawing Israeli troops from a position in an enclave in the Palestinian territory in the town of Nablus on the West Bank unilaterally there, in an attempt to reduce friction. But that led to the Palestinians overtaking that position. The Palestinian authority police not be able to keep control after the Israelis went out, and Mr. Barak had been criticized for weakness on that front, for allowing the option that the Palestinians can gain out of showing such weakness and believe that they can gain from a show of force. So there is pressure on him to show that Israel should stand firm, should stand strong. It will be interesting to see what Mr. Barak says in the next hour when he goes on national television to speak to the Israeli people before convening his cabinet in an emergency situation. There is talk of possibly forming a national unity government with the right wing. It is a very tremulous time for the Israeli prime minister as well as a difficult situation on the ground Gene.
[Randall:] Jerrold, thanks very much.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] We're getting a better idea from the White House today of the tone U.S. officials will take when they meet with a delegation in Beijing in the wake of the surveillance plane standoff. One key item on the agenda at Wednesday's meeting: the fate of the crippled U.S. plane, still in China. For more details, we check in with CNN senior White House correspondent John King John.
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Natalie, administration sources telling CNN that even during negotiations to win the release of the crew there were some discussions about getting a U.S. team in there to repair and retrieve the EP-3 surveillance plane. That could not be worked out in the negotiations, so the negotiators focused on winning the president's first priority: the release of the 24 crew members. But now, a key meeting on Wednesday; the first between U.S. and Chinese officials since the end of the standoff, and returning that surveillance plane will be one of several items on the U.S. agenda.
[Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary:] The agenda for the meeting Wednesday is basically four-fold. One is for the United States to provide clear understanding to the Chinese about the cause of the accident from our point of view. Two, is to discuss how such accidents can be avoided in the future. Three, as the president indicated last week, to ask tough questions to the Chinese about the manner in which they have dangerously intercepted the United States reconnaissance flights. And four, to make the case that plane is in the United States property and the United States would like to have the plane returned.
[King:] Senior administration officials telling CNN the U.S. delegation also will inform the Chinese side that the United States plans to resume those surveillance flights in the near future. The U.S. side, we're told, will not give a firm date for security reasons, but will make clear those flights will resume and that they expect the Chinese side to back off, to have its fighter pilots to back off. Now, the White House wouldn't publicly confirm the plans to resume the flights, but Ari Fleischer making clear the Bush administration certainly views such a step as clearly within its rights.
[Fleischer:] The United States will always reserve the right to operate over international waters and international airspace to protect the needs of our neighbors, promote regional stability and secure peace.
[King:] Now, in the debate over resuming those flights, there has also been discussion of, wouldn't it be safer to have that slow-moving EP-3 surveillance plane, have some jet fighter escorts along with it. Some reports even suggesting that the USS Kitty Hawk, an aircraft carrier, is in the region, to do just that, to provide air escorts to those surveillance flights in the future. But Pentagon officials and other administration officials telling CNN, the Kitty Hawk is on its way to Guam. They're discounting any notion, at least in the short term, you would have fighter escorts for such surveillance flights. Most administration officials believe that that would be more dangerous, more planes in the sky. Fighter jets obviously heavily armed, that that would actually increase the risk of some sort of confrontation or some sort of accident Natalie.
[Allen:] And John, is anyone saying what the next step will be if the U.S., in this meeting, doesn't get any assurances from China that they plan to back off flying alongside the U.S. surveillance planes?
[King:] No. As you heard in the open of the show, the White House hoping, because the Chinese did lose a pilot here, hoping that the Chinese will understand and will agree to some form of protocols; although there's no expectation that perhaps you will do this in one meeting. Everyone assuming this will be a series of meetings to work this out. But the U.S. side saying very firmly that it believes it can, within its right, within international law, and that it must, to show that is has not been intimidated by the Chinese, resume these flights. They're hoping to work out some sort of agreement. But the administration acknowledging it's not certain it will be able to do so.
[Allen:] All right, John King at the White House. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Tech stocks managed to follow through on Wednesday's rebound with a 32-point gain, but how long can the rally last?
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] If 32 points is a rally. Technology analyst Jonathan Cohen, of Wit SoundView, joins us now for some insights. And certainly, volatility continues to be the theme here for the Nasdaq. Is that the type of behavior that we can expect to see in the short-term here?
[Jonathan Cohen, Wit Soundview:] I think so. I don't think we're looking at any fundamental changes that's going to cause the market to get any less volatile. This has been an extremely difficult market to call changes in. And we really see that continuing. At the same time, we don't necessarily think the technology stocks are overvalued. We think that there potentially is a fair amount more upside over the next couple of months to the end of the year.
[Marchini:] We've seen some signals the U.S. economy's poised to slow down. The same may be true of economies abroad, most notably in Europe. Does that have much of an impact on the tech sector?
[Cohen:] Well, ultimately it does, absolutely I mean, to the extent that corporate buying is slowing, technology stocks will suffer, technology companies will sell less product. But, at the same time, I think we've really seen a systemic change over the last, let's say, 18 months. Technology buying by large corporations is really seen now as a competitive necessity, whereas before they spent when there was money to spend, now they spend almost regardless just because to not spend on technology is to be at a competitive disadvantage.
[Marchini:] So is the sector almost immune to economic cycles?
[Cohen:] Well, I wouldn't say that. But at the same time, if you're looking for growth in a growthless economy, technology is clearly going to be the place to be. At the same time, to the extent that we see basically an elimination of inflation over some period of time, or a diminishment of inflation worries, growth is going to be worth more that it would in a period of great where there is growth across the economy. So, to that extent, I think that investors are going to continue to be willing to pay a premium for growth stories, and technology is clearly where they're going to be found.
[Haffenreffer:] What are some of the stories? and where do you find them within the tech sector?
[Cohen:] Well, within technology, specifically, we're looking at areas like the software, Internet infrastructure, optical networking equipment, areas where we're looking at very, very big markets, and where there are companies that are enormously well positioned by virtue of their technology position, the strength of their sales force, their ability to continue to deliver price performance increases; those are sort of the key issues.
[Haffenreffer:] We're looking at the names that you like right now. What about FreeMarkets?
[Cohen:] Well, FreeMarkets is interesting because the stock is down dramatically from its high obviously, you can see on the screen but at the same time, the fundamentals look very, very strong, probably stronger than they have at any time in the company's history. We think there's upside to the current quarter, the third- quarter. The whole B2B market space, after suffering a terrible, terrible shakeout, now looks like it's beginning to come back, and a couple companies have really emerged as dominant market leaders in that sector. And FreeMarkets is one of them. They really seem to be in this marketplace, the dominant provider.
[Marchini:] You're also recommending American Online. Does that presuppose that the merger with Time Warner does or does not go through?
[Cohen:] It doesn't presuppose that the merger goes through, but we strongly believe that it will. I mean, there's an article out this morning to the effect that the FCC looks like they're recommending for approval of the transaction. The jury is still out on the FTC. But all in all, we think this is a transaction that's going to through. And more to the point, we think that the transaction at the end of the day is going to result in a company that is very, very well positioned to take advantage of trends like wireless Internet, like the propagation of broadband technology. This is a company that's going own content and distribution to probably a greater extent than any other company in world. We think that's going to be an enormously powerful combination, and the stock at these levels does look attractive.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, Jonathan Cohen, Wit SoundView, thanks for coming in this morning.
[Marchini:] Thanks, indeed.
[Cohen:] Thanks very much.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Well two weeks from tonight PBS will show a documentary about the downfall of Yugoslavia's former leader Slobodan Milosevic. The filmmakers are with us this morning and are ready to take your questions at wam. That's wam@CNN.com. These are the three key players: Executive Producer, Peter Ackerman; Director, Producer and Writer, Steve York; and Srdja Popovic, he's a member of parliament of the Serb Republic. All three of these gentlemen put this documentary together. Hello to all three of you. Boy I'll tell you, we're getting many e-mails. Miles is sorting them out, but I'm going to begin by having you guys sort of brief bringing down a dictator for us. Peter, why don't we begin with you, and let's talk about the focus of this documentary.
[Peter Ackerman, Executive Producer:] I think the focus of this documentary is what occurred after the Kosovo bombing until Milosevic fell, which was almost 15 months. I think most Americans feel that Milosevic fell because of the bombing, but so much happened in between. And the civilian population was so mobilized by outrage over Milosevic's rule, that ultimately he was taken from power in a very interesting story that I think most Americans don't really know. And that's the point of making this movie.
[Phillips:] Srdja, tell us about atpor am I saying that correctly?
[Srdja Popovic, Member Of Parliament Of The Serb Republic:] Correctly.
[Phillips:] OK. Tell us about this word that means, I guess, resistance in Serbia, correct?
[Popovic:] The word atpor means resistance. It was a huge non- violent movement organized and started by a group of students in October of 1998. And for two years it mobilized hundreds of thousands of people giving to the big lesson to the dictator and also showing others that regime whose dictatorship could be removed only by internal powers, not from the outside. And we were good organized, well mobilized. We had a lot of common people with us, and this is why we succeeded in removing the Milosevic from the power in Serbia.
[Phillips:] And you actually wrote the training manuals for this movement to bring down Slobodan Milosevic, right?
[Popovic:] It was all about pressing increasing the pressure and training people how to stay non-violent, even if your opponent is violent. And it has a lot of training stuff, it has a lot to do with mobilizing people and giving them precise instructions. And it has also a lot to do to train people how to behave when they get arrested, when the get beaten. And to stay calm and send a strong message.
[Phillips:] Steve York, what drew you to work on this film? Obviously, a struggle that was never an even one.
[Steve York, Director:] Well, we had been following I had been a short history of doing films about non-violent struggle, and therefore had been paying attention to what was going on in Serbia. And when it was clear that there was going to be an election of September of 2000, and it was clear that Milosevic was going to lose the election and it was clear that he wouldn't go easily, that he'd probably try to manipulate or steal the election, the state was clearly set for some kind of because of what atpor had been doing and other things that were going on. And the stage was set for some kind of it appeared to us non-violent resolution of this impasse. And it was a we had a pretty good idea that the opposition was going to win and that it was going to be a great story.
[O'brien:] All right. Let's go to an e-mail, shall we gentlemen? There are still some coming in. We're trying to field them as we go. Dale Friesen has this Dale Friesen is one of our more frequent correspondents, and we appreciate that. "How stable is the political situation there now, that a new Serbian state has been carved out of the region?" I'm not sure who wants to take that.
[Popovic:] I will.
[O'brien:] Good thought.
[Popovic:] Serbian new government is pro democratic. And besides we are making the good moves, we are facing the big challenges. You have 10 years of different anti-Western propaganda in our country. You have a lot of elements of a former system that is very difficult task to move Serbia towards the European and 85 percent of my people are pro European and pro
[O'brien:] Well this might be a good follow up to that question that comes from Hasan Ahmad. "How is it possible that so many people inside Yugoslavia..." I guess you'd say the former Yugoslavia now "... are still supporting the former dictator, when there is clear evidence that he was involved in genocide?" Would you reject the premise of the question? Is there a lot of support that endures for Slobodan Milosevic?
[Popovic:] I wouldn't say that there is a lot of support for Slobodan Milosevic, but this is the consequence of 10 years of anti- Western propaganda. You can't expect the people to be open after being poisoned for more than 10 years. And, of course, after being isolated, under sanctions and bombed. This is one of the strong points why the movie should be seen those bombs. The only strength in Milosevic, as well as the new pressure from my country, will only weaken the democratic powers.
[Phillips:] Srdja Popovic and Peter Ackerman, also Steve York, I know "Bringing Down a Documentary," it's a one-hour documentary film. It's going to premiere Sunday, March 31st, 10:00 PM on PBS. Check your local listings. Thank you so much, gentlemen, for sharing this project with us. It's fabulous.
[Popovic:] Thank you.
[Ackerman:] Thank you very much.
[York:] Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Political news. Texas, the Lone Star State, has nominated its first Hispanic candidate for governor. Millionaire Tony Sanchez beat out another Hispanic in yesterday's rather contentious Democratic primary. Our senior political correspondent Candy Crowley tracking this from Washington. Now some insight on what's happening in the Lone Star State. Candy, good afternoon.
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] Hi, Bill. A contentious is sort of just the half of it. This was a really bitter race in the Democratic primary, but there is a winner, Tony Sanchez, as you say. He's never run for office before. He's got a pot load of money. He's worth about $600 million. People figure he spent $20 million of it in this primary race, and you can expect him to spend at least that much on the general race. He's going to be running against Rick Perry who is the sitting governor. He took over when George Bush left to run for the presidency. What's interesting, I think, about this race is, first of all, it will be very expensive, perhaps the most expensive governor's race in Texas history. And it also will pit two friends of George Bush against one another. The Democrat, Tony Sanchez, gave money to the Bush governor campaigns as well as to the Bush presidency, and of course Rick Perry was Bush's lieutenant governor before he left office. So no doubt that Bush will, of course, campaign for Perry. But Sanchez has been a friend. So that's an interesting race.
[Hemmer:] On the on the national scale, Candy, this race kind of crept up on a lot of us here. Why are politicians watching it so closely there in Texas?
[Crowley:] Well a couple of things. It has implications for 2004. That is, you know President Bush took Texas for granted, as well he should have, in the last time around. He's from there. Suppose a Democratic governor should get in, that changes things mightily. It would be a place where Republicans would have to spend money. But more than that, it's the demographics, as we say. Is Texas going to become another California? California was very Republican and then the demographics began to change. It got increasingly Latino, increasingly Hispanic, and it became very Democratic. It's now solidly Democratic. Texas is, likewise, a huge influx of Hispanic-Americans. And that's why you see the Republicans and Democrats out there so assiduously courting Latinos and Hispanics because they are an increasingly powerful voting block and they could well change the politics in Texas which have been solidly Republican for a decade or so.
[Hemmer:] As you point out there, a harbinger, possibly, for the rest of the country as well. Thank you, Candy. Candy Crowley watching this from Texas, live in D.C. with us. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com History

[Bernard Shaw, Cnn Anchor:] To the Middle East now, where members of a Palestinian legislative body finished a two-day meeting in Gaza Monday. Officials approved Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's plan to declare a state by the end of the year. CNN's Jerrold Kessel has more on the prospects of Palestinian statehood.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] ... of many ordinary Palestinians is running out for Yasser Arafat to fulfill his promise to bring them their long awaited state.
[Unidentified Male:] He wait enough, you know, he wait enough time. So no more time, I mean, to wait more.
[Kessel:] At the summer camp, not far from Mr. Arafat's seaside headquarters, where the decision was being taken on how and when to declare the state, the teenagers borrowed part of their leader's favorite phrase. "We're not asking of the moon," says the camp slogan, "only for our flag, our identity, and a homeland." In the arts and crafts lessons, some dwell not only on the shape of their future state, but whether it will live up to dreams. "It's a great idea," he says, "but I worry it will be weak. We won't have real sovereignty." Also, along Gaza's seashore, at the beach refugee camp, people say a state is important, but only if it secures all Palestinian rights, especially the right of all refugees to reclaim their homes inside what's now Israel. Best, say some, to insure that before the state is proclaimed. Others say declare the state, and then get all the other rights, even if it means having to fight for them. [on camera]: Whenever it comes, and whatever the context, the stakes are very high. The declaration of the Palestinian state could lead either to the end of the long conflict with Israel, or to the beginning of a reshaping of the long battle for Palestinian independence. [voice-over]: In either direction, plenty of rocky shoals still to be navigated, tricky waters yet on the way to the hopeful safe haven. Jerrold Kessel, CNN, Gaza.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] The question this morning: What scared off Ken Lay? The remarks by congressional members that Kenneth Lay found inflammatory yesterday were in response to an internal report just released by the company over the weekend. The 200-page report was highly critical of Enron management, and said the company's founder, Kenneth Lay, bears significant responsibility as the captain of the ship. For more on what the report revealed, we go to senior correspondent Brooks Jackson, who joins us now from Washington Brooks, good morning.
[Brooks Jackson, Cnn Senior Correspondent:] Good morning, Paula.
[Zahn:] Does the fact that Lay refused to testify suggests he is afraid of potential criminal charges?
[Jackson:] Well, the Powers report that you just mentioned really doesn't give much of a basis for that. It does say that Ken Lay was failing to supervise his own employees, that he was acting more like a director of the company than an actual manager, raising the question about why there were paying him $7 million a year. But that's a far cry from criminal charges or facts that would lay the basis for criminal charges. It's much more critical of some of Lay's underlings. What Lay's attorney, Earl Silbert, says he is afraid of, and seems to be afraid of, is a hostile atmosphere in Congress. As you heard earlier, he says there were inflammatory statements made over the weekend by some congressional investigators, and he is right. Just listen to this.
[Rep. Billy Tauzin , Energy And Commerce Chairman:] Were there really wrongdoing, and maybe somebody ought to go to the pokey for this. And I think we're going to find out, yes, to that answer.
[Jackson:] So when you have members of Congress senior members of Congress talking about sending people to the pokey, it's only prudent to tell your client that perhaps he doesn't want to go up there and testify. What he is really afraid of is making statements before a congressional committee that though they might not necessarily be under oath, still could be used later during criminal investigations of the company to pick apart his story. Say, well, you told us one thing here, and you said something else over there. His attorney just doesn't want to put Mr. Lay in that posture Paula.
[Zahn:] What's interesting now, Brooks, is that you have Arthur Andersen coming out and saying this Powers report, as brutal as it was, particularly when it came to Ken Lay, is actually a whitewash that Enron's board is trying to blame others for its own problems. What about that take on this report?
[Jackson:] Well, I have to say I had to smile when I heard that, because the report is just brutal as to Enron's own management. This is a report that was commissioned by the board of directors, when they found out that the company was going down the tubes. And they brought in Mr. Powers, who is dean of the University of Texas Law School to conduct as independent an investigation as a company can conduct of itself. They brought in an outside law firm, brought in outside audit firm to look at this. It said the board of directors should have been more vigilant. That they bear responsibility. It said some of Lay's underlings laid out facts that experts are now saying could well provide the basis for fraud charges against some of these Enron executives. It says that Enron's law firm, Vinson & Elkins, should have spoken up and urged fuller disclosure. It also says and here is what really gets Arthur Andersen upset that Arthur Andersen quote "failed in its professional responsibilities." That they made accounting mistakes that were simple and not so simple accounting mistakes. And that's just devastating criticism of Arthur Andersen, but they certainly don't stint on their criticism of the company itself.
[Zahn:] Brooks, before we let you go, OK, so Ken Lay is refusing to testify. But aren't there some other key Enron officials that will be testifying later this week?
[Jackson:] Well, that's, of course, we thought Lay was going to testify up until late yesterday. So it remains to be seen. I think there is going to be plenty that you overhear. There are lots of subpoenas out there, boxes and boxes of documents that the committees already have, and of course, they are saying they don't have nearly enough. They are clamoring for more, and they are going to get them. And plenty of lower-level witnesses potential witnesses, who have no fear of criminal prosecution, no reason not to testify. I think you're going to be hearing plenty about Enron for the foreseeable future.
[Zahn:] All right. Brooks Jackson, thanks so much for that update. And we move on on this story. Up front this morning, why Mr. Lay isn't going to Washington. Well, Sen. Byron Dorgan is heading one major investigation of Enron. It was his Commerce Committee that canceled its hearings today in the wake of Kenneth Lay's refusal to show up. And the Democrat from North Dakota joins us now from Washington good to have you with us, sir. Thank you very much for joining us on
[A.m. Sen. Byron Dorgan , Commerce Committee:] Hi, Paula.
[Zahn:] So let me put up on the screen what Kenneth Lay's attorney is saying about why Mr. Lay pulled out at the last minute quote "He cannot be expected to participate in a proceeding in which conclusions have been reached before Mr. Lay has been given an opportunity to be heard." What's your reaction to Mr. Silbert's comments?
[Dorgan:] Well, the conclusions are talking about the conclusions that his own vice president reached last August, his accounting firm reached in a report to him a couple of months ago, and especially conclusions in the Powers report, which was released Saturday late evening. Now, that report came from inside the company, the board of directors. It was a devastating indictment of what had happened inside that corporation. So you know, those are the conclusions. The restatement of the obvious ought not to have been difficult for him. It was never, in my judgment, something that would be a walk in the park for him to come before our congressional committee. There are a lot of tough questions to be asked and to be answered.
[Zahn:] But as you know, Mr. Lay's attorneys are also suggesting, in spite of what you have just said, that you and other congressional investigators had made up your mind about his guilt. Let's quickly replay some of what you and your colleagues had to say yesterday on the Sunday talk shows let's listen.
[Dorgan:] This is almost a culture of corporate corruption here. Clearly, some things have happened here that are going to put some people in real jeopardy and trouble.
[Tauzin:] Maybe somebody ought to go to the pokey for this. And I think we're going to find out, yes, to that answer.
[Zahn:] And once again, there was another quote that says, "Mr. Lay will face a panel eager to pulverize him." That was in "The New York Times." How... Yes, exactly. How would Mr. Lay have had any chance before this committee?
[Dorgan:] Well, look, what we said is what his accountants have already said a month ago that there were possible illegal acts here, what his vice president said in a memo to him last August. But the point is this: The people at the top in this corporation, including Mr. Lay, made tens of millions of dollars. The people at the bottom lost their life savings, and in many cases investors lost their shirts. There is a lot to answer for, and especially to answer the Powers report, which is an internally-generated report that talks about $1 billion in profit that was overstated, a debt that was incurred by the company that was never disclosed. There's a lot that went wrong here, and I think the public would be served by hearing Mr. Lay's description of what happened and how it happened and who was responsible.
[Zahn:] Given that you said a lot of this information was available as, you know, as recently as late August, do you think it was a mistake then to talk about this Powers report in advance of questioning Mr. Lay?
[Dorgan:] Well, the Powers report was released...
[Zahn:] That of course came out over this weekend.
[Dorgan:] That was released publicly on Saturday evening. Of course, it's going to be discussed. But look, Mr. Lay, in my judgment, was looking for a door to get out of this testimony, because of the Powers report. And I understand that. I am disappointed by it. But to suggest that somehow he is going to come before a committee that is not going to ask him tough questions, given what has happened in this rather spectacular bankruptcy, the biggest corporate bankruptcy in history, and given the fact that there are now documented reports, and in addition memos from his own employees inside the company talking about accounting hoaxes and so on and so forth. This would not have been an easy testimony by Mr. Lay. But he ought not blame his nonappearance on others. What he ought to understand, he and his attorneys, is he didn't want to show up because of the Powers report generated by his own company. It talks about substantial problems inside that company that deceived investors.
[Zahn:] Do you think you will ever get him to talk on the record before a congressional committee?
[Dorgan:] I don't have the answer to that. We can compel Mr. Lay to come, but we cannot compel him to speak. He can certainly assert his Fifth Amendment rights. But we'll have a meeting later today to talk about that. I mean, there is subpoena power here. This is you know, the issue of criminal liability is something the Justice Department will evaluate, not us. And we are interested in the public policy questions. Where were the regulators? Brain dead? Asleep? Without power or the authority? Where were the accounting firms? You know, what about Arthur Andersen's role? And especially, who in the company, Mr. Lay, Mr. Fastow, Mr. Skilling and others, who did what in order to allow all of this to happen? I am talking about all of this that's described in the Powers report, which I think is a devastating indictment of what happened in that company.
[Zahn:] Sen. Dorgan, I know you said you were going to hold a meeting later today to figure out whether you will subpoena Mr. Lay. What are the chances that you will do just that to compel him to come testify before your committee?
[Dorgan:] Well, let us have the meeting and evaluate. I mean, we had expected until yesterday for Mr. Lay to be appearing this morning. He is not, so we canceled the hearing, because he was our only witness. But let's hold this meeting, and then we will talk about it.
[Zahn:] We'd love to have you come back...
[Dorgan:] Thank you very much, Paula.
[Zahn:] We'd love to have you come back, when you make a decision one way or the other Sen. Dorgan, thank you for joining us this morning.
[Dorgan:] Thank you, Paula.
[Zahn:] Appreciate your time. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] But first a look at the latest developments out of Florida. At this hour, the on again, off again recount is off once again. As we just mentioned, late this afternoon, the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court put the hand count on hold. A hearing on the matter will be held late Monday morning. The Bush camp is viewing that stay as a major victory, it came shortly after the Florida Supreme Court refused a similar request to stop the count. In the Gore camp, his legal advisers say they will fight on despite this latest setback.
[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Some greeted the high court's ruling with cheers, others with tears, and some were simply stunned by the court's decision to intervene in the election process at all. CNN national correspondent Bob Franken was on hand when the surprising announcement was made and he joins us from the Supreme Court in Washington with the details and a crowd behind him Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, as a matter of fact, Brian, the crowds have become part of the landscape throughout this constitutional dilemma, they're here at the Supreme Court as the words spread that the justice were, in fact, going to hear arguments of this case, but of more significant, immediate impact, that they were stopping the recount in Florida. By all accounts, this is not considered good news for the Bush lawyers for the Gore campaign. The Bush lawyers have prevailed in their first request, put a stop to the recount in Florida. And as a matter of fact, to do that required a majority of the Supreme Court justices, and one of the five who agreed with that was Justice Antonin Scalia, a conservative who said "it suffices to say that the issuance of the stay suggests that a majority of the court, while not deciding the issues presented, believed that the petitioner has a substantial probability of success." Now, in the event that the Bush side would ultimately prevail, it is widely believed that the Bush presidency would then become a reality, because the recount would be stopped in Florida, the current situation with Bush as the leader in Florida would mean he would get the electoral votes, and that would mean the presidency. That, of course, is based on the assumption that the Bush campaign ultimately wins. That would come after arguments at 11:00 a.m. on Monday, the arguments again, by the way, 90 minutes of them will be heard immediately after they're over the Supreme Court again releasing audiotapes which will be shared while the justices go and decide whether they are going to once and for all put an end to this election crisis that has kept the United States mesmerized and the world mesmerized for over a month Brian.
[Nelson:] All right, CNN's Bob Franken at the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington.
[Kagan:] And for some more insight on this, let's bring in our CNN legal analyst, Greta Van Susteren standing by in Washington. Greta, hello.
[Greta Van Susteren, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Hello, Daryn.
[Kagan:] Double hit here on the Gore camp from the U.S. Supreme Court they took the case, that would have been one thing, and yet along with that they put this stay. How much does that hurt the Gore camp?
[Van Susteren:] Well, the problem is, is that in issuing a stay what the court says is that there is a substantial likelihood that the Bush side will prevail. So it's not just a question of the court taking it, but they have foreshadowed what may come. Now, the court may change its mind. One of the tricks that lawyers do is they go back and look at what justices have done in earlier cases, and what I would do if I were arguing this case on behalf of the Gore people is I'd go back and go through the audiotapes from the United States Supreme Court, listen to the questions in the other case little different issue, but at least we have a little bit of an idea of who you might be able to sway over to your side. But this is a significant victory for the Bush side.
[Kagan:] They issued that statement, they did it in a way that is characteristic of this U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 split. What do you make of that division, Greta?
[Van Susteren:] Well, I don't know what to make of the division. All I know is that I am sure that the Bush people are extremely happy. What's sort of interesting is that one of the people who dissented, who didn't think that the case should be heard, is Justice David Souter, who was put on the Supreme Court by Governor Bush's father, President Bush, and he's always been sort of a wild card. He always issues decisions that are rather surprise to people who thought that he would vote a particular way. So I don't know what to make of the 5-4 other than to say to you is that the Bush people should feel real happy tonight and the Gore people should feel very scared tonight.
[Kagan:] And they should also all feel very busy, because here we go again, those written briefs due tomorrow and then the oral arguments 11:00 a.m. on Monday morning. Is this going to look much like the last time we saw, or last time we heard? Let's be clear about that, no cameras in the courtroom.
[Van Susteren:] Well, I think so. I am hoping that they will issue they will give us the audiotapes. Maybe this time we'll make a giant leap forward and they'll either give us audiotapes that are in real time so we don't get them delayed maybe they've learned that this isn't such a bad idea to open their doors to the American people, that we learn a lot from it. Or maybe we'll take even the hugely forward and put cameras in the courtroom, but I wouldn't bet on it. But I sure would like to open those doors so that the American people could actually see and hear the arguments, but I am hoping at least that we can audio tape like last time.
[Kagan:] But besides that, in terms of legal arguments, do you think it will be much the same, or what will be different?
[Van Susteren:] I think it will be much the same, except for there are different issues here. I mean, I you know, in the first case you had cert issues that the court was entertaining, of course, obviously confused because they sent the case down to the Florida Supreme Court. These are more direct issues. Even the issues of whether or not there should be a quote "standard," you know, is voter's intent, which is in the Florida code, is that a standard so that it can be applied equally to all the counties, is that fair, or is it not. And then you have the issues that Justice O'Connor raised about whether or not you're changing the rules if all of a sudden you create different standards. She talked about changing the rules in the argument last week. She had all sorts of similar arguments, but this is a different case. These are different issues.
[Kagan:] Greta Van Susteren in Washington, D.C. Greta, thank you very much Brian.
[Nelson:] And so what was promised to be a very busy day for Florida vote counters has now turned into a waiting game. Everything has come into a frozen halt. CNN national correspondent Martin Savidge joins us from Tallahassee with the latest on what would have been a busy evening of counting Martin.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] It would have been. And, you know, we heard all the noise there in the background of Bob Franken's report from the Supreme Court, it has gotten very quiet here in the state capital of Tallahassee. You talk about what a difference a day makes, it's what a difference an hour makes. And here, it was the hour of 2:00, actually 2:45 when that ruling came down in local time from the U.S. Supreme Court that basically slammed the brakes on the recount process. There were 67 counties in the state of Florida that were actively involved in this recount as ordered by the Florida Supreme Court. They were trying to count the underballots, or the undervoted ballots. Some of those counties had started, many of them were just making preparations when the order came down. In fact, we have been told now that of those 67 counties, 13 counties were able to either complete their recount or at least get started and have a partial result. One of the biggest recounts was going on here in Leon County. That was, of course they were recounting the ballots for Miami-Dade County that had been brought up here some time ago, they had about 9,000 ballots to get through. Now, when the ax came down, we are told that they had made it about 13 of the way through that process and that there had been increases to the vote tallies for both candidates. There were also 137 ballots that were said to be challenged, these would have been ballots that were set aside and then sent off to the courtroom of Judge Terry Lewis, who is overseeing the whole recounting process, and it would have been his determination to try to figure out what the voter intended. We are also told that there were about 3,236 ballots for which there could be no determination in the office of president. One thing we should point out right now, a news conference a short while ago, Ron Klain, one of the Democratic attorneys announced some figures about an improvement for Gore. They are furious, the Republican Party, about that. In fact, there is a hearing going on now in Leon County Circuit Court and they want Ron Klain charged with contempt of court, saying that he violated the spirit of the agreement, the written agreement from Judge Terry saying that he could not release any figures. So the legal bickering is still continuing, even if the hand count has stopped right now Brian.
[Nelson:] Martin, a lot of those undervotes still needed to be separated from the other votes before they were counted, and that was a time-consuming process that I think a couple of the counties said would not be finished until later this evening if they had indeed been completed. So is there some misgivings on the part of the county workers that are counting the ballots, that, that process has stopped when it could continue?
[Savidge:] Well, it keep in mind the Supreme Court came down and said the count must stop, so it's being interpreted here in many of these canvassing boards that does not mean that the separating of the ballots, that is finding the undervotes, which was one of the big jobs they had to do first, that, that could not go ahead and continue. That was probably the biggest task they faced, and if a recount were ordered, or allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court, with a narrow window of opportunity, it's important they get that separating factor out of the way today
[Nelson:] So that separating factor is continuing?
[Savidge:] Well, as far as we have heard this, it was continuing and it was interpreted, at least among a number of canvassing boards, that it could continue.
[Nelson:] All right, thanks, CNN's Martin Savidge from Tallahassee Daryn.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] We begin with the U.S. economy, which is suffering a crisis of confidence. Government figures out today show the annual growth rate plunged during the summer to 2.2 percent, the economy's worst performance in four years. Despite that, a rally is under way on Wall Street a day after stocks sank to the lowest close in more than a year and a half. Right now, the Dow Jones is up about 162 points. The Nasdaq is up about 100 excuse me, about 90 points. A growing chorus of analysts say the end of the year could mark the end of the most spectacular bull market in a century. Look to the retail market for more evidence. CNN's Greg Lefevre reports the holiday shopping crush isn't bringing in the cash.
[Greg Lefevre, Cnn Correspondent:] America's shopping malls, 8,000 of them, say business so far this holiday season is down 8 percent from last year. Retailers are pulling out the discount stops. Example: trousers at J.C. Penney were tagged at $42; I bought for $15. Penney's wouldn't discuss its pricing, but insiders say so deep a discount wipes away most, if not all, the profit.
[Andrea Brentham, Apparel Manufacturer:] Many retailers will buy merchandise specifically at an off price to give a value, or to offer a discount to a customer for the Christmas holiday to generate volume.
[Sue Woods, Apparel Manufacturer:] And then as the Christmas season evolves, there's a lot of things that can happen that make a retailer, you know, maybe panic because it is a very short selling window.
[Lefevre:] One sign of nervous retailers: they are buying 21 percent more newspaper ads than last year. Mall jewelry sales are off 22 percent. This year's half-off sales start before Christmas, good timing for these newlyweds.
[Unidentified Male:] Fifty percent off, which puts it just within my range.
[Lefevre:] Not all is gloom. Some specialty chains are doing nicely.
[Unidentified Female:] We have definitely been within the goal that we targeted for this year. And we can't keep the shelves filled fast enough.
[Lefevre:] The sale signs seem to be working.
[John Konarski, Intl. Council Of Shopping Centers:] What we're not going to know until all is said and done is, are these promotions planned or are they unplanned? If they're unplanned, that's going to eat into retail profits.
[Lefevre:] Traffic is growing, and this year's shopping season is two days longer than last year.
[Konarski:] Thirty-five percent that's over a third of all holiday purchases are being done this week. So we have a huge potential here.
[Woods:] I guarantee you it will explode.
[Lefevre:] It's a tradition in retail: There's always hope. Greg Lefevre, CNN, San Bruno, California.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Something that's become a staple for many of us while we're on the read is a cell phone. Chances are you have chatted it up while behind the wheel, but don't be surprised if you're forced to put down that cell phone one of these days. For more, let's check in with CNN's Jeanne Meserve in Washington Jeanne.
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Lou, some of us of a certain vintage, anyway, remember the old Doors tune, "Keep your eyes on the road and hands upon the wheel." Well, too many drivers have their hands on a cell phone and that has some lawmakers in Washington worried. Two Democrats today introduced legislation to ban dialing while driving. Some states are already moving in that direction. This would make it national policy and, if passed, states who didn't follow suit would be denied federal highway dollars if they didn't enforce it.
[Rep. Gary Ackerman , New York:] We step up the ante each year that they don't do it. It's free the first two years. They get a pass to enact the legislation, decide which way they want to go. Different states can do it differently, and then they get the 5 percent hit after two years and then 10 percent on each year.
[Meserve:] Distracted drivers are not the only concern. Consumer worries have prompted new calls for more research into the possible side effects of radiation emitted by cell phones.
[Rep. Edward Markey , Massachusetts:] When millions of Americans put this phone up next to their ear, even if only for brief periods of time, there are millions of them that wonder whether or not they may be hurting their own health or their children's health. And when 110 million Americans are using cell phones, it doesn't take a very large error in terms of identification of the adverse medical consequences to have an epidemic-size problem.
[Meserve:] A General Accounting Office report released today called for standardized testing to determine possible health risk, and to make that data more readily available to the consumers. The FDA says there is no specific information that shows cell phones pose a health risk, but Lou, there is also not enough information to rule it out. Back to you.
[Waters:] All right, Jeanne Meserve.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Now on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS, John Walker Lindh sees his parents.
[Frank Lindh, John Walker Lindh's Father:] John loves America.
[Blitzer:] And hears the charges against him.
[John Ashcroft, Attorney General:] John Walker chose to join terrorists who wanted to kill Americans.
[Blitzer:] Did al Qaeda have a secret nuclear program? We'll have an exclusive report on documents recovered from the rubble. Dangerous cargo: could a weapon of mass destruction reach a U.S. port in a shipping container? We're on the waterfront.
[Unidentified Male:] Enron robbed the bank. Arthur Andersen provided the getaway car, and they say you were at the wheel.
[Blitzer:] A fired auditor won't talk to Congress, but find out how the Enron chief invested his money. Hello. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. We are monitoring a developing story happening in suburban Washington, D.C. Right now, 13 children are waiting to be picked up after their school bus went more than 100 miles off its route and crossed state lines. Inside the bus: a loaded rifle and a disturbed driver. Police are trying to piece together the facts at this hour. We'll have live reports coming up shortly. We're also standing by for a news conference from the FBI, who's on the scene. They're monitoring the development as well. When that news conference happens, we'll take it live. First, this hour's latest developments. The American who joined Taliban fighters in Afghanistan made his first court appearance today. Asked if he understood charges that he conspired to kill his fellow Americans, John Walker Lindh replied, "Yes, I do." If convicted, Walker Lindh faces life in prison. We'll have much more on this in a moment. In Afghanistan, U.S. Army special forces attacked two Taliban compounds today, killing about 12 fighters and taking 27 prisoners. The Pentagon says an American soldier was wounded, but his injury is not life-threatening. The fighting happened some 35 miles north of Kandahar. President Bush is proposing to roughly double spending on homeland security, to almost $38 billion in the next fiscal year. Speaking to the nation's mayors, Mr. Bush also promised much more help to local fire, police and rescue departments. A fired Arthur Andersen auditor refused to testify today at the opening of a Congressional hearing on the Enron scandal. David Duncan invoked his fifth amendment rights against self-incrimination when asked about the destruction of Enron documents. Other Andersen officials say Duncan ordered the shredding campaign on his own. Duncan has said he acted on the advice of Andersen lawyers. More now on the American who fought with the Taliban in Afghanistan. John Walker Lindh, who just returned to the United States from Afghanistan last night, faced a federal judge for the first time today. CNN national correspondent, Susan Candiotti, is covering the story. She joins us now live from outside the federal courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia Susan.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn National Correspondent:] Hello, Wolf. Far away from the war zone in Afghanistan, John Walker Lindh found himself in a courtroom in Alexandria, Virginia, wearing a dark jumpsuit with the word "prisoner" written on the back.
[Fbi. James Brosnahan, Defense Attorney:] He began requesting a lawyer almost immediately, which would have been December 2nd or 3rd. For 54 days, he was held incommunicado.
[John Ashcroft, Attorney General:] He chose to waive his right to an attorney, both orally and in writing, before his statement to the FBI. Mr. Walker will be held responsible in the courtroom for his choices.
[Candiotti:] Legal experts call Walker's statement to the FBI crucial to the government's case. In it, he allegedly admits training in al Qaeda camps and being told about planned suicide attacks in the U.S. Also part of the government's case: a CNN interview with Walker Lindh shot shortly after his capture. Both pieces of evidence expected to be challenged by his lawyers. Walker Lindh met his parents for about 20 minutes before the hearing, separated by a mesh screen in a small room, with an FBI agent present.
[Marilyn Walker, John Walker's Mother:] It's been two years since I last saw my son. It was wonderful to see him this morning. My love for him is unconditional and absolute.
[Frank Lindh, John Walker's Father:] John did not take up arms against America. He never meant to harm any American, and he never did harm any American. John is innocent of these charges.
[Candiotti:] For now, Walker Lindh is being held in this city jail, confined to a 7.5 x 7.5 cell, equipped with a bed, sink and toilet, joined to a common area with a TV.
[Blitzer:] Susan, in the next few days, what is immediately scheduled? What happens with Walker Lindh next?
[Candiotti:] Within a couple of weeks, on February 6th specifically, he is next scheduled to appear in court for what is called a bond hearing, to determine whether he can continue to be held without bond, and a preliminary hearing. However, sources say it is possible he could be indicted by a grand jury before then.
[Blitzer:] Susan Candiotti, thanks for that report. And joining us now with a closer look at the legal issues involved in the John Walker Lindh case, former Justice Department official she was a federal prosecutor, Victoria Toensing, and criminal defense attorney, Jeralyn Merritt. She joins us from Denver. Thanks to both of you for joining us. Jeralyn, let me begin with you. The argument that the defense attorney makes for John Walker Lindh, that they didn't allow an attorney present. That he wanted an attorney, and didn't waive his rights. How does the judge deal with that specific issue, which seems to be at the heart of an immediate dispute between the prosecution and the criminal defense attorney?
[Jeralyn Merritt, Criminal Defense Attorney:] That is probably going to be the most critical issue in the case. And what the judge will have to decide is whether he knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel. And the court will use a totality of the circumstance test, including looking at all of the circumstances of his confinement and his physical condition, and his mental condition. And if the court finds that his waiver of a right to a lawyer was not made with a full understanding of the nature of the right that he was giving up and the consequences of that decision, the court may well decide the statements were not voluntary and therefore, inadmissible.
[Blitzer:] Victoria, what about that? What if he was on painkillers? He was, as you can see in the CNN interview that he had, he was obviously hurt. Was he of mind to make that kind of decision, to waive his right to an attorney?
[Victoria Toensing, Former Federal Prosecutor:] Well, of course, all those facts will come out at a hearing, Wolf. There's no indication that was a problem so far. And the FBI, we hope, is professional enough to know that he should not have been on something that was going to be a detriment to his waiver. We're pretty experienced here in the United States, about making sure that you're not on any drugs when you write out such a waiver. The CNN interview, though, is very crucial, because here is John Walker. Maybe he was in pain, but I mean, fully wanting to talk about his situation and giving all kinds of information to the CNN reporter. And I think that will be a factor that the judge will look at. He wasn't hesitant at all, to speak about this previous waiver to the
[Fbi. Blitzer:] But nowhere in the CNN interview. Victoria, does he say he wants to kill Americans, or that's his goal.
[Toensing:] Well, of course, that's not going to be the evidence that's being used to show that he's going to kill Americans. A conspiracy is an agreement. And by the very fact that he was out marching with people who were out to kill Americans is sufficient, legally, to show a conspiracy to do so.
[Blitzer:] What about that, Jeralyn Merritt? Is this a slam-dunk case, this first charge of conspiring to kill Americans?
[Merritt:] No, I don't think it's slam dunk at all. And I think the complaint against him itself states that at the training camps he was given a choice between fighting against American and Israeli interests, and fighting in Afghanistan against the Northern Alliance. And he clearly chose to fight against the Northern Alliance. So I don't know that there's any evidence that he conspired to kill Americans.
[Toensing:] But he said very well that he knew and this is in his statement to the FBI that he was aware that the Taliban was against not only Americans, but the Saudi Arabian government. That he was aware of the September 11th attack, and he was aware that al Qaeda had sent suicide bombers to the United States pretty damning words. No case is a slam dunk, Wolf, I can tell you that, never, ever, ever. But it's pretty strong evidence if these statements come in.
[Blitzer:] Go ahead, Jeralyn.
[Merritt:] I was just going to say, Victoria, he also did not want to fight against Americans. He was fighting against the Northern Alliance. And the fact that he knew about the September 11 attacks after they happened doesn't make him a participant in those acts. And the fact that he knew that bin Laden was going to send suicide bombers to the U.S. doesn't mean that he knew the nature, or that they were going to attack the World Trade Center. In fact, bin Laden himself said that many of the suicide bombers didn't even though they were on a suicide mission until afterwards.
[Toensing:] He could look up and see airplanes that are from his own country, and know. If he had left, Jeralyn, before he had left the army and quit fighting prior to September 11th, or even prior to October 7th, when our forces started over there and it was clear they were fighting the Americans, then there would not be a case. But, having stayed after that, he was captured the end of November I think it was November 25th there is certain, strong evidence that he knew he was fighting his own country.
[Blitzer:] Let me ask both of you, because you have a lot of experience in plea agreements who has a greater desire in this particular case? Try to spoke objectively, I'll begin with you, Jeralyn. Who has a better desire to see a plea agreement reached that would avoid a full-scale trial, a plea agreement in which he would cooperate fully with the government?
[Merritt:] I think both sides have an incentive to do that. First of all, if he were to plead guilty to anything, the federal sentencing guidelines would apply. And he has cooperated, and so that would justify a departure from the guidelines and a lesser sentence for him. I also think the government might benefit from a plea agreement and from avoiding a protracted trial, and to let him plead guilty to something that would hold him accountable for any misconduct he engaged in. But not also be to the extent that we're seeking revenge instead of justice for him.
[Blitzer:] What about that, Victoria?
[Toensing:] We should never seek revenge. I don't think that's what our criminal justice system is all about. What Jeralyn and I do agree on is that both sides are better off if there's an agreement, a plea agreement. So let's hope that that's what occurs. But if he doesn't, Jeralyn, then he's going to have to get credit for the cooperation, say that his statements to the FBI were being helpful, and not done under duress.
[Blitzer:] On that note, I want to thank both of you for your analysis. Victoria Toensing and Jeralyn Merritt, appreciate it very much. And our on-line quick vote asks, "Can John Walker Lindh get a fair trial?" So far, as you can see, the vast majority says "yes." Cast your vote at cnn.com. The AOL keyword is CNN. And remember, this poll is not scientific. Back in Afghanistan, an extraordinary find: a host of documents that appear to be training manuals for al Qaeda members, with notes on everything from high explosives to nuclear bomb making. And for the past two months, CNN national correspondent, Mike Boettcher, has been busy deciphering them, with the help of experts. Mike joins us now from Atlanta with details. What have you learned from all of these documents, Mike?
[Mike Boettcher, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Wolf, we've gone through hundreds, if not thousands of pages of documents, with some top nuclear and weapons experts, and a top Arabic translator. And we were going through documents like this, Wolf. And this says in this blue magic marker written on a notepad, it says "superbomb." And inside were all sorts of different plans for conventional and nuclear weapons. The bottom line is, in these documents, it appears, and according to our experts analyzing them, they were surprised at the depth of knowledge that al Qaeda had, that they were definitely on track on a program to try to build a bomb, although they weren't there yet. But they also had capabilities to build what was known as a dirty bomb, which is a conventional explosion that spreads radioactive material over a broad area. It's not a nuclear explosion, but it does contaminate an area. As well, there were other pages dealing with conventional weapons. All sorts of pages. You're looking right there, Wolf. Let me give you the translation of that diagram there. It says "enriching uranium by using laser beams." So, they had achieved a level of knowledge. Now, you have to take that further. They would have to come up with things like plutonium and machinery in order to mill certain parts of the weapon, which they didn't have that is the belief. So, we have to bank on that belief, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] And, Mike, I've heard top Bush administration officials, experts, intelligence officials, say they believe that al Qaeda operatives were attempting to develop some sort of crude nuclear device. They don't know how close they might have gotten. They don't believe they got very close. Does the information that you've gathered suggest they were closer than perhaps previously thought?
[Boettcher:] They were further along in their knowledge curve than previously thought. Now, the gap is, were they able to obtain nuclear materials like plutonium. It's not believed that they were able to obtain that yet. And some of their plans, Wolf, frankly didn't work. Like here's a little plan right here. Now, you can't see it, but at the top is a little diagram. It's not workable. They were nonworkable designs. But they were looking for shortcuts, and had found some shortcuts to get around problems they couldn't solve by acquiring material conventionally around the world. So they were being pretty clever in their research. But again, U.S. authorities and other coalition authorities believe they have not built any bomb.
[Blitzer:] And I know that you have information about other conventional weapons that the al Qaeda were looking for. Any bomb shells, if you'll forgive the pun, that you found there?
[Boettcher:] Oh, yes. They were making their own brand of C-4. They were taking conventional explosives, high explosives, and trying to make them better. For example, they had diagrams on where to put an explosive in an airplane in order to blow it up. There were other graphics showing how to place explosives presumably, plastic explosives in a tower to blow it up. Also, here is a diagram of how they believe they could blow up a bridge. So they were far along in how to deploy these weapons. And also, they were very far along on making sophisticated weapons, explosives, out of material that could be bought out in the open market.
[Blitzer:] And, Mike, briefly tell our viewers how CNN obtained these documents.
[Boettcher:] Well, in those confusing days in mid November, when the Taliban and al Qaeda were leaving Kabul, CNN producer Ingrid Arneson took the initiative and went out into the neighborhoods with the help of Afghan authorities who remained behind, and people familiar with the houses, and said we want to show you the houses where the Arabs lived. They escorted her to those houses, and several of them, she found these documents lying around, some in the garbage. These are documents left behind, which makes you wonder what they took with them.
[Blitzer:] OK, Mike Boettcher, thanks for that report. Fascinating material. And to our viewers, this note. You can watch Mike Boettcher's complete report tonight, as Martin Savidge anchors our "LIVE FROM AFGHANISTAN." That's at 8:00 Eastern, 5:00 Pacific. A lot more details coming up in Mike Boettcher's report on that program. And for more perspective on these documents linked to al Qaeda, we turn now to Gary Milhollin. He's the director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control. Gary, as usual, thanks for joining us. What did we learn from this series of documents? I know you've had a chance to review some of the material that Mike Boettcher and his team collected. It does suggest that they may have been more advanced than we previously thought.
[Gary Milhollin, Wis. Project Nuclear Arms Control:] What it shows is that they certainly have an appetite. They want to get a nuclear weapon, they have been looking around for the ingredients. They've been thinking about designs. And they've obviously been giving it some thought. So, even though we don't have any evidence that they have the machinery or the materials or the people, or the time necessary to make a nuclear weapon, the fact that they're interested and working at it is disturbing.
[Blitzer:] And the fact that they had a sophisticated knowledge of what it would require would be very disturbing as well?
[Milhollin:] Yes. There are people in the world that could help you. And one of the big question marks is, how many of these people have they been talking to? There's a lot of information open in the public domain, which you can get from the Internet. But you can't get the techniques and you can't overcome the problems without expert help.
[Blitzer:] The fact that they were looking for uranium deposits in Afghanistan, what does that suggest to you?
[Milhollin:] Well, it suggests to me that they wanted to become independent. They wanted to have their own source of uranium. They wanted to have their own source of brain power. And it wouldn't be long before they started figuring out how to have their own source of manufacturing capabilities.
[Blitzer:] And, walk our viewers through the process, the step between the brain power, assuming they had some smart nuclear physicists on board supporting them. There have been reports, as you know, Pakistanis who worked on Pakistan's nuclear program, had moved over to Afghanistan to work with al Qaeda and the Taliban. How much of a leap forward does it take from the knowledge, the expertise, to actually developing a crude device?
[Milhollin:] It takes a tremendous leap. The biggest problem is to produce or acquire the nuclear material, either the plutonium or high-enriched uranium. And that stuff is not easy to make. I think it would be impossible, virtually impossible, for a terrorist group to actually produce that material. If they managed to steal it or buy it on the world market, then that brings them a giant step closer. But this material is carefully protected, and I think it is unlikely that they would be able to get their hands on the material they would need.
[Blitzer:] All right. That was then. Since then, since these documents, of course, have been found, al Qaeda's on the run, Osama bin Laden is still on the run. The network has been dispersed, presumably, the Taliban regime has been destroyed. Do you sense that there's still a lingering capability that they might have to develop some sort of crude nuclear device?
[Milhollin:] What they would need would be a sanctuary. They need a place where they can put material, people and equipment together, and keep them there for a period of time, probably undetected. If we prevent them from having that, they're going to have a very difficult time.
[Blitzer:] But the other point that Mike Boettcher made, which you and our viewers heard, that in the conventional area, they did have some pretty impressive capabilities.
[Milhollin:] That's the immediate threat, it seems to me. They know how to use high explosives, they have dedicated people and have trained thousands of them. And we have to assume they're still out there and they're still looking for targets.
[Blitzer:] OK, Gary Milhollin, thanks again for joining us.
[Milhollin:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] No one knows more about this stuff than you do. Appreciate it. And, what information has been gathered to prevent fresh terrorist attacks on U.S. interests? The Senate intelligence committee chairman, Bob Graham, joins me later tonight in the CNN "WAR ROOM." That's at 7:00 Eastern, 4:00 Pacific. And you can participate. Just go to my Web site, cnn.comwolf. Click on "send questions." I'll get as many of them answered by my guests as possible. Enron's accountants are taken to task on Capitol Hill, while Enron's CEO quits, but not before making some big stock deals. Find out what he bought and sold before Enron went down. That's at the half-hour. But up next, the school bus that missed more than just one stop. The kids from Pennsylvania who wound up near Washington, D.C. Stay with us.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We want to go back to the federal courthouse in Boston, where an arraignment has just concluded for the man dubbed the shoe bomber. Richard Reid faces nine terrorism-related charges, all dealing with the December airline flight in which he allegedly tried to light explosives hidden in his shoes. Our Jason Carroll was in that proceeding and joins us live with this report. Jason, I misspoke before the break there. I think I said there was a plea agreement. In fact, it was the plea, and that's a big difference.
[Jason Carroll, Cnn Correspondent:] Absolutely, Daryn. The arraignment ended just a few minutes ago. A relatively short proceeding, as far as they go. I can tell you, basically, what happened. Richard Reid entered plea of not guilty on all nine counts. As he entered the courtroom, he was wearing the orange prison garb. He still had the long hair. He was unshaven, wearing the long beard. Sandals. He looked relatively calm as he entered the courtroom. The judge went through and read all of the counts he was charged with, some of them being attempted murder, also using a weapon of mass destruction. But again, Daryn, he has plead guilty to all nine counts involving his alleged role in trying to light a shoe bomb on board an American Airlines flight that left from Paris and was bound for Miami and diverted here, to Boston, after the flight crew on board tackled him once the flight attendant realized he was trying to set off that bomb by lighting a match to his shoe. After the court went through and read all of the counts and he plead not guilty, a second court date was set, for March 4. That will be sort of a status conference at that point. Both sides will be able to come forward and speak to the judge and present more of their case Daryn.
[Kagan:] Jason, to be clear, he pleaded not guilty to all of the charges.
[Carroll:] He pled not guilty. Not pled guilty it all nine counts. I should also tell you that if he is convicted on all nine counts, he faces life in prison Daryn.
[Kagan:] I understand that this long list of charges includes a charge of a crime that didn't even exist before September 11, attempting wrecking a mass transportation vehicle. That's part of new legislation by Congress that makes that a crime.
[Carroll:] Right, enacted after September 11 by Congress. In fact, the defense attorney seems to have some discrepancy about that. During the court proceeding, she said she didn't believe that an airliner could be construed as a transportation device used by a number of people. So she wanted the court to review that particular count. But again, Reid has pled not guilty to all nine counts that he was charged with.
[Kagan:] That will be an interesting argument: If an airliner is not a mass transportation vehicle, then I don't know what it, Jason. Jason Carroll, in Boston, thank you very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] A new poll shows most Americans think the U.S. should get involved in caring for AIDS orphans in Africa. A "Newsweek" survey asked about involvement. Fifty-nine percent said yes, 38 percent said no. But Americans are divided about spending more tax dollars in that effort: 46 percent favor more spending, and 46 percent oppose it. Eight percent are still uncertain.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the money question is significant. At his U.N. appearance, this morning, Vice President Gore is expected to announce a new Clinton administration initiative to combat AIDS in Africa. The vice president joins us now from the United Nations. Good morning, sir. Thank you very much for talking to us today.
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] Good morning, Leon.
[Harris:] Can you give us an advance of your speech this morning? What is it you're like you're likely to introduce this morning?
[Gore:] Well, after 4,000 meetings of the Security Council stretching back a half century, Leon, this is the very first time that the council or the U.N. has addressed in this forum a health question, and it's really emblematic of a whole new security agenda: the global environment, terrorism, pandemics, the emergence of old diseases that now are resistant to the antibiotics that have protected the last three generations. And the United States is stepping up to provide leadership and new resources. I'm going to be announcing significant new resources and a lot of new initiatives, and we hope that the other developed countries will rally around and join with us, and we have some preliminary indications that they will. I think that it's a great way to start this new era, with a new definition of security, because AIDS is going to kill more people in the first decade of this century than all the soldiers who were killed in all the wars of the 20th century, so it's time.
[Harris:] Well, Mr. Vice President, there have been many activists in the U.S. who have been trying to gain the administration ear on that, using that particular bit of information that you just listed, and many are going to be wondering why it's taken this long for the administration and for the U.N. to get behind the ball on this?
[Gore:] Well, of course, it has not taken this long for the United States. I announced some time back a $100-million initiative. The United States does more and sends more and focuses more on this than any other nation in the world; it's a point of pride with us. But that's not to say that enough has been done, obviously. This tragedy has outstripped all of the efforts to stop it, and that's why we're now asking the rest of the world community to join with us as we redouble our effort. And you know, the activists are right that this was ignored for far too long. I have made four trips to Africa as vice president. I've made speeches here and in Africa to try to rally support for efforts to confront this crisis, but none of us have done enough, and all of us must do more, because this is a threat to our future. Now, it's important to recognize that we can meet it successfully. Uganda, where that used to be the epicenter of the crisis, has showed the way to organize successful efforts to stop the spread and slow the advance of this disease, but all countries need to be aware and alert and part of a global response to this pandemic.
[Harris:] Well, going back to the poll that we mentioned moments ago, another figure that emerged from that poll was that only four percent of the American public, the U.S. public, believes that the U.S. should take the lead in pressing forward on this particular issue. It seems as though you may have a harder time organizing forces here in the U.S. than you will in the U.N. How do you go about getting around that problem?
[Gore:] Well, I don't think that takes into account the role that leadership can play. I find, as I have open meetings around the country and talk with people, that when they confront the facts that more people will die of AIDS in the first decade of this new century than in all the wars of the last century, people say, hey, wait a minute, that's something that we have to take into account. And yes, no other nation is capable of focusing in exactly the same way and bringing the rest of the world to rally around in a cause like this. Other nations have done great work, and we're proud to be their partners, but if the world is going to be successful in confronting this challenge and the other new challenges on the new security agenda, such as global warming, the United States has to be in a leading role.
[Harris:] Well, let me ask you something else about our changing world, if you will, this morning, if we can digress for just a moment.
[Gore:] Sure.
[Harris:] I'd like your thoughts on the big news, this morning, about the merger with AOL and Time Warner. We all know about how intimately you've been involved with technological issues and looking into the future in matters like this. Do you see any red flags being raised at all with this merger in Washington?
[Gore:] Well, I was joking with your producer on the ear-phone a minute ago whether or not this was going to be AOL-CNN now. But you know, beyond lighthearted comments like that, I'm going to try to deflect your question, simply because whenever there is a big merger there is the possibility that the Justice Department or the Federal Trade Commission or the FCC will be asked to have an antitrust review to make sure that competition is protected. I don't know that that will be a major part of this or not, but traditionally I have because of my position in this administration, tried to not bias the potential review of something that might raise an anti-trust question. So, I'm going to defer on that. I'll just say that there are so many exciting developments. It is obvious that our world is changing rapidly, and incidentally, in addressing the new security agenda for the world, it's important to take note of the new opportunities that are at our disposal with this global information infrastructure, the World Wide Internet, which makes cooperation possible in ways that were impossible in the last century.
[Harris:] And it looks like there may be another vast offering of opportunities through this merger. We thank you very much for your time, this morning, Vice President Al Gore at the United Nations.
[Gore:] Thank you very much. Thank you.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] The other story of the hour, of course, is the passing of comedian, poet, writer, composure, actor Steve Allen. And another of his dear friends is on the line with us, Milton Berle. Mr. Berle, your reaction to this?
[Milton Berle:] Well, I'm in terrible shock. I got the news this morning. And he just took a nap and went to sleep last night, and didn't get up. That was awful. We have lost one of the great icons of show business, and the theatrical world, and any world. He was my very dearest friend, and when he was only a year old, I was his baby-sitter. We always made a joke about that. His mother, Bell Montrose, was a great, great comedian and to bring him as the off-spring was a great joy to the world. We lost a heavyweight, a heavyweight, a man that was so talented, and so dear, and such a nice man, and a critic of different people, but rightly so, and sometimes not like all of us, it is a human thing, but Steve Allen was a giant. He was the world will lose him, and we lost a real big, big man, that he was so smart, so educated, and he could do everything. And I think I can't say it is from overwork because he loved to do it and you know he originated. We all know the format of doing a talk shows, he was the first one. And I'm so overwhelmed now, so overcome by the whole thing that I must send of course my regrets and my sorrowful feeling to Jane Meadows Allen and his son, Bill, and all his grandchildren and everything. He was, he stuck by his way, he knew what he wanted, he knew what he said. And he was a giant. We lost another giant. I'm just I'm so overcome and overwhelmed that I can't believe it, because he was also a very formidable member of the Fryer's Club, and one of the presidents in the past years. He did everything. He was kind, and he was a gentleman and he made he made so many friends. But my experience with him is tremendous. And knowing him, just knowing him that when he was here was a Godsend. And all I can say is my sympathy goes to his lovely wife Jane Meadows.
[Waters:] As I mentioned to some of the other of his friends who I have spoken with this afternoon since learning of Steve Allen's death. He said in an interview not too long ago that he thanked the universe for allowing him to accomplish all that he's been able to accomplish, that says a lot about the man, does it not?
[Berle:] I should say it does. There was nobody better or more of an icon, there want to call people icons today, there was a true icon. Nobody will ever replace him. He was a dear man, very kind. He had his opinions, like we all do, but justly so. And, you know, he wasn't jealous of anyone, he never had a piece of jealousy in his mind, when all those copycat talk shows, he liked them, and sometimes he didn't, but he never really put them down. He never said anything about it. He could stand on his own laurels. And as you quoted, as somebody just said, it can be double that, because he was my dearest friend. And I'm so choked up now and so overcome by the shock of the whole thing that I'm too filled up to speak anymore.
[Waters:] We will hold him warmly in our thoughts and thank our lucky stars he walked among us. Milton Berle, thanks so much for talking to us.
[Berle:] God bless you.

[Kurtz:] Welcome back to RELIABLE SOURCES. President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin completed a three-day summit this week that included talk of reducing nuclear warheads. But it was also filled with feel-good activities down at the Texas ranch. And an interrogation of sorts from students at a local school.
[Unidentified Male:] I was wondering if you've come to a conclusion about whether or not to deploy the national missile defense system?
[President George W. Bush:] Are you with the national press corps, or? I notice my friends in the national press corps are giving you a thumbs-up.
[Kurtz:] Mark Whitaker in New York, the coverage of the summit, these guys clearly got along very well, but was the media coverage skeptical enough? I mean they didn't have a whole lot of hard accomplishments here.
[Whitaker:] You know I think in general, I mean you talk about stories that have been lost a little bit or haven't been given enough emphasis in the wake of the terrorist attacks. I mean I think the evolving relationship between the U.S. and Russia and between Bush and Putin is fascinating. I mean it has many good aspects, but I think there are a lot of questions to be raised, and I think that all of us have to get around to exploring them in greater depth. I mean you're right in fact, not much of substance was accomplished. Missile defense, NATO, all of those things were kind of put off for another day. On the other hand, you know I think that, you know, warm relations between the leaders of the super powers is meaningful. You look at Reagan and Gorbachev and their personal chemistry, and this was an objective that George Bush set for himself, that he was going to charm Vladimir Putin and he succeeded. And I guess all I can say is I'm so glad we didn't at least have to watch them dancing the Cotton-Eyed Joe. I think that might have been a little too much.
[Kurtz:] It's hard to imagine a meeting between the President of the United States and the President of Russia being overshadowed as Mark Whitaker said.
[Brownstein:] I think one thing Condy Rice said this week, was quoted as saying, I think actually explained some of the coverage as well, where she said that post September 11th, missile defense in particular is not as big a piece of the overall U.S. Russia relationship as it was before. And I think that was very much reflected in the coverage, where the fact that they continue to cooperate on the crisis in Afghanistan and the building of a government and the military campaign, it really does overshadow the importance, the continued deadlock on missile defense. Not that that isn't important, it's just a new reality and there are new issues in the room and new issues in the press to focus on.
[Kurtz:] So the media can't walk and chew gum and cover a war in Afghanistan and this at the same time?
[Thompson:] Well, that's a function of 24-hour cable. That's a serial enterprise. It can only cover one story intensely at a time. But you've got two young presidents, early in their tenure. They're becoming friends. I mean things could be worse. I think what we're seeing here is a tilling of the soil for future harvests, and I think the lack of agreement this week really isn't that important, given what else was going on.
[Kurtz:] Speaking of stories being overshadowed, we had the media recount in Florida. After 10 months, nearly $1 million, consortium news organizations including CNN, "Washington Post," "New York Times," "Wall Street Journal," Tribune Company including the "LA times," and it produced a variety of headlines. The "Washington Post" says, "Florida recounts would have favored Bush." A number of newspapers wrote that. But here's the Chicago Tribune with "Still Too Close to Call."
[Brownstein:] Yes, most people are in the "Post" camp. I mean, obviously the most conventional scenarios of what was in the realm of the possible at the time, the recount concluded that Bush would have still won. I mean the reality was...
[Kurtz:] My question is not who would have won. My question is, after all this time, was this worth doing?
[Brownstein:] Well, the intermediate events made it probably not worth doing, except there's a historical record. For all practical purposes, September 11 among other things, ended the election of 2000. It was the moment at which Bush became President in the minds of all Americans, even those that didn't vote for him. I mean right up until September 10, Howie, you were still getting 40 to 45 of the people in the polls saying they didn't think Bush had the experience and skills to be president, most of them, of course, being Gore voters. I mean a 48-48 split in polling, so people were still divided. But that really ended the question and I think for most voters and for most Americans at this point, this is superfluous. It's not a bad thing to get it. It's a good thing to have the historical record, but it doesn't have much contemporary impact.
[Kurtz:] Mark Whitaker, "Newsweek" opted out of this expensive effort, so can I conclude that you along with much of the public thinks that this whole recount was a bit of a yawn?
[Whitaker:] Well, I mean we did it for reasons really of our deadline and that basically after a lot of negotiation, it was pretty clear that on our deadline we couldn't make much use of the results.
[Kurtz:] Right, bottom line there?
[Whitaker:] You know, I think the bottom line is, you know, after all this time and all that money, you know, it shows that it was still in the margin of error and I think we kind of knew that at the beginning.
[Kurtz:] That sounds like an awful lot of work, money, effort expended for a finding that didn't really take us that much beyond the last media obsession which was the 2000 elections.
[Thompson:] Howie, good journalism requires drilling a lot of dry holes. This might have been one of them, but you've got to drill ten dry holes for every gusher, and maybe I think some of the folks that have invested so much money might have overplayed the story a little bit. I do think, as Ron says, it is important for the historical record.
[Brownstein:] Still going back to what the election commissioner in one county in Florida said, "the margin of victory in this election was less than the margin of error" and that is the reality and I doubt that any recount would have found some decisive result. This was one in which you can argue forever. It had to be settled. It had to be stopped and it was.
[Kurtz:] If there wasn't a war in Afghanistan, this would be argued by every talk show for cable for a couple weeks on, because it would be the juiciest thing around. Mark Whitaker in New York, Ron Brownstein, Mark Thompson, thanks very much for joining us. When we come back, the spin cycle on the nation's media critic- in-chief.

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] Solitary dolphins are rare to encounter in nature. They are usually found only in large gatherings called pods.
[Shibah Rattansi, Cnn Anchor:] These lone mammals, sometimes referred to as rogue dolphins, have been thrown out of their families for their unusual behavior. In our continuing look at the life of a special solitary dolphin that changed the lives of his researchers, here is Melody Horrill.
[Melody Horrill, Network Ten:] Three weeks ago, we brought you the first part of Jacques 's incredible story, the sad tale of a wild and lonely dolphin who befriended myself and a small group of people from Adelaide, South Australia. We examined the perils of this unusual dolphin's existence, how Jacques became entangled in fishing line, and how he battled to survive in the highly polluted river that was his home. Independent research found that this river was filled with highly toxic chemicals that can be especially fatal in baby dolphins. Mothers ingest the poisons and pass them on through their milk to their babies. This week's episode will explore how those poisons tragically infected our friend Jacques. [voice-over]: Throughout history, humans have held a fascination for dolphins. And they, too, are intrigued by us. Dolphins have been credited with saving the lives of people stricken at sea. Ancient Greeks considered them divine, and people who killed them were executed. But mutual respect isn't always enough. This male bottle nose, believed to be only three months old, was brutally stabbed over the weekend. He probably belonged to the Port River pod, which holds a special place in the affections of many South Australians. Stabbings and shootings or Port River dolphins have become depressingly frequent.
[Dr. Bosley, Dolphin Researcher:] One of the dolphins that got shot, that we called Hilo, when she died, she a dependent calf or semidependent calf, and I've actually named the calf Nicky, after my own daughter. And so, in a week or two after Hilo died, and we were seeing this young dolphin swimming around by itself, wondering whether it would survive or not.
[Horrill:] She didn't, like most of the babies orphaned by human attacks. But the biggest tragedy of all was Jacques' as fate. In August, 1993, Dr. Bosley hadn't seen him for weeks. He felt something was terribly wrong and he began searching.
[Dr. Bosley:] We just couldn't find him. And then I had call from the museum saying that they had collected a dolphin's body who and the dolphin had a strange-looking fin, which immediately made me think it was probably him. I guess I'm the kind of person that doesn't burst into tears easily. And I don't tend to show my emotions that much. I can remember the people at the museum looking at me a little strangely when I probably made some kind of outburst about that was my friend dying, because they had known me up until then, I think, as straight scientist and probably thought it was a little strange that I was so emotionally involved with a dolphin.
[Horrill:] The shock and emotion all at once as overwhelming. I didn't know what I to do. It was like I had lost my right hand, that I had lost a friend that I was never going to replace. The upsurge of emotion was almost too much. It was such a loss.
[Annie Buchecker, Dolphin Researcher:] I was actually surprised by my reaction. I felt like I had lost a very close friend. I had. It just wasn't a human friend.
[Horrill:] I remember walking into your lounge room when you had that glass of scotch. And you looked at me and I looked at you and there were no words that we could say to each other. And I just gave you a hug. And we would like to think that the Port River dolphins were grieving too. Only weeks, before Jacques had begun to reach out to his peers for the first time. And like a teenager embarrassed by his parents in front of friends, he pretend not to know us. The tears in our eyes and this dolphin swimming away from us, not really wanting anything to do with us for the first time ever and how that felt. That felt it felt wonderful in some respects, because he no longer needed us. But it terrible in another respect, because it was almost a feeling of loss, like what are we going to do without him?
[Boswell:] If you had take a photo of us at that moment, no one would ever have doubted what these people were feeling. They felt a deep unity, there was loss but there was happiness, there was extraordinary joy.
[Horrill:] He was actually starting to really enjoy his life. He was starting to interact with other dolphins, he was starting to enjoy enjoy being. In dolphin terms, Jacques was an adolescent. An autopsy found he had ingested large amounts of manmade toxins called PCBs. Until being banned in the early '90s, they were used in paint products and coolants. PCBs can remain toxic for decades.
[Boswell:] He had had levels of PCBs in his system which were elevated at the time. Anyway, they were something like six times higher than any other dolphin that had been tested in Australia.
[Horrill:] The finding is particularly worrying because the Port River is Adelaide's most important fish breeding ground. And with so many popular fishing spots along the river, it's not hard to see how PCBs and other organic chemicals can enter the food chain.
[Unidentified Male:] More research needs to be undertaken by the South Australian government to identify what the levels are in edible fish, because it potentially could be a problem for people that eat a lot of fish from the river.
[Horrill:] A problem that might yet force people to act to save this paradox of nature. Next week we'll bring you the final episode of "A Dance with a Dolphin." A shocking look at the devastating affects man has had on Jacques and the other Port River dolphins. Now it's back to you.
[Rattansi:] Thank you very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] As we've been telling you this morning, the Allied D-Day assault landed on France's Normandy coast 57 years ago this day. The invasion combined 175,000 troops from a dozen Allied nations. So for the men of Easy Company of the 101st Airborne Division, that day began a wartime journey of heroics and horror. Academy Award-winning actor Tom Hanks tells their story in a new HBO documentary series produced by our sister network. "Band of Brothers" is based on a book by historian Stephen Ambrose. And we welcome Tom Hanks live from Utah Beach this morning. Good morning. It is great to see you and great to have you here.
[Tom Hanks, Producer, "band Of Brothers":] Nice to be here. Thank you.
[Lin:] Once again, we find you at the crossroads of life imitating art, art imitating life. I'm wondering: What is it like for you to be there at Utah Beach on this morning?
[Hanks:] Well, it keeps things interesting. It makes my job much more fascinating and perhaps a bit more full of responsibility. You know, we are here with actual the surviving members of Easy Company. These are guys that can tell you exactly where they were and what they were doing 67 years ago at 2:00 p.m. local time. And they just finished knocking out some German a battery of German guns at a place called Brecourt Manor and moving on to a village called Courville. It is for me, it is a surreal experience to have done the research and try to come up with the stories to make it fit our purposes, and then to come right back around again to the original research, except this time made manifest by the actual place and the actual men.
[Lin:] Mr. Hanks, why this company? Of all the wartime stores that could be told in World War II, what makes this regiment so special?
[Hanks:] Well, as chronicled by Stephen Ambrose in his book, if you were looking for a handful of men to be the embodiment of the of a G.I. experience from D-Day to the end of the war in Northern Europe, you're not going to do much better. These paratroopers formed up in July of 1942 and were together through every major campaign in Northern Europe that took place, and were the reasons for a number of historical events to occur in the first place. So if you're trying to what we were trying to do was to incorporate somehow, in a for an audience, the scope of the endeavor from 1942 to 1945. And by following these men of the 101st Airborne, it was almost tailor-made for our purpose.
[Lin:] And from the very beginning, right, from their training all the way up through D-Day and the trials and tribulations that they experience along the way.
[Hanks:] They knew that they were going to be jumping into hostile territory and that, as soon as they hit the ground, they would be surrounded by enemy forces. That was their purpose. Now, even within the confines of that, you still have a myriad of combat experiences, both major and minor, both very serious and almost comic in the reality. But it's just a different enterprise than other versions of looking at the World War II experience.
[Lin:] And a very different enterprise for you. You were behind the camera on this one. What was it like for you actually being the co-executive producer?
[Hanks:] Well, in some ways, it's actually great fun, because you get to it's putting together the world's most complicated jigsaw puzzle. And it's all based on fact. To start with "Band of Brothers," the book by Stephen Ambrose, and just try to figure out how to break it down over the course of 10 hours, and then how to get whatever nuggets of detail and truth we can on screen, it's it made for a lot of very lively late nights with a very trusted group of cohorts and artists. But also, at the same time, there comes the moment where I'm just standing back and getting reports from the field how things are going and realizing that these guys, these writers and directors and actors, have are coming up with truths that I could never even imagine. So the final analysis is, they have all made my job look a lot easier than it was.
[Lin:] You seem very humbled by the experience, Mr. Hanks. You seem very humbled by...
[Hanks:] I don't see how you could not be. I don't view this as a as a brand of our mythology that is not somehow approachable or applicable to our daily lives. I see old men who were once young and strong and had their entire lives ahead of them who themselves are self-effacing and self-deprecating and would never, ever assume the mantle or the responsibility of being heroes themselves. And you respect them for that. And I can't help but realize that, listen, we live protected by the four great freedoms that FDR laid out, before Pearl Harbor even. And the reason why we enjoy them is because there were a bunch of guys like the men of Easy company who said: If there's trouble somewhere, I'd like to be part of the solution.
[Lin:] A tribute well deserved.
[Hanks:] Those are words we can all live by, even today.
[Lin:] Certainly and certainly for a much younger generation who may never really have to know that kind of sacrifice, one can only hope. Thank you so much, Tom Hanks, for joining us this morning on the 57th anniversary...
[Hanks:] Thank you, Carol.
[Lin:] ... of D-Day and the story of Easy Company. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Ann Kellan, Cnn Anchor:] First Dolly, now Fido? A potentially life-saving device that's full of hot air. And feeling stressed? That could be a good sign. These stories and more just ahead on SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY WEEK. Hello and welcome. I'm Ann Kellan. We're taller, we don't have wings and our life spans are longer, but turns out we humans have a lot in common with fruit flies. Scientists have decoded virtually the entire genetic code of that fly. The findings will help in the research of various human diseases and birth defects.
[Kellan:] What could fruit flies possibly have in common with humans? Genetically, more than you think. This tiny fly with the scientific name Drosophila is now an open book. Scientists have decoded its entire genetic blueprint, or genome, one chemical at a time.
[Craig Venter, Celera Genomics:] It's a very exciting time. The Drosophila genome plays such a key part in science.
[Kellan:] Even though the fruit fly has only about 13,000 genes compared to 70,000 to 100,000 in humans, we're more similar to fruit flies than not: 70 percent of the genes found in the fly are also present in humans. And because fruit flies reproduce and grow quickly, they're a scientist's dream specimen.
[Venter:] There's literally hundreds to thousands of discoveries in the fruit fly that have helped us understand our own biology better. One is a set of genes that determine body segments in insects, turns out those same genes control our body development as humans. The key discoveries for understanding the molecular basis of how the human brain functions have come from the fruit fly.
[Kellan:] Scientists at Celera Genomics, where much of the research was done, developed a new method to quickly sequence vast amounts of genetic information. They take DNA out of a cell, break the material into pieces, analyze the parts chemical by chemical, and with the help of a supercomputer put the genome back together like a jigsaw puzzle.
[Art Caplan, Bioethicist, University Of Pennsylvania:] By understanding those genes, by seeing what you can do in a fruit fly change the temperature, expose it to different chemicals and then knowing exactly what the fruit fly genes are we'll learn something about why sadly things sometimes go astray in human development.
[Kellan:] Though Celera is a private, for-profit company, it plans to share its findings with researchers around the world. Knowing the fruit fly's genome will also help companies develop more effective pesticides to protect crops. Researchers in both the public and private sectors are hard at work decoding the human genome and expect results as early as this summer. Cloning sheep, and, most recently, pigs, is one thing, but copying canines? Researchers say they are within fetching distance of cloning man's best friend. Rusty Dornin has details.
[Rusty Dornin, Cnn Correspondent:] She's beautiful, athletic and super smart. Her owners say Missy is one of a kind, that is until researchers can make a canine copy. Missy's owners are spending more than $2 million in attempts to clone her.
[Lou Hawthorne, Genetics Savings & Clone:] It started with a dream of a single anonymous billionaire who loved Missy so much that he wanted another dog with the same genetic endowment.
[Dornin:] It's called the "Missiplicity Project," and it's no joke. Sixty-two dogs at Texas A&M; University are would-be surrogate moms of Missy II. Missy will be the first. Then any Fido might do.
[Hawthorne:] The type of animal you want to clone is one that's a once-in-a-lifetime masterpiece of Mother Nature. It could be a mutt, it could be a pure bred, but it's an animal that, for whatever reason, you want to capture those genes.
[Dornin:] To capture your dog's genes, the Genetic Savings & Clone Corporation will send you a bio-box. A vet will take DNA from your dog. And for $1, 000, it will be frozen until the process is perfected. Some worry whether dogs produced by cloning will be as healthy.
[Hank Greely, Stanford University:] There's a little bit of evidence from cloning from cattle, particularly, that there are some higher rates of some problems with joints and growth in cloned cattle.
[Unidentified Female::] She's like an angel. This is sort of the devil dog.
[Dornin:] Just try and duplicate that, say some dog owners.
[Unidentified Female::] Yes, I mean, it would be cool if it would come out the same, but it wouldn't be the same dog, you know?
[Greely:] I do think it's important to note that it would be the illusion of sameness. Cloning won't make a pet or a person immortal.
[Dornin:] Researchers believe they'll be able to successfully clone 13-year-old Missy within the next year. And while it may cost a few million to try and clone your canine today, soon it could come down to the cost of a new car, a price some would gladly pay to recreate the essence of their four-footed friend. For SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY WEEK, I'm Rusty Dornin.
[Kellan:] Well, you say cloned dogs aren't for you? How about a robo-cat? The techno-feline was among the critters up for grabs at the recent Tokyo Toy Fair. The $500 kitty can jump, play dead, do somersaults, without ever having to use the litterbox. Also featured at the fair, Robo-bunnies? And a robo-jellyfish. What will they think of next? Coming up: Tired of the rat race? We're going to introduce you to some mellow and not-so-mellow mice who know the feeling. But next: Those fighting for a safer Internet faceoff with the pharmaceutical industry.

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] References to fuzzy math and Medicare lock boxes gave way to agreements and some apologies last night. It was the second presidential debate, and it did have a noticeably different tone than the first debate. CNN's Keith Oppenheim joins us live now from Winston-Salem, North Carolina with a look at some of the evening's more note-worthy exchanges. Good morning, Keith.
[Keith Oppenheim, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning to you, Linda. And round two here at Wake Forest University was intended to be a more informal format, and it was an opportunity for the candidates, as well, to show that they could do more than just argue. Mr. Gore wanted to show that he could be likable. Mr. Bush wanted to show that he has some expertise, especially in foreign policy. And both are trying to break a near-dead heat in the polls.
[Oppenheim:] From the opening hand shake to the end of 90 minutes, the second debate was clearly different from the first. Vice President Al Gore didn't sign or attempt to dominate.
[Jim Lehrer, Debate Moderator:] Let's move on.
[Vice Pres. Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] Far be it from me to suggest otherwise.
[Oppenheim:] Governor Bush was less rattled and more fluid on questions of foreign policy.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] Maybe I am missing something here. I mean, are we going to have kind of a nation-building Corp from America? Absolutely not. Our military is meant to fight and win war.
[Oppenheim:] Yet, with all the civility, there were key moments of disagreement. Gore attacked Bush's record on health care.
[Gore:] The governor opposed a measure put forward by Democrats in the legislature to expand the number of children that would be covered, and instead directed the money toward a tax cut, a significant part of which went to wealthy interests.
[Bush:] If he is trying to allege that I am a hard-hearted person and I don't care about children, he is absolutely wrong. We spent $4.7 billion a year in the state of Texas for uninsured people, and they get health care.
[Oppenheim:] In the past week, the Bush campaign has hit hard on factual errors made by Gore in the first debate.
[Bush:] I am going to continue to defend my record and defend my propositions against what I think are exaggerations.
[Oppenheim:] Gore acknowledged the mistakes, but argued that his big-picture message is what is important.
[Gore:] I will promise you this with all the confidence in my heart and in the world that I will do my best, if I am elected president, I will work my heart out to get the big things right for the American people.
[Oppenheim:] Now, of course, the question turns to who did better in the second debate and what effect, if any, it will have on the third and final debate next Tuesday in St. Louis. Reporting live in Winston-Salem, I am Keith Oppenheim. Linda, back to you in Atlanta.
[Stouffer:] Thank you, Keith, and we will be watching.

[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] By the thousands, people in the formally-atheist nation of Cuba have turned out to greet the leader of the Roman Catholic Church. The arrival of Pope John Paul II...
[Lucia Newman, Cnn Havana Bureau Chief:] The significance of Pope John Paul II's trip to Cuba was that it gave many, many Cubans a greater sense of openness, of freedom to speak about the things that they cared about.
[Unidentified Female:] It's a dream. I feel like something monumental has happened. It's a magnanimous event.
[Harris Whitbeck, Cnn Mexico City Bureau Chief:] The atmosphere was just absolutely incredible. It was one of the most historic moments I have ever had the good luck of being a part of. The energy that you could feel that was there was almost palpable, and that energy was you could feel that throughout the streets of Havana and in the other streets of the other towns that the pope visited. I think a lot of Cubans were out there mostly out of curiosity than out of religious fervor.
[Newman:] People were rather reluctant to show openly that they were Catholics, to carry crosses on their chests, but after the pope came that changed completely. There has not been political changes here, but perhaps what the most significant message for Cuba was when the pope called for Cuba to open up to the world and for the world to open up to this country, and that certainly did happen as a result of the pope's visit. Cuba somehow felt, and Cubans felt, they were breaking out of their isolation.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Many Americans are devoting countless hours to remember those who died in the September 11 attacks. One project is this massive flag of remembrance. Some 100 people have volunteered to help sew the 30-foot-by-20-foot banner, which memorializes the 911 victims. Two people intimately involved with the project are cocreator Sherry Kronenfeld and Eileen Cirri, who was widowed when her husband, a Port Authority policeman, was killed in the World Trade Center. Good morning.
[Sherry Kronenfeld:] Good morning.
[Eileen Cirri:] Good morning.
[Zahn:] It's nice of you both to be with us. First of all, how are you and your six kid doing?
[Cirri:] Well, we're holding up. We have a police funeral planned for next week on the 14th and the 15th. My husband hasn't been recovered. That was a private decision we had to make to go along so we can move along with our life.
[Zahn:] And as I understand it, you're getting overwhelming support from all over the country. A family is traveling from where?
[Cirri:] From Scotland and from there's Philippine people coming because my husband was also a ham radio operator. But I want to say the most support that I've received is from the Port Authority Police Department itself.
[Zahn:] They've really helped you cut through this maze...
[Cirri:] Red tape.
[Zahn:] ... and the red tape that you're subjected to.
[Cirri:] Absolutely. They are taking care of their families.
[Zahn:] Why don't we hold up, Karen or, excuse me, Sherry, this part of this flag that you now are putting together. This was your husband, Robert Cirri, right?
[Cirri:] Right, lieutenant.
[Zahn:] Lieutenant Robert Cirri, PAPD, 2000. You want to encourage other family members to send you pictures of their lost and loved ones to increase the size of this flag.
[Kronenfeld:] Right. We're hoping to get every single victim. We wanted to turn those numbers into photos. As you can see, each of these smiling faces is somebody that we want to remember forever. And Eileen is helping us with the Port Authority. And other families have responded with gratitude, knowing that their loved ones are going to be remembered forever. And we just need families to send in the photos. And we are making this American flag that's going to be a permanent record of who they lost.
[Zahn:] How touching is this for you, when you have so many other distractions in your life? You're trying to you are taking time off from your job as an emergency room nurse. You've got six kids to raise. And the Port Authority police, I know, are still continuing to pay your husband's salary; you don't know how long that's going to last. And yet you were so deeply committed to this project. Why is this so important?
[Cirri:] Well, it's a project of love, I think. And since it's what I respect about Mindy and Sherry is they're not going to go out to the families that are widowed and have lost husbands, brothers every relationship that you can think of. They want those people to send photos in. And I'm in the same boat as those people, so I want to beseech to those people [sic] to bring in their photos, or send them in to them for this flag. This flag is going to be a permanent remembrance of everyone that was involved in the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, the airlines. And it will be a permanent remembrance for them, and no one should be forgotten.
[Zahn:] And in the near term, this will immediately be hung at a museum here in New York City?
[Kronenfeld:] The New York Historical Society would like to have it for their special exhibition that they're going to have about the aftermath of September 11. So we're looking forward to that. And we'd like it to travel around the country, so the rest of the country can get to see it as well. And it will be two stories high, 30 feet long. And it will hopefully have everyone on it. The rescuers will be in their special section, in the blue section of the flag. And it's just going to be beautiful. And I don't know where the permanent home will be, but it will be around forever, that's for sure.
[Zahn:] Well, I wish you both tremendous luck, and our thoughts are with you.
[Kronenfeld:] And we have a Web site.
[Zahn:] You do have a Web site? Want to give us a quick read-off?
[Kronenfeld:] Yes, it's flagofremembrance.com. And one word, "flagofremembrance." We have an 800 number that you can get from the Web site as well. And you can send photos to a post office box, or through the Web site.
[Zahn:] Our best to all of your families.
[Cirri:] Thank you.
[Kronenfeld:] Thank you very much.
[Zahn:] Thank you very much for coming in at such a painful time of your life. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] A spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak calls the investigation of the U.S. ambassador to Israel an internal American matter that has nothing to do with Israel. The state department pulled Martin Indyk's security clearance two days ago while it looks into possible security violations. CNN's Kathleen Koch reports the investigation comes on the heels of other security lapses that have the state department scrambling.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] He is U.S. Ambassador to Israel; a trusted confidant of Prime Minister Ehud Barak. But in April, the state department began to examine Martin Indyk's handling of intelligence information. Thursday it pulled his security clearance. The state departments says, quote: "There is no indication of espionage in this matter. At this time, there is no indication that any intelligence information has been compromised." [on camera]: Senior U.S. officials tell CNN the ambassador is, in part, being investigated for bringing home classified documents to read. One official explained the duties of the state department's top diplomats often require such long hours that bringing work home is the only way it gets done. [voice-over]: But they also say Indyk had been warned numerous times by his supervisors about not handling secure documents properly. Because his clearance has been suspended, Indyk's duties have been passed to the embassy deputy. Indyk responded, saying, quote: "Jeopardizing the national security interests of the U.S. is absolutely abhorrent to me, and I would never do anything to compromise those interests." This action comes after an embarrassing series of security lapses at the state department. In April, a laptop computer with top secret arms data disappeared from the building; and a listening device was found in a conference room and traced to a Russian diplomat. So security has been tightened across the board.
[Madeleine Albright, Secretary Of State:] Failures to observe basic procedures put our nation's secrets at risk. They damage the credibility and reputation of the department and everyone who works here.
[Koch:] Indyk's case raises questions similar to those brought up in the cases of CIA director John Deutsche and Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee: What to do when classified U.S. data, even though never passed to anyone else, is mishandled. The state department insists Indyk's case has, quote, "absolutely no implications for the Middle East peace process." But with the White House pushing for a peace deal before the president leaves office, the departure of an influential player certainly doesn't help. Kathleen Koch for CNN, Washington.

[Brown:] OK. We've come to that moment now. The Harry Potter movie review moment. We need to make a couple of quick points first. Number one, this is a Warner Brothers movie, as in AOL-Time-Warner, our parent company. What that means, of course, is I love the movie. I haven't seen it yet, but I love it anyway. Secondly we probably should have had a child do this review, but because the program is on so late it seemed the wrong thing to do. So we settled on the next best thing to a child: "Time" magazine humorist Joel Stein and his grandmothers. They went to the movies today. They go to a lot of movies. They often go early so they can get bargain prices at both the theater and the restaurant afterwards, but they know movies. There they go. So meet now, Mama Ann and Mama I their grandson Joel is around too for their review of the Harry Potter movie. From Mama Ann's living room, I do believe. Welcome to both of you.
[Mama Ann, "harry Potter" Viewer:] Welcome.
[Mama I, "harry Potter" Viewer:] Thank you.
[Brown:] Welcome. Well, either one works. Mama Ann, start us off. Take a half minute or so and tell me what you thought of the movie?
[Mama Ann:] I thought it was great.
[Brown:] OK.
[Mama Ann:] I really enjoyed it.
[Brown:] You have 27 seconds left to fill. Tell me what about it you thought was great.
[Mama Ann:] Well, the scenery, the witchcraft it was really good. But I think children may be frightened with it.
[Brown:] How what age do you think is appropriate?
[Mama Ann:] Eight and above.
[Joel Stein, "time" Magazine:] But kids nowadays, like you said, they can...
[Mama Ann:] Well, they're more sophisticated today, the kids. But there are some frightening scenes in there.
[Brown:] Are there? And do you think they'll keep you up tonight, or you will be OK?
[Mama Ann:] No, I'm fine. But I'm wondering it's the children it will keep up.
[Brown:] OK. And would you go see it again?
[Mama Ann:] Yes, I would.
[Stein:] Without me.
[Brown:] OK. Without Joel.
[Mama Ann:] I'll take him along.
[Brown:] That's that's because you're a good grandma. That's what...
[Mama Ann:] Yes.
[Stein:] She's a great grandmother.
[Brown:] Now we'll go to Mama I. Mama i, you saw the movie today, right?
[Mama I:] Yes.
[Brown:] And did you enjoy it?
[Mama I:] Yes. Well, Joel insisted we go see the movie.
[Brown:] So you were...
[Mama I:] And we did.
[Brown:] Go ahead. No, go ahead, please.
[Mama I:] And we did, tonight. Surprisingly, I liked it. I mean, it gave me a headache. There was an awful lot of noise.
[Stein:] It was a noisy film.
[Mama I:] A very noisy film. And Mr. Harry Potter didn't impress me one bit.
[Brown:] He did not?
[Mama I:] I mean, no expression on his face. And very disappointed in him.
[Brown:] So...
[Stein:] You thought he was cute, right?
[Mama Ann:] He was adorable.
[Stein:] Yeah, he was a cute kid.
[Mama I:] But I liked I really did like the movie.
[Brown:] Good.
[Mama I:] I liked the fantasy and the magic, witchcraft.
[Brown:] But you didn't think you didn't think the acting was up to snuff?
[Mama I:] No.
[Brown:] All right.
[Mama Ann:] I did.
[Mama I:] I didn't like that English girl, didn't understand a word she was saying.
[Brown:] All right. So, so far, Mama i the movie gave you a headache, you didn't like either Harry or the girl.
[Mama I:] Well, I liked it.
[Brown:] What exactly did you like?
[Mama I:] No, I really did like it. Those are little just little things. But I really did like the movie.
[Stein:] You liked the story, the imagination?
[Mama I:] I liked the story, I liked the fantasy of it, and I certainly liked the scenery. Absolutely beautiful.
[Brown:] All right. OK. Now, don't you guys go anywhere. Well, you're not going anywhere. You're in Ann's kitchen there or living room.
[Mama I:] No, in the living room.
[Brown:] The living room. Just stay where you are. We are going to show a little clip of the movie, so people watching the program can get a headache too, I guess.
[Mama I:] I'll stay here.
[Hagrid:] Did you ever make anything happen, anything you couldn't explain? You're a wizard, Harry.
[Harry Potter:] I'm a what?
[Potter:] Dear Mr. Potter: we are pleased to inform you that you have been accepted at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
[Unidentified Female:] In a few more minutes you will pass through these doors and join your classmates.
[Unidentified Male:] Keep an eye on the stair cases. They like to change.
[Professor Mcgonagall:] Good afternoon, class. Welcome to your first flying lesson. Stick your right hand over the broom and say, "up."
[Potter:] Up! Wow.
[Mcgonagall:] Mr. Longbottom, Mr. Longbottom, exactly where do you think you're going?
[Ron Weasley:] Do you really have the scar? Wicked.
[Professor Snape:] Mr. Potter, our new celebrity.
[Albus Dumbledore:] First years should note that the dark forest is strictly forbidden, with no magics to be used between the classes in the corridors.
[Hermione Granger:] Centrifugus totalus.
[Dumbledore:] The third-floor corridor is out of bounds to everyone who does not wish to suffer a most painful death.
[Unidentified Male:] Throw him in the dungeon!
[Hagrid:] Understand this, Harry, because it's very important. Not all wizards are good.
[Granger:] I'm going bed before either of you come up with another clever idea to get us killed. Or worse, expelled.
[Weasley:] She needs to sort out her priorities.
[Unidentified Male:] I think it is clear that we can expect great things from you.
[Brown:] I thought I thought the trailer made it look great. Just my opinion, but I feel that way about Warner Brothers movies generally. Mama Ann, did you think it was true to the book?
[Mama Ann:] Unfortunately, I did not read the book.
[Brown:] Ah.
[Mama Ann:] But I'm going to go out and get it.
[Stein:] Really? You're going to read the book now?
[Mama Ann:] I definitely am going to read the book.
[Brown:] And Mama I, do you think if there's another Harry Potter movie you'll go see it?
[Mama I:] No, definitely not.
[Stein:] Wait, I thought you liked it.
[Mama I:] Well, one time is enough.
[Stein:] You have all the Harry Potter you need.
[Mama Ann:] I would go again.
[Stein:] You would. OK.
[Mama I:] You mean would I see the movie again?
[Stein:] No, when there's a sequel.
[Brown:] Right. Like the next Harry Potter II movie.
[Mama I:] No.
[Mama Ann:] I would.
[Mama I:] No, definitely not. I've had it.
[Brown:] What if what if we agreed to put you on television again if you went to see it? Not likely?
[Mama I:] You know, I think once is enough.
[Brown:] OK. Give your grandson a hug.
[Mama I:] Sure.
[Brown:] And thanks for joining us, all of you. The Harry Potter review.
[Mama Ann:] It was my pleasure. Thank you.
[Brown:] It was ours. No, have a great weekend. Thank you. Front pages from newspapers around the country, or at least a couple of places around the country, delivered by actual editors, when we come back.

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to begin with the West Nile Virus, which has claimed its first human victim this year. Georgia physicians confirm the cause of death for an elderly women who lived here near CNN Center in Atlanta. Marty Savidge looks at the efforts to combat this mosquito-born virus.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] One day after the first confirmed death this year in the nation from West Nile Virus, health workers in Atlanta intensified efforts to battle the mosquito-spread disease. Crews dispersed insecticide pellets into standing water where the bugs breed. According to health officials, the death of the 71-year-old woman earlier this month is the first-ever human fatality in the state of Georgia. Authorities declined to identify the victim, saying only she was admitted to hospital July 31st with encephalitis-like symptoms. But it wasn't until Friday morning, six days after her death, that the Centers for Disease Control confirmed that it was West Nile Virus. The victim reportedly lived in the heart of downtown Atlanta, near the park built to celebrate the Olympic games in 1996. Saturday, health workers focused on communities near the park and areas surrounding elderly housing, spreading information as well as insecticide. Older residents and children are believed to be most at risk for the disease.
[Mayor Bill Campbell, Atlanta, Georgia:] This is no time for panic. It's a time for caution, it's a time to understand the necessary ingredients as to how we can protect ourselves.
[Savidge:] Until now, the West Nile Virus had only shown up in the state in animals, mainly birds. But health officials say at least 6 other people in Fulton County surrounding Atlanta are being tested after showing symptoms of the disease. Still, officials downplay the danger.
[Scott Wetterhall, Altantal West Nile Task Force:] In a given area a very, very small percentage, perhaps 1% of the mosquitoes are actually infected with the virus. If a person is bitten by an affected mosquito, the chances of becoming ill is very, very small.
[Savidge:] Monday, Atlanta area health officials will meet to compare notes with health experts from New York city. From 1999 to 2000, at least nine deaths and 73 other cases were reported in the New York city and New Jersey metropolitan areas. For now, Georgia residents are being encouraged to roll down their sleeves in the battle against a bug that has suddenly become more than just a nuisance. Martin Savidge, CNN, Atlanta.

[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] And tonight, for the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession.
[Jon Stewart, "the Daily Show":] Did he concede? What do we do now?
[Stewart:] Did O.J. or Monica do anything today?
[Larry King:] Tonight, for comedians the last few weeks nonstop laughfest. Joining me in Los Angeles, one of the funniest folks around, Jon Stewart, host of "The Daily Show" on Comedy Central. You do not want to miss the next hour on LARRY KING LIVE. Finally, an hour with Jon Stewart. We've been trying to put this together for months, and sometimes it happens, and then it doesn't. Other stories break, but finally we got him here. We'll be taking your phone calls. He's truly one of the funny, funny people and it's a great pleasure to have you here.
[Stewart:] It's a great pleasure to be here. I'm excited. I'm looked around. Where's everybody else? Hal Bruno, Schlessinger.
[King:] You missed all of that.
[Stewart:] They're not here? Every time I turn you on it looks like a "Matlock" book club.
[King:] Well, we were on top of it. OK, first on news of the day, we're going to repeat an interview tomorrow night with Colin Powell that we did because tomorrow he's going to be named secretary of state.
[Stewart:] I'm excited. Who doesn't love 80s nostalgia? You love it, right?
[King:] That's 80s.
[Stewart:] They're getting the old band back together Colin Powell, Dick Cheney. When I think on Inauguration Day with those guys up on the dais, you know, they're going to do their thing and the crowd's going to have the lighters up. Do something from Iran-Contra. You guys are awesome. I love that they're getting them. They should keep going. Forget keep going back into Republicans. What's Kissinger doing? What about Patton? He's around still, isn't he? Keep going back. Westmoreland.
[King:] All right, this was great comedy material, right? You couldn't have written this.
[Stewart:] I have some news for you, Larry. I did write this. Four years ago. Secret journal. No, it was you know, here's why I think we can deal with it in a humorous way. It's not that serious. As much as we play the tragedy of it and the melodrama, if this truly were a crisis and a tragedy, we couldn't get the giggles that we're getting from it.
[King:] Media said it was crisis, but the public never did.
[Stewart:] Right, the media said it was crisis. No, the public was busy. They have the dog to walk, They have, oh, God. The pie's done.
[King:] But this is the presidency, though. They should have been excited.
[Stewart:] But I don't know. Did we have one the last four years? Who was it last four years? Clinton?
[King:] Clinton.
[Stewart:] OK, yes, but he wasn't nobody listened to him past two years.
[King:] You mean it don't matter anymore who's president?
[Stewart:] No, it doesn't matter, unless we're in a crisis. It matters in war and depression and that's not so funny, but other than that, as long people are concerned about their lives. The problem, I think, that maybe the media has to a certain extent is they define themselves along partisan lines. The people that you interview are Democrats or Republicans. The country, that's not their defining characteristic. You know, you don't turn on "Wheel of Fortune" and Pat Sajak, oh, we've got a woman. She's an ad executive, three children, moderate Republican, pro-choice. You know what I mean? Nobody that's not how people define themselves.
[King:] Was it nice seeing Jim Baker back?
[Stewart:] Jim Baker I missed, although I tell you didn't they used to call him the Velvet Hammer?
[King:] Yes.
[Stewart:] I think the velvet's worn out. He just looked like the hammer to me.
[King:] He was a little rough?
[Stewart:] He was a little rough. I mean they're literally it's like every now and again George W. Bush will just call up his dad and go, do you know anybody who wants to go to Florida? Maybe help me out a little bit. I don't know what to do right now. I'm putting together my Cabinet. You know any black guys? Anybody I can put together? Baker, yes. I think made a mistake because he came out. He was supposed to be one of our wise men. He, Warren Christopher. And Warren Christopher is so genteel. Literally, afterwards you'd figure he'd just reach into his pocket, pull out a little hard candy covered with lint and give it to some of the reporters. Please, good mazol to you. Have some fun. But Baker was just up there.
[King:] Angry.
[Stewart:] Oh, my God. When he warned us that if we didn't get closure, the stock markets would fall. Do you remember when went on TV? Look at the Nasdaq. It's acting funny. Oh, the Nasdaq, our longstanding institution of rationality, the Nasdaq. Oh, my God. It's acting weird.
[King:] It went down today.
[Stewart:] It goes down. They don't it makes no sense, the Nasdaq.
[King:] People who buy stocks.
[Stewart:] Makes no sense.
[King:] Why do they buy and sell like this?
[Stewart:] And it's the same reason we go to Vegas. Come on, black. That's all it is.
[King:] It's Gambling.
[Stewart:] Yes, it's gambling.
[King:] But they lose faith in one day and then they faith back Greenspan.
[Stewart:] You know what I heard today? Gold. Buy gold. Like it's 1838, Buy gold. Andrew Jackson's coming, buy gold.
[King:] OK, what do you make of Florida now?
[Stewart:] Let's take a call.
[King:] Wait a minute. We will in a while
[Stewart:] Let's take a...
[King:] We will in a while.
[Stewart:] All right. Sorry.
[King:] Florida. How did Florida come out of all of this, do you think?
[Stewart:] The same way they went into it. Not looking well.
[King:] What did they...
[Stewart:] Looking a little peaked.
[King:] What went wrong in Palm Beach?
[Stewart:] Old Jews, Larry. No, I don't know if you're familiar with that. Palm Beach is with old Jews and they're used to being able to send things back. You know that as well as I do. Whether it be briskets...
[King:] Palm Beach used to be no Jews.
[Stewart:] Is that true?
[King:] Oh, you're too young. Palm Beach, forget it.
[Stewart:] When was this?
[King:] Palm Beach was a stricter community,
[Stewart:] You see that. You let us in, and what happens. Like moss, we take over and then we send ballots back. I'm sure they thought it was no big deal when they first did it. They go, maybe I voted for Buchanan, but I don't know. I like Gore. Can I vote again? You know, they're just used to that sort of thing. But I really have a theory about Florida that Florida was doing very well for itself for a long time. They had spring break was there. They were really coming on in national scene.
[King:] Houston.
[Stewart:] Used to shoot shuttles launches from there. Everybody used to come to Cape Canaveral. Then O.J. moved there. Now I'm not saying, but ever since he moved there, what happened? Elian Gonzalez, the Palm Beach Florida thing. You see what I'm saying? Are you with me on the conspiracy theory?
[King:] A slow truck riding on highway followed by helicopters.
[Stewart:] Thank you. You know, you never know with this guy. You know, he could be polluting the whole thing. He might have been the one who threw Elian into the sea. We don't know. We don't know. We don't know who was out there.
[King:] Do you think he might have had something to do with the ballots?
[Stewart:] It may be. I mean, certainly it was about not being able to punch it through. You never know. That makes no sense, does it? Makes absolutely no sense. I don't know what I'm talking about.
[King:] That's beauty of it.
[Stewart:] No, it is, though. But I do there has been a good effect from it. Right near my house in New York City, they are opening up a new gay bar called the hanging chad, and I think.
[King:] Is this a tainted presidency, do you think?
[Stewart:] Aren't they all? It is not a tainted presidency anymore. So, now that it's done. He's won and it's his presidency to taint. I'm sure that if we leave him alone, he will taint it on his own.
[King:] OK, what happens if the meddlesome "Miami Herald," say in January brings forth its own vote and then tabulates it and shows you here's what the dimples were, here's what the chads were, and in one of them, Gore won? Would that cause a crisis then?
[Stewart:] Absolutely a crisis.
[King:] And what would happen?
[Stewart:] The same crisis nothing would happen. He'd be the president in the same way that Clinton got impeached, he was still the president. We're not a nation on the precipice of any constitutional disaster other than you know what we have? We have a pundit disaster. We're out of pundits. They've been used up now, and they have nothing left to say.
[King:] They were all wrong.
[Stewart:] I was watching your show. I could literally lip sync without having seen it before, to the pundits. You had Pataki on, it was like somebody just wound him up and let him go. They had a count. They had another count. Bush has won rule of law. Didn't matter what you asked him, he just I was literally lip syncing along to the Republicans. Then you'd go to Democrat and he would say, every vote counts. We have not had a fair count. We're only asking for a fair count. Governor Pataki, what do you think of that? We had a count. We had a recount. Sometimes a third and fourth count rule of law.
[King:] Count counts.
[Stewart:] Change the rules in the middle of the game. I'm lip syncing at home. It's like karaoke now.
[King:] And how about the reporters? Well, let me ask you how the media fared in all of this.
[Stewart:] They fared very well. Look, here's why...
[King:] Let me get a break.
[Stewart:] I cannot leave right now.
[King:] This is not Comedy Central. Let me get a break.
[Stewart:] Oh, is that true? You have advertisers?
[King:] Worldwide.
[Stewart:] Oh, we don't have those.
[King:] We'll be right back with Jon Stewart, host of "The Daily Show," one of the funny people. We'll be taking calls for Jon, too. Don't go away.
[Stewart:] He was clearly caught off guard by the loss, and my guess is in the rush probably just jotted down some notes on back of a napkin. Here's his speech.
[Gore:] Good evening.
[Stewart:] Oh, my God. What a sore loser!
[Gore:] Now the U.S. Supreme court has spoken. Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the courts decision, I accept it.
[Stewart:] Gore added.
[Unidentified Male:] Earlier today in a last-ditch effort to put an end to the election stalemate, Al Gore ate George W. Bush.
[Unidentified Female:] On "Meet the Press" last Sunday, Dick Cheney warned that we may be on the edge of a recession. Governor Bush has since asked his running mate, "If it's warm enough, can we have recession outside?"
[Stewart:] That's funny.
[King:] These are what? Funny.
[Stewart:] So Bush is dumb?
[King:] Now, these jocks about that: Unfair, Jon?
[Stewart:] Absolutely.
[King:] Unfair?
[Stewart:] Yes. Guilty, as charged. They're completely unfair. I mean, he can't he can't be that dumb. I mean, he did well, he can drive.
[King:] What do you think of us, the media, on election night?
[Stewart:] I thought an amazing job.
[King:] You liked what we did?
[Stewart:] I just want to say that our show, "The Daily Show," was the first news outlet to call it wrong. And I just want to get that on the record.
[King:] No.
[Stewart:] Seriously?
[King:] I never did. I delivered groceries, but I never worked in a restaurant.
[Stewart:] Really? Well...
[King:] Why? Does everybody work in a restaurant?
[Stewart:] Everybody that sucks. I sucked for a while. You never sucked? You were just good right off the...
[King:] I delivered groceries. No...
[Stewart:] So what, when you were 12?
[King:] Yes...
[Stewart:] And then you jumped right into radio and got your own show and that was the end of it.
[King:] No, I
[Stewart:] You calling me a schmuck?
[King:] No. I forgot what I asked you.
[Stewart:] Here's what you asked me, here's what I think. Everybody was panicking. You know, you turn on the TV, and literally, you know, you'd see pundits and their heads would start to grow like "Scanners" and it's just, the veins would phup. But the country has to go to work, and many of them have, you know, to maybe rake leaves and things like that. They're not as wild about it. It's like when I used to work at a restaurant, we'd get really angry about the things that went on in the restaurant. She sat someone at the four-top with only two people, that's crazy! And then you'd have big arguments about it, but outside the restaurant, if you walked outside and went, the four top with the two top, I'm not going to marry ketchups all night, people would go, yes, that really sounds like a problem.
[King:] When these people, when their eyes bulge like that...
[Stewart:] Yes.
[King:] ... did you hold them all in anger that they had that we had somehow misled you?
[Stewart:] You created it. You didn't mislead me, because I don't watch I don't watch you guys. I'm disgusted by it. No, that's not true.
[King:] You're disgusted?
[Stewart:] No, I watch it all the time. Here's what it was. By calling it for Bush, by making him...
[King:] At 2:00 a.m.
[Stewart:] ... the presumptive president-elect, we lost all chance to do a fair and reasonable recount immediately by hand. We lost that chance. Because there was a presumptive because there was a guy driving to go do a concession speech. And you know, they expressed shock that he would say he was going to recall it. By the end of the night, it was down to a thousand votes. Of course, he's not going to concede at that point. But the damage had been done. The picture had already gone up. The fireworks behind the head. You know, George Walker Herbert Quincy Adams Bush is the 18th president of the United, blah-blah. You know, then it would come back to Brokaw, and him and Russert would know go "or not" and just stare at each other.
[King:] Do you think, therefore, we have learned from that and it will not happen again?
[Stewart:] Here's the danger of it. If we don't do something, Larry, this is going to happen to us every 120 years...
[King:] I remember that night.
[Stewart:] This cannot stand.
[King:] You warned us.
[Stewart:] I warned us.
[King:] Remember, the Tilden was on the show.
[Stewart:] Tilden, though, bitter, bitter, bitter.
[King:] And he was ticked.
[Stewart:] You know that.
[King:] He was ticked.
[Stewart:] Very angry.
[King:] Well, wouldn't you be?
[Stewart:] We've all handled this so much better there are two tragedies in this situation. One is clearly there is a disenfranchisement of minorities and the poor in this country. That's I think probably the only issue of depth that we have to really deal with in that sense. And the other issue is Russert has to get ride of the hand-card thing when he writes on the boards. Do you know, with the magic marker... Exactly. That's got to go.
[King:] Why, you don't like it?
[Stewart:] That and the minority voting are the two tragedies.
[King:] Those are the two tragedies?
[Stewart:] I think so.
[King:] You rate them equally?
[Stewart:] Maybe Russert a little more.
[King:] We'll be right back with Jon Stewart, host of "The Daily Show" on Comedy Central. We'll including your phone calls. Tomorrow night, we're going to replay our interview with Colin Powell. According to every informed source we know, he'll be...
[Stewart:] He's funny.
[King:] He's a riot. Well, Colin is funny, very funny.
[Stewart:] I know.
[King:] He'll be named the secretary of state of tomorrow. On Monday night, Katie Couric for an hour.
[Stewart:] Very good.
[King:] We'll be right back with Jon Stewart. Don't go away. [Begin Video Clip, Nbc "the Tonight Show"]
[Jay Leno:] Governor Bush, Governor Bush, just one question. Well, hang on. Hang on, everybody. I'll get his attention. Oh, Governor Bush...
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] Ask his legal advice.
[Leno:] Let me ask you a question: Do you know who this little guy is?
[Bush:] Jim Baker?
[Unidentified Male:] Governor Bush, are you going to make a statement about the Supreme Court?
[Bush:] Well, I'll make a statement once we determine what the outcome of the Supreme Court decision is, and...
[Leno:] Oh, come on. You know you want a brewskie. Why not?
[Bush:] I'm keeping my emotions in check.
[Leno:] Oh, you're the president now oooh.
[Begin Video Clip, Cbs "the Late Show With David Letterman") David Letterman:] But if you think about it and Al W. Gore has thought about it. And he and Tipper...
[King:] Good line.
[Stewart:] Very good.
[King:] A lot of...
[Stewart:] Very good. Yes.
[King:] Create your own stuff, right?
[Stewart:] Absolutely.
[King:] Did you who came out the best in all this? Did you have a favorite person?
[Stewart:] A favorite person to mock or...
[King:] Mock. Who's your favorite to mock?
[Stewart:] Mr. T. Was he in this?
[King:] No.
[Stewart:] Well, I think anybody who is in a position of blind partisanship is always easy to mock, and that was everybody. So we had a ball with everybody. I mean, it was easy. Look, you don't want to just Katherine Harris came out and it was immediately, you know, "Avon calling" and all that stuff with the makeup. That...
[King:] Bad rap maybe?
[Stewart:] Yes, and you don't want to stay on that level. You want to go deeper and find out the makeup on the inside. You want to see the eye shadow on the inside. Do you know what I'm saying?
[King:] No.
[Stewart:] It's a metaphor.
[King:] What did you make of the...
[Stewart:] Judge.
[King:] The guy with the light.
[Stewart:] Holding it up?
[King:] Yes.
[Stewart:] I thought we were into the guy who had the magnifying glass...
[King:] Yes.
[Stewart:] ... and every time they'd cut to him he'd be doing this...
[King:] Did you understand the dilemma of the dimples and the chads? Did you understand?
[Stewart:] I do understand the dilemma, because and this is something that happened to me. I had officially thought that I had lost my virginity in 1981, but it turns out and I was just notified of this I had only dimpled the chad.
[King:] Oh!
[Stewart:] And so it's being taken away from me. CNN moved my virvinity into the too-close-to-call category.
[King:] All right. Let's move to some issues. Do we expect some Democrats in the...
[Stewart:] Bring the issues on Larry. Can I tell you something? Loaded for bear.
[King:] Democrats...
[Stewart:] Bring the issues on.
[King:] Democrats in the Cabinet. John Breaux turned him down today.
[Stewart:] I don't know that one. Give me another issue.
[King:] You don't know that one.
[Stewart:] Is this on? I think I think there will be Democrats in the Cabinet.
[King:] Anyone you recommend?
[Stewart:] I like Bill Clinton. I think he's done a hell of a job.
[King:] What post?
[Stewart:] I'd like him to be president.
[King:] I don't think George will give him that. So...
[Stewart:] You know what, two years from now we're going to want it. Two years from now, we're going to show up on Bill Clinton's doorstep in Chappaqua naked with a box of cigars, going stick it wherever you want, just come back. Whatever you got to do.
[King:] We'll be back with more of Jon Stewart's keen analysis of the news. He's bucking for Bill Schneider's job.
[Stewart:] Bring it on!
[King:] Bring it on.
[Stewart:] Schneider!
[King:] You'd like to be Wolf Blitzer, wouldn't you, secretly?
[Stewart:] I need that beard. I need the Blitzer beard.
[King:] We'll be back with more of Jon Stewart. We'll include your phone calls. Don't go away. [Begin Video Clip, Comedy Central "the Daily Show"]
[Stewart:] All we can really tell you is the electoral count stays the same. Bush has taken 20 states, Gore has taken 13. The interesting thing is Bush has swept the South: Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi that's M-I-S-S-I-S-S-I-P-P-I...
[Begin Video Clip, Nbc "the Tonight Show") Leno:] I guess last night they had a little victory party. Did you see that footage of George W. Bush driving home today?
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, no, I didn't, Jay.
[Leno:] In the early morning. Show Bush driving home at dawn. There he is, coming down the freeway. There he is. Probably a little tipsy, yes.
[King:] It never stops. Jon Stewart, brilliant humorist. People overseas?
[Stewart:] Terrible, terrible for our country overseas.
[King:] Their reaction?
[Stewart:] I was in Israel last week, and that's all they talked about over there.
[King:] The American election?
[Stewart:] Exactly. Just between Hasidics, Palestinians together at coffee shops. Just a dimpled chad is a vote! I'm telling you, my friend. Listen to me, my friend. If you do not punch in the stylus, it does not count as a vote. I tell you, I think there's going to be real trouble over there.
[King:] What do you think...
[Stewart:] Canada did it better than us. Canada held their election in one day. Canada.
[King:] Mexico.
[Stewart:] Haiti. We're the ones who installed their government and now they're running it better than us. I think they were ruled by a cardboard cutout of Lee Majors in the '70s for a while.
[King:] Do you think the trouble they have is understanding the electoral college? They don't understand how one man got more votes...
[Stewart:] They don't understand the electoral college. No one understands the electoral college. I mean, the electoral college was put into place so that white slave-owning people from states like Virginia would have the same power as the more populous northern states. I mean, that's that's what it was for. That's why guys like Jefferson got in office, was because the balance of power had to be shifted some way, because there was a lot of population in Virginia, but they were only counting them as what? three- quarters person.
[King:] Three-quarters of a person.
[Stewart:] You know, so...
[King:] You're saying that now it's outmoded?
[Stewart:] Oh, it's most definitely outmoded, but you'll never get 38 states to ratify that.
[King:] What did you make of the Supreme Court in all of this?
[Stewart:] I thought that was the biggest shock. George W. Bush is a Republican, and yet, in the final tally of votes, 5 to 4, 100 percent of the African-American vote went for George W. Bush. I thought that was really interesting.
[King:] He did. He got the entire African-American vote on...
[Stewart:] Clarence Thomas.
[King:] Yes, he got it.
[Stewart:] I love Clarence Thomas not saying a word during the whole thing. I literally figured he's just playing Minesweeper the whole time. People are talking back and forth. In his head, he's just like blah-blah-blah-blah law, law, law, law.
[King:] You're saying he didn't listen?
[Stewart:] No.
[King:] You don't think he listened?
[Stewart:] No, I think he listened. I think he listened and then went in the back and went, what do we do, Scalia I like yesterday, they had a tape of him on C-SPAN. He was talking to high-school kids trying to explain, because they were I mean, you're upset. Basically, the Supreme Court said if you make a constitutionally, this would be valid. If you give standards, specific standards, and you recount the whole state, you can do this, it will be valid. You've got two hours.
[King:] That's what they said.
[Stewart:] And basically, it's a catch-22. You almost thought Yossarian would walk into the courtroom and go, what, what happened. So naturally, kids, people...
[King:] So Clarence was the judge was speaking.
[Stewart:] Right, and he was speaking to kids and he was trying to explain to them what they had done, trying to explain that it wasn't partisan. And he said, look, I like the Dallas Cowboys, I can't make you like the Dallas Cowboys. I like the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, I can't make you like the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. See what I'm saying? And they cut away to the kids, and they're like, "I don't know what you're saying."
[King:] Called the Rule of Law.
[Stewart:] Yes. Well, they were at their campaign headquarters.
[King:] There were guys in the rule of law who...
[Stewart:] The Rule of Law as a Nonpartisan Observer. How many times did you hear the word "rule of law"?
[King:] All throughout it, but I didn't know...
[Stewart:] How many times have you heard it before this month?
[King:] Not much.
[Stewart:] Never.
[King:] But I did not know that you actually contacted them.
[Stewart:] We contacted them. Very sad.
[King:] How many rules are there, of law?
[Stewart:] There's just the one group, and they're very sad tonight.
[King:] How many in it?
[Stewart:] Three guys.
[King:] Three guys.
[Stewart:] It's actually, it's like the Mouseketeers. There's like 12 of them. There's Cubby and Buffy. I don't know who's in the rule of law. But who uses terms like rule of law? That's what you do, whenever you trap somebody and you know that as an interviewer you trap somebody in their own hypocrisy, and what do they do? Well, it's rule of law.
[King:] You can't be against the rule...
[Stewart:] Exactly. You had a guy on the other night. George W. Bush used the word "race" three times in his acceptance speech, and somebody said, he's clearly reaching out to minorities. He mentioned "race" three times. David Duke mentions race like 50 times in his speeches.
[King:] We'll be back with Jon Stewart. We'll include your phone calls on this edition of LARRY KING LIVE. We'll replay our interview with the new secretary of state, Colin Powell. It will be official tomorrow. Of course, the Senate has to approve. Don't bet against it. Katie Couric on Monday. We'll be right back. [Begin Video Clip, "the Daily Show"]
[Stewart:] Now we're still here crunching some numbers. We'll be here all night. But it looks like one of the most surprising things about this Florida vote is that George W. Bush got 100 percent of the African- American vote shocking.
[Begin Video Clip, "saturday Night Live") Will Ferrell, Actor:] Read 'em and weep, Al. That is a double word core.
[Darrell Hammond, Actor:] That is not a word, George.
[Ferrell:] Sure it is.
[Hammond:] Listen to me, George. Dignitude is not a word.
[Ferrell:] Well it's certainly not a word we associate with the Clinton-Gore administration, I'll tell you that much.
[Hammond:] All right, use it in a sentence.
[Ferrell:] As president, George W. Bush carried himself with great dignitude.
[Hammond:] That is not a word trust me.
[Stewart:] That is funny stuff. Farrell and Darrell Hammond are just tremendous with that stuff.
[King:] Before we go to some calls, what do you make of this new controversy already we have one.
[Stewart:] I'm ready.
[King:] Hillary Clinton, $8 million, Simon & Schuster, a book. Is that against...
[Stewart:] Are you serious?
[King:] Yes, she got the offer today and signed.
[Stewart:] OK, do you see, though, what this says to people?
[King:] What?
[Stewart:] Land deals in Arkansas, you make maybe $10,000. Write a book, $8 million. Clearly if they had known this before, this whole Whitewater thing never would have happened. She would have known. [Off-mike]
[King:] All right, in the Senate there are some upset because they're saying you shouldn't earn this kind of money. Remember when Newt made a lot of money off a book?
[Stewart:] No, I understand. Look, the Senate is they're mostly sharecroppers, very poor...
[King:] They're what?
[Stewart:] Sharecroppers, you know, poor people, peasants. Our Senate...
[King:] You insane?
[Stewart:] ... is made up of mostly so when someone like that has money, they don't like it because it's too much flash and dash. You know, guys like John Warner, you know, poor folk. They hate to see somebody flashing the money around like that. You know how it is.
[King:] How do you think she's going to do in the Senate?
[Stewart:] Oh, I think they're going to try and deride her and block her out as much as they possibly can. But I truthfully don't know because quite frankly I don't know what the Senate does. I mean, I know, I've seen it on "Grammar Rock": "I'm just a bill, sitting on Capitol Hill," the whole thing. But I don't know do you know what they do?
[King:] Yes, they meet, they have bills, they vote, they pass laws, they legislate.
[Stewart:] What laws? What legislation?.
[King:] They passed all the rules of law.
[Stewart:] Thank you. But all I'm saying is they don't really do anything, so I don't think she's going to have that tough a time.
[King:] Williamsburg, Virginia for Jon Stewart hello.
[Stewart:] That's where I went to school.
[Caller:] Yes, good evening, Larry. I have a question for Jon. Jon...
[Stewart:] That's J.D. Is that John Daley?
[Caller:] Yes, it is.
[Stewart:] John Daley, that's my old soccer coach.
[Caller:] So you know it's going to be a good question.
[Stewart:] He's in a league by the way and I don't mind saying this on national TV illegal immigrant, should be deported.
[Caller:] Not anymore. Jon, don't you think it's time that we invited the British back in to teach you how to say aluminum and spell aluminum, teach you how to play real football and for the general election.
[Stewart:] Absolutely. That's an excellent point.
[King:] Bring the British back what do you think?
[Stewart:] That's an excellent point. Look, the British are they're a people that deserve the empire that they lost.
[King:] Really.
[Stewart:] They're a tiny county. Well they've got nothing left. It's sad. They're pale, they have terrible food, they sit, the queen mum is, what, 108 now? They've got nowhere to turn. We need I think we should go back to them with a proposition: We'll be your acolytes once again. I feel bad for Britain.
[King:] You want a king?
[Stewart:] I wouldn't mind a king. I wouldn't mind a king and a queen and good punk music.
[King:] Minneapolis, hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry. How are you doing?
[King:] Hi.
[Caller:] My question for Jon is, do you think that the American public believes comedians more than traditional media when it comes to deciding what politics and politicians are really all about?
[King:] Good question.
[Stewart:] I would hope not. I don't know...
[King:] You guys are dumb, right?
[Stewart:] Yes, I mean, we're not trying to make a point, we're just goofing off. So...
[King:] Yes, but you do hit a lot of points. In not trying, you do hit a lot of points.
[Stewart:] Right. But the key thing you said there was not trying. That would be the key. I mean, I nobody comedy is mostly reactive, so it's hard you can't really make jokes about things if nobody understands the references to what I'm saying.
[King:] Does a comedian like the fact that he's going to have Governor Bush? Is that going to be fodder? You like that word?
[Stewart:] Well comedians I mean, yes, we love fodder, but if Bea Arthur was president that would be even funnier. Like, you know, it's not a question we had two choices: George Bush, Al Gore.
[King:] Yes, but I mean what kind of answer is that?
[Stewart:] We don't want tragedy, we want hypocrisy. Hypocrisy's a joy to pull the veneer off of. That's the fun for us. You know, a tragedy isn't. You know, no we're bratty, but we don't wish destruction upon the country. We're not anarchists.
[King:] What do you think Clinton's going to do Bill?
[Stewart:] I think he's going to spend some of that $8 million on hookers. Yes, honey, you stay up there and keep writing. I'll be down here. Nothing going no, that's not music you're hearing.
[King:] Orlando hello.
[Caller:] Hello.
[Stewart:] Is this Walt Disney?
[Caller:] Hi, Larry. Hi, Jon.
[Stewart:] Hi.
[Caller:] Why were you the only one reporting the news accurately?
[King:] You think he was the only one?
[Caller:] Yes, pretty much.
[Stewart:] I should ask for a raise. We just thought we were monkeys making jokes. I had no idea. We're just...
[King:] How long did you stay on election night?
[Stewart:] You know what it may be? We stayed on for an hour, and then I just called it.
[King:] That's all?
[Stewart:] Yes, I just called it at that point and then we left.
[King:] Wait a minute, I don't follow.
[Stewart:] We were having a rap party with quesadillas and stuff and I didn't want to miss it. So we left at 11:00.
[King:] Wait a minute, 11:00, called what, called a tie?
[Stewart:] No, no, no, we called it for Bush.
[King:] Wait a minute.
[Stewart:] We called it for Bush.
[King:] You left at 11:00 and called Bush the winner?
[Stewart:] Yes, and then left. You guys could have done the same thing. You would have saved yourself 36 days of pain. We called it for Bush, we went out, we had delicious quesadillas. They had guacamole was not tremendous, but the sour cream was fresh. And we ate and we danced and we partied and then we went back in the next day and Bush was president at Comedy Central. Look, the show before us is a little fat cartoon character that farts. I don't think I need to have anything right. Do I? The show before that is robots that beat each other up. Do I really need to have any mandate or dignity on my show?
[King:] I guess not. Do you like having Senator Dole?
[Stewart:] Senator Dole was tremendous.
[King:] Funny.
[Stewart:] And you know what was so nice about it is you got to see a side of him that he's always had a very dry wit, wonderful insight. And it was unfortunate for me to see him back in the more partisan role that he had to assume once the election controversy hit. Because I also think to a certain extent he enjoyed being able to speak his mind in that manner in a way that wasn't. Look, I think political parties I think you guys should never allow partisans on your shows anymore because it's we're carpet bombing the American people with rhetoric and propaganda. And we're not dumb.
[King:] That means no outspoken Democrats, no outspoken Republicans?
[Stewart:] Right, without somebody there with, like, a gong or something to pull them back.
[King:] Like "The Gong Show."
[Stewart:] Yes, or like you know what would be great what do they call them, those with electricity coming through them?
[King:] Shocks.
[Stewart:] Yes, on the testicles. And whenever they say...
[King:] On the testicles?
[Stewart:] Or however you want to do it. I just I watched "Rambo." That's how they did it there. But you don't have to do it that way.
[King:] So if a guy says something that's...
[Stewart:] Partisan.
[King:] Partisan.
[Stewart:] And propaganda...
[King:] The host holds the thing?
[Stewart:] ... that he clearly in his head doesn't believe, you should be able to hit the thing just and then they would have to talk real. Because they don't look, do we really think the Republicans thought that America needed closure on this? They thought a bad land deal on Arkansas was worth five years and $50 million. But the presidency, I think a month is enough people come on, it's not that important. You know, truth is good, but closure, you've got to have closure. You know, the hypocrisy on both sides. There's no doubt in my mind if this had been reversed...
[King:] Same thing.
[Stewart:] Same thing.
[King:] Both sides.
[Stewart:] So cop to it and let's move on and talk about something interesting. You guys are on for 24 hours a day.
[King:] Are you worried about Cheney's health?
[Stewart:] No, I'm not related to him. Why should I worry?
[King:] Well he's your vice president, he's a nice guy.
[Stewart:] Oh, yes no, I'm worried, because if somebody dies overseas I might have to go to the funeral. No, what am I worried about? The vice president might I mean, I hope for his sake and his family, I'm sure they love him very much.
[King:] You're not personally worried is what you're saying.
[Stewart:] I've never met the man.
[King:] He's a nice guy.
[Stewart:] I worry about my family and the heart attacks. We're Jews. We have goiters. I worry about that. But Cheney, I mean, I think he should take care of himself, because I do think he has a bit more insight into this whole process than, what's his name, Chuck E. Cheese, George W. Bush.
[King:] Chuck E. Cheese?
[Stewart:] I think it is you know, I think Dick Cheney there's definitely he's a guy who's kind of holding it together. So I would like him to stay in there for a while.
[King:] We'll be right back with Jon Stewart and more of your phone calls. Don't go away. [Begin Video Clip, "the Daily Show"]
[Sen.-elect Hillary Rodham Clinton , New York:] Sixty-two counties, 16 months, three debates, two opponents and six black pants suits later, because of you, here we are.
[Stewart:] Six black pants suits later? If you're wondering what happened to the first five black pants suits don't ask.
[Begin Video Clip, "the Late Show With David Letterman") David Letterman:] Here's Al Gore. This is a photograph taken of our vice president. This is one of this is the debate in St. Louis. October 17th. He looks all right there I mean, a little pink but he looks all right. This Al Gore, October 17, 2000. Here now is how our vice president looked yesterday. Ladies and gentlemen, you tell me, is this taking a toll on the guy?
[King:] Cruel with Jon Stewart in Los Angeles hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry, I want to ask Jon if he sees a possible connection between Reagan as president cutting the school lunch program for the poor and those children growing up to be voting age too weak to punch in a chad?
[King:] Oh, what you fell asleep, Jon?
[Stewart:] What did he say? What happened? I think that's exactly right.
[King:] You do?
[Stewart:] And I'm surprised it hasn't come out before.
[King:] In other words, the people denied school lunch...
[Stewart:] I'll tell you what, that guy's holding a grudge. Anybody who's still talking about the school lunch program that Reagan cut, that's holding a grudge.
[King:] That's carrying a bit much you.
[Stewart:] The next question is going to be, do you think when Eisenhower didn't have any fuel economy on the cars that...
[King:] San Bernardino hello.
[Stewart:] San Berdu.
[Caller:] Yes...
[Stewart:] Oh, this is our seventh caller. Don't they want tickets to something?
[Caller:] Yes, Jon?
[King:] It's not a disk jockey show. Yes, go.
[Caller:] My question is, in political humor is there a line that you don't cross?
[Stewart:] Yes, and we cross it often. It's the unfunny line. And we're often in there.
[King:] What are where do you not cross?
[Stewart:] Well, I don't know that there's any dogma. I don't know there's any hard and fast rule. I mean, I assume that I mean, what we're trying to do, like I say...
[King:] I'll give you an example.
[Stewart:] Oh, boy. This is going to be...
[King:] No, no, a thing.
[Stewart:] Is this something like the Dukakis thing in the debates not my mother?
[King:] No, no, no, this is serious. There's nothing funny about the death of a Missouri governor.
[Stewart:] Absolutely.
[King:] Nothing funny.
[Stewart:] Nothing funny about Columbine. We did nothing funny on Columbine.
[King:] Nothing funny about Columbine. Nothing funny the day after Chappaquiddick about Chappaquiddick.
[Stewart:] You know what? I did not have a show at that time so I don't know, but I might have.
[King:] So death you might have done something?
[Stewart:] Death in itself is not...
[King:] Unfunny?
[Stewart:] ... untouchable. No, death is one of the I mean, anything that's rife with emotion I mean, have you ever been to a wake? Death is one of the funniest things in the world. and that's used to heal. I mean, my grandfather passed away maybe about four or five months ago. And whoever runs funerals must know what they're doing, because you walk in and you're in agony. And you go through the service and you walk out and you sit with your family and you have a pastrami sandwich. And suddenly, remember that time and you laugh. And that's part of that is not death in itself is not unfunny. But there are tragedies in which you shouldn't make light of. But there are no hard and fast rules, I don't think.
[King:] Is this East Hampton I'm sorry, I hit the wrong one. East Hampton, New York hello.
[Stewart:] Is this from Radio Shack? This is nice.
[King:] I don't know.
[Stewart:] I've got to get me one of them.
[King:] East Hampton hello.
[Caller:] Hello, Larry. Hello, Jon.
[Stewart:] Nice to see you.
[Caller:] It's nice to see you, too. I have a question for you, Jon. I was wondering, are you going to miss Al Gore not being on the political scene anymore?
[Stewart:] I never really had a chance to form the attachment to Al Gore that I should have. And while I won't miss him, I'm hoping that we still keep in touch, pen pals, that sort of thing. What do you think is he going to go back to Tennessee? Do you think he moves back to his home state where he lost, or do you think he moves into a state where he didn't lose?
[King:] There are rumors the presidency of Harvard, his alma mater.
[Stewart:] Really?
[King:] Yes.
[Stewart:] See, that's not a bad gig. You know, when I got canceled on my talk show, I would have loved to have been president of Harvard. That's a great fallback. 1
[King:] Why didn't you apply?
[Stewart:] They have standards apparently. But you know what? I think if we re-look at my thing, SATs-wise, a lot of chads I didn't punch out completely that should have been. I think I could have had 1600 on that.
[King:] So you could have been.
[Stewart:] We couldn't count, though, because I missed the deadline, December 12. December 12 is the deadline for almost anything now can't go past that. I wanted safe harbor. Don't we all? Don't you want safe harbor? So many words, so many things that came out of this that we had no idea about.
[King:] I'll bet you'd like to be an elector.
[Stewart:] I would love I was coming in on the radio, they were talking about the panic situation, that three electors could defect.
[King:] And if they do...
[Stewart:] And if they do, that's it. We're done. Gore's the president, as though we're literally just lemmings. Like, well, OK, let me give you another scenario. What if 538 electors defect and it is Bea Arthur? Oh, my god. Are we stuck with her? Like, how ridiculous is this? Whatever happened to common sense, Larry? By the way, did you know I'm wearing suspenders underneath my sweater?
[King:] That's a little weird, isn't it? By the way, why are you hung up on this Bea Arthur thing?
[Stewart:] The funniest name I could think of.
[King:] We'll be back...
[Stewart:] You want to go with Ed Asner? What do you want to go with?
[King:] Bea Arthur's funnier a funnier name.for.
[Stewart:] I knew that. And you're a pro, and I defer to you.
[King:] We'll be back with more Jon Stewart. Don't go away. [Begin Video Clip, "the Tonight Show With Jay Leno"]
[Jay Leno:] You can't read the arrow? It's got your guy's name and an arrow. You can't follow that along? People used to be ashamed to be stupid. Now it gets you on TV. And people oh, the ballot. It's too hard. Did you see the ballot? How hard it can't be any harder than bingo. That's what those people do down there, right? They play bingo all day. I mean, oh, OK, so you're hitting Al Gore instead of B9. How hard is that?
[Begin Video Clip, "saturday Night Live") Hammond:] Americans still do not know who their next president will be. And until the votes in Florida are truly counted, we will never know. Is it me? Is it Governor Bush? Or is it Ralph Nader? Or is it Socialist Workers Party candidate David McReynolds? We will simply never know.
[Stewart:] That's who that's the loser of this election is Darrell Hammond, who works a year to perfect a beautiful Gore imitation. And when's he going to get to use it again.
[King:] What did you make of Lieberman? Did he carry the mantle of your people.
[Stewart:] I'm glad he didn't do anything dumb. First Jew to be vice president, we had to be very careful with that because, you know, he's carrying the mantle.
[King:] That's right. Were you worried?
[Stewart:] Yes, imagine he misspells potato. Suddenly, all the years of Jews being shrewd and smart, down the drain. We're dumb. We can't spell potato. He was carrying our name. If tripped, oh, look how clumsy the Jews are. We can't have that.
[King:] What about Ralph Nader? What about him? He cost him the election, didn't he?
[Stewart:] No, Ralph Nader didn't cost him the election. That's a hypothetical that is the conventional wisdom is Ralph Nader cost Al Gore the election. Ralph Nader was just another candidate for president just like Buchanan was on ticket, just like Hagelin. Ralph Nader just got a lot of votes from people who were disturbed. What happened was the Green Party got lazy. The Green Party got soft. They forget what it was like to live under Reagan and Bush for 12 years, and they took for granted that even though it was a moderate Democrat in the White House, it was still a Democrat, and so what they thought was they did what the religious right does. What about us? Come on, what about they should never cut down trees. They went out with their whole agenda, you know, paper, plastic, no paper. And they went out with the whole thing and they'll now get their comeuppance and they'll be in administration that will literally probably write you a ticket for not having smoke coming out of your exhaust pipe. That'll come over to you when you are smoking and go, you know, you can throw that on the ground.
[King:] We'll be back with our remaining moments with Jon Stewart. We'll put a wrap on all this and since he accurately forecasts the election at 11:00 p.m. on November 7th, we'll ask him to forecast some of the Cabinet right after this.
[Stewart:] The Electoral College vote has changed somewhat dramatically recently. Right now, it's G.W. Bush 217; Gore 173. The reason for that is Florida which had been in Al Gore's column has now been reassessed and is now considered too close to call. Apparently a lot of people had been at the what's the called early bird specials and had then oftentimes when too many people take up the handicap spaces near the booths, it's very difficult for other voters to get in there.
[King:] Before the predictions, a call day from Crestview, Florida. Hello.
[Caller:] Hi.
[King:] Hi.
[Caller:] Hi, Jon.
[Stewart:] Hello.
[Caller:] I'm, like, one your really big fans.
[Stewart:] Thank you very much. I've heard I'm huge in Crestview.
[Caller:] I know.
[King:] What's your question?
[Caller:] Everyone talks about you at school.
[King:] At school. I don't want to get into that. What's your question.
[Caller:] I was wondering, is it hard to make political jokes and not be on, like, either side?
[King:] You can't be for either side.
[Stewart:] No, that's not true I mean I think you most people can't hide their political.
[King:] I think you're a Democrat, Jon.
[Stewart:] I think that's probably correct. I think I would say I'm more of a socialist or an independent but, yes, I mean, no one would ever I think watching our show think that, boy, that guy is just leaning so far right.
[King:] But you would knock the Democrats...
[Stewart:] Oh, sure.
[King:] .. when a prime opportunity occurred.
[Stewart:] Oh, yes.
[King:] Like Mark Twain, humor comes first.
[Stewart:] No, I always you know me. I've got the Mark Twain thing. What did he say?
[King:] Humor comes first.
[Stewart:] Humor comes first, and I have that. I never met a man I didn't like that wasn't him, was it?
[King:] He said that. You didn't believe that, did you?
[Stewart:] No, I didn't. But yes, clearly. I mean, your personal prejudices always get involved in the job.
[King:] Predictions for the Cabinet.
[Stewart:] All right, here we go. Colin Powell is going to be secretary of state.
[King:] The man is amazing.
[Stewart:] Henry Kissinger, secretary defense.
[King:] Amazing.
[Stewart:] Moondoggy's going to be in charge of getting the ladies.
[King:] Moondoggy.
[Stewart:] Snoocher's got a car, so he's going to have to be in charge of getting the beer. I'm going to say, Boo-boo plays drums.
[King:] Boo-boo Bea Arthur.
[Stewart:] Bea Arthur is going to be asked secretary of the interior Rue McClanahan will accept.
[King:] Takes it, will accept.
[Stewart:] A lot of the "Golden Girls" are going to be in the Cabinet this time. You're going to be surprised when it comes. You're going to come to me and Secretary Getty Estelle, and you're going to be surprised.
[King:] What about Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican? Should he be...
[Stewart:] Schwarzenegger is now going to be considered our secret weapon and we will after watching his performance in "Terminator," like if we had another problem with Yugoslavia, we're just sending him in alone.
[King:] Alone.
[Stewart:] Alone, and he's just going to do one of those things where he blows up the country then turns to Kostunica and goes, I'll be back. That's our new foreign policy. No more putting our troops on the line. It's all about "Rambo." It's all about Schwarzenegger.
[King:] Are you anxiously awaiting the new...
[Stewart:] No.
[King:] You're not?
[Stewart:] Yes, I am because I'm a concerned American with the rule of law and judicial activism and I don't think that our country can take another constitutional crisis.
[King:] And so, as your final remark as our pundit of the nigh,t your overview of the election, your final...
[Stewart:] Here's my final remark Hal Bruno left this chair warm and I appreciate that. And you tell him I said so.
[King:] You like him, don't you.
[Stewart:] I just he's got the best face I've ever seen.
[King:] Hal Bruno.
[Stewart:] Hal Bruno has the most wonderful face and Schlessinger is a prince. I loved listening to him. Those are the guys that should always be on this show, and not the crazy...
[King:] You don't like the...
[Stewart:] I don't like the partisanship because the country is not that way. They keep saying, this country has to heal the partisan divide. We don't have a problem. All we did is go out and vote. You guys have the problem. Leave us out of it.
[King:] Thank you, as always, Jon.
[Stewart:] Seriously? Do I get a T-shirt or no?
[King:] Oh, you complained about that. You give away things.
[Stewart:] Do you have T-shirts?
[King:] What do you give way on your show?
[Stewart:] Hats.
[King:] Hats.
[Stewart:] We have very low-level guests. They're happy to get anything.
[King:] You give them a hat.
[Stewart:] Yes.
[King:] We don't give gifts.
[Stewart:] Do I get a mug?
[King:] No mug.
[Stewart:] I flew out here.
[King:] We paid for the flight.
[Stewart:] Is that true?
[King:] You didn't we pay for the flight?
[Stewart:] I really should call somebody because I don't if I had known that, I wouldn't have gone steerage.
[King:] We didn't pay for the flight.
[Stewart:] Fine.
[King:] OK, you went steerage.
[Stewart:] It's OK. I don't mind being in there with the Rottweilers and whoever else is down there. That's fine.
[King:] Jeff Greenfield is next. Tomorrow night, Colin Powell. Monday night, Katie Couric. Thanks for joining us. From Los Angeles, good night.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Time to talk movies now. And we're going to start with a movie that is good for anybody who was ever wishing he could read a woman's mind. Let's take a look. [Begin Video Clip, "what Women Want"]
[Helen Hunt, Actress:] Set meeting, Nike, women's division. Hi.
[Mel Gibson, Actor:] Hi. Well, I've been here five minutes. It looks like you've been here a year.
[Hunt:] Oh, yes. I'm compulsive. It's a problem. Why do I always feel like he's checking me out? I wonder what he's got up his sleeve.
[Gibson:] Great photographs.
[Hunt:] He has no clue they're all Margaret Burke-White.
[Gibson:] They're not all Margaret Burke-White are they?
[Hunt:] Yes, they are.
[Gibson:] Wow. It's a beautiful collection.
[Hunt:] Thanks. So how's it going?
[Kagan:] And a little quick scene there from the latest Mel Gibson movie; also Helen Hunt in there: "What Women Want." Peter Travers, remember him? He used to be here every Friday...
[Peter Travers, Movie Critic, "rolling Stone" Magazine:] Yes.
[Kagan:] Peter, good to see you.
[Travers:] Good to see you, Daryn.
[Kagan:] It's been a while.
[Travers:] You've got all that chad now. You know, we can move past it. Whoa.
[Kagan:] Yes, hanging chads. There you go. Let's get back to the movies. This one has intrigued me since I first saw the trailer in the movie house. This is a good one?
[Travers:] I think you're going to like this one, I really do, even though I'm here to tell you that no man will ever figure out what women want ever.
[Kagan:] And that's a good thing.
[Travers:] Yes. And Mel Gibson, even though he's given a special power in this movie because he has a little hair dryer accident that I won't go into...
[Kagan:] OK.
[Travers:] ... does get this power temporarily. And, you know, this is Mr. "Braveheart" in a movie where he plays a really chauvinistic ad exec who gets this power and gets to rise because of it. And then we get to see him try out women's products. I mean, there's Mel wearing stretch-top pantyhose, using depilatories, getting his legs waxed.
[Kagan:] Yes.
[Travers:] I mean, this is nothing we've ever seen before. He's looser than he's ever been on screen, funnier than he's ever been.
[Kagan:] And he carries it off?
[Travers:] Yes, he's really, really good. You know what happens, though? When it becomes a conventional romance, when he just falls in love with Helen Hunt and becomes a good guy again, I was less interested in that. I liked him when he was a rat.
[Kagan:] As I bad guy.
[Travers:] Yes.
[Kagan:] And you also got a little bit better idea of what we go through for you men.
[Travers:] Yes, you know, and we do not want to know, speaking for all men here. We do not want to know. The scariest scenes in this movie are when Mel is hearing what women actually do think of them. No.
[Kagan:] Pretty scary thought.
[Travers:] Yes.
[Kagan:] Let's move on to the next movie "Chocolat." It sounds tasty if nothing else. Listen to a little clip and then we'll talk about it.
[Travers:] OK. [Begin Video Clip, "chocolat"]
[Unidentified Male:] She was some kind of radical.
[Unidentified Male:] I heard she's an atheist. What's that? Don't know. Opening a chocolatery just in time for Lent.
[Unidentified Female:] Oh, yes, it does seem inappropriate. Chilly pepper and hot chocolate? It'll give you a lift. Tastes like something I had when I was a girl.
[Kagan:] "Chocolat."
[Travers:] I love the way you say that, Daryn. You know, it's very French. And you know the reason we call is chocolat and not chocolate is because it's set in France.
[Kagan:] Oh, OK.
[Travers:] Even though there are except for Juliette Binoche, everybody's either Judi Dench, who's English, or Johnny Depp, who's American all doing French accents, which is very strange. This movie is really about the power of the sensual power of chocolate, which Juliette Binoche's character sells with her daughter in this little French town to make people be less rigid in their lives, to really just open them up and not be intolerant anywhere.
[Kagan:] But is it good? Is it a good movie?
[Travers:] It's the chocolate looks good. You know, at the screening I was at, nobody gave me any so I'm bitter and resentful over that. And it has a lot of different tones in it and really wonderful performances. There's a little too much whimsy for me. The little girl, the daughter in this movie, talks to an imaginary kangaroo called Pontuf. That's going too far for me. I don't want to talk to any imaginary kangaroo.
[Kagan:] A bit too much. Peter, my sister calls me the other day from New York and she says, do you want to see because we're going to be spending Christmas together do you want to see "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon"? And I said, huh? What is that?
[Travers:] You want to see that.
[Kagan:] What is it?
[Travers:] There you go, huh, what is that? People are not going to be saying that come Oscar time because this movie, which is the strangest title, directed by Ang Lee, who gave us "Sense and Sensibility," mixes the martial arts genre. It's set in the 19th century with one of the sweetest, most romantic love stories you'll ever see.
[Kagan:] Really?
[Travers:] It stars the Hong Kong action king Chow Yun-Fat and Michelle Yeoh, who was a Bond girl in "Tomorrow Never Dies." And here's something that usually has no respect and people think it's all Jackie Chan, it's all boom-boom, like we're looking at now on the screen. But the fact is, this is the most touching, most romantic movie this year. And to me, humble little me is saying this is the best picture of the year. You and your sister and everybody else's sister has got to get out to this one.
[Kagan:] Wow. If she's not watching because sometimes she does watch from work Kallen, if you're watching, don't see that without me.
[Travers:] No.
[Kagan:] If not, I'll have to call her. Peter Travers, good to have you back on our regular crew.
[Travers:] Oh, it feels good.
[Kagan:] Our regular Friday date. We'll see you again next Friday.
[Travers:] OK, thanks, Daryn.
[Kagan:] Thanks a lot. Peter Travers, "Rolling Stone" magazine.

[John King, Guest:] Now on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS, a new year begins in Afghanistan with unfinished business from 2001 still high on the agenda.
[George Walker Bush, President Of The United States:] Anytime you get a person running, it means you're going to get him pretty soon. And same with Mullah Omar. It's just a matter of time.
[King:] Unprecedented security the ball will drop just hours from now in Times Square. One last hurrah for the man in charge.
[Mayor Rudy Giuliani , New York:] I just feel an enormous gratitude that the people of the city of New York have given me an opportunity to be their mayor for eight years. These are the most incredible people that I've ever known.
[King:] Millionaire Michael Bloomberg stands ready to take over.
[Michael Bloomberg , New York:] It's a daunting task to know what lies ahead.
[King:] From the war against terrorism to the economy, we'll look at what's ahead for the nation in 2002. I'm John King in for Wolf Blitzer. With hours left in 2001, President Bush is already setting optimistic goals for the year 2002. What will the new year bring for America's jobless? What missions will the U.S. military undertake? In a moment, a few predictions and news of troops in pursuit of Mullah Omar, the spiritual head of the Taliban. But first, the latest developments. President Bush says the country will remain on alert in the coming new year. In a chat with reporters in Crawford, Texas today, Mr. Bush spoke of a new American culture. The key word: vigilance. He also said the past year's hardships have made the country stronger. The hunt is heating up for Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar. The United States says that rival militias are moving on a city north of Kandahar where Omar is believed to be hiding. U.S. special forces are on the scene as well. The Pentagon says the target struck Sunday by U.S. bombers was a Taliban compound, not a village. A military spokesman says secondary explosions suggested the presence of weapons or fuel. Local Afghan witnesses claim today the attack killed scores of civilians. India says a Muslim militant arrested today in New Delhi was caught with explosives and detonators and may have been planning a New Year's bombing. Also, the Indian government welcomed the arrest by Pakistan of two militant leaders linked to the recent assault on the Indian parliament. India's foreign minister called Pakistan's move a step forward. Here in the United States, the latest phase of the effort to kill anthrax spores in the Hart Senate office building was completed earlier today. It may be a week before officials know if the delicate effort to scour the air conditioning and ventilation systems was successful. The hunt for Mullah Mohammed Omar could be heading to Bagram, an area northwest of Kandahar. U.S. officials have what sources call, quote, "credible reports" that Omar may be hiding in that area. CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr joins me now live with the latest Barbara.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Hi, John. Yes, Pentagon officials are confirming that anti-Taliban forces led by Gole Sharzay, one of the local anti-Taliban warlords, are moving towards the Bagram area, this area about a hundred miles or so northwest of Kandahar, and that U.S. special forces are going to move in with them. And these special forces, these U.S. commandos are going to do what they've been doing throughout the conflict. They will be on the ground with the anti-Taliban forces providing intelligence and targeting information to call in U.S. air strikes if those local anti-Taliban forces get a good fix on exactly where Omar is John.
[King:] And, Barbara, do they believe Omar has a large group of men who would fight with him and any indications at all that perhaps the elusive Usama bin Laden could be hiding in this area as well?
[Starr:] Well, exactly. There are growing intelligence reports that Omar is there and that there are hundreds if not perhaps thousands of Taliban with him, that these are the Taliban who fled Kandahar several weeks ago when it fell and simply disappeared into the local village and countryside structure of Afghanistan. And there are even reports, some reports that Usama bin Laden might be in the same general area under the protection of the same Taliban forces. But senior Pentagon officials say these are just one set of intelligence reports and that they honestly do not know where bin Laden is at this point.
[King:] Obviously, the use of special operations forces, one of the most sensitive issues at the Pentagon. Any indication at all of how many about how many U.S. troops we could be talking about, whether this is, as in the past it has been, perhaps a mix of military special operations and perhaps CIA and intelligence officials as well?
[Starr:] Well, you're right. The Pentagon's very sensitive about any use or any discussion of special forces. We really do not know how many are involved. Typically, over the last several weeks of this conflict, it has been a mix. It's been Army, perhaps some Air Force, perhaps some Navy, and it has been CIA paramilitary operatives on the ground. There's really no reason to think that it will be any different in this case. It's likely to be a mix of people.
[King:] Barbara Starr, a fabulous new edition for us here at CNN over at the Pentagon. Thank you very much.
[Starr:] Thank you, John.
[King:] President Bush said it again today. Wherever they are, both Mullah Omar and Usama bin Laden will not escape justice. CNN's Kelly Wallace is with Mr. Bush at his ranch in Crawford, Texas and joins us now with a look at the president's day Kelly.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, John, as you know, almost every time the president goes before reporters, the question comes up: Where is Usama bin Laden? And often: Where is Mullah Mohammed Omar? Well, today, no different. And Mr. Bush's answers the same. He did a short question-and-answer session with reporters here at the only coffee shop in the small town of Crawford, Texas. The president said there are no artificial deadlines here, that he remains patient, and he believes it is just, in his words, "a matter of time before the U.S. locates Omar." And Mr. Bush says the same holds true for the most wanted man of all, Usama bin Laden.
[Bush:] We're going to get him. And it's just a matter of when. You know, you hear all kinds of reports and all kinds of rumors. You know, you got people saying he's in a cave, people saying he's dead, people saying he's in Pakistan. And all I know is that he's running. And anytime you get a person running, it means you're going to get him pretty soon. And same with Mullah Omar. It's just a matter of time.
[Wallace:] And Mr. Bush also using this brief New Year's Eve appearance to outline what are going to be three challenges for his administration in the coming year. And the president sounding upbeat about handling all three challenges. Those include the campaign against terrorism where it goes from here, the economy, and also protecting homeland security.
[Bush:] And 2002, in my judgment, is going to be a great year. It's going to be a great year, because people are going to be able to find work again. It's going to be a great year because our military is going to do the job the Americans expect. It will be a great year because at home, we'll protect the American people.
[Wallace:] And on the economy, John, as you know, the president is expected in the coming days and weeks to continue to put pressure on the Democratically controlled Senate to pass a measure to help laid off workers and to stimulate the economy. Look for Mr. Bush to take that message on the road in the days and weeks ahead. And also, John, look for the economy to be a big focus of Mr. Bush's first State of the Union Address later this month John.
[King:] Kelly, about a year ago this time, I had a conversation with then President-elect Bush in which he said one of the mistakes his father made was when you build up political capital, you need to spend it. Any indication that as the president focuses on the economy, that he plans to be more specific, more pointed in his criticism of congressional Democrats, especially since with the dawn of the new year we will be in an election year?
[Wallace:] Well, definitely. We saw some of that stepped up criticism, John, in the last couple of weeks of December. We saw it in the president's radio address during the week of Christmas as well. Look for that to continue. And that's really going to be the message. The White House knows the president has a sky-high approval rating. The administration definitely looking forward to a couple of weeks while lawmakers are away in their districts for Mr. Bush to use the bully pulpit and to go ahead and to continue to put pressure on the Senate. John, you've heard the president say that as many as 300,000 jobs in his estimation could be at stake if the Senate fails to act. So look for the president definitely to step up the pressure. And as you know, John, White House advisers don't want the president to make the mistake his father made. Many believe he did not do enough to get the economy out of a recession in the early 1990s. So look for lots of attention on the economy in the weeks ahead.
[King:] All right, Kelly Wallace reporting from near the president's ranch in Crawford, Texas. And Kelly, remember the president said he'd be in bed by 10:00 tonight. We expect the same from you.
[Wallace:] We'll keep you posted.
[King:] All right. If 2001 has been a tough year for President Bush, the lingering fallout makes it likely the new year will be a major challenge as well.
[Bush:] First of all, I wish everybody...
[King:] One resolution: Eat your cheeseburgers, and this optimistic prediction.
[Bush:] 2002 is going to be a great year for America. And we will continue to pursue our mission in fighting terror. We'll work hard to make sure our economy rebounds. But most of all, the nation will continue to embrace the culture of compassion, which really flourished right after September the 11th.
[King:] The president faces a delicate balancing act in the new year. A year-end national survey by the Republican firm, Public Opinion Strategies, finds a distinct shift in the nation's political and emotional pulse. Asked whether they are more concerned about the economy or more terror attacks in the United States, a majority 53 percent of Americans now say it's the economy. Forty-three percent are more worried about terrorism.
[Bill Mcinturff, Republican Pollster:] Three months later, they are beginning to absorb what happened, and they're moving on. And there are a lot of other issues that concern them. They're concerned about the economy. They're concerned about healthcare costs. They're concerned about wanting a drug benefit from Medicare. And they're going to want to deal with those issues.
[King:] The poll found the public split when asked which political party has the best plan for fixing the economy. Forty-five percent say Republicans, 42 percent, the Democrats. And what about the nation's emotional state? Large majorities of Americans say they are still sad, angry, disgusted and outraged. Those numbers have not fallen much since late September just after the terrorist strikes.
[Stanley Greenberg, Democratic Pollster:] I think the country's changed. I mean, the question is whether it's sustainable over a long period. The people are you know, they're more reflective, they're more, you know, serious. They think about, you know, spending time with family, getting their own personal priorities right.
[King:] But there's also evidence that Americans are less anxious as 2001 gives way to 2002. A third or fewer of those surveyed reported feeling nervous, scared or depressed. That is a big improvement from late September just after the attacks. Joining us now to discuss the mood of the nation and how all this will affect the political battles of the year 2002, from Seattle, Democratic political consultant, Frank Greer. Frank, a happy New Year to you.
[Frank Greer, Democratic Consultant:] Happy New Year.
[King:] Let me begin by asking you this question. Back in 1991, 1992, you were a key player in a campaign that had the slogan, "It's the economy, stupid," that knocked the first President Bush from office after he came out of the Gulf War with sky high approval ratings. Some already trying to draw a parallel to this President Bush. Premature to make that assessment?
[Greer:] I think that this president has really learned the lessons of his father's failure to address the economy. And he's certainly talking a good line on the domestic front. He's talking about improving the economy and getting people back to work. I'm not sure that his policy prescriptions are going to fly, because if you look at any of the other polling and it was interesting the polls that you had there. Any of the other polling also says that his tax cut, most of which goes to the wealthiest individuals and reduces the tax rate for the wealthiest individuals, is not something the public supports. They don't think that's the way to get the economy moving. They'd much rather have something that says, "Let's provide unemployment insurance. Let's provide job training to help people get back to work." So it will be a battle, and I think at least he knows, unlike his father, that he has to address it, that even with sky high approval ratings, he cannot ignore the economy. If he does so, he does so at his political peril.
[King:] So you believe and in the spirit of the holiday season, give the president some free advice from the Democrats. You believe he must be specific and very focused on these domestic issues. You do not believe, as some say, that perhaps he should focus on the war, focus on homeland security, and perhaps leave the domestic agenda to the Congress, if you will. Let it be the president focusing on the war, that Congress will deal with the home front.
[Greer:] There were two elections this year for governor: one in New Jersey, one in Virginia. Voters made a very clear distinction. They elected Democrats in both of those races. They thought that the Democrats, each candidate McGreevey and also Mark Warner in Virginia had the best economic plan, the best plan to make America strong at home. And so they made a clear distinction. The support for the president in each of those states was at over 85, 90 percent. But yet, they decide that the Democratic candidate had a better prescription primarily on education, because education was the key issue before September 11th, education and job training, getting the economy moving were the key issues after September 11th. And the poll that you just shared with us said that people are much more concerned about their economic insecurity than they are about the threat of terrorism. The nation is indeed united behind the president around his war against terrorism. But here on the home front, they're going to be looking, I think, for policy prescriptions that really help workers, help people get back to work. And tax cuts for the rich, which is their primary prescription, we've already $1.6 trillion in tax cuts. It didn't seem to help. So I think most Americans are saying, "We don't need more tax cuts for the rich. What we need is some job training, some education, some real commitment." And it's interesting, the president did recognize that one of the last things he wanted to get through this session of Congress, John, was his education bill for national testing and for national accountability. And I think it's because he politically is very astute about realizing that education is the key issue for the future, not just fighting the war on terrorism.
[King:] And quickly, Frank, is there a risk for Democrats in this new season as they run if they're too critical of the president, that perhaps there will be a backlash? How do they walk that line? Criticize the Republican agenda, as you say, is an open field for them without being seen as criticizing a wartime president.
[Greer:] I think there's a risk for Democrats and a risk for Republicans as well. The risk for Republicans is that many in Congress are complacent thinking that the president is so popular, somehow, that's going to help their chances in the congressional races and the Senate race and the gubernatorial races. I don't think that's going to be the case. In Virginia and New Jersey, the two races that we worked on, proved that not to be the case. Now Democrats, I think, do face a real risk. And yet, Democrats have been able to unite behind support for the president's policies in the war against terrorism and still make a distinction on the domestic front on the policies they think are best for the country: improving education, providing job training, providing unemployment benefits, providing better healthcare for the American people. So I think that the public is going to trust Democrats on the home front if they offer real solutions to the real problems and provide for that kind of security, homeland security that has to do with their pocketbooks and their future.
[King:] Frank Greer, we will discuss this again with you as the election year heats up. In the meantime, thank you very much for joining us today.
[Greer:] Happy New Year, John.
[King:] Happy New Year to you, Frank. Take care. A very tumultuous year has ended. And though the date will change, the year 2001 can hardly be erased or forgotten. The country remains at war, both at home and abroad. And here on New Year's Eve, there's no end in sight. Months since September 11th, the clean up continues at the site where the massive trade center once stood. Among all the other changes this country has seen, the New York City skyline is among the most poignant. Still, some things are constant. And if it's New Year's Eve, that means New York City will find a way to celebrate, and much of the country will tune in to watch. CNN's Deborah Feyerick is in Times Square, the scene of much anticipation, and this year, much security Deborah.
[Deborah Feyerick, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, John, thousands of people have already begun to gather here at the crossroads of New York. That is Times Square where Broadway and 7th Avenue intersect. Let me show you sort of the crowds. You can take a look down there. You may be able to make out, they are all penned in there. Security here is very, very tight. In order to get into those pens, they are passing through a police checkpoint. The police are actually frisking several of the people who have come in. We understand there are also metal detectors at other entry points along here in order to get into this particular area. Now the barricaded pens all sectioned off. The police have gotten very, very good at crowd control. In fact, I think here in New York City, they really brought it up to the level of a science. I am joined now by Cristyne Nicholas, who is president and CEO of New York City, Inc. You said that compared to last year, the crowd is not as big. Explain.
[Cristyne Nicholas, Nyc Tourism Chief:] Well, it's not as big at this time, but we expect that by midnight, you're going to have about 500,000 people or so in Times Square. And there are a lot of parties going on all over the city, and I think there is a more reflective crowd this year. A lot of people are staying home or going to parties. There's a great race in Central Park at midnight which I'll be running. And the great news is that they have 5,000 people running, which his more than last year. So people are in the mood to, you know, ring in the New Year and move on and really I think it's wonderful, though, that we have such a crowd here today and that they are going to be reflective and honor those that have lost their lives on September 11th.
[Feyerick:] Now you have you're in charge of tourism here in the city, and you say that it is not actually doing too well right now. What is the situation?
[Nicholas:] Well, we're still down about 10 percent from where we were last year, and even more so when you look at the price point. New York City is probably the most affordable city right now to come visit. That's an invitation. But the bottom line is we're going to be losing a lot of money. We've already lost a lot of jobs. Tourism in New York City supports 300,000 jobs; it brings in $25 billion into our economy. So it's a serious industry and it is suffering.
[Feyerick:] OK, Cristyne Nicholas, thank you very much for joining us. And, of course, the reason it is suffering is because of the September 11th attack. This will be a very reflective New Year's Eve. As the ball goes up, it will have Waterford crystal on it. On that Waterford crystal, engraved are the names of countries as well as rescue organizations and flights of all of the victims who perished in the September 11th attacks. The mood here at Times Square decidedly patriotic. There will be red, white and blue balloons, also confetti and pom-poms. You may be able to hear a roar going up in the crowd just behind me as people get excited. The ball is actually going to be going up at about 6:00. And at that time, there's going to be a bell ringing ceremony across New York City. Those bells ringing in memory of the people who lost their lives here. Again, not as many people turning up, at least not at this hour as there usually is. Security is very, very tight, and that is underscoring the mood throughout this city. You have snipers on the rooftops. There are metal detectors, also, officers with radioactivity detectors just in case anything should happen. They will get wind of that very, very quickly and be able to take whatever steps and whatever measures are necessary. But you've got 6,700 police officers out both in uniform and also undercover. That in order to make sure that this celebration goes off without a hitch John.
[King:] Deborah Feyerick ringing in the New Year in Times Square. We'll check in with you as the night continues. Thank you very much. And let's check now stories making news around the world. It's already 2002 in Australia. About one million revelers gather at Sydney's harbor for a firework celebration billed as one of the world's largest. Officials decided to go ahead with the display despite a fire ban due to bush fires near the city. In Tokyo, thousands of balloons were released at the stroke of midnight to mark the arrival of the New Year. The New Year also was welcomed with 108 gongs of temple bells. Traditionalists believe each ring washes away a trouble for the upcoming months. China also welcomed the New Year with a countdown and fireworks. President Xiang Zemin marked New Year's Eve by counting the blessings of 2001. They include China winning the right to host the 2008 Olympics and becoming a member of the World Trade Organization. And thousands of people filled Moscow's Red Square to ring in 2002 with fireworks. Russian president, Vladimir Putin, delivered a New Year's address broadcast at midnight in each of the country's regions. He told Russians the years of chaos caused by the fall of the Soviet Union are now behind them. And just moments ago, New Year's comes to Syntagma Square in Athens, Greece, the site of next summer's Olympics. Count on CNN to bring you the complete countdown to 2002 this New Year's Eve. Coverage of the celebrations around the country beings tonight at 11:00 p.m. Eastern, 8:00 p.m. Pacific. In a moment, steps toward preventing war between India and Pakistan. And later, the future of the war on terror and the potential battleground of 2002. Also, a new year for New York. What pitfalls await the city's new leader? For the first time in weeks, there's a small sign of a thaw in relations between India and Pakistan. The leaders of two groups India accuses of attacking its parliament earlier this month are under arrest now in Pakistan. India says that's a step in the right direction. CNN's Michael Holmes has more from New Delhi.
[Michael Holmes, Cnn Correspondent:] Some significant developments here in New Delhi today. The first stems from Pakistan's arrest of the leaders of two groups which India says are responsible for the attack on the Indian parliament building on December 13th, the attack that left 13 people dead and sparked this current crisis. President Pervez Musharraf announcing the arrest on Monday of Hafiz Saeed. He's the leader of the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba organization, and that moves follows the arrest in turn of Molana Masood Altah. He is the leader of the Jaish-i-Muhammad group, another of the terrorist organizations placed on the international list. Several members in fact, we understand two dozen or so members of both groups also taken into custody. Everyone, of course, waiting for how India would react to the detentions. And today, after a meeting of the cabinet committee on security, the external affairs minister, Jaswant Singh, came out and in essence said that if true, this was a step in the right direction. In diplomatic speak, it was a significant thing. It was the first time we've heard some really positive comments from the Indian government that they approve of at least some of the moves made by Pakistan, although Mr. Singh did add that India fully expected that to continue to insist on the complete elimination of cross border terrorism in Jamoo and Kashmir. Finally, police here in New Delhi have just announced that they have arrested what they say is a member of the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba organization, one of those two terrorist groups. Arrested him at a bus terminal here in New Delhi. And according to police, carrying 4.5 kilograms of explosives, detonators and other equipment. They say that he was planning to disrupt New Year's Eve celebrations here in New Delhi tonight. Michael Holmes, CNN, New Delhi.
[King:] President Bush today praised Pakistan for, quote, "cracking down hard on Islamic militants" and said the arrests are a good sign. Earlier, Pakistan's foreign ministry spokesman said his country would be glad for a dialogue with India. CNN's Tom Mintier is in Islamabad, Pakistan and filed this report.
[Tom Mintier, Cnn Correspondent:] The crackdown against Islamic militant groups in Pakistan couldn't have come at a better time, at a time when tensions between India and Pakistan were at their height. The arrests of nearly 30 people in Karachi and the closing down of three offices of the Islamic militant groups couldn't have really basically prevented anything from happening, but it was something that India was looking for. And it was something that President Pervez Musharraf said he had as a high priority domestically here in Pakistan.
[Pres. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan:] I would like to eradicate any form of terrorism from the soil of Pakistan. Now this was one purpose to take all the politicians along with whatever I want to do inside Pakistan to improve our domestic environment, establish the writ of the government, and avoid this extremism and intolerance in our society.
[Mintier:] On Monday at the foreign ministry, they were a bit cagey about the timing, saying that this was an ongoing campaign against terrorism and against the militants here in Pakistan, saying that it was something that they have continued to do and would continue to do. Along the border between Pakistan and India, tensions do remain high. Everyone is now looking forward to what might happen in Katmandu. A south Asian summit there will provide the opportunity if it is accepted for the two sides to get together and talk. There is already a possibility at the foreign ministry level that the foreign ministers of both India and Pakistan will sit down for a meeting there. But there are no promises made. Up higher on the heads of state level, it's quite possible that that meeting will not take place. President Musharraf, when asked if he would speak with Prime Minister Vajpayee, said he will sit across the table but he may be looking in another direction. Tom Mintier, CNN, Islamabad, Pakistan.
[King:] Tom Mintier is just one of many CNN reporters in India, Pakistan and the surrounding region. To see where our other correspondents are and what they're reporting, click on the "On the Scene" box at cnn.com. AOL keyword is CNN. Let's check some other stories from our news wire. Argentina's congress plans to convene tomorrow to decide who will lead the country after the resignation of interim president, Adolfo Rodriguez Saa. The man next in line for the presidency also quit. Officially, Rodriguez Saa is still in charge until congress accepts his resignation. Texas is ringing in the New Year with some wintry weather. Icy conditions created a nightmare for some drivers in the Lubbock area. The National Weather Service has issued a winter storm warning through the Panhandle today where temperatures are in the teens. And clean-up crews in Buffalo are spending New Year's Eve clearing more roads of more snow. About seven feet of the white stuff fell on the city since Christmas Eve, or about 90 percent of the average snowfall Buffalo normally gets for the entire winter season. More snow is forecast through New Year's Day. When we come back, we'll update today's developments including new word from our Pentagon correspondent, Barbara Starr, of a U.S. casualty in the war in Afghanistan. Also, where will the war take us in the year 2002? Later, a send off for a big city mayor and what his successor will need to succeed. In a moment: the future of the war on terrorism first, the latest developments. The hunt is heating up for the Taliban leader, Mohammed Omar. The United States says that rival militias are moving on a city about 100 miles north of Kandahar, where Omar is believed to be hiding. U.S. special forces are on the scene as well. President Bush says the country will remain on alert in the coming new year. In a chat with reporters in Texas today, Mr. Bush spoke of a new American culture the key word: vigilance. He also said the past year's hardships have made the country stronger. And the Pentagon says the target struck by U.S. bombers was a Taliban compound, not a village. A military spokesman says secondary explosions suggest the presence of weapons or fuel. Local Afghan witnesses claimed today the attack killed scores of civilians. We want to take you back to the Pentagon now for some late- breaking news about U.S. special forces under fire in Afghanistan. CNN's Barbara Starr is there. Barbara, what's the latest?
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Hi, John. The latest is that the Pentagon is confirming a U.S. special operations soldier was shot earlier today. It is a non-life- threatening wound. He is getting medical treatment. What happened was, a group of special forces soldiers were riding in a vehicle near Jalalabad. They came under enemy fire. They returned fire. And a quick-reaction force of other special forces quickly swooped in. And whoever was doing the shooting fled the scene John.
[King:] Barbara, any indication of that, of who was doing the shooting? Do they believe this was a pocket of Taliban forces or just some local militia, perhaps, unhappy with the presence of U.S. troops?
[Starr:] Well, they really don't know, because whoever was doing the shooting did flee the scene. But it could be either of those. There are pockets of Taliban resistance throughout the region. And, in that area, there are a lot of local people who are not thrilled with the U.S. presence.
[King:] And this in a very different part of the country from the operation we were discussing earlier near Baghran, perhaps the search for Mullah Omar this obviously elsewhere in Afghanistan. Nothing to connect the two, correct?
[Starr:] That is correct.
[King:] All right, Barbara Starr, with the latest from the Pentagon, thank you very much. Now, much of the fighting in Afghanistan is winding down, but the war on terrorism continues. To look at the possible direction the war could take in the new year, I'm joined by retired General Wesley Clark, the former NATO commander. General, nice to see you today.
[Ret. General Wesley Clark, Cnn Military Analyst:] Thank you, John. Nice to be here.
[King:] Indications the Marines will be switched out an announcement, actually the Marines will be switched out, the 101st Airborne going in. What does that tell us, anything at all about the focus of the military campaign on the ground?
[Clark:] Well, it says we are going to be there for some time in Afghanistan. And we are going to use Kandahar as a base for humanitarian assistance, probably a base for additional forces if necessary to come in, and maybe even opening it up commercially down there at the airfield. And that's what that task force in the 101st will be capable of doing.
[King:] A search under way, at this hour, in fact, involving some special forces from the United States, as well as local militias in the Baghran area, about 100 miles or so northwest of Kandahar, looking for Mullah Omar, some say perhaps even Osama bin Laden. What do we know about the territory there and the region there and any cooperation the United States would be getting from local militias? This, of course, being not Northern Alliance territory, but another part of the country.
[Clark:] We know that we have had contact, through our special forces, with tribes in the area. We know that some of these tribes are working with the special forces. We know others have been allied with the Taliban. We have got intelligence reports apparently that suggest that Mullah Omar may be there, perhaps even Osama bin Laden. And so now it's matter of reacting to the intelligence. That means going out there with forces on the ground, making sure you have got U.S. eyes and ears with them and the ability to bring in air support, if you need it. And then it will be the typical process, I think, of negotiation and thrust of bluff and threat back and forth as we go into this area. And we will see what is there.
[King:] It is often confusing, General, and it must be frustrating to the American people to hear: Well, Osama bin Laden might be dead. Perhaps he's alive and still hiding in Tora Bora. Perhaps he snuck into Afghanistan. Now we are saying perhaps he's in a completely separate part of the country hiding with Mullah Omar frustrating and confusing to the American people. What about as a military commander? Take us back through your experience. What do you do when you get such conflicting intelligence, that he is perhaps one place, he is perhaps another place? How does that affect how you plan and send troops into combat on the ground?
[Clark:] You have to have multiple capabilities to react to intelligence. And, in this case, we are using probably only a half- dozen U.S. special forces troops and the tribes that are mostly resident in the area to react to this. The commanders want to keep a very balanced disposition. They want to look very skeptically at all intelligence reports that come in. They want to look for confirmation of the intelligence before they react to it. They want to be able to react in a timely fashion. If it is very perishable intelligence, if it looks very credible, then we react in one way. If it is not as timely, not as credible, then we react in another. But the big thing is, keep the emotions on an even keel. Don't let the troops get frustrated. Don't let the command get frustrated. This is part of the day-to-day doing business in Afghanistan. And we are going to see a lot of these reports.
[King:] And if Mullah Omar is indeed hiding in this Baghran area, you say a process of negotiations. If he has a sizable contingent around him that is willing to fight to protect him, do you believe that the U.S. would send in more forces? And would the emphasis be on killing him or do they want him politically? Do they want him to be interviewed?
[Clark:] Well, I think that what has happened after 20 years of warfare in that country is that most people have learned that martyrdom is a bad choice. And so, if there is resistance there to the U.S. forces and their anti-Taliban allies, then more anti-Taliban tribes will come in and more U.S. capabilities will be deployed, probably airpower, because a few soft troops on the ground will probably be enough. And the show of the force of the airpower is going to be enough, I think, to persuade the pro-Taliban elements that they don't want to be the targets of those bombs. And so it will be a process of negotiations. Maybe there will be some shooting. But, ultimately, they won't want to die. And Mullah Omar will either surrender, or maybe he wasn't there in the first place. And no doubt, if he was, he will try to buy his way out. But that's what the negotiation has to prevent. And that is what the forces on the ground have to be strong enough and alert enough to stop.
[King:] CNN military analyst, retired General Wesley Clark, thank you for your thoughts today. And a happy New Year to you, sir.
[Clark:] Thank you.
[King:] Let's continue our look now at how the war may change in the new year. I'm joined here in Washington by defense policy analyst David Isby. David, let's pick up where the general just left off. Mullah Omar, if he is there...
[Isby:] Baghran.
[King:] Baghran what do we know about the terrain? And let's take a look let's show our viewers on the map, if we can, we are talking about an area here. U.S. Marines down here, but we're told they're not involved, that it is special operations.
[David Isby, Defense Policy Analyst:] Right, upstream from Kandahar. And this is an area, certainly, where there was one of Mullah Omar's first successes. In fact, the local headman is known locally as the "Mad Mullah," raised Abdul Wali. He is an old friend of Mullah Omar's. This guy has his own hard-line Islam. He will not breathe the same air as Westerners, even converts to Islam so very much a hard-core, fanatical kind of guy. He and Mullah Omar beat up their neighbor, Masim al-Kunzada in the Helmand Valley, who was another local ruler and a poppy grower back when the Taliban was just starting out. So he and the locals go way back, even though that is not where he himself is from. This has been always the second choice of where Mullah Omar might be hiding. The other alternative, and I think the more likely one, is
[King:] Well, if he is here, what are we talking about? Is this a place where he would be hiding in a residential area? Or are there bunkers and cave complexes like we saw in Tora Bora?
[Isby:] He has to have some sort of caves, some sort of resistance. There was a lot of resistance activity there in the war against the Soviets. So they probably built on that. You have to have a place for your water, your food. So he has got these static bases that he would probably operate out of one, rather than just specific caves. So it's not simply picking him off a street are or out of a house. He is likely in a more hardened facility.
[King:] And General Clark was talking about perhaps negotiating. You say madman fanatical people. Is this the type of crowd that would negotiate? Or do you think they would fight to the death for Omar?
[Isby:] The local leader may be his friend, but many of other people, like you said, in the Taliban have since come over. I don't know how much of his people would defend him. He may still have some of the Arabs who have been loyal to him in the past. They are likely to be fanatical. If he was in
[King:] A great deal of discussion over the past couple of months, as this military campaign unfold, is, this is a new war. This shows how the United States military and the intelligence communities need to adapt to the new world. In the last few days, we say Osama bin Laden might be in a cave. He might be in Pakistan. He might be dead. Now he might in Baghran. Is that evidence that there is still failures in U.S. intelligence or does that kind of confusion just come with the territory?
[Isby:] I think so. I certainly think finding one individual is always very hard. And, indeed, when we focus on one individual, even ones as dangerous as Mullah Omar or Osama bin Laden, we look we lose the larger picture, as happened in Somalia in 1992, when we demonized, in effect, Colonel Aidid, and set out to quote, unquote "get" Colonel Aidid, which undercut our overall policies. So it's very hard to find, as they say, one particular flee on the dog.
[King:] David Isby and we thank you for your thoughts again.
[Isby:] Thank you.
[King:] And a happy New Year to you, sir.
[Isby:] You, too.
[King:] OK. The change that will jingle in 300 million pocketbooks next: how Europe is counting on its new money. The new year will change the face of finance across much of Europe. About 300 million people start using the euro at midnight. There are twelve European nations in the euro zone. CNN's Richard Quest has more from Frankfurt, Germany.
[Richard Quest, Cnn Correspondent:] An ordinary pretzel that costs two euros: my first purchase with the new European single currency. With just hours to go before 300 million Europeans find a new currency available, so the final preparations are being made. Cash machines from Finland to Portugal and all points in between are being loaded with the new bank notes. Coins have been distributed, more than 50 billion of them. And, after midnight tonight, it will be the new currency that will be in use over the continent of Europe. That is except for Britain, Sweden, and Denmark, three European nations that have decided to stay out for the time being. Everything is expected to go smoothly. The preparations have taken years to put in place. Even so, no chances are being taken in these last few hours before the euro arrives. Richard Quest, Frankfurt, Germany.
[King:] Back in the United States, business people and tourists will also be bracing for Europe's new financial era. You can learn more about the euro by logging on to CNN.com. Take an interactive look at the new paper currency and coins and chart their value with the online currency converter. The AOL keyword, once again, is CNN. In stories on the "Newswire" today: Smoke continues to blanket Sydney, Australia, as more than 100 brushfires ring the city. People are being urged to remain calm as more than 5,000 firefighters and residents try to control the fires. The toll of a deadly weekend fire in Lima, Peru continues to rise as firefighters find more bodies today; 296 people are dead. And about 150 others were injured. As searches continue, the death toll is expected to rise. Exploding fireworks touched off the blaze Saturday. And a church group in New Mexico set a fire Sunday, burning books about Harry Potter, calling them Satanic. The Christ Community Church of Alamogordo also put other books and magazines on the fire. Protesters gathered across the street chanting, "Stop burning books." The city survived a terrorist attack and has also been hit by an economic recession. We'll look at what it will take for New York to recover and prosper next year and later, a unique tribute in Times Square. A live picture here you see New York mayor for a few more hours: Rudy Giuliani, this his final walk from city hall as the mayor of the nation's largest city Rudy Giuliani shaking hands here. You see key aides and supporters around him. He is mayor until midnight, this his final departure from city hall. You hear the chants, you see the hugs for the man who became a national political presence in this country in the wake of the September 11 attacks in New York. As we watch the mayor, let's bring in Joel Siegel. He is the senior political editor for the "New York Daily News." He joins us from New York. We are watching the mayor say goodbye here, Joel. What will his political legacy be for the city of New York?
[Joel Siegel, "new York Daily News":] Well John, I think his biggest legacy will be the fact that he showed New York is in fact a governable city. I think, when he came into office, there were real question whether there were just too many problems and the job was just too imposing, and that you elect a mayor to deal with one problem and then another problem arises, and the mayor is not able to deal with that. The mayor was able to sort of put faith back in city government. And nowhere is that more apparent than in the issue of crime and public disorder. The crime rate, of course, has gone done markedly under Mayor Giuliani. And the sense of disorder that had occurred in the city, of panhandlers, squeegee men, those problems, so-called quality-of-life issues, have been largely resolved on his watch.
[King:] And, Joel, does this mayor think he has a future in national Republican politics? He's a moderate, some would say a liberal Republican if you take him out of the city and the state of New York and put him out in the country. But, obviously, he has won national acclaim for his performance. Does he have his eyes on office outside of the state?
[Siegel:] Well, I think deep down inside he would he like to serve again. The question is where and when. Unfortunately for the mayor, there is nothing available here in New York. Both Senate seats are filled for now. And Chuck Schumer is not up for another two years. He is pretty popular. Hillary Clinton has four years. Government Pataki, a Republican, is running for reelection next year. That would be a logical step for the mayor. So, right now, when he is hot, politically speaking, there is no place for him to go. And he has always had sort of an up-and-down relationship with the national Republicans. He is more to the left on many of the social issues that are of concern to national Republicans. And many Republicans still are, let's say uneasy by the fact that he endorsed Mario Cuomo, the Democratic liberal governor, back in 1994. I think many people sort of have gotten over that, but right now there is no place for him to go.
[King:] A larger-than-life figure, if you will. You see him shaking hands, hugging here as he exits.
[Siegel:] Right.
[King:] Joel, what about the future for New York? Let's start, No. 1, with the man who, in a few short hours, will be mayor, Michael Bloomberg. What awaits him?
[Siegel:] Well, I think the biggest problem is fiscal. New York City faces a budget deficit estimated at about $4 billion for the year that begins July 1. The economy is a problem in New York state and throughout the nation, but it's a particular problem in New York City. First of all, the September 11 attacks basically evaporated thousands of jobs that have not yet come back. Many companies have temporarily left the city for New Jersey, Connecticut, and the New York suburbs. And, secondly, tourism is way down. And that's also an important and vital source of revenue for New York City. So the economy is really going to be mayor-elect Bloomberg's biggest challenge, I believe.
[King:] A wave again there from Rudy Giuliani, as we watch him exit. Joel Siegel, some politicians, though, benefit from low expectations, President Bush, for one. Many, when he came to Washington, thought perhaps he was not up to the job, period, and was a governor with little experience in international affairs. Now he gets high marks. Any sense in New York that perhaps Michael Bloomberg again, as we watch the mayor here go by an honor guard any chance that they think Michael Bloomberg might benefit from low expectations, if you will?
[Siegel:] Well, absolutely. That is a very good point. You know, we know less about the new mayor coming in than I think any political figure that we have elected here in New York, whether it's state or local. Michael Bloomberg was a newcomer to the political scene. He was a largely unknown businessman, a wildly successful businessman, but unknown to the general public. And his image during the campaign was largely shaped through carefully choreographed TV ads, which put him in the best possible light. He can't rely on that now when he takes office. It's sort of him the real Michael Bloomberg is going to emerge. And we are not quite sure what that will be. He was elected in part because he was a businessman, is a businessman, and people think that New York needs a businessman right now to deal with the economic problems. So, if can he deal with those problems effectively, that's to his credit. If he can't, it's to his detriment. And, of course, one issue is that a lot of the economic problems are really beyond the reach of a mayor to deal with. They are state in scope or national in scope.
[King:] We just saw the mayor give a high-five to his police commissioner. Joel Siegel, senior political correspondent for the "New York Daily News," thank you for your thoughts and insights on the farewell, if you will, of a man who has become a national figure, as well as the New York City mayor, Rudy Giuliani. You see him there, his last walk out of city hall as mayor of New York, ending his two terms as mayor, ending his tenure at a time of crisis for his city and the country. Let's go now to New York back to New York and get a preview of "LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE," which begins at the top of the hour. Jan Hopkins is sitting in for Lou Jan.
[Jan Hopkins, "lou Dobbs Moneyline":] Thanks, John. Coming up "
[Moneyline":] thousands of law enforcement officers, including sharpshooters on rooftops, in a high state of alert in New York's Times Square this evening. We will show you celebrations in Paris, Berlin and, of course, Times Square. A U.S. special operations soldier is shot in Afghanistan. And the Pentagon believes it may have a lead in the search for the Taliban's notorious leader. We will go live to the Pentagon. And the new year also brings about a significant change in the way 12 European countries will count their change that and much more straight ahead now back to John King in Washington.
[King:] In a moment: the countdown in Times Square that will not ring in the New Year. Just moments from now, bells will begin ringing throughout New York City to remember the people who died in the September 11 attacks. That's all the time we have on this edition of WOLF BLITZER REPORTS. I'll be back in one hour with the "War Room." Author David Halberstam, "Newsweek"'s Evan Thomas and former White House aide David Gergen join me. That's 7:00 Eastern, 4:00 Pacific. I'm John King in Washington a happy New Year to you. CNN's coverage of America's new war continues now with "LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE," which begins right now.

[John King, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Also developments in the investigation, the criminal investigation of last week's terrorist attacks. Our national correspondent Eileen O'Connor joins us here now in Washington with the latest Eileen.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, John, FBI, ATF and other federal agents continue to search databases, run background checks and roundup people they would like to talk to. Over 100 are currently in custody on possible visa violations, and there are nearly 200 more on a watchlist. They've been going through apartment buildings, motels, other things. They've actually Been over many of these things with a fine-toothed comb, and in fact using forensic scientist to try to make sure they match up names and faces. All of this to prove the link between the suspected hijackers and Osama bin Laden, who the president says is behind these attacks. The Attorney General and FBI director, touring the crash site in Pennsylvania yesterday, said that Americans need to be vigilant still against the possibility of further attack. The FBI director also spoke of law enforcement's frustration with the difficulty in matching up those names and faces. Many of the suspected hijackers and associated that are wanted may have stolen identities.
[Robert Mueller, Fbi Director:] We have several hijackers who's identities were those of the names on the manifest. We have several others that are still in question. So it's the investigation is ongoing, and I am not certain as to several of the others.
[O'connor:] That of course just delays things, and it's literally a page out of Al Qaeda manual for escaping detention. There are several people in custody on, as I said, visa violations, though more seriously, being held as material witnesses. One of them being seen as very important, an Algerian picked up by authorities before the attack who's been taking flight training. He's now been transferred to New York for questioning. Very important, for intelligence agencies say, they can prove through him, they believe, links back to bin laden Paula John.
[King:] John King actually on the roof up here. That's OK. One of the big debates, the Taliban demanding it see the evidence of this investigation before it turns over Osama bin Laden. The White House saying no. What about here at home. Any evidence yet that the administration is beginning to show this evidence to a grand jury, perhaps beginning to seek indictments.
[O'connor:] Well, John, as you know, all these material arrest warrants, the material witness arrest warrants are under seal. And this has been transferred into an investigation under the U.S. attorney in New York, the southern district of New York, Mary Jo White, and she said it's going to be empaneling that grand jury, and that means that everything, those proceedings are secret, so we do not know yet whether they are currently seeking indictment. That's being held very closely. But certainly there is this, you know, really need to prove those links, because also as he gathers the military forces, he needs to gather in those allies, and that helps. This will be critical around the world, not just to the Taliban, but to allies, too. So politically, they can prove to their people that the president of the United States and if they're alive with him, they're seeking justice, not vengeance John.
[King:] CNN's Eileen O'Connor, thank you very much. Very difficult work, keeping track of this very complicated situation. Now back to Paula Zahn in New York.
[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Thanks, John. And I've going to move you now to Afghanistan, a rocky, mountainous nation controlled primarily by the Taliban. Their opposition, the northern alliance. We're going to go now to Miles O'Brien at the CNN Center in Atlanta, who can explain all of this with the help of a map. We need that map, Miles.
[Miles O'brien, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, I'll give it a try. We're all learning an awful lot about this region. It's a very inaccessible region. You couldn't think of a perhaps more inaccessible region for the U.S. military to attempt any sort of military action, large or small. Let's put this map in motion, and I will give you sense of lay of the land, once again. That's the road network. The vast majority of those roads, as we have them, disappear are unpaved and very difficult to get through. These orange areas you see right here are areas controlled by the group which has an umbrella title of "Northern Alliance." The remainder controlled by the Taliban. Now the Northern Alliance has a troop force of about 15,000. There are about 50,000 troops in the Taliban. Let's bring in a guest who has spent an awful lot of time in this region, knows an awful lot about it, and can give us a sense of the type of weaponry and tactics that might be used in this region, Eric Margolis. He's a journalist who's written a book "War on Top of the World."
[Eric Margolis, Journalist:] Good morning.
[O'brien:] All right, let's get the lay of the land, if you will. The history on this, if you read any of it, is there have been awful lot of well-equipped big military forces that have tried to come in through here, whether it's the Soviets, the British, and have been thwarted by these fighters. Explain how they do it.
[Margolis:] Add to that Alexander the Greats Macedonians, too. Afghanistan is, first of all, very remote. Secondly, very mountainous. The Hindu Kush cuts right across it. It's wild, there's no roads, there's dust storms. It's a very heavily-armed population. At puberty, every Afghan boy gets a gun. The Afghans have covered 14 wars, and I think the Afghans, along with the Chechens, are the bravest fighters that I've ever seen. They're disorganized. They are medieval in their combat capability, but nevertheless, they're very brave. And the one thing you never do with an Afghan is you threaten him, because if you do, he will dig in his heels and he will fight.
[O'brien:] All right, let's take a look for just a moment and try to sort of stack up the weaponry and on both sides, Taliban versus Northern Alliance. Let's go to graphic for just a moment, if we can, and we'll show you a little bit about what we know. Well, we do know this, the Taliban weaponry, most of it appears to be leftovers from the Cold War occupation by the Soviets, Kalashnikov assault rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, recoilless rifles, and machine guns. Now, moving over to the northern alliance, very similar group of weapons, fewer of them. Armored vehicles: They have 650 vehicles in total on the Taliban side, T-62, 54 and, T-55 tanks, troop carriers and the like. Moving over to the Northern Alliance, there's 60 to 70 total vehicles with similar battle tanks. As you move along to artillery, there are 76-millimeter mountain guns, 122 millimeter, 155 millimeter towed guns on the Taliban side. Similar kind of weaponry on the Northern Alliance side, obviously fewer in numbers. And as we get to the air defense, we talk about antiaircraft guns, automatic cannons, leftover stinger surface-to-air missiles. Once again, the Northern Alliance may have some of those, as well as the Taliban, leftovers from that Soviet occupation. And finally, the air force, their actually are a few Sequioa fighter-bombers in the Taliban side of things. On the Northern Alliance all of eight transport helicopters. Factor all of that in for us, Eric, it seems like a lightly armed group of individuals. Nevertheless, they use those to very effective end, don't they?
[Margolis:] Any invader can break into Afghanistan. That's not the problem. The problem is getting back out again. These are tribal militias; they're not armies. The United States against Iraq, the United States fought against a World War I capability force. Now it's fighting against a medieval force. It reminds me of the British when they fought the Durbish as a cartoon. There's no military problem. The greatest danger for the Americans in going in, is that there are 80 million mines that the Russians spread over Afghanistan in the 1980 that are still there. They'll be very little heavy weapons resistance. Most of the stuff is inoperable. Once the American forces are implanted there, the Afghans will fight. And the U.S. forces, if they go in, will find themselves surrounded by an extremely hostile population, not just in Afghanistan, but if they base themselves from neighboring Pakistan. It's a very dangerous situation. And the Afghans, I want to repeat again, the Afghans will not be cowed. Look, the Afghans have stood up to greatest power in the world yesterday and today, and they're only doing on point of honor, because they will not give up a guest.
[O'brien:] Eric Margolis is author of "War on Top of the World." I wish I had a little more time to talk to you today, but we'll bring you back in again. We'll appreciate your insights. And he joined us from Toronto. All right, we'll keep you informed and give you a sense of this shifts and the tides and who's got what as we continue our coverage of "America's New War." Paula.
[Zahn:] That's helpful to all of us. Thanks, Miles.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] In Birmingham, a doctor at the University of Alabama Hospital is taking some unique approaches to handling victims of stroke. The blunt-talking, pioneering doctor is getting results, too. CNN medical correspondent Rhonda Rowland spoke to the doctor about some people, well, they're calling him a cowboy.
[Rhonda Rowland, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] This is the care of stroke victims begins every morning at the University of Alabama in Birmingham.
[Dr. Camilo Gomez, Univ. Of Alabama-birmingham:] No more scans. No more surprises.
[Rowland:] Leading the team is Dr. Camilo Gomez.
[Gomez:] This is a major improvement. You look back, look at this, two days ago, look at that lung.
[Rowland:] He drills his team as if they were in the Army, a technique he picked up while serving in the Gulf War.
[Gomez:] What's your plan? Speak. Find a way to do it without doing that. I'm sure you can. Be creative, for once. Anything else? We're moving out of here. Thank you.
[Rowland:] Intimidating?
[Gomez:] Very good, very good. You're getting better.
[Dr. Sean Orr, Senior Fellow:] He makes it very clear right up front that he's a taskmaster. It's pretty obvious that in any interaction with him that he really demands a lot of the people around him. He demands excellence.
[Gomez:] When God sends us down here to help patients, he doesn't say be polite. I think that it's important that we recognize that these are critically ill patients. And my responsibility is the patients.
[Rowland:] Critical patients like this victim of a brain hemorrhage. He arrived the night before from Selma, Alabama, and immediately was given a simple brain shunt.
[Gomez:] Considering the severity of his stroke, I think he's doing fairly well.
[Rowland:] And what would happen if he'd stayed in Selma?
[Gomez:] He would have died.
[Rowland:] Dr. Gomez says his team doesn't do magic. It's attention to detail and the use of cutting-edge therapies. [on camera]: There are a number of stroke centers around the country, but only a dozen or so that, like the University of Alabama, are using techniques to control temperature, techniques still considered to be pioneering. [voice-over]: For example: hypothermia, chilling stroke victims to at least 94 degrees to slow brain damage.
[Gomez:] I'm more interested in, "Who should we be treating with hypothermia?" than I am "Should we be treating people with hypothermia?," which I think the answer is yes.
[Rowland:] He routinely uses simple techniques acetaminophen and cooling blankets to control fever which is commonly seen in stroke patients.
[Gomez:] He'll have this simply for temperature control. And why was he a candidate? Because his temperature was elevated. And we take a very, very harsh approach to that.
[Rowland:] Some studies have shown fever can damage the brain. But there isn't proof yet controlling fever is beneficial after stroke.
[Gomez:] Why wouldn't you treat it? You know, this is an abnormal reaction. It's something that has been shown to be damaging. You have a lot less to lose by treating it than by not treating it. Very still, ma'am. Don't breathe. Don't move. Don't swallow.
[Rowland:] Instead of recommending standard surgery to clear blocked neck arteries, Dr. Gomez is among a small group of physicians using a highly controversial approach: balloons and stents, tiny metal devices to open arteries in the neck and deep within the brain, techniques developed decades ago for heart patients.
[Gomez:] I think the scalpel is an obsolete tool. And I think that surgeons themselves have realized that.
[Rowland:] Would you describe him as aggressive?
[Orr:] Very aggressive appropriately so. He has been labeled a cowboy by some people, by some detractors.
[Rowland:] Dr. Gomez admits six years ago, he was pushed from a hospital in Saint Louis.
[Gomez:] What I will not do is compromise my principles in the care of the patients for politics. And if that makes me politically incorrect and undesirable in certain circles, well, that's too bad. But I'm a very reasonable guy. I mean, I people love me.
[Rowland:] Birmingham's hospital administrators say doctors like Gomez are a benefit to patients.
[Unidentified Male:] We're delighted Saint Louis chased him away and we've got him here.
[Dr. Susana Bowling, Fellow:] There's a big change from the time before he was here and after he arrived here.
[Rowland:] And do you think these techniques are working? Do you think the patients are getting better?
[Bowling:] Absolutely. I have no doubt.
[Rowland:] And Dr. Gomez has no doubt. He sees stroke victims walk out of the hospital and back to their lives ever day.
[Gomez:] Stay out of trouble.
[Unidentified Female:] OK.
[Gomez:] Don't come back. This is not a Hilton. Don't come back.
[Unidentified Female:] All right.
[Gomez:] All right.
[Rowland:] Rhonda Rowland, CNN, Birmingham, Alabama.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Pope John Paul II, on a historic visit to Egypt, is appealing for harmony among Christians and Muslims there. The pontiff is on a three-day tour of Egypt, where some members of the minority Christian community have complained of being treated as second-class citizens. The pope today said mass to some 20,000 people at a stadium in Cairo. CNN's Ben Wedeman now with more on his appeal to the faithful and to others.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Correspondent:] Another first for Pope John Paul II. The first ever mass conducted by a Roman Catholic pope in Egypt. The audience of more than 20,000 included not only members of Egypt's small Catholic community, but Copts and Muslims as well, all come to hear an appeal for religious tolerance and understanding from the ailing 79-year-old pontiff. The mass was broadcast live on Egyptian television. Speaking in French, the pope praised Egyptian Christians' role in education and social development, and committed himself to trying to narrow the centuries old divide between the Catholic and Orthodox churches. And he expressed a desire that, one day, all Christians will come together and put aside doctrinal differences. Catholics in Egypt number between 200,000 and 250,000. The vast majority of Christians here belong to the Coptic Orthodox Church totaling around six million. On Thursday, the pope met with the leader of Coptic Orthodox Church, Pope Shenouda III, as well as one of the leading figures of Sunni Islam, Sheikh Mohamed Sayyed Tantawi, stressing the need for brotherhood in a country that in recent years has been shaken by sectarian violence. [on camera]: Pope John Paul's visit has, so far, gone off without a hitch with barely a peep of protests from any corridor, a positive sign, many people here say, for the future of Muslim- Christian relations in Egypt. Ben Wedeman, CNN, Cairo.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Also from overseas, in the Mideast, it looks like a billionaire construction tycoon has won again a seat in Lebanon's parliament. He could go on again to become the country's prime minister, but first he needs the approval of Lebanon's president, and that is no easy task, the two men are at odds. Here is Brent Sadler, live in Beirut, for more on the elections from this past weekend Brent.
[Brent Sadler, Cnn Correspondent:] Thanks, Bill. Well, so far, results from Sunday's parliamentary elections here have shaken the political establishment. Voters having turned their backs, as you say, on the current administration of Salim Hoss. Instead they switched to the former Lebanese prime minister, Rafik Hariri, the businessmanpolitician, and his allies within the opposition. It is allowing Hariri, who left office less than two years ago, the perhaps unstoppable opportunity to return to power. Outside his home, supporters celebrate what they call the conquest of the capital. For his opponent, Salim Hoss, it was the first time in modern Lebanese history that a serving prime minister was defeated at the polls, losing his own parliamentary seat. But Mr. Hoss wasn't the only big name to topple. Three of his ministers also went out, as well as a number of other important figures within Beirut's ruling elite, shattering long-established traditions here. Prime Minister Hoss blamed the huge spending power on a Hariri- led assault on his government as the root cause of defeat. In voting for a change, a majority of Lebanese are putting their confidence in a return to the dynamism of the former Hariri years, hoping the landslide win they gave him will bring about a stabile and unified government intent on putting Lebanon back on the map. That is a daunting challenge in a country reeling from many economic problems, and where prospects of a financial dividend from stalled Middle East peace talks between Israel, neighboring Syria and Lebanon are indeed slim. Back to you, Bill.
[Hemmer:] Brent, it appears nothing gets done in Beirut and the rest of Lebanon without the involvement of Syria. Have they taken a position or issued any sort of statement, given the election results we saw on Sunday?
[Sadler:] Not yet, Bill. It seems that the Syrians this time around, particularly under the presidency of Bashar al-Assad, who came to power just a few months ago, have taken a less than direct involvement in this election, perhaps allowing this really surprising upturn to take place here. But, for sure, the Syrians will be closely involved in monitoring who ascends up the political ladder here and becomes the next prime minister Bill.
[Hemmer:] Something to track, we will. Brent Sadler, live in Beirut. Brent, thanks to you.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] A sonar crewman from the USS Greeneville now says that civilians in the sub's control room did, in fact, distract him from his work. Our CNN military affairs correspondent Jamie McIntyre broke this story, has had a number of breaks as the story developed, out of Hawaii and out of the Pentagon and joining us now from the Pentagon. Jamie, good morning, again.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Military Affairs Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Daryn. Last night, the National Transportation Safety Board revealed that one of the submarine's crew members, whose job it is to record the location of nearby ships on a paper log, told investigators that he was distracted by 16 civilian guests who were all jammed into the control room. The crew member, identified as a fire control technician, is supposed to update something called the CEP, the contact evaluation plot, a manual plot of each contact bearing and the ship's course over time. He says he stopped updating that because that log because there were so many civilians present. The Navy, also, after analyzing information from a new piece of equipment on board the Greeneville something called the sonar data logger has been able to figure out that the Japanese fishing boat was picked up by passive sonar 71 minutes before the accident. But it's not clear why that information did not get to the skipper of the ship or how they didn't know at the time that the accident took place, that that the ship was overhead.
[John Hammerschmidt, Ntsb:] The Greeneville reportedly gained passive sonar contact with a surface vessel, at 12:32 local time, that Navy analysis has shown was the Ehime Maru.
[Mcintyre:] The NTSB also says the ship's engineering officer did see the fishing boat through his periscope, but only after the accident; by the time he made it up a ladder to the bridge, the training vessel had already sunk. The NTSB says that, in the periscope sweeps that preceded the surfacing drill, one guest said she did see a ship on the display monitors that were visible in the control room, but she said when she later saw the actual fishing vessel on a display monitor in another room, she didn't think it was the same ship she'd seen earlier Daryn.
[Kagan:] Jamie, that sound we just heard from the NTSB. Meanwhile, the Navy having its public inquiry was originally supposed to start tomorrow; that, now, though has been pushed back to when and why?
[Mcintyre:] Well, they say they'll now schedule this court of inquiry to begin on Monday. They just said they needed more time for logistics and for the people involved to prepare for this proceeding. This is a formal proceeding, under which all of the testimony is given under oath, and in which the parties to the investigation and that's the captain of the ship, the executive officer, the officer of the deck; all of them had been named as parties, which means they could be potentially subject to punishment down the road they're all given representation and basically get a chance to prepare their case for this very formal investigative process. So the Navy says they now plan to start that on Monday instead originally it was going to begin tomorrow.
[Kagan:] And where does that actually take place, Jamie?
[Mcintyre:] That will be in Hawaii, on the base of Pearl Harbor in one of the military courtrooms, It's presided over by three admirals a three-star, a two-star and a one-star who have broad powers to subpoena witnesses and take testimony in a public forum that is very similar to a court proceeding, although it's not a trial.
[Kagan:] Jamie McIntyre, at the Pentagon, thank you so much.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] One week before election day, George W. Bush and Al Gore target voters in the Pacific Northwest, and stake their claims to the Golden State, and its mother lode of Electoral votes.
[Vice Pres. Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] God bless you, seven more days, let's win this election.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] I do want your vote and your help, as we are coming down the stretch.
[Blitzer:] Tonight, the latest insight on where the race stands from our team of analysts and reporters on the trail. Also, I'll speak with Minnesota's outspoken governor, Jesse Ventura, on the influence and potential impact of third party candidates.
[Gov Jesse Ventura , Minnesota:] It's called more candidates than just two.
[Blitzer:] And Comedy Central's Jon Stewart drops by with his offbeat analysis of the sometimes comical side of the campaign season all straight ahead on CNN, your election headquarters.
[Announcer: Countdown To Election 2000:] 7 DAYS TO GO. From Washington, here is CNN's Wolf Blitzer.
[Blitzer:] Good evening. Tonight, and every night this week, we continue our election day countdown with our guests and live reports from the campaign trail. But first, a brief look at the hour's top stories. We start overseas tonight, with an update on the crash of a Singapore Airlines 747, bound for Los Angeles; 179 people were on board flight 006 this morning, when it crashed on takeoff in Taiwan. At least 66 people were killed. Dozens of survivors were taken to hospitals, and Taiwan government officials say 30 people are still missing. The passenger list included 47 U.S. citizens, and 55 Taiwanese. An airline spokesman described the accident as an "aborted takeoff," and he said the pilot reported hitting an object during the takeoff run. The accident happened as a typhoon approached Taiwan, drenching the airport with wind and rain. Late tonight, the National Transportation Safety Board announced it is sending a team of investigators to the crash scene. New protests in the Middle East today over yesterday's Israeli helicopter attacks against Palestinian targets. One Palestinian was killed in clashes in the West Bank. And four died in heavy fighting at a border crossing in Gaza. CNN correspondent Ben Wedeman was among those hit in the crossfire, but his wounds are not life-threatening. The death toll in more than a month of fighting has reached 166. The Pentagon today added Kuwait and Saudi Arabia to the list of countries where U.S. forces are on the highest state of alert for a possible terrorist attack. U.S. troops in Yemen, Qatar, and Bahrain are also under the same so-called "Threat Condition Delta" status. The alerts are based on what a Pentagon spokesman calls "credible threat information involving unspecified targets." And comedian Steve Allen is dead at the age of 78. His son says he suffered heart failure last night. Allen was the creator and original host of television's "Tonight Show," and a prolific author and songwriter. Steve Allen was also active in politics. He once described himself as an advocate of "radical middle of the roadism." And we now turn to election 2000, and the seven day strategies for Al Gore and George W. Bush. Both men are out west, as the pace of this campaign picks up with multiple stops designed to reach the most potential voters. Al Gore's day began with a red-eye flight from Wisconsin to Oregon. From Portland, Gore traveled south to Los Angeles. George Bush was already in California. He held a rally in San Jose. Then he headed to Portland, before traveling tonight to Washington state. Since the candidates passed through Portland on the same day, our Jonathan Karl and Candy Crowley are now able to meet up, and they join us now together from Portland, Oregon. Candy, how unusual is this for both candidates to be in the same place at the same time?
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, as the days get closer and the battlegrounds get tighter, it's not all that unusual. I think we will see them again in the same states. They've been kind of crisscrossing each other. It is unusual to have them meet up on the same day. But we will see more of that because the battleground sort of dwindled down and they both want the same states.
[Blitzer:] And Candy, George W. Bush, only a few minutes ago, was repeating his mantra, namely that Al Gore is not the one who should be the next president. Listen to what he had to say.
[Bush:] When I first got going in this campaign, people said: George W., you better not talk about Social Security. They will use it against you. They're going to try to scare seniors. This is Halloween time, as you know, and it's appropriate that my opponent be trying to scare seniors. That's the only way he knows how to do it.
[Blitzer:] That so-called scare tactic worked apparently in '96, at least according to the Republican theory. The Bush campaign, I take it Candy, is not all that concerned this time.
[Crowley:] No, I think they are concerned, Wolf. They have a new ad out that aims at that, which we'll talk about later. But, you know, absolutely, they know that more than one Republican has been taken down on the Social Security issue. But they also think that Bush's approach, which is to reform it, to allow younger workers to take a part of their Social Security payments and invest it on their own, has resonance in an economy that has been quite good among young people who have learned to trust the stock market over time. So they think it is a winning issue, but they are worried, again, about the phone calls that are going out about Social Security from the Gore campaign and the things that the vice president is saying on the campaign trail. So they know it's an issue, it is why Bush keeps it out there.
[Blitzer:] All right, let's listen to what the vice president had to say on the campaign trail earlier today. I want to get your reaction to this, Jonathan Karl. Listen to this.
[Gore:] What he is actually proposing, let's be plain about it, is a massive redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the wealthiest few. It is, in fact, a form of class warfare on behalf of billionaires.
[Blitzer:] The Gore campaign believes that kind of rhetoric, which we have heard before, is working; right?
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, absolutely, you know, you talked about the scare tactics to seniors, especially on the issues like Social Security, and also the situation with nursing homes in Texas. Al Gore has had one demographic group that has consistently been for him throughout this campaign, as the polls have gone up and down, the one group that has always been pro-Al Gore has been senior citizens, those 65 and over, and especially 70 and over. So, in response to this question of whether or not Gore is using square tactics, this charge, the Gore campaign is pretty honest that it is square tactics, but they say that what's scary here are Bush's proposals. And that's why they're doing this, not only in their television advertising, with Gore on the stump, but also with these phone calls now going out in the last week, in an effort to get seniors to the polls to vote for Gore.
[Blitzer:] There's a new Bush-Cheney ad that is beginning to run. I want to play a snippet from that ad right now. Let's listen. [Begin Video Clip, Bush Campaign Ad]
[Announcer:] When Al Gore said his mother-in-law's prescription cost more than his dogs, his own aides said the story was made up.
[Gore:] There has never been a time in this campaign when I have said something that I know to be untrue. There has never been a time when I've said something untrue.
[Announcer:] Really?
[Blitzer:] I take it that kind of ad is going resonate, at least according to the Bush campaign, Candy?
[Crowley:] Well, one of the things that that ad was edited, and in the middle, what you hear is what we've been talking about, which is that Al Gore is not telling the truth about Social Security. This is a two-fer, it gets the exaggeration and truth thing out there, as well as response to the Social Security issue. I imagine that over the course of time, and we don't have much left, you will see these kinds of ads from both campaigns, yes.
[Blitzer:] How is the Gore campaign, very briefly, Jonathan Karl, going to respond to that?
[Karl:] Well, the Gore campaign came out, as soon as they heard about that ad, and called in very harsh terms, Mark Fabiani, the deputy campaign manager for the Gore campaign, called George W. Bush both a liar and a hypocrite for running that ad. A liar because Bush had just talked yesterday about the need to change the tone in Washington and about the need to bring a positive message. And now he comes out with a negative ad. And a hypocrite because this contradicts his message about changing the tone. But the Gore campaign, even as they make that case, is coming out tomorrow with an ad that they were going to come out with today, an ad very, very critical of George W. Bush, questioning whether or not he has the experience and judgment to be president.
[Blitzer:] All right, John Karl and Candy Crowley on the campaign trail. Once again, we will see you tomorrow. Thanks for joining us. And joining us now is our senior political analyst Bill Schneider. Let's take a look at the new numbers for today, our CNN- "USA Today"-Gallup tracking poll. Bill, basically the same as yesterday, 47 percent for George W. Bush, 44 percent for Al Gore, 3 percent for Nader, 1 percent for Buchanan. We look at the so-called poll of polls, similar numbers in the other polls as well, 3 point spread ABC, 2 point spread by the "Washington Post," and a five point spread by Reuters-Zogby-
[Msnbc. William Schneider, Cnn Sr. Analyst:] Yesterday, the polls average a Bush lead of two points. Today the Bush lead averages three points. It is not exactly a surge and the race is still very close. But there's no good news here for Al Gore.
[Blitzer:] What about the Electoral College? No change I take it overnight.
[Schneider:] Well, here's where the race stands, 270 Electoral votes needed. Bush is carrying 25 states, those are the ones in red on the map, with a total of 214 Electoral votes. Gore is holding 11 states and the District of Columbia, they're in blue, with total of 171 Electoral votes. Neither guy has a majority. The yellow states are the toss-ups, 14 states with 153 Electoral votes. What is interesting is, Bill Clinton carried every one of those toss-up states in 1996. Those were Clinton states, but they are not, so far, Gore states.
[Blitzer:] But I take it on this Halloween night, not all the news for Al Gore is necessarily negative.
[Schneider:] Well, let's take a look. On July 31st of this year, the Dow industrial index closed at 10586. Today, October 31st, the stock market close at 10971, higher. Now. for the past hundred years, when the Dow has gone up between the end of July and the end of October, the incumbent party has almost always stayed in power. And that would be the Democrats this time. It has worked in 22 out of last 25 elections. The irony is, a lot of people think one reason the Dow has been going up is that a lot of investors think Bush is going to win the election. So they may be outsmarting themselves. And you know what, not for the first time.
[Blitzer:] Bill Schneider sitting, overlooking the Old Executive Office Building, next door to the White House, for our alert viewers out there, who are anxious to know about that pretty sight. Bill Schneider, we will see you tomorrow. Thanks for joining us. Next here: a third party candidate who had forced political experts to reassess the conventional wisdom, Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura. Why he says America needs a third party movement. And his thoughts on election 2000, including his favorite candidate. Welcome back. The scenario is familiar: A third party candidate told he would never win, and whose supporters were warned their votes would be wasted. Ralph Nader is the latest to hear those warnings. But Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura proved a third party outsider can be elected. Earlier, I asked the governor about this election, the candidates, and the role of a third party. Governor Ventura, thanks again for joining us on our special COUNTDOWN TO ELECTION 2000. Always good to have you on our program. And I have to ask you, a week before the election, who are you going to vote for?
[Gov. Jesse Ventura , Minnesota:] Well, first of all, Wolf, that's my business. I, like every other citizen, am afforded that luxury of being able to walk in that voting booth and vote for anybody that I want to, and I don't have to tell you or anyone else who I vote for. I really don't know yet. I'm probably leaning towards John Hagelin.
[Blitzer:] Really, tell us why.
[Ventura:] Well, because I had a chance to hear him debate. We held debates here in Minnesota, and unfortunately Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan chose not to show up, neither did Gov. Bush and Vice President Gore. So I kind of limited it down to the three candidates who decided to show up to debate, and John Hagelin I was very impressed with him. He is a very bright man.
[Blitzer:] Tell us what you don't like about Al Gore or George W. Bush.
[Ventura:] It's not a question of what I don't like about Al Gore personally, or Governor Bush personally. It is what I don't like about the Democrats and the Republicans, and the two-party system that we have entrenched in this country that won't allow for any third party to rise up. They do everything they can to hold us back. These phony debates that they held, where they held a 15 percent, you had to be polling that in which to participate. And so, for me, it's very much a vote for the third party movement and against the Democrats and Republicans combined. It is nothing personal against the vice president or Governor Bush.
[Blitzer:] And even if you vote for John Hagelin, you know he has no chance of winning this election. What about the argument that you're wasting your vote?
[Ventura:] Well, Wolf, you know, they used that on me for my entire election in Minnesota. All I heard for months and months was, I was going to get Democrat, Hubert H. "Skip" Humphrey elected. I didn't have a chance to win, and therefore it was a wasted vote. In fact, one of my opponents, Norm Coleman, the mayor of St. Paul, he used that line at the end of every debate. He turned to people and said: Remember, if you vote for Jesse, you're wasting your vote. Well, guess what, about 780,000 wasted Minnesota votes put me here in the capitol.
[Blitzer:] You know your lieutenant governor, Mae Schunk, who you ran with, who is the lieutenant governor of Minnesota, she disagrees with you. I want you to listen to what she said this past weekend.
[Mae Schunk, Minnesota Lt. Governor:] Who's the man that will take care of the environment or see to it that we do it?
[Crowd:] Gore!
[Schunk:] Do we want leadership in the White House?
[Crowd:] Yes!
[Schunk:] Who will put it there for us?
[Crowd:] Al Gore!
[Schunk:] You bet, Al Gore, Al Gore.
[Blitzer:] She's endorsing Al Gore.
[Ventura:] Yes, she called me up the day that she did that and asked how I felt about it. And I have no problem with that. Mae Schunk is an individual. Yes, she's my lieutenant governor. But I don't put any type of pressure on anyone that works for me that it is my way or the highway. You know, they have the right to endorse whoever they want to endorse, and stand behind the candidate of their choice. And I respect Mae's decision, the lieutenant governor's decision. But that doesn't mean we have to go together on it.
[Blitzer:] It's free country. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Do you believe that Ralph Nader, and I understand later this evening, you're going to be at an event with Ralph Nader, do you believe he would make a good president?
[Ventura:] I think Mr. Nader is incredibly intelligent. I think that certainly he's been an advocate for people for many, many, many years. He is, as I said, an extremely bright man. I think that he could be the president. My only problem is Mr. Nader and I differ on a lot of issues. I find him farther left than the vice president. And I personally, I'm a centrist, I need a candidate that is in the center, and I believe in which to win, you have got to be in center because that's where most Americans are. They are physically conservative, like myself, and socially liberal.
[Blitzer:] It's a tight race in Minnesota between Gore and Bush. A lot of Democrats are worried, though, that those who Minnesotans who vote for Ralph Nader, in effect, are voting for George Bush.
[Ventura:] That's not true at all. Ralph Nader's name isn't spelled the same as George Bush's name. How could you make a mistake like that?
[Blitzer:] Well, the argument they make is that those are votes that presumably would be inclined to go for Al Gore.
[Ventura:] Inclined, I agree with Mr. Nader on this, you earn everyone's vote.
[Blitzer:] You know, an issue close to your heart: special interests. The vice president has been going out of his way saying, if you want to support special interests, vote for the Republican candidate. I want you to hear what he said earlier today, when he was out on the campaign trail. Listen to this.
[Gore:] Governor Bush often says, you should support him because he would get along with people in Washington. The real question is: Who does he want to get along with? The special interests who want to pry open more loopholes in the tax code, the HMOs, the insurance industry, the oil companies.
[Blitzer:] Is vice president right?
[Ventura:] Is he right? Yeah, I think he's right, but I think he should include the Democratic Party, along with Governor Bush's Republican Party. Let's face facts, until you have meaningful campaign reform, Wolf, both of these parties sell out to their corporate interests and the corporations who play this game win no matter who wins because if you look at who contributes the soft money to the Democratic Party, it's the same people that contribute the soft money to the Republican Party. They can talk the talk, but will they truly walk the walk? We'll have to find out.
[Blitzer:] Very interesting. Very quickly, who's going to win Minnesota, Bush or Gore?
[Ventura:] Well, I would be surprised you can never judge Minnesota because here's an interesting thing, Wolf. You've got Democrat Mark Dayton supposedly leading incumbent Senator Rod Grams quite comfortably, and yet they're saying that Governor Bush may be next-in-neck or even with Vice President Gore. I'm trying to figure that out. Why would they would vote for liberal Mark Dayton and not for conservative Rod Grams and yet they'd reverse themselves for president. So there's no way to really tell in Minnesota, but I'd be hard pressed to say the vice president would lose Minnesota. I'd be surprised if he did.
[Blitzer:] On that note, governor, it's always good to have you on CNN. Thank you so much for joining us on our COUNTDOWN TO ELECTION 2000.
[Ventura:] Thank you, Wolf. Always my pleasure.
[Blitzer:] And from an independent thinker to a man who spares no one, including me. Up next, Comedy Central's Jon Stewart, host of "The Daily Show," shares his thoughts on Election 2000. Welcome back. Stepping back from the usual campaign analysis, we turn now to a man unafraid to defy the prevailing political winds. In part, because his success depends not on making people agree with him, but on making people laugh. Earlier, "The Daily Show's" Jon Stewart wasted no time telling me his thoughts on this election. Jon Stewart, welcome back to CNN and our COUNTDOWN TO ELECTION 2000. Always good to have you on our program. But let me ask you this serious question. Why are serious journalists like me talking to comedians, in effect, like you during this political season a week before the election?
[Jon Stewart, Host, "the Daily Show":] A lot of it's fear, Wolf. People know that we swing a lot of clout in the late night market. Our audience here constitutes a good 0.0002 percent of the population and that could be the swing in this election.
[Blitzer:] This is a very close election.
[Stewart:] Especially in Michigan. We're huge in Michigan.
[Blitzer:] The serious thing is, though, there are a lot of people paying attention to David Letterman and Jay Leno and you and others during this political season, and it's obviously a format that is gaining some sort of traction. Politicians, serious politicians, for example appearing on your show.
[Stewart:] But hasn't that It's always been the case that there's sort of a efforts to lighten the air or to humanize the candidate. But I think in the way that the market place is so split up now, that just the niche of these late night shows kind of becomes a story in itself and feeds upon itself. I mean there's how many 24-hour networks are there, five?
[Blitzer:] There's too many.
[Stewart:] You guys have got to fill it with something. Lewinsky can can't hold on anymore. She's tired.
[Blitzer:] You know, Joe Lieberman, the Democratic vice presidential candidate was on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show," your Indecision 2000 a few weeks ago, I want to run...
[Stewart:] That was a bit of a trick.
[Blitzer:] Let's play a little excerpt from that interview you had with Joe Lieberman. Listen to this.
[Stewart:] I'd be delighted.
[Blitzer:] Listen to this. [Begin Video Clip, "the Daily Show"]
[Stewart:] What does the vice president do?
[Sen. Joe Lieberman , Vice Presidential Candidate:] Well...
[Stewart:] What's his job?
[Lieberman:] Well, it's an important question. First thing the vice presidential candidate does not do "The Letterman Show."
[Stewart:] Oh, I see. That's the other guy. I see.
[Blitzer:] How did you get Joe Lieberman to come on your show?
[Stewart:] It's kind of an embarrassing story. I told him it was a brisk and that I was his cousin. And he just he showed up with lox and some bagels and we just sat down and talked.
[Blitzer:] And you had a good time with him.
[Stewart:] We had a real good time with him. I mean, the nice thing about Joe Lieberman was he wasn't as scripted. You know you know when you're interviewing somebody you could tell when they're home or not. And oftentimes the people that you talk to are so on message that they're not home. But, especially on a show like this, which is a little bit, probably, more unpredictable, it was nice to see that there was some lights on behind the eyes.
[Blitzer:] Some warmth, there, between you and Joe Lieberman. I could see you were bonding. you know, I'm a regular viewer of "The Daily Show."
[Stewart:] I know. Embarrassingly so, Wolf and the letters and e- mails are enough. You know what I'm saying?
[Blitzer:] I'll try to help myself.
[Stewart:] I have work to do.
[Blitzer:] What are you going to do without Bill Clinton, once he leaves office?
[Stewart:] We've really weaned ourselves off Clinton, you know. As you know, watching the show, we barely pick up on him anymore. Every now and again we'll cover one of his, you know, jaunts to Pakistani Club Med or whatever he's doing now in his last three months. But as a lame duck, we have to pull our sales off of it. So we're not we haven't done much Clinton material at all recently.
[Blitzer:] And that's it. So you'll have new president. Any prediction who's going to win?
[Stewart:] I'm going to go with Mr. T. Is he running?
[Blitzer:] Mr. T? Not running.
[Stewart:] Then I'm going to go with Gore.
[Blitzer:] All right.
[Stewart:] Who are you voting for, Wolf?
[Blitzer:] You know, I can't tell you because it's a very, very I'm a serious journalist. I've to be very bipartisan, if you will.
[Stewart:] Then what about the Gore tattoo on your cheek, and I ain't talking about your face.
[Blitzer:] All right, John Stewart. Always a pleasure.
[Stewart:] Do I have to leave now?
[Blitzer:] You have to leave. It's over with. Go do your show. We'll be watching tonight.
[Stewart:] I heart Wolf.
[Blitzer:] All right, bye. Jon Stewart. We'll be right back. CNN's special coverage of Election 2000 continues next with Jeff Greenfield's "UNCONVENTIONAL WISDOM." And tonight at 10:00 Eastern, "THE SPIN ROOM." Here with a preview are Bill Press and Tucker Carlson. What's going on, guys?
[Bill Press, Co-host, "the Spin Room":] All right, thanks a lot, Wolf. Indeed, it's Halloween in "THE SPIN ROOM." So tonight Tucker and I are going to be haunted by ghosts like Ralph Nader and undecided voters.
[Tucker Carlson, Co-host, "the Spin Room":] Join us online at cnn.com or e-mail spin@cnn.com or call 1-800-310-4
[Cnn. Press:] That's 10:00 Eastern, 7:00 Pacific, "THE SPIN ROOM." Pretty scary, huh? Back to you, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] I'll be watching. Tomorrow night on this COUNTDOWN TO ELECTION 2000, I'll have the latest from the campaign trail and the NRA's Charlton Heston. That's all for now. Thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. Up next on
[Cnn:] Jeff Greenfield's "UNCONVENTIONAL WISDOM," which begins right now.

[Riz Khan, Q&a;:] It's a killer 10 times more deadly than war. Africa's death toll to AIDS is sending shockwaves throughout the continent and fears that Africans will continue to slide downhill in the global economy. [on camera]: Hello, and welcome. How much of a threat does AIDS pose to the development of the continent? Consider that in 1998, armed conflicts were responsible for 200,000 deaths throughout Africa. That same year, two million people succumbed to AIDS. And that's a toll that can be measured not only in terms of a staggering loss of life, but also lost productivity and economic potential. We have two guests to field your questions and comments on the issue. Dr. Libertine Amathila is the minister of health and social services in Namibia. She's joining us from the United Nations. Her country, independent since only 1990, is seeing the HIV-AIDS infection rate increasing by between 7,000 and 10,000 a year. She says Namibia estimates that 67 percent of the population is already infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. And in Boston, we'll speak with Dr. Max Essex, the chairman of the Harvard AIDS Institute. Dr. Essex was one of the first researchers to determine that HIV could be transmitted through blood and blood products. And we'll get their reaction to the AIDS crisis in just a moment. But first, a look at the epidemic that's now holding world attention.
[Dr. Max Essex, Harvard Aids Institute:] Well, I think it will certainly have some positive impact. It was a recognition in the Security Council that a health issue can be important enough for their deliberation. It was a recognition that AIDS in Africa is just the health issue that is so disruptive to not only the economy, but security and the future potential of that region of the world that it merited concern and attention in that body.
[Khan:] Well, Dr. Libertine Amathila, I want to get you in on this and talk to you specifically about your country, Namibia, because that's one of the key concerns obviously in sub-Saharan Africa so badly affected by this disease. Let me ask you why is it that Namibia has such a high rate of infection 20 percent of the adult population, according to the figures I've seen?
[Dr. Libertine Amathila, Namibian Health Minister:] Well, I think the reasons are that you know the HIV virus, once it starts, it takes about five to six, seven years before people get ill. And when the virus started in 1992, we were barely, probably only 4 percent in the highest highest people was 4 percent. And this was people who were infected with the virus, but they were not sick. So people started dying only in 1994, 1995. And before that time, you know, this was an obscure disease. People didn't believe that anything like that is on. And a few people who are dying were not known, so people felt that we are just talking. And it's only now that the virus is killing so many people, so people have started becoming serious.
[Khan:] We're going to get a call in from Switzerland, actually show our viewers, show you all some of the figures of what's taking place in Africa. Let's get our caller in from Switzerland with your question, please.
[Caller:] Yes, my question is why is it that the AIDS epidemic is more in Southern Africa and in East Africa, but slowly in West Africa? Why? In West Africa, it's not very much.
[Khan:] Well, I'm going to put that to our minister. But first, let's get our viewers to have a look at exactly some figures we're compiled here of AIDS in Africa. And it says 2.5 million AIDS deaths worldwide. Now, 80 percent of those are in sub-Saharan Africa. We go up 510,000 AIDS deaths among children worldwide, more than 90 percent in sub-Saharan Africa. And out of 1.2 million children under 15 living with AIDS, 1 million of those are in sub-Saharan Africa. So Minister Amathila, let me just ask you that's it really does focus so much on sub-Saharan Africa. And our viewer is asking why is it so much there?
[Amathila:] I don't want to blame apartheid and colonialism, but I think during the apartheid system and the colonialism, there were disruption of family lives in Southern Africa. For example, the contract system whereby the men had to go and work in the mines, and they didn't go home for up to 12, 24 months. And they found their friends around there. So it became kind of apparently a habit that, you know, women were left alone and the men were away so much, they started having new families. Whereas in West Africa, I think they Muslim traditions are also very helpful, and they were not disrupted like us in Southern Africa. And remember, we also fought a very furious war of colonialism. And I think that disrupted the family lives. If you take the question of Namibia, for example, during the first world war, 80,000 people were killed of one tribe, and the women were pushed alone in the desert. So I think all these family disruptions are responsible for it.
[Khan:] And I want yes, I want to get to Dr. Essex. Dr. Essex, do you think that the rest of the world, the developed nations, if you like, as well realize the impact that the AIDS situation in Africa will have outside the continent, outside the African continent?
[Essex:] No, I don't think they do, and I think it's time that they started finding out and learning. A comment I would add with respect to the last question is that I believe a difference also within different regions of Africa, on the different rates of infection is perceived today is that the epidemics within Africa really started at different times. The epidemic in Central Africa, for example, was an epidemic of the mid- and late-1980s. It had peaked and begun to go down by the mid- to late-1990s. The epidemic in Southern Africa, where Minister Libertine is from, really didn't begin until the early '90s. It's due to a different virus than the virus in Central Africa or East Africa, for example, and I think that one of the realizations the rest of the world should begin to own up to is that these are new and different viruses. These are not the same virus that caused the epidemic of the '80s in the West, and we have to allow for the possibility that new epidemics can occur elsewhere in the world due to newer HIVs.
[Khan:] All right. We've got a call from The Netherlands I want to get in. So our caller there, what would you like to ask?
[Caller:] Hi, Riz Khan. Good evening.
[Khan:] Hi, good evening.
[Caller:] Happy New Year.
[Khan:] Thank you.
[Caller:] My question is, looking at the press, especially CNN's announcement on AIDS issue in Africa, they seem to have so much confidence on the statistical data. And if you look at the Third World countries, you know we don't really have a high confidence level on the data, considering the poor database system there. Why place so much confidence on these numbers?
[Khan:] Right, OK. Well, actually, I'll put that to Dr. Amathila. Let me ask you about that because we got our figures from United Nations figures, the joint AIDS program there. And obviously, we're putting our faith in that. How accurate can the measurement be of what's going on there now?
[Amathila:] I don't think the statistics are accurate because the figures we are having are from
[Khan:] Well, we want to find out what's happening there and what's being done. We're going to take a short break first, though, so please don't go away. When we return, does the African continent provide any models for Namibia and other countries to follow in fighting AIDS? You can have your questions ready, too, and we'll get to those. First, one of the many comments we've received by e-mail on today's topic. Welcome back to Q&A.; That was another of your opinion on our topic, controlling the spread of AIDS in the developing world particularly Africa, where it's most prevalent. Now we have two guests with us taking your questions. Dr. Max Essex is chairman of the Harvard AIDS Institute and one of the pioneers in researching the disease. We're also pleased to have with us Dr. Libertine Amathila, the minister of health and social services for Namibia. And let's get to some more Q&A;, and here, there's a question in our Internet chat room which I want to put to our guests. It's from Holland. It's come in and says, "Is the price of drugs for AIDS too high for most people living in Africa?" And Dr. Essex, I want to put this to you. What is the reason for the cost? And why is it why is there no way of making it a little less costly for those in Africa?
[Essex:] Well I think that there's two aspects to this. One is that the cost of treatment of an AIDS patient with what we call triple therapy regimens, the most serious drug combinations that are used in the West, is on the order of $10,000 to $20,000 a year. Certainly, it can and should be less than that, and it will be in the future. But you have to realize that in many countries in Africa where a fifth or a quarter or a tenth of the adults are infected, that leaves relatively few remaining to pay the costs of for those drugs. So unless support is obtained from the international community, from the West, I think we're unlikely to see real progress rapidly as we should on making available many of these drugs to people who need them most in Africa.
[Khan:] Right. Now before I get to Benjamin in London. Benjamin, just hold on. I want to ask Dr. Amathila if there is really that feeling among African leaders that there is something of this eastwest dividesouth divide, you might call it that. And certainly this feeling of a conspiracy that Africa is being left behind that, you know, there isn't a care about trying to help the treatment of AIDS in Africa.
[Amathila:] Yes, we have a feeling that the West has waited too long to help us with these drugs. Had we received the drugs, say, for example, three, four years ago, we should have stabilized the situation by now. But because up to now we don't have drug treatment, and people are dying. They are leaving orphans behind, and we cannot extend their lifespan. And so, we just feel that they are waiting until the last moment.
[Khan:] Right. I'm going to get a call in from Benjamin, who's in London with a question here. Go ahead, Benjamin.
[Caller:] Hello, this is for both the doctors. Now there's a lot of talk about HIV vaccines in the pipeline and drug treatment. And it really seems unrealistic that the West will at the time send people into Africa with these drugs and establish a relationship with the governments. Don't you think a more effective treatment for AIDS would be to actually abstain totally from premarital sex and during marriage to be faithful to one's partner? How long will it take for this message to really get through to human beings that that is the most effective treatment?
[Khan:] Benjamin? Benjamin, let me first get Dr. Essex's view on this before we go to the minister.
[Essex:] Well, I think that there's absolutely no question that education and behavior is the most important thing we can do either in Africa or in Asia or the U.S. or any other place of the world at this particular moment because we can't no one has come forward with enough monetary resources to pay the costs of all the drugs that might be needed in Africa. We don't yet have a vaccine, and we probably won't for another four, five, or six years. So right now, that's the only costs we have. At the same time, we have to recognize that people want to have children. That's part of human nature, and it's entirely appropriate and necessary for procreation of the species. And in many instances, it's absolutely impossible to have children while using condoms because one needs insemination with sperm, and condoms don't block HIV unless they also block sperm.
[Khan:] Right.
[Essex:] So for those people who are already adults, who already have lived part of their lives and want to have children, there really are relatively few options available.
[Khan:] And this is what I want to put to Dr. Amathila is basically what do you use in your fight against the cultural attitudes? How can you persuade people, because it doesn't matter how much money you throw at the problem if the attitudes don't change?
[Amathila:] Well, it's an upheaval to change people's attitudes because what we are doing since independence is to talk about change of attitude, and we preach what we call ABC abstain that is for "A" - and "B" is be faithful to one partner, and "C," last one, is condoms. But we don't seem to get through. People there were also some things from the churches that, you know, condoms should not be used and so and so forth. But I'm not blaming churches. I think people have difficulties to change the attitude. But we are working on it. Particularly we have started also talking to school children, and I hope at least from there on, maybe we'll get some change.
[Khan:] Right.
[Amathila:] But with the adults, it's not possible. I mean, it's a hard as the other doctor said, I mean, this is a situation. It's a normal life sexual life. And it's very, very hard for couples to use condoms.
[Khan:] Resiya is on the line in London with a question. Resiya, what would you like to ask?
[Caller:] Hello, Riz. Yes, I'd like to say Happy New Year and
[Khan:] Thank you.
[Caller:] My question is that an article in the British press today stated that sub-Saharan Africa would have the highest economic growth rate this year. But don't you think that the economy will be adversely affected by the huge financial burden of AIDS?
[Khan:] Actually, that's something I want to put to Dr. Amathila. That's really one of the key issues, the economic impact on Africa.
[Amathila:] Yes. Well, we don't stop what we are doing normally just because of AIDS. We are we are continuing with our lives. We are treating other diseases. We are continuing with our economy. We are trying as much as we can, as alongside what we are doing for HIV- AIDS. So the life is not stopping. People are continuing, and I think economy is going to grow.
[Khan:] We're going to take another very short break. When we come back, we'll see whether our guests view the fight against AIDS in Africa with optimism. Stay tuned for that. Welcome back to the program. We've still got a few minutes left for our guests to take your questions on combating the spread of AIDS. Back to our Internet chat room here. We've got a question here that will come in for it's coming from Germany. Thanks very much for this. She says, "Will the UN conference also deal with the fate of the orphans left behind by AIDS victims?" I want to put that to Dr. Essex.
[Essex:] Well, certainly the issue of orphans was addressed, and there were grave concerns expressed in relation to the orphans by Secretary-General Kofi Annan and a variety of others. How exactly that will be solved remains to be determined. The extent to which all of us throughout the world will mobilize resources to address this issue in Africa for the most part has yet to be determined. I think we need much more action now. I think we need high-level deliberations between governments and different regions of the world. There's much to do.
[Khan:] I've got a question here that came by Internet e-mail. I want to put this to our minister from Namibia, Dr. Libertine Amathila. It says, "AIDS funding to Africa will need strict monitoring by donors. Such relief usually ends up in private pockets." Your comments on this. It's from Nigeria. I also want to put to you, how do you address these critics who say that really African leaders have let down their people?
[Amathila:] No, I think this is an old stereotyping of African leaders, this whole question of pocketing money in our region. There is no possibility to pocket money because the money doesn't go to the ministers. The money is given by programs. And for example, in Namibia, we have national planning commission which controls the money. We have the ministry of finance. So any donor money coming in goes first to these people and it is known, and we just make our projects. And money is released by the ministry of finance, and you've got to justify what you want to do with the money, and then it is controlled. So that question of pocketing money is an old stereotyping of African leaders, at least not in Southern Africa.
[Khan:] Well, then Dr. Amathila, let me just get your projections how optimistic you are on the fight against AIDS and HIV in Africa? To what extent what do you see as the worst-seen scenario and what optimism do you have of overcoming it?
[Amathila:] I'm actually optimistic because I think that those who are already infected as we are talking, there is not much we can do about them. But the new infections can be controlled because in Namibia, for example, we have decentralized the whole question of HIV- AIDS. It's not only in the ministry of health as it used to be. It is now dealt with generally in public service, in private service. Churches have already come around the villages. I mean, everybody now knows about AIDS. So I am hopeful that in the next two years we'll start seeing downstream of the new infections. Of course, as I said, those who are already infected will have to we cannot do much about them except treating their opportunistic diseases. And I want to emphasize that what we need really is the vaccines, and what the vaccines which are now being researched, if I'm correct, are not even for Southern Africa sub-group. Sub-group in Southern Africa is apparently C, and the vaccines they are controlling are for sub-group A and B. Therefore, I think we need yeah.
[Khan:] Well, let me get to Dr. Max Essex on this. You're one of the pioneering researchers here, Dr. Essex. Do you feel frustration at how much progress hasn't been made in the time up to now? And what do you see as the outlook for a vaccine and perhaps some improvement?
[Essex:] Yes, I absolutely do feel frustrated that more hasn't been done. I would like to emphatically second the comment by Minister Libertine that we need to focus most of our attention on making a vaccine on precisely those sub-types of HIV that are most prevalent in the world. And number one is the sub-type C in Southern Africa. So we do need to re-think those projects and emphasize more that particular sub-type of the virus. I think there are, however, examples of countries in Africa where the curve has turned around. Uganda and Senegal are often mentioned as clear examples. There are clearly many examples in Africa where international input and cooperation has been used wisely and honestly and effectively in every sense.
[Khan:] Right.
[Essex:] And I think one of our big mistakes is to consider Africa as a whole as opposed to individual countries, which, as in any other region of the world, vary much from one to the next.
[Khan:] Well, Dr. Essex, I have to end it there on that note. But I thank you and Dr. Libertine Amathila for joining us as well from Namibia, as well for joining us and taking questions, too. Until next time, we bid you farewell and stay tuned. The news continues on CNN. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Tonight on
[Wolf Blitzer Reports: The War Room:] One hour from now, President Bush talks to the nation about homeland security.
[Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser:] He will make a very clear case that the government is on the case and doing everything that it possibly can.
[Blitzer:] But after a visit to health workers fighting bioterrorism, the president will tell Americans that life for them will never be as it was before September 11. The U.S. commander of the war in Afghanistan reports progress and says anti-Taliban forces are on the move.
[Gen. Tommy Franks, U.s. Army:] There is a big fight that's going on in the vicinity of Mazar-e-Sharif.
[Blitzer:] I'll discuss the fight on both fronts with Senators Joe Lieberman and Fred Thompson and former NATO supreme commander, retired General Wesley Clark, as we go into
[The War Room. Blitzer:] Good evening. I'm Wolf Blitzer reporting tonight from Washington. On September 20, President Bush delivered his now famous and, by all accounts, highly acclaimed speech on terrorism before Congress. Tonight, in about an hour, he will make a similar effort in Atlanta. His subject: the nation's homeland security. We'll spend some time tonight previewing what he'll say. We'll also talk about the other front, the war in Afghanistan. But let's begin with the president. Traveling with him is our senior White House correspondent, John King. He joins us now live from Atlanta John?
[John King, Cnn White House Correspondent:] And, Wolf, we are told tonight the president will describe a country forever changed by the events of September 11 and tell all Americans they have a role in the new effort to improve what the White House calls the homeland security, domestic security here in the United States. The president will also update the American people on all the steps the government has taken and will take in its effort to improve airline security, to improve security around major facilities like dams and nuclear power plants, to put law enforcement agencies across the country on high alert, because of what the president will describe in his speech tonight, we are told, is the continuing threat of terrorist attacks here in the United States. As part of his lead-up to the speech, the president, a short time ago, took a tour here in Atlanta of the headquarters for the Centers for Disease Control, that agency involved prominently in the government's response to those anthrax mailings. Some criticized the agency for responding slowly, for not putting postal facilities around the country on high alert fast enough. But the president, in his very brief remarks after this tour at the CDC headquarters, said he believed the doctors and the scientists there on the frontlines of the war on domestic terrorism had saved lives.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] The folks that work with CDC are part of a vast army to fight off the terrorist attacks in America. And I am so fortunate to be able to come by and say hello to the people that are working endless hours to provide good public health information, remedy, quick response to people who have been affected by this evil attack.
[King:] Mr. Bush will promise in tonight's speech that the federal government will remain vigilant in the war on terrorism here at home. He will urge all Americans to go about their daily lives, but ask them to take a role in this campaign as well. And, Wolf, CNN has learned that, already, the president planning for additional announcements tomorrow back in Washington. He will announce a more prominent role for National Guard forces in airport security. There have been some criticism and a still partisan debate in the Congress over new airline security legislation. Because that legislation has not been passed, we are told the president will announce several new measures. Among them, increased National Guard presence at airports and an increased role for those National Guard troops in watching people as they check in for their flights at airports Wolf.
[Blitzer:] John, unlike the president's speech before Congress, tonight's speech will not be carried by the major broadcast networks. Is that a source of concern to the White House, that's he's not going to get the audience that he perhaps would have liked?
[King:] It is a concern, yes, but they also did not pressure the networks. This would have been an Oval Office address, a formal address to the American people if they thought they needed to demand that network time. They are calling this a major policy address tonight. They believe most Americans will listen in. But yes, there's some disappointment that the president won't have as big an audience as he did when he spoke to the Congress.
[Blitzer:] John King in Atlanta, thank you very much. And of course, CNN will have live coverage of the President's address on homeland security. That begins in less than an hour at 8:00 Eastern. Let's begin our WAR ROOM discussion on the subject of homeland security. I'm joined now by Senators Joe Lieberman and Fred Thompson, both members of the Governmental Affairs Committee which has held hearings on the subject. Senator Lieberman is, of course, the chairman. Senator Thompson is the ranking member. Also with us here in our WAR ROOM, the retired General Wesley Clark, CNN military analyst, the former supreme allied commander of NATO. Thanks to all of you for joining us. Senator Lieberman, what do you want to hear from the president tonight?
[Sen. Joe Lieberman , Governmental Affairs Chairman:] This is an important speech. The president set a very high standard in his remarks to Congress on September 20, really articulated what I have been calling the Bush doctrine, about the importance of defeating terrorists and not letting states that sponsor or harbor terrorists to get away with it and asking every nation to take a stand, with us or against us with the terrorists. Tonight, I think it's a moment when we're now two months from September 11, when a president should take a look back at the progress we've made and particularly reassure people about homeland security. I think he has got a nation that is as united as it's ever been. And it really wants to be part of helping America, serving. I think it's time for him and all of us to get together and figure out ways to give the people an opportunity to protect our homeland. I don't think the American people are going south in this battle. They understand the importance of it. They are sticking with it. And they want to hear some reassuring and encouraging news from their president tonight.
[Blitzer:] Senator Thompson, it's also a very jittery nation, a nation still on very much on edge, reflected in one of the e-mails we got for you tonight from our viewers. Chuck in Minneapolis wrote us with this question: There should be more efforts to inform Americans rather than scare them into hyper- alertness. How do you see the office of homeland security succeeding in that task? And what are congressional leaders doing to ensure its success?
[Sen. Fred Thompson , Tennessee:] Well, in the first place, the office of homeland security is being asked to make up for over a decade of things that we should have done by now already. And now they are having to play catch-up ball. And they are not going to be able to assure everybody of total safety with regard to everything. Obviously, a delicate balance is going to have to be walked. People are going to have to be warned when the leaders think that there are credible threats out there. On the other hand, we have got to go about our daily business. It's going to be awkward. It's going to take some time. We're not used to doing that. We're not used to making sacrifices on a daily basis. But when people ask what they can do, that's what they can do, listen to their leaders, whether they're local or national, have a state of alertness, be good citizens, report what they see if necessary, but then go on about their daily lives, and don't depend on people in Washington to have all the answers because we never do and this is no exception.
[Blitzer:] General Clark, as you know, and you heard John King report, the president is going to be announcing that he needs more National Guard troops to be involved. Fighter aircraft are being involved protecting homeland security right now, F-16s patrolling the skies over major airports. How much of a drain does this put on the U.S. military which is engaged in an actual war on the ground in Afghanistan?
[Retired General Wesley Clark: Former Nato Supreme Commander:] Well, it is a drain. It's especially a drain on the Guard and Reserve people because they have got normal jobs and normal lives to lead. But on the other hand, I think the American people feel really good about seeing the National Guard in the airports and they feel really good knowing that some of the people in their neighborhood are called up in helping to protect America. And I think that's really the key thing that I hope will come through in this speech tonight, is there will be a way for the American people to participate, and you'll let all of us be part of this team.
[Blitzer:] OK, Gentlemen, stand by. The commander of the military campaign in Afghanistan delivered a progress report on the course of the war. Let's go live to the Pentagon. CNN military affairs correspondent Jamie McIntyre, who was there for that briefing Jamie.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Military Affairs Correspondent:] Well, Wolf, there is still reports of ebb and flow of a battle around the key city of Mazar-e Sharif. And with at this point only reports of modest battlefield gains. The Pentagon was signaling, today, that it is settling in for a long winter of fighting.
[Franks:] I have described this as an effort that will, in fact, take as long as it takes.
[Mcintyre:] The four-star general in command of U.S. forces made a rare appearance at the Pentagon Thursday, explaining he's too busy to conduct regular briefings the way General Norman Schwarzkopf did during the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
[Franks:] Well, I suppose I'd begin sort of at the end by acknowledging that Tommy Franks is no Norman Schwarzkopf.
[Mcintyre:] Franks also defended his methodical war plan, which has drawn fire from some generals in the Pentagon, as unimaginative and too timid, with fewer than 100 bombing sorties a day.
[Franks:] To talk to the specific of do I believe that this campaign plan was too timid absolutely not.
[Mcintyre:] Frank's boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, jumped to his defense.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Of Defense:] I think people have in mind Desert Storm and Kosovo and they're beginning to compare different sortie raids and so forth. That is a misunderstanding of the situation.
[Mcintyre:] And Rumsfeld attempted to put to rest recent media speculation that dissatisfaction with the war's progress might result in Franks being fired.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary:] He has my full trust and respect, and I know he has the trust and respect of the president of the United States.
[Mcintyre:] And Franks made one cryptic comment that seemed to be at odds with President Bush's statement that Osama bin Laden was wanted "dead or alive." He said quote "We have not said Osama bin Laden is a target of this effort." But afterward, Pentagon officials insisted that Franks was not trying to take Osama bin Laden off the most-wanted list, that he was simply trying to make clear that the war against terrorism is about more than just getting Osama bin Laden Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Jamie, what was General Franks' assessment of the battle that seems to be getting very near for the strategic town of Mazar-e-Sharif in the northern part of Afghanistan.
[Mcintyre:] He seemed to be very reluctant to make an assessment of what's actually going on there. He referred to news media reports of the pitched battle that's going on. If he had some of his own intelligence, he was keeping it close to the vest, not wanting to make an overoptimistic projection. But he did again restate the strategic importance of how having Mazar-e-Sharif would allow the United States to have a place on the ground where it could bring in supplies and humanitarian aid, and would make a land bridge between Uzbekistan, where supplies and aid could also be brought in. So clearly, the United States is hoping that that town and that airport will fall into the hands of the Northern Alliance.
[Blitzer:] Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon, thank you very much. And let's continue our war room discussion now once again with let's go to Senator Lieberman. Are you frustrated by the course of this war?
[Sen. Joseph Lieberman , Connecticut:] No, I'm not. This was never going to be easy. It's far away. We don't have bases near at hand from which to deploy. We've got our carriers over there, which are obviously being very helpful and being a base from which planes can fly. We've got an enemy that's dispersed. So it's going to take some period of time. But this is so critical. Remember, we are fighting a force that killed almost 6,000 Americans here on American soil. So we are going to do whatever it takes to win. And I count on the military leadership, of the Pentagon leadership to be prepared to do that. And just the other day and of course he said it publicly Secretary Rumsfeld met with some us. We asked about the possibility of more American ground troops, and he said everything is on the table, including that. So we're building our strength. We've accomplished a lot so far. And we're going to do whatever we have to do to get the Taliban out of power and destroy bin Laden and al Qaeda.
[Blitzer:] As you know, Senator Thompson, it's not going to get any easier politically with the start of the month of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month, November 17th, and the beginning of winter, which could complicate this military campaign. So what the American public should anticipate is months and months and months of this going on.
[Thompson:] In other words, exactly what the president and the secretary have said all along. You see in this last clip what they're confronted with. They've been saying it would take months and months, and possibly years, to see this thing through, and yet people express surprise that we're going through the winter. So it takes a lot of discussion in order to get the point across, which is exactly what Joe Lieberman just said. So it clearly is going to take a while. We can't lose sight of the fact of what we're doing and how important it is. We must prevail. We have no choice, no option. We can't have 535 tacticians every day second-guessing what these people are doing. Let them do their job.
[Blitzer:] We've got one tactician over here, a four-star general.
[Lieberman:] I just have...
[Blitzer:] He's going to stand by, but go ahead, senator.
[Lieberman:] Real briefly to what Fred has said, we only have actually been fighting since October 7th. So it's about a month in a very difficult terrain, difficult tactical situation. So give us time.
[Blitzer:] All right, general, let me play devil's advocate for a second, and we'll go to our map and show Mazar-e-Sharif, for example, which as you well know is a key strategic town in the northern part of Afghanistan. It's right up here. And if the Northern Alliance, which controls this area, can take this Mazar-e-Sharif, it opens the door for a lot of support coming in from some of the Central Asian republics, including Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. So it's obviously a very, very important site. Why is it taking so long, given the enormous amount of airstrikes, for the Northern Alliance to go in and take that town?
[Clark:] Well, based on the troop strength figures that I've seen reflected in the press, the Northern Alliance is trying to attack and it's outnumbered by the defenders by two or three to one. The defenders have got a reign of terror going in that town. They've intimidated the population. That town has been ethnically cleansed once or twice by the Taliban. It's been a scene of a lot of brutal massacres. And the Northern Alliance has got to attack in such a way that it wins over time. What they can't afford to do is attack and break their sword against the shield there in Mazar-e-Sharif. They've got to keep the pressure on, and slowly nibble, bite, fight, push and claw their way into Mazar-e-Sharif. They're outnumbered, and so they're going to be dependent on American air power. And American power is as effective as the target spotting, and the target spotting is done by our people. And we've got to get up close enough, we've got to have enough people in there, and we've got to be able to spot those targets. No point in launching a bunch of infantry assaults against people dug in. That's just going to cause needless casualties to the Northern Alliance. So persistence and patience, they're the watch words here. But with our combat power I think the outcome is inevitable.
[Blitzer:] All right, we're going to take a quick break. We have a lot more to talk about. When we come back, while the Pentagon says it's satisfied with progress on the battlefield, is Osama bin Laden winning the public relations war? Stay with us. Welcome back to our WAR ROOM. The United States is unleashing its military might in the war against terrorism, but how is it faring in the parallel battle for the hearts and minds of the Muslim and Arab world? Let's once again go to Senator Lieberman. It seems like at least in much of the Arab world and the Muslim world the U.S. is losing this propaganda war. Why?
[Lieberman:] Well, I think we're not making our case well enough, and I'm glad to see that someone's been designated within the State Department, someone with an advertising background, because this is all about marketing. We've got a case. This is not a war against Islam or Arabs. It's a war against terrorists. And I think the best way to make that case is to say that over the last 10 years we've been involved in three major encounters where we put American lives at risk, and they were all on behalf of Arabs and Muslims: the Gulf War, Bosnia and Kosovo. Here in America, Islam is growing dramatically because of the freedom and respect we give to our fellow Americans who are Muslim. So we've got a case to make, and I think we're just beginning to make it. But once we do, we're going to be all right.
[Blitzer:] And you can add Somalia to that list as well.
[Lieberman:] Somalia's right.
[Blitzer:] We got another e-mail that underscores this problem, and I want you to respond to it, Senator Tomorrow. Syed in Pakistan asks this question: "Why is the United States bombing civilians in Afghanistan? It sees they are doing it intentionally."
[Thompson:] Is that...
[Blitzer:] That's a question he asks, and it's a there's a widespread impression out there.
[Thompson:] I don't think that it's that widespread. Clearly, you've got to bomb the military targets first. That is what they are doing. Clearly, they are moving cots in after some of these buildings are bombed and bringing in some wounded people and all that. Everybody, I think, knows that. That's gotten to be an old game. But you know, getting back to what Joe was talking about, we ought to count up the number of Muslims that Saddam Hussein has killed. Some of this is intractable, though. You have so called respectable journalists in some of these moderate Arab states saying things like it is all a Jewish conspiracy, the airplanes into the towers, that we are poisoning those Afghan civilians by dropping the foods and things like that. You can't dissuade that sort of foolishness. But what you to win the public relations battle, ultimately, is win and prevail.
[Clark:] I think the other thing we have to do is get moderate Arab leaders. We have to get the Saudi government, the Egyptian government and other Arab leaders out making that case for us. We don't speak with the same authority that they could in the world of Islam, and especially the Saudis.
[Thompson:] We haven't had much luck doing that, so far, have we?
[Clark:] Well, we just had the first breakthrough this be weekend. The prince of Turkey came out and condemned Osama bin Laden. That was an important step because just as in the case of Kosovo, it wasn't until the leaders of NATO really understood that it wasn't about Kosovo, it was about the future of NATO that they really got into it. In this case, the leaders of Islamic countries have to understand that they are the real target of Osama bin Laden. And until they come up and defend themselves and their interpretation of Islam, they are not going to be safe.
[Lieberman:] Well, my advice not to begin to hit Saddam Hussein now. My counsel, which I believe, a lot of people in the Bush Administration agree with, is that so long as he is in power, America is in danger. Obviously, if we find really conclusive evidence that he was the part of the attacks on September 11, and there is some circumstantial evidence, such as his intelligence people meeting with Mohamed Atta and others in the al Qaeda network, then we should hit Saddam. But what I say, is that the president's war on terrorism policy is correct. When we get done with the Taliban and bin Laden, then Saddam has to be next.
[Blitzer:] Do you agree?
[Thompson:] Yes. A defector, I think, was in the store today, another defector, Iraqi defector, says that they are training terrorists in Iraq. So the facts are adding up. We are not going to be able to ignore it forever. Getting back to what general says, I think he is absolutely right, but I think those Muslim leaders are looking to make sure we have the determination. In times past, we have not had the determination to stick it out. I think we do now, and when they see that we will have a little better luck with them.
[Clark:] And I think when they see that,we will also be able to bring the full weight of international law and the United Nations Security Council against not only Osama bin Laden, but also against Saddam Hussein. To give him an opportunity one more time to fess up, and show the U.N. special commission what he's got, and if he doesn't do it, better make sure we use it against him.
[Blitzer:] Unfortunately we have to leave it right there, but we are going to bring you back soon, I hope. We will all be watching the president's speech. Senators, Generals, great to you here in the CNN WAR ROOM. And what is the price of terror for the Postal Service, and what will it cost you? Details of that and other latest developments when we come back. Welcome back. Here are some of the latest developments we're following. Pakistani president, Pervez Musharraf, voiced concern again today about airstrikes during Ramadan. Mr. Musharraf met with British Prime Minister Tony Blair in London. He'll meet with President Bush this weekend in New York. The Postmaster General asked Congress today for $5 billion to cover terror and security related costs for the Postal Service. He says postal customers shouldn't have to pay. And fighter jets forced a small plane to land in Ocala, Florida today, after the FAA raised questions about its flight plan. The pilot is from Angola. He's being questioned. That's all the time we have. Please stay with CNN throughout the night. We'll have live coverage of President Bush's address on homeland security at 8:00 Eastern. And join me again tomorrow twice at both 5:00 and 7:00 p.m. Eastern. Until then, thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. "CROSSFIRE" begins right now.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Many rescuers here in New York City calling the former site of the World Trade Center simply the ruins at this point. It is now day 12, but 11 days since anyone has been pulled out alive. CNN's Michael Okwu down near the site, with us again this morning on a Sunday morning. Michael, good morning to you.
[Michael Okwu, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Bill. Firefighters recovered the body of one of their own yesterday. Mayor Giuliani said that he was touched at how the firefighters stood to attention at the site of his body and how gingerly they treated his remains. He has called the work of the rescue efforts here sad and magnificent. Some more than 2,000 rescue workers continue to sift the rubble, led by metal workers who cut through the twisted steel and iron and by firefighters and police officers, many of whom are accompanied by dogs who often wear boots to protect their feet. 6,333 people are still missing and presumed dead. We are told that that number might be lowered in the coming days, but a number that will of course unlikely be lowered, and that's 261, the number of dead bodies that have been recovered. They have carted off some 90,937 tons of debris on 6,255 truckloads. It has been a massive undertaking. No one has been recovered here, as you mentioned Bill, since September 12th, which of course was the day after the attack. Mayor Giuliani has said that the date is fast approaching when the experts will say no one can possibly still be alive. Bill.
[Hemmer:] And, Michael, quickly here, we saw some rain at the beginning of the weekend, but it's been beautiful yesterday. Beautiful again today. How has that changed the operation? Can you get a measure of that?
[Okwu:] It changes the operation but, you know, anyway you look at it, it's just bad news. It's funny, when I stand here I always think of this city as being a city in contrast right now. It is a beautiful, beautiful sunny Sunday morning here in New York, and yet that's bad news for the rescue workers, because it's going to get to be about 80 degrees today, and they say that there are still fires raging deep within. It is very hot down there, and as I mentioned before, they often have to wear boots. There's one rescue workers who told me that the rubber soles on his boots literally, if you stand on the site for too long, start to melt. And when it rains, it simply makes all the material that they are lifting out of there that much more heavy, and it tends to disperse the smoke a little bit. It is very difficult and treacherous conditions for these rescue workers. And as you can tell, Mayor Giuliani sends his heart out to them. Bill.
[Hemmer:] And the workers 100,000 tons of rubble removed so far. Michael, thank you. We'll check back in a bit later this morning. Michael Okwu, down here in Manhattan. Those horrifying television images of those two planes crashing into the World Trade Center, leaving indelible impressions on everyone, including the kids. CNN's Elina Fuhrman now, and their point of view.
[Elina Fuhrman, Cnn Correspondent:] These images, these children at Trinity School in Atlanta will never forget.
[Unidentified Child:] I mean, I watched the news, and I saw the planes crashing, and the Trade Centers collapsing. We saw a lot of firefighters trying to put out the fire.
[Fuhrman:] The shocking images everywhere. Children can hardly fail to see them.
[Unidentified Child:] Two buildings when they got, when the plane crashed, they like smashed together and a lot of people got hurt and some people had to jump out the windows. I think about it while I'm writing in my journal, and at home in bed at night, and at lunchtime. Basically, all day. Why would people do these things to America? I don't get it.
[Fuhrman:] Kids everywhere asking questions, forcing adults to grope for answers. Answers that may be beyond reach.
[Becky Coolage, Parent:] Why would someone fly an airplane into a building? And, you know, I just took him, you know, that there are evil people in the world.
[Fuhrman:] Surveys conducted in the aftermath of the tragedy show that adults have been haunted by the vivid images of the plane crashes shown repeatedly on television. For children, television is pure entertainment, so when news appears on the same screen, they do not necessarily understand the difference, or do they?
[Nadine Kasloff, Child Psychologist:] Children do understand that it's real, in part because it's the same images over and over again. But more importantly, because their family is watching these images.
[Fuhrman:] Psychologists say one way to keep the disturbing images out of children's minds is to keep them busy, drawing or writing letters. The writing and drawing provides a way for the children to cope with the reality of horror that's not going away.
[Kasloff:] These children are going to grow up, if not faster, then differently. They're going to grow up with those images indelibly imprinted in their minds.
[Fuhrman:] Just as their grandparents, who filled this school for a family event, will never forget World War II, these youngsters will always remember where they were when a war against something called terrorism began.
[Nadine Gold, Grandmother:] These children have had a very, very protected life, even people going into their 20's. They've never really experienced the horror of war and the sacrifices that it takes, and this is grow up time for all of them.
[Fuhrman:] You can hear that in the words of this nine-year-old.
[Unidentified Child:] Somebody else is probably never going to kill that many people again, unless in a war.
[Fuhrman:] This school is stressing the need to pull together, being better helpers, talking about patriotism, about love of country, and being guardians of its future. Elina Fuhrman, CNN, Atlanta.
[Hemmer:] Let's continue our discussion and so many of the questions you heard in Elina's story. Dr. Joyce Brothers, known as America's counselor, is with us this morning live in New York City. Nice to see you.
[Dr. Joyce Brothers, Psychologist:] Good morning, Bill.
[Hemmer:] I ran into a rather precocious eight-year-old earlier in the week and I said, do you know what happened? And she said, yeah, they flew the planes into the building. I said, do you know why? She said, yeah, the buildings fell because they weren't strong enough. Where do we begin?
[Brothers:] We begin I'm out of step with some psychologists. I think that for a child of four or three, we begin with, you are safe. These were bad men. They died. It's over. I don't think that we have a right to change their childhood and make them frightened. And even older children, four, five, six, seven below the age of eight, it is not very real to them. Children below the age of six do not have the concept that dead is dead. They think that people will come back, which is one of the reasons we don't say that they've gone to sleep, because it makes children afraid to go to sleep. But I think for little tiny ones, all they really want to know is, am I safe. And for bigger ones, also, what they want to know is, am I safe. They may talk about the images and they may draw the images, and they are the more they do that, the less it has an emotional context. But for almost every child, they're having bad dreams. And one of the things parents can do is to say draw your dream. It doesn't necessarily mean that the drawing will have much meaning, but very often even four-year-olds will draw two buildings with a plane, and...
[Hemmer:] It's interesting you say that. Our executive producer, Ted Fine in Atlanta, his child drew exactly that, the buildings as they stood with a rainbow in the sky. What's to explain that?
[Brothers:] Oh, he's the child how old is the child?
[Hemmer:] Ted, how old is three-and-a-half, is his son.
[Brothers:] Three-and-a-half.
[Hemmer:] Yeah. And what's his name?
[Brothers:] That's a very bright child.
[Hemmer:] Noah? Noah.
[Brothers:] Noah is extremely bright, because he's doing automatically what all of us should be doing, and that is reprogramming our dreams, with the rainbow. It's going to come out all right. And that's wonderful. I gave a speech sometime back at John J. and looked at some of the things that police are doing, because over all the years, because they deal with trauma and traumatic events day after day after day. It's their life. And they have a procedure, and everybody can use that procedure. They collect the mementos, the newspaper articles, the TV stories, and their clothing, and they write out what has happened. Now, a child can't necessarily do that, but they can dictate it to you, their version of it, and then they can you can ask them to draw their dream, and it won't necessarily be meaningful to you, but you use it as a jumping off point to say to the child, you know, what is, what is happening here? How do you feel about this? And really what they want to know, am I safe. And so I think for little ones you can say the bad men are dead, it's over. And the president is going to keep us safe and we're going to punish the bad men.
[Hemmer:] Take us a little bit down the road. What's the lingering impact of this? The lingering effect? Possibly a greater understand in a few months time, or what do you forecast normally when something like this hits?
[Brothers:] For some children, they will be just fine, because they're going over the images over and over again, and because they're closer to their to the others in the school. You may find some children who are disruptive that have never been disruptive before, but they're acting out. You're going to find some children regressing, where before they were toiled trained, now they're back wetting beds. They'll go back in time. But little by little, they'll get better. But children, even under the age of seven, can experience post-traumatic stress disorder. So, we look to see if their grades or dropping. We look to see if they're getting into more fights than usual a kid who isn't a fighter. We look to see if they're having difficulty concentrating, and if those things are happening, then we seek psychological help. But for most of us, what we're experiencing is real grief and it will go away little by little by little. But if it gets worse, then you go for help.
[Hemmer:] In the 30 seconds we have left, some amazing numbers came out from the Pew Research Center last week that just really surprised. Seven in ten Americans, they found, suffer from depression. These were adults now, not kids. One in three have trouble sleeping. 50 percent have a tough time concentrating. I know we're talking about the kids, but adults are impacted too.
[Brothers:] Oh, that is that is grief, and it only becomes post-traumatic stress disorder a little later on, if it gets worse or if it lasts more than about three months. So, for those people, know that they're experiencing they would be abnormal, because we have if they weren't experiencing this. This is normal behavior in abnormal times.
[Hemmer:] And quickly, they just gave us a bit more time, but earlier in the week, down now the site that we call it, the ruins, as it's referred to, speaking with a lot of the rescue workers, some of them were a bit angry when I would come up to them and ask them a couple of questions, simply because they felt that uptown, the north end of the island of Manhattan, same part of the world here, same city, they were upset because people were out eating in restaurants, etcetera, drinking in bars. And they did not feel that that behavior was necessarily the right approach. It is true, though, that everybody deals with it in their own way and that way is different for everyone.
[Brothers:] The sooner we can get back to normal life, even for the people who are so heroic that they're giving up their lives or destroying their health trying to help others, the sooner we get back to normal behavior, the better off we are. So, it isn't a terrible thing, if you go to a baseball game. Just don't make important decisions, stressful decisions, right now. But try, for your kid's sake, too, to make everything as normal as possible. Bedtime is the same time, homework is done, stories are read to you at night, but not scary stories, just comforting stories.
[Hemmer:] One final thought on kids here, when they see the images of an airplane going into a building like that, it probably plays over in their minds, constantly, like it does for adults. Do you see a difficulty for getting children back on airplanes after something like this? And if so, how do you do it?
[Brothers:] Only if parents don't want to go back on an airplane. They take their cute from what parents are doing. So, if parents go back and say, this is what we're going to do, and they are comfortable and not scared, then the child will just go along and say, you know, we're back to normal now. The bad men are gone, they're dead.
[Hemmer:] Yeah, and the perception is so true, when you hand it down from the parents to the kids. Thanks for sharing. Much appreciated, OK? Dr. Joyce Brothers, live here in New York. Many thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] The political debate over gun control reached a new level last week when NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre launched a personal attack on President Clinton. "Just in Time" this week: a look at the response to his comments, some interesting moves by Republicans and gun makers, and how the gun issue is playing on the campaign trail. Here from our sister news organization, "Time" correspondent John Dickerson. John, thanks for coming in. We're going to be hearing a lot about gun control during this presidential campaign season, aren't we?
[John Dickerson, "time" Correspondent:] That's right. And Al Gore's going to be the one talking the most about it. There were some interesting polls last week. One of them, a battleground poll, showed that Gore is not doing as well with women, a traditionally-strong Democratic voting block. And one of the reasons is because George Bush has a strong education agenda that works with those women voters. Another issue that works well with those voters is guns. And that's why Al Gore will be talking about it; he thinks Bush has a real weakness there.
[Meserve:] What is that weakness, as he perceives it?
[Dickerson:] The weakness is that, in Texas, Bush has had a very strong pro-gun record; he has two pieces of legislation, the most important of which is the one that allows Texans to carry concealed hand guns. That's a piece of legislation Governor Bush was very happy and proud about; and now, in a general election, though, is one that might cause him some trouble.
[Meserve:] Do you see Bush trying to moderate his position here? He has been somewhat critical of Mr. LaPierre in his remarks.
[Dickerson:] Well, in some ways, LaPierre his remarks last week and now, LaPierre has not backed away from them helps the governor, Bush, because it allows Bush to look more moderate. Bush came out and said that the remarks were over the line. And it allows him to, then, look slightly more moderate. But again, important for Bush is his base does care about Second Amendment they do they do care about Second Amendment rights? And they will come out and vote if they think that Democrats are going to take away those rights.
[Meserve:] So, ultimately, how does Bush position himself on this issue?
[Dickerson:] Very, very carefully. He has to look like he's open to some kind of gun control, but he has to look, also, like he's not bowing to the media and the left-wing folks at the NRI the NRA, so exercise the bout.
[Meserve:] Looking at LaPierre's remarks and reaction to it on Capitol Hill and elsewhere makes me ask this question: Has the NRA lost some influence and power as a force on Capitol Hill?
[Dickerson:] The death of the NRA is always talked about, and it never really happens. And particularly on Capitol Hill, they still exert a tremendous amount of influence because, in district by district, there are a lot of Democrats who have a lot of NRA members in their districts, and they can't go along with a lot of this gun control, which means that the Republican-Democratic split that people talk about with gun control really doesn't exist, which means the NRA in specific districts can, in fact, have a lot of influence in this next election.
[Meserve:] And meanwhile, you have Smith & Wesson reaching this agreement with the government. Well, how does this change the dynamic here? And does it force other gun makers to reach similar sorts of accord?
[Dickerson:] Well, that's one of the most interesting things that happened last week. The nation's largest gun manufacturer has, essentially, capitulated to the government's demands on safety issues. And we remember from the tobacco situation, where it tobacco companies, at first, started caving in, and it caused a whole series of other tobacco companies to fall in line. We may see that here. Glock, another gun manufacturer, is already talking about, perhaps, agreeing to the same things that Smith & Wesson did. So, in fact, a lot of the Kabuki ritual in Congress, and the dance that goes on about politics and guns, may be irrelevant now, because gun manufacturers may take some of these measures on their own.
[Meserve:] John Dickerson, "Time" magazine, thanks so much. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] Wade decision. There is, right now, here in Washington, thousands of anti-abortion demonstrators gathering at the U.S. Supreme Court. This is Nellie Gray speaking for the Rally for Life. Let's just listen in for a moment.
[Nellie Gray, March For Life Education & Defense Fund:] ... is for every American, not just pro-life America, but every American. Stopping abortion is the responsibility of every elected and appointed official in federal, state and local governments throughout our country. It's the responsibility of feminist abortionists to stop the action. They are caught up in an evil of abortion, it's their responsibility to come out of that, and indeed it is the responsibility of clergy and teachers and lawyers and doctors and all Americans in all professions and all ages to stop abortion.
[Sesno:] Nellie Gray, speaking here in Washington, as this rally going forth to call on the new president and the country to end the practice of abortion in America. John King, back to you over at the White House. This one front and center for the new president as well today.
[John King, Cnn Sr. White House Correspondent:] And a very delicate political challenge. No surprise, we have an anti-abortion president in the White House. He is a conservative Republican. But how he handles himself on this issue could well set the tone. He wants bipartisanship, remember, liberal abortion rights activists don't want this administration rushing into an abortion debate. But, we are told, President Bush, this week, will reverse the Clinton administration policies that allow U.S. funding to go to international family planning organizations that either pay directly for abortions or for abortion counselings. Now, Congressman Chris smith of New Jersey, an anti-abortion conservative, will read a statement from the new president at this rally. Let me quote briefly from it. "We share a great goal to work toward a day when every child is welcomed in life and protected in law. We know this will not come easily or all at once." In that statement, an implicit reflection, this is not a president who will rush to reverse the Roe v. Wade decision. But he will take some steps toward the anti-abortion camp. In addition to reversing that language, allowing U.S. money to go to overseas groups, look, as well, for discussions about fetal-tissue research. This president supports fetal-tissue research, but not on aborted fetuses. That will become a hot point as well, as Tommy Thompson, the secretary of Health and Human Services, takes office over his department.
[Sesno:] All right, John King, thanks very much.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] A live look now at the Comcast First Union Center where, tonight, George W. Bush will give his acceptance speech of the Republican nomination for presidency. Heading into his convention-topping speech tonight, let's see what numbers George W. Bush is pulling. Editor in Chief Frank Newport is taking the pulse at the Gallup Poll headquarters. How's it looking, Frank.
[Frank Newport, Gallup Poll Editor In Chief:] Well, it looks pretty good for George W. Bush. He's speaking tonight so we went back, Carol, and did a review of a lot of our interesting data on him. Very, very interesting given the prominence of President Bush and Bill Clinton in the discussion this week. We, a month or two ago, had asked a question: What's the first thing that comes to mind when you think of the two candidates? This is George W. Bush behind me, and look at that. "His father was president" was the number-one thing that people thought about when they thought about George W. So clearly his father is a big part of his image so far. We'll see if he can break away from that tonight. Just to show you the comparable data on Al Gore, when we asked the same "come to mind" question, guess what? It was Bill Clinton the first thing that came to mind on Gore. And, of course, that's what Cheney was trying to keep that connection going in his speech last night. We'll see what happens with that out in Los Angeles. Image of George W. Bush: We've been tracking it now for well over a year, all the way back to February of '99. It was actually more positive until he got into those primaries, then his negatives came up to a more typical range. As of last week, 63 favorable, 31 unfavorable. That's pretty good for George W. Bush. Fairly normal portrait for a politician in a very partisan environment like he is. It's the Democrats who had those unfavorable opinions. Here's the two strengths for George W. Bush. In all of our polling we've been showing all spring, strong leader, he beats Gore, as you can see, by a significant margin there, and an effective manager. He beats Gore by a significant margin there. So he'll want to really emphasize those in his speeches. But things that aren't so strong for George W. Bush are the following: Cares about the needs of people like you: He's just tied with Gore on that. He's going to have to show his compassionate side, as he talks about tonight. And over here, this is his bugaboo: complex issues, the thing people argue he may not be as strong on. The public puts him at parity with Gore. I think the public will be watching tonight to see how well he demonstrates his intellectual capabilities. That's where the public stands as we go into the speech tonight. Carol, back to you.
[Lin:] Still a very tight race, Frank. Thanks so much.

[Kate Snow, Cnn Anchor:] Time is running out for Napoleon Beazley. He's on death row in Texas, scheduled to die by injection tomorrow night. He was convicted of a murder committed when he was 17. Now, his lawyers are looking for a way to stop the execution. CNN's Kelli Arena on their maneuvers.
[Kelli Arena, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Is Napoleon Beazley a ruthless killer and danger to society, or a confused young man who after one horrible incident no longer poses a threat?
[Napoleon Beazley, Convicted Murderer:] DA and his assistant DA, they paint this picture of me being as being a bad monster, you know, this predator, this animal, but then they couldn't bring anybody that knew me before this crime to come in and testify to say I was that person.
[Arena:] Seven years ago, Beazley and two friends follow a prominent Tyler, Texas couple home, looking to carjack their Mercedes. Beazley shoots at 63-year-old John Luttig. The bullet grazes his head.
[Jack Skeen, Smith Co. District Attorney:] When he came back around, as Mr. Luttig was on the ground and just walked up to him at point-blank range and shot him in the head, and that was the fatal shot. And then, he rifled through his pockets to get the car keys.
[Arena:] Beazley also aims his.45 at Luttig's wife Bobbie, but misses. She crawls under the car and plays dead.
[Bobbie Luttig, Victim's Wife:] I was wondering what the bullet would feel like if it went through my back.
[Arena:] Beazley admits he was the shooter. At the time, he was 17, considered an adult under Texas law. The man Beazley murdered was the father of a prominent federal judge, J. Michael Luttig. Critics charge if not for Judge Luttig's influence, Beazley would not be facing execution. Prosecution says the decision was justified.
[Skeen:] It was a very horrific, premeditated, calculated, cold- blooded execution.
[Arena:] The murder was Beazley's first brush with crime, even though he admits he had started dealing crack cocaine. He was popular at school, even class president. Beazley's two co-defendants recanted their testimony that Beazley had said he wanted to kill someone that night. Death penalty opponents say no other Western nation executes someone the rest of the world considers a juvenile at the time of the crime.
[Ajamu Baraka, Amnesty International:] A child offender who committed a crime, no matter how heinous, should not be subjected to a death sentence.
[Arena:] Napoleon Beazley would be the 19th U.S. inmate to be executed for committing murder while under the age of 18. Kelli Arena, CNN, Washington.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Seventeen New York City police officers are being disciplined after another officer allegedly killed an entire family while he was driving drunk. Officer Joseph Gray and nine other officers had allegedly been drinking on the morning of the accident. Gray is accused of multiple counts of manslaughter. The victims are being buried this morning. CNN's Jason Carroll is live in New York with more. Jason, good morning.
[Jason Carroll, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Leon. And a very sad story that it is. The mayor has called the results of a police investigation into this a major event. Seventeen officers were disciplined for drinking or failing to supervise those who were drinking with officer Joseph Gray the day of that accident. Officer Gray is accused in the DWI accident involving Maria Herrera, her 4-year-old son, Andy. Her sister, Dolcia Penna. Herrera was eight-months pregnant and an emergency cesarean section could not save her baby. Funeral services are about to get under way. We want to come back out here live, so you can take a look at all of the people who have gathered in the front of the church of St. Michael. Hundreds of people are expected to attend. The mayor is expected to be here as well. The family has said all along that they want justice. And the mayor says that he wants justice as well, and he also says, Leon, that this investigation into this accident is not over Leon.
[Harris:] Jason, do you know whether or not there will be any representatives from the police department in attendance today?
[Carroll:] Absolutely. Representatives is from 72nd precinct, which is the precinct where officer Gray was stationed, will be here. Other dignitaries from the police officer from the New York Police Department will be here as well, as well as other candidates who are running for mayor. A lot of people in the community in the community, here in Brooklyn, and throughout the city of New York are expected to attend.
[Harris:] All right, thank you very much, Jason Carroll in New York. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Press, Co-host:] All eyes on the Middle East tonight. Continued, if reduced, violence on the West Bank, FBI agents begin their investigation of the terrorist attack on the USS Cole, President Clinton prepares for a possible emergency summit over the weekend, and foreign policy suddenly takes center stage in presidential politics 2000. With a former secretary of state and two U.S. senators, we tackle it all, next on CROSSFIRE.
[Mary Matalin, Co-host:] The bodies of some of those killed on the USS Cole start their journey home. And amid more violence in the Middle East, talk of an emergency summit of world leaders. Tonight, the latest on the crises in the Middle East, including what impact will it have on the presidential race.
[Announcer:] Live from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Mary Matalin. In the crossfire, in Charlottesville, Virginia, former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger and, later, Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, a Gore supporter and member of the Armed Services Committee, and in Manchester, New Hampshire, fellow committee member Senator Bob Smith, a Bush supporter.
[Matalin:] Good evening, and welcome to CROSSFIRE. Another day of turmoil and tragedy in the Middle East. Diplomatic entreaties took on an increasing urgency as the violence following following the Palestinian mob killing of Israeli soldiers showed no signs of subsiding. Gunfire was exchanged in Ramallah, and a Palestinian man was shot and killed in the West Bank. Senior Clinton administration officials tell CNN that it appears increasingly likely that there will be an emergency Mideast summit early next week in Egypt. At the same time, U.S. officials dealt with tragedy and terrorism in Yemen. As the bodies of sailors killed in the bombing of the USS Cole were transferred out, hundreds of FBI agents and forensics experts were pulling in to begin investigating the terrorist act that left as many as 17 dead and 38 wounded U.S. sailors. So, tonight, crisis and chaos in world hot spots. What should the U.S. do, what can the U.S. do, and how will world events affect domestic politics? Two members of the Senate Armed Services Committee join us in just a few minutes, but with but, first, questions for former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger Bill.
[Press:] Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for joining us tonight.
[Lawrence Eagleburger, Former Secretary Of State:] Pleasure.
[Press:] An unusual version of CROSSFIRE perhaps tonight where we'll be looking for more light than heat. That's why we've turned to you. And let's start with the bombing of the USS Cole, which, so far, has accounted for the deaths of 17 U.S. sailors. We don't know all the hallmarks or all the facts about this yet, Mr. Secretary, but it seems to have all the hallmarks of Osama bin Laden's operation responsible...
[Eagleburger:] Yeah.
[Press:] ... for the bombing of those two U.S. embassies. If we can prove that connection or prove a connection to any other known terrorist organizations and you were still secretary of state, what action would you recommend?
[Eagleburger:] Well, Bill, first of all, don't worry. I'm not secretary of state. But if we knew who they were, my fervent recommendation to the president would be that we should forcefully do everything we could to to get rid of them, if you want me to be blunt about it. I think we need to react against these sorts of terror any time we can identify who the author is. The trouble is it's very hard to figure out who did it, but if we know, I would go at them.
[Press:] The last time we did that we went after the camps of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, he survived, went after a factory in Sudan, which evidence seems to be was the wrong factory, not producing what we thought it was producing. Doesn't maybe an easy solution, maybe the right solution, but it doesn't always work, does it?
[Eagleburger:] Oh, no. I mean, you know, we on occasion are like the gang that can't shoot straight. I don't argue that. On the other hand, if you'll recall, President Reagan's response against Libya when they on the bombing of the bar in Germany and we haven't seen much of Mr. Qaddafi since. It can be made to work. But even if we miss the target, if we know who the target is and don't try to do something about it, we are simply inviting further action against us, and my by the way, even attacking these terrorists doesn't mean you're going to stop it, but it does mean they at least then understand that there's some price to pay.
[Matalin:] Mr. Secretary, we have only recently resumed refueling at this particular port. Besides Osama bin Laden, it's a known terrorist haven. This is an area that Yemen did not support us in the in the Persian Gulf effort. In recent days, there's been government-supported anti-U.S., anti-Israeli activities, but the reason that we're resuming fueling there is to restore or improve relations. Is using our sold our sailors and our sophisticated destroyers the best vehicle for diplomacy?
[Eagleburger:] No, of course not, but I you know, I also have to you also have to accept that the Navy has to refuel someplace. Look, the Yemen is not a nice place, and they have certainly not been our friends for a long time. On the other hand, I I really doubt that the government at least had anything to do with this, although you, obviously, can't prove it at this stage. But anyplace that harbors these terrorists or lets them move around, as they apparently did in the Yemen it means that we, therefore, ought probably to avoid them, and if for no other reason than to avoid the attacks against us. I don't argue against that.
[Matalin:] So let me talk of ask you about the timing of this. This the Pentagon is saying that this took a long time. It's a seems at the moment to be unrelated to the other Mideast crisis. Do you think the timing had anything to do with trying to disrupt United States elections?
[Eagleburger:] I doubt it. Look, again, this is asking for a sophistication on the part of these terrorists that isn't there or, indeed, if they think it would have an effect on our elections, they've also made a mistake. I to me, this was and probably is a target of opportunity. They had planned for a long time. They waited for a ship to come in. I don't think it's related to what's going on in Israel and, frankly, I don't really think it's related to the elections. It is clearly related to their hatred and antagonism of the United States.
[Press:] Let's shift now, Mr. Secretary, please to Israel, to the Middle East. This conflict has been going on for a long, long time. At one time, it was your responsibility as secretary of state to be trying to bring these parties together. Earlier this year, we thought we were so close. Now it looks like we're so far away. My question to you is are there any black hats here and white hats here? Is it fair, as Tom Friedman did in this morning's "New York Times," to call this Arafat's war?
[Eagleburger:] Black hat look, I happen to believe that fundamentally the Israelis are the white hats, if that's what you're talking about. I think Mr. Arafat, at least for a while, began to look like he had turned from black to gray hat. I'm not so sure anymore. The fact of the matter at this stage is, and I and nobody can argue that Sharon Sharon made a major error or did a very rotten thing when he went to the temple. But having said that and, certainly, the reaction on the part of the Palestinians was paranoid, but, having said that, the Israelis and Sharon had something to do with all of this, but the reaction has been way beyond anything it that he that he did himself. And what it brings me to question is whether one, does Arafat have control of his people and, if he doesn't, then why are we trying to work to a peace agreement? If he does have control of his people, then they're doing this at his orders. Again, we have a doubt. Now I'm not against the peace process, but what I am saying to you is I think the last several weeks have brought into question fairly substantially the role of Arafat and whether or not the Palestinians, in fact, really mean the commitments they have made with regard to the peace process with Israeli with Israel in the last years.
[Matalin:] Well, speaking of Arafat's control over his people, the front pages of "The Washington Post" and "The New York Times" and most of America's major dailies ran that horrific picture of the Palestinian mob throwing the Israeli soldier out the window. There's the young man with blood on his hands, the crowd cheering him. From the president to the vice president to Governor Bush all condemn this act. How do we, however, as a as a nation, express our outrage in a tangible way at this kind of barbarism?
[Eagleburger:] In this particular case, I think it's very, very difficult to do anything meaningful. I look, we are we're an important player, but we are not the two active players. We have tried to help bring the players together, but the U.S. at this stage, it seems to me, other than good offices when we can, is largely out of this thing, and I think our ability to affect these events is largely non-existent right now, and I therefore, in any way to express this outrage, other than to make it clear to Arafat and the Palestinians that, as far as we're concerned, this is beyond the pale I don't really think that we have much of an ability to do much.
[Press:] Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for joining us tonight, helping us to better understand two very troubled areas right now of the world. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. And when we come back, we'll be joined by Senators Mary Landrieu and Bob Smith to talk more policy and also about the political dimensions of what's happening in the Middle East. Who benefits if the crisis continues George Bush or Al Gore? Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. So far, both Al Gore and George Bush have spent most of the time in this campaign talking about health care, taxes, and Social Security, but with troubles in the Middle East, they're also now being pressed on foreign policy. If this crisis continues, who stands to benefit politically Bush or Gore? And which one is better equipped to step into the role of world leader? We turn now to two U.S. senators to debate the policy and the politics of the Middle East. Republican Senator Bob Smith of New Hampshire joining us from Manchester, New Hampshire, and Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana here in the studio with us Mary.
[Sen. Mary Landrieu , Armed Services Committee:] Good evening.
[Press:] Hi.
[Matalin:] Thank you, Senator, for joining us once again. The candidates were careful to not talk about politics today, but Gore's campaign manager said that this crisis I want to use his words "highlights the importance of Gore's experience," but when we look back on modern relations in that ar arena, hasn't the the greatest advances been made by the Secretary Cheney, General Powell, National Security Adviser team, Condoleeza Rice, all presumed members of the Bush administration? That was the only time there's been stability in this region. Wouldn't those that team that has proved their ability to bring stability be better in the past be better for the crises in the future?
[Landrieu:] Well, actually, I disagree with with the point that you just made. There has been stability over the last couple of years. These last 15 days are quite unfortunate, but this administration has really guided these Mideast peace talks in a way that really gives us hope that peace can be brought to that region, and the experience, I think, Mary the comparison is going to be very important to people in this election. The Gore-Lieberman team has 22 years of combined experience. Joe Lieberman is one of the most respected men on the Armed Services Committee, and Al Gore, with eight years as vice president, clearly has a handle on international affairs, and I think that's going to play to the minds of the voters and be very positive in that, although Dick Cheney comes with a lot of experience, actually, Governor Bush doesn't have very much.
[Matalin:] Well, he has as much if not more experience than previous governors, which included Clinton and Reagan, but in spite of Gore's presumed superiority about his foreign policy, voters continue and consistently have given Republicans an edge and not just an edge, a decided advantage, by two to one. They believe that Republicans handle foreign policy better.
[Landrieu:] Well, I think some people remember the Vietnam days, and those were difficult days for our country, but I think people give this administration great marks for the successes in Europe. Europe being unified, democratic, and free is a wonderful accomplishment. That was President Clinton's accomplishment. The accomplishments of North Korea which is you know, trade with China. These are all engagement policies that sort of take nations off of the rogue list and put them on the sort of normal nation status, and that helps us, and I think people give credit to this administration.
[Press:] Senator Smith, as much as I love politics, I want to ask you, if I may, first, a quick policy question as a member of the Armed Services Committee. We've seen under President Reagan the bombing of the the Marine barracks over in Lebanon. We saw the bombing of the U.S. embassies a couple of years ago in Kenya and Tanzania. We see today the bombing or, yesterday, the bombing of the USS Cole. Are these are we doing enough to protect our institutions and our personnel overseas, or is this just something we can never protect against?
[Sen. Bob Smith , Armed Services Committee:] Well, Bill, I don't I don't think you could say you could never protect. You do the best you can, clearly. But I think it's important to be mindful of the fact that, you know, America's finest, several of them, are coming home now in body bags two of them women, I might add and we need to be mindful of the fact that American forces every single day are out there on the front lines and they deserve the best we can give them, whether it be the weapons they need or the protection they need. Clearly, a terrorist who who decides to do something like this is very difficult to stop, and what we what we know about this so far and we've got a lot more to find out is that, you know, somehow, this this group this terrorist group got compromised those people who were tending the vessel, who were putting the lines on. Somehow, they got explosives on that on those little one of those boats and got it up close to the hull and and did the damage. We don't know what happened yet, but I I think we'll find out, and I would agree with Larry Eagleburger, if we find out who did it, we should respond in spades because that's the best way to protect American forces out there. This was a United States warship...
[Press:] OK. So...
[Smith:] ... that was attacked.
[Press:] All right. Senator, now to now to the politics. In 1984, President Reagan gave a speech at Georgetown University echoing President Lyndon Johnson, and President Reagan said that day, quote, "We must restore America's honorable tradition of partisan politics stopping at the water's edge." Do you respect that tradition, Senator, or are you ready to blame the whole mess in the Middle East on Bill Clinton and Al Gore?
[Smith:] No, I I do respect that statement, Bill. We have one president at a time. This is a terrible tragedy. The Middle East right now is is embroiled in a horrible situation, violence. We had a we've had a warship attacked. There's one president. We should speak with one voice. I think we can analyze the the blame, if there is any, later, but I don't think it's appropriate to do that right now. I think we're in a we're in a time of mourning. And, you know, I think it it should put things in perspective. You know, the one-liners and the jokes and the cheap shots or whatever they may be in a political campaign are are totally irrelevant now. They're not they're not important compared to what happened, and I think we should be mindful of that. And I think, frankly, Vice President Gore and Governor Bush have set the standard by basically suspending their campaigns moment you know, momentarily in a time of mourning, and I, frankly, wish that the talking heads and and some of the political types who work for both of them would do the same thing.
[Matalin:] All right. Let me go to substance then, taking my cue from the good senator. The people might be wondering why we were refueling in Yemen in the first place, a terrorist haven, and "The New York Times" reported today that was because we were trying to improve our relations in that neck of the woods, and the Pentagon said today we'll we're going to reflect on if we're going to con do this and if we should have had heightened security. What measures do you think or what would you be encouraging as as an expert in this area?
[Landrieu:] Well, first of all, they have refueled there actually over probably a dozen times in the last year or two. It's not unusual. We do it with great precaution. Our forces are on high alert all the time when they're in that region, and there are precautions that are taken on a regular basis to protect against situations like this. But, as Senator Smith said and he so well knows, terrorists can strike at any time, and they have done that against buildings, against ships, against lots of other targets in the last several years, in places all over the world, Mary, not just in our countries that are enemies or not quite friendly. Even in friendly countries, they have.
[Matalin:] I think let me ask the question the way I asked the secretary. Should we be using our sailors and our destroyers for diplomatic missions? Should we be refueling in a place that we know is dangerous, is a haven for terrorists to improve relations?
[Landrieu:] Well, we fuel in many places around the world, in places and we try to take the best precautions that we can, and those precautions are under evaluation. There is a serious review going on. Perhaps that particular area will not be used in the future, but that decision hasn't been made. I do know one thing, that we do our best in the military to protect our men and women in uniform. We use all precautions and will continue to do so.
[Press:] Senator Smith...
[Smith:] Mary, can I make a comment on that?
[Press:] Yeah. Go ahead, Senator. Please.
[Matalin:] Yes. Go ahead.
[Smith:] I would just say, when I was in Vietnam, I served on an oil tanker with sitting on literally on top of tens of thousands of gallons of jet fuel that we used to refuel the into the ships in the Vietnam War, and you can there are times when you're out in the open sea that you can have tankers and your support vessels to provide that, but, you know, it depends. This ship was in route to the Persian Gulf. It had to stop somewhere. I haven't had really had the opportunity to check to see, you know, what other options they had as far as ports. But I I think you make a valid point, that if you if you have some indication that there might be a problem but remember this ship did not tie up to the dock. This ship was in a tied up to a buoy in the middle of the harbor, and it was somebody who compromised security in the whoever the contractors were that were providing that fuel. It that's how that boat was able to get up to the ship.
[Press:] All right. Senator Smith, almost out of time, so I'm going to be the irresponsible talking head who gets dirty and talks about politics, but there I mean, we are in the middle of election, and the American people are if this crisis continues or not, this certainly raises the issue of foreign policy that hasn't been talked about in this campaign so far. At a time of crisis like this, don't the American people want to keep a steady hand, and isn't it the wrong time to change horses?
[Smith:] Well, I think, if you look back in history, there it goes both ways. I mean, in the middle of the Korean War, Harry Truman left office, and so and Dwight Eisenhower took over. I I don't I don't believe that necessarily that's the case. There are other examples. Second World War where we stayed with Roosevelt. We want the I think the American people don't want this exploited. I think anybody who tries to exploit this terrible tragedy for political gain will pay serious, serious consequences.
[Matalin:] All right. Senator Smith, Senator Landrieu, we are all happy as Americans and feeling more secure that both of you are in this arena. Bill and I will return with our closing comments on CROSSFIRE after this quick break. Stay with us.
[Press:] Now you can find out what's coming up in the CROSSFIRE. Sign up for a daily e-mail sent free of charge telling you what we are planning for that night. Log on to cnn.comcrossfire to sign up for your daily CROSSFIRE e-mail.
[Matalin:] You know, Saddam is moving troops. The there are Arabs taking to the streets all across the region, even in moderate countries. The coalition is totally frayed at a time when this thing could spill out over into the entire region. It is this administration that let that coalition fray, and I think the administration that pulled it together, which included Cheney, Powell, and Condoleeza Rice, would do the best job of keeping it together in the future. My political point, though, is that, look, the Gore people have been trying to keep Clinton under wraps for months now. Obviously, in this emergency situation, he will resume center stage, and he just it's just going to exacerbate Gore's leadership gap.
[Press:] I'll tell you something. Nobody has done more to bring about peace in the Middle East that Bill Clinton has. He's devoted almost all his almost his entire presidency to that, and Al Gore has been right alongside of him, Mary. And, you know, I I admire both Bush and Gore, that they have not tried to make political hay out of this crisis. We can be more irresponsible than they are, and I have to say, when you see a crisis like this, it's not a time for anybody who needs on-the-job training. We've got 25 years of experience...
[Matalin:] Cheney, Powell...
[Press:] ... with no, no, no. It's not good enough to have a team. You need...
[Matalin:] ... Rice...
[Press:] ... the guy who knows the stuff. Bush Gore, 25 years experience; Bush, 0. From the left, I'm Bill Press. Good night for CROSSFIRE. Have a good weekend.
[Matalin:] Just remember the last time there was stability there who brought it. From the right, I'm Mary Matalin. Have a wonderful weekend. Join us next week for more CROSSFIRE.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] A team from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board is on its way to the Middle East. The government of Bahrain has requested help in the investigation of yesterday's crash of a Gulf Air jet. All 143 people on board were killed. Their grieving relatives today begin the gruesome task of identifying them. Our Brent Sadler has just arrived on the scene in Manama, Bahrain, he is joining us now live via video phone Brent.
[Brent Sadler, Cnn Correspondent:] Thank you very much, Daryn. Indeed, two elements from the United States taking part in assisting the Bahraini authorities in this air disaster. The crash, less than 24 hours ago, of Gulf Air 072, less than a couple miles short of Bahrain International Airport here, attempting to the land for the third time at the airport and crashing into the sea short of the runway. Crash experts from the National Transportation Safety Board are arriving here in the next few hours alongside the manufacturers of the Airbus 320, which went down, from France. And also many teams of divers from the U.S. Fifth Fleet, based here in Bahrain, have been helping not only in the recovery of bodies, 143 victims from this air crash, those bodies recovered after the first five hours into the air crash disaster, but also helping in picking up the many thousands of pieces of the aircraft, which disintegrated immediately after smashing into these Persian Gulf waters. Now I went out to the crash site a couple of hours ago and saw that the debris field covered about 1 12 square miles. A large area of very shallow and clear ocean. It's possible to see various sections, the largest section of the fuselage, for example, the sides of the fuselage, in one case, and the tail fin with the distinctive logo of Gulf Air on that tail fin. Also mixed in amongst the wreckage, various personal effects from victims. The important pieces, the most important pieces of salvage recovered so far are the two recorders: the black box so-called flight data recorder; and within the past three hours or so, the cockpit voice recorder. Those two pieces of equipment going to be obviously fundamental to the air crash inquiry which U.S. official experts will be taking part in. But as yet here, no real indication of what happened to cause the Gulf airliner to go down with all those people on board, killing 135 passengers and eight crew. Most of them, Egyptians and Bahrainis, more than 100 Egyptians on their way here right now to take part in the grim process of identification. Back to you, Daryn.
[Kagan:] Brent Sadler, bringing out the latest from Bahrain, thank you.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] This morning, bowls of Fruit Loops and bagels may be providing to be too tempting for some al Qaeda and Taliban detainees in Cuba. A number of prisoners at Camp X-ray began a hunger strike earlier this week after a turban fashioned out of a sheet was taken away from one of the captives. But now, the number participating in the protest, once as high as about 200, has fallen below 80. And CNN National Correspondent Bob Franken joins us now from Cuba with the latest on that good morning, Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Good morning, Paula. You're right. It is 73 this morning who said they would not take breakfast. Things are quiet know at Camp X-ray. It was as high as 194 at noon, but more and more are taking their meals. As you pointed out, this had to do with a fight over a turban and charges of religious insensitivity on the part of the camp guards. Turbans were forbidden. On Tuesday, when a guard ordered repeatedly one of the detainees to take the one off that he had fashioned out of a bed sheet, he seemed to be ignoring the guard, so in went the guards into the cell. Shackled, shacked the detainee only to find out he was in the middle of prayer, which sometimes requires entire focus in the Muslim world. That caused the protest to begin. You are seeing the end of it. We watched last night as many of the detainees, as sign of victory put turbans on, and that was because the general of the camp, the commander, who is Brig. Gen. Michael Lehnert, came, spoke to the detainees, agreed they could wear turbans if they wanted, but at they would have to allow them to inspect them. The problem was that things could be hidden in them. So, things have gotten a little bit back to normal. There was a protest yesterday morning. A protest that lasted about a half hour, with detainees were chanting, yelling. Sliding their bedding out of their cells. Bad enough that there was a security perimeter set up, by which I mean, guards went out with their machine guns pointed at the camp. Things have quieted down. The hunger strike seems to be having been averted now. They will not have to put in a plan, it sounds like, at least they are not contemplating one, where there would not be any allowance for somebody to become a martyr and starve themselves to death. Finally, there would be a forced IV if everything else had failed Paula.
[Zahn:] All right. Thanks so much for updating us on that story. Bob Franken joining us from Cuba this morning. Bob once again confirming that the protesters are now down to about the number of 73. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] The National Hurricane Center in Miami is hard at work tracking this tropical storm for us. Director Max Mayfield has been joining us all night long. But right now we have Hugh Cobb, who's standing by with an update. Hugh, what do you have?
[Hugh Cobb, National Hurricane Center:] Well, as of 8:00 p.m., the center of Tropical Storm Gordon is about 25 miles southwest of Cedar Key, Florida, expected to make a landfall within the next hour to two hours.
[Hall:] OK, and Hugh, with this particular tropical storm we know that it is diminishing, is this a time for people to get relaxed?
[Cobb:] Not at all, absolutely. People should keep their guard up. It is a very strong tropical storm, we've only lowered the winds 5 miles an hour from 75 to 70 miles an hour. Even though it is a tropical storm, we're still anticipating a storm surge of 5 to 8 feet to the right of where the center makes landfall. So folks along the Florida west coast should not by all means lower their guard, and expect a storm surge within the next several hours as we see Gordon come ashore.
[Hall:] And Mr. Cobb, with a storm surge as you described it, perhaps 5 to 8 feet, what kind of damage could that potentially do?
[Cobb:] Well, we're talking the inundation of structures right along the beaches. That same area in Florida witnessed a 10-foot storm surge during the storm of the century in 1993. The area is very prone to storm surges, there are quite a few structures along and very near the beaches, and so those structures can expect to be inundated with a 5 to 8 foot storm surge.
[Hall:] So one to still be watching and be careful by all means. Forecaster Hugh Cobbs, thank you very much for joining us with from the National Hurricane Center Brian.
[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] And hundreds of folks in the Cedar Key area are in temporary shelters right now, and Carrol Miller of the American Red Cross is coordinating shelter relief efforts and she joins by phone. Ms. Miller, describe the conditions for us. How many people have you sheltered this evening?
[Carrol Miller, American Red Cross:] Well, the American Red Cross has sheltered about 500 people since yesterday. We've had up to 34 shelters open and people are still coming in tonight out here just outside of the Cedar Key area.
[Nelson:] Where most of your shelters right along the western coast of Florida, up near Cedar Key?
[Miller:] Yes actually they started all the way down in Tampa and they've gone all the way up the coast.
[Nelson:] All right, the have people been in there for quite a while, or are they just now starting to rush in?
[Miller:] Well, no. Actually, a lot of people came in at noon today and they've stayed all day. Several have left after they've heard of the downgrading of the storm, but then we've had several more come in as the storm moved through their area. And we just actually just got done with a real pretty major rainstorm and we expect more coming this way of course.
[Nelson:] You said 500 people have been sheltered since yesterday. That does not seem to be a high number of people. Does that indicate to you that people are not taking the seriously enough?
[Miller:] Well, actually it's more a matter of the way that the stats are compiled. They're usually compiled officially once a day and those numbers were from about 12 or 1 today. So we might see that number go up overnight. But the people that are here in the shelters tonight do plan on staying, and we have a lot of people with special needs here.
[Nelson:] OK, Carrol Miller of the American Red Cross, coordinating the relief efforts in the Cedar Key area.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] And now we're going to get to look at stocks are moving this morning. Sasha Salama is at the Nasdaq marketsite. What should we be looking at, Sasha?
[Sasha Salama, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi there, Deb. A couple of biotechs to watch today. Chiron is one of them CHIR. The company reported profits of 21 cents. That was 1 cent better than what Wall Street had expected and as if that's not good enough news for shareholders, Chiron also raising its outlook for fiscal year '01, saying that higher sales for its meningitis vaccine really prompting it to force that outlook higher, which certainly is welcome news. Another biotech to watch today is Amgen. Amgen reports its results after the close today; 28 cents a share is expected for Amgen. Some other big names that come out with results after the close include Starbucks, the specialty coffee retailer, looking to report 12 cents a share, which would be actually higher than year-ago results. That's something unusual these days. And also maker of wireless technology, Qualcomm, reports results QCOM expected to come in with 21 cents a share lower from the year-ago. Another stock to watch today is Homestore.com HOMS is rallying already in the premarket. It's up more than $2 a share. The company, which is an online real estate company, reported 13 cents a share in profits 2 cents better. And the company also said that revenues and earnings, not just for this year, but for next year should be higher than expectations this coming against the backdrop of a relatively strong housing market, which has held up pretty well amid the backdrop of this slowing U.S. economy so HOMS already is a winner in the premarket Deb.
[Marchini:] Thanks a lot, Sasha. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Well, as we teeter on the cusp of 2002, what can we expect? I never really heard of this title, but a trained futurist, David Zach joins us from Milwaukee. What a cool title, David.
[David Zach, Trained Futurist:] Yes, it is a cool title.
[Phillips:] Well, let's get right into it, because we're running toward the end of the hour here and you have got some really things that came out of your, I guess your future research, and that is, the changes since 911, sort of the lighthearted thoughts. We marked some of these, marriages and engagements are up, expecting a baby boom in June, divorces are always up. But let's talk about some of the other positives that you found here, things like puppy dog sales up 30 percent. This is all positive stuff.
[Zach:] And this is all people trying to connect with somebody, you know, the romantic gifts, the marriages, the engagements. There is this sense that people are trying to connect and be affirmed by somebody other than themselves. And all this technology that we're bringing is, you know, it's been telling us you don't need anybody else. You can be this little entity unto yourself, but after 911 we learned that wasn't true, and so we're searching for answers from other people.
[Phillips:] Well you notice well that leads right into this next point. You say that people are not living in the present.
[Zach:] They're either living in the past, trying to go back to a time where they felt safe and secure, or they're living in the future and running these scenarios through their heads of what if and oh my. What if this happens? So it's a lot of worrying, but not really grounded in the here and now.
[Phillips:] Now some of the more serious things that I was reading here, counseling services are way up, prescriptions for Prozac way up, gun sales are up, and 41 percent of Americans rethinking their career choices. Wow.
[Zach:] Yes, but there's also this fear because of rising unemployment. There's a lot of people rethinking but they don't know how to quite take those steps to try something new. So there's everybody's just kind of stuck in the moment as it were. They don't know where to turn.
[Phillips:] Well, I notice too racial tensions are down. New focus on cultural education, these are definite positives.
[Zach:] There's a tremendous curiosity out there, and you think back in like World War II. I don't think a lot of people wanted to go out and learn all about Japan or learn all about German culture. But today, like one of the local bookstores here in Milwaukee, they can't keep Korans on the shelf. As soon as they're in, people come and buy them. And another friend of mine told me that people are actually taking Arabic because they want to be able to read this stuff in the original language.
[Phillips:] Wow. Now what's common theme in all of this? Did you find some common themes?
[Zach:] I think one of the more interesting themes is, my dad once told me that there are no atheists in foxholes. Neither are there individuals. And so that is a sense of trying to reach out, trying to connect. There is, I think a real interesting trend is moving back towards organizations that made this country great. So you're seeing a surge in or stronger interest in organizations like Rotary, Kiwanis, but also Peace Corps enrollment is way up. And then you look on the campuses, people applying towards getting into the CIA, the FBI, as well as the military is people are kind of affirming what is it that got us to this point in terms of being a great nation. But if you add in the curiosity and the cultural education, we're really kind of trying to step outside of our comfort zone. The 1990s made us very comfortable and we had this sort of, this very dangerous attitude that we knew what the future was going to be. After 911, all bets were off and we stopped and started looking around. And so one of the things you may see is more creativity because of this, more solutions coming because we don't know, and therefore we have to start looking. We have to look for new places and new ideas for answers.
[Phillips:] What about top trends for 2002? What are some of your predictions?
[Zach:] Well first of all, I would not make a prediction. I'd make a forecast.
[Phillips:] Oh, a big difference.
[Zach:] Yes. A prediction is, you're going to get hit by a bus at 2:45 tomorrow. A forecast is, there's a lot more traffic, so look both ways before you cross the street. I would say there are two sort of sets of forecasts that I could make. One is if there is terrorism, more terrorism like a major terrorist strike again, gives me one set versus if there isn't. Deurbanization may happen if there is terrorism. There's a lot of people whose jobs are not defined by location. They're defined by access. And I was working with one of the colleges in far northwestern Wisconsin where there's a lot of vacation homes, of people who live in either Milwaukee or Minneapolis or Chicago, and a lot of those people are saying, you know I have high-speed access up here and I have FedEx. I don't have to go back there. And so if we have this perception that urban areas are going to be dangerous, you may see this deurbanization, and a lot of companies are now going through decentralization plans, so that if one pocket is taken out, they can still exist and still do their business.
[Phillips:] David Zach, very interesting. We need to see more of civic nation and more people, more faithful people, a lot of good points that came across from your research. I appreciate you being with us.
[Zach:] Thanks, Kyra. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] In the wake of that tobacco settlement, Massachusetts attorney general wanted restricted limits on advertising, and so, he pushed through a law which barred tobacco ads within 1,000 feet of parks, playgrounds and schools. And it is that law that is being argued about today at the Supreme Court. Charles Bierbauer is there with more -Charles.
[Charles Bierbauer, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Jeanne. It's a First Amendment case that pits the interests of the tobacco companies in commercial speech versus the interest of the state of Massachusetts in this case. Here's why it is before the court today.
[Bierbauer, Cnn Correspondent:] Tobacco companies gave up their billboards following tobacco's 1998 settlement with the states.
[William Corr, Campaign For Tobacco Free Kids:] But they do advertise at retail stores, at convenience stores, where three out of four teenagers visit at least once a week.
[Bierbauer:] In 1999, Massachusetts sought to curb that advertising, too, with a statewide ban on outdoor tobacco ads, such as these, if placed within 1,000 feet of schools, parks and playgrounds, and limits on the location of cigarettes and ads inside stores. The tobacco companies appealed to the Supreme Court.
[Mark Berlind, Phillip Morris Attorney:] All that's at stake in this case for us is the ability of ourselves and retailers to place small signs in the retail stores or directly outside the retail stores so that customers, adult customers, can be notified that cigarettes are available, what the brands are, what the price is.
[Bierbauer:] Actually, two important issues are at stake. The tobacco companies contend the 1965 Federal Labeling Act that required the surgeon general's health warning on cigarette packages, preempts the states from imposing separate ad restrictions. The companies also raise a First Amendment claim for "commercial speech."
[Berlind:] We've got truthful speech here. In addition, this is a restriction that singles out tobacco advertising. It is discriminatory in that way.
[Bierbauer:] But critics counter that commercial speech does not get as strict constitutional protection as political speech.
[Corr:] The current Supreme Court rulings allow states and cities, if they have a very important public purpose, and narrowly tailor their regulation, to regulate advertising, or so-called commercial speech. And that is precisely what Massachusetts is trying to do.
[Bierbauer:] The public purpose, in this case, is to limit teenagers' exposure to the tobacco ads in the hope of reducing teen smoking. It could be a close call. Some justices feel free speech is free speech and should not be divided into different categories to meet different government interests- Jeanne.
[Meserve:] Charles, tell us about the other case being argued today before the Court.
[Bierbauer:] The other case involves a question of whether police can search a vehicle if a suspect or the person that they are watching is not in the vehicle, has left the vehicle prior to making contact with the police. It's a question, again, of a warrantless search. It involves police in Florida tracking some drug operations down there. The Florida Supreme Court has said that's not permissible, and the U.S. Supreme Court will now take up the question of the warrantless search of a vehicle when the driver or passenger has already gotten out of it Jeanne.
[Meserve:] Charles Bierbauer at the Court. Thank you. We are expecting decisions today from the Supreme Court in about half an hour's time. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Excerpts from cockpit transmissions published by the "New York Times" paint a very chilling picture of exactly what happened on September 11th, in the moment before the horror began. The Times says, an air traffic controller heard these words from American Airlines Flight 11. Quote "we have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be OK. We are returning to the airport." Minutes later, Flight 11 flew into Tower One of the World Trade Center. And as we said this morning, we're just beginning to learn a little bit more about the final words from the fatal flights of September 11th. The chilling words are published in this morning's "New York Times." CNN's Miles O'Brien is at CNN Center with the details. I have to tell you, Miles, I read through the transcript and it made me sick.
[Miles O'brien, Cnn News:] It is chilling is really not even a good enough word, is it, Paula. These transcripts are difficult to read, especially when you consider the gravity of it. It's sort of like a fleeting glimpse of something that is really an enduring horror. Normally, in when you there's an accident, the National Transportation Safety Board would release these transcripts, which are recordings of the air traffic control communications between pilot and controller, fairly quickly after any accident. Of course, this is normal about this. These are criminal investigations. But the "New York Times" did get a hold of them. Let's take a look at our, some of the graphics we have put together, just to help you understand what's going on and what the timeline was, the departure of American Airlines 11, just around eight o'clock, United Airlines 175 at 8:14, flights continuing as they should have according to their flight plans at 8:20. And then, at 8:38 AM, by this time, something had happened that was definitely wrong. American Airlines 11 drastically off course, was supposed to be headed out this way to Los Angeles. And this is what the transcript indicates, the conversation coming down at 8:33:59 to be precise. And apparently what had happened was, the microphone had been keyed open, either accidentally, or perhaps on purpose by the pilot trying to tip the hand of what was going on. And the transcript says this, "nobody move, please. We are going back to the airport. Don't try to make any stupid moves." Now, let's continue on. And at this point, very shortly thereafter, at 8:44 a.m., it is now apparent that United 175, also supposedly headed to Los Angeles, is veering off course, headed in a southbound direction. And that is when, about this time, right before controllers become aware of it, controllers ask if they know anything about American Airlines 11. Let's look at the full-screen graphic on that for just a moment. It turns out that United 175 responded to a general call for information about American 11 a little bit of irony here the unsuspecting crew not knowing they, too, would be hijacked shortly, radios back and says, sounds like someone keyed a mike and said, "everyone stay in your seat." So, the pilot unsuspecting, as we say here. Then, as time goes on, here, we get a little closer to the event, at 8:53:23, American Airlines 11 has already disappeared from radar screens, having crashed into the first tower of the World Trade Center. And air traffic control has this conversation amongst themselves at 8:53. The controllers say, "we may have a hijack. We have some problems over here right now." That's a conversation between two controllers. And I should have you note, that at this juncture, there were fighter jets, F-15s from Otis Air National Guard Base, en route to New York City by nine AM with United Airlines 175 closing in on the second tower. They were still a good eight minutes away. So the controllers had gone through the procedures that they would normally go through in a hijacking situation. There just was not enough time to respond in this case. Both planes had crashed in, and the fighters were still some 80 miles away from New York City. Now, let's move down to Washington and American Airlines Flight 77. It, too, was headed to the West Coast, went off with pretty much without a hitch and headed out in this direction. The radar tracking is not as complete on this, because of the fact that the transponder was turned off, as it was in the other cases. But then, it becomes apparent to controllers, that they see this blip, not aided by a transponder, headed in the wrong direction, and the controllers lost radio contact. And the first clue that they saw knew that there was something wrong comes at 8:56, when the controller tries to raise American Airlines 77. "American seven Indy," which stands for the Indianapolis en route control center, which had the sector coverage at that point. "Indy radio check, how do you read?" They do this repeatedly, and to no avail no response from that aircraft. And so then, American Airlines 77 apparently homing in on Washington, controllers at the pick up a hotline to the Secret Service, and let the Secret Service know that there may be some the White House might be in jeopardy. Meanwhile, three F-16 fighters are scrambled from Langley Air Force base down near Norfolk. They are initially, before the crash of American 77, they are headed toward New York, because of the situation there. They get veered off to Washington. And this is the conversation that we get as United Airlines 93 crashes into the Pennsylvania countryside, those F-16s waiting over Washington. And there is this kind of cryptic, sort of telling conversation from an unknown pilot, which says, "anybody know what that smoke is in lower Manhattan?" So, as I say, Paula, fleeting glimpses, but in their own way very terri very terrifying. Sort of the clipped communication of air traffic control and the pilots, and yet in its own way, very, very moving. Paula?
[Zahn:] Yeah, Miles. And the part that affected me the most was, I guess, was the fighter pilot later being interviewed, whose name was, of course, not identified, saying that the prospect of taking a plane of his fellow countrymen and countrywomen was something, you know, too distasteful to even think about after the fact.
[O'brien:] Well, yeah, and it can you imagine that decision, to have to squeeze that trigger. Now these are military people and they are trained to follow orders, and at that juncture, the President of the United States had authorized orders to shoot down a civilian aircraft, if it was, in fact, going to harm a target on the ground. I'm certain they would have followed their orders, but I'm sure that would have been a terrible thing. They would have obviously had visual contact before they would have fired off any missiles. And that would have been something they would have remembered all their lives, for sure Paula.
[Zahn:] Miles O'Brien, thanks so much. See you a little bit later on this morning.

[Colleen Mcedwards, World News:] Elian Gonzalez and his family remain at a secluded farm in the U.S. state of Maryland. But they're not alone. Four more of Elian's playmates have come to the United States from Cuba for a two-week visit with their friend. Meanwhile, a U.S. appeals court has issued important rulings in the boy's custody case. CNN's Kate Snow has that.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Elian Gonzalez remains on a sprawling estate, his privacy protected by U.S. marshals. And as long as the boy can't return to Cuba, Cuba is coming to him. Four of Elian's classmates, dressed in school uniforms, arrived in Washington accompanied by parents. Among the group, Elian's best friend and the pediatrician who's cared for him since he was born. Elian's favorite cousin and his former teacher have already arrived. The group was granted permission to stay two weeks. Before they left Havana, Cuban President Fidel Castro complained the U.S. government was placing too many restrictions on Elian's visitors.
[Fidel Castro, Cuban President:] These things are crazy, absurd, ridiculous. That's the least I can say. They don't contribute at all to helping the boy.
[Snow:] As for the Miami relatives, Attorney General Janet Reno indicated, in time, there might be a way for a reunion between Elian and his second cousin, who helped care for the boy after his rescue.
[Janet Reno, U.s. Attorney General:] I can't imagine that Marisleysis will be out of his life. I mean, you could look at them and see a connection.
[Snow:] A government-appointed psychiatrist has said Elian's feelings toward Marisleysis may be "the romantic feelings of a school boy" rather than the emotions a boy would feel toward a mother figure. Regardless, a reunion is not likely to happen anytime soon. A federal appeals court Thursday refused to grant the Miami family's request for access to the boy. The court also denied their request that a legal guardian be appointed. In a separate ruling, the court said Juan Miguel Gonzalez could participate in the legal fight over Elian's asylum petition, but it rejected his request that he speak for his son, replacing Elian's great-uncle Lazaro in court.
[Kendall Coffey, Atty. For Elian's Miami Relatives:] I want to emphasize there is an appeal. It's going forward. We have to remain confident and believing in our legal system.
[Snow:] All told, it was a disappointing day for the Miami relatives after having returned to Miami, tired and defeated in their mission to see Elian. In Washington, supporters of the Miami relatives picked up where they'd left off, some 250 people protested outside the White House. [on camera]: At Carmichael Farm, little information about the boy at the center of all this attention. We do know the place is well- equipped for a bunch of 6-year-olds. Earlier, a delivery truck went into the farm carrying a brand-new swing set. Kate Snow, CNN, Queenstown, Maryland.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] And now to a transportation problem on the ground: the problem of distracted drivers. That's what an employers group is trying to draw attention to today: those who drive even though they are distracted. The group says that doing things like talking on cell phones and eating keeps drivers from watching the road. It's estimated that 25 to 50 percent of car crashes each year are caused by distracted drivers. Officials recommend keeping the distractions brief or just avoid them all together. As for those cell phones, some believe better hands-free phones could be helpful. More now from CNN technology correspondent Rick Lockridge.
[Burt Kolker, Ackerman Security Systems:] Would you like to do that 2:30 or 3:00 today? I'm in my car...
[Rick Lockridge, Cnn Technology Correspondent:] Many Americans think of their cars as their mobile offices. Alarm system salesman Burt Kolker, though, is serious about it.
[Kolker:] So, when people call me, they're used to getting me. And that is the nature of my business. Hi, this is Burt. I need Yvette, please.
[Lockridge:] A hands-free cell phone helps Kolker keep his eyes on the road. Voice-activated cell phones may one day be the only kind drivers will be permitted to use in the U.S., especially now that many cell phones come with screens designed for web access shopping, stock trading, e-mail screens that could divert your eyes from the road.
[Richard Grant Jr., Chief Scientist, Airtrac:] Like, oh, let me make a reason why you're not going to be looking out the window. So with hands-free and speech, that problem is taken care of.
[Computer:] Please choose the type restaurant you want.
[Unidentified Male:] Ethnic.
[Lockridge:] Under perfect conditions, a voice-operated phone can work well.
[Unidentified Male:] Scratch that.
[Lockridge:] But in the real world, cell phone connections are often noisy and garbled. That makes it harder for the remote computer Josh here is talking to, to interpret what he's saying.
[Unidentified Male:] No, it's not going to go do it. Scratch that.
[Lockridge:] What's the solution? More powerful computer chips that will enable cell phones to do speech processing internally. But will smarter phones turn us into smarter drivers?
[Grant:] Now, listen, improving driver safety this isn't a magic box that protects people when they drive. I've given them a better-than-odds-on chance. They are still going to be the same driver they were before.
[Lockridge:] In fact, a study in the "New England Journal of Medicine" found no safety advantage to using a hands-free cell phone behind the wheel. That same study also found that drivers using cell phones were four times as likely to cause an accident as drivers who weren't. That's almost exactly the same increase in risk as driving drunk. Rick Lockridge, CNN, Atlanta.

[Rosemary Church, World News:] Russia's president-elect Vladimir Putin is to meet with European Union officials on Friday. A day earlier, Russia received a sharp reminder of East-West tensions over the Kremlin's war on Chechnya. CNN's Steve Harrigan joins us now from Moscow with more. Steve?
[Steve Harrigan, Cnn Correspondent:] Rosemary, that sharp public rebuke came from the Council of Europe's meeting in Strasbourg, and really it led to a dramatic move by the Russian delegation. They decided to walk out of the Council of Europe. They made that walkout only after having their voting rights suspended by the Council of Europe. As a matter of fact, things got so testy in the hallway in the corridor after that walkout, there was a fistfight between a Russian delegate from Dagestan and one of the Chechen representatives. Now, so far, the reaction from the Kremlin has been nothing no reaction yet from acting Russian president Vladimir Putin. Mr. Putin spent much of Thursday onboard a nuclear submarine in the Barents Sea. Mr. Putin was there to see a ballistic missile test, also for some public relations with the military something we've seen a lot of from Mr. Putin lately. He was wearing the navy uniform, the traditional great coat and blue and white striped T-shirt of the sailors. We've seen him in a leather jacket emerge from a Russian military jet during the campaign. So really, another public display of one of Mr. Putin's main goals, something he talks often about, and that is reviving Russia's military might. Now, although Mr. Putin was silent about the Council of Europe's move, there was angry reaction from other Russian politicians. In particular, in the lower house of parliament in the state Duma, here is what the speaker of the Duma, Gennady Seleznyov, had to say.
[Gennady Seleznyov, Chairman, Russian State Duma:] I believe that the 21st century will be the Russian century. They are just mocking us, and I believe we should just say enough is enough. We will get by without you European teachers.
[Harrigan:] Rosemary, despite the angry words, once again, it's important to keep in mind that this is little more than a public rebuke. Although at the same time, it is an embarrassment for Russia's new president-elect Vladimir Putin and for many on the Russian side who've worked hard to get Russia into the Council of Europe. They just became members in 1996, and now that very membership is threatened. Rosemary?
[Church:] Steve, can we look now at that meeting Friday with the European Union officials. What's expected to come out of that?
[Harrigan:] Well, that meeting is supposed to take place about four hours from now, and that might be a lot calmer than the scene we saw in Strasbourg Thursday. Mr. Putin is meeting with three of the top leaders from the European Union. Basically, Russia is in a very difficult spot right now. The population and the military still want the military action in Chechnya to continue. But it's gotten to be a much more difficult fight. In Chechnya's south, in the southern regions, in the mountainous regions, it's become very difficult to fight the Chechens in their hiding places in those mountains. Over the past few weeks, we've seen some real military setbacks for the Russians. We've seen convoys ambushed and attacked. We've seen scenes of public mourning from cities across Russia in the past few weeks. So really public sentiment to keep this war going still strong, to make sure the Chechen rebels are entirely destroyed. That is very much at odds with pressure from the West, from the outside world to end this war and to start negotiations. Rosemary.
[Church:] Steve Harrigan, updating us there from Moscow. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] You've been listening to Attorney General Janet Reno speaking in Miami about the Elian Gonzalez case. She said repeatedly she wanted to deal with this in a fair and even- handed way; she wanted to be reasonable, she wanted to be measured. She said that the offers still stands for the Miami family, the family of Lazaro Gonzalez, to fly to the Washington, D.C. area free of charge to meet at a neutral site with Juan Miguel Gonzalez, who is, of course, the father of young Elian. She said this would be a private meeting, and if the family could work it out amongst itself, then the federal authorities would step back. However, if the family could not work it out, then the rule of law would be enforced. As you know, a letter has been sent to the family of Lazaro Gonzalez saying that young Elian should be taken to Opa Locka Airport near Miami at 2:00 this afternoon. However, Janet Reno said you would not see Marshals at 2:01 going to the house if the boy has not been taken to the airport. When asked what she would do at 2:00, she said we will make that determination at that time. She did, however, say that the department was prepared to enforce the rule of law, but would do it in a measured and reasonable way. We're going to go back to Susan Candiotti who is outside the home of Lazaro Gonzalez in Miami. Susan, I presume that people there were listening to what the attorney general had to say. Is there any reaction?
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, unless they have radios or a little television sets, frankly, we did not see many of those in the crowd. I think it's fair to say we've been unable to see anyone listening to it. However, right now, the family spokesperson Armando Gutierrez and attorney Manny Diaz are standing at microphones to address the media.
[Manny Diaz, Attorney For Elian's Miami Relatives:] ... that, number one, we certainly agree that there should be no precipitous action. We believe that that's very important and that we should keep talking. To that end, we have offered before, we offered last night and we offer again today that we want very much for the families to get together with no preconditions. Let the family speak to each other. Who knows what will come out of a family meeting. Perhaps they will leave that room and come out and tell the world that they have worked this out. In the meantime, I think the family needs to understand why, and I think the American public needs to understand why, Mr. Craig refuses to let his client meet with his family. We want to know why. What's on the table today is not an offer. What's on the table today is a demand. This family does not want to react to demands, this family just simply wants to meet with their relatives. We need to let that happen. Thank you.
[Candiotti:] All right, so you've heard from attorney Manny Diaz who was saying that what U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno is talking about does not amount to an invitation, in his opinion, but a demand. And he said that this family is not willing to comply with such demands that they automatically turn over, surrender this youngster no matter what happens after a meeting with Juan Miguel Gonzalez. So it would appear at this time that the family remains intransigent, and they are maintaining their position they will not surrender this youngster. So we appear to be at an impasse at this time unless, unbeknownst to us, there is talk going on behind the scenes. I can tell you this, that the family spokesperson, Armando Gutierrez, spoke with one of the other attorneys, not Manny Diaz, just before Janet Reno began her news conference. And Armando Gutierrez instructed this attorney to listen to what the attorney general had to say before any final decision was made about going to the district court of appeals in Atlanta to file an injunction to try to prevent any action from U.S. Immigration from forcibly removing this boy from the home. You have heard U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno say that authorities are not planning to take any action at 2:01 p.m., one minute past the threatened deadline for them to surrender this youngster at Opa Locka airport nearby. So at this point, we'll just find out what happens next. Well, it's anyone's guess at this point. Elian's great-uncle Lazaro Gonzalez is addressing a crowd of demonstrators. He has continuing is thanking them for their support. And so the question is, what is Lazaro Gonzalez's next move? He has remained defiant throughout, that unless he gets what he wants, and that is much more time than has been offered to meet with Juan Miguel Gonzalez and be convinced in his own mind that he is speaking freely, then he, apparently at this time, is not to agree to anything about what U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno has to say. But, if I may, we are joined now by Miami Police Lieutenant Bill Schwartz. Now, earlier this day, he told us that the U.S. Marshals had spoken to the police chief about requesting to move the news media from the streets. Now, Lieutenant Schwartz, you now have some new information, that apparently you were given bad information. You want to correct what you had to say to us.
[Lt. Bill Schwartz, Miami Police:] Yes, there's no question that was some misinformation misunderstood information. The federal government has not asked that the media leave. We don't know where that rumor started. We do know that the chief's position and apparently the federal government's position is that the media may stay here exactly where they are.
[Candiotti:] So, initially when you said that the Fed's had addressed your police chief, asking us to move, you're saying that that's wrong.
[Schwartz:] That was incorrect. It was my mistake.
[Candiotti:] And so far, how has the crowd been acting so far?
[Schwartz:] Fine. You know, it's a very passionate issue and people are here to express themselves, but so far it's been very peaceful; loud at times, but always peaceful. And I think most of the people want it to remain that way. Of course, there's always a wildcard in every crowd.
[Candiotti:] Lt. Bill Schwartz, thanks for joining us. And with that, we will turn it back to you.
[Meserve:] Susan Candiotti, thank you. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] He's been out of the White House for several months and pretty much out of the public eye, but not today. Former President Bill Clinton is settling into his new office in Harlem, today, and the neighbors have turned out by the hundreds for a street party to welcome him. CNN's Maria Hinojosa is there for the festivities. I guess he's expected to speak soon Maria.
[Maria Hinojosa, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Natalie. Yes, in fact, the former president arrived on stage about a half hour ago, and he's been listening to some of the speakers who are a who's who of African-American politics in New York City. Speaking now is former Mayor David Dinkins, the first African-American mayor of New York City. Before that was Congressman Rangel, who takes a lot of credit for bringing the former president here. Also, it's being hosted by Cicely Tyson. This is a big event with many people. It started off not-quite full, but now it's really filled up. There are people lining up and down 125th Street. When the former president stepped on stage, everybody started waving these flags and these little fans that have been passed out. It's really like the welcoming of a rock star, almost. Much of what's been said here has been the importance of establishing his offices here as a way of revitalizing not only Harlem, but other Harlems across the United States, other African- American communities
[Joe Lockhart, Former Clinton Press Secretary:] I think the president likes to tell people that sometimes your first idea isn't your best idea, and he definitely believes that today the best place in the world for him to be is in Harlem. You can see by the look on his face how happy he is to be here, and the vast majority of the people here are returning that.
[Hinojosa:] Now, what is your sense about how he's dealing with the fact he's got a group of protesters. What do you think is going on in his mind, in terms of look at my new neighborhood.
[Lockhart:] I think the one thing that Bill Clinton understands is a little bit of controversy, and he's flowed around and
[Hinojosa:] What has he told you about his feelings about Harlem? Does he want to walk the streets here? Does he feel like this is the neighborhood that is going to open themselves up to having him be just a regular guy?
[Lockhart:] The president's talked very fondly about when he was just out of college walking around 125th Street and seeing all of Harlem. He's been back here as a candidate for president, and as the president, and I think he's just really excited that this will be his new home.
[Allen:] Joe, this is Natalie Allen at the Atlanta studio, wondering what life has been like been for Bill Clinton. You said, this morning, that he had trouble using an ATM card. What kind of adjustment has it been for him? He's made millions of dollars; is he out of debt, at this point in his life?
[Lockhart:] I think there's been a number of little things that he's had to figure out. He doesn't have aides following him around. But I think that's what he enjoys the most, that it isn't a big deal, and 50 people don't have to move to get him to a coffee shop or to go have breakfast. He's been very busy. He's been working on his foundation on this office, giving speeches, providing for his family. So I think his biggest complaint right now is that he's got too much to do. Otherwise, I think it's been a great transition for him.
[Allen:] Joe Lockhart, a familiar face to all, we thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Searchers are looking for more bodies after a tornado carved its way through northeastern Mississippi over the weekend. At least five people were killed. Hundreds of homes were destroyed or damaged. Top wind speeds during the storm are estimated to be more than 150 miles per hour. Two other storm-related death are reported in Arkansas and in Kansas. For more on what's ahead for Mississippi in the aftermath of this devastating storm, we're joined now on the phone by Mississippi Gov. Ronnie Musgrove. The governor is in Washington. He's attending the National Governors Conference there. And he's actually calling us from the White House this morning. We thank you very much for your time, Mr. Governor. Governor, can you tell us now what is the latest on the recovery effort under way now?
[Gov. Ronnie Musgrove , Mississippi:] The confirmed report is that there have been five deaths, major devastation in a number of counties, a lot of homes totally destroyed. But there's a sense of optimism. And in spite of this sadness, of the tremendous loss, the pain and the suffering, the people of Mississippi are resilient. We were there within hours. The representatives from FEMA were there. Robert Latham, the head of the Mississippi Emergency Management Association and many others were there to work together to help rebuild our communities, rebuild our counties, but more importantly rebuild lives from this devastation.
[Harris:] And we did see that you were there. You left Washington to go back home to Mississippi and take a look at the damage firsthand. How does this compare with other storms that you've seen hit your state?
[Musgrove:] Well, since I've been governor, this is certainly the most devastating in terms of loss of life. It's tough when you look at a family who's looking at the foundation of a home that was once sitting there. So it is a difficult situation to address, but I want to commend the people of Mississippi and the cooperative work and effort. It's one of those things that you're judged on how you rebound because you can't do anything about the fact that it has occurred. I believe our people will respond in a great way.
[Harris:] Is there anything that could have been done to keep the damage down even lower, or maybe keep the toll on life a little bit lower on this one? Is there any chance that I mean, I've heard reports that the sirens didn't go off very early before this storm hit?
[Musgrove:] A number of the places were in rural areas outside of the downtown areas. It also happened very quickly. So there was not an opportunity for much warning. The devastation occurred in a large area, so, consequently, you know, one could always say things could be quicker. But it was a tremendous response, and people did the right thing. Many people went exactly where you're supposed to in times of storm. And as a result, many lives were saved. There were a lot less injuries than could have happened.
[Harris:] And that's...
[Musgrove:] And if you look at the devastation and the damage that was done, the first question that you ask is, how were there not more lives lost? So that, again, that is a very positive statement to the people for responding in the right way.
[Harris:] Certainly. That's good to hear. How soon before the FEMA help gets in there.
[Musgrove:] By having a representative of FEMA with me yesterday, it cut the time dramatically on processing the application. Instead of having a team to come in, his presence would give us a full report. I'm going to ask the president this morning to call those counties a federal disaster and to provide some relief. I've already declared them yesterday morning a state disaster, and so, therefore, I'm going to appeal to the president personally this morning to go ahead and declare these counties a federal disaster entitled to relief.
[Harris:] Mississippi Gov. Ronnie Musgrove, we thank you very much for your time on this very busy morning for you. Good luck to you...
[Musgrove:] Thank you.
[Harris:] ... and the folks back there in Mississippi who are trying to clean up and recover.
[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Yes, our best wishes with them.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] The millennium's arrival is also delivering opportunity: a reminder to reflect, as well as look ahead. Few have as much to consider as the world's top peacemaker, the United Nation's secretary-general, Kofi Annan. In the waning hours of 1999, he sat down for an exclusive interview with CNN's Richard Roth.
[Kofi Annan, U.n. Secretary-general:] We have managed to avoid major world wars. Economically, most people are perhaps better off today than they were a century ago. Most of us are perhaps better educated than our parents or our grandparents. So there's a lot to be grateful for. At the same time, we have the major inequalities between states and within states. We have the question of whole groups of people who are excluded from the economic and political process. And I think these are issues that one would want to tackle. But I will say that generally, as we end the century, we are ending it on a better note than one would have expected, given the nature of this century.
[Richard Roth, Cnn United Nations Correspondent:] What do you think the challenge is for the leaders of the world, who you are on the phone with a lot and who you meet in person and make a lot of promises in their speeches? Are there any specific challenges that you think you'd like to see them tackle?
[Annan:] I think one of the main issues I would want to see them tackle would be this whole question of eradication of poverty. I would want them to join us in the fight against AIDS epidemic, which is ravaging Africa and will spread to other parts of the world. It is just an international problem that we all need to tackle.
[Roth:] You issued a clarion call at the beginning of the last general assembly section in effect that irrespective of international borders, human rights is a paramount concern and, in effect, allows outside forces perhaps to go in to defend human rights. Is this going to catch on in the next year ahead?
[Annan:] I have argued that even though the U.N. is an organization of states that rights and the ideas we exist to protect and promote belongs to the people. And we have put the human being at the center of everything we do. We need to take steps to protect the individual if they are caught in interstate conflict. But if they are caught in an international situation, which is persistent, brutal, unrelentant abuse of their human rights or humanitarian rights, that we have no right and theirs a great, growing awareness around the world of people's rights and their dignity. And this consciousness is not going to allow governments, individually or collectively, to push human rights back into the bottle.
[Roth:] But this time next year, will there be a settlement between the U.N. and Iraq? Do you have any kind of a hope there?
[Annan:] Well, we have lived with the issue for almost 10 years. We have major hurdles ahead of us. I hope all will cooperate. The Iraqi government will cooperate and that we can implement the resolution smoothly. But given the history of this particular crisis, I will not be it would be hasty for me to say that we will resolve it by the end of the year.
[Chen:] That exclusive interview with Kofi Annan was taped on New Year's Eve.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] Two former U.S. diplomats are in Atlanta for a special event. It's an American embassy evening and symposium. Well, they're joining us now to give us their insights into this new war on terrorism. And to talk about the role of diplomacy in this battle, we welcome Wyche Fowler, he is former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia; and Phillip Lader, he's former U.S. ambassador to Great Britain. Ambassadors, nice to have you join us because I know you're very busy in your schedules. So thanks for taking the time with us. Ambassador Fowler, let's talk about Saudi Arabia first. How important is this relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia? But how delicate can it be for the Saudis domestically?
[Wyche Fowler, Fmr. Ambassador To Saudi Arabia:] Well, I think the importance of the relationship of the two countries is undeniable, ever since we fought and won the Gulf War together, repelling Saddam from Kuwait. And that, I think it's fair to say that that relationship is only strengthened in peacetime over the last 10 years. Economically, we've exchanged we just have a strong relationship. Delicacy in the Middle East all revolves around the fact that sometimes we forget there's such a thing as Arab public opinion, that monarchs and sometimes even dictators have to listen to the people in the street. And they are...
[Kelley:] But in this case...
[Fowler:] And there are many, many discordant voices, mainly having to do with whenever you have superpower who has a presence in the region. Beginning with Osama bin Laden, that has been source of tension because he has made it the source of American forces.
[Kelley:] And that's what I was going to say. You know, the country, Saudi Arabia kicked Osama bin Laden out of the country. So might that be an easier sell this time. But because of the cells that might remain there from al-Qaeda, that might be more of problem domestically?
[Fowler:] Well, I think it's just you know, we just don't know the extent of these terrorists and where they are. There could be cells in Saudi Arabia, though of all the countries, they have probably been swept out. And most of the terrorists been arrested. Because as you will recall, we had two bombings against American soldiers in Saudi Arabia. And many Saudis were killed in both of those attacks. So they've been fighting Bin Laden after they took away his citizenship and after they drove him from country for four years. But it has to be, you've got to fight him in the neighborhood. You've got to fight him with the cooperation of your friends. And all of our Arab friends there will share in the intelligence gathering and the information sharing that if we are to see the extent of the networks and we're going to and get at the cells, get at the roots, as the President says, it has to be done collectively and together.
[Kelley:] Ambassador Lader, probably not as hard a sell in Britain to get folks on board there. You see Prime Minister Tony Blair in the big box next to Mrs. Bush when the President addressed Congress, you know, a couple of nights ago. How would you think is it military and intelligence that are the strongest points that Britain brings to the table?
[Phillip Lader, Fmr. U.s. Amb. To Britain:] When you consider the two countries, you have to recognize that our histories, our cultures, our economies are irrevocably intertwined. But in deal politics, you can't take anything for granted. And so, the initiative of this prime minister Tony Blair stepping forward, the support of the leaders of the other parties in the United Kingdom, is so helpful to us. They'll be helpful in a variety of ways. Some known and some unknown to the general public, but we could not ask for a stronger allies than the leadership of and the people of United Kingdom of Great Britain.
[Kelley:] How bad do you think it is, Ambassador Lader, in Britain? They think that maybe the latest attacks were kind of put together and really came from Germany, United Arab Emirates and England. How bad is the problem there and trying to get at who may be living in Britain. How strong will they have to be and how strong is there intelligence there? And can they get them?
[Lader:] The British are known for very strong intelligence capabilities. And I'd have to say that the they are up to the challenge. That being said, the type of terrorism which we have just suffered is nothing new. Certainly on a scale, it eclipses anything that can point to in European recent history. But we have to recognize that the people of London, the people in capitals around Europe have suffered in the past as well. And so, consequently, there's a heightened sense of security, but a heightened determination. But they know, as the American people need to know as well, and as this president has so ably been telling us, we must have patience as we let the intelligence and military capabilities be mobilized.
[Kelley:] Yes, patience and resolve he said. Ambassador Fowler, are you worried about other terrorist attacks and where they might happen?
[Fowler:] Well, I think we've, you know, we've had the most alarming and tragic wake-up call that any nation has probably ever suffered by this magnitude. But I think that, you know, the American people understand, as Ambassador Lader was saying, that we've got to defend ourselves. We're going to have to suffer some inconveniences as security precautions are put into place. But we would not no one would be honest to say that it could not happen again. But just as in my time in Saudi Arabia, you do everything you can. You go on the offensive, as we are doing in trying to find them and root out these cells and arrest these people. At the same time, we've got to have a long slaw, as the British would say, in putting together our defensive mechanisms to minimize the chance of another terrorist attack. And if does come, to be able to have the people ready to deal with it.
[Kelley:] We're glad to have both of you join us today. Thanks very much, ambassador, former Ambassador Wyche Fowler, who is with Saudi Arabia and former Ambassador Phillip Lader to Great Britain. You were the ambassador there. Thank you both very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Gary Imlach:] Hello, I'm Gary Imlach with WORLDBEAT; Brooke Alexander's on location this week, and so are we. We've come to the ancient and venerable English city of Oxford for reasons which will become clear later in the show. In the meantime, here's what's coming up: We've got Peter Gabriel and Herbie Hancock embracing the digital age; the idiot's guide to dance music; and the brilliant world of Moby at home and play. Now, then, Oxford is famous for having some beautiful architecture, and is the home of one of the world's finest universities; so it's no surprise that when the music industry's top executives stage their annual get-together they head for the south of France. I followed them down there recently as they got to grips with the impact on the business of new technology.
[Imlach:] The main event was MEDAM, which has been coming to Cannes on the French Riviera for years. But with the Internet increasingly dominating the music industry's thinking, it was MEDAM's Web-footed offspring, a one-day conference called MEDAM Net that brought in the big names. Take jazz legend Herbie Hancock, for example, showcased in all his analog glory at a MEDAM concert with John McLaughlin. MEDAM Net, though, was what he was really in town for, speaking out for artists' rights over the digital availability of their work on the Web.
[Herbie Hancock, Musician:] I've been trying to spread the word for the past seven years to record companies that they really need to look into technology and look into the Internet, and nobody paid attention to me. I guess they figured, he's an artist, what does he know about this stuff, right? And now I can look at them and, unfortunately I can't laugh in their face because it's not funny; I'm still getting ripped off, too.
[Peter Gabriel, Musician:] It's not for musicians to decide, it's for society to decide if anything should be paid for on the Internet, because the same principle that applies to the music is going to apply to films, to software, to
[Imlach:] Peter Gabriel was another star speaker. And, characteristically, he's put his liquid assets where his lead vocals are, setting up On Demand Distribution, a company which offers a secure payment system for music downloads from the net and routes the royalties back to the artists.
[Gabriel:] The Internet has enormous potential to open things up so that, say, records that would be seen as uncommercial, couldn't be made, that the record companies wouldn't want to finance are going to be possible because the cost of production is down, and the cost of distribution. MICHAEL ROBERTSON, CEO, MP3.
[Com:] While it hasn't impacted the number of Madonnas that are out there, it has, I think, grown that middle class and allowed every artist to get their music out, even without, you know, having a big budget.
[Imlach:] Last year, all five major record labels were suing Michael Robertson's MP3.com over downloads of copyrighted songs. This year he was a keynote speaker, along with Hancock and Gabriel, after signing agreements with all five. Even Napster was showing signs of going legit before the recent court ruling against it, with the Dave Matthews Band becoming the first major-label act to release a single on the site before it was in the shops. [Dave Matthews Band, "I Did It"] The exhibition floor at MEDAM was a commercial mosh pit of competing delivery systems, tracking software and filtering devices. Of course, in a world of change, there have to be some constants. And across the zebra shag parlor to Abbey Road Interactive, poor lads who shook the world were gently vibrating the speakers of an iMac, as well as topping the worlds latest chart, the Internet top 20.
[Francois-xavier Nuttall, Chief Visionary Officer, Audiosoft:] We're tracking every movement of music. Each time a song is being played by the radio station or downloaded from the Web site, we track that information. So a little report comes to us, and then we gather that information and deliver a report to the record label.
[Imlach:] In fact, the information we upload about ourselves every time we download a song could be as valuable to the music business as how much we pay for it. Herbie Hancock's already planning his follow up to the Grammy- winning "Gershwin's World" as a series of Internet events before the full CD release. And the possibilities don't end there.
[Hancock:] Collaborations with not just other musicians, but actually with some of your customers, some of your fans. You can take material, if you choose to, and put it out there to be remixed. [Thomas Dolby, "She Blinded Me With Science"] That's exactly what Thomas Dolby's already doing. These days, the '80s pop star runs an Internet company employing 100 people in California's Silicon Valley and offering fans the chance to remix everyone from David Bowie to Thomas Dolby.
[Imlach:] Using this player, I can listen to a Britney Spears track in very high-quality stereo sort of MP3-quality stereo, but I can actually remix it in real time. I'll give you a sense of what I mean.
[Thomas Dolby Robertson, Beatnik.com:] So one of the most popular applications of this is actually to take Britney's voice off and just listen to the groove. But, you know, with different with dance musicians, for example, a lot of dance music fans like to go in and be the DJ and make their own mixes and e-mail them to their friends. And using a mobile, wireless device like a PDA or a cell phone, it would be possible to actually do this interactively with multiple users at the same time.
[Imlach:] The way things are going, MEDAM Net's days as an event in its own right are probably numbered. In a few years' time, the idea that Internet business was ever somehow separate from the music business as a whole will seem as quaint as a wind-up gramophone, or possibly a CD.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] There's a marketing trend taking to the highways that has some drivers praising the rush hour. It's called car-wrapping, and some companies now paying top dollar to transform your wheels into a rolling billboard. CNN's Gayla Hope now with more on this.
[Gala Hope, Cnn Correspondent:] How would you like to make money driving your car around town just following your daily routine? That`s just what these drivers are doing.
[Adrienne Kolowich:] I actually had another little part time job which I was able to quit and spend more time with my kids because I`m doing this now, so I`m completed delighted.
[Michele Muller:] I thought it was a really fun way to make some extra money and pay off my credit cards.
[Hope:] Dan Shifrin`s company, Autowraps.com, is transforming cars into vinyl-wrapped billboards. The first cars hit the streets in February and he now has nearly 200 wrapped cars on the road. He calls it a win-win-win situation.
[Daniel Shifrin, President, Autowraps.com:] There`s three parties involved. One is the driver, which is the consumer. They`re getting anywhere between $200 and $400 a month to let us put this advertising on their car. The other party is the advertiser. They`re making money because they`re getting a very inexpensive form of advertising that is extremely effective. And then, of course, Autowraps picks up a dollar or two here or there.
[Hope:] Autowraps is picking up an average of about $250,000 a month, and that`s on the rise. Advertisers pay Shifrin $1,000 to $2,000 per car. That`s cheap compared to billboards.
[Shifrin:] For one billboard on the 101, you can get 30 cars for that amount of money.
[Hope:] Volkswagen bugs and SUVs are favorites of advertisers. One`s cute and the others are big. But all cars are considered, depending on the miles driven or the routes taken every day. Advertisers are targeting particular demographics. Autowrap`s list of more than 20 advertisers is expanding daily.
[Shifrin:] Just today we had, you know, we got a call from WebTV Microsoft WebTV that they are going to be doing a program with us. We're actually launching with Kraft California Pizza Kitchen in the near future.
[Hope:] Two new companies recently signed for 180 cars each and Dreyers ice cream just resigned for next year.
[Dave Ritterbush, Dir. Of Marketing, Dreyers Grand Ice Cream:] As we look about traditional media, you`re finding a greater need to use more and more untraditional ways to reach so many consumers as their lifestyles change.
[Hope:] For some extra attention, cars with the same ads drive through town in tandem, like these two cruising a crowded Fisherman`s Wharf. Most prospective clients here about Autowraps through the Internet and the company`s Web site is filling up with anxious wrapees.
[Marianne Farrell, V.p., Operations, Autowraps.com:] At any given moment, I can probably have between 3,500 and 4,000 unread e-mails.
[Hope:] Shifrin`s wrapped cars do outsell standard billboards in one way. The cars have talking representatives to give out information about advertisers and Autowraps.com. Autowraps and advertisers are getting PR and the drivers are getting something they enjoy.
[Darrin Cannady:] Besides the financial benefit, it`s a little bit of recognition. It`s something different. It adds a little excitement to one`s day.
[Hope:] The biggest challenge so far is getting cars wrapped fast enough to keep up with demand. Shifrin says the waiting list has topped more than 20,000. Gayla Hope, CNN Financial News, San Francisco.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] In Florida, the counting is almost over. In fact, they've already gone home in Broward County, where after 11 long days officials finished their hand recount just before midnight Eastern Time. Unofficial figures show Al Gore picked up 567 votes there. They're still counting in Palm Beach County, though, and have been all night, as election officials try to get everything done by today's 5:00 p.m. Eastern deadline. After that, Florida's secretary of state can certify the results of Florida's election, but whatever the tally, don't expect either candidate to claim victory. There's still a lot of legal maneuvering to be done. Let's go first to our point person in Tallahassee this morning, CNN's Kate Snow. Good morning, Kate.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, good morning again, Miles. We are awaiting that five o'clock deadline here tonight by which time all of the counties of Florida are supposed to have their final certified tallies in to the secretary of state. We should be clear that many of the counties already turned in their final numbers. They did it long ago. In fact, on November 14 they had the first certification, you'll remember, and on November 17 they added in the military and the overseas ballots. So at this point about a dozen, a little more than a dozen counties we expect to be turning in numbers later today, one of them Broward County, that finished counting just before midnight last night, a very late night. They had been counting for some 11 days. They looked at 588,000 ballots and in the end Vice President Al Gore gained in Broward County a net of 567 votes. Now, all of the counties, Broward included, Palm Beach as well, which continues to count, all of them have to be in here by five o'clock. That is the deadline hour. The counties must submit their amended certifications to the secretary of state by that time. Now, that does not mean that she has to certify right away. There will be a little period, probably at least an hour, of administrative work that has to go on where they'll receive those faxes, they'll receive hand delivered counts and then some time after six o'clock, the secretary of state, Katherine Harris, will then certify the Florida election results and then after that time we expect there may be some words from her. We may have some kind of signing ceremony. Not entirely clear how it's going to go just yet. But we are wired up and ready for that. I should point out that every network and networks from all over the world are wired into this spot here in Tallahassee, ready to go live with the pictures of Katherine Harris certifying those results. Miles, back to you.
[O'brien:] All right, thank you very much, CNN's Kate Snow, watching it down there. And as the recounting winds down, we'll check on the candidates themselves, and for that we turn to Kyra.
[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] All right, thanks, Miles. CNN's Patty Davis is keeping up with the vice president, and Eileen O'Connor, CNN is monitoring the goings on with the Texas governor. And first we're going to go to Patty in Washington, where we've seen Al Gore out and about lately, but haven't heard very much from him. Patty, let's get down to the...
[Patty Davis, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, he...
[Phillips:] I'm sorry. Go ahead.
[Davis:] I was going to say he's here at his official residence in Washington today. He is keeping a close eye on those hand recounts. Now, don't expect him to make a concession speech, though, later today if George W. Bush is ahead at the end of the day with the total number of votes in Florida. His lawyers have made it very clear that they will likely contest the results of the Florida election Kyra.
[Phillips:] All right, Patty and Eileen, let's get down to basics here and talk about the message from both camps. Eileen, why don't you go first.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, basically the message here from the Bush camp is that they believe that these manual recounts are inaccurate. They say that they are subjective and that Governor Bush has already won two machine recounts. They hope that he will prevail again in this recount. But they believe that these are, these counts are basically tantamount to stealing the election and this is what they have been saying, this is what their supporters have been saying, this is what these demonstrations, they say, have been about. And I think that, you know, the response from, of course, the Gore camp is much different. They see it a lot differently, right, Patty?
[Davis:] I have to say, Eileen, the Gore campaign is really deploring that kind of rhetoric like stealing the election. What they're saying is all of the votes need to be full, fair and accurately counted. They're saying that there were thousands and thousands of votes that were kicked out of the machine because it couldn't detect who the person had voted for. The Gore campaign is saying that those votes need to be looked at by hand to really determine the intent of the voter and they say that Florida law is behind them. It allows a hand recount and, in fact, they say the Florida Supreme Court was also behind them. It allowed those hand recounts to go forward.
[Phillips:] All right, let's talk about the demonstrations for a minute on both sides. How many do you think have been spontaneous, how many have been orchestrated? Patty, you want to start?
[Davis:] Well, Democrats have been alleging that, in fact, the Republicans have been orchestrating those. They point particularly to Miami-Dade County. What they're saying is that a disturbance, I believe it was last Wednesday, while the hand counting was going on at the canvassing board, they're saying that that is what caused the canvassing board to drop its hand recount. They're calling it plain and simple intimidation and they're talking about going to the Justice Department to have it investigated. Now, the Bush campaign certainly denies that, doesn't it, Eileen?
[O'connor:] Yes, they do. I mean basically what they are saying is that they have party people on the ground, that, of course, some of the party people are getting people out to protest, but that Democrats do the same thing. You had Jesse Jackson down there in the beginning in Palm Beach County demanding a recount, complaining about the butterfly ballot. And so they're also calling, saying hey, look, this is politics. In addition, they say these are not mobs and that these are people who are upset with the process, upset with the manual recounts, upset with what they say are unfair counts. And by the way, they also, on these demonstrations and particularly in Miami-Dade, they deny that the canvassing board turned down that recount, stopped the recount because of intimidation and they point, actually, to an interview that David Leahy did on CNN, in which he basically said look, we didn't have time by the Sunday deadline to complete that manual recount. He's on the canvassing board and the Republicans are pointing to that saying it's proof that it wasn't the demonstrations that stopped those manual recounts Kyra.
[Phillips:] Eileen, what about dimpled ballots? What's the real issue here for Bush?
[O'connor:] Well, basically, on the dimples, they're saying look, they're, yes, OK, there is a Texas state law about dimpled ballots but that's their standards in Texas. There are no standards in Florida. And so what they're saying is it's unfair. It's not across-the-board. Each canvassing board has been setting their own standards. So therefore it makes the counts different and thus unfair. So they're basically saying because you don't have standards on dimples, you shouldn't be counting them. And that's their basic line.
[Phillips:] Patty?
[Davis:] What the Gore campaign is saying on this instance is that the dimpled ballots should be included, in fact, that they agree that all the counties haven't been doing the same thing, but they think, they're pointing the finger at Palm Beach, that Palm Beach should be including more of these dimpled ballots. Those are the ballots where the selection is not punched all the way through. They say there is clear evidence if you have a dimpled ballot on who the person wanted to vote for and that that ballot should be included. They were hoping to pick up many more of those dimpled ballots for Al Gore.
[O'connor:] This is where the Republicans, but this is where the Republicans have a problem because they say that's where, you know, the canvassing board is looking and saying that's who they wanted to vote for. And that's why the Republicans say, you know, you have three other people trying to figure out the intent of the voter and that's where they say there's subjectivity coming in.
[Phillips:] Eileen O'Connor, CNN, Patty Davis, great conversation, great insight. Thank you very much.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] With us today is CNN consultant Mike Brooks, who once was a detective with the D.C. police himself. Mike, I want you to give our viewers first a little bit of perspective about Rock Creek Park and what a huge area that we are talking, the investigators looking for. After all, if we look at the picture on the Web, you can see it is a park really that goes all the way through
[D.c. Mike Brooks, Cnn Consultant:] It's a very large park, Joie. People don't realize how big Rock Creek Park is. If you compare it with Central Park in New York, it's a lot bigger and a lot more spread out than Central Park is in New York. It's a favorite tourist site; you have the National Zoological Park, that's encompassed in Rock Creek Park; you have a number of historic homes, Pierces Mill and the Klingle Mansion, where they were concentrating some of the search today. It's a very large, you know, picnic area also, and that's probably why they are finding some of the bones. People will go there, bring their own food and picnic and enjoy themselves on the weekends, during the week, you can always find people there, you know, having a good time, eating lunch, these kinds of things.
[Chen:] Just for our viewers, so you can help understand what is going on here. The area where Chandra Levy was living was right off Dupont Circle, which is a pretty popular area among young people, there is a fair amount of nightlife in that area. And then Rock Creek Park comes pretty close to Dupont Circle and then goes all the way up here, as you see, following along there the water, all the way up, up to the National Zoo, as Mike was just telling you, and then up to this Klingle Mansion, that's been the subject of the latest questions. Now, Mike, we have questions from the Web audience right now. This is from the morning on-line editorial meeting. Mark Meredeth asks: "How long will it take before the police consider downsizing the amount of time in the investigation?" Doesn't sound like, from yours sources, Mike, that they were ready to downsize at all.
[Brooks:] No, I think right now, they will continue what they are doing; it may be a couple of weeks before they cover the whole area of Rock Creek Park, and again, an exhaustive search. But some of this area was gone over initially when Chandra was reported missing, due to the proximity of how close her apartment was to the park. So again, that was the area
[Chen:] All right, Mike, another question from the Web chat under way. MariGrace Centofante. "Why didn't the police investigate as thoroughly the first week as they are now?"
[Brooks:] I think that they were investigating it. When someone is reporting missing in the District of Columbia, they are classified as either critical or noncritical, missing person. On the critical side, you take into consideration the person's mental state. They consider someone who is missing as, let's say, as with Alzheimer's, as to be a critical missing person, or someone who may have been taken, where they believe to be foul play, and that's what this is. They particularly they put a command post up. They do a thorough search of the area and then they start their investigation. They start looking at all of the different leads. Right now, they're talking about doing a number of different things, especially in the Dupont Circle area, which is frequented 24 hours a day, seven days a week. It's a very busy area and that is where they are concentrating their search on some of the investigative leads they have right now. Some people said there was a lead yesterday that came about a van. Somebody was trying to lure young women into a van. Again, they're looking into that right now. It will be difficult to do that in the area of Dupont Circle, because of all of the people that are there. They are also looking right now, with dealing for the next 10 days, trying to get flyers out to cab drivers, to put Chandra's picture out there, to put some of the pictures...
[Chen:] Trying to make sure that no stone is left unturned in all this. Mike Brooks is a CNN consultant helping with this story, as well, he was formerly with the FBI and the D.C. police, and we appreciate your insight on the story, Mike.
[Brooks:] Thank you, Joie. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] We want to return now to one of our top stories today: the office shooting deaths of seven people in Wakefield, Massachusetts. Their co-worker, Michael McDermott, is scheduled to be arraigned this morning. "Boston Globe" reporter Brian MacQuarrie is covering the story for his paper. Brian, thanks so much for being with us on what I know is a very busy day for you. Thank you.
[Brian Macquarrie, "boston Globe":] Thank you, too.
[Stouffer:] Well, first of all, I'm hoping that we could get into the how and the why. What are you learning about Michael McDermott's morning yesterday? Do police believe that he went in there with some kind of a plan to get certain people?
[Macquarrie:] Yes, we heard that he did report to work or about 8:30. He worked then for about two hours there. He then went to the reception part of the building. He apparently shot people there. He then walked about 50 feet back to the accounting part of the building, and he slowly and methodically killed five more there.
[Stouffer:] Well, what about this theory about back taxes that he owed to the IRS? What have you learned about that? Perhaps, how much he owed, how much might have been taken out of his paycheck in the future?
[Macquarrie:] Right, well, we heard from a law enforcement source last night that it would be a significant amount. This source told us that he had expressed some concern last week that he might not be able to live on what was left. We also learned that he had an argument last week about this. So it was something that was on his mind. They planned to begin to take this out at the start of the new year.
[Stouffer:] And, Brian, I know you and the other reporters at your paper have been able to talk to some of the employees who were actually in the building yesterday. What are they telling you about those first moments, what they heard, what they saw?
[Macquarrie:] The best that we heard was that there were about five employees in a conference room behind the receptionist. That's where the killing began. The bullets started to fly, broke the glass there in that room. They dove to the floor. And from what we can piece together at this point, people started to race out from all parts of the building. Most of this occurred on the first floor. There were some people above him on the second floor who then hid up there. And we understand there were people up there for quite some time before they were able to get out. But from what we understand at this point, no one really knew what was going on. They just raced outside and ran up and down the street.
[Stouffer:] I can't even imagine. It must have been terrifying in there. Brian MacQuarrie, thank you so much for your time today and filling us in on some of the details as we all try to understand what happened there yesterday. Thank you.
[Macquarrie:] Thank you.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Today's top story: George W. Bush's search for a vice presidential running mate. Aides to the likely Republican presidential nominee don't expect him to name his choice before tomorrow. The most talked about possibilities over the past couple days: former Senator John Danforth of Missouri and former Defense Secretary Dick Cheney. Cheney got a big nod this morning from a one-time national security adviser who served with him during the gulf war era.
[Brent Scowcroft, Fmr. Natl. Security Adviser:] He would add a lot to the ticket because what he brings is what Governor Bush does not have, and that is practical experience in working in Washington and in making the government work. He's been in both the executive branch and in the legislative branch, and so he knows both perspectives.
[Kagan:] Scowcroft also praised Danforth for what he calls "towering integrity" and an outstanding history of service in the Senate.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider, is keeping watch on all of it.
[Kagan:] And he's joining us now from our Washington bureau. Bill, good morning once again.
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Good morning, Daryn.
[Kagan:] They're dotting their "I"s and crossing their "T"s on this possible veep selection. When they look at Dick Cheney, are they going to find a pretty conservative background and record?
[Schneider:] Oh, sure. He is a conservative, perfectly acceptable to the conservative wing of the party, but he's not a harsh partisan, and therefore he's a good match with Governor Bush, who is conservative but has put aside the kind of harsh partisanship one associates with the Gingrich era in the Houston convention of 1992 that renominated his father more of a Ronald Reagan type: expansive, inclusive, that style of conservativism.
[Hemmer:] Hey, Bill, I'm confused here on one thing.
[Schneider:] Yes.
[Hemmer:] Dick Cheney last week, according to reports, changed his official address from Dallas back to Wyoming, his home state. Why does this 12th Amendment exist that says the president and the vice president on the same ticket can't come from the same state?
[Schneider:] Oh...
[Hemmer:] It seems a bit I can understand it from 200 years ago, but it seems a bit antiquated. Where is that?
[Schneider:] A lot of people think it's antiquated. It was written way back when there were a very small number of states and they were all very jealous of each other and didn't want any one state...
[Hemmer:] Right, true.
[Schneider:] ... like the big ones, Virginia and Massachusetts in those days, dominating the presidency or the federal government. So they said that the electors of any one state in this case, Texas shall not be allowed to vote for a president and a vice president from the same state as themselves. So that if Cheney continued to live in Texas, where he now works, the electors of Texas and there are a lot of them could not vote for both Bush and Cheney. By moving back to Wyoming, which he represented in Congress, they avoid that problem.
[Hemmer:] Got it.
[Kagan:] Tell us a little more about former Senator Danforth. I think he came to prominence in a lot of people's minds during the Clarence Thomas nomination situation and chapter of American history. Could his involvement and the way he was outspoken during that time come back to hurt him?
[Schneider:] Well, there is some view that his sponsorship of Clarence Thomas, his testimony in favor of Thomas, might still create controversy. But you've got to remember that he was Thomas' patron. Thomas was a staff member for Senator Danforth so it was really a personal less than an ideological relationship, because when Danforth came to the Senate in the 1970s, he was widely regarded as a moderate Republican. That's a swear word these days: No Republican wants to be called a moderate. But one of the first things Danforth did was lead support for the Panama Canal treaties. Now, opposition to the Panama Canal treaties by Ronald Reagan and other conservatives was a kind of test case, a litmus test, if you will, of conservativism, and Danforth was opposed to them. Danforth is a conservative by most measures. He's an interesting mix. He's a minister, an ordained Episcopalian minister, who is both anti-abortion, and he's anti-death penalty. On a lot of issues, he is very acceptable to the moderates; probably more moderate than Dick Cheney.
[Hemmer:] Bill, quickly here, shoot this idea down we talked about earlier: John Kasich from Ohio. He's from one of those swing states. Ohio has picked every presidential election for the past 150 years or something like that, since 1803, whenever they were elected. He's bright, he's young I think he's about 47 years old why not go with that and completely remove yourself from a past administration that worked with your father?
[Schneider:] Well, that's a very good idea and I think you've got a good argument there because one of the defects of a Cheney appointment is that it makes Bush II look a lot like Bush I. It looks like he's taking his father's advice because he was very close to the former President Bush. Kasich: Why is that a problem? He comes from an important state, just as you indicate, but there is the problem it's a funny image kind of problem, and in a way it's quite unfair. John Kasich is young. He's attractive...
[Hemmer:] He's smart. He'knows budget matters.
[Schneider:] ... he's not known. Yes, and he is an expert. He was the chairman of the House Budget Committee so he has a lot of experience. He's very youthful, he's very exuberant, and I think he's a very effective campaigner in a way that even Dick Cheney is not. So why not pick him? Well, to a lot of people, they'd say, my goodness, he's unknown, youthful, exuberant: Does that remind people of Dan Quayle? And, you see, his father, Bush's father, picked Dan Quayle and many people regard that as a mistake. So what his father may be saying is, don't do like I did, do like I say. Don't pick a Dan Quayle-type person, young and inexperienced and unknown, pick someone who's established like Dick Cheney.
[Hemmer:] It's fun to speculate anyway, isn't it?
[Schneider:] Everybody does it. Of course, only one guy knows what's going on.
[Hemmer:] You're right. Bill, thanks.
[Schneider:] Sure.
[Kagan:] Yes, but he doesn't even know quite yet.
[Hemmer:] We will see. Bill, thanks. Talk to you again.
[Schneider:] Sure.
[Hemmer:] Bye-bye.

[Bernard Shaw, Cnn Anchor:] Under pressure from the president of the United States and former South African President Nelson Mandela, a group of Tutsi politicians signed a power-sharing agreement for Burundi on Monday. But the new pact designed to end Burundi's civil war does not have unanimous support. The Burundi peace talks were held in neighboring Tanzania. CNN's John King reports.
[John King, Cnn Sr. White House Correspondent:] They entered smiling, a picture designed to project power and prestige. But before long, both the former South African president and the U.S. leader were voicing their disappointment.
[Nelson Mandela, Fmr. South African President:] We have a section of the leadership who do not care for the slaughter of innocent people inside Burundi, who never think in terms of money, who do not appreciate the generosity of the international community.
[King:] This was to be a signing ceremony for a comprehensive peace accord to end the seven years of deadly civil strife in Burundi. Instead, an interim agreement was on the table and some parties to the talks were refusing even to sign that. It left unresolved the critical obstacles to peace: arrangements for a cease-fire, and agreement on a transitional government, and a return to democracy. President Clinton pleaded with the parties to lock in the progress they have made so far and then get to work on the major issues, and he warned of the consequences if some parties refused to sign and even the interim agreement proves to be worthless.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] If you don't do it, what is the chance that the progress you have made will unravel? If you come back in five or 10 years, will the issues have changed? I think not. The gulf between you won't narrow, but the gulf between Burundi and the rest of the world, I assure you, will grow wider if you let this moment slip away.
[King:] The civil war began in 1993 when Tutsi paratroopers ousted the democratically-elected Hutu president. More than 200,000 have been killed, more than a million displaced from their homes. Mr. Clinton could not hide his disappointment, but U.S. officials rushed to make the case that he was not to blame for the failure of the talks. Aides stress Mr. Clinton took no direct role in the negotiations and they say he came mostly out of respect for Mr. Mandela. John King, CNN, Arusha, Tanzania.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] The wintry weather in north Georgia caused dozens of accidents on Interstate 75 in the Atlanta area, but the slippery conditions didn't make some drivers slow down. Kathy Murphy of CNN affiliate WGNX in Atlanta shows us what happened to a police officer directing on an icy road.
[Kathy Murphy, Wgnx Correspondent:] Moments before he's hit by a passing motorist, Alpha Retta Police Officer Warren Hinsman is working to clear two cars out of the median just north of the Mansell Road overpass. Meanwhile, several cars lose control coming across the bridge. Some even careen down the embankment into the woods. Officer Hinsman moves to an area just off the bridge and continues to caution motorists to slow down. After a while, he runs over to the motorists, who are stuck on the side of the road, to see if they're OK. While he's talking to them we can see several cars sliding across the bridge and just as this U-Haul truck passes, we heard a crash. That's when the officer gets hit. Now, watch again in slow motion as the white sport utility vehicle spins around so that it's perpendicular to the road and the minivan hits it broadside and pushes it off the road. You can see the officer running to get out of the way but it's too late and the minivan slams into him. Almost immediately the officer jumps up and limps away. The officer is obviously in a lot of pain. Finally he falls to the ground. That's where EMS personnel find him when they arrive.
[Phillips:] Wow. That report from Kathy Murphy of CNN affiliate WGNX in Atlanta.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] The Northern Alliance marches into Kabul and chases Taliban forces from the Afghan capital. The capture of Kabul considered the most stunning victory yet for the Northern Alliance. Opposition forces rode into town and met little, if any, resistance, greeted there mainly by thousand of residents who celebrated their arrival. The White House had urged the alliance to not seize the town until a broad-based government could be assembled. However, those pleas have been not heeded necessarily to the full extent at this point. To the White House now and CNN's John King for reaction on what's happening oversees. John, good morning again.
[John King, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Good morning again to you, Bill. This development overseas, fast-changing developments on the ground in Afghanistan, come just as President Bush meets at the White House with an already important summit meeting with the Russian President Vladimir Putin. The two men in the Oval Office have a luncheon today in the White House residence, which you can see behind me. Then a news conference this afternoon. Issue number one was to be discussions about dramatic cuts in both country's strategic nuclear arsenals. We are told Mr. Bush will tell the Russian leader today, he is prepared to cut by more than two- thirds the U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal. Now more than 7,000 warheads, roughly 7,000 warheads. Mr. Bush could go somewhere in the area, we are told, of 2,000 warheads, and he is expecting a reciprocal announcement from the Russian leader, but also obviously on the table for discussion, the latest situation on the ground in Afghanistan. The White House on the one hand saying the president is very pleased with the progress the Northern Alliance is making. Ari Fleischer, the White House press secretary, saying this morning, this is a war, and one of the goals of the war is the defeat of Al Qaeda organization and the Taliban regime that harbors them. At the same time, the administration has repeatedly voiced concerns that it did not want the Northern Alliance to go into Kabul, believing that could significantly complicate the efforts to bring the rival tribes together, to build a broad-based coalition for a post-Taliban government. There have been reports of some atrocities, some human rights abuses, by the Northern Alliance forces. U.S. officials say they can not independently confirm that, but they do say the administration at several levels, military-to-military communications, as well as diplomatic communications, making clear that they want the Northern Alliance to keep the number of its troops in Kabul to a minimum, and that they want the Northern Alliance to respect human rights. Again, this is a military success in the view of the White House, but a diplomatic challenge as well Bill.
[Hemmer:] John King, thanks. John King from the White House. And certainly the military strategy for the Northern Alliance pretty obvious right now: control as much ground as possible and do it quickly. Let's bring in retired Major General Don Shepperd, our CNN military analyst again. General, good morning to you. Quickly want to go to map right now, and take us back to Friday of last week. And if we look at the overall perspective of Afghanistan, and just look at the massive amount of military action that's taken place, reports in Herat, reports in Mazar-e Sharif, going back to Friday of last week. They're talk about Konduz and Taloqan yesterday, Baglan and into Kabul today. Given all this fast military action, how do you react to this, knowing that things virtually at moving at a pace that had not been predicted?
[Maj. Gen. Donald Shepperd,  Cnn Military Analyst:] Well, many of us on the air side thought that the air campaign would basically have a significant effect, and you would see a sudden collapse. None of us thought it would be as soon as it was, and none of us thought it would be as widespread as it was. That surprised all of us. Basically Mazar-e Sharif, what we talked about a week ago. Now everything is gone accept Kandahar from Taliban control..
[Hemmer:] I heard somebody talking earlier this morning, that said, with the Taliban leaving so many areas, it would be a really good opportunity to collect intelligence. What kind of intelligence are you looking for?
[Shepperd:] Basically, you go to the people, and you say, where were they and who were they? And as they retreat into the area around Kandahar, you want to concentrate you centers, and again the space centers, the airborne centers, and the ground intelligence, the humat, if you will, and you want to say, where are the Al Qaeda? Where is bin Laden? And you want to get that into the coordinate business, so we can strike it with airpower and also go after it with ground troops and special forces, if we desire.
[Hemmer:] We have talked about this front being mostly centered on the capital city of Kabul. It appears now the front will move to the south, specifically in the to the area of Kandahar, and possibly the area here, that we have heard so much about as well. If you strategizing right now for the Northern Alliance, what do you do?
[Shepperd:] For the Northern Alliance, basically, I get myself together. I encourage the Pashtun tribes in the south to move on Kandahar, to make it easy for me to oust the Taliban. But again, I try to consolidate my gains all over the country, to make sure I can hold those areas and don't get trapped into a one-on-one guerrilla warfare in that area between Kabul and Kandahar with the mountains and the mountain passes in there.
[Hemmer:] I know we are talking military, but there is a political equation in there as well. Pakistan is not happy right now with the Northern Alliance moving in.
[Shepperd:] Not only is Pakistan not happy, we're not happy. We wanted to hold out. We wanted them to hold out of the city. But they got to the city, and instead of having to fight their way in, the city was abandoned. So they basically walked into the city of Kabul. Now we have to hurry up and back and get a political solution in place, and we have to get a U.N. peacekeeping force in there, hopefully comprised of Muslim nations, not United States and not Arab forces.
[Hemmer:] All right, general.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Police say they want another chance to question a U.S. congressman about the disappearance of a former Washington intern. 24-year-old Chandra Levy has been missing since April 30, and a lawyer representing Levy's parents is scheduled to hold a news conference any moment now. CNN national correspondent Bob Franken is at the Watergate hotel where the conference is about to take place outside. Bob, what's going on?
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, what's going on now is an awful lot of hubbub. To give you an idea of how this story has become something that is of such huge interest around the country and around the world, the story of course, of the disappearance seven weeks ago of 24-year-old Chandra Levy who had been an intern at the Bureau of Prisons here in Washington. There have been repeated accusations that in fact, she had a romantic relationship with the congressman for her home town, Gary Condit, 53 years old, and married; allegations that have been consistently and repeatedly denied through a spokesman by Congressman Condit. Nevertheless, the allegations have not gone away. There has been continued speculation about this. I emphasize, only speculation. The parents of Chandra Levy, Dr. Robert Levy and Susan Levy have been very successful in mounting a public relations campaign about this, but they have run into some snags and are dissatisfied with the investigation. They will be leaving here and going down to the Washington, D.C. police department and meeting with police officials. But first, they are going to appear in just a couple of minutes here at the Watergate office building with their newly-hired lawyer, who has his offices here. He's Billy Martin, you might remember he became quite prominent during the investigation into the Monica Lewinsky matter. He ended up representing Monica Lewinsky's mother, Marcia Lewis, was seen by her side any number of times. But the reason he was hired, we're told, is less his experience in matter of interns than the fact that he is also an experienced investigator. In one of his earlier careers, he was with the U.S. attorney's office here in Washington, and headed the homicide investigation unit. So, the Levys have hired him to try and supplement the official police investigation. But as I mentioned a moment ago, they will be going down to get a briefing from the police on exactly what's going on. Now, as for Congressman Condit, we have been told by police officials that they are trying to arrange a second interview with the congressman. He was interviewed by them about five weeks ago, but police officials say that in a case like this, it is not unusual to want to try and retrace their steps. Also they say that since there's been such a persistent discussion about a relationship with Condit and the intern, police say that there's some sort of relationship and they're saying that perhaps that might now shed some light on the disappearance of Chandra Levy. I should point out that police emphasize, A, that Condit has been cooperative; B, he is not considered a suspect but that's also because this is not considered a criminal investigation. The police are still calling this a missing person investigation. They have just made this a very intense one because of all the huge publicity, publicity which has caused the scene like we have today, a scene that is going to continue to be repeated, the thing that all of this has done has not done, rather, is to result in finding Chandra Levy. She continues to be missing. Officials say that there are three possibilities: it could be that she took her own life, something like that; that she's in fact hiding with some friend, or of course, the other possibility is that she came to bad end through foul play Lou.
[Waters:] Bob, does this second interview with Congressman Condit imply that the D.C. police are getting nowhere with the case?
[Franken:] Well, the D.C. police have been really quite close about what it is they do and don't know. They say that all it implies is that they need more information. They believe that Condit, given the period of time that has lapsed since his last interview and given the new information that continues to recur about the relationship he had, that that might jog somebody's memory. It is clear that the police do not yet know what the fate of Chandra Levy is, so they are tracing their steps, retracing their steps. I have been told by any number of people that they have done interviews with them, time after time after time. We are being told now that we're about two minutes away from the appearance of Billy Martin, the attorney along with Levys. They'll be joining us in just a second. Billy Martin is walking out right now. You can probably see him over my shoulder with the Levys. Here they come. They're coming right past us, and they'll be going to make a statement, Billy Martin of course accompanying Dr. Robert Levy and Susan Levy as they walk to the microphones, which are just about 15 feet from where they are right now. They are headed over there. And we're seeing them, of course, as they head toward the microphones. They are going from here to the police department, but first here's Billy Martin, attorney Billy Martin.
[Billy Martin, Attorney For Robert And Susan Levy:] Good afternoon. My name is Billy Martin. I am a partner at a law firm Dyer, Ellis & Joseph, located here at the Watergate. Beside me is Mrs. Susan Levy and her husband, Dr. Robert Levy. As you know, they are the parents of Chandra Levy, who has been missing for more than six weeks. The Levys have retained our law firm to assist them in obtaining both information and, if necessary, to conduct an independent investigation into the whereabouts or the facts surrounding Chandra's disappearance. On behalf of the Levys, we would like to request publicly and worldwide that anybody who has information surrounding Chandra's disappearance, please contact us. We would say that we have spoken with the metropolitan police department, we have arranged for a meeting with Chief Ramsey to discuss this matter. We would publicly state that we have complete confidence in the D.C. police department in their investigation of this matter. Chandra has been missing now for six weeks. Chief Ramsey has agreed to meet with us as soon as we complete this appearance. We are asking that anybody with information please contact us. Here at the law firm, we've established an 800 number for anybody who has information to contact us. That number is 1-800-860-6552. We've also established a Web site and address here. Anybody with information can contact us via the Internet at www.levy@dejlaw.com. Again, On behalf of Dr. and Mrs. Levy, we implore anybody with any information to assist us in locating Chandra. We would have no further comments from the Levys at this time. I would on behalf of them today be willing to entertain a few questions, and I can see that we may have more than a few that you may have of Dr. and Mrs. Levy, but at this time, they will make no statements. I open it up to you.
[Question:  Martin:] We assume that there will be many questions relating to Congressman Condit. Congressman Condit has acknowledged that he is a friend of Chandra Levy. We asked the congressman and all other friends who have any information regarding either Chandra's emotional state prior to her disappearance, the existence of and depth of any relationships and any information from her friends. So, we would ask Congressman Condit and anybody else with information to please come forward, please cooperate with the police and with any investigations that we have at the two addresses we gave you.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] deferential to Mr. Condit up until the present?
[Martin:] We don't think so. We think that we've heard Chief Gainer say that this is not yet a crime, it is a missing person. Having been a federal prosecutor here in Washington, we know how sensitive these matters are. We, again, have complete confidence in the D.C. police department and this investigation. I would say to you that we here at Dyer, Ellis & Joseph have a background. Assisting me will be Patrick Woodward, another partner of mine at Dyer, Ellis & Joseph, and two investigators. We have Duane Stanton, and Joseph McCann. Duane Stanton and Joseph McCann are former retired they are retired homicide detectives here in D.C. They will assist us. Mr. Woodward and myself have experience in crimes of violence. I was the head of the homicide unit here in Washington. With our team, we hope to supplement any investigation now ongoing by the metropolitan police department. We understand that we will stay out of their way, but on behalf of the Levy family we will look into this matter.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] Congressman Condit's cooperation?
[Martin:] We have at this time, I will not discuss the state of the evidence. We will meet with Chief Gainer and Chief Ramsey, we hope in 10 to 15 minutes to discuss both their investigation, to provide them with information that we have, that we are confident they don't yet have, because we have been meeting with people, and we hope to find out the status of that investigation.
[Question:] We understand, sir, we understand that Congressman Condit did make an effort to speak to Mr. and Mrs. Levy. Why was that effort rebuffed?
[Martin:] After six weeks, it was my recommendation I was out of town on another major investigation it was my recommendation to Dr. and Mrs. Levy, who would love to talk Congressman Condit, to wait until I could arrive back in town. We are now hoping to meet with congressman. We're available.
[Question:] So, you would like that call to be made now? You want the congressman to call up and to speak to you and to the parents of Chandra?
[Martin:] That is correct. And we've heard from attorney, indicating he represents Congressman Condit. We haven't had an opportunity to speak with that attorney or to confirm it, so until I have had a chance to do that, we don't know what the status of that is, but we do want to talk.
[Question:] Mr. Martin can you describe the nature of the congressman's relationship with Ms. Levy?
[Martin:] At this time, I note know you would all like to know that. The answer to that question, we hope that during the investigation we can really find out the depth of that relationship, what it was. Dr. and Mrs. Levy have no what that relationship was, and again, in an attempt not to jeopardize the police department's investigation, it has been my recommendation that the Levys not comment any further on any relationship with Congressman Condit.
[Question:] What you understand now, Billy, is has congressman cooperated with the police department, just from what you understand?
[Martin:] I would hope to be able to answer that question when we walk out of police headquarters in about 45 minutes.
[Question:] Billy, why are homicide and medical examiner detectives involved?
[Martin:] After six weeks, and...
[Unidentified Female: . Martin:] No knowing thank you. Knowing their daughter, Mrs. and Dr. Levy are confident that Chandra has not just walked away. What has brought publicity and heightened the intensity of this investigation is the fact that Chandra lived here temporarily as an intern in a federal agency that she has that a congressman has acknowledged being a friend, and any information, any investigation that they can give will help us.
[Question:] My question was about the homicide and medical examiner detectives. Why would they be involved in this if it's just a missing persons case?
[Martin:] After six weeks, we are confident and we are hopeful that Chief Gainer and Chief Ramsey would agree to upgrade this to something other than a missing person investigation, and we are going to ask them to do that. It is standard police procedure to consider people missing until some evidence of foul play has been determined. We are going to ask the D.C. police department whether they could upgrade this to something beyond a missing person investigation.
[Question:] Why did the Levys feel it necessary to hire your firm? What can you offer them?
[Martin:] One of two things I think this firm can offer to the Levys. One is help with the media. The Levys have been trying to do this on their own, at their home in Modesto. It's overwhelming. We are hoping that we will now take over all media contact and the Levys can go about trying to get on with their lives. They have other children. They would like to go back to their lives, and they would like not to have the current and repeated contact with the media. What we think my firm at Dyer, Ellis & Joseph and I can do is give them an in-depth as we know Washington. We know Washington very well. We have people who have been out on the streets trying to find information. We are contacting sources and other information that is out there. We are devoting a full team of people to do this on behalf of the Levys. We hope to supplement any investigation that D.C. police department will do. And again, we will stay out of their way. We understand what it means to make a case, and we would make sure that we do nothing to jeopardize their case. We are scheduled to be at police headquarters at 2:30.
[Question:] Do you believe that Congressman Condit knows more than he's [OFF-MIKE]?
[Martin:] Again, I think I've answered all the questions that I can regarding Congressman Condit. I would hope that I know that Chief Gainer yesterday indicated that he was trying to interview the congressman for a second time. We are hopeful that the congressman will in fact cooperate with that investigation, and maybe he can share information that he has regarding Chandra. Excuse me one second. We are going to break off now, and we would hope that we may have further information following our meeting with the chief of police. Thank you.
[Waters:] All right. Billy Martin who is the new attorney for Dr. Robert Levy and Susan Levy who were at his side as he told us that they are on their way to D.C. police headquarters to talk to Chief Gainer and other officials about the Chandra Levy case, in hopes of persuading the D.C. police to upgrade this to something other than a missing persons investigation. Bob Franken is on the story. He's not far from where we just heard Billy Martin speak. What would upgrading the case allow in this matter, Bob?
[Franken:] Well, it would turn it into a matter that where with a criminal investigation, which always gets a higher priority. It would change the focus. It would cause the ability to more easily have subpoenas brought in, that type of thing. So, what they are saying now is, look, there's considerable evidence that there is foul play here. That is the standard that is used to require criminal investigations, and they're going to ask the police to do it. The police have gone out of their way to say that thus far this has just been a missing person investigation. And of course, you also heard that there's going to be an effort to try and get a meeting between Congressman Condit and the Levys. Up until this point, the congressman has said that he would like to have such a meeting, but up until this point he had not heard from the Levys. So, now we're going to have to find out when that is going to happen, of course, and under what circumstances Lou.
[Waters:] I heard mentioned twice by Billy Martin that they would urge Congressman Condit to cooperate with the police investigation. I thought I heard you report earlier that police have been saying he is cooperating with the investigation.
[Franken:] As a matter of fact, you did hear that, Lou, and the police repeatedly say that, as evidenced by the fact that Condit is expressing a willingness to go back and talk with the police something, by the way, he would not have to do without a subpoena. And police said that he was entirely cooperative the first time they talked to him.
[Waters:] All right, Bob Franken at the Watergate in Washington. The first order of business for Billy Martin was a call for help, issuing that 800 number for anyone who might have a lead for them, 1- 800-860-6552. There has been a Web site established, so the answer to the question where Chandra is still has been unanswered, but we've kicked it up a notch, and we will continue to follow the story.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] On the day the Grammy Awards are handed out, the recording industry must also deal with a settlement offer from Napster. For the latest in the dispute between the record companies and the online music service, let's go to CNN science correspondent Ann Kellan in Washington Ann.
[Ann Kellan, Cnn Science Correspondent:] Good morning. Napster, the online record-sharing Web site, is offering to pay a billion dollars over the next five years to record companies. In exchange, it wants the record companies to drop the lawsuit charging Napster with copyright violations. Now, Napster made it possible for people to download music free off the Web. Now Napster is offering to turn its popular Web site into a monthly subscription service. People would pay from $3 to $10 a month to download music. Napster is offering to pay major record companies like Sony, BMG and EMI $150 million a year for the next five years as a settlement. And it would also pay independent labels would get $50 million a year for five years. Napster CEO Hank Barry says it's a way to keep Napster alive.
[Hank Barry, Ceo, Napster:] This is a community of 60 million people, 60 million people who really love music. And there ought to be a way that we can, working together with the record companies, find a way to let those consumers enjoy this thing that they really love, which is this Napster community.
[Kellan:] Now, Barry is confident people will pay a monthly fee to download music even though there are other downloading Web sites out there.
[Lin:] Ann, so, what has been the reaction of the record companies? Are they going to go for it?
[Kellan:] Well, we're still waiting to hear from the record companies right now. Sony and EMI really have had no comment yet, but AOL Time Warner reportedly is downplaying this offer, saying why should we give Napster money when you know, to settle this suit. So, we're still waiting to hear, but we're not sure that there's going to be a positive reaction to this. But we'll let you know when we hear more.
[Lin:] All right, thank you so much, Ann Kellan.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] I want to bring in Joie Chen in Atlanta. She has more on the military campaign, some analysis from today's Pentagon briefing Joie.
[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] Wolf, right, as a former Pentagon reporter yourself, Wolf, we certainly got the very detailed update on what happened at today's Pentagon briefing. But we want to take a minute now and look at a little bit of detail from today's briefing from Secretary Rumsfeld and get a little detail now from our CNN military analyst, General David Grange, who is with us from Chicago. General, I know that in the course of your active duty in the Army, you had done some work in counterterrorism. So I want you to help our viewers understand more about this dirty bomb business. It keeps coming up. It came up with Secretary Rumsfeld today. Can you just put a little fine point on what a dirty bomb really is?
[Retired General David Grange, Cnn Military Analyst:] Well, it's the ability to jury-rig an explosive device using conventional explosives to spread radiological material. And with the proliferation right now of weapons of mass destruction, chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, the possibility does definitely exist. And with the transnational crime that's going around the world right now, the power some of these criminal organizations that are in that of kind of activity to terrorist elements, it is something to be aware of and precautions must be taken.
[Chen:] We think a lot of nuclear fuel in Russia. But in this sort of dirty bomb, suitcase bomb type material, it could be any of a number of radioactive elements, couldn't it? It could be spent fuel. It could even be something as simple as some medical, radioactive material.
[Grange:] It could be. And it could be just recent nuclear waste material that's confiscated, stolen, bartered for. You know, it is not as simple as you may think, maybe, to get it into the country, but it probably could be brought in or stolen in our own country, though we have better security measures than a lot of places overseas like possibly in Pakistan or Russia or elsewhere. But have you it take precautionary measures and I'm sure our government is doing that. But I think the possibility definitely exists and we ought to support, as American citizens, any kind of counterproliferation means that is brought up either in our homeland or abroad.
[Chen:] When I understand this notion of a dirty bomb, a suitcase type bomb, something that is really transportable. This appears to be something that actually uses a normal sort of explosive, say TNT, something of a conventional explosive and then tacks on radioactive material on top of it?
[Grange:] Right. The conventional explosives, C-4, TNT, dynamite, would spread the material and contaminate an area. It wouldn't have an explosive effect of a nuclear device, but it would contaminate areas. And though it maybe a very low yield, a few people would probably be injured or pick up the results of this contamination. And just like the anthrax terror and chaos that was spread with those few incidents, it would have the terrorist effect of inducing fear.
[Chen:] So, really, the important thing is not necessarily how many people might be killed, how many people might be deliberately effected by the radioactivity, but just the psychological impact for a lot of us, the notion of a nuclear device.
[Grange:] Right, or in this case really, a radiological device. But the point is the psychological effect, as you said, Joie, is the thing that, really, is what the terrorist wants to induce upon the American people or any other of our allies.
[Chen:] That is what terrorism all about, isn't it? General David Grange, our CNN military analyst, thank you very much for your insight on that. We will continue to look further into this notion of dirty bombs. Now let's go back to Wolf in Washington.
[Blitzer:] Thank you very much, Joie.

[Judy Woodruff:] We're breaking in here to go to New York City, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani taking a group of members of Congress on a tour. Let's listen.
[Mayor Rudy Giuliani, New York:] Are we ready? I want to thank Senator Daschle and Senator Lott for coming. And I want to thank Senator Schumer and Senator Clinton for inviting them and I believe 40 of their colleagues, 40 senators at least. They came down to the site. And I'll have them describe their own experiences, but the reality is, I think I heard several of them say, that seeing it in person is very different than seeing it on television or seeing pictures of it. Gives you a sense of the devastation that was accomplished there. And I don't believe there's anything necessary to increase the resolve or the sense of unity of the United States Senate and Congress and the president, but I think it just underscores that when you actually see it. I thank them very, very much for doing that, and I thank them for their support last week, which meant so much to the people of the city, and I thank them for their continuing support, which I know crosses all lines of any kind, party or anything else. Thank you very much.
[Sen. Thomas Daschle , Senate Majority Leader:] Well, the mayor said it so well. It is one thing to see it on television, to hear about it on the radio and watch it, as we have, from day to day. It's another thing altogether to be here, to experience the loss. We are here more than 40 strong with a very simple message: that we are Americans in complete unity with our New York and New Jersey friends. We're here to express our heartfelt sympathy to the victims and the families and those who have lost so much. We're here to commend the leadership of this mayor, our governor and your extraordinary senators, and all of those who have played the role that they have in providing leadership. We're here to commend the firefighters and those who have given so much in the rescue effort already, who work day in and day out to try to assure that whatever chance of rescue could be realized. And we're here, perhaps more importantly than anything else expect that our physical presence can demonstrate this morning, in saying that we support you and we're here 4to continue to provide that support whatever it may mean. We're here because we recognize this loss must be shared not only by New Yorkers, but by all Americans. We're here to demonstrate that support, and that support will be here for whatever length of time it takes.
[Sen. Trent Lott , Senate Minority Leader:] Well, thank you, Senator Daschle. And I want to thank Mayor Giuliani for the suggestion that we have a delegation of senators come here. And of course that request was supported by Senator Schumer and Senator Clinton. And I think it is so important for us that we're here and we hope that it's encouraging to those that are out there right now at Ground Zero working in search and rescue and the tremendous clean-up effort that's underway. I'm from a part of the country that has been hit by hurricanes repeatedly. I've seen the devastation from tornadoes, from ice storms, drought, all kinds of disasters and so many of us here have had to deal with disasters. But I must say, I've never seen anything comparable to what we have seen here today, the magnitude of it and the horror of it. And so that's why it was so important that we come and see what we're dealing with here. We are here to commit to the people of New York City and New York, regardless of the region of the country that we come from and the entire country is represented here by this delegation that we will stand with you. We made that clear last Friday when, without pontification, without speeches that we are quite often known for, we stepped up and voted for $40 billion for the clean up effort, the federal government's part of that for the disaster assistance that individuals and businesses and corporations and everybody will need and also for the cost of transportation and defense that's underway. We are here to tell you that we're together as Americans in this effort. America has been hit a tremendous blow, but it has not blown us apart. It has pulled us together. And we will do our part from the federal level. We will do our part as individuals, men and women all across this country. With our efforts, our prayers. And we're here to tell you too, along with the president and a united Congress, we will build on that who has made this happen and we will do everything we can to make sure it doesn't ever happen again. Thank you so much.
[Sen. Chuck Schumer,  New York:] Well, thank you. You know, the picture behind me says one thing to all of us as New Yorkers; we are not alone. The 40 senators here represent every region of the country, every ideology, every different background, and they are all here united to say that they share some of our pain and that they will be here for us as they were, as both Tom and Trent mentioned last week. It says to us that America is united behind us. It says to us, when we need help, they will be there, as Trent Lot said, without flinching. When Hillary and I made our request to our colleagues, there wasn't a debate about this or that or this, they were there for us. And we are so grateful. I have, in my time in the congress, I've never seen 40 senators come to a different locale on such short notice, but here you all are. And I think I speak for every New Yorker when I say to you from the bottom of our hearts, thank you. It means a great deal to us and in our hour of deed, the Senate, the House, the president and America are there for us.
[Sen. Hillary Clinton,  New York:] I think you can appreciate the extraordinary feelings that are coursing through every one of us up here because this is one of those moments that will long be remembered. The kind of show of support and concern that our colleagues have given to this city and state, to the families, is really unprecedented, and it will never be forgotten. I think it is especially appropriate that we stand here, as well, with our mayor. People have asked me a lot, Mayor, in the last days, you now, "Gee, what do you think? What do you think?" And I don't think I think anything different than not only people throughout the city and the state or even the nation, but I honestly believe the world, think that your leadership not only demonstrated the courage and determination and strength that we would expect in a moment of crisis and have come to see in other settings, but also the compassion and the caring and the concern, which has really help to lift up the hearts and spirits of countless people. It's important, though, as we stand here to recognize that, you know, our mayor hasn't slept. A lot of people down on that site haven't slept. This has been an extra human effort to keep it going, to keep it together. And when of the great gifts that we're being given today is to know we're not alone. That we have support from every corner of our nation. That means a lot. As I said down on the site, one of the firefighters I was talking to said, "You know, are they going to forget us, though, when they leave? Is It all going to be forgotten, you know, like in a month or two?" And I told him what I honestly believe. That, "No, it won't be." That we're going to have the help and support and assistance that we need, because we recognize that, although this was an attack on New York, it was an attack on America, and all Americans feel it and are willing to support us as we try to comfort and rebuild. So from my perspective, personally, Chuck and I are immensely grateful. And I think it would be appropriate, Mr. Mayor, if we heard from some of our other colleagues, if any wanted to say anything. Because several of the press asked me, down on the site, who all was here. I think you're going to get a list. Everybody will get a list, I believe. And it is appropriate that the first person who would come to the microphone is Senator Warner, who has seen more than his share of warfare and military preparedness. I went with him to the Pentagon yesterday to pay my respects to the brave men and women who died there and also were fighting to save lives there. And Senator Warner, we'd be honored to have you say a word.
[Sen. John Warner,  Virginia:] Thank you, Senator. I'll be very brief. I appreciate very much your coming to the Pentagon yesterday and Senator Schumer. We visited with our firefighters and they're just like your construction workers, firefighters, Red Cross, all, who are on these sites. And when they learned that you had asked that I come up here today, the Fairfax County Fire Department gave me this hat. And they said, "Senator, we're a band of brothers and sisters, whether we're in New York or in Virginia, here at the Pentagon." And they said, "If you see that mayor, he's our kind of guy, give him our hat." Mr. Mayor, here we go.
[Giuliani:] Thank you.
[Warner:] I'll take this one back and it will be in the Hall of Fame in the Fairfax County Rescue Squad.
[Giuliani:] Thank you, Senator.

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] The U.S. State Department is renewing its warning against travel to Israel, the West Bank and Gaza in response to yesterday's suicide bomb attack on a Jerusalem pizzeria. Today, Israel buried its dead and struck back. CNN's Mike Hanna with details.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] The funerals of those killed in the terror attack went through the night and into the day, 15 Israelis and Jewish visitors to Israel mourned. Among them, five members of the Schevischorder family, the parents, Tzira and Mordechai, and three children, aged 14, 4 and 2. Two now orphaned children remain in hospital. Another funeral for Shoshana Greenbaum, a 31-year-old American who was five months pregnant. Her family decided she should be buried in Israel.
[Unidentified Male:] She's here and she will stay here.
[Hanna:] Among the speakers at her funeral, the American ambassador, Daniel Kurtzer.
[Daniel Kurtzer, U.s. Ambassador To Israel:] We hope that the peace and security...
[Hanna:] He became the focus of one mourner's anger for the U.S. administration's past criticism of Israeli attacks against Palestinian targets.
[Unidentified Male:] You are now talking about peace? What a joke is that! You are the number one supporter of terrorism, you don't let us retaliate when it's needed!
[Hanna:] Part of Israel's action in the wake of the Jerusalem bombing took a familiar form. Israeli F-16 fighters fired missiles at a police command post in the West Bank city of Ramallah. Fearing just such an attack, the police had abandoned the post before its destruction. There were no casualties. But another reprisal was unprecedented: Israeli forces took over areas of East Jerusalem that until now been under Palestinian Authority administrative control. Among the buildings seized, Orient House, a social and political center that has long been a symbol of the Palestinian aspirations of an independent state with its capital in Jerusalem.
[Saeb Erakat, Chief Palestinian Negotiator:] The mere sight of the Israeli flag over the Orient House, the symbol of Palestinian nationalism, statehood, capital and peace, to be flying over the Orient House is telling the Palestinians, your dreams are killed, your aspirations are no longer there, and Israel's fait accompli policies will prevail.
[Hanna:] The Israeli government says the move was intended to send the clearest of messages to Yasser Arafat.
[Dore Gold, Sharon Adviser:] If the Palestinian Authority continues to support violence, it is important that Israel and the international community make it clear that they cannot advance their political agenda, their political goals. Violence will bring about a reversal of Palestinian goals, not their advance.
[Hanna:] No matter what the political goals of either side, after the bomb attack Thursday and the Israeli actions in its wake, Jerusalem is once again clearly at the center of conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Mike Hanna, CNN, Jerusalem.

[Bill Bradley , Presidential Candidate:] You know, Al, your underdog pitch brings tears to my eyes.
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] Well, I hope that my upset victory brings tears to your eyes on February 1st.
[Robert Novak, Co-host:] Tonight, the New Hampshire primary is just weeks away. After votes are counted, which Democratic candidate will be laughing, and which will be crying?
[Announcer:] Live from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Robert Novak. In the CROSSFIRE, Ron Klain, former chief of staff to Vice President Al Gore and an adviser to the Gore campaign. And in Des Moines, Eric Hauser, press secretary for Bill Bradley.
[Novak:] Good evening, welcome to CROSSFIRE. Al Gore and Bill Bradley squared off in their fourth Democratic presidential debate. And it's not just the vice president calling the former senator a quitter. The former basketball star also took off the gloves.
[Bradley:] When I hear you talk, Al, it reminds me of a Washington bunker. I think you're in the Washington bunker. And I can understand why you're in the bunker. I mean, there's Gingrich, there was the fund-raising scandal, there was the impeachment problem. And I think that the major objective in the last several years in the White House has been political survival. I understand that.
[Gore:] I'm proud that I stayed and fought against the Gingrich Congress. I'm proud that I was where I think the American people needed a lot of folks to be, fighting against that, preventing them from shutting down the government.
[Novak:] But what made front pages of the nation's newspapers was the vice president saying, yes, he would impose a gay rights litmus test in naming members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Senator Bradley didn't go quite that far but did say the generals and admirals he picked would follow his orders to allow gays in the military. If you didn't catch debate number four last night, never fear. Debate number five will be in Des Moines Saturday afternoon, broadcast live on CNN. Who's winning these debates? And are the debates really preparing the Democrats to run against Republicans next November? Bill?
[Bill Press, Co-host:] Eric Hauser, I started out in politics with Gene McCarthy in 1968, so I like somebody who's independent, I like somebody who's an outsider. I thought that's what Bill Bradley was, and then I hear him last night giving this answer when challenged to give up 30-second commercials. Let's remind everybody what he said.
[Bradley:] Let me tell you, if you are not known by a million people in the country, as Al is I'm not known by as many people. My only opportunity to get known is through a 30-second television commercial, which, quite frankly, if you know what you believe is really not a problem.
[Press:] Now, Eric, that is classic insider establishment BS, isn't it?
[Eric Hauser, Bradley Press Secretary:] No, not at all. The couple points are, one, it is true. You can say you can have an important impression in 30 seconds if you're clear and candid and direct with people. Thirty-second ads, 60-second ads are not the only way to communicate. You do it in living rooms, you do it in debates, you do it in speeches. But the other part of it is 30-second ads aren't the problem, 30-second attack ads are the problem. People aren't saying they want to hear less of politicians through the air, they're saying they don't want to hear attack politics through the air. So we'll keep a mix of communication, and we'll keep it positive.
[Press:] Eric, you're doing what your boss does. You're avoiding the question. Look, Bill Bradley is not an unknown, and his answer is the same answer you hear from Mitch McConnell and Republicans on campaign reform. They say we can't do it because we need to keep raising money, basically, to fight the other side.
[Hauser:] Bill, Bill, he is a lot less known than the vice president. And, more importantly and it was interesting. The vice president sort of agreed to this last night when said, now this time, Bill. It's not a ploy, meaning last time it was, meaning it still is a ploy. And it's a gimmick. There's a lot of stunts. There's a lot of gimmicks. It's a foolish idea, and I don't think we'll do it...
[Press:] And...
[Hauser:] ... under any circumstances.
[Press:] And...
[Hauser:] It's a form of communication with people. And If you say what you believe...
[Press:] And...
[Hauser:] ... about health care and guns and campaign finance reform and look in the camera, tell people...
[Press:] And...
[Hauser:] ... what you believe and why, that's fine.
[Press:] And, Eric, standing up Bill Bradley standing up with John McCain in New Hampshire and shaking hands was not a campaign ploy?
[Hauser:] Absolutely not. These have been guys that have committed to campaign finance reform since the very beginning of this campaign, that have made it centerpieces, that have proven something very important, which is you need cooperation and a national purpose to get campaign finance reform done. We haven't had that in the last seven or eight years, and you need that if you're going to get it accomplished.
[Novak:] Ron Klain, I was reading today the "Hot Line" publication, all the reaction to last night's debates from people who aren't committed journalists, analysts, neutrals. They all say your candidate lost. You doing something wrong?
[Ron Klain, Gore Adviser:] Bob, you're reading something different than what I'm reading. I heard a great reaction from people all over the country to the vice president last night. And it's no surprise. Once again, I thought he was right on the issues. I think he was right on the issue that Bill just raised, which was the question whether or not Senator Bradley would be willing to give up 30-second spots and focus the campaign on the issues through a series of debates. And what the vice president said last night was if Senator Bradley isn't known throughout the country, he'd limited it to New Hampshire alone, where Bill Bradley is leading us, and where there's no reason why he can't agree to the vice president's proposal.
[Novak:] Ron, I'll send you that sheet from the...
[Klain:] Thanks, Bob, thanks. I appreciate that.
[Novak:] You'll see. But let me I try to be helpful. And I want to tell you what's wrong with the vice president. And let's just...
[Klain:] Thanks, Bob. I appreciate that.
[Novak:] Let's just look at this little piece from the debate last night.
[Klain:] OK.
[Bradley:] First of all, Al, let me explain to you, Al, how the private sectors works, OK? If you have if you have a health care plan...
[Gore:] Try not to be aloof.
[Novak:] You may not have heard that. What Vice President Gore said was "try not to be aloof." And, you know, they're having a debate about health care, and he has read somewhere in some of the polling data that you have piled onto him that Bradley is too aloof. He reads it in the paper, and so in the middle of the health care thing, he says, try not to be aloof. That's the whole problem.
[Klain:] Well, no, no. Look, first of all by the way, I think the first question in that debate was a question from a journalist asking Senator Bradley about his aloofness. And, frankly, I thought Senator Bradley's answer was just plain, old condescending. He doesn't want to defend his health care plan because he...
[Hauser:] Ron, Ron, wait a minute.
[Klain:] Eric, let me finish. I didn't interrupt you. Let me finish.
[Hauser:] All right.
[Klain:] He doesn't want to defend his let care plan because he can't. It's a bad plan. It gets rid of Medicaid, it gets unstabilizes the health care system, it would explode the deficit. It's a wrong plan. That's why Senator Bradley can't defend the program.
[Novak:] You didn't answer my question, but I didn't expect you to. But I want to raise one other thing. You have been the vice president has been really attacking Senator Bradley as being the tool of the pharmaceutical companies. And he answered that last night. And let's take a look at what he said.
[Bradley:] Less than one percent of the money that I ever raised when I was running in all of my Senate campaigns came from anybody connected to a pharmaceutical company, less than this 310 of a percent in my presidential campaign. So from my standpoint, that's not a problem.
[Novak:] Now don't you think the vice president owes Senator Bradley an apology, raising this red herring of pharmaceutical contribution, when less than one percent of his contributions come from those companies?
[Klain:] Look it's thousands and thousands of dollars, whatever the percentage is. And Senator Bradley has been, as I think has been documented in most of the major newspapers "The New York Times did a story about this a couple of weeks ago a very loyal and overly loyal friend of the pharmaceutical industry. And just this week, when he announced his big plan to close corporate tax loopholes, none of them were addressed to the pharmaceutical industry once again. On the tax issue, the difference between these two candidates couldn't be clearer. Al Gore supports middle class tax relief, and Bill Bradley hasn't pushed that issue in this campaign.
[Press:] Eric, I've got a question for you here, but if you want to...
[Hauser:] Let me...
[Press:] ... give a quick response, go ahead.
[Hauser:] Let me can I ask a question for Ron?
[Press:] Yes, go ahead.
[Hauser:] Ron, how much, I mean, $150 billion, $350 billion, the vice president's tax cut range is extraordinary. And that's why we don't know exactly how much he's trying to spend. The fact is the vice president, by his own numbers, has overspent the surplus. So any talk of a tax cut...
[Klain:] Eric, that's just not true. The vice president has been right there on taxes...
[Hauser:] Which one? No, he hasn't, Ron.
[Klain:] He's very clear on taxes, very clear.
[Hauser:] How much? How much?
[Klain:] He's talked about getting rid of the marriage penalty. I wish Senator Bradley would support that.
[Hauser:] But how much, Ron?
[Klain:] Health care tax cuts, savings tax cuts, a total of almost $300 billion. And his plan, unlike Senator Bradley's, fits within the balanced budget...
[Hauser:] No, it doesn't.
[Klain:] ... and doesn't destabilize the economic future of our country.
[Hauser:] No, it doesn't.
[Klain:] I'm sorry, Eric. Those are the facts.
[Press:] All right, let me jump in here with a tax question that didn't come up in the debate last night, Eric, which is the senator's statement yesterday that he wanted to eliminate or close some tax loopholes. Liberals love that, right? Tax loopholes amounting to $125 billion. My question to you, Eric, is this is a senator who authored, when he was in the Senate, a tax break for pharmaceutical companies doing business in Puerto Rico, also a senator who flip- flopped on one of the worst tax loopholes, which is the ethanol subsidy in Iowa. I mean, isn't it kind of hypocritical of him to talk about tax breaks when he's I mean, loopholes, when he's the author of these two?
[Hauser:] No, I you know, he is the author of the 1986 tax reform act, which was probably the greatest reform in of the tax code in American history, taking out billions of dollars in loopholes and lowering rates for millions of Americans.
[Press:] But he can't have it both ways, Eric.
[Hauser:] No, but the point is, the interesting thing the other day after we made the proposal to save $125 billion, is the Gore campaign said that Bill Bradley was new to the issue of tax reform. That's like saying he's recently tall. I mean, you guys have got to get the facts right. He offered the biggest bill on tax reform in the country, and we're going to continue that tradition in the White House.
[Novak:] I have to get away from the debate for a moment, Mr. Klain. The Gore campaign manager, Donna Brazile, made this statement, quote: "The Republicans bring out Colin Powell and J.C. Watts because they have no program, no policy. They play that game because they have no other game. They have no love and no joy. They'd rather take pictures with black children than feed them." And a black Republican, Governor Colin Powell was...
[Press:] General you said "governor."
[Novak:] I'm sorry General Colin Powell was absolutely outraged by that. He called it playing the race card. Are you identifying yourself with the outrageous statements by Donna Brazile?
[Klain:] Donna Brazile was 100 percent right. Look, General Powell is a great American. He's a great leader. He's a national hero. J.C. Watts is a great man, too. But the fact is that their presence in the Republican Party, as great leaders as they are, doesn't make up for the fact the Republican Party has no real agenda to help...
[Novak:] So you like to play the race card.
[Klain:] This is not about playing the race card; it's about playing the truth card, Bob. And the truth card is this: The Republican Party doesn't have an agenda to help minorities. In fact, just yesterday, as this controversy was erupting, the Republican Party once again renewed their opposition to the vice president's plan to support school construction in our inner-cities. Where is their agenda for African-Americans in this country, Bob?
[Press:] Gentlemen, we're going to have to take a break. We've got more issues and more differences coming up. But as we go to this break, here's one issue that both candidates found last night that they could agree on.
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] I respect, Bill. I really do. I am not just saying that as a ploy. I think he's a genuinely good person.
[Unidentified Male:] You agree with him??
[Bill Bradley , Presidential Candidate:] I agree with what he said, yes. I think I'm a genuinely good person.
[Gore:] He also thinks he's a genuinely good person.
[Press:] Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. In the first debate of 2000, Bill Bradley and Al Gore agreed last night on gays in the military, but they clashed over health care, Medicare and relations with Russia, among other topics. Tonight, we continue to probe the difference on the issues with representatives of both candidates. In Des Moines, Eric Hauser, press secretary to Bill Bradley. Here in Washington, Ron Klain, former chief of staff to Vice President Gore and now adviser to the gore campaign Bob.
[Novak:] Eric Hauser, I almost fell off my chair last night when I heard Senator Bradley, not only raise the impeachment issue, when he talked about Al Gore in the bunker, but say this about his Democratic administration's policy to Russia. Let's take a look at it.
[Bradley:] I look at our relations with Russia over the last eight years, and I think we've had a missed opportunity. They came, they wanted to know what to do. I think that we have not pushed hard enough for a reduction in strategic nuclear weapons, destruction of nuclear stockpiles. I believe that we sent IMF money to Russia knowing that corruption was rampant.
[Novak:] Eric, any one of the six pack of Republican candidates debating tonight at Durham, New Hampshire could use that are you just cutting all of your ties with the Clinton administration?
[Hauser:] No. We've got a disagreement with some of how some of the Russia policy over the last six or seven years, but there's a thread that extends far beyond Russia, and it's missed opportunities, and it's settling for far less than we could do, whether it's Russia, or gun control, or child poverty, or health care, or campaign finance reform and on and on and on. The vice president made very clear last night that he was willing to settle for a lot less than Americans want, and that's unfortunate. And it's clear on health care, in particular, that he is leaving millions of people behind without insurance, without finances for insurance... Well, let me make one other point on this one. You've talked about step by step to universal care. There is no more money in your budget for any steps. What you've proposed is as far as you're going to get in a Gore administration, and that's what you have settled for and that's how... Ron, talk about yourself for a minute.
[Press:] One at a time. Eric, OK, hold on.
[Klain:] Senator Bradley's proposal costs six times and covers one percent more persons and leaves nothing, nothing for education, to save Medicare, to promote fiscal responsibility and for tax cuts. Bill Bradley has the small agenda here. It's an agenda here; it's an agenda just focused on health care. Al Gore has leadership for the 21st century on health care, education, Medicare, Medicaid, the whole range of issues. That's the biggest difference here.
[Novak:] That's fascinating, but that's not the point I was making. You know, the first election I voted in was 1952, and the Democratic candidate, Adlai Stevenson, just trashed the Truman administration up and down America. They missed opportunities, they didn't do well enough, and he ended up winning nine out of 48 states for one of the worst Democratic showings ever. Isn't there a danger when you really dump on your own record, Democratic record of eight years, you're giving a windfall to the Republicans?
[Hauser:] No, it's Bob, I think it's a difference of opinion on a critical issue in global relations. There have been some things the Clinton administration has done right. There have been things that Senator Bradley believes have not been done as well as they should have been. That's normal politicking. What's not normal politicking is attacking relentlessly on issues that are distorted, are unclear, are that's the difference in the Gore campaign, Unfortunately, he started with that back in October.
[Novak:] I want one more thing about the general looking forward to the general election. Last night, your candidate said that he would force members of the joint chiefs of staff to accept his views on gays in the military. Vice President Gore said he would have a litmus test on members of the joint chiefs of staff. Don't you know, Eric, that the Republicans are going to take those soundbites in the general election and whichever of you is nominated, just cram it down your throat?
[Hauser:] No I don't think so. I mean, I think it's an issue of common human respect, and that gays in the we believe gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military. And what Senator Bradley talked about last night was establishing that principle and that working in consultation with the Joint Chiefs and the military on enacting that principle in the course of his administration. He made the point that military officers follow their commander in chief and they'll follow this principle that he's laid out and the vice president has agreed with.
[Press:] Let me pick up on that, Ron, with you, because you know, I thought I remember as a Democrat attacking the Republicans all the time, because they wanted litmus test for appointees to the Supreme Court. Are you saying now and is Al Gore saying that we are for litmus tests when it comes to the military?
[Klain:] What the vice president said last night was that litmus tests for an independent branch of the government, like the Judiciary, is one question, but it's, of course, common sense that people he will appoint to jobs in his administration will support his policies. That's why it's the executive branch. That's why the president is the commander in chief. And I think it's common sense that the vice president, who wants to rid our military of discrimination, is going to seek people to serve in high posts in that armed forces that share his views against discrimination. I think that is common sense. I think it's why both Al Gore and Bill Bradley agreed on that last night.
[Press:] Well, I totally agree that the "don't ask don't tell" policy is outrageous. It should never have been adopted. It should be eliminated right away. But I think the question is: What is the proper role of the military? Let me just read you what one of the former marine commandants said today, quote, this is...
[Novak:] Commandant.
[Press:] ... commandant Carl, General Carl Mundy. Quote: "Military officers certainly execute the orders of the president, but a litmus test beforehand would place an officer in an untenable position, saying: Do you believe what I believe? I think it would be unworkable." Isn't that the issue? It is not that a soldier won't obey orders, but you can't are you going to demand of the soldier that he agree with you ahead of time?
[Klain:] The vice president as commander-in-chief is going to demand military officers be prepared to support and execute his policies. I think that's common sense for someone who is trying to bring an anti-discrimination approach to the U.S. military. I am sure that's what Harry Truman did when he integrated the armed forces, and I think it's sensible for Al Gore to want to do the same thing now. I think it is a step forward in our society. It's a step for eliminating discrimination in the armed forces. I think it's the right place for the next president to be.
[Press:] Let me ask you just one other quick one on handguns.
[Klain:] Sure.
[Press:] Because I was surprised last night when Bill Bradley I mean, Al Gore has been good on handgun control.
[Klain:] Right.
[Press:] Bill Bradley said one simple thing: I want to license and register all hand guns. And the vice president would not go along with it. Why not? What is wrong with that policy?
[Klain:] Because what the vice president has is a policy that makes a heck of a lot more sense, which is licensing gun owners, and making sure that before you can go buy a handgun you have a photo ID, basic safety instructions, and a legal entitlement to buy them. Registering handguns would be a bureaucratic nightmare. There is no way to actually implement it. Senator Bradley has no plan to do it. It would be an absolute disaster. It can't be done right now in our country. And why not and why not do something that will make our streets actually safer?
[Press:] Eric...
[Hauser:] Yes.
[Klain:] This is like a lot of things Bill Bradley has proposed.
[Hauser:] No, no, no, Ron...
[Klain:] It sounds good at first blush...
[Hauser:] Ron, first of all...
[Klain:] but it wouldn't work.
[Hauser:] Ron, first of all, we support licensing, but what you're doing is leaving 66 million guns in America without any check. The guns that are already out there, the only way to trace them, the only way to track them, the only way to know how they're used in crimes and how to find the people who use them, is to register. It's symbolic of so many things. You have got to step up and do the big thing, because it's going to help a lot of people. And with that many guns out there unregistered, you're not going to be able to trace them, and...
[Klain:] It is symbolic of many things, Eric.
[Hauser:] ... you're selling people short, you're selling people short.
[Klain:] It is symbolic of many things. It's a complicated plan Senator Bradley has laid out there that wouldn't work, that hasn't been thought through, that has no details, and wouldn't actually do anything to make this country better off.
[Novak:] All right, we're going to we're going to have to take a break. I want to ask a quick question: Richard Berke of "The New York Times" on "INSIDE POLITICS" on CNN today. I think he's an objective reporter. He said both of you are running well to the left. Is that true? Eric?
[Hauser:] I think we're running right to common sense, which is where most Americans are. You're not going to tell me that most Americans don't want health insurance for everybody, don't want guns off the streets, don't...
[Novak:] Ron, quickly, are you running to the left?
[Klain:] The vice president is running on a common-sense agenda that will make America a better place in the 21st century.
[Novak:] You're both wrong, you're both running to the left, and that old left-winger Bill Press thank you very much, Ron Klain.
[Klain:] Thank you.
[Novak:] Thank you Eric Hauser in Des Moines.
[Hauser:] Thanks, guys.
[Novak:] And that old left-winger Bill Press and I will be back with closing comments in just a minute.
[Press:] OK, if you love politics, CNN is the network to watch, and here a couple of programming notes: Iowa and New Hampshire, of course, aren't the only states where votes matter. The GOP candidates meet in South Carolina tomorrow night for still another debate. And in the CROSSFIRE tomorrow, to preview it, we'll be joined by Bush adviser Ralph Reed, and McCain's top man in the state, Congressman Lindsey Graham. That's Friday, tomorrow night, at 7:30. And Saturday at 2:00, tune in to watch Democratic candidates Al Gore and Bill Bradley face off in still another debate, this one in Des Moines, Iowa. And of course, that is all on CNN. Bob, first I have to tell you, I agree with you on I thought Donna Brazil's comments were out of line, and she certainly deserves an apology to Colin Powell, at least, and to J.C. Watts. The other thing I have to tell you you know what I picked up last night from this debate? I think Bill Bradley is surprisingly thin-skinned. I mean, he loves to put out these big ideas, but when you challenge him he really bristles and question whether he's really tough enough for the long haul.
[Novak:] Well, I've spent my whole life looking for a thick- skinned politician and I haven't found one yet. But I let me tell you this, 27 percent of the U.S. of the officers in the U.S. military say they'll resign from the service if this "don't ask, don't tell" policy is abandoned. And when the when Vice President Gore says on national television that he would demand a litmus test for members of the Joint Chiefs, that is gold, porcelain, the platinum for the Republicans to use in the fall campaign.
[Press:] And they will, but it won't work. From the left, I'm Bill Press. Good night for
[Crossfire. Novak:] From the right, I'm Robert Novak. Join us again next time for another edition of CROSSFIRE.

[Stephanie Oswald, Cnn Correspondent:] Come along as we travel now deep into the cultural landscape of Italy to witness efforts to preserve the country's treasure. Venice has been teeming with tourists for centuries. Despite the crowds, the panoramic port city continues to flourish.
[Michael Broderick, Venicescapes Cultural Association:] So they're not just helping a charming, unique city, they're helping a city that wants to be helped.
[Oswald:] Savor the tastes of Italy. We see how traditions to please the palate also are being passionately protected.
[Sara Baer-sinnot, Oldways Preservation & Exchange Trust:] If the world becomes all one and it's all one big fast food world, each country and place loses its own identity.
[Oswald:] And we'll take you where miracles are happening as we journey to Assisi. This spiritual Mecca is being readied to welcome the new millenium. Napoleon called this the most elegant drawing room in Europe. Welcome to CNN TRAVEL NOW and Venice's Piazi San Marco. I'm Stephanie Oswald. We'll catch up with Carolyn O'Neil in just a few minutes. But first, we delve into this city, struggling to balance 1,000 years of history with millions of today's tourists. Venice is a life-sized open air museum telling a story of artistic expression, cultural crossroads and maritime history. Each year more than 12 million visitors flock to this historic water space eager to frolic with the pigeons in St. Mark's Square, gaze at the bronze horses standing in a frozen prance on the balcony of St. Mark's Basilica and glide into the carnival setting by gondola. But there's a serious side to the serenity and serenades. According to some environmental reports, the ground level of Venice has dropped by more than 23 centimeters, or almost nine inches, during the last century, caused by both natural phenomena and industrial work. [on camera]: Venice's waterways are the city's lifeblood, but they're also the single greatest threat to the artistic treasures within. A lot has been said about the city sinking, but that's only part of the problem. [voice-over]: Overwhelming crowds combined with pollution, erosion and simply the passage of time has sent a wave of concern washing over the Venetian lagoon. Motorboats, essential to life in Venice, also share the blame.
[Paolo Gardin, President, Insula:] Once upon a time there was not the motorboat. In the last 30, 40 years the problems induced by the motorboat, the waves make a big problems to the banks. So we have to repair the banks much more often than in the past.
[Oswald:] Insula is one of the companies charged with maintaining the 30 miles of canal.
[Ivano Turlon, Director, Insula:] This is a fundamental problem because it's a modern city that uses an urban fabric that has not changed since the end of the 700s. That's why there's a contradiction in the city of Venice, a modern city but also a city that must be conserved for its high historical value and ambiance.
[Oswald:] Decades of natural tides also have left their mark, especially damaging during the winter months when tourists are often forced to walk on raised planks.
[Turlon:] When the tide's arrived, even if it's not very high, because we're only talking about 10 to 20 centimeters, but when it arrives 20 times a year, it can cause big problems.
[Oswald:] Michael Broderick joined the campaign to preserve Venice by putting a new spin on traditional tours. He founded the cultural association Venicescapes with a mission: to build awareness of venetian history.
[Broderick:] Many people have a fondness for Venice. I think to some extent it's seen as an oddity, a quaint, charming city and people miss out the tremendous importance that Venice had in the way that our civilization developed.
[Oswald:] In an effort to tell that story, Venicescape's tailored itineraries take visitors beyond St. Mark's Square to hidden treasures often embracing other cultures. One of Broderick's favorites is this quaint sanctuary, the Church of the Holy Cross of the Armenians.
[Broderick:] Even though it was constructed as a Benedictine monastery, when they inherited it they remodeled it along Armenian lines so the blue ceiling with the stars was a must.
[Oswald:] Also part of the conservation crusade, the Save Venice organization. We met with Executive Director Beatrice Guthrie.
[Beatrice Guthrie, Save Venice Inc:] Well, this is the Squale Grande Di Saint Marco, which now serves as the facade of Venice's city hospital and it's a building that dates from the last part of the 15th century and it's really one of the great treasures of venetian art.
[Oswald:] According to Guthrie, this is the most important structure in the city still in need of restoration.
[Guthrie:] But where you see the very white which you would think is where it's clean is, in fact, where the most salt damage has occurred. They will look much better after they've been restored but what's lost is sadly lost.
[Oswald:] Is it too late to save Venice?
[Guthrie:] Well, I think Venice is pretty fabulous the way it is. And so if we can just keep it the way it is, clean it up a little bit, solve some of the environmental problems, we hope that it'll be here for many, many more years to come.
[Oswald:] These plans will take Venice tourism to a new level, with an eye on conservation and education, helping the city maintain its charm, preserving the lessons of the past and protecting its splendor for future generations. Next on CNN TRAVEL NOW, uncover some of Italy's unique customs when it comes to cuisine, glimpse the colorful life of coastal fishermen and taste family traditions with a visit to the village butcher shop. Later, painting a glorious welcome for the year 2000, a rare look at the painstaking restoration of the wonders of Assisi. It's impossible to talk about Italian traditions without talking about Italian food. In our next report, Carolyn O'Neil gives us a taste of Italy's culture.
[Carolyn O'neil, Host:] You may not journey all the way to Italy just to gulp down raw anchovies at a seaside market...
[Unidentified Tourist:] Shall we taste them? You go ahead. Oh, Nancy!
[O'neil:] But learning about local food customs is certainly a fascinating part of world travel.
[Unidentified Tourist:] I wish we could get fish like this at home. It's too bad we can't.
[O'neil:] And while it may be the centuries old vistas and snapshots of every day life that attract millions of visitors to Italy each year, the unique tastes and aromas of the country's regional cuisines offer moments to savor.
[Carol Field, Author, "in Nonna's Kitchen":] Which is one of the great draws of coming to Italy because if you want to explore there is this wealth, tens of thousands of dishes.
[Nancy Harmon Jenkins, Author, "flavors Of Puglia":] You never run out of new things to eat here because it tastes good. Because it has, it's just full of magnificent flavors.
[Field:] Thank goodness people have gotten over the idea that Italian food is spaghetti and meatballs.
[O'neil:] Many American cookbook authors and chefs who get the word out on authentic Italian cooking through the recipes and restaurants make frequent trips to learn more, even about the nuances of olive oils.
[Unidentified Cook:] It's leaner. It smells like peas.
[O'neil:] A special trip organized by Oldways Preservation and Exchange Trust brought food professionals together in Puglia, the region in southern Italy in the heel of the boot.
[Baer-sinnot:] I think the food that we've found is really the food the food, the cuisine of the grandmothers and it's still around.
[O'neil:] And food of the grandfathers. In the coastal town of Barre, fishermen set out in small boats as they have for generations and visitors can witness this scene as octopus are thrown to the ground with a resounding slap to tenderize the meat. Boston chef Joe Simone was so enthralled he had to give it a try.
[Joe Simone:] I can only do one at a time because I'm very new at this. Oh, it went right in my calf.
[O'neil:] Another must see and sample, the breads of Altamura, baked in wood-fired ovens.
[Field:] There is a wonderful, wonderful sweet taste to the Durham wheat. We see it all over Fulize. You drive along and you see fields of wheat.
[O'neil:] Also made from Italian wheat, fresh pasta. Experienced hands form intricate shapes and ravioli are stuffed with local cheeses and birds. And while tables laden with the bounty of Italy are proudly displayed for guests, there are concerns that these are endangered dinners, threatened by mass produced food distributed worldwide.
[Dun Gifford, Oldways Preservation & Exchange Trust:] The fast foods, the hamburger chains, the fried chicken, the pizza places, it's all destroying what is special about the local and regional exciting food.
[Baer-sinnot:] People really want to visit places like Puria and Italy and to experience the food traditions, the cultural traditions and to see the Italy and the Puria that has always been.
[O'neil:] And preserving the traditional eating styles of Italy also means maintaining the professions that create the food products. The butcher in this shop in Chianti is continuing a craft practiced by his family for over 250 years. [voice-over]: Dario Chicini welcomes American guests on a tour of Tuscany to share his enthusiasm for cured meats with some recipes dating back to the Renaissance.
[Dario Chicini:] Basically he said he's not Leonardo, but what his job is to do is to basically preserve what he was taught by his family. It's his joy, it's his love but it's also his work and it's his duty basically to keep this tradition going.
[O'neil:] Just as many are moved to protect music and art, what can travelers do to help keep Italian food Italian? Simply enjoy.
[Jenkins:] If at all possible rent a car and drive out into the countryside and look for small country restaurants. Look for markets. Most country towns have a weekly market.
[Gifford:] Just walk around. You'll find that people eat in different ways, that they eat different things, they prepare the foods in different ways. It is truly exciting because one of the things that we like to talk about is what do we eat on our vacation and on our holidays.
[O'neil:] And by enjoying Italy's food traditions, even vacationers can strengthen the country's culinary culture so meals like this won't become just a memory. Carolyn O'Neil, CNN.
[Oswald:] For many travelers to Venice, this is the first stop after a fine Italian meal. Cafe Florian opened in 1720. Legend has it even Casanova had a cup of coffee here before fleeing the city. When CNN TRAVEL NOW continues, a destination that speaks to the soul, an incredible spiritual and architectural icon, the Basilica of St. Francis. We'll give you a fascinating look as our cameras climb into the inner workings of a restoration in progress. Our Italian journey continues now. We've traveled to central Italy. This is the Piaza of Pimuni, the main square in Assisi. This popular stop halfway between Florence and Rome is perhaps best known for its most famous resident, Saint Francis. Assisi has been rebuilding itself since a major earthquake struck in September of 1997. But today tourism is flourishing and while the quake was devastating in many ways, one thing it did not destroy is the spirit of the people. Nestled amid the tranquil hills of Umbria, you'll find one of the greatest landmarks of the Western world, the Basilica of St. Francis of Assisi. It's a place where architectures have molded their visions in stone, artists have cast their imaginations in color and religious pilgrims on spiritual journeys find what they came for.
[Unidentified Tourist:] It just tells you so much about us and the type of lives that we led and to be here and feel such a sense of peace, it's such a peaceful city.
[Oswald:] People have been coming here to trace the footsteps of St. Francis for more than 700 years and whether they're passion is religion, art or any of the simple pleasures of Italy, more than 13 million visitors are expected to celebrate the coming of the new millenium by visiting Assisi during the year 2000.
[Gabriele Dellanave, Tour Operator:] It gives me a feeling you are really experiencing Assisi. There is something mythical, truly, and even if you are not Catholic and you don't believe in some kind of things I think you'll feel something really special around here.
[Oswald:] Believers and non-believers alike are putting faith in this, that the frescoes inside the basilica, which were shattered by the earthquake, can be restored to their natural beauty. The quake took only moments to bring down what took years to build.
[Mayor Gorgio Bartollini, Assisi, Italy:] There was a bit of confusion because at that moment I thought the damages were much worse than they actually were. I thought everything had collapsed. You couldn't see anything there was so much dust.
[Oswald:] The main damage occurred in the two-tiered basilica's upper church. Several parts of the ceiling collapsed, sending frescoes, including those painted by famous artists Timabue and Joto falling to the floor in bits and pieces.
[Giuseppe Basile, Restoration Director:] The frescoes of the upper basilica formed the basis for modern and Western art. Without these, those forms of art would not exist. Chimabula is the great painter that was the first to paint grand forms on walls in a very precise place and Joto was the first great artist that painted on the walls with a new technique, the fresco.
[Oswald:] Besides harming the basilica, the quake rocked structures throughout Assisi. But physical damage was only part of the devastation. Tourism also was shaken.
[Bartollini:] In September of '97, tourism stopped with the earthquake. In '98, tourism was 30 to 40 percent of the total and now in 1999 we're around 80 percent of what we had in 1996.
[Oswald:] The potential decline in tourism was partly what drove townspeople into action.
[Unidentified Resident:] We had a great desire to rebel and prepare the city for the 2000 jubilee.
[Oswald:] Fifteen thousand visitors a day are expected here to mark the dawn of the new millenium, a period biblical faith calls a year to celebrate. But even without a deadline, the past is daunting, one many say will take a miracle to complete.
[Paola Passalaqua, Restoration Team:] In the beginning many people, when confronted with the mass destruction and with the grave problems that involved the basilica in front of them thought that this was, let's say, secondary work, work that would be impossible to realize. It was called the utopian workshop.
[Oswald:] If that's true, then these are the laborers of utopia, patiently restoring the vaulted ceiling above stroke by stroke. While below in an underground laboratory frescoes are being put back together, one tiny piece at a time. Walking around this room is like being immersed in a giant, seemingly impossible jigsaw puzzle. Tens of thousands of pieces lie in trays awaiting their reunion. Fragments are finding their place, some with the help of life-sized photographs. A computer program reads the colors, even the brush stroke of each mosaic, eventually indicating how each piece fits together. The work is expected to take two to three more years to complete with only part of the frescoes restored and back on the ceiling by the end of 1999. Still, the upper basilica, closed for two years, is expected to be reopened by Christmas. Before he devoted himself to a lifetime of ministry, St. Francis was also committed to repairing churches in the town of Assisi. Now, many believe his spirit is helping the town return the favor. Saint Valentine, the patron saint of lovers, was also from this part of Italy. If you've fallen in love with any of the places we've taken you today, stay tuned. We'll be right back with some information to help you plan your trip. Whether you're looking for a gondola ride or a history lesson, here's where to find more information about the places we visited today.
[Announcer:] The Italian embassy is a good place to start. Its Web sites in English and Italian has helpful advice and links for planning your trip. Other great Venice resources include Venicescapes for cultural information and suggested itineraries to make the most of your visit. And the color newsletter and Web site at Save Venice Inc. offers updates on various restoration projects. If learning more about preserving Italy and its culinary traditions interests you, contact Worldways Preservation and Exchange Trust. And if our profile of Assisi and the Basilica of Saint Francis piques your curiosity, contact the Assisi Tourism Board for important details on how to see the restoration progress. You can find these contacts and more on our Web site at cnn.comtravelnow.
[Oswald:] The world's traveler Marco Polo was born in Venice. Thanks for traveling with us today. I'm Stephanie Oswald. I hope we've inspired you to explore Italy on your own. Here's what's coming up next week on CNN TRAVEL NOW. Next week, join us at some of the world's top golf courses. Experience the thrill of California's renowned Pebble Beach.
[Unidentified Male:] We don't advise very much beginners we don't advise them to be playing. That may be a little bit of a hard track.
[Oswald:] Then we hit the links at golf's birthplace in Scotland.
[Unidentified Male:] Putting on St. Andrews is like, I guess, going to Mecca if you're inclined that way.
[Oswald:] And for the golfing novice or the professional, find out why this Florida golf school is among the best.
[Unidentified Male:] See, that is a great grip.
[Oswald:] Golfing vacations next week on CNN TRAVEL NOW. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Nobody likes to be stuck on hold, but that's exactly where we remain today. It appears the nation for that matter, the world will have to wait at least until next Friday to find out who will be the 43rd chief executive. An unofficial tally of all Florida counties gives George W. Bush a minuscule 327-vote lead over Al Gore out of 6 million votes cast. Let's stress these Associated Press numbers are not certified. And, in fact, it looks likes a few thousand overseas ballots, which will be counted a week from today, could determine who wins Florida and the presidency. Between the counting and the waiting, more high-voltage rhetoric from the campaigns. Let's begin our coverage of the nation's unfinished business with CNN national correspondent Mike Boettcher in Tallahassee Mike.
[Mike Boettcher, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, hello, Natalie. Here in Florida where the war over the ballot box is being waged, the rhetorical battle really heated up in Tallahassee today. First up to the podium, former Secretary of State James Baker, who is representing the Bush campaign in this election recount in Florida. Now, he dangled the possibility that if this process continued, these challenges continued by Al Gore's campaign, he dangled the possibility of possible recounts in Iowa, New Mexico and Wisconsin, states that went for Gore. And he said, Gore should give up that was his bottom line enough is enough.
[James Baker, Observer For Bush Campaign:] Let the country step back for a minute and pause and think about what's at stake here. This may be the last chance to do that. There is no reasonable end to this process if it slips away.
[Boettcher:] Next to the podium were the surrogates for Vice President Gore. His campaign chairman, Bill Daley, along with former Secretary of State William Christopher, said that the lawyers for the Gore campaign now believe, after studying that controversial ballot in Palm Beach, that it is illegal. If you'll remember, 19,000 of the double-punches for president had to be eliminated from that ballot, and he says their lawyers say it is illegal. He asked the nation for patience and he said let the process work.
[William Daley, Gore Campaign Chairman:] The way to get these results is frustrating; frustrating to all of us in both campaigns, and to the American people, obviously, as well. But calls for a declaration of a victor before all the votes are accurately tabulated are inappropriate. Waiting is unpleasant for all of us, but suggesting that the outcome of a vote is known before all the ballots are properly counted is inappropriate.
[Boettcher:] Meanwhile, the official election count here in Tallahassee on the 18th floor has slowed somewhat because this is a holiday in Florida, Veterans Day. But they now have 65 of the 67 counties. All are not in. The unofficial count of all 67, as you know, this 327 gap between Vice President Gore and Gov. Bush, with Gov. Bush leading. We shouldn't see any more movement, or very little movement, until Tuesday when there is a final count announced here, the ballots are certified. And then the next movement will be probably a week from today when all of those overseas ballot are opened and are counted in all the various counties, and then sent here. The Republicans side says, traditionally in this state, those overseas ballots have gone Republican. But the Democrats say, let's stand back, let's watch it, let's be patient. So the rhetorical war continues here, Natalie.
[Allen:] All right, Mike Boettcher, thanks, in Tallahassee.
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] And election workers in disputed Palm Beach County, and perhaps several other counties, will conduct a hand recount starting this weekend. CNN's John Zarrella is covering things in West Palm. John, what's the latest from there?
[John Zarrella, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Lou, it won't be just a hand recount. They're going to do that of about 1 percent of the vote, about 4,600 people. That was requested by the Democratic Party. The Republicans asked for a machine recount of the entire county's vote, and that will also be conducted tomorrow beginning about 9:00 a.m. We're not going to see any of that until the results of that until late tomorrow evening. Now, about 40 miles south of us here in West Palm Beach right now, a couple of attorneys representing two women who have filed suit in Palm Beach are holding a press conference to discuss that suit. It's an important event because last night at about 8:30 p.m., a circuit court judge here in West Palm Beach granted a temporary injunction to those women on their suit. Their suit challenges that they were misled, that they didn't have a proper opportunity to vote because of this ballot that is out there, the butterfly ballot, as it has become known, saying that it wasn't fair the way it was laid out. The judge is going to hold a hearing on this on all of this and hear their arguments sometime next Tuesday. We don't have an exact time for that hearing, but you can expect that it will be one major hearing. While all of that is going on, there is a phone bank not too far from us here where members of the Democratic Party are gathering affidavits from people who say they voted for the wrong person just in case there's further legal action.
[Unidentified Female:] You feel that you voted incorrectly? And would you be willing to sign an affidavit?
[Zarrella:] Now, that phone bank, rather, got in about 5,000 phone calls during the last couple of days from people who said they picked the wrong person. In fact, a couple of the people who say they picked the wrong person talked with us a while ago while they were there filling out their affidavits.
[Unidentified Male:] I thought it was pretty stupid the way they arranged it. I think the way it was, I saw Gore as the No. 2 candidate, so I pushed No. 2, and I think that voted for Buchanan.
[Unidentified Female:] When I looked across, I mean, it seemed like I was voting for Gore, but I didn't realize the hole and the name, they just didn't line up.
[Zarrella:] Now, there will also be two rallies here; one on Sunday a little bit further south of us from here, one on Monday organized by Jesse Jackson, who, as he was leaving here today, said that he was very concerned about how democracy is going to be perceived in the rest of the world based the on what is happening here in the United States.
[Jesse Jackson, Rainbow Push Coalition:] As I've traveled around the world, and the one the role that Jimmy Carter's played around the world, is to monitor elections: are they open, free, and are the fair? We assume that happens here all the time. And when it's not certified as open, free and fair, we withhold aid and diplomatic relationship. Now this has become an international embarrassment. This was not, in the end, a fair election.
[Zarrella:] No quick end to this story; certainly not here in West Palm Beach Lou.
[Waters:] Yesterday, John, the Democrats requested four counties to be hand-counted. West Palm is one of them, but there was also Volusia, Broward and Dade, I believe. What's happening on that score in those other counties?
[Zarrella:] Don't know exactly when those other counties will get started. A couple of them were supposed to get started today. It's going to take quite a bit of time. The hand counts take longer, obviously, than the machine counts. Here, it's going to take all day to count by hand. If it's in Dad and Broward and Volusia, bigger counties than this, I can imagine that that will take some time. But they can't certify the results here until the judge on Tuesday hears the arguments in this lawsuit that has been filed. So that could further delay things as far as the state giving a final certified result to the vote because they can't certify Palm Beach County no matter what happens Lou.
[Waters:] Right. OK, so you'll remain on duty in West Palm. John Zarrella from down there today.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] A short time ago in Purchase, New York, Hillary Rodham Clinton, the first lady, made history she declared her candidacy for the U.S. Senate. CNN's senior White House correspondent John King is standing by in Purchase with a report John.
[John King, Cnn Sr. White House Correspondent:] Gene, it is
[Hillary Clinton , New York Senatorial Candidate:] I am a new Democrat. I don't believe government is the source of all our problems, or the solution to them. But I do believe that when people live up to their responsibilities we ought to live up to ours to help them build better lives. That's the basic bargain we owe one another in America today.
[King:] Education and health-care reform among the first lady's primary issues. Her agenda very much like the president's agenda and the national Democratic Party agenda. But a key subplot here, the first lady and other New York Democrats out to make the case that the mayor is too controversial and too combative to serve in a collegial body like the United States Senate. Earlier today on CNN's "LATE EDITION," the mayor said he was indeed a Republican, but also said that he believed if he went to Washington, he could get things done. [Begin Video Clip, "late Edition With Wolf Blitzer"]
[Mayor Rudolph Giuliani , New York City:] I believe in Republican principles, but I am pretty good at advocating, I'm pretty good at getting for the people that I serve the things that they need. So I think that the idea that I could be part of the majority party actually is something that is helpful to the people of the state.
[King:] The first lady now trying to raise upwards of $25,000,000 for this election effort, her first run for public office. The president had nothing to say today. He sat on the supportive spouse, a role his wife has played throughout Mr. Clinton's career, but he is behind the scenes helping his wife prepare for this campaign. A very bruising campaign expected. Mrs. Clinton said as much when she said, "I know this will be a fight, but after all, this is New York" Gene.
[Randall:] Thanks, John. A new poll shows Mrs. Clinton is running only slightly behind Rudy Giuliani. A survey of registered voters in New York gives Republican Giuliani a 3 percentage point edge, 45 to 42, with 10 percent undecided. The Quinnipiac College Poll has a 3 percentage margin of error. Joining us to talk about Mrs. Clinton's move, from Purchase, New York, Democratic Congressman congressional Representative Nita Lowey, and from Albany, Republican Congressman John Sweeney. Mr. Sweeney, what kind of race do you see ahead and do you think Mrs. Clinton will be a formidable challenger?
[Rep. John Sweeney , New York:] Well, obviously, Mrs. Clinton has a lot of celebrity, Gene, and that and a lot of financial backing, so those two factors in and of themselves will make her formidable and tough. You know, I listened to the speech today and I kept thinking as a representative of upstate New York and someone who also serves in Congress, where have you been? Hillary Clinton has been in the White House for seven years. Many of the issues she touched on, she pointed to, I think that we could agree work needs to be done, but I think the bottom line is she hasn't really accomplished anything and doesn't come forward with a record of accomplishment.
[Randall:] Ms. Lowey, any mixed feelings today? You had thoughts about running for that Senate seat.
[Rep. Nita Lowey , New York:] I'm looking forward to continuing to serve in the House, to be in leadership in the House when the Democrats take over the House. That's the reason that Hillary Clinton will win and the Democrats will take care of the House, with all due respect to my good friend and colleague. The people's agenda is a Democratic agenda, modernizing schools, patients' bill of rights, preserving Social Security and Medicare, getting common-sense gun safety legislation passed. The reason Hillary Clinton will win, the reason the Democrats will get control of the House, because these are the issues that people care about.
[Randall:] Ms. Lowey, do you think the mayor of New York will be a very tough candidate?
[Lowey:] He certainly will be a very strong candidate. But eventually the people will make a decision based upon their concerns, their values and their future, and Hillary Clinton's agenda is my agenda, the Democrats' agenda, it's a Democrat for the future. We're unfortunately the majority of the Republican caucus want to take us backwards. Where is the patient bill of rights? They held it up. Where is gun safety legislation? They held it up. They want this huge tax cut. We all like tax cuts. But I want to target a tax cut so we can preserve Social Security and Medicare. This is the agenda that we're going to win on.
[Randall:] Mr. Sweeney?
[Sweeney:] That all makes great sound bites, Nita, but the fact is Rudy Giuliani is the one candidate here who has created jobs, who has paid down deficits, who has balanced budgets, who has done something about quality of life to reduce crime, and really can help create jobs. And I come from an upstate region that for seven years has really struggled with a lot of the polices the Clinton administration has promulgated. So I think that in the end it's really going to come down to the proven commodity versus a lot of rhetoric, and we heard a lot of rhetoric today, we will continue to hear that, but I think New York voters understand...
[Randall:] Mr. Sweeney...
[Sweeney:] Yes.
[Randall:] Mr. Sweeney and Ms. Lowey, take 15 seconds each. What holds the key in this contest in New York, Ms. Lowey?
[Lowey:] What holds the key is the people. The people of New York are going to make a decision based upon their values, and Hillary Clinton, the Democrats are in sync with them, and that's why they're going to vote Democratic in New York and around the country.
[Randall:] Mr. Sweeney, what holds the key?
[Sweeney:] It is the people, and it's not whether they're going to vote Democratic or Republican, they're going to vote for what is proven.
[Randall:] Mr. Sweeney and Ms. Lowey, thanks very much.
[Sweeney:] Thank you, Gene.
[Lowey:] Thanks very much.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We continue our coverage of this developing and breaking story concerning Timothy McVeigh. The Justice Department asking for stay of execution for 30 days in light of the missing documents that suddenly showed up just days before McVeigh was to be executed in Terre Haute, Indiana.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Yes, and in the meantime, we're still waiting on Attorney General John Ashcroft. He is supposed to be coming out and making a statement about this and finalizing the whole deal. We don't know exactly when that's going to happen. When it does...
[Kagan:] But when it does, you'll see it here on
[Cnn. Harris:] ... In the meantime, let's go see what our Greta Van Susteren has to stay. She's standing by in our Washington bureau. Greta, what do you make of this? And the 30-day stay Daryn and I were talking about this during the break. Is this a setting of a date 30 days from now or 30 days from May 16, or the decision will be made 30 days from May 16?
[Greta Van Susteren, Cnn Correspondent:] Oh, I think the attorney general may at the moment think it's going to be set 30 days from now. You know, a death warrant actually has to be signed if you actually set a date. But, wait a second. This is not the end. The clock is just beginning to run on this. The defense attorneys aren't going to just sit and read those documents and say, "Gee, aren't these interesting?" They're going to dig deep into them. The job of the defense attorney is not to agree with the United States government. It's to fight for the benefit of his client. So there may be motions filed. If they go back to Judge Matsch on some motion saying that there is something in a document that is critical, if Judge Matsch holds a hearing after he rules, if he rules against the defense, they're going to go up to the Court of Appeals. If the Court of Appeals rules against them, they're going to try to go to the United States Supreme Court. Look, the role of the defense attorney here isn't just simply a role let me read the documents. The role is to save your client. And these are aggressive lawyers. Now, here's the big problem. Suppose that Timothy McVeigh wants to die.
[Harris:] And he has been saying that. And he has been saying that.
[Van Susteren:] Well, of course. A lot of people say that until you get right up to the deadline. A lot of defendants on death row say that. And then they have buyer's remorse, and suddenly they don't want to die.
[Harris:] But they don't want to be martyrs. This man it's been clear that he wants to be a martyr.
[Van Susteren:] Leon, I have no idea. We only hear what other people say. I haven't heard it from Mr. McVeigh himself. But let me tell you one thing. There's a huge debate within the death penalty community. Now, I'll take you inside what defense lawyers talk about in the death penalty community. If your client wants to die, is your role as an advocate for the client to help him die, to look the other way? Or do you suddenly depart from your role as the advocate spokesman for your client and take a different role instead, almost fight your client and try to save your client's life? You oftentimes see these disputes. We saw in it Ted Kaczynski where the lawyers wanted to go one way because they thought it would save Ted Kaczynski's life. Ted Kaczynski wanted to go the other direction. In death penalty cases, lawyers and their clients sometimes depart on the role of the lawyer. And that in itself can create appellate issues. So don't expect June 16 to be the day when everyone gathers in Terre Haute. It very well could be some day in the future. It could be June 16. But it could be a year or two from now.
[Harris:] That's very interesting because the way you play this whole thing out, you bring up this ethical dilemma here. How do you think it will play out? Do you think Timothy McVeigh would use that sort of thing to play this whole thing out seeing as that's not been the road he has taken so far?
[Van Susteren:] Leon, there's no blueprint in this case, how people act. There's no blueprint in terms of how a defendant in this situation is going to react. He just may this could end very swiftly. You know, it could be so bizarre that Timothy McVeigh could file a motion on Monday opposing the attorney general seeking a postponement of his execution. I mean, there is just simply no blueprint. But the one thing that's certain is that there's sort of the internal struggle that lawyers have. A defense lawyer in a death penalty case goal is to save the client or to follow the client's wishes. And we don't know right now what those lawyers we don't know what the wishes are, first of all, about the client. Once those wishes are established, which will probably kept private between the defense attorney and his client Timothy McVeigh, but we don't know how they will react to it. There's a tremendous amount of uncertainty. But a very good defense attorney having a few cards fall his way correctly could delay the matter for a year or two. Now, why would lawyer do that in light of the fact that Timothy McVeigh has allegedly confessed to two others? Even if he got a new trial...
[Harris:] Right.
[Van Susteren:] ... back in the soup with these authors coming to court and say he confessed. I'll tell you why. Because sitting on the back burner and every defense lawyer knows it is this ongoing discussion in this country about a federal moratorium on the death penalty. We have none. And usually it's in connection with DNA cases. But it wouldn't be a selective moratorium. So there's a wild chance, wild, that perhaps the death penalty in federal cases would go away.
[Harris:] Well...
[Van Susteren:] So there's so many uncertainties in this.
[Harris:] ... let me ask you one other one. What about the FBI? What about is there any culpability there since they are the ones that pretty much created this whole situation?
[Van Susteren:] You know, a lot of people are going to sit around and criticize the FBI. But I'll tell you, Leon, I'm not. You know, there are tens of thousands of documents in this case. But I'll tell you why I'm not. And I've been in court, and I've screamed and jumped up and down and accused the FBI of all sorts of things.
[Harris:] I can believe that.
[Van Susteren:] Yeah, I know. But let me tell you something. You know, the fact that our Justice Department would come forward with these documents I think is a reason for all of us to be proud of our Justice Department. They shouldn't have been so sloppy. The FBI should have been more careful. But, you know, chances are nobody would have discovered this anyway. But, you know, even if the criminal is going to play fair, is going to violate a social contract and commit murder, the federal government must go about prosecuting, and state governments as well, in a very careful, strict way, totally compliant with the rules. When the government is sloppy or makes a mistake, it needs to step up to plate and say, "I made a mistake. And now is the time to take corrective action. And it may result in this delaying it a couple of years." But I must say, I'm not going to criticize the Justice Department, the FBI. I wish they turned them over sooner. The judge may give them a lot of heat. The judge may be furious. But the fact is, they have turned them over. And they turned them over today. They didn't turn them over at 8:00 next Wednesday morning.
[Harris:] That would have been really interesting. All right, good deal. Thanks much, Greta. We appreciate it. We'll talk with you later on about all this. Daryn.
[Kagan:] Of course, Greta coming from a legal and a scholarly position. It might be very different if you were a victim or lost a family member. And that's the situation with Kristi McCarthy. She lost her father in the Oklahoma City bombing. And she's with us on the phone right now from Kansas City. Miss McCarthy, thanks for joining us.
[Kristi Mccarthy, Father Killed In Oklahoma City Bombing:] Thank you.
[Kagan:] What can you tell us your reaction is to this announcement, this news that we're hearing that there will be a 30-day delay at least in the execution of Timothy McVeigh?
[Mccarthy:] It's very troubling to me. I mean, although I am for the death penalty, I do think that it's right in this situation. It's very frustrating to me that now six days five days before it's scheduled to happen, there's 18,000 pages that we have misplaced and somehow here's another 30 days that we have to wait and wonder.
[Kagan:] Had you planned to go to the execution or to witness it from Oklahoma City?
[Mccarthy:] I hadn't planned to. I have an uncle who is. But I had not planned to myself, no.
[Kagan:] Give us a glimpse from inside your family, the agony this has been for a number of years already, and what this does to even extend it by at least another 30 days.
[Mccarthy:] You know, people have asked me that all the time. I don't think I can ever fully describe what this kind of loss is like. I mean, it's never I mean, the death penalty having this man die is not going to bring back my father. But the pain that you live with every day, the loss, looking at my nephew every day knowing he never knew my father. My children that I plan to have one day will never know him. My mother is a widow. And you can't replace that. You can't fill that kind of void in your life. And extending this more, it's just that it adds to the pain. It adds to the fury as far as I'm concerned.
[Kagan:] Can you tell us a little bit about your dad?
[Mccarthy:] Yeah, I can. My dad was he was a very funny guy. And he was just kind of a very easygoing guy, hardworking. And I tell you, he never really did anything without his family. There was never any vacations just him and mom. It was always all of us kids and dad. And I think I get a lot of things from my dad. I look like him, and I act like him. And he's somebody I will miss for every moment for the rest of my life.
[Kagan:] What was he doing in the Murrah federal building on that day? Why was there?
[Mccarthy:] He was the director for the Department of Housing for the state of Oklahoma. He was on the ninth floor. And he had a window office.
[Kagan:] Just a good family man at work.
[Mccarthy:] Yeah.
[Kagan:] Wrong place, wrong time. Kristi McCarthy, we're sorry for your loss even all these years later. And we realize it's a difficult time with each development. And we do appreciate your visiting with us and giving us your perspective.
[Mccarthy:] Thank you. And you're welcome.
[Kagan:] Thank you. Leon.
[Harris:] Let's check in now with our Keith Oppenheim, who is working the story for us from Terre Haute, Indiana, which is where the penitentiary is where Timothy McVeigh is sitting right now Keith.
[Keith Oppenheim, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Leon, earlier you asked about what's the reaction from prison officials here. The news had just broken. We hadn't had a chance yet to talk to them. Since then, we have. And the comment from the Bureau of Prison officials on the ground here is that the plans are still in place for the execution to take place on Wednesday. They have no other comment than that. We are going to pan off for just a moment to give you an example of what I'm talking about. There are staff here who are busy working. They've been putting up some fencing. The plans for Wednesday's scheduled execution are quite elaborate. If you go to a prison facility just little ways down the road because we're at training center on the ground. So the actual prison facility is about a half-mile away. Well, in the field around that prison, you would find that there is an area that has been cordoned off for protesters, a large area that's there for the media. It's a day that they've put a lot of effort into. And the point being made is despite what we are hearing from the Justice Department at this point, the comment here is that until someone tells them that there will not be an execution to take place on Wednesday, they have to operate under the assumption that things go as planned. That's normal procedure, given the way executions work at the state level. The federal level works the same way. There has to be an actual call for the date to be changed. And as of now, that has not happened. So it's a fluid situation, Leon.
[Harris:] We understand the attorney general should be coming out we don't know exactly when, but it will sometime this afternoon I believe is what we are hearing from Washington. So we will stay on top of that story. Thanks much, Keith Oppenheim reporting live from Terre Haute. Daryn.
[Kagan:] And when the attorney general does speak, it will happen at the Justice Department. That's where we have our correspondent Kelli Arena standing by with the new information Kelli.
[Kelli Arena, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Daryn. Well, here is my guidance from the Justice Department. Again, they are reiterating the previous statement of coming from the Justice Department spokesperson that there is a strong possibility that the attorney general will recommend a stay of execution. Now, here's why they're sticking to that statement. Anything can happen between now and 1:00 when the attorney general is scheduled to hold that press conference. One of the most pressing points being that Timothy McVeigh could decide for himself, no, he doesn't want the execution delayed, that he wants to go forward as planned. If that happens, then of course that changes this whole scenario. So there's a lot of negotiation going on right now behind the scenes of Justice. The advice to us is right at this point, strong possibility, but, as I said, anything could happen. The situation is very fluid. There are three parties involved here, Daryn. You not only have Justice Department, you also have obviously Timothy McVeigh's defense attorneys, and you have the judge who heard this case back in 1997. Those parties have all just received this information, this week are thumbing through it to see whether or not it really is relevant. And I would like to reiterate one more time, Daryn, the information that was uncovered, the 3,000 pages worth of documents that were uncovered, according to Justice and law enforcement sources, they say there's nothing in those documents that would contradict Timothy McVeigh's guilt, Daryn.
[Kagan:] Kelli, I don't know if you would happen to know or if we could get Greta back, but does Timothy McVeigh have that power to overcome a stay by the government? Can he himself say, "No, I want this execution to go ahead?" Or can the government put in stay whether Timothy McVeigh wants it or not?
[Arena:] The scenario as described to me was that the he does have that right, that he can say, "No, I want the execution to go forward." Now what is not clear is that many legal experts have argued Justice needed to stay this execution. The Justice Department sets the date for the execution. So they don't request a stay, they grant a stay. They say, "OK on this day, Timothy McVeigh will be executed." And I do believe that Justice thinks that they need to prolong this process because they need to give all interested parties an adequate amount of time to review the pertinent documents. And I do believe that Justice can trump McVeigh. However, if Timothy McVeigh does come forward and say, "No, I don't want this, I have been informed by my lawyers, and I do not believe that this execution should be delayed, then I think that the guidance that we've received now is that Justice will go along with that recommendation from McVeigh." So that is how it works, Daryn.
[Kagan:] Bottom line, you're hearing 1:00 p.m. for the John Ashcroft news conference.
[Arena:] That's right, about 1:00 p.m., about 1:00 p.m. Eastern.
[Kagan:] OK, that's the first we have heard of an exact time. Once again, you'll definitely see that live here on CNN about less than two hours from now. Kelli Arena at the Justice Department, thank you. That John Ashcroft, the attorney general, holding a news conference at 1:00 p.m. Eastern. We will take a break. Much more after this. Once again, we continue this breaking news in terms of the execution of Timothy McVeigh. We're waiting for 1:00 p.m. news conference from Attorney General John Ashcroft. You will see that live here on CNN at 1:00 p.m. Eastern. Right now, we want to talk with Marsha Kight. She is a mother who lost her daughter in the Oklahoma City bombing. And Mrs. Kight, I understand we have your husband Tom on the phone with us. He is in Oklahoma City. Tom, are you there?
[Tom Kight, Daughter Killed In Oklahoma City Bombing:] Yeah, but I can't help the calls coming in. I'm not taking them, but you're going to get that.
[Kagan:] OK, we'll ignore the call waiting if you do. And we'll talk to both of you. We're going to start with Mrs. Kight in Washington, D.C. Thanks for being with us, first of all.
[Marsha Kight, Daughter Killed In Oklahoma City Bombing:] Thanks for having me.
[Kagan:] Can you tell us your reaction to this ever-changing story on what looks like will be a stay on the execution of Timothy McVeigh?
[M. Kight:] Well, it's been an emotional roller coaster ride. A lot of people have been emotionally preparing themselves for this upcoming execution. But I must say that the FBI should not be gatekeepers of evidence. If that hadn't happened, we wouldn't be having to go through this right now. And it's too sensitive of a case to make any kind of mistake. And I don't wand a cloud hanging over this execution in any way. And all these documents should be disclosed and made to the general public because we don't want McVeigh to be seen as a martyr.
[Kagan:] So as frustrating as it is, you would support of idea of giving this some space to breathe and give the defense attorneys some time to look over these documents so there is no question involved when the day does come that Timothy McVeigh is put to death?
[M. Kight:] Yes, absolutely.
[Kagan:] Does it add, though, to the frustration of all these years as a parent?
[M. Kight:] Yes. Absolutely it adds to frustration. But we have to make sure that justice is served. That's why we have checks and balances in our system. And I think it's crucial. I don't think anybody would feel good not having all the information out there and having Tim McVeigh put to death. He would probably be laughing.
[Kagan:] Is there in terms of the sense of frustration, the sense of control and power that this puts in the hands of Timothy McVeigh, and we're still not exactly clear as to whether he gets to decide if there's a stay of execution or if he gets to override that, even if the Justice Department wants one. It's yet another level of power control it puts in his hand.
[M. Kight:] Well, I hope that's not true. I hope Justice can say, "No, we need to look at this evidence," and McVeigh not have the last say. I hope that's not the case.
[Kagan:] Had you as family planned on viewing the execution?
[M. Kight:] No.
[Kagan:] Why did you make that decision?
[M. Kight:] It's not going to bring me closure. It's not going to bring my daughter back. I thought I had seen and I do feel like that I saw justice served when I was in the courtroom every day from gavel to gavel in Denver, Colorado.
[Kagan:] Mr. Kight, had you decided whether or not you were going to be viewing the execution?
[T. Kight:] I am going to be viewing the execution. I don't know when now. But Judge Matsch is one of the finest judges. I've watched him both as you know, he was the judge in both Nichols and McVeigh's cases. And he's a stickler for following the law as he sees it. And I it's an emotional roller coaster ride. But this law has to apply, as he sees it, to everybody. And that includes Tim McVeigh.
[Kagan:] And so you support the stay?
[T. Kight:] I support if that is the way Judge Matsch sees it, then I've got to go along with it because I think he's a very true jurist in the purest form, a very technical person. And he holds it to the letter of the law as he sees it. And we've lived six years with this. So if we have to live it little longer with Tim McVeigh living, then so be it. But it has to apply to everybody.
[Kagan:] Throughout this, have you supported the death penalty?
[T. Kight:] I have been for the death penalty long, long before this. My problem with the people who get life in prison for murder, I value life as very precious. You give somebody life in prison, basically you're giving them room and board, medical care, some form of recreation, and visitation rights with the family. And I don't know that that's a great punishment when you take somebody's life, have all those things victims don't have. You
[Kagan:] Mr. Kight, can you tell us something about your daughter Frankie?
[M. Kight:] Frankie was 23 years old. She worked for the Federal Employees Credit Union. Frankie was a very loving...
[Kagan:] I know it hard.
[M. Kight:] ... young woman. And she was one of the best mothers in the whole wide world. And I miss her very much.
[Kagan:] I understand. We feel your pain all these years later. Marsha and Tom Kight, I know it's a difficult day for you, yet another difficult day in what has been six years of difficult days. And we appreciate your time in spending it with us. Thank you so much.
[T. Kight:] Have a good day.
[Kagan:] Leon.
[Harris:] Those may not be the only tears we see today. All right, we'll take a break right now. But when we come back, we'll check in with our Jeanne Meserve, who is trying to scare up some more information on the details coming out of the Justice Department on this pending announcement. And we'll check in with our Charles Bierbauer, who covers the Supreme Court for us. And we'll check and see some he's going to check out the different legal aspects of this particular move. So stay with us. Much more to come. Welcome back, 24 minutes after the hour now. Let's go to Jeanne Meserve, who is standing by in Washington. She's been digging up some more information on this pending announcement we expect from Attorney General John Ashcroft Jeanne.
[Meserve:] Leon, here's the very latest guidance from the Justice Department. It is that the attorney general there's still a strong possibility that the attorney general will announce a delay of the McVeigh execution. A couple of key words here. He will be announcing a delay, not seeking on. And it is a delay that he will announce, not a stay. Charles Bierbauer here with me, senior Washington correspondent, covering the courts for us. Charles, what is the difference between a delay and a stay?
[Charles Bierbauer, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, it is more than semantics. It is an administrative procedure. The attorney general as the head of the Department of Justice also supervises the Bureau of Prisons. And they set the dates. And they carry out executions. So it would seem what we are hearing, if this what comes to pass and everything is very fluid, is that a delay means we're not going to execute him on Wednesday. We're going to examine these papers and see what legal steps might come as a result of that. A stay is a legal process, a delay in the administrative process.
[Meserve:] And a delay is an action that the attorney general can take unilaterally?
[Bierbauer:] The attorney general is within his powers as the nominal head of Bureau of Prisons to do that.
[Meserve:] There has been some speculation today about what impact this will have not just on Timothy McVeigh, but some of the other people involved or allegedly involved in the Oklahoma City bombing. You have some news about Terry Nichols and his lawyers.
[Bierbauer:] Well, most specifically Terry Nichols because Terry Nichols has raised this question of was there a John Doe number two, someone else who was involved in this conspiracy with Timothy McVeigh? And that could be a factor in Nichols' case. Nichols is appealing, has sought appeals with the Supreme Court and been turned down. But Nichols is serving life imprisonment for conspiracy and involuntary manslaughter. If these documents contain more information about a John Doe number two, we've seen those sketches years back of someone else who might have been with McVeigh, that would certainly be something that Nichols' lawyers would want to raise.
[Meserve:] And I believe you know that his lawyers intend to file a petition tonight relative to this?
[Bierbauer:] I've heard that. I'm not actually sure what the timing will be.
[Meserve:] OK. Michael Fortier, another person involved in this case. Possible impact on him too?
[Bierbauer:] Well, I suppose it comes up in the same way. Was this a grander conspiracy? Were there other people involved? Is there something that might mitigate the sentence?
[Meserve:] OK, let's talk about the McVeigh case, the one central to all of this. What are the legal options before his attorneys now?
[Bierbauer:] Well, the legal options before his attorneys would be, one, if McVeigh said, "Let's go ahead and file an appeal." Maybe he's having second thoughts about this. But there's nothing that McVeigh has said or done that indicates he wants to alter the calendar and the timeframe of his execution. But he may not have control over that. That's up to the attorney general. He does have control as to whether he would file an appeal. And it's my understanding talking with legal experts that his lawyers cannot act on their own. They would have to show that she was incompetent unable to make a judgment on his own and nothing indicated that. So they would have to rely on McVeigh saying let's appeal or let's not appeal.
[Meserve:] Because there has been some reporting that the lawyers could do otherwise, that they could feel that the system was more import than their individual...
[Bierbauer:] I've heard that. But the legal experts that I've talked to, and there's an abundance of them in this country, say no, that it really depends on McVeigh because he has not demonstrated incompetence. And the important thing to remember here is that what legal experts are telling me is there is no precedent for this. This is an unusual set of circumstances. There's no statute that particularly governs this. But let me point out one thing that might be important. And that is in terms of an appeal, it would have to go to the Court of Appeals, not to the presiding judge, is my understanding. And the Court of Appeals would have to act under provisions of the 1996 act, which was essentially passed following this disaster, this tragedy, which says newly discovered evidence for a Court of Appeals to act, the standard, the threshold, for even taking up the case would be newly discovered evidence that if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that no fact finder, judge, or jury would have found the movement guilty of the offense. In other words, it would have to throw the whole thing out and say, gee, maybe there's some doubt that Timothy McVeigh did this. So it's certainly conceivable that an appeal filed with the Court of Appeals, they look at it and say there's nothing here that changes anything.
[Meserve:] Now, his attorneys have the documents in hand. What are they doing with those documents? How long will an investigation and study of these documents take?
[Bierbauer:] I can't really tell you that. It's, what, 3,000 pages, some 200 documents. How much redundancy in them, what they really entail. Obviously, there are transcripts of conversations and interviews there. They could move with some dispatch depending on their mood and his mood. Or they could say, "We may need weeks to go through this." And for that matter, so may the government.
[Meserve:] Charles Bierbauer, senior Washington correspondent, thanks much for your input. And, once again, that latest guidance from the Justice Department is that there is still a strong possibility that the Attorney General John Ashcroft will announce a delay in this case when he meets with the press later today. Now back to Atlanta.
[Harris:] All right, thanks, Jeanne. As we understand, that should happen around 1:00 Eastern. Of course, live coverage right here on
[Cnn. Kagan:] Yes. And, of course, we've been spending the last hour or so talking about what the government might do. The question still remains: What will Timothy McVeigh and his lawyers request to do? That is ground zero, Denver. And we'll check in in Denver, with our Gina London after this break. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jason Carroll, Cnn Anchor:] And speaking of driving, we've got some more news on that front for you. It may be expensive to fill up your car with gas, at least right now, but motorists are getting a break somewhere. Experts say vehicles are more affordable now than they have been in decades. CNN national correspondent Gary Tuchman has the details.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] Reuel Buttram is reflecting on whether to buy a new Chevy Blazer.
[Reuel Buttram, Auto Buyer:] Well, I can't see that the Blazers have gone up in price very much in the last six years, when you come right down to it.
[Tuchman:] He's right just ask a man who sells them for a living.
[Chuck Miller, Car Salesman:] They know that we have plenty of inventory, and they know we're willing to make deals right now. So, we're obliging them, shall we say.
[Tuchman:] Don't take his word for it.
[David Littman, Comerica Bank:] This will probably be the most affordable window for the average American household if they're thinking of buying a car, even a light truck.
[Tuchman:] Comerica Bank does quarterly car affordability studies. Exactly 10 years ago, it took 30 weeks of income from the average American to purchase a car or truck. But now, in the first quarter of 2001, that number is down to 22.7 weeks of income. That's the lowest since the second quarter of 1979 when it was at 22.6 weeks. The average vehicle cost is just under $22,000, the same as it was four years ago.
[John Clor, Edmunds.com:] The big three realizes that they have a lot of product out there, the pipeline is full and they have to move the merchandise and they're going out after the buyers with big money.
[Miller:] More of our vehicles have rebates on them than they've ever had before and most of them are higher than they've ever had before.
[Tuchman:] It's a problem for the big three American auto companies. But that's OK with Reuel Buttram, who's decided he's ready to buy some new wheels.
[Miller:] This car is 31,540. Is that a good price?
[Buttram:] Yes it is.
[Tuchman:] So according to this report, this is the most economical time to buy a new car or truck in nearly a generation. Now about those gas prices. Gary Tuchman, CNN, Atlanta.

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] Authorities in the Netherlands are leading a crusade against a different social issue. They are looking for ways to get teens away from the life of crime. Up until now, the efforts to fight juvenile delinquency has not been successful, that is until the Dutch army stepped in, as we see in this report from Radio Netherlands Television.
[Radio Netherlands Television Correspondent:] Instead of hanging around, dropping out of school, being unemployed and facing a possible future in crime, Dutch teenagers are now given the option to make something of their life, with the help of the army. That is what the project called "The Challenge" is all about.
[Suzanne Felderhof, "the Challenge":] Our goal is to try and help these young people who haven't had that many chances in life. During three months, we teach them physical and social skills, but especially perseverance and a feeling of responsibility.
[Posthumus:] Research shows that serious crime is increasing in The Netherlands and that criminals are getting younger and younger. Wim Slot of the Amsterdam's Free University has done extensive research on juvenile delinquency.
[Wim Slot, Free University Of Amsterdam:] Figures show that juvenile delinquents are getting younger, so it is important to start prevention at an early age. A lot of Dutch projects are not integrated enough. If you want to get results, you must not only focus on the young person, but also on his family, school and friends.
[Posthumus:] The Challenge Project teaches the young men how to work in a team. They can also get some basic training and skills which they can later use to find jobs in the real world.
[Major Henk Gerrifsen, Dutch Army:] When they find out that they can really achieve something and get a diploma, it gives themselves confidence, and the strength of this project is also that the boys have volunteered, so they are really motivated.
[Posthumus:] But it's not always easy.
[Unidentified Male:] Getting up at 6:00 in the morning was difficult at the beginning, but it's not anymore. I don't know how they did it, but we are a team now, and we work until 9:00 in the evening.
[Posthumus:] So far, results are encouraging. Around 70 percent of the participants now have a job, or are continuing their training. Annette Posthumus, Radio Netherlands Television, for CNN WORLD REPORT.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Officials in Washington are tightening security at the Pentagon, the FBI, and the Justice Department. The move comes after congressional investigators using phony I.D.s broke through security. CNN's justice correspondent Pierre Thomas joins us now. Pierre, how could this happen?
[Pierre Thomas, Cnn Justice Department:] Well, Judy, these people could have walked in with bombs, guns, and weapons of mass destruction, and it happened primarily because of what's called professional courtesy, they posed as law enforcement officials therefore they were given the green light to walk right in. Now law enforcement officials are saying that this simply cannot stand, they cannot afford to let their own come in with their weapons. So now the Pentagon announced today that no longer will people be able to move without escort and they will also have to give up their weapons once they come to the Pentagon.
[Woodruff:] So real change in the method of operations there?
[Thomas:] Major change in the method of operation because, as one source told me, this was a pretty major gap, it was a unique approach used by congressional investigators using the law enforcement sort of comradery against itself, but it worked.
[Woodruff:] All right, CNN's Pierre Thomas, thanks very much.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Earthquakes can be jolting, deadly and frightening, but what about musical? Sounds farfetched? Well, maybe not. Here's CNN's Rusty Dornin.
[Rusty Dornin, Cnn Correspondent:] What we hear during an earthquake are usually the consequences. But the actual shake, rattle and roll of this 1992 California tremor was music to the ears of seismologist Andrew Michael.
[Andrew Michael, Seismologist:] So we just take basically our seismograms, turn them into a compact disk and then play them out through the loud speakers where we then make the motion go much faster so that we can actually hear it and it gets up into the pitches that our ears can deal with.
[Dornin:] A musician, Michael used the quake's frequencies to compose The Earthquake Quartet tremors from a trombone, vocals, cello and notes from the hard rock of the California quake. Michael uses the piece when he lectures.
[Michael:] When we're doing these sort of smeared notes it's trying to symbolize the strain building up in the earth and it's repeatedly interrupted by earthquakes and the earthquakes give off energy from that strain.
[Dornin:] A researcher for the U.S. Geological Survey, Michael says there are tens of earthquakes daily in California alone. He hopes the notes here will make the impact of these notes much clearer.
[Michael:] There are people who are going around sort of as the happy culture not listening to those earthquakes in the background and maybe they're interested in music and we might be able to sort of hook their interest with a piece of music and then get them to think a little about earthquake preparedness.
[Dornin:] Awareness of the possibilities through earthshaking rhythms. Rusty Dornin, CNN, San Francisco.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Now we move to the Arabian Sea, and that aircraft carrier whose planes reportedly struck an al Qaeda convoy in eastern Afghanistan today. CNN's Frank Buckley is aboard the USS John C. Stennis.
[Frank Buckley, Cnn Correspondent:] Attack aircraft from the USS John C. Stennis returned safely to the deck of the carrier after dropping bombs in eastern Afghanistan. It was the first time aircraft from this Nimitz-class carrier launched munitions in the conflict. Carrier Captain James McDonell, breaking the news to the crew over the ship's public address system.
[Capt. James Mcdonell, Commanding Ofc. Uss Stennis:] We had an F- 14 aircraft drop laser-guided bombs, an F-18s drop. Joint Direct Attack Munitions or JDAM weapons, into eastern Afghanistan today.
[Buckley:] The Stennis has been on station in the Arabian Sea since December 15th. The first bombs to be dropped from its aircraft coming on the fourth day of combat operations from the carrier. Members of the crew have been eager to engage.
[Unidentified Male:] After being deployed for about a month and a half, to hear somebody finally tell us that we did something positive. We're all excited about it, the crew, especially the people where I work. Everybody was fired up. We were really excited to hear we finally did part of the mission that we came out here to accomplish.
[Buckley:] USS John C. Stennis deployed the region two months ahead of schedule, after the September 11th attacks on the U.S. attacks that affected many members of the ship's crew, including the carrier's battle group commander, personally.
[Rear Adm. James Zortman, Cmdr., Carrier Group Seven:] My last assignment before I came here was in the Pentagon, on the staff of the chief of Naval operations. Twenty-one of those people that were killed in the attack on the Pentagon worked directly for me.
[Buckley:] The USS John C. Stennis is now engaged, the carrier it replaced, Carl Vinson, headed home. The crew of this U.S. Navy ship now in the fight. Frank Buckley, CNN, aboard the USS John C. Stennis in the Arabian Sea.

[Dalton Tanonaka, Cnn Anchor:] Japan's government says the country will have to accept slower growth in the near term to give its structural reforms time to work. A report outlining the government's reform plans says Japanese economic growth will fall far short of its official forecast of 1.7 percent. And that estimate was further undermined by indicators showing the Japanese economy may be continuing to shrink in the current quarter after a contraction in q-one. The All-Industries Index of business activity fell 2 12 percent in April from the previous month. That's the biggest monthly drop since April 1997. The Nihon Kezai newspaper is reporting that economics minister Heizo Takenaka expects 100,000 to 200,000 job losses as Japanese banks write-off bad debts. To ease the pain, the government is proposing banks sell those loans to a state-backed company. But Takenaka told me in Tokyo recently that privatization of the government sector is at the top of the structural reform agenda.
[Heizo Takenaka, Japanese Economics Minister:] The Bank of Japan and some other financial corporations, these should be some of them, not all maybe, but some of them should be privatized. By doing that, the private sector has new business possibility and chance, and also, this will revitalize the market economy itself.
[Tanonaka:] So the government is taking steps to privatize? You are seeing putting things in place to privatize?
[Takenaka:] Yes, the specific industry, especially the agency now, seriously considering this privatization plan is my understanding. So privatization is a very visible change for the people I think. Investors cheered the government proposal, Tokyo's Nikkei surging 2.2 percent. Banking giants Mizuho, FJ and Sumitomo-Mitsui all packed on more than 10 percent gains.
[Tanonaka:] With analysis of the government's moves, we're joined now by Darrel Whitten, head of research at ABN Amro Securities in Tokyo. Darrel, are you convinced that the Koizumi reforms are the way out of the last 11 years?
[Darrel Whitten, Abn Amro Securites Japan:] You are serious about it and the plan is certainly comprehensive. The question that remains is how are we going to stimulate demand amidst some pretty serious deflation over the past couple of years.
[Tanonaka:] Are you optimistic at all that Takenaka and his policy council will be given the authority to make it work?
[Whitten:] That comes with the upper house elections on July 29th, and going forward from there, we expect him to so solidify the mandates that we've got so far.
[Tanonaka:] Well, with the popularity rating of Koizumi, what, 85 percent I think I saw the last one doesn't that seem to indicate they're going to win the elections next month?
[Whitten:] Well, don't forget that we also have yet another LDP presidential election in September, and I find it hard to believe that the Hashimoto faction will just kind of lay quiet during all of this. So at some point, there is going to be an attempt to gain some ground back.
[Tanonaka:] Darrel, do you see any way the economy can recover before the two to three years that the government is saying it will take?
[Whitten:] Not unless this whole process takes place a lot quicker than what they are indicating right now. And what that would indicate is that for the first year for example, the dip in the economy is a lot deeper than they're suggest right now.
[Tanonaka:] OK, Darrel Whitten, ABN Amro Securities in Tokyo, thank you very much. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Press, Co-host:] Santa has already made his list and checked it twice. Now it is our turn. Tonight: Our list of who's been naughty, and who's been nice.
[Announcer:] From Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press; on the right, Mary Matalin; in the CROSSFIRE, Democratic strategist Kiki McLean and Cliff May, communications director for the Republican National Committee.
[Press:] Good evening, Merry Christmas, and welcome to CROSSFIRE, where Santa is taking a well-deserved nap, but we, Santa's elves, are still busy tonight, looking back over the past year, making a list, checking it twice, and trying to nail down who has been naughty or nice, so we can give them the jeers or the cheers they deserve. The problem is, like beauty, naughty and nice are the eyes of the beholder. Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, for example, tops my naughty list, but Mary thinks she is one of the nicest people on Earth. And turnabout is fair play, I will bet Mary has that insufferable James Baker on her nice list, but he would get nothing from me but a stocking filled with coal. And so, in the true Christmas spirit of rewarding good deeds and punishing bad ones, we ask: Christmas mirror on the wall, who have been the naughtiest and nicest ones of all this year? Mary.
[Matalin:] Scrooge.
[Press:] I'm only half Scrooge.
[Matalin:] Grinch, Kiki, let's start with naughty.
[Kiki Mclean, Democratic Strategist:] It's more fun.
[Matalin:] This is a nice naughty thing because it's naughty in every sense of the word. The Gore-Tipper lip lock, look, you are a newlywed, you managed to get married in the middle of this campaign, yet I bet even with your brand new husband, you don't make out like two teens in the back seat, like, let's take another look. Go baby go. This is where I look up, and that is what I aspire to. Yet again, I find an example in the Gores for great behavior. I actually think it's nice that they showed a kiss can really be more than a kiss. In the end, they... A political act.
[Mclean:] They took America with them. But let's talk about the real naughty of this campaign, for the kinds of things your mother and your grandmother would shame you, and make sure there was coal in your stocking: George Bush and Dick Cheney, and why? Because they couldn't pay attention to the old adage: If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all. It's a big-time naughty to George Bush and Dick Cheney, when they had their personal feelings made known over an open microphone about a particular "New York Times" reporter during the campaign.
[Matalin:] Kiki, this is one of my favorite highlights of the campaign. I never felt prouder.
[Mclean:] You are a mother. You would shame your own children for that kind of behavior.
[Matalin:] I say to my children. There is children behavior. There is adult behavior. Adults are allowed to do that.
[Mclean:] With an open microphone in front of 3,000 people.
[Matalin:] As if they knew that. Let's take another look because I loved it so much. This is my Christmas present to myself. I want to see it again.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] There's Adam Clymer, a major league a-.
[Dick Cheney , Vice Presidential Candidate:] Big time.
[Matalin:] Did you hear that eruption of applause when he said it?
[Mclean:] Here is the best part. Mary looks up and says George W. Bush doesn't know he had that open microphone on him. The man has been the governor of Texas for six years, and he is running for president of the United States, and he doesn't know enough not to make a comment like that on an open mike.
[Matalin:] As a communications guru, you have never worked with anybody, who something went out inadvertently...
[Mclean:] I always walk into a room and scream open microphone.
[Press:] All I wonder is, what G.W. would have said if he had looked out and seen me standing in the crowd.
[Matalin:] Big time.
[Mclean:] Big time might have been the holiday version of it for you Bill.
[Press:] It is more fun to start with a naughty, and I will tell you, the naughtiest person, Cliff May, for me this year has been I called her Katherine the Great, the secretary of state of Florida, who before this election was just concerned with taking trips and giving tourist tours of the state Capitol. She puts out a press release before the election saying to the networks: Don't rush into calling this election, make sure to take the time that we know who won and who lost. And yet the votes aren't even counted, and she is trying to force it down everybody's throat for George W. Bush. You know, the puppet, the only question was, we knew Governor Bush was pulling the strings, but which Governor Bush? It really didn't matter, one of them had to be. You have got to admit.
[Cliff May, Communications Dir., Rnc:] No, actually, she was on my nice list. What she did was she was defending the law, she was upholding the law, and doing her job, and she got Borked and beaten up like crazy by Democrats for it. And at the same time, by the way, the networks get on naughty list because we lost 15,000 people who would have otherwise gone to the polls in Florida because all the networks announced too early. You have got to admit.
[Press:] It sounds to me like what you are saying is that some of the people in Palm Beach were too dumb to know how to vote, and some of people in the other sides of Florida were too dumb to know to vote, or when to vote. I mean, you can't win in Florida with these people.
[May:] Let me give you one other one, Terry McAuliffe. He has been a fund-raiser...
[Press:] He is on your nice list?
[May:] He is on my naughty list. He has been a fund-raiser extraordinaire, but rather shady. And now he is going to take over the Democratic Party. Is there not in the Democratic Party, one woman, one African-American, one Hispanic-American who deserves to be considered for party chairman. It has got to be a Clinton...
[Mclean:] They all deserve to be considered. The committee will consider them, and the fact of matter is that Terry McAuliffe has been a great friend of this party, a great supporter of this party. He has stood behind Democratic candidates up and down the line. He has worked the hours. He has cared about the staffing.
[May:] How about Donna Brazile, has she not worked hard enough?
[Mclean:] Does this mean that because Jim Nicholson, or another white male, will be chair of the RNC, that there us no one of diverse color or ethnicity that is viable in the Republican Party?
[May:] You are always giving us a hard time with this. You guys got to do it too.
[Press:] May I suggest that you are the last person on Earth that the Democratic National Committee is going to look to for suggestions as to who should be the DNC chair, I mean, don't take that personally, but it just happens to be true.
[May:] I know.
[Press:] In Terry McAuliffe's office, there is a great picture of Terry, maybe 10 years ago, in a pit wresting with an alligator.
[Mclean:] He was 22 years old.
[Press:] You know what that's...
[Matalin:] That is the Prerequisite for becoming chairman...
[Press:] That's the kind of guy that the Democrats want as national chair. He will do anything to win.
[May:] That's true.
[Press:] Watch out for 2002.
[May:] He said, by the way, he wouldn't give the Republicans a honeymoon. Like he would give anything to a Republican.
[Mclean:] No, I think he said he would give the Republicans the same kind of honeymoon they gave Democrats. Did you want to define what kind of honeymoon it was we got.
[Matalin:] I think Terry's biggest requirement, job qualification for that job, is that he is mortgage a guarantor for the Clintons and their Chappaqua house, soon to be on the market.
[Press:] Best fund-raiser we ever had.
[Mclean:] He is not just a fund-raiser. Terry McAuliffe is also a heck of a supporter of this party at every levy. I was on the Gephardt campaign with him in 1988. He is a terrific husband, He is a terrific father to his kids. And he is somebody who believes.
[Matalin:] And he is a great schmoozer. He is a great guy. But we want to stir up some trouble any ways because you would do it to us, and you know you would. Let's talk about some real, awesome, unparalleled talent and grit, James Baker, Margaret Tutweiler, the legal team, the political team they assembled overnight.
[May:] Ted Olson went into the lion's den against David Boies and against Larry Tribe, and he beat them both, nine-zip the first time; 7-2 the second time.
[Mclean:] You want to call Jim Baker nice? You want to the Grinch...
[Matalin:] I want to call him awesome. Get over it, Kiki. I mean, get over it!
[Mclean:] I'm going to give you one back, this is on a platter fro you.
[Matalin:] This is not a vote. This is not a vote, OK, you want to manufacture a vote.
[Mclean:] I'm going to give you one, in the spirit of the season, with the theme of the show, I am going to give you one. A nice for Pat Buchanan for actually admitting that over 3600 votes that were attributed to him probably did belong to Al Gore. And for once, Pat just came up and admitted it.
[Matalin:] I think Pat was very confused by what we all agree was a confusing ballot.
[Mclean:] Santa was shocked, but happy to add him to the list this year.
[Matalin:] Very confused Pat Buchanan.
[Press:] I want to give you a nice one too. I want to give you a nice one because, for once, the federal government did something that we could all be proud of. There was a kid who was kidnapped, taken away from his father, and the federal government went in, actually on the Saturday before Easter, and took that little boy away from his kidnapers in Miami, and restored him to his father; Janet Reno saved Elian Gonzalez. They are back together now, where they belong, in their homeland. Bravo to Janet Reno.
[May:] She is on nice list.
[Matalin:] She is on the top. Anybody who wrestles with alligators gets on his list. I guess that is what it is.
[Press:] I guess so.
[May:] Think about his mother, who took him here, and lost her life to get him to freedom. And people like yourself and Janet Reno said: Nah, send him back to communism. It is OK. Anybody taken a look lately to see how he is living back there?
[Press:] No, she just said, if his is mother is dead, he belongs with his father. That is what any court in this country would say. And his father happened to say. You know what: We have a nice home, we have great family, and that's where we want to raise him. And it is the father's choice.
[May:] If a mother had taken somebody out of Eastern Europe, over the Berlin Wall, I don't think you would send him, back but...
[Mclean:] You have to get over this one.
[May:] Kiki, get over it. I will give you another nice, and a surprising one: Madonna, she got married. See what happens, you get to a certain age, you get married.
[Matalin:] Certain age? You get conservative, and you become a Republican because, you know...
[Mclean:] Don't spend your dying years waiting for this one.
[May:] My dying years?
[Press:] Believe it or not, I have nothing bad to say about Madonna.
[Matalin:] She even Christened her kid the day before her wedding.
[Mclean:] The big secret out of this whole moment is the fact that Cliff May is actually a huge Madonna fan and has been tracking her. He is one the fans that is obviously tracking her progress.
[May:] I will give you an actress that I am upset about, though, who is on my naughty list: Sara Jessica Parker. She is upset that Bush is in office because he is going to cut programs, and her family needs the government to help. Now, anybody who can afford help me with this Manola Blanic shoes shouldn't need the government to help her family.
[Matalin:] You can't wear them.
[Press:] I admire her a lot. She is young. She is politically active. I don't care whether they become active Democrats or active Republicans. What I can't stand are these Hollywood celebrities who make all the money, and then go off to Hawaii or somewhere off to Malibu, and don't get involved at all. She is there. She ought to be there.
[Mclean:] You don't know what her personal responsibilities are to her family and what should does.
[Matalin:] We do know she makes $50 million a year.
[Mclean:] We also know that she is somebody who has taken an active roll in public life on public policy. And good for her because when more people are active...
[Matalin:] ... Bush was going to cut programs that her family...
[Mclean:] It's my worry too.
[Press:] And mine.
[Matalin:] What specific program is Bush going to cut that her family, who presumably has access to her $50 million...
[Mclean:] I can just remember what the Reagan years were like for me when Social Security got cut and my father died, and I didn't get to go to college with any Social Security help.
[May:] She is a multimillionaire actress. She shouldn't need the tax payers to take care of her family.
[Mclean:] You don't know that that is what is going on with her family. You don't know that she isn't providing other assistance there. Let me offer you another thing.
[Press:] We have to take a break first.
[Matalin:] We are going to break, ho, ho, ho. I'm so engaged in this chitter chatter of the Christmas season, which will continue after this break. Stay with us on CROSSFIRE. Welcome back to a special holiday CROSSFIRE. We wish all season's best to all you good little boys and girls out there. Back here, we are reviewing who and what was naughty and nice in this extraordinary year with a very good boy and girl, communications gurus Cliff May, from the Republican National Communications, and Democratic strategist Kiki McLean, that is your new married name?
[Mclean:] That is my new married named.
[Matalin:] Kiki Moore McLean?
[Mclean:] Seven months later, it is still working. Of course, when you spend three of it on the road.
[Matalin:] That's a good way to kick off a new marriage.
[Press:] I want to start with a naughty again because I will tell you who is my naughty list, probably not yours: Ralph Nader. I'm mean here is all I have to say is, looking back, thank you Ralph Nader for John Ashcroft, thank you Ralph Nader for George W. Bush. Thank you Ralph Nader for a new Supreme Court that is going to be so far right that Roe v. Wade is probably going to go bye-bye. And Ralph said, it doesn't make any difference who appoints whom to the Supreme Court.
[May:] I think he gets on my nice list just for that. But the important thing is, now you see what happens. We had Ross Perot in two elections and that split the vote on the right. You had him get 2 percent of the vote on the left. A little competition on the left...
[Press:] You deserved Ross Perot, we didn't deserve Ralph Nader.
[Mclean:] Let's also talk about how these two elections were. I mean, Ross Perot had nowhere near the impact of that last election that we had, and this one with Nader, in terms of where the numbers came down, where the Electoral College and the popular vote came down.
[May:] He took a lot of votes from us. Seventy percent Nader voters in this election voted for the Republican. How about Hillary Clinton? On my naughty list, of course. Here she is with an $8 million book deal. I would like to go back and see the tapes of what you had to say about Newt Gingrich on his $4 million book deal. And she is buying a house in Georgetown. Guess what? Where is she's going to spend her time? Not in New York, New York, but being a social butterfly here. Naughty?
[Press:] Not at all. Let me tell you something, Hillary rules. This is the woman that nobody said could win. Everybody said, all you have to do is mention Hillary, and we will send you millions of dollars. She crushed the Rick Lazio. She is going to be a great senator. And watch out. I said. leave some boxes in the attic Hillary because you are going to be moving back before you know it.
[May:] The point is not that Hillary rules, but for Hillary and Bill, there are no rules.
[Mclean:] Smart lady succeed is what's that means, and that is $10 million legal bill.
[Matalin:] Let's close it off on this double standard. When it is your smart ladies, it's OK; when it's our men, it's not OK. That's not the kind of feminism.
[Mclean:] There is big difference about what Newt Gingrich was writing about versus what Hillary Clinton is writing about.
[May:] He wasn't writing porn, he was writing public policy. She is writing...
[Matalin:] More than made up what was the original asking price.
[May:] What is bad for the goose...
[Matalin:] Let's move on, and I want to move off of this into something related to politics. "Saturday Night Live" big nice, big winner, not only was it some great comedy, some of the best since its inception, but it made the chattering classes, of which we are all members in good standing who were predicting a constitutional crisis, kind of put us in perspective and in our place.
[Mclean:] They had a great season no doubt about it. And you know what, they got double the fodder with what they had to do. And we just kept adding characters to it every day. I mean this was like a movie with a series of sequels and numbers twos and number threes that just kept coming. It was just by week, not by year. And in the end, it made more people participate, but I'm not sure if it was in the best way for us. But in terms of entertainment value, I am with you. I will actually agree with you on that one.
[Matalin:] On a serious note, comedy, in the way in which comedy now has infiltrated the political arena, has gotten a younger audience, and how ever you get them into politics, that's a winner.
[Mclean:] I was a big thing in 1992 to break out of the news media and into the mainstream media. It was the kiss on "Oprah" this year. I went with Sen. Lieberman to do "Conan" this year. Not something I planned on doing on a presidential campaign before. Let me give you a nice back out of the entertainment, and this caused a lot of talk among chattering classes across the board, and that was back at Cliff's Hollywood, his favorite place: Jennifer Lopez. I am going to give her a nice for what she did for the toupee tape industry this year, when she wore a dress that had more tape than fabric to the Academy Awards, and probably drove more news cycles for a week than the recount ever would have dreamed of doing.
[Matalin:] I would agree with you that she was nice just for what she did personally for my husband.
[May:] Can we just say.
[Mclean:] I'm not going there.
[Matalin:] On a fantasy level.
[May:] With Jennifer Lopez, sometimes naughty is nice. PRESS; Two nice ones for you, a Democrat and a Republican back to politics fro a second. Two men I think this year that rose to the occasion, and both of them left a great impression and have great futures ahead of them: John McCain for the primaries and Joe Lieberman in the general; class acts both of them. Relatively unknown on the national scene until this campaign, and I think they are both superstars. At Christmas time, be Christian enough to say, and Dick Cheney, who was a grown up, he is a mature guy.
[Press:] Do you agree about McCain and Lieberman?
[May:] I do. And I will add one more nice to the list, and that is Tom DeLay, who is out meeting with let me finish...
[Mclean:] How to kill the spirit of moment.
[May:] Meeting with Blue Dog Democrats in an effort at bipartisanship. And you know what, the word bipartisanship in Washington today is the synonym for nice.
[Press:] I have to say Dick Cheney, I will agree you, after all he is going to be running the country, so I have to be nice to him. Number two, Tom DeLay I mean give me a break the hammer. There is one guy who is the antithesis of bipartisanship.
[Mclean:] The mention of man's name took out all the smell of ginger bread from this room; the visions of sugar plums are gone; you have killed it. It's May, it is 103 degrees outside, and you have ruined it.
[Matalin:] Politics of personal destruction.
[Mclean:] That's one Texan on another Texan, let me point that out.
[Press:] Mary, you get another one.
[Mclean:] She going to do it. Go ahead I'm listening.
[Matalin:] I think that, contrary to popular opinion, I think that democracy was well served. It was nice for social studies teacher, nice for children this year. When my 5-year-old comes home and says: You know why this is a great country? Because I'm free and my vote counts. That was a recap of the year that will live with that generation forever. That is the best gift we can give them, appreciation for their vote and their democracy.
[Press:] We all had a great civics lesson, we just not all happy with the end of the lesson. But speaking of the end of, we are there folks. Thanks for joining us on this Christmas Day. Cliff, thanks. Kiki, I can't rather your new married name. You will always be Kiki Moore to me.
[Mclean:] And happy to be to you.
[Press:] And Mary and I will be back and wrap it up with a glass of eggnog and some Mary closing comments. It may be more fun to be naughty, but let's be nice just here at the end. I have to tell you one person we didn't get to is Jack Germond, the political columnist, a great friend of mine. I think he is one of most astute observers of the political scene, certainly one of the smartest, and one of the most fun. And you know what, and he knew when he had had enough, and this week he said he is just not going to write any more columns. I salute him. He is a great guy. We will miss him.
[Matalin:] One of the original boys on the bus, and from an era in which politicians and politics were covered with the reverence and the honor that they deserve. I miss those kind of reporters in general.
[Press:] Absolutely.
[Matalin:] But the way in which politicians behave, which is not always evident, was evident in the concluding speeches of both of these raw, competitive fighters, George Bush, Albert Gore, gave great concluding speeches, an inspiration to all, and something to hang on for everybody.
[Press:] They are both the best speeches either one of them gave.
[Matalin:] And you have been nice for some periods of this year, I want to say.
[Press:] From the left, I'm Bill Press. Merry Christmas. We will be back with more CROSSFIRE" for the rest of the year and next year.
[Matalin:] From the right, I'm Mary Matalin. Have a wonderful holiday season. Don't do anything under that mistletoe that we wouldn't do.

[Ann Kellan:] Hello, and welcome. I'm Ann Kellan. Power blackouts, record high gas prices: it was one of those weeks that make you wonder whether it's payback time for the high-tech, consumer lifestyle so many Americans enjoy. In California, hot weather brought a new round of rolling blackouts from a power grid that just couldn't cope. Many people worried that this is a preview of worse outages this summer, when temperatures will stay higher for longer. For many consumers, new electricity rate hikes will show up in next month's bill, so they may be paying more for less. Speaking of paying more: U.S. gas prices hit new highs this past week. In some places, self-serve regular gas cost more than $2 a gallon. And filling up a big SUV or pickup could get into the triple- digits. There are a lot of reasons for rising gasoline prices, and some of them relate to the crunch in electricity supplies. Rusty Dornin reports.
[Rusty Dornin, Cnn Correspondent:] The product from here goes here. But if California's rolling blackouts hit the states's oil refineries, drivers already digging deep for fuel, they'll see the impact here.
[Dan Kamen, University Of California, Berkley:] Skyrocketing gas prices, and you know, three dollars a gallon's not unreasonable number to think about if we have a lot of blackouts, and those refineries are going to go on and off-line all the time.
[Dornin:] The state's gasoline producers were told in April, expect to be part of the rolling blackout list. Here at the Valero plant in Benicia near San Francisco, there are no back up generators. The same is true of about one third of the state's refineries.
[Scott Folwarkow, Valero Energy Corporation:] Normally it takes us a couple of days to shutdown a plant. We can shut it down relatively fast, however, the faster we go, the more questions we have whether you do damage to the process equipment during that rapid shutdown.
[Dornin:] Damaged equipment means plants might not be able to turn the power back on when a temporary blackout is over.
[Folwardow:] You could ultimately be down for many days to many weeks as you try to get the system back up.
[Dornin:] Ten percent of California's clean burning fuel comes this plant. A shutdown for days or weeks could mean short fuel supplies, sure to drive prices even higher. Health and safety reasons keep the lights on at hospitals and emergency agencies were are exempt from blackouts. Economic arguments about skyrocketing fuel prices fall on deaf ears when it comes to the state's public utility commission.
[Carl Wood, California Public Utility Commission:] If we exempt everybody from rolling blackouts, the electrical system in the state will collapse, and that's a much worse catastrophe than anything else that we're facing at the present time.
[Dornin:] California legislators are considering a bill to exempt refineries from power cutoffs. For SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY WEEK, I'm Rusty Dornin.
[Kellan:] Now if gasoline is in short supply, massive traffic jams aren't helping the situation. A report out this week has some sobering figures about just how much time Americans spend sitting in traffic. Natalie Pawelski has the story.
[Natalie Pawelski, Cnn Correspondent:] You're not just imagining it. Traffic is getting worse.
[Unidentified Female:] On a week like this week, I'll be in a car 25, 30 hours.
[Pawelski:] A new study says what was once called rush hour now lasts over three hours in the morning, and another three hours at night. With the average American wasting 36 hours a year stuck in traffic. That's not total travel time; that's just the extra time spent in traffic jams.
[Tim Lomax, Texas Transportation Institute:] The problem really is a situation of, the transportation system hasn't expanded as fast as the transportation demand.
[Pawelski:] Researchers at the Texas Transportation Institute say Los Angeles has the slowest rush hour, with rush-hour trips taking twice as long as off-peak trips. The other cities stuck with the slowest rush hours: Seattle; San Francisco; Washington; Boston; New York; Chicago; Portland; San Diego; and Atlanta.
[Unidentified Male:] I can leave and be at work an hour later, which is 35 miles from here, all of it interstate driving.
[Pawelski:] As for solutions, researchers warn there are no quick fixes.
[Lomax:] New roads are a part of the mix but that isn't all of the solution you need more efficient operations; you have to look at managing the demand, so that everybody doesn't try to get on the roads at the same time.
[Pawelski:] Researchers figure traffic congestion cost $78 billion a year in lost productivity from 4.5 billion hours of wasted time. Also being wasted: 6.8 billion gallons gas a year. And with gas prices continuing to climb, the cost of traffic jams will only increase. For SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY WEEK, I'm Natalie Pawelski.
[Kellan:] Later in the show, could Emus help ease the pain of arthritis? And up next: Meet some people who talk to dolphins and the dolphins who talk back.

[Karuna Shinsho, Cnn Anchor:] Iran's transport minister is dead after the plane he was traveling in crashed, killing all 29 people on board says the country's interior ministry. There were also several members of parliament onboard. For more details, we are joined on the line from Tehran by journalist Shirzad Bozorgmehr. Shirzad, bring us up-to-date.
[Shirzrad Bozorgmehr, Journalist:] Well, Iran civil aviation authorities have not yet officially confirmed the news about the plane crash that reportedly killed 29 people aboard, including the transport minister and seven members of parliament. In a recent statement carried by Iran's news agency, Iranov, they said the crash could not be confirmed, and the wreckage has not yet been sighted. The statement added that foreign news services reports are too premature, and should not be taken seriously at this stage. Those news agencies said the plane had gone down due to bad weather close to the Iran- Turkmenistan border, and they said that the minister of transport, Rahman Dadman, and seven members of parliament were onboard, as well as 12 other people and 10 crew members. The news services said that the plane had contacted air tower control and reported he had to either go back to capital or make an emergency landing. This is 10 minutes before reportedly it crashed. We are still waiting in Tehran to hear from the civil aviation authorities as to the final result of this incident.
[Shinsho:] Are authorities telling you rescue efforts are still underway?
[Bozorgmehr:] Search-and-rescue effort, yes, because they are saying we are not sure if it crashed or not, but we are trying in four or five different provinces close too each other to see it has gone down, but we have not found the plane crash, the plane yet, therefore, we cannot confirm it yet. As soon as we find it, we will confirm it, but as things stand now, we don't know if the plane has gone down or not. But reports from the foreign news agency said the plane carried only fuel for only three hour's flight, and it's been way past that three hours now.
[Shinsho:] OK, Shirzad Bozorgmehr, from Tehran, thank you for that update. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Yvonne Chu:] Hello. My name is Yvonne Chu. I am from Houston, Texas. And my question is: How has the Internet affected health care?
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] The Internet has really changed the doctor-patient relationship. Before the Internet, if a patient wanted to learn let's say different treatment options for cancer, they would really have to rely pretty much on their doctor. They could get information some places, but it wasn't always so easy to get. But now anyone with a computer, anyone with a modem, can actually go on the Internet, can look at the different options, can think of questions that they want to ask their doctor, and then come into their doctors much better educated. Now some doctors aren't crazy about this revolution. They say they're the ones who went to medical school; they are the ones who should be telling patients what the options are. But studies show that most doctors have kind of gotten used to this. They are getting used to idea that patients will be more partners in treatment rather than just on the receiving end. And about 40 million Americans surf the Internet for medical advice. So doctors are really starting to change their attitudes.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] Still reeling from it's massive tire recall, attorneys for Firestone are asking a federal judge to move a class-action lawsuit against the company from state to federal court. Meanwhile, as Kelli Arena reports, it is not clear who's to blame for the way the recall has been handled.
[Kelli Arena, Cnn Correspondent:] Firestone service centers are bracing for this weekend's crowds. The tire maker has already replaced more than 200,000 tires. But still, there is no definitive answer to what, if anything, went wrong with them.
[John Lampe, Bridgestone/firestone:] I have no reports of any preliminary findings. There are areas that we are jointly investigating and collecting additional data from.
[Arena:] Critics are increasingly concerned about who knew what and when. Insurance giant State Farm says it notified Firestone and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of an increase in claims years before a formal investigation was launched. There were also questions surrounding Ford's culpability. Most of the tire accidents involved Ford's popular Explorer SUV. More than 60 percent of the incidents involved rear tires, which experts say could suggest a problem with the suspension.
[Joseph Gerhardt, University Of Akron:] Is there something going on with the way the load gets distributed or load transfer? Or are the forces greater there? Is it running straight and therefore heats up more?
[Arena:] Ford flatly denies there is any design problem. But one source close to the companies says Ford's suspension is being looked at. [on camera]: And Ford has altered suspension systems in South America and the Middle East where tires were replaced. Ford says that's due to different usage conditions. [voice-over]: Crisis experts say Ford has managed to keep the focus on Firestone, but that Firestone has been less successful in handling the controversy.
[Karen Doyne, Crisis Counselor, Ketchum:] There seems to be some feeling that this company didn't sufficiently take ownership of the problem with this product.
[Arena:] What's more, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is under scrutiny for failure to take action sooner.
[Joan Claybrook, Fmr. Nhtsa Administrator:] The answer in part is the lack of a proactive program to identify defects other than passively, through consumer complaints.
[Arena:] Congress will hold hearings on that issue and others involving the Firestone accidents. Meanwhile, safety groups are keeping the pressure on, urging Firestone to recall other tire sizes, which they say are also suspect. Kelli Arena, CNN Financial News, Washington.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We begin this hour at the headquarters of the NATO military alliance, where President Bush has faced a critical test of his diplomatic skills. NATO allies are upset with his administration's plans to build a missile defense system. They say that would violate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, a landmark agreement long credited with reining in the U.S.Russian arms race. Mr. Bush calls the agreement, quote,"a relic." Instead, he says NATO must guard against nuclear threats from rogue nations and the futuristic system provides just such a safeguard.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] I told the allies I'm committed to working closely with them to address this common threat by developing a new framework for nuclear security. The framework must include greater non-proliferation and counter- proliferation efforts, decreased reliance on offensive weapons and greater transparency so that responsible nations can have greater levels of confidence.
[Harris:] Mr. Bush also came under fire yesterday in Spain, which was the first stop of his six-nation tour. There, he faced questions over the White House's plans to abandon the Kyoto treaty, which is an international plan to combat global warming. Let's take a closer look now at these issues of diplomacy and divisiveness. For that, we turn to our guests in Washington. Jason Forrester is a former senior analyst on international affairs for the Gore presidential campaign. He joins us in our Washington bureau this morning. Good to see you, how are you?
[Jason Forrester, Frm. International Affairs Analyst, Gore Campaign:] Thank you. Good morning, Leon.
[Harris:] Were you able to listen to the entirety of Mr. Bush's comments just moments ago before the NATO the press there covering the NATO summit?
[Forrester:] I was able to listen to it. I thought that what the president had to say was very encouraging. The Bush administration, in its early months, has been in sort of an anti-Clinton, we're not Bill Clinton mode, which makes sense on some levels, but in terms of international, diplomatic consultation, I think it's very encouraging to see the president is talking a lot more about consultation rather than, for instance, unilateral abrogation of the ABM Treaty, as had been hinted at by certain members of his administration early on.
[Harris:] Yes, and as a matter of fact, that question about unilateralism was brought up there by the press. We also want to take a moment now to welcome in another guest who is going to join us now. Robert George is an associate editorial page editor for "The New York Post." He's joining us in our New York bureau this morning. Good to see you, glad you're able to join us. Were you able to hear the comments Mr. Bush made moments ago?
[Robert George, "the New York Post":] Unfortunately, I didn't hear the exact comments. I saw basically an advance outline of the speech, so I have a general idea of what the president said.
[Harris:] All right, then what do you make then of what you were able to see, then?
[George:] I think I tend to agree. I think that the president is definitely trying to, in a sense, bring in his European allies into his way of thinking. I think the early days of the administration might have been awkward from a public relations perspective, but I think, actually, he's on the right track right now.
[Harris:] Yes, what he's doing right now is he's actually having to go out and actually sell the ideas that he's been talking about for some time, and the fact that these questions are actually being asked says something about this way this administration going about building relationships with the international community. Do you expect this trip, basically Jason, do you expect the trip to, I guess, pave the way for a smoother way to go from now on for the administration in that regard?
[Forrester:] I certainly hope so. In my opinion, probably the most important visit that he will have the most important meeting will be on Saturday in Slovenia with President Putin. Getting off on the right foot with President Putin could be the key to trying to implement this new vision that the president talked a lot about, but he hasn't given a lot of specificity on. I think the more we move toward specificity and to consultation, the more encouraged I will be, and I think the greater likelihood we'll have of international stability.
[Harris:] And that lack of specificity has been cited as the reason why so many in the international, particularly European, community have been on edge about this administration; correct?
[Forrester:] Exactly, Leon. There's a common phrase flying about Washington now, "fly before you buy." As it relates to missile defense, I mean, the clearer we get on missile defense, the clearer the discussion or the more concrete we can have an exchange of ideas so the Europeans can understand whether the Bush proposal will threaten the Russian nuclear deterrent or whether we're actually moving into, as the president mentioned in his speech at NATO headquarters, in his press conference of a complex approach to dealing with the questions of nuclear weapons, et cetera, via arms control, diplomacy, deterrence as well as possibly a limited missile defense.
[Harris:] Well, that agenda there in mind, Robert, what is it that you are looking to see this administration do; specifically, what are you looking to see or hear Mr. Bush say in the coming days before he meets Vladimir Putin at the end of the weekend?
[George:] I think one of the things that we've learned is that Bush, obviously, is a right-of-center politician. And he, in a sense, is trying to convey his views on arms control and so forth from that philosophical perspective, where most of the a lot of the Europeans are sort of left-of-center. So, I think Bush, obviously, in a sense has to clearly outline a vision saying that the United States is still going to be there as, in a sense, a trusted ally, but there's a new world, there's new priorities, and they're willing to share the technology on missile defense and so forth, and convince Putin of the wisdom of that view.
[Harris:] It's a new world, but there's still some old business to attend in that world. Mr. Bush was also asked about the developments in the Middle East, and I want to keep the two of you here, since we do have you here, we'd like to get your perspective on the developments there in the Middle East. And before we get to that, I want to get back to Kyra Phillips.
[Phillips:] Good segue, Leon. In diplomatic news, Washington has helped broker a new agreement between Israeli and Palestinian leaders, but reluctance and reservations loom. CNN's Jerrold Kessel has more on the latest chapter in nearly nine months of violence now.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] From the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv, the CIA chief continues his energetic mission to consolidate the truce in the making. No immediate changes on the ground, though. Israeli tanks still presiding over Palestinian areas; shooting still at Jewish settlers on West Bank roads. One woman injured in the latest incident. Dominating, too, each side's lack of faith that other will actually respect commitment undertaking in terms of the plan, buttressing the doubts it will work.
[Limor Livnat, Israeli Cabinet Minister:] Arafat's response will be examined by the outcome and the result. He is supposed to stop all the violence, and what we will see in the next few days, next few hours, next few days, if he lives up to his promises or not.
[Yasser Abed Rabbo, Palestinian Cabinet Minister:] This is a test for the Israeli government to show that they are really ready to start a new process: if they freeze the settlement activities, if they put an end to atrocities of settlers and if they lift the siege and the collective punishment they have imposed upon our people.
[Kessel:] President Bush called Mr. Tenet to congratulate him. Perhaps, say observers, most crucial to the success of the efforts, what the U.S. leadership does now.
[Chemi Shalev, Israeli Political Analyst:] Whether George Tenet will tell them that this is a lost case despite the fact that he signed some sort of cease-fire agreement, and they will therefore desist and hold off or whether he will recommend that America continue its heavy involvement in the area, in which case both sides will be interested in maintaining the cease-fire and in seeing where American diplomacy leads them.
[Kessel:] There'll be plenty of opposition on both sides. Even as the CIA chief and Yasser Arafat were wrapping up the late-night Palestinian agreement, demonstrations in nearby streets from various Palestinian groups opposed to ending their intifada.
[Ismail Abu-shanab, Hamas Spokesman:] We understand the enormous pressure against Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. This pressure is not solving the real problem. The real cause of the suffering of the Palestinian is the occupation, the settlers and the Israeli tanks on the Palestinian territories. Tenet is not dealing with the real cause of the problem.
[Kessel:] On the Israeli side, Prime Minister Sharon, who has been conferring with his military commanders on the West Bank, has resisted insistence of Jewish settlers that he unleash Israeli's full military might. Now, the frustrations of the Israeli right have grown.
[Yehudit Tayar, Settler Spokeswoman:] If it wasn't so serious, it would be ludicrous that people actually pretend to believe when Arafat says there's going to be a cease-fire.
[Kessel:] The Tenet working plan is designed to consolidate two previously independently-declared cease-fires by Ariel Sharon and Yasser Arafat. If this attempt to create one agreed truce doesn't take hold, the risk, the fear is it could undermine, perhaps even collapse those declared commitments to restraint. Jerrold Kessel, CNN, Jerusalem.
[Harris:] And back now to our guests, who have been helping us analyze these international issues this morning, Jason Forrester in our Washington bureau, and Robert George, who's standing by in New York. Robert, let's start with you on this one, taking a look now at the situation in the Middle East. This administration, the Bush administration had kept an arm's length approach for some time now. It seemed to reverse course, now actually getting involved here, and it actually produced something, produced some quiet or at least a chance at some quiet there on the ground. Does this signal now, the time for the Bush administration to step up its involvement?
[George:] Well, I think so to a certain extent, and George Tenet had experience doing that when the Clinton administration was in there. So, he knows several of the players. But frankly, I mean, we have to be somewhat skeptical of this because so far, I mean if you go back to previous agreements, Israel had really given more concessions than they may have done in their previous history, and that was not enough for the Palestinians in that, and they restarted the intifada. So I think, really the onus is on the Palestinians to hold on to this cease-fire. I think that's really the only success that you're going to have right now.
[Harris:] Many observers of note have said that the reason they made this concession this time or at least come to table is because you want to say the press battle in trying to present an image of the victim in this. Let's go to you, Mr. Forrester, standing by in Washington. What's your take on all of this?
[Forrester:] Well, obviously, a very complicated situation. Once again, greatly encouraged by the Bush administration's willingness to get involved. The bombing almost two weeks ago in Tel Aviv at the beachside club had the potential of igniting conflagration much wider than it's been since September, since the intifada started. It can only be an encouraging sign that in the interim, the Bush administration deployed George Tenet who, as Robert noted, does have extensive experience with the leaders there, and that we now have something that we can build upon that both sides seem to have some degree of confidence in, and we would hope move away from this situation of the last eight months.
[Harris:] Jason go ahead. Final word. Robert.
[George:] I was just going to say, I think the key issue there was following that explosion was Sharon's willingness to hold back, and that really delivered the public relations blow to the Palestinian Authority.
[Harris:] Very good, thank you very much for your insight this morning, gentleman. Robert George of "The New York Post" in our New York bureau, and Jason Forrester, former senior analyst of foreign affairs for the Gore-Lieberman campaign, we thank you very much for coming in with us and sharing your insights.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Well, it appears Palestinian and Israeli negotiators want to accomplish something at the Camp David summit, signaling both sides are determined to forge some kind of an agreement, President Clinton left the mountain retreat for Japan this morning. So Secretary of State Madeline Albright will guide the talks in his absence, and while Mr. Clinton said there has been progress in the past nine days, the consensus remains elusive. Just yesterday, the talks appeared to be over, hopelessly stalled. State Department correspondent Andrea Koppel explains what happened.
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn State Department Correspondent:] It was literally the 11th hour, just before 11:00 p.m. Wednesday evening White House spokesman Joe Lockhart issued a statement, "The summit has come to a conclusion," he said, "with no agreement." After nine days of talking, stalemate. President Clinton, his trip to the G-8 Summit in Japan, already delayed by a day, was ready to leave Camp David.
[Joe Lockhart, White House Press Secretary:] The luggage was loaded, the motorcade was assembled in front of the president's cabin, people changed into more formal clothing, except for me, to go back to the White House. We were ready to go.
[Koppel:] Then, shortly before midnight, a surprise.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] After a round of intensive consultations this evening, the parties agreed to stay at Camp David while I travel to Okinawa for the G-8 Summit.
[Koppel:] The president said there had been progress, but stressed, in his words, the gaps remain substantial.
[Clinton:] During the time that I am gone, Secretary Albright will be working with the parties and we will continue to try to close the gaps. Upon my return, I will assess the status of the talks.
[Koppel:] And with that, President Clinton was off to Japan, delayed but determined to return this weekend to a summit that now appears to have new life. And in President Clinton's absence, it is Secretary of State Madeline Albright who resumes the role, as she did last weekend, of chief U.S. mediator. But first things first, Carol, U.S. officials say that all of the negotiators many of them actually have been up all night long for the last several evenings in a row and so they want to let them get some sleep. Later this morning, Secretary Albright will meet with the leaders and with some of the other mediators to put together a schedule for their work during President Clinton's absence Carol.
[Lin:] Andrea, I know you've been dealing with an ongoing news blackout, as the parties have agreed to not talk about the details of this deal, but do you read into the situation that because the two leaders have decided to stay that they have agreed on at least something?
[Koppel:] Well, as you heard President Clinton say, there had been some progress. But just after President Clinton briefed, the White House spokesman Joe Lockhart was asked that very question, and he said: Don't read anything into the fact that the two leaders, Mr. Arafat and Mr. Barak, have decided to stay. There were there are still lots of differences, no progress really was made last night on Wednesday evening. And so the only reason they decided to stay was because the prospect of a total breakdown, if the leaders were to return to the region, was so daunting, they decided to stay here, wait until President Clinton gets back, at least with a glimmer of hope that they might be able to resolve things when President Clinton returns Carol.
[Lin:] All right, thank you very much, Andrea Koppel.

[Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] In the Middle East, the two largest Palestinian factions say they are sticking to a truce with Israel despite the killing of a top militant from Yasser Arafat's Fatah Party. Palestinians bury Raed al-Karmi today. He was killed in the West Bank town of Tulkarem by a bomb the Palestinians say was planted by Israeli forces. CNN's Mike Hanna is in Tulkarem Mike, what's the latest?
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Carol, at the moment we are outside the mosque here in the West Bank city of Tulkarem waiting for the body of Raed al-Karmi to emerge. The body has been paraded around the streets of the city proceeded by fellow members of the Al Aqsa movement, of which he was a member, which is aligned to Yasser Arafat's Fatah organization, firing weapons in the air. And although Israelis see Raed al-Karmi as a killer, as a murderer, here in Tulkarem he's regarded as a hero, a fighter against Israel and a fighter against Israeli occupation. Still great debate over the circumstances of his death. He was walking near his home not too far from the center of Tulkarem here when an explosion alongside the road occurred, killing him. Palestinians are adamant that it was an Israeli assassination. Israel has refused to confirm or deny its involvement in Raed al-Karmi's death. But within hours of that death, the Fatah movement had announced that it would no longer observe a cease-fire that had been declared by Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat last month and shortly after that an Israeli soldier was killed and two injured in a drive-by shooting on the West Bank by Palestinian gunmen. So all attempts to get a cease-fire in place here appear to be in tatters. U.S. envoy Anthony Zinni was due to return to the region at the end of the week, but his return, or the date of his return, is now in doubt while the U.S. State Department waits to see the ramifications of the death of Raed al-Karmi, whether, indeed, this produces yet another torrent of violence, whether tentative attempts to get a cease-fire in place on the ground have now been completely blown away Carol.
[Costello:] All right, Mike, thank you very much. He can't hear us. There's a lot of noise around him.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] In the meantime, we told you about two hours ago, a situation in Asheville, North Carolina, at the local health department there in Asheville. Apparently, a gunman did walk in there about two hours ago. It is said that 200 employees inside that building were evacuated. However, the gunman still is inside. Let's talk with one of the public information coordinators there in Asheville with the county health department. Robin Nix by telephone. Robin, can you hear me?
[Robin Nix, Public Information, Asheville, North Carolina:] Yes, I can.
[Hemmer:] Tell us, the gunman, is my understanding, is still inside the building, is that accurate?
[Nix:] No, it is not. They do not know, they are searching the...
[Hemmer:] I'm sorry, Robin, I'm going to make you pause here, I believe you might be on a cell phone. You're breaking up a little bit. Again, you're saying the gunman is not inside the building. If he's not, where is he?
[Nix:] At this point, they are still searching the building to see if he is still inside. They do not think he is inside or has left the premises.
[Hemmer:] OK, do you know if any employees or any patients or anyone else is still inside the building as well?
[Nix:] No, the building has been completely evacuated at this time.
[Hemmer:] Do we know who the gunman is? Has anybody been able to identify him?
[Nix:] No, we don't. We do have a physical description...
[Hemmer:] OK, again, I'm going to try and hang you on here. I believe you said you have a physical description. In addition to that, do we know anything the man said upon entering that building?
[Nix:] No, we do not. We have... ... department of social services building... ... he did try to get over there...
[Hemmer:] OK, Robin, listen, if you can call us back a bit later, we'd much appreciate to get the information. It is just a little difficult for us to pick up on the cell phone as your audio continues to break up there. But again, Asheville, North Carolina, this morning, a gunman did enter a health department building there. We'll continue to track it, let you know what we know from officials on the scene there. So stay tuned for more in just a bit.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] First, right now on the Arabian Peninsula where there has been another explosion, this one at the British embassy in Sana'a, the Yemeni capital, a six-hour drive north of Aden, where the USS Cole was attacked yesterday. CNN Carl Rochelle is at the Pentagon with those details and an update as well on the USS Cole attack Carl.
[Carl Rochelle, Cnn Correspondent:] Carol, the latest figures that we have from the U.S. Navy authorities on the death toll on that ship, the death toll has been raised to seven, the number of missing and presumed dead is now 10, and they have changed the status of the missing to missing and presumed dead and have informed the families. Thirty-five people were injured, 35 sailors were injured in that. I understand that three of them have been returned back to duty. They weren't severely injured, they were returned back to duty. And some of the most serious have been evacuated, medivacked to a French hospital in Jibuti for treatment there. So that is all going on. The sailors are hard at work trying to get the ship back in reasonably decent shape. We understand it is stable, the flooding is under control. There is still some seawater in it. There is still that 20-by-40-foot size hole in the side of it and a lot of damage inside, but they're moving forward on that. Meanwhile, investigators are trying to determine who was responsible for the attack. One very strong focus is on Osama bin Laden, the terrorist who has targeted the United States interests throughout the world. Not also being ruled out are Hezbollah, Hamas, and officials say especially the Egyptian Islamic Jihad organization. FBI agents moving into the area to try to help with what they can in trying to figure out who was responsible for the cause. One question, though: Why did the U.S. Navy go to that area that had once been considered to be a terrorist area? Well, the chief of naval operations talked about that this morning.
[Adm. Vern Clark, Chief Of Naval Operations:] We don't live in a risk-free world. Those are the facts. We have friends throughout the world. We also have some people who don't like us, and that's all about the risks that we face. And our young men and women sign up to serve and go with us and represent the interests of the United States of America. And if we are going to influence events throughout the world, we have to be there.
[Rochelle:] And the Admiral says that those sailors are working hard this morning, doing the best they can to get that ship back in shape. I'm Carl Rochelle, CNN, reporting live from the Pentagon.
[Lin:] Thank you very much, Carl. Well, a world away in Norfolk, Virginia the Navy community is anxious. It is the home base of the USS Cole, and it has dealt with similar situations too many times before. But it is never easy. CNN's Mark Potter is outside the Navy base where families are waiting for more details of the attack's aftermath. Mark, is it hard for them to get news right now?
[Mark Potter, Cnn Correspondent:] No, the news is getting out. They can call in. As more news comes in from Yemen, it's being disseminated. People can call in and find out what's going on. Notification, however, in the case of sailors who died or who are missing is being done in person. All efforts here at the Norfolk base are being concentrated now on the family members. This has been a very painful time, as you can imagine, for the family members, and for the base personnel who have been trying to inform them and to console them. A number of support services are being offered. I want to bring in a guest who has agreed to join us on a very busy morning and a troubling morning here for her. Catherine Stokoe is the director of the Navy Family Services Center. And Catherine, you have been extremely busy. This has been a very difficult time on the base. Tell me where we stand now. How are the families doing in terms of notification, and what's being done to support them?
[Catherine Stokoe, Director, Navy Family Service Ctr:] Well, not all of the notifications are complete, but the leadership in the Hampton Roads area has set up a site on the base for the families to gather so that they can be together. And they are getting briefings. Yesterday, there were three briefings, and today there will be one at noon for the family members who want to hear what the latest is from the leadership.
[Potter:] And what sort of services are there in terms of counseling, religious counseling and all of that?
[Stokoe:] We have social workers and there are chaplains available. We are holding support groups for both the adults and the children to help normalize some of the feelings. This is a very traumatic event and very challenging for the families. And everybody handles stress a little bit differently, so we're trying to provide the support to be here if they need us; also to provide information and referral. We don't always have the answers, but we try to hook people up with the right numbers.
[Potter:] OK, and lastly, there was some bit of delay yesterday in getting information to the families, making it an even more painful time. What explained that delay?
[Stokoe:] Well, the services, whenever there's a death, always have to be very, very careful that the identification is complete. It would be very unfair to ever make a mistake in that area. So that takes time. And unfortunately, delays like that make it even more stressful and difficult for the families.
[Potter:] All right, well, thank you for your time, and we wish you good luck today.
[Stokoe:] OK, thank you.
[Potter:] Thank you. Appreciate it. And, Carol, that's the situation here at Norfolk. Efforts are being made to help the families. The community has rallied as well. This is a tough time for all, but this is a military town and the community has come to the assistance of this military base. Carol, back to you.
[Lin:] That's why they call it the Navy family. Thanks so much, Mark. Well, we now go back to the Middle East and the investigation into now two suspected terrorist attacks on Western interests. We have been reporting on the USS Cole, but this morning there was an explosion at the British embassy in the capital city of Yemen. We have CNN's Matthew Chance now on the telephone with an update on both stories. But, Matthew, can you tell us first what happened exactly at the British Embassy?
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Correspondent:] Thanks, Carol. Yes, you're right, there are two stories in the country today. And there was this incident in the north of the country, north of where I am now, the capital of Yemen, Sana'a, where British officials were reporting earlier an explosion inside their embassy compound. And now, there were no reports of casualties, there have been no reports of casualties at this stage. But like the U.S. and on the attack on its ship here in Yemen, British officials at this stage are not ruling out, they say, this being a terrorist attack Carol.
[Lin:] Matthew, are they linking the two explosions directly?
[Chance:] Not directly, no, but both countries have launched their individual investigations into what's at the root of these problems, who's responsible, what's responsible for the devastation, in the United States case the very heavy casualties. And so they're not being linked directly, but I'm sure that both countries are likely to share what intelligence they have when it comes to combating a comment threat.
[Lin:] How much damage was there to the building?
[Chance:] Well, that in Sana'a it's difficult to say. I'm not there at this moment. I'm some distance south of there. But from the reports that we've been getting from British officials there, the explosion was very strong indeed. It shook the entire neighborhood, according to one British embassy spokesman in the city. Robin Cook, the British foreign minister, said after hearing about the explosion, that it appeared to him that someone had literally thrown a bomb over the wall into the embassy compound. So it was quite a significant explosion and quite a remarkable surprise, really, that no one was, in fact, injured Carol.
[Lin:] And remarkable now that you are in the position of covering both major stories. You are at the port of Aden. What is the situation with the USS Cole?
[Chance:] Well, the USS Cole is anchored a short distance from where I am now in the port, which the hotel I'm in overlooks. You can't see it from where I'm standing right now, but I went to have a look at it earlier today and it doesn't look in a very good state. It's listing to one side, leaning to one side quite heavily. Around the other side, there's a gaping hole in the one side, in part, some 40 feet across that was ripped into it by this explosive boat that approached it. According to eyewitnesses, we've learned, of course, that the two people who were apparently spotted in the small boat that was packed with explosives. They were reported to have stood to attention before the boat actually detonated. Officially here on the ground now, I have to say, at least we're being told, that it's not yet been determined that this was a deliberate act, but there is an ongoing investigation, like with the British case further north, into what is the cause of it Carol.
[Lin:] All right, thank you very much, Matthew Chance for reporting live from the Port of Aden.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Researchers with the National Cancer Institute say a new genetic test could send a red flag to doctors that a patient may be at risk for cervical cancer. CNN medical correspondent Eileen O'Connor looks at the test and how it could help patients make better health care decisions.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] A genetic test for a virus that has shown a strong link to cervical cancer is a valid tool for women and their doctors, according to a new study by the National Institutes of Health. The test was developed by sequencing the DNA of the human papilloma virus, a virus that is present in over 99 percent of all cervical cancers. Once a woman has an abnormal Pap smear, her doctor can now screen for HPV using this test.
[Dr. Diane Mcgrory, Dedham Medical Associates:] The Pap smear looked for abnormal cells. This test actually looks for the virus.
[O'connor:] Dr. Diane McGrory says not only will the test tell whether HPV is present, but whether it is a strain that is more or less likely to cause cancer, giving the patient and her doctor more information to go on.
[Unidentified Male:] ... indicated by high-risk positive or negative.
[Mcgrory:] I find it really relieves anxiety if they find out they're negative for the high-risk virus. And if they're positive for the high-risk virus, it gives them an understanding about what's wrong with them, and then they get treatment.
[Barbara Mcguire-broderick:] Bye, Chris. Have a good weekend.
[O'connor:] Barbara McGuire-Broderick, a school principal, knows the agony of waiting, something she's had to do several times after an abnormal Pap smear.
[Mcguire-broderick:] Here at work people notice that there's that anxiety level that really goes up the more days that you have to wait and wonder. That will be happening next week.
[O'connor:] She says she hopes the results of this new study mean more women will have this test.
[Mcguire-broderick:] I have more information to work with my physician so that she can help me make better decisions about my health care.
[O'connor:] Still, doctors say the most important aspect of screening for cervical cancer is that women have to come in and have a Pap smear test done in the first place. Not everyone does. And of those who do, only 50 percent have them often enough. Eileen O'Connor, CNN, Washington.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] President George W. Bush is in Mexico on his first international trip for a friendly meeting with President Vicente Fox. The two will spend the afternoon in an informal setting, the Fox ranch, getting reacquainted and discussing a number of issues from trade to immigration to energy policy. Joining us now from Leon, Mexico is CNN Senior White House Correspondent John King John.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Well, Leon, and the first thing up in this hour for President Bush on this visit to Mexico: meeting the president of Mexico's mother. That a sign of the informal nature of this trip, also the friendly tone the new president wants to set as he makes his first trip out of the United States to a key neighbor, in his mind: Mexico. The president arrived here a short time ago, greeted at the airport by President Vicente Fox of Mexico. After the informal discussions, meeting Mr. Fox's mother, getting some gifts presented to him, the two leaders will retreat to Mr. Fox's ranch and have what aides describe as a casual but significant conversations about the key issues in U.S.-Mexico relations. Some of them are very difficult: illegal immigration, for example. More than 6 million illegal immigrants living in the United States. The United States government says more than half come from Mexico. Drug trafficking, of course, another sore spot. Illegal drug trade in the United States $63 billion a year, and the United States government says half of that comes into the United States through Mexico. So that another issue these two leaders want to discuss. On the bright side, trade relations. President Bush holding up U.S.-Mexico economic cooperation as an example of what he hopes to bring throughout the hemisphere during his at least four years in office in Washington. But White House officials saying, don't look for any big breakthroughs on this trip or any major agreements. The two leaders will also discuss energy cooperation. That a little bit more urgent than one might think normally because of the California crisis. Most of all, though, White House aides say this a getting-to- know-you session and that President Bush, as he made his first trip out of the United States, wanted to come to a place he is familiar with from his days as governor of Texas and sit down with a man he is familiar with. He has met President Fox three times before. This, though, of course, their first meeting as presidents Leon.
[Harris:] All right, John King reporting live this morning from this afternoon, we should say, from Leon, Mexico. And John will be here throughout the day with coverage from there.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Susan Lisovicz, Cnn Anchor:] Shares of HMOs such as Cigna and Aetna will be in the spotlight today. Late Friday, the Democratic controlled Senate passed patients' rights legislation promising millions of Americans new health care protections. The legislation also includes provisions which would give patients the right to sue their HMOs. The Senate measure now moves to the House. President Bush is expected to work with House Republicans to limit the lawsuit provision. Here with more on the Washington beat is Greg Valliere, political economist at Charles Schwab Washington Research Group. And as we mentioned, Greg, this is a Democratic led measure but you think the Bush White House is going to back this, why?
[Greg Valliere, Political Economist, Charles Schwab Washington Research Group:] I think so, Susan, a very interesting stretch coming up in the next two or three months in Washington. Bush has had his first slump begin. His polling numbers are down, he's on the defensive not the offensive with Congress, and I think in order to get his momentum back, he's going to sign almost anything that lands on his desk whether it's education, patients' bill of rights, maybe even minimum wage. Probably a good story for him politically, but for the markets, for investors, there may be a concern that he might be moving away from his conservative philosophy.
[Lisovicz:] Exactly, and is that's one of the reasons why we're seeing a slump in his popularity, it's a sense that he wouldn't be, perhaps, a centrist as he had indicated? This patients' bill of rights would certainly get him there.
[Valliere:] Yeah, he's going to I think he's going to move back quite a bit to the center. The best thing for him would be if the economy came back, but I think politically he'll move away from the right wing for a while now.
[Lisovicz:] All right, Greg Valliere, we'll be seeing you a little bit later on in the show. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] As it stands right now, we do have the European stock markets in a bit of a mixed picture right now. Our Todd Benjamin is standing by in our London bureau with more. Good morning, Todd.
[Todd Benjamin, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Dave. They are mixed, but they've really stabilized a lot, and I think they're also looking towards that stronger open for the Nasdaq. And I think that's definitely cheering the markets right now. The FTSE is up a half of a percent. The DAX in Frankfurt, the last time we talked it was down, now it's turned into positive territory. It's up a third of a percent. Paris is off a third of a percent, it had been now much more before. And Zurich has been the odd one out all day. It remains up at just over a half percent. But again, it does not have any heavy weighting in technology, it's financials, pharmaceuticals, things like that. Some of the stocks, though, still getting hammered in that tech sector: ASM Lithography, which trades in U.S., it's down 6 12 percent. Reuters, a media group, is off 6 percent. But get this, STMicroelectronics, the French chip maker that has been a Wall Street darling, it's up nearly 1 percent, and Nokia's off just a half percent. So things are stabilizing. Among some the big winners, it's in those defensive groups such as foods: Unilever, for instance, is up four percent. BP Amoco is up about 6 percent. And British American Tobacco, which owns a Brown & Williamson, it's up just over 10 percent. I do want to mention oil. Oil is up 59 cents today at $25.22. Of course, that's Brent trading here in London. Back to you.
[Haffenreffer:] And Todd, we are seeing the European markets improve, as we are seeing, also, S&P; futures and Nasdaq futures improving as the morning is progressing as well. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Tumi Makgabo, Insight:] In Washington and Beijing, words of diplomacy, but no apology.
[George W. Bush, U.s. President:] I regret that a Chinese pilot is missing, and I regret one of their airplanes is lost. And our prayers go out to the pilot, his family. Our prayers are also with our own servicemen and women, and they need to come home.
[Unidentified Male:] The U.S. side should admit its mistakes, apologize and explain to the Chinese people. This is the first step.
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn Correspondent:] Tumi, State Department officials say don't expect to see any more high-level meetings here at the State Department with China's ambassador to Washington, who has been a frequent visitor here over the last five days. His most recent visit this morning. And during that meeting, State Department officials say that they received a positive sign from Ambassador Yang that the Chinese government had positively received the letter that Secretary Powell sent off to China's vice premier last night. In this letter, Secretary Powell outlined possible ways to bridge the gaps, to find a way to resolve China's insistence for an apology on the one hand, and the U.S. expression of regret.
[Makgabo:] Now, Andrea, one thing that perhaps comes to mind in this is that it seems that there is a new sense of urgency of trying to bring this matter to a conclusion. Is there a sense of how soon "soon" might be?
[Koppel:] No, there isn't, Tumi. And the reason that there is this added sense of urgency is the fact that this has gone on five days. In just two days, it will have lasted a week. And there is something magical about when an incident of this nature runs for about a week, the news cycle sort of takes on a whole other life of itself, and so there is added urgency here within the State Department. They feel that that urgency is being matched on the part of the Chinese. They're involved in very seriously discussions, very intense discussions. And according to State Department officials, this is a very sensitive moment.
[Makgabo:] Now one thing that came to light earlier today was the fact that the Americans had previously expressed concern to Chinese officials about how aggressive the Chinese jet fighter planes were in the area when approaching U.S. aircraft. Is that perhaps a new tone in these negotiations or talks, a new tone that maybe implies that they are getting a bit more serious?
[Koppel:] I don't know about that. I think that's sort of I think that further explanation on the part of the Bush administration as to why this incident may have happened in the air and how it might have been an accident and how it was something that they had seen coming for a number of months. And the fact that they had already raised this with the Chinese government. And so I'm not sure it's really a new tact in their negotiations right now, Tumi.
[Makgabo:] Andrea Koppel at the State Department, thank you. Well, in China, newspapers moved their focus to the missing pilot and to his wife and 6-year-old son. Mike Chinoy reports now on how this may signal the beginning of the end of the standoff.
[Mike Chinoy, Cnn Correspondent:] Over the South China Sea, Chinese helicopters search for Wang Wei, the 32-year-old fighter pilot who's been missing since his F-8 jet collided with the U.S. spy plane on Sunday. President Jiang Zemin has made the search for Wang a top priority, and Chinese ships and planes have been combing the waters southeast of Hainan Island, where the incident took place. Meanwhile, the Chinese state-run media has begun to portray Wang as a national hero. His photo has been splashed on television and in newspapers. Media accounts have hailed him as an outstanding pilot, although some Western press reports quote U.S. military officials as saying that Wang had previously flown dangerously close to other U.S. surveillance planes. U.S. acknowledgment of China's grief over Wang's fate and how Beijing handles the reaction of its own people to his disappearance has emerged as a crucial element in resolving the crisis, and the fact that Beijing chose Thursday to launch its propaganda campaign about him could be a significant move. April 5 is Qing Ming, the day that Chinese traditionally commemorate their dead. If China wanted to bring this issue to closure, Qing Ming would be an appropriate time to start. Indeed, many analysts believe that ending the search and declaring Wang dead is an essential step before China will feel able to let the U.S. air crew leave. The fact that Beijing has now begun to eulogize its lost flier appears to be an important sign that moment could be approaching. Mike Chinoy, CNN, Hong Kong.
[Makgabo:] And in just a moment, we'll take a closer look at the weapons of choice in a diplomatic exchange words. Stay with us. Welcome back. An intense exchange of words is under way over the China affair, and Washington has been careful in its choice of weapons. For instance, the Bush administration insists that this is an accident, not a crisis. It involved a surveillance plane, not a spy plane. And most important, the American servicemen and women are not hostages. Let's take a look now at a report from Bill Schneider.
[William Schneider, Cnn Correspondent:] President Jimmy Carter's preoccupation with the Iranian hostage crisis turned it into a personal and national obsession "America Held Hostage."
[Jimmy Carter, Fmr. U.s. President:] This is an issue that's been constantly on my mind and on the minds of the American people.
[Schneider:] Despite his denials, Ronald Reagan made his worst decision as president, secretly trading arms to Iran, because of his frustration over a hostage situation.
[Ronald Reagan, Fmr. U.s. President:] The United States has not swapped boatloads or planeloads of American weapons for the return of American hostages, and we will not.
[Schneider:] President Bush's father got caught up in a hostage crisis in 1989, when terrorists killed American Lieutenant Colonel William Higgins in Lebanon. The president veered between treating the matter as a grave national crisis and trying to downplay the issue.
[George H.w. Bush, Fmr. U.s. President:] I don't want to be responsible for the loss of innocent life.
[Schneider:] If a president takes a situation like this too seriously, the United States government ends up being held hostage by the crisis, as President Carter's was. The other side controls your agenda, which is why President Bush has so far been cautious.
[George W. Bush, U.s. President:] Our approach has been to keep this accident from becoming an international incident.
[Schneider:] But there are ominous signs. Yellow ribbons. The "H" word.
[Dana Rohrabacher, U.s. House Member:] Until our 24 military personnel are returned, they should be considered as hostages being held by a hostile power.
[Schneider:] Yes, the American service personnel are being held against their will, but they are being held by a government, not a group of terrorists threatening to kill them. Terrorists have only one interest their cause. But a government like that of China has a wide variety of interests, like U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, like hosting the Olympic games, like trade.
[Charles Grassley, U.s. Senate Member:] They want to get into the World Trade Organization. Respect for law is the basis of the World Trade Organization membership.
[Schneider:] A hostage crisis immobilizes the United States. The U.S. government's actions are limited by American values. Protecting American lives takes precedence over all other objectives, which is why the American people are surprisingly patient. It wasn't until five months into the Iranian hostage crisis that President Carter lost public support. President Bush's response has been to ratchet up the pressure on China. On Monday, he expressed frustration.
[Bush:] Failure of the Chinese government to react promptly to our request is inconsistent with standard diplomatic practice and with the expressed desire of both our countries for better relations.
[Schneider:] On Tuesday, it sounded like a veiled threat.
[Bush:] This accident has the potential of undermining our hopes for a fruitful and productive relationship between our two countries. To keep that from happening, our servicemen and women need to come home.
[Schneider:] Today, the pressure went up. In the end, there is only one standard of success.
[Makgabo:] That was Bill Schneider reporting. Well, joining us now to talk about the United States, China and diplomacy is John Holden, the president of the National Committee on U.S.- China relations. He's worked in Beijing for many years in the private sector. Mr. Holden, thank you very much for joining us, and welcome.
[John Holden, Natl. Committee On U.s.-china Relations:] Tumi, it's good to be with you. Thank you.
[Makgabo:] First of all, we heard a lot about how people are trying to be careful, cautious, trying to choose their words very carefully in this instance. And keeping that in mind, how has it happened that this incident has reached the proportions that it has at this point in time?
[Holden:] Well, I think it's gotten an awful lot of media attention, and that makes it look like an enormous incident here in the United States. The Chinese have played this from a different perspective. I think that this is going to be resolved relatively soon. I do think that the diplomatic overtures that both sides are making to one another and the skilled people on both sides are going to result in a resolution. So I'm quite optimistic.
[Makgabo:] Now one aspect that people have quoted on several occasions with regard to the type of the way the standoff has evolved is the fact that within China itself, within its administration, there are, indeed, problems. How big a role does that play in the situation?
[Holden:] I really don't think that this is an issue. There has been a lot of speculation about that. But this is a diplomatic U.S.-China bilateral puzzle that has landed in the laps of the leadership in China. There are legal questions involved. Briefs have to be written. Things have to be studied. And it's a bureaucracy that doesn't, in the best of circumstances, respond really promptly as we do here. We're a little bit more used to the media ties, the environment in which we live and the necessity of operating in kind of a media fishbowl all the time. So I think to some extent, we've got to be a little bit patient here.
[Makgabo:] Now as that magic day, if you will, of a week approaches and the tension is increased on both sides, let's consider the time factor. How much of a concern is it, considering the fact that nobody seems to have budged since this accident actually occurred?
[Holden:] Well, I think it is time is a factor, but we're fortunately, both sides are keeping quiet about the diplomatic progress that is under way. And I actually would my analysis reading the tea leaves is that quite a bit of progress has been made, and so, yes, if there is a perception that no progress is being made, the American public in particular is not going to understand that. And they're going to be getting increasingly restive. I do think, though again, let me repeat that I think we're in the right direction on this.
[Makgabo:] Now I'd just like to quote you something that U.S. president George Bush said. He said, "This incident has the potential of undermining our hopes for a fruitful and productive relationship between our two countries." Now that sounds almost like he recognizes that it has the potential to cause great damage. Does it, in fact?
[Holden:] Well, anything any incident that becomes a crisis and is very badly handled could and does have that potential. I think I would be very, very surprised if the wisdom can't be found on both sides to get this sorted out. He's also underscoring something that was revealed and underlined in the visit of the Chinese vice premier to Washington several weeks ago in which they had the first chance to sit down and talk about a strategic dialogue between the two countries and the real potential for cooperation and how to deal with issues. So he's underscoring his desire that the two countries work well together, and I think that's a positive thing, and I applaud him for it.
[Makgabo:] Now since this incident began, an issue that has been mentioned is that of arms sales to Taiwan, perhaps even that in light of the developments the United States might consider doing just that selling the arms to Taiwan. Surely that, though, has the potential in itself to cause some serious problems?
[Holden:] Taiwan arms sale issue needs to be compartmentalized, and I think if this particular accident is resolved, as it should be, it isn't going to have any major bearing on that decision. That is a question that we have to consider in the light of the Taiwan Relations Act and the needs that Taiwan has, the legitimate needs, for its own defense.
[Makgabo:] Well, then, considering the fact that it is being played down, as it has been, as you yourself have mentioned, what should we then be considering and be concerned about as far as the diplomacy is concerned?
[Holden:] Well, I think the bottom line here is that both sides need to work the details out of a solution quietly. In the meantime, in the public arena, need to be showing respect for one another and concern. And I'm I think the Bush administration has been doing this, and I think the Chinese want to feel that their loss of one of their pilots is being is receiving sympathy from us and that we're taking them seriously, and I think we are.
[Makgabo:] John Holden, thank you very much.
[Holden:] Thank you, Tumi.
[Makgabo:] And we pause now for another short break. But just ahead, the financial fallout what Beijing and the United States stand to lose if the crisis continues. An eye on Olympic gold a series of events are being staged in Beijing as the city counts down the days to July 13, when the International Olympic Committee will vote on who gets to host the 2008 Summer Games. China believes it's ready for the honor. [on camera]: The Olympics would bring China enormous prestige and clout. Beijing also has other ambitions riding on its emerging industrial power. Fred Katayama reports on why the business world is watching the standoff in the South China Sea so closely.
[Fred Katayama, Cnn Correspondent:] China watchers say the spy plane standoff could hurt trade relations between the U.S. and China if the situation drags out. But even if that were to happen, they doubt relations would deteriorate as drastically as they did when the U.S. mistakenly bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade two years ago.
[James Sasser, Fmr. U.s. Ambassador To China:] If there should be a severe downturn in U.S.-China relations, if we should develop almost a hostile attitude toward each other, then certainly that's going to have a very, very chilling effect on the economic trade between the two countries. Frankly, I don't see that happening.
[Katayama:] The former ambassador says China needs good relations with the U.S. so it can boost commerce. The United States is China's second- largest trade partner and its top export market. Trade between the two nations rose nearly 23 percent to almost $124 billion last year. The air collision comes at a time when the U.S. relationship with China has become strained over human rights and U.S. consideration of weapons sales to China's arch-rival Taiwan. And some analysts say China has become anxious over the Bush administration's stance toward Beijing, seeing it as a competitor rather than as a partner.
[Robert Kapp, Pres., U.s.-china Business Council:] There is I think already some evidence of a greater cautiousness about engaging in a positive way with the
[Prc. Katayama:] With the U.S. economy slowing, the huge trade deficit with China, the U.S.'s largest, could become an issue. [on camera]: And any fallout from this spy plane incident could heat up the rhetoric in the congressional debate over China's trade privileges in the spring, and multinationals like Boeing could suffer. Five years ago, China snubbed Boeing by buying 33 Airbus planes, angry over U.S. support for Taiwan and U.S. criticism over nuclear exports to Pakistan. Fred Katayama, CNN Financial News, Washington.
[Makgabo:] And joining us to talk about trading with China is Theodore Moran, director of international economics and business at the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Mr. Moran, thank you very much for joining us, and welcome.
[Theodore Moran, Georgetown University:] Thank you, Tumi.
[Makgabo:] First of all, we heard from Fred Katayama's report how far- reaching an impact this latest situation could have. In your view, what do other countries outside of the relationship between the U.S. and China believe or see in the implications of the situation?
[Moran:] Well, this is a pivotal time in trying to determine the course of relations between the United States and China, not just over this specific incident. But really setting the tone for the next four years or maybe eight years of a Bush administration because, as we have seen, there are conflicting pressures within the Bush administration and within the Congress. And business and economic ties are only part of that relationship.
[Makgabo:] Those ties, perhaps one would immediately think of that membership to the World Trade Organization, which China has been very keen to become a member of. Surely in their dealing with the latest situation between the United States and China, that has played a key factor in determining their strategy.
[Moran:] That's right. And we have to remember that China is not yet a member of the WTO. The multilateral negotiations, not just our negotiations with China, are still going on. It's possible that some members of Congress are thinking that they can review and the whole debate about PNTR. In my view, that would be a bad use of this incident. The best thing that we can hope for is that there is some diplomatic solution of this incident and that the common, more mature forces within the Bush administration in Washington gain the upper hand.
[Makgabo:] And ultimately, there are many factors that determine trade relations between the U.S. and China. China with many other countries and the same even for the United States. So when one was to or if one was to look into the situation from a business perspective, how much of what has been said is rhetoric or much would one actually take seriously and consider re-examining one's own objectives?
[Moran:] Well, very good question, Tumi. The point is that businesses that want to trade with China, that want to invest in China have to think in terms of a decade. It takes a long time to expand sales in China or to set up investments in China. This incident by itself will not have any impact on that. On the other hand, if this incident serves to take those in the Bush administration who want to see China as a rival, a competitor, I avoid the term "enemy," but in some sense want to see an antagonistic relationship develop in Asia, if they use this particular incident to set the tone for the next four years, then business and financial leaders will have to rethink their plans going forward.
[Makgabo:] Now I put this question to our previous guest, and I'd like to put it to you as well. And just in a general sense, if you could give us an indication then how far-reaching this incident has been? Our previous guest mentioned that perhaps in light of things, it wasn't that important. What is your response?
[Moran:] Well, it need not be that important. Again, if we think of what Boeing or IBM or Qualcomm, some of the high-tech companies that are looking forward to selling products and selling services in China, their business plans will go ahead and this will just be a minor blip. On the other hand, if the Chinese turn nasty and, in fact, don't let the armed forces personnel come home very quickly, then things could deteriorate and it wouldn't be a minor blip. So this is really a kind of a pivotal moment.
[Makgabo:] So perhaps an indication of how difficult and delicate a situation this is is looking at how important both these countries are with regard to trade with each other.
[Moran:] That's right.
[Makgabo:] Do you think that in any way, at the end of the day, they will be really and truly concerned? Or is this more of a question of appearance to the rest of the world?
[Moran:] Well, you have conflicting pressures. If you looked today on your CNN programs, you saw senators from the Midwest and from the mountain states Republican senators who feel very strongly that they don't want an apology to China, that the Bush administration has to stand up to China. On the other hand, they are from states that will sell significant agricultural products and manufactured goods into China over the next decade. So you can see in terms of their interests in American service people, in human rights. But at the same time, workers and exporters from their own states, they're going to be torn about this.
[Makgabo:] Theodore Moran, thank you very much for joining us.
[Moran:] Thank you, Tumi.
[Makgabo:] And one final word before we go about U.S.-China business and berets. The Pentagon abruptly canceled a news conference this week about whether black berets worn by U.S. soldiers could be made by companies in China and elsewhere. Despite some congressional opposition, the Pentagon was reportedly going to announce that the berets could, indeed, be manufactured outside the United States. It's unclear now whether the contracts, which are worth $27 million, will go overseas. So while the arguments rage over who caused the spy plane collision, at least the beret debate could indisputably be made in China. And that's INSIGHT for this day. I'm Tumi Makgabo. Thanks for watching. The news on CNN continues. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We've just been able to establish phone contact with our Susan Candiotti, who is in El Salvador. She's in the capital city San Salvador, where she has been tracking this devastation that is inside Tecla. Let's go to Susan now on the telephone Susan.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Leon. Yes, telephone service, among other things, continue to work in a spotty fashion at best, and there is mounting frustration among families as they continue to search for the missing. In some cases, you see stunned spectators standing on mountains of mud, while others use whatever means they can to lift debris. Additional heavy equipment is being flown in from outside El Salvador to assist in the effort. And then there are those left homeless by the disaster wandering the area looking for help. Thousands are receiving assistance at government-sponsored as well as privately operated shelters, seeking food along with consolation from others whose are trying to regroup. El Salvador already in the process, also, of burying the dead. Some were able to be identified by relatives who made their way to make-shift morgues. However, some remains have been placed in mass graves, authorities unable to wait for identities of the dead to be known because of health concerns Leon.
[Harris:] Well, Susan, we've been talking this morning about how countries around the world are trying to chip in and offer some assistance. Are authorities there being able to are they getting all the assistance that they need or do they need more?
[Candiotti:] They are seeking additional assistance, especially when it comes to heavy equipment and the like. However, when they are also seeking outside help, they are most concern with getting additional manpower to help in these efforts, as well as monetary donations. They say that in terms of supplies, they can handle that. If they receive too many of them, then they will be saddled with problems of distribution. And so money, they say, to purchase supplies is what they need the most.
[Harris:] And certainly we do wish them all luck. Thanks so much. Susan Candiotti reporting live this morning from San Salvador, El Salvador. And, once again, if you would like to help and chip in, the number to call is at the Red Cross. The number's 1-800-HELPNOW.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] In Japan, that closely watched decision to leave interest rates unchanged came after trading closed.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Lian Pek wraps up the day in the Asian markets from our studios in Hong Kong. Good morning.
[Lian Pek, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Dave and Deborah. Well, as expected, the Bank of Japan is standing pat on its zero- interest rate policy, choosing to keep monetary policy unchanged in the wake of Sogo's collapse, and the concerns it has triggered about the health of the Japanese economy. But, in a rare statement, the central bank did say that Japan's economy is coming to a stage where the inflationary concerns are being dispelled. It's now keeping a close eye on job and income conditions to make sure they stop worsening before making a move on rates. Disappointed with the move, the yen slid more than one full yen to a low of 108.3 against the dollar. But it has come back slightly, underpinned by expectations that the BoJ will not hold its fire for long. Japanese stocks fared better, the Nikkei 225 closing up nine- tenths of a percent higher on the day. Here in Hong Kong, the Hang Seng index jumped nearly 1 12 percent. China Mobile lead the gainers2 percent after Nasdaq's Friday rally boosted local telecom stocks. Over in Taiwan, stocks closed higher for the fourth day running. The TAIEX of nearly eight-tenths of a percent as banking stocks took heart from news that banks would receive higher interest rates on their deposit with the central bank. The central bank is upping deposit rates by 0.8 of a percentage point to four percent to boost the financial sector's competitiveness. And that's a quick wrap of business in Asia. Back to you, Dave and Deborah.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, thank you very much.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] For years millions of Americans got their kicks on Route 66 as they made their way west across the country.
[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] That's right. Mother Road, as it was known, linked Chicago and Los Angeles. And this weekend marks Route 66's 75th anniversary. Dan Monaghan of affiliate KOAT looks back along the famous roadway across the country.
[Dan Monaghan, Koat Reporter:] The Route 66 signs these days are actually historic markers. The fabled highway was decertified in 1985, a victim of high-speed interstate travel.
[Unidentified Male:] So, you know, the Route 66 folks like to boast that it took five interstates to replace one highway.
[Monaghan:] David Kammer is a professor of pavement, an expert on the asphalt that was Route 66. The twisting roadway cut into the steep climb is still visible to the west of what is now I-25. While the rutted and rugged roadbed is now suited to little more than lizards, it is loaded with history. [on camera]: As if these 26 switchbacks up a steep hillside weren't difficult enough already, many a motorist faced an extra unusual challenge here.
[Unidentified Male:] It had such a steep incline that the fuel pumps in the early automobiles were such that some folks actually found themselves backing up La Bajada.
[Monaghan:] A few miles to the south is another pair of historic marks in the earth. That is Little Cut. Big Cut is above what is now Casino Hollywood. The notches in the hillside were engineering marvels in 1909, allowing travel along a road above the sandy flood plain. Route 66 is loaded with these trivia tidbits, and it is a road romanticized by almost everyone who speaks of it. But why?
[Unidentified Male:] It sort of represents our collective dreams of the freedom of the road, of automobility, of movement from the industrial heartland to the Pacific shores, to Hollywood.
[Monaghan:] It was 21 feet wide, hundreds of miles long. Kammer calls it "a linear community," a huge step in actually uniting our states. Dan Monaghan, KOAT, Action 7 News.

[Announcer:] From the heart of New York City, this is LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE. Here now, Lou Dobbs.
[Lou Dobbs, Cnn Anchor:] Good evening. In tonight's headlines, stock prices plummet. The Dow hits a one-month low, the Nasdaq drops to a new four-month low. Hurting the Dow and Nasdaq today, the shares of Microsoft. An appellate court rejected Microsoft's bid to delay the remedy portion of the antitrust case against Microsoft. And shares of Ford plunged today, Ford announcing as many as 5,000 layoffs and slashing profit estimates. We'll have complete coverage of what was a very difficult day on Wall Street. Now let's check in with our reporters to see what they're working on. Christine Romans at the New York exchange, Christine.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Correspondent:] Lou, stocks fell at the opening bell and kept going, the Dow down more than 200 points at its low before recovering some of its losses.
[Greg Clarkin, Cnn Correspondent:] And the Nasdaq today hit harder than the Dow, all but nine of the Nasdaq 100 ending the day lower.
[Steve Young, Cnn Correspondent:] A legal setback for Microsoft, the remedy part of the trial will go on without delay.
[Kitty Pilgrim, Cnn Correspondent:] TV networks are pushing the envelope in a quest for ratings, and advertisers are beginning to balk.
[Tim O'brien, Cnn Correspondent:] The dollar has fallen against major foreign currencies for weeks, but U.S. exporters say it is still too strong, putting them at a global disadvantage.
[Fred Katayama, Cnn Correspondent:] Ford cuts thousands of jobs in a bid to make the company more competitive, but Wall Street reacting more to a cut of a different kind. Lou?
[Dobbs:] Fred, thank you. We'll have all of that coming right up for you. Our top story tonight, a dismal day on Wall Street. Stock prices tumbled, closing out a losing week for both the Dow and Nasdaq. Ford today sparked selling in auto stocks, that after Ford said it was slashing jobs and its profit estimates. Microsoft tumbled after an appellate court rejected its request to delay remedy hearings in its antitrust battle. And losses in the four Dow technology stocks and General Motors accounting for 40 percent of the Dow's 151-point loss today. Christine Romans at the New York exchange. Christine.
[Romans:] Lou, it was a bitter end to the trading week, the Dow tripping early in the session and stumbling for most of the day, ending down 151 points, 10,240, the lowest close since July 10. Take a look at the week's performance for some of the major indexes, the Dow down 1.69 percent, the S&P; 500 down better than 2 percent, transports falling more than 1 percent. But look at the small cap Russell 2000, it edges up just slightly. So why the malaise overall on Wall Street? Folks keep looking at those earnings warnings. Today we heard from Ford. Gap beat the Street, but then warned on its current quarter. Scientific Atlanta withdrawing its guidance for the current quarter and the year. And more news of layoffs, companies trimming their work forces. This has sparked worries on the Street. Analog Devices, Accenture, General Semiconductor, Ford, Boeing, of those names, only Accenture moving higher here today, Lou. In fact, you saw losses in financials, retailers, tech names, building products. The only buying anywhere here, gold stocks, chemical stocks, and tobacco stocks. That's defensive. Lou?
[Dobbs:] OK, Christine, thank you. The Nasdaq today falling twice as much as the Dow. It was the worst one-day decline, in fact, for the Nasdaq in more than a month. Greg Clarkin at the Nasdaq. Greg?
[Clarkin:] And Lou, the Nasdaq now closed at 1867. That is the first time it's closed below 1900 since April 11, on the week the Nasdaq losing better than 4.5 percent. And today we saw widespread selling, all the sectors were hit. They were hit extremely hard. Take a look at Dell Computer. It was a catalyst this morning after it issued a profit and sales warning. Dell down sharply on the day. Microsoft down to tech selloff as well as its legal setback, Cisco Systems, Sun Microsystems lost ground as well. Yesterday we saw the chip stocks really kind of ride to the rescue of the Nasdaq. Not the case today. Chip stocks were down, and they stayed down. Applied Materials, Broadcom, KLA-Tencor, and Linear Technologies all down sharply on the day. And Lou, in speaking with traders this week, you really saw a shift from the talk of basically, When will the market rebound? The talk now is, Will the Nasdaq go back to those April 4 lows of 1638? That's really something on everybody's minds at the moment.
[Dobbs:] OK, Greg, and trading light again today. How much weight should we give to these losses, given the low trading volume?
[Clarkin:] You do see sharp, sharp swings in either direction on the low volume, Lou, but still the psychology at this point is incredibly negative. The fact that it wasn't on heavy volume, a lot of folks didn't take a lot of solace there. They still saw widespread selling today on light volume. And either way, this was just not a good session.
[Dobbs:] All right. Thank you, Greg Clarkin. Ford today losing more than $3 billion in market cap, that after announcing as many as 5,000 job cuts. Ford also cut profit estimates dramatically for the full year. This another painful moment for the number two car maker. The Firestone controversy continues. And earlier this week, Ford agreed to settle a massive lawsuit over defective ignitions. Fred Katayama has the story now.
[Katayama:] One of every 10 of these salaried workers at Ford will soon have to clean out their desks. Ford will slash up to 5,000 white collar jobs, mostly through early retirement. That will result in a charge of $700 million in the fourth quarter. Calling it "a necessary action," Ford's CEO, Jack Nasser, said the job cuts will help boost the company's efficiency and make it more competitive. But the cut in jobs was eclipsed by a cut in its outlook. The company warned earnings for the full year would plunge more than 40 percent short of analysts' targets. That caused Ford's stock to skid to a new 52-week low, slamming other car stocks as well.
[Domenic Martilotti, Bear Stearns:] And the other companies are going to come out and say their earnings are going to be weaker than expectations are out there. So this could be the tip of a bunch of preannouncements for the third quarter.
[Katayama:] Ford's sales overall are heading downhill faster than those of its rivals, and it's losing market share as a result, sliding 1.8 percent points over the past year. It slapped incentives to spruce up sales, and those higher marketing costs are also hurting earnings. Expect more restructuring.
[John Casesa, Merrill Lynch:] I think this is the beginning of a process that will probably take a year or more to get this company more competitive for a more difficult environment.
[Katayama:] Standard and Poor's put Ford and GM today on credit watch, indicating a strong possibility it'll lower their debt ratings.
[Dobbs:] Is this an indication, Fred, that we may be seeing a break in the consumer here, suggesting that car sales are going to back off, the consumer retreating a bit?
[Katayama:] Right, Lou. You know, it's been a strong year for the first half of the year so far, but analysts are now fearing that with the rising rate of unemployment and also problems of incomes at the consumer level, that consumers are starting to cut back. And that's why some of those stocks really fell today.
[Dobbs:] And Ford, while they're talking about improving efficiencies and cutting back on their expenses, that's obviously just simply further contraction for this economy to deal with.
[Katayama:] That's right.
[Dobbs:] Fred, thanks. Well, the government today announcing the trade deficit for June widened. Experts exports, rather, hit the lowest level in 16 months. A key reason, the strong dollar, the strong dollar making U.S. products more expensive overseas, of course. And while the dollar has fallen in recent weeks against other currencies, it hasn't fallen enough to satisfy many big internationals. They continue to press the Bush administration for some relief. Tim O'Brien reports from Washington.
[O'brien:] The decline in exports is old news to companies like Dupont, which reported a 2 percent decline in worldwide sales last quarter. Gillette had a 4 percent decline. So did International Paper, export sales down 4 percent. And they all blame the strong dollar. Since 1995, the dollar is up 70 percent against the German mark, 50 percent against the yen, and the resulting drag on exports has left many U.S. companies reeling. Last month, the National Association of Manufacturers urged President Bush "to stop the economic hemorrhaging by acting to ensure that the value of the dollar will be consistent with economic reality and market conditions."
[Dave Huether, National Association Of Manufacturers:] What we've asked so far is just for the administration to recognize that the dollar is overvalued, and that's as far as we've gone at this point.
[O'brien:] Some analysts say even that could be risky, that any administration rhetoric about the dollar being overvalued could trigger a decline that may be hard to control.
[William Dudley, Goldman Sachs:] It's probably too late to scrap the strong dollar policy, because if they were to do so, they might provide a very severe decline in the dollar, which might be worse than the disease, because it could destabilize financial markets.
[O'brien:] But Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill defends U.S. policy on the dollar and had this to say to those complaining about how it affects U.S. competitiveness.
[Paul O'neill, Treasury Secretary:] People who are really good at what they do, they're producing value and don't spend a lot of time haranguing somebody else about why they're not successful. They make themselves successful.
[O'brien:] In his former post as chairman and CEO of another multinational corporation, Alcoa, Paul O'Neill might have viewed the dollar differently. But now he is emphatic. The dollar is strong, it's going to stay that way. Lou?
[Dobbs:] And now we'll see what the markets have to say about that, Tim. Thanks. Tim O'Brien from Washington. Bonds today rallied after the trade deficit numbers were released, and those bond prices moved higher as stock prices on Wall Street tumbled. The 30-year issue up almost a full point in price, while the 10-year had its biggest gain in more than a week. The yield there, 4.94 percent. That is a five-month low. Today's session on Wall Street not a comforting way to go into the weekend, but my guest tonight says investors should take the long view. He sees a strong recovery by the beginning of next year. Chuck Kadlec, strategist at J&W; Seligman, joins us now. Chuck, good to have you with us.
[Chuck Kadlec, J&w; Seligman:] Lou, good to be here.
[Dobbs:] We're sitting here now with new lows. It looks like we're going to very close to testing some new lows in the stock market. Give us some comfort here.
[Kadlec:] Well, what's happening today was in many ways produced by the Federal Reserve policies late last year, certainly not the only thing, but one of the single most important events was the Fed kept interest rates too high too long. As late as December, remember, they thought the economy was too strong. And now, of course, we find out it was already sinking into this dramatic slowdown.
[Dobbs:] Sort of the obligatory boilerplate, always following an FOMC meeting about the persevering in the fight and diligence against inflation. That's sort of gone away. You're right, I mean, do you think that Alan Greenspan has gotten a bit of a free ride here in terms of monetary policy being too strong or too long?
[Kadlec:] He has. He's probably as good as it gets. What it I think today's situation really underlines the debate we're just hearing now again on the dollar's strength, the weakness of the Brazilian real, the current potential currency crisis in Latin America. Once again, it's time to begin an earnest dialogue on restoring a monetary standard for the United States dollar based on a price rule. Here are the benefits. One, inflation, predictably, under 1 percent. Two, low and stable interest rates. For small business, a prime rate of 4.5 percent. For American families, fixed mortgages, 30-year fixed mortgages, under 6. For U.S. corporations, they could borrow 10-year money under 5. This is normal in the United States for periods of peacetime, especially when we're running budget surpluses.
[Dobbs:] Historically.
[Kadlec:] Historically, it's normal, absolutely.
[Dobbs:] In terms of what the Fed has to deal with, in terms of what the Bush administration has to deal with, I think you would agree with me, the price
[Kadlec:] I think they've indicated it's not going to be the first priority. I think the first step would begin to move away from a strong dollar to a strong and stable dollar. It made sense to talk about a strong dollar when we had inflation of 3, 4, or 5 percent. Now as we restore price stability to the U.S. economy, why would you want a strong dollar? That means deflation. What you want is price stability. That would say a strong and stable dollar.
[Dobbs:] In terms of the influence on markets here, Chuck, what do you expect for the market for the next year?
[Kadlec:] Well, there are certain things that are catalysts that can bring us out of these doldrums. First, better monetary policy. The Fed has begun to ease. We do see some relief of the dollar pressure and commodity prices. This is pivotal.
[Dobbs:] Right.
[Kadlec:] Second, we will get another tax rate reduction on January 1 of 2002. It's modest, but it's in a positive direction. Third, the decline of the price of oil, of course, in the price of gasoline helps American consumers. So I think you're going to see the economy begin to show some recovery in the latter part of the third quarter, more evidence of recovery in the fourth quarter, better than 50-50 chance we can be at growth rates above 3 percent again sometime during the first half of next year.
[Dobbs:] And, of course, the Bush administration calling for that now, after having revised lower their growth estimates for this year. The market, the stock market, an intelligent place to be as an investor right now?
[Kadlec:] Long term, I think this is an enormous buying opportunity for people who are investing for the next two to five years, at a minimum. You know, it's not a heroic assumption to get back to 3 percent growth. If you just stop the inventory correction, if you just stop the decline in capital spending and keep it at today's lower levels, you quickly get above 3 percent growth rates.
[Dobbs:] When you stop when, as you put it, stop the inventory correction, once we work through that inventory correction, I don't think we want to stop it quite yet, do we?
[Kadlec:] Well, we want to work through it. So companies again produce as much as they sell. That alone would add 1 percent to growth rates. But the longer term view for the U.S. economy is strong. What we're going through is one of these cases where U.S. monetary policy purposefully attacked our prosperity and our growth.
[Dobbs:] Right.
[Kadlec:] So what Alan Greenspan said, he said he was going to bring it to a stop, he did. Now he's trying to undo the damage that he visited upon our portfolios.
[Dobbs:] Are you ready for a little irrational exuberance?
[Kadlec:] I'd just settle for some positive growth and reasonable market valuations, absolutely.
[Dobbs:] Yes, Chuck, thank you very much for being with us.
[Kadlec:] Good to be here, Lou.
[Dobbs:] Appreciate it. Well, Microsoft today lost another court battle. An appellate court decision means the remedy part of the antitrust trial against Microsoft will resume in September. A new judge to take over that case could be named by the end of this month. Steve Young with a report.
[Young:] Instead of heeding Microsoft's request that it put a lower court on a leash, the court of appeals put Microsoft in its place. And that's squarely back before the district court, before the Supreme Court decides in October whether to consider Microsoft's complaint that district court judge Thomas Penfield Jackson was biased and his entire antitrust ruling against the company should be thrown out. The court of appeals said Microsoft misconstrued its legal burden and failed to demonstrate the harm of returning the case to the district court in seven days.
[Harvey Saferstein, Mintz Levin:] In effect, what it's doing is lobbying that Supreme Court, saying, Microsoft is just dead wrong about what we did, and here's the reasons why they're wrong.
[Young:] Soon after the case returns to the district court, a new judge will be appointed, the third after Stanley Sporkin and Penfield Jackson, to hear more testimony about how to rein in the company found guilty of abusing its Windows monopoly, and to consider other charges. A Justice Department spokesman said, "We are pleased" with the court of appeals decision. A Microsoft spokesman said the company regrets it but is "prepared to move ahead." What Microsoft is really keen to move ahead with is its scheduled October 25 launch of Windows XP, its most important operating system in six years. The federal government and 18 states suing Microsoft haven't ruled out trying to get an injunction or temporary restraining order against the controversial product.
[Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut Attorney General:] We need to develop a strategy that offers consumers the most immediate kind of remedy to the monopolistic power that Microsoft has misused, and to prevent Microsoft from repeating what seems to be the same kind of misconduct.
[Young:] The latest setback puts more pressure on Microsoft to seek a negotiated settlement, but the company and prosecutors won't say if settlement talks are now under way. Lou?
[Dobbs:] Why not?
[Young:] Well, they say that doesn't serve the talks.
[Dobbs:] The purpose of settlement.
[Young:] That's right.
[Dobbs:] Should that be, a talk is under way?
[Young:] Microsoft also has one last Hail Mary, as the antitrust lawyers say. They could try to hunt down William Rehnquist on the Supreme Court for a stay. But that's very unlikely.
[Dobbs:] All right. Terrific. Steve, thank you. Steve Young. Well, straight ahead here on MONEYLINE, U.S. troops joining in that battle against the wildfires raging in the Western states. We'll let you know tonight if there is any relief in sight. And the Windward Islands catching something of a break. But now the tropical storm Chantal is bearing down on Jamaica. Another shark attack in the Bahamas, we'll have the latest for you on what's been a summer of shark scares. And Steve Fossett's quest for world records in ballooning has ended. We'll tell you why he didn't make it all the way around the world. And a guest who says there's a nuclear bomb lurking off the course of Georgia, and a congressman who says he's wrong. They'll be here to discuss the issue.

[Jeff Greenfield:] Tonight, a Taliban American is heading for the courtroom. And then, Enron's melted down and probably so has the value of your stock holdings. Now that most of us are giving up the dream of easy money, will we start hating the rich? Tonight on GREENFIELD AT LARGE. We're going to spend most of our program talking about whether the rich are about to become an endangered species, politically speaking. But first, late this afternoon, Attorney General John Ashcroft filed federal criminal charges against John Walker, that could result in life imprisonment.
[John Ashcroft, Attorney General:] The complaint alleges Walker knowingly and purposely allied himself with certain terrorist organizations with terror, that he chose to embrace fanatics. And his allegiance to those fanatics and terrorists never faltered, not even with the knowledge that they had murdered thousands of his countrymen.
[Greenfield:] Joining me now to talk about the legal hurdles that John Walker, and for that matter, the government may face, Jonathan Turley, law professor at George Washington University Law School who has defended clients in national security and espionage cases. Speaking of which, Professor Turley, suppose your phone rings tonight. And it's someone from the Walker family. And they say OK, you're going to rep our client if you so choose. You've read the complaint, where are the vulnerabilities?
[Jonathan Turley, George Washington Law School:] Well, there are vulnerabilities, Jeff, is that these charges are based in large part on his statements. Now the Attorney General calls those voluntary statements. The defense attorney's likely to argue that they were not voluntary. The question is whether, when he gave these statements, he had lawfully and willfully waived his rights, his Miranda rights. He waived his right to speak to an attorney. Many people criticized the government for not allowing the attorney retained by the family to speak to Mr. Walker, that's going to be a very early fight. And the outcome of that fight could determine the outcome of these charges.
[Greenfield:] Well, some of the evidence in the complaint comes from, in fact, a CNN tape, an interview with Walker, when at first he said, "Don't tape me." Now the CNN tape isn't a police interrogation. Is that inadmissible? Could that be challenged?
[Turley:] Well, it can be challenged, but it is not challenged on the same grounds. You're absolutely right. When CNN interviews someone, they don't have to give Miranda. And so, when you make a statement to CNN, it can be very much admissible. It's usually admitted, not directly as evidence, but to rebut the testimony of someone. One of the greatest problems for Mr. Walker is that even if he gets this stuff kept out, even if he gets his statements kept out, the CNN tape kept out, it's still means he can't take the stand. Because when you make statements like that, the government just waits for you to get on the stand, asks you a question, you answer it, and they say: Your honor, I now want to introduce the CNN tape, to show this guy is lying. Yet, you're not introducing it for the evidence. You're interested to show that he's lying.
[Greenfield:] Now on a much more fundamental level, Jonathan, this guy was captured fighting with the guys, fighting against us. Now it seems to me that that's a pretty even a fine lawyer such as yourself might find that a pretty large hurdle to leap?
[Turley:] Yes. No, this is not exactly the world's best defense case. You know, Mr. Walker has some serious problems, including the company that he kept. And there's no question that he is going to face serious questions about giving material support to a terrorist organization, possible transaction violations. Those type of charges are usually what are called "safety net" charges. And if the jury is a little bit worried about the conspiracy to kill Americans, it gives them two very easy fall back charges that they could go to. I think it's very likely he will be convicted of one of these. They also pick a very conservative court, the eastern district of Virginia. And that is the prosecutor's favorite court.
[Greenfield:] Right.
[Turley:] And you know, if he's going to be convicted anywhere, it'll be in the eastern district.
[Greenfield:] Why no treason charge?
[Turley:] That is a very interesting question. Now according to Attorney General Ashcroft, it's because the Constitution requires two witnesses. I find that a little bit hard to believe, quite frankly. I would think that Afghanistan right now is something of a buyer's market for witnesses. But I think the main problem is that treason charges, to prove them, require certain element of clarity, not just legally, but factually. And there's a lack of clarity here. You know, we were trying to get the Taliban to join us. Many Taliban units ultimately did switch sides. And it's that problem of clarity that could make a treason charge very difficult. And it could also really focus attention at the fact that we have never had a formal declaration of war.
[Greenfield:] Right.
[Turley:] Something the administration has tried to avoid.
[Greenfield:] The complaint alleges that Walker was part of a group that met with Osama bin Laden, although for five minutes. Is that in I mean, if you were Walker's lawyer, would you challenge that on the question is this too inflammatory?
[Turley:] You would definitely challenge it. I mean, that's right up there with pulling a severed head out of a duffel bag. It's one of those things where regardless of what value it is as evidence, that jury's not going to forget it. And you're going to challenge it. But the problem is there is a nexus here. The government's going to argue, well now come on, the guy's the head of a terrorist organization. And he gives an "atta- boy" to this guy. Now that suggests something of a nexus to a terrorist organization. That's going to be one of those issues they fight about, Jeff. And it's one of those issues the defense is really going to get hurt by, if that statement gets in court.
[Greenfield:] Lastly, you mentioned the district where this case is being brought as a prosecutor's dream. But given the publicity in this case, the "Newsweek" proclaims him American Taliban, where does John Walker go to get a fair trial or an unbiased jury in this country?
[Turley:] Well, you're right. I mean, that's going to be very, difficult. And that's what makes it so important to do voir dire, the selection of jurors. And to really try to get jurors to keep an open mind. But people would be surprised. American jurors really are very fair and taking their jobs very seriously. And I think you can get a fair trial in the eastern district. It's just the defense will have a very steep hill to climb.
[Greenfield:] OK, Professor Turley, thank you very much for joining us. Appreciate it.
[Turley:] Thanks, Jeff.
[Greenfield:] When we come back, is it OK to start hating the rich? Stay with us. Maybe you heard about this story out of Boston, two doctors have come up with a nifty way to give patients the care and attention they want. They'll provide their cell phone numbers, personal
[Franklin D. Roosevelt, Fmr. President Of The United States:] This great nation will endure.
[Greenfield:] In his inaugural address at the depth of the Great Depression in 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt proclaimed that the money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization, and promised to apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit. Harry Truman, in his 1948 campaign, cheerfully bashed the barons of Wall Street. And during a battle with U.S. Steel, John Kennedy reported snapped: My father told me all businessmen were SOBs, but I never believed him until now. But note, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, JFK, were all themselves men of substantial wealth, who nonetheless won the votes of the poor and the middle classes, nor did their political views keep them from enjoying the privileges of the wealthy. Indeed, in part because prosperity in America has been spread across a broad middle class, Americans are as likely to admire the rich, as to scorn them. In fact, when Senator George McGovern proposed a stiff inheritance tax on the wealthy during his 1972 presidential campaign, he found that factory workers in New Hampshire attacked the idea. Maybe because they dreamed that someday, their children might grow rich. And so, our highly successful business people have become folk heroes of the sort. Chrysler's Lee Iacocca was a businessman hero 20 years ago. Amazon.com's Jeff Bezos was "Time" magazine's man of the year in 1999. GE's Jack Welch was all but buried under an avalanche of favorable press clips. And that may help explain why taking on the rich can often be risky political business. While consumer advocate Ralph Nader became a national figure by tangling with General Motors back in the 1960s, his independent presidential campaign in 2000 couldn't draw even five percent of the vote.
[Al Gore, Fmr. Vice President:] It's time to fight for people and not the powerful.
[Greenfield:] And some Democrats argued that Al Gore's populist rhetoric in the 2000 campaign hurt more than it helped.
[Rick Macarthur, Harper's Magazine:] Well, if it's done in private, so to speak, and it doesn't turn into a sort of a mad house of spend thrift conceit, then yeah, my you can get away with it. My grandfather used to say: Pigs get fed. Hogs get slaughtered. And what he was getting at was that if you are successful in business and you want to stay successful and keep your money, you shouldn't get too greedy, as in the case of these Enron types. Although, that doesn't get at the question of what you're intro talked about, which is why the American people don't resent it more when the rich get too greedy. And for that, I think you have to go right to your question of class. The American people have always assumed, generally correctly, that we don't have a class system in this society. We don't have a certainly don't have a hereditary aristocracy.
[Greenfield:] If I may, Michael Kelly, it seems to me one of the reasons why wealthy people often do very well in politics, I mean you've got the Kennedys, the Rockefellers, the Bushes, the Roosevelts, is that people also believe if you're wealthy enough, you're not going to steal.
[Michael Kelly, Editor, The Atlantic Monthly:] I think that's part of it. And I think that Rick's point is a very large part of it. This from this country's inception, it was in this way obviously different from England from France. They're isn't hundreds of years of rigidly enforced, entrenched hereditary class. So that there is this thing from the beginning, this ambivalence towards the rich. On the one hand, we've always there's never been a time when it's not been fashionable to hate them, to whack the rich. But on the other hand, there's always been a kind of sense of, compared to Europe at least, of make believe or theater about it. There's a kind of lovely symbiotic relationship. We get to whack the rich, and the rich get to be rich. It sort of works out for everybody.
[Greenfield:] Then, James Glassman, one of the things that struck me was, in that example I gave at the outset, that when George McGovern proposed a stiff inheritance tax above, I think, a couple of million dollars, it was blue collar people who said, "Wait a second. You know, it's going to deprive my kids of their opportunity." And yet, I believe, it was Andrew Carnegie, not exactly at the end of his life a person of modest means, who proposed at some level 100 percent inheritance tax. His view was you can live as well as you want during your lifetime, but at the end of your life, everybody should get to the same starting line again. There's never been much appetite for that in this country, has there?
[James Glassman, Syndicated Columnist:] No. But we see this all the time. Remember during the proposed Bush tax reforms, there was a group of very rich Americans who stood up and said, "No, no, no, we have to keep the inheritance tax." Whereas 71 percent of Americans want to get rid of the estate tax. Frequently you find the rich, who may well be feel guilty about the money that they make, in the forefront of these kinds of, sort of, socialistic kinds of ideas, these leveling sorts of ideas. Well, whereas most Americans feel that in fact, they can become rich themselves, because we live in an open society.
[Greenfield:] Go ahead.
[Macarthur:] You have to be careful when you say most Americans, because most Americans is a little vague. I mean, most Americans don't know how they get conned by the stock touts and the Enron types, who take their money and run.
[Glassman:] I think that your view is
[Macarthur:] Most Americans are unaware of you know, you look, the American dream is to get rich quick. I think we'll all agree on that. That's one of the American dreams anyway.
[Glassman:] I wouldn't agree with that.
[Macarthur:] For many Americans, it's getting rich quick is and taking short cuts is an admired path to success. But if you look at a guy like Henry Blodgett, for example, who started out his career as a not very good proofreader at Harper's Magazine and went on to tout worthless Internet stocks at Merrill Lynch, you have to ask yourself, how do these people become created? How do they make a fortune? And really, do most Americans, as you say, really know that Henry Blodgett doesn't know anything about stocks or business or anything until after they've lost their money?
[Glassman:] Well
[Greenfield:] James, let me just zero in on this question. You know, it seems to me, whenever I look at the lines at the lottery sales, when the lottery gets to about $20 million, you have to certainly acknowledge that the idea of putting away money for 20 years is a way of getting rich has certainly been supplanted by a kind of, if not a lottery scheme, then the whole idea that you could get a lot of money accumulated in a bull market very quickly. The question is, is this real? Is it realistic to believe that people can aspire to the dream of great wealth on a mass basis?
[Glassman:] It is absolutely realistic to believe that people can aspire to great wealth on a mass basis. And it is not realistic to believe that most Americans think, or even a small minority, or a large minority of Americans believe that the road to riches is buying a lottery ticket that pays off. Look, half of Americans today are in the stock market. 40 percent of them have 401 [k] plans, which require them to accumulate wealth. And they can't even take it out until they're 59.5.
[Greenfield:] All right, now
[Glassman:] The idea really for America is not Henry Blodgett, it is Robert Johnson, the head of BET, Black Entertainment Television, one of 10 kids, the only one who went to college, put up $15,000 in 1979 and became a billionaire.
[Greenfield:] Now Michael
[Glassman:] People know that story. That's an American story.
[Greenfield:] Michael, if I may, Michael Kelly
[Kelly:] Yes?
[Greenfield:] I want to bring you in as a political with your political columnist hat. If in the 1990s, I can certainly understand how people could believe, you know, that everybody was going to get richer. Is it your sense, whether you think it's right or not, that in a time when people are watching their 401 [k] s plummet in value, and seen stories like Enron, and other companies, where workers are really, you know, on the short end of the stick, do you think that is going to feed the idea that maybe there's something that this is like a crooked roulette wheel, rather than a system in which everyone can prosper?
[Kelly:] I don't think so. I think that you look at something like Enron. And I think most people, and Rick Macarthur is right, that most people is a tricky phrase to toss around. But with the evidence as they are now, we'll probably look at that and say, "Well, it certainly seems like scandalous behavior on the part of some people in that country. And let's hang him high." You know, let's whack him, let's get him, let's put some people in jail. I don't know that there's any direct translation at all to the political process at large. I do think there has been a long change in sort of the ethos of being rich, a kind of disappearance of the magnificent ambros in model of which that Rick was talking about the patriarchal rich, who had a certain sense of aristocratic responsibility. We're not going to flaunt it too much, get too rich. We haven't seen anything like that in the last 20 years. It's been fabulous ostentation. So I'm and there hasn't been any resentment of it at all, that I can see on any mass level. Certainly Pat Buchanan couldn't find it. Ross Perot couldn't find it. Jesse Jackson couldn't find it. I don't know that anybody will find it right away.
[Greenfield:] All right, I need to take a break here. We're going to have more of our conversation after this. We're back. And we're talking about whether the rich are or should be becoming targets of opportunity, political and otherwise. With columnist and "Atlantic" magazine editor, Michael Kelly. With journalist and author John Rick Macarthur, publisher of "Harper's" magazine. And with business columnist and author James Glassman. Rick Macarthur, here's a question that I often struggle with. OK, if you're rich, we know you're going to have some things that most people can't. You're going to be able to buy $100,000 car if you're that rich, live in a fancy house, buy nice clothes. But at what point does was what you get for being rich bother your sense of justice? Better health care, better schools? You can charter an airplane. Nobody particularly may mind that, but do you get to charter the airplane if it keeps a whole of bunch of commercial flights, in which regular people are flying in, delayed on the ground? How do you draw a line like that?
[Macarthur:] I think the only place the line gets drawn in this country is when it starts to cost other people money on a grand scale. I think the American people are remarkably tolerant of private planes. Because as we said, we said, we're repeating ourselves now. They would love to have a private plane themselves. And they think, well, if the guy worked hard enough and could afford to buy a private plane, that's fine, even if they didn't work very hard. Even if they inherited the money or they got it on insider stock information. They made their money that way, which happens all the time and doesn't get talked about. Where it really starts to upset people, and where it is a political issue and could be exploited by politicians is when it really starts to cost people money. You know, I talked to somebody today, works for the University of California, the new pension manager at University at Berkeley, decided to buy Enron stock two years ago. That was worth $68 million. Now it's worth $300,000. People's livelihoods and retirements are at stake here. And it is a politically explosive issue. But as far as ostentation goes that we were talking about, in fact, I think people get a vicarious thrill from it. We celebrate money in this country. We celebrate the rich. We idealized them. And we ascribe wisdom to them that they don't possess, simply be because they're rich.
[Greenfield:] Mr. Glassman, focus in on this question because one of the favorite phrases of a lot of conservatives is the warning against class warfare. But is it ever appropriate to go to war, or at least to combat let's say class terrorism. That is, is there a point at which what people do with a great deal of money begins in Rick's notion, to directly hurt other people?
[Glassman:] Well, I think it certainly can. And I don't think there's any group of people in the world more conscious of that, than Americans. I mean, part of the American ethic is not just that you can get rich starting off poor, but that when you do get rich, you have a lot of obligations to the rest of society. And you know, we have, traditional in this country, like no other country in the world of philanthropy. So I do think there is a it's hard to say where to draw the line. But I think that there is a line and it is generally, in fact, drawn. And the amount of money that's given away in this country is quite remarkable.
[Macarthur:] Given away to what? You got to be more specific.
[Glassman:] Given away well, I can be very specific. Well, I don't know about, you know, you do with your money that you inherited, but you know, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's done a tremendous job in Africa and in other countries, fighting disease. Certainly there are good things that are done with the money and there are bad things that are done with the money. But the notion that we started with it, Americans for some reason, now hate the rich, I think is absurd.
[Greenfield:] No, it was a question rather than a statement. Jim, it was a question, not a statement.
[Glassman:] OK, well, my answer is that they don't.
[Greenfield:] I got you. If I could bring in I need to bring in Michael Kelly for...
[Michael Kelly:] There's a I wanted to pick up on this thought. The whole idea, I think of hating the rich or hating the upper class or the top class. The problem with it, in this country, is that there isn't a homogeneous rich that you could hate or homogeneous upper class that you can hate. In England, raised in England. You could say well, "there is a land owning hereditary class that makes it it's business, though government, through law, to keep everybody else in their proper places. You can define that class. You can define what they do. And there's a target there that is clear. Here, what is the rich? What is the upper class. Katie Couric, is in it? Sean Puff Daddy Combs is in it. And the chairman of Enron is in it. And so are, you know, 10,000 people, you don't know their names, who live in mega mansions all over the country.
[Unidentified Male:] Or who
[Kelly:] It's not group or who don't.
[Glassman:] You know, there's a rat book on this. "The Millionaire next door, where they actually surveyed millions. And what they found was millionaires basically are people who started small businesses, most of them incredibly boring. 80 percent of them had no inherited wealth. They're just basically hard working people.
[Kelly:] And I think Americans will get very historically, have got very angry at rich people or mega rich people that they think are doing the rest of the country dirty.
[Greenfield:] OK.
[Kelly:] But that's not a class.
[Greenfield:] Rick, this, it seems to me, a rather important point, that the combination of upward mobility in this country, where you can be rich if you'd be perfect. You'd be poor if you were rich.
[Macarthur:] Right.
[Greenfield:] That has a lot to do with maybe why they're isn't as class-based politics here as in other places.
[Macarthur:] Right, and there are spectacular examples. As everyone knows, I profile one in my book. A Jack Linsky, who invite the Swing line stapler fortune. He came as a poor immigrant from Russia and ended up owning Lewis 14th chairs and so on in his apartment on Fifth Avenue. We all know these stories. But what we're not talking about here is the public relations gloss that gets added to the rich, once they become rich. They, as I said earlier, are given powers, way beyond. Powers of philanthropy, as you suggested or goodness that just doesn't exist. A lot of philanthropy is just public relations. John D. Rockefeller started it when Ivy Lee, his public relations agent, told them to start going around handing out dimes.
[Greenfield:] Can I ask you, since we're down to our last 20 seconds, do you think it'll be a good idea to adopt some version of Andrew Carnegie's notion and tax back the great bulk of wealth
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, yes. I'm all for a very steeply graduated inheritance tax that hits everybody the same.
[Greenfield:] I've got about 30 seconds.
[Glassman:] Sure.
[Greenfield:] I take it this is not on an idea, an appeals to you?
[Glassman:] Not that much, but I got to say on the top of my list for tax cuts is cutting tax rates. It's not getting rid of the inheritance tax. All I'm saying is three-quarters of Americans want to get rid of the inheritance tax. There's a social reason for that.
[Greenfield:] All right, Michael Kelly, you've got a 10-second response to this idea?
[Mccann:] Well, I think I'm like most Americans. So it depends how much I make it before I die.
[Greenfield:] Theogenes you can stop. We found a genuinely honest man. James Glassman, Michael Kelly, Rick Macarthur. Thank you very much for joining us. I appreciate it. A rich conversation. I'm Jeff Greenfield. Thanks for watching.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Election 2000 rolls on, and from the Buckeye state, one of several states taking part in Election 2000 come Super Tuesday four days away. Ohio is the third-largest state voting on that date, and a boatload of delegate up for grabs. For the Democrats on Tuesday: 1,315 delegates; that's more than 60 percent needed for the nomination. It's a similar story for the Republicans: 605 delegates up for grabs for the Republicans. Again, that is close to 60-percent needed for that nomination. Specifically in Ohio, the delegate count stacks up like this: 146 for the Democrats, 67 for the Republicans. It is winner-take-all. Meanwhile, on the topic of the Republicans, last night all three candidates did engage in a debate you saw live here on CNN. In Los Angeles two were there in person, one was there electronically. Jennifer Auther has a look back at last night.
[Jennifer Auther, Cnn Correspondent:] The candidates told the audience they wanted to debate the issues, but where there were issues the sabers were drawn. On campaign finance reform
[Sen. John Mccain , Presidential Candidate:] Governor Bush just said that he wants unlimited contributions from individuals. Maybe that explains why there have been the sleepovers in Austin at the governor's mansion by the Pioneers.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] You talk a lot about the iron triangle, and you're ringing it like a dinner bell with all those fundraisers and lobbyists in Washington,
[D.c. Auther:] Former U.S. Ambassador Alan Keyes called that frontrunner banter hypocrisy.
[Alan Keyes , Presidential Candidate:] They've shoveled the money in their mouths hand over fist, then walk into the arena professing to be shocked at the discovery that it's there.
[Auther:] Arizona Senator John McCain denied labeling George W. Bush as anti-Catholic following the Texas governor's visit to Bob Jones University in South Carolina. Among other things, the campus prohibits interracial dating.
[Mccain:] We wanted to tell people exactly what Governor Bush had done. He was there and waited three weeks before he repudiated it.
[Bush:] If you don't think those phone calls labeled me an anti- Catholic bigot, then you weren't paying attention to what your campaign was putting out, I guess.
[Auther:] Both bush and McCain went after the ClintonGore administration's foreign policy, specifically Taiwan's battle for independence from China. But it was Keyes who lobbed the strongest attack against Clinton when asked if he'd credit the president for a strong economy and a drop in crime.
[Keyes:] You don't give to a shameless, lying, oath-breaking president any kind of credit for an improvement in the nation's moral atmosphere, which he as polluted.
[Question:] Which of these two gentlemen is better equipped to carry your message?
[Keyes:] Well, that's a...
[Auther:] Keyes also said neither Bush nor McCain could win in November, but obviously McCain and Bush disagree. George W. Bush so far is leading in the polls among the Republican candidates for the nomination, and only the Republican registered voters in California count toward delegate allocation in this state. There are 162 delegates from California, it is a winner- take-all state. In the new open primary, independents and Democrats can cast their vote for McCain, but it will only count towards a beauty contest. Going to toss it back now to Bill in Cleveland.
[Hemmer:] Jennifer, before we let you go, quite obvious, there, Alan Keyes, George W. Bush in person there at the "L.A. Times" building in downtown Los Angeles. Did it hurt John McCain, though, not to be there in person and to show up by way of satellite?
[Auther:] Well, I can tell you what the pundits say. The pundits say that poor California Republican voters really need to feel at home with John McCain. They just don't know him very well, and I think that the pundits are feeling as though if he had a stronger presence here he might do better. But again, the only the registered Republicans will be counting toward a delegate allocation, so if a California voter wanted to cast their vote for McCain and they happen to be independent or they happen to be a Democrat, they would have had to reregistered as a Republican one month before the March 7th Super Tuesday Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right. Interesting on Tuesday. Jennifer Auther, live in Los Angeles. With the Republicans: 162 delegates at state at stake there, rather, in the Golden State.

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Anchor:] Larry, thank you. It wasn't breakfast without you today. Thank you very much. Good evening again everyone. We had an interesting debate around our offices today. It centered around Dr. Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech. Most of you know the sound bytes from the speech. I suspect many of you can quote them. One phone company actually uses part of the speech in an ad. Goodness. Anyway, the debate centered around how much of the speech to play tonight. The speech runs about 16 minutes and 49 seconds. In TV news terms, that is a lifetime. The average sound byte these days is eight seconds, so a speech that's 16 minutes and 49 seconds equals about 126 sound bytes, if you follow my logic. Now the sound bytes became eight seconds because people who claim to know you really well decided that's what you want. No one will admit that's what they want, of course, but then no one admits they really like car chases either or Gary Condit, and no one admitted watching the Simpson trial. So maybe those smart people really do know what they're talking about. We'll find out tonight, because we're going to run the whole speech. I wasn't sure we should, and then I listened to it and watched it, and so that's what we're going to do, but it's Segment 7. We begin with the issue of the treatment of the detainees. Bob Franken begins our whip around the world, the correspondents covering it. Bob is in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba again. Bob, a headline.
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] Aaron, the detainee population continues to grow. So does the controversy over their treatment. We'll report on all of that, plus show you some remarkable new video of Camp X-Ray at night.
[Brown:] Bob, thank you. We'll be back with you. The reaction to what's going on in Guantanamo from Havana is an intriguing one from Fidel Castro. CNN's Lucia Newman is with us from Havana tonight. Lucia, a headline from you please.
[Lucia Newman, Cnn Correspondent:] Good evening, Aaron. Well, it probably falls into the believe-it-or-not category. Washington's old Cold War adversary, Cuba, is not jumping up and down about the arrival of al Qaeda and Taliban prisoners. On the contrary, it's actually offering the help the Americans on the U.S. Naval Base in Guantanamo.
[Brown:] Well, we'll check back. I didn't hear it. Perhaps we got it. We'll find out when we get there again. In any case, we didn't lie when we said this is a whip around the world. We're going to Rwanda next, a frightening scene for the survivors of a volcanic eruption last week. Cross our fingers, and ask Catherine Bond for a headline please. Catherine.
[Catherine Bond, Cnn Correspondent:] Aaron, yes tens of thousands of Congolese families have gone back into the town of Goma and that despite that there's still a river of lava that's flowing through it. It's got a hardened, blackened crust and they're walking across it. But underneath that, there's still a red-hot molten lava flow that's going into the nearby Lake Hebrew. So tens of thousands of families going back and that's what we're going to be reporting on. Aaron.
[Brown:] Back with all of you in a moment. Also coming up on NEWSNIGHT, we'll look at the hidden costs of securing an American icon. Actually, it's not hidden at all. A lot of security can turn even a beautiful building into a bit of an eyesore. It's happened at your capitol in Washington, D.C. and we'll look at the efforts going on there. Also tonight, a look at history and integrity. If Stephen Ambrose borrowed phrases from other historians, should his books be pulled from classrooms? We'll talk tonight with one historian who says yes, and let's just say he knows the details of the Ambrose case all too well. All of that just ahead, but we begin with the detainees, the pictures of them, and how differently people are seeing their story. Well, we understand the desire to keep this one simple. They are evil, so who really cares anyway. We submit tonight, it is a tougher question than that. What are they? Should they be treated as prisoners of war? Should they be given the protections of the Geneva Convention? It exists for a reason. Does the country's treatment of these men set up future American POWs for something worse, and then the country would find it has less of a moral leg to stand on when it protests. And why are people overseas, people who also fear terrorists, upset? And why is a lawsuit about to be filed to get these men in Cuba lawyers and have them hear what charges they face? And the list goes on. So we have three reports tonight, beginning with Barbara Starr at the Pentagon.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Correspondent:] It is these pictures showing detainees on their knees, shackled and eyes covered, that has sparked and international controversy, forcing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to defend the U.S. against criticisms of inhumane treatment.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary:] We know they're not coming from people who are knowledgeable. That's clear, because the treatment has been certainly appropriate.
[Starr:] The Pentagon says the detainees are getting culturally appropriate meals, medical treatment, and are allowed to pray. A Muslim cleric will now visit Camp X-Ray. A sign has been posted, showing them which way to turn to Mecca at prayer time. The detainees are classified as unlawful combatants, not officially prisoners of war. The Pentagon says that is because the Taliban and al Qaeda are more terrorists than soldiers. Still, the U.S. legal position is that they are being treated in most instances as if they were POWs under the Geneva Conventions. But critics say the Bush Administration is playing nothing more than a world game.
[William Schulz, Amnesty International:] If it walks like a war, talks like a war, sounds like a war, has been called a war by the President and every network in the United States, then there might be reason to believe that those who have been taken into custody as a result of military action are, indeed, prisoners of war.
[Starr:] Amnesty International has expressed concern over the cells in which the detainees are being held, 8 X 8 chain link fence units, which some call cages. Many are waiting to see the results of the current inspection by the international committee of the Red Cross.
[Michael Noone, Catholic University Law Professor:] If the Red Cross says that these measures are not appropriate under the circumstances, the U.S. has a major problem, not that a court can intervene, but simply that there will be a general consensus that what the U.S. is doing is wrong.
[Starr:] The detainees now will be interrogated to see what they may know about future terrorist attacks or the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden. After that, they could face a military tribunal, the U.S. Criminal Court System, or deportation back to their countries. Some could be held indefinitely. On Tuesday, a Federal judge will consider a petition by former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and other civil rights advocates, challenging the government and demanding that the detainees be brought before a court to face specific charges. Barbara Starr, CNN, the Pentagon.
[Brown:] So that's the overview. CNN's Bob Franken was there when the first prisoners landed. He's back in Guantanamo tonight with another view, an exclusive view of their arrival. Bob, good evening again.
[Franken:] This is the first televised look at Camp X-Ray at night, but it's as bright as day. Intense floodlights make it look like a sports stadium. But this is no game of course. Day and night, the detainees will live under bright lights, so their every move can be monitored 24 hours a day. They spend almost all their time in 8 x 8 foot cells, which are slabs of concrete and a roof, surrounded by chain link fence. No one seems to know exactly why it's called Camp X-Ray, but it's been called that, at least since the Cuban and Haitian detainees were here in the mid-'90s. It's an apt name now. Security officials can look into the dismal lives of their inmates constantly.
[Brigadier General Michael Lehnert, Commander, Task Force 160:] These individuals are dangerous people. They have taken up arms. They were captured on the battlefield. They were brought here, and we start out by showing them that we are actually in charge, and then begin slowly to relax the conditions, based upon the, you know, their own behavior.
[Franken:] This is also the first independently shot video that shows the newly-arrived detainees being processed. Still disoriented from the long flight around the world, they are forced through a thorough processing, everything from medical exams to complete searches, and identification.
[Lehnert:] The detainees themselves spend about 45 minutes in that particular compound. By the time they've been showered, they take their goggles off. The shackles are removed as soon as they get into the cell. None of the detainees are shackled in the cell. Their eyes, they're allowed to see whatever they need to see, but the reason we keep their blindfolds on for the movement across the base, is just to make sure that they don't know exactly where they are in comparison to the rest of the base.
[Franken:] The newest group to arrive is being handled in a somewhat different fashion. Many came in on stretchers and will require immediate medical care before they too take up life here at Camp X-Ray. The detainees who arrived today came on stretchers. They will be processed. Meanwhile, American officials say that they're doing the best they can to provide humane treatment, in light of the fact that so many of the detainees are desperate to kill Americans. Aaron.
[Brown:] Bob, quickly, why did they let you get a little closer with the camera today? Any idea?
[Franken:] A very specific reason, we asked.
[Brown:] Doesn't get better than that, does it? Thank you. We'll keep that in mind for the next time. Just ask. There's no shortage of irony in where these detainees are being held, of course. The base at Guantanamo is surrounded by a minefield that was laid by the Cuban Army, not to keep the American prisoners in, but to keep Cubans from fleeing to Guantanamo. So you might think Fidel Castro would be all too eager to stir the pot a bit here. Admit it, it's nice when things aren't predictable sometimes. Once again, here's CNN's Lucia Newman.
[Newman:] From the outside looking in, Cuban soldiers observe every move inside Guantanamo Naval Base. But instead of jumping up and down with anger, Cuba is actually seeing the arrival of Taliban and al Qaeda prisoners as a golden opportunity to improve relations with Washington. In a meeting with CNN, President Fidel Castro bent over backwards to explain that Havana is serious about fighting terrorism, even though Washington has refused to take Cuba off its list of nations that sponsor it. "Cuba would never allow its territory to be used to launch any acts of terrorism against the United States or any other country" said Castro. Earlier, the President's younger brother, Defense Minister Raul Castro, was asked in Guantanamo what he'd do if any al Qaeda or Taliban prisoners escaped into Cuba. "They'd be captured and our government informed," he said. "Then I can tell you that we would hand them back to the Americans." Cuba has also offered medical and sanitation services to the Guantanamo base, this at a time when a revolving door of Congressman, Senators, businessmen and other influential Americans have been visiting Cuba, almost all of them anxious to begin normalizing relations with the only communist nation in the hemisphere.
[Ricardo Alarcon, President, Cuba's National Assembly:] What should happen is that
[Newman:] A long shot. Nevertheless, Cuba remains cautiously optimistic as it continues to court American lawmakers and especially public opinion, this in the hope of changing not only the tone, but especially the essence of relations with its old enemy, the United States. Aaron.
[Brown:] Lucia, is it being widely reported in Cuba that the detainees are there and what are you hearing when you wander around the streets of Havana?
[Newman:] It has been reported. At first it wasn't, but eventually it was and it's been given ample coverage, especially the comments by the Defense Minister Raul Castro. I must say though, most ordinary Cubans just don't get it. They don't understand. After 40 years of antagonism, why now it's a good idea for these guys to be here in Guantanamo? Aaron.
[Brown:] Lucia, thank you. Lucia Newman in Havana tonight. Progress to report in the case against the accused shoe bomber, Richard Reid. Thanks to a quirk of high technology, it is almost impossible, you might keep this in mind, to completely erase e-mail from a computer. Investigators have turned up a handful of messages Reid sent from several locations in Europe. Some were obviously intended to be read after his death, taking credit for blowing up an airliner. Another may help tie him to a larger conspiracy. For more on that, CNN's Jim Bitterman tonight in Paris.
[Jim Bitterman, Cnn Correspondent:] It was at this hotel, near Charles DeGaulle Airport outside Paris, that attempted shoe bomber, Richard Reid, got his final marching orders. At the hotel business center, according to police sources, Reid sent an e- mail to Pakistan, explaining that security agents had stopped him from boarding his assigned flight. What should he do, he asked.
[Frederic Helbert, Terrorism Expert:] The answer coming back from Pakistan is saying that you have to go. You have to do it. This is your mission. You have to take the next plane going from Paris to Miami.
[Bitterman:] That next plane was the American Airlines flight that ended abruptly in Boston, after passengers overpowered Reid as he tried to set off the bombs hidden in his tennis shoes. Reid claimed he was operating on his own, but according to investigators, his e- mails prove otherwise. He was a regular at two Paris cyber cafes. The owner of this one told me he remembered Reid as tall and dirty, but he was unsure which computer Reid might have used. So the police carted off all eight of the cyber cafes hard drives as evidence. Among other messages they reportedly found was a kind of last letter to Reid's mother, explaining why he wanted to blow up the jet and urging her to convert to Islam. According to reports, investigators have now determined that Reid was constantly using the e-mails for communication, not only from this very room, but from elsewhere in France and Belgium as well, confirming what's long been suspected, that the Internet can provide terrorists with an efficient command and control system. Thousands of web sites like this one, according to author Roland Jacquard, permit terrorist cells and their leaders to stay in touch.
[Roland Jacquard, "secret Biography Of Osama Bin Laden":] They can send information. Also they can spy on the next targets and send the video by the Internet. They can send an audio message.
[Bitterman:] But additionally, in the kind of tough neighborhoods from which Reid sent many of his e-mails, police sources tell CNN that at least 10 people were in touch with him, helping him with money and logistics.
[Helbert:] They're convinced that there is a network. There is a logistic cell. There is an apparative cell, but they did not arrest anyone.
[Bitterman:] Police here predict there could well be arrests coming soon. But sources close to the investigation say that authorities remain very worried, because the cases demonstrated that the terrorist network which gave Richard Reid his orders and his help, still exists. Jim Bitterman, CNN, Paris.
[Brown:] Back home, Enron's top lawyer says the company is looking into the circumstances surrounding the destruction of documents, in essence the timing of it, whether shredding went on after the company learned it was under investigation. One high-ranking employee says it did and may still be. She says they were shredding when she left the company last week. If it was, Enron's lawyer, Bob Bennett, says it went against the company's policy. He says in October, a memo went out warning that all documents should be preserved in light of the litigation that is in the works against Enron. Just ahead, why thousands of people are going back to a volcano that continues to kill. This one isn't a case of neighbor helping neighbor. It is NEWSNIGHT back in New York on a Monday. There's something a bit surreal, maybe more than a bit about what's going on tonight beneath an erupting volcano in Congo, surreal and very sad. Thousands of refugees who have fled across the border to Rwanda have decided to go home, even though there's nothing to eat at home, even though the water is contaminated and things are still catching fire, people still dying. One refugee explained it this way. They, speaking of the Rwandans, they wanted us to die. When we saw the sky clearing, we said we might as well go home and die at home. On that note, we turn once again to CNN's Catherine Bond on the videophone from Rwanda. Catherine, good evening.
[Bond:] Good evening, Aaron. Yes, I think a history of bad blood here between Congolese and Rwandans. Rwandans took refuge in Congo in 1994 at the end of the genocide here in Rwanda, and when they passed through the town of Goma, they didn't receive much help. As a result, they turned to drinking the water from Lake Kebu and there was a Colera epidemic, which killed about 30,000 Rwandan refugees. I think the Congolese remember that. They remember how miserable the lives were for refugees in the camps outside Goma for the two years that followed between '94 and '96, and they coming into here, don't want their lives to become as miserable as that. Aaron.
[Brown:] There was an incident earlier today that I saw, where a gas station exploded and they were trying to sort out how many people had died. Do we know any more about that tonight, Catherine?
[Bond:] I think what happened, one version I got of the story was that there was a storage shed in which containers of gas was stored and looters came in and tried to siphon the gas out of the metal drums, and in doing so, the fumes ignited because of the heat from the lava flow which had surrounded the storage shed. They don't know how many people died in that. It's cut off by the lava flow, and so there really isn't any access to emergency workers, even if they were up and running, which frankly they aren't, to go and find out. They do know that two women and two children were hospitalized as a result of that for burns. So that's as far as anybody knows. The casualty figures seem to vary between 30 and 60, and we haven't really heard many more details than that, simply because there's no access to it because it's cut off by the river of lava that came out of the volcano last week. Aaron.
[Brown:] Catherine, thank you. I'm not sure what that photographer is standing there doing. Thank you very much. Catherine Bond in Rwanda for us tonight. Coming up, history under the lens, a professor who's decided to stop using the works of Stephen Ambrose in his class, one with a key supporting role in the Ambrose drama. This is NEWSNIGHT in New York.
[Jeff Greenfield, Greenfield At Large:] What should Ground Zero look like in the future? Should all of it be a memorial? Some victims' families think so. But the new mayor says the city needs buildings there. Who's right? We'll hear from both sides tonight on "GREENFIELD AT LARGE" right after
[Newsnight. Brown:] We're reminded today, as we remember Dr. Martin Luther King that history is serious business, and we like to think as journalists that we're writing the rough draft of history, as we like to say. Professional historians are the one with the time and the expertise to fill it out, and how they do that can have an enormous impact on just not what we remember, but how we look at problems today. So when they mess up, it has to be addressed, which brings us to the case of one of America's best-known historians. We've talked before about the case of Stephen Ambrose. He's accused of copying sentences, whole passages from other authors in his new book about World War II bomber pilots, "The Wild Blue." He apologized for what he called "omissions." That would be quotation marks. Ambrose is facing more accusations in his book, ironically enough called "Nothing Like it in the World." And another historian is also facing scrutiny, Doris Kerns Goodwin. The Weekly Standard is out with a look at her book, "The Fitzgeralds and the Kennedys." Many sentences are very similar to ones written by other people, though they are not quoted either. Goodwin told the Standard that her notes were taken in longhand and she didn't realize she was writing "a close paraphrase of the original work." All of these revelations have sparked an interesting reaction on college campuses. Students say they'd be expelled for doing the same thing, and professors are now deciding whether to continue using the books to teach students. One of them has decided to stop using books by Ambrose in his class, and it so happens that it was largely his work that Ambrose borrowed from. Professor Thomas Childers says the decision has nothing to do with spite. He teaches at one of the country's great universities, the University of Pennsylvania. We're delighted he's with us tonight. Professor, over time here, your position seems to have toughened. Initially at least, you seemed to be cutting Steve Ambrose some slack. What's changed?
[Professor Thomas Childers, Professor Of History, University Of Pennsylvania:] Well, when I initially was made aware of these charges and Mr. Ambrose instantly apologized, I thought said Mr. Childers is right. "I made a mistake. I apologize." I thought that was a classy thing to do. He stepped up to the plate. He didn't try to dodge it. He took responsibility. And I thought, this is an isolated incident and was ready to move on.
[Brown:] And that changed as you saw more examples? Is that what happened?
[Childers:] Well, there was a response instantaneously at the University of Pennsylvania, where my students, I teach a large course in the second World War. My students raised this question. If this would have happened to us, we'd be failed for the course. We'd be expelled. And then, of course, during that week after the story broke, there were more allegations of borrowing from other books and in that instance, I just finally thought it was time to make a decision. And then finally, Stephen Ambrose made a statement to the New York Times, in which he explained his method, which I found very disturbing. And it was, "well, I'm not doing a Ph.D. dissertation here. I'm telling a story. I'm not talking about my documents. If I find something in another book that fits the story or works with the story that I'm telling, I use it. I put it in there and then put a footnote in so that I'll know where it came from." And that I thought was simply not the right thing to do.
[Brown:] Is there I think this is an interesting argument, that somehow there is a difference between popular history books that I might read, and serious history books that you might teach with. Is there a difference in your mind there?
[Childers:] Well, yes and no. I mean, I guess one of the things that has been most disturbing to me as I've read the subsequent stories about Ambrose's work is that I think actually one of the great obligations that professional historians, those that teach in the university have, is to address a wider reading public. There's an enormous public out there that is interested in history, as Mr. Ambrose's books and David McCullough's books and so on, really illustrate. And so, I think it is not actually the case that people who write for this broader audience that some have called popular history as if there's something wrong with it, I don't see this as the problem. The problem, I think is working too fast and taking shortcuts.
[Brown:] Do you think your colleagues I don't mean your colleagues at the University of Pennsylvania, but your historian colleagues around the country are nervous about every word they've ever written and whether inadvertently they may have done the same thing?
[Childers:] Yes. I'm sure we all are.
[Brown:] Yes. And do you expect that in some ways this is more common than perhaps we had all thought?
[Childers:] It may be. I wouldn't go too far with that. I mean, there are cases of borrowing, of just outright plagiarism within academic writing, within scholarly writing. It's not commonplace. It does happen. I think in this instance, it's simply because we're talking about an author who has, you know, a very, very large readership and a very high profile.
[Brown:] I hope this doesn't make you uncomfortable. Do you think that Mr. Ambrose is forever discredited by this? Is this just a huge mark against him forever an all time?
[Childers:] Well, that's a hard thing to say at this point. I think for me I mean, Stephen Ambrose has done a great deal of very good work. During the 1990s, we've seen a huge shift in our attention away from the generals and the admirals, away from the statesmen, to the experiences of ordinary sailors, soldiers, airmen, and so on. And Stephen Ambrose's work has been at the forefront of that, he's led the charge that moved shifted our focus away. And he's to be congratulated for that. And I've used his books with great profit. I think this will, however, be a problem for him in the future. I think these stories, which don't seem to want to go away, will make life difficult for him. But I suspect the base of his readership will still be there.
[Brown:] Professor, it's nice to talk to you, finally. We came close one other night. We appreciate your time tonight.
[Childers:] Thank you.
[Brown:] Thank you. It's an interesting case, and just I seem to have figured this out, but we did invite Stephen Ambrose to join us as well, and he hasn't said yes yet, but when he does, we'll talk to him too. We have a breaking news story we need to deal with here. There's been a shooting outside the U.S. Information Service in Calcutta. On the phone with us is CNN Satinder Bindra. What do you know?
[Satinder Bindra, Cnn Correspondent:] Good evening, Aaron. What we do know, and this is from the police, that unidentified gunmen opened fire, and they opened fire on armed guards outside the American Center in Calcutta, eastern India. Aaron, we also know that the incident happened at about 6:30 a.m. local time. Police are now telling us that three of these guards were killed, and several people there were injured. The injured include U.S. consulate staff. Now, the attackers rode up on motorbikes. They then rode away. Aaron, I also know that the American Center in Calcutta houses the U.S. consulate's press office, the U.S. cultural offices there, and there is a library there as well. This office is located in a very crowded downtown Calcutta location. The U.S. embassy in New Delhi here is describing this as a, quote "shooting incident." They say they have no idea of the motivation of the attackers. What is ironical is that this incident happens just as the FBI director, Mr. Robert Mueller, is in India to discuss counterterrorism measures with the Indian government. Aaron?
[Brown:] Satinder, thank you. We'll keep waiting for more information there. When we come back on NEWSNIGHT, Dr. Martin Luther King, in his own words. Segment Seven tonight, the speech. It was August 28, 1963. Hotels and lunch counters in the South were still legally segregated. Schools were segregated too, but not legally. It's just that there was not a whole lot of will in the country to enforce the Supreme Court decision. John Kennedy was still alive. He believed there had to be change in the way the country dealt with race, but he moved cautiously. The landmark Civil Rights Bill would come a year later, after Kennedy's death, and out of the sheer force of will of Lyndon Baines Johnson. What role the March on Washington and the speech played is conjecture, but the speech itself from beginning to end is a wonderful piece of American history, thoughtful, peaceful, poetic, and true. So here is the speech, the parts you know by heart and the parts you may have long ago forgotten.
[Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr:] I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation. Five score years ago, a great American in whose symbolic shadow we stand today signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope for millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity. But 100 years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself in exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition. In a sense, we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men yes, black men as well as white men would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "Insufficient funds." But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. So we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children. It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating
[Brown:] The speech. We got permission to run the speech from Intellectual Properties Management, which manages the King estate. We're grateful for that. And our thanks too to the King Center for their help as well. Coming up next on NEWSNIGHT, the price of safety. We'll be right back. Finally from us tonight, changes. September 11 changed a lot. There are the big changes, the skyline of the city. There are the changes that can't be repaired, the families who still grieve. Airports look different, so do many office buildings. Washington, D.C., looks so much different and jarring and necessary and sad. Here's CNN's Kate Snow.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Step back from this famous dome, this monument to neoclassical architecture, and here's what you see. Sewer pipes, concrete barriers, chain-link fencing, a slalom course of planters, all strategically placed for protection.
[Unidentified Man:] You have to be careful when you're taking a picture what, you know, that you don't get all the barricades and everything else in it.
[Unidentified Woman:] Kind of sad, because when I was here before, it was so beautiful, and now it's as if because of the terrorists, we've lost a lot of our beauty.
[Snow:] Visitors say they understand the need for added security. September 11 was a powerful warning. But even security experts acknowledge this is not the look Frederick Law Olmsted was going for when he designed the Capitol grounds in 1874.
[Roger Lewis, Architect:] I think they've gone way overboard.
[Snow:] Architect Roger Lewis says security doesn't have to be ugly.
[Lewis:] I think what we need is a designed system of security barriers that become part of the landscape aesthetically, that make our landscapes and our buildings look good rather than look bad. And I think what you see here feels like a fortress.
[Snow:] The fortress was built post 911, but the look of the Capitol landscape has been evolving for decades. As late as 1969, there weren't even guards posted at Capitol entrances. And just look at the contrast between 1917 and today.
[Lt. Dan Nichols, U.s. Capitol Police:] The nature of the place is, once we've put security into effect, it's difficult to back down from some of the physical barriers we've put up, just on the chance that we're going to have the same concern in the future.
[Snow:] These went in when? These...
[Alan Hartman, Architect Of The Capitol:] The '80s, in the '80s. And they're basically sewer pipes, is really what they are.
[Snow:] It's been nearly 20 years since these barriers were quickly erected following the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut.
[Hartman:] Aesthetically, the it's not the image for the Capitol. No question. You can see that one's just collapsed over there. There's a hole in it. So I don't know if that's going to stop a Toyota.
[Snow:] Now, the official architect of the Capitol is finally getting rid of them. The new look, these less intrusive steel bollards.
[Hartman:] It's much more compatible with the landscape. We're trying to have them essentially be here as security elements but kind of disappear into the background.
[Snow:] The project was planned well before September 11. Bollards will eventually encircle the Capitol, and officials hope they'll replace most if not all of the concrete barricades they're using now. [voice-over]: Construction is also under way on a new visitors' center. When it's done, in three years, designers hope the beauty of the grounds will finally be restored. But in a bow to the times, the People's House may never look or feel quite as open as it once was. Kate Snow, CNN, Capitol Hill.
[Brown:] It's good to be home. We'll see you tomorrow at 10:00. Good night for NEWSNIGHT. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Well, Christine Romans joins me now on this Friday morning with the numbers expected for today's economic data, personal income and spending, as well as factory orders. Good morning.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi there. Well, factory orders is an old number, yesterday's news, very rarely riles the market. But we're going to be taking a close look at personal income and spending. There's going to be a savings-rate reading in there, too. So we're going to get a picture of the American consumer, the average American. What's he or she putting in the piggy bank? And what is he or she spending at the mall? And I bet you can guess.
[Haffenreffer:] Nothing in the piggy bank and everything at the mall.
[Romans:] Exactly. So for personal income, at least, this is what we're looking for: Wall Street is forecasting that February personal income rose 0.3 percent. That is, you know, much shy of the January gain of 0.7 percent. So they're looking for personal income to slow down a bit in February. But when you look at the spending picture, what is the American consumer spending? What is the average American spending on consumption? You can see that they're looking for that to jump to a 0.8 percent increase in the month, led by autos, compared with January gain of 0.5 percent. And the savings rate? Well, economists are saying it's probably down at another all-time low. If you look at what the American is saving, you can see that over the past decade or so the piggy bank's empty. But on the flip side of that, folks are saying that people are putting more and more money into the stock market this is where we talk about the wealth effect. We talk about this constantly that their putting money into the stock market. That is their intermediate and long-term saving vehicle at the moment, not necessarily the bank accounts. So the savings rate can be a little bit deceiving, but still it concerns some people who say that, you know, the average American has credit card debt, has incomes that are rising, but many months they're spending more than they are earning, and they're keeping the savings rate pretty low, so...
[Haffenreffer:] Isn't that the American dream now? If you break it apart, and you see that incomes are coming down, that should please the Federal Reserve, no?
[Romans:] It should, it should. But remember, in January income rose 0.7 percent, so this could be a one-month anomaly. You have to see sort of you'll have to see a smoothing out. They'd like to see that sort of gain a little bit. You know, but then at the same time, there are other people, politicians, for example, who like to see that you know, like to see those wages step up with productivity. If companies are making more money because productivity is increasing, they like to see some of that given back to the workers as well.
[Haffenreffer:] What's the most important aspect of this report that the Street will be keeping an eye on?
[Romans:] Take a look at the consumption figures, because when you look on a quarterly basis, if we come in with 0.8 percent, on a quarterly basis that means that real consumption is stronger in the first quarter of this year shaping up to be stronger in the first quarter of this year than it was in the fourth quarter of "99. And that's when the Fed was concerned about the pace of the U.S. economy. There's a couple of other reports too, David. University of Michigan Sentiment and the Chicago Purchasing Managers" index. That Chicago number could be interesting about what it might foretell for the national report next week. Remember, we get the National Association of Purchasing Management report and the jobs report next week. Those are seen as very key as the most important most recent pictures of what's going on in the U.S. economy.
[Haffenreffer:] We are seeing a nice showing here for the futures. Any indication anybody talking on the floor of the exchange about what to expect on the final day of the quarter?
[Romans:] They keep talking about this window dressing, and I know I keep talking about window dressing as well, but they're looking for a bit of volatility today because they think that there will be money pouring into these blue chips that have performed pretty well this week, even amid a tech rout. So they're looking for more gains perhaps into the end of the week but you never know.
[Haffenreffer:] OK, Christine. We'll see question mark. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] And with the third case of inhalation anthrax to talk about today, Elizabeth Cohen, our medical correspondent, is joining us, and we'll get a little bit of more information on that. It might not hurt to go over inhalation vs. skin once again today, the third inhalation case.
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Right. Three cases of inhalation anthrax so far; six cases of skin anthrax. The same bacteria causes both diseases. However, the inhalation anthrax, which it makes sense, is much more serious than the skin form. The skin form can be caught much more easily in some ways, because you can see the rashes that happens. At first, it looks like it could just be a bug bite, but eventually it develops into a very nasty-looking ulcer that's black in the middle, and then they can tell that it's anthrax. And if they catch it early, they can give antibiotics and then treat it very easily. And hundreds of people have had skin anthrax in this country, because people who work on farms get it from anthrax [sic]. Inhalation anthrax, though, is much more unusual and is much more deadly. If it is not treated with antibiotics pretty quickly, hopefully before actual symptoms set in, then it can be fatal. That doesn't mean it always is fatal, but it can be very likely be fatal. In fact, if it's untreated, it likely is that it will be fatal. So those are the basic differences there, and you know, luckily most of the cases that we're seeing now are skin anthrax, not inhalation anthrax.
[Kelley:] And since those symptoms are like flu symptoms, if you feel like that, probably a good idea to get checked.
[Cohen:] Yes, but it's only really you only really need to worry if you have been exposed in some way. For example, if someone works in the NBC Building and has those flu-like symptoms, they really have much more reason to be concerned than if you just worked in some random building someplace else. This is not a disease you can get from other people. It's only a disease you can get if you were directly exposed. So that's why mail workers or people who work at NBC, ABC, CBS, any of those media buildings where it happened, they would be more likely to be concerned. Now, the way the doctors know that it's anthrax is that there are several tests that give them indications. Also as they follow the person, they will see the symptoms change to become much more serious than just flu symptoms.
[Kelley:] Any word that you've gotten so far why so many on Capitol Hill after they got the letter to Senator Daschle's office 28 at last count, that I saw?
[Cohen:] Right, 28 exposed on Capitol Hill. And that all of the outbreaks that we've seen, there have been 32. So 28 on Capitol Hill and 4 in all of other ones put together. I haven't heard anyone give a really good answer as to why that's true. I've heard a couple of theories, but, of course, we don't know if those are true or not. But one thing I think that's important to think about, and that the CDC has pointed out, is that people have handled these letters in different ways. If someone received a letter that had anthrax in it in the form of a power, if they just opened it with a letter opener very gently and saw the power and didn't say, oh, gee, I wonder what this is, and put their head in it, and then they just put it if they just looked at it from sort of afar, put it down on the table, washed their hands, left, called 911, they would probably the only person who would be at risk. But what I've been told has been happening in some of these incidents is that if someone looks at it, they get close into it, they say to their friend, hey, look at this, what do you think, and then they call other people over. And so, I think that it's possible that just that these letters were handled in different ways, and that more people were close in the vicinity.
[Kelley:] Talking about that and, of course, four sites on the Hill now that they are looking, and they're closed for business until Tuesday morning, how do you get it out of the system if it is, in fact, in the ventilation system, or if it's sitting on somebody's desk after they've opened a letter? But what do they do?
[Cohen:] There are ways that they can get rid of it, which is actually, in a way, pretty interesting, because anthrax is a very hardy bacteria. In its spore form, it is covered with it's like a seed that's covered by a hard shell. So if there is anthrax out on a table, or when you find anthrax in the soil, it can survive for a very, very long time. But there are chemicals that can get rid of it. There are even chemicals that could be put into a ventilation system, which has lots of nooks and crannies and bends and what not. So there really are chemicals that can get rid of it, but it does take some work, because it is such a hardy spore.
[Kelley:] Yes, and one of these times, we're going to talk a little bit more about the flu, because this is traditionally when you get a flu shot. And we'll talk about that and the numbers, you know, that people have to worry about that and should watch for that. Elizabeth Cohen, thanks very much our medical correspondent. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] As if a power crisis isn't enough, Southern California also is tinder dry, perfect conditions for the wildfire now raging in San Diego County. It began yesterday. CNN's Jim Hill is near Alpine, California, which is east of San Diego. He joins us with the latest on the firefighting efforts. What's new today, Jim?
[Jim Hill, Cnn Anchor:] Well, Lou, yesterday high winds were fanning flames in this area. Today, high hopes of replacing those high winds, hopes that firefighters can gain some ground in trying to encircle or contain this fire that has been so destructive in this area. The change in weather they're concerned with is a break from the strong, hot, dry Santa Ana winds that blew from the East, replaced instead by a more westerly flow, a little bit cooler and perhaps more humid. And that should help firefighters, at least they hope. There are some 2,000 firefighters, 2,000 ground crew members who are trying to encircle the blaze. They've made about 10 percent progress trying to get a ring around this fire. Are they are being helped today by a lot more aircraft: up to nine tankers in the air, including two C-130s from the National Guard that will help with specially equipped tanker mechanisms that can put more water on the fire. Also, nine helicopters are being brought in to drop water on the blaze, as well as bulldozers. And no fewer than 220 engine companies, fire engines, if you will, brought in from surrounding counties to help this effort. So far, they have confirmed that five homes have been lost to this fire. However, the good news is that there have been no deaths, no major injuries in this particular blaze. The cause is still suspected to be a car fire that broke out along Interstate 8, the main route between San Diego, California and Yuma, Arizona yesterday. They're not convinced that this is the cause, but they're zeroing in on that, and that is the prime suspect at this point. Now, throughout the day, firefighters hope the winds will stay either relatively calm or be out of the West, and that will help them. But as I say, they've only encircled about 10 percent of this fire so far, and they have a long way to go before they finally declare a victory. I'm Jim Hill, CNN, reporting live near Alpine, California.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] The big question this hour: Is the CIA leading the war on terror? As we have been reporting, the Pentagon says a CIA missile attack earlier this week may have killed a prominent al Qaeda leader. Officials say there is even a 10 to 15 percent chance it was Osama bin Laden. Well, the CIA has played a key role in the war on terror, unlike in any other major conflict, and CIA George Tenet testified on Capitol Hill yesterday defending his agency's role, and answering questions about what the CIA did and did not know before 911. Tenet said that while hundreds of al Qaeda operatives in dozens of countries are now in custody, the terrorist threat to American soil remains very strong. Robert Baer is a former CIA officer and the author of the book "See No Evil." He joins us now from Washington welcome, good to see you.
[Robert Baer, "see No Evil":] Good morning.
[Zahn:] What leapt out at you yesterday when you thought about what George Tenet had to say publicly?
[Baer:] George Tenet has a difficult mission in front of him. He can't blame the CIA, but the CIA does share some of the blame for September 11th, as does the FBI, State, Immigrations everybody does, and I think what he was telling us he is going to get on it's a new mission, new mandate, and he is going to put people back on the ground, and he's doing exactly the right thing.
[Zahn:] So, in your estimation, what was the CIA's biggest shortcoming pre-September 11th, and what can you do to change that?
[Baer:] I think the biggest shortcoming was that the information that the CIA gets from technical means should have been complemented by more human sources on the ground, more people on the Afghan border, maybe even Afghanistan, before September 11th, but that was not the CIA's political mandate, and that has got to change now.
[Zahn:] Do you see any evidence that it is changing?
[Baer:] Oh, absolutely, and it's also I should add, that it is going to be very dangerous for the CIA to be involved in a ground war in a place like Afghanistan. Innocents will be killed, and we just have to remember this when the blame is thrown around after the war, that it wasn't the CIA's fault, it was a political decision.
[Zahn:] Well, this has already happened, with the killing of a number of Afghan civilians, right? And Hamid Karzai came out and said, you know, that it was unfortunate, but apparently our officers had been given some very bad information.
[Baer:] That's going to happen in war like this. Afghanistan is a snake pit. Probably much worse than Vietnam ever was. We are just going to have to accept that innocents will die, and we will do our best to correct it, with good intelligence.
[Zahn:] So realistically, what kind of a role will be CIA play when we know that you can buy off warlords with very simple bribes, and alliances change very rapidly in that country?
[Baer:] The CIA has to sit down, very methodically, and sort through human sources until finds people that will tell it the truth, and this could take years, unfortunately to vet, train, and make sure these sources are telling us the truth, could take years. That's what the CIA's role should be. Primary, at least.
[Zahn:] But in the meantime, the head of the CIA has made it abundantly clear to Americans that al Qaeda can very quickly reconstitute itself and do some very serious damage to us once again. Let's replay that part of his testimony from yesterday.
[George Tenet, Cia Director:] We know that the terrorists have considered attacks in the U.S. against high-profile government or private facilities, famous landmarks, and U.S. infrastructure nodes such as airports, bridges, harbors, and dams. High profile events such as Olympics or last weekend's Super Bowl also fit the terrorists' interest in striking another blow within the United States that would command worldwide media attention.
[Zahn:] Given the fact that Mr. Tenet confirmed that we have seen over 1,000 arrests of al Qaeda operatives all over the world, he still obviously believes they're capable of pulling off another attack, but haven't they been compromised at all?
[Baer:] Somewhat, but they are compartmented, there are cells that operate independently. That's the problem. And getting into every one of the cells is nearly impossible, as Mr. Tenet said, but that doesn't mean we have to stop trying. We just have to be more aggressive, we have to take more risks, and I think we'll cut them back much more than we have so far.
[Zahn:] And you talk about the reality of this "snake pit" that you said the CIA faces in Afghanistan with quickly changing alliances. A lot has been made of the fact that, in the beginning, the CIA didn't have officers on the ground that could speak the same dialect as many of the allies were trying to get into our corner.
[Baer:] I served on the Afghan border in 1992-1994 in Tajikistan, and the fact was that Washington, not the CIA, had written off Afghanistan as a hopeless case, and we were not encouraged to focus on Afghanistan. It was a mistake, but it was a political mistake. not the CIA's.
[Zahn:] All right. Robert Baer, we're going to leave it there today.
[Baer:] Thank you.
[Zahn:] A former CIA officer, and the author of the book "See No Evil." Appreciate your time this morning.
[Baer:] Thanks.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to begin with politics, parties and the balance of power. The buzz in Washington this morning is over Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords. He is expected to announce today that he is leaving the Republican Party. And sources say it's unclear right now whether Jeffords will join the Democratic Party or if he will become an independent. Either way, this move would shift the balance of power to the Democrats, since the Senate is right now evenly divided between the two parties 50-50. The Jeffords factor has implications from Capitol Hill to the White House. The timing could affect President Bush's legislative agenda, including that big tax package which is now before the Senate. Let's get some extensive live coverage this morning from our congressional correspondent Kate Snow and our senior White House correspondent John King. Ladies first. Let's start with Kate on Capitol Hill. Kate, what is the latest from there?
[Kate Snow, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Good morning, Leon. The latest from here, two Democratic sources telling me this morning they do expect that Senator Jim Jeffords will leave the Republican Party and will go independent. That is the expectation that he will become an independent rather than becoming a Democrat and sort of going all the way. But as an independent, Senator Jeffords is expected to vote in favor of the Democrats and expected, as a key thing, to back Senator Tom Daschle as the new majority leader. Now that is very crucial, Leon, because that would set up a new majority for the Democrats. It would mean the Democrats would take charge of the agenda here in the Senate. It would mean that they are able to control the votes and it would mean, importantly, too, that they would get the key committee leadership positions Leon.
[Harris:] Well that's got to have folks in the White House either stroking their chins or wringing their hands. John King, what are they doing there at the White House about all this?
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Well, they're quite disappointed. They made a last-ditch effort yesterday afternoon and last night to try to convince Senator Jeffords to change his mind and stay in the Republican camp. However, this morning, sources here as well saying they don't expect that to happen. They do, indeed, expect Senator Jeffords to bolt the GOP. What will the impact be? This could have dramatic impacts on the president's first year agenda and redefine how we define bipartisanship here in Washington. Up to now, with the Republicans in charge, the president has reached out to selective Democrats on selected issue. Moderate and centrist Democrats say like he did during the tax cut debate. He has shied away from dealing directly with the Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate. Now they know here this morning that if Tom Daschle is the majority leader of the United States Senate, the president's going to have to do business in a very different way.
[Harris:] Well, John, what are you hearing about the business being done there in the White House in regards to Senator Zell Miller? We've been hearing that perhaps the White House has been reaching out to him. I even read somewhere that they might even be offering to name an aircraft carrier after him to get him to switch parties and even things back up again.
[King:] Well, the White house has been trying for some time and Republicans in Georgia and here in Washington have been trying for some time to convince Zell Miller, a conservative Democrat, a former governor of Georgia now in the Senate, to come over to the Republican side. But about two weeks ago, Senator Miller issued a statement, trying to tamp down all this speculation, saying he would stay in the Democratic Party. And I'm told by sources on Capitol Hill that key Democrats have checked in with him in the last few hours and they expect him to stay put in the Democrats. That doesn't mean there won't be an aggressive lobbying campaign from the president on down in the days and weeks ahead.
[Harris:] We know lobbying is going on on Capitol Hill. Let's go back there. Kate, what do you hear? Actually, right now we want to show you live picture, folks, that we are getting of Senator Jim Jeffords, the man in the center of the attention this morning, as he's leaving his house. Let's listen to see if he's answering questions.
[Sen. Jim Jeffords , Vermont:] Thank you.
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you.
[Harris:] He has been saying that for the last couple of days, no questions, no answers, no nothing before he makes his announcement, which we expect will come sometime today. Let's go back to Kate Snow on Capitol Hill. Kate, what does this mean for President Bush's tax package because of the right now it does seem to be in a rather tenuous situation?
[Snow:] Right, and that is a key question, Leon. Of course they thought two days ago that they were going to have a tax cut pass. The Republicans in control of the House and the Senate right now thought that the Senate would quickly pass a tax cut. Well that didn't happen. It's been stalled. And the Democrats on in the Senate have been actually stalling on purpose, throwing in as many amendments as they can think of to try to delay the process. That's where we're at with the tax cut. So what happens when Senator Jeffords makes his announcement later today? Well that depends on what he says. If he says that it's effective immediately, then certainly that could impact his vote on the tax cut. He has, of course, opposed the president's tax cut for some time now, which is what led to all this trouble in the first place. But the other possibility, Leon, is that he may say, look, I'm going to become an independent, but I'm going to wait until after the two key pieces of legislation that are landmark pieces for this administration, the tax cut and the education plan, have passed through this Congress. That's a definite possibility as well. He may sort of announce his change but make it effective after those key votes.
[Harris:] OK, we'll keep our eyes and ears peeled for whatever happens from all that. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] A turbo-prop plane crashed today. It happened near Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, killing at least 19 people aboard. CNN's Carl Rochelle is here. He is a certificated commercial pilot. He's been working this story for us all day. Carl, what can you tell us?
[Carl Rochelle, Cnn Aviation Correspondent:] Gene, it was a Jetstream 31. It's an aircraft that you see very often in commuter operations. It's a twin-engine turbo-prop plane. It can carry 19 passengers and a crew of two. In this case, it was carrying 17 passengers and a crew of two. The flight originated in Atlantic City. They were trying to land at the Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, Airport. Now, they were on their second instrument approach. And by instrument approach, it means they were having to use the instruments within the aircraft to try to approach the airplane the airport when the plane went down. It went down about nine miles south of the airport, which means it was just outside of the edges of that particular instrument landing systems approach. Now sources say that the weather at the time of the accident was roughly 1,500 feet of heavy cloud cover and some scattered clouds all the way down to 300 feet above the ground. I checked the approaches for that particular approach at the Wilkes-Barre airport, and when you can descend, the altitude you can descend to off of the ground is roughly 300 feet, so the clouds were right down at the end of that. But that may not have been the problem. The problem may have been some problem with the engines. The crew of the plane apparently reported to the tower that they were having an engine problem. Sources tell me they believe that the crew lost both engines, that both engines shut down on them or went out or stopped running for some reason, and that one of them was re-started, but that wasn't enough, and the airplane ultimately went down. Officials on the scene say there was a ball of fire when they went to the crash scene, and the National Transportation Safety Board is in the process right now of putting together a go team that's a team of investigators to go to the scene and examine the cause of the crash. We do expect to hear from them sometime within the next half- hour, even less, member George Black, the board member who is going to head the investigation into this crash, to give us a take on what they know Gene.
[Randall:] And, Carl, what's the priority for this investigation? What happens first?
[Rochelle:] Well, the first thing is to absolutely be sure that there are no survivors. Now, we do not believe there were survivors, but to ensure that no one survived the crash. Then they need to secure the scene of the crash and go in. It is very important for them in an investigation to see exactly how everything fell when it hit the ground. By that they can tell a lot about how the plane went apart. Now we know there were engine problems. They will try to recover the engines, and they will take those and put them up on test stands, try to see if they run, try to see if there was fuel, if there was no fuel in the fuel tanks. They'll examine that. They'll try to see what it was that caused problems with the engines and why the plane went down, and more about where it was going and what it was doing.
[Randall:] All right, Carl, thanks very much. And when the NTSB holds its press conference, we plan to carry it live.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Another busy week in the news we don't need to tell you that from the Osama bin Laden tape, to Israel cutting off communications with the Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat. Joining us for our weekend wrap-up, from New York, conservative talk show host, Curtis Sliwa. And from Washington, on the liberal side, talk show host Victoria Jones. Good to have you both with us. Let's do ladies first. Vicky, the tape. I've got to admit I I'm just from where I sit, I'm just mystified at the reaction in the Arab world that this is just a phony. Could you have predicted this?
[Victoria Jones, Wmal Radio Talk Show:] Yeah, I did predict it before it came out. What I predicted was that we would be told that it was a phony tape either made by the CIA or made by Hollywood deliberately to foil them, and that the delay of releasing the tape was a government thing. Of course this was going to happen, because if you want to believe in bin Laden and we're talking about belief, not facts then you're going to believe in him. But I think that most people in the Arab world do think that the tape is genuine. I think there's a small minority of people who think that it's phony. And I think there was nothing that we could have done. Bin Laden could have stood up on the tape and said, "I did it, I bombed the World Trade Center..."
[O'brien:] Well, he practically did Vicky, he practically did.
[Jones:] ... and they still would have said he practically did. He practically did, but they still would have said it was phony. So there's nothing we can do about those people. But the majority of people, I think, do accept that this tape is genuine, and very damning.
[O'brien:] So it was worth putting out there? Curtis, do you agree? Should it have been released? Was it released properly?
[Curtis Sliwa, Wabc Radio Talk Show:] Oh, absolutely. And, in fact, Miles, more troubling to me is there's some Arab Americans some Muslim Americans who thought it was fake, it was fraudulent, it was phony. But if, in fact, you want to believe that the Masad originally had bombed the World Trade Center which is what these Arab propaganda said and had warned 10,000 Jews to escape before the bombing, why, if the Jews in Hollywood as they say created this, would Spielberg create such a poor representation of Osama bin Laden? So I think no matter what you put out there for public consumption, there is a strong aspect of the Arabic and Muslim community oversees and even here, on our shores that have window shades on their eyes, cotton balls in their ears, a zipper on their mouth, and will continue to actually support the efforts of Osama bin Laden through foundations, charities, and that's really through their ongoing propaganda.
[O'brien:] So you're telling us central casting could do better than what we saw there?
[Sliwa:] Oh, please.
[Jones:] But
[O'brien:] Oh, boy. We're getting deep.
[Jones:] I mean, that's where you go...
[O'brien:] We are so deep into the grass, you know, now...
[Jones:] I know, it's so weird.
[O'brien:] ... I don't know if we'll ever get back. Let's talk about military tribunals. There's a report this morning that the Eastern Alliance has captured all those al Qaeda positions. We don't know where Osama bin Laden is yet. We don't know if that report is is going to turn out to be true. But, nevertheless, we're getting closer to the possibility of capturing this guy. What about a military tribunal for him? Vicky, what do how do you weigh in on that one?
[Jones:] Well that's the last thing that we need for him. We need either a public trial before a criminal court or and this is what I think we really need, but we're not going to do it he should be charged with genocide and he should be tried internationally. He not only attacked the United States, he attacked 80 countries. This was an assault on the world. I don't think that we have a crime on our books that is big enough to charge him with in this country. And I think he should be charged internationally. Failing that, he should certainly be charged in a criminal court. All protection should be given to the jurors and to the judge and to any evidence that's secret. But we the last thing we need to do is to put him in front of some kind of military tribunal where we don't know and the rest of the world doesn't know what's happened, and we play into the hands of people who say that we're not being fair. We are fair, we're better than that. We need to keep our standards.
[O'brien:] Yes, but you know, I got to admit, the whole prospect of, you know, Osama bin Laden hiring somebody like Johnny Cochran and staging this trial just turns by stomach. Curtis...
[Jones:] Absolutely.
[Sliwa:] Miles, he would be hiring the anti-Christ of all lawyers, Alan Dershowitz, who said he would have even defended Hitler. And worse than that...
[Jones:] No, Dershowitz has already said that he would not defend bin Laden.
[Sliwa:] ... we would see the likes of Geraldo Rivera schlepping over to Osama bin Laden wherever he was being held, like he does each and every year to go to Charlie Manson with the swastika on his head in Vacaville, California. All you'd be doing is giving him a forum like we gave Timothy McVeigh, like Milosevic, the butcher of the Balkans, is getting now. That he's defending himself pro se in front of that international tribunal in The Hague. No, military tribunals...
[Jones:] ... he's defending himself because he doesn't recognize it, and he's still going to be found guilty. Timothy McVeigh was found guilty. Our systems seem to work pretty well.
[O'brien:] But the same argument that...
[Jones:] Unless you want to keep these people out of the public eye and make it all secret so we don't see them, because it's too scary to know what...
[O'brien:] Curtis, the same...
[Jones:] ... I think we can do better than that.
[O'brien:] The same argument that you could make for releasing the bin Laden tape could be made for putting him in a public trial.
[Sliwa:] No, no, no, because...
[O'brien:] Do it out in the open.
[Sliwa:] The tape is unedited. He had no idea that that tape was going to be played for a world body of viewers. And more importantly, if you want to continue to keep putting him on a pedestal which you would be if you actually held a trial in which a jury of our peers would end up judging him and the likes of every legal vulture would be running to his side to aid and abet him and to act as his voice his mouthpiece outside of the courtroom on the endless interviews that would take place. And all of a sudden they would look for the one juror who would say, "Oh, this was part of covert government assistance," going back to his support of the mujahideen, when we supported Osama bin Laden. And it would create that kind of atmosphere. So a military tribunal, give him the best defense and then put a bullet in the back of his head.
[Jones:] Are we so afraid of the truth that we don't want him to have an attorney?
[O'brien:] All right, let's move on here. And that whole prospect is as unsettling as it is. Let's talk about this whole issue of whether it's a military tribunal or civil court or whether he ends up dead. We were just talking with a guest last hour who said no matter what happens, al Qaeda is going to continue on every bit as robust as ever. It's decentralized. There are cells all over the world, some 60 countries. And they can pull off a World Trade Center-style attack with or without bin Laden. Do you buy that?
[Jones:] Yes, they can pull off an attack. But of course, now we know that the World Trade Center attack wasn't intended to be so big. My understanding is that the No. 2 waiting to step in for bin Laden is every bit of charismatic as he is. So I think we have reason to be concerned...
[O'brien:] If he's alive. We don't know who's left.
[Jones:] No, we don't know who's left. And we can hope they're all dead.
[O'brien:] All right. Curtis? What do you think? You disagreed on that point.
[Sliwa:] First of all, I can't imagine you didn't think that it would be as great an attack as it turned out to be, just because he didn't think the entire two World Trade Centers would implode. That was devastating. And more importantly, he is the head of the monster. He is the evil Cyclops. He controls the financial wing. He controls the moral wing. And more importantly, he is the symbol of al Qaeda. Chop the head off the monster, and we'll see if any other monster heads emerge. But you will weaken the process of al Qaeda whether it's out in the Philippines, whether it's in Pakistan, or whether it's here in Patterson, New Jersey, Jersey City or Brooklyn, New York, which have become the centers of terrorism right here in the United States of America.
[O'brien:] Yes, but Curtis, the argument against that is that if for whatever reason he is made a martyr there's some mystery he's missing or he's dead or even to a trial, military or otherwise. You know, that might somehow involve him and cause a new leadership to arise.
[Sliwa:] Miles, that argument was made when we had four of his lieutenants on trial here for the bombing of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Don't give them the death penalty, because if we kill them or give them the death penalty, they'll attack us. Well, guess what? Our jury here in New York, weak, folded like a cheap camera on that argument, didn't give them the death penalty and they attacked us anyway. They attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
[O'brien:] All right. All right.
[Jones:] That was already in the works.
[O'brien:] We've got to give the last word to Vicky, all right? Go ahead.
[Jones:] Well, that was already in the works they were going to do that. And if we want to talk about monsters, let's remember that the Hydra grew more heads when the head was cut off. I think we have to be very careful. We have to get them all. And the last thing we need is bin Laden missing and becoming Elvis.
[O'brien:] All right. That's a good place to leave it, I think. Victoria Jones, Curtis Sliwa, thanks for well...
[Jones:] Thank you.
[O'brien:] ... we didn't have to have an extra cup of coffee after that discussion. We appreciate it as always.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] Joining us now also from Washington from the Christian Science Monitor is Dante Chinni; he's going to talk about the pardon story itself and the Florida recount story we talked about earlier in the hour. Dante, can you talk about these latest developments, and whether it means that there will be more of a gearing up on Capitol Hill for more or the pardon issue or will there be more of a issue to follow what Mr. Bush has said; it's time for us to move on as nation?
[Dante Chinni, Christian Science Monitor:] I don't know. You get the feeling things are Capitol Hill on spinning out of control of George W. Bush. I don't think President Bush wants these things to go forward, but they are likely to go forward. Dan Burton is not the kind of guy to let these things like this go; he will push them as far as can push them; and we're in for probably a couple weeks of hearings, unless everybody invokes the 5th, then there won't be anything to talk about.
[Chen:] Let's talk a little bit more about Mr. Clinton's effect on his own party; I mean, what is happening for the Democrats? Is the bigger part of their problem, that Mr. Clinton just stays in the limelight and makes the party look bad; or is he actually helping them, because they don't have another leader to step in the place for the Democrats?
[Chinni:] I don't think you can say he's helping them now. Definitely, look, he getting a lot of coverage, but I don't think this is the kind of coverage the party wants right now. There's been a lot of talk this week about how this is a big week for George W. Bush, who releases his budget, and he has to draw these ideas he has had into a cohesive idea. But also, this is a big week for Democrats. Is somebody else going to come up and become the spokesman for the party, someone who's good, not only oratorically, but who's good on points, and can make good points with people? That's what we will see over the next week now four or five days.
[Chen:] Let's talk a little bit about the "Miami Herald" and this recount in Florida. What's the last word going to be on all this, now that we have seen the "Miami Herald"'s recount, and it says Al Gore couldn't have won this any way.
[Chinni:] It's true. Look, here is the thing. Bush will feel very good about this. The president can feel good about this in some way, this ratifies the election; he was the president. Still, there's going to be people so that doesn't change that are Gore supporters that will say not only did he win the popular vote but, hey, what about the voters in Palm Beach that registered their votes in the wrong way, and made a vote for Pat Buchanan and they shouldn't have? We also still have the tally of the state to come; that's still down the road. But for a lot of people that are middle of the road, don't lean they don't dislike George Bush, but they don't know what to think of him yet it helps because it does kind of solidify his claim to the presidency.
[Chen:] But even though it might solidify, doesn't it appear he has been effected by that questioning; or does it seem that the bigger problem for Mr. Bush in these first weeks of his presidency has really been the former president Clinton and the headlines?
[Chinni:] That's true. I mean, I was saying before, Bush really benefits from the comparison to Clinton no doubt about it but his message is being drowned out right now. That's why tomorrow night is so critical to him, because bush gets to get up in front of the nation, and make his case for presidency and his budget and try to steal some of the limelight back. And like you said before, Dan Burton will be out there, maybe keeping this story alive maybe a little longer than the president would like him to.
[Chen:] Dante Chinni, from the Christian Science Monitor, thanks a lot.
[Chinni:] Thank you.

[Mary Matalin, Co-host:] The Ten Commandments on display in courthouses, a moment of silence in public schools: Tonight, are new state laws blurring the line between church and state?
[Announcer:] Live from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press; on the right, Mary Matalin. In the crossfire, Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation Church and State, and Janet Parshall, chief spokeswoman for the Family Research Council.
[Matalin:] Good evening and welcome to CROSSFIRE. Americans list restoring moral values as their No. 1 concern today and are crafting all kinds of legislation to do just that. As the clock strikes 12:00 tonight, for instance, court officials will be posting the Ten Commandments in Paoli, Indiana, and in Virginia, students must now start each day with a moment of silence. But the nation's current concern with moral issues is raising age-old church-state tensions. Civil liberties groups embraced the Supreme Court ban on voluntary student-led prayer at sports events, but loudly opposed this week's decision to extend public resources to private and parochial schools. Tonight, church and state, religion and politics: Is the wall of separation between church and state crumbling or is our reach for religion a reaction to our sense of moral decline? And are our public institutions the right vehicle to inculcate private values? Bill.
[Bill Press, Co-host:] Janet Parshall, good evening.
[Janet Parshall, Family Research Council:] Nice to be here.
[Press:] So tonight at midnight you can hang the Ten Commandments, according to state law, you can hang the Ten Commandments in Indiana courthouses, you can hang the Ten Commandments in South Dakota public schools even though the Supreme Court in 1980 said that hanging the Ten Commandments in the classrooms of Kentucky clearly violated the First Amendment freedom of religion clause. Janet, if it was unconstitutional then, it's still unconstitutional, right?
[Parshall:] Well, let me tell you, the movie "The Patriot" opens this weekend with the phrase "Some things are worth fighting for," and this would be one of them. Let me tell you what Judge Rehnquist said in that decision. He said, The First Amendment does not provide that the private the public sector should be insulated from anything that has religious significance or importance. This is about acknowledgement, Bill. And by the way, those justices, when they penned that Stone versus Graham decision, they had to open bronze doors that have a relief of the Ten Commandments on them. And the chief justice gets to look up and see a copy of Moses holding the Ten Commandments. So how come it's OK for them but it's the scariest thing in the world for the kids in Indiana?
[Press:] Well, take them all out, as far as I'm concerned. But here's the here's the, I think, what doesn't add up about this effort to get the Ten Commandments up in all the classrooms, the idea that hanging something on the wall is going to change human behavior. I want to quote to you a retired Baptist pastor by the name of Bob Lockhart, who wrote recently in "The Orlando Sentinel." Quote: "You've got this mystical idea you can hang the Commandments on the wall and people will start behaving. That's ridiculous. If that works so good, why don't they hang them up in their churches and quit fighting?" Right? Point well-taken.
[Parshall:] I would take diametrically the opposite approach and view: Instead of stripping them everywhere, I'd put them everywhere: hang them in the churches, but put them in the schools and put them in the courthouses. And I'll tell you again last time we talked, we were both teachers, we recognized that fact. Remember, we hung signs in the hallway: Don't run, don't shove, no chewing gum. We didn't know if it would change anybody's behavior, but we infused in their environment a code of behavior. And the funny thing is we sit here tonight having this conversation in America, and Justice Rehnquist recognized that the Ten Commandments are the cornerstone of law for all of the Western part of the world. So it's not it's very germane.
[Press:] No. Sorry, that's not what's behind it. I think what's behind it and I was reading an article in "The Indianapolis Star" that one of the people who voted for or I mean, it was a poll. "Do you support this new law?" Right? One of the people quoted in "The Start" said quote: "The Ten Commandments are very meaningful. They're the background of the Christian religion." A Jewish legislator, the only one in the Kentucky legislature, was asked on the floor of the assembly whether she believed in Jesus and that Jesus rose from the dead. The people who want to put the Ten Commandments up are imposing the Christian religion on all Americans. That's what it's really all about, isn't it?
[Parshall:] Ooh, I'm very surprised you would ascribe motive, because, by the way, if you go back and study the history of the Ten Commandments, it would come from the Judeo part of the Judeo-Christian ethic.
[Press:] No, of course it does. But that's not why it's being used today.
[Parshall:] Actually, it's being used today because it happens to be the cornerstone of American law. And by the way, in many of the places where it's displayed, it's displayed with the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and other historically significant...
[Press:] It's not the cornerstone of American law. That's ridiculous.
[Parshall:] Thou shalt not kill. Anyplace in the American law?
[Press:] Then why don't we get rid of the guns that kill?
[Parshall:] That would be another CROSSFIRE for another night.
[Press:] Yes. I mean, come on. Be consistent.
[Matalin:] Golly. Get a grip. OK. He's already in the holiday mode. How religious is this, Barry? OK. Let's look at the national sentiment about posting the Ten Commandments. Nationally this is from our Gallup poll displaying the Ten Commandments, favored by 74 percent. Only a quarter of Americans opposing it. In Indiana where this has been broadly and openly debated, 90 percent of Indianians support it. It's there are laws passed or in the process of passing in 12 states. It's not isolated. It's not in the Bible belt. It's not even Christian, because 90 percent of America isn't Christian. Do you really find this one little effort to search for some moral grounding that harmful?
[Barry Lynn, Americans United For Separation Of Church And State:] Well, you know, I think Americans do want some moral center. They even want it in politicians and they're having trouble finding it. So they turn to this kind of exploitation of religion. This is religiosity. This is not religion. You know, in Indiana, I'm sure that the polls say most people want the Ten Commandments up on the walls. But if it was as simple as hanging up the Ten Commandments and making us moral, I guess in the state of Indiana, which routinely has Gideon Bibles in the motel rooms, there wouldn't be any adultery there. But there is. It just isn't that simple. It's not magic.
[Matalin:] Watch out. You're talking to a Hoosier here.
[Lynn:] I'm aware of that, and that's why that's why I'm sure you've been in motels for the best of reasons.
[Parshall:] And why did they why did they do that?
[Lynn:] Because a court rightly said that that promotes the idea of Christianity and of godliness in Ohio, and it makes some of the people in Ohio feel like second-class citizens.
[Matalin:] Just a minute, Janet. Before we talk about exploiting this and I you haven't said it, but you're dying to say the religious right, those extremists. Let me point out some of the others supporting this. The Indiana governor happens to be a Democrat. When the House of Representatives voted on posting the Ten Commandments, a quarter of the Democratic caucus did this. It's not just Republicans. It's Democrats.
[Lynn:] Oh, it's not. Oh, believe me.
[Matalin:] It's at all level of government.
[Lynn:] Mary...
[Matalin:] It is you who are in the minority, and what you are expressing is tyranny of the minority.
[Lynn:] No, it's not, because the Bill of Rights of course was designed not to protect the majority, because they already have the majority. They have the right to crush other people's opinions but for the fact that we protect the minority with the Bill of Rights. This is about politics, but it's not about partisanship. It's about people who don't want to show up on some Christian Coalition score card in November looking like their anti-God, anti-Jesus candidate.
[Parshall:] Can I just...
[Lynn:] Janet Parshall's campaign to hang 10, to put the Ten Commandments up is just designed to politicize this issue.
[Parshall:] Really?
[Lynn:] It is not designed if you wanted to make good on the idea of communicating the Ten Commandments, including maybe you could explain to me that second one about graven images. What does that teach children in the second grade? Don't draw pictures of dogs.
[Parshall:] First of all, bipartisan support when the House voted on this, and you'll remember the dialogue started as a result of Columbine, because you can have metal detectors, gun detectors, drug detectors, but we need a heart detector. And just below the veneer, there's a real heart problem in this country. And that's why you're getting polls that say 75 percent support the displaying of the Ten Commandments...
[Lynn:] Janet, why...
[Parshall:] ... including one today from the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center that said 65 percent of teachers in America...
[Lynn:] Why is this...
[Parshall:] ... should lead kids in prayer.
[Lynn:] OK, why is it...
[Parshall:] I'll tell you what, Barry, the problem with this country is not that we're suffering from too much prayer. Trust me.
[Lynn:] No, and that's exactly I would happen to agree with that. The problem is why do more people say that they believe in prayer being returned to public schools than actually take their children to church.
[Parshall:] Because we're hurting we're hurting as a country.
[Lynn:] And so we want the government to jump in, and do what the churches, synagogues and mosques don't do.
[Parshall:] What we don't the government to do is to crush it?
[Press:] I want to jump in. I want to jump in with a question, OK. When you're going to hang the Ten Commandments, I want to know which version are you going to hang? Are you going to hang the version in Exodus or the version in Deuteronomy?
[Parshall:] And Deuteronomy.
[Press:] Or the Jewish version or the Catholic version? Or as George W. Bush said, are you going hang the standardized version, and who decides?
[Parshall:] You know, Bill, the wonderful answer to that question is it's all the same author. So let the group decide.
[Press:] No, it's not. No, it's not.
[Lynn:] No.
[Press:] No, no, no. Let me give you one good example. In the Jewish version it says for the Fifth Commandment, "Thou shalt not murder." The Christian version is "Thou shalt not kill."
[Parshall:] Well, wait a minute. The Christian version would come from the Old Testament, which would be all part of the same Bible.
[Press:] It's different. It's different. The Christians write it "Thou shalt not kill." There's a big difference between the two. Who decides?
[Parshall:] Well, actually, if you look at the Hebrew, the word is murder, which means take innocent life. Same author...
[Press:] Who decides what goes on the wall?
[Parshall:] Whoever wants to. Let it be the statehouse... ... let it be the school house. The bottom line is the issue is not the issue is not the lexicon.
[Press:] I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Could you repeat that? The statehouse will decide. There you go. The state is imposing religion.
[Parshall:] No, no, no.
[Press:] Mary.
[Parshall:] The state decides if they want to hang the Ten Commandments.
[Press:] No. No.
[Parshall:] Here's what the courts have said, and my learned opponent will recognize this. The courts have said you may not be hostile to religion. And since the early '60s, what we've seen is a seismic shift where instead of benevolent neutrality we have seen malevolent hostility.
[Lynn:] Let me tell you why this is absolutely wrong. The Supreme Court in its decision that said you can't have prayer over the public address system at high school football games said the purpose here was to have the majority be able to dominate over the minority. In other words, those Baptists that are the majority in Texas would have always won. Those students would always have been praying their prayer over the public address system.
[Parshall:] And what did Rehnquist say?
[Lynn:] And just a second. And make those minorities, including the Mormon parent and the Catholic parent who brought to the case, feel like they were outsiders in their own community. That's what majority rule does.
[Parshall:] But Rehnquist and in the dissenting opinion, Rehnquist said, "This opinion bristles with hostility." I rest my case, your honor.
[Lynn:] No bristling there.
[Press:] Well, rest your case right there, because we have to take a break and Mary's chomping at the bit. Coming up, meanwhile, political candidates these days are falling all over themselves professing their faith. Should we believe them? And is it making any difference? Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. Religion used to be below the radar in politics, but not this year. Not only has the Supreme Court made several important rulings on religious issues, but all candidates for president, Republican and Democrat, have made a point about bragging about their religious observance. Is this sudden display of religion constitutional or is it causing the founding fathers to roll in their graves? Debating the issues tonight, Janet Parshall, chief spokesperson of the Family Research Council, and Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Mary, praise the Lord.
[Matalin:] But of course hallelujah. Of course, that is the very issue. This is not a sudden display. Our entire history is built on respect for religion. The first state-mandated school in 1647, designed for to teach children how to read the Bible so they could make their own moral decisions. Let's flash forward, Thomas Jefferson, who coined the phrase separation of church and state, when he was the school district I mean, District of Columbia school person he designed a curricula that had the Bible and hymnals as the main text. Our history is replete with public education and religion being part of it.
[Lynn:] There's no question that religion is a part of America. The question is, is the state sponsorship of religion, has it been good or bad in the history of our country? Thomas Jefferson, like most politicians many people are shocked to hear this was not always consistent. But he was, remember, the president who wouldn't declare Thanksgiving a national holiday because he said it was based on a religious principle and therefore inconsistent with the idea of separation of church and state. We do we made the decision over 200 years ago that governments were going to support all religions or some religions. And that's still the standard, not withstanding the Supreme Court did earlier this week by allowing computers and other resources and devices to flow freely into private religious schools. That was a terrible decision of the United States Supreme Court.
[Matalin:] But supporting Bibles or supporting the Ten Commandments, supporting those kinds of rules, if you will, that are nothing more than been codified into our law, a respect for our parents, for our spouses, for our neighbors, they're part of the culture. It's the same rationale that the court used when they validated their overreaching Miranda. It's part of the culture. People don't think of the Ten Commandments as a religious document.
[Lynn:] Oh, that's but that's a sad thing. You know, as a minister in the United Church of Christ myself, I am not happy that when courts look at these words and phrases, they say, well, it's lost it's religious significance. It is religious. At least four of the Ten Commandments are explicitly religious. And I refer to the second one: Do not make graven images. That means don't, according to the Hebrew text, do not make a representation of God or anything God has created above the waters, below the waters or on the land. I mean, that really says a second- grader can't have an art class. What kind of message is that to be communicating?
[Matalin:] Oh, Barry, come on.
[Lynn:] Here's what I'd like to do. Would you agree with this? If we could around this table come up with 10 principles that would include don't steal the pencil from your neighbor's desk, respect the opinions of others, those kinds of traditional community values are always taught in America's schools, from elementary schools to high schools. The only objection I have is when you need approved texts from the Book of Leviticus or some other holy scripture in order to prove it. I don't need that. God, by the way, did not need to be endorsed by the House of Representatives in order to feel I'm sure that he is control in control in the state of Ohio. This is just posturing.
[Press:] Janet. let me ask you about another decision or another state law that's bound to be struck down, which is the Virginia law requiring a moment of silence at the beginning of the day.
[Parshall:] Right.
[Press:] Now, last week, a couple of weeks ago maybe, the Supreme Court ruled that public prayer at football games was unconstitutional. Writing for the majority, here's what Justice John Paul Stevens said. Quote: "Nothing in the Constitution prohibits any public school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during of after the school day. But the religious liberty protected by the Constitution is abridged when the state affirmatively sponsors the particular religious practice of prayer." Janet, you can take that word for word against the Virginia moment of silence, correct?
[Parshall:] No, I don't think so, and the reason because it is a moment of silence. Now, Johnny and Susie can infuse into that silence whatever they want. So this is like a trial for heresy. Uh-oh, within the 60 seconds there may be some religious thought. And that's the problem. Poor Barry suffers from a severe case of theo-phobia, all things religious. It says, "In God we trust" on our coin. We put our hand over our heart, and we pledge allegiance to the flag. "One nation" uh-oh "under God."
[Lynn:] Janet Janet, really...
[Parshall:] We sing "God bless America." So that we systematically strip all...
[Press:] I've just got to jump in first. I've read the law. You are so wrong. The law is a state-sponsored law, again, which sets up that moment of silence for in the law it says "mediation, prayer or some other silent method activity."
[Parshall:] "Or," "or" there's the operative word, "or," "or."
[Press:] No, but...
[Parshall:] In other words...
[Press:] It is
[Lynn:] Bill...
[Parshall:] In its application, it means that Johnny or Susie can put in that 60 seconds what they want, but prayer does not by state law exclude it.
[Lynn:] Let me just let me explain something. We all know, unless we are living in caves...
[Press:] Yes.
[Lynn:] ... that the purpose of the Virginia so-called moment of silent prayer, meditation or other silent activity is to bring the government into the position of setting a specific time and a manner for prayer.
[Press:] It's in the law.
[Lynn:] When Virginia school officials for one day said, well, now teachers don't actually have to say you can do prayer here, of course, your guys on the far right of the Virginia legislature...
[Parshall:] Oh, I know it would come. There it is. There's the adjective.
[Lynn:] ... went berserk, and said, no, no, no, teachers have to use the prayer the word prayer, because they want to encourage prayer.
[Parshall:] Can I tell you why...
[Lynn:] Government has no business doing that. None.
[Parshall:] That's important to respond to. That's important to respond, because it was multiple choice: prayer meditation or reflection, all of the above. And the reason they have to make the declaration, Johnny, Susie, you can put in there, is because there are folks like Barry that have scared the living daylights out of kids that they can't pray in school.
[Lynn:] Yes, I'm sure the average first-grader understands what meditation is. I don't think so.
[Matalin:] That is absolutely contradicting the point you made earlier in this segment, which is if we could all sit around and come up with a list of things that we all agreed on, we all agreed mediation, reflection, prayer. What's wrong with...
[Lynn:] No, we don't. In fact, this moment of silence by the way, it says specifically in the legislative history of this law that you can't get up during this minute of silence. In other words, if you are an Islamic student, you can't move toward Mecca and pray quietly in your own way. If you're an Orthodox Jew who does not believe that silent prayer is heard by God, it is not respectful, it must be vocal, you don't get to do that. So this is discriminatory even amongst religions. But of course, this goes way...
[Parshall:] No, that would violate silence. That would violate silence.
[Lynn:] If you think this is about silence, then you believe in the tooth fairy. This is about bringing back organized government involvement in the religious activity that ought to be in the hands of guess who the parents of this country, not the state.
[Parshall:] I have a question for you. What prayer did the state the Virginia assembly say the kids had to pray? Come on, if it's state-endorsed and it's coercion, what
[Lynn:] They set the time and the manner of prayer, and took...
[Matalin:] It's the one-minute religion.
[Lynn:] Yes, and isn't that a sad thing. The average Christian student has prayed long before he or she gets to that school, he's prayed probably with mom and dad over breakfast. The state of Virginia...
[Parshall:] But by cracky, when he gets to the school...
[Lynn:] ... is unnecessary to this process.
[Parshall:] ... leave it out...
[Matalin:] All right.
[Press:] Right, separation of church and state.
[Matalin:] All right. Let's all pray for a safe and happy holiday weekend, right.
[Lynn:] Absolutely.
[Matalin:] Barry Lynn, thank you so much. Janet, keep the faith. Bill and I will be back with our own prayers on our closing comments. Stay with us on CROSSFIRE.
[Press:] OK, the debate doesn't end here. Barry Lynn and Janet Parshall will take your questions online right after the show at CNN.comcrossfire, and Monday night, Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader steps into the crossfire. Is he going to keep Al Gore from winning the presidency? Monday, 7:30 p.m. Eastern on CNN. You know, Mary, I'm not concerned about these state laws, because it's clear they're going to be struck down, and I'll tell you, because we Americans constitutionally are free to practice religion or not practice religion. We're also free not to have religion forced down our throat. And these laws on the Ten Commandments and the school prayer are unconstitutional.
[Matalin:] You are hanging on to decades of moral relativism spawned by your party, which is why people are reaching out for religion, for spiritual grounding, for some kind of moral foundation after decades of relativism, and not to mention a term two terms of Clinton. I welcome it. The public welcomes it. And they will find a way to make it constitutionally...
[Press:] You are trying to say I'm anti-religion. I am not. I am for the separation of church and state. You can have both. From the left, I'm Bill Press. Good night for CROSSFIRE. Have a great weekend.
[Matalin:] And from the right, I'm Mary Matalin. Have a safe weekend, and join us next week on CROSSFIRE.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] In the last hour, CNN justice correspondent Kelli Arena sat down with U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft to discuss the pending execution of Timothy McVeigh.
[Kelli Arena, Cnn Correspondent:] Mr. Ashcroft, Timothy McVeigh's lawyers called yesterday ruling the Tim McVeigh exception to the rule of law. They say all they wanted was more time to look over the documents. With McVeigh scheduled to die on Monday morning, won't there always be some doubt that full justice wasn't carried out?
[John Ashcroft, Attorney General:] There won't be any doubt, because the courts have acted very responsibly. The court had the opportunity to look at the documents, and Tim McVeigh's attorneys indicated that there were only nine documents that they felt could have any impact at all. Our brief very clearly specified that every fact in all nine of those documents had previously been available to the McVeigh trial team during the trial on the basis of other documents that contained the same facts. The court in getting to the nine-document level and the McVeigh attorneys sifted through what clearly was a lot of material, most of which totally irrelevant. We had folders of newspaper clippings about the trial or about the event. They didn't bring new facts to bear. The U.S. court in Denver, on the basis of our brief, our material, made a very clear ruling. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals made a ruling so clear that McVeigh's attorneys and McVeigh have decided not to pursue this matter further. I believe that justice has been done responsibly, and the completion of this process is very important.
[Arena:] Some suggest, sir, that Timothy McVeigh, in this whole process, has been turned into sort of a martyr for sympathizers or militia groups who view the government as an enemy. How concerned are you that this may give momentum to their cause?
[Ashcroft:] I'm concerned about the victims here. They have been very responsible, and we have a responsibility to the victims 168 people were killed, including 19 children. Hundreds more people were injured. And it's our responsibility, and it's the responsibility of the justice system to come to a completion of the process. This completion will not restore the victims, but it will, at least, allow them to know that the justice process has worked and that it's complete.
[Arena:] Is there any concern at all on your part about momentum building up for that faction of the population?
[Ashcroft:] You know, we want the conduct of justice to be responsible, and that's why we don't think that there should be irresponsible publicity in the media regarding Timothy McVeigh. We didn't think there should be any filming of this matter so that he could promote his ideas. I don't think an individual who kills 168 people should be in any way memorialized or aggrandized. And yes, we are concerned and want to make sure that in our responsible operation of the judicial system, we don't promote activity that is abhorrent, the most heinous crime ever to be perpetrated on American soil.
[Arena:] Following up on the filming of the McVeigh execution, a federal judge in Pittsburgh today ordered that the McVeigh execution be videotaped for use in an unrelated capital murder case. What is Justice's position on that ruling?
[Ashcroft:] The Justice Department respects the rule and regulation of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, which prohibits the taping, recording or memorializing of executions. The Justice Department will do everything within its power to sustain that ruling and to observe it, as a means of providing the right, responsible approach to bringing justice to a completion in terrible, heinous criminal cases like this one, where 168 people died, and hundreds more were injured.
[Arena:] Some suggest, though, that a broader audience viewing an execution could serve as a deterrent. What's your stand?
[Ashcroft:] I think a responsible approach to the completion of the justice responsibility here, to fulfilling this charge we have from the culture, is very consistent with the Federal Bureau of Prisons' prohibition on publicizing, aggrandizing or memorializing the person being executed. Its prohibition on filming, recording or taping is the right policy, and this department will do everything within its power to observe and sustain that policy.
[Arena:] How significant do you think it is that the United States is carrying out the first federal execution in 38 years, when many of our Western partners have either abolished the death penalty or firmly against it?
[Ashcroft:] The Congress of the United States, in response to the kind of heinous, terrorist attacks, like this one, has made it very clear that we value our freedom, and we value the lives of American citizens so profoundly that we want to send a signal that we take it so seriously that we will impose the death penalty on those who inflict this kind of damage on America and on her people. I support the Congress in that respect. I believe a responsible judicial system replete with fairness, guaranteeing that the procedure is a good procedure that is sound, bringing us to the right conclusion, is what it ought to be. And the Congress has appropriately directed this; it's the policy of the United States government, and it are be achieved in this case.
[Arena:] In administering the death penalty, the Office of Justice just concluded a study showing there were no racial or geographical biases, but critics are not satisfied with that conclusion and point specifically to the fact that more blacks and Hispanics are targeted at the front end of the process. While may not be facing capital sentences at the end, at the beginning, there's an unfair targeting of blacks and minorities. How will you address that?
[Ashcroft:] Well, first of all, we have very carefully studied 700 cases, Miss Reno did my predecessor as attorney general. She found no basis for concluding that any bias, ethnic or otherwise, existed. We added 250 more cases that had been more recent and hadn't been part of first study, and with the 950-case study group, we could find no bias whatever. In fact, white citizens were slightly more likely to be charged in and moved through the system in a place of capital jeopardy than were blacks: 38 percent for white, 25 percent for blacks, and 20 percent for Hispanics. So there isn't any evidence. However, I think it's very important that the American people trust the system, and that they trust it to do the right thing. I'm directing the National Institute of Justice to study further and to continue our circumspect, careful approach, so that we can be assured and understand and know there's no racial or gender bias or other bias that makes inappropriate the imposition of this very serious penalty.
[Harris:] There we heard the words of Attorney General John Ashcroft, on the eve of this execution of Timothy McVeigh. Kelli Arena conducted that interview. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Let's talk about the injured U.S. Marines we told you about at the top of the program. CNN's Mike Chinoy was within earshot of the explosion as it happened at the Kandahar Airport.
[Mike Chinoy, Cnn Correspondent:] I was at the side of one part of the runway here at Kandahar Airport, being showed a mine field by the Marines, when we heard an explosion several hundred meters away down the runway. It turned out that three Marine combat engineers had been injured in a land mine explosion there, one of them stepping on a mine. The Marines going through a field they thought was free of mines to a house that they were going to clear of mines. The three Marines were brought here to the tarmac at the center of the airport and put on a helicopter. Then they were medivaced to the field hospital at the Marine base at Camp Rhino in the Afghan desert south of Kandahar. This is the first time the Marines have sustained casualties since they occupied Kandahar Airport on Friday. More Marines have been coming in since then, trying to consolidate their positions. One of the biggest challenges underscored by this latest incident is the profusion of land mines. Three sides of the airport are completely surrounded by land mines. In addition, Marine ordinance disposal experts have told me that they have uncovered in virtually every building here in the airport compound munitions that were left behind by fleeing Taliban and al Qaeda fighters, including mines, artillery, rocket-propelled grenades, surface-to-air missiles. It's a very, very dangerous environment. Add to that concerns about security from Taliban and al Qaeda fighters who may have mingled with the local population nearby. I was told by an Afghan journalist we're working with some of the journalists in the town that the Afghan guards here at the gates say that they detained two Arab al Qaeda members trying to reach this airport compound last night. So security and safety for mines and ordinance remain big concerns for the Marines here. I'm Mike Chinoy with the U.S. Marines at Kandahar Airport.
[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Well, several U.S. Marines that Mike just talked about that were hurt in Southern Afghanistan this morning, we've been talking about that. While at another part of the country, U.S.-led forces continue to pound Tora Bora. CNN Military Analyst and former NATO supreme commander, retired General Wesley Clark joins us live from Little Rock to talk about these new developments. Good to see you, General.
[Gen. Wesley Clark , Cnn Military Analyst:] Thank you, Kyra.
[Phillips:] Well, let's talk about these Marines that that were injured possibly sweeping for mines, looking for booby traps. What's the situation at the airport now, and is this something that could very easily happen again?
[Clark:] Well, it could. There's been ordinance, probably, that's been buried there and mine fields that have been there for years and years and years, since the Soviet occupation. Some of that stuff may be there 20 years or so. Nobody will know where it all is. And it's a matter of systematically going through the areas that are most likely to be used by us and clearing that material out. It should be done by dogs or mechanical means. We should be getting that stuff in very shortly; I'm sure it's on the way.
[Phillips:] That was my question, is how do they do it? Dogs what kind of mechanical means? Is it special types of equipment that they bring in?
[Clark:] Well, you start with hand-held mine detectors, and these detect anomalies under the soil by putting out radio waves and getting reflections from them. But you go into other devices. There are vehicle-mounted devices that can put pressure on the ground and churn up the ground and so forth, and dig in deep. We've developed a number of these during the mission in Bosnia. We had some previously; we've used them in the Iraq campaign during Desert Storm. But they weigh a lot; they're probably not forward with the ships. They're going to have to be flown over from the United States. But they can be brought in. And that's what should be done in this area, because it's flat, it's open, and it is it's good soil for being able to use mechanical devices.
[Phillips:] Now the senior Afghan commander claims Osama bin Laden has left Tora Bora. Do you believe that?
[Clark:] Well, I think it's entirely possible. And we've always speculated on whether or not he would stay there and why he would stay there. It's tough to understand his motives. Don't know what to make of the reports that he was heard on the radio. Maybe he was heard on the radio. Maybe it was coming from somewhere else, maybe it was a tape recording, maybe it was a mistake. But my guess had always been that he would want to stay there long enough to make a stand, to try to show that his fighters could stand up to the great power of the United States, then he would try to slip out. Perhaps that's what he's done. On the other hand, you know, our allies and our special forces people are going to need some time to move through this area. The fact is, they've been advancing against resistance. And when people would shoot at them, they'd fall back, they'd call for airstrikes. Now, no one's shooting. That doesn't mean no one's left there; it doesn't mean every area's been searched. It's just that the areas where they thought they had organized resistance seem to have stopped resisting. So people will be in that area, it will take another probably couple of days, maybe longer, to go through the whole area to really see what's there. Maybe there are other bunkers; maybe there are other caves that we didn't know about.
[Phillips:] Did that surprise you when Ben Wedeman, one of our reporters, reported yesterday that he believed that he was picking up possibly Osama bin Laden on his radio?
[Clark:] Yes, I didn't expect that. I haven't expected to see Osama bin Laden out there personally directing the troops. That doesn't mean he couldn't do it. But it's normally a sign of real desperation, when you get the top commander like Osama bin Laden apparently is down at the tactical level, trying to tell people to move from one position to another and trying to encourage them to keep their spirits up.
[Phillips:] What about these reports that the Eastern Alliance says it's captured the last al Qaeda positions at Tora Bora? Do you believe those reports?
[Clark:] Well, I think that they certainly believe them. But I think it's also a matter of having enough time to really sweep through the area from multiple directions and really look. If this area is as torturous and cut off as everyone says it is and I haven't been there on the ground, obviously, myself personally but it's going to take more than just a couple of hours to work your way through the area. And we may be finding positions there for the next two or three days if they're still there.
[Phillips:] General Wesley Clark, thank you so much, sir.
[Clark:] Thank you, Kyra.
[Phillips:] All right. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] More information for you now on a situation that is breaking in southern California in Santa Clarita, where we have information that a deputy has been shot. We have with us on the phone right now Sergeant Ken Davidson of the L.A. County Sheriff's Department. Sergeant, hello.
[Ken Davidson, Public Information Officer:] I'm here.
[Kagan:] Can you tell us what is happening in Santa Clarita right now?
[Davidson:] Well, right now we have ourselves a barricaded suspect who has been shooting randomly out of his house. Our special weapons team has been deployed at this time. We are in communications with him, trying to negotiate a peaceful surrender.
[Kagan:] Any information about a deputy being shot?
[Davidson:] Yes. We did have one deputy sheriff shot at the scene. He's been transported to a local hospital; his condition is unknown at this time.
[Kagan:] Do you know where he was shot?
[Davidson:] I'm not sure.
[Kagan:] Any more information about the suspect? Does he have anybody else with him in the house?
[Davidson:] I'm sorry, I didn't hear you.
[Kagan:] Does the suspect who has barricaded himself have anybody else with him in the house?
[Davidson:] That is unknown at this time. We believe he is he is armed with numerous weapons, and I believe our negotiations team is in contact with him, talking to him at this time.
[Kagan:] Are you having to evacuate the neighborhood?
[Davidson:] Yes, we had to evacuate the immediate area of the residence on the street.
[Kagan:] All right, Sergeant Ken Davidson with the L.A. County Sheriff's Department. Once again, one deputy has been shot in Santa Clarita in southern California. One suspect barricaded in his house with what they believe to be a number of weapons by his side. More on that story just ahead. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] If you have ever put your child in a hospital, you know it can be upsetting it can be. And a study out today gives parents yet another reason for some worry. On that, here's CNN medical correspondent, Elizabeth Cohen.
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Correspondent:] Two years ago, Dr. Carol Lay's 7-year-old daughter, Jacklyn, was on a morphine pump following surgery to fix a broken elbow. In the middle of the night, Dr. Lay says she found her daughter lying unconscious in her hospital bed.
[Dr. Carol Lay:] The pump itself was programmed was misprogrammed, but very difficult to program, so that it was giving her way, way too much morphine.
[Cohen:] Dr. Lay, an internist, says she and the nurses revived Jacklyn. And a new study finds that errors like this one are common on pediatric wards. The study's authors examined nearly 11,000 medication orders for children in two Boston hospitals, and found 115, or about 1 percent, were incorrect and could have harmed the child. The type of errors varied. Sometimes the dosage was wrong, sometimes the drug was given too often or not often enough.
[Unidentified Female:] Children can't communicate as readily to us when they might perhaps be suffering a side effect to a medication, or if we administer them a medication that's incorrect, or perhaps intended for the patient in the bed next to them.
[Cohen:] The ward with the highest rate of potentially harmful drug mistakes: the neonatal intensive care unit. The study authors say preemies don't have the reserves to recover as easily from a mistake. [on camera]: The study authors found that nearly all the errors in their study, some 93 percent, could have been avoided if the hospitals had used computer programs designed to catch mistakes. [voice-over]: Some hospitals have written their own programs because it's hard to find one for pediatric patients that's commercially available.
[Unidentified Female:] It's a technology that today is custom- made, it's homegrown, and it's not yet at a point where it can be used widespread throughout hospitals.
[Cohen:] One of the study authors says it's worth it for hospitals to write their own. Studies have shown it's a proven technique for cutting down on medication errors that harm patients.

[Bill Press, Co-host:] Old Dan Glickman had a farm.
[Tucker Carlson, Co-host:] And on his farm he had some pie
[Press & Carlson:] E-I-E-I-O. Good evening, everybody. Welcome to Roger Ailes favorite television show. It's THE SPIN ROOM on CNN. I'm Bill Press. Thanks for joining us.
[Carlson:] And I'm Tucker Carlson. Later tonight, we'll be joined by former Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman.
[Press:] And he'll tell us all about those pies and everything else.
[Carlson:] He certainly will. We're going to give him the pie quiz.
[Press:] Tucker, good weekend.
[Carlson:] I would say just short of fantastic.
[Press:] Same here.
[Carlson:] Glad to be back.
[Press:] Good to relax and good tonight to sit back again to sort of kick back and talk about the day's big political story.
[Carlson:] And there has been a lot going on, and we, as always, have combed our SPIN ROOM bureaus from around the globe Jakarta, Islamabad, Ougadougou and culled the most interesting news that you want to know about.
[Press:] Not to mention Des Moines. And you have the questions. We have the answers. But first, we know what your questions are. Our top "Spin of the Day": First of all, who has been a secret visitor to THE SPIN ROOM chatroom?
[Carlson:] And why is Hillary Clinton's real estate agent in such a great mood?
[Press:] Does John McCain there he is does John McCain really have his sights on 2004 already?
[Carlson:] What's the one nickname George W. Bush doesn't want you to use?
[Press:] How hard how hard is it to get your picture taken with Bill Clinton?
[Carlson:] And finally, if Jesse Ventura were a fruit, which fruit would he be?
[The Spin Room. Press:] I can't wait for that one. How about if he were a vegetable? Which vegetable would he be?
[Carlson:] Sadly, you'll have to wait until the end of the program.
[Press:] Cabbage head or...
[Carlson:] Something like I can think of a few others. OK, but first...
[Press:] We could fill a show with those.
[Carlson:] And we probably will.
[Press:] Where do we start, Tucker? Where do we start tonight?
[Carlson:] Well, we start in the future, in 2004. A number of Republicans are saying outloud the rumors are now out in the open that John McCain may run for president in 2004. Why are they saying this? Well, it's the only explanation some Republicans can find to explain the ongoing hostility between John McCain and President George W. Bush, who of course ran against one another this election. And the hostility came out in the open today in an article in "The L.A. Times," in which John Weaver, chief political strategist to John McCain, was quoted as saying this about George W. Bush. Quote: "We either have no relations on a good day or negative relations on a more routine day." They just don't like each other, Bill, it turns out.
[Press:] OK, Tucker, here's the scenario. Right? The McCain- Feingold bill passes the Senate. George Bush vetoes it. John McCain leads the override of the first Bush veto, and 2004 is off and running. I love it.
[Carlson:] You and eight other people will notice that. People are not interested in campaign finance reform. That is rule No. 1. I like John McCain. I wish he'd run again maybe in a dozen or so years, but it won't be on the back of campaign finance reform.
[Press:] Well, now let's move onto the next you know, there's something about the Clintons and office space that they just kind of can't get it right or do it low-key. Remember the flap about Bill's office space. Now the first former first lady, Senator Hillary Clinton has taken space right there you see it midtown Manhattan. She is paying $514,149 a year for her office space. Folks, that makes her office space the most expensive of any single United States senator. I think the senator from New York, Tucker, deserves to be No. 1, don't you?
[Carlson:] Jim Kennedy, who's a very nice guy, clearly did something appalling in a former life, because he's still a spokesman for the Clintons, explained today she needs the space because she has 60 volunteers handling her correspondence and constituent services. So the volunteers' accommodations are being paid for by the taxpayer. How exactly are they volunteers?
[Press:] What the story didn't point out is that if she had stayed in Daniel Moynihan's space, Daniel Moynihan's space would actually have cost $627,000. So actually, Hillary is saving taxpayers a $113,000.
[Carlson:] Or she could to move to Harlem at half price.
[Press:] We should all be we should all be grateful. Share space with Bill?
[Carlson:] You're nuts. OK. And finally now, this is sad news President George W. Bush is offline. Because of revealing laws that allow news organizations to get ahold of any e-mail sent to or from the West Wing, George W. Bush can no longer e-mail his friends. He sent a poignant e-mail to 42 of them using his personal e-mail address, which was GW94B at aol.com. He sent it to 42 friends, including golfer Ben Crenshaw, to say, sadly, I'm not going to be e-mailing you anymore. He's an isolated man.
[Press:] But you know, Tucker, I was glad to read that article, because it cleared up a mystery around here. I mean, we have all those e-mails that we just kind of couldn't quite identify, you know, where they were coming from.
[Carlson:] Yeah, the mystery e-mails.
[Press:] The mystery e-mails. You know, now I think we know. Like here's one right here that just came in the other day. "Tucker rocks; Bill sucks." That little devil, he's been sending e-mails to THE SPIN ROOM, I bet you.
[Carlson:] Oh, I thought that came from Katherine Harris.
[Press:] It could have...
[Carlson:] I think it probably did.
[Press:] All right. It is Monday. Before we move onto Senator to Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman, it being Monday, we have to check our calendar, our special calendar called "America held hostile." You remember this administration started out with 1,461 days. Look at it, folks. Time flies. Only 1,403 days to go before we are free at last.
[Carlson:] And if we can just make a quick pronoun clarification here, when you say "our calendar," what you really mean is "my demented bitter little calendar."
[Press:] Me and my friends.
[Carlson:] OK. We will be back in just a moment with former Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman, the funniest agriculture secretary since Earl Butz.
[Press:] At least.
[Carlson:] At least.
[Press:] And folks,
[Carlson:] At least. We'll be right back. Welcome back to THE SPIN ROOM. As usual, we've backloaded the show, so you'll have to wait until the next segment to find out about tonight's "Tailspin." Jesse Ventura recently announced that he is not a fruit. Find out which fruit he denies being...
[Press:] That's on the Web site, too.
[Carlson:] Yeah, of course, it's on the Web site. Tonight's from Linda Huey from California: "After watching you two, who treat politics astutely but humorously" you can see why we're reading this...
[Press:] Yes.
[Carlson:] ... "I feel all is well with the world. I'm an addict, and I'm not even a Canadian or a prison inmate."
[Press:] All right. That's really good. It's time for our oh, oh. Amy, thank you. Late flashing e-mail here. "Dear Tucker and Bill, finally a school child will be proud to take him or her picture with the" "with the president." GWB he's he's still e-mailing.
[Carlson:] You better file a FOIA request, Bill, and get in touch...
[Press:] I knew it was him before he even signed it. I tell you. Our guest, Dan Glickman, former agriculture secretary, good to have you here.
[Dan Glickman, Former Agriculture Secretary:] It's such a pleasure to be with you guys.
[Press:] Are you ready for this?
[Glickman:] Whatever you want.
[Carlson:] Dan Glickman, this is your life. We're going to start off with one of the highlights, at least caught on film, of your career. I think you were in the House in 1977 in government service up until two months ago but it's this moment, and I think we can get a picture of this here that many of us remember. There you are, giving a speech. See how I ducked there? One of our friends from PETA; noticed that she called you a meat pimp. Was that the last time you tangled with the vegetarians?
[Glickman:] Well, actually, I have been tangling with food protesters since I got in this job for whatever reason, whether it's my handsome body or face or whether it's because of food being such an emotional, provocative thing, I have had pies thrown at me, I have had bison guts thrown at me, I've had naked protesters throwing ungenetically modified seeds at me. They've got something...
[Carlson:] Bison guts?
[Glickman:] Yes. I had infected bison guts out in the Yellowstone Park, and I was the most assaulted member of the Clinton Cabinet. It just, you know, goes with the territory.
[Press:] I was going to say, do you put this down under the perils of public service? Is that...
[Glickman:] I kind of think that these things are good for public servants to show some humility, but they just happen; they just follow me around.
[Press:] You were agricultural secretary and you traveled around the country going to farms; what's the funniest thing you ever saw on a farm?
[Glickman:] Me, probably.
[Press:] Wait a minute; that was probably the funniest thing that they had ever seen on a farm.
[Glickman:] The truth of the matter is, is that I spent a lot of years working on farm issues in Congress and six years as secretary, but frankly, I didn't grow up on a farm. My family was in the scrap iron business which is probably nothing could be further away from actually production agriculture.
[Press:] We have to ask you this question. You served proudly with president Bill Clinton and you know, around Washington here they have these cut outs of current presidents and former presidents, and tourists can walk up and for $6 or $10 you see some of them here they can get their picture taken with Clinton with a saxophone or George W. or Laura Bush, the first lady or whatever. This week, because of the pardon scandal, the photographers nobody wants to get their picture taken any more with Bill Clinton. They have taken the Clinton cardboard cutouts not even Bill Clinton could get his picture taken with Bill Clinton.
[Glickman:] He will be back.
[Press:] Do you find this embarrassing?
[Glickman:] I think it's sad myself. I think he's a handsome guy and the pictures look nice, but I think he will be back. I think that any embarrassment will be temporary and we will see his picture up there again.
[Press:] A loyal fan.
[Carlson:] That's why I want I want to be surprised; I want to hear that Mrs. Clinton, despite all appearances, is actually a deeply funny person.
[Glickman:] Well, I can speak about myself. I'm sure she has a great sense of humor, but I can tell you this, the president had a very good sense of humor; President Clinton did, he was a very funny guy.
[Press:] When you if you saw last week, Christie Whitman was out there on global warming, she got slapped down. Colin Powell was out there on sanctions to Iraq and he got slapped down. Paul O'Neill was out on global warming and on tax cuts and he got slapped down. What it is like when you are a Cabinet member and your president rebukes you? What do you do? Do you just roll over or is there ever a point when you want say, I won't take that, I quit?
[Glickman:] First of all, it never happened to me, because I was never slapped down. I say that kind of half of...
[Press:] Never reversed on a...
[Glickman:] Not realty. I mean, the fact of the matter is but I wasn't there during the beginning of the administration where you are kind of feeling your oats and these things kind of perhaps happen early on but most of the time, you prepare, you plan and these kinds of things don't happen and I think we are seeing kind of the nervousness of the new administration, where they are not quite sure with what direction they are going in. They will make plenty of these mistakes in the short term.
[Carlson:] Now, if you are agriculture secretary, how often do you have to talk to people at ADM? Do you have a special green line, you know, where the ADM guys call you? You must have talked to them a lot.
[Glickman:] You a mean supermarket for the world?
[Carlson:] That's exactly what I mean.
[Glickman:] You know...
[Press:] Does Dwayne Andreas have your home number? Do you have his home number?
[Glickman:] No, I talk to Bob Dole more than I talk to Dwayne Andreas because that's where I get some of my humor from.
[Press:] Good source.
[Glickman:] Yeah.
[Press:] This is not a funny thing, but I noticed one our people at home e-mailed this question I have to ask you you know, Europe, with this frenzy right now over foot-and-mouth or hoof-and- mouth, whatever they call it over there. Is this a real threat to the United States?
[Glickman:] It's a threat to our livestock industry. We don't have this disease; it's a disease that largely effects cattle and sheep and hogs in Third World countries, undeveloped countries.
[Press:] England, France.
[Glickman:] Primarily, it's in England. We haven't had it for about 70 years here; doesn't hurt people, doesn't harm you. It doesn't cause a health problem, but if it gets into the livestock industry, it could be disastrous, because the livestock industry is worth several hundred billion dollars a year, so taken the steps we can take to keep it out of our country and I think we'll be successful. But in this new globalized world we live in, you can't ever be sure so, if it happens here, we have to take steps to really define those animals and get rid of them.
[Carlson:] What is the single best diet out there?
[Glickman:] Eat less. Exercise more.
[Carlson:] What is a good gimmicky diet?
[Glickman:] Well, they all work if you stay on them for a very short period of time, but the problem is, very few of them work if you try to sustain a weight loss program, because it just takes a lot of will power. I have tried every diet in the word. I have gained and lost thousands of pounds in my life.
[Press:] You yourself?
[Glickman:] Me myself. And it's now on the upside lately. We looked at the Atkins Diet and the Ornish Diet and everything else. And Americans spend billions and billions of dollars on diet books and diet programs and ways to miraculously lose weight. Most people are looking for the easy way, so that you don't have to exercise and you can eat what you want, it just doesn't work that way.
[Press:] We have all this surplus food; we are paying farmers not to grow certain crops and we got all this crop, and we pay others to put crops in storage; why don't we sell some of this surplus food we have to Cuba?
[Glickman:] Well, I actually...
[Press:] Do you think we should?
[Glickman:] I actually do believe we ought to let down the sanctions on Cuba. I mean, I don't know how long it will take; I was very much involved with President Clinton in opening the markets to China. And I'm from the Hubert Humphrey school of agriculture, which is you sell anybody anything they can't shoot back at you. Generally, tends to work pretty well. So, I think it will happen. I really do.
[Press:] Well...
[Carlson:] Before we go, our crack team of researchers discovered that apparently you like to eat...
[Press:] You have a favorite snack food.
[Carlson:] It's not peanuts or candy; it's mustard.
[Glickman:] Yes. Thank you.
[Carlson:] Is that true? You actually eat mustard?
[Glickman:] I suck on mustard whenever I can; I also suck on ketchup.
[Press:] We didn't want you to come to THE SPIN ROOM and leave empty-handed.
[Glickman:] My wife will kill me when she sees this, because I leave mustard stains all over the house.
[Carlson:] You would actually eat mustard right out of the packet?
[Glickman:] I tear open the corner. I won't do it here no, no, no, I won't do it here. I kind of suck it out. I used to do it at ball games and stuff like that. It's a good snack. It keeps your eyes open. It's what allowed me to duck very fast when that pie was thrown at me.
[Carlson:] That right there is a qualification of the agriculture secretary as far as I'm concerned. That's adventurous.
[Press:] Did Richard Nixon qualify mustard as a vegetable?
[Glickman:] No.
[Press:] Just ketchup.
[Glickman:] That was actually Reagan.
[Press:] That's right. It was Ronald Reagan.
[Glickman:] But thank you very much.
[Press:] In honor of the THE SPIN ROOM, we want...
[Glickman:] It's an honor for me to be here.
[Press:] Cut the mustard. Dan Glickman, he can still cut the mustard.
[Glickman:] Thank you very much.
[Carlson:] We will be right back with Jesse Ventura and our tailspin and tons more. We'll be right back.
[Press:] Yes, there's another Clinton pardon, well-deserved. Bill Press and Tucker Carlson in THE SPIN ROOM, folks.
[Carlson:] They were all well-deserved.
[Press:] They were.
[Carlson:] OK. It's time for our "Tailspin" moment. Now, this also pertains to Jesse Ventura. SPIN ROOM really is your one-stop shopping for Jesse Ventura news.
[Press:] Almost every night.
[Carlson:] Almost every night. You may remember from a few shows back that Vince McMahon, head of the XFL, complained about Jesse Ventura's performance. It turns out he's not only a bad governor: not a very good sportscaster either. Well, Jesse Ventura addressed this issue in a news conference today. He said, I'm not going to quit. Recalling his days as a Navy SEAL, he said that people who washed out of the SEALs, quitters, were known as bananas. Jesse Ventura said and I'm quoting now "I may take criticism for not being a quitter. But you know what? I'll always be able to look myself in the eye in the mirror and say, 'I am not a banana.'" So he has that going for him.
[Press:] Yes, he does.
[Carlson:] ... about Jesse Ventura. He is not a banana.
[Press:] He does. I look at myself in the mirror every morning and say, "I am not an artichoke."
[Carlson:] Or a tangerine.
[Press:] You know, it makes you feel...
[Carlson:] It really does. It's a way to way to buck yourself up in the a.m.
[Press:] And we do try to keep you up to date with the latest in Web sites, interesting Web sites. Here's one you may want to check out. It is CheneyHeartWatch.com. Actually, this is a spoof. It is an EKG, but it's not really Dick Cheney's EKG. They just say that this is a Web site with a finger on the pulse of the presidency. But you know, Tucker, that spoof does make me think about something. I mean, maybe...
[Carlson:] Actually, that spoof makes me nauseous.
[Press:] Well, there it is.
[Carlson:] You know, there are some things that's the information I just don't want to have.
[Press:] No, but then we could add like brain scans, although that may be dangerous.
[Carlson:] Yeah. No, I would not want to know I don't want to know any more medical information about anybody else.
[Press:] No, but I want to know what the e-mails have to say tonight.
[Carlson:] OK. Here's one addressed to me. "Oh, Tucker, you are so" there are over 22 o's here "wrong. I am very interested in campaign finance. Get your finger on the pulse," writes Patty Ecoles. So, Patty, that makes nine people you and the other eight who are interested.
[Press:] And Gail says: "Senator Clinton should have an office in New York at whatever price the real estate market deems. Please leave her alone already and let her do her job."
[Carlson:] Not a chance. Not a chance of that. Beverly Kenoble writes: "Hillary is royalty please!" exclamation point. "I thought we were the United States. And what happened to the children? She'd do better to spend a half a million dollars on a children's shelter." That's an excellent point.
[Press:] A couple of
[Carlson:] I'm not certain what that means. Is it time for our quick vote, Bill?
[Press:] It is indeed. Those who voted and the quick vote, "Is John McCain using McCain-Feingold simply as a bridge or platform for 2004?" 64 percent said of you said no, his motives are pure, and 36 percent of you said yes, in fact he is. Which gets us, Tucker, to our drum roll.
[Carlson:] "Spin of the Day," Bill.
[Press:] "Spin of the Day." Mine goes right to the very top, to the Oval Office. One thing, folks, whether we agree with his policies or not, whether we are Republican or Democrat, whether we are liberals or conservatives, we can all appreciate about George W. Bush is his gift for the English language. This man adds a new word to the language at least once a day. He did so today. Listen to George W. and listen for the new word.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] The facts are that thousands of small businesses, "Hispanically" owned or otherwise, pay taxes at the highest marginal rate.
[Press:] Now, Tucker, I just want you to distinguish. There are the Hispanically owned businesses as distinguished from the "African- Americanally" owned business or the "Asian-Americanally" owned businesses, or the ones...
[Carlson:] You're prolonging this as long as possible, I know.
[Press:] ... or the ones owned by women, of course, which are the "womenly" owned businesses.
[Carlson:] Womenly owned businesses.
[Press:] Yes, and then...
[Carlson:] Womenly owned businesses. And those, of course, are my favorite kind.
[Press:] Then there are those owned by the gays, which are the "gayly" owned businesses. And I I thank you,
[G.w. Carlson:] I I find it very totally charming. He has the confidence to invent new words.
[Press:] I stopped at that Hispanically owned deli down the street on the way here. I was...
[Carlson:] Very
[Sen. Russ Feingold , Wisconsin:] The eyes of the nation are on this chamber. This group of 100 senators can prove to the public that we are the Senate that the people want us to be. But the public's patience is wearing very thin.
[Carlson:] The public's patience is wearing very thin. Well, to test that theory, I went to Capitol Hill today, and it turns out the public was, in fact, at lunch. There was virtually nobody there. There were about 80 protesters, a nice assortment. Granny D she's 91. There was John Anderson, who ran for president some time in the last century. And there was just about no one else: me and a couple of other reporters. The public doesn't care. It's sad. There are issues to be debated, but this is not the subject that sets people on fire, Bill.
[Press:] May I tell you one more time? The public is not on Capitol Hill. The public is out there.
[Carlson:] Oh.
[Press:] And the people out there...
[Carlson:] Oh, right.
[Press:] ... want campaign reform, and you are...
[Carlson:] Desperately.
[Press:] ... underestimating them, Tucker.
[Carlson:] They're at the gates, Bill.
[Press:] All right, folks. We'd like to carry on, and we will again, tomorrow night at 10:30 Eastern, 7:30 Pacific. But right now, we're going to take a break and then come back with...
[Carlson:] "SPORTS TONIGHT" and the sports people.
[Press:] Sports guys coming up.
[Carlson:] We'll be right back.
[Press:] Tucker, who's the only other bigger name in television than Press and Carlson?
[Carlson:] You have to be pretty huge. You probably have to throw chairs on the set to be bigger than we are.
[Press:] You got him. Jerry Springer...
[Carlson:] Tomorrow night, on
[The Spin Room. Press:] Tomorrow night on
[The Spin Room. Carlson:] Do not miss it. And don't miss "SPORTS TONIGHT," which comes right now with Vince Cellini.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] Well, amid the death and destruction in New York, some new lives are being celebrated as well. And we want to bring that to you now. Since Tuesday's attacks on the World Trade Center, dozens of babies have been born in New York City. And to many, that's a big reason for optimism. Story now from CNN's Beth Nissen.
[Beth Nissen, Cnn Correspondent:] The outside walls of New York University Medical Center in Manhattan are papered with the names, descriptions and photos of the missing, many shown with their children, carrying them, feeding them, holding them in their first days in this world. Yet at the end of a week when thousands of lives ended, there is this small comfort: knowing that other life have begun. Meet Nora Rose Draper, born September 15th, one of 56 babies born here since Tuesday morning.
[Unidentified Female:] You know, I've just felt so good since she's been here, for the first time since that day.
[Nissen:] That day, the day the World Trade Center was attacked. The labor nurses here logged an unusually high number of births Tuesday.
[Unidentified Female:] Twenty-two. Twenty-two babies, 24 hours.
[Unidentified Male:] That's actually a lot.
[Unidentified Female:] That is a lot. That is a lot.
[Nissen:] Nurses say high stress often triggers labor. It did for Lorraine Tobias. She watched the horror unfold on television all last week, until Friday night.
[Lorraine Tobias:] Like it hit me. And that night, I went into my water broke, and she came.
[Nissen:] Came three weeks early.
[Unidentified Male:] I think she decided that it was you know, people needed some good news.
[Nissen:] Little Max Edelsteinber's safe arrival was good news for his parents, too. Yet they both admit, they are apprehensive.
[Unidentified Female:] It was sort of overwhelming, the idea that there's so much death and destruction going on, and here we were bringing a new life into the world, and what that world would be for this child.
[Unidentified Male:] Yeah, we even tried to call right away, to call our Congress people to ask them, you know, to push for justice rather than revenge. We want peace; we don't want more killing.
[Tina Monis:] His name is Jaden Francisco Mirez. And I had him today at 8:06 a.m.
[Nissen:] Tina Monis is praying for peace especially hard. Little Jaden's father doesn't yet know his son has been born. Tina's husband is in the U.S. Navy, serving aboard a submarine that is somewhere in the world.
[Monis:] I have no way of getting in contact with him probably for a month, a month, month and a half.
[Nissen:] The past six days have been terribly hard for Tina: first the attack, now the talk of war.
[Monis:] Him being in a war now, with this going on, it's you don't even want to think about it. Hopefully, me bringing this life into the world is making those around me more joyful.
[Nissen:] All of these new parents, and the labor-weary nurses, are at heart optimistic.
[Unidentified Female:] It's hope. You know, the children are our hope. And that's a new generation that we're bringing into the world. And they're our hope. Alex's mother thought we should call her Hope
[Nissen:] They didn't name her Hope, although for her parents, she does represent it.
[Unidentified Female:] You know, she's being born into the world, but she's also coming into the world she'll make it better. I think it's still a good world. I just think we have to believe that.
[Nissen:] Maybe we do. Beth Nissen, CNN, New York.

[Sydney:] Movie fans are counting down the minutes to "Gone in 60 Seconds." It opens tomorrow, the next big movie in a summer that has already breaking records, thanks to "Gladiator" and "Mission: Impossible 2." Lauren Hunter reports on the hot fun heading our way.
[Lauren Hunter, Cnn Correspondent:] It's going to be a sizzling summer on the silver screen, and check out who's coming.
[Unidentified Actress:] Come on, we're having a party. Do you want to come and join the party?
[George Clooney, Actor:] It's as compelling a story as I know.
[Angelina Jolie, Actress:] It's the jones for speed.
[Sean And Marlon Wayans, Comedians:] Hilarious!
[Mel Gibson, Actor:] It's a transportation to another time, another place.
[Jim Carrey, Actor:] It's all me.
[Hunter:] Well, not really. For Jim Carrey, it's actually "Me, Myself & Irene." That's one of more than 100 films released this summer, a traditional 15-week period that makes up nearly 40 percent of the year's total box office take.
[Anne Thompson, West Coast Editor, "premiere" Magazine:] The studios spend more than they do any time of the year, and the idea is to score.
[Hunter:] In the crucial 4th of July slot, George Clooney in "The Perfect Storm," the true story of a fishing crew caught in a force-12 gale.
[Clooney:] Everybody was throwing up like crazy. They gave us clear plastic barf bags. Here's a new recommendation: not clear plastic from now on.
[Hunter:] Clooney's competition? Mel Gibson in "The Patriot," a father-son saga set against the backdrop of the American Revolution. [Begin Video Clip, "the Patriot"]
[Unidentified Actor:] This is not the conduct of a gentlemen.
[Gibson:] I'll take that as a compliment. It's got all the big stuff, too, but it's a small, very personal story.
[Hunter:] Twenty-nine years later, the baddest private detective ever is back Samuel L. Jackson in "Shaft."
[Samuel L. Jackson, Actor:] Cool, and tough and semi-sexy a different kind of hero for a different time. He is a bit more volatile and a bit more violent.
[Hunter:] Nicolas Cage and Giovanni Ribisi are brothers with a fondness for stolen cars and Angelina Jolie in "Gone in 60 Seconds."
[Jolie:] Racing Ferraris around and learning how to, like, steal a car, and hanging out with Nic and Giovanni, you know that ain't a job.
[Hunter:] Men in dresses are big, literally. Martin Lawrence is "Big Momma" and Eddie Murphy is, well, pretty much everyone in "Nutty Professor
[Ii:] The Klumps." It's Bruce Willis, young and old, in Disney's "The Kid." Scary movie parodies, what else? scary movies, and Brendan Frasier sells his soul to Elizabeth Hurley's Satan in "Bedazzled." It's a psychological thriller for Harrison Ford and Michelle Pfeiffer in "What Lies Beneath," and a sci-fi thriller in "Hollow Man."
[Unidentified Actress:] We come up with a formula for invisibility.
[Hunter:] Jennifer Lopez'scientist gets in other people's minds in "The Cell." And superpowered mutants inhabit earth in "X-Men." Plenty of animated fare this summer, including "Thomas and the Magic Railroad," the "Pokemon" sequel, "Rocky & Bullwinkle," and "Chicken Run," with Mel Gibson as the voice of Rocky.
[Clooney:] If I was competing, I wouldn't want to go up against Mel Gibson.
[Gibson:] Well, he's going to have his work cut out for him trying to beat the rooster there.
[Hunter:] Hollywood's hoping this summer's box office will be something to crow about. Lauren Hunter, CNN Entertainment News, Hollywood.
[Sydney:] "ER's" departing Julianna Margulies is 34 today. Nancy Sinatra's boots are still made for walking at 60. And comedian Jerry Stiller of "King of Queens" is 71.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Updated. Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome back, as we continue our coverage of President Bush's first overseas trip as president. This may be his first trip, but it continues a long tradition of presidents traveling abroad. And our Garrick Utley takes a look at some of the sights and the challenges of a president on the road.
[Garrick Utley, Cnn Correspondent:] How often we have seen this: presidents and first ladies maintaining dignity and balance while descending the steep stairs of Air Force One arriving in a distant land. They've been doing it for some time. Theodore Roosevelt was the first president to travel outside the United States when he visited the Panama Canal in 1906. Woodrow Wilson was the first president to visit Europe for the peace conference following World War I. He spent a total of six months there, the longest a president has stayed outside the United States. Franklin Roosevelt was the first president to travel abroad by plane, to North Africa in World War II. But the flight took two days and was so uncomfortable that Mr. Roosevelt took the boat for his other trips overseas. [on camera]: Clearly, presidents would not get the itch to travel the world until something faster and smoother came along. It was the 707. In 1959, Dwight Eisenhower flew off in it to visit 11 nations in 18 days, a presidential record that still stands. [voice-over]: Presidential trips have been about symbols and rhetoric. The trips have also been about substance. There was no way Richard Nixon could make the historic open into China without going to China. As important as the trips are for leaders to get to know each other, they have lost some of their old grandeur. What they have not lost is their cost. When Bill Clinton visited six African nations in 1998, it took 10 advance teams to prepare for the visit, 98 military airlifts to fly in 13 helicopters, five emergency medical facilities, as well as assorted limousines and other equipment. Thirteen hundred federal officials went along on the trip. And that does not include Secret Service personnel. The government's General Accounting Office put the cost of the visit at over $48 million. [on camera]: But, then, neither the president nor anyone else on Air Force One gets frequent flyer miles. And despite all the comforts of their own 747 today, presidents still face some of the same problems of any global traveler. [voice-over]: There is the fatigue of jet lag, as Ronald Reagan discovered on his trips. There can be tummy troubles, as George Bush found at a dinner table in Japan. And if George Bush was the second most traveling president ever, who was the first? No surprise: Bill Clinton, who made 122 visits to 74 countries. George W. Bush, after this trip, will be at six countries and counting. Garrick Utley, CNN, New York.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] If you've been following the news on all the anthrax scares that have been coming out and spreading around the country, you know, the first of these cases came up out of Boca Raton, Florida. Two employees of American Media, Inc., a tabloid company, tabloid newspaper company in Florida, had a case where two employees did contract anthrax, one of whom actually did die. There are been also other reports possibly, saying that, perhaps that some other employees there may also have been exposed to the anthrax bacterium. Let's check in now with our medical news correspondent, Rhonda Roland, who has been tracking this particular new development down for us Rhonda.
[Rhonda Roland, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Well, Leon, as you just said, we are just hearing from the "New York Times" and Associated Press that there may be five additional people who have tested positive for anthrax antibodies in their blood. And I contacted the CDC, and they have said that those results are not final. That is, any other testing that is going on in Florida right now, the results are not final. And I think that we need to say that, with the past cases the first case, the second, the third that they've all been announced by health officials down in Florida. And none of this information, as we know yet, is coming from any health officials, either in Florida or from the CDC. So once again, we don't want to unduly alarm anyone until final results are in Leon.
[Harris:] Well, Rhonda, do we know how far they've gotten into the process of checking and testing every single employee? I believe there's something, about 1,000 employees there at that company.
[Roland:] Well, with the nasal swab test, which is really just seeing if people have been exposed, if they've been in the vicinity where the anthrax was. Believe that those tests, at least the first 700, were complete. The last 300, I think we're waiting for absolute final results on. And then we know that they were going to do some additional blood testing. And we were hearing that that was going to begin this week, and some of it would be done on a voluntary basis. So I think we just have to make it clear that this is a moving process here, a continual process. And when there may be something suspicious on one test, another test may be followed up. And just to put this in perspective with the case we heard of in Nevada, we heard about a positive test on a male sample, that it was negative, then a positive one. There are a lot of series of tests being done, and we need to wait for official results. The CDC is very clear, that when they have something positive, in order to protect the public's health, they will make that information available.
[Harris:] Rhonda Roland reporting on the telephone for us. We thank you very much. We can try to straighten out this some more with our Dr. Sanjay Gupta, who joins us once again here in the studio. You've been following this quite closely. What do you make of what's happened here? I mean, we were talking a while ago about the number of employees to be tested there, and the fact it might have been kind of surprising to think that they might be find this many cases in the last couple of people to be tested?
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] That's right. They talk about 965 people coming back negative as of yesterday. What preliminary preliminarily as we're hearing from Rhonda, five people have antibodies. Let me just clarify something about that. First of all, we don't know for sure that that's confirmed. But what that means is that there was an exposure at some point. Anybody who's been exposed to any sort of anthrax, really, may develop antibodies in their blood. We don't know when those exposures occurred. What we're talking about here, maybe, is people who work with animals, people who work in research labs, that may have had contact with anthrax. It's hard to pinpoint these five people and if, in fact, that this is true with the Florida case at this point, does not mean that they're infected. It only means that they have been exposed, and at some point in the past. These tests can be confusing. And it's not a perfect science. you have to do a lot of different tests. And as Rhonda just pointed out, we'll certainly hear for sure from the Centers for Disease Control when these have all been confirmed. A lot of these things are preliminary at this point.
[Harris:] OK. So in other words, don't believe it until you actually hear it from after we've heard it from the doctors.
[Gupta:] That's right,...
[Harris:] There you go.
[Gupta:] ... that's right.
[Harris:] All right. Dr. Sanjay Gupta, thank you very much for clearing that up, appreciate it. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Announcer:] A CNN viewer wants to know: Why does Congress use "yea" and "nay" instead of "yes" and "no" to express their approval or dissent?
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Well, the term "yea"s and "nea"s actually comes out of the United States Constitution. Right there in article I, section 5, clause 3: "The yeas and neas of the members of either House on any question shall, at the desire of 15 of those present, be entered on the journal. Now, "yea" and "neas" are traditional English usage. Remember, when the Constitution was written, the United States had only recently declared its independence from Britain. Taking a vote by "yea"s and "nea"s is really a special procedure spelled out in "Robert's Rules of Order." The chairman states the question, the clerk calls the role, and each member rises and either votes in favor by saying "yes," or "aye."
[Unidentified Male:] Mr. Gramm of Texas.
[Sen. Phil Gramm , Texas:] Aye.
[Schneider:] Or votes against by saying "no."
[Unidentified Male:] Mr. Hollings.
[Sen. Fritz Hollings , South Carolina:] No.
[Schneider:] Then the final result is announced.
[Unidentified Male:] The vote on this bill is 60 aye, 34 nay.
[Schneider:] The term "yea"s and "nay"s refers to the tallies, not to the word people use when they vote.

[Announcer:] From the world headquarters of CNNfn, the financial news network of CNN, this is MONEYWEEK, with Terry Keenan.
[Terry Keenan, Cnn Anchor:] Hello, everyone, and welcome to MONEYWEEK, where we aim to keep you ahead of the curve for the upcoming week on Wall Street, including a look ahead to a busy week on the earnings front. Dell, for one, will be out with earnings. As always, our MONEYWEEK insiders will be here for a roundtable. But first, the market starts the month of May with a slide. Stocks end the week lower on concerns about rising interest rates. AT&T; raises a warning flag, saying earnings will fall short of expectations. And two media titans clash Time Warner and Disney in a cable turf war. And, as always, we'll have stock picks for the coming weeks and months on Wall Street. We begin, though, with the outlook for stocks and for interest rates. The Dow and the Nasdaq rallied on Friday, but overall it was another tough week, investors concerned that the Fed will aggressively raise interest rates when it meets on May 16. The market also rattled following an earnings bombshell from AT&T.; That company warning that earnings and revenue growth will be lower than expected this year, the stock plunging sharply, falling to the lowest level in more than a year. And so far this year, AT&T; is down 20 percent. AT&T;'s decline is just the latest in a string of recent big blow- ups. On Tuesday, AT&T; lost about $22 billion of its market value. A few weeks ago, Bristol-Myers Squibb lost $30 billion in market value. Last month, Microsoft lost about $80 billion in one day, ahead of the antitrust ruling against the company. And in March, Procter & Gamble shed about $35 billion, following a profit warning. Lucent lost $50 billion for the same reason. So the big question: Who will be next? Our insiders this week say there may be more big stock blow-ups down the road. Joining me now is Todd Eberhard of Eberhard Associates and Doug Cliggott at J.P. Morgan, he's the chief equity strategist there, and Jim Grant of "Grant's Interest Rate Observer." And, gentlemen, welcome. Todd, let me start with you. More big blow-ups on the way? Where do you see them coming?
[Todd Eberhard, Eberhard Investment Association:] Well, certainly I do think there are going to be more with THE earnings front continuing and Dell coming out shortly and a lot of other numbers that we're going to see, specially inflationary pressures, could very much hurt some of these big stocks, even the good-quality companies with earnings.
[Keenan:] Doug, are you concerned by these big blow-ups.
[Doug Cliggott, J.p. Morgan:] We are, and I think what's a little bit surprising about them is they're occurring in an environment where overall corporate earnings are actually very strong. And so as we look forward, our guess is the U.S. economy will be slowing, corporate earnings will be slowing. So we might actually start seeing more, rather than fewer earnings disappointments.
[Keenan:] Jim, I'm not going to ask you if you're worried, but I would like to...
[Jim Grant, Grant's Interest Rate Observer:] I've been petrified for the last 10 years.
[Keenan:] I would like to know, though, what you're looking at in particular behind some of these big sell-offs.
[Grant:] Well, what we're trying to look at is the 10 [k] s, and the Qs and the documents. Footnote reading and general securities analysis have gone out of fashion during the preceding five or so years. It has not paid too much to focus on the details because so great was the momentum or liquidity and the fervor that microanalysis was actually generated negative returns. But if you begin to look closely at some of these big-cap companies, for example, you see trouble. IBM is a case in point, buying back over the past five years, in dollar terms, 30-odd billions of dollars worth of stock, more than it has earned. So its debt is up, its equity is down, its business prospects are diminished. It is buying stock at 10 times book, it earlier bought it at two times book, and yet the Street is nonplused. The Street is happily keeping a buy on IBM. That to us is a potential disaster in the wings.
[Keenan:] And, Todd, given the sell-offs in these companies and how they've been punished by Wall Street, are you seeing any value there, or are you going to await it out?
[Eberhard:] There's a word we haven't heard in a while: value investing. That's been out of focus for a bit. But I do think there are positions out there to be looking at. We look at buying on dips, or major dips, but it really has not been a stock-by-stock dip. It's really been the markets overall, to a great degree, that have sold off, with certain stocks that have sort of stood out Microsoft being a case, or AT&T.; So we're looking at positions that we like that actually have earnings, which is something, again, many people haven't focused on, and picking up companies that we think have good quality prospects for the future.
[Keenan:] Any of those on our list...
[Eberhard:] They are.
[Keenan:] ... the AT&Ts;, the Microsofts that you like?
[Eberhard:] Well, I think certainly the Procter & Gamble is on the list, certainly, and I think that's something for the future. Though it may not happen in three or six months, I do see a very rosy picture for that. We still have to brush our teeth and wash our hair.
[Keenan:] Doug, where are you seeing value?
[Cliggott:] Same exact place. We think.
[Keenan:] That worries.
[Eberhard:] I knew I liked you.
[Cliggott:] The stocks that are broken down in the consumer staples sector we're very attracted to, because we think one of the themes going forward is we're going to get a little bit more rather than a little bit less inflation. And that tends to help beverage stocks, household products stocks, food stocks. And so that's where we're going to be looking for bargains here.
[Keenan:] Any names in particular?
[Cliggott:] Sure. In foods we like General Mills, in beverages we like Budweiser, we like Pepsi. Actually, a pharmaceutical stock that took a pretty good hit that we like is Schering-Plough.
[Keenan:] OK, we're going to take a quick break. And just ahead, our rate debate. Interest rates look like they're heading higher. we're going to tell you how that could impact your portfolio. And a bit later, we'll get some stock picks from our insiders. You're watching MONEYWEEK on CNN. Cisco Systems this year has been vying with GE and Microsoft to be the world's biggest company in terms of market cap. Next week, a potentially market-moving report comes out as the company reports its fiscal first-quarter earnings. Cisco is expected to earn 13 cents a share. The stock has bucked the down trend this year, posting a gain of about 20 percent. Also due out, Dow component Wal-Mart is expected to report earnings of 28 cents a share. On Thursday, Dell Computer's numbers are out. And on the economic front, we're going to get retail sales figures on Thursday. On Friday, the all-important Producer Price Index report for the month of April. And, of course, the week after next we get the Federal Reserve meeting, and a widely anticipated hike in interest rates. Let's talk about how big that hike could be. Jim Grant, what do you think?
[Grant:] I'm in the 50 basis point, or one half a percent, camp. And I think there's an important reason for expecting the Fed to do something more than its usual incremental step, that being that there's been a great confusion about productivity. Chairman Greenspan has hung monetary policy on the perception of a breakout to the upside in productivity. Wall Street has use productivity as its great skyhook for the valuation of tech stocks. The economists Jim Medoff and Andy Harlis in my sheet have shown, I think quite persuasively, that the 5 and 6.9 percent numbers from the last half of 1999 were statistical illusions generated by the some innocent assumptions by the government that people were working 37.4 hours a week in the run-up to Y2K. They were working, in fact, 1,337.4 hours a week, and some adjustments to computer prices having to do with the perceived quality. So productivity is nowhere near as strong as advertised, and we saw some of that this week.
[Keenan:] And we also saw it in your op-ed piece in "The New York Times," the outline, that argument this week. The market seems to buy what Jim is saying because we saw this week a 50 basis point hike factored into the stock and bond markets, arguably. Do you think that that's what the Fed is going to do come May 16?
[Eberhard:] I do. We were more the quarter point believers going back about three or four weeks ago and have shifted dramatically towards the 50 basis point move, which I think is going to happening also. The question, really, at that point is what's next. And that's really the market does not like uncertainty at all. It's fine, I think, at this point built in for half a point, but past that it's going to be a question.
[Keenan:] And the market might even be relieved if we got it, right?
[Eberhard:] I think it will. I actually look at it as being, possibility a short-term, but a relief nonetheless for the markets to go up on that news.
[Keenan:] Doug, your take on all this?
[Cliggott:] Same view. I think it's tough to argue that incrementalism, you know, the nudging up rates a quarter of a percentage point has been a successful policy, so I think they have to get more aggressive.
[Keenan:] But that's...
[Grant:] This is Morgan bank talking. They're going to do it.
[Keenan:] It's official now. Well, you know, Alan Greenspan hasn't raised by 50 basis points in five years. So is he behind the curve? Does he realize it?
[Grant:] Well, burden of proof falls on those who predicted he will. It is highly out of character. But he has been taken in by the statistical illusion of this supposed upside break-out in productivity. And I think when he is disabused of this, he will feel that he is farther behind than he he will know that he is far behind, and he will act decisively.
[Keenan:] OK, Grant and Morgan say it's so. Coming up next, we're going to wrap it up with our MONEYWEEK insiders. We'll get some predictions up next. Time now for predictions. And we're joined as always by CNNfn's financial editor Myron Kandel. And, Myron, we just had the interest rate discussion here. What's your prediction?
[Myron Kandel, Cnn Financial Editor:] Well, I really hesitate to disagree with three such wise men, but I think the Fed raises interest rates by a quarter point, not half a point. And, of course, the only thing that could change that, in my view at any rate, is a major increase in the PPI and the CPI, which we are yet to see. I think the figures that came out on Friday on employment were a little better than expected but not enough to really panic the Fed. So I'm looking for a quarter-point increase when the Fed meets on May 16th.
[Keenan:] And that's based primarily on Mr. Greenspan's cautious nature?
[Kandel:] Yes, partly largely on that, you're right. I think he's a gradualist. The pattern has been quarter-point raises. I think he's going to stick to that.
[Keenan:] Jim, a prediction from you.
[Grant:] Yes, I predict continuing a continued renaissance in the art of security analysis. We'll make even greater strides next week, and, therefore, I predict my investment strategy for this idea to be long CNN and short
[Cnbc. Keenan:] And it will make greater strides next week because of some of those...
[Grant:] Even greater strides.
[Keenan:] ... some of those reports. OK, we'll take that trade. Todd, how about you your predictions.
[Eberhard:] How could I disagree with any of that? I'm sorry. I, as we said, still think it's a half a point, due to the economic nature of what's happening. But predictions on stocks, we're looking at some of the companies like a Procter & Gamble, which we think are a decent bargain at this point, and General Electric, which is a 3-for-1 split candidate. In the technology arena, there's a company called Metromedia Fiber Networks which we think is excellent and provides very good service and good value at this level.
[Keenan:] Any of the Internet stocks appeal to you at these levels?
[Eberhard:] We really were never big believers in the e-Net or e- commerce game. We really like the suppliers, the Ciscos, Lucents and the MFNXs out there.
[Keenan:] Doug.
[Cliggott:] I think looking beyond, you know, two weeks out and how much the Fed moves interest rates, I guess we feel interest rates will continue to move up over the next three to six months because inflation will continue to move up, and so a very sort of defensive approach to equities, really for the first time since 1994, makes sense here.
[Keenan:] And we've gone nowhere on the Dow and Nasdaq this year except south. How do we finish out the year?
[Cliggott:] Our S&P; target for then end of the year is 1300, so we're on 1400 now.
[Keenan:] OK, we'll leave it on that cautious note. Thanks, gentlemen And coming up next, a new twist on the phrase "May sweeps." ABC's programming earlier this week was swept off Time Warner cable systems. We'll find out if it could happen again. A clash between two media titans played out on the airwaves this past week. Time Warner, the parent of this network, blocked ABC programming in 3.5 million homes during the crucial May sweeps. At issue, Disney wants new channels featured for 'Toon Disney and its soap opera network, as well as the Disney Channel, put on Time Warner's basic cable service. A temporary truce was called on Tuesday, ending a 39-hour blackout. The Federal Communications Commission ruled on Wednesday that Time Warner cable violated an FCC rule when it blocked the ABC and Disney programming during the sweeps. Time Warner said that it objected to the ruling because, in its view, it gave broadcasters more power rather than less, adding that the company didn't, quote, "think that it was the intent of Congress," unquote, and vowed to pursue further review of the order. Shares of Time Warner and ABC's parent, Walt Disney, ended the week lower. While ABC programming is back on, the companies still face the task of working out a deal. Joining me now is a media consultant who says this is the first of many conflicts that will affect the industry. Joining me now is the chairman and CEO of the Myers Group, Jack Myers. And, Jack, welcome back. Good to have you with us.
[Jack Myers, The Myers Group:] Good to be here, Terry.
[Keenan:] A wild week in the battle between these two media giants. Who won?
[Myers:] Short term, Disney won in the public relations battle that was being fought. Really, there were no winners and losers. There were two losers, because what it sets up is a continuing battle between media giants, among media giants, for primacy and who's going to have that pipeline to the viewer, who's going to control the content. Disney's looking for assurances that in the AOL-Time Warner combination, they'll have access to the viewer and they'll control their content and control the rights. This is really an interactive television battle that's being fought. It's for digital, it's for broadband, and there are no winners and losers here. I think the government to a certain extent is the loser here, because they did set up regulations and Disney is Time Warner is right in saying this was not the government's intent. By the same token, it was the government's intent to protect that local broadcast signal to get through, to the viewer and to get through in its full component. So the question is how that will shape up for the next few years.
[Keenan:] What about investors? Because for years now we've heard that content is king. And yet this seems to be a real battle between content and distribution, and the lesson, at least one of them, to be learned from this week was that Disney didn't have the distribution, and it didn't get its content to three and a half million viewers.
[Myers:] Well, it may not have got its content to three and a half million viewers, but "Millionaire" on Monday night, despite the blackout, still did its biggest rating to date, 38 million 38 12 million homes reached. So it was very strong. On the other hand, the issue really, Terry, I think, is how this whole battle shapes up for digital and broadband content. Now that you have competition to the cable operator from the satellite distributor, from Echostar and DTV, those are two very strong plays, very strong competitors who now carry the broadcast signal. The viewer, the consumer, has an option. The cable operator has to fight for the right to maintain their pipeline into the home and to keep these investments that they've made and billions of dollars in their control and with their revenue streams. On the other hand, Disney and Viacom and others putting billions of dollars into programming content that now that local operator can interrupt with all types of intermittent signals coming over a number of different streams, taking people to the Internet, to interactive content, away from the programming, has to make sure that it's protected well. I don't think we've seen either the beginning or the end of this battle yet.
[Keenan:] And long term, you also think that perhaps some of the over-the-air broadcasters will come out winners, right?
[Myers:] I think the local broadcast segment, especially companies like Hearst-Argyle and Bilo are very strong players for the future. But I also think Time Warner-AOL's combination is the new AT&T; for the future in terms of a blue chip. And Disney's a very strong player in its content as well.
[Keenan:] OK, thanks, Jack, as always.
[Myers:] Thanks.
[Keenan:] Jack Myers of the Myers Group. And just ahead, a final look at what you need to know for the coming week on Wall Street. "The Last Word" is up next. Volatility expected to continue on Wall Street next week no surprise there. But joining us for a final look at some of the items that could move the markets is CNNfn's Susan Lisovicz Susan.
[Susan Lisovicz, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Terry. Well it seems there's no end in sight for the volatility. As you mentioned, investors are nervous the Fed will hike rates by half a percentage point when it meets on May 16th. Investors will also be keeping an eye on shares of AT&T.; The stock sold off this past week following an earnings warning. And Cisco Systems will be in the headlines. It's expected to report earnings on Tuesday. You may recall, the company beat the Street last time around. Attention will once again turn to Microsoft, as the company hands its proposed remedy to the government that's on Wednesday. And finally, investors will be looking for any signs of inflation in Friday's report on producer prices Terry.
[Keenan:] And it's interesting because we'll get that report on Friday, then on Tuesday we'll get the Consumer Price Index report, right before the Fed goes behind closed doors that day to decide rates.
[Lisovicz:] And, of course, we've had some economic reports that have really shown that there is some inflation pressure. So this could be the final straw, really.
[Keenan:] OK, thanks a lot Susan Lisovicz. And finally, we'd would like to hear from you. Please e-mail us your questions or comments to MONEYWEEK@turner.com. That's going to do it for this week. I'm Terry Keenan. Have a great weekend.

[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] Well, with Britain and the U.S. close allies, what effect is Thursday's Labour election victory expected to have on relations between the two nations? To answer that, we turn to Adrian Wooldridge. He is the Washington correspondent for "The Economist" magazine. Thank you very much for joining us.
[Adrian Wooldridge, "the Economist:] Thank you.
[Savidge:] Is it pretty much a done deal, Tony Blair going to make the election?
[Wooldridge:] Absolutely. I'm afraid it's a done deal. Well, I shouldn't say that I'm afraid it's a done deal, it's a done deal. I think it Blair has a very, very large lead in the opinion polls of between 12 and 30 points, and we could actually see Blair, the Labour government, actually increasing its majority. Its majority is now about 180, we could see a majority of 200. And this is actually a historical thing that's about to happen, because this will be the first time ever that a Labour government has won a second term.
[Savidge:] And what has happened to the conservatives? Have they just self-destructed?
[Wooldridge:] They self-destructed. Blare has done, I think brilliantly, in occupying the center ground. He has adopted a lot of Mrs. Thatcher's policies of privatization and injecting the market forces into the public sector. And what the Tories have done is to retreat further to the right. They've moved to the right on social issues. They have made a huge issue of asylum seekers. They talked about putting asylum seekers into makeshift prisons,and I think that has alienated a lot of people, they have just ruled themselves out of the middle ground.
[Savidge:] It's interesting as we look over the past relationship between the United States and Great Britain. Often the leadership and the parties they represent have been reflected in both countries. You had Tony Blair, you had Bill Clinton. But now there seems to be a parting of the ways. Why is that?
[Wooldridge:] I think that's absolutely right. I think if you look at the '60s, for example, you had Kennedy here, you had Wilson in Britain. If you look at the '80s, you had Reagan and Thatcher. Now, I think the electoral cycle, the political cycles are moving apart. You have certainly a conservative government in this country, and you have a center-left government in Britain. Why it has happened I think is because simply because the Tories have been in power for so long, they alienated so many people, there was a huge reaction against them, and Blair very cleverly continued to pursue centrist policies, thus forcing the Tories to pursue more unpopular policies. But I think the significance of this is actually quite considerable, because normally the trans-Atlantic alliance is strengthened by the fact that you have ideologically sympathetic people in power in London and Washington. Now you don't have that, and I think that increases the pressure on Blair to look very much to Europe rather than to the United States as a model and as an ally. And I think also, if Tony Blair does get a large majority, an increased majority, that also increases the likelihood that he will push for a referendum on membership of the euro, and if he goes into the euro again, that pushes him further toward Europe, and it also does I think once Britain joins the euro, creates a much stronger currency, which is a real rival to the dollar.
[Savidge:] Does it also suggest that the British people and the American people are perhaps drifting apart?
[Wooldridge:] In some ways I think it does. I think we shouldn't underestimate the extent that Britain is actually much to the left of of the United States anyway. And many of the things that Mr. Hague is campaigning on would be regarded as pink socialism in the United States. He supports a public health service, he supports high levels of taxation, certainly by American standards. So he, on many issues, would be regarded as a Democrat, not as a Republican. But yes, they are continuing to drift apart, and Britain is drifting further toward Europe, further away from the United States.
[Savidge:] All right. Adrian Wooldridge, we have to leave it there, with "The Economist." Thank you for joining us.
[Wooldridge:] Thank you.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] We begin in Mozambique, where that nation is trying to cope with the catastrophic aftermath of one of its worst floods in history. Relief organizations from around the world are delivering food and supplies to thousands of people who have been rescued. About 13,000 people have been pulled from the floodwaters. At least another 800 remain stranded. Now, even as the floodwaters begin to recede, conditions in this southern African nation are still deteriorating. Robert Moore has the very latest.
[Robert Moore, Itn Reporter:] It was intended as a final day to comb the floodwaters in the hope, however remote, of finding more survivors, but in the end, it was another day of many dramatic rescues, and at times the pilots put down actually in the flood water, their landing gear submerged, and discovered whole trains of people heading their way. They were also plucked from improvised tree houses, and we were still finding people waiting for help. [on camera]: I have never seen a people with greater levels of resilience and courage. The people on this tiny boat, entirely lost out here on the vast floodwaters, don't even want to be rescued. Perhaps it is only now, a full week after this tragedy, that their remarkable feat of survival can be appreciated. [voice-over]: But today, thousands of those marooned appear to be in rapidly-deteriorating conditions. Desperate hunger and thirst makes the distribution of food a nightmare. Children are drinking the contaminated river water, families are cooking bowls of locusts. Even as countries like Britain finally belatedly get their aide into the country, it has not yet reached the people who need it most. Robert Moore, ITN, Southern Mozambique.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] More now on the trade agreement with China from Manhattan Democratic Congressman Joseph Crowley of New York. He is against the bill. Mr. Crowley, President Clinton first scheduled a nationwide address in the Oval Office on Sunday night to push for passage of this trade agreement with China, and then canceled it. Why do you suppose did he that? Would he not have changed any minds among Democrats?
[Rep. Joseph Crowley , New York:] Well, I think at this point, the concern not to lose any more support that he may be capable of getting at this point. I think for the most part, people have made up their minds; it's more matter of public jockeying at this point. And I think the people on my side of the issue here who are opposed to China PNTR would not look favorably upon the president coming out at this point putting any more pressure on them than they have already.
[Randall:] Some people would look at the president's change of plans and say, oh well, must thing he has the votes? Do you think that he does?
[Crowley:] Well I think at this point in time, it looks as though the favor is in their direction, but I wouldn't sell it out yet. I wouldn't say this is over by any means. It's very fluid, it's in a state of flux, and I think that any movement by either side could change positions on this issue.
[Randall:] Mr. Crowley, what is that most bothers you about this trade agreement with China?
[Crowley:] Well, there are a number of issues. Obviously, the human rights, the issue of you know, discrimination against Roman Catholics, the Falon Gong, the Tibetan monks, the use of slave labor, basically, or forced labor, non-compensated labor in camps, some 1,100 of them throughout the entire country of China, the environmental problems that that country has some of the most polluted cities in the entire world are in China the proliferation of nuclear weapons to rogue states, Like Iraq, like North Korea. These are issues, as well as the fact that China has never followed through on previous agreement with our country. There are some 12 agreements that they have never fully complied with in the past, and these are all issues they can combine to leave any member of Congress, certainly the American people a very concerned about the potential of granting permanent trade relations. I am in favor of normal trade relations and voting for this on and I voted for last year on an annual basis. I believe that being engaged in China, I think for both countries, is mutually beneficial. But at the same time, I don't think we should be rewarding a country like China that has an abysmal human rights record, amongst the other issues that I mentioned as well.
[Randall:] Mr. Crowley, is there anything that would convince you that in fact this treaty in the interests of the United States?
[Crowley:] Well, there are certain things in this treaty that if you look at in face value, you would say, oh boy this is something really good for the United States. But Chinese just have an abysmal record at this time. I am not saying that in the future we shouldn't look at fair trade. I am for fair trade. I am for fair trade with China. But they are not politically or economically ready to have a fair trade policy with the United States.
[Randall:] How long do you think it will take before your position on this is justified, if the agreement is approved by the House and the Senate? And it will be easier time in the Senate. How long do you think it will be before it is apparent to those who favor the treaty that it was a mistake?
[Crowley:] Well, I think once we see, again, like what happened in 1989 in Tiananmen Square, a major human rights problem in China, that people will realize that this was not the right time to do this.
[Randall:] Excuse me, let meet interrupt you, because we need to Jacksonville, Florida. We've just gotten our connection through with Representative Tillie Fowler, Republican in Florida. You will vote in favor of the treaty. Do you have the votes?
[Rep. Tillie Fowler , Florida:] Right now we do, Gene. We've got 184 votes that are either saying yes or leaning yes, about 164 nos or lean nos. So we are ahead. I think we will stay ahead. I think will be a close vote on Wednesday, but I do think in the end the U.S. House of Representative will vote in the favor of the permanent normal trade relations with China.
[Randall:] Mrs. Fowler, Republicans have long argued that there was need for the president to gone on nationwide TV to push for the treaty. He made the plan to do that at 7:00 Eastern Time Sunday night, and then he scrapped it. Now do you think that was a good idea, to cancel the speech?
[Fowler:] No, I don't. I mean, certainly the president is supposed to lead this nation, and this is a very critical issue facing the Congress, facing the country. He needs be educating the country as to how important it is and why it will be good for this country. So I am very disappointed that the president gave into political pressure and canceled his speech. This one more time shows how this president is not willing to lead the country when difficult decisions have to be made.
[Randall:] Let me play devil's advocate, Mrs. Fowler, when you announced your support for the agreement, you said:"The best way to tame the communist bear is not poke it in eye, but to endear yourself to its cubs." Now some people would say that is naive, and the bear has no intention of doing that.
[Fowler:] Oh, I disagree. You know, we watched years ago capitalism rip through the iron curtain, and we've got a perfect opportunity now to see capitalism tear through communist China. It's going to have a tremendous impact on the dynamics between our two countries once we admit China to the WTO and we expand trade between our countries. And you have to remember that once they come into the WTO, they will come under the rule of international law. They are going to have change many of their trading policies and many of their laws. They've got problems in their country right now, with people going to premier complaining that they are going to loss their jobs, that they are going to have change the way they do these state-owned factories. It's goings to be a great much greater change in China. We all stand benefit in this country from PNTR. It's a win-win for the United States.
[Randall:] Mrs. Fowler you took quite a while to announce your support for this agreement. Should I understand then that there were compelling arguments for you to vote against it at one point?
[Fowler:] Well, I've always you know, anything that's this tremendously important. I did the same thing on NAFTA. I wanted first to read their agreement, to understand what was in it, because I knew what we'd agreed to last April, and then when the president at the last minute backed off. I wanted to make sure it hadn't changed, that we still, the United States, had gotten all the gains and all access we had wanted. We did. I was very pleased to see that. I talked to some of the military people about my national security concerns, because I wanted to get those questions answered. And I feel very comfortable that the way that we want to ensure stability in that region is as we have capitalism take hold there and there businesses see that if we allow disruptions in their economic opportunities, then they're going to be stabilizing force in China, saying, hey wait, don't start saber-rattling with Taiwan, don't start being the aggressor here, because we as a country have a lot more to lose than to gain. So I think you're going to see a stabilizing force as the Chinese economy becomes more open.
[Randall:] Mrs. Fowler, thank you.
[Fowler:] Thank you. And, Mr. Crowley, does the fight continue this weekend?
[Crowley:] I think it does. I think it's important to note that last year I have a great deal of respect for Tillie Fowler, but last year, she voted against normal trade relations.
[Fowler:] Yes, I sure did.
[Crowley:] Nothing has changed in China in this last year. In fact, it's gotten worse. The crackdown on human rights has gotten worse. It's not getting better.
[Randall:] Mr. Crowley Crowley, thank you. And Mrs. Fowler, thanks very much.
[Fowler:] Thank you. It has gotten better. Thank you.

[Liz Weiss, Cnn Correspondent:] They're only a few months old, but already these babies are reaping the benefits of yoga.
[Unidentified Mother:] Instead of him crying all the time and being colicky, this sort of helps calm him down. So it helps him to relax, makes him happier, which makes mom happier and he enjoys it. Afterwards, he's extremely relaxed and he's able to sleep better right after the class.
[Helen Garabidien:] Now we're going to do stretch and together.
[Weiss:] In Helen Garabidien's baby yoga class in Newton, Massachusetts, moms and babies practice various postures called osamas.
[Unidentified Female:] These are physical stimulation's to the baby's bodies. It helps to relieve colic. It helps to boost immunity. It helps to better regulate their emotion. It helps to make them more alert. It helps to stimulate the mind and neuromuscular development.
[Weiss:] Moms also appreciate the one-hour workout.
[Unidentified Mother:] The more you rock, the better you feel.
[Weiss:] This posture, called super baby, gives parents a lower back massage while babies hang out for the ride.
[Unidentified Mother:] It's a time to bond. It's a quiet time. It's not a time of forcing.
[Weiss:] Since a baby's body is fragile, Garabidien teaches her students the correct way to support the neck and spine. The class may look pretty low key, but in the end everyone looks ready for a nap. For "Feeling Fit," I'm Liz Weiss.

[Anderson Cooper, Cnn Anchor:] And up front this morning, the search for peace in the Middle East. After meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Vice President Dick Cheney said he was willing to meet with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat only after certain conditions are met.
[Dick Cheney, Vice President Of The United States:] In order to help General Zinni's mission, as the Tenet work plan is being implemented, I told the prime minister that I would be ready to meet with Chairman Arafat in the period ahead at a site in the region to be determined. The Tenet work plan requires 100 percent effort by Chairman Arafat to stop the violence and the terror and I would expect the 100 percent effort to begin immediately.
[Cooper:] CNN's Mike Hanna is in Jerusalem and joins us now live good morning, Mike.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Andersen. Well, you heard from the vice president there that he and the Israeli prime minister believe that the onus of getting the cease-fire working is on the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat. Israel has withdrawn from several areas in the West Bank and Gaza that it had reoccupied in recent weeks and now both parties looking towards the Palestinian Authority to make good its commitment to fight terror on the ground. Well, Cheney met with Ariel Sharon for the second time in his very brief period of stay in the region here, part of an ongoing Middle East tour. And from Vice President Cheney the announcement that he would be prepared to meet with Arafat on condition that the cease-fire plan that had been drawn up by CIA Director George Tenet was implemented. The Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, said that he would be prepared to allow Arafat to leave the area and travel to a very important Arab summit in Beirut next week if this plan was implemented. Arafat's been under virtual house arrest in the West Bank city of Ramallah for a number of months, only recently having these restrictions relieved, allowing him to travel around Palestinian territory. But this seen by Israel as a major concession by Sharon that he will allow Arafat to travel, with Palestinians not overly impressed, although they have been pressing hard on the U.S. to bring pressure to bear on Sharon to allow freedom of movement for Yasser Arafat. So the vice president left the region without the cease-fire that he may have hoped for. But he's carrying with him signs of progress in getting a truce implemented on the ground Andersen.
[Cooper:] Mike, what exactly is in the Tenet Plan?
[Hanna:] Yes, this is a plan that has been talked about much in recent weeks. It is a document that was drawn up by the director of the CIA a year ago. Both sides agreed to it, but it was never implemented on the ground. It is a very specific series of steps that each side has got to undertake in order to get to where a cease-fire can be declared. For example, Israel has to withdraw its forces to the positions they occupied in September 2000 before this current intifada erupted. Palestinians have to arrest known militants. They have to collect unlawful weapons and they have to meet certain security guarantees within Palestinian controlled territories. So there are a very clear series of steps that have to be done in terms of the plan. This is nothing new to both sides. They both know what this plan contains. The question is whether they now can implement the provisions of this plan Andersen.
[Cooper:] All right, Mike Hanna in Jerusalem, thanks very much for joining us this morning.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] President Bush is pushing the economy to the forefront of his 2002 agenda as the recession becomes more of a political issue at the start of this mid-term election year. Our senior White House correspondent John king joins us with more from the White House John.
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Wolf, immediately back to work for the president. He returned to the White House today, as you noted, 12 days over the Christmas holidays, at the ranch in Crawford, Texas. A bit of travel at the end of that working vacation to focus on the economy. The president was back at the White House for only an hour when he sat down in the Cabinet room with several cabinet secretaries, his top economic team, the vice president was on hand. And a special and very important guest, Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan. Mr. Bush trying to show to the American people that he will immediately get about the business of the U.S. economy. Remember just before the Christmas break, negotiations on a stimulus plan broke down because of disagreements between the Republican White House and the Democratic controlled Senate. Mr. Bush vowing again today to push for a stimulus plan. As he did so, he acknowledged the new realities of the budget debate. This president came to office almost a year ago, record federal budget surpluses at the time. Now the government will be in the red, a deficit, at least this year, perhaps for the next three, four, or five years. Bush aids say, the president says all that is necessary because of the ongoing war and the slumping U.S. economy.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] It makes sense to spend money necessary to win the war. It makes sense to spend money necessary to protect the homeland. And we are in a recession. There are some talk about raising taxes. And that would be a disaster to raise taxes in the midst of a recession.
[King:] Some talk, you heard the president say, of raising taxes. Actually no meaningful Democrats have put such a proposal on the table, but the president is involved in a bit of a tug-of-war, if you will, with the Senator majority leader Tom Daschle. Mr. Daschle last week said he believed the Bush tax cut made the recession even worse. So economic policy will dominated the discussion early in this mid- term congressional election hear. Mr. Bush almost daring the Democrats to propose to repeal his tax cut. He believes, and other Republicans do, that would be a disaster for the Democrats. The Democrats on the other hand, trying to blame Mr. Bush and the Republican Party for the state of the U.S. economy. So that long-term calculus, looking ahead to the November elections dominating the discussion. The question is, in the short term, the next couple weeks, can they, amid all that partisanship, strike some sort of a bipartisan compromise on a stimulus package to help the Americans thrown out of work in recent months Wolf.
[Blitzer:] John, as you know, over the weekend, the president caused a bit of a stir by saying flatly that there would be no tax increases, using the phrase, "over my dead body," raising a lot of comparisons with what his father said in 1988, no new taxes, "read my lips, no new taxes." Any second-guessing, any second thoughts over at the White House about that very, very controversial statement the president made?
[King:] None at all. You will remember, the former President Bush went back on his word, if you will. He cut a budget deal with the Congress that did indeed raise taxes during his administration. Administration officials in this Bush administration say the president simply will not do that. Much of this though, is political positioning. No one expects the Democrats in a congressional election year to push a tax cut through the Congress. And remember, Republicans still control the House. So, even if they wanted to in the Senate, and again, most of the majority Democrats do not, even if they wanted to, they couldn't get it through the House of Representatives. So, much of that rhetoric viewed as political positioning as we head into this election year. Again, though, the big question is with all the rhetoric flying back and forth between the president, the Senate leader Tom Daschle, can they reach any agreement in the short term on a new stimulus package. That the big open question for the next week or two.
[Blitzer:] And looking ahead while I have you, John, what about the education bill the president is scheduled tomorrow to sign into law? I take it that Ted Kennedy will be standing right nearby when he does that.
[King:] Mr. Bush will travel to Ohio to sign that bill into law. He is travelling to focus on the bipartisan education reform bill. On one hand, he will use that as a springboard to the conversation we were just having, saying this is proof there can be bipartisanship, a Compromise on the education bill. On the other hand, the president's also believes and his political team believes that is one bill that the president should get more credit for than he did. It sort of passed under the radar screen late in the congressional session, at a time when everyone was focused mostly on the war in Afghanistan and on the debate over the economy. So, the president will sign that bill tomorrow in Ohio. He will also travel on to Boston. The two E's: education and the economy, White House aides say will be the president's focus in the early weeks of the new year.
[Blitzer:] John King over at the White House, thank you very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] Convicted killer Gary Graham is scheduled to be executed in Texas on Thursday. Protesters at the state's Republican convention yesterday blamed the GOP-controlled state penal system for unfairly putting to death innocent blacks, Hispanics and the poor. Both candidates for president support capital punishment, but could it become a campaign issue? Here is Bruce Morton.
[Bruce Morton, Cnn Correspondent:] Throughout his campaign, Governor George W. Bush has defended the death penalty and the way it has worked in the 134 executions held in Texas during his time in office.
[Bush:] And I'm absolutely confident that everybody who has been put to death is two things: one, they're guilty of the crime charged, and secondly, they had full access to our courts, both state and federal.
[Morton:] Bush is confident despite a "Chicago Tribune" investigation which showed irregularities: a pathologist who admitted faking autopsies, a psychiatrist who testified defendants he'd never met were certain to commit more violence, lawyers who slept in court, and so on. Bush's Democratic opponent, Al Gore, has not made the death penalty an issue; He's for it, too.
[Gore:] I do support capital punishment, and I have always supported it.
[Morton:] And he defends Bush, telling "The New York Times": "If the record shows he's done a terrible job, then I'm sure that would be a legitimate issue. I haven't reached that conclusion." Illinois Republican Governor George Ryan imposed a moratorium on executions in January: 13 Illinois death row inmates have been proved innocent since capital punishment was reinstated there in 1977.
[Gore:] If there were the kind of record they found in Illinois in some other criminal justice system, then it would, in my view, justify a moratorium, just as in Illinois.
[Morton:] Gore opposes a federal moratorium and has not endorsed a bill ensuring that prison inmates get access to DNA evidence which might prove them innocent. Gore may remember past campaigns when Republicans labeled Democrats soft on crime, as in this ad from 1988. [Begin Video Clip, 1988 Bush Campaign Ad]
[Announcer:] As Governor Michael Dukakis vetoed mandatory sentences for drug dealers, he vetoed the death penalty.
[Morton:] A Gallup poll last February shows 66 percent of Americans favor the death penalty, down from 80 percent in 1994, but still a substantial majority. And that's another reason Gore may not want to make it an issue in his campaign. Bruce Morton, CNN, Washington.
[Randall:] More now on the politics of capital punishment with John Parker, Washington bureau chief of "The Economist" magazine. John, what chance do you think there is that capital punishment will end up as a campaign issue this year?
[John Parker, "the Economist":] Directly, not a great deal of chance. As your report said, both candidates support it, so I don't think there will be a great deal to debate there. What I think might happen is the debate might play on that underlying sense that the Gore campaign will presumably want to get across that the governor of Texas is kind of a little bit shallow. And they might try to make this charge stick against him there.
[Randall:] But would this be a political tightrope, with so much of the country favoring capital punishment, for the vice president to attack his Republican opponent over capital punishment?
[Parker:] Yes, I think it would. In fact, he'd be he'd have to do it very, very carefully. He's only got to look around to his immediate sort of past history of people around him. Bill Clinton, when he was governor of Arkansas, got defeated in his first term partly because he pardoned a number of death penalty cases.
[Randall:] And during Bill Clinton's first run for the presidency, he took time out from his campaign to return to Arkansas to fulfill his duties as governor to oversee the execution of a defendant who had been convicted of murder.
[Parker:] Yes, and my conclusion for that is, you know, no one ever got defeated underestimating the sort of appetite for the death penalty.
[Randall:] Now what do you make of the national debate which has been he sparked by the action of Republican Governor George Ryan of Illinois, who has put in place a moratorium on executions?
[Parker:] It's long overdue, in my view, I was shocked, really, when I first discovered the extent of the problems in the capital punishment system. There was a recent study from professor Joe Lieberman at Columbia University which showed that over two-thirds of all the convictions made in the first court were overturned in some stage. That seems to me to be very, very worrying on any measure.
[Randall:] And what do you make of Governor Bush's use, for the first time, of a delay in an execution for 30 days because of this DNA question?
[Parker:] That's a very good question. I think that was probably long overdue, too. I can't help feeling that if he hadn't been running for president, one wonders whether he would have done this. But I think that DNA evidence, which is actually quite rare in death penalty cases, but where it is appropriate, I think there's almost like an open-and-shut case for you to use it. I mean, he was right, therefore, in my view to give the stay.
[Randall:] Do you think this debate, which to some extent is below the radar screen, the debate kicked off by Governor Ryan's action in Illinois, will catch up to the presidential campaign and will and the two will become intertwined at some point?
[Parker:] I think it might. I doubt it will ever become quite the issue that it was in the '88 campaign, for example, when you remember the Willie Horton case, as it was referred to. That, of course, was really a death penalty case, a death penalty debate, as well as a sort of debate, unfortunately, about race. I doubt it will have quite that power, but, yes, I do think that it will become intertwined at some point.
[Randall:] John Parker of "The Economist" magazine, thanks very much.
[Parker:] Thank you.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Now on
[Wolf Blitzer Reports:] a Houston mother goes on trial. At stake in this courtroom, her own life.
[Unidentified Male:] The evidence will show that beyond a reasonable doubt she is guilty. Andrea Yates was, without question, one of the most severely ill with postpartum depression.
[Blitzer:] Coming to terms with a cremation horror story.
[Unidentified Male:] It's just so much pain that these people are going through down here.
[Blitzer:] Can you trust that your relatives' remains won't be tampered with? And Canadian skaters get their gold, but who gets the blame for an Olympic controversy? Was he wrongly implicated? I'll speak with the head of the French Figure Skating Federation. Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. We've been following two horrific, gut-wrenching stories all day, and they top our "News Alert." In Houston, a lawyer for Andrea Yates says severe depression drove her to kill her five young children. Opening statements in Yates' trial were made today. She has already pleaded "not guilty" by reason of insanity in the drowning deaths of her children last year. We'll have much more on this in a moment. One-hundred thirty, and counting. That's the number of bodies recovered on the grounds of a crematory in Georgia. Officials say the total may reach 200. The crematory operator, Ray Marsh, is under arrest, charged with 16 counts of theft by fraud. According to investigators, Marsh said the bodies were not cremated because the incinerator was broken. In Tokyo, President Bush is refusing to ease his hard-line stance against the countries he calls the "axis of evil": North Korea, Iran and Iraq. The president says his goal is to settle issues peacefully, but the United States will do what it must do, he says, to defend its interests. His comments came after talks with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. More deadly violence in the Middle East. A suicide bomber blew himself up in Gaza, killing three Israelis. And in the West Bank, a suicide bomb attack killed an Israeli policeman. The attacks came after Israeli officials said they stopped five Palestinian suicide bombers yesterday. Now back to our lead story: a jury of eight women and four men heard opening statements today in the trial of the Texas mother accused of drowning her five children. At the heart of the proceedings: the state of mind of Andrea Yates. CNN's Rawley Valverde looks at how the prosecution and the defense laid out their case.
[Rawley Valverde, Cnn Correspondent:] Andrea Yates sat emotionless in a packed Houston courtroom, as the prosecution's opening arguments described the chilling details of June 21, 2001.
[Unidentified Male:] She called Noah into the bathroom, and put him in the water with Mary and drowned him. Then carried Mary and put her on the bed with the other three children that she had already drowned.
[Valverde:] In the span of less than an hour, Yates had methodically drowned her five children. Prosecutors hope to prove that Andrea Yates, though she might have been depressed, knew full well what she was doing that day.
[Unidentified Male:] She told him that she wasn't mad at the children, that she killed them because they weren't developing correctly, and she was a bad mother.
[Valverde:] The defense team will focus on Yates' mental state, claiming that she is not guilty by reason of insanity. In their opening argument, the defense said that since the birth of her fourth child, Yates' mental stability had deteriorated rapidly. She was in and out of mental health treatment centers, heavily medicated for depression, and had attempted suicide twice. They plan to call up to the stand a large number of experts, including Dr. Rickels of the Baylor College of Medicine.
[George Parnham, Defense Attorney:] He will tell this jury that, among other things, that in his opinion, she not only did not know on June 20th what she was doing was wrong, but believed it was right. It was the right thing to do.
[Valverde:] The trial is expected to last two to three weeks. Now, Andrea Yates is looking at three possible outcomes, here. She could get life in prison, she could die by lethal injection. Or if she's found not guilty by reason of insanity, she'll be institutionalized. In Houston, I'm Rawley Valverde. Back to you.
[Blitzer:] Thank you very much, Rawley. And many legal experts say the defense could face a difficult job during the Yates trial. What steps will the attorneys on both sides take to prove their cases? Joining us now with some legal analysis is Cynthia Alksne, former federal prosecutor. Cynthia, thanks for joining us. They both make pretty compelling opening statements. What did we learn from their general strategies in these opening states?
[Cynthia Alksne, Fmr. Federal Prosecutor:] Well, the general strategy of the prosecution is to focus on the day before the murder and the day of the murder, and afterwards. That's where it begins. And they will talk about that almost exclusively. On the other hand, the theory and the strategy of the defense is to try to bring up her whole life, and how she came up from being a mother of five to suddenly drowning five children. How did that happen? And specifically, why did they live in a bus, and why was she catatonic, and those types of things. So the focus is global for the defense, and very black and white for the prosecution.
[Blitzer:] What is the burden of proof? What do they have to prove to show that she was not insane? Because by definition, a mother who kills her five little children by definition, that's not a normal person.
[Alksne:] Right. This is an interesting point you bring up. After President Reagan was shot, insanity laws changed completely in this country. They went from the prosecution having the burden of proving insanity or sanity, to the defense. So the prosecution will have to prove that she murdered her children. That will be relatively easy. She has confessed to that. There isn't any question about that. Then the burden shifts to the defense. The defense actually has to prove that she was insane at the time. That s he did not because of a severe mental disease or defect, she was unable to understand what she was doing. She didn't know what she was doing was wrong. That's the defense's burden of proof. And that's a very important distinction, here.
[Blitzer:] Given the fact that she has a long history of psychiatric problems she was taking all sorts of medical prescriptions to deal with the postpartum psychosis, and the other mental illnesses that she had how difficult of a burden is that for the defense?
[Alksne:] It's a very difficult burden, because there's a difference from being mentally ill, severely mentally ill and not knowing the difference between right and wrong. Let's remember, Jeffrey Dahmer was legally sane. So, being legally responsible is very different from, "that woman is nuts," which, of course, we know. We all know instinctively, any mother who drowns her five children is nuts. But that's not the same as whether or not you are criminally responsible or not.
[Blitzer:] So if the prosecution can show that immediately after she committed these murders, she knew she did something really, really bad, in talking to her husband or anyone else would that be enough to convince a jury, presumably, that she was sane enough to go ahead and be convicted of murder?
[Alksne:] Right. That's what the prosecution is doing. Here's, for example, what they have. She planned the murders the night before, according to her statement. When you're planning, then you have some knowledge about right and wrong. She decided to wait until after her husband had left, because she knew he would stop her. That's planning, knowing the difference between right and wrong. She committed the murders during a window of time after her husband left and before her mother-in-law arrived, because she didn't want her mother to catch her in the act. That's understanding the difference between right and wrong. She called the police that's an indication she knew the difference between right and wrong. She told the piece she needed to be punished, and that she knew hat she had done was a sin. All those things are going to be her statements that came out of her mouth, and they all reflect that she had some understanding of right and wrong. Now, the question will be, how do you balance that? And this is the jury's job between what is clearly a long and severe history, including, you know, multiple suicide attempts, being catatonic, being institutionalized in the state of Texas, all kinds of things. And that's the jury's job to do.
[Blitzer:] Were you surprised that there was no plea agreement in advance of the trial?
[Alksne:] I was surprised there's no plea agreement. And I'm not convinced that there won't be one, as the case goes on.
[Blitzer:] OK. Cynthia Alksne, thanks for your legal analysis.
[Alksne:] You're welcome.
[Blitzer:] Turning now to a case in Georgia that Governor Ray Barnes calls "shocking." At least 130 bodies have been found on the grounds of the Tri-State Crematory in the small northeast town of Noble. Relatives are not only shocked, but they're outraged. CNN's Holly Firfer is covering developments in Noble. She joins us now live Holly.
[Holly Firfer, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Wolf, authorities say that the process of removing bodies from a 16-acre area of grounds in the Tri-State Crematory is a slow one. Hundreds of bodies have been found and the medical examiner says that number is growing by the hour.
[Dr. Kris Sperry, Georgia Medical Examiner:] We have opened one of the vaults, and found that it was filled with human remains. The other four had been opened now, for initial evaluation. And all of those are filled with human remains.
[Firfer:] Identifying the hundreds of remains is no easy task. Some bodies were already mummified, making it difficult to gather DNA. Authorities are taking samples from family members to try to make a match. Over 400 people are involved in the operation, from mapping the site, excavating and testing remains, and counselling family members.
[Rock Thomas, Relative Of Deceased:] I was just shocked that anyone could walk around and conduct business, and go home to what we now know are hundreds and hundreds of bodies scattered out and behind their place.
[Firfer:] Twenty-eight-year-old Ray Brent Marsh, the director of the family-run Tri-State Crematory, sits in a Walker County detention center as the charges pile up: one count of theft by deception for every body identified. Marsh claims the incinerator did not work. But for how long, no one knows. The county medical examiner said some of the remains could be 20 years old, expanding the investigation.
[Blitzer:] Holly, what kind of reputation did this crematory have before we learned of this horrific evidence?
[Firfer:] It had a very good reputation. Nobody suspected anything. People had been on the property up to about a year and a half ago. Didn't see anything. And funeral homes certainly were using them quite a bit, so they had a fine reputation. And it's quite shocking.
[Blitzer:] Holly Firfer, quite shocking indeed. Thank you very much. And, devastated, traumatized: those are just two of the words being used to describe the reaction of families who believed relatives had been cremated at the Tri-State Crematory. Here's what some of them had to say.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, no doubt about it that he is guilty. Knowing that knowing that something was going on in his property. I couldn't tell you. There's not a thing that you could do to I would not know. I couldn't tell you. There's just so much pain that these people are going through down here. Whatever they do to him, it won't be enough.
[Unidentified Female:] How can anybody throw bodies out in the woods and leave them? This man is pure evil, to take loved ones, family members, and discard them like an old beer can? It's somebody that has no heart, no feeling.
[Blitzer:] Joining us now with some insight into this incredible, horrible case, Robert Vandenbergh, the president of the National Funeral Directors Association. Thank you, Mr. Vandenbergh, for joining us. How unusual, in your experience around the country, is this case in Georgia?
[Robert Vandenbergh, National Funeral Directors Association:] This is an awful aberration. It has never, to my knowledge, happened before. And hopefully, of course, will never happen again.
[Blitzer:] Has anything like this ever happened, even in a smaller scale, as far as your history as far as you know?
[Vandenbergh:] No. The only time that I've heard of any problem that kind of even gets close to this was a situation out in California, where cremated remains were not being returned to families, but were being placed in a 55-gallon drum type situation, and were not being handled properly. But that is probably the closest that I've ever heard of, anything like this.
[Blitzer:] Well, as you know, our viewers out there, a lot of people, are going to be wondering what happens to the remains of their loved ones when they send them to a crematory. What should people look for when they go to a funeral home, for example, to deal with this most painful kind of decision?
[Vandenbergh:] Well, of course, when you're going to a funeral home, it's like when you're going to anything that you are entrusting something. And with someone's loved one, of course, it is a very sacred trust. But it's much like selecting a physician or an attorney. You need to investigate it, obviously. You need to ask people that you trust people like your clergy, your other family members, friends who have used funeral homes in your area. And ask them for recommendations. And then also go and talk to these people yourself. Today it is not uncommon to be virtually interviewed by a family. Just the other day I was interviewed by a man whose wife was dying with cancer. And we were recommended to him to help him through this. But he wanted to come and meet with us first, to see if, in fact, we were the people that he wanted to trust. And that is something that I advise to all the families who are out there, who are possibly facing this type of situation in the future.
[Blitzer:] Given that trust situation that you described, how much damage do you believe has been done to that trust level because of what we're now seeing happened in Georgia?
[Vandenbergh:] I'm sure that it is bringing questions to people's finds. However, I have to assure them that in my history, and with our members and the people we represent and the funeral directors across this country, something like this doesn't happen. This was a very strange situation. And in talking with the people down there that have known these people for years, as your reporter said moments ago, these people had a very good reputation. They were very well thought of, very well trusted. So it's strange. No one knows exactly what this is. But I'm sure people will be asking a few more questions about this, and rightfully so.
[Blitzer:] Robert Vandenbergh, thanks so much for joining us and giving us some perspective on this most horrific case. Thank you very much.
[Vandenbergh:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] And the skating scandal that made Olympic history is putting one man on the defensive. Coming up: my interview with the president of the French figure skating federation. Was he wrongly accused? The new and improved airport security force faces its first test in Los Angeles. Did the changes make a difference? And how much influence does Vice President Dick Cheney really have in running the country? Still ahead: I'll speak with a man in a position to know. Stay with us.

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] But how do you think the candidates are doing in addressing the real issues in this race?
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Well, let's check and see what the numbers say about all that. Frank Newport is editor-in-chief of the Gallup Poll and he's with us this morning. Good morning, Frank.
[Frank Newport, Gallup Poll Editor In Chief:] Good morning, Leon and Linda. The two clips that you just showed are very exemplary of what we're going to show you here, that is the candidates, Gore and Bush, out of there addressing all these little individual issues. We'll show you in a minute that they are right on with where the American public thinks they should be in this election. First of all, an update from this weekend on where the race stands. If the vote were held today among likely voters, who would win, well it would be George Bush, as has been the case all this year. Our latest numbers from this weekend, 50 percent of likely voters for Bush, 41 percent for Al Gore, likely voters in our estimation about half of the overall voting age population, those most likely to vote more likely to be the Bush voters than Gore voters, as is usually the case. Now back to the issues again, this weekend we asked Americans a very interesting question: What do you think should be the number-one priority for the next president, whoever he should be, when he takes office next January? What we got, a whole variety of issues that kind of go across the board that we've been hearing about from the candidates. Now these are Gore voters, they say education is number one; health care, Social Security and the economy, that's the top priority for those people voting for Gore. Bush voters, on the other hand, look fairly similar overall, education for Bush voters the number-one priority for the new president; then Social Security; abortion, there are some Republican single-issue voters there; health care, and then taxes is last on the list for them. Our overall conclusion, looking at these questions, is that there is no one dominant issue out there in the public for the public this year in the race. There is all kinds of little issues they want the president to address, and that is why you are seeing these candidates putting out all of these issue papers on all of these issues, and I'm sure we will see more of it between now and November. That's where the election is right now. Leon, Linda, back to you.
[Harris:] All right, thanks, Frank, see you in a bit.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] Returning now to our top story, a look at the European markets on this first day of possible computer problems. Let's go to London where CNN's Todd Benjamin is watching the financial markets for any signs of Y2K-related illnesses Todd.
[Todd Benjamin, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Colleen. Of course, there was a lot of apprehension before this first trading day, but there had also been a lot of preparation, and a lot of money spent, an estimated $306 billion was spent globally making sure that the Y2K problem wouldn't be a problem, and so far everything is running smoothly. For instance, in Frankfurt, that market is up and running, and everything is moving along very nicely there. There have been no Y2K glitches, a lot of relief that there isn't, and therefore traders are moving in, buying stocks, there's also fund managers buying for the year 2000. And overall, it's a very good morning on Frankfurt's market, as it is in Paris, where also, no Y2K glitches have been reported. And in Asian markets that were open, the same story there, there were no glitches reported. Let's go to the numbers for you. As you can see, very strong open in Paris. Paris is up 136 points, or at 6094, a very strong gain there. And the Dax is also up very strongly, up 116 points, above the 7000 level at 7073. And Hong Kong also in record territory, up 407 points at 17369. So, a lot of relief in these world markets that there are no Y2K related problems. And the rally continues where it left off in 1999 in record territory. Back to you in Atlanta.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] All right, thanks Todd.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] And we just wanted to alert you that the president is expected to come out in a minute or two to formally announce that the United States is withdrawing from the 1972 Anti- Ballistic Missile Teaty so that it can continue testing for the administration's missile defense program. Let's listen to the president.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Good morning. I've just concluded a meeting with my National Security Council. We reviewed what I've discussed with my friend, President Vladimir Putin, over the course of many meetings, many months, and that is the need for America to move beyond the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Today, I have given formal notice to Russia, in accordance with the treaty, that the United States of America is withdrawing from this almost 30-year-old treaty. I have concluded the ABM treaty hinders our government's ability to develop ways to protect our people from future terrorists or rogue state missile attacks. The 1972 ABM treaty was signed by the United States and the Soviet Union at a much different time, in a vastly different world. One of the signatories, the Soviet Union, no longer exists, and neither does the hostility that once led both our countries to keep thousands of nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert, pointed at each other. The grim theory was that neither side would launch a nuclear attack because it knew the other would respond, thereby destroying both. Today, as the events of September 11th made all too clear, the greatest threats to both our countries come, not from each other or other big powers in the world, but from terrorists who strike without warning or rogue states who seek weapons of mass destruction. We know that the terrorists and some of those who support them seek the ability to deliver death and destruction to our doorstep via missile. And we must have the freedom and the flexibility to develop effective defenses against those attacks. Defending the American people is my highest priority as commander-in-chief, and I cannot and will not allow the United States to remain in a treaty that prevents us from developing effective defenses. At the same time, the United States and Russia have developed a new, much more hopeful and constructive relationship. We're moving to replace mutually assured destruction with mutual cooperation. Beginning in Ljubljana and continuing in meetings in Genoa, Shanghai, Washington and Crawford, President Putin and I developed common ground for a new strategic relationship. Russia is in the midst of a transition to free markets and democracy. We are committed to forging strong economic ties between Russia and the United States and new bonds between Russia and our partners in NATO. NATO has made clear its desire to identify and pursue opportunities for joint action, ACT 20. I look forward to visiting Moscow to continue our discussions as we seek a formal way to express a new strategic relationship that will last long beyond our individual administrations, providing a foundation for peace for the years to come. We're already working closely together as the world rallies in the war against terrorism. I appreciate so much President Putin's important advice and cooperation, as we fight to dismantle Al Qaeda network in Afghanistan. I appreciate his commitment to reduce Russia's offensive nuclear weapons. I reiterate our pledge to reduce our own nuclear arsenal, between 1,700 and 2,200 operationally deployed strategic nuclear weapons. President Putin and I have also agreed that my decision to withdraw from the treaty will not, in any way, undermine our new relationship or Russian security. As President Putin said in Crawford, we are on the path to a fundamentally different relationship. The Cold War is long gone. Today, we leave behind one of its last vestiges. But this is not a day for looking back. This is a day for looking forward with hope and anticipation of greater prosperity and peace for Russians, for Americans, and for the entire world. Thank you.
[Zahn:] Obviously not going to take any questions today, but confirming what he told congressional members yesterday, that the United States will unilaterally withdraw from the ABM Treaty, what he calls a relic of the Cold War. I want to check in with John King right now to talk a little bit about the ramifications of this decision. John, I know you have been reporting about some of the harsh criticism the congressional Democrats have already sent the president's way, Sen. Biden calling this idea out of whack, saying Americans should be more concerned about terrorists using mass destruction than countries using long-range missiles. How does the administration counter that charge?
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] The administration counters that charge by saying candidate Bush promised he would do this. President Bush is keeping a long-term promise to do so and that he does so at least with an acceptance by the Russian president that he was going to do this. Make no mistake about it, Russia will protest this decision, say the United States is acting unilaterally, that it should negotiate this, not act on its own. But the Bush administration message to its critics in Congress is that the president has consistently said this is what he is go do, and that, yes, there are some who doubt whether anyone has the long-range missile capability to strike the United States now with such a weapon. Mr. Bush said that should not be his concern; his concern is not today or tomorrow, his concern is 5, 10, 15 years from now and that the United States must go ahead with the testing. A missile defense will take years to develop. Some question the very technology the administration wants to test. But to conduct the most specific tests the administration now says are necessary, it would violate this treaty. So the president is starting this clock today; six months from now, the United States will no longer be a member of what many consider the cornerstone arms control agreement of the Cold War.
[Zahn:] But John, what about the other charge coming from Democrats, that this in and of itself could lead to an arms buildup, not just in Russia, but in Pakistan and India as well?
[King:] That will a diplomatic challenge for the administration. The focus now is on the war on terrorism. The administration had been moving closer to India. Now a close to Pakistan, trying to keep the Indian government at ease about the new relationship with Pakistan it's a challenge. The administration has put both countries on notice that it does not want them at all to increase their nuclear program, but, in fact, to decrease. Some question what will China say about this? Will the Chinese go further ahead? They have been dramatically accelerating their own nuclear program anyway. Will they take this as a green light to go even further? So this will present a diplomatic challenge to the administration when it comes to proliferation, the president himself noting that President Putin has assured him that yes, Russia disagrees with this, but it will not undermine the overall relationship. But as you noted, there will be challenges, both in Central Asia and China.
[Zahn:] And Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle took it a step further along the lines of what you are saying, the diplomatic challenges. He says that he thinks it is going to undermine the very fragile coalition that America has now with some of its allies that are engaged in this war on terrorism.
[King:] Certainly, President Putin would be the key player there, and he assured Mr. Bush that will not happen. Many European countries are concerned the president is acting alone here, but they will take their cues from Moscow's reaction. If President Putin says disagrees with this, but Mr. Bush is still welcome to come to Russia early next year; then the European allies will likely say, as well, that they are concerned, but the president has said consistently he was going to do this and he would deal with the reaction. And you saw the very blunt announcement a few moments ago.
[Zahn:] John, let's move on to the Osama bin Laden tapes. I thought you appropriately used some humor earlier this morning when you said it was this time yesterday where you and everybody else reported the tapes would be released yesterday afternoon. We heard at first today at 11:00, now 12:00. What's the holdup?
[King:] The holdup has been in the translation. We are told by senior administration officials that that process is just about done and now they are simply working on the logistics. I spoke to several senior officials just a few moments ago who assured me this tape would be released by early afternoon. They say the Pentagon is moving as quickly as possible. This time they are not saying with any hesitation or a caution. They are saying it will be released by early afternoon. I hope I am not out here tomorrow telling you we are still waiting.
[Zahn:] I hope you're not either, for your sake and all of ours. Good luck, John, thanks for the update. We will wait alongside you. And when the tape surfaces at the Pentagon, we will be sharing it with you live. Let's go back to Bill Hemmer, who is standing by to give us more details on the announcement the president just made. We should thank everybody for joining us early on this morning. It's all yours, Bill.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Paula, thanks. See you again, tomorrow, on Friday Friday's good, Paula. Good morning, everyone. Let's continue the discussion about what just happened in the Rose Garden of the White House. Russia has made its intent quite clear on this issue. Despite pleas from the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, the United States is continuing along the path to build that missile defense system. Vladimir Putin and many people in Russia signal they just, frankly, don't have the money to build a similar system, and they don't have the technology that has have been developed in the United States as well. Further east, John King talked about China. They have concerns as well, strictly because they do not nearly have the number of long- range missiles in their supply and their stock. With that as backdrop, to Moscow, our bureau chief Jill Dougherty now, joining us live from the Russian capital. What is the anticipated reaction there Jill?
[Jill Dougherty, Moscow Bureau Chief:] Yes, Bill, there hasn't been any official reaction, but what we're expecting and what we have been hearing from other officials is a calm reaction. This was not unexpected, and the Russians know that the United States does have the legal right to get out of this agreement if it wants to. But also, no one here really, although you hear it from the military people saying, don't worry, we have the missiles and rockets, and they cannot be overcome by this system that the United States wants to build, but on the other hand, nobody here really thinks realistically that the United States would target Russia or that it would compromise in any way the security of Russia. Essentially, what's going on with Moscow's approach is they feel that it was a cornerstone, the ABM Treaty was a cornerstone of nuclear security and stability in the world. They argued that once you again to pull that away, you call into question a lot other agreements that were signed between the United States and Russia, and also, they would argue, give a bad example to countries that are developing potential or have a beginning potential, like India, Pakistan, to do what they want to do. If they did not want to stay in an agreement, perhaps they would be able to pull out of it. But there is also, Bill, another level here, and that's kind of the emotional level. Even though President Bush said that this is not going to in any way ruin or hurt, undermine, the new relationship with Russia after the anti-terrorist coalition, the mood here is that it could because, after all, they believed that there was some progress, that the countries were coming together, and perhaps President Putin was making his voice be heard. Now the United States is going to go ahead with this unilaterally, and there is a certain amount of hurt here among the Russians for that unilateral approach by the United States Bill.
[Hemmer:] Jill, quickly, from an insider's perspective, has the relationship of President Bush with Vladimir Putin helped smooth the road at all on this issue?
[Dougherty:] One would have to think so, Bill, because after all, they have been meeting quite a bit recently, and they have been talking about this issue. This did not come as a big surprise to Russia. And if they understand each other, where they are headed with this, then that would help very much, because, after all, President Putin has been leading his own people into more of a pro-Western stance. And that understanding has been crucial in doing that.
[Hemmer:] Got it, Jill, thanks. Jill Dougherty, in Moscow. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] A newborn child in Britain is getting plenty of attention. She's the newest member in a family of hearty women spanning six living generations. Eric McGuiness introduces us to all of them, from the youngest to the oldest.
[Eric Mcguiness, Itn-tv Reporter:] Fallen Wittsworth is two weeks old and the youngest. Ethel Hill is 100 and she is the oldest. They may be separated by a century in years, but, together, they help to make up six living generations of the same family. And while Fallen is naturally getting all the fuss expected from mum Emma, waiting in line is Grandma Jane, Great Grandma Carol, Great Great Grandma Eva, and, of course, Great Great Great Grandma Ethel, believed to be the only one of her kind in the country.
[Ethel Hill, Great Great Great Grandmother:] I didn't expect to live to be 100 anyway, but I'm very pleased.
[Mcguiness:] It was a tough winter for Ethel, despite receiving a telegram from the Queen, she was struck low with a festive flu and Fallen was three weeks late arriving. But, in this family, they believe the secret to a long life is being together.
[Carole Jones, Great Grandmother:] We didn't realize that it was six generations. You know, we were just hoping that Nan would make 100 and then the baby would be born and she would see the baby.
[Mcguiness:] Ethel shouldn't be short of a story to tell her great great great granddaughter. Mind you, she will have to join the queue for babysitting duties. There are already three grands in line. Eric McGuiness, ITN.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] President Clinton is making history as the first U.S. president to visit Bangladesh. He arrived in the impoverished nation today, starting a six-day visit to South Asia. CNN's John King is traveling with the president.
[John King, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Mostly celebration, but some disappointment today, as Bill Clinton became the first U.S. president to visit impoverished Bangladesh. The celebration reflected at an airport ceremony that featured a 21-gun salute and a military honor guard for the visiting U.S. president. The disappointment, however, caused because of a schedule change forced by security concerns. Mr. Clinton was to visit the tiny, remote village of Joypura to promote economic development efforts. But the stop was called off because the Secret Service could not guarantee the president's safety. Instead, the villagers brought to the U.S. embassy in Dhaka. Mr. Clinton met with a group of women from the town, entrepreneurs, and also with a group of schoolchildren. This is a country where disaster and disease are all too common. But Mr. Clinton told the children he would leave Bangladesh full of hope.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] You convinced me again that no one, no one should believe that poverty is destiny, that people have to remain poor, that their children cannot learn and do better. You have made me believe more strongly than ever that every child in this world should be given the chance to dream and to live those dreams.
[King:] The toughest part of the trip lies ahead, as Mr. Clinton travels to India and then onto Pakistan, hoping to calm nuclear tensions in the region and also to convince the two nations to reopen a dialogue over the disputed Himalayan region of Kashmir. While here in South Asia, Mr. Clinton also focusing his attention on the volatile Middle East, telling reporters he would travel to Geneva on the way home to meet the Syrian president, Hafez el-Assad. Mr. Clinton trying to get back on track negotiations between Israel and Syria, that began with high hopes in Washington in December, formerly were launched in January, but quickly stalled.
[Clinton:] We worked very hard with the parties to get the Palestinian and Israeli track back going, and they're doing very, very well indeed. And I think they have a lot of energy and a real plan for the future. And I think is this is the next logical step. I don't want to unduly raise expectations, but I think that this is an appropriate thing for me to do to try to get this back on track.
[King:] In India, Mr. Clinton will seek to elevate a relationship strained for decades because of India's leanings toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War. And in Pakistan, he will urge the military government that ceased power five months ago to restore democracy, and also to crack town on terrorism. John King, CNN, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair and his wife are celebrating the birth of a son, a 12-pound, six-ounce baby boy named Leo born last night. Here is Nic Robertson in London.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] It's a boy. Awaited by parents and nation alike, Leo Blair arrived overnight, becoming the fourth child for the prime ministerial couple. His birth, long and tiring for his mother, according to his emotional dad.
[Tony Blair, Prime Minister Of England:] It was quite a long labor in the end, because it went on for quite a few hours. And, you know, it is quite a struggle in the end for Cherie, and I think she's just relieved that it's all she's relieved it's over.
[Robertson:] A healthy six pounds and 12 ounces, he will be the first baby at 10 Downing Street in 150 years. The happy event also a political blessing.
[Gervase Webb, "evening Standard" Newspaper:] It's come at a very good time for him. The polls are not looking good. He's just had a bit of a thrashing in the local elections.
[Robertson:] In fact, the youngest Blair has been causing quite a stir for months. Dad has been unsure he can take time off work to be with mum, but mum, better known by her professional name, Cherie Booth, queen's counsel, which roughly translated means top-notch lawyer, has been battling her husband's government in the courtroom to give fathers just that right.
[Webb:] Just before the baby was due to be born, she spent three hours on her feet in court arguing for the rights of workers. She has said that she thinks fathers should take paternity leave. He has said, well, it's a nice idea, but not for him.
[Robertson:] On this night, however, dad put paternal duties first, staying at his 45-year-old wife's bedside for the delivery, before taking mother and child home to join their other three children. [on camera]: The Blairs have always guarded their privacy, and the arrival of Leo will likely prove no exception. However, the delivery of baby Blair into the hands of dad's spin doctors will likely provide them their own bundle of joy. Nic Robertson, CNN, London.
[Randall:] We didn't mean to scare the Blairs when we said 12 pounds, six ounces. We had the numbers wrong.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Shihab Rattansi:] Ramadan has begun, but the bombing continues in Afghanistan. Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf had asked the international coalition to end its bombing by today. But as that likelihood receded, the General emphasized the primacy of coalition's military objectives over religious sensitivities. But now Kabul, as well as large swathes of northern Afghanistan, have fallen to the Northern Alliance. The guarantees General Musharraf asked for that Alliance troops remain outside of Kabul have been eviscerated. That's raised fears that despite General Musharraf's pledge of allegiance with the United States, Pakistan will have little say in the future of Afghanistan. Tonight on
[Q&a;:] Is Pakistan losing the war in Afghanistan? And good evening. Welcome to Q&A.; I'm Shihab Rattansi. Jim Clancy is on assignment. As the Northern Alliance solidifies its hold in Afghanistan, attention is already being turned to the political consequences. Pakistan is the neighbor, that some say, has the most to win or lose in the conflict in Afghanistan. There's concern that the eventual Afghan government could be hostile to the country. Earlier, I talked with Major General Rashid Qureshi, the spokesman for Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf. I first asked the major general what he thought of reports that Osama bin Laden had managed to escape and get to Pakistan's border.
[Major General Rashid Qureshi, Spokesman For Pakistan's President:] It's ridiculous. Frankly, there's no if they have information of the location of Osama bin Laden or Mullah Omar, why don't they tell us. And, so I wonder who has initiated this. It seems to be a similar report as what we heard yesterday, about Pakistan sending two transport planes to get out Pakistan military personnel. I think it has no basis.
[Rattansi:] But the border region is of concern to Pakistan. We have had reports over the last few days that you've heavily fortified the whole area.
[Qureshi:] Yes, that is true. Pakistan has reinforced the border. It has reinforced the scouts that we have which man the border. We've also got people in depth. Some troops have been moved forward so that for two, three reasons. One, we don't want people, Afghan refugees or whoever they may be, coming across the border. And we'd like to monitor exactly who comes across.
[Rattansi:] None the less, there are real concerns that the Taliban may still be being supplied from the border region, that they may flee to that area, and indeed, an area where many of the locals are still perfectly in tune with their cause. And they might even try and destabilize Islamabad from there.
[Qureshi:] No, I don't think any such thing would happen. Yes, it's a very long border. It's a porous border. So, therefore, we need that's why needed to beef it up, but we are going to make sure that all routes that come from there are monitored. And we will even use, maybe, vehicles and helicopter patrols to monitor everyone who comes in. We've already announced very clearly that no refugees are allowed into Pakistan from Afghanistan except on extreme humanitarian grounds. And anyone else will be dealt with according to law.
[Rattansi:] You mentioned that the reports that we were getting about Pakistani military personnel being evacuated from Konduz were erroneous. We are also getting reports that Pakistan is very concerned about the fate of thousands of international fighters in the region and that you're trying to get safe passage for them. Are those reports erroneous as well?
[Qureshi:] Oh, absolutely not. They were we have no information about what you call thousands of personnel who are fighting there. And there has been no effort whatsoever to evacuate anyone. In any case, from what I hear, if there was an airport at Konduz, I'm sure the bombing would have made sure that it's nonfunctional. So it's such a ridiculous report. I'm sure it's planted. It's initiated by people who want to malign Pakistan. There have never been military personnel inside Afghanistan Pakistani military personnel.
[Rattansi:] Never, even under the Taliban? I mean, it was widely believed that the ISI and the Pakistani military were into supplying weapons to the Taliban to help their rule, but also personnel for advice.
[Qureshi:] Again, absolutely false, and people have said in the past that the Taliban have been using or have been given equipment and ammunition by Pakistan. It's absolutely false. If you look at the equipment that the Taliban use, they use Russian equipment. Pakistan does not have Russian equipment. And in any case, from the times of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, such large dumps of ammunition and equipment, some really greased were left over and helicopters that I don't think the Taliban need any equipment or ammunition from any country. They can, perhaps, supply surplus ammunition and equipment to various countries.
[Rattansi:] Ramadan is commencing. The bombing is continuing in the north and the south. There are jitters about the intentions of the Northern Alliance. Might not all of this cause immense instability, not just amongst Islamic countries but amongst the Pashtun communities both in Afghanistan and, indeed, on the border regions of Pakistan?
[Qureshi:] I'm sure it will have some effect and these concerns have been voiced by President Musharraf to various world leaders, to the coalition forces, to the United Nations. However, one does understand and we do understand that the military objectives that the coalition forces have set out to achieve can not be put off, and one needs to achieve those to create the right effects. However, there will be concern. There will be concern not only in Muslim countries. I think there will be concern the longer you spread the military action, the more concern will be voiced by even other world countries and communities.
[Rattansi:] But Pakistan had concerns. Before, General Musharraf said he had ironclad guarantees that the Northern Alliance wouldn't take Kabul. That didn't seem to account for very much, did it?
[Qureshi:] We are quite sure that the coalition forces were conscious of sort of keeping Kabul as a demilitarized zone. And the United Nations, I think, is now taking action on that. Yes, there were some concerns voiced when the Uzbeks and the Tajiks and these people entered Kabul. And there is still apprehension amongst the United Nations that this may result in turmoil and atrocities. So that's why, I think, the United Nations will take action.
[Rattansi:] But the Northern Alliance appear to be consolidating power. They've said that they won't accept a multi-national force, let alone demilitarized Kabul. So then what, a military action against the Northern Alliance from the coalition?
[Qureshi:] I think the ethnic community that formed, what you're referring to as the Northern Alliance, are quite conscious of the fact that what they have achieved could not and would not have been achieved if it hadn't been for coalition forces. And therefore, that much of leverage the coalition forces and the United Nations has on them. And I'm also quite conscious that perhaps the Afghan people, as a whole, all of them including the Northern Alliance, have had enough of fighting and enough of tension and friction. And they would like that, ultimately, a broad-based multi-ethnic government, which is perhaps the only solution to a government that can really govern Afghanistan, is what is the best way forward.
[Rattansi:] But with the Northern Alliance dominance over large swathes of Afghanistan, doesn't frankly Iran, Russia, even India, have more of a say now on the future of Afghanistan than Pakistan does?
[Qureshi:] I don't think so. I think in the south and in the center of Afghanistan, there are a lot of local tribal leaders who have risen up against the Taliban, and that was something that was to be expected. And even areas which border Pakistan, the Pashtuns there, have risen up and the local tribal leaders have taken over their respective areas. I don't think Indian or even Russian influence would be so much that it should cause anyone any worry. In any case, we are quite sure that the Afghans will only accept a government which they want. And that is what everyone should want also. It should be according to the wishes of the Afghan people.
[Rattansi:] General Qureshi, thank you very much for joining us.
[Qureshi:] Thank you very much.
[Rattansi:] Well, we're going to pause here for some breaking news out of Afghanistan. Carol Lin is going to join us from Quetta. Indeed, on that point of whether the Pashtuns are indeed rising up against the Taliban and whether Mullah Mohammad Omar is withdrawing from Kandahar. Carol, do you have any more information?
[Carol Lin, Cnn Correspondent:] Shihab, we've been following a series of meetings of Afghan tribal leaders who've been negotiating with the Taliban for them to put down their weapons and allow a Pashtun agreement to take place so that tribal law can take effect in Kandahar. What we have just learned after a series of telephone calls and meetings is that Mullah Omar, apparently, has agreed according to these sources with these tribal leaders. He has agreed to withdraw, but he is handing over power inside of Kandahar to a Taliban military commander by the name of Haji Basher, who took control, military control, of Kandahar very early this morning. What does this mean? Well, Haji Basher is a member of the Noorzai Pashtun tribe. And it was the Noorzai Pashtun tribe representative that went in, earlier this evening, to negotiate a peaceful solution inside of Kandahar. What these Pashtun tribal leaders are hoping for is that this Taliban commander will set aside his loyalties to the Taliban and allow his tribal affiliation to take over. The argument over whether Haji Basher should have authority in Kandahar as Mullah Omar had wanted to withdraw: Haji Basher said that if Mullah Omar withdraws, there would be no security force in place to keep civil unrest from rising in the city. So he felt that his role should be to stay in the city until the Pashtun tribal leaders figure out a way to fill the power vacuum. Here is the problem. There is disagreement within these various Pashtun tribes as to who should fill that vacuum. What they want to have happen is for King Zahir Shah to come out of Rome, become the figurehead of a coalition government. But time is not on their side because events are moving so quickly. So you have a situation here where Mullah Omar has apparently, according to sources with these tribal elders he has agreed to withdraw. But in his place is his top military commander. So in effect, the city of Kandahar may still be in Taliban control, although heavily influenced by these Pashtun tribal leaders who say they are taking their orders from King Zahir Shah up in Rome Shihab.
[Rattansi:] But, Carol, is Mullah Mohammad Omar withdrawing with his troops in order to carry on the fight against the Northern Alliance?
[Lin:] Well, there is discussion now. I just got of the phone with a source who said that there is Taliban moving north through the Oruzgan province, which is north of Kandahar. But what he is saying that eyewitnesses are telling him so admittedly I am giving you second hand information he is telling me that civilians are actually approaching these Taliban fighters who are trying to move north and disarming them, so that these witnesses are telling this source that the Taliban is losing control inside of Afghanistan and they're losing public support. It is hard for me to believe that average citizens would go up to a Taliban fighter and grab their automatic weapon. But that's what they're saying is happening just north of the city.
[Rattansi:] Carol Lin there reporting to us at Quetta with some very interesting stories. Trying to make sense of the many stories we're hearing across the border in Afghanistan in and around Kandahar. We'll, of course, keep you updated on any more information as we get it. But, we'll continue with Q&A; after this break. Stay with us.
[Rifaat Hussein, Military Analyst:] Well, the concerns, basically, relate to internal security. The pressure on the Pakistan border from these Taliban soldiers. Some of them, they have thrown their guns away, and they are trying to stream across. So to deal with those concerns, Pakistan has stepped up security along the entire Pakistan-Afghanistan border.
[Rattansi:] Welcome back. The Pakistani government says its not concerned by the Northern Alliance's march through Afghanistan. Someone with a different perspective is the former director general of Pakistan's intelligence service. We talked to Hamid Gul in Islamabad. And I asked him if he thought that the coalition had lost control of the Northern Alliance.
[Hamid Gul, Fmr. Pakistan Intelligence Service:] Yes, I think that's correct. I think this perception is right. Right from the beginning, you had to see what is the composition of the Northern Alliance. It has been heavily invested by the ex-Communists who are very deeply aligned with Moscow in the past, and they haven't forgotten the kind of defeat they suffered at the hands of Mujahadeen backed by America. So, I think, they are coming back. And now that they're in control of Kabul, Begram, and some of the important airports, I think, they're going to create lots of difficulties.
[Rattansi:] The Taliban, of course the backbone of support, in many ways, was the ISI, the security services of Pakistan. Is there a sense then that if things on the ground continue to favor Mr. Rabbani and other elements of Northern Alliance whom the ISI don't feel are particularly favorable to Pakistan? Is there a sense that then the ISI might resume support for those elements?
[Gul:] No, I don't think so because it depends here as far as ISI support for Taliban is concerned, I can assure you that no such movement can be created in Afghanistan. This will be spontaneous response of the situation which prevailed in the mid-90s in Afghanistan. And Taliban emerged as a force which was received with both arms by the Afghan people. They enjoyed a considerable degree of support. I'm not saying absolute support, because in some of the urban centers of Afghanistan, their harsh manner of governance was not liked. But they did establish their rule over 95 percent of Afghanistan, not because they were being supported by ISI or Pakistan, but because people of Afghanistan accepted them. Whoever now has to rule Afghanistan, the whole of it, has to be acceptable to Afghanistan.
[Rattansi:] Then to what do we owe the complete collapse, basically, of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and the apparent welcoming across Afghanistan of either Northern Alliance forces or Pashtun leaders who have decided to turn against the Taliban?
[Gul:] Well, I disagree with that point of you. I don't subscribe to that at all. I think it's a change of posture on part of Taliban. I think from purely professional military point of view, this should be understood that they have changed posture. They have not been defeated. They have been unseated. And that too, because they decided to get themselves unseated, they were offering too many exposed targets while they were in control of cities. Now, they have taken to the hills, and they are they will have the targets.
[Rattansi:] But the consensus amongst many military analysts is simply that the Taliban this isn't the same situation as the Soviet invasion. This is a time when the Taliban no longer have the support of much of Afghanistan. And crucially, they no longer have the supplies from Pakistan. That's why it's very different and, in fact, their guerrilla war may not work this time around.
[Gul:] Well, I think, somebody is closing eyes shut on this situation. And I think the American poor taxpayers are being taken for a ride. This is absolutely wrong assessment. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, the entire country was in the control of government, which was friendly to Soviet Union. And they had 300,000 troops under their command. The Soviets brought in 120,000 additional troops. They were well equipped, well trained, well armed and they were in total control of the country. And yet, when Mujahideen started off, there was no support to them for a year and a half. The American support started flowing in, and that too in shape of small arms, only handheld, shoulder fired if you attribute this victory to Stinger, then Stinger, let me tell you, was introduced in the seventh year of war.
[Rattansi:] But, General Gul, that may be, but the point was there was a common foreign enemy, and that, of course, was the Soviet Union. This time around, it's Afghans who are the enemy of the Taliban. That there is it's simply a completely different equation.
[Gul:] No, you will soon find that it will start turning around, because Afghanistan will exercise a suction effect. And already, the Russians are trying to assert themselves, because now that they are in control of Kabul, their forces allied to them, and I think they are going to now have a different mood and different style of dealing in the coalition. And at some point in time, maybe Iran gets sucked in and China gets sucked in. So it should not be taken it's an evolving picture. I think the American analysts are looking at a still picture, but it is like a movie camera. The picture is moving, and it is going to evolve into the future.
[Rattansi:] Hamid Gul there, I'm just breaking into that interview. Hamid Gul there speaking to me earlier. Well, let's get some analysis of what we have been hearing. Dilip Hiro joins us from London, the noted author and commentator on Central and South Asian affairs. Mr. Hiro, thank you very much for joining us. The Pakistani government is used to be saying, everything is happening exactly as planned. Hamid Gul there saying, the communists have taken over. Well, where is the Pakistan government line right now?
[Dilip Hiro, Author:] I think that we must of course, everybody has to have that background, so, in fact you know, some of the ex-communist commanders joined up with Taliban. The key point that comes through is the ethnic loyalties of the Afghan people. And even the story that came from your correspondent Lin, when she talks about Pashtun leaders now being talking to Omar in Kandahar, et cetera, et cetera, it seems to me that Pashtuns are trying to have a United Front as an ethnic group. Whether they belong to Taliban or not is becoming incidental, and so we go back to even the word Northern Alliance itself is very misleading. When you say alliance, alliance means more than one party. But the party which is really upfront there, and the one which is occupying sorry, not occupying which is now in Kabul is a purely Tajik organization called Jamiat-i-Islami, belonging to Professor Rabbani. I don't think there are any Uzbek forces there. So, ultimately, Afghans are falling back to a position which has been very historical for them ethnic identity.
[Rattansi:] And indeed are we now basically seeing an effect of partition of northern and southern Afghanistan between the once members of the Northern Alliance, as you say, they are mainly particularly centered around Mr. Rabbani. And in the south, the Pashtuns now are trying to counter that enormous influence that they have in the north. I mean, are we going to see both sides now just entrench themselves and start confronting each other?
[Hiro:] Absolutely. I think they're again you know, of course, you have talked with two Pakistani spokesmen Pakistani who are involved in the situation. And from Pakistan's point of view, their strength is the Pashtun ethnic group. And we have to remember that the Pashtuns are the largest group. They are not more than 50 percent, they are about 45 percent, but they're the largest. Also, they live in a contiguous area. They live in the east, and they live in the south, and they are next to Pakistan. Also, everything that's being talked about, you know, Pakistan has been helping Taliban, et cetera, et cetera please remember, there is a no-man's land between Pakistan and Afghanistan. And there are seven Pashtun tribes, which are governed by their own law. And that is were precisely Taliban is going to use that particular area as their rear base from which they may be able to launch guerrilla warfare coming spring. But, I mean, that is we're going forward. But in terms of specifics, what is the strength of Pakistan? In Pakistan, there are Pashtuns. They're in the northwest frontier. So Pashtun ethnic identity is the one which is the strength of Pakistan, and that is why Pakistan is very important. And if any arrangement which excludes the Pashtuns, which excludes Pakistan will not last very long, you know. And trying to run Afghanistan without the Pashtuns is like trying to run Britain without the English.
[Rattansi:] But of course, I mean, things have been obviously changed quite a bit in the last few days. Only a few days ago, it looked like Pakistan had basically lost their complete strategic importance in this battle as the Northern Alliance were moving through large portions of Afghanistan. Now, with the Pashtuns organizing themselves, possibly as a result of the Northern Alliance advance, Pakistan's back again in the picture again, isn't it?
[Hiro:] Absolutely. I think ultimately, as you know, geography is very important, you know. And if you are Pakistan, this very long, 1,500 mile broad with Afghanistan, therefore that's
[Rattansi:] Dilip Hiro, we're going to have to stop there. We are out of time. But I think we have got what the analysis is. Thank you, Dilip Hiro, and all our guests. The news is next on CNN. TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Congressional hearings into the recall of millions of Firestone tires get under way on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers will question Firestone and Ford executives about what they knew and when they knew it, and why the tires were not recalled sooner. The tires, found mostly on Ford Explorers, are being blamed on 88 highway deaths. Louisiana Representative Billy Tauzin called the House hearing scheduled later today. Right now, he joins us though, from Capitol Hill with a preview. Good morning, congressman.
[Rep. Billy Tauzin , Louisiana:] Good morning, Carol Lin.
[Lin:] What are your key questions as you go into your hearing today?
[Tauzin:] Well, obviously, what Firestone and Ford knew of this circumstance years ago and what they might have or could have done to alert the American consumers and to recall these tires before we lost nearly 90 people on the highways. And, secondly, what can we do in the future to avoid these kind of situations? Particularly, what can we do to test tires more efficiently to find out whether they're going to fail?
[Lin:] Well, the first of your questions, then what do you read into this memo between two Ford executives discussing the possibility that Firestone was, in fact, aware of problems with tires in Saudi Arabia and certainly concerned that government regulators here in the United States might find out?
[Tauzin:] Well, we have a lot of information that Firestone knew a lot about this problem going way back in the early '90s. But, here in 1999, is a memo, indeed by these Ford executives, acknowledging that Firestone legal teams are saying: Please don't make us recall these tires in Saudi Arabia, because we don't want the DOT to find out about this. That's the first evidence of intentional hiding of the facts from the federal authorities in Washington, chiefly responsible for auto safety on the highway.
[Lin:] Well, do you if they were aware of it, are you also aware that they did anything to specifically cover it up, other than express their concern?
[Tauzin:] Well, all we know is that they they forced Firestone they forced Ford, rather, in Saudi Arabia, to voluntarily replace these tires rather than do a legal recall. That was obviously an attempt to make sure that DOT, the Department of Transportation, and NHTSA here in Washington, wouldn't know about the problem. That's a clear indication that they didn't want to do a recall here in America and they probably knew enough that they should have done a recall. How many people's lives were lost in the meantime is one of the questions that are going to come up today.
[Lin:] Well, congressman, what Firestone told us a few minutes ago on EARLY EDITION is that the tire separation there, the tread separation was due to extreme weather conditions in the Middle East, as well as some things that the consumers themselves were doing wrong, like underinflating the tires.
[Tauzin:] Firestone has constantly blamed somebody else for these tire failures throughout this process. I've never seen a company in bigger denial in all my life. The fact is we've got some have bad tires out there. There wouldn't be a recall going on today. And they can't keep denying that. They have to face up to that. The question is, did they know about it back in the early '90s? and could they have recalled these tires sooner? And the answers we're going to get today will lead us either to a conclusion that this recall came too late and Firestone has some accountability there, or it will lead us in some other direction.
[Lin:] All right, well we'll see what those executives have to say when they appear before your committee at 1:00 Eastern today. Thank you very much, congressman, for joining us.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] U.S. and Russian space officials are feuding over the upcoming journey of space tourist Dennis Tito. Tito is scheduled to travel to the International Space Station tomorrow after agreeing, reportedly, to pay Russia 20 million bucks for the privilege. But with computer problems plaguing the orbiting outpost, NASA contends now is not the time. For more on the controversy, CNN's Jill Dougherty is in Moscow Jill.
[Jill Dougherty, Cnn Bureau Chief, Moscow:] Well, Donna, we're still getting two different views from both sides. On the U.S. side, NASA is saying that this could be down to the wire in terms of when Dennis Tito and that Soyuz spacecraft wi ll be blasting off. It's supposed to be happening about 11:30 in the morning Moscow time, Saturday morning. That's very early U.S. time. But Viktor Blagov, who is the deputy flight director for the Russian mission control, says there's no question that Dennis Tito is going to be leaving tomorrow, that that Soyuz rocket is going. Now, the hitch is the computer problems that you are talking about, Donna. And those have been plaguing the station. And attached to that station now is the U.S. space shuttle, Endeavour,and the U.S. side is saying that that cannot leave until those computer problems are fixed. They asked the Russians for a two-day delay. The Russians obviously want to go ahead. Meanwhile, Dennis Tito, 60-year-old California millionaire, says that he is ready. He did pay a reported $20 million for the privilege of going up into space, and he's had nine months of training, 900 hours in classroom, and his son, Mike, tells CNN that his father is a natural for space.
[Mike Tito, Dennis Tito's Son:] He makes a great first space tourist. He's got the rocket scientist background. He spent years working with NASA. He's a successful businessman, a negotiator. He knows this space station inside and out.
[Dougherty:] So NASA says there has been quite a bit of progress on the computers. They say that two are back already and the third and fourth are on their way to recovery, and that presumably, if things go as they expect, they could have the possible undocking Sunday. And then, according to the original schedule, Dennis Tito would be arriving on Monday. Again, the Russians are saying that they are planning to go ahead as scheduled Saturday morning on that launch Donna.
[Kelley:] OK. Jill Dougherty in Moscow, thanks very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] The Atlantis space shuttle is scheduled to take off from Earth tomorrow on a mission to make repairs to the International Space Station. The repair mission has been delayed several times now. But as CNN space correspondent Miles O'Brien reports, the space station itself is behind schedule, too.
[Miles O'brien, Cnn Space Correspondent:] By now, the $60 billion International Space Station should have looked like this. Instead, it remains like this: a fledgling, and an ailing one at that. So the seven-member crew of the space shuttle Atlantis is making an urgent house call.
[Jim Halsell, Atlantis Commander:] The reason we're flying this flight on this date is to extend the life of the space station.
[O'brien:] The station was supposed to be home and office to a three-person Russian and American crew by now. The reason for the delay: The Russian-built crew quarters, the so-called service module, has not been put into service due to a lack of cash and confidence in the proton rocket that will carry it into space. The Russians now say they have their act together and the service module will fly in mid- July. But meanwhile, the manufacturer's warranty on the station has expired.
[Scott Horowitz, Atlantis Pilot:] So our job is to go up and replace these serviceable items, fix a few items that have failed, and basically get the station in a posture where it's ready to receive the service module, which will lead onto what our mission originally was going to be.
[O'brien:] This mission was supposed to fly after the service module docked at the station, so the crew had been trained to activate it for the first station keepers. When NASA managers re-jiggered the schedule and the mission in February, they took the three service module experts off the flight. There were replaced with a crew scheduled to live aboard the space station next year.
[Halsell:] We literally lived together and trained together, spending, in some cases, more time with each other than we do with our own families for more than a year. So there were some close bonds there and it was, from a psychological point of view, it was a difficult transition to make.
[O'brien:] Last month, NASA tried to launch Atlantis on three consecutive days, but each time, high winds kept the orbiter grounded. This time around, the forecast looks better. But Florida weather is no easier to predict than a Russian launch schedule. That said, the weather office this morning here at the cape issued a new forecast and they're saying it is 100 percent "go" on the weather forecast for launch. All this time I thought the only certainties were death and taxes Lou.
[Waters:] Well, we'll check tomorrow and see if that holds up.

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Rudi Bakhtiar, Co-host:] Welcome to your Tuesday NEWSROOM. I'm Rudi Bakhtiar. Let's get started with a look at the rundown. Education is on the agenda of George W. Bush's first full day as U.S. president. Then, from the White House to the schoolhouse, we tackle teen smoking in today's "Health Desk." Up next, "Worldview" visits a Kenyan operating room via the Internet. And we end up with more medical news in "Chronicle." We're headed for your brain. United States President George W. Bush meets with reading experts on his first working day in the White House. He also sat down with House and Senate Republican leaders to discuss his plans for key issues such as improving schools. Mr. Bush is preparing to send his education agenda to Congress. The package is expected to focus on improving literacy and teacher training, holding schools accountable for test scores, and giving school districts greater freedom. It's also believed to include a voucher plan to help low-income parents send kids to private schools if they wish. Some Democrats say vouchers would drain funds from public schools. Aside from education, president Bush is focusing on his Cabinet. Six of seven confirmed Cabinet members were sworn in Monday: Colin Powell as secretary of state, Ann Veneman as agriculture secretary, Donald Rumsfeld as defense secretary, Don Evans as commerce secretary, Spencer Abraham as energy secretary, and Paul O'Neill as Treasury secretary. Bush is scheduled to attend Education Secretary-designee Rod Paige's swearing in Wednesday. U.S. President Bush is also pushing ahead with his tax cut plan. He's hoping for bipartisan support, but many Democrats are objecting to the size of the tax cut. They say the nation cannot afford it. Chris Black has more about Mr. Bush's tax cut proposal and the lone Democrat who supports it.
[Chris Black, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] While President Bush focused on education, his allies on Capitol Hill set the ball rolling on his $1.3 trillion tax cut.
[Sen. Phil Gramm , Texas:] We are joining together in a crusade to see this tax cut in its totality adopted. We want to see it become the law of the land.
[Black:] One Democrat, Zell Miller of Georgia, a former governor like Mr. Bush, joined Gramm, breaking ranks with his own party.
[Sen. Zell Miller , Georgia:] Right now, our taxes have never been higher. Right now, our surplus has never been greater. To me it's just plain common sense that you deal with the first by using the second. Remember that old Elvis Presley song, "Return to Sender"? That's what we're going to do right here.
[Black:] The tax proposal calls for reducing income tax rates for all taxpayers; doubling the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000; reducing the so-called marriage penalty; and repealing the estate tax. So far, Miller is the only Senate Democrat to publicly embrace the Bush tax cut. The Senate majority leader says it is a sign of things to come.
[Lott:] Well, it is significant, because on a bill usually you have one, then you have two. And then it becomes many more. But I think it is important that Sen. Gramm and Sen. Miller, a Democrat, have joined together to introduce the basic bill.
[Black:] Democratic leaders say they are now willing to support a larger tax cut, but not as large as the president wants. And Democratic sources in the House and Senate say Democrats are moving away from targeted tax cut advocated by the Clinton-Gore team and towards a rate cut preferred by Mr. Bush. But they say the rate cut must be aimed at middle-income taxpayers, not the wealthy.
[Sen. Tom Daschle , Minority Leader:] I think it's important that we find the right balance between targeted cuts and some sort of a rate cut. Finally, we have to ensure that the bulk of the real benefit goes to those who need it the most.
[Black:] But Democrats and some Republicans say the slowing economy could cause government revenues to shrink, eating up the surplus. [on camera]: Democrats are privately acknowledging a tax cut is inevitable this year. But the exact size and shape of that tax cut is still very much in doubt. Chris Black, CNN, Capitol Hill.
[Announcer:] Teachers, make the most of CNN NEWSROOM with our free daily classroom guide to the program. There you'll find a rundown of each day's show so you choose just the program segments that fit your lesson plan. Plus, there are discussion questions and activities, and the guide highlights key people, places and news terms. Each day, find hot links to other online resources and previews of upcoming desk segments. It's all at this Web address, where you can also sign up to have the guide automatically e-mailed directly to you each day. It's easy, it's free, it's your curriculum connection to the news. After all, the news never stops, and neither does learning.
[Bakhtiar:] In today's "Health Desk," we focus on the fight against the Ebola virus. First identified in Africa in 1976, it's one of the deadliest viruses, killing between 50 and 90 percent of its victims. It's transmitted by direct contact with blood, secretions or organs of an infected person. The symptoms include sudden fever, weakness and eventual internal and external bleeding. Until now, there's been nothing to prevent people from getting the disease or treat them once they're infected. But some researchers may be changing that. Christy Feig has the story.
[Christy Feig, Cnn Correspondent:] Ebola's deadly power most recently hit northern Uganda, killing 145 in one town. So far, the virus has killed over 800 people worldwide since it first appeared in 1976. There is nothing doctors can do to prevent or treat those infected. Now researchers at the National Institutes of Health say there may be hope.
[Dr. Gary Nabel, National Institutes Of Health:] We've found that it's possible to protect against the lethal effects of the Ebola virus in a primate model. By vaccinating animals ahead of time against Ebola virus, we were able to prevent them from dying from the infection.
[Feig:] Nabel and his colleagues tested the vaccine in four monkeys. They all survived after being infected. Four other monkeys who didn't get the vaccine died. [voice-over]: The two-part vaccine uses some of the DNA of the virus to prime the immune system, then a weakened form of a common cold virus as a booster.
[Nabel:] By presenting those parts of the virus to the immune system, we activate it, we alert it to the possibility that a virus might be coming, and then the immune system can respond more rapidly to the actual virus when it sees it.
[Feig:] Next step: more clinical trials, eventually with health care workers in the countries most often hit to see if they are protected in the next outbreak. It will take three years or more to know if this is an effective and safe vaccine for humans, and if it does work, doctors hope they can experiment to see if the vaccine can help treat patients who are already infected. Christy Feig, CNN, Washington.
[Bakhtiar:] Studies have shown kids' experimentation with drinking and smoking increases with age. Now one study is looking at even younger kids, middle school students, to see what influences them to pick up that first cigarette or drink. Here again is Christy Feig with details.
[Feig:] By all accounts, who young people hang around plays a big factor in whether they start smoking or drinking.
[Unidentified Male:] I've been smoking since I was 11, and, well, started with that because of my friends.
[Feig:] And he fits right into the findings of one of the first studies to survey over 4,000 middle school students to see where teens' attitudes towards smoking and drinking first develop.
[Bruce Simons-morton, National Inst. Of Health:] Affiliating with other youth who smoke or drink was the most powerful peer influence, Indeed, sixth, seventh and eighth graders were nine times more likely to smoke and five times more likely to drink if they had two or more friends who smoke and drank.
[Feig:] This association is even stronger than if they were directly offered a cigarette or a drink. Girls are more likely than boys to be influenced by their peers, a trend that carries over to high school. So what's a parent to do? The study found several things: knowing who their kids play with and what they do; keeping expectations high for their children. The study shows young people will try to reach them. And holding them in high regard, respecting their opinions and listening to them helps most children behave better.
[Simons-morton:] Teens who ported that their parents were highly involved in their lives were about half as likely to smoke or drink than youth who felt their parents were not very involved.
[Feig:] And it's never too early to start. Researchers say parents may need to pay attention to their kids' friends as early as the sixth grade. Christy Feig, CNN, Washington.
[Bakhtiar:] We have more ahead about you and what's going on inside your head. Stick around to check out your brain coming up in "Chronicle." More on health as we spin the "Worldview" globe. Our focus is on a condition that threatens the vision of many people. We head to Kenya, site of a cataract operation seen around the world. And we examine the entertainment world. Our focus: Asian filmmakers. You may have heard of Ang Lee, who this week won the Golden Globe for best director, and his movie which won best foreign language film. In "Worldview" today, we head to one of Asia's major ports: Hong Kong. Hong Kong is a special administrative region of China. It was part of China from ancient times until the 1800s when Britain gained control of Hong Kong Island in 1842. In fact, on July 1 of 1898, China leased Hong Kong to Britain for 99 years. Then in July of 1997, Hong Kong was returned to China. In spite of the 99-year British lease, there's a great deal of Chinese influence in Hong Kong. One example, the popularity of martial arts films there. Now Lauren Hunter on a Hong Kong martial arts film that's getting a lot of thumbs up.
[Lauren Hunter, Cnn Correspondent:] "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" is a story of love and betrayal centering on the theft of a sacred sword in ancient China. The film's message is honor and integrity. Its language is Mandarin, and its action pure Hong Kong- style martial arts. Director Ang Lee may be best known for his Oscar-winning film "Sense and Sensibility." He calls "Tiger" a "Sense and Sensibility" with martial arts, and says it's the fulfillment of a boyhood dream.
[Ang Lee, Director, "crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon":] You know, making martial film makes me feel, like, really macho, that the can- do, the fun of it, the crazy setup, the ultimate exhibition of the skill of making movies in the most exciting way. To me, that's really satisfying.
[Michelle Yeoh, Actress:] There is martial arts, and yet there is the dramatic side that balances it. It's like seeing the yin and the yang work in perfect harmony.
[Hunter:] Preparation for the film began months before the cameras rolled with both the actors and the director immersing themselves in the physical and philosophical tenets of martial arts.
[Yeoh:] Three hours in the morning, maybe another two hours in the evening. You see the more aggressive side of it, the visual side of it, the very powerful side of it. But that is the exact opposite of the philosophy behind it. It's not about going into war, it's about deflecting it, it's about learning to pacify situations. It's about knowing yourself, looking into yourself.
[Hunter:] Choreographer Yuen Ho Ping, who did the action sequences in "The Matrix," helped put Ang Lee's vision on screen, including one fight sequence on the tops of bamboo trees. The actors were suspended over 100 feet in the air, attached by wires to nearby construction cranes.
[Lee:] We have scores of people underneath the actors pulling the cables and mimicking the bamboo movements. You know, one or two out of many takes maybe work in certain sections, and we cut it together, and then in post-production digitally remove those wires.
[Hunter:] The film premiered to standing ovations at the Cannes Film Festival in May and was a summer blockbuster in Asia before heading West, where it's generated a lot of Oscar buzz.
[Lee:] I think at heart it's really a romantic story, a romantic drama with martial arts as its film language.
[Hunter:] A language that appears to be universal. Lauren Hunter, CNN Entertainment News, Hollywood.
[Bakhtiar:] More on Asian films as we turn to Japan, an island country in the North Pacific Ocean and one of the world's economic giants. Japan also ranks among the world's leading producers of motion pictures. Many Japanese films have earned international fame, but only two Japanese filmmakers have ever won Oscars for directing. The legendary Akira Kurosawa was one. The other is a young Japanese woman who says she surprised even herself when she clinched the Academy Award for best short documentary. Marina Kamimura has more from Tokyo.
[Unidentified Male:] What are you nominated for?
[Keiko Ibi, Director:] The short documentary category.
[Marina Kamimura, Cnn Tokyo Bureau Chief:] Keiko Ibi scored big on her first try, winning a coveted Oscar for directing "The Personals," a short film chronicling the love lives of a group of Jewish senior citizens in New York. It's an achievement the Tokyo native chalks up to her background.
[Ibi:] I think I look at American culture as a slightly different perspective because I'm not American, and not necessarily Japanese, perhaps.
[Kamimura:] Ibi has beat the odds before. A former Miss Japan, she says she was always attracted to the stage and screen, writing and directing her first play in grade school. Eventually Ibi says she managed to persuaded her mother she had to study in the United States, since she was loathe to join the male-dominated industry in Japan.
[Ibi:] There weren't many role model. I mean, I have never heard of a filmmaker as a woman, or as a writer or a producer. So, you know, it's just a different atmosphere, and I thought in America there will be a different opportunity.
[Kamimura:] While Ibi says she never even dreamed she could get this far, with a graduation thesis on a group of American seniors, nevertheless the director has become an inspiration at home. Young industry hopefuls, many of them female, thronged to see her at a recent film festival in Tokyo, designed to nurture up-and-coming directors. "She gave me confidence," says this director wannabe, "by making me think that I can do it too." Now the bicultural director says she's ready to turn the tables again.
[Ibi:] I didn't think I could make A story about Japanese or Japan when I left, but now I feel like I can.
[Kamimura:] Ibi's already started work on a feature- length screenplay about Japan's involvement in World War II, but first she's determined to shed light on another slice of American culture, this time cheerleaders in Texas. Marina Kamimura, CNN, Tokyo.
[Shelley Walcott, Co-host:] Next stop Africa and the country of Kenya. Kenya is a large country located on Africa's East Coast. Most Kenyans live on farms and raise crops and livestock for a living. But every year, many Kenyan farmers opt out of their rural way of life and move to cities and large towns. It can be something of a culture shock. Kenyans used to the slower pace of life on the farm must adjust to the fast pace, regular work schedule and impersonal relations typical of urban centers. Some rural Kenyans also face a learning curve when it comes to technological advancements, like use of the Internet. At least that was the case of one Kenyan woman who became the first cataracts patient to have surgery broadcast live on the World Wide Web. An estimated 25 million people worldwide are blinded by cataracts. It's a whitening of the eye caused by dirt, sun and aging. Catherine Bond has the story of a surgery routine in the developed world, but still hard to come by in Africa.
[Catherine Bond, Cnn Correspondent:] Tabitha Wanjiku lost her sight a year ago. She knows her way around her home in Kenya, but she needs her husband's help. Mrs. Wanjiku looked forward to a sophisticated yet simple operation to restore her sight. "I want to be able to cook for myself and wash my clothes again," she said. Not totally blind, she could just see our camera lights. The surgery to Mrs. Wanjiku's left eye would be what they were calling the world's 4 millionth cataract operation, but the very first broadcast live on the Internet, though Tabitha Wanjiku didn't know what the Internet was.
[Unidentified Female:] She doesn't know.
[Bond:] The result of aging, strong sunlight and poor health care, cataracts cloud the pupil of the eye, eventually causing blindness. By putting this cataract operation on the Internet, the German charity which pays for thousands of cataract operations here every year hopes to raise money to do more.
[Prof. Christian Grams, Christian Blind Mission:] What we realize is there is a lack of awareness that blindness is such a big problem, because in the developed world it's not such a big problem.
[Bond:] Kikuyu Hospital outside the Kenyan capital of Nairobi specializes in eyes. It used to cater to the poorest of the poor, but now the poor can no longer afford even basics like consultations, let alone cataract surgery, which gets people back to normal life.
[Dr. Stephen Gichuchi:] Because they are able to work and look after themselves better. It's actually much more than just giving sight. You really are giving life.
[Bond:] What happens next is not for the squeamish. Mrs. Wanjiku is given a local anesthetic. For an experienced surgeon, the operation is easy, an incision made and a lens inserted. Made in India, this lens costs just $7 U.S. as opposed to $70 from the United States. The operation goes out at 7:00 p.m. local time, peak-viewing on the Internet in Germany.
[Unidentified Male:] The wound is closed with a very small stitch. Wanjiku will have medicine placed in the eye.
[Bond:] It's all over in 15 minutes. Mrs. Wanjiku is led back to her bed on the ward. In the morning, she'll begin to see again. Catherine Bond, CNN, Nairobi.
[Bakhtiar:] Today in "Chronicle," it's all about your brain. Turns out hormones aren't the only reason teenagers sometimes act crazy. You know the behavior we're talking about: rapid mood swings, poor self-control. Now neuroscientists say there's a good reason why adolescent brains seem different: they literally are. Here's NEWSROOM's Shelley Walcott.
[Walcott:] The teen years can roar in like a lion, turning an otherwise easygoing kid into one with ferocious mood swings.
[Dr. Jay Giedd, Neuroscientist, Natl. Institutes Of Health:] I think, in general, teens get kind of a bad rap.
[Walcott:] Maybe so. But teens have been known for making silly decisions, appearing out-to-lunch in the area of self-control, running hot, then cold, loving you one minute, hating you the next. [on camera]: It's behavior often blamed on hormones or youth rebellion. But scientists say the root of teen tantrums could be buried deep in their brains. [voice-over]: While using sophisticated brain-mapping technology, U.S. and Canadian scientists made a startling discovery.
[Giedd:] It used to be thought that the brain didn't change very much after about the age of 3 or 4. But by studying teens, we now know that the teenage brain is changing very dramatically and very dynamically.
[Walcott:] In other words, the adolescent brain isn't as fully developed as scientists had previously thought, a theory that tends to provoke strong reactions from some kids.
[Unidentified Female:] I think that's dumb, personally. We're just young. We're having fun.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, if it's scientifically proven, I guess I have to give some credit to that. But, personally, I'd have to see the results myself. We're just having fun. It's not like we're retarded or like are you all stupid or something?
[Unidentified Youths:] No!
[Unidentified Male:] No, see, we're just out here trying to have some fun, basically, you know. You're only young once.
[Walcott:] For a long time, scientists believed the most important time in brain development occurred during the first few years of life, an assumption that prompted many parents to stimulate newborns with classical music or alphabet flash cards.
[Unidentified Female:] Carrot.
[Walcott:] Turns out, parents of young children can relax a bit since researchers say a child's brain is still developing way into puberty. Just as a teen is all arms and legs one day and all nose and ears the next, different regions of his or her brain also have an awkward sense of timing, with neural growth spurts that seem to coincide with important leaps in learning abilities. Researchers say there are three major periods of brain growth. The first occurs between the ages of 3 and 6. That's when there is a virtual forest fire of growth in the front of the brain.
[Dr. Elizabeth Sowell, Neuroscientist, Ucla Lab Of Neuro Imaging:] We know that the frontal lobes are regions of the brain that are responsible for things like planning, organization, inhibiting inappropriate responses, controlling emotion.
[Unidentified Female:] Sometimes me and my friends, just, we laugh a lot and we have a lot of jokes and stuff. My parents, they're kind of down to earth and not like that.
[Walcott:] As children grow older, the wave of rapid growth in the frontal lobes responsible for all that organization and planning slows down, not picking up again until much later in adolescence into early adulthood.
[Sowell:] Teenagers can plan and organize their lives, just not as well as they probably can when they're maybe 20, 25.
[Walcott:] The second phase of brain development takes place between the ages of 7 and 13. At that time, there is a growth spurt toward the middle and back of the brain, areas that affect, among other things, language skills.
[Dr. Paul Thompson, Neuroscientist, Ucla Lab Of Neuro Imaging:] So one of the things you might want to do is you might say, you know, maybe learn a language a little bit younger. You know, I want to learn French or learn Spanish or something like this. That might be a key period for educating children in that type of skill.
[Walcott:] But all this rapid growth suddenly ends around the ages of 13 to 15. During this final phase, the brain begins to fine-tune itself for the adult years, holding on to neurons and connections that get used a lot and shedding those that are hardly used at all; a time when certain motor skills, like playing an instrument, become more of a challenge.
[Unidentified Male:] I don't know, I started playing guitar last year. I'm still pretty bad at it, so, you know, that might support the theory.
[Walcott:] Scientists say the brain's growth pattern also explains the characteristic most associated with adolescence: teen angst, that feeling of edginess, an inability to control emotions, plain old stress. All this, scientists say, can be traced to the amygdala. That's the area of the brain that controls fear, the fight or flight response. Teen emotions are centered around the amygdala since their frontal lobes, which temper emotions, are still not fully developed.
[Dr. Deborah Yurgelun-todd, Neuropsychologist, Mclean Hospital:] It has implications for anything that requires a responsible review of the consequences. And that could be anything from decisions about what kind of work one's going to do, how you're going to apply yourself in school, what kind of relationships you want to have.
[Walcott:] So whether it's learning French, learning to play an instrument, or learning to control anger, biology plays a big part in those all-important teen years. And while parents may not have much say in the development of their child's brain, they can make a difference in another crucial area.
[Sowell:] If parents really understand that maybe their teenagers are a little bit scattered or disorganized or take risks or are rebellious because the part of their brain that would keep them from doing that isn't yet finished. So I think it just, again, reinforces that strong structure and support through the teenage years is of critical importance.
[Walcott:] Scientists say they will continue to probe the teenage brain. And they say parents should take heart. Even though it might sound like the teen brain is nothing more than a mental mosh pit, adolescence is actually the time when nature steps in to help a teenager grow up. Shelley Walcott, CNN.
[Bakhtiar:] Stay tuned for part two of our series tomorrow. Shelley Walcott looks at how a fully mature adult brain is supposed to function and why it's so important to protect the brain from drug abuse during its formative years.
[Giedd:] It's a real unfortunate irony that, at this time when the brain is most vulnerable during this adolescent pruning period, it's also the time when teens are most likely to experiment with drugs or alcohol.
[Bakhtiar:] We'll also find out why neuroscientists say the substances young people put in their bodies today could have lifelong effects. That's tomorrow on NEWSROOM. We'll see you then. Bye.

[Neville:] And welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. According to the 2000 census, women are beginning to reverse a trend that's been in place since 1971. What they are doing is choosing their children over their careers. More than half 55 percent of mothers still work outside the home, but that's down from the 59 percent high in 1998. Now it may not seem like much, but there may be something to talk about here, something going on. And here to talk about it are Rebecca Hegelin vice president of communications and columnist for worldnetdaily.com. Tomorrow's column, by the way, encouraging moms to stay home is called "be a quitter." She is a mother of three children and works from home. Also with us, Sharman Stein, the articles editor for "Working Mother" magazine. She has two boys and has always worked outside the home. Hmmm. Who do we start with? Rebecca, how about with you? Tell us your story and when did you decide to stay at home?
[Rebecca Hagelin, Mother Of Three:] When I got pregnant with my first child in 1987 I decided that I was going to be with my children, that there was no greater call for a woman than to be a mother and to raise productive citizens in society. I know that children have needs that only a mom can meet and I'm committed to doing that. Mothering is a process that takes place through our whole lives once we become a mother, but there are specific formative years where we have a very limited time to influence their lives, to teach them value and virtue and unconditional love, and I'm committed to doing that. And with modern technology we can...
[Neville:] Let me ask you this, was it a difficult decision emotionally and financially to make to stay at home?
[Hagelin:] No. Not at all. I mean, to me it was never a question. I was going to be there to raise my children no matter what. Now financially there was a sacrifice. And there continues to be, even though I'm an executive with worldnetdaily.com and Internet News Company, I do give up certain things to be at home with my children full-time and work there. Now I will say with modern technology, more women can do both but the priority has got to be on the kids, on the children.
[Neville:] Now, I'm going to jump in here and play a little something advocate. Don't like to use the devil word. But anyway, you know, some people may say, well, Rebecca, good for you. You are at home but you are still working. So, really, how much can you pay attention to your children while you are on the Internet doing your job?
[Hagelin:] You know what, that's where the key come in. Children at six months old have different needs than they do at seven years old or six years old. And you need to have a focus as a mother that allows you to evolve in your work and have your primary focus your children. If I could say one thing to the women that are watching this maybe some of them are watching it during their lunch hours across America it's change your paradigm of thinking. Make your children be your priority and let your work be the extra thing that do you in your life, and you will be very happy for that.
[Neville:] Ms. Stein, Rebecca says guess what, your priorities are all wrong if you are a working mom. What do you say about that?
[Sharman Stein, Working Mother Of Two:] Well, I have no intention of getting into a fight with her about that. My children are my No. 1 priority and children are the No. 1 priority of all working mothers, but most women who work have to work. They need the financial income that comes from it. A lot of women need to work for a feeling of self worth. Men have always felt that way, and there's absolutely no wrong with women to feel that way. When women feel that way, they bring more to being a parent. I have been as close a loving, giving mother as it's in me to be. I spend dinner with my children every night. I'm there for every school occasion when they need me. I have found a work life that doesn't keep me away 80 hours a week. But most women do not work 80 hours a week. They have found a work life that allows them to be a good mother.
[Neville:] Here's a question: a lot or a statement some women feel that if they don't work, they give up their careers, then suddenly they are dependent on men if the word divorce comes into play. What do you think about that? We'll talk about that after this break. Don't go anywhere.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] President Bush is back in Washington at this hour, after spending Thanksgiving holiday weekend at Camp David. Mr. Bush was joined at the presidential retreat by the first lady and their twin daughters, Barbara and Jenna, who, incidentally, it's their birthday today, they turned 20 today. Aides say that he went to church and enjoyed brunch with his family before heading back to the White House. And a full calendar for the upcoming week. For a preview on what's on the president's agenda for the upcoming week we are joined now by CNN's White House correspondent Major Garrett. Major, hi.
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Hello, Donna, how are you. Things are going so well in Afghanistan militarily on the ground that the administration is really looking to a crucial meeting Tuesday in Bonn, Germany. Who is going to attend? Well, the four dominant factions in Afghanistan, who are going to try to put together, under U.N. sponsorship, a broad-based government for that war-ravaged country. Now, it's under U.N. sponsorship that this meeting will occur, but the United States government is anything but a neutral party. First of all, it was vital to the U.S. that the meeting occur not in Afghanistan but on neutral ground in Bonn, Germany, and U.S. administration officials tell CNN what they are looking at that meeting is expressions from all four major Afghan factions that they do, in fact, intend to set up a broad-based and ethnically diverse government for Afghanistan. What is that so important to the United States? Because it doesn't want a civil war to break out between the Northern Alliance, which has gained so much ground militarily but made up of ethnic Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras, and the anti-Taliban forces in Afghanistan from the south, the Pashtuns. They want all of them to work together. This first meeting Tuesday in Bonn will be a crucial early indicator of how much cooperation is in fact going to ensue from this military victory in Afghanistan. President Bush will be watching that very closely Donna.
[Kelley:] And in addition to pushing that process, Major, they're also sending a couple of envoys to the Middle East.
[Garrett:] Indeed. Assistant Secretary of State William Burns has been working in the region since the Bush administration took office in January. He is going to bring someone else with him, retired Marine Corps General Anthony Zinni, and the two will arrive tomorrow in the Middle East to talk to the Israelis and the Palestinians. First and foremost on their agenda, of course, quelling the violence, because until there's a cessation, even temporary cessation of violence between the Israelis and the Palestinians, there's no hope for moving to what are called confidence-building measures, and then ultimate negotiations for political settlements. So the first goal of these two top U.S. officials as the Bush administration more strenuously involves itself in the Israeli- Palestinian peace process is to eliminate the violence. If that can be achieved, then other things appear possible. If not, these envoys will go out, come back, and we'll be at same place we are now, a lot of violence, a lot of recriminations, and not much optimism.
[Kelley:] Major, and what about the president of Yemen is coming to town to meet with the president. What's the relationship there, and is there more cooperation in the fight against terrorism?
[Garrett:] Well, generally speaking, the relationship between the United States government and Yemen has been strained over recent years, but President Salih will be here on Tuesday to meet with President Bush. And administration officials tell CNN they are satisfied with the level cooperation from Yemen so far, not only with last year's bombing attack on the USS Cole, but others things Yemen has communicated to the U.S. government about the 1998 embassy bombings and the September 11 attacks here in the United States. So the president of the United States, as one administration official just told me, would not be meeting with President Salih of Yemen if the United States was not at least happy with the cooperation it has received so far.
[Kelley:] Major Garrett at the White House, thanks very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We go back to Lev Grossman who's in our New York bureau this morning. We're talking about this love "I love you" virus that has been ravaging computers around world. I think we've got the microphone problems straightened out. Lev, can you hear me now?
[Lev Grossman, "time Digital":] I certainly can.
[Harris:] Now I can hear you. All right. Let's begin again. Now, I have heard this morning, I heard it said that this is the worst virus ever, is that true?
[Grossman:] It appears to be the consensus among security experts, that by some measures this is in fact the most devastating virus outbreak that we've ever seen. We should keep in mind that it has spread more quickly than any other virus, including the Melissa virus that we remember from about a year ago. In other respects, it is not as damaging as some other viruses, it's not as malicious, for example, about erasing files on your hard drive as some viruses we've seen.
[Harris:] Yes. But isn't it true, though, I heard some other people talking this morning about it being possible for this virus to go into your files and take out proprietary information, say for instance, your bank card numbers, or whatever, and then send that number to some other mailbox?
[Grossman:] That's very true, the virus does make an attempt to roundup some of your passwords and send them off to an e-mail address that we believe is in the Philippines. However, it is a little bit ironic, the virus was so successful that the site that it was it's downloading a little Trojan Horse program, and it's downloading it from a Web site, that Web site immediately went down because the virus was so successful it was getting so many demands for the download.
[Harris:] You say this has been traced back to some mailbox in the Philippines. Does that mean that authorities or technology experts can actually trace back this program to who actually started the whole thing?
[Grossman:] Well, they're doing their best to do that. The FBI is, as I understand it, working with authorities in the Philippines to try to figure out exactly who planted this virus. I don't think they've got a culprit yet, but that is the goal.
[Harris:] All right, so in the meantime what do we do?
[Grossman:] Well, the two things you can do are update your antivirus software, assuming that you have some on your computer, make sure you have the latest, latest version, and that means, incidentally, the latest version this morning because there are some new versions of this virus floating around that cropped up overnight. The other thing you can do is just make sure you stay aware and educate yourself and people around you so they know how to spot the virus when it shows up.
[Harris:] All right, Lev Grossman, thanks for bearing with us this morning, and thanks for the advice.
[Grossman:] Thanks for having me.
[Harris:] All right, take care.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] We want to take you now live to the State Department. You saw the big crowd gathered there to greet the secretary of state, Colin Powell and now applause for President Bush, who heads out on his first foreign policy trip. He's heading to Mexico tomorrow. He's going to make statements about, we think of what he expects from the trip with Mexican President Vicente Fox.
[Colin Powell, Secretary Of State:] Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
[Powell:] It's a great pleasure to welcome the president with us today on national security week. On Monday, he visited with the troops at Fort Stewart, Georgia. On Tuesday, he visited with the troops in Norfolk. On Wednesday, he visited with the Reserve and National Guard troops in West Virginia. And here on Thursday, he's with the troops of the State Department of the United States of America.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Thank you all. Thank you, very much.
[Bush:] Well, Mr. Secretary, thank you very much. It's an honor to be here with you. And thank you all for that warm welcome. As the secretary mentioned, I'm focusing this week on America's national security, and few are more important to that mission than the people of the State Department, both Foreign Service and Civil Service. Our gathering here will be seen by some 10,000 State Department personnel in the Washington area. It will be seen by 37,000 committed men and women, including many Foreign Service national employees, in 250 posts all over the world. So to those in this room, those around the town, those across the world: Thank you for what you do on behalf of the American people. You do so much to sustain America's position in the world and so much to foster freedom, and for that we are grateful. In a few moments, I'll go upstairs to witness the swearing-in of 38 new foreign service officers. Our hope is that they draw strength and inspiration from your example, because you all are the finest diplomats in the world. The flags that surround us here represent every country with whom the United States has diplomatic relations. They are a powerful reminder that you are one department of our government that literally never sleeps. America's commitments and responsibilities span the world in every time zone. Every day you fulfill those responsibilities with quite excellence. You solve problems before they become headlines. You resolve crises before a shot is fired. And when tragedy or disaster strikes, you are often the first person on the scene. The other markers that surround us speak even more directly of your devotion to duty. They memorialize your colleagues who gave their lives to our country. The earliest are from the 18th century, understanding your long record of service and the long march to freedom. Others are all too recent, bitter reminders of the dangerous times we live in, like the ones marked Kenya. I know the example of these American heroes inspires you, just as seeing you all here today inspires me. It's sometimes said that State is the one federal department that has no domestic constituency. Well, whoever said that is wrong. Let me assure you that, between me and Secretary Powell, you do have a constituency.
[Allen:] President Bush, visiting the State Department during his defense theme week, giving an "atta boy" and an "atta girl" to members of the State Department on the eve of his first trip foreign policy trip, going to Mexico to see a friend, Vicente Fox. And, as you heard, he'll be talking about immigration and trade, drug-trafficking. And let's talk with Major Garrett about what more we can expect, Major, from this trip tomorrow.
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, good afternoon, Natalie. A couple of points about the president's speech and the sort of backdrop for it: Not only was he trying to reach out to the State Department, but it's a key issue for this White House. Many of the people who work at the State Department are career foreign service or civil service. There are not very many political appointees there. And the Bush team really believes it needs to recruit them, get them on their team. Having Secretary of State Colin Powell there is a big part of that. But the president wanted to underscore that desire as well. Also, he said to the State Department employees: You have a constituent at the White House. That is an underlying message that the State Department may have not as much trouble getting its budget through Congress as it did when just Republicans were running and there was not a Republican president. Lastly, on the trip to Mexico, the president said it's part of a hemispheric policy he's going to have to unite the United States, Canada and Mexico. One issue he did not mention that will clearly come up in his conversations with Vicente Fox is new energy policy between the United States and Mexico a good talk about the transmission lines, perhaps creating new pipelines to get energy from Mexico, possibly to California and other Western states. That's a long-term project. But clearly, the energy crisis in California is on the White House agenda. And they're going to talk to the Mexican government about ways, perhaps in the future, they can address it Natalie.
[Allen:] And, Major, are there some major differences, as far as U.S.-Mexican relations that might be difficult to talk with at this step in the Bush administration?
[Garrett:] There are a couple of major thorns in the relationship between the United States and Mexico. One is the issue of amnesty for illegal Mexican immigrants who are in the United States. Vicente Fox is very clear: He would like blanket amnesty for those illegal immigrants here in the United States. The Bush administration has made no decision on that. But, generally speaking, he's not favorably disposed to it. Also, there is this issue of the recertification process that Congress has set up for many nations around the world: Are they doing enough to fight the drug war? Mexico constantly has to fight a lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to make sure it's not on that list of nations who are not cooperating. The Mexican government would like that whole process changed. And, as a matter of fact, Republicans and Democrats are pushing a bill in Congress to change that whole certification progress: a key element of the drug war. The White House is open to all ideas on this. Clearly, that will be discussed in Mexico tomorrow Natalie.
[Allen:] All right. And, of course, we'll be following the president along on his trip. Thanks so much, Major Garrett at the White House.

[Pawelski:] Welcome back. A grassroots movements of sorts is under way to legalize hemp, a non-narcotic form of marijuana. The fight has gained a little publicity of late with Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader throwing his support to the cause. Kathleen Koch looks at the controversy.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] It grows like a weed, industrial hemp, a cousin of marijuana, but without its narcotic kick. Canadian farmers have planted 100,000 acres of the hearty crop since Canada lifted its ban two years ago.
[Rick Plotnikov, Canadian Hemp Farmer:] It grows 2 inches a day. It requires no irrigation. We didn't even use any fertilizer in this crop.
[Koch:] The lure is the heap of hemp products starting to crowd store shelves. It has 25,000 commercial uses, including clothing, bracelets, wallets, food, fiber board, even entire lines of beauty products.
[Sean Donohue, The Body Shop:] We have products that take care of your hair, we have products that take care of your skin, we have a hand protector.
[Koch:] But under U.S. drug laws, growing hemp and marijuana remains illegal.
[Unidentified Male:] We're harvesting seeds. Where you see this plot right here...
[Koch:] Still, Hawaii last year got federal permission to plant hemp experimentally under tight security.
[Cynthia Thielen, Hawaii State Legislator:] We have sugar plantations that have gone belly up. We've got a lot of vacant agricultural land. Hemp is a real answer for Hawaii.
[Koch:] Maryland, North Dakota and Minnesota are also vying for approval to grow hemp legally.
[Thomas Mcclain, Maryland State Legislator:] It could be an alternative crop, especially for those of us in southern Maryland whose principal cash crop here is tobacco. We're looking for alternative crops.
[Koch:] Hemp has a colorful history, it was grown by George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. Early drafts of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence were written on hemp paper. Henry Ford even made auto body panels for earl cars using hemp fibers. But marijuana and hemp were banned in the United States in 1937.
[Unidentified Male:] Hemp for mooring ships, hemp for tow lines.
[Koch:] But when World War II broke out, farmers were given temporary permits to grow hemp for the military.
[Unidentified Male:] Hemp for victory.
[Koch:] Drug officials insist allowing hemp to be cultivated again would create confusion for law officers who couldn't distinguish hemp from marijuana.
[Barry Mccaffrey, U.s. Drug Policy Director:] Indeed in many cases they can only be determined by chemical assessment. I think what's going on is an attempt to make widespread growing of hemp products almost impossible for U.S. law enforcement to deal with.
[Koch:] While the two plants look similar, hemp was bred to have strong fibers. It has only a fraction of marijuana's mind-altering compound, THC. Hemp plants are planted close to grow tall; marijuana plants farther apart to grow more leaves.
[Andy Kerr, Environmental Consultant:] Supposedly American cops can't tell the difference between hemp and marijuana. But gendarmes, bobbies and mounties all can tell the difference and tell us there isn't a problem.
[Koch:] While U.S. drug enforcement officials are said to be reviewing their policy, there's no indication hemp will get the green light anytime soon. Kathleen Koch for CNN, Washington.
[Pawelski:] In Afghanistan, people have long been enduring fighting between the ruling Taliban forces and rival militias. Now the effects of a three-year drought are setting in and observers say if rain doesn't come soon, the scene may rival those we've seen from Africa. Nic Robertson reports.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] Desperate for water, Afghan women dig in a dried up irrigation canal. Three years without proper rain has left all but one of southern Afghanistan's nine rivers dry. [on camera]: Empty now for more than four months, this dam was once more than 40 meters deep, and provided water and livelihood for more than 1 million people. The valley, it's said, was fabled for its fine fruits. Now, all that and more is threatened.
[Simon Taylor, Mercy Corps International:] The absence of rain will mean one thing: mass population movement, and that's what we're trying to discourage at the moment.
[Robertson:] Providing drinking water, the top priority. This well already left dry by the rapidly falling water table. Villagers crowd around another, its hole just deep enough to reach water. "The water keeps receding," Haji says. "Yes, it keeps receding and it's got worms," adds Mohamed. Even the old here say they have never seen the situation so bad. Their fear, if the water runs out, they will have to leave. Already, they say, most of their 10,000 animals this villages' livelihood have either died or been sold because there is no food. Further down the valley, fruit farmers face a similar plight. "You can see they are dry," Yar says. "They have nothing in them." His fear now: lack of water will kill the trees. At a nearby well, girls collect water while they can. The level 15 feet down from two weeks ago, and with no rain expected any time soon, aid groups say they have no idea how long the rapidly dwindling supplies will last. Already, tens of thousands have fled to cities in search of water and food. Among the hardest hit: the nomadic Kuchus. "I am so hungry," Mohamed says, "I cannot afford any food." Malnutrition is not a killer yet; aid officials, however, worry their food stocks will not meet demand.
[Leslie Oquist, U.n. Coordinator:] Very, very severe, and unless rain falls in the coming rainy season, probably we'll see Africa-like pictures in this region.
[Robertson:] More than 5 million people are threatened. So far, the falling water is costing them only their livelihoods; the fear is with no rain, it will start costing lives. Nic Robertson, CNN, Kandahar, Afghanistan.
[Pawelski:] Up next on EARTH MATTERS, a clean-air initiative that gets more people to buy alternative-fuel vehicles. Why is this program a disaster? Also ahead...
[Unidentified Female:] I don't care if I look like a bag lady.
[Pawelski:] Another clean-air program gets people off on the right foot.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] The next summer games will be held in 2004 in Athens, Greece, but you don't have to wait quite that long, for four years at least, to get your Olympic fix. The winter games are just two years away in Salt Lake City, Utah. As CNN's Greg LaMotte reports, the athletes can't wait to compete.
[Greg Lamotte, Cnn Correspondent:] Flying high, giving it their all, pumped no, it's not the summer games, although it is still very warm. These athletes love snow. And after seeing the games in Sydney, they couldn't be any higher in anticipation of the 2002 winter games in Salt Lake City, Utah.
[Picabo Street, 1998 Gold Medalist:] Every winning moment, every losing moment, every struggle, every strife, every achievement that goes on there really motivates you to get up every day and train.
[Lamotte:] Construction is on schedule. The venues are either in place or getting there. The dings in the city's infrastructure are getting a face lift. Athletes are in training, including ones from Down Under who have been watching the games in Sydney.
[Shannon Leotta Freestyle Aerial Skier:] To see it every day and get glimpses of what you can be a part of is just incredible. And it's definitely extra motivation.
[Lamotte:] The training facilities are state of the art. It's 85 degrees, and these athletes are ski jumping on artificial turf. Others are hoping to make a splash in 2002 with their snowboarding skills. But despite all the excitement, all the work, all the training, there is still that cloud of scandal hovering over Salt Lake City.
[Terry Orme, "salt Lake Tribune":] I think Utahns are tired of the "best games money can buy" sort of jokes and things like that. And I think there's a worry that the games, when they happen, the scalp is going to be ripped off that wound.
[Lamotte:] The two former heads of the Salt Lake City bid committee, Tom Welch and Dave Johnson, are scheduled to be tried in federal court, accused of, among other things, bribing International Olympic Committee officials in order to win the 2002 games.
[Mayor Rocky Anderson, Salt Lake City:] If anything good is going to come of this and I think there will be a lot of good it's that things will be reformed in the Olympic movement.
[Matt Romney, Salt Lake Organizing Committee:] The scandal was apparently perpetrated by a very few people a long time ago associated with winning the bid for Salt Lake City. It has nothing to do with the athletes who are coming. And it's the athletes that the people of the world want to watch.
[Lamotte:] In fact, it seems many people are more worried about...
[Hall:] Traffic.
[Lamotte:] Clearly there is optimism the scandal will have blown over by the time the games begin. As for the athletes, they say all they've got time to think about is the color gold. Greg LaMotte, CNN, Salt Lake City, Utah.

[John Sperling, Chairman & Ceo, Apollo Group:] If you never stop fighting, you never stop to think that you're going to lose and until you actually lose, until you're down and dead, you don't think you're going to lose.
[Beverly Schuch, Host:] John Sperling is about living, reborn several times after close brushes with death. In fact, he's a lot like the mythical bird the phoenix, having risen from the ashes of his own adversity. He was born the son of an impoverished sharecropper who beat him regularly. As a youth, he worked the farms in the Ozark Mountains shucking barley. He didn't learn to read until he was 16. He faced bankruptcy twice and cancer once. But John Sperling is a fighter and has overcome these hardships to soar to the highest level of entrepreneurial success.
[John Sperling:] Fortunately, there were no laws governing institutions of higher education so all I did was start a corporation and name it the University of Phoenix.
[Schuch:] All John Sperling did was create what has become the nation's largest for profit university and certainly the most unusual. Its 74,000 students must hold full-time jobs. Its 52 campuses in 35 states are actually housed in office buildings and there are no dorms, no student unions and certainly no football teams. But the unusual university that John Sperling created in 1978 has become the talk of higher education, not all of it flattering. While his peers criticize Sperling's concept, they can't argue with his credentials, including Ph.D. from Cambridge University. [on camera]: You were originally criticized as being a diploma mill.
[John Sperling:] A diploma mill.
[Schuch:] A diploma mill.
[John Sperling:] Right.
[Schuch:] Just giving them out without accreditation, without any foundation.
[John Sperling:] Yes. Yes. That's true.
[Schuch:] And what did that make you think?
[John Sperling:] Well, the thing that helped a lot is that because I was a legitimate academic, it was difficult. They couldn't say that I wasn't an academic. They just said that I was a rogue academic.
[Schuch:] But Sperling defied the educational establishment that tried to run him out of town.
[John Sperling:] I had students but no college so I set up the University of Phoenix.
[Schuch:] Who wouldn't have thought that there wasn't a University of Phoenix? I mean you came in and invented it.
[John Sperling:] Yes.
[Schuch:] People could not have been happy about that.
[John Sperling:] Well, they weren't happy. They were incensed that this California carpetbagger had come down here and stolen the name of their fair city.
[Schuch:] It took a while, but Sperling is gaining the grudging respect of his peers and the not so grudging respect of Wall Street, after the University of Phoenix reported revenues of a half a billion dollars last year. The parent company, Apollo Group, is doing even better.
[John Sperling:] We took the company public and the IPO, the stock increased by 20 times and I was holding, my son and I were holding a third of the company or nearly 40 percent of the company. We don't own that much anymore, but we own about 30 percent. But 30 percent of $2 billion is a lot of money.
[Schuch:] Sperling has used his newfound wealth to pursue a grab bag of causes, from prolonging human life to legalizing marijuana to feeding the world.
[Unidentified Colleague:] Dr. Sperling, you're making one hell of a contribution.
[Schuch:] You have a lot of money now.
[John Sperling:] Yes.
[Schuch:] You have a son...
[John Sperling:] ... who also has a lot of money.
[Schuch:] Who also has a lot of money. What are you going to do with all this money?
[John Sperling:] I'm starting, as you know, drug law reform is very expensive. It costs millions of dollars a year.
[Schuch:] So this is your indulgence?
[John Sperling:] Yeah, that's one of them. And then two other indulgences, Seafire International, which is a saltwater agricultural company that is one day going to save the world, I might add...
[Schuch:] Modestly.
[John Sperling:] ... by stopping the global warming problem. And then I have Chronos, which I'm trying to use as an instrument to reform medical practice in the United States.
[Schuch:] John Sperling has overcome poverty, conquered a learning disability and risen to the status of multi- millionaire. Yet why does Sperling call his own father's death a miracle?
[John Sperling:] It's still the happiest day of my life.
[Schuch:] And you have no remorse about this?
[John Sperling:] None whatsoever.
[Schuch:] The implausible story of John Sperling, chairman of the Apollo Group, is next on PINNACLE. How would you characterize your childhood?
[John Sperling:] It was a disheveled childhood.
[Schuch:] Disheveled?
[John Sperling:] Yes, psychologically disheveled.
[Schuch:] In his autobiography, "Rebel With A Cause," to be released this fall, John Sperling describes an upbringing marked by sickness and poverty. His mother, he writes, was the most influential person in his life. His father, the most despised. [on camera]: Was he ever a good father to you?
[John Sperling:] No.
[Schuch:] When did you first hate him?
[John Sperling:] Probably the first time he became a conscious part of my life. There was something about him that I just didn't like from a very early age.
[Schuch:] At some point it was dislike that turned to, you know, loathing.
[John Sperling:] Well, in looking back on it I perceived him as weak, cowardly and cruel. There was nothing about him I liked. So a person that has no redeeming qualities is easy to begin to dislike and then if they're abusive, the dislike turns into hatred. So it seems pretty normal to me.
[Schuch:] And he hit you?
[John Sperling:] Oh, yeah, lots of times.
[Schuch:] But you turned the tables on your father.
[John Sperling:] Well, I threatened to kill him.
[Schuch:] How old were you?
[John Sperling:] Nine or 10, I think I was 10.
[Schuch:] What did you say?
[John Sperling:] I said I'll kill you in your sleep if you ever hit me again.
[Schuch:] And that was it?
[John Sperling:] See, he was cowardly enough he believed me.
[Schuch:] You'd have had more respect for him if he'd have hit you again?
[John Sperling:] No, I'd have killed him.
[Schuch:] That's a lot of anger for a little boy.
[John Sperling:] Um-hmm.
[Schuch:] You say in your book that, you refer to his death when you were 15 as the miracle.
[John Sperling:] Yeah.
[Schuch:] The miracle.
[John Sperling:] It's still the happiest day of my life.
[Schuch:] And you have no remorse about this?
[John Sperling:] None whatsoever.
[Schuch:] On that day, John Sperling rose from the ashes of his childhood hell. His father's beatings would not be his worst ordeal.
[John Sperling:] Well, I was in a neighbor's cherry orchard eating, unfortunately, not quite ripe cherries and got a terrible case of dysentery and stomach upset and for some reason I guess it lowered my resistance and I got pneumonia and the pneumonia did not go away. Finally, it went away, but not until one of my lungs had filled up with pus and it was pretty clear that I was going to choke to death, and if the other one started. So they decided that they had to drain it and this was before general anesthetic, anesthesia. So they gave me local anesthesia and put me onto an operating table and cut the rib open, brought a hunk of the rib out.
[Schuch:] Do you remember that pain?
[John Sperling:] Yes, I do.
[Schuch:] Ever felt anything like it?
[John Sperling:] No, fortunately. And then they stuck a tube in it and it drained and I was in bed for a year.
[Schuch:] That brush with death has haunted Sperling his whole life. When he finally returned to school, the once gregarious child had become a loner, timid and withdrawn from his classmates. And then there was another problem, John Sperling couldn't read. [on camera]: You have found out since that you were dyslexic.
[John Sperling:] Yes.
[Schuch:] Do you think that you were functionally illiterate at that point in your life?
[John Sperling:] Yes, in the sense that I, it was painful, painful, painful to sort of parse out sentences and try to struggle my way through these courses.
[Schuch:] And now you have a Ph.D. from Cambridge University.
[John Sperling:] Um-hmm.
[Schuch:] The turning point for John Sperling came after his father's death. He graduated high school, joined the Merchant Marine and went to sea.
[John Sperling:] For some reason I was able to cure the dyslexia. I don't really know how I did it, but I did it. And then I became an avid reader and just devoured books and anything I could lay hands on. And then I became more and more intellectually interested and began to think of myself as well, yeah, I'm not so stupid, and decided that I'd get an education.
[Schuch:] But something else happened on that ship.
[John Sperling:] Yes, I became ideologically are. That was also, that was terribly important. As Frantz Fanon says, that you have to become political in order to develop your intellect and that happened to me.
[Schuch:] The political activism John Sperling picked up in the Merchant Marine would become a recurring theme in his life.
[John Sperling:] Just checking on the latest news flashes.
[Schuch:] From fighting university administrations as a teacher's union activist to battling anti-drug laws to creating a DNA bank for the cloning of animals, the radical pursuits of a rebel with a cause, the next chapter in the story of John Sperling when PINNACLE returns. In 1968, when the black students at San Francisco State demanded more black studies programs, John Sperling, then a humanities professor at San Jose State, saw an opportunity. He piggybacked on their protests, organizing his fellow teachers in a sympathy strike for faculty rights. Sperling and his six-year-old son led the pickets.
[Peter Sperling, Chairman, Callwave:] I remember most vividly the strike at the San Francisco State college and being out on the picket line and being very cold and then comfortable.
[Schuch:] Sperling and his son also attended another teachers march in Sacramento when Ronald Reagan was governor.
[John Sperling:] Peter was sitting right in the front row and Ronald Reagan came out and we all booed like. It was great.
[Schuch:] You said that, you know, being the union organizer was really imperative to your being a successful entrepreneur. What did that give you?
[John Sperling:] Well, it gives you, first, you become a very good salesman. You're selling people nothing but potential knocks on the head. They aren't going to get, maybe they'll get something out of it, but you're really selling them a chance to be reviled in some sense by their peers.
[Schuch:] Sperling himself was reviled by his academic peers when he came up with the notion of an adult for profit university. He began his crusade while teaching at San Jose State University in 1972. There he developed a program to educate local police and school teachers on combating juvenile delinquency. When San Jose State turned down the adult program, Sperling hooked up the with University of San Francisco and seven years later, Sperling took his idea to Phoenix. [on camera]: So here's a guy with a very classical, traditional education in some of the finest universities in the world and 20 years teaching in academia and then you decide at the improbable age of 52 to become, as you put it, an unintentional entrepreneur. And how did you get there?
[John Sperling:] Well, one, I honed my personal skills or interpersonal skills as a union organizer and union leader. That gave me without that training I couldn't have been a successful businessman. And it was an unintentional entrepreneur because I didn't think of myself as an entrepreneur. I didn't even realize I was one. I realized that I was becoming an entrepreneur unintentionally and inevitably if what I started out to do was to succeed. And what I started out to do was to have a new kind of education. And in order to keep that alive, I had to leave the university, set up a company and in doing so, when you do that, you're an entrepreneur.
[Schuch:] Sperling's leadership didn't stop there. He took his university online, pioneering long distance learning programs where students never have to step foot in a classroom to earn a degree.
[Unidentified Employee:] Let me see if I can do that for you. What's your login password at the student site?
[Schuch:] What percentage of your student population is strictly online now?
[John Sperling:] There's 60,000 on the ground and 14,000 in the air, as it were.
[Schuch:] Traditional universities have followed Sperling's lead. Eighty percent of four year colleges, including the University of Maryland, Duke and Harvard offer courses over the Internet. John Sperling's pioneering efforts in adult online education paid off big time. His Apollo Group went public in 1994 and John Sperling, the union organizer who became the boss, became an instant multi-millionaire. The former barley shucker was worth $300 million. He bought art work, collected sculptures and built a mansion. But he never stopped working.
[John Sperling:] It was about two weeks after I became wealthy that I started my drug law reform.
[Schuch:] But you never were interested in the accoutrements of wealth such as that, were you?
[John Sperling:] Well, no, never having had it.
[Schuch:] Sperling's interest in drug reform was at least partly inspired by his use of marijuana during treatment for prostate cancer. As with the other passions in his life, Sperling has attacked the marijuana issue with a vengeance, teaming up with Cleveland businessman Peter Lewis and hedge fund billionaire George Sorros.
[John Sperling:] It's unbelievable how much we've achieved in just three election cycles from having the whole issue absolutely off the table. No one would discuss it. It was the ultimate third rail of politics. It was you touch that and you're dead. A federal commission says that there are real medicinal properties of marijuana that should be accepted. Starting in 1996, we won the first two in California and Arizona. Then in '98 we won in Colorado and Nevada. And...
[Schuch:] You won what?
[John Sperling:] Initiatives to either medicalize marijuana or to reduce the civil penalties or the criminal penalties...
[Schuch:] You want to take people out of jail who are in jail for...
[John Sperling:] Yes. Yeah.
[Schuch:] ... what, dealing or smoking or?
[John Sperling:] No. For possession.
[Schuch:] Possession. Ultimately, what do you want to see, total legalization of marijuana?
[John Sperling:] No, I want to see decriminalization. I think drugs are bad. They have some medicinal usage. Man is a drug taking animal. There's just no doubt about it. Man will take drugs one way or another no matter what you do. And therefore you should do everything you can to reduce the harm and you should not try to totally prohibit it. Prohibition is a loser and not only is prohibition a loser, but interdiction is even worse. We've destroyed two or three societies in South America in the Andes and it's a mindless activity.
[Schuch:] And that's not all. At age 79 and still going strong, John Sperling has a great many other causes to fight for, including finding the fountain of youth. The continuing saga of the unintentional entrepreneur, when PINNACLE returns.
[John Sperling:] This is a real cool machine.
[Schuch:] The near octogenarian education entrepreneur John Sperling has a great many interests. He cooks, he sews, he exercises daily. His Phoenix mansion is decorated with sculptures and paintings, include four Andy Warhol originals. He's a connoisseur of opera, literature and loves to entertain both in his Phoenix mansion and his getaway retreat in San Francisco.
[John Sperling:] Varsity Books.
[Schuch:] What's the worst thing one can feel?
[John Sperling:] Boredom. And that in its most extreme form would be depression.
[Schuch:] Do you understand happiness?
[John Sperling:] No. I never thought of being happy. I've never sought happiness. It's not something that concerns me.
[Schuch:] What does concern John Sperling these days, he says quite humbly, is saving the world. He's teamed up with scientist Cora Hodges to form Seafire International, a company designed to harvest a crop called salacornea grown in salt water. Sperling sees this project as a lifeline for poor economies.
[John Sperling:] The sea water farms are going to be an essential element in, you might call, the economic recovery of both Eritrea and Ethiopia.
[Schuch:] And if you want to save the world, then you'd better plan to be around for a while.
[Unidentified Technician:] Here we go, the scanner on. It's going to move over on top of you.
[Schuch:] That's why John Sperling also created Chronos, named for the Greek god of time, a wellness center that combines vitamin therapy with extensive body and blood analysis to help forestall the aging process. And beyond improving the condition of mankind, Sperling's latest challenge, the cloning of animals.
[John Sperling:] That's another company I've started, Genetic Savings and Clone.
[Schuch:] You're kidding, right?
[John Sperling:] No. We already have a cryo bank for DNA for all sorts of animals. We intend to start a cloning service to clone pets and farm animals.
[Schuch:] And why?
[John Sperling:] Because it's possible. There are all sorts of reasons to do it. In addition to one of a kind animals, there are, you can help to recover species that are endangered with extinction. You can do transgenic work with farm animals and create all sorts of medicines for human beings.
[Schuch:] And you would want to make money out of this?
[John Sperling:] Oh, we will make money. We'll make a lot of money at it.
[Schuch:] John Sperling has no plans at the moment to clone himself, but the Sperling legacy transcends the organizations he's started and the causes he's backed. In fact, of all of his many contributions, the rebel who so hated his own father is proudest of his most personal achievement, his son. [on camera]: Tell me about Peter.
[John Sperling:] Well, he was the light of my life, still is, and he was a wonderful companion. I couldn't imagine a better companion.
[Schuch:] You write that you weren't an enthusiastic father to begin with.
[John Sperling:] That's right.
[Schuch:] What happened?
[John Sperling:] Well, Peter. He was so charming I couldn't resist.
[Schuch:] As a little baby?
[John Sperling:] Yes.
[Schuch:] So you changed your life for him actually, didn't you?
[John Sperling:] Um-hmm.
[Schuch:] You quit a job. You just said I can't leave.
[John Sperling:] Um-hmm.
[Schuch:] That's a wonderful feeling.
[John Sperling:] Yeah. He, sometimes I hear of times when I hear the footsteps hurrying near and when you have a child, you suddenly, you are introduced to mortality and it gets one's attention.

[Fredericka Whitfield, Cnn Anchor:] In Houston, a psychiatrist testified today that Andrea Yates told him she knew drowning her children was wrong, but the doctor said her admission came five days after the June 20 killing. CNN's Ed Lavandera is outside the courthouse now while the session is on a lunch break. Ed, what's the latest?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, we are about 15 minutes away from hearing from the defense's expert witness, Dr. Phillip Resnick from Case Western University in Cleveland, Ohio. He is a psychiatry professor there and he has worked on some several high- profile cases across the country in these insanity issues. He consulted with the prosecution in the Unabomber case. He's also worked on the Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols case for the prosecution, and as well as on the John Dupont murder trial. He, of course, is the wealthiest man ever tried for murder in the U.S. So his testimony, basically what they've done just before the lunch break, they went over his resume and why he should be considered an expert witness. So we will get into the nitty-gritty of his testimony when court resumes at 1:30. But earlier in the morning, we heard from the psychiatrist who interviewed Andrea Yates five days after the drownings, and he spoke of Andrea Yates' psychotic state, described it in his conversations with her, that she much of what we've heard a lot, to be honest, from other medical experts in this case, that Andrea Yates was struggling as she thought to be a good mother and that she was in a psychotic state and saying that she didn't know right from wrong. And of course, we anticipate hearing more of the same, perhaps on a stronger level with Dr. Phillip Resnick, who will, of course, probably testify that Andrea Yates did not know right from wrong when we drowned her five children last summer. This testimony will probably take the rest of day and we anticipate cross-examination from prosecutors to be rather lengthy as well. Defense attorneys say that they will probably be able to wrap up their case by next Wednesday. Then it will be the prosecution's turn to put on their expert witnesses. So if you do a little guessing here, we're looking at about another week-and-a-half of testimony left in the Andrea Yates capital murder trial Fredericka.
[Whitfield:] All right. Thanks a lot, Ed, from Houston for that update.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] And a bit later today, the president will visit a Navajo Indian reservation in Shiprock, New Mexico. Many people there don't even have a telephone. While he's visiting, Mr. Clinton will announce a plan to get Native Americans phone service for only $1 a month. CNN's Kelly Wallace visited the Navajo reservation, this ahead of the president's trip.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn Correspondent:] Shiprock in northwestern New Mexico, in Navajo, the rock with wings, part of the vast Navajo Indian reservation big, open sky, picturesque, and so very poor. More than one-half of all Navajos live in poverty, and nearly half don't have jobs. The economic boom hasn't made its way here, and if the technology comes, it comes slowly. Wilhelmina Clah is a teacher and a mom.
[Wilhelmina Clah, Navajo Teacher:] Sometimes it just gets so frustrating. You there are times you want to give up.
[Wallace:] But she doesn't. She holds out hope for her 12-year- old daughter, Darragh. At the Boys and Girls Club, Darragh and her friends can do what they can't do at home: go online, thanks to a donation of 20 computers from the corporate-backed Power Up Foundation. Darragh wants to be a veterinarian when she grows up, and the Internet has already come in handy with her studies.
[Darragh Clah, Navajo Student:] I learned about dogs, animals, subjects I needed to know that will help me out with my science projects.
[Wallace:] But Darragh represents the minority. Eight out of 10 who live in Indian country still don't have access to the Internet. [on camera]: The poverty here isn't the only reason the reservation hasn't been able to go high-tech. The other is infrastructure. Only twenty percent of the homes have telephones, and it costs tens of thousands of dollars to install new lines in these remote areas. [voice-over]: The elders say the younger Navajos who go on to college will be key to developing the infrastructure for phones and the Internet. But the elders know the young will only come back if there are good jobs.
[Al Martinez, Pres., Shiprock Boys And Girls Club:] Economic development is big on the agenda now. We need to promote more outside enterprise. With that in mind that would give us more leverage, that would bring in more technology.
[Wallace:] As one day sets on the Navajo reservation, the hope is the next one will bring this majestic but isolated place closer to the benefits of the wired world beyond. Kelly Wallace, CNN, Shiprock.

[Unidentified Male:] We love Clinton here. The Bubba looked good.
[Daryn Kagan, Guest:] Some people can't get enough of former President Bill Clinton. And now Clinton is negotiating with publishers eager to sell his memoirs. "The New York Times" estimates that the deal is worth more than $8 million. But is there enough interests in what the former president has to say to make the investment pay off?
[Unidentified Child:] The president held my mommy's hand.
[Unidentified Female:] Oh, yes, shook this hand here but only three fingers.
[Kagan:] What do you think President Clinton will include in his memoirs? What do you want him to write about? Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Daryn Kagan, Bobbie Battista feeling just a little bit under the weather today, so I stayed late after school to fill in. We are talking about Bill Clinton. There have been dozens of books written about the former president. His mother wrote a book, so did his wife. Now it is Bill's turn. Less than an hour ago we learned that the deal is done, but not all publishers are convinced that Clinton's view is worth the investment. So today, among other things, I thought we could come up with some ideas some chapter ideas, perhaps, to help make his memoirs a best-seller. To help us do that, joining us is Lanny Davis, former White House special counsel under President Clinton. He is the author of "Truth to Tell: Tell it Early, Tell it Early, Tell it All, Tell it to Yourself, Notes From my White House Education." John Fund, member of the editorial board at "The Wall Street Journal. " He is the co- author of "Cleaning House: America's Campaign for term Limits." And Nora Rawlinson, editor in chief at "Publisher's Weekly." Welcome to all of you. Thank you for joining us.
[Lanny Davis, Former White House Special Counsel:] Thank you.
[Nora Rawlinson, "publisher's Weekly":] Thank you.
[Kagan:] Nora, you have the news nugget, so let's start with you. We know who is going to get the rights to this deal, but we don't necessarily know for how much.
[Rawlinson:] No, they're not releasing the details of that. But Knopf is the winner of the auction, and Sonny Mehta just announced it within the last hour. Bob Bernstein is going to be his editor. And we know that they have worldwide rights, which means that the publisher will be able to sell those rights in other countries. They have rights to nearly everything, the audio, the electronic rights, so that helps with whatever the up-front advance cost was.
[Kagan:] So that means probably a bigger number than, perhaps, if they were only doing the North American rights, let's say?
[Rawlinson:] I think probably the number has much more to do with the interest of the book, and then the details of it are sort of how you justify it.
[Kagan:] Give and us an inside look at the publishing world, how you think this deal probably worked out. Do you think up-front they say, OK look, Bill, you're going to be talking about this, this, and this. We want to know about these things in your personal life, we just don't want to hear your views on Middle East peace?
[Rawlinson:] I think they're going to be a lot gentler with him than that. I think the real issue is getting a very well-known, fascinating ex-president's memoirs. Consider the 10 years ago Ronald Reagan's memoirs came out, and that deal was a $6 million deal. So these kinds of deals are pretty big deals, and I don't think they can really press him that hard to say, we want you to tell us exactly what happened with Monica or any of that kind of thing.
[Kagan:] Also in the publishing world, give us an inside view of this publishing house that won. Are you surprised that this is who's going to be doing the deal? And what do you know about this editor?
[Rawlinson:] No, I'm not surprised. Bob Bernstein is very well- respected. Has edited many well-respected books certainly will be a guy that Clinton will respect, and vice-versa. Knopf, of course, is a very well-respected publishing house. Part of the whole large Random House umbrella organization, which is the largest trade publisher in the United States. This is a publishing house that obviously has the money to spend on a big deal like this, and also has the experience it takes to deal with a big- name person and market the book the way it needs to be marketed. Lanny, let's bring you in here. You were inside the White House, you know a lot of thing that probably many of us never will. But of what you know and what you don't know, what would you like to read from Bill Clinton?
[Davis:] This is, according to public opinion polls, one of the most popular presidencies in American history, certainty the highest poll ratings for a second-term president than was ever recorded. It also is, in my judgment, on job performance, one of the most successful presidencies. I'd like to know the inside story I wasn't at the White House at the time how president Clinton stood up to a lot of people in his own White House and his party to insist on deficit reduction at the expense and the risk of many Democrats in the House of Representatives, which...
[Kagan:] Really!
[Davis:] ... led to this nation's recovery.
[Kagan:] Lanny, of everything that you want to know about deficit reduction?
[Davis:] Well, that's a story that is the beginning chapter of the Clinton presidency that led to surpluses, that led to the best economy we've ever experienced. And that story, where Bill Clinton fought against the base of his own party, and fought successfully, I think I'm looking forward to his telling, among many, many other stories about how successful his presidency ended up in terms of the public's opinion of his job performance.
[Kagan:] John Fund, let's bring you in here. Do you think most people who buy this book will be looking for the chapter on deficit reduction?
[John Fund, "wall Street Journal":] Well, I think that would make a great Brookings Institution seminar. I'm not sure whether it sells books or not. You know, these publishing political marriages don't seem to work out. I can't remember the last major political book that actually made back its advance. I'm not even sure if Colin Powell made back his advance. Certainly Ronald Reagan didn't. Certainly Richard Nixon didn't; certainly Jimmy Carter didn't. Almost all of these books seem to fall flat, and I think they really are done for prestige purposes rather than real monetary advantage. And I think the winner here is going to be Bill Clinton, because he doesn't have to give anything up. And we're certainly not going to get anything close to the truth about what happened during his administration. We know that much.
[Kagan:] Nora, is that right? Is this a loser, money- wise,usually, for a publishing house?
[Rawlinson:] Well, I don't know where he gets his information but, no, they're not losers. By all accounts, every president's memoir has become a best-seller.
[Fund:] Ronald Reagan lost a lot of money, you know that Nora.
[Rawlinson:] No, I don't know that.
[Fund:] I have these statistics from the publishers themselves, so they all lose money. Colin Powell might have made money.
[Kagan:] Well, we still don't know how much we're talking here. But Nora, give us a ballpark figure. What do you think Bill Clinton is going to be getting for this book?
[Rawlinson:] Well, it's difficult to speculate. Hillary Clinton got $8 for her book, so one would expect that there would be more for this book, maybe a million more, may be $9 million.
[Kagan:] And how does it work? How did they come up with that price tag?
[Rawlinson:] Well, they have to take into account how many copies they can sell. What again, what the rights situation is. The different forms in which they can sell the book hard cover. They've already announced that a year after it will go under paperback under Vintage, that they have the rights to sell it in any language in other countries, so to sell to another publisher to translate. They have the audio rights. Audio rights can be very lucrative as well...
[Kagan:] But $9 million would be all-time? I mean, $9 million would definitely a record, right?
[Rawlinson:] Nine million is a record for a one-time book, but there are other authors who are making more. Nine million is just the advance. If it earns back that $9 million, then President Clinton could get royalties as well. There are other writers, generally in the fiction area, who are making more per book.
[Kagan:] Lanny, what do you think? Do you think Bill Clinton deserves more for his book than Hillary Clinton is getting for hers?
[Davis:] Now, you're talking it a very biased observer, because...
[Kagan:] I know that.
[Davis:] ... Hillary was my friend at Yale Law School, and I would hope that Hillary would get a higher amount no matter what she does. But President Clinton has a story to tell and, with all due respect, the current best-seller on "The New York Time's" best-seller list is not a titillating story about private relations by David McCullough, and it's a pretty dry history of John Adams. I think the American people are going to look forward to the inside story of how Bill Clinton accomplished so much in his eight years. What he did to get the Northern Ireland situation, what happened at Camp David, how he fought through, again, the base of his own party on welfare reform, which, I think, took our party into the middle of the road. Of course, there should be some chapter about the Ken Starr years, the abuse of prosecutorial power. What it was like to be in the White House where Congress was spending $20 million dollars on investigations that never went anywhere. I'm sure President Clinton is going to have something to say about the scandal machine, and he may even have some own personal comments of regrets about what happened in the Lewinsky episode I don't know. But the thrust of this is about a successful presidency that, nobody can deny, left with public approval in the high 60s, an unprecedented number.
[Kagan:] John, what do you think about the timing of this? The president did leave with high numbers, and yet he had a very bumpy first six months to start his former presidency. Is this a little bit late to be getting into negotiating book deal rights?
[Fund:] Oh, not at all, because I'm sure that if he'd tried to negotiate the deal five months ago they would have wanted to know all about the pardons. He's let that slip. Bill Clinton, according to actuarial tables, is probably going to be our next president for 30 years. He's going to have a long-term rehabilitation strategy. This is part of it. Moving into Harlem last week was it. He's going to be giving lots of speeches on AIDS in Africa, Third World debt repayment, things like that. He's in addition to making a lot of money, he's going to try to slowly rebuild his credibility. This book is going to be a piece of it. It will probably come out, I would guess, just about the time of the mid-term elections next year.
[Kagan:] Our audience is already buzzing about whether or not they would buy the book, whether they would read the book. We want to hear from two audience members. First, Jeff from Arkansas. Would you buy it? Would you read it?
[Jeff:] No, I wouldn't buy it. If it were laying around somewhere, I might read parts of it, just to the see what he had to say. But no, I wouldn't buy it to read.
[Kagan:] You wouldn't, but Davis, would you?
[Davis:] Yes, I would.
[Kagan:] Why would you?
[Davis:] First off, he was the president of the United States. Therefore, he is entitled to some respect. And the information that he would put out into his memoirs would be excellent reading.
[Kagan:] The conversation will continue. Some members of our audience agreeing with that. The conversation's going to continue. Nora Rawlinson, I want to thank you for telling us who will be publishing this book and for giving us an inside look at the world of publishing, to explain to us exactly that works. As we go to break, here's our first e-mail of the day. This one from Coos Bay, Oregon: "Read Bill's book? You've got to be kidding. If one cannot trust what he says, why should one trust what he writes." We want to hear from you. Send us e-mail. And call us as well. We will take a quick break and be back after this. Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. We're talking about the book deal that former president is setting up with Knopf. We know that that's who will be publishing his memoirs. We have not heard the amount he'll receive for that. We're thinking somewhere in the neighborhood, sources are saying, around $8 million. Still more ahead on that. Meanwhile, today, we're talking about whether you would even want to read this book. We're getting some e-mail in. Let's take a look at this one, from Leesburg, Florida. An e-mailer before the break said no way. This person is saying, "I would consider it a privilege to read Clinton's memoirs. I'll buy the book as soon as it comes to market. Eight million dollars is not enough to pay him for all that he's done for this country." Some people in our audience are agreeing with that, but as we heard during the break, some people are not agreeing. Betsy, you had a comment about respect.
[Betsy:] I just knew that Ronald Reagan always stepped in the Oval Office with a suit and a tie in, and we know what Clinton did in the Oval Office so how can any of us respect him or believe what he writes? He had no respect in the American people and the office he held.
[Davis:] It's amazing, to me, if I may comment, that that individual wouldn't comment on the fact that former President Reagan didn't talk to his daughter for 20 years, and had another natural son, that he didn't talk to. Everybody can judge others in family situation. Bill and Hillary Clinton raised a wonderful daughter. They have a wonderful family, and whatever personal faults Bill Clinton has, that lady doesn't reflect what I said was two-thirds of the American people. She's, obviously, in the minority of one-third who believe that. When Bill Clinton left office, eight years after he came into the presidency, he left a better country, and there's no denying that.
[Kagan:] All right, Lanny, clearly, there are some people who don't agree and support former President Clinton as much as you do. We have a couple of callers on the phone. Caller, what do you think? What do you think about the book? Would you read it? Would you buy it?
[Constance:] Excuse me?
[Kagan:] Constance, go ahead. Constance, are you with us? We are going to work on the phones. Meanwhile, we're going to get some other comments here. Here is Debbie from Pennsylvania.
[Debbie:] I want to respond to that gentleman. He was talking about Ronald Reagan and his relationship with his daughter. He how can he say Bill Clinton was showing any family values at all by lying to his wife and his wife and having an extramarital affair. How could that be respecting your child or your family. I am sorry.
[Davis:] May I respond to that?
[Kagan:] Go ahead, Lanny?
[Davis:] If that young woman is in a position to judge other people's private lives, then more power to her. But I was saying that if you ask Chelsea Clinton about her relationship with the father, you will find a family unit in Hillary, Bill, and Chelsea Clinton that most people would envy and admire.
[Kagan:] Let's go back to the phones, which I think are working better now. Marcel, in Tennessee, what did you want to say?
[Marcel:] I just want to say that yes, I will buy Bill Clinton's book.
[Kagan:] Why?
[Marcel:] Why? Because I feel like his side should be told. And I am tired of his personality and his accomplishments being narrowed down to Monica Lewinsky. He's so much more than that. We had a terrific economy. He has been a terrific leader, and I'm sick of this voyeuristic, "Enquirer" magazine-type mentality that reduces him down to that. Past leaders have not been paragons of virtue, so I deny anybody to say that they were, from Jefferson on up. You know?
[Kagan:] Marcel, in Tennessee, thank you for that comment. I think Ken, in Missouri, has a different comment. He send us this e-mail: "I wouldn't waste my money on Bill Clinton's book. We all know it will just be more lies. He will never admit how he disgraced the presidency. John, let's bring you back in here. How much do you think of the personal side Bill Clinton will talk about in this book, and how much do you think it will be policy and his vision for world peace?
[Fund:] I think there will be a chapter in which he will make some regrets about some of his behavior and perhaps some of the scandals. I don't think the pardons, however, will figure in it. I do hope there is a chapter that would follow up on Lanny's book, about telling the truth early and telling it often, and I think I would like to hear Bill Clinton's explanation of why he didn't follow Lanny Davis' advice on public relations. And as Bill Clinton said, you're going to have the truth sooner rather than later, and more rather than less. He didn't follow Lanny's advice, and I think his administration and his credibility suffered as a result.
[Kagan:] Do you agree, Lanny?
[Davis:] First of all, I wish I had the advance that President Clinton is getting for his book. Look, it was very easy to give somebody advice about a private relationship that he was very embarrassed to tell the truth about and I do wish, and I think he probably wishes, that he had told the truth earlier. That having been said, nobody, I think, expressed himself in public in a more painful and honest fashion, ultimately, than Bill Clinton, and he paid harshly for what happened when he finally owned up to it. My question is why is there a focus on that issue when his presidency and what he did for the country the very fact that the poorest people in our country some of the faces you saw in Harlem the poorest, most needy people in this country look at President Clinton as one of the great presidents, who spoke for them. And if nothing else in his presidency, we should remember that.
[Fund:] Lanny, I might make one explanation. First of all, it wasn't entirely a personal matter, because the president was impeached. He was and only the second president in the nation's history to be impeached. It clearly was not just a personal matter. You can even talk to Democrats who wanted to censure Bill Clinton who admitted that lying under oath and trying to obstruct justice was what many Democrats in the Senate privately admitted happened. It may not have been something they wanted to convict him on, but they wanted to censure him. That is not just a private act.
[Davis:] Let's not replay the impeachment debate.
[Fund:] Because you don't want to argue it, I know.
[Davis:] I respect my friend John Fund's views on that, but let's remember that a majority Republican Senate did not agree with what John Fund just said.
[Fund:] How does a 50-50 vote come to become a majority, Lanny?
[Davis:] A majority did not agree with you. Fifty votes is not a majority. Even of Republicans, 10 of them disagreed with you on voting to acquit on obstruction, and 5 of them disagreed with you on voting to acquit on perjury. But I do agree, and President Clinton agrees, that what he did was wrong. He's paid harshly for it, but it hasn't affected, I believe, the judgment of history on what a great president he was.
[Kagan:] Gentlemen, I'm going to call a time out here, we want to here from our folks at home, ask them to get on the Internet to CNN.com, our TALKBACK site. The question of the day, the poll we want to hear from you: Would you read Bill Clinton's memoirs? Go online, vote and we'll tell you the results at the end of the hour. Still ahead: Can't get enough? This is a wild idea is it worth changing the Constitution so that Bill Clinton could run again? Ah! E-mails will be coming in on that one, and we'll talk more just ahead. Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. We are continuing what is turning out to be quite a hot topic today. Former president Bill Clinton striking a deal to write his memoirs. Would you read them or pay any money for his book? People definitely feel strongly one way or the other. We're going to add to our conversation now, by bringing in two more guests. First, historian Douglas Brinkley. Doug, good to see you.
[Douglas Brinkley, Historian:] Nice to be here.
[Kagan:] Since you are a resident historian here we are going to talk about something that Chris Mathews wrote in a column in "The San Francisco Chronicle." He basically said, let's end the two-term limit on presidents. Quickly, with Bill Clinton back on the political stage, why should a 22nd Amendment stop 21st century Americans from having the president we want. Before we get the tempers flaring here. First be a historian for us and explain the 22nd Amendment.
[Brinkley:] The 22nd Amendment came after the advent of Franklin Roosevelt winning four consecutive terms, and there was a feeling that you could have a demagogue as president what if somebody stayed for eight terms? So it became a movement for the 22nd Amendment to limit it to two terms. Hence Bill Clinton can never run for president again. I think that there would be a great outrage if someone tried to overturn that. I think we're there. Chris Matthews is good at stirring up things. It's fun to talk about. But the 22nd Amendment is there to give other people a chance at the presidency, and so we don't have somebody who might stay on for 20 years and kind of limit the democratic process.
[Kagan:] Let's stir things up with Kim Alfano. Let's add a lady to this panel here. She is a Republican consultant. Kim, good to see you.
[Kim Alfano, Republican Consultant:] Hi. Thanks for having me.
[Kagan:] I bet that you will be right out there trying to get the 22nd Amendment changed, won't you, Kim?
[Alfano:] Not a chance. I think that Chris Mathews is nervous that Bill Clinton will try to take his job. He may be a good talk show host, but I don't think that he would make a good president again. I think we should just let that be the past.
[Kagan:] Kim, what do you think about this book? Would you like to read it?
[Alfano:] You know, as someone who just wants to keep up on what has gone on, sure, I will probably read it. Do I want to give my money to Bill Clinton? Probably not.
[Kagan:] You can check it out from a library, maybe.
[Alfano:] That's right, I'll get it from the library, a high-jet copy from the Internet.
[Kagan:] There's that, too.
[Alfano:] Yeah. But, you know, I think that it's predictable and what else is he going to do? I think that he misses being in the limelight and so, it's the dead of summer, he's getting a little bit of coverage.
[Kagan:] But come on, almost every former president writes his memoirs.
[Alfano:] Sure.
[Kagan:] That's a given, that's not just wanting attention.
[Alfano:] I don't think there's anything wrong for him doing that.
[Kagan:] Doug, from a historical perspective, what's the difference between a president writing his memoirs and actually getting a good historical picture of the presidency.
[Brinkley:] Well, you're always the hero of your own autobiography. As a historian, when I write books I use them constantly. Whether I'm writing on the Civil War and I use Grant's, or the Progressive Era, and I use T.R.'s autobiography, or even Vietnam and I use Richard Nixon's autobiography. So it's extraordinarily valuable resource. And what Bill Clinton will do, is not just not focus on the impeachment and Monica Lewinsky, obviously. I am interested of reading his perspective on Bosnia and Northern Ireland, or his meetings with Nelson Mandela, and it will add new anecdotes to 1990s political culture all over the world, so I think that it will be an extraordinarily important book. My fear is that Bill Clinton's taking a lot of money
[Kagan:] Why does it have to be one book? Jimmy Carter's written a number of books as former president. Richard Nixon wrote a number of books, as well.
[Brinkley:] There's one book that's considered "The Presidential Memoir," where he will have access to things in the White House that a scholar like myself will not get. And I will end up footnoting him. One of the things that the media hasn't picked up in the last months of the Clinton White House, the on-doing all of the pardons, they had put together each department in the Clinton White House, has made a big, fat report about 1,000 pages, whether it's the NSC or the Department of Energy, Department of the Interior, Clinton will have the first crack at those documents. Hence, his book will be I think very historically accurate, because it will have the documents there, but when it gets to the personal, he'll be doing his typical spin.
[Kagan:] All right, let's go to the phones. I think we have Dan on the phone.
[Dan:] Yes.
[Kagan:] Go ahead. Where are you calling from?
[Dan:] New Jersey.
[Kagan:] OK.
[Dan:] I can't believe that anybody would buy this man's book, or want him to serve another term. I mean, he was a good president. But he proved himself totally untrustworthy, and he should have been impeached for the adultery alone.
[Kagan:] And yet he wasn't.
[Alfano:] It will be good fantasy, Dan. It will be novelesque. You know, just read it as you would one of the J.R. Tolkien novels or something.
[Kagan:] Go ahead, Lanny. I hear you there. Go ahead.
[Davis:] One thing about the Bill Clinton history and memoir, that I am looking forward to and I'd be interested in Doug's comments on this this is a president who is truly a great writer. He didn't depend on speech writers, probably to the vain of a lot of speech writers, he wrote most of his own speeches. He is a gifted writer. If he weren't president, he could have been a journalist and maybe even a historian, Doug. So I think the writing of this book will be outstanding, because it will be Bill Clinton.
[Fund:] I agree with Lanny. And one chapter that I am looking forward to is a chapter called Settling Scores. Bill Clinton had a lot of pent-up anger and resentment against a lot of his political adversaries. And he said, when I am not going to talk about these people in the White House, he told that as told us that in many press conferences, he said I will wait until afterwards, so the Settling Scores chapter, whether it's Newt Gingrich or Ken Starr or people like that, that will be fascinating reading. That will be the most sellable aspects of the book.
[Kagan:] And you think in some ways...
[Davis:] You'll need a good editor, Doug. John, we will need a good editor on those sections.
[Fund:] I will volunteer.
[Kagan:] Kim, go ahead.
[Alfano:] How much the question will be, how much of this will be hubris? How much will be, let's talk about me? And how much will actually be policy? I think that Bill Clinton himself is even enamored with his sort of acting skills and his spin skills, and I think he finds himself the best political pundit. So I wonder how much will be, how great I was when I was out there shaking hands and things like that, and how much will actually be insight.
[Kagan:] Doug, I want to get Doug here on Lanny's point about Bill Clinton being a great writer. What do you think about that?
[Brinkley:] I am not sure that I agree with Lanny. He's a good writer, and I think this gives him an opportunity to do a very, very important book. I hope he does the important book. We're kidding ourselves if we don't think this will be a policy book. People that are looking for stories about Monica Lewinsky's blue dress will get a very short supply, just like at presidential libraries. You don't go to the Richard Nixon Library in Yorba Linda and expect to see walls on Watergate. I think he will try to show what he did in his administration, the domestic renewal, some of the projects that mean a lot to him, and it will be very much in line with Gerald Ford's book, "A Time To Heal" and Jimmy Carter's, "Keeping Faith." Both of those books both unpopular presidents Ford and Carter, those books became No. 1 on the best-seller's list. You'll see Bill Clinton's book No. 1 for quite awhile. He'll be on the cover of "Time" or "Newsweek." He'll be on "
[Larry King." Kagan:] He'll be on "CNN LIVE THIS MORNING." That will be his first stop.
[Brinkley:] "CNN LIVE TODAY." Yeah, the point I'm trying to say, this is not a Gennifer Flowers book. This is going to be a book trying to understand the domestic and foreign policy in the 1990s by a man who knows it as well as anybody in the United States.
[Kagan:] OK, before we go to break here, we want to get our audience members in. Here's Tara from Florida.
[Tara:] I just think that the one thing that everyone will probably agree with is that we're all curious about Bill Clinton. And we want to know what it is about, whether it's budget surplus or deficit or his private life, anything. We're just curious, so we want to know. So we'll probably end up reading the book anyways.
[Kagan:] People probably will. Let's show you this one e-mail as we go to break. From M.L. Baldwin in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida writes: "They'd have to pay me $9 million to read anything that Bill Clinton has to say." More e-mail and more comments just ahead. We'll take a quick break and talk about what else president former President Clinton will be doing with his ex-presidency. Stay with us.
[Chris Askew, Cnn Correspondent:] If President Clinton moved to your neighborhood, what would you do?
[Unidentified Male:] I'd invite him in for a beer, maybe a stogie.
[Unidentified Female:] I would have him to come over and have some ribs with us and some greens and some really good Southern hospitality.
[Askew:] Soul food.
[Unidentified Female:] Soul food, that's exactly.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, I'd probably invite him out for a round of golf and try to get as much inside information as I could.
[Unidentified Female:] Not in my backyard. I'm from Texas, and we're Bush people there.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, they'd have to change religions. I'm a Catholic priest, and so he'd have to go to Confession first.
[Kagan:] Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Daryn Kagan, filling in today for Bobbie Battista. We are talking about the book deal that former President Clinton has struck up with Knopf, the publishing house that will be publishing his memoirs. We don't know exactly how much. We expect in the millions of dollars, and it is for worldwide rights, not just here in the U.S. Which brings to us to Genai's comment. He was talking during the break and what would you like to say?
[Genai:] Well, first of all, I think the book is going to be a global hit I mean, the money they will make. But that's not point. We're talking too much concentrating about here in America. But if you look around the world, India, Bangladesh anywhere in the world that Bill Clinton is so popular after his presidency. So people around the world are really interested to read what he got to say. So let's talk about that. And I'm sure I mean, money-wise it will be a winner.
[Davis:] Daryn?
[Kagan:] Yes, go ahead.
[Davis:] It is interesting and I'm glad that comment has been made that even John Fund will admit that right now the most popular American president around the world is Bill Clinton. The level of both recognition and popularity, whether it's the Western governments or in the Pacific Rim or in the subcontinent or the underdeveloped world. Bill Clinton Northern Ireland, the Middle East, you name it, made an imprint on the peoples of the world, especially the underdeveloped peoples of the world in a way that I think no other president, perhaps in American history, made.
[Fund:] Lanny, I appreciate your saying what I think, but what is you data? Please give me your statistics or your facts to back that up. I'm waiting.
[Davis:] You're so intelligent and fair-minded I thought you would agree with what I just said.
[Fund:] I'd like some statistics and some data to back up that statement. ... Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan might have some disagreements with you on that, but do you have any statistics or data?
[Davis:] Well, I think anecdotally the statistics and data probably would emerge through public opinion polls on popularity of...
[Fund:] So do you have them, Lanny?
[Davis:] But I don't have that data, but I do have leaders of the Western European Alliance, who still talk about Bill Clinton's popularity, from Tony Blair across Western Europe. I certainly have evidence in the subcontinent as well as in the underdeveloped world of his popularity based upon his travels and what people say, John. But no public opinion data yet. But I suspect that when there are public opinion polls taken, they will show Bill Clinton as immensely popular around the world.
[Kagan:] Let's check in on our chat room. And Larry from North Carolina has been monitoring that for us. Larry, what are some of the comments you're hearing from viewers as they chat along with us?
[Larry:] Well. it's [sic] been more people that said they would buy the book. There've been quite a few that said they wouldn't. One person said they would buy 20 copies for Christmas. Another one said: "No, I don't plan to waste time reading the book, the title should be `staining of the president.'" "Find Clinton's book at the bookstore under Romance." "I can't wait for the book to come out. Monica should write the forward to the book." It's just been a lot of slams, personally, at Clinton and at Bush. This Web site kind of goes all over the board here. But, probably right now I'd say there's be more purchasers than non-purchasers.
[Kagan:] Than there would and what that shows, and, of course, it's easy to make comments like that when you're anonymous in a chatroom, but Bill Clinton is a man that stirs up very strong feelings on both sides.
[Brinkley:] Can I interject something?
[Kagan:] Go ahead Doug.
[Brinkley:] I think it's telling that he signed with Knopf. Knopf is one of the most distinguished publishers, and they're known for doing extraordinarily serious fiction and nonfiction. And I think that's an indication. When it's a Knopf book you're going to be getting a book that's very policy driven, not settling scores.
[Kagan:] Versus like what would be another publishing house...
[Brinkley:] Oh, I think it's Random House. Knopf is part of Random House empire, but it's the serious brand name within the Random House the Random House sometimes does serious, but sometimes they'll be more sensational. Clinton's going to come in as a heavyweight president. He wants to...
[Fund:] But Daryn, Professor Kennedy's [sic] point is, I think, indicating, perhaps, some of the commercial limitations here. There's something has happened in the last five years, it's called the Internet. You can now, basically, put up chunks of almost any book on the Internet, including the most interesting parts. If this is a policy driven book, I suspect the parts that are of most public interest are going to be on the Internet. That will reduce sales. And that may not be fair, but I think that this is not going be as commercial a success as everybody thinks, because of the Internet.
[Kagan:] Kim, you're trying to get in here. And that's obviously a challenge that all authors today, and all...
[Alfano:] Yes, I would say that this is the first president who's kind out of that rock-star era the era of massive spin and image- driven sort of politics. And this will be a big test for Bill Clinton because, you know, Jimmy Carter and Henry Kissinger and Gerald Ford, they've written serieses of books series of books that have talked about different sort of aspects of their presidency in great depth. And they're very academic, and they're studied in college. Bill Clinton has got to do this very serious book to start, but I think you'll find some people will buy it I hope the cover is pretty to put it on their coffee table and say they have Bill Clinton's serious book. I think policy wonks and politicos like us will read it, maybe get through the first few chapters, if I was being honest, and then probably put it down because we're busy. And I think that history professors and autobiographers will comb through it to find things. But, you know, in terms of massive, rock star crazy popularity, this isn't Madonna's picture book.
[Kagan:] It is for Doug Brinkley. He's going to be in heaven.
[Alfano:] I'm not sure what that says about Doug. You should be nicer to him.
[Kagan:] He's a history geek, but he'd probably be the first to admit it. Let's get some more audience members in here Fred.
[Fred:] yes, I was just going to say that everybody gives him such credit for being such a popular president overseas and his popularity overseas, but what was his foreign policy? I mean, let's talk about what he actually did. It's not about going overseas and shaking a bunch of hands...
[Davis:] Excuse me.
[Kagan:] Lanny, let's let Doug get in there. What do you think are the significant foreign policy...
[Brinkley:] Richard Holbrooke wrote a memoir about Bosnia, which won, by "The New York Times," one of the great books of the year. Holbrooke, of course, being throughout the Clinton administration. I think Clinton on Bosnia, on Kosovo, Iraq his relationship with world leaders ranging from Tony Blair to Mandela to Saddam Hussein is all going to be of interest. There is a lot of I don't think it was a great foreign policy, the Clinton years. I don't think people go out and look at it as great. But it was a time of great trade policy, and I think reflecting on Clinton putting trade policy at the heart of our foreign policy, could be a very interesting chapter. Is that going to be Madonna-like best selling status? I don't know. But it will have a lot of interest with a lot of people in the business community, political community, and by Clinton getting out there and hawking the book himself on TV and using the magazines and newspapers, it will become a very big book. Whether it will make its money, I'm sure it will, whether it will become for two years on the best-seller list, I doubt it. I think it's going to be too serious for that.
[Kagan:] Some of our audience members are thinking even beyond the book and what former President Clinton might be doing. Here's Kathy from New York. Kathy, you have an idea for President Clinton.
[Kathy:] Yes, before he runs for his third term as presidency, I think he'd win the most hardest job in the United States in a heartbeat, and that's mayor of New York City, because we want him. Welcome, Bill! Your wife got to stay. We want you in the city. Yeah, Bill!
[Davis:] Can't afford the pay cut.
[Kagan:] There you go. That will bring up our next topic when we talk about what else does Bill Clinton have to do after writing the book? There's a lot to being a former president of the United States, and we will talk about some of those ideas, just ahead. Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. We're continuing our discussion about the upcoming memoirs from former President Bill Clinton, announced today he signed with a publishing house. We don't know how much, we expect somewhere in the range of $8 to 9 million for the worldwide rights to that book. We were on a subject before we went to break here, about what comes after the book. Doug Brinkley, let's bring you back in here. I think it's fair to say, non-partisan, that Jimmy Carter has set the standard of how you can really make use of a former presidency.
[Brinkley:] Absolutely. He used the presidency as a stepping stone for greater achievement, and he's raised the bar of what it means to be an ex-president, and that's a hard bar for Bill Clinton to reach. Carter left office with his moral integrity in tact, hence he built on a lot of presidential achievements: the Panama Canal treaties, so he was able to go be an election monitor in Panama or the Camp David Accords, Carter's role with Arafat and things in the Middle East. I think Bill Clinton has already told us what he will do. He will focus on international AIDS, he will work here domestically on race issues and education. And these are things that mean a lot to him. I know he's itching to get back into the diplomatic fray, in places like Northern Ireland, which he worked so tirelessly to get a peace there. And he's respected by people there. And I think a smart administration down the line, even a Bush administration, should consider at least consulting Bill Clinton on U.S. foreign policy in places like Northern Ireland, where he knows more than just about anybody. He is a policy wonk. Just because you don't like a person a lot of people didn't like Nixon, Bill Clinton was not a Nixon-person, but he consulted Nixon before his death on Russia. And I think the Bush administration should use what Bill Clinton knows, and consult him of certain aspects of international affairs.
[Kagan:] Kim, could you ever see that happening?
[Alfano:] No. I think that will be a big hurdle for him, because again, I think that his I bet we watch his presidency be more like, you know, an older, you know, movie star where you see him going in very public venues to try to raise awareness about things like AIDS abroad, and causes that way, testifying before Congress. But I don't think when you think of Bill Clinton, people think that's the policy guy. When you think of Jimmy Carter, you certainly think, you know, he was so smart, he couldn't articulate what he wanted to do in the presidency. I think for a lot of people it's a leap to get beyond Bill Clinton's flash, and really you know, other than having worked with him everyday, to get to that sort of intellect you guys are talking about. I really think he has that, you know, more of a sort of style, bringing attention to things rather than being a really substantive, deep thinking policy wonk, and I doubt George Bush goes to him.
[Davis:] I have to disagree a little with that, but let me repeat what I said earlier, what I believe really will be his priority: no president, may be going back to FDR, is more revered and admired by the people who are least well-off in our society. That tells you a lot about Bill Clinton and his presidency. And his post presidency I believe will focus on especially the problems of race and poverty, that remain amidst our affluence in America and abroad, will focus on the poverty and the impoverishment of the underdeveloped world, the plague of AIDS, and perhaps, his ability to bring peace to places that need his auspices.
[Fund:] Let me combine Lanny's point and Kim's point, you reach a happy medium. I think Bill Clinton, who is the fund-raiser extraordinaire for the Democratic Party while he was president can be fund raiser extraordinaire for all kinds of good causes as an ex- president, because he is charisma. He does bring controversy, he brings people that like him and don't like to the meeting halls. They'll buy tickets for all kinds of worthy events. So Bill Clinton can do a lot of good, simply because he is such a stellar figure.
[Kagan:] Time to go back to the audience. Rashandra from Missouri.
[Rashandra:] I just needed to clarify the situation. We are discussing a book by Bill Clinton, the ex-president or Monica Lewinsky's lover, because every president, ex-president and future, has caused conflict for the country, whether it was financial, foreign policy, sending them off to war. The problem that we seem to have with Bill Clinton is sexual content, since it's such a strong issue in the country. Do we need to decide which one is sexual or was actually best for the country?
[Brinkley:] I think the answer to that is, Bill Clinton will write the book he wants to write, and I'm sure that he's not going to want to be talking about his sexual life, after we've lived with it for so long in this book. Whether he will be forced to on talk shows, when he's promoting the book, he's obviously going to have a chapter that deals with some of these affairs. There will be some
[Kagan:] Even Jimmy Carter wrote a book on poetry.
[Brinkley:] Exactly, and Carter's writing a novel right now on the Revolutionary War in Georgia.
[Fund:] But you know, Doug, Bill Clinton did write a book while he was president and it sold about 30,000 copies. So it's not necessarily the case, that did I think the memoir will sell well, but it's not the case that the 10th book or the 11th will necessarily sell well. Bill Clinton wrote books while he was president, they were promoted, but they didn't buy them.
[Brinkley:] You know, I'll tell you the difference, because I wrote a biography of President Carter and I learned this: when you get a live ex-president that is such a rare site when they go into the Barnes and Noble or Borders, you get such giant lines. And everybody wants a presidential autograph and everybody wants to see that just promoting the book and the access that an ex-president has, almost guarantees that the book will hit the best-seller list.
[Fund:] We are talking about the 10th or 11th book, I think even those will continue. I think any presidential book hits the list, even if it's by a president that is not popular, for a while. I'm not saying that's going to be a mainstay.
[Alfano:] I think sometimes that's all they have to do to stay in the public fray. I think what is going to be so disappointing to Bill Clinton is not to have that rock star draw everywhere. And I had the opportunity to interview Richard Nixon and I was really nervous, and I went up to him and I said, when we were done, I said I know you are very busy, you're the ex-president of the United States, I wanted to get your autograph on something. And he remarked, well, I'm an ex-president, I have nothing else to do, sit down. And we ended up sitting and talking about politics, and it was amazing to me how this person, who so hounded by so many people, was so ready to just hang out and chat. And I think Bill Clinton will have to reconcile that now. He will have to figure out maybe I just need to find myself, write more books, hang out, get inside my own brain.
[Kagan:] Go Kim, maybe you will have a chance to sit down and talk with Bill Clinton and get his autograph. I know you are dying to do that.
[Alfano:] Different experience, I'll tell you that.
[Kagan:] We'll take a break, but before we go to break, do you ever think about how we put this show TALKBACK LIVE on the air? You can see for yourself and get to know the folks behind the scenes, go to cnn.comtalkback. Would you buy and would you read Bill Clinton's memoir? That's the question. We will check that vote when we come back. Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. Talking once again, would you buy would you read Bill Clinton's memoir? We will check the on-line viewer vote in just a moment. We want to get a final audience comment, we have some communications students from the University of Missouri, who want our jobs, so we're going to put them on television. Yes. Edward, knock them out.
[Edward:] Yes, she said during the break about how nobody really talked about Monica. I can't stand people who do that, yes, we did talk about Monica like most of the time. So don't backtrack and say, we don't like him because he was just a bad president, a caller called in and said he was a great president. But then you bring up the Monica thing, so yes, it is the Monica thing, and that's what everybody mostly talks about.
[Kagan:] Let's ask our panel. Is this presidency to be forever marked by the Monica Lewinsky scandal? Or, as time goes by, will people see it for other and greater things? Or lesser things?
[Brinkley:] I think he'll be forever scarred with not Monica, but with impeachment, the big I. It will be something Bill Clinton has to live with, but I think over a period of time, his accomplishments will look greater, particularly, just the fact that nobody will bemoan the 1990s, it was a time of unprecedented economic growth in this country, and so, the recollections and nostalgia will kick in, and I think Bill Clinton will be there to reap those benefits years from now.
[Kagan:] Debbie from Pennsylvania.
[Debbie:] It's not fact that he had an affair with Monica Lewinsky. It's the fact that he lied to the nation and made a laughing stock of the White House. It has nothing to do with his personal life or us judging him, but he's holding an image as a president of the United States for us to all look up to. And it's just not proper to do that to the White House.
[Alfano:] I think Debbie is absolutely right. The bottom line is: if you know Bill Clinton, you don't know him for his brain necessarily. And it's going to be a hard thing to get...
[Fund:] Worse than that I worse than Monica Lewinsky were the pardons, because Bill Clinton has never given us any satisfactory explanation of the pardons. There's no one who can explain the Marc Rich pardon, even Lanny Davis can't do that. That is the lasting stain for the historians, not necessarily popular culture.
[Davis:] Let me hopefully put everything in perspective again to the same young woman that took a shot at his private life. The American people are smarter than that. Two-thirds of the American people, when he left office, said this man did great things for our country. Eight years ago, we were worse off. We had deficits. We are better off, and historians will judge that more than anything else.
[Fund:] You never mentioned that those numbers of two-thirds dropped precipitously with the pardon news. You never mention what the polls were two months after that.
[Davis:] Not on job performance, on personal ratings. And I was critical of those pardons. On job performance, he left this country better off, poor people, middle-class people, and even wealthy people agree with that.
[Kagan:] OK, Lanny, we want to check our online poll. The question, would you read Bill Clinton's memoirs? Yes, 58 percent. No, 42 percent. We will have to see, it's not coming out for a couple more years. We want to thank all our guests in participating in our conversation, it did make for a lively afternoon of discussion. Douglas Brinkley, Lanny Davis, Kim Alfano, and John Fund. Thank you all at home. I'm Daryn Kagan, certainly hoping that Bobbie Battista will be feeling better and be back with you again tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. Eastern for more TALKBACK LIVE. I will see you tomorrow morning on CNN "LIVE THIS MORNING".

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to check in with some of our other journalists who are working on stories around the world. Maria Ressa, our Jakarta bureau chief. Maria, can you hear me?
[Maria Ressa, Cnn Jakarta Bureau Chief:] Well, at this point, part of the problem really in covering the story is gauging how much of our resources do we put into it, first of all, to get accurate timely information right when the landslide happens. In this instance, it took more than 48 hours for the first rescue teams to get to that site most affected. The area was so remote with communications down, transportation at a standstill, not even the Red Cross could guarantee their information was accurate. If you remember on Wednesday, they estimated about a hundred people dead, up to a thousand missing. Thursday, those numbers were scaled back dramatically. Some good news, 33 bodies recovered, more than a hundred still missing. As far as CNN was concerned, we had decided to pull back once it was clear that the information was quite inaccurate and hard to rely on at that point early, early this morning Carol.
[Lin:] All right. Maria Ressa, sorting out what's true and what's not. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] The breaking news wheel continues, and it's got more coming.
[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] That it does.
[Harris:] And Fredricka Whitfield is here to take care of that for us now.
[Kagan:] We'll let you take it.
[Fredricka Whitfield:] That's right. You guys have been talking about thanks very much, you too. You've been talking about the Louima case and the overturning of three convictions involving three police officers out of New York, whose cases were overturned on the grounds of insufficient evidence, according to a federal appeals court. We're getting all kinds of reaction out of New York. Right now, Al Sharpton is addressing an audience there in New York, and let's go to him now.
[Rev. Al Sharpton, Activist:] that Bruder acted alone when that is not only not the evidence but physically impossible. It is a blow to all American citizens and clearly is something that we will not sit by and tolerate. Firstly, we call upon the federal prosecutors to not only pursue the new trial ordered on Schwarz but pursue relevant, winable and necessary charges against all of those that are guilty. And prepare immediately to do so, because any lacking of doing so, would be, in my judgment, a permanent miscarriage of justice as it relates to policing in this country. Secondly, we call upon Senator Schumer and others that are now involved in deliberating on who would be the U.S. Attorney in Eastern District, to make sure that whomever that is, that they will aggressively pursue the new case as the older cases were pursued. The problem here is, even with the new case that has been ordered, we will now be facing a questionable new prosecutor, who may or may not have the same commitment and dedication as the outgoing prosecutor. Which means, in effect, this could mean that they have let these people walk on one of the ugliest, most pathetic and certainly sick crimes that we've seen in the history of this city. We intend to pursue this. I have a call in to the federal prosecutors. I have a call in to Senator Schumer. We intend to meet immediately with both. We also, however, want to make it clear that this is just one more round. The fight is not over. We intend to meet Schwarz in court. We intend to pursue the charges that can still stand against the others, and we intend to let the world know that Mr. Volpes confession validated forever, that Abner Louima did not lie. We cannot allow one man to take a fall, when clearly, one man could not have operated alone and clearly this is something that impedes the faith of people in the criminal justice system and in the process in these United States. Any questions?
[Whitfield:] You've been listening to Al Sharpton in New York, rather incensed about the federal appeals court overturning the conviction of three of the police officers involved in the attack against Hatian immigrant, Abner Louima, back in 1997. We'll be having a little bit more from Al Sharpton later on on "TALKBACK LIVE." He said, this is not over, this is just one round. We are hoping to see Charles Schwarz, who was one of the three officers, in court once again. And, in addition to hearing from Al Sharpton later on today on "TALKBACK LIVE," we'll also, in about 30 minutes, going to be hearing from one of Louima's attorneys, Sanford Rubenstein. He's holding a news conference at about 12:30, and we'll, of course, bring you that. Let's now go to New York, back to New York, and talk with Deborah Feyerick. She's been covering this story for reaction out of New York. We've been hearing from Reverend Al Sharpton, and obviously, an awful lot of people in New York are very unsettled about what has taken place this morning, Deborah.
[Deborah Feyerick, Cnn Correspondent:] Absolutely. Everybody is trying to sort out exactly what the appeals court ruling means. And to bring you back a little. This was a brutal assault inside Brooklyn's 70th Precinct. A Haitian immigrant sodomized by police officer Justin Volpe and the three other cops also implicated were found guilty for their roles. And to put it into perspective, this had so rocked New York City. There were huge demonstrations, public cries of police brutality, a shakeup of the NYPD and the threat of federal oversight. This was really a city divided. Now the three of the ex-officers who have had their convictions overturned. What it means for Charles Schwarz is, he has a shot at freedom. He was found guilty of violating Abner Louima's civil rights for holding Louima down while Volpes sodomized Louima with a plunger handle. Schwarz has maintained he was never near the bathroom where the assault took place. The prosecutor said that was a story Scwarz made up with two other officers, Thomas Wiese and Thomas Bruder. They were found guilty of obstructing justice, lying to cover all this up. Well, an appeals court has now overturned the convictions of those three cops, ruling, that in the case of Charles Schwarz, the court has said he was denied effective assistance of counsel and that the jury may have been exposed to material which prejudiced them during deliberations. So a new trial has been ordered in that case. The appeals court also found that in a second trial, the one of obstruction of justice, that's got to be thrown out because of a lack of evidence. So this is a victory for the three disgraced officers and a big blow to prosecutors. Louima did sue the city, settling for close to $9 million. The appeals court has said Charles Schwarz can get another trial. Schwarz is a former Marine. He's been moved around between seven federal presents prisons, kept in solitary confinement. And his wife has really been on a massive crusade, holding fundraisers, sending out mailings, trying to free her husbands [sic]. We have called the prosecutor's office several times, and it not clear just what their next step will be. All of this sorting itself out now. Fredricka?
[Whitfield:] And also, Deborah, hadn't Schwarz also complained about that solitary confinement? You said his wife has been campaigning on his behalf, that he wasn't getting the proper treatment while being held?
[Feyerick:] Well, one of the the Federal Bureau of Prisons has basically said that they cannot guarantee his freed his safety, basically, if he is in the public domain of the prison, so they've locked him away in solitary confinement. His lawyer has said that that's basically cruel and unusual punishment and that, you know, he'd rather take his chances. But to be locked up like that, is even more unfair. So, you know, there are it's a big day for them.
[Whitfield:] You said it's going to be difficult to know exactly what the next step is. If there is indeed a retrial, one more detail that's further complicating matters is that the judge that was in charge of this past case, he has since died of pneumonia, just last January, Eugene Nickerson. How much more complicated is it now going to get in this case, to try to retrieve those records and find out whether indeed the jury was prejudiced prejudicial, as the federal appeals court judges are saying now?
[Feyerick:] Well, this is what's very interesting. During the trials, there was a lot of emotion on all sides of the platform here. Charles Schwarz's family basically accusing the judge of acting unfairly, accusing prosecutors of going out on a vendetta to get Charles Schwarz. And so the fact that they've got a new judge, that could actually help them. Schwarz's side has basically said, the judge has been prejudiced all along or was affected by, sort of, the publicity surrounding this case. Meantime, on the Louima side, you know, there the judge was always ruling in their favor. So, it's going to be very interesting to see what happens. But, again, an issue that people thought was over has now, basically, skyrocketed back onto central stage.
[Whitfield:] And, Deborah, you touched on it earlier, about the protests, the demonstrations that took place shortly after it was revealed that this attack had taken place involving Louima. Al Sharpton alluded to, this fight is not over. It's frightening to think what exactly may be taking place or what may be brewing in New York now. Thanks very much, Deborah Feyerick, for New York. Now, of course, later, we're going to be hearing, once again, as I mentioned, in less than, now, 25 minutes we're going to be hearing from one of Louima's attorneys. He's holding a press conference. Sanford Rubenstein will be addressing the audience there, and we'll, of course, bring that to you live. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com Case

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] U.S. military forces in two countries are on the highest possible state of alert this morning. American forces in Bahrain and Qatar are on heightened alert because of terrorist threats. CNN's Carl Rochelle joins us live now from the Pentagon with the latest. Carl, good morning.
[Carl Rochelle, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Daryn. Well, that is Threat Con Delta, Threat Con level Delta we are talking about. Officials here at the Pentagon say it is not that common, but it is not without precedent.
[Rochelle:] Less than two weeks after the apparent terrorist attack on the USS Cole, Pentagon officials say U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf countries of Bahrain and Qatar have been put on the highest possible state of alert because of new threats linked to associates of accused terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden. The highest state of alert is known as Threat Condition Delta, and officials say it is in response to threats considered specific and credible against U.S. citizens, troops and facilities. Threat Condition Delta is equal to a war footing, officials said, and normally is reserved for situations in which an attack is believed imminent. The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Pentagon planners are looking at the option of a preemptive strike against bin Laden's organization, including camps in Afghanistan. But they say that's only if a firm link can be established and if it is determined such a strike could be effective in disrupting bin Laden's ability to attack U.S. interests. One official cautioned: "We have been looking at that option since the strike on the Cole." Officials say the 1998 decision to strike bin Laden's terrorist training camps and at a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was made in part because information at the time indicated he was about to strike U.S. interests again after terror bombings at two U.S. embassies in East Africa. A senior official involved in national security discussions says that a discussion is under way about a new preemptive strike. And there will be a meeting of the president's national security advisers and defense advisers at the White House later today Daryn.
[Kagan:] Carl, soon after this attack happened on the USS Cole are you still there you are happened on the USS Cole, Osama bin Laden spread the word that he had nothing to do with it. So why the refocusing on his possible involvement?
[Rochelle:] Well, intel sources have picked up some indications that he may in fact have been involved, or at least affiliates of his, and he would bear the responsibility for that. But they haven't completely closed the loop yet. One of the conditions of this alleged preemptive strike, the discussion of a preemptive strike, is that they are able to close the loop and effectively and firmly tie him to the threats, the threat conditions, and the attack on the Cole. That is something that they are trying to do. And we are told that some of these new threats came from Osama bin Laden's organization, but not all of them, that there were other organization involved with this. They're trying to close that link. If they do, then the discussions about a preemptive strike would go to a higher level. Right now, it's just a discussion, we're told.
[Kagan:] Carl Rochelle at the Pentagon. Carl, thank you very much.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] The latest CNN"USA Today" Gallup presidential tracking poll is just out. It shows Democrat Al Gore still ahead of Republican George W. Bush. Gore is at 48 percent among likely voters to 42 percent for Bush. Green Party candidate Ralph Nader gets 3 percent, and the Reform Party's Patrick Buchanan, 1 percent. Margin of error: 4 percentage points. For more on the national political landscape, we welcome David Broder, noted columnist for "The Washington Post." He is in Columbus, Ohio, today. David, it's a battleground state. How do things look there for Bush and Gore?
[David S. Broder, "the Washington Post":] Well, it's one of many states here in the Midwest, Gene, where the race has really tightened up. I think the polls show, probably, Bush with a slight lead, but, talking to people here all day yesterday on both sides, this is going to be a real battle here. I'm it's beautiful day here, I have to say, in contrast to what we were just hearing, and I'm on my way out this afternoon to the Delaware County Fair to talk to some real voters.
[Randall:] David, the Bush campaign certainly capitulated on the issue of campaign presidential debates, now accepting the bipartisan commission on debates proposal, dropping away from their own proposal for more limited debates. Also, we're hearing that the Bush camp will have a more a busier campaign schedule in the weeks ahead. What's the message, here, from the Bush campaign?
[Broder:] Well, they have been hearing from their party leaders and their campaign allies here in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania and Michigan all of the battleground states that Gore has had three very good weeks in a row, and that Bush has to step it up if he's going to win this race. I think every Republican I've talked to in the past two weeks thought that Bush was making a mistake in drawing out this controversy about the format and the timing and the sponsorship of the debates, so they had to close that down, and do it quickly. Now, I think, with the Olympics on, we're probably in a period where the polls are not going to move very much; but as you know, Gene, we're going to have an intense two weeks between the third and the 17th of October, with three presidential, one vice presidential debate. I think that's the time when this election is probably going to be decided.
[Randall:] David, you probably heard the latest "USA Today"GallupCNN tracking poll numbers 48 percent for Gore and 42 percent for Bush. It is not much of a spread, but is there cause for concern, there, in the Bush campaign, given what many see as Al Gore's momentum?
[Broder:] Well, I think that what's the concern is not so much the margin because, with the sampling errors that we all have in our polls, that could very well be a tie race. But, everybody I've talked to, including the officials here in Ohio yesterday, understand that the trend has been toward Gore; that he has had a good convention, a good vice presidential selection, and that he is the issues that he has chosen to talk about have been the issues that are now dominating the debate. Bush has to find some way to change that dynamic. It's going to be difficult to do while the country is watching from the Australian Olympics but, I think, coming out of that, he's going to have to rally. One thing we should say, and you know it as well as I do, we should not be quick to call George Bush out of this race. He was in trouble coming out of New Hampshire and he rallied in very well in South Carolina. He was in trouble coming out of the Michigan primary, and he rallied very well, again, after that. So this is a fellow who has some resilience in him.
[Randall:] David, let's talk about the Senate race in New York. It is clear that Democrats are counting on what they see as a stature gap between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Rick Lazio, the Republican. And yet, this week, after you watched the two debate, you wrote a column headlined "What Stature Gap?" What did you mean by that?
[Broder:] Well, I thought Lazio performed very well and that, if you hadn't known the biographies of the two candidates, and somebody said to you, one of those people has been a world figure for the past eight years and other is a back-bench congressman, you wouldn't have known which was which. But I have to say, the interesting thing about the reaction to that is, as in so many other parts of our politics, Gene, there does seem to be gender gap in the reaction. Gail Collins of "The New York Times" watched the same debate that I did, and she came away thinking that Lazio had been much too aggressive toward Mrs. Clinton and was really put off by it.
[Randall:] David Broder, in Ohio, to talk with real voters. David, thanks very much.
[Broder:] Thank you, Gene.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We want to go and focus once again on Colorado were there is an out of control wildfire in being called the Mesa Verde fire. Let's bring in Richard Homann, he is with the Colorado State Forest Service. Richard, thanks for joining us.
[Richard Homann, Fire Division Supervisor, Colorado State Forest Service:] You're quite welcome.
[Kagan:] First, give us an idea, for those of us not in Colorado, where this fire is burning and what the status is?
[Homann:] Well, Mesa Verde National Park is located in the southwest corner of Colorado. The current status, as of official reports last evening were was the fire was about 500 acres in size. Burning both in national park and outside the national park on county land and also Bureau of Land Management land.
[Kagan:] And because of this fire, there have been evacuations of tourists in the area?
[Homann:] There have been the precautionary measures within the park. The park tours, some have been evacuated and the park has been closed while there is threat to the park visitors.
[Kagan:] When we look at 500, 1,000 acres compared in scale to some of the massive fires we have seen in the west this summer, it doesn't really compare. Yet we've also seen how quickly these fires can get out of control. What's the concern there?
[Homann:] Well, the fuels all across Colorado are very dry, coupled with windy vents, fires can grow very fast. This particular fire was first reported at 1:00 yesterday afternoon and quickly escalated to 500 acres.
[Kagan:] Also within this park there are ancient cliff dwellings. Are those structures, are those sites in danger?
[Homann:] Well, the artifacts and antiquities within the park are certainly a concern for protection. I can't say specifically if which ones, if any, are directly in the path of the fire.
[Kagan:] OK, and just quickly as we wrap up here, what are the weather conditions there today?
[Homann:] Weather conditions are warm and dry. Possibility of some wind coming up. So it is a concern for the firefighters.
[Kagan:] That could be a problem. Well, we wish you well in fighting the fire and trying to save the park, thank you very much. Richard Homann, from the Colorado State Forest Service, thanks for joining us.

[Shihab Rattansi, Cnn Anchor:] A special school in South Africa is showing promise for its students. It's geared toward underprivileged children, who have struggled throughout their young lives. Some have never been to school before. Yet, as SACB reports, with the care, patience and understanding they are receiving, many are thriving in this new environment.
[Paula Slier, Sacb Reporter:] Three years ago, Leolo had not opened a book. Today, at the age of 14, he is in his first year of school. His dream to be a doctor.
[Unidentified Male:] My father left I didn't eat, but
[Slier:] His is a heart-wrenching story, but it's not unique. [on camera]: Leolo is part of what some refer to as the lost generation. But the people who work inside this building have not given hope on him or the thousands of others like him. [voice-over]: Leolo is one of 702 students attending New Nation School in one of Johannesburg poorest suburbs. Established five years ago, over 90 percent or these pupils come from the streets. Some were referred by welfare, others were in foster care; most live in shelters, but all have lived life the hard way.
[Desmond Mabuya, Headmaster:] There isn't any specialty training to deal with street children, but a person who's got a background of remedial education, and also it needs a person who is dedicated and committed in helping children who bring a lot of baggage in school.
[Slier:] In a school that's already different, Leolo's class is even more so. All his classmates have missed out years of education.
[Aggy Mthembi, Teacher:] Some of them have never been at school. So here in this special class, I am teaching them the basics that I've done in grade one, grade two and grade three work. We started them by teaching them how to write their names, because they can't even write their names.
[Slier:] But every kid as at least one talent, and it is this that school hopes to develop. But life is not easy. The children suffer from low self-esteem, mistrust, violent and often rude behavior. Some come to school dirty, while others are sick with TB,
[Mabuya:] Some of them, when they buy sweets, they give me a sweet and I enjoy it. It seems as if they recognize and appreciate what I'm doing. That's how I get fulfillment.
[Slier:] He's not the only one being fulfilled. For hundreds of these children, New Nation offers them precisely that; a second chance to build a new nation. Paula Slier, SABC, Johannesburg for CNN WORLD REPORT.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Many Afghans are leaving their homes. They are traveling to refugee camps within the country to find food and shelter. But near Herat, in western Afghanistan, very little aid is available, leaving refugees in a desperate situation. CNN's Kasra Naj reports.
[Kasra Naj, Cnn Correspondent:] Thousands more refugees have arrived in the past few days in a desperate search for food. Many camped out in the open on the fringes of a camp which already houses hundreds of thousands of refugees. "We have come here because we don't have anything to eat. We're having a hard time here. Our children are in danger", says this man. They come from neighboring provinces, victims of four years of a severe drought. The U.S.-led military campaign in the past two months has meant that little aid has been distributed in the provinces. They say no one has come to their help here. No one has been to register them, which would entitle them to receive aid. They say every night a few babies and old people, the most vulnerable, die of cold. This woman says she has already lost a daughter to the cold and hunger. She says she and her children arrived two weeks ago and are spending the nights sleeping here on the bare ground. Just a few hundred meters away in a new cemetery, many of the new graves are those of small babies and children. The small amount of international aid that reaches here, a drop in the bucket. The U.N. and many international aid organizations have been slow in their response. And, more people are arriving in the thousands. This Afghan official says the reason for the new rush of refugees: the arrival of winter and their need for shelter. Also, the roads are now open again after the initial fighting. [on camera]: Far too many are going hungry. Tens of thousands are desperate for help. And the situation can only get worse because there are reports that tens of thousands are on their way here. Kasra Naj, CNN, Maslakh camp, western Afghanistan.
[Woodruff:] It does make you wonder, since that area has been under control for the last many days, why they are not able to get aid in there are more quickly than they are.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Time now for your "A.M. Market Call." Sasha Salama is at the Nasdaq marketsite with a look at how investors are reacting to Microsoft's numbers in the premarket Sasha.
[Sasha Salama, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Deb. Well, investors getting a bit of a surprise from Microsoft despite the fact that the software giant did last week say that it would beat revenues it stood by that forecast. What it didn't say was that its growth estimates for this quarter and the rest of the year really would fall short because of remaining weak demand for personal computers Microsoft reporting 43 cents a share in profits. That's excluding charges. And that's in line with lowered estimates announced last week Microsoft announcing $2.6 billion in investment losses. Microsoft shares, after finishing at about $72.50 yesterday, in the premarket are down about $3.50 a share. We're also watching Sun, whose stock is up just a bit in the premarket. SUNW makes network computers and servers. It reported its first quarterly net loss in 12 years. On an operating basis, though, Sun did report 4 cents a share. That was a penny better than lowered estimates the company saying it cannot predict anything for the current quarter because the economy is simply too unstable. The real winner in all of these reports from after the close: eBay, the online auction site EBAY rising about $3 a share in the premarket after losing ground in Thursday's session eBay reporting 12 cents a share. That was 3 cents better with growth across all categories. Revenues nearly doubling. The CEO, Meg Whitman, says the key for growth is new business.
[Meg Whitman, Ceo, Ebay:] Our growth strategy for the company is to continue to attract new buyers and new sellers and grow the gross merchandise sales that is transacted on this site. We've had just one price increase in four years, which was January a year ago. We don't have any near-term price increases planned. That notwithstanding, our sellers think, I think, that this is a real value. But the strategy of the company is really to bring new sellers, new buyers and have more business done on the eBay platform.
[Salama:] Despite strength in eBay shares this morning, Deb, the futures overall pointing to a considerably lower open. And that's your "A.M. Market Call" for this Friday morning.
[Marchini:] Yes, Sasha, indeed, a lower open and the futures have been getting weaker all morning. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] And to talk more about the first week of the Bush administration and the performance of the new president, let's turn now to Washington, again, and to Ron Faucheux, who's the editor-in-chief of "Campaigns & Election" magazine, part of the "Congressional Quarterly." Mr. Faucheux, thanks for being with us.
[Ron Faucheux, Editor-in-chief, "campaigns & Election":] Thank you.
[Nelson:] How did George W. Bush do during his first week in your view?
[Faucheux:] Well, I think overall he probably got an "A" in just about everything. He was able, I think, to stay on top of all the issues. There was a lot of advancement on the tax issue with Alan Greenspan's announcement, with Senator Zell Miller, the Democrat from Georgia coming out so strongly and effectively in favor of it. I think the education plan looks like it's got momentum with Democrats saying nice things about it. Overall, I think it was a good first week and a good start.
[Nelson:] About that tax plan, that was quite a surprise to have those two endorsements. What do you think that's going to do now to the chances of a tax cut on the on Capitol Hill?
[Faucheux:] Well, I think there's a lot of momentum to have a tax cut. Of course, any time you have tax cuts there's always a lot of complications when you get into the details that have to be worked out. But I think that the chances of a having a large tax cut that's close to what Bush proposed are much greater today than they might have been a few weeks ago, not only because of those developments, but because of the surplus and because of the economy.
[Nelson:] Now, you mentioned we mentioned the tax cut and we mentioned education. But how much of any success we attribute to George W. Bush's first week comes from just having gotten through this week unscathed?
[Faucheux:] Well, it's tough to get through any week in Washington unscathed. I remember Alice Roosevelt Longworth once said, if you don't have anything nice to say about somebody, come sit next to me. And that's sort of the attitude in the city. People like to criticize. They like to pounce on people, whether it's a Democrat or Republican, whoever it is in office. So, to come through unscathed is certainly an accomplishment for him. He's going to have some bad weeks. There's no question about it. This is a tough job and...
[Nelson:] And one of the most difficult things to do in Washington is to stay on message, and he did manage to do that with the exception of abortion at the beginning of the week. Now what does that do to the president when he issued his abortion order?
[Faucheux:] Well, I'm not so sure he was off message as much as there are things that presidents have to do, whoever they are, to please their political base, things that they promised to do before the election and that their supporters expect and that was one of those things. It wasn't one of those things that's going to get him new support or reach out to the center of the political spectrum. It was one of those things he had to do for his political. But I think they did a pretty good job since then of getting the focus off of that onto some other issues.
[Nelson:] And my final question is do you think there's any worry within the administration now to the troubles that John Ashcroft is receiving and the and as we head into next week and the expected vote?
[Faucheux:] Well, unless there's some new revelation that we haven't heard of, it looks like John Ashcroft will be confirmed. The Republicans have 50 votes, plus they have at least one or two or a few Democrats who will vote. So, it seems to be pretty certain at this point that he'll be confirmed. And what I hear from a lot of Democrats on Capitol Hill, they want him confirmed because they want to make him and Gale Norton radioactive so they have symbols to shoot at in the administration. So, I suspect you'll see that.
[Nelson:] For the upcoming Congress elections they'll be a target?
[Faucheux:] Sure. Absolutely.
[Nelson:] All right, Ron Faucheux from "Campaigns & Elections" magazine. Thank you for joining us.
[Faucheux:] Thank you.
[Nelson:] We appreciate it.

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] Authorities are scrambling to understand what caused a Concorde jet to erupt into flames just before it crashed in a Paris suburb yesterday. Everyone on board was killed, as were four people on the ground. Investigators will be aided by the late night recovery of the supersonic jet's flight recorders. For the latest on the crash, we go to CNN's Tom Mintier who is live at the crash site. Tom, hello.
[Tom Mintier, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Linda. Those flight data recorders may provide the information that investigators need so desperately as to what happened in the final seconds of the Concorde flight. They were recovered late last night in that hillside behind, just a few hundred yards back over the top of this next hill. It is there where the remains of this small hotel are, where the Concorde slammed into, in a fireball. It is a fireball that is going to make it difficult for investigators to identify those who were onboard. Many of the families of the 96 German tourists have made their way to Paris. There is a counseling set up at the Charles de Gaulle airport nearby. And we also expect within the hour to hear from Air France officials with the information they have. But for now, the investigators, in recovering the remains of those who perished in this disaster, are the top priority here at the scene. Now we've only seen a couple of ambulances this morning making their way slowly out of here. But it is going to be a very slow process, done piece-by-piece and inch-by-inch.
[Mintier:] The Concorde carries more than 100,000 liters of jet fuel. When Air France Flight 4950 slammed into the small hotel just outside Paris, it was incinerated quickly. All that remained was part of the hotel's foundation, mixed in with the wreckage of the Concorde. Firemen used water and foam on what continued to burn, but there was little left. There were no survivors. All 100 passengers, the majority of them German tourists on a charter, and nine crew members onboard, were apparently killed instantly. Four people on the ground were killed, apparently workers at the small hotel. This man says he saw the plane coming in very, very low. He says he could see one of the engines on fire. Within two seconds, he says, it was all over, a huge explosion occurred about 300 meters from where he says he works. If it had been just a little closer, he says, we would all be dead now. Police and emergency workers, despite arriving at the crash site minutes after the accident, could do little more than just watch. As darkness came over the crash scene, the fires continued to burn. The smoke and the smell from the fires could be detected at least a mile from the crash site. Police, fearing that toxic fumes from the fires or remaining fuel might explode, cordoned off a large area around the crash site. Only a few ambulances could be seen leaving the area, all were driving slowly. The German tourists were scheduled to fly to New York and then board a cruise ship for a two-week voyage. There were two Danes, one Austrian, and one American. The airline says the American apparently was a retired Air France employee. Just a couple of seconds ago, a cream-colored truck, panel-truck, just made their way through the police lines here, going to the accident site just a few hundred yards away to begin the process of recovering the victims of the Concorde disaster. Now there is picture that's rather spectacular that bears note. It is taken by an amateur photographer as this plane was taking off from Charles de Gaulle airport. And you can see clearly in the photograph a stream of fire coming out of the back of the plane. Now this was taken just a few seconds before it attempted to climb, nosed up, apparently lost power, rolled over, and then flattened down on top of this small hotel here just outside of Paris. It is going to be a day, very cloudy, rainy day here, where investigators are going to try to recover the remains, taking them to a nearby temporary morgue set up in a theater in a small village just outside the airport Linda.
[Stouffer:] Tom Mintier, live from France, thank you very much.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] The Federal Reserve interest rate cuts are aimed at revving up the sluggish economy, but what do they mean for your financial bottom line? CNN's Valerie Morris looks at how the rate cuts affect you, the consumer.
[Valerie Morris, Cnn Correspondent:] During the last year, the Federal Reserve has cut interest rates six times. The aim? To stimulate the economy by making it cheaper for households and businesses to borrow money. Traditionally, lower interest rates give consumers the most help on mortgages and credit card debt. The Federal Reserve is expected to cut interest rates by at least a quarter percentage point, but financial specialists say consumers shouldn't expect much immediate relief. Here's why: Long-term mortgage rates are tied to the Treasury bond market and react in anticipation of fed policy moves, sometimes up to a year in advance. So as the fed began aggressively cutting rates last January, the popular 30-year fixed mortgage rate was well on its way to some of the lowest levels in years. David Berson of Fannie Mae says, don't expect a dramatic move in mortgage rates after today's expected rate cut.
[David Berson, Fannie Mae:] The impact on fixed rates is likely to be very little, but still, mortgage rates remain extremely low today low on a historical basis, so home buyers today are still getting a pretty good deal, even if mortgage rates don't go down when the Fed eases.
[Morris:] And what about credit cards? While traditionally it's consumers with fixed rate credit cards that miss out when the fed cuts rates, these days, not even variable rate card holders are guaranteed any relief. That's because some cards have already reached their rate floors, which are established by credit card companies as protection from interest rate cuts. About a quarter of all variable rate cards in the U.S. have these lower limits.
[Travis Plunkett, Consumer Federation Of America:] On your variable rate card, there is no ceiling. That is, they can charge rates as high as they want to, but there may be a floor. That is, at a certain point, if the cost of money goes way down, those rates will hit a bottom and won't go below it.
[Morris:] Industry observer cardweb.com says if the Fed continues to lower rates, more companies could add rate floors to their cards. Check the fine print to see if yours does. That's your money. Valerie Morris, CNN Financial News, New York.
[Phillips:] This year's interest rate cuts represent the fed's most aggressive action in nearly two decades, and still the economy is sputtering. Joining us to talk about whether the rate cuts are working is Rajeev Dhawan. He is director of the economic forecasting center at Georgia State University. Good to see you. Thanks for being with us.
[Rajeev Dhawan, Georgia State University:] Good morning. My pleasure.
[Phillips:] Let's begin. When do we actually see the effect of these cuts? Is there anyway to gauge it?
[Dhawan:] Yes, six to nine months minimum here in the decent impact on the rate cuts and already seen some impact in the interest rate sector. For example, the mortgage rates are down from last year and the automobile sales have gone up, because the financing is cheap. So we have already seen impact on two sides, which is the automobile sales and housing stocks, which have been doing very well. But we haven't seen what we call the job generation, the job growth, which we are looking for, which we call the recovery, which expect to come like in four or five month, you know.
[Phillips:] what about the loan generation? Does that have to catch up, too?
[Dhawan:] Yes. Once the loan catches up to borrow people to start the investments, you will have the job generation.
[Phillips:] Inventory correction, explain to this to me.
[Dhawan:] It basically means getting rid of the undesired goods from the shelves which you have stocked up a bit more. For example, every business keeps a little bit of products on the side in the warehouse to sell when there is a demand, and it takes a time a little bit of time before the production happens and then the good gets delivered, and then to keep a thing called the inventory. Once you have a little bit too much of that, to do a fire sale, like getting rid of it, and then only produce it more, and producing more means hiring more people and producing more job.
[Phillips:] Massive sale, right?
[Dhawan:] That's what you see. The sectors like the cars or the computers or even clothing, you know?
[Phillips:] Consumer spending is the clincher here, correct?
[Dhawan:] Correct. In my reporting, there was a title as to why us consumers don't lose our cool. We need to keep spending in the decent amount. Not like in the last couple of years, but we just have to keep doing our parts, because the businesses are going to take a while before they start revving up the capital spending which implies more capital businesses, which means more hiring. That I am seeing in a proper capital spending coming back in line maybe a year from now probably, but in the next six months, I want to see some job generation if my forecast is to come true, for us to spend a little bit more. And the tax cuts checks that are coming in and the rate cuts by the Fed before are going to help, bet we'll have to be a little patient.
[Phillips:] And in the past, just the notion that Greenspan was going to make the cuts, but it's much different this time around.
[Dhawan:] The last couple of times to cut the rates one was in '87 and one in '98 was the response to the financial loss in the market, when there was a loss of confidence in the market. At that point, the implied rate cuts or the statements by the federal bank have a more psychological impact in the market. Right now is the fundamental in the real economy. Too much production last year, the Fed was trying to control it, and now we have a little bit of loss in the confidence on the business side; it takes a while for it to come back. It's not a financial problem. Of course if you hold the tech stock, of course it's a different story. All right. Rajeev Dhawan, thank you very much. We sit patiently and wait.
[Phillips:] Thank you Leon.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] I don't know about that patient part. Professor Dhawan was talking about the consumer confidence. Economists say consumer spending has been keeping the economy going, but people's confidence in the economy is slipping. Joining us from Princeton, New Jersey: the man with his finger on the public pulse, Gallup poll editor-in-chief Frank Newport. Good morning, Frank. Good to see you again. Let me ask you first of all, what are you seeing in the polling that you guys having doing about how seriously the public is taking this right now, the problem with the economy?
[Frank Newport, Gallup Poll Editor-in-chief:] It's a good question. Our last August update we finished on Sunday, Leon, and I would say relatively speak not seeing the kind of concern that we saw back in the early 1990s. Look at this question, it's important to us. What's most important problem facing the country today? You can see the economy is number one; 50 percent of Americans mentioned it. Jobs are number 2 at 9 percent, and then off to other topics. Back in '91, '92, the economy was 40 percent mentioned, and jobs were like 25. So nowhere near that kind of concern that we saw in the '90s, but these numbers are slightly up this year, Leon.
[Harris:] What are you showing about how people will think that this will turn around or when it will turn around?
[Newport:] Well, we thought that we were seeing some optimism through July. We have been measuring this every single month and seeing the bottom lines of the percent that the economy is getting better, what you were talking about there, Leon. It had been 25, up to 35, and we said, a-ha, people were getting optimistic, and our hopes are shattered this month, so no sign yet that the consumer is saying, it's up, it's up.
[Harris:] What about the personal finances and ask that later on and asking the folks how they can save money? What are you seeing about that?
[Newport:] People are usually more positive about themselves than they are to pontificate about the economy in general, and sure enough find the same thing. This is the key question, rate your personal finances right now. That's a little bit over 50 percent in the top two boxes, and just about a third when they rate the national economy. But whether we track this over time, these kind of numbers still don't look very hot when people are rating their own personal finances, Leon. No uptick in these numbers.
[Harris:] All right. Good deal, Frank. We do appreciate that. We will talk to you later. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] In the cyber age, a click of a computer mouse can provide anyone with your address, Social Security number, credit card number, information a thief can use to cash checks or even charge purchases. But did you know just a bumper sticker on your car or even how you stand in line at the post office can make you an easy target? The federal government is holding meetings to craft legislation to help consumers. But Kevin McKeown, author of "Your Secrets are My Business," says consumers have to do more to protect themselves. Good morning, Kevin.
[Kevin Mckeown, Author, "your Secrets Are My Business":] Good morning, Carol.
[Lin:] Very interesting topic here and a big problem for many people. A quick definition of what an identity thief is.
[Mckeown:] An identity thief is any person that takes any small bit of information, your personal information, and misuses it either against you or to their gain.
[Lin:] And for many people, it's a surprisingly how quick and easy it is for them to do just that. You have some tips. We put up four them, and let's quickly go through some of them. For example, you say watch out for verbal crowbars. What does that mean?
[Mckeown:] Verbal crowbars are the little techniques that thieves will use. They'll bump into you, ask you for directions. A few simple sentences then turn into a question; a question of, oh, well, do you live far from here? or, are you going on vacation for a long time? That will provide the thief with information they need to either abuse your credit report and get credit cards under your name, or to violate your privacy and your personal information in numerous ways.
[Lin:] Well, you also say conduct a vehicle privacy check.
[Mckeown:] We're all guilty of this. The next time you park your car, just walk around it. See what is visible through the windows. Can I see a magazine that has a mailing label that will show me where you live?
[Lin:] But you also say a bumper sticker with, say, my kid's school name on it. My kid is an honor student at, you know, John Marshall Middle School can give away some...
[Mckeown:] It's not a Carol, it's not a good idea to advertise where you're going, where you can be tracked, where people can monitor your movement. They'll know that you might be going to parents night, you might be driving your kids to that school, how long it takes to get there. It gives them an opportunity to rip you off.
[Lin:] Yes, and you even said that one Taco Bell actually went into the parking lot and took license numbers for marketing information. People can get that off of your license plate?
[Mckeown:] Yes. Well, that's my biggest beef, is with license plates. We all need to become more license-plate conscious. Taco Bell thought it was pretty clever marketing-wise to make note of everyone's license plate number who came into their restaurants. And they turned those license plate numbers into a very focused and very detailed marketing list. So they knew what time you were going into Taco Bell and what you were ordering, and then they would focus their marketing efforts.
[Lin:] That's interesting. And you also warn people not to park in long-term parking lots because sometimes thieves go and get your license plate and get your address and know that you're out of town. Another quick point: You say don't stop your mail. I thought that was a good way to keep people from knowing that you were out of town?
[Mckeown:] It used to be. We recommend that people have neighbors, friends go by and pick up their mail because the clever thieves now in this cat-and-mouse game that we play, they now know if the mailman doesn't deliver your mail that your mail is stopped, and for probably a very good reason, and that is that you're out of town for a week or two and they'll just help themselves to whatever they want.
[Lin:] So the fewer people who know you're out of town the better. And earlier in the lead I mentioned how you stand in line at the Post Office. You also mention in your book that people flip out their check books, getting ready to write their checks for some stamps and people can see the address. So that's something to be aware of as well, right?
[Mckeown:] Exactly. We need to be more aware of the information we give out to everyone around us, and we need to be aware at home, at work, everywhere we go, because the information thieves don't need much to find out more about you and I that we probably remember over a period of time.
[Lin:] Remarkable. Thank you very much, Kevin McKeown. Great tips in your book.
[Mckeown:] Thank you, Carol.
[Lin:] And the last tip we made notice of here was be trash- conscious. Don't throw out, you know, credit card slips. Tear them up. And even don't even bother with a shredding machine because it attracts attention to your trash. They know that you've got something to hide.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] That's amazing.
[Lin:] Yes, things like this I didn't think about.
[Harris:] It's amazing what these guys will think of, boy.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] We are going to jump on over to the White House. Major Garrett, White House correspondent, is there with a developing story. What is it all about?
[Major Garrett, White House Correspondent:] Yes, Lou. Just a few moments ago, a fire alarm sounded at the Marriott Hotel here in Washington, where President Clinton was giving an address after the awards, the Malcolm Baldridge Awards. The president has been moved out of the building, as have many of the attendees. The president is in the motorcade, returning to the White House. He is safe. He at no time was in jeopardy of the fire, nor was the crowd, as we are told. The DC Fire Department has advised CNN that 12 units are on the scene dealing with the fire in the laundry room of the hotel. During the president's remarks, he heard the firearm, he made a joking reference to whether or not he should leave. Someone said, "Not yet." The president said, "That doesn't sound very good." For a while, he continued on with his remarks, and then was advised to leave the building. Secret Service then took control of the situation, has moved the president into the motorcade. he is on his way back to the White House, and everything appears to be in order Lou.
[Waters:] All right, Major Garrett at the White House.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] George W. Bush plans to be sworn into office using the same bible that his father used 12 years ago. There is more to the history of this bible. It is the same book used to swear in George Washington, Warren Harding, Dwight Eisenhower and Jimmy Carter. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist will swear in George W. Bush as the 43rd president of the United States on January 20th. What else is being planned for the 2001 inauguration? We are going to get some clues from the executive director of the Presidential Inaugural Committee. Jeanne Johnson Phillips is joining us from Washington. Good to see you. Good morning.
[Jeanne Johnson Phillips, Presidential Inaugural Comm:] Thank you very much. It's nice to be here.
[Kagan:] Is there going to be a theme to this inauguration?
[Phillips:] Yes. Absolutely, this is the 54th presidential inauguration, and our theme is celebrating America's spirit together. So, you'll be seeing that throughout the inaugural week, which officially begins on Monday the 15th, but of course the celebration begins on Thursday the 17th.
[Kagan:] And, as I understand it, you go way back with the Bushes. You know them quite well. You did the inauguration for the Bushes the last time he was sworn in as governor?
[Phillips:] Yes, that is correct. The first time. I did not do the second one.
[Kagan:] The first time. So what can you tell us about them and their style that will be reflected in this celebration?
[Phillips:] Well, I think that people can expect everything to be as authentic as possible. It will be traditional. It will be a lot of fun. It's really geared for the mom and dad and their two kids who come to Washington, and want to learn about their nation's capital and learn about the tradition of our passage of power, and how peaceful and beautiful it is. It's really a very simple ceremony on Saturday, during the oath of office. So I think you will see things that are traditional, but also a lot of fun. We expect to have a lot of a variety of entertainment, something for everybody.
[Kagan:] Tell us some of the entertainers who have signed on?
[Phillips:] Well, you know, we'll be announcing them formally later this week. But if you like Van Morrison, you will probably enjoy the opening ceremonies. You will have a lot of athletes, including Muhammad Ali and Lance Armstrong and Marion Jones. We have got we have been in discussions with Ricky Martin. He wants to come, and we want him to come, and we are hoping that the logistics all work out for him to be here as well.
[Kagan:] When I think Texas, and of course George W. Bush does pride himself on his Texas roots, I think big. So is there going to be a Texas...
[Phillips:] That is a pretty accurate assessment of Texas. It is big. And we have a big heart. Texans like to have fun. They love their country. They love their state. And we are very proud of the fact that we have now three presidents from the great state of Texas. So I think big is something that you can count on in describing this inaugural.
[Kagan:] We mentioned just a couple of minutes ago that George W. Bush will be using that same bible that his father used, and of course it has been some years since we Americans have had a fatherson act to follow in the presidency. Any other influence that we will see from the older Bushes, from President Bush and Barbara Bush?
[Phillips:] Well, you know, the Bushes are a great family, and they are very easy to work with, and it's wonderful to be a part of their team. I am very honored. I think you'll see a lot of events that are geared for American families. And that's really our hope, that all families can look at this as a day to be proud that we are Americans. That they can, you know, we have many stories as Americans that tell us who we are as a people, and those stories include all different kinds of people, from different parts of our country and different heritages. And so, we're looking forward to really bringing everyone together and really looking at where we are and where we're going, and we hope that everyone will join it. It's going to be a lot of fun. Many of our events are free, because we have a good underwriting program. So we're able to allow, you know, a lot of people to come at no cost. And we really hope that will encourage people to come out and be a part of things.
[Kagan:] A big part of the inauguration is the balls. How many are there going to be?
[Phillips:] We'll have eight balls, eight official balls. And that's a few less than we have had in the past. But they're in large venues so everyone should get excited about that. They should be very beautiful and wonderful evening.
[Kagan:] Is there one that is considered the ball?
[Phillips:] No.
[Kagan:] That would be politically incorrect to pick one.
[Phillips:] In fact, we consciously, we tried to make all of the balls very similar, so that there would not be, the ball. You know, in the beginning, we did have just one inaugurate ball. But now America has grown and we have a lot of people who want to participate. So they will all be pretty much the same.
[Kagan:] And finally, I got to say, I mean, your job would be hard enough as it is, but given how the can you hear me still?
[Phillips:] Yes, I can.
[Kagan:] I was going to say I was going to give you a little sympathy, your job would be hard enough as it is in any given year, but given how the election worked out this year, talk about a time crunch. How are you getting it all done in time?
[Phillips:] Well, first of all, I have about 400 very talented individuals who are working day and night, trying to make it happen. The city of Washington and the Congress and the Armed Forces Inaugural Committee and the General Services Administration and Park Service have all joined in to help us. And we really are just a lively group of optimists who believe it can all be done in 31 days. And so we are pressing hard.
[Kagan:] Well, you keep up the good thoughts. Jeanne Johnson Phillips, good luck with all the inaugural activities. We will see you up there in Washington,
[D.c. Phillips:] Thank you. I hope everyone will join us. Thanks for having me.
[Kagan:] We will be.

[Karuna Shinsho, Inside Asia:] Trafficking in human migrants is criminal enough. But our next story concerns an even more evil kind of crime, terrorism. A recent United Nations report says many terrorists are trained in the hot, dusty valleys of Afghanistan. But as INSIDE ASIA's Dalton Tananaka reports, some of them may have overstayed their welcome.
[Dalton Tananaka, Cnn Correspondent:] Welcome messages in Arabic and Urdu still clutter the Rishkul Camp in Afghanistan. Villagers say hundreds of fighters left the training facility near Kabul about a month ago.
[Unidentified Male:] We live here. Yes, Pakistanis and Arabs left here about a month ago. They had been doing physical exercise.
[Tananaka:] The Taleban denies it's running training camps for international terrorists. Leaders say bases like Rishkul are for their use only.
[Amir Mohammed, Taleban Base Commander:] We call our people here at the base before going to the front lines. If 2,000 men come, 1,000 stay here and 1,000 go the front line. When the fighters get tired, they come back and are replaced by a fresh unit. At the moment, we have here 300 volunteer soldiers.
[Tananaka:] Last month, the United States labeled Afghanistan the new haven for Islamic extremists. It says there is a trend toward non-state- sponsored terrorism coming from networks of religiously motivated terrorists. Washington says the Taleban provides a safe haven for like-minded holy warriors. It was the kind of attention that the Taleban would prefer to avoid.
[Mohammed:] We don't have any volunteers from any foreign country. They were never here in the past, nor now. Those in the camp are all Afghans serving their country. We have our own people here.
[Tananaka:] Witnesses say the fighters who are at the Rishkul camp have simply moved to new training grounds, leaving behind little hopes that words alone can keep terror at bay. I'm Dalton Tananaka for INSIDE ASIA.

[Vince Cellini, Cnn Anchor:] Millions of people in the U.S. are spending this Labor Day laboring. Among them, migrant workers whop harvest fruit and vegetables from American farms. Growers say they can't do without migrant workers. But it's not always a labor of love. CNN's Sean Callebs has more from a vegetable farm in South Carolina.
[Sean Callebs, Cnn Correspondent:] It's early. The sun is low in the Carolina sky. Already scores of migrant workers are doubled over harvesting the number one cash crop at the Walter P. Rawl farm, collard greens. There are about 100 migrants working here, some of the more than three million Mexican nationals earning a living in the United States. The reason, many can make as much here in one week as they can in a month or more in Mexico.
[Unidentified Farm Worker:] It is really important to send the money to my family. I feel really happy here. I am looking forward to December, to seeing my family.
[Callebs:] So, in the interim it's hours on end in the fields. The Rawl family farm has been part of the South Carolina landscape nearly 75 years. The difference between profit and loss can be whisker thin. Wayne Rawl says the ratio is helped by a plentiful, cheap workforce.
[Wayne Rawl, Walter P. Rawl And Sons Farm:] We supply a lot of jobs and we put a lot back into the economy, we think, into Lexington County and the state.
[Callebs:] Many of the migrants here have nearly a decade of experience at the Rawl farm.
[Unidentified Employer:] Hopefully they're going to want to keep coming back here and working with us. And that keeps us from having to retrain people year after year.
[Callebs:] Unions are trying to organize migrant workers out west. But there's no such effort in South Carolina. The Bush administration is working with Mexico to make migration to the U.S. safe and legal. But it's also keenly aware that it's a politically sensitive issue, not wanting to put workers in the United States at a disadvantage. I'm live now in Lexington, South Carolina. As large as this field seems, it's only going to take these workers a few hours to harvest all of these turnip greens. And they get more than minimum wage. The Rawl family also offers benefits, including insurance and 401K retirement plans. But don't mistake this entirely for generosity. The family says it just makes good business sense to do what they can to keep the trained workers and keep them from moving on. Live in Lexington County, South Carolina, I'm Sean Callebs Vince, back to you.
[Cellini:] All right, thank you very much, Sean.

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] How big a tip should you leave when you dine in a restaurant? In New York City, a city-devised tip sheet could make the decision easier now, and we are going to get the bottom line on that from Michael Musto, a columnist for "The Village Voice," who's in our New York bureau. Mr. Musto, thanks for coming in.
[Michael Musto, "the Village Voice":] Thank you for having me.
[Frazier:] The tip sheet is put out by a city agency. This is a public institution. Is that right?
[Musto:] Yes, the Department of Consumer Affairs. And these are just recommendations, but I'm immediately rejecting the whole thing. I mean, this couldn't come at a worse time.
[Frazier:] Why are you rejecting it.
[Musto:] First of all, I'm cheap, OK? Remember those signs that said "Tipping is not a city in China"? I disagree. It is a city in China; it's a lovely city everyone should go visit it. But we shouldn't be tipping that much here, because the economy, in case people haven't noticed, is on the verge of a major downslide. All the excessive spending of '90s is going bye-bye.
[Frazier:] When you talk, let's show a little picture of what they're recommending here. In the restaurants, I understand, the guidance is now 15 percent to 25 percent of the meal, but subtracting the cost of the tax. 25 percent!
[Musto:] That's like my rent. That's absurd. Call me crazy, but I always felt like 7.5 percent was OK. Fifteen percent is a high end, and 20 percent is absolutely, incredibly insane you're ready for a straitjacket. And 25 percent?
[Frazier:] Would anything occasion a 20 percent tip on your part, if you received amazing service? Isn't that what you're doing, rewarding service?
[Musto:] It would have to be some kind of sexual favor, like Nathan Lane just said, and also tickets to "The Producers." There is nothing that deserves 25 percent. And some of the guidelines call for tipping people that don't even usually get tipped at all shuttle bus drivers. They're practically saying you should just run through the street throwing money to the wind.
[Frazier:] Sometimes when you're visiting New York it feels like that's what you do, if you come in from out of town.
[Musto:] Well, I'm not a tourist. I live here, and if I tipped everybody 25 percent, I'd be in a hole very quickly and have to tip my way out of it.
[Frazier:] I must point out, too, although we didn't have that on our picture on the full screen, they're also talking about tipping the wine steward who they go on to say is the sommelier and the captain, if he happens to come by and make something at table for you. So there are all sort of guys showing up.
[Musto:] Just popping out of nowhere to say, Don't drink red wine with fish give me 25 percent. No! You're not getting anything out of me. And if I want red wine with fish, I shall have it.
[Frazier:] Right. What about when you go to a hotel? They're saying $1 per bag for the bellhops. What else $1 for the chambermaid that seems pretty reasonable. I think that's been a longstanding guide.
[Musto:] Well, to be fair, I'm being a bit crumudgeonly. I do think professionals deserve to be tipped, and you do have to tip those people $1 actually sounds cheap to me. If it sounds cheap to me, that's really on the low end.
[Frazier:] Especially when you think of how these bags are packed these days. You'd have to throw your back out every time you tried to hoist one. And then taxies, too: 15 percent to 20 percent, but only if you encounter a courteous English-speaking driver, which in New York, I think, is getting to be a pretty rare breed.
[Musto:] Yes, well that sounds a little racist to me, like should you reward them for knowing the language. That doesn't bother me at all, if they don't. I do think you should also bring your Dustbuster and your Berlitz guide into every cab, and then just tip evenly, 2 percent.
[Frazier:] Wouldn't you give more if you get the traditional five- borough tour that they give to outsiders, like me?
[Musto:] If you're going on a percentage basis, that would come into the thousands of dollars.
[Frazier:] That's right. I'll take you to all five boroughs, and you'll be happy, and you'll like just don't fall asleep in the back seat you never know where you'll end up.
[Musto:] They also want you to tip doormen. Of course you have to tip doormen if you live in a doorman building, which I do, but I happen to have 12 doormen because it's 24 hours around clock. There are about 12 porters. Come Christmastime, I'm hocking my furniture just to pay these people little bonuses.
[Frazier:] Right, I thought that was the only time, at the end of the year envelopes are flying.
[Musto:] The rest of the year, they're on their own.
[Frazier:] That's right. It's confetti time in New York. Well, Mr. Musto, thanks for joining us, and good luck as you dine out in New York.
[Musto:] Thank you. Do I have to tip you?
[Frazier:] No, no, this one's a freebie.
[Musto:] Great. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Karuna Shinsho, Asia Tonight:] Pope John Paul II is urging Christians to intensify their prayers for peace in the Middle East. He made the statement after hearing about the Israeli teenagers found bludgeoned to death in the West Bank. The Pope is preparing to leave Malta for home, after completing a trip that took him to the Holy Land. Jim Bittermann looks at the Pope's journey.
[Jim Bittermann, Cnn Correspondent:] Here, one Catholic volunteer said, the Pope is among family. And indeed, after four days of travel through not always religiously friendly territory, John Paul II ended his trip on a Mediterranean island where the Apostle Paul was shipwrecked, where divorce and abortion are still illegal and where 98 percent of the population is Roman Catholic. Perhaps the reason the most part of the 380,000 people who live on Malta came out for papal Mass. To the delight of the Maltese, John Paul used the occasion to beatify three of their own three especially devoted Catholics from Malta who now have been launched on the path toward sainthood. The Pope, who has now beatified well over 1,000 saints during his 23-year reign, seems intent on giving even the smallest of nations a saint who they can identify with and look up to. [on camera]: The Maltese, the Pope said, are in the center of the Mediterranean and in a unique position to build bridges to other peoples. And in many ways, that's what this papal trip has been all about. [voice-over]: In Greece, John Paul trying to build bridges to other Christians. In Syria, he reached out to Muslims. Ill and often tired, the Pope continues to lay the groundwork for relations, which the Vatican spokesman says will become a part of the heritage of the church.
[Joaquin Navarro-valls, Vatican Spokesman:] I cannot deny that he is tired. He is very tired. But at the same time, public opinion should focus on what he's achieving with those trips, and achieving not only for the Catholic Church and not only in the fate of relationship of the Catholic Church with different other faiths or religions, like Islam, but for humanity as such with that message of tolerance, mutual confidence and so on.
[Bittermann:] At the end of this trip, as never before, questions were raised about how much longer John Paul can physically continue traveling. The Vatican confirms there are at least two more trips in the planning stages for this year to the Ukraine and Armenia. And more travel next year. "He has decided to do it," said the Pope's spokesman, "and he will do it." Jim Bittermann, CNN, Malta.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] More now on the speech last night. And talking to the folks around the country, you've heard a lot of people talk about support for the president's speech, especially the parts and the areas where he summoned a sense of patriotic fervor. Leon Harris standing by with some workers at a place where patriotism is literally manufactured. He's in St. Charles, Illinois, at a flag factory there. Hey, Leon, red white and blue everywhere, huh?
[Leon Harris, Cnn Correspondent:] You got it, Bill. That is a great way of putting it, patriotism being manufactured right here. As you can see, J.C. Schultz Flag Source Company here. They are the nation's No. 5 flag maker. And as you can see, they are hard at work here. They have got a back order their backlog goes back six months now from now you're going to have to wait to get a flag from this company. And we have been here talking throughout the morning with different folks here on the floor about their reactions to the speech last night. And now I want to we talked a bit about the economy and about the war earlier, but, you know, there were a couple of other items that also came out of that speech last night. And Ben and Beth are back here on the floor to share some more thoughts with us. First of all, what did you all think about the idea that President Bush introduced last night, about a call to service for all Americans, get to donate some 4,000 hours or two years of their time. Do you think that is the kind of call people will answer?
[Unidentified Male:] I think it is. I think it was a very critical issue that he addressed. And I think that since 911, Americans have been coming forward. They have been giving of their time. And I think that is going to continue. I really feel that we are going to continue to develop and I for one know that I want, you know, to do more than even what I am doing now. And I think that America is going to respond.
[Harris:] Yes, do you even have time to give two years of your time? Beth, I know you are very busy.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, but I think it is something that, as an American, that we need to do, whether, you know look the people in New York that helped out after 911. I mean, they found time, you know, to give.
[Harris:] All right. Do you think people can find the patience needed? President Bush last night did not say this war is going to be over any time soon, and we know the economy is still, right now, in first gear. Do you think people are going to have the patience to wait both of those situations out?
[Unidentified Female:] I think we are going to have to be reminded that we need the patience. From the very beginning, he said this was going to be a, you know, a two to three or four month war and we have to be continually reminded that the terrorists you know, the war on terrorism is a long project. And we just have to be patient and know that he is going to do the right thing for the country.
[Harris:] All right. And how about for the economy?
[Unidentified Male:] I think it has got a good effect on the economy. I think we can I think it's going to be slow moving, but the primary objective right now is the homeland defense and really concentrate on that. And I think that is what we need to stay strong and stay focused on and I think the economy will come back once that is the main effort.
[Harris:] All right. Thanks, Dan. Thanks, Beth. You know, Bill, that kind of confidence is the thing that we have been hearing over and over again. As much concern as there is right now about the economy, more folks are concerned about homeland security, and everyone is thinking that if you do not take care of that, the economy doesn't need anything. So, there you go. We have lots of support for President Bush here, but lots of folks are waiting to see what is going to happen next. Back to you, Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right, Leon, thanks. And a great point too. Leon Harris there watching the red, white and blue in Charles [sic], Illinois. Leon, thank you.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] So whom do you admire the most? Ask that question of Americans, and you'll likely hear the same name over and over again. Gallup Poll editor-in-chief, Frank Newport, joins us this morning from Princeton, New Jersey with the results of a new poll Frank, take it away.
[Frank Newport, Gallup Poll Editor-in-chief:] Miles, this is our classic question we've actually been asking for over 50 years: Who is the man living that you admire most anywhere in the world? And who is a woman living that you admire anywhere in the world? Let's show you the results. This is the positive side of whom Americans tell us right now they're admiring. We'll go from the bottom up here for the top five list. Billy Graham, Bill Clinton and Tony Blair, 2 percent mentioned these not a lot. But that puts them in the fifth place on our overall list, and we can go up from there. Pope John Paul II 3 percent mentioned. Rudy Giuliani "Times" Man of the Year he comes in third in our most admired list at 4 percent right there. Coming in in second place this year, Secretary of State Colin Powell. And overwhelmingly the most admired man by Americans this year, President George W. Bush. I'll come back to this 39 percent overall mention him. What about on the female side of the ledger? Well, we can look at it again politically. It's National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice and former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher low numbers, but nevertheless, they come in at fifth place. Former First Lady Barbara Bush comes in here, then talk show hostess, Oprah Winfrey, the third most-admired woman in America. Senator, former First Lady Hillary Clinton in at 8 percent, and then our current first lady, Laura Bush, comes in beating Hillary Clinton at, Miles, 12 percent. So it's the first lady and the president, most admired man and woman this year Miles.
[O'brien:] You've got to give Margaret Thatcher some credit for staying power there on that poll. I'm curious, Frank, over the years, how frequently have presidents topped that poll. Is it fairly often?
[Newport:] Yes. This is, again, top of mind, so the first lady and, of course, the president, as you mentioned generally not always, but generally do come in first. At 39 percent for George W. Bush this year, however, Miles, is the highest percent that any man has ever gotten in the history of the Gallup Poll. So Bush is just overwhelmingly most admired this year. Of course, 86 percent job approval rating is not surprising given what's been going on since September 11 Miles.
[O'brien:] Frank Newport with the Gallup Poll thank you very much. We appreciate it interesting poll. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] We begin this hour with new beginnings: seven babies, one mother. The five boys and two girls were born last night at Georgetown University Hospital in Washington. And it's a story not without some controversy. We get the whole story now and a checkup on the babies from Rea Blakey Rea.
[Rea Blakey, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Natalie, we're told that these seven babies are being attended by a medical SWAT team, so to speak. It's a group of six team members that includes a neonatologist, a respiratory therapist, a nurse, a pediatric resident. These babies are being well guarded. And the hospital was well prepared for their arrival. They went through a number of dress rehearsals to make sure that everything would go as smoothly as possible as you mentioned, five boys, two girls. And at this time, we're told that the mother in good condition.
[Unidentified Doctor:] If they were to grab my finger, their hand would just barely go around it.
[Blakey:] The doctors say all of them are in critical condition in the neonatal intensive care unit. All but the smallest girl are on ventilators.
[Dr. Siva Subramanian, Chief Of Neonatology:] We are not out of the woods in terms of you know, as far as the babies, it's a great start.
[Blakey:] The babies were created through a process called ovulation induction.
[Unidentified Doctor:] Virtually all fertility drugs overcome the natural tendency of the human female to produce one egg per month.
[Blakey:] It was seven weeks into the pregnancy when the woman's doctor saw she was carrying seven babies.
[Dr. Mutahar Fauzia, Community Physician For Mother:] I said, "God, help me." I swear to God I'm not telling you a lie. There it was. I was and I meant it. And I explained the severity of the situation at that time to the parents.
[Blakey:] The family is Muslim and chose not to reduce the number of babies. But some fertility experts consider the birth of these seven babies to be treatment failure.
[Eric Widra, Shady Grove Fertility Center:] I think that high- order multiple births are as much a failure of treatment as no pregnancy is in fact, in many ways, more so.
[Blakey:] That's because of the risk involved. Natalie, we're told that the mother may likely be discharged sometime early next week. The babies will remain in intensive care for the next several weeks. The care of this endeavor, the doctors say, will approach something on the order of $1 million.
[Allen:] Oh, my. Hope they have insurance. Thank you, Rea Blakey in Washington.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to turn it to Washington, now, where officials of the Red Cross are holding a briefing. The short story here is they are offering some money back. Let's listen for details.
[David Mclaughlin, Chairman Of The Board, American Red Cross:] counseling to those who were in need of it. It is what the American Red Cross does. Also, Harold Decker, our CEO, was on the site at Rockaway yesterday afternoon to provide his support and encouragement to those. So it was another sad and difficult day for this country and certainly for New York. Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, the people of this country have given to the Red Cross certainly their hard-earned dollars, their trust and very clear direction for our relief effort. They have made it abundantly clear to us that the Americans want 100 percent of the funds directed to support the people who were affected by the September 11 attacks. And while our relief efforts have always put those affected by the disaster as our very first priority, we also followed a plan to prepare the American Red Cross for other weapons of mass destruction incidents. These were plans that were developed before September 11. But it has been made increasingly clear that there is a significant gap between the focus of our efforts and the expectations of the American public. And regrettably, it took us sometime, somewhat longer than I think probably it should of, to address that creditability gap. But today we are making a course correction for the Red Cross Liberty Disaster Fund. One hundred percent of that fund and our efforts will be devoted to support those who are affected by the terrible tragedies that occurred on September 11. And with this action, we hope to restore the faith of our donors, the trust of the American public and to empower thousands of Red Cross workers and volunteers on the front line to devote themselves to their relief efforts and to help make those who were affected by the tragedies their lives better. We have already touched 25,000 of these individuals and we will continue to work at it. Disaster relief is difficult work, but it is what the Red Cross does and does well every day of the year. This has been a disaster of unprecedented dimensions. It presents unique challenges to this organization. We do not always get it exactly right, but we are a transparent organization and will make the changes when it serves the interests of the American public that we do so. Harold Decker, our CEO, will explain those changes. But before I turn to him, I should point out that Harold assumed his CEO role two weeks ago, and I'm sure for him that seems like a long, very long time. He has provided very strong leadership in this intervening period. He made a quick examination of the current policies of the Red Cross. He identified problems within the Liberty Fund. They developed solutions to those issues. They were presented to the full executive committee and the board of governors last weekend who approved them unanimously. I am delighted that Harold is on the job. He's helping steer the Red Cross in a way that serves the interests of the American public, but also victims of the disasters which occurred on September 11. So with that, Harold, we turn this over to you. I turn it over to you, but with my very sincere thanks.
[Harold Decker, Interim Ceo, American Red Cross:] Thank you all for coming this morning, and thank you, David. Let me say at the outset that David's leadership has helped bring this organization together in the past two difficult weeks which was necessary before we could consider a change in course. David, I thank you for your leadership and for the leadership of our volunteer board of governors; 50-person board of governors, and your strong endorsement of our new direction. I want to say now that America has spoken loudly and clearly and that America wants our Liberty Relief efforts directed solely at the people affected by the September 11 tragedies. We deeply regret that our activities over the past eight weeks have not been as sharply focused as America wants and the victims of this tragedy deserve. The people affected by this terrible tragedy have been our first priority and beginning today, they will be our only priority. In addition, we will move more money to the families of the victims quickly by extending Red Cross' family grief program to cover a full year of basic living expenses and by providing payments for the next six months before the end of this calendar year. We will also make it easier for people affected by the tragedies to get help by creating a database with other relief agencies and public officials that will greatly improve coordination as we respond to the terrible events of September 22, 2001 [sic]. With these changes and the commitments planned, we project by the end of this year the American Red Cross will have spent $275 million overall in support of people effected by the disasters, about one half of the $543 million that has been received to date in the Liberty Fund. Now, let me give you some more details of these changes. First, as to the Liberty fund. As I mentioned, we will narrow the focus of the Liberty Fund; a segregated fund established to respond to the September 11 terrorist attacks, and going forward, the Liberty fund will be used exclusively to meet the immediate and long- term recovery needs of the people affected by the attacks of September 11. That means that three programs initially included in the Liberty fund activities the strategic blood reserve, community outreach program and the armed forces services program will not be funded by the Liberty Fund unless donors made such designations. We will find other sources of funding to continue those valuable programs. We are not going to abandon our armed forces, we're not going to abandon our efforts to make a safe and available blood supply, and we're not going to abandon our efforts to outreach to the community, but we are going to make every effort to fund them in some way other than the Liberty Defense Fund. It also means that all of the Liberty funds will be used to meet the needs of people affected by September 11 disasters; none of it will be reserved for future events. Also, the direct support costs of the Liberty Defense Fund, including such items as toll free lines that have been used to locate victims, will be covered to the extent possible by the interest earned on the Liberty Fund income. Let me also reiterate that the Liberty Fund will remain a separate segregated fund. As we announced a few weeks ago, we have stopped the active solicitation of fund-raising for the Liberty Fund, because we believe that we have enough money to meet the immediate and long-term needs of people affected by the disasters. Finally, the fund will be independently audited by the accounting firm of KPMG, and we have also invited the United States Army Audit Agency to participate in the audit process. Second, as to the Family Gift Program. As many of you know, the Family Gift Program provides tax-free cash gifts to families of victims to help them pay basic living expenses, like housing, food and utilities. Families only have to fill out a one-page, single-page form that tell us what needs they have now. The Red Cross then verifies the identities and sends out checks, working with our social workers, often within 48 hours. In the first weeks after the disaster, we identified nearly 3,000 families of victims, and most about 2,300 applied for and received three additional months of living expenses three months of living expenses. We will now extend this program for up to one year and will send checks before the end of this year to cover the next six months of expenses for all families of victims who need this support. We estimate that this will total about $111 million in additional support.
[O'brien:] We've been listening to the CEO of the Red Cross, Harold Decker talk about narrowing the focus of that Liberty Fund, under public fire. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to begin with a shocking story, a deadly rampage that erupted into a running gun battle with police. This started over the weekend in Sacramento and it ended early this morning when, authorities say, a former security guard suspected of killing five people shot and killed himself. CNN's James Hattori has been following this. He joins us now from Sacramento live the with details James.
[James Hattori, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Leon. A 24-hour man hunt ended culminated, rather, with a standoff and a gun battle here in eastern Sacramento County. The suspect, 20- year-old Joseph Ferguson, a laid off or rather suspended Burns security guard died apparently of a self-inflicted gunshot. The citizen tip led police to this location at about 11:30 last night. Officers converged on Ferguson's car. A brief chase led to an a tense shootout, Ferguson firing as many as 50 rounds. A CHP officer and bystander were wounded.
[Lt. Sam Somers, Sacramento Police:] Upon seeing our units getting close to him, he immediately began a pursuit which ended into a gun battle between ourselves and him. And during that gun battle, the Mr. Ferguson, ultimately shot himself, which is what we believe right at this time, gave himself a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
[Hattori:] Now, all this took place after the suspect apparently killed a fifth victim yesterday, another former co-worker at Burns Security. Police believe Ferguson shot three other Burns Security guards, including ex-girlfriend Saturday night; plus, a city park employee was the fifth victim. During yesterday's manhunt Ferguson made a videotape indicating he was not going to be taken alive, saying something to the effect he was going to go out in a blaze of glory. Leon, I'm not sure there was any glory here in any of this, just the story of sad, tragic, very disturbed young man. His five victims and their families now grieving. Leon, back to you.
[Harris:] Thanks, James. And that's very understandable. Let me ask you something quick, if I can, before we go here. The police have had time to talk to his other co-workers, any idea about why he may have been targeting them?
[Hattori:] They're not sure why they targeted why he targeted specifically those people. Obviously, his girlfriend, he had broken up, he was distraught over that; she was one of the victims. As for the other Burns employees, they're just speculating as to the motive. The one city employee who was killed apparently was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
[Harris:] Yes, thanks much. James Hattori, reporting live this morning. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Let's bring Greg Clarkin of CNN Financial News. He is tracking the markets from the Prudential Securities trading floor. He is joining us live from New York. Greg, good morning.
[Greg Clarkin, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Daryn. Very, very choppy trading here this morning, and what we are seeing is the Dow coming back strongly, the Nasdaq coming back off its early session lows really. Now to give us sense as to exactly if the morning has turned out the way a lot of folks expected it is Ash Rajan. he is with Prudential Securities. He is one of the market strategists here. Ash, give me some sense, early on, is there anything you can discern about this market, where it is going to today?
[Ash Rajan, Prudential Securities:] You know, everything is coming together, you have margin selling, you have tax-related selling, also there will be some redemptions from the funds, all of it coming together in one session. Yet it is too early to tell if all of that is manifesting this morning. you have this little rally now. The important thing is, does the rally hold? It is the quality of the rally that we are watching to see if we can build a consolidation or a bear phase?
[Clarkin:] Ash, quickly, have you seen any kind of psychological change over the last week in investors?
[Rajan:] Clearly, we are getting closer to the capitulation, we are getting closer to the panic, we are getting to the fear. All of these are good to get back to the sentiment change. Two weeks prior, we were complacent, now we are certainly, and that is good sign for the shift.
[Clarkin:] Ash Rajan, thanks very much. That is the situation here at Prudential Securities in Lower Manhattan. Greg Clarkin for
[Cnn. Kagan:] Greg, thank you. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Michael Holmes, World News:] Elian Gonzalez remained out of sight on Tuesday. United States officials announcing that the 6-year-old Cuban boy and his family left an Air Force base for new housing. But the political fallout from the case has only intensified. Attorney General Janet Reno met with Trent Lott, the Republican leader of the U.S. Senate, to defend her decision to use force to take the boy from his Miami relatives. And a strike by Cuban Americans shut down parts of south Florida. In Cuba, too, the case continues to be headline news. CNN's Havana bureau chief Lucia Newman reports.
[Lucia Newman, Cnn Correspondent:] Elian Gonzalez may be happily reunited with his father, but that, according to Juan Miguel Gonzales and Cuban officials, is not enough. Even before leaving Cuba, Mr. Gonzalez had requested that a support team including 12 of Elian's first-grade classmates, his teachers and several medical specialists be allowed to go to Washington while Elian waited for a federal appeals court ruling. Now officials say is the time to establish what they call the minimum conditions for a normal life around Elian.
[Ricardo Alarcon, President, Cuban National Assembly:] If everybody agrees that we should be guided by the best interests of that child, well, nobody has condemned that child not to play, not to study, not to have a normal life. Nobody could. And that's why we believe that precisely because he's not returning immediately to his home and to his school and to his natural atmosphere, that he should have something of that being brought to Washington.
[Newman:] Last month, the State Department issued visas to Elian's 10-year-old cousin, his kindergarten teacher and a pediatrician who, according to Cuban government sources, will now go to the United States to join Elian. Now Washington has agreed to grant visas to four more youngsters, accompanied each by a relative. The State Department, however, is calling them Elian's playmates, not classmates, in a clear attempt to distance itself from the Cuban government proposal to re-create a school environment for Elian for the duration of his stay in the United States. [on camera]: Washington says a two-week stay is adequate for a visit by playmates. Cuban officials respond that while they're still studying the State Department's announcement, they want more visas and for a lot longer. Lucia Newman, CNN, Havana.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] One of the big questions this hour that we're exploring, is it too risky for older women to have babies? Well, this morning a new study suggests the decision to wait could put their babies at risk. The study analyzed births in Alberta, Canada and found that in 1990 less than 10 percent of infants were born to women over the age of 35. Now, this is where everything changed. By the year 2000, that number had actually doubled. In the U.S., 13 percent of births in the year 2000 were to women 35 or older, up from 8.9 percent in 1990 and 4.5 percent in 1980. So, why are women waiting and what are the risks they and their babies face? Dr. Suzanne Tough led the Canadian study. She joins us now from Alberta this morning. Also with us, Michelle Giuisana, who gave birth to her daughter two and a half years ago when she was in her early '40s. She joins us from Buffalo this morning. Welcome to both of you. Glad to have you with us.
[Michelle Giuisana, Mother:] Good morning.
[Dr. Suzanne Tough, Alberta Children's Hospital:] Good morning.
[Zahn:] So, Dr. Tough, we just shared some of the statistics about the age of women giving birth and how dramatically that has changed over the last 10 years. What seems to be the main reason why they're putting off having babies?
[Tough:] Well, from focus group work that we've done with women, they tell you that they're waiting for a number of reasons. One, they're waiting to finish their education. They're waiting until they have a career established. They're waiting until they've done some traveling, often. And, importantly, they're also waiting until they have a relationship that they feel comfortable in.
[Zahn:] You also explored the risks that women over the age of 35 face and we're going to put some of those risks up on the screen now. Among them, an increased risk of birth, premature birth and multiple births.
[Tough:] Exactly.
[Zahn:] According to your study, babies born to women over the age of 35 are 20 to 40 percent more likely than the general population to have low birth weight babies, 20 percent more likely to have premature babies, 20 percent more likely to have twins or triplets. You want to add anything to that?
[Tough:] No, that's exactly right. They are more at risk of having a baby that's of low birth weight and preterm, or preterm delivery. And these babies are more likely to end up requiring some kind of intensive care or special care after they're born.
[Zahn:] And what are some of the birth defects that parents should be aware of by putting off having children?
[Tough:] Well, I don't know that we're looking specifically at birth defects. And that's not what this study looked at. What we do know, though, is that children that are lower birth weight are more likely to have problems after they're discharged from the hospital, as well. So these children are more likely to have to go back to the hospital for a checkup or to see their family physician more frequently. They're also more likely to require special assistance at school, whether it's speech and language pathology, whether it's phys- ed skills and motor delay or whether it's even delay in social aptitude.
[Zahn:] Michelle, let's talk about your situation. When did you have your baby? At what age?
[Giuisana:] I was 42 years old, almost 43.
[Zahn:] And how concerned were you about having a baby at that late stage of your life?
[Giuisana:] Well, I think I was concerned but primarily with my ability to become pregnant. We had had a lot of attempts, worked with a lot of fertility doctors and it did not look like it was ever going to happen. When I did become pregnant, I think we were so happy to be pregnant we weren't really concerned about risks during pregnancy or during labor.
[Zahn:] And how did you do?
[Giuisana:] Well, as it turns out my baby was born late. I was showing no signs of going into labor. The baby was becoming non- responsive. When that happened, they tried to induce me. There was a lot of difficulties inducing me. When I went into labor, my blood pressure went up very high, was spiking into stroke range. They took my husband aside and told me to be prepared for the worst.
[Zahn:] So I guess it's pretty easy for us all to understand why you call your baby your miracle daughter.
[Giuisana:] Absolutely. Fortunately they were able to give me an epidural and my blood pressure went down. And both my daughter and I are doing very well. But it could have been very scary.
[Zahn:] Michelle, I know you talked about your concerns about your ability to actually conceive at that age. How well aware were you of some of the potential birth defects your daughter might carry if she followed some of these statistics?
[Giuisana:] Well, I think the only one I was really aware of was the risk of Down's Syndrome and we had an amnio to see how she was doing and she was doing great. So we actually felt that things were going to go very well for us.
[Zahn:] Dr. Tough, a final word of advice this morning for women in this country who are thinking about having children now at the ripe old age of 35 plus?
[Tough:] Well, I think my final word would be that the idea is that women have as much information as possible so that they can make the decision that's right for them, so that they're aware and they talk to their health care provider and they can best understand what they want, what actions they want to take for their life.
[Zahn:] Well, Dr. Tough, I appreciate your coming on to help us better understand your study. And Michelle Giuisana, congratulations to you and thank you for getting up this early to join us this morning.
[Giuisana:] Thank you.
[Tough:] Thanks so much.
[Zahn:] Good luck to both of you.
[Giuisana:] Thank you.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] With that, we go from Chelsea Clinton to Donald Rumsfeld and the daily Pentagon briefing. Let's listen in.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Of Defense:] First I want to express my condolences to the families of the two Marines that were killed in the helicopter crash in Afghanistan over the weekend and certainly to their five injured comrades. The sacrifices that these young men and women make defending freedom is deeply appreciated by me and by all the folks in the Department of Defense and in the country, and certainly our hearts go out to their families and their friends. Next, I'd like to take a few minutes, probably a little longer than normal, and talk a bit about the detainee situation at Guantanamo Bay and try to put some perspective on the subject, the implication being that it needs some. First, let me say that our troops are handling a tough assignment in a very professional and truly outstanding way. They're doing a first-rate job. The allegations that have been made by many from comfortable distance that the men and women in the U.S. Armed Forces are somehow not properly treating the detainees under their charge are just plain false. These are fine well-trained young men and women who are serving our country well and it is a disservice to them to suggest anything to the contrary.
[Rumsfeld:] I think it bears reminding that these young men and women in uniform volunteered to serve in the military and to defend our country. They come from communities all across this nation. They're from all stratums of society. They're all races and religions. They went to high schools with your children and mine, and they're fine people. They're doing a job that is difficult and dangerous. They're very well-led by their commanders. And let there be no doubt, the treatment of the detainees in Guantanamo Bay is proper, it's humane, it's appropriate, and it is fully consistent with international conventions. No detainee has been harmed. No detainee has been mistreated in any way. And the numerous articles, statements, questions, allegations, and breathless reports on television are undoubtedly by people who are either uninformed, misinformed, or poorly informed. The detention center in Guantanamo Bay has gone from nonexistent to a temporary facility. Current facilities are just that, they're temporary. They didn't exist a few weeks ago. They will be replaced in the months ahead with a more permanent facility, as it becomes possible to determine the size and the scope of the problem. Today, which is, I think, just something like two short weeks after the activity began, the more than 150 detainees have warm showers, toiletries, water, clean clothes, blankets, regular culturally appropriate meals, prayers mats and the right to practice their religion, modern medical attention far beyond anything they could have expected or received in Afghanistan, exercise, quarters that I believe are something like 8 by 8 and 7 12 feet high, writing materials and visits by the International Committee of the Red Cross. These men are extremely dangerous, particularly when being moved such as loading or unloading an aircraft, buses, ferries, movements between facilities, movements to and from showers and the like, during such periods the troops properly take extra precautions. Lest we forget, in Mazar-i-Sharif, the Al Qaeda prisoners broke loose in a bloody uprising. They killed one American, they killed a number of Afghan troops and some prisoners were carrying grenades under their clothing. In Pakistan, some Pakistani soldiers were killed when prisoners revolted while they were being moved by bus, sometime after the Mazar-i-Sharif uprising. At least one detainee now in Cuba has been threatening to kill Americans. Another has bitten a guard. This is not wonderful duty. It's a difficult duty. To stop future terrorist attacks, we have detained these people and we have and will be questioning them together additional intelligence information. A word on the legal situation about which there also seems to be considerable interest: Whatever the detainees' legal status may ultimately be determined to be, the important fact from the standpoint of the Department of Defense is that the detainees are being treated humanely. They have been, they are being treated humanely today, and they will be in the future. I'm advised that, under the Geneva Convention, an unlawful combatant is entitled to humane treatment. Therefore, whatever one may conclude as to how the Geneva Convention may or may not apply, the United States is treating them all detainees consistently with the principles of the Geneva Convention. They are being treated humanely. Lawyers must sort through legal issues with respect to unlawful combatants, and whether or not the Taliban should be considered what the documents apparently refer to as a, quote, "high contracting party" or in plain English, I think a government the Department of Defense will leave those issues to them. General Pace?
[General Peter Pace, Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs Of Staff:] Thank you sir. On behalf of General Myers and all of us in uniform, we'd just like to join with the Secretary in expressing our condolences to the families of the two Marines who were killed in the C-53 accident over the weekend. And we wish a speedy recovery to the five men who were injured in that accident. And with that, we'll answer your questions.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, you intimated that people who criticized the conditions of detainees are charging that military people, that individual members of the military are mistreating these people. Aren't these charges that U.S. policy is unfair and inhumane, and that these people are being kept in 8 by 8 outdoor cells for an indeterminate time? Do you plan any immediate changes to these policies?
[Rumsfeld:] There are so many charges that it's hard to categorize them, but I've seen in headlines and articles, words like torture and one thing and another, which is just utter nonsense. The policies of the United States government are humane and the way the prisoners the detainees are being treated is humane. So regardless of whether one wants to look at it from one perspective or another, in any case, there are no instances where detainees have been treated in any other than a humane way.
[Question:] Other than the ongoing construction of the new facility, do you plan any immediate changes to the treatment of the...
[Rumsfeld:] We're always we're always available for improvements, and every day that that center has been since the order was given to establish that detention center, it has improved every single day over the past several weeks. And it will, I ensure, every day from now on as they move toward the more permanent facility which probably would take several months to construct. But there is nothing inhumane about the cells that are being used at the present time. They have a roof. They have the materials and items that I've mentioned, and they're being treated properly. Yes?
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, why not call them prisoners of war? And you're indicating that that's some legal debate. Are you not concerned that this could somehow come back and haunt the United States in potential future treatment of American soldiers who are taken in whatever condition so that a future entity could say to the U.S., "You didn't abide by the Geneva Convention on this. You didn't call them prisoners of war. Why should we"?
[Rumsfeld:] Well, first of all, we are as I said giving them that the treatment that is appropriate under the Geneva Convention.
[Question:] In principle, you said.
[Rumsfeld:] We are. I mean, we simply are doing that. Now, I don't I think that the legal questions I'm going to leave to the lawyers as to why they prefer one characterization as opposed to another. My understanding of the situation is that one of the higher purposes of the Geneva Convention was to distinguish between legitimate combatants and unlawful combatants lawful combatants on the one hand, and unlawful on the other. And the reason for doing that was that they felt that a higher standard should be provided and given to people who, in fact, wore uniforms; who, in fact, were fighting on behalf of the legitimate government; who did carry their weapons openly; and who did do those things that men and women in the United States armed forces do, as a matter of course, were insignia indicating who they are. The importance of it, if you think about, to the extent you blur the distinction between people who are lawful combatants, that is to say, men and women in uniform, and innocents, who are civilians. And you try to behave and conduct yourself by not wearing uniforms, by not carrying your weapon openly, by not carrying insignia of that, you're trying to suggest that you want the advantages that accrue to an innocent, a civilian, a noncombatant. That was a concept, I'm told, in the Geneva Convention, which is very important. So in direct answer to your question, no, I don't think that anyone will confuse U.S. men and women in the armed forces and treat them any differently, because they merit standing. The second issue, I'm told, is complicated. And again, I'm not a lawyer, and I don't really spend a lot of time engaging in these issues. They're terrific people in the Department of Justice and in the White House and in the general counsel's office who worry through these things. But the issue of what is a country and what isn't a country is something that gets debated. And I think most people would agree that the Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization. It's not a country. And to give standing under a Geneva Convention to a terrorist organization that's not a country is something that, I think, some of the lawyers, who did not drop out of law school, as I did... And that's what the process is that's going on.
[Question:] There is, of course, the issue of when is the U.S. and you have said repeatedly that's it's an open-ended question at this point when the U.S. is going to accuse them of something, charge them with something, specify something, which is the body of law that rules American citizens and, in most other situations. Thus far, that has been kept a gray area...
[Rumsfeld:] Well, not really well, I don't deny that the criticism runs the gamut across the entire spectrum. And the fact that people raise those things I think is fine, and it elevates the discussion and people can talk about them. But the reality is that they have been charged with something. They have been found to be engaging in battle on behalf of the Al Qaeda or the Taliban and have been captured. And we have decided as a country that we'd prefer not to be attacked and lose thousands of lives here in the United States and that having those people back out on the street to engage in further terrorist attacks is not our first choice. They are being detained so they don't do that. That is what they were about. That is why they were captured, and that is why they're detained. Go back to any conflict, when there is a conflict and people are engaged in a battle and some win and some lose, some are dead and some are captured, the ones that are captured are detained. They are kept away from the battle. They're kept away from killing more people. Now that is not an unreasonable position. I think anyone in uniform would find it a perfectly reasonable conclusion.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary....
[Rumsfeld:] Tell you what I'm going to do. I am going to stay here and answer as many detainee questions as need to be answered, so I'll try to work my way through the room. I don't know that I'll know the answers to all the questions, but if I don't, we'll find them, because it seems to me it's time to tap down some of this hyperbole that we're finding.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, is John Walker being treated the same way as the other detainees...
[Rumsfeld:] Yes.
[Question:] Shackled, hooded...
[Rumsfeld:] Oh my goodness, now, look, is he being treated like the other detainees, shackled, hooded and what have you? Uh, well, let me say this about that. I will repeat what I said in my opening comments. When people are moved, they are restrained. That is true in prisons across the globe. It is not anything new. It is because in transit, movement from one place to another, is the place where bad things happen. That's what happened in Pakistan when the Pakistani soldiers were killed, in the uprising in the bus. And will any single prisoner be treated humanely? You bet. When they are being moved from place to place, will they be restrained in a way so that they are less likely to be able to kill an American soldier? You bet. Is it inhumane to do that? No. Would it be stupid to do anything else? Yes.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, there was a debate yesterday in the British Parliament I happened to notice on cable T.V....
[Rumsfeld:] Oh, I read some of that. It's just amazing.
[Question:] Well, it was interesting. And one of the comments made was that the handling of John Walker in the United States has been different from the handling of the others and that this demonstrated that the United States would not treat one of its own people the way that it has treated these others, and I would ask your reaction to that.
[Rumsfeld:] Well, I mean, it's amazing the insight that parliamentarians can gain from 5,000 miles away. I don't notice that he was handled any differently or has been in the past or is now. He was wounded, so he was treated. There are many other people who were wounded, and they've been treated. They are being treated in Guantanamo Bay, very well, excellent medical care. And you know, I just can't imagine why anyone would suggest that he's been treated any differently from anyone else.
[Question:] Will he be put in an 8 by 8 cell that has no walls but only a roof?
[Rumsfeld:] Just for the sake of the listening world, Guantanamo Bay's climate is different than Afghanistan. To be in an 8 by 8 cell in beautiful, sunny Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is not inhumane treatment. And it has a roof, they have all of the things that I've described, and how each person is handled depends on where they go, and Mr. Walker has been turned over to the Department of Justice. He will go where they want him. He will not go to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. What kind of a cell he is put into is up to the prison that he is held in during the period that he's being processed through the criminal justice system of the United States. And any suggestion that the United States is providing preferential treatment to people depending on which country they came from, I think would be false.
[Question:] There are three British apparently, three British citizens at Guantanamo Bay. Can you clarify, did the United States tell the British government before moving these detainees from Afghanistan to Guantanamo Bay that we were taking this step?
[Rumsfeld:] I don't know. The United Kingdom is working very closely with us. They have a liaison in Tampa, Florida. They're part of the coalition. They're leading the International Security Assistance Force. People talk at multiple levels with the UK everyday of the week, everyday, just continuously. And do I know whether someone called them up on the phone and said, "Gee, we're thinking of doing this, that or the other?" I just don't know the answer to that. You could ask them.
[Question:] Well, they apparently have stated. They claim that they weren't told and they seem pretty upset about it. And I'm just wondering...
[Rumsfeld:] They. Who's they?
[Question:] Several members of the British parliament are claiming that the British government...
[Rumsfeld:] They are not the government. "They," is the U.K. government. And if I'm not mistaken, I read that Prime Minister Blair and other representatives of the government said things quite the contrary to what you're saying.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, I have a question, but before I ask it I'd like you to think about, since you're talking about the detainees, you may want to get to this in a minute or so. You said that the al Qaeda is a terrorist organization not a government. And yet, even though it's not elected, the Taliban was a de facto government of Afghanistan. I know you understand that there are some Taliban principles. But my question, although it may sound parochial, has, perhaps, a farther reaching implications. There's a company called Evergreen International Aviation General Pace, you may want to check this; but if you know it, jump in, Mr. Secretary from the town of McMinnville, Oregon, that wants to send a 747 loaded with 175,000 pounds of relief supplies to Afghanistan. And according to the company, it has been preventing from doing so by the Defense Department and the FAA. Any comments on that?
[Rumsfeld:] Well, first, I know nothing about it. Second, the Defense Department is not in a position to prevent anybody from flying into Afghanistan. People fly in there all the time.
[Question:] Can I ask General Pace to maybe check...
[Rumsfeld:] Country after country sends things in. Company after company send things in. NGO after NGO send things into Afghanistan. How anyone can suggest that the Department of Defense is prohibiting them from doing it, I can't quite imagine. But I simply don't know enough about it. Do you?
[Pace:] I do not, sir. We'll find out.
[Question:] Last week, Friday, the U.S. military took into custody six Algerians in Bosnia, not directly related to the combat under way in Afghanistan. Can you explain, in previous renditions, usually the civilian law enforcement agencies FBI and the like have done these renditions, under what authority do the U.S. military have to take those six individuals into custody and then transport them to Guantanamo, after they were released by the Bosnian government for lack of evidence against them?
[Rumsfeld:] I think we'll have to get you an answer on that. I don't know that it's correct that always they have been through civil side. I think that, in fact, there have been renditions that the military has been involved in previously, even during my time.
[Question:] Usually, however, there is an element of civilian authority involved in those renditions, if I'm not mistaken.
[Rumsfeld:] Yes, I'd have to check on that, but my recollection is that it's been done both ways.
[Question:] And a follow-up, if in fact, as you say, these prisoners are being treated humanely, that's certainly not the perception in some quarters. Is there a concern that the U.S. will somehow lose the high moral authority in this war on terrorism, by the treatment of these detainees and any subsequent rendition such as the one with the Algerians?
[Rumsfeld:] Well, I guess I'm I think the truth ultimately wins out. And the truth of the matter is, they're being treated humanely. And people down there are fine young men and women, and the commanders are talented and responsible people. And the work that's being done to create facilities that are appropriate is moving forward with dispatch. And I think that the American people will see that. Indeed, I think the people of the world will. You know, it's perfectly possible for anyone to stand up and say, "Henny penny, the sky is falling, isn't this terrible what's happening," and say that and have someone else say, "Gee, I view with alarm the possibility that the sky is falling."
[Question:] Mr. Secretary...
[Rumsfeld:] The facts of the matter are there. They're clear. And I think that there's no question but that if someone looked down from Mars on the United States for the last three days, they would conclude that America is what's wrong with the world. America is not what's wrong with the world. America is not what's wrong with the world. And what's taking place down there is responsible, it's humane, it's legal, it's proper, it's consistent with the Geneva Conventions and after a period that will sink in, let there be no doubt.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, you've mentioned a couple of times as a matter of fact, it's been the first criteria you've mentioned, in making the distinction between lawful and unlawful combatants wearing uniforms and insignia. Weren't there times when U.S. troops, special forces and others, wore native garb in Afghanistan and did not display insignias and uniforms?
[Rumsfeld:] You'd have to talk to everyone who was ever in there. It's perfectly proper for someone in the military to wear something that is appropriate to a climate or a circumstance. That's why there are multiple criteria. It isn't just, do you happen to have a hat that's different than the hat you normally wear or you happen to have a scarf around you in a sandstorm or if you're riding on a horse, do you happen to have something over your military trousers? The answer is sure you can. That's why there's a series of things one looks to and it's how they carry their weapon, whether they've got insignia, whether they are reasonably, clearly combatants as opposed to civilians and noncombatants. Is this roughly right?
[Pace:] Yes, sir.
[Rumsfeld:] Terrific.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, you mentioned earlier that Cuba has a beautiful climate, but as you know, in a few months it's going to be very, very hot down there and there is going to be more complaints about them being held in open conditions like that. And also, again, going back to some of the criticism, the criticism being the open- ended nature, that they are going to be there for an undetermined period. How would you again respond to that?
[Rumsfeld:] I don't know how many times I've been to Guantanamo Bay, but it's a lot, and it frequently was in the summer when I was a Navy pilot and that was back in the days before air-conditioning. And it's just amazing, but people do fine. I've also been in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in a hurricane, and that is not a nice thing. But that's hard on anybody, no matter where you're living, what you're in, a cinder block house or whatever. So that is a bigger worry for me, quite honestly, than the temperature.
[Question:] ... issue about being there for an undetermined period. I mean, this goes also the question of prisoners of war. If they were prisoners of war and the operation ended in Afghanistan, you'd have to release them.
[Rumsfeld:] Or charge them.
[Question:] Right.
[Rumsfeld:] Right. And I would think that one could reasonably assume that they will be the case here, that at some point they will either be charged or released. At the moment, it's been two weeks since they've been there. The war on terrorism is not over, the effort. These people are committed terrorists. We are keeping them off the street and out of the airlines and out of nuclear power plants and out of ports across this country and across other countries, and it seems to me a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
[Question:] I want to go back over a couple of points, because you just said at some point these people will be charged and previously you were quite adamant that they already had been charged. So the question is...
[Rumsfeld:] Well, not legally charged. They have been found to be people shooting in Afghanistan who have been captured. Now, that is something. That is why they're off the street.
[Question:] What I don't understand is, this has all been going on certainly for much longer than two weeks, and you said several times that you were basically leaving this to the lawyers, that you weren't especially getting involved in this. But yet, with all due respect, you seem really quite annoyed here today and quite involved in the details. So how...
[Rumsfeld:] Just trying to answer the questions.
[Question:] We're just asking them. How do you move this forward? What have you said to your lawyers, or administration lawyers, about getting this resolved, either getting these people charged into the criminal court system, into military tribunals? How do you avoid the prospect of the U.S. military in fact being jailers for an indeterminate period of time of people who have not been charged? What are you going to do about it?
[Rumsfeld:] It is certainly not the first choice of the Department of Defense to be in the business of detaining people for long periods of time. I think, as I mentioned before, and I'll just do it very briefly, a number of people have been processed, identified, interrogated and turned back to Afghanistan forces. A number have been turned back to Pakistan forces. A number have been received from Pakistan and given back. We now have people from, you know I don't know, probably two or three handfuls of countries different countries. And my first choice would be for many of those to end up back in their countries to be processed through their systems, whatever they may be. We, undoubtedly, will end up processing some through the criminal justice system. I wouldn't be surprised if we did some through the Uniformed Code of Military Justice, and I suspect there will be some military commissions. I mean, I'm sorry to have to say it again, but those are questions for lawyers. Those are questions for people to work through, and they are working through them. And it is not as though it has been a long period of time. The process of gathering intelligence information is still going on. The process of gathering law enforcement information is still going on. And during that period, it seems to me, that the world and certainly the American people can fully understand that the task is to keep them from killing more people. And that is why they are being detained during this period that we're doing the interrogations. That seems to me to be quite reasonable.
[Question:] What techniques are you using to encourage these people to talk to their interrogators? Why should they talk to the interrogators? Can you offer them anything?
[Rumsfeld:] I have no idea what they do. I'm sure that what they do is what they do in the criminal justice system. They get good at it. And they figure out ways they can ask them questions. And I would assume that it's possible that they can offer them things. I don't know what.
[Question:] Can you offer them deals? Can you offer them plea bargains? Can you offer...
[Rumsfeld:] I'm not a lawyer and I'm not in to that end of the business. The most important thing for us, from our standpoint, is gathering intelligence. Yes?
[Kagan:] As you can see, we are tracking two different live events at the same time. You have the Pentagon briefing on the left side of your screen and President Bush speaking in Charleston, West Virginia. Right now, the president just making a lot of welcoming comments. When he begins his remarks, the main part of his remarks, we'll bring him in live and listen to that. Right now, back to the Pentagon briefing and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
[Question:] ...feel entitled to hold them at Guantanamo purely for intelligence-gathering, even with no intent to charge them?
[Rumsfeld:] A lawyer will end up deciding what is appropriate and what's not appropriate by way of periods of time. But certainly, we feel not just entitled, but an obligation to try to gather intelligence about future terrorist attacks and how the network functions. And that is what we're doing.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary?
[Rumsfeld:] Yes?
[Question:] One, if you have list of countries that these people are being held from? And two, if you have any comments from General Musharraf that he claims that Osama bin Laden and Omar Mullah bin Laden, he may have been killed from kidney disease? What I'm asking is, sir, why he's making claim now after
[Rumsfeld:] I don't claim victory. There is still a lot to do in Afghanistan. As we all know, it's a dangerous place, and let there be no doubt about that. There's still a lot of Taliban and a lot of Al Qaeda running around, and people are still getting killed. I do have a list of countries. It changes everyday It changes every day as to how many are from each country, and as people are given back and the process is completed with respect to people, the numbers change by country as well as in the aggregate. With respect to the issue of Osama Bin Laden's health, I just don't have any knowledge. I read what you read in the paper, and I can't I'm sorry, I can't add any texture to those reports. Yes?
[Question:] With regard to the helicopter accident over the weekend, you've now lost, I believe, 4 helicopters in Afghanistan, a B-1, a C-130. There was an accident aboard the Theodore Roosevelt with a plane crash landing. Here at home, you have the carrier Kennedy delayed in its departure because of material problems. Are we seeing a breakdown in the material readiness of U.S. forces? Are you taking any immediate steps in terms of shifting this money in this budget to try and address that?
[Rumsfeld:] Pete, you've been underutilized today.
[Pace:] First of all, with regard to the crashes and the air crash, we do not yet know for certain in each of those cases what the problem was. We do know, the best we are able to tell by what we've seen at the crash sites, that they did not involve any kind of enemy firepower. Having said that, the conditions under which these pilots are operating is really very, very difficult. Think about going into a landing zone, flying a helicopter. You've never been there before in your life. It's dark, you're wearing night-vision goggles, and you have a dust storm that's created by your own helicopter's prop-wash. It's unfortunate that we have crashes of that nature, but it's also a very difficult business that we're about. Do not misplace the reasons for these accidents. They do not make it a readiness issue. It is in fact very, very fine soldiers and Marines doing their jobs in a very difficult environment.
[Question:] With regard to the Kennedy in particular, the allegations that superiors in the chain of command were well aware of the problems with aboard that ship, and that steps were not taken to address it. Is there going to be any inquiry into those allegations or are you satisfied with what the Navy's done in terms of replacing the skipper?
[Pace:] Not sure exactly what the problems you're talking about with the Kennedy, but I can tell you that the Kennedy is going to deploy sooner than she was suppose to. So whatever time line she was on to get prepared for normal deployment has been shortened, and therefore, the kinds of things that normally happen during the pre- deployment period are not happening with the amount of time they normally have. Yes?
[Question:] Taking off on your better balance of the four risks, let's kind of generalize this from the other question. Secretary Rhodes spoke last week about how the whatever the homeland defense Air Force operation is eating into training time and so forth and so on. That's the kind of thing that historically, you know, the services will do; when they're deployed overseas, things just have gone down, readiness has gone down. Has your new approach embodied in the QDR been trying to get a better balance among the risks to the force, the risks to OPTEMPO and operation risk? I mean, are you doing anything are we far enough along in this operation that you or the joint staff feel it necessary to do something to somehow shore up the effect of the operation the ongoing operations on readiness for other things down the road?
[Rumsfeld:] Well, let me respond and then Pete can add a comment. We began September 11 and the budget was being built during that period of September, October, November, early December. A supplemental will be going in at some point, one would think, depending on how events play out. I feel that the process has been taking into account the stresses and strains on the force, and you're quite right, they're significant. The fact that we have had to put in stop orders on people departing, the fact that we have had to add large numbers of Guards and Reserve back to active duty and God bless them, they're just doing a wonderful job you're right, training and exercises go by the board in large measure, but not totally. On the other hand, what these folks have been engaged in is also important and the experience that they're gaining in every aspect of the armed services by their role in this war on terrorism can be also enormously beneficial to them, to their training, to their competence and to the readiness. We are doing everything we can to mitigate the stress and strain on the force. But you're quite right, it's not trivial.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, you've been reluctant to release the names of who as far as detainees who we have in custody. Why is that? And in general...
[Kagan:] Meanwhile, right now we go back to the Pentagon briefing and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
[Rumsfeld:] Well, Iran has a long border with Afghanistan. And these tribes have moved between the two countries for centuries. And there's no question but that they have attempted to influence Afghanistan, and particularly the western portion, in the past, in the present, and one would think prospectively in the future. One would hope that they would do it in a way that is benign relatively benign and defensive, as opposed to offensive and intrusive. The reports about delivering lots of weapons there is not a happy report. I think one has to realize that countries along a border do have an interest in that country. How worried am I? I think anyone who has reviewed Afghanistan's history has to be concerned about its future. It has been a difficult and untidy and hostile environment for a long time. There are a lot of people there who have differed with each other from different sections of the country, and even in the same sections of the country. We know there are still Al Qaeda and Taliban lose. We know there's criminals, and we know they were active in the drug trade in that country. So there's a lot of people there who have interest that they're trying to further and advance other than good government. And the new government has that responsibility. And we're working with them. The International Security Assistance Force is working with them. The process is going forward. And I think all we can do is everyone in the world who cares and wants it to go well to see if we can by providing the kind of food and assistance that will be helpful, and encouragement that we can help them launch a government that will have some stability and be able to impose some order in the country.
[Question:] I grew up in South Florida and my mom never turned on the air-conditioning, and I'm here to tell you it was torture.
[Rumsfeld:] Would you please refrain from using that word? Look at you, you've survived admirably.
[Question:] I moved up North. You said earlier that accepting the construct that these are, say, prisoners of war, and therefore able to be detained for the length of the war. My question is, length of which war is this the battle in Afghanistan, is this the global on terror? Because at the opening days you said that could last for five or 10 years. And then, also could you tell us what benefit does the Defense Department get out of not formally charging them now? Is there some kind of constitutional protection that would apply that would prevent you from being able to get the kind of intelligence that you need if you were to formally charge them and start putting them through a legal process?
[Rumsfeld:] I don't know enough of the legal technicalities to answer your question. I know that the process of gathering the intelligence information has not been concluded. And that seemed to us, and quite reasonably to me, to be sufficiently important from the standpoint of the American people and our forces deployed overseas to stop further terrorist attacks that that is what we have been doing. I'm sure that the lawyers will figure out at what point it's appropriate to bring charges to people. For the moment, I'm just pleased that they're detained and off the streets and not killing people.
[Question:] And you haven't established end of global war on terrorism or end of battle in Afghanistan as the marker?
[Rumsfeld:] No. No. Those are issues that will get sorted out as we go ahead.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, actually a question for the general relating back to the question about civil war. There's been reports of fighting over the past few days in Kunduz between factions of Dostam and Rabbani. I was wondering if you can explain what's going on there and whether a situation is developing that could be dangerous for the interim government.
[Pace:] I don't have the specifics on that. I can tell you that we will continue to work with each of the tribal leaders to get to the point where the things that we are doing in Afghanistan alongside them are good for both the United States and for Afghanistan. And the battlefield will continue to be fluid, there will continue to be very dangerous places on that battlefield. But I don't have the specifics of your question.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, is it a fair summary of what you're been saying today that the prisoners are being treated well but that swift administration of justice is not a priority for you, that your first priority is security and intelligence? And you keep saying, you know, leave it to the lawyers, as if it wasn't really very important, the administration of justice.
[Rumsfeld:] No, I don't mean to suggest it's not important. It is important. Let me summarize. I think that's a useful thing to do. There is no question but that people that are being detained by the United States are being treated humanely. They are being treated in a manner that's consistent with the Geneva Convention, whether or not they merit that kind of a treatment. That is what the United States does, that's what the kind of people we have in the armed forces do, is treat people decently. And suggestions to the contrary are misinformed at the minimum. Second, you're right. The concern that the Department of Defense has had and from the outset has been to do everything humanely possible to stop terrorists from killing people and to gather as much intelligence information as we can so that we learn more and more about these terrorist networks and the people that are financing them and the people that are harboring them and the people that are actually committing terrorist acts, and that is pure, simple self- defense of the United States of America. And so, those two things are correct, if that's roughly what you said, which is pretty roughly what you said.
[Question:] A swift follow-up. Are the facilities that you're designing to be built at Guantanamo being designed with an eye to long-term incarceration not only for these detainees, but potentially for future detainees in future chapters of the war on terrorism? I mean, is this going to be
[Rumsfeld:] That kind of thought has not been given to it. What they are is well, the contract is being considered right now in the building but what they would be is not something that would last 100 years, if that's what you're wondering. These are facilities that would have walls and a back and a roof and open into a hall with a mesh very much like a prison cell, and they would be semi- prefabricated that would be moved down there and then erected relatively quickly.
[Question:] With air-conditioning? Mr. Secretary... ... are there people of Chinese origin and do you plan to send them back to the Chinese government?
[Rumsfeld:] I don't recall whether there are still any Chinese. There certainly have been reports of Chinese Al Qaeda-related people both in Afghanistan and in Chechnya. Whether we have any in tow or not, I don't recall.
[Question:] ... people said you have Chinese people... Can you give us a list of the countries that are included in the detainees?
[Rumsfeld:] I didn't bring it with me. We might be able to. The problem is, it may be inaccurate. This is what they're saying. It isn't what may be ground truth, and there's an awful lot of what they say that is not ground truth. Yes?
[Question:] Number one, has Walker been transferred today?
[Rumsfeld:] Walker is at some point in the days ahead going to arrive in the Northern District of Virginia, and I don't really pay much attention to precisely when he leaves, what location. And it depends on whether he goes from here to there, to here to there, and he ends up here.
[Question:] Can you give us any progress report on the whole issue of where the tribunal structure is, and when that might be a reality?
[Rumsfeld:] Well, certainly I can. There's no one that the the President has assigned no one to be treated in a military commission. Therefore, its status is it's not operative at the moment. We will, we have come very close to working through some preliminary judgments as to how they might operate. Those are now being discussed with a variety of different people. I've had several meetings on it. They'll come back to me with the views of those folks, and then we may announce something. We may wait until someone's assigned. I just don't know, but at the moment, there's nobody...Yes?
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, since you want to clear the air about the detainees, one of the things that have aroused public opinion and the parliamentarians in Britain is this photograph that shows the detainees kneeling with their hands tied behind their back. Can you just explain that-
[Rumsfeld:] I will, to the best of my ability. It's probably unfortunate that it was released. It's the tension between wanting to meet the desires of the press to know more and the public to know more, and what that was, I'm told, is not a detention area. That is a corridor or a walkthrough area that came my understanding is something like this. When they're on the airplane, they wear earpieces because of the noise. You've ridden on these planes. They're combat aircraft. And we've all worn earpieces. It's no big deal. There were a number who had tested that were worried about tuberculosis. So in a number of instances, they were given masks for the protection of other detainees and for the protection of the guards. They come out of an airplane, and their back lowers, and they walk out. And then they loaded them into, I believe, buses, and they took them down to a ferry, and they were still restrained their hands and their feet restrained because of the dangers that occur during a period of movement. They put them on a ferry, if I'm not mistaken, and the ferry takes them across to the other side of the Guantanamo Bay. They get off of the ferry and they get into something that then transports them to the detention center. They get out of that vehicle and in relatively small numbers are moved into this corridor that is a fenced area, and they are asked to get down on the ground. They get down on the ground, and they take off their ear pieces. They take off their masks. They do whatever they do with them before taking them in small numbers into the cells where they then would be located, at which point they are no longer in transit and, therefore, they are no longer restrained the way they were. What happened was, someone took a picture and released it apparently, of them in that corridor kneeling down while their headpieces are being taken off and people drew a whole lot of conclusions about how terrible that was, that they're being held in that corridor. Now, you know, if you want to think the worst about things, you can. If people want to ask questions and find out what is reasonably happening, it seemed to me not an unreasonable thing, when you're moving them from the vehicle they're in towards their cells to have them stop in some area prior to that and do what you do to get them in a circumstance that's more appropriate for being in a cell than how they were arranged in the buses, the ferries and the airplanes. And I think you're quite right, I think that a lot of people saw that and said, "My goodness, they're being forced to kneel," which is not true.
[Question:] You said it was unfortunate that that photograph was released. I would just argue that it was unfortunate that it wasn't released with more information.
[Rumsfeld:] Maybe. That's fair.
[Question:] The lesson here ought not to be...
[Rumsfeld:] I mean, I'm not blaming anyone for releasing it, but...
[Question:] ... less information or withholding photographs, but simply releasing more information...
[Rumsfeld:] Fair enough.
[Question:] ... so we can make better judgments. And Mr. Secretary, would it be more beneficial to provide more open access to the media to allow the media to see for itself how these prisoners are being treated to convey that information? You've spent now nearly an hour trying to explain what's going on there when, over the past couple of weeks, if the media would have had more open access, the stories that you're telling today would have been perhaps better told over the past couple of weeks.
[Rumsfeld:] You mean the facts that I'm presenting...
[Question:] Exactly.
[Rumsfeld:] As opposed... I though that's what you meant.
[Question:] The facts as they've been conveyed to you, because you yourself have not been there yourself. So do you think it would be more beneficial if there were more open access to...
[Rumsfeld:] Aren't there a lot of people down there?
[Question:] Well, but they're not allowed any access or any access to the detention facilities themselves.
[Rumsfeld:] Let me just try and do this, and then I'll come back. My recollection is that there was something in the Geneva Conventions about press people being around prisoners and not taking pictures and not saying who they are and not exposing them to ridicule, which is the genesis, as I understand it, of the convention requirement. So I don't know what the rules are. But my impression is, there are an awful lot of people who've been press people who've been to Guantanamo, who have seen the facilities. And I don't know that a single one who's been there has seen a single thing that was inhumane. All the reports about all of these problems are coming from people who've not been there. They're not from the press who were down there, that I've seen, or at least the press that are inside the area.
[Question:] I just returned from there.
[Rumsfeld:] Did you? Good.
[Question:] But we couldn't get closer than about 150 yards away, and even with binoculars, it was very hard to see from outside what was going on. And I understand the rules about photography...
[Rumsfeld:] Wasn't I roughly right? Not just photography...
[Question:] I mean, all we could see if they weren't wearing orange, we would not have been able to see anything, pick out anything. And wouldn't it be I mean, if we could have gotten closer to them, we could actually see, not with pictures, but that the reporters could have actually seen close up what that compound looked like, because we were really too far away, and we only were there for a couple of hours. And the rest of the time reporters are kept on the other side of the bay. We were basically penned up ourselves, not able to see. So, I mean...
[Rumsfeld:] Oh, now that'll be a news story.
[Question:] I mean, is it possible to get reporters closer, still being underneath, you know, the Geneva Convention?
[Rumsfeld:] I don't know. I just don't know the answer.
[Question:  Rumsfeld:] Yes, we will look into it. My recollection is that, getting reporters, with or without cameras, in close proximity to prisoners is considered not fair or right with respect to the prisoners from the prisoner's standpoint not from my standpoint, but prisoner's standpoint under the conventions. I tell you what. It's been a full hour in about two minutes.
[Rumsfeld:] Why don't we take you and then one other in the back, way in the back?
[Question:] Let me ask you a weapons of mass destruction type of questions. Yesterday, there was a report from the U.N. monitoring group in Afghanistan that said Taliban and Al-Qaeda had VX and sarin nerve gas, short-range missiles or they may have, they said short-range missiles to...
[Rumsfeld:] Who said this?
[Question:] The U.N. monitoring group in Afghanistan. They said they had short-range missiles on which these warheads could go, and they had artillery that could be used for this type of weapon. I want to know this runs a bit contrary to what you've been saying up there from the podium. What's your reaction to the report, and if it's not accurate, what is the state of play on weapons of mass destruction?
[Rumsfeld:] Well, first a fact it is factually correct that it is possible to take both ballistic missiles and artillery pieces and weaponize them for use with weapons of mass destruction.
[Question:] Do they have that capability?
[Rumsfeld:] Not to my knowledge.
[Question:] No indication of radiological sill no indication of...
[Rumsfeld:] That's the kind of question I just don't like to answer, because we've located correction, we've identified something in the neighborhood of 50 sites that we have been systematically tracking down, and we are at varying stages in that process where we're up in the 40s, high 40s, as to the ones we've gotten into. A number of the early ones are concluded, and in those instances, there has not been hard evidence of weapons of mass destruction capability. There has been evidence of WMD interest in a variety of different ways. Second with respect to the middle group that we've been in, but we haven't brought closure on, there are a number of samples that are in a variety of locations around the world being examined to try to determine whether the first indications are right or wrong as to what might or might not have been in those sites.
[Question:] They have come to a conclusion that is virtually antithetical to what you're saying. I mean, they're saying sarin and VX is there, or likely there.
[Rumsfeld:] First of all, you've got to remember who they are.
[Question:] Which base was it...
[Rumsfeld:] No, wait a second. The U.N....
[Question:] ... group in Afghanistan.
[Rumsfeld:] Well, maybe let's put it this way, I am very conservative. I try to be very careful. I try not to say things that I don't know, that I can't prove, that I can't back up. And I can't back up their claim. Why don't we have people ask the U.N. about their claim and see if they can back it up. I just don't I just can't. Do you know anything I don't know?
[Pace:] No, sir.
[Rumsfeld:] A lot... ... but I meant on that subject. No, wait a second.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, another follow-on about detainee treatment. Over the last several days the International Committee for the Red Cross has been holding individual interviews with the detainees...
[Rumsfeld:] Yes, they still have people down there.
[Question:] ... for a period of time and they're still continuing that. Are they, so far, from what you're getting, in full agreement with your assessment of the treatment of the detainees andor are they making recommendations for changes that they see are needed there?
[Rumsfeld:] Well, this is an unusual situation. I'm told by the people in Guantanamo Bay that the arrangement they have with the International Committee of the Red Cross is that the International Committee of the Red Cross is happy to do what they're doing. They're given free access. They had a larger team there initially, some have now left and they are going to be reporting at some point I don't know, a week, week and a half, whatever it takes to somebody and who it is, I don't know; whether it's the Pentagon or whether it's the forces in Tampa is probably unlikely more like Miami, the SOUTHCOM, that has the jurisdiction for it possibly the people in Guantanamo. They have not done so yet. I have not talked to them. And I think it would not be wise for me to try to characterize these people. They're professionals. This is what they do. They go around and look at prisoners and make judgments about their treatment and I'm sure they're perfectly capable of characterizing what they found in their own good time. I am telling you what I believe in every inch of my body to be the truth and I have spent a lot of time on secure video with the people down there. I have talked to people who have been down there and come back and I haven't found a single scrap of any kind of information that suggests that anyone has been treated anything other than humanely, not withstanding everything we have read and heard over the past three days. And last question.
[Question:] Question for General Pace. As you know, a sizable number of Canadian forces are going to need to fly into Kandahar to serve alongside the 101st Airborne. Reportedly, the Canadian forces have been issues little reference cards that give them the rules of engagement. And I'm wondering what is the potential for their being Canadian rules of engagement and U.S. rules of engagement, and that posing problems? And what is the command structure between the Canadians and the U.S. in the Kandahar deployment?
[Pace:] The potential for confusion is always there when you have more than one country on the ground. For example, the international force that's in Kabul has 10 countries. So anytime you have military forces together that come with different guidance from their country, is the first thing that commanders on the ground do is make sure that they are, in fact, understand what each other's forces are allowed to do and understand the rules. It's not so important that they all have the exact same rules. It is very important that everyone understand the rules under which each country is allowed to operate.
[Rumsfeld:] And this is true in the air, it's true on the sea, as well as on the ground. And it has been something that has been addressed throughout the Operation Enduring Freedom, with respect to ships operating in close proximity and aircraft flying together.
[Question:] Mr. Secretary, can you release the name of the countries being held there?
[Rumsfeld:] I said I would what?
[Question:] Name the countries
[Rumsfeld:] I said I would look at it. My problem with it is, I don't know if they're telling the truth and it's
[Question:] Can you tell us more about this time with no air conditioning?
[Kagan:] We've been listening to an hour-long, over an hour long briefing from the Pentagon today with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. It basically was an entire hour spent in defense of the situation at Guantanamo Bay, and the detainees that are being kept there. The defense secretary very confident that he believes conditions at Guantanamo Bay are good, they've been provided, he says, with good supplies and adequate housing. He says these are men who one has threatened to kill an American, one has bitten a guard while he has been there, and basically the defense secretary saying these are men who are being detained in order to prevent future terrorism acts. As for John Walker, the American Taliban fighter, we have received word at CNN that he is on his way here to the U.S., and the defense secretary confirming he will eventually make it to the northern district of Virginia. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] In southern California now, firefighters gaining ground against two large brush fires. Want to get to Fallbrook, north of San Diego, and James Hattori keeping a track of everything out there. James, how goes it today?
[James Hattori, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Bill. It's been a couple of hellish days for residents here along this canyon in Fallbrook. In fact, the battle still goes on with firefighters. You can see some tape that we took just a few moments ago of aerial tankers making runs along the canyon, dropping water on hot spots to make sure that they're completely out. There are also ground crews and bulldozers out to make sure that there are no flare-ups of any serious consequence. And, of course, a lot of that depends on what the wind is doing. Right now, the winds are pretty calm. But that was a very different case Sunday, when the fire came over the ridge through north of here. It came across these hillsides, these blackened hillsides, with amazing speed on Sunday. In all, the blaze singed more than 5,200 acres, destroying several dozens structures, more than 20 vehicles. The flames were pushed by fierce winds, raging up to 60 miles per hour across tinder dry terrain. Now that's all changed, as I mentioned, thanks to favorable wind conditions, a shift in direction. The fire is now 60 percent contained and officials expect full containment some time tonight. Crews are still hitting hot spots, as I say, with ground crews, aerial tankers. For the residents affected, they are being allowed back into their homes, the survey to survey damage in the area. It's going to be a busy time for them as well as for insurance adjusters, no doubt. Even as fire crews start what right now, Bill, appears to be more of a mop-up situation than not. But again, crews are still out on the fire lines just making sure those hot spots are taken care of. And they will be here for some time to come Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right. James, thanks. James Hattori keeping track there in southern California.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] It is time now for this week's travel segment. It brings us some information on favorite summer pastimes for many of us, and that is hitting the beach. Our travel correspondent Gail O'Neill met up with a man known as Dr. Beach to find out this year's list of America's best beaches. Let's see which destinations made the list.
[Gail O'neill, Cnn Travel Correspondent:] When he's moonlighting, Stephen Leatherman is known as Dr. Beach, but by day he's known as professor; and as director of the Laboratory for Coastal Research at Florida International University, Leatherman managed to learn a thing or two about human nature as well.
[Unidentified Male:] I think people are looking for to get away from it all. Most of us live in urban areas. We're looking at traffic. We're looking at buildings. We're kind of hemmed in.
[O'neill:] Ever the scientist, he started by analyzing what people were looking for.
[Unidentified Male:] Sand and water. You've got to have that and sun. You got to have good, clean water. When you come to a beach, you want sand, and you want a wide beach; so the wider, the better. People want warm water. They want sunny days. And so after that, amenities. They're looking for the setting.
[O'neill:] Which led to the publication of his book, "America's Best Beaches," and his 11th annual list that goes by the same name. Coming in at No.3 for 2001: Kaanapali Beach on the island of Kauai in Hawaii. Second place honors go to
[Unidentified Male:] St. Joseph Peninsula State Park. This is on the Florida panhandle. Now, you don't go for there for surfing, but if you really like beautiful sand, the sand is like sugar. It's sugar white. In fact, it has finest, whitest sand in the world; it's pure coarse crystal.
[O'neill:] And the No. 1 beach in America?
[Unidentified Male:] That's going to be Poipu Beach Park in the isle of Kauai, Hawaii. Now, here's a place if you really want to get away from it all, enjoy nature at its best. Great for surfing. My preference is to go snorkling with the tropical fish in the flatwater area, in the stillwater. So it's got everything there; and it's got the golden coral sands. Perfect weather in Kauai. Mountain backscape. Oh, what a place!
[Kagan:] Well, somehow we did peel Gail O'Neill off the beach; I don't know quite how we did that, but...
[O'neill:] The rain.
[Kagan:] But what a great guy to hang out with Dr. Beach. How did he get this job?
[O'neill:] He got it completely by accident. As a geoscientist he really is a doctor, a Phd, he's charge with studying beach erosion and sand storm impacts. So he would travel around the world and the country, and when he came back to his campus, the most pressing question from students was, as you can imagine, where is the best beach? He always had great answers, and that led to magazines and newspapers calling, and then, with our obsession of top 10 lists, he started compiling them, and people responded.
[Kagan:] There you have right there. Now, you are doing something online with this beach topic as well.
[O'neill:] Yes, we are having a summer travel special to kickoff the Memorial Day weekend. People can logon to our Web site: CNN.comTRAVELNOW. And we'll have tips on everything from staying safe in the sun, to summer drink recipes.
[Kagan:] Very important. And more beaches on "TRAVEL NOW" this weekend?
[O'neill:] Oh, yes. We're going to have the top 10 actually, the top 20 listed; but more from Dr. Beach, more from Monhegan Island in Maine, a totally different kind of beach, if you like frigid water, but extremely beautiful coastline.
[Kagan:] Absolutely. And Dr. Beach will be our guest next hour here on CNN LIVE THIS MORNING; so we've got beaches on the brain. My favorite place in the world...
[O'neill:] Everybody's.
[Kagan:] Gail O'Neill, thanks so much; good to see you.
[O'neill:] Good to see you, too. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] U.S. officials say that the noose is tightening and that the Taliban may be losing more ground in Afghanistan this morning. As U.S. military forces keep up the pressure, CNN military analyst retired Air Force Major General Don Shepperd joins us live from Washington. Good morning, General.
[Maj. Gen. Don Shepperd , Cnn Military Analyst:] Morning, Martin.
[Savidge:] Just in the last several hours, we have learned that the Taliban are at least willing to surrender in Konduz but only to the United Nations, not to Northern Alliance troops. As far as I know, there's not a significant force of U.N. troops there and that would seem to be problematic.
[Shepperd:] Yes, there's no U.N. force up there. They're surrounded by 30,000 of the Northern Alliance troops reportedly waiting for the Air Force strikes to take effect before they take military action. I think it's highly unlikely that the U.N. will accept responsibility for this surrender. Remember when the Northern Alliance troops supposedly went in the first time to accept surrender of the city, they were attacked so they're going to be very cautious about any move to let these people go that are inside their noose.
[Savidge:] And moving to the south and the spiritual capital of Kandahar, the Taliban saying that they're willing to fight to the death. Do you believe that's credible?
[Shepperd:] It's credible. It's a very confusing situation down in Kandahar, because remember, Kandahar is the Pashtun area and the Pashtun are the major source of support for the Taliban. So you've got the Taliban agreeing to surrender to the Pashtuns from which they came and therefore it's really confusing to say what's going to happened down there. But it's fairly obvious that if the right thing doesn't happen there's going to be war in Kandahar and there's going to be significant fighting because also there's a lot of Arabs and other fighters down in that area that are that are going to be a real problem.
[Savidge:] There's also some interesting stories coming out of this morning's "Washington Post." One, the CIA is fighting its own quote, unquote "secret war" on Afghanistan. What do we know of that?
[Shepperd:] Well, there's two reports in the "Washington Post," one about the CIA and the other about controversy between the Central Command in Florida and Air Force targeteers, if you will. I'm sure, by the way, that both of those stories are true. If there wasn't controversy, it would be the first war that there wasn't controversy over targeting. The targeteers are responsible for finding targets and putting them in the crosshairs and then they have to go to a chain of command that approves pulling the trigger. That is sometimes cumbersome and slow in the best of times. Also, the CIA has been in that area for a long time. They're charged with a lot of the human intelligence. They develop their own targets. And I'm sure they're in the area and I'm sure there is occasional conflicts between the military forces and them. But we've practiced working together. The CIA has representatives in all of the targeting agencies there. So this is kind of a normal piece of warfare with a lot of frustrations probably on both sides.
[Savidge:] Do we know how far up the chain of command approval for hitting a target must go? I know there were other cases, say the Gulf War, where there was even talk decisions were made at the White House level.
[Shepperd:] It's fairly apparent the decisions are not made at the White House level in this war from the words coming out of the Secretary of Defense. There are probably certain levels of targets can be approved at lower levels and then there is a few targets that have to be approved at the highest level. The concern of the commander is, look, we've got to be very careful about collateral damage. We can't just go because there's a truck convoy down there hosing off at every truck convoy. The commander, the SINK, if you will, General Franks is responsible for the conduct of the war, for public opinion, for holding the coalition together and he will retain the rights in some cases. But there is a review process and you have to make sure that the review process is rapid. We spent billions of dollars being able to put people in the crosshairs of things such as the Predator and you have to have a process that responds rapidly to use it.
[Savidge:] This critique is not new, as we've heard, it's come up in other conflicts, but it does seem to be very public this time around. Does that surprise you?
[Shepperd:] No, it doesn't surprise me at all. If you think back in the Vietnam War, it was the we had the same frustrations there. I was involved in some operations in the Vietnam War where the rules of engagements prevented us from doing what was absolutely obvious should be done, such as truces during holidays and this type of thing not being allowed to hit lines of trucks until 6:00 in the evening at which they vanished. So this is this is simply not unusual. It has to be worked out over the course of a war and it's very frustrating to the people in the targeting cells that are charged with finding the targets and having them in the crosshairs.
[Savidge:] And lastly, I want to talk about Osama bin Laden, the prospect that he could perhaps try to escape. It was the Secretary of Defense who said well it's not unlikely he could take a helicopter and hide flying through a ravine. I thought that there were aircraft up above that could look down and spot that very thing.
[Shepperd:] There are, Martin. But again, it's the same thing as targeting, you've got to be very careful who you shoot. Remember, we shot down one of our own aircraft two of our own helicopters before in Turkey with Americans onboard or rather, one of our helicopters, Americans onboard. It was a tragic, tragic accident. You've got a lot of special forces helicopters, you have CIA operating that area, you also have Northern Alliance with some helicopters and aircraft so you just can't shoot at every moving target. There has to be careful, careful coordination. And so is it possible he could escape, sure. I'm one of Kathleen Koch's 41 percent that say finding him is somewhat likely but certainly not certain.
[Savidge:] All right, thanks for your input. Major General Don Shepperd, as always, I'm sure we're going to talk again. Thank you, sir. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] The long running custody battle over six-year-old Elian Gonzalez may soon be over. A U.S. federal appeals court has denied a request from the boy's Miami relatives to reconsider the case. CNN's Gary Tuchman is outside the courthouse in Atlanta Gary.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Judy, it's a major victory for the father of Elian Gonzalez and the U.S. government. A bitter defeat for the six-year-old's Miami relatives who are now on their way to the U.S. Supreme Court, all because this court behind me the appellate courts in Atlanta, the second highest level of courts in the United States of America has basically said it wants nothing more to do with this case. On June 1st, three judges on a panel inside this courtroom said Elian Gonzalez is not entitled to an asylum hearing. But the court ruled that Elian must stay in the United States pending an appeal for a rehearing by the Miami relatives. The Miami relatives filed that appeal and today they heard their request for the rehearing was denied. The court also said that Elian could go back to Cuba as early as this Wednesday unless the U.S. Supreme Court intervenes in the case. The attorney general of the United States, Janet Reno, said in a written statement she was very grateful, and added: "Now that the Court has conclusively upheld their decision, I am hopeful that this father and son will soon be able to move on with their lives together." The father's attorney, Gregory Craig, spoke a short time ago and he talked about what could happen in the next eventful few days.
[Gregory Craig, Attorney For Juan Miguel Gonzalez:] Over the weekend I will be meeting with him to discuss his plans for the coming week. Juan Miguel, Nercy, Elian, and Hianni look forward to resuming a normal life with their friends and their family. Thank you very much.
[Tuchman:] Now just minutes ago a spokesman for the Miami family spoke, said that they will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court this Monday two days before Elian could go back. And it was a very chagrined and disappointed spokesman who did do.
[Armando Gutierrez, Miami Family Spokesman:] We remain convinced of the justice of Elian's cause a cause of freedom for which his mother gave her life. We also believe that this historic case deserves consideration by the Supreme Court of the United States. As our attorneys have explained in legal terms, this cause is about whether a refugee child, like Elian, has a right to a fair hearing under our Constitution. It was a little less than seven months ago that Elian Gonzalez arrived in the United States. If the U.S. Supreme Court decides not to hear the appeal, this legal case is completely over. Judy, back to you.
[Woodruff:] Gary, just to be clear. Assuming the relatives do appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, is there a deadline by which the court needs to make a ruling?
[Tuchman:] Well, there's no deadline that the Supreme Court has set and the U.S. Supreme Court hasn't even said anything on this matter. But this court here in Atlanta made it clear today, this boy can go home as early as this Wednesday at 4:00 Eastern time. So that's why it's critically important for the Miami relatives to file their appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court before Wednesday. And they say today they will do it on Monday.
[Woodruff:] All Right. CNN's Gary Tuchman in Atlanta, thanks. Since his rescue off the Florida coast in November, Elian Gonzalez has been at the center of a political and news media fire storm and a flood of litigation in a series of U.S. courtrooms. CNN's Susan Candiotti reports.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Since their legal battle began, no shortage of support for the boy's defiant relatives. But few legal victories to cheer about. In January, the INS decides the father of Elian Gonzalez in Cuba is the only one who can speak for his son. The six-year-old's political asylum applications: all rejected. In March, a federal judge in Miami turns aside the relatives' lawsuit and upholds the INS decision: no asylum hearing. Then a state judge throws out an attempt to sue for custody in family court. As crowds grow bigger and bigger outside the Miami home, something for the relatives and their supporters to cheer about. A federal appeals court orders the child must remain in the U.S. until his case is decided. Days later, this: after challenging the Justice Department to take the boy by force, it does. Elian is reunited with his father. Within hours, smiling in his father's arms. The Miami relatives fly to Washington demanding, as the father had since arriving in the U.S. in April, to be with Elian. They are turned away. As legal maneuvers continue, Elian is rarely photographed anymore. He is seen playing with classmates from Cuba visiting tourist attractions. On June 1st, another legal blow to the Miami relatives. The federal three-judge panel denies their latest appeal. On June 15th attorneys ask for a re-hearing, questioning the INS's decision to deny Elian and any other alien the right to political asylum hearing, a hearing Elian's father says is unnecessary. All he wants to do is go back to Cuba with Elian and the rest of his family.
[Juan Miguel Gonzalez, Father Of Elian Gonzalez:] I want to thank the American people. Thank you.
[Candiotti:] Susan Candiotti, CNN, Miami.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] As we learned from Bill Hemmer in Tallahassee just moments ago, Florida's secretary of state, Katherine Harris, is refusing the request by Palm Beach County elections officials to extend the deadline for getting in the recounted totals from 5:00 p.m. Eastern tonight until 9:00 a.m. on Monday. John King is here. He's been covering the Gore campaign. Good news or bad news for the vice president, or does it matter?
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, it matters in the sense that from a public relations standpoint, you will have the chief elections officer in the state of Florida stepping forward tonight and once again saying, "George W. Bush won the state; therefore, won the 25 electoral votes." If you are the vice president, you face the challenge now of convincing the American people that "This is not over, that these numbers do not count. Pay no attention to this, essentially. My fight continues in the courts." And he needs the support of the American people to keep the support of fellow Democrats.
[Randall:] John, is there at least private talk among those around Vice President Al Gore that one of the options he should at least be considering at this point is reaching a time when he will have to say, if he's trailing in the vote count tonight, where he will have to say, "Look. I have more court challenges that I could wage, but this is over. For the good of the country, I'm going to step back"?
[King:] Is there such a time? Yes...
[Randall:] Is there such a time?
[King:] Democrats will tell you there is and it's probably next Friday or Saturday after the U.S. Supreme Court holds its hearing. Right now, Democrats feel no suffering personally from this, so they're supporting the vice president. He is filing suit tomorrow to try to get Miami-Dade to recount again, challenging the standard Palm Beach County used. If he loses those two fights if you have a Democratic vice president suing Democratic canvassing boards in two Florida counties pretty hard if he loses those two fights to then come out and say, "I want to sue some more." So they will run out of time shortly.
[Randall:] John, thank you very much Andria.
[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] In Palm Beach County, despite a feverish last minute effort, officials say they need more time. But as we just heard reported, doesn't look like they're going to get it. Let's check in now with Bill Delaney who is West Palm Beach with the latest from there. Hi, Bill.
[Bill Delaney, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Andria, thank you very much. This will come I think it has come it has come by now as quite a blow to Judge Charles Burton, to Commissioner Carol Roberts, and Theresa LePore, the three members of this canvassing board here who have been working now since 8:00 yesterday morning with maybe just a two-hour nap in the middle of the night last night to try to get this count done. They now know, and we saw them leave
[Hall:] One can imagine mixed feelings from that canvassing board right now. Bill Delaney, thanks a lot. We appreciate it.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] A fast-moving wildfire has hundreds of people in a small California town on the run today. Right now, about 1,000 folks have been evacuated from their homes in Weaverville, in northern California. That's about half the town's population we hear. The flames have destroyed as many as 20 homes. Also evacuated, Weaverville's hospital and jail. And schools have canceled classes there as well. About 500 firefighters are battling the flames. But there is one bit of good news. The fire was approaching Weaverville's historic district, but firefighters were able to divert those flames. Let's go to the phone and get the latest on the Weaverville fire. Joining us now is Jason Martin, he's with the California Department of Foresty in Redding, California. Jason, what's the latest word?
[Jason Martin, California Dept. Of Forestry:] The latest so far, we're looking at 1948 acres. There is a 15 percent containment. We're just keeping our fingers crossed that the winds stay calm. They really fueled the fire last night, and really hampered the efforts of the firefighters.
[Harris:] Now, that 1948 acres, is that an increase, decrease, holding steady or what?
[Martin:] That's basically holding steady. The fire kind of laid down last night as the winds decreased, and so it that's the latest report that we have, is 1948.
[Harris:] All right. So what's the latest on the folks in Weaverville? Any more going to be evacuated?
[Martin:] It's hard to say. It all depends upon the winds. Hopefully the winds stay calm. We have heard that the winds are going to pick up again by the afternoon. But we're hoping that we're trying to stay positive that that's not going to happen.
[Harris:] Yes. I think the last report we had said something about 20 structures being damaged. Do you have any updated numbers on those?
[Martin:] The numbers that we have, we have 9 homes and 3 RVs. But due to the awesome work of those firefighter out there, they've saved over 200 structures.
[Harris:] That is fantastic.
[Martin:] Yes, definitely.
[Harris:] That's great. What about injuries, have you had any reports of those to anybody?
[Martin:] No injuries, no injuries. Yes, everything just the houses have been lost. But no loss of life and no injury to report.
[Harris:] That's the best news there.
[Martin:] Definitely.
[Harris:] And how are you fixed for resources? Are you set to handle this whole fire? Are you going to need help or what?
[Martin:] There's we're looking at 722 right now, and there are quite a few on their way up. Up around the number of 500 on the way. Now that the sun came up, the tankers we have 6 helicopters and 8 air tankers out there to hit it hard and heavy. And hopefully they can take the heat out of the fire, so to speak, before the winds kick up again.
[Harris:] Well, we're sure wishing you luck. Jason Martin, thank you very much for the update. We appreciate that. Jason Martin with the California Department of Forestry.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Firefighters in Arizona are digging in and awaiting another charge from the so-called "pumpkin fire" in Arizona. That fire, which was sparked by a lightning strike a week ago today, has engulfed more than 7,500 acres of the Kaibab National Forest. For the latest on what's happening this morning, we turn to reporter Steve Bodinet of our affiliate KTVK with more.
[Steve Bodinet, Ktvk Reporter:] This is how most of the country sees the pumpkin fire: smoke and flames miles away. But this is the view those fighting the fire get every day: up close and very personal.
[Unidentified Male:] OK, they're really squarely over here. We're getting 180-degree wind shifts coming around the side of the mountain, so...
[Bodinet:] Amid thick smoke and dry grass and pine, this crew from White River literally fighting fire with fire. It's called a burnout, and it's an important weapon against an out-of-control forest fire. [on camera]: If all goes well with this burnout, this road will be a lot wider. It'll be a bigger firebreak. And When the main fire hits here, it won't find much to eat.
[Unidentified Male:] If it doesn't it the trees too hard, we get a little bit of the trees, and we may take out some of the smaller trees in particular. But we want to reduce the amount of fuels that are there to burn.
[Bodinet:] While the fuel disappears from this side of fire-breaking road, a flying ember can cause excitement on the other side. But watchful eyes make sure that excitement is put out almost as fast as it starts.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, we have quite a few crews out here today to watch for spotting on the other side of the road, and then to initial attack it and capture it before it gets any larger than we can handle.
[Bodinet:] A back-burn operation is risky, especially when nasty afternoon winds roar through the trees.
[Unidentified Male:] Suppose to be a red flag today, so winds are up to 25-30 miles an hour or so.
[Bodinet:] But if the pumpkin is going to be stopped, it has to run out of forest to eat. And it's up to these guys to make sure the cupboards are bare when the fire comes calling.
[Unidentified Male:] That's our hope, is that when it comes this way, there won't be much for it to do and will just kind of die down and become very much less of threat to the road.
[Kagan:] And that was Steve Bodinet from KTVK. Let's bring in his coworker, Scott McGee, also with KTVK. He's joining us from Flagstaff, Arizona. Scott, good morning.
[Scott Mcgee, Ktvk Reporter:] Good morning, Daryn. Right now I'm in Flagstaff, which is about 15 miles south of where the fire is burning, right over those ridge of mountains behind me. It sits at about 9,000 acres right now. It is fed by high winds and high temperatures. It's what we've had all this week and we're expected some more, actually, over the next couple of days. Right now, 700 firefighters working that fire, although that keeps changing because we have wildfires burning in one area, and then another area. And so they will actually come back and forth as they put out these spots hot spots here and there all across the Southwest. Actually, this morning they're going to start lighting backfires, which they're hoping will stop the spread of this fire which is at, right now, at about 30 percent contained. But, Daryn, as they're saying, they're telling us it's going to be probably the end of June before this fire is controlled, and probably even several weeks after that before we stop seeing smoke in this area, which we have seen a lot of as the sun starts getting high around the mid afternoon area and that fire starts really burning Daryn.
[Kagan:] Scott, a lot of folks who think of northern Arizona in the summertime plan on going up to the Grand Canyon. I think you were telling us yesterday about the road to access that. Is that all clear and things are fine to go visit?
[Mcgee:] Yes, actually, the Arizona DPS, the Department of Public Safety, has been able to keep that road open because the smoke has not gotten as bad there. The one mixed blessing with that high winds we've been getting, it has actually blown the smoke enough where it hasn't blocked the vision for drivers on Highway 180, which is one of the main arteries up to the Grand Canyon. So the prospects are good that they will be able to keep that road open. However, anything can happen with the way we've had our weather changes and the hot, hot sun that has baking down on us for the last couple of weeks.
[Kagan:] And it can do that. It can get warm even in northern Arizona.
[Mcgee:] That's right. You know that.
[Kagan:] Scott McGee I do know that. And I know that bureau from where you're reporting
[Mcgee:] That's right.
[Kagan:] The Flagstaff bureau of KTVK. Thanks for joining us this morning.
[Mcgee:] Sure.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] A lot of economic reports for Wall Street to look forward to this week. And, of course, there's that Fed meeting tomorrow. Susan Lisovicz joins me now with a preview. Hello.
[Susan Lisovicz, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Deborah. Well, you were just talking about Caterpillar, and those are some of the things that we don't know about in advance, but certainly capable of moving the markets. And we've had a lot of negative warnings in the last two weeks for sure, a lot of big, high-profile companies. But here's some things that we do know about. Starting today, one of them concerns the housing sector. We will be hearing about construction spending today, as well as something that we call the NAPM, or the National Association of Purchasing Managers, give us an idea of what's going on with factory orders and the like. Tomorrow, the Fed meeting, what Deborah just referred to. Typically, the Federal Reserve does not make any sort of move prior to a presidential election, what with the continuing signs of the economy slowing. That would certainly reinforce that tradition. But we also have new home sales and leading economic indicators; on Wednesday, factory orders; and on Friday, the employment report for the month of September. We also have as we were talking about during the commercial break, Deborah, we have the presidential debate, tomorrow the first of three scheduled, and we'll see if that any sort of bombshell announcements on the economy that could come from either Gov. Bush or Vice President Gore.
[Marchini:] All right, looking at all of these, I guess the most forward looking are the purchasing management report, and Friday's employment report because that gives us the first official look at the month of September. A lot of nervousness surrounding these numbers, or the thinking is just it won't affect Fed policy one way or the other?
[Lisovicz:] Again, the tradition with the Federal Reserve, especially prior to election this is the closest one that pretty much people are referring to, the pollsters are saying in 30 years it's very unlikely that the Fed would touch interest rates, and especially because we've had continuing signs of a slowing economy. And certainly with the deluge of warnings that we've gotten in the last two weeks, that would reinforce that as well.
[Marchini:] All right, thank you, Susan.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] We're now coming up on prime time viewing for the first total solar eclipse of the millennium.
[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] But the eclipse is only visible in southern Africa. That's why you need us. So don't worry about a passport; you can watch the eclipse from the comfort of your own home with us. This morning, we're talking with Kenneth Brecher. He's an astrophysicist with from Boston University, who is on the West Coast. And CNN science correspondent Ann Kellan is here with us. We've also got CNN's Charlayne Hunter-Gault on videophone from Zambia, and that's where we're going to start. Charlayne, describe what you're seeing.
[Charlayne Hunter-gault, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, I have to put these glasses on, but the dark moon has moved into the sun, and I'm seeing a crescent in the sky. The tension is building as people are watching that along with me. The tension is building in the atmosphere. It's getting a little bit cooler. Around here, the leaves have started to rustle in the trees, but it's not yet started to affect the color of the atmosphere. It's still quite a bright day, although, as I said, with these glasses, the moon has moved into the sun. There's also a drama going on behind me. I think people are as excited about that as they are about the eclipse. The king of the Ngoni people is going to make an appearance shortly, and as you have been hearing, these are the people who were crossing the Zambezi River, coming from South Africa, just as this eclipse happened in the 1800s. So they're here reenacting this dramatic moment in their history. This king is a descendant of one who was born just after they crossed the river. They have been reenacting aspects of that all day and are now waiting for the king to make his appearance. Even as I'm speaking now, my arms are starting to get a little bit of a chill, because the temperature is starting to drop slowly.
[Lin:] Charlayne, stand by there. Let's go to Kenneth Brecher here. Kenneth, as you heard Charlayne describing some of the actual changes, could you go into that further, what some of the physiological or atmospheric changes are that are going on right now?
[Kenneth Brecher, Boston University:] As the moon moves in front of the sun, of course, you're blotting out a lot of the sun. In the next 20 minutes, you completely blot out the sun.
[Lin:] I'm sorry, we've lost Kenneth's signal. We're going to try to reestablish that. But let's go to science correspondent Ann Kellan, who's right here in the studio with us Ann.
[Ann Kellan, Cnn Science Correspondent:] We can sort of pick up. As the moon starts blocking the sun, what we are going to be seeing is the edges of the sun. This is exciting for scientists because they can actually study the atmosphere of the sun. They'll take great pictures of that and study the big mystery why the sun's atmosphere so much hotter than the surface of the sun.
[Lin:] What do they look for?
[Kellan:] They're looking at the gases. They look to analyze the activity that's going on in the atmosphere, and usually that's pardon the pun clouded over. The sun's shining brightness usually blocks that. So they're able more to pinpoint the atmosphere. It's exciting because, in Africa, obviously, we're in a place full of ancient superstitions regarding this, so in Zambia, it's a national holiday. In Zimbabwe, some tribes think it's an omen, because there has been unrest there from their ancestors, sending a signal to then that they should go back to peace, that the ancestors are unhappy with them. Eclipse means, actually, abandonment it's a Greek word so we think that the sun is abandoning the earth. It's fun to know all these superstitions. Some people still think that pregnant women should go inside because of miscarriages. Of course, we say that's not true today.
[Lin:] Lots of people believe lots of different things.
[Mcedwards:] A lot of mythology.
[Kellan:] There's a lot of myth around eclipses. As this is happening, it's exciting. People are here, and they're watching it. The demons aren't swallowing the sun. Eventually, the sun will come back.
[Mcedwards:] Why don't we bring Charlayne Hunter-Gault back. She's there and she can tell us how people are reacting there now. Charlayne, go ahead.
[Hunter-gault:] Yes, there doesn't seem to be any demons in the minds of these people, but I was going to add that there's a sun legend that says that the sun was angry, that the moon was a man and the sun was angry with it, and so the sun, just every time it presented itself in its fullness, started cutting away at it, and when it would get finally down to this small portion, the moon would beg the sun not to take any more, because he wanted to save some of himself for his children, and the sun would agree. That's when the moon would become full again. As I said, no one around here seems to be preoccupied with that mythology. They are very excited about the historical significance to the Ngoni people. There's a real picnic atmosphere here. The children are out of school; they're running around playing. I must say most of them are being very careful not to look directly into the sun. Somehow, the word has gotten out, and most people here don't have glasses. The children I saw some with a piece of paper, trying to get that effect by holding the paper up and watching the progression of the sun. It has moved a bit more now. There's still a bit of a crescent there. And as I said earlier, the leaves on the bushes where we happen to be standing are starting to tremble a little bit because the temperature is starting to drop. It's not cold, but it is cooler than it was.
[Lin:] How about animals? Are you seeing any reaction from animals, at this point? They say they hibernate or they go to sleep during an eclipse.
[Hunter-gault:] Not yet.
[Lin:] That's true. I've heard that flowers...
[Hunter-gault:] They don't know it's happening yet, because it's still quite bright. Carol: We're laughing, Charlayne. I know it's hard to understand. It's still quite bright here. I don't think the animals yet know what's coming. The crocodiles are out here in the Zambezi, just behind me. As I've told you, I can see the mountains in Mozambique. I can see parts of Zimbabwe. And I'm standing in Zambia. So it's an interesting confluence, and part of the struggle of these people, who are reenacting their history here, is that they had to get across the Zambezi, which is crocodile infested. You may even know of the folks tale here that the sun is swallowed each night by crocodiles and comes out the following morning to make a new appearance. So people are sort of staying away from the river and just sitting on tops of buses and cars, but as I said, most of them right now are preoccupied with the festivities of the king. There are some maidens who are dancing here now, topless maidens I don't think we'll be showing that on CNN. But that is the tradition here, to bear themselves for the king, that everything belongs to the king, so all the dancers, all the pageantry, is in his honor. He will soon be making an appearance. We're not quite sure just when. I asked a few minutes ago if the king had glasses, and someone said of course he has glasses. So I'm sure he'll be coming out soon to watch this. I looking up, once again, at the eclipse. There is a little less of the sun to be seen. This, obviously, is going to come off if anybody had any doubts about it. It is really moving. The moon is really moving into the sun. And it's a very exciting moment. The little children are rushing around, borrowing glasses from people who have them, so that they can get quick glimpses, but there are a lot of people with their backs turned to it. The word, obviously, has gone out, that it's dangerous to look at this raw.
[Lin:] We're seeing a lot of activity behind you, Charlayne, as we're watching live the first solar eclipse of the millennium. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] A former Cuban diplomat has been escorted out of the United States by federal authorities. Jose Imperatori is now in transit to Cuba after a U.S. government flight to Montreal, Canada. Earlier, he refused to leave the U.S. after he was accused of spying.
[Jose Imperatori, Former Cuban Diplomat:] I've become the victim of a major slander. I've been wrongly accused of doing intelligence work in the United States.
[O'brien:] The expulsion of the former Cuban diplomat is big news in Cuba, to say the least, where the story is being followed closely. We have the latest from Havana from CNN's Martin Savidge. Martin, what is the latest?
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, good morning to you, Miles. The Cuban government so far has not said a lot about the forced removal of Jose Imperatori. Just as he was taken into custody in Maryland last evening, a source with the Cuban government told CNN that this was, quote, "a North American problem," unquote. He didn't elaborate. He also said that Cuba wasn't going to cooperate with their diplomat's departure, and said that this was a great injustice. Jose Imperatori, who had worked for the Cuban Interest section in Washington, was accused by the U.S. of being connected to Mariano Fajet. Now, that's the American immigration official that the FBI claims is guilty of spying for Cuba. Cuba is denying adamantly that there was any espionage whatsoever by anyone. They admit that Imperatori and Fajet had had communications between one another, but they say that's nothing unusual. The Cuban Interest section talks to a lot of American officials. That, the Cubans say, is part of the job. Now the question among the diplomatic community here in Havana this morning is, will Cuba now respond in kind, ordering an American diplomat at the U.S. Interest section in Havana to pack their things and leave? The Cubans believe that this is all related to the case of 6- year-old Elian Gonzalez. He's the shipwreck survivor from Cuba now in America. The Cubans believe that this spy scandal was manufactured to make Cuba look bad just before a critical legal hearing to decide if Elian should be returned to his father and to his homeland Miles.
[O'brien:] Marty, any indication right now as to what sort of reception this diplomat might receive? I know Cuba's fond of giving state-sanctioned hero status to people.
[Savidge:] Well, so far there hasn't been an announcement, but yes, there is a lot of speculation here that when Jose Imperatori steps off the aircraft and returns once more to Cuba, that he will be treated as a hero, as a man who stood up to the United States. We look back on the return of the grandmothers after their visit to the United States when they went and met with 6-year-old Elian, and there was a large crowd that was waiting for them at the airport, and throngs of people were basically announced and told to come out on the streets and greet the grandmothers as their motorcade moved down the streets and entered into Havana. It's expected that Mr. Imperatori will be received and treated the very same way Miles.
[O'brien:] Martin Savidge in Havana, thanks very much.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Republicans say that President Clinton's State of the Union address included too much spending and not enough tax reduction. The president focused on new proposals and unfinished business in outlining the agenda for his final year in office. CNN senior White House correspondent John King has the highlights.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] The state of our union is the strongest it has ever been.
[John King, Cnn White House Correspondent:] His final State of the Union address was hardly a farewell speech. Speaking for 90 minutes, the president looked to shape his legacy with a long list of proposals that reflect the new politics of prosperity and his party's election-year priorities.
[Clinton:] I ask you the pass a real patients' bill of rights. I ask you to pass that common sense gun safety legislation. I ask you, I implore you to raise the minimum wage.
[King:] And there was more and more as Mr. Clinton detailed new proposals for his final year, and recycled ideas from years past.
[Clinton:] We cannot let another year pass without extending to all our seniors this lifeline of affordable prescription drugs.
[King:] Mr. Clinton proposed $350 billion in tax cuts over 10 years, and said the bulk of what's left of the budget surplus should go to Social Security, Medicare and paying down the national debt. The parent of a Columbine High shooting victim was on hand as the president made a controversial call for requiring a license to purchase a handgun.
[Clinton:] And I hope you'll help me pass that this time.
[King:] There was praise for the man the president hopes wins the race to succeed him.
[Clinton:] Tonight, I propose that we follow Vice President Gore's suggestion to make low income parents eligible for the insurance that covers their children.
[King:] Republicans loved this slip of the tongue.
[Clinton:] Last year the vice president launched a new effort to make communities more liberal livable. Liberal? I know.
[King:] And congressional Democrats also got an election-year boost from a president out to prove to the majority Republicans he's no lame duck.
[Clinton:] For too long this Congress has been standing still on some of our most pressing national priorities.
[King:] Republicans applauded politely, but many said a president scarred by scandal was trying to buy himself a more favorable legacy by proposing billions in new spending. The president heads to Quincy, Illinois later today to try to sell his agenda to the American people. The question in this year of both congressional and presidential elections: Will the Democratic president have confrontation with the Republican Congress or cooperation? Daryn.
[Kagan:] John, and what about the first lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in a very different situation this year and perhaps next year will be in even a different situation.
[King:] The first lady always playing an important subplot in the president's State of the Union message. Back in 1994, he saluted her as the architect of his health plan. That, of course, resulted in a humiliating political defeat for the president. Last year, she sat in the balcony in the middle of the impeachment debate, offering critical support to her husband. He paid tribute to her very briefly last night, but did make no mention of the fact that when the next president goes before the Congress in January, he does hope his wife is on the floor as a Democratic member of the Senate from New York. Daryn.
[Kagan:] John King reporting live from the White House. Thank you, John.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] First up in the news today, we've all been talking about it, and he calls it an incomprehensible tragedy. Still, the husband of the woman accused of drowning her five children says he supports her. Russell Yates' 36-year-old wife Andrea is jailed on multiple murder accounts, accused of killing the couple's children yesterday at the family home near Houston. Their house has become something of a heart-breaking memorial, with neighbors leaving flowers, notes and stuffed animals in the yard. Yates says that his wife had gotten help for the postpartum depression she suffered after the birth of their fourth child two years ago, but that the illness had come back with the birth of a fifth child, a daughter who was just six months old when she was killed yesterday. Yates says the woman accused of the murders isn't the wife and mother he knows.
[Russell Yates, Victims' Father:] She obviously wasn't herself, and I think that will come out, you know, that she's everyone who knows her knows that she loves the kids, and she's a kind, gentle person and what what you see here and what you saw yesterday, you know, it's not her. Yesterday, it was hard for me, you know, I was like, I don't understand this. Why did do you this? You know, but and I got to remember that, you know, she she wasn't herself. I mean, she is thinking irrationally and, you know, Andrea, if you see this, I love you, you know. I am primarily concerned with right now, you know, attending to my kids and, you know, making sure they get a good burial and, you know, and are treated good and my wife, I am supportive of her, you know. It's hard, because on one hand I know that she she killed our children, you know, but on the other I know that, you know, that the woman here is not the woman that killed my children.
[Chen:] Andrea Yates could face the death penalty if she's convicted of capital murder. She's set to be arraigned tomorrow. Joining us now with more insight into this tragedy is Fernando Guel. He's a neighbor of the Yates family. We appreciate you're being with us, Mr. Guel. We have got a question for you from our live Web chat audience. Right off the top, MariGrace Centofante: "Was Andrea's depression known to you, or was she hiding it?" What did you know about this woman and the family?
[Fernando Guel, Neighbor Of Yates Family:] About two-and-a-half years ago, they purchased the house at a corner, two houses away, which I desired that house to purchase at the time, but I didn't get it because I was short on finances, and we began to know them from a distance and hello this, and we walked by and drove by. We we noticed some things about them, and for example, some things that's the children playing outside with a father quite a bit, which was that was real neat to us, because every time the father had a chance to play with the children, he would like basketball.
[Chen:] What about the mother?
[Guel:] ... and some things and...
[Chen:] What about the mother, what did you notice?
[Guel:] We noticed that she was very different. She was kept to herself. She was a person who didn't say anything, she just kept to herself, very quiet person, very reserved. I notice because I've been a pastor of a church, I have noticed that certain look that they have about them when they are disturbed, and we knew that for two-and- a-half years that she wasn't all all there.
[Chen:] Mr. Guel, we've another question now from the Web chat. Let's take a look at that. Michelle Rogers' question: "Did you noticed any change in Mrs. Yates yesterday?" You've probably seen some of the videotape of her being led out of the house.
[Guel:] She went into a yesterday when she came out of the house, she went into a very very into herself. She was very, very different, quiet. Well, you saw the pictures of when she came out, and it was a quite quite a drastic change, yes it was.
[Chen:] You say, though, that she had been a quiet person before that. What do you mean by a change?
[Guel:] Yes, this time she was completely what I saw was a completely, completely into herself, withdrawn, more than before. Quite a bit more than before.
[Chen:] Now, I understand that have you some grandchildren who have played with the Yates' children?
[Guel:] Yes, they played around the area with them, they would drive their bikes up to them, and they knew the children, especially one of my older grandsons.
[Chen:] Knew one of the one of the older Yates' children, I understand, played with your grandson, right?
[Guel:] Yes, yes.
[Chen:] Did he ever mention anything about the problems at home, asking to stay away from his house, asking if he could be with you, anything of that nature?
[Guel:] No, no. As a matter of fact, it was quite the contrary. They were very seemed to be very joyful children. Never any complains, nothing like that, nothing negative. Nothing, not one bit.
[Chen:] What do you tell your grandkids now? Given all that's happened, obviously they will see some of the news coverage about all of this, and certainly see the commotion in your neighborhood. What will you tell your grandchildren?
[Guel:] I have a 9-year-old granddaughter, Deborah. She came to me this morning, and said: "Papa, would you do something like that to us?" And I I saw in her a hurt in her voice, and I saw her concern about her concern about the adults doing such a thing, such a horrible, morbid thing like that to their children. So a 9-year-old, affected her so much that she would say something like that to me. But I answered her properly, I said: "No, no, I would never do something like that." So, we can see how it affected the children.
[Chen:] All you can do is offer your assurance, Mr. Guel. Fernando Guel out there in Texas, helping us out with a little insight on what's going on in his community. We appreciate you being with us, sir.
[Guel:] You are quite welcome.
[Chen:] Some of the symptoms now of postpartum depression: look for severe mood swings, high expectations, acting in an overly demanding way, having difficulty making sense of things and feeling trapped. That's a clinical sort of definition Joining us now to talk more about this type of illness is Dr. Paul Friday. He's the chief of clinical psychology at the University of Pittsburgh, and he's also the author of a book called "Friday's Law: How to Become Normal When You're Not and How to Stay Normal When You Are." We appreciate you're being with us from Pittsburgh today. We want to bring you a question right way from our live Web chat audience. Let's take a look at that. Steve Mason asking: "How often has postpartum depression led to actual murder in the past?" Is there much of a history on this?
[Dr. Paul Friday, Clinical Psychologist:] I think it's very important, Ms. Chen, that we differentiate between postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis. We are dealing with postpartum psychosis. The statistics show only two in 1,000 births have postpartum psychosis, and the number of people in that state that hurt their children are infinitesimal. I think it's very, very important that we get across to the millions of people out there who have postpartum depression that you are not going to hurt your children. You are going to be OK. There are treatments for you. Talk to people. But don't be concerned because of this one incident in Houston. As tragic as it is, it's not going to be seen again. It's a once-in- a-century thing. It certainly peeks the part of our brain that is looking for fight flight and raises concerns, but statistically it does not happen very often at all.
[Chen:] Let me talk to you, though, about some of the symptoms and what people see in postpartum depression, and what it might mean. You know, I can understand that you might have a depression which would lead to you say to yourself, "I hate myself, you know, I don't want to live with myself anymore." Maybe if you were having postpartum feelings, you would be angry at your husband, but I think it's awfully hard for us to understand how a postpartum depression might lead to anger at children.
[Friday:] You are exactly right, Ms. Chen, and this is such an exceptional thing. What we are dealing with is an anomaly. Postpartum depression has is a crisis. When you have a child, your life is changed forever. And the beginning part of that, especially when you have the expectations leading into it, and what you take out of it, is very different. The anger is expressed far more to self and then to your spouse. It very seldom is expressed toward your children. What's very important is that you talk to the people who love you and support you. Those people who are close to you have to be aware that the chances of a mother hurting a child are negligible. It's not going to be there. Part of the depression is that fear that you could, not that you would ever act on it.
[Chen:] Right, and I have heard that. I mean, that you don't feel that you can do enough to help your child, and you might hurt him.
[Friday:] Right. And that's why you feel so depressed, because you think that you should be able to do more.
[Chen:] To do everything.
[Friday:] It's that idea of the myth of the perfect mother, the perfect child, and I should be feeling all of these wonderful things, and we don't feel those things. What we feel are sense of desperateness, that I'm not going to be able to fill these expectations that are developed throughout the gestation of the child. It's for the vast majority of people, it's over with in about three months. It starts about 10 days in and again, it only happens, postpartum depression is only 8 to 26 percent of the population, and it's treatable. You can talk to people.
[Chen:] But people need to know about it if...
[Friday:] They need to know, right.
[Chen:] Paul Friday, I am afraid we're going to have to leave it there. From Pittsburgh today, Paul Friday, psychologist and author of "Friday's Laws" some good advice there. Thanks.
[Friday:] Thank you.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] At the disaster site in New York today, it was a day of mixed emotions. Rescuers pulled the body of one more fire fighter from the rubble. Earlier, there was cautious but some fresh optimism of finding survivors as searchers got close to possible air pockets. CNN's Gary Tuchman joins us now from New York with more on that. Is there really some optimism, perhaps, Gary, that someone could still be found alive?
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] We have to be very careful with how we talk about this. There has been absolutely no sign, Wolf, whatsoever of any survivors. Nothing has been heard, nothing has been seen. However, they are approaching what they call air pockets or voids, areas where people could have potentially survived. They haven't been able to get to these areas for 11 and a half days, therefore they are excited that they are approaching it, that they are able to get enough rubble away to get to that. And they are hoping they find somebody alive. But there is certainly no visible or audible information that that might happen. So they are hoping, and that is very important to stress. Over 2,000 people are on the scene as we speak, using tools ranging from cranes to shovels and participating in this rescue and recovery effort. And when we talk about recovery, we're talking about the recovery of many people who perished. Right now, 252 people have been recovered. Yesterday, the number was 241, so that shows you 11 bodies have only 11 bodies have been found over the last 24 hours, including a fireman. The mayor of New York spoke to us earlier. He told us when the fireman was found, that two other firemen took him away in a stretcher and the other police and fire officials on the scene put their hats and helmets over their hearts. As you said, Mayor Giuliani spoke before, he is the chief executive of the city. Obviously, he's also become the chief cheerleader, and he spoke with another former chief, former commander- in-chief.
[Mayor Rudy Giuliani, New York:] Everybody in their own way has to find a way to get back to normal. Normal means not being sad and not mourning of everybody is going to mourn and feel terrible and feel awful. And then, there are going to be times when people just cry. But they have to be able to, as best they can, get back to work, get back into normal life, get back into enjoying their lives, and also stop being afraid. Stop being afraid doesn't mean you can get rid of the emotion, it means overcoming it just going out and doing the things that you normally do.
[Bill Clinton, Former President:] We need to keep the confidence of the people up. The ultimate victory here is the maintenance of America's confidence in itself, its values and its future. And I certainly think, and Mr. Mayor you have been critical not only for the people of this city but all over America. My friends call me from every region of the country and say how well you have done and how well the people of New York have done, and how proud they are. So I'm glad to be here, and I hope I can be of help.
[Tuchman:] Six thousand three hundred and thirty-three people are still missing and presumed dead, and more than 70 countries, ranging from Antigua to Zimbabwe. But it is believed that number might go down, because it is thought that many of the countries reported people who haven't called back home, but might not have been at the World Trade Center the day this happened 11 days ago. Wolf, back to you.
[Blitzer:] Thank you very much, Gary Tuchman in New York. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Global Crossing reportedly will sell its Web-hosting unit to Exodus Communications. And Microsoft says it will take a charge of $350 million.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Also, a warning from the World Wrestling Federation is not well received. Our Sasha Salama has more now from the Nasdaq marketsite. Hi, Sasha.
[Sasha Salama, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi folks. Lots of corporate stories to tell you about that are moving stocks this morning. You mentioned Microsoft, let's start there. Microsoft is going to be taking that one-time charge, also updating the way the company reports revenues to reflect some new product categories, including enterprise software, desktop software, just to name a few. Microsoft taking that one-time charge, and the stock is down about an eighth in the pre-market to 60 12. Well2 billion in stock. The deal could be announced today. If it goes through, it would make Exodus the biggest company in the Web-hosting market. It would also give Global Crossing the biggest state in Exodus, a 20 percent stake, making the company the biggest shareholder in Exodus. GBLX up on the news, up two to 31 78 in the pre-market. Exodus going the other way4 in the pre-market to $51 a share David and Deb.
[Haffenreffer:] Sasha, are we suppose to learn something by the fact that the World Wrestling Federation first decides to leave the Nasdaq and go to the Big Board and now an earnings warning?
[Salama:] That's right. Talk about the shares going down to the mat too, if that's the right expression. WWFE, the ticker symbol, down seven in the pre-market to 12 78. Here's the story: The company, which produces wrestling programs, is issuing a warning, for the next two quarters revenues will be about three percent below previous guidance. The reason for the shortfall, World Wrestling says, a decline in sales of commercial advertising, as well as product licensing. Over my shoulder there you see where the stock closed, just under 20. As I mentioned this morning folks, it is below 13. And Nasdaq 100 futures down just slightly after that decline yesterday, which brought the market to 3656. Analysts telling me that lots of investors are selling into strength here. Back to you.
[Marchini:] Sasha, thank you very much.

[Jeff Greenfield:] You've done enough, Aaron. Go home and rest. Compared with the task tonight, that memorable speech that President Bush gave to the Congress on September 20th was simple. Back then, Mr. Bush had one job: to rally a stunned nation and to proclaim that nation's resolve. Comb through tonight's speech, and you can see just how many different tasks the president had tonight. First, to reassure.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] What we couldn't be sure then and what the terrorists never expected was that America would emerge stronger, with a renewed spirit of pride and patriotism.
[Greenfield:] Second, to define the stakes, and to promise victory,
[Bush:] We wage a war to save civilization itself. We did not seek it. But we will fight it, and we will prevail.
[Greenfield:] Third, to rebut an undercurrent of criticism. For instance, that the new head of homeland security lacks the power to do his job.
[Bush:] Its director, my good friend former Governor Tom Ridge reports directly to me, and works with all our federal agencies, state and local governments and the private sector on a national strategy to strengthen our homeland protections.
[Greenfield:] Fourth, to explain that unspecified terror alert.
[Bush:] A terrorism alert is not a signal to stop your life. It is a call to be vigilant.
[Greenfield:] Fifth, to make this fight every citizen's fight.
[Bush:] Many ask, what can I do to help in our fight? The answer is simple. All of us can become a September the 11th volunteer by making a commitment to service in our own communities.
[Greenfield:] And finally, to stir his listeners' spirits by invoking the last known words of one of the men who thwarted the hijackers of United Flight 93.
[Bush:] We cannot know every turn this battle will take. Yet we know our cause is just and our ultimate victory is assured. We will no doubt face new challenges. But we have our marching orders. My fellow Americans: let's roll.
[Greenfield:] So let's roll through some of the implications of the president's speech. Joining me now from Washington, the former director of the CIA, James Woolsey. He's now a partner with the Shea and Gardner law firm. Full disclosure: Mr. Woolsey and I were classmates at Yale Law School 150 years ago. In Atlanta, Scott Miller. He is a corporate and political strategist, founder of the Core Strategy Group, and he is was consultant to three presidential campaigns. And we will also be joined shortly from Austin, Texas, by Bill Minutaglio. He is a senior writer at the "Dallas morning news" and he is the author of "First Son: George W. Bush and the Bush Family Dynasty." Mr. Woolsey, we asked folks all of you to pick out some of your key lines. And the one you picked was, I believe, "let's roll!" So in what I want to ask about is the line that he talked about in defending the terror alerts. Clearly there's been a lot of doubt about whether that was a good idea to alert the country to an unspecified possible act of terror. Was it a good idea to do that?
[James Woolsey, Former Cia Director:] A lot of intelligence, Jeff, is not precise. If it were precise with respect to time and place and method of attack, we would be able to thwart attacks. Often it is rather general and all we know is that something is likely to happen. And I think we need to cut the government a fair amount of slack on these. They have tough calls to make. And sometimes all they are going to know is that something terrible may happen this weekend. And under those circumstances, they have to make a decision as to whether or not to say something or not. And I think I think we really need to give them the benefit of the doubt. We're not used to letting the government have the benefit of doubt in peacetime. In wartime we sort of need to.
[Greenfield:] I guess the question question a lot of folks are asking is if we are more alert to some unspecified danger and clearly if if beyond that the country is way more on an alert status than it was on September 10th to all sorts of things. Planes being diverted and landing on on things that would never have made them divert or land seven weeks ago. Is this in fact a safer nation, more protected from terrorism than it was on September 10th?
[Woolsey:] Well, the problem is that the home front is the front lines in this war. This is the first time we've had anything like this since the Civil War and even then normally civilians weren't targeted. So troops on the front lines are used to being generally on alert and then having someone say, "now, tonight you need to really expect something." And then they are really, really on alert. What's happened is that that attitude has been transmitted to the home front. And those of us who lead normal lives and are not in fox holes have to have to deal with this type of not only on alert, but really-really-on-alert attitude. And it's not easy. It's extremely stressful for a lot of people.
[Greenfield:] But has it made us safer?
[Woolsey:] Well, it's hard to say. You know, remember back at the time of the Millennium celebration at the end of '99, beginning of 2000 there were alerts. And there was a customs official up on the border at Washington State and she was told to really really be on alert and she perhaps did a more careful search than she otherwise might have and picked up a terrorist coming in who was going to blow up a bomb at the Los Angeles Airport. You know, sometimes it works. It doesn't always work. But sometimes it does.
[Greenfield:] I gather that Austin has rejoined us in the person of Bill Minutaglio. You the video gremlins are gone. Mr. Minutaglio, we asked to pick out a bite, and you picked one that we didn't pick. So let's hear that brief sound bite please.
[Bush:] We're a different country than we were on September 10th. Sadder and less innocent. Stronger, and more united. And in the face of ongoing threats, determined and courageous.
[Greenfield:] Mr. Minutaglio, sadder, less innocent. You literally wrote the book on George W. Bush. Do you think he might have been talking a little bit about himself there?
[Bill Minutaglio, Author, "first Son:] " Yes, absolutely. I think it's always a great prism when you listen to George W. to try to factor in what he's saying about the the country and international affairs through through his own experiences, his own life. And when I heard that I remembered him sharing with me at one moment some words that his father had spoken to him that apparently have lingered with George W. His dad told him one day, "If you choose this line of work, if you choose to follow me and eventually attain the presidency, you will be like a cork in a raging river." And I think I think at that time George W. probably thought it would be the net result of the political game, the politics, the media, enduring all those kinds of things. I don't think he really understood what kind of raging river was waiting for him on September 11.
[Greenfield:] You you pointed out to our producers people have talked about the speech tonight that it was a pep talk, almost like a pep rally. And yet in your view, cheer leading is something that came comes very naturally to this president.
[Minutaglio:] Sure, absolutely. And I think what he's doing presently is cheer leading, you know, the second inning in a sense. The excitement of the first pitch has worn off and he needs to kind of rally everyone, to let them know that this might be a game to extend the analogy and the metaphor again that will go on into infinite extra innings. But yes. He was a head cheerleader in high school. He was a cheerleader for oil ventures, in a sense. He was the guy out drumming up interest and enthusiasm for different oil adventures. He was really the head cheerleader for the Texas Rangers. And as you have noted, Jeff, during his tenure as governor he used it his position as a bully pulpit. He was a cheerleader. And at times the guy that was constitutionally limited by the office of governor in Texas so he did what he could only do, which is be a cheerleader.
[Greenfield:] Mr. Miller, the bite that you directed our attention to was the one that we played, where the president said we wage a war to save civilization itself. But I wondered if I can paraphrase a line from movie studios, not how will it play in Peoria but how will it play in Peshawar? I mean, can you tell other civilizations that this is a war to save civilization itself, when you come from a place that's so different?
[Scott Miller, Core Strategy Group:] I think we have to. I I think, you know, one of things that the president has done well is define why we're fighting and who we're fighting. Just as Osama Bin Laden is constantly defining an us versus them, the president has done that. And he's saying the terrorists are mass murderers. They are intolerant dictators. Intolerant of religion, intolerant of women's rights. Intolerant of anyone's rights, really, except their own. So he's done this good job. And when you say how does this play in Peshawar. I was interested in the visuals. You know, everything communicates. Everything communicates. The visuals tonight in that audience of 7,000: firemen and firewomen and policemen and armed forces people and postal workers and health care workers. And those people were pumped and looked resolved and they looked roused. And I got to tell you, they looked tough. And I want them to see that, the fence sitters.
[Greenfield:] But Mr....
[Miller:] I want them to see that in the Muslim world.
[Greenfield:] Yes, but when we see people in Pakistan by the thousands demonstrating, even rioting, against the United States, they're pumped and it certainly doesn't convince those of us in the United States that those folks over there are in in a righteous cause. Why would the fact that Caucasian American, mostly Christians and African-American Christians and Jews are pumped persuade anyone in the Muslim world that our cause is just? Or is the point just to let them know we're united?
[Miller:] We're united, we're roused and we're tough. And I think and we're ready. I think that that's terribly important. Yeah, it's important to say, "our cause is just." But part of that is defining their cause as unjust, defining their cause as unholy, defining their cause as a as a perversion of anything that's holy. We have to do that.
[Greenfield:] Mr. Woolsey, one of jobs of the agency you used to run is to collect information. We think of you as a bunch of, you know, James Bond types. But it's information. Was the was the CIA during your tenure aware of and communicating to the administration that you served the nature of this rage in part of the Muslim world, how angry part of the Muslim world was with the United States?
[Woolsey:] We had a counterterrorism center that had been established before I got there that was really very focused on terrorism. And I would say terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in rogue states particularly Iraq and Iran and North Korea were really the top of our priority. Bin Laden himself had only begun to surface a bit by the time I left at the beginning of '95 as a salient individual. But the general concern about Islamic extremism in the Mideast was, yes, it was very close to the top of the agenda.
[Greenfield:] All right. We're going to take a break. When we come back we are going to explore some of the consequences of the president's speech and ask if America really means to take on other countries harboring Afghanistan. We'll take that up right after this.

[Dalton Tanonaka, Cnn Anchor:] You probably wouldn't want to do this: launch a business in a developing country with exposure to the U.S. economy when the Nasdaq was in freefall. U.S. based E-Telcare did something similar to that. But as CNN's Andrew Brown reports, it's longshot gamble may pay off.
[Andrew Brown, Cnn Anchor:] Twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, complaints from every corner of the United States are piped underneath the Pacific Ocean to the tropical. Philippines. Most of the callers don't know that the person on the other end of the line has probably never set foot on U.S. soil. E-Telecare began operating a call center in the Philippines last year. So far, 500 young Filipinos have been trained. They field questions about U.S. politics and geography.
[Unidentified Male:] This large swamp wetland land area of Florida is know as?
[Unidentified Female:] What is the Everglades?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Brown:] And of course E-Telecare instills vital phrases like
[Unidentified Male:] Let me just thank you for calling customer service, and again, my name is Yuai. You have a good day,
[Ok, Brown:] There are compelling reasons for U.S. companies to outsource customer care to the Philippines. Service providers like E-Telecare can operate at a cost than competitors that base call centers in U.S. In the Philippines, wages have long been depressed, and there are skills in abundance. E-Telecare estimates one worker in five is overqualified for the job they're doing.
[Jim Franke, President, E-telecare:] We often joke that it's like hiring people from Harvard and Stanford to work in your call center.
[Unidentified Male:] For 40 points, this is the classic black and white movie that is shown around Christmas?
[Unidentified Female:] What is "It's a Wonderful Life.?
[Unidentified Male:] That's right.
[Franke:] Even more important than having a good American accent is that people here have a cultural understanding of America. So when they're trying to build rapport with a customer on the phone, they can talk about the latest "Survivor" episode.
[Brown:] A simple gesture that may be worth a great deal.
[Franke:] In the U.S., this is $100 billion industry that employs over two million people. So when you think about even a small portion of that business migrating offshore to a country like the Philippines, it can have tremendous effect.
[Brown:] Jim Franke won't say call centers are about to eradicate poverty in the Philippines, but he points out, restaurants and other businesses have opened up across the road from E-Telcare's office and are packed with his staff. [on camera]: So some of the money originally invested in technology ends up in the neighborhood, with service providers, retail outlets and restaurants, including McDonald's, another U.S. institution. You just can't get away from them. Andrew Brown, CNN, Manila.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Take another look now at one of America's most wanted by the FBI. Shortly after he was caught, you'll see Nikolay Soltys slowly turn his head and look right into the camera. A few moments later when he was brought into jail, his head was bowed, his hands cuffed behind him. He was found, again, hiding under a desk in his mother's backyard right at center of the area where police have been conducting a search for 10 days, looking for this man who allegedly killed six members of his family. A news conference expected to begin in a few moment. Hear now from the sheriff of Sacramento County just about an hour after Soltys arrest.
[Sheriff Lou Blanas, Sacramento County Police:] Because of the coverage and I got to give the media a lot of credit and the community, we haven't had really very many verified sightings outside of Sacramento County. So we continually believed, along with a lot of our Russian our Ukrainian officers that he was still in town. We've had a number of calls from the Ukrainian community in regard to this individual, and I have to commend the community for their calls. We've had interpreters on the line. Every call we're researched. Some of the calls you know, obviously at this point we have him in custody but every call we followed up diligently. Our officers, along with California Highway Patrol, Sacramento Police Department, FBI, U.S. Marshall, State Department of Justice, just have done an outstanding job in regards to this manhunt. This is probably one of the biggest manhunts in the history of Sacramento County, and it came to a happy ending today. We don't have any to our knowledge there's no other victims, we took the suspect into custody without incident, and we're very happy about that.
[Allen:] So we should hear more in a moment how Nikolay Soltys reacted when he realized police had found him and were going to take him in. For now we'll turn it over to Lou.
[Waters:] And are we going to New York again? OK. Up in New York helping us out is Bill Daley, a former FBI investigator. Still not much to talk about because Sacramento authorities haven't given us that much to talk about. We know Soltys is in custody after what the sheriff just said, with the biggest manhunt in Sacramento history. Now there were a lot of law agencies involved in this. And the media has been given some kudos for help in that. What is that stew like, the pressures involved there?
[Bill Daley, Former Fbi Investigator:] Well, you know, when one of these incidents occur we need to get together a large group of law enforcement agencies, usually called a task force. You know, this, of course people positioning themselves as being the lead on it. In this case we know it was the Sacramento police because it was a capital offense. And the other agencies will add in as they can contribute to the case. Obviously, the FBI with their resources across the United States can alert not only the field offices but can also, you know, do other things that might assist them with regard to putting information in computers, going further out, alerting border patrol, et cetera. In other words, they can help widen the dragnet. It is interesting, Lou, though, is that we've heard so far that the police were outside conducting a surveillance of the mother's home, and yet, the when they left, it drew attention to the fact that something was awry. And later they got the call from the from Soltys' brother. You know, it's not that uncommon that fugitives will return home or to loved one or to a girlfriend, perhaps to feel they have to close out some business or something else. And it's one of the steps law enforcement takes is to actually conduct surveillance of known locations where people sometimes are creatures of habit and they show up at locations where they feel comfortable. And so it's not that uncommon. And it's interesting that here this has proven out to be the case, where police were on the scene conducting a discreet surveillance, and they too were alerted to the fact that something was wrong, something was different.
[Waters:] I think the authorities were fearful that other family members of Nikolay Soltys also might be in danger, too, were they not? So we heard there were some protective-custody measures taken in the Sacramento area?
[Daley:] Yes, I know that there were because there were come concerns that this man was deranged and we didn't know what his intent was and who else he might reach out for in conducting some harm.
[Waters:] OK, we are waiting here we're a matter of seconds away, Bill, from this news conference in Sacramento. We're awaiting the sheriff, who's standing there at podium, to fill us in on not only the capture but how the capture was implemented and all the other questions that we still have unanswered. This is Sheriff Lou Blanas in Sacramento County.
[Blanas:] I'm Sheriff Lou Blanas. Good morning. I'd like to welcome you all here to our Rockingham Station in Rancho Cordova. As you all know, this morning at quarter to 8:00 officers made up of a joint task force arrested suspect Nikolay Soltys, who's responsible for six brutal murders here in Sacramento that occurred approximately 10 days ago. He was taken into custody without incident. We are going to have you talk to the arresting officers during this press conference. You know, you talk about a joint effort from various law enforcement agencies, and also the community. A number of law enforcement agencies really stepped up to the plate and supported Sacramento County Sheriff's Department in trying to apprehend this vicious criminal. I'd like to thank the various departments that participated: the Sacramento Police Department; the United States Marshals Office; the Federal Bureau of Investigation here in Sacramento; Sacramento County Probation Department; West Sacramento Police Department; Citrus Heights Police Department; Davis Police Department; the Sacramento County DA's Office; and the California Department of Justice; and also the California Highway Patrol. You know, when I mean a community joint effort, I really got tell you, when these murders occurred a week ago Monday, about an hour and a half after the murders I got a call from the governor of the state of California, Gray Davis. He stepped up and said: What can I do to help you? What state resources can I give you? The highway patrol stepped in to help us, and, as you know, a few days later the governor signed a reward for $50 thousand for the arrest and capture and conviction of this individual. Just about 30 minutes ago, the governor called here to congratulate all the agencies involved and also to personally congratulate the two the arresting officers involved in this case. So I'd like to thank the governor of the great state of California for his support in relationship to helping us capture this individual. We have a number of speakers here, and the first speaker who I really got to thank, who is and I'm going to tell you something, I've been in law enforcement a long time. I have never seen anybody get on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted list faster than we then the FBI got this subject on the 10 Most Wanted list. Largely responsible of Richard Baker, the special agent in charge here in Sacramento, who has been here a short time, but has already made an impact in law enforcement in the Sacramento community with his cooperation and effort to work with local law enforcement Special Agent Baker.
[Richard Baker, Fbi Special Agent In Charge:] Thank you. This sign over here is a direct result, obviously, of combined efforts by multiple agencies that Sheriff Blanas pointed out. Without that effort this couldn't have happened. Because of that effort there was such a relentless pressure on this individual that he had to go to ground. He couldn't sequester himself out of the area, he couldn't get help. It's just a great effort by law enforcement. But I'd also like to thank the media for keeping this in the public's eye. And I'd also like to thank the Ukrainian community for having to put up with and to assist us into looking for someone in their community. This is a day for celebration, but, however, as we celebrate the capture of this individual, let's don't forget the victims, and our hearts are still with them. Thank you.
[Unidentified Male:] It's now my pleasure to introduce our next speaker, the commissioner of the California Highway Patrol, Dwight Spike Helmick.
[Comm. Spike Helmick, California Highway Patrol:] Thank you very much. I'll just keep my comments very short. Again, I'd like to compliment Sheriff Blanas, Sacramento County Sheriff's Department, for an outstanding effort in bringing a person that absolutely does not belong in this community to justice. I'd like to also thank all the additional departments that he's mentioned. This clearly was a community effort and it shows that we can all work collectively together with the public's safety being our primary goal. And then finally, two people I'd like to thank. First of all, as Lou has already mentioned, Governor Davis was very, very quick to step in and tell us to pull out all stop, any resources we could do to provide the Sacramento County to assist. And to each and every one of you. The media's played a major part in keeping the pressure on this particular individual, letting the public know what was the daily changes, and for that I am very appreciative. Thank you.
[Unidentified Male:] The arrest team actually, the surveillance team that made the arrest on this subject was made up of member of the Department of Justice, members of the Sacramento Police Department, and members of the Sacramento Sheriff's Department. And I'd like to [OFF-MIKE] for the Sacramento Police Department. Ladies and gentlemen, I think pretty much everything's been said about the collaboration that has taken place in this case, and actually, it's part of a collaboration that has been going on for us for quite a while. We were just able to focus it much more on this particular case. Immediately after the homicides took place, I called the sheriff and made the offer of any resources that we had in the police department to facilitate the arrest and bringing to justice of Mr. Soltys. And I'm happy to say and very proud of the fact that some of our members of the Sacramento Police Department were part of that arrest team. That arrest team, as he indicated, actually is comprised of multiple agencies. And working very close, cooperatively with the state and federal agents as part of that team, I think that's what you are seeing the result of today. It could not have been done by any single agency. It really required cooperation. As the commissioner also mentioned, two other folks that really need to be tanked. One is the press. All of you really have kept it on the forefront, and that has been communicated, obviously, worldwide. But really to a more important group, and that is the immigrant community. There was a real sense of tragedy that was really felt throughout the Ukrainian immigrant community. And we have received a lot of information and a lot of cooperation from them, and so we also want to thank them as well. To the arrest team, I mean, we are really proud of them. And now, we need to move forward with justice, as the individual is brought forward. Thank you. Thank you, chief. You know, there's a lot of behind-the-scenes operations that went on since the murders occurred a week ago Monday. One of those is we maintained a 24-hour command center in the first floor of the sheriff's department for 24 hours a day. At any given time, there was anywhere from a minimum of 10 people to 30 people working that command center. Not only made up of local law enforcement agencies and interpreter, but also made up of the FBI and the U.S. marshal. And that brings us to our next person to introduce, is the assistant U.S. Marshal here in Sacramento. Jerry Anamoto is out of town. His assistant is Thomas Figmis Thomas. Good morning. On behalf of the United States marshals, I want to thank the sheriff, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies in this community for allowing us to participate in this investigation. Our staff live and work in this community, and we try to support local law enforcement as much as possible. Our main investigative response to this would be fugitive investigation. We have a lot of expertise in this area, and we're glad to offer it to the local community. Thank you. And before I introduce the arresting officers, I just want to reiterate what a lot of the speakers said, I want to thank the press for their coverage, their fair analysis of this whole incident that occurred over the last 10 days, and I also want to really thank the Ukrainian community. This is attack on everybody. This just wasn't an attack within part of our one part of our great society, especially in the Rancho Cordova area, where four of the murders occurred a short few blocks from here. We receive a number of calls from the Ukrainian community in regards to sightings, they believe where the subject is hiding. I want to thank them personally, thank them on behalf of all the men and women involved in law enforcement. I want to thank them for their support and the phone calls they made to our communications and command center. The next two individuals I'd like to introduce now we had arrest team or surveillance team out there, so let me give you a little background. Since the homicides have occurred, we had a number of plain clothes officers working various parts of the investigation in trying to track these fugitives, not only the local agencies involved, but also the federal agencies. We've maintained 24-hour residence on the residences involved. On the residency down the street here on Mills Station, we had a uniformed squad car there, the fact that these individuals living over here may be potential victims. That is where four of the victims were murdered over here, on Mill's Station. Since that time, we have tried to follow members of the family, not only to provide safety, but to hope that the subject would try to make contact with them over the course of our surveillance. This morning, at quarter to 8:00, our graveyard surveillance team was in the presence or just about ready to get off. And the day shift was coming on, and at that time, the arrest was made. That team was made up of one of individual from the Department of Justice, Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement, Sacramento police officers, and Sacramento deputy sheriffs. I have two of the officers involved in that, and I'm going to have them come up, give their story of what happened, and then we'll open it up to a little question and answer of those officers. So bear with us. From the Sacramento police department, we have sergeant Virgil Brown. Virgil? And from the Sacramento sheriff's department, we have detective Chris Joachim.
[Sgt. Virgil Brown, Sacramento Police Department:] As the sheriff indicated, my name is Virgil Brown. I'm a sergeant with the Sacramento police department. I'm currently assigned to the Crank, Rock Impact Project of Sacramento. It's a state-funded task force, which consists of Sacramento police department, probation and the sheriff's department. The grant is currently administered by the sheriff's department, and at this time, as I indicated, I'm a Sac p.d. sergeant, and I'm running the team. We've been actively involved in the investigation almost from the beginning. My captain, Captain Brazil, and Lieutenant Gregson, went to the sheriff and asked if they needed some assistance, and at that point, we were asked to assist in this investigation. Lieutenant Lazido from the sheriff's department is my immediate supervisor, ad also indicated he needed our team to assist on the surveillance. That's how we got involved in this investigation. As everybody has indicated earlier, this is not just an individual-type event here. This is a law enforcement community that came together to bring the suspect into custody. And this just says something about Sacramento in general, the fact that we work together as a unit to take care of our problems. And I'm just really proud to be a part of this organization. The fact that we all worked together, nobody put anything all the egos were put aside and everybody worked as a unit to take care of this problem. And again, I have to thank the Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement. I have to thank the probation department, the sheriff's department, and SPD for giving us their support and doing whatever it took to take this person into custody. And basically, what that took was 24-hour work to take this person into custody.
[Det. Chris Joachim, Arresting Officer:] I will describe how the arrest occurred. As the sheriff said, at 7:45 this morning, I was working the graveyard shift, and was getting ready to get off, and Sergeant Brown here was bringing his day shift crew on. We observed the family leave the residence in a very hurried fashion. And we began to follow them. Shortly after that, we saw them arrive to a store, and the suspect's brother entered a store, and we realized that he had called 911, reporting that the suspect was underneath a desk in the backyard of the residence we were watching. Somehow, the suspect had arrived in the backyard of that residence on foot, undetected, in the cover of darkness while we were watching the residents in the area. The patrolman assigned to the area did a fantastic job of immediately setting an outer perimeter so the suspect wouldn't escape, allowing Sergeant Brown's team and my team to do as we planned, and that was if he arrived at that residence to hit it, and effect an arrest as immediately or as fast as possible. So under the direction of Sergeant Lancaster, we had two teams converge on the residence from two different directions. We quietly approached, and we couldn't see a desk in the backyard at first. Eventually, some of my partners were able to peer through the fence and find a desk just inside the gate to the residence, just outside a sliding glass door, next to an inoperable refrigerator. As we moved to maneuver through the gate, several of us could see the suspect's feet. He was maybe curled or lying on the ground, as if he had been resting or laying in wait in that location. As he heard us, he sprang to his feet and appeared as if he were to run, but the inoperable refrigerator's door was open, blocking his exit. We entered the gate. It was a very confined area. We were able to grab him, and he thrust his hands in the air as soon as I entered the gate. So I immediately saw he wasn't armed. I secured my weapon, was able to grab him, extricate him from that little small area. And Sergeant Brown was able to handcuff him, along with the assistance of several of our partners right outside that gate area. And we brought the family back to the scene who positively identified him.
[Question:] Sir, did he say anything?
[Joachim:] He spoke no words that I heard during the entire incident?
[Brown:] The whole time he was very stoic, didn't say anything to us. He didn't really respond immediately when we took him down. We told him to get down. We had to forcibly take him down, although he didn't struggle with us.
[Question:] He thrust his hands in the air as if he surrendered?
[Joachim:] I believe so. I was looking at him through the fence, as he appeared to turn and run, but the refrigerator was blocking his way. So officer Brad Warner pushed the gate open for me, because I was armed with the shotgun. I entered the small area, and as soon as he saw me he thrust his hands in the air. I took it as a surrender. I was happy to see that he was unarmed, so I was able to secure my weapon and extricate him from the area.
[Question:] Detective Joachim, given the fact that you have the house under 24-hour surveillance, how surprised were you that he showed up in that backyard?
[Joachim:] Well, that's why we had the house under surveillance. We believed this is one of the likely places he would have arrived at. It's a very difficult surveillance is a very difficult thing to do, especially at nighttime, when it's dark. And you could see vehicles arrive, but people on foot in the darkness he was wearing dark clothing he could have entered the place over back fences. And in fact, earlier in the day we did see somebody approach on foot to the residence, but the family had cell phones to dial 911 directly to us. They had a panic alarm in the house. We received no alarm, so we didn't fear for their safety at that time. Apparently, if that was him, he laid in that backyard until the family saw him and evacuated the house.
[Question:] How long do you think he'd been there? What did he look like?
[Joachim:] Well, basically he was wearing a blue T-shirt with yellow writing on it. He had on a dark colored to black type of jogging pants. He was very dirty. His feet were dirty. His whole body was basically dirty, like he'd been camping out. He had a two or three-day growth of a beard. Just very disheveled. Again, he looked like he had been camping out.
[Question:] You said that the family left in a hurry. Do you take that to mean that they were fearful, that they'd just discovered him themselves?
[Joachim:] At first, when we saw the family leave, we didn't know what they'd seen. We were simply watching them. They didn't use their 911 cell phones or their panic alarm. Five to six family members first of all, the garage door flew open. Detective Macateeb was watching at that point. The garage door flew open, he radioed to us that the family was entering the car in a hurry, backup lights, and it left in a really quick hurry. Once we realized that they when we followed them to the store, once they made the 911 call, it was obvious to us why they were leaving in such a hurry. They had just discovered him and went to report it.
[Question:] Just the two people? The mother and the son, or how many people are we talking about getting in that car?
[Joachim:] There were several.
[Brown:] Yes. We're talking about his brother, his mother, the brother's wife, a younger male juvenile, and an older female juvenile. And the female juvenile was the one we saw actually kind of run into the vehicle, that really gave us some indication that they were in a hurry to get out of there.
[Question:] Since they called 911, will they be getting the $120,000 reward?
[Brown:] Well, that's something you have to talk to Sergeant Lewis about. I'm not really sure on that.
[Question:] Do you have any idea where he's been the past couple of days, before he was under the desk?
[Joachim:] Well, the investigation obviously is continuing, and it's in its preliminary stages now that they have an opportunity to talk to him. But, as Sergeant Brown said, he was disheveled and looked like he may have been camping out.
[Question:] Are you sure he came in overnight in the darkness [OFF-MIKE]?
[Joachim:] Well, technically, I guess he could have been there, but it wasn't a very great hiding place. I'm sure the family would have seen him if he hadn't come in during the night.
[Question:] Did he have anything with him?
[Brown:] On..
[Joachim:] He had a...
[Brown:] Yes he when we took him down, we searched him. At that point he had a, I'd say about a four to five-inch potato peeler, a metal potato peeler with him. He also had a folded up map. I'm not sure exactly what the map was of.
[Joachim:] It was of the Sacramento area, I'm being told.
[Brown:] That was the only property that he had on his person. Behind the fence where he was hiding, there was a backpack and a sleeping bag.
[Question:] Any weapons? Do you believe the potato peeler was the murder weapon?
[Joachim:] No, I believe he was maybe peeling potatoes if he was camping out.
[Unidentified Male:] We found a knife in the...
[Joachim:] They...
[Brown:] Yes, right. As we're being told, there was a knife in his backpack. We're not really sure if it is the murder weapon. But it is a knife similar to what we think might have been used.
[Question:] Any indication how he survived all this time? Did he have cash in his backpack?
[Joachim:] I looked in the backpack briefly when I first saw it. I left it for the investigators to further search, and they found the weapon that he was describing. But there was a soda bottle, some water in there, a sleeping bag that I saw immediately. So I believe that indicated he may have been camping out.
[Question:] Can you describe that knife?
[Joachim:] I did not see it myself.
[Question:] Is there a rural area adjacent to where he was found [OFF-MIKE]?
[Brown:] To the north there is a wooded area that could be used for camping, yes.
[Question:] Is it a park [OFF-MIKE]?
[Brown:] No, it's not really a park. If I'm not mistaken, I'm not really familiar with the area, but from what I understand it's like a creek area.
[Question:] Have you talked to the family at all since this happened, and has the brother said anything to clarify exactly what may have happened?
[Brown:] The suspect hasn't given us any information, hasn't talked to us. The family is, at this time, hasn't provided any information, and at some other time, later I'm sure, the homicide investigators might have additional information to provide to you.
[Blanas:] OK. We're going cut the press conference off. We got AeroJet setting off a rocket here in about 60 second, if you remember, and it's probably going to be quite loud. Again, you can't say enough about the cooperation of local law enforcement. And as more details come forward, Jamie Lewis will be available later on. I know some of you asked on the 911 tape of the brother. We're going to try to see if we can put that together for you. There was a knife found in the backpack. The knife is consistent, we haven't positively identified it, but from what homicide tells me, it's consistent with the murder weapon.
[Question:] Sheriff, just one more thing. You had there had originally been reports that the Ukrainian community and the family might not be cooperative. But, you found that not to be the case?
[Blanas:] Yes, that's correct. It appears that, as Sergeant Brown and Chris Joachim have indicated, it appears that this person had been living out along the parkway or bike trails in Citrus Heights. There's still the question of: How did he get from where he dropped his car off, which is on Auburn Boulevard, to out to that location on Bonham, which is several miles. We are still conducting further investigation on this. We will be available after the press conference, but again, I want to thank each and every one of you in the press. And I also want to thank the Ukrainian community who've done a great job with respect to helping us capture this violent murder suspect. Thank you.
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] There you go. A sense of relief from the Sacramento sheriff who's been in charge of this investigation, with congratulations all around to the many agencies involved. I counted 12 in all. It broke down to good, old fashioned police work, which began at a stakeout. The family home, belonging to Nikolay Soltys' mother. Five family members inside, they quickly left the house at 7:45 a.m. pacific time this morning. That alerted police who have been watching the place. There was a call from a brother, the brother of Nikolay Soltys just a short while later, a 911 call telling police that Nikolay Soltys was under a desk in the backyard at that house. Two teams from the Sacramento County Sheriff's Office and Sacramento police converged on the backyard. Sure enough, under the desk in the backyard, Nikolay Soltys, who raised his hands. He was taken to the ground, but other than that put up no resistance. The family was brought back in to identify him, positively, as Nikolay Soltys, the man that police had been searching for, for 10 hectic and furious days. Yes, that's him. There was a backpack found, and we just heard, the last bit of information from the sheriff himself, that there was a knife inside that backpack, which he says is consistent with the murder weapon. Six murders in this case, of family members of Nikolay Soltys. There's a further investigation not only of the forensics concerning that knife, but also how Nikolay Soltys got around the Sacramento area. Again, Nikolay Soltys in custody. When the arraignment will be, we don't know. The man has not talked yet with police. We continue following the story, further developments in just a moment.
[Allen:] Again, the international manhunt for Nikolay Soltys began after the discovery of grisly killings August 20th. It was shortly before 10 a.m. that police found the pregnant wife of Soltys dead; her throat slashed at their home in North Highlands that's a Sacramento suburb. Twenty minutes later Soltys arrived at his relatives' home in Rancho Cordova; that's also just outside Sacramento. His aunt and uncle, both in their 70s found fatally stabbed, along with his two 9- year-old cousins, a girl and a boy. Then it was one hour later that Soltys arrived at his mother's house in Citrus Heights where he was found today. And later that evening they discovered his son, his 3-year-old son Sergey, whom Soltys had taken from his mother's home. Police described in excruciatingly sad detail how they believed the killing of this boy, Sergey, took place as Nikolay allegedly lured him to a box in a trash area, a dump site with toys and then slashed the boy's throat. Again, many, many leads, tips went nowhere. There were no hot leads for police as they searched for him in the Sacramento area. As we just heard, they believed all the while that he was staying close by. And again today, Nikolay Soltys is in jail. We'll continue to bring you any more developments. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Here in Washington, the Clinton administration is closely following the developments in the Middle East. CNN's Andrea Koppel has that.
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn Correspondent:] Another apparent setback for U.S. efforts at forging a Mideast peace deal. President Clinton appealing for calm, condemning Thursday's deadly car bombing in Jerusalem.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] This morning we were reminded once again in Jerusalem that there are those who seek to destroy the peace through acts of terror. This cannot be permitted to prevail.
[Koppel:] Just Wednesday night, the Clinton administration thought a truce had been struck to end more than a month of Israeli- Palestinian clashes. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and members of the U.S. peace team worked the phones, urging both leaders to publicly announce the cease-fire they'd agreed to.
[Madeleine Albright, U.s. Secretary Of State:] And we will continue to work on it and hope that the parties, between themselves, can continue working.
[Koppel:] Hours later each side issues a written statement, but neither leader himself makes a public call to end the violence. Back in Washington, U.S. officials, their fingers crossed, hoping this cease-fire will stick.
[Albright:] What also, now, has to happen, is that we see how these commitments are fulfilled and then move to the peace process.
[Koppel:] But after so many weeks full of disappointment, the Clinton administration recognizes that this agreement, like the one signed last month in Egypt, could unravel. Making sure it doesn't will be the focus of Friday's agenda when the Palestinian's chief negotiator meets with Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and National Security Adviser Samuel Berger here in Washington. Andrea Koppel, CNN, the State Department.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] And joining us now to talk about high gas prices and what we can expect for the Fourth of July travel period is Mantill Williams. He's with the AAA, and he joins us from Washington. Mr. Williams, thanks for being with us.
[Mantill Williams, Aaa:] Good afternoon.
[Nelson:] First of all, can you tell us, have you noticed any drop-off in travel plans this summer because of the high price of gas?
[Williams:] No. We haven't noticed any drop-off in travel plans. What we're noticing is a altering of people's traveling plans. People seem to be altering their plans in terms of their limiting their distance, and they're also cutting back in other areas of their trip, but they're or not canceling their plans.
[Nelson:] What do you make of this spiraling gas price? I mean, there, was an agreement by OPEC back in March to increase production. We, as a nation, I think were expecting some relief, but not only has relief not materialized, but prices continue to go up. So what do you make of all of this, especially in the wake of the latest OPEC promise?
[Williams:] Well, we think that it's a number of factors. Number one, you have the new regulations going into effect for reformulated gasoline. You also have the OPEC situation to where they're in the boosting output at the levels that we really need. We do have a supply problem, but the number one thing is the demand for gasoline is really strong in America right now, and we don't have overall energy policy. So it's going to keep coming back to that, coming back to the fact that we have this huge demand and we're depending on sources outside of our country to fulfill our needs.
[Nelson:] Drivers as they face their vacation plans are probably wondering what they can do to perhaps be a little more cost-effective. Have you got any suggestions?
[Williams:] Yes, we do. Number one, you want to use self-serve regular unleaded, unless you're owners manual specifically says you need premium, because that can save 10 or 20 cent per gallon. Keep in mind that a well-maintained car is fuel-efficient car, so just do minor things such as changing your oil, keeping your air filter clean, and making sure your tire pressure is at the right level. And basically, when you go out and travel, use the smaller more efficient vehicle, more fuel-efficient vehicle as opposed to the larger
[Suv. Nelson:] OK, and also pray for lower prices. Thanks for being with us. Mantill Williams from AAA joins us from Washington. Thanks.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] Now to a new confrontation looming this morning between the U.S. Navy and protesters in Puerto Rico. The Navy is set to resume bombing exercises at its range on the island of Vieques, but hundreds of protesters are believed to be heading for Vieques and a few have already invaded the bombing range. CNN's John Zarrella is on the island.
[John Zarrella, Cnn Correspondent:] Colleen, no confrontation yet, but that certainly could be the case before the day is out. Behind me you can see Camp Garcia, which is the Navy military bombing range, and the security guards outside here, about 10 of them right now, in front of the behind the barricades and the gates, then the concertina wire, the fence line that leads to Camp Garcia. In the distance we can see the two destroyers off in the distance that are part of today's exercise, and they may be involved in some ship-to-shore bombing before the day is over. There will also be area bombardments by A-4s. And, you know, as you mentioned, somewhere out there in Camp Garcia we are told by the organizers of the demonstrations here that there may be up to 70 people who have infiltrated who have gone inside and say they're going to stay there when these bombs fall. Now, we have to emphasize that these are inert bombs, so they are not going to explode. But certainly, if the people are around and they should get hit, they would likely get killed. We don't know what the Navy will do if, in fact, there are people in there. Now here on this side of the street, we've got about 50, maybe 75 protesters that have gathered so far. A lot of them have spent the night here some of them sleeping on cots, some of them sleeping in tents. And there was a protest until the wee hours of the morning here on Vieques Island and also yesterday in San Juan there was a protest. The people here just want the bombing stopped. Now, a few years ago, a civilian security guard was killed here on the island by an errant bomb, and that's what really set the people off in Puerto Rico. Since then, some real nationalism, some real sentiment has grown here on the island for the U.S. Navy after six decades to finally stop the bombing. But, right now, no indication that that will happen anytime soon. John Zarrella reporting live from Vieques Island, Puerto Rico Colleen.
[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you very much John. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Wolf Blitzer:] Tonight on
[Wolf Blitzer Reports:] Target Terrorism. City after city has fallen. Are the Taliban about to lose their remaining strongholds? We'll go to CNN's Christiane Amanpour on the ground in Kabul. Does the U.S. have Osama bin Laden cornered?
[Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser:] We're beginning to narrow his possibilities for hiding.
[Blitzer:] I'll speak with President Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice. After a series of stunning victories, does the Northern Alliance want to govern all of Afghanistan? Neighboring Pakistan may have something to say about that. I'll speak with Northern Alliance representative Haron Amin, and Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S., Maleeha Lodhi, as America targets terrorism. Good evening, I'm Wolf Blitzer, reporting tonight from Washington. We'll get an update from Afghanistan in just a moment, and go to our interviews, including U.S. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, but first, here's CNN's Donna Kelley in Atlanta with a quick check of the latest developments Donna.
[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] Wolf, thank you. Military and diplomatic pressure being applied to the two remaining Taliban strongholds in Afghanistan. In the north, the Taliban held city of Konduz has been under siege from U.S. warplanes and rival Northern Alliance troops for about ten days. But rather than surrender to the Northern Alliance, Taliban leaders in Konduz want the city turned over to the United Nations. The U.N. is reportedly considering the situation and has been in touch with the International Red Cross, which normally handles surrender situations. The only other major Afghan city still held by the Taliban is Kandahar and that could also be changing. Sources tell CNN that public support for the Taliban is waning. In fact, some civilians have tried to disarm Taliban soldiers. Pashtun tribesmen are meeting with Taliban leaders to discuss the city's handover. We have new information coming out Jordan involving terrorism. Apparently, Jordanian officials made three arrests a couple of days before September 11. They say that the men taken into custody were planning to bomb two hotels in Jordan as way of amplifying the attacks on American. The three men were arrested after investigators intercepted a phone call in which one of the men used a phrase believed to be an Al Qaeda code word "big wedding," code for "attack." Back to Wolf Blitzer in Washington.
[Blitzer:] Their regime shattered, Afghanistan's Taliban are battling on for just a couple of strongholds. Can negotiation avert a bloodbath? Will the victorious Northern Alliance share power? Let's turn now to CNN's Christiane Amanpour. She's in the Afghan capital of Kabul. Christiane, who appears to in be control of almost all of Afghanistan right now?
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Senior International Correspondent:] Well, the Northern Alliance are in control of about 80 percent of the country. And they have really seen the military momentum sweep so fast, further than they thought and quicker than they thought. And of course, the political momentum is dragging. And so, that's what the focus is on right now. The Northern Alliance President Rabbani came back to capital, Kabul, for the first time in five years yesterday. But he didn't come to say that he wanted to keep his presidency, rather that he was here to pave the groundwork for peace, that they wanted a broad-based alliance, that they wanted to make it more inclusive than it had been in the past and that they welcomed the United Nations and the United States involvement in trying to hammer out a future peace settlement.
[Blitzer:] But is it is there a sense also, Christiane, that the Northern Alliance will give up some of this power that they clearly have right now in order to work with the U.N., the rest of international community, in putting together an interim government in Afghanistan?
[Amanpour:] Well, that's precisely what everybody was worried about, whether once the reality on the ground took hold, which is as it is right now, the Northern Alliance would then be willing to share power so to speak now that they're in military control of so much of this country. But of course, everybody is watching them. The pressure is intense upon them. And so far, they seem to be saying the right thing. Of course, there was a moment when the Northern Alliance was dragging its feet. It wanted to this consultative meeting of all the various faction leaders right here in Kabul, in a place that it controlled. And that was meeting with resistance from other factional leaders, particularly the Pashtuns of the south. The U.N. wanted this meeting to be outside of Afghanistan as a symbolic sort of a symbolic move. And it appears now, that the Dr. Abdullah, the Northern Alliance foreign minister, is saying that they will exceed to what the U.N. wants. They will hold this meeting outside of Afghanistan. And he says perhaps as early as this week. We'll have to wait and see whether that in fact does take place.
[Blitzer:] Christiane Amanpour in Kabul, once again, thank you very much. Is the U.S. closing in on Osama bin Laden? Should the Northern Alliance be allowed to take the reins of power or should it be rained in? I spoke, earlier to today, with the White House national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice. Let's get to the situation inside of Afghanistan right now. Do you, the U.S. government, have any idea where Osama bin Laden is right now?
[Rice:] We have no reason to believe that he has left Afghanistan. We do believe that he continues to operate in a fairly narrow range. We think that the more that we are stripping away his protection in a sense, stripping away the Taliban, stripping away the hardcore fighters that protect him, that we're beginning to narrow his possibilities for hiding. But I want to be very clear that getting the Al Qaeda network broken up is really what we're after here; that it's terrific that the Northern Alliance has had the successes that it's had. It's very important that the Taliban are fleeing and that they're loosening we're loosening the grip on the country. But this mission will not be complete until we have broken up this Al Qaeda network and until it cannot do the kind of harm that it did on September 11.
[Blitzer:] Have you narrowed the potential area where Osama bin Laden is to within what 30 square miles or anything like that?
[Rice:] We believe that his options are quite a bit narrower than they were when we began.
[Blitzer:] Is it near Kandahar in the south?
[Rice:] I can't speak to precisely where he is. But we are narrowing this, and we are putting a net around him, and eventually we're going to get him.
[Blitzer:] Do you want to get him alive or dead? In other words, do you want to capture him, or do you want to kill him?
[Rice:] As the president has said our view of this is that we have to break up this Al Qaeda network and we have to make certain that bin Laden and his lieutenants are brought to justice. And that's the focus here. The president has said we'll do it any way that we can.
[Blitzer:] Well, what would be better in your opinion? Would it be better to put him on trial to capture him, put him on trial? Or just to kill him?
[Rice:] I think the most important thing is that he's not able to function any longer, and we're agnostic as to how that happens.
[Blitzer:] So even a long drawn-out trial, he may be able to function in certain ways.
[Rice:] I rather doubt that we're talking about just given the circumstances here; I rather doubt we're talking about a long, drawn- out trial.
[Blitzer:] Mohammed Atef, one of his top deputies, do you know for a fact now that he is dead?
[Rice:] We are getting more and more confirming evidence that he is. In fact, I think a Taliban leader has said that we managed to eliminate him. That's very good news because he was the number-three man in the organization. He most likely planned a lot of these attacks. But the Al Qaeda network is more than one man. And we have made very clear that there's an entire leadership here, an entire command and control structure that has to be taken down.
[Blitzer:] Mullah Omar, the leader of the Taliban, he gave an interview to the BBC this past week. Among other things, he said this: "The current situation in Afghanistan is related to a bigger cause, that is the destruction of America. If God's help is with us, this will happen within a short period of time." Do the same rules of engagement, as far as Osama bin Laden is concerned, involve Mullah Mohammed Omar, the leader of the Taliban?
[Rice:] Taliban command and control, including Mullah Omar, are clearly have to be eliminated if we're going to be able to loosen the grip of the Taliban and to win this war. And winning this war, again, means getting rid of the Taliban leadership so that the grip on the country is loosened, so that we can rout out the Al Qaeda, and so that Afghanistan is no longer a terrorist haven. But this is he is considered command and control.
[Blitzer:] So you want to capture or kill Mullah Omar and his top lieutenants as well?
[Rice:] We are certainly determined to eliminate the command and control apparatus of the Taliban as well.
[Blitzer:] The Northern Alliance appears to be acting as if it's the new government of Afghanistan in Kabul. You saw the former leader Rabbani; he's now on the ground in Kabul. Seems to be acting as if he's the prime minister of Afghanistan or the president or whatever. And this seems to go against what President Bush specifically said earlier in the week. I want to play an excerpt from what the president said on Tuesday about the Northern Alliance. Listen to this.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] They have no intention of occupying. And they said this publicly; they intend not to occupy Kabul, which is fine. That's the way it ought to be.
[Blitzer:] They're operating out of the foreign ministry, the treasury, most of the government buildings in Kabul. They seem to be thinking that they're the government.
[Rice:] In the first phases, when the Taliban were fleeing from Kabul, it's very clear that the Northern Alliance believed that they faced a situation in which the Taliban were really wreaking havoc and there was a kind of chaos ensuing in Kabul. And so, they used some of their security forces to try and bring about some order. They did keep the bulk of their forces outside the city, as they were asked to do. We've made very clear to the leadership of the Northern Alliance and they have said that they want to be a part of a broad-based government in Afghanistan. And that cannot be done if there's some kind of declared government up front. And so, what you're seeing here is, I believe, a willingness of the Northern Alliance to wait for the process that needs to get underway here. Mr. Brahimi is working very hard now to bring various parties together in a process so that a provisional government can be established. That government cannot be Northern Alliance only, and we've made that very clear to them. So have the Russians, the French, the British, others. Clearly, they understand what has to be done here, and we have no reason to believe that they are unwilling to participate in that process.
[Blitzer:] The Taliban soldiers who are defecting, what happens to them? Are they arrested, are they pursued? Are they brought in, are they welcomed as part of a potentially new regime in Afghanistan?
[Rice:] We're not going to try to dictate the nature of this government to the Afghan people. It is really the U.N.'s role and Mr. Brahimi's role to bring them together to discuss the solution here. Clearly, Taliban leadership and those who've been associated with the Taliban most closely can't possibly be a part of this, because obviously they have wrecked the country, they've been incredibly repressive. They've oppressed the people. They've allowed Afghanistan to be occupied by foreign invaders, including a terrorist cell that is doing great harm and damage to many countries all over the world. They obviously can't be a part of anything like this.
[Blitzer:] But are they treated as POWs?
[Rice:] They will be treated I'm quite certain that they will be treated well, unlike the way that they would treat anyone under their own auspices.
[Blitzer:] You've seen the reports, though, that some Northern Alliance troops are summarily executing, torturing Taliban soldiers and others, especially the non-Afghans, the Pakistanis, the Arabs who worked with Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
[Rice:] I've seen lots of reporting about what is going on in a very chaotic situation. I've also seen reports that these foreign fighters, these mercenaries who came from around the world to occupy Afghanistan and to give cover and support to the Al Qaeda network are fighting back hard, that they've said that they are not going to be take alive. And so, we have to remember that this is a wartime situation.
[Blitzer:] Condoleezza Rice earlier today. After the brutal period of rule, do the Taliban have any part to plan in Afghanistan's future? I'll speak with Haron Amin, representative of the victorious Northern Alliance and Maleeha Lodhi, ambassador to the U.S. from Pakistan. Stay with us.

[Announcer:] From New York,
[The Capital Gang. Mark Shields:] Welcome to CAPITAL GANG. From New York, I'm Mark Shields with Al Hunt, Margaret Carlson, and in Atlanta at CNN's world headquarters, Robert Novak. Our guest is Republican Congressman Peter King of New York, the top vote-getter in all congressional races in Long Island every time he's run. Thanks for coming in, Peter.
[Rep. Peter King , New York:] It's a pleasure, Mark. Thank you.
[Shields:] Thank you. Dick Cheney checked himself into the hospital after suffering chest pains. A medical procedure was performed, and the 60-year-old vice president was released and went back to work the following day. Doctors said he had not suffered another heart attack, but questions were raised whether the vice president's duties are adversely affecting his health.
[Richard Cheney, Vice President Of The United States:] I don't think so. I'm having the time of my life. I've lost a good deal of weight over the last several months and expect to lose more. I'm doing those things a prudent man would. As long as I'm comfortable and the doctors are comfortable having me do it, I'll continue to do it.
[Shields:] Margaret Carlson, has the vice president's health become a political problem for President Bush?
[Margaret Carlson, "time" Magazine:] You know, if this had happened during the campaign, Al Gore would probably be president today. I mean, he would have really won and be president. We didn't get Dick Cheney's medical record during the campaign and no one knew perhaps how serious it was. But now that he's vice president, I think, you know, he's going to get 280 million "Get Well Soon" cards, including from me, because people want him to be well. The problem for the White House is that Bush looks very nervous when Dick Cheney gets sick and there's Orwellian language coming out of the White House, saying, I think he said the White House said it was a non-emergency precautionary procedure. But the hospital said it was urgent and significant. So, it makes it seem as if the White House, you know, the spin machine is spinning us on something as important as health.
[Shields:] Bob Novak down in Atlanta, Margaret makes a very good point and I think you have to add to that the fact that this vice president, in just a short time, has become the most important vice president in the nation's history, and that has caused some consternation.
[Robert Novak, "the Chicago Sun-times":] Yes, he is a prime minister and that's why there is consternation. But you know, I'm amused that a lot of my colleagues who have trouble understanding politics have suddenly become medical experts and are speculating on his life expectancy, when his next heart attack is going to be. I think there's a lot of people who don't mean very good who have don't have very good intentions towards President Bush, are saying well, he's not really president. Cheney is president. That's nonsense. I think he relies on advice from Cheney, but the decisions are made by President Bush and I think this is being used by a lot of critics to undermine President Bush.
[Shields:] Peter King, whether it's being used to undermine President Bush or not, there is real concern about Dick Cheney?
[King:] I think there is. I think it's important to note, though, that Bill Clinton felt everybody's pain and Dick Cheney doesn't even feel his own. So, there really is a difference as we've gone from administration to the other. Dick Cheney is an invaluable part of this administration. Obviously, we all hope his health is going to come back, he's going to be strong. But I don't think there's ever been a vice president who plays the role that he does. But in fairness to President Bush, they work well together. I think President Bush is very comfortable in knowing what he can do, what Dick Cheney can do and I think that as long as his health remains OK and he keeps getting the check ups, things are going to get along. I don't know what else we can do about it at this stage. As Margaret said, this would have been an issue in October or November. Right now, he is the vice president. He's doing his job. We just have to wait and watch.
[Shields:] Al Hunt, do you think some of the, as Robert Novak charges, some of the press concern, consideration about this or emphasis on Dick Cheney's health is those who don't wish the Bush administration well?
[Al Hunt, "the Wall Street Journal":] Well, I think that's almost irrelevant because I think that the vice president, as Peter said, has taken, Dick Cheney has taken the vice presidency to a new level in only seven weeks. He is a truly indispensable man. I agree with Bob that George Bush is still the president. But let me explain to Bob what the problem is. There is a zone of privacy for a president, for a vice president, but it doesn't extend to their health records. And I think the press, in fact, has abdicated its responsibility here, starting back with the fall. I think the White House ought to release Dick Cheney's full health records. If they are as encouraging as he says, it will put all of this rest and nobody can take those kind of cheap shots. We don't know how much weight he's lost. We don't know what his LDL cholesterol level is. We don't know what medications he's taking or what side effects they may have and until they put all that out, Mark, I think there will be a suspicion that they're trying to hide something.
[Novak:] Can I respond to that?
[Shields:] Bob Novak, I want you to respond to that. Al makes a good case, doesn't he?
[Novak:] You know, I have been very critical of all of you for bringing up Republican past misdeeds every time there was a criticism of the Democrats, so I'm going to do the same thing right now and say that Bill Clinton never, ever released all his health records. There was always some implications of mysterious stuff we didn't know about. So, this is not a precedent, and didn't I didn't hear people ringing their hands that Bill Clinton's health records were not out. And I think this is all a lot of nonsense. I think if we're in a midst of an election campaign, maybe there's some validity, but the question is not his health records, but whether he is capable of performing his duty, and hell, he was back on the job the next day.
[Shields:] Bob, let me just draw attention to your limping analogy there. The questions about Bill Clinton dealt with a, let's be quite frank, gossip about a non life-threatening disease which they thought may be incurable. But it had nothing to do with the fact that his mortality was hanging in the balance, and I think that's the difference with Dick Cheney, you'd have to agree.
[Novak:] No, I wouldn't agree with that at all. I think this is all more politics. I think that there is a different treatment of Cheney and Clinton and I'm disappointed, frankly.
[Shields:] Well, Bob, we'll have to end on your disappointment.
[Hunt:] Let me just say that I'm just disappointed that Bob Novak. as a member of the press, no longer thinks that politicians ought to fully disclose their records. I'm very disappointed in that, Mark.
[Shields:] Well, that's the last word there and disappointment reigns. Peter King and the gang will be back, however, with the end of bipartisanship. Or is it? Welcome back. In a surprise move, Senate Republicans killed worker safety regulations put in place by President Clinton during his final hours in office. The ergonomics rules were aimed at fighting repetitive motion injuries.
[Sen. Don Nickles , Oklahoma:] Look at how extensive, how expensive it is. I will state that this is probably the most expensive, intrusive regulation ever promulgated.
[Sen. Edward Kennedy , Massachusetts:] They're coming in here with a blunderbuss, and say, we've got the votes, we're playing hardball. Effectively, we are not going to we are going to give short shrift to the American workers, primarily women.
[Shields:] On the next day, the House finished the scuttling of the regulations. Democratic leaders were bitter.
[Rep. Richard Gephardt , Minority Leader:] I think what we're seeing this week is the end of what we thought was bipartisanship.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] It doesn't look like it's dead to me. It looks like it's alive and well here in South Dakota.
[Shields:] Bob Novak, is this action in Congress evidence that the Republicans really do not want bipartisanship?
[Novak:] They don't want Dick Gephardt's bipartisanship, which means swallowing all the liberal regulations left over by Bill Clinton, all the liberal proposals on the grounds that George W. Bush not a legitimate president. What was fascinating to me, Mark, that was we had all 50 Republican senators opposing organized labor in the Senate. Couldn't imagine that in bygone years and all but 14 Republicans in the House opposing them. John Sweeney, the president of the AFL-CIO, has overplayed his hand by antagonizing Republicans and that's the real message of this vote.
[Shields:] Congressman Pete King, has the AFL-CIO antagonized Republicans by overplaying their hand, as Mr. Novak intends?
[King:] Yes, to an extent they did. On the other hand, Republicans played into the hands of the Democrats, I think, and I'm one of those who voted with the Democrats in this because I think we are making a mistake as Republicans. Nixon made great roads into organized labor. Ronald Reagan made great inroads into organized labor. I think we needlessly antagonized labor by bringing this up right away. I think we can get labor on issues like tax cuts, on social issues; but by driving these wedges between us and the Democrats, we're playing into Gephardt's hands, we're playing into Sweeney's hands. We're undoing the work that Nixon and Reagan did in bringing the Reagan Democrats into the Republican Party.
[Shields:] Well, you have a disadvantage, of course, you run for office. But we don't, so Al, what's our reaction?
[Hunt:] The first thing that John Sweeney ought to do is get a new name. I mean, ergonomics sounds like something we shouldn't be talking about on this program. But I don't think it's an issue that is going to resonate a lot with voters out there; but I am struck by the hypocrisy of Don Nickles and others, because they said they did this in the name of small business and yet, on a separate measure, bankruptcy measure, Pat Leahy, the senator from Vermont, democratic senator, thought he'd test that. And he said, let's make sure that from bankruptcy that small business creditors get paid first. Now, that meant the big business creditors weren't going to get paid first, and Don Nickles and all the other weeping hearts about small business said oh, no, we can't do that. I think there's a lot of hypocrisy in this vote.
[Shields:] Margaret, we're talking this repetitive motion injury we're talking a sizable number: up to 600,000 a year. I mean, this is an issue that's just not going to go away, is it?
[Carlson:] Yes, it actually does matter. But, as a way of showing your political muscle, it wasn't a bad one to go after because, as Al says, it's badly named. And it looks like the oh, my aching back set of regulations. And you know, everybody would like a better chair. I mean, you can trivialize the rule and then make it easy to vote against and it's not going to resonate the way something against, you know, coal miners or farm workers or something where it's black lung disease versus carpal tunnel syndrome. Even the syndrome doesn't work. So Republicans had a way of showing, boy, we can stick together, we're strong the Bush White House we can do what we want on something that's not going to hurt them as much out there with the ordinary folk.
[King:] Margaret, we could have done that on taxes, which we did. You know, why needlessly antagonize people when we're trying to line up votes for more important things like taxes, rather than this, which was really just a power play against the AFL-CIO.
[Shields:] Bob Novak?
[Novak:] Let me say, of course, that this isn't just fun and games; this would cost American business hundreds of billions of dollars. Some people think 1 trillion dollars over time. But the political point that I am trying to make is that John Sweeney was trying would love to kill every Republican at the polls. If he thought he had a chance even against a friend of labor like Peter King, I think Peter would agree with me, he'd snip his head right off; but he knows he can't. Now, the interesting thing to me is that when you find in the Senate Ted Stevens, a great friend of organized labor from Alaska; Arlen Specter, a great friend of organized labor from Pennsylvania voting voting with the rest of the Republicans on this, you know that Sweeney is in trouble with the Republicans. And I think he has made a tremendous blunder.
[Shields:] Bob, I'll go back to Peter King and his political decapitation. But before we do that, I want to point out that Ted Stevens from Alaska did, in fact, warn the Republicans at their Senate luncheon that they just couldn't walk away from this issue; that maybe they could...
[Novak:] But he voted yes.
[Shields:] I understand that, but that pretend that there's no federal responsibility for dealing with this problem...
[Novak:] That's not the point.
[Shields:] He thinks is an abdication of heart Peter King.
[King:] Well first of all, I hope I don't get decapitated; but I just we shouldn't let John Sweeney set our policy. I'm saying we should go on the offensive; and I think we, as Republicans, could make inroads into organized labor if we played our cards a little better and not needlessly antagonize them and not respond to everything John Sweeney does. We should set our own agenda, the way Ronald Reagan did, the way Nixon did.
[Shields:] Last word, Pete King. Next on
[Capital Gang:] What's the outlook for tax cuts in the Senate after passing the House?
[Shields:] Welcome back. The House passed President Bush's tax cut on a largely party-line vote.
[Gephardt:] I must say, with all due respect, that this tax cut bill, coming without a budget, is another "my way or the highway" approach to legislating in this Congress.
[Rep. Jennifer Dunn , Washington:] The longer we delay in providing tax relief, the less likely it will materialize because we know that it's a fundamental fact that if that money stays in Washington, D.C., it will be spent.
[Shields:] President Bush followed the House action by taking his tax cut campaign into the Dakotas.
[Bush:] The American people had a victory today. The American family had a victory today. The American entrepreneur had a victory today. One House down, and now the Senate to go.
[Shields:] Al Hunt, how hard will it be for George Bush and the Republicans to sell the Senate on the tax cut?
[Hunt:] Mark, first of all, the White House made a rare political mistake: they did not tell Tom Daschle before it was public that they were going into his home state to campaign against him on the tax cut. You don't do that with the Senate democratic leader. And that trip to South Dakota actually, I think, backfired. But look, already in the Senate the talk among Senate Republicans is full of compromise. Specter, and Collins and Hagel are all saying, we're not going to get the House bill, Bush is not going to get his bill, we have to start to modify it. I think by the summer that President Bush will get a tax bill close to the $2 trillion dollar tax cut that he is seeking, but it's not going to have so many ingredients. The top rate will not be cut from 39 to 33. The estate tax will not be abolished. More will be given to working class Americans. It will be a compromise that I won't be crazy about, Bob Novak won't be crazy about, but I'll bet you Peter King votes for it.
[Shields:] Bob Novak down there in Atlanta, is Al Hunt's analysis and prediction hold water?
[Novak:] I love Al, because just a couple weeks ago I thought he was saying a little prayer over the unearthed corpse of the tax bill. What's going to happen is there's going to be an across-the-board tax cut, which the Democrats oppose; it's not going to be a targeted tax cut. It's going to be a very substantial tax cut in the upper bracket, perhaps not as much as the president wants it's going to go pretty much what he wants in both the size and direction. Now, in the old days when Al used to be one of the great reporters covering the Ways and Means Committee, he'd call that a Republican victory.
[Shields:] Margaret Carlson.
[Carlson:] Bob, all of us on this panel said there would be a tax cut; I don't think anybody said there wouldn't be a tax cut. We said it wouldn't be the tax cut that Bush is proposing, it would be modified.
[Hunt:] Thank you, Margaret.
[Carlson:] You're welcome, Al. And you know, Bush is showing, as he did in the ergonomics, that bipartisanship is just something he kind of goes out and talks about but isn't really practicing. He really wants to go it alone, as he did on ergonomics, and he wants to do it on the tax cut. But he alienated conservative the blue dog Democrats in the House and doesn't have somebody like Senator John Breaux in the Senate whom he needs who could bring along people. He's got Zell Miller who announced in January and who can bring along who has brought along no one and probably isn't going to bring along anybody. And it's 50- 50 over there, so I think he's going to have a hard time.
[Shields:] Pete King, you've looked at the United States Senate for a long time. Tell us your assessment of what's going on over there.
[King:] First of all, let me set the record clear. Bob Novak and I agree 100 percent, and I'm not going to sit here and let you people malign this good man... And we agree on this issue.
[Shields:] The Capulets and the Montagues are making up here!
[King:] No, actually, I strongly support the president's tax cut. It worked under Reagan, it worked under Kennedy, it'll work again. The reality is, it is going to get bogged down somewhat in the Senate; that's why it was important for us to get it out of the House, get it over there, and now the process begins. If we had fooled around for this for the next six weeks or eight weeks in the House, it would have just, you know, delayed the whole process. Right now it's in the Senate; sure, some of the moderate Republicans are going to back away, and a few Democrats, maybe, will come on board and it will be probably better than what Al wants, not as god as what Bob Novak and I want; but I think you will see a tax cut late this summer.
[Shields:] Let me ask this great political question, and that is and I'll start with you, Mr. Novak and that is, this tax bill that passed the House this past week will not be taken up in the Senate until after the budget, which is the first chance they'll have in early April, until a mark-up in the Senate Finance Committee, which Republican Chairman Chuck Grassley says will be at least the middle of May. I mean, don't they run the risk of some of the air going out of that balloon the momentum?
[Novak:] Oh, that's lot of bologna, I mean...
[Shields:] Well, thank you, Bob.
[Novak:] I mean, it really is ridiculous. People want a tax cut; Republicans took a poll in South Dakota and they had they said the Daschle tax cut or the Bush tax cut. The Bush tax cut won two-to-one in the poll in South Dakota. And I'd love for Al Hunt to explain to me how the president going to South Dakota backfired on him, because that my fragile mind cannot conceive of how...
[Hunt:] Well, Bob, I'm glad you asked that question because I now will explain it to you: because Tom Daschle actually is more popular than George Bush in South Dakota. He's taking out television ads for 10 days, pointing out the details of the Bush tax plan; and I assure you if the reason to go out there was to get Tim Johnson, the other senator, it's not going to happen. Finally, Bob, I will tell you that we did a poll this week with a competing television outlet, NBC, and we asked the question we had a Republican, Democratic pollster we framed the question as it should be framed, and the result was quite different, Bob. So it depends on whether you have a good poll or the kind of tilted poll that you were taking about.
[Novak:] I think you used the right word, Al, when you used the word "frame," because a lot of those polls are framed.
[Shields:] Margaret?
[Carlson:] I think there's you know, Bush may be overreaching a bit. He even taped his radio address on Wednesday crowing about the House the tax cut...
[Shields:] The one that played on Saturday.
[King:] Margaret, that showed he had vision.
[Carlson:] He also has hubris.
[Shields:] The hubris and vision, are they mutually exclusive? That's the question; we'll be back with a CAPITAL GANG classic speculating whether Hillary Rodham Clinton really would run for the U.S. Senate. Welcome back. Two years ago this week, we were in New York talking about whether Hillary Clinton would run, or really should run, for the U.S. Senate. Here is what your CAPITAL GANG had to say on March 6, 1999. [Begin Video Clip, Capital Gang, March 6, 1999] Is it possible for Mrs. Clinton to still say no after all this buildup?
[Carlson:] Of course she can say no. But if she's going to say no, she has to say no sooner rather than later. I mean, no one has benefited more from not dispensing from sexual favors not dispensed by herself than Mrs. Clinton. And so this Sally Field moment they like me, they finally like me has to be taken advantage of quickly.
[Novak:] I think the New York Democrats are in a terrible box; at least the ones I talk to say so, because those who a few months ago thought didn't take it seriously, now feel she must run or they're going to lose that Senate seat because it's really too late.
[Hunt:] If I were a friend of hers, I would advise her not to run; and I think she still may come to that decision. All I said was, as of today, I think she's planning to run.
[Shields:] I have one thing to say, and that is that Chuck Schumer said this week the senator from who was elected last November, beat Al D'Amato said, I haven't felt this much electricity and excitement in one room in a long time. Bob Novak, were all the members of the GANG a little too negative about Senator Clinton's prospects?
[Novak:] Absolutely. All guilty, especially me. I think we overestimated the sensitivity and intelligence of the voters of New York that they would accept this kind of a candidate. And another thing we overestimated was the aggressiveness of the New York press corps. They let her off easy in the campaign; never laid a glove on her.
[Shields:] Pete King, is that a fair assessment, that the New York press took a dive on Hillary Clinton?
[King:] I don't think so. Actually, they went after her quite a bit. The fact is that she ran a decent campaign; she ran a steady campaign. She was able to zero in, she blocked out all distractions and she showed that type of compartmentalization that has made the Clintons as successful as they are. Also, Giuliani had to drop out of the race; Rick Lazio had a hard time getting his campaign started. And now she's in the Senate and she's laughing at all of you.
[Shields:] Margaret Carlson, you made the comment then that she was the beneficiary of not having dispensed sexual favors a victim on that count. Tell us your own assessment.
[Carlson:] Well, she took advantage of that victim moment and decided to run. And, as Pete says, she ran the most disciplined campaign. You know, she practically lived in upstate New York. I thought she was going to start milking cows she was up there so much. So, you know, of course she won. And she's still showing that discipline in the face of the pardons; when she gave that press conference, she said exactly the same words like 40 different times.
[Shields:] Al Hunt?
[Hunt:] I like it better, Margaret, when you talk about sex. You looked awful young, gosh, I tell you.
[Carlson:] I've got to get that facelift.
[Hunt:] You know, Mark, obviously we were wrong, Bob Novak's absolutely right; but, you know, I'm still...
[Shields:] Bob Novak was more wrong than anyone.
[Hunt:] Of course he was but that's not news; that's not a headline.
[Carlson:] It was agonizing not telling him.
[Hunt:] But I'm wondering, you know, if it's still not true that if you were a good friend you'd tell her not run. I mean, she's not a very happy woman these days.
[Shields:] Well, you're absolutely right. Pete King, thank you for being with us.
[King:] Thank you.
[Shields:] We'll be back for the second half of the CAPITAL GANG with newsmaker of the week, likely candidate for mayor of New York, Mike Bloomberg; our "Beyond the Beltway" feature looking at the dangers of lost wealth in the stock market; and our "Outrages of the Week" all after a check of the hour's top news. Welcome back to the second half of CAPITAL GANG from New York City. I'm Mark Shields with Al Hunt, Margaret Carlson and in Atlanta, Robert Novak. Our "Newsmaker of the Week" is billionaire communications mogul Michael Bloomberg. The 59-year-old founder of the Bloomberg News Service probably will run for mayor of New York City this year as a Republican. Al Hunt interviewed him in New York this week.
[Hunt:] Michael Bloomberg, why would a successful and influential business leader even consider running for an aggravated, aggravating job like mayor of New York City?
[Michael Bloomberg, Ceo And Founder, Bloomberg L.p:] Well, I love the city. I live here. My kids live here, and I think the city needs the four things that I think I could bring to it. It needs somebody that can listen to people. It needs somebody that can attract and explain what we're trying to do. It needs good management, and it needs somebody that knows how to be accountable
[Hunt:] Rudy Giuliani is considered by most observers to have been a pretty successful mayor.
[Bloomberg:] Yes.
[Hunt:] What would you do differently?
[Bloomberg:] Well, keep in mind, Al, that every mayor governs during a different period when they have different resources and different problems. What I am going to do is try to focus on, if I run for mayor, and if I win, to include as many people as possible. I think that's one of the problems. There's a big section of the city who Rudy really probably did a lot for, but they don't feel that they were part of the solution.
[Hunt:] African-Americans, primarily?
[Bloomberg:] African-Americans and Latinos, in particular.
[Hunt:] In that context, this is a city of interest groups, a city of ethnic enclaves, how can you do that and also not practice the politics of pandering?
[Bloomberg:] Well, you have to have some principles and you have to stand up, and you can't give all things to all people, but if you tell them why it isn't their turn, I think they'll go along with it. And if they won't go along with it, then there's nothing I can do about it. Somebody has to stand up and stop the partisan arguing, the special interest groups, and just say this is what's in the common good. I've listened to everybody, and you've elected me, and here's where we're going to go. Let's get going and stop it.
[Hunt:] There are other wealthy men who have run...
[Bloomberg:] Sure.
[Hunt:] ... for political office. "The New York Times" editorial page says it would be an outrage, however, if you were to brush aside New York City's public financing system and use your own wealth.
[Bloomberg:] I have absolutely no intention of brushing aside the city's campaign finance reforms. It those reforms allow two things. You can either take city money and agree to a cap or you can spend your own and not agree to a cap. For me, somebody that's as lucky as I've been, to take city money that could go for police and fire and education and health and to spend it on trying to get a better job would just be obscene. The public will find out, based on the money I spend to get the message out, what I believe, and then they'll know that that's what I'm going to do if elected.
[Hunt:] Final question, while we have you here, Michael Bloomberg, a] are we headed into a recession, and b] should the Senate follow the House and pass George Bush's tax cut?
[Bloomberg:] Well, number one, the economy is clearly slowing down. I don't think there's any question about that. Recession is more a definitional thing. And in terms of the tax cut, I think they will come to some compromise. The politics of giving people something for nothing and passing some kind of a tax cut are so compelling that both sides of the aisle will find some ways to go back to the voters and say we reduced the tax burden. Now, it may very well be that the surplus that they're trying to give back to the taxpayer never exists and we'll have some big problems down the road.
[Shields:] Al Hunt, will political rookie Mike Bloomberg have a chance against an experienced Democratic opponent in this overwhelmingly Democratic New York City?
[Hunt:] Mark, it's uphill. New York City politics is a mine field, and the experience of wealthy men running for political office in recent years has not been very encouraging. But if anybody can overcome it, it's Michael Bloomberg. He created he just brilliantly created a remarkably successful empire. We at Dow Jones appreciate it because, frankly, he clobbered us, and unlike most people who get in the news business later in life, he has injected great values and total integrity in Bloomberg News. I think that's very impressive. He's also chairman of the board at Johns Hopkins. He's brought not just great generosity, but quite thoughtful and quite caring. So, I'm not sure if he can make it, but it'll be an more interesting race with Michael Bloomberg in it.
[Shields:] Bob Novak, what's you sense. I mean, here's a rookie candidate with deep pockets. But, boy we saw that in a California governor race in California with Al Checci of Northwest Airlines who ran into a buzz saw in Gray Davis.
[Novak:] Well, I think Bloomberg is impressive, and I would think that my old friend and former colleague on "CROSSFIRE," Mark Green, the public advocate who is the leading Democratic candidate for mayor, is really not a household word in New York. He's not a major figure. I think he ought to be scared to death of Bloomberg. The thing that fascinates me about this interview, Al, is that he is saying is that, gee, Rudy Giuliani was a good mayor, but he just wasn't nice enough to African-Americans and Latinos. I'll tell you something right now, if Giuliani could run for a third term, he'd win very easily and I'm not quite sure that pandering is going to be as successful in New York as it used to be.
[Shields:] Margaret.
[Carlson:] Bob, what happens, I think, with Bloomberg is you get Giuliani's management, bringing the city back to financial viability and getting rid of the squeegee man and doing things that improve the quality of life, but you won't have the Diallo, the police shootings that then Giuliani would defend, you know, mindlessly, and alienating a huge segment of society, which hurt Giuliani and might have hurt him if he had actually run for the Senate. You know, Al brings up this one point, Bloomberg the only drawback to Bloomberg running for mayor is that the city lose a great philanthropist in that he's actually done he's one of the more generous billionaires in American society.
[Shields:] Bob Novak, on that question, though, how do you run I mean, do you run for continuity as the Republican candidate for mayor of New York City? I mean, to succeed a two-term Republican, I mean, how do you make your self different if you're Michael Bloomberg?
[Novak:] That's a problem. I think it has to be a personality problem. I think putting himself up against Mark Green, you know, he's not going up against Ronald Reagan. I think that's possibly to do that. The interesting thing to me, Mark, was when I learned that Mike Bloomberg was going to run as a Republican. I always thought he was a liberal Democrat, and I think he thinks like a liberal Democrat. For example, when he says that a tax cut is giving the people something for nothing, I almost fell off my chair because of course it isn't, it's giving their own money back and I don't think he understands that. Now Rudy Giuliani isn't much of a conventional Republican, but I do think he understands that tax cuts are not an hand out, but a simple justice to people who carry the economy and pay the taxes.
[Shields:] Al Hunt, I have to ask you, do you think Michael Bloomberg understands taxes?
[Hunt:] Well, I just think it's so nice that Bob Novak can explain entrepeneurialism success to Michael Bloomberg. I supposed, perhaps, Bob is worth more than Michael Bloomberg. Maybe he'll tell us later on in the show, Mark. I think one of the big issues that's going to confront Michael Bloomberg is that part of his appeal is he's a very candid man. He's very blunt. He says what he thinks. I think that's very hard to do in New York City politics. I think it is a city of ethnic enclaves and I think that candor is going to have to be tempered and can he be himself and also temper the candor. That's a delicate balancing act. That'll be tough
[Shields:] Margaret, you think he can?
[Carlson:] He'll learn. he might get burned once by being an excess of candor and then will back off, and in New York, wealth may not be as big a problem. Next door in New Jersey, remember, Jon Corzine, the former chairman of Goldman Sachs, just won.
[Shields:] I'll you this, New Jersey looks like Sunnybrook Farms politics compared to New York City, though. I mean, you wish him all the luck in the world, but welcome the NFL, Mr. Bloomberg. Next on CAPITAL GANG, "Beyond the Beltway" looks at America's investors loss of wealth. We'll be joined by financier Roger Altman. Welcome back. "Beyond the Beltway" looks at the impact of the stock market decline. Both leading market indicators fell yesterday. Joining us now in New York is investment banker and former U.S. deputy secretary of the treasury, Roger Altman. Thank you for coming in, Roger.
[Roger Altman, Chairman, Evercore Partners, Inc:] It's a pleasure, Mark.
[Shields:] Roger, what does the market news and the drop and the loss of paper wealth mean for America?
[Altman:] Well, first of all, it's a gigantic amount of wealth that's been lost. Three trillion dollars has been lost on the Nasdaq over the past year. Now, you have to put that a little bit into context because the Nasdaq soared like a skyrocket, excuse me, very quickly to get to that level of 5100 a year ago and now, of course, has fallen to 2100. But three trillion in value has been lost. I think the main impact is on consumer confidence. I think one of the big reasons consumer confidence levels have fallen to five- and six-year lows is the daily onslaught of news about the falling Nasdaq and particularly, the falling stock market in general.
[Shields:] But Bob Novak, your own take down there, what do you think it has had? What impact?
[Novak:] Well, I think it's had a very serious impact. I think it's had a serious impact on the broader economy. I think the economy is in much worse shape than the politicians admit. Poor President Bush tells a little truth and he's accused of talking down the economy. But anecdotally, the people I talk to are very concerned. I think that Alan Greenspan is having the worst time of his entire life. I think he is looking at the numbers on his green screen instead of realizing we have to liquefy the economy, and I think when you have the kind of loss of wealth that Roger talks about, that is a very serious business in America, and it doesn't just affect the millionaires and the billionaires.
[Shields:] Roger, just to come back to you for a second, do you agree with Bob Novak about Alan Greenspan's plight right now?
[Altman:] Well, I agree with Bob in the following sense: The global environment as a whole is kind of scary and a little worse, I think, then is being generally recognized. The three strongest economies in the world, U.S., Japan and Germany, the U.S. is stalled, zero growth, probably that way at least through the first half. Japan is weakening again. It's stock market is at a 15-year low. Germany is seeing negligible growth. We're seeing, you know, recurring national financial crises erupting like volcanoes, most recently, Turkey, but Argentina and so on. We're seeing vastly higher energy prices, and I think that combination makes the global environment shaky and I thinks that the outlook, specifically for the U.S., but more broadly, is very weakish and that I agree with Bob. I don't think President Bush and his colleagues are talking down the economy. I think it's actually at a delicate moment.
[Shields:] OK, Margaret Carlson, let's just take that and the political implications for it. The privatization of Social Security, which involves investing in the stock market, that politically and psychologically becomes a harder sell when you've got a market, if not in free fall, at least in decline.
[Carlson:] It sounded like this no-lose proposition last year when it was talked about in the campaign, because as Roger said, it was still skyrocketing, the Nasdaq, and you saw these incredible dot-com millionaires, you thought you could get in without risk. Now, I think that's a much harder sell because imagine if you were retiring today and you'd had part of your Social Security privatized. You know, it's not just the wealth effect, it's not a paper loss, it's a real loss.
[Shields:] Al Hunt.
[Hunt:] Roger, it still seems to me the fundamentally sound companies and fundamentally sound investments are doing fine. I mean, the Dow Jones average has stalled a little bit, but it's still three times what it was when you so wisely engineered back in 1993 that budget compromise and tax increase. We thank you as American citizens...
[Altman:] Thank you, Albert.
[Hunt:] ... for that, Roger, but there was a story in "The Wall Street Journal" this week, which I thought was a metaphor for a lot of this, about this hot new issue, Loudcloud, I think it was called. A lot of prominent bankers, or backers, rather, and we quoted a top money manager in saying that the only problem, the real problem is I don't really understand what the company does. And it seems to me that that really said a lot about what was going on and the drop from 5100 to 2100 was a burst of the speculative bubble, and a lot of it was blue smoke and mirrors, wasn't it?
[Altman:] Well, you make a good point in a number of ways. First, we do have two markets today, essentially. There's the industrial world, both big companies and small industrial companies represented by the S&P; 500 and the Dow Jones Index and that market has declined moderately, as you say. It's down 16 percent year-over-year. Not small, but not severe, and that decline is primarily in response to the falling corporate earnings we've seen, and corporate earnings have been steadily falling. Five percent this first quarter is the estimate and probably 5 percent a quarter for the rest of the year. So, it's a natural response and, I think, essentially in line with what you would expect historically to see in light of such falling corporate results. And then you have the technology world, as you're saying, represented by the Nasdaq which has absolutely crashed, and the dot- com world, the Internet world has imploded and the California gold rush mentality which we saw in the late '90s, which was really quite an amazing moment in history, really; and I think will be the object of many, many, many books has completely evaporated. And that's you're right that's the sector, which is not the whole country, and is certainly not all of American industry, which has imploded; and the rest of our economy, which is most of it, has not.
[Shields:] Bob Novak, go ahead, in Atlanta.
[Novak:] Roger, I think you would agree that we're not just talking about the dot-coms here, we're talking about substantial companies like Oracle and Intel and who are really as important in today's economy as General Motors and U.S. Steel. And I think it's something to worry about. And just anecdotally, outside the Beltway, outside New York, I talk to developers they can't find customers, but they can't find financing. And I respect your judgment, as you know, Roger, and I was surprised that you did not immediately rise to defense of Alan Greenspan for his performance during this crisis, and I maybe you will now but I think it's an indefensible performance by Alan Greenspan.
[Altman:] Well, I actually think Greenspan has managed monetary policy pretty well, Bob. You can argue that he's taken a little too long to ease and allowed conditions to get somewhat shaky and been a little slow on the trigger. But I think the Greenspan record in general, and I think you agree with that, Bob, has been awfully good. And I find it difficult to criticize Greenspan, whom I think in general gets an "A" over the entire period of his tenure.
[Shields:] An "A" from Roger Altman. Roger Altman, thank you for being with us. The GANG will be back with the "Outrage of the Week." Now for the "Outrage of the Week." Art Buchwald wrote that you never see a politician on TV campaigning in the company of rich people. That's true with cops, nurses, yes; but no spots with investment bankers. Thursday House Republicans, striving to project worker support for the Bush tax plan, got high-paid business lobbyists to remove their Gucci loafers to take off their $900 suits and to pose as blue-collar workers for a Capitol Hill rally. It's OK if you're not a real worker, you can still play one on TV for Republicans. Bob Novak in Atlanta.
[Novak:] Bill Clinton keeps confirming himself as the sleaziest of ex-presidents. A group of lawyers that includes Clinton brother-in- law Hugh Rodham last week made its arguments for a $3.4 billion fee request in tobacco lawsuits. Its videotaped presentation included the former president praising the lawyers for forcing what he calls "big tobacco" to negotiate. Now we know why Hugh Rodham was brought into the case despite absolutely no experience in tobacco litigation.
[Shields:] Margaret Carlson.
[Carlson:] Mark, last fall a tape of a Bush practice debate arrived on Gore supporter Tom Downey's desk. This only hurt Gore because Downey immediately had to drop out of debate prep. But the Bush campaign blamed Gore anyway. Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer said, quote, "the more the FBI inquires, the more nervous they're getting in Nashville." Dick Cheney said, quote, "there seems to be a little bit of smoke there." Last week a Bush aide was indicted for the crime. Ari, want to call those folks from Nashville and apologize?
[Shields:] Al Hunt.
[Hunt:] Mark, there were more tragic school shootings this week, with two kids killed in a suburban high school in Santee, California, while a young girl shot a classmate in a parochial school cafeteria in Williamsport, Pennsylvania. Inevitably this produces the stale old debate: is the cause too many guns or debased culture? The answer is both, and until we address the problems of far too many and far too easily attained guns and our cultural ills, there sadly will be lots more of these shootings.
[Shields:] This is Mark Shields saying good night for the CAPITAL GANG. "CNN TONIGHT" is coming up next.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] We want to turn attention to the other side of the country, a Los Angeles courtroom, superior court, where the sentencing hearing continues for Sara Jane Olson, once a member of the Symbionese Liberation Army, which in the mid-'70s gained some notoriety primarily because of a link to the heiress of the newspaper fortune, Patty Hearst, but also because of a series of bank robberies, some which involved fatalities. This sentencing hearing specifically involves a case in which Sara Jane Olson is accused of planting pipe bombs underneath a police cruiser. Immediately after this sentencing hearing, she will face arrangement on yet another charge, in an unrelated case, also involving the SLA, in the same time frame. That involves a bank robbery in which woman who was depositing some money on behalf of her church was killed. That will happen in this same courtroom. Other members of the SLA will be arraigned on that same charge of murder. Let's turn to a couple of experts who have been listening to this arraignment as it has been underway. There you see Sara Jane Olson, obviously a bit emotional as she is listened to. The last person there was her husband, Dr. Jerrold Peterson. Previously, her mother, Elsie Soliah, was up, talking on behalf of her daughter. Charles Feldman has been listening to the whole thing. Charles, just give us the basic jist. We haven't had an opportunity to listen in.
[Charles Feldman, Cnn Correspondent:] The sentence is a fixed one, as the judge pointed out, so in effect, all the testimonials are not going to have any impact whatsoever on the sentence that she is going to get. We've had sort of a small parade of acquaintances of hers, mostly people who knew her as right now, we're going to go to the daughter, I believe, who is giving some very emotional testimony.
[Feldman:] Emotional testimony by Layla Peterson that's the daughter of Sara Jane Olson and her husband, Dr. Fred Peterson, at this sentencing. And there you see Sara Jane Olson, who in another life was known as Kathleen Soliah, an alleged former member of Symbionese Liberation Army, the group that took responsibility for the kidnapping of newspaper heiress Patty Hearst. The proceeding that we are watching now is the sentencing.
[Sara Jane Olson:] I want to say that because I knew a person at one time named Angela
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you.
[Michael Latin, Prosecutor:] Your honor, we have only two people that would like to speak, and they will be brief. Each of them were intended victims, people whose lives were intended to be taken by the defendent's actions back on that day in August of 1975. One is a police officer, still a police officer, by the name of Martin Finemart; he has just come back from a tour of Vietnam, had survived, come back, and almost had life taken by one of the two bombs that the defendant has admitted she helped plant. This one was at the Pollenbeck station. The other bomb was an active bomb. It was live, and I'd like to show the wanted to call back that station. The other bomb was an active bomb. It was live. I would like to show the court a picture before the intended victim of that bomb speaks, so the court understands the difference between life and death for this particular officer.
[Unidentified Female:] So I would object to the picture. I have no objection, of course, to the witnesses speaking.
[Latin:] This is one of the photographs. It was given over in discovery originally. This photograph shows the position of the clothes-pin trigger device as it came to rest when officer John Hall and officer James Bryan pulled out of their parking spot at the International House of Pancakes. As I explained before, the two screws were designed so that when they shut and made contact, that bomb would go off. Because the officers pulled out at an angle, the clothes pin got slightly twisted out of joint; this is the position of the clothes pin and the two metal contacts when it was discovered by Los Angeles Police Department bomb experts and they were called out to disarm the bomb. The space between the two screws that were supposed to make contact was approximately 132 inch or less. It is almost not even visible. You have to look at the photograph at very close range even to see that there's a gap between the two clothes pin ignition points. This picture is the difference between Officer Hall being able to be here and talk to the court and the defendant facing another murder charge in this case and Officer Hall having the good fortune to be here to talk to the court today so at this time I would like to call Officer John Hall. Good morning, your honor.
[John Hall, Lapd:] My name is John Hall, and I'm one of the policemen who was
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you.
[O'brien:] Officer John Hall, who 26 12 years ago stepped into a cruiser that had a pipe bomb placed underneath it. The allegation is, and now the guilt has been admitted32 inch. That is the first of the prosecution witnesses testifying at this sentencing hearing of Sara Jane Olson, formerly of the Smybionese Liberation Army. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] Now more on Enron. A letter from an Enron employee to the company's chairman warned of "funny accounting that could mean trouble." The warning came months before Enron declared bankruptcy. The letter is one of thousands of documents being studied by Congressional investigators. CNN's Allan Chernoff updates us on the probe.
[Allan Chernoff, Cnn Correspondent:] The House Energy and Commerce Committee said a memo authorizing disposal of thousands of documents related to Enron audits came from an in-house attorney at Enron's accountant, Andersen. Congressional investigators say documents were destroyed as late as last November, after Enron had restated its financials and the SEC had begun a formal inquiry, documents that should have been held indefinitely, according to accounting experts.
[Alan Anderson, American Institute Of Cpas:] If the records were certainly subject to subpoena and they were destroyed after the subpoena was rendered, that would be more than unusual. That would be illegal.
[Chernoff:] One month ago, Andersen's chief executive told Congress the firm would reform itself.
[Joseph Berardino, Ceo, Arthur Andersen:] Andersen will have to change to restore the public's interest and confidence. The accounting profession will also have to reform itself. Our system of regulation and discipline has to be improved.
[Chernoff:] Yet there is now more heat on the accounting profession. The Securities and Exchange Commission Monday censured accountant KPMG for violating auditor independence rules. At the time, it was a major investor in the Short Term Investments Trust, KPMG was also the auditor of the fund, part of the AIM family of mutual funds.
[Howard Schilit, Financial Analyst:] When auditors are found not to be independent, as in the case of KPMG, or they're found to have missed some major accounting frauds, in the case of Arthur Andersen, we have a profession in crisis.
[Chernoff:] The SEC found that KPMG had no procedures in place to prevent conflicts of interest between the firm's investments and its auditing clients. [on camera]: And there's more financial fallout from Enron. Northern Trust Corporation is writing off $45 million in loans it made to the company and the New York Stock Exchange is still considering delisting Enron's shares. The average price has been below $1 for more than 30 days. Allan Chernoff, CNN Financial News, New York.

[Willow Bay, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to go now to Susan Candiotti, who is on the telephone. She has some breaking news for us from Washington. Go ahead, Susan.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Willow, as you may have already heard, it turns out that the FBI has said, according to sources familiar with the investigation, discovered through one of its archivists, regarding the Timothy McVeigh Investigation and trial, that they had additional information collected from various FBI field offices around the United States that were involved in the investigation, that some of that information never made it into the hands of defense attorneys for now-convicted Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh. The FBI admits now that it found some original items. However, sources familiar with that information insist that in it there is quote "nothing of major significance." Sources maintain that the information is redundant, and used as an example people who, for example, more than one person who saw alleged to have seen Timothy McVeigh in a particular location, for example. Or giving another example: FBI agents who took notes and filled out a form, which is then filled out summarizing the information to the defense. But in some instances the original notes had not been turned over. Once this was discovered, the FBI notified the justice department lawyer in charge of this, and in turn, the information was passed on to Timothy McVeigh's defense attorneys. So far we have no information, no reaction from Timothy McVeigh's lead attorney, Rob Nigh, in Oklahoma. As to whether he will file anything with the court so far nothing has been filed to see whether he can be granted a stay of execution based on this new information.
[Bay:] So, Susan, it seems it appears, from what you're telling us, as if the FBI detailed some of this information, but did they detail any reasons why it never made it to McVeigh's defense attorneys?
[Candiotti:] The explanation is more or less that it was an oversight. In many instances that they had the information but sometimes, for example, the example that I gave you, notes that were never turned over. But they took the notes and made a summary of the notes, and those were turned over to the defense attorneys. But oftentimes in a trial, unless the defense has reason to suspect information from these summaries unless they question them, then they don't normally request from the court to ask for the original notes of an FBI agent. That's just one example. Now the question is whether there's any could be any exculpatory evidence contained in information that the defense attorneys have never seen. That, apparently is what is being decided now by the defense attorneys. and they must decide, in effect, but they have to have agreement from their client, Timothy McVeigh, as to whether they want whether he wants his attorneys to move to attempt to get a stay of execution.
[Bay:] Susan, did you do you have any sense as to why this is just coming to light right now? Any sense of the timing of this?
[Candiotti:] The timing is all very recent. The letter to the defense attorneys just went out yesterday, and evidently it has been within recent days or weeks. And it would appear, according to one of the sources that I spoke with, that it was in the exercise of putting together all of the case files on this particular McVeigh trial and collecting all the information from all the field offices to archive it. That's when the discovery was made.
[Bay:] So it was during the process of basically pulling all this together and making a catalog of it that these original items, as the FBI is calling them, were unearthed.
[Candiotti:] That's what sources say. That's correct.
[Bay:] And that normally a defense attorney would accept the summaries, and if not, then choose to ask for those original items?
[Candiotti:] That's correct. Under normal circumstances, defense attorneys work from summaries. But remember, Willow, that's just one example of this information that authorities defend as being redundant information. That's just one thing. There are other items as well. That was turned over now to the defense attorneys and we do not have access do not yet have information on what some of that other information, alleged evidence, might be. So until we can talk to the defense attorneys about this to find out how they attempt to pursue this information, well, at that time we'll know more.
[Bay:] Susan Candiotti, thank you for bringing us this news. And of course, you'll keep us posted should more details come in. We're going to go now to our senior legal analyst, Greta Van Susteren. Greta, Susan just told us that the FBI has said that there are what they called "original items" that have been discovered in the process of collecting and documenting all of the details of this case that they have unearthed. Does this tell us anymore? Does this add another piece to this puzzle?
[Greta Van Susteren, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, let me put myself in the shoes of the lawyers on behalf of Timothy McVeigh. Even if I couldn't get to Terra Haute in the next 24 or 48 hours to find out exactly what he wants me to do, what would I do as a defense lawyer? Say: "Oh, well, so what, I didn't look at these original documents. I'll just let it go"? I mean, he can't do that. These defense lawyers have to look at these documents. They have to be satisfied themselves that this would not have in any way impaired the verdict against their client. So these lawyers have to go through these documents. They cannot accept the judgment of the justice department saying that these documents are not material. They have an affirmative obligation of a first-hand investigation of these documents. It's hugely important to the defense. It may turn out that they are totally irrelevant, but at this juncture, these lawyers have absolutely no choice be to make sure they pour over every single word of every document, because they cannot let their client go to a lethal injection having looked the other way.
[Bay:] But, Greta, I'm curious. Susan described a scenario in which defense attorneys will oftentimes rely on these summaries without asking for the original items. Is that the case?
[Van Susteren:] That is indeed true sometimes, Willow. But when your client is about four days away from dying and you have a mechanism by which you can save your client, relying on government summaries is not a practice that any defense lawyer would encourage who is worth his salt. But indeed, there are cases in which you rely on summaries. I mean, even in trials both sides agree to summaries, oftentimes, to present to a jury for consideration. But believe me, on the eve of something so final as a lethal injection, and knowing these defense lawyers I know how hard these prosecutors worked on these cases, which is perhaps why I come to this story with no sense that anyone did anything sinister these prosecutors did a really good job. And knowing these defense lawyers, I suspect these defense lawyers are going to pour through every single document by themselves.
[Bay:] And knowing what we do about how this happened, that these original items were unearthed during the process of, as I gather, creating some sort of archive for this case is that a typical process? And do things from time to time turn up as a result of this process?
[Van Susteren:] Well, this is a bigger case than almost any criminal case I've seen, and when these documents show up and the prosecution in a routine case says, you know, they just showed up. I mean, even, look at the billing records for Hillary Rodham Clinton when they showed up at the in the family residence at the White House, the Republicans in the city were rolling their eyes. You know, when documents suddenly surface out of nowhere. So, I mean people are always suspicious. But sometimes documents do just sort of surface. And I can tell you that in a case as important as this, the prosecutors want to be extremely careful that they complied with all the rules. But the truth is that when you have a case this large, things like this can happen. Now, we don't know if it was an accident, we don't know if it was deliberate, but when you have so many documents it does not surprise me that it happens. And you know, at least, from a legal standpoint is that I'm delighted to see the Justice Department and the FBI turn them over a couple days before the execution. I would have rather seen it done a couple years ago though.
[Bay:] Greta, at this point, obviously the defense attorneys are trying to get some sense if what this information is but they also, as you have pointed out, they also will be consulting with their client. But at this point does it matter that Timothy McVeigh has already made it clear that he wants to and is prepared to die?
[Van Susteren:] It doesn't right now. Here's one scenario. The lawyers know that the ultimate decision is made by the client, Timothy McVeigh. But they also know they want to have time to talk to him. They won't just fly out there tonight, because they have not seen the documents themselves. So, it would not be unusual for them to go to the judge and say, Judge, we have not spoken to our client. We can not let our client die Wednesday, 7:00 a.m. Indiana time by lethal injection until we have gone through these documents. We would like a chance to go through these documents. Then we will take the information we have, and maybe the documents to our client in Indiana. We will consult with him. And at that time he will give us marching orders, whether or not we should seek some sort of order or whether or not we should simply ignore it and the judge can then reset an execution date. That would not be an unusual scenario.
[Bay:] Greta Van Susteren, thank you very much. As CNN learns more we will bring it to you and MONEYLINE will continue right after this. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Moret:] Elton John certainly will feel the love on Grammy night. He will receive the Grammy Legend award and will perform during an all-star tribute. Other performers during the rest of the ceremony include the Backstreet Boys, TLC, Santana, and Ricky Martin, who all are nominated for multiple awards. The Grammys will be handed out February 23 right here in Los Angeles. Moby is another name you might be hearing on Grammy night. The DJ was more than surprised when he earned two nominations. After all, the house music impresario had an unusual recipe for making his Grammy-nominated CD. He took recordings a folklorist made some 65 years ago in the deep South, and built new songs around them in his home studio. Mark Scheerer visited him in his New York apartment.
[Mark Scheerer, Cnn Correspondent:] The video for the song "Natural Blues" finds DJproducerperformer Moby in senior citizen makeup. What he's done in this song and others is take a blues number from the 1930s, "Trouble So Hard," by Vera Hall, and reinvent it. On his album "Play," he's done that with lots of samples of the Southern Folk and Blues field recordings by legendary musicologist Alan Lomax.
[Moby, Dj/producer/performer:] I wish I had stories about like, you know, either me like getting them myself, like, you know, hanging out in prisons and farms in Georgia, Atlanta, or Alabama, or whatever, but no, I just went around the corner to my old record store and bought the reissues.
[Scheerer:] So just who is this Moby, caught here on the second stage at Lollapalooza '95?
[Moby:] I am convinced that at like one point in a past life I was a lemur or a squirrel or something, because it's almost like my apartment is like a human habitrail.
[Scheerer:] Thirty-four-year-old Connecticut-born Richard Melville Hall says his parents gave him the nickname Moby.
[Moby:] The basis for Richard Melville Hall and for Moby is that supposedly Herman Melville was my great-great-great-granduncle.
[Scheerer:] "Bodyrock" is one of the tracks from the album that's an exception. A rap song was sampled, not one of the old field recordings from the South, on which most of the songs are built. [on camera]: Were you concerned that somebody might take you to task for exploiting this old music by these old musicians?
[Moby:] The real litmus test for me was at the MTV Music Awards. I met Chris Rock, and if anyone was going to skewer me for sampling African-American vocals from the early 20th century, it would be him, and he told me how much he loved the record,
[Scheerer:] The lavish critical praise for "Play" has led to two Grammy nominations.
[Moby:] I keep waiting for the phone to ring and for, you know, Mr. John Q. Grammy or whoever is in charge of the Grammys to call up my manager, and say, "oh, we made a big mistake. These were two more nominations that were supposed to go to Santana."
[Scheerer:] Songs from "Play" are on the soundtracks of the new Leo DiCaprio movie and Madonna's new film. And he's also in a Calvin Klein ad campaign. Perhaps the best perk of all involves an old friend, Christina Ricci.
[Moby:] In a part in the video where I am lying in Christina Ricci's arms, I did have the thought, you know, there are an awful lot of men in the world that would gladly trade places with me right now.
[Scheerer:] Mark Scheerer, CNN Entertainment News, New York.
[Collin Raye, Musician:] I thought this record would be, if we did it right, would be a good opportunity to get parents and children together to spend quality time together, listening to the music.
[Peter Furler, Musician:] This record, there there is really sort of three singers in the band and so we tried to focus more on that, you know, with harmonies and things that and we hadn't done it before.
[Stephan Jenkins, Musician:] We got together and did some really intensive song-writing sessions. Those happened in in different ways and the different ways turned into different songs. So, that's why there's not one sort of pattern Third Eye Blind song.
[Announcer:] Tomorrow, why some critics say "The Hurricane" is historically inaccurate, and teenage country sensation Alecia Elliott.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] The opening bell rang on Wall Street just over a half hour ago. And nervous investors are wondering if yesterday's plunge day four of a plunge will continue its slide. For the latest, let's check in with Financial News reporter Peter Viles Peter, how are things looking today?
[Peter Viles, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Daryn, about nine minutes ago, actually, some good news came into the stock market. Factory orders turned positive in July. They had been very negative in June. Inventories continue to fall. When that news crossed the tape just at 10:00 sharp, the markets spiked higher. I'm looking now at a Dow that is up about 71 points. So we actually do have a little bit of good economic news this morning after some pretty bad news all week so perhaps a day of stability here, Friday, maybe even a little bit of gains in the market.
[Kagan:] Very good. And, traditionally, Fridays have not been a good, day especially in those summer months. Isn't that right, Peter?
[Viles:] Yes. And it's very hard to gauge on a day like, when you have a long weekend coming up. You probably won't have as much volume in the market. That leaves he market vulnerable, in some senses, to fluctuations one way or another that we later will say were not that meaningful because not that many people traded. But when you've got 71 points higher after a week that we've had, we would certainly take it at this point, Daryn.
[Kagan:] After a 500 point loss for the week, we will take that, absolutely. Peter Viles in New York Peter, thank you.

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] Business leaders from South Africa and Brazil are trying to bring the two
[Kim Cloete, Sabc:] Think of Brazil and the Rio carnival springs to mind. The annual carnival boasts thousands of people from across the world for a frenzied few days of fun and entertainment. But trade officials would like South Africans to see Brazil in a different light, as a firm partner in trade, development and investments. It's part of the government's strategy for what it calls South-South operation.
[Alec Erwin, Trade And Industry Minister:] The massive growth in world trade since the 1950s is not taking place between north and south, it's taking place north to north. So like economies can actually trade more with each other than unlike. And that's what we seem to be doing.
[Cloete:] New alliances are being formed between South Africa and India, Nigeria and Brazil.
[Rob Davies, Trade And Industry Committee:] It's been sort of a butterfly policy, which is position the body of the butterfly as being Africa and the wings as being Asia and Latin America.
[Cloete:] Andre Smith, who manufactures shade netting for parks and carports is one of a number of exporters that is keen to break into markets of the so-called Murkesa Block: Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay.
[Andre Smith, Alnet:] We understand those markets. We understand the finance that is needed. We understand the way they operate. We operate in a very similar manner, so I think it is easier for us to identify with those type of markets.
[Cloete:] But some South Africans, particularly in the agricultural sector, are concerned about the possible risks of a take- off in trade between South Africa and a country like Brazil.
[Claudia Mutschle, South African Institute Of International Affairs:] In scale, the economies differ quite a bit. Brazil's is much, much larger that South Africa. But they have fairly similar products, are ranging from agricultural products all the way up to more value at industrial products. And certainly, there is a danger that these could flood our markets.
[Cloete:] But Erwin disputes this.
[Erwin:] The greatest growth in agricultural trade since 1950 has been in Europe. They produce identical stuff and they pay for it, they trade for it. So I can appreciate some of the hesitations and nervousness that agriculture might have, but if you look at other circumstances in which agricultural economies begin trading, trade comes from opening the markets.
[Cloete:] At this stage, steel and auto-related products are some of South Africa's main exports to Brazil and other Latin American countries. [on camera]: But an unusual South African product is also doing great business in Brazil. South Africa's wild berry liqueur and rivuta cream is moving into Brazil at a rapid pace, proof that there could be opportunities for products of all kinds. I'm Kim Cloete of the South African Broadcasting Corporation for the CNN WORLD REPORT.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] A week after the Million Mom March brought huge numbers of anti-gun activist to Washington, gun advocates are in Charlotte, North Carolina to put the spotlight on their Second Amendment rights. The setting is the National Rifle Association's annual convention. And for more, we go to CNN's Brian Cabell in Charlotte Brian.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] Good afternoon, Gene. This is the second day of the NRA convention, a convention in which the delegates are hoping to regain momentum in the battle over gun control, and they are encouraged, they say, by some numbers: 3.6 million members now nationwide. That is a new record. They say in last six weeks alone they have gained 200,000 new members. By Election Day, they hope to have 400,000 more, a total of four million. So they are encouraged. The reasons, they say, because people are simply fed up with all criticism they've been receiving in the last year or two. They are taking to the sidewalks as well today, the sidewalk of Charlotte. They have been coming by in waves of 100, 200, people with placards supporting their Second Amendment rights, always placards mocking the gun control advocates, this a reaction to last week's Million Moms March. Now this convention is not about political endorsements at all. Those won't come into after the national political conventions, but if you talk to any of these delegates here, just about any one of them, they will tell you that Vice President Al Gore is not one of their favorites.
[James Baker, Chief Lobbyist For The Nra:] If Al Gore is elected, we will dangerously close to going down the disastrous path already traveled by Great Britain, Canada, Australia and other nations that have effectively disarm their civilian population. This fight for freedom. This election will determine whether we march to the 21st century in full possession of our Second Amendment rights, or whether lawful gun ownership in America could soon become only a memory.
[Cabell:] NRA officials say they have about $7 or $8 million to spend on political campaigns this November, but more than money, they say they want bodies, they want volunteers to support candidates who are against strict gun control. I'm Brian Cabell, CNN, live in Charlotte, North Carolina

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] A police search of Congressman Gary Condit's apartment 10 weeks after intern Chandra Levy disappeared the latest from CNN national correspondent Bob Franken, who has been covering this story from the very beginning Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] And, of course, Congressman Condit, Carol, has been linked romantically with Chandra Levy, the 24-year-old former Washington intern, something he has now acknowledged to police. He did that Friday night, according to investigative sources. Things have returned to normal on the street where Gary Condit lives in Washington. We can show you a live picture of the apartment building this morning in the Adams Morgan section of Washington well, maybe we won't show you a live picture. But what we can show you is the scene overnight. There it is. There is the apartment building this morning. But overnight at that apartment building, there was a beehive of activity, of course. About 11:30 in the evening Eastern time, detectives showed up, the evidence team that had been assigned by the Washington, D.C. Police Department to thoroughly search the apartment. And thoroughly search they did. The detectives were in there for about 3 12 hours. They brought chemicals like Luminol, which is one that, combined with ultraviolet light, can detect blood. They were looking for signs of a struggle. As you can see, when they departed about 2:30 in the morning, they were carrying bags of material that could be construed as evidence, evidence from this search, which came, as you pointed out, 10 weeks after the disappearance of Chandra Levy. Now, the Chandra Levy investigation is also looking to come up with a lie-detector test for Congressman Condit. The police department is saying that, in fact, it wants to give a polygraph test. And the reason that it is now seeking one is because the apartment search, a lie-detector test and the DNA test have all been information that Condit's lawyer, Abbe Lowell, said the police might be able to get. The lie-detector test is something that, as a matter of fact, they are negotiating right now. At the police department this morning, they are discussing the next strategies. As for what they found in the apartment, we got no answer to that specifically from the police chief, Charles Ramsey, when he was interviewed on CNN just a short while ago. But he did tell us what they were looking for.
[Charles Ramsey, D.c. Police Chief:] Well, you look for everything. You look for and when I say signs of foul play, all those things kind of add up to what we would call foul play: signs of a struggle, other types of evidence blood, skin or tissue things of that nature that could point to something happening that was unusual. And that might all point toward foul play.
[Franken:] The police continue to say that Congressman Condit is not a suspect. As I pointed out, next on their agenda is negotiating with Condit's lawyer, Abbe Lowell, to see if they can do a lie- detector test. There are many things to negotiate. The police would like to use the FBI expert, but the police Condit's attorney would probably want to use a private investigator, a private polygraph expert. Now, as for Congressman Condit, he returned to the capital yesterday. Congress has been off for a week. He returned to a capital and colleagues who are going to be quite upset hearing him talk, because he had told them repeatedly that there was no romantic relationship with Chandra Levy. But now he has to face the members, many of whom are quite irate. He also has to face reporters and camera crews that are chasing him throughout the capital. And the other colleagues have to try and get down to business, knowing knowing that, in fact, everybody's attention right now is on Congressman Condit and on the Chandra Levy case. That is where most of the public attention is these days. And there is also going to be attention to Anne Marie Smith in Washington today: attention from the U.S. attorney's office. Anne Marie Smith is the flight attendant who told interviewers that she too had a romantic relationship with Congressman Condit and that the congressman asked her to sign a false sworn statement saying that she did not. That has caught the attention of investigators. The U.S. attorney here in D.C. is going to be talking to her today and see if there is any evidence of illegalities that can be added to this investigation. The investigation, of course, is into the disappearance of Chandra Levy. It has been 10 weeks. And police still don't know where she is Carol.
[Lin:] All right, thank you very much, Bob Franken a pretty comprehensive report there.

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] With Americans flying in record numbers these days, it's not surprising the nation's skies more crowded than ever now, and that's causing problems not just in the air, but on the ground. CNN's Kathleen Koch now on one solution in that race for an elusive parking space.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] It is garage gridlock frustrating frequent flyers before they even check their luggage.
[Unidentified Female:] I had to drive probably about four times around trying to get a spot.
[Unidentified Male:] Circling the parking lot looking for a space, for about 10 or 15 minutes going from one level to the other.
[Koch:] Enter "Smart Park," now being tested at Baltimore- Washington International, the fastest growing major U.S. airport.
[Bill Lins, Director Of Technology, Bwi:] You come down a central corridor and you're greeted with these signs indicating to you what aisles have spaces and the number of spaces down each of the individual aisles.
[Koch:] The first of its kind in North America, the system uses lights and sensors linked to computers to direct drivers to open spaces.
[Lins:] When a customer pulls in you will see that the LED lights on sensors will turn red.
[Koch:] When you back out, a car backs out, it turns green?
[Lins:] That's correct.
[Koch:] Wow.
[Lins:] And as it's doing that, it's sending data back to the computer and that's changing the signs on the digital readouts as you come down each of the isles.
[Unidentified Male:] I saw the green light down here and I'm right in the front and it's a great deal. It was just great. I wish all the airports had this.
[Koch:] Airports in Los Angeles, San Francisco and San Jose are considering similar technology. At $500 a space, it's not cheap. [on camera]: Officials here say their system helps pay for itself, because now they can keep the garage open until it's completely full, instead of closing it at 90 percent because they aren't sure how many spaces are left. [voice-over]: As the number of air travelers increases, experts say parking has become an issue airports can't ignore.
[Peter Mandle, Airport Parking Consultant:] At some airports parking is their most significant problem. It affects customer service. It affects roadway congestion.
[Koch:] And the length of the journey.
[Unidentified Male:] I wish somebody would get in their car and leave so I can have a parking place. I mean, look at where we're at. We're out here by the highway.
[Koch:] Airport parking panic that could end as more drivers see the light. Kathleen Koch, for CNN, Baltimore.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] We're looking at a decline in the futures markets and some weakness in the dollar this morning, just a couple of signs that markets the world over are nervous about a report we'll be getting shortly. In just over two hour's time, we find out how the U.S. job market performed in July. In May and June, it wasn't pretty. Job losses like that usually make the economy take a turn for the worst. Peter Viles joins me from the interpreters desk. And, Peter, what do the job figures tell you?
[Peter Viles, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, this is sort of a good news, bad news thing. The bad news is this economy lost 281,000 jobs in the three months ending in June. When that happens, it usually means you're heading into recession. The economy doesn't go in reverse very often, and when it does, it's usually a recession. This economy in job creation was in reverse in April, May and June. But if you look back at the past recessions, I think we have a list of them here, and how many jobs were lost in each one, look at those numbers 281,000 at the bottom is what we have lost so far. The other four are the four previous recessions, all of them well over a million. That 1980 number, that 1.32 million, that was four months of job losses. We've had 281,000 job losses here in three months. So the pace here is not consistent with past recessions. What is consistent, though, is you just don't get job losses unless the economy has started to move backwards. That's why this is on the list. It's not like we're trying to compare it to recessions out of the blue. There's no other period of job losses in that whole 25-year period other than these five. So, as I say, sort of a good news, bad news thing here in the sense that we are on one of these negative tracks but so far it's a very small one and we have to keep watching it, Deb.
[Marchini:] Peter, much has been made here of the fact that most of the job losses have been in manufacturing while the service sector has held up fairly well. Is that significant?
[Viles:] Well, it's significant, though, that the service sector has started to weaken and has now failed to make up for the lost manufacturing jobs. I think your guest, Steve, earlier said he expects maybe 80,000 to 100,000 lost manufacturing jobs in July. That's been the trend 785,000 manufacturing jobs lost in the past year. So that's definitely the problem. The question is: Is there any muscle in the service sector to keep the economy going?
[Marchini:] All right. Thank you.
[Viles:] Sure.
[Marchini:] Peter Viles at our interpreters desk. And my featured guest this morning is Stephen Gallagher, chief U.S. economist at SG Cowen. And what do you think that the markets reaction would be to a weak report? Oftentimes we see the markets rally on weak reports because it means the Fed will cut interest rates,...
[Stephen Gallagher, Chief U.s. Economist, Sg Cowen:] Right.
[Marchini:] ... but in this case, we might get scared about the weakness that the economy is showing.
[Gallagher:] That's true. I think that you know what, what we're really interested in is that we're not looking for a recovery in these jobs numbers. This is going to be a lagging indicator in terms of recovery. What we need to make sure of is that job growth or job losses haven't reached an extent that's going to cripple the consumer because the consumer is all this economy's got in terms of the spending and the spending power in the U.S. and what's kept us out of a recession. So we're that sort of definitive line is is this job report going to be so weak that the consumer sector is threatened? I don't believe so, but that's what we're going into this report and looking at.
[Marchini:] What do you make, though, of reports that we see, maybe anecdotally in some cases, that consumers are doing things like cashing in on home equities and rising home prices in order to support their spending, that they're heavily in debt on credit cards and the like as well? If those are the sources of continued spending, how long will they hold up in the face of a weakening job market?
[Gallagher:] I think they can hold up for a long time. I mean the housing prices are fairly firm, the housing market's fairly strong, homeowners are taking some equity out of their houses and putting it into some spending in the malls. Yes, they're doing that, but they're also paying down those credit card bills and that's a very healthy process and that's actually improving the consumer balance sheet. So low interest rates are a factor that are actually improving the consumer sector.
[Marchini:] All right. We'll see what else low interest rates might improve when we talk a little bit more later on. Stephen Gallagher, thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Glenn Van Zutphen, World News:] British prime minister Tony Blair is dealing with a rash of election setbacks. The governing Labour Party lost more seats than expected in the mid-term elections, and Blair faces the prospect of his main political nemesis winning the mayoral race in London. With the latest, let's go to Amanda Kibel in London. Amanda, an interesting day there in politics.
[Amanda Kibel, Cnn Correspondent:] Certainly has been, Glenn. Basically, we are now waiting for the results to come through. We were expecting results early this morning, and there has been a delay in those, we are told, due to problems with the electronic counting machines. Interestingly, these machines were employed for the first time in an election in this country in order to speed up the process. We are now delayed with these results by a number of hours, and we are expecting results some time around 9:30 local time. But unofficial exit polls from the local media seem to indicate that Ken Livingstone has this one in the bag. He's ahead by some 41 percent trailing him the Conservative Party candidate, Steven Norris, and trailing him still, the Labour Party candidate Frank Dobson. Now, interestingly enough, as you mentioned earlier, at the same time that London has voted for their mayor and the assembly yesterday, the country was also asked to vote in a number of local council elections. Early results on those also seem to indicate that the Labour Party has been dealt significant blow. They have lost some 550 seats in these local elections. That, coupled with the expected victory for Ken Livingstone, is certainly going to indicate to Tony Blair and his Labour Party that there is a symbolic loss of confidence in the Labour Party here in Britain. Glenn?
[Van Zutphen:] All right. Thanks, Amanda. Amanda Kibel reporting from London. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] To the west to the south today in Iraq, well, leaders there accuse the United States of seeking to enforce what they're calling the law of the jungle as it tries to build an international terror coalition. Iraqi president, Saddam Hussein, is marking the first anniversary of last year's Palestinian intifada to say military action by the United States will only bring more destruction in the Middle East. CNN's Rula Amin reports.
[Rula Amin, Cnn Correspondent:] A protest of American policy. It's in Baghdad, but the demonstrators are not Iraqis. They are Arab students, workers, families living in Baghdad. Some from Sudan; others from Somalia Palestinians, Egyptians. They marched in solidarity with the Palestinians on the first anniversary of the intifada with a message. "Why is it that when Americans were hurt in New York, the whole world sympathized with them?" asked this Jordanian student. "But when Palestinians are killed every day, nobody steps in to support them?" Many here blame the United States for what they say is Israel's continued occupation of Palestinian lands. "It's American who is the terrorist," says this man, "liberation is a human call." [on camera]: Declarations for these rallies have been going on for weeks, way before the September 11 attacks on America. Iraqi officials say Muslim development makes it more urgent for them to make their point. [voice-over]: Baghdad says America's new war is not against terrorism that the U.S. is using the attack as an excuse.
[Tariq Aziz, Iraqi Department Prime Minister:] They want to create false pretext to attack Iraq or to hurt Iraq in any way.
[Amin:] And Baghdad rejects the U.S. position that countries are with the United States or they are with terrorism.
[Aziz:] There are scores of countries who are neither with the United States nor with the terrorists and hundreds of millions of people who are in the same position. Mr. Bush wants to divide the world either with him or against him. That's not a correct and a moral division of the world. We do not condone terrorism, but at the same time, we are not with the American government.
[Amin:] Iraq continues to deny any links to Osama bin Laden or Afghanistan's present leadership.
[Aziz:] These are false reports. As I said, we don't know Mr. bin Laden. We don't have any contact with him. We don't have any relationship with the Taliban government.
[Amin:] In fact, the Afghan ambassador here represents the same government the Taliban overthrew. Rula Amin, CNN, Baghdad.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Now on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS, a star- spangled budget. The president asks Congress for a big boost to fight terrorism.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] We need to be able to send our troops on the battlefields in places that many of us thought there'd never be a battlefield.
[Blitzer:] After the company's own investigation finds that executives got rich amid accounting violations, Enron's chairman pulls an end run around Congress.
[Sen. Byron Dorgan , North Dakota:] There are a lot of tough questions to be asked and to be answered.
[Blitzer:] Will Kenneth Lay be ordered to appear? Is Congress out to get him? Should gay couples adopt children? A group of children's doctors think so. We'll have a debate. Against all odds, the Patriots win the Super Bowl.
[Tom Brady, Patriots Quarterback:] When people say, "Well, you can't do this. You can't do this," that makes for a pretty dangerous team.
[Blitzer:] Not everyone said they couldn't do it. Hello. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington where President Bush today divided up our money. Billions more for defense, both for military might as well as for protecting the homeland. Also ahead, an FBI memo that gives us a new signal as to who might be responsible for the anthrax attacks. First, this news alert. President Bush calls on Congress to approve billions of additional dollars for fighting the war on terror and for homeland security. Speaking at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, the president unveiled his $2.13-trillion budget today. The budget also calls for steep cuts for a number of government programs. We'll have much more on this in just a moment. Angry senators say they'll subpoena the former Enron chief Kenneth Lay to testify before congressional committees. This after Lay abruptly decided not to testify on Capitol Hill earlier today about the collapse of the energy company. Lay says he thinks lawmakers have already decided on his guilt. Pakistani and U.S. officials say they're still acting on the assumption that kidnapped journalist Daniel Pearl is still alive. Officials say they're checking out several leads. "The Wall Street Journal" reporter disappeared in Karachi, Pakistan, on January 23rd. The flights of Afghan war detainees to the U.S. naval base in Cuba are expected to resume in the next few days. Sources say the decision was made in part because more cells have been built and the security force at Guantanamo Bay has been beefed up. And now back to our top story, President Bush's $2.1-trillion budget. A big chunk of that goes for the military for its war against terrorism and for protecting the homeland. On domestic matters, some parents will get education breaks. Older people are to get help paying for those high prices for drugs. But other areas will get squeezed. The president defends it all, reminding Congress that the September attack, like Pearl Harbor, is a call for action. Our Senior White House Correspondent John King now with the nuts and bolts.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] The president opened the budget battle focusing on what he calls priority one: paying for and winning the war on terrorism.
[George W. Bush:] It's proved that in this first phase that expensive precision weapons not only defeat the enemy but spare innocent lives, and the budget I submit makes it clear we need more of them.
[King:] The new Bush budget proposes spending $2.1 trillion in the fiscal year that begins in October. The Pentagon would get the largest one-year increase in two decades, $48 billion to $379 billion in all. And spending on homeland security would nearly double to $38 billion with an emphasis on airport and border security and fighting bioterrorism. Other key Bush priorities include $591 billion in new tax cuts and credits. One with a price tag of $32 billion would allow taxpayers who do not itemize deductions to get credit for charitable contributions. Another costing $4.2 billion would help parents pay for private education if their children leave failing public schools. But some domestic spending would be cut and, overall, funding for programs other than the military and homeland defense would grow at just 2 percent on average. The White House says the squeeze is necessary, that supporting the troops and winning the war requires tough decisions elsewhere in the budget. But Democrats say key domestic priorities, like health care and job training, suffer under the president's plan. Democrats also say Mr. Bush is dipping into Social Security money, that he wouldn't have to were it not for last year's big tax cut.
[Sen. Kent Conrad , Budget Chairman:] The hard reality is his long-term fiscal plan did not add up before September 11th. It's been made worse by the events of September 11th.
[King:] Democrats also note the bottom line: After four years of budget surpluses, the Bush budget projects a deficit of $106 billion this year and $80 billion in red ink next year. The White House notes past wartime presidents also have been forced into deficit spending. [voice-over]: Presidential travel is one element of the early Bush strategy, as the president tries to rally the American people to see things his way in a wartime budget battle all the more complicated by this fall's congressional elections. John King, CNN, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
[Blitzer:] And joining us now with more on the president's budget and his big-stick approach to defense spending, our Military Affairs Correspondent Jamie McIntyre. He's live at the Pentagon. Jamie, give us the details over there.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Military Affairs Correspondent:] Well, Wolf, this is the biggest increase or proposed increase in defense spending in nearly two decades, since the early years of the Reagan administration, and as you heard John King say, the Bush administration is defending this big increase as justified by the war on terrorism.
[Mcintyre:] The Pentagon says its record-high spending plan is needed to make up for years of neglect and to transform the U.S. military into a high-tech force capable of defeating terrorists wherever they hide. The Bush administration is asking Congress to approve $379 billion for defense, an increase of $48 billion. The Pentagon argues it needs every penny.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Of Defense:] If one thinks about the economic loss that took place on September 11th in this country and elsewhere in the world, in billions and billions of dollars, it is very clear that the defense budget is cheap when one compares it to putting our security at risk, our lives at risk, our country at risk, our freedoms at risk.
[Mcintyre:] While the budget is being sold as funding for the war on terrorism, the bulk of the money goes for traditional weapons and forces. But some programs are being touted as transformational, such as $1.1 billion for more unmanned spy planes, $1.3 billion more for more precision-guided bombs, and another billion to arm four older ballistic missile submarines with cruise missiles. Controversial programs, like the Air Force's F-22 Stealth Fighter, the Marine Corps' V-22 Tilt-Rotor Aircraft, and the Army's Crusader Howitzer all survived. But the Navy's next-generation Destroyer was scrapped as was one of its ship-launched missile-defense programs. Some Democrats in Congress say Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is avoiding the tough decisions he promised to make when he came to the Pentagon last year. Some of those Democrats I've talked to say that they're concerned the Pentagon is simply adding new spending to many of the old programs without making some of the hard decisions that they expected Secretary Rumsfeld to make. That will be a subject, obviously, of some debate when the secretary goes up to Capitol Hill to defend his budget. Meanwhile, Rumsfeld himself declared war on the Pentagon bureaucracy the day before the September 11th attacks, and he says that it's not the case that the Pentagon is inflexible and incapable of change, and he cites the way the U.S. military quickly adapted new tactics and techniques to fight the war on terrorism in Afghanistan. Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Jamie, on a different subject, what's the latest on that internal investigation the military is now undergoing as far as that Afghan strike that may have hit the wrong target?
[Mcintyre:] Well, it's increasingly beginning to look, Wolf, although this investigation is not over, that the U.S. may have killed some forces there that were friendly to the United States. But the U.S. is insisting that, at this point, it believes that the shoot-out started because people from inside this compound fired first at U.S. forces. But Defense Secretary Rumsfeld today, in acknowledging that some innocents may have been killed, said it's possible that everybody's telling the truth here, that the U.S. troops were fired on first but that some friendly forces were also in with some unfriendly forces. He says it's a very confused situation, and they are hoping the investigation will sort it out. Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon. Thanks very much. And let's turn now to the anthrax investigation. The FBI is now asking the country's 30,000 microbiologists to help them in finding out who sent letters laced with the deadly bacterium last year. Our National Correspondent Susan Candiotti joins us now with these fresh details. Susan.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn National Correspondent:] Yes, Wolf. It's a massive new nationwide call for help to what a government official calls a unique population with specific information. But will it lead to the anthrax killer?
[Candiotti:] Nearly four months after the first anthrax death and with no killer in custody, the FBI is making another plea for help. In a letter to the 30,000-member American Society for Microbiology, the FBI puts it bluntly. "It is very likely that one or more of you know this individual." It's one more indication of what investigative sources have been saying privately: The four known anthrax letters came from a single U.S. source. The FBI's letter, obtained by CNN, recaps the latest FBI anthrax profile: someone who's experienced working in a laboratory, with access to select biological agents, with the knowledge or expertise to produce a deadly product, someone who's standoffish and works in isolation, a killer who may have used off hours in a laboratory to produce the anthrax. Work at this private laboratory is isolating the anthrax spores' genetic sequencing, which could further narrow the list of suspect labs and scientists. So far, not even a $2-12-million reward has helped.
[Fbi Spokesperson:] I don't think it's that we don't have any leads. We're looking out for that one person who may be able to give us specific information to help us utilize the investigation that's already being conducted.
[Candiotti:] The FBI won't say the case is stalled, but is it closed to being solved? Well, the Bureau won't say that either. And, Wolf, it's not as though the FBI has not been talking to some of these microbiologists already, but, quite frankly, as you heard the FBI say, it's very likely that some of them might know the person who's behind the anthrax attacks. And we also understand the Society is not very thrilled that their names have been given out to the FBI, 30,000 members.
[Blitzer:] So is it the bottom line: Are we any closer to finding out the culprit or culprits of who sent out these letters?
[Candiotti:] All the FBI Director Robert Mueller will say is that the case is not stalled and that there are promising new leads and that they hope to learn more information when they're through analyzing the anthrax found in that letter to Senator Leahy.
[Blitzer:] Susan Candiotti, thanks very much. And how safe are the nation's nuclear power plants from a terrorist attack? The Nevada Senator Harry Reid who oversees nuclear safety issues in the Senate will join us in the next half-hour with his assessment. But now to the Enron investigations. Electricity is in the air here on Capitol Hill because of the expected appearance of the Enron former chief executive, but Ken Lay abruptly bowed out, much to the dismay of several lawmakers. Right now, the SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt is testifying. Covering all these developments for us now is our Congressional Correspondent Kate Snow. We're taking a look at the live picture of the testimony that's underway right now on the Hill, but let's get this report from Kate Snow.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Former Enron CEO Kenneth Lay snubbed a Senate subcommittee, angering lawmakers and prompting new criticism not only of Enron but the Bush White House.
[Sen. Fritz Hollings , South Carolina:] I've never seen a better example of cash-and-carry government than this Bush administration and Enron.
[Snow:] Citing Enron's ties to a host of administration officials, Hollings called for a special prosecutor to look into Enron and a subpoena to force Lay to appear on Capitol Hill next week. The White House dismissed the comments as a partisan attack, calling it disappointing that some are more interested in reading off partisan Democrat attack memos and repeating unfounded and unsubstantiated allegations. Lay's decision to avoid Congress came Sunday after his lawyer said lawmakers made inflammatory statements on the talk shows.
[Sen. Byron Dorgan , North Dakota:] He should not have expected it would ever be a walk in the park to appear before a congressional committee.
[Snow:] Dorgan said Lay was scared off by the Powers Report. Commissioned by Enron's board and released Saturday, it paints a scathing portrait, stating Enron management spent considerable time and effort working to say as little as possible about controversial outside partnerships.
[Sen. Peter Fitzgerald , Illinois:] Enron Corporation went way beyond all hat and no cattle. It was pure bull. In my judgment, in my opinion, Enron was running a gigantic Ponzi operation.
[Snow:] Now the author of the Powers Report, William Powers, who was asked by the Enron's board of directors to put this report together, is up next on this subcommittee this House hearing that is already underway, which you showed just a moment ago, Wolf. We do expect him to give some interesting testimony. He, the author of this report, will say that what he found was appalling. He will say they found that Enron employees involved in these partnerships outside of Enron enriched themselves in the aggregate, he says, quote, "by tens of millions of dollars." Wolf.
[Blitzer:] And, Kate, who else will be testifying on this issue of the Enron scandal in the days and, indeed, weeks ahead?
[Snow:] Yeah. It's Enron week here on Capitol Hill. We have a number of more hearings coming up in the days ahead, about seven of them. Tomorrow, we expect to hear from the top person at Andersen. The CEO of that company, Joseph Berardino, expected to be here. And then on Thursday, we expect to hear from Jeffrey Skilling who is the former CEO of Enron. We do expect to hear from him we expect we're told right now that he will testify. Two of his colleagues, Andy Fastow, the former CFO, chief financial officer, of Enron, and Michael Kopper, his associate, we're told, are going to be pleading the Fifth. That from Representative Billy Tauzin. Back to you, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Kate Snow on Capitol Hill. Thanks for that report. And joining us now to talk about Ken Lay's sudden decision not to testify on Capitol Hill and other legal reasons that might be involved, the Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz. His new book is entitled "Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age." Professor Dershowitz, thanks again for joining us. Let me read from the letter that Earl Silbert, Ken Lay's attorney, wrote to the Senate yesterday explaining the sudden about reversal in not wanting to testify. "In the midst of our preparation, particularly disturbing statements have been made by members of Congress. He," referring to Ken Lay, "cannot be expected to participate in a proceeding in which conclusions have been reached before Mr. Lay has been given the opportunity to be heard." Does that make sense to you legally speaking?
[Prof. Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law School:] Well, it's a lawyer's letter, obviously, trying to justify his decision. I think he would have been crazy to appear without immunity in front of a belligerent congressional committee. There's, obviously, the possibility of criminal prosecution. You'd think everybody would have learned the Clinton lesson when his lawyer, Robert Bennett, allowed him to be deposed, and that led, as we all know, to impeachment and disbarment and all the rest of that. There's no legal obligation for him to appear. There's been so subpoena. Now there will be a subpoena. He then has to make a very tough decision. Does he invoke the Fifth Amendment or does he testify? Once there's a subpoena, those are the only two options available.
[Blitzer:] Well, isn't there's a third option that he would granted immunity in exchange for his testimony, right?
[Dershowitz:] Well, he has to first be subpoenaed and invoke the Fifth Amendment or indicate a willingness to invoke the Fifth, and then he'd be granted what's called use immunity, which is that anything he says to Congress in response to questions can't be used against him, nor can it be used as a source of other evidence. You'll remember from the Oliver North case that can create enormous problems for the prosecutor. North testified in front of Congress. Then he was prosecuted, and then the court reversed his conviction, saying it was very difficult to disentangle what he had said in front of Congress from what the prosecution may have used to prepare witnesses.
[Blitzer:] You heard his wife say last week in a televised interview that he really has nothing to hide, that he wants to fight this battle before court of public opinion. Presumably, that's why he had been willing, at least until yesterday, to testify. Were you surprised by those comments and his apparent willingness to testify?
[Dershowitz:] Well, no. I mean, the any good criminal-defense lawyer knows you put the wife on for the spin. She'll get the softball questions, and if she gets a hard question, she can always say, "Well, I'm just the wife. I didn't know." What she may have done, though she may have waived some of her own spousal privileges in relation to her husband. So it's possible now for Congress to subpoena her and to ask her questions about what he may have told her, if they're within the scope essentially of what she said on television. You can't just turn on and off the spigot and say, "Well, I'm prepared to talk to one television station or another, but I'm not prepared to talk to Congress." So she may have opened up some doors.
[Blitzer:] That would be playing pretty much hard ball, the U.S. Congress. Do you have any recollection of when they've ever done such a thing, bring in a spouse because the spouse appeared on television and gave up his or her privilege?
[Dershowitz:] Well, you remember in the Lewinsky case, they, in fact, called Lewinsky's mother to testify in front of the grand jury. So hard ball is not so unusual when politics is the name of the game. And the other thing that we're going to see, too, is calling people like Lay Ken Lay in front of the committee to see him invoke the Fifth on television I have to tell you that is really dirty pool. We didn't like it when Senator McCarthy used to do that, and I don't like it now. Even as a Democrat, I don't like Congress calling people in front of a congressional committee just to show that they're raising their hands and taking the Fifth Amendment. That's just not right.
[Blitzer:] But why can't they do that in terms of hard ball they want him to testify and make him take that Fifth if he's not going to testify?
[Dershowitz:] Well, the courts and some bar associations have said that it's an improper use of the subpoena power to call somebody knowing that that person is going to invoke a privilege simply to put them under public apogram for invoking a privilege. Now, you know, there's so much partisan politics. My friend, Senator Hatch, today is justifying Mr. Lay, saying, "Well, I don't blame him for not doing this." I myself don't blame him either, looking at from the point of view of a criminal-defense attorney. But you'll remember that the same Senator Hatch has frequently condemned people for hiding behind the Fifth Amendment and for not cooperating with Congress. So it really depends on whose ox is being gored here.
[Blitzer:] All right. Bottom line, Alan Dershowitz, if you were representing Ken Lay, what would you tell him to do?
[Dershowitz:] Well, it depends on whether he was innocent or guilty or whether I thought he was innocent or guilty. If I thought there was any reasonable prospect of guilt and a criminal prosecution, I'd have him play hard ball at this point. He's not going to win in the court of public opinion with a belligerent Congress or least senatorial majority. Better less said. Let his lawyer speak for him. Let other people speak for him. He's better off at this point not exposing himself to very difficult questions under oath.
[Blitzer:] The Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, the author of the new book, "Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age." Thanks, once again, for joining us. And the SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt and Senator Byron Dorgan will be among the guests on LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE. That's less than an hour from now, 6:00 Eastern, 3:00 Pacific. Pediatricians weigh in on the controversial issue of gay adoption. We'll hear from both sides at the half-hour. Also, has the trail gone cold in the search for the kidnapped reporter Daniel Pearl? We'll have the latest from Karachi. And football's world champions are back home. We'll follow the Patriots' convoy to fans waiting at the stadium. And we'll be live there for the big welcome. Also, find out who among us picked the Super Bowl winner and the exact margin of victory. Stay with us.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Here's a story that just makes you one image that makes you feel so horrible. A Houston toddler is undergoing surgery this morning to reattach his right arm because a Bengal tiger bit most of it off yesterday.
[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Authorities say that the tiger attacked when the child reached into the tiger's cage. From our affiliate station, KTRK, in Houston, here is reporter Cynthia Hunt, who has more on the condition of three-year-old Daton Cadwell.
[Cynthia Hunt, Ktrk-tv Reporter:] The family keeps the four-year-old female tiger inside this chain-linked cage. The three-year-old nephew of the tiger's owner wandered into the backyard alone. And, before any adult noticed, the boy had approached the tiger's cage and the tiger had attacked.
[Tracy Olivas, Neighbor:] I heard a scream, and it wasn't a scream of, like, "I fell down"; it was a blood-cuddling scream.
[Hunt:] Tracy Olivas rushed to help her neighbors. She says their tiger named Cheyenne had ripped the little boy's right arm off. Instantly, she says, everyone knew they had to recover the boy's arm, which was still in the cage with the tiger. [on camera]: As they were trying to get the arm, what was the tiger doing?
[Olivas:] Nothing; very passive.
[Hunt:] But they had no idea the normally-passive tiger would snap again. The owner's son decided that he had to go into the cage and get the arm.
[Olivas:] My husband and the owner of the tiger were on the other end of the cage, coaxing her. And he, literally, put himself in there and grabbed the arm. And we got the arm; we iced it; we bagged it.
[Kagan:] That poor little boy.
[Hall:] I know. Well, let's pray for him, and hope that he will be much better and recovers. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Glenn Van Zutphen, World News:] Leaders of Northern Ireland's Protestant Orange Order say they'll continue protests demanding the right to march through a Catholic neighborhood on Sunday. Protestants have rallied for four straight nights, throwing gasoline bombs and fireworks. The fire served to illuminate the tensions in the province. CNN's Nic Robertson reports.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] Keeping roads open, a full-time job for police now. Their armored Land Rovers essential in chasing down the angry protesters. For the fourth night, barricades burned across the province as protesters showed their willingness to close down their neighborhoods. The damp night, however, seemed to subdue the stone-throwing mobs police reporting fewer major incidents that Tuesday, when outbreaks of disorder surpassed the previous year's total. But it was by day perhaps the more effective tool than the armory of civil disobedience took hold, as small armies of women and children manned roadblocks, disrupting traffic.
[Unidentified Male:] When everybody across the road, there was cars coming down, and there was no bullocks.
[Robertson:] Quiet negotiation, the tactic here to reopen the route, not easier when passions are running high. But repeated, time and again, police say, as roads reopened and then closed again. All the chaos of closure in the name of the Orangemen and their re- routed Drumcree march.
[Unidentified Female:] People down here feel very strongly that the parade of Drumcree should have get through.
[Robertson:] At Drumcree, the epicenter of the dispute, a new barricade put into protect the police felt the heat of the conflict. Here, too, the violence was lower key than on recent nights, but security chiefs still fear serious attack by fringe terror groups. And in a move to strengthen their ability to defeat that threat, British officials have issued a possession order over the grounds of Drumcree Church. It will allow that police and army, if needed, to reach demonstrators sheltering there. Nic Robertson, CNN, Drumcree, Northern Ireland.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Across the southern U.S. and in Georgia, a drought is gripping much of the reason region, rather, in a stranglehold. A shortage of rain dating back to more than three years in some parts has caused water lines to plunge and tensions to soar. CNN's Brian Cabell shows how disputes over water rights have turned some state lines into battle lines. Brian, good morning.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning. We're in the middle of the Chattahoochee River network. We're at lake Eufaula in Alabama, right on the border. What we have here is essentially a water war among three states, three states battling for water. People upstream want more water, people in the middle want more water, people down in the bottom want more water. And this, frankly, will probably end up either in the courts or before Congress.
[Oscar Jackson, Water Activist:] If this goes to litigation, it's going to be last perhaps 10 years, it's going to be the biggest legal battle the East Coast has ever seen, and the most expensive.
[Cabell:] At issue: How is this water, especially in the midst of a drought, to be divided among Georgia, Alabama and Florida? The three states are now engaged in settlement talks. The lake's water flows down the Chattahoochee River through Georgia, along the Alabama border, then by way of the Apalachicola River into Florida. The Flint River's waters also flow from Georgia into Florida. Not only are the states vying for the water, but so are competing interests: farming, navigation, hydropower, environmental protection, and growing cities with growing needs.
[Bob Kerr, Georgia Water Negotiator:] It's our contention that it ought to be managed to meet human needs, principally, and then all other needs would be met secondarily.
[Cabell:] That's Georgia's view. And with Atlanta's exploding population, it wants to lock in plenty of water for the next few decades. But the state of Alabama says, not so fast.
[Gov. Don Siegelman , Alabama:] We cannot let Atlanta dictate the water policies for the rest of the Southeast.
[Cabell:] Many Alabama and Georgia farmers agree. They can't irrigate some of their fields this summer because lake and river levels are too low. Not enough water is being released upstream.
[Charlie Speake, Alabama Farmer:] There's been a lot of crying and complaining about it, but I don't know that, you know, that we're doing any good.
[Cabell:] It's a continuing refrain, that Atlanta has the money, the people and the clout to keep the water, and everybody else downstream suffers. Oyster harvesters in Apalachicola are also crying foul. There's not enough fresh water coming out of the river, they say, to produce a good, meaty crop.
[Bill Thomas, Pristine Oysters:] You know, we're here at the mouth of the Apalachicola River and we're the drain. You know, everybody turns the spigots on, and when it gets down here we get what's left over.
[Cabell:] Bottom line: Along this increasingly dry network of rivers and lakes, nobody's happy with their allotment of water and everybody's suspicious of everybody else. The deadline for a settlement of this water dispute is August 1. If the streets haven't agreed on how to distribute the water by then, then this probably will end up before the Supreme Court. As for the boaters out here on Lake Eufaula on this July 4, all they know is the water is extremely low, five feet below normal, the lowest it's been in some 35 years for this date. If you take a look at these boats back here, most of them need about four feet of clearance under them to navigate this channel. Right now, there's about five feet. Another foot down and they are sitting on the bottom. I'm Brian Cabell, CNN, live in Eufaula, Alabama.
[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Brian, thank you.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Well, perhaps love is in the air, or perhaps just a chance to get a legal document. Today is the last day that undocumented immigrants can stay in the United States and apply for a green card. But to qualify, you have to be sponsored by a relative, like a spouse. That is why wedding bells have been ringing practically nonstop for the past month or so. Vokaye Parker from CNN affiliate WTXF has been with some of the last-minute brides and grooms in Philadelphia Vokaye.
[Vokaye Parker, Wtxf Reporter:] Well, good morning, Carol. Well, you know, many of us take our U.S. citizenship for granted. And it's quite a humbling experience to be here. And when we first got here about three hours ago, there were about 100 people in line at the office here of Immigration and Naturalization. Now that line has reached several hundred our estimation is about 300 all hoping they will meet the criteria to become a U.S. citizen.
[Franco Agulario:] Man, we have fun with the stereo and talking.
[Parker:] Fun aside, he and others are gathered here because of an act passed by Congress last year. The Legal Immigration and Family Equity Act gives immigrants until midnight tonight to file for a visa. The best part: They can stay here in the U.S. while it's being processed, an opportunity best expressed by those who have been outside of the system for years.
[Unidentified Male:] That's an opportunity to be legal, to be in this free country.
[Parker:] Now, one guy eager to get inside and get his application processed told us he has been here since about 4:00 yesterday afternoon, sitting in this seat he was the first in line waiting to get inside. Again, the doors here at the Immigration and Naturalization Service in Center City opened at about 7:30 this morning, just a little while ago, and will stay open until 12:00 midnight tonight so still plenty of time for those seeking to come down and fill out an application for entrance here, possibly to stay here in the U.S. There's still plenty of time to do that now back to you.
[Lin:] OK, thank you very much, Vokaye Parker on the scene a lot of activity there in Philadelphia. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] As we've been reporting all morning long, there is a report from the Islamic Press out of Afghanistan that the Taliban supreme leader is getting ready to hand over the last Taliban stronghold, Kandahar. CNN's Nic Robertson is in Chaman, near Kandahar. He has the very latest for us this morning. What can you confirm at this hour, Nic?
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Paula, at this time, we can't confirm that Mullah Omar has agreed to a surrender of Kandahar. What we do know, we called just recently to a senior Taliban commander in Kandahar, that negotiations are under way. Now this commander told us that he did expect the outcome of the negotiations to be announced in the next few days, but what he said was that he didn't, in his estimation, expect that the negotiations would come to a surrender for the Taliban. We also know that on the streets of Kandahar at this time, there's still a lot of Taliban fighters. We are told by our sources in the city there that they even just a few hours ago they were firing anti-aircraft guns at U.S. bombers that were flying overhead. We also know from the former Taliban ambassador to Pakistan that negotiations with Hamid Karzai, the new head of Afghanistan's interim government, are under way. In fact, tribal leaders here have been telling us for some time that Hamid Karzai has been negotiating with the Taliban. However, there were no indications that anything momentous as a Taliban surrender in the works. Perhaps, the only other indication there is that something may be being negotiated at this time is that in recent days our sources are said inside Kandahar bombing very, very intense. But today, they tell us that the bombing in fact, they say there's no bombing inside Kandahar. Perhaps that is an indication that a letup in the bombing is to facilitate some type of negotiations that are going on. It does appear to be correct that negotiations are happening, but no outcome yet, and definitely no indication of any surrender as far as we know Paula.
[Zahn:] Thanks you for that late report, Nic Robertson, appreciate it. Now on to the U.S. military operations near Kandahar. If the southern Afghan city falls without a battle, what is the next for the troops in the region? CNN military analyst, retired General Wesley Clark joins me from Little Rock, Arkansas. Good to have you with us, sir.
[Gen. Wesley Clark,  Cnn Military Analyst:] Thanks. Good to be here, Paula.
[Zahn:] Thanks. So once again, the U.S. government is quite kept skeptical of these reports coming from the Islamic press. They say they hope they are true. Let's assume for a minute they are true, then what happens next?
[Clark:] Well, if they are true, then we have some very important unfinished business still on Afghanistan. First of all, we have got to continue to work for the reduction of that fortification complex in the White Mountains, so-called Tora Bora, and there are also reports that there's other complexes there not directly linked, where Osama bin Laden may have fled or other groups of Taliban. We have to get not only the reduction of this fortification complex; we've got to get the key information that will allow the United States to take down the Al Qaeda network, not only in Afghanistan, but elsewhere around the world, and there's every reason to believe there's still a lot of information on the ground in Afghanistan, written information, maybe computer disks, and programs and other things, and the people who were involved in it need to be talked to, and give the information. We have a lot of work left to do, even if the Taliban regime is completely finished.
[Zahn:] We know anti-Taliban forces have been quoted in the American newspapers, suggesting that in fact, they did see Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora at a certain point last week. What do you make of those reports, and what is your thought about the potential to get him?
[Clark:] Well, I think that we've got a reasonable opportunity to get him. My guess would be that he's given temperament and personality, he's going to want to try to make enough of a stand to have some opportunity not only to kill soldiers of the Northern Alliance, but to try to bring Americans into the fight on the ground. He will want to try to inflict casualties on Americans, so he can claim personal victory, and then he'll try to slip out and allude us. We have to tighten the net. I think we've been remarkably successful in encouraging the local people to take up the fight and be the first line of attack with the U.S. in support with airpower. But there's a lot left to do, and that mountain readout is very tough.
[Zahn:] Some breaking news just come in as we continue to talk here, general Clark. Associated Press is now confirming those reports that Mullah Mohammed Omar has agreed to surrender Afghanistan as early as Friday.
[Clark:] I think that's very encouraging news, Paula, but I also recall during a Kosovo campaign when we had the reports that Milosevic was willing to meet all of NATO's conditions. We were very clear that we wouldn't stop the military operation until he has, in fact, agreed in writing, and we saw tangible evidence on the ground. I think that's the case here what is pushing this agreement to surrender by Mullah Omar is the fact that he's losing, and the United States and its supporters in the region have to do everything possible to convince him that nothing will change that.
[Zahn:] I know that we all are supposed to be balanced and fair in our treatment of the subjects, but I'm just curious what your reaction was to reports this morning that Mullah Mohammed Omar has actually gone to the head of this new transitional government and asked reportedly for amnesty?
[Clark:] I'm not surprised. That's the traditional way of ending the fighting in Afghanistan. People switch sides, they change allegiances, they say they never really meant it in the first place, and it was all a misunderstanding, and we've got to work through this. Whether he gets amnesty or not is it's first of all a responsibility for the leader in Afghanistan, but it's also a matter for us. He, after all, defied the will of the United States. He defied the request of the United States government to turn over Osama bin Laden early on. He may have critical information. He is also been adversary in what is, in essence, war. And so not only a matter for the Northern Alliance, it is also a matter for the United States government.
[Zahn:] You are a man who has spent your life defending this country on a personal level. I know you said, matter of factly, this is what happens in war, this is what happened in Bosnia. Are you outraged?
[Clark:] No.
[Zahn:] That this man would ask for amnesty?
[Clark:] Not at all. I'm not all surprised. This's exactly what he would ask for. This is a man, remember, who was calling for martyrdom only a few weeks ago. And It does show that when the United States is aroused and when the United States moves, the power of the United States and our forces and our legitimacy is just you cannot oppose it, and it completely runs over people like Mullah Omar, who want to call on resistance. He's not resisting now. So I think that's a good sign. I think it's a sign that he recognizes the inevitability of his defeat. But I think we have to also stand firmly, because this is fight not finished. We want to take the network apart and all of its supporters from top to bottom in 50-60 countries, so there's a lot left to be done.
[Zahn:] We always appreciate your analysis, General Clark. Before we move on, just a quick reminder that the Islamic Press has been reporting that Kandahar was about to be surrendered. Now the Associated Press confirming the fact that Mullah Mohammed Omar has agreed to surrender Kandahar, perhaps as early as Friday. Once again, the U.S. administration quite skeptical of these reports. They say, in the past, they found the Islamic press semireliable. They hope these reports to be true. As soon as we have more information from the Pentagon, we will bring it live. This morning, three members of the U.S. special forces killed in Afghanistan are being remembered as proud leaders who loved the Army and their country. The three Green Berets died in a friendly fire incident when a satellite-guided bomb from a U.S B-52 missed its target north of Kandahar. Sergeant first class Daniel Petithory was one of the victims. His brother, Michael, joins me now from Berkshire Hills of western Massachusetts. It is very generous of you to join us such a tough time for your family.
[Michael Petithory, Brother Killed In Afghanistan:] Well, thank you.
[Zahn:] Tell us a little bit about your brother. I know you talked to the Associated Press. As a child, you always said you wanted to play baseball and he always wanted to play war.
[Petithory:] That's accurate. It's also fair to say, it's tough to say just a little bit about Danny. A lot to say about him. He lived life large. I've said this a couple of times. It seems to keeps popping into my mind, so forgive me. His stature certainly mirrored personality. My brother was 6'4", weighed about 220 pounds. My sister is 6'2". I'm only 6 feet, so I'm the midget. Anyway, he lived life to the fullest. And my dad, mother and my myself, my whole family, one thing we want to get across to everybody is we're proud of him, very proud of him. We're also very proud of everybody that's over there right now in trying to get this job done. He yes, he was very popular, very outgoing. Everybody loved him. Everybody that knew him loved him. They didn't like him; they loved him. I think that's the best way to put it.
[Zahn:] Well, certainly you're family's pride and what he did has been so abundantly clear over the last 24 hours. Tell us a little bit more about where his sense of patriotism came from, why he was so committed to defending this country.
[Petithory:] I think General George Patton put it the best: "Real Americans love the sting of battle." He was born with it. I don't know where he got it from. Innate, I guess.
[Zahn:] Can you share with us how he reacted to the tragedy of September 11th, and how that might even have reinforced his drive to defend this country?
[Petithory:] Well, unfortunately, I didn't have any communication with him at all, save for a few scant e-mails. I wrote him a letter. He didn't correspondent to that. I'm not sure if he got the letter. That was about 2-3 weeks ago. He did respond back in e-mail. Very, very short, very brief and to the point. He didn't respond to me. I have to my readjust earpiece.
[Zahn:] I will let you do that. I know that is extremely disturbing, when you're getting feedback in your ear. Michael, can you hear me now?
[Petithory:] Yes, I can.
[Zahn:] OK. Does your family know because of the lack of communication, did you know much about Danielle's mission in Afghanistan, what he was doing, where he was stationed?
[Petithory:] Absolutely not. It was top secret. Our feeling on that was he had a job to do. I understand I don't know much about it. I'm not a soldier. I was never a military person, but my understanding is in times of war, you have a mission to do, you do it, no questions asked, carry out your task the best you can, so we certainly didn't know at all where he was. We my dad has been very good over the news reports. He listened all the time, as do myself. We could speculate from the news reports as to his ability, his unit, where he would be roughly. Of course we never had any confirmation. That's really not our business. Our business was to worry about him and make sure he made home safely.
[Zahn:] Mike, what has the government told you family about what went wrong?
[Petithory:] Well, I don't think anybody knows right now. I've been assured by the government that we will know. We will find out. That right now is not our concern really. I've been talking to my dad about this. We're just we're concerned about it, let me take that back. But our we're just overwhelmed right now with our loss. That's the big thing. We're not really too concerned with that at the moment. We are going to miss him. He's the only brother I have, and sorry to get personal here, but I hope we get this done, and I hope we bring those responsible for all the horror that this country has had to endure over the past couple months, we bring them to justice, and they get dealt a swift and severe punishment. That's my feeling.
[Zahn:] Well, as you know, all of America is on your side. We salute the commitment your brother made to this country and our thoughts with you as you deal with your horrendous sense of grief.
[Petithory:] Thank you very much.
[Zahn:] Thank you for your time, Michael Petithory.
[Petithory:] Yes, ma'am.
[Zahn:] As Michael and I were speaking, I was handed something that indicates there's actually more breaking news to report. We have been reporting that initially this morning the Islamic Press said Kandahar about to fall. The Associated Press now confirming that Mullah Mohammed Omar has agreed to turn over Kandahar as early as Friday. There seems to be a little bit of a twist in this story. Abdul Saleem Zahif is now saying that Taliban leaders have specifically decided not to hand over their weapons to Hamid Karzai, the U.S. backed head of a new interim government to rule a country. Instead, they will surrender their weapons to Mullah Najeed Ullah, who is a former guerrilla commander against Soviet occupation troops, indicating once again that they wanted to turn their weapons over not to Hamid Karzai, but to tribal leaders. Once again, the Pentagon not even confirming this is a possibility. They say they've heard these reports before, that the sources out of the Islamic press are semi-reliable, but they hope these reports are true. In the meantime, Allen Pizzey, our reporter on the ground, indicates the military campaign in Kandahar proceeds. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Cubans by the thousands are showing their frustration today at the continued refusal of American courts to let Elian Gonzalez come home. There now have been three separate court rulings that side with Elian's father and against Elian's Miami relatives, yet the child remains barred from leaving the U.S. while the relatives file further appeals. And that's the reason the Cuban government called on half-a-million mothers and grandmothers to rally today outside the U.S. Interest Section in Havana. CNN's Lucia Newman is there, too, she joins us now by phone Lucia.
[Lucia Newman, Cnn Havana Bureau Chief:] Good afternoon, Natalie. Well, the Cuban government's response, indeed, to the Atlanta appeals court ruling, which prevents Elian Gonzalez from returning home immediately, was an unprecedented march even by Cuban standards; with tens of thousands of women marching past the U.S. diplomatic mission here. The protests included a new chant, women said yelled actually, as they went past the building: Down with the hoax, liberate Elian. Now the march was literally organized overnight by the government and the various organizations affiliated with Cuba's Communist Party. Havana nearly came to a standstill while the women marched, led by Elian's grandmothers. They later joined President Fidel Castro for a rally at the protest plaza that faces the U.S. Interest Section. There is a lot of frustration here because even though the Atlanta appeals court ruling did favor Elian Gonzalez's father and certainly the family here, the boy is not free to return here yet. And they say that it is outrageous that the family in Miami is still being given another opportunity to appeal, they don't understand that. The Cuban government says that this yet another sign, another symbol of the abuse of "Yankee imperialism" against Cuba. This is Lucia Newman, reporting live from Havana.
[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Thanks, Lucia.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Certainly going to talk about the buzz today, which has to do with the RNC...
[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] The ad.
[Hemmer:] ... and the ad about what's now being called the "rat" ad.
[Kagan:] Right. And if you haven't been watching us all morning or other people's media coverage or political coverage, there is an ad that the RNC has been running. And once again, there's the graphic where you can send your e-mail questions to: CNNLive@CNN.com. But getting to the "rat," with this ad it's an RNC ad talking about George W. Bush and his prescription coverage and his issues there is a subliminal message, whether it's there on purpose or not, but the word "rat" comes up for one frame, one-thirtieth of a second. Should we show the ad one more time?
[Hemmer:] Absolutely.
[Kagan:] Let's do it.
[Hemmer:] Roll it now. [Begin Video Clip, Rnc Ad]
[Announcer:] Under Clinton-Gore, prescription drug prices have skyrocketed and nothing's been done. George Bush has a plan: add a prescription drug benefit to Medicare.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] Every senior will have access to prescription drug benefits.
[Announcer:] And Al Gore? Gore opposed bipartisan reform. He's pushing a big government plan that let's Washington bureaucrats interfere with what your doctors prescribe. The Gore prescription plan, bureaucrats decide. The Bush prescription plan, seniors choose.
[Kagan:] OK, maybe you saw it, maybe you didn't.
[Hemmer:] Maybe you didn't.
[Kagan:] If you didn't, we slowed it down so you can see it a little more easily. Here's the slow-mo version.
[Hemmer:] And what you're seeing here in this advertisement here is something, again, that was picked up by a retired Boeing worker in Seattle who says he contacted the local Democratic Party reporting that. A interesting reaction. Nothing too firm yet from the RNC. Gov. Bush was on the air this morning on another network, and he was also speaking in Florida a short time ago. Here is the governor's response about 90 minutes ago, again, in Orlando to what's happening right now surrounding this ad.
[Bush:] It's coming out of the rotation, Dave. I mean, it's not going to be around. It's scheduled out of the rotation. I want to make it clear to people that, you know, the idea of putting subliminal messages into ads is it's ridiculous. We, you know, need to be debating the issues, talking about the merits, And the idea of one frame out of 900 hardly, in my judgment, makes a conspiracy.
[Question:] Governor, you've seen the ad. Is that correct?
[Bush:] I saw it on a computer, and I didn't see "rats" when I saw it, though. I didn't.
[Question:] You didn't see the frame of "rats"?
[Bush:] When I looked at the ad? No, I didn't. Did you?
[Question:] I thought I did.
[Bush:] Oh, come on. Wait a minute.
[Question:] Governor, why do you think this is unintentional? How could something like that happen?
[Bush:] You know, I just can't imagine the I'm taking the guy who made the ad's explanation.
[Question:] Who is that?
[Bush:] Alex Catillano.
[Question:  Bush:] No, but I read in the newspaper what he said. But we don't need to play games. What we need is a debate on the issues.
[Hemmer:] Ari Fleischer, who the spokesperson for the Bush campaign, had an interesting quip. He said earlier today: "I'm told if you play it backwards it says 'Paul is dead,'" a reference to a Beatles album released in the late '60s. I want to bring in Scott Donaton now by telephone. He's in New York City. Scott is with "Advertising Age" magazine. Scott, good morning to you. Can you hear me?
[Scott Donaton, Editor, "advertising Age" Magazine:] Yes, I can, Bill. Good morning.
[Hemmer:] Big deal here, or are we making too much of it?
[Donaton:] No, I think it's definitely a big deal. I think this kind of thing is it doesn't happen in the advertising business very often and it's definitely worth calling attention to.
[Kagan:] Scott, you know how these commercials are produced and how production works. Is it possible, as we heard one explanation, that this was just a bad edit, that if you look at the word rats, that's just the end of "bureaucrats" and it was just an editor's mistake?
[Donaton:] You know, it's possible, but it's highly unlikely. In a political campaign especially, these ads are produced on a much shorter schedule than they are with a traditional advertising campaign. But at the same time, there are a number of people in the editing room who are going over the ads frame by frame and should be very aware, before the campaign the ad goes into final form, what's in every frame and what the finished product is. It's really unlikely that this got in without someone knowing it was there.
[Hemmer:] But speaking in terms of advertising, do these ads work? What's the proof based on history?
[Donaton:] Well, there is no proof. We don't know whether or not if it was in there intentionally, whether it got any message across that's somehow going to influence anybody's behavior. It's impossible to know that. But what really the more damaging thing is that this got out there now, the fact that it is in there. I think whether or not people believe that their views were somehow impacted by this message, I don't think they're going to be very happy to find out that somebody was trying or possibly trying to manipulate their views this way.
[Hemmer:] Yes, here's my question just to follow up, but apparently the ads were on 4,400 times in 33 different TV markets. They spent $2 12 million so far running this buying the advertising time. If you look at those numbers and only find one person in Seattle, one may conclude that it doesn't work because nobody else picked up on it?
[Donaton:] Well, again, if, in theory, it was meant to be a subliminal message, you're not supposed to pick up on it consciously, you're supposed to somehow pick up on it subconsciously, even if it was meant to be an inside joke for someone, sort of like we've had these Disney tapes where suddenly you'll find out that there's a scene in there that's not seen by someone watching the tape at the regular speed, but it exists. Again, it's really more the point that somebody thought this was funny or did it. It's going to be a damaging thing to the Bush campaign. It's one more stumble, I think.
[Kagan:] So is this the kind of thing within an advertising agency that heads roll?
[Donaton:] I would say that if this happened to a traditional advertising company and a traditional advertising agency, heads would definitely roll over.
[Hemmer:] All right, Scott Donaton there live by telephone there from New York City, "Advertising Age" magazine. Thank you, Scott, appreciate it. And certainly want to make it clear to our viewers again, this was something that came from the RNC and not directly out of Austin and the Bush camp, though. But certainly we will see if it has legs, huh?
[Kagan:] We will. And I'll be there will be some interesting discussions between those two groups.
[Hemmer:] You're right, you got it.

[Jason Carroll, Cnn Anchor:] As the Navy investigates last month's sub collision with a Japanese ship, it will have to do so without hearing from sub Commander Scott Waddle. His attorneys tell CNN their client will not take the stand at this week's court of inquiry. With or without Commander Waddle, the panel is learning a lot about what happened on board the sub just before it surfaced under a Japanese research vessel. CNN's Gary Tuchman has more.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] Scott Waddle will not testify in his own defense. That's what the attorney for the man who commanded the USS Greeneville when it hit the Ehime Maru tells CNN. Attorney Charles Gittens says his client's request for testimonial immunity has been deferred by the Navy. He says he interprets that as a no, and therefore, will not have his client take the stand. But he has a few things to say about Waddle.
[Charles Gittens, Waddle's Civilian Attorney:] He's responsible for everything that happened on board his vessel. He's he was the authority on the vessel, and he carries the commensurate responsibility.
[Tuchman:] But Gittens says that doesn't mean the 41-year-old captain violated any laws.
[Gittens:] Accepting responsibility does not necessarily mean that he has to accept criminal liability for what happened on the vessel, and in fact, he will fight that tooth and nail.
[Tuchman:] And he will have to fight. An admiral who has done the initial investigating of the incident has testified about a litany of mistakes made on the submarine that could have led to the accident. Admiral Charles Griffiths talked about a periscope not brought high enough and not sweeping long enough, a long lunch with the civilians on board that led to maneuvers being done in a rush, and broken equipment all allegations that could possibly lead to court-martial for Waddle and two of the officers under him on the sub.
[Gittens:] What he did was reasonable under the circumstances in that maybe he didn't get all the information he needed, but he was he was working hard and he was he was giving it an honest effort. And so, you know, bad things sometimes happen.
[Tuchman:] Admiral Griffiths also testified the only reason the sub was out in the first place was for the benefit of the 16 civilians on board, a practice the Navy discourages. [on camera]: The list of mistakes aboard the Greenville could be interpreting as damning, but Captain Waddle's attorney hasn't had a chance to do any cross-examination yet. Is he worried that he could end up in prison?
[Gittens:] I think I think he has a concern about that. My job is to try to allay that concern.
[Tuchman:] He'll likely get to start his cross- examination today. In the meantime, the Navy tells CNN, despite what Waddle's lawyer thinks, it is still considering granting testimonial immunity. Gary Tuchman, CNN, Honolulu.

[Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] We see the pictures of the Taliban and al Qaeda detainees at Camp X-ray in Cuba, but what about all those people captured in this war on terrorism who weren't part of the leadership or in either group? CNN's Nic Robertson tells us about one overcrowded Afghan prison.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Senior Correspondent:] Emaciated and pale, prisoners crowd into a tiny cell in Sherbigan Jail. Captured four months ago by pro-Afghan government forces, these detainees claim to have been fighting for the Taliban, not al Qaeda. A handful of prisoners have been taken by U.S. officials for questioning. 3,155 remain. Most we talked to complain overcrowding is so bad there isn't enough room to sleep.
[Unidentified Male:] Our room is very less. We are 15 50 or 60 men in one room.
[Robertson:] Hayatallah continues, explaining they have no news of developments in Afghanistan in the last four months. [on camera]: They don't get news.
[Unidentified Male:] No.
[Robertson:] A prison guard nearby does not deny the claim. In a nearby cell, Meerwise demonstrates on the hamison the effects of their poor diet. Two meals a day, they say. Meerwise shows his lunch.
[Unidentified Male:] This one
[Robertson:] This is for one man?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Robertson:] Diarrhea, dysentery, headaches and constipation are their primary ailments, they say, and complain of insufficient drugs to combat sickness. [on camera]: The prisoners here are only a small fraction of those captured in Afghanistan in the last six months. Apparently, unimportant enough to warrant detailed questioning by the United States. Their future, however, remains uncertain. [voice-over]: While there is little sympathy for their plight, guards appear compassionate about the conditions.
[General Jorabak, Prison Governor:] This jail is made for 1,200 people, so it's overcrowded. And we don't have enough money for more food.
[Robertson:] Most guards here suspect their captives are unrepentant al Qaeda sympathizers. And they also fear such close containment unites them further. Nic Robertson, CNN, Sherbigan Jail, Afghanistan.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Despite higher gas prices, AAA predicts a record number of us will travel they do this every year, don't they?
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Yes; yes.
[Allen:] Will travel more than 50 miles this holiday weekend. If you need directions, but don't have a map, there's a high-tech way to keep your holiday from becoming a lost weekend. Although most people speak the language, you can probably figure out how to get there.
[Waters:] Well, we're talking about global positioning systems, that have been available for some time now, but they're slowly becoming standard equipment on the cars we drive.
[Allen:] More on how they work now from CNN technology correspondent Rick Lockridge. Where are you, Rick?
[Waters:] You know.
[Rick Lockridge, Cnn Technology Correspondent:] Down on the freeway. I'll give you a traffic report after this, if you like. Well, after 100 years of road-tripping, technology has finally found a way to possibly prevent all of those arguments that begin with the phrase, "honey, why don't you just stop and ask for directions." It is, as you mentioned, the GPS receiver.
[Lockridge:] So Gerald, we've got a variety of handheld GPS receivers here, including one that looks like it might be for hunters. So tell us: Are any of these better than any others for a family wanting to go out on a road trip?
[Unidentified Male:] They sure are. The Garmin eMap here is very popular for going cross-country, as well as giving you a great deal of detail for metro areas. Simply by hitting our zoom-out key a few times, we can see the entire state and the entire southeast very quickly.
[Lockridge:] So if you want to plan this great big circuitous trip, you can sit at home with your PC, you can plot it all out on your PC, and then you can download it to the little device, and that will be your guide on the way?
[Unidentified Male:] Exactly.
[Lockridge:] So here's where you take the big step up to a unit that's actually made to go in your car; not a handheld. And these are a lot more powerful, but they're also a lot more expensive, aren't they?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes they are. This is the latest of the street pilot versions from Garmin. It's the Street Pilot III. First off, you can see it's got a color screen. It's got 16 colors. You're going to gain a lot of accuracy with this. It's about $1,000. You're going to be able to get some voice instructions as you've plotted your course. It will even tell you if you need to make a U-turn and go back the other way.
[Lockridge:] Or you could use the occasion of the holiday weekend to buy a $50,000 Cadillac SUV and have a real-life person give you directions everywhere. So, Deborah, you're just going to press this blue button, and what's going to happen?
[Unidentified Female:] I'm going to press the blue button, and a real-life person is going to come on and... I'm trying to get to...
[Lockridge:] Peidmont and Roswell.
[Unidentified Female:] Peidmont and Roswell.
[Lockridge:] Within moments, the OnStar operator had us on our way. [on camera]: Some people who are a little intimidated by gadgets and don't want to fool with the GPS, they might find a human voice comforting.
[Unidentified Female:] Definitely; and easy to use. It's only three buttons, you can't go wrong. And if I had an emergency in the car, like someone was sick or someone was threatening me at a red light, all I would have to do is press the red button for emergency services.
[Lockridge:] Do you get the feeling that now we're in a high- end vehicle here, but that someday that these features really should be pretty common in cars just for safety's sake?
[Unidentified Female:] Definitely.
[Lockridge:] Now, this particular unit is about $200, but they start as low as about $100, and go up to as you saw, well over $1,000. Remember that these are not meant to be operated by a driver while the vehicle is in motion. Lou and Natalie, you should have a passenger do it, or pull over to the side. Remember, there's a lot of families going to be out on the roads this holiday weekend. A lot of them are already there. Over on the far side you've got southbound traffic, people going to Florida, pretty slow. Northbound not moving too badly. Hey, you know, this traffic reporting thing's not that tough; I think I could do it. Back to you.
[Waters:] We'll get you a helicopter.
[Allen:] We'll get you out there.
[Lockridge:] A helicopter; a helicopter!
[Allen:] Lou will be zooming past you there in a short while, Rick, so watch out. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Osama bin Laden is a shadowy figure, and following the money trail to the suspected terrorist mastermind can be even more elusive.
[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Boy, that's especially true in Asia, where CNN's Lisa Barron reports the money trail often goes underground and under the table.
[Lisa Barron, Cnn Correspondent:] In an area of the world where money can move in many mysterious ways, the United States may find good intentions are not enough to pinch off the flow of funds to terrorism. In Asia, money-laundering laws often are lax, and under-the-table transactions are common. Take the Philippines as one example.
[Glenda Gloria, Author, "the Crescent Moon":] As far as money laundering is concerned, that would be the worst case, would be the Philippines. And we're not just talking here of terrorists from the Middle East. Money is being laundered here by public officials.
[Barron:] Until now, the lack of a law against money laundering has prevented the Philippines from even investigating potentially shady transactions. Hong Kong may offer more hope.
[Samuel Porteous, M.d. Kroll Associates:] Hong Kong is a financial hub for Asia, so to the extent there's terrorist activity and funds moving through the region, it's very likely they're coming through Hong Kong. Bin Laden has been said to have outlets in the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia.
[Barron:] Hong Kong officials say the territory is ready to freeze any of bin Laden's or his associates' assets it finds once new regulations are drawn up in October. [on camera]: But regulations can't govern the underground banking system prevalent in South Asia and the Middle East. It's called the hawallah, a trust-based system involving local brokers in different countries. Money never crosses borders. Instructions to pay and receive do.
[Barry Rider, Institute Of Advanced Legal Studies:] The only agency, really, in the world that's had any great success is the directed revenue intelligence in India. Now, and frankly, there's not the expertise in traditional law enforcement agencies to pursue these inquiries.
[Barron:] Extraordinary times, say experts, require extraordinary measures.
[Stephen Vickers, Price Waterhouse Coopers:] And this is, in fact, an attempt to cut off the oxygen, as it were, to organizations. So that bridge, I think, needs to probably be attacked from two ends. One is the traditional follow-the, follow-the-money, money end, and the other is through the investigative end and intelligence aspect.
[Neil Maloney, Hill And Associates:] Intelligence is a key to it, intelligence and long-term planning and long-term targeting of the right people. But it takes it's a very expensive process to go through, and you need to put it's not a question of when you think of an undercover operation, sending somebody in and that's it, and it comes back a month later with all the evidence. It doesn't work like that.
[Barron:] But with the cooperation and the will, say experts, it's possible to make significant advances in the economic war on terrorism, hopes that from these ashes, the evil acts perpetrated here will never again come to be. Lisa Barron, CNN, Hong Kong.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to hear more about the congressman. You know, back in Modesto, California, Congressman Gary Condit's constituents wonder when he's coming home, what he's going to say about his affair and whether his staff obstructed justice. They shouldn't hold their breath. Gary Condit is going on a retreat with his wife and kids during this August recess of Congress. So let's go to Marc Sandalow. He's the Washington bureau chief for the "San Francisco Chronicle." Marc, what is going on in the family right now, the Condit family?
[Marc Sandalow, "san Francisco Chronicle":] Well, or course, Carol, they have been cloistered and we don't exactly know. I can tell you that he has two grown children, a boy by the name of Chad who's 33, a daughter, Katie is in her 20's. Both of them worked back in California for Governor Gray Davis, who's actually a very close, personal and political ally of Gary Condit's. I think the family, it's fair to assume, is in somewhat of a state of shock. I mean they have watched the way they've watched their father be vilified on tabloids, cable television, newspapers around the world. And what Condit has said through his staff is that August, what they call the district work period here in Washington, will be consumed with him spending time with his family and healing. You know, we all assume in Washington that everything has a political motivation. And indeed most of what politicians here do do have political motivations. But remember that people these are real folks and they have their own personal reasons to do what they do and it looks like Condit will spend most of August trying to heal his family wounds.
[Lin:] Sure. And it's understandable but what does it say about how Gary Condit views his political career, that he is not going home to Modesto to face the music with his constituents if only for a couple of days?
[Sandalow:] Yes, Carol, you make a very interesting observation there because I think that if Gary Condit's primary focus was on winning reelection he might be doing something very different. He might be going back to his district, talking to his hometown newspaper, trying to paint a sympathetic view of himself and trying to show that he still is a hard charging congressman. Now, somebody who doesn't have a political future doesn't need to worry about any of those things at all. Remember what Bill Clinton did in the first days after the Monica Lewinsky confession. He went on a family vacation. But it was a very public ordeal. He did this on national television. He did this with pictures posed with his wife and daughter.
[Lin:] And people embraced him. I mean this is a district in Modesto that adores this man. And he had a reputation for picking up the telephone and wishing people happy birthdays, when he found out somebody was, you know, putting their parents in a nursing home, he'd make a call to see how the family was doing. He had a very personal style.
[Sandalow:] Well, and that may still be the case, Carol, that I think that the district is likely to be much more forgiving than the voices you've heard emerge, you know, through the national clamor on all of this. I think that remember two-thirds of the central valley district in California have voted for this guy for six terms now. He's very popular politician. Now, there is a vocal group of folks back home who want nothing to do with him now, who are horrified with what he did. Many of them didn't vote for him in the first place. There is still room in his district for Condit to explain himself but there's no sign that that explanation is coming any time soon.
[Lin:] Yes, and less and less room to maneuver on Capital Hill as many people are speaking out about his behavior and the fact that he lied about this affair. Thanks so much Marc Sandalow, Washington bureau chief for the "San Francisco Chronicle," good to see you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We begin this morning on the big island of Hawaii, where one man found himself in a rather tight situation, literally. now if you've ever gotten your hand caught in the cookie jar, you will know how this man felt. Tina Shelton from affiliate KHON brings us the story.
[Tina Shelton, Khon Reporter:] The digit dilemma started after a security guard spotted the man standing helplessly near his car in the parking lot at the Alamana Shopping Center. Soon he was surrounded by puzzled authorities, who had never before came across a tourist with his finger in the tank. The visitor from China apparently intended to remove a smudge on the bumper of his rental car, and thought a shopping bag with a touch of gasoline on it might do the trick. Instead both the bag and his finger were stuck.
[Unidentified Male:] Say that, again.
[Shelton:] Communicating in different languages wasn't nearly as difficult is figuring out what to do. They tried a screwdriver. What about entering from the trunk? Or perhaps from under the car?
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, no. No.
[Shelton:] The tourist's English was good enough to establish a rapport with one firefighter.
[Unidentified Male:] Who is the president of the United States?
[Shelton:] Well, it's not this guy. But the next exchange sure reminded the Americans of Bill Clinton.
[Unidentified Male:] We can't feel your pain.
[Shelton:] At one point, mechanics from Sears Automotive shop joined in the effort. The rental car company was summoned to bring in a similar Ford Taurus. And the master plan was devised: Use the jaws of life. Carefully, they carved the gas tank chamber out of the car. But they quickly discovered the fuel line had to be shorter. So out came the jaws of life, again. And at this point decided putting a coat between the tourist eyes and the sharp steal jaws might prevent some understandable panic. Finally, it came down to some old fashion tugging, with some hotel-sized shampoo and hand sanitizer poured in to ease the friction.
[Unidentified Male:] All right
[Shelton:] Fortunately, the finger only bruised, leaving the Chinese visit able to shake the hands of the men who rescued him. In Honolulu, I'm Tina Shelton, reporting for Fox News.

[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] We have been telling you about a humanitarian aid convoy that is trying to trudge its way toward northern Afghanistan. CNN's senior Asian correspondent, Mike Chinoy, tells us the story of one woman who has made helping the Afghan people her personal mission.
[Mike Chinoy, Cnn Correspondent:] Afghanistan is a long way from Scotland, but for the past eight years, that's where Hermione Youngs has made her home, helping the victims of that countries continuing turmoil. This is her latest project, the first aid shipment into Afghanistan since September 11, a convoy under the banner of UNICEF, bringing emergency supplies to the beleaguered residents of northern Afghanistan, who were already in dire trouble even before the latest crisis.
[Hermione Youngs, Aid Worker:] Well, three weeks ago, when I was helping one of the remotest villages, they were already plucking grasses from the hillside and boiling that as food because they have no food. And this is just an everyday, normal village. So with all what's been happening recently, it is going to be catastrophic.
[Chinoy:] In these trucks, 200 metric tons of food, special nutritional formula for youngsters, medical kids, blankets and school books. The route of this convoy will take it up into the rugged mountains on the Pakistani side of the border, to a pass almost 4000 meters high. There, all the goods on these trucks will be loaded onto hundreds, perhaps thousands of donkeys and horses for the journey to the other side. [voice-over]: The Northern Alliance, which controls this part of Afghanistan, has granted safe passage. Aid agencies are still working to get Taliban permission for similar shipments to the rest of the country. Hermione Youngs volunteered to help in Afghanistan, after the death of her husband nearly a decade ago. Now she can't imagine doing anything else.
[Youngs:] Once I got into Afghanistan, I fell in love with Afghanistan and the Afghans. And I think going to back to a 9:00 until 5:00 job in the U.K. would be absolutely awful. I spend my days riding horses, visiting schools, implementing an educational program, which I love very much. And it's a lovely way to work.
[Chinoy:] And with the convoy on its way for the week-long trip, a critically important one, too.
[Youngs:] People are dying in Afghanistan. They have to change, otherwise there's going to be no Afghans.
[Chinoy:] Mike Chinoy, CNN, Pashawar, Pakistan.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] The Justice Department this morning is confirming reports of an antitrust settlement with software maker Microsoft. But attorneys generals from 18 states still have to sign off on the deal. One computer program Microsoft does not make is called Carnivore. Government officials call it a necessary tool in the war against terrorism,, while critics say it smacks of Big Brother, snooping where the government should fear to tread. Joie Chen joins us from the CNN Center in Atlanta with more this Internet search for terrorists. Good morning, Joie. Good to see you.
[Joie Chen, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Paula. Thanks very much. This has hall come up because investigators do believe bin Laden used the Internet to communicate with his terror network, perhaps even plan the September 11th attacks. Now the FBI is using its online surveillance program Carnivore that you referred to, to try to locate any terrorists who might still be using the Web. Daniel Sieberg from CNN.com joins us here now to help us explain what Carnivore is, and we want to go ahead and look at the animation that our folks put together to understand what Carnivore does and how it works.
[Daniel Sieberg, Cnn Correspondent:] Sure, absolutely. This may give people a better understanding of what it does, because it is a very technical program obviously.
[Chen:] Well, there it is, and let's imagine that these are two computer terminals, yours and mine, and you are sending me e-mail, effectively, through an Internet service provider. Most of us have that, if you have Internet at home. And the idea of Carnivore then is that it can take essentially an interception of what's going through the Internet service provider, is that right?
[Sieberg:] Exactly. The FBI needs to get a specific court order, and what they look at is what's called packets of information. When an e-mail goes out over the Internet, it spreads out into a number of different packets of information, and they're looking at these packets. They could contain the to and from of an e-mail, the subject line, and possibly the entire content of the e-mail, and they are gathering this information, trying to assess what's inside.
[Chen:] But the important thing there is that Carnivore isn't allowed to be randomly used. There has to be a court order that says, with these limitation.
[Sieberg:] Right, it has to be very specific. That's the legal side of it certainly.
[Chen:] All right, the concept here then is that not only would Carnivore look at it, but it was essentially take a picture, make a copy of what's coming through.
[Sieberg:] Exactly. The idea is that a recipient, or the person who's sending it, doesn't know that this is being done, and so the FBI makes a copy of the information and keeps that as a record of what they've got.
[Chen:] Neither the recipient or the source person sending.
[Sieberg:] Exactly. It's done very surreptitiously.
[Chen:] All right, so then what would happen is the Carnivore takes this picture, and through its system can either put it into a file for more investigation, or effectively, if officials say anyway, that they could throw it into the trash if they decide it's not worth anything.
[Sieberg:] Right, and this is where some of the privacy concerns come in. A lot of privacy Advocates say that it is gathering too much information; it is not filtering out certain information, and the FBI is saying they've got specific filters that were put in place, that only look at certain bits of information, whether it's the to and from or the subject line of the e-mail. CHEN Daniel Sieberg from CNN.com. We appreciate you being with us and giving us a little bit of a primer here. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Tom Haynes, Co-host:] From CNN Center in Atlanta, I'm Tom Haynes. Thanks for joining us today.
[Shelley Walcott, Co-host:] And I'm Shelley Walcott. Here's a look at what's coming up.
[Haynes:] In our top story: Relics of the ancient world are destroyed in the name of religion.
[Walcott:] Then, in "Health Desk," the stress test: how stress could be affecting your health.
[Haynes:] In "Worldview," we head to the Middle East for a behind- the-scenes look at Israeli army training.
[Walcott:] And finally, we're flying high in "Chronicle." Our Tom Haynes hits Mach 1 to get the story. The world watches in horror as Afghanistan's ruling Taleban movement carry out their mission to destroy all statues they regard as idols. Two giant Buddhas carved in cliffs near Bamiyan more than 1,500 years ago have gone up in a cloud of smoke. It wasn't an act of nature, but an act of mankind. The Taleban, a radical Islamic movement, ordered the destruction of the towering images several weeks ago. The Taleban has vowed to destroy all statues they consider un- Islamic. Monday, the United Nations confirmed that order as being carried out. The U.N. says at least two ancient Buddhas have been destroyed by the Taleban, despite international pleas to save them. The Taleban captured the capital of Afghanistan in 1996. About 90 percent of that country is now under Taleban rule. The Taleban have said their mission is to create the world's most pure Islamic state. They've banned television, music and movies. And they've also forbidded girls from going to school and women from going to work, rules the international community doesn't like.
[Haynes:] Much of the international community is appalled at the Taleban's actions. The destruction of Afghanistan's pre-Islamic heritage is considered unacceptable by many leaders. Relations between the Taleban and the United Nations have never been easy. And as Ralitsa Vassileva tells us, they're particularly low now.
[Ralitsa Vassileva, Cnn Correspondent:] This photograph taken by an Afghani shows what appears to be the destruction of the towering Buddha statues built more than 15 centuries ago in Bamiyan province. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization confirms the destruction of both monuments. A Taleban leader says there is still more work to be done to obliterate the last traces. This is what the Buddhist statues looked like before an edict two weeks ago to destroy them. Taleban leaders decreed them to be un-Islamic. The order stirred an international outcry. Many Islamic nations disagreed with the Taleban's interpretation of the Koran, calling on the Taleban to spare the statues. Even appeals from neighboring Pakistan, the Taleban's biggest ally, were ignored, and several offers to remove and house the statues outside Afghanistan were rebuffed.
[Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil, Taleban Foreign Minister:] We do admit that all these monuments and relics were the cultural heritage of Afghanistan. But the part which directly contradicts our present belief, we would not like to leave them anymore.
[Vassileva:] A last-ditch appeal came Sunday from the U.N. Secretary-General when he met the Taleban foreign minister in Pakistan.
[Kofi Annan, U.n. Secretary-general:] I find, if they do carry through this lamentable decision, I think they will be doing themselves a great deal of disservice and they will be doing a great deal of disservice to Islam, in whose name they claim to be doing this.
[Vassileva:] The Taleban has received vigorous global criticism, not only for the destruction of the statues, but for its treatment of women, alleged support of terrorists, and for ignoring the plight of tens of thousands of war refugees struggling with famine. Already facing U.N. sanctions for refusing to hand over suspected terrorist Osama bin Laden, a U.N. peace broker says the Taleban now will likely face additional isolation. Ralitsa Vassileva, CNN.
[Walcott:] Several Muslim nations are protesting the Taleban's mission to destroy Afghanistan's ancient statues. Egypt has made several unsuccessful attempts to stop the destruction. Ben Wedeman has more on that now and on how Egypt's own ancient statues are so important to modern-day Egyptians.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Cairo Bureau Chief:] Egypt's ancient monuments have drawn onlookers for thousands of years, drawn by their majesty, their beauty, their sheer age and size. For predominately Muslim Egypt, these ruins are a rich source of national identify and tourist dollars. With such a strong attachment to their past, Egyptians are mystified by the Taleban's reported destruction of Afghanistan's Bamiyan Buddhas.
[Zahi Hawas, Director, Pyramids Plateau:] They should understand that destroying those statues is not going to serve anything. They're not helping them, but are making bad publicity about Islam and Islam has nothing to do with what's happening in Afghanistan.
[Wedeman:] Egyptians are not ashamed of their pagan origins, deriving a fierce pride from their history. "This is the basis of our patriotism," says this Cairo resident visiting the Sphinx. "We would never do anything to harm it." In the past, some Egyptians, like the Taleban, have focused their religious fervor on famous landmarks, with decidedly mixed results. [on camera]: According to one medieval Arab historian, in 1378 A.D., an overzealous Muslim mystic tried to deface the Sphinx. But that didn't go down very well with local villagers, who, fearing divine retribution, rewarded the mystic's efforts by lynching him. [voice-over]: On Saturday, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak dispatched the Mufti of the Republic, the country's most senior Islamic authority, to meet with Taleban leaders and convince them to halt the destruction of Afghanistan's ancient heritage. Egypt's concern goes beyond questions of archaeology and heritage, says this Muslim scholar. "This could lead to great schisms," he says, "between Muslims and non-Muslims. Buddhists and Hindus are now in an uproar against Muslims, and that is something we would like to avoid." But Taleban leaders say they will not change course. The damage has already been done. The message from Egypt may have arrived too late. Ben Wedeman, CNN, Cairo.
[Haynes:] "Health Desk" today: stress, something we've all got to deal with. And a lot of things can bring it on. There are two kinds of stress: acute or short-term stress and chronic stress, which is long term. Stress is serious business. An estimated 75-90 percent of all visits to primary-care physicians are for stress-related disorders. Elizabeth Cohen has more.
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Stress can send your immune system into a tizzy. Here's what happens. When you're under stress, the pituitary gland releases a hormone called ACTH. ACTH stimulates your adrenal glands to produce another hormone called cortisol. Cortisol attaches itself to the cells that fight infection. Simply put, with a load of cortisol on its back, an immune cell has a harder time doing its job. But not all stresses are created equal. So here's a quiz. Of these four examples of stress getting stuck in traffic every day, having a troubled marriage, getting mugged, and taking care of a spouse with Alzheimer's disease, which do you think the experts say is the least harmful long term to your immune system? [on camera]: The answer is getting stuck in traffic, even if you're bumper to bumper day after day, week after week. Psychologists say that's because even though traffic is frustrating, it's temporary. You know at some point it'll be over. [voice-over]: Psychologist Janice Kiecolt-Glaser says traffic jams might depress your immune system a tiny bit...
[Janice Kiecolt-glaser, Ohio State University:] But it's probably not meaningful on health, just like if your blood pressure went up for a minute or two, it's not going to make a big difference.
[Cohen:] So what about the other three stressors, having a troubled marriage, getting mugged, and caring for a spouse with Alzheimer's? Kiecolt-Glaser says getting mugged is the least harmful of these, because even though it's traumatic, it's a one-time event. But if the victim thinks about the mugging over and over again, that's a different story.
[Kiecolt-glaser:] As you relive it, as you keep it alive in your mind, you're also keeping it alive physiologically, unfortunately.
[Cohen:] So now, which is worse, having a bad marriage or taking care of a spouse with Alzheimer's? It's a tie, Kiecolt-Glaser says, because both can go on and on with no end in sight. And there's a gender difference. A bad marriage seems to take more of a toll on a woman's immune system than on a man's, because women have a harder time letting go.
[Kiecolt-glaser:] And when women are remembering disagreements more, and thinking about them more, we know from our research they're certainly keeping it alive more in their body in a bad way.
[Cohen:] And so the key to controlling stress, for anyone, man or woman is to let go if you can, and get help if you can't. Elizabeth Cohen, CNN, Atlanta.
[Walcott:] Later in the show, we'll revisit the United States Navy. But before we do, take a look at war games and some training in some other countries. Those stories take us to Israel and Russia. Over the last several months, the Russian military has announced sweeping cuts in personnel. Over the next five years, as many as 600,000 civilian and uniformed positions will be eliminated. Russia has already cut its armed forces from 5 million troops and personnel to about 1.2 million in the past decade. Moscow is hoping to create a leaner, but more mobile fighting force, as Russian leaders recognize they can no longer afford a bloated military. One elite unit within the Russian military is already a lean and mobile fighting force. As Steve Harrigan reports, their training quickly weeds out anyone without the right stuff. We warn teachers, some of these images are graphic.
[Steve Harrigan, Cnn Correspondent:] The Red Berets are looking for a few good men. But to join the elite Russian anti- terrorism squad, you first have to prove your endurance: two hours of crawling, sliding, rolling, accompanied by kicks and gunfire. If you fall behind, you're out. [on camera]: Forty-four men started out the day trying for a red beret. By this point in the exam, just half are left. [voice-over]: The toughest obstacles are still ahead: six rounds with fresh opponents.
[Lt. Ivan Kolokostov, Interior Ministry:] Spirit, that's the most important thing. It's my dream to get a red beret.
[Harrigan:] Ivan and five others get the red beret. The rest are left to lick their wounds and try again next year. Steve Harrigan, CNN, Novaya, Russia.
[Rudi Bakhtiar, Co-host:] Onto Israel, a small country on the Eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea: Founded in 1948, it's considered a homeland for Jews all around the globe. Years of conflict with neighboring Arab states has prompted the country to maintain a very strong military. Nearly all Israeli men and most unmarried women are required to enter the military at age 18. Men serve for three years, women for two. Israel's army, navy and air force have about 141,000 members. Jerrold Kessel provides this behind-the-scenes look at army training.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] No longer need Israeli army commanders battle mirages in the desert. For training, at least, they now use a real and serious enemy: fellow officers. These don't look much like highly advanced Russian-made T-model tanks, but include a highly sophisticated U.S.-made computer system in a simple fiberglass vehicle. And gone are the days when, in training, commanders need to do battle with toy tanks in
[Major Gen. Mosho Ivri Snkenic, Idf Ground Forces Commander:] This is not a game anymore. This is a battlefield. When you get shot, you want to hide. You have to relate to whomever is around you.
[Kessel:] Red smoke signals this tank has been hit. The result is relayed back to the control center, which retains constant contact with the presiding observers in the field. After the battle, a four-minute computer run through reconstructs precisely every angle, every shot fired during the four-hour battle exercise.
[Yiftah Sarig, Training Coordinator:] You see shooting?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Sarig:] This is the antitank shoot this It hit, but it didn't kill.
[Kessel:] Tactics must now be planned, strategy executed against a real opponent.
[Sarig:] It force the battalion commander to face a reality that he didn't that he never faced before, because in front of him standing another thinking commander.
[Kessel:] Brigadier General Meir Gahtan, who commands the center, is one of the few officers who has actually been through a full-blown war.
[Brig. Gen. Meir Gahtan, Base Commander:] Nothing is like the real battle, because even if it is like this, you can't put the fear inside.
[Kessel:] However good the new training methods, commanders here are constantly reminded they can't be taught the real thing. Jerrold Kessel, CNN, in Israel's Negev Desert.
[Walcott:] And it's time now to pick up where we left off yesterday in our series, "To Serve a Nation." In today's report, the guy sitting next to me here gets the assignment of a lifetime.
[Haynes:] Yes, the funny thing is, I was just trying to get from point a to point b, from Oceana Naval Air Station to the USS Theodore Roosevelt in the Atlantic Ocean. The Roosevelt was about 150 miles east of North Carolina in the Atlantic Ocean and there I was fast approaching in an F-18 Hornet flying Mach 1. The ship was on a training mission for Navy pilots to practice landings and takeoffs from the deck of the carrier. In setting up the story, I was offered the chance to fly to the Roosevelt on the F-18. This is one of the most advanced, most sophisticated fighter jets in the United States naval fleet. The Navy required that I go through a series of training before I actually got to fly on the F-18. Once they determined I was physically fit to fly... I always wanted to wear one of these, just to look cool.... I got into an outfit that I'd become very familiar with over the next few days: a flight suit and combat boots. This would be the beginning of a somewhat condensed version of flight school. My first test of physical endurance came when I suited up to go on what's called a hypoxia chamber. Hypoxia is basically what happens to the body when not enough oxygen reaches the brain. The ejection seat is one of those necessary components in a fighter jet, and they were very meticulous about teaching me how to safely operate the ejection seat in case anything happened on my flight.
[Unidentified Male:] Given the command, eject, eject, eject, pull on that handle and away he goes. Good job. If you feel no pain or discomfort, give me thumbs-up.
[Haynes:] It was a complete rush. That was great. Just like the end of a roller coaster ride, I wanted to get on the seat and actually do it again. Since my flight to the Roosevelt would be over water obviously, I had to go through water survival training.
[Unidentified Male:] We do occasional hurt people doing this stuff.
[Haynes:] I hooked up with a Navy class who was getting recertified at the time.
[Unidentified Male:] Don't fight the water.
[Haynes:] I had to swim the length of the pool in the flight suit and actually stay afloat for two minutes. That's a long two minutes. I was totally exhausted and my day in the pool hadn't even begun.
[Unidentified Male:] In the bleachers.
[Haynes:] For naval aviators, knowing how to escape from a submerged aircraft is real important. The shallow water Egress trainer is a cage-like contraption designed to simulate a ditched aircraft in shallow water.
[Unidentified Male:] Don't kick your buddy.
[Haynes:] You and a buddy basically swim through this thing under water and try to get out without kicking each other in the face. Unfortunately, one of the guys that went through wasn't so lucky. He got kicked right in the forehead. If you eject from a fighter jet and parachute into the ocean, there's an actual danger that your chute will drag you several hundred feet through the water if it's a windy day. You need to be able to detach from your parachute to avoid being literally drowned to death. And the payoff came when I was rescued by a helicopter waiting overhead. Not a real helicopter, but they actually simulate a helicopter rescue with wind and everything. It was actually pretty neat. Unfortunately, nothing could rescue me, though, from my final test of endurance: the infamous "helo dunker." It's the mother of all training obstacles in the Navy. Even people in the Navy are afraid of this thing. The goal here is to simulate an actual helicopter crash under water. The most difficult test came when we were entering blindfolded to simulate a night crash. And they not only blindfolded us, but once we hit the water, the thing turned upside down. I had trouble escaping the first time. I couldn't even find the buckle and I had to be rescued by one of the Navy SEALs who were swimming around the helo dunker.
[Mike Hiltke, Aquatics Instructor:] It's very dramatic. Some people quit aviation community because of that device.
[Haynes:] All the training finally paid off.
[Unidentified Male:] Here's where we're going.
[Haynes:] There I was on the tarmac of Oceana Naval Air Station about to go up in an F-18 Hornet. I felt like Tom Cruise. I mean, it was a beautiful day for flying.
[Unidentified Male:] What I want you to do now is to go ahead and basically put yourself in the seat.
[Haynes:] Everything I learned in training seemed like a distant fog at that point. And once I got all settled in, it was time for us to fly. It was an incredible feeling to be in this jet surreal, almost like a dream. When we neared the Roosevelt, I could see the carrier out to my left-hand side. I couldn't imagine how we would land on this thing. It was as if we crashed right into the carrier, except it was a actually, it was a perfect landing. Man, that was a lot of fun. Once on board the Roosevelt, I caught up with young sailors just starting their Navy careers. It was fascinating to hear what life was like aboard a ship that size, and how the Navy goes about instilling the virtues of character, teamwork and responsibility. It is a massive floating city, one of the most powerful and prominent forces in the United States military. The USS Theodore Roosevelt, named after the 26th president, is one of the most advanced aircraft carriers in the world. More than 5,000 officers and crewmembers make it operate. The crew are men and women from every state in the U.S., each with a unique story about making the choice of a military career.
[Patrick Smith, Corpsman:] And I saw that Navy commercial where that person is standing up there stall and proud. He has his uniform on pristine. [Begin Video Clip, Navy Ad]
[Unidentified Male:] I wanted to see the world. So I figured the Navy would be the best place to do that.
[Smith:] And I was saying to myself: That's what I want to be. I want to look in the mirror and I want to look like that person.
[Haynes:] Meet part of the Roosevelt's crew: six men and women in the infancy of their Navy careers. They are beginning what they hope will be the experience of a lifetime.
[Roger Riffle, Airman:] An opportunity to see the world and just, the new thing is get away from the regular the hometown, just to get out out to sea and travel.
[Elizabeth Carvalho, Seaman:] I didn't really have that much money when I got out of high school. And I knew that if I joined the Navy, I would have a big opportunity and just meet different people, go different places. It's just an experience.
[Haynes:] An experience that has the potential to transform these young sailors during their years of service, to strengthen their characters in a way that promises success, whether in the military or in the private sector.
[Capt. David Bryant, U.s. Navy:] A lot of people join the Navy because they're looking out there and they're not seeing, one, the challenges, and also a real route for them to develop their future. That's something that we provide, and I think we provide very, very well.
[Haynes:] From the moment they walk aboard the Roosevelt, crewmembers learn what it takes to make this massive structure operate.
[Unidentified Female:] How many miles out?
[Haynes:] It's a tall order, especially for those fresh out of boot camp, who are just learning the ropes.
[Unidentified Female:] I was nervous at the beginning. But now now it's just my job.
[Haynes:] The key to success? Like other branches of the U.S. military, the Navy instills the value of teamwork.
[Unidentified Female:] Port lookout reports service contact.
[Carvalho:] The thing is, you got to trust one another. If you can't trust one another, then maybe that person might not come out right.
[Unidentified Female:] Quartermaster, mark distance from land.
[Riffle:] It's a very large responsibility, especially for a teenager, because once you're in the military, you have a military mind. Now, that's what boot camp is for, you know, to show help everyone work as a team.
[Haynes:] Finding your way around an aircraft carrier isn't easy.
[Riffle:] At first, it's pretty hard to get around because you don't know where you're going a whole lot of hallways. Each one has a billion different doors, a lot of different work centers.
[Haynes:] Does it get easier after a while?
[Riffle:] Yes, a whole lot easier, because, you know, we live here on the ship. And this is this is just our home. And you've got to, you know, get familiar with it.
[Haynes:] For Airman Roger Riffle and his shipmates, familiar gets a whole new meaning in what they call the racks: sleeping quarters that stack sailors one on top of the other. So this redefines the word "roommate," huh?
[Unidentified Male:] Oh, definitely. Six people to a cube? Getting dressed...
[Haynes:] Sometimes life at sea aboard an aircraft calls for performing jobs a Navy sailor could probably live without. But the Navy depends on much of its crew to perform the basic duties that keep ships like the Roosevelt operational. Still, they insist the ultimate objective is to teach teamwork, responsibility, dedication and what it means to work your way through the ranks from the ground up.
[Bryant:] And we provide them the off-duty education that goes in concert with that, to grow them as an individual.
[Smith:] And I could look back and see myself as a teenager and just laugh and wonder how I could ever have been that way.
[Carvalho:] Through the experience I've been through here in the Navy, I know that, if I got out now, I could go and get what I wanted whenever I wanted.
[Riffle:] Being out on your own at a young age, you're just you know, you're forced to grow up quick.
[Bryant:] Every time I see them do that, the work that they do, I have to say that they really are my heroes, down there doing this incredible job for us.
[Haynes:] All right, tomorrow in part three of our series, "To Serve a Nation," we'll take a closer look at the men and women behind the U.S. Air Force. They do much more than fly jets. They also operate billions of dollars worth of equipment that affect our everyday life, Shelley.
[Walcott:] Really fascination, Tom.
[Haynes:] Yes. Check it out tomorrow.
[Walcott:] Sure will. And that wraps up today's show. And we'll see you right back here tomorrow.
[Haynes:] Take care.
[Walcott:] Bye-bye.
[Announcer:] CNN NEWSROOM, here for you 12 months a year. And it's free. Educators need to enroll once a year. And it's easy. In the U.S., call 1-800-344-6219; outside the U.S., 44-207-637-6912; or on the Internet at turnerlearning.com.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] When apartheid finally collapsed in South Africa, the people who suffered under those rules sought justice. Four stories of reconciliation are told in the documentary film "Long Night's Journey Into Day," which will air on HBO this coming Monday evening. Filmmakers Frances Reid and Deborah Hoffman come to us this morning from Washington. Thanks so much for being here. Your film won a documentary award at Sundance, correct, nominated for an Oscar as well. Congratulations.
[Frances Reid, "long Night's Journey Into Day":] Thank you.
[Deborah Hoffman, "long Night's Journey Into Day":] Thank you.
[Mcedwards:] I think most people will remember the story of American Amy Biehl, who is one of the people you feature in the documentary. Deborah, can you tell us what about her story was so compelling?
[Hoffman:] Well, oddly enough, you would think what was compelling for us as Americans was the fact that she was American, but what really was so compelling that her parents took this extraordinary, generous stand of supporting amnesty for the killers of her of their daughter. And the mother of the killer of the daughter took this extraordinary, generous stand of deep compassion towards the parents. And in fact, the parents have of both the killer and Amy met and to this day are still in contact. We were very moved by that.
[Mcedwards:] I think of lot of people found that almost incomprehensible and instructive. And if you guys would just hold on for one moment, I'd like our viewers to get a little bit of a feel for the film, and we've actually got a segment of it we can run now of Amy's father, Peter.
[Peter Biehl, Father Of Amy Biehl:] Racism in South Africa has a painful experience for blacks and whites, and reconciliation may be equally painful. However, the most important vehicle toward reconciliation is open and honest dialogue.
[Mcedwards:] Frances, how important was it for him to go before the truth and reconciliation commission and have that moment?
[Reid:] Well, I think it was extraordinary, especially for South Africans, to understand that there was this American whose daughter had been killed there who felt that was important was to talk about reconciliation. And that little piece that you just saw, actually, he was reading from a letter that Amy had written to the "Cape Times" about three months before killed. And I think for both Peter and Linda Biehl, representing their daughter and who she was in South Africa was very important to them.
[Mcedwards:] Deborah, the truth and reconciliation commission was supposed to be sort of symbolic of new start for South Africa. As you followed it, do you think it achieved that?
[Hoffman:] Well, absolutely. I mean, it can't completely achieve it. There's no way that something that goes on for just a few years can wipe out decades of something incredibly evil, which is what apartheid was. So, the legacy of apartheid, of course, still continues. But what it did achieve was that it got a tremendous amount of truth out so the entire nation now knows what happened. And also, the victims were given a voice. They were allowed to come forward and tell their story. So, it's an incredible first step. It's only a first step, but it's a more profound and, I think, successful, first step than I've seen anywhere elsewhere where a country s trying to deal with brutal history.
[Mcedwards:] And Frances, on the film, how have you found people who have seen the film, how have they reacted to you on a very personal level to what they see?
[Reid:] Well, we've had a lot of people come to us after screenings where we've be there in person and they say, first of all, they had no idea about what was really happening in South Africa. But also, they relate to the film on a personal level, and they will come and say things to us like, I need to talk to my brother about, you know, something that happened five years ago, and we really need to reconcile over that. I need to start to approach things in a different way that has to do with understanding the truth can hopefully leave to reconciliation. And we've been our people will say to us the next day, we were my husband and I were up all night last night talking about this film, and that's been gratifying to us because in making it, we really wanted there to be a response that was universal, that went beyond needing to know about what happened in South Africa, but also what's happening in our own hearts.
[Mcedwards:] All right, Frances Reid, Deborah Hoffman, we have to leave it there. Thank you both very much and congratulations on the film.
[Hoffman:] Thank you very much.
[Reid:] Thank you very much.
[Mcedwards:] All right, "Long Night's Journey Into Day." TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] The city that built the atomic bomb is under attack by a much older force of destruction. A fire that started last week in the Bandelier National Monument continues to consume homes today in Las Alamos, New Mexico. The city sprang up in the 1940s as the base of operations for the Manhattan Project. Now it is covered by a cloud of smoke, and it is disappearing, house by house. The fire is one of several fires in New Mexico, pushed by winds over 50 miles an hour, too dangerous, say firefighters, to battle head-on. Ironically, the Los Alamos fire was started deliberately by the National Park Service, which was trying to clear some brush. It has grown to consume 18,000 acres. It has destroyed at least 100 homes in Los Alamos so far, and firefighters say, continued high winds and warm temperatures will continue to feed the flames today. Some fires are said to be burning on the 43 square mile Los Alamos National Laboratory. But structures there are built to withstand severe fires. At least 18,000 people have been evacuated from Los Alamos and surrounding communities, including Espanola and White Rock. The Red Cross says, doctors and mental health workers are on duty at shelters.
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] President Clinton has issued declarations of disaster for three New Mexico counties, Los Alamos, Sandoval and Santa Fe. This morning, the president talked about the fire.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] I have been briefed on the situation. The fire is continuing to blaze. The residents have been evacuated. We have taken steps to protect our lab, and the assets there. And most important, I just want to give my sympathies to the people who have lost their homes.
[Waters:] The head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, James Lee Witt, will be in New Mexico today, assessing the situation.
[Allen:] CNN national correspondent Tony Clark is in Los Alamos. He joins us now Tony.
[Tony Clark, Cnn National Correspondent:] Natalie, we're in an area that is kind of high ground of Los Alamos and can kind of look around and it gives us a good vantage point to see how the firefighting effort is going, and it is not going well because you can tell by all of the smoke that really surrounds this whole area from the west side of Los Alamos, the fire moving north, and moving south as well. In fact, if you look off to my side, you can see the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and you can see how close the fire is to various areas as it comes down closer and closer to the laboratory. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, in this area today, will go over to the laboratory area today, officials saying that everything there is safe, but the fire is moving further to the south, forcing further evacuations in the White Rock area. This the biggest fear today was that the winds would get up with gusts of over 60 miles an hour, and that would keep the firefighters from using helicopters to battle the fire. It hasn't gotten that bad yet. So we have seen throughout the morning helicopters carrying large buckets, dousing the area with water. They go make trips back and forth to a reservoir, picking up water to try and stop what is quickly being decimation of house after house. There are areas of Los Alamos on the west and north where whole neighborhoods are wiped out. Also, ironically places where houses are burned to the ground and another is still standing. There are some 800 firefighters battling this blaze today. The temperature is expected to get up to 90 degrees, making conditions even worse. As I say, if the wind gets up to the gusts of 60 miles an hour, it will make it even worse. At this point, there is some hope weather conditions may improve tomorrow, improving the chances for firefighting, but right now everything is on the side of the fires. Tony Clark, CNN, Los Alamos, New Mexico.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Well, a short time ago, 15 U.S. special forces personnel wounded in Operation Enduring Freedom were honored for their bravery and for their heroism in Afghanistan. The troops were injured in Mazar-e Sharif and in Kandahar. CNN's Art Harris is at the site of that ceremony in Fort Campbell, Kentucky. He joins us live. Hello, Art.
[Art Harris, Cnn Correspondent:] Leon, it was very moving as generals from Washington awarded 19 members of special forces units in Afghanistan for their wounds and their bravery. Nineteen purple hearts were awarded and some of them for valor. There were several bronze stars, for courage, and they went to the men for their fighting, at Mazar-e Sharif when they tried to put down the prison uprising, and five special forces men were wounded there. They received purple hearts.
[Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Lambert, U.s. Army:] They had to conquer the differences in language, and culture, and religion, and they had to the conquer centuries of difference in the tactics, weaponry and communication that Afghani warriors had practiced throughout the 23 years of this war. And finally, they had to conquer one last thing, and that was the Taliban, and they've done it.
[L. Harris:] All right, thanks much. Art Harris in Fort Campbell, Kentucky. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Announcer:] A day of violence in the Middle East: Without warning, a U.S. Navy destroyer comes under attack.
[Unidentified Male:] Everyone was at a high state of alert. This was a brief stop for fuel scheduled in a friendly port.
[Announcer:] The USS Cole sustains major damage. Evidence points to a suicide bombing.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] We will find out who is responsible and hold them accountable.
[Announcer:] The investigation of who might be behind this deadly attack is already under way. In the same region, days of fighting become an all-out assault. Israel attacks targets on the West Bank and Gaza following the death of Israeli soldiers taken into custody by Palestinian police, then killed at the hands of a mob.
[Unidentified Male:] What the Israeli government did just now is tantamount to declaring an all-out war against the Palestinian population.
[Ehud Barak, Prime Minister Of Israel:] We responded in a very focused manner, a very clear signal that we will not have this kind of violence continue forever.
[Announcer:] As prospects for peace fade, the U.S. calls for an end to the violence by both sides.
[Clinton:] The alternative to the peace process is now no longer merely hypothetical. It is unfolding today before our very eyes.
[Announcer:] Now, a CNN special report: "Crisis in the Middle East" and "The USS Cole attacked." Here's Joie Chen at CNN Center and Wolf Blitzer in Washington.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Good evening and welcome to our viewers from around the world. Jim is on assignment. We replace our usual coverage to bring you an hour-long special on an extraordinary day in the Middle East. In the West Bank, the lynching of at least two Israeli soldiers by a Palestinian mob has had a chilling effect on the peace process and now both sides openly talk of war. The attack triggered an Israeli response that reduced a number of Palestinian targets to smoldering ruins. Now, the world watches as the violence spirals out of control. In Yemen, an explosion that has the hallmarks of a terrorist attack has crippled a guided missile destroyer and left six U.S. sailors dead and 11 missing. The USS Cole was making a refueling stop in Aden when a small boat came alongside the vessel and exploded, leaving a 20-by-40 foot hole on the port side. CNN's Matthew Chance is en route to Yemen. We hope to hear from him within this newscast. But we first go to the Pentagon, which has scrambled to respond to the suspected terrorist attack. To bring us up to date on developments out of the Defense Department, we have this report from CNN military affairs correspondent Jamie McIntyre.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Correspondent:] The blast that punched this 20-by-40 foot hole through the one-half-inch thick steel hull of the destroyer USS Cole was as unexpected as it was deadly.
[William Cohen, Defense Secretary:] According to an eyewitness account, the explosion occurred when a small boat that was participating in the mooring approached the USS Cole.
[Mcintyre:] The American sailors caught in one of the main engine rooms and on the mess deck above it were killed by the powerful blast, and three dozen other sailors were wounded in what the Pentagon says appears to be a suicide-terrorist attack. According to Pentagon sources, in a routine maneuver, the small boat helped attach a mooring line to an offshore buoy. But then, with the boat close by the warship, the two men aboard appeared to stand at attention, as the boat exploded without warning.
[Admiral Vernon Clark, Chief Of Naval Operations:] My view is that and the scenario that I've described to you is that it would be extraordinarily difficult to have ever observed in time to do anything about this kind of situation and to have stopped it.
[Mcintyre:] The destroyer USS Cole was en route from the Mediterranean sea to the Persian Gulf to take part in enforcement of the oil embargo against Iraq. Because of the terrorist groups known to operate in Yemen, it used to be off-limits to U.S. ships. But the Cole, which left its home port in Norfolk, Virginia this summer, refueled there, in part, because of a U.S. policy aimed at improving relations with Yemen. The warship was scheduled to be there for only four to six hours, meaning the attack had to be planned well ahead of time.
[Sen. John Warner , Armed Services Chairman:] Given the magnitude of this blast, it couldn't have been put together in a garage overnight. Somebody had to do some careful planning to cause this much damage, this much loss of life and injury to our loved ones.
[Mcintyre:] The Pentagon says it's premature to blame the attack on any particular group.
[Cohen:] If, however, we determine that terrorists attacked our ship and killed our sailors, then we will not rest until we have tracked down those who are responsible for this vicious and cowardly act.
[Mcintyre:] In response to the attack, the Pentagon has put all of its forces around the world on a higher state of alert. But until the U.S. completes its investigation, the Pentagon today could offer no assurances an attack like this couldn't happen again Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Jamie, on top of all of this, there are now some reports that Iraq is having some suspicious military maneuvers or troop movements. What are they saying at the Pentagon?
[Mcintyre:] Well, as if the Pentagon didn't have enough to worry about today, today we learn that U.S. intelligence has reported that over the last day or so some an Iraqi army division of the Hammurabi Division of the Republican Guard, some of the troops that the most loyal to Saddam Hussein and are usually based around Baghdad, began to move west sort of toward Jordan and Syria. Now, that sounds somewhat alarming, but the analysis here at the Pentagon is that it appears to be a show of force by Saddam Hussein, a show of solidarity with Arabs who are engaged in the dispute with Israel. There's no logistical trail that would indicate that these troops are actually in any sort of a combat posture, and there's no indication that the troops were, for instance, moving against the Kurds in the North. Nevertheless, a movement of an Iraqi division of about 11,000 troops along with their tanks heading toward the west, that's something the Pentagon is keeping a close eye on.
[Blitzer:] All right, Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon, thank you Joie.
[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] Wolf, for more insight on today's attack against the USS Cole and the potential U.S. responses, we're joined by former National Security Council staff member Daniel Benjamin. He was most recently the coordinator of the U.S. counterterrorism policy. Today, he is with the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington. Dan, we want to talk first about who might be behind this. There has been to this point no legitimate claim of responsibility for the attack. Can you help us understand who might be behind it?
[Daniel Benjamin, Former Director Of Counterterrorism, National Security Council:] Joie, that, of course, is the question everyone is going to want to answer. I think first there needs to be a cautionary note. The investigative and intelligence work that will go into ascertaining who is responsible for this could go on for a very long time. It's very important not to get carried away with speculation.
[Chen:] But I think there are plenty of people out there who might wonder, for example, if this has the fingerprints of Osama bin Laden on it?
[Benjamin:] Yes, well, there are going to be a couple of groups, of categories of terrorists who are going to be scrutinized in particular in the days ahead. The first group will be the Jihadists, the radical Islamic terrorists affiliated with bin Laden, based in the terrorist camps in Afghanistan. As the State Department pointed out in its annual report, there are plenty of operatives from these groups in Yemen. They belong to groups like the Al-Qa'ida, which answers directly to bin Laden, and the Egyptian Islamic Jihad. There's also going to be a lot of scrutiny, I believe, of the rejectionist Palestinian groups, such as Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. They also have representation in Yemen, and there have been indications that they have been cooperating more and more with the Jihadists out of Afghanistan, that they are finding common cause to derail the peace process. I think the timing suggests that that's one area that's going to get a lot of scrutiny.
[Chen:] Would you say that in looking at it from your view do you see the fingerprints of one group over another more likely to be on this?
[Benjamin:] Well, as I said, I don't want to get carried away with speculation. There are some clear aspects of this attack, however. It was clearly very well-planned. They used an enormous amount of explosives. They were out to cause a lot of death. And this is the hallmark of terrorists today who tend to be more interested in large-scale carnage and have a religious agenda. That has been the trend that we have seen over the last few years. It is consistent with the agenda of pushing the United States or trying to intimidate the United States to leave the Gulf region. That has certainly been an explicit goal of bin Laden and his associates. But I think we're going to have to wait and see until more of the investigative and intelligence work has been done.
[Chen:] Earlier in Jamie McIntyre's report, we heard the use of the word "plan." I mean, obviously, this is not a spontaneous event. It is something that somebody put some thought into. Was there also reason for the United States, should intelligence have been aware of something possibly happening in Aden?
[Benjamin:] Well, I certainly wouldn't want to second-guess U.S. intelligence. In the last few years, the CIA, the NSA, and the other parts of the intelligence community have ramped up their capabilities enormously. At the same time, there's been an extraordinary increase in the amount of threat material that is out there. I think that the important thing to keep in mind here is that we're in an era where we're defending all the time everywhere. We saw in East Africa that terrorists can hit us very far from their traditional theaters of operation. And I think that we have to keep in mind that it's very difficult to keep our defenses at the very highest pitch all the time and to defend everywhere. Remember, this is an operation, this is a game in which we can score many successes, as we have against the new transnational terrorists, and all they have to do is score once, and it looks very bad.
[Chen:] As you talk about keeping eyes out all over the place, Jamie McIntyre also reported intelligence signs of Iraqi troop movements under way today. Can you comment on how that might play?
[Benjamin:] Well, one of the things that the government is going to be doing in the next few days and weeks is looking at all of the state sponsors of terrorism, those who have a history of trying to harm U.S. interests through terror. Iraq is one of those countries. Iraq's capabilities in this regard have been greatly diminished over the years, and so it's relatively unlikely that they were able to pull this off. That will certainly be something that the administration will look at very closely. My own guess is that the deployments that the Iraqis are having are largely being done to gather some attention while the peace process is in such such dire straits. Several days ago, Saddam Hussein made a remark about wanting a parcel of territory near Israel and he would eliminate Zionism. So he's clearly using this as a moment for grand political theater.
[Chen:] Daniel Benjamin, we appreciate your insight. Daniel Benjamin is with the U.S. Institute of Peace. Also on the possibility of connections to Iraq, Yemen has been building close ties with that longtime U.S. adversary for years. It has to do in part, as Daniel Benjamin noted, with their location in the Middle East and with associations with bordering countries. But an alliance potentially could pose a threat to the United States. CNN's Mike Boettcher on that.
[Mike Boettcher, Cnn Correspondent:] Located on the strategic southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula, Yemen has often been the object of courtship by the world's stronger powers. Both the United States and Russia have recently stepped up their attempts to win influence there. During the Cold War era, Yemen was split in two. South Yemen was supported by the Soviet Union; North Yemen, by Western powers. They were united nine years ago, but the hangover from those days still lingers. John Bolton is a former U.S. assistant secretary of state who is familiar with the region.
[John Bolton, Former U.s. Assistant Secretary Of State:] During the Cold War at different points, the two halves of what is now the united Yemen were on different sides of the Cold War. And that's one of the reasons why even after the Cold War the country has still been a conduit for terrorists and other unhelpful elements.
[Boettcher:] In recent months, Yemen has had another suitor: Saddam Hussein. According to international experts who monitor the region, Yemen, which has an ongoing, bitter border dispute with Saudi Arabia, has had increasing contacts with Iraq, the bitter enemy of Saudi Arabia. During the Gulf War, Yemen served on the U.N. Security Council, where it openly questioned resolutions against Iraq.
[Bolton:] It served as a surrogate for Iraq in a lot of the critical votes there. Yemen has long had difficulties with its neighbor, Saudi Arabia, which of course was directly threatened by Iraq, and in that part of the world the old saying "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" really rings true.
[Boettcher:] No intelligence analysts we spoke to believe the present government of Yemen would actively support a terrorist attack on the United States, but they say the country does make an easy and logical base of operations for organizations bent on attacking U.S. interests. Mike Boettcher, CNN, Atlanta.
[Chen:] Indeed, the president of Yemen today suggested that the explosion might have caused by a mechanical problem on board the USS Cole, but he says if it was a terrorist attack, his country will pursue and punish anyone found responsible Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Joie, here in Washington, President Clinton made a quick return to the White House from New York, and he spent the day huddled with advisers and making phone calls to world leaders. More now from CNN senior White House correspondent John King.
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] One aide called it a double dose of despair from the Middle East; another, one of Mr. Clinton's most frustrating and disappointing days as president. First: the deadly and apparently terrorist attack on a U.S. naval destroyer during a refueling stop in Yemen.
[Clinton:] If their intention was to deter us from our mission of promoting peace and security in the Middle East, they will fail utterly.
[King:] The Pentagon ordered ships in the region to sea. The State Department put embassies on high alert and warned Americans about the risk of travel to the volatile region. Then, horrifying scenes of new violence in the Middle East, Israeli soldiers murdered by a Palestinian mob. The president called for an end to the bloodshed, calm and then a return to the bargaining table.
[Clinton:] I call on both sides to undertake a cease-fire immediately and immediately to condemn all acts of violence.
[King:] The Palestinians labeled the Israeli retaliation an act of war, and Israel's prime minister angrily called for the White House to take sides and publicly rebuke the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat.
[Ehud Barak, Prime Minister Of Israel:] We expect the American administration to tell loud and clear the American people and the leadership of the world who failed to move forward in order to put an end to the bloodshed in the Middle East.
[King:] Mr. Clinton watched from the Oval Office, where he was busy with another day of feverish telephone diplomacy. There were three conversations with Mr. Arafat, and urgent appeals to Mr. Barak, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and King Abdullah of Jordan. Mr. Clinton's high hopes of July have given way to profound frustration and disappointment. But the White House does report a few hopeful nuggets tonight. For the first time, senior administration officials say, fellow Arab leaders, including President Mubarak and King Abdullah, have agreed to help the president in pressuring Mr. Arafat. And there's renewed talk of an emergency Mideast summit. But first, says one senior White House official, the violence must stop, and he said, "We must break the psychology of anger that has replaced the psychology of peacemaking." And one last development: The president is scheduled to attend Democratic fund-raisers here in Washington tonight and then travel on a domestic political trip tomorrow. He canceled both of those stops, staying here instead at the White House, where he continues to work the phones this evening Wolf.
[Blitzer:] John, despite those rays of hope that are out, is there still a widespread fear at the White House, elsewhere in Washington that as bad as the situation in the Middle East right now, it could still get a whole lot worse very quickly?
[King:] That fear does exist indeed, Wolf. Go back through the cycle of the Middle East peace negotiations predating this president, but especially in the 7 12 years he has focused on this crisis, and it has been a roller-coaster ride, as one senior official put it today. The assassination of Yitzhak Rabin. They thought they had a deal, they were on the verge of a deal in July and it broke down again. They thought in the 36 hours heading up to this morning that the situation on the ground had improved and there was talk of a major U.S. diplomatic mission. So the White House watching tonight, encouraged that Prime Minister Barak said that the retaliation was through and that he would now be watching the Palestinians. But behind the scenes here, they're quite nervous tonight. Again, they are encouraged, though. They say for the first time the Arab leaders seem to understand that the situation was spiraling out of control, and they are coming to the president's aid, White House officials say, in trying now to get Mr. Arafat to come out and publicly condemn the violence.
[Blitzer:] OK, John King, at the White House, thank you Joie.
[Chen:] Wolf, we have more now on the deepening crisis between the Israelis and Palestinians. Israeli helicopters attacked Palestinian police targets in the West Bank towns of Jericho and Nablus overnight. Earlier, it was Ramallah and Gaza that took the brunt of Israeli military retaliation. CNN's Ben Wedeman with the story.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Correspondent:] An Israeli helicopter fires a missile into the Palestinian town of Ramallah: more proof as if more proof was needed the Middle East peace process may be in its death throes. The attack was Prime Minister Ehud Barak's response to the killing "lynching" as Israeli officials call it of Israeli soldiers by a Palestinian crowd. According to Israel, the soldiers strayed into Ramallah by mistake. Palestinian police suspected they were undercover agents and arrested them, but could not defend them against the crowd. Wherever the truth lies, there's no doubt about what happened next. The streets emptied. Israeli Merkava battle tanks moved into firing positions while more armor deployed in the hills above Ramallah. Helicopters hovered menacingly over the outskirts of town. And then the attack began, hitting the police station where the killings took place. Israel also targeted Palestinian radio, which was knocked off the air. The Israeli general in charge of the West Bank made no apologies.
[Brig. Gen. Benny Ganz, Israeli Army:] And there was a very severe case this morning on these murders of our soldiers. As far as I'm concerned now, I will do my best to control the area and to get ready to whatever option will come in the future.
[Wedeman:] Panicked residents fought to put out the fires. Palestinian Council member Hanan Ashrawi described by phone the scene in Ramallah during the attack.
[Hanan Ashrawi, Palestinian Council Member:] We have no electricity. I'm sorry, but we are trying very hard to stay calm. The situation here is very, very critical. It's very dangerous.
[Wedeman:] Dozens were wounded as Israel launched a similar assault on targets in Gaza. Israel described the attacks as limited, but the injuries done to the peace process by the killing of the Israeli soldiers and by Israel's response may be fatal. Ben Wedeman, CNN, Ramallah, on the West Bank.
[Chen:] Next up here, how we got to this point: The incident that sparked what's now been two weeks of violence.
[Barak:] The Sharon visit is the excuse, not the reason. It's the same determination...
[Chen:] Christiane Amanpour's interview with Ehud Barak. She joins us live from Jerusalem. And we'll get reaction from Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat. And the men who want to be president react to the dual crises. You are watching a CNN Special Report.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] The Powerball and lotteries the topic tonight on "CROSSFIRE." We're going to go up to Washington for a preview. Bill Press and Tucker Carlson, my old friends, back with us now. Listen, guys. Good evening, first of all.
[Bill Press, Co-host, Cnn's "crossfire":] Thank you, Bill.
[Tucker Carlson, Co-host, Cnn's "crossfire":] Thank you, Bill.
[Hemmer:] We're going to give you one minute to go ahead and frame tonight's debate. The clock is running, so give it your best shot.
[Press:] The worst news I'm from Delaware and I'm not the fourth winner. But Tucker if you hadn't been so cheap, Tucker, if you had just gone out and spent a buck this weekend, you could have walked away with $41 million dollars. Aren't you sorry for your family?
[Carlson:] That I didn't humiliate myself by standing in line outside a liquor store waiting for a prize I'm never going to receive? You know, we have David Edwards on tonight, who is of course one of the winners. I'd like to do a show with the millions of sad, uneducated, credulous people who didn't win. Unfortunately, we can't fit them in the studio. But we should do that show.
[Press:] Tucker, that is so elitist. They're not so sad. You know, not everybody like you can afford to go to the baccarat table, Tucker. Not everybody can fly first class to Las Vegas. So this is the average working stiff's casino. A buck.
[Carlson:] And the average working stiff is getting stiffed. Think of it this way. If the government owned tobacco companies and were advertising, promoting smoking, you would say, "Gee, this is horrifying." Government promoting a destructive habit for profit. You would be against that. That's what it's doing here. And you ought to be against it now.
[Press:] I don't anybody that's gotten killed by playing the lottery, Tucker. But let me ask you this. Where else...
[Carlson:] There are many people.
[Press:] Get out. Where else could you spend a dollar and get $41 million?
[Carlson:] But you are not going to get $41 million.
[Press:] David Edwards did.
[Hemmer:] Time out.
[Carlson:] Eighteen minutes, Bill Hemmer. Tune in.
[Hemmer:] You got it. 18 minutes away. See you then, guys. Many thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the Marc Rich pardon is a hot topic in Israel where the Marc Rich Foundation is based. That charitable organization is headed by a former agent of the Israeli Intelligence Agency, Mossad. Our Ben Wedeman talked with that man this morning and joins us now to tell us his perspective Ben.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Colleen, the echoes of that controversy surrounding Mr. Rich are being heard here in Israel. Earlier today, as you said, we spoke to Mr. Avner Azulay, who is the head of the Rich Foundation, a charitable organization that has funded a variety of activities here. He was also the man who coordinated the effort to win Mr. Rich's pardon from President Clinton. He collected a variety of letters from leading Israeli personalities, including senior officials such as the foreign minister who sent addressed those letters to Mr. Clinton. Now, Mr. Azulay, when we spoke to him earlier today, explained to us why he believed Mr. Rich deserved that pardon.
[Avner Azulay, Managing Dir., Rich Foundation:] It's a fact Mr. Rich has been helping the Jewish people and Israel for many, many years in humanitarian causes, and helping was all he can do, not only his money, also with his connections when they were necessary. And what he was asking for is the help to support his plea for pardon so that he could visit his daughter's grave, he could visit his father's grave, he could visit his family in New York.
[Wedeman:] Many Jewish and Israeli leaders Jewish-American and Israeli leaders are distancing themselves, nonetheless, from the Rich pardon. Many feel that more deserving of a pardon was Jonathan Pollard, the American convicted of espionage on behalf of Israel. And those same people also believe that this Israeli involvement in the pardon is excessive involvement in what is essentially a U.S. domestic matter Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] CNN's Ben Wedeman, thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Many economists predict the easing of trade restrictions with Iran are going to do little to revive that nation's troubled economy. But in this country, the largest group of Iranians living outside of Iran is in Southern California, and CNN's Jennifer Auther finds growing optimism in that community about the expansion of trade.
[Jennifer Auther, Cnn Correspondent:] Alex Helmi sells mostly antique Persian rugs in a section of West Los Angeles known as "Little Tehran." He is among an estimated 500,000 Iranian- Americans living in Southern California. Helmi welcomes news the U.S. is easing trade sanctions on Iranian caviar, pistachio nuts and Persian rugs. Before the lifting of the embargo, Helmi could only buy and sell rugs he found in the
[U.s. Alex Helmi, Iranian American Businessman:] It is wonderful news for both Iran and for USA, because you know, more than 10 million people are affected in Iran.
[Auther:] For two decades, Helmi has made a living in the U.S., while the U.S. has held a policy of isolation and containment where Iran is concerned. [on camera]: The United States routinely has banned imports from Iran since the seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1979, in which Iranian revolutionaries took Americans hostage and held them until 1981. [voice-over]: But now, immigrants such as Steve Zand are encouraged by political reforms occurring in Iran. Specifically, Zand says he was elated by the election three years ago of Iranian president Mohammed Khatami, and last month's elections, which ushered in a reformist parliament.
[Steve Zand, University Of La Verne Law School Dean:] I think this reformist movement, in its infancy, needs all the support, even if it is simply symbolic, that it can possibly get from the rest of the world.
[Auther:] It is the topic for talk radio station KRSI, which brings immigrants news and more, in Farsi and English.
[Mikki Mohodjer, Krsi Radio:] They're looking at it very closely, the young adults that are growing up here, the professionals, hoping that they can maybe take those trips back home.
[Auther:] Alex Helmi will celebrate the new year in Iran this week. He says he knows pistachios, caviar and carpets won't impact much, but
[Helmi:] I think it's a very, very good step towards, you know, normalizing the relationship. There is nothing better than friendship.
[Auther:] Jennifer Auther, CNN, Los Angeles.

[Koppel:] Spring has arrived in Washington. Those are cherry blossoms blooming not far from where we are coming to you live this morning here in Washington, D.C. How important is religion in America? A big majority will be in church tomorrow. The Gallup organization says 64 percent of Americans say they will attend Easter services; only 31 percent say they will not attend. Joining us with some perspective on religion and its impact on people's lives since September 11 are three guests: In Lynchburg, Virginia, is the Reverend Jerry Falwell, chancellor of Liberty University. In New York, James Martin, a Jesuit priest. He's also the associate editor of "America" magazine and author of a new book, "The Search for God at Ground Zero." Also joining us in New York is the Reverend James Forbes. He is the senior minister of New York's interdenominational Riverside Church. Good morning to all of you.
[Rev. Jerry Falwell, Televangelist:] Good morning.
[James Martin, Jesuit Priest, Author:] Good morning.
[Rev. James Forbes, Senior Minister, Riverside Church, Nyc:] Good morning.
[Koppel:] You have seen I don't know if you were listening to our previews segment, but you've seen those horrible pictures coming out of the Middle East. And I'm just wondering if any of you has some words of wisdom or comfort to offer Israelis and Palestinians, as to how they are supposed to turn the other cheek? Reverend Falwell?
[Falwell:] Well, obviously, we are admonished, all believers are, to pray for the peace of Jerusalem. On that, I think we all agree. Prayer is our most important contribution. But at the present moment, as I listened to Secretary Eagleburger, there's no question America is just about powerless right now to demand anything from the Israelis or the Arabs. It is a terrible picture. I've traveled there 31 times with two groups, up to 1,500 persons. I would not dare take a tour group there right now. And I think that unless something happens very radically and very quickly, Israel and most of that part of the Middle East is in for a bloodbath.
[Koppel:] Reverend James Forbes, I'd like to ask you also for a bit of wisdom here. But it has more to do with, how do you forgive those terrorists behind the September 11 attacks?
[Forbes:] The truth is, a prophet once said, "Not by might nor by power, but by my spirit, said the Lord." This means we at least have to decide that the use of violence against us should suggest also we have to decide, can violence solve that problem? Clearly, nations have to have defense. But it is clear now that we will not solve the problem, with respect to terrorism, or the problems in the Middle East primarily by military means. That means that all religious groups need to dig deep into their traditions to find answers to the question, if not violence, then what leads us in the direction of restoration of peace amongst the nations?
[Koppel:] Father James Martin, we read in the Bible about a loving God. How could a loving God let so many innocent people die as they did September 11?
[Martin:] Well, that's very difficult question. That's the question of evil in the world. And I think the more important question is, what is the believer's response to a situation like September 11? I worked down at Ground Zero for a few weeks afterwards, and what I saw was not only the presence of evil, as evidenced by the destruction of the World Trade Center, but also the presence of good and the presence of God's grace, which brought together so many people in works of charity.
[Koppel:] Has 911 made us more spiritual?
[Falwell:] I think it has, at least it has brought us together. When I saw Democrats, Republicans in the Congress praying together, singing God Bless America hours after the tragedy, it was something I had not seen since World War II. I'm probably the senior of this group of three here, and I remember World War II quite well. Sadly, crises and tragedies do tend to draw us to God, to one another. Six months later, are more people attending church now than ever? I'm not sure that's true. But tomorrow, 2 billion B like boy 2 billion persons around the world will gather somewhere to celebrate the death, burial and glorious resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. And that, the first Easter since 911, I think will be a significant time wherever we are, as we ask the Lord, the risen Christ, the only hope for peace in the world, to intervene.
[Koppel:] Gentlemen, I'm going to read to you an excerpt from James Martin's book. He describes this simple religious service at Ground Zero. This was the first Sunday after the terror attacks. And he writes, "A small group of people gathers around the table, all visibly tired, all covered sweat, all blanketed in ash. We moved quickly through the mass. These are busy people. The gospel reading today from Luke is heartbreakingly appropriate: The shepherd who rescues his lost sheep and the woman who searches for her lost coin. We speak of searching, rescuing, hoping and loving." James Martin, it really it feels to me, just reading your words there, that you saw the Bible come to life.
[Martin:] That's true. I saw not only the Bible come to life in some of those gospel readings, which were, as I said in America Magazine, almost painfully appropriate, but the gospel come to life in terms of, as Reverend Falwell was saying, the mystery of the resurrection in a place of great suffering. I used to tell people, if you doubt the mystery of evil in the world, come to the World Trade Center. But also, if you doubt the power of good and the power of God's grace, come to the World Trade Center and see how God's grace is working itself out in the works of charity from the firefighters, the police officers and the rescue workers.
[Koppel:] Father Martin, we are going to take a quick break, but we'll be back with all of you in just a moment. How has September 11 transformed spirituality in America? Our panel of clergymen will take your questions, and we'll have a news update when CNN's SATURDAY EDITION returns.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] President Clinton says older Americans are being left out of clinical trials of new drugs and procedures, and that money is the reason. So today, he sought to change that. And CNN's Kathleen Koch tells us all about it now. She's in Washington Kathleen.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] Lou, up until now, senior citizens have been reluctant to participate in tests of new drugs or new treatments because Medicare would not pay for the cost of their any treatments that they were facing, that the cost of their care, even if there was a complication. So any elderly who did sign on ran the potential risk of incurring thousands of dollars in medical bills. The result, for instance in breast cancer, where 44 percent of elderly elderly women, I should say, make up 44 percent of the patients, only 1.6 percent of them participate in clinical trials to find a cure or a treatment for the disease. So today President Clinton said that, for the first time, Medicare will begin paying for the care of the elderly and disabled patients who are in clinical trials.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] As America ages, we must provide all our seniors affordable quality health care. And we should be using our cutting-edge science to meet that challenge. Simply put: The more seniors we enroll in trials, the faster we'll be able to use these advances to save American lives.
[Koch:] And there is hope now that private health care providers, which often follow Medicare's lead, will now expand their coverage to include the patient cost of those who participate in these clinical trials. Right now, many private health care providers deny such coverage, saying that it is experimental. Back to you, Lou.
[Waters:] OK, Kathleen Koch, from Washington.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Back to U.S. and to another topic. This issue: energy deregulation. In Texas, where they're known for doing things in a larger-than-life way, supporters of the deregulation plan that went into effect last week say it will be a big success in Texas. They're promising consumers there lower rates and better service. However, there are critics who are saying, remember this? California's deregulation attempt. That left consumers with power blackouts, and sky-high bills during the past two years. And the issue doesn't affect just California and Texas; 24 states and the District of Columbia have all passed some form of deregulation legislation. For some more perspective on the issue, we are joined now by two guests: Carol Biedrzycki is executive director of the Texas Ratepayers Organization to Save Energy, known as Texas ROSE. And joining us from Washington, D.C., Jerry Taylor. He is director of natural resource studies for the CATO institute. Thank you very much for coming and joining us today, folks.
[Jerry Taylor, Cato Institute:] Good afternoon.
[Harris:] Ms. Biedrzycki, since you are the one who has complaints about the implementation of this plan in Texas, let's start with you. What is wrong with this? Didn't Texas learn the lesson from California to avert the same problems California went through?
[Carol Biedrzycki, Texas Rose:] Actually, I don't think we have averted the problems that are present in California. Some of the problems that arose in California were transmission constraints. We have transmission constraints here in Texas. Some of the problem in California were power supply. We may not have power supply problems now but we are likely to have them in the future. Also, there is no jurisdiction where deregulation has resulted in lower rates. It has not driven down prices the way it promised to.
[Harris:] Mr. Taylor, how about that? Let's start with that last point. It is a point I have heard made a number of times, particularly in our coverage of what happened in California. Is there any place where it has been proven that deregulation actually does lower rates for consumers in the first place?
[Taylor:] Well, nor is there any place where deregulation has actually occurred. What he have here is restructuring. We have some regulations which are lighter than they had been in the past, but we have other places in the law in Texas where the regulations are tougher. On balance, in fact, I would say it is more regulation than less. But in California, you have to remember, what happened there had almost nothing to do with the so-called deregulation. What happened was, you had a drought in the west, which knocked off about seven or eight nuclear power plants the equivalent thereof, of hydropower right out of the system. When you had this huge shock at the system and all that hydropower disappeared, power got scarce, prices went up, and you had rate controls in California which prevented the state from passing on those that increased scarcity in the price of that power to consumers and that's why you had blackouts. So, since Texas don't rely on hydropower I don't think Texas is in any real trouble.
[Harris:] The question, though, is about whether or not any of these deregulation plans, whether they have been complete ones or not, have actually resulted in lower prices for consumer, which is supposed to be the reason why these plans go into place in the first place?
[Taylor:] Actually, if you ask the economists who support these kinds of restructuring laws, what they would tell you is that most of the price gains would occur not because of increased competition or anything of the kind, but for two reasons. First of all, under a restructured system supposedly companies will be a little bit more careful about what they invest in. In the past, in the old regulatory regime, if a company invested in a white elephant nuclear power plant, they could pass on those costs to consumers forever. But in this new regime, if you build a power plant that isn't competitive, you eat the losses and the rate payers don't cover you for it. The second reason these restructuring plans were supposed to work is that they were supposed to lead power companies to charging real- time prices. In other words, electricity is very, very expensive during summer days. It is very, very cheap during the evening time and during the winter, but we don't see those prices under the normal regimes. The people that support this restructuring think that under these new regimes we will see real-time pricing. We haven't seen them yet which is why I don't think you have seen any real price declines.
[Haynes:] All right, Ms. Biedrzycki, how about that? It sounds as though these concerns have been taken into account, and consumers in Texas won't be hurt. What do you think?
[Biedrzycki:] Well, I think Mr. Taylor is wrong. First of all, real-time pricing is something that most consumers don't want. What real-time pricing means is that we will be paying the highest prices for electricity when we need it most, when it's hot in the summer, elderly people on fixed incomes and low-income families will have to decide between whether or not they want to use electricity or whether they want to buy food or medicine. In response to some other statements that Mr. Taylor made, I would simply say that when we engaged in debates here in this state about whether or not to restructure the industry, companies other than the electric utilizes made statements that they could beat the utility's prices by 30 to 40 percent. Within the past month rates have been decreased by 6 percent in Texas for the opening of market, competitors are saying that they can't afford to compete because the rates are too low. And they want the commission to raise it. What has happened here is that the industry has not delivered the goods that it has promised.
[Haynes:] Are rate cops the answer? As I understand it, that is part of plan here, is it not?
[Biedrzycki:] I'm sorry, I missed that.
[Haynes:] Rate caps, is that part of the plan here? As I understand it, there's some idea that putting a cap on how high the rates can go will be put into effect there?
[Biedrzycki:] No. Actually, there is no cap on how high rates can go. There is a rate that has been put into effect that will remain regulated called the price to beat, that competitors can try to beat. But a competitor can charge anything they want for electricity and there is a pass through for fuel costs.
[Haynes:] Finally, Mr. Taylor, let me ask you this, one of the other things that came up in the debates about what was happening in California is that there still does not seem to be a clear answer as to whether or not competition actually works in a utility's market based upon what we have seen and again, not being able to say unequivocally that rates are lowered for consumers in a competitive market with utilities, where is the proof that this is actually a good idea?
[Taylor:] See, actually what they did in California, what they have done in 20-odd other states as you mentioned in the setup of the piece is that the generation market has been deregulated. Now you have got power plants here competing against power plants there. That has been deregulated but the retail and distribution end of electricity hasn't been deregulated. In fact, that's been there has been increased regulation on that side of business. It's clear that you can have competition between power plants. I mean after all, if you allow for competition between power plants the white elephant nuclear power plants that were built over the years and the other expensive power plant contractors would never survive in the marketplace and rate payers wouldn't be dinged for them. But on the other hand, there hasn't been a complete deregulation. In fact, I am no fan of what is going on in Texas. I wrote against what was going on in California because on balance, I think it's more regulation, not less.
[Haynes:] Let me ask, on the way out, quickly, as I understand it, refresh my memory, part of problem and some of the fallout from the California episode was that power companies in Texas were making money hand over fist by jacking up the rates unjustifiably, it was found. Is that not what happened there and are those the same companies that are going to benefiting from this deregulation in Texas?
[Taylor:] It is a very complicated story. The economists who argue that there was price gauging going on do not argue that the entire price increase was made up or was concocted by pirateers or anything of the kind...
[Harris:] It wasn't just economists, it was also the government that said that in that case as well.
[Taylor:] Well, politicians will say whatever they need to say to get elected. The economist that they cited would tell you that about 10 percent of that price increase was suspicious. In other words, almost all the price hike that occurred happened because we had a drought which tore off a ton of hydropower from the California system. The question was, at the very top end of that spike, was all of that price legitimate or was some of it the result some sort of shenanigans? Even if there was some of that going on, it doesn't explain the entire price increase. There was a drought. There was a tremendous run-up in power prices. There was a scarcity that was not make believe. Power did go out because there wasn't enough to go around.
[Harris:] But even it was only a small amount, in percentage terms, it ended up being billions of dollars that hit the consumers. We are going to have to end it there. I am sorry folk. We will be watching to see how this all plays out. Carol Biedrzycki, thank you very much, and Jerry Taylor in Washington, thank you as well. Happy new year to both of you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has been delivering one core message in the last two days during his trip overseas. He says the war on terrorism is far from over. CNN's Kathleen Koch is at the Pentagon with more on that. Hello, Kathleen, and I guess the defense secretary is now in Brussels.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, he is, Judy, for a NATO meeting, as evidence to those statements of his that this war is far from over. There are today more Afghans and Afghan fighters in U.S. custody in the region. They are excuse me, there are more prisoners in U.S. custody from the region of Afghanistan. They are non-Afghans, one of them including American John Walker, the Taliban fighter. Also an Australian, as well as three others. And they have been flown to the U.S. Pelilu, a Navy helicopter assault ship that is in the region. Now the Pentagon says that some of them are Al Qaeda, some are Taliban, they are not quite sure. All of them were taken to the ship either for medical reasons or for security reasons, or for further interrogation. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld who is, again in, Brussels, Belgium for that NATO meeting, confirms there's still plenty of resistance on the ground in Afghanistan.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary:] There are still a lot of Taliban in the country, and they're still armed, and it's going to take time, and energy and effort, and people will be killed in the process of trying to find them, and capture them or have them surrender.
[Koch:] Meanwhile the pentagon today showed tape of latest U.S. Bombing runs over the Tora Bora region. One strike reportedly killing Al Qaeda fighters and damaging a cave complex there. Still, Rear Admiral John Stufflebeem says the Tora Bora region has gotten quiet, that there is Less fighting there, less chatter on the radio, and all of that perhaps giving less evidence then that Osama bin Laden remains in the area. The U.S. military saying that Pakistani soldiers have captured less than 100 fighters fleeing across the border. So U.S. and Eastern Alliance fighters continue searching that cave-pocked region of Tora Bora for more evidence of Osama bin Laden or any Al Qaeda fighters.
[Rear Adm. John Stufflebeem, Pentagon Spokesman:] There are an indeterminable number of caves to inspect at this point, from what I can tell. So what I gather is that while the fierce fighting that we have seen up until just a few hours ago may have subsided a little bit. Now it becomes the more difficult and slower process of confirming who is left to fight, or is this cave now empty, and was there evidence that somebody was recently there.
[Koch:] Judy, those three Marines injured Sunday in that mine- clearing operation have all now been removed from Afghanistan, taken to regional facilities for treatment. One reportedly has had his leg amputated. One Marine suffered a head injury, and the other had an injure to his hand Judy.
[Woodruff:] Kathleen, what are they saying at the Pentagon about what happens in the event these Al Qaeda fighters go across the border to Pakistan, which is pretty clear now a number of them have done. What's the agreement with Pakistan in terms of going after them?
[Koch:] That very question came out in the briefing today. And at this point, the Pentagon is saying that U.S. special operations forces do not have permission from Pakistan to chase Al Qaeda, to chase Taliban fighters across the border. So it is there expectation that the Pakistani military lining that boarder, that very porous border, will do their best to intercept the Al Qaeda. Clearly they have some, but it's bit of difficult situation; if they were in hot pursuit, apparently they would just have to stop.
[Woodruff:] All right, our Kathleen Koch, reporting from the Pentagon. Thanks, Kathleen,
[Koch:] You're welcome. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] Outside of Philadelphia at this hour, rescue crews are working to shore-up a flooded apartment building where four people have died in an explosion and fire, and where three are still missing. Rescuers are hoping to stabilize the structure so it's secure enough for them to get back inside to look for possible survivors, or possibly for more victims. Officials think this fire is linked to flooding from Tropical Storm Allison, which dumped up to nine inches of rain over the weekend. We're going to check in now with CNN's Jason Carroll, on the phone from Philadelphia, who's been following this episode for us Jason.
[Jason Carroll, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, as you look at the Village Green apartment complex in Upper Moreland Township, you can see so much destruction. One side of the building is completely gone. It was blown away during the explosion. At this point, crews have stabilized the structure enough to recover those four bodies that they found inside. Two or three people are still missing. Earlier today, I did speak with some of the people who lived in the complex. One man, Bill Meyers, said that after the flood waters started to rise up to the first floor, he then heard a huge big boom, as he described it. He said the smell of gas was everywhere. The ensuing fires spread to two other buildings in the complex. Fire officials have not given us a cause, but they tell me they do believe the flooding had something to do it. Sections of Southeastern Pennsylvania were hit very hard with what hopefully will be the last blow from Tropical Storm Allison. This all happening Saturday. The storm triggered power outages and flash floods throughout the area. It all happened so quickly, cars were flooded on the roadways and some people had to be rescued because they were trapped inside. A major exit on the Pennsylvania Turnpike had to be closed for a time. It has since been reopened. There is a lot of cleaning up to do out here, as you can imagine. Most of the people who went to the shelters last night are now headed back home. We found one shelter where there are still about 60 people there. Most of those people are from the Village Green apartment complex, who simply no longer have a home Stephen.
[Frazier:] Jason Carroll, with a full spectrum of news. Only Friday, Jason, you were reporting on the happiness or a lottery winner, now this.
[Carroll:] You know, it just shows just you how short things can be in terms of how life goes, and a number of these people really just cannot believe I mean, when you're looking around here, Stephen, it's hard to believe that there was even a flood here. I mean, there is very little evidence of it, very little water that's still here. A flash flood, it comes and then it goes very quickly. But as you look up and see this apartment building, you can definitely tell that something went very wrong here.
[Frazier:] Jason Carroll from outside Philadelphia. Jason, thank you for that update.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] As election 2000 heads into its final busy hours, we turn to another high-profile race for a U.S. Senate seat in New York. In a daylong blitz through traditionally Republican upstate New York, GOP challenger Rick Lazio hopes it's still friendly territory on Tuesday, of course. At stops from Syracuse to Niagara Falls, Lazio continued hammering Hillary Rodham Clinton over a campaign donation from a Muslim organization that was ultimately returned. Mrs. Clinton has countered Lazio's criticism with a campaign ad of her own. And as CNN's Kelly Wallace reports, she brought her husband along yesterday to help get out the vote.
[Unidentified Musicians:] Vote for Hillary, because she's the one that will fight for us.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn Correspondent:] With a retooled Latin favorite blasting, Bronx Democrats rallied for the first lady without her but with her biggest booster.
[Unidentified Citizens:] We want Bill! We want Bill!
[Wallace:] From there, Harlem, where the president urged voters to go to the polls for Democrats, including his wife.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] If you want to keep building one America, you just have one choice, Al Gore, Joe Lieberman, Hillary and Charlie Rangel.
[Wallace:] His wife's race has gotten nasty. Republican Rick Lazio continues attacking Mrs. Clinton for receiving a $50,000 donation from and sending a thank you note to the American Muslim Alliance, some of those members defend the use of violence against Israel.
[Unidentified Actor:] She invited a leader of the group to the White House. Here he is at a rally last week, supporting a terrorist group.
[Unidentified Muslim:] I wish they added that I am also a supporter of Hezbollah. Anybody supports Hezbollah here?
[Wallace:] The first lady fired back with an ad featuring former New York City Mayor Ed Koch. [Begin Video Clip, Hillary Rodham Clinton Campaign Ad]
[Ed Koch, Fmr. Mayor Of New York:] Have you seen this? It's garbage. Rick, stop with the sleaze already. This guy gave money to George W. Bush and to Hillary and they both returned it. So what?
[Wallace:] In the final days, both candidates are getting some help on the stump. Political observers say the first lady needs to overwhelmingly win New York City, Lazio needs a double digit lead upstate.
[Maurice Carroll, Quinnipiac College:] Can Mrs. Clinton turn out black voters? You know, black voters are the most loyal Democrats there are.
[Wallace:] The minority vote may be the deciding factor for Mrs. Clinton. It may also mean the difference between victory or defeat for Al Gore, and that is why the President is heading to his home state of Arkansas on Sunday for his final get out the vote rallies before Election Day. Kelly Wallace, CNN, Harlem.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Well, for you motorists making that morning commute, you will soon have a few new gizmos to fill your time during traffic tie-ups, Lou, and those stoplights.
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] We could use some more of those, I guess. CNN's Ed Garsten says high-tech devices rolling off the assembly line now will allow you to keep your eyes on the road while performing the many tasks.
[Allen:] Do we want to?
[Ed Garsten, Cnn Correspondent:] Making the most of time spent stuck on the road, if you thought the cell phone is a lifesaver, now meet the Delphi's Communiport mobile productivity center. It lets you use your personal digital assistant along with your cell phone while you're driving.
[Jeff Owens, Delphi Corporation:] You can do obviously, Web interconnectivity, here. You can bring your e-mail in and out of the vehicle via your palm device.
[Electronic Voice:] You have three items in your business category: item one, fax presentation to team, completed.
[Garsten:] It's relatively cheap, less than $500, and requires no complicated installation.
[Owens:] In literally, in five seconds out of the box, if you have got a cupholder and a 12-volt cigarette lighter, you're ready to go.
[Garsten:] A factory-installed version will be available early next year on Cadillac Seville.
[Owen:] By voice recognition, using voice techniques here, keep the eyes on the road, hands on the wheel, and enable them to use the devices and still maintain a safe drive.
[Garsten:] Another heads-up idea, literally: new instrument displays, for the first time, let the driver decide what will appear.
[Owens:] Anything from the miles per hour, to the brightness of the lights, turn signals. But you can also display navigation information.
[Garsten:] Add in the mobile productivity center and even more information can appear before your eyes.
[Owens:] You can look at a phone list. You can look at sports scores, stock quotes.
[Garsten:] Delphi says it's all displayed below the sight line.
[Owens:] So the driver never has to take their eyes off the road.
[Garsten:] But what about a cockpit toy for your ears? the radio in the built-in mobile productivity center has a slot for an MP3 digital music card, so you can play tunes downloaded from the Web. The engineers say, with all these onboard gizmos in the works, getting behind the wheel will never mean just driving ever again. Ed Garsten, CNN, Brighton, Michigan.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] In Washington, D.C., a woman gave birth to septuplets in just three minutes late last night, at Georgetown University Hospital the septuplet story from CNN's medical correspondent Rea Blakey Rea?
[Rea Blakey, Cnn Correspondent:] Carol, five boys, two girls, born at 11:25 last evening, in the NICU Unit, that's the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, at Georgetown University Hospital. The mom, we are told, is in good condition, though she wants to remain anonymous this morning. The lead obstetrician in that case, Dr. Helain Landy, had 24 people assisting her. Again, caesarean section within three minutes. Each of the babies is assigned this morning a medical SWAT team that includes a neonatologist, respiratory therapist, nurse, and many others, and that's for each child. We have no information at this point on how each of the babies is doing. We do know that this is not the first time that septuplets have been delivered in the United States. You will recall back in 1997 the McCaughey family were the first, in fact, to deliver septuplets. Those babies were born at Iowa Methodist Medical Center. That's in Des Moines, Iowa. They will be coming up on their fourth birthday. In Houston, also, there was a family that delivered eight babies, actually; one did not survive. We should tell you at this point that Georgetown University Hospital is ranked number 22 in the nation regarding its ability to deliver fertility and gynecological services, even though we're not really certain at this point as to the status of the pregnancy coming into being. We don't really know specifically what occurred prior to the point of the deliveries. But we do know five baby boys and two baby girls at Georgetown University Hospital this morning, and a mom who, we are told, is in good condition Carol.
[Lin:] But I bet pretty tired.
[Blakey:] I am sure she is.
[Lin:] Thanks, Rea. We'll see you later. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] The big question we're looking at this hour: Do men actually deserve to be paid more than women? The so- called glass ceiling is apparently getting thicker. A new congressional study says the salary gap between male and female managers in many industries actually grew during the five-year period from 1995 to the year 2000. Reps. Carolyn Maloney of New York and John Dingell of Michigan commissioned the study. They both join us this morning from Washington. Welcome, good to see the two of you.
[Rep. John Dingell , Michigan:] Good morning.
[Rep. Carolyn Maloney , New York:] Good to see you, Paula.
[Zahn:] Thank you. So Rep. Maloney, let's take a look at some of the findings of this study to give both of you a chance to analyze this for us this morning. Full-time women managers earn less, as we just said, than men in the years 1995 to 2000. In seven of ten industries, the earnings gap between full-time women and men managers widened between 1995 and 2000. And only half of the industries studied had women managers in proportion with women in the industry's work force in the year 2000. Now, aren't there, Ms. Maloney, discrimination laws that are supposed to prevent this from happening?
[Maloney:] There are laws in place; they're obviously not being enforced. And I believe it's very much of a wake-up call to corporate America, the seven industries that had the biggest gap or the private sector, the three industries that were more in line were heavily regulated. Almost public sector, hospitals, education and public administrators. So I just think we have to make sure that our actions in terms of equality live up to our rhetoric. What was most disturbing about this report was that it happened during a time of great prosperity and economic growth. So when America was strongest, women slipped. We didn't spread the wealth, we grew the disparity.
[Zahn:] Rep. Dingell, there are critics out there that suggest there's a very good reason for this gap. And the say it's because women choose to take time off while they're having children and raise them. And I want you to take a look at what Ed Hudgins from the CATO Institute had to say about this in "The Washington Post" yesterday. Quote, "It has nothing to do with men cutting their salaries because they wanted to be mean. Would these congressmen content that employers have become discriminatory in the past five years? It's a hard argument to make." How do you respond to that, Rep. Dingell?
[Dingell:] I respond that it doesn't have much to do with the real situation. The answer is, there are many, many things that affect the earnings capacity of women, particularly in the managerial status. The simple answer is that all of these things are working together to see to it that women aren't making the same wage as managers that men do. I think we have as a nation to disregard this kind of argument and focus on what it is we have to do to see to it that everybody has a full opportunity. Obviously, having children; obviously, child care; obviously, raising families who have problems that are peculiarly affronting and confronting women. The fact of the matter is, however, there are things that can and should be done about those. There are also other things. And the simple fact of the matter is we don't know what all the problems are. We know they are here; we know the result is unfair; we know that something has to be done, and we believe that the American people want to be fair on these matters.
[Zahn:] But, Rep. Dingell, you heard what your colleague had to say. That she feels that the best start is to make sure these discrimination laws are enforced. Do you have any faith that that's going to happen?
[Dingell:] I believe that that's true. But I believe that there's one thing about this, Paula. This study tends to show something, and that is that there are a lot of questions that we are that we do not know. And it raises more questions, frankly, than it answers. But, certainly, that is a major step. And one of the other things that needs to be done, for example, is what my good colleague Congresswoman Maloney says, and that is we need to do something also about an equal rights amendment, about additional statutes, and about additional enforcement.
[Zahn:] So in the meantime, Rep. Maloney, you've got women out there and these statistics, I think, are pretty interesting that two-thirds of American families' income are provided by women at least half of the income. And so these women find themselves in industries where they're not making any headway. What are they supposed to do in advance of these additional laws getting passed?
[Maloney:] Well, I think that's an important point, that it's not a woman's issue, it's a family's issue. Because women's salaries are needed to help support the family, and in many cases, they're single parents. And when you discriminate against a woman's salary, you discriminate against her children and her husband and her entire family. I'll tell you the truth, Paula, when we commissioned this study, John and I are actually shocked at the results. We didn't expect it to be as bad as it is. I, quite frankly, thought, Paula, that the life and the job opportunities that our daughters would face would be easier than the one that we faced. But this is extremely disturbing and shows that women particularly in managerial positions have lost ground. When I began working, probably when you began working, women were paid 50 cents to the dollar. We're now paid 76 cents to the dollar. We've made progress, but it's still not fair, it's still not equal. But this shows just striking disparity. In one case in entertainment, they said that had slipped 21 cents. That the woman's dollar had dropped down to roughly 65 cents to the dollar.
[Zahn:] Wow.
[Maloney:] So it raises very disturbing information. We intend to continue working on it, we intend to join with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle working to enforce the laws that we have on the books. And really working to put other laws on the books. I have to ask, why can't we pass the equality amendment? I think everybody in America feels that men and women should be treated equally and have equal opportunity.
[Zahn:] That sounds like a good subject for us to debate here on another morning. We really appreciate Rep. Dingell, your coming in. And Rep. Maloney, you as well, to shed some light on this study that you commissioned. Have a good weekend.
[Maloney:] Thank you, Paula.
[Dingell:] Thanks, you too.
[Zahn:] I appreciate your time. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Hattori:] Welcome back. We are at the Computer Museum History Center here in Silicon Valley this week and with us is the executive director and CEO John Tool. John, thanks for having us.
[Unidentified Male: John Tool, Ceo, Computer Museum History Center:] Thank you.
[Hattori:] How many artifact do you have here, what, dating back to the '50s, even before that?
[Unidentified Male:] You bet, we got thousands and thousands of things from hardware, software, ephemeral, networking kinds of things.
[Hattori:] One thing I was wondering about, where is the very first computer?
[Unidentified Male:] surprised you asked. Actually, the first computer was actually termed for women who actually used for calculations.
[Hattori:] Oh, not a machine, a person.
[Unidentified Male:] It was not a machine, they were people,OK, that were actually considered particularly during the war, and insurance industries were doing actuarial tables.
[Hattori:] So they would sit there and scribble and do calculations all day?
[Unidentified Male:] Exactly. And they became some of the first programmers.
[Hattori:] What are we standing in front of here? This is a
[Unidentified Male:] This is an exciting machine. This is a one of a kind rescued by the computer museum. It is a tube machine, there are thousands of these kinds of things.
[Hattori:] You don't see those anymore, do you?
[Unidentified Male:] Not really. Very unreliable in the sense of what the machines were. But it really pioneered a lot of new stuff.
[Hattori:] And what kind of power did it have for calculations?
[Unidentified Male:] Well, it was, by comparison to what we have today, orders of thousands of thousands of less power than we have. But at the time it was just world break-through.
[Hattori:] John, this is a terrific place. The Computing Museum History center, if you are ever in the neighborhood, stop on by.
[Unidentified Male:] Thank you.
[Hattori:] Another device that's also marking its 20th anniversary this year is the compact disc. No other audio technology has been able to match the sound quality of the CD until now. Mark Saltzman has this week's "Technofile."
[Mark Saltzman, Cnn Correspondent:] A war is on to replace the almighty CD. The contenders: DVD-Audio and Super Audio CD. Both offer true, six-channel Surround Sound, much like a DVD movie, with five speakers delivering different tracks, and the subwoofer pumping out the low-end bass.
[Paul Kennar, Audio Product Specialist:] You really feel like you're sitting in the middle of the performance.
[Saltzman:] We tested them out for some music lovers at an audio store.
[Unidentified Female:] It sounded like different things were coming from different places.
[Saltzman:] The discs hold much more information than a standard CD, and offer graphics to display on a TV such as lyrics or videos. So, the big question remains, how do they differ?
[Kennar:] Dvd-Audio really positions itself more with the home theater experience. The Super Audio CD, though, is geared more as an extension of what the CD started out as, and is going above and beyond what CD did.
[Saltzman:] Some of our music-lovers said they preferred the DVD- Audio.
[Unidentified Male:] I'd say the first one sounded more live. The sounds are more in-depth, the bass is more vibrant, and everything is there.
[Saltzman:] Others preferred the Super Audio
[Cd. Unidentified Female:] I would buy the Super Audio
[Cd. Saltzman:] Some couldn't tell the difference.
[Unidentified Male:] I'd say about the same quality as a cd, I mean, from my ears.
[Saltzman:] Only a handful of DVD-Audio discs are on the market right now, with a few hundred more planned by the end of the year. There are already about 200 Super Audio CD's available. Both formats are hovering around the $25 range. [on camera]: Now here's the catch, just like you had to buy a new piece of equipment 20 years ago to play CD's, both the DVD-Audio and Super Audio CD require yet another player. And that can cost you anywhere from $400 on the low end all the way up to $15,000. But some DVD-Audio discs will work in an existing DVD video player.
[Kennar:] And the great thing about Super Audio is that when you have a hybrid disc which has the Super Audio and the regular CD layer on it, you can pop that into any CD player: in your car, on the road with your CD Walkman or anywhere.
[Saltzman:] Will there be room in the market for both of these formats? Audiofiles like these will determine whether one goes the way of the Betamax.
[Announcer:] Up next, wonder what's living in your backyard? The answer could be a click away.
[Unidentified Female:] If you put into your zip code it tells you what wild life lives in your particular area.
[Announcer:] Turning your home into a habitat with the help of the Web. Stay with us.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Tiger Woods is back playing golf for the first time since his Masters win last month. The tournament is the Byron Nelson Classic in Irving, Texas. Nearly every week on the tour, amateurs pay for a chance to play with the pros. And this week, one of the lucky amateurs is Dr. Daniel Cooper, who joins us now from Las Colinas, Texas. How were you picked to play with Tiger? What did you have to pay, Doc?
[Dr. Daniel Cooper, Tiger's Playing Partner:] Well, it's a random drawing out of 105 teams. They essentially draw your group out of a lotto machine. And ours came up first.
[Waters:] And you were chosen to play with a pro or you were chosen to play with Tiger?
[Cooper:] No, if you're picked first, then you get your choice...
[Waters:] I see.
[Cooper:] ... of which pro you play with. And we chose Tiger.
[Waters:] So you picked Tiger.
[Cooper:] That's right.
[Waters:] And you played with him today. The round is over?
[Cooper:] That's right.
[Waters:] How did you shoot?
[Cooper:] Pretty well. We were 13 under par with our net score. I didn't embarrass myself too much.
[Waters:] Thirteen under, you were playing best ball, is that it?
[Cooper:] You play a net best ball format.
[Waters:] OK, the question everybody is asking around here is what was it like to play golf with Tiger Woods?
[Cooper:] It was just as special as you would hope for. Everyone since we drew it and picked him, we were all very, very excited. And as far as watching him hit the ball and seeing how far he would out- drive you when you hit your best shot, that was impressive. But he also was very down to earth, very nice, and made our experience really a pleasure.
[Waters:] And I hear you're a nine handicap. If I had played golf with Tiger Woods, I would have been very intimated and may not have been able to hit the ball at all.
[Cooper:] Well, I think that that's true of everyone. Everybody was talking about just relaxing and swinging easy. And Tiger put everybody at ease. And for me personally, I was less nervous than I thought I would be. I was a little nervous leading up to it. But once we got going, I was fine.
[Waters:] Well, you must be comfortable around athletes in the first place. You're the team physician for the Cowboys and the Stars?
[Cooper:] That's right. I think that helps. You give them little space and don't treat them any different that you treat a normal person. And Tiger was very normal, very nice, and personable with us. It was very pleasurable to play with him.
[Waters:] OK, with your nine handicap, do you think you will be able to bring it down with what you learned today by playing with Tiger?
[Cooper:] One thing I know is I shouldn't quit my day job.
[Waters:] I see. OK. Thanks very much and congratulations to you. Five thousand dollars for charity...
[Cooper:] Thank you.
[Waters:] ... and a chance to play with Tiger Woods. Who could ask for anything more than that? Dr. Daniel Cooper...
[Cooper:] That's right.
[Waters:] ... from Las Colinas, Texas today.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] You may well remember the concerns across the country for Americans working and living in high rises, skyscrapers, to be more specific. Also in Chicago back on the 11th of September, the Sears Tower was closed for a time. And the observation deck has been closed until today. Our bureau chief in Chicago, Jeff Flock, watching this now. Jeff, good afternoon to you.
[Jeff Flock, Cnn Correspondent:] Good afternoon to you, Bill, about 1,454 feet in the air, I come to you from here, almost the apex of the Sears Tower. And perhaps, if you look over my shoulder here, you see the extraordinary view that is available up here. It's a view that no one from the general public has seen since September 11. Today that all changed. Another perspective for you along the lake front. A camera place out there gives you some sense of how important this building is to Chicago's skyline. And while those of you on CNN were listening to Ari Fleischer, the spokesman for one President Bush, we here in Chicago were listening to another President Bush reopen the Sears sky deck. And take one step, he said in trying to get life back to normal in the United States.
[George H. Bush, Former President Of The United States:] By reopening this symbol of strength and vitality in America's heartland you're sending a clear message that the terrorist have failed in one of their objectives. And 48 days ago those same terrorists struck at the symbols of American might and freedom, murdering thousands of men innocent men, women and children and in so doing they thought they could strike fear in our hearts, and for a while maybe they were successful. No longer.
[Flock:] The elder President Bush says he doesn't typically take reporters questions because he is concerned that if he says something that doesn't jibe with something his son as said, that he will get in trouble. But he did answer the question about the coalition. Obviously George Herbert Walker Bush with a lot of experience in terms of putting coalitions together. He says that he has good confidence that this coalition will hold, and he says don't believe everything you read in the news papers about how it might come apart. He says also that the president is doing well. He is blessed by a strong team, says the former President Bush and all is well on that front. On this front, that is Chicago, to give you some perspective here, I don't know if you were able to get it from up here. The sky deck, as we said, closed since September 11. This is one of the top tourist attractions in Chicago. From this you can see perhaps four states on a clear day. And today is a reasonably clear day in Chicago. It reopens now, we are told, as perhaps we take another perspective you look along the lake front there, within two and a half hours, just as soon as those of us who are reporting clear out. So the public will be back up and at least one more step toward normalcy in Chicago Bill.
[Hemmer:] Jeff, before we let you go, have you heard from tenants who occupy space in that building, businesses, et cetera? Are they concerned at all since the attacks?
[Flock:] Oh, you bet. They have been very concerned. In fact I talked to one man who purchased parachutes for his staff. He is on about the 80th, floor and of course we have had a lot of reports that talked about the dubious notion of getting parachutes together. But can you get some sense from that what people at least what's in people's heads about this and how concerned people are Bill.
[Hemmer:] Let's hope they never use those. Jeff Flock, in Chicago, high atop the Sears Tower on a beautiful day there today in the Windy City.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the Final Four frenzy got out of hand in College Park, Maryland overnight. Disappointed Terrapin fans set several fires on the University of Maryland campus. One of the fires knocked out power to thousands of cable customers. Police say one person was hurt, but no one was arrested. Duke beat Maryland 95 to 84 yesterday in the NCAA semi-final action. Now, with Duke's win over Maryland and Arizona's win over Michigan State, the scene is now set for the Final Two. CNNSI's Larry Smith is Minneapolis on more on how the Final Four were whittled down. Larry, are you having a good time.
[Larry Smith, Cnn Correspondent:] Oh, we're having a ball. It's been a great tournament so far. A little colder than what I would like, but it's Minneapolis in March, so what can you do.
[Smith:] But, still, they've talked about it being a classic final four, and that it has been so far. As you mentioned, Duke and Arizona both getting big wins last night to move on to tomorrow nights championship game, but both wins coming in different styles. Duke fell behind 22 points in the first half to ACC rival, Maryland. But then overcame the biggest half-time deficit in national semi-final history. All American Shane Battier and Jason Williams combining to score 34 of their 48 points in the second-half to dig out of an 11 point half-time hole and get the win.
[Unidentified Male:] It's really ironic that in the four games each team that's won the game has come down from double-digits and that was in the back of my mind. We were down by 20 and I was hoping to continue that trend. I think our team this year proves some things to our university, to our state, where we can be as a basketball program, and we're going to try and go from here. I've had some teams with heart that, this one is right there. You know, we've won a lot of games like this. Not with being behind, but making big plays.
[Smith:] Mike Kryzewski now 7 and 2 in NCAA tournaments semi- final, national semi-final play. Meanwhile, Arizona stymied defending champion Michigan State with an incredible defensive run in the first game. 12 steals, 15 forced turnovers, to run away with an 80 to 61 win and end the Spartan's 10 game win streak in NCAA tournament play.
[Unidentified Male:] I think our changing up with our defense, I think, bothered them. They're a team that once they get into rhythm, they're awfully good. And we changed up from man-in-zone and tried to keep them off balance. Our senior class has had an incredible journey and I don't want one game to mar that. I do give Arizona a lot of credit, and let I, you're talking to a guy who is totally confused on what happened to us.
[Smith:] That was quite a game last night. So, Arizona versus Duke. The coaches, Lute Olson versus Mike Krzyzewski. And you talk about classic, how's this for classic. The last time that two coaches who both already had championship rings met with another ring on the line was 1993 when Dean Smith of North Carolina beat Michigan's Steve Fisher. Should be a great match-up for Monday night.
[Phillips:] Alright, Larry, thanks. Bundle up. Get inside and shoot some hoops and warm up, OK?
[Smith:] OK.
[Phillips:] Larry Smith, thanks so much. Well, let's get a preview now of this men's championship game set for Monday, and maybe a prediction. David Scott joins us from Minneapolis. He's editor of "The Basketball Times," the Bible of what's going on in basketball for the coaches and players. Good morning, David.
[David Scott, "the Basketball Times":] Good morning, Kyra. How you doing?
[Phillips:] I'm doing alright.
[Scott:] March madness striking you in Atlanta as well?
[Phillips:] I'm definitely, I'm starting to feel it. You can't help it, right?
[Scott:] I think so. Absolutely.
[Phillips:] My mom sent me a Final Four pin. So, you know, she told me to wear it. I'm holding on to it.
[Scott:] Wow. Wear it with pride.
[Phillips:] There you go. Let's talk about Duke and Arizona. Arizona here, definitely on an emotional mission. Coach Lute Olson losing his wife there's sort of some special meaning going on here, isn't there?
[Scott:] Yes, there really is, Kyra; and it's a story that, certainly, the nation has latched onto. And you never want to have something like this overshadow an event as special as the Final Four, but I think Lute Olson losing Bobbi in the towards the beginning of the season really had an effect on this team and, in a strange way, brought them closer together as a family. And I think we;re seeing the results of that now.
[Phillips:] Wow; and Larry Smith was telling us about the billboards that said "Four Bobbi" "
[F-o-u-r." Scott:] Yes it's really special how everybody's kind of embraced this team and it's really a special match up because Dike has certainly been America's team for many years now, with coach Krzyzewski ad what he's been able to build there. But I think a lot of America will be pulling for the Wildcats tomorrow night.
[Phillips:] All right; well then we have Duke a lot of tradition with this team. Is that going to be an advantage here?
[Scott:] Well, in a one-game situation, I'm not sure that tradition really matters, but certainly the Duke players having the experience and having been there just two years ago, and some of them still having a chip on their shoulder for a game where coach Mike Krzyzewski surprisingly got out-coached by Jim Calhoun two years ago when the Connecticut Huskies surprisingly won the championship. And I think coach Kay has something to prove, as well that that was just a fluke.
[Phillips:] And he's got his All-American Shane Battier. Well, what's your call, before we let you go?
[Scott:] I think I've got to go with Arizona. I've been on their bandwagon for a while, and I love the emotional story that it's brought to the Final Four. And I think if you have half a heart, you have to root for Lute Olson.
[Phillips:] David Scott, thank you, sir.
[Scott:] Thanks, Kyra; great to see you again.
[Phillips:] Good to see you, too.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Right now, getting back to our stop story, U.S. law enforcement confirmed today that material found in the shoes of the American Airlines passenger was indeed explosive. CNN's Kathleen Koch is at Boston's Logan International Airport where the plane was diverted during an international flight yesterday. And what a drama it was, Kathleen.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, it was indeed, Carol. And here tonight, there is no word yet on exactly what prompted the bizarre incident or exactly what charges will be brought against the suspect, 28-year-old Richard Reid. As you said, a Bush administration source has confirmed that this material that was found inside his shoes is of an explosive nature, though the FBI has not yet confirmed to us whether or not it was a working bomb. Now, the authorities do tell us that Reid is a Sri Lankan national, and Scotland Yard is confirming that he also has a valid British passport. Now, the incident occurred over the Atlantic, after some time after the plane left Paris, when a flight attendant smelled sulfur and noticed this passenger, very tall man, 6-foot-4, with long, dark hair, back in row 29, trying to light something on his shoes. Now, at that point she and a number of passengers tackled him. They were able to restraint him with belts and other items that they had on hand. Sources tell CNN that a couple of doctors who were on board used drugs in the in flight medical kit to sedate him three different times to keep him under control. Now, because of this incident, the FAA today has issued another alert to the airlines to be on guard, to be on the watch for people trying to smuggle weapons or bomb-making parts in their shoes. Now, a similar alert was issued back on December 11. And at that time, some airlines began checking people's shoes, taking them off and putting them through the X-ray screening machines. Now, here at Logan Airport they began doing that for the first time today. It increased the lengths of lines, but the passengers we talked to didn't mind at all, though some of them were quite upset by yesterday's frightening incident.
[Unidentified Female:] Bothers me. Everybody can take their shoes off If they had X-ray vision at this point, do it.
[Lin:] Kathleen, the officials you spoke with, are they saying that Richard Reid is cooperating with the investigation, is he answering questions, or is he just completely silent?
[Koch:] We really are not hearing much about his level of cooperation. We do know one interesting note that he had tried to board this very same flight on Friday in Paris, but was detained by French authorities, by French police for some reason. Something about him wasn't right. We don't know if it was his appearance, if it was this British passport, or perhaps it was the fact that he wasn't checking any luggage. He was taking an international flight and not taking luggage. He was detained for some reason yesterday, missed the flight, but then did get on the flight today.
[Lin:] So, does that mean that if you are taking a long flight and you're not checking luggage and you're just doing carry-on if I understand it, he just took a carry-on bag on board that you are going to be detained, likely?
[Koch:] Not necessarily, Carol, but it can be somewhat of a red flag. It is one of the things that officials watch for. Other red flags also being: If you pay cash for a ticker, if you buy a ticket at the last minute, if you buy a one-way ticket, or, say, if one person purchases tickets for several people on their credit card, but the people have different names. So, there are a number of little triggers that might cause you to get extra attention for security, and that's just one of them.
[Lin:] You know, that's pretty funny, Kathleen, because that pretty much describes how most of us travel at CNN last minute, often one way, the company well, usually the company credit card, but they pay upfront.
[Koch:] Absolutely. And Carol, did you know that the last two times I traveled for CNN, when we flew up to Boston, I was profiled myself, and my hand carry-on and my check baggage went through intense scrutiny, and my check bag went through the explosive detection system, and that's what's supposed to happen, to keep us all safe.
[Lin:] Wow, and you look like nothing what, you know, how somebody might profile a terrorist. You know, you just look like a regular business traveler. All right. Thank you.
[Koch:] Absolutely, but they say that they say that you can't just check out people who look suspicious, that someone, you know, who looks completely innocent could also be carrying a bomb.
[Lin:] There you go. All right. Thank you very much. Kathleen Koch reporting live from Logan International Airport. Well, all those passengers on board that American Airlines flight landed weary and shaken. They finally arrived in Miami early this morning, and that's where CNN's John Zarrella was able to talk to them about the ordeal.
[John Zarrella, Cnn Correspondent:] Early Sunday morning, thankful to be on the ground and alive, passengers from the diverted Paris-Miami American Airlines flight finally made it to their final destination. The story they tell of what happened over the North Atlantic is both heroic and chilling. This man, identified by the French ministry from his British passport as Richard Reid, was apparently attempting to ignite an explosive in his shoes. A flight attendant caught him in the act.
[Nicholas Green, Passenger:] She screamed and was pushed away. And then she yelled, "help me," at which point, somebody from behind the person pulled his hair from behind he had very long hair. And the stewardess once again tried to jump on the person to stop him.
[Zarrella:] During the struggle, the flight attendant was bitten on the hand. The 767 300 series is configured with seven seats across in coach two on the left, three in the middle and two on the right. Nicholas Green was sitting in row 34 in the center section. The suspect, Green says, was seated a few rows in front of him on the right.
[Green:] Then very quickly, two people who were seated opposite the person in question jumped on top of him.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, first they hit him over the head with or something with a fire extinguisher, which kind of knocked him out a little bit, and then they sedated him afterward.
[Zarrella:] Maija Karhusaari was seated a couple of rows in front of the suspect, in seat 27-G. She says the struggle with Reid lasted less than a minute.
[Maija Karhusaari, Passenger:] One of the passengers jumped on to help the stewardess. They got him got him tied down, with
[Zarrella:] The suspect was unbelievably strong, even for 6-foot-8 basketball player Kwami James, who held Reid down. James says when Reid was asked why...
[Kwami James, Passenger:] He said, you'll see, you know, you'll all see.
[Zarrella:] Most of the passengers on the flight knew something had happened, but didn't know the details.
[Geoffrey Bessin, Passenger:] They just said that a gentleman had a match. We don't know he has been subdued. Get to know your neighbor, just to be sure that there's nobody else on the plane that might want to do something.
[Zarrella:] Passengers close enough to the struggle to know what had happened, say their hearts raced for the reminder of the flight.
[Karhusaari:] Two hours, 40 minutes more was the longest two hours and 40 minutes of my life.
[Zarrella:] Finally, under jet fighter escort, the plane landed without further incident in Boston. John Zarrella, CNN, Miami.
[Lin:] Well, the American Airlines scare made us wonder what happened to having federal sky marshals on board flights. Earlier today, I talked with Congressman John Mica, he's the chairman of the House Aviation Subcommittee and co-author of the Aviation Safety Law.
[Rep. John Mica , Florida:] I would assume that there would have been a sky marshal on that. Most of our international flights with an American carrier in the past have had and even the present have had sky marshals, but the passengers were the real heroes here. That sky marshal's job was more than likely to protect the cockpit and the pilot from keeping plane coming down that way.
[Lin:] The congressman also said that he's trying to figure out and confirm whether there was a sky marshal on the plane, but none of the passengers said anybody except themselves and the flight attendants actually tackled this man. Congressman Mica says the government is trying to implement new aviation security measures as soon as possible that might involve some new technology.

[Woodruff:] Come what may in South Carolina, the next big test for the Republican candidates comes three days later, with primaries in McCain's home state of Arizona and in Michigan. In the latter, the vote in one particular suburb may prove revealing. CNN's Bruce Morton has the inside view from Macomb County, outside Detroit.
[Bill Nearon, Bush Supporter:] You know, you've got the Regan Democrats that are kind of are more along the line of McCain's thinking. And then there are the Democrats that are more along the line of McCain's thinking. Now if they all go vote for McCain, McCain will get the nomination and Bush will not.
[Bruce Morton, Cnn Correspondent:] Bill Nearon, who's for George W. Bush at the end of a Kiwanis breakfast in St. Clair Shores in Michigan's Macomb County, a county with a famous political past.
[Unidentified Female:] This was a strictly Democrat county and has been for a long time.
[Morton:] Macomb County men worked in the auto plants and raised families. They came to symbolize the famous Reagan Democrats in the '80s. Reagan carried the county big time in 1984, Bill Clinton in 1996. It's changing.
[Unidentified Female:] The demographics of the county have changed tremendously.
[Morton:] Soaring population, maybe three-quarters of a million and growing, houses sprouting like mushrooms. Terry Almquist has taught here for 35 years.
[Terry Almquist, Macomb County Community College:] We are probably more industrial than most counties still are, but as we note, that's not the mainstay of any economy any more.
[Morton:] Still a Chrysler plant, but lots of new, high-skill companies like Visioneering, which designs parts and tools to make parts for companies in the automotive and aerospace industries.
[Unidentified Female:] There are a lot of young professionals engineers, lawyers that are settling here as their starter homes.
[Morton:] And they are continuing that Reagan Democrat tradition, in a way.
[Almquist:] They are open. They are less prone to be a straight party voting populace. They will split a ticket.
[Morton:] So in this open primary, are some of them McCain Democrats?
[Jancie Nearon, Macomb County Gop Chairwoman:] His opponent is blaming him for sounding like a Democrat, so and a couple of the issues he's raised probably would appeal to Democrats, but I think more independents are likely to support him.
[Unidentified Female:] I need half-a-pound of the Genoa salami sliced thin, please.
[Morton:] Nino Salvaggio's market shows what an ethic stew this county is: Italian sausage next to kilbasa, cheeses from everywhere. Politics too. This Republican likes John McCain.
[Unidentified Male:] I think a lot of his points are well-taken, seems like a fair man, besides being a vet.
[Morton:] This Republican has voted for Bush, absentee.
[Unidentified Male:] He seems to be the most normal one of the bunch, and I like his policy. He's a gentleman and he's not as strident as these other politicians.
[Morton:] But in this county, this woman and her husband, undecided independents who will vote, may hold the key.
[Unidentified Female:] I like Bush. I feel that a lot of his ideas have worked in Texas, and things that'll work in the government for the national. However, McCain looks pretty good. And we're not sure yet of who we're going with.
[Morton:] Bush independents? McCain Democrats? Independent- minded county always was. Bruce Morton, CNN, Macomb County, Michigan.
[Shaw:] Joining us now on INSIDE POLITICS, Democratic National Chairman Joe Andrew and Republican Chairman Jim Nicholson. Joe Andrew, are you concerned that many independents, many Democrats might vote for a Republican presidential candidate?
[Joe Andrew, Dnc National Chairman:] No, I am not at all. These are two conservative peas in a right-wing pod here. In the end, what Americans are going to learn is that these are both candidates that have fought for and agreed with Newt Gingrich's Contract With America. They were fighting last night in the debate about who is the most right to life, who is most going to fight against a woman's right to choose. Those are the kinds of things in the end that I think will help our party, not hurt our party.
[Shaw:] Why do I think you want to respond that, Jim Nicholson?
[Jim Nicholson, Rnc National Chairman:] Well, I think what you're going to see in a county like Macomb County are the people come out in droves for our nominee, because they're going to lose jobs if Al Gore is elected president. I mean, he's written a book I happened to bring it along it's called "Earth in the Balance." And he calls for the elimination of the internal combustion engine. The other thing that he is doing today it's germane, because up in New York, people are paying $2 a gallon for home heating fuel and he wants to add new taxes to fuel oil consumption in America, and he wants to diminish domestic exploration. I mean, Gore, in addition to being dishonest and untrustworthy, is just out of sync with the people on the issues.
[Shaw:] Looking at the Republican primary South Carolina, for example, Joe Andrew will the anger, the name-calling between McCain and Bush help your party's nominee in the fall campaign?
[Andrew:] Absolutely. I mean, the partisan personal attacks against the president, against Democrats in the past have only helped elect Democrats. That happened in 1996. It happened in 1998. You just heard the chairman of the Republican Party do it again. Every time they do it, it helps elect Democrats.
[Shaw:] But Jim Nicholson, conversely, will the Bradley-Gore contretemps with the name-calling and the finger-pointing help your party's nominee in the fall campaign?
[Nicholson:] Well, absolutely. I mean, I don't agree with Bill Bradley on everything, but when Bill Bradley points out to the American people that if you can't trust Al Gore in his campaign for the presidency, how could you trust him as the president? And the thing that the American people are looking for the most, Bernie, is somebody that is trustworthy, someone who will bring honor and integrity and dignity back to their White House.
[Shaw:] Joe Andrew, are many in your party fearful that John McCain might get the nomination and therefore be a tougher opponent?
[Andrew:] Oh, I don't think that we have any reason to be afraid of John McCain or George W. Bush. Again, what South Carolina is revealing is truly how conservative both these candidates are, how truly out of step they are with the average American, who is out there carrying about things like a real prescription drug benefit right now. Those are the kinds of things these candidates aren't talking about and should be talking about.
[Shaw:] Gore, Bradley, who would be tougher for your party?
[Nicholson:] You know, bring them on. I don't think it's going to matter. I mean, what we have got are two real good decent men. In fact, last night they called each other that. One called the other "noble." The other called the other "a good man." They said they both respected their achievements in life. We have got a vigorous primary going on, but that's way it ought to be in our party. But when we finally have a nominee, the people are going to pick one of those two great Republicans because they want to bring integrity and trust back into the government.
[Shaw:] On that debate last night, Jim Nicholson, your party's abortion plank does not list rape, incest or the threatened life of a mother in the plank for. Should it?
[Nicholson:] Well, we are the pro-life party, the party that respects the sanctity of life. The platform makes that clear. The platform will be revisited again here in just a few months leading up to our convention in Philadelphia. There will be a good, healthy debate, something that we permit in our party, people of different views to come together and debate that. And then we will have a new platform.
[Shaw:] Let's talk money now. Front-page story above the fold "New York Times," Governor Bush having spent millions, and the impression is that he is running out of money. True or not, my question is this: By summer, your party's nomination, whoever he is, might be near broke. Question: How much soft money is the national Democratic Party planning to pour into your candidate's campaign? I'll ask the same question of you, Chairman Nicholson, in just a moment.
[Andrew:] Well, we're not going to pour any soft money into the campaign, but clearly we're not going to allow ourselves to simply have these attacks by Republicans go unanswered, particularly when they're very personal, and very partisan attacks. You know, the two things the people thought the Democrats had going against them would be because George W. Bush wasn't following the Watergate reforms, he could spend all the money he had and there would be a lot of it. Now, he's broke. They thought we were behind. Now, we're dead even. They thought that George W. Bush would be a moderate. Now, he's showing he's a conservative. The fact of the matter is, it is going to help Democrats.
[Shaw:] Jim Nicholson, you have the last word.
[Nicholson:] The two big stories about money, Bernie, are the one that came out Monday that said the president is going to go on the road and travel and raise over $40 million for his party, by meeting with large donors around the country. And the other was in the paper today when John Sweeney said that the AFL-CIO is going to put over $40 million into these U.S. House races to try the take back the House. Now, this is the party that says it's for reform of campaign financing, and this is the party, the president today said, that we need to make a trade deal with China. And yet you have got the unions who are saying, we're going to raise enough money to take back control of the House. We want to see if the president is going to be able deliver those union votes. Because we think we ought to be trading with China, but it sounds to me like the unions have bought a lot of votes in his party, and we will see if the president and Al Gore can deliver.
[Shaw:] Jim Nicholson, Republican chairman, Joe Andrew, Democratic chairman, thank you.
[Andrew:] Good to be with you.
[Nicholson:] Thank you.
[Shaw:] Always good to have you two. And INSIDE POLITICS will be right back.

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] They say imitation is the greatest form of flattery, and countless have tried to imitate singer Elvis Presley.
[Shihab Rattans, Cnn Anchor:] And a French Canadian has taken center stage with an Elvis act that's getting quite a bit of acclaim. Raymond Filion of Canada's Global TV takes us on the road with this Elvis story.
[Raymond Filion, Global Tv, Canada, Reporter:] For decades, hundreds of imitators have tried match Elvis Presley's style. Now, meet this young French Canadian: Martin Fontaine is the star of a hit show called "The Elvis Story." "We wanted a show that would fill a newly renovated concert hall," he says. "It turned out to be a huge success." The show worked so well in Quebec, producers decided to take it to Mississippi, Elvis Presley's home state.
[Martin Fontaine, Elvis Impersonator:] I was afraid of playing in front of Americans because, you know, what would they think about a guy from Canada, about a French-speaking guy that would do their icon?
[Filion:] Now, I can understand a guy from Montreal being a Canadian hockey fan, but were you an Elvis fan when you were...
[Fontaine:] People always told me, like Martin, you look like just like Elvis. And I was like this I was red and I had my Army haircut, and I said, well, how can you say that I look like Elvis? Well, I don't know, you've got that something.
[Filion:] It's the night of the big premier in Biloxi, Mississippi.
[Unidentified Female:] I'm Elvis Presley's No. 1 fan.
[Filion:] As people start packing the concert hall, backstage Fontaine is becoming Elvis Presley.
[Fontaine:] I'm not a real Elvis look-alike, so it takes a lot of makeup to become Elvis Presley.
[Filion:] After two hours, the resemblance is stunning.
[Announcer:] The new recording artist from
[Rca:] Elvis Presley.
[Filion:] The show lasts 90 minutes and reviews the different stages in Presley's career, from the young Elvis, Elvis in the movies, and the older Elvis.
[Fontaine:] We start at Sun Records and we finish at very end in '77 where he almost died onstage.
[Unidentified Female:] He was absolutely gorgeous and sang just my heart is still not right. He had every move. It was wonderful. I loved it. He's French Canadian this young fellow?
[Unidentified Male:] I've seen a lot of them, but he's the best I've ever seen. We did it!
[Filion:] They sure did it in Mississippi, and they're doing it again this summer here in Quebec City. Producers say they expect to sell 120,000 tickets this summer alone. Their next goal now is to bring The Elvis Story to the Los Vegas Hilton, where the real Elvis Presley performed many, many times. In Quebec City, this is Raymond Filion, Global TV, Canada, for CNN WORLD REPORT.

[Roger Cossack:] Do you think of your pets as your children? If you divorce, who gets custody? Can you collect for pain and suffering if they're killed in an accident or deliberately? More than just property, the law in many cases treats pets as nearly human, deciding in their best interest even over the desires of their owners. How far should courts go in determining animal rights?
[Steven Wise, Animal Rights Attorney:] If it turns out that animals that we use for food have the kinds of minds that would warrant fundamental legal rights, then they should no longer be killed.
[Cossack:] Does it stop with dogs and cats? What about snakes, fish, birds or pigs? Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Roger Cossack in for Bobbie Battista. All over the country, court cases are being fought and won on behalf of pets. Now, we are not talking about animal cruelty cases, but the type you might usually associate with human family members, suits over custody, pain and suffering, and judges who consider the animals best interest. In California, there are even attempts to have pet owners declared legal guardians of their animals. Now, here to talk about legal rights for animals is Barbara Newell, an attorney with the Animal Legal Defense Fund, and Richard Cupp, an attorney and professor of Pepperdine University, a school of law. Barbara, let me start with you. What kind of rights should animals have?
[Barbara Newell, Animal Legal Defense Fund:] Well, really, I don't know that we are talking about legal rights for animals just yet. I think we are talking more about the concerns of humans that live with those animals as family members. We've been filing briefs in cases involving animals, which often are actually cruelty cases, but they're handled at the civil level. In other words, sometimes an individual's beloved dog is shot by a neighbor and under the traditional concept of the law, there was only the government that could go after the neighbor for cruelty. But if they didn't, the person whose dog was shot had basically no recourse against the neighbor except maybe the price of a new dog, which if it was a dog from the shelter, that is effectively zero. So that is really not we are not talking about rights of the dog in that case. And the other area of cases that we are filing in is custody disputes and all we are basically saying is that when two people are disputing with which of them a dog or a cat should live, at least part of the consideration needs to be the interest of that dog or cat. It's not just it doesn't just boil down to who has the better bill of sale, particularly if one of those people is abusive.
[Cossack:] Well, Barbara, let's take it one step forward and let's say that in the hypothetical the first one you gave where we're talking about the neighbor hurting or injuring my pet, my let's just assume that it's my dog and I sue that neighbor for injuring my dog. What kind of damages could I get? Let's say that the person says to me, well, you can go replace that dog for $500 or $200. Should I get anymore than that?
[Newell:] Well, if you can show that, that dog was really your best friend in the world, if you can show that you had a real important bond of companionship with that dog, if you can show that you had severe emotional distress, let's say, if your neighbor mutilated your dog, which I am sorry that does occur we get tens of thousands of calls at Animal Legal Defense Fund every year from people absolutely distraught about things that have happened to their animals and they get the message from lawyers who, let's say, aren't aware of some of these newer cases, who say, you know, it's just property, all you can get is the cash value, and believe me, not one of these people is interested in the cash value, they are very upset because they lost their family member.
[Cossack:] Well, then, what would happen if, for example, I took my dog to a veterinarian and the veterinarian didn't do a good job and I wanted to sue the veterinarian for malpractice; what kind of damages should I get in that, I mean, anything more than what the value of the animal is?
[Newell:] Well, again, if you can show and of course, not everyone can show this but if you can show that you had a true bond of companionship, that you love that dog like a child, as I hear a lot of people sincerely say to me, or if you can show that you experienced severe distress, if you couldn't go to work because you were so distraught, and believe me, that also happens, and of course, you also have to show that your vet committed wrongdoing. This isn't just a matter of, you know, going after good vets and making their life difficult. We are talking about veterinarians who are mangling animals...
[Cossack:] All right.
[Newell:] ... and I certainly hope they're a small percentage, but the point is they need to be people need to be compensated for that.
[Cossack:] All right, let me interrupt you for a second and go to Richard Cupp, professor of law from Pepperdine University. Richard, if we start giving these kinds of rights, or we start giving these kinds of rewards, if you will, to people who have lost their animals either by veterinarian's hand or by the neighbor, what kind of what does that mean in terms of rights for animals, and what does that mean in terms of pet owners and economics?
[Richard Cupp, Attorney/law Professor:] Well, I think it's important first to distinguish between cases in which someone intentionally injures a pet and cases that would typically fall into the veterinary malpractice category, negligence directed toward a pet. If we have we had the scenario raised of someone, a neighbor intentionally shooting a dog, for example, in that kind of a situation, the courts would not just award in a civil lawsuit the dollar value of the dog; rather, they would add on punitive damages. The court system would reflect society's judgment that action like that is odious and needs to be punish. So depending upon the wealth of the defendant, the person who had killed the dog, the damages could be enormous from punitive damages. And even if you had a defendant that wasn't wealthy, they'd be enormous for that defendant. So I think that might be a little bit of a red herring that we need to deal with first. The issue I think that is more of a real problem, a real issue is a negligence kind of case, where, for example, if you take your pet to a veterinarian and a veterinarian doesn't intentionally mangle your pet or something like that if he or she does, they should be punished with large damages for punitive damages. But if they negligently mistreat your pet, which will happen from time to time, presently, as you indicated, the damages would be the market value of the pet, which my pet, I love very much, is a dog that I picked up at the pound I said before that his market value is probably less than his weekly dog biscuit, which is not going to be very much. But if we change the rules to start allowing damages additionally for emotional distress or loss of companionship damages, which is a similar form of damages, as some animal rights activists are arguing, I'm concerned that we're going to create a situation where pets are actually suffering more.
[Cossack:] How could that happen, Richard?
[Cupp:] What will happen is that veterinarians are going to have to go out and buy more insurance to cover their malpractice rates. Presently, veterinarian malpractice rates are laughably low, $200 a year, $500 a year, something like that. We all know that the price of human medicine has skyrocketed enormously, in part because of the lawsuit tax that's attached onto human malpractice. The difference is with veterinarian medicine we have a much different demand curve from an economic point of view than we do with human medicine. People go to a vet and say, look, if you can fix my dog for $200, do so, but if it's over $200, put it to sleep. Or people don't go to a vet at all because they won't spend the money. Now, I'm not going to address whether that's right or wrong, but the consequences, if vets have to drastically increase the rates that they charge because they're having to pay more malpractice insurance, fewer pets will get medical treatment. Pets will actually suffer more.
[Cossack:] Barbara, let me give you another hypothetical. Suppose that there comes a time when a husband and wife break up and the husband wants to go someplace, and there's been two dogs that have been in the family. And the husband says, I'm going to take one of the dogs and you can have the other. And the wife says, no, I think it's in the best interest of the dogs if they both stay here with me; look, that's all they know; I've got this big backyard; it's not fair to the animals if you separate them. In that case, what should happen?
[Newell:] Well, what we're seeing in our brief is that the animal's needs need to be part of the equation. We're not...
[Cossack:] But how do we know what the animal needs are? I guess that's the point I'm getting to. I mean, we can't talk to them and we can't ask them.
[Newell:] Yes, and we're not asking any judge to try to go into something that's speculative. We do have scientific evidence: We know that mammals like dogs and cats experience things like hunger and thirst and physical pain, for example, if they're harmed, going back to the neighbor scenario. They experience those physical sensations similarly. And so those are things that we know are in their interest. And if you can show, for example, that one of those two people routinely beat the dog or deprive the dog of food or something, that ought to be part of the decision.
[Cossack:] That and I agree with you. And that, of course, would be cruelty. But we've got to take a break. Barbara Newell and Richard Cupp, thank you both for joining us today on this abbreviated show. Animals for pleasure, animals for food, and what's the difference. And how do veterinarians fit into this picture? Is there a price to pay for animal rights? We'll talk to two vets who disagree, next. Joining us now is Dr. Michael Fox, a consulting veterinarian, bioethicist and syndicated columnist. He's the author of a number of books, including "The Healing Touch" and "Understanding Your Pet." Also with us by phone is Dr. Arthur Tennyson, assistant executive vice president of the American Veterinary Medical Association. Well, Mr. Fox, I want to ask you what kind of writes should pets should we now extend the law that our animals, our pets should have inalienable rights?
[Dr. Michael Fox, Veterinarian/bioethicist:] Well, initially, we are talking about the emotional value of animal companions, and when we look at people's health bills who have an animal companion, they have fewer trips to see the doctor, hospital and so on because of the emotional, physical benefits of having a companion animal. But as for the rights, we do acknowledge that animals have certain rights: not the right to an education or to vote, but a right to humane treatment, a right to proper veterinary care when needed, a right to good nutrition, a right to being understood. And when we put all this together, we're seeing essentially a new covenant of communion with these animals and a shifting toward a more "equalitarian" attitude. We're not saying equal rights; we're saying equal and fair consideration, because these animals can suffer like we. They're physiologically and emotionally more similar to us than they are different.
[Cossack:] Why aren't we saying equal rights? I mean, why why don't we draw the line? Obviously, we say they're not entitled to an education, but you know, in some ways we could say, look, they're entitled to the kind of good care, good health care. Those are the same kinds of things that we would give our family members.
[Fox:] Well, education, you could say, well, training is a good investment. You train your dog. Some animals cats, for example, don't need to be trained and goldfish and so on. But in terms of respect and compassion and responsible care, custodianship we're even moving away from the concept of a person being an owner and the language of pet to saying custodian or guardian and animal companion. So there is a so-called paradigm shift going on. We are reevaluating our relationship with non-human animals and our responsibilities. Some can say: Well, animals really do not have rights. But we do have obligations, duties, responsibilities.
[Cossack:] Dr. Tennyson, if you I think if follow what Dr. Fox says, there is an implication here that animals would have certain needs that should be met. But the problem is: How do we know what those needs are? How do we know what they want? What are we, as people who are good people, want to do the right thing, how do we know what to do?
[Tennyson:] Well, I think that that's a key element. And I fully agree with Dr. Fox that we have a responsibility and an obligation to care for our animals humanely and with respect, and to provide for their needs. That is our obligation and our responsibility as part of our right to own animals. But animals in themselves are unable to express their own rights. And they can't carry out the responsibilities that go with it, because they haven't that kind of judgment and ability. It is our responsibility. And therefore, the association and the veterinarian profession, predominantly, look more towards a concept of animal welfare as the responsibility of owners than the rights of the animals themselves.
[Cossack:] Well, then let me then let me jump in and ask both of you gentlemen the question. If that is all true and we hope that it is then how come are we not all veterinarians, if we're looking at for the welfare of animals? It is not in their best welfare to become our steaks.
[Dr. Arthur Tennyson, Veterinarian:] Well, one could go back to "Genesis," where humans were given dominance over the animals for their benefit. And that can be argued in various different areas. But as food, fiber, and so on, animals have been our servants as beasts of burden, as helpers, through ages. And to provide food for humans has been a condition that has existed throughout time.
[Fox:] So for me to chip in here: When you look at "Genesis..."
[Cossack:] Dr. Fox, please go ahead.
[Fox:] The book of "Genesis," dominion originally means comes from the root verbiarad, from ancient Hebrew. And it means to come down to to have communion with. And it is an injunction not to dominate, but to really engage in compassionate stewardship. And we should remember that while animals eat each other, and some of us choose to eat animals, there are humane slaughter laws in most civilized countries that recognize the rights of animals to humane treatment, even to the point of death. There is also humane transportation laws.
[Cossack:] Doctor, humane slaughter is to me, sounds to me like an oxymoron: two words that just don't make sense when you put them together. You know, human slaughter just doesn't make much sense to me, sir.
[Fox:] Well when when you see when you see inhumane slaughter, you will know the difference.
[Cossack:] But the bottom line is the bottom line, and which is that...
[Fox:] Is killing.
[Cossack:] ... is killing. And you know, hopefully, I mean we would hope that, you know, obviously, you know, I am not a hypocrite in the sense that we understand that we these are animals but if you both of you gentlemen are talking about humane treatment and that obligations that we have for animals, I mean, what do we do about this? Where do we draw the line? I mean, why is the cow...
[Fox:] In some countries...
[Cossack:] ... less valuable to us than our dog?
[Fox:] In some countries in some countries, dogs are killed for food. It's unthinkable here. In other countries, it's unthinkable to kill cows for food. We are beginning to change, to explore and examine the legal status of animals, cultural traditions, and I think, beginning to see animals in and for themselves, and having intrinsic value and a life of their own. And this is a radical change in perception. And I think it's all for the good.
[Cossack:] Well, I am afraid we are out of time on this abbreviated version of TALKBACK LIVE today. Thanks to all of our guests, and our studio audience, and you too, for joining us. We'll be back again tomorrow at 3:00 Eastern with more TALKBACK LIVE. And I will see you then.

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Anchor:] The day, of course, began with news at least began for us with news that a CBS employee, an assistant to CBS news anchor Dan Rather has been diagnosed with the skin form of anthrax. That's where we'll begin this hour's coverage. Michael Okwu joins us with more on that Michael.
[Michael Okwu, Cnn Correspondent:] Aaron, good afternoon. Apparently, she is a young woman. And she is on antibiotics. Officials here say that she's responding well to those antibiotics and that she is resting comfortably at home. Now, CBS officials say that one of her duties is to open mail for Mr. Rather, but it is unclear how she contracted anthrax. There's absolutely no evidence at this point, they say, that any of the mail or any of the envelopes received here in the past couple weeks was suspicious. And there's no indication at this time that anyone else at CBS was exposed to anthrax. Now this morning, Mayor Giuliani at a press conference said that she noticed swelling on October 1. After she noticed this swelling, she went to her medical team, her doctors, who prescribed penicillin for her on the fourth. But last Friday when she heard about the news at NBC, the case of anthrax there, she became nervous and contacted health officials. She was then tested and found positive for anthrax and was given Cipro. Authorities are confident, however, that this is an isolated case.
[Mayor Rudolph Giuliani , New York:] She is recovering, if not recovered completely. She responded well to both the penicillin and the Cipro and should be all right. And that she works at CBS. She handles mail. And no one else at CBS, during this very lengthy time period, which is what it is, since October 1, from what we can tell, has any symptoms. So there's no indication that anything got spread to anyone else.
[Okwu:] We've counted about two dozen representatives from the CDC who have entered this building. At this point, of course, CBS is still operational. It is still open. And there are just throngs of media here Aaron.
[Brown:] And just Michael, just to reiterate one point are CBS News employees being tested now, or is the assumption that if it had happened we'd already know?
[Okwu:] Well, they the authorities are very confident that if this had happened that we would already know. But there are people in the mail room which, of course, seems to be the pattern these days who are being tested. And they are conducting tests on that mail room, environmental tests for that space, as well as environmental tests for spaces beyond the mail room. And that's going to be going on for the better part of this afternoon Aaron.
[Brown:] Michael, thank you. Michael Okwu on the CBS story. On the subject of mail and mail rooms: The Associated Press is just now reporting that a New Jersey postal worker has now tested positive for exposure to anthrax. We don't know at least, I don't know where that postal worker worked. But we do know that a couple of the letters that contained anthrax were mailed out of New Jersey. And we recall that two New Jersey postal workers had complained earlier in the week of flu-like symptoms, which may have been the flu or may not have been the flu, of course. In any case, one worker, according to AP, has now tested positively for exposure to anthrax. And again, we make the distinction, we'll make it often, there is a huge difference between being exposed to anthrax and actually contracting anthrax. It is not a little distinction. It can be a life and death distinction. And so we're very careful in how we say this. The postal worker exposed. Judy, good afternoon.
[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Good afternoon, Aaron. The numbers keep climbing. By my count, we're now over 40 with this number with this new announcement coming out of New Jersey. And again, CNN hasn't confirmed that. But as Aaron said, this is a report from The Associated Press. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jesse Jackson:] Welcome to BOTH SIDES from Orlando, Florida this week. In a few days, George W. Bush will become the next president. Of all of his appointments, the most controversial seems to have been John Ashcroft from Missouri for Attorney General. Today, we want to talk about that with two of my very special guests. Joining me from Springfield, Missouri, Missouri Republican Congressman Roy Block is a long time friend of Senator Ashcroft and he is President-elect Bush's Congressional liasion. And in New York is Democratic Congressman Jerrold Nadler, the member of the House Judiciary Committee. Welcome both of you to the program.
[Rep. Roy Block , Missouri:] Good morning.
[Rep. Jerrold Nadler , New York:] Good to be with you.
[Jackson:] We'll begin our discussion in just a moment, but first some words from John Bisney.
[George W. Bush, President-elect:] Today it's my honor and privilege to submit three more nominations to my Cabinet.
[John Bisney, Cnn Correspondent:] With the announcement of his nominees to head the Commerce, Labor and Energy departments, President-elect Bush this past week completed the selection of his administration's top Cabinet appointments. But while the diversity of Bush's choices is being praised by both Republicans and Democrats, they're not without controversy. One Cabinet nominee who will likely face a tough grilling in Senate confirmation hearings is former Missouri Senator Ashcroft, the President-elect's choice to be Attorney General. Ashcroft is a staunch opponent of legalized abortion and gun control. The ranking Democrat on the committee that will consider the nomination says Ashcroft's stands on certain issues are of concern.
[Sen. Patrick Leahy , Delaware:] Will he enforce the laws that protect a Planned Parenthood clinic from firebombers and others? Will he enforce the Fair Employment, the Equal Rights laws, whether he's for them or not as a legislator?
[Bisney:] There are also questions about Ashcroft's commitment to civil rights, especially his role in defeating the nomination of Missouri Supreme Court Justice Ronny White, an African American, for a federal judgeship. Despite promises by civil and women's rights groups to fight Ashcroft's nomination, he's all but certain to get the nod from his former colleagues in the Senate.
[Sen. John Breaux , Louisiana:] Ashcroft is probably more conservative than over 90, 95 percent of his Senate colleagues, but I think he has a great deal of respect for his honesty and for his integrity.
[Bisney:] Liberal groups are hoping even if Ashcroft is confirmed, their opposition will make the new Bush administration more cautious about controversial nominations in the future. For BOTH SIDES, I'm John Bisney.
[Jackson:] Congressman Block, this matter of Ashcroft has created great concern. He has taken very strong positions against a woman's right to choose in case of rape or incest. He's taken a real strong position against Affirmative Action. He supports right to work laws. He's engendered a lot of fear. You think he's a good nominee for a position that requires so much broadbased respect and support?
[Block:] Well, what he really brings to this job will be a broadbase of experience. Now certainly he brings positions on issues as somebody who's been in the Senate, who's voted day after day will, but he also brings experiences, the Governor of Missouri experiences, the Attorney General and the state auditor of Missouri and his eight years as Attorney General or his eight years as Governor, John Ashcroft often enforced and even implemented laws that he clearly did not agree with. One example would be the state lottery in our state, which by the standards of how you measure lotteries, been a great success. John Ashcroft was not for it, told the voters of Missouri he wasn't for it in his first election for Governor. They voted for him. They voted for a lottery. He implemented the lottery in a way that's made it very successful. As Attorney General, he was never accused of not vigorously enforcing the laws of the state. And I'm sure as Attorney General of the United States, his personal views will be less important than his commitment, which will be all important to obey the Constitution and enforce the law.
[Jackson:] Congressman Nadler, do you think it is a bit hypocritical for him to be expected to enforce laws that he disagrees with, that he in fact if he is against a woman's right of set determination, if he's against Affirmative Action, do you think he will support the laws that he is against?
[Nadler:] Well, it's the obligation of any official in the executive branch, especially the Attorney General, to enforce the laws, whether he agrees with it or not. It's certainly his right and his privilege to urge that any law he disagrees with be changed by Congress if he wants to, but he must enforce the laws. That's the obligation of the office. And people, when you have such an extreme partisan, Senator Ashcroft, partisan on issues, I don't mean Democratic Republican partisan, I mean partisan on issues of being opposed to a woman's freedom of choice even when the pregnancy resulted, for example, from rape or incest, someone insists that as a matter of law, she must carry that baby to term, even if the pregnancy came from rape or incest, one questions how with what strength he will enforce the law the freedom of access to [inaudible].
[Jackson:] Could given his position about a woman's right of choice, his positions on labor and the environment, could you vote to confirm him?
[Nadler:] If I were in the Senate, I certainly would not vote to confirm him.
[Jackson:] Mr. Block, respond to that.
[Block:] Well, you know, I have both a huge advantage and a huge disadvantage here. And the huge advantage is that I've known John Ashcroft well for almost 30 years now and I've seen him in action as a public official. I've talked to him often about his faith, his view of the world reaching out to people. I've seen him take the oath of office over and over again and then fulfill that oath. And that will be the determining factor. And what happens in the Attorney General's office is his commitment to enforce the law. It's up to Jerry and I and others like us in the House and the Senate to pass the laws. It's up to the Supreme ultimately to the Supreme Court in the court process to determine what that law is, but John Ashcroft will vigorously execute the law that's on the books because that's his job and he'll take an oath to do that before he does a single official thing.
[Jackson:] Well, in terms of his voting record, Dr. [Satcher], one of our ablest surgeon generals, he voted against him on the basis that as a doctor he terms a woman's right of set determination. In the case of Ronny White, according to St. Louis Dispatch, he literally libeled him, calling him a judge who supports criminality based upon a matter of the death penalty when 7 out of 10 times supports it. Don't you think that his attack on Ronny White was a big extreme and threatening?
[Block:] Well, when you look at the two cases that were really a problem in the Ronny White confirmation, I don't think that. Now I know Ronny White. When I was the Secretary of State of Missouri, he was in the legislature. I like him, but I do think that just as Jerry suggested, he'd have a problem in confirmation of somebody he disagreed with, particularly to a judgeship where a judge enforces the law often from his perspective. I think that does make a difference. You know, the real case in the Ronny White case is terribly unfortunate case where a person had been convicted, a white man of killing a number of people, sheriff's deputies, the sheriff's wife in several different incidents, not one incident where he had to go from place to place to do this, almost 77 of Missourans, 114 sheriffs motivated by the sheriff whose wife was killed, I'm sure, who started a petition drive, asked that Ronny White not be confirmed. And he wasn't.
[Jackson:] Well...
[Block:] I think John Ashcroft voted for 26 of the 28 African American nominees to the court while he was in the Senate. And there were few cases where he disagreed with that judge's philosophy on cases like that one.
[Nadler:] Well, my problem with the Ronny White case is not that he disagreed on two cases. I mean, you don't know the a judge has to look at all the details of a case. The case you just cited, for instance, I think I read in the paper that the question was whether he was insane or not. And that was the defense. And Judge White ruled that the defense was not given an adequate hearing and it should be looked at again in court. And I don't know whether the man was insane or not or whether he got an adequate hearing. But the fact is that Senator Ashcroft slandered Ronny White. He said he was pro-criminal. He issued decisions favoring murder, his rapists, drug dealers and other heinous criminals. He was and that he would never uphold the death penalty, when in fact he upheld 70 percent of the death penalties before him. It's very dangerous, very dangerous to look at a judge who has hundreds of thousands of cases and pick out one or two because you don't know the people on the outside don't know the details or in fact that killer was obviously heinous, but maybe he was also insane. So the question should never look at one or two cases. You look a man's overall record. And my problem with the Ronny White situation is not that Senator Ashcroft opposed a nominee who happened to be black. It's that he slandered quite inaccurately and opposed the nomination on grounds that weren't true on someone who had a long record, contrary to the way he was characterized.
[Jackson:] We'll be right back.
[Block:] Jerry...
[Jackson:] We'll be right back. Wait, we'll be back in a moment. Just back in a moment. Should John Ashcroft be confirmed and will he? We'll be right back. [COMMERCIAL BREAK.] Joining me this week to discuss the Ashcroft controversial nomination from Missouri, Republican Congressman Roy Block. He's a long time friend of Senator Ashcroft and President- elect Bush's Congressional liaison. And in New York, Democratic Congressman Jerrold Nadler, a member of the House Judiciary Committee. Welcome both of you again. Mr. Block, Mr. Ashcroft is a man of strong faith and religious convictions. If he in fact enforces the law of Affirmative Action and supports the law of Roe v. Wade, is he not putting his politics over his faith? And is that ethically sound?
[Block:] Well, I'm not quite sure how you phrase that question, where those things come together? There's no question...
[Jackson:] My point is, if he's religiously opposed to Roe v. Wade, why would he accept the job to uphold Roe v. Wade? If he's against Affirmative Action, why would he accept a job to uphold laws he disagrees with?
[Block:] Well, I you know, he's had a history of being able to do that, to obey the law. At the same time, he doesn't have to agree with every law as long as he's doing his duty to enforce that law and see that the law is obeyed. And I'm confident he'd do that. Anytime you're in public office, particularly in a role like Governor or Attorney General of the state or Attorney General of the United States, they'll be laws on the books that you aren't fully in agreement with from everything from the kind of serious of things you discuss to other laws that you just may not think are necessary, but they've been passed by the people whose job it is to pass those laws. The courts have determined that that's the way the law is to be enforced. And it's your job to do that. You know, one of the reasons he that a person of faith often uses a Bible when they take the oath of office is suddenly that oath they take has a preeminent obligation for them to do what they just promised themselves, their God and the people that they hope to work for that they would do.
[Jackson:] Mr. Nadler, we live in our faith. We live under the law. Could one expect Mr. Ashcroft to enforce with enthusiasm laws with which he disagrees relative to women and workers and basic civil rights of ethnic minorities. Can one trust him to do that?
[Nadler:] Well, I don't know that I don't have the advantage and the disadvantage that Roy Block has. I don't know Senator Ashcroft, certainly not for 30 years. So we have to go by the public record. I feel very uncomfortable with referring to a man's religious faith in this respect at all. I don't think that's the question. I think you look at the man's public record over the years. I may disagree religiously with certain things, but it's my duty as a public official to say that I don't impose my religious views on other people. And I have to legislate based on my opinion of the common good, not on my religious convictions.
[Jackson:] Well, my point is the Religious Right is a major factor in political judgment priorities. And so, look at his supporters, whether it's Pat Robertson or whether it is Jerry Falwell or Gary Bauer. These his key supporters are very much against laws that he has voted against. He's expected now to uphold.
[Nadler:] The problem I have with the Religious Right is not their religious views, but that they seek to impose the consequences of those religious views into law on all the rest of us. And that, I very much oppose. Now Mr. Ashcroft has shown, I think by his public record over the years and by his public statements over the years, that he is of such an extremist point of view that one could not trust him, not only to enforce the law or the laws as they are, but to make judgments as to which cases will be appealed and which won't. Someone who opposed a voluntary school desegregation plan, someone who has praised a pro-Confederate magazine that thinks that Abraham Lincoln was a terrible person, those views are just so out of line with what you want the views of someone who's supposed to uphold the law, laws regarding quality and [inaudible].
[Jackson:] In this essential question, can a broad spectrum of Americans trust Mr. Ashcroft the moral tone of the country and to set their legal priorities?
[Block:] Well, certainly you can trust John Ashcroft to in terms of setting the moral tone of the office, to never do anything in the Attorney General's office that's an embarrassment to himself or the country, to take his oath of office seriously. And really, I think the more important record here is the record of his public service, where he has clearly enforced laws that he wasn't fully in agreement with. At the same time, you don't want a person whose had a lifetime of public service, to have their views unknown. Now I'm sure John Ashcroft would defend Abraham Lincoln if he was here. I probably should do that. You know, in 26 or so years as a public official, you make lots of statements, some of which out of in a different context can appear to be different than they were. That's what the Senate confirmation process is about, to say, "Here's what somebody says you said. Can you explain what that meant and how it might affect the job you're about to take?" And also, the point here is that many that Governor Bush has confidence in John Ashcroft to do this job and to do enforce the laws of the country and give him the kind of sound legal advice that a president of the United States needs.
[Jackson:] Well, we'll come right back. Does George W. Bush have the mandate to create such a disruptive controversy in this position? And should the Democrats choose collegiality over civil rights? We'll be right back. [COMMERCIAL BREAK.] Mr. Nadler, we hear some Democrats saying on television, we may not agree with Mr. Ashcroft's views on a woman's right to choose. We may not agree with the position on civil rights and the Ronny White case in Missouri, but collegiality. Should Democratic senators choose collegiality and personal friendship over public policy?
[Nadler:] I don't think so. Of course, I'm not a senator, but I don't think that I don't so at all.
[Jackson:] Even though the congressman...
[Nadler:] No, I don't think so. The president is entitled to a certain deference in his appointments of non-judicial administrative candidates. And he's entitled to that deference, but the Senate has the duty to advise and consent or to reject the Senate's rejected two nominees by President Clinton earlier in the first month of the administration to be attorney general because of minor indiscretions with nannies. Certainly if senators feel that this candidate for Attorney General that his views are too extreme so that they wouldn't want him making those legal judgments or that they couldn't trust him to enforce the laws with which he disagreed, that's a perfectly valid grounds. In fact, I would think they would be duty bound to vote to oppose him if they can't answer those questions satisfactorily.
[Jackson:] Mr. Block, there's this thing called the Ashcroft standard. He used a standard, an ideological standard in voting against Surgeon General. He used an Ashcroft standard in killing the nomination of Ronny White. The Democrats used an ideological public policy standard over and against private collegiality?
[Block:] Well, I'm not really familiar with the concept of the Ashcroft standard, but I do know that the people that have worked with John Ashcroft trust him. I've heard a number of Democrat senators who don't agree with him necessarily on every issue, say they believe that he will fairly do the job and take his oath of office, his responsibility seriously. And that list is beginning to grow. And these are people who most of them for six years or some portion of six years have seen John Ashcroft at work day after day. They know how he treats people as an individual. His father was a minister and a university president. His grandfather was a minister. He as a person reaches out to people, Jesse. He will not hold the kind of extreme positions that I think you're hearing talked about. He'll reach out. You'll see an attorney general's office that is reflective as the Cabinet of the diversity of America.
[Jackson:] The people of Missouri saw him up close. And they just rejected him. We'll be right back in just a moment. [COMMERCIAL BREAK.] In just a few days, they'll be celebrating the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., whose life and legacy helped to transform America, to make it a one big tent, more inclusive America. Mr. Block, as we move toward the Dr. King's birthday celebration, John Ashcroft is a controversial figure. Why is this community so threatened by him?
[Block:] Well, you know, as we move toward that day, we're going to have celebrate that day in Missouri with the government offices closed and the proper kinds of celebrations. John Ashcroft signed that law and worked to get that law passed through the legislature. The first Missouri historical site dedicated to an African American was signed into law by John Ashcroft. The American people are going to see what Missourians saw. And John Ashcroft lost that last election, but in a very unusual circumstance. And he'd been elected over and over and over again by the people who saw him work. I think he'll be confirmed rather handily by the people he works with, who've seen him at work every day.
[Jackson:] Congressman Nadler, why are the Dr. King forces, as they were, why do they feel so threatened by Ashcroft?
[Nadler:] I think because over the years, they have watched him not so much on symbolic issues such as Dr. Martin Luther King, Junior holiday, but on substantive issues, oppose civil rights issues, such as opposing a voluntary school desegregation in plan in St. Louis and on symbolic issues, too for that matter. Accepting an honorary degree from the notoriously bigoted Bob Jones University, praising as I said before "The Southern Partisan," which is a pro-conference magazine. And they have formed a judgment that this is somebody who they will be loathe to see, not just in charge of enforcing the law, but in charge of making judgments about enforcing the law. And those judgments can be affected by your own views, obviously.
[Jackson:] I express my thanks to both of you for being my very special guests this week. I'm coming this week from Orlando, Florida. There is a challenge for us, as a nation, to be sensitive, to be caring, to do justice, to love mercy, but to include all Americans in our judicial decisions, make all feel secure and leave not American behind. We'll see you again next week at 5:30 p.m. Eastern on CNN. That's it this week from BOTH SIDES. Keep hope alive.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Most of the Asian markets finished out the day on the upside today, thanks in part to the Nasdaq's gains Monday and a growing sentiment that U.S. interest rates have peaked. But domestic issues dragged other markets lower. Lorraine Hahn sums up the day in Asian trading from Hong Kong. Good morning.
[Lorraine Hahn, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, David. You took the words most out of my mouth. Most of Asia's key stock markets got a boot of confidence by soaring tech shares on the Nasdaq and growing expectations that U.S. interest rates have indeed peaked. In Japan, gains by high techs, such as computer maker Fujitsu and Internet investor Softbank, led the overall market higher. Fujitsu added 5.6 percent, while Softbank surged almost six percent. Nissan Diesel still surging, up 31 percent Tuesday, after soaring 40 percent yesterday, on news that it's developed a hybrid power truck, using natural gas and an electric motor. Well, on the economic front, five days before an election and Japan's economy gets a positive report card. The Economic Planning Agency, or EPA, upgraded its assessment of the economy for the second month in a row, although it fell short of declaring a full-fledged recovery. But caution did still prevail among some senior officials who admitted personal consumption remains week. Overall, the Nikkei picked up close to two percent. Here in Hong Kong, stocks fell with property, banking and mainland Chinese firms listed in Hong Kong, or H shares, leading the losses. Investors kept taking profits. The Hang Seng index ending down one percent. Taiwan stocks closing lower for the fifth straight day, despite President Chen Shui-bian's offer to meet with China's leader Jiang Zemin. But he said the summit should not be limited to any preconditions or locations, something onlookers say Beijing will not accept. Up until now, Beijing has ignored Chen's offer for peace talks, stressing that the only way the two will sit down and talk is if Taiwan understands and listens to the one China policy. Now, while investors approve Chen's goodwill gesture, they doubted that it would make any difference. Their malaise sent the Taiwan market down more than half a percent after an early rally. And that's a quick from me this Tuesday. Back to you, David.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, thank you, Lorraine.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Commercial actors in Hollywood are still manning their picket lines with no indication of when their strike might end. And already, there's talk about the possibility of two more major strikes next summer that could cripple the entertainment industry. CNN Financial News' Casey Wian has the story.
[Casey Wian, Cnn Correspondent:] The pace of movie production by major studios is at an all-time high. One reason: Producers are rushing to finish as many pictures as possible now, because by early next summer, two strikes could shut down Hollywood. The Writers Guild's contract expires in May, film and TV actors' in July.
[Nicholas Counter, Alliance Of Motion Picture & Tv Producers:] Our bottom line is: We're preparing for the worst and we're hoping for the best. In other words, we if we're well prepared, we think we'll ultimately make a deal without a strike.
[Wian:] The last time Hollywood faced a major labor stoppage was in 1980. Since then, the U.S. entertainment industry has gone global and digital, creating new distribution channels. While producers are trying to hold down rising costs, unions say they're not being paid enough for work sold in those new markets. The ongoing commercial actors strike over similar issues may be a preview.
[Michael Mahern, Writers Guild Of America:] It has sent the message to management that the actors are capable of taking a strike. Four or five months ago, the general thought around this town is that the actors couldn't pull off a successful strike.
[Wian:] Hollywood's union activists have become more militant and more determined.
[Susan Sarandon, Actress:] It's really important to take a stance that's a just stance now, because what happened with cable in the past, you know, we just, kind of, let it slide, underestimating what was going to happen. And we can't do that again for other issues in the future.
[Wian:] Caught in the middle, are people like Lyle Waggoner, a former actor whose company builds and rents trailers for movie and television productions.
[Lyle Waggoner, Star Waggons:] The impact would be devastating. I have a crew of 50 here and I don't want to lay them off. Whatever I could do to keep them, if, eventually, I had to lay them off because the strike went on too long, then that's what I'd have to do.
[Wian:] Some argue studios may take a hard line because many would save money during a strike.
[Jeffrey Logsdon, W.r. Hambrecht:] I think half the studios lose money on current production. But arguably, I mean, if you're a Walt Disney company and you lose a couple hundred million dollars a year or more in live-action films, if you shut down production, I don't know, maybe you want to have a victory celebration.
[Wian:] TV networks may also be reluctant to settle because a strike would come while actors are on summer hiatus. Plus, the public's appetite for so-called realty shows reduces the need for union talent. [on camera]: But a strike lasting three months or longer would start to squeeze Hollywood's bottom line. And that's not out of the question. The commercial actors' strike is about to enter its sixth month. Casey Wian, CNN Financial News, Los Angeles.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] We're watching the currency markets, and we see the euro strengthening a bit today, up more than half a cent against the U.S. currency, 86 cents. That comes despite some comments from the head of the European Central Bank, saying he wasn't too worried about the euro's decline recently. Will Lewis is news editor at the "Financial Times" and joins me now, from London, with some fallout from those remarks Will.
[Will Lewis, News Editor, "financial Times":] Hi, how are you doing? Yes, it's confusion rains once again in the currency market, and it's our old friend Willem Duisenberg, president of the European Central Bank, that is the cause. Monday saw Sir Edward George of the UK's Bank of England to indicate that, like many of us, he feels that the dollar's strength is having some perverse effects on the global economy. Currency traders took heart from this. The euro bounced a bit Tuesday morning. But then wait for it, here comes our friend Willem, who is consistently inconsistent. When asked if he agreed with Sir Edward George Markets assuming he was talking on behalf of policy makers He said no. In addition, he had added further confusion by saying that the euro is not very weak, it's very stable.
[Marchini:] All right, I want to thank you, Will Lewis. It's a never-ending saga. Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] As for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's Middle East trip, he is meeting with political and military leaders in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Uzbekistan and hoping to visit U.S. troops in Egypt before returning for a family commitment this weekend. CNN National Correspondent Brian Cabell is at the Pentagon this morning. Brian, what should we read into this trip?
[Brian Cabell, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Carol. It's hard to say what we should read into it, but we do know it will be a very quick trip four nations, as you say, in about three or four days. Secretary Rumsfeld is hoping to be back by Saturday morning, and during this trip, he hopes to meet with military and political leaders in that region. He left last night on Tuesday night, and our Jamie McIntyre, our CNN Pentagon Correspondent, is on board. He reports that Rumsfeld on board said that he is not intending to put any pressure on these four allies, but he's hoping, rather, to gain intelligence from them. As for Saudi Arabia, Rumsfeld says that Saudi Arabia will be a silent partner in the case of any military activity. The hope overall is just simply to strengthen military alliances with these four nations.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary:] We have a lot of activity in the region of the Defense Department, and I have not been able to be there yet this year. Normally, ministers of defense visit countries where there is that type of activity, and I, unfortunately, have not been able to thus far, and it just seems that I should. And it is something that, as we all know, there are a lot of things others can do, but there are some things that the Secretary of Defense has to do.
[Cabell:] In the meantime, the military build up in the region around Afghanistan continues; 30,000 American troops now said to be in the area, along with about 300 war planes. One final note Jamie McIntyre mentioned to us just about an hour ago. Apparently Rumsfeld was asked on the plane: Do you now know where Osama bin Laden is? And Rumsfeld's answer was: Well, I have a little bit of a handle on it, but I don't yet have the coordinates Carol, back to you.
[Lin:] Well, Brian, four countries in three days the secretary back by this weekend. Does that suggest any sort of a timetable for an initial strike?
[Cabell:] Well, the White House and the Pentagon have said repeatedly there is no timetable, there is no deadline. They will determine when any sort of strike will occur, if it occurs. But they certainly aren't going to reveal that to us.
[Lin:] And do you know the nature of these discussions that Secretary Rumsfeld is going to have with these political as well as military leaders? Is it more of a briefing? Is it more of an exchange of intelligence? Is it talking about resources that they might actually want to base in these countries?
[Cabell:] It could be all of those, but according to what Jamie told us just a couple of hours ago, primarily he is looking for intelligence from them, perhaps on Osama bin Laden.
[Lin:] All right. Thank you very much Brian Cabell, live this morning at the Pentagon. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] The 75th Annual Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade is just getting underway at this moment in New York. And with all the city has been through lately, the parade this year takes on a patriotic tone, as you may not as you may expect. CNN's Maria Hinojosa is in her Big Bird outfit. She's out there along the parade route. She joins us now live this morning Maria.
[Maria Hinojosa, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey, Leon, how you doing? It's about to start. We've been watching the very beginning of the parade, which is going to be headed by Lady Liberty and behind her a toy soldier. Of course this parade is going to take on special meaning this time because of it's coming after just two months of a lot of mourning and sadness in New York City. So what you're seeing right now is so much happiness, people smiling, people being together, a lot of people talking about unity, a lot of people talking about why it's important for them to be part of the parade this time around. And among them are a lot of immigrants. People like Fajula Imotto who is from Mexico, who was a lawyer in Mexico and who's come here to live in New York City and find job as a as a nanny. Now, Fajula, why was it important for you to come out to this parade? This is your first time ever.
[Fajula Imotto:] Yes, this is my first time. I think it was very important, you know, two months ago what happened in the Twin Towers I think. My girlfriend and me came here because we really want to share with other people. And this is special moment and you don't care about if it's cold or not, the thing is you're here for enjoy.
[Hinojosa:] And you lost a lot of friends in the World Trade Center, so is it also for you to kind of be here in memory of them?
[Imotto:] I think so, because you know when you came here, you came here for a better life. You don't know what's going to happen now, you don't know what you're going to do before I mean after that so...
[Hinojosa:] It's important for you to live every day to its fullest?
[Imotto:] Yes, it's very important.
[Hinojosa:] OK, thank you, Fajula.
[Imotto:] Thank you very much.
[Hinojosa:] Special stories about why people are coming out, but for a lot of teenagers, coming to the Thanksgiving Day Parade is just part of the tradition. We have here Celina, Crystal and Jennifer. Jennifer, why did you want to come out today, in particular?
[Jennifer:] I think that despite everything that's been going on around the that has been going on around us that we shouldn't let that bring us down. And we come here to enjoy ourselves so we should enjoy ourselves.
[Hinojosa:] And how are you feeling being out here with so many New Yorkers?
[Jennifer:] I feel happy that everybody can recover from this tragedy. And I think it's a good thing because everybody's everybody seems to be happy here and it seems like we're going to have fun.
[Hinojosa:] OK. And what about for you, why is it important for you to be here?
[Celina:] Yes, I think the same way. You know I don't think that what happened on September 11 should bring all these people down. You see so many smiles and happy faces, you know, so that makes me feel happy inside that, you know, nobody's feeling sad.
[Hinojosa:] And you, Crystal, you wanted to wear your American flag. Why today? Why for the parade?
[Crystal:] Because I feel, you know, sad, like I'm not going to forget what happened because that was on my birthday, but you know,...
[Hinojosa:] You want to feel happy today?
[Crystal:] Yes.
[Hinojosa:] OK. Well that's the feeling that we're really getting a sense of here, happiness, joy, a lot of New Yorkers together. Back to you, Leon.
[Harris:] All right, thanks, Maria. Now you stay warm. We'll get back to you. We're going to check back with you off and on throughout the hour, OK?
[Hinojosa:] OK, take care.
[Harris:] All right. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Well, as we mentioned earlier, bit of a lackluster session for the European market.
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Yes, exactly. We have got London, in particular, down, despite some new entrants to the Financial Times 100. Christopher Swann, of the "FT," joins us from their London newsroom now with an update on what new stocks are in the index and what the index is doing. Good morning.
[Christopher Swann, "financial Times":] Good morning. Well, the index has again seen the triumph of the new economy stocks over the old economy stocks. We've seen such icons of British culture drop out; as Rolls-Royce, the aircraft engine maker; Hanson, the building materials maker has also dropped out. And in their stead, Baltimore has bounced back into the index. The Irish high-tech company has been promoted back in March, but then dropped out again. And we've seen quite a lot of yo-yoing in the London index as technology stocks have come in and out of fashion.
[Marchini:] So this has introduced more volatility?
[Swann:] Yes. There has been a pickup in volatility, yes, since the high-tech stocks were first sort of bounded into the index back in March. And, but they now seem to be stabilizing somewhat. And, I mean it's rather ironic considering that we've had a bit of a fading of the enthusiasm that we had earlier in the week in high-tech stocks. And again we've seen those losses continuing today with a fall in Logica, despite very positive results. And also a fall in Bookem, which is it is just announced it's issuing some new shares. Obviously not much appetite for those at the moment.
[Haffenreffer:] Aside from the declines that we are seeing for the FT 100 index and the rejigger of the index itself, what sort of trading day is it in Europe today?
[Swann:] Well, at the moment, it's looking pretty flat in the main indexes. As I said, the technology stocks have continued to fade. There's some surprise that oil shares haven't benefited more from the rising oil price. Again, this continued to rise up also to nudge up towards $34 in Asian trading. But we've had very, very good profit figures from Total Fina, profits up 165 percent and yet no apparent benefit. And it looks like traders have already priced in these rises, BP's pretty flat as well.
[Marchini:] Yes, worth noting of course that the price of oil continues to rise in London this morning. We've got North Sea Brent up 17 cents at him $33.15. Christopher, switching gears, we are looking at a rather sharp drop, about three-quarters of cent in the value of the euro. What's going on there?
[Swann:] Well, it seems like some of the Asian investors in particular, who piled into the euro when it was rallying in May and June, are finally throwing in the towel. I mean, there have been fears for a long time that investor enthusiasm would kindly crack. It seems also that investors are continuing to reflect on comments earlier in the week by Gerhard Schroeder suggesting that the euro's fall was really not that serious, and that it was beneficial to exporters, and this is at odds with European central bankers who've been trying very hard talk the euro higher.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, Christopher Swann, at the "Financial Times," thanks for the update this morning.

[Laurin Sydney, Cnn Correspondent:] The Wayans brothers are out to put some fright into your Fourth and bring you a "Mid-Summer Night's Scream." The comic brothers are back with the sequel their wildly popular horror flick spoof, "Scary Movie." And as CNN's Paul Vercammen reports James Woods and others, the new mix, nothing, absolutely nothing is sacred.
[Paul Vercammen, Cnn Correspondent:] The Wayans brothers shocked show business spoofing their way to $156 million at the domestic box office for "Scary Movie." [Begin Video Clip, "scary Movie 2"]
[Unidentified Actor:] Now let's split up..
[Unidentified Actress:] Wait a minute, hold up! How come you white people always say, "let's split up." She's right, we should stick together.
[Unidentified Male:] OK, you three, follow me.
[Vercammen:] Now it's time for "Scary Movie 2." What's changed for Shawn and Marlon, the franchise's insane brains trust?
[Marlon Wayans, Comedian:] Now the gun is to your head to make people laugh. Before, we had no guns.
[Shawn Wayans, Comedian:] Right, before, it was like, Ha. Now, it's like what about this one? Why did the chicken cross the road? Or something like that.
[Vercammen:] Brother Keenan again directs and everybody must listen to coach.
[Keenan Ivory Wayans, Director/comedian:] They all must come to have fun and be ready to play. No vanity.
[Vercammen:] Newcomers to the cast include Tori Spelling, Andy Richter, David Cross, Tim Curry and... [Begin Video Clip, "scary Movie 2"]
[James Woods, Actor:] Silence!
[Vercammen:] ... James Woods, who torments the devil as only he can. [on camera]: You have just made everyone wonder if this is a movie or the letter section of a nudie magazine.
[Woods:] You know, my attitude is basically, it's really kind of harmless fun. I mean, in a world where hey, I didn't do a single thing in this movie that Clinton didn't do in the White House, OK.
[Vercammen:] Chris Elliot plays the creepy caretaker. [Begin Video Clip, "scary Movie 2"]
[Chris Elliot, Actor/comedian:] I'm handsome and I'm the caretaker.
[Elliot:] Keenan has used takes of mine that I thought I was doing just to make him laugh, that I never thought on earth he would put in the movie.
[Vercammen:] Back as the damsel in distrust, wide- eyed Anna Faris.
[Anna Faris, Actress:] My hair is normally blonde so people never recognize me as a blonde. It's only been lately that people have been recognizing me again. And it's a really odd experience.
[Vercammen:] Cast members swear they found comfort in Faris' derriere.
[Regina Hall, Actress:] I remember one day I said, "Anna, I'm so tired." And she turned and said, "Here, baby," and she turned to me, I grabbed her bum just like this...
[Unidentified Male:] Her supple bum.
[Hall:] ... her supple bum, but Chris was stressed too, so I couldn't have it as long as usual.
[Vercammen:] That's "Scary Movie 2," a lot of jokes below the belt and around back. Paul Vercammen, CNN Entertainment News, Hollywood.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Two million young people from around the world turned out to see and hear Pope John Paul II at one of the largest outdoor masses ever held. CNN's Jim Bittermann was there.
[Jim Bittermann, Cnn Correspondent:] As dawn broke over their improvised campground on the outskirts of Rome, young Catholic pilgrims were already up and getting ready for mass. They had come from 160 countries to be here. A girl from Mauritius would not have missed it for the world.
[Unidentified Female:] Well, I see it's a way to I'd say to confirm our faith in Christ.
[Bittermann:] Nor would have a girl from Chile.
[Unidentified Female:] It is so beautiful to be with the Holy Father. For me, it is a great gift.
[Bittermann:] But this event is also a great gift to the Vatican. [on camera]: World Youth Days have proven successful far beyond what Catholic organizers could have hoped when the pope first suggested the idea 15 years ago. Back then, 200,000 people came to Rome. This weekend, it's 10 times that number. [voice-over]: Church leaders believe the pope's grandfatherly image is part of the attraction. A cardinal from Boston who brought 800 young people here with him also says it's the pope's authenticity.
[Cardinal Bernard Law, Boston:] We tend to live in an age that exalts youth, but young people themselves have, I think, a much broader vision of human beings.
[Bittermann:] For the aging and infirm leader of a 2,000-year-old institution, to be seen appealing to such a young and diverse crowd might confirm that thought. But the pope's draw, others suggest, also lies in his uncompromising ideals, which were in evidence again during John Paul's message at Sunday mass. "Young people and society," he said, "need to turn away from the comfortable life, drugs, and pleasure-seeking." Before officially closing the ceremonies, the pope invited the young people to the next World Youth Days two years from now in Canada, an event many here are already planning to attend, including, apparently, John Paul.
[Pope John Paul Ii:] Dear young people, we must say goodbye until the next time.
[Bittermann:] It was a farewell wish many here shared. Jim Bittermann, CNN, Rome.

[Nicole Poole:] Hi. My name is Nicole Poole from Whittier, California. My question is: I recently read an article about the USO and their involvement cheering the troops during World War II. I was wondering if they are still active today. And if so, what sorts of projects they are involved in?
[Gen. John Tilelli , President & Ceo, Uso:] Well, Nicole that is a great question. The USO today is as alive and well as it was during World War II. In a real sense, it's more active today than it was then, because there are so many more programs that the USO does around the world. And we do everything from the celebrity entertainment to recreation centers to family readiness centers to airport centers to mobile canteens. We do in both the continental United States, and we do it overseas. Celebrity entertainment is still a pillar within the USO deliverables. In a real sense, we think of celebrity entertainment as Bob Hope, who is an icon in the USO entertainment business. Celebrities volunteer their time. They go overseas. They entertain our troops. And what the troops get from it, is more than entertainment.

[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] Political observers say that Haq's death is a serious blow to the efforts to replace the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. CNN State Department correspondent Andrea Koppel reports.
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn State Department Correspondent:] U.S. officials readily admit exiled Afghan commander Abdul Haq has been an important player in the ever-evolving U.S. strategy to help build a broad-based post-Taliban government in Afghanistan. A leading commander of anti-Soviet Mujahideen in the 1980s, Haq made no secret of his desire to rally Afghans to rise up against the Taliban. And so when the Bush administration first heard reports Haq had been captured and killed by the Taliban, the reaction was one of concern.
[Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary:] It would be a loss for those who believe in that effort, for those who believe in a broad-based government for Afghanistan.
[Koppel:] The Taliban claims it captured Haq near Kabul, the Afghan capital. At the same time, near Kandahar, another exiled anti- Taliban leader, Hamid Karzai, is believed to be on a similar mission to undermine the Taliban. Karzai, like Haq, is a prominent member of the Pashtun, the dominant ethnic group in Afghanistan, comprising 40 percent of the population. The challenge for the Bush administration and others opposed to the Taliban, to convince not only the Pashtun, whose exiled king has become a rallying force, but also Afghanistan's many other ethnic groups and tribes to support a new government to replace the Taliban. They include the Tajiks, the Baluch, Imach, and Hazara ethnic groups, as well as the Turkmen and Uzbeks, each with its own agenda.
[Richard Boucher, State Department Spokesman:] We need Afghans who will occupy territory and drive out or kill al-Qaeda. If we can't find Afghans like that, then we've got to do it ourselves on the ground, and that would be a terrible business, you know, lasting a very long time.
[Koppel:] Further complicating matters, Afghanistan's neighbors, in particular Pakistan, Iran, Russia, and India, support different ethnic groups. In recent days, President Bush and Secretary of State Powell have tried to move everyone to the same page.
[Anatol Levin, Carnegie Endowment For Peace:] It's a great game for very small stakes, actually, or at least it was until the 11th of September, which was raised the stakes enormously. It's pathetic, in a way. I mean, Afghanistan is one of the poorest societies on earth.
[Koppel:] With so many competing interests, replacing the Taliban won't be easy. Said one senior State Department official, "We don't have a secret as to how to get the Afghans organized. There is no favorite son." In other words, this is a work in progress. Andrea Koppel, CNN, at the State Department.

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the Justice Department has a new leader today who's every move is likely to be watched very closely for quite some time.
[Jason Carroll, Cnn Anchor:] John Ashcroft was sworn in as attorney general last night, just hours after he was confirmed by a deeply divided Senate. But Democrats mustered enough dissenters to send a powerful message to Ashcroft and President Bush. CNN congressional correspondent Jonathan Karl explains.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Just two hours after being confirmed, John Ashcroft headed to the Supreme Court for a private swearing in by his long-time friend Justice Clarence Thomas. Ashcroft said, in a statement, "Let me send a clear message today I will confront injustice by leading a professional Justice Department that is free from politics."
[Unidentified Male:] The Senate gives its advice and consent to the nomination of John Ashcroft...
[Karl:] President Bush got his man for the Justice Department, but Republicans were outraged at what it took to get him there.
[Sen. Orrin Hatch , Utah:] I resent the calumny that they've heaped on John Ashcroft. I resent the unfair tactics; I resent the distortions of his record. And boy, it's been distorted, and I think we'd all resent it. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
[Karl:] Looking around the Senate floor, Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch added "and there's plenty of sinning around here."
[Unknown:] Mr. Daschle, no...
[Karl:] In the end, 42 Senators, all Democrats, voted against Ashcroft, the second highest number of no votes for a successful Cabinet nominee in American history, and the most in 30 years. Democrats said the stronger-than-expected opposition sends a message to the new president.
[Sen. Charles Schumer , New York:] It's a shot across the bow in terms of the Justice Department and how it conducts itself. It's a shot across the bow in terms of Supreme Court nominations. It's a shot across the bow in terms of the push and pull within the Bush administration to be moderate and bipartisan or to play to the hard right.
[Karl:] The 42 no votes means Democrats may have had the votes to prevent the Ashcroft nomination from coming to a vote, a tactic several Democrats said they may use against future Bush Supreme Court and other nominees. [on camera]: Shortly after the vote, Ashcroft's spokesperson said that early into his tenure as attorney general, Ashcroft will reach out to some of those who vehemently opposed his nomination, especially the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Jonathan Karl, CNN, Capitol Hill.

[Tapper:] Welcome back to TAKE 5. Send us your e-mail at TAKE5@cnn.com. Do it right now, and we'll read it on the show later. And check out our Web site, CNN.comTAKE5, for more about the show and online chat every Friday. This week, a 27-year-old woman from Washington state won a victory that could affect women across the country. Jennifer Erickson launched a case that persuaded a federal judge to rule that it was discriminatory for her employer's health plan not to cover women's prescription contraceptives. Michelle, I've been listening to you yammer about this for weeks. All right, sister, lay it on us. Why is this important?
[Cottle:] About time! I'm sick of hearing people talk about how fertility is not a disease. In fact, this is one of the most important preventative health care measures that women have. And it's very expensive. And that's what the court said, they said if a health care plan is covering preventative medicine, it needs to include prescription contraceptives.
[Tapper:] You know, what I thought was funny about this is the fact that this was not really an issue until about two years ago, when the Pfizer corporation discovered this pill called Viagra, and all of a sudden CEOs and insurers were, like, yes, let's cover that! Let's cover that!
[Cottle:] Absolutely! And they weren't covering contraceptives.
[Tapper:] I wonder why they were so excited.
[Cottle:] ... and women went berserk.
[Caldwell:] But this plan did not cover it, and this smacks of special pleading. Look, people are different. Men don't pay the same life insurance premiums as women, even though they die earlier. And this is just one of those accidents of nature, and I don't see why why it's the business of the government to compensate.
[Dickerson:] No, I disagree, because what happens in this case is they measured it against other preventative medicines. So, for example, men take blood pressure and cholesterol medicine. So, why you know, men who are overeating their stakes and all of that, women have to pay for that, I mean, in the overall insurance pool, so why in this case shouldn't this be the same as those other preventative medicines?
[Sanchez:] Another little tact here in terms of looking at who is opposing this. And I know that the Roman Catholic Church was opposed very much to this, both because they don't want to provide contraceptive, and they don't want anyone else providing contraceptives, but as a Roman Catholic, I think this is where I have a hard time with the church having such a narrow-minded approach to women today. And I think this is a struggle that is going on constantly within the American church.
[Cottle:] I think exactly. I think Felix has got an excellent point here. Jake, you are clearly wrong once more. From the pill to prisons and criminal justice, whiplash this week over new crime statistics. The FBI says crime is up. Another Justice Department report said it's down. But all agree that the prisons are packed. The number of people behind bars in local, state and federal prisons is more than two million, four times what it was 20 years ago. With 5 percent of the world population, the U.S. has 25 percent of the world's prisoners. Chris, has it been worth the cost?
[Caldwell:] No. We've had some benefits, but no. You can break those numbers down in even more terrifying ways, like say that half of the people in the world are American blacks, and over 10 percent of the world's prisoners are American blacks. The people we are putting in jail are not, in general, more violent offenders. It's more drug offenders, and it's the war on drugs that's driving this. Bad idea.
[Dickerson:] But if you put the drug offenders in jail, aren't they then so conservatives would say precluded from committing other crimes, and that's why we've seen both the number of crimes go down?
[Caldwell:] Yes, some people would say that. It's a high, high price to pay and it creates a real chilling effect on the rest of the...
[Cottle:] And the problem right now is there are huge numbers coming out of prisons. And you send them in for non-violent crimes, you then train them to be violent and to commit even worse crimes. It's a training program.
[Sanchez:] I think it continues to beg the question of the disparity between black and Hispanic prisoners that are populating these jails and the inequity of the system that seems to be profiling them and putting them into jail. And I mean, there's just no way that you can look at the population and seem to figure out how this is happening.
[Tapper:] Well, because is it not fair to say that blacks and Hispanics also make up more of the lower class, the classes that are more likely to commit crimes? I am not saying that I support the inequity, but I mean, that's at least one of the factors.
[Sanchez:] But I don't know that you know, we've always looked at those terms that if you come from a lower socioeconomic income, you are going to have a greater propensity to go into jail. And I think that all the white-collar crime that we know that is out there doesn't get attacked in the same way as the kind of drug crime that we're looking at that's putting people that are non-violent into prison.
[Cottle:] Well, Felix, sorry, I have to move on here, from crime and punishment to the music often accused of promoting the gangster lifestyle. In New York this week, a closed-door gathering of the kings and queens of hip-hop, the red-hot music that often uses raw language to highlight the raw issues of poverty and racism. Jake, you're a big hip-hop fan. Are the sexist and violent lyrics just poetry aimed at the establishment?
[Tapper:] That's Mack 10, by the way, in case you're wondering what that video was. You know, I did for another CNN show earlier this week, I had a bunch of these people from the hip-hop summit, Russell Simmons from Def Jam Records and Chuck D and a few others. And what amazed me yes, I like hip-hop. I am an adult, of course, purportedly, and a lot of this music is listened to by children and it is affecting these kids. I was amazed, none of these guys would accept any responsibility for the lyrics and for the message they were sending. It was really phenomenal.
[Dickerson:] Russell Simmons, in particular, since he makes money directly from all of this, and the others as well. One thing that's interesting, though, is you know a genre has made it when it starts navel-gazing. I mean, hip-hop is here to stay, and you know, there are a lot of other types of music that haven't done it. This is now a fundamental part of American culture.
[Caldwell:] Well, it might be a sign of demise, actually. What might be happening is what happened to the folk music movement in the '60s, where these things hang around until they get more and more pretentious and have these huge claims to want to reorder society, which is...
[Dickerson:] Well, I disagree. There seems to be a whole raft of new hip-hop artists who are going to see this summit and want to do everything that they are against whatever they are talking about in these closed rooms.
[Sanchez:] But the idea of the summit, which was to organize the hip-hop constituency to have a political action committee, et cetera I mean, when Cornell West from Harvard has his own hip-hop album about to come out to preach, basically, to young kids, I think that we're missing the boat about this genre of music. But at the same time...
[Caldwell:] ... it's like taking the booze out of Irish ballads, or something like that.
[Tapper:] But you know, one of main things they were worried about, the subtext of this, was how they were going to market the records, because they are terrified Russell Simmons in particular is terrified about a bill that is being introduced by Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman that is going to fine movie and video game and rap artists and music people, industry people, if they market adult contend to children. They are terrified of it. That was definitely one of the subtexts.
[Cottle:] Well, Jake, we're going have to check on your e-mails in a minute, plus "Our Takes" in a moment.

[Bauer:] Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. I'm Bay Buchanan sitting in on the right. A group calling itself Women on Waves has converted a fishing boat into an abortion clinic and sailed with a Dutch flag to Ireland. The problem is they sailed without a proper license to operate a clinic, and we're told by Dutch authorities that if they took the life of even one child they would be facing four years in prison. Stopped cold on this trip, but what's going to happen on the next? Our guests, Elizabeth Birch, executive director of the Human Rights Campaign, and Gary Bauer, president of American Values Bill.
[Press:] Gary, quick question, I think I know why you don't like this boat, because these women are so clever. They have found a way around the antiquated laws of an antiquated country like Ireland. That's what it's all about, isn't it?
[Bauer:] Bill, talk about ugly Americans. You know, these folks are not content with 1.3 million abortions a year in America. They're trying to export it all over the world. Women around the world need lot of things. They need better health care, better education, better job opportunities. The last thing they need is being promoted the idea that taking innocent human life is somehow a great advantage for women. It isn't.
[Buchanan:] Elizabeth, Ireland is a democratic country. It is also a Catholic country. It voted twice, the people voted in a referendum twice keep abortion illegal. This is their choice. Is this not a contemptuous act on the part of these women to show up and suggest they change that?
[Birch:] I don't think so. I think that the choice to have an abortion is probably one of the most difficult ones that any individual would ever have to face, and I would never want to have to face that decision myself. But the fact is that conservatives want it both ways. I can't think of anything more intimate, more local than the control of one's reproductive rights. And I think the women of Ireland and the women of the planet deserve the opportunity to make these difficult decisions themselves, perhaps with a spouse or a partner, perhaps on occasion with their doctor or a religious adviser, but in fact, it is their own decision and not a government's decision.
[Press:] All right, Gary, let's back up here on this ship. Now, as we know, there was rumors that they do have a clinic on board this ship so there was a capacity to perform abortions if women had requested it and they went off in international waters. They're not doing that, because as Bay pointed out they didn't have the license. There was talk that they might give out the pill, RU-486. They're not doing that because they don't have a license. So at the most they're offering counseling now. But let's go back and assume that they were doing what they said they were going to do. I mean, there are casino ships all over the world that pick people up, where gambling is not allowed, and they go off into international waters and they can gamble away. There are 6,000 women a year from Ireland that go to England because they choose to have an abortion. If these Irish women want to exercise that right, why shouldn't they be able to go out under international law and do so? It's a medical service...
[Bauer:] Well, because because the taking of innocent human life is a little bit more profound than rolling the dice on a gambling ship.
[Press:] See, they don't believe you. I mean, they don't share that same opinion, Gary. So why shouldn't they have the choice to exercise their rights?
[Bauer:] Obviously not. But the good people of Ireland, a majority of them, do share my opinion, which is why they've spoken on this issue a number of times. And as a right of a sovereign nation they've decided they don't want to go down the road that the United States was forced to go down by Roe versus Wade, a horrible Supreme Court decision that's resulted in the destruction of millions of innocent human unborn children.
[Press:] Let me ask about this. What if this was the good ship Viagra? Viagra is allowed in Ireland, not RU-486. What if this ship were pulling into Dublin to give away free Viagra? They'd have a hero's welcome from the Irish, wouldn't they?
[Bauer:] Well, Bill, I don't know. I mean, I think they're going to still have to go to the drugstore and not count on a ship docking there...
[Buchanan:] Yeah, the last I heard Viagra didn't kill babies, Bill.
[Bauer:] ... in order to get your Viagra.
[Press:] Neither does RU-486.
[Buchanan:] Disagree...
[Press:] Yeah, right. Damn right.
[Bauer:] Fundamental disagreement.
[Buchanan:] Elizabeth, you say conservatives want it both ways. Let's talk about liberals, in particular your group, Human Rights Campaign. You say that all these different people have human rights, but you seem to be the one that wants to choose who has the right to live. OK, these babies have a right to life, yet you are unwilling to defend their right.
[Birch:] That's not what I said. I think that what I I really battle with is who makes the decision. And I think you want to place the decision in the hands of large, unwieldy governments, and I want to put the decision in the hands of women, who should have complete control over the reproduction...
[Buchanan:] What about the human rights? You're not answering the human rights. You don't like it when government...
[Birch:] The decision about the human right should be placed in the hands of women who choose to bear or not bear children.
[Buchanan:] All right. What about what about...
[Birch:] It is the decision-maker...
[Buchanan:] All right. How about the times that we've had men who have actually decided that the women, their wives, were like property, and you've asked government to come in and say this is just not permitted. There's many, many times that you have come in and said we need laws to protect the rights of gay, because government has to step in because people are making the wrong choices. And yet in this occasion, you say, we're killing somebody here, it could be. We have a baby here we're killing, but with this crime, government backs out, women choose. This is life, Elizabeth.
[Birch:] This is the decision of the woman who would give birth or not. And it is not the decision it should not be the decision of the Irish government, or the American government. And that is it. I mean, it is a public policy position that I feel very strongly about. My organization does not take we are a pro-choice organization, this is not part of our central missing, but in fact, as a woman and I think countless men feel this way as well we are talking about the decision-maker. Should it be a large, faceless government, or should it be the woman and her intimates, the people that she cares about around her to grapple with that decision?
[Bauer:] But Bill, the more fundamental question is whether anybody should ever be able to make a choice to take the life of an innocent unborn child.
[Birch:] Well, who gets to say? Why do you get to say?
[Bauer:] We had some references to reproductive rights when a woman is pregnant, she has reproduced. The question is whether that child will now be allowed to live. You can call it whatever you want, but there is now there is now two heartbeats.
[Birch:] ... U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on this too. It is the law of the land.
[Bauer:] And God willing, they will rule sometimes soon...
[Birch:] It is the law of the land.
[Bauer:] ... that all of our children are protected by the law and protected by the constitution of the United States. But I would remind you again, you are very good at quoting the law of America, but you are quite willing to ignore the law of Ireland. They have decided they don't want abortions there.
[Birch:] No, what I'm saying is that Bay pointed out I'm simply saying this and I will go quickly that indeed, you were holding up a Supreme Court decision. The Supreme Court of this country has ruled.
[Bauer:] And Supreme Courts have made mistakes, and this is one of them.
[Birch:] It should be respected. No, it should be respected, as it is the law of the land.
[Bauer:] And one can abide by a decision while working strenuously to overturn it, just as we did in the Dred Scott case, which was the other time that the Supreme Court took a whole class of human beings and said they had no rights that the rest of us were bound to respect. That was a disaster and a blot on America's conscience, and I'm convinced, Elizabeth, that some day we will look back on this disaster of 1.3 helpless children destroyed every year, and we will be ashamed.
[Press:] I just want to cut in here. Here is the problem with you and Bay you keep calling it killing babies, killing children that is outrageous, that is wrong. If it is murder, why shouldn't the doctor and the woman both be accused of first-degree murder and executed? Why don't you support that? Because you know it's not murder.
[Bauer:] Bill, if you want to support such a law, I would urge you to do it. It would be a great step forward for you since you seem oblivious about the fact that it is innocent human life. What do you call when something that has a heartbeat is destroyed, Bill? Whether it's a dog, a cat, or an unborn child, it has been killed.
[Press:] You say it's choice and you let the woman make the choice.
[Bauer:] A heartbeat indicates life.
[Press:] Time to go. Good night, Gary Bauer, good night, Elizabeth Birch, thank you both for coming in.
[Birch:] Good night. Thank you.
[Press:] We are not saying good night yet, because on the boy scouts and on the ship Aurora, Bay Buchanan and I will have some closing comments coming up next.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] In about two hours, Rick Lazio and Hillary Rodham Clinton will square off in their second debate in the New York Senate race. As CNN's Frank Buckley reports, one issue is sure to take center stage, the ban on soft money.
[Unidentified Emcee:] Our next senator, Rick Lazio.
[Frank Buckley, Cnn Correspondent:] Rick Lazio campaigned close to home on Long Island. U.S. Senator John McCain, a leading proponent of campaign finance reform, at his side as Lazio's opponent, First Lady Hillary Clinton, criticized Lazio for allegedly breaking the agreement that banned soft money and spending by anyone but the campaigns themselves.
[Hillary Rodham Clinton , New York Senate Candidate:] But clearly what he's done and what the Republicans coordinated with him to do was cynical and really inexplicable.
[Buckley:] Mrs. Clinton referring to this Lazio commercial, paid for in part by the Republican National Committee. But Lazio argues both sides agreed national party money was permitted under the agreement. Still, he says his campaign will make a refund to the Republican National Committee in the interests of maintaining the ban.
[Rep. Rick Lazio , Senate Candidate:] Assuring that if they're willing to do the same thing that we, we run our ads only with the hard dollars from our committee without the coordinated dollars.
[Buckley:] The issue is sure to be among the topics in the second debate between the two candidates.
[Rodham Clinton:] We'll shake on this, Rick.
[Lazio:] No, I want your signature.
[Buckley:] Lazio dramatically sought a soft money ban in their first debate, the candidate criticized by some for coming on too strong. When asked this week if he would be as aggressive in the second debate, Lazio joked...
[Lazio:] Does this face look like an aggressive or confrontational face?
[Buckley:] Aides say Lazio will be focused on his legislative record and his stand on issues, Mrs. Clinton saying she hopes the second debate will feel more like the vice presidential debate this past week.
[Rodham Clinton:] Where you actually talk about the issues and explain your differences.
[Buckley:] For the lesser known Lazio, it's a second chance to make a first impression, the four term Long Island Congressman facing off against a two term First Lady, one month before election day. Frank Buckley, CNN, New York.
[O'brien:] And now a programming note. CNN will carry today's WCBS sponsored New York State debate. Our live coverage begins at 10:30 A.M. Eastern, 7:30 A.M. Pacific. And just a reminder, you can get the latest political news any time by logging onto cnn.comelection2000.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] In January alone, music fans downloaded more than 2 12 billion that's with a B files using Napster. Users call it sharing; the music industry calls it stealing. CNN technology correspondent Rick Lockridge is here. I notice you just dialed up Napster, and it's up there: Call to get active, by notifying the Congress about all this. So they continue the good fight, but effectively, when this injunction is over with, they will probably have Napster as we know it shut down.
[Rick Lockridge, Cnn Technology Correspondent:] As we know.
[Waters:] But they're proceeding with a fee-based system, are they not?
[Lockridge:] Well, what will probably happen is the injunction will say you can allow, you can the facilitate the downloading of some songs, the ones for which you have permission. But the vast majority of songs, they won't have permission. So it'll just be a few songs. And then, if they can somehow work out that they can get a fee- based system later on, maybe you'll be able to get that content that people really want to download now: the pop songs, the hits. But that's still very much up in the air if that will ever happen, as well.
[Waters:] Well, Napster, of course, has drawn all the attention to this, but there are, of course, legal ways of downloading music on the Internet.
[Lockridge:] Well, sure, sure. In fact, there's a brand-new one here, with Web site that some of us might have heard of before: Amazon.com, the Internet superstore. It's got a free music download site that just went up, and they say they've got 5,000 tunes, including some by artists you have heard of.
[Waters:] How is that different from Napster?
[Lockridge:] Well, they're working with the industry. They have the explicit permission to use the music from, like, Smashing Pumpkins. There's some well-known names here: Wu-Tang Clan. I mean, you can pick any one of these. Let's just click on one. Which one do you want? Just click on one.
[Waters:] Oh, boy, I'm a big Smashing Pumpkins fan.
[Lockridge:] Are you really? OK, we'll check this one out. And now all we have to do to download this song is hit the download button, and since I'm a registered customer, you can see the download has already started. This is legal, you can do it; however, it doesn't have all the songs that Napster has. It only has a few, compared to the vast library of songs that you can get through Napster. Again, I want to mention, the music industry calls that stealing, and we don't want to give the appearance that we're condoning that.
[Waters:] now, what you're downloading here you can transfer to a CD also, legally.
[Lockridge:] Yes, you can sure, sure, but we already have downloaded a song earlier on. I can play it for you right now. This is by U2, another band you've heard of.
[Waters:] Right, the big Grammy winner.
[Lockridge:] Now, what a lot of people are going to do and for right or for wrong is they're going to want to continue to download music the way they have been, which is to get the songs they really want from other people's computers. And there are other technologies that allow this, and they're getting better, so the question really should be isn't Napster going to go away: The question should be is it relevant, because you've got services like BearShare their software will allow you to go, say, you have your computer, I have mine. I get the song right from you, you get it right from me there's no central computer, like with Napster, there's no way anybody knows what you and I are doing together. And then there's there's another one here. This is an Israeli company, iMesh. And I want to point out, on their site, they say you may share only material which you either own the copyright of. Lou, people are going to ignore that in droves.
[Waters:] Yes, so now, this fee-based system that Napster's talking about, that they're going forward with this summer, is that quality music, or are they reduced now to the 5,000 tunes or the 10,000 tunes or whatever?
[Lockridge:] What people expect to happen, people in the know, is that Napster will be reduced to supplying access only to tunes which they haven't been denied the use of, and the recording industry's going to come in with these reams of printouts and say, OK, all these songs, forget it, you can't allow it anymore. Here's a few that are garage bands, people who want their music on Napster, and some good- natured bands who want their music up there, but...
[Waters:] We're looking at the future here, and I suppose there's got to be some accommodation.
[Lockridge:] In the long run, certainly, but it's going to be a stormy interim until that happens.
[Waters:] Yes, OK, Rick Lockridge, our science and technology correspondent. And Natalie, it's grooving over here.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] The invasion of Philadelphia is under way. My partner Natalie Allen is one of the first to arrive. She checks in again now. What's going on, Natalie.
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Well, CNN has definitely invaded, Lou. We started broadcasting yesterday, so we volunteered to come on down, turn on the lights here in Philadelphia. We'll be broadcasting today, throughout the weekend for the lead-up to Monday. We're even here before the candidates arrive. For George Bush and Dick Cheney, the road to Philadelphia leads through Arkansas. With just three days left until the convention, the presidential candidate and his designated running mate campaigned today in the home state of the current president. And CNN's Jonathan Karl is in Springdale, Arkansas with them Jonathan.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Natalie, here at the Springdale, Arkansas High School, Bush and Cheney just finished the first kick-off rally of their trip to the convention in Philadelphia. This trip designed to build up energy and intensity going into the Philadelphia convention. And, in fact, 2,500 seats here in this auditorium at Springdale High School, every one of them filled at the height of this rally, and also standing room only. They did a confetti drop, borrowing a page out of John McCain's primary playbook, and displayed here a level of intensity that we have not seen since, really, since the primaries. Cheney spoke as well, reiterating some of the themes that George W. Bush has made the centerpiece of his campaign; themes about bringing honor and integrity to Washington; themes of compassionate conservatism. Bush also spoke about his running mate, spoke with great pride about Dick Cheney's record and about his position here on the ticket.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] I had a big decision to make. I had a decision to decide who was going to be my running mate. I told America loud and clear that I wanted somebody by my side who, if need be, could be president of the United States.
[Karl:] And, Natalie, we saw something new here at this rally: the debut of the Cheney of the Bush-Cheney buttons. Here this button has a picture of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney with the phrase, "the winning team." Now, from here they go on to Missouri, another one of those swing states, states that were carried by the Democrats in the last two presidential elections, and states a state where George W. Bush is actually leading in the polls. Back to you, Natalie.
[Waters:] Going to have to be back to me, Jonathan. We're having some problems along the line up in Philadelphia.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] A short time ago listening to the congressional leaders at the White House. They are there, in part, to talk about keeping classified material just that classified. Back to the White House and John King this morning John.
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Bill, those members of Congress the top four leaders also received an update from the president on his assessment of the war in Afghanistan so far. We are joined this morning by the House Democratic Leader the House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt. Sir, first on this issue of the classified information the president was quite angry. He thought reckless leaks of information that put troops in harms way, intelligence operatives in harms way. An agreement reached this morning, at least tentatively: The president will expand the circle now of people who get those briefings?
[Rep. Richard Gephardt , Minority Leader:] He will. We'll go back to briefing intelligence committee people and people on appropriations and foreign affairs that get briefed by Secretary Rumsfeld and Secretary Powell. And then the whole membership needs to be briefed by the Pentagon on the military operations and what's going on. That will hopefully happen sometime later today.
[King:] Is this agreement restrictive in the sense that the president is now willing to talk in a past tense about what has happened and less willing, because of his anger, to talk about what might happen tomorrow or the next day?
[Gephardt:] I think that's right. But obviously, people need to be briefed constantly about what's going on in the field over there. We have all got constituents who are over there, and so all members will be briefed on the status of the military operation. I think we'll get back to a normal situation. The president was rightfully angry. There should not be breaches in security of the kind that apparently went on.
[King:] Let's talk about his assessment related to the top four leaders of Congress today about how successful or not successful the raids have been so far. Three days of airstrikes, some of them in daylight the administration claiming air superiority. Did he give you any sense specifically of the damage done to the Taliban or to bin Laden and his organization?
[Gephardt:] We really don't have that information yet. Obviously, they hope to have taken out some of his top leadership people, and eventually they've got to get him, and they are trying hard to do that. This is going to be a long operation. It's clear to me that you use air and you use covert and you use paramilitary operations eventually to get this done. This is not the Persian Gulf War. This is not Bosnia or Kosovo. This is going to take a long time, and then down the road, we've got to worry about getting Afghanistan in a position where it's no longer a seed bed for terrorism and have to work with the U.N. and other countries to make that happen.
[King:] He is also releasing a list today: 22 most-wanted terrorists. Many of them are not in Afghanistan. Any indication from the president that there will be military action soon in places other than Afghanistan?
[Gephardt:] I don't think so. I don't see that on the horizon right now. But eventually that could happen. Obviously, the first thing is to try to get other countries to help us find these people arrest them. There have been a number of arrests around the world, I think, over 200 of suspected members of al Qaeda. So this thing is going forward. We're making progress, but it's a long road.
[King:] And quickly, sir. You were just talking about trying to get this stimulus package passed quickly, so a consumer out there might get a check before the holiday season. Are you optimistic that will happen? And what size of a tax cut are we talking about for the average guy out there?
[Gephardt:] Well, I think the president is still talking about trying to get this done, so that we can get the checks in their hands. Most businesses, in the retail anyway, make most of their business in the holiday season. So it's really important to try to get this done. We're going to try to do that. I think we're mainly talking about checks going to the people who didn't get it last time people who paid payroll tax, but not income tax. It could be a $300, $400 check to them, and that would help them in the holiday season.
[King:] All right. Congressman Richard Gephardt, Democratic of Missouri, the House Minority Leader thank you for your time today. We'll get more reaction in the minutes ahead from this key breakfast meeting this morning between the president and the congressional leadership.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] They say that everything out there in Texas is bigger, so it's no surprise that the remains of one of the largest creatures ever to walk around here on this planet Earth were found out there. The fossil bones of the Alamosaurus were discovered in Big Bend National Park in 1996 and have just now been airlifted to the Dallas Museum of Natural History: 10 neck bones were recovered, the largest one weighing 1,000 pounds. You can see them being moved along here. Given that size, it's believed that the animal, which lived about 70 million years ago, must have been about 70 feet long. They grow them big down there. For more on the story, we're joined by Tony Fiorillo, who is curator of earth sciences at the museum down there. Tony, thanks very much for being with us. Talk to us about Alamosaurus: 70 feet long. That seems pretty big. Give us some other information that you know about him.
[Tony Fiorillo, Dallas Museum Of Natural History:] Well, yes. The adult size is about 70 feet long, and we recovered about 23 feet of its neck. And it's a sauropod dinosaur, one of the last of the sauropods. And sauropods are basically the oversized Dino the dinosaur from "The Flintstones."
[Chen:] Ah, Dino.
[Fiorillo:] A good plant eater.
[Chen:] So we're looking at Dino or parts of Dino. Now, have you seen all of this guy?
[Fiorillo:] Well...
[Chen:] Or gal. I guess we won't know, right?
[Fiorillo:] Sorry, I didn't hear that question.
[Chen:] We won't know whether he's a guy or a gal. He's just a big...
[Fiorillo:] That's right. We don't know the sex just yet.
[Chen:] Now, do we know what he looked like in total or we've only seen part of him?
[Fiorillo:] Well, this animal, the original discovery was the hip region of the skeleton, but it was exposed on the surface and badly weathered. So we didn't collect that. But in the digging around that, we recovered the neck. So we've got these 23 feet of neck, and there's every reason to think there's a few more bones out there, and we'll go back and collect them at some later date.
[Chen:] That's a big neck. Tony, we've got questions for you from our live Web chat under way now. This is Lula's question. "Judging from the bones found, how big would the whole dinosaur be?" We've talked about this a little bit, but since you don't have all the pieces, will you ever really know?
[Fiorillo:] How will we ever I missed most of the first part of your question.
[Chen:] I'm sorry. Her question was, given what you've been able to find, do you know how big the whole creature must have been? If you don't find all the pieces, will you every truly know how big this creature was?
[Fiorillo:] Oh, well, what you do is you extrapolate based on some measurements you take with what you do find compared to other animals that are related to it. Obviously, the most exact measurement is going to be if you find the whole animal intact, but we can come up with some pretty reasonable estimates.
[Chen:] And 70 feet long is the estimate at the moment. This is Clarke Bellamy's question: "How long does it take to dig up a dinosaur and restore it?" Great question, Clarke.
[Fiorillo:] This this excavation has taken quite some time. This last stretch was about a 10-day stretch where we were working pretty long shifts, the hardest part of the excavation. We're about 2 12 miles off any road. So we mixed about 1,500 pounds of plaster to coat this thing and all of that had to be carried on our backs out there. And it was an equal amount of water that had to go out there. So we carried 3,000 pounds of supplies out to this site.
[Chen:] One of our chatters was saying perhaps you ought to name this thing the Bushosaurus, because it comes from Texas. How did you seize upon Alamosaurus as his name?
[Fiorillo:] Well, around here, most people get pretty excited hearing the word Alamosaurus, because the make the association to some other place in Texas. But in fact, the animal's named for a trading post in New Mexico where the first couple of bones of this animal were found back in the '30s.
[Chen:] Well, I guess that's you haven't even attempted to rename him Bushosaurus or anything like that, or Dubyaosaurus?
[Fiorillo:] Well, when we open the jackets up, you know, and if it turns out to be a different animal, we'll keep that in mind.
[Chen:] We'll see what his political affiliation might be. Tony's got another question from the live Web chat under way now. Cheri asks: "Who found the dinosaur?"
[Fiorillo:] The dinosaur was originally found when we were excavating a juvenile locality of the same animal. This locality produced the remains of three half-grown Alamosauruses, and one of the students, Dana Biasotti, from the University of Texas, Dallas, needed to go stretch her legs and so she left the quarry, wandered off into the desert, and about an hour later she came back and said she thought she had found something. So we all decided to go stretch our legs and went out, and sure enough she'd found the hips of this Alamosaurus.
[Chen:] I guess everybody needs to stretch their legs more often. Now, let me ask you this: It always seems like things like this are found somewhere way out in Texas or in Montana or someplace like that. I mean, why don't why doesn't anybody discover a dinosaur like in downtown Chicago or someplace like that?
[Fiorillo:] Well, you're right. Most dinosaur bones tend to be found out way out away from every place, but of course, there's a group of dinosaurs called the "duckbill" dinosaurs. And the earliest record of duckbill dinosaurs from North America comes from the Dallas- Ft. Worth Airport.
[Chen:] Tony Fiorillo, the earth sciences
[Fiorillo:] You're welcome. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] As Congress heads off on summer recess, President Bush is taking the rest of the month off at his Texas ranch to give him time to think about the gains in his first six months in office. The list begins with his tax cut. There is a House passage of his energy plan and the patients' bill of rights as well. When the president gets back to the White House in September, reality is likely to set in. His energy, health and education initiatives face tougher sledding in the Senate. That's where the Democrats hold the cards, of course. Well, Kelly Wallace is at the White House for us this morning and joins us now. Kelly, I guess happy days are here again here still.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] That's right. Still some happy days here at the White House, Colleen. And President Bush will be talking about some of what the White House considers its achievements over the past six months, and then some of those goals and issues facing the president in the next months ahead. He will be meeting with his cabinet this afternoon, and then he will come out to the Rose Garden and talk to reporters. Also, White House advisers are circulating these talking points to staffers on Capitol Hill, basically crediting the president with breaking gridlock and leading to constructive spirit and bipartisanship and results. But again, as you mentioned, to big battles ahead. One of the biggest victories, though, the White House savoring on this day is passage in the House last night of that patients' bill of rights, which the president says he can support. Now, this all coming after the White House, Mr. Bush, brokered a deal with Republican Congressman Charlie Norwood. The White House very pleased with this. And in fact, shortly after the vote, the president issued a statement saying quote: "Today's action brings us an important step closer to insuring that patients get the care they need, and that HMOs are held accountable." Now, what's important here for the White House passage of this bill [a] gives the president some credit in helping to pass a measure that a majority of Americans support and want the president and the Congress to act on this year. Also, Colleen, though, the president dodging, you can say, a political bullet, because he had talked about vetoing this bill, and a veto would have been very, very political difficult for the president Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] Kelly, what about the issue of embryonic stem cell research? We have been hearing all kinds of rumors that a decision could come sometime today, that it could come sometime in the next month, when he is in Crawford. What are you hearing?
[Wallace:] It is sort of the issue. And White House advisers are being asked about this every single day. I just talked with an administration official, who said that this decision is definitely not expected today. It is, though, potentially could come sometime this month. As you know, the president is faced with this decision of deciding whether to allow federal funding of embryonic stem cell research using the stem cells for research. Supporters of the research say it could lead to new breakthroughs in treatments of diseases, such as Alzheimer's. But there is lots of opposition, particularly coming from Catholics, who believe that the embryos would have to be killed, and that amounts to a destruction of human life. So a big decision politically, ethically and a scientific one as well likely to come, at this point, all we know maybe sometime this month Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] All right. Kelly Wallace at the White House, thanks very much. On to Crawford now Carol.
[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] You bet. The president obviously will have a lot to deal with, but first he goes on vacation. He is going to have a whole month off, and he is going to go to his favorite place in the whole world. That is his ranch in Crawford, Texas. And Robert Campbell is the mayor of this lovely little town population 700. In fact, do we have the mayor right now? There you are. Good morning, Mr. Mayor.
[Robert Campbell, Mayor Of Crawford, Texas:] Good morning.
[Lin:] Well, I looked up your town on the Internet, and we saw some really cool pictures. I mean, we keep hearing about how small Crawford is, but certainly not too small to have its own inaugural ball. And the president was there.
[Campbell:] Correct.
[Lin:] Yes, let's take a look at these pictures here. Tell me what that evening was like.
[Campbell:] Well, I wasn't there, but they tell me it was a very good evening there at the ball. But we are kind of happy that he is here. He has been a boost for the town, and we are just pleased that he is going to be coming to well, for vacation and be here with us for a while. I guess...
[Lin:] You must be so proud. You must be so proud of him. We saw some other pictures of Crawford, and it looks like just a quaint, cute little town. There it is. All right. I've got to ask you this. We're taking a look at a picture here. It looks like a stoplight. I understand it is "the" stoplight is that right?
[Campbell:] Correct. We have one flashing light in town. It is right at the intersection of the two main highways that come through town a state highway and a farm-to-market road. And that's the hub of town. City hall is right up the street from that stoplight. And the population here is only about 700, so we don't have that much traffic coming through anyway.
[Lin:] Well, good something else that all of the tourists can look forward to. But this is my favorite shot, because the rest of America is going to be seeing this water tower quite a bit over the next month. This is our favorite live-shot position. And it's rather hard to find water towers around the United States these days.
[Campbell:] Well, we have our own water system here. We are totally independent on our own water system. So we have water storage. That tower has been there for quite some time. And we are looking forward to replacing that one with a new one.
[Lin:] Quite some time. But you know who is not looking forward to the hoards of tourists coming to town? Do you know Cathy Nagle of the Brown Bag in town?
[Campbell:] Say again?
[Lin:] Cathy Nagle do you know Cathy Nagle, who owns the Brown Bag a restaurant?
[Campbell:] Yes, I do.
[Lin:] Well, you know what she says about all these tourists coming to town? She is going to tell them, "I'll tell them you can't see anything at the ranch." She doesn't want these folks coming. How do people feel in town about the president vacationing there, and all of the notoriety he is going to bring?
[Campbell:] Well, I think it's going to be good for us. It's really going to help to boost the economy of the town when they come in. When the president comes, it's not any turmoil, because he generally comes in to get some rest, and he is out on the ranch. And so we don't see him. We don't see his family. But...
[Lin:] He doesn't come shopping in town, maybe a night out?
[Campbell:] Well, as big as we are, we really don't have any stores in Crawford.
[Lin:] Oh.
[Campbell:] We have one convenience store, which is in conjunction with the one restaurant and the service station with the most gas islands.
[Lin:] Do you think that might change, though, in the month of August? Are you letting business people come into town and set up shop, try to sell a few trinkets here or there?
[Campbell:] Oh, I would be assured of that. We have some people that are already opening up some smaller gift shops. Besides the Brown Bag, we have a new placed called the Carriage House. And there are some other places. There is a place right next door to City Hall called the Red Bull. So we are having some people come in and set up some small shops to try to take advantage of the presence of the president out here. And I am quite sure that while he is here and with the press and everybody else coming in, that we'll have others coming in trying to do some vending.
[Lin:] Yes. And you've got people coming from around the world, I heard. You have some people from Costa Rica, Austria visiting.
[Campbell:] We've had people from all over the world. It has been a pleasant surprise.
[Lin:] A pleasant surprise. What are the town folk telling you, though? Are they asking you, Mr. Mayor, you know, you've got to stop promoting this town. We like Crawford just the way it is.
[Campbell:] Well, you know, most people who live here are here because they want to be in a small town. That's the ambience about being in Crawford. We are a very small, laid-back community in the midst of a bigger urban society. And we are close enough to everything to get what we need, but still have small-town living.
[Lin:] And just 20 miles from Waco, Texas.
[Campbell:] Right. We are about 20 miles from Waco, about an hour and a half drive from Austin. And about the same from Dallas and Fort Worth.
[Lin:] Well, there you go.
[Campbell:] So we're in a good location.
[Lin:] It must feel like the center of the universe. Thank you so much, Mr. Mayor. Congratulations. And I hope you hang on through the month of August. It's going to be a busy one.
[Campbell:] Thank you very much.
[Lin:] All right.
[Mcedwards:] Absolutely, indisputably on the map now. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Baseball fans know Andruw Jones as a Gold Glove-winning center fielder. Today, though, he starred on the witness stand. The Atlanta Braves outfielder testified in the federal racketeering trial involving an Atlanta strip club and allegations of gangsters, sex and payoffs. Our national correspondent Brian Cabell has been covering the case and he joins us with more Brian.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] Daryn, what's sometimes forgotten here is that this is a federal racketeering trial involving such charges as extortion, money laundering, credit card fraud and payoffs to the mob. But, of course, it is the sex that is getting all the attention here. On Monday it was basketball player Patrick Ewing testifying about his experiences at the Gold Club. Today it was Andruw Jones, the Braves' center fielder. What he said was this, in 1996 or '97, he wasn't sure which, he went to the Gold Club. Eh was approached by the owner of the Gold Club, Steve Kaplan, who's on trial in this racketeering case, asked if he wanted to go to a party. He said yes, got in a limousine, went to a hotel, went upstairs. He saw two women having lesbian sex in one of the rooms. There were five or six other men there, he said. After a while it turned into oral sex involving the men and women and then after a while, after that there was sexual intercourse between the men and the women. He was asked was he participating in this intercourse? He said yes he was. He was on the stand for only about 15 minutes. He said he didn't pay anything there, he didn't tip. He didn't think he had to because he was frequently comped. Again, he is the second of the big name athletes to show up. Others are likely to follow in the weeks ahead. I'm Brian Cabell, CNN LIVE in Atlanta.
[Kagan:] All right, Brian, thank you very much.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] The high price of gasoline has almost everyone out there looking for ways to save fuel and money, and one idea may also save some of the time that drivers spend idling at red lights. CNN's Lilian Kim takes a look at how retiming traffic signals can put the brakes on gridlock.
[Lilian Kim, Cnn Correspondent:] All across the U.S., commuters greet a new day and face the same old problem traffic but, on this stretch of road, motorists aren't seeing red. They're getting the green red light.
[Peg Nielsen, Motorist:] I've cut off at least five minutes or more, and when you're running late, five minutes can make a major difference.
[Kim:] Seattle is one of a handful of cities retiming its traffic signals. The concept: reduce the reds and maximize the greens on heavily traveled streets. Engineers spend months monitoring traffic flows, then use that information to reprogram the lights to current conditions. The result: faster drive times anywhere from 8 to 50 percent.
[Brian Kemper, Seattle Traffic Engineer:] Anybody can go out there and say they've tweaked a few signals and say they've done their job, but, in order to do it right, it does take a lot of staff hours.
[Kim:] Gathering all that data adds up to about a million dollars, and while city leaders are touting the plan as a success, some motorists aren't so sure it's making a difference.
[John Neverdowski, Motorist:] It's a mess because the lanes are narrow. So even changing the lights really don't help because some of the bigger buses and trucks and that get to where they really crowd you out.
[Kim:] But others are convinced their traveling at light speed.
[Nielsen:] The lights it's they all work for you, and so traffic just totally disappears. There's no traffic at all. It's amazing.
[Kim:] Proving that theory that timing is everything to keep traffic moving. Lilian Kim, CNN, Seattle.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Now, nearly half of all heart bypass patients suffer a drop in brainpower help me this, will you, Rhonda that's a measurable five years after surgery. That study is reported in this week's "New England Journal of Medicine." But now some heart surgeons believe they have a safer way to perform the surgery: It's called beating heart surgery and medical correspondent Rhonda Rowland is here to tell us what that means. And it's literally beating heart surgery, right?
[Rhonda Rowland, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] That's right and we're going to have a story to show you this. And doctors hope this new beating heart surgery, which avoids the use of the heart-lung machine, will help prevent some of this mental decline. And according to this new study, the amount of brain power that's lost during a bypass operation is about the same as the brain power we now lose between the ages of 40 and 60.
[Rowland:] Dean Maloney is having a heart-bypass operation that's being performed in a new way: to protect his brain.
[Unidentified Male:] So this man's going to have two grafts done, one with each of his mammary arteries.
[Rowland:] Doctors are calling it beating heart surgery.
[Unidentified Male:] This device has suction cups on it, which suck onto the surface of the heart and hold it still.
[Rowland:] Using a vacuum-like device, surgeons hold still just the part of the heart they're working on while the rest of the heart continues beating.
[Unidentified Male:] Specifically, we hold still the coronary artery that we're sewing the graft to, and then work with that artery, finish that job there, and then move to the next part of the heart that needs another graft.
[Rowland:] In traditional heart bypass, the patient's heart is stopped while the surgeon sews on the new arteries. The patient is kept alive with a heart-lung machine. But there are potential risks.
[Unidentified Male:] The heart-lung machine causes some inflammation that affects the brain and the lungs and the kidneys and the heart and every organ in the body. Most patients tolerate that inflammation very, very well and do fine.
[Rowland:] But some don't. Dr. Denise Barbut studies the brain damage often caused by bypass surgery, the most troubling risk
[Dr. Denise Barbut, Neurologist:] Neurocognitive dysfunction occurs in up to 60, 70 percent of patients, of all patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery. It is still present two months after the operation in 25 to 30 percent of them, and is that is permanent.
[Rowland:] In most patients, the damage is subtle: personality, mood changes, depression. But a small percentage of patients suffer a stroke. [on camera]: If you're going to have a heart-bypass operation, chances are your surgeon will not be using the new beating heart surgery. Worldwide, just 15 percent of all doctors have learned the procedure. The reason: There still is no definitive proof the new way is better. [voice-over]: A comparison of the stopped heart approach and the beating heart surgery should be completed in about a year. In the meantime, Dr. Puskus says his experience with 400 patients has been encouraging.
[Unidentified Male:] We have a mortality rate of less than one percent and a stroke rate that seems to be just slightly less than it would normally be.
[Rowland:] Patients are also leaving the hospital 1 12 days earlier, which saves money. For Dean Maloney, the beating heart surgery was a success.
[Unidentified Male:] I didn't feel any different mentally. It was physically, I just hurt. Of course, they only sawed my chest open why would I hurt?
[Rowland:] It took two months after the operation before his body was ready to endure the rigors of the road, but his mind, he says, was rolling from the start.
[O'brien:] All right, keep us posted, will you, Rhonda?
[Rowland:] Certainly.
[O'brien:] CNN's Rhonda Rowland, checking in with us.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] After the U.S.-China agreement to release the 24 Navy crewmembers held since their spy plane collided with the Chinese fighter jet 11 days ago, a commercial jet is en route to Hianan Island to bring them. And then the crew will be reunited with their families at the Whidbey Island in the Washington. Still at issue, if China will return the U.S. spy plane in that collision and if the United States will continue those reconnaissance flights off of the China coast.
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] The Pentagon has been working out the details of the crew's return. CNN military affairs correspondent Jamie McIntyre joins us with the latest Jamie.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Military Affairs Correspondent:] Well, here is the timeline we have been able to put together from the Pentagon sources. It appears, at this point, that the chartered Continental Airlines plane will land in Haikou about 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time. That would be 6:00 a.m. in China. Sources tell us that the plane will need to refuel to make sure it has enough fuel to get back to Guam. That will take about an hour or two. The crew will be loaded on the plane. Sources saying that the plane also is carrying some medical personnel, some psycologists, and some of the debriefers so some initial debriefing of the crew can go on as it travels back to Guam. It will arrive in Guam at Anderson Air Force Base sometime after midnight Eastern Time, and then the crew will switch to a C-17 transport plane for about a 10-hour hop to Hickam Air Force Base in Honolulu, Hawaii. Now Pentagon officials are still very nervous about all of this until it takes place, until the crew is back on U.S. soil, so they are not talking much about other things such as whether or not if the United States will resume its reconnassaince flights, how soon and whether any have taken place since this accident began. Pentagon officials are going to reserve comment on any of those things until they're sure the crew is back on U.S. soil in Guam Natalie.
[Allen:] All right. It won't be long. Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon. Now here's Lou.
[Waters:] Today's agreement and its implications are certain to be dsicussed for sometime to come, and there's no time like the present. Joining us from Washington, Bill Triplett. Thank you.
[Bill Triplett, China Military Expert:] Thank you.
[Waters:] Bill rather President Bush has just survived what arguably is his first test in international relations. Some would call it successful, the crew's on its way home, but we have those on the right saying he was too soft on this business, those are the left saying he was too hardlined. Wnd where do you come down in that spectrum?
[Triplett:] I come down very happy that our people are back. That's we have to start with that and, certainly, from the United States' standpoint, that's the first item of business, and you can't argue with success. They when the young people get on the plane in a few hours, we're all going to be very happy. The next question, I think, is what happens when the United States wants to send out another one of these flights, because we don't have a real choice. We've got to send the surveillance flights out to find out what China is doing with its military modernization. Are we going to get buzzed again? Will they will we have another incident? And that's, of course, the next step.
[Waters:] And what about this meeting on April 18th, to discuss the incident and that matter that you just mentioned, the return of the plane. Is that an important matter?
[Triplett:] Well, certainly I think the return of the plane is important. The Navy is interested in in what's left of it, what was taken out and so forth. Some things they'll get from the debriefing of the of the crew. But the plane itself is valuable. If they never get the plane back, the back, the Congress will have to appropriate money for a new plane, I mean, just for the openers, and that's several million dollars. So that that does matter. But, again, to go back to the question of what the next step is, beyond the plane, the issue is: are we going to be able to continue these surveillance flights? And the reason is the Chinese have bought a whole bunch of new modern equipment, a lot of it russian, a lot of it was designed to kill Americans on aircraft carriers and so forth, and we want to see how well they can integrate that stuff into their existing forces.
[Waters:] The question was asked earlier today what happens when the crew comes home and begins telling their story. How might that change the dynamic in what we perceive as what happened in this incident or accident, whatever you want to call it? Maybe China might change its tune when those stories begin to be told.
[Triplett:] Sure. Of course, obviously, it depends on what the story is. Yk, there are a lot of newspapers floating around in the Far East, some of them hysterical, about the tracer bullets being shot in front of our guys, or there was another story in which the second pilot wanted to shoot our 24 people down. I think we have to focus on the fact that we came that close to having 24 dead Americans. That close. And and it was really a pilot error from the Chinese side. So what happens when we go back out in the Far East again? Are we going to have people buzzed? Are they going to be back within three or four feet of our people? Are we going to have a really terrible accident and a bunch of dead Americans?
[Waters:] And I hope we get a chance to talk again. Bill Triplett, China specialist...
[Triplett:] Ty.
[Waters:] ... with the U.S. Congress. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Correspondent:] CNN's Bob Franken is at the Pentagon. Bob, good afternoon to you. What do you have?
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Aaron, I wanted to tell you a moment ago you were talking about how "normal" is changing so much in the United States now. I was fascinated by the conversation you had a while ago with our national security correspondent David Ensor, talking about the different role that intelligence and security might play in the life of the United States. A departure from the traditions here, and there was another example today of how the face of life in the United States might be changing when the deputy secretary of defense, Paul Wolfowitz, at a briefing, talked about jet aircraft, the combat aircraft we have seen over Washington, D.C. and New York the last couple of days as the country has tried to protect itself. Military aircraft flying over the United States. Now Wolfowitz put it very mildly, he is an understated man. But he talked about something quite remarkable during the briefing.
[Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary:] There are costs already incurred with the combat air patrols that have been maintained over a significant number of American cities including Washington. The cost mount rapidly and will mount more rapidly as this campaign develops.
[Franken:] This has not been something the United States has seen, at least not in what have been called peace time. Of course, many people are saying, what we had here is a declaration of war on the United States. Now you might be able to see over my shoulder the large American flag that has been unfurled over the Pentagon. That was put there by people just trying to express the continuing spirit of the U.S. in the face of the collision with the aircraft right next to it. Now, one of the people whose office was on the fourth floor under the flag managed to survive. It is Dick Goodman who is a Navy lieutenant, who talked to me a while ago.
[Unidentified Male:] When we were out in the courtyard there were some people that were injured and having trouble breathing. Helped them out as best we could. The people from the health clinic at the Pentagon hadn't come out yet with equipment yet, so made do with what you could, tried to calm some people down, clear airways. And I went back with a group of other people that had some medical training and with the security folks, headed back into the building to see if there were other people who needed assistance.
[Franken:] And you can see the flag that is on the Pentagon. Under that flag on the fourth floor was Lieutenant Greg Goodman's office. Describing what happened after he was able to get away and go out on the courthouse. Now, he was lucky, he was one of the survivors. We are now being told by various people within the Pentagon, that they are now expecting the final casualty count will be not casualty count, but the number of people who are killed by what occurred here, will be approximately 190. And that would include the 64 who were on the American Airlines plane that crashed two days ago into the Pentagon. You can still see the evidence of it there. Body recovery is still going on and Aaron, we are told that the remains will be taken to Dover, Delaware. That has been the place where the other victims of other wars that the United States has fought, other military actions, have been brought as they've been returned to the U.S. Of course, from this particular case, these are remains of people who died in what many people say is a military action in the United States Aaron.
[Brown:] The number again, just for clarification, includes the people in the plane that hit the Pentagon and the people in the Pentagon itself who were lost, correct?
[Franken:] That's right. It is 194, including the 64 on the plane as well as those who they believe that they are going to find inside.
[Brown:] And we go back about 24 hours, and I think you might have been in the briefing, Bob, when Secretary Rumsfeld said that the reports that were coming out at the time, which had death toll much, much higher, I believe the number that was being tossed around was about 800, was considerably too high. One never looks at a number like this, 194 people, and says it is good news, but is certainly better news than what it might have been.
[Franken:] The people at the Pentagon, to be honest with you, were very irritated that that figure had been bandied about. We made a real point yesterday throughout the reporting to say that that was one estimate, an estimate from a fire chief here who admitted that he was only guessing. The Pentagon people repeatedly said, they didn't believe it was going to be that high. Then they told us that there were about 150 military people who were unaccounted for who were inside the building and now their estimate and I underline estimate is that there will be about 190.
[Brown:] Bob, thanks. Bob Franken at the Pentagon. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Another tired and determined person, Chad Myers. He's been following all the crazy weather patterns with that big smile. He's keeping in a happy mood.
[Chad Myers, Ams Meteorologist:] I have good news for the folks up there. It has stopped raining and it's stopped windy.
[Harris:] Great. OK.
[Myers:] It's stopped blowing, I guess. Things are going to get a whole lot better for the folks up there. We had a lot of rain over the weekend up in the northern basin up here in the Missouri River basin and the Mississippi River basin, but we're not seeing anymore and the new computer models that are just printing out literally show no more rainfall for the next 10 days. Here's the next seven. A few scattered rain showers down across the southeast. Good news for the southeast and into Florida. We're already looking, this is Tuesday so about Sunday now into Monday and now into Tuesday, more rain developing for the southeast. But if you notice up here, not a drop coming down and so what's there is there. Not much melting. Most of the snow is already gone. Yes, they had a little bit, but most of it's gone so now we look for the improving conditions all the way up and down from really Minnesota all the way down into St. Louis. Now, this water, although the bubble, if you will, is somewhere right in here in Davenport, will eventually travel all the way down the Mississippi River, so we'll probably be having stories like this for the next couple of weeks until all that water finally gets down into the Gulf of Mexico. Rainfall for the next seven days in this area here, the two to three inches area here, and also down into Florida, more rain for the folks down there. Could be enough rain by the end of next week to alleviate a lot of the drought down there. A little tropical system could be traveling over Florida. That's some great news for the folks there, and I'll have that forecast for you coming up just a little bit later. Back to you guys.
[Phillips:] Chad, thank you.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] We begin our program this hour in Washington, where U.S. officials are sorting out the facts in the accidental death of an American missionary in Peru. A vigil in Michigan yesterday mourned the death of the Muskegon native, Roni Bowers, and her infant daughter. Their plane was shot down Friday by a Peruvian Air Force plane, mistakenly thinking it was an aircraft carrying illegal drugs. Bowers husband, seven-year-old son and the pilot survived the attack. Bowers and her family were members of Baptists for World Evangelism based in Pennsylvania. The Peruvian Air Force plane was acting on a tip from a U.S. anti-drug surveillance plane. The drug interdiction flights are part of long-standing U.S.-Peru projects to combat smuggling. The Bowers plane was flying without a flight plan in airspace frequented by drug runners. Joining us now with more, CNN's Patty Davis at the Pentagon Patty.
[Patty Davis, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Miles, U.S. officials say those anti-drug surveillance flights operated by the U.S. are being suspended for now pending an investigation. The State Department does say that a U.S. surveillance plane did indeed help locate that plane over Peruvian airspace, gave the information to the Peruvian Air Force, that plane mistakenly taken for one carrying illegal drugs. And the Peruvian Air Force did try to signal that plane, but no response, and then the plane was shot down. Two of the five Americans onboard, as you said, killed. Now, that surveillance plane, though, according to the Pentagon, not a U.S. military aircraft. The Pentagon stressing that this morning. The U.S. has provided assistance to Peru over the years, help in it's interdiction efforts to help stem the flow of illegal drugs, that will continue. But, for now, those U.S. surveillance flights to help in the anti-drug efforts, suspended Miles.
[O'brien:] CNN's Patty Davis at the Pentagon. Thank you very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Kate Snow, Cnn Anchor:] After tireless days on the front lines, firefighters waging a major battle in the West are getting some much- needed relief. Army soldiers are switching uniforms, joining efforts against dozens of wildfires burning across eight states now. One of the major hot spots is in Oregon. That's where we find CNN's Gina London.
[Gina London, Cnn Correspondent:] Combating fatigue as much as fire, the battle goes on today through much of the west. Reinforcement's are on the way for some exhausted firefighters. Military battalions from North Carolina and Washington state of at least 800 soldiers on alert to be sent in within a week.
[Gov. John Kitzhaber, Oregon:] But this front that's coming through, although it's going to be cooler, is going to bring wind with it. Then we expect more dry lightning strikes this weekend. So at this point we're OK. But it could get out of control.
[London:] Of the eight states now waging wildfire wars, Oregon is hardest hit. 11 major fires there have scorched nearly 300,000 acres, hot winds blowing at least one to within just a few miles of a city limit. National Guard members from around the state have been trained, hundreds join the fight in earnest today.
[Dave Larson, Firefighter:] ... excellent thing to do to help out the people who are in strife and to help the brave souls who have been out there for 3 12 months already fighting the fires to maybe get a chance to get out there and give them some relief.
[London:] And across the rest of the fire-torn states, crews struggle to continue their grueling pace. Work goes around the clock, many on 14 to 16 hour shifts, in efforts to contain each raging blaze.
[Unidentified Male:] Fatigue on the fireline is one of our No. 1 concerns, and especially when we're getting into this phase of the fire, the crews are going to the fatigue is going to be a major factor.
[London:] But reinforcements are on the way here. We have word from the officials that there are going to more than 300 National Guard members coming in, in shifts over the course of this day to help assist in the fighting of this fire. Gina London, CNN,
[Snow:] To the north now and another state hit hard, at least seven wildfires are burning in Washington state. One of the hot spots, the Wenatchee National Forest. Reporter Chris Daniels now from our affiliate out there, KCPQ, joins us from the command post in Leavenworth. Chris, start by setting the scene for us. Where are you? What kinds of fires are burning around you?
[Chris Daniels, Kcpq Reporter:] Kate, well, bad news right now as the wind has indeed picked up over the last 12 hours or so. We are talking right now about The Icicle Complex Fire, which is directly over my shoulder. Now, 3,800 acres, and you can see the brown and orange glow in the hills there. This fire now growing at an immediate rate just outside Leavenworth, Washington. Now, this is a town known to several throughout the Northwest. It is a tourist town with a Bavarian theme, known for its Christmas lights. Plenty of tourists are there this weekend. We're told many of the hotels are sold out. This is just 3 miles away: the city chamber of commerce telling us they aren't worried about what's going on up in the hills high above Leavenworth. But there is some concern. Already, 18 homes have been evacuated in the Icicle Creek area. Another 100 homes have been told they could evacuate, a voluntary evacuation. It is a very tenuous situation at best Kate.
[Snow:] Chris, so could those tourists be in any danger? Are they talking at all about needing to evacuate the tourists, or is it far enough away?
[Daniels:] Well, Kate, it's 3 miles away right now, but it all depends on the wind. Right now, there's a zero-percent containment. Firefighters cannot get in to combat this fire. They can only build trenches at this point. So right now, they are saying Leavenworth is not in danger.
[Snow:] I understand that in '94, 1994, there was another fire in that area. How are people comparing this fire to that that big fire back then?
[Daniels:] I can actually show that to you, Kate, right over my shoulder. The 4th of July fire is what it's called back in 1994. The folks around here say that was the worst fire until this one. And you can see where the fire hopped over this hill, burned away a bunch of trees and where it stopped. That is directly to the east of our current fire, if you pan over, Steve, which is raging right now. The folks say that was the worst until the one you see right now Kate.
[Snow:] It looks really mountainous there, Chris. Is that is that an area where a lot of people live, over your shoulder, or is that more where people go hiking, camping, that sort of thing?
[Daniels:] Well, there actually were some hikers in over the last few days. They rescued another five from this situation, another eight yesterday. And there are some homes. Like I said, there's 18 homes that have been evacuated, and we're told that some people are still staying in those homes until the situation gets worse.
[Snow:] Chris Daniels, with our affiliate KCPQ, appreciate you joining us tonight. Thanks, Chris. Washington Governor Gary Locke is in Seattle right now, where he is awaiting a flight to Leavenworth, where we just were, to survey the fire damage. He joins us now by phone. Governor, thanks for being with us.
[Gov. Gary Locke , Washington:] Well, my pleasure.
[Snow:] Tell us, you're going down to Leavenworth now. What do you expect to see? Are things under control?
[Locke:] Well, obviously, we'd like to have these fires contained, and we're getting more lightning strikes, even more fires being created throughout eastern Washington. This is part of the problems of our drought that has plagued the entire Pacific Northwest. We're in a very, very severe drought, and conditions in the forest, on range and pasture lands are extremely critical, very, very dry. And here on the wet side of the mountains, while we may have some clouds and maybe a little bit of precipitation, on the eastern side of the mountains, it translates into lightning, which has triggered all of these fires. I've called up the National Guard. They're going to be responding with several hundred people to help put out these fires. We also are bringing in as many inmates as we can, who have already been trained in fighting forest fires, to help out. And we're getting help from other states and even other countries.
[Snow:] Governor, our reporter talked about some 18 homes near the Leavenworth area being evacuated. Is your biggest concern homes and people, or is it the environmental damage these fires could do?
[Locke:] Our first priority, obviously, is to people, making sure that they're safe, protecting personal property, homes and other structures, and of course, we also care about the environment. There's not much that we can to do but to try to contain the fires to keep them from spreading. This is a very beautiful part of our state of Washington: a lot of recreation, a lot of hiking, camping, and in the wintertime, a lot of snow skiing. But we also have people who live up there. We need to make sure that they're protected. That's our first order of business.
[Snow:] You declared a state of emergency two days ago in four counties, I understand. Do you have the resources now that you need to fight all of these seven fires?
[Locke:] Well, we actually have more than seven fires throughout the state of Washington, and these seven are the major ones. But every day, every night we're getting more lightning strikes and more fires starting up. They're having a huge problem in Oregon and some of the other Western states. We're bringing in everybody that we can, other agencies. We're bringing in people from federal government agencies, military people, people from other countries, firefighters from other countries. We're throwing anybody and everybody that we can at this at these fires.
[Snow:] One last question, Governor. Just a while ago, you endorsed and the president endorsed a new plan, talking about thinning back forests, getting rid of some of the old growth, some of the brush to try to avoid situations like this. Do you think that that could help in the future and is that the problem, that you didn't do more of that in the past?
[Locke:] Well, that's not really the problem here. First of all, these fires were caused by lightning and because we have tinder-dry conditions in the forest. Whether they have been thinned out or not and a lot of the underbrush removed, we still would have had this horrific situation. We are in the midst of a major drought, and we do have lightning storms, and they occur any place, at any time. And the these are very, very hilly, mountainous areas. But let me just say that I very much applaud the commitment by the administration of working with the governors to develop a long- term strategy and plan to thin out our forest, remove vegetation that could exacerbate fires. This was actually a commitment made by the Clinton administration a year ago and the Congress has begun to provide money. We need to make sure that the policies are carried out and developed with the governors of the Western states.
[Snow:] Governor Gary Locke of Washington state, we wish you the very best. Good luck to you.
[Locke:] Thank you.
[Snow:] Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] We begin with the latest on the New York plane crash investigation. Federal crash investigators say so far there is no evidence of criminal activity in the American Airlines crash that killed at least 265 people yesterday. The investigation is focusing on an engine which apparently broke away from the Airbus A- 300 shortly before the crash. Among the possibilities, some sort of catastrophic, uncontained failure of the engine. The plane, as you probably already know, went down in a neighborhood that lost 60 people in the World Trade Center attacks. Still another blow to New York. Can New Yorkers, still reeling from September 11th, cope with this latest tragedy? Mayor Rudy Giuliani says yes. He's with us this morning. Thank you very much for being with us, sir.
[Rudy Giuliani, Mayor Of New York City:] Good morning, Paula, how are you?
[Zahn:] Is there any I'm OK, as I'm sure that's about all you can say this morning as you face...
[Giuliani:] Right. We'll be we're okay.
[Zahn:] ... yet another crisis here. Any information you can share with us about the investigation that you're privy to this morning?
[Giuliani:] Well, I can tell you that we recovered 262 bodies yesterday the police department and the fire department did. We think there are five people missing on the ground, in addition to the people on the airplane, and that number could grow. Those are the numbers that are official. And other than that, I you know the fact is that the response to this was about as quick and about as sure and about as professional as it possibly could be. So that if anyone has any doubts about the morale of the police and fire personnel in New York City, the NYPD and the FDNY did a magnificent job yesterday of containing what could have been an even worse tragedy, if that's even possible to contemplate. Much worse than what happened, which was pretty bad.
[Zahn:] I know this big chill went through the air here when we learned that you had...
[Giuliani:] Sure.
[Zahn:] ... called for a Level 1 Alert. Walk us through where you were yesterday and what went through your mind when you had heard that this plane had gone down.
[Giuliani:] I was in my office. I was having a meeting in my office. I got a call that a plane had crashed into the Rockaways. I immediately called the police commissioner and said we'd better head out there. And while we were in the car, we called we called the White House, talked to the president's Chief of Staff Andy Card, talked to the president, talked to Governor Pataki and organized a organized a response and preceded on the assumption, although you know at that point we didn't know, but we proceeded on the assumption that it would it would be part of a group of attacks and therefore closed down different parts of the city and sent out police personnel to areas of the city where we anticipate something like that might happen. And then after a couple of hours after we were we were pretty certain that it was not part of a coordinated effort, we were able to reduce those efforts somewhat, you know, although the city is on high alert day in and day out now, so it just means stepping it up in a situation like that.
[Zahn:] And that was the reason why you had a partial lockdown of the UN yesterday as well, right?
[Giuliani:] Well, yes, that happened that some it's like I talked to one of the police officers that was assigned there. That happened that happened within minutes. We go back after one of these things and check, to make sure it actually all worked out the way it was supposed to, and it did. And you know, listen, it was the right thing to do, and we're and we're fortunate that it wasn't part of that. And it may turn out that this was not a terrorist act, that it was an accident. But at the time that it happens, that's the way in which I think nowadays you have to proceed.
[Zahn:] I know yesterday when you got on the scene in one of your first interviews, because we had a mike poked in your face at that moment, where you talked about this community being so devastated by the World Trade Center, a community that had lost a number of firefighters,...
[Giuliani:] Yes.
[Zahn:] ... 60 folks in all, many parents who had worked at the World Trade Center, describe to us what it was like to see so many families on the street because kids, of course, were home because of Veteran's Day...
[Giuliani:] And some of the their...
[Zahn:] ... and sort of how the community dealt with this.
[Giuliani:] Well, I know this community really well. I mean I spent a lot of time there, I know a lot of the people there, and to go to go back there, I've been there for I think about 10 funerals in the last in the last two months. In fact, many of them in the church that was just two blocks away from where this happened. So my first thought, when I reflected on that was it can't be that it's happened to this community again. I mean they were hit so hard by the World Trade Center, so many police officers, firefighters, people that worked at the World Trade Center, and then to have a plane to the Dominican Republic, where that's another one of our very, very strong and beautiful communities, the Dominican community. And when you know a lot of the people involved, it makes it makes it even worse. But, this is also a beautiful and very, very good community. I mean they this these this is a community of families, of religious faith, in both cases, and I think you're going to see a very, very strong response by them.
[Zahn:] I know you have focused so much on the human toll this crash has taken, and appropriately so, and the head of American Airlines coming in and trying to interface with some of the family members affected by this. But have you had a chance to even begin to understand what the economic impact of this crash will have on the city?
[Giuliani:] Well, you know we're working our way through that. We're coming back. I think we are back, and I think we will continue to. I don't think this is going to deter people. I think they're just going to move right ahead, continue with their lives and not let these things psychologically play with their minds, you know, in quite the way that I guess some of our enemies would like to see this happen. I mean if in fact it's correct that this is an accident, then what would have happened is because the terrorists attacked us back on the 11th, that other things that happen, if we allow that to affect us, we really give them a big victory, and I don't want to see that happen. I think you're going to see New York City move right ahead forward. And we're going to help the people of Rockaway, they deserve it, they're very strong and good people. We're going to help the Dominican community. It's one of our strong and most important communities in the city. We're all going to pull together and we're going to be even stronger. That's when I talked to President Bush on the telephone right I was right in the middle of Rockaway then, when the fire was going on, he said New York City is being tested again. And I said "that's right, Mr. President, and we'll pass the test." And I'm quite convinced that we will. These are extraordinarily strong people, people of religious faith, people who have a lot of determination and a real dedication to democracy.
[Zahn:] I can't think of a worse nightmare to live through as you wrap up your mayoralship. Just in closing this morning, have you given any thought to what you want your legacy to be as having...
[Giuliani:] No.
[Zahn:] ... served this city...
[Giuliani:] No.
[Zahn:] ... during a horrible, horrible time...
[Giuliani:] No, I'm not...
[Zahn:] ... in our history?
[Giuliani:] I give no thought to my legacy. I think legacies happen after you're dead, and I don't intend to die, so I don't give any thought to legacy. I think that's one of the silly things that goes on among politicians when they start thinking about legacies. You do the best you can, you do it with all the energy you have and then you, you know, you let you let history and the future take care of however they view you. It's not my job to figure out my legacy.
[Zahn:] Given the pace you move around at, I expect that we'll be talking about you for many years to come.
[Giuliani:] Well, thank you.
[Zahn:] Mayor Giuliani,...
[Giuliani:] All right.
[Zahn:] ... best of luck to you as you...
[Giuliani:] Thank you.
[Zahn:] ... continue to try to comfort the poor folks out there in Rockaway whose community has once again been subjected...
[Giuliani:] Yes, a great community.
[Zahn:] ... to such enormous pain.
[Giuliani:] God bless it.
[Zahn:] Thank you, Mayor.
[Giuliani:] Thank you.
[Zahn:] Good luck. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Joining us now with more on the waiting and the watching is Bush campaign spokeswoman Alicia Peterson. She is at Bush campaign headquarters in Austin. Alicia, good morning, good to see you.
[Alicia Peterson, Bush Campaign Spokeswoman:] Good morning. Happy election day.
[Kagan:] Well, same right back to you. What about this confidence factor? Does George W. Bush believe he is the next president of the United States?
[Peterson:] He does. The campaign is very confident. He has had a steady lead in the national polls over the past several weeks. And the campaign goes into this evening feeling very good. We have had a couple of strong days, a very strong day yesterday, visiting four states before ending up here in Texas with a welcome home rally last night, attended by supporters and well wishers.
[Kagan:] Alicia, those weren't just any four states, two of those states, as we heard Jeanne Meserve report in her coverage just a few minutes ago, Tennessee and Arkansas. Was that a little stick it to you to the Gore campaign that you went to the home states of President Clinton and Al Gore?
[Peterson:] Right. Well, the interesting thing about this campaign is the breadth and depth to which Governor Bush been able to tactically campaign, and that does include Al Gore's home state of Tennessee, and it does include the state of Arkansas. And so I think that's all part of momentum and the the illustration of the breadth and depth of where he's been able to campaign.
[Kagan:] Does the confidence factor of this campaign go so far as, we have heard reports, of staffers are already looking at real estate and schools and checking out neighborhoods in Washington, D.C.?
[Peterson:] Absolutely not. I think the campaign is very confident. We are looking forward to tonight and having a big celebration at the end of the evening. But, again, it is a very important day. There is a lot of work to do. We have to get a lot of people to the polls. By the end of the day today, over 60 million get-out-the-vote phone calls will have been made; 110 million pieces of get-out-the-vote mail will have been sent. There is a lot of work, and it is an important day, and I encourage everyone out there who hasn't voted, to get up this morning and go vote.
[Kagan:] And of course, George W. Bush and his wife will be going out to vote just a little bit later. Besides that, how does the man who believes he will be the next president of the United States spend today?
[Peterson:] Well, again, as I said, he got in the wee hours this morning, had a welcome home rally. This morning he is going to be making some radio calls out to the western part of the country and some other get-out-the-vote activities. He will vote this morning with his wife Laura here in Austin, Texas at the Travis County Courthouse. And then, this afternoon, he will joined, and later on today with some family and friends and supporters. He will have spend some family time for dinner this evening and then spend time with Secretary Cheney watching the election returns.
[Kagan:] Alicia Peterson, thank you so much for joining us from the Bush campaign in Austin, Texas.
[Peterson:] Thank you.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] In the United States, an earthquake rocked northern California Sunday. A 5-year-old boy is in critical condition right now, suffering from head injuries sustained when debris was shaken loose by the tremor. The drama of the 5.2 magnitude quake was caught on a convenience store surveillance camera. Most of the damage appears to be limited to fallen objects and broken glass, but engineers are inspecting buildings for structural damage. The quake hit an area north of San Francisco, sending 40 people to area hospitals with minor injuries. And CNN's Greg LeFevre is live now in Napa County, California, with the latest Greg.
[Greg Lefevre, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Brian. The damage was moderate, but it was widespread here in California's wine country. We know that 76 people have been driven out of their homes and into shelters, some of those people were residents of a 60-unit apartment complex that just a few hours ago was deemed unsafe by city inspectors, apparently the building's brick facade seemed to be in danger of falling in, or falling out, posing peril to the folks inside. Much of the damage to homes and residents here in the Napa area was to the interiors, items falling off of shelves, paintings coming off of walls, and chimneys pulling away from homes. Chimneys many of them in this area are built of brick and they seem to separate from the homes when the earthquake comes. For many of the residents who were startled awake by this earthquake, it seemed odd that their entire world seemed tossed about.
[Unidentified Male:] When the thing hit, it just it sounded really amazing. It just was an undescribable sound. I mean, and it woke me up out of bed. The bookshelf in my bedroom fell over and landed on my bed. I guess I must have just got up before it hit. And when I managed to get out into the living room, bookshelf in there, the shelves fell and my kitchen stuff on top of my cupboards you couldn't walk in my kitchen floor without stepping on glass.
[Lefevre:] The most significant damage here in the city of Napa was to buildings that were occupied by commercial establishments, stores and what not, stores and shops. The city now estimates that about 150-200 buildings in the city have been damaged, that toll may go much higher. These buildings are being assessed as whether they are safe or not. A few have been so-called "red tagged," that is deemed unsafe for occupancy. There needs to be a little bit of perspective here, though. While there is considerable damage to some buildings within sight of us here on the northern edge of the city, nearly every building that anticipated opening on this holiday weekend has opened. The exceptions, of course, are notable. Greg LeFevre, CNN, reporting live in Napa, California. Brian, back to you.
[Nelson:] All right, thank you, Greg.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Right now, we are going to play on the run for the presidency and voter attitudes. They combine this hour to give us an idea of how people feel about the November election and where the candidates stand. Frank Newport is editor-in-chief of the Gallup Poll, and he joins us with the latest results this morning in his quiz. Good morning, Frank.
[Frank Newport, Editor-in-chief, Gallup Poll:] Good morning, Carol. We won't quiz you, but we will give you some information on where the public stands going into the Republican Convention, based on our most recent poll just finished one or two nights ago. First of all, in the basic horse race, which we of course monitor to see where the candidates stand, Bush is up. He's been up, he has been down. Generally, Bush has been ahead in every poll we have conducted for the last two years. In our most recent poll, he is back up now to 50-39 percent among likely voters, back where he was about a month ago. Good news for the GOP, you would always rather go in to your convention ahead than tied or actually behind. Ralph Nader, by the way, as you can see, is down at 4 percent. Buchanan now just gets 1 percent among our likely voters. There is a gender gap. This is kind of the fabled gender gap, still operative. You can see, among men, Bush, the GOP does very well; among women, they are tied. You can see, I think, in the convention, the Republicans trying to really appeal to women because they would like to neutralize the usual Democratic advantage in women, in order to try to win in November, as they are currently doing right now. Now, things, of course, can change. The Democrats are hoping that as people focus more on this election, they will change their minds and come around more so to Gore than we've been seeing in our polling. This is how much thought have you been giving to the election? Going all the way back to last September. It peeked at 50 percent during primaries. And in our recent poll, it is down to about 42 percent. So it is down. We do expect that to go up during the convention. But interestingly, even in October, this number usually will only be up at about 60 percent overall. So it doesn't have a lot of room to go, 40 percent not playing very close attention. Now, the GOP will focus on Bush's record as governor of Texas. But the Democrats have been focusing on that, as well, in a more negative way, and that may be having some impact. Way back in September, 68 percent approved of Bush's performance as governor of Texas. Not a lot of people knew a lot about it probably. Now, in our most recent poll, that is actually down to 54 percent; disapproval is up. So what it tells us is, that Bush is actually less stellar now, in terms of the public's perception of how he is doing there, and that is probably something we will see the Democrats continue to hit on. That is where the public stands, as we go into the convention. Carol, back to you.
[Lin:] We'll see what happens. Thanks so much, Frank.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] And welcome back at just about 20 minutes before the hour. Facing a no-win situation, since September 11th some people have been attacked simply because of how they look. Since September 11th, there have been 960 complaints in which people have said they were targeted because of their ethnicity. New York City taxi driver Parwinder Singh was attacked in his cab. Haver Rigsby, a freelance journalist, a native of Pakistan was also the victim of a brutal attack. Gentlemen, thanks so much for being with us this morning. Parwinder, what happened to you?
[Parwinder Singh:] Actually, like about a couple of weeks and a couple of days after the attack, I started working at nighttime driving a taxi, so I picked two guys from Port Authority, so they want to go to Brooklyn.
[Zahn:] Before you go any further, we're going to put on the screen a picture of what you looked like on your taxicab medallion...
[Singh:] Sure.
[Zahn:] And I've got it in my hand, which is what all taxi drivers have to carry. So you were wearing your turban this night.
[Singh:] Right.
[Zahn:] OK, go on and tell the story.
[Singh:] And those guys they want to go to Brooklyn, the part of like east New York. They give me destination. So when I reached there, there were a couple of guys standing in front of their house like they are supposed to drop those guys. So those guys they're like holding bottles and drinking beer, right. So they're drunk. So after I reached there, they're like they sound like look, Osama's relative is here. So we have to finish him right now. So they start like a like throwing bottles on me. They smashed my windows. Like almost 3, 4 windows of my cab. So at that time I was scared. They're like after a couple of minutes, I called my mom, so she said Parwinder, I want you to come home right now. So that time there's no way to call police and I don't think like if I stayed there another minute they might want to kill me
[Zahn:] So you were very lucky...
[Singh:] Yes.
[Zahn:] Now in the meantime, in order to continue driving a cab in New York City and to feel safe, you thought it was necessary to cut all your hair off. And to trim your beard.
[Singh:] Yes. So it was really hard...
[Zahn:] So there's nothing underneath that hat that you're hiding this morning. You really cut a tremendous amount of hair off.
[Singh:] Yes like one-third of my hair, like
[Zahn:] You endured a similar situation where you felt incredibly threatened by your Pakistani heritage. How violated do you feel?
[Haver Rigsby, Freelance Journalist:] I feel I've been a victim of ignorance.
[Zahn:] And what can you do about it?
[Rigsby:] What can you do about it?
[Zahn:] What do you want us to do about it?
[Rigsby:] I want not I we
[Zahn:] So what do you think is happening here in America that people that...
[Rigsby:] I'm as much angry about what happened in my city. New York City is my city. It's as much my city as anybody else's city. I love my city. I cried at Union Square looking at those
[Zahn:] And you think it's through sheer ignorance on the... ... public part that you've been victimized as well.
[Rigsby:] We have a greater role to play. And it is not being played.
[Zahn:] So you think the media is doing a bad job... In helping the American public better understand that this was a crime directed, not just at America...
[Rigsby:] Look at him... I don't have
[Zahn:] Not to me you don't, but to an ignorant person like you just said who makes no differentiation between anyone basically. So, let me ask you this, what how has this affected your writing and how has this affected... Your...
[Rigsby:] Well I have not been able to write a single word since last week. This is the first day that I really felt a little bit better that I'm herein the studio talking to you. They took my tooth away. Your teeth are so beautiful and good-looking.
[Zahn:] They cracked your tooth.
[Rigsby:] Yes.
[Zahn:] Simply because...
[Rigsby:] Because I am...
[Zahn:] ... you are Muslim.
[Rigsby:] Yes. No I am not a Muslim. I'm not a Hindu. I'm not a Christian. I'm a journalist.
[Zahn:] So let me ask you this, I mean the statistics aren't very optimistic, if you got close to 1,000 people registering complaints like the two of you that they were attacked simply because someone is putting them in the same framework as Osama bin Laden...
[Rigsby:] They say according to NYPD Hate Crimes Unit, there have been 200 cases in the city cases of hate crime since September 11th and last year we had 400 cases in one full year and that's
[Zahn:] Well if nothing else... Simply the two of you coming here and describing to us this morning what happened to you might raise the level of awareness about what folks like you confront. We wish you tremendous luck, and you're still working right?
[Singh:] Yes. Yes. These days I feel safer.
[Zahn:] Because you've gotten rid of your turban and... I like that hat by the way.
[Singh:] Thank you.
[Zahn:] Parwenda, thank you very much and Haver, thank you for your thoughts.
[Rigsby:] Thank you for having me.
[Zahn:] Best of luck to the two of you, appreciate your coming in.

[Larry King:] Tonight, he scored a slew of exclusives, including the only on-camera conversation with condemned Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh after his conviction. And even though Ed Bradley of CBS News, "60 Minutes" and "60 Minutes II" likes asking questions more than answering them, we have nabbed him for a rare interview and we'll take your calls. But first, how would you cope if your teenaged daughter was kidnapped by a federal fugitive? Anne Sluti's parents endured that for nearly a week. They'll join us from Kearney, Nebraska with that very gripping story. Elaine and Don Sluti next, on LARRY KING LIVE. Welcome to another edition of LARRY KING LIVE. Ed Bradley will join us in a little while. We begin with Don and Elaine Sluti. They are in Kearney, Nebraska, the parents of 17-year-old Anne, who survived 6 days as hostage of a federal fugitive. Don, how was your daughter abducted?
[Don Sluti, Daughter Abducted:] Well, she was abducted from a local shopping mall at 6:00 in afternoon, went up there to do a little shopping, and, apparently a man assaulted her so we are told, and drug her in his truck, and that was it.
[King:] Elaine, when did you know that your daughter was missing?
[Elaine Sluti, Daughter Abducted:] I was up studying and the doorbell rang, Don answered it, he was talking to someone, and shortly thereafter he called me down. I came down, I saw two unformed officers on our doorstep, and, this was fear from then on.
[D. Sluti:] About 7:00.
[E. Sluti:] About 10 after 7:00.
[King:] Don, did you hear from the abductor and your daughter during these six terrible days?
[D. Sluti:] We only heard from our daughter through the recorded messages until very near the release time, but, we hadn't had personal contact in any of that time, and, as far as I know, we had no contact with the abductor.
[King:] Do we know why I know he is going to be brought to trial, and so we can't prejudge that case, but do we know why, Elaine, she was taken?
[E. Sluti:] That is something that we do not know.
[King:] There were no ransom asked for, no give me this and I will give you her back?
[E. Sluti:] No. We had none of that whatsoever.
[King:] When how was she returned, Don?
[D. Sluti:] Well, we actually flew up a local business lent us their Lear jet and flew us up to Montana and we met her there in Montana, and we met her at the airport. They put us up in a motel. So we flew back with her, so by return, we got as the family to return with her, a local business Lear jet.
[King:] How, Elaine, is she doing?
[E. Sluti:] She seems to be doing surprisingly well, she seems like our Anne, the Anne that was taken from us a week ago, she seems very good. She is we have had a lot of her friends and neighbors and well-wishers in the house, there is a lot of laughter, and she is just enjoying it and it just seems very good.
[King:] Does she know why she was abducted?
[D. Sluti:] No. No. She I think she really knows this was pure random act, wrong place, wrong time. Could have been anyone.
[King:] Was she bothered sexually at all during those six days?
[D. Sluti:] I really am not that is something that any particulars of the case really, we don't feel is appropriate to discuss right now.
[King:] Elaine, was there times you felt you might have lost her?
[E. Sluti:] Yes. That feeling was also with us. Initially when she was taken, I have really felt that we may have lost her, the fear was always there. It is very electric, very with us all the time. Almost despair kind of wanted to creep in but, we just had to keep that away. But we knew it was a very dangerous situation, we are grateful to have her back.
[King:] Don, when this goes to trial, she will of course have to testify. She is the prime witness. Are you concerned for her emotionally at that time?
[D. Sluti:] Truthfully Larry, no, I know my daughter. I guess I know even better now that I know how surprisingly strong she is and she will do what she has to do. And I think she is emotionally strong enough to take what it takes to go through this, to relive it. I'm quite convinced that she will do it and do a fine job of it.
[King:] Were you happy with the way the media, the police, the authorities, and everyone handled this, Elaine?
[E. Sluti:] Yes, extremely happy with every aspect from every law enforcement agency that we dealt with. We were treated very, very well, our family was treated with respect, they worked very hard all the law enforcement volunteers, everyone. They just were very focused, and, very happy with every detail.
[King:] Don, what does this was reported that you saw a missing person's poster of your daughter?
[D. Sluti:] Well, I said it you the most one of the most tearing things at you. I went to the grocery store to buy some food during during this, and there was on the door the grocery store a missing persons poster for my own daughter, and, you can't imagine the feeling, Larry. You just can't imagine how bad that is.
[King:] Elaine, how were you told she was OK? How were you told she was free?
[E. Sluti:] There was several hours of negotiation going on, just prior to her freedom. We were kept abreast of every detail as it went on, and it was through the authorities here that were right here in our home that we got word, they told us that Anne was free, her captive was her captor was in in custody, and that is how we knew.
[King:] She is 17. That's approaching adulthood. Don, is she afraid to go out alone? Any repercussions? Any things like that occurring?
[D. Sluti:] I don't think so. I think she will be a little weary, naturally, but, I would expect that what we have seen so far, that she will be going out alone. This is not a dangerous area, Kearney, Nebraska this is a quiet rural city, small city, and, there is no need to worry and I think she knows that.
[King:] You know, Slutis, when people hear a story like this, they fear the worst based on past history, you have to think the worst, we can only feel so happy for you.
[D. Sluti:] Well, thank you, because we...
[E. Sluti:] Thank you very much.
[D. Sluti:] ...we do know that most of the times, this does not turn out to be happy ending and we just feel so blessed, just so blessed that we have this wonderful person back in our home.
[King:] Give all of our best to Anne, too.
[E. Sluti:] We will certainly do that. Thank you very much.
[King:] Don and Elaine Sluti from Kearney, Nebraska with their safely home daughter Anne back home. When we come back, Ed Bradley. He did the only interview with Timothy McVeigh, after Timothy McVeigh was convicted. He's also got a special segment on "60 minutes II", tomorrow night about Columbine. Ed Bradley is next. Don't go away. We now go to Ed Bradley in New York, the co-editor of "60 Minutes." This year he celebrates his 20th anniversary on that program, he is a CBS News correspondent, of course. I said segment, tomorrow night on "60 minutes II" on CBS, it's the whole show dealing with his special on Columbine. Before we talk about that, how Ed, did you get the interview with McVeigh?
[Ed Bradley, Cbs News:] Well, we worked on it for an awfully long time. Michael Ruduski was a lead producer talking with McVeigh lawyers at the time. And it was just a matter of convincing, one, the lawyer, and then convincing McVeigh, that it was in his interests to sit down and talk with us on the air.
[King:] Was it, for want of a better word, eerie?
[Bradley:] No, I wouldn't call it eerie. I mean, we have all done a number of interviews, in prison, so, you are used to going as used to it as you can be. I, for one, have never totally at ease in prison but...
[King:] Nor
[I. Bradley:] ...it wasn't unlike any other prison interview. I wouldn't use the term "eerie" but it was odd at times, because you sat there in front of McVeigh, you know, just two feet in front of me, and, you had the impression sometimes that you were talking to someone who was like maybe somebody who lived up the street from you or someone you had met before. He just seemed very much like a nice guy. And then there was that sudden realization of what he had done in Oklahoma City. And you had that duality there that you are dealing with. On the one hand someone could seem so rational and reasonable, at some points in conversation. And then, on the other hand, someone who did something that caused so much damage, so much death, so much hurt for people that still exists today.
[King:] How do you explain him to you?
[Bradley:] I can't. I can't explain Timothy McVeigh to me. I mean, I I can't imagine how I can't imagine the circumstances in which I would take someone's life without my life being threatened. Or defending myself or my family.
[King:] Does he rationalize at all?
[Bradley:] Well, his rationalization, is because of the policies of this government. And it keys on what happened at Waco, and I guess Ruby Ridge, and I mean that is what he thinks is wrong with this government. And that this government is working against people he would regard as patriots.
[King:] Are you surprised that he has waived all appeals, and now wants to die?
[Bradley:] I'm not. I think that I think that he feels that this is the best way for him to go. I read something of what he planned to say at least, what he has said he plans to say before he dies in his last words, that he is the captain of his ship. He is the captain of his fate. And in that sense, in that he has said, I'm going to waive all my appeals, kill me in that sense he feels that he is deciding his fate.
[King:] A couple other things. Do you expect did you expect criticism for doing the interview? And how do you respond to any that might say, why give this person a voice?
[Bradley:] There was criticism. I mean, when we do a story and the mail is half of the mail says, you know, how could you do this story? The other half says, thank you for doing that story, we have the feeling that we have done a good story at "60 Minutes." That is pretty much, the way the mail was for the Timothy McVeigh story. I think there were people who wrote in and said, how can you give this guy a platform, to spew that venom? And to just sit there, the way you would interview someone else. And then, there was other mail including mail from people who lost loved ones, family, friends, in the Oklahoma City bombing, who said, thank you for helping to give us some closure in seeing who this guy is, how he thinks and how he talks, because, they didn't really the at the trial.
[King:] Do you agree with the closed-circuit telecast into Oklahoma City?
[Bradley:] You know, that is a difficult question. I don't know where I stand on that. I mean, I I certainly empathize with people who lost loved ones there, and want to see this man die. The other side of that is that, I don't know that that is something that in their position I would personally want to see. But I also know that there are people who didn't who weren't directly affected in Oklahoma City, in that they didn't lose relatives, they didn't lose loved ones, but they were also hurt by this, because of what it said to them about our country, about our government, and about our policies, who also want to see him put to death and want to see it on television. So you have these camps who want it, and are directly involved and some who are only indirectly involved and then you have people who are absolutely posed to it. I don't know where I stand on it.
[King:] I want to get a break and then talk about Columbine, but do you think the execution should be telecast?
[Bradley:] I don't know. It is a difficult question, I haven't made up my mind on it.
[King:] Our guest is Ed Bradley. He's got a special tomorrow night on Columbine. One would think we have heard all there is to hear about that tragedy. Let's find out what Mr. Bradley has when we talk about that, when we come back. Don't go away. [Begin Video Clip, "60 Minutes"]
[Bradley:] ...for some people to come to grips with you, as the same person who was commended by the Army, who received a bronze star, who received a combat medal, as being the same person who was convicted in the Oklahoma City bombing. It can't put the two together. You understand that?
[Timothy Mcveigh:] I do understand. They perceive and, many people have thrown this at me. They say well, Tim, if we think you are guilty, imagine the paradox in the Gulf War, you were given medals for killing people.
[Bradley:] According to Nate, Harris and Klebold even made video tapes of them shooting their guns, and brought those tapes to school.
[Unidentified Male:] They shot video when they were editing it in our Video Productions class.
[Bradley:] What did you think they were going to do with these guns?
[Unidentified Male:] They had told me it was for target practice.
[Bradley:] You wouldn't use a sawed-off shotgun for target practice.
[Unidentified Male:] You don't, and that was odd, but they Eric was an extreme person.
[Bradley:] All of these things that people are pointing to now as red flags, the video in classroom, the pipe bombs, the guns.
[Unidentified Male:] I figured, if if teachers are seeing this, and numerous students are seeing all these signs, somebody else should be worried about this. If nobody else is seeing anything wrong with this, you know, why should I?
[King:] "60 Minutes II" will air a complete hour on this tomorrow night about the tragedy of Columbine wow! What led you to even look into this? I thought we heard the whole story, Ed.
[Bradley:] Well, if you remember going back, I guess, almost two years, Larry, I was on your program the day that Columbine happened. I was on to talk...
[King:] Correct.
[Bradley:] ... to talk about another story, and Columbine has just swept all of us away. I mean, we had never seen anything like that in this country. And we thought that it was pretty much over, but someone gave us a call and said: "Talk to one of these parents out there." And the producer of this unit that I have at "60 Minutes II," David Gelber, talked to one of the parents, and came back and said: "I think that there is more to Columbine than we are aware of." And we decided to take a look at it. And we spent, I guess, a good part of the last six months in and around that area, Columbine, the Denver area, Littleton, Colorado, trying to sort out what happened, who knew what when, who did what when. And there is information that just hadn't been public knowledge before.
[King:] What of what you learned surprised you the most?
[Bradley:] You know, there were a couple of things. One is that almost, I guess, more than a year before the Columbine massacre, there was a threat on a Web site, Web site that belonged to Eric Harris, in which he talked about blowing up the city, and he threatened specifically to kill a kid by the name of Brooks Brown. They had had problems with Eric Harris before. His parents were so concerned that they went to the police, and took the pages they printed out the pages from the Web site, and took them to the police. And the police said that they would look into it. The police actually worked up an affidavit, an affidavit for a search warrant that was never carried out. But one of the police officers actually found a pipe bomb in an area that was sort of halfway between the Harris home and Dylan Klebold's home. So he put the two together. The police went to the school told the deans at the school that you have a kid here who may be messing around with pipe bombs. Now what did the school do with that information?
[King:] What?
[Bradley:] That is one of the things that is difficult to ascertain. They say they were keeping a closer eye on him. Yet they admit to us that keeping a closer eye did not involve calling his parents in, it did not involve talking to his friends, it did not involve talking to the teachers he was with in class throughout the day. So I'm sort of at a loss if you are keeping a closer eye on this kid, who is it that you are keeping a closer how are you doing that? The other thing the other thing...
[King:] i want to ask the other OK, go ahead.
[Bradley:] The other point is that the police made this connection with the affidavit. All they had to do forget a search warrant, they could have gone to the house and knocked on the door and talk to the parents. They didn't do that.
[King:] Boy! This special airs tomorrow night. We will be right back with more of Ed Bradley. He's with us for the rest of the hour. We will include some phone calls later. Laura Bush from the White House on Wednesday. Don't go away. [Begin Video Clip, "60 Minutes Ii"]
[Bradley:] In December of 98, you went to an assistant principal at the school and told her that you had been threatened by Eric Harris.
[Devon Adams, Columbine Student:] Yes.
[Bradley:] What did say to her?
[Adams:] I told her that Eric was intimidating, that he was threatening, that other students were feeling threatened by him, they did not feel safe in school around him. That it was not a safe environment when he was around.
[Bradley:] And what did you want her to do? What did you think she would do?
[Adams:] I wanted her to call Eric in, maybe call his parents and just talk to him.
[Bradley:] And?
[Adams:] And I don't think it ever happened.
[Bradley:] But that assistant principal denies Devon Adams ever spoke to her about Eric Harris.
[Adams:] I made an appointment, sat down, and I talked to her. I was serious, and she should have known that.
[King:] We are back with Ed Bradley. We'll also learn on this program is it true that they had a security plan in place because of some shootings previously in Paducah and that it was never implemented?
[Bradley:] It was never implemented. It was a security plan that was drawn up by two of the men who were responsible for security not just for Columbine but all of the schools in district. After the shootings in Paducah, Kentucky and I think Jonesboro, Arkansas, they sent out and asked themselves, where are these shootings likely to take place? And they looked at them and said, they happen in largely suburban areas, mostly white areas, mostly affluent, upper-middle to upper-middle-class areas, and they said, hey, we are talking about our own school district here. So they drew up a plan that had one provision in it, among others, that if there was any threat of violence, not just a threat to kill someone, but if there was any threat of violence by a student, there were certain things that should be implemented. That would include bringing in the parents, bringing in the police and bringing in the counselors in the school. So, as you saw this young woman Devon Adams who said that she felt threatened enough that she went to the assistant principal. If that plan had been implemented, and they would have brought in the parents, they would have brought in the police, they would have brought in the counselors, then would have been made aware that, hey, this is a kid who has threatened to kill another child, another student, this is a kid who has been detonating pipe bombs and making threats on his Web site to blow up the city. Maybe we need to do something here. Now, would that have prevented what happened at Columbine? That is a question that no one can answer. But that plan was drawn up for a reason, and it was never implemented. According to the two men, Howard Cornell and Joe Schallmoser who drew it up for the district, they say it I was never implemented by Columbine.
[King:] We will take a break and come back. We'll have more on what they are going to do tomorrow night on "60 Minutes," and we'll also take calls. We'll be back in a moment with Ed Bradley. By the way, you can log on to my Web site and test your knowledge on Ed Bradley, at cnn.comlarry king. The answer will be revealed later in the hour.
[Begin Video Clip, "60 Minutes Ii") Larry Glick, Director, National Tactical Officers Association:] There is not one officer that I know that responded there that would not have given his or her life for any child or teacher in there.
[Bradley:] But just in terms of common sense. Here is what you know: you have got kids dead and wounded outside, you have got at least two shooters inside with who knows how many unarmed kids. You have got armed cops outside. Aren't those kids aren't they better off if the armed cops go inside? Isn't that just common sense?
[Glick:] Well, it is it seems like it's common sense, but early on they believed that they really had six to eight armed individuals inside there. And if you were in the shoes of those officers, they felt that it was more reasonable to wait until additional personnel responded to move in.
[King:] Thirteen people were killed, 23 more injured at Columbine. That's the subject of a special tomorrow night on "60 Minutes II," the full hour devoted to it. It's hosted by Ed Bradley, who when in this, in the get-going did you know you had a story here? Early on?
[Bradley:] I don't no. To be honest, David Gelber knew early on, and I resisted it. I thought, you know, I looked at what we had, and I said: "I think we have got one good segment here, not three segments." You know, typically, "60 Minutes" and "60 Minutes II," we have three pieces. I saw one story. And then, eventually I saw two stories. So, I came to it late. I mean, David really had to convince me that we had an hour here. And the bottom line is, we have I mean, we have an hour that has an awful lot of material in it, that tells a very sad and very gripping story.
[King:] Did you attempt to get the parents of the shooters?
[Bradley:] Yeah, they wouldn't talk. We couldn't get to first base with the parents, Harris or Klebold.
[King:] Do you think that other schools watching tomorrow can learn?
[Bradley:] Oh, I think they can, and I think other schools have already learned. You just listened to the video clip that you had of Larry Glick, who trains national who trains SWAT teams around the country. He said there was not an officer who would not have wanted to go into that building. The fact is they didn't. Today, I think the training has changed. You have to ask questions, why didn't they go into the bidding? And he says that they weren't trained to that that then. They were trained to wait until the SWAT teams arrived. I got a letter today an e-mail from a retired warrant officer who had been in the United States Army in special operations, working with counterterrorism. And just to quote what he said here, he said: "Once the shooting started, the officers should have reported: "Shots fired. I'm entering from the east side of the structure through the gym." Just as in counterterrorist operations, they had only one mission at that point, and that was to take out the bad guys." Well, that never happened. You had police officers who exchanged gunfire with one of the two shooters, who shot at him as he went back into the building, but they didn't pursue him into the building. Why? I can't answer that question, but I can tell you that if that happened today, they would go in that building after the shooters.
[King:] You report that his teacher, Dave Sanders,
[Bradley:] He was alive, Larry, for well over three hours. If they had gone to where he was, I mean, there were students there who said, let us bring him out, and they said no, you get out. Then, when the SWAT team came in, they said they finally got there three hours later, let us carry him out. They said no, the paramedic is coming in. Well, it took another 42 minutes for the paramedic to get in. By that time, he was dead.
[King:] Let's take a call for Ed Bradley. This airs tomorrow night. Oklahoma City, hello.
[Caller:] Yes, my question is for Ed Bradley.
[King:] Go ahead.
[Caller:] The question is, do you think that the consolidation of so many smaller schools into a larger school campus might have some effect on this? I have a child that is teacher in a school system here, and it's possibly they're depersonalizing the school systems with the larger campuses.
[Bradley:] I don't think that size has so much to do with it. I think it's the alienation of kids who are within the school. Now, does size alienate the kids? I can't answer that. I started, Larry, many years ago, as a schoolteacher. I taught in the upper elementary grades. And I was shocked at what happened at Columbine and what we have seen in Paducah and Jonesboro and more recently in California. When I taught school and this is going back to the mid-to- late-60s the major problem was talking in the hallways, or occasionally a fistfight after school.
[King:] Yeah.
[Bradley:] I mean, our world has changed today, and we have too many kids, one, who are alienated and, two, who have access to guns.
[King:] Now, what to do, though? Everyone keeps pointing out that this kid, they knew he was a loner, this is true in all the schools, and that he was disturbed. What can the school do? You can't take a child out of the system because he looks like he's alone. I mean, what can you do?
[Bradley:] No, but you can if you see red flags, you can ask questions. If you learn in a school, for example, that a kid is making pipe bombs, you start to ask some questions. If you learn in a school that a kid has threatened another kid, you start to ask questions. You put all of these things together. You bring the child's parents in. You talk to counselors. You keep a closer eye. And I don't know how you keep a closer eye on someone as the people at Columbine say they were doing without talking to the parents, without talking to the teachers he sees every day. I mean, it's common sense if you are keeping a closer eye on a kid, you say to the teachers that child sees through the day: "Hey, we are keeping a closer eye on this boy or girl. Let us know if you see anything that you think is untoward." That's common sense.
[King:] Our guest is Ed Bradley of CBS "60 Minutes" and "60 Minutes II." The special airs on Columbine tomorrow night. Back with more and more of your phone calls after this. [Begin Video Clip, "60 Minutes Ii"]
[Bradley:] You said that when you heard those tapes, you began to doubt that the sheriff's department had done everything it could to save those children. What made you think that?
[Unidentified Female:] There was no one in that school that had a gun other than the two killers, and no one pursued them. No one tried to engage them. No one tried to keep them from the random murdering that they had just seen happen outside.
[Unidentified Male:] In essence, they chased them into the school. And then let them just kill well, knowing they were killing.
[Unidentified Female:] For almost 20 minutes, she waited. Twenty minutes. That's a long time for someone to have the opportunity to come in and make a difference.
[King:] We are back with one terrific journalist, Ed Bradley, and we go to Manassas, Virginia. Hello.
[Caller:] Yes, I have a two-part question. I have not heard talk about the principal. I would like to know Ed's opinion about his responsibility or culpability in all this. And the second part of my question is, if you walked into Columbine High School today, are there significant changes that have taken place and what is the atmosphere like there?
[King:] Two great questions Ed?
[Bradley:] First of all, we were not allowed to walk into Columbine High School. We couldn't shoot there, and we were not able to talk to the principal on camera. He was scheduled to do an interview with us and the day before the interview, he canceled. I can't I don't know what his responsibility
[King:] Why?
[Bradley:] If I knew the answer to that, Larry, I certainly could tell you.
[King:] I mean, that's a public school. They have the right not to let you in?
[Bradley:] Sure. I mean, listen, I asked one teacher, you know, just an easy question. I mean, how did you know Klebold and Harris? She had them in her class, and this teacher totally went to pieces. I mean, it was just a nervous wreck from a simple question like that. It was after that. It wasn't difficult, it wasn't penetrating, it wasn't a hard-ball question. It was just, how did you know Klebold and Harris? And it was after that, that the principal said, he didn't want to talk to us.
[King:] What's the community like?
[Bradley:] I think many people there have had enough of Columbine and said they didn't want to hear any more about Columbine. You probably know Dusty Saunders, who was a long time critic for the Rocky Mountain news.
[King:] Sure do.
[Bradley:] I talked to him over the weekend and he said look, I'm one of those people that had it with Columbine. I have just had enough. But he said, I heard things in this hour that I had not heard before. And the way the story was told, just presented it in a way I had not seen before. And I think that there are many people in the community who will hear these parents, after all, who lost children, at Columbine they are the ones most effected. And they are still trying to get questions from the people who know most about what happened at Columbine and why. One, the people in the administration, the school authorities themselves, and two, the sheriffs department. I mean, the sheriffs department not only would not talk to us, but the governor of the state of Colorado organized a commission to investigate what happened at Columbine. The sheriff wouldn't appear before that commission to testify.
[King:] Little Rock, Arkansas, hello.
[Caller:] Mr. Bradley, one of my favorite interviews of all time was your interview with Muhammad Ali. What was that like and where does it rank on your list of interviews.
[Bradley:] I would have to put it near the top. It was an interview in which Ali, including a couple of other people, including the producer John Hamlin, and Lonnie, his wife and Howard played a trick on me, and they told me this story of how he sometimes falls asleep and gets violent and starts punching in his sleep. And Lonnie said, when he starts to snore, I have get up and go into the other room, because he hurt me when he starts punching. So, we are all sitting there having lunch and, all of a sudden, Ali is sitting next to me and he sort of nods then I hear him start to snore, and I looked like that and he flinches a little bit. All of a sudden, he shoots a fist at me and I jumped. I jumped. And he just fell out with peels of laugher, because he's a practical jokester and he knew that he's played the joke on me.
[King:] He is. I first interviewed when he was an Olympic champion. He's been a practical joker all his life, and also a wonderful human being.
[Bradley:] He is. I think one of most touching things about him. Here's someone whose perception our perception of him certainly most people in America has certainly changed, because he was someone who was reviled by many people earlier in his career and now is loved by just about everyone.
[King:] How do you like Don Hewitt's book?
[Bradley:] I just started it, and I have seen stories you know, Don is one of the world's great storytellers and he has great stories to tell. You never get tired of hearing Don's stories.
[King:] You are the youngster there, aren't you? You're the kid?
[Bradley:] Listen, Lesley would kill me if I said she was older than me. Lesley is younger than me. I'm sort of in the middle. Leslie and Steve are younger. Steve is at the bottom then Lesley, than me, then Morely. and then, the old man is at the top there. Wallace. What is he? 85, 84?
[King:] He's up there.
[Bradley:] He says he is 83, but I think he's cranked it back a year.
[King:] His Social Security number is three. We'll take a break and we'll be back with more calls with Ed Bradley. The special airs tomorrow night. Don't go away.
[Bradley:] Maybe when got out there, we can sit you down in a chair and you can talk. Would that be OK?
[Muhammad Ali:] Probably.
[Bradley:] Probably?
[Ali:] According to how I feel.
[Bradley:] According to how you feel?
[Unidentified Female:] He has a way of communicating with people and I think he knows this. And that's one of the reasons why he really doesn't bother with the speech as much. He can communicate with the heart. With his face. And he knows that. He has the ability to love without ever opening his mouth.
[King:] Ed, you looked a little different there.
[Bradley:] I had more hair and it was a different color.
[King:] It sure was. Ed Bradley is our guest. Let's get a call from Syracuse, New York, hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry. This question is for Mr. Bradley. I know there's a lot of controversy about the book written by Timothy McVeigh and the fact that he shows no remorse for his actions. What are your feelings about this book? And after interviewing him, do you feel that maybe he is remorseful?
[Bradley:] First of all, I haven't read the book. I've only read excerpts and the stories about the book. From what I have read, I don't think see that he is remorseful. I think he believes that what he did was right in his mind. Someone who refers to children who were killed as collateral damage is certainly not remorseful. I don't think he's sorry at all for what he did. If he's sorry, he's probably sorry he got caught.
[King:] When you interviewed Kathleen Willey and she was discussing how the president of the United States had fondled her, was that kind of a weird feeling to be sitting there in that meeting?
[Bradley:] Sure.
[King:] A story like that, that you are part of?
[Bradley:] I had interviewed people about President Carter, about President Nixon and about President Ford, about President Reagan, and about President Bush. I interviewed people about President Clinton. But I never interviewed anyone where the subject matter was so on the edge. And you have only one person's story there. Actually only two people who knew the truth of what happened there.
[King:] That's right.
[Bradley:] One was Kathleen Willey and the other was the president who wouldn't talk to us.
[King:] Our guest is Ed Bradley. This special airs tomorrow night on "60 minutes II," dealing with Columbine, a whole new look at that tragedy. We will come back with our remaining moments with Ed Bradley after this.
[Bradley:] This is the east coast of Malaysia, the final destination of thousands of refugees fleeing Vietnam. Many don't make it this far. They're attacked by pirates, drowned or starve to death. Only a few fishermen help the boat people ashore. We joined in.
[King:] By the way, we are back with Ed Bradley. If you logged into the Web site cnn.comlarryking for the quiz on Ed Bradley, you can check now for the answer. Ed, is it true that you once told Don Hewitt as a gag were you going to change your name to Shahbib Shahabab?
[Bradley:] It was actually Shahib Shahab. That was close.
[King:] What did Mr. Hewitt say?
[Bradley:] He wasn't sure if I was telling the truth. But I had done it by sending him a phony memo, saying to the CBS payroll department, saying that I was going to change my name to Shahib Shahab and please let all payroll records, including my check reflect the change in my name. And this was, I think, maybe my first year at "60 Minutes." And Don thought he should call he said, let me call Kate Cardella, who was a TV critic in the "Daily News." I said, sure, give her a call. Figuring I could head her off before she had to go to print, and then he realized that I was telling the truth, and he called Bev in and he said, what do you think this sounds like? I'm Mike Wallace, I'm Morely Safer, I'm Harry Reasoner, I'm Shahib Shahab.
[King:] Great stuff. Do you ever think of going back to doing other kinds of news, leaving "60 Minutes" and going back to reporting or anchoring?
[Bradley:] You know, anchoring has never had a lot of appeal for me. I sort of like going out and being a reporter, which is what I get to do now. Go out and report these stories. And working with the talented team of producers and associate producers, but essentially, you get to go out and ask people questions about issues and stories of day and that's what I enjoy. You know, I think if I wasn't doing this, I would have to find something totally different to do. This isn't something that I would leave to go somewhere else. If I left this, I would retire.
[King:] And the travel doesn't bother you?
[Bradley:] The travel bothers me. That's the only downside to this work that we do. You have to get to someplace to do it. You spend too much time on the road. You know, it comes with the territory. It's really very difficult. All of these stories you see, Larry, about planes that are late, passengers that are irritated, flights that are canceled, they are all true.
[King:] The frequent traveler knows this better than anyone. Right? There's something wrong.
[Bradley:] Listen, I have all of these air miles, right? You get frequent flyer miles?
[King:] You sure do. Got a lot of them.
[Bradley:] OK. You want to get on a plane and go somewhere? I mean, if you spend your life on the road, when you get some time off, you want to stay at home. And that wonderful air line food, you know? I'm in the habit I always carry a bottle of hot sauce with me when I travel, because it will make whatever the air lines serve, taste better.
[King:] To camouflage everything. Hey, Ed, thanks very much. It's good seeing you, and best of luck. We look forward to that tomorrow night.
[Bradley:] Larry, thanks for having me.
[King:] Ed Bradley, coeditor of "60 Minutes" and you will see him tomorrow night for an hour-long special on the Columbine shootings. It airs on "60 Minutes II" Tuesday night. Terri Taylor from federal prison is with us tomorrow. Laura Bush from the White House on Wednesday. Barbara Walters on Thursday. And Friday Night, Jim and Sara Brady. We thank you very much for joining us on this edition of LARRY KING LIVE. Stay tuned now for "CNN TONIGHT." Tonight, like right now, good night.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Much needed rain is falling over part of Florida, but some areas are still incredibly dry. So dry that authorities in the Ft. Myers area have declared a state of emergency. That's where the fire burned earlier this week. Right now, firefighters are still battling a wildfire that's charred about 11,000 acres in the central part of the state. Without heavy rain, they say, it could burn for weeks. And it could be several more days before a major highway connecting Tampa, Orlando and Daytona Beach, I-4, reopens. Susan Candiotti joins us now from the fire lines Susan.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Good afternoon, Natalie. I may be fulfilling the dream that a lot of people might have. And that's the ability to walk down the middle of an interstate highway without any danger of being hit by traffic. That's because I'm standing on that stretch, that 10-mile stretch of Interstate 4 that runs across central Florida, that has been shut down just west of Orlando because of the brush fires running through this area. And there might not be any danger from cars here. But there is other danger. Danger from smoke lofting over the highway, as well as falling trees that have been weakened by the wildfires. There is also another danger. That, that's come from fence posts in this area, that have been burned down, allowing cows to roam out onto the highway. Now, trees that haven't fallen on their own are currently being pulled out. And that's some of the work that you see going on now, being ripped out by the Division of Forestry, because these are all adding potential fuel to the fire. And then they're carting away the lumber here. Now, the blaze so far, as you indicated, has consumed 11,000 acres thus far. It is 50 percent contained. And authorities say it will probably be several more days, perhaps the early part of next week, before they are able to reopen this particular section of I-4. They're calling this the mop-up-and-containment phase. But they are not through with their work yet. And this symbolizing the symbolizes the brush fires that are currently going on across the state of Florida, where water-use restrictions are in place. We can tell you that so far, more than 800 fires have burned since the beginning of the year. And that is up 230 percent over the same period last year. The answer is a rainfall. But so far, Natalie, none is forecast. Back to you.
[Allen:] What a shame. Thank you, Susan Candiotti in Florida.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] First, why? That is what police and those who know Andrea Yates want to know. The 36-year-old Houston mother is charged with capital murder in the deaths of her five children. And CNN's Ed Lavandera is in Houston. He joins us now with the very latest. Good morning, Ed.
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Colleen. The home of the Yates family is empty this morning. Now Houston prosecutors are starting to build their case against the 36-year-old mother who is accused of killing her five children almost 24 hours ago. That process started early this morning. Thirty-six-year-old Andrea Yates appeared briefly before a judge at 1:30 in the morning Central time. She is in jail this morning and being held without bail. This has been a disturbing case, to say the least, especially for the police officers who first arrived at the scene.
[John Cannon, Houston Police:] A responding patrol officer came to the door and the woman, who was still breathing rather heavily at that time, said that, "I just killed my children."
[Lavandera:] When the officer walked into the house, he found a 6- month-old girl and three boys between the ages of 2 and 5 dead in a bedroom. A second officer found a 7-year-old boy dead in the bathtub. Police say their 36-year-old mother, Andrea Yates, drowned all five children.
[Cannon:] You could tell that she was in some type of a panic after she said that she had killed her kids. And our responding officer who went in the house himself has children. And he was just basically in shock at that point.
[Lavandera:] Wednesday night, Houston Police filed formal charges against Yates. She could now face the death penalty if convicted.
[Robert Hurst, Houston Police Spokesman:] Multiple charges of capital murder had been filed on Andrea Pia Yates, 36 years of age, in connection with the deaths of her five children.
[Lavandera:] The news stunned neighborhood friends, who had just enjoyed a weekend party with three of the Yates' children. But one family friend quickly found out there were problems when she asked Andrea Yates' husband why the rest of the family didn't make it to the party.
[Unidentified Female:] He asked her asked him, "How come she didn't come?" And she had said that she stayed back with one of the kids and the baby because she was going through a depression from having babies. That's what he said.
[Lavandera:] There are reports that the first signs of postpartum depression emerged in 1999 when Andrea Yates attempted to commit suicide. We've also learned that Andrea Yates had been undergoing depression treatment for the last two years. As for her husband, Russell Yates, he is a NASA engineer and left was last seen leaving the family home you see behind me late yesterday afternoon. Mr. Yates is an engineer at NASA at the Johnson Space Center, which is just a short distance from this house. And that's where he learned of the murders of his children. One other note: Andrea Yates will appear in court Friday at an arraignment hearing. And at that time, we're expected to hear from her as to whether or not she will plead innocent or guilty. If convicted, of course, in Texas, capital murder charges carry with it the possibility of the death penalty. I'm Ed Lavandera, reporting live in Houston Colleen, back to you.
[Mcedwards:] Ed, is it clear whether the police have spoken to her husband yet or whether they've learned anything from him?
[Lavandera:] Well, actually when right before Andrea Yates called police, she reportedly called her husband at work and told him to get home immediately. By the time he arrived here, police were already at the scene and they did not let him into the house. But Mr. Yates had been talking to police all afternoon. Apparently that is when police first learned of the issue of postpartum depression with his wife.
[Mcedwards:] OK, CNN's Ed Lavandera, thanks very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] Certainly the U.S.-led coalition in the war against terrorism is keeping a close eye on the weather. Donna Kelley is with us again to talk more about what the military is going to do to prepare to fight, as winter hits.
[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] Martin, thanks very much. And joining us from Washington is a military analyst, retired Gen. Don Shepperd. He is in our Washington bureau today. General, good to see you again. Tough enough to fight in Afghanistan, we have talked about before, but now here comes winter, probably about five weeks away. How do you prepare for that?
[Don Shepperd, Cnn Military Analyst:] Well, let's run the telestrator here and the animation we have got. This is a tough place to fight. It's half way around the world. It takes a long time to get there, and winter complicates everything you do. The weather resuming in on Afghanistan, we're going to go on into the mountains here a little bit more. Let's talk about how this really affects military operations. What you see generally here is the plains area down around here in Kandahar. That's OK. But these mountain valleys, in which people and equipment move and lot of these caves are, really complicates the picture when winter comes. Late this month, comes the rains, then comes freezing rains, then come deep, deep snows and bad weather. I'm just going to draw over the top of this map, and let's just take the mountains here and a mountain valley. Let's put a helicopter in this valley, and let's put some weather in here. What do the mountains do here is: We have fighter aircraft above. They can drop things through the weather if they know where the coordinates are. But if they can't see it visually, they can't drop laser-guided bombs, and they can't hit targets of opportunity, unless those targets can be coordinates of those targets can be rapidly relayed to them. So I'm going to do a couple of other things here. I'm going to put a helicopter back down in here. The other thing that the helicopter does is that the helicopter uses night vision goggles in night as protection, because in all of these hillsides, shoulder-fired missiles and anti-aircraft artillery from the hills can shoot down at the helicopters that are going in. So again they use night. When you bring bad weather in and moisture, it affects our ability to operate in bad weather at night. So this just complicates the whole thing the ability to use air and also our intelligence assets. Now, let's move from this telestrator on to some before-and-after pictures. And let me contrast what good weather will do for you with what bad weather does to you.
[Kelley:] Yes, there is the airstrip, before and after.
[Shepperd:] Yes, exactly. Here is the right airstrip taken from space, or it could also be taken from a U2 type platform. And what you've got is a very clear picture of the aircraft that you are interested in hitting right here, and it's easy to get that picture. Now if you bring in bad weather and you want to see what damage you've done, let's go to the next the after. Here's the damage photo, and you have to wait for good weather from satellites to get this kind of damaged photo. It's true you have radar capabilities from airborne platforms. Now just leave it at that. But the problem is the airborne platforms with radar would not tell you exactly what damage you have done. So it really affects our ability to truly assess the effective strikes, and it affects your ability to hit targets that are not radar reflected. So it really complicates our life, Donna.
[Kelley:] Yes. And of course, there is just the comfort factor even with the troops. How do you help prepare the troops?
[Shepperd:] Well, the troops have winter gear, and they're trained in winter fighting. So cold weather doesn't affect the troops, but it does slow down movements. What you really want to avoid now go to the telestrator again here, and I will draw I will draw something on the telestrator. What you really want to avoid, if you will, is putting vehicles, wheeled vehicles, down on these valleys so that they can be ambushed by troops in the bad weather, where you can't get air support. So again, it slows things down. It makes our ability to get intelligence a real problem, and weather is a major factor, and it's coming in the end of this month. That's why you are hearing the talk already about this may extend over the winter months into next spring, would have yet. Weather is a major factor, even with our good weapons and our good intelligence Donna.
[Kelley:] Yes. Do you have to have visuals, and it can affect some of the equipment that really the intelligence gathering. All right, General Don Shepperd, thanks very much, and we will be seeing you again soon. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jeff Greenfield, Host, Greenfield At Large:] This was a moment that comes to America once in a generation, if we're lucky. It's a moment when a President has to tell his country that we're in danger, that some of us might not survive that danger, but that we know the path to take that will lead us out of that danger. Tonight President Bush had perhaps a harder task even than his predecessors. At least FDR and John F. Kennedy could tell us who the enemy was. And President Bush had to speak not only to a stunned nation that had suffered what is now clearly the worst one day loss of life ever on American soil, he had to speak to leaders around the world, some of whom may risk their lives if they do what he asked of them. So what did they and we hear? And what does it suggest for what's ahead? Joining me here in New York, Joshua Ramo. He is the World Editor at Time Magazine. In Washington, David Broder, Washington Post reporter and columnist. And also in Washington, Stephen Fidler. He is Diplomatic Editor of the Financial Times of London. David Broder, it seemed at times that the President was delivering two messages at once. First, be patient, my fellow countrymen. This won't be a TV war. But second, your desire to strike back will soon be met. Is that a line that he had to have walked?
[David Broder, Reporter, Washington Post:] I think that's correct, Jeff, but I think it also was a defining moment for the President himself. When he said "we have found our mission and our moment," he was speaking about the country. But he could very well have been speaking about himself, because this is the kind of thing to which the Bush family has rallied. They are very good in crises, and the crises that test their manhood. And this President, what ever wavering he may have felt up to this point, has now found the backbone and the steel in the backbone to lead the country and to attempt to lead the world.
[Greenfield:] At the risk of stating, perhaps, the obvious, is this moment, and this challenge, so great as to pretty much wipe off the table everything else that was on the table in our politics nine days ago? Is this the only issue now for the foreseeable future?
[Broder:] Well, it's the only issue as far as the President is concerned. He has said that this is his self defined mission in the Presidency at this point. There will be other issues. The Congress itself may even deal with things like education and healthcare and so on at some point. But, for now, this is George Bush's single test.
[Greenfield:] Let me turn to Stephen Fidler, because your job is to look at the international community. The President, by name, singled out not only al Qaeda, but Islamic jihad and the Islamic movement of Uzbekistan, which is a new player for many of us. Why so specific? Who was he talking to by singling out by name those groups?
[Stephen Fidler, Financial Times:] I think he was clearly addressing, to some extent, the Middle East and putting the point that many countries there are also under attack and under threat from terrorism. The reference to Uzbekistan, I think, this is a country to the North of Afghanistan, where the U.S. does want help. Possibly in basing troops, possibly in basing aircraft. The reference to that, I think, was very deliberate and seeking to gain the help of these nations in Central Asia on the U.S. side.
[Greenfield:] Now, more broadly, let me play what everybody is, I think, seeing as one of the most dramatic moments of the speech, get your reaction, and then Joshua Ramo's in terms of who he was talking to with this clear statement to the rest of the world. Let's see that now.
[Bush:] From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.
[Greenfield:] Stephen, and therefore what? Economic sanctions? Military threat? Wait and see?
[Fidler:] I think just about everything in that list. And financial moves, too. One interesting thing that he did point out, though was that this wasn't going to be an unlimited war against terrorism in all parts of the world. He did make the very specific point that he would deal with terrorists that have global reach, and not those involved in local disputes around the world. So I think he was quite clear in answering one question that people had had: How far is this going to go? How far can this war against terrorism reach?
[Greenfield:] Joshua Ramo, let's just look at one nation, because it just, I referred to this earlier as three-dimensional chess. That may be underestimating it. Describe to us what this means, that kind of statement to a country like Iran.
[Joshua Cooper Ramo, Time Magazine:] Well, Iran is a great example. Iran is a country that, by any definition, supports terrorism. As recently as six months ago they hosted a joint meeting between Hamas and Hezbollah, two leading anti Israeli guerrilla groups who were having a disagreement, and they invited them to Teheran in order to talk out their problems. They have provided money and financing to Hezbollah, going through Syria. The problem in Iran is, you have a very delicate political balance. You have, on the one hand, a moderate party led by President Khatimi, which the U.S. has tried to quietly encourage. But there's been great fear in the U.S. that if you embrace Khatimi too openly you'll discredit him internally, and then you have a hard line policy that's really run by the people who control the government, the mullahs, led by Khamenei. So the challenge for the administration is, how do you go in and change a government like that? The minute Khatimi starts to show any sign at all of not backing the anti Israel cause, he's done. And instead of having a government with a chance of moderation, you're stuck with a government that's only going to be extremists. But you can't get rid of Khamenei, because he's got all the support of the clerics. So it's a very, very difficult problem. And you can go through country after country after country on the list that supports terrorism, and the U.S. is going to have to come up with a diplomatic and military or an economic solution for every single one of those. A very big order.
[Greenfield:] Now, David Broder, as you listen to this, and you think of how the Administration has to explain that kind of complexity to a Congress and a country that wants the President to do something, how much more difficult does that make the President's job?
[Broder:] This is a difficult job, and the President himself said in the speech, a line that kind of jumped out at me, that there are thousands of terrorists operating in more than sixty countries. Obviously we cannot go to war with sixty countries simultaneously. So this is going to be a very, very delicate and complex operation. The advantage that he has is that, for now at least, the country is united behind him, and the Congress is united behind him. And I think we were hearing a short-term ultimatum to the Taliban. The three requirements that he laid down for them, or the four that he laid down for them are almost impossible to imagine them meeting. So I think this speech was, perhaps, the final warning to the Taliban that military force will quickly be directed against them. And the quick start of that campaign, I think, will tend to solidify support for the more difficult steps that probably come afterwards.
[Greenfield:] Mr. Fidler, speaking of difficulties, I wonder if part of that statement was meant to be heard in places like Cairo and Riyadh, where our ostensible allies, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, have at least turned a blind eye to those in their countries who may be funneling money to terrorist groups. Do you believe that was part of that message?
[Fidler:] I think it was. I think there's been a very clear message delivered in private to these countries, that now is the time, really, to stop the sympathy and the covert support that one has seen among some of the elite in these countries for these groups. So I think that was a pretty clear message, yeah.
[Greenfield:] Before we break, I want to play one more tape, and ask Joshua Ramo whether he heard what I heard in this. It was when the President was describing enemies defeated. If we can see that now, please.
[Bush:] They follow in the path of fascism, Nazism, and totalitarianism. And they will follow that path all the way to where it ends, in history's unmarked grave of discarded lies.
[Greenfield:] Joshua: Nazism, fascism and totalitarianism. Not Communism, which we spent half a century defeating. Do I hear a China card being thrown on the table?
[Ramo:] I think that's a piece of it. And also maybe you're hearing something which is very important, which is a recognition in the Bush Administration that other forms of government in other parts of the world may be OK, as long as they're not seeding terrorism. And that's a very substantial change for them. It doesn't mean that democracy is a solution for everything all of a sudden.
[Greenfield:] All right. This has more turns than Rubik's Cube, and it's a heckuva lot more serious. We're going to continue this discussion in a moment. We're back. We're examining the messages the President sent in his speech tonight, and to whom he sent them. Joining me are Joshua Ramo, World Editor of Time Magazine. And in Washington, David Broder of the Washington Post. Also in Washington, Stephen Fidler of the Financial Times. David, I do want to play one other tape from the President's speech, how to go on, because it strikes me as perhaps a challenge that none of us can predict. If we can see how he described what's ahead, please.
[Bush:] ...terror we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success.
[Greenfield:] And of course, it also may include further attacks on American soil. This is a country that, when wars drag on, when conflicts drag on and are not resolved, we sometimes drift from unity. I'm thinking of Vietnam, obviously, but even the Korean War. If this is a long twilight struggle, is this country prepared, by our recent history, to deal with that?
[Broder:] Not by our recent history. But if you reach back to the great wars of our past, World War II and even the Civil War. What struck me about some of the passages in that speech we heard tonight, was that they seemed to be inspired almost by Lincoln's words in the early stages of the Civil War. The sadness, the resignation, the sense of loss that was inevitable, that the country was going to feel itself, but yet the determination to see it through for the cause, which Bush described in the same terms that Lincoln did, the cause of liberty.
[Greenfield:] And I suppose also, David, he had one advantage, which was even if there are further strikes on American soil, even if it doesn't go well, it's not as though there's any choice in the matter.
[Broder:] We have no choice in the matter. But he did take one action tonight, or announced one action, which in fact may have some effect in reducing the vulnerability of the country. Any number of groups have pointed out that we are poorly coordinated in our government to deal with the threat to our own homeland. And by appointing a Presidential Coordinator of Homeland Defense, giving that job to Tom Ridge, who is a strong leader, he may have taken the first step in at least assuaging that problem.
[Greenfield:] Stephen Fidler, you and others have written about a conflict within the Bush team. Those who want a limited action, to make the coalition as broad as possible. And those who want a broader strike, even if it risks the coalition. Based on what you heard tonight, who's prevailing?
[Fidler:] I think, actually, there's a deferred decision here. I think there is a decision that really, at this point, the target has to be Afghanistan. It has to be Osama bin Laden and his network. That on that point, on this there is widespread international agreement, huge international support. On this objective, the American military can go forward and strike at these targets. I think later, down the road, there will come the question of what happens to other supporters of terrorism. Issues such as whether Iraq, which has been associated with terrorist actions in the past, will also be targeted. I think that debate within the Administration has been won for now by those who want a more focused military effort. I think that debate may not have ended, and may in the future come again.
[Greenfield:] In fact, Mr. Ramo, in saying as bluntly as he did, "any nation that supports or harbors terrorism we will regard as hostile," it seems to me that he's certainly promising something more than a strike against the Taliban.
[Ramo:] Absolutely, and I think that this is the key. Sort of as we look in the next week, what's the key problem for the Administration. This is it. They have got to start matching the rhetoric with action. If the rhetoric was only "we're going to take out the Taliban," you'd have fairly easy action for next week, which is, there'll be some strikes against Afghanistan. The rhetoric tonight was unbelievably wide in scope. And so one of the issues in keeping political support solid for President Bush is going to be very quickly having action which matches up against each one of those stated objectives.
[Greenfield:] I know you didn't mean the word the way it could be interpreted, but when you say "unbelievably broad," that's precisely the problem, isn't it? That is, if people do not believe that the Administration means what it says, that's real trouble.
[Ramo:] Absolutely. And I think the credibility and, again, this gets back to why you need action that matches up against the rhetoric. And that's why this is an open question in the Administration right now. How do you pick the best way to take on this challenge? And that means everything from the tactical issues of which bombers you send over Afghanistan to the much bigger strategic problems of how you deal with these other countries that we've been talking about.
[Greenfield:] Dave Broder, the President, on a couple of occasions in this speech, was clearly reaching out to the Muslim community. In his description of the Muslim faith, his description of the terrorists as people who have twisted the faith, in plea to Americans to respect Moslem-Americans. On the assumption that, say, Osama bin Laden's and his followers are not going to say "Oh, I guess the President's OK on this issue." Was that message aimed more at us, or at the world at large, do you think?
[Broder:] Well, I'm sure it had foreign policy implications, because some of the countries that we're trying to enlist to use as bases or as allies in this struggle are, of course, Muslim countries. But I've been told by people in the White House that the President personally has been deeply troubled by the attacks that have been reported to him on Muslims, and on people who simply look as if they might be Muslims.
[Greenfield:] Like Indians.
[Broder:] And does not want to see this going ahead unrebuked in this country.
[Greenfield:] Mr. Fidler, do you think that that will have any impact in the Muslim world? I'm not talking about among extremists, but will people in Cairo and Riyadh hear that lot and say "Hm, he really does seem to understand there's a problem here"?
[Fidler:] I think it will help. It certainly can't harm. I think the U.S., though, has an enormous hill to climb in the Middle East, particularly among the public, to convince them that it really isn't anti Arab and anti Muslim, and this is a first step. I think there'll need to be other actions, and I think simply the developments we've seen in the Middle East, and the pullback from Palestinian territories that we've seen the Israelis promise, I think these kind of things will also help. But, as I say, there is a big hill to climb in popular Arab opinion.
[Greenfield:] We're down to our last few seconds. Joshua Ramo, one line the President spoke. I'll recite it, because I don't want the control room do triple loops. He said "freedom and fear, justice and cruelty have always been at war, and we know that God is not neutral between them." He clearly wasn't making a secular religious point. But given the problem that he had when he called what we were doing a crusade, an inoffensive word here but, to Moslems, a loaded word. Is there any problem with that rhetoric, do you think?
[Ramo:] No, it's very close to saying God is on our side. And this battle, if it is about anything, is trying to separate religion from politics. It's about the danger of intermixing the two. And I think the President tried to be as careful as he could, while trying to reassure a nation, a very faithful nation, that God is on our side.
[Greenfield:] All right. Thanks very much to my guests, Joshua Ramo of Time Magazine, David Broder, an old friend, of the Washington Post. We've never seen a story like this one, I think. And Stephen Fidler of the Financial Times of London. I'll be back with a closing comment in a minute. ... run the risk of worldwide nuclear war. Hardly comforting words, but if you want comfort in this uneasy hour think about the outcome of those crisis. I'm Jeff Greenfield. We go back now to Wolf Blitzer in Washington. Wolf.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Before I let you go how will this speech stack up in connection with some of those other speeches you just referred to?
[Greenfield:] This was a this was a speech that met the moment. This was a serious tough steel steely and yet compassionate speech but I think it will be judged less by the rhetoric than where we are a year from now. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We are awaiting the word on the final tally from Florida. Election results from a number of other states also hang in the balance. In New Mexico where Al Gore holds a slim lead over George W. Bush, one county has yet to release results from a recount of thousands of early-voting ballots. Officials say they are trying to account for 252 missing ballots there. The Bush campaign also is keeping a close eye on the final vote count in other states. In Iowa, Gore beat Bush by some 5,000 votes. Republican party officials in the state say they are prepared to seek recounts if Bush requests that. For more on the story, we have on the phone with us Iowa's secretary of state, Chet Culver. Mr. Secretary, good morning. Thanks for joining us.
[Chet Culver, Iowa Secretary Of State:] Good morning. It's nice to be with you.
[Kagan:] Could you give us the latest count as you have it of the presidential race in Iowa?
[Culver:] Yes, as of this morning, the latest unofficial results have Al Gore Vice President Gore with a 5,121-vote margin, 5,121 votes ahead of Gov. Bush at this point.
[Kagan:] Now, if my math is correct, that would be a 1 percent difference, is that right?
[Culver:] Yes, it's actually less than 1 percent.
[Kagan:] So do you possibly find yourself facing the same situation in Iowa as they are facing in Florida?
[Culver:] Well, I want to make it very clear that we do not have an automatic recount provision in Iowa election law. There is no automatic recount in all 99 counties. That has been reported and that is incorrect. We do, however, have a recount process in Iowa. The process is triggered when a candidate requests a recount, which they cannot do until after our 99 county results become official either this coming Monday or Tuesday of the 13th or 14th. And they can't ask for a recount until then.
[Kagan:] So you'll have to wait until then. A side note here. In reading up about you, I understand that you are 33 years old, the youngest secretary of state in the nation right now, and also a former teacher. You address young people. What would you like to see young people take away from election 2000 and what has happened in the days following?
[Culver:] Well, I ran for this office in large part because I'm extremely concerned with the historic decline that we're seeing in voter participation across the country. In 1996, we had just 48 percent turnout, 100 million Americans refused to vote. And I hope that young people learn from this election that their vote does count, that there should be no doubt from now on in this country about the importance of one vote at a time. And I think that young people in this country really came out and wanted to be a part of this process. They got involved in the caucuses, they got involved in the primary process. And I really hope that this makes the point very clear that a democracy is alive and well and it is run by the people of the United States. And more importantly, we need young people to carry on this tradition in this country of a strong and a healthy democracy. And I encourage young people not only to vote, but I would like them to run for office and to become public servants and to roll up their sleeves and make this country what they want it to become in the future. And I hope this inspires young people to become active participants in this wonderful democratic process in this country.
[Kagan:] Well, clearly you are walking the walk in Iowa. That is Chet Culver, secretary of state for the state of Iowa. Thanks for joining us.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Florida is also having to contend with dangerous wildfires. A scatter-shot of lighting on Monday is blamed for igniting some 70 fires across the state on Monday. Today, the largest burns are near Sarasota on the Gulf coast. We get the latest now from Brian Goff. He is with our Tampa affiliate, WTVT.
[Brian Goff, Wtvt Reporter:] Normal fire breaks just couldn't stop it.
[Scott Lane, Nokomis Fire Dept:] We're getting spots up to between a half a mile a quarter and a half a mile. And you've got spots that far even across this large break at the interstate. It's pretty tough to catch it.
[Goff:] Although no residences were threatened yesterday, the soot from the fire found its way into swimming pools.
[Ed Flowers, Division Of Forestry:] Naturally, you get concerned because you hear so much about fires and people having problems with their own homes. So, naturally, we got concerned and decided we, you know, better get ready for it just in case.
[Goff:] Tractors worked all day trying to smother the fire. But by all accounts, this was a bad one.
[Rob Porcelli, Miami Resident:] Actually, this is a pretty bad fire. I mean, I've been doing this for quite a few years, and the way this wind and the dryness is, it's really burning fast and hard.
[Goff:] The thick smoke from the fire blanketed I-75, and that's why the highway is closed. A decision on when to open it will be made later this morning.
[Kagan:] And that report coming from reporter Brian Goff.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Does Al Gore have an Elian Gonzalez problem? We'll check new poll numbers for signs of political fallout. Also ahead
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] A slice of suburbia time to think about anything but their disappointment at campaign 2000.
[Woodruff:] John King on Michigan voters and the presidential field, now that John McCain is out of the game. And from Britain, Tony Blair delivers a compromise between the demands of state and his pregnant wife. Thank you for joining us. Bernie is off today. Just a week after Al Gore appeared to be closing the gap with George W. Bush, the presidential race has widened again, according to our new CNN"USA Today" Gallup poll. The survey shows Bush now leading Gore by nine points among likely voters nationwide. Bush was just one point ahead last week. Gore's losses come 11 days after he broke with administration policy in the Elian Gonzalez case. Our Bill Schneider has been going over all these numbers. Bill, is this shift related to Gore's position on the Gonzalez child?
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Well, Judy, that is possible. Americans continue to feel, by 2-1, that it would be in the best interests of the boy to live with his father in Cuba than to remain in the U.S. Now Gore took the position that he should be allowed to stay in the U.S. Here's something surprising. By the same 2-1 margin, Americans disapprove of the way the U.S. government has handled the Elian Gonzalez case, even though the government is taking the position that the boy should go back to his father. Now what's the government doing wrong? It's let the case drag on for four months and it's let the case become too political. Even though Gore has broken with the administration on this issue, those who dislike the way the government has handled it show very little support for the vice president. Gore has broken with the president for the wrong reason. The public wants the boy to go back to his father as quickly as possible. Gore backs legislation to grant Elian and his father permanent residency status.
[Woodruff:] Bill, is there specific evidence of what Gore has said and appeared to shift on, that this has cost him support?
[Schneider:] Actually, there is. Let's look at the majority of Americans who support returning the boy to live with his father in Cuba. In February, before Gore broke with the administration, those voters gave him a 13-point lead over Bush. That lead has now vanished. Notice that Gore lost almost 10 points among those who want Elian to go back. Has Gore made gains among those who want Elian to stay in the U.S.? No. In February, Bush had a 15-point lead among those voters. Now Bush leads by 20. Instead of picking up support, Gore has actually lost a few points among those who feel the boy should stay here. They don't seem very appreciative of the vice president's position.
[Woodruff:] And how about in South Florida? Do we know enough to know what voters there are thinking?
[Schneider:] Well, let's see. "The Miami Herald" published a poll of Dade County residents this weekend. It showed a deep and growing split between Cuban-Americans and others over this issue. Over 80 percent of Cuban-Americans favor keeping Elian in the U.S., while growing numbers of non-Hispanic whites and African-Americans favor the boy's return to his father. Three-quarters of South Florida whites and over 90 percent of blacks want him to go back. That split does not apply to the vice president. No constituency in South Florida approves of the way Gore has handled the issue. Cuban-Americans disapprove of Gore's handling of the situation 47 to 32 percent. A majority of South Florida whites disapprove. Even South Florida blacks disapprove of Gore's position by 2-1. Why? Because South Florida residents do not think Gore is sincere. Two-thirds say Gore's position is an attempt to get votes from South Florida. Almost everyone in South Florida believes that two-thirds of Cuban-Americans, two-thirds of whites, more than two- thirds of blacks. Gore is not getting credit from people on either side of the issue because his position is seen as a political move Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, Bill Schneider, thanks very much. Well, while Gore has been trying to boost his prospects against Bush in Florida, some of the old Rust Belt states are considered to be the key presidential battlegrounds this year. Among them, Michigan, where many voters apparently are on the fence now that John McCain is out of the race.
[King:] ... time to think about anything but their...
[Unidentified Female:] And I didn't have those same feelings towards Gore or Bush.
[King:] John McCain... ... of choice for the Morgans and everyone else in this mix of Democrats and independents from the bellwether Kalamazoo area in southwest Michigan. [on camera]: Kalamazoo is at the heart of a reliably Republican congressional district, yet Jimmy Carter won here in 1976, and Bill Clinton narrowly carried the district twice, tapping into a pool of presidential swing voters who have a knack for picking the winners. [voice-over]: So who these folks pick now that McCain is gone from the race could be critical to the November outcome.
[Michelle Marquardt, Attorney:] I guess I'm looking for some sort of dignity, and I don't see that. I keep waiting for that.
[King:] Michele and Jim Marquardt are attorneys. She leans Democratic, he leans Republican.
[Jim Marquardt, Attorney:] I sense that Al Gore has learned well at the knee of his boss, and I've picked up on a number of things that Mr. Gore just has trouble finding the truth. And that bothers me.
[King:] But Jim isn't sold yet on Bush. And like many moderates in this part of the country worries the Texas governor tilts too far right.
[Joan Van Zoeren, Retired Librarian:] The Republicans have frozen out moderates in the last 20 years or so. And it's been extremely difficult for me.
[King:] Joan Van Zoeren voted for George Bush the elder back in 1988, then twice for Bill Clinton.
[Van Zoeren:] My problem with the Bushes is that he wanted to be president rather than he wanted to do things. And this is still my problem with the younger generation. And so I'm very undecided.
[King:] Most here voiced worry that both major party candidates are sons of privilege.
[Jerry Potratz, Human Resources Specialist:] I head down to Florida on spring break, and I'm heading down though Tennessee on Al Gore Highway Al Gore Sr. Highway. And I don't know. That rubs me the wrong way. I think they're out of touch. I think they're both out of touch.
[King:] Several on hand voted for Ross Perot at least once, but there was no support for a Pat Buchanan Reform Party candidacy here. These folks viewed McCain as a truth-teller, a leader, a reformer, and didn't mind, in his case, that they didn't see eye-to-eye on every issue.
[Bob Peterson, Human Resources Specialist:] He brought something to the race that resonated with me and obviously a lot of other people here. And I'm not sure I see that in the two candidates that are running for president at this point.
[King:] All 10 insist they haven't made up their minds for sure, but talk of the issues reveals some leanings.
[Norma Cash, Retired:] I've been around 80 years. I've worked all my life. And to not be able to have the medicine that I need, I'm not comfortable with that. And I don't think the Republicans are sympathetic at all.
[King:] Michele Spencer is African-American, a single mom who would have voted Republican in November if McCain were the nominee. But she sees his defeat as proof the GOP fears diversity.
[Michele Spencer, Engineer:] It really reminded me more of a machine, a system, that you really have to fit in as a candidate for the Republican Party to move ahead.
[King:] Physician Tom Melgar is watching how Gore and Bush handle the debate over the HMO patients' bill of rights.
[Dr. Tom Melgar, Pediatric Physician:] There are decisions that are clearly in the best interest of the patient, and we still have to argue with the insurance companies.
[King:] The Morgans are a snapshot of middle America young daughters raise concerns about schools and crime, an elderly parent a very different set of issues.
[Kent Morgan, Self-employed Consultant:] I have an 88-year-old mother who I think about her future. And I look at myself at that age and whether I'll have retirement and pension.
[King:] The disappointment that their candidate failed is still fresh and sometimes clouds their reaction to questions about Bush or Gore. But this late dash of snow can't hide for long that it's just spring, and that when it comes to picking a president there's no need to hurry.
[Woodruff:] Well, joining us now, John King, who has now level Michigan for Missouri, where he will continue talking to voters. John, is it fair to say that the voters who like John McCain are also independent?
[King:] It's not an exact match, Judy. There are some independents who, of course, did not support John McCain in the Republican race. But McCain's pollster, Bill McInturff, keeps doing research. He says in a recent national survey he conducted, some 25 percent of the electorate still identifies with the Arizona senator. And in McInturff's view, they will be the pivotal force in year's campaign.
[Bill Mcinturff, Gop Pollster:] There's roughly about one out of four people in the country who say yes. And those one out of four people are the swing vote in this election. They're tied to the generic congressional ballot. They're tied on the presidential ballot between Bush and Gore. And who are those people? Well, they're 35- 55, they're college graduates, they're upscale, they're suburban. And they are not hard partisans. And they've found a lot of appeal in John McCain, and I don't think they're strongly attached to either Bush or to Gore. And I think they're willing to listen to both sides.
[King:] One of the things we hope to do as we find these McCain voters and other independent voters is to keep in touch with them in the weeks and months ahead so we can get a sense of what it is in the end that helps them make up their mind as they choose the next president Judy.
[Woodruff:] John, as you talk to these voters, is there one issue that seems to be dominating the debate out there?
[King:] That's what's very striking about the election. There is no dominant issue right now. It's still April. There could be, come October and November. Some mention education, some mention health care, but in the good economic times, in the words of the Democratic pollster Peter Hart, he thinks the voters instead especially the independent-minded swing voters, we find in the suburbs and places here like St. Louis he thinks they will look at Al Gore and George Bush not on policy matters but look directly at the men and determine if they're leaders.
[Peter Hart, Democratic Pollster:] At this stage of the game, Gore and Bush look like they're small fighters going against one another. They look more like they are more like middleweights than heavyweights. And voters really want to be able to find a heavyweight. I believe that 2000 is a lot more about leadership than is about any single issue. It really has to do with something with stature.
[King:] And when we raise that question with the voters, we meet many raised questions about Governor George W. Bush's experience. Many know he has only been governor for five years. In the case of the vice president, they know he's been around a long time. But many feel detached from him as a person. They also view him as very much a tactical politician. And on the issue you opened the show with, asked voters out here in middle America about the Elian Gonzalez case, they feel both the vice president and Governor Bush have been pandering to the Cuban-Americans in Florida Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, John King, who is now reporting from St. Louis, thanks, John. Good luck on your interviews with these voters. And still ahead on INSIDE POLITICS, a pause on the campaign trail as the vice president takes time out to honor his mother. And we will talk to a professor who says Al Gore has the keys to winning the White House.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We are keeping an eye, expecting any moment now an announcement from Attorney General Janet Reno about the campaign finance investigation. A source, though, is telling CNN that Reno has decided not to name a special prosecutor to look into Al Gore's 1996 fund-raising activities. Questions center around Gore's visit to a Buddhist temple where illegal contributions were raised. Gore maintains he did not know the event was a fund-raiser. Joining us now to talk about the decision and the fund-raising controversy is CNN legal analyst Greta Van Susteren in our Washington bureau this morning. Greta, good morning.
[Greta Van Susteren, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Good morning, Daryn.
[Kagan:] First, help us understand what are the actual allegations of what the vice president supposedly did wrong?
[Van Susteren:] Well, you know, that's sort of the curious thing. It all started from essentially two incidents. One was a fund-raiser at a Buddhist temple, which you have characterized as illegal. And the other inquiry was into White House coffees where donors to the Democratic Party were entertained at the White House, and the question is whether that was improper or not. This investigation is going on for a number of years. And while it is done in secret, some of it has leaked out and the vice president has been under oath five times in connection with this. And where we are right now is that one of the lawyers at the Justice Department who interviewed the vice president under oath in April was not particularly satisfied with his answers, and he was interested in pursuing the matter further. There are other prosecutors at the Justice Department, though, who had a different view and they thought that the matter should end. And what we're expecting to hear today is the decision of the attorney general of the United States, Janet Reno, who has the ultimate say on this, as to whether or not a special prosecutor will indeed be appointed. We're expecting that she'll say no to this, that it was one single Justice Department prosecutor who would like to go forward, but the other prosecutors at the Justice Department thought this inquiry should be put to bed. And, of course, Janet Reno now has to weigh all the facts and has to decide whether the investigation should go forward.
[Kagan:] So, Greta, would it be a matter that the vice president took part in an illegal fund-raiser or that he might have lied, allegedly, under oath to say that he didn't think it was a fund- raiser?
[Van Susteren:] Well, it's not enough to take part in an illegal fund-raiser. You actually have to do something else. You have to take a step further to have any sort of criminal involvement. You have to have knowledge and participate in it having that knowledge. So it isn't particularly that, but you are actually correct that what this this investigation has sort of, like, meandered...
[Kagan:] Greta, we're going to have you stand by here because I see the attorney general having a seat in the media briefing room. So we'll just have you stand by. We'll listen to the attorney general and bring you back afterwards.
[Janet Reno, Attorney General:] Over the past four years, the Campaign Finance Task Force has been vigorously investigating allegations of wrongdoing in the 1996 election cycle. I'm pleased with the progress the task force has made, and I respect all of those who have contributed to the success. Robert Conrad, the current head of the task force, is one person who deserves a good deal of credit for the success. He is an excellent prosecutor. I meet with him on a regular basis, and I am impressed with his judgment, his management of the task force, and his knowledge of the law. He is an excellent prosecutor. There will always be disagreement among lawyers. The Supreme Court often splits five to four. The arguments around this table, where I have my staff meetings, are vigorous, and that's the way I want it. But I can tell you my regard for Bob Conrad has only increased as I have dealt with him on this issue. Like those before him, Bob believes that internal deliberations among prosecutors should not become public. There are two basic reasons for this. First, we should encourage candid, vigorous internal discussion as we determine how to proceed in any matter. Participants should feel free to disagree. Release of internal recommendations threaten such a candid discussion. Secondly, such a release of internal preliminary recommendations in a pending matter is not fair to those involved, and it undermines the fairness and the credibility of our entire criminal justice system. For example, today Bob Conrad has been tagged with being the only person in the Justice Department who thought I should appoint a special counsel. Although I'm not going to get into who recommended what, I can tell you that that is not correct. Earlier someone released the fact that Bob had recommended that I appoint a special counsel to further investigate the falsity of certain statements the vice president made in an interview conducted by Mr. Conrad last April, about the Hsi Lai Temple event, and coffees held by the vice president and the president as part of the 1996 campaign. The recommendation did not involve the legality of those events themselves. I've carefully reviewed the transcript of the vice president's interview, as well as related documents and materials. The special counsel regulations provide for the appointment of a special counsel when the attorney general determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted, that that investigation would present a conflict for the Department of Justice, or other extraordinary circumstances, and it would be in the public interest to appoint a special counsel. Because further investigation is not likely to result in a prosecutable case under applicable criminal law and principles of federal prosecution, I have concluded that a special counsel is not warranted. The transcript reflects neither false statements nor perjury, each of which requires proof of a willfully false statement about a material matter. Rather, the transcript reflects disagreements about labels. I've concluded that there is no reasonable possibility that further investigation could develop evidence that would support the filing of charges for making a willful false statement. The task force will, of course, continue its ongoing investigation into illegal fund-raising activity and will be free to pursue all avenues of investigation wherever they may lead.
[Question:] Ms. Reno, how important in your decision was the materiality aspect, the fact that none of these events that were discussed were themselves illegal?
[Reno:] We have considered that, but, basically, I came to the conclusion, as I have indicated, that no further investigation could produce facts that would permit, under our principles of federal prosecution, the filing of charges.
[Question:] Why is that? Can you help us understand that a little better? In other words, because why?
[Reno:] Just to give you an example, for the vice president makes the statement in the transcript that has been released that he may have attended one coffee. And then he says, "I don't know what the record reflects." He immediately turns to the record. At the conclusion of the interview, he asked his counsel to check the record and to clarify the record, and he produces that information as to the number of coffees he attended or he hosted, as best the record can reflect. That I don't think would support in any way a charge of false statement based on a statement that he may have attended one. There are other issues with respect to what the question means. The vice president took the question to mean just coffees in the White House hosted by the president; Mr. Conrad intended it to cover coffees that might have been hosted or attended by the vice president. That was clarified. There is some indication, "Why didn't he indicate that at first?" but if you look at the transcript carefully, the vice president says: Those coffees were on the other side of the house, in the White House, that was the president's coffees. I hosted the coffees in the Old Executive Office Building. And so the number of coffees referred to will depend on the question, and fundamental ambiguities in the question, and how it's understood by the person answering the question, make a perjury charge or false statement charge impossible to prove.
[Question:] Miss Reno, does this mean that the task force will no longer consider any questions surrounding the Hsi Lai Temple event?
[Reno:] What I have tried to make clear is that this first of all, Mr. Conrad's recommendation did not go to the underlying events. It went just to the statements, and the task force is free to pursue the issues.
[Question:] The task force can pursue any questions that it thinks appropriate about that temple event?
[Reno:] That's correct.
[Question:] Will Mr. Conrad continue to head up the task force?
[Reno:] Yes, he will.
[Question:] Has he accepted your decision? RENO; I don't discuss conversations I have with lawyers, so that they can feel free to talk to me. But as I indicated, based on my conversations with him about this issue, I have an even greater regard for him. Will he have any difficulty, though, in pursuing the investigation? Will he feel that he has any conflict between what he believes should be done and what you have now told him will not be done?
[Reno:] He would have to make any comment that he wanted to make with regard to that.
[Question:] Has he expressed any qualms about that to you?
[Reno:] I have indicated that he should make any comment.
[Question:] Ms. Reno, as sure as we're sitting here, you're going to be accused of making a political decision. They're going to say that your chief of the task force and you both looked at a set of facts and law and came up with entirely different conclusions. How do you counter those accusations that this is a political decision made in the heat of a presidential campaign?
[Reno:] Same way I've done it before. I don't do things based on politics. I realize that politics will be hurled around my head. I just sit there and duck as it comes, and continue to look at the evidence and the law and make the best judgment I can after consultation with as many people as possible who have relevant information.
[Question:] Has this process been fair to the vice president, or anybody else in a similar situation? Should this have been public to begin with?
[Reno:] Well, as I indicated to you earlier what do you mean should what have been public?
[Question:] Your deliberations as to whether to appoint a special counsel...
[Reno:] I don't think the deliberations should be made public. That's the whole point I was making here. But if you think if you think my decision should have been made earlier, I try to make decisions based on what's right and make them as quickly as possible.
[Question:] Ms. Reno, most of the paperwork on your earlier decision processes in the campaign finance matter, whenever questions arose about then-independent counsels, have now been made public. Will you make public any of this paperwork, including Mr. Conrad's original recommendation and any of the responses from other justice people?
[Reno:] I don't know think, for the reasons I indicated, that that should be made public. These internal deliberations should be just that. And people should have confidence that their thoughts and disagreements are not spread out across the world until final decisions are made.
[Question:] But in the last few years, you have essentially caved on that belief, when Congress has demanded the earlier documentation.
[Reno:] I would hope that Congress would see the wisdom of what I am trying to do, understand the risk that are taken when Congress intervenes in a pending matter, so that we can proceed with the campaign task force investigation in a thorough way.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] concerning the Hsi Lai Temple and how you came down on that?
[Reno:] The concern was that the vice president called it a fund- raiser and made references to it being finance related. The vice president defined, and he defined early on, his definition of fund- raiser as an event at which money was raised there. But then he went on, both with respect to the coffees and with respect to the temple, to describe the role that the coffees and the temple event played in raising money for the campaign, because, if you read the transcript carefully, it refers to the fact that calls, events and coffees would be important. He is asked, "What is the role of these events in the raising of the $108 million for the campaign?" And he describes that role. There's no if's, and's or but's about it. He describes the role that it's to build relationships, develop an understanding, answer questions, hear people's ideas, and build a relationship so later you might go out and ask for a contribution. It's the labels where they disagree. And I reached the conclusion that the vice president had not, based on this record, failed to describe what the role in fund-raising was.
[Question:] How can you assure the American people that these decisions that you make, given the fact that he is the person supposedly most intimately involved with the details, that your conclusions are more accurate stronger than his?
[Reno:] More accurate than...
[Question:] Or that you're right and that he's wrong?
[Reno:] I have taken each one of the statements and gone through it to see whether you could develop evidence sufficient to prove it beyond and to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt by further investigation, and have concluded that you can't.
[Question:] That is the opposite of Peter's question. Could you argue that this was never even a close call, given that the underlying conduct here, the temple fund-raiser, or the temple event, and the coffees were not themselves illegal?
[Reno:] I don't want to get into anything with relationship to the underlying events because that relates to the continuing investigation. But in all of these factors, we have considered whether you could, with further investigation because everybody agrees now that based on the state of the record, you could not file charges now under any circumstances, but if you could develop evidence sufficient to prosecute.
[Question:] Ms. Reno, one of the most troubling aspects of what's been reported of the vice president's statements is his contention that he did not know that some of the money he raised in phone calls from his office was going into hard money accounts, that he thought it was all going to soft money. How was that issue resolved?
[Reno:] Well, we go back to that and, again, I don't want to comment on the underlying events. I just refer you to previous statements filed.
[Question:] But there was an indication that the vice president was present in at least one meeting in which this money was divvied up this way, at least part of the money raised in these calls was going to hard money accounts.
[Reno:] I would refer you to the filings with regard to that matter, but I don't want to discuss further any of the underlying events.
[Question:] Because this is a continuing investigation?
[Reno:] That's correct.
[Question:] How many of your advisers agreed with Mr. Conrad, that an independent counsel might or should be brought in?
[Reno:] I can think of two.
[Question:] What's your thinking about the timing of this announcement? Did it occur to you that it might have more or less impact if you made this announcement prior to the convention rather than after the convention?
[Reno:] I wanted to make it as soon as possible. I did not want to interrupt or interfere with or influence, in any way, either convention.
[Question:] Does that mean that you consciously held off on a final decision until after the convention, or that you made the decision earlier but just held off announcing it?
[Reno:] No, I struggled over this, and I want to be as fair as I can. When do I reach the decision? You are constantly keeping your ears open. You wake up one morning and you think: Let me check this, let me check that. I just want to be as thorough as I possibly can, and make sure that I have heard from everybody and consider everything and try to do it the right way.
[Question:] Ms. Reno, how much what will the politics be, in terms of whether or not you would actually appoint the special counsel, and the difficulties of setting up an office in the middle of a presidential election?
[Reno:] What role did politics play?
[Question:] Well, yes. In other words, did you factor into account the well, just the difficulties of setting up a new investigative unit to look into these issues as the campaign is going on, in the closing days of...
[Reno:] No. What I did was ask that threshold question that the regulations require: Was investigation, a criminal investigation, warranted? And in this instance, the question was: Was further investigation warranted? I concluded that it was not, because I did not think that there was a reasonable possibility that further investigation would produce evidence sufficient to charge.
[Question:] You say you struggled over that decision. Can you tell us how exactly you prepared two earlier White House fund-raising reviews, in terms of complexity of the issues, difficulty...
[Reno:] One was an apple, one was an orange and one was a pear.
[Question:] When did you reach your decision? Yesterday?
[Reno:] Sometime over the weekend.
[Question:] Ms. Reno, you reached the conclusion that further investigation was not warranted because it was not likely to lead to charges. But your critics over the last four years have maintained that there needs to be someone outside of the department, someone not you, not any of your top advisers, who makes that fundamental threshold decision whether further investigation could lead to charges.
[Reno:] I think we're under principles of federal prosecution because, remember, under the special counsel regulations I appoint. And I do not see how, under the criminal law and under the principles of federal prosecution, these statements could be determined to be either false statements or perjury. To then appoint a special counsel would, I think, be inconsistent with the regulations. But I think it would be, first of all, unfair to put people through an investigation. And secondly, I don't think that, since the special counsel is in effect my appointee, that I can justify and support the decision they made. This goes to the heart of everything we care about in this country: that you don't pursue a case where there is no basis for concluding that you can make a case; you don't put people through an investigation where you don't, based on the law and principles that governor our conduct, think that you can find the evidence that would justify further action.
[Kagan:] We've been listening to Attorney General Janet Reno from the Justice Department making an announcement that she has reviewed the material and she says she will not name a special counsel to look into Al Gore and his fund-raising activities during the 1996 election cycle. She says she's looked at the documents and she's carefully reviewed the vice president's statements and she believes that further investigation will not lead to charges being filed and prosecution. Let's bring back in our legal analyst, Greta Van Susteren, in Washington as well. Greta, the attorney general saying she doesn't think it's going to it would lead to prosecution or charges, but she's not saying the vice president didn't do anything wrong.
[Van Susteren:] No, but her job is to determine whether a further investigation is warranted. And you very correctly stated there, in the process, she first has to meet the threshold that she thinks further investigation is likely too lead to charges against the vice president. She's reviewed all the information and, in her opinion, the answer is no. What she was focusing on was an April 18 interview with the vice president under oath, and she was attempting to see whether or not there was evidence of false statements, which is a violation of the law, or perjury. In her opinion, having reviewed that, there may have been disagreements about labels, but statements the vice president made under oath would not lead to a criminal investigation and criminal charges because any sort of disagreement about the facts she characterized them as not being willful and not being material. The law has specific elements. If they are not material, if they are not willful, then under no circumstances can someone be charged, and it is her judgment, and she's required by law, to stop the investigation there.
[Kagan:] Greta, not one but three prosecutors underneath Janet Reno have suggested that a special counsel should be appointed. She did talk about the disagreement and the discourse that takes place among lawyers at the Justice Department, and used as an analogy the Supreme Court, saying often they disagree 5-4. Is that a good analogy?
[Van Susteren:] Actually, I was quite surprised by that analogy. I thought it was a quite smart analogy because the United States Supreme Court, in about 20 percent of its opinions just this term, was in disagreement 5-4. Lawyers oftentimes do disagree. People disagree. I mean, husbands and wives can disagree about what particular house to buy. I mean, people disagree all the time. But, ultimately, the buck must stop someplace. And what we have decided in our country is the buck stops at the attorney general of the United States. She has the ultimate authority and she has to review all the facts and exercise her judgment. And in exercising her judgment, what she did say is that she consulted other lawyers in the Justice Department, and she also considered the three who were in disagreement with her ultimate opinion today. So, you know, someone has to exercise judgment. She has exercised her judgment, and, in fact, she had high praise for one of the Justice Department lawyers, the one who's head of the task force who actually disagreed with her. But it's her decision and the buck stops with her and she's decided that the investigation should not go on further. She did not see any willfulness and she did not see any material misstatements.
[Kagan:] Greta Van Susteren in Washington. Greta, thanks for joining us this morning.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] We take a closer look now at the mission to move those prisoners in U.S. custody all the way from Afghanistan to the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station in Cuba. CNN's Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr joins us now with moire on that pretty sizable undertaking. Good afternoon, Barbara.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Pentagon Correspondent:] Hi Judy. Yes, as the first detainees begin to move from Kandahar to that U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, security is the number one concern. At the Pentagon, we've just had a press briefing from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and he's reminded everybody that these prisoners which is what they are have a long history of violence and suicidal tendencies. So during the flight there are a number of unprecedented security measures that may be taken to restrain these detainees, or prisoners. And that possibly can include sedation, very heavy restraints and, to be somewhat blunt, no bathroom privilege. Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld said this is essential; and he noted that the Pentagon has consulted with prison experts and its own military commanders at the transportation command, TransCom, to see what kinds of appropriate measures should be taken on these flights.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary:] Transportation from Kandahar, very likely is being handled by TransCom. And the detention facilities in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba are being handled by the acting combatant commander there for SouthCom. And they have been authorized and instructed to use appropriate restraint.
[Starr:] And in another matter, Rumsfeld addressed this growing potential U.S. military involvement in the Philippines. In fact, there are now a small number of U.S. special forces on the ground in the southern Philippines. And they are part of a much larger program to offer military training and assistance to the Philippine military in their effort to hunt down Islamic guerrillas who are possibly tied to al Qaeda and are operating inside the Philippines. That deployment could grow to several hundred in the weeks and months ahead Judy.
[Woodruff:] Barbara, what about the crash yesterday of the refueling plane in Western Pakistan the KC-130? Where do we stand with regard to an investigation of what happened there?
[Starr:] Well Judy, an investigation is underway, like it is in all military plane crashes. It's going to take some time, though, we are told. The plane crashed into a very mountainous area. It was full of fuel, and exploded into a fireball. And so the wreckage is very difficult to reach. And it will be very difficult, we are told, to investigate exactly what might have happened and caused this crash. But that investigation is now underway.
[Woodruff:] All right, Barbara Starr reporting fir us from the Pentagon. Thanks Barbara.
[Starr:] Thanks Judy. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Natalie Pawelski:] This week, on
[Earth Matters:] at a Marine base, a hidden danger, and a search for potential victims. A massive water project sparks celebrations and promises of protest. And a flock of young birds, and their mechanical mama, may bring new hope to an endangered species. Those stories, and more, on this edition of EARTH MATTERS. A watery threat on a Marine base. Hi, welcome to EARTH MATTERS. I'm Natalie Pawelski. Sixteen families that lived in Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, may have been drinking poison every time they had a sip of water. Health officials think contaminated wells may have caused a rash of birth defects and childhood cancers. Brian Cabell reports.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] All that's left today of the contaminated wells at Camp Lejeune are rusty pipes sticking out of the ground. The wells have been closed for 15 years. But for the Marine Corps, the problem, potentially massive, remains. Federal health officials suspect that pregnant women on this base between 1968 and 1985 may have given birth to a disproportionately high number of babies with birth defects and cancers. The water they were drinking contained excessive levels of two carcinogenic chemicals: the solvent PCE, dumped by a former dry cleaner; and the degreaser TCE, apparently dumped by the motor pool. The concentration of the chemicals, according to environmental health professor Jeff Fisher, was 10 times higher than at other comparable toxic sites.
[Jeff Fisher, University Of Georgia:] At least a factor of 10, going from 100-part-per-billion contamination level for solvents to 1,000.
[Deborah Horney, Former Camp Lejeune Resident:] I was devastated.
[Cabell:] Deborah Horney was one of the Camp Lejeune mothers. She had a miscarriage there, then another child who developed a large mass on his neck that was surgically removed but never identified. Doctors were baffled.
[D. Horney:] We actually consider ourselves relatively lucky compared to some of the people who had children who were born severely deformed and may have lived a few days; people had children who died.
[Cabell:] That was the case with another Camp Lejeune wife, Martha Vaughn. Her daughter died when she was a month old.
[Martha Vaughn, Former Camp Lejeune Resident:] When she was born, she had a knot on her stomach and they told us that she needed to have surgery, that her intestines were somehow tangled together, her large and small intestines.
[Cabell:] Vaughn says doctors told her they had seen two other newborns with the very same rare defect in the previous two months at Camp Lejeune. Federal health officials are now trying to contact parents of children either born or conceived at the base between 1968 and 1985. That could be as many as 16,000 families. Could it have affected others on the base adults and children?
[Wendy Kaye, Federal Health Official:] There's always that possibility, but in-utero exposure is believed to be the most susceptible time period; and if we find a problem in that group then we may expand it to other groups.
[Cabell:] As for the Marines, they claim that until the early '80s, they and water officials weren't even monitoring wells for PCE and TCE. They didn't know better.
[Col. Mike Lehnert, U.s. Marine Corps:] The important thing to understand is what we knew and when we knew it and what type of guidelines were available to commanders at that time. We're convinced that the commanders that were working aboard that base at that time acted responsibly.
[Cabell:] The Marines say, once they discovered the problem in the early '80s, they told those living on base, but not former residents, and made little effort to do so until last year. Former Marine Charles Horney, whose family drank the contaminated water, hopes the Marines are telling the full truth.
[Charles Horney, Former Marine:] I love the corps and I'll always be, you know, faithful to the corps but, you know, if what's wrong is wrong, you know, something needs to be done. They need to make it right.
[Cabell:] For EARTH MATTERS, I'm Brian Cabell.
[Pawelski:] Expect big protests in India over the coming months. The country has resumed work on a highly controversial dam project, after India's supreme court threw out an environmental lawsuit. Satinder Bindra reports.
[Satinder Bindra, Cnn Correspondent:] With the touch of a button, work has finally restarted on the controversial Sardar Sarovar project in western India. The Sardar Sarovar Dam is part of the Narmada Valley project, one of the world's largest river development schemes that plans to build more than 3,000 smaller dams across the river Narmada. Six years ago, India's supreme court stopped all work on the dam after activists expressed concern about environmental damage, they claim the project would swamp large tracts of land, displacing thousands. But two weeks after India's supreme court ruled the Sardar Sarovar Dam's height could be increased another five meters, pro- development forces are claiming victory.
[Lal Krishna Advani, Indian Home Minister:] We will achieve development even while protecting the environment. This dam will protect the environment and will be a symbol of development.
[Bindra:] But the controversy over the project is likely to continue. Environmentalists, who have in the past generated international headlines by staging hunger strikes and sit-ins, continue to describe the project as an "obsolete, money-guzzling technological disaster." Despite the supreme court ruling, anti-dam activists say they will fight on. Pro-development forces say the environmentalists are fighting a lost cause. They claim the project will ultimately irrigate some of India's driest areas, as well as provide drinking water and cheap electricity. The next stage in the ongoing controversy comes when environmentalists plan to stage huge demonstrations in India's capital, New Delhi. They say they'll also seek a review of the decision by the Supreme Court. For CNN EARTH MATTERS, I'm Satinder Bindra.
[Pawelski:] Up next on EARTH MATTERS, a fight over a dried-up wetland could change how environmental laws are enforced. And later, vampires that suck electricity instead of blood.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Some folks regard teaching as a calling, the fulfillment of a lifelong dream. CNN's Maria Hinojosa talks with some new teachers who are learning the ins and outs of their new career.
[Maria Hinojosa, Cnn Correspondent:] It's well over an hour before students are expected, but math teacher Steven Brunnlehrman is already preparing. At Heritage High School in New York city, that means attending a morning session...
[Greg Hamilton, Teachers College, Columbia University:] How about June 26, 27?
[Hinojosa:] ... with a professor from a teachers college whose weekly visits help the staff stay on track, especially new teachers like Brunnlehrman.
[Hamilton:] Many new teachers haven't worked with kids before. When they hit the classroom all on their own, they feel very alone.
[Hinojosa:] But even so, they're generally happy, according to a new study. The nationwide survey contradicts the conventional wisdom that teaching is a career of last resort: 96 percent of new teachers surveyed said they love what they do.
[Unidentified Male:] This is the most important work in the world, so it's not surprising.
[Hinojosa:] But there are complaints.
[Susan Bartonlone, Principal, Heritage High School:] They come in with a tremendous amount of enthusiasm, well-prepared, I would say, academically in their disciplines, but the most difficult element is discipline.
[Hinojosa:] The survey shows new teachers complained most not about low salaries, but about lack of classroom management preparation.
[Steve Farkas, Dir. Of Research, Public Agenda:] They would much prefer to spend more time in the field while they were in a teacher preparation program rather than in the classroom studying theory.
[Hinojosa:] This study says its findings challenge the stereotype that teachers aren't satisfied by what they do. In fact, only one-fifth of the new teachers surveyed said they plan on doing something else in the future.
[Farkas:] So rather than having a vision of teaching as a kind of unmotivated, uninterested, uninspired teaching corps, actually, we get the exact opposite.
[Hinojosa:] Teachers like 10-year veteran Ron Saltz, who says to teach was a calling.
[Ron Saltz, English Teacher:] It's an incredibly romantic profession. It's filled with their own experiences of teachers who inspired us, and we want to be that person.
[Hinojosa:] And Steven Brunnlehrman plans on being that well into the future.
[Steven Brunnlehrman, Teacher:] I want to get involved in writing math textbooks that are maybe set more for the urban school system. I'm really here to stay.
[Hinojosa:] Maria Hinojosa, CNN, New York.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Now, a developing story on another potential terrorist concern. CNN has learned that a government memo, warning the nation's nuclear power plants that they could be possibly the next target of terrorist hijackers. Susan Candiotti now watching this live in Washington. It broke late yesterday. What do we have today? Susan, good morning.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn National Correspondent:] Hi, Bill. That memo, an update it was called, was put out by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission last week. It talks about information coming to it from the FBI from a senior al Qaeda operative, about a plan to fly a commercial airplane into a nuclear power plant. But a senior FBI official tells CNN it's the same information they put out to nuclear power plants late last year. Then and now, the official tells CNN, the threatened attack could not be substantiated or verified. Meantime, the FBI's Infrastructure Protection Center issued a new bulletin yesterday, saying it found a computer quote "A computer that belonged to an individual with indirect links to Usama bin Ladin [sic] that contained structural architecture computer programs that suggested the individual was interested in structural engineering as it related to dams and other water-retaining structures." Now the president and the Pentagon are talking about finding diagrams and photos in Afghanistan of the U.S. nuclear power plants, dams and other landmarks. And the FBI director says trained terrorist sleepers are still in the U.S., he believes, but Robert Mueller says he doesn't know how many or of any specific plans to attack. Now, terror experts say that makes it difficult to prepare.
[Ben Venzke, Terrorism Expert:] The extreme difficulty is is that if these sleeper cells are not previously known to the intelligence community, and if they've been here for the last couple years, it is infinitely difficult to be able to identify them and find them, if they are, in essence, asleep. They're not doing anything illegal. They're simply residing, and they're waiting for the right time.
[Hemmer:] Susan, for the past four and a half months, we have been battling this problem her and this question about whether or not the threats that are announced eventually are taken seriously or not, given the number that we have had. What do officials say in Washington about the possibility that some of this may be watered down at this point?
[Candiotti:] Well, it's an ongoing concern that the public might get so used to hearing about these things that they'll start taking them for granted. But it is the hope of authorities that Americans remain on alert. The FBI, the White House, the Pentagon are continuing to take all of this information all the information that they're gathering and continuing to gather very seriously. And they're also very concerned about the upcoming Super Bowl, the Olympics, the World Economic Forum, and as FBI Director Mueller said just yesterday, "We have moved heaven and earth," as he put it, "to try to provide the very best security at all those locales."
[Hemmer:] And best of luck this weekend too. Susan, thanks. Susan Candiotti in Washington.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] And there is plenty of drama left in this baseball season, with two players in reach of Mark McGwire's home run record. Already? Well, as CNN's Gary Tuchman reports, Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds may share the limelight, but they don't share an outlook.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] The fans at Atlanta's Turner Field are in a frenzy over a visitor.
[Unidentified Male:] Sammy! We love you, Sammy!
[Crowd:] Sammy!
[Tuchman:] Sammy Sosa, the man who battled Mark McGwire to the wire for baseball's home run season record in 1998, is now in the hunt again.
[Unidentified Female:] Thank you, Sammy. We came a long ways to see you!
[Tuchman:] And the Chicago Cub says he is thoroughly enjoying it.
[Sammy Sosa, Chicago Cubs Player:] If it's meant for me to be the man, I will do it. But if not, Mark is the man.
[Tuchman:] Unless Barry becomes the man. Although Sosa has made a splash, Barry Bonds still holds the home run lead. He's just a good September away from Mark McGwire's record of 70. Good news for Bonds, right?
[Barry Bonds, San Francisco Giants Player:] No, I don't want 70.
[Question:] Why not?
[Bonds:] I don't need it. I need to win. I don't need 70 home runs. What is 70 home runs going to do for me?
[Tuchman:] Ask Sosa the same question?
[Sosa:] I'm just happy to be here in America. So for me, it's like, enjoy everything.
[Tuchman:] Sammy Sosa is on the verge of becoming the first major leaguer to hit 60 homers in three different seasons.
[Sosa:] I love to talk with the press, making some friends lovely.
[Question:] And do you feel pressure on your shoulders?
[Sosa:] Never. I'm a gladiator. A gladiator don't feel pressure never.
[Bonds:] I'm done with interviews today.
[Tuchman:] Barry Bonds isn't quite as enthused by the press scrutiny.
[Sosa:] It's just too much. This is not why I play baseball. This is not why, you know I play baseball for love of the game of baseball and to support my family.
[Unidentified Female:] Barry!
[Tuchman:] The Giant slugger is not as prolific in the autograph department another reason he's not as popular of a figure as Sammy Sosa.
[Bonds:] Not everyone's going to like you. That's life. That's the way it is. You can't change it. You just pray for those people. That's all you can do.
[Tuchman:] Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds have different outlooks about the home run race. But they do have a lot in common: They're both being counted on to lead their teams to the playoffs. And they're both poised to make history. Gary Tuchman, CNN, Atlanta.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Now on to Afghanistan now and the search for terrorists. CNN's Nic Robertson has been following the latest developments of this ongoing U.S. mission. Nic joins us now live. He has got some details on the overnight detainment of prisoners. Nic, good morning.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Leon. We are in the remote mountain town of Bamiyan. At about 10 hours ago, about a dozen U.S. Special Forces arrived at a compound just behind us here, secured the compound. And then, about two dozen U.S. Army personnel arrived, went into that compound, we are told by local commanders. They talked with two prisoners there. They left that compound, came back a couple hours later. And from that compound, they removed those two Pakistani prisoners. Now, local commanders say these prisoners could either be Taliban or al Qaeda. When they were taken away, they had bags on their heads. They had their hands cuffed behind their back. But also, in another compound in Bamiyan, U.S. Special Forces secure that while U.S. service personnel inspected, took photographs, took hair samples from about two dozen detainees there. And at the end of that process, they took away 2 of those Taliban prisoners. Now, those were Afghan fighters, we are told. They also had their heads encased in plastic bags. They had their hands tie-wrapped behind their backs. All of these prisoners were taken away by the U.S. forces, put on helicopters and removed, we are told, to Bagram Air Base, just near the capital, Kabul Leon.
[Harris:] Thank you very much Nic Robertson reporting there in the evening in Afghanistan thank you very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] We have a first in campaign 2000. Until now, the presidential race has been a statistical dead heat, but that is beginning to change.
[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] The numbers are very interesting. The CNN"USA Today"Gallup poll that tracks the race day by day now has Al Gore beginning to edge ahead of George W. Bush. We want to get the latest on the numbers from Gallup's editor in chief, Frank Newport. Good morning, Frank.
[Frank Newport, Gallup Poll Editor In Chief:] Good morning. That's right. You know, statistics are statistics, but when we do our tests, we have found that when we averaged the last six days across, it's kind of crossed that threshold into statistical significance for Al Gore. But keep in mind that these things do go up and down. And we'll keep monitoring it and see what happens. Let's put this in context for you. I think this is a good way to look at it among likely voters. Back in June and July, the red line was higher. That's George W. Bush, 48 to 40 over Al Gore. And that was kind of what happened pre-conventions. Now, coming out of the conventions of late August, it was tied 46-46. And then when we started tracking on Labor Day, the fourth through the sixth of September, Gore had moved ahead about 47 to 44. It's kind of gone up and down since then, but in our most recent aggregate of three days through the 12th, you can see that yellow line is 49 percent for Al Gore. The red line has gone down. That's George W. Bush at 41, so that's an 8-point lead. The basic point is, if you track the yellow line, it's gone up, the red line has gone down, and that's where we're at a point now where Al Gore is ahead of George W. Bush, at least as of Tuesday night, which was the 12th of September. As I mentioned, we're tracking it every night. Now, here's how Al Gore is doing it right now. It's very interesting. Among Republicans, Bush has about 90 percent. Among Democrats, Gore has about 90 percent. So they've both solidified their bases. Here in the middle, this is this independent group that's so much at play, and here you can see Gore has that 43-31 lead over George W. Bush. So you put it all together, there are a few more Democrats in our likely voter sample, Independents. You do the math and you end up at a point where Al Gore is ahead of George W. Bush, at least for right now. One other point we thought was interesting: Is this election gathering the attention or garnering the attention of Americans? Well, way back in September of '96, 58 percent of Americans said they were paying quite a lot of attention. Fast forward to this week, almost the same number. So right now, about as many people are paying attention as was the case four years ago, which predicts maybe about the same turnout. That's where the public stands, but we're monitoring it day by day. Linda, Carol, back to you.
[Lin:] All right, thank you very much, Frank. Boy, and turnout was only 48 percent.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] To Sacramento, now, we promised that briefing with family members of Nikolay Soltys and also members of the Sacramento police force. They have come to the microphone and again we will take you live to Sacramento, California.
[Sheriff Lou Blanas, Sacramento County Sheriff's Office:] We have the family here of the victims on Mill Station. Before I get into that, we just met with them upstairs with members of the board of supervisors and the county executive. I'd like to introduce the board members who are up there. We have Muriel Johnson from the third district. We have Lila Collin
[Roger Niello, Sacramento County Fourth District Board Member:] Yes, on behalf of Sacramento County and our board, luckily most of us can't even imagine the depth of the tragedy that these people experienced and the emotion that they have been through over the last several days. We want them to know that they have the support of the community, the support of Sacramento County, and, obviously, the dedication of our sheriff's department and all of other law enforcement agencies that collaborated to bring this man to justice this morning. So with that, we just want to make sure the family knows Sacramento is with them. Thank you very much.
[Blanas:] Thank you, Roger. During the course of the last several days, as I've told you all earlier, we had the family in protective custody here in Sacramento at a hotel in the downtown area for at least eight to nine days. During that period, we had a number of people who were providing protective custody or providing security services for them.
[Hemmer:] We will not leave Sacramento, but want to know let you know, rather, in the split screen you see on the left-hand side of your monitor. That is San Antonio, Texas, courtesy of KENS. As much as six inches of rain have fallen there. And again, what we are watching here is a high water rescue by emergency officials. We were not sure earlier what was taking place, but it appears that someone, possibly more than one person has been stranded there as the water moves across a roadway. We'll have that for you and conference from Sacramento live on CNN.
[Unidentified Female:] I would like the introduce the family of the victims and the family is Boris, Kuharsky the first name is Boris, B-O-R-I-S. The last name is Kukharskiy, K-U-K-H-A-R-S-K-I-Y. His wife is Zoya Kukharskaya and the last name is K-U-K-H-A-R-S-K-A-Y- A. And they have two children, Victoria and Galina. The other family is Sergei and Lubov. The last name is Kukharskiy, K-U-K-H-A-R-S-K-I-Y. And Lubov Kukharskaya K-U-K-H-A-R-S- K-A-Y-A. They have a daughter named Oxana and a little boy named David. Unfortunately, David is in a day care center. This is Sergei. This is Boris. This is the third brother. He came from Ukraine just for the funeral. His name is Vasilly. So there are three brothers. This is Lubov Kukharskaya, and Zoya Kukharskaya. This is their children, Oxana Kukharskaya, Victoria Kukharskaya, and Galena Kukharskaya.
[Hemmer:] Again as we keep one eye on San Antonio, Texas, it appears that emergency officials have removed at least someone from the minivan stranded in that stream of water and they moving now along a rope of some sort of fence set up. We will watch and also listen to Sacramento.
[Unidentified Male:] Everybody who was so feeling toward our grief. You all know what happens in our family. He thanks God, that God gave him so many friends here, that basically helped them a lot, and supported them during all this grief. He thanks those people who took care of him from day one, from day one to the very last day, they were taken care of like little babies. When that happens they have a birthday they were very surprised. Even under protective custody, they had a birthday, and those people who were taking care of them basically made a birthday party. And they were so surprised and so deeply touched they didn't expect it. They were very thankful to everybody who took care of them, who helped them, because alone it is impossible to survive in such a huge grief. Everybody was sharing their tragedy, their grief and basically taking pieces off their shoulders, everybody, through the Sacramento and whole United States. We felt your support financially and physically. And your spiritual support, your prayers, they felt the prayers of each and everyone and God helped them go through the tragedy. He's thankful to everybody who was a participant in that issue. He has no words to thank everybody. He wanted to hug everybody. He doesn't know everybody's name who was helping him. He thanks the lady who was at the scene at the very beginning and she tried to save his daughter's life. He doesn't remember that lady's name. He will pray for all of your families and all his family. He will remember your sharing and your help for all their life. It's impossible to forget. They are very thankful to everybody that they were standing shoulder by shoulder and helping him. He thankful to everybody, kids, bigger, their parents and everybody who helped them. It's impossible to express it by words. You have to feel it. Thanks everybody, and wishes that it never ever happens again in this country. And he want to tell to everybody, that all negative we can upper hand with kindness. Stand by each other. Because there is enough negative in this planet. And the only way to solve it to be united.
[Hemmer:] Clearly a difficult time with this family meeting with reporters. The brothers of Nikolay Soltys who noticed in their mother's backyard early this morning West Coast time, Nikolay Soltys had returned to his mother's home. It was then when they ran out of the house, raced down the street about two and a half blocks and called police. Nikolay Soltys in custody tonight, accused of killing six members of his family last week. This concludes a 10 day national manhunt for the Ukrainian immigrant.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] The father of an American man who fought alongside the Taliban says that he hopes his son will be able to come home soon. Twenty-year-old John Walker was captured by U.S. special forces after a bloody uprising at an Afghan prison. Walker's father, Frank Lindh, describes his son as a devout Muslim, who was on a religious journey.
[Frank Lindh, John Walker's Father:] He was very idealistic, and I guess was taken in by a philosophy that suggested that the Taliban were trying to build some form of ideal Islamic government there in Afghanistan. And in May, I guess, from what we understand, he went to Afghanistan, unbeknownst to his family to try to help the Taliban to help establish the government there. I think he used bad judgment in going to Afghanistan. But he has not a traitor. He's a good boy. He did not do anything against the United States. He went there to help the Taliban, not a good choice but he did go to help the Taliban at a time when the United States was not involved. The United States came in later and did getting involve supporting the Northern Alliance, and I'm glad we did. I hope we can get bin Laden and root him out there. John was there before the United States got involved. And he got caught in something he shouldn't have been caught up in. He didn't do anything wrong. He didn't go to make war against his own country.
[Harris:] Walker is now in the hands of the U.S. military, and he may face prosecution. But there are a lot of questions about what, if anything, the government will do. For a little legal perspective, we're joined by CNN legal analyst Roger Cossack, who is in Washington. Good to see you, again, Roger. Long time no see.
[Roger Cossack, Cnn Legal Analyst:] How have you been, Leon.
[Harris:] not bad, man, good to see you. First of all, any precedent, any case like this before that you're aware of?
[Cossack:] Well, I guess the closest crime that we think of off the top of our head that he may have committed would be that John Walker may have committed is treason. And treason is defined in the Constitution as anybody who fights against the United States or paraphrasing a little bit or gives aid to an enemy that fights against the United States is guilty of treason. The justices of the Supreme Court Justice Jackson in 1945 said those two circumstances are the most complex you can have. In 1807 Aaron Burr was tried for treason. He claimed he was trying to set up own republic, but acquitted after a long trial, because to prove treason, you have to two independent witnesses that say the individual was there for every single overt act, or the defendant has to confess. So there's really been very no almost no exact precedent like this. We've had Tokyo Rose in World War II. I think she ended up getting seven years. And Esra Pound, who trying to give comfort to the Nazis in WWII, but he was judged insane and sent to an insane asylum. So there has been nothing that has been directly on point.
[Harris:] And one other thing that jumps out. We have a comment from his father, who makes the distinction about the fact that Walker went over to Pakistan in that area and he got hooked with the Taliban well before any war activities broken out, therefore, he seem to be ahead of curve.
[Cossack:] You know, obviously you have to feel sorry for father. That doesn't help out too much here. It's true that he was a member of the Taliban at a time when the United States was not having any hostilities toward the Taliban. But once the United States began attacking the Taliban, he is still a United States citizen, and once our planes started dropping bombs, and we were while not at the clear state of war, we were at war with the Taliban. He is certainly fighting against the United States, and I think that certainly comes within the definition of treason. Whether or not provable, obviously things have to be shown down the line. I'm afraid the fact he started before the war doesn't help him. On the other hand, we've talked about President Bush's military tribunals, but remember, they're only limited to people who are non- American citizens. This young man is an American citizen, so he could never be tried in a military tribunal.
[Harris:] Let me ask you one last question about another wrinkle that just occurred to me while you were talking there. There is another American citizen I recall that went through some things like that, with the religious angle being the biggest determination, that being Muhammed Ali. Here's a case where this young man did what he did based upon his religious beliefs. Do you see any sort of loophole there for him?
[Cossack:] You know, what Muhammed Ali did was refused to be drafted. There was a statute that he was in violation of, at least, the government claimed, and they tried him for being in violation of the statute having to do with the draft. He was eventually acquitted because of religious beliefs. This is a different story entirely. Muhammed Ali didn't take up arms against the United States. That is what this person allegedly did. That is defined in the Constitution, article 3, section 3. If you take up arms against the United States and give aid or comfort to those who do. that is, at least under the Constitution, treason.
[Harris:] Well, this will get some lawyer a chance to earn his way. We will talk about this later on. Roger, take care.
[Cossack:] Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Lou Dobbs, Cnn Anchor:] Tonight, on Wall Street, stock prices plummet: The Nasdaq is now below 2,000. Quarterly results late today: AT&T; struggling with a stock that's collapsed. And Amazon.com facing investors clamoring for profits. And Ron Muhlenkamp will tell us how his fund is outshining the rest of the market. Jessica Bibliowicz: her bet on when the economy will recover. And Conoco's chief executive officer on his company's performance and the outlook for oil and gasoline prices.
[Announcer:] From the heart of New York City, this is LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE. Here now, Lou Dobbs.
[Dobbs:] Good evening. It was yet another hectic day of profit reports and a losing session on Wall Street: It was the first time in weeks that stocks tumbled in back-to-back sessions. Our coverage tonight begins with Steve Young Steve.
[Steve Young, Cnn Correspondent:] Lou, AT&T; managed to beat drastically lowered expectations slightly, but delivered lots of reasons for concern about the current quarter.
[Jennifer Westhoven, Cnn Correspondent:] Stocks sunk but volume was really light. Could the market snap back? We'll have details of the trading day coming up.
[Tim O'brien, Cnn Correspondent:] Labor, the environment and what Democrats call unfair competition add up to trouble on trade for George Bush. I'll have that story.
[Kitty Pilgrim, Cnn Correspondent:] Indonesia may have averted a political crisis, but will investors give it another chance? Lou.
[Dobbs:] All of that and after-the-bell results from the Internet pioneer that's never made a dime: Amazon.com. We begin tonight with a late-day profit report from AT&T.; The struggling telecom reported that it lost 5 cents a share last quarter. That compares with a profit of 53 cents only a year ago. Profit from continuing operations coming in at 4 cents a share. That edged just past lowered expectations. AT&T; also warning that the weak economy will put further downward pressure on profit. The stock is down fractionally now in late trading. The news comes at an extremely sensitive and difficult moment for AT&T; and its embattled CEO, Michael Armstrong. The board has put off the break-up plan, hoping to sell the company's cable assets to unwind the controversial acquisitions made during Armstrong's four-year tenure. Steve Young has the report.
[Young:] AT&T;'s earnings meltdown gained momentum in its June quarter. The company beat lowered expectations slightly, but said that counting a charge, earnings in the current quarter will be less than analysts were looking for. On the basis of continuing operations, which strips out AT&T; wireless, now a separate company, earnings were 4 cents a share. That's down 92 percent from a year ago. And AT&T; says including a number of charges it amounts to a 4-cent-a-share loss.
[Charles Noski, Cfo, At&t;:] What you're seeing are all of the investment costs associated with the acquisition of Media One and the other growth investments that we've made. We think that we're going to see continued improvement in the quarters ahead.
[Young:] In what almost sounded like an echo of dot-com valuations, one analyst said AT&T; earnings don't matter.
[Tim Horan, Cibc World Markets:] We don't think earnings are so important at this point for AT&T.; The company is breaking itself up. It's transitioning. We think a lot of the assets have a lot of value even though they're not contributing to earnings right now.
[Young:] Sales were off 2 percent to about $13 13 billion. But some analysts were more focused on whether broadband growth would climb to the mid-teens from a year ago it did whether consumer long distance growth would improve it didn't and whether business long distance growth would stabilize, another disappointment.
[Floyd Greenwood, Prudential Securities:] We saw pretty much what we were expecting from AT&T; this time around. We saw expected weakness weakness in mature products like basic voice services. The company spoke about e-mail substitution, wireless substitution.
[Young:] On the conference call, AT&T; CEO Michael Armstrong said Comcast's bid for AT&T; broadband was rejected because it was just too low, and he's reviewing a range of strategic options for the unit, including the already planned spin-off. The company will hold a conference call tomorrow to discuss broadband. CEO Armstrong says it will be, quote, "a deep dive" Lou.
[Dobbs:] Now, what does he mean, "a deep dive" on this call?
[Young:] He means he's going to get into the nitty-gritty details. One supposes the analysts wanted to know how the company could explain sinking profit margins and what they're going to do about them in the future.
[Dobbs:] Is part of this now, because of the Comcast bid, is it possible that we're going to see this four-way split just simply held up in its entirety, not just AT&T; broadband?
[Young:] I think analysts think anything is possible. They think Comcast may come back with a richer bid or maybe the spin-off will continue.
[Dobbs:] All right, Steve, thanks. Steve Young. Also out after the bell, results from Amazon.com. The e-commerce company lost less than expected last quarter, but sales for the quarter came in below some expectations as did the guidance for revenue going forward. Amazon's stock is down 85 percent from its all-time high. It's under pressure in late after-hours trading. Bruce Francis has been analyzing the report and joins us now. Bruce, tell us all about it.
[Bruce Francis, Cnn Correspondent:] Lou, they did beat the bottom line by a wide margin, but I'm afraid that's where the good news stops for Amazon. Let's take a look at Amazon's earnings scorecard, or they don't actually have earnings, so we can't call them an earnings scorecard. They've lost on a pro forma basis 16 cents a share. That versus an estimate of 22 cents a share. Revenue light, at up 16 percent to $668 million. On a gap basis, though, they lost 47 cents a share. The highlight: The U.S. operations were profitable at Amazon. Earlier, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos described an arrangement, a new deal with AOL, the parent of CNN. Amazon is going to get $100 million, a cash investment from AOL, and he described what exactly the company is going to do with that.
[Jeff Bezos, Ceo, Amazon.com:] Now, we are going to be taking certain parts of our platform for example, our e-commerce search technology and integrating that into AOL's shopping area.
[Francis:] But the bad news starts when you get into the outlook. Let's take a look at some of the key points. When it comes to the third quarter, Amazon says that revenues will be down 7 to 14 percent from what analysts are currently expecting. And they will and for Q4, they'll be up year over year, but below the estimate. Also, the you'll see that this is something that we have seen very strongly in after-hours trading, a big reaction to that. Earlier we spoke to Jeff Fieler of Bear Stearns, who said for a company that's supposed to be a growth company Amazon really isn't growing all that much.
[Jeff Fieler, Bear Stearns:] Until the company can prove to investors that it's going to be able to grow its business, its accomplishments in terms of operational efficiencies will only help to keep the stock from going down, but it won't power it higher.
[Francis:] Amazon.com has, before this report anyway, had practically doubled from its April 4th low. But in after-hours trading, Lou, it is down sharply. We're down more than 2 bucks, and it's now down for the year. It had a distinction of being one of the big Nasdaq big caps that was actually up for the year. That's no longer true, and they're guiding down on revenues.
[Dobbs:] Somewhat lesser cap right now.
[Francis:] Much so, yes.
[Dobbs:] Well, this puts Bezos in an interesting position, doesn't it? Because now he's been managing toward break-even or profitability. Now The Street is saying, and neither are you growing, so he has two issues that he has to contend with simultaneously.
[Francis:] Yes. What's the Amazon story now? They're looked at as a growth company, but they aren't growing the top line very aggressively. Their sole profitable operation books, music and video barely growing at all, just 1 percent in this quarter.
[Dobbs:] And the third issue, their cash position in this quarter: They took a very heavy hit.
[Francis:] That's why they had to do the deal with AOL. They have other reasons for doing it, but that certainly helped them.
[Dobbs:] Even with that 100 million, over half a billion is a significant erosion in anybody's book.
[Francis:] Pressure is on.
[Dobbs:] 47 cents loss...
[Francis:] On a gap basis.
[Dobbs:] ... on a gap basis. And that's what we pay attention to irrespective of pro forma, right?
[Francis:] Look at all the numbers.
[Dobbs:] There you go. Bruce, thank you. Well, during regular trading today stocks slumped across the board, the second-straight session in which that has occurred. The Nasdaq down for the third time in the past four sessions, ending below 2,000 for the first time in two weeks. Investors are facing a grim reality as corporate profit reports continue to pour in. Not only was the second quarter horrendous for earnings, but this quarter isn't looking appreciably better. Jennifer Westhoven has the day's activities for us from Wall Street.
[Westhoven:] More companies are reporting poorer earnings and giving negative comments about future profits. The Dow turned lower, closing near its worst levels, down 152 at 10,424. 3M beat lowered targets, but it highlighted weakness in economies around the globe and the pressure of the strong dollar. American Express rose, but barely, after a heavy writedown for bad junk-bond investments cut into profits. And printer company Lexmark, a top loser after a profit warning.
[Byran Piskorowski, Prudential Securities:] We came into the second-quarter earnings season with the hope that we'd be able to see at the end of the tunnel, that we'd see confirmation that the bottoming process is taking hold. Ultimately, right now, what the market is enduring is more earnings warnings about the third quarter.
[Westhoven:] Stock analysts said trading was trendless, but still frustrating, with many industries lower: utilities, semiconductors and software. On the upside, networking stocks gained after UBS Warburg said: "Things are calm at Cisco" in contrast to the sense of panic at many tech companies as they scramble to book orders. Losses in tech stocks sent the Nasdaq back below 2,000, closing down 40 to 1,988. Some strategists dismiss fears the market is near dangerous levels.
[Richard Mccabe, Merrill Lynch:] The market, after going down from mid-May to basically early July, has been kind of in a see-saw, rally, retest, stabilization process. And I think that's going to be the bottom that would probably be the foundation for a rally phase starting either late in July or in August, and extend out to the very late summer or maybe early fall timeframe.
[Westhoven:] With a trendless day and light action, traders are throwing around a lot of theories. One is the market could be pricing in fear about the second-quarter GDP number, due Friday. There's also worry about a market psychology poll that showed too many bulls, a bad sign. But Lou, arching all of this is a Q&A; session tomorrow from Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, which traders say kept a lid on the action today.
[Dobbs:] Well, Jennifer, that's kind of curious, because the Fed chairman gave us a pretty exact preview last week.
[Westhoven:] And he's expected to repeat that preview again, but what the traders are honing in on is, is he going to talk about when a bottom might come? That is one thing that could give hope to the market. And they're also, traders are saying that right now with the volume very light today, the market could be in the kind of mood where it could move up pretty quickly Lou.
[Dobbs:] It would be nice to think that someone knew exactly where the bottom was in all of this. Jennifer, thanks a lot. Jennifer Westhoven from New York exchange. Topping tonight's "MONEYLINE Movers," Colgate-Palmolive down more than a dollar a share. The consumer products maker meeting lowered estimates, but its sales barely budged. Revenue edging up 1 percent in the quarter, hurt by the strong dollar. French media conglomerate Vivendi Universal gaining more than $2 12 a share, following stronger-than-expected earnings. Strength in its telecom and Hollywood operations, specifically Universal's movie "The Mummy Returns," driving those gains. HCA climbing a $1.30 a share after reporting better-than-expected second-quarter results. Earnings at the nation's biggest hospital chain boosted by an increased number of patients and higher fees. Shares of HCA up 50 percent from their 52-week low. The Nasdaq today once again falling below 2,000, down more than 60 percent from its record high. My guest tonight is still wary of technology stocks, and his fund is up about 14 percent this year while the S&P; 500 is down nearly 10 percent: not a bad record for Ron Muhlenkamp, manager of the Muhlenkamp Fund. Good to have you with us.
[Ron Muhlenkamp, Muhlenkamp Fund:] Good to be here.
[Dobbs:] Ron, this market is, at the very least, becoming intriguing. What's going on?
[Muhlenkamp:] Well, as you know, we've had a split market since the fall of '98. In '99 and early 2000, the fad stocks ran up and everything else did nothing. In '99, as you know, there were more stocks on the New York Stock Exchange down than up. We said in late '99, as long as the Fed was raising interest rates and the hype stocks were running, no one looked outside of that.
[Dobbs:] You know, you raise an interesting point. Most people didn't pay attention to what some termed a stealth bear market in '99 and 2000.
[Muhlenkamp:] Well, we did. The rest of the market, once you look outside the hype stocks, looked just a whole lot like a normal slowdown or recession. It looks a whole lot like the pattern of '90- '91 or '94-'95. And that's what's been going on. Interest rates, long-term interest rates, rolled over in January of last year. The hype stocks rolled over in March. And frankly, since then, this is if you step outside...
[Dobbs:] You're speaking rather quickly.
[Muhlenkamp:] I'm sorry.
[Dobbs:] Let me slow down. What kind of stocks? It began with an "H," I believe.
[Muhlenkamp:] The hype stocks. People call them tech stocks...
[Dobbs:] Right.
[Muhlenkamp:] But the public got enthused about a group of stocks that looks for all the world like a fad. And everyone is comparing to prices of a year ago, which have no relationship to anything. If you look at where they were versus three years ago, they're kind of back getting close to back to normal.
[Dobbs:] We still have some huge, huge multiples.
[Muhlenkamp:] Agreed. So the best thing you can do is ignore those. Meanwhile, the rest of the marketplace is doing what it normally does when the Fed slows the economy down and then speeds it up again. A year ago, the place to start was financials and then you rotate into consumer cyclicals, including housing, including maybe auto parts this time instead of autos. Beyond that, frankly, it's pick and choose.
[Dobbs:] And what are you picking and choosing now?
[Muhlenkamp:] We still think you've got to be in housing stocks. Incidentally, there the news is all good. We still think you can do well in some of the auto parts, a Superior or
[Dobbs:] Let's take a look, Ron, quickly at the picture the last time you were with us, if we can have that up. Thank you. Calpine is off 34 percent, Citigroup off 7 percent, Morgan Stanley off 24 percent. Coastal, which was also one of your recommendations, acquired by El Paso. At this juncture, what would you say? Do you want to keep those? Do you want to...
[Muhlenkamp:] I want to keep those, and I'm moving down the list of from class a to class b to class c in those groups. We still think that energy, particularly natural gas, is a good place to be.
[Dobbs:] Do you want to add anything to that list?
[Muhlenkamp:] Certainly. I'll add a Superior. I'll add an MBR, which is in home building. Superior Industry, which is in auto parts, things of that sort. Yeah.
[Dobbs:] And the market from here until the end of the year?
[Muhlenkamp:] It's going to remain a split market. What we haven't begun to see yet in the hype stocks is tax-loss selling. That's about a month or two away. But the rest of it, it's going to be earnings. The consumer's in good shape. Remember, all of the stuff that we see is problematic for companies is good for the consumers. And consumer is going to be in good shape here.
[Dobbs:] Well, we like that.
[Muhlenkamp:] Exactly.
[Dobbs:] All right, Ron Muhlenkamp, thanks for being with us.
[Muhlenkamp:] Good to be here.
[Dobbs:] Well, after the closing bell, Texas Instruments reported its quarterly results along with other technology companies. Profits at the world's largest maker of chips for mobile phones plunging 90 percent. TI's chips are used in about two-thirds of the world's digital cell phones. TI tonight saying the weakness in the sector is stabilizing, however. On a per share basis, Texas Instruments did beat much lowered expectations, but by only a penny. Revenue fell 31 percent compared to the same period a year ago. After hours, the stock has gained a little. It's up 25 cents at 31.05 a share. Over the past year, the stock has lost more than half its price. Still ahead here on MONEYLINE, President Bush, well, he had some advice in Rome: what the pope had to tell him about stem cell research. And a change at the top of one of the world's biggest countries: what a new president in Indonesia may mean for corporate America. Also, Disney grabs a bigger share of the cable television market.

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] In South Africa, there's a growing debate over the country's gambling industry. While it brings jobs and money to South Africa's struggling economy, it entices many to spend money they do not have.
[Shihab Rattansi, Cnn Anchor:] SABC reports on the industry and what the government is doing to help those taking a costly gamble on their luck.
[Kim Cloete, Sabc Correspondent:] Until a few years ago, horse racing was the main event for South Africans hoping to strike it lucky, but proliferation of casinos has changed this. While betting on the horses that are still popular, it's now being overtaken by the lure of the slot machine. This South African
[Rodger Meyer, National Responsible Gambling Program:] It is a condition that doesn't have a particularly pleasant prognosis: jail, divorce, death
[Cloete:] And 3 to 8 percent of the gambling population are considered problem gamblers.
[Meyer:] They spend too much time, too much money, it affects themselves and their families negatively, and they feel guilty about their behavior.
[Cloete:] Some people are being assisted by help lines. And the bank is also turned to the effect on the very poor, welfare officials are concerned about the proposed 50,000 limited pay- out machines, which will be installed in public places around the country.
[Cas Salooje, Parliamentary Welfare Cmte:] There is no doubt that something that has to be looked at much more serious.
[Cloete:] He is pleased that government is tightening up the industry, but worried about the spread of slot machines in both urban areas and the impoverished rural parts of the country.
[Meyer:] The proximity of the limited pay-out machines, whether it's at your local club, laundromat or pub, we're concerned problems related to gambling will increase.
[Cloete:] What steps will have to be taken to limit the sometimes devastating affects of gambling on the

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] More than 100,000 people remain without electricity five days after a deadly ice storm in the Midwest. In Kansas alone, more than 50,000 are without power. It could be another few days before people in the hardest hit areas have their electric service restored. Joining us now to talk about the outages in Kansas is Cynthia McCarvel. She is with Westar energy. Cynthia, warm greetings to you.
[Cynthia Mccarvel, Westar Energy:] Thank you, Daryn. Nice to be here.
[Kagan:] Joining us from Topeka as I understand.
[Mccarvel:] Right.
[Kagan:] This has been going on for a while. The bad ice storm was about a week ago?
[Mccarvel:] Yes, it started last Tuesday and finished on Wednesday.
[Kagan:] Now you have made some progress.
[Mccarvel:] Yes, we've made progress. At the peek of storm, we had over 100,000 of our customers without power, and today, we're down to 4,300 customers without power.
[Kagan:] And what's the challenge in getting those last 4,000 people back on-line.
[Mccarvel:] A lot of times, it's individual customers that we're working on at this point, and it just takes a little bit of patience and some time to get out and get to everyone's home.
[Kagan:] Meanwhile, how is weather cooperating as you are trying to get everyone plugged back in?
[Mccarvel:] The weather has been working with us. We've had some 40-degree weather which has been helping in melting the ice and keeping the days good.
[Kagan:] Cynthia, it seems like we do these stories every winter the ice comes in, the power lines go down. Is it possible to build power lines that are more resistant to the ice and to the weight that they put on them?
[Mccarvel:] Well, our power lines are built to withstand that weight of the ice, but there's just special circumstances that some of these storms are just more powerful than others.
[Kagan:] Sometimes. We wish you good luck and getting people back on-line. Thank you. Cynthia McCarvel, joining us from Topeka, Kansas. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] It was 37 years ago today Martin Luther King Jr. stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and spoke of his dream for racial equality. Today, thousands of people gathered in the same spot in Washington to redeem the dream, and called for an end to unfair treatment of minorities by the police. Kathleen Koch has more.
[Martin Luther King Iii, Sclc:] And abolish racial profiling!
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] It was a call for change from the son of the man who transfixed so many 37 years ago.
[Rev. Martin Luther King Jr:] Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation.
[Koch:] In 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. dreamt of a day when all Americans would be judged by the content of their character. But recent cases of police brutality and ongoing problems with racial profiling led African-American leaders to rally in Washington to redeem the dream. Speakers included victims, like Abner Louima, beaten and sodomized by New York police in 1997.
[Abner Louima, Assault Victim:] We demand for the government to use their power as one of the greatest nations in the world to end police brutality, to end racial profiling.
[Koch:] Amadou Diallo was shot to death by police in the vestibule of his Bronx apartment last year. His parents recalled Dr. King's dream.
[Saiko Diallo, Shooting Victim's Father:] My family and I regret tremendously that his dream has not been realized. Had his dream been realized, our son Amadou would be still alive today.
[Koch:] Protesters came with their own stories and hope for change.
[Unidentified Male:] I drive a Mercedes Benz, and I've been pulled over on countless times for no apparent reason.
[Unidentified Female:] I think it all has to start in the heart of individual people. People have to learn to love each other.
[Unidentified Male:] You know, let everybody, let the world know that we don't really want to take this no more.
[Koch:] Only a few states have specific laws against racial profiling, but nearly two dozen other are considering such measures. Demonstrators here want Congress to mandate a nationwide study of the problem and how to stop it. [voice-over]: They also called for federal prosecution of high- profile police brutality cases and an executive order banning racial profiling by the federal government. Organizers say the rally is just the first step on a long road.
[Coretta Scott King:] I think we just want justice to be evenhanded.
[King:] The time is now, but I'm not sure that the will is there. We're always in a phase of denial.
[Koch:] Something they hope events like this can change. Kathleen Koch, for CNN, Washington.

[Announcer:] Liz Boyes from Bay City, Michigan, asks, "What is the significance in the different colors and styles of the head coverings used by the different religions? Do they indicate a different tribe, sect, religion or social class?"
[Jean Abinader, Managing Director, Arab American Institute:] Liz, thanks for the question. It's a good one and I hear it often because people are confused when they look and see people who are members of the Northern Alliance and they all dress differently or they look at women in Afghanistan, they look at women in Saudi Arabia or Jordan or Egypt or Indonesia and they say well, why don't they all look the same if they're all members of the same religion? Well, the religion, Islam, doesn't really tell them how to dress. It tells them how not to dress. It tells women they should be modest and it tells men not to be flamboyant in the way they dress. But it doesn't say specifically how to dress. And so women and men generally evolved the way they dressed out of local traditions and culture. And so when you see the people in the Taliban, when you see the people in the Northern Alliance, when you see Arabs or when you see Indonesians or Malaysians, the way they dress is dictated by social convention, by the classes they belong to and by what they can afford to wear. But generally the local tastes are what determine how people dress and how they appear in public.

[Deepak Chopra, Founder And Ceo, The Chopra Center:] I have the appearance of a wave coming towards me.
[Unidentified Female:] According to [inaudible], it's going to be a group.
[Chopra:] Depending on your perspective, you may think we are sages, or you might think we're psychotics, you might think we are geniuses. But it all is up to how you view us. We are OK with any interpretation. OK? We think we are a motley group of sages, psychotics, and geniuses.
[Beverly Schuch:] And proud of them all.
[Chopra:] And proud of them all. Actually, one of our mantras should be please write it down Nothing ever is wrong in my world.
[Schuch:] Deepak Chopra is talking about his growing band of fellow seekers on an eternal quest for the meaning of life. In addition to the thousands of world followers and students of meditation, Chopra's own inner journey has taken him on a career as a respected doctor of endocrinology to what some have called one of the most influential spiritual leaders of the 20th century.
[Chopra:] At the moment, I seem to be riding the wave.
[Schuch:] A prolific writer, he shares his collected wisdom with celebrities and common folk alike in a series of best-selling books, tapes, and lectures. He recently inked a two-book, seven-figure deal with Putnam to pursue the answers of science and spirituality. Like all searches, Deepak's began with a restless feeling that there must be more to life than this.
[Chopra:] There is always the need for discontent. There's an expression I'm fond of, it's called divine discontent. And if you have that discontent, then there's an urge to do something.
[Schuch:] You've captured the imagination of baby boomers so well. What's missing in our lives that has allowed this to become the phenomenon that it is?
[Chopra:] This is an amazing generation, the baby boomer generation. And if there was one characteristic for this generation, it's that they never accepted the status quo, whatever it was, whatever the major movements of our last century were, this was the generation created new music, it was the antiwar movement, it was the feminist movement, it was the ecology consciousness. Today the same generation is dismantling the old and structuring and engineering the climactic overthrow of the superstition of materialism.
[Schuch:] One of Chopra's unique methods of overthrowing materialism is to start to pay more attention to the coincidences in your life.
[Chopra:] The author is Indian from Tehran. Now, you know, for me that's a coincidence, and I just note it down, because it's magical, it makes my life so full of wonder.
[Schuch:] The mystical life of Deepak Chopra, next on
[Pinnacle. Announcer:] This is PINNACLE with Beverly Schuch.
[Chopra:] How many people are in the How to Know God course?
[Schuch:] Born in India to a family of healers, Deepak Chopra came to the U.S. at age 21 to practice medicine. Once here, he smoked, drank, and sinned just like the rest of us. Perhaps his sins stung a little more, because at the time he was the head of the Boston Regional Medical Center. He says he felt like a hypocrite. [on camera]: What happened to you?
[Chopra:] Smoking cigarettes and having Scotch, and that was acquired by just being in the atmosphere that I found myself in as an intern, a resident, in both New Jersey as well as Boston. We worked very hard, sometimes worked two or three days in a row, didn't go to sleep. On Fridays, everybody almost every week got a little drunk. That was the atmosphere in the hospitals. And all the doctors used to smoke at that time. And so I just wanted to be part of the crowd, and I got into it, and I for the short while I really enjoyed it.
[Schuch:] Do you have an addictive personality?
[Chopra:] I probably do. I do have an addictive personality. I'm an all-or-nothing person, so yes.
[Schuch:] And what made you want to stop? I mean, what made you realize, Maybe I'm in a little trouble here?
[Chopra:] There was a part of me that started feeling like a hypocrite, you know. I was telling my patients not to smoke, I'm telling my patients not to do this, and then I was doing it. And I was also prescribing medication all the time, and most of it was tranquilizers, sleeping pills, antibiotics. So I felt funny, I felt like a legalized drug pusher who was in trouble myself. And so I just one day I announced to my wife that I'm done with all that.
[Schuch:] An all-or-nothing person, faced with nothing, he discovered all, and changed his life radically. [on camera]: Is there an average day?
[Chopra:] It varies. You know, I wake up at 4:00 in the morning. I meditate for two hours. Please don't mind the time, and let's go with the process. And then I work out for about one and a half hours. And then I come here. I'm here before 8:00 in the morning, about 7:30.
[Schuch:] But...
[Chopra:] But, yes, I meditate for two hours, I go into silence, and then I work out for two and about one and a half hours. I do a lot of teachings. We have a third course starting for it's called Reversal of Aging.
[Schuch:] He's teaching what he learned himself through a series of coincidences, or, as he now calls it, synchrodestiny.
[Chopra:] Synchro stands for synchronicity, and destiny stands for destiny. So synchrodestiny means, how do you understand the meaning of coincidence and synchronicity? And how does it shape your destiny, ultimately?
[Schuch:] Seemingly by accident and he doesn't believe in accidents he stumbled onto a path that led him away from traditional Western medicines to rediscover ancient Eastern traditions, from healing to mystical poetry.
[Chopra:] "I'm an astounding, lucid confusion. I'm your own voice, echoing off the walls of God."
[Schuch:] The "lucid confusion" named Deepak is forwarding a message of ancient wisdom made modern. His great discovery is that what used to be thought of as mystical is really just another way of looking at physics, cause and effect. What you give out, you get back.
[Chopra:] The gravitational effects of the sun and moon are causing the ocean to heave up and down. That's all that's happening. But as the earth is spinning on its tumbling on its axis, then I have the appearance of a wave coming towards me. It's the same water that hits the shore all the time.
[Schuch:] He's just as skilled at translating literature and ancient esoteric poetry as he is in explaining physics.
[Chopra:] OK, Beverly, hold onto your seat belt.
[Schuch:] Deepak's original translations of the 13th century poet Rumi so galvanized his celebrity followers that they helped him make the poems into a
[Cd. Chopra:] I just finished the manuscript, and Madonna happened to be here that weekend. And she said, "These are beautiful poems." So I said, "Would you like a copy?" So I gave her a copy. And they hadn't been published yet. And the next day she called me, she said, "They're just extraordinary. They should be put to music. They're very musical." I said, "Well, would you like to read one to music?" And she said, "Sure."
[Madonna:] "In my hallucination, I saw my beloved's flower garden. In my vertigo, in my dizziness, in my drunken haze, whirling and dancing like a spinning [inaudible]."
[Schuch:] So who is the man behind the myth called Deepak Chopra? He is equal parts in the worlds of science and spirit. The synchrodestiny of Deepak Chopra how one moment led Chopra to find himself back in his native India and thrust into a whirling dervish journey of enlightenment, when PINNACLE returns. Deepak Chopra was born into a life of wealth and privilege in India. He grew up with dreams of becoming a writer. His father, however, had greater expectations for his son.
[Chopra:] My father is a wealthy man, so, yes, we had everything. We had lots of people in at home as domestic servants, drivers to drive the cars, do everything for you, including polish your shoes and polish your belt and things like that.
[Schuch:] Whose idea was it that you become a doctor? Was it yours or was it expected?
[Chopra:] I never wanted to be a doctor. I was more interested in being a writer, and particularly a writer of fiction. And on my 14th birthday, my father gave me a bunch of books as presents. And the books were "Of Human Bondage" the hero of the book is a doctor. He gave me something called "Arrowsmith," by Sinclair Lewis, where the hero is a doctor. He gave me a book called "The Magnificent Obsession," where the hero is a doctor. They were amazing books, and after I finished reading them, I went to him, I said, "I want to be a doctor."
[Schuch:] It worked. [voice-over]: Although today he embraces no formal religion, Deepak was a Hindu by heritage, educated in the best Catholic schools in India. He was a voracious reader with a talent for feats of mental agility.
[Chopra:] When you came out of Catholic school, you could recite all of Shakespeare from beginning to end. I can still do it, you know, if you tell me, what's Act I, scene 1, "Merchant of Venice," I can rattle it off like this, or "Hamlet" or whatever, [inaudible]...
[Schuch:] Act I, scene 1, "Merchant of Venice."
[Chopra:] "In truth, I know not why I am so sad. It wearies me, you say it wearies you. But how I [inaudible], what stuff 'tis made of, whereof it is born, I am to learn. And such a one to its sadness makes of me. I have much ado to know myself."
[Schuch:] To know himself, Deepak, along with much of India in those days, was looking to the West for enlightenment, setting aside ancient native philosophies. Chopra became a well- trained Western doctor, eventually teaching at Boston University and Tufts Medical Schools. But his success in the West left a void he tried to fill with unprescribed vices. [on camera]: At what point, then, after you made this commitment to quit smoking and drinking and all, did you find meditation and Ayurvedic philosophy and your roots again?
[Chopra:] I happened to meet Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, who was the founder of the TM movement worldwide. And he asked me to look into Ayurveda.
[Schuch:] Ayurvedic, what's the definition of Ayurvedic?
[Chopra:] Originally the word meant science of life. It deals with every aspect of life, relationships, love, romance, art, music.
[Schuch:] Was there, like, an Aha! moment of stark realization, or was it a cumulative effect?
[Chopra:] It was a synchronistic experience. I was in a conference in Washington, D.C., that Maharishi was at, and he said, "Have you ever looked into Ayurvedic medicine?" I said no. He said, "You should look at it." And I was polite, I said I would, perhaps, one day. After I left the conference, I was at the airport. I ran into a friend of mine who was from medical school. And he gave me a book on Ayurveda. And I thought that was an interesting coincidence. I read the book on the flight from Washington to Boston, and then I didn't go home, I took the flight back to Washington. I went back to the hotel. I went to Maharishi, and I said, "Can you introduce me to some experts?" And he said, "Sure."
[Schuch:] Since then, Deepak has spread the practice of Ayurveda, meditation, and synchrodestiny through his writings and lectures and from his headquarters at the Chopra Center for Well-Being in La Jolla. [on camera]: So why did you choose La Jolla? I mean, not that a place has any reality, it's just an illusion. But why not Plainfield, New Jersey, or Boston?
[Chopra:] Well, the environment has to be healing. The environment is our extended body. And you can't look at this and not feel good.
[Schuch:] He holds workshops provocatively titled, The Seduction of the Spirit, Magical Beginnings, and Spiritual Divorce.
[Unidentified Female:] Did I tell you about Deepak sing in spiritual journeys, and they're doing packages, land packages that get you actually from Delhi to Agra?
[Schuch:] And he takes his message abroad, often traveling with a group. By his own account, he's visited every country in the world. But despite the success of the center, you won't find Chopra franchising his philosophies.
[Chopra:] I think we would dilute ourselves if we do if we spread out, and even you know, we only have about 18 people, maximum, here in a week. Now, theoretically we could have 50 and make a lot of money. But it wouldn't serve the purpose. You can't give people the kind of attention they need if you make it a factory.
[Schuch:] Although his workshops can run in the thousands, the profit engine is his books. At last count, Deepak's written 27 books. Five are best-sellers. And his lectures can run up to $50,000 each. Annual estimates for the Chopra empire are about $15 million, but don't ask him. [on camera]: You don't know?
[Chopra:] No, I don't, because what happens is, you know, this might be difficult for you to believe, but I've never looked at a bank statement. My assistant, Carolyn, she signs all my checks. And long time ago, I convinced myself that if you know how much money you have, then you're not rich. And if you have no concern about it, then you're very rich.
[Unidentified Male:] Don't worry, be happy.
[Schuch:] Does that kind of sum it up?
[Chopra:] That sums it up.
[Schuch:] When we come back, deep talk with Deepak. The kids carry on, and what unsettles the sultan of serenity. PINNACLE returns in a moment. When was the last time you saw God?
[Chopra:] I'm sitting right next to God.
[Schuch:] Well, that'll score you a lot of points.
[Chopra:] God is the infinite, unbounded, eternal intelligence that orchestrates the information, energy, and the whole fabric of spacetime and all these universes, and...
[Schuch:] OK, what does that mean?
[Chopra:] What does that mean? Well, if I look at a little flower, it is the confluence of rainbows and sunshine and earth and water and wind and space and the infinite void and the whole history of the universe in a rose petal. That's God.
[Schuch:] Is that what your book says, "How to Know God"?
[Chopra:] My book "How to Know God" says that as you expand your own awareness, it ultimately becomes unlimited. And the essential human is one of ambiguity, that at the depth of our being we are sinners and saints, we are divine and diabolical, we are sacred and profane.
[Schuch:] And is science just a more primitive form, then, of spirituality?
[Chopra:] Yes. If when scientists make great discoveries, they are filled with a sense of reverence and awe and a feeling of the sacred. Didn't Einstein once say, I want to know how God thinks, everything else is a detail? That's what Einstein said, because the laws of nature are the thoughts of God.
[Schuch:] What is the soul?
[Chopra:] The soul is a confluence of meanings, contexts, relationships, interpretations, memories, desires, all born of karma. Now, it takes two books to explain that.
[Schuch:] By all accounts, Deepak will write those books. But in the meantime, his two offspring are spreading his message. GOTHAM
[Chopra:] Is giving also an act of self-love...
[Dalai Lama:] And forgiveness.
[Gotham Chopra:] ... and forgiveness?
[Schuch:] At just 26, Gotham is becoming a star in his own right, a master of all media. He reports for Channel One, a cable affiliate of
[Abc. Dalai Lama:] When you develop genuine sense of [inaudible], then your mind immediately broadened.
[Schuch:] Deepak's 29-year-old daughter, Mallika, is combining business and Eastern Indian practices. This January, she launched My Potential, a Web site counseling people on leading fuller lives.
[Mallika Chopra, Founder, My Potential:] Well, actually on Friday, Bija Bennett, who's someone who's worked with my dad in the past, she was here, and she wants she's now dying to be a part of this, and wants us to do her books, wants to do videos. She does yoga.
[Schuch:] With his children flourishing, Deepak and his wife, Rita, love nothing better than slipping away into a celestial silence.
[Chopra:] Every three months, I take a week and go in silence. I cut myself off from the rest of the world. I don't even read, because reading is a conversation with the author. And so I have no conversations, other than with nature. And sometimes my wife will go with me, and we will live in separate apartments or separate locations, but we'll meet each other for go for a walk once a day, and we won't communicate during that period. Have you met my wife, by the way?
[Unidentified Male:] No, I haven't.
[Chopra:] When I met my wife for the first time, I had stopped to tie my shoelaces. And my glasses, reading glasses, had fallen. And she picked them up, and she said, "Are these yours?" And I looked into her eyes, and I knew I was in love. Now, let's assume that my shoelaces had come off on the traffic light before this one. My life would have been different. So every incident in our life is actually is actually a clue.
[Schuch:] And there are no coincidences.
[Chopra:] And there are no coincidences. Nothing is random, nothing is by chance.
[Schuch:] With all the love and joy surrounding Deepak, it may seem like nothing can jar his serenity. But if you want to see this self-described spiritual vagabond turn into a warrior, just sue him. Those who have sued him over the past several years have seen this side of Deepak. [on camera]: You are quoted as saying, "Lawsuits can be about love."
[Chopra:] I said that.
[Schuch:] You said that.
[Chopra:] I said that.
[Schuch:] What's that all about?
[Chopra:] Well, you know, in my self-righteous mood, I've said lots of things that I may have regretted. I felt I was being targeted by powerful interests and legal systems, et cetera. I took a stand, and over the years, in retrospect, I was right, you know, every lawsuit that I have had has almost every lawsuit is totally resolved, and its resolution has always been in my favor. Would I do it all over again? I don't know. I still don't know. There's a part of me that loves the fight.
[Schuch:] So right now, the lawsuits stand where?
[Chopra:] I do not at the moment have any lawsuits against me. I have reason to believe, as a result of what happened in the lawsuits that I was involved in, that there are several judges in this system that are extremely corrupt.
[Schuch:] Having stymied his enemies and passed on something to the next generation, Deepak's current thoughts are of peace and obscurity. [on camera]: You have been quoted as saying, even recently, that you hope that by the time you die, you will have sunk into anonymity.
[Chopra:] Time is the ultimate reckoner, and it will definitely make sure that you sink into oblivion and anonymity. There's a Shakespeare said, "There's a tide in the affairs of men, which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune." And as we speak right now, you've caught me in the middle of that tide.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Only days after President Bush named Iran as one of three nations in what he called the "axis of evil," Iran is now saying it could use some help in finding al Qaeda and Taliban fighters, who may have fled there. Why the apparent change in tone? Well, for his insights, we turn to Richard Butler, our ambassador-in-residence good morning. How are you doing this morning?
[Richard Butler, Former United Nations Chief Weapons Inspector:] Good morning, Paula. I am fine.
[Zahn:] There continues to be concern about President Bush's axis of evil speech. Yesterday, Secretary of State Colin Powell had to answer some very tough questions from legislatures in that regard. How did he do?
[Butler:] He did pretty well, Paula. If one of his key objectives, and of course it was, was to stay real close to the president, no daylight between the two of them, he said the president meant what he said. There is problems for the United States out there in these three countries. He said maybe also in some other countries that, you know, he didn't name. So he defended the party line. But he came under some very, very tough questioning as well, and in that context, you know, maybe in reaction to some of this European concern about the axis of evil concept, certainly concern in Iran, which we might come to in a moment. But in that context, he said something extremely interesting, which I think we should listen to.
[Colin Powell, Secretary Of State:] Actions are going to be required. It doesn't mean the war is going to start tomorrow, or that we are going to invade anybody. In fact, it may mean in the short term, focus on the policies that we have in place with respect to each of the three countries he mentioned and other countries that might have been mentioned.
[Zahn:] So is the secretary of state basically saying that people were reaching conclusions that were inappropriate? Because within days of that speech, everybody, pundits at least, were speculating when the first strike was going to happen and where.
[Butler:] That's right. So we've got to get inside this. What actually was he saying? He was saying the president used a rhetorical flourish. The president went for popularity in the situation, where this war is very popular, and maybe it should be. But that truly the three countries at issue are something we know to be true. They are all different. They all present different problems. They each deserve their own policy, and maybe that's far more important than some overarching concept of axis of evil...
[Zahn:] Don't lump them all together.
[Butler:] That's right. And interestingly, Paula, I mean, you and I could have been forgiven if last week we thought the United States was going to go off and invade Iraq any moment now. OK? And here is the secretary of state saying we're not going to do that anytime soon. We are going to pursue what we were doing in the past with respect to each of the three named countries, and maybe some unnamed ones. And in that context, Paula, we still need to know what are these policies? What is the Iraq policy?
[Zahn:] Well, when it came to Iraq, he made very clear that the inspections must continue.
[Butler:] That was clear. That was very clear, and I thought he was great, if I may say so, when he...
[Zahn:] Well, yes, you were the guy that used to conduct those inspections.
[Butler:] Well, that's right. When he said this conversation with the Iraqis at the U.N. could be real short, because there is only one thing at issue, which is getting those inspectors back there. And of course, he is quite right. I hope it is short, and I hope it results in those inspectors going back. Don't hold your breath. But I thought that was very clear. On this other point though, three policies are what we need, an Iraq policy, an Iran policy and a policy towards Korea. I'm not sure what the Iraq policy is. The Iran policy, again, we were doing not badly in trying to get things back on track with Iran. The foreign minister of Iran yesterday tried to put them further back on track.
[Zahn:] Well, essentially saying we need your help. We can't control our 560 mile border with Afghanistan. Come in and help us find where these al Qaeda leaders are.
[Butler:] Exactly. And I thought that was...
[Zahn:] That's pretty encouraging, correct?
[Butler:] That was encouraging, and...
[Zahn:] But what does it mean? What are the implications of that?
[Butler:] The implications...
[Zahn:] That we'll send agents in to assist them in trying to find these al Qaeda leaders?
[Butler:] Maybe, but I think what it means is that we've got to walk back from this gross concept of axis of evil and deal with each of these countries in their terms. And in this case, yes, we should take the Iranian offer and go help them and try and see that their long and porous border with Afghanistan is not something through which al Qaeda terrorists can pass and get safe haven. We should get back on track in an intrinsic way with each of these countries.
[Zahn:] And the other thing Secretary Powell make quite clear is the United States would not contribute to a peacekeeping force...
[Butler:] That's right.
[Zahn:] ... in Afghanistan.
[Butler:] That's right.
[Zahn:] Now, you've got a bunch of senators out there that are pretty unhappy about this, basically saying you're going to win the war but lose the peace.
[Butler:] Paula, dead right, I mean, to put it that way. We have been there before. We were there in the Gulf War. We won the war, but we kind of lost the peace. That's why we are still dealing with Saddam Hussein today. We have won the war in the military sense in Afghanistan, but there is a peace to be built. And senators from both sides, Biden, Democrat, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Lugar, Republican, distinguished man, saying to Colin Powell, "Come on. Is it really so unthinkable that we could have American boots on the ground to help rebuild Afghanistan?" There is this ideological hang-up in this administration that we don't do that thing. The world...
[Zahn:] The nation-building thing.
[Butler:] That's right. The world has been calling for that, pointing out the 2,500 British troops around Kabul is not enough. There is a whole country to rebuild and to keep safe. You know, these warlords are fighting in various parts of the country. Can we please have some American troops? And both sides of politics are asking for that. This administration is saying we don't go there. What do we do? We fight video wars from the sky. We send to the Congress this massive defense budget, but we are not going to put American troops on the ground, as you say rightly so, not just to win the war, but to secure and win the peace. I think it's a matter of concern.
[Zahn:] Well, it's something we will continue to debate here at A.M. Richard Butler, as always, thanks for your insights.
[Butler:] Good.
[Zahn:] See you tomorrow morning.
[Butler:] Thank you.
[Zahn:] Same time, same place.

[John Defterios, Cnn Anchor:] This could turn out to be another volatile day for the bond market with today's auction of 30-year notes.
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Christine Romans join us now to explain something of the wise and wherefores Christine.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Correspondent:] It has been very bewildering for those people who've been watching and dealing in the bond market lately. And we have the quarterly refunding this week, that is a supply situation: The five-year note sale was hum-drum; the 10-year note sale was called a "disaster, anemic." That was yesterday, and the long bond suffered a bit on that. And we get the 30-year sale today, and there's two schools of thought. Some people think that because the first two legs of this auction did not go so hot, it could be a little bit sloppy today. We could see some volatility and maybe a downside move in the bonds. Because of that, others say that maybe the long-term players, the U.S. pension funds, stayed out of the first two legs of this refunding, and they'll be bidding for the long bonds. So we'll have to wait and see. Early this afternoon we'll get the answers to that. But, as I said, it's been very bewildering for the bond market, and there are lots of things going on here. You know, we heard last week about major steps to pay down pay down government debt, and then a lot of people assumed that the long end of the bond was where the long end of the yield curve, rather, was where this was going to happen, that the government would be buying back its 30-year bonds and would be and as they did say, would be issuing fewer 30-year bonds. And then Larry Summers comes out yesterday, he's the Treasury secretary, and he says that they're actually going to use the entire yield curve to hold down their borrowing costs; that really threw a wrench into people's expectations there. Also, some people are believing that a slowdown is imminent; that was one reason why the market was able to really the yields come off significantly last week. But at the same time, a lot of people saying the Fed is going to raise interest rates in March. So lots of different cross-currents going around in the bond market, and it's making for very, very volatile trade. I want to look real quickly at a 30-year yield chart and the 10- year note chart. You can see how they behaved over the past year. You can see recently things have inverted; it's called a "yield-curve inversion." It gets very technical and hard to explain, but you can see there on that chart what that means. Yesterday, with a long bond at 6.31 percent, but the 10-year note at 6.65. So you're getting more yield, more money, you know, a better return at the short end of the market, which is counter-intuitive and sometimes can indicate that an economic slowdown is in the works. So lots of really crazy stuff going on there.
[Marchini:] Bottom line here is last week and again yesterday, a lot of people lost money in the bond market because of something they though the Treasury did. What's the fallout from this?
[Romans:] I don't know. You know, that's a very good question. It has been so hectic lately. I think you can really assume that a lot of people are taking to the sidelines and are going to sit back and wait and see: Is the 10-year going to become the benchmark? A lot of people are saying it is. The 30-year is a scarce commodity; it's going to volatile; it's going to be illiquid. But that said, now we have Larry Summers saying that they're going to be buying back securities all along the yield curve, so what does that mean for the rest of the...
[Defterios:] Well, it's interesting, prior to being number one at Treasury, he was not as cautious; remember his comments about the dollar kind of shaking things up. But he's learned to be very cautious, and that really raises into question here: What his motivations truly were?
[Romans:] It really does. And it's interesting, one of the economists who I follow, he said something he called it "Larry's misstep"; it's a learning experience, that Larry Summers should never have said that and that Robert Rubin wouldn't. He said, tough love. So it's interesting that, you know, this is Larry Summers' sort of first year on the job, and here in the bond market, he you know, everyone says he moved it a point yesterday.
[Defterios:] And costly love, we should say, right? Not tough love, costly love.
[Romans:] Yes, exactly.
[Marchini:] Suffice it to say a lot of bond traders are not too happy with him yet.
[Defterios:] Yes.
[Marchini:] All right, Christine, thanks a lot.
[Defterios:] Thanks.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Let's bring in our military analyst General Don Sheppard, who is of course keeping us on the straight and narrow as well on all of these things. I want to talk a little bit at least about how in fact special forces might be deployed in and around this region, given what we know about how troops have been forward deployed. And, general, I guess one of the thing that comes to mind immediately are those carrier battle groups out there in the Arabian sea. We have an image, a graphic which we put together, which depicts probably what might be happening onboard the USS Kitty Hawk, which as we know left Japan without its flight wing, thus making possible to be useful for helicopter pilots, kind of a joint operation. Let's look exactly how mission might be flown off that deck. And general, this would be probably a Pavilow hawk helicopter, which would have to refuel along the way. There is a lot of coordination involved here, right?
[Gen. Don Sheppard,  Cnn Military Analyst:] There is indeed. That is a Pavilow helicopter there, and we also have Pave Hawks coming off to refuel by MC-130 Talon, which gives them unlimited range, about 400 miles into the country, which is about a four-hour flight for these airplanes. It's a long way. These are very capable forces, can operate in night and all kinds of weather.
[O'brien:] All right, so that's just one way. There are many other points of ingress, if you will, from what we know about where U.S. helicopters, where aircraft are, and where some of our ground troops might be. Of course, the caveat on all this is that while many of these governments around Afghanistan have said, yes, you can put people on the ground here, but so long as they're used for humanitarian purposes or search and rescue. Is that one of those wink and nod, diplomatic statements.
[Sheppard:] It could be. The secretary of defense has been very careful to say that he is going to allow each nation to characterize what they can do to support and what the forces within their country are doing, but basically, we need bases to station our special operations forces, to refuel them, and to receive larger Army forces, that come in later, Miles. They are going to have to tell us from the Pentagon and also from the countries involved what they're allowing these forces to do.
[O'brien:] All right, with all of those disclaimers, why don't you give the lay of the land, if you will, and at least in general terms, give us a sense of and what special operations role will be at this juncture.
[Sheppard:] Right, let's take a look at the telestrator, if we can. If I can go to this telestrator here. I'm going to mark the key cities here. First of all, Kandahar is the center of activity from Kabul, the capital, Mazar-e-Sharif and Herat. Those are the major population centers held by the Taliban forces. They have to be able to communicate back and forth between these cities and resupply forces back and forth between the cities here. Now the whole idea of inserting special forces, if you can, is I will clear the last lines out of there. The whole idea of special forces is to come in and insert between these lines people that can intercept resupply missions, that can tell you where they are going on so that airpower can be brought on. Also, the Northern Alliance at the same time now will be moving on Mazar-e-Sharif and down toward Kabul, trying to secure those areas. The whole idea is disrupt the movement of forces, cut off their communications. Now, one other thing I would like to state, is that when by going into the Kandahar area, and between Kandahar and Kabul, this would be a line of retreat for the Taliban forces from Kabul to Kandahar. They may have no way to retreat. So the special operations forces to watch and listen and tell us where they are, so we can call in airpower and further to disrupt when the time comes to do that.
[O'brien:] Give us a sense then, general, and special operations when they are on the ground. How useful can they be in identifying those targets for the air campaign. As time goes on as there become fewer and fewer obvious targets, it becomes more difficult, no matter how good your precision weapons are, if you can't find target, they do no good?
[Sheppard:] These are small teams of forces. Don't think that of the special forces as large groups of heavily armed troops. They are small teams, a dozen men, this type of thing. They can get in quietly, they can watch day and night, they can also mark targets call in airpower from the AC-130 gunships, relay targets to airborne- forward air controllers so we can call in heavy airpower. This is a joint team that is well practiced between special operations and the airpower forces that we have available. Very well practiced and very, very powerful Miles.
[O'brien:] General Don Sheppard, thank you very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Announcer:] From the heart of New York City, this is LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE. Sitting in tonight, Jan Hopkins.
[Jan Hopkins, Cnn Anchor:] Good evening. In tonight's headlines: Cisco Systems is restructuring into 11 technology groups, and CEO John Chambers says there are signs that business is stabilizing. A modest retreat on Wall Street, stocks fall after yesterday's strong rally. And the government reports the total number of people receiving unemployment rose to more than 3 million. That's the highest level since 1992. Let's check in with our reporters to see what they're working on tonight, beginning with Fred Katayama Fred?
[Fred Katayama, Cnn Correspondent:] A late day surprise, Jan, from Cisco. The company is reorganizing and offering some hopeful hints about the future.
[Steve Young, Cnn Correspondent:] Lucent offers a lame near-term outlook but says: "Just you wait until 2003."
[Kitty Pilgrim, Cnn Correspondent:] A federal investigation into the health care sector looks into Medicare and Medicaid fraud. Some of the biggest names in the industry are involved.
[Allan Chernoff, Cnn Correspondent:] Corporate America's mountain of high-yield debt is crumbling. We'll tell you about a new record high in defaults and downgrades, and remind you why they call those bonds "junk."
[Hopkins:] Thanks, Allan. Those stories are coming up on MONEYLINE. We begin tonight with after-the-bell news from Cisco Systems. The network equipment maker said it would separate into 11 technology groups, and CEO John Chambers voiced some cautious optimism about the future. It was just three weeks ago when Cisco warned of continuing weakness in the U.S. and Asian markets. Fred Katayama is here to sort out the company's outlook now. So things have changed in three weeks?
[Katayama:] They are changing, Jan. Cisco is announcing its biggest management overhaul in four years. It's eliminating its telecom unit and the executive who headed that telecom business, Kevin Kennedy, is resigning. The networking company is eliminating two other divisions as well, those that served large and small businesses. In its place, it's forming 11 technology groups, all headed by one person, Mario Mazola, an eight-year veteran who formerly oversaw business ventures. The company says it's doing this to get closer to customers whose needs, it says, are changing. Now, currently, if a large corporation wanted to get information about, say, a wireless product, Cisco would have to turn to a different business unit. But under the new structure, engineering and technology would be centralized under one roof, under one boss. So all groups would have access to all the technical information, helping the company serve its clients better. One analyst said that this move is not really a restructuring, but rather a reorganization. It will have no financial impact, since it doesn't involve any charges or layoffs, although chief executive John Chambers said he hasn't ruled out attrition. Chambers also comforted investors when he said that he sees signs that business is stabilizing. He reaffirms his earlier guidance to analysts, saying that orders for the first few weeks of this quarter are in line with expectations. Cisco stock is rising sharply in after-hours trading, and analysts say the stock is reacting more to Chambers' comment about the business than his overhaul plans Jan?
[Hopkins:] Because he's made such amazing comments about what's going on, you know, things falling off sharply, you know, running against a wall, and now stabilizing. That's a big difference.
[Katayama:] Right, Jan. In a climate when all you heard was bad news, investors are willing to hear anything hopeful, and this is the most hopeful sign from Cisco in some time.
[Hopkins:] Thanks, Fred Katayama. And as Fred told us, shares of Cisco are getting a boost in heavy after-hours trading tonight. So let's's go to the Instinet trading desk and check in with Jennifer Westhoven. She can tell us about it Jennifer?
[Jennifer Westhoven, Cnn Correspondent:] Thanks, Jan. And Cisco shares aren't stabilizing. They really haven't settled on a price. Every time I check this stock, it goes higher and higher. At last check, up 97 cents at 17.73. That is a gain of nearly 6 percent on heavy volume. Chip stocks, especially those that make the chips that work in big networks, getting big gains. So we see Applied Microcircuits, PMC Sierra and Vitesse, up sharply. And Juniper Networks, a Cisco rival, that stock is up about 8 percent. More importantly, the QQQs, which tell us a bit about sentiment for big tech Nasdaq stocks, up about 2 percent. That could bode well for tomorrow's Nasdaq opening Jan.
[Hopkins:] Thanks, Jennifer Westhoven. During the regular session, stocks drifted for most of the day, but they turned lower in the final two hours of trading. Christine Romans is at the New York Stock Exchange Christine?
[Christine Romans, Cnn Correspondent:] Jan, it was hardly a dramatic trading day on Wall Street here today. A down day, really drifting and directionless overall. The Dow Jones Industrial Average losing 47 points to close at 10,229. Now, traders are telling me you can't gauge much from the averages. You've got to look inside some of the sectors, and today they were watching the home building stocks, really a fire under this one. Toll Brothers came out, it makes luxury homes, its profit up 60 percent in the quarter, its revenue up 26 percent, and positive comments there overall about the future of the housing sector, at least in the high end, and other names going higher as well. Meanwhile, some household names, though, making new 52-week lows. Take a look at Qwest. Active trading here today, under pressure, down about 7 percent today. Gateway, a debt downgrade hurting that one. Limited and lots of other retailers getting hurt today. And U.S. Airways under pressure, hitting a new 52-week low there, as soft business in the airline sectors continues to be felt on Wall Street. So, Jan, a couple of bright spots, Procter & Gamble and Coke, but it was light volume here today. Not even a billion shares.
[Hopkins:] Maybe the Cisco news will help tomorrow. Thanks. The Nasdaq today fell twice as much as the Dow in percentage terms. Jennifer Rogers is at the Nasdaq marketsite Jen?
[Jen Rogers, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, there, Jan. Well, the story here really is that we didn't have follow-through on that rally that we had yesterday here at the Nasdaq. If you take a look at the intraday chart, we were actually in positive territory for a good part of the day, but the selling really picked after 2:00. We started to lose ground. Volume coming in. We closed at our lows for the session, a level 1,842, that was down 17 points, just shy of 1 percent. We really saw weakness across the board, but one bright spot: biotech stocks. The AMEX biotechnology index, climbing for the second straight day, up more than 4 percent. Check out some of these winners, a very volatile sector, the biotechs. And some of these are at depressed levels. Investors coming in here, PDLI, a protein design lab, up more than 10 percent. So what's going on? One analyst we talked to said that investors may be getting into these stocks ahead of September. Now, September not usually a great time for the market overall, but biotechs, the new cycle seems to pick up for them and some of them get a bounce here. So maybe investors coming in at these low levels right now, hoping for that bounce in September. Back to you, Jan.
[Hopkins:] Thanks, Jen Rogers, at Nasdaq. Troubling investors today: reports that merely complicate the debate over the future of the economy. Peter Viles has that story.
[Peter Viles, Cnn Correspondent:] It was a day of what economists call two-handed news: mixed readings on the economy that don't really advance the debate over which direction it's headed. News that 393,000 Americans filed first-time jobless claims in the week ending August 18th. That's a rise of 8,000, pushing the four- week moving average above 378,000. On the one hand, all of those numbers were higher in early July. It's possible layoffs have peaked. On the other hand, the total number of Americans now drawing jobless benefits hit 3.2 million. That is a nine-year high.
[Heather Boushey, Economic Policy Institute:] I think it is relevant that the absolute number is at a nine-year high, because it tells us that not this many people have been unemployed and looking for work in a very long time.
[Viles:] A new survey of 33 economists by the Philadelphia Fed showed a ratcheting back of growth forecasts, dropping current year forecasts from 2.3 percent growth to 1.7 percent. And next year's forecast, from 2.8 percent to 2.6. The White House now beginning to look bullish, forecasts growth at 3.2 percent. Economists are bracing for a possible negative reading on second quarter GDP next week, some readying arguments that a negative reading isn't necessarily bad news.
[Diane Swonk, Bank One:] That won't mean we're in a recession. It will go down because we're going to be seeing something like $40 billion in inventories during the second quarter, which, from the commerce perspective, is actually great news for later in the year.
[Viles:] The other ripple of news in the market: minutes from the FOMC's June meeting, revealing the vote then to cut interest rates was nine to one, with William Poole of the St. Louis Fed dissenting, believing the Fed had already gone far enough. A second regional Fed president, Thomas Hoenig of Kansas City, had dissented in May. Now, looking forward to that revised GDP number next week, there is a lot of talk a number that would show a shrinking economy. Now, that would not necessarily mean a recession. The economy did contract very briefly in early 1993, no recession there. But that is the only example of negative GDP, outside of recession, in the past 34 years, Jan.
[Hopkins:] Thanks, Peter. The slowing economy, of course, has gone hand in hand with a stock market in decline. The S&P; is currently down 12 percent this year. But my first guest tonight manages a fund that is up 10 percent in 2001. John Rogers of Ariel Funds joins us now from Chicago. Welcome, John. You're a value investor. That's part of the reason that you've done well picking stocks. But let me ask you about the growth sector and this news from Cisco that perhaps business is stabilizing. Does that help the market overall?
[John Rogers, Ariel Mutual Funds:] I think it will be a temporary help for the market. But I think that this is just maybe a false rally that's occurring this afternoon, And we'll get back to the sort of more negative tone in the next several weeks.
[Hopkins:] Now, your motto is slow and steady wins the race. What do you mean?
[Rogers:] Well, we've always had a tortoise as our logo in the 19 years now that we've been in business. And we believe that patience truly wins. You stick with a company for the long-term, you take your time doing your homework, and if you just find these good, quality, solid companies, they ultimately win out and outperform the fast growers, the rabbit-type companies.
[Hopkins:] And that's really what your message is to investors in this kind of climate?
[Rogers:] That's what we tell people all the time. It's funny. Recently, a lot of people are saying, you know, I'm coming back to that turtle theme and I'm going to join the turtle mutual fund family because they've realized that chasing the ups and downs of the hot tech market ultimately isn't a winning strategy.
[Hopkins:] Also, you say that the small companies tend to ride out these difficult times better.
[Rogers:] We really do believe that. We think small companies are more nimble and they have a chance to grow 12, 15 percent a year consistently. And that they really are the kind of you can really get in and do the homework and make a difference with original, creative research, with the smaller companies.
[Hopkins:] Does the leadership of a company really make the difference?
[Rogers:] We think it truly does. We think management is very, very important, especially in smaller companies. We want to know everything we can about the histories of the people that run the companies that we invest in.
[Hopkins:] So give us some examples of some of the companies that you are invested in and that you still like?
[Rogers:] Currently, our largest position is Lee Enterprises, which is a large newspaper chain based here in the Midwest. They own a lot small town newspapers where people still read the newspapers every morning and get their local sports and their local information. We think that's a terrific, terrific company. Also, we have a big position now in ServiceMaster, that provides services for homeowners throughout the United States, everything from getting your lawns cut to having maids come in and clean the house and making sure the plumbing is going fine.
[Hopkins:] McCormick is another one, that's a spice company. Do people tend to buy spices, regardless of what's going on in the economy?
[Rogers:] We really think that McCormick has a great brand, a great franchise, and it does well when times are tough and people are eating at home more and they want to spice up their foods. McCormick, really, the only game in town.
[Hopkins:] And Hasbro? People buy toys regardless?
[Rogers:] We think so, but especially this year, because Hasbro is coming off of a very difficult time, but now they've got the rights to the toys that come from the Harry Potter movie and some of the card games that will be involved with that, the trading card games that will be involved with Harry Potter. Plus, of course, the new "Star Wars" movie will be coming out next spring and Hasbro has a great license agreement with "Star Wars."
[Hopkins:] Thanks very much. John Rogers of Ariel Mutual Funds, joining us from Chicago. Lucent Technologies delivered some mixed news to analysts today. The company officials updated their plans on job cuts. Also talked about how Lucent will improve its profits by focusing on its best customers. Steve Young has our story.
[Young:] Lucent, which is racing to shrink its work force by more than half, says it expects overall industry revenues will shrink next year as well by as much as 5 to 10 percent. And the struggling company says its market will stay flat in 2002. But it sees the market coming back in 2003, not with wild and woolly growth rates, but a more traditional 10 to 15 percent upward pace.
[Kenneth Leon, Abn Amro:] Lucent management has much better control of their business and where their opportunities are. That's a dramatic difference from even a quarter ago.
[Young:] The company told analysts a slimmer Lucent will lavish its attention on its 30 best customers that account for three quarters of its sales.
[Michael Cristinziano, Gerard Klauer Mattison:] That's the right strategy for Lucent. Not only do they have 30 big customers, which not every telecom equipment vender can say, those are the customers that will be the survivors.
[Young:] It hopes to pump its profit margins from around 15 percent now, to 25 or even 35 percent by 2003. Lucent painfully stubbed its toe by being late to market with a new generation of optical networking gear. In some good news, a research company says for the first time in ages, Lucent was back in first place in the second quarter.
[Shin Umeda, Dell'oro Group:] We saw Lucent with 22 percent share. They are the leader in that space, ahead of Nortel and Alcatel. So that was the first quarter that Lucent has been No. 1, and actually, the first quarter that Nortel was not No. 1 since the beginning of 1999.
[Young:] Umeda foresees a much tighter battle in optical networking, in which the front runner could change from quarter to quarter Jan.
[Hopkins:] Lucent stock didn't do very much?
[Young:] No, it's down a little bit.
[Hopkins:] So, it's a long time before this company recovers.
[Young:] Patience, patience.
[Hopkins:] That's the theme tonight. Thanks, Steve. Coming up next on
[Moneyline:] call it the corporate credit crunch. More companies default on loans. We'll tell you how bad things are. Then, another shark attack at a popular Florida beach. We'll tell you what happened. And no Powerball winner last night. That's good news for dreamers, but not for one city. We'll have all of that and more, straight ahead.

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] And now to Russia where ships are racing against time, trying to save 116 crew members aboard a nuclear submarine, crippled at the bottom of the Barents Sea. CNN's Mike Hanna joins us from Moscow with the latest Mike.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, the rescue attempt is now well under way. About an hour ago a spokesman for the Russian navy, Igor Digalo, told CNN that an attempt was being made to attach a submersible sphere to the hull of the submarine. There is no news yet as to whether this has been successful. Basically what has been happening is that a sphere has been lowered from the rescue ship Irodnisky, this is then slipped down, onto the submarine. The difficulty is is that the submarine's reportedly at an incline of some 60 degrees, so the sphere has to slide across the hull of the submarine, there to be attached to the escape hatch. Then the pressure between the two vessels is equalized and the crew members are brought out. We understand that the submersible carries some 12 people each time. The head of the Russian navy, Admiral Vladimir Koriadov, has said earlier that the operation should take between six to eight hours. This, he says, if these favorable weather conditions under way at present, continue. Back to you.
[Meserve:] Mike Hanna, thank you.
[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] And weather conditions are crucial to the success of this rescue. CNN's Walter Rodgers is in Norway, at the northern tip of Scandinavia, joins us now live via video phone line. Walter, what can you tell us?
[Walter Rodgers, Cnn Correspondent:] Frank, you can tell from the gray and glowering clouds behind me in the Verangor Fjord here in Norway, which abuts the Russian border, just how much the weather is complicating the rescue efforts. One thing working on behalf of the rescuers at this hour is that this latitude, 70 degrees north latitude, we're in the high Arctic here, we have probably four hours more daylight even at 6:00 at night. Still we could have had a difficult time picking a less hospitable climate for a submarine to go down in. As I say, this is Barents Sea, part of Arctic Ocean. The temperatures here surface temperatures on the water are only seven or eight degrees Celsius. Down below it doesn't matter what the daylight is above because those Russian sailors are sitting trapped in the hull of a nuclear submarine. The temperature there is just a few degrees above freezing. They're in the dark. You have to imagine they're huddled together wrapped in blankets, whatever coats they have, hoping that this rescue comes through. The weather forecast for tomorrow, by the way, is more rain and rolling seas Frank.
[Sesno:] Walter Rodgers, thanks.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Now it appears that for the first time, a Republican administration is in favor of a Palestinian state. CNN's Major Garrett joins us now from the White House with what is shaping up to be a major development in U.S. policy. Good morning, Major.
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Good morning, Leon. A major development in Bush administration policy in the Middle East that has been derailed, at least temporarily, by the tragic events of September 11th. CNN has confirmed that before those attacks Secretary of State Colin Powell, with the agreement of President Bush, was going to deliver a major speech on the Middle East peace process at the U.N. general assembly. That speech was to outline Bush administration support for an eventual Palestinian state and set out some broad parameters of the final contours of an agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians that would deal with such difficult issues as the status of the final borders of that Palestinian state and the status of thousands upon thousands of Palestinian refugees. That speech was put on hold because of the September 11th attacks. The U.N. general assembly itself was canceled. The administration is now trying to decide how to move forward on a major Middle East peace initiative that had already been okayed but has been changed by the context of events after September 11th. The State Department is pushing the White Hose to move forward on this plan, to carry it out, nevertheless, because they believe it would build support among key moderate Arab nations, Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, chief among them. All three were consulted before this speech was approved and before the process was set in motion, a process that was stopped by the September 11th attacks. No word yet today on exactly when or how the administration will proceed with this initiative, but clearly the administration is looking for ways to tell the Arab world that it is going to reengage in ways it had not, up until now, in the Middle East process itself with some new concrete ideas and one, particularly, that would at least eventually recognize a Palestinian state Leon.
[Harris:] Major, I'm very curious about one thing here, I know you have sketchy information about any timing here, but is there any guidance there or any I guess indication of what the thinking is about whether or not this kind of a speech or this kind of a of a policy will be established before there are any strikes either in Afghanistan or wherever else against Osama bin Laden?
[Garrett:] Well that would be the fundamental and key question, Leon. State Department diplomats and those who have been working in the region strongly believe giving this speech, putting this policy pronouncement out before the military strikes would be most advantageous to the Bush administration, most advantageous to the cause of peace. The White House is still considering that. They're wondering exactly what the timing should be. How far along is the military planning? How far along are they those troops and those forces that are being prepositioned? Are they ready to go? The White House doesn't want to short-circuit military goals for diplomatic goals. They're weighing all of them very carefully. Clearly the State Department and the diplomats who are on the front lines believe for the Arab world, particularly the moderate Arab world, a speech before strikes would be very, very advantageous Leon.
[Harris:] All right, thank you very much. Major Garrett at the White House, we'll talk with you later. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Catherine Callaway, Cnn Anchor:] The war in Afghanistan holds a touch of irony for one U.S. soldier. He is stationed at Kandahar inside a Soviet relic that represent another time and another war. Here's CNN's Martin Savidge on those shadows from the past.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] There are ghosts at the Kandahar Airport. They dwell in the outer buildings and linger in the shadow of a still-growing U.S. military presence. At this former hub of another army, of another time, the shadowed remnants of the failed Soviet occupation bleach beneath the Afghan sun. Russian planes that once roared for the runway, now rest beside it in a mass grave. Not far away, their spare engines still stacked in the crates they came in. A former barracks reeks of dust, decay and defeat. The Soviets do not appear so much to have left but fled. [on camera]: Signs of a hasty Russian departure can be found everywhere. In this room, it is piled two, three feet deep with old uniforms, a Russian gray coat, an old suitcase here, part of a harness, a uniform, bandages, lots of bandages, even an old boot. [voice-over]: Next to where the American forces now burn their garbage lies a junk yard, stacked 50 feet high with Soviet vehicles as abandoned as the empire that built them. For the modern day occupiers, the past is just an oddity except for one.
[Savidge:] Meet Andriy Kononenko. As a boy growing up in Soviet Ukraine, he dreamed of joining the Army, but never in his wildest imagination did he envision it would be the U.S. Army.
[Kononenko:] Here we go. I'm ready to strike.
[Savidge:] Six years ago, he moved to New York. Three years later, he was wearing the uniform of the Army's 101st Airborne. Now he stands on the parameter of America's war on terrorism. Recalling a recent conversation he had with his father, a Soviet Army veteran, when Andriy said he was heading for Afghanistan.
[Kononenko:] He actually got I can't say scared, but he got very nervous about it.
[Savidge:] History is not lost on the 26-year old. From his post, Andriy can see the demise of Russian domination. He can also see the irony.
[Kononenko:] Who would think that in all the countries that I've ever been and will ever be would be Afghanistan. It's amazing.
[Savidge:] Andriy is prepared to lay down his life for America, saying he chose to be here. That freedom to choose, he says, makes all the difference between the soldiers here today and the ghosts of the past. Martin Savidge, CNN, Kandahar.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Where better to get a picture of financial market activity and the economy than at the helm of the nation's largest financial institution and one that is growing. Our guest this morning is bringing us his first live interview from Williamsburg, where he is at the convention of CEOs. Sandy Weill is chairman and chief executive of Travelers or Citigroup now it is known, and is joining us from the Business Council Summit in West Virginia. We welcome you.
[Sandford Weill, Citigroup Chairman & Ceo:] Thank you.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Mr. Weill, I do want to begin, first of all, with the Federal Reserve. Everybody is seemingly talking about their expectations for what the Federal Reserve will be doing come Tuesday. Are you in the 25 or 50 basis point camp, and what are your impressions of the Fed's strategy for shaping the economy now?
[Weill:] Well, you know, I think the Fed has been trying to cool off the economy for the last year. We've had five 25 basis point increases already, and I would expect, as everybody else does, that we will have another one this coming week. Whether they do 25 basis points and continue to say that there's an outlook for further increases or they do 50 now and indicate, possibly, that they may slow down in the increases, I don't think it's really that important. I think that what they have done is beginning to affect the economy, and I think we're beginning to see the beginning of a slowdown in the economy.
[Marchini:] It certainly has affected the stock market, we're seeing intense amounts of volatility there. What does that say to you?
[Weill:] Well, I think that we really went through a period where there was indiscriminate buying of a lot of the high-tech stocks, and I think when you think about the Internet, it's going to really revolutionize and transform our global economies, but yet, a lot of these companies that are public today won't be in existence five years from now. But I do believe that the value of all those technology stocks five years from now, as a collective, will be a lot higher than it is today.
[Haffenreffer:] Are you concerned how a higher interest rate environment here in the U.S. might impact your shares of Citigroup?
[Weill:] I think our company is not really that affected by interest-rate increases of 100 or 150 basis points. We had had over a hundred basis point increase in rates, and yet, in the first quarter, we earned $3.6 billion, which was up 50 percent from the year before. So our company is doing very well.
[Marchini:] When you look at the economy overall, what's your sense of it? Do you think that things are going along well?
[Weill:] You know, I think that the U.S. economy was really growing too fast, that the labor market got very, very tight, which is creating a problem for a whole host of companies in being difficult to replace workers and costs are going up somewhat. So I think that the U.S. economy cooling down a low bit is good. However, if you look around a world, the global economy is really in terrific shape: Asia's growing, Latin America's growing, Europe is starting to grow. So I think we are in an environment, from a global perspective, that is really terrific. And since this world is becoming a smaller place and we trade with each other much, much more, I think that that's really the important key to the outlook, so therefore I'm very optimistic.
[Haffenreffer:] You speak of global growth and international growth. Yesterday, Citigroup took one step closer to the purchase of Poland's biggest corporate bank. Is Citigroup essentially done expanding in the U.S. and more angling toward growth overseas?
[Weill:] I think that we still like the U.S. market for financial services and are looking to grow some parts of our business, but we think that the growth rate in the emerging markets is going to be far higher than that in the United States. So, as you mentioned, we're buying Bank Hanloi in Poland. We're very optimistic about the Polish economy long-term. Last week, I was in Asia and we announced a strategic relationship with the Fubon Group in Taiwan with an intention to grow our insurance businesses through Asia together with them.
[Marchini:] All right, well, clearly, you're going to be a busy man. Sandy Weill, chairman and chief executive of Citigroup, we thank you for joining us this morning from the Green Brier.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Our top story: mifepristone, also known as RU-486. More than a decade after the so-called "abortion pill" first became available in Europe, the FDA today approved its use in the U.S., a market its developer shunned. Used in conjunction with another pill, mifepristone is said to be more than 90 percent effective in ending early pregnancies. We have extensive coverage, beginning with CNN medical correspondent Rhonda Rowland.
[Rhonda Rowland, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Most people know it as the French abortion pill, RU-486. Its generic name is mifepristone. Now, with approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, it will be marketed to American as Mifeprex.
[Gloria Feldt, Planned Parenthood:] Mifepristone, or the early option pill, is as significant a technological advance for women's health as the birth control pill was 40 years ago.
[Rowland:] The FDA gave mifepristone conditional approval in 1996, indicating the drug was safe and effective in inducing an abortion early in pregnancy. Final approval would come once a manufacturer was found and fulfilled criteria for labeling and manufacturing. The European pharmaceutical company Roussel Uclaf developed RU-486 but refused to market it in the U.S. because of abortion politics. The patent on the drug was eventually given to Danco Laboratories, a new women's pharmaceutical company which will market and distribute Mifeprex. The identity of the actual manufacturers has not been released. Family planning experts say Mifeprex won't replace surgical abortion, but offer another option.
[Stanley Henshaw, Alan Guttmacher Institute:] It helps women in the sense that, in some cases, they can end their pregnancies much earlier. Nowadays, with sensitive pregnancy tests, some women know they're pregnant even before they miss their period.
[Rowland:] Studies show Mifeprex is 92 percent effective in causing an abortion in the first seven weeks of pregnancy. Following extensive counseling, physical exam, pregnancy test and ultrasound to date the pregnancy, the woman take Mifeprex in a doctor's office or clinic. After two days. she returns and takes the drug misoprostol, a prostaglandin already FDA approved as an ulcer treatment. After that addition of misoprostol, a hormone-triggering drug, most women will complete the abortion in the next six hours. In a small percentage of women, it can take up to a week to complete. Side effects include uterine cramping, heavy bleeding, nausea and fatigue. If the drug abortion fails, the women must have a standard, surgical abortion.
[Feldt:] It will enable them to choose, if they choose to terminate a pregnancy, to do that earlier, to do it without surgery. And for many women, that is a very positive thing.
[Rowland:] Mifepristone is already available to women in France, Great Britain and Sweden. In France, about half the women choosing to terminate a pregnancy choose medical abortion. The other half choose surgery. In the United States, it's expected that the cost of terminating a pregnancy with Mifeprex will be similar to the cost of a surgical abortion: about $300. Mifepristone also has other medical uses. Preliminary studies suggest it could be helpful in treating breast and brain tumors, as well as uterine fibroids and endometriosis. So, now, Natalie, those studies looking at those other uses will probably continue.
[Allen:] We will have more about that in a moment as well. But you were telling me that the abortion pill is not necessarily safe for all women.
[Rowland:] That's right. According to the FDA, they've given us information that there are certain women who may not be candidates for this who decide to choose an abortion. These are women who are currently using an IUD, who have a tubal pregnancy, who have bleeding disorders or who have to use cortical steroids for a long period of time. Some people with asthma do use those particular medications. So it's important for a doctor to really check a woman's medical history.
[Allen:] And is this pill in itself a safer form of abortion than a surgical abortion for a woman?
[Rowland:] Well, it depends. Like with a surgical abortion, any time you do surgery there are risks with surgery. And there's risk with anesthesia, which you do need if you have a surgical abortion. Here, again, with the drug abortion using these medications, you can have some very heavy bleeding. And in some of the women actually it's one out of 100 the bleeding may be severe enough that they would need surgery to actually stop that bleeding. So, again, neither procedure is without risk.
[Allen:] And as far as who can administer this pill, is it your typical OBGYN who will now have access to it?
[Rowland:] That's right. An OBGYN could, but that doesn't mean that every physicianGYN may be willing to use this particular drug. Also, the FDA is requiring that whoever does administer it, whichever doctor chooses to, they have to be able to perform a surgical abortion in case the abortion with the drug fails, or they need to have a plan in place that they would have access or be near somebody who could, indeed, do that. So it is a little complex. I mean, you do have to have some systems in place. And here again right now, even with surgical abortion, it's difficult to find providers. It may not differ that much even though we now have this medication.
[Allen:] All right, Rhonda Rowland, thank you. And we'll continue now with Lou.
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] And as Rhonda mentioned, like countless other drugs, the abortion pill has other applications, and those other applications have saved lives. We get one apparent case in point from CNN's Elizabeth Cohen.
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Every night for the past seven years, Doris Laird has taken the abortion pill.
[Doris Laird, Mifepristone User:] It saved my life and my sight.
[Cohen:] Mrs. Laird had a growth on her optic nerve.
[Laird:] I had a tumor the size of an orange in the middle of my head.
[Cohen:] Three times, surgeons removed as much of the tumor as they could, and three times it grew back. Then she started taking the abortion pill, properly called mifepristone.
[Laird:] The mifepristone has kept it from growing.
[Cohen:] Some 30 patients in the United States have special permission from the Food and Drug Administration to take mifepristone for a variety of illnesses, including cystic fibrosis, breast cancer and brain tumors. [on camera]: So how could mifepristone, a drug that induces abortion, also be used to treat brain tumors? It works because the same hormone, estrogen, helps tumors grow and helps fetuses grow. Mifepristone blocks estrogen, so in some cases tumors shrink. [voice-over]: Mrs. Laird hopes now that the drug is approved it'll be easier to get. Few doctors have been willing to go through all the red tape necessary to have it imported from France where it's made.
[Dr. Nettleton Payne, Doris Laird's Physician:] But it's available on a very limited supply through a very kind of circuitous route.
[Cohen:] Mrs. Laird's doctor, Nettleton Payne, wishes he knew more about the long-term side effects of mifepristone. For abortion, you take the drug for just one day. His patients take it for years.
[Payne:] Because of the politics surrounding the use of the drug, particularly in terms of abortion issues, the drug has never had a fully completed double-blind study.
[Cohen:] Dr. Payne says mifepristone doesn't work for everyone. Doris Laird is one of the lucky ones. Before mifepristone, her doctors told her the tumor might kill her, or at the very least incapacitate and blind her. But now...
[Laird:] I jitterbugged at both my sons' weddings.
[Cohen:] Elizabeth Cohen, CNN, Atlanta.
[Waters:] Abortion has been a matter of intense debate in the United States for decades. Frank Newport joins us now from the Gallup studio with a look at how public attitudes have or have not changed. Frank, what have you got?
[Frank Newport, Gallup Poll Editor In Chief:] Well, Lou, it's not a clear-cut issue controversial as it is. Let's do a little background for you. A little earlier this year, we actually asked the public about the abortion pill. Obviously there may be a different reaction now in future polls that's it's been officially been approved. But here's what we found earlier this year. Do you approve or disapprove of it being available to American women? Thirty-nine percent favor, 47 percent oppose. So. actually, at that point in time, slightly more opposition than favoring. Now let's show you some of the more basic questions here. This is where we asked Americans to choose a label: Are you pro-choice? Are you pro-life? And you can see the lines have been very close. The red line is pro-choice. It was actually somewhat higher. The pro-life numbers came up, but in our last asking this year it's been about a 10-point difference, more Americans actually pro-choice than pro-life despite what we just showed you. Now, here's the interesting point. There are not, despite some conventional wisdom, big differences between men and women on abortion. Notice that for men and women, the profiles look roughly the same in terms of the labels they choose. And also, I should say, on that abortion pill question, women were just slightly more likely to actually oppose it than men. So it's not like women totally favor it and men totally oppose it, men and women very, very close in their attitudes. One final question to help set the stage for you and we've been asking this for a number of years three part choice: Should all abortions be legal in all circumstances? Less than a third say yes. Should they all be illegal in all circumstances? the classic pro-life position. You can see only 19 percent. This is the story: About half of Americans, a little more, say some circumstances, yes, some no. And this is the environment that this abortion pill issue will play out in. Americans ambiguous, is the word I always use when I talk about abortion. That's where the public stands. Natalie, back to you.
[Allen:] All right, we'll have no ambiguity with our next guest on this subject. Joining us to talk more about it, Patricia Ireland, president of the National Organization for Women; and Heather Cirmo with the Family Research Council. Thank you both for joining us. Ms. Cirmo, I'll start with you because so many abortion opponents have fought for over a decade to keep this day from happening in the United States, and here it is. What's your reaction?
[Heather Cirmo, Family Research Council:] Well, I think it's actually a setback for the women's movement. You think about the potential physical side effects; but I want to focus on the emotional impact the abortion pill will have on women. And, for the first time, women, on their own, will have to deal with the remains of the aborted baby. And I know that it could be a it could look like a glob, but it's still a baby. And she's going to have to deal with that in the privacy of her own home; and I think that we, at no time, at any point in history we need to be very concerned with what's happening with women, not only with what's happening with the children.
[Allen:] Is there anything more that abortion opponents can do at this time? Something I read said that many plan to pledge to continue to fight to keep this pill from becoming widely used.
[Cirmo:] Yes, I think pro-lifers are not going to cease in their efforts to communicate both love to the woman and to the child; and I think, at this point, those who really value life need to express their views at the polls and put people in place who really respect life. And I want to make specific mention of the president, because a president has the authority to appoint a new FDA commissioner who could decide that RU-486 was put on a fast track and needs to be reconsidered. So that's a potential that we have in this election.
[Allen:] Patricia Ireland, would you react to that? And is this a setback for feminism?
[Patricia Ireland, N.o.w. President:] Well, first of all, it's hardly been a fast track. It's RU-486 has been used around the world for 12 years now. It's been deemed safe and effective by the FDA for the last 7 years. Compare it to how quickly Viagra was made available to men, which has much larger side effects indeed, has caused deaths in this country and I think that we understand it's been purely politics that has kept RU-486, mefipristone from women in this country; not only for abortion, but for fibroid tumors, for endometriosis and from all of us for breast cancer, ovarian cancer, HIV, AIDS, Cushing's Syndrome, Alzheimer's which, as I get older, I'm more and more interested in. So I think that the abortion politics or the anti-abortion politics have been very difficult to get through. I would echo Heather only in the sense that the presidential election will have a huge impact. One of my favorite buttons out in Los Angeles at the Democratic convention said: is the Supreme Court Stupid? We're five to four on the Supreme Court, not only abortion rights, but on so many other issues; and that's got to be a key election issue. I don't think it's a setback. I think it's a great breakthrough when we have a safer, more effective and more private means of abortion that can be used in the first six or seven weeks of a pregnancy, much earlier than a surgical procedure.
[Cirmo:] But Natalie, this really, kind of, exposes the hypocrisy of the Clinton administration, who said they want to make abortion safe, legal and rare. This is not going to make abortion rare. And I find it amazing that some people would rejoice that more abortions are going to take place. All we have today are legal abortions. We don't have safe abortions, we don't have rare abortions. So it seems to me that there should be some outcry from the public that, you know, this is not the case. We haven't met our goals.
[Allen:] Is there the expectation this is going to mean more abortions? I was reading that it didn't actually increase the number of abortions in France when it became available.
[Ireland:] That's correct; and only about 10 percent of the women in France have chosen this medical procedure. It's not for everyone, both for their health and for their emotions. It requires more than one trip to the doctors. I'm disappointed that there have been restrictions put on it here. Part of our concern has been that this will move the abortion procedures or options into a physician's office and stop the targeting of physicians and their families in clinics. Fewer and fewer doctors are available to provide abortions, fewer medical students are taking the training because they don't want to have to work in a bullet-proof vest and they don't want their families harassed and terrorized.
[Cirmo:] But there haven't even been that many restrictions. I mean, the Population Council, the very organization that is going to be marketing and manufacturing this drug, even recommended, when the FDA began to consider this approval of RU-486, that there be restrictions; and today we have only a few restrictions. I don't think in fact, I think that there are too few restrictions. We might see quite a few lawsuits on our hands as a result of this. So, you know, it's not the pro-life community that was asking for restrictions, it was actually the pro-abortion lobby asking for restrictions.
[Ireland:] Trying to get it approved under some circumstances.
[Allen:] We've seen some laws passed to try to restrict or limit abortions. How will the introduction of this pill affect, say, states' laws on this issue in the future?
[Ireland:] It's going to remain to be seen. Most of people most lawyer-type people are arguing that the state laws of abortion will cover RU-486, will cover mefipristone for uses in abortion, and I suspect that that's true. Still, perhaps, parental involvement, mandatory delays, anti- abortion counseling whatever kinds of restrictions have been imposed by the states will, presumably, still apply.
[Cirmo:] Like I said, Natalie, I agree with Patricia that I think it does remain to be seen. But I don't think it's fair for us to discount the emotional impact this will have on women, as all abortions do. You know, you can put that to the side and say, emotional consequences, that's not really as important as physical; but you cannot dismiss that we are emotional beings. Especially women. And we have to deal with the impact of this for the rest of our lives, and it's a real mistake to put that to the side when you're considering abortion of any shape, whether it's chemical or surgical.
[Allen:] We thank you both so much for talking with us on what is such a heated subject for so many people. Patricia Ireland and Heather Cirmo, thank you so much. And for more on the approval of the abortion pill and other health news, you can go to our Web site, CNN.comhealth. It is produced with WebMD. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] There is a fear of more aftershocks in western India, following a severe earthquake that may have killed more than 1,100 people. We get the latest from our New Delhi bureau chief Satinder Bindra, who joins us now by satellite phones Satinder.
[Satinder Bindra, Cnn Correspondent:] Jeanne, the worst damage here is in the western Indian city of Ahmedabad. About 50 buildings have been completely flattened. And the army is now joining in the relief efforts. I've just come back from a few sites where soldiers digging away furiously, many of them with their bare hands. So far, at the building where I was, they managed to pull out six people. Four of them are doing OK, two are dead, and at least three are still trapped inside. The need of the hour, of course, is speed. Also what's needed here is heavy lifting equipment, like cranes. A lot of the residents are very angry that cranes didn't get in time or didn't get there fast enough. In fact, one said resident told me the first cranes that arrived were too small, and when they tried to lift heavy slabs, they just turned right over. Of course, New Delhi is taking matters very seriously. The Indian Prime minister, Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee, has called this a national calamity. Relief efforts are being sped up and medical units and doctors are being sent here, to local airports which are still operational Jeanne.
[Meserve:] Have there been severe aftershocks, Satinder?
[Bindra:] Officials are warning there could be aftershocks measuring five in terms of intensity. Of course, this earthquake measured a 7.9. Officials are broadcasting on local radio and TV stations that the aftershocks could happen any time, and people who are living in buildings that may have suffered structural damage should could come out immediately. So at the moment, this city is full of fear. Many people are coming down out of the high-rises, and be spending a long, cold night out in the open. Of course, the center of this earthquake was in a place called Bhuj, which is just west of here. We are hearing reports from Bhuj that about 130 people have been killed there. Here there is one place where some 100 school students are still believed to be trapped under the rubble of what was once their school building. So clearly, what's needed is more relief, more help. Some 5,000 troops are already here. And what's also being tried what people are also trying to organize here is a civilian relief effort. Many civilians are now volunteering, telling the army they would like to help. I've seen some civilians who are making tea, providing drinking water for army soldiers so their energy is up and they can try and save people who are trapped inside Jeanne.
[Meserve:] Satinder Bindra, from India, thank you.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] First, a little bit more about what is happening inside Afghanistan. For that we turn to CNN's Nic Robertson. He is he just across the border in Pakistan Nic.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] Well Miles, just a couple of hours ago, before sunset, we were able to get across into Afghanistan, into territory that was, until a few hours ago, controlled by the Taliban. This is the border town of Spin Boldak. What we found there was quite a chaotic situation. A lot of armed men on the street. Perhaps just as many as there would have been under Taliban times. There's certainly a lot of men with machine guns large machine guns and shoulder-launched rockets wandering and the town. It was somewhat chaotic, but at the same time it seemed relatively peaceful. And people were putting up red, green and black flags. These are flags that show their loyalty to the exiled king, Zahir Shah. Now, in the town of Spin Boldak and it should be remembered Spin Boldak is a fairly small town three are tribes who've negotiated with the Taliban to take over control of the town. Not all the sort of differences between the tribes over who controls what, where, when and how has been worked out. But at the moment, the tribal leaders there tell us the situation is peaceful. They also say, most interestingly, that when the Taliban left they were disarming the Taliban before the Taliban left. This is a somewhat different picture to what we've heard coming from our sources inside Kandahar. Kandahar, in the early part of the day, we are told, was chaotic. There was random looting throughout the town of aid agencies, of civilian properties. Then the forces of the commander who is now in control of Kandahar, Commander Mullah Naqib, his forces came into town and began to restore some semblance of order. Then later in the day, other tribal forces entered the town as well. They were also carrying flags showing their support for the exiled king. The situation there that we're hearing about now, although we are told it is somewhat more peaceful in Kandahar now, it is also a little bit confusing. The picture emerging, some strange details; we're told the commander who had been fighting outside of Kandahar for the airport Commander Gullah Lai has now moved himself into the governor's building inside Kandahar, and has announced himself governor. Also, we know that Mullah Naqib's forces have also taken over the key militarily buildings and some of the other administrative buildings inside Kandahar. But the general picture emerging from these areas the Taliban have now left is one of the calm being restored after a very troublesome start to the day Miles.
[O'brien:] CNN's Nic Robertson in Pakistan, thank you very much. As Taliban fighters gives up their major cities in Afghanistan, troops in Tora Bora are said to be putting up a tough fight against anti-Taliban forces. CNN's Brent Sadler is close to the action in eastern Afghanistan. Here's the latest from him.
[Brent Sadler, Cnn Correspondent:] Signs of progress by anti-Taliban tanks supporting the offensive to take Tora Bora: the high-altitude mountain hideout of well-armed, well-entrenched al Qaeda defenders. After three days of static fire, the tanks move forward, looking for a better shot. Supporting ground troops inching toward their objective. Al Qaeda's first line of defense appears to have crumbled after more than a week of sustained U.S. bombing. The latest American airstrikes have been the heaviest since the ground attack began, the sound of powerful explosions echoing down the valley. The intensity of bombing coincides with the appearance of a possible deployment of unidentified special forces, moving with guides and equipment heading up the valley in the direction of Tora Bora. As American warplanes target mountain positions, al Qaeda fighters are using mortars and machine guns in an attempt to beat back the assault. [on camera]: No one expects this to be an easy conquest, and al Qaeda fighters, mostly of Arab origin, it's thought, are refusing radio appeals to surrender, threatening a fight to the death. Brent Sadler, CNN, Agam in the White Mountains of eastern Afghanistan.
[O'brien:] It appears, two months after the fighting began in and over Afghanistan, the end game is underway. The end game can be a very tricky one, indeed, as we focus on a couple of people: Omar and bin Laden by name. We turn now to our Major General Don Shepperd, retired U.S. Air Force military analyst for CNN. Good to have you with us, General Shepperd.
[Maj. Gen. Don Shepperd , Cnn Military Analyst:] Morning, Miles.
[O'brien:] Let's talk about Kandahar first, and Mullah Omar. In Kandahar, there are reports of looting, of chaos in the wake of the change of power there. This is a particularly tenuous time in any engagement, isn't it? What should U.S. forces be wary of?
[Shepperd:] Well, they should be wary of everything that's going on there, and very suspicion of any attempts to surrender, any people approaching them to surrender. We saw what happened in Mazar-e Sharif. A surrender is a very difficult time. Neither side quite knows what to do. The people trying to surrender don't know whether to lay down their arms and walk out, walk out with a flag up; they don't know, if they lay down their arms, how they're going to be treated by the other side. The other side doesn't know how to separate them from their arms, or exactly where to take them. So there's a period of chaos that goes on there while each side is feeling each other out, and people are then allowed to surrender. But, again, it could very well be that people within this group that are surrendering the regular Taliban, the hard-core Taliban, the foreign Taliban, the al Qaeda, could have plans to do something like they did at Mazar-e Sharif, or even more dramatic. So our soldiers, when they're involved in any operations with these people, must be very careful and very suspicious.
[O'brien:] Now, you mentioned that prison uprising in Mazar-e Sharif. And the U.S. was involved in the peripheries there. But nevertheless, a CIA agent was killed in that uprising. How actively engaged, typically, would the U.S. be in the gathering of prisoners and anything in a post-changeover of power like this?
[Shepperd:] Well, we are not in charge of this surrender, if you will. But clearly our special forces are there, and assisting. And I assume also, although it has not been announced, that our CIA would play similar roles to what was played in Mazar-e Sharif. What the U.S. and the coalition want, is they want information and they want people. We want the top Taliban leaders, the al Qaeda fighters and leaders, and we want Mullah Omar and we want bin Laden. And so we will do everything we can to get our hands on these people and actively participate. But again, we're not in charge of the surrender. It's a coordination and liaison role that we're playing right now.
[O'brien:] So we should not presume, just because the Marines are to the west of Kandahar, that they would become directly engaged in any sort of surrender activities?
[Shepperd:] No, it appears so far they have not been engaged in active combat as far as the taking of Kandahar goes. At least, that's what we've heard so far. We'll be listening intently to the Pentagon briefing as Secretary Rumsfeld and General Myers or General Pace describe the action. It's the Marines have been acting as a blocking force so far. They've received people that have been injured, and that type of thing. They've acted as a base for insertion of other forces. But they have not been actively involved in the combat for the city. So it remains to be seen what role they will actually play in this surrender. But they will have to be very, very careful if they're brought in to accept surrender or accept prisoners. It's a dicey and dangerous time.
[O'brien:] General, I guess one of the big concerns is that these Taliban fighters will simply melt into the mountains and just be there, lurking. Might be very difficult for anyone to separate the wheat from the chaff, if you will.
[Shepperd:] Evidently, already happening, Miles. It appears that many of the Taliban have disappeared, and many of the al Qaeda are disappearing. There's lots of places to hide, as we've been told, in Oruzgan Province, north of Kandahar. And, of course, the Marouf area, and north of Spin Boldak and southeast of Kandahar, one of the allegedly places we were looking for bin Laden. So there's lots of places to hide. Many of them will try get across the porous border into Pakistan, hoping to receive sympathy in that area from the Pashtun people that are in there, and naturally sympathetic to the causes. But they also now have the Pakistani military looking after them, as well as us actively pursuing them. They're going to find it very, very difficult; but it may take a long time to root them out all over the country.
[O'brien:] General Shepperd, sir, thank you very much for the briefing, as always. Major General Don Shepperd, retired U.S. Air Force, is one of our military analysts, and we always appreciate his insights.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Keeping you "Ahead of the Trend" this morning, Larry Seibert, portfolio manager at Barrett Associates, is here to give us a preview of what we can expect from Compaq and what it could mean for techs in general. Good morning. Nice to have you here with us.
[Larry Seibert, Barrett Associates:] Good morning. Good to be here.
[Marchini:] And Patricia Chadwick is here with us as well. I want to start with Compaq. Jen Rogers mentioned in her recent appearance that the real focus is not on the earnings we already know what they are going to be but on the third quarter and what the company will say about it. What do you think?
[Seibert:] I would agree with that. If there is one lesson that we have learned this quarter, it's that you should not buy ahead of the earnings. And I think that's good advice for Compaq as well. Some of the other companies that have come out and given their earnings have generally missed on the top line, but made the earnings number based on good cost control. We saw that with Apple. We saw that with IBM. And we probably will see the same sort of thing with Compaq, but guidance might be difficult.
[Marchini:] I was going to say, because does it make an analyst happy to see profits OK if it comes from cost controls and not the top line, not revenue?
[Seibert:] Well, as Patricia mentioned before, it is management, management, management here. We really need to purchase companies with very strong
[Marchini:] Is Compaq management doing what it needs to do?
[Seibert:] I think so. I think they are attempting to do what they need to do. They have raised the severance the number of people they are going to let go to 8,500. They are focusing on the service area, which is now about 24 or 25 percent of their business like IBM, about 35 percent. And IBM was one of the brighter earnings reports that we have seen in the PC area.
[Marchini:] We've got Patricia looking for 2500 on the Nasdaq. I want to know if you agree with her.
[Seibert:] I think certainly we will get there. The question is when we'll get there. The second quarter was a little bit tougher than people have expected. And we believe the third quarter will be again a little bit tougher than people expect so not anytime soon. However, we do believe in technology in the long term. And those are really driving the Nasdaq.
[Patricia Chadwick, Ravengate Partners:] Now, let me ask you a question again about the PC industry. We know that it's a very tough competitive industry. And people say that the margins on boxes get smaller and smaller. Could Microsoft's new XP product actually stimulate demand over the next several years, so that we have kind of a rebirth of the PC business?
[Seibert:] I think that's sort of the bright side here. That is absolutely possible. Microsoft is bringing out what appears to be a very good product. On the flip side to that, however, we are seeing somewhat more powerful servers and somewhat less powerful nodes within the enterprise. In the home, we are looking for very powerful PCs that are very capable of doing some pretty interesting things so a little bit of a mixed picture there.
[Marchini:] You've got a mixed picture there. I mean, what's more important to PC makers? Is it the home user?
[Seibert:] Absolutely not. Seventy percent of the PCs go into corporations.
[Marchini:] All right. So Windows XP may not have as much of an impact there.
[Seibert:] Not necessarily in the corporation.
[Marchini:] OK. Thanks very much, Larry Seibert, portfolio manager at Barrett Associates, and Patricia Chadwick of Ravengate Partners. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] The hijackers of an Afghan airliner released eight more people today. British authorities who are negotiating with the hijackers say that their only demands have been food and other supplies, but they did ask for the release of one person as well. The crisis began yesterday shortly after the plane took off in Kabul, with hostages released at stops along the way. The airliner remains parked at a runway at Stansted Airport, outside of London. What strategies are the negotiators using? Lawrence McGinty has more on that and similar crises at the airport.
[Lawrence Mcginty, Itn Reporter:] Stansted is Britain's the preferred airport for receiving hijacked airplanes because it's surrounded by wide-open spaces and is much quieter than Heathrow or Gatwick. The last hijack here was four years ago, when six Iraqis ceased a Sudanese Airbus. They released the crew and nearly 200 passengers in a matter of hours.
[Unidentified Male:] Stansted has a well-rehearsed plan. It is pre-designated airport here in the U.K. for handling situations such as this. The emergency services will be will have been standing by as soon as that aircraft left Moscow.
[Mcginty:] The Afghan plane was last night directed to area on the apron called Campus One. Parking the plane here means it can be isolated and surrounded by police marksmen and other security forces. The only building nearby is a maintenance hangar. With a plane here, Stansted's main terminal, a mile away, can still be used by the public. Scheduled flights can use three piers where they're normally parked, even if they have to use a shortened runway to avoid getting too close to the hijacked plane. Ever since the Afghan airliner landed, last night, relays of trained negotiators will have been trying to keep the hijackers calm and to persuade them their action is futile. At this moment, what one's trying to do is to explain to the hostage-takers the hopelessness of their position. They should be isolated, they should be able to be building up a relationship which is about the next delivery of food, but all the larger ambitions one should try to pick away rather gently to show that really one cannot get anywhere with this. Last time, that strategy worked faultlessly, and it should work again. Lawrence McGinty, ITN.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] U.S. airlines are working to meet today's FAA deadline for inspecting the tail assemblies of 1,100 planes. The agency ordered the safety check after the Alaska Airlines crash. Crews are focusing on the jackscrew, the rod that drives the stabilizer and helps keep the plane level. CNN's Carl Rochelle joins now with more on this story from Washington Carl.
[Carl Rochelle, Cnn Correspondent:] Natalie, some potentially serious information learned by the National Transportation Safety Board reported to us last evening, and still a very important, very interesting aspect of this story. During a heavy maintenance check in September of 1997, investigators discovered that the same jackscrew and gimbal nut assembly that was recovered from the Alaska Airlines Flight 261 crash had been run up to the limits. In other words, it was as far as it could go without being replaced, and it was recommended that it be replaced in the heavy maintenance the next day. Well, a subsequent investigation or inspection on the next day by officials and mechanics at Alaska Airlines determined that it was in tolerance. And after five different inspections and let me show you exactly what we're talking about. This is the jackscrew here. It's driven by a motor up in this top area. And this is the gimbal nut assembly. And right in here is where they determined by the inspection that, on the first day, that it was all the way to the limits, that it could not be run anymore without being replaced. The next day, it was in tolerance; five different inspections said it was OK to use this particular part even if it was not replaced. That was in 1997, the first inspection on September 29, the subsequent inspection on September 30. According to the National Transportation Safety Board, that was the last inspection of this particular part of the aircraft. Now, the National Transportation Safety Board says that the information, the significance of this information is still to be determined. It is being evaluated by the board and no determination has been made by the board whether this information is a factor in the accident. Now, complicating the issue, making it more complex, is the fact that Alaska Airlines' maintenance base at Oakland is under federal inspection over allegations that some maintenance records may have been replaced. So, Natalie, that is all out there. That's what they are looking at very carefully. Those airline inspections, let me tell you just the latest figures that I have from the FAA, are that 21 airlines found problems with the tail section, that jackscrew assembly that adjusts the trim. Thirteen of the airline of the airplanes were inspected, the parts were replaced and they were returned to service. There are eight that are still under inspection. And of all these inspections I've looked at, surprisingly, Alaska Airlines, which operates 34 of these aircraft, had eight with problems in that stabilizer trim area, Natalie.
[Allen:] All right, Carl Rochelle in Washington.

[Tom Stinar, Cnn Correspondent:] Manon Rheaume may be a novice when it comes to a photo shoot, but the 20-year-old is a model of persistence with a firm grip on her future. Rheaume's pro hockey odyssey has taken her from a Tampa Bay tryout to the Lightning's minor league affiliate in Atlanta.
[Manon Rheaume, Atlanta Knights:] I never think that I am going to play here or make a tryout in NHL when I was young because I never see a woman there and every year, so when I play, I tried to go higher but, I don't want to think too far.
[Stinar:] When Rheaume first arrived in Atlanta, there were those who thought she would be a distraction. But no such controversy. The Knights have given her the royal treatment.
[Rheaume:] Two goaltenders are with me help me when I do something wrong, they said to me what I have to do and they said to me, it's better to do this and they helped me.
[Stinar:] They say speed and reflexes count more in goaltending than size or strength. Rheaume does have quickness and agility, but her main weakness remains stamina. Carrying 20 pounds of equipment on a 135-pound frame make it all the more difficult for her to remain cat quick in the crease. [voice-over]: Playing between the pipes is old hat for Rheaume, who began skating at the age of three. What's new is dealing with the intense media scrutiny, but she's handling it well. After all, Rheaume has opened the door for other women shooting for hockey's stratosphere. And that's a goal worth tending.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Back now to our main story, the deadly Amtrak derailment in southwestern Iowa. Joining us live on the phone from Corning, Iowa, near the accident site, is the police chief of Corning, Larry Drew. Chief Drew, bring us up to date if there's anything further since we last chatted about an hour ago.
[Larry Drew, Corning Police Chief:] There's no real update. Everybody's been evacuated. There's approximately 90 injured in several different hospitals. Three were life-flighted out, one from the scene and two from the Legion Health Hospital in Corning. The total passengers, there was 195, with 15 crew members, and they've all been accounted for.
[O'brien:] All right, let's back up just a little bit for those who just might be tuning in as we speak. If you could give us a sense of when this happened and any indications as to how it happened and your response.
[Drew:] There was no indication of how it happened. We got the call at approximately 11:40. It was off, out in the open field. There was no road to it so we had to use what they call a right of way road next to the railroad track in order to get to it off of the main road. We used five different county ambulances to haul the injured out to several different hospitals in the area. The ones that weren't injured were taken to Nodaway, Iowa at the community center and since then Amtrak has bussed them out to some other destination.
[O'brien:] Now, an hour ago you told me that nine cars had left the track. Typically, how fast is an Amtrak train moving as it passes through your town?
[Drew:] Approximately 80 miles an hour.
[O'brien:] All right, do you know if this train was moving that quickly at the time?
[Drew:] No, I don't.
[O'brien:] All right. And...
[Drew:] But it was out in a rural area so I presume it was.
[O'brien:] All right. And were there any witnesses that you know of to it? Have you heard from anybody who might have heard or seen anything?
[Drew:] No, there wasn't even any houses close.
[O'brien:] All right. And what was the weather at the time?
[Drew:] Twenty-eight degrees, no wind. It was a fair night.
[O'brien:] All right, Chief Larry Drew with the Corning Police Department in southwestern Iowa. We appreciate your time on what is an extremely busy morning, we know, as the efforts continue now to treat those injured and the investigation begins into the derailment of the California Zephyr near Corning, Iowa 12:40 A.M. Eastern Time.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] The July consumer confidence report and the June existing home sale figures are both due at 10:00 Eastern time. I'm holding my breath.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] And perhaps most importantly here, Mr. Greenspan also set to testify before the House Banking Committee at 10:00 a.m. Eastern time. And joining us now with more on the 10:00 a.m. line-up is Christine Romans.
[Marchini:] Hi.
[Haffenreffer:] And I've got to tell you, I was at a Bloomingdale's and a Crate & Barrel over the weekend, and it appears as though the U.S. consumer is still hopping.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, you're anecdotal shopping evidence.
[Haffenreffer:] Yes, exactly.
[Romans:] It is true. Well, we're going to hear about July consumer confidence from the conference board. June existing home sales, and Alan Greenspan, all at the exact same time, half-an-hour after the stock market opens. So you can bet that first half-an-hour of stock market trade will be very closely tied to earnings, and then we'll dive into the latest read on the economy. Real quick, I want to take a look at that 10:00 line-up on that agenda. Consumer confidence is seen ticking up to 139.3, that compares with 138.8 in June. We've also got July existing home sales, that seen slipping slightly to 5.02 million units, at an annual rate from 5.09. Higher rates may be biting there. It was a very strong May, too. May saw existing home sales up 4.3 percent over April. So they're looking for a bit of a pullback, probably, in existing home sales for the month of July. Also that June confidence number, they're looking for a slight rebound in confidence. Even though there's talk of a slow-down in the economy, talk of slow-down in economy, stagnant stocks, the jobless rate is still very low, analysts say, and the July Michigan consumer sentiment saw a slight rebound, a 1.6 rebound. And they're saying that they've been very closely correlated, so it looks like there could be a rate rebound in these confidence numbers.
[Marchini:] When Mr. Greenspan spoke to the Senate Banking Committee last week, he sounded pretty happy with the way things were going on the economy, is there any likelihood he'll say something different to the House?
[Romans:] No, there's what the analysts are saying is that he could fine tune in the Q&A.; Remember, there are something like 60 members of the House Banking Committee, it is a huge number of people who have the opportunity to ask questions to him. So this could be a very long, a very long Q&A; session. So there's a lot of scope there for...
[Marchini:] Also a huge opportunity for them to make statements to be picked up by the papers back home. So it could be a long time before Mr. Greenspan even gets to open his mouth.
[Romans:] Exactly. So, basically, there's a lot of scope for a lot of comments and a lot of discussion of Mr. Greenspan's stance from last week. So it doesn't mean, you know, just because it'll be the same testimony that we shouldn't pay attention, basically, is what people think.
[Haffenreffer:] And we should note here that we will carry the Greenspan testimony live on CNNfn a little bit later on this morning.
[Marchini:] That's right, so we'll be keeping you updated.
[Romans:] Can't wait.
[Marchini:] I know, it could be a long one. Thanks, Christine, OK.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to take a look now at where stocks are likely to head today. The futures say higher. With specific stocks in mind, we go to Jen Rogers at Instinet.
[Jen Rogers, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Debbie. Well, it looks to be a busy session here this morning. We already have 12 issues trading. That is pretty healthy for this time of day. Right now, we have Cisco moving to the upside it is up 25 cents at $20.55. And our most active issue is Intel continuing its trend. The chips rallied yesterday. We have Intel up another 44 cents here at $31.40 46,000 shares coming through already Debbie.
[Marchini:] All right. Thank you, Jen. Now, Sasha Salama at the Nasdaq marketsite.
[Sasha Salama, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi there, Deb. We've got PMC-Sierra likely to move higher today after rallying yesterday. That maker of specialty chips being added to the S&P; 500 after the close of trading today replacing Quaker Oats, which is being acquired. We're also watching Aether Systems AETH the ticker symbol. This company makes software for handheld devices. It lost $1.19 8 cents worse than expectation. And Peet's Coffee & Tea trades here under the symbol PEET. It came in with a profit of one penny a share when a loss of three pennies had been expected. PEET may be a mover to the upside Deb.
[Marchini:] All right. Thank you very much, Sasha Salama. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Well, as we reported at the top of this show, it was a long night's journey into election day for Al Gore. Eugene O'Neill, playwright, would be proud. CNN's John King joins us from Tampa to tell us about Gore's 30- hour marathon. So John, how are you and the candidate holding up?
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Doing just fine, Carol. This is hour 25, approaching hour 26, of Al Gore's 30-hour campaign finale. You might recall I certainly hope you recall yesterday at this time we were standing in a driving cold rain in Waterloo, Iowa; much more favorable conditions here in Tampa, Florida. The vice president perhaps hoping this is an omen for what lies ahead today. On the final morning of the campaign, Mr. Gore reunited here in Tampa with his running mate, Connecticut Democratic Sen. Joseph Lieberman. After all this campaigning, the all-night campaigning, a little bit of caffeine in order. Both gentleman into a local bakery for a Cuban coffee, a toast there. Then off to the local Democratic headquarters for a pep rally. The workers there going out to work the polls, knock on doors, make the final phone calls to try to turn out the votes. And as he delivered his pep talk today, the vice president took note of the fact that he was the only major party candidate still out campaigning.
[Vice President Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] Well, it's almost 5:30 a.m. Texas time, and George W. Bush is still asleep, and I'm still speaking to people here in Florida.
[King:] Now, earlier, at a stop in South Beach, Miami, 1:00 a.m. at the oceanside, thousands came out for the vice president, several Hollywood actors on hand as well and actresses, the performer Stevie Wonder. Fireworks at the end of the presentation there. Once again, an effort by the vice president to try to fire up the Democratic troops. Florida's 25 electoral votes critical to both campaigns. The Democrats will tell you they can't see how George Bush could win the White House if he does not win this state. Now, the stops earlier on this marathon: Michigan, Missouri, and as we began yesterday, in Iowa. From here, the vice president, in just a short time, he's doing some local television interviews right now to reach a few more states. Then he heads home to Nashville, Tennessee, then to the family farm in Carthage. He will vote later today, find out late tonight or early tomorrow morning whether he'll get to trade in Air Force Two for Air Force One Carol.
[Lin:] Good point. Thanks, John.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] And here's the mayor now of New York City, to start his news conference.
[Myr. Rudy Giuliani, Mayor Of New York City:] Good morning. Obviously, everyone is concerned about the impact of the weather on the relief and recovery efforts, and there's no question that they're hampered by it. Things have to proceed more carefully, more cautiously. At the same time, they're going on, because there is still a strong hope that we'll be able to recover people and find people and save them. So we will try very hard to conduct the operations today, obviously considering the fact that it's dangerous, or more dangerous than it otherwise would be. But they will go on, and hopefully we'll be able to find and save some people today. The misinformation yesterday was a cause of real concern, and I'd like to explain at least a little bit about it and ask you, if you could, consider in reporting this information to be more patient than to just run with information before it's been verified. Some of it is meaningless, ultimately, because it gets corrected, but some of it could be very, very dangerous and very emotionally damaging. Reports, for example, that there are people that we've discovered and been in contact with that aren't verified, aren't true. And there was a report like that yesterday evening that a woman was in communication with people and there were 10 or 15 people in a store underneath. It was reported, it was reported rather widely, and it leads to lots of families becoming very, very hopeful and then finding out that it's just not plain true at all. It also leads to sometimes a lot of activity that can be very dangerous, recovery activity and people who become very excited about it. So please be more careful about reporting this information. There's no reason to run with it until it's actually verified by the police or by the FBI. Same thing was true about the alleged arrests last night and information about box cutters and knives, none of which was verified by the police or the FBI, all of which was publicized, all of which turns out now to be untrue. So if we could all be a little bit more patient and verify the information before we put it out, we won't raise people's hopes unnecessarily and we won't create a situation in which, you know, decisions are made that can endanger lives. School is open today, and it opened on time. It'll be open, they'll be open again on Monday, except in the area that is still closed off, which is the area south of Canal Street. And that part of the city is still part of the recovery zone. We're going to try today to carve out another area south of Canal Street that we can open over the weekend and particularly to have it open for Monday, and it would be the Wall Street area. And therefore we would ask businesses there to start considering the fact that over the weekend they may want to come in and clean out and make sure that their buildings are able to operate on Monday. I'll know better or 4:00 or 5:00 or 6:00, whenever we get back to briefing you, how much of the Wall Street area we can reopen, but we're going to try very hard to open up as much of it as possible for Monday. The Staten Island ferry will also start operating, definitely on Monday, and we'll try to start these things over the weekend so that there's a shakedown before we actually get to Monday. Businesses that need help, there are a lot of them. They should know that resources of the city, the state and the federal government are all there to assist them and to help them to reestablish, to reestablish themselves, so that not only they can recover what they lost, but so they can grow and prosper. We ordinarily have lots of incentive packages and other programs that the state and the city do together to keep businesses in New York and to encourage businesses to come to New York. All those packages are now going to be assisted by the legislation that was passed in Albany yesterday and the legislation that apparently is going to pass in Washington that will make substantial amounts of money available to the city and state for exactly this purpose. So we're trying to reach out to all of the businesses that are affected. We've put together city and state economic development operations to do that. And what we will do is give you a number later so that they can also call us. If we don't get to you we will try you get to us and we will work with you on figuring out what you need in order to get through this difficult period and then reestablish and grow. We've taken out 10,425 tons of debris, 1,154 truck loads so far, and that's really to give you some sense of the monumental nature of the task that's going on. The people who are doing it are incredibly brave. The reports yesterday of firefighters and others that were saved and taken to hospitals were also false. They were not firefighters and people who have been buried in the attack. They were people who got injured or hurt or got into some difficulties during the recovery effort yesterday. So it is very good news that they were saved; it's wonderful. However, we also have to be careful about reporting that. And we also have to underscore how dangerous it is for what these men and women are doing. Finally, a couple of warnings. There's a telemarketing firm that is calling people up asking for donations. If somebody calls you and asks for a donation to help the surviving families or the heroes or anything like that, call up the police or the FBI and tell us who's calling you, because we'll go out and arrest them. Nobody should be calling up and asking for donations. There are people that are offering donations, and that's wonderful. But there's nobody that I know of, or the governor or anyone else, that has been authorized by anyone to be calling up and soliciting donations from people. If anybody is doing that and there is one telemarketing group that is doing this, particularly from senior citizens we would really like to catch them and make an example out of them, in the same way that we would like to catch some of the people that are calling in bomb threats. This is a difficult time, it's a time in which people are more susceptible, more vulnerable than usual, and there are always, unfortunately, people trying to take advantage of that. But if we catch you, then we're going to try very hard to put you in jail. On that note, Governor?
[Governor George Pataki:] Mayor, thank you. First, let me say that we're grateful the president is coming in this afternoon. And as we indicated yesterday, I think it's an important message and sign of his commitment to the ongoing effort to make sure that the people of America stand with the people of New York as we get through this. And we're extremely grateful to him for that. We've thanked so many people. The police and firefighters have been so brave. The EMS groups. But I want to particularly than one particular group right now that are still out there working. The Port Authority had its headquarters in the World Trade Center. It's been through devastating losses. Many of its top administrators are lost. Dozens of its police officers are lost. And yet right now out at the airports, out at the bridges in downtown Manhattan we have hundreds and hundreds of Port Authority workers, thousands of workers, out there standing shoulder to shoulder with everyone else, helping others instead of bearing their own grief. And I just wanted to thank them for their professionalism and the great job they are doing. I also want to thank our command center bunker up in Albany. I don't know if they're watching right now. But they were activated by 9:30 Tuesday morning and they've been there ever since, many of them going 18, 20 hours a day helping to coordinate the effort with the city so that we could make sure whatever needs the city had we would be able to respond to as quickly as possible. And I want to thank them. The mayor talked about the economic and the financial considerations that are under way right now. And just about two hours ago I talked with Chairman Bill Young of the Appropriations Committee, I talked with Senator Clinton, Senator Schumer and our House delegates. And we're very grateful to them, because it does look like this morning legislation will pass Congress authorizing significant and important financial help to the city of New York, to the tri-state area, and to all of those who are going through this difficulty. Congress authorizing significant and important financial help to the city of New York, to the tri-state area, and to all of those who are going through this difficulty. And I just wanted to thank Senator Schumer, who I was on the phone with all night, and Senator Clinton. And in the House delegation, the whole delegation, but in particular about 1:00 this morning there was a meeting going on trying to decide what to do, and Congressman John Sweeney, Congressman Jim Walsh, both of whom are from upstate, were in that meeting with the speaker fighting very hard. And along with Senator Schumer they deserve a great deal of credit for making this appropriation possible to help us get through this. As the mayor indicated, we are working as well on economic recovery. As I said yesterday, we set up an economic recovery assistance headquarters at 633 Third Avenue. This is a joint state and city effort, with the federal SBA and other federal agencies there as well, where a business seeking assistance can get, in one place, state, city, federal help to make sure that they can get back on their feet. And the entire 32nd floor has been allocated for this purpose, and there is a number operational, 212-818-1700, for businesses that want the help in getting back on their feet. Finally, with respect to the contributions. We've been inundated with contributions from people across the state, and we are very, very grateful. It is just incredible to see this outpouring of public support for the families and for all of those who are going through this difficult recovery. The city has the Twin Towers Fund. The United Way has its September 11 Fund. And the state has set up a fund, the World Trade Center Relief Fund, to take in all those contributions that have been made from across the state. And as the mayor indicated, we are unaware of any legitimate group that is soliciting funds. But, obviously, donations are accepted. And we have a 1-800 number for those who want to donate, but it's probably going to be inundated, but I'll give it anyway. 1- 800-801-8092. Or checks can be sent to P.O. Box 5028, Albany, New York. And these funds will be working with the Twin Towers Fund and with the United Way to make sure we coordinate our efforts to make sure that everything that can be done is done for the victims of this tragic incident. So we'll get through this. And again, to the mayor, to the president, we're grateful that everyone is pulling together to make sure we put this behind us. Thank you.
[Barry Mawn, Fbi Assistant Director, New York:] Good morning. Again, I'm Barry Mawn, and I'm the assistant director of the FBI here in New York. Following on the mayor's comments, what I would like to just reiterate is again the whole investigative effort of the Joint Terrorism Task Force, which is the FBI, NYPD and a number of other federal agencies, is to identify the hijackers, their support systems, where they were since they've been in country. And in that regard, we are doing numerous interviews, running down hundreds, if not thousands of leads around the country. We are responding to numerous calls from the airports. To reiterate what the mayor has already told you, the reporting that has been going on all night, I can definitively tell you, is inaccurate. We were out at both airports last evening. We did talk to approximately a dozen individuals.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Convicted bomber Timothy McVeigh is scheduled to die in one week from today, but if his defense team wins the latest court battle, that will not happen, at least not that soon. Standing in the way right now are federal prosecutors, and today they filed their response to McVeigh's petition for a stay of his execution. CNN's Susan Candiotti live from Denver now. And, Susan, what's the Justice Department's take thus far today?
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Bill, not surprisingly, the government has gone on the attack against the defense, tried to knock down each and every point the defense is making in trying to win a stay of execution for Timothy McVeigh, who is currently scheduled to die by lethal injection, as you know, on June the 11th. The government is basically attacking the defense's case on three main points: No. 1, that this is the improper court. The trial judge does not have proper jurisdiction for the defense to file a stay of execution. No. 1 [sic], that there is nothing in any of the documents turned over to the defense that questions in any way McVeigh's guilt. And third, that the government did not commit fraud, did not intentionally withhold evidence by the defense. In fact, in the words of the Justice Department Prosecutor Sean Conelly, this quote: "There is no case in which the death sentence could be more appropriate than this one." Now, you will recall that just last week the defense went on the attack and tried to win a stay of execution for Timothy McVeigh, and it used a very creative and interesting argument. It cited a 1944 civil case involving patent fraud in trying to say that the U.S. government intentionally withheld evidence, more than 4,400, pages of new material not previously available to the defense before trial. McVeigh's lawyers are arguing that the FBI committed fraud by not turning over this information to them. And they want a stay so that the court, in the words of. defense, can get time to post a to hold an evidentiary hearing so that the defense can try to prove this to the court. And they also want the judge to allow them to reopen an appeal, an appeal that was rejected by the trial judge last October, in which the defense tried to say that Timothy McVeigh had ineffective counsel, and that the FBI had mishandled evidence. The government, of course, is going on the attack by saying that none of this is applicable, and that if the defense wants to file for an appeal, then it should appeal before the court of appeals. All of this, of course, is up to Judge Matsch, who will hold a hearing on all of this on Wednesday. Back to you.
[Hemmer:] All right, Susan. Susan Candiotti live in Denver with the very latest there.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] And now to New York, to an area near where the Trade Centers collapses. Our own Michael Okwu is there talking to some people who live in that neighborhood. Hello, Michael.
[Michael Okwu, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Judy. This is a very special place for New York City police officers and for firefighters and other volunteers here. Since September 11, this restaurant called Nino's has not accepted any paying customers. In fact, they have served something over 400,000 meals here to those recovery team members. And I am joined now by several folks here who came in from Connecticut today, who were watching the bin Laden tape earlier. Let me ask you gentleman Dwayne Tony and Darrell, right?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Okwu:] What was your feeling when you saw the bin Laden tape?
[Unidentified Male:] Well, a few minutes that I looked at it, as a former veteran, you know, the military in me wants to say this man is evil and he needs to be taken care of. And it hit home personally. When I see this man, it affects me so personally that I want to say this man is evil. He needs to be taken care of. And, you know, innocent lives people woke up that morning, you know, as a normal life, getting on a normal airplane, and thinking I'm going to see my mom, going to see my dad. And then, all of a sudden, they never dreamed that that morning, that destiny would be waiting, you know.
[Okwu:] Tony, all three of you essentially come from have religious faith.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Okwu:] That is part of what you do.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Okwu:] You have been going to areas that are in need and trying to spread the word as it were and to try to restore faith in people who might have felt battered by what happened on September 11. When you were watching Osama bin Laden talking, for example, about how he calculated, just essentially, where the jets were going to hit and how many floors would be taken out, what was your feeling?
[Unidentified Male:] Well, I...
[Okwu:] Does it test your faith?
[Unidentified Male:] No, it does not test my faith. It would take a lot more than that to test my faith. I feel that he is the epitome of evil and initially I was against any air time. But then I thought there are people in this world that have never even seen the pictures of the World Trade Center and what happened here. So I think that if showing that tape helps the president in any way keep together the coalition he has or help to make a future coalition, then I am for it. But I agree with Dwayne that the veteran in me is you know, I kind of tense up and I want to see him dead, actually.
[Okwu:] Dwayne Tony and Darrell I'm sorry we did not have time to get to you I really appreciate your time. Judy, essentially, this is an area where there have been many New York City police officers who have come in and come out. We have not seen too many firefighters today. But it is a very special place in the heart of those people who have been involved in the recovery effort. They have very deep feelings, as you know, about what happened on September 11 and very deep feelings about Osama bin Laden back to you, Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, Michael, thanks to you and to the people there you have been speaking with. We appreciate hearing from them. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Thousands are expected at the funeral of Cardinal John O'Connor in New York City today. The president and Mrs. Clinton will be among the dignitaries attending. The archbishop of New York died last week of brain cancer. CNN's Deborah Feyerick has more on the Catholic rituals for this funeral Mass.
[Deborah Feyerick, Cnn Correspondent:] Cardinal John O'Connor in the vestments he wore to celebrate Mass, a white robe symbolizing baptism and resurrection. The cardinal lying in state near the pulpit at St. Patrick's Cathedral. The funeral Mass is by invitation only. Three-thousand guests are expected to attend, among them cardinals and bishops, dignitaries and the Catholic elite, a funeral fit for a prince.
[Prof. Peter Awn, Columbia University:] The rituals that are about to take place really harks back to the early traditions of the church, when the pope was not just simply the spiritual head of the church, but also an important European monarch. The cardinals were, therefore, the princes of that realm.
[Feyerick:] Pope John Paul II is sending a top Vatican official to celebrate the Mass. Secretary of State Angelo Sodano is the cardinal who officiated at Mother Teresa's funeral three years ago.
[Awn:] This is clearly a sign and a validation of the current pope's reliance on, trust of, and real affection for Cardinal O'Connor.
[Feyerick:] Because of the cardinal's bond with the pope, his charisma, his position as leader of New York Catholics, there will be a high level of pomp and ceremony, but the prayers and rites will be the same as those used at all Roman Catholic funerals.
[Awn:] All of the prayers that will be said, even the traditional ones, will be those that emphasize resurrection, new life and the move from an earthly life to Paradise.
[Feyerick:] Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston will give the sermon. After the service, Cardinal O'Connor will be interred in the crypt behind the altar. There are several dozen people inside the cathedral. It is open from 6:30 to 10:30 this morning for a final viewing of Cardinal O'Connor. After that, it will be closed down to receive all the dignitaries who are expected, among them: President Clinton, the vice president, also the first lady, as well as former President George Bush and his son, and U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan. They will arrive shortly before 2:00 when the funeral Mass is expected to begin Carol.
[Lin:] Deborah, what kind of security are they going to have around the cathedral today?
[Feyerick:] Security in this area is going to be very tight. They're going to be closing off bits in parts of this what is midtown Manhattan. All the traffic will move around the perimeters, all of this, just to secure the cathedral.
[Lin:] All right, thank you very much, Deborah Feyerick in New York.

[Mark Shields, Co-host:] He is Congressman Dan Burton of Indiana, chairman of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee.
[Janet Reno, U.s. Attorney General:] Yesterday, Mr. Gonzalez came to our country to be reunited with his son. Today, we move forward with that reunification. Early next week we will give the relatives instructions on when and where Elian is to be turned over to his father.
[Shields:] Congressman Dan Burton, listening to the attorney general, following the news, it appears that the resolution of the Elian Gonzalez case will end up where you don't want it to end up, the repatriation, reunification with him and his father going back to Cuba. The rule of law will prevail. There have been voices in the Cuban-American community in Miami and outside of it, suggesting that there should be forceable resistance to any court order and the implementation of it. What do you say to those people?
[Rep. Dan Burton , Government Reform And Oversight Chairman:] Well, I think the rule of law ought to be followed. There should be law order and no civil disobedience. The reason I took issue with Janet Reno's decision is because as a boy I went through child abuse, saw my mother beaten and I was beaten. And I thought all the facts concerning Elian Gonzalez should come out in a domestic court where child custody cases are decided. And that's the reason I took the position I did.
[Shields:] Given the fact that 1,500 American children each year are kidnapped and taken to other countries, usually by relatives, does the rule of law in this case make sense?
[Burton:] Well, the attorney general has the right to revoke the amnesty, if you will, for Elian Gonzalez and send him back. But I still maintain that we don't know all of the facts about the father, why the mother died on the high seas trying to come to America with boy. And I still maintain that it would be better to have it decided in a court of law like other domestic cases are handled.
[Novak:] Are you out of options in Congress right now on this case, being realistic?
[Burton:] Oh, I think so. The only option that could happen would be if somebody would push a permanent resident bill in the Congress like Connie Mack or somebody and get that passed in a very short period of time. I don't think that's likely. So, I think that Janet Reno's decision probably will stand.
[Novak:] On the broader aspect Mr. Chairman, all the polling data indicates that the American people are losing confidence in the desirability or the effectiveness of embargoes on Cuban trade. Surprisingly to some, a majority of the American people want the boy returned to Cuba. Do you feel there is a loss of American support, voter support for the policy that you have advocated in the Helms- Burton bill which codifies the embargo on Cuba?
[Burton:] Well, President Clinton wanted to normalize relations back when the Helms-Burton law was pending. And he said he would veto it. And when the two planes were shot down with Americans aboard by Soviet Migs, flown by Cuban fighter pilots, all of sudden he had a politically untenable situation facing him. And so he agreed to sign the Helms-Burton law, but he has never lost his ardor, desire, to normalize relations with Cuba. And I think he's using this opportunity right now to further his goal of normalizing relations with Castro.
[Novak:] But I asked about the American people. What do you think they want?
[Burton:] Well, I think the American people are getting a very strong pro-Cuba view from members of the media. And I don't think they're getting all the facts. People don't realize that Fidel Castro takes the money and doles out to the people who work in American institutions down there, about one-seventy one-seventieth of that in Cuban currency. And so people who get $400 a month from companies that work there, only get $10 a month to live on. It's a very repressive society, but that fact is not getting out to the American people.
[Novak:] Well, one more point on that, Republican Congressman Lincoln Diaz-Balart, a leader of the Cuban-American community, saying that this is all a this whole Elian affair is an attempt to undermine public support for the Cuban-American community, public to instill public dislike for that community and therefore undermine the Helms-Burton law. Do you think that's the case?
[Burton:] I think that's a strong possibility and the president I think is trying to further that although he's not out front. You will notice that the lawyer that defended him in the Lewinsky matter, is also the lawyer for the father of Elian Gonzalez.
[Novak:] Greg Craig.
[Burton:] Yes. And I don't think that's a coincidence.
[Shields:] Mr. Burton, just to a point [inaudible], the majority of the people don't want Elian sent back; the Americans don't want him sent back to Cuba, want him rejoined with his father. And that was obviously goes back to given the choice of his staying here or staying in Florida staying here or staying in Cuba...
[Burton:] Let me just make one thing clear. I am not opposed to the boy being with his father.
[Shields:] OK.
[Burton:] But I think that all the facts need to come out in a court of law because I don't know, he may have been abusive father. Why did the mother risk coming to America on the high seas? I don't know. We need to know that.
[Shields:] We do know that he had primary custody of the child, and that was the case in Cuba. But in returning to that, your party and you've led very forcefully criticism of the Castro regime. Yet, at the same time the other surviving communist country in the world, China, is embraced by Republicans. Overwhelmingly they are pushing for Most Favored Nation status. They just can't get enough of China. They think it's a wonderful market. They see 1.3 billion consumers. Now isn't there a certain inconsistency and contradiction on the part of Republicans when you have led this fight and you have been strong on criticism of China as well, but the Republican Party can't get enough of the repressive regime in Beijing.
[Burton:] Well, I have voted against almost everything for communist China because of the repression over there, the 10 million people that are in slave labor camps, making tennis shoes and everything else and the human rights violations and the imbalance in trade. There is a myriad of reasons why I don't think we should give permanent MFN status and WTO status to China. But a lot of my colleagues see it differently on both sides of the aisle. Now regarding Cuba there is a difference. Cuba is 90 miles from our shores. Castro has been supporting revolution forever. He did it in Grenada. He did it in Nicaragua. He did it in El Salvador. He did it in South America. And for that reason I think people feel like that here's a person who is a dinosaur that needs to be eliminated so we have complete democracy in this hemisphere.
[Shields:] Just to ask you this though, Cuba is not selling nuclear weapons to rogue nations. Cuba is not firing missiles across the Taiwan Straits. Cuba is probably less of a formidable threat you would agree I think, than is China.
[Burton:] Yes.
[Shields:] ... to the U.S. than the Zhiang Zemin leadership.
[Burton:] Oh, I think that's probably true, Mark. The problem is I think Fidel Castro, if he gets an opportunity, will continue to try to export revolution, the revolutionaries throughout this hemisphere.
[Novak:] Mr. Chairman, on this program about two weeks ago, one of your colleagues, Republican Congressman John Kasich of Ohio, was asked about your investigations of the campaign scandals of the Clinton administration. And this is what his response was. Let's take a look at it.
[Rep. John Kasich , Budget Committee Chairman:] I don't like to tell chairmen how to do their work. And I was just on TV saying I like Dan Burton. I just don't want any more stories about this. This president is leaving office. Let's just get on with it. And I just I'm tired of all this.
[Novak:] What's your response to that sir?
[Burton:] Well, my response is that I have high regard for John Kasich and I disagree with him because if somebody broke the law, if somebody took campaign contributions from communist China, Macao, Indonesia, Taiwan, Egypt and so forth, which was illegal, they should be held accountable to the law for breaking the law just like any like you or Mark or anybody else. And my responsibility as chairman of this committee that does investigations is to ferret out waste, fraud, abuse and illegal activities in the government and oversee that. And I am not going to curtail my investigation until we get some final results.
[Novak:] Just quickly, John Kasich also said he would advise George W. Bush in his campaign for president, not to bring up the campaign scandals. Your opinion?
[Burton:] Well, I think parts of it inevitably are going to come up...
[Novak:] Do you think it's good to bring it up?
[Burton:] Well, I think the Hsi Lai Temple is inevitable yes, I think it should come up because there's some activities there that need to be clarified.
[Novak:] We have to take a break and when we come back, we'll ask Dan Burton who is his next target by the House Government Reform Committee.
[Shields:] Dan Burton, my partner has called you the leading Republican investigator in Congress and there's statistics to back it up. You have personally issued as chairman of your committee 900 subpoenas in terms of the investigation of the vast campaign finance reform. Ninety-nine percent of them have gone to Democrats. How can you justify that when in fact Fred Thompson's own committee in the Senate, a Republican of impeccable credentials, said this was a bipartisan yes, Clinton-Gore was primary, but this was a bipartisan scandal.
[Burton:] We have asked for and received information from Republican sources involving in the campaign finance scandal. And they have volunteered it. They have given it to us without the necessity of subpoenas. We have subpoenaed some documents. But the large number of subpoenas should be put into proper perspective. For instance, if we have one individual we're trying to get information from, we may subpoena his credit card records, his phone records, his bank records and there maybe several banks involved even overseas. And so as a result, one person may have 20 or 30 subpoenas because you have to get all the facts to make the case.
[Shields:] You said publicly in order to be credible as chairman and investigator you had to be fair.
[Burton:] Yes.
[Shields:] And yet congressional scholar Norm Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute said this of your hearings on campaign scandals. "The Burton investigation is going to be remembered as a case study on how not to do a congressional investigation and is a prime example of investigation as farce."
[Burton:] Well, all I can say is that everybody is entitled to their own opinions. We are committed to getting the facts out to the American people on the illegal campaign contributions coming into the Clinton campaign from Indonesia, from communist China, from Macao, from Taiwan and so forth. And I think the American people have a right to know those things. I also think that people who broke the law ought to be held accountable and come to the bar of justice.
[Shields:] And those people including Republicans?
[Burton:] Yes. And as a matter of fact, let me just tell you that the biggest fines levied against people who broke the finance laws, have been against Republicans, two fines that I know of, one was for $8 million, one was for $6 million. And yet Charlie Trie and John Huang who were leading characters in the campaign finance scandal, one got a $5000 slap on the wrist; the other got a $10,000 slap on the wrist and community service time. Now contrast those two. When Huang and Trie brought in millions of dollars and these other people brought in thousands.
[Novak:] Mr. Chairman, your committee has asked for the full report about Prosecutor LaBella recommending an independent counsel in the Clinton campaign scandals. Most of that report has been leaked and published. What do you expect to learn from it that you don't know now?
[Burton:] Well, there's parts of that report both to those that have been redacted. My counsel on my committee and my legal staff have gone over and read the LaBella and Freeh memos and I believe there's some very important information to come out about the president, the vice president, Harold Ickes, and the first lady, that's in those reports that has not come out. And I think they're very important and relevant to our investigation.
[Novak:] In regard to the missing e-mails that we talked about at the beginning of this interview, what do you have a target? Is there a high level official in the Clinton administration that you really think covered up these e-mails?
[Burton:] Well, Chuck Ruff was the president's counsel at the time, and these e-mails started missing in September of 1996 when the campaign scandal was really reaching its peak. They found out about the missing e-mails in 1998. Five people from the Northrup-Grumman company were involved in keeping track of these e-mails. When they brought these to the attention of Ms. Crabtree, and Mr. Lindsey, one of the counsels to the president, they were threatened, three of them with possible jail if they told anybody about it.
[Novak:] But you're not blaming President Clinton for this one specifically?
[Burton:] No, I'm certainly not. But I will tell you this, that a message was sent to his chief counsel and they did nothing. And we had to find out about them by accident. It should have been given to us two years ago, and the independent counsels because these e-mails could be relevant to a whole host of investigations.
[Shields:] Mr. Chairman, on the CBS broadcast "Face the Nation" you charged that the Clinton administration was using the IRS to conduct audits in prosecution, persecution however you want to do it to harass their political foes. And yet a three-year investigation, bipartisan just concluded by the Congress has established that there was no political skullduggery, influence in any IRS audits. I mean, do you withdraw that charge now?
[Burton:] I really don't recall making that charge. If you could cite exactly what I said...
[Shields:] Sure, October 1997, "Face the Nation."
[Burton:] I would like to see what I said.
[Shields:] OK, would be happy to do that.
[Burton:] But I will tell you this that the Justice Department has obstructed and I believe illegally, obstructed congressional investigations for the past three-and-a-half to four years. And I think Janet Reno is blocking for the president.
[Shields:] Tell us this put on your fair hat for a second what one initiative of President Bill Clinton's nearly eight years in office, do you most admire?
[Burton:] Oh, I admire his signing on to the tax cuts. I admire after vetoing twice, his signing on to the welfare reform bill. There's a number of things that I think...
[Shields:] What about an initiative of his?
[Burton:] I think most of the things that he's accomplished have been reactions to Republican initiatives in the Congress, although he takes credit for them and does a good job of it.
[Novak:] All right, just a short time before we take another break, but Mr. Chairman, your committee is still going ahead with more investigations into the Waco massacre. But the Justice Department has just named former Senator John Danforth, Republican, a very respected man, to look into it. Why can't you rely on Senator Danforth to make a fair investigation of this problem without your committee getting involved?
[Burton:] Well, our committee is charged in the House with investigating things where there's illegal activity that may have happened. The Justice Department and Janet Reno had a memo back when we first investigated four years ago, five years ago, and that memo has 49 pages and when the committee got it, it had only 48 pages and the 49th page showed that incinerary devices were used in Waco. And they left that off. And they tried to blame Louis Freeh for withholding that information from Congress when it was Janet Reno.
[Novak:] Do you have confidence in Senator Danforth's investigation?
[Burton:] I do but I also believe that there's things he may not be looking into that we are. For instance I have hired two floor tape experts to look at those floor tapes in addition to who he has.
[Novak:] Just quickly we have to take a break and when we come back we have "The Big Question" for Dan Burton. And "The Big Question" for Chairman Dan Burton. The Congress approved two years ago detailed questions to be asked in the census and that came under the jurisdiction of your committee, I believe. In view of that, do you recommend that that American people who get the long form on the census should or should not answer those questions?
[Burton:] Well, I think if they have the time and can they should answer all the questions. It's pretty much the same form that we had 10 years ago. But I will say this. If they just answer the first six questions, and don't have time the answer the others, that will still be a big help as far as letting us know where people live and where we ought to be getting the...
[Novak:] So, it's an option you think then for those?
[Burton:] Well, I wouldn't say it's an option. And my subcommittee chairman Dan Miller who handles the census would be better qualified to answer this. But let me just say that I think they ought to return the census form and if they don't answer all the questions, they ought to answer at least the first six.
[Shields:] You're a strict constructionist Mr. Chairman. The census is mandated. It's one of the few things that the founding fathers said we had to do every 10 years. You're telling the American people to be indifferent to it?
[Burton:] No, no, no. I'm saying they should send it back. I'm saying if they don't have the time...
[Shields:] Fill it out?
[Burton:] Yes. There's two forms. There's a short form which has about six or eight questions that are very important to finding out where people live so we can send money equally divided based on population of the various states for various purposes education and so forth. But also the long form goes into more detail just like it did 10 years ago which bothers a lot of people, myself included. I think it should be shortened. I think it will be shortened in the future. So, if people don't fill it out completely, I think they should fill out at least the first part of it.
[Shields:] We will be back with a comment. Thank you very much for being with us Congressman Dan Burton.
[Burton:] Thank you Mark.
[Shields:] Thank you. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] ... that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States...
[Larry King:] Tonight, George W. Bush has taken the oath of office and Bill Clinton says farewell to D.C., at least for now. The nation's 54th presidential inauguration is history. For partisan perspective on the transfer of power, Republican Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, head of the congressional committee that oversaw today's swearing in, and Democratic Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the minority whip. Then inaugural observations from Ben Bradlee, vice president at large of "The Washington Post." With him is journalist, author and keen observer of the Washington social scene. Plus "TIME" magazine contributing editor, presidential columnist Hugh Sidey. We'll also hear from the new chairman of the Republican National Committee, Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore, and we'll take you inside some of the top inaugural balls. All that next on LARRY KING WEEKEND. A quick reminder: LARRY KING WEEKEND now airs two nights, Saturday and Sunday night. They'll both be highlight shows. Tonight's is live. LARRY KING WEEKEND now Saturday and Sunday night. And we welcome senators Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid. If you watched the inauguration today, you know that you were the emcee.
[Sen. Mitch Mcconnell , Kentucky:] I was.
[King:] How do you get that job?
[Mcconnell:] Well, the chairman of the Senate Rules Committee traditionally has presided over the inauguration, and it was a thrill. It was...
[King:] Yes, what was it like?
[Mcconnell:] It was a great experience. Despite the drizzle I had a little water on my glasses.
[King:] You didn't flub a line, though.
[Mcconnell:] Well, tried not to. I thought that President Bush did an outstanding job. Really a terrific job.
[King:] Were you there, Senator Reid?
[Sen. Harry Reid , Nevada:] I was there. In fact, Larry, I brought my granddaughter, my 10-year-old granddaughter. She sat next to me. As people know, I didn't support President Bush in the election, but I thought it was important for my granddaughter to find out what our government is all about. And that's what it's all about today, learning that we have a peaceful transition no matter how close the election is.
[King:] It's almost incredible to watch it and to be a part of it. Did you ride in the car with Clinton and Bush?
[Mcconnell:] Yes, there were five of us in the car: Senator Dodd, Speaker Hastert and myself, President Clinton and President Bush. And it was an interesting experience.
[King:] What did they say?
[Mcconnell:] Well, they were one of the things they had in common of course was their experience with protesters. So both of them made some rather humorous remarks, which I don't think I can repeat, related to the signs that were out for and against both of them.
[King:] Was it comfortable or tension?
[Mcconnell:] I think it was remarkably comfortable. I thought it would be a lot more tense than it was, but President Clinton was quite talkative and seemed quite relaxed. I guess that makes sense when you're on the way out. But President Bush was comfortable and funny. It was an easy conversation. It could have been quite tense, and frankly, that's what I expected.
[King:] And in the past, that has happened.
[Mcconnell:] I understand that it has. Probably Truman and Eisenhower.
[King:] Didn't talk.
[Mcconnell:] Oh, is that right?
[King:] And Senator Reid, observing, how do you think Al Gore handled it?
[Reid:] I watched him a lot. I was directly across from him. He handled it very well. He looked good. And as I I just reflect a little bit on the two men that were in the car with Mitch. I mean the people of Nevada like both of them. And I think that's the way the country's broken up. We have half for him, half against him, and I think if there were ever a mandate, we've got one to work together, because that's the American people have told us we better, because everything's 5050 back here.
[King:] How do you explain it, both of you this is first for you, Senator McConnell how well this works despite the heated feelings?
[Mcconnell:] Well, we have a long and respected tradition, an orderly transfer of power.
[King:] But nobody takes over, nobody...
[Mcconnell:] We understand the rules, and it's widely accepted in this country, and every four years we've had a peaceful orderly transfer of power. And this one, after such a contentious election, it makes you doubly appreciate that strong tradition that we have.
[King:] We also like the pomp and circumstance, don't we?
[Reid:] Yes, but it's the miracle of our Constitution. Think about that. We had a man took office today who got 600,000 votes less than the person that he beat. We have the close election in Florida. Not a single person has been arrested, no physical violence. And we had a celebration today, and that's what it should be.
[King:] And even protesters, I guess that's part of the scene, too, right?
[Mcconnell:] Sure.
[King:] I mean, that's what the country's...
[Mcconnell:] It's sort of like what Claude Raines said about gambling in "Casablanca" we have protests in Washington.
[King:] No kidding! All right, Ashcroft, is he going to go through?
[Reid:] Well, it appears so. There's of course 50 Republicans, so he's got a pretty good jump right there. And it would appear we have Senator Byrd and a number of Democrats who have already come out for him. So it seems a sure thing that Ashcroft will get the nomination. But I think it's something that's going to take some debate, and there will be some votes against him. It's a question of how many.
[King:] You're watching vice president I was going to say elect Vice President Dick Cheney being introduced at the Florida ball tonight, a chad ball I guess you could call it, right?
[Reid:] Mitch and I were talking about that. It will be late next week or the following week.
[King:] Oh, it won't definitely you think it could go through next week?
[Reid:] Well, it could, but I think it'll start maybe next week and go over into the next week. There will be a couple days of talk...
[King:] It won't be it won't be a one-day thing?
[Reid:] I don't think so.
[Mcconnell:] The main thing, though, is he is going to be confirmed. It's been an experience for him, but he's going to be...
[King:] And Ms. Norton as well?
[Reid:] We confirmed Larry, we confirmed seven today.
[King:] Seven today. Ms. Norton as well?
[Mcconnell:] Yes, she'll be confirmed as well.
[King:] And your wife she's out here with you tonight. We would have invited her on, but she hasn't gone through the confirmation.
[Mcconnell:] No. The transition people like for them to to not deal with the press until after they're confirmed. Her hearing is next Wednesday, and we're hopeful.
[Reid:] They all should have it as easy as Elaine Chao.
[King:] What does it feel like to have a wife who's going to be in the Cabinet?
[Mcconnell:] Well, I'm immensely proud of her, but beyond that, Larry, you know, she's the first Chinese-American to ever be in the Cabinet. So among the Chinese-American community, this is a huge thing, and she's a symbol of their assimilation and their success. And I'm immensely proud of her and they are, too. It gives you sort of the extra dimension. From a Kentucky point of view, by the way, it's been 55 years since we've had a member of the Cabinet. So at home, people are just...
[King:] That's funny. It's been 55 years and the first one you get is Chinese-American.
[Mcconnell:] Yes.
[King:] Not even from the horse-racing end. All right. How well a couple other quick things is this Senate going to get along, Senator Reid?
[Reid:] Well, as I said earlier, I think if we have a mandate it's a mandate to do something together. We have 50 Democrats, 50 Republicans. If there were ever a formula for working together, that's it. And I think we're going to surprise the American people by passing things dealing with education, health care. We're going to do things with workers rights, the environment. I think we're going to do a lot of good things.
[King:] You agree?
[Mcconnell:] I agree: 20 of the Democrats come from states that George Bush carried. I think that's a core of people who will support him from time to time. I think he's going to be remarkably successful.
[King:] And one other thing, Senator McCain is meeting with President Bush I think on Wednesday. He's going to try do bring up campaign finance reform. You're his biggest foe in that area.
[Mcconnell:] Well, I have been on the merits, but I think this year we ought to have a full debate on it, and I think we agree on that, that we have a full, couple-of-weeks debate, give everybody an opportunity to offer their amendments. We have a different administration now with a little different point of view about that issue, and I think the chances of advancing the ball in the campaign finance area are a lot better than they used to be.
[King:] Does that surprise you?
[Reid:] No, it doesn't. Remember, Mitch is a legislator. Legislation is the art of compromise, and this is the time to compromise, to build consensus.
[King:] Thank you both very much. We'll be seeing a lot of you.
[Mcconnell:] Good to see you.
[King:] A lot of both of you. Senator Mitch McConnell, Senator Harry Reid. When we come, three of my favorite people: Ben Bradlee, Sally Quinn she's Mrs. Bradlee as well and Hugh Sidey. We'll also be checking in at various balls around town. There's Dick Cheney in Florida at the Florida ball right now. We'll be back. Don't go away.
[Richard Cheney, Vice President Of The United States:] Our new president, George W. Bush, and his wife, Laura.
[Bush:] I, George Walker Bush, do solemnly swear...
[William Rehnquist, Chief Justice, U.s. Supreme Court:] ... that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States...
[Bush:] ... that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States...
[Rehnquist:] ... and will to the best of my ability...
[Bush:] ... and will to the best of my ability...
[Rehnquist:] ... preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States...
[Bush:] ... preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States...
[Rehnquist:] ... so help me God.
[Bush:] ... so help me god.
[Rehnquist:] Congratulations...
[King:] We're back on LARRY KING WEEKEND. The inaugural parade today held in very inclement weather. There's no way you can you can't elaborate. You can't make it any better than it was. It was terrible. It was misty and cold and yucky. And we now welcome to LARRY KING WEEKEND, Ben Bradlee, vice president at-large "The Washington Post"; Sally Quinn, journalist, author, one of the keen observers of the Washington social scene; and our man, Hugh Sidey of "TIME" magazine. He's Washington contributing editor, author of the presidency column, and president of the White House Historical Society. I wonder how many inaugurals we have combined in this panel. How many...
[Ben Bradlee, "washington Post":] Well, since '50, probably fifty...
[King:] Two Eisenhower?
[Bradlee:] ... three. No, I was out of there.
[King:] '53. Sally?
[Sally Quinn, "washington Post":] Well, the question is many inaugural balls have we been to. That's a different subject. That's...
[King:] That's more important to you, right?
[Quinn:] Well, yes, because anybody who's been to one doesn't ever go again.
[King:] You're the expert. Has there always been inaugural balls? Did Washington have an...
[Sidey:] I've been through 11. I '57 was my first one, and that was Eisenhower, and that was rather restrained. But it was Kennedy that had 10 or something. We went to all of them.
[Bradlee:] I don't know if I should tell this story, but the first...
[King:] Go ahead.
[Bradlee:] ... the first presidential election to have more than one inaugural ball was Ike, and there was a famous story about Larry Laserd. Do you remember Larry Laserd, the old radio man?
[King:] Sure. Larry Laserd, CBS News.
[Bradlee:] He was in in New York, masterminding the whole thing, and it came time to shift down to Washington. So he said, "And now we take you to Washington, where both presidential balls are in full swing." And he broke up.
[King:] There are the Cheneys dancing at the Florida ball. What did you make, Hugh, of the inaugural setting today...
[Sidey:] It was quite good.
[King:] It was Mr. Gore and Mr. Bush and Bush parents I mean, it was an incredible story.
[Sidey:] It was very good. It was very good. But you know, we're a society that is sated with spectacles. So each year, it probably diminishes a little in our perception, because, you know, we've been through Kennedy and the blizzard, and we've been through Reagan, who moved it to the west side of the Capitol, and we've been through rain and all of that sort of thing. And it was very good.
[Quinn:] This one had so much poignancy. The poignancy...
[King:] You couldn't write this,.
[Quinn:] ... with the Gores, you know, what a tragedy for them this was and how difficult it must have been for them to sit there and watch this, and know that he got a majority of the popular vote. And then to see the father and son, and watch them tear up. There were just so many different tensions and so much emotion there on that platform.
[King:] Now, you're the social...
[Quinn:] Person.
[King:] ... expert. Not
[Quinn:] Well, yes. I mean, you...
[King:] In other words, Democrats shouldn't go to these balls?
[Quinn:] Well, I can't imagine why a Democrat would want to go and celebrate a Republican administration.
[King:] So it is just a celebration?
[Bradlee:] Jammed, jammed, jammed with people. You can't move around. What?
[Sidey:] A lot of Democrats.
[Bradlee:] It's a party, you know. What the heck.
[Quinn:] No, I think it's a lot of people from out of town, because I really do think that most people in Washington, if they have been to one ball, probably won't ever go again unless they absolutely have to.
[King:] Is it like at the circus?
[Quinn:] It's worse, oh my god. It's the worst possible experience you could ever...
[King:] Because?
[Quinn:] Because it's freezing cold, you can't find a place to park, you can't find a place to check your coat, you can't get anything to drink, you can't get anything to eat, it's too crowded to dance, your feet get trampled on, you don't ever see the president. Then, of course then you can't get your coat...
[King:] Have you been to them, Hugh?
[Sidey:] I've covered them. I've been probably to more balls than anybody, because for many years I went I went around with the presidents and we would stop at all of these things. And then I tried a few on my own just as a guest, you know, and they're hideous. But but...
[Quinn:] Hugh, then why did you go to more than one?
[Sidey:] Well, I had to. It was my line of work, for heaven's sakes.
[King:] Why do people like them?
[Bradlee:] Well, I bet you the Texas crowd that comes up, they want to...
[King:] So even though they're stomping on each other...
[Bradlee:] ... want a spectacle for their dollars. They're spending a lot of money up here, and they like to go to a party. They like to be able to say they've been there.
[Quinn:] You want to go so you can say you've been. That is why...
[King:] I was there.
[Quinn:] That's right.
[King:] We'll be right back with Ben Bradlee, Sally Quinn, Hugh Sidey. Pat Sajak is covering a ball tonight, and we'll check in with him. Hey, there he is. And along with him is the very lovely Cynthia Steele Vance, who is a prominent member of Washington society. Sajak and Vance, we'll go to them after this. We're back on LARRY KING LIVE. The site you're looking at is the Florida ball, where we just saw Dick Cheney and Lynne Cheney do their dance. Covering things at the California ball is Cynthia Steele Vance, public relations director, a former broadcaster herself, and a veteran TV journalist. And with her is Pat Sajak. All right, set the scene, Cynthia. What's going on in the California ball?
[Cynthia Steele Vance:] Well, it's quite a scene. We've rounded up Pat Sajak, and we are really pleased to have him. It's been quite an event so far. They've sold about 4,500 tickets. They were really packed to the rafters and the president sort of swept in, and I will say he swept in on time, which is a little unusual.
[Pat Sajak:] Well, I was having a wonderful time until Sally Quinn told me how miserable I was. Now I can't wait to get out of this hellhole!
[Vance:] He's been trying to cut out on me for the past 10 minutes, but I won't let him go. Tell me what you did today.
[Sajak:] Well, actually, I was out at the parade. I was a PA announcer. I was actually right across from the presidential viewing area, and I did loudspeaker stuff and froze my little body parts off. But it was it was you know, it's quite an event. It's my first inaugural, and I don't care what party affiliation you are, what your politics are, you can't help but get swept up in in the significance of it within our history. And you know, people have talked about the peaceful transition of power it's a pretty amazing thing to see.
[Vance:] What was your best memory from today?
[Sajak:] Thawing out afterwards was actually the best part.
[King:] All right, Pat...
[Sajak:] ... some of the problems going on. Yes, Larry.
[Vance:] Go ahead, Larry.
[King:] Since this is your first ball Cynthia, you've been to others, right?
[Vance:] Yes.
[King:] OK. Pat, is it as sally said? Be honest.
[Sajak:] Well, root canal...
[King:] Come on.
[Sajak:] ... isn't as bad as Sally said.
[Vance:] I will say if I could break in a minute, I have worked these balls and I've also attended personally as a guest. And I do prefer working them because you have a much better view, wouldn't you say?
[Sajak:] Oh, absolutely. And you know, Larry, I'm happy to say, if I may plug something...
[Vance:] Please do.
[Sajak:] ... that I will be sitting I'll be sitting in your chair I think Friday.
[King:] Next week.
[Sajak:] Yes, Friday night. And you know, Larry has a very quite a varied guest list. I don't know who my guest will be. But we have it narrowed down to the U.S. ambassador to Senegal or Bobo the Clown. We don't know which it will be.
[King:] Thank you. We'll check back with you later. Stay there, Pat. Cynthia, thanks. Cynthia Steele Vance and Pat Sajak at the ball. But he said you were right.
[Quinn:] Well, you know, he's I'll tell you, she's right about the fact that if you're covering it, you have a much better time. I was the pool reporter for Jimmy Carter, and I went to all the balls with the Carters in the motorcade. And I wore literally hiking boots and a black dress that was indestructible, fake pearls.
[King:] Is anything about this fun to you, Ben, now at this point?
[Bradlee:] Oh, I I had a wonderful time today. I had a wonderful...
[King:] You were there?
[Bradlee:] Yes, I was there. And I...
[King:] Nice to hear. You didn't stay in the confines.
[Bradlee:] No, no.
[King:] You
[Bradlee:] I went out there. And I thought that it's good for the city. This city was getting a little OD'd on the other...
[King:] Clintons?
[Bradlee:] Yes, they were. They've been around too much. And it was a time for this rejuvenating process that's very good for journalists. We now have got to get, you know, get put our nose down and find out who these people are.
[King:] Now, we're going to take a break. We'll come back, we're going to ask these folks about Bill Clinton and his exit today with pardons and Air Force One, now called 2888, because the president wasn't on it. He's going he's going to have a rough time, watching him on the shuttle. And as we go to break, hear was George Bush attending earlier tonight the California ball, as both of our guests mentioned. They swept in and swept out. We'll sweep out right now. We'll be right back. Don't go away. This is the scene at the Texas ball, as Sally has explained to us. Last night was the Texas party, with all the entertainers and the like. This is the Texas inaugural ball, and President Bush is expected there in about 20 minutes. We're with Ben Bradlee, Sally Quinn and Hugh Sidey. OK, we'll start with Hugh. What did you make of the Clinton exit today?
[Sidey:] Well, that was about as graceless an exit as I've ever seen anybody at that level of power make? It's kind of sad. I...
[King:] He shouldn't have spoken at Andrews?
[Sidey:] Well, I think he should have gotten out.
[King:] Just go?
[Sidey:] Sure, just quickly, just go quickly, and not do this sort of thing. And then I you have to wonder all of this action at the end where was he in eight years on putting the acreage in the national parks or in protection? Where was he on the declarations on civil rights? All of these things that have come in the last...
[King:] Profiling.
[Sidey:] ... in the last...
[King:] What did you make of the way he left today?
[Bradlee:] Well, I think that's the nicest way to describe it I've heard yet today. I mean, it was it was embarrassing.
[King:] Here we see the scene.
[Bradlee:] Classic classic forgotten but not gone.
[King:] Why? Why, Sally? It's just he can't get off-stage?
[Quinn:] Well, it was so over-the-top. I mean, there was this sign saying, don't go, at Andrews, and he's saying, I'm not going. And you know that he's not going, he's there forever. Well, it did I thought it was Bush's day and that Bush should have been allowed to sort of have the main be the main event.
[Bradlee:] He split the screen on television.
[Sidey:] He's so self-absorbed, Larry. He just can't seem to get away from himself. His speech was about himself. Everything his self-adoration that comes out all the time. And you know, he leaves the others in the dust, tramples them.
[King:] You think they'll keep covering him, too?
[Bradlee:] Well, I guess for a while, until until...
[King:] Most presidents just fade off. Not him. Let's go back to the California ball. Cynthia Steele Vance is now with our old friend, Marie Osmond.
[Vance:] Yes.
[Marie Osmond, Entertainer:] Hey, Larry, how are you?
[King:] How are you, Marie? What brings you here?
[Osmond:] At the ball? I'm hosting with Meatloaf.
[King:] You and Meatloaf are the hosts of the ball? Only the Republicans...
[Osmond:] They know. I stepped up from Donnie.
[Vance:] She's been doing a great job, and I might add looks absolutely beautiful. It's been great to sit here and meet you and talk with you. What did you do today?
[Osmond:] Well, we did a lot of things. We did the parade, you know, all the different events. We were at the event last night, the the Black Tie...
[Vance:] Black Tie & Boots...
[Osmond:] ... Black Tie & Boots.
[Vance:] What was your best memory from the parade?
[Osmond:] Oh, you know what? It was cold, it was fun. I think the most important thing is that everybody that was there, whatever their voting was, whatever they did, they were there to unite the country, which I think is really important right now: that we come together, that we're supportive. That where else I was saying today where else can power be handed over so smoothly when you see, you know, Clinton and Gore standing there, and then you see, you know, Bush and Cheney standing there? And within, you know, one day it's transferred peacefully, and it really says a lot about our country and the things that we should be proud about.
[Vance:] Let's talk a little bit...
[King:] I've got to take a break. Hold it, Cynthia. Cynthia stay right there. We've got to get a break. And when we come back, we'll be joined on the panel by Governor Jim Gilmore, Republican of Virginia, the new chairman of the Republican National Committee. As we go to break, Jeb Bush is now at the Florida ball. He is, of course, that state's governor. There is Jeb right in the middle of things. Governor Gilmore joins us right after this. Don't go away. This was a great tradition this morning as the Bushes come to the White House for coffee with the Clintons before they go together to the inaugural proceedings at the capitol. This happens every time except once Harry Truman waited inside, but Eisenhower would not get out of the car to come in for coffee, which ticked Harry off. Joining our panel now for some brief moments it's always good to see him is Governor Jim Gilmore, Republican of Virginia, the new chairman of the Republican National Committee. How are you going to wear two hats here?
[Gov. Jim Gilmore, Rnc Chairman:] Well, I'm just going to do it. I think that a manager is able to do that I'll be using good people in Richmond to be governor and using good people in Washington to be chairman of the RNC. The president-elect has confidence excuse me, the president of the United States, has confidence in me and I'm looking forward to the challenge.
[King:] Do you do a lot of hopping around, because the RNC guy's got to go around the country a lot, too, right?
[Gilmore:] You bet; but we've picked a good co-chairwoman from the chairman of the Republican Party of Missouri, Ann Wagner, and we'll have a lot of other people, too. The governors want to help, the congressmen want to help. We're going to have a big, unified party that's going to really reach out to a lot of people.
[King:] What balls are you going to?
[Gilmore:] Tonight, the Virginia ball and, I hope, the Hispanic ball if I can get there.
[King:] There's a Hispanic ball?
[Gilmore:] There sure is.
[King:] What has been the fallout, do you think, from this election? You saw, I guess, more protesters today than at any other inaugural parade.
[Gilmore:] You know, I'm not too concerned about that. We seem to live in an age of protest. It seems like that, for years now, that everyone has decided that they wanted to get on camera and get in their two cents. I think today is really about new beginnings. It's about the reaffirmation of the democracy and freedoms of this country, the salvation and the saving of the republic as it goes along year after year after year. I'm excited about the message that the president has given today one of civility, which is something I think we badly need in American society today; one of bringing people together, unity.
[King:] Did you like that speech today, guys?
[Sidey:] Good speech, very good speech.
[Quinn:] The writer, I gather is, according to the people at "U.S. News and World Reported," where he Gerson is one of the best young writers in the country today.
[Bradlee:] I though it was said well; sentences were short.
[King:] Crisply written, he delivered it well.
[Bradlee:] Delivered it well.
[Quinn:] It was a beautifully written speech.
[Sidey:] And this idea that people are responsible you know, we've just got to get that back in this country, and he did that wonderfully.
[Quinn:] It had a little Kennedyesque part in there about it was sort of ask not what you can do for your country part that I thought was...
[King:] You have urged your party to reach out more to minorities. He did very poorly in the election certainly in the black communities of America. How do you change that?
[Gilmore:] Well, I think we've been reaching out a long time in the Republican Party. I've been impressed by all of the work and the effort. And yet, nonetheless, it was about 95 to five. So I think, as a party we have to do a lot of thinking. We've had some success in Virginia; I had about 20 percent of the African-American vote; and Governor Bush has done very well in the Hispanic community. We have to now and he has asked me, as party chairman, to find ways to really reach into the communities. But I believe that the one thing we have to do is get out and talk to more people, get to know more people; reach into more and more leadership in all these communities and do a little listening, I think, and listen to what the concerns of people are. But I am convinced that the Republicans are the ones who have the right principles and the right messages, Larry. We're the ones that are believe in success and opportunity and education and jobs.
[King:] You think they can get them back? You used to have them.
[Sidey:] Well, I think so. I think they can do much better; we'll see. The city, as you know, got terribly uptight. There was so much partisanship and so bitter and I think we're going to see that fade away somewhat. It's always going to be there, so and I think that there will be some healing, you bet. And I think some people will come back.
[King:] Do you?
[Quinn:] Yes; I think one of the things that's important to remember is that partisanship is about two parties and, you know, there are the Republicans and the Democrats and they're there because they have different ideologies and different views of how to run the country, and that's not a bad thing. So I don't think we should do away with it completely. I mean, the whole idea of having a discourse is healthy.
[Bradlee:] I wasn't impressed by those protesters at all.
[King:] Not?
[Bradlee:] No, I was not. There were only seven people arrested in the first place. I mean, you get that many arrested on a warm day.
[Gilmore:] I think there were more protesters by a long shot in '72 with Nixon.
[Sidey:] So do I; so do I.
[King:] I know reports today they kept saying they've never seen protesters like this.
[Bradlee:] And as soon as they were on television, they went away, they walked away. They got in the subway and went away. The protesters walked down, happened to I watched them walk down 15th Street, which is where "The Post" building is a can of black spray paint, you know, and they just sprayed the wall this way. They made a big a series of big "A"s, and I can think of one word that begins with an "A" that came to mind, but I don't know what that was.
[King:] '72 was Vietnam, right?
[Sidey:] Sure; it was also after Watergate. The election was... There was much really a lot of demonstration.
[Bradlee:] I was not impressed with them, and they looked sort of sloppy and they didn't...
[King:] A critic of protests?
[Bradlee:] Yes, more and more.
[Gilmore:] You've got to have a real protest, and this is just very perfunctory. I think today is really about uplifting messages, myself; I think it's a new, fresh start. New presidencies always are. I think that Governor George W. Bush is going stick to his principles and offer opportunity to more and more people; and that's what our party is doing and is going to continue do. We're going to broaden the base of our party.
[King:] We're going to be seeing a lot of you, governor. Thanks for dropping by; we'll see a lot of you. You know, that's like a regular thing the chairman of the party comes here. Republican Governor Jim Gilmore of Virginia, the new chairman of the Republican National Committee. We'll be back with our panel; they'll stay with us the rest of the ... as we go to break. We'll be checking back shortly at the California Ball with Connie Stevens and there's look at her. Boy, they brighten up the screen with the lovely Cynthia Vance Connie and Cynthia after this; don't go away.
[Bush:] And this is my solemn pledge: I will work to build a single nation of justice and opportunity.
[King:] That was right after his inauguration that was President Bush signing the papers for each Cabinet member that officially certifies that he is their choice. Seven were then approved today in the United States Senate. We are with Ben Bradlee, Sally Quinn and Hugh Sidey. We're going back to the California Ball, where Cynthia Steele Vance has been covering things for us. She, by the way, is the public relations director for Saks Jandelle, that company's only 113 years old very upscale women's clothing boutique in Washington. And with her is the lovely old friend of mine Connie Stevens, another you work hard for the Republicans, don't you Connie?
[Connie Stevens, California Inaugural Ball:] Well, I worked hard for McCain. I'm more of a moderate right. I campaigned with John McCain and that's how I actually ran into the Republican Party. I'm a registered Democrat or at least I was.
[King:] So now you're celebrating, though, with the Bush group tonight?
[Stevens:] I am; you know something, I've never been, I'm always working my head off, you know. And I got an invitation, and I had never seen anything like this. It's a beautiful, beautiful historic weekend for me, and I'm glad to be here.
[King:] Cynthia, how would you describe what Connie is wearing?
[Vance:] Oh, I think Connie looks absolutely spectacular. She's got these incredible diamond and emerald earrings and this fabulous pin. Where is that pin from, is it an antique?
[Stevens:] Oh, yes, all antique. You just tell Badgley Mishka they owe me. I buy my own clothes and I wear my own jewels.
[Vance:] The do owe her because she looks fabulous in it. Connie did want to share a story with us, Larry. She was telling me about a beautiful afternoon she had yesterday with Vice President Cheney and the veterans.
[Stevens:] Yes; well he gave a beautiful party for the veterans. It was very moving, Larry; I wanted you to be there because there were 101 medal of honor winners there and the Cabinet was there and General Powell was there and Chief Cohen was there and General Shelton and Bob Dole I've never met, you know, several of them. And it was so fun and very, very moving, of course, and they I'm so happy because you know I worked with a lot of military and I've entertained several decades of them and I think there's a new tone as far as the military is concerned. You know, we don't need to have kids on food stamps; so I'm very happy to hear about that. I'm always glad to honor any veteran.
[King:] Well, you look lovely.
[Stevens:] Oh, thanks; thank you.
[King:] Have a great time. Keep having a great time.
[Stevens:] Yes; you were great the other night. It was really a wonderful opening ceremony.
[King:] Oh, thank you; thank you. I had the honor of emceeing it.
[Stevens:] OK, when you're through come hang out with us.
[King:] OK, thank you. Cynthia, we'll check back with you.
[Vance:] All right; thanks Larry.
[King:] What do you expect of this early on, Ben?
[Bradlee:] Well, I don't...
[King:] What do you expect? Do you expect a lot of harmony? Do you expect discourse first 100 days?
[Bradlee:] No, I don't think much harmony until you get rid of that 50-50, you know, distribution in the Senate, I don't see where you're going to amount you're going to get a lot done.
[King:] You can only get rid of it by death.
[Bradlee:] Well no. Excuse me.
[King:] Don't jump on me. You've got to wait two years.
[Bradlee:] Because a name comes to mind.
[King:] Sally, do you expect you are right.
[Bradlee:] No, but I'll bet you that the majority of the Senate will change in two years without an election.
[King:] OK.
[Quinn:] He's talking about death, I think is what...
[King:] Here's Katherine Harris, who was with us the other night. She's at the Florida Ball where else would Katherine Harris be? You saw her the other night, Sally. Were you impressed? She was on this show for on hour.
[Quinn:] She was on this show for an hour and I she did much better than I expected her to do. I didn't know what to expect because she had become the butt of a lot of jokes; but I thought she handled herself quite well.
[King:] What do you expect ahead, you? First 100 days Ben's pessimistic.
[Sidey:] No; in the first place, this is not a time for heroism an heroic president. This is not Lincoln, this is not FDR, we don't have the Cold War, we don't have depression. I think it's going to be a workaday presidency, as it should be very quiet, subdued get it off the front pages if you can. Let it go to the governors and the mayors. Let it be quiet, calm; let it bore us to death for a little while and have him meet with these people and talk over these issues that no reporter wants to get into deeply. And I think it's going to work just that way.
[Quinn:] Larry, I don't think it's not going to be an issue of personality anymore. For eight years it's been about personalities, and I think now the Bushes are there, they're nice, they're quiet, they're calm. It's going to be very efficient, very buttoned-down. It's not going to be about them, it's going to be about the agenda and about the issues. And whether George Bush gets his own way or not it's not going to be because people don't like him. I don't think he has a lot of personal enemies.
[King:] Maybe it's because
[Bradlee:] Comfortable; comfortable he looks very comfortable in this setting.
[King:] In his setting. He's not in awe of this.
[Bradlee:] No; and he's not full of mock awe.
[Sidey:] Whether you agree with the issues of his father or the policies or his, even, there's honor in that family. It's a remarkable family and they've come down through those generations Ben probably covered press Bush as I did back in those days. ... but I mean there is, I don't want to call it a magic, but a marvelous quality about that family and I think we'll see that.
[King:] And they are very, very, very, genteel, aren't they? I mean they write thank you letters?
[Quinn:] They do; and, I mean, they I have a sense that they're very gracious. They're very quiet.
[King:] They're on time.
[Quinn:] I don't expect that it's going to be a wild, crazy time in the White House. I think it's going to be a lot of family events and friends coming up from Texas. I don't see a lot of major social events. But I, you know, as you say, if they bore us to death, how great.
[King:] We'll take a break and come back with Ben Bradlee, Sally Quinn and Hugh Sidey. And as we go to break we'll show you a little more of what we think of the Texas Ball going on; and the president is expected at this ball momentarily. He goes to each of the balls. He usually makes a quick appearance and he dances. He'll probably spend a little longer time at this one this is the home crowd. By the way, this is now Saturday LARRY KING WEEKEND; there is now a Sunday LARRY KING WEEKEND. It debuts tomorrow and will feature highlights of our interviews over the years with Bill Clinton. Don't go away. Once again, the Texas ball. Again, last night was the party, this night is the ball. They're awaiting the arrival of President Bush it could be at any time. If he's due at a certain time, he'll be there at the time because this man is prompt. Dick Cheney's role Ben.
[Bradlee:] Big, big, big; most important vice president because primarily because the president is going to let him be important. There were other important, strong vice presidents who didn't get a shot.
[King:] Apparently Harvard part of the Harvard business management concept is to delegate, Right? Is that true, Hugh?
[Sidey:] I've never been to Harvard.
[King:] You were some delegator. You knew the crossword puzzle.
[Sidey:] Cheney is one of the smartest men I've ever met in government. I knew him from the day he came up here when he came up with Ford and he worked in that, and then in Congress and then in the White House. There is something about his intelligence and his knowledge of how government runs that I really haven't seen in any other person. He's remarkable, this quiet fellow. You saw it in the Desert Storm, when he analyzed the situation, when he talked to people, calling everybody. But he's remarkable and I think the whole Bush family I think Jeb.
[King:] What do you think of the whole Ashcroft thing?
[Quinn:] Well, I always say I remember the day that...
[King:] It won't be until late next week or the week after they said. It will not happen quickly this week.
[Quinn:] The day that Ashcroft was nominated and everybody started screaming and yelling we were having breakfast and both of us said at the same time, well you always have to have somebody to kick around. You have to have somebody to take the flak. And every president needs someone who can deflect all of the criticism and the anger away from him, and George Bush seems to be brilliant...
[King:] You mean it's kind of good it's smart to have someone like this?
[Quinn:] It's kind of good, yes. It's kind of good to have one person yes everybody gets it, you know. They can scream and yell about Ashcroft and they can, you know now this is not I'm not talking about the merits of Ashcroft of Ashcroft one way or the other. I'm simply saying that, you know, as a as a sort of governing philosophy, this is not totally bad. Not only that he gets points with the right wing. And I don't think that a really zealous Cabinet member lasts. Usually they get themselves in trouble and they leave.
[King:] There's someone we haven't discussed. He's at home, back home tonight in Arlington. First time he's been back in the Arlington house in eight years Al Gore. What goes on with him now?
[Bradlee:] Well, I he's got to regroup. It's going to take him some time. I haven't heard any job. But let me say one think about Cheney Cheney now we call him.
[Sidey:] Cheney.
[Bradlee:] He...
[King:] There he is saying goodbye. The Gores go right to Arlington.
[Bradlee:] Maybe the genius of George Bush is going to
[Sidey:] I think he understands that.
[Bradlee:] Because we never how many vice presidents were given a shot?
[Sidey:] Well, in the process of selecting you see this was a remarkable kind of transformation. Here's the fellow that's supposed to serve up the vice presidential candidates and...
[King:] He picked him.
[Sidey:] ... and he picked him. And I know a little about the process. Just as he talked with him, it became apparent this guy knew more about government, had more experience, was sharper than anybody.
[King:] Then why not him?
[Sidey:] Yes, why not?
[Bradlee:] And was comfortable...
[King:] Will Al Gore will we see a lot of Al Gore?
[Quinn:] I think Al Gore is going to go into a sort of some kind of a retreat for a while and just sort of try to figure out what he wants to do. But I thought that one of the most the saddest part about it was that he was put in an absolutely no-win situation: trying to run with the specter of Bill Clinton's scandals hanging over him. He had to be loyal to a certain extent. He had to distance himself. I don't know who could have run a good campaign in those circumstances.
[King:] So blaming him for a bad campaign is misguided?
[Quinn:] Well, I mean, you know, it was not the greatest campaign, but I think who could have run a good campaign in a situation like that?
[King:] Let me get a break and we'll get Hugh's comments. We'll be back with Ben Bradlee, Sally Quinn, Hugh Sidey. We'll make one more check with Cynthia Steele Vance as well at the California ball. This is LARRY KING WEEKEND. Don't go away. We're back at the and the president has arrived at the Texas ball. Let's listen.
[Bush:] I knew we'd finally make it to the Texas ball!
[King:] There they are, the dance at the Texas ball. He said it would be less than 30 seconds. Let's thank all of our guests, because we're out of time. Ben Bradlee, Sally Quinn, Hugh Sidey, thank you so much for your observations. Appreciate having you. Always great seeing you, Ben. Try to come out a little more next time.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] President Bush has said that he sees any victory in Afghanistan as just one battle in the anti terror war. CNN's White House Correspondent Kelly Wallace looks at how other nations who may harbor terrorists could be targeted.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] While President Bush enjoyed Thanksgiving with family and close aides at Camp David, his administration released this new report cataloging past atrocities allegedly committed by Afghanistan's Taliban and the al Qaeda network, including the torture of children, the burning of an entire family, and the massacre of villagers. White House aides say they want to send a message to the world about al Qaeda, which is believed to have operatives in more than 60 countries. It's another example of stepped-up efforts by the White House to proclaim that a U.S. victory in Afghanistan won't mean an end to the war against terror. Listen to the president Wednesday rallying U.S. troops at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] There are other terrorists who threaten America and our friends. And there are other nations willing to sponsor them.
[Wallace:] The president has not named those other nations, but the next focus could be Iraq with Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein believed to be building chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. MAJ. GEN. DON SHEPPERD
[Cnn Military Analyst:] If you're serious about terrorism, you must go to Iraq. But you don't have to go to Iraq next and you might not have to go there militarily. There are other means to pursue this.
[Wallace:] Such as, putting more financial and political pressure on the country. There is a debate within the administration about whether to pursue military action against Iraq. The White House knows the diplomatic stakes could be high especially with Arab allies.
[Shepperd:] Well you want to make sure that whatever we do is perceived to have allies and support in the worldwide community.
[Wallace:] Other potential targets for American attention could include Iran and Syria, countries the U.S. accuses of sponsoring terrorism. While the president prepares the nation for a battle extending beyond Afghanistan, he says the fight in Afghanistan is by no means over and warns the most difficult steps with the most risks for American forces are still to come. Kelly Wallace, CNN, Hagerstown, Maryland.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] A bomb blast in front an elementary school was the latest terror tactic used by protesters in Northern Ireland. Young Catholic schoolgirls have become the focus for religious hatred in the divided province. ITN's Mark Webster has details on today's vicious riots.
[Mark Webster, Itn Reporter:] These ugly scenes of little children on their way to school being protected by police in riot gear had become almost a ritual, until Loyalist terrorists set off an explosive device. A wounded officer lay on the ground, but the blast bomb is designed not to kill, but to cause maximum terror. In a pandemonium of blind panic, the schoolgirls and their parents ran stumbling from the school gate. They arrived sobbing and distraught.
[Unidentified Male:] I want to go home.
[Unidentified Female:] That's my niece, and I'm not taking her through it again. She's too good to walk past that. She's too good of a child for scum like that.
[Webster:] Loyalist paramilitaries have threatened violent action against the parents and children, but their action has been roundly condemned by leaders of the Protestant community.
[Bill Hutchinson, Progressive Unionist Party:] I'm totally ashamed to be even connected to the Loyalism, be a Loyalist, totally ashamed. No excuse for this officer laying over here on the ground.
[Webster:] After what's happened here this morning, the question that everybody is asking on both sides of the divide, is what will it take before people realize that this is completely spiraled out of control? This must end, and it can't end soon enough for these children. Mark Webster, ITN, Belfast.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] With more on what we can expect from Joe Lieberman, also to talk about the convention, we are joined by one of the more prominent Democratic mayors, Willie Brown of San Francisco. Mr. Mayor, good morning.
[Mayor Willie Brown , San Francisco, Ca:] Hello, Daryn. How are you? Thank you.
[Kagan:] Thanks for stopping by.
[Brown:] Thank you.
[Kagan:] Nice to be at an event like this that would be nice to have in your own town, but kind of nice not to have it in your town.
[Brown:] Well, it is very expensive. We had it in 1984. I think we did a reasonably decent job. We have not bid on it since then.
[Kagan:] Would you like to have something like this in San Francisco?
[Brown:] We don't really have the accommodations for an arena similar to this that we could convert as quickly and as inexpensively as can other cities. We will be there, though, before I complete my term as mayor.
[Kagan:] One day. You built some other nice facilities.
[Brown:] Absolutely, Pac Bell Park.
[Kagan:] Yes, we were talking about. Still have to get a baseball game there. Looking ahead to tonight, to Joe Lieberman, what does he need to do to be embraced by the entire Democratic Party?
[Brown:] I think the top of your program, when you described what Mr. Lieberman says he intends to do and that: introduce himself to the American people. Joe Lieberman is known very well to the insiders, or the people who have been in politics for a very long time. He's known very well to some of the human rights movement, but he is unknown to the American people. He is not a household name. He will be after tonight, though, because I think everybody is going to be excited about what they see in Joe Lieberman.
[Kagan:] Some prominent African-American leaders have raised some questions about his selection and his stance on a lot of issues, like school vouchers, like Affirmative Action, yet he had a meeting yesterday with members of the Black Caucus that seemed to improve relations a little bit.
[Brown:] Well, you know, Joe Lieberman is a very impressive guy. When you think in terms of Joe Lieberman being in the South, risking his life as a young person participating in helping to register people to vote. That gives you a tremendous amount of credibility coming out of the box. The fact that you may have said something in response to a question put to you on the theoretical basis, that's now being interpreted four or five year later in a different fashion is always a burden. But Joe Lieberman can handle it. I'm sure that when Mr. Gore says: It is no, say, on 38, which is a voucher measure in California, I'm sure Joe Lieberman is going to be right there with him.
[Kagan:] Looking one more night ahead to Al Gore. What does he need to do to unite this party and get Democrats across the country excited about his candidacy?
[Brown:] Well, I think, first, we are excited about Al Gore's candidacy. We are Excited about Al Gore's candidacy because it is a continuation of the last seven years and eight months of absolute prosperity, of wonderful extending of opportunity, a reduction in the unemployment rolls, the business of handling the needs for education and child care and child health. Those are the kinds of things that Al Gore is going to talk about. You know, Al Gore is like a professor. He really knows this stuff. This is not somebody you prepare with a teleprompter. This is guy who has lived in. And that will come through, and that's what the faithful is looking for in Al Gore.
[Kagan:] Mayor Willie Brown, thanks for stopping by. Really appreciate it.
[Brown:] Thank you.

[Moret:] A watchdog group is accusing the networks of going into the gutter. The Conservative Parents Television Council held a news conference in Washington today to unveil a new study covering 10 years of prime time. The report found the amount of sex on TV more than tripled between 1989 and 1999. It found the amount of violence on TV remained steady over that period, but would have fallen significantly if UPN's WWF Wrestling wasn't factored in. Overall, the group does not like what it sees.
[Brent Bozell, Parents Television Council:] What parents will find on broadcast television today is literally crap, a word that was used 44 41 times during a four-week period last week fall as compared to only five times in 1989.
[Moret:] It's possible the new show "Wonderland" will land on the Parents Television Council's hit list. The gritty one-hour drama is the latest midseason replacement to hit prime time. "Chicago Hope" alumnus Peter Berg has hopped hospitals. He's the executive producer of this new series about a psychiatric ward. Cynthia Tornquist has more.
[Cynthia Tornquist, Cnn Correspondent:] This graphic scene inside a psychiatric ward of a hospital in ABC's new drama "Wonderland" has sparked a controversy that has some mental health advocates upset. [Begin Video Clip, "wonderland"]
[Unidentified Actor:] Very few wrist cutters really go deep, Mr. Matowksi, very few. You went deep.
[Laurie Flynn, National Alliance For The Mentally Ill:] "Wonderland" is a very bleak, very grim and very hopeless picture an extreme picture of mental illness. It's not the reality for most people today, but it reflects the stigma.
[Tornquist:] Laurie Flynn wrote letters to ABC asking they eliminate or edit a suicide scene in the second episode, provide a warning before each episode, and make the public aware that the show depicts only a narrow part of the world of mental illness. [Begin Video Clip, "wonderland"]
[Unidentified Actor:] Can we turn down the volume, please, doctors?
[Tornquist:] "Wonderland," created by former "Chicago Hope" star Peter Berg, deals with the treatment of mental patients. Despite the outcry, Berg is going ahead with the show. Berg consulted with the psychiatrists at New York's Bellevue Hospital during production.
[Dr. Robert Berger, Director Of Forensic Psychiatry, Bellevue Hospital:] Hopefully, this is going to bring mental illness into people's homes in a way it never has before, to get them to understand that it exists, the extent to which it exists, and that it's not as frightening as people actually think it is.
[Peter Berg, Executive Producer:] The subject matter is certainly not for everyone, but after spending as much time as we spent in the hospital, there's no way to candy coat it, there's no way to present it as anything other than what it is.
[Tornquist:] The creators of "Wonderland" spent months at a New York hospital researching the project. Not only did they get to witness electric shock therapy, but they were allowed to interview serial killer, schizophrenics and people who had tried to commit suicide. [voice-over]: Actor Martin Donovan based his character on some of the doctors he met while researching his role.
[Martin Donovan, Co-star, "wonderland":] I feel pretty useless as an actor after I've spent a day with those guys, because the kind of work they're doing, and they're filling, you know, an extremely vital role.
[Tornquist:] "Wonderland" is attempting to shed light on mental illness, a subject that often has been taboo for the tube. Cynthia Tornquist, CNN, New York.
[Sydney:] Friday on SHOWBIZ, "Dawson's Creek" star Joshua Jackson discovers the perils of college hazing in "The Skulls," and this 13- year-old singing sensation is being compared to Michael Jackson and Stevie Wonder.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] It's time for your "A.M. Market Call." Sasha Salama is at the Nasdaq marketsite with the latest on Krispy Kreme?
[Sasha Salama, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Deb. Krispy Kreme, which is no longer a four-letter stock. You know, the company defected to that other exchange: the New York Stock Exchange. It came in with its results better than expected: earnings of 10 cents a share, one penny better than Wall Street estimates. KKD in the year-ago period reported 7 cents a share. So we're watching Krispy Kreme Doughnuts. Also, we've got CIENA on the radar screen, and that stock is up in the premarket, after gaining ground in yesterday's session, it's above 19 in the premarket. The maker of telecom and fiber optic equipment reported that it's being added to the S&P; 500 index. And by definition it is going to be bought up by those index fund managers. So CIEN a nice mover on the plus side today. Speaking of joining the indices, SBC Communications is doing that as well. It's joining the S&P; 100 SBC the ticker symbol. And it's replacing American General, which is being bought by AIG. Another stock to watch is Synopsys, which is getting slammed in the premarket. This company is a maker of computer chip equipment the ticker SNPS. And after finishing virtually flat yesterday, it's down $5.50 in the premarket. Here is the story: The company reported earnings that were worse than expectations, and the company also said that earnings for 2001 and 2002 would fall short. The CEO says, conditions in the chip market continue to deteriorate, as our customers have gone through second and third rounds of layoffs. So we're watching that one. Also Gymboree this is the retailer of children's clothes, and it is rallying in the premarket after gaining nearly 1 percent yesterday. GYMB is up nearly $2 to $7.50 a share. The company lost less than Wall Street expected and guided higher for earnings, saying it expects higher earnings, not just for the fourth quarter, but for all of fiscal year '01. So that's a stock on the move higher, and that's your "A.M. Market Call" for this Thursday Deb.
[Marchini:] Thank you, Sasha. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.

[Larry King:] Tonight: He was once voted the most trusted man in America. And as a world-renowned anchor, he not only covered legends, he became one the extraordinary Walter Cronkite next on LARRY KING LIVE. It is always an honor to be in his presence, and it's a great pleasure to have him as a special guest here in New York tonight, the legendary anchor of the "CBS Evening News," the author of numerous books got another one even coming soon Walter Cronkite, who recently marked it's the 20th anniversary of your stepping down.
[Walter Cronkite, Former "cbs Evening News" Anchor:] I can't believe it, but it seems to be true.
[King:] Does it feel like 20 years?
[Cronkite:] Not at all. The world has been passing by as a great panorama of events that I wish I had been out there covering. I really regret I stepped down when I did.
[King:] You do?
[Cronkite:] I didn't know I'd be in such good health, and I didn't...
[King:] Were you forced to resign? Was it a CBS policy?
[Cronkite:] Oh, no, not at all. I had long since decided I was going to step down from daily journalism at 65. I had been with United Press for 11 years, at "Scripps Howard" for two or three years, fighting deadlines every day. And then, 20 years on "The Evening News," and you know, after that, I said I want to take it a little easy. I didn't realize how easy I was going to have to take it.
[King:] You are going to be 85 then.
[Cronkite:] Eighty-five, by gosh, in November.
[King:] Do you feel 85?
[Cronkite:] Not at all. Not in the slightest. I tore my Achilles tendon last summer playing tennis, and now I have to creep around a bit. I am still getting over that very serious wound and the surgery that followed, and I have to tell people I said, this is not an old man's golf, this is a young man's active tennis game.
[King:] Baseball players get this, football players.
[Cronkite:] It's one of the worst of the athletic injuries, and it happens often.
[King:] And one thing we do have in common just one, I think is that we have the same heart surgeon, Dr. Wayne Isom, who has gotten famous now with all the people he has done.
[Cronkite:] He is an incredible man, isn't he?
[King:] Yeah, unbelievable. You feel OK, the ticker's fine?
[Cronkite:] I felt OK immediately. I've never had any repercussions from that quadruple bypass at all as far as I know. If I keel over tonight, it wasn't Isom's fault.
[King:] And I know you have got a new knee.
[Cronkite:] I got a new knee three or four years ago. I was playing tennis only two months after that one.
[King:] How many days are there where you miss being on?
[Cronkite:] Every day, every day. Not on, that's not quite the term for it, Larry. I don't miss being on the air, I miss not being at the center of gravity there where you're getting the show together, getting the broadcast together, where you're really setting the agenda that day for people's consideration. That's an important job, and I miss that.
[King:] You always like being the one who says, hey, I know something and I am going to tell you. That's what you are, right?
[Cronkite:] Absolutely. That's what a reporter wants to be, whether they write it for a newspaper or do it on the broadcast.
[King:] And do you know why you like that so much?
[Cronkite:] No, I'm not so sure of that. There's something about being on the inside first, about being the first to know something, or one of the early ones to know something, harboring it, working with it, molding it for the public's advice and information.
[King:] And of course, you got involved as well with the space program. You became not just the reporter, you became part of it, you do realize that?
[Cronkite:] Well, yes. That's true. I have been credited with that, or debited with it, depending on how you look upon what a reporter's job should be. I was enthusiastic about space flight. I was very critical about many of the decisions that NASA made in the course of getting man up to the Moon eventually and then in the shuttles but at the same time, the enthusiasm of the idea of human beings getting out there into space and finally getting to that distance orb, I thought was the most exciting adventure of our time. I think that we live as such in the 20th century. I think when people look back at the 20th century, where all these incredible inventions, these technological improvements, these and particularly in medicine, for heaven's sakes and everywhere else atomic energy, for goodness' sakes all of it the one thing that will live 400 years from now will be man's escape from his own environment, and landing on the Moon, just as Columbus' trip to America 400 years ago is the one date the kids remember today.
[King:] We have a lot to talk about tonight. We will be taking your phone calls, our guest is Walter Cronkite. You are now in the news. Apparently, you are among many notables who lobbied for a pardon for somebody. What was the story, Walter? Walter!
[Cronkite:] Well, no money changed hands as far as I know. No money changed hands at all. There was a very fine gentleman in Austin, Texas, a banker, who in those 1970 problems with the banks trust funds and all the rest of it got mixed in a very small, really almost unimportant aspect of banking. He owned a big bank in Austin. His problem was that he took a fee for managing the bank's building, the new building they put in and leasing of it, and that turned out to be illegal. He fought the case, of course, but he was found guilty. But he was treated most unfairly, we felt, many of us felt, by the justice at the moment. He was sentenced to a longer term than bankers who really stole vast amounts of money. His the total amount was five figures, $41,000 or something like that, and they sent him up for five years, and he served every minute of it. And while there, he formed a choir in the prison, of the prisoners. He counseled the prisoners in a religious sense. He is a Knight of Mulder, the Catholic Church. He is he's got a list that long of things he has done for society in Austin, and the man deserved a pardon.
[King:] And he was pardoned?
[Cronkite:] He was pardoned.
[King:] That's what pardons are written for, right?
[Cronkite:] That's what exactly what they exactly this. This was a typical case of why there should be a pardon to let people once once they have paid their penalty return into society with full privileges of citizenship.
[King:] What do you make of the Marc Rich story?
[Cronkite:] The which one?
[King:] Marc Rich, the pardon, the infamous pardon.
[Cronkite:] Yes, yes, the Rich pardon. Well, it seems absolutely unexplainable. Unexplainable except money changing hands. And of course, the pressure from Barak in Israel. I think that was probably the key to the last-minute decision that the president made. Whether he should have made it is obviously a very serious question of doubt. It would seem that the president should have had at least a dossier in front of him that would say, well, wait a minute, does this fellow no matter what Barak wants really deserve a pardon, and you think he would say, certainly not, but that wasn't the way it worked out.
[King:] Our guest is Walter Cronkite. This is LARRY KING LIVE. We will be right back. [Begin Video Clip, 1963]
[Unidentified Male:] Directly from our newsroom in New York, this is "The CBS Evening News With Walter Cronkite."
[Cronkite:] Good evening from the our CBS newsroom on this: the first broadcast of network television first daily half-hour program.
[King:] We are back with Walter Cronkite. How do you assess Bill Clinton? I mean, you have sailed with him, you know him very well an enigma?
[Cronkite:] Definitely a mystery man. I don't really understand how he could have mishandled his departure from the White House as he has. It's a tragedy, because the man is exceedingly smart, he is a great politician, he is a wonderful salesman. He'd be a great spokesman for the United States and for the Democratic party and for what the Democratic party stands for, and here he seems to have blown it at the moment. I have some hope for resurrection for Clinton after this all blows over. I think he is strong enough to come back and be still of some help to this democracy, which I think he really nurtured.
[King:] How about his wife?
[Cronkite:] Well, I think she is capable of being a worthwhile senator for the state of New York. However, she has been caught up really with this same problem of the evacuation from the White House, if you can call it that. She has to do some recovering. She has six years before she has to stand for re-election, four years if she wants to run for the presidency. I think we have yet to find out how she will function as a senator. She has got the capability of doing it and she's got the smarts to do it. And if there are no other secret problems out there that come up...
[King:] One never knows.
[Cronkite:] You know, it's was the Clinton story of the day, practically, last month.
[King:] What is your early assessments of President George W. Bush?
[Cronkite:] Well, the early assessment is that he is doing well in these opening months in the office. He has shown leadership quality. He has, certainly with the help of his advisers, pushed quickly to move legislation along, getting that tax bill through yesterday was remarkable, getting it through the House this early and with this little debate. It's remarkable, and perhaps unfortunate that there is that little debate, but it proved that he had that hold in the Congress to do it in the House. We will see how it works in the Senate, where the division is a little more difficult, but at any rate, I think he has done well. The polls show the one yesterday, NBC "Wall Street Journal" poll showed that his approval rating is quite high for this early in the administration. So he is doing all right. He still has to overcome some things. The appointment of the attorney general, John Ashcroft, was certainly laying down the gauntlet to a lot of Americans, and we have to see how that one works out. Is Ashcroft going to be a fair attorney general or not? That is going to make a lot of difference with his administration.
[King:] And what is your read on Dick Cheney? Here is a man who loves his work, obviously has a problem, physical problem there are some people calling today I think Arianna Huffington's column, Walter Shapiro, calling for him to resign.
[Cronkite:] Well, I would hope that doesn't happen, because I think Dick Cheney is important to this administration. I think he's one of the strongest figures in the administration, and he has a good reputation in Washington, previously Secretary of Defense, and well acquainted with the right people in Washington. That's important. You know, poor old Jimmy Carter lived up with to his campaign promise of turning his back on Washington, and that is something you can't do and get along in Washington. I think Jimmy Carter was a very fine president in principle, but he didn't play the political game that has to be played. Cheney knows where the bodies are buried, and that's important. And I think it's important that he stays in that job.
[King:] But we should be worried about his health, should we not?
[Cronkite:] And we certainly should be, yes, indeed.
[King:] But it's his as long as he is willing to do it...
[Cronkite:] Well, and his doctor maintains that he sees no stress factor. Apparently, there was not a stress factor in this recent episode a couple of days ago...
[King:] In fact, I saw his doctor today and he told me it's not nearly as bad as they originally thought. It was a clot instead of scar tissue, and the prognosis of a 40 percent return is probably down to 30 percent, maybe 25 percent.
[Cronkite:] Is a clot better than the scar tissue?
[King:] Yes, it's better, because clot goes away. Scar tissue doesn't. We're doing a medical thing two old guys talking about...
[Cronkite:] But doesn't a clot indicate there's likely to be more of them?
[King:] Apparently I don't know. They said a clot is better than scar tissue. What do I know? I just listen, and that's what he said. What do you make...
[Cronkite:] I want to check on that one.
[King:] Since you have left, we saw the clip of wow, we've got a 30-minute newscast! Think of it, folks, no more 15, now 30. Now since then, we have got 24-hour news. What is your view of this whole CNN, Fox, MSNBC instant, everything today, get it now!
[Cronkite:] Well, in some ways, that's good. It's good to have 24-hour news. I think it's important. People can, indeed, tune in any hour of the day, any minute of the day, and get caught up on what is going on. They don't have to be there at 6:30 or whatever it is in the evening to get today's news. That's important. I think it's important that competition drives these people to be at the source of news when it breaks. That's important too. What is not so important, however, is being first in news. I would like to see us back up a bit and spend a little time thinking about a story before we put it on the air. You know, that business of being first was an old newspaper bromide, and it was a necessary thing. Indeed, when there's competition on the streets, in the afternoon newspapers particularly morning newspapers as well every city had more than one newspaper...
[King:] They wanted to be exclusive.
[Cronkite:] And they had to get that headline out, because the first one on the street with a big headline...
[King:] Sold the papers.
[Cronkite:] Sold the papers. That doesn't exist anymore. It doesn't exist for newspapers, with only one newspaper in most cities today certainly not more than one newspaper, afternoon or morning and as far as broadcast goes, it's not important. Unless one network is so good that it's always first, and that's got to be tough, because they have to first long enough that people realize they are first, and that's not going to happen, because every other network as soon as goes on one network, picks it up and broadcasts it anyway...
[King:] So, you are saying it's meaningless, I beat you by one minute.
[Cronkite:] It's meaningless. Absolutely meaningless. Why not take a little time, digest the news, get it right, be sure it's right. I'm not talking about election returns, that's another story.
[King:] Yeah, I want to get to that in a minute.
[Cronkite:] But on regular news, we can take it a little slower.
[King:] We will ask about election return and lots of other things with Walter Cronkite. When they write when they etched the name in the building, his name. Don't go away. [Begin Video Clip, 1962]
[Cronkite:] A press corps of 500 and we, of television and radio standing by, and, atop of that rocket, Colonel John Glenn, standing by.
[Unidentified Male:] T minus 10 seconds. Counting: eight, seven, six, five, four, three, two, one, zero, ignitions, lift off.
[King:] At 85, by the way, he's still active, making speeches, writing columns, got another book coming on sailing, I understand?
[Cronkite:] I do.
[King:] He's still around, Mr. Walter Cronkite! Oh, you mentioned election night coverage, what do you make of that?
[Cronkite:] I think that the broadcasters got a bum rap.
[King:] Really?
[Cronkite:] I, indeed, do.
[King:] Because?
[Cronkite:] Because that system of exit polling and calling the elections had been in effect for about 20 years. Fifty states and 20 years, and we never had that kind of mistake before. That's a pretty good record. I can't think of any baseball player or any sport or any salesman of stocks who has kind of a record like that. One big mistake in all those years, and that mistake was not as horrible as people made it out to be. It turned out to be worse than it seemed because nobody else could count those votes either. And we had that five-week gap of trying to figure out who won Florida. Why should we have known when nobody else could figure it for five more weeks?
[King:] How about calling a winner soon?
[Cronkite:] Well, that has been a practice, state by state, as I say, for 20 years without a major boo-boo like this one. And indeed, it was a haste rush to judgment, which we might now, looking at it, been better off not calling. But as it turned out, it was, they called because that's what he numbers seemed like at the moment. They found out shortly that wasn't correct so they changed it. Then that turned out to be such that they didn't want to call anything. So it seemed that there was all this confusion. But it wasn't anybody's fault.
[King:] Did you like election night as a journalist?
[Cronkite:] Well, as well as I've liked anything after I, since I left...
[King:] I mean, was that a night, as an anchor, you looked forward to, or was it tedious?
[Cronkite:] I looked forward to it and then found it a little tedious as it goes on. I realized how tedious it must have been when I did it. But, you know, before we had that exit polling it was a lot more fun because we were counting the actual returns...
[King:] Actual returns!
[Cronkite:] Oh, boy, we really had a, really had a horse race there. We went until 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning, you know, without any indication who was going to win, and that was a lot of fun.
[King:] Are you disturbed by the seeming tabloidization of the news?
[Cronkite:] Absolutely. Very much so, very much so. The, we've always had sensationalism in the press. A lot of people think this is something new. It's not new. Look, you know, you've looked at the files, 1850, 1830, from the time of the revolution. They were terrible. The newspapers are far more, far more responsible today than they were in those days, right up, right up practically through World War I -far more responsible. Broadcasting is reasonably responsible. But the trouble with broadcasting, as I see it, is we get hold of these stories that are really not important to the future of the democracy: Princess Di, O.J. Simpson for heaven's sake, John John's accident at Martha Vineyard. And we cling to these stories so long. We wear them out. We wear them to death, and they're not that important. There's so little time on the air to report the important news that makes a difference whether we're going to live or die in this democracy of ours. Whether we're going to succeed or fail in our education, and our health care, all of these things. That's what should be taking our time and we spent all that time going over the same facts over and over again. And we rush to these stories. With John Kennedy's accident, my gosh, within a half-hour one of the networks I won't name here on CNN, immediately found a pilot who piloted a plane similar to the one that Kennedy was in, and we saw that guy on the air for 24 hours telling us how that accident could have happened. He knew, had no more idea of how the accident happened than I did.
[King:] I've got to get a break. Wish we had hours. We'll be right back with more Walter Cronkite. Don't go away.
[Cronkite:] This is Walter Cronkite on the Greenland ice cap. Beyond the horizon lies the North Pole. Walter Cronkite reporting from London. Queen Elizabeth the II to be crowned Britain's sixth reining queen. This is Walter Cronkite back at our CBS news booth overlooking the platform on the east portico of the U.S. Capitol, where now, in a very few moments, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, age 43, from the state of Massachusetts becomes the president.
[King:] We are back with what did you make of the retirement of Bernie Shaw?
[Cronkite:] Oh, boy. I saw the show last night, CNN. It was terrific. That was some broadcast.
[King:] Thank you.
[Cronkite:] A wonderful tribute to a wonderful reporter and a great guy. He's got everything...
[King:] We really enjoyed interviewing him. It was a different kind of Bernie we saw last night.
[Cronkite:] Yes, indeed. It showed the great intelligence that he has. The ability to, he recalls so much that he has done over the years. He is a top notcher.
[King:] And you are his hero, as you know. Rather, Jennings, Brokaw, you like them all?
[Cronkite:] I do like them all. I think they're all very, very good, Rather, Brokaw, Jennings. You know, the people in broadcast journalism, the networks, are good. They're all good. Their editors are good, producers are good, reporters, correspondents in the field, the producers, who don't get enough credit. The producers ought to be called correspondents as well, you know. They do so much of the reporting, so much of the writing, even, in the preparation of the broadcast. They should have title of correspondents, not producers.
[King:] So, you like a lot of what you see?
[Cronkite:] I like a lot of what I see. I dislike a lot of what I see as well.
[King:] We'll get to that too. We've got to take a quick break. And we'll come back with more of Walter Cronkite. We will also include your phone calls. Tomorrow night Hugh Downs will host LARRY KING WEEKEND, and his guest will be Rosalyn Carter. We'll be right back.
[Cronkite:] They called it the march on Washington for jobs and freedom. They came from all over America, negroes and whites, housewives and Hollywood stars, senators and a few beatniks, Clergymen and probably a few communists. More than 200,000 of them came to Washington this morning in a kind of climax to a historic spring and summer in the struggle for equal rights.
[Begin Video Clip, 1963) Cronkite:] From Dallas, Texas, the flash, apparently official, President Kennedy died at 1:00 p.m. Central Standard time, 2:00 Eastern Standard time, some 38 minutes ago. Vice President Johnson has left the hospital in Dallas, but we do not know to where he has proceeded. Presumably, he will be taking the oath of the office shortly and become the 36th president of the United States.
[King:] Is that your toughest moment?
[Cronkite:] Emotionally certainly, yeah. That was the only time I really been caught up and thought I was going to lose it, and I did for a brief second. Managed to come back. You know, I am not ashamed of that in any way.
[King:] And why should you be?
[Cronkite:] I heard Bernie Shaw talking in here last night about emotion, showing emotion on the air. I think he was entirely right, I don't think we should hide it. Why should we? We are presumably human beings, and are affected by these things. In that case, a case like that, you know, we reporters are very much like other emergency room workers. Policemen, firemen, nurses, doctors who go who see the most horrible things happen, and we have only learned recently that there is psychological affect, that there needs to be trauma treatment for that sort of thing. We are very much in the same sort of thing. We have to do our job, we do our job. It's only when you get back to your hotel room, or back home or whatever, that it hits you what happened. The rest of the time, your adrenaline is flowing and getting the job done, just like those policemen, firemen, nurses and doctors, and that was much the same thing that day.
[King:] By the way, we saw a clip of you discussing the March 1963, and you used the word "Negroes" unless anyone think that that was current that was term of the day.
[Cronkite:] You know, we went through that constant changing until we got to African-American for or black brothers, but we went through negro that was first effort to get away from the real nasty "N" word, and "colored" was also used, then "negro," then we got to "black." It was a proper word, and now we are to African-American.
[King:] Do you there are we are going to some calls, but there are some people now in Santee, California complaining that we overdid it, we went there too much, we laid too much on that town, do you think so?
[Cronkite:] Well, that's a tough call. That's very tough call. That is a major story, important story. It's a headline story, however you look at it, and it needs to be covered. I think obviously, when so many cameras, so many reporters move in on a scene like that, a small suburban town, obviously there's going to be an appearance of overkill. It's not overkill from the standpoint as the press goes, because we have individual cameras, we have individual reporters, individual newspapers, press services, but it's going to appear that way. The question is whether the coverage, however, inspires others. Whether there is an imitation aspect there, those sort of crimes. And even if that is so, what do you do about it?
[King:] Do we know that is so?
[Cronkite:] We don't know it's so. But even it is so, what would you do about it? I mean, not report it? The worst thing we can do is self-censor to the degree we do not tell people such stories, and let rumor run wild in this country, to where the press is not believed, not trusted, that we are we censor ourselves. And when we do that, we are leading down the path of real serious problems of democracy.
[King:] Speaking of trust, the power of Walter Cronkite to those of you who may not know this when Walter Cronkite turned on Vietnam, and he did LBJ said he can't afford to lose Cronkite. If I've lost him, I've lost the country. Let's take a call for Walter Cronkite. Toronto, hello.
[Caller:] Hello, how are you.
[King:] Hi.
[Caller:] Hi. Not to put the devastation and comparison magnitude with John F. Kennedy, but is there a story that you would liked to have covered since your retirement that would put you kind of like in parallel with how you felt on the day that Kennedy died?
[King:] Any stories since, Walter?
[Cronkite:] Well, it happened within a month after I stepped down when they shot at Ronald Reagan. And right away I was in Moscow already, I had taken a trip doing some documentaries, and I was in Moscow and here I was halfway around the world, and here was the story, the attempted assassination of the president of the United States, and of course, the serious wounding of Brady. Yes, every important story since then...
[King:] And if there was an important story you would have liked to cover, the California story.
[Cronkite:] Oh, absolutely. And of course, there have been many really important stories in those years that affected the course of mankind that I would have liked to have covered.
[King:] Do you like all these magazine shows?
[Cronkite:] I would like them better if they took the feature stories out of the daily news, the evening news, and put them on the magazine shows. Your bank account and mine, your health and mine, all that stuff. That doesn't belong on the evening news. We got 23, 24 minutes on the evening news to cover the most complicated country in the world, the most complicated world that you're going to find that we are supposed to be leaders of. There are so many important stories that don't get on the news at all, and instead those feature stories are run there. I cringe every time there is one of those. We ought to be hitting the news solidly for that half-hour or the 23 minutes after commercials and that other stuff and put all that other stuff is important. It's important to people your health, your bank account, but put it on those magazine shows instead of those Hollywood creatures they are always showing.
[King:] Our guest is Walter Cronkite. We will be right back. [Begin Video Clip, 1968]
[Cronkite:] Good evening. Dr. Martin Luther King, the apostle of nonviolence in the civil rights movement has been shot to death in Memphis, Tennessee. Police have issued an all-points bulletin for a well-dressed young white man seen running from the scene. Officers also reportedly chased and fired on the radio-equipped car containing two white men.
[King:] During the break, Walter was telling me the thrill of covering the 1952 conventions, the last convention that had a second ballot. Now, you're saying we overdo coverage of them. You wouldn't cover them?
[Cronkite:] I wouldn't cover them except for the acceptance speeches of the president and vice president.
[King:] There's no suspense.
[Cronkite:] I used to fight to cover them when people were already saying we shouldn't, because I thought it still was a good civics lesson. It's not even that anymore, because there is nothing open about the convention. It's all it's pre-staged deliberately for promotional purposes, and for it doesn't mean anything.
[King:] So, when Ted Koppel went home a few years ago, you understood that.
[Cronkite:] Absolutely.
[King:] Let's take a call. Lawton, Oklahoma, for the dean Walter Cronkite. Hello.
[Caller:] Good evening.
[King:] Hi.
[Caller:] Thank you for taking the call. I would like to ask Mr. Cronkite, what would you consider to be the low point and the high point of your journalistic career?
[Cronkite:] Well, the low point, I'm taking the television years, the I was 11 years with United Press, many of them overseas, including Moscow for a couple of years, Nuremberg trials and all of that and several years with "Scripps Howard" newspapers but, taking the television years, which most people are talking about, I think the lowest point was a broadcast we did in which we named well, it was Hamilton Jordan, who was on the staff of President Carter, and we revealed that he had been present at party at which narcotics were used. And I think we did him an injustice in reporting that, not in reporting it so much, as leading this broadcast with it, as if it had great importance, and it had none really. Nothing important about it. The high point I think, well, those thrilling moments, certainly, to take the easy way out man landing on the Moon. The one event that will live in history as, perhaps, the most important of all those great technical achievements and inventions and developments of the 20th century. That is the one that will live in history man escaping from his environment, because people will be living out there 400, 500 years from now, and they'll still remember that first voyage.
[King:] You wanted to go, didn't you?
[Cronkite:] Oh, I'd love to go. I would go today if they let me. You know, when John Glenn went, and I called him up they announced that he was going and I said if they are sending you just to send an old man out, I'm older than you are, John, I'll go.
[King:] River Falls, Wisconsin, for Walter Cronkite, hello.
[Caller:] Well, hello, and thank you very much for taking my call and for having such a wonderful guest on your show.
[King:] Thank you.
[Caller:] My question relates to your years on CBS, and I'm sure that it was very difficult to get the stories that made headlines every day on the evening news in this limited time that you had. What were some of the criteria that were used to choose one story over another? And thank you again.
[Cronkite:] Well, the same criteria that all newspeople use, whether they are in broadcasting or newspapers, it's the story that affects the greatest number of people, and that can be a story of great importance, it can affect them because their taxes are going to be lowered or raised, or whatever, or it affects them because it's an emotional story. The death of a hero, the death of a much-beloved figure would be a leading story, because it affects the greater number of people. That's the major criteria. That is the criteria that really counts.
[King:] Now when does a sidebar story now, today, a lot of people are leading with the sentencing of a of a 16-year-old boy to life in prison in Florida for a crime committed when he was much younger 14-year-old boy for a crime committed when he was 12. Is that a lead story?
[Cronkite:] It can be, depending on what else you have to lead with that day. You've got to take that in balance. There are days we have so many stories to get into that 24 minutes of a half-hour broadcast, that some of the important stories get dropped entirely. And that's one of the problems with television is too brief a period.
[King:] You have complained that what goes by the wayside now is international stories.
[Cronkite:] Yes. And it's a very serious deficiency in broadcasting today. The networks and additional networks are not covering foreign news as they should. This is part of a budget cut situation, they do not have the bureaus overseas they used to have. They pulled their coverage overseas so that we only get one basic coverage. It's a disaster. We are a leading country in the world today, perhaps the leading country, as we believe we are, what we decide to do in foreign affairs is going to make a difference whether there is war or peace. That little smoke rising from some small town in a country we never heard of before could turn into a mushroom-shaped cloud if we are not very careful, and if we don't cover the story from the beginning, it can suddenly explode on us. That happened, as a matter of fact, in Iraq. We weren't covering Iraq and the Kuwait situation. If we had been covering it, we might never have had to go to war in that part of world. We weren't covering it, and that's a serious matter.
[King:] Our guest is Walter Cronkite. We will be back with more after this. [Begin Video Clip, 1969]
[Cronkite:] Armstrong is on the Moon. Neil Armstrong, 38-year-old American, standing on the surface of the Moon. On this July 20th, 1969.
[Neil Armstrong, Astronaut:] That's one small stem for man, one giant leap for mankind.
[Begin Video Clip, 1962) Adlai Stevenson, U.s. Ambassador To The United Nations:] Do you, Ambassador Zorin, deny that the USSR has placed and is placing medium and intermediate-range missiles in sites in Cuba, yes or no?
[Cronkite:] Despite that angry rhetoric at the United Nations, the world seems to have veered off, at least for the moment, the collision course toward global annihilation.
[King:] That was something. Adlai saying, "I will wait until hell freezes over!" Stevenson said. Before we take another call, Timothy McVeigh has asked to be executed in the Oklahoma city bombing, and asked it to be telecast. Should it be?
[Cronkite:] I don't know. I am of a mixed opinion about that. The fact that he asked it to be telecast was one factor that would mitigate against it happening to me. I'm not inclined to want to yield anything that Timothy McVeigh wants.
[King:] How about the telecasting of executions?
[Cronkite:] The telecasting of any execution I think is sensationalism beyond necessity. I don't see what the value of it is. If execution were committed in such a manner as to be heinous and bloody and horrible, such that it might deter others from committing such horrible crimes, then it might be advisable, but it's a simple process today, shot in the arm of a narcotic...
[King:] But if it were shown, the shot in the arm, tomorrow night, the world would watch.
[Cronkite:] Oh, the world would watch, but isn't that sensationalism?
[King:] Murphysboro, Tennessee, hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry. How are you?
[King:] Hi, fine.
[Caller:] Mr. Cronkite, I would like to know if you ever considered getting back into broadcasting?
[Cronkite:] Well, if you're suggesting somebody's about to make an offer, I might listen to it.
[King:] Have you had offers over the years, the last 20 years?
[Cronkite:] Oh, yes, sure.
[King:] You're still an employee at
[Cbs. Cronkite:] I've remained under contract with CBS for now 51 years.
[King:] You're on the payroll?
[Cronkite:] I'm loyal, I'm on the payroll.
[King:] On the board?
[Cronkite:] They don't use me very much. Well, I was on the board for a for a while. I haven't been for a long time. And I also have a contract with Discovery Channel for cable work, which has prevented me from doing some CNN things...
[King:] They wanted you here.
[Cronkite:] I'd like to have done them, too.
[King:] By the way, Reliable Resources has been established at University of Southern California, the Annenberg School of Communications, to, among other things, improve television political coverage. A project of the Norman Lear center at the Annenberg school, and they're going to give the Walter Cronkite award for excellence in broadcast political coverage at a dinner, April 20th. It will take place in Bethesda in Washington, D.C. Another thing in honor of Mr. Cronkite.
[Cronkite:] Well, it's an important organization. They're, it's a new organization. And its purpose is to provide tools to local stations particularly, but also to networks, cable people in improving their coverage of politics, improving their coverage of elections. In a way, to sort of, to elevate the entire industry. And I think that's a worthwhile cause.
[King:] And we'll be back with our remaining moments with Walter Cronkite right after this. Let's get another call in. Tempe, Arizona, hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Mr. Cronkite. I'm a student at the Arizona State University Walter Cronkite School Of Journalism, and my question for you, Mr.Cronkite, is what do you think we as students can do now to change the perception of the media in the future?
[Cronkite:] Stay loyal to the general principles of journalism which you're learning there, I hope, at ASU. That's all it takes. Actually, to elevate journalism is, really requires elevating the education of the American people. If the American people want a better newspaper, better broadcast, more complete journalism, they will get it. It's a market-driven situation. And what you can do is stay loyal to the good principles of journalism: accuracy, fairness, impartiality, that sort of thing. Learn to write. That's the important part, both in print and in broadcasting. The communication requires using the right words. Learn how to do that. You'll get along fine. The first thing, of course, is to get a job.
[King:] You once told me that you wouldn't mind it if the anchor were never seen, just voiced over all the film and edit we had for them.
[Cronkite:] That'd be perfectly satisfy...
[King:] You didn't like celebritydom, did you?
[Cronkite:] No. And I don't like that part of the journalism today. I see too many young journalists who are forgetting the principals of the craft in order to be on air, to be a star. Stars don't belong in journalism.
[King:] But it's a product, it's a self you can't do anything about it.
[Cronkite:] No, no. It can't be helped. It's nobody's fault.
[King:] Did you ever think of just retiring, retiring? No Discovery Channel, no writing. Go out and watch the dancers.
[Cronkite:] Or sail the boat.
[King:] Or just sail the boat.
[Cronkite:] Well, I thought of that. I thought that might happen when I stepped down from the evening news, but I found that I couldn't do that. And I don't feel that I want to do it today. I think that gets pretty boring. The news, the current news, the breaking news, I've got to get that newspaper the first thing in the morning. The only trouble with boating is that you can't get that newspaper. But now can you get it on the Internet.
[King:] And what about the Internet, where is that going to take us?.
[Cronkite:] Well, it's going to be a major factor in communications, there's no question about it. The newspapers will be delivered through the Internet in the future, and I'm hoping that the one thing that the Internet needs is responsibility. The, we don't want to interfere with freedom of speech and press, but we've got have to have responsibility. People on the Internet should be just as liable for libel as...
[King:] Play by the same rules.
[Cronkite:] Yes, absolutely. They should be playing by the same rules as everybody else.
[King:] It's an honor knowing you.
[Cronkite:] Well, it's an honor to be with you, Larry. Thank you, very much.
[King:] Walter Cronkite, what do you say after that? Tomorrow night Hugh Downs will host LARRY KING WEEKEND. The guest is Rosalyn Carter, and on Sunday night we'll have a repeat of our interview with the then just pardoned Patty Hearst. You've heard from us. We'd like to hear from you what you think of tonight's show. Log on to my Web site and e-mail us your questions and comments at cnn.comlarryking. I don't now what that slash means, but I just like to say it. With Walter Cronkite, I'm Larry King in New York. Stay tuned for CNN TONIGHT and allow me one personal note: Chance King is 2 years old today. Happy Birthday, little one. Good night.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome to the New York Stock Exchange. It is opening bell time. We, obviously, just missed the ringing of the bell, but some of the folks that are standing there were representatives from the sanitation department, the police department, fire department, the office of corrections and the U.S. Army National Guard. You didn't hear the bell, right, Andy. I didn't hear it, but they said might have been underneath that. Andy Serwer is here, an expert from "Fortune" magazine. Give us a preview of what investors might expect today given what the market did yesterday.
[Andy Serwer, "fortune" Magazine:] Well, it was a very crummy day yesterday, Paula. Stocks were way down. They actually came back a little bit the worst levels of the day. But the Asian markets weak, down 2-3 percent. Trading in Europe was very week. And the sentiment is very negative right now, quite frankly. Yesterday, there was some real fear in the market as investors, institutional investors and ordinary investors sold stocks across the board. Again, the only good news is that we didn't close in the worst levels of the day. We had a kind of rally at the end of the day.
[Zahn:] What are the trends investigators should be looking for today?
[Serwer:] Well, I think what they have to be concerned about is this ripple effect, is this situation where different parts of the economy are going to come under pressure, and investors move from sector to sector, from technology to hotels, to airlines, to consumer products, to housing companies, and sell them out, as they say, in Wall Street lingo, and look for places of weakness and go there, but I think also you will see things where they will look to buy stocks. It's so confusing right now, just to give you an idea, Paula. Just to give you an idea, usually when you have a crisis that involves the Middle East, oil stocks, price of oil will go up, but because there are concerns about a recession right now, oil stocks and the price of oil actually went down yesterday. So you know, all bets are off in this type of environment. Very confusing for people on Wall Street.
[Zahn:] So for the folks who don't have steel guts and who have their investments wrapped up in mutual funds, do they stay in their with those?
[Serwer:] You know, it's so hard to say that in this environment, but I think the answer is yes; particularly, if you have, say, a 10- year time horizon, it really doesn't make sense to sell stocks right now. If you have a wedding planned in November, and you need the money that's in stocks, I will say, you might want to think about selling them to make sure you have that cash in hand. Otherwise, if you're looking at retirement down the line, you got to believe that we are closer to a bottom than a top. You would just be selling out close to a bottom, the wrong time to sell. It's a counterintuitive thing, but very important for investors to remember.
[Zahn:] And of course this volatility comes at a time when you have a number of economists in the United States saying we are in recession. We had a guest on the air yesterday who said, forget the conventional definitions of a recession, forget two quarters in a row of blah, blah, blah, we are in a recession.
[Serwer:] You know, I'd have to agree with that. Again, it's just a definition thing. They always also revise these government statistics in terms of growth. So we may go back to the second quarter and see we actually were contracting then. The third quarter we are in now, it's hard to see any growth. And then going forward, again, with the ripple effects of these attacks on the economy, it's very hard to see how we are in a growth mode.
[Zahn:] Give us the latest this morning on the airline industry, more bad news, more people being laid off. Even British Airways is announcing that, what 7,000 people will find themselves out of work.
[Serwer:] Yes, it's very disturbing actually, Paula, that it's spreading to all different kinds of industries. If you include Boeing with the other layoffs, you are getting toward 100,000 people in that industry being laid off, and including British Airways. That is the size of city. I mean, that's a massive amount of people. And obviously, that has a tremendous ripple effect. We keep coming back to that, but it's really true, a ripple effect in the economy. Those people will be buying less goods, spending less money, not buying homes, trying to find jobs. The economy has to take a hit when that kind of thing happens.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Israelis, Jordanians and Palestinians are preparing for Pope John II's historic trip to the Holy Land next week. In Bethlehem, where the pope will celebrate mass in Manger Square, thousands of police are preparing for one of the largest security operations the biblical city has ever seen. More now from CNN's Jerusalem bureau chief Walter Rodgers.
[Unidentified Male:] Our father who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy name.
[Walter Rodgers, Cnn Jerusalem Bureau Chief:] The Roman Catholic faithful, a priest and pilgrims offering prayers before Pope John Paul II's visit to Jerusalem. Like these Christian pilgrims, the pontiff is about to embark on a deeply personal pilgrimage. Unlike their's, the pope's is politically complicated, complicated because his church believes it has special responsibilities in Jerusalem.
[Unidentified Male:] It is not possible to forget that the church has been founded in Jerusalem, by the Lord himself, because it is the city where Jesus suffered, died and rose again.
[Rodgers:] Three religions lay claim to Jerusalem. It has been the center of Judaism for three millennia. Though historians say before the modern Jewish state, Jewish rule existed only about 400 years. Muslim's ruled here longer, but lost control after the first World War. For them, it is home to the Allaksa Mosque, the third-holiest shrine in Islam. Israelis and Palestinians both lay claim to Jerusalem and into this spiritual and political pressure cooker the pope is coming to pray. Some Arabs say the pope favors their claim to the city.
[Hanan Ashrawi:] I think the Israelis are trying to get the pope's blessings for their control over Jerusalem, which is very clear they wouldn't get it. Nobody in the world, be they pope, or be they secular leaders, would recognize Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem.
[Rodgers:] Some Israeli's are wary of The Vatican's relationship with Palestinians. A recent agreement saw the holy sea warning that any attempt by the Jewish state to control the disputed city is quote "morally and legally unacceptable." Israelis were angry with The Vatican.
[Mayor Ehud Olmert, Jerusalem:] I don't need them to tell me which is my capital city. Jerusalem is my capital city. Jerusalem has been for 3,000 years the capital city of the Jewish people, undivided and united, and it will remain forever our capital, whether they agree to it or they don't agree to it.
[Rodgers:] So the pope must carefully navigate this controversy, but Rome's position does not make it easy. A Vatican document two years ago stated quote "Israel does not possess any legal title to the city, not even continued occupation and growing settling of the country would help Israel get title." Yet on the eve papal visit, that hardline is being soft-pedaled.
[Unidentified Male:] The problem of sovereignty, this is an aspect that belongs to the politician and the politician has to solve.
[Rodgers:] Preserving sacred sites, like the church of the Holy Sepulkur, and access for pilgrims seems the Vatican's real concern, far more than the issue of sovereignty in Jerusalem. [on camera]: For Rome, the Israeli-Palestinian quarrel is a small thing. The Vatican views history in terms of thousands of years. [voice-over]: One church scholar said Rome's real concern lies in protecting a shrinking Christian population here as Jerusalem's demographics shift. Some church officials say the prospect of Ultraorthodox Jews becoming dominant in Jerusalem frightens Rome, which views the Ultraorthodox as intolerant and hostile to Christians. It's a prospect that frightens some Israelis as well.
[Rabbi David Hartman:] I wouldn't feel safe as a Jew to be here if that as true. It's not a question of Christian holy sites; it's my own institution. I would be very threatened. In other words, I couldn't live in a triumphalists, Irani, fundamentalists mindset. I mean, Jews couldn't live here.
[Rodgers:] That Jerusalem is a troubled city is evidenced by the guns you see on the streets, and there is massive security for the pope's visit. So can the pope even walk through Jerusalem without inflaming the issue of conflicting Israeli and Palestinian claims to the city?
[Abu Assal:] I feel that it will not be easy for him to ignore the issue. It's like, I mean like me being what I am, an Arab- Palestinian-Christian-Israeli, always finding myself to be caught in between. I'm sure he would say that there can be no peace without justice.
[Rodgers:] A thousand years ago, an Islamic scholar wrote, "Jerusalem is a golden bowl filled with a thousand scorpions." The pope may find it so again on his pilgrimage here. Walter Rodgers, CNN, Jerusalem.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Apparently it says right here it's hip to be high-tech. And we are told, if you want to have the coolest cubicle at work, you need to get the latest gizmo.
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] We have got to get on it. Some gadgets could also make you pretty popular at home as well. Here's CNN technology correspondent Rick Lockridge.
[Rick Lockridge, Cnn Correspondent:] It is the ultimate desktop status symbol: a $4,000 computer monitor, the Apple Cinema Display. Thinner than your briefcase, it's the first all- digital display, built to work only with the new line of Macintosh G-4 computers.
[Greg Joswiak, Apple Computer:] So there's no conversion from analog. It keeps the signal pure digital all the way from start to finish, which gives you a beautiful picture, beautiful color and beautiful contrast ratio. a 300:1 contrast ratio.
[Lockridge:] What kind of work would you do with a big letterbox monitor like this one? None, of course. You would spend all your time watching DVDs. If you ever wanted to roar through the streets of Manhattan without taking your life in your hands, or hover over Hawaii in a helicopter without leaving your armchair, Ipix.com is a Web site to watch. Ipix, which pioneered the art of interactive, 360-degree still photography, has now moved into moving pictures. Slow Internet connections can hinder home users, but the company says directors Steven Spielberg and Ron Howard have agreed to use the technology to make movies where each viewer could steer the plot in a different direction. It looks like a portable CD player, but the Nomad Jukebox by Creative Labs is actually a digital music machine. Its six gigabyte hard drive can hold more than 100 hours worth of MP3 music files downloaded from your
[Pc. Christi Wilkerson, Creative Labs:] We did have a lot of demand from people saying, you know what, I have a ton of music at home that I have been collecting since I was a kid, some of it was on tape, there is even vinyl, and a lot of CDs, so this is our solution for everyone to carry all of that around with them anywhere they go.
[Lockridge:] Expect to pay about $500 for the Nomad when it wanders into stores this summer. Rick Lockridge, CNN.

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Rudi Bakhtiar, Co-host:] Hello and welcome to CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Rudi Bakhtiar.
[Tom Haynes, Co-host:] And I am Tom Haynes. Today's show gets started in the U.S. capital. Here's a quick preview.
[Bakhtiar:] Tune in to "Top Story" for the latest on the debate over education reform.
[Haynes:] In "Health Desk," our focus now: battling bullies.
[Bakhtiar:] We travel to Asia in "Worldview" as we check in on China's Olympic bid.
[Haynes:] Finally, school's out for the summer so NEWSROOM is headed to camp. First today, United States President Bush is calling on Congress to move forward with his education reform bill. One of the most contentious aspects of the bill is how much funding the federal government will allow for special education. The House and Senate disagree on the monetary issue and so do many parents and educators. Kathy Slobogin reports from one school district that found more money was not necessarily the answer.
[Unidentified Female:] Close your eyes.
[Kathy Slobogin, Cnn Correspondent:] Sam is a child with multiple disabilities.
[Unidentified Male:] A bunny. A rabbit.
[Slobogin:] Because of the federal law passed 25 years ago, Sam is also a kindergartner in a public school.
[Unidentified Female:] Who's that? Santa.
[Slobogin:] The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, guarantees disabled children a public education. It now serves more than six million American children. But while IDEA has made moments like this one possible, it has also grown beyond all expectations, swallowing school budgets and dividing communities. Roger Lulow, the superintendent in Greenwich, Connecticut, where Sam goes to school, says special ed costs nearly bankrupted the system there, forcing Greenwich the wealthiest district in the state to borrow money from the town three years in a row.
[Roger Lulow, School Superintendent:] And the number of kids in special ed, well we were up almost to 20 percent of our student body, being identified as handicapped.
[Slobogin:] Parents of disabled and nondisabled children were at each other's throats, according to Candace Timpson, who headed the PTA's special education committee.
[Candace Timpson, Parent:] There was almost physical violence. So there was a general PTA meeting going on, and several parents turned. They knew who I was, and they said you're the reason we don't have soccer equipment for the kids.
[Slobogin:] In many school districts, special ed eats up a quarter to a third of the school budget, while serving about 12 percent of the students. [on camera]: Special education programs have opened the school house door for millions of children who might once have been shut out, but their costs have had a profound effect on regular education, even getting in the way of reform. One estimate, by the Economic Policy Institute, found that special ed soaks up 38 cents of every new dollar raised for the public schools. [voice-over]: As Congress debates whether the federal government should pick up more of the cost, a growing number of educators are challenging the program itself.
[Chester Finn, Fordham Foundation:] Special ed is cracked, if not broken, and after 25 years, needs to be rethought.
[Slobogin:] Chester Finn, an editor of a new report on IDEA, says the current system is so troubled that more funding might actually mask its problems.
[Finn:] If you put an ice pack on a pain so that you no longer feel that sprained ankle, you don't deal with the fact that you actually have a sprained ankle that needs treatment.
[Slobogin:] Beyond runaway costs, Finn says there's little evidence special education is actually effective.
[Finn:] We do know that the graduation rate for special ed kids is very low. We do know that getting out of special ed is very rare. It's sort of a one-way street.
[Slobogin:] Granted superintendent Lulow agrees the argument over money may be the wrong argument.
[Lulow:] Money in and of itself won't solve the problem. It's how you're going to use that money that's going to make the difference.
[Slobogin:] Three years ago, Lulow and the school board decided to change business as usual in Greenwich.
[Unidentified Female:] Ninety-five percent of the children her age are doing better than she is. However, there was some spark there as I worked with her...
[Slobogin:] Evaluation teams were organized to help teachers figure out whether students really need special education or whether some other intervention might work.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm going to...
[Unidentified Female:] Get. Get.
[Unidentified Male:] ... get on yellow...
[Unidentified Female:] And.
[Unidentified Male:] ... and get all down.
[Slobogin:] Literacy programs were introduced for every kindergartner. Here, reading and other learning problems are detected early. As a result, far fewer children end up in special ed.
[Finn:] These are preventable. You don't have to wait until the kid's in third grade and say, yikes, there's a reading disability.
[Unidentified Female:] Mad!
[Slobogin:] Greenwich has brought special ed down from nearly 20 percent of the student body to only 13 percent. Costs are under control for the first time in years.
[Lulow:] We've had no difficulty in passing our budget the last three years, and in fact, we've returned money to the town each year out of our budget for the last three years.
[Slobogin:] Tension between parents has abated. Lawsuits are way down.
[Timpson:] It's a much better environment to be in when you walk into a room and people aren't assuming you're the enemy.
[Slobogin:] While politicians in Washington debate how to fix special education, it's classrooms like these that might give them the answer. Kathy Slobogin, CNN, Greenwich, Connecticut.
[Haynes:] Well, another hotly debated issue right now in Congress is campaign finance reform. Sponsors of a reform bill that passed in the Senate in April are now trying to get it through the House, a task that may prove difficult. Eileen O'Connor has more on campaign finance reform and the competing proposals currently on the House floor.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn National Correspondent:] Republican Senator John McCain is pulling out all the stops, invoking the ghosts of reformers past to rally support for a House version of his campaign finance reform bill.
[Sen. John Mccain , Arizona:] I believe that Teddy Roosevelt is very disappointed today, is very disappointed in a system where soft money and unlimited contributions come from every source, unaccounted and unregulated which has corrupted American politics.
[O'connor:] At the same time, House Republican leaders are trying to pass their own version with fewer restrictions by forming some unlikely alliances, with black and Hispanic Democrats in Congress and even labor unions. At issue: soft money, unrestricted contributions from individuals, companies, unions or advocacy groups meant for party building but often used in issue ads that benefit specific candidates. The House bill that McCain supports, sponsored by Republican Chris Shays and Democrat Martin Meehan, would ban national political parties from accepting or spending soft money contributions. The alternative, sponsored by Republican Bob Ney and Democrat Albert Wynn, would limit soft money contributions to $75,000 per year, restricting its use to get out the vote efforts and voter registration, critical in races with big minority populations.
[Rep. Bob Ney , Ohio:] The coalitions have fallen apart. There's concern now by minorities on being able to register people to vote. There's a great concern by Democrats and Republicans that this is a gag rule on citizens. Advocacy groups are going to be restrained.
[O'connor:] Congressman Marty Meehan says his bill gets big money and the influence it brings out of politics.
[Rep. Marty Meehan , Massachusetts:] We have to change this system. It's having a corrupting influence on passing the Patients' Bill of Rights, on passing Medicare prescription drug coverage for seniors, we can do better than that.
[O'connor:] With the president politically unlikely to veto any campaign finance reform bill that comes his way, it's up to the House Republican leadership to either come up with a bill that is acceptable or one that is so incompatible with the McCain Senate version that it dies due to irreconcilable differences. Eileen O'Connor, CNN, Capitol Hill.
[Bakhtiar:] OK, gang, time to talk about a very serious subject: bullying. Now many of you have either witnessed or actually been a victim of bullying. Maybe you have been the bully a time or two. Some believe that teasing and taunting another person is all just harmless fun, but bullying isn't about just beating someone up and stealing their lunch money. It also includes name-calling and excluding someone from the group, all things that can hurt. And for those too fearful to seek help, the pain can really run especially deep. Parents and administrators are also struggling with a solution to this age-old problem. Now here's Bill Delaney with news of a governmental effort to battle the bullies.
[Bill Delaney, Cnn Correspondent:] In the course of any school year, studies now show three out of four students will be bullied. Like this young man...
[Unidentified Female:] Did you tell a teacher?
[Unidentified Male:] No.
[Unidentified Female:] Why?
[Unidentified Male:] Because I felt like if I told the teacher, then that will be one more thing that they would make fun of me of.
[Delaney:] Video shot by a staff member at a school outside Boston, illustrating just one aspect, talking it out, of the first statewide, state and federally-funded effort at six Massachusetts schools to apply a new, comprehensive approach to battling bullying.
[Zoe Perry, Program Coordinator:] What we're doing now is we're helping teachers to know what do and to actually react to every single situation, so that students no longer are saying nobody cares.
[Delaney:] Gradually making it acceptable for victims to talk, as well as so-called bystanders that great sea of kids who know about, but rarely tell about, bullying. [on camera]: The program now in place here at Lynn Community Charter School actually stems from a pioneering study on bullying in Norway in the 1970's in the wake of a wave of teen suicides in Europe. [voice-over]: Studies that led to a so-called "Blueprint on Bullying Prevention," co-authored by Norwegian Dan Olweus, that's now been approved by the U.S. Department of Justice.
[Nancy Mullin-rindler, Wellesley College:] Teasing and bullying are known as the evaded curriculum. Kids know it happens, teachers know it happens, administrators and parents know it happens, but typically schools don't have a structured or systematic way of responding to the problem.
[Delaney:] At Lynn, bullying incidents are reviewed openly, weekly, demystified through workshops and role-playing, and awards presented for confronting bullying and learning not to bully.
[Lisa Drake, Lynn Community Charter School:] Just changing the climate into a place where bullying isn't going to be tolerated and where we're all going to do something about it. I think a number of students have turned around that way.
[Delaney:] On a front line of a growing insistence all over the country that bullying doesn't have to be just part of growing up. Bill Delaney, CNN, Lynn, Massachusetts.
[Bakhtiar:] Despite awareness programs, bullying remains a major problem in our nation's schools. In fact, one study shows bullying, which includes sexual harassment, happens as frequently as it did a decade ago. Kathleen Koch has more on the findings of that study and on the unwanted behaviors that are making many kids feel uncomfortable in school.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] It happens in hallways and classrooms, everything from students groping and tugging at clothing, to whistling and sexual innuendo. In interviews with more than 2,000 eighth- to 11th-grade public school students, the American Association of University Women found 81 percent experience sexual harassment during their years in school, just as bad as they found in 1993.
[Jacqueline Woods, American Association Of University Women:] It's extremely disappointing that there hasn't been more progress thus far, and especially in light of all the immediate attention in the most recent times, in terms of what's happening in our schools, and that many of our students, unfortunately, are acting out this behavior.
[Koch:] Boys are increasingly targets of sexual harassment, often by groups of girls, with 56 percent reporting incidents. All this, despite the fact that 70 percent of schools now have policies against sexual harassment, versus just 26 percent in 1993.
[Paul Houston, American Association Of School Administrators:] I think that schools are caught in a bind between trying to be effective in responding to the dangers that are created and the sort of psychological problems that are created by this, and the other side of it, of not overreacting, not cracking down to the point where schools become almost like prisons.
[Koch:] Swanson Middle School, in Arlington, Virginia, crafted its anti-harassment program using the findings from the 1993 study. Step one: teaching kids to recognize harassment.
[Jane Murray, Director Of Counselling Services:] What the instruction does and the curriculum does is set a standard, that this is what it is, and this is what you're going to be responsible for.
[Koch:] Students there now stand up for themselves and others.
[David Campanella, Sixth Grader:] Some kids tease me and call me bad names, and it kind of gets on my nerves, and I try to tell an adult.
[Judy Jankowski, School Counselor:] Even other kids will come and advocate for other kids and say they're aware of this kind of situation that's going on.
[Koch:] Study authors say education experts need to get young people's input in order to draft anti-harassment programs that work and to start teaching kids in elementary school the difference between flirting and hurting. Kathleen Koch, for CNN, Washington.
[Haynes:] Our destination in "Worldview" today, the most populous country on the planet. Do you know which one it is? How about a hint? It's located in Asia. The answer, of course, China. Today we'll explore its progress on child rights, look at its bid for the Olympic games, find out why so many Chinese are learning English and even check out politics check it out. China is a place where political opposition is hardly welcome. Ever since Mao Tse-Tung and the communists took over more than 50 years ago, the government has tried silencing dissident voices. Perhaps the most famous example was the protest staged in Tiananmen Square back in 1989. Hundreds of pro-democracy demonstrators were killed in a crackdown by the communist government, a thousand more were injured. Today, there are signs at least the situation is changing, if ever so slowly. Rebecca MacKinnon introduces us to one woman in the capital city of Beijing who's apparently not afraid to take on the powers that be.
[Rebecca Mackinnon, Cnn Correspondent:] Wu Qing is a people's representative. When she's not being an English professor or an activist for women's rights, Wu is also a delegate to the Beijing People's Congress. This citywide legislature passes laws and regulations for China's capital and also selects representatives for the National People's Congress.
[Wu Qing, Beijing People's Congress Member:] The major task of a deputy is to use the constitution and all the existing laws to supervise the officials in the court, in the court and in the procuratorial office. That's our job.
[Mackinnon:] Wu meets with constituents every week, listening to their problems. These men are involved in a land dispute. The law is on their side, they say. But certain officials and their cronies are not. She agrees to help. The stream of letters and phone calls is endless.
[Wu:] Sometimes I would take some government officials to go and to see and to hear what people have to say. I think it's important.
[Mackinnon:] Delegates to the local people's congresses do go through elections in city districts, but there is a political screening process to keep out potential troublemakers.
[Wu:] In 1990, the school party committee tried in every way to prevent me from being re-elected. They first warned all the party members that they shouldn't put me forward as one of the candidates, and yet a lot of people did.
[Mackinnon:] In return for that support, she says she's worked hard at getting city hall to help her community on bread-and-butter projects like this pedestrian walkway under a dangerous road. [on camera]: Wu Qing says she'd like to be a representative to this National People's Congress, but the Beijing Congress wouldn't choose her because she's too outspoken and not a member of the Communist Party. But she says the fact that she's gotten as far as she has is a sign that China is changing and that the will of the people can count for something. Rebecca MacKinnon, CNN, Beijing.
[Bakhtiar:] More from China as we explore its bid to host the Olympic Summer Games of 2008. The International Olympic Committee will make its decision in a few days. And as time gets closer and closer, China is spreading the word in English more and more often as Denise Dillon explains.
[Dennis Dillon, Cnn Correspondent:] Across Beijing, English language classrooms are filling up. People are trying to learn to speak English in anticipation of the city winning the bid to host the 2008 Olympic Games.
[Unidentified Female:] I want to learn English so I can make more friends.
[Dillon:] Officials in Beijing hope if the residents learn English, it will help boost Beijing's chances of staging the Olympic Games. Paris, Osaka, Toronto and also pushing to host the Olympics. Beijing's bid for the games has become something of a national crusade, and people here seem more than willing to learn some English phrases. This taxi driver learns as he works.
[Computer Voice:] Welcome to Beijing.
[Unidentified Male:] Welcome to Beijing.
[Dillon:] He's listening to Beijing's Peoples Radio Station, where the "Learning to Speak English" program is one of the most popular shows. The host says she hopes it will help people communicate with visitors to the Olympics.
[Zhou Min, Radio:] If the Games is held in Beijing, and there will be a lot of people from around the world come to Beijing, and for Chinese people, Beijingers have more opportunities to communicate with them.
[Dillon:] An estimated 600,000 people in Beijing have taken up English in the past few months. Now they may not all become fluent, but at least they will know some key phrases.
[Unidentified People:] Fried chicken.
[Dillon:] Denise Dillon, CNN.
[Shelley Walcott, Co-host:] We turn now to children's rights in China and Asia. Recently, UNICEF held the fifth East Asia and Pacific consultation on protecting the rights of children. The United Nation's organization cited progress in protecting children but admits education is one of the obstacles holding kids in the region behind. With more on the issue, here's Lisa Rose Weaver.
[Lisa Rose Weaver, Cnn Correspondent:] Beijing hosted the UNICEF conference designed to highlight what's been done in the last decade to insure basic rights for children in the region. Despite better health care and education for many, UNICEF says the successes have not fulfilled the needs of all. In this part of rural southwest China, little has changed. A documentary shot for UNICEF by a Chinese film director tells the story of a 17-year-old girl who once had dreams of continuing her education. She dropped out after the fourth grade because her family decided to educate her brother instead. Despite progress in literacy overall, UNICEF found sex in equality in education in China and other countries remain...
[Weaver:] UNICEF noted China's efforts to crack down on the trafficking of women and children inside the country. In the region, it's a problem that crosses borders.
[Carol Bellamy, Unicef Executive Director:] Clearly one of the emerging issues in many parts of the world is the exploitation of children. Part of that exploitation is through the trafficking of children.
[Weaver:] The conference also pointed to the region's failure overall to cut malnutrition among children younger than 5 years old. And AIDS, a disease affecting more than 2.4 million people, including children, threatens Asia with a human catastrophe to rival Africa's. Young activists lent their lobbying power to the conference in the hopes of leaving an impression that's moved into action.
[Nikki Devera, Philippines Activist:] I think it's very important because there's nobody else in the whole world who could say what is our situation except for us because we are the ones who are experiencing all the ages like poverty and hunger and child labor.
[Weaver:] Twenty-one countries signed on to the Beijing Declaration, a document which calls the well being of children the most important sign of a country's economic and social progress. Areas in which countries around the world have to do more to protect children will be brought up in a special session of the United Nations in September. Lisa Rose Weaver, CNN, Beijing.
[Announcer:] Teachers, make the most of CNN NEWSROOM with our free daily classroom guide to the program. There you'll find a rundown of each day's show so you choose just the program segment that fits your lesson plan. Plus, there are discussion questions and activities and the guide highlights key people, places and news terms. Each day find hot links to other online resources and previews of upcoming "Desk" segments. It's all at this Web address where you can also sign up to have the guide automatically e-mailed directly to you each day. It's easy. It's free. It's your curriculum connection to the news. After all, the news never stops and neither does learning.
[Bakhtiar:] OK, summer is here and school's out, so what's a young person to do? Has the idea of camp crossed your mind? Well, if it did, the thought was probably that you're too old and camp is too corny. Well, guess again, my friend, Jason Bellini's about to take us to some camps that are way cooler than you thought.
[Jason Bellini, Cnn Correspondent:] It's a summer trip many parents know they themselves can't do keep their children from lying around, board, restless and climbing the walls. That's why Hanna's parents sent her to circus camp.
[Hanna, Camp Participant:] Before I went to this camp last week I was really bored.
[Bellini:] You were really bored? Why?
[Hanna:] Just 'cause after being in school and having everything, you know, so intense and stuff then just having nothing to do was kind of boring.
[Bellini:] Summer camps are trying out new routines to attract older children who would otherwise be reluctant to go to camp, those difficult 10 to 16-year-olds. [on camera]: Do you get bored during the summer sometimes?
[P.j. O'neil, Camp Participant:] Yes.
[Bellini:] Not enough activity?
[O'neil:] Yes, not enough activity.
[Bellini:] But here there's plenty of activity?
[O'neil:] Yes, there's tons of activity here.
[Bellini:] With the younger children camps don't have to worry as much about the "is this cool" factor? By the time they pass their mid teens, they have cars to get around in and jobs to keep them busy. Camps wanting to reach those the middle years are realizing they need to be creative.
[Angel Vigil, Coach, Colorado Circus Camp:] The 14-year-old doesn't want to spend his summer making menus.
[Bellini:] Angel Vigil...
[Vigil:] Push, kick.
[Bellini:] ... is the coach and coordinator at Colorado Academy Circus Camp.
[Vigil:] Now to be honest, it took us time to become savvy about this and kind of work through it in our own evolving way of developing programming. But now we're a little bit wiser about that and we're better able to match up activities with the interests of young people.
[Bellini:] Recognizing interests vary, Angel maintains circus like atmosphere where campers can decide for themselves what they want to do. Parents applaud.
[Unidentified Parent:] I think kids need some structure. I think they also need to make choices inside those structures.
[Bellini:] Another full camp this summer, the Field Science For Young Women Camp. Slackers need not apply for this five day long program high in the mountains near Vail, Colorado. After hiking around all day looking for the endangered burial toad, the girls have a pasta dinner then head outside again for a flower identifying contest.
[Unidentified Camper:] Is it all kind of uniform?
[Bellini:] Libby's parents picked this camp for her because...
[Libby Maloney, Camp Participant:] Because they thought it would be a good experience.
[Bellini:] Yeah, why?
[Maloney:] Because it would be outdoors and hiking and all the adventure.
[Bellini:] All the adventure?
[Maloney:] Yes.
[Bellini:] Why do they want you to have adventure?
[Maloney:] Because I'm not very adventurous.
[Bellini:] Church camps are also now offering alternative ways to reach new heights.
[Unidentified Camper:] I mean there's stuff here that you can't do at home. You can't, you don't have a rock climbing wall at home.
[Mike Deboer, Camp Instructor:] I think kids need that stimulus...
[Unidentified Camper:] Dude, this is so cool!
[Deboer:] ... that just keeps them going, gets their adrenaline going. They're so used to video games and doing those kind of things, that it's just instant gratification.
[Bellini:] What do you think you would be doing if you were home right now?
[Mike Rosenthal, Camp Participant:] Just playing Nintendo.
[Bellini:] The cost of sending kids to these new school camps? Circus Camp is $235 for one week, no overnights. Field Science for Young Women sleep-away camp, $425 for five days. And Camp Id-Ra-Ha-Je, around $250 for seven days and six nights. The campers say their parents pay because...
[O'neil:] They like me learning this kind of stuff.
[Maloney:] My dad is looking forward to getting lots of work done.
[Rosenthal:] There's not one second when I'm bored.
[Bellini:] There's not one second when you're bored?
[Rosenthal:] Not one second I'm bored.
[Bellini:] Boredom cured and a bunch of happy campers. Jason Bellini, CNN, Clark County, Colorado.
[Haynes:] Man, what a great gig Jason Bellini has.
[Bakhtiar:] Yes, time to come back and work here.
[Haynes:] Yes, really. Listen, we'll see you back here tomorrow.
[Bakhtiar:] Bye.
[Announcer:] CNN NEWSROOM, here for you 12 months a year and it's free. Educators need to enroll once a year and it's easy. In the U.S., call 1-800-344-6219; outside the U.S., 44207-637-6912; or on the Internet at turnerlearning.com. CNN NEWSROOM is part of Cable in the Classroom, a service of the cable television industry and your local cable company. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bernard Shaw, Cnn Anchor:] Al Gore portrays himself as a truth- teller about global warming and George W. Bush's environmental policy.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Nominee:] In my administration, we'll make it clear there is the controlling legal authority of conscience.
[Shaw:] Bush turns Gore's past words into a stinging message about leadership. Plus...
[John King, Cnn White House Correspondent:] These folks come to play, and to vote, but they don't always like their choices.
[Shaw:] John King on the cards senior citizens hold in election 2000.
[Announcer:] This is INSIDE POLITICS, with Bernard Shaw in Washington and Judy Woodruff reporting from Pittsburgh.
[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Thanks for joining us. I am here in the battleground state of Pennsylvania to talk to voters. George W. Bush is also in this state. He will be addressing a rally in Erie in this hour and then head on to the state of Ohio. Our Candy Crowley reports that Bush's battle cry of the day is leadership.
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Sr. Political Correspondent:] Military heroes on the stage; the Gettysburg Address as a backdrop; a Pittsburgh veteran's museum is his arena. George Bush delivered a somber but slighting speech on the nature of leadership. Al Gore's campaign, he said, is a fitting end to the Clinton-Gore administration.
[Bush:] They're going out as they came in: their guide, the nightly polls; their goal, the morning headlines; their legacy, the fruitless search for a legacy.
[Crowley:] It was, in essence, a treatise on leadership and its importance.
[Bush:] ... should be the most important question Americans ask before they vote: What kind of leader will a potential president be?
[Crowley:] It was a serious, scathing indictment of the Clinton- Gore administration. Bush's most pointed to date.
[Bush:] When you wait for the latest polls to point the way, you cannot lead. When you hold your finger to the wind, you cannot put your finger on a problem. And when you hold onto power for power's sake, you cannot govern.
[Crowley:] The Texas governor accused the Clinton-Gore administration of eight years of not leading on the issues of education and Social Security.
[Bush:] Responsible leadership does more than just sets an agenda, it sets a tone of civility and bipartisanship to get things done on behalf of the American people. In recent years there's been too much argument in Washington and not enough discussion. Too many standoffs and showdowns and shutdowns.
[Crowley:] Though he walked carefully through the political minefield of administration controversy, Bush left footprints nonetheless.
[Bush:] Finally, a leader must uphold the honor and the dignity of the office to which he had been elected.
[Crowley:] No direct mention of Gore's legalese defense of his fund-raising calls from the vice president's office, but you did not have to read between the lines to hear it.
[Bush:] In my administration we'll make it clear there is the controlling legal authority of conscience.
[Crowley:] The Gore campaign said the speech was a Bush effort to hide from his lack of experience and judgment. Al Gore, said a spokeswoman, is talking about issues. [on camera]: But from the very beginning George Bush has felt that leadership is the core issue of campaign 2000. As the campaign draws to a close, he still feels that way. Candy Crowley, CNN, Pittsburgh.
[Woodruff:] I was also at the Republican-sponsored event we just saw in Candy's report, and I talked to some voters there. Almost all of them were already in Bush's camp. But many of them left more enthusiastic about voting for him. Ray Horvath, pro gun-rights, originally for Alan Keyes, said today's speech is just what's needed to turn out the Bush vote in western Pennsylvania.
[Ray Horvath:] I think it's just going to fire up the base even more. It start out with an I think, an anti-Gore-Clinton vote. But the more people see Governor Bush, it's a pro-Bush vote and people that I know are energized. They're excited; they can't wait get to get to the polls.
[Woodruff:] There were a handful of undecided voters who slipped in. Graduate student Jennifer Drent voted for Bill Clinton; liked his policies, she said, but not his moral values. And as for Bush and Gore, she said there are things she likes about both of them.
[Jennifer Drent:] Gore is really strong on his pro-choice and a couple of other things; whereas Bush I really like his strong statements on Social Security.
[Woodruff:] Investing some of it?
[Drent:] Yes, yes; and making sure that, you know, the 20-some- year olds will still have, you know, the opportunity to get the benefits from that.
[Woodruff:] Tomorrow, Ms. Drent will go to see Al Gore when he campaigns here in western Pennsylvania. It is winning over the undecideds and firing up the decideds, like these voters we just saw, that bring Bush and Gore back to Pennsylvania and its 23 electoral votes again and again -Bernie.
[Shaw:] Thanks, Judy, see you again, very shortly. Today, Vice President Gore is in the Midwest. After stumping most of this day in Iowa, he is due to arrive this hour in Wisconsin where a new poll is suggesting he has widened his lead over Bush slightly to 7 points. As CNN's Jonathan Karl explains, Gore tried to bolster his chances in key battlegrounds today by focusing on the environment.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Seizing on a new U.N. report with alarming findings about global warming, Vice President Gore returned to his signature issue: the environment.
[Gore:] Unless we act, the average temperature is going to go up 10 or 11 degrees. The storms will get stronger. The weather patterns will change. But it does not have to happen, and it won't happen if we put our minds to solving this problem, and that is one of the reasons I am running for president.
[Karl:] At a raucous outdoor rally in Davenport, Iowa, Gore used the report to take a shot at George W. Bush.
[Gore:] We have a situation where the big polluters are supporting Governor Bush and they are wanting to be in control of the environmental policies.
[Karl:] Gore called global warming a moral issue and said Bush doesn't understand what needs to be done about it.
[Gore:] He says on global warming he's not sure that what the cause is and maybe we shouldn't do anything except just study it.
[Karl:] The Bush campaign says Governor Bush acknowledges the existence of global warming and offers a more reasonable approach to protecting the environment than Al Gore.
[Karen Hughes, Bush Campaign Communications Director:] The vice president seems to be saying, let's act and then figure out what the problem is. Governor Bush is a responsible leader who believes we should figure out what the problem is and then act accordingly.
[Karl:] Gore spent much of the day talking about the issue, addressing it during a special Iowa taping of rap star Queen Latifah's show, a nationally-syndicated program with a young audience. As Gore moves his way through the battleground states, he's telling voters that their state is the key to victory.
[Gore:] You are in the catbird seat, because Missouri is even up. The bellwether state always goes with the almost always has gone with the winner. Iowa is in the catbird seat. You have a chance to pick not only the next president, but the kind of future that you want for your children, and thank goodness it's Iowa.
[Karl:] Jonathan Karl, CNN, Davenport, Iowa.
[Woodruff:] Gore also slammed Bush's Social Security plan today, citing a study by financial experts of evidence of what he calls Bush's "fuzzy math." But the Bush camp is using the same report as ammunition against Gore. Our Brooks Jackson checked out the study and found it criticizes both candidates.
[Brooks Jackson, Cnn Correspondent:] George W. Bush says he'd pay off the national debt in just 16 years. Al Gore says he'd protect Medicare.
[Gore:] I will put Medicare in an ironclad lockbox.
[Jackson:] But do their numbers add up? Now a new report says both candidates' claims are quote "incomplete, at times internally inconsistent, potentially misleading, and leave many questions unanswered." It was released by the American Academy of Actuaries, a nonpartisan group of number crunchers. Ron Gebhardstbauer analyzed the Bush and Gore Social Security plans.
[Ron Gebhardtsbauer, Pension Expert, American Academy Of Actuaries:] We looked at the two campaigns, both Bush and Gore. Neither one of them really fixes the problem completely. And they do a little bit here and there, but it's not going to solve the problem.
[Jackson:] He says Bush's plan to let younger workers put some of their Social Security taxes into private accounts would rob the government of so much money it would bring back federal deficits by the year 2015, making it impossible to pay off the debt by 2016, as promised. He also looked at Gore's plan to prop up the existing Social Security system with up to $250 billion a year in general revenues starting in the year 2011. His conclusion: "that will be far less than necessary to make up the Social Security shortfall." Eventually, Gore's plan would require new deficits, increased taxes, or reduced Social Security benefits. Medicare plans came under analysis by Guy King, former chief actuary of the federal Medicare system. King says Gore's lockbox isn't really ironclad. It's quote "imaginary" and "does nothing to cover the significant shortfalls" that begin in a few more years. He also says Bush's plan to restructure Medicare quote "does not provide sufficient detail to judge the cost or long-term impact." Both the Bush and Gore campaigns reject these findings. The Bush campaign says the actuaries underestimate future economic growth. The Gore campaign says Gore never promised his lockbox would do anything more than delay the system's insolvency. Brooks Jackson, CNN, Washington.
[Shaw:] Still ahead on INSIDE POLITICS, what voters are looking for in a candidate, and what they are seeing on television: Bill Schneider with some new results and David Peeler with the ad spending.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] We just want to show you a quick live picture of a room in Tallahassee, Florida where we're expecting any moment Former Senator George Mitchell to come to that podium. In fact, he's coming in right now to answer some questions.
[George Mitchell , Former Senate Majority Leader:] Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I'd like to make a brief statement. Then I'll introduce Mr. Michael Mone, who will make a brief statement. And then we'll be pleased to try to respond to your questions. At the request of Governor Bush, the dispute over the election will go to the United States Supreme Court. Whatever the outcome, it is important that the process be fair and orderly, and that the will of the people and the rule of law prevail. In its historic decision on Tuesday, the Supreme Court of Florida said that, and I quote, "the will of the people is the paramount consideration. The right to vote is the right to participate. It is also the right to speak, but more importantly, the right to be heard." With those eloquent words, the court reached the very foundation of democracy. The word itself is a combination of two Greek words: demos, the people; kratia, the rule. Democracy is the rule of the people. Elections are the means by which we determine the will of the people, so as to establish the rule of the people. That is why I believe that above all the clamor and confusion, there should be one clear and overriding goal: to ensure a full, fair and accurate count of the votes in this election. Only then will we honor our Constitution and reflect the will of the American people. The Supreme Court of Florida, and many other courts across the country, have stressed the importance of the individual and the need to count every valid vote. There has been criticism of the use of hand recounts in this election. However, hand recounts are authorized by law in many states, including Florida. Hand counts are provided for in Texas in close elections. The laws of Texas and Florida and other states are based on the reality that the most fair and effective way to count every valid vote, and to discern the intent of the voter, is a careful, fair hand count. Up to now in this process, no court, state or federal, has accepted the assertion that hand recounts are unfair or unconstitutional. The courts and the people know better. They know that hand recounts are consistent with the law and with past practices in Florida, in Texas and all across the country. The United States district court put it well when it said, and I quote, "The manual recount provision is intended to safeguard the integrity and reliability of the electoral process by providing a structural means of detecting and correcting clerical or electronic tabulating errors in the counting of election ballots," close quote. In such recounts, every effort should be made to ascertain the intent of the voter. For example, in the now famous Delahunt case, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that if an impression is made on or near the chad portion of the ballot, that impression should be treated as a vote. That ruling, and others that hold similarly, are based on a simple and just premise: Whenever possible, valid votes should be counted and the will of the voters heard. Texas law authorizes hand recounts and provides that a ballot should be counted if it meets any of several criteria that indicate the voter's intent. One such criterion is that a ballot may be counted if, and I quote, "an indentation on the chad from a stylus or other object is present and indicates a clearly ascertainable intent of the voter's vote," close quotes. Thus, Texas law includes the counting of so-called dimpled chads. What the Texas law properly seeks is, and I quote again, "any clearly ascertainable intent of the voter," close quote. So far, Florida has demonstrated that this process can be done fairly, with objective counters and observers representing both parties, despite some unfortunate attempts at delay and disruption. I urge that the counts be permitted to proceed without interruption or disruption. It is essential to assuring the fairness and integrity of the process and of the result. I mentioned briefly the Delahunt case. Here today is Michael Mone, who was counsel for Congressman Delahunt. He will describe that case in more detail. Mr. Mone?
[Michael Mone, Former Attorney For Rep. William Delahunt:] Thank you, Senator. My name is Mike Mone. I'm a lawyer from Boston. In 1996, I represented then-District Attorney William Delahunt, now Congressman William Delahunt, in a recount in the 10th Congressional District in Massachusetts. What was at issue there is what is at issue here in Florida, that is, the necessity of counting the votes that the voters have recorded. I come from Brockton, which is 20 miles south of the city of Boston. We have had two elections in Brockton that have turned on the ability of the election officials and judges to count the so-called indented chads. The law in Massachusetts is quite clear. It is in accord with the law in Illinois, and it is certainly in accord with the law that the senator just quoted to you from the state of Texas. That is, that if in looking at these punch cards you can ascertain the will of the voter, the vote should be counted. Now why is this punch card system does it produce this uncertainty where you have blank votes where people have voted? The reason for that, in my view, is simple. It is the only system of voting in which the voter records his preference on a piece of paper, but he can't see the piece of paper when he votes. And when he's finished voting, what he has in his hand is a card that has random holes in it. They are not next to the name of a voter; they are simply holes. And if he voted 16 times, he may not notice that on 14 of those he knocked out a chad, but on one occasion he simply dimpled it. These machines are susceptible to misalignment of the cards, and that is the problem with the system. The problem with the system is so severe that Massachusetts, after the Delahunt campaign, abolished the use of these machines. Let me tell you a little bit about the Delahunt case, because it really is right on point as to what's going on now in south Florida. In the Delahunt election, on the evening of the election, we discovered that in the town of Weymouth, which voted on this punch- card system, 4,000 Massachusetts voters...
[Lin:] All right, this is a live news conference out of Tallahassee, Florida. That is Michael Mone; he is an attorney out of Boston who represented Congressman William Delahunt, who's congressional race back in 1996 was determined and finalized through a hand recount. Just moments ago, earlier, former Senator George Mitchell made his case for the hand count to continue in the state of Florida, saying that a hand count is the only way to discern the will of the voter. Right now this is a good time to bring in our elections analyst Ken Gross for further analysis. Ken, one thing that we found interesting, and I think Michael Mone really crystallized what we always, sort of knew in the back of our minds is that when voters are voting, they're punching a card, a piece of paper, that they really can't see because it's buried within the ballot machine. Do you think they made a valid decision and a valid point in the state of Massachusetts to ban this form of voting as a result?
[Kenneth Gross, Cnn Election Law Analyst:] Yes, I do. If this whole mess that we're in Florida stands for anything, it's that punch- card balloting has many, many problems. The ballot itself, in the butterfly situation was a problem; but even properly constructed ballots are creating innumerable problems with this dimpling and this punching of the chad, and I think something has to be done about it.
[Lin:] Well, at the same time, as we look forward to this case now before the U.S. Supreme Court, I suppose, you know, the issue of hand counts is a bit set aside because the court is going to be looking at different questions. If the Supreme Court rules that the Florida state Supreme Court overstepped its authority, would you expect, then, that the Supreme Court would take that decision one step further and say what the fate of these hand counted or recounted ballots will be?
[Gross:] Well, I don't know that they'll need to. If that's the case, then the Supreme Court's decision in Florida, which allows the recounting of the vote, effectively would be nullified and those votes won't count. So that will be the effect of a Supreme Court decision reversing the Florida Supreme Court. That would be I think, send the death knell for the Gore campaign.
[Lin:] All right, at this point let's bring in Bill Hemmer from Tallahassee Bill.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey Carol, thanks. I don't know if Ken can jump in on this thought, too but it struck me, as I was listening to George Mitchell and the other gentleman inside the room there that, knowing that the Supreme Court has no case law on which to go when they're going to start hearing, you know, the briefs on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and the oral arguments on Friday wondering if this is a way to communicate to the court that, not just in Florida, but if you look at different parts of the country, perhaps you can or cannot make a case that the recount should continue and the state Supreme Court here in Florida was, indeed, correct for when they ruled: extend the deadline and count those votes. Ken, you thoughts on that?
[Gross:] Well we, frankly, have been surprised that the Supreme Court is even taking this case because it has always been the case of in other jurisdictions whether it was the Delahunt case that was just talked about in Senator Mitchell's press conference or in other instances, that it has been the province of state law to make these decisions regarding the balloting process. And I still believe that it's an uphill battle for the Bush campaign to convince the Supreme Court to step in and say that the Florida Supreme Court acted improperly here. If they do, then that would send a signal to other states saying, what we decide to do at the state level could well be questioned in a higher court.
[Lin:] Ken, as the counting continues I mean, you look at the situation in Palm Beach County we don't see any conceivable way that they're going to be able to finish counting tens of thousands of ballots by tomorrow's 5:00 p.m. deadline. So if they do not finish, does it mean that all of the ballots that they have recounted so far will be excluded, then?
[Gross:] That's my reading of the law. If they undertake to do a recount, they need to finish the recount in order for it to qualify. Otherwise it would be unfair to the counties or the voters or the precincts that didn't quite get into the count. You can't extrapolate a partial count and say that, well, you know, we expect the last 10 percent that we didn't get to would follow the same counting pattern as the other 90 percent. It would jeopardize the entire recount.
[Lin:] All right; thank you very much, Ken Gross, for joining us this morning.

[Jeanne Meserve Cnn Anchor:] Right now we're going to go to the Rose Garden, President Bush making an announcement abour Sudan. Let's listen in to his remarks.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] I'm pleased to announce today my appointment of John Danforth of Missouri as Americans Envoy for Peace in the Sudan. It's my honor to welcome the former United States Senator, his wife Sally, and distinguished guests here to the Rose Garden for this important announcement. I am under no allusions. Jack Danforth has taken on an increadibly difficult assignment. The degree of difficulty is high. But this is an issue that's really important. It's important to this administration, it's important to the world, to bring some sanity to the Sudan. I'm honored to be on the stage with our secretary of state, who's doing a fabulous job for America. When he speaks the world listens, and when he speaks on this subject the world will listen. I'm honored to welcome members of the United States Congress, who have taken this issue very seriously. Thank you all for coming. And I want to thank members of the diplomatic core who are here as well. For nearly two decades the government of Sudan has waged brutal and shameful war against its own people. And this isn't right. And this must stop. The government has targeted civilian for violence and terror. It permits and encourages slavery. And the responsibility and the war is on their shoulders. They must now seek the peace, and we want to help. Today, the tragedy in Sudan commands the attention and compassion of the world. For our part, we're committed to pursuing a just peace which will spare that land for more years of sorrow. We're committing to bringing stability to the Sudan so that many loving Americans, non-governmental organization will be able to perform their duties of love and compassion within that country without fear of reprisal. Recently I appointed a humanitarian envoy, Andrew Natsios, to the administrator of USAID to address the material needs. Today I take a step further by naming distinguished American, a former United States senator, an ordained minister, a man of enormous respect. The United States will continue to signal to the rest of the world our interest in this subject, our desire to bring governments together, to achieve a lasting peace. I repeat what I told Jack in the Oval Office: Our administration is deeply committed is deeply committed to bringing good folks together from within our country and the leadership of other nations to get this issue solved once and for all. It's a test of the compassion of the world. We're under the degree as I said, the degree of difficulty is high. Our Jack Danforth brings a realistic assessment to what is possible. But he also brings a big heart and enormous amounts of energy and a great commitment. And so it's my honor to bring a good man back into government to take on a difficult, yet important, assignment. Please welcome John Danforth.
[John Danforth, Special Envoy To Sudan:] Mr. President, thanks you very much. The civil war in Sudan has lasted at least 18 years and it's caused immense human misery, the death of 2 million people, bombing and displacement of civilians, trading in human being as slaves. And appointing me special envoy, President Bush has asked me to determine if there's anything useful the U.S. can do to end the misery in Sudan in addition to what we are already doing on the humanitarian side. Even to ask that question is a powerful statement by the president of the values of our country. In the past few weeks, I have asked experts on Sudan their views on whether the United States can play a useful role in bringing about peace. Some have frankly told me that the answer is no. Others have been more hopeful. I believe, as does the president, that if there is even the chance that we can help the peace process, we should seriously explore the possibility that America can do so. While I accept this job with no expertise on Sudan, and I look forward to working with a number of people here today to get their views on the situation, I do have some thoughts that I would like to share with you. First, the possibility of peace depends on the will of combatants, not on the actions of even the best-intentioned outsiders, including the United States. Perhaps America can encourage peace, we can not cause it. Second, the will of combatants to have peace will be gauged not by their words, but by their acions. Third, the job of a special envoy is to further peace. I am prepared to deal constructively with both sides of the conflict, the government of Sudan and the SPLA. Fourth, the effectiveness of America's efforts for peace in Sudan will depend on our communication and cooperation with other interested countries, including the European Union and countries neighboring Sudan, especially Egypt and Kenya. And finally, and this is very important, I'm not a one-man band or an independent contractor. In matters of foreign policy, America should speak with one voice. A special envoy is not a separate entity. He should support the normal diplomatic enterprise of the United States and not suplant it. Mr. President, thank you very much.
[Meserve:] President George W. Bush announcing the appointment of former Senator John Danforth to be his special envoy to Sudan, where a civil war has raged for almost 20 years. An estimate two million people have died there. The president saying that he's under no illusions, that this is an incredibly difficult assignment for the former senator to undertake. The senator saying that he has no particular expertise on Sudan, but he does have some thoughts that peace depends on the will of the combatants, not outsiders like the United States. And that the will of those combatants will be gauged not by their words, but by their acions. Danforth left the Senate in 1995, has been active on a number of fronts, including the investigateion of what happened in Waco. But now picking up new portfolio, going to the Sudan. Major Garrett joins us now from the White House. Major, why John Danforth and why now?
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, John Danforth has a good deal of trust with many who are advising the president on this issue. Among them, Sam Brownback, a Kansas Republican senator. The two know each other. Mr. Brownback has worked long and hard on this issue. There are others in the religious community throughout the United States who've been working this issue very hard, Chuck Colson, Franklin Graham, who is Billy Grahams' son. The Reverend Billy Graham's son talks to the White House frequently about this issue. They also know Jack Danforth very well, trust him immensery. One thing that's worth noting here, Jeanne, the United States does not, as the Clinton administration did, have a special envoy to Middle East. It does now have a special envoy to the Sudan. One might ask: During the campaign, President Bush criticized the Clinton administration for trying to do nation building in places where there weren't exact pronounced U.S. interest. Well, the Sudan, some might say, would fall exactly into that category. There are no major U.S. corporation in the Sudan. There are no particular military on geopolitical interests in the Sudan. So, why is this happening? Well again, it's a reference again to an interesting coalition not only of liberals who are from the African-American community, Congressional Black Caucus in Congress among them, and also evangelical christians throughout the country who have lobbied the Bush administration to take the issue of Sudan very seriously. Now, with this move, the president has done exactly that. Jeanne?
[Meserve:] Major Garrett at the White House. Thank you.

[Roger Cossack, Co-host:] Today on BURDEN OF PROOF, American officials met with 24 crew members being held in China as the White House walks a diplomatic tightrope and the president writes to the grieving wife of the missing Chinese pilot.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] We've got every diplomatic channel open. We're in discussions with the Chinese. It is now time for our troops to come home so that our relationship does not become damaged.
[Fei-ling Wang, Georgia Institute Of Technology:] The mood over there has remained to be roughly the same, in other words, demanding apology, pinning the blame on the United States and asking the Chinese government to be tough and strong and to be patriotic, to be nationalistic. I think the mood is roughly the same.
[James Sasser, Former U.s. Ambassador To China:] The Chinese are negotiating just as they always do when they hold all of the cards. They're going very slowly, going very painstakingly and drawing it out. And now I think we're really negotiating over words and a question of semantics.
[Announcer:] This is BURDEN OF PROOF with Greta Van Susteren and Roger Cossack.
[Cossack:] Hello and welcome to BURDEN OF PROOF. It's day nine in an international stand-off between the United States and China and two dozen Americans remain in captivity. Earlier today, two U.S. officials visited the 24 crew members for 40 minutes. They were reportedly in excellent health and in very high spirits. They've been held by the Chinese since making an emergency landing after their surveillance plane collided with a Chinese fighter jet. Yesterday, President George W. Bush sent a letter of sympathy to the wife of the missing Chinese pilot through the U.S. embassy in Beijing. Now, the text of the letter was not made public by the White House. Joining us today here in Washington is international relations professor Huan Jiang Chaou. Joining us today here in Washington is professor of diplomacy Casimir Yost, international law professor Jim Feinerman and Chris Candy. And in the back, Megan Marville and Brian Jones. And now, joining us from the White House is CNN correspondent Major Garrett Major, there was a Cabinet meeting today led by, of course, President George W. Bush. What came out of that meeting?
[Major Garrett, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, what came out of it, Roger, was a very direct message from the president of the United States to the Chinese hierarchy both on the political and military side. There's been a good deal of discussion here at the White House internally about who's really in control of this situation in Beijing, is it the military bureaucracy or is it the political apparatus beneath President Jiang Zemin? Well, whoever is in charge, the president wanted to send them a message, which is that if this goes on much longer, in the president's own words, relations between the United States and China could be damaged. I refer you to that earlier sound bite we just ran from former China ambassador to the Chinese government, James Sasser, former United States senator. He said that the Chinese are negotiating the way they always do when they hold all the cards. Well, clearly there was a tipping point yesterday where the administration wanted to remind the Chinese that, perhaps, they, in fact, do not hold all of the cards and there are other parts of the U.S.-Chinese relationship that could be damaged the longer this goes on.
[Cossack:] Major, what about the letter that President Bush sent to the wife or the widow, now, I'm sorry to say, of the downed and perhaps missing and perhaps dead Chinese pilot? Was there any reaction to that and do we know what exactly the president said? Manageable well, the White House has said that that letter simply expressed the president's regret, tried to seize upon some of the things that she said in her letter to the president that were at least viewed by the White House as positive, talking about the future of U.S. relations with China, trying to acknowledge her grief that her husband may, in fact, be lost. It's important to point out that neither the Chinese government nor the U.S. government calls her a widow because the Chinese government is still engaged in a rather elaborate and extensive search and recovery rescue operation. So neither government has said that that Chinese fighter pilot is, in fact, dead. Secretary of State Colin Powell said that this was a way of expressing American regret for the loss, the apparent loss of that life, but nothing more. The White House also described it as a humanitarian gesture from the president, a gesture that they hope will carry great weight in China, at least showing that the commander-in- chief of the most powerful military in the world can write a note to a wife in a circumstance such as this, showing a degree of sympathy, a degree of regret. The White House hopes that will move things along. Jim, the notion of, as Major brings up, this perhaps internal struggle between the military side of the Chinese government and the diplomatic side of the Chinese government, there are those who believe this is becoming more apparent and that is why this is dragging on. Your thoughts on that?
[Jim Feinerman, Professor Of Asian Legal Studies:] Well, I think most China specialists believe this is very real. Theoretically Jiang Zemin is the paramount leader in China, like Deng Xiaoping and Mao Tse-tung before him. But they had strong military ties and had experience as military leaders during the Long March and the revolutionary struggle. Jiang is really a civilian leader who's tried to assert some control over the military, but it's pretty clear that he doesn't really effectively have it and as long as he doesn't and as long as there is some sort of clear space between him and the military about the positions they'd like to take vis-a-vis the United States on this issue, it's going to be very hard for them to reach a final resolution.
[Cossack:] Casimir, that is, in a sense, something that if Jim's analysis is correct does not bode well for a quick conclusion to this stand-off. Obviously you have two positions within the government that are at odds with each other, the Chinese government. How do you get around it? If that's true, what do you do?
[Casimir Yost, Member Board Of Trustees, Asia Foundation:] Well, I think not only is it true but it's particularly true now. China is about to go into a major leadership transition. Next year the party congress will meet and part of the role of that party congress is to inaugurate a new leadership for China. So you have a juggling process that's underway as leaders, would be leaders begin to position themselves for what comes after the current generation of Chinese leaders. During that juggling process, the security services, the military, all play a role that they would not in the normal course of business.
[Cossack:] What's the benefit to taking a rather strong military position? What would be the argument of the military leaders?
[Yost:] Well, I think the argument comes back to Chinese concern about sovereignty, about face, about stature in the world. China is attempting to position itself at present as playing a new and more ambitious role in the world and the country that stands in its in the way of its doing so is the United States. And so there's a testing process that is underway now and we're seeing evidence of it across a whole range of issues.
[Cossack:] It's almost as if the Chinese government or the Chinese military was saying now you must respect me.
[Yost:] Well, they're looking for respect, but the other feature to this is that we are seeing a traditional pattern of Chinese negotiating unfolding here. The Chinese, when they get into a negotiating situation such as this one, are testing their interlocutor. They want to see are we going to get as much as we possibly can out of the United States.
[Cossack:] It's almost a cultural event. And with that, let me just interrupt you for a second, because we have to take a break. Up next, the hazy line between regret and sorrow. And is Beijing trying to get Uncle Sam to say uncle? Don't go away. It's become a question of semantics, how the American government responds to a collision between a U.S. surveillance plane and a Chinese fighter jet. Should U.S. diplomats express sorrow or regret for a missing pilot and are cultural barriers adding fuel to the flame? Jim, I want to talk a little bit about those cultural barriers. During the break, we had the opportunity to discuss for a moment the notion of what China is attempting to find out about the U.S. government and our new president. Describe some of those things.
[Feinerman:] Well, I think they're trying to figure out whether or not the Bush administration is firm in its positions, which seemed to be, at least initially, somewhat anti-China, and whether they can follow a similar trajectory that they did with the Clinton administration. Clinton came in, of course, criticizing Bush's father for coddling Chinese dictators and yet within two years the policy towards China completely changed. They had dropped their aggressive human rights stance towards China and moved towards a much more conciliatory one so that by the end of the administration, Clinton was talking about a strategic partnership between the U.S. and China. Now, Bush sounded rather tough and somewhat hostile in the campaign and in the first few days of the new administration, but they're probing to see exactly where they're going to come out and whether they can use incidents like this to try and push the administration to a somewhat different position.
[Cossack:] So Cas, within the Chinese government, then, this issue becomes a symbol for other things?
[Yost:] It becomes symbolic. The risk that the Chinese are running now is exactly the risk that the administration pointed out over the weekend, that they will get, they will push us one step too far and at that point their short run advantage, which is holding onto our folks, becomes a long run disadvantage. They want our support in their hosting the 2008 Olympics. They want us to limit arms sales to Taiwan. They want to eventually get into the WTO. There are a whole series of issues on which U.S. cooperation is important to the Chinese and those begin to kick in, you know, in a very serious sort of way for the Chinese if this is not resolved in the short run.
[Cossack:] If you, Cas, if you, if that is the proper analysis, is that why you extrapolate out the notion of why the apology becomes so important because it's a way of, if you will, placating the Chinese military and getting the Chinese diplomacy off the hook?
[Yost:] What I don't think we want to do, I mean my own view is that the administration has it about right, that we should not apologize, first of all, because we don't know all of the facts of the situation. But the other is that with that apology would come additional demands on additional issues. I think Jim has it right, that we are in a testing period here. The foreign ministry in Beijing may want...
[Cossack:] I'm sorry, let me interrupt you for one second.
[Yost:] Right.
[Cossack:] We have to go to Atlanta to Natalie Allen Natalie?
[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Roger, thank you. We've heard from the White House today so now we're going to hear from the State Department. They're holding their daily briefing and we're going to get the latest from them on the impasse with China.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Time to check "Showbiz News" this morning.
[Daryn Kagan:] Laurin Sydney telling us what one of the biggest stars in Hollywood was up to. He turned up someplace I think a lot of people didn't expect him to show up.
[Laurin Sydney, Cnn Correspondent:] Absolutely. The star in question is Ben Affleck and, Leon and Daryn, the reason why he was there at the Teen Choice Awards was because the facility that he is in actually allows people to go out, as long as it is related to work, into the real world. And of course he was accompanied by somebody and we'll get to that. Apparently, recovering from an alcohol problem does not keep one from accepting an award, especially from teenagers. Actor Ben Affleck, currently in treatment at the Promises Rehab Center for Alcohol Abuse, showed up at the Teen Choice Awards last night in Hollywood. He won two awards, including favorite actor. He told the kids why he interrupted his program to come to the event.
[Ben Affleck, Actor:] Thank you very much. I guess I'll have to learn to surf. I wasn't going to be here, but I felt like it was important, and so I came. Because this actually means a lot to me, because it was voted on by you guys, and it's really, actually very, very good to be here.
[Sydney:] Comedian Drew Carey is expected back at work at his sitcom the week following heart surgery. Carey was released from a Los Angeles-based hospital on Saturday after undergoing angioplasty to unblock a coronary artery. He complained about chest pains last week and was taken to the hospital, where it was determined to proceed with the angioplasty. OK, despite it's R rating, "American Pie 2" had moviegoers begging for seconds this weekend. Hollywood reporter box-office analyst Mr. Marty Grove joins us from Hollywood. And, Marty, another record set this weekend who knew?
[Marty Grove, Hollywood Reporter:] Laurin, let me tell you, they broke so many records this weekend with "American Pie 2, they are still cleaning up. Well, first to update the numbers, 45.4 million is Universal's estimate this morning. Yesterday they thought a great 45.1, so it had an even stronger Sunday. Now, some of those records it's the biggest R-rated comedy opening ever. It's the second-highest opening ever for an R-rated film of any kind. It's the third biggest comedy ever to open not only with just an R rating, but with any rating. Let me keep going. It's Universal's fourth No. 1 opening this year. But that's not the big news. The big story is, Laurin, it is Universal's fourth opening in a row with over $40 million per opening, so they are as hot as any studio can be. And in Paris, where Vivendi, which owns Universal, must be watching us right now, I'm sure they are opening the champagne.
[Sydney:] I think they're eating the croissants. Now, Marty, moviegoers are still rushing to see "Rush Hour 2." Are you surprised about that one?
[Grove:] No, you know something? It fell 53 percent. That's the story of this summer huge openings and big second-week plunges. But nonetheless, it is an enormous hit. In the case of "Rush Hour 2," Laurin, this picture is probably going to go on to do 175 to 200 million. It's already done close to 132 million, so New Line has to be very, very happy, and Brett Ratner, who directed it, told me he wants to do all the future sequels himself. He says Steven Spielberg directed all of his "Indiana Jones" films, Richard Donner does all the "Lethal Weapons." Well, Brett Ratner will be very happy to do the next couple of "Rush Hours."
[Sydney:] Who could blame him if he has a piece of the action? It's a good thing.
[Grove:] Indeed, he does.
[Sydney:] I'd like to direct it as well. Kids are still peeking into "The Princess Diaries".
[Grove:] Royal business continues for Garry Marshall's film, once again showing that if you are unique in the marketplace there's business to be had. This weekend, just over $14 million, a drop of only 38 percent. That's a fabulous hold in this summer, where everything has dropped 50 and 60 percent. The film has already done about $52 million. I would say it's on its way to over 85, possibly even get to 100.
[Sydney:] OK, Marty. And we are out of time, so you go and study those numbers and we're going to see you next Monday.
[Grove:] Yes.
[Sydney:] And when we return, mix African rhythms with Irish music and what do you get? Something like this.
[Peter Gabriel, Musician:] Now become something else. It's got it's very own strong identity. It's very energetic, very soulful. I think you've to hear those beautiful voices on top of it and it's quite unique.
[Sydney:] Rocker Peter Gabriel has always been a proponent of world music. His patronage of the WOMAD festival has helped bring bands from around the world to the attention of the music world.
[Gabriel:] It's quite unique.
[Sydney:] His latest project is with a group called Afro Celtic. It's an amazing combination of musical sensibilities from two completely divergent cultures. Gabriel talks about this groundbreaking band in our 2:00 p.m. "Showbiz Today Report." And later today, a look at whether an R rating helps or hurts a film at the box office. Until a little bit later, I'm Laurin Sydney. and now back to Daryn and Leon.

[Jason Carroll, Cnn Anchor:] The international space station's guest tourist says he's staying out of trouble. Dennis Tito described his stay so far in the Russian section of the station as surprisingly comfortable. NASA officials have complained the amateur astronaut could disrupt the crew's work, but Tito says he's not getting in the way of the American crew.
[Dennis Tito, Space Tourist:] I know that the crew is due for a little slowdown in their schedule because they've had a lot of work over the last two weeks with the Endeavour mission. However, the American segment is at least 100 meters away from where we're sitting right now, where I spend most of my time. And there's absolutely no way that my presence can interfere with their work.
[Carroll:] All right. Tito is scheduled to return to earth Sunday onboard a Soyuz capsule. Well, is Tito's holiday in space yet another giant leap for mankind? For many stargazers it signals the possibility that they, too, may someday travel beyond the confines of the earth's gravitational pull. CNN's Anne McDermott takes a look at the infatuation with space travel.
[Anne Mcdermott, Cnn Correspondent:] This is what it's all about.
[Tito:] I love space.
[Mcdermott:] And Dennis Tito isn't alone. People have been in love with space since "War of the Worlds," since "Star Wars" and "Star Trek." In fact, on "Star Trek" regular Joes sometimes turned up on the Enterprise, and some thought that might soon happen for real. After all, once man went to the moon Pan Am began taking reservations for lunar flights flights that never took off. So some settled for less, like "Star Trek" creator Gene Roddenberry, and noted trip-taker Timothy Leary, they had their ashes sent into orbit. But it's obviously much more fun to take Tito's trip. Trouble is, you need $20 million. Now, "Titanic" director James Cameron says he's interested in going into space. Can you say king of the cosmos? But if you can't scrape up $20 million, you can do what Miami businessman Alan Wolnick did: experience brief periods of zero gravity aboard a Russian cosmonaut training flight for only about $5,000.
[Unidentified Male:] It's exhilarating. It almost makes you want to yell from the exhilaration.
[Mcdermott:] There are a handful of ultimate vacation entrepreneurs that offer such adventures, and some are already taking orders for sub-orbital voyages that they hope to make available in the next few years at a cost of about $100,000 or so. Still, others envision a day when space tourists will stay in hotels up there. It's already on the drawing boards.
[James George, Space Frontier Foundation:] And I believe that the human species must expand past the earth. It's our destiny to become a space-faring species. It's out next evolutionary step.
[Mcdermott:] Well, it's not for everyone.
[Unidentified Female:] Because I don't even go on roller coasters.
[Mcdermott:] How about you guys?
[Unidentified Male:] You'd like to go into space, wouldn't you? Hell yes, man. Yes. Be like "Star Wars," man.
[Mcdermott:] Well, maybe not, man. But it would be something; and it seems we're on our way. Anne McDermott, CNN, Los Angeles.

[Laurin Sydney, Cnn Anchor:] Hollywood is saying goodbye to a treasured filmmaker. Director Stanley Kramer died yesterday after a long bout with pneumonia. Paul Vercammen looks back at the career of the director who left a legacy of movies with a moral.
[Unidentified Male:] I don't know about you but it seems to me these two are rushing it.
[Paul Vercammen, Cnn Correspondent:] Directorproducer Stanley Kramer explored a wide range of social and moral issues in his films from interracial love in "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner"
[Stanley Kramer, Filmmaker:] I called "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" early Spike Lee.
[Vercammen:] To the Scopes Monkey Trial in "Inherit the Wind,"
[Unidentified Male:] This man wishes to be accorded the same privileges as a sponge. He wishes to think.
[Vercammen:] To the atrocities of the Holocaust in "Judgment at Nuremberg." Kramer's wife likened the filmmaker to Gary Cooper's character in Kramer's classic western "High Noon," a man of courage willing to stand up to evil while others cowered in the shadows. Kramer was nominated for an Academy Award three times as Best Director, but didn't win. And while his films never won an Oscar for Best Picture, "Ship of Fools," "High Noon," "Judgment at Nuremberg," "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner," "The Defiant Ones" and "The Caine Mutiny" were all nominated. The body of work led some to call Kramer the social conscience in Hollywood, a director who hired blacklisted writers. But the New York-born director explored life's lighter side with the 1963 comedy "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World."
[Kramer:] The comedy was a piece of arrogance on my part to do something which I wasn't supposed to be able to do.
[Vercammen:] Kramer said that critics described his comedy as
[Kramer:] Kramer trying to put a message into comedy: greed. All comedy is based on greed, in a way. It's chasing a buck, one way or another, and I go by what Spencer Tracy advised: "Take the job seriously and yourself not at all."
[Sydney:] Kramer was 87 years old.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] A Russian journalist who disappeared in Chechnya has resurfaced only to face a possible jail term. He had provided reports of Chechen rebel resistance for U.S.-funded Radio Liberty. CNN's Steve Harrigan continues the story.
[Steve Harrigan, Cnn Correspondent:] The human chess game with Andrei Babitsky entered a new phase when state television aired police video with the Russian journalist. Babitsky, who's coverage of the war in Chechnya for U.S.-funded Radio Liberty angered the Russian government, first disappeared in January after being detained by the Russian army. Feared dead by many colleagues, Babitsky resurfaced three weeks later as part of a bizarre swap with masked men government claimed were Chechen rebels. Once again, Babitsky vanished. Friday he was arrested by police in a cafe in the southern republic of Dagestan carrying a false passport.
[Andrei Babitsky, Journalist:] It's obvious my documents are false. But I was afraid to say who I was.
[Harrigan:] Who Andrei Babitsky is, is a question that divides many Russians. For some, he's a symbol of a free press persecuted by the state. But many ordinary Russians have little sympathy for a man who has been critical of a popular war.
[Unidentified Russian:] He's the one who got himself mixed up into all of this trouble.
[Harrigan:] The attacks are nothing new for Babitsky's family, who kept a vigil by the television for weeks. Now they hope to see him in person.
[Unidentified Female:] They've accused him of so many things it's hard to keep track. Let the lawyers decide. I just want to see my husband.
[Harrigan:] That may take time. Carrying a false passport in Russia can be punished by two years in jail. Steve Harrigan, CNN, Moscow.

[Peltz:] We've all heard the old adage, the best things in life are free, but who really believes that? Well, "PC World" reviewed some of the free stuff on-line and actually came up with some real deals. James got together with Kim Zetter, an associate editor with the magazine. Here are some tools for all of us free-loaders.
[Kim Zetter, "pc World":] There's tons of free stuff. Just in general, the Internet is growing daily and Web sites are constantly being launched, and, you know, a lot of sites have discovered that they are getting more visitors if they offer free stuff, so that's bringing a lot of traffic to their site.
[Hattori:] Free ISPs seem to be catching on. Companies like NetZero offer you free access in exchange for you looking at their ads.
[Zetter:] Right.
[Hattori:] And they're all pretty similar?
[Zetter:] They're similar. Freei.net was one that didn't require you to actually quick on the ads. You saw a tremendous number of ads, which were annoying, but you didn't have to actually click on them in order to stay on.
[Hattori:] There is also a lot of information that is available to be tapped for free.
[Zetter:] There are a lot of services, such as reference tools, on the Internet. Sites like Brittanica.com, which give you an entire encyclopedia on-line, as well as other content that they take from periodicals. A site that we really like is Howstuffworks, which is, basically, it solves the mysteries of the world. It covers so many things from telling you now bread rises, to how the animators on a "Star Wars" flick, for instance, make the sabers shine, to how engines work, and how a Web page operates, or how your VCR works.
[Hattori:] Some other sites that are popular and free are the game sites.
[Zetter:] Well, the Internet is always fun, and there are a lot of games and entertainment sites that are out there, a lot of major sites. For instance, ESPN offers fantasy games that are available to anyone. This is a Sandbox.com, this is a game site as well, has a lot of casino games, blackjack, poker, has arcade games, a great time- waster.
[Hattori:] There's all sorts of free services that some sites offer.
[Zetter:] Right. This is AllHealth.com. It allows you to upload your health documents so that you can access them from anywhere in the world, and it also encrypts the documents so that there sit sure as well. If you find yourself in Bora-Bora and in an emergency room, then, yes, you don't have to someone fax them or to locate your doctor, they're available for you. There are a lot of legal documents, legal advice sites. We found one that actually lets you download legal forms, so that you don't have to pay a lawyer to go get the forms. Legaldocs.com will provide you with documents on how to write a will or how to rent property. In many cases, you can just fill out the information here and it will provide you with the filled out form that you just printout or download to your computer.
[Hattori:] This is Productopia. What's free here?
[Zetter:] Productopia is advice on consumer goods. You don't know which camera to buy, which digital camera to buy. They have reviews from normal people, but they also have expert reviews, so that you can balance a recommendation from someone who actually knows something about cameras with maybe four or five other consumers who bought the camera that they liked the best.
[Hattori:] This is the total trivia search engine, Absolute trivia.
[Zetter:] Right. This is another great way to waste time. Random trivia tidbit: Hens do not have to be impregnated to lay eggs. The rooster is necessary only to fertilize the egg. Give me another one.
[Hattori:] A male emperor moth can detect and find a female of his species a mile away. And that's free.
[Zetter:] That's free, yes, you don't have to pay for it.
[Hattori:] For information on how to get more free stuff on-line log onto to idg.netfreestuff. When the dot continues: If you enjoy life in the fast lane, slowdown for the lowdown on a Web site that could keep you from getting pulled over.

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] For 15 years, Jeffrey Pierce sat in an Oklahoma prison for a rape he did not commit. His two baby boys grew up without ever knowing Pierce was their father. He refused to admit guilt, even though doing so might have led to parole early. On Monday, Pierce was finally vindicated and released from prison. A DNA analysis proved he could not have been the rapist. This raised new questions about the methods that police chemists use, whose testimony led to Pierce's conviction. Jeffrey Pierce joins us from Oklahoma City this morning. Mr. Pierce, thank you very much.
[Jeffrey Pierce:] Good morning. `
[Frazier:] You maintained your innocence all the time you were in prison. What made them finally pay attention to you?
[Pierce:] They never did pay attention to me. I was down to living with paper sack. I had no privileges or anything. Finally, the legislature in Oklahoma, last year, passed a law that opened an indigent DNA defense system. They came, looked at my case, and took it, and within a month, we were finding out that there wasn't enough evidence to be DNAed, and the test was sent out to be DNAed.
[Frazier:] DNA testing has been around a very long time in some places. I think that in some places it was used before you were even convicted. What took so long for it to be available to you?
[Pierce:] When I wept to jury trial, there was no DNA testing. About a year after I came to prison was when the first person got out on DNA testing. In 1988, I did do a DNA test, but the evidence was not enough to get a result back in 1988.
[Frazier:] What was it that this police chemist Joyce Gilchrist was analyzing, as we now know, incorrectly?
[Pierce:] Miss Gilchrist analyzed every piece of evidence that she testified to in court. Not only was the semen not mine, the FBI and other chemists in the Oklahoma City Police Department looked at my hairs microscopically, and excluded me from being the person that left the hairs at the crime scene.
[Frazier:] Do you think that other innocent people have been sent to prison by this police office?
[Pierce:] I am almost certain. Miss Gilchrist worked for the Oklahoma City Police Department for 21 years and has testified in some 3,000 cases. I don't recall one case that was ever lost that she testified in.
[Frazier:] Wow. You must be feeling a little bit like Rip Van Winkle. I know your boys have grown up in your absence. Are there other things about life that have changed dramatically during your time inside?
[Pierce:] It just seems like the world is going so fast. Cell phones and computers are everywhere you look. I'm trying to get onto that little cell phone and computer kick, and get going with everybody else.
[Frazier:] How are you handling that part?
[Pierce:] I'm about used to the cell phones. I made my first cell phone call yesterday. As for the computer, I've only been on one for about 30 minutes.
[Frazier:] We mentioned in the introduction to this interview that had you admitted guilt or said you were guilty, it might have had practical benefit to you never mind the principles of letting you get out of prison a lot sooner. Do you ever regret standing firm on your principles?
[Pierce:] No, I do not. Even as early as four months ago, they had a sex offender treatment program, and they told me to go sign up to it, or lose all privileges. I had no telephone privileges, no canteen, just a one-hour visit behind glass. I mean just no privileges no TV or radio. I said, You're going to have to go take it, because I'm not going to go out to this program, in which you have to admit guilt in order to get in.
[Frazier:] Having been through all that, and now that you're released and exonerated, do you plan to sue anybody, bring a lawsuit against Miss Gilchrist or the system?
[Pierce:] I am looking at those options.
[Frazier:] Are there any options? Would you ask for any kind of censure, short of a lawsuit, if you don't want to go down that road?
[Pierce:] I want an independent investigation of all of the Oklahoma County police, prosecutors, and chemists. I just want the truth to come out, and if there are innocent people in there, get them out of prison. They're just rotting away in there. It took my case to open people's eyes that there are innocent people in prison, and to this lock-them-up-and-throw-away-the-key-and-no-questions-asked attitude that everybody has. The prosecutors are just doing it their way, and nobody's asking questions.
[Frazier:] Final question for you, Jeffrey Pierce. You seem to be a very unembittered man. How is it you can't blame people for what happened to you?
[Pierce:] The citizens of Oklahoma County have been duped too. The jurors have been sentencing people to prison, and now they're finding out that they lied to them in there, and they thus sent somebody to prison. I've had jurors in my case say they can't believe that the police got on the stand and lied like they did.
[Frazier:] Jeffrey Pierce, now that you're a free man, we're grateful that you took time out to join us and explain what happened to you. Thank you for joining us this morning.
[Pierce:] Thank you for having me. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] We mentioned it a few moments ago, a warning for Americans traveling in the Arabian Peninsula. To the State Department now: CNN's Andrea Koppel with word on this late development here. Andrea, what more do we know?
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn Correspondent:] Bill, I just spoke with one administration official who told me that he thinks these attacks could be imminent. He says they've been building over a period of the last several days, and in his words "The window for these attacks has just opened." Now while officials don't want to tell us who they think might be involved they say they know but they don't want to compromise sources they are saying where. As you mentioned, the Arabian Peninsula. That includes counties like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, where the U.S. has a large military presence, as well as Yemen, where the USS Cole was bombed last year, killing 11 U.S. sailors. Now having said that, U.S. officials tell us that both military U.S. official targets as well as civilian targets could be at risk here. They say that for more information they should contact the U.S. embassy, and of course, be on alert and vary all travel routes.
[Hemmer:] Good news to know. Andrea Koppel at the State Department, again on this late-developing story here. Thank you.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] In Britain, people are leaving flowers and cards outside Kensington Palace to mark the fourth anniversary of the death of Princess Diana. Diana, Dodi Fayed and driver Henri Paul were killed when their limousine crashed in the Paris tunnel. An investigation showed that Paul was speeding and under the influence of alcohol and prescription drugs. A handful of people visited the tunnel today. Diana is the focus of this week's "People In The News" here on CNN. Daryn Kagan now has a preview.
[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Correspondent:] Diana is buried at the Spencer family estate in Althorpe. And it's there that people continue to make the pilgrimage to honor the late princess.
[Earl Spencer, Diana's Brother:] We find that the people who come here and they see, particularly the rooms dedicated to her charitable work, go away with a sense that this was a woman who was very glamorous. But she was also a humanitarian.
[Kagan:] In life, Diana took advantage of her celebrity status to become an activist for dozens of causes.
[Andrew Parkis, Diana, Princess Of Wales Memorial Fund:] She made even the most humble and unpopular people feel special. And that was a remarkable gift.
[Kagan:] The causes that meant the most to her: Fighting AIDS, helping children, banning land mines continue to benefit from Diana's efforts. Diana's true living legacies are her two sons, Prince William and Prince Harry.
[Spencer:] She would have carried on very much with her role as mother to those two boys. That was probably the most important thing to her.
[Kagan:] An exclusive interview with Diana's brother, Lord Charles Spencer, and the seldom seen video of Diana as a child, in a show that looks back at the princess' life and examines her legacies. Tune in this Sunday night at 8:30 eastern on CNN's "People In The News."

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] Conditions in the Midwest this week have been downright dangerous because of intense summer heat there and some unusually high humidity. The heat is being blamed for four deaths just yesterday in Chicago. And Minnesota Viking Korey Stringer also died of heat stroke complications yesterday in Minnesota. People in the Midwest, Plain States and the South are being warned of the dangers of overheating. And Jill Brown has been watching all of this. She joins us right now here on the set to talk about it. Jill, I know it's kind of a cliche, it's not the heat, it's the humidity, but it really is.
[Jill Brown, Cnn Weather:] It's true. It is true. The temperature we haven't really seen a lot of record highs but we've had these heat advisories, excessive heat warnings for weeks now. And it really at his point, there's no end in sight. Some places will get a little bit of relief, but in general, another dangerous day out there it looks like. We have a Web site, actually, that'll show you some of the information about the heat and some safety advice for you. There's a little spot on here where you can click on symptoms and this will show you some of the things that we've been hearing about. With Korey Stringer, we heard that he was vomiting at practice and that's one of the symptoms of heat exhaustion. That's sort of your last point to rescue yourself. That's when you really need to catch it or well before that, of course. And heat stroke is sort of the last point and that's where you'd usually find death and that's what we've seen several reports of just this week alone and we hope that we won't see more. But the heat will continue. Take a look at what's been going on. Temperatures this morning are into the 80s already. I tell you, when you see temperatures in the morning in the 80s, with these kind of dew points into the 70s, it already feels like it's in the upper 80s. By this afternoon, we'll see the heat index go as high as 110, maybe even a little bit higher than that in some locations. You can see St. Louis and Kansas City both have an excessive heat warning. That means that the heat index could get as high as 110 to 115. But all of these areas, take it easy today. A little time in the air conditioning, especially if you've had several days of heat, that will bring your body a lot of relief. So if you don't have air conditioning, time to head to the library, to the mall. Linda, this isn't the only spot, actually. By the way, in the Plains we have the real terrible heat, but in the northeast, a lot of the major cities will go into the 90s and that's one place a lot of people don't have air conditioning.
[Stouffer:] Especially kids and elderly people,...
[Brown:] Right.
[Stouffer:] ... that could be very dangerous for them.
[Brown:] Exactly. And, you know, when you think about a professional athlete doesn't realize his limits, how can you expect children or other people to realize when they've had...
[Stouffer:] Right.
[Brown:] ... too much heat. I think it's just going to take you over very quickly.
[Stouffer:] Right. Long hot summer, we hope it gets cooler soon. Thank you, Jill.
[Brown:] You know, September is not far away, I hope.
[Stouffer:] OK. All right. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] As you can see in these live pictures from the U.S. House of Representatives, members of Congress debating at this hour whether China should be granted permanent normal trade relations with the United States. This could add up to billions of dollars for U.S. businesses. Clouding the passage of the measure: China's human rights record. A vote in the House of Representatives, which we're seeing right now, that vote expected tomorrow, Wednesday. More now on this from CNN state department correspondent Andrea Koppel.
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn State Dept. Correspondent:] In the midst of the usual faceoff with labor and human rights activists on one side and the pro-China business lobby on the other, an unlikely alliance between Beijing and Washington. Both on the same side, pushing Congress to support permanent normal trade relations for China. President Clinton calls it a matter of national security.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] I believe that a no vote invites a future of dangerous confrontation and constant insecurity.
[Koppel:] And Mr. Clinton's advisers warn, without PNTR, Beijing will conclude the United States wants to prevent China from becoming an Asian economic power.
[Jim Steinberg, U.s. Dep. Natl. Security Adviser:] They will see it not as an economically motivated decision, but rather one that's designed to weaken China.
[Koppel:] The administration says other potential fallout includes trouble for China's reformers eager to embrace the West, increased friction and resentment of the United States and a higher trade deficit. Last year's was already the highest ever.
[Rep. Nancy Pelosi , California:] As we get this challenge to our conscience, the question is, what will prevail, our conscience or our cash registers?
[Koppel:] In its most recent human rights report, the U.S. State Department put Beijing on notice, harshly criticizing China for its deteriorating record on human rights. [voice-over]: Citing the Chinese government's campaign against followers of the Falun Gong meditation group, a group the government labeled a cult, making it illegal to join. Most Falun Gong organizers have been thrown in jail. [on camera]: Still U.S. officials insist denying PNTR won't encourage China's leaders to ease up, but they believe greater exposure to Western values could. Andrea Koppel, CNN, the State Department.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] The European Union and China have failed to come to an agreement regarding China's entry into the World Trade Organization. For a closer look now at why the talks broke down and the prospects for future deal, we go to Hugh Carnegy, world news editor of the "Financial Times" in London. Thanks for joining us, Hugh. What do you think of the situation?
[Hugh Carnegy, World News Editor, "financial Times":] It's a pleasure. Well it's interesting isn't it? Pascal Lamy, the EU trade commissioner, is flying back to Brussels without a deal. He says he needs more time to consult with his commissioners and with, presumably, the EU governments about a deal. And so, for the time being, there is a bit of a holdup on China's road back into the WTO on the European side, as well as, of course, the continuing debate there is in the Congress on your side of the pond.
[Haffenreffer:] Is there any indication as to what issues were at the center of the breakdown?
[Carnegy:] Yes. We understand that it's over EU demands that majority-control should be allowed for joint ventures for foreign companies investing into, for example, telecoms and insurance and other areas in China, which the Chinese are very sensitive about. The other area is duty levied on imports of motor vehicles. And the interesting thing here is that the Europeans seem to be pushing for more than the Americans settled for, and the Chinese are very reluctant to go down that route. The Americans settled for a transitional period in which duty on motor vehicles imported into China would go down 25 percent over time. It looks like the Europeans are pushing for a greater concession than that. Of course, levels at the moment of duties are over the 80-percent mark, and the Chinese are digging their heels in on this, so we have a bit of an impasse, at least for the time being.
[Haffenreffer:] Well, that impasse, can it get last forever? Or obviously, China wants in. Are they likely to be the first ones to bend?
[Carnegy:] Good question. The Europeans are signaling on their side that this is not a complete breakdown in the talks, it's more like a pause. There had been a lot of optimism earlier in the week, which has led people to take this fairly hard, this breakdown now. But the signals on both sides are that they do want a deal. I think that what was interesting at the end of the round of talks that got the breakthrough agreement with America with the U.S. side in November, was that the Chinese Prime Minister Zhu Rongji got involved, and then the final deals were hammered out. And it could be that this has to step up a level on the Chinese side, too, to get the final deal hammered.
[Haffenreffer:] OK, thanks for your insights. Hugh Carnegy from the "Financial Times" on this Friday morning. Have a good weekend. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Attorneys for Elian Gonzalez's Miami family face a noon deadline today to respond to a government ultimatum. The Justice Department told them to speed up the appeals process or the boy's temporary parole status will be revoked. CNN's Susan Candiotti has more in this report.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] By noon today attorneys for Elian Gonzalez's Florida relatives are supposed to decide: accept a speedy appeals process or the 6-year-old's temporary parole status will be revoked Thursday, making his presence here illegal.
[Linda Osberg-braun, Gonzalez Family Attorney:] The Department of Justice has been criticized for not acting quickly at the very beginning of this case. And I think that they're making up for it now. And I don't think that's fair.
[Candiotti:] U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno said she is not willing to wait for an open ended appeals process, quote, "that could prolong the separation of this child from his father." This morning, the boy is scheduled to appear in his first taped television interview. A spokesman for his Florida relatives say their desperate to have him say for himself he doesn't want to go back to Cuba.
[Osberg-braun:] This is the ultimate attempt to get the Department of Justice to get Janet Reno to consider Elian's voice. Elian's political asylum case needs to be heard.
[Candiotti:] Reverend Joan Brown-Campbell, who escorted boy's grandmothers on their U.S. visit and favors returning Elian to his father, says no one should be surprised that the boy claims that he does not want to go back to Cuba.
[Rev. Joan Brown-campbell, Council Of Churches:] When he left Cuba, he left in a boat, and his mother died in that boat. And so his thoughts about Cuba, going back or coming from Cuba are no doubt affected by that experience.
[Candiotti:] Over the weekend, perhaps the strangest twist of all: On a bank's window a few blocks from the boy's home, an image some claim is the Virgin Mary, proof, some say, the boy is blessed and should not go back to his father. Reporting to you live now from outside the home where Elian Gonzalez has been living for the past four months, we can tell you that at this hour attorneys are still working on their response to the Justice Department. These attorneys say they agree in principle with a speedy appeals process and could even go along with the dates set out in the government's ultimatum. However, these lawyers are still hedging on what they will say by the noon deadline, and they are planning a news conference to announce their intentions. Finally, if the family loses all of its appeals, will they turn the boy over? Well, the attorneys say they will do what is required by law. Susan Candiotti, CNN, reporting live in Miami. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] In Connecticut today, Ethel Kennedy's nephew, Michael Skakel, will be arraigned for the murder of a young neighbor 25 years ago. Skakel will be arraigned as a juvenile, since both he and the victim were 15 years old at the time. CNN's Deborah Feyerick joins us from Stamford with more Deborah.
[Deborah Feyerick, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Jeanne, Michael Skakel will be here today. His lawyer says he plans to enter a plea of not guilty. This arraignment will started at about 2:00. It is expected to be quick. Skakel will be advised of his rights, and then a date will be set for a reasonable cause hearing. Now this is almost like a mini-trial, in which prosecutors will lay out their case and try to convince a judge to move this murder trial from juvenile court to superior court. Michael Skakel was just 15 years old when he allegedly beat his next-door neighborhood Martha Moxley to death with a golf club. The reported motive? He was jealous over her with flirtation with his brother Thomas. Now, during discovery, Skakel's lawyer reviewed much of the evidence gathered by prosecutors, he calls their case weak.
[Mickey Sherman, Skakel's Attorney:] To my knowledge, there is no physical evidence, there is no DNA evidence, there is no scientific evidence or anything that links Michael Skakel to this crime.
[Feyerick:] Prosecutors have said they wouldn't have brought this case if they didn't think they could win. Meanwhile, Mrs. Moxley tells CNN that she will be here today in court with here son John. He is her one surviving child. Mrs. Moxley tells CNN, she wants to be here to see what Michael Skakel looks like after all this time. Reporting live, Deborah Feyerick, CNN, Stamford, Connecticut.

[Greta Van Susteren, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Let me interrupt for a second. We're going to go to a genome event here in Washington. Let's listen.
[Craig Venter, Celera Genomics:] And as I said earlier, I'm delighted that Francis Collins made such a tremendous effort to help build good cooperation in this community. And I thank in particular Ari Patrinos, who was sort of the master of ceremonies for getting us together, leading to this cooperation. So today, Celera is announcing that it has sequenced 99 percent of the human genome. We have 3.12 billion letters of genetic code that have been assembled using our unique algorithms developed by the scientific team here. I'll be making various introductions later on, but this is a historic moment, I think, for private industry, that the risk of capital at a time when the strategy we had was deemed to be too risky for other types of funding. I want to introduce to you, particularly acknowledge Tony White, who's the chairman and CEO of PE Corporation. Tony, if you'd stand up. If Tony White had not been willing along with Mike Hunkapiller of PE Biosystems to take a risk of investment to form Celera I certainly would not be standing here today. And the tremendous equipment that Mike Hunkapiller's team produced are clearly responsible for both teams being at the point they are today. And so this is clearly a triumph for both public funding and private funding that had both had not happened the human genome would still be a very long way off. We described in our press release and I'll be talking about it more in a few minutes about some new cloning methods that our team developed to get to this point even faster, and they're exciting developments in science. We'd like to say that we have members of the pharmaceutical and biotech industry here that are using...
[Francis Collins, National Institutes Of Health:] Well, I'd like to add my welcome also to all of you who are here at this historic press conference and particularly to express my gratitude to Ari Patrinos for the important role he's played in helping to organize this coordinated announcement today and also serving as our emcee. I don't think we should go any further today without reintroducing at least one person who's in the room whose contribution to the very idea of the genome project made it happen back there some years ago and who continues to play an enormously important role in urging this effort forward with all due speed. So can I ask Jim Watson to maybe stand up and be recognized?
[Van Susteren:] We've been listening to the participants of the Human Genome Project. Earlier today, it was announced about 99 percent of the human blueprint has now been mapped and that there's much more work to be done, but a very exciting day today in genetics.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Israelis and Palestinians met at Camp David for 15 days over the last two weeks, trying to work out a peace agreement. They went home empty-handed. So what happens now? Let's bring in Mike Hanna, our Jerusalem bureau chief, with the latest Mike.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Jerusalem Bureau Chief:] Well, Daryn, the prime minister, Ehud Barak, has just returned back from the United States to be greeted at Tel Aviv's Ben-Gurion Airport by a crowd of supporters, by a crowd of comrades, old war generals that he used to fight with, and by his acting prime minister, his foreign minister, who refused to accompany him to Camp David. A sign of what's going to await Mr. Barak, there are those who will support him and there are those who are opposed to him. And he is going to have to resolve these two contradictory things in the days ahead. Shortly after his arrival, he made a speech in which, once again, he said that the success did not happen, the talks failed because of what he said was the refusal of his Palestinian partners to make the vital concessions necessary. He said he could not compromise on three issues: the security of Israel, the sanctities of Israel, and what he called the unity of the people. But, Mr. Barak said, the hope of peace has not yet been extinguished Daryn.
[Kagan:] Mike, we just heard in the last hour here on MORNING NEWS, Sandy Berger said and President Clinton said yesterday that they felt Mr. Barak was willing to make more concessions than Mr. Arafat, and yet he comes home empty-handed. How is that going to hurt him politically now that he is home. Does that make him even weaker than before he left?
[Hanna:] It is going to create major problems for Mr. Barak from the parliament, or Knesset here, in which his government did not have a majority when he left. It's going hurt him politically from those on the right who were opposed to the Camp David peace process. Mr. Clinton did say that Mr. Barak had been prepared to move further in concessions than Mr. Arafat. And while President Clinton was praising Mr. Barak at this particular time, it will be interpreted by some in Israel that exactly what was happening was what they feared; that Mr. Barak was going to make concessions that they would regard as unacceptable. So this will be used as a tool against Mr. Barak. It will be used in the days ahead by those opposed to him. But, at the same time, those who support the peace process, and in particular the process that has been under way for the past few weeks, they will take encouragement from the fact that Mr. Barak, according to President Clinton, did show some flexibility, did produce at the talks a degree of willingness to make concessions that perhaps was absent in his public pronouncements before he went to the United States. The key for Mr. Barak is to prove to the Palestinians, to the Israeli people, and indeed to his divided parliament that he has got what it takes to push through a comprehensive peace settlement and he has to prove to the Palestinians too that he has a mandate to continue the negotiations if that is what is going to happen, Daryn.
[Kagan:] Mike Hanna, in Jerusalem, thank you very much. With more on this, here's Bill.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] All right, Daryn, certainly the White House had a major role in those peace talks. Let's check in there now with our senior White House correspondent. John King with more. Hey, John.
[John King, Cnn Sr. White House Correspondent:] Hello, Bill. A sense of disappointment, but also some hope here at the White House. This, a time of reflection, according to the president and senior White House officials. They are watching closely the situation Mike Hanna just outlined. What can Prime Minister Ehud Barak do now with his domestic political situation, as he returns from the talks? They are also watching to get a sense of how the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, is greeted, not only back in Gaza, but by other Arab leaders, looking to see if, in the weeks ahead, he will show more flexibility on the issue of Jerusalem. As to what the president and the United States does next, everyone here says they need to wait and see first. There is some talk from the Israelis that a senior U.S. official will visit the region as quickly as perhaps two weeks from now. White House officials say that probably will happen, but it depends on a positive tone and developments in the region, especially they say again more evidence that the Palestinians are willing to be more flexible. The view here is that if they begin these talks again soon, and if they pick up where they left off at Camp David, that they could indeed reach an agreement by September 13th. White House officials saying, obviously, still a big sticking point over Jerusalem. But that major progress was made on all the other major core issues in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. The fear, however, is that now that the secret negotiations are over, now that the public positioning and posturing has begun, that there will be some finger-pointing and that Mr. Barak's domestic political situation, and perhaps Mr. Arafat's domestic political situation as well, could cause some back sliding Bill.
[Hemmer:] John, you've been in touch with a lot of folks over the past 15 days in these peace negotiations there. When we hear that phrase again, historic progress was made, is it your sense that it was truly legitimate progress, or is that a bit of a selling point at this point?
[King:] We are told genuinely by senior administration officials that on the issues of the borders of a Palestinian state, on the issue of Israel being able to keep eight percent or so of the West Bank, the most heavily-settled Jewish settlements, that major progress was made there. The sticking point, again, was Jerusalem. One senior official in the room for most of the talks describing this as a cave that no one had gone into for decade, talking about sharing power in Jerusalem. He said both sides, for the first time now, have gone into that cave. They quickly retreated out. The officials saying that it is pretty dark in there. The question now is whether they will be bold enough to go back in Bill.
[Hemmer:] We'll see if some light is shed as well. John King at the White House. Thanks, John.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] All right, now back to the big story here on the anthrax here. You can't pick up a newspaper or turn a television on, a radio anywhere without hearing about it and about the panic that is starting to spread in certain areas. But we wonder about the rest of the world we know how things are here. We're joined this morning by Iain Simpson. He is with the World Health Organization and that's an organization that basically has been spending a lot of time talking to governments around the world about health issues, and we want to talk this morning Mr. Simpson, first of all, thank you for joining us today. What is has the WHO...
[Iain Simpson, World Health Organization:] Thank you.
[Harris:] ... been speaking very often lately now with other countries? Have they been coming to you for advice about how to deal with anthrax or any other communicable disease right now in the wake of this terror war?
[Simpson:] They've been coming to us for advice really since September 11th, because I think at that point governments realized that really all bets were off, and that anything that they'd previously dismissed is unlikely or even impossible should now happen. They've been coming to us asking for advice, asking what they should do. We've provided a great deal of information directly to governments and also by our various web sites so that people the general public can assess that information too and see that there is a network there. There is a surveillance system there, and there is a system for responding to any infectious disease whether it started deliberately or occurring naturally.
[Harris:] Now are these governments coming to the WHO and asking for advice because there's already concern or panic within their populations or are they doing it to head it off?
[Simpson:] Well I think a bit of both, and one of the messages we're trying to get out is that one of the ways to prevent panic is for governments and individual health authorities to put out information, as is being done very widely in the U.S. A lot of governments are anxious that if they start talking to their populations about anthrax people will think well maybe it's happening already. But we think that the important thing is for governments to tell people that there are these systems in place, that it is possible to treat the disease and that people shouldn't worry they shouldn't panic, but they should rely on a well-equipped, well- trained public health system and that, as I say, they shouldn't worry. They shouldn't panic, and they certainly should not go out and buy their own drug supplies. They should rely on drugs supplied by doctors or hospitals.
[Harris:] Have you been seeing much of that? We've been talking about that quite a bit here in the states, about people stockpiling Cipro and other drugs. Has that been happening in Europe?
[Simpson:] It is happening a little. There are various reports, various rumors. I think the United States is ahead in the sense that people are starting to go out and buy their own drugs. We're trying very hard to discourage people from doing this. If you're sick, you really need to go to a doctor or a hospital. You should not be self-medicating with antibiotics. They're powerful drugs, but they're targeted against particular bacteria, particular germs, particular diseases. If you misuse them, then they might not work. They could even do your harm and more importantly, they can be lost to the future, because drug resistance grows very quickly if the disease has become resistance to a powerful antibiotic. It means we can't use those to treat it in the future. People should really rely on the health service and on their doctors.
[Harris:] You've just proven that an ounce of information can prove can cure a pound of panic. Iain Simpson, thank you very much. We certainly appreciate your time this morning. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] All right, here's a question for mothers. Have you ever been angry at your children? Well, I think we know that answer. But how angry have you been, and what did you do about it? Well, our next guest has a book dealing with this subject. It's appropriately titled, "She's Gonna Blow: Real Help for Moms Dealing with Anger." And we want to welcome Julie Ann Barnhill. She's been a public school teacher, a stay-at-home mom, a lecturer on anger management for mothers, and we're going to talk about this book.
[Julie Ann Barnhill, Author, "she's Gonna Blow":] Yeah.
[Phillips:] I love the title, "She's Gonna Blow."
[Barnhill:] Thanks, thanks.
[Phillips:] We can all relate to that, right?
[Barnhill:] I definitely think so.
[Phillips:] Now what happened in your life or among your friends that triggered this book? I mean, were you on the verge of therapy?
[Barnhill:] Well, actually, yes. I was an only child growing up so everything was cool and then I had kids, and all of a sudden I found myself saying things and thinking things and doing things and things driving me crazy that I never, ever read about in a book. I know that I spent like $700 on books and I never mention that kids can shut down their systems and decide to boycott going to the bathroom and such things like that. So, just things like that just drove me nuts.
[Phillips:] Well, let's talk about it. You use the metaphor of a volcano in your book, OK? So maybe we should begin with, how do you divert this anger as a mom before the eruption?
[Barnhill:] Right, well, I think one of the most important things is to lighten up. You know, I think we take ourselves so seriously. And my generation especially we've just read so many books about how to have it all together. And, you know, sometimes my daughter poked my rear end in a bank lobby with hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people around.
[Phillips:] I probably did that to my mom a time or two.
[Barnhill:] And, you know, "Big bottom, big bottom." And then she changed it to, "Big butt, mom, big butt." And that's just so precious. And, you know, you laugh or die, right? So I think so many times you can just lighten up and not take things quite so seriously. And then you have serious things in your life with your kids that I think sometimes you just have to choose laughter. You just have to choose to find something somewhere in there.
[Phillips:] Why do we get so angry? I mean, these are our children, we love them, they're a part of us yet, I mean, that anger just builds up and you wonder how we get to this point?
[Barnhill:] Exactly. Well, this is really profound.
[Phillips:] OK.
[Barnhill:] I'm an expert. Anger just is. It just is an emotion like everything else, and then these kids come along and I have found, you know what? They're so much like me. That's kind of ugly to see when that kid that's just driving you nuts, pushing every button all of a sudden it's like, wait a minute, he wants to control the world. Well, so do I. You know, he wants to be in charge of everything. Well, so do I. And you see yourself a lot of times. So, sometimes you just have to step back and think you have to actually use your brain.
[Phillips:] Do you have some strategies?
[Barnhill:] Yes, I do.
[Phillips:] All right, give me some strategies right now.
[Barnhill:] Simple things.
[Phillips:] OK.
[Barnhill:] Wear house slippers so you don't get Cheerios stuck between your toes.
[Phillips:] That's the worst.
[Barnhill:] That's so irritating.
[Phillips:] Or Fruit Loops.
[Barnhill:] Or Fruit Loops. Depending on no healthy cereals around with sugar on them. And think before you think, just think about what's going on. Plan ahead. Know your child. That's one of the biggest things, is temperament. Know your child's temperament. And if they need a nap, don't take them to Sears and go walking around and then get irritated because they do what kids do. Know kids in their developmental stages, know what to expect, what not to expect. And then, just lighten up and don't worry about how they act in public 100 percent of the time. That's what always gets the biggest response when I speak. You just hear this audible, "Uhhh!" Because you know, moms are like, "Don't act like that. I can't believe you did that!" Because it's a reflection on me, you know? So you just have to lighten up.
[Phillips:] Now, on this Sunday we of course have to touch on you add some biblical foundations for this change.
[Barnhill:] Right.
[Phillips:] How do you incorporate that?
[Barnhill:] Well, I for me, it was I needed a heart change, because I just my kids I loved my kids, but they were just kind of burdens instead of blessings. So I just I believe in speaking truth, even if you don't necessarily believe it at that moment. And one of the things I encourage moms to say is just, "Children are blessings, children are blessings," because that is scriptural, OK? We may not always believe it. So when you're in the middle of the grocery store and they're just wigging out on you "Children are blessings, children are blessings,"
[Phillips:] What about when they're smoking and they're drinking and they're rebelling at 16?
[Barnhill:] Well, I think that's definitely a biblical concept that you just you just can't control that. I mean, isn't that so much of what it is wanting to control and know what's best for them, but they just don't understand that? So to know that God is watching over them, that he is taking care of it. And he loves us as mothers, he really does. He didn't give them to us just to irritate us and make us crazy, really.
[Phillips:] One thing, one small thing before we let you go quickly. If you want anyone to remember from your book, it would be?
[Barnhill:] Just let it go. That's what I say to so many moms and dads. Let go. Choose what's best, let go of the rest. You know, concentrate on those kids and if there are things that are just causing it, let it go just let it go and laugh and laugh.
[Phillips:] Yeah, we do try to find humor in everything, don't we?
[Barnhill:] Yes.
[Phillips:] "She's Gonna Blow: Real Help for Moms Dealing with Anger." Julie Ann Barnhill, thank you so much.
[Barnhill:] Thanks so much for having me.
[Phillips:] All right. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Hopkins:] On September 11, terrorists launched an attack that struck at the very heart of capitalism, Wall Street. Many companies lost their offices. Some sought new homes in nearby states. But others, including some major players, planned to stick it out. Kitty Pilgrim looks at these companies that are refusing to leave their homes on Wall Street.
[Kitty Pilgrim, Cnn Correspondent:] Manhattan versus New Jersey, Connecticut and the suburbs. It's an old rivalry. On the streets of New York, bad drivers are called New Jersey drivers. People from the areas outside of Manhattan and the suburbs of New Jersey are called the bridge and tunnel crowd. But after September 11, the New York-New Jersey rivalry turned serious. To stay or not to stay. New Jersey has offered tax breaks to entice businesses to move permanently. A handful of companies have applied, although few have definitely committed. American Express has relocated more than 2,000 employees to New Jersey and 500 more to Connecticut. However, the company says they are committed to staying in New York, but has yet to determine a location. Real estate analysts say Manhattan's financial district will be rebuilt for practical reasons.
[John Utt, Salomon Smith Barney:] There's a brain trust market. You know if you go to New Jersey, you lose all the people from Long Island and West Chester, likewise if you go to any other markets. This market is very central for people in the financial industry and I think it will always be.
[Pilgrim:] Some companies have stayed in Manhattan. Merrill Lynch has moved employees to mid-town from downtown Manhattan and the company has begun to move more than half their 9,000 employee back into the World Financial Center.
[Vale Roeding, Office Builders Magazine:] It's a place where you can easily have eight or nine meetings in a day and move from one meeting to the next face-to-face and do business and that's very important for many businesses.
[Pilgrim:] Lehman Brothers is committed to Manhattan, setting up its new world headquarters here in mid-town Manhattan and another office on Park Avenue. The rebuilding of lower Manhattan may take years. The transportation systems are still very damaged. There are millions of square feet of empty office space which won't be rented anytime soon. But most analysts say with economic recovery, boom times will come back to the financial district Jan.
[Hopkins:] It's hard to get to those meetings on Wall Street these days.
[Pilgrim:] Well these days the transportation system is still not functioning.
[Hopkins:] Thanks, Kitty Pilgrim. The number of dead or missing from the September 11 attacks appears to be a lot less than earlier thought. Original estimates at one point totaled more than 6,000. Now New York City puts that number closer to 3,700. Peter Viles has the story.
[Peter Viles, Cnn Correspondent:] How many really died at ground zero. Two months ago, city officials were saying at least 5,000 or 6,000 and many feared the final number would be much higher. This was the Mayor of New York back on September 17.
[Rudolph Giuliani, New York City Mayor:] The total that we now have that we have recorded 5,422 missing people. We have 201 confirmed dead. We've identified 135 and we have 66 that have not yet been identified.
[Viles:] But as the weeks have passed, that official estimate of the dead and missing has steadily dropped with each daily update from City Hall. This week it fell below 4,000. Today it fell below 3,700. City officials now say their original list was full of mistakes and duplications. Among the more common employers that reported employees missing when, in fact, they were on vacation or not at work that day. Other nations that similarly made high initial estimates of the missing from their countries and duplicate missing persons reports.
[Giuliani:] Ninety percent of it is attributable to foreign nationals that were reported as missing, sometimes several times with slightly different names. They turned out to not have been at the World Trade Center. Maybe it's not 90 percent. Maybe that makes up 70 to 80 percent of it. Another 10 to 20 percent is just duplication.
[Viles:] It is not entirely clear why the process of verifying the list is taking so long. The city has never released the list to the news media, citing confidentiality concerns, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which provides disaster relief, says Washington is relying entirely on the city to tally the dead.
[Hopkins:] Peter, we should point out that fewer victims though are a good thing.
[Viles:] Right.
[Hopkins:] It means that a lot of people survived.
[Viles:] Right, there's this undeniably terrific news. It doesn't really help comfort those who have lost somebody or know somebody who's lost, but this is great news. We thought as many as 6,000 or 7,000 people are dead. Now we know the number's roughly half that and still falling.
[Hopkins:] Yes. Thank you, Peter Viles. And coming up on MONEYLINE, the Taliban agrees to surrender Kunduz but vows to fight to the death in Kandahar. We'll have the latest war developments. We'll also report on holiday travelers and whether the September 11 attacks are keeping more people at home. And we'll tell you how one rental car company is thriving while many of its rivals are stuck in reverse.

[Jeff Greenfield:] Should the White House release the bin Laden tape? And what anti-terror targets are up next outside Afghanistan? We'll ask Senate Intelligence Chairman Bob Graham, and we'll also talk about fairness in America. Tonight on GREENFIELD AT LARGE. A little later in this program, we'll get to that question of fairness. Are some Americans more equal than others? But first, we're going to talk about the war effort, both here and overseas. Intelligence has been a key element in figuring out, not just who America is fighting, but where and how. So earlier, I sat down with the chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Senator Bob Graham, Democrat of Florida.
[Greenfield:] Senator, first of all, this Bin Laden tape of what you're heard so much, why is it important, if it is, that this tape be released, seen and heard by the American public by the world?
[Sen. Bob Graham , Select Intelligence Chmn:] Jeff, I think it's important that we treat the American people as adults, And as adults, the American public has, not only the right to hear this information, but the ability to discriminate. There's been some concern that this might have been, in part, used for propaganda purposes, even for sending some secret signals. I tend to doubt the latter, given the events of the past 30 days. But as to the former, the American people can tell the difference between propaganda and what is hard news.
[Greenfield:] In terms of going after the al Qaeda network, now that Afghanistan seems no longer to be a staging area for them, from your point of view, what's the most important target militarily, financial, geographic or otherwise? What do they have to do next?
[Graham:] Well, I think the most important target is not in Afghanistan. I think the most important target is that we keep our focus on Afghanistan as just a beginning chapter in a much longer book. And the target is to see that we conduct the final phases of this operation in Afghanistan to keep the coalition together, so that when we start taking on the much tougher, harder targets in places like the suburbs of some of the largest cities in the Middle East, where the next group of global terrorists are going to be located, that we've got the sort of support that we've had in Afghanistan.
[Greenfield:] Expand on that, if you will. The suburbs of these cities in the Middle East, what do you have in mind specifically?
[Graham:] When you look at the next group of global terrorists, many of them are located in large cities in the Middle East. And if we are going to be true to our commitment that we will be eliminating global terrorism, not just bin Laden, that means that the next phase of this is likely to be a close encounter. It won't be using our aerial superiority. You can't carpet bomb a civilian neighborhood. We're going to have to send people in small groups, covert operations, heavy emphasis on political and economic, as well as military activities.
[Greenfield:] But are you thinking of a places like the Makav Valley in Lebanon, like places in Syria, in Sudan, maybe even Iraq? Is this where you're saying we're going to be finding American forces of one kind or another next?
[Graham:] In some form of activity, that's the places that global terrorists, after bin Laden are located. And that's where we're going to have to be, if we're going to accomplish the objective of their elimination.
[Greenfield:] And are our friends and I'll put that in quotes in the Middle East, those who say they're our allies, going to be with us if we say that's what the United States has to do next?
[Graham:] That's why it's important that we conduct this campaign in Afghanistan in such a way that when it's over, and we turn to the next chapter, that we still have a functioning coalition, including and particularly, the Muslim state leadership.
[Greenfield:] I want to pursue this one more, because I think this is really interesting. In terms of our more staunch allies in Western Europe, is it your sense that they will stand with the United States, should the U.S.A. Afghanistan was the beginning. Now we've got to be on the ground elsewhere?
[Graham:] They're not immune from this concern about how we conduct the war in Afghanistan and the immediate post-Afghanistan, in order to keep the coalition together. As an example, there are some who are urging that we move immediately to Iraq as our next target. Unless there is a rationale for moving immediately to Iraq, I think that has the potential of destabilizing the coalition. In my own judgment, the next targets ought to be any other global terrorist group which was identified as being part of the conspiracy that led to September the 11th. One of the first things the CIA said, unclassified, after the horrific events of just three months ago, was that bin Laden was the principle culprit, but that there was evidence that he did not act alone. If we find that there were, in fact, other global terrorists groups that were collaborating with bin Laden, they should be our next targets.
[Greenfield:] Let's turn to the whole issue of gathering intelligence. In the first days after September 11, you were one of those who was saying that in the past here in America, bureaucratic turf wars between agencies, between levels of government were a real hindrance to the free flow of information. Has that gotten better?
[Graham:] It wasn't just bureaucratic barriers, it was also legal barriers. For instance, if a law enforcement agency had a wiretap for a criminal purpose, and they overheard information that would indicate an impending attack by a foreign terrorist, they were legally prohibited from sharing that information with our intelligence agencies. Since the President signed the anti-terrorism act at the end of October, they will now be legally obligated to provide that information as expeditiously as possible to appropriate intelligence agencies.
[Greenfield:] And in terms of the other area, which we've heard so much about, the just kind of institutional reluctance to share information, have the different agencies has the FBI said, "OK, local police departments, INS, CIA, we're all in this together?
[Graham:] I had a meeting recently with the director of the FBI, Mr. Mueller and said, "What are you planning to do to implement this new requirement that you provide information to your intelligence agency brethren, and be more cooperative with state and local government?" He said, "I'm fully committed to that as is this agency." He says one of the problems is we don't talk to ourselves inside the FBI very well, because we have intelligence technology and communications technology that is so out of date, that we can't do it very well. In the legislation that the Senate passed last Friday, we provided some $250 or $300 million for the FBI, for the specific purpose of upgrading its technology so that it will be able to communicate within itself and among the intelligence and other law enforcement agency that need to be on the same page.
[Greenfield:] Now let's look, if we may, about intelligence gathering beyond our borders. In terms of what happened before September 11, the reluctance of other countries to share, sometimes the outright refusal, has that gotten better?
[Graham:] Yes. And this has been particularly true of some of the countries with which we'd marginal relations. Maybe the best example are the Russians. And the Russians have a real national interest in what's happening in Afghanistan. Not only do they occupy and then were forced to leave Afghanistan, largely because of assistance from the United States, but they also see Afghanistan as the principle source of heroine, which has become a very serious problem in the former Soviet Union. They see Afghanistan and the Taliban as embarked on a program to try to destabilize the states that used to be the southern boundary of the Soviet Union by inserting an extreme form of Islam.
[Greenfield:] Places like Uzbekistan.
[Graham:] Uzbekistan and Turkministan. So they have an interest beyond just being nice to the United States, to want to see the Taliban folded.
[Greenfield:] Specifically in one area, we've been hearing these rather disturbing stories about Pakistani nuclear scientists who may have been ideological friends of the Taliban. They may have actually been meeting with them. And there seems to be some story that the Pakistanis are reluctant to share that information with us because they're worried it's going to reveal their nuclear secrets. So seems to be a kind of classic example of intelligence information that's blocked for one reason or another. Does that concern you? And if so, what do we do about it?
[Graham:] Well, it does concern me, but we're going in the right direction. The Pakistani Intelligence Service, during the 10 years when the United States had essentially washed its hands of both Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Pakistanis got to be quite close with the Taliban Intelligence Service. And when we started this war against terrorism, we're not a reliable ally in terms of sharing intelligence. One of the things for which I give great credit to President Musharraf, is he's moved in, eliminated leadership of his own intelligence service that he did not feel were reliable. He's starting to purge the middle and lower ranks of the Pakistani Intelligence Service. And I think a big part of the fact that the Taliban folded as quickly as it did was when the Pakistanis withdrew their military and intelligence support.
[Greenfield:] Senator Graham, thank you very much for joining us. Appreciate it.
[Graham:] Thanks, Jeff.
[Greenfield:] Welcome to New York.
[Graham:] Thank you.
[Greenfield:] When we come back, while the nation fights recession, are the rich fighting along, or fighting for themselves?

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] Gas prices are heading up. Brooks Jackson has more now for you on just where gas prices are heading.
[Brooks Jackson, Cnn Correspondent:] Here we go again: gasoline prices rising faster than the temperature. Regular gasoline averaged $1.40 barely a month ago, but it shot up so fast it's already exceeded Energy Department predictions for summer, getting an average of $1.62 last week, and well over $2 in some areas. The problem isn't the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. Crude oil prices have eased. U.S. crude inventories the amount on hand are higher than last year. The problem is at the refineries, operating at lower levels than they were last year, sending gasoline inventories down 7 percent below a year ago, the lowest since 1994, with driving season still to come.
[Robert Sinclair, American Automobile Association:] There hasn't been a new refinery built in the United States since the late '70s, and in fact, we're down 25 percent since then in refinery capacity.
[Jackson:] Is it a conspiracy? Last year, when prices briefly spiked to more than $2 per gallon in some parts of the Midwest, politicians called for an investigation. But after nine months, the Federal Trade Commission found "no credible evidence of collusion. Nothing illegal. A combination of many factors was likely responsible for the price spike." And so it is again. Clean air regulations are one factor. The price of gasoline required in smoggy areas currently averages 10 cents per gallon more than conventional gasoline. And it's been made more difficult this year for marketers to switch over to required summer blends.
[Phil Flynn, Alaron Trading:] What we have to do is all the storage tanks, essentially, at this time of year, have to be emptied with the old stuff, you know, the polluting stuff, in the winter and put in with these new summer blends.
[Jackson:] Another factor is refinery maintenance. Several of them are shut down. Engineers are trying to squeeze out more production in the long run, but pinching supplies right now. And of course, the consumer factor. The affluent American motorist is burning more and more gasoline, even at higher prices. Consumption is up 6 percent from over a year ago. [on camera]: With supplies tight and demand strong, some fear prices could spike to over $3 per gallon in places if everything goes wrong. So stay tuned. Brooks Jackson, CNN, Washington.
[Stouffer:] $3 per gallon? Ouch.
[Jason Carroll, Cnn Anchor:] That is pretty bad. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Wolf Blitzer:] Tonight, Gary Condit speaks out. In a mass mailing to constituents, the congressman admits he's made mistakes, while denying he had anything to do with the disappearance of Chandra Levy, but that scripted message is the easy part. Now comes the media grilling with tough questions from a TV network, a local TV station and national magazines. Can the congressman win back his supporters, his credibility? We'll go live to Condit's home turf. And I'll speak with the local Democratic leader, Sandra Lucas, a strong supporter, and with one of his harshest critics, Republican congressman Scott McInnis of Colorado.
[Rep. Scott Mcinnis , Colorado:] I'd come up here and Gary by his neck and say, "Tell me what you know."
[Blitzer:] As Gary Condit speaks out, we'll also look at the history of the big comeback interview. Is that the way to put a scandal to rest? Good evening, I'm Wolf Blitzer reporting tonight from Washington. Two hours from now, the nation will have a chance to hear directly from embattled Congressman Gary Condit. His 30-minute sit- down interview with ABC's Connie Chung was taped earlier today. Under the theory the best defense is a strong offense, Condit is clearly going on the offensive. He mailed all constituents a letter, suggesting among other things, that missing Washington intern Chandra Levy may have been the victim of a serial killer. This is what he says, "I pray that she has not met the same fate as the other young women who have disappeared from the same neighborhood." And that's our focus tonight, Gary Condit speaks out. Her interview with Gary Condit has not yet aired, but a short while ago, Connie Chung released some details. Condit says he had a close relationship with Chandra Levy for about five months. He says he was not in love with her, but liked her very much. He says they never exchanged a cross word. Under repeated questioning, he refused to say whether he had a sexual relationship with her. His bottom line, he has no idea what happened to Chandra Levy. To find out more what Condit is saying, how he's saying it, and what folks are saying about it, let's go live to CNN national correspondent Bob Franken in Condit country in Modesto, California. Bob?
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] And Wolf, we're outside Gary Condit's office. But for Condit, this was hardly a day at the office. When he left his home this morning, he was heading to a secret location, a little bit of a convoy. His handlers hoped that it would be a secret location, that it was not in fact surrounded by media, turning into a circus was their fear, as he conducted his interviews. Well, media found out about it, found out that Condit was going to the Walnut Ranch, Walnut Grove of a friend, Paul Warda, who is somebody who has been a supporter of Condit's, both financially and politically since just about the beginning of Condit's career. There, Condit did his interview with ABC News' Connie Chung, an interview with the local station also. There were interviews on tap with two local newspapers. He also had done an interview with "Vanity Fair" magazine, that in addition to "People" magazine on Wednesday. And of course "Newsweek" is scheduled for tomorrow. In addition, there was the letter that was timed to arrive at the constituents' homes before all of this on television tonight. In that letter, he said the following. "Before speaking with the media, I wanted to write to you. I have known some many of you for a long time. You know me to be hardworking, committed to our issues and dedicated from my community and my family. I hope you also will understand that I am not perfect and have made my share of mistakes." That, the only concession to the controversy that has swirled around the reports of his relationship with Chandra Levy, the missing intern, a relationship, an affair that he confirmed, according to police sources, in his third interview with investigators trying to find Chandra Levy. Now among those who received the letter was Susan Levy, well the parents of Chandra Levy, Susan and Robert Levy. It showed up at their post office this morning. Mrs. Levy took a quick look at it and then she decided to go into the house. She is already made it clear that she will be among those watching the televised interview with Congressman Condit. Now there is already reaction coming from some of the Condit constituents, not just to describe what it is that they want to hear from the interview, but also their reactions to the letter.
[Unidentified Female:] The letter was very vague and there was no actually, I was looking for an apology. There wasn't an apology in the letter. So it was very vague. And I think people will disappointed when they get it.
[Unidentified Male:] He's in a very difficult spot, because as we saw with Clinton and Lewinsky, he's in a position where we all know that he has to have a certain amount of discretion to protect his career and his relationship with his family. So we have to, kind of, be able, I think in a skeptical of anything he'll say.
[Franken:] The media strategy, of course, in effect as Condit realizes and his advisers realize, he is in a spot. His political career in many estimations is in jeopardy. He's trying to recover the kind of political power that he had, that always meant easy re- elections Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Bob Franken in Modesto. Once again, thank you very much. So is the Condit strategy the right approach? Will this public campaign restore his good name? Joining me now from Grand Junction, Colorado is Republican Congressman Scott McInnis. In his last appearance on this program, he was sharply critical of his colleague, and later called for an Ethics Committee investigation. And from Modesto, California, I'm joined by Sandra Lucas, a Condit supporter who chairs the Stanislaus County Democrat Committee. She'll be joining us shortly. Let's begin with Congressman McInnis. And so far congressman, based on what you've heard, the letter that he released today, what's your reaction? Is he going far enough?
[Rep. Scott Mcinnis , Colorado:] Well, Mr. Blitzer, let me tell you this, I used to be a police officer. And I can tell you that when we would go to the scene of a terrible accident, where somebody left the scene of the accident before aid was rendered, and then at some point in the future, showed back up with their attorney, that didn't exactly, you know, that didn't really make him look like a martyr in my opinion. So I think the attempt here is the public relations effort. And granted, he should do what he can, but I don't want the people just think all of a sudden that the sympathy should shift to him, instead of staying with the Levy family, which is exactly where it should be. There's a horrible tragedy that's been suffered. And frankly, in my opinion, somebody left the scene of the accident without rendering aid. And now they're showing up and trying to come across as kind of a martyr. I just, I don't buy it.
[Blitzer:] Sandra Lucas, you've been a strong Congressman Condit for all of these years, including these past several months. Based on what we've heard so far from Connie Chung when she was on ABC Evening News earlier tonight, so far, he still seems to be somewhat stonewalling, not answering the questions about the nature of his relationship with Chandra Levy?
[Sandra Lucas, Stanislaus County Democratic Leader:] I didn't see that interview. So I really don't know what Connie Chung has said.
[Blitzer:] She said that despite repeated questioning, he refused to say whether or not he had a, for example, a sexual relationship with the 24-year-old former intern.
[Lucas:] OK. If he admitted to having a relationship with her, I'm not sure that he needed to admit having a sexual relationship. That really denigrates this missing 24-year-old woman. I don't think that, if I you know, if it was my daughter, I wouldn't want the whole world talking about her sexual relationship.
[Blitzer:] What about that point, Congressman McInnis? His refusing to discuss the nature of the precise nature of the relationship?
[Mcinnis:] Well, the lady that just spoke, let me tell you, it was Condit's public relations person that about a month ago spoke very strongly about the sex life of Chandra Levy. She later retracted that, I guess. But look, the issue here, in my opinion, is the institution. And that rises above party politics. And we you know, I think the congressman, with all due respect, he was a friend, but he's brought discredit to the institution. And so I think people are understandably going to be very skeptical of what he has to say if he says it. I'm not sure he said. I don't think he's going to say it tonight.
[Blitzer:] Sandra Lucas, he has a huge hurdle to overcome in this interview that's going to air in less than two hours, doesn't he?
[Lucas:] Yes, he does. But you know, I think we have to see this as a continuum. The letter was the beginning, this interview and so forth. But he does have to convince his constituents, number one, that he had nothing to do with her disappearance. So I believe the majority of the constituents feel that he doesn't have anything to do with her disappearance. But he also has to come across as being honest and answering the questions that are asked to him. And he also needs to, you know, let his constituents know about the misinformation that also has been put out there, and clarify that situation.
[Blitzer:] Well, Congressman McInnis, in the letter that he released to his 200,000 constituents earlier today, among other things, he writes this. And I'll put it up on the screen. He says, "Despite my best attempts to help the police find Chandra, some in the media have criticized me for remaining silent. I have not been silent with those in charge of finding Chandra. I have answered every single question asked by the police and F.B.I." Is that not fair on his part to speak to the law enforcement authorities, as opposed to the news media, which he will do later tonight, obviously?
[Mcinnis:] Oh, sure. I think that's fair. But maybe he ought to grant the request of the Levy family and talk with their private investigators. And maybe he ought to submit to a lie detector test by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He's refused to do both of those. Both of those people, the FBI and obviously Chandra Levy's parents and their investigators are trying to find this girl. I don't call partial cooperation I don't think he should receive all kinds of applause for this. He has not fully cooperated. And I'm ask I hope he does. I hope Gary does. I hope they find Chandra and we can go on. But in the meantime, I don't think you're going to see that kind of cooperation. And I think those questions should be asked. Lie detector, private investigators with the Levy family. I think he ought to visit with those people. They want to find Chandra.
[Blitzer:] Sandra Lucas, why not do those two steps and submit to an FBI lie detector test, not one organized by his own attorney. And why not go ahead and cooperate with the investigators who are hired by the Levy family attorney?
[Lucas:] Well, first of all, the Levys have threatened a civil lawsuit. Billy Martin has said that. So to sit down with their investigators, when they're threatening a lawsuit, quite frankly, there wouldn't be a defense attorney in the world that would tell him to do that. He passed the lie detector test and answered the important questions about whether he had anything to do with the disappearance of Chandra Levy.
[Mcinnis:] Wolf, let me say something.
[Blitzer:] All right.
[Mcinnis:] That's not if we ask the lady right there to tell us what questions were on that lie detector test, my bet is, with all due respect, she could not answer that. It was made clear, I think... Well, look, nobody questions the credibility, I think, of a professional law enforcement like the FBI or another agency, giving that kind of examination. Look, does he want to find her or doesn't he? We have people that are in car accident. They know they're going to have civil liability, but we still expect them to render aid and help people. We should expect no less than from a United States congressman.
[Blitzer:] And on that...
[Mcinnis:] That's the standard. Those are high standards.
[Lucas:] Well, and the Washington, D.C. police said on July 30 that he was not a suspect. They had focused entirely too much on him as the only suspect. And you know, I think that there is a lot of other avenues that were not checked out.
[Mcinnis:] Well, if he's not a suspect, why doesn't he cooperate? If he's not a suspect, why doesn't he do those two steps?
[Lucas:] And we don't know what he has or has not done. I mean, you're buying into everything the media has...
[Mcinnis:] Well, you're right. That's exactly right. And there's one person that can clarify it through these steps and that's the congressman that you're standing up and supporting right now.
[Blitzer:] Sandra Lucas, let me just break in and point to another excerpt from the letter that he sent to his constituents today. He said this. And I'll put it up again on the screen. He said, "I'm sorry that the pain the Levy family and Chandra's friends are feeling has grown worse with each passing day." A lot of people have commented during the course of today, that certainly does not sound like an apology to the Levy family?
[Lucas:] Well, it's not "I am sorry." That is true. But he's sharing his pain. And I again, I think you need to see this letter...
[Mcinnis:] Sharing his pain?
[Lucas:] ... as the continuum. Sharing his feelings about their pain. Yes.
[Mcinnis:] OK. That's better.
[Lucas:] I mean, but he didn't say, "I am sorry."
[Blitzer:] Which a lot of people he think he should have apologized formally to the Levy family for not telling them the truth right away during that first telephone conversation they had.
[Lucas:] Well, and you know, that's one of the issues I understand, that he is going to be clarifying over the next several days, on what he did and did not tell the Levy family.
[Blitzer:] Congressman McInnis...
[Lucas:] So far, you know, unfortunately, because he hasn't spoken until now, we really don't know what has or hasn't been said because it's really been one sided or the media. And that's I mean, quite frankly, the congressman should've spoken earlier in my viewpoint. But I think we need to let him tell his story before we criticize
[Blitzer:] Welcome back. The televised comeback. It's become an American tradition. And as Gary Condit speaks out, he's joining a long line of other scandal subjects who have chosen to public with a big interview. CNN's Anne McDermott reports.
[Anne Mcdermott, Cnn Correspondent:] Gary Condit is one big "get." The interview TV types kill for. The greatest "get" of all.
[Barbara Walters, Abc News:] ...that oral sex is not a sexual relationship? That you call it what?
[Monica Lewinsky, Former White House Intern:] Messing around.
[Mcdermott:] Barbara Walters is the mother of all good "gets." She's had competition in recent years. Like Diane Sawyer, who once got Michael Jackson and then wife Lisa Marie Presley to confess that yes, they actually slept together.
[Lisa Marie Presley:] Yes, yes, yes.
[Mcdermott:] Such interviews make ratings zoom, while providing the Condits of the world with confessionals.
[Joe Saltzman, Media Analyst:] They hope that this will create a new image for them in the public mind. And sometimes it works.
[Mcdermott:] It worked for Hugh Grant. Remember his meeting with the prostitute. [Begin Video Clip, Nbc's "the Tonight Show"]
[Jay Leno:] Let me start with question No. 1. What the hell were you thinking?
[Mcdermott:] That interview worked.
[Unidentified Male:] He's still a star.
[Mcdermott:] And it worked for this couple from Arkansas, who went on "60 Minutes" in 1992 to answer questions about the husband's alleged affairs. [Begin Video Clip, Cbs "60 Minutes"]
[Hillary Rodham Clinton:] You know, I'm not sitting here, some little woman standing by my man like Tammy Wynette.
[Mcdermott:] OK, Tammy Wynette didn't like it, but they went to the White House. And so did this man, who may have invented the whole genre of televised comebacks in the '50s with his famous checker speech.
[Richard Nixon, Former President Of The United States:] I come before you tonight as a candidate for the vice presidency and as man whose honesty and integrity have been questioned.
[Mcdermott:] "Nightline" would later question the honesty and integrity of PTL ministers Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker, then at the center of a financial scandal. And sure enough, Tammy admitted to the sin of shopping.
[Tammy Faye Bakker:] And I enjoy shopping. It's kind of a hobby to help my nerves.
[Mcdermott:] You call that a confession? Evangelist Jimmy Swaggart showed the Baker how it's done.
[Jimmy Swaggart, Evangelist:] I have sinned against You, my Lord.
[Mcdermott:] O.J. Simpson wasn't admitting to any sinning at all with BET's Ed Gordon this "get."
[O.j. Simpson, Former Professional Football Player:] I'm as innocent as anyone else out there.
[Mcdermott:] That's what the Ramseys were saying when CNN got them, just days after the death of Jon Benet.
[Patsy Ramsey, Jonbenet Ramsey's Mother:] We have to find out who did this.
[Mcdermott:] We're all still waiting. But you never wait too long for the next great "get." Shortly after Connie said she got Gary, Walters piped up and said she's got Carey [Mariah]. Anne McDermott, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Blitzer:] Millionaire wanna-bes swamp a New York City suburb. We're show you how lotto fever is being remedied in one community. And later, he took liberties with the Statue of Liberty and wound up under arrest. That and more when we return. Welcome back. Another story is making news. An update on a story we told you about last night. A Connecticut town will get some relief from Powerball fever. The state lottery has granted Greenwich permission to suspect ticket sales tomorrow. The town is swamped by Powerball players from out of state, eager to try their luck at the growing jackpot, expected now to reach as much as $300 million because no one won last night's drawing. Most tourists huff and puff their way to the top of the Statue of Liberty. This stunt man from France used a parasail powered by a motor to get there. He says he wanted to bungee jump off the monument, but his parachute got caught on the torch, stranding him there. The National Park and New York police pulled him to safety and then immediately arrested him. Tonight on the "leading edge," remember when President John F. Kennedy promised to get us to the moon? Well, now you can hear his rationale in his own words. Newly released recordings reveal the President's heated discussion with a top Nasa official about the mission. Nasa wanted to focus on exploring the moon, but without actually landing there. During that Cold War era, Kennedy however had one goal, to beat the Soviet Union in landing a man on the moon.
[John F. Kennedy, President Of The United States:] I do think we ought to get it, you know, really clear that the policy on these issues be top priority program of the agency and one of the two
[Blitzer:] The John F. Kennedy library released the 1962 recordings. Up next, I'll open our mailbag. Lots of reaction to the Powerball lottery drawing last night. No single winner again and the pot grows, but one of you says there were many winners. I'll explain. Welcome back. Time now to open our mailbag. Strong feelings about our special coverage last night of the pros and cons of the Powerball lottery. Mark, from Louisiana writes this, "Lotteries are voluntary taxations. The more people who play, the lower my taxes will be. So the real winners are people like me who do not play." And Ian from San Francisco, "People will gamble illegally if they are unable to do so legally. It is much better to have the funds used for projects to benefit society, instead of going into the pockets of organized crime." Remember, I want to hear from you. Please e-mail me at Wolf@cnn.com. Or go to our Web site www.cnn.comwolf. That's all the time we have tonight. Please stay with CNN throughout the night. Much more on the Condit interview. Coming up on "LARRY KING LIVE" at the top of the hour, Larry will conduct the first interview with "Vanity Fair's" Judy Bachrach. She interviewed Condit yesterday and has exclusive information on how he's publicly addressing the Chandra Levy controversy. And after tonight's Condit interview on ABC, CNN will have a special report at 11:00 p.m. Eastern. Thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. "THE POINT" begins right now. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Press, Co-host:] Good evening. Welcome to CROSSFIRE. Hold the phone! No, don't hold the phone! Not while driving. Not if you're in New York state. Or, starting November 1, you'll be breaking the law and might have to pay a $100 fine. With little debate, a bill banning handheld cell phones if you're behind the wheel passed the state legislature last night. Governor Pataki says he will sign it. But if New York's the first, it might not be the last state to crack down on cell phones. Similar measures are under consideration in 41 other states. And Congressman Gary Ackerman, tonight's guest, has introduced legislation for a national ban. Is this an important step to cut down distractions and save lives on our highways? Or is it one more blow to individual freedom and one more power trip for big brother Bob?
[Robert Novak, Co-host:] Congressman Ackerman, welcome.
[Rep. Gary Ackerman , New York:] Thank you.
[Novak:] I know anybody who has ever been to New York City thinks you New Yorkers are crazy, you don't know how to drive, you swerve around it is dangerous. But why are you trying to impose your insecurities on the rest of the country?
[Ackerman:] Well, if you take a look at all the polling that has been done, including a CNN poll, 70 percent of all of the American people favor a ban on the use of cell phone while driving the car. It's a major distraction. And if you have been in back of a driver or next to a driver with a cell phone, you know what I mean.
[Press:] Fred Smith, latest study I saw showed that someone using a handheld cell phone is four times more likely to get in an accident that someone who's got both hands on the wheel. That's as bad as someone who is driving drunk. Isn't this the one time that even you can support a government regulation?
[Fred Smith, Competitive Enterprise Institute:] Good try, but not this time either. It turns out that the same types of polls that we all seem to believe in this city have found out that of the many distractions that occur driving, cell phones are way down the list. Basically, we're dealing with an issue where cell phones, unlike the other distractions, that pet monkey we were hearing about earlier or the thing in the back seat, cell phones have safety offsets. They create risk, they offset risk. Because if you are being stopped in an automobile, you don't want to stop the car to be able to call for help.
[Ackerman:] A 110 million people have cell phones, not many people have pet monkeys, that's the problem. There is no technology that pets your monkey for you, but there is technology so that you can talk while driving without taking your hands off the wheel, and that's what we should be looking at.
[Novak:] I don't have a pet monkey, but I do have...
[Ackerman:] A pet peeve.
[Novak:] I won't get into that. I have an electric razor, and since times since sometimes when I'm over on my way to the studio, my Corvette burning gas, and with the top down...
[Press:] And the air conditioner on.
[Novak:] No, top down, I take my electric razor, steering through Washington traffic with my left hand and I shave. Now, would you like to get a law passed in Congress that in the District of Columbia shaving while you're driving is illegal?
[Ackerman:] I think in your case we would let you do whatever you want when you're behind the wheel. But I have been behind you, and I have seen you doing that shaving thing while have a slice of pizza in the other hand and steering with your left...
[Novak:] ... why don't you censure it, why don't you legislate against that?
[Ackerman:] Because there is no technology whereby you can get around any of those things. There is technology, very simple, very inexpensive, handheld devices are as cheap as $10 and less today, and that would allow people at least to keep both hands on the wheel while still being distracted by the cell phone, but it cuts down quite a...
[Novak:] Well, that's an amazing piece of logic, because you can't do it safely while you're shaving, you can't legislate. But I want to back up what Fred said from data by University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center. Driving distractions: things outside the car, 29.4 percent; adjusting radio, 11 percent; another person in car, almost 11 percent; moving objects in car, 4 percent; another object in car, almost 3 percent; adjusting climate controls, 2.8 percent; eating or drinking, 1.7 percent; using a cell phone 1.5 percent. It's the least big problem and you busybodies are just attacking it because it's there.
[Ackerman:] No. First of all, almost all the surveys that are coming out now are based on data taken between 1997 and 1999. The amount of the number of cell phones in use has quadrupled, and a lot of people just don't like to admit that they are on the cell phone. All of the latest studies that are coming out indicate that it is a major distraction. You got to take your eyes off the road, you got to take your ears off of listening to traffic, you have to take your hand off the wheel, and your concentration, which is supposed to be on driving, is somewhere else.
[Press:] Fred, let's come back here to where this all comes from. And believe it or not, this legislation does not come from busybodies who are just looking for things to do. The legislation comes from surviving family members, where they have been victims killed by a driver who was on the cell phone. "The New York Times" talked a couple of months ago about a woman by the name of Mardy Burns [sic], out of Independence, Missouri. Her 18-year-old daughter and her boyfriend killed by 17-year-old who was yakking away on the cell phone, doesn't know what the hell he's doing, runs into them, kills them both. This famous model Niki Taylor got out of the hospital today. She's been in the hospital for two months with injuries that she sustained when her the guy driving her car, cell phone goes off, and he's down there looking for the cell phone and runs into a utility pole. I mean, you cannot deny that these things are a distraction, they are a danger. So, I mean, isn't this important just for the lives that it will save on the road?
[Smith:] Bill, you are making a mistake that almost all people make from the liberal side. Good antidotes make bad law. Basically, what you've done is ignored the data that Bob just gave us, that of all the distractions, this is a minor distraction even though a growing one, certainly the congressman tried what you're basically dealing with is something which in Europe now is called the precautionary principal: worry about the new, the novel. We don't worry about the person driving with us, we don't worry about the thing in the back seat, we don't worry about the radio or climate control. We worry about the new thing, forgetting the fact that those other conveniences in the automobile have offset inconveniences. The cell telephone has offsetting safety value because if you are driving that car and somebody is chasing you, you don't want to...
[Ackerman:] We make an exception in the bill for any kind of emergency that anybody can...
[Smith:] Wonderful.
[Ackerman:] And what you consider a minor distraction rises to the level of drunk driving. You are just against government regulations! I think your organization was against helmets...
[Novak:] Guilty! Guilty!
[Ackerman:] ... helmets on motorcycles, seatbelts we put on...
[Smith:] Congressman, we have a tremendous skepticism about the ability of government who says I'm from Washington, I want to help you. We basically believe that people want to have safer lives, and they make tradeoffs between the risk of cell phones and the risk of not having a cell phone.
[Ackerman:] People want to have a safer life, and they understand common sense, but yet and they know they shouldn't murder people, yet we need a law that prevents that from happening.
[Smith:] We need laws...
[Ackerman:] They know they should have their headlights on while driving, but still we have a law. They know they shouldn't speed, we have laws that say don't speed.
[Smith:] We have laws against risky driving. If Bob drives with that pizza and...
[Novak:] I really don't have the pizza, just the razor.
[Smith:] ... get Bob and put him in. But if he's driving safely, what's wrong with driving safely?
[Press:] Wait a minute, let me cut through. I mean, we think she does protest too much. We are not banning cell phones! You can still have a damned conversation! You can still yak all the way to the office. It's just the handheld. The hand-free phone is there, you can make calls, you can answer calls, you can talk all you want! So, it's not as bad as you're saying.
[Smith:] I understand, but the general argument is that they're trying to say, we don't mind the technology, but it has to be the Cadillac technology, voice-activated technology...
[Ackerman:] No, no, no, we're not saying that. You can have one of those little plugs in your ear, you can have it mounted. I got four different devices people have shown me, as cheap as under $15. Plug it into the cigarette lighter!
[Smith:] What about the one-number? The speed dialing, the one- number dialing, will that be OK?
[Ackerman:] We haven't addressed that. The individual states will take that up.
[Novak:] Let me ask you this...
[Press:] What is wrong with that?
[Novak:] We have a cell phone with a loudspeaker system, we don't have it hand-dialed, but you got to dial it. Now, some I am guessing in New York, some people can use other protuberances to dial it, most of us need a finger that takes a hand off the wheel. What have you gained?
[Ackerman:] That's dangerous as well, and people should use common sense. But we won't be able to account for every single... The technology eventually will catch up. Right now, you put your windshield wipers on in new cars, the lights go on automatically. We have a law that says you're in trouble if you don't do that. There will come a time when every cell phone is equipped completely voice-activated, and you will say "call the office," you won't have to look, you won't have to...
[Smith:] I agree.
[Ackerman:] But in the meantime...
[Smith:] But, congressman, that's the point. In the meantime, you are basically saying, let's raise the ladder up a little bit harder, making the average cell phone a little less available and making the Cadillac for the time being a little more, only for the elite.
[Ackerman:] If you are driving a Cadillac and you can afford a cell phone, go up to the $15, it's cheaper than it's cheaper than it's cheaper than a funeral.
[Novak:] Congressman, I have followed your long congressional career adamantly, and I know that...
[Ackerman:] You are one of my greatest fans.
[Novak:] That's right. Unlike....
[Press:] Watch out.
[Novak:] Unlike Fred and I, you are a great admirer of bureaucrats and people in the government. So I will quote to you Robert Sheldon of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, says, there's not enough testing and he said quote: "It's premature to push for federal legislation in this area." Let's get more data. That's not kind of an argument that appeals to me, but that argument ought to appeal to you.
[Ackerman:] It doesn't appeal to me, because the only data you need is to take a poll of the American people, who are driving and 70 percent of them and the numbers are going up since we put this bill put out New York, New Jersey, most of the Northeast, are doing polls in their states, and they are coming up with as much as 85 percent of the people and 85 percent of the 85 are cell phone users.
[Novak:] 85 percent of the American...
[Ackerman:] I'm surprised if I'm driving in back of somebody like you while shaving on the sidewalk.
[Press:] I want to show you, Fred, I want to show you this poll that the Congressman was talking about. New York State: I haven't seen numbers like that for anybody, not even Hillary Clinton didn't get numbers like this. OK, here it is. You want to ban cell phones among all voters in New York State. 85 percent say it, and then who go to the people who own the cell phones: you take your cell phone away, ban cell phones: 87 percent.
[Novak:] That's...
[Press:] I'm sorry, I got them backwards. 87 altogether. But 85...
[Novak:] I'll give you a quick answer to that.
[Smith:] The point is, that...
[Press:] All alone! New York, Fred!
[Smith:] New York State can do what it wants to. Why not let
[Ackerman:] New York is the Empire State. It's not crazy. There's...
[Smith:] Empire! Empire is the term.
[Novak:] It's the Umpire State.
[Ackerman:] Umpire. We have a Republican governor and a Republican state senate and this sailed through the Senate and it's supported by the governor. And he is about to sign it into law.
[Novak:] We have to take a break.
[Press:] God bless America.
[Novak:] When we come back, we will ask whether the liberties of the American people are being threatened by these legislatures. Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. The New York state government, leading America once again, makes it a crime for drivers to talk on a handheld cell phone. Democratic Congressman Gary Ackerman of New York likes the ban so much he wants to extend it to the rest of America. Fred Smith, president of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, thinks the ban ought to be tested on Broadway before we send it beyond the Hudson Bill Press.
[Press:] Fred, first, back to the philosophy behind all this, when I get in my car, OK? I have first of all speed limits I have to obey, there are traffic lights, there are stop lines, there are lanes I'm supposed to stay in. I have to put a seat belt on, I have to turn the lights on, have to have working taillights, certain safety bumper in the car. I don't exactly feel henpecked or that the Constitution has been ripped up. So this cell phone thing is really just one more little thing to make cars safer to drive and to protect all the people around me, right? I mean, what is the big deal?
[Smith:] One more hatchet stroke on the tree of liberty.
[Press:] Hardly. Hardly.
[Smith:] The point is, we have laws already that address the the safety facts of distractions in the automobile. All the distractions in automobile. They have laws against reckless driving. We don't need to reach in to that panoply of all the distractions of a car, and then have his one, because it represents a novel technology, is going to be somehow demonized. It's in any technology element that seems to be jumping into play, where the new is always more to be feared and more regulated than the traditional. If it survives long enough, we don't need regulate it.
[Ackerman:] Fred, you are missing the point. This is the only of all of those distractions that you have named, the only one that there is a technical solution to the problem. And that is, use we are not taking it away, we are not saying you can't drive the car, and we are not destroying democracy in this country!
[Smith:] We can basically have voice-actuated radios, voice- actuated air conditions systems, all those things can be voice- actuated. Very expensive, we don't those because we recognize the convenience tradeoffs.
[Ackerman:] This is very inexpensive to do. It represents sometimes 5 percent of the cost of...
[Press:] Fred, one other point.
[Ackerman:] Cheap fixes are better than expensive hospital bills, and expensive funerals.
[Press:] One other point. One of the driving things behind this New York State law, was the fact that counties and counties were passing different laws, and so, you drive from one county to the next. In one county, you are allowed to hold the phone, and the next you are not. In one county, you are allowed to dial a call. The next one you are not. It made sense. You needed some statewide...
[Novak:] Conformity!
[Press:] Conformity. Doesn't that make the argument for the congressman's national bill, so that all states are the same.
[Smith:] No, Bill. The genius of America has always been that we have allowed experimentation. Some states have sales taxes that are higher, and some have taxes that are lower. Some have high speed limits and some have lower speed limits. The laboratory of democracy is a place where we test out the concepts of regulation. We don't basically try a one size fits everybody policy. Because America New York may be right. We may find that out. New York just could be wrong, and we find out the other states...
[Ackerman:] Fred, you have just endorsed exactly what our bill does, and it allows each of the states to come up with their own regulations.
[Novak:] Oh, no. You have a money club on it!
[Ackerman:] That's right, but the regulations that are involved well, the same with speed limits. Each states does their own thing. Everything We're saying that you should have a hands-free device, we don't say which kind it should be, or whether it should be mechanically installed or whether it's portable.
[Smith:] But you link government money to the process. And that basically...
[Ackerman:] We have 40 states that are doing this!
[Novak:] Congressman Ackerman, let me point to you where this all leads to. Patricia Pena has a daughter who was killed in an accident involving the use of a cell phone by another person. I feel very sad for her. She was one of the real crusaders for this ban. Now, listen to what she says now. "I'm a little scared that people are going to run out, and get a headset or some equipment they're not familiar with and be fumbling with that on the road." She wants to then ban headsets. I mean, this is wouldn't you call this "big mother" government?
[Ackerman:] No, I...
[Novak:] That big mother is going to protect us all.
[Ackerman:] I would say that's a very sad case, and it's one of countless cases that we're that we're seeing these days and it's a very concerned mother. We're not trying to overlegislate on everything. We're just saying the technology exists, use it, it'll save lives.
[Novak:] Let me let me...
[Smith:] Let me can I there's another point here. Look, we already find that police in some situations abuse the power to decide you're a bad driver, you're a dangerous driver. They come in. Now the fact that even you have a cell phone in your car you can be accused of using it while you were driving, do we really want to give more reasons to have abusive police pulling over drivers because they
[Ackerman:] I've heard tell that some police go as far as planting evidence. Maybe we shouldn't have any laws to prevent...
[Smith:] No, but you...
[Ackerman:] ... the use of drugs. Maybe we should do away with the police. I don't know what your point is.
[Smith:] Yeah, but congressman, we do have a serious problem where we have had difficulty of the police sometimes abusing their power. And that was when they were just basically dealing with real substance, not cell phones.
[Ackerman:] All laws are difficult to enforce.
[Novak:] Congressman, let me...
[Ackerman:] We don't get we don't get...
[Novak:] Let me raise a philosophical point. Congressman, I assume as a leftist you're a member of the American Civil Liberties Union. You are, aren't you?
[Ackerman:] No, I'm not. But I appreciate and applaud everything that they do.
[Novak:] All right. All right. Now, I...
[Press:] I'm a member.
[Novak:] I just I just wonder if you're a little worried about our freedom is being taken away. There's very few places now where if I wanted to smoke I don't smoke but I could go to a restaurant. Even if the people in the restaurant wanted me to smoke, there's a lot of local areas that prevent that from happening. I think what we're going to have next on the cell phones is laws banning the use of cell phones in restaurants. It might...
[Press:] I hope so.
[Novak:] ... disturb somebody's eating pleasure. Aren't you a little bit worried about we're having a little John Adams revival that we're getting away from American liberties?
[Ackerman:] I well, sometimes somebody's what you call your liberty interferes with somebody else's basic freedom to relax and enjoy a dinner. I was on Amtrak going back to New York from Washington last week, there's a quiet car...
[Press:] Quiet car, right.
[Ackerman:] ... for people who don't want people I mean, I've been at funerals where people's cell phones have gone off. I've been at restaurants, as you...
[Novak:] You like you like a lot of regimentation of the people, don't you?
[Ackerman:] Oh, no, I don't I don't like regimentation, but neither do people in Great Britain or Italy or Israel or Japan or Korea.
[Novak:] In Japan they do like regimentation.
[Ackerman:] Well, I'll compromise on that one.
[Press:] The debate stats in New York. It's going to continue. Our debate will continue, but not for now. We're out of time. Fred Smith, thanks for coming in. If we have any more questions, we'll give you a call. Congressman Gary Ackerman, thank you for coming in. And when we come back, I'll give Bob Novak a call and we'll get together for our closing comments about those dreaded cell phones. We'll be right back. OK. Congressman Ackerman is going to be in our chat room right after the show. You can join him by logging on to cnn.comcrossfire. Continue the debate, Bob. It's a big, big day. I don't know whether people realize what an important day this is. Little Gloria Novak was born today, daughter of Angie and...
[Novak:] Alex.
[Press:] ... and Alex. And I want to say congratulations to the parents, congratulations to Grandmother Geraldine, and congratulations to Grandpop Bob. Six grandchildren.
[Novak:] I think you've introduced about four of them on this on this broadcast.
[Press:] I have. Now, are you going to give her a cell phone as a
[Novak:] I would think so.
[Press:] I hope she grows up in an America where it's safe to drive and you don't have idiots on those cell phones running into people. So long life to Gloria.
[Novak:] Thank you, Bill.
[Press:] From the left, I'm Bill Press. Good night for
[Crossfire. Novak:] From the right, I'm Robert Novak. Join us again next time for another edition of CROSSFIRE! TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jack Cafferty, Cnn Anchor:] This morning, for the first time in a month, a tape surfaced of an American couple who has been held hostage in the Philippines for almost a year, by the terrorist group Abu Sayeff. Looking tired, the missionaries, Martin and Gracia Burnham, read a statement explaining the group's motives as some of their armed captors can be seen standing behind them.
[Martin Burnham, Hostage:] They are targeting U.S., European and citizens of other western nations for the following reasons. One, the continued desecration of the island of Arabia, especially Mecca and Medina, by the presence of U.S. and European troops and their business interests. Two, their support to the illegitimate Israeli regime that occupies Palestine and the holy city of Jerusalem.
[Cafferty:] Just today police arrested eight Abu Sayeff supporters, including the wives of some of the rebels. Authorities have seized documents and other evidence showing al Qaeda sleeper cells were training in the Philippines. The U.S. government has deployed over 600 troops to the Philippines to help the government there track down al Qaeda, Abu Sayeff and other terrorist groups operating in that area. Paolo Pasicolan, with the Heritage Foundation is an expert on southeast Asian affairs and he joins us this morning from Washington. Welcome to "AMERICAN MORNING." It's nice to you have with us.
[Paolo Pasicolan, Heritage Foundation:] Thanks for having me.
[Cafferty:] How widespread and how powerful, potentially, is the al Qaeda presence in southeast Asia, particularly in the Philippines?
[Pasicolan:] I think the al Qaeda presence in southeast Asia is very dangerous, and it's very widespread but not primarily in the Philippines. I think the bigger problem in southeast Asia, is that they're operating in Indonesia. They have training bases over there and so on and so forth. But, in terms of the Philippines, I think, there are definitely Muslim insurgents and Muslim separatist groups who are sympathetic to al Qaeda but not necessarily al Qaeda operatives
[Cafferty:] Does that include does that include the Abu Sayeff group?
[Pasicolan:] Yes. The Abu Sayeff group is a terrorist organization. They're really more a band of thugs and criminals who are sympathetic to al Qaeda. They offer logistical support. For example, in 1995, they helped support Ramsey Yussef when he was over there testing his bomb designs.
[Cafferty:] You wrote a piece for the "Wall Street Journal" earlier this year, and you suggested in that piece, and we'll throw a portion of it up on the screen so our viewers at home can read it for themselves while we talk. But you suggested, basically, that several governments in southeast Asia are simply underestimating "the sinister nature and potential threat of these Muslim extremist groups." I wonder which governments you were referring to specifically, and talk to me a little bit about how big a danger this represents in your opinion.
[Pasicolan:] I think all of the governments in southeast Asia, meaning, the major ones, with large Muslim populations, like Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, the Philippines. Just in in late January, they Singapore arrested some terrorists, the Gemma Islamia, which I mention in the article, and this group wanted to carve out sections of Malaysia, Singapore and the Philippines, and turn it into sort of like an Afghanistan in southeast Asia a Muslim super state.
[Cafferty:] Right.
[Pasicolan:] And the Singaporean and the Malaysians didn't know they existed before September 11th. Only after the increased scrutiny, after September 11th, did they did they clamp down, and they discovered this cell. So, certainly, I think, they didn't anticipate how deep and how deeply rooted the al Qaeda threat is in southeast Asia.
[Cafferty:] Now, talk to me a little about the politics of American military presence in that part of the world and an effort to address the situation you just described. The Philippines, for example, the government has made it very clear that American military can be there, but, when it comes to actually apprehending and dealing with Abu Sayeff, they want the Americans to keep their hands off. Yet, there are no laws about terrorism on the books in the Philippines, so, if Philippine authorities even apprehend these people, what happens to them next? And what can the United States do to be an effective presence in trying to combat the threat that you see in that part of the world?
[Pasicolan:] I think what the United States is doing now, basically, incremental participation. It went into the Philippines because President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo of the Philippines asked for help. And I think that's good. Especially the way they're conducting the American forces are conducting themselves now which, they're consulting, they're helping the Philippine military do the work. 5,000 Philippine troops are after the Abu Sayeff with the help of 160 U.S. special forces. Now, the key is for the U.S. to help local governments do the jobs themselves, because the U.S. can't do the job for all of these governments. And another important task for the governments is to work together, which they're beginning to do now. My understanding is there's a cooperative anti-terrorism coalition between the Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia in the works, behind the scenes, and they're going to unveil that sometime in the next few months.
[Cafferty:] Well, that has to be, arguably, the first major step as these governments that you talk about have to recognize the seriousness of the threat and express some willingness to address it. Then the United States can go in and be of more help. Unfortunately, our time is expired, but I'd like to continue our discussion on the subject at some point in the future here on "AMERICAN MORNING", Paolo. Thank you.
[Pasicolan:] Thank you for having me again. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] A majority of Americans approve of the death penalty, but the support is declining. Gallup Poll Editor in Chief Frank Newport is here with the latest numbers Frank.
[Frank Newport, Gallup Poll Editor In Chief:] Natalie, you're right. You've summarized it nicely. We have been tracking American attitudes towards the death penalty for almost 50 years. Interestingly, back in 1953 when we first started tracking it, support was about 68 percent for the death penalty for murder. It went down, then it's been back up, actually to 80 percent earlier in the 90s. But in our most recent poll, as you mentioned, a gradual decline, and we're kind of back where we started. Still, however, a very strong majority: 66 percent of Americans, to put the straight facts on it, approve of the use of the death penalty in cases of murder. Now, we can point out a lot of critics of the death penalty say, well, why don't we instead have life imprisonment with absolutely no possibility of parole? So we asked Americans, if that was the alternative, would you still favor the death penalty? You can see, it's a smaller number than the 66, but still 52 percent of Americans favor it. Now, here's some very interesting data that we just collected and updated. We asked Americans: Do you think that an innocent person is, at least occasionally, sentenced to death that is, incorrectly sentenced to death? And five years ago, 82 percent said that was the case, and now we've gotten 91 percent of Americans who admit that, yes, at least one percent or more of the people on death row are, in fact, innocent. What's important here, Natalie and Lou, is that of those who favor the death penalty, that number is still 90 percent. In other words, Americans are willing to favor the death penalty even understanding that occasionally it looks like an innocent person might be sentenced incorrectly. That's where the public stands on this important issue. Back to you in Atlanta.
[Allen:] All right, Frank, thanks.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] In Washington today, the momentum seems to be with Senate Democrats in their attempt to pass a patients bill of rights that comes with sweeping rights to sue. The White House says what some Democrats really want is a veto. And CNN's Major Garrett joins us now with all the latest on this story from Washington. What's going on, Major?
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Lou, the president indeed is losing ground in the Senate. Senate Democrats yesterday beat back a Republican amendment that the White House favored that would have protected businesses from liability if, in fact, a patient with an HMO wanted to sue that employer. Republicans in the White House lost that amendment. The Republicans I have talked to in the Senate today say all other amendments of this kind will also fail this week, which means the Senate Democrats are ultimately expected to prevail with their brand of a patients bill of rights, which had led the White House to shift its strategy completely and now move away from the Senate to the House, which has put together a bill that has yet to be debated. But it will be debated after the Fourth of July recess. The White House is going to meet with about 15-20 House Republicans today. The president will sit down with them to try to persuade them to stick with that bill. It's pushed by the House speaker, Dennis Hastert, a Republican from Illinois. The White House favors it because the rights to sue are slightly more limited than the Senate bill. That's really the defining element of this entire debate. The Senate, as I said, is continuing debate. And someone who is very familiar with all the contour,s both politically and substantively, of the health care debate, Hillary Rodham Clinton, was presiding this morning, as two very well-known senators Senator Edward Kennedy, a Democrat of Massachusetts, and Kit Bond, a Republican from Missouri fought intensely over this question of liability and the consequences of allowing patients to sue their HMOs.
[Sen. Edward Kennedy , Massachusetts:] We will be inviting once you give them the carte blanche, whatever the problems are today are just going to increase a thousand fold, because they are going to be immune, effectively, from any kind of action.
[Sen. Christopher Bond , Missouri:] I heard one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle said, "Well, the McCain- Kennedy bill is taking care of small employers small employers health care provision." Yes, just like a herbicide takes care of a bed of flowers. It's going to kill small business health care at the roots.
[Garrett:] And, Lou, this is really the central question remaining for the Congress: Do you put together a bill that allows a right to sue? And can you do so without effectively diminishing the business' interest in providing health care to its employees? Because if they fear lawsuits, the White House argues, they will cut off care completely. That's what Republicans in the White House are trying to stop. But at the moment, Senate Democrats have the upper hand on the liability question Lou.
[Waters:] Major, Daschle said Senator Daschle said he wanted this bill cut by the July 4 recess or he would cancel the recess. Can you get there from here?
[Garrett:] It looks like Senator Daschle will in fact get his wish. And I can tell you, after covering Congress for many, many years, there's nothing that concentrates the lawmaker's mind like an impending recess. All of the sudden, things that were immovable and non- negotiable suddenly become very open to negotiation once you're nearing that recess date. And everyone I've talked to on the Hill today says they're moving through amendments smartly. That defeat the White House suffered yesterday was a clear signal they're not going to win on these other amendments. They will get their chance. They will be voted on. But the White House already sees this turning again itself in the Senate Senate action due by the end of week. And then the entire focus, at the White House and elsewhere, turns to the House after the recess Lou.
[Waters:] Right. Nothing like the lure of a burger on the grill Major Garrett in Washington. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Now to presidential politics, ever the more complicated. And also a peek at the angst surrounding the intervention of the highest court in the land in election 2000. A book called "The Accidental President," by "Newsweek" writer David Kaplan, looks at the Supreme Court's 5 to 4 ruling that essentially stopped the Florida recounts. Kaplan quotes one of the four justices, David Souter, as saying he'd "only if he had only one more day, he might have been able to persuade one of the five others to switch sides." Kaplan says the swing vote that Souter most likely was pursuing was Anthony Kennedy.
[David Kaplan, "the Accidental President":] Justice Souter was meeting with a group of prep school students from Chode, and they were meeting at the court in a private setting, no cameras, no press there. So of course he assumed his comments would remain within the room. He told them that had he had one more day, just one more day, he thought he could have turned Justice Kennedy. Now maybe that's maybe he could have and maybe he couldn't have. This is according to Justice Souter. But at least in his mind, it was just that close.
[Waters:] One presumes Mr. Bush is happy he's president, Al Gore is sorry he's not, but the job hasn't gotten any easier since January 20th. The Bush team's number one headache at the moment may well be the slumping economy and rising unemployment just months before campaigning begins for the off-year elections. Joining us with some insights, CNN political analyst Stuart Rothenberg. The administration can't be happy with the headline "Accidental President," while Republicans reportedly are meeting, concerned about the president's potency, his image, his leadership?
[Stuart Rothenberg, Cnn Political Analyst:] You're right, Lou. And really the danger is for congressional Republicans, Republicans in the House and the Senate who are up next year in 2002, rather than the president. The president has a long time here in the White House, he can withstand a recession as long as he gets some sort of recovery before 2004. But, it's the congressional Republicans who are grateful risk.
[Waters:] Is that what the administration is counting on, a recovery? The chief White House economist is saying we're not going to have any more stimuli for the economy. We don't see a recession. We're going to have a turnaround. Is that what they're counting on?
[Rothenberg:] Well, I think, sure, yes, they are counting on some sort of recovery. But I don't think that they're dismissing the current economic circumstances, and that would be a mistake. The president is now regularly talking about the state of the economy, acknowledging the weakness, indicating that maybe it will improve when all of the refunds are returned to taxpayers. But there is an acknowledgement that circumstances are bad. If the president poo-poohed this, said oh no, there's not only is there light at the end of tunnel, we're already out of the tunnel; that would be very dangerous, because that's what his father did and his father got in trouble for not recognizing economic problems. I don't think this president wants to be whistled past the graveyard.
[Waters:] You know Bush II is early similar to Bush I. Give us an idea of how difficult it's going to be for this president to wiggle past this?
[Rothenberg:] Well, I think it's going to be quite difficult, because when you look at domestic economic circumstances, you look at the rising unemployment, you have to wonder whether consumer confidence is going to hold up, that's been the thing that's held up the economy. If that starts to erode, you'll see a broader erosion of the economy into housing prices. You have international economic events that are problems, in Argentina, in Japan. So, it looks like a worldwide economic slowdown. It's awfully difficult for one person, for the president of the United States, to turn this around. And you know the president it's not unreasonable for the president to say that this economic slowdown occurred during or started during a Clinton administration. But the fact of the matter is, the president is the guy who gets the credit or takes the blame for economic circumstances. George W. Bush may not be able to turn this around. Look, Alan Greenspan has tried to do it with cuts in the interest rates, that hasn't done it, so it's hard to imagine anybody having a magic wand. But, the president will pay the price unless there is rebound, or I should say the president and his party.
[Waters:] So, James Carvel said, it's the economy, stupid. Are we past that now?
[Rothenberg:] Oh, no. Lou. It's always the economy, stupid; unless the economy is in good shape, in which case the voters have the opportunity to look at other things, whether it's foreign policy, or the environment, or education. But if there's an economic slowdown, people are fist concerned can they put enough food on their table to keep their family happy.
[Waters:] CNN political analyst Stuart Rothenberg. Thanks.
[Rothenberg:] Sure, thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] One thing seems clear, anthrax spores are spreading. Our medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, spoke with the nation's Health and Human Services secretary about all that. He joins us now from CNN Center good morning, Sanjay.
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Miles. That's right. We heard a lot just from Dr. Fauci about cross- contamination. We performed an admittedly non-scientific, very simple sort of experiment here at CNN, trying to demonstrate how spores might actually get outside an envelope. What we used here is talcum powered, Miles. Just for a frame of reference, talcum powder is usually 30 to 40 microns in size, spores one to five. We put some in a mail bin, shook it up. This was fluorescent talcum powered. We put a black light on that and certainly we did find that some of the powder actually got on some of the other envelopes. Now, again, this isn't really scientific. It's just a possibility, purely speculative. But I did sit down and speak with Secretary Thompson about this. I showed him this video and asked for his reaction. This is what he had to say.
[Tommy Thompson, Secretary Of Health And Human Services:] My reaction is is that common sense would certainly come to the conclusion that anthrax spores could conceivably come through an envelope and be deposited on other mail just going through the mail department or being delivered to somebody else. It's entirely plausible and I think your explanation certainly shows that it could happen.
[Gupta:] And it is just one explanation and it has not been proven yet, Miles, but it may show how what may have been a suspicious package full of anthrax spores may have actually had some of those spores leak out onto other envelopes and possibly be delivered to people other than what we've seen so far Miles.
[O'brien:] CNN's doctor in the house. Sanjay Gupta, thank you very much.
[Gupta:] Thank you.
[O'brien:] We'll check in with you a little bit later. The first drug of choice to combat anthrax was Cipro. It's made by the Bayer Corporation. But the company, best known for its aspirin, may have a headache of its own. It's been accused of failing to ramp up production fast enough and refusing to cut prices. And then there's the matter of giving the drug away where it's needed. In an exclusive interview, CNN's Willow Bay sat down with Bayer's CEO and began with that very question.
[Helge Wehmeier, President & Ceo, Bayer Corporation:] Initially, Secretary Thompson talked about 100 million tablets. Just take, take the premise of that we would have donated that. Then he all of a sudden talked about the option for another 200 million tablets. Then there are nations like, who else is in the fight? Great Britain is in the forefront of the fight. They will have a need to protect themselves, because there could potentially be an anthrax attack there. Do we deny them then, you know, the same free gift? Germany, France, Italy all the civilized nations around the world. What do we do? All of a sudden we become the free supplier of the entire free world. Clearly not an option.
[Willow Bay, Cnn Correspondent:] Can you reassure people that there's enough Cipro on hand?
[Wehmeier:] The nation can be assured, the citizens can be assured, everyone in America can be assured that there is and there always will be enough Cipro on hand. Absolutely.
[Bay:] Were you caught off guard by the criticism this company received in the early going?
[Wehmeier:] We tried to concentrate on the supply and quickly ramping up production. I give here our team great credit that on the day of September 11 they started to ramp up production, even though at that time there was nothing on the horizon about anthrax. And why did they do that? Because we had the experience of supporting the troops at that time, at the time of Desert Storm, and we knew that America in one way or another would need to respond to this extraordinary horrific event.
[Bay:] Wehmeier is so anxious to reassure people that there is adequate supply of the drug that he invited us into their U.S. manufacturing facility.
[Wehmeier:] This is where we do the gowning.
[Bay:] A visit that required sterile jump suits, shoes, hats and goggles.
[Wehmeier:] Let's proceed.
[Bay:] Employees are working 24 hour shifts, seven days a week to produce 60 million tablets a month. At that rate, Bayer will fill the government's order by the end of the year and still continue to supply pharmacies and hospitals.
[Wehmeier:] There is enough Cipro around, particularly since the government really has built up an enormous safety stockpile for the nation. There is no need to hoard. And why am I so adamant on this? Because hoarding is just one step away from using the drug on hunches, on fear, without the indication, without the advice from a doctor. And that should not be. This is not cough medicine.
[O'brien:] In fact, Bayer has given Cipro away, two million doses to postal workers whom Wehmeier believes are on the front lines in the anthrax battle.
[Zahn:] And still to come this morning, finding Osama bin Laden. Checking up on the U.S. intelligence gathering operation in Afghanistan. A talk with James Woolsey, former CIA director, right after this break. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] It's been a day of sorrow and uncertainty in the Middle East, following the death of one of the region's longest-serving leaders, Syrian president Hafez Al-Assad. Assad, who was said to be ailing for some time, died of heart failure. He was 69. Autocratic, skillful, disciplined, and ruthless all words used to describe Assad. His death raises questions now about Syria's future stability and its prospects for peace with Israel. Our coverage begins with Major Garrett from the White House.
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Aides slipped President Clinton a note just before he took the stage to deliver his last commencement speech. Inside, word of Assad's death, another jolt to the unsettled Middle East process.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] While we had our disagreements, I always respected him because I felt that he was open and straightforward with me and because I felt he meant it when he said he had made a strategic choice for peace. I regret that that peace was not achieved in his lifetime, and I hope that it can still be achieved in no small measure of the because commitment he made.
[Garrett:] Administration officials said it was too early to predict the affect Assad's death will have on the peace process, but pessimism is the dominant reaction, one shared by Middle East analysts.
[Mark Perry, Mideast Analyst:] We're not going to have any kind of aggressive following of a peace track with Israel perhaps for the next year until the leadership question is sorted out.
[Garrett:] Assad's failing health has been a top administration concern for years and intensified when Mr. Clinton met a frail Syrian leader on March 26. That meeting produced no progress on granting Syria some access to the Sea of Galilee, or return of the Golan Heights to Syria, the two toughest issues separating Israel and Syria.
[Clinton:] There will be a period of mourning in Syria. There will be a period of sorting out. And the Syrian people will make some decisions, and then we'll see what happens.
[Garrett:] Administration officials hope Syria's new leaders, likely to be Assad's son Bashar, will have the political strength and will to reach a deal with Israel.
[Hall:] Messages of condolences from around the globe are pouring into Syria at this hour. Let's check in now with Rula Amin. She's beginning our coverage, also at the Syrian capital of Damascus.
[Rula Amin, Cnn Correspondent:] Andria, it's 1:00 in the morning here. It's nightfall, but there are still crowds on the street. Just now, we've passed by a big march chanting slogans in support of the late president, and also more than in support of the late president, for his son Bashar. People have been calling on Bashar to succeed his father and stand by the legacy that his father had left him. President Assad passed away this morning. Syrians didn't know the news until 6:00 local time, and then everyone went to the street. They tried to go to the president's house. They went there, people were mourning, crying. And then the parliament moved quickly to pave the way for the president's son to take over. They changed the constitution. They dropped a couple of conditions that like the age of the next president, because Dr. Bashar is only 34 years old. The constitution said whoever is the president of the Syria has to be 40. They dropped that condition, they dropped a couple of other conditions, and they paved the way for Bashar to succeed his father. Later on in the day, the regional command for the ruling Baath Party nominated Dr. Bashar as a candidate for the presidency. On June 25th, that is in like two weeks from now, the Syrian parliament is going to meet to vote on that recommendation, for Bashar Assad to succeed his father. For now, Syrians are mourning, and they're mourning deeply. They're very sad. They're shocked. They also feel a bit taken aback, because this is a very sensitive time for Syria. Syria's going through a transition period. In one week's time, Syria was supposed to hold its first congress meeting for its ruling Baath party, the first in 15 years. It was a meeting that was supposed to put Syria on a new course regarding economy, regarding reforms, regarding corruption, and more important is regarding the peace process with Israel Andria.
[Hall:] Rula Amin reporting from the Syrian capital of Damascus. U.S. State Department officials watching the situation in Syria say the transfer of power appears to be carefully orchestrated, and officials believe Assad's death will have little immediate impact on Mideast peace negotiations. CNN's Andrea Koppel is at the State Department Andrea.
[Andrea Koppel, Cnn State Department Correspondent:] Andria, U.S. officials admit that President Assad was a known quantity. He was someone who, after all, had been in charge for the more than 30 years. He was firmly in control of the military, and he also had sway over Hezbollah in Lebanon. He was also someone who was always thinking about what was in Syria's best interests, and in the last six, seven years he made the calculation that peace was in Syria's best interest, peace with Israel. Now if his son succeeds him, then the question is will he want to continue down that path for peace. Also, U.S. officials admit that realistically, Dr. Bashar, if in fact he does become president of Syria, will be more focused on domestic concerns, trying to consolidate his power base, trying to get all his ducks in a row, and probably in that case wouldn't be as focused on what's happening outside of Syria, wouldn't want to think about peace with Israel because he would have more pressing concerns at home. Now in the short-term, some U.S. officials do believe that the death of President Assad may also have an impact on the Palestinian- Israeli peace track in that you now have the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, who is in his early 70s. He is now one of the oldest remaining Arab leaders, one of the old guard. And in the words of one senior U.S. official, it will now be a reminder to everyone that their biological clock is ticking. Reporting live, I'm Andrea Koppel, CNN, at the State Department.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We have a completely different legal situation taking place in the state of Texas. It is there that law enforcement officials are searching for seven escaped convicts. The men are wanted in connection with the killing of a police officer during a Christmas Eve robbery. The convicts broke out of a South Texas prison two weeks ago. Yesterday, officers surrounded an Arlington hotel, acting on a tip that some of the escapees might be inside. Authorities later determined that the suspects were not there, so the manhunt continues. Irving Police Chief Lowell Cannaday now joins us on the phone with more on the case. Chief, good morning, thanks for joining us.
[Chief Lowell Cannaday, Irving Police:] Good morning, Daryn. And thank you having me.
[Kagan:] Any new leads on where these seven men might be?
[Cannaday:] Nothing of substance at this point. We are, of course, receiving tips all the time, and we are following up on each one of the tips individually. So far none of them has passed out. The tip that we had yesterday seemed to be the strongest one that we had on the Arlington hotel. However, as you stated, that simply did not work out.
[Kagan:] When these seven men broke out of prison, they left a note behind saying: This is not the last you will hear from us.
[Cannaday:] Yes, they did.
[Kagan:] These are men who are definitely armed and dangerous. They broke out of prison and they actually stole guns and ammunition from the prison as they left?
[Cannaday:] Yes, they took guns and ammunition with them when they left, and in the robbery of the Oshman store here in Irving.
[Kagan:] Where we should mention a police officer lost his life?
[Cannaday:] Yes, they killed one of my officers, and they did get additional guns, and an undetermined amount money from this location too.
[Kagan:] On the idea that you think that these seven men are responsible for the killing of the officer and also that robbery, any clues you are able to pick up from that scene of that crime?
[Cannaday:] Well, of course, we're still doing extensive processing on every piece of evidence, or presumed evidence that we were able to collect at the scene, and we haven't reached a large number of conclusions yet with regard to that evidence. But we're working on it all of the time.
[Kagan:] But you think these seven men are still together?
[Cannaday:] It's our feeling that they are, yes.
[Kagan:] And what gives you that indication?
[Cannaday:] Well, it's been two weeks since they broke out of prison, and they were still together this last weekend. So, apparently, they have some sort of a plan in mind. The plan that they used to get out of the prison was very well thought out and coordinated.
[Kagan:] How did they do that? What did they do?
[Cannaday:] Well, actually I would probably refer you to the prison authorities on that. We received a briefing on it, and I can't give you the exact details on that.
[Kagan:] You could just say it was very well thought out.
[Cannaday:] Yes, it was very well thought out, and the plan that they had here in Irving was a very well thought out plan also.
[Kagan:] And these are men who were in prison already for violent crimes.
[Cannaday:] Yes, that is true.
[Kagan:] Including two convicted murderers.
[Cannaday:] That is right.
[Kagan:] And we are in a state that is very successful in carrying out the death penalty. So you have men who now are going to be facing charges of killing a police officer, could conceivably face the death penalty. They are out there, they are armed and dangerous, they would have nothing to lose about killing other people?
[Cannaday:] That's probably what troubles us more than anything else. We are encouraging all of the agencies throughout the state and throughout the nation to be extremely careful, as this point, because these people do have very little to lose. They are facing capital murder charges.
[Kagan:] Irving Police Chief Lowell Cannaday, thank you very much. We will continue to track that story, as you look for those seven prison escapees.

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] With the margin narrowing and the deadline nearing, both sides in Florida remain dug in for a battle to examine the Florida quagmire, now a legal quagmire in many ways. We're joined by two south Florida members of Congress. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen has been rallying Republicans in Miami and Peter Deutsch represents Democrats in parts of two companies, Broward and Miami- Dade. Welcome to you both.
[Rep. Ileana Ros-lehtinen , Florida:] Thank you. Good morning.
[Rep. Peter Deutsch , Florida:] Thank you.
[O'brien:] Mr. Deutsch, I'd like to begin with you. I know you've been watching a lot of the counting under way. What's your impression of the fairness of the whole process?
[Deutsch:] Well, in Broward County, as you're well aware, the manual recount was completed last night and I think the process went really very well in Broward County. We ended up with a fair and accurate count, as provided for under the Florida law. The manual recount is a more accurate way of determining voter intent, as provided by the Florida legislature, as well as eight or nine other states. The computers can't read partially detached chads, holes in chads, dimpled chads and the canvassing board went through them one by one and no votes were manufactured, but literally over a thousand voters, both Bush voters and Gore voters, votes were counted because of the manual recount.
[O'brien:] All right, let's look at the flip side of the chad here, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, what are your impressions of the overall fairness of the process?
[Ros-lehtinen:] Well, of course, I'm sure that Peter would be very happy with that recount because I think the Broward Canvassing Board used two standards, first, the ouija board, and when that didn't get them enough votes, then they used the other very strong criterion, which says you have to be a lunatic to vote for George W. Bush. Of course you meant to vote for Al Gore. They used the dimpled ballot. And I want the viewers to understand that this is an incredible process, where there's no hole, there's no light shining through. It's very unlike the process that Palm Beach is using. And let me just read two sentences of what they were using beforehand as part of their criteria. It says that an indentation is not evidence of intent to cast a valid vote. Well, that was then, this is now. Now Broward County, what a surprise, over 500 votes for Al Gore, of course, it's totally biased and each person in that canvassing board had a different criteria of what constituted a ballot. There were no written uniform standards to guide this statewide election and it is, I think it will be a court challenge for whoever wins or wherever loses.
[O'brien:] All right...
[Deutsch:] Let me just jump in...
[O'brien:] I'll tell you what, Mr. Deutsch...
[Deutsch:] Because...
[O'brien:] Mr. Deutsch...
[Deutsch:] Let me just jump in, though, just in response because in Broward...
[O'brien:] All right, briefly because we've talked about these chads ad nauseum.
[Deutsch:] OK, but again, in Broward County, unfortunately they did not use the dimpled standard, Ileana. That's exactly, I wish they did because eight other states, every appellate court in the United States that has faced this issue has said to use the dimpled standard. The Texas statute by statute says use the dimpled standard. In fact, a state representative manual recount was just done in the state of Texas where they used, guess what, the dimpled standard. So I wish in the county...
[Ros-lehtinen:] In Texas...
[O'brien:] All right, all right.
[Deutsch:] ... that they had...
[O'brien:] Enough.
[Deutsch:] But they did what...
[O'brien:] Let's move along.
[Deutsch:] ... what was provided under Florida law. They looked at every ballot...
[O'brien:] Folks...
[Deutsch:] ... ballot by ballot.
[Ros-lehtinen:] That's not true.
[O'brien:] Folks, can I ask you for just a moment to get your crystal balls out or your ouija boards, if you prefer, and look ahead here to the deadline. In all likelihood, what is going to happen here is Palm Beach is not going to finish the task today and what is going to happen, the count will virtually stand as it does right now and what that will do is put Katherine Harris in a position to certify George W. Bush as the winner in Florida. OK, what happens then, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen?
[Ros-lehtinen:] Well, I think the first thing is that the Al Gore campaign will once again try to get the Miami-Dade Canvassing Board to count hand ballots, even though already at three levels in our judicial process they have been turned down. First, the Miami-Dade Canvassing Board said no, we cannot continue because we cannot meet the deadline. Then they went, Al Gore's campaign went to a local judge. That judge says Miami-Dade Canvassing Board is right. It's their discretion if they can't do it. Then the Al Gore campaign took it to the appeals court. Once again, Al Gore lost. Then they took it to the Florida Supreme Court, a court that we say is really appointed by Republicans, and once again the Miami-Dade Canvassing Board was affirmed to be correct in this decision.
[O'brien:] Look, I'm trying to get a handle on what's going to happen next, though. If you could give me an idea...
[Ros-lehtinen:] So that's going to be what's going to happen next.
[O'brien:] If you were advising...
[Ros-lehtinen:] They are going to sue the board of Miami-Dade.
[O'brien:] If you were advising the Bush camp, would you have Mr. Bush make a speech and declare victory and demand a concession from Mr. Gore?
[Ros-lehtinen:] That would be the correct thing to do. We're going to have an election certified today by 6:00 p.m. but I know that court challenges will continue. No one says that they shouldn't continue. But to go on and count and recount and recount until Al Gore gets the votes that he needs, I think, is an unfair process.
[O'brien:] Mr. Deutsch...
[Ros-lehtinen:] There's got to be an end to this.
[O'brien:] ... what happens if George W. Bush, after the certification, makes some sort of victory speech? What does the Gore camp do next?
[Deutsch:] Well, I think, first of all, it would be absurd. I think we need to step back a little and remind everyone in America what happened in Miami-Dade County. What happened in Miami-Dade County is a bunch of paid, out of state, you know, political operatives came into south Florida to try to disrupt the fair and accurate count of a federal election. They tried to do it in Broward County. They weren't successful. We didn't let it happen. Unfortunately, the reality of what happened on Wednesday was they were successful in Miami-Dade. If Al Gore, assuming at five o'clock today he's not ahead, if he does not contest what happened in Miami-Dade, what we will have had happen in the United States of America is literally, as crazy as it sounds, a mob determining the outcome illegally, in violation of the federal Voting Rights Act, a mob will determine who became president of the United States. I can't believe that the people of America would want that to happen.
[Ros-lehtinen:] That is absolutely untrue.
[Deutsch:] And I don't believe the Florida courts will allow that to happen either.
[Ros-lehtinen:] No.
[O'brien:] All right, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen briefly, because we're running out of time.
[Ros-lehtinen:] That is actually factually untrue. The Miami-Dade Supervisor of Elections, David Leahy himself said he was not intimidated. It was a vote that he cast to say that he could not continue with the hand count. And many of their Republican Hispanic precincts were not counted. He could not submit those reports by 5:00 p.m. today. He was not intimidated. Don't make up the facts, Peter, just to your theory.
[Deutsch:] That's just not true, Ileana. That's what he said to "The New York Times" and a reporter reported it. You know, he changed his statement after he realized, you know, who his bosses are, a Republican county commission. But again, the reporter I spoke with stands by his article.
[Ros-lehtinen:] Who won Miami Al Gore won Miami-Dade County.
[O'brien:] I'm sorry, I'm going to have to revoke...
[Deutsch:] Stands by his article that they weren't committee people, saw it on TV...
[Ros-lehtinen:] Gore won this county, Peter. How many more votes do you want?
[Deutsch:] They saw it themselves on TV, Ileana.
[O'brien:] All right, I am sorry. Our time is expired.
[Deutsch:] I mean the people in America saw it.
[O'brien:] I must invoke cloture here. Thank you so much both...
[Deutsch:] They saw it on
[Tv. O'brien:] ... for being with us.
[Ros-lehtinen:] Untrue.
[O'brien:] Ileana Ros-Lehtinen...
[Deutsch:] How can it be untrue? They saw it on TV, Ileana.
[O'brien:] Representative Peter Deutsch of the 18th and 20th Districts of Florida respectively. Thanks very much for being with us on
[Cnn Sunday Morning. Deutsch:] Thanks a lot.
[O'brien:] Clearly the debate continues.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to turn to the Middle East peace talks under way in Maryland. On the eve of the seventh day of negotiations, President Clinton has broken his silence on how the talks are going, saying there is some progress. But he doesn't stop there. CNN's Kelly Wallace is near Camp David where the talks are going on and she joins us with the latest. Hi, Kelly.
[Kelley Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, Hi there, Carol. I guess you can say the president sort of broke the so-called "news blackout" that was agreed to by all sides when this summit began when he gave us a glimpse of just what is going on behind closed doors. In an interview with the "New York Daily News," the president signaled there is some progress. He also, though, said this is one of the toughest negotiations he's ever been involved in, and he also said he doesn't know if they will succeed. Let's show you an exact quote of the president from that interview with the "New York Daily News." He said, quote, "I'm more optimistic than I was when they got here. This is really important. We might make it. I don't know. God, it's hard. It's like nothing I've ever dealt with: all the negotiations with the Irish, all the stuff I've done with the Palestinians before this and with the Israelis, the Balkans at Dayton." Now, when you look at the photographs the White House has been releasing of the negotiations under way at the presidential retreat at Camp David, it is really hard to know what each side is thinking. But, today, both sides are saying that President Clinton's comments reflect their perspective of what is going on behind closed doors even though the two sides have a definite different take of what is happening, the Palestinians saying there has been some progress on some issues, but the Israelis indicating that the gaps, especially on the key issues, still remain wide, the key issues being the fate of Palestinian refugees and the status of Jerusalem. Again, not clear of what is happening today. The White House still hoping to get some type of deal before the president leaves for Japan on Wednesday. Kelly Wallace, CNN, reporting live from near Camp David, Maryland.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Kelly, thank you.

[Jeff Greenfield:] As America's students head back to school, one of the oldest questions in our history heads back with them: How do we make our schools better? More money? More accountability? Higher standards? Computers in every classroom? More discipline? Tonight, yet another question: What is it we want our schools to do? Tonight on GREENFIELD AT LARGE. America's students are heading back to school now, some 53 million of them, and that sound you're hearing is not just their groans of resignation, nor their parents' sighs of relief. You are also hearing the renewal of a debate that's as old as the republic: what should our schools teach, how should they teach it, who should run them, by what standards? There's hardly an issue in our public life, from economic justice to the politics of race, to our morals and values to the promise and perils of high tech, that hasn't focused on our schools. Today, as CNN's Rusty Dornin tells us, there's another question: Just how much can and should we ask of our schools?
[Paul Cheng, Principal, Lowell High School:] Any ninth graders here?
[Rusty Dornin, Cnn Correspondent:] Paul Cheng, principal of Lowell High School in San Francisco, knows about expectations. His school is academically one of the best in the Bay Area. He knows in education, there are no end to the expectations.
[Cheng:] We know that there is a greater demands for student performance. We know there's a greater demand for parent involvement, and teachers to teach at higher standards, and to have everybody rise to a higher level.
[Dornin:] So many expectations, and for so many schools, so few resources. The goals may be the same.
[Cheng:] A very strong curriculum, quality teaching and a safe school environment.
[Dornin:] But few can agree on how to achieve them. More computers or more math teachers? What about English? Art? After- school programs? Paul Cheng is one of a growing number of educators who say, "Let each school district make up its own mind."
[Cheng:] Those people who are in the community know best how best to use those dollars. I think people at the central government and the state government, they need to recognize that.
[Dornin:] While many schools want to do their own thing when it comes to where money is spent, teachers say they want to know what's expected of them. That means figuring out what are the top priorities. The American Federation of Teachers says standardized curriculum in core subjects, more teachers, smaller class sizes, stronger reading programs in lower grades and extra help for students who need it. And then there's technology. While many believe computer literacy should be added to the three R's, reading, writing and arithmetic, there are still those who say, "Hold on, let's not get fancy until we learn our ABC's."
[Greenfield:] CNN's not ABC's, but CNN's Rusty Dornin. Joining us now to talk about this from Washington, Bob Chase. He is president of the National Education Association, the nation's largest union of public school teachers. Also in Washington, Jeanne Allen. She is president of the Center for Education Reform. With me here in New York, James Verrilli. He is co-founder and co-director of the North Star Academy, a charter school in Newark, New Jersey. James, that school that you co-run. In terms of the kids who come in and their needs, how different are they from what we traditionally think of as what kids come to school to do, and how do you meet those new needs?
[James Verrilli, Co-founder, North Star Academy:] I think there are a great deal of needs that students come to school with. A lot of students come to school unprepared academically, many have not been read to as children. Their fundamentals in math and reading and writing are very low. They come particularly where I am, in the city of Newark there is a lot of problems in the city, there's a lot of crime, substance abuse, sexual abuse, violence in city so they come from all this, plus parents that are struggling to get by. Mostly single parents who are trying to do this. So they come to school with a great deal of needs, and we had the choice of crying out at the darkness or lighting a candle. And we chose to light a candle. And what we did was to create a school that would really meet the needs of the students there. So we have a longer day, a longer year. Our students go to school through the end of July. We're there every day until 5:00. Our school day runs about an hour or two longer than a regular school day, and then we have after-school activities and programs for the students. What we're trying to do is rise up meet the needs that the community used to provide but doesn't any longer. So we as a school have to meet those needs and provide them. But it takes a great deal.
[Greenfield:] Bob Chase, on the one hand it would seem to me that any teacher could cry, you know, they're bearing the burdens of Joe being asked to do all this. But the other thing that this raises is, if a big city asks the public school system and its teachers to work through the end of July, to be in school until 5:00 every day, to work through lunch hour, the things that James is talking about that would be, I think, probably a strike. In other words...
[Robert Chase, President, National Education Association:] I don't think that is necessarily true, Jeff.
[Greenfield:] OK. Tell me, then, how the teachers are preparing in a public school system to meet the kinds of needs James is telling us about.
[Chase:] Sure, right. There are a lot of schools right now, and a lot of districts, individual schools in districts, who do exactly what James is talking about, where there are extended school days, extended school years, some are programs after-school programs. These type of programs within the public school systems are in fact growing. And if you had an opportunity to really sit down and talk with a lot of public school teachers, they would tell you that these are, in fact, the kind of programs that we need to see in place, with the resources available, to help kids succeed.
[Greenfield:] So then, Miss Allen, if in fact, Bob Chase is right, that public school public school systems, public school teachers are quite aware of the needs that James is telling us about. We have longer days, longer years. Why the clamor for basic reform? That is the group that you had.
[Jeanne Allen, President, Center For Education Reform:] Well, Jeff, in fact, what James had just described is absolutely a model that we should be emulating all across this country. Somebody in the piece your opening piece said that he believes that the school district should have control over where to spend money and what kind of things to purchase. I would go one step further. I think we need to give it to people like James and the co-director to start individual schools, where the money and the teachers themselves the teachers themselves decide where the money is spent, how it is spent, and are directly accountable to the parents. And that kind of setting, Jeff, which has all sorts of programs that we all can agree are there, however, they are locally and community driven, and they are based on the needs of the smaller group of kids, right in front of those folks at that particular charter school. The question the debate today about reform isn't so much what, it is how you take all of these things and put it in a box. Do you use the traditional big city or big town school districts with a central office, with everybody from top down telling people what to do, making them very unresponsive and resulting in what we do have today, which is lack of ABCs known? Or do you take the system and kind of break it up and allow it to still be united but yet have these wonderful autonomous public schools where people have opportunities to delve into this and to specialize where they need it in different places? Newark may be different from Washington, may be different from a suburb. That is where we have to give the control and the incentives, at that level.
[Greenfield:] James, let me ask you. Can this program can this charter school that you are running is it having impact on the public schools in Newark, New Jersey? Are they adapting to what you're showing might be one way to help?
[Verrilli:] We are working very hard to make inroads into the district and to share with them, but unfortunately, the systems are so different that it's hard make it happen. I think that what's happened to the traditional district schools in Newark, is they used a very old model which I think is obsolete. It's like the old housing that they used to make in the 50s for poor folks, these giant projects that were like warehouses for poor people and they put everybody in. Well, nowadays in Newark they're blowing those up and they're building small row houses and condominiums and town houses which are much more humane for people to live in. What I would like to see is school systems begin to do that, because the public education system is not its present manifestation, it's a system that serves the needs of the public.
[Greenfield:] Do you think that's right, Bob Chase, that in fact that the model itself, a centralized, top-down model has to be radically restructured?
[Chase:] First, Jeff, I think there is something interesting that's going on. The whole concept of charter schools would is a concept that enables people to have more opportunity and more choice and doing things within the school to meet the needs of the individual students. At the very same time, we have being passed in state legislatures, as well as in Congress, the legislation that places more controls, in some respect, over the regular public school setting. A very interesting piece of the ESEA discussion that's going on right now in Congress when it comes to the issues of teacher quality, when in fact we are looking at those schools that are deemed to be Title I schools. In the proposed legislation there are very, very strict controls on teacher quality, controls that we think are fine and appropriate and so on. At the very same token, they say these controls or charter schools, rather should be exempt from these very same standards for teachers. What when we're talking about about the idea of enabling school personnel to be empowered and to make decisions at their own level, and at the same time have legislation being adopted or proposed and in some cases, implemented that does exactly the opposite of that, it is rather problematical to understand why people who profess to want more local control are in fact doing just the opposite...
[Greenfield:] I want to pick up on that when we come back. And I also want to pick up on the question that's widely being asked today, whether computers in the classroom are a necessity or a diversion. And later, if our schools have been so troubled for so long, how come America has been doing so well? When we come back.
[Unidentified Male:] And courtesy is what Jane's class talked about that morning. They talked about what courtesy means. Some thought courtesy was like kindness.
[Greenfield:] Just to prove that values were in our classrooms not just in the last five or 10 years, that is a film from 1957, I believe. And we're talking about great expectations for America's schools, with NEA President Bob Chase in Washington. Also in Washington, Jeanne Allen, who is the president of the Center for Education Reform. And here with me in New York, James Verrilli, co-director of the North star Academy, a Newark, New Jersey charter school. Ms. Allen, just on that one question, I don't want to get mired in the legislative agenda of education, but on the issue of whether it's fair to require more of public schoolteachers than of teachers in charter school, is Mr. Chase right about this?
[Allen:] No. There is there is a little bit of a different focus on what's really way going on right now. Essentially, Jeff, across the country and in Congress the debate is about standards, teaching and structure, structure being the kind of thing we just described about charter schools, teaching being how do you make sure the people in front of our kids whom are getting the lion's share, who are getting the lion's share of federal dollars in terms of helping disadvantaged kids are really in fact helping those children get the remedial education they need, and standards how do we hold them to high standards without getting so boggled or boggled in local control that we take over the schools. It is a very, very good question, very good debate, but here is what's really happening: Charter schools are on a performance contract. Unlike every other kind of public school in this country, charter schools have to sign a performance contract laying out their goals. They still have to meet health safety, civil rights and the academic standards, but it's all loose on the means, there are allowed to get there the way they want. What they tend to do, we know through federal as well as university research, is they tend to incentivize their teachers and their staff. They tend to hold them to very high standards, pay them for responsibilities as well as how they perform. We have a huge problem in this country. We don't hold teachers with fixed salary schedules responsible for whether the child learns, and so while many of us long for a simpler time where we can simply send the kids to school and get them to learn, the fact of the matter is teaching is the only profession and teachers are dying for this where we don't say to them, the best ones make this much, and that's great, and the other ones that need help, we've got to do something about it or move them on.
[Greenfield:] All right, let me Ms. Allen, I want to let Mr. Verrilli respond to this specific point: Are your teachers held to the same standards in terms of training, education, as public schools teachers?
[Verrilli:] Far higher.
[Greenfield:] Far higher?
[Verrilli:] Far higher standards, absolutely. Well, it's everything. The quality of teaching is everything in education. A good teacher in the classroom is where teaching happens. And we would not have 900 kids on our waiting list, which is what we have now, if we don't have the absolute best people in our classrooms teaching the kids, because they choose to come here. No one forces them to go to our school the way they would in a district school. So if we don't have the absolute best teachers in the room, nothing will fly, and we are held accountable to a standard, to a high expectation, and the only way we can meet it is if our teachers in the classroom are the absolute best.
[Greenfield:] Mr. Chase, the question I guess which always comes up is: What when you say standards, do you mean, for instance, that the teachers don't necessarily have to have a degree from a teachers college, or school of education, or are you talking about something else?
[Chase:] I'm talking about that plus. Certainly, we believe that those who teach should know how to teach, and we also believe that those who teach should be very well grounded and know their subject area. Both of those things should be in place.
[Greenfield:] All right, well...
[Chase:] As a matter of fact, that is what's being called
[Greenfield:] Because we have a limited amount of time, I do want to turn or wrench the discussion to a different area, and that is the, you know, in every generation, somebody has a magic bullet, whether it's everybody had to be a math and science major after sputnik or everybody has to learn phonics, now it's computers in the classroom. Is it a fair point that if your kids, or any kids, are not computer- learned by the time they get out of school, they are at a powerful disadvantage? Is this a key to what you do?
[Verrilli:] I think it's important to what we do. I think that computer literacy is a skill that children will need, and our children do not have computers at home, so it is up to us as the school to provide them. We have worked very hard to gets lots of technology in the school. We spray-paint the keys, kids learn to touch-type. We have the Internet, they learn to do PowerPoint presentations. However, that alone, a computer in the room, is not going to change things. Again, it's the good teacher using that tool which will make a difference in education.
[Greenfield:] Ms. Allen, your organization is the Center for Education Reform, is computer literacy part of the reform you want to see, or do you think it is a side issue?
[Allen:] I think it's one of the I think it is a side issue at this point. I think I absolutely agree with James, a good school that is held highly accountable, like his school is, and that has to educate all these children and be accountable to their customers, is going to use technology well. The problem has become, like everything we have thrown on the schools, we just assume that by throwing a bunch of computers in a classroom, oftentimes without training and without integrating it, excuse me, into a program, that it's suddenly going to let kids learn. I have been in public schools in lots of cities where kids are sitting in front of the computer to learn to read, and yet there is no one really helping instruct them, but they somehow have been told it's a beautiful computer, it's an expensive program, this will do the trick. It's not teacher's fault that's happening. Quite frankly, it's one of those other top-down controls, so I think that we definitely need to give children those skills, just like I had typing. And now kids need computers, but at the same time, it is a small part. We've got to remember, our kids still aren't reading and writing and doing some of the basic stuff they can do manually, and should learn to do manually first.
[Greenfield:] Mr. Chase, I wonder if this is one of those issues where you and Ms. Allen might actually be in agreement but you can tell me. Do you want to see computers in every classroom, is it an important part of what you think we have to do next?
[Chase:] I think I think computers are an important part, and I think computer literacy is something that's very important for all of our youngsters, but I also agree with the fact that in using computers and technology in schools they have to be integrated into the program. To have them be add-ons without them being fully integrated is really a mistake. There is a growing amount of quality software available for that kind of integration, and it's particularly important.
[Greenfield:] All right. We want to take one more break, and when we come back, we are going to ask our guests we are going to put them on the spot, actually, and ask them for the one thing each of them would most like to fix in American education, after this. President Bush, candidate Bush, back last March, March of 2000, visiting the North Star Charter School in Newark, New Jersey. And we are back for some final thoughts on what we can do now to make our schools more effective, given all the demands on them. James, you hosted the future president. You've given us a kind of preview. What's the one thing you would like to see done?
[Verrilli:] I think educational justice for the disadvantaged. I think that if we could create the kinds of schools that urban children really need, which would be small, which would be diverse, which would be able to meet their needs in a way that's really successful, to eliminate this whole kind of model, of a factory model to a more humane model, that really meets the needs of the kids who come to our schools and gives them the kind of educational justice they deserve.
[Greenfield:] And just a quick follow-up: would you like to see that done throughout the school system, not just in charter and experimental schools, but as a...
[Verrilli:] Yes. The overall school system, I think, needs radical change if we're going to meet the needs of the kids we serve.
[Greenfield:] Mr. Chase, does the school system as a whole need radical change if we're going to serve the kids that we want to serve?
[Chase:] Well, I think my answer to the initial question, Jeff, would be equal opportunity for all kids. There's no question about the fact that that is crucial. There are three or four things I think that can bring that about. Obviously, ensuring a quality teacher in every classroom, the resources necessary to make things work, parental involvement. Just opportunities being there, and people working together to meet the needs of our students.
[Greenfield:] Ms. Allen, that sounds fine. What do you want to add to that add to that mix?
[Allen:] I just want to put a sharper point on the concept of equal opportunity. You know, Jeff, across America this week and next week, our kids are going back to school. And for the most part, the majority of children are going to school not based on their needs, not based on what they need from a school or how successful the school is, but based on where they live. We have got to get away from this ancient idea that somehow children can learn based on their housing pattern. The only reason we're even having the kinds of debates and they're great debates, despite the fact that some of us might disagree the only reason we're having it is because the pressure of greater parent choice across the country in a variety of venues has taken place. We have got to let parents be in the driver's seat, vote with their feet and have some critical options. It's the only thing that's going to pressure the system to get that equal opportunity for all kids.
[Greenfield:] We're down, literally, to our last minute and because, James, you are actually in these schools, so I want to give you the last word on one key question. In terms of money, does your school get about what a regular school gets, more, or less, to do what you do?
[Verrilli:] We get significantly less to do significantly more, and I think it's a problem. I think if our society is going to ask us to meet these higher expectations in the way that North Star is attempting to do so, we need greater resources to do it. Money alone will not solve the problem, but money to programs like ours, that are successful and working very hard in achieving, should receive a greater share of the public dollar to do so, if we're going to serve the children well.
[Greenfield:] And just one last point, because we really have just a few seconds. Are the schools in education, which train most of our teachers, training them to meet the needs that you're trying to meet at North Star?
[Verrilli:] I think there's a great variety of that. Different schools do it well. Different schools do not.
[Greenfield:] All right.
[Allen:] No.
[Greenfield:] I'm sorry?
[Allen:] No.
[Chase:] I think James' answer was right. Some schools are doing an excellent job in preparing teachers. Others are problematic.
[Greenfield:] All right. That's a sufficiently ambivalent note to end this conversation. Thank you very much to all of our guests: Bob Chase, president of the National Education Association; Jeanne Allen, president of the Center for Education Reform; and James Verrilli he's co-director of the North Star Academy Charter School in Newark, New Jersey. When we come back, a really heretical thought: Are schools really the key to America's future? After this. "And Another Thing": If there is one thing that unites almost everybody about education and it may be the only thing that does it's that our future as a nation will be shaped by the quality of our schools. If our schools are failing, then we must be, as one influential report was titled 20 years ago," a nation at risk." OK, but consider, in the late 1950s, after the Soviet Union put the first satellite in space, there was a national outcry at the state of our schools. "Life" magazine showed our high-schoolers frittering away their time at school dances while back in Moscow Ivan was studying physics and rocket science 10 hours a day. Conquest was just a matter of time, "Life" implied. Well, now the Soviet Union No longer exists. Come to think of it, neither does "Life" magazine. In the 1980s, when Japan seemed to be buying up America's economy, we were sure that their far more rigorous education was the key to their imminent economic conquest. Now, Japan is an economic basket case. The high-tech revolution happened here. Year after year, decade after decade, our students show breathtaking ignorance about history, geography, math, science. It must be only a matter of time before it catches up to us, but as the song says, "Time goes by so slowly." I'm Jeff Greenfield. Tomorrow, who decides whether a patient lives or dies when the patient cannot speak for herself? "SPORTS TONIGHT" is next. Thank you for watching. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Mayor Rudy Giuliani , New York City:] People in New York City sort of have a reputation for being very tough and they have a reputation for being kind of cynical, but the reality is that they're the most generous and the most loving people in the whole world.
[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] A day after disclosing his prostate cancer, Rudy Giuliani exudes warmth, while his aides try to make the future of his Senate campaign seem less fuzzy. Also ahead
[Bruce Morton, Cnn Correspondent:] Landmarks are there, but something is missing. In a state which likes politics, voters are coming late to campaign 2000
[Woodruff:] Bruce Morton on the political scene in Illinois. Plus
[William O'brien, Ret. Miami Police Chief:] I refuse to be the chief of police in a city that has someone as divisive and disruptive as Joe Carollo as mayor.
[Woodruff:] In Miami, political casualties from the Elian Gonzalez case.
[Announcer:] From Washington, this is INSIDE POLITICS, with Bernard Shaw and Judy Woodruff.
[Woodruff:] Thank you for joining us. Bernie is on assignment. We begin with the talk of New York and beyond, after Rudy Giuliani's prostate cancer diagnosis. Even many supporters who are interested, first and foremost, in the mayor's recovery also are anxious that he may decide not to run for the Senate, so Giuliani's aides are launching a new campaign of reassurance. CNN's Frank Buckley looks at Giuliani's day and his future.
[Frank Buckley, Cnn Correspondent:] New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani remained on the job, but received a reminder of his newly diagnosed condition.
[Unidentified Male:] I brought you some get-well canoli from Royal Crown Bakery in Staten Island.
[Buckley:] The kidding over the mayor's serious diagnosis, matched by his Senate campaign staff's furious effort to keep up appearances.
[Juleanna Glover Weiss, Giuliani Campaign Spokeswoman:] At this point in time, the schedule is to remain as is, and we're going to go ahead.
[Buckley:] Giuliani aides are on overdrive, reassuring reporters and supporters that the mayor is still in the Senate race, after he left the door open to the possibility of pulling out. He said Friday he plans to cut back on campaign events while he evaluates his future.
[Giuliani:] Over the next two weeks, I need to meet with doctors and others to talk about what's the best thing to do, how should we do it, so I'm going to need to do that. So I will do some campaign events, but I will cut them probably in half.
[Buckley:] But Giuliani's campaign sent signals the candidacy is still viable, sources telling CNN Giuliani is sending out two million pieces of direct mail and making his biggest ad buy to date. The mayor telling listeners on his weekly radio show that physically he's alright.
[Giuliani:] I want to reassure everyone that I'm in very good spirits.
[Buckley:] Some political observers say, from a raw political perspective, Giuliani could be helped by the health issue.
[Nelson Warfield, Fmr. Bob Dole Spokesman:] There's also something from a sort of whole
[Buckley:] But if Giuliani decides to back out, Congressman Rick Lazio could be first to get in. The Long Island Republican said just last month that he was still open to a run. Other potential candidates, Westchester County DA Janine Piro and even New York Governor George Pataki. The governor saying, however, he expects Giuliani to be the candidate.
[Gov. George Pataki , New York:] Obviously, he'll have to make a decision now based on how strong he feels, but I would hope that he would be in a position to continue to lead the city and help us lead the state into the 21st century.
[Buckley:] Giuliani remains focused on his job as mayor for the moment, fully aware of the storm of speculation billowing around him.
[Giuliani:] This is my 66th town hall meeting 76th.
[Buckley:] Most Republicans here continue to believe Giuliani will run. And on May 30, they'll nominate they're Senate candidate at their state convention. They hope Rudy Giuliani will be ready to accept. Frank Buckley, CNN, New York.
[Woodruff:] Mayor Giuliani plans to attend a Republican women's dinner in Upstate New York tonight, and he appears tomorrow in Buffalo, where Hillary Rodham Clinton now says she that she will join Giuliani at a forum sponsored by New York's Independence Party. Many see Giuliani's continued campaigning as an example of the fighting spirit that has been both an asset and a target of criticism during his political career. Political observers say the seeds of New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani's combative nature were sown in childhood. He grew up a Yankees fan on the home turf of the Dodgers, Brooklyn, and took considerable heat from the kids in his neighborhood. As a grownup and throughout his career, Giuliani has treated public service as a battle. He's built a reputation for straight talk, political independence and obstinacy. Controversy has followed him his entire public life. As number three in the Reagan Justice Department, Giuliani made headlines, denying political asylum to Haitian refugees fleeing dictator Jean Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier. As the U.S. attorney for New York's southern district in the 1980s, Giuliani humiliated three Wall Street traders accused of insider trading by parading them in handcuffs, took down '80s icons Michael Milken and Leona Helmsley and took on the mob. He jokes about that time fondly.
[Giuliani:] It's nice of all yous to have me here tonight. Families are represented from all over the country.
[Woodruff:] In 1989, Giuliani ran for mayor, and narrowly lost to David Dinkins. He got his revenge four years later, and won re- election easily in 1997. Giuliani's record as mayor, impressive and of course controversial. He has angered many New Yorkers, black and white alike, for his support of police officers in brutality scandals, but Giuliani has also led a transformation of New York from a bankrupt, crime ridden and dangerous place to the prosperous city best symbolized by the rebirth of Times Square. His reputation, combined with Hillary Rodham Clinton's celebrity, has made their matchup the most talked about Senate race in the century, billed as the political slugfest to rival the best of the Madison Square Garden prize fights. And now this.
[Giuliani:] And I know all these cameras are here because they're very, very interested in all the issues that involve
[Woodruff:] For Giuliani, politics has always been personal, and never more than now. The question on many New Yorkers minds, will this tough as nails mayor choose to fight for the Senate seat anyway, or step aside and focus exclusively on his illness? And Joining us now, E.J. Dionne of "The Washington Post" and Bill Kristol of "The Weekly Standard." Bill, what are the chances, do you think, that Rudy Giuliani might decide not make this race after all?
[Bill Kristol, "weekly Standard":] Judy, I just spoke to Bruce Teitelbaum about 20 minutes ago, Mayor Giuliani's top political operative, who said the mayor gave the go signal this morning, the green light to go ahead with a plan, a 2 million piece direct mail drop with a major media buy for the month of May. Obviously, the mayor is going to have to make up his mind when he decides on the medical treatment that he's going to have, but the medical prognosis is good, the cancer is localized, and Bruce Teitelbaum said the mayor said to him, Bruce, you know me, I'm a fighter; as of now, at least, I plan to go ahead, and I plan to win.
[Woodruff:] E.J., based on what you know, do you believe he's going to go ahead?
[E.j. Dionne, "washington Post":] Well, my inclination is to think he'll go ahead, and I think what Bill just said is interesting, because as soon as Giuliani got sick, people started speculating about, well, he didn't really want to make this race and there's some reluctance on his part, and so he would use this as an excuse to drop out, and I think it was very important that he send the signal that he seems to be sending through what Bill said and what others are saying, that no, no, no, he is really in this for reel. It would put the Republican Party in a very difficult position if he couldn't run, if he decided to drop out. None of the money he has raised, lot of which is money directed as much against Mrs. Clinton as it is for Mr. Giuliani none of that money could be transferred to another Republican candidate, so they'd have to kind of start from scratch. Now you can probably raise a lot of money running against Mrs. Clinton, but it would be a problem, so I would guess he's going to run unless somebody terrible happens. But as Bill said, the health prognosis looks pretty good.
[Woodruff:] So, Bill Kristol, not even worth speculating about who might run in his stead.
[Kristol:] Well, it's always worth speculating, Judy; this is politics after all. Look, and we don't know, and Mayor Giuliani says, he's not certain right now. There are a bunch of names, a bunch of congressman, two from Long Island in particular, Rick Lazio, who was tempted to run earlier and backed out when Giuliani took a plunge, Peter King, also from Long Island, two independent, pretty attractive congressman, and then there's the question of Governor Pataki, who is not, I think, going to be George Bush's vice presidential pick, and who might be tempted to get in himself. And it's a late primary, a September primary, the Republican Party doesn't have its convention until May 30. So there's a whole month here for us to talk about this. But look, I think the odds are Giuliani stays in, and if he does, obviously no one else gets it.
[Woodruff:] And E.J., predictions about whether this whole thing assuming he can keep this treatment under control, can continue campaigning any predictions about how this affects his strength as a candidate?
[Dionne:] Well, I'm sure the last thing Rudy Giuliani wanted was to get cancer. I think but when you look at the flow of the campaign, the flow of the campaign was not very good for him at this point. This not only broke the flow of the campaign, but I was talking to a Democrat yesterday who said that Giuliani, not surprisingly, looked terribly human and sort of conveyed something that he had not easily conveyed when he was talking about issues or talking about talks, something a softer side of himself, and so I think that helps him. And obviously, Mrs. Clinton is going to lay off Rudy Giuliani for a while, so it gets in the way of what I think was a pretty good trajectory for her in this period. But all that said, I'm sure Rudy Rudy Giuliani would still rather not have that cancer.
[Woodruff:] I want to interject here that CNN has learned that John McCain offered to to do whatever he could for Giuliani when he heard about the prostate cancer. And among other things, he's going to fill in for him on two Sunday shows, including here on CNN on "LATE EDITION." Meantime, a lot of toing and froing about whether there's a meeting between John McCain and George W. Bush. There was a meeting between their two top aides today. They say the meeting is going ahead. Bill Kristol, is this meeting going to be meaningful? Is it going to produce some results that are going to help George W. Bush in his march to the nomination and on in November?
[Kristol:] Well, who knows? And I don't think it will be terribly meaningful, but I don't know that it will be terribly reply damaging either. And at the end of the day, John McCain will support George W. Bush. I now think he will not be George W. Bush's vice presidential nominee. I once did think, right after March 7th when the primaries ended, that if Bush had really made a run at getting McCain for five or six weeks, had romanced him, had made a pitch to him, I think McCain was getable. I think that's the case anymore. So I think McCain will not be the VP. They'll have a meeting, they'll have another meeting. McCain will speak in primetime at the convention, and the Bush campaign will chug ahead.
[Woodruff:] So, E.J., what role then does John McCain play in this election?
[Dionne:] You know, what I think is funny, almost every week or every other week we discuss this. It's almost a soap opera, "The Edge of Endorsement." And I think the fact that we keep discussing it is talks about where the problem is, which is to say that McCain and Bush don't really like each other from everything you can gather. They do have real problems reaching any kind of accord on issues that Bush cares about. McCain wants to preserve his integrity. He also wants to be a loyal Republican. He's got a terrible balancing act here, I think. And then there have been snafus all along the line where things leak out of one side or the other that get in the way of the endorsement that both sides claim to want. In the end, I think McCain will support Bush. I think he's going to hold back a little bit. I think you're going to be able to tell that he's not wild about Bush. But he doesn't want to hurt himself in the long run. If Bush loses and he wants to run again, he's going to have to look loyal enough that Republicans will take a look at McCain in 2004.
[Woodruff:] McCain, as we know, has been over in Vietnam for the 25th anniversary of the fall of Saigon, but before he left today, he had some very harsh words for the country where he was held prisoner. This is what he had to say.
[Sen. John Mccain , Arizona:] I think that the wrong guys won. I think that they lost millions of their best people, who left by boat, thousands by execution, and hundreds of thousands who went to re-education camps. But the object of my relationship with Vietnam has been to heal the wounds that exist between particularly amongst our veterans and move forward with a positive relationship. Apparently, some in the Vietnamese government don't want to do that, and that's their decision.
[Woodruff:] Coming on the heels of that statement, which was made some hours earlier, our Bill Kristol, your your colleague, Tucker Carlson, and our frequent contributor, commentator here on INSIDE POLITICS, Tucker Carlson was detained in Vietnam. Bill, what can you tell us about that?
[Kristol:] Well, he has been Tucker has been detained in Vietnam, perhaps in retribution for what they regarded as Senator McCain's harsh comments, but what were in fact truthful comments about who should have won the Vietnam War and the terrible consequences of the communist victory. They said that Tucker did not have an exit visa. Apparently, they messed up and didn't stamp his passport on the way in. In any case, it was a ridiculous formality. There were harsh words exchanged at the airport. Senator McCain held the Lufthansa flight up for a couple of hours, making an argument to let Tucker Carlson on board the plane with Senator McCain and his wife and the rest of the journalists who have been traveling with Senator McCain. The Vietnamese were obdurate and wouldn't let him on. They tried to make Tucker sign a statement that he had been in the country illegally. He refused to. They tried to make him fly up to Hanoi somehow on the grounds that that was the only place they could process his papers. He refused to do that. He's with American embassy officials. They're they believe they will be able to get him out of there and get him back home. And we've obviously been in contact with the State Department, and I'm sure CNN has as well, and I'm sure it will work out. But right now, Tucker is detained in Vietnam.
[Woodruff:] But your again, your assumption, Bill Kristol, is that he will be able to get out safely.
[Kristol:] Yes, I told our managing editor, Richard Starr, who was on the phone with him a few hours ago, to reassure Tucker that he was 5 12 years short of the amount of time that Senator McCain had been detained in Vietnam, and so he shouldn't worry. No, look, it's not a laughing matter. I mean, he deserves to be he deserved to be on that flight out of there, and I hope and trust that he'll be out of there soon.
[Woodruff:] Well, I think that's true for all of us. We certainly do. E.J. Dionne and Bill Kristol, thank you both very much for joining us.
[Dionne:] Thank you.
[Kristol:] Thanks, Judy.
[Woodruff:] Up next on INSIDE POLITICS, from the windy city to down on the farm: We'll look at Illinois this election year and how some voters' views have been changing. Plus...
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] Governor Bush says he cares about education and wants to improve our schools. Be that as it may, he has a bad plan.
[Woodruff:] Al Gore invades Bush's turf in more ways than one.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] Years after the end of the Iran-Iraq War, almost 2,000 Iraqi POWs are finally going home. CNN's James Martone reports from the release point on the Iran- Iraq border.
[James Martone, Cnn Correspondent:] Free at last, Iraqi prisoners of war return to their country after as many as 18 years captive in Iran. For most, it was a tearful encounter with loved ones they had not seen in years, or with sons and daughters some of them had never seen. Khaled Khalil Ismael was meeting his family again for the first time in 12 years. His wife, Muthana had been waiting for him on the border for two days with their three children. The youngest of whom, a girl, was not even born when Khaled was captured in 1988. "I can't express anything, just that I have been born again," said Khaled. The prisoners, released under the monitoring of the International Committee of the Red Cross, were put onto buses by the Iraqi authorities. After a medical examination, including an AIDS test, they will be taken home.
[Beat Schweizer, International Red Cross:] They will meet their families and I think this is the very first priority that these prisoners can take, can meet their families. We will debrief them once they have settled down a little bit. And if there are individual cases needing assistance, they will get that from us.
[Martone:] The prisoners are heralded here as heroes of the eight- year war with Iran that claimed nearly a million lives in all. Iraqi officials say the prisoners will be given up to 300,000 dinars, about 150 U.S. dollars, to help them start their lives anew. [on camera]: Close to 2,000 Iraqi prisoners of war are expected to be released by the end of this operation. But both Iraq and Iran say that thousands of their soldiers remain held by the other side nearly 12 years after their war. James Martone, CNN, on the Iraqi-Iranian border.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] So is the idea of national ID cards a good one or a bad one? Well, Jake Tapper, Washington correspondent for salon.com is against the idea. An editorial writer for "The New York Post" Robert George you could say is I guess quasi for a national ID card. Both sound off on this issue this morning. Good morning, gentlemen.
[Jake Tapper, Salon.com:] Hi, Paula.
[Robert George, "the New York Post":] Hi, Jake.
[Tapper:] Hey, Robert.
[Zahn:] Yes, you guys haven't seen each other forever, at least two days here. All right, Jake, would you happily carry a national ID card?
[Tapper:] I would. But I think it is a waste of time. I think it's a typical American attempt at a quick fix. You know the problems we have in this country with terrorism are not that we can't ID the 280 million Americans in this country legally. It's the fact that we have borders that are too porous. We have individuals who come over here who hate us, who want to kill us, who we can't track down when we need to, and that we have serious security problems still on airplanes, and those are the problems we need to focus on.
[Zahn:] Jake, before you go any further, don't you think that if you are required to carry around national ID card, you might pick up more people at the border, particularly when we know that security at the borders, particularly the Canadian border, have been heavily fortified?
[Tapper:] Well, we don't need ID cards for us. The American people don't need to know that Paula Zahn is Paula Zahn. What we need is we need to be able to better identify the terrorists, those are problems. You know, two of the 19 terrorists...
[Zahn:] Yes, but maybe it will be harder to get in here, Robert.
[George:] Yes, I think I CNN, Paula, is a national ID card.
[Zahn:] Thank you, Robert.
[George:] But I am, as you said, quasi in favor of it, because you I think we're at a point now where you have to look at a whole host of ways that we can identify people, that we can actually track some of these people that Jake is talking about. I don't think we should just, you know, reflexively reject something like an ID card out of hand, even though I am concerned about some of the Big Brother implications that are around it.
[Zahn:] All right, but, Robert, how easy it would be to fake their identification. Isn't it true, that if you get a national ID card, you could you falsify information to get the card?
[George:] That is true, but we are getting a whole lot more technology now that you know, that can track people by retina scans, fingerprints, things like that. I think there is a whole lot of possibilities that have to at least be explored.
[Zahn:] But get to the point that Jake was making, that is not going to stop terrorists from coming in at porous borders.
[George:] Well you see, I agree with Jake, and that's why I think a national ID card is going to be part of immigration reform, national security reform, securing the borders and so forth. It's not going to be a silver bullet, but I think it's going to have to be part of more of a comprehensive approach.
[Zahn:] Jake, why wouldn't it work, as just a small part of an overall broader approach?
[Tapper:] It's not that it wouldn't work, it is that there are so many more important things we need to do before we start talking about giving Robert George and me and you national ID cards. We are not problems when it comes to terrorism. The problem are the individuals that we let into this country, and let them have free and unfettered use of anything they want in this country, and we don't track them. That is the problem. Mexican nationals do have ID cards, but the problem is on some of the borders, the INS doesn't yet have computers that allows them to register these cards. There is a lot of work that still needs to be done on focusing on the individuals coming into this country, not focusing on us. As I say, Paula, I mean I was born in Trinidad, then moved to England, then came here. For the first several years, when I was in the United States, I had to register every single year, just to show my whereabouts and so forth, and I think, you know, those are some of the policies that we may have to go back to and make them a lot more stringent.
[Zahn:] Do either one of you see erosion of civil liberties coming with this one? Jake, if it's in force, do you have to carry one around? I mean, after all, any of us who drives a car has to carry around a photo ID and our license.
[Tapper:] It is an erosion of civil liberties. It's probably one according to polls, 70 percent of American people favor such a thing, although the Bush administration said that it is opposed to it. It is an erosion of civil liberties that people are willing to withstand. The question is not what happens with the card, but what comes after the card, as with all questions with civil liberties that we are being presented with these days.
[Zahn:] And what are you the most concerned about after the card?
[Tapper:] Well, who has access to this information, what kind of information is on the card. These are the questions that I think civil libertarians and conservatives would be very concerned about.
[Zahn:] And, Robert, have you even acknowledged that you have some problems with that, but it is something you are willing to consider, because you say we've to start some place, right? Let Robert respond, then fire back.
[George:] You know, that is exactly right, Paula. It is always,a balance, obviously, between civil liberties, how much information the government knows about you, and the general security of the populace, and you are going to definitely balance those things out. I think if we can find some limitations that kind of prevent say the IRS from, you know, from tracking you they can track you anyway but other agencies from illegally tracking you, I think that we definitely have to look at that.
[Zahn:] Jake, even you say you are willing to live with this. You don't think that's going to make that big of a difference.
[Tapper:] I'd have a monkey on my head if I thought it was going to prevent a future terrorist attack...
[George:] Let me see that Jake.
[Tapper:] But I think that the resources that we devote need to be smartly done. Look, there are 30 million entrances in this country of nonimmigrants, people who are from other countries visiting. We only have 2,000 investigators in the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 2,000 for 30 million entrances. That's where this money needs to go not ID cards, so that Robert George, you know, could be identified on the street. We know who Robert is. He is safe. We don't worry about Robert. We need to worry about these people who are coming into this country who are fanatics and want to kill us. Those are the ones we have to worry about.
[Zahn:] All right, Robert, you get the final word this morning.
[George:] Well, then, of course, the question is, you know, how do we identify those people from the normal law-abiding citizen right next to them. This may be something we have to take a look at.
[Zahn:] You guys throw out very good questions, and you answer them well, too, even though you don't always agree on everything. Robert George, Jake Tapper, thank you very much.
[Tapper:] Thanks, Paula.
[George:] Thanks, Paula. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Karuna Shinsho, Cnn Anchor:] Former Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid is back in Jakarta, following medical tests in the United States, and today he warned those who removed him from power they would be held accountable someday for breaching the nation's constitution. Maria Ressa has the details.
[Maria Ressa, Cnn Correspondent:] When he took office, in 1999, Abdurrahman Wahid was Indonesia's first democratically elected president in more than four decades. Now he holds the added distinction of being the country's first president to be fired by its legislature. On Friday, he returned after a medical trip to the United States. The clinically blind Muslim cleric remained in the presidential palace for four days after Megawati Sukarnoputri became Indonesia's new leader, on July 23. The medical checkup was largely seen as a face-saving way for Mr. Wahid to leave the palace. Upon his return, Mr. Wahid maintained he was removed from power unconstitutionally. He said he would continue to fight for democracy, providing an alternative way for Indonesians to seek justice.
[Abdurrahman Wahid, Former Indonesian President:] I will form a clearing house for violations of human rights and anti-democratization efforts without naming the perpetrators, so the victims can directly mail their problems with me, and if possible, I would like to solve that.
[Ressa:] Mr. Wahid lost much of his support because of his erratic and often come capricious style of management. Supporters say he returns to what he knows best: criticizing a government and working for change from the outside. Maria Ressa, CNN, Jakarta.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Still thinking about your New Year's Eve celebration? Well, taking nothing away from Times Square in New York City, here in Atlanta it's kind of becoming the Times Square of the South. And we have this special, behind-the-scenes look from our photographer Adam Schumacher and producer Christina Park.
[Unidentified Female:] We're here at Underground celebrating 2001, baby!
[Unidentified Male:] Want to see the peach come down. Georgia's got peaches, baby. We don't want no apples, we want peaches, that's why. Dufus hat with "2001" on it.
[Unidentified Female:] I want one.
[Unidentified Male:] I got these for a buck. Got to come to Georgia for New Year's. Everybody knows that. We just going to enjoy it, let the kids see the peach thing. Never saw the peach. We drove all the way from Memphis, Tennessee. Greensboro, North Carolina.
[Unidentified Female:] New Orleans.
[Unidentified Male:] I'm from Germany, actually. I'm from New York originally, but I've lived here in Atlanta now. But like I said, I'd rather be here now because there's a lot of snow in New York right now. We have the Southern people and the hospitality that I don't think the New Yorkers have. Rub the horses. Hey, we've got it going on down here. God is calling you to turn your heart back to him. Out here preaching the gospel. Making necklaces. See, you can wear them over your head, around your neck.
[Unidentified Female:] Funnel cakes, lots and lots of funnel cakes. Hot chocolate.
[Unidentified Male:] What kind of ice cream? What flavor? Are you vanilla, butterpecan...
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, it is millennium food. It will take you right through the new year.
[Unidentified Male:] OH, OK. Don't leave me hanging now. Don't leave me hanging.
[Unidentified Child:] The peach falls down and we all yell and scream.
[Crowd:] Six, five, four, three, two, one!
[Unidentified Male:] Celebrating the peach, celebrating the peach! Well, I mean, Atlanta doesn't have, you know, everything like New York has, but it's a pretty nice little city. It's more cleaner than New York. I need a kiss. Oh, hi.
[Crowd:] Happy new year.
[Kagan:] The guy got his kiss, so he had a good New Year's.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Senior Israeli and Palestinian security officials met today with U.S. envoy Anthony Zinni, presiding over discussions meant to lead to a cease-fire agreement. Even as they met, more violence at an Israeli roadblock. CNN Jerusalem bureau chief Mike Hanna is monitoring the volatile events for us this morning. Mike, what do you have?
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Carol, the cease-fire process continuing, despite being buffeted by ongoing acts of violence on the ground. Earlier in the day, Anthony Zinni, the U.S. envoy, met with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. Harsh words were exchanged according to all accounts. Afterwards, he says he did not believe Yasser Arafat was doing all he could to stop these ongoing acts of violence. But despite this, security talks went ahead between Palestinian and Israeli negotiators, security chiefs from each side talking about how to get a truce in place. Well, these talks were postponed from Thursday night after a suicide bombing in the middle of Jerusalem. Three Israelis were killed and dozens injured when a Palestinian suicide bomber detonated an explosive device in the middle of the afternoon in a crowded part of the city. The man was identified as the 22-year-old Palestinian police officer. He was a member of the Al Aqsa brigade, an offshoot of Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement, and details emerging he had been placed in prison by the Palestinian Authority in February. He was released from prison in the West Bank city of Ramallah following Israeli incursion into that city earlier this month. Also on this day, while the negotiators meeting, another bomb attack, this time at a checkpoint in the West Bank. According to the Israeli Defense Force, a Palestinian detonated an explosive device near an Army checkpoint, near the West Bank city of Jenin. The bomber died. No other deaths in the blast. Two Israeli soldiers nearby were likely injured. But a reminder how tenuous the situation as negotiators continue their efforts to get a truce in place on the ground Carol.
[Lin:] Mike, is today's suicide bombing attack, the suicide bomber, is he connected with the group that attacked yesterday in central Jerusalem? Well, there has been one claim of responsibility so far for that attack in a telephone call to news agencies. The group claiming responsibility, the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, the same group that claimed responsibility for the bomb blast in Jerusalem Thursday. But this attack on the West Bank, of a differentiated order on many levels, Carol, the fact that it was not in an Israeli city, the fact that Israeli civilians were not killed certainly a determining factor as to whether Israel sees it as a sufficient breach of tentative agreements in order to break off negotiations. That's not any indication of that happening at this stage. The negotiations are continuing. So Arafat came out yesterday and condemned the attack in central Jerusalem of this group that he has connections with. Has he said that he is, in fact, going to be cracking down on them, going out and arresting, backing his words with some actions?
[Hanna:] Well, that is what the U.S. Is demanding, and that is what Israeli is demanding. Yasser Arafat, as you say, strongly condemned attacks against Israeli civilians following that bomb attack in Jerusalem. But no signs yet of what he means to do or what he intends to do to prevent such attacks. The U.S. is now determined and declared the Al Aqsa Brigades a terrorist organization. There have been demands for Arafat to crack down on Al Aqsa brigades and other extremist organization, such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad. As yet, no sign that this is happening, and Arafat as well on Thursday promised to hunt down those who helped plan the suicide bomb attack in Jerusalem. Once again, no indication that this is happening on the ground. This is a demand that has been made by the U.S. and Israel, all parties waiting to see whether Arafat makes his pledges into a realistic and determined action on the ground Carol.
[Lin:] Waiting indeed. All right, thanks very much. Mike Hanna, reporting live from Jerusalem. Vacations to the Holy Land used to be big business, but not right now, obviously. Tourism has been ruined by terrorism, and the region's economy has been seriously wounded. CNN's Michael Holmes explains.
[Michael Holmes, Cnn Correspondent:] Stroll around Jerusalem and you'll have plenty of room to do so. It's quiet. Very quiet. [on camera]: What sort of change have you seen in these streets in the last month or so?
[Ettie Epstein, Store Worker:] Oh, big, big change. I mean, every day, it's getting worse.
[Holmes:] This is the Ben Yehuda Pedestrian Mall in west Jerusalem, and it's not the rain that's keeping people away. This area has been the scene of several suicide bombings, the most recent in December. This place is usually teeming with tourists, the shops full. But not anymore. These days, even Israelis are reluctant to come here.
[Epstein:] No tourists. Even Israelis, if they do want something, they call us to bring them, if they saw something they want.
[Holmes:] They don't want to come?
[Epstein:] They don't want to come.
[Holmes:] Ettie Epstein works in a deserted jewelry store, but it's not just economics she worries about.
[Epstein:] If something happens, the kids, I have to call the kids to tell them, OK, I'm still alive. It's bad, it's bad.
[Holmes:] A little way up the street, past empty cafes, and closed ones, we meet Gerry Stevenson, seller of, among other things, black humor T-shirts,
[Gerry Stevenson, Store Owner:] I opened up last night at 7.30, which is normally a busy time. I would say there was about eight people in the entire mall. Of those eight, maybe six were shop owners.
[Holmes:] Security is tight, nerves, frayed. Enter one of the coffee shops still open, and you'll do so only after a search, even at McDonald's. [on camera]: Do you feel that, ironically, if you like, you have something in common with Palestinians, economically?
[Stevenson:] Certainly. Whether you agree with their politics or not or what's going on, they're obviously feeling it, too.
[Holmes:] Cross into Arab east Jerusalem, and you see that Gerry Stevenson is right.
[Unidentified Male:] We are afraid, and they are afraid.
[Holmes:] Meet Tony Katanasho, owner of a once-bustling restaurant. You're looking at the lunchtime rush. [on camera]: Two years ago, how many people would have been here?
[Unidentified Male:] A lot.
[Holmes:] Would it have been full?
[Unidentified Male:] It's really full.
[Holmes:] And how is business now?
[Unidentified Male:] Now, it is completely dead, nothing.
[Holmes:] In alleyways where tourists once jostled for space, store owners play backgammon, sleep, sit, or don't bother to open up at all. During our filming in east Jerusalem, we got a call to come here, to perhaps the best example of why there are no tourists here. A suicide bomber detonates his explosives in front of a bus. [voice-over]: The bomber blown literally to pieces, nine Israelis in hospital, with understandable shock. More tourists decide to stay home. [on camera]: Did you make any money today?
[Unidentified Male:] No, only five shekels from 7:00.
[Holmes:] Five Shekels, that's about a bit over a dollar. [voice-over]: In this place of complexity and nuance, both sides have a simple solution to ending their economic pain. [on camera]: What will bring it back.
[Unidentified Male:] Peace, that's all. Peace, of course. Peace, we hope. Peace.
[Holmes:] Michael Holmes, CNN, Jerusalem.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] This weekend could be the swan song for free music downloads off of the Napster Web site. An attorney for the San Francisco-based company says more than one-million copyrighted songs will be taken off the playlists. That's music to the ears of the recording industry, which has been fighting for months with Napster over alleged copyright infringements. CNN technology correspondent Rick Lockridge has been monitoring the Napster Web site for us all morning. Is it busy?
[Rick Lockridge, Cnn Technology Correspondent:] Still pretty busy and still up and running. The filter that you were just mentioning hasn't been implemented. By the way, the music industry really loves that phrase, free music. As can you imagine, they don't think it's free at all. They think the music is worth something and it's being stolen, not being swapped as many Napster users would contend. But we have been downloading songs throughout out morning thus showing that the filter that was promised by Napster attorney David Boies, he said it would go into effect this weekend and would effectively prevent Napster's 46 million registered users from downloading the most popular 5,600 songs, at least, on their list, comprising more than a million actual songs files, which is you were talking about earlier. That filter is not yet in effect. We can take a look at the screen here. I'm actually downloading, where my cursor is up on the left here, that's hard to read, but it's Joe featuring Mystikal singing or rapping "Stutter." That is the number one hit on the Billboard Hot 100 charts this week, and this other download down where my cursor is here, on the left side, is "It's a Beautiful Day," which you might remember, Donna, won the Grammy for best song, didn't it, just a few days ago. So, these have to be among the most popular downloads that Napster users would be downloading now and we're doing it right here. So, there's no indication when exactly this filter is going to go into effect, but clearly it has not yet been put into effect.
[Kelley:] Right, and they were saying sometime this weekend. And as you were mentioning, the recording industry, of course, says that they're stealing music when it's copyrighted like that and I was wondering when they're talking about copyright songs, aren't all the songs copyrighted?
[Lockridge:] Well, usually a song has a copyright holder and that's not always the artist. You might think that the artist who does the song has the copyright. In fact, the music recording label usually has copyright. So, even if the artist wants to give you that song, it's not up to him or her or the band. So, there a lot of songs that are made by garage bands or maybe the copyright holders say let's it put on Napster because that way we can get more people to hear it, those songs will still be available, but they'll only comprise a very small portion of the songs that Napster users want. Mostly Napster users want the big hits, the popular songs, the ones they've heard on the radio and those songs are ones that are going away. So, Napster is going to be very different, and then it still has to face the judge's injunction. If the judge decides this isn't good enough for me, you got to shut it down all the way, that could still happen.
[Kelley:] And we're going to talk to you next hour as well, too, so we'll cover some more points then. OK, Rick Lockridge, thanks.

[Michael Holmes, World News:] United States president Bill Clinton is back in Washington after a week in Europe. Mr. Clinton accepted a peace prize in Germany but was told in Moscow a U.S. missile defense plan could re-ignite the nuclear arms race. On his last stop, Mr. Clinton chipped in to end another kind of nuclear worry. CNN's Major Garrett was there.
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] President Clinton achieved a breakthrough on nuclear safety in Ukraine after wrestling unsuccessfully with key trade and national security disputes in Europe and Russia. Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma announced he will close the last of four reactors operating at Chernobyl by December 15. As Ukraine struggles to seal Chernobyl and update its nuclear power industry, Mr. Clinton offered new financial aid $78 million to help rebuild the concrete dome covering the damaged Chernobyl reactor, $2 million to increase safety at Ukraine's four other nuclear power plants and to push other G-7 nations for safety at Chernobyl. Earlier, Mr. Clinton became first American president to address the Russian Duma underscoring U.S. support for tax reform, an end to corruption and closer economic ties between the Europe and Russia. On ballistic missile defense, Mr. Clinton pushed again for a limited ballistic missile defense system and smaller nuclear arsenals.
[Bill Clinton, U.s. President:] If we can reach agreements about how we're going forward, then it is something we ought to take in good faith to the Chinese, to the Japanese, to others who are interested in this to try to make sure that this makes a safer world, not a more unstable world.
[Garrett:] The Russians remained unmoved. They prefer bigger cuts in nuclear stockpiles and no missile defense. But while new Russian president Vladimir Putin values close ties to Washington, ultranationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky made it very clear he did not. [on camera]: The president returns from Europe and Russia with few big results. But administration officials stress that on all the big issues, trade in Europe and security in Russia, incremental progress is better than none at all and may yet yield results before Mr. Clinton leaves the world stage. Major Garrett, CNN, Kiev.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Have a look "CNN 20." Back after this.
[Unidentified Cnn Correspondent:] The earthquake struck in the middle of the night, precisely two minutes past 3:00 a.m., when the world, their own homes, caved in. So many were crushed to death in their own beds.
[Jim Bittermann, Cnn Correspondent:] This was just unlike anything I had seen, where not only were buildings collapsed everywhere but entire towns were collapsed. People were truly frantic about digging for lost relatives and friends and trying to find friends, and a lot of people were crowding into the area. At a certain point, the hope of finding anybody underneath the debris really was diminished, and people would cling to the stories that came out about the miraculous rescues, where someone would be pulled out of the debris. I think that's one of the hardest things is when you get emotionally involved in these stories, and I think you can't help but watch some of these personal tragedies and not project yourself or your family into this sort of thing. What would I do if I were in this circumstance? what if it was my relatives that was missing? You find often after a story like the earthquake of Turkey that I'll get back to home base and really have an emotional outpouring because of what I've seen. But it takes a while afterwards, when I start sort of running over in my mind what I've just seen, and the immensity of it, sometimes it can be devastating afterwards.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the candidates themselves are still letting their lawyers do the talking, but we still want to check in with our reporters in Austin and Washington. First up, CNN's Jeanne Meserve, deep in the heart of the Texas capital where she's been for several days now and to tell us how George W. Bush is holding up through all of this Jeanne.
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Correspondent:] Natalie, let me tell you first that we have some protesters outside the governor's mansion today, about 150 of them, marching around with various signs. One which we particularly noted reads: Al Gore's psychic hotline palms read, tarots read, ballots read. And as they go around the governor's mansion here, cars coming by, honking their horns in support here of what they have to say. The Bush campaign, we are told, has intervened in a legal action by the Florida secretary of state, Katharine Harris, which has asked the Florida state supreme court to consolidate the myriad legal actions that are underway in Florida, and also to halt the hand counts. Halting the hand counts, of course, the top priority of the Bush campaign. They believe this is a flawed process, and it only works to the benefit of Al Gore. Also, we're told no reaction yet to the proposal by Warren Christopher this morning that the supreme court be asked: Are the hand counts appropriate, what is the deadline for completing them, and what are the standards for determining if they are justified? The governor, meanwhile, remains at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, about two hours from here, remaining out of sight, consulting closely, we are told. with his aides here in Austin, and also with his lawyers on the ground down in Florida. As we get more information, we'll pass it on to you. Jeanne Meserve, CNN, reporting live from Austin, Texas
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] And as Jeanne mentioned, the Gore campaign had plenty to say today. Let's check in with CNN's Jonathan Karl with the Gore campaign in Washington John.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, that's right, Lou. As we speak, the Gore campaign is preparing to file a petition with the supreme court, the state supreme court, of Florida. Basically, what this petition to do is to ask for the state supreme court to rule on what they call the two questions that are at the heart of the matter. First question is do these counties have a right to go ahead with their manual recounts? And if they do, at what deadline would they have to have them done by, give a time frame? The second big question is what constitutes a vote? The Gore campaign is asking the state supreme court to rule on this question of what actually constitutes a vote. When they look at these hand ballots, when they look at them by hand, is it the whole question of the shard how do you determine voter intent, did they intend to vote for a candidate Those are the two big remaining questions that the Gore campaign says need to be resolved. Questions that are before various state courts in the state of Florida. So the Gore campaign asking that the supreme court intervene and answer the two questions once and for all. Meanwhile, the Gore campaign representatives down there, Warren Christopher and David Boies, the new attorney for the Gore campaign, made the point unveiled this new proposal and also made it very clear the reason why they're doing this is they think that the most important thing to happen here is for the hand recounts to go forward and here's why.
[David Boies, Gore Campaign Attorney:] Under Florida law, any candidate has a right to get a manual recount. It's always been that way. That's happened in a lot of campaigns in the past. It's happened in this campaign in other counties. And what we're saying is don't change the rules in the middle of the game. Don't shut out the manual recount here when that has been a traditional part of Florida law
[Karl:] Meanwhile, the vice president's Democratic allies on Capitol Hill are turning up the heat on the Florida secretary of state, Katherine Harris. Most recently, Tom Daschle, the minority leader in the Senate, told CNN's Chris Black that Katherine Harris should recuse herself from this whole process, says that she has a conflict of interest because she served as the co-chairman of the Bush campaign in the state of Florida. As a result, Daschle making this point that Harris should not be part of this process, that she should step aside, as the governor of the state of Florida, Jeb Bush, did more than a week ago. Reporting live from Washington, this is Jonathan Karl.
[Waters:] All right, Jonathan.
[Allen:] OK, Jonathan. Well, when you're fighting over the closest presidential race in memory, and probably in history, you don't turn to the yellow pages for a lawyer.
[Waters:] Probably not. You turn to your rolodex, and as we've seen over the past eight days, both sides have very good rolodexes. CNN's Allan Dodds Frank introduces us to a few of the legal luminaries who are helping decide this presidential election.
[Allan Dodds Frank, Cnn Correspondent:] With the battle for the presidency intensifying in court, the Democrats brought in the biggest name in litigation.
[Warren Christopher, Observer For The Gore Campaign:] Now I would like to introduce the newest member of our team on this point, David Boies.
[Frank:] He's the man the government hired to argue its antitrust case against Microsoft. And Napster turned to him to keep its controversial on-line music sharing service alive. But they were no contest compared to his current assignment.
[David Boies, Gore Campaign Attorney:] All that this campaign is attempting to do is to get the votes counted. Nobody's trying to litigate this issue.
[Frank:] Boies joins a court battle that is already deep in all- star legal talent. Heading vice president Gore's team, Warren Christopher, former secretary of state under Bill Clinton and a renowned international corporate lawyer. Governor Bush has his own former secretary of state, James Baker, who served under president George Bush. Baker is also known for his diplomatic, political and legal savvy. While the Republicans, so far, have no superstar corporate lawyers out front, they have brought in a tough litigator, Ted Olson, a former assistant attorney general in the Reagan administration. Olson has already popped up on the morning talk shows. Matched against him, on the Gore team: Harvard professor Laurence Tribe. But it is the top dogs who are in charge of spin.
[James Baker, Observer For The Bush Campaign:] In every election, you have to have to balance, I think, the interests in making sure you have a recount, if necessary, against the interest of finality.
[Christopher:] Let me reiterate that the most important thing now is for the counties whose manual counts are in process to continue and to complete their work. When that finality will come is in doubt, but both sides are taking no chances, with lawyers deployed all over Florida, ready to flood state and federal courts. So many it would be funny if the issue weren't so serious.
[Jay Leno, Host Of "the Tonight Show":] He's air-dropping them into Florida. Look at that, there they are, ladies and gentlemen. Allan Dodds Frank, CNN Financial News, New York.

[Wolf Blitzer:] It's noon in Washington, 11:00 a.m. in Crawford, Texas, 5:00 p.m. in London and 8:00 p.m. in Moscow. Wherever you're watching from around the word, thanks for joining us for this two-hour LATE EDITION. We'll get to our interview with White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card shortly, but first, the hour's top story. We begin with the possibility of a major change in the status of Tropical Storm Barry. Along the Gulf Coast in the southern United States, residents are now bracing for the worst.
[Blitzer:] But turning now to President Bush, after receiving a clean bill of health and scoring some important last minute legislative victories, he's now begun a month-long vacation in Crawford, Texas. And earlier, I spoke with Andrew Card about the president's first six months in office. Mr. Card, thanks for joining us on LATE EDITION. Good to have you back on the program.
[Andrew Card, White House Chief Of Staff:] It's great to be with you, thank you.
[Blitzer:] You probably saw the headline in today's "New York Times" suggesting there's going to be a change of the president's focus after this first six months. He's going to become now more, quote, "compassionate," presumably less conservative. Is that accurate?
[Card:] Well, actually, what President Bush was when he was campaigning for president is exactly what he is as president. He is a compassionate conservative. The top priority for this president has been education reform. But you know, with the passage of the bill in the House and we hope the passage of the bill out of the entire Congress after the conference committee gets together...
[Blitzer:] The patients bill of rights bill?
[Card:] No, I'm sorry, education. With that bill passing, we will want to see it become law, get it out of conference committee, become law. And the president will talk about education all during the fall. And this will not be an issue that stops for him after a new law is in place. He will be talking about educating and leaving no child behind, attracting good teachers to teach in our school systems. So he will talk about that in the fall. He will also be talking about the sense of responsibility that we all have as citizens of this great country and citizens of the world. But this is not something new. This is what the president campaigned on, this is what he has delivered during his first six months as president. And he will continue on with that during the fall.
[Blitzer:] But is there a sense that he needs to do more in terms of reaching out on this compassionate side in order to attract support from moderates and from women?
[Card:] He's actually doing quite well. The polls have shown this president is pretty well positioned. We're not driven by polls. Instead we're driven by what the president feels is important for the country. And he is a compassionate conservative. The agenda that he put forward to Congress is a compassionate conservative's agenda. It started off with education, moved to tax relief, bringing faith-based initiatives so that we can have real solutions to societal problems in our country by working in partnership between the government and religious institutions. He's talked about the need to reform our military, he's already delivered on the campaign commitment to bring help to the military. And so I think what you saw during the campaign is what you'll see this president delivering on.
[Blitzer:] One of the areas where he will have an opportunity in the next few weeks to demonstrate his compassionate, let's say, side, at least according to those who support embryonic stem cell research, is to announce his support for federal funding for such research. A, has he already made up his mind what he's going to do?
[Card:] This president has worked very, very hard on this issue. He's met with lots of individuals ethicists, religious leaders, doctors, scientists. He had some of the NIH officials who are most knowledgeable of stem cell research and its potential. He's also talked with the Pope about stem cell research. He knows that this is a very, very big decision. The federal government right now does not fund any stem cell research with regard to embryos. And the president is being asked to consider whether or not federal funding should be used. It is not an easy decision. There are obviously the hopes of science and technology, but there are also the concerns of ethics and morality. And this president is taking the decision very seriously. He has not made his mind up. He will, I expect, make his mind up over the next few weeks and make an announcement before Congress comes back into session.
[Blitzer:] In September?
[Card:] It's a very challenging issue, and this president is taking it very seriously. I can tell you he's read thousands of pages, and met with a lot of different people who have very strong views, and he's been very contemplative how he's considered this issue. But this president is deeply committed to the sanctity of life. And he understand the enormity of this decision, and I think that he will make an informed decision that will be good for America.
[Blitzer:] As you know, many of those who are deeply committed to the sanctity of life as you say, opponents of abortion rights, like Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah are suggesting he should go forward with this kind of research because these embryonic stem cells would be discarded, and indeed, his wife was on "INSIDE POLITICS," Mrs. Bush was interviewed by our own Judy Woodruff this past week. Listen to what she had to say about this sensitive issue.
[Laura Bush, First Lady Of The United States:] Because a lot of those embryos will be destroyed anyway or disposed of anyway, so I think that makes it even more difficult. But also, there's certainly, I don't know what he's thinking, these are all my own ideas, but there's certainly a life side of it as well when you think about lives that will be, could be, saved by research.
[Blitzer:] Is he inclined to go along with what his wife is at least suggesting?
[Card:] I'm not going to predict which way the president will go. This is a decision that he will have to make, and he knows that. I can just tell you that I have great confidence that he is weighing all of the challenges around this decision, both the challenges of opportunity that come through science and technology but also the huge moral implications and ethical challenges that are faced by governments as they consider this very, very tricky issue.
[Blitzer:] Do you believe that these embryonic stem cells potentially could help scientists, doctors, find cures for Parkinson's, juvenile diabetes, Alzheimer's? I know that I believe your father had Parkinson's.
[Card:] My mother had Alzheimer's.
[Blitzer:] So you have a personal interest in this kind of science if, in fact, it could work?
[Card:] But I also am committed to a strong sense of morality and ethics, and I know the president has listened to people on all sides of this issue. He is doing the homework so that it's not based a decision will not be based on ignorance, it will be based on knowledge. And he is going to look at his own conscience and his own beliefs, but he's going to do what I think is in the best interest of the country, respecting the principles that he came to office with. It's not an easy decision. I am confident that he will make an informed decision that will be right for this country.
[Blitzer:] Have you weighed in personally with the president, given him your best recommendations?
[Card:] My job is not to offer my personal advice and counsel. My job is to make sure that he gets all of the information that he needs to make an informed decision. And I have been doing that with him.
[Blitzer:] As you know, the president worked with Representative Charlie Norwood of Georgia this past week, managed to reach a compromise with him on the issue of a patients' bill of rights that narrowly passed the House of Representatives, I think the vote was 218 to 213. But a lot of Democrats remain bitterly opposed to the compromise you worked out with Representative Norwood, including Senator John Edwards, one of the cosponsors and the Democratic majority U.S. Senate. Listen to what Senator Edwards said about this compromise that was worked out and passed in the House of Representatives.
[Sen. John Edwards, , North Carolina:] We're very disappointed the other six original sponsors and the deal that he made. It's very important for us to be straight with the American people about this. No. 1, this deal, which was written in the middle of the night, by the way, takes away rights that patients already have across the country. No. 2, it maintains the privileged special status that HMOs enjoy today. And No. 3, it stacks the deck against patients when they're trying to hold HMOs accountable for what they do.
[Blitzer:] Is the negotiation just beginning now in this House- Senate conference committee, because as you know, the Senate passed by a wide margin a much different version of what the House passed?
[Card:] Well, Congressman Charlie Norwood has been working on this issue for seven years. He's the most respected member of Congress when it comes to this issue, and he's also a very highly respected in his ability to work with people on both sides of the aisle, in both branches, the House and the Senate. And it was appropriate that we negotiate with Charlie Norwood to try to get a bill that the president could sign into law. The ultimate objective here is to get a patients' rights bill signed into law. The Senate version could not be signed into law. This bill is a good bill. It would provide patient protection to all 50 states. It would do so in such a way that fewer people would lose health insurance, and there's great concern under the bill that has passed the Senate that there would be a number of people in America who would lose health insurance. We think the negotiated arrangement between Charlie Norwood, respected by the House now, will not jeopardize as many people who have health insurance, and it also provides the flexibility for states that have those plans in place right now. It does provide a sense of understanding what the rules will be, and there will be federal rules on patient protection. But this bill is written to protect patients, not to protect trial lawyers. And the Senate bill is written more for the trial lawyers than it is for patients.
[Blitzer:] But as you know, in a House-Senate conference committee, the negotiations begin, additional changes will be made if there's going to be some sort of legislation. One of the things that Representative Norwood, who's your ally now on this issue, suggested on Meet The Press earlier today that he was open to possibly changing the language from the House version which suggests that "a" proximate cause of injury or death the article A could be changed to "the" proximate cause of injury, your death meaning that if there is some misdiagnosis, some mistake that they're ready he's ready to deal on that specific issue. Is the White House ready to change the language in the House version to what is in the Senate version. Change the article from "a" to "the"?
[Card:] Well, obviously, the House and the Senate will take a look at every word in the bill that will eventually come to the president's desk. The White House will take a look at every single word. There is an awful lot at stake in these words. The devil is in the detail. We feel very strongly that the version that was passed by the House, negotiated between the White House and Congressman Norwood, is the right version. And we think that it is sound from a legal point of view, sound from a constitutional point of view, and the right policy for America. And that's what we'll hang to.
[Blitzer:] Well, explain to our viewers why it's so important for the White House to have the language be "a proximate cause" instead of "the proximate cause"? Because, as you know, the if there are several issues at stake, in terms of the death or injury of a patient, "a" it limits the ability for that patient to win damages in a court.
[Card:] I think it's "the" is the word that we like, versus "a." But...
[Blitzer:] With "the" more restrictive.
[Card:] We do not want to see kind of the deep-pocket trolling that goes on sometimes in litigation, where trial lawyers are looking for the deepest pockets to sue, rather than for a way to meet the needs of a patient. And this is one way to accommodate that.
[Blitzer:] Well, is that a potential source of a veto if it is changed from "a" to "the"?
[Card:] Well, we'll look at the entire context of the language. There this is section nine of the bill, is a very interesting section of the bill, one where we have put an awful lot of time and effort into negotiating. And that's a very important provision in this bill. It's section nine, or paragraph nine, which I actually think has now become paragraph eight. But, in the context of negotiations, it was around paragraph nine. We'll pay close attention to the details. This bill is very, very important, because we want to sign it into law. The president would like to sign the patients' bill of rights into law. He wants to provide patient protection, for all 50 states, respecting the flexibility that should be there for states that have patients' protection bills already in the law. Both the version that was passed by the Senate and the one that was passed by the House offered different guidance to the states. They both interrupt some of the activities going on at the state level. We think that the negotiated arrangement between Charlie Norwood and the White House is the best way to go. This is the result of a lot of compromise that the White House worked on with Charlie Norwood. I have great respect for how Congressman Norwood conducted himself during this process. And, by the way, the White House did a phenomenal job. Josh Bolten, who's the deputy chief of staff, and his team, were terrific, spending hours and hours and hours in good-faith negotiations. We're confident that good-faith negotiations with the conference committee can produce a bill that the president will sign.
[Blitzer:] So, will you work with Senator Kennedy, for example? You've worked with him on education. He came out bitterly opposed to this compromise you worked on with Congressman Norwood. I want you to listen to what he said in anticipation of the debate that's about to begin in September. Listen to this.
[Sen. Edward Kennedy , Massachusetts:] This issue is not going away. They may have had a temporary victory this afternoon, and it'll be a temporary victory. But it is not going away.
[Blitzer:] So what do you say? You're ready for more compromises with Democrats and Senator John McCain and other Republicans in the Senate?
[Card:] I think you should ask the question of them: Are they ready to make some compromises? So far there's been very little willingness on the part of Senator Kennedy and others to compromise on this issue. The bill that has passed the Senate will not earn the president's signature. So we have to find whether or not the Democrats are willing to start to compromise, and we'd like to have bipartisan negotiation that will produce positive results. But it's important that the result be principled enough that the president can sign it into law. We do not want to cause a situation where literally thousands of people will lose their health insurance. The Senate version of the bill would put in jeopardy health insurance to a lot of Americans.
[Blitzer:] Let's move on and talk about taxes. That's been one of the success stories of the Bush administration. These first six months that the president did sign into law a very impressive $1.3 trillion tax cut, checks are now going out to American taxpayers. But it now appears that you have to borrow some $51 billion to pay for those checks that are being mailed out to American taxpayers and that the budget surpluses that were projected earlier are simply not going to be there. Is this going to be a, looking back, a political error that the Bush administration made?
[Card:] This was not only first of all, it wasn't a political initiative. This was an initiative to return money to the taxpayers. It was also an initiative to stimulate our economy. Every economist that I've talked to has said that this is the right kind of stimulus at the right time. So, this tax relief package is good for America just from its stimulative effect on the economy. Beyond that, we have huge surpluses. In fact, our surpluses are still there. We are not going to get into the Social Security trust fund.
[Blitzer:] What about the Medicare trust fund?
[Card:] The Medicare trust fund, there are two funds to Medicare, A and B. The A fund that you contribute to, not one dime that goes into that account will be used for any other purpose than Medicare. The other trust fund account, B, which is really not a trust fund account, it's an ongoing appropriation from the government, will still be an ongoing appropriation for the government and health care contributions...
[Blitzer:] So that won't be lockboxed, as they say, the second part of Medicare?
[Card:] The second part of Medicare would not be lock-boxed. But, Medicare will increase in its funding and medical services under Medicare will continue to be provided. But, we also need to have reform in Medicare. And that's one thing the president talked about in terms of reforming Medicare. But, this tax relief package is right for America. It was right for the economy. And it's also right for bringing discipline to the federal fiscal system. Congress right now is working on budgets that will have to be signed before the next fiscal year begins. It's very important that they respect the fiscal discipline that the House and Senate have already adopted as they put together the department appropriations. The president will be a good watch dog for the American taxpayer during this process.
[Blitzer:] Let's go through a few issues because I know your time is limited. On the whole issue of drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge up in Alaska.
[Card:] I have a tough time with that too,
[Anwr. Blitzer:] As it's called, ANWR, it passed, drilling passed in the legislation of the House of Representatives. Once again, the Senate Democrats are threatening to filibuster, if necessary, to prevent that kind of drilling up in Alaska. That would require 60 votes to break a filibuster. Do you have those 60 votes in the Senate?
[Card:] First, I think it would be a mistake for the Senate to filibuster over that issue. This is a long-term energy program that requires that we look at all aspects of energy, conservation, as well as new resources and getting those resources to marketplace. The president presented a balanced energy plan to Congress. It was not a plan designed for a year or for two years, but it's a comprehensive plan to look out over the next 10, 15, 20 years. We need to make sure our country is doing all it can to encourage conservation. And it's doing all it can to make sure that we have clean energy to run our power plants, and natural gas is a clean energy to run power plants. And we don't have enough natural gas in this country. We need to find more, and I think the ANWR area, which is a very small footprint on this huge, vast area after all, the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge is about the size of South Carolina. And we're talking about drilling on an area that is smaller than most airports and with new technologies that are environmentally friendly, I think it's the right thing to do. I think it would be a mistake for the Senators to be shortsighted as they look at the energy policy for Americans.
[Blitzer:] But, you don't have 60 votes to break a filibuster, do you?
[Card:] We'll see. I think it will be an uphill battle. But, the important thing is that there be an honest debate about the energy needs of this country.
[Blitzer:] Let's move on and talk about some overseas issues, as you know, we're seeing live around the world on this program. The United States is threatening not to participate in a UN conference against racism in South Africa at the end of this month, if there is language in the draft resolution which condemns Zionism as racism or other language attacking Israel. Will the U.S. participate in that conference if such language critical of Israel is included in this draft resolution?
[Card:] First, the United States would like to participate in that conference on racism. Secretary Powell would like to participate. I know that the entire government would like to participate. But we will not participate if the anti-Israeli, the Zionism language is included in that proposal, and we'll be taking a hard look at it. We will work with all our friends around the country to make sure that that language is not there. But, we are not looking to participate in any effort that would discriminate against Israel. And we don't think that it is the right language to be in that provision.
[Blitzer:] So, if there's any criticism, condemnation of Israel or Zionism, whatsoever in that resolution, the U.S. will boycott that conference?
[Card:] Well, I don't like the term boycott. We would like to see the conference respond to the real concerns of racism. And if they're going to attack Israel, it's inappropriate. We don't think we should be a party to that.
[Blitzer:] Let's move on and talk about a potential presidential veto. It would be his first if Congress goes ahead and bars Mexican trucks from moving forward across the Mexican border, according to the NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement stipulation. If Congress goes ahead and says Mexican trucks can't have that access to U.S. highways, the president might veto that legislation.
[Card:] He certainly might. Hopefully the conference committee will find an accommodation so that they are not in violation of the North American Free Trade Agreement. The North American Free Trade Agreement is between Canada, the United States and Mexico. Canadian trucks are welcome in the United States. U.S. trucks are welcome in Canada. We think that there is discrimination if they don't allow Mexican trucks to come to the United States under the provisions of that agreement. And first of all, we respect the need for safety, and we're confident that the trucks will be safe on America's highways.
[Blitzer:] Do you think the Mexican trucks are as safe as the Canadian trucks coming in?
[Card:] I think that they will be, yes.
[Blitzer:] And don't represent a danger to American drivers?
[Card:] I am confident that Mexican truckers who are going to do long-haul carries in the United States would comply with the safety expectations of this country.
[Blitzer:] And just to nail it down, the president would veto that bill if it comes out of the Congress as it's now threatening to come out of?
[Card:] Well, we want...
[Blitzer:] If it bars the Mexican trucks?
[Card:] He would like to look at the language in the conference committee. The conference committee has two versions right now, a version that the House passed and a version that was passed by the Senate. They're very different. They have the same result of denying access for Mexican trucks to the U.S. market, which is discrimination. And we'd like to see that addressed in the conference committee. Let's hope conferees will meet their responsibility and comply with the North American Free Trade Agreement so that the Mexican economy, the U.S. economy and the Canadian economy can be further integrated.
[Blitzer:] We're going to talk shortly with two senators about possible military base closings throughout the United States. Is President Bush ready to start closing a bunch more bases in the Southeast, elsewhere in the United States, given the reduced military necessity for those bases?
[Card:] The president has called for Secretary Rumsfeld to put together a plan for representing the Defense Department as we are now in the 21st century. We have a strategic plan for the military that is outdated, and Secretary Rumsfeld is taking a look at the needs and obligations of the 21st century, and that plan will be, I think very, very important. Included in that plan will be an effort to take a look at excess military installations. We will consult with Congress in fact consultations started last week with Congress on how we would have a system to take a look at the inefficiencies in our installations and trim them back. The president has not received a report from Secretary Rumsfeld on exactly what that legislation would look like, but I think it's realistic to say that we're going to have to have some mechanism to be more efficient in the use of our military installations.
[Blitzer:] We are all out of time, but the president is going on vacation for a month to Texas, his ranch.
[Card:] It's a working vacation.
[Blitzer:] The vice president's going to his ranch in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. What about Andy Card, where's he going on vacation?
[Card:] I'll be spending a lot of time in the office at the White House, but I do hope to get up to Maine. I've got a place on a small lake in Poland, Maine, that I love to get to, and I want to be there with my children and grandchildren, but I'm not sure I'll get there very many days.
[Blitzer:] Is that where Poland Spring water comes from?
[Card:] Right where Poland Springs water comes from.
[Blitzer:] Sounds like a good place.
[Card:] Great place.
[Blitzer:] Enjoy yourself.
[Card:] Thank you.
[Blitzer:] Thanks for joining us.
[Card:] OK.
[Blitzer:] And up next, two key senators join us to talk about the battles ahead on Capitol Hill for President Bush's agenda. We'll talk with the Armed Services Committee chairman, Democrat Carl Levin of Michigan and Republican Jeff Sessions of Alabama. LATE EDITION will continue right after this.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Our "CNN 20" today, Dr. J calling it quits.
[Fred Hickman, Cnn Sports Anchor:] Dr. J didn't leave too early, and he didn't leave too late either. Clearly. I think his skills were beginning to diminish as a player, as far as the explosiveness and the jumping ability he had become famous for. Those things were starting to leave him a little bit. He can still play, and he can still compete, and he was still better than most everybody out there when he left. He was an incredible showman, but not in an intentionally showy kind of way. He just was very creative with the basketball, and that was a little bit different. That was a little bit different. Nobody a lot of people wanted to do the stuff that he did, but nobody could quite do it with, you know, with the consistency that he did. He was incredible. He had a great career. We all knew he had a great business mind, and he was going to do very well in business as well, and which he always had done, and then moved into the front office down in Orlando with the Magic there. So, you know, successful television guy, smooth, suave. You certainly miss watching Doc explode out there. Number 6 was special.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] There is a lot of excitement at Chicago's Field Museum this morning over a bunch of old bones.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] These aren't just any old bones, though. In about 30 minutes from now, this museum is going to unveil the biggest and most complete Tyrannosaurus rex skeleton fossil ever uncovered.
[Lin:] And with that build up, CNN's Jeff Flock is only dino beat this morning, and joins us live from the Field Museum. Hi, Jeff.
[Harris:] Hey, Jeff.
[Jeff Flock, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning to you. Bones even older than mine here in Chicago this morning. Indeed, 67 million years are about to go on display. You see the curtain back there behind me. The Chicago Field Museum and we've got a picture from the outside the kind of gives you a good picture of what this great museum looks like. It is the real focus of activity in this city, and perhaps around the country this morning. As you report, the significance here is the most expensive T. rex skeleton ever found, 90 percent of the skeleton. Never before has any kind of skeleton that much of a skeleton been found, I guess is the best way to say. And perhaps you can see the people gathered in Chicago. That unveiling in less than a half-hour now. I want to take you back to some pictures of what they have been doing for the past two years since the obtained this $8.36 million at auction at Sotheby's. They have been 10 people have taken about two years to clean and repair the bones and then go about the business of putting it all together. And it is that final the final version, the whole skeleton together, that you will see today. I'm joined by Becky Margolin, who's the assistant exhibit developer here. And I guess I would ask, first, what were your goals? What were you hoping to achieve here?
[Becky Margolin, Asst. Developer, "sue" Exhibit:] We were hoping to showcase Sue and just sort of display her as what she is, the world's largest, most complete, and best preserved T. rex.
[Flock:] You will find, no doubt, new information from what you got here. What do you expect to find out? And what have you found out so far?
[Margolin:] Well, one of the biggest things we have found out so far is the T. rex must have had an excellent sense of smell. About two years ago we sent her for a CT scan of her skull, and the results showed that she had huge olfactory bulbs.
[Flock:] Which means maybe she was a scavenger more than a hunter.
[Margolin:] Not necessarily. It sort of supports either argument. If she were a scavenger, it would have given her wonderful powers to smell rotting flesh.
[Flock:] I want to talk about the exhibit. We've got some pictures from where she was first assembled in Trenton that show the extraordinary way you've gone the lengths you've gone to to make the exhibit able open to continued research.
[Margolin:] Yes, it was our scientists' biggest concern that if someone was interested in studying a part of Sue, the bone would be readily accessible to them.
[Flock:] So how do you describe what we're saying there? It's almost like they are set in a jewelry setting? Is that how you...
[Margolin:] Yes, every bone is sort of a giant jewelry setting, it cradles each bone...
[Flock:] So if I were a researcher, I want to come in, I could just obtained the bone, have it taken out...
[Margolin:] It's a little more difficult than that. It's a long process to get every piece out. You have to remove a lot of bones to get to certain bones. But it's definitely doable if need be.
[Flock:] Thank you, I appreciate the time. Thank you this morning.
[Margolin:] Thank you.
[Flock:] Two hundred fifty plus bones and they will all be on display here at the Field Museum in, oh, I think about 25 minutes or so. We will be back to show it to you live. I'm Jeff flock, CNN, reporting live from the Field Museum in Chicago.
[Harris:] Jeff, Leon here, real quick, how in the world do they know it was a girl? Why did they named it "Sue"?
[Flock:] In fact they don't know that it's a girl. I would ask Becky for extra explanation about that, but they have not been able to determine. So at this point, we call her Sue because she was found by a young lady named Sue Hendrickson. But beyond that, we don't know.
[Harris:] All right, good deal. Thanks, Jeff.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] More pictures tell the story: a Cuban father and his son just hours ago.
[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Elian Gonzalez and his father, Juan Migel, will reportedly spend the next few days at Andrews Air Force Base near Washington,
[D.c. Randall:] And back in Little Havana, in Miami, a volatile situation on the streets.
[Woodruff:] We welcome CNN International viewers to our continuing coverage of this breaking story. I'm Judy Woodruff in Washington.
[Randall:] And I'm Gene Randall. Elian Gonzalez and his father Juan Miguel are together again at Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington. The reunion came after immigration agents launched a pre-dawn raid to forcibly remove the 6-year-old Cuban boy from the Miami home of his great-uncle Lazaro Gonzalez. The action, ordered by Attorney General Janet Reno, came nearly five months after the boy was rescued from the waters off Florida, where his mother drowned. The first still photos of Juan Miguel's reunion with his son have been released. The father's attorney, Gregory Craig, says the event took place at an airport terminal at Andrews Air Force Base. He described the scene as one of relief and big smiles. He said Elian appeared totally at ease, that he was affectionate, that he hugged and played with his 6-month-old half-brother. Craig said there was also a touching moment as the INS agents who brought the boy to Andrews said goodbye. Some of the Miami relatives of Elian Gonzalez boarded a plane for Washington about a half hour ago. Great-uncle Lazaro and cousin Marisleysis Gonzalez are among those traveling today. So far we are told no arrangements have been made to meet with Elian, Juan Miguel Gonzalez or members of the administration Judy.
[Woodruff:] Elian Gonzalez and his father plan to spend the next few days at Andrews Air Force Base. That is where we find CNN's Patty Davis.
[Patty Davis, Cnn Correspondent:] Judy, a reunion taking place here at this hour between 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez and his father, Juan Miguel Gonzalez. Now as you can see from these aerial pictures taken earlier this morning, the U.S. government plane carrying Elian arriving here about five hours ago. Elian was met by his Cuban father, who's been here in the United States for over two weeks, waiting for his son to be returned to him from custody of his Miami relatives. Now U.S. marshals took these pictures of the reunion between father and son released a short time ago. Both obviously very happy to see one another after nearly five months apart. Juan Miguel Gonzalez's new wife and their baby also greeting Elian. Greg Craig, the lawyer for Elian's father, did not witness the first moment of the father and son reunion but saw them soon afterward. No sign, he said in a telephone interview with CNN, that Elian had suffered any trauma from the events of this morning.
[Gregory Craig, Attorney For Juan Miguel Gonzalez:] I saw absolutely no evidence of that kind of trauma or that kind of fear or that kind of uncertainty or, you know, being scared of where he was or who he was with. He was totally at ease. He was laughing with his little brother, Janni, he was hugging his father. I saw no evidence that this person had gone through a traumatic experience. Now I don't doubt that for those of us watching this it looked shocking and scary. I have a feeling that it happened very, very quickly in the reality of the moment. But I would I would hope and I would think that the early evidence is that Elian's in good shape. He's a strong boy, and that connection between his father and him is so powerful and so strong, the magnitude of what has been done to him over the last five months comes through even more powerfully, that when you see the two of them together you realize that by keeping them apart something terrible was done.
[Davis:] About a dozen protesters here outside of Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland protesting the Clinton administration's seizure of Elian this morning. But it is very ordinarily, no police needed here to keep these protesters out in the streets. You can see behind me normal traffic here around Andrews Air Force Base, considerably less commotion here at Andrews Air Force Base than there is in Miami. Now we're being kept far away from where that reunion is taking place inside Andrews Air Force Base. It's heavily guarded. This is where the president's airplane is kept, Air Force One, Air Force Two, the vice president's plane very secure, heavily patrolled by the Air Force, although this is now a Department of Justice operation, No onlookers, no press, no protesters allowed inside Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, Patty Davis reporting from just outside Andrews Air Force Base Gene.
[Randall:] Miami's Little Havana is reacting with anger to what happened this morning. Mark Potter has been there for many hours today, and he reports on the rising tensions Mark.
[Mark Potter, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Gene, the tensions continue here. We just had an incident a couple moments ago where the police that you can see behind me moved forward once again, throwing tear gas, clearing the streets of protesters. This is Flagler Street near 27th Avenue, an intersection well, there's some more tear gas right now. Police trying to clear this area out. And we're trying to stay clear of it. The trick is to stay upwind. The police are very serious about keeping this area clear of protesters, and this has been sort of a see-saw battle. Sometimes the protesters move in as the police move out, and then the police come back in with force, throwing the tear gas that you're seeing right now and retaking the area. They've done than a number of times, and once again they are they are confronting the protesters who are angrily responding here to the actions of the federal government in the Elian Gonzalez case. This is a very passionate issue and it has spilled out into the streets. It continues today. We have seen a number of fires that been set of trash dumpsters, tires, things like that. There have been a number of arrests I spoke with one of our cameraman, Fred Doller who said that he personally had witnessed 15 arrests Here's one right now. You're seeing it on camera, two more people being arrested by the Miami Police Department. I would suspect that dozens of people have been arrested. I don't have an official number, but we've seen a lot of people arrested in the streets, sometimes in connection with incidents where they didn't move fast enough. There was a there was some rock throwing incidents. Somebody broke a window at a gas station, that man arrested in connection with that. So this situation is not it's more under control than it was earlier, as the police have really come in in force. But it's not fully under control, as situations continue to pop up Gene.
[Randall:] Mark, do you have any handle on the numbers of peoples involved number of people, rather, involved? Are we talking about hundreds or thousands on the streets?
[Potter:] At this location at any given time, I would say that it's hundreds. And right now it's considerably less than that. This is much quieter than it was earlier today. If there are if you were to count in the thousands, it would be all the small little skirmishes that have blown up in this general area. But I would not that it's thousands at any one given location. The fire department has been in here a number of times to try to put the dumpster fires, the tire fires. In fact, we saw one incident where a fire crew tried to come in here at one of the times when the police had backed off, and the crowd turned on that fire vehicle, jumped on top of the vehicle, and the vehicle had to sort of speed out in reverse to get away from the crowd. You're looking at the officers who had moved forward. They have now come back to the intersection. And this is really ground zero. This is Miami's Little Havana. This is the hub of all the activity. There have been a number of small skirmishes that have blown up, incidents, I would say, that have blown up, essentially nonviolent. We have had, as I said, some rock throwing, some pushing and shoving, some skirmishes at the time of arrest, but this has been, as far as we can see, a largely nonviolent event. The worst thing that we have had to put up with, of course, is all the tear gas. That's been pretty brutal and that has been used frequently this morning on the crowds Gene.
[Randall:] Mark Potter in Miami. We will stay in that Florida city and go to CNN's Susan Candiotti. She is outside the home where Elian Gonzalez spent five months Susan.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Gene. The crowds here have thinned considerably over the past few hours, and the mood here has been one that remains very angry. As Mark indicated, just as those protesters are saying over where he is, people hear are also also sense a bit of betrayal on the part of the government. They say that the last thing they wanted was for this boy to be forcibly removed from this home, but that's exactly what happened. And they have been expressing their dismay with the government by waving flags, by some tying up the American flag with in knots with black garbage bags and the like. And here you see a Miami police lieutenant who was pushed and shoved. He says that someone tried to pull the begun out of his holster, as well. However, he was not injured. And as far as we know, there have been no injuries here. The police officials say they will continue to allow crowds to stay here because in their opinion they're are not causing any trouble right now, they're simply venting their frustrations. Now sometime earlier, within the last hour or so, the Miami relatives of 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez arrived at Miami International Airport after leaving the house here, and their intention, according to family spokesperson, is to fly to Washington, D.C., in an attempt to try to get an audience to try to see Elian Gonzalez, to make sure in their minds that he is all right. We don't know if they'll be successful. However, the attorney for Juan Miguel Gonzalez has said that he doesn't think this family is in a position to make demands, and that in his opinion father and son should have some time together before he will entertain that request. Now in the meantime, the crowd here has also been reacting to the photographs that we have seen, one taken by Juan Miguel Gonzalez, one by a member of the U.S. marshal service and provided to us by Gregory Craig's office, who represents Juan Miguel Gonzalez, photographs of the child smiling with his half-brother and smiling with his father and stepmother. I'd like to talk to one of the people here who I was discussing with this earlier. What did you make of the smiles of the face of that little boy, especially after what he had gone through here?
[Unidentified Male:] I think Elian's smile is genuine because I know that he was taught well by his mother and by the Gonzalez family. He has no malice in his heart. So his smile is genuine. However, the fright that he showed this morning was also genuine.
[Candiotti:] Do you think that he will be able to recover from this? It certainly seems from those photographs he appears to be very happy now that he is with his father again, who he has spoken with on the telephone, of course.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, you have to understand that the stage that we are seeing was prepared by the ultimate spinmaster, Fidel Castro.
[Candiotti:] Are you saying that the child's joy is not genuine?
[Unidentified Male:] His face is genuine. His joy is genuine. Is the trauma there? Absolutely.
[Candiotti:] Thank you very much for your opinion. And so the crowds here remain outside the house where Elian Gonzalez spent about, gosh, close to five months now. And now the relatives are heading up to Washington, D.C., in an attempt to see him. Gene, back to you.
[Randall:] Susan, we will talk to you later. Thanks very much Judy.
[Woodruff:] An Associated Press still photographer who slipped into the Gonzalez home in Little Havana after Immigration and Naturalization Service agents broke down the door, the photographer captured key moments of the action. This is the closet where Elian was found in the arms of one of the fishermen who rescued him last Thanksgiving Day. In this picture, one of the armed INS agents hold his weapon as the boy is brought out of the closet. In this photo, Elian's this is a scene of the female INS agent carrying Elian, wrapped in blanket, out of the house and to the waiting van. Now we want share with you the Justice Department rundown of today's raid to remove Elian and tell you how it all unfolded. Efforts to mediate the custody battle went into the earlier morning hours of Saturday. It was about 4:30 a.m. Eastern, about half an hour before the raid, when U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno decided to act. She did inform President Clinton of her decision. And shortly after 5:00 a.m. Eastern, 130-some federal agents arrived at the Miami home of Lazaro Gonzalez the great-uncle of Elian. They broke down the door when their knocks went unanswered. Eight agents entered the home with their guns drawn. Elian was found in a closet in the arms, as we said, of one of the fishermen who had rescued him last November. A female INS agent, and this is according to what Attorney General Janet Reno said a little later this is her description of what happened the female agent says to Elian in Spanish words to the this effect, I know that you are scared. This must be frightening, but this will be over very soon and you will feel much better. I'm going to take you to Poppy. "Poppy" is what young Elian calls his father. Elian is then carried in a waiting minivan for his trip to the airport. The whole matter was over in just a matter of three minutes Gene.
[Randall:] And we will have more in just a moment. Stay with us.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Well, another big telecom IPO begins trading in Europe today, and on the Nasdaq here in New York, Norway's Telenor raising $8 billion. Janet Guyon, of "Fortune" magazine, has more now from London. And Janet, should we be surprised that an IPO's going on in this market climate?
[Janet Guyon, London Bureau Chief, "fortune":] Well, we might be a little bit surprised, given that it's a really crummy market for an IPO, particularly telecom IPOs, but obviously, Telenor needs the money. That stock has traded down about 4 percent from the issue price, which was 42 Norwegian crowns per-share; it's now trading at about 40.2, and that price was already cut from between an initial price of 50 to 68; that was the initial speculation about what they would price this IPO at. So it's a very disappointing debut for Telenor. The stock was the issue price was already cut from an initial estimate, and it's trading down. So it does tell you that the market for telecom shares, although they sold the shares, is really not very good right now.
[Haffenreffer:] Now a lot of people are saying that, at some point, these are all going to become bargains. Could that be a sort of a prognosis for a better or more rosy future?
[Guyon:] Well, I guess there are some people right now who are saying Telenor is a bargain. So sure, I mean, if you look, you know, long-term, pretty obviously we're all going to keep making phone calls, I assume, even in Norway. And it is a big Internet economy and mobile phone economy, so sure, long-term, you know, we could say that these do look like buys. I think that what is weighing on a lot of the telecom sector over here is the high debt ratios that a lot of these companies have taken on as a result of having to pay up for those wireless licenses. It's kind of the same old story. But yes, there are some people, even now, today, in the market, saying that it looks like Telenor is a bargain at these prices, but still, there's that thing called market psychology, and the market just doesn't like these high-tech telecom shares right now.
[Haffenreffer:] Are we likely to see the trading behavior for Telenor on the Nasdaq mirror that of Oslo?
[Guyon:] I would think so, David. It would be very surprising if the U.S. investors did not take their cue from what's happening over here, that you know, it is they did make the debut here. It would be quite one would expect it would trade down in Nasdaq as well. Although, of course, there could be those people who think, gee, it's a bargain and it might trade up again. But I doubt that this would go very far above its issue price.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, Janet, thank you very much. Janet Guyon of "Fortune" magazine.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] And the recount continues. We're going to head back over to West Palm Beach, where Jeff Flock is standing by. You're going to introduce us to somebody, Jeff, correct?
[Jeff Flock, Cnn Correspondent:] Indeed. We had the Bush side on earlier in terms of the attorneys that are here observing this recount. I wanted to bring the Gore team in now. Dennis Newman is the attorney. A good deal of experience with recounts, you were involved in that Delahunt recount, the one in Massachusetts that overturned a senate I'm sorry, a House primary there.
[Dennis Newman, Attorney For Democratic Party:] That's correct.
[Flock:] What are you seeing as we take a look, perhaps, live inside there, kind of a close-up shot at somebody looking at these ballots? This is what they're going through, and they hope to be half done by today. Are you seeing any kind of chaos in there, any kind of problems with this process? What are you seeing from your perspective?
[Newman:] No problems whatsoever, I think that the canvassing board deserves a great deal of credit. Judge Burton and Carol Roberts and Theresa LePore under very difficult circumstances, they're running a very professional and even-handed process.
[Flock:] But the Republicans say in addition to saying that this is not a fair process, also have some concerns that some people have difficulty getting their arms around the notion of just recounting in the Democratic strongholds. Was the vice president serious about saying, Let's do a full, statewide manual recount, even in the Republican areas?
[Newman:] Absolutely, and the Republicans had that option. But they're afraid of recounting these counties and the whole state because they know when a fair and accurate count is obtained here, that they will lose.
[Flock:] On to the next question, and that is what happens out of these recounts. You say you want a fair and accurate count, but obviously it is your hope that this recount will give your man some additional votes. We are being told by the observers and the counters that with about 108 precincts tallied fully, it is Governor Bush who actually has made up a small bit of ground.
[Newman:] Actually...
[Flock:] What's your feeling about that?
[Newman:] That's true in one sense, but however, we feel that the standards that are being applied by the board is not the standard that, as you mentioned, the Delahunt or Johnson standard, and it is the standard in many other states, that the intent of the voter should be given. There's about 300 votes that we have further protested that have dents on the five, the number five chad, which is Vice President Gore, and there's about 100 for the Bush chads. So if those are counted accurately, that would give us another 200 votes.
[Flock:] Would that would require us, as we look back in there, require these people to go through these ballots yet again?
[Newman:] No, not at all. These ballots have been protested by myself and by Mr. Wallace. They've been segregated. It's just that small number, that, as I mentioned, 400 that they would look at again, so that they could look at them again, as Broward county is going to do challenge ballots only.
[Flock:] So you're continuing to protest even what we're seeing here today?
[Newman:] Yes, that's correct. We're protesting a number, and Republicans are also, the number of ballots that we believe that the board has made a wrong call on. We reserve our rights for further review.
[Flock:] More fun to come. Mr. Newman, thanks for the time.
[Newman:] Thank you, Jeff.
[Flock:] I appreciate it. I know you to get back inside, as you've been watching this process all morning. We'll let you go. That is the latest from here in West Palm Beach. As you can see, more fun to come.
[Phillips:] Jeff Flock, thank you.

[Hemmer:] Once again, President Bush back in Washington now after his speech in Atlanta urging Americans to still remain strong in the face of terrorism. He also visited the CDC while in town here. To the White House this morning, and Kelly Wallace. A briefing just finished there. kelly, what's on the what's on the radar thus far this morning?
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, Bill, the big news coming from the White House today, President Bush to announce that he's going to make more federal resources available to the states so that governors can call up more National Guard troops to deploy them at the nation's airports. As you know, the president urged governors back in September to call up National Guardsmen and deploy them at airport security checkpoints. Well, we understand the president again making more federal money available, and also the governors will have more flexibility about where they can deploy these troops. They can monitor them at security checkpoints, or at the departure gates. They can monitor curb side traffic, even guard air traffic facilities. Again, the message is more money to be available. White House not announcing the price tag just yet, and governors: giving them the flexibility. Now, this all coming, Bill, senior administration officials saying the president trying to increase confidence in the airlines as the busy holiday season approaches. And while the House of Representatives and the Senate continue to be dead locked over airline security legislation. The big sticking point continues to be over whether those airport and baggage screeners should become government employees. Democrats believe they should become federal employees, this would be the best way it guarantee you're getting the best workers. Republicans believe the federal government should have the flexibility to decide whether to use private contractors with federal oversight. Federal background checks. Federal standards. So, lots of discussions expected to continue between lawmakers over the weekend, and you can expect the president to use the bully pulpit again today, as he did, Bill, last night, calling on Congress to get a bill to his desk right away. But again, aides say this is a stop-gap measure until he gets a bill he can sign.
[Hemmer:] All right, more later. Kelly Wallace, thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Thousands of miles from Washington, the secretary of state, Colin Powell, was wrapping up his tour of Africa. Yesterday, Mr. Powell announced the U.S. plans to ship aid to Sudan's government for the first time in more than 10 years. The move comes as Powell also pledged extra funds to fight AIDS. And CNN's David Ensor has more on this report from Kampala.
[David Ensor, Cnn Correspondent:] As Secretary of State Powell arrived in Uganda, U.S. officials had just announced an emergency supply of food for northern Sudan: 40,000 tons, including some on a ship on the high seas which may get there within two weeks.
[Colin Powell, Secretary Of State:] It is a very desperate situation in the North. And we don't use food aid as a political weapon, so there is not a political connection to the food aid.
[Ensor:] Drought in Sudan threatens famine. But it has been over a decade since the U.S. aided the pro-government North in Sudan, which Washington accuses of harboring terrorists and bombing hospitals in the rebellious South. [on camera]: Powell came to Uganda, to the shores of Lake Victoria, where the first cases were recorded in the HIVAIDS pandemic, to announce $50 million additional U.S. dollars to help in the fight against AIDS, and to gather evidence, he said, to help him convince Washington that much more will be needed.
[Agnes Nyamayarwe, Hiv Positive Mother:] Instead of giving my children life, I gave my children HIV. Up to today, I live with this guilt of knowing that I infected my own child.
[Ensor:] When he spoke, Powell offered his reasoning for spending so much time on AIDS, even when conflicts are raging in the Middle East and elsewhere.
[Powell:] And there is no war on the face of the Earth right now that is more serious, that is more grave than the war we see here in sub-Saharan Africa against
[Hiv/aids. Ensor:] And it seemed that the secretary and Africans who will die of AIDS each gave each other some hope. David Ensor, CNN, Kampala.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] Well, a flurry of diplomatic moves are unfolding in Beijing and Washington. And on China's Hainan Island, U.S. officials have met for a second time with the crew of the U.S. surveillance plane.
[Joseph Prueher, U.s. Ambassador To China:] The good news that we're going on right now is, in place is the meeting going on with the aircrew in Hainan Island in Haikou. It started late, but it started about an hour and 20 minutes late. But it's in progress right now. And our people are in contact with the aircrew. Another meeting is scheduled with them tomorrow. We are having meetings here with the appropriate Chinese authorities. We are in fairly intense talks that are going on. And we are all working it very hard and hoping to do it constructively. And I would like to say that it's quite well coordinated with our government in Washington. We are in close touch with them, with our leaders, the president and Secretary Powell and Deputy Secretary Armitage. And they are coordinating in Washington. And we are working in sync. Thank you very much.
[Mcedwards:] All right, for the very latest now, we turn to CNN's Beijing bureau chief Rebecca MacKinnon. She is joining us by phone from the Chinese capital. Rebecca, we are just hearing U.S. officials sounding optimistic, saying that things are well coordinated, going well, by their reading of it. What are Chinese officials saying?
[Rebecca Mackinnon, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Chinese officials have yet to comment publicly today. There has yet to even be an official reaction to President Bush's expression of regret for the loss of the Chinese pilot. But the Chinese media continues to actually to be ratcheting up the emotion on this issue, which is in great contrast to what I am told by diplomats to be very reasoned and pragmatic talks going on behind closed doors in the Foreign Ministry and elsewhere. In the public domain, we just saw a fairly emotional broadcast on Chinese state television. The pilot of the second plane came on as a witness. He reaffirmed the Chinese government's story that it was the U.S. plane that suddenly bumped into his colleague Wang Wei's plane and caused it to fall into the sea. And, also, we saw the weeping parents of Wang Wei in their hospital beds, talking about the first they realized something was wrong was when he didn't call them on Sunday as planned the grieving wife, the 6-year-old son reaction from the streets broadcast on television: angry citizens saying that the United States has no right to be coming so close to our territory. It appeared that a lot of the people interviewed on TV thought that the U.S. plane had entered into China's airspace before the collision happened. But a lot of angry statements about people saying things like, you know: "If a burglar goes into your home, why should you be expected to give this burglar safe haven and return their property?"
[Mcedwards:] Rebecca, is there any more talk about the actual plane, the reconnaissance plane? What are people saying about what the Chinese plan to do with it, and what, if anything, they have been able to glean from it?
[Mackinnon:] That is not clear. It appears I mean, diplomats are saying that they believe that the Chinese have certainly gone through the plane fairly thoroughly, taken equipment off of it. What they have gleaned from it is not clear at this point. What they plan to do with it, one is not really hearing. The priority of the American officials now remains the 24 men and women, who have not yet left China. And that is the focus at this time. One is hearing very little about the plane. At this point, it's the secondary priority in comparison with the livelihoods of these American citizens still being held on Hainan Island Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] All right, CNN's Rebecca MacKinnon in Beijing. And as Rebecca just mentioned, there has been quite a bit happening in the Chinese media today. Just about an hour ago, both English language and Chinese language broadcasts showed an interview with Zhao Yu, who is one of the Chinese fighter pilots who was involved in the tracking of the U.S. surveillance plane. And for the first time, people heard what he had to say about exactly what happened up there in the air. Let's listen to that now.
[Zhao Yu, Fighter Pilot:] On April 1, Wang Wei and I were on duty. At about 08:45 a.m., we took off to conduct our routine tracking mission in the airspace southeast of Hainan Island. Seven minutes after take off, we found a large plane to our left, 50 kilometers ahead of us. Wang Wei and I approached the plane and identified it as a U.S. EP-3 type surveillance plane. When the U.S. spy plane spotted us, it adjusted its navigation course. So we adjusted ours accordingly. At 09:05 a.m., the U.S. plane readjusted its course to 110 degrees. We readjusted ours once again so that we were flying at the same speed and the same direction as the U.S. spy plane. Our planes were on the inner side of Hainan and the U.S. plane was on the outer side. Two minutes later, the U.S. plane suddenly swerved at a wide angle toward our direction and collided over the plane Wang Wei was flying. I saw the nose and left wing of the U.S. plane bump into Wang Wei's plane. And the left outer propeller of the U.S. plane's left wing smashed the vertical tail surface of Wang Wei's plane.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Who do you think is responsible for this collision incident?
[Zhao Yu:] The U.S. side is fully responsible for this collision. It was directly caused by the collision of the U.S. plane veering at a wide angle toward our plane, making it impossible for our plane to avoid it. The U.S. plane severely violated flying rules, so they should hold full responsibility. It is our duty to identify any midair objects that would endanger our national security and to track them. As Wang Wei's comrade in arms on the same mission, I am especially worried for his safety. I hope our rescue efforts will bring him back to us. I am very grateful for the government's and the navy's concern over his safety. I am indignant at the actions of the U.S. spy plane crashing our plane right at our doorsteps.
[Mcedwards:] All right. That's the Chinese fighter pilot who was involved in this, placing the blame squarely on the U.S. crew, saying that the cause of the accident was that U.S. plane veering into Wang Wei's plane. He is the pilot who is missing and presumed dead in this accident Carol.
[Lin:] Well, Colleen, let's check in with the White House on this standoff. President Bush says his administration is working all diplomatic channels to end it. White House correspondent Major Garrett has the view from the North Lawn. Major, who are they talking to and do you know what's being said?
[Major Garrett, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Carol. "Intense diplomacy" going on that is a phrase we have heard throughout the week, but it really does matter on a day like today a senior White House official telling CNN this morning, in reaction to news that a second meeting is occurring on Hainan Island between U.S. officials and the 24 members of the surveillance plane being held there since Sunday, considering that a very positive step. Let me quote that senior administration official directly: "The fact that the meeting is taking place is a sign things are moving forward." When asked just how much farther forward they are moving, the administration official did not want to say: "We're right in the middle of the meeting right now. Let's wait until that meeting is done and we know the facts before deciding exactly how positive a step is going on," that administration official telling CNN. But, clearly, diplomacy is happening on several fronts. And administration officials are encouraged that that diplomacy is occurring at very high levels. Earlier this week, when U.S. officials were trying to obtain contact with senior Chinese officials, they were rebuffed. Now those channels of communication are wide open. And White House officials consider that yet another positive development.
[Lin:] Major, in the early days of this standoff, we heard a lot of demands out of the White House, very specifically: We want our crew back right away. We want our plane back. That is U.S. property, sovereign territory. While these talks are going on, do you expect the language to be changing out of the White House, or even that we might not be hearing very much at all?
[Garrett:] Well, the language doesn't change, Carol, but what the the emphasis does or the order of priority does. Yesterday, the president, amplifying the comments of his secretary of state, said that he regretted the loss or the apparent loss of the Chinese fighter pilot's life. That expression of regret took precedence over earlier statements. Now, the President didn't change his underlying bottom line, which is: The crew needs to be returned, as does the plane. But this is all a matter of emphasis and placing priority over certain elements of presidential rhetoric. And, yesterday, the president's expression of regret by far became the most important thing the president said. It was the headline, not only here, but in China. And the administration believes it is now beginning to reap the fruits of that expression of regret at a presidential level. They do see, very much, that this progress on Hainan Island the second meeting, and the announcement of a third meeting, and continuing high level dialogue with Chinese officials is, in part, a reaction to that expression of presidential regret.
[Lin:] Thank you very much, Major Garrett, live at the White House. Well, the Pentagon says it is encouraged that U.S. diplomats have been able to see the crew once again. And another meeting is scheduled for tomorrow. And a spokesman gave new details on a possible joint U.S.-Chinese investigation into that incident. CNN national correspondent Eileen O'Connor has that side of the story from the Pentagon this morning Eileen.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, good morning Carol. Pentagon officials say that a likely scenario a likely mechanism that can be used for a joint U.S.-Chinese investigation of the accident would be this maritime consultation group that was actually established by an agreement that was signed by then Secretary of Defense William Cohen in 1998. And it is a working group that meets on a regular basis. In fact, there's a meeting scheduled for later this year. Also, this agreement allows for special meetings that can be mutually agreed upon. Now, the advantage of this, according to Admiral Craig Quigley, who is the Pentagon spokesman, is that the parameters the diplomatic guidelines, if you will have already been established. So that saves valuable time, because the ultimate goal here, Carol, is getting that crew back safely and very quickly. And, by the way, on that note, you know, with this meeting having taken place and going on so long, that is very encouraging to Pentagon officials. Primarily, they want to know from this crew how they are and: Are they being held safely? Have they been interrogated? And how were the conditions, if they were interrogated, of that questioning? But, also, they want to find out what happened during this accident. They're not reacting to those statements by the Chinese fighter pilot, because they want to hear from their crew what their version of events was Carol.
[Lin:] So, Eileen, on this joint maritime committee, the Chinese would be represented on this committee as well, right?
[O'connor:] Well, you know, Carol, I wasn't actually able to hear your question. What was that again?
[Lin:] Oh, that the Chinese would be represented on this on this maritime committee that would be responsible for hopefully negotiating an end to this standoff.
[O'connor:] Yes, they are represented. This is a joint maritime working group. There's delegations from both sides. And they come together on regular meetings. And they also, according to this agreement, can have special meetings that are mutually agreed upon. So there could be some additional delegates that the two sides could agree to send in this particular incident Carol.
[Lin:] All right, thank you very much, Eileen O'Connor, reporting live from the Pentagon Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] All right, Carol. Well the U.S. position on the incident is drawing heavy criticism in China. In an editorial today, the newspaper "China Daily" said: "The American government's ignorance of China's demand for an apology has testified to their arrogance in handling international affairs. In Washington's eyes, power is everything. And the country with the most power can do whatever it likes." And then it continues: "Washington officials never did any serious soul searching as to why the incident happened and how it could have been avoided. If the United States had not conducted frequent spy missions near Chinese airspace, the collision would never have happened." TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Howard Kurtz, Co-host:] A rough year for the media: blowing the presidential election, the Elian obsession, the hounding of Wen Ho Lee, and the coming era of big media mergers. Welcome to RELIABLE SOURCES, where we turn a critical lens on the media. I'm Howard Kurtz along with Bernard Kalb. And joining us to look at the major media stories of 2000, Michael Isikoff, investigative reporter for "Newsweek" magazine; Jodie Allen, assistant managing editor at "U.S. News & World Report"; and Barbara Cochran, president of the Radio and Television News Directors Association. We begin our year in review with election 2000, starting in the heart of the primary season, with the press' fascination over John McCain.
[Brian Williams, Msnbc Anchor:] John McCain has apparently turned the tide on George W. Bush...
[Unidentified Female:] Supporters are starting to use a word they say seemed unimaginable just a week ago: "front-runner."
[Kurtz:] When you're on the bus, do you make a conscious effort not to follow under the magic of McCain's spell?
[Jake Tapper, Salon.com:] Oh, you can't. You become like Patty Hearst when the SLA took her.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] This administration had its moment, they've had their chance. They have not led; we will!
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] If you entrust me with the presidency, I know I won't always be the most exciting politician.
[Dana Millbank, "washington Post":] This is summer camp for journalists. That's why there are 15,000 there: not for the story, but so we could hang out and go to parties and eat our food.
[Brit Hume, Fox Anchor:] And welcome back to our FOX News election coverage. I'm Brit Hume. It's 6:00 p.m. in the East, and polls have now closed...
[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] A big call to make...
[Williams:] Mr. Gore will take the state of Florida.
[Tom Brokaw, Nbc Anchor:] What the networks giveth, the networks taketh away.
[Dan Rather, Cbs Anchor:] Bulletin: Florida pulled back into the undecided column.
[Rather:] We made a mistake. We were wrong. We were just flat- wrong.
[Kurtz:] First, a reality check: While campaign 2000 seemed the center of the journalistic universe, the week after election day ranked only No. 6 on the Pew Research Center's survey of the year's top stories which 38 percent of the public followed closely. Topping the list were the hike in gas prices, the attack on the USS Cole, the Firstone tire recall, a failed shooting by a 6-year-old in Michigan, and no surprise Elian Gonzalez. The Bush-Gore recount fight did, however, beat out the Super Bowl. Michael Isikoff, the election: Compared to some of the tabloid fast-food that we've gorged ourselves on in the past, this seemed like a relatively nutritious episode for the press. So why do I have this feeling of indigestion afterwards?
[Michael Isikoff, "newsweek":] Well, there's a lot to digest. I actually think it was just one hell of a story. It probably was the most wild, crazy story I've ever covered with more plot twists and more of a sense one of the few stories I've ever been involved where you really didn't have any idea how it was going to turn out. There was genuine suspense, and that just makes it a great story. But you know, that said, I think, you know, a lot of people are focused, as you clearly are, on the wrong calls that were made election night, which clearly, you know, were big gaffes for the networks.
[Kurtz:] But beyond the wrong calls, Michael...
[Isikoff:] Yes.
[Kurtz:] Let me turn to Jodie Allen. I have this nagging feeling that, you know, the pathetic coverage of the Ryder truck carrying the ballots to Tallahassee, the relentless nature of the coverage, that the media have only one volume: really loud.
[Jodie Allen, "u.s. News & World Report":] That's clearly that's clearly true, Howie. But as Mike said, forgive us, this was for journalists a great, great story, although it did it had its flagging moments. But and the public, for a political story, was paying a considerable amount of attention. Look at CNN's ratings during that period, MSNBC. Put them all back, all the cable, back on the map. So that for a political story, it generated a good deal of public interest, and I don't think you can blame the media for covering it: although I am struck by the fact that in the end the public doesn't view these things as earth-shaking as we do. They are more worried about gas prices than about whether their kid might get shot at school.
[Bernard Kalb, Co-host:] Well, given this obituary for journalism in the year 2000, will I be driven off the set if I say something nice about the coverage of this year? That's all I want to say, "something nice." Now, let's get it serious. When planes land, nobody writes a story. When a plane goes down, it's headlines. And that's essentially what happened with November 7. That was one hell of a yarn, and you used the keyword. The word is "suspense." When we don't know the outcome, we all
[Barbara Cochran, Radio-tv News Directors Association:] Well, I think there were a lot of very interesting things that happened there, and you know, as much as the campaign seemed like kind of a cut-and- dried piece up until election night, all the excitement happened after the normal time when the story would have been finished and that was pretty interesting. But I think the public got to see its institutions, its democratic institutions working up close and personal. One of the most fascinating things was how much exposure we had to what went on in courts, because of cameras in the Florida Supreme Court. We even got the Supreme Court of the United States to release an audiotape. And after it was all over, I think part of the reason the public accepted the outcome was because they were able to observe so much of what went on, thanks to the news media.
[Kurtz:] I know that the election night fiasco by the television networks, biggest blunder in 40 years easily. Looks even worse now that we have the report of the Voter News Service. It turns out that this all the networks rely for these projections. It turns out that they expected half twice as many ballots I'm sorry. They expected half as many ballots to be counted after 2:00 a.m. than was actually the case, and they expected half as many absentee ballots as turned out to be the case. This was shaky stuff. But Barbara, you talk about observing the institutions in action. We certainly got to see the media, you know, making the sausage, so to speak. And I'm reminded of that night, Michael Isikoff, of the Supreme Court ruling that in effect handed the presidency to George W. Bush, and cold reporters standing out on the street. And why can't is television incapable of saying, give us five minutes to read the opinion and we'll get back to you?
[Isikoff:] Yes, because everybody wanted to know right away. We had an incident in our story, Bush was calling from Austin Don Evans, had on the cell phone the second this opinion came out, and Don Evans is telling Bush, we'll have to call you back, we'll have to call you back. He wants to know. What did it say? Nobody knew. Everybody wanted to know. And you've got to feel sorry for those correspondents out there. I mean, it was a very difficult opinion to get through and figure out what it meant. And everybody was standing there reading...
[Allen:] Well, it was so difficult that even people that did study at great length still can't figure out what it meant, and I think they did an incredible job.
[Cochran:] And in the age of the clicker, you know, if you aren't at least acting as if you're going to tell somebody something pretty soon, the thumb will go and they'll be on to the next person who makes that comment.
[Kalb:] Is there any chance that one of the lessons coming out of this, the question I asked you that you chose to duck, is there any chance, for example. of the next election being called off and the entire election being entrusted to the Supreme Court?
[Cochran:] Oh, of course not. Of course not.
[Kalb:] ... very simple. You know, you have a vote, put it up to the nine justices and so forth.
[Cochran:] Well, I think one of the more serious outcomes for the networks and their election night calls is that Congress is getting into the act now...
[Kalb:] Yes.
[Cochran:] ... and is threatening to do things like ban exit polls and so on. The networks need to make a report. They need to go public with their findings on what wrong that night. But they need to be the ones in charge of preventing mistakes in the future. Not Congress.
[Kalb:] This is a media show, right? And we've often talked about where lawyers stand, as if
[Allen:] Well, Bernie, I don't think anything does wonders for the media...
[Kalb:] Either way.
[Allen:] ... overnight. But I think that, by and large, setting aside election night, the media actually learned to be more careful. If you look at the post-election coverage, it was pretty careful, the post-election. There was a minimum of overhyping of this or that, an attempt to downplay even the demonstrations and to not overhype it. I think that there were lessons learned, which isn't to say that we will not be back sensationalizing next year, because, as Barbara picks out, if we don't points out you know, people will be clicking the clicker.
[Kurtz:] Let me jump in, because we're very short on time. Michael Isikoff, the press and John McCain was a huge story. People called it a swoon, a romance. I'm wondering if perhaps McCain found a new way to deal with the press, or was this unique to Senator McCain, the idea of being accessible almost all the time to reporters...
[Isikoff:] No. Actually, he sort of paved the way. I mean, you had, if you remember I mean, Bush was completely inaccessible in those early months of the campaign and then became much more open with the press, as did Gore to a a more limited degree, but more open so than before, and because of the success McCain had with the press. Yes, there was an element of swooning, people went a little overboard in the in the coverage of McCain. But again, he was the most exciting candidate in the field at the time. He was the one threatening to shake things up more than anybody else. And it was natural that the press was going to, you know, seize onto his candidacy.
[Kurtz:] OK, I've got to call a timeout. There's a lot more to say here. When we come back, the 6-year-old who dominated the newscast for weeks and the nuclear scientist presumed guilty by the press next.

[Stuart Varney, Cnn Anchor:] ... Stuart Varney. It will go down as one of the closest presidential elections in American history, and it is not over yet.
[Willow Bay, Cnn Anchor:] No, it is not. The fate of the White House hinges on a painstaking recount of votes in just one state: Florida. And the results of that recount have been trickling in. We'll check in with Wolf Blitzer and we'll get the very latest with a live report from Florida. But first, Stuart takes a look at a dramatic day on Wall Street.
[Varney:] And dramatic it was. Investors today woke up, if they slept at all, after a night of political twists and turns. Early on, they showed resilience in the face of great uncertainty, with both the Dow and the Nasdaq trading higher. But as the election cliffhanger wore on, that resilience wore thin. And adding some tension: renewed concerns about profits and growth in high-tech business. After breaking back above 11,000, albeit briefly, the Dow lost its footing and ended down 45 points at 10,907, the volume relatively light at just over 900 shares. The Nasdaq got pounded in its worst session in weeks, plunging 184 points, that's over 5 percent, all the way down to 3,231, the volume there also relatively light, just over 1.6 billion shares. The S&P; 500 fell 22 12 points2 percent, it moved down to 1,409. As for the bond market, little changed, traders awaiting word on the election the 10-year note up 2 ticks, the 30-year bond up about 14 of a point. Clearly, tech stocks bore the brunt of the selling today, and while profit fears were key, the presidential guessing game may have played a role as well. Allan Chernoff joins us now with more on that one Allan.
[Allan Chernoff, Cnn Correspondent:] Thank you, Stuart. In very broad terms, George W. Bush is more of a Dow stock candidate, Al Gore more of a Nasdaq man. While there were other factors influencing today's trading, many investors today were doing exactly what they had done in the weeks leading up to the election, anticipating a Bush victory.
[Chernoff:] So-called "Bush stocks" picked up where they left off before the election: standing out as leaders of the stock market oil drillers, hospital management, tobacco, and pharmaceutical shares.
[Mary Farrell, Painewebber:] Certainly, industries that would be most hurt by a Gore victory would be companies in the drug industry, particularly the pharmaceutical companies, also other health care- related, tobacco companies.
[Chernoff:] Merck benefited from a Lehman Brothers upgrade. Lilly, Pharmacia, American Home Products and Johnson & Johnson also continued gaining. Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, British American Tobacco, Loews and Vector Group rose on anticipation of a more sympathetic administration taking over the White House. While Al Gore has been loosely tied to the technology sector, fundamental factors were mainly responsible for pushing Nasdaq stocks lower. Continued worries about cutbacks in telecommunications equipment spending weighed heavily on component suppliers. Volatile networking chip makers tumbled for the second day in a row, Xilinx, Vitesse, Applied Micro Circuits and PMC Sierra. Fiber- optics firms slumped: JDS Uniphase, Corning, Ciena and Nortel. And providers of high-speed connectivity equipment for storage fell: QLogic, Emulex, Brocade and
[Jni. Art Hogan, Jefferies & Company:] Supply is finally catching up with demand in a sector that doesn't need that to happen real soon, so I think that that's why you are seeing a bit of a sell-off in the space. I don't think it's long term.
[Chernoff:] Investors are particularly nervous that some long-time Nasdaq leaders have been breaking down, such as Oracle, down 17 percent this week alone. Technical analysts who would not place any importance on the presidential election are feeling smug at the moment. As we reported, they had been warning the Nasdaq composite would hit a resistance level at about 3,500. Sure enough, after hitting 3,480 intra-day on Monday, the Nasdaq has been pulling back. And, Stuart, we should point out that even though traders are saying tobacco, pharmaceutical stocks actually would benefit under a Bush administration, there is no guarantee of that of course, if even Bush does carry the election.
[Varney:] Correct. Allan Chernoff, thanks very much. Well, today's postelection reaction on Wall Street came in contrast to the last two presidential contests, and no surprise given that during those trading sessions, investors at least knew who had won. Well, both the Dow and the Nasdaq rose more than 1 percent, that was when President Clinton was re-elected in 1996. The Dow posted a modest loss the day after Mr. Clinton's first victory in 1992.
[Bay:] Today, of course, it was the Nasdaq that got pummeled, with yesterday's losers taking it on the chin again: those telecom chipmakers. Also hit hard: Internet stocks. John Metaxas joins us now from the Nasdaq market site with a look at the worst sell-off for the index in weeks John.
[John Metaxas, Cnn Correspondent:] Willow, that it was a day of uncertainty was evident by the slow and steady decline of the Nasdaq to close at session lows, but tempered by the lower than normal volume that we got today. Cisco Systems a big loser, down 8 percent, fears of that telecom spending slowdown helping to erase the gains this stock had yesterday and send it back down to the $52 level. In fact, all of the big caps here at the Nasdaq were lower, strong or sharp losses, rather, for Sun Microsystems, down about 10 percent on the day. And the Cisco suppliers once again weak today, that inventory overhang for Cisco threatening to weaken the sales of such companies as Broadcom, which was down 14 percent on the day. Internets also had a bad day, starting with Priceline.com, the second major executive in a week to quit that company, Maryann Keller saying in an interview she thinks that the experiment of selling cars online has failed, Priceline down a dollar at $3.25. And eToys losing 78 cents at about $2.50. Henry Blodget of Merrill Lynch coming out with some negative comments about the dot.coms, highlighting how difficult it has been for them to raise the money they need to reach profitability, he brought eToys down to a neutral, the stock falling to a new low today. Nasdaq down today sharply and some analysts think we may test 3,000 before we can perhaps even make another move toward that 3,500 level Willow.
[Bay:] John Metaxas at the Nasdaq market site thanks, John. There was hope today that the Dow might manage to end in the plus column, but that hope had vanished by the closing bell, the index ending near its low for the day. So let's go to Terry Keenan at the New York Stock Exchange for a look at the big board movers Terry.
[Terry Keenan, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Willow, gridlock in a landslide, that was the bullish spin that Wall Street was putting on the election results, or non-results, this morning. But like last night's projections, by the end of the day many traders here were taking back their early call on things, and that is one big reason why both the Nasdaq and the Dow closed at or near their lows of the day. Art Cashin, the legendary trader down here put it to me bluntly, he said a tight race is one thing, but if the Florida results wind up in the courts, Wall Street is not going to like it and he attributed that concern to today's sell-off. Now, Greg Valliere of the Washington Research Group put an even more negative spin on things, telling me that no matter what happens, this election will go down as tainted, something that will hurt the credibility of the new president. That said, traders still were positioning themselves for what the market seems to believe will be an eventual Bush victory, buying those drug stocks, as Allan mentioned, and sending Merck to a new high. Taking a look at what else was moving in the Dow: Intel was by far the biggest loser among the Dow 30 today, falling 3 12, a decline there of more than 7 percent. Citigroup and J.P. Morgan also losers in a weak financial sector. To the upside, in addition to those drug stocks, we saw some buying in ExxonMobil, even though oil prices were virtually flat. Procter & Gamble also up a dollar. As for the market breadth, it was negative, about 15-13 in favor of decliners. The telling number here, however, was that volume coming in at about yesterday's anemic levels, and that is one sign that the real gridlock today was on Wall Street, where traders were truly stunned by what happened in last night's election Willow.
[Bay:] Terry, IBM had some news after the bell, what's going on there?
[Keenan:] Yes, I mean, that's another thing that may weigh on trading tomorrow, IBM currently trading down $2 at 98, the company held its fall meeting with Wall Street analysts today and it said that wide availability of its newest mainframe will be delayed until the start of next year, and that, of course, is a big concern about the fourth quarter, because IBM's revenues came in late in the third quarter. So that news weighing on IBM shares tonight Willow.
[Bay:] Terry Keenan at the big board thanks, Terry Stuart.
[Varney:] Now, the very latest on the presidential cliffhanger. Let's go to Wolf Blitzer, who has been following all the election results, for a complete roundup Wolf.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you, Stuart. It was only 24 hours ago that the first polls began to close, and tonight we still do not know who will be the next president of the United States. One state holds the key: Florida. Officials there are scrambling to recount the state's nearly 6 million votes. The race between Texas Governor George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore was so close in Florida that state law mandated a recount. Bush emerged this afternoon from the governor's mansion with running mate Dick Cheney to stake his claim to the Oval Office.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] This morning brings news from Florida that the final vote count there shows Secretary Cheney and I have carried the state of Florida. And if that result is confirmed in an automatic recount, as we expect it will be, then we have won the election.
[Blitzer:] In the initial count, with only absentee ballots from Florida residents living overseas still to be counted, the tally showed Bush was ahead by some 1,700 votes. And whoever wins Florida will win the state's 25 electoral votes. As the tally stands now, Gore holds 260 electoral votes to Bush's 246. Also still undecided tonight is Oregon, with seven electoral votes. Vice President Gore won the national popular vote, leading the governor by about 170,000 votes. Gore made his first public appearance later in the afternoon. He called the uncertain outcome an extraordinary moment for U.S. democracy. Gore also said the race should be decided quickly but with no rush to judgment and that the U.S. Constitution must be respected.
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] Despite the fact that Joe Lieberman and I won the popular vote, under our Constitution, it is the winner of the electoral college who will be the next president. Our Constitution is the whole foundation of our freedom, and it must be followed faithfully.
[Blitzer:] As the candidates and the nation awaited the recount in Florida, that state's governor, Jeb Bush, brother of George W. Bush, promised that the promise would be carried out fairly. CNN's John Zarrella is in Tallahassee, Florida. John, tell us what is the latest.
[John Zarrella, Cnn Correspondent:] Wolf, actually, I'm in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and here at Fort Lauderdale we are at the area where they did the recount in Broward County today, where they had to recount 587,000 votes here. They finished up the process about an hour ago. It's one of about half a dozen of Florida's 67 counties that are already reporting in the results of the recount. In Broward County actually, the governor from Texas picked up 44 votes, more votes, and the vice president picked up 43 more votes in the recount. So actually, a net gain of one for the governor from Texas. The big story in Florida this is the focal point may narrow further even tomorrow. In Palm Beach County, a big dispute brewing over the actual ballot and how it was laid out. People, about 2,000 voters up there, now beginning to claim that they thought they were voting for Al Gore when, in fact, when they punched their cards they voted for Pat Buchanan, because it's laid out in a format that makes it a little bit difficult to understand. There's now a lawsuit. It was filed this afternoon on behalf of three Palm Beach County residents by two Boca Raton attorneys claiming that the vote should be thrown out. There's also a grassroots effort going on now, going door to door, asking that petitions be signed in Palm Beach County so that people can get a new vote in Palm Beach County Wolf.
[Blitzer:] John Zarrella in Florida, thank you very much. Both Bush and Gore have dispatched teams of lawyers and campaign representatives to Florida to oversee the recounting: Bush sending former Secretary of State James Baker while Gore sent former Secretary of State Warren Christopher. And that's the latest on this presidential cliffhanger, Willow. We'll continue to give you all the latest developments as they become available, and we'll have a special election edition of "THE WORLD TODAY." That's tonight at 8:00 p.m. Eastern, 5:00 p.m. Pacific. Back to you, Willow.
[Bay:] Thank you, Wolf. Coming up on MONEYLINE, the Republican Party may still hold the majority in Washington, but gridlock may rule the Hill more than ever. We'll check out why. And the confusion over the U.S. election was felt around the world, with overseas markets reacting to every new headline. That's ahead with MONEYLINE continues.

[Jack Cafferty, Cnn Anchor:] Shakespeare wrote, "Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown," and, perhaps that could apply to the current Miss America. 21-year-old Katie Harman was crowned in September. And now, just five months into her reign, Harman's parents are complaining about their daughter's treatment by the pageant organization. In a letter to the board of directors of the Miss America Pageant, they said quote "Katie is your Miss America, and I can't tell you how many times she's been in trouble for things that are not her fault." Now, though, Katie Harman is denying reports that she's unhappy. She issued statement, through her pageant, the Miss America Pageant, saying that the crown fits just fine, thank you. Joining us from Los Angeles to sort his out is a former Miss America, Kate Shindle, who wore the crown in 1998. We're delighted, Kate, to have you with us on "
[American Morning." Kate Shindle, Former Miss America, 1998:] Thank you. Thank you. It's way too early to be functioning, so be nice to me or I'll beat you with my crown.
[Cafferty:] Well, it's three hours later here, and I'm not functioning either, so it will be it will be a good match.
[Shindle:] Okay.
[Cafferty:] What's going on, to the best of your knowledge, here? What's the beef?
[Shindle:] Well, you know, I think that what's happened, and it's been consistent over the last several years, is that there's been a breakdown of communication between the pageant office and Miss America and her family. And for for some reason it's been difficult to different degrees for each of them. But, you know, the thing to remember is that everyone wants to be on the same page, and everyone wants the organization to do as well as possible for things to function right, for the year to run smoothly...
[Cafferty:] Sure.
[Shindle:] ...and for Katie to keep her focus where it needs to be.
[Cafferty:] Is this is being Miss America a good gig?
[Shindle:] Yeah! It's a great job. It's a great job. I mean, certainly, there are there are difficulties like there would be with any, you know, job as a spokesperson in a major corporation. And they're complicated by the fact that you're on the road about 20,000 miles a month. So, you have to deal with the additional pressure of having to having to resolve communications, conflicts...
[Cafferty:] Sure.
[Shindle:] ...that way.
[Cafferty:] But, I mean everybody knows up front that there's an extensive travel schedule. That you're expected to make a lot of appearances on behalf of the Miss America Organization, for which, you can accumulate a pretty fair piece of change in terms of fees. I was reading where the current Miss America stands to make about a quarter of a million dollars in appearance fees, in addition to the gifts and the scholarship money that she won at the time she won the title. So, I mean, it's not about compensation this this traveling...
[Shindle:] No.
[Cafferty:] ...and whatever...
[Shindle:] No.
[Cafferty:] ...hardships are attached, right?
[Shindle:] No. I mean, that's true. And I can't speak to how much Katie is or is not going to make, because I frankly just don't know. But the thing that I think is important to realize, in that context, is that nobody becomes Miss America just to get rich. And there are some things which are very important. Katie wants to help breast cancer patients and speak about the Miss America Organization and be a advocate on their behalf. And when these kinds of conflicts occur, it makes it very difficult for her focus to stay where it needs to be. I mean, just as an example, the last I hear, they were canceling some of her appearances and trying get her to sign a statement that none of it was true. So, they've put her in the position that she has to choose between the organization and the job she loves and, you know, her family, who's very concerned about her. And it's a difficult choice. And I'm sure they want this to go away. And she wants to keep her focus where it should be.
[Cafferty:] Now there's apparently there's a little subplot to all of this. The director of the Miss America Pageant, Robert Renneisen says that there are four states that would like to have him removed as the director of the pageant: Oregon, Illinois, South Carolina and California. Miss Harman's from Oregon. You're from Illinois. What about this movement to have the director of the pageant removed, and is that complaint related somehow to this thing you and I are talking about here?
[Shindle:] Well, not in my mind, it's not. Frankly, I don't have a personal problem with Mr. Renneisen, and I'm certainly not trying to get anybody kicked out of their job. This is a situation which has come up because Katie's parents wrote a letter to the board saying that they where concerned about their daughter.
[Cafferty:] Right.
[Shindle:] Mr. Renneisen distributed the letter the other day at a press conference and started saying that none of it was true. And the reason that I spoke up after four years of not saying anything about the consistent problems within the organization, is because I don't think that the blame for this deserves to be laid at the feet of Katie and her family and the volunteers who run this program. If there's something else that's going on, then, unfortunately, he's in the position to have to deal with both issues at the same time. But, he's the CEO, and that's why he gets paid, you know? So.
[Cafferty:] You know what? Given the early hour, you did great.
[Shindle:] Well, thank you.
[Cafferty:] Thank you. It was nice to have you on the program. I appreciate your insight. Thanks for being with us.
[Shindle:] Thanks for having me.
[Cafferty:] All right. Kate Shindle, Miss America 1998, joining us this morning from California. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Veronica Pedrosa, Cnn Anchor:] Japan and China are locked in an escalating trade dispute. China is moving to impose duties on certain products from Japan after Tokyo raised tariffs on some Chinese goods. Lisa Rose Weaver reports.
[Lisa Rose Weaver, Cnn Correspondent:] China firmly hit the ball into Japan's court, saying tariffs imposed on Chinese agricultural products in April caused Beijing to act now.
[Zhang Qiyue, Foreign Ministry Spokesman:] China has voiced its opposition several times, and had several consultations with the Japanese side, but the Japanese refuse to correction their decision, and in this situation, the Chinese side had decided to adopt some measures. China had not said when tariffs on Japanese cars, cell phones and air- conditioners would actually begin or how high the tariffs will be. But impact on taxing these items might not directly effect overall export trade to China. Auto exports in fiscal year 2000 accounted for a small portion of overall export trade, and Japanese mobile phone exports are limited, because different technologies are used in China. But Japan is a major investor and trade partner and has issued billion of dollars in development aid and soft loans in the past two decade. A diplomatic fallout could cost more than actual trade losses. The Japanese are advocating conciliation, while China doesn't appear to rule it out either, so long as Japan moves first. Japan's prime minister has said he wants to solve the impasse through negotiation. Lisa Rose Weaver, CNN, Beijing.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] America's main base in Afghanistan is about to experience a shift change, as we were just telling you. Meanwhile, military planners are grappling with the issue of Mullah Omar, and where he will be taken if and when he's captured. CNN's Bill Hemmer details those developments and other headlines from Afghanistan.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Correspondent:] In the event Mullah Mohammed Omar was captured by U.S. forces, a scenario is starting to develop that would take the Taliban founder actually to sea, and not here to the Kandahar Airport. Already the U.S. military has several dozen ships floating in the Arabian Sea. You can imagine for yourself the logistical problems if Mullah Mohammed Omar came here, already with several hundred detainees here at the airport. As we mention that, the rumors and the reports are various and rampant as to where the Taliban founder may be at this time. But here is what we know: We are led to believe, through the Kandahar governor, that Mullah Mohammed Omar still is in northern Helmand Province, possibly around the town of Baghran. In addition, we are told, 1,500 loyal Taliban fighters may be surrounding him. There are various reports about talks of a surrender there. But again, not being on the ground there, it's difficult to ascertain whether or not that is making progress. On another front, the airport here is, indeed, making progress. Transitional teams from the 101st Airborne Division the U.S. Army were here today talking with the U.S. Marines about the eventual handover. We do anticipate the Marines handing this base over in a week or two weeks here in Kandahar, Afghanistan. Also, as we mention that, the U.S. Army will be responsible, then, for the detainees here at the base. Right now 250, after 25 more came in last night. Again, most in this group are from Pakistan. And the Marines indicate right now the expansion facility has taken place [sic]. Up to 400 prisoners can be brought here, and eventually possibly by the end of this month another expansion will take place, taking in about 500 here at the Kandahar Airport. Also, there were some greetings from home. Specifically, eastern Maryland. A number of people from small towns like Denton, Maryland and Greensboro signed a number of papers here that now are glued and taped onto the walls of the terminal buildings. Many notes in there from parents and schoolkids. Some kids say good luck and come home soon. Others say good luck, hope you don't get lost. Good sense of humor, 7,000 miles from home. With the U.S. Marines, Bill Hemmer, CNN reporting, Kandahar, Afghanistan.

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] We begin in Indonesia, where crowds marked the country's 55th birthday with ceremonies, tight security, and at least one protest. About a thousand students gathered in the capital, Jakarta, to demand the armed forces be stripped of their parliament seats. The students want to curb military influence in the government. In the province of Aceh, people shunned national celebrations to push for their own independence vote. Indonesia's government says it's trying to extend a three month cease-fire with separatist militias. As Indonesia's RCTI reports, tensions in Aceh are rising as the expiration of the truce draws near.
[Unidentified Rcti Correspondent:] Human rights groups have often criticized the government over the implementation of the joint understanding for a humanitarian clause in Aceh. They say authorities have done little to familiarize the terms of a clause to the general public. But in some parts of the province, villagers seem to know that the cease fire between government forces and separatist rebels will not last forever. The truce stipulated under the joint understanding ends on September 2, prompting villagers to flee to safety in Aceh's oil installations. Aside from a few grenade attacks, these structures have been left mostly untouched by the fighting. But as anxieties rise in Aceh, the government has disclosed it is prepared to extend the joint understanding by another three months. Officials say this will give time for the government to discuss political solutions for the long-suffering province.
[Hasballah M. Saad, Human Rights Affairs Minister:] I think we have to prepare a political deal, political possible solutions. Quite simple, it might be days. We have to discuss soon, but
[Unidentified Rcti Correspondent:] A law on special autonomy for a region that now calls itself Aceh Jaru Salaan is now being deliberated both by parliament in Jakarta, and provincial legislators in Banda, Aceh. The law calls for wide-ranging autonomy in implementing Islamic Sharia law in the staunchly Muslim province, and a fairer share of local revenue from the province's rich oil and gas reserves. But officials have ruled out independence for Aceh saying Jakarta's sovereignty over the region is not negotiable.
[Alwi Shihab, Foreign Affairs Minister:] We think that if there is necessity that after the extension of the humanitarian clause, there should be a necessity action, there should be a decisive measure in terms of sitting together with young people and letting them know that we never be able to compromise our principle, the territorial integrity of Indonesia is something that we will never compromise.
[Unidentified Rcti Correspondent:] Officials say the last word on the extension of the humanitarian clause will come at the end of August. This is the RCTI News Team reporting.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] The family of Chandra Levy today appears no closer to finding out what happened to her than when the intern disappeared about a trace without a trace, rather, over three months ago. Police have disclosed no new leads or clues in this baffling case, so what's next? As CNN's Rusty Dornin reports, families like the Levy's typically turn their heartache into action.
[Rusty Dornin, Cnn Correspondent:] Not knowing, families and loved ones of the missing describe it as torture.
[Donna Haley, Stepmother Of Missing Woman:] If you haven't been in our shoes, you don't understand what we're going through. It is it is a black hole in the middle of your heart.
[Dornin:] A black hole that drove Susan Levy and two other families of missing women to create a support group for the families and friends of the missing. [on camera]: In missing person cases, it is often those left behind feel compelled to do something, anything to keep the memories of their loved ones alive and help others in their same situation.
[Les Weidman, Stanislaus County Sheriff:] I think for a lot of the, I think it's desperation. I mean, they, they're feeling frustrated because they're not getting the kind of information that they're hoping for. A lot of these cases are protracted. They go on for months and months and these poor people, they just live this pure hell where they're just looking for any opportunity that might finally bring them the kind of news that they're hoping for.
[Dornin:] When the three Yosemite tourists disappeared and were found murdered, their loved ones started the Sund Carrington Foundation. It helped Chandra Levy's family put up part of the reward.
[Kim Peterson, Sund Carrington Foundation:] Our organization puts up reward money for families who have missing or murdered loved ones, but don't have the resources to put up a reward.
[Dornin:] When his daughter, Polly Class, was kidnapped and then found murdered, Mark Class also felt compelled to do something.
[Peterson:] The Class kids foundation by Mark Class helps get the word out and fingerprints kids and he's travelled all over the nation bringing this to the forefront. The Amber Foundation by Kim Schwartz there are several organizations that have been founded.
[Dornin:] One of the most famous advocates of the missing and other crime victims, John Walsh, not only started his own TV show, he also founded the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. His son Adam was abducted in 1981 and later found murdered. Along with the high profile organizations, there are many groups most people never hear about.
[Peterson:] I know families whose faces haven't been profile and have started their own search groups and things that they need to do. It helps in their healing, as well as feeling like they're doing something in honor of their loved one.
[Dornin:] The need to reach out to others, others going through similar anguish. Rusty Dornin, CNN, Modesto, California.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] The first lawsuit against defective BridgestoneFirestone tires goes to trial tomorrow, but it could still be halted by a settlement. Firestone has settled more than 150 similar cases out of court. CNN's Patty Davis takes a look at the fallout from defective tires and the damage already done.
[Patty Davis, Cnn Correspondent:] Scores of deadly accident involving Ford Explorers, equipped with Firestone tires, the tread separating from the tire, the Explorer rolling over. The federal government is seeking a mandatory recall of Firestone tires after the company refused to recall the tires on its own. It wouldn't be the first recall for Firestone. In August, 2000, Firestone first took action, but it was voluntary.
[Gary Crigger, V.p., Bridgestone/firestone:] BridgestoneFirestone is taking the extraordinary step of announcing a voluntary recall.
[Davis:] The recall involved 6.5 million 15-inch Firestone tires made in its Decatur, Illinois plant. One month later, Ford and Firestone faced angry members of Congress.
[Masatoshi Ono, Former Ceo, Bridgestone/firestone:] I apologize to you and the American peoples, especially for the family that have lost a loved one terrible in this rollover accident.
[Davis:] Explorer owners rushed to have their tires replaced. While the focus may have been on Firestone's tires, consumer advocates say the design of the Explorer was as much at fault in the rollovers.
[Joan Claybrook, President, Public Citizen:] I believe both companies share the blame, because the vehicle is prone to roll over, the tire is not robust enough, and when the tire fails, then the vehicle is uncontrollable.
[Davis:] In May, 2001, when Ford hinted it wanted a recall of another 13 million Firestone tires of all of its vehicles, Firestone severed its nearly 100-year relationship with Ford. One day later, Ford went ahead with its replacement effort. Both companies took aim at the other.
[John Lampe, Ceo, Bridgestone/firestone:] There is something wrong with the Ford Explorer. You could take all our tires off of the Ford Explorer, and the Ford Explorer would continue to roll over.
[Jacques Nasser, Ceo, Ford Motor Company:] This a tire issue, and only a tire issue.
[Davis:] But the replacement effort has not gone as smoothly as Ford hoped. In July, 2001, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration opened a defect investigation into one of the replacements. The FoodFirestone controversy has been linked to 203 deaths. [on camera]: Among those injured, a Texas family whose Explorer rolled over on a Mexican highway last year after a tire blowout. Their case against Firestone is the first to go to federal court. Patty Davis, CNN, Washington.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We turn now to the concern about international terrorism. It is the focus of a new report being released today in Washington. Our Kate Snow joins us now from Capitol Hill. She has more on this story. Kate, good morning.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Daryn. This report outlines what the Commission on Terrorism sees as an increasing threat from terrorist activity and terrorists, they say, bent on doing more harm and causing many casualties. They talk about the need to do more about that and how the federal government can do more. The panel suggests that the CIA needs to have more leeway in recruiting sources that may have criminal or terrorist backgrounds themselves. They also talk about the possibility of using the U.S. military in a role in a lead role responding to terrorist activities. Also suggested by this panel, which was appointed by the Congress six months ago to look at this, that the FBI should sift through evidence at crime scenes and share terrorist information with other intelligence agencies. Also, that Congress should pass stricter laws controlling components that would be used, or could be used, in making biological weapons, and that the State Department should list states who don't fully cooperate in the fight against terrorist. Also, another recommendation coming from the panel, slightly unusual recommendation, that perhaps international students studying in this country should be kept an eye on.
[Paul Bremer, Natl. Commission On Terrorism:] The CIA and the FBI have become a bit overcautious in their approach to collecting intelligence, and we think that has to change.
[Snow:] One of those convicted in the World Trade Center bombing had entered the United States to study engineering at Wichita State University. But some say tracking international students is inappropriate.
[Hussein Ibish, American-arab Anti-discrimination Committee:] It identifies people as a threat based on their national origin and their legitimate academic pursuits. What this does is it stigmatizes people because of lawful First Amendment-protected academic or even political activity, none of which ought to be the concern of law enforcement in the United States.
[Snow:] The FBI says it's always looking for improved ways to combat terrorism and will look seriously at the commission's report. But the bureau will not target specific groups.
[Eric Holder, Deputy Attorney General:] I think we certainly want the resources so that we can monitor whoever is in this country and who poses a threat to this nation. I wouldn't necessarily single out students as a group we need to particularly be concerned about.
[Snow:] Now, the report certainly going to raise a lot of discussion here on Capitol Hill and in Washington. It's taken up today by Congress. Congress back in session and could deal with it in terms of hearing as early as this week. Kate Snow, CNN, live, Capitol Hill.
[Kagan:] Kate, thank you.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] New York's fashion week struts to its midpoint. It's the semiannual designer showcase taking on a different look: The last gathering was abruptly halted by the September 11 attacks. Our Gail O'Neill is backstage at the Douglas Hannat fashion show, with more. Gail, what goodies have you found for us?
[Gail O'neill, Cnn Correspondent:] Daryn, look at my outfit. Need I say any more? I have been swept up in the fabulousity of fashion week.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Oh, my God.
[O'neill:] It's only day four, and the wonderful thing about these collections I hear somebody saying, Oh, my God.
[Harris:] It's Leon.
[Kagan:] That was Leon.
[O'neill:] Leon, I am bringing this back for you. The great thing about the collections is that you get to see how designers put their personal stamp on clothes and at the same time, somehow reflect the national psyche. Let's take a look at that. Fashion Week has returned to the Big Apple after being interrupted on September 11. Designers are going back to basics for their fallwinter collections, in keeping with the nation's more grounded mood.
[Unidentified Male:] There's a real return to the business of fashion. I think fashion for fashion's sake, not just for a show, to put on a spectacle.
[O'neill:] But in a business that has always thrived on high- drama, impracticality, and especially fun, anything but a spectacle can be downright disappointing. Still, the design team at Anne Klein took a chance: The signature look was subdued and introspective, and that generated excitement.
[Cindi Leive, Editor-in-chief, Glamour:] Tremendously wearable. Real clothes for real women, the kind of thing that people are going to walk into stores and see it just as it was shown on the runway and say, Yes, I want to have that.
[O'neill:] The last time fashion's A-list got together was on September 11, and within hours of the strikes on the World Trade Center, all shows were abruptly canceled.
[Unidentified Male:] We haven't had closure from the terrorist attack, so to think about fashion is really facetious right now. It's not going to be fun until we achieve closure, and then people can think about fun and fun clothes. Now with Seventh Avenue's return to fashion, it seems that everyone has grown up a little. And the catwalk at Sean John was a prime example, where music mogul-turned-designer Puffy Combs blended vintage elements with contemporary design for a feel that was gentlemanly feel dapper.
[O'neill:] And now we have gone back to fabulous. We have Douglas right here. Isn't he handsome, Leon? Douglas, the '60s brought us counterculture and the fashions that reflect it in grunge and hippy wear and fringe. Dior gave us wonderful opulence after the deprivation of World War II. What may September 11 have done to fashion? I can't speak, I love this jacket so much.
[Douglas Hannant, Designer:] Individuality is the most important thing for fall. It's about fabrics that are broken in, familiarity, that old worn piece you will have forever and you can never break it in because you've worn it for a couple of years. Well, I'm doing new clothing that way, with the finest fabrics, in a very refined way. You can see here Ann's dress. Threat work is very important. And the fact that this is frayed to look old, though, of course, it's not. Then on Andreas, we have a hand-beaded caviar smoking jacket. It's beaded on lamb skin suede. It's an alternative to black tie; the tie is no longer necessary. He's just very relaxed and nonchalant, and there's an ease about clothing.
[O'neill:] What is with the button-down guys. I mean I'm liking it, but is Leon, are you going to go for this look?
[Hannant:] It's about freedom. You feel much freer when your clothes are not constricting. Nothing is tight. Everything is loose now. There's an ease about it. The pants are falling down on the high hip. Nothing is tight and cinched and.
[O'neill:] Do you have a favorite look? Is there a signature piece that women must have for fallwinter 2002, as well as men?
[Hannant:] It is about individuality. You need the piece that's special and one of a kind. You know, the thread's just frayed in a way you could never reproduce it again. There are a lot of pieces like that in the collection.
[O'neill:] I think this is it for me. Thank you, darling. Back to you, Daryn. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Unidentified Male:] Yankee Stadium was opened in 1923.
[Joe Mazan, Wxix Correspondent:] In baseball, the New York Yankees with names like Ruth and DiMaggio is a historic franchise. In music, the Vienna Boys Choir with names like Mozart and Schubert equally has a remarkable past. And that past will become part of these two boy's future.
[Donald Smith, Future Vienna Boys Choir Member:] I want to bounce off the walls because this so exciting. It's just a great opportunity.
[Mazan:] Meet 13-year old Donald Smith.
[Smith:] We didn't even know this was going happen.
[Mazan:] And 11-year-old Ryan Slone.
[Ryan Slone, Future Vienna Boys Choir Member:] Just fun going over there, to be invited.
[Mazan:] The two Cincinnati boy choir members will be leaving next week for Austria to join the Vienna boys Choir.
[Smith:] At first, we thought, one day I will be able to go there to see the place and probably sing a song with them or two. But I didn't think I'd have to sing with them or two for a year-and-a-half.
[Mazan:] To give you an idea of how great an honor this is, since it was founded more than 500 years ago, only one other boy from the United States has joined the choir. [voice-over]: To get a break like this, you need talent, but you also need a Godfather to open up a door.
[Randall Wolfe, Cincinnati Boy Choir Director:] I couldn't be more proud of these two young men.
[Mazan:] It's not Marlon Brando, but Cincinnati Boy Choir director; Randall Wolfe helped Donald and Ryan get into the group because he's friends with the choir's director.
[Wolfe:] He's hoping to establish relationships with other choirs on other continents where there will be boys sent to Vienna, possibly here in Cincinnati, that we may have a Vienna choirboy come here at one point.
[Mazan:] Mozart and Schubert have made their mark in music. Now, Smith and Slone hope to make theirs.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] A memorial at sea for the victims of Alaska Air Flight 261 a group of surfers paddled into the waters off California on Saturday to pay tribute to those who lost their lives. Family and friends are remembering those who died in the crash of Alaska Air Flight 261. Memorials were held Saturday in California, Oregon and Washington state for the 88 people who died in Monday's crash. CNN's Don Knapp with that of service in Malibu, California.
[Don Knapp, Cnn Correspondent:] In a building overlooking the Pacific Ocean on the Pepperdine University campus, about a thousand family members and friends gathered to remember the passengers and crew of Alaska Airlines Flight 261.
[Gov. Gray Davis , California:] I do know that someday we are likely to know the earthly cause of this accident. But we may never know the answer to our collective question, why did it happen to me? Why did someone I love have to leave me so quickly? Why, God, did this happen?
[Knapp:] The ecumenical service honored different religions of those on the plane.
[Davis:] We are Muslim and Jew, Hindu and Orthodox, Protestant and Catholic. We are different. Yet today, we are the same. We have all wept with you, the same bitter tears of saying goodbye to parents, to a wife, a husband, a sister, a brother, a child.
[Knapp:] Roses representing the 88 victims were given to those attending. Some were kept by family members and friends. Others were placed in baskets and taken by Coast Guard helicopters to be dropped into the Pacific Ocean. [on camera]: Besides remembering and honoring those who died, grief counselors have said a memorial service also helps ease the suffering of those who have lost their loved ones.
[Killorin Riddell, Clinical Psychologist:] It honors the person they lost. And it is an important ritual, I think, throughout human history.
[Knapp:] For closure?
[Riddell:] For closure, and it's very therapeutic.
[Knapp:] White doves, one for each of the passengers who died, soared from the Malibu bluffs, while buglers played taps. Don Knapp, CNN, Malibu, California.
[Kelley:] Navy crews are working quickly to map the Alaska Airlines crash site. The National Transportation Safety Board says Monday's crash scattered the debris over a small area, about the size of a football field. Sonar devices are being used to map the area.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] That U.S. spy plane sat on a runway at a military base on China's Hainan Island for more than three months before an agreement for its return was reached. It is now about to touch down at a repair facility at Dobbins Air Reserve Base in Marietta, Georgia, and that is where we find our Martin Savidge Marty.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning to you, Colleen. As you say, the plane's scheduled to arrive here about 10 minutes from now, and you are not going to see the EP-3, per se. What you will see is, instead, an Antonov-124. It is said to be the largest cargo plane in the world and carrying inside of the cargo bay of that aircraft will be the main fuselage of the EP-3. As you know, the EP-3 had a collision over the South China Sea, off of the coast of China, back on April 1, and that sparked an international incident between the United States and China, the aircraft with its 24 U.S. Navy crewmembers forced to make an emergency landing on Hainan Island. The Chinese aircraft that ran into it was forced to go down in the sea, and the pilot was lost. Now, the crewmembers remained on that Chinese island for some time. Eventually, there was a deal worked for their release and then came the hard part: trying to figure out if there could be a deal to release the aircraft. Eventually, China and the U.S. government did come to an agreement. However, it was determined that the aircraft would not be flown off the island, due to sensitivities, but instead would be broken into pieces, loaded on board the Russian cargo plane, and then brought back here to Atlanta. This is the headquarters, by the way, of Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin is the original manufacturer of the EP-3, so the plane will be brought here, and in a hanger over several months, and costing several million dollars, it will put back together, and eventually put back into service. That whole prospect is expected to be done by the end of the year. So right now, all eyes are focusing on the skies, to see a rather interesting end to what has been a drawn out saga of the EP-3. The aircraft may not have made it back in one piece, but of course, the crew did and that is the most important aspect out of all of this. The plane is expected to touch down here about 10 minutes from now Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] Martin, you mentioned that the Russian cargo plane will be carrying the fuselage of the EP-3. Any other parts on board that plane, or where those other, smaller parts all sent somewhere else?
[Savidge:] Well, the other smaller parts are being retrieved. All of the aircraft will be brought back to the United States. However, the engines and the wings, which were separated from the aircraft, have actually gone back into the Navy parts division and will be used as spares. Instead, what will happen here is that there is a donor P-3 that is the same sort of aircraft that is sitting in a hangar, and they will basically be taking parts the wings, the engines from that donor plane and using those parts to rebuild the originally EP-3. This EP-3 was built in 1969, so it's over 30 years old. It's not only an opportunity to put the plane back into service, but it's also an opportunity to update all the instruments that are on board, including the engines Colleen.
[Mcedwards:] Understood. CNN's Martin Savidge, thanks. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Lou Dobbs, Cnn Anchor:] Good evening. America battling terrorists in Afghanistan, while Americans battle anthrax anxiety at home. Good evening. Part of our nation's capital shutting down because of a growing anthrax scare. More than three dozen people have now been exposed to the bacteria nationwide. So far, no links to terrorists have been discovered. Tonight, we'll tell you how the United States is responding to the anthrax scare, and the efforts being made to bring more anthrax medicine to the market. We'll also have the latest for you on the military attacks against the Taliban and Al Qaeda network targets in Afghanistan, and what effect growing tensions between India and Pakistan could have on the world's antiterrorism war. Former Defense Secretary William Cohen will be here. As efforts move through Congress to choke off Osama bin Laden's money, we'll hear from one of those individuals whose assets have been frozen. And on Wall Street, new anthrax developments rattle investors, pressuring stock prices. The anthrax scare causing chaos in the nation's capital. Thirty- one people in Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's office were exposed to anthrax. Officials now warn that nasal swab tests can, however, produce false results. Three staffers of Senator Russell Feingold also exposed to anthrax. We'll have a live report for you from Capitol Hill in just a moment. New York Governor George Pataki, closing his Manhattan offices after tests found anthrax spores in a room used by the governor's security detail. Governor Pataki says he and his staff are taking antibiotics as a precaution. Nationwide, there have now been a total of four anthrax infections. Two of those were in Florida, one of them resulted in death. Two, in New York City, including an assistant to NBC news anchor Tom Brokaw. Investigators say the anthrax strain sent to Brokaw matches one found in the mailroom of a Florida media company. So far, there are a total of 38 known exposures to anthrax. They include staffers of Senators Daschle and Feingold. Eileen O'Connor is in Washington, D.C. Eileen, what is the latest on the anthrax investigation?
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, basically, Lou, they're trying to determine exactly the kind of strain, and if the strains of all of the New York, Washington and the Florida case are matching. Now, we do know that the strain found in the letter sent to the NBC anchor Tom Brokaw, and the spores found in Florida as you know, there was no letters ever found down there. Apparently, according to CDC, that's the same strain. That's going to be very helpful to investigators. Another helpful piece of information today: the sample found in Senator Daschle's letter that was sent to his office that was, being told, is a common strain. A naturally occurring strain, a pure they were pure spores in that sample. Now, what does that mean? That means that it is not genetically altered, it's not resistant to antibiotics. That lessens the possibility that it was actually produced in a state-sponsored lab, a lab that would be used to produce biological weapons, the kinds that are designed to kill a massive amount of people, because it does respond to antibiotics. Very promising news, Lou, on the investigative side. On the one hand, because it eliminates that kind of state sponsorship. On the other hand, though, Lou, it's going to expand the list of possible suspects. So that's going to make it even harder for investigators.
[Dobbs:] Eileen, the first reports were that the the anthrax strain, if you will, the spores in Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's office, were of a very potent and presumably sophisticated nature. Now we're not so certain about that?
[O'connor:] Well, what I've been told, by people who are experts in this, in the military area, is that virulence means the ability to cause disease, and cause the kind of cutaneous anthrax, or inhaled anthrax. So it was possible the kind that was found was very pure. But at the same time, sophistication, what does that mean? It wasn't sophisticated enough to be a weapon of mass destruction, but it was the kind that does require a bit of sophistication. It requires the kind of sophistication required in a college-level biochemistry degree. But, Lou, it can be produced in a laboratory, a regular laboratory setting. Now, what's going to be interesting for investigators now is to determine what the strain was, that was used. Because that's going to be able to lead them down the path of the source. A lot of commercial labs have been able to sell this to research facilities, where they could produce vaccines or perhaps it was stolen from a lab. And it's going to be the strain that's going to be almost like a fingerprint for investigators Lou?
[Dobbs:] Do we have any sense of the number of laboratories? Because irrespective, it would require, would it not, a laboratory in which to process this anthrax, no matter how pure, how virulent, how potent or not to create this anthrax and to distribute it?
[O'connor:] It would. But someone could recreate that kind of laboratory. I've been told by sources who are familiar with the making of this that and with the strain and the test results it could be made in a home. If you have enough expertise, you could order the required materials, to process it, to grow it and to put it into this powdery substance. And you know, another interesting thing was this: the one found in Senator Daschle's office, we know, may have been transferred through a ventilation system, originally flurrying one to two microns, we're told, inside. But again, that's the kind that could still be produce in a laboratory setting. Doesn't mean it's in one of these very sophisticated state labs Lou.
[Dobbs:] At this point, Eileen, to very quickly recap, we know that we're dealing with two different strains of anthrax, suggesting two different sources?
[O'connor:] We don't necessarily know that, because we don't know if they've compared that sample from Senator Daschle's office to the New York and Florida. We know the New York and Florida seem to be of the same strain, according to those tests. We do not know if Fort Detrick has now compared that strain to those two. If it's all the same strain, that at least will possibly a relief to investigators, at least, if not two different groups that they might be dealing with.
[Dobbs:] And Fort Detrick being the Army's principle investigative lab for chemical biological weaponry. One last question: Any advancement on the part of the FBI or the Justice Department? Any leads? are we any closer to knowing who is doing this?
[O'connor:] They are very tight-lipped, Lou. But I've been told by investigators, they're not ruling out any possibility. But it does not seem right now if they're any closer. They haven't ruled anyone in or out.
[Dobbs:] Eileen O'Connor, thank you. Well, for the latest now on the anthrax scare on Capitol Hill, we're going to Capitol Hill correspondent Kate Snow Kate.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Lou, precaution is being taken here on Capitol Hill tonight. Within the hour, about 7:00 Eastern time, about 55 minutes from now, all of the office buildings that are on either side of the Capitol, here, the House and Senate Office Buildings, are going to be shut down. They're going to be testing environmentally inside those buildings, testing for any kind of threat from anthrax. They're doing this, again, just as a precaution. Senate offices will remain closed until Monday, although we're told the Senate itself will technically be in session tomorrow. And the House, in contrast, will be out of session. They will not be due back here until next Tuesday. We're told a lot of members trying to make arrangements right now, to hold some hearings off campus, of you will, tomorrow. Some of them looking at hotels and other spaces they might be able to use, to continue with their work. As you mentioned already in the show, 31 people have now been found to be positive for anthrax exposure. That's not the same as infection. And authorities in Capitol Hill here urging a lot of caution about all this. They don't want people to overreact. In fact, a news conference was just completed, at which Senator Bill Frist, the only doctor in the U.S. Senate, was very clear. He said there is a threat here, certainly, but it's under control.
[Sen. Bill Frist , Tennessee:] The good news, and the good news you heard today, is that this bug, this bacteria, that has a shell or spore around it, is sensitive to every single antibiotic for which it was tested that's penicillin, tetracycline, doxycycline, Cipro. And that's good news, and that means this thing is eminently treatable.
[Snow:] There's no sign of anthrax being in the ventilation systems. At least, not at this point, Lou, although they are doing some further testing. Right now the only places its been found is in the office of Senator Daschle, and also in a mailroom on the Senate side. And everyone who has been exposed is being treated with 60 days worth of antibiotics Lou?
[Dobbs:] Kate, one last question. How long do we expect this week to take, both in the Senate and the House the House, of course, with far more offices to sweep?
[Snow:] Well, we believe it will run through the weekend. House Speaker Dennis Hastert saying that they needed until Tuesday to complete the sweep. And we understand in the Senate that the sweep will take until Monday. So, presumably, they think they can get it all done by early next week.
[Dobbs:] Kate, thank you very much. Kate Snow from Capitol Hill. As this anthrax scare intensifies, the administration says the federal drug stockpile is adequate, and it is growing, and that two antibiotics, in addition to Cipro, are in fact approved to treat anthrax. Peter Viles has that part of the story.
[Peter Viles, Cnn Correspondent:] Along the Mexican border, Americans looking to buy cheap Cipro. In New York, even the governor is taking it, and there is a shortage. On Capitol Hill, a push to manufacturer generic Cipro. Against that backdrop, the Bush administration's point man on the issue went to Capitol Hill with a message: Cipro is not the only way to fight anthrax.
[Tommy Thompson, Hhs Secretary:] The FDA is officially approving today the use of two additional generic antibiotics for the treatment of anthrax: doxycycline and penicillin, because these drugs are available in generic forms and produced by several manufacturers. They will be relatively inexpensive, and readily available.
[Viles:] In fact, the government's anti-ant anthrax stockpile, currently capable of treating 2 million people for 60 days, and with plans to expand that figure to 12 million people, already relies heavily on penicillin and doxycycline. Only 10 percent of the stockpile is ciprofloxacin. Thompson insisting every strain of anthrax examined in recent days is sensitive to all three drugs. Scientists worry, however, about attacks using other strains of anthrax, developed specifically to resist some antibiotics. Even as the anthrax investigation widened, a developing issue surfaced: the government's preparedness to fight smallpox.
[Unidentified Male:] Is it accurate to say that smallpox is a if it could be obtained by a terrorist, would be a more threatening substance than anthrax?
[Thompson:] There is no question, because it's infectious and contagious.
[Viles:] The hearing, however, ended abruptly, an unfortunate sign of the times on Capitol Hill.
[Sen. Joe Lieberman , Connecticut:] I've just received a message and request from Senator Daschle that we recess this hearing for now, and that the two of you come with us to the joint caucus of senators.
[Viles:] Prior to this hearing today, the government had said it wanted a stockpile of 40 million vaccines for smallpox. Today Thompson informed the Congress that's not nearly enough. He wants 300 million vaccines of smallpox on hand Lou.
[Dobbs:] How soon?
[Viles:] He didn't say how soon. They think they can get the 40 by the end of next year, and perhaps even the 300. He met with drug manufacturers today to form a partnership to get what they need in a hurry, and he said he did get good cooperation from them.
[Dobbs:] You don't think it would be over
[Viles:] Not soon enough.
[Dobbs:] Thank you very much, Peter Viles. Here now are the latest developments in the attacks against the Al Qaeda and Taliban targets in Afghanistan. U.S. aircraft continuing to pound Taliban and Al Qaeda targets. The heavy bombing has been focused on front line troops, those located north of Kabul, the capital. And the Pentagon tonight says those airstrikes are hurting Taliban resistance. The assaults around the capital city mark the first time that the special forces AC-130 Spectre gunships, such as the one shown here, have been used in the area. The Pentagon says more than 2,000 missiles and bombs have been launched against Afghanistan since the war on terrorism began October 7th. And today, President Bush promised those bombs will continue to fall until the terrorists are rooted out.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] They're learning that anyone who strikes America will hear from our military. And they're not going to like what they hear.
[Dobbs:] International aid organizations, however, want the bombing to stop, at least for awhile. Those groups want to make sure the Afghan people have food before winter arrives. And British Prime Minister Tony Blair saying that the bombing will continue. Meanwhile, the Taliban has seized more than half the United Nations' food aid in Afghanistan, that hindering efforts to send that aid into Afghanistan. Tensions between India and Pakistan are intensifying, despite a trip to both countries by Secretary of State Colin Powell, who is trying very hard to ease those tensions. That friction could undermine antiterrorism efforts in the region. John Vause is in Islamabad, Pakistan with more for us now on that John?
[John Vause, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, Lou. Well, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell was barely out the door before this latest development took place. We were at a briefing at the foreign ministry here, in Islamabad, when General Quereshi, a spokesman for President Musharraf, interrupted. He informed us that he believed that Indian troops were making threatening movements on that line of control. You might recall that the last couple of days, there has been sporadic fire on the border. India fired first. Pakistan retaliated. For its part, India says the troop movement, merely routine. Pakistan is not buying that. It's placed the army here on high alert. Really quite extraordinary, given the meeting earlier between first, Pakistan President Musharraf, and then Indian Prime Minister Vajpayee. Now, the other news from this part of the world: There have been more nighttime airstrikes. A couple of hours ago on the city of Kandahar, we've been told by our people on the ground in Kandahar, something like six to eight explosions. Very, very loud explosions, they're saying, in the vicinity of the Taliban headquarters. Kandahar, of course, is the stronghold for the Taliban and has been the focus of many attacks over the last 11, 12 days. Also being struck tonight, the city of Jalalabad, as well as Kabul. Earlier today there were some daytime raids on Kandahar, hit very hard. These pictures you're seeing now are the hospital. This is also some video that we shot, a CNN crew took, taken to that scene by the Taliban. They say this, in fact, was a bus, which was hit by a stray U.S. missile, or a stray bomb. The Taliban claim 18 people were killed in that attack. There's obviously no way to get that confirmed. Foreign journalists, very light on the ground, inside Afghanistan. But obviously, these nighttime raids continuing. And as we said, more nighttime raids in Kandahar Lou?
[Dobbs:] John, very quickly, a couple of things. One is, Kandahar has been under attack from almost the very beginning of this assault against the Taliban. The headquarters you say, apparently being struck at today, with six to eight explosions in the area. Has not the headquarters of the Taliban in Kandahar been attacked previously, and do we have an assessment of damage?
[Vause:] It's very difficult to get assessment of destruction, from our point of view. Yes, they have hit the Taliban, and they have hit them hard, and they have hit them before. And they're going back and they're hitting them again. In fact, what we're being told tonight is that these explosions are very targeted, very specific explosions in the region of the Taliban headquarters. As far as the extent of the destruction, we cannot be too sure. I guess it's very difficult to gauge how much destruction is taking place in Afghanistan. As one British newspaper put it, "rubble upon rubble."
[Dobbs:] Specifically, I was referring to the headquarters, John, of the Taliban in Kandahar. Does one infer then, that it had not been destroyed in previous attacks?
[Vause:] Well, I guess from what we're gathering at this point, is that the Taliban headquarters is a fairly extensive network of buildings. And while one part of it may have been hit, there are probably other parts which are still standing, which would warrant for these airstrikes to go back over to Kandahar, to hit these targets again. In fact, yesterday we were told that many of the missions which are being flown over Afghanistan now are mopping-up missions, to complete their original targets, sent out to hit. So that's possibly one explanation as to why they continue to hit the Taliban headquarters in Kandahar, as well as those strongholds in Kabul, and Jalalabad as well.
[Dobbs:] John, as you are reporting, the Pakistani military on high alert tonight because of the troop movements by India to the border. But over the two previous days we've had actual engagements at the border between India and Pakistani the Pakistanis at their outpost. Is there any report tonight of a third day of those attacks?
[Vause:] Essentially, you're quiet on that front at this stage. But as we have been reporting, the Pakistan military placed on high alert. What was interesting at that press conference, which I spoke of earlier, General Quereshi was very light on details as to what exactly was happening in the part of the world. He said he would not divulge details of exactly where this was taking place, because of security concerns. He would not actually give any indication of what Pakistan was doing, as far as any kind of military response. All he said was that Pakistan reserves the right to retaliate with force. That it's appropriate for any misadventure or mischief making on India's part. So as far as exactly what's happening in the area, Pakistan is very tight-lipped. India, playing it completely down, saying these troop movements are just routine.
[Dobbs:] John, thank you very much. John Vause tonight, from Islamabad. Efforts to choke off Osama bin Laden's money supply continue, as well as the attacks against the Taliban and Al Qaeda, targets in Afghanistan. Assets belonging to several Muslim charities have now been frozen, because it is believed, money from some of those charities are funneled to terrorists. Allan Dodds Frank talks with a wealthy Saudi businessman who ran one of those charities, whose assets have been frozen. This is his report.
[Allan Dodds Frank, Cnn Correspondent:] Afghan refugees in Pakistan. According to the United States government, perfect cover for Muslim charities that actually served as fronts for Osama bin Laden. In its most resent asset freeze, the U.S. Treasury took aim at several charities and the people behind them. Perhaps the most notable, Yassin Kadi, a prominent Saudi businessman, whose Muwafaq Foundation, the government says is a front for Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden's organization.
[Yassin Kadi, Saudi Businessman:] I have nothing to do whatsoever with bin Laden and his group. And I never financed them by any cent not even millions of dollars, but not even with one cent.
[Frank:] The Treasury stands by its naming of Kadi, saying quote "The U.S. government has clear, convincing and credible evidence to put each individual and organization on that list." Kadi says his foundation spent between 10 million an $20 million on charitable organizations and schools, in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sudan, Bosnia and Malaysia.
[Kadi:] We send a lot of students from different countries of the world to continue their education, like countries like Malaysia.
[Frank:] But Kadi's money has come up before. Three years ago, U.S. law enforcement froze $820,000 a Kadi company sent through Switzerland to affiliates of this suburban Chicago foundation, called the Koranic Literacy Institute. The U.S. government believes the money was intended to benefit Mohammed Salah, who the government claims is an operative of Hamas, a Middle Eastern terrorist organization.
[Kadi:] This is a Koranic institute. We gave them a loan yes, I confirm that.
[Frank:] Yes, he may have met Mohammed Salah, Kadi admits, but he says the money was to buy Islamic books like this one, and he has never filed suit to get his money back from the Chicago case. Kadi says he's talking with American authorities and has a message for the United States.
[Kadi:] These days, you need friends. You don't need more enemies. You have to make sure not to point finger on people, on innocent people. We like we have nothing to hate about America.
[Frank:] Kadi told me his books and audits will be in order shortly, and available for examination. And he insists his books will prove the foundation never gave any money to bin Laden, even unwittingly Lou?
[Dobbs:] That's quite a statement. Is he saying, in point of fact, that he will open up all of his books and operations to U.S. agencies?
[Frank:] Well, he told me he would let me look at them, on the phone yesterday. We'll see if he lives up to that.
[Dobbs:] We'll certainly take him up on that. Allan, thanks very much. Allan Dodds Frank. Well, now, for more on the money, the Taliban and the situation between India and Pakistan, we are joined by Mansoor Ijaz. He lived in Dubai. He knows how easy it is to hide money. He is the chairman of Crescent Investment Management, handling nearly $1 billion in investments. He has experience negotiating as well with the Taliban. Last year he brokered a cease-fire between India and Pakistan in Kashmir. Sir, it's good to have you with us.
[Mansoor Ijaz, Chmn. Crescent Investment Mgmt:] Thank you for having me, Lou.
[Dobbs:] Let's start first with Kashmir, which is one of the most intractable political situations, and occasionally military situations, in the world. The movement of Indian troops, the heightened state of alert there, both between India and Pakistan, what do you think is going on?
[Ijaz:] Well, I think this was all started by a terrorist attack in Srinigar, which is the capital of the Indian side of Kashmir, a few days after the September 11 tragedy here in New York City. And the Indian government argued that if the United States was going to help stamp out terrorism in Afghanistan, they might as well go ahead and stamp it out in the Pakistan side outside of Kashmir, and with Pakistanis themselves. So I think the Indians are right now reacting to something that, in my judgment, causes a lot more tension than it needs to. And, far from troop movements being normal or anything of the sort, there's no routine troop movements between India and Pakistan under any circumstances. And the problem now is that the military movements with the aircraft that happened today, those are very similar to what we saw during the cargo crisis two years ago, that brought General Musharraf to power.
[Dobbs:] And do you believe, first, that this is simply a transitory act by the Indians, to establish with Secretary of State Powell being in the region, that the Indian interest will be preserved here to remind Secretary Powell, President Bush, that Pakistan is not the sole player here?
[Ijaz:] Well, it's unfortunate that that's probably what's going on. And certainly, they didn't treat Secretary Powell very well by inviting him in, having discussions and then the minute he left Indian airspace, moving their military aircraft to the front lines. But the larger problem here is that, as a coalition partner, if India, as a democracy, has a capacity to run a country of a billion people, they ought to understand the value of having to stamp out terrorism in Afghanistan first, before we go after other types. Because the terrorism in Afghanistan is a very different breed. That is against civilization. The terrorism in Kashmir is an extension of a freedom movement that's going on there for the last 50 years. It's a different type of movement altogether.
[Dobbs:] You talk about democracy. As my friends in India remind me, it is the longest-running free democracy in the world. Moving from the situation between Pakistan and India and after all, it is what's going on in Afghanistan who's creating all of tension there how does the progress of the war look to you against the Taliban and the Al Qaeda, to this point now and it's well into its second week?
[Ijaz:] Well, it's pretty clear that we have probably taken most of the military installations that we needed to. But unfortunately, that's not really what we have to achieve in this ground campaign that's going to be coming up in the not-too-distant future. And we're not going to have very much time to execute that before the Muslim holy month of Ramadan starts, on November 17th. The difficulty that the Defense Department and the war planning department, if you will, faces right now is, one, to get the American commando troops in there efficiently. And once you get them in there, then you have to get them out, get whatever we want, out of those caves as quickly as possible.
[Dobbs:] And amongst the things that, obviously, are wanted, would be the Al Qaeda and specifically, Osama bin Laden, should he be there.
[Ijaz:] Yes.
[Dobbs:] Relying, as it appears the United States and Great Britain are now, on the Northern Alliance, and these troops supporting the Northern Alliance, as they try to unseat the Taliban from power, do you think that's going to be a sufficient solution, going forward, for Afghanistan?
[Ijaz:] the Northern Alliance by itself cannot be, because the majority of the population Afghanistan are Pashtuns.
[Dobbs:] Right.
[Ijaz:] But what people are not paying attention to is that the Taliban don't necessarily represent all Pashtun, either. They are, essentially, a student militia that has grown into something different. And so the opportunity that's before us is to reach out, once we have removed these radical minds from the scene to reach out and have a dialogue with those people in the Pashtun tribes that are still reasonable people to talk to.
[Dobbs:] Of the many things that are not clear tonight, it is clear we're a long ways away from that point at which that's going to be relevant, unfortunately. It's very good to have you with us.
[Ijaz:] Thank you for having me.
[Dobbs:] Thank you. Coming up here next, we'll take a look at the future of the skyscraper after the terrorist attacks of September 11. And Former Defense Secretary William Cohen will be here to give us his insight on the battle against terrorism in Afghanistan, and against terrorism in this country.

[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] Teachers may be surprised when Alex Smyth turns in his paper called "What I Did on My Summer Vacation. The 13-year-old is riding his bicycle 800 miles from Olympia, Washington to Salem, Oregon and then on to Sacramento, California. He hopes to raise awareness about learning disabilities. Alex Smyth joins us now from Seattle. Good morning, Alex. Thanks for getting up so early being here.
[Alex Smyth, Ride For Awareness:] You're welcome.
[Mcedwards:] Alex, why is it important to you to raise awareness for learning disabilities like dyslexia, like attention deficit disorder?
[Smyth:] Kids like me, if they had dyslexia, they'd probably want to not have to struggle the rest of their life. So, I think it'd be better if they were caught early, around preschool, because 90 percent of kids that are caught by preschool go on to be average or above- average readers even if they have dyslexia.
[Mcedwards:] Is that right? So, catching it early is really important?
[Smyth:] Yes.
[Mcedwards:] How hard was school for you, Alex?
[Smyth:] Well, back in second grade actually, way back in kindergarten, I used to be calling like, if my parents were like is that's OK, Alex? I'd be like that's too hot when I mean that's too cold. So, I'd get those mixed up. I'd call my grandma uncle, and I didn't even know how to spell my name. And in second grade what me what took other kids maybe an hour took me six hours to practice 10 spelling words, even though I only got two right.
[Mcedwards:] And then how did things change for you once you were diagnosed and once you knew why this was happening to you? How did things change for you?
[Smyth:] Well, we knew what was wrong, and we went and got some help. We went to tutors and they helped us. But what was surprising to that we found out was that we didn't since I had talked fine, I like to talk a lot. We didn't expect that the help I needed was actually from a speech therapist.
[Mcedwards:] And it affects people in different ways, too. I mean, you describe in your biography, you've got a really high IQ. Your IQ's in the 98th percentile, it's just that language part that's tough for you; right?
[Smyth:] Right.
[Mcedwards:] You've also got a great sense of humor about this, Alex, and I just want to share this with people because in your bio, you say that in spelling, you spelled sore throat as sour trout.
[Smyth:] Yes.
[Mcedwards:] That's very cute. Punctuation you've got, in brackets, what's that and then under writing, you've got in brackets, only on computers with spell check.
[Smyth:] Yes. That's what I do.
[Mcedwards:] How do you keep your sense of humor?
[Smyth:] Well, I just don't take it as hard as most people would because you know there's something wrong, you know it's going to be with you for the rest of your life. Just get over it. Just get help and you're over it.
[Mcedwards:] Good for you. Now, when do you head out on your trip?
[Smyth:] Actually, later today.
[Mcedwards:] Well, good luck. We wish you all the best. Appreciate it.
[Smyth:] Thanks.
[Mcedwards:] OK, take care.
[Smyth:] All right, bye. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bruno Del Granado, Co-host:] Who would have ever thought last summer that a song with a title like "Blue Ds Ba Dee" would become a global smash, selling more than five million singles and over two million albums, one million in the USA alone? Currently riding high with their second number one worldwide smash, "Move Your Body," Jeffrey Maritzio and Gabrie, better known as Eiffel 65, are proving that when it comes to "Euro Pop," as their album is aptly named, no one does it better than the Italians.
[Jeffrey Jey, Eiffel 65:] The meaning of Euro pop actually, you can split this into Euro and pop. With Euro, we're meaning a gathering of different dance, European cultures. So we're talking about trip hop coming from the U.K., techno from Germany, we're talking about dance from Italy. It's all blended together. In fact, the different tracks have a different kind of dance situation as a bottom arrangement. And pop means that there's always a song on it. So that's exactly what we're saying, Euro pop and songs put onto a European dance situation.
[Gabry Ponte, Eiffel 65:] We have a tradition for the dance music in Italy and our, I think, our best thing in Italy is the composition of the melody. That's the reason why we thought that blue is a good mix between a good Italian melodies and the good situation in dance, you know, rhythmically speaking.
[Jey:] And we used a computer to choose the first part of the name because us three guys are producers so you don't really want to waste time, waste a lot of time choosing names. So Eiffel came out of the computer. But 65 nobody chose it. We got the record and we just went in there and it was like who did this? And we found out that our producer was writing a phone number and two digits of the phone number ended up on the label copy. And the graphic artist thought that it was part of the name put on afterwards and he just fused it all together without saying anything to anybody. "Too Much of Heaven" is still a song that is based on dance music, but this time we're talking about trip pop music, same as blue, talking about a lifestyle. In this case we're talking about having too much of one thing that can spoil your entire existence, like maybe money so that's the only thing that becomes important in your life and you forget your family, your friends and you end up becoming money wise, money this and money that.
[Ponte:] I came from a classic study of piano but I like to play other things and to listen to all the styles. But I prefer this experimental one. I prefer the I'm always looking for a very particular electronic.
[Jey:] Jeffrey was raised with rap music, rock music living in the United States, of course, and I moved on to in the '80s the electronic scene, which totally captured me, like Depeche Mode and, you know, that electronic stuff, Craft Work, computer with music. That was the culmination, you know, because I love computers and I love music and when I knew that I could combine them together it was like, OK, I don't need anything else, you know?
[Maurizio Lobina, Eiffel 65:] I like all the music too, but I am especially fond of dance music because I started my life in the music business as a deejay.
[Jey:] What we're mainly doing is continuing exactly what we were doing before "Blue." If we're sitting down in a studio, we're not thinking hey, this is going to be the new Eiffel and it has to be like this and it's got to sell. We don't care. I mean we just sit down and do exactly what we do. We love doing music.
[Ian Dury, Musician:] I'm not here to be remembered. I'm here to be savored.
[Neil Curry, "the Beat":] The memory of Ian Dury was savored this week by his fellow artists after the prince of punk poetry lost a long battle with cancer. The 57-year-old singer brought humor to the British new wave in the late '70s with classics like "Hit Me With Your Rhythm Stick."
[Curry:] Crippled by polio since childhood, Dury campaigned for vaccinations, joining fellow artist Robbie Williams on this UNICEF trip to Sri Lanka in 1998. Dury's acting skills took him to work in both theater and television. But it was his music which left a lasting impression from fellow British bands like Madness and Chumbawumba.
[Boff, Chumbawumba:] He successfully took the idea of being very aware of what was going on in the world into punk. It wasn't just I'm against this and I'm against that, it was like OK, I love song, but he wrote it in a sort of punk way.
[Curry:] Dury's writing partner, Chaz Jankel, recalls how Rhythm Stick emerged from a jamming session.
[Chaz Jankel, Ian Dury & The Blockheads:] So I'm sitting there and the scientist in me suddenly went heaven, if I go ba ba da dun dun dun with this little motif that had come out of the jam that I'd had with him, if I add that to the fun of it, I would get da unga ding a ding ding ding ding de da da da. So the next thing is I call up Ian and I said hey, I've got this great idea. And I told him this idea. And by this time he'd moved the drums and the piano into a garage. And he said oh, well hang on a moment. He said I'll be back in a second. He runs into the house, comes out with a typewritten lyric and he's there it is, "Hit Me With Your Rhythm Stick."
[Jankel:] I think it's enduring. I don't enduring, enduring, enduring. I think it's going to carry on, you know? I just can't see it fading. He brought a lot of light and a lot of happiness, you know, to people's lives. He wasn't conventional by any stretch of the imagination. He didn't fit into a slot. You know, he was the classic rebel.
[Curry:] "The Beat" this week is devoted to the memory of Ian Dury. For the rest of this week's music news, visit our Web site at cnn.comworldbeat. I'm Neil Curry and that's "The Beat."
[Alexander:] After the break, we are California bound as Serena Yang meets with Billy Corgan to get the inside track on the latest release from the Smashing Pumpkins.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] As United States airstrikes continue in Afghanistan, the Taliban has now allowed a group of journalists to see the damage on the ground in the city of Kandahar. CNN's Nic Robertson was among those journalists allowed into the city. The Taliban did not put any restrictions on what Nic could say. Here now, his report via videophone, from Kandahar.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] In Kandahar, at least, has been a quiet day. A few jet aircraft burst around the city, but no bombs were dropped. The Taliban has taken a group of 26 journalists, including CNN, to see various sites in Kandahar. The first site we were shown was the ministry of the religious police, which had been completely destroyed in downtown Kandahar. Also next to that, two other ministries have been destroyed. Now the Taliban did want to show us that they had been destroyed, but they also wanted to show us across the road collateral damage. Now we were taken to what had been a tailor shop, where we talked to several people, who told us that various friends and relatives have tied in the bombing there in that collateral damage. We also were able to travel outside of the city, into the surrounding countryside, and visit some villages there. We were not allowed to visit military sites. However, while we have been touring around, we have been able to see evidence of the Taliban say they say, they will not meet the United States head on militarily. What they say they will do is to disperse their military hardware around the countryside, and that's what we have seen today, antiaircraft guns, armored personnel carriers, either In the mountains or in trees, but hidden around the countryside, and this is very much in line with what the Taliban have been saying on who they will deal with the current air bombardment. But we did also see downtown one destroyed armor personnel carrier. We were told that that was destroyed by American fighter jets a few weeks ago, but relatively speaking, the city of Kandahar appears to be returning to normal. The stores are open. There are a lot of people out on the streets, and we are told that the last 10 days, people have been returning to the city, people who were initially afraid very afraid that the heavy bombardment in the early days of the air campaign are now coming back to the city. The city is without electricity and without running water, but the stores are open. There is a lot of traffic on the road, and we are told that the city is returning to normal. Certainly, from our view, from what we have seen before the air campaign and before the September 11th attacks, it is not as busy as Kandahar would have been then, but there still are a lot of people on the streets here, Nic Robertson, Kandahar, CNN.
[Woodruff:] And we would just remind you, as we also do now with these reports from inside the Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, that you are seeing only one side of the story, that these U.S. military actions that Nic Robertson was talking about are in response to a terrorist attack that killed 5,000 and more innocent people inside the United States. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] We begin in Washington, where the House is expected to pass a compromise tax cut bill this hour with the Senate following suit later today. That would satisfy President Bush's request of tax relief passage by Memorial Day. CNN White House correspondent Kelly Wallace is here with more details on the plan. Good morning, Kelly.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Kyra. As you know, President Bush made a tax cut the centerpiece of his presidential campaign. He said it was going to be one of his top priorities this year. And even though he is not getting exactly everything he wants, and even before the final vote, he is hailing it as a landmark tax relief agreement, one that will give the economy a much-needed shot in the arm. As you mentioned, Kyra, at this very hour, House lawmakers are taking part in a rare Memorial Day weekend session. At any moment, really, they are set to vote on the $1.35 trillion tax cut plan, this after House and Senate lawmakers reached a compromise late last night. Now, here is what it will mean for you. All taxpayers will be getting recent refunds checks in the mail, probably by August or September. Individuals will be getting $300, single parents will see $500, and married couples $600. Beyond that, all taxpayers are likely to see less money coming out of their paychecks in taxes over time, since all tax brackets will be reduced. The $1.35 trillion plan over 10 years cuts the lowest income tax bracket from 15 percent to 10 percent. What this means is that the first $6,000 of your income will be taxed at that lower rate. Also, the highest income tax rate, now at 39.6 percent, is lowered to 35 percent. That full cut, though, not phased in until about 2006. Now, there are many other provisions of this tax cut, the largest tax cut in about 20 years, including a doubling of the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000 by 2010. The president wanted this tax cut bill on his desk by Memorial Day. His chief of staff is hailing it as a terrific bipartisan victory. But many Democratic lawmakers have been coming to the House floor this morning to say that this plan is too large, that it is too generous to the wealthy. And House minority leader Richard Gephardt said it will return the country to the deficits of the 1980s.
[Rep. Richard Gephardt , Minority Leader:] I was thinking of proper titles for this bill. I'm sure it has some classy title that has been given it by its sponsors. How about "the special interest relief act"? How about "the Deficit Re-Creation Act"? How about "the Plunder Medicare and Social Security Act"?
[Wallace:] Now, this tax cut, one of the biggest legislative victories for this White House this year, it also comes after one of its probably most disappointing weeks, this after Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords announced he will be leaving the Republican Party and becoming an independent, leading to a Democratically controlled Senate in a short time from now. This, Kyra, has many observers believing this bill, once the president signs it, he's expected to sign it sometime during the week of June 5 when lawmakers return to Washington, may be the last major piece of legislation he signs this year Kyra.
[Phillips:] Kelly, with Jeffords' defection and this Senate power structure definitely taking a shift, what other agenda items do you see being affected pretty soon?
[Wallace:] Well, very soon. One definitely, the president's energy plan. As you know, he just sent up his plan to Congress just about two weeks ago. He wanted Congress to enact that plan by the July 4 weekend. That does not look to be very likely, because now you have a Democratically controlled Senate, you do have a Democratic chairman of the new Senate Energy and Environment Committee, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico is very much against some of the provisions of the president's plan, such as drilling on public lands. Other issues, Kyra, when it comes to judicial nominations, the president likely not to get some conservatives on the federal bench. Also when it comes to health care, the president has put forth his version of a patients' bill of rights and his ideas for prescription drug coverage for seniors. But Democrats will look for a much more robust plan when it comes to both of those issues. And now the president will definitely have to be negotiating much more heavily with Democrats, because the Democrats will control what legislation gets to the Senate floor and exactly when Kyra.
[Phillips:] All right, Kelly Wallace, thanks so much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Terry Keenan:] Hi, everyone, welcome to MONEYWEEK, where we aim to keep you ahead of the curve for the week ahead on Wall Street. And we begin once again on Wall Street, where tech stocks continued to struggle. Cisco, Dell Computer and Yahoo! all posting losses on the week. But the Dow managed to gain ground, rising to its best levels since April. What left many investors wondering, perhaps valuations really do matter after all. The Dow topping 11,000 for the first time in about four months. While the Nasdaq ended with little change, as many bellwether stocks there sold off even in the face of good earnings. Eli Lilly among the hardest hit Big Board stocks this past week. The company's Prozac drug was stripped of more than two years of patent protection by a federal appeals court. Lilly says it will appeal that decision. And Amazon.com moved lower again. Sanford Bernstein initiated coverage of the e-tailer with an underperform, saying that the stock could lose as much as two-thirds of its value.
[Faye Landes, Sanford Bernstein:] The question really is, what can it do outside of books, music and DVD videos, which I think they have terrific prospects in that in those categories, but what else can the company do? I think the company will continue to grapple with that, as we're likely to see some twists and turns over the next several months.
[Keenan:] Amazon is down about 60 percent on the year so far. Cisco lost ground this last week, despite a good earnings report. And Dell sharply also lower. Second-quarter revenues came in slightly below expectations. There you can see the carnage in Lilly this last week. And The Gap losing ground after the company said the third quarter could be a weak one. Time to bring in our team of experts. Joining me this week: Elizabeth MaCkay, chief investment strategist at Bear Stearns, Rick White he manages the Guardian Fund at Neuberger & Berman and Clark Yingst, a market analyst with Prudential Securities. And welcome, everyone. Rick, let me start with you because this is your kind of market here.
[Clark Yingst, Neuberger & Bergman:] Has been our kind of market actually for the last several months. I think something has very significantly changed since March 10 or so when the Nasdaq broke down, where expectations for the technology sector had tremendous business conditions, had gotten so far ahead of reality, I think, that we started to see thing pull back, and more of a focus on, when will profitability come for some of these companies? And I think that as the last couple of months have unfolded, what we're seeing is a real narrowing, and people have moved away from using proxy metrics, which are how many doctors use your product or how many customers you have, how many households you pass, and focused on what really matters in the long term, on what is earnings and cash flow? And that is something that we really tend to look at a lot, and so we've been benefiting from that.
[Keenan:] Elizabeth, the Dow this week broke out of its trading range. G moved to new high. Tobacco stocks moved higher. Is this, indeed, a real return to valuation?
[Elizabeth Mackay, Bear Stearns:] I think value is taking a stand, and I think at some level, what's been happening is the market has been acting normally. When the Fed is raising rates, we tend to see cyclicals, consumer, discretion financials, underperforming, and I think this past week the market began to believe that the Fed was through raising rates, possibly for this year.
[Keenan:] And the bond market seems to believe it as well, because that inversion we saw at the long end of the yield reversed itself.
[Mackay:] Exactly. We're beginning to see the yield curve flattening, and typically, financials underperform. With an inverted yield curve, that's your
[Keenan:] Clark, do you agree.
[Rick White, Prudential Securities:] I do. I have two observations. One, I think that the broader market independently of technology is discounting a soft landing, and the U.S. Economy, implying a peak, if not a decline in rates, perhaps sometime late next year or early next year. I think that the soft landing would have limited impact or at least tolerable impact on earnings and sectors other than technology. And second observation is, I think there is an important structural change under way in the market, change in both leadership and breadth. I think groundwork is being laid for the broadest stock market advance in two to three years.
[Keenan:] Interesting. Yet this week, we had Cisco report some really good numbers, traded up the next morning, up to almost 70, and then sold off the rest of the week.
[Yingst:] Consistent with the pattern in techs, over the last three weeks, with just a few exceptions, no matter how strong, spectacular the performance, no matter how promising outlook, the stocks have been for sale. I think that's an ongoing technological, psychological adjustment in the sector.
[Keenan:] Rick, if value is back in vogue, what are some of your favorite value plays here?
[White:] Well, I think the key issue is to try and find some stability of earnings growth, because if the economy is slowing down, then we're going to see down you know, people cutting estimates for a number of value stocks. So I don't think want you to be too cyclical. I think I would be focused on names where you can buy some stability in sales and earnings growth and pay a reasonable price for them. So I would use names like Safeway, Kimberly-Clark, some of the energy names, like Amerada Hess; in the financials, maybe Household International or Associate Corp I think all represent pretty good value today.
[Keenan:] I know you like the financials. What else do you like?
[Mackay:] Most of stocks that Rick mentioned fit into groups that tend to outperform when the Fed stops raising rates, according to studies that we've done. It also, we like the defense stocks. Lockheed Martin is one of our favorites. I think the political situation is more favorable for the defense stocks, and we have specific company issues the Lockheeds that we think are turning around more favorably.
[Keenan:] Up next, the SEC approves a new rule intended to make corporate information more available to investors, but it is creating a lot of controversy.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Fast-forwarding from that racially- motivated attack nearly 40 years ago to concerns about racial hatred today: African-American students at Penn State University say that they have been the targets of death threats. CNN national correspondent Martin Savidge is live on the Penn State campus this morning. We go to him now for the very latest good morning, Marty.
[Martin Savidge, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning to you, Leon. The protests by several hundred students out of the total population of 41,000 students on the campus of Penn State University is now entering into its ninth straight day. The students have been sitting in by day and sleeping by night inside of the student center here on the university campus. Last night, they also held a candlelight vigil. The protesters are upset and, in some cases, frightened by what they say is an atmosphere of racial hatred here at Penn State. A number of African-American students have received anonymous death threats. They claim the university is not doing enough to prevent the hatred, nor enough to encourage racial diversity on campus. The president of the university says if there is some racial intolerance, it didn't start here.
[Graham Spanier, President, Penn State University:] I think we have racism in our society. It's all around us. It's in every community. And it plays out prominently on university campuses, I believe, because every year, at a place like Penn State, we have 14,000 new students who arrive on a campus like this. And we also have about 14,000 students who leave. They bring with them biases and prejudices and experiences from their communities. And all of a sudden, an awful lot of people are together in a pretty enclosed environment here at the university.
[Savidge:] Classes here at Penn State are scheduled to wrap up on Friday the student protesters inside the student union say they are willing to stay beyond that date unless their demands are met. Now, the NAACP has arrived here on campus. They organized a town meeting last night. They are trying to meet with university officials, hoping to come up with some resolution to this standoff. They are also asking for more security measures to be in place for graduation ceremonies that begin on May 11 Leon.
[Harris:] Well, Marty, first of all, do you have any idea about how many students may have been receiving these death threats? From what I've been reading this morning, it is a number of students in fact might even be one of the chancellors or one of the trustees, rather of the university also receiving one of these threats.
[Savidge:] Well there have been a number of threats. And this is not something that just began within a matter of weeks. It is something that the students say has been ongoing for perhaps as long as two years. The head of the student black caucus, she has received as many as four death threats. And, in fact, the university has provided her with security and the FBI is investigating. They are taking this very seriously here, although some students believe not quite seriously enough Leon.
[Harris:] All right, thanks much, Martin Savidge, reporting live this morning from the campus of Penn State University.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Investigators today are on the ground in Washington State trying to figure out if the deaths of four firefighters could have been prevented. The forest service has pulled remaining crews from the fire in Washington's North Cascade Mountains. Reinforcements are expected today. The four firefighters died when winds fanned what was a small five-acre fire into a raging inferno. Tom Craven was 30, Karen Fitzpatrick, 18, Jessica L. Johnson, 19. Deaven Weaver was 21 years old. Reporter Sally Schultz from our Seattle affiliate KIRO begins our coverage.
[Unidentified Male:] Once we get out here we're all firefighters. When we lose somebody it tears us all up.
[Sally Shultz, Kiro Tv:] This crew from Yacima is itching to get at that 30 mile fire. But many admit they are scared tonight.
[Unidentified Male:] It's always on your mind, Always looking around, always trying to keep yourself out of those situations. Because they are dangerous and they will take lives.
[Shultz:] Twenty-three people trapped in a narrow canyon, winds whipping what was a small fire into an inferno. They desperately tried to pull emergency shelters over their bodies, but the flames killed four of them.
[Unidentified Male:] Grab the corners and dive forward. Just like that. We're very sorry that people died. But a lot of people made it.
[Unidentified Female:] A little mistake can cost lives.
[Shultz:] Twenty-three-year-old Christy Fiander lives near Yakima. And when she faces the flames she will be thinking about the young women from there who died, along with her two kids waiting for her at home.
[Christy Fiander, Firefighter:] It's kind of scary going up there and taking that risk and leaving my children after hearing about those girls, but I feel pretty safe with this crew, but it is pretty scary.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Five days after a devastating earthquake, India's defense minister says he fears the death toll could reach 100,000. Survivors in western India are facing food shortages, with some people saying they've not eaten solid foods in several days. Hungry residents have mobbed relief workers, angry over the lack of food, even as the search for bodies continues. CNN's Kasra Naji reports.
[Kasra Naji, Cnn Correspondent:] International search and rescue teams are finding fewer and fewer survivors. This team of British rescue workers were about to give up and leave, when they found another survivor. The chances of finding many more people alive under the rubble is very slim now. Among those found alive today were a young woman and her one- year-old baby. They were pulled out alive from under the rubble in the city of Ahmadabad, four days after the quake. Amazingly, both were relatively unhurt. In the town of Bachau, a 75-year-old woman was pulled out alive by the Russian rescue team. A 16-year-old boy was rescued in the town of Anjar. In many areas, rescue workers are now focusing their efforts on recovering the dead. Here, soldiers are calling on the crowd to clear the area for that work to begin. Many bodies have decomposed. This man is applying disinfectant. Thousands are still buried under the rubble in several towns and many villages. There is also concern for the survivors. Food, water and medicine are badly needed. International aid is arriving. This plane arrived at Ahmadabad Airport earlier today. It brought with it tents and blankets from India's arch enemy, Pakistan. Such is the extent of the disaster, that the need to help people in need transcend age-old hostilities.
[Unidentified Female:] Its a gesture of goodwill and sympathy.
[Naji:] History has also been a casualty. Many ancient temples, mosques and monuments have been damaged. A 113-year-old museum in the town of Bhuj has been completely destroyed. India has yet to count the cost of this earthquake. Kasra Naji, CNN, New Delhi.

[Colleen Mcedwards, World News: Mcedwards:] As U.S. president Bill Clinton tours India, a number of Indian-American entrepreneurs are visiting their homeland to try to draw attention to their economic success in the United States. As CNN's Satinder Bindra reports, many immigrants from India are finding their pot of gold at the end of Silicon Valley's rainbow.
[Satinder Bindra, Cnn Correspondent:] The Rajes are living the American dream, twice over. Both husband and wife have just started new companies. Every morning, the Rajes juggle breakfast, a dog and two young children. Life's so busy, Anagha Raje carries her son with her to work every day.
[Anagha Raje, Internet Entrepreneur:] It is a gold rush. It's exciting. Husband has a startup; I have a startup. You know, you communicate at midnight for half an hour, maybe catch up on the news of the day or something.
[Bindra:] Still, Raje loves what she does. In a tiny office, she and seven others design software tools for Java, a prominent language of the Internet. [on camera]: Studies show 15 percent of Silicon Valley companies that go public every year are started by immigrants from India. For example, this company, Exodus, started by an Indian Immigrant in 1994 already hosts Web sites for over 2,000 customers and it has a stock market value of $21 billion. [voice-over]: Inspired by stories like Exodus, Stanford-educated Prassad Raje started his own company a few months ago. Raje and his team are trying to make the Internet even more user-friendly.
[Prassad Raje, Internet Entrepreneur:] This is a methodical process of starting with an idea and going to the right people to fund the idea, finding the right people to work with you to build your idea into reality.
[Bindra:] Hungry investors are propelling the dot-com craze, pouring nearly $70 million a day into Internet startups. With so much capital available, Indian-American entrepreneurs like Kannan Aiyar are already on their forth start up.
[Kannan Aiyar Internet Entrepreneur:] For me, if it was work, I certainly wouldn't be doing it. And it's kind of, you know, what I believe is fulfilling and a great adventure.
[Bindra:] The Rajes hope their adventure will make them millionaires. In the process, they dream of creating jobs and building something their children can be proud of. Satinder Bindra, CNN, Freemont, California.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Finally in this hour, museum officials north of London are appealing to the thief who made off with a rare World War II artifact. Someone recently outsmarted the former British spy center, walking off with a machine once used by the Nazis to send coded messages. CNN's Margaret Lowrie reports on the conundrum over Enigma.
[Margaret Lowrie, Cnn Correspondent:] A daring daylight theft: Enigma, the encoding machine once used by the German high command, stolen from a display case at Bletchley Park, the former British spy center, stolen in what looks like a professional job just days before new security measures were to be implemented.
[Penny Ritchie Calder, Imperial War Museum:] It's very difficult to know what somebody who had stolen one of these machines would actually do with it, because the whereabouts of all the ones that we know of are is well-known and the provenance of them can be tested and checked, so it would be impossible almost for somebody to sell one to a museum or other national body.
[Lowrie:] Bletchley Park, code named Station X, was once so top secret, its existence wasn't even revealed until many years after the war had ended. Now a museum, in its heyday, up to 10,000 people worked here linguists, cryptologists, mathematicians, chess champions, crossword experts. Their task: to crack the code elite German S.S. units used to encrypt all their messages. The Germans believed their system impenetrable, but by 1941, Bletchley Park was able to crack successive versions of the Enigma code.
[Calder:] It helped us in all sorts of campaigns, from North Africa through to D-Day, and without it, the war would almost certainly have gone on a lot, lot longer than it did, and may even have run the risk that we wouldn't have won it.
[Lowrie:] Bletchley Park officials have posted a plea on the Internet for Enigma's return. The Germans originally made 40,000 of these encryption machines. Only a handful exist today. Perhaps surprisingly, it's only valued at $160,000, but given Enigma's role in history, its intrinsic value is much harder to calculate. Margaret Lowrie, CNN, London.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Now, the DNC chairman, Joe Andrew, says there's still time for Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez of California to be restored as a convention speaker. Ms. Sanchez Lost her speaking role at the convention when she refused to cancel a fund-raiser scheduled for next Tuesday at the "Playboy" Mansion. Today, she told NBC "Today's" show she might be willing to move the event. Andrews says he's been working with Sanchez for two months to find another site. Now, if you prefer your politic a little more dramatic, a little better scripted with a little better lighting and makeup, meet James Pryce. [Begin Video Clip, "running Mates"]
[Tom Selleck, Actor:] Every delegate on the floor, every citizen in the gallery, every American in your cars and houses, if you're really serious about taking America back, stand up! Stand up wherever you are and be counted! Stand up and pledge with me! The government of the United States is not on the auction block and America's not for sale.
[Waters:] That's Tom Selleck, of course, starring in a TNT movie called "Running Mates," and the film's executive producer probably didn't have to do much research for this. He's Gerald Rafshoon, who in a formal life was White House communications director under Jimmy Carter. Mr. Rafshoon, joins us from Washington. Hello there.
[Gerald Rafshoon, Executive Producer, "running Mates":] Hello, Lou. How are you?
[Waters:] A comedy-drama about campaign finance reform. There's a market for that?
[Rafshoon:] Well, I hope so. I think there's an interest in it. It's it's a comedy-drama, and it's about a presidential candidate, a reformer who's for campaign finance reform, but along the way people want him to pick a running mate who is not. And he's tempted, because it comes with $100 million worth of soft money. It's also the story of him and his female campaign manager, his wife. Faye Dunaway plays a senator's wife. It's a lot of fun. And I noticed that you said that we were better scripted, and I'm not so sure. I think there may be more spontaneity in our film than in the convention that I saw last week. And I hope I hope there's more spontaneity in the one I'm going to see next week.
[Waters:] Let's talk about the convention in a moment first. First, I want to ask you about the movie.
[Rafshoon:] No, let's stick with the movie.
[Waters:] If there are is any similarity between persons living or dead in your movie.
[Rafshoon:] There is. Yes, there is some similarity between persons living or dead. It's intentional, but they're all public figures so they can sue us. And I think that they're composites of a lot of people. There's a senator who never saw a special interest he didn't like and there's a senator who's for campaign finance reform. Our candidate, James Reynolds Pryce, is a reformer, a guy, the good guy, and he's got the nomination sewed up. And he's at the convention trying to make the biggest decision of his candidacy so far, picking a running mate.
[Waters:] So you were communications director under President Jimmy Carter. I guess we can talk about the last 50 years of conventions. But let's talk about the last 20. You sounded almost critical of the way things are going with these political conventions.
[Rafshoon:] Well, one thing I think we should see more at the political conventions than less and maybe they would be encourage to give more drama but the convention I saw last week was well- scripted, and well on-message, but I got the feeling that it was a made-for-television movie. I think there's a lot of reality in our film. The people are real, and the issues that they talked about are real. I heard nothing about campaign finance reform last week at the Republican convention, and it's all through our film, as well as a lot of fun
[Waters:] The greatest political actors of modern times, the comparisons drawn between Reagan and Clinton. Of course, you have political actors in your movie. But how about political actors today? Do we have any or is it an actor's workshop?
[Rafshoon:] Well, I think Clinton is the greatest political actor that we've had ever since television. He's a better actor than Reagan. But I think that you don't have as many you have actors. But they are also people who believe in things. I think the best actions are if the candidate is authentic and has authentic beliefs.
[Waters:] All right, Gerald Rafshoon, the movie is called "Running Mates." When's it out? August...
[Rafshoon:] It will be on Sunday night on TNT at 8 o'clock, 10 o'clock and midnight Eastern time.
[Waters:] OK. Good luck with that, Gerald Rafshoon from Washington.
[Rafshoon:] Thank you.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet is leaving has left England. He is now on his way back to Chile. Let's get the latest now from CNN's Nic Robertson Nic.
[Nic Robertson, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, that's correct, Leon. In the last few minutes, General Pinochet took off in his Chilean airport plane back for Chile. We understand that's a flight that's going to take him 17 hours to reach his home. Now, we also know that the British government earlier today effectively said that they were bringing a closure on the plans for his extradition. Now he has lifted off from Britain, he is completely free of the legal entrapment that he has been in for the last 17 months. This does bring to an end for him these claims, the desires by the Spanish, by the French, by the Swiss and by the Belgian governments to try and bring him to trail for crimes they say that were committed by him, by his regime, that he is responsible for during his rule in Chile Leon.
[Harris:] So when he gets back to Chile, there will be absolutely no being held accountable by any court system at all?
[Robertson:] Well, as a former ruler of Chile, and as a Chilean senator, General Pinochet has immunity from prosecution. However, there are lawyers there that would like to see lawyers in Chile that would like to see General Pinochet tried for those crimes that they accuse him of during his rule. However, it is widely expected by particularly many of the people in Britain who have been demonstrating, many of the human rights organizations who have been trying to have General Pinochet extradited to face trial in Spain, that they do not expect him to get a trial in Chile.
[Harris:] Understood. Nic Robertson reporting live this morning. Thank you very much.

[Varney:] In tonight's headlines, Wall Street gets a charge from tech profits as some chipmakers help the markets break a two-day losing streak. And Compaq comes out with earnings after the bell. We'll check out whether the PC maker has left its troubled days behind, and we'll talk to Compaq's chief, Michael Capellas. And a major defection for a Web icon. We'll ask Joseph Galli why he bolted as Amazon's number two man and took the reins of another online business.
[Bay:] But first, more on tonight's top story: an Air France Concorde jet crashes outside Paris, leaving 113 people dead. The plane went down shortly after takeoff en route from Paris to New York. The disaster claimed the lives of everyone on board, 100 passengers and a nine-person flight crew, along with four people on the ground as the plane smashed into a hotel. The passengers, part of a luxury tour group, were mostly from Germany, but also included one American, two Danes, and an Austrian. The cockpit voice and flight data recorders were both recovered. It was the first time in the Concorde's three-decade history that the supersonic jet has been involved in a fatal accident, and it prompted Air France and British Airways to suspend all Concorde operations. We go now to Peter Humi, who's been covering the story all day from Paris Peter.
[Peter Humi, Cnn Paris Bureau Chief:] Well, Willow, it's about 1:00 in the morning here in Paris, it is pitch black. Nevertheless, the investigators are on the site and, as you mentioned, there was confirmation about 30 or 40 minutes ago that two flight data recorder boxes, also known as black boxes, of course, have been recovered. That confirmation coming from the French civil aviation authority. Now, this is a key element. It will provide probably the best clue as to what actually happened on the flight. The Concorde had literally just taken off from Charles de Gaulle Airport about 15 kilometers, 10 or so miles to the north of Paris, and when the accident happened, eyewitnesses and, in fact, some dramatic still photographs clearly indicated there were flames shooting out from one of the Concorde's engines. So the black box will provide a very important clue, as will recent maintenance records of the plane. The plane was looked at and checked just four days ago, but hadn't received a full overhaul since last September. Looking now at some of the devastation caused by the crash, the Concorde landing on a hotel very close to Charles de Gaulle, it did enable the rescue services such as firefighters to get on to the scene very quickly. They were called in, obviously, from Charles de Gaulle Airport. Eyewitnesses reported a huge ball of flame as the Concorde impacted. And of the deaths on the ground are believed to be of the hotel staff, the Concorde landing, or crashing, I should say, on to the hotel. So investigation under way. The black boxes have been recovered and we expect to hear get more information in the hours that come. Back to you.
[Bay:] Peter Humi from Paris, thank you for the update Stuart.
[Varney:] Thank you, Willow. Turning back to financial news now, Wall Street turned in a solid day as the markets reversed a two-day losing streak. Boosting stock prices today: strong profit news from some high-tech heavyweights. The Nasdaq rose 48 points, rising back above that 4,000 level, but still standing in negative territory for the calendar year. A weaker showing for blue chips as the Dow rose nearly 15 points, reaching 10,700, that was on light volume. Now check today's major movers: Texas Instruments right at the top of that list, it beat profits estimates and forecast even better results ahead, it was up nearly 4 12. Nextel surged 5 14. And Qualcomm up 4 34 after saying it would spin off its circuits business. Look at Sun Microsystems2. And Applied Materials up 4.
[Bay:] Another company driving today's positive momentum: AT&T; after beating street profit forecasts, earning nearly $2 billion. Peter Viles takes a look at AT&T; and some of the other major corporations that reported today.
[Peter Viles, Cnn Correspondent:] The turnaround Michael Armstrong is trying to pull off at AT&T; will take months, or even years, but this was at least a step in the right direction. Ma Bell beat street estimates by 4 cents a share and its ailing stock gained more than 50 cents.
[Charles Noshi, Cfo, At&t;:] We saw strong growth, over 10 percent in broadband, over 31 percent in our wireless business. And we think improving performance in our business services unit and the expected declines in consumer long distance.
[Viles:] But revenue grew only 4 12 percent, and with AT&T; shares still down 25 percent for the year, analysts are not sold on the comeback just yet.
[Jim Linnehan, Thomas Weisel:] Some of the language that Mike Armstrong used in today's call were sort of very we'll say recovery-mode type language, like, you know, aggressive actions in place, corrective actions in place, the company is under running the ship, second half is you know, looks great. So the language was very upbeat and optimistic. Yet the results were a bit mixed and even the guidance was a bit down for the second half of the year.
[Viles:] McDonald's met street expectations, earning 39 cents a share in what it called a disappointing quarter. But its shares gained nearly a dollar on talk of a stronger second half. The oil giants reported staggering numbers. ExxonMobil beat the street by 11 cents and earned $4.5 billion, that's more than $50 million a day. Chevron tripled earnings to $1.1 billion and also beat the street. But both stocks slipped fractionally as investors continue to bet that oil prices are headed lower. [on camera]: But this continues to be a rock-solid earnings season. With two-thirds of the S&P; 500 now reported, First Call projects second quarter earnings for those companies will beat last year's levels by 20 percent. Peter Viles, CNN Financial News, New York.
[Varney:] After the bell today, a standout profit report from a cutting-edge company already in the spotlight this week, that's Nortel. The fiber-optic hot shot beat expectations with quarterly profits, and investors clearly liked the news. The stock up 4 12 points in moderate after-hours trading. Bruce Francis reports.
[Bruce Francis, Cnn Correspondent:] When major telecoms want to build state-of-the-art optical networks, increasingly, they're choosing Nortel's networking gear. Those optical sales more than double. That helped Nortel book almost $8 billion in revenue in its second quarter, up 48 percent. Net income increased 75 percent to $561 million, or 18 cents a share, 3 cents better than analysts were expecting, excluding special items.
[Wojtek Uzdelewicz, Bear Stearns:] Now, there was some concerns earlier on that they were capacity constrained. It's very clear from the revenues that they beat the numbers by a huge margin. So, definitely improving execution in terms of revenue side.
[Francis:] Nortel also told analysts to expect revenue growth in 2000 to increase to around 40 percent, up from 35 percent. Profit should rise in the 30 percent range. And in 2001, revenue and earnings should grow 30 to 35 percent, more than twice the estimated rate for the industry. Analysts say that Nortel has been benefitting from unprecedented demand for networking gear with a buildout of the Internet. It helps, too, that archrival Lucent has stumbled.
[Alex Henderson, Salomon Smith Barney:] There is no question they're beating out the competition. If you look at the growth rate in optical at Lucent in the quarter just reported at 27 percent, and then compare that to the triple-digit growth in optical at Nortel, there is no comparison.
[Francis:] On a conference call with analysts, Nortel sidestepped questions about a possible business combination with Corning. But the company did say that it is concerned with the consolidation among its parts suppliers. Just look at all the people that JDSU has been buying up.
[Varney:] Yes, well said. Bruce Francis, thanks very much.
[Francis:] My pleasure.
[Varney:] Willow.
[Bay:] Coming up, Compaq reports how PC's have paid off on the bottom line, but will it be enough to win back investor confidence. We'll ask Compaq boss Michael Capellas.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] On this Friday before Christmas, a taste at Christmas past. CNN's Bill Delaney looks at a holiday tradition that seems to improve the more it stays the same.
[Bill Delaney, Cnn Correspondent:] To the humble Christmas tree stand at the corner of Harvard and Cambridge Streets in Boston, it's a long way from Germany, the 16th century, when Martin Luther himself first popularized the Latvian custom of the Christmas tree. Tradition...
[Dave Baker, Christmas Tree Merchant:] It's frozen stiff at the moment.
[Delaney:] ... Dave Baker is heir to; 23 years in the Christmas tree trade.
[Baker:] In this world of commercialism and hectic pace, this little lot with the trees and the smell, the people seeing the smiles on their faces, the children that come, why people come here, tradition. This reindeer shirt, sweatshirt I have on, is 23 years old. I wear it every year. People ask me about this. They want to see faces and this lot.
[Delaney:] For years now, more and more of the 35 million Christmas trees sold every year have come from big lots at big shopping malls, practical, like another Yuletide convenience. [on camera]: There is, of course, a way to avoid going out in the cold and having to choose just the right tree, and trying to decide whether to shop at a small independent lot, or a big corporate one. About 40 percent of trees in living rooms this Christmas will be artificial. [voice-over]: For the Dave Bakers of the world, though, that just will never cut it.
[Baker:] People sometimes ask us, why don't you put fancier lights up, fancier signs, um, more commercial stuff? I don't know, it's just part of who we are, and why we're here, and many people love that. I think they just love the simplicity of it all.
[Delaney:] You see, at the corner of Harvard and Cambridge in Boston, it's not just about selling Christmas.
[Baker:] Have a nice holiday.
[Delaney:] It's about loving Christmas. Bill Delaney, CNN, Boston.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Back in this country now, another developing story this morning. Literally, Tropical Storm Helene now weakening as it comes onshore, but still soaking the Florida Panhandle. There is rain and there is wind involved in the storm. Brian Cabell, live now, from Fort Walton Beach, with us this morning. How are things thus far, Brian?
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, I tell you, Bill, about 90 minutes ago we had rain and we had blustery winds, but take a look out here right now. What we have is a cloudy day. We have people walking along the beach over here. We have winds we have a breeze about seven or eight miles per hour, I'd estimate, an occasional sprinkle, not much, waves perhaps five- or six-feet high. There is a fellow on a boogie board over there. So, that gives you a sense that this is, perhaps, not the most dangerous of conditions. We talked to a county official one county over from here. He said they have had heavy rain for the last three hours, but winds topping out at only 30 miles per hour. They never had to close the bridges. He said, essentially, this has been a good exercise for emergency officials. So, again, Tropical Storm Helene was really not much at all. We had heavy rains here for about three or four hours just before dawn. But, for the most part, this has been just a good drenching, two or three inches here. The big concern, right now, is that as it moves inland we will have some inland flooding and also, of course, there is the possibility of tornadoes. But, for the coastline it escaped. Helene was really not much, presented no problems whatsoever. Schools were closed down. Government offices were closed down, but that was primarily as a precaution. I'm Brian Cabell, CNN live, in Fort Walton Beach, Florida.
[Hemmer:] Brian, thank you. Now, just a rainmaker, here's Flip with more. Coming our way, Flip?
[Flip Spiceland, Cnn Meteorologist:] Yes, Bill, you called it a developing story; we'll call it an undeveloping story. Now, it is weakening very rapidly as it moves on shore. If you are plotting the storm, these are the latest statistics. The center of the storm is still near Fort Walton Beach, but that's misleading, because the center of the storm has never been the problem. The problem has been well to the east of the center of the storm throughout the entire life of this system. And that continues to be the case. And as Bill said, that's moving up through Alabama and Georgia right now. The wind speeds are now down to 45 miles an hour. It may not be a tropical storm with next advisory, due in at 11:00 this morning, Eastern time. Here's the satellite photography. Center of the storm right here, you don't see much rotation. As a matter of fact, the statement from the National Hurricane Center, the individual forecasting it said: If I didn't have Air Force reconnaissance on it I wouldn't even know I had a tropical storm. Here you can see it moving on shore. Still a tropical storm strength with our next bulletin, but then after that it begins to weaken. It moves up through Georgia and the Carolinas, carrying the rainfall with it. Flash flood watches are in effect along that track, and there are still, at this hour, tropical storm warnings in effect along the coast. They may be dropped in a just few hours too. Some wind advisories, but Bill, Daryn, I'll tell you the truth, the wind has not been a problem with this one and not expected to be. We'll have more a little bit later.
[Hemmer:] All right, Flip, thank you.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] A study is being released that may signal a disturbing trend, even though it looks like it might be good news. For the second year in a row, the number of AIDS-related deaths and new AIDS cases has reached a plateau after years of decline. CNN medical news correspondent Rea Blakey joins us now from Washington to explain exactly what all this means Rea, good morning.
[Rea Blakey, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Good morning, Leon. We'll start with an explanation. When special immune system cells drop below their CD4 cells when they drop the the count of 200, the Centers for Disease Control says a person then has AIDS. Now, the number of AIDS cases, as you mentioned, and the deaths during a two-year period that ended in July of 2000 has remained steady. Researchers meeting at the second National HIV Prevention Conference say those new figures underscore the urgent need for earlier HIV testing, including reenergizing the fight to prevent HIV in the first place. The CDC's doctor, Helene Gayle, says new studies show continued increase in sexual-risk behavior among men who have sex with men. And that is among all racial and ethnic groups. Now, experts also say these new figures point out the need to get more at-risk individuals tested and treated earlier in their disease course. An Atlanta-based study shows almost half of low-income African-Americans surveyed did not use a condom during any sexual encounter during the previous two months; 60 percent didn't know the HIV status of their partner. Now, Leon, the CDC admits the nation faces formidable challenges in its efforts to decrease the rate of AIDS and AIDS deaths.
[Harris:] They're not saying, are they, that the news has got to get worse before people actually pay attention to it and actually follow the advice of the doctors, are they?
[Blakey:] They would love to prevent the news getting any worse. In fact, the CDC launched a program back in February to try and increase awareness of HIV prevention. It focuses on getting people specifically to learn their HIV status. At this point, we're not certain how effective it's been. But that's the effort that is under way, because, after all, if people don't understand it, if they don't know what their status is, they have no idea where they may fall. And many of these people are not finding out they're HIV-positive until they are actually diagnosed with
[Aids. Harris:] Another case where knowledge is power.
[Blakey:] Right.
[Harris:] Rea Blakey, thank you very much. We'll talk to you some other time. Take care.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] The board of directors of Bestfoods met last night to consider Unilever's sweetened takeover bid. No word on their decision has been released yet.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] For more on the proposed deal and the merger and acquisition environment as a whole right now in the marketplace we have M&A; specialist Wilbur Ross. He is chairman and CEO of WL Ross & Company. Welcome and good morning to you.
[Wilbur Ross, Wl Ross & Company:] Good morning.
[Haffenreffer:] Well, this is turning out to be a suspenseful story between Unilever and Bestfoods. Any ideas how it might play out?
[Ross:] I think it's very difficult for Bestfoods to pay a premium to buy Campbell's Soup when they're faced with a big premium for themselves to be acquired by Unilever. I think the bid from Unilever is a very, very good bid, probably take almost $1 billion of synergies for it not to be dilutive for Unilever. So if I were a betting man, I would bet on Unilever.
[Marchini:] The stock was down yesterday on the prospect that Bestfoods would take over Campbell's. Of course, Campbell's stock was up; they were sort of happy at the prospect of a takeover. What do you think the reaction of shareholders would be if they decided to go with Campbell's rather than Unilever?
[Ross:] Well, I think there would be a huge amount of litigation over it because there is around a 10-point spread between where Bestfoods' stock closed yesterday and the takeover bid by Unilever. It's hard to imagine that acquiring Campbell would have an immediate positive effect.
[Marchini:] In talking with Campbell, what do you think Bestfoods wants, its independence or more money?
[Ross:] Well, I it feels like they want independence more than more money. Unilever sent people here over the weekend; it's pretty clear they would have put something or other additional on the table if that were all that it took.
[Haffenreffer:] You mentioned litigation coming up as a result of it. You mean from shareholders of Bestfoods sort of trying to put the squeeze on management to accept the Unilever offer?
[Ross:] Yes, I think it's a very difficult situation to be put into, turn down a high premium bid; nobody else, even though they searched the woodwork came with anything like a better bid. So instead of taking that, to say, no, I want to pay a premium to buy someone else, I think is very tough.
[Marchini:] Another takeover in the news today: AT&T; apparently won preliminary approval from the Federal Communications Commission to acquire MediaOne; that's conditional I should say, not preliminary, but conditional approval requires it that sell one of two things apparently, either Libya Media Liberty Media or its 25-percent stake in Time Warner Entertainment. Any sense about which of those properties is likely to go on the block?
[Ross:] I would guess that they would be more likely to sell the 25-percent stake because that's a non-operating thing, they don't really have control over it. But either way, I think the important thing to them is to get their major deal done and participate in the reshaping of the telecom industry.
[Haffenreffer:] How has the market's, the stock market's, behavior affected the environment for a merger and acquisition activity? We just recently have seen a bit of a flourish come up, especially in the airline industry. But as you look at the markets, how do you see the landscape?
[Ross:] Well, acquisition premiums have tended to go up some as stocks, in general, have declined since the March period, and I think you would expect that because in an acquisition you're paying for true value as opposed to just where the securities have been trading. But I think, in general, the high multiples have facilitated deals, they make managements feel happier, they make them feel they have better currency to use, and therefore it helps to stimulate deals.
[Marchini:] Do you see more coming in the airline industry?
[Ross:] Well, there aren't that many airlines left.
[Marchini:] I know.
[Ross:] From the few who are left, yes, I think there will be a great rush, because the United Airlines decision, obviously, puts a huge amount of pressure on everyone else.
[Marchini:] Banking, also, ripe for consolidation...
[Ross:] Well, commercial banking with the dropping of Glass- Steagall and the general deregulation there, clearly, there will be a lot; clearly, in Europe there will be a lot to reflect Euroland and the dropping of borders; and certainly in Asia it is continuing because of the economic distress of some of the countries over there.
[Haffenreffer:] What's the best way for investors to play this, or should they be trying to buy up shares of companies that they think will be taken over?
[Ross:] I think the most attractive way to do it is what's probably the best investing anyway, try to find companies that are selling for less than their fundamental value, and then you'll probably be all right, whether it's a takeover or just normal market appreciation.
[Marchini:] All right, terrific. Wilbur Ross, WL Ross & Company, thanks for joining us this morning.
[Ross:] Thank you for having me.

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] "Time" correspondent Viveca Novak joins us now from our sister news organization. The magazine has not yet hit the newsstands, Viveca. Today with all this late-breaking news, events to squeeze in, you can see things on the Internet.
[Viveca Novak, "time" Magazine Correspondent:] Right.
[Sesno:] OK.
[Novak:] Go to Time.com.
[Sesno:] But here's my definition of fun. I work for a weekly publication and this story changes by the minute.
[Novak:] It has been a challenge, to say the least. We usually close the magazine on Saturday night, which means everything is basically written on Friday. This week, because things were unfolding, we knew there would be some sort of certification Sunday night, we held the magazine open. We closed it last night. Things were still being written, you know, up until the certification and at the time of the certification. But it means less, of course, than we thought it would mean when we originally planned that with the Supreme Court case pending.
[Sesno:] Well, on the cover, 537 votes.
[Novak:] Right.
[Sesno:] That's the certified difference between the two...
[Novak:] That's right.
[Sesno:] ... the two candidates when this thing hits the newsstands. One of the things you looked at, and we've been talking a fair bit about it, is the interesting political dynamic that hit this city. Because last week, we were hearing what we might call some "squishy" Democrats. And the squishy Democrats, at least for the moment, have firmed up.
[Novak:] That's right. And I think there was good evidence of that in the Sunday shows yesterday. And what really galvanized them was not so much Al Gore, because there's still a lot of mixed feelings about Al Gore on Capitol Hill and elsewhere. But it was, as one Democratic strategist said to me, "we are blessed in our enemies." When you have Tom DeLay and Dick Armey and the head the Republican head of the Florida legislature coming out there saying that they might want to get involved in this, when you have a near riot in Miami-Dade County that may or may not have had something to do with stopping the vote count there, when you have a very extreme reaction on the military ballots that in some cases led to Republicans saying things that actually weren't true about the Democratic strategy, all just...
[Sesno:] Such as...
[Novak:] That there was a concerted strategy on the part of the Democrats. They cited a memo that was really nothing more than a statement of Florida law as something that was conspiratorial, and it wasn't. But all of these things served to galvanize the Democrats and to say, wait a minutes, you know, and to sort of buy in more to the, "this election isn't over until the votes are counted" strategy.
[Sesno:] But, Viveca, haven't the Democrats been doing every bit as much as the Republicans to kind of roil the waters, keep this going? They're both playing spin games, they're both playing to their publics, they're both playing to the street in some fashion.
[Novak:] Yes, I think they are, but I think they've been a little bit more measured in their responses. And in part because the Democrats weren't as unified, you didn't hear them out there quite as strongly. You didn't have Democrats of stature out there.
[Sesno:] How long do the Democrats hold?
[Novak:] Well, at least through the week. And beyond the week I think it depends on what the Supreme Court does, it depends on what Gore gets in his contest challenges, and it depends very much on public opinion.
[Sesno:] Viveca Novak, thanks, as always.
[Novak:] Good to be with you.
[Sesno:] Look for the magazine.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to Washington now. Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the man from whom we heard about the third and latest recommendation to the attorney general to investigate Al Gore's 1996 fund-raising activities, is now addressing the committee and the attorney general. We're going to listen to what he has to say.
[Sen. Arlen Specter , Pennsylvania:] ... and to correct the misstatement about judges on pending matters. Judge Hatter was questioned about a closed matter and the only judge in issue, but on to the subject matter at hand, and I join in welcoming you here, Attorney General Reno, and the focus of what the subcommittee has been doing involves espionage cases, campaign finance and Waco. With respect the issue of independent counsel, a good bit of our focus today will be about your decisions not to appoint independent counsel. And by way of setting the stage, with respect to your judgment not to have independent counsel as to the vice president, as to the distinction between hard money and soft money, and whether the vice president knew that he was soliciting hard money, the established record shows that four witnesses testified that hard money was discussed in the vice president's presence at the famous November 21st meeting; that one of the witnesses, Leon Panetta, even went so far as to point out that, quote, "The purpose of the meeting was to make sure they knew what the hell was going on." That included among those four witnesses was the vice president's chief of staff, David Strauss, who had a memorandum written memorandum putting in writing the fact that there was a discussion about 35 percent hard money. Then there were the 13 memoranda from Harold Ickes, which went to the vice president marked "hard money," and the testimony of the vice president's assistant that they very carefully culled the in-box to leave out matters which the vice president wanted excluded but always left in the items with respect to what Mr. Ickes had sent. And then the vice president's only own statement that, quote, "The subject matter of the memorandums would have already been discussed" in his and the president's presence. The vice president further acknowledged that he, quote, "had been a candidate for 16 years and had a good understanding of the hard money." At this point, it is important to put in perspective that the independent counsel law, then in effect, did not call for a conclusion that the vice president had committed a crime, but only that there was specific and credible information not evidence, just information that there may, and I emphasize the word "may," have been a violation of the federal criminal laws. And then there is the question of the coffees, 103 of them, some $26 million contributed, over $7 million within one month of the donor's attendance. When the vice president was questioned about this matter on April 18, questioned, quote, "in terms of a fund- raising tool, what was the purpose of the coffee?" Answer, "I don't know." Further down page 53, "With respect to raising the $108 million, did you have discussions with anybody concerning the roles a coffee would play in raising that type of money?" Answer, "Well, let me define the term, "raising,'if I could." Shades of what "is" is. And on page 59, question, "You had indicated earlier that you may have attended one coffee. What were you talking about?" Answer, a little farther down, page 60, quote, "Although it was not my practice to go to any of these coffees, there may have been one," one, "that I attended briefly, perhaps because some of the invitees were known to me." Then the attorney for the vice president submitted a letter on the subject two days later, pointing out that the vice president's schedule, he was designated to attend four White House coffees, and the vice president hosted approximately 21 coffees in the executive office building. Very briefly, on the issue of the Buddhist temple, to put the matter in perspective. Shortly before the scheduled fund-raiser, the vice president's scheduler sent him an e-mail message, asking whether he would be interested in adding another stop on the April 29 itinerary, on top of the quote, "two fund-raisers in San Jose and LA." The vice president responded, "If we already have booked the fund- raisers, then we have to decline." Again, Ickes" memos were specific to the president about a $250,000 take from a fund-raiser. And a second one, a $325,000 take from a fund-raiser. It is in this context, Madam Vice President Madam Attorney General Reno, that we raise the question about the lower level of sufficiency to establish with specific and credible information the level for calling for independent counsel. Again, as I said last Thursday, in fairness to the vice president, it is a very different level of evidence than that required for a criminal prosecution or for an indictment. One of the issues in sharp focus today will be why on the first four times the vice president was questioned, he was never asked about the Hsi Lai Buddhist temple. It was only when the subcommittee issued subpoenas and had the LaBella and Freeh memoranda with the return date of April 20 that the Department of Justice finally got around to questioning the vice president on April the 18th. So those are a brief focus, in addition to the decision that you made not to appoint independent counsel with President Clinton and the vice president on the soft money coordination issue and advice of counsel. And one final comment: The vice president's surrogates have raised an issue that my disclosure of what Mr. Conrad recommended was inappropriate. That disclosure was made in the course of the committee's business. But before making that disclosure, we called in Robert Conrad and asked him the questions head-on. And it was only when he failed to disclose them, did the disclosure come from the subcommittee. And that was done so that there could be public accountability. There was a substantial period of time between the LaBella recommendation and the Freeh recommendation, the Freeh recommendation in November of 1997 and the LaBella recommendation in July of 1998, until we finally got the specifics on their memoranda on April the 20th in the year 2000. And I do not take lightly the comments of the vice president's surrogates, accusing me of McCarthy-like tactics and being in cahoots with the Bush campaign. I have not and would not discuss this matter with the Bush campaign. And as to the reference to McCarthy-like tactics, that is a matter which I will take up personally with the vice president to see if it was authorized. And if so, I will take it up with him in some substantial detail. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Sen. Orrin Hatch , Utah:] Thank you, Senator Specter. We'll turn to Senator Torricelli. And then Senator Thurmond has to leave, so he said he has a very short statement and we'll grant him that...
[Sen. Robert Torricelli , New Jersey:] Thank you Mr. Chairman. Madam Attorney General...
[Hatch:] Then we're going to go to the attorney general.
[Torricelli:] Good afternoon. Madam Attorney General, I welcome you to the committee and thank you very much for your attendance today, hoping that at long last, through your testimony and the questions that we are about to ask, we can bring what has been a matter that has proceeded for literally years to some conclusion. I think, Madam Attorney General, it would be fair to say, as I begin my own statement, that not only do I hold no brief for the attorney general, but indeed I have on occasions not hesitated to criticize judgments of the Justice Department when I found reason to disagree with them. Indeed, in the matter of Wen Ho Lee and the prosecution of Peter Lee, I've expressed my concerns, joined with the Republican majority in their investigations and never hesitated to reach a judgment on how I believe the matters should have been dealt differently. But it is inconceivable to me that either the Justice Department generally or Janet Reno specifically could be criticized on questions with regard to either her independence, which raises issues of integrity, or her willingness to use the independent counsel statute. The facts simply do not support either. Indeed, the only area of criticism open to those who are raising issues with regard to the independent counsel statue is that on occasion they simply don't agree with the final judgment. No attorney general could be less vulnerable to attack on issues of independence. No attorney general could be less vulnerable to attack on issues of using the independent counsel statute or using outside counsel when otherwise generally necessary. On seven different occasions, Janet Reno has appointed independent counsels to investigate the president of the United States, for whom I assume she has both affection and loyalty, and fellow members of the Cabinet. Not simply more than any other attorney general in the history of the United States, but more than her predecessors combined, she has sat across a Cabinet table with colleagues and friends and appointed independent counsels I assume at some personal discomfort because it was the right thing to do and the facts justified it. I do not even make this claim because I necessarily agree with all those instances in which she appointed an independent counsel. Indeed, I believe she has erred on the side of appointing them even when not always justifiable. At enormous cost in human terms and to the taxpayers, we have witnessed independent counsel being named against former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy, prosecuted for accepting sports tickets, after four years and $17 million of investigation, to hear 30 "not guilty" verdicts. Housing Secretary Cisneros, charged with felonies, his relationships with a woman, pled guilty to a misdemeanor after a multi-million dollar investigation and paid a $10,000 fine. The matter of Ken Starr, his judgment, his cost, his investigation, speaks for itself. And yet, incredibly, incredulously, the attorney general of the United States now faces this Congress with the allegation that she has hesitated to appoint an independent counsel on another matter. Her independence, her integrity, her willingness to examine her own administration, being brought into question. The issue now before the committee appears to be centered on the question of whether when confronted with appointing an independent counsel under the statute previously or now under internal Justice Department guidelines, there was unanimity on her judgment. Indeed, wouldn't it have been extraordinary if upon soliciting advice from all of her assistants, in Public Integrity, the Criminal Division, her deputy, each of these people had reviewed all the facts, considered the law and reached the same judgment. If there is one thing that characterizes the difference between Janet Reno's judgment in dealing with independent counsel on the campaign-related issues with the vice president and the seven other instances involving the president and members of the Cabinet, it is the breadth of advice that she sought, not simply from all of her own senior advisers, but the director of the FBI and the leadership of the campaign finance task force. Members react with extraordinary surprise that there was a difference of judgment. The surprise would have been if they were all of the same mind and all came to the same judgment, given the extensive number of people who were consulted, indeed the unprecedented number of people that were questioned. Divergent views, of course, include those of FBI Director Louis Freeh and Mr. LaBella, the head of the campaign finance task force. Among those consulted as well, perhaps one of the most senior officials of the Justice Department, Mr. Radek, a professional of no particular partisan persuasion, 29 years with the Department of Justice, 20 of those years with the Public Integrity Section. Mr. Radek appeared before our committee. He concluded, and I quote, "There was no substantive basis to proceed under the clause of the statute." He further shared with the committee not that it was his judgment or a majority of his staff or an overwhelming majority of his staff, but that it was the unanimous judgment of career prosecutors in the Public Integrity Section that there was no basis for using the mandatory provision to the independent counsel statute with regard to Vice President Gore. He further added to the committee that had there been independent counsel and we proceeded under the mandatory provisions of the law there was no evidence upon which to build a case with regard to Vice President Gore. During the course of the attorney general's review, a preliminary inquiry of the facts, it must be assumed by those who think that a misjudgment was made by the attorney general, that she did so without a complete review of the law or the facts as they apply to the vice president. The record is directly contrary. Two hundred and fifty witnesses were interviewed, including the vice president. Thousands of documents were obtained from the White House, the DNC, the Clinton- Gore campaign and a variety of individuals who received telephone calls from the vice president. It was on this basis that Mr. Radek and each and every one of the career prosecutors of the Justice Department advised the attorney general that she should not proceed and, if she proceeded, there was no case to be made. And yet today my colleagues will weigh Mr. Freeh and Mr. LaBella's advice versus the unanimous judgment of the professional prosecutors within the Justice Department, leaving the committee to conclude the attorney general reached the right judgment to agree with the unanimous judgment of the career prosecutors, or Mr. Freeh and Mr. LaBella's and, indeed, now Mr. Conrad's judgment, of equal or superior basis. It is worth noting that Mr. Radek is the single individual in the Department of Justice with the greatest experience in the application of the independent counsel statute, the most experienced in law enforcement, the most experienced with the statute and the most experienced with campaign finance related issues. Indeed, his combined staff has a multiple of years of experience compared with Mr. LaBella, Mr. Conrad and Mr. Freeh on campaign related issues and issues relating to the statute. And, indeed, Mr. Radek testified before our committee that he believed that this was persuasive, that his own staff had more experience specifically with the statute, and the other individuals involved had little to none in some cases. Now the statute has expired. The attorney general has been left with the issue now of provisions that will were arrived upon within the Justice Department to deal with the expiration of the Independent Counsel Act. It is worth nothing that the attorney general was not required to write these procedures, to establish an independent counsel's provision within Justice, but she did so. It was the right thing to do and now she has followed those procedures. The question now turns to the individual instances that are leading some to question the attorney general's judgment with regard to independent counsel. Before briefly examining the three instances, I want simply to note to my colleagues this is not the first time that I have been in this hearing room on these issues addressing these questions. As, indeed, three successive campaign finance task force heads have led inquiries, so, too, the Government Affairs Committee occupied months in thousands of hours of review of some of these same issues. Indeed, over the course of three years, the House and Senate expended $11 million, questioned hundreds of people, only to have their own efforts duplicated by the Justice Department and the FBI itself. Same issues, same law, same facts, only to be assumed to the same equation. It was not for lack of effort or desire or motivation that Mr. Thompson and the bipartisan members of this committee could find no substantive basis to find violations of the law by the president or the vice president. We came to the same position as Mr. Radek and professional prosecutors within the Justice Department. Let me turn each, finally, of these three instances. First, the visit to the Buddhist temple. It is alleged that the vice president knew that he was attending a fund-raiser at a charitable nonprofit institution, the Buddhist temple, where violations of the law occurred. Our committee examined this issue. No doubt the Justice Department on these issues has done so again. We found the following: No tickets were sold. No campaign materials were displayed. No campaign table was set up for information, solicitation or acceptance of money. The vice president made no mention of fund-raising in his speech, which spoke about religious tolerance and brotherhood. The committee was further persuaded that the only paper the vice president actually received on that day in visiting the Buddhist temple was his schedule. His schedule makes no mention of a fund- raiser, solicitations of funds, people raising funds, commitment to the campaign or involvement in the campaign. The only paper before the vice president of the United States was instructions that he was to extend brief remarks from the podium and exit, take photos with 150 guests, pay homage in the shrine. This is a fund-raiser? This is leading the vice president of the United States to solicit funds? $11 million dollars later, Mr. Chairman, this is what our committee found. With respect to the White House coffees, it appears in the popular press that the campaign finance task force was intrigued by the notion that they asked the vice president about the numbers of coffees that were held. The vice president's answer relied upon a belief that the question was as to coffees held in the White House. The vice president, to the best of his knowledge, seemed to have answered that question both honestly and accurately. Upon reflection, there are some who are now arguing that it was not differentiated between coffees held in the Old Executive Office Building, of which there were a greater number, and those held at the White House. This is the nature of a federal law enforcement inquiry? This is a serious allegation of perjury? Whether or not we were distinguishing between the appropriate buildings in the White House complex and the numbers of coffees. On what basis could it be argued that the vice president was attempting to mislead someone? The Justice Department knew how many coffees were held. The popular press, the American people and the Justice Department knew where they were held, the numbers that were held and who was in attendance. The facts were not material, they were not new and they misled no one, nor did the vice president clearly have the intention to do so. Third, the solicitation of hard as opposed to soft money. The allegation centers largely on a single meeting in which 13 people were in attendance. They've all been interviewed by committees of the Congress, by the Justice Department, and by the task force. There has been a great deal of attention paid to the fact that two people, two, remember a mention of hard money. On a later date, after reviewing documentation, a third raised the possibility. Thirteen people were there. Apparently, if the president and the vice president of the United States do not remember a discussion of hard money, they have good company, because neither did 10 other people. The entire theory rests on the belief that the vice president of the United States reads every memorandum that reaches his desk, every word that is ever said at a meeting, and nothing is ever to be forgotten. But that somehow these two individuals have extraordinary credibility in their recall, but the other 10 do not, including the president and the vice president. And this is alleged to be an offense which would have warranted some time ago the appointment of an independent counsel. Madam Attorney General, the best conclusion to be reached on how you have performed your responsibilities as attorney general, the integrity with which you have come to your position, the independence with which you have weighed your judgment, is that somehow through all these years, you have managed to have everybody disagree with you on something at some time in some way. Good for you. That's the way attorney generals should be. I'm among those who have disagreed with you, but I cannot argue that you did not err on the side of independence, that you did not have the courage to look the president of the United States in the eye, Cabinet members, who I know you have great affection for, have served with over the years, and questioned them when they were wrong and stood up for what needed to be done. It is, Mr. Chairman, though we will endure this hearing today, time to bring these long proceedings to a close. The New York Times editorial on Sunday may have actually put it in the best perspective. These issues now belong to the American people. Vice President Gore may have made some mistakes of judgment; I do not believe he made mistakes of law. I commend those questions now to the American voter. He, like all Americans, deserves to be judged in the totality of his life and his service. He's done some things he'd like to change. He's done a great deal that is good. I hope, Mr. Chairman, after several years of reviewing the same questions and the same facts, which always seem to come to the same resolve, this can finally come to some conclusion. And that somehow, despite all the doubts and the cynicism, we can have some confidence in professionals in the Justice Department who have reviewed this for so many years and seem to overwhelmingly agree with the attorney general. Despite those in their own good judgments because I do not come here with Mr. Freeh or Mr. Conrad or Mr. LaBella doubting their own sincerity, their own belief in their own positions. But, indeed, maybe the way to conclude is with Mr. LaBella's or Mr. Freeh's own conclusion: They disagreed on the facts. They would have called it differently, but they respect those in the department who saw it differently, do not question the attorney general's independence or integrity. They believe that justice was done. If Mr. Freeh and Mr. LaBella and Mr. Conrad can come to that judgment, so can we. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[Hatch:] Thank you, senator. And Senator Thurmond has asked...
[Waters:] That's Senator Robert Torricelli making his case for why the vice president should not be investigated by special counsel. His central political point was that if the attorney general thought an independent counsel or in this case, a special counsel was needed she would appoint one, because she has done so many times in the past. At issue, the question before the committee posed by Arlen Specter: Did the vice president know he was soliciting hard money or soft money in the 21 or so coffees at the Old Executive Office Building and other coffees at the White House and at the Buddhist temple in 1996? The justice correspondent, Pierre Thomas, who is closely following this story, has been listening along with me here. Senator Specter was very careful, I noted, Pierre, when he said the vice president may and he stressed the word may have violated a federal law, suggesting the vice president bent the truth, shades of what is is.
[Pierre Thomas, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, it's clear that Senator Specter is skeptical of Vice President Gore's remarks in his April 18th interview just a few months ago. But what you see unfolding at the hearing today is sort of a referendum on the work of the attorney general. Was she fair? Did she deliberate properly? Was the investigation thorough? And what Specter is suggesting is that there is evidence out there of possible wrongdoing, and with the possibility of wrongdoing, that Reno should have gone forward with independent counsels, and in this case, with Vice President Gore, a special counsel. So really what you see unfolding here is a referendum on the actions of the attorney general. Senator Torricelli did his best to suggest that Reno has been very forceful in going for independent counsels. I think he pointed out the number, seven, and that she no one questions her integrity. Even some of the people, like FBI Director Louis Freeh, the former head of the campaign task force, Charles LaBella, who recommended actions that were contrary to what Reno ultimately decided to do. But the referendum is on Reno today.
[Waters:] There is also apparently some sensitivity on Arlen Specter's part to being called, as he put it, by Vice President Gore's surrogates, "accusing me of McCarthy-like tactics and in cahoots with the Bush campaign." This story, of course, got its spotlight because Arlen Specter stepped out and broke the story. How did that come about?
[Thomas:] Well, Specter, I don't know that he broke the story. There was actually a wire report on this. But Specter did confirm in his remarks that he had reason quote "to believe" that there was a recommendation calling for a special counsel investigation of Gore. So the Clinton administration and some of Gore's supporters have seized on that as to why he would be so public on confirming the sorry. Now Specter's point of view is that he's been conducting an investigation of Reno's actions in regard to campaign finance and that it was perfectly legitimate for him to have knowledge of information and to bring it out to the public.
[Waters:] All right, Pierre Thomas. We're standing by. We're waiting for Janet Reno to say something about all of this. And while we wait, let's take a break. "CNN TODAY" will continue. And Janet Reno is now addressing the Senate Judiciary Committee.
[Janet Reno, U.s. Attorney General:] ... and I want to thank you all for the thoughtfulness and the kindness that you have shown me. Mr. Chairman, I understand that you sometimes think I'm crazy when I tell you that I appreciate the oversight function, but I have before this committee, because it brings new issues to our attention and it sharpens our decision-making at the Department of Justice. I moan and groan as I get ready for them, but I always find them helpful. In the course of these oversight functions and committees, we have debated and disagreed, sometimes fiercely, on a number of issues, and today, obviously, is no exception. But I think our founding fathers valued the spirit of spirited debate and thought it one of the most important foundations of our government. I'm going to take just a moment to reflect on something. One of the most extraordinary experiences that I have had as attorney general is to welcome my colleagues, ministers of justice, ministers of the interior, law enforcement officials from the emerging democracies to my conference room to look at how they act almost with stars in their eyes as they are commenced on a great new undertaking. To see some of them fail and some of them succeed makes you realize how fragile democracy it is, and what a cherished institution it is and how we must not take it for granted. This scene is the epitome of democracy. It represents the hallmarks of it: representative government, public accountability and the peaceful transfer of power. It is almost a miracle, but it is a great testament to the strength and the wonder of the human spirit. It is a miracle that we have a Constitution that has stood the test of time in the advance of technology that our founding fathers never dreamed would be possible. But at the heart of that document, essentially and required, is the respect for individuals and the different opinions we hold. Although I may disagree with so many of you on so many occasions and agree with you completely on others, I respect you and I respect your opinion. In this spirit, the department has tried very hard to cooperate with and facilitate the oversight process, thus following the long- standing executive branch policy and practice of seeking to accommodate congressional request for the information to the fullest extent with the constitutional and statutory obligations of the executive branch. The Constitution also wisely assigns each branch of the government distinct roles. Among the most important functions of the Justice Department, as part of the executive branch, is the faithful execution of the laws, including the vigorous but fair prosecution of criminals. When there is conflict between the legislative and executive branch, I want to, and I think our task as public servants is to find solutions that respects our individual duties and permits both branches to do their job responsibly. One issue will come out today amongst many others that I think I have got to address because I think it will require no comments on a number of occasions, and that is: I do not think it proper for me to comment on pending investigations and pending prosecutions. I think that those matters should be handled thoughtfully and professionally, not in headlines, but in courtrooms and in the processes of an investigation. I mean no disrespect whatsoever to the committee when I tell you that I cannot comment. I just feel very strongly that we must be careful in order to protect the investigation, protect leads, protect the reputation of people involved, lest information disseminated impede our careful and professional process that we pursue. I know that some of you have been concerned about the department response, and if we have not done it as well as you would like, I will keep trying harder in the time that I have remaining. There is always opportunity for improvement. But at the same time, people should be careful to reflect accurately on the situation. First, we are required by law to review material for privacy, grand jury secrecy and other obligations. That takes time. Secondly, we have competing demands from many senators and members of the House who each express a very strong sense of urgency about his or her own request, all at the same time. Third, the offices at the department are poised to respond to these requests, but they operate under statutory caps on personnel and salaries, despite marked increases in requests on these offices by the various committees of Congress. In addition, the same people who are responding to the document requests and requests for information are also the people that are trying to move what you and I would consider to be the agenda of the American people along. Fourth, and most importantly, the department has, in my review, been very responsive. It has produced to this committee alone more than 8,000 pages in May and June relating to the appointment of independent counsels. We have produced or given access to tens of thousands of documents on Peter Lee, Wen Ho Lee, Johnny Chung, John Huang, Charlie Trie and Maria Hsia, among others; over 800 pages on the Loral waiver issue, and over a half a million pages on Waco. Last and more importantly, we must be careful not to confuse our inability to provide you with certain material as being unresponsive. If I determine that a particular document's dissemination will interfere with an ongoing investigation or criminal prosecution and cannot provide that document to you at a particular time, this is not, in my view, being unresponsive. I am required by law to provide answers to you that you may not like, but I can assure each of you that much thought and reflection goes into a decision to say that I can't do this. This is not a matter I or anyone at the department takes lightly and it in no way indicates disrespect for the committee. Much comment has been made about how I do things and who I rely on. I urge you to read carefully the filings made with the court on the matters relating to the independent counsel, for these are the documents where I've laid out the thorough investigation of the facts at issue, the careful analysis of the law involved, and the consistent, reasoned application of the law to the facts that has gone into each of these matters. This work is complex, it is fact intensity, sound bites and quick appraisals are not conducive to thorough analysis. People's reputation often rests on how we talk about important matters. I urge you to read carefully the documents submitted. I think that these documents may provide additional information that would be helpful. I value honest debate about all matters that come before me. I don't like yes people. Somebody said some of my decisions are unanimous; I don't think I've ever had a unanimous decision one way or the other. I think the mix has always been interesting. It is no secret by now that I rely on a wide variety of people. Nor do I count up the votes on each side. I don't say, "The majority wins," or I don't say, "This person wins." I make the best judgment I can. Under the independent counsel statute, when it existed, Congress placed on me the responsibility to make the judgment. I made the best judgment I could and I will continue to try to do that. As I told you once, Mr. Chairman, I don't do things based on polls, I do things based on the evidence and the law. Senator Specter has commented on one of the particular cases and has said that the standard for determining the appointment of a special counsel is that there be specific and credible information that a crime may have been committed. That is the standard that has been used not for the application for independent counsel, but for the triggering of a preliminary investigation, which was done in the case to which he refers. And there is a provision for a preliminary investigation which is permitted and authorized by the act. That was triggered, the preliminary investigation was conducted. But the bottom line at that point was in determining whether the application should be made, was whether reasonable it was necessary to have further investigation and whether further investigation was reasonable and warranted. Thus, I think we look at each of the standards and try our best to make the best judgment we can, and I will look forward to that opportunity to talk with you today about it. I've said when I appeared before you last that the American people should be extraordinarily proud of the people in the Department of Justice. If you want to blame somebody, if you reach disagreement, blame me. Don't blame them. They work so hard for you. They try to give you the best advice they can. Director Freeh will disagree with me, but he has done so much for this country. There are people that you never hear about that do incredible jobs going over the law, getting the facts. Agents, border patrol officers, just so many different people in so many different ways. The American people should be very proud of them, and you, since many of them have served through one administration after another, should be equally proud of them. I know that I am. And I appreciate the opportunity to be here today, Mr. Chairman.
[Hatch:] Well, thank you, Madam Attorney General. I'll defer to Senator Specter, who I believe is going to have five-minute rounds. All right. Thank you, Madam Attorney General. I appreciate your appearing, appreciate you being here.
[Reno:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Specter:] Attorney General Reno, I begin with a memorandum which has been the subject of considerable discussion, and that was from FBI Director Freeh to Mr. Esposito, dated December 9, 1996, and I'll read the pertinent part. Quote, "I also advised the attorney general Lee Radek's comment to you, that there was a lot of, quote, "pressure,'close quote, on him and on PIS" the Public Integrity Section "regarding this case, because, quote, 'The attorney general's job might hang in the balance," close quote, or words to that effect. I stated those comments would be enough for me to take him and the Criminal Division off the case, completely." Did Director Freeh say that to you, Attorney General Reno?
[Reno:] I don't have any recollection of it, Senator. What I have in terms of a recollection of the things that he covers in the whole memo, is his reference at a time and place different than he suggested this meeting took place, in which he talked about the need for a junkyard dog prosecutor, and that he was anxious to have the matter referred to the FBI. But I'm sure he thinks he said it in those words or in so many other words but I don't remember it, sir.
[Specter:] Well, in this memo he talks about the junkyard dog concept. But I come back to this point, Attorney General Reno, because it's a very unusual point to refer to one of your top deputies, Mr. Radek, talking about pressure on him and on his unit, that the attorney general's job might hang in the balance. If, in fact, that was said isn't that something of sufficient importance that you would remember?
[Reno:] Yes, I think so, sir. But I think Director Freeh I feel very strongly that he thinks he said it. I don't know how he said it or the circumstances that occurred at that moment, but I have no memory of it. And, clearly, if I had any memory I would have gone back to Lee Radek and said, What is this all about?
[Specter:] But you think that if it had been said, you would remember it?
[Reno:] I think if I had understood it, I would have remembered it. I think he said it or thinks that he said it in that that or so many words, and it's the "so many other words" that is the puzzle to me of what I might have confused. I note that Neal Gallagher said that there was pressure to do a good job, because it was going to be a critical and sensitive investigation.
[Specter:] Neal Gallagher and Mr. Esposito confirmed that Mr. Radek did say that.
[Reno:] I understand that. That's what was confusing to me was that they talk about the pressure to do a good job. I don't know how Director Freeh said it, but I did not understand it.
[Specter:] Let me move to another subject, because the time is very short. And quote very briefly from your testimony on confirmation about the need for independent counsel where you said, quote, "It is absolutely essential for the public to have confidence in the system and you cannot do that when there is a conflict or an appearance of conflict, and the person, who, in effect, is the chief prosecutor. The credibility and the public confidence engendered with the fact that an independent and impartial outsider has examined the evidence and concluded prosecution is not warranted serves to clear a public official's name in the way that no Justice Department investigation ever could." Now I've recited key facts as to the vice president, and there have been references made to Cisneros and Espy, and I turn now to Alexis Herman where you appointed independent counsel. But in your submission said, quote, "While I cannot conclusively determine at this time that any of these allegations are credible, much of the detail of the story he has told has been corroborated, though none of it clearly inculcates Herman. Although our investigation has developed no evidence clearly demonstrating Secretary Herman's involvement in these matters and substantial evidence suggesting that she may not have been involved, a great deal of Yanni's story has been corroborated. We are thus unable to conclude that it is not credible." Now it is true that asking for independent counsel, means that you have to make a determination my red light went on. I'll finish within 30 seconds. You must make a determination there are reasonable grounds to believe that further investigation is warranted. We are not saying that the vice president committed perjury, as Senator Torricelli has raised the question, but only of sufficient evidence to go further. In light of what is on the record to the vice president, how can you order independent counsel for Alexis Herman, but not for Vice President Gore?
[Reno:] First of all, I did not order an independent counsel. I don't have that power, the court...
[Specter:] Recommended it.
[Reno:] I applied to the court, and the court appoints.. In that instance, I have got to trigger a preliminary investigation, if I can, on two accounts: one, if I have specific and credible information that a crime may have been committed; or two, if I cannot show that the information was either specific and credible or that I can disprove it. So that's what precipitated the triggering of the preliminary investigation in Secretary Herman's case. In the course of the investigation, I could not disprove or I could not prove that he was not credible, and thus felt that the further investigation was necessary because I, under the Independent Counsel Act, while conducting a preliminary investigation, did not have the tools to get to the answer that was such as a grand jury proceeding, subpoenas or immunity issues. In the instance of the vice president, you have spoken of four people who remembered. Mr. Strauss did not remember. When shown his notes, he said, that must have been the case, but he had no memory. We interviewed 15 people, two of whom remembered the discussion. The wide variety of and everybody gave information, nobody seemed to withhold information, and we could not, as we spell out in the submission to the court, which has been a matter of public record, which is a very careful report on just what we did. As noted above, in order to prove violation of section 1001 in this case, the government would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that at the time he made the telephone calls there were at issue in the '97 investigation, the vice president actually knew that the media campaign had a hard money component or that the limit on hard money was $20,000. In this case, there is no direct evidence of such knowledge. While the vice president was present at the meeting, there is no evidence that he heard the statements or understood their implications so as to suggest the falsity of his statements two years later that he believed the media fund was entirely soft money. Nor does anyone recall the vice president asking any questions or making any comments at the meeting about the media fund, much less questions or comments indicating an understanding of the issues of the blend of hard and soft money needed for DNC mixed media expenditures. Witnesses were also asked whether they recalled any other discussion with the vice president about the hard money component in the media fund. None recalled any, nor did any recall the vice president saying or doing anything at any other time that would indicate that indeed he knew, whether from the meeting or some other source, that there was a hard money component to the media fund. I would ask each of you, I would ask everybody listening, if you had a meeting if you had a meeting two years before of this committee and somebody raised a subject and you did not hear it or do not remember it, can you be expected to remember everything you hear at every meeting you go to? And what we concluded in this instance was that the range of impressions and vague misunderstandings among all the meeting attendees is striking and undercuts any reasonable inference that a mere attendance at the meeting should have served to communicate to the vice president an accurate understanding of the facts. We concluded that there was, under the law, as the statute spells it out, the statute provides that I shall apply to the division of the court for the appointment of an independent counsel if, upon completion of the preliminary investigation, I determine that there are reasonable grounds to believe that further investigation is warranted. I concluded that there was not. Let me make sure that 15 attendees were interviewed. The president submitted a statement and one other attendee has testified about the meeting under oath saying he had no memory of it.
[Specter:] Thank you. Senator Leahy? Senator Torricelli?
[Torricelli:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Attorney General, in reaching judgments about the application of the Independent Counsel Act, it was your practice to consult with a wide range of senior officials in the Justice Department?
[Reno:] That's correct, Senator.
[Torricelli:] And was this a standard list or did it change on occasion?
[Reno:] It changed, depending on the circumstances and as people came and left the department.
[Torricelli:] Mr. Esposito of the FBI testified that actually in this instance he believed that, to your credit, you actually consulted on the campaign finance question with a larger group of people; that the FBI had not always been consulted in the past and asked for their advice on independent counsel, but in this instance, given the seriousness of the matter, you seemed to expand the list to get a wider range of opinions.
[Reno:] I included the FBI in my weekly meetings, asking them on each occasion sometimes the meetings weren't weekly, they were but they were on the average of about once a week asking if there was anything else that I should know or argue did they want to argue with me, did they want to disagree with me. I tried to be as open and as accessible as I could.
[Torricelli:] In the seven other instances when you named independent counsel, were all of these senior officials in the Justice Department always of a single mind or have a single perspective on whether the appointment should be made or who it was or how the department should proceed, or was it common to have occasionally someone disagree?
[Reno:] I think I made the statement earlier that they were not all unanimous, but I think there were I'd have to go back and look at it, but I and I'm not sure that there were any that were unanimous, but...
[Torricelli:] So it might be unusual that this Congress is this committee is questioning the judgment because there was not a unanimous judgment with regard to campaign finance independent counsel, but in fact it was not unusual in the department for people in other instances which have receive no attention, upon which we've had no hearings, your judgment has not been questioned, it was not unusual there for there to be disagreements.
[Reno:] And if you look at the Supreme Court of the United States, 5-4 decisions are often commonplace.
[Torricelli:] In proceeding with a preliminary investigation of the vice president in 1997 and 1998, the FBI and the Department of Justice interviewed approximately 250 witnesses, including the vice president, former members of his staff, DNC officials, White House officials, reviewed phone records, interviewed the vice president personally. In reaching this preliminary inquiry, was this equally exhaustive of the process you went through in other preliminary investigations? Or it would appear to me that indeed you went to some extraordinary lengths that might seem beyond other instances. How would you compare the amount of investigatory work that went into this preliminary inquiry with others that were conducted?
[Reno:] I tried to be as thorough and as complete as I could each time I asked the court for the appointment of an independent counsel or I notified the court that there was no basis for concluding that a further investigation was warranted. So I don't think it was exceptional, we just tried to be thorough in all the instances, Senator.
[Torricelli:] Let me read for you the memorandums of the views of a couple people on the central question that Senator Specter raised about whether or not you were under political pressure or some other influence in not naming an independent counsel. Mr. Radek, in his memorandum, writes of discussions with Director Freeh: "He repeatedly had assured us and the Congress that while there had been disagreements from time to time over investigative strategy, the investigation had not been impeded or blocked in any way." Mr. Radek then writes of the task force generally and Mr. LaBella personally: "Have repeatedly told us that no investigative steps were closed to them, that they were free to follow any leads, and that if their efforts developed specific and credible information that any covered person may have violated the law the attorney general will trigger the act." Now, it is being alleged by this committee that there was pressure involved or compromise of judgment, and cited are Mr. LaBella and Mr. Freeh as principal witnesses. I have just read you two statements quoting Mr. LaBella and Mr. Freeh making very clear there was no inappropriate pressure, no other judgments, indeed standing as testimony for your own independence of judgment. I assume is this are these statements consistent with what Mr. LaBella and Mr. Freeh told you personally, that while they may have disagreed with your decision they had never questioned your independence in doing so?
[Reno:] Mr. LaBella sent me a letter that I will treasure that sets forth his feelings, and one of the things that I prize most from these seven years is something that was given to me by the FBI. It is a honorary special agent badge and it's something that I treasure. It would not have been given, I think, without Director Freeh's approval. He presented it to me, and he presented it to me after we have had our disagreements.
[Torricelli:] You should know that people may have the impression that those who disagreed with you on the independent counsel statute, not only including Mr. Freeh and Mr. LaBella, but, indeed, the line attorney, Mr. Mansfield, and others, that because they disagreed with you they may believe that you had reached the wrong judgment or that it was not a fair judgment or that the facts only supported a contrary judgment. In many of our hearings, there have been few of us present other than the members of the committee itself, So those of us who are joining for the first time today should know this: Not one of them not one individual who disagreed with you on the appointment of the independent counsel hesitated to say to this committee that, based on the facts and the law, a reasonable person would not have reached the same judgment that you reached. Now, finally, if I could, Mr. Chairman, I know the time has expired and I'll then conclude...
[Hatch:] Senator Torricelli, we're going to come back for another round. I don't mind your asking another question, but I don't want to establish the precedent that we're going to go to 10-minute rounds here. So I'd ask you to wait till the next round.
[Torricelli:] Fine, Mr. Chairman.
[Specter:] Senator Grassley.
[Sen. Chuck Grassley , Iowa:] Yes, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to...
[Waters:] All right, Robert Torricelli has been given his time with the attorney general of the United States, as was Arlen Specter. Establishing criteria for triggering application for independent counsel law. Justice correspondent Pierre Thomas listening along with us. What do we learn here, Pierre?
[Thomas:] Well, again, you're hearing some of the seemingly age- old campaign finance issues. You're hearing about coffees, you're hearing about soft money and hard money. Again, these issues are looking at Reno's judgment in not going forward for independent counsels to investigate campaign finance. Now, again, this was resurrected by the issue of whether Vice President Gore told the truth in an April 18th interview with new campaign task force head Robert Conrad about the Buddhist temple. So again, you have people questioning what Reno's motives were, that you saw Senator Specter talk about the notion that one of Reno's principal aides saw pressure, felt pressure in this particular investigation, in that Reno's job could be at stake. Reno said she had no recollection of it. And also, you see the theme of the FBI director's name coming up over and over again, where FBI Director Freeh believed that there should be an independent counsel investigation on campaign finance. Reno did not. Now, Reno's holding out that she did not want "yes men" around her and that these were simply disagreements among lawyers.
[Waters:] All right, Pierre Thomas, justice correspondent. And again, Janet Reno, as is her want, is not tipping her hand as to this latest recommendation by Robert Conrad to trigger a special counsel appointment to investigate the vice president's '96 campaign fund- raising activity, declining comment, saying no disrespect to the committee, but she refuses comment on all pending investigations. We've heard her say that many times before.

[John Defterios, Cnn Anchor:] The game today is about technology after all those earnings reports from AOL, IBM and others. Let's go down to the Nasdaq Marketsite and check in with Sasha who's got an early read of the reaction Sasha.
[Sasha Salama, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, John and Deborah. Thanks very much. Nasdaq 100 futures right now are 26 points higher. That's a pretty nice gain. If it holds, we'll see some advances when trading gets underway. We are going to be watching out for some key earnings reports today, one of them coming from Sun Microsystems. We'll be watching SUNW until after the bell when the report comes out; 20 cents a share expected for this company which develops workstations and servers for network computing. SUNW reporting today. Excite@Home also reporting, ATHM. Break even is expected here following a loss of 3 cents in the year-ago period, some of these Internet companies starting to report actual profits. And also, after the close yesterday, Legato came out, falling shy of estimates, and that could be a big mover to the downside today. LGTO is the symbol of this company which is a leader in management of data storage systems for companies. Legato coming in with 11 cents a share; that was 8 cents shy of estimates, and the stock getting killed in after hours trade, John and Deb. It fell to 30 from 53, which is where it closed. The company also saying it has to restate Q3 earnings. So just another sign that companies that do fall short often do get punished. Back to you.
[Defterios:] Well, a couple of sectors doing real well right now, chip equipment stocks and the chip makers, I see in Europe today, doing extremely well. That report from AMD, Intel earlier. What's the outlook here for chip makers going forward, from what you can see?
[Salama:] The outlook is very strong from all the analysts that I'm talking to. Demand very strong for personal computers going forward, Intel really setting the pace there.
[Defterios:] OK, thanks a lot. Sasha Salama down the Nasdaq Marketsite this morning, as usual.

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] Secretary of State Madeleine Albright is in the Middle East to push for a final Israeli-Palestinian framework peace accord. As CNN's Jerrold Kessel reports, Albright may have to bridge large caps in thinking between the two sides.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] An unexpected outcome of Israel's military withdrawal from South Lebanon: Across the border fence, Palestinian refugees in Lebanon meet their relatives from Israel. Special relevance perhaps about this after reports that as part of a Palestinian-Israeli peace package developed in back- channel Stockholm talks, Israel might consider a family reunification program.
[Unidentified Male:] Is Israel prepared to implement family reunification with 100,000 Palestinian refugees?
[Shlomo Ben Ami, Senior Israeli Negotiator:] I'm not going to go I'm not going to go into any kind of internal deliberations with the Palestinians as far as the so-called Stockholm channel is concerned.
[Kessel:] Another key issue: Jerusalem. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak has been seeking to postpone consideration of its future to a later agreement. "That's a definite no-go," says Yasser Arafat, translated by a top aide.
[Unidentified Male:] Whether people like it or not, Jerusalem is the most single most important element of these negotiations and of the outcome, and if there are people who don't like it, let them drink from the Dead Sea.
[Yasser Arafat, President, Palestinian Authority:] The capital of the Palestinian state.
[Kessel:] The nature and boundaries of that state are also still very much in dispute. Israel has mapped out a territorial plan for the West Bank, but for the Palestinians, that's not the essence.
[Saeb Erakat, Chief Palestinian Negotiator:] What they are doing in the negotiations and in the preparations for negotiations is to define the limitations on us, whether you call us self-government or you call us a state.
[Ami:] It will be totally wrong, in my view, if the Palestinians stick to one ingredient of the package. They have fascinating ingredients, components in this package that they should look at.
[Kessel:] If Mr. Barak's plans worry Palestinians, they alarm Israelis living in the West Bank. Tens of thousands of Jewish settlers might have to be removed under his reported future map for the West Bank. That's increased concern for the security of the prime minister and other leading ministers for fear ultranationalist Jews might try to harm them in hope of derailing the peace moves. [on camera]: After Secretary of State Albright's two-day mission here, Yasser Arafat is expected to travel to Washington for a meeting with President Clinton, to be followed by a return Albright visit to the region; all aimed at paving the way for a critical three-way Clinton-Arafat-Barak summit by the end of this month or early July. Jerrold Kessel, CNN, Jerusalem.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] We're going to talk about what are the hot movies this weekend.
[Tyrese Gibson, Actor/singer/model:] Yes, what are the hot movies?
[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] I don't know, let's see. "Corelli's Mandolin," right?
[Lin:] Yes, and we want to hear a little bit more about that from Leah Rozen, our movie critic from "People" magazine. Leah, good morning.
[Leah Rozen, "people" Magazine:] Good morning.
[Lin:] So what's hot this weekend? Do you think Nicholas Cage and Penelope Cruz have a little chemistry onscreen?
[Rozen:] Nope, they don't have any on-screen.
[Lin:] Come on, come on! We've read so much about their private lives.
[Rozen:] You know, the weather is hot, not what's at the movies right now. Yes, this is interesting because there were, of course, tabloid rumors when they were making the film that they were having an onset romance. But what they're showing on-screen would sort of cast down on those rumors. "Captain Corelli's Mandolin" is based on the best-selling novel, "Corelli's Mandolin," and it is about a World War II romantic drama. Nicholas Cage plays Captain Corelli, an Italian army soldier, who is posted to a Greek island that the Italians and the Germans are occupying during the war. And he falls in love with Penelope Cruz, who plays a local doctor's daughter. But this movie is just it's a real snooze fest. You know, nothing all that dramatic really happens, other than beautiful, beautiful shots of the scenery on this Greek island. It's one of those movies you go, you know, I'd like to vacation there.
[Lin:] Yes, I don't want to pay 8 or $9 to see great photography.
[Mcedwards:] But with that kind of star power, what's the problem? Is it the script? What is it?
[Rozen:] It's one of these movies in which everyone is being fabulously, colorfully ethnic. All the actors are speaking English, but with accents. Nicholas Cage in particular has this Italian accent that sounds like Chico Marx. He's waving his hands enthusiastically to, you know, show us how full of life the man is. You just sit there and you go, you know, this is ham as big as I've ever seen it.
[Mcedwards:] Well, that's a pan if I ever heard one. What about "American Outlaws?"
[Rozen:] Sorry, but I'm going to be I'm putting out negative energy on this one, too. "American Outlaws" is a Western really sort of aimed at teenagers and at young male action adventure fans. It's the story of Jesse James, yet again. How many Jesse James movies have you seen? This is sort of young Jesse, cute Jesse. He is painted as the nicest guy to ever point a gun at a bank teller. Jesse James is played by Colin Farrell, who is this 25-year-old Irish actor but he has no trace of an accent here who I think is going to end up being a major movie star, but not with this one. This movie makes "Young Guns," which was sort of the last teen-appeal Western, look like a John Ford masterpiece.
[Mcedwards:] Yes, I'm afraid I saw it.
[Rozen:] Yes, it certainly wasn't, if you remember.
[Mcedwards:] That's all the bad news we can take.
[Lin:] Let's end on an up note here in the few seconds we have left. Name them.
[Mcedwards:] What should we see?
[Rozen:] You should see "Rat Race," actually. I'm not going to claim this was a brilliant movie. I'm not going to claim it's a deep- thinking movie. But "Rat Race" is silly, goofy fun. It's a bunch of folks who are in this race to get $2 million. They're going from Las Vegas to Silver City, New Mexico. They're going by car, train, plane all sorts of mishaps befall them. It is based, to some extent, on "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World," the early '60s film. And it's just silly fun, and sometimes in the summer that's what you want.
[Mcedwards:] You bet, thanks so much, Leah.
[Lin:] Always a pleasure.
[Rozen:] You're welcome. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Roger Cossack, Co-host:] Today on BURDEN OF PROOF, tens of thousands of people are descending upon Los Angeles for the Democratic National Convention. Now, some are delegates and some are protesters. How will the police react?
[Lt. Horace Frank, Los Angeles Police:] Those people whose main goal or mission it is to come to Los Angeles and engage in criminal activity, to engage in decadent behavior, our message to them is going to be it is not going to be tolerated.
[Nancy Mitchell, Activist:] Sunday is the big day. We're finally going to see the product of all this work. But it doesn't stop there. On that day, we want to do even more outreach and reach out to more people and get them pulled into the movement.
[Chief Bernard Parks, Los Angeles Police:] People will debate whether we should allow an intersection to be clogged up for 30 minutes because we didn't choose to arrest 100 people, because something more important was going on. There has got to be discretion in all the things we do, and we understand that.
[Announcer:] This is BURDEN OF PROOF, with Greta Van Susteren and Roger Cossack.
[Cossack:] Hello and welcome to BURDEN OF PROOF. Greta is off today. On Monday, the Democratic National Convention kicks off in Los Angeles, but politics may not be the only gathering on the agenda. Schools and businesses around the convention site are bracing for protests in the "city of angels." Blocks away from the Staples Center, an elementary school has prepared its students for a lockdown mode. Police have been preparing for 18 months for next week's planned protests, with more than 2,000 officers assigned to convention duty. But police may be outnumbered as estimates of protesters have exceeded 30,000. Joining us today from Los Angeles is LAPD Commissioner David Kalish. Also in Los Angeles, Margaret Prescod, a founder and co- founder a protester and co-founder of D2KLA. And in New York, we're joined by criminal defense attorney Gerald Lefcourt, who once represented Abbie Hoffman. And joining us today here in Washington, Carly Salazar, constitutional law scholar Bruce Fein, and Ben Jones. In the back, Christian Allen, Jeremy Peters and William Duston. Commissioner Commissioner Kalish, I want to go Commander Kalish I want to go right to you and talk to you about your plans for the upcoming protest in Los Angeles. And I want to start off with this: You are in the perhaps unenviable position of having to keep the safety for the citizens of Los Angeles, recognizing of course that all citizens have a right under the First Amendment to protest, all citizens have a right to assembly. How are you going to try and balance the tension between those two?
[Commander David Kalish, Los Angeles Police:] Well, I think it's important to realize that we have a number of responsibilities. We have to ensure public safety. We have to maintain public order. We have to ensure that the convention is able to conduct their business, we have to ensure that the remainder of the city is able to function. And finally and very importantly, we have the responsibility to facilitate those individuals who want to engage in protests, who want to exercise their First Amendment rights. And we are committed to ensuring that individuals who want to legally and lawfully protest peacefully are able to do so.
[Cossack:] Well, Commander Kalish, I think everything you say is great, but the problem I guess the devil is in the details. I mean, what do you do and how do you handle people when you say legally and lawfully? I mean, who defines legally and lawfully? How do you define legally and lawfully? And obviously, people who wish to protest and wish to exercise their rights under the First Amendment wish to be as vocal and be heard by as many people as possible. What do you do when that sort of tension now becomes?
[Kalish:] Well, it's important to realize also that we handle protests here in Los Angeles on a daily basis. Every day, there's a different protest. We deal with it, and they're nonproblematic. Again, what we are concerned about is working with people to facilitate their rights so that they can engage in public discourse in a peaceful manner. Obviously, we cannot allow violent behavior, we cannot allow destruction of property. And that's when we have to be more proactive. But for the most part, our responsibility is simply to facilitate individuals who want to engage in public discourse in a peaceful manner.
[Cossack:] Well, there's been accusations that some of your decisions already perhaps may and I say "may" violate some First Amendment rights. Let's talk about the decision that you've made to close off access to the protesters in and around the area of the Staples Center. Now, obviously these protesters are going to want to get as close to that Staples Center as possible, because that's who they want to have their message seen by.
[Kalish:] Well, we believe we have made a good-faith effort to try and balance legitimate security needs for the event with the rights of individuals to engage in protests, and that's a difficult balance. It's controversial. It has resulted in some litigation. But we've come to some negotiated settlements, and we believe that we have been able to accomplish that balance.
[Cossack:] Margaret, you are a leader of the protests and protesters in Los Angeles. As far as you as far as you're concerned, what do you want to do in Los Angeles? How do you want to get your message across?
[Margaret Prescod, Protester:] Well, I'm simply one of the protesters. We're non-hierarchical in our approach, and our goal is simply arc call in our approach. And our goal is simply to make sure that a number of issues and concerns at a community level about how globalization impacts us locally in Los Angeles how the situation of those of us who work doing unwage work as wage works also impacts the global issues are brought center stage of politics in Los Angeles: issues like welfare reform, issues like police corruption, issues like the rights of immigrants, issues of homophobia, the kinds of bread-and-better issues...
[Cossack:] But Margaret Margaret, I'm going....
[Prescod:] ... that we're all concerned about.
[Cossack:] Margaret, I understand that those are legitimate issues that absolutely you have an absolute right to bring to the public fore. But what I'm suggesting to you is you are going to want to get as many people as possible to see what you have to say, to understand what you have to say. Now, recognizing that, you're going to want to get perhaps as close to the convention as possible. You're going to want to do as many things as to gain attention to what you're trying to do as possible. That may cause conflict. What are you going to do, and how are you going to are you going to try and accommodate the issues that the police commissioner, policeman has just talked about?
[Prescod:] Well, we've done a number of things. In fact, Commander Kalish referred to a negotiated settlement, but in fact, a judge in federal court told Los Angeles Police Department, the city and the Democratic National Convention that their proposals were unconstitutional. They, therefore, had to go back and take another look at those proposals and put forward another one. You the Los Angeles Police Department, the mayor, the city just cannot set the Constitution aside because the Democrats are coming to town.
[Cossack:] But we understand that, but with that in mind they have an absolute right, as the commander indicates, to look out for the safety of the citizenry. You have an absolute right to go ahead and want to have your message heard. What are you going to do and how are you going to try and accommodate what their issues are?
[Prescod:] Each day there will be legal permitted marches on a number of issues focused around very specific themes, like "Human need, not corporate greed," "Injury to one is an injury to all," et cetera. Each day there will also be people who are committed to doing nonviolent civil disobedience very much in the tradition of Dr. Martin Luther King and Gandhi. There are many of us, many rights that we have in this country and around the world that would not have been achieved if there were not brave and courageous individuals who took the decision to do nonviolence civil disobedience, beginning with the Boston Tea Party, for example. It has a long and glorious tradition in this country, and we'll see some of that on the streets of Los Angeles this summer. However, we have said again and again that we're committed to nonviolence, we're committed to not destroying property. What we are committed to is to make sure that the growing gap between rich and poor in this country comes to the center stage of politics, and that we will no longer tolerate control of both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party by multinational dollars.
[Cossack:] All right, Margaret, let me...
[Prescod:] Government is being privatized but not by the people.
[Cossack:] Let me shut you off for a second and only a second, because we have to take a break. Up next, Los Angeles Police are preparing to control a crowd of protesters, which could exceed 30,000. How did Philadelphia police handle protesters two weeks ago and what has become of those cases? Stay with us. As Los Angeles prepares to host next week's Democratic National Convention, the Los Angeles police are gearing up to control tens of thousands of protesters headed to the city. Two weeks ago, Philadelphia police used video surveillance to keep tabs on protesters at the Republican National Convention. Some of those protesters are still being held on huge bails. Joining me from Philadelphia is Sayde Ladov. Sayde, you are familiar with what happened in Philadelphia as well as what's happened now to those people within the court system. Some of the protesters are being held on million-dollar bails. It seems to me that's a little out of a little out of site. Why is that? What was the rationale for that?
[Sayde Ladov, Former State Prosecutor:] The rationale is fairly simple. It's horn book law that the purpose of bail is to ensure against the individual becoming a flight risk. You want to have that person show up at a subsequent hearing or trial. What has happened in Philadelphia is that the protesters are refusing to give their true identities. They will identify themselves as Jane Doe, John Doe, fictitious address, not let themselves be fingerprinted. So unfortunately, because of their own lack of cooperation with the system, they are being incarcerated at high bail.
[Cossack:] And Sayde, it seems to me that many of these people first of all, I was able to read their names in the newspapers. But putting that aside, it seems like many of these people are being charged with conspiracy, which is a felony, to commit a misdemeanor: you know, blocking traffic, acting outrageously in many ways, and you know, civil disobedience. The notion of using a conspiracy, which is a serious charge, to commit a misdemeanor and keep someone in jail behind a million dollars just seems a little heavy-handed.
[Ladov:] I can tell you what I saw, and what I saw was not a heavy-handed attitude by the police. They truly were the model of restraint, when protesters laid down in the streets, blocked traffic, prevented ordinary people, not delegates, ordinary working folk from going to and from their places of business, going to their homes, leaving their offices, going to the bank the cops stood back and let the protesters do their thing unless and until it got completely out of hand, and the protesters began to confront the police, and destroy and deface property. I hear what you're saying, and it is great concern that you're using a felony conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor. The trier of facts will determine whether or not the district attorney can make out his or her burden of proof. But unless the citizens cooperate with the police officers and give out their true identities, that bail is going to remain unreasonably high. So that, I can't blame the bail commissioner, the trial judge or the D.A. for asking that kind of bail and getting it.
[Cossack:] All right. Joining me from New York with I can tell a look of disgust on his face is Gerry Lefcourt. Gerry, a million-dollar bail. They don't give their name, they don't give their address, what's a police officer to do?
[Gerald Lefcourt, Criminal Defense Attorney:] Well, look, if they're violating the law by not giving their name and there's a statute that requires it, that's one thing. Maybe bail is inappropriate. But if bail is being used, as I think it is being used here, as to keep protest leaders in jail when they very well know who they are because of fingerprints, because there's been published in the newspapers that several of them have prior misdemeanor arrests, this is really political, and it's really nonsensical, and it really violates the demonstrators rights under the First Amendment, because they're basically keeping them off the street with ransom. One million dollars is ransom; it's not bail. And it's certainly not necessary to have somebody to come back to court for some, you know, low-level misdemeanor. So I'm just a little bit concerned, and I'm also concerned about what I heard Commander Kalish list as the responsibilities. He goes through a long list, you know, we have to make sure that the city can function normally, we have to make sure that there's protection for the people in the Staples Center, all true and good. But at the bottom of his list is the First Amendment. You know, and that's not a place where it should be. It should be at the top of his list. It should be to provide demonstrators the opportunities that they have a constitutional right for. And if the city is a little bit troubled, well, so be it. You know, when Clinton comes to New York, New York shuts down for him. But you know, it's really important to have demonstrators exercise their rights, and he should be a little flexible.
[Cossack:] Gerry, let me ask Bruce Fein a quick question. Bruce, the notion of a million-dollar fine, the reasons behind it. But isn't that kind of a chilling effect? Doesn't that say to other people, you know, perhaps you shouldn't be protesting?
[Bruce Fein, Constitutional Law Scholar:] I don't think so in the circumstances of Philadelphia. The vast majority who were arrested did not confront any such bail. By the way, the U.S. Supreme Court has never held that the excessive bail protection in the Eight Amendment applies to the states. But moreover, I think you've really slighted the potential danger of conspiracy. Even though you have...
[Cossack:] I would suggest the state constitutions, though, do suggest...
[Fein:] They may, but conspiracy involves a much greater threat to social convulsions, because it involves a large number. It's not an individual misdemeanor where you have one car that drives in the wrong way of a street. So there's justification for higher bail. And...
[Lefcourt:] Bruce, that is so ridiculous.
[Cossack:] All right. Hold on, you guys. Hold on, you guys.
[Lefcourt:] You're talking about a conspiracy to have a demonstration? That's ridiculous.
[Fein:] ... violate the law through demonstration...
[Cossack:] All right. Hold on, you guys, or I'm going to be off the air. We've got to break. Up next, a history of civil disobedience: what the police and the law scholars have learned from the ghosts of protests past. Stay with us. [Begin Q&a;]
[Q:] What recently released ex-convict has landed a recurring role on the Fox television show "Ally McBeal"? [END Q&A;] What recently released ex-convict has landed a recurring role on the Fox television show "Ally McBeal"?
[A:] Robert Downey Jr., who was jailed for missing scheduled drug tests, then released early. [END Q&A;]
[Cossack:] Los Angeles Police, like their Philadelphia colleagues before them, are preparing to handle crowds planning to protest during a political convention. Since students and other protesters raided the convention parties of the 1960s, the tactics of police and protesters alike have changed. But what have we learned from history? Commander Kalish, I want to call you commissioner, put you on that commission, But Commander Kalish, what have you learned, and what did you learn from the Philadelphia convention?
[Kalish:] Well, we are always learning. Any time there is an occurrence, we send our people to other cities to learn what worked, what didn't. We try and refine our tactics, refine our training, to provide the best possible service. Again, as I mentioned. we are committed to facilitating individuals who want to exercise their First Amendment rights in a legal and peaceful manner, and that's what we are committed to do. We will only react if there's unlawful activity, if there is violence, if there is property damage, then we are obligate obviously to move in and make arrests.
[Cossack:] Well, what about people who, for example, would lay down in front of oncoming cars and block traffic, nonviolent kinds of activity, in the sense of what we think of violence. I mean, how do you react to that? what are you going to do?
[Kalish:] Well, obviously, it is situational specific. But to use your situation that you described, where an individual lies down in the middle of the street and prevents people from driving, we always begin with asking for voluntary compliance, asking the people to move. If people demand on being arrested, we will be there to do just that.
[Cossack:] Gerald Lefcourt, you yourself were active in protests in the '60s. What exactly, what should protesters do? and what, in your opinion, do they have the right to do?
[Lefcourt:] Well, I think that, you know, what has evolved in this country over centuries really, since the Boston Tea Party, is they certainly have a right for nonviolent protest, that makes a point. You know, the police have to be flexible enough to understand, as I think, Timoney did in Philadelphia, the police commissioner, that protesters sometimes have to be allowed to, in effect, snarl traffic, to make a point to get their message heard on TV. You know, we are no longer the marketplace of ideas where everybody comes to the local town spot and anybody can spout off what they wish. It is only what television will cover is what goes on the air. So protesters, the police have to be flexible, let them block traffic, so what? It's not going to hurt anybody long-term. It's better than creating a situation where protesters feel their point is not getting across, their message is not being heard. And so the protesters also have to understand that tactically they have to understand what police might do to them, and how to regroup, and how to continue being effective. It's a give and take.
[Cossack:] Commander, should the police allow protesters, under certain situations like this, where it is clear that people are coming to protest before a national convention, to perhaps interfere with traffic?
[Kalish:] Listen, I think we have to be realistic. There is obviously political theatrics played out in the streets every day. And, yes, we can be flexible, and yes, we are flexible. But ultimately, if we have to make arrests, if people demand on insist upon breaking the law, and we have to, we will. But obviously, we can be flexible, we do understand the issue of political theatrics in the streets. But each situation is different. We can never allow there to be...
[Lefcourt:] Can I ask the...
[Cossack:] Let me let Bruce jump in.
[Fein:] He is really wrong. There's not a right to violate a law that is a reasonable way to keep thoroughfares and traffic open. If the demonstrators do it today, why can't I or you or anybody else? Well, I want to protest against imports from Taiwan. Or anybody else, why should they selectively claim...
[Cossack:] There's a difference between a political convention, where in fact it almost invites people to come protest so that their party might change and listen to them, as opposed to you and me out there protesting Taiwan.
[Fein:] Not necessarily.
[Lefcourt:] Roger, I wonder...
[Cossack:] This is too great a story. But I have to cut everybody off. We got to go. That's all the time we have for today. Thanks to our guests. Thank you for watching. Today on "
[Talkback Live":] a free-for-all in the house that Perot built. Join Reform Party presidential candidate John Hagelin and Pat Buchanan supporter Pat Choate. That is at 3:00 p.m. Eastern time, noon Pacific. And tune in to BURDEN OF PROOF all next week. We'll be live from the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles. Find out how this year's election will impact you and the law, beginning Monday on another edition of BURDEN OF PROOF. We'll see you then.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Well one thing that Mullah Omar has made perfectly clear: Anybody who opposes the Taliban could be subjected to the death penalty. Well, clearly the opposition in northern Afghanistan is in its fight with the Taliban and that's where we find CNN's Matthew Chance. Matthew, some battles going on, some prisoners taken, what is the Northern Alliance learning?
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right. Carol, there is a lot of renewed activity here in this very hot and dusty part of northern Afghanistan. The latest reports that we've been receiving are from several hundred kilometers from where I'm standing right now, reports, though, coming from General Fahim who is the military commander of those anti-Taliban Northern Alliance forces. He said that on Tuesday his men launched an attack on Taliban positions, hundreds of kilometers, as I say, from where I'm standing right now, managed to capture some 15 square kilometers of very rugged terrain but also as part of that, 75 Taliban fighters, he said, along with three quite important senior Taliban commanders. Now one of the things that's been coming out from officials here at the Northern Alliance headquarters is that one of the problems they're seeing a lot more of they say are fighters from other countries outside of Afghanistan, from the Arab states. From countries specifically like Pakistan, they say, who are coming and fighting alongside the Taliban. Now this has been happening throughout the long-running civil war here in Afghanistan. Many of those people have been captured, along with Taliban fighters, and a lot of them are held in prisoner of war camps in the heart of the of the Northern Alliance stronghold in the Panjshir Valley.
[Chance:] Captives from years of bitter Afghan conflicts, devout Muslims but still hardened fighters who've battle on the side of the Taliban and others but lost. Most are native Afghans, but there are nationals here from Yemen, Iraq, even China, all held by the Northern Alliance as prisoners of war. Sola Adin told me he's from Pakistan, an Islamic fighter, he said, trained on Afghan soil in a base run by none other than Osama bin Laden. The claim is impossible to verify and made within earshot of prison guards.
[Sola Adin, Prisoner Of War:] When our enemy he was very strong and we was weak and we cannot fight face to face with our enemy and that time we fight terrorism.
[Chance:] So what kind of things are we talking about? We're talking about bombings? We're talking about kidnappings?
[Adin:] Bombings and killing the sniper and hijacking and every very much.
[Chance:] Off camera he said he spoke under duress. The warning shots are from guards high above this isolated prison. Three times a day there are prayers outside in the windswept Panjshir Valley. Northern Alliance commanders say each of these captives is investigated to extract, in their words, any useful information. "We can gather very important intelligence on enemy bases and military strategy," this prison official said. "It's information the Americans could also use," he said, "if they would ask." There are reports of contact with Washington. Most of these fighters have already been held for years, too long to be of much intelligence gathering use. [on camera]: There's word here the coming days could bring more prisoners from a fresh upsurge in fighting in the mountains behind me and perhaps also with fresh information not just on the Taliban but, according to Northern Alliance officials here, on the organization of Osama bin Laden himself. [voice-over]: It may be prisoners in Afghanistan's long-running civil war that prove one vital source ahead of any U.S.-led attack. Let's turn briefly now to the diplomatic efforts underway. And I spoke earlier today local time to the Foreign Minister of the Northern Alliance, Dr. Abdallah Abdallah. And he told me that there was still daily contacts he said between him, between his officials and officials of the United States administration. He said the entire range of options was being discussed with them, including the military one. He wouldn't go any further than that though and tell us exactly what was being discussed. But he did hint to us again very strongly that in his mind and in the minds of senior Northern Alliance officials here they are expecting in the days or weeks ahead some kind of attack possibly in conjunction with their forces on Afghanistan by the United States Carol.
[Lin:] All right, and they have been saying that from the very beginning so we'll see what happens. Thank you very much. Matthew Chance reporting live from northern Afghanistan. He is with the Northern Alliance in their civil war. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Andy Jordan, Co-host:] We're cruising into Tuesday here on NEWSROOM. Thanks for coming along for the ride. I'm Andy Jordan.
[Shelley Walcott, Co-host:] And I'm Shelley Walcott. We begin right here in the United States.
[Jordan:] In today's top story, the torch is passed symbolically from the current U.S. president to a presidential hopeful, as the Democratic convention kicks off in California. And the fate of more than 100 sailors trapped in a Russian submarine hangs in the balance.
[Walcott:] Then, in today's "Health Desk," the battle of the bulge versus technology.
[Thomas J. Philipson, University Of Chicago:] Historically, if you wanted to be obese, you couldn't afford it. And that's true in poor countries today.
[Rudi Bakhtiar, Co-host:] I'm Rudi Bakhtiar. In "Worldview," today NEWSROOM goes fishing. Find out who's getting hooked on a scaly health treatment. Can swallowing a live animal help you breathe easier? We'll explore a cure that seems a little bit fishy!
[Jordan:] Then, in "Chronicle," it's all aboard the Earth train for a course in politics.
[Tahj Mowry, Age 14:] I want to go everywhere and just help kids, and tell them that they can do it, if they put their mind to it.
[Walcott:] This Tuesday in the United States: pomp and politics. Tradition and strategy are mingling in the Staples Center in Los Angeles, California, where the Democratic National Convention is in full swing. Its first night brought a potpourri of politicians, protesters and even a past president. Jimmy Carter is the party's only living former president. He was honored for his legacy. First lady Hillary Rodham Clinton also made an appearance. She's hoping to build momentum not only for the Democratic candidate, Vice President Al Gore, but for her own Senate bid in New York. She passed the podium microphone to her husband, President Bill Clinton, who sought to associate Vice President Al Gore with the successes of his administration.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] Now, at this moment of unprecedented good fortune, our people face a fundamental choice. Are we going to keep this progress and prosperity going? Yes, we are.
[Walcott:] As President Clinton made his pitch for a Gore presidency, the party faithful were plotting on campaign strategy. Who will they target? Jeanne Meserve looks at the demographics of the modern Democratic Party.
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Correspondent:] African- Americans are the bedrock of the Democratic Party. In 1996, an overwhelming 84 percent of African-Americans voted for Bill Clinton.
[Geoff Garin, Democratic Pollster:] It is a result partly of what it is Democrats do for African-Americans; it is a result partly of what Republicans do to African-Americans. But, clearly, in terms of, if you wanted to look at one tried and true loyal constituency, it would have to be African-Americans.
[Meserve:] The party also wears the union label. Organized labor has consistently given its votes and organizational skills to the Democrats. Al Gore's support for permanent normal trade status with China infuriated some labor organizations, but few observers see lasting harm to his candidacy.
[Ed Goeas, Republican Pollster:] The very same union voters that are most upset over those trade issues are the more liberal union members that are not going to walk away from Al Gore. They're going to stick with Al Gore.
[Meserve:] Women are a crucial Democratic constituency. Bill Clinton profited from a 17-point gender gap with women. Al Gore is struggling to hang onto women voters, because Republican George W. Bush is fighting fiercely for them and for two other traditional Democratic constituencies, which have lately been drifting towards the Republicans: Latinos and seniors. Gore is trying to rally those groups and fend off Bush, by drawing distinctions between their positions on the federal role in Social Security, education, prescription drug benefits, and gun control.
[Garin:] A lot of the issues, with which gore has chosen to create that bright red line, are issues that really speak to the gut and the heart of the base of the Democratic Party.
[Meserve:] Polling shows a majority of Democrats support stricter gun control, along with abortion rights and environmental protection. They tend to have lower incomes than Republicans do and are more likely to live in urban areas. Interestingly enough, while 30 percent consider themselves liberal, 48 percent say they are moderate, and 22 percent identify themselves as conservative. Bill Clinton won the White House by pushing the party to the center.
[Goeas:] He combined the conservative factions of the Democratic Party, along with really a lot of conservative independents and conservative Republicans, to kind of govern the country over the last six years, and the liberal Democrats had no where to go.
[Meserve:] In order for Gore to win, analysts say, he must replicate Clinton's formula or devise one of his own that will bring his diverse party together and motivate its members to get up, get out and vote. Jeanne Meserve, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Announcer:] On day two of the 1916 Democratic convention, in St. Louis, delegates went back on their 1912 platform call for a single- term presidency and renominated incumbent Woodrow Wilson for a second term. Wilson, who'd been elected in 1912, when Theodore Roosevelt's third-party candidacy split the Republican Party, got all but one vote on the first ballot. Europe had been at war for two years, and staying out of the war had been a Democratic convention keynote theme. The Wilson campaign slogan would become "He kept us out of war." Wilson would win reelection, and four months later get the Congress to declare war on Germany.
[Steve Harrigan, Cnn Correspondent:] The Russian navy says, this giant submarine is now sitting on the bottom of more than 350 feet of extremely cold water. Its two nuclear reactors, the navy said, are shut down. There has been no radioactive leakage. Inside, more than 100 crew members remain trapped, but in radio contact with ships on the surface. The admiral in charge of the Russian navy says, a number of ships, including the Kursk, were involved in a major naval exercise in the Barents Sea. When the Kursk was damaged in a big and serious collision. So far, the Russian navy has not said what the Kursk hit or what hit the submarine. There are more than ten Russian naval vessels at the scene, including a aircraft carrier, rescue helicopters and at least three other submarines. Russia's Northern Fleet Press Service says a rescue operation for the trapped sailors is underway. Russian submarine crews are trained to evacuate through escape hatches, but water temperatures are so low and water pressure so high, it's unlikely many crew members would survive an unassisted swim to the surface. The Kursk is one of the largest submarines in the world, a little more than 500 feet long, it weighs 14,000 tons. Built in 1994, it's designed to carry 24 nuclear warheads. The Russian navy said, none were aboard at the time of the accident. [on camera]: These military exercises were supposed to showcase a reinvigorated Russian navy. Instead, now, the Russians have a nuclear submarine on the floor of the Barents Sea. The admiral in charge of the navy says, the outlook for a successful rescue is very unlikely. Steve Harrigan, CNN, Moscow.
[Ann Kellan, Cnn Science Correspondent:] Any modern navy that launches nuclear powered submarines puts the environment at risk of radioactive contamination. In the '60s, two U.S. Navy nuclear powered subs sank. The USS Thresher went down off the Massachusetts coast and broke into six pieces, but the Navy says the nuclear reactor compartment remains intact. The USS Scorpion mysteriously went down near the Azores in 1968, broke in two, and, to date, no radiation leaks have been detected. These two subs now sit at the bottom of the ocean, along with a number of subs from the former Soviet Union. In 1970, a fire on board sank the nuclear powered sub K-8. In 1981, the K-27, disabled from an 18-year-old on board nuclear accident, was intentionally sunk off the northern coast of Russia. In 1986, the Soviet's K-219 went down just east of Bermuda after an explosion in a loaded missile tube with two nuclear reactors and 16 nuclear missiles on board. Given Soviet press controls, we don't know if radioactive materials leaked in any of these incidents. In the only case where we know plutonium leaked, in 1989, the Soviet Navy sub Komsomolets sunk in the Norwegian Sea just 100 miles from Bear Island. Lethal plutonium from two damaged torpedo casings contaminated ocean waters, until the Russians sealed the hull in 1996, which should hold it for 20 years. If they leak, the radiation would likely kill sea life nearby, and some of that fuel stays radioactive for hundreds of thousands of years. Ann Kellan, CNN, Atlanta.
[Walcott:] In "Health Desk," the battle of the bulge. Here in the United States, studies show people are losing that battle. In fact, figures indicate half of all Americans are overweight. Approximately one in five children, between the ages of 6 and 17, is overweight. Obesity is defined simply as an excess of body fat. Too much fat puts a person at risk for health problems, such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes and heart disease. Now, in scrambling to explain why Americans are getting heavier, there's a new theory that might surprise you. Brooks Jackson explains.
[Brooks Jackson, Cnn Correspondent:] Ah, isn't technology wonderful? Not only can it be annoying, but technology may also be fattening. At least, that's a theory being advanced seriously by a University of Chicago economist.
[Thomas J. Philipson, University Of Chicago:] Historically, if you wanted to be obese, you couldn't afford it. And that's true in poor countries today. So the price of calories has gone down, and the cost of expending them has gone up. So naturally, you will have a rise in weight.
[Jackson:] It's a fact, Americans are getting heavier. The latest figures show more than half of all Americans are overweight or downright obese. The number has grown from 43 percent in 1961 to more than 53 percent in the '90s. It's a serious medical problem.
[Dr. Arthur Frank, Obesity Management Specialist:] People die of the consequences of obesity. It makes blood pressure worse, it makes coronary artery disease worse, high cholesterol worse. It makes diabetes worse.
[Jackson:] But doctors can't agree on why there's an outbreak of obesity. Could the explanation be economic? It's true, food is abundant in rich industrial societies like the U.S. and relatively cheap, and also true technology has made spending calories more difficult. Work used to be physically harder, as re-enacted here at the Claude Moore Colonial Farm near Washington.
[Philipson:] So essentially, if you wanted to earn a living, you had to engage in physical activity. So that's essentially getting paid to exercise.
[Jackson:] In today's new economy, more and more people get paid to process information no heavy lifting required. Some still do get paid to exercise. Ever see a fat bicycle messenger? But more and more, we pay to exercise: money for health clubs, sports gear and also precious leisure time. The theory might explain the odd fact that in America, low-income people weigh more and high-income people weigh less. Theoretically, the rich can afford to be thin. This economic theory holds that Americans rationally choose to weigh more, choosing to spend time and money on things like movies and Web surfing and, yes, eating, rather than paying the price of becoming thin an informed choice.
[Philipson:] It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if you eat less and exercise more, you're going to lose weight.
[Jackson:] Economics usually deals with money and assumes people make rational choices like buying cheap, selling dear, maximizing profit. But when it comes to food, actual human behavior is often far from rational.
[Frank:] We don't eat simply because we're hungry. We don't stop eating when we're not hungry. Every culture on Earth uses food for hospitality. Every culture on Earth uses food as a way of bringing people together.
[Jackson:] But it is food for thought. As you sit their on your couch watching this, maybe you can blame those added pounds on the new economy if you choose. Brooks Jackson, CNN, Washington.
[Jordan:] "Worldview" takes us to North America, the Middle East, and Asia. And keep your eyes open for our Rudi Bakhtiar. She'll show you how to cast for fish before you learn about a fishy custom in India. We'll also examine poverty in the United States. And we'll look at what kinds of lessons are being drawn from the Holocaust.
[Walcott:] On to Israel, a small country in the Middle East. Israel occupies a narrow strip of land along the shore of the Mediterranean Sea. The country was founded on May 14th, 1948, as a homeland for Jewish people from all parts of the world. Over 80 percent of Israel's people are Jews. Between 1948 and the mid-1980s, about 1.8 million Jews migrated to Israel, many to escape persecution in their native country. Israel became the adopted home of thousands of Holocaust survivors. The Holocaust was the systematic, state-sponsored murder of Jews and others, by the Nazis during World War II. The Nazi dictator, Adolf Hitler, wanted to eliminate all Jews, as part of his aim to conquer the world. By the end of the war, the Nazis had killed about 6-million Jewish men, women and children; more than two-thirds of the Jews in Europe. Some Holocaust survivors have tried to forget the horror they lived through. But others say, it is crucial to keep memories of the Holocaust alive. With more, here's Jerrold Kessel.
[Jerrold Kessel, Cnn Correspondent:] Years go by but memories of the Holocaust don't fade and the sound of the memorial siren seems to intensify the pain.
[Unidentified Male:] I hear the siren every day. But this leaves makes me trembling.
[Kessel:] While some Holocaust survivors speak of a deep need to forget their horrors, their peers say Israelis have an obligation never to forget or allow the world to forget. Awareness of the Holocaust is sharpening. Pope John Paul II during his recent Holy Land pilgrimage visited the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial in his most sympathetic identification with the victims.
[Tom Segev, Author, "the Seventh Million":] The holocaust is not an Israeli story anymore. It's a universal story. The whole world has adopted the Holocaust as a universal code of ultimate evil. The concept of guilt has also changed. It's not personal guilt anymore. It's moral guilt that obliges everybody.
[Kessel:] At Auschwitz in Poland, on the day when Israelis remembered, Polish teenagers joined Israeli teenagers and survivors at a ceremony called the March of the Living. One of the messages, for other nations in Europe to address the moral implications of what they did or did not do during the Holocaust.
[Ruth Dreyfuss, Former Swiss President:] The problem is not to have a clear conscience. The problem is to know what was the reality of this time.
[Segev:] In Israel, people still tend to draw national lessons from the Holocaust. In the world, more humanistic lessons are being drawn from the Holocaust. I think Israel still has to learn to adopt some more universal lessons from the Holocaust. And we are learning. It's a process.
[Kessel:] Especially critical at a time when Israelis stand at the crossroads of some very critical decisions about their place in the Middle East and about the nature of their society: just like any other, or because of the Holocaust, a symbol of survival. Jerrold Kessel, CNN, Jerusalem.
[Jordan:] Next up in "Worldview," poverty in America. We've all seen the faces of poverty around the world. Experts say the problem is so pervasive that it affects about one in every five people around the globe. There can be a tendency to think of it as a problem only for developing nations. The U.S. Census Bureau reports that the overall U.S. poverty rate stood at 13.3 percent in 1997. That left nearly 36 million Americans living below the poverty line of $16,400, for a family of four. A large chunk of those Americans were children. Frank Buckley takes a closer look.
[Frank Buckley, Cnn Correspondent:] The facade of an apartment building, in New York City, hides the struggles of one of the families living inside. Enter apartment seven and you are entering the world of the Barrientos family, where Margie Barrientos, a single mother, lives with her four children, ages 10 through 20. Conditions in the subsidized apartment provide an insight into the daily struggles. Roaches and rodents enter through gaping holes. Margie's income as a seamstress: $512 every two weeks, exhausted quickly after payments for rent, food, utilities and medicine for her chronically ill daughter.
[Margie Barrientos:] Yeah, it's hard to make it sometimes.
[Buckley:] Behind the facade of her understatement, a deep pain.
[Barrientos:] Sometimes I think it's for the kids, you know, when they got to struggle with me and see what they go through. It's not easy for them.
[Buckley:] And the findings of a new study by the Children's Defense Fund suggests that the Barrientos family is far from alone. It says a child in the U.S. now is more likely to be poor than in any year between 1966 and 1980. Thirteen and a half million children living in poverty; many of those children, more then 70 percent, part of working families, like the Barrientos family. [voice-over]: Marian Wright Edelman is the president of the Children's Defense Fund. What she finds particularly disturbing is that so many children are suffering during such a prosperous time in the
[U.s. Marian Wright Edelman, President, Children's Defense Fund:] At this moment, we are the sole superpower in the world, the most powerful, the most wealthy our children are suffering. When we have the capacity to take care of them, why don't we? Where is our spiritual will? What do we value? If we don't value our children, I don't know what we stand for. And so this is a moment of real decision and choice.
[Buckley:] The report advocates a number of actions from more government funding to more mentoring of children to better monitoring of legislators. The goal: to improve the lives of children like those of the Barrientos family.
[Barrientos:] I still thank God for what we have, because at least we have food on the table and we have warmth that keeps us. And we have each other.
[Buckley:] Frank Buckley, CNN, New York.
[Bakhtiar:] For a lot of people, fishing is a relaxing pastime. Even if I don't catch anything out here, it's great to just get outdoors and enjoy the fresh air. But for some, it's a lot more than just a hobby. [voice-over]: Around the world, fishing is big business. Worldwide, the annual fish catch totals about 130 million tons, or 120 million metric tons. It's an industry that provides jobs and food for millions of people. India is one of the world's leaders in fishing. And recently, crowds were gathered to gobble up fish packed full of special ingredients. But don't expect to whip up this recipe at home. It's not really a meal, it's actually medicinal. And the fish aren't even cooked. James Martone has the details.
[James Martone, Cnn Correspondent:] The medicine consists of small fish stuffed with special herbs and then stuffed alive into the mouths of people suffering from respiratory problems. The Batini Gaud family says to be effective the fish must be taken annually, for three years, during a solar phase known in India as Mrigasira, taking place here in India this week. The family has been administering the herb stuffed fish for generations. The family says a saint gave their relatives the recipe in 1845. "This is a 155 year old tradition. We are in our 5th generation now," said Vishh Anath Gaud, eldest brother in the family. This years treatment in the southern Indian city of Hyderabad drew many patients. "I have come for the third time this year," says Sanjay Kumar, who suffers from asthma. "I feel some relief, but it still has not been cured totally. I may come again next year," he says. Hyderabad's tourism director says the city hopes to profit from the popularity of the treatment.
[Krishna Rao, Hyderabad Tourism Director:] When people come into Hyderabad for this medical of fish medicine, the tourism department wants to take advantage of their presence in Hyderabad and enlighten them and educate them about the places to be seen.
[Martone:] But for the time being, the small living fish, stuffed with herbs, appears to be the big attraction. James Martone, CNN, New Delhi.
[Walcott:] As thousands of reporters, politicians and delegates converge on Los Angeles for the Democratic National Convention, a train carrying a group of students has headed out on another type of political journey. CNN student bureau reports on the "Earth train" and some civics students on a trip of a lifetime.
[Jason Friedman, Cnn Student Bureau:] From the outside, it looks like any other daily commuter train. But this is the, L.A. bound Earth train. And what goes on inside is more important than reaching the final destination. Dozens of civic-minded kids debate the issues they care most about, gearing up for a week- long crash course in politics. Among the passengers are some familiar faces, like Tahj Mowry, star of the WB's "Smart Guy."
[Tahj Mowry, Age 14:] I realize that, since I'm an actor, I'm very fortune to have things that other kids don't. And I want to reach out and talk to other kids and tell them how fortunate they can be and that they are already; even though, they don't have the things that I have.
[Arjay Smith, Age 16:] I knew people were watching me, and I had to making a difference I could make a difference just from being on TV.
[Mowry:] And I think I'm going to build more and more visit maybe countries. That's what I want to do. I want to go everywhere and just help kids, and tell them that they can do it if they put their mind to it.
[Friedman:] Earth train is about a lot more than just child celebrities on a scenic trip to Los Angeles. Most of the passengers are everyday kids.
[Ltoya Wheeler, Age 21:] I live in a community with a very low voter turnout rate, and I would like to up that percentage, because the youth out there, they do not vote because they feel that their voice is not heard.
[Joey Mallman, Age 15:] It gives ma a chance to represent a lot of other people.
[Francisco Castillo, Age 20:] I think this is one in a lifetime experience. And I think most importantly, i is unity amongst the young people. Before we got on the train, we didn't know each other, and now it's like we're talking with one other.
[Wheeler:] Adults, they try to tell the youth and tell the political leaders what the youth want, but they don't really know. The youth know what the youth want, and that's what we are going to try to do.
[Mallman:] I feel excited and I feel a little bit nervous. I've never done anything like this.
[Friedman:] This train trip was only one leg of the students' journey. They will spend a week in this convention city immersed in national politics. Then return home to share what they've learned with their communities. Jason Friedman, CNN Student Bureau, Los Angeles.
[Jordan:] And, of course, stay with us all week for coverage from Los Angeles and the Democratic National Convention.
[Walcott:] And that wraps up today's show. We'll see you tomorrow.
[Jordan:] Bye.
[Walcott:] Bye-bye.

[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] King Edward VIII's abdication stunned Britain and the world back in 1936. On Wednesday, 10 boxes of papers from the king's lawyer were made public, many dating from that tumultuous time. CNN's Margaret Lowrie reports from London.
[Margaret Lowrie, Cnn Correspondent:] The only British Monarch to abdicate, Edward VIII, gave up his throne for the woman he loved, Wallis Warfield Simpson. Now, papers made public by Oxford University for the first time flesh out a tale, long shrouded in mystery, intrigue and romance.
[Prof. Vernon Bognadonor, Oxford University:] They show what a tragic and predetermined problem it was.
[Lowrie:] The papers include documents from the private archive of Edward VIII's lawyer and confidante, Walter Monckton, who died in 1965. Known as the Duke of Windsor, after his exile, Edward was widely rumored to be a Nazi sympathizer.
[Bognadonor:] There's no evidence here at all that the Duke of Windsor had any treasonable feelings towards his country. He was sympathetic to the policy of appeasement, which was the government's policy in the late 1930s.
[Lowrie:] Oxford has held back some records believed to include letters from the Queen Mother, then wife of George VI, because she is still alive. She reportedly resented her brother-in-law, because her desperately shy husband was forced to become king. In turn, the Duke of Windsor reportedly felt ill-treated by his brother.
[Bognadonor:] The later papers show that the story of the feud between George VI and Duke of Windsor should be modified a bit, because a lot of things the Duke of Windsor objected to about George VI were really decisions taken by the government of the day.
[Lowrie:] And that, historians say, highlights the problem of having two sovereigns, one actual and one ex, at the same time. The archives released, not only shed light on a family tragedy, but show there is no place for abdication in the British monarchy. Margaret Lowrie, CNN, London.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] A new report contains some chilling information about executives in the Internet industry.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] It is a fascinating story. The report is in today's "Financial Times," and it's all about unsavory backgrounds. And we get details now from Ed Crooks. He's at the "FT"'s London newsroom. Hi, Ed. What can you tell us?
[Ed Crooks, Economics Editor, "financial Times":] Hi, good morning. Yes, well, you're right, it's a cracking story we carry on the front page today about, as you say, the unsavory pasts of many dot.com executives. But perhaps when you see some of these valuations and what's happened to the share prices and how quickly they go up and how quickly they come back down again and all the rest of it, you might have thought perhaps there's something not quite right there. And it does rather seem to be the case. We got this report done by Kroll Associates, of course the very famous New York-based security company. They say that when they investigate the backgrounds of Internet company executives, they're four times as likely to find problems in their backgrounds as they are with the backgrounds of ordinary, standard business executives. And they say that, I think, something like they checked out 70 dot.com directors of which 39 percent that's a breathtakingly high number had some kind of murky secrets in their past, problems with the SEC and that kind of thing. So certainly I think enough to make anyone think twice about putting their money into a dot.com.
[Marchini:] Did the study, Ed, give any indication as to why it was that this dot.com area seems to be fertile ground for people with unsavory pasts?
[Crooks:] Well, yes, I mean, it's very interesting. Actually, one of those things they say is that perhaps when one thinks about problems with dot.com management and things that go wrong in dot.com companies, you think about the young kids. They start off, they have a bright idea, perhaps they know a lot about computing but they don't really know a lot about the world of business, and they're the ones, then, that run into trouble. But they're not really the key problem that Kroll Associates have been identifying. They talk about these people they describe as "vampire investors," this lovely term for it, essentially, perhaps, older people, people with a bit of past behind them, people with perhaps a slightly shady past behind them who have seen the dot.com world as a place where a lot of money is being made very, very quickly and have seen that perhaps because the industry is growing so fast, because perhaps the checks aren't all they could be, they can move into a dot.com company, invest a little bit of money into it and then take a whole lot money more out for themselves by putting their friends and family on the payroll and that kind of thing, charging massive consultancy fees and so on. And it's those people that Kroll say are the real problem with a lot of dot.com companies.
[Haffenreffer:] Is there any indication by way of this study as to geography and location of these people with the unsavory backgrounds? Is it mostly U.S. or does it go outside the borders as well?
[Crooks:] I think it's the U.S. that they've been looking at, but certainly I think anyone obviously I wouldn't like to mention any names, but I certainly think in a large number of other countries around world, I certainly indeed, we've got to be very careful here but certainly I think that in Europe as well this is something definitely that we've noticed. But some of the cases of Internet companies, when you look at those kind of names that are cropping up and you perhaps remember things about these people's pasts, you think, well, hang on, you know, what's going on here? Are these really people we want to be trusting? Are these people you should be confiding large amounts of money in? So certainly I think it does seem to be a global not just a specifically U.S. problem.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, Ed, thank you very much. Ed Crooks at the "Financial Times."

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Shares of Lucent will be in the spotlight today. For details, we head over to Jen Rogers, live at the Instinet. What can you tell us Jen.
[Jen Rogers, Cnn Markets Editor:] Good morning, Debbie. Well, it feels like a Monday all over again here. It seems that volume is going to get off to a slow start, but Lucent is definitely on the radar screen here. A French paper reporting that Alcatel, one of the suitors for Lucent's fiber-optic business, is reportedly reducing its offer for that business down to $3 billion from $4 billion. Now, analysts had initially said that this deal could fetch up to $8 billion for Lucent, which is a troubled telecom company. "La Tribune," the French paper, reporting this. We'll have to see how this plays out today. Other companies in the news, United Airlines coming out slashing its quarterly dividend after the bell on Tuesday. The new dividend will be 5 cents. The old one was just above 31 cents. This comes after earlier this month the company had warned as travel is down amid the slowdown that we are seeing in the economy. Apple Computer also in the news ticker there AAPL. Apple coming out again after the bell on Tuesday and saying that it is pulling the plug on production of its G4Q. Now that computer had some rave reviews, but it had a little bit of trouble getting off the ground, never really delivering to the bottom line for Apple and they are pulling the plug on that indefinitely. And finally, MGM Mirage, the ticker there MGG, coming out and saying that they are comfortable with analysts' estimates for the second quarter. Those estimates right now are at 42 cents per share and that they are comfortable with that right now. So we'll see how that plays out today. It seems that casinos aren't getting hit as much as hotels in the slowdown we are seeing Debbie.
[Marchini:] Thanks, Jen. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] What happens to a house during a massive earthquake? was the subject of an unusual test last hour in California. Researchers mounted a full-sized furnished home on a giant platform, then shook it with some devastating force of the 1994 Northridge earthquake in the Los Angeles area. CNN's Greg LaMotte joins us from San Diego now, with more on how and why. And, Greg, I know you can relate to the visuals.
[Greg Lamotte, Cnn Correspondent:] Yes, I can, and Kyra, you being a Southern California native, I would imagine that you're probably glad you're living in Georgia right now after what you and I both witnessed here in Southern California about an hour ago. This two-story wood-framed house was subjected to 6.7 earthquake as part of study being funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, in hopes of helping architects better design more earthquake- resistant homes and help insurance adjusters better understand earthquake damage. Joining me now is Andre Filiatraut, he is the principle investigator for this project. First of all, why did you choose the '94 Northridge quake to mimic?
[Andre Filiatraut, Professor Of Structural Engineering, Ucsd:] Well, the project focuses on the performance of wood-framed buildings in California. And the record we selected this morning was recorded during the Northridge earthquake, in a renowned recording station, very close to the epicenter of the ground motion of the earthquake. And it's one of the most intense ground motions that was recorded in California. So we wanted to show or present an upper bound or use an upper bound of ground motion to see how a wood-framed building would behave under such a large earthquake.
[Lamotte:] This house is sitting on a quake plate that moves back and forth that mimics these earthquakes, 6.7. We were told that this house has been tested 30 or 40 times prior to this, over the past five months. Could that testing have impacted the results of today's test?
[Filiatraut:] Not really, because between each test phase or each time we were testing a different structural configuration, we would actually repair or even more rebuild the house. So we have local contractors coming in and essentially removing all the structural components, the walls, the studs, and so on; and bringing back the structure to its initial state of lateral load resisting capacity. So, each time we were starting with a new structure.
[Lamotte:] This house has stucco on the outside today for its test. You're telling me earlier that you tested it a few weeks ago without the stucco, what happened then?
[Filiatraut:] Well, we were quite surprised this morning. We when we tested this configuration a couple of weeks ago, without stucco, we had a lot more damage than we saw today. So definitely, just by looking at a structure after the earthquake, it seems that the influence of wall finish material is significant on the seismic response of wood-frame construction. And I think that's a surprising result. Because the thought is that these components do not act as structural elements, they're just cracks and basically have no influence. And I think we saw today, even during this very large ground shaking, the house performed very well, mainly due to the stucco or wall finish material.
[Lamotte:] Given what I saw today, I'm certainly going to return to my own home and look around in terms of those things that can fall. Because some of the things that were part of quake test today were bolted to the ground and other things weren't. And those things that weren't seemed to cause the most damage.
[Filiatraut:] That's right, we had two goals today: one was obviously a scientific goal, looking at a structural response; but we also had an educational element, and that's why we fully furnished a house. And all the components you saw inside the house were paired. So one, properly anchored, another one unanchored. And you saw the big difference. I mean, probably the most important example is the water heater. We saw the unanchored water heater completely turn over during the earthquake, which, of course, is a major fire hazard. But the anchored one performed very well. So, I think it's a good lesson that you have to prepare before the earthquake. Preparedness is the most important thing. You cannot really react during the earthquake when you saw all the violence and the shaking. And a very few pulses, in a very short time, all the energy was released. And you really can do very little during the shaking. But if you're prepared before then, then you can really minimize the damage and potential for injuries.
[Lamotte:] How soon will this information from today's test be doled out to those in the construction industry, for instance?
[Filiatraut:] Well, the procedure we're following is within the CURECaltech Wood Frame Project, we have a complete element dedicated to building codes and standards. And the way we proceed is we are going take all this information, and with all the other tasks, and these engineers have to synthesize this information and write it up in a way that it could be presented to building code committees. And eventually be incorporated into building codes to better build the wood-frame structure for next time.
[Lamotte:] Thank you very much, principle investigator for this project. A 6.7 earthquake that we witnessed, it was sort of bone- chilling to watch given the fact I live in Southern California along with my colleagues here. And Kyra, I'm glad you're in Georgia now.
[Phillips:] And I was just going to say, why don't you come join us here in Atlanta.
[Lamotte:] Be happy to.
[Phillips:] Greg LaMotte, all right, thanks for that report.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] The bulls came running back, for a winning day on Wall Street Tuesday, but can the buying binge carry over to today's trading? The Dow rose more than 250 points, or 2.6 percent, taking the index safely above the 10,000 mark. Buyers jumped into technology issues, moving the Nasdaq 6 percent higher, and the broader S&P; 500 index gained almost 3 percent.
[Fred Sears, Investor Capital Funds:] I'm still in the camp that says it's a rally in a bear market. Generally, in a bear market, we get very explosive rallies. We need to have the volume that we're not getting today; I need to see over 2 billion shares traded to convince me to be full throttle buying tech stocks again.
[Haffenreffer:] But oversold tech stocks bounced back. Shares of Juniper, Sun Microsystems and CIENA, among others, all enjoyed sparkling gains. Right now, the Nasdaq's up by 7 points, the S&P; 500 index by 2.5 points. Treasury's 30-year bond is up by 632. It's yielded 5.6 percent. The 10-year note is higher by 332. It's yielded 5.05 percent. Motorola is set to host a conference call at 8:00 a.m. Eastern time this morning, after reporting its first operating loss in 15 years. The mobile phone and chip giant is expected to give additional guidance for the current quarter and beyond. After the closing bell, the company boasted a first quarter loss of $206 million, or 9 cents a share worse than analysts' already lowered estimates. Sales fell 11 percent, to $7.8 billion. Motorola said its loss was largely due to weak order growth in nearly all its business segments, especially cell phone, chip and telecom. The company also said it sees the downturn in the U.S. economy spreading to other parts of the world. Motorola is the first major tech company and the first of the big three mobile phone makers to report on the latest quarter, which is expected to be a rocky one for corporate profits. Afterhours, Motorola fell as low as $12 per share, but it recovered a little, to trade down 81 cents, at $12.19 a share in very heavy volume. Let's take a look now at how the Asian markets ended today's session. We had the Nikkei 225 index, in Tokyo, jumping 4.3 percent. In Hong Kong, the Hang Seng Index soared by 4 percent. And in Seoul, the index was up by 16 points. As far as the European markets are concerned right now, it's sort of a mixed picture, with London down by 8 points, but Frankfurt, Paris and Zurich all to the upside. In the foreign exchange markets, we're seeing some slight gains for the euro this morning, at 88.92, the pound at 143.56, and the dollar trading weaker versus the Japanese currency, down about.5 yen right now, at 123.87 Japanese yen. Taking a look now at some stocks in the news this morning, Dow component Eastman Kodak has named a new president. Former Lucent executive Patricia Russo will now oversee Kodak's daily operations and report directly to recently named CEO Daniel Carp. Online broker E*TRADE posted break-even results in line with analysts' expectations, but the company issued lower guidance for the fiscal year. Financial information firm Moody's reported earnings of 25 cents a share. That was a penny below expectations. Moody's also pleaded guilty to criminal charges stemming from a 1996 anti-trust probe. The company has been ordered to pay $195,000 as part of a plea agreement. Sonus Networks said it broke even in the first quarter. Analysts expected a 2 cent loss. Ravenswood Winery has been bought out by Constellation Brands, for $29.50 a share, or $148 million. That is a 70 percent premium over the vineyard's closing price on Tuesday. And finally, Harley-Davidson beat the Street by 1 cent, earning 30 cents a share. The motorcycle maker has also increased production targets for the current quarter and full fiscal year. In afterhours trading, Harley, E*TRADE, and Sonus rose on their positive news stories. Afterhours decliners included Juniper and QUALCOMM. The stocks gave back some of the gains racked up in Tuesday's session. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] We turn now to the alarming escalation of violence in the Middle East. Just today, five Israelis and three Palestinians have died. In Jerusalem, eight Palestinian school children were injured when a bomb exploded. And Just minutes ago came word that Israeli warplanes attacked two West Bank cities. And at an Israeli emergency cabinet meeting, Israel reportedly decided to send tanks back into West Bank town of Ramallah. Joining us now to discuss some of Israel's options, Israel's consul general in New York, ambassador Alon Pinkus. Good to see you. Welcome.
[Alon Pinkus, Israel's Consul General:] Good morning, Paula.
[Zahn:] First off, there are reports that the latest Israeli missile attacks came within yards of striking a building where Yasser Arafat was holding a meeting. Is Israel trying to assassinate Yasser Arafat?
[Pinkus:] Oh no, absolutely not. I think it's more of a coincidence than something deliberate. We're not in the business of assassinating people, let alone leaders. We wish the Palestinian people would depose of him politically, but we're absolutely not...
[Zahn:] But where's the coincidence? I mean, did you not have intelligence that he was holding a meeting at the time? What would be the point?
[Pinkus:] I don't know exact the details. I can only speculate and guess based on things I knew from the past. If we knew he was there, it was meant to frighten and harass. If we did not know he was there, it was just a coincidence.
[Zahn:] At the same time, you're hearing people like Benjamin Netanyahu basically say it's time for Yasser Arafat to go. Ariel Sharon basically said that many, many months ago. Have you all but given up on Yasser Arafat?
[Pinkus:] We've given up on him as a political partner for serious negotiations ever since Camp David in July of 2000. We've given up on him. The Clinton administration then gave up on him. The Bush administration has given up on him. Everyone's given up on him as a credible negotiator. However, no one's given up on him in the sense that he is still the elected leader of the Palestinian people. And in that respect, we need to somehow find a way to reach an ad hoc accommodation, an interim agreement, if you will. No one behind him, no one under him, no one on his side, seems to be credible enough to muster the legitimacy and the authority to effectively replace him.
[Zahn:] All right, you say you're looking from interim agreement. You have the president of Egypt yesterday telling CNN essentially that why don't you come to Egypt and we'll sit down and have some peace talks. Let's listen to what the president said, and you can react to it.
[Pres. Hosni Mubarak, Egypt:] We have to work, whether we like it or not, to bring the two parts to the table and negotiate. This will be the only window of hope for the people at least to start calming down.
[Zahn:] How seriously will the Israelis consider the prospect of going to Egypt and sitting down and having peace talks now? Is this a non-starter? Is this a PR move?
[Pinkus:] It's not a PR move, and it's not a non-starter. Everything that Hosni Mubarak, the president of Egypt says, we take seriously, because he's a serious man, he's a man of peace; he has a record proving that. However, the idea of getting together in Sharm Al-Sheikh for a weekend has to be based on an agreed upon agenda. The agenda exists, Paula. It's called the Mitchell Plan, the Tenet plan, the Camp David agreements. The agenda is there. There's someone on the other side not willing to cooperate in this game. He's playing baseball in the football game. We all know what the rules are. We all know what needs be done. The blueprint is on the table and this man just refuses to play along.
[Zahn:] What about the Saudi Arabian blueprint? Some describe it as a vision. Others describe it as a plan. Is it plausible?
[Pinkus:] It's an idea. It's an idea that needs be explored. I will not go ahead and dismiss it. Others have. I personally will not dismiss it. However, seeing is believing. Public diplomacy is of the essence in the Middle East, and I await to see that speech being delivered in Arabic with the force that the Saudis can put behind it, not read about it in Tom Friedman's column.
[Zahn:] And I guess you'll have to wait for this Arab summit in Beirut to see how seriously it's considered by the Arab world.
[Pinkus:] On the 27th of March, yes.
[Zahn:] In closing, we just reported at the top of your introduction that eight Palestinian children were wounded today when a bomb explode in a schoolyard in east Jerusalem. There are indications that that bomb may have been set off by Israelis.
[Pinkus:] Right.
[Zahn:] Are you concerned that Israeli civilians now might get involved in what seems to be a never-ending cycle of violence?
[Pinkus:] Yes, we're concerned. Yes, I'm very concerned. We will investigate this. If proven to be correct, this concern that it may be Israelis who did it, who perpetrated this, they will be investigated. The thing will be investigated, they will be apprehended, and they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. We're a democracy. We will not tolerate this kind of behavior. We've never tolerated this kind.
[Zahn:] When do you see an end to any of this madness?
[Pinkus:] As soon as two things happen the pressure applied by the world on Arafat yields some fruit, or an Arafat is being replaced by a more credible, pragmatic leadership. Hopefully, sooner rather than later, but I wish I had a definitive answer for you. I don't. The fact over the matter is that here we are as if Camp David never took place, as if the Oslo Agreements were never signed, as if the Madrid Conference never convened. We are back in the 1960s, 1970s kind of intercommunal conflict. This is absolutely unacceptable for us as a Democratic society, and I think that the Palestinians should seriously look in the mirror and ask themselves what kind of promises, what kind of delivery did the Palestinian leadership provide them with? Nothing, if they ask themselves truthfully.
[Zahn:] We have to leave it there. Alon Pinkus, thank you very much for dropping by here.

[This Is A Rush Transcript. This Copy May Not Be In Its Final Form And May Be Updated. Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] As I told you before the break, a verdict has just been announced in supermodel Naomi Campbell's privacy lawsuit. She is seeking damages against a tabloid newspaper for reporting that she was attending meetings of Narcotics Anonymous. Our Matthew Chance is live in London with the verdict. Matthew, what was it?
[Matthew Chance, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Carol, outside the High Court here, quite a surprise for all the assembled members of the press that have gathered to hear that the verdict went in favor of Naomi Campbell. The judge ruled that the newspaper here that carried those photographs, called "The Mirror," was in breach of Naomi Campbell's privacy and they awarded her 3,500 pounds or just over $5,000 in damages and compensation. So a pretty nominal cash penalty that "The Mirror" has to pay. And in exchange for that of course, they get to rake over the private life of Naomi Campbell in the press for weeks. And so a bit of a double-edged sword, a double-edged blow there for Naomi Campbell in this in this victory in the courts.
[Costello:] What did you mean by that, Matthew, that they get to rake her over in the tabloids after paying this $5,000 fine?
[Chance:] Well of course the trial has been reported extensively in the British press, the ins and outs of the of the of the way that Naomi Campbell was attending this clinic for treatment for her drug addiction. Ironically, members of "The Mirror" newspaper that I've spoken to out here say that the very fact that the newspaper reported this story and the way it did, it did it in a very sort of caring way, saying that Naomi Campbell was courageously trying to battle her addiction against drugs by attending therapy, that was deemed to be an invasion of her privacy. Whereas if they had in fact just said Naomi Campbell is a drug addict and reported it as sort of a criminal expose, that would not have been subject to the same kind of laws and the same kind of judgement that we've seen passed down today.
[Costello:] I understand. So in essence, even though she has had problems with drug in her past, she wasn't having problems with drugs when the tabloid printed the story that she was going to Narcotics Anonymous?
[Chance:] I think I think simply that it's not been, you know, clear to us what her current condition is regarding drugs. The fact is that the court found that the way "The Mirror" reported the story that she was attending therapy for her drug addiction was an invasion of privacy. As I say, instead of just come out and said we've got evidence that Naomi Campbell is a drug addict, here are some photos saying she's attending a drug rehabilitation clinic, that would have been an entirely different story.
[Costello:] Got you. I understand now. Thank you. Matthew Chance, reporting for us live from London where Naomi Candle Naomi Campbell has been successful in her lawsuit against a British tabloid. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Now, an investigation about human trafficking: Federal agents say they've broken up a smuggling ring responsible for bringing hundreds of Ukrainian immigrants into the United States. Ring members allegedly helped Ukrainians first get into Mexico, and then they took them into San Diego and on to other cities. CNN's Charles Feldman has more.
[Charles Feldman, Cnn Correspondent:] It was early morning in L.A. when the arrests came down: 11 people busted from running what the FBI calls "a well-organized Eurasian crime ring" that smuggled Ukrainian nationals into the U.S. some paying up to $7,000. Among those arrested: the reputed ringleader of the international operation. The FBI says, "when many of the Ukrainians were unable to pay the smuggling fees, they were forced to work in prostitution."
[Patrick Patterson, Fbi:] Well, we know that a little over 200 were interdicted by the border patrol and INS. And our conservative estimate is that was probably about 10 percent of the total operation.
[Feldman:] The FBI says Ukrainians who wanted to come to the U.S. were recruited in Kiev, Ukraine and then, with Mexican tourist visas in hand, flown to Mexico. From there, by foot, car and boat, they were brought initially into southern California. This government video purports to show the Coast Guard coming upon one of the boats used to smuggle some of the Ukrainian immigrants. The investigation is ongoing, with more arrests possible both in the United States and overseas. Charles Feldman, CNN, Los Angeles.
[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] We give you more on this issue now with Laura Lederer. She is director of the Protection Project. That's a legal research institute that's doing a study on the trafficking of women and children. She joins us from Washington. Laura, thanks for being here.
[Laura Lederer, Director, Protection Project:] Thank you.
[Mcedwards:] Let's begin right where this story begins: in the Ukraine. Why do people want to get out? Is it the economic situation?
[Lederer:] Well, as in other trafficking cases, yes; if there's economic or political instability or terrible poverty, people are trying to escape those conditions.
[Mcedwards:] OK, and describe their journey, then; what happens?
[Lederer:] Well, in I think in the case of many of the women from Eastern Europe and the newly independent states and Russia, there are very sophisticated methods of recruiting them. They may answer job applications that are asking them whether they want to have a job in tourism or in banking or whether they'd like just like to travel abroad. Or they may be recruited on the street and told that they're, you know, very good-looking and they could be part-time models. There are many, many different ways of recruiting these young women.
[Mcedwards:] So do some of them think that they're coming to the United States somehow legitimately and that their paperwork is going to be done, or do they know that this is illegal?
[Lederer:] Well and this is the difference between a classic case of alien smuggling and trafficking in a classic case of alien smuggling, a deal is made, really, between the smuggler and the smugglee. You pay me such and such an amount of money, and I will take you across the border and then our agreement ends so you go your way and I go mine. In a trafficking case, it begins with a deception, coercion, some kind of threats or intimidation, luring, inducement, where the young woman or the child is promised something that is never going to be the case. Then when they get to the new country, their passport and Visa are taken away and they're forced into situations of prostitution, sexual servitude, slavery-like conditions.
[Mcedwards:] And now why did they come through Mexico?
[Lederer:] I think as the what we call "receiver countries" or "countries of destination" are tightening their borders, watching for trafficking cases, the traffickers are looking for those loopholes countries where the laws are lax, or where they're non-existent, or where there is not law enforcement and where it's easier to get a load of people, really, hundreds, sometimes thousands into a country and then move them from there to another country.
[Mcedwards:] Now, one of the most astonishing things about this case that we just heard about is that the FBI got onto it by sort of stumbling on a videotape that was accidentally dropped by a Ukrainian family along a pathway that was used by the smugglers, and that's how they got onto this. Although I assume, in most cases, it isn't such happenstance. I mean, what's being done to get at this problem?
[Lederer:] Well, I think actually this is probably classic, is that in the past 10 years it has been a more I don't want to say use the word "passive," but waiting for the cases to come to us. And what needs to happen now, if we want to stop the trafficking of women and children, which really is a contemporary form of slavery, there are going to have to be proactive federal investigative teams that can move out and look for clues and follow up on leads and actually find these cases, not wait for them to come to us.
[Mcedwards:] All right, a call for action and Laura Lederer, thanks so much for your thoughts this morning. I appreciate it.
[Lederer:] Thank you for having me.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] At this point, we know that Dick Cheney is resting comfortably at George Washington University Hospital. Don't know very much about the condition, and what exactly happened. We just know that he had chest and shoulder pains and he is now resting comfortably, has had the proper tests, and we're going to turn over to Jeanne Meserve, who is in Austin, Texas. We are waiting for a news conference around noon, where George W. Bush is supposed to have some reaction to his condition. Jeanne, is that true? And do you know anything else at this point?
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] Well, I can tell you that the campaign's communications director, Karen Hughes, was spotted a few minutes ago and asked how Secretary Cheney was doing. And she said everything sounds encouraging. As you know, an EKG that was done this morning showed no change and his early blood test showed no change in cardiac enzymes, both very good signs. We know that Governor Bush was awaken at about 5:00 this morning and told that Secretary Cheney had been admitted to George Washington University Hospital and he did phone Secretary Cheney there. Now when the governor entered the state capitol an hour or so ago, reporters yelled questions at him about how Secretary Cheney was doing. He refused to answer those, saying he would have a statement shortly. We expect that come up in 15 minutes to half an hour's time. He will be speaking to us from the State Capitol Reception Room. Bush is expected to address not just Secretary Cheney's condition. but to have some reaction to that Florida Supreme Court ruling last night, which is allowing those hand counts in Florida to go forward Kyra.
[Phillips:] Jeanne, do you know if the governor has visited Cheney since he has been in the hospital since this morning.
[Meserve:] No, because the governor is here in Austin, Texas, and Secretary Cheney is in Washington, D.C. They have simply communicated by telephone that is it.
[Phillips:] I am sorry, I meant to say, had plans to go visit him. I apologize.
[Meserve:] Not that we have heard anything about, no. I think all attention this morning has been on preparing the statement this morning, which is supposed to address Secretary Cheney's condition, and of course reaction to the Florida Supreme Court. We don't know at this point exactly what the campaign is going to do. They have talked about several options. Last night, Secretary Baker, in his very heated remarks after the ruling, hinted that they might turn to the state legislature and see if they wanted to do something about the way electors are chosen in the state of Florida. Certainly also, the campaign has raised constitutional issues throughout this, saying that having the hand counts done in only selected counties made the weighing of votes arbitrary and unfair. So it is possible we could see further court action by the Bush campaign in federal court, perhaps. We don't know yet what option, either of those, or any others, they might choose, but hope to get some illumination when Governor Bush speaks to us within the half hour Kyra.
[Phillips:] CNN's Jeanne Meserve in Austin, Texas, thank you Leon.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Let's turn to Washington now, and our political analyst Bill Schneider is going to join us now to give us another perspective on the situation now with Dick Cheney. Bill, can you give us an idea of the repercussions that occur to you, now, if Mr. Cheney does stay in the hospital, and if things actually deteriorate?
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Well, we all of course hope for the best for Secretary Cheney, and the indication at the moment are encouraging. So I believe that nobody is going to take any precipitous action. He, of course, is in a vice president still a vice presidential candidate. Nobody is vice president-elect at this point, because neither ticket has achieved an electoral majority. If for some reason he were to be declared or declare himself incapable of running for vice president, because, remember, the actual selection occurs on December 18th That is when the electors meet in their respective state capitols If for any reason he decides that he cannot serve as vice president, then there is a procedure. Governor Bush would recommend another choice and the Republican National Committee would have a special meeting, probably here in Washington, most likely to ratify George Bush's choice, unless it were a particularly controversial choice. The last time I can remember that happening was in 1972, after the Democratic Convention, when the first choice of the Democratic nominee, George McGovern, was Tom Eagleton. After there were revelations about his medical treatments in the past, he left the ticket and was replaced by the Democratic National Committee. He was replaced by Sergeant Shriver, who became the running mate. The difference here is this is after election day. But I don't think there would be any difference in procedure because the electors will still not have voted until December 18th. So between now and December 18th, Cheney could theoretically be replaced, although it is not clear at this point, there is any need to do so.
[Harris:] How likely is that the party itself would recommend to Governor Bush that he at least consider doing something like that?
[Schneider:] I think that it's very unlikely. I think this will be left in the hands of Governor Bush and Secretary Cheney. They will make the decision about what is best for Secretary Cheney, what is best for the Republican ticket. I think the decision will be left in the hands of the two nominees, and the doctors. They are the ones who really should make that decision. My guess is the Republican National Committee will take Governor Bush's advice.
[Harris:] And again, let's reiterate, no matter which way this goes, we certainly do hope that Secretary Cheney does recover and recovers well.
[Schneider:] Of course.
[Harris:] Bill Schneider, thanks much. Appreciate it.
[Schneider:] Sure.

[Carol Costello, Cnn Anchor:] Hard to believe it's over. Yes the flame is out in Salt Lake City and the Winter Games will go into the history books.
[Chad Myers, Cnn Weather:] Yes, we're kind of happy about that.
[Costello:] That it's over?
[Myers:] Well, you know I'm very happy that the Canadians won their two gold medals in hockey. I mean it's really an impressive thing.
[Costello:] Hey let's head out there live now and talk to Sean Callebs because he witnessed the closing ceremonies. How were they Sean?
[Sean Callebs, Cnn Correspondent:] Oh it was great. It was actually perfect. I mean it started out somewhat somber in the opening ceremonies. Last night just a huge celebration, things went off here flawlessly. As you guys mentioned, after 17 days and nights the Olympic flame no longer burns here, but clearly Salt Lake is going to revel in the excitement generated here. And these games will be remembered for the Olympic records, but also for the controversy and the criticism.
[Callebs:] The games ended with a spontaneous street celebration among Canadian fans. Legions of supporters pouring into the street after Canada knocked off the USA to take the gold medal in men's hockey. Still the silver for the U.S. marked its 34th medal far outpacing the old record for Winter Games of 13. But the games also ended in controversy. The IOC has failed three athletes who tested positive for a performance-enhancing drug. A female Russian cross-country skier was forced to surrender her gold medal as was Spanish cross-country skier Johann Muehlegg.
[Unidentified Male:] The recommendation were for this athlete disqualification of the athlete from the men's 50-kilometer classical cross-country skiing event, withdrawal of the medal and diploma.
[Callebs:] The other blemish on the Olympics, a judging scandal that exposed the ugly side of figure skating. The controversy has the International Skating Union promising to dramatically overhaul the way skating competitions are judged. For all the buildup of security, there was only one incident. Thirty people were arrested and police were forced to use rubber bullets to break up an unruly crowd upset that beer sales were being cut off Saturday night. City officials defend police action.
[Chief Rick Dinse, Salt Lake City Police:] We know that some of the people in the crowd did receive some bruises or welts as a result of the impact devices that we used.
[Callebs:] Still Salt Lake has reason to celebrate. They made it through two weeks safely and the USOC president wrapped up the games by saying he feels proud.
[Costello:] Oh we got Chad in here too. He's got e-mails to...
[Myers:] Yes.
[Costello:] ... talk about.
[Myers:] Sean, we got we got Jake from Phoenix that wants to rename this the "scammed Olympics." Can you feel it there?
[Callebs:] I don't know if the people here would go for that, but clearly I think that is what these games are going to be marked by.
[Myers:] Yes.
[Callebs:] It's not only the skating controversy, but also the various controversies in the speed skating arena, South Korea, Russia both threatening to pull out right before the closing ceremonies. It really got ugly toward the end of last week.
[Costello:] Yes, a lot of people are calling it the "whining Olympics". Everybody was whining about not winning a gold.
[Callebs:] It should be faster, stronger, higher, and more contentious. They should add that to the to the motto here.
[Myers:] Yes we weren't sure that lobbying was an Olympic sport, but apparently now it is.
[Callebs:] Exactly.
[Costello:] Win a gold medal for lobbying, yes. Hey thank...
[Callebs:] But who would who would that go to though? There are so many...
[Myers:] Yes exactly.
[Costello:] Exactly. Thank you Sean Callebs.
[Unidentified Male:] Take care. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Well, this is quite a treat for us on CNN TODAY. Our next guest needs no introduction, and I am just so thrilled to be leaning on a piano and having Ray Charles sitting at that piano. Many people would love to be in my spot, Mr. Charles. What a treat it is to have you with us today.
[Ray Charles, Musician:] Right. Thank you very much. You sure know how to make an old man feel good.
[Allen:] Well, you are so highly acclaimed. I know you're here in Atlanta to get yet another award, the Trumpet Award. This award shows honors African-American achievers. And do you have any ideas how many awards you have back at home?
[Charles:] Oh, my goodness. I I you're right. I absolutely don't, because I have so many I have been so fortunate to have so many awards and decorations and keys to the city. But it's nice; it's really nice that people think so much of my music that they want to do that for me. I appreciate it.
[Allen:] People see you and you always have a smile on your face. You always seem like you are so thoroughly enjoying yourself when you are sitting at the piano.
[Charles:] That's right.
[Allen:] And in this day in age, we see so many pop stars and all kinds of musicians pop in and out of the scene. What is it about Ray Charles, other than your incredible talent, that just has you keep going on and going on, and doing so with such great pleasure?
[Charles:] Well, what it is, when you're fortunate enough to really love what you do and you're able to make a decent living from it at the same time in other words, see, when I'm out playing the piano, it's just like a hobby, or sitting around playing with cats in a jam session or something. It's just that people pay me to do it.
[Allen:] Go ahead. You don't have to stop. I can see you've got your fingers, your fingers on the keys there. You can tinker around for us.
[Charles:] You don't want me to sit at this piano that don't have no pedals, do you?
[Allen:] Yes. No, we have to let our viewers know that.
[Charles:] How is that?
[Allen:] Amazing. And people...
[Charles:] I'm sorry. That's with no pedals.
[Allen:] ... a musician, you know you need pedals. How many times do you have any idea how many times you've played "Georgia on my Mind"?
[Charles:] Whoo! Whoo, whoo, whoo!
[Allen:] Is it thousands upon thousands? No, honey. You know, that song came out in 1959, and this is what? 2001. So, that's maybe 42 years ago. So I've played and I cannot do a concert without playing "Georgia." I have to. The people won't let me leave. You know, I get in big trouble if I don't play "Georgia." I have to do, so you figure all the countries I've played since 1959 until now, that'll give you some idea. And do you playing all the oldies as much as the new songs?
[Charles:] Oh, yes. But you see, it can never become old, because I you know, I don't sing the same notes the same way every time I play. I mean, I change you know, you change the eighth notes or the quarter notes or the half notes of whatever you're doing, so it's always fresh. You know, I couldn't stand it if I had to sing "Georgia" identically the same way every night.
[Allen:] I was reading that when you first learned to play the piano, someone taught you to play "Mary Had a Little Lamb" when you were 4 years old. And you took it from there.
[Charles:] Yes, yes. That's it.
[Allen:] Do feel like you had music just inside of you?
[Charles:] Oh, yes. It's always been it's not something that I you know, how some people, they do other things on the side. Music is inborn. It's something that's within me. I can't help it. Somebody asked me, "When are you going to retire?" and I say, "From what?"
[Allen:] Good answer! What's the perfect day like for you? Do you play music every day at home?
[Charles:] Well, I'm involved with music some kind of way all of the time. I mean, if I'm around the piano or I'm fulling with the piano or I'm in the recording I have my own recording studio, so I make all of my CDs or albums or whatever you call it. I do all my recording. I'm my own engineer, so I play
[Allen:] Pretty good at it?
[Charles:] Well, I'm not Spassky or Bobby Fischer, but I'm not bad. I hold my own out there.
[Allen:] Oh, that's great to know. Ray Charles, we thank you so much. Here's one of my favorite quotes I read about you: "He was bad before anybody knew what bad meant. He was born bad, stays bad, and gets badder by the year."
[Charles:] Oh, look out!
[Allen:] And that's good.
[Charles:] I love that one.
[Allen:] Can you play a little more on the piano that's kind of broken for us? We'd appreciate it.
[Charles:] OK.
[Allen:] Oh! Thank you so much.
[Charles:] You're welcome, dear.
[Allen:] Let me shake your hand. Thanks a lot.
[Charles:] All right, baby. Any time. OK.
[Allen:] And we'll be back. The Trumpet Awards February 24th on TBS. You'll see Mr. Charles again then. We'll be back.
[Charles:] Hey, hey, hey.

[Plato Cacheris, Attorney For Alleged Spy:] Well, it's a serious matter: an FBI agent was charged with espionage, and we'll have to see we'll have to see what quality of the case is.
[Greta Van Susteren, Co-host:] Today on
[Burden Of Proof:] A 27- year veteran of the FBI has been arrested and charged with spying for Russia. Investigators say he's been a mole for the Russians the past 15 years.
[Announcer:] This is BURDEN OF PROOF, with Roger Cossack and Greta Van Susteren.
[Van Susteren:] Hello, and welcome to BURDEN OF PROOF. This morning in Alexandria, Virginia, 56-year-old Robert Philip Hanssen appeared in federal court on charges of espionage. For a quarter century, Hanssen has worked in counterintelligence operations, in a unit assigned to catch spies. Now he's being accused of spying.
[Roger Cossack, Co-host:] Sources say Hanssen was in position to disclose details of U.S. surveillance methods and may have enabled the Russians to confirm identity of Russian agents working for United States. Those names were first supplied by former CIA employee Aldrich Ames. At least 10 of those agents were executed. President Bush was, reportedly, aware of the Hanssen investigation. The Russian embassy in Washington and officials in Moscow have refused to comment on the case. Today in court, Hanssen was represented by well-known Washington lawyer Plato Cacheris, the one-time attorney for former CIA employee Aldrich Ames.
[Question:] ... Justice Department officials?
[Cacheris:] Yes.
[Question:] How do you evaluate what you've been told about their case?
[Cacheris:] I'm telling you, it's very embryonic. I've been handed a lot of materials; I haven't read it yet. They always talk that they've got a great case, but we'll see.
[Van Susteren:] In just a few moments the FBI and CIA will hold a joint news conference along with Attorney General John Ashcroft. We'll carry that event live when it begins. Joining us today are former federal prosecutor Mark Hulkower; Ron Kessler, the author of "Inside the FBI"; and Nancy Cullen, a neighbor of suspected spy Robert Hanssen.
[Cossack:] And in the back, Erica Berger, Julie Moon, and Kelly Kirby. And also joining us from outside the FBI headquarters is CNN justice correspondent Kelli Arena. Kelli, bring us up to date on what's going on in this investigation.
[Kelli Arena, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, first I was just told that a statement was released from the FBI saying that the damage done was exceptionally grave. We should be hearing more details in about 15 minutes. As you said, 15 minutes, Louis Freeh, the director of the FBI, George Tenet, director of the CIA, Attorney General John Ashcroft, and William Webster, who's the former director of both CIA and FBI will be there. We're told that Webster will be named to head up a blue-ribbon commission to conduct a review of security issues. Basically, here is what we know: He has been charged for several counts. In October of 1985, Hanssen allegedly I.D.ed three KGB officers as double agents. In March 1989, Hanssen allegedly gave top secret documents to the Russians. He also allegedly was paid $1.4 million from 1985 to his arrest for supplying certain information. Those those charges do could mean life in prison, or in some cases, the death penalty. And I'm having a problem here with this. I can hear you...
[Van Susteren:] All right, while you fix that, Kelli, let me tell you...
[Cossack:] Kelli, can you hear us now?
[Arena:] I sure can I'm just going to hold it.
[Cossack:] OK, Kelli, listen, what do you know about why charges stemming from 1985 and 1989 were brought? Do you have any idea why things that occurred so long ago are the subject of the charges?
[Arena:] Roger, I was told a key part of this investigation came loose when FBI got their hands on KGB documents that they say clearly pointed to Hanssen. It is interesting, though, because Hanssen allegedly was able to keep his identity unknown; even the Russians did not know exactly who they were dealing with, according to sources at the FBI. But these KGB documents were, apparently, pivotal in helping them to break this case. As you know, he was arrested Hanssen was arrested on Sunday as he was allegedly making a drop for a contact. We have also just learned from sources that, as part of that situation, he was also picking up $50 as part of that. We are told that details, more details on that, of course, will emerge at the press conference. Another thing: He was also, supposedly, set for mandatory retirement in April. So he was at the very end of his career.
[Van Susteren:] All right, well, let's go to Nancy Cullen, who is a neighbor of Mr. Hanssen. Nancy, how long have you known Mr. Hanssen. I mean, what kind of neighbor was he? Did he seem to have a lot of extra cash and money?
[Nancy Cullen, Robert Hanssen's Neighbor:] No, not at all. I've known them 10 years I believe it's 10 or 11 years that they've lived in our neighborhood. A lot of us have lived there for 15 years. And it's a very tight, crazy neighborhood, unusual neighborhood, where we all are together a lot. There is a cul-de-sac at the end of well, where my house is they live four houses up. And everybody's always there; it's like the town square when the weather's nice. And Bonnie and Bob always participated in all our block party activities and kids' sports going on and off, and we're just all in we can't believe it.
[Van Susteren:] Did you know what he did for a living?
[Cullen:] Oh, yes, we knew he was an FBI agent. I mean...
[Van Susteren:] But were there any strange cars coming or going? Was anything bizarre, unusual, at all? CULLEN No, no really, his Ford Taurus was always just parked on the street. And they had a one-car garage, so Bonnie's van is parked there, and a dog, and six kids, and regular routines and part of their routine that we all thought made us feel kind of guilty was that every Sunday they would load into the van I mean, every single one of them together and go off to church. And you know, lots of people do that, but it was just kind of interesting that they made it a family thing. It would, it was going to happen, you know. The kids are well behaved and great kids, and most of them are grown now, or in school, but I think one or two are left at home.
[Cossack:] Nancy, did was this a kind of couple that did a lot of entertaining and had a lot of, like, friends over, or I mean, you mentioned block parties and things like that, but were there other people there besides people that lived on the street.
[Cullen:] Well, her sister lives just three or four houses up the street and had lived in the neighborhood before Bonnie and Bob moved in long-time neighbors. They have lots of kids too. And more often, rather than entertaining neighbors in our homes, we'd all find ourselves out, doing things outside, or things like that, because there were so many sports activities for the kids and so many school things that you're involved in that it doesn't leave a whole lot of time to say let's all have dinner together, but...
[Cossack:] I know when you live probably next door to an FBI agent, there's probably not the same kind of conversation that there may be talking to other people, but did you ever discuss with either his wife or with him what his job was all about, what he did?
[Cullen:] No, no, not really.
[Cossack:] Is there a reason for that?
[Cullen:] I don't know I think it's kind of a guy thing, at least that's part of it. You know, I mean, when the guys would get together, it's how are those Redskins, or something, and none of them...
[Cossack:] Not much different than what goes on here, by the way.
[Van Susteren:] Yes, you know, you talk politics with your political buddies; you talk other things with other groups...
[Cullen:] I don't think so. I don't recall them ever really being gone, because there's so many kids...
[Van Susteren:] And no lavish lifestyle. You mentioned a Ford Taurus; there's no, like, Jaguar convertible or...
[Cullen:] Oh, no.
[Cossack:] And that's an old that's a 10-year-old Ford Taurus, isn't it?.
[Cullen:] I don't know how old the Taurus is, but I know that her van I mean, I've already been quoted today as saying Bonnie, that van, is it going to make it, you know. But they're just a great family. And I don't know Bob as well as I know Bonnie, but she's you would aspire to be Bonnie if you had kids, because with you her six kids, she always never got...
[Cossack:] One question: You said some of the kids were in college. Do you know what schools they went to? Were they private schools or state schools?
[Cullen:] I think Boston University was one that one daughter went to, and one daughter's now married with one child, if not two. They all went up through Catholic schools.
[Unidentified Male:] I think they went to private school, the Heights.
[Cullen:] Yes.
[Cossack:] All right, let's take a break. He's accused of causing extreme damage to U.S. security, so when we come back: the case against Robert Philip Hanssen. Don't go away.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Well, Elian Gonzalez arrived on an inner tube from Cuba seven months ago, he could leave on a chartered jet this afternoon. His long journey through the legal system now set to end in the U.S. Supreme Court. Today the high court could give the go ahead to the father of Elian Gonzalez to take his son back to Cuba. The session opens about three hours from now. If the court does not issue a stay, Elian Gonzalez could leave as a early as 4:00 this afternoon, Eastern time. CNN correspondent Mark Potter reports both sides have made their final appeal.
[Mark Potter, Cnn Correspondent:] As Elian Gonzalez and his father attended church in Washington, D.C., the Justice Department urged the U.S. Supreme Court not to delay the boy's return to Cuba, it argued that Elian's Miami relatives last-ditch appeal is without merit and said: Prohibiting Elian's departure would only cause him harm. In a separate petition, Gregory Craig, the attorney for Elian's father wrote: The perpetuation of these circumstances deprives Elian of his childhood, and Juan Miguel of his right to raise his family. The lawyers for the Gonzalez family in Miami argue Elian has been denied he is constitutional right to an asylum hearing. Meanwhile, at the home in Miami's Little Havana, where Elian once stayed with his relatives, signs and flags remain on the front fence. But across the street, where crowds of demonstrators once gathered, only two men kept vigil in support of Elian remaining in the United States. Among Miami's Cuban-Americans, there is resignation that Elian could soon return to Cuba. Political leaders say they expect a quiet community response.
[Sylvia Iriondo, Cuban-american Activist:] We abide by the law, we abide by the rule of law, and we'll be very saddened thinking about what this child will have to encounter upon his return to Cuba. But we will continue our struggle so that there are no more children like Elian.
[Potter:] The Miami relatives are asking to see Elian, perhaps for the last time.
[Linda Osberg-braun, Gonzalez Family Attorney:] They haven't seen him since the raid. They want him to know that they haven't abandoned him and that they love him.
[Potter:] But the relatives' lawyers released a letter from Elian's father, saying he would only allow a reunion if the relatives dropped their lawsuits, which they did not. As it stands now, under the appeals court order, Elian and his father are free to leave the United States at 4:00 this afternoon, Eastern time, unless of course the Supreme Court intervenes and delays that departure. Plans are already being made for a charter flight from Washington's Dulles Airport to Havana late this afternoon Carol.
[Lin:] Mark, I see some people behind you, early signs of an organized protest today?
[Potter:] No. There are about 20 people here, there may be some impromptu demonstrations today, but the political activists say that they have no plans for any sort of demonstration. City and county officials are saying, they don't expect any big demonstrations, they certainly do not expect any violence. A sense of resignation has been building in this community for quite some time that this case is winding down, it is almost over, and that explains why we are not expecting any big, big demonstrations today.
[Lin:] All right, a far cry from the scene just a few months ago. Thank you very much, Mark Potter.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] For a check on the mood around that temporary Washington home of Elian Gonzalez and his father, let's go now to CNN national correspondent Bob Franken. Good morning, Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Good morning, Leon. And a few of us have began to call this Elian's Island. It has been sort of an island for him in the United States since he's been here, an island surrounded by heavy security, you can possibly see over my shoulders the U.S. marshals that have been a constant presence, keeping Elian Gonzalez since he was taken back to his father, keeping him away from reporters, heavily secure, behind in an estate here, his last place that he has stayed in the United States in a very, very opulent section of Washington. He is expected, if the Supreme Court, in fact, rules the way everybody believes it is going to rule today, he is expected to leave the United States and return to what was his normal life in Cuba later this afternoon, taken by the marshals from here to Dulles Airport, if in fact the order stands and it goes out of commission to 4:00. He is expected to leave about an hour later, and perhaps Juan Miguel Gonzalez, who fought so hard to get his son back, will make some statement, presumably thanking the people of the United States before he heads back to Cuba. Elian Gonzalez has been in the United States for over seven months, of course, arriving on November 25th, so that's seven months and three days, his father fought so hard, finally came to the United States, finally, when his son was retrieved from the Miami relatives, they were reunited and came here, soon they will be going back. Bob Franken, CNN live, Washington.
[Lin:] With the Elian Gonzalez case now in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court, there are several things that could happen today. CNN's senior Washington correspondent Charles Bierbauer joins us now from outside the high court to explain. Good morning, Charles.
[Charles Bierbauer, Cnn Sr. Washington Correspondent:] Good morning, Carol. Well, the court is very mindful of that 4:00 deadline, and there are really two issues that have been presented to the court. One is for an injunction, or a stay, to prolonged Elian's stay here in the United States, pending a decision by this court, the U.S. Supreme Court, as to whether or not it will hear an appeal of the 11th Circuit ruling, that ruling which said that Elian and his father should be free to go. So the court can address the stay and it can address the question of whether or not it will hear that appeal. Once it decides whether or not to hear the appeal, then of course, the question of the stay becomes either moot, and he can go, or the stay would be granted until the appeal is heard here. But most scholars don't see a compelling reason for this court to overturn the rulings already granted by the district court and by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. And in fact, the Circuit Court of Appeals refused to hear this case again. So that sort of narrows the chances that the Supreme Court will Carol.
[Lin:] Well, Charles, certainly a very busy day at the court. What other cases are pending?
[Bierbauer:] Yes, this is the last scheduled day for the court to hand down opinions in this term and there are major cases pending. Two of them deal with the issue of abortion, always an important and significant and controversial issue. In one case, the justices must decide side whether a ban enacted by the state of Nebraska on what is commonly called partial-birth abortion, a very political term in and of itself for a procedure that usually occurs in mid-term, as to whether that ban was too broad and, therefore, unconstitutional. Roe v. Wade, of course, remains the law of the land and that is not being challenged. A second issue deals with a ban in the state of Colorado, or a limitation on where anti-abortion protesters may protest outside abortion clinics. A third case comes from the state of New Jersey, where the Boy Scouts sought to exclude a gay Boy Scout leader from a troop there. This is a major point of concern for gay and lesbian advocates in this country. And the fourth case comes to us from the state of Louisiana and it questions for what sort of things may federal aid be used to purchase supplies for parochial schools. In question specifically, computers, television sets, VCRs, those things which, in and of themselves, have no religious content but may be used to convey religious content, and the question, of course, is the separation of church and state Carol.
[Lin:] A loaded day. Thank you very much, Charles Bierbauer.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Let's get right to our top story. It's the rising water and the rising anxiety in the Midwest. The Mississippi River is expected to crest at near-record levels today in Davenport, Iowa. That's the largest major city on the upper Mississippi without a permanent flood wall. CNN's Jeff Flock is on the flood watch this morning. Let's go to Jeff now live on the phone Jeff.
[Jeff Flock, Cnn Correspondent:] And I actually am across the river this morning that's why we're on the phone in Rock Island. A lot of flap over the fact that Davenport...
[Flock:] ... wall. The FEMA director yesterday criticizing Davenport, and they didn't take it particularly well in Davenport. They are saying, that, well, you know, "You don't make people move off the Florida coast because there are hurricanes. You don't make people leave California because there are earthquakes, and you shouldn't make people leave the river because there are occasionally floods. So some flap about that, and the FEMA director will be here in Davenport later this week on Thursday. But, first, to the latest numbers. The latest numbers we have out here along the river in terms of the crest again, expected to crest at 22.5 feet sometime later today, and the latest we had from the emergency operations center in Davenport about 22.1 or so... Earlier, we reported this morning that the river levels began to drop for a time. There was a reportedly break in a levee perhaps upstream. We are not able to confirm that, however, and right now, they are still not getting a good explanation for why there was a slight drop. We expect to get more from the city a little later this morning, perhaps in about two hours. Right now, the latest is that the flood wall it is up and protecting downtown Davenport, continues to hold. They're getting some water through it as well as a little bit that comes under it, but, at this point, they're able to pump it out and, so far, so good, Leon.
[Harris:] All right. Jeff, just if we can hold the shot right there, Jeff, I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but we actually do have a camera shot on you. Folks, that is Jeff Flock standing there on top of that levee. Now that that is on those is it Rock Island that's called over there where you're at right now?
[Flock:] That's right. I'm over in Rock Island and, in fact, I've got the city administrator here, John Phillips. And you folks I we're going to talk with him this morning about how you built this levee out here, John, and you're happy that you have one here, and it was at considerable expense, but you're pretty glad that we're standing in a dry area right now.
[John Phillips, Rock Island City Administrator:] We certainly are. We're really pleased that we've got it. There are tradeoffs that communities have to make about what their priorities are. We're...
[Phillips:] ... the power that it provides the Rock Island about 30 years ago decided that they should work with the Corps of Engineers to build this protection system.
[Flock:] So, as you can see, Leon, they're pretty happy they've got this right now and, as you can see, we can get another four or five feet worth of... ... would not have a problem here.
[Harris:] All right. Good deal. Thanks much, Jeff Flock. You can run, but you can't hide. We've got cameras that track you down everywhere. There we go. We've got a great- now we've got a great closeup shot of the two of you. And we'll get back to you in just a bit. All right. Take care.
[Flock:] Thank you.
[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Would you call him Lord of the Live Shots?
[Harris:] He is that.
[Phillips:] He makes it happen no matter where he is.
[Harris:] There you go. He proved it, didn't he?
[Phillips:] That's right.
[Harris:] But the first shot we had, folks, was from the Davenport side of the Mississippi River, and you can see where that water is starting to creep into the downtown area down there.
[Phillips:] And covering the weather from all angels, of course, Chad Myers. What's the latest, Chad?
[Harris:] Hey, Chad.
[Chad Myers, Cnn Meteorologist:] Yesterday, the wind was the problem. Today, that wind has died off for those folks and, in fact, it's turned out of the West at about nine miles per hour. Here's Davenport right here, and if you notice, why we were saying this this south wind was such a problem, because, for a while, the Mississippi River goes from east to west on this little turn, and that's where Davenport is. So that wind coming out of the South yesterday was really causing havoc with waves lapping up against the areas there. The barrier or the sandbags some of them even getting washed away because of the wave action, not even the water coming down. Here's what we have for you now. I have drawn this map of the next seven days precip potential, and we're really not seeing anything in the upper Mississippi Valley. That's some great news. From Minneapolis, we see a little bit of green in here, but that's all less than a quarter of an inch everywhere. And the good news is we're beginning to see some rain down across the South. Two-inch rainfalls across the northern sections in Canada. That will not get into the Mississippi River. But also down to the South, two-inch areas in the Everglades, and that's some better news. And we'll zoom into these areas here. For the next seven days, only a quarter inch across the Great Lakes, dry in the basin here. So what water is here is running off from the rains we had this weekend. But no more rain coming down for the next seven days, except for the folks in Miami and down in South Florida, and a lot of water potential coming in in the next 10 days. I'll have that for you coming up in the next few minutes back to you.
[Phillips:] All right, Chad. Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] A number of European countries are calling for an investigation into a possible link between depleted uranium ammunition and cancer among Balkan peacekeeping troops. Uranium weapons were used by the United States aircraft during the NATO bombing of Kosovo. A host of countries in the International Red Cross deny any evidence of a link, but sick veterans and recent testing at two Canadian universities are telling a different story. Here is Canada's CBC.
[Darrow Mcintyre, Cnn Correspondent:] Eight years ago, Raza Miran went to war in the Balkans as an army doctor; he came back a patient, suffering first from leukemia, then bone cancer. Today, he seems to have beaten both. But he can't shake suspicions of how he got them in the first place.
[Raza Miran, Balkan Veteran:] It is very difficult to believe that a perfectly normal individual, could
[Mcintyre:] He doesn't know exactly what caused his illness, but he thinks he was exposed to something. Dozens of other Canadian soldiers also survived war zones, only to later develop unexplained illnesses: cancer, kidney failure, chronic fatigue. So far, 104 have asked to be tested for depleted uranium; 59 Gulf War veterans, 45 who served in the Balkans. Those tests showed no problems, which is why Canada will not be launching a new, more aggressive testing policy.
[Art Eggleton, Defense Minister:] There has not been any linkage between illnesses and depleted uranium. No toxic levels of depleted uranium have been found in the Canadian personnel that have been tested.
[Mcintyre:] Researchers at this lab in Newfoundland have been doing their own tests on sick veterans from Canada, the U.S., as well as Britain. They are finding different results.
[Greg Dunning, Memorial University:] Either urine has a significant component of depleted uranium in it, not short uranium, but depleted uranium, which does not occur in nature you couldn't pick it up just walking around.
[Mcintyre:] Raza Miran says it is time the government found out what is making people sick.
[Miran:] I think at the moment, the action of the government is the peace deal, poorly organized, and like, scientific rigidity.
[Mcintyre:] He says a thorough investigation is the least Canada can do for soldiers who served overseas in the past and those who will in the future. Darrow McIntyre, CBC news, Toronto.

[Mary Matalin, Co-host:] Tonight, President Clinton says he won't seek a pardon after he leaves office.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] I have no interest in it. I wouldn't ask for it. I don't think it would be necessary.
[Matalin:] But as Independent Counsel Robert Ray steps up his investigation, will the president need one?
[Announcer:] Live from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Mary Matalin. In the crossfire, Julian Epstein, chief minority counsel for the House Judiciary Committee, and former Deputy Independent Counsel Bob Bittman.
[Matthew Miller, Guest Co-host:] Good evening, and welcome to CROSSFIRE. I'm Matt Miller, a syndicated columnist, sitting in for Bill Press. Well, just when you thought it was safe to run out the clock on this presidential term, Bill Clinton's legal problems are in the news again. The president was asked yesterday at a convention of top newspaper editors whether he'd accept a potential pardon from Al Gore. The issue came up after Independent Counsel Robert Ray, who took over Kenneth Starr's fun job, said that he was hiring more lawyers and couldn't rule out an indictment of the president after he leaves office. Did Clinton rule out a possible pardon? Well, that may depend on close textual analysis of the Clintonian language that opened this show. The editors were also kind enough just how much of his presidential library would be devoted to his impeachment, evoking this from the plainly peeved president.
[Clinton:] I'm not ashamed of the fact that they impeached me. That was their decision, not mine. And it was wrong. I consider it one of the major chapters in my defeat of the revolution Mr. Gingrich led.
[Miller:] So if Bill Clinton gets handcuffed the day he hands over the keys to the White House, would it be a triumph for the rule of law or a tribute to prosecutors with the worst judgment in human history? And is Clinton right to paint his legal endurance as part of a positive political legacy? Only one woman has the courage to lead us back into these culture wars with a smile. Mary.
[Matalin:] With a guffaw, you're absolutely right. And I was just thinking, Julian, Julian, Julian, we meet again, constantly forced together by this scandal-plagued administration. Well, just because we haven't gotten enough of Elian Gonzalez this week, let me play for you before we get into this, because it is related, what the president had to say about the Elian Gonzalez case. And we'll launch from there.
[Clinton:] I think the issue here for me is the rule of law. We have a system. The system has if you don't think it's right, then you should say, "Well, we ought to change the laws."
[Matalin:] Change the laws. The rule of law. This is a somewhat selective application, right, because the correlative principle of the rule of law is that no person is above the law. Why would Robert Ray be held to a lesser duty in applying the rule of law than the president himself?
[Julian Epstein, Chief Minority Counsel, House Judiciary Committee:] Well, the adage is the same if you flip it on the other side. No person is below the rule of law as well. I think as an intuitive matter, Senator Reid was correct. Most people have just had enough of this in this country and believe that this sorry soap opera has run its course. As a legal matter, Mary, I don't think there is a fair-minded prosecutor in the country that would touch this with a 10-foot pole. Even Elliot Richardson, the former Republican attorney general, said that this thing legally was a bag of trash. He believed that the statements in question for which he would potentially prosecute the president could never meet the materiality threshold. There were no witnesses that confirmed any of the somewhat speculative theories. Even Henry Hyde, a man who you respect, I respect I disagreed with him during the impeachment process said that he didn't believe that a prosecution would be warranted. And Ken Starr himself I don't think believed that prosecution would be warranted. If this thing goes on, Mary, I think what it says...
[Matalin:] Indictment is not a prosecution, OK? And then what Henry Hyde and what Harry Reid...
[Epstein:] Indictment means you believe.
[Matalin:] ... and what everybody was saying was this is not a political matter. It's going to drag us all under. And in truth, the president has paid a political price. But the reason he was not impeached, or is not removed from office, so say the senators, Democratic senators, liberal senators, their whole excuse for not passing the articles of impeachment, removing him from office, was precisely because he would be subjected to the legal system post-office. Let me share some of those with you. And I know you read them yourself today. This is from Barbara Boxer. "He remains subject to the laws of the land just like any other citizen." Herb Kohl: "The president can be criminally prosecuted, especially once he leaves office." Kent Conrad, senator, another liberal senator: "These are matters best left to the criminal justice system." That's what they said then, to not deal with it...
[Epstein:] Yes. And none of those statements are but Mary, the difference is in none of those statements, none of those Democratic senators are saying the president should be prosecuted. And look, there isn't a single case in the history of this country where you have a civil case that was settled and you have in question statements which were peripheral. On two occasions, the judge ruled that the statements in question weren't even relevant to the Paula Jones case. There isn't a single case that you or that Bob on this program could cite where anyone has ever been prosecuted in this country. So the point is, the president isn't below the law. Republicans want to continue talking about this because they can't talk about the best economic record, the lowest poverty...
[Matalin:] Oh, please. Oh, please...
[Epstein:] ... unemployment, the lowest crime rate...
[Matalin:] ... No Republican wants to talk about it. We're frankly sick of it. There's no one maybe no one was prosecuted like that. But there's never been a president which has subjected the country to the scandals that this one has.
[Miller:] Well, isn't it and let's bring Bob into this. I mean, isn't it, based on the kind of stuff Julian was saying, there's a whole gallery of ex-high-level prosecutors you could line up who would say that in the exercise of their discretion, they wouldn't bring a case, they wouldn't have brought the impeachment, let alone a case post-presidency for Bill Clinton. Doesn't this prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that if Robert Ray is thinking about this now that somehow special prosecutors get into this deep tunnel where they essentially lose their sanity?
[Bob Bittman, Former Deputy Independent Counsel:] Well, it really isn't a deep tunnel. Remember, you have what Julian left out is that you have a federal judge who looked at all these facts. That is Chief Judge Wright in Arkansas, who had made a very favorable ruling, many favorable rulings to the president. She looked at all the facts. And she found this is an easy case. The president of the United States raised his hand at a deposition in which I was present, the judge, and he lied. He gave false, misleading, and evasive answers for the purpose of obstructing justice. And...
[Miller:] He lied about an affair, right?
[Bittman:] ... Yeah, he lied about an affair. He lied about his relationship with...
[Miller:] The woman he was having an affair with.
[Bittman:] ... a potential witness in that case.
[Miller:] The woman he was having an affair with.
[Bittman:] That's correct.
[Epstein:] Bob, don't you agree that that legal standard that the judge uses in that, which is just civil contempt, is far different from any criminal, doesn't really have any relevance criminally?
[Bittman:] Oh, I don't agree that it doesn't have any relevance. It's clearly a lower standard...
[Epstein:] It's an entirely different standard.
[Bittman:] ... It's a lower standard.
[Epstein:] You don't have to meet the materiality. You don't have to meet any of the things that a prosecutor would given if you're trying to attempt to prosecute the case criminally.
[Miller:] So it's a different question that way. But listening to you, you want Clinton indicted, don't you?
[Bittman:] I think he should be held up the rule of law like many of the Democratic senators that Mary referred to earlier.
[Miller:] Well, that's not quite an answer...
[Bittman:] That...
[Miller:] ... You were chasing this guy for a number of years. You must inside want him to I guess pay a price that he hasn't paid thus far. Is that...
[Bittman:] No, no, no, no, no. I have no animus towards the president. We set out to look at the facts and find the facts. And that's what we did. The facts unfortunately were that the president of the United States lied under oath...
[Miller:] About an affair...
[Bittman:] ... both in his deposition and the grand jury, and he obstructed justice. And he got other people to lie about it. If people want to throw up their hands and say, "We've had enough of this," then they're falling into the trap that Clinton said all along. That is delay, delay, delay, so people just get sick about it.
[Miller:] Or they're allowing for prosecutorial discretion, which a gallery of famous prosecutors said they would have exercised. Can I ask one last question before we do you want to...
[Matalin:] Please. You're clearly obsessed with vindicating a man who lies under oath...
[Miller:] ... No
[Matalin:] ... obstructs justice, tampers with witnesses...
[Bittman:] Thank you, Mary.
[Epstein:] None of which were ever proved, Mary. And even a Republican Senate, a Republican controlled Senate...
[Matalin:] Not true.
[Epstein:] ... couldn't even get 50 votes, couldn't even get a majority in the Senate.
[Matalin:] That was not that's a political situation...
[Miller:] Let me ask because...
[Matalin:] ... not a legal situation.
[Miller:] ... there's one question that I always wanted to ask you guys, ask one of the prosecutors, which is did you ever consider in that first deposition when Clinton lied about whether he'd been involved with Monica, Monica had given her affidavit under oath before that so that if Clinton right if Clinton that first day had said, "You know what, now that you've asked me, I'll come clean," which is what Bob Bittman and Ken Starr would have wanted him to do, that would have been his duty. If he'd come clean then, he would have immediately exposed Monica to perjury charges. And so in essence, Clinton was done in by his own chivalry. Isn't that right?
[Bittman:] Well, no. He was done in by his own conspiracy. He had conversations with Monica Lewinsky when Monica Lewinsky was drafting her affidavit. There was a conspiracy for both of them to lie because unless both of them lied it would have fallen apart.
[Miller:] That's right. A fancy way of saying people who have affairs talk about covering it up.
[Matalin:] Matt...
[Bittman:] The fact is, Paula Jones was entitled to a fair trial, was entitled to learn relevant evidence that the judge had determined to be relevant evidence. And she did not get her day in court because the president of the United States lied.
[Epstein:] You know, with respect to Bob, try those cases in a criminal court, and the same thing will happen that happened in the Willey case...
[Bittman:] That may happen.
[Epstein:] ... The same thing will happen in the Julia Hiatt Steele case. Look, this has been now, what, five or six years, $60 million. Whitewater was an empty bag. It certainly appears to be Travelgate was, Filegate was. The two criminal cases that came out of this so-called impeachment matter both lost. I think that, you know, at some point, enough becomes enough. Now Ray may be trying to do this because he is attempting...
[Matalin:] You're making a political point. No...
[Epstein:] ... to do this because he is attempting to...
[Matalin:] ... Robert Ray is a Democrat...
[Epstein:] ... Legally, Mary, Mary, the point is, legally...
[Matalin:] ... Robert Ray is a Democrat. He's trying to uphold the law. He's trying to do his duty. Can I just as an aside say that remember the president's chivalry started with trying to accuse Monica of being a stalker. OK, there is nothing chivalrous about this. And you're acting as delusional as the president.
[Epstein:] Mary, I'm not making, I'm not making, I'm not making look, Mary, I'm not making a political point. I also made a legal point. Neither you or Bob can cite a single precedent where a case given this fact situation ever in this country's history has ever been prosecuted.
[Matalin:] Matt, Matt...
[Epstein:] That's why all the prosecutors, the Republican prosecutors, Mary, that came before the Judiciary Committee, said that no fair-minded prosecutor would ever attempt to prosecute this case. This is another if this goes forward, this is another case of prosecutorial excess that the country thinks and knows intuitively is out of bounds, and that legally won't survive. The case would lose.
[Matalin:] We have a justice system. If the president has broken the law, he should be indicted for it and then let him go to a jury of his peers to say whether or not he's prosecuted...
[Epstein:] Mary...
[Matalin:] ... I want to talk about this delusion of this as all nothing, it's all a vast right-wing conspiracy because you're echoing what the president had to say to the editors yesterday.
[Epstein:] That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying legally there's no precedent for it. This would be a loser in court.
[Matalin:] Let just it's all part of the president's attempt to, as Matt said in the opening, make his endurance, his endurance through the most scandal-ridden administration in the history of this country...
[Epstein:] I suppose Henry Hyde is part of that.
[Matalin:] ... part of the political positive...
[Epstein:] ... Henry Hyde is part of that conspiracy too?
[Matalin:] ... Henry Hyde did not want to tie down the Congress any more. And
[Epstein:] No, Henry Hyde said there shouldn't be a prosecution.
[Matalin:] ... Listen to what the president said yesterday that starting with what he believes was the onset of all of this vast right-wing conspiracy.
[Clinton:] I would like just once to see someone acknowledge the fact that this Whitewater thing was a lie and a fraud from the beginning, and that most people with any responsibility over it have known it for years.
[Matalin:] This is what I mean about rewriting history. For the record, there were a record 15 convictions in connection with Whitewater, including a sitting governor and the president's two business friends. Because the president was in a position to obstruct justice, lose files, delay, who knows what was in the e-mail, all of that, he was able, has been so far, able to get off. But don't say there was nothing there...
[Epstein:] Mary, you're going to blame the president because people that he knew...
[Matalin:] ... 15 convictions.
[Epstein:] ... happened to be convicted? The fact is that this independent counsel... ... this independent counsel spent untold resources trying to find wrongdoing in Whitewater, wasn't able to. Tried to find wrongdoing in the Travelgate, wasn't able to. Tried to find wrongdoing in the Filegate, wasn't able to. Lost the two cases that came out of this thing. I mean, this thing has been a wild goose chase...
[Matalin:] Obviously, you guys have been you're both attributing motives. You're attributing a motive to Bob that he wants the president to be indicted...
[Epstein:] Mary, we're not talking motive. I'm talking about a record...
[Matalin:] ... You're saying these independent counsels were trying to find bad...
[Epstein:] ... of no.
[Matalin:] ... Do you know what the president said when he reauthorized the independent counsel statute, was that it's also an institution for exoneration. How do you know they weren't going about their business in an effort to exonerate, not to find bad?
[Epstein:] Well, interestingly enough, when the exoneration comes, unlike any other independent counsel where you've always had one final report, we now have four final reports, being dribbled out, guess when, during campaign season...
[Matalin:] By a Democrat.
[Epstein:] ... No, by Robert Ray, who is the...
[Matalin:] Who is a Democrat.
[Epstein:] ... who was also hired, and I don't believe this indicates that he is fair or unfair one way. He was also hired by Rudolph Giuliani...
[Matalin:] But you're going to say it anyway. If you don't believe it then, why say it?
[Epstein:] ... at one point. But the reason why I should say that is because of the fact that he was hired...
[Matalin:] Yeah, we've got to Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. In a vigorous defense of his scandal-plagued administration, President Clinton lashed out at Republican revolutionaries and irresponsible journalists for his turbulent tenure. Did the vast right-wing conspiracy collude with the mainstream left-wing press to launch investigations the president called, quote, "a lie and a fraud from the beginning"? We're joined by two who lived through it almost as closely as Bill Clinton himself, without all the fun. Chief Minority Counsel of the House Judiciary Committee, Julian Epstein, and former Deputy Independent Counsel Bob Bittman. Matt.
[Miller:] Bob, if it turns out that Robert Ray does the right thing, decides that we've all been through enough and doesn't prosecute after Clinton leaves office, will you have a sense somehow lingering that Clinton got away with something?
[Bittman:] Well, you have to look at the facts and then what actually happened and has this president really paid for the crimes that he committed? And that's a judgment that someone else will have to make. I think the public ought to make that... ... history. I think we'll have to see because we still have yet to see what's going to happen with the president with regard to his Bar, his being an attorney in the state of Arkansas. That's been challenged. He has been found by a federal judge to have committed a serious contempt against the court. And if his law license gets taken away from him, some other things, you know...
[Miller:] But if there's nothing more than what we've had to date, is it your view that a man who went through the most searing global humiliation presumably in history will have not paid sufficient price, who had his family shattered through this experience, won't have paid enough for lying about an affair under oath?
[Bittman:] I don't know. I mean, you know, part of the Department of Justice analysis as to whether or not someone has paid a price is acceptance of responsibility. And I think we've seen tonight by the president's statements and at other times that he has not accepted responsibility. He has not admitted that he did anything wrong. It's everyone else who does something wrong. It's never President Clinton himself. He's never admitted that he lied. He's never admitted that he obstructed justice. He's never admitted that he tried to get other people to lie.
[Epstein:] Except for the umpteen million times when he said he thought that he made a mistake and...
[Miller:] His mistake was having an affair...
[Epstein:] ... was sorry that he gave misleading...
[Miller:] ... His mistake was having an affair...
[Epstein:] ... And Bob still refuses to point out a single case that's ever been prosecuted, which is the legal standard for independent counsels...
[Matalin:] OK, Julian, Julian, you made that point...
[Epstein:] ...
[Matalin:] ... You made that point. Let's move on to Bob's point because the point he's making is why this story is on the front page of all the newspapers today. After saying I'm not he didn't say, "I won't accept a pardon," but the other comment he made which made everyone's hair stand on fire was this.
[Clinton:] On the impeachment, let me tell you, I am proud of what we did there because I think we saved the constitution of the United States.
[Matalin:] You were there. You're very political. That's Alice in Wonderland. Did you find this a proud day for Democrats?
[Epstein:] No. I don't think that the misdeeds created a proud day for Democrats. But I think that we did defend the constitution, which was set up to use impeachment only when there were crimes against the state. This wasn't that. I think the country widely believed that the impeachment process was a political process. That's why Republicans lost seats. That's why...
[Matalin:] No, no.
[Epstein:] ... if they continue with this Scandalpalooza, Mary...
[Matalin:] That's wrong.
[Epstein:] ... you're going to lose in the 2000 election. You've got to start talking about the fact that this has been the best economy we've had in...
[Matalin:] Julian, if you want to go to politics, then look at the polls...
[Epstein:] ... a generation, lowest crime, lowest unemployment.
[Matalin:] ... The reason the Republicans lost was because...
[Epstein:] Your question was a political question.
[Matalin:] ... they didn't deliver, not because of impeachment. If you want to look at the polls today, those who voted for impeachment are ahead of those who voted against it. That's political fact. That's a political reality...
[Epstein:] And a political fact in 1998 was that...
[Matalin:] ... None of those impeachment voters are working today.
[Epstein:] ... Republicans were changing parties in the droves when they saw how Republicans in the House of Representatives used the impeachment process in a highly political way that wasn't warranted given the constitutional standards.
[Matalin:] You don't think the president is even slightly delusional or has grandeurs of delusion to say he was...
[Epstein:] No.
[Matalin:] ... proud of that he saved the constitution. OK
[Epstein:] I think the defense of the constitution, I think is
[Miller:] And since we're tag-teaming, let me toss this to Bob also which is why shouldn't he view this as part of an extended effort to beat back the revolution that Newt Gingrich was supposed to usher in, and he at least survived and the best evidence of his victory in retreat, including the impeachment but also some policy stuff, is that the Republicans are coalescing around a man who sounds like George Bush, not like Newt Gingrich, who is long gone?
[Bittman:] If the president wants to say that he's proud of what he did when he lied under oath, both...
[Miller:] When he lied about that affair.
[Bittman:] ... Look, lying under oath is lying under oath. If you want to say that's OK, Matt, that's fine.
[Miller:] Would you ever lie under oath to protect your kids?
[Bittman:] I absolutely would not.
[Miller:] To protect your children?
[Bittman:] Look, a federal judge sitting next to me and I raise my right hand to swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, I'm going to do it...
[Miller:] Even if it harms your children or your family...
[Bittman:] ... But if you want to excuse...
[Miller:] ... I'm just asking.
[Bittman:] ... No, I'm not going to do that. I wouldn't first of all, how was he protecting his family by lying? How was he protecting the country by lying?
[Miller:] How was he protecting his family by not disclosing an affair in a public proceeding?
[Epstein:] This is not what the president is saying he's proud of. What the president is saying he's proud of was the defense that he and the House Democrats made in defending against the disproportionate and the overreaction to the misdeed. That's the point, Bob...
[Bittman:] But many federal judge...
[Epstein:] ... And that's what the country believes.
[Bittman:] ... have been removed for lying under oath.
[Epstein:] Never in this type of situation, Bob.
[Miller:] We're going to have to leave it there... ... the arguments will continue. Thanks very much, Bob Bittman. Thanks to Julian Epstein for the able defenses of your position. And Mary and I will be back in a minute with a fresh taste on this stale scandal. Mary, you know, going through dredging all this old stuff again and going through all those emotions, at least with me, just reminds me this episode was not about the death of outrage like Bill Bennett always argued that it was. But to me, it was about the death of discretion, about the death of discretion of the prosecutors. Yes, Bill Clinton was obviously indiscreet. Monica Lewinsky was. But the whole political culture was so indiscreet that that's why we ended up with this mess. And we're looking at it again.
[Matalin:] But this is such a chicken or an egg. Who put us in this indiscreet position? Who would have ever done in this environment I'm not saying it hasn't been done in the past but in this environment asked to be scrutinized and then do that kind of stuff? But why this is in the news is not because Republicans are dredging it up, that vast right-wing conspiracy. It's because Al Gore was asked and answered wrongly again the issue of pardoning Clinton. He said that Clinton had long ago said that he wouldn't seek one. Gore just makes this stuff up. This is your bigger problem. The Clinton legacy is not your problem for 2000. That's Gore is even more delusional than the president.
[Miller:] And I agree, Clinton was dumb to get us into this. But it took a lot of other stuff. And if there was any justice in this world, Bill Clinton would be able to sue for a third term.
[Matalin:] Whew.
[Miller:] From the left, I'm Matt Miller sitting in for Bill Press. Good night for
[Crossfire. Matalin:] And if he did, we'd all move to Canada. From the right, I'm Mary Matalin. Have a wonderful weekend. And join us again next week for more CROSSFIRE. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Ah, the Eiffel Tower, graceful symbol of the City of Light. But sometimes things get lost in "le translation." CNN's Paris Bureau Chief Peter Humi shows us Eiffel Tower memorabilia that's going on the auction block in Paris today.
[Peter Humi, Cnn Correspondent:] Not only can you see it from everywhere, you can find it everywhere. Wrote French author and poet Guidemo Poisson, he added, "It's an unavoidable excruciating nightmare." Guidemo Poisson wrote those scathing words just one year after construction of arguably the world's most famous landmark for the 1889 Paris Exhibition. What the poet found a nightmare was a collector's dream. Over a quarter of a century a Parisian couple gathered 2,000 items related to the tower and the international fair. The tower was meant to be demolished afterwards, explains Andre Fetro, who put together the collection's catalog, even though it was the highlight of the show, he says. Debate raged at the time but the tower survived, of course, and became a tourist magnet almost immediately. The collection may not be expensive, there are just a few objects that would make much more than 1,000 francs, about $175, but they have historical value.
[Andre Fetro:] It shows quite very well the decorative arts of the beginning of the century.
[Humie:] These matching chairs with the Eiffel Tower carved into the back rest were found in a bar in Vietnam. [on camera]: And then there's this monumental work, almost as impressive as the real thing. And it took 10 times as long to build. [voice-over]: More than seven feet tall and made of 18,000 match sticks built over nearly two decades by someone who can, at best, be described as patient. Another tower, this one made entirely of foil used in cigarette packs. Turn of the century souvenirs, says Andre Fetro, were more practical than today's. There are bottles for perfumes, for liqueurs, even baby bottles. This one was condemned as a health hazard in 1910 but it sold in its thousands by then. Scissors, plates, glasses and even a bell, the form of the tower to summon the help. And what would Monsieur Gustave Eiffel have made of all of this? He would have been delighted, says Fetro. He was first and foremost a businessman, after all, he says, and one whose biggest gamble paid off handsomely. Peter Humi, CNN, Paris.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Now we move onto the conflict in the Middle East. Secretary of State Colin Powell will address the issue of Palestinian statehood today in a major speech at the University of Louisville. There is some hope that dangling this particular carrot in front of the Palestinians just might stop the violence and restart the peace process. CNN's Senior White House Correspondent John King reports on just what the administration has in mind. Good morning John.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Good morning to you, Paula. The administration hoping to revive hoping yet again to revive the long stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace process. This speech by the Secretary of State today was to have been delivered in early September, delayed by the tragic events of September 11th. Since then the president himself has gone on the record saying he would hope that at the end of a peace process there would be a Palestinian state, so there's not as much splash, if you will, in the secretary state secretary of state's speech, there might have been if he had delivered it on schedule. But Secretary Powell will today say the United States envisions a Palestinian state at the end of an Israeli peace process. He will urge both sides to get back to the bargaining table. Tensions, though, of months over the last several months have kept that from happening and as the administration dangles a carrot, if you will, an overture to the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat of support for Palestinian state, the president's national security adviser Condoleezza Rice also making clear over the weekend the administration in other ways still unhappy with Mr. Arafat.
[Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser To The President:] What we've said to him is that responsible leadership means that you can not associate with terrorists. We've said that to responsible leaders all over the world, and we've asked him to demonstrate that responsible leadership by arresting terrorists; by dealing with them; by making certain that they are not in his midst so that conditions can be created on the ground and a future vision of a Middle East in which Israel is secure and there is a secure Palestinian state where the Palestinian people can determine their own destiny, can be fulfilled.
[King:] Again, it's an effort by the Bush administration to get the Israelis and Palestinians talking once again, but not a great deal of optimism as the secretary of state prepares to deliver this major policy address today. Just over the weekend the European Union delegation traveling in the region. The Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon holding fast to his pledge that he will not enter into the so- called cooling period as envisioned in the George Mitchell Peace Plan until there are seven days of total non violence in the Palestinian territories. Most U.S. officials believe that is unrealistic. They have been urging the Israeli leader to back off just a bit, but so far he has refused to do so. Paula.
[Zahn:] John, before we let you go, please walk us through some of part of the president's schedule he's headed to Reagan National and he will sign the aviation security bill. Is that true?
[King:] He will the long awaited aviation security bill finally made out of the Congress last week. The president will sign it. It calls for about 28,000 airport screening workers to become federal employees over the next year or so. All of them will be trained by the federal government. When you go through at an airport, those will now be federal employees checking in your bags. Once that training and the hiring is completed, after about three years, that could go back to the current arrangement. It will be up to airports after three years to decide whether to stick with the federal employees or to then go out to private contracting or local law enforcement officials. This viewed as one way to improve airport security. Other measures in this long awaited piece of legislation, those cockpit door improvements in aircraft, also new screening procedures especially designed to sniff out any explosives at an airport. So the president will sign that bill today. It puts into law those new security measures. The president hopes it inspires Americans to travel over the coming holiday period. Paula.
[Zahn:] All right John, thanks so much, appreciate it. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] A fire is burning in a Moscow television tower right now and four people are reported to be trapped in an elevator inside the 1,700-foot tall structure. No one has been hurt, but authorities aren't sure how to reach the trapped people. CNN Moscow bureau chief Jill Dougherty has our report.
[Jill Dougherty, Cnn Moscow Bureau Chief:] The fire broke out Sunday afternoon in the Ostankino TV tower, a 540-meter structure that pierces the Moscow skyline, the second tallest free- standing building in the world. Nearly 100 fire trucks raced to the scene. Visitors were evacuated from the observation deck and a popular restaurant. But the blaze continued to spread down through the metal and concrete tower. Initial indications were that it started with a short circuit in some equipment. [on camera]: The Ostankino tower was built nearly 40 years ago, but today it's a key link for modern sophisticated communication in Russia, including television, radio, and paging operations. [voice-over]: Within minutes, major television networks, including Russian state television, went off the air in the Moscow region. Unable to watch the fire on television, thousands of Muscovites from the area near the TV tower stood by in the streets listening to radio reports. Many seemed wearily resigned to yet another tragedy coming on the heels of the sinking of a Russian submarine and a bombing in downtown Moscow.
[Unidentified Female:] What is Russia coming to? They can't extinguish anything. It's one catastrophe after another. What's next?
[Dougherty:] It's the general state of neglect, this man says. As the fire continued to spread, President Vladimir Putin consulted with government officials on how to restore communications. Jill Dougherty, CNN, Moscow.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] How about Britain and its involvement? They're on the ground and in the air just like American troops. Let's go ahead and talk with an authority on that subject and welcome Professor John Gearson. He is in the Defense Department at Kings College in London and he is joining us from London today. Dr. Gearson, hello, a pleasure to have you with us.
[Dr. John Gearson, Professor, Kings College:] Good morning.
[Kagan:] What can you tell us about this buildup of British and U.S. troops, what appears to be an upcoming significant ground defensive?
[Gearson:] Well I think Britain or more importantly, America have decided that the Northern Alliance in effect the only game in town, and that they're going to have to support them more overtly. A week ago we had the British defense minister state that U.S., sorry, British Special Forces were ready to go. Royal Marine commanders could be there within days. And then being, in effect, council-briefed by our military commanders who said they wouldn't be ready for weeks. So the British are trying to steady the line, send out one coherent message, but be ready to support any ground action when it comes.
[Kagan:] Dr. Gearson, why are do they see it that way, that the Northern Alliance is the only game in town. This doesn't appear to be the most organized group and clearly to support the Northern Alliance will upset some of the other groups that are helping the U.S. and the British in this area.
[Gearson:] Well that's right. We're getting conflicting reports about what the results of the Ranger raids two weeks ago were. Some people are suggesting that it wasn't a great success, and that seems to have been proven by the fact that we haven't seen subsequent ground incursions by significant numbers of Special Forces. That being the case, as we hear from Pentagon briefers, the Northern Alliance understand the grounds. They understand the Taliban and would be more appropriate front-line troops in these circumstances. So I think there's going to be caution about sending in allied forces to attack directly Taliban positions, but that doesn't mean they won't be used to attack al Qaeda's network, which, after all, is the strategic point of this campaign. It is not to defeat the Taliban. It's the destruction of the Taliban terrorist network sorry the al Qaeda terrorist network rather.
[Kagan:] And that's not simply based in Afghanistan. We're finding out that that's worldwide.
[Gearson:] Well that's right. Although the reason for the air campaign is that the Taliban regime are providing a secure base for al Qaeda to plan, train and launch operations globally around the world. But undoubtedly the defeat of al Qaeda in Afghanistan and even the defeat of the Taliban regime won't remove the threat of terrorism. But President Bush and Prime Minister Blair have been saying this from the start. The interesting change in some ways is that Prime Minister Blair has suggested that one of the war aims is the replacement of the Taliban regime, and that wasn't actually articulated at the start of the campaign, but it suggests that now it seems that we can not live with the Taliban regime running Afghanistan and providing a base for terrorism.
[Kagan:] But that's going to be a problem onto itself. On one hand, you have this military campaign going on, effort to form a coalition government, but efforts that are becoming increasingly more frustrating.
[Gearson:] Well that's right. There have been a number of setbacks. The Taliban have managed to capture and kill envoys who were trying to develop support from the majority Pashtun community against the Taliban and it isn't at all desirable to focus our political efforts and military support on the Northern Alliance. But as I say, at the moment, they're the main people engaging the Taliban. However this is completely against the wishes and policy of Pakistan, which is very concerned that the Northern Alliance will not achieve broad-based support from the population of Afghanistan. Leaving Pakistan, after the west has left the region, with an unstable regime next door to it. So we can understand why the Pakistani government wants there to be a broad- based government, but the immediate concern is to actually have a military campaign that is that is delivering results. And to date we haven't really had that.
[Kagan:] And getting back to that military campaign, Dr. Gearson, can you explain to our American audience what the British bring into this campaign besides support and numbers.
[Gearson:] Well the British have got a small but very well trained and experienced special forces. The Special Air Service, which is equivalent to your Delta Force, which was actually modeled on the Special Air Service, has got some of the best campaign experience of any special forces units in the world, but they only number a few hundred. And then we have Royal Wing Commandos, who are, in effect, what you would call Green Berets in the United States, who are trained in winter warfare and they've also had operational experience in our counter-insurgency campaign in Northern Ireland. So we've got, to some extent, battle experienced troops, but very well trained who will be able to support the Special Forces efforts of the United States. What we don't have in the region yet are large numbers of troops to back up any significant ground invasion.
[Kagan:] It's been pointed out that there's two fronts here. There's the military front, but there's also the public relations front. Can you give us a sense of how this campaign is playing in Britain?
[Gearson:] Broadly, we've had very solid numbers from opinion polls, some 68 percent of the British public support the action going on in Afghanistan. Slightly fewer, 64 percent support the idea of ground forces going in. But in Britain we have a significant minority of Muslim population, the majority of whom in surveys recently are against any bombing or military action against Afghanistan. The same people also say they are against international terrorism, but there is some concern that community relations are going to come under strain in Britain.
[Kagan:] And it'll be interesting to see how that plays as Ramadan approaches in the next week or so. Dr. John Gearson joining us from London and Kings College. Thank you for your insight today sir, good to have you along with us.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] We want to shift our attention to John Walker. Can Walker get a fair trial here in the United States? Let's talk about that question and some answers now. Criminal defense attorney Ron Kuby is live in New York with us. Ron, good afternoon, good to see you.
[Ron Kuby, Criminal Defense Attorney:] Thank you.
[Hemmer:] Former federal prosecutor Victoria Toensing also with us, from Washington.
[Victoria Toensing, Former Federal Prosecutor:] Hello. Victoria Toensing Hi there.
[Hemmer:] Ron, first to you. The judge says let's start this thing in August. Both sides are saying no, let's wait until November. Does it take nine months to get ready for a case like this?
[Kuby:] It depends on the complexity of the case. It certainly can. The government had the opportunity to create vast amounts of material, there are a large quantity of documents, there are all kinds of difficulties tracking down witnesses who were overseas and trying to bring them back. So it easily could easily take nine months.
[Hemmer:] Victoria, you wrote a piece this past week that I read that you think essentially that, at this point, John Walker may have gotten off easy because is he not facing a change of treason. Explain that.
[Toensing:] Correct. The evidence is there. Treason is defined in the Constitution as levying war against the United States or giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Carrying grenades and rifles while marching with the Taliban certainly fits into that factual and legal definition.
[Hemmer:] Does Victoria have a point, Ron? Should there be a treason charge here? In essence, if it's not, is it slipping the legal noose, sort of speaking?
[Kuby:] Well, Victoria's point was debated within the highest circles of the Justice Department itself. You certainly could bring treason charges, but the Constitution poses a high burden. You need two eyewitnesses to the actual act of treason itself. And I think the Justice Department's thinking was why go for the death penalty in a questionable legal theory when you have stronger legal grounds and you still are able to give this guy life in prison without parole.
[Toensing:] Let me make two points on that. First of all, you don't have to ask for the death penalty. I think it is a matter of public policy treason should charged, because that's what he is, he is a traitor to the United States. So we should call like it is. The death penalty does not have to be requested. That is always a separate decision by the Justice Department. The two witnesses are a no-brainer. You can have two American soldiers say we captured him while fighting with the Taliban.
[Hemmer:] Let me leapfrog a little bit to ultimately what could, and many people see, is the core issue. Can Walker Lindh get a fair trial just a few miles away from the Pentagon. Ron, what do you think? Ultimately some say this is the biggest test for the U.S. legal system and a way for it really to shine on this matter.
[Kuby:] I think it's a tremendous challenge, but we have had challenges before. We had a man attempt to assassinate the president of the United States on national television, and he was tried in Washington, D.C., and, in fact, was found not guilty by reason of insanity. So if you invest the time and effort necessary to weed out those jurors who have bias and prejudice, he can get as fair of a trial as is possible to have.
[Hemmer:] Can you speak at all, Victoria?
[Toensing:] No, I'm sure we are in agreement. It's up to the court. I think it is interesting for people to see how different these federal courts are than the court that everybody really broke their innocence about how courts work, with Judge Ito and O.J. Simpson. These judges do not stand for any nonsense. They will proceed for as much to protect the defendant as the government. Just as you heard the court says, Hey, I don't care what the defense and prosecution decided, I want this trial sooner, you will see a judge who is going to question very carefully each juror to make sure there is no one there that brings prejudice that they couldn't decide the case fairly.
[Hemmer:] As a prosecutor and a defense attorney, I want to get your arguments on this. Victoria, first to you. What's the strongest bit of evidence have you against John Walker? How would you try it?
[Toensing:] The statements. There are three different kinds of statements. There are the statements to CNN, the e-mails, and then the statements he made to the FBI. So those are all being decided individually whether they are going to be put in or not. Any one of them is evidence that will convict him.
[Hemmer:] It sounds like a pretty tall order, Ron. How do you defend that?
[Kuby:] I think his best chance is to join Team America, become a snitch, an informer. He will make a deal; all his sins will be wiped away...
[Hemmer:] I read something where you said he should defend himself and kiss his lawyers off and do it himself. Were you serious about that?
[Kuby:] I think that of all the people we've seen indicted in the aftermath of September 11, John Walker Lindh, because of his ideology, his rigidity, and what we know about the man seems most likely eventually to fire his legal team, take control of the case himself, and try it wage jihad in the courtroom.
[Hemmer:] That would make one heck of a story, Ron.
[Kuby:] He's going to hire Ron, and Ron is going to come in and strike a deal. Never ever.
[Hemmer:] Victoria, thank you. Ron, many thanks. We will talk again. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] The European markets are higher this morning. Philip Coggan, markets editor of the "Financial Times," joins me with a look at their performance from the "FT"'s London newsroom. Hello, Philip.
[Philip Coggan, Markets Editor, "financial Times":] Hello, Deborah. Yes, they are higher, but only modestly so. And Germany is closed today for Reunification Day, of course the 10-year anniversary of the two nations getting together. We've got a fairly strong performance from the oil stocks, and tech stocks are really holding up pretty well considering Nasdaq's poor performance yesterday. So it looks as if October European markets are trying to shrug off their rather poor performance in September and try and edge towards a fourth-quarter rally.
[Marchini:] You talked about oil and energy stocks leading the charge higher this morning in London. We've got oil up another 10 cents this morning after Brent gained $1.24 yesterday. What's roiling the oil market?
[Coggan:] Well, again, it's those continued tensions in the Middle East, particularly between Kuwait and Iraq, with Kuwait calling in the United Nations to try and stop Iraq from making threatening noises about alleged stealing of oil from Iraqi oil fields. So there's always a concern that Saddam Hussein might find some way to stir up trouble in the region. And, of course, all the killings in Jerusalem are not helping the situation at the moment by raising Middle East tensions. So with no sign of any indication of further releases of stocks from the European Union after the U.S. released stocks last week, then, at the moment, it's tension that's pushing the price higher.
[Marchini:] I might have thought the Japanese yen would have strengthened given that Tankan survey, but it's holding pretty steady this morning. Any reason why?
[Coggan:] Well, I think it got a little lift when the figures first came out. But then when people started looking at the detail, it wasn't quite as strong as they first thought, although big companies reported an increase in confidence. In small companies, that wasn't the case. And I think investors remain concerned that the Japanese recovery is pretty shaky and that the government is going to have to produce another of these spending packages to try and buoy up the recovery. And of course that's creating a real problem for the Japanese later on. A lot of people are concerned that the Japanese bond market will eventually collapse under the weight of this huge government debt.
[Marchini:] All right, we had earnings out from Vivendi this morning. How did they do?
[Coggan:] Well, they came out actually late last night after markets closed and they were very good. They shared a 67 percent increase in net profits, 44 percent increase in EBITDA, very strong performance from its mobile telecoms unit, SFR, good performance from the waste and water companies which are being spun off. So it looks in good shape as it tries to merge with Seagram. And, of course, we had those changes to voting procedures yesterday. It's really tidying itself up and trying to become an international blue chip that investors on both sides of the Atlantic will want to own.
[Marchini:] Do you get the sense, Philip, that there's been a sort of a decoupling between the U.S. markets and the European equity markets of late?
[Coggan:] There has a little. I think the main thing is the difference between the U.S. economy and the European economies. European economies are still rising, but of course there's a slowdown. In the U.S., there are these lots of profit warnings, many more so than in Europe, and I think that's starting to make investors concerned that the Fed, having slowed the U.S. economy, might really be biting into corporate profits. So that's giving Europe the chance, for once, to do a little bit better than the U.S. stock market.
[Marchini:] All right, Philip Coggan, markets editor at the "FT," thank you.

[Catherine Callaway, Cnn Anchor:] Just hours ago, more than 200 Afghan war detainees arrived at Camp X-ray. That's the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. CNN national correspondent Bob Franken was on hand for the arrival of this latest group of detainees.
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] Thirty-four were in the latest batch of detainees. So now, there are 200 at Camp X-ray, which has 320 of the infamous outdoor cells. This was the eighth delivery. What's new is the presidential order that among other things, requires different treatment for Taliban inmates and al Qaeda inmates. The response here on the ground, easier said than done.
[Unidentified Male:] Keep in mind that though the president has made that distinction, many of the detainees are not forthcoming. Many have been interviewed as many as four times, each providing each time, providing a different name and different information.
[Franken:] The fact is the Taliban and al Qaeda will not be segregated at Camp X-ray, even if officials here become convinced they know who is which. This is a temporary facility. Construction of a penitentiary building is planned a few miles away at a site called radio range.
[Unidentified Male:] The facilities that are being built will allow a certain degree of segregation that is certainly not possible now. So in terms of whether or not we'll build separate camps, no, that's not my intention, but there probably will be some type of segregation in the radio range facility, just due to the fact that it is a more permanent, more mature type of facility.
[Franken:] For now, the treatment of all the detainees will remain the same. Humane, they contend here. Controversial, nonetheless, in many parts of the world. Bob Franken, CNN, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] The first day of the famous running of the bulls in Spain is over, and as usual the bulls won, at least for the run into the ring. More than 20 people suffered minor injuries. CNN's Al Goodman has the pictures.
[Al Goodman, Cnn Correspondent:] Six fighting bulls, each weighing more than half a ton, charge into the streets. Some steers help guide them along the 825-meter, or half-mile, course to the bull ring. The only thing in the way: hundreds of daring runners. For Pamplona natives, it is a proud and centuries-old tradition to run with the bulls, passed down from one generation to the next. But for visitors from around the world, it's more of a quick thrill. The week-long festival honors Pamplona's patron saint, San Fermin. The fiesta became known internationally because of Ernest Hemingway's 1926 novel, "The Sun Also Rises," which described the sometimes deadly runs. Official records list 13 fatalities over the years. There have also been a few hundred serious injuries from bull gorings, and thousands of minor cuts and bruises. But none of that has scared off a fresh batch of runners year after year, many dressed in the traditional white and red outfits. As for the bulls, they face certain death in Pamplona's bull ring only hours after their one and only run along the cobblestone streets. Al Goodman, CNN, Madrid.

[Willow Bay, Cnn Anchor:] Tonight on MONEYLINE, shares of Eli Lilly capsize: a blockbuster ruling putting its blockbuster drug Prozac in grave jeopardy. We'll talk with the CEO of Eli Lilly.
[Stuart Varney, Cnn Anchor:] An abrupt end to the longest blue- chip winning streak in years: Is the Dow's late summer rally over?
[Bay:] Firestone, launching the second-biggest tire recall in U.S. history: the impact on drivers, automakers and Firestone itself
[Varney:] And what do these unsuspecting salmon have to do with cutting-edge technology? More than you might think.
[Announcer:] This is the MONEYLINE NEWS HOUR, live from New York and Los Angeles.
[Bay:] Good evening, everyone. I'm Willow Bay in Los Angeles.
[Varney:] Stuart Varney in New York. Our top story tonight: a staggering market plunge for the company behind Prozac. The stock in Eli Lilly was halted at 12:59 Eastern on the big board. Minutes later, investors found out why: A U.S. Appeals Court overturned a decision that protected Lilly's patent on Prozac until 2003. Translation: Generic competitors could hit the market as soon as next year. Lilly immediately slashed earnings estimates for late 2001 and early 2002, and when the stock opened up again at 3:39 p.m., it was more than $30 lower and fell even further by the close. Peter Viles has the story.
[Peter Viles, Cnn Correspondent:] Eli Lilly new this day was coming but not this soon. Its patent on Prozac, the hugely popular antidepressant drug, gave it exclusive marketing rights through 2003. But a federal appeals court struck down one of those patents today, leaving Lilly and Prozac vulnerable to generic competition next year: a huge victory for Barr Laboratories, a generic drug-maker that challenged Lilly's multiple Prozac patents in court.
[Barbara Ryan, Deutsche Bank Alex Brown:] The cost of Prozac to consumers will probably drop 80 to 90 percent. So, that's good news to consumers as these are, you know, widely used drugs and fairly expensive on a cost-per-day basis.
[Viles:] The court ruled Lilly had improperly extended its exclusive rights to market Prozac by obtaining a double patent that would extend beyond next year. Lilly shares tanked on the news, losing more than $30 a share, roughly $38 billion in market value. Also hurt by the ruling, Sepracor, which has a licensing agreement with Lilly to sell a variation of Prozac, and Forest Laboratories, which makes a Prozac competitor. The big winner was Barr, the legal challenger. In fiscal 1999, Lilly sold $2.6 billion worth of Prozac, 26 percent of its total sales. Through two quarters this year, sales totaled 1.2 billion, running 4 percent behind last year's levels. Drug analyst Len Yaffe predicts Lilly's Prozac sales will fall by about a billion dollars a year.
[Len Yaffe, Bank Of America Securities:] Lilly had a setback today with generic Prozac coming to market 34 months earlier than was expected, but we think that they'll continue to grow after the one- year anniversary of generic Prozac being on the market at a mid-teens rate because they brought so many good drugs to market in the last four years.
[Viles:] Lilly immediately said it would appeal this ruling, but the Supreme Court rarely hears patent cases, especially when the case is seen as a straightforward application of patent law Stuart.
[Varney:] So, Peter, this is not a long-running legal drama where the outcome is uncertain. Lilly has taken a hit and that's it.
[Viles:] They're going to keep fighting it in court, but Wall Street voted today: They believe this battle is over and that Lilly has lost it.
[Varney:] All right, Peter Viles, thank you very much. Let's go to Willow now with more on this story.
[Bay:] Stuart, joining us now to talk about today's ruling and the impact on Lilly's bottom line, CEO Sidney Taurel. He comes to us from Lilly headquarters in Indianapolis. Thank you for joining us.
[Sidney Taurel, Ceo, Eli Lilly:] You're welcome.
[Bay:] You've indicated that this decision will cut into earnings in calendar year 2001 and 2002. But by how much will it impact your earnings?
[Taurel:] Well, we expect to continue to produce double-digit growth in the first half of 2001, and then after August 2001, when we expect to see generic fluoxetine on the market, to have a decrease in both sales and earnings for the next four quarters, but then resume our growth in the second half of 2002. So calendar years 2001 and 2002 should be still years where we grow, albeit in single digits.
[Bay:] In Peter Viles' report, we just heard an analyst suggest that Prozac sales will fall about a billion dollars as a result of these generic competitors. Is that a fairly accurate assessment?
[Taurel:] It's a bit too early to give precise figures. We do have a once-a-week formulation of Prozac, called
[Bay:] Those will help in the future, but what is your strategy for competing against a generic drug? Can you or do you just watch sales erode?
[Taurel:] Oh, basically the strategy, which we have put in place for a long time, is to come up with new products, new products both in the field of depression, which are going to help us continue to maintain our franchise in this very important market, but also drugs in many other areas. We currently have eight product which are in phase III clinical trials, two more to reach that stage by the end of the year. So, that means up to 10 products that will be launched between 2001 and 2004. And this is really what will help us weather this storm.
[Bay:] As you well know, your stock was hit hard on the news. Other pharmaceutical companies Pfizer and Merck, for example were also down. Is this a decision today that could affect the entire pharmaceutical industry?
[Taurel:] That's not for me to say. I would doubt it. There is no reason for it to do so. It's a very specific decision, and one which, you know, is not over. We hope to appeal it, and there is no reason in my mind that this should affect the rest of the industry.
[Bay:] As we noted, your stock was down 30 percent or so today. Did investors overreact?
[Taurel:] You know, at the end of the day, the market is always right, at least in the medium, long term. Perhaps for the short term, there is a certain overreaction, in my view. If you compare the previous estimates for our earnings in 2001 and 2002 and the sort of guidance that we gave today, single-digit growth for both years, the difference between the two does not justify a reduction of $38 billion in our market capitalization.
[Bay:] Sydney Taurel of Eli Lilly, thanks for joining us tonight on
[Moneyline. Taurel:] You're welcome.
[Bay:] Stuart.
[Varney:] Well, Willow, after the bell today, a more uplifting story emerged from the tech sector. The chip equipment maker Applied Materials, which shot higher in regular trading, beat expectations with its quarterly report. Income more than doubled with AMAT that's the stock symbol earning 70 cents a share, 2 cents better than expected. And sales jumped more than 80 percent. The shares are up less than a dollar in active late-day trading. The stock was beaten up last week on fears that chip demand was, in fact, slowing. And we will have more on this story later on MONEYLINE. Applied Materials was a winner today, yes, in what was generally a losing day on Wall Street, especially for blue chip stocks. After a phenomenal seven-session advance, the Dow lost its way, ending down 71. Even the Nasdaq went astray, losing a strong rally sparked by a bullish report from Cisco. Susan Lisovicz reports.
[Susan Lisovicz, Cnn Correspondent:] By the time the opening bell rang, investors already knew they were headed for tech stocks, thanks to a profit report on Tuesday. Tech bellwether Cisco's robust quarterly earnings ignited buying in the Nasdaq's biggest big cap, as well as other stocks involved with powering the Internet. Cisco, Juniper Networks and JDS Uniphase jumped in the early going, and closed with solid gains. Chip stocks, including Intel and Analog Devices, also advanced. But investor enthusiasm waned, and the Nasdaq, which had been up 2 percent at its high for the session, closed up just five points on the day at 3,853.
[Edward Von Der Linde, Lord Abbett & Company:] Over the last couple of weeks, though, you're seeing a definite move toward probably a more defensive posture. Utilities have worked. Certain sectors of the financials have worked. And they keep on trying to rally the old leaders, the ones for the last two years, but it's not convincing. For example, Cisco a year or two ago with the report they had last night would have been up a lot more than it is today.
[Lisovicz:] And the Dow couldn't get a rally going at all, ending a seven-session win streak to close down 71 at 10,905. The Dow's two pharmaceutical stocks, Merck and Johnson & Johnson, slumped in sympathy with Eli Lilly after an adverse patent ruling on its antidepressant, Prozac. And retail stocks also sold off, including specialty chain Talbot's, luxury goods store Tiffany, and Dow component Wal-Mart. The nation's No. 1 retailer met earnings expectations but was slammed on word that customer traffic slowed toward the end of the second quarter.
[Charles White, Avatar Associates:] The market right now lacks some of the broad leadership that you'd like to see to feel better about extending a bull market move here.
[Lisovicz:] And that translates into sector rotation, which is why the Nasdaq and Dow continue to trade in a narrow range. Investor indecision was reinforced by the release of the Federal Reserve's Beige Book, which showed more signs of a slowing economy. That helped alleviate interest rate fears, but makes stocks with high valuations vulnerable. Susan Lisovicz, CNN Financial News, New York.
[Bay:] Not all the Nasdaq stocks went astray today. Two dot.coms exploded after announcing a mammoth merger. Phone.com is buying Software.com for $6.8 billion. Both companies are involved in various kinds of Internet messaging software. The price tag amounts to a 17 percent premium over Software.com's close on Tuesday. Phone.com rocketed more than 13, and Software.com soared nearly 34 34 today. So what's behind that warm reception? Several analysts said it was the fact that Donald Listwin, currently a top Cisco exec, will lead the combined company, and we'll talk with him later on MONEYLINE Stuart.
[Varney:] Thanks, Willow. An update now on the story we brought you late last night: A massive tire recall by BridgestoneFirestone. The company today formally announced that it was recalling 6 12 million tires. BridgestoneFirestone will replace the ATX, ATXII and Wilderness brands as the government investigates whether those tires played a role in a series of fatal crashes. Firestone had to recall 14 million tires in the late 1970s. That nearly bankrupted Firestone, which was eventually taken over by the Bridgestone's Corporation, based in Japan. Bridgestone's stock tumbled 185 yen that's more than 8 percent in Tokyo's Wednesday trading session. The stock is down 15 percent this week. The competitor, Goodyear, which is the world's biggest tire- maker, it gained nearly a point and a half today.
[Bay:] Coming up next on MONEYLINE, back above $30 a barrel: What lit the fire under oil prices this time and what does it mean for the economy?
[Varney:] And later, salmon: It's not for dinner anymore. We'll tell you about a strange high-tech breakthrough.
[Bay:] And on the prowl in California wine country, one bug with a serious drinking problem. Those stories coming up.

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] Now a story about a mother and twin girls who are lucky to be alive, much less being together for their first Mother's Day. On the verge of certain death, their lives were saved by new advances in medical technology. CNN's medical correspondent Rhonda Rowland reports.
[Rhonda Rowland, Cnn Correspondent:] Twins Grace and Kelly Greene, conceived with the help of modern infertility treatments. There mother lives three lives saved because of state- of-the-art technology and a medical team that happened to be in place.
[Elizabeth Greene, Mother:] Then I was very lucky that the people who helped save my life were in the hospital on a Sunday afternoon.
[Rowland:] This is how it all began. Eliz and Clay Greene tried for five years to have a baby.
[Greene:] We want to a series of infertility specialists before we found the guy who knew what he was doing, and he was able to help us get pregnant.
[Rowland:] A combination of fertility drugs and surgery finally worked for them. Then: a surprise.
[Greene:] Once I saw that second heartbeat I was like, "Oh, my Lord! There's going to be two babies inside of me."
[Rowland:] It was a difficult pregnancy. Contractions started early. Bed rest and medications were prescribed. By her 6th month, this room at Saint Joseph's Hospital in Milwaukee became her home.
[Greene:] But I was willing to do anything. If I had to hang upside-down by my toes, I would have, to make sure that the babies were born healthy.
[Rowland:] Then the critical day: November 12, 2000.
[Greene:] It started off as a regular day...
[Rowland:] But suddenly...
[Greene:] ... I was in real pain and I knew that there was something wrong. I could point to a spot I mean, it was right here, that hurt. And then there was like radiating pain from there.
[Rowland:] Her perinatologist, Dr. Margaret Carr, happened to be at the nurse's station.
[Dr. Margaret Carr, Perinatologist:] A day doesn't go by when I don't have somebody complaining of heartburn. Even chest pain.
[Rowland:] She soon determined this was different something very serious.
[Carr:] It was then she put her eyes back and she became unconscious and she had no pulse.
[Rowland:] Eliz was in cardiac arrest. Specialists, who happened to be in the hospital on call, were brought in. CPR started.
[Dr. Husam Balkhy, Cardiothorasic Surgeon:] You could say that she was dead for several minutes.
[Dr. Robert Wakefield, Cardiologist:] The babies were dying. Their movement had stopped. We didn't know if we were going to resuscitate her quickly enough, or should we deliver the babies.
[Rowland:] Doctors took a chance and shocked Eliz's heart. She opened up her eyes. I said, "Liz, something just happened. Your heart stopped. We don't know if you had a clot to the lung or if you had a heart attack." And she nodded her head like, OK, something happened, just take care of me. Eliz was taken to the cardiac catharitization lab, where staff was standing by due to a last-minute cancellation.
[Wakefield:] She had a spontaneous tear of an artery in the front of her heart, and we knew that the only thing that was really appropriate was open-heart surgery.
[Rowland:] Specifically, bypass surgery.
[Wakefield:] Can we do this on somebody who's carrying babies? And the answer is: You could, it's been done in the past. But was it really necessary to put the babies through this? And the answer was no.
[Rowland:] First the twins were delivered by C-section.
[Carr:] The babies came out kicking and screaming and as you know, they are beautiful.
[Rowland:] The bypass operation began.
[Carr:] Within 15 minutes after I closed, they were opening up her chest.
[Rowland:] Eliz wasn't out of the woods, yet. Could she endure the rigors of having her heart stopped and being put on a heart-lung machine during the surgery? Doctors thought it would be dangerous. They had a new high-tech alternative. While the heart continues beating a device is used to stabilize just the part of the heart being work on. Seventeen hours after her heart surgery, Eliz met her daughters for the first time in a neonatal intensive care unit.
[Greene:] The best thing was when he came to tell me that we had girls. It was first time that I saw him after surgery. And he was glowing. See, now, I'm going to do it. He just you have never seen anybody more in love with his daughters. He was he was so proud and he was so happy that I was OK.
[Rowland:] The beating heart surgery may have contributed to Eliz's relatively short and uncomplicated recovery. Considering her years of infertility treatment, a high-risk pregnancy, bed rest, a heart attack C-section and then open heart surgery.
[Greene:] I can do whatever I want at this point, and have been for months. I take the girls out by myself. I can carry whatever I need to carry. I can care for the girls by myself, essentially. And I don't think that would have been possible.
[Rowland:] Doctors say Eliz's condition is uncommon. That she survived it, rare.
[Carr:] With a little bit of help from God, I think we have modern technology on our side.
[Rowland:] Is motherhood all that Eliz Greene hoped it would be?
[Greene:] Even on bad days when they cry for three hours and I don't really know why, it's still a great day. And I'm so grateful and so blessed to have these girls and to have my husband and have a family, that we worked for and hoped for, for so long. And here they are.
[Rowland:] Rhonda Rowland, CNN.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We turn now to the Elian Gonzalez drama. As both sides await the all-important appellate court ruling, Justice Department officials have released a warning by a government- appointed doctor. The pediatrician says the boy is in imminent danger and should be removed from the home of his Miami relatives. CNN's Susan Candiotti is outside that home in the Miami neighborhood of Little Havana. Susan, good morning once again.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Daryn. Indeed, the buzz so far this morning surrounds that letter written by Dr Irwin Redlener who was the doctor who helped to assemble the group of psychologists who came to Miami last weekend, briefly met with Elian's great-uncle Lazaro Gonzalez. Now, Dr. Redlener says that he wrote that letter after he saw the videotape shot by one of the boy's Florida relatives in which Elian claims he does not want to go back to Cuba. Now, not long ago, little Elian came outside to play here in the yard, in fact kissing a little girl as he played in the front yard and running around. When the crowds saw him, they began yelling, "freedom, freedom" and they cheered and applauded. Now, Dr. Redlener says that he wonders, again, how all this kind of attention is affecting the youngster and adds that, in his opinion, the child is under great strain.
[Dr. Irwin Redlener, President, The Children's Health Fund:] The most telling point of concern here is the videotape that has been released by the family themselves, and that shows me a child under a significant amount of duress. I mean, this is a child that has actually bitten his own therapist that the family's gotten for him down in Miami. He's obviously in an enormous amount of stress. And he's also suffering from a syndrome known as parental alienation where there's been outside influences trying to affect his relationship with his dad.
[Candiotti:] One of the attorneys representing the Florida relatives that live at this home and taking care of the child calls Dr. Redlener's comments "absurd" and wonders how he can say such a thing without ever having examined the child. Now, a U.S. government official contends that this letter simply is meant to help educate the public and adds one more piece to the puzzle of trying to explain, in the official words, of why this little boy should be reunited with his father as soon as possible. Susan Candiotti, CNN, reporting live in Miami.
[Kagan:] Susan, thank you. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Attention focused on an area in the Antarctic after an iceberg larger than the state of Delaware has broken off. Scientists call it B22, pictured here in a satellite image from space. More now on this story and what's happening down there at the South Pole. Joyce Ohajah, of Independent Television News has our report today.
[Joyce Ohajah, Itv Correspondent:] Experts have been predicting the collapse of this antarctic ice shelf for years, but they describe the dramatic breakup that has taken place in less than a month as staggering. The Larsen ice shelf, which is just under the size of Cambridgeshire and 200 meters thick, has broken into small icebergs and fragments. On these satellite pictures, the red line shows its size in 1995. The blue line illustrating the extent of its collapse. Scientists from the British Antarctic Survey
[David Vaughan, British Antarctic Survey:] We can make the connection between the loss of the ice shelves and the rise in temperature, atmospheric temperature. What we can't do at the moment is tell you why that rise in temperature has occurred, and why, specifically, on the Antarctic peninsula it has been so dramatic.
[Ohajah:] Their findings come on the day a new exhibition on climate change opens at the science museum in London. The interactive exhibits focus on how scientists are tacking the issues, and how governments need to take responsibility for the global changes.
[Michael Meacher, British Environment Minister:] It is a wake-up sign, I think, to the whole world, that when an iceberg of such enormous proportions can break up, which is probably not happened before in human experience in the last quarter of a million years, that shows the effect which we are having on the climate.
[Ohajah:] Scientists are concerned. In 2004, they will launch a new satellite which will survey the thickness of the ice here, and monitor closely how our climate is changing. Joyce Ohajah, ITV News.

[Lou Dobbs, Cnn Anchor:] Stocks today poised to finish lower on the day, investors dealing with a second round of air strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Both the Dow and the Nasdaq spending the majority of the trading session below break even. At one point, however, the Dow was down more than a hundred points. But it since has recovered about half of that. For more on the session, we're going to Rhonda Schaffler standing by at the New York Stock Exchange, Greg Clarkin at the Nasdaq, standing by, every bit as live. Rhonda, we begin with you.
[Rhonda Schaffler, Cnn Correspondent:] Lou, one trader walked by and he said, down 56, and not bad. And not bad seems to be the general assessment about this trading day. Keep in mind, the Dow had run up significantly ahead of these military strikes against Afghanistan. The stock market anticipated military strikes. That's why we didn't have a bigger sell off. You can see how the Dow performed. Fairly choppy but well off the lows of the session. The reason the market doesn't rally from here, according to traders and analysts I talk to, is while the strikes end some bit of uncertainty, there are other questions raised about how long the military action will be. Will there be any retaliatory action against the U.S., and if the conflict would spread, would oil supplies be disrupted? That's why the market still remains a little bit edgy. The fact that the Dow recovered lows and held its own is making traders feel pretty confident about the way the market responded to the attacks Lou.
[Dobbs:] Rhonda, how are the oil stocks doing? Since there is apparently some particular interest in the market in those stocks.
[Schaffler:] The oil is performing pretty well. You did see buying in a couple of sectors today: some tech stocks, some defense stocks, and some consumer products stocks. So there were buyers here, Lou.
[Dobbs:] Oil prices little changed, so there is not that much concern about those oil supplies, one would infer?
[Schaffler:] No. In fact, the conflict would have to worsen. And we are nowhere near that and oil prices have dropped significantly in the last few weeks.
[Dobbs:] Terrific. Rhonda, thank. We will go back to you in just a minute. We are about less than a minute away from the closing bell. We are going to go over to Greg Clarkin who is at the Nasdaq Market Greg.
[Greg Clarkin, Cnn Correspondent:] Lou, a very subdued, cautious trading session today. If you look at the volume, 1.3 billion shares traded. That is about half of what the Nasdaq did on a couple of the busier days last week. You can see the composite just kind of in a drifting mode. At its worst it was down 30 points early on. At its best, it was up 15 points around midday. Once the news reports came out, of the military strikes, you saw the Nasdaq just kind of drifting in volume, even drift a little bit lighter than we had seen on this Columbus Day holiday Lou.
[Dobbs:] OK, Greg. Just about, oh about 20 seconds away from the closing bell. There on the balcony, the retiring member, Anthony Ales, honored today. As Rhonda and Greg have said, finishing lower on the day. There's the bell. And stocks officially finishing lower on Wall Street. Strength seen in the defense, oil and certain tech sectors while the retail and cyclical issues were somewhat weaker on the day. Rhonda, let's go back to you. This day could have been far worse.
[Schaffler:] It really could have been. And, you know, the sell- off today was not one of nervousness, just like we saw on the Nasdaq volume, here. I mean, it's light. It's not even a billion shares here as the closing bell rings. And even if the bond market is open or closed, if people want to get in and sell, they would do that. You did not see that here. You saw a market move lower. And the expectations were, even before this trading week, because of the gains the past two weeks, the market would give some back. There were some groups, as you mention, though, that were under pressure. Retailers, interesting, because we had some brokerage calls on the session and retailers saying that some of these companies are going to see their sales impacted from the terrorist attacks. In fact, we'll get a big retail sales number later in the week. You can see how the group performed. Even Target and Wal-Mart stores selling off a bit, and those two seen as more defensive in the retailing sector, because the discounters tend to hold up better in an economic slowdown. Defense stocks, though, continued their climb. The group pretty much moving higher with just one or two exceptions. Lockheed Martin up $1.39, Boeing up 46 cents. It's still trying to recover. It hasn't had the run that these other stocks have. Ratheon, Northrop Grumman closing up on the day, and of course the expectation is there will be increases in defense spending going forward Lou?
[Dobbs:] All right, as you say, Rhonda. But nearly every expert, analyst, if you will, that we talk with, says that this is a different kind of war, a new war, in which those stocks are not likely to be big beneficiaries of any defense spending.
[Schaffler:] Well, it's interesting, because Wall Street doesn't always think rationally on certain moves. And that's been the one group people flock to, almost a knee-jerk reaction, to buy some of those defense stocks. There will have to be parts replaced, there will have to be some buying. And that's what attracted interest today.
[Dobbs:] Terrific, Rhonda. Thank you very much. Turning over to Greg Clarkin at the Nasdaq despite a negative close, some positives in that market Greg?
[Clarkin:] Indeed, Lou. We saw the Nasdaq after a full day of trading pretty much back to where it began the session this morning, up less than 1 point at the moment. Let's take a look at the big caps. Give you an idea of how the big game technology shares did on the day. You can see this group of four were higher. Microsoft, Intel, up 20 cents. Cisco and Dell Computer higher. There were also some of the stocks that really continue to run up over the last few weeks are technology companies that are into kind of the security end of things. Visage Technologies these folks make facial recognition systems. Small company, $139 million market cap, but a big pop today, up 482. Envision Technologies they make explosive detection systems for airports. They're up 2.59. Magal Security they make perimeter security operations. They're up almost 2 bucks. Northwest, though, continues to struggle. That stock was around 20 back before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. You can see where it is today, continues to lose ground. Now down around $11 a share Lou?
[Dobbs:] Basically, a flat finish over on the Nasdaq. Greg, thanks a lot. Greg Clarkin. Well, that is the latest on the markets. Please join us again at 6:00 Eastern Time on "MONEYLINE," when we go through the day's activity on Wall Street. And among our guests tonight, economist Lakshman Achuthan will be joined by former NATO Commanding General Wesley Clark. Until then, I'm Lou Dobbs in New York.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Another big story we've been following all day today. and that is Hurricane Debby. We are going to go to Max Mayfield at the National Hurricane Center in Miami. We've been talking to him throughout the day. Max, what is the latest with regard to the hurricane and its path?
[Max Mayfield, Dir., National Hurricane Center:] Well, if you look at the satellite imagery right behind me, you will see a tremendous blowup of thunderstorm activity. It looks very, very impressive on the infrared satellite loop. However, if you look at the visible loop, what we will see here is that the low level circulation has become exposed. The terrain over Hispaniola and the high upper level winds has allowed the low- level center to come out from under the thunderstorm activity. That's really good news. This system has definitely weakened. We have dropped the winds down now to 60 miles per hour on our intermediate advisory. It is moving more westward now, it is a little bit faster, about 18 miles per hour. And if it continues this motion, which we now think it likely will, that will take it closer to over Cuba, and that should further inhibit development. So, for once, we do have a little bit of good news here. It's just been struggling so much with the land mass there that it doesn't look like it has a chance to come back to a hurricane, at least in the short term.
[Phillips:] Max, with regard to evacuations, what's the latest on that? you are recommending exactly what areas?
[Mayfield:] Well, we are really not doing the evacuations. We do have the emergency management director for Monroe County up here at the hurricane center today. And he really didn't feel like he had a choice this morning. He went ahead and started moving some of the non-residents out, you know, from the campgrounds and some of the hotels. This system could still come off the coast of Cuba as a very decent storms. So he is still doing the right thing. He just doesn't have the luxury to wait until it gets much closer. So my understanding is that they have asked for some movement of the non- residents down there in the Keys.
[Phillips:] Max, tell me about the miles per hour again. You said it is up to what were the speeds?
[Mayfield:] It is actually down to 60 miles per hour. This morning, early this morning, it was 75. It's always been sort of a marginal category one hurricane and sort of struggling to maintain that intensity. And then, as the center of the hurricane moved north of the island of Hispaniola, it just got very disrupted, and actually it is quite disorganized looking right now, and that's good news.
[Phillips:] Yes, it is good news. You and I were talking about this yesterday. Let's put it in perspective. We were talking about how powerful can 75 mile-per-hour wind, now it is down to 60. Can you give us an example, said we were out on the street and the winds were coming through, how much of affect would we feel?
[Mayfield:] Well, this is, especially for residents in South Florida, this is more like a Tropical Storm Irene right now, the winds speeds anyway, just below hurricane force. We will have to see, as it moves over Cuba, whether it weakens anymore. But I think the good news is that we are really not going to see it strengthen back to a hurricane, at least in the next day or two, anyway. I think the main threat, at least today, will certainly be the rainfall. The biggest concern that I would have for the United States would still be in the Florida Keys, Even a tropical storm can rally pile some water even over those roads. There is a place there in the Upper Keys that goes under any time the winds get up to 35-40 miles an hour. That could still happen. Some places down there people don't want to let down their guard totally here. They still need to pay very close attention to the storm.
[Phillips:] Of course, you never know what Mother Nature is going to do. And we will continue to follow the evacuations taking place in the Florida Keys, also check in with you, Max, on a regular basis, thank you. Max Mayfield from the National Hurricane Center in Miami.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Back here in New York City, as I mentioned earlier on, the recovery begins one step at a time. The public schools are open today. They open two hours late to give teachers and counselors the time to discuss exactly how they are going to confront students with the reality of what has happened here in our city. At this moment some 100 buildings have been damaged in the area surrounding the World Trade Center. And right now we're going to go to Michael Okwu to give us an update on what rescue workers are finding this morning Michael.
[Michael Okwu, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Paula. Right now the first thing on my mind is that this is a city in contrasts. Just due north of me you might not be able to see it from the cameras, of course but just due north of me New Yorkers are waking up to a rising sun and it is a beautiful, beautiful sight. And yet behind me a completely different story. This plume of smoke that has come to symbolize what has happened here, the total devastation, has become rather black and it is moving due east right up against the rising sun just east of this site towards Queens and part of Brooklyn. Rescue workers, of course, worked throughout the night. They, as of last night, 82 bodies, of course, were found. Rescue workers are telling us that they are finding actually more body parts than they're actually finding bodies. Of course, the number of those who have been found is expected to rise and perhaps dramatically at some point today. Mayor Giuliani, as you mentioned at the top of the hour here, has asked for more body bags. He's asked the Federal Emergency Management Agency for more than 6,000 body bags and of course there may be some additional requests as the day continues. Just outside of this ring here along the West Side Highway due west of us there are trucks lining up waiting to take more of the bodies to various parts of the city. Pockets of fire inside the site right now behind us. You might not be able to see it because of the plume of smoke, which, of course, is like a pall that has descended over this city. Now, there is indication at some point today that there has been a strain on hospitals. Mayor Giuliani has stressed the fact that the city is prepared for this and people are working ceaselessly to try to attend to victims and but they do say that they need more clothes, that they need more beds for medical staff who have been working overnight to sleep on and they certainly continue to ask for more blood Paula.
[Zahn:] So, Michael, before I let you go, I know you've had a chance to talk to rescue workers who have been in and out of there. What are they telling you about what they have seen?
[Okwu:] Well, you can't use negative words too much for a story like this. It is absolutely gruesome. When I say that this plume of smoke is like a pall that's descended over the city, well, it's the rescue workers who are at ground zero seeing this, this twisted metal. There is debris all over the street. There are basically inches of ash and soot, what appears to be ash and soot, which, of course, is this material and papers that have burned throughout the past 48 hours here. And they're saying that they're finding body parts. And again, more body parts than they're actually finding bodies. The interesting thing is what is going to happen tonight. How will the rescue workers be affected by what we expect is going to be a major weather change. It's a beautiful, clear day today, but we expect that we might get some rain tonight. Will that affect what they have to do? Will it actually cool down the fires that are inside that are making it so dangerous for rescue workers to get even closer or will it completely make things more difficult for them, obscure their view and make it physically more uncomfortable. That remains to be seen Paula.
[Zahn:] Michael, thank you so much for that update.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] There are developments today in the Elian Gonzalez case. The Justice Department appears to be closer than ever to a final confrontation with the Florida family of Elian Gonzalez. Immigration officials met with the family attorneys this morning. CNN's Susan Candiotti is joining us now from Miami with the outcome of that meeting and what lies ahead Susan.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Lou. Here's what's on the table. At a closed-door meeting earlier this day, attorneys representing the Florida relatives of 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez were given a written proposal by Justice Department officials and the INS. It seeks to make the uncle of 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez promise to surrender the boy if they lose all appeals. The Justice Department has also ordered the family to submit this written statement before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. But attorneys for the boy's great uncle tell me they would never submit such a document because it implies, they claim, that they would lose. They also say a spokesman for the family that is that all of these relatives are emotionally drained.
[Armando Gutierrez, Gonzalez Family Spokesman:] I don't can't tell you if he's going to sign it. I think that you just don't sign something everybody puts in front of you. You know, we see all those fraud cases out there.
[Candiotti:] Attorney Linda Osberg-Braun, who is part of the team, called the written proposal, the written statement from the Justice Department "coercive, irrational," and she said they are not likely to sign such a statement, but that they were having a meeting about that later this day. She said if they advise their client to sign such a statement they would be committing "malpractice." Now we do are expecting a statement from the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service later this day in about an hour or so they tell us. We are also told by attorneys for the Florida family here of Elian Gonzalez that there is to be another meeting tomorrow at INS, that the great uncle, Lazaro Gonzalez, has been advised to attend, and that if the statement is not signed, they have been told that the INS will revoke the temporary parole status of Elian Gonzalez come Thursday morning at 9:00 a.m. Lou.
[Waters:] And if they revoke this temporary status, what does that mean, Susan?
[Candiotti:] Well, the Justice Department is not disclosing what steps it plans to take after that. For example, would they at least temporarily remove the boy from this home and, if so, how do they intend to carry that out? Would these appeals be able to go on before the 11th Circuit Court? The attorneys do tell me they do have one option if the temporary parole is revoked, they could ask the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals for a stay to try to prevent the INS from carrying out removal of the child from the home while the appeals go on. But if they don't get that injunction, they say that they admit that they are in trouble.
[Waters:] How far and how far off is the appeal hearing?
[Candiotti:] Well, the appeals they got all kinds of briefings and oral arguments, but the first briefings are to be filed in a couple of weeks, and oral arguments have been set before that court in early May.
[Waters:] All right, Susan Candiotti keeping watch in Miami today. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Rudi Bakhtiar, Co-host:] We're off and running with Wednesday's edition of NEWSROOM. Thanks for joining us. I'm Rudi Bakhtiar.
[Shelley Walcott, Co-host:] And I'm Shelley Walcott. We begin as we do every day here on NEWSROOM, with a look at what's ahead.
[Bakhtiar:] First today, U.S. President Bush offers a sneak peak to the sequel of Star Wars.
[Walcott:] Then, "Business Desk" has the lowdown on getting laid off and locked out.
[Bakhtiar:] From Thailand, should men hold a monopoly on being monks? "Worldview" with a woman who says no.
[Walcott:] And we wind up in "Chronicle" with a look at life through the lens.
[Bakhtiar:] United States President George W. Bush vows to move forward with a controversial missile defense system. Aides say it reflects a new philosophy and focuses more on defense than offense. Mr. Bush's national security plan calls for building a shield of systems designed to disable incoming missiles. In a speech Tuesday at the National Defense University, Mr. Bush focused on the shortcomings of the 1972 anti-ballistic missile treaty between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union. The president said the ABM treaty, which prohibits the U.S. from pursuing large scale missile defenses, ignores technological breakthroughs of the past 30 years. Russia, China and North Korea oppose a U.S. missile defense system, saying it threatens international security. And several key European allies have been skeptical. The president's security plan also calls for a reduction in arms, which isn't a new idea. In 1991, the Strategy Arms Reduction Treaty known as START II went into effect. The treaty called for a 30 to 40 percent reduction in U.S. and Russian arms. START II, signed in 1993, is aimed at cutting the two countries' nuclear warheads to no more than 3,500 each by the year 2007. President Bush acknowledged Tuesday that he still had many details to cover regarding his national security plan. So far, all he's given to the public is a defense framework for the future. John King has details about the proposed missile defense system and why many officials oppose it.
[John King, Cnn Sr. White House Correspondent:] The president's speech was short on specifics, but he hinted at taking interim steps toward his long-term goal of a high-tech missile defense shield.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] The preliminary work has produced some promising options for advanced sensors and interceptors that may provide this capability. If based at sea or on aircraft, such approaches can provide limited but effective defense.
[King:] Mr. Bush promised consultations with allies and the Congress, and said he was committed to a major shift in national security policy: away from the big nuclear arsenal of the Cold War world in favor of a missile defense. Mr. Bush did not name names, but had North Korea, Iran and Iraq in mind as he made his case.
[Bush:] Unlike the Cold War, today's most urgent threats come from the thousands of ballistic missiles in the Soviet hands but from a small number of missiles in the hands of these states. States for whom terror and blackmail are a way of life.
[King:] There were few specifics: No budget, no timetable for deployment, and no decisions on what the system would look like. Mr. Bush called the Russian President Vladimir Putin before the speech and said he was willing to work with Moscow. But he also made clear he was prepared to abandon the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty if an accommodation with Russia can not be reached.
[Bush:] No treaty that prevents us from addressing today's threats, that prohibits us from pursuing promising technology to defend ourselves, our friends and our allies. It is in our interests, or the interests of world peace.
[King:] Mr. Bush also promised to push for major cuts in U.S. nuclear stockpiles but again, no numbers. The United States has about 7,200 nuclear weapons now, and has committed to bring that number down to 3,500. President Clinton had hoped to reach agreement with Russia on reducing the number to 2,500, and some Bush Advisers believe 1,500 is enough to maintain a credible nuclear deterrence. Administration teams will soon head to Europe and Asia to make the case to skeptical allies, and Mr. Bush began the lobbying with calls to the leaders of Japan, Great Britain, France, Germany, Canada, and
[Nato:] A tough sell abroad and a tough sell here at home as well. Key Democratic leaders in the U.S. Congress say they're not ready to go along, not sure yet that Mr. Bush is right, not sure yet that they should spend billions of dollars developing a system before there is any evidence the technology will actually work. John King, CNN, the White House.
[Bakhtiar:] President Bush's evolving defense strategy has become a touchy subject among some senior military officers who feel left out of the loop. But as Jamie McIntyre reports, the Pentagon brass is chafing at the inattention and worried that some pet projects could be axed to save funding for the proposed missile defense system.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Correspondent:] During the Campaign George W. Bush surrounded himself with retired generals and admirals, and promised to be the president who would rebuild the U.S. military and restore morale. But Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is drawing fire from senior military officers who privately complain they are being cut out of the strategy reviews that will determine how much the Pentagon spends and on what.
[Loren Thompson, Lexington Institute:] They've excluded all the key players, including the military, and as a consequence there's going to be a lot of alienated people when they have to go out and sell this plan.
[Mcintyre:] Rumsfeld insists he's kept the joint chiefs and the top military commanders, known as the CINCs, in the loop even if they are not represented on any of his review panels.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary:] There's no question with a big department, that not everybody is involved in everything that goes on, but the cincs and chiefs have had repeated opportunities to participate as has the joint staff.
[Mcintyre:] Rumsfeld does meet daily with Joint Chiefs Chairman General Hugh Shelton or his deputy. But military sources say while the generals offer their guidance, they rarely get any idea of what Rumsfeld is thinking. The military services complain they are in the dark about basic plans, such as whether they will get money needed for pilot training in the coming months. Other officers fear the administration is rushing to spend billions of dollars on a missile defense system that they would argue, if they could, might be better used on other weapons. Its creating concern among uniformed leaders that, some say, is a byproduct of Rumsfeld's close-to-the-vest style, and his penchant for asserting civilian control over the military.
[Thompson:] He's very disciplined, he's very intelligent, and he's also a little autocratic.
[Mcintyre:] Sources say, when Joint Chiefs chairman, General Hugh Shelton, was informed last week about the president's big defense speech, he quipped he hoped he would also be informed about what the president would say. The irony is that the administration that ran on respect for the military appears to have left the military feeling slightly disrespected. Jamie McIntyre, CNN, the Pentagon.
[Walcott:] You know, these days it seems we're seeing more and more companies downsize in the United States. Simply put, that means they're letting employees go so that they can survive in lean economic times. In March, the unemployment rate in the U.S. was 4.3 percent, up slightly from the previous month. The fact that downsizing is becoming more common is not much consolation to those who receive the dreaded pink slip. And when employers consider employees' e-mail and other information company property, the good-byes can become even more stressful. Steve Young reports.
[Steve Young, Cnn Correspondent:] Kathy Fionte worked in purchasing for Lucent Technologies 33 years. Then one day in January the company gave her 15 minutes to get out. Suddenly she couldn't retrieve her voice mail. Her PC log-in didn't work, so she lost personal addresses, tax information, and summer vacation contacts.
[Kathy Fionte, Former Lucent Employee:] It felt, after 33 years, that I should at least have been given an opportunity to retrieve some of what I thought were my things.
[Young:] Lucent says it tries to treat employees with respect and sensitivity. But it adds there were reasons it can't disclose for the way it treated Ms. Fionte, who now works for a Massachusetts public service agency. More and more fired workers face an instant PC and phone freeze- out. Knowing that, at Luminant, a big Web design firm, there was a rush, soon as it became clear that a large number of workers would be fired that very day.
[Tony Brancato, Former Luminant Employee:] A lot of people were scrambling to just burn CDs and get their data and put it on zip discs or whatever, because they knew somebody was getting laid off.
[Young:] Brancato, who was fired, later managed to recover personal data because he was friendly with the systems administrator. But the law is clear. If an employer has told workers all data belongs to the company, end of argument. Still, companies need to make decisions.
[Michael Curley, Employment Attorney, O'melveny & Myers:] You don't want to take away somebody's access to purely personal information, their vacation information, travel information. On the other hand, quite often, you are shutting it down because there's also very sensitive trade-secret type information.
[Young:] Employers are also thinking about incidents of workplace bloodshed. Will a worker locked out of his PC and phone lash back?
[Timothy Dimoff, President, Sacs Consulting & Investigative Service:] These employers are scared that there's going to be a serious workplace violence incident. So they want our people to be there, armed. Either in the same room or in room next door, if not with firearms, they're requesting us to have pepper spray.
[Young:] Dimoff says the safer and more humane way is to give workers a day or two to retrieve personal data. [on camera]: He terms that "the ramp," but says more and more companies are pulling the plug. He calls that "the cliff." Steve Young, CNN Financial News, New York.
[Walcott:] We crisscross the globe today in "Worldview." We'll spend some time in Asia later when we visit China, find out how some enterprising women are beginning their own small businesses in the face of rising unemployment and learn about the sometimes clandestine efforts of the Communist Party in Hong Kong, in Thailand meet a woman who's trying to make her mark as a monk. But first, we turn to Cuba, where Cubans are celebrating May Day, a day marked by leftist groups as the international day of the worker. Thousands of Cubans took to the streets in support of their president, Fidel Castro, who led the annual march. In parts of Europe, May Day had a very different feel. Bettina Luscher explains.
[Bettina Luscher, Cnn Correspondent:] It was a long May Day. German police battled hundreds of violent protesters in several different neighborhoods of Berlin. German authorities had sent a record 9,000 police into the capital, trying to prevent the violence Berlin has seen every year for more than a decade. Berlin's top law enforcement official had vowed to crack down on what he called street terror and authorities forbade one planned demonstration by a left-wing anarchist group. Another march by an extremist right-wing party, the NPD, was permitted by a German court since past marches have been peaceful. Police had feared clashes between the 900 neo-Nazis and marchers who oppose the NDP, but the police kept the two sides apart and the march ended without violent incidents. There were some 1,000 peaceful May Day celebrations and demonstrations across Germany, marchers attempting to raise awareness on a host of issues, including fears of unemployment. In Moscow, thousands took to the streets to commemorate May Day, traditionally one of the proudest days of the former Soviet Union and the day Red Square had seen elaborate displays of communist pride. This year, it was a modest affair.
[Lidya Olennikova, May Day Marcher:] Throughout my whole life we marched on Red Square. Throughout our whole lives we have kept our traditions. Even though I had a hard time getting here, I came to celebrate this holiday because everything has been taken away from us. Moscow is overwhelmed with Western influence.
[Luscher:] Those Russians who came demanded better pay, more jobs and more workers' rights. In France, marchers demonstrated against the recent wave of layoffs by big international companies like the British chain Marks and Spencer. French workers, like many around Europe, demonstrating concern about globalization and its effect on their jobs and lives. Bettina Luscher, CNN, Berlin.
[Bakhtiar:] Thailand is an Asian nation which was once known as Siam. It's a popular tourist destination. Thailand's economy is heavily agricultural and rice is a major crop. Its official language is Thai and Buddhism is the state religion. The hierarchy of the Buddhist religion remains largely in the hands of men, however. In 1928, Buddhist authorities declared that only men can be ordained as monks. There are some 300,000 men currently serving as monks in Thailand. Now, one woman is hoping to join those ranks. Deborah Wang reports on the challenges she faces.
[Deborah Wang, Cnn Correspondent:] From a Buddhist temple not far from the bustling Thai capital, Chatsumarn Kabilsingh is waging a quiet campaign. The 56-year-old is an advocate of equal rights for women throughout the Buddhist word. Chatsumarn is also an expert on Buddhism. She's the author of more than 40 books on the subject and a teacher of Buddhist philosophy at Bangkok's prestigious Thammasat University. Chatsumarn believes that Buddhism is, above all, an egalitarian faith.
[Chatsumarn Kabilsingh:] Buddhism is the very first religion in the world that actually accepted men and women have equal potentiality for their spiritual development. But through the process of time, you know, sometimes you kind of fall back, fall back into the situation that we came out of.
[Wang:] Since Thailand's supreme Buddhist council, or Sangha, bans women from being ordained, Chatsumarn went to Sri Lanka to be ordained as a novice. In two years, Chatsumarn could become a fully ordained monk. For now, she is pressing Thailand's Buddhist authorities to recognize her ordination and to change the rules in order to allow women to become monks.
[Chatsumarn Kabilsingh:] I hope that in the future, the Sangha and the Thai society when they say that there is possibility and female, so to say, you know, are positive. It is an asset to society. I do hope that they will consider it, and they will accept it. Right now, we are going against our how do you say not understanding, not understanding and not accepting, but I hope in the future they will understand better.
[Wang:] Until then, all Chatsumarn can do is pray that Thai Buddhists will some day accept women as equals in the faith.
[Walcott:] We turn now from Thailand to another Asian nation, China. Women there are also facing challenges. China is the most populous country in the world with over one billion people. Among those growing numbers, more and more unemployed women. Rebecca MacKinnon takes a look at the problem and some solutions.
[Rebecca Mackinnon, Cnn Correspondent:] For China's growing number of laid off factory workers, making a living takes creativity. Shu May Ling and Wu Chung Lee now deliver water the hard way, earning one Chinese yuan, or about 12 U.S. cents, per delivery. Their partner, Wong Wei Lee, admits switching from a mindless factory job to running a small business was tough. For the past decade, economic reforms have forced thousands of money-losing state-run factories to shut down all over China. In industrial cities like Tianjin, two hours' drive from China's capital, some economists estimate real unemployment is as high as 30 percent. [on camera]: The people of Tianjin are bracing for more layoffs and factory closings after China joins the World Trade Organization next year. And as usual in China, the hardest hit will be women over 40. [voice-over]: More than 60 percent of Tianjin's current employed fall into that category. To help them help themselves, the United Nations Development Program and Tianjin city authorities have set up what's called a business incubator, giving loans to unemployed women like Wang Huaiying, who hires more employed women to embroider sweaters by hand. Wang says her education was cut short by the extremist political movements of the '60s and '70s. Few women workers her age went beyond grade school, she says, so nobody wants to hire them.
[Wang Huaiying, Tianjin Women's Federation:] If we don't help them, I believe there will be a growing number of employed women in this age group. After two or three years of unemployment, people become emotionally unstable.
[Mackinnon:] Not to mention poorer, which is why these women say embroidering all day to earn just U.S.$3 or U.S.$4 is still a lot better than not working at all. Rebecca MacKinnon, CNN, Tianjin, China.
[Tom Haynes, Co-host:] Our look inside Asia continues now as we head to Hong Kong. On July 1, 1997, the British colony of Hong Kong officially reverted to Chinese control. The transfer ended more than 150 years of British rule. Great Britain acquired Hong Kong from China in 1842 when the two signed a treaty at the end of the Opium War. Later, in 1898, the two parties agreed Britain would lease Hong Kong for 99 years. But when the communists took control of China in 1949, the new communist Chinese government declared the treaties giving Britain control of Hong Kong invalid. But the two finally worked out terms of an agreement in 1984 for Britain to hand over Hong Kong as scheduled in 1997. So far, Hong Kong has maintained much of its political and financial freedoms under China's communist control. The question is will those freedoms last? Mike Chinoy reports.
[Mike Chinoy, Cnn Correspondent:] Hong Kong is the one part of the China where the Communist Party isn't supposed to call all the shots. Where a formula known as one country, two systems exists to preserve the territory's freedoms, rule of law and capitalist way of life. And a Western-educated chief executive governs with the help of a professional civil service and a partially elected legislature. [on camera]: The Chinese Communist Party always had an ambiguous legal status in Hong Kong never formally banned, even under British rule, but never formally registered as a political party with the government even after the 1997 handover to China. Historically, the Communists have always kept a very low profile here. Now that's beginning to change. [voice-over]: This is the headquarters of the Chinese government's liaison office in Hong Kong. Before the handover, it was known as the new China news agency, Beijing's de factor embassy here. Behind its curtained offices, diplomats and China specialists say, operates what's called the "gong al gung way" the Hong Kong- Macau work committee, the formal name of the Communist Party cell in Hong Kong.
[Joseph Cheng, City University, Hong Kong:] The liaison office remains a front of the Chinese party organization in the territory. It will definitely keep a very low profile in public, but it is the organization controlling and instructing various organizations.
[Chinoy:] Long-time China analysts and sources close to the Communist Party say the head of the work committee in effect, the party secretary in Hong Kong is chief of the liaison office, Xiang Enzhou, seen here at a recent reception with Hong Kong chief executive Tung Chee-hwa. Receiving its instructions from the general office of the Communist Party's central committee in Beijing, the gong al gung way works as a series of key party-run or influenced organizations in Hong Kong. According to scholars and diplomats, the organizations include the Wen Wei Po and Dogwu Po, two local newspapers regarded as Beijing's mouthpieces here. The 280,000 member pro-Beijing federation of trade unions, the Bank of China and the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong the DAB -the territory's leading pro-Beijing political party. Local China watchers describe it as the classic Communist structure, the united front.
[Lo Shiu-hing, Hong Kong University:] The united front organizations, they are referred to the grassroots organizations in Hong Kong, which are led by Hong Kong people but which have very close interactions with the mainland officials in Hong Kong.
[Chinoy:] Some Hong Kong legislators have also raised questions about whether there are Communist Party members in the Hong Kong government itself.
[Emily Lau, Hong Kong Legislator:] I am talking about the real core of the Communist Party here. Who constitutes membership of this core? How many of them are people in the Hong Kong government, members of the executive council, policy secretaries, legislators who are there? We don't know.
[Chinoy:] On another issue, the case of the Falun Gong: The CCP's united front throwing its weight behind calls for a crackdown. Banned in mainland China as a threat to Communist Party control, the spiritual movement is still legal here and has used Hong Kong as a platform to denounce Beijing's crackdown, to the fury of the territory's pro-China forces, who have mounted what appears to be an orchestrated political campaign urging the Hong Kong government to get tough. First, Falun Gong activities were denounced by the pro-Beijing media, then by pro-Beijing politicians, then by liaison office chief Xiang Enzhou himself. In response to the pressure, Chief Executive Tung borrowed Beijing's language, calling the Falun Gong more or less an evil cult that the government would watch carefully. [on camera]: In some ways, the Communist Party's uneasy, half- opened, half-clandestine role in Hong Kong underscores the broader question mark about this territory: Can it remain a free and open society in a country where the Communist Party is determined to maintain its ironclad grip on power? Mike Chinoy, CNN, Hong Kong.
[Bakhtiar:] You know the old saying beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Well, it turns out art is, as well. In "Chronicle" today, we profile Andreas Gursky. He's a photograph who produces highly original photographs that illustrate modern life, everything from apartment buildings to hotel lobbies. His first American retrospective is on display in New York and Phil Hirschkorn takes us to the show.
[Phil Hirschkorn, Cnn Correspondent:] The frenzy of the new economy seen on the trade floor of the Tokyo Stock Exchange, our high tech world viewed from inside a factory of the electronics company Siemens, international trade visible in rows of cars at the port of Salerno, Italy. This is the global view of Andreas Gursky, German photographer whose work is on exhibit at New York's Museum of Modern Art, his first retrospective in the United States.
[Peter Galassi, Curator, Museum Of Modern Art:] About 10 years ago he set out deliberately to try to picture what he thought was specific to our times now. His work isn't just a passive mirror of that world, that globalized world. It's a very inventive artistic picture of that.
[Hirschkorn:] The photographs are always in color, the prints always large. This rock concert fills 16 feet on the wall.
[Galassi:] These are pictures that wouldn't be the same if they were smaller, partly because as you see in a lot of these pictures, one of his themes is the relationship between the tiny, anonymous individual and this massiveness of contemporary society or, indeed, of the landscape as a whole.
[Hirschkorn:] The lone figure is dwarfed by the environment in Gursky's cross country skiers parading through the Alps or in his tiny cable car traveling up the side of a misty mountain and these tenants staring out windows of a huge Paris apartment building.
[Galassi:] He can't get back far enough to get the whole thing in his camera so he photographed, he stands here and he photographs one half of the building and then he just moves over here and he photographed the other half of the building.
[Hirschkorn:] The images are merged in a computer. Gursky used the same method, piecing together negatives, with hotels. This atrium in Shanghai appears twice as large as it really is. In this picture of the Rhine River, Gursky digitally erased buildings that spoiled the pristine view. One of Gursky's influences was his father, a commercial photographer.
[Galassi:] And I think it does show up in these pictures, the sort of slick perfection of the pic which is so much a part of the pictures derives from the commercial world.
[Hirschkorn:] So does capturing consumer abundance in the bright shelves of a California store where everything costs $0.99 and depicting the information age in stacks of international titles available at a Stockholm library. Gursky's pictures both document and idealize our times.
[Galassi:] His technique is impressive, but the technique is at the service of an artistic vision and it's that vision, both its power and its originality, that draw us to him.
[Hirschkorn:] Phil Hirschkorn, CNN NEWSROOM, New York City.
[Bakhtiar:] Wish I lived in New York. I'd like to see that.
[Walcott:] Yeah, me too. Well, that wraps up today's show. We'll see you back here tomorrow.
[Bakhtiar:] Bye. CNN NEWSROOM is part of Cable in the Classroom, a service of the cable television industry and your local cable company. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Asien Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] One hundred and eight nations gathered in Poland this week to launch a global effort to help fragile new democracies and strengthen old ones. Most of the delegates signed a document dubbed the Warsaw Declaration, fashioned after the 1975 Helsinki Accords on Human Rights. Poland's president hosted the conference, as he kicked off his campaign for re-election. TVP reports on the beginning of that presidential race.
[Barbara Grad, Tvp:] Off they go. As the speaker of the parliament sets a date of the presidential election for October 8th, the race has officially begun. Mr. Kwasniewski, the incumbent, went to the southern town of Kirza to press the flesh.
[Aleksander Kwasniewski, Polish President:] I launched my campaign at the he place I started and won five years ago. This place has been some kind of magic for us. It's a lucky place.
[Grad:] With 70 percent approval, Aleksander Kwasniewski is far ahead of all of his contenders. Andre Alahovski, the former finance and foreign minister, comes second with about 10 percent. Let's move on the concrete things is his slogan. Lech Walesa, the legion of Solidarity, commands 5 percent so far. We wish you come out of the legion to reality, he was urged by his followers of the Christian Democratic Party. Yes, I take the challenge, Walesa promised, adding that Poland as it is now is certainly not the one he and the other Solidarity leaders suffered in prison for. He will solicit for support under the slogan, the black is black and the white is white. In the meantime, the Solidarity bloc nominated its current leader, Marian Chupetsky, as its official candidate. Chupetsky united Poland's center-right parties under Solidarity's umbrella and led them to victory in the 1997 parliamentary election. Yet the coalition he has built has recently broken down. [on camera]: If the polls are right, Kwasniewski seems to be out of reach for the contenders. For many of them, the goal is not the presidency itself, but the parliamentary election scheduled for the next year. This is Barbara Grad, Polish Television for CNN WORLD REPORT.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] The president of the United States was in Florida this morning helping building a house. Now he's back in Washington, hoping to build a coalition for the future. CNN's John King is joining us now. He keeping watch over things at the White House. John, what's going on there today?
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Lou, as you mentioned, the president is back here at the White House, and he is less than an hour away from looking directly into this new world order, if you will, here in Washington. A bipartisan group of senators is due here, to meet with the president to discuss that pending education bill that you just heard Jeanne talking about with Terry McAuliffe. At the table is Senator Jim Jeffords. Of course, he is the Republican who is now an independent, the reason the Democrats will take control of the Senate tomorrow. He will be here, along with other Democrats and Republicans. The White House believes the most important thing for the president as the Senate shifts and some poll show support for the president dropping a bit is to focus on getting things done, so the president will call for swift, final passage of that education bill. On Thursday, he will sign his tax cut, celebrate that as a promise kept to the American people. But it's no secret here there's a difficult row ahead, as Kate Snow was talking earlier in the show. There are major differences over the patients' bill of rights: The Democrats want to increase the minimum wage; the Republicans don't want to do that unless there is an accompanying set of tax cuts for businesses. Many disputes lie yet ahead, but the president is this week focusing on outreach. Senator Jeffords will be here today. Senator John McCain, not always on the same page as his former campaign rival, the president, is due for dinner tonight. Senator Lincoln Chafee, one of those moderate Republicans not always happy with the White House will get a meeting with the president on Thursday, and then on Thursday night, Tom Daschle, who by then will be the majority leader, gets dinner with the president. So the president recognizes this new environment here in Washington. White House officials say the agenda won't change, but certainly, the president is going out of his way, at least in these early days, to make an effort, at least in public, to show that he wants to operate in a more bipartisan manner as the Senate shifts to the Democrats Lou.
[Waters:] John King, keeping watch at the White House. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] We have been telling you today about some of the controversy now surrounding some of the figures tapped for key roles in the upcoming Bush administration. Joining us now to talk more about this are two members of Congress. Representative Bernie Sanders is an independent from the state of Vermont. Also with us today is Jeff Flake, who is a newly elected Republican from the state of Arizona. Mr. Flake, I'd like to begin with you. Your state, of course, one in which immigration is certainly a very important and key issue. You are a Republican, however, probably, I understand, a supporter of Mr. Bush and his appointees, and you also know Linda Chavez. This latest controversy surrounding her, that she brought a woman to live in her home who was an illegal immigrant to this country, what do you make of that?
[Rep. Jeff Flake , Arizona:] Well, I've known Linda for years and she's a very kind individual, and it sounds as if what she did was an act of compassion. And this is what the nominating process is about, and I'm sure these questions will be answered.
[Chen:] Well, an act of compassion, but is this going to be something that could hold up her nomination, do you think?
[Flake:] I don't think so. I think that when it is explained and when she explains the situation, the comfort level will increase.
[Chen:] Mr. Sanders, do you see this as going to be something acceptable to critics who may lie on the Hill, particularly in the Senate that will consider the nomination? A compassionate act by a Cabinet nominee?
[Rep. Bernie Sanders , Vermont:] Well, I really think there's something more involved than just that potential incident. And that is, as you know, Mr. Bush received 500,000 less votes than Mr. Gore. He may or may not have won the state of Florida, and he comes forward during the campaign as saying that he is a unifier and not a divider. What concerns me very much with the nomination of Ms. Chavez as well as John Ashcroft is that he is really bringing forth extreme, right- wing proponents who are not going to be uniters. They're going to be very divisive forces if, in fact, they are nominated. I don't know have enough information about the issue of the illegal the alleged illegal immigrant that worked for Ms. Chavez. But I think you've got a real problem with the secretary of labor is opposed to increases in the minimum wage when the minimum wage today is basically a starvation wage of $5.15 an hour. So it goes beyond the issue of the illegal immigrant. But whether or not this nominee is going to really represent working people in this country or is going to work against their best interests?
[Chen:] Let me ask you this, though you wouldn't be voting; of course, you're not a member of the Senate. You wouldn't be voting on the nomination yourself. But could you accept the possibility that an illegal immigrant and we haven't, as you said, heard all the details of this but that an illegal immigrant lived in the home of a Cabinet secretary? Could you accept that if you could live with the issues with the positions that she takes on these issues that you bring up?
[Sanders:] Well, I can't live with the positions that she's taken on the issues. In terms of the illegal immigrant, I think the hearing will discover what she in fact did. I would remind you that one of Clinton's nominees, or more than one, was faced with a similar problem and ended up withdrawing her name as a candidate for attorney general.
[Chen:] And that would be Zoe Baird.
[Sanders:] Yes.
[Chen:] Mr. Flake, Mr. Sanders brings up an interesting point here. Is the holdup or is the questioning going to be more along the lines of Ms. Chavez's personal history and what she's done? Or is there going to be a greater question about the issues and the positions she represents?
[Flake:] Well, I hope that what it's about are her qualifications. Certainly, President Bush President-elect Bush has a right to appoint individuals who share his philosophy and his beliefs. And I think he's done that. And she's a good person. She's a person of integrity. And I think as the process goes on, that America will see that.
[Chen:] But in terms of positions and we're not talking only here about Ms. Chavez but also Mr. Ashcroft, as Mr. Sanders brings up I mean, these people have generated some controversy over the positions. Mr. Ashcroft, some of the defense has been, that, look, he may have certain positions but he will uphold the law, and that is the important thing here.
[Flake:] With regard to Mr. Ashcroft, it would be hard to find a more qualified individual if you look for years. Here's an individual who was a law professor, then served as attorney general, was head of the association of attorneys general, then was a governor, then was a senator, served on the Judiciary Committee there. He is eminently qualified, and I can tell you personally I know John Ashcroft, and he's a great individual. He's a person of integrity.
[Chen:] Qualifications over positions, even if perhaps they might ring contradictory?
[Flake:] I think I think qualifications is what they will look at mostly. But certainly, the president has a prerogative to appoint individuals that share his agenda and his philosophy, and Mr. Ashcroft does.
[Sanders:] Well, of course, the president has the right to nominate anybody that he wants. But again, I would reiterate the fact that President Bush has talked about bringing the Congress and the American people together. By appointing some extreme right-wingers, you're not going to do that. In terms of Mr. Ashcroft and I don't know him personally, and again, the hearing will determine the most important parts about his career he there are some very serious allegations that he acted in an unethical way regarding the nomination to a circuit court of a black Missouri Supreme Court justice, and he played a very bad role.
[Flake:] I would have to jump in and say I don't think that that has been part of anything coming forward. I don't think anybody...
[Sanders:] Oh, I would beg to differ.
[Flake:] ... could seriously accuse him of something...
[Chen:] I think we will hear about all these issues as the confirmation process goes forward. Unfortunately, we're going to have to leave it there. Representative Bernie Sanders and Jeff Flake as well, thank you both for being with us.
[Flake:] Thank you.
[Sanders:] Thank you.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] The nation is waiting to hear what George Bush will say tonight, but my next guests are more interested in what he will wear. Joining me are Joan and Melissa Rivers, fashion commentators for E! Entertainment TV. And you brought your show to the conventions.
[Joan Rivers, Fashion Reporter:] And our show believes it's not how you lead, it's how you look.
[Allen:] Absolutely. I mean, this is America.
[J. Rivers:] This is what makes America great.
[Allen:] It is image.
[J. Rivers:] Would you vote for a man that wasn't wearing Armani suit? You'd think twice.
[Allen:] You vote for whatever Regis is wearing.
[J. Rivers:] Yes, exactly.
[Allen:] So you're going to be putting a show together for E! TV, so you're going to be comparing the Republicans and how they look and the Democrats and how they look.
[J. Rivers:] Yes.
[Allen:] So you want to give us kind of a clue to what you're seeing around the hall? First, let's talk about the delegates. Does anyone really care how they look.
[J. Rivers:] Well, the delegates, it's just, you know it's like an old frat house. I mean, they're all a lot of Texas guys dressed with their boots and their hats and yahoo. I mean, just they look like asses. I mean, they just look like fools.
[Allen:] You were saying it looks good to people in Texas.
[J. Rivers:] Oh, it looks great for Texas people, and this is their moment to shine.
[Allen:] Yes, but if George Bush takes the White House, what kind of look might come from...
[J. Rivers:] I'm scared there'll be a string tie at the inaugural. I'm terrified of that.
[Allen:] What about the fact that a lot of America is dressing down and going with the casual look? We've certainly seen Al Gore looking a bit more casual out on the campaign trail. What do you think about that?
[J. Rivers:] Well, and looking so uncomfortable.
[Melissa Rivers, Fashion Reporter:] Yes, I think the biggest problem we're seeing with that is there is sort of that discomfort level like, why am I in this? But, I mean, so much of it you have to look comfortable in what you're wearing as if it's actually yours and someone didn't just come in your room and put it there on a hanger and say, your stylist says wear this.
[Allen:] Right.
[J. Rivers:] Do you remember the first day Jimmy Carter was in the office? He wore jeans to the and never again. I mean, you just wear what you look good in. Don't pander.
[Allen:] Yes, be yourself.
[J. Rivers:] Be yourself.
[Allen:] Do you think anybody can be that's running for office?
[J. Rivers:] No, especially the wives. I'm so sorry for the wives.
[Allen:] Let's talk about the wives. There's Laura Bush and we have Tipper Gore. We've seen a lot of Tipper, so we're first seeing Laura Bush a little more and her daughters. How is she looking to you?
[J. Rivers:] Like a nice looking Amish woman. I mean, they're all Republican women, you don't look to them for fashion, and they have to look like church ladies.
[Allen:] What do they need to do to spiff up their image?
[J. Rivers:] Braless and thighs. Get with the Clintons.
[M. Rivers:] I thought Laura Bush looked good.
[J. Rivers:] She looks good. I mean, she is.
[M. Rivers:] Yes, I mean, she looks good. It's a younger look. I mean, it's still that Republican suit in a color, but at least its a little bit more of an updated version and it doesn't look like she pulled it out of Barbara's closet and borrowed it. It looks like it's truly hers.
[Allen:] So you're saying, don't try and mimic your mother-in-law.
[J. Rivers:] No. Barbara Bush is wearing something she obviously has kept since she was the president's wife. You know, and that's fine. She looks like what she always looked like, you know, a sturdy woman. The girls I thought the Bush...
[M. Rivers:] Daughters.
[J. Rivers:] ... daughters, the twins, looked adorable. They're young and they let them look they didn't dress like little "Mini Me"s. They gave them a chance to look hip.
[M. Rivers:] They looked their age.
[J. Rivers:] Yes.
[M. Rivers:] And Karenna Gore is really the one that sort of ushered that in.
[Allen:] Right, she's kind of stylish.
[J. Rivers:] Yes.
[M. Rivers:] Yes.
[Allen:] But you're going to pick on the Democrats, too, in a couple days.
[J. Rivers:] Oh, of course. I hate them all. I'm voting for myself.
[Allen:] How does following political fashions compare with the glam of following the Hollywood set and the Oscars?
[J. Rivers:] I think this is more fun because you know these women had to think, what can I wear to look good and yet not offend anybody? And that's very difficult. We've been talking to senators and delegates, and we're going to be speaking with Governor Whitman.
[M. Rivers:] Governor Whitman later.
[J. Rivers:] And it's very hard to be a woman. You want to look good, you want to look pretty, but you don't want anyone to write you a letter and say, you shouldn't have worn your blouse was too low. We won't see Versace tonight.
[M. Rivers:] No, I'm guessing we're not going to see a lot of wild prints.
[Allen:] You'll see politically correct clothing.
[J. Rivers:] Yes.
[M. Rivers:] But it is such a difficult...
[J. Rivers:] Line.
[M. Rivers:] ... line. Sort of the image I mean, we were talking the other night about, do you remember what Hillary wore to the first inauguration?
[Allen:] That purple...
[J. Rivers:] Oh, please.
[M. Rivers:] The purple plaid and with the hat and all.
[J. Rivers:] I mean, terrifying. I watched the whole time holding a cross. I mean, it was just...
[Allen:] All right, listen, we'll be watching for your program on E!...
[M. Rivers:] August 26.
[Allen:] ... August 26, OK, to get more of Melissa and Joan. Thank you.
[J. Rivers:] A pleasure. You're in the right color.
[Allen:] Thank you so much. See, she knows what to say. You're on my program.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] What's really going on with gas prices? And why did they go up? Who can we blame? Well, to help with answers, let's go to Los Angeles and to Christopher Palmeri. He covered the energy industry for "Forbes" magazine and is now senior correspondent for "Businessweek." Thank you for joining us. You have just done a major look at this problem. Who, in your view, is to blame? Is it refineries? Is it OPEC? Is it consumers? Is it government?
[Christopher Palmeri, "businessweek":] Well, the irony in this, Brian, is that everybody is looking for somebody to blame, and the reality is that we're all to blame a little bit. If you look what happened to the price of gasoline in the last year and half, it sort of a low at around February of last year of about $1 a gallon, and of course nobody was complaining back then. Now it's around $1.66 average nationally. And if you break down that increase, about 48 cents came directly from the price of oil, which has skyrocketed in the last year and half, and then the rest of the part of that equation is myriad of smaller influences. One of them is the new reformulated gasoline, the cleaner-burning gasoline, which was introduced on June 1 throughout much of the country, and clearly, the EPA, I believe, could have executed that rollout better. Then there were some pipeline problems in the Midwest, which led to much higher prices there. That's sort of the oil company's fault. And the part that people don't really want to talk about, certainly politicians and oil companies, but is really a major factor here is that consumers have been using a lot more gasoline. We've all enjoyed low prices for 15 years, and we're all now driving these gas- guzzling trucks, more of them, further, and using public transportation less. And so, to a large degree, we're all paying the price of that increase which the supply gasoline has not kept up with.
[Nelson:] There are any number of politicians who have been charging collusion or price fixing among the oil companies. In your investigation, did you find anything like that?
[Palmeri:] There's actually ample evidence, if you study the state of California, which introduced it's own reformulated gasoline program in March of '96, and almost from the day that happened, prices spiked. And since that day, they've continued to spike higher than the national average more frequently. And so when you study California, and the same scenario happened over the last few years there, prices would go, consumer would get angry, politicians would schedule hearings. And studies have been done, at least four major ones. And the conclusion is always the same, that there hasn't been a major refinery built in California in 30 years, so supply is tight, and the introduction of reformulated gasoline, a special fuel exclusively for Californians, has an effect of reducing the supply of that gasoline during crunch times, and so the price takes off. And I am pretty sure that when the Midwest situation is studied in depth, as it is being right now, that the conclusions will be much the same. There isn't any sort of grand scheme on the part of oil companies.
[Randall:] Quickly, Mr. Palmeri, is the solution in the short run for state governments to reduce their taxes?
[Palmeri:] There are number of short run things you can do. That's one of them. They might, from time to time, wave the reformulated gasoline requirement. They also, you know, might just consider sort of releasing more oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve that sort of releases pressure on prices. Those are all short-term things. The reality is that we're going to have to sort of, at least until more refineries are built, we're going to have to deal with these price spikes.
[Nelson:] And what about looking for alternative fuels and putting more emphasis on conservation? Is that something that we have to address in the long term?
[Palmeri:] I think it is. We had great success in the '80s of reducing consumption of gasoline and other fuels, and I think that that's probably something that a lot of people should consider right now.
[Nelson:] OK, Christopher Palmeri, from "Businessweek," thank you for joining us. We appreciate it.
[Palmeri:] Thank you.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] It's a holiday in Tokyo and Hong Kong today, but Deborah Wang's on duty and joins me live from Hong Kong, with a look at the Asian markets that did trade. Good morning Deborah.
[Deborah Wang, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Deborah, to you. As the markets were closed here, the markets that were open were, for the most part, were buoyed by the strong GDP numbers out from the United States on Friday. The biggest winners were in Seoul, where tech stocks were scooped up across the board. The tech-heavy KOSDAQ picked up 4.85 percent, and the benchmark KOSPI firmed up 3.27 percent. But fears of a slowing economy dragged down the Weighted index in Taiwan. It fell 0.65 percent on relatively light volume. Taiwan's United Microelectronics, the second-largest contract chipmaker in the world, posted disappointing first quarter results late on Monday. It reported earnings of $196 million in the first three months of the year, down 13 percent from last year. In Manila, stocks continue to tumble, the Manila Composite falling through the key 1,400 level, to fresh six-month lows, down 2.92 percent. Mounting protests over the arrest of former-President Joseph Estrada dragged the index down for the third day running. If found guilty of all the graft charges against him, Estrada could face the death penalty or life imprisonment. And that's the business day here in Asia. Back to you, Deborah, in New York.
[Marchini:] Thank you.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] We've got every day this week another important economic report. Of course today, we've got an upward move in the price of oil. The spotlight, though, a little later on is going to be on manufacturing.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Christine Romans joins us this Wednesday morning with more on this front. Good morning.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi there. Well, 10:00 this morning Eastern time is when we're going to get the National Association of Purchasing Management report. It's called N-A-P-M, or NAPM for short; for some people in the markets, that's what they like to call it. Anyway, they're looking for that number to increase just a little bit, maybe, from the last one that we saw. They're saying that manufacturing looks pretty good; that's what economists think overall, looking for 56.3 roughly is what we saw last time, and they're looking for maybe even a little bit up-tick from that. Anyway, so that's what we're looking for in terms of that number, and maybe a little bit of strength there. But what people are really zeroing in on is the prices-paid component; they're expecting that to reflect the recent increase in oil prices. And they're actually looking for that to be something like a five-year high. So a strong prices-paid component of this number. And of course the inflation-wary bond market always keeps it's eye on any kind of inflation components, and that's what we're going to get in this report. But that said, a lot of economists are saying we're probably going to be able to talk ourselves out of any big concerns about the prices-paid component because we do know that oil prices have been rising. Still, overall, fairly high for the overall number, consistent with continued strength in manufacturing. The prices-paid number could probably rise again, led by oil, up sharply, but not even close in the prices-paid component to that 87.1 that we saw back in '94. So, still, they're telling me anywhere from 77, 78, 79, 80 are the readings that we could see on that prices-paid component; that compares with 72.6 in January. So it is, you know, a significant little up move for the prices-paid component, and that could be something that sort of takes the markets, maybe not by surprise, but certainly grabs their attention. Also, at 10:00, there's a construction-spending number. This is a number for the previous month. It's sort of a lagging number. A lot of people say it's ancient history. But I'm hearing that there are some folks out there who think it might be pretty strong given a recent surge in construction employment. So we could see a strong number there. And for a market that is looking for any signs of a slowdown, that could be a little bit worrisome.
[Haffenreffer:] If the prices number does come in stronger than expected, it's simply going to lead people to believe that, yes, interest rate hikes are pretty much going to be coming down the pipeline anyway, which is already the expectation. So is this already factored into the market?
[Romans:] Well, that's the question. And whenever you talk about expectations for numbers, it depends how far outside of expectations these numbers are. So, lots of folks are looking for that number to be at a five-year high. If it's significantly above a five-year high, I think it's going to be harder for the markets to talk themselves out of it.
[Marchini:] Christine, thanks.
[Haffenreffer:] We'll hold our breath.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] The secretary of state, Colin Powell, said the United States cannot meet the demands of the people holding journalist Daniel Pearl nor said Powell can the U.S. negotiate. Pearl disappeared in Pakistan about a week ago yesterday and his kidnappers are threatening to kill him. And now they are threatening open season on all journalists in that country from outside of Pakistan. First to Ben Wedeman in the Pakistani city there of Karachi where Daniel Pearl vanished about eight days ago. Ben, good evening again to you.
[Ben Wedeman, Cnn Correspondent:] Good evening, Bill. Yes, that extension has been extended by rather, that deadline has been extended by one day. This according to an e-mail received by a local newspaper, the "Jang" newspaper. Now we must underscore here that there is no way of actually verifying that that e-mail came from the same group that is holding Mr. Pearl. But in that e-mail, they said that they will give one more day if America to meet those demands, and if America will not meet them, Mr. Pearl will be killed. The e-mail goes on to say that don't think this will be the end. It is the beginning and it is a real war on America. Now, we've heard since yesterday impassioned appeals both from the managing editor of the "Wall Street Journal" and the wife of Mr. Pearl, Marianne. She's a freelance French journalist, six months pregnant. Both of them calling for his immediate release. His wife, Marianne, saying that Daniel is not a spy, neither for the CIA, Massod or anybody else, that he has come here to try to create cultural bridges between the West and the people of Pakistan, to give them a voice so the world can understand how they feel, what they think. And as far as the editor of the managing editor of the Washington rather the "Wall Street Journal", he says that there will be no purpose served by killing Mr. Pearl and therefore he should be released as soon as possible Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right. Ben, thanks. Ben Wedeman again live in Karachi, Pakistan.

[Announcer:] Seen in classrooms the world over, this is
[Cnn Newsroom. Tom Haynes, Co-host:] Hello, everyone, welcome to the new week. I'm Tom Haynes. We have a full agenda this Monday. Here's a look at the rundown. First up today, birthday wishes for the personal computer. Details in today's "Top Story." We'll also recap the big stories making news last week. That's coming up in the "News Reel." Moving on to "Environment Desk" today, we have a tale of shellfish vs. algae. We stay close to the water in "Worldview" as we explore the Hawaiian Islands. Then we end up proving that one man's trash is another man's art. We'll explain that. But first today, can you believe it, 20 years ago this past weekend the wild-eyed passions of some hobbyists and engineers went mainstream. IBM marketed its first personal computer. Since that time, more than 500 million computers have been sold. The rest, as they say, is history, including smart TVs like this one where you can actually access the Internet. Well, with a look at what the PC has promised, delivered and where it's headed, here's Steve Young.
[Steve Young, Cnn Financial News Correspondent:] It's relatively small so you could say the Bendix G-15 back in the 1950s almost qualified as a personal computer, but its price tag was 60,000 bucks. In the 1970s, the Altair hobbyist computer kit put a gleam in Bill Gates' eye. Then some guys named Jobs and Wozniak thought different. But it wasn't until 1981 that the PC became legitimate.
[Richard Shaffer, Technologic Partners:] If it came from IBM it was a serious business product and that, at the time, was where the money was coming from was business buyers.
[Rod Canion, Founder, Compaq Computers:] When IBM introduced their PC, one of the things that just really became clear was this is going to change the industry, it's going to cause it to explode and I was at about the right age if I'm ever going to start a company, I better do it now.
[Young:] The PC promised us the paperless office. Well, get a load of a colleague's office next to mine. Analysts say what happened to the paperless office was, until recently, we never had technology we could put in our pocket and carry away. Economists used to have pillow fights about whether PCs increased productivity, but this economist and most others now agree mission accomplished, except for two hitches. ESTHER DYSON, RELEASE 1.0: The guy next to you is more productive, too, so it doesn't give you a competitive advantage, it just means you have to do more to catch up. And the second is, from a company's point of view, the same issue, the competition exists. Despite the increasing gaggle of handheld gizmos, most experts agree 20 years from now the PC will still be around, it just won't look like or act like anything we have today.
[Rob Enderle, Giga:] It is more of a partner, it's less of a hurdle. It is virtually invisible as far as an obstacle and I probably can't live without it.
[Young:] The acronym DWIM sums up the dream computer of 2021. It'll be a PC so smart it'll be able to do what I mean. Steve Young, CNN Financial News, New York.
[Haynes:] While personal computers have been a force driving America for 20 years, the technologies that led to the PC's invention date back much further. From the loom, green scans and floppy disks to bulky mainframes, the PC's evolution has been a long on-going process. Garrick Utley looks at a few people and inventions responsible for the high-speed Internet PC world we live in today.
[Garrick Utley, Cnn Correspondent:] It was the next big thing back in 1981, that first IBM PC with its glowing green screen and large floppy disks. But it did the job, bringing the digital information age into our homes and workplaces. [on camera]: And who should get the credit for changing our lives with this thing? Is there the equivalent of the Wright Brothers or a Thomas Edison? How about a weaver working at his loom? We'll get to him in a moment. [voice-over]: First, we should acknowledge that Apple and others were already making computers in the late 1970s, but they could not interact with each other, so IBM can claim credit for allowing their competitors to make their computers IBM-compatible, which made the PC the dominant computer. Intel can claim credit, because its chips drove that first PC, even if today's chips are 300 times faster. And, of course, there was the young Bill Gates who provided the operating system which created his fortune. But what would Bill Gates and others be without those who went before them, way before them? Those who built those bulky room- filling mainframes and the first electronic computers back in the 1930s and '40s. [on camera]: And why stop there? The origins of the computing power that we have today are so much older than we might think. How old? [voice-over]: A weaver works at a loom, a demonstration of the first time that the programming of information, the heart of computers today, was used to run a machine. Information on punch cards controlled the patterns woven on the cloth. Where? In France. When? In 1805. And then there are those digits we never see, the zeros and ones on which all computing operates. That key to our information age was devised by the mathematician Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz in Germany in the late 1600s, who saw it's potential for calculating machines. [on camera]: But Leibnitz was also a philosopher who felt that numbers should have some universal meaning, so he said that one should represent God and zero its opposite, the void. [voice-over]: Today we may not put much spirituality into computer technology as we tap out our zeros and ones via the keyboard, but before that first PC 20 years ago, the man who made it all possible did, more than 300 years ago. Garrick Utley, CNN, New York.
[Announcer:] Tran Nguyen from Hanoi, Vietnam asks: Which country has the highest rate of Internet users?
[Allison Tom, Cnn Correspondent:] The United States has the largest number of Internet users. Experts say that's because most people are connected both at home and at work and the cost for Internet connectivity is often cheaper in the U.S. than in other countries. By 2005, close to a billion people worldwide are expected to be using the Internet. At that time, analysts say usage will become more widespread rather than being dominated by a single region. Rapid growth will be seen in Europe and Asia Pacific where people will access the Internet using their cell phones and other wireless devices.
[Thomas Nybo, Cnn Correspondent:] First up on the "News Reel," another week of violence in the Middle East, including a suicide bombing in Jerusalem and a missile attack on a Palestinian police station in Ramallah. Flooding in India displaced hundreds of thousands of people. American student John Tobin emerged from six months in a Russian jail.
[John Tobin, American Student:] It's great to be home.
[Nybo:] He was held on drug charges but his family claims the Russian government framed him when he refused to be a spy. A big week for controversial medical practices.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Embryonic stem cell research offers both great promise and great peril.
[Nybo:] President Bush decided to allow federal funding of embryonic stem cell research that doesn't involve destroying new embryos. And a handful of scientists pressed ahead with their plans for human cloning. No human pictures yet, but there is video of a cloned Chinese goat and its new kids. A plane crash in Florida caught 911 operators off guard.
[Unidentified Male:] The guy landed it in the middle of the road. And he did a great job, but he just... 911
[Operator:] OK.
[Unidentified Male:] He bumped the back of the bus.
[Nybo:] On Wednesday, NASA launched the Genesis satellite. Its mission: collect solar particles to fill in the gap in the understanding of the universe. Here's a look at the blastoff.
[Unidentified Male:] And we have liftoff. The NASA Genesis space... ... on a mission to retrieve a piece of the sun.
[Nybo:] Millionaire Steve Fossett launched his latest attempt to become the first person to circle the globe alone in a balloon. Double amputee Ed Homer is setting out to climb Mount Everest. Also in Columbia, a daring group of bulls partook in the running of the humans and that's it for the "News Reel." Thomas Nybo, CNN.
[Haynes:] We add a little math to today's "Environment Desk" and look at what can happen when algae multiply. Now algae is Latin for seaweed. It's also the plural of alga, which means any of various chiefly aquatic, eukaryotic, photosynthetic organisms, ranging in size from single-celled forms to the giant kelp. As for the aquatic part, algae live in the sea, in fresh water and in moist places in land. Eukaryotic means they are composed of one or more cells with a distinct membrane-bound nucleus. And photosynthetic means algae can manufacture their own food using carbon dioxide, water and light. This translates into trouble in Long Island, New York's Peconic Bay. That's where a type of alga known as brown tide has over multiplied devastating the Bay's shellfish population. But there's hope in sight for those shellfish thanks to local residents and a group from Cornell University. Brian Palmer explains.
[Brian Palmer, Cnn Correspondent:] The Peconic Bays of Long Island, New York, cover about 100,000 acres and support thousands of species of plants and animals linked together in a complex ecological chain.
[Ada Horton:] The scallops were just swimming through the water. I mean, you could just go out with a net and just scoop them out.
[Palmer:] In 1985, the chain broke. The bays' abundant fish and shellfish started to die, suffocated by a bloom of algae called brown tide.
[Jim Mcmahon, Southold Exec., Administer:] The brown tide devastated the scallop population in the Peconic Bays and it was a multimillion dollar industry that both recreational and commercial harvesters enjoyed for years and years. And after the brown tide it has really never come back to what it was.
[Palmer:] It's been ten years since the last major bloom. The number of fish has increased, but shellfish have had a harder time.
[Kim Tetrault, Cornell Marine Center:] In nature, there are no oysters that are this size this year.
[Palmer:] Kim Tetrault runs the Cornell University Marine Program's shellfish hatchery...
[Tetrault:] There's one of your quintessential fouling organisms.
[Palmer:] ... which raises oysters, clams and scallops to replenish the bays.
[Tetrault:] What we're really looking at, the ultimate goal, isn't to subsidize the fishery as much as it is to provide new brood stock, so that nature will provide the product over time.
[Palmer:] Last year the center raised about 10 million of the mollusks.
[Tetrault:] Raise your hand if you're gardening here.
[Palmer:] This year it started teaching ordinary Long Islanders to raise them, both at the hatchery and at their homes, part of what they call
[Spat:] the Southold Project in Aquaculture Training. Shirley and Alan Watson are raising about 2000 oysters in the creek that runs past their house.
[Shirley Watson:] Everyday we look at them and make sure they're alright. We move them around, make sure that we don't have any predators getting into the cages.
[Palmer:] The Watsons and other participants can keep three- quarters of what they produce.
[Unidentified Male:] I thought it would be nice to eat them.
[Palmer:] The hatchery uses the rest to continue replenishing the Peconic Bays. Brian Palmer, CNN, New York.
[Haynes:] We head to a tropical paradise in "Worldview" and a state known as Hawaii. When you hear the word, you probably think of lush flowers, beckoning seaside, sunshine and palm trees. Well, today, we take you beyond the beaches to examine the culture and cuisine of this magnificent state.
[Shelley Walcott, Co-host:] It's known as the Aloha State, a cluster of 132 islands. Hawaii is the only state in the U.S. that's separated from the North American mainland. Its unique position in the North Pacific Ocean gives it a major role in U.S. military planning. In Hawaii, all of the Pacific units of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines are under a single command. The salaries of military personnel and civilian employees at these bases provide an important source of income in the state. Another key moneymaker: tourism. The state has long been a vacation hot spot with attractions from active volcanoes to stunning scenery to Hawaiian hospitality. But as Gail O'Neill reports, the islands offer much more than the average tourist would think.
[Gail O'neill, Cnn Correspondent:] Blue water, black lava, the colors make a striking first impression. But it's green that draws duffers like these to the Big Island.
[Steven Hookano, Head Golf Pro, Mauna Lani Resort:] When you come and play golf here, look at it. I mean it's beautiful. It's gorgeous. The aesthetics is unbelievable and people just love to be here.
[O'neill:] And with near perfect weather conditions year round, the western or Kona side of the big island, has become a golfing mecca. What started as an adult playground had evolved over the past decade.
[Hookano:] I would say they're catering more to families. Why it makes it easier for them is they can come on and golf and do their things and at the same time their families can do other things that would take their time and not stay at the hotel room.
[O'neill:] The hard part is choosing what to do. [on camera]: There's a lot of ground to cover on the Big Island and one of the most breathtaking ways to get an overview of it all is from above in what some locals refer to as a state bird. [voice-over]: Most helicopter tours take off from the Kona side, where nearly all of the islands major resorts are located. The Big Island is so named because it's the largest of the Hawaiian islands. In fact, it's almost twice as large as all the others put together. It's also the youngest. Volcanoes gave rise to Hawaii and the Big Island has three active ones in the central and southern areas.
[David Griffin, Blue Hawaiian Helicopters:] And that's where the volcano has been erupting since 1983. So it's one of the most awe inspiring things most people ever see in their entire lives. It changes all the time. We'll have the lava flows entering the ocean. It's a pretty amazing sight.
[O'neill:] Over time, the lava becomes rich, fertile soil and because the eastern or Hilo side gets most of the island's rain, agriculture is a key industry. But the ground can't absorb all the moisture, so dozens of rivers and waterfalls punctuate the coastline as the tour moves north.
[Pacheco:] If you want to come and you want to really see what Hawaii is about and understand its nature and get out, this is the island to do it. And it's just all these wonderful lessons of life that are just laid out, you know, before you, these lava flows and these lush, erosional valleys. And what really makes the Big Island different is just its diversity.
[O'neill:] And these differences extend to the island's culture as well. The northern region is known for its cowboys.
[Unidentified Male:] Climb aboard there.
[O'neill:] Most people don't know it, but cattle ranching is actually a big industry in Hawaii. While these pastures were once sugar cane plantations, all that's changed. And there's no better way to see this country than on mule back.
[Wally Ching, Hawaii Forest & Trail:] This is all farmland for the Hawaiians when they live here. Then 1900s, the sugar plantation came in. They planted all this cane. As far as you can see, all into the forest, there's all cane fields. OK, now they use it for raising cattle. My great grandfather came from China just a shirt on his back and a few seeds in his pocket, pumpkins seeds, squash seeds. So when he came to the islands here he could live, you know? He'd plant those seeds, he would have food.
[O'neill:] We picked guava, another import, delicious but pesky. This fast growing fruit threatens native plants. [on camera]: Very good. High in vitamin C, right?
[Ching:] High in vitamin C. OK, everybody, lean forward now.
[O'neill:] Because mules are sturdy and sure-footed, they helped open up the Big Island's treacherous back country. [on camera]: What's the benefit of riding a mule around as opposed to a horse?
[Ching:] A mule, for one thing, is smarter than a horse.
[O'neill:] Are they really?
[Ching:] Oh, yeah. You teach a mule how to do something and he won't forget it, not like a horse. He forgets. You've got to constantly train him.
[O'neill:] You're strong,
[J.j. Ching:] Yeah, you can feel the power of the mule right now.
[Pacheco:] So now people get to get on these mules and do something that's been going on up here for over a hundred years.
[Unidentified Tourist:] To be real honest with you, it's kind of I've always been a little afraid of horses and mules and I've gotten over that part of it today. So it's fun. And it's beautiful country and this is a lot of fun on the mule.
[O'neill:] To the tourist who comes and says look, Wally, I've got two weeks a year, I'm spending a lot of money to stay in a fabulous resort, I don't want to leave the grounds, what do you say?
[Ching:] Come up on our mule ride and see all of this beauty and hopefully, you know, after the mule ride I can teach them a little about the land and they might appreciate it a little bit more.
[O'neill:] But not all Big Island fun happens on shore. The name says it all. We're going fishing.
[Taylor:] Today we're going to be going out for Pacific blue marlin, striped marlin, spear fish and we use a number of different lures. This type of lure here is, you're basically for your big blue marlin. The buoys remain lower because of the sound of the motors, the prop wash, they think it's a school of fish feeding and they come up into the pattern and they see the lures and start attacking.
[Captain Brian Wargo, Bite Me Sportfishing:] Well, Kona is the Pacific blue marlin capital of the world. There's been 58 marlin here caught over 1,000 pounds. So there's some monster fish and in this business, this is the mecca of it all. It's where it all happens and that's why we're here.
[O'neill:] It doesn't take long for our first animal sighting or, rather, splashing of a humpback whale.
[Unidentified Tourist:] I've never seen anything like that. That is unreal.
[O'neill:] Not to worry, we're told our fishing lures aren't enticing to whales. And these dolphins won't bite, either. The ocean seems to teem with life. Soon we encounter a school of pilot whales. Still, no bite yet. But when it happens, we'll be ready.
[Taylor:] So basically the key word in fishing is tight line, OK? You can never crank too fast and you're going to forget 80 percent of what I just told you. And it's not a race. It's not a sumo match. It's a chess game, OK? You don't have to be a real strong person to catch a big fish. Just pace yourself and take your time, OK?
[O'neill:] OK.
[Taylor:] Big giant fish are going to come in when they're ready.
[O'neill:] But on this day the fish aren't ready. As the captain searches, we wait. And after six hours on the water, we head back to shore with good memories, but no catch, just a determination to try our luck another time.
[Walcott:] More from Gail O'Neill on Hawaii as we shift our focus to cuisine. Fresh fruits like papayas and bananas are popular and many islanders eat poi, a food made from the taro plant. And maybe you've heard of a luau, a Hawaiian feast featuring roast pig, singing and dancing. In Hawaii, Mother Nature serves us the bounty and chefs do their best to serve it up Hawaiian style.
[O'neill:] When East met West on the Big Island of Hawaii, one of the most delectable results was that mealtime was never the same. And now the rest of the world is catching on.
[Peter Merriman, Owner, Peter Merriman Restaurant:] To me Hawaii regional cuisine is two things. It's a reflection of the cultures which have contributed so much to Hawaii and so there's license to use a lot of different cultural techniques. But the other component that's so important is the use of the fresh, locally grown and raised products.
[O'neill:] An agricultural bounty that gives chefs creative inspiration every day.
[Merriman:] Making a Caesar salad out of this is easy. And this corn is also the number 10 sweet corn. It's really fantastic. We have people from Nebraska telling us this is the best corn in the world.
[O'neill:] A fact not lost on Peter Merriman's biggest fans. But not all farming is done on solid ground.
[Steven Katase, President, Royal Hawaiian Sea Farms:] You think something like this could take off on the East Coast?
[O'neill:] Seaweed isn't exactly replacing potatoes on tables across the mainland, but it does have its benefits.
[Katase:] It has all the elements that are found in the ocean, the zinc, the iodine, the calcium.
[O'neill:] Once the seafood of choice among royalty, these fish, called moi, are being raised using the ancient practice of aquaculture or fish farming, but with a modern twist.
[Choy:] Back in the old days the only place you could catch it was all along the cliffs and now they have it right here in tanks going around in a circle, the famous circle that what happens is it makes them feel like they're swimming all day, because these guys have got to swim to get big.
[O'neill:] A huge fan of using only the freshest ingredients, Sam Choy is famous for serving comfort food with a big helping of aloha spirit on the side.
[Choy:] And it has to come from the heart. We cook a lot of dishes from the heart and, you know, it's really important to understand the source of it and how to do the, you know, the findings of the recipe and stuff like that.
[O'neill:] With signature entrees like pork and cabbage and the loco moco, a fried rice melange with an egg on top. Another tradition that prevails even today, the luau, where the main attraction is the roasted pig cooked in an underground oven called an emu. But pigs aren't all that's roasting in Hawaii. [on camera]: To experience a coffee break Hawaiian style, you might want to stop in at one of several orchards on the Big Island, where an ideal climate and soil conditions yield the famous Kona coffee. [voice-over]: Kona is actually a district on the western coast of the Big Island and stretching along 27 of its 40 miles is what's known as the coffee belt, with Greenwell Farms falling roughly in the center.
[Unidentified Tourist:] Oh, it's great. And, in fact, coming by the budget where they're roasting it was just an unbelievable experience. The smell was phenomenal.
[O'neill:] At $20 to $30 a pound, the cost of this crop is pretty impressive, too, primarily due to the labor intensive process.
[Unidentified Tourist:] I just have not a clue of what was going on. So to hear that everything is done by hand was, it was just unbelievable.
[O'neill:] But for those Java junkies who eagerly await the next sip...
[Unidentified Tourist:] You want to try the macadamia nuts?
[O'neill:] ... this black gold is well worth the wait. And just like Hawaiian regional cuisine, the perfect compliment to any social gathering.
[Haynes:] Some landfills in North Carolina are fueling the dreams of some local artists there. Garbage from the dumps is being converted to energy and it's a cheap source of power for many art studios that otherwise couldn't afford the soaring costs of electricity. Rich Brooks has details on this environmentally conscious program.
[Rich Brooks, Cnn Correspondent:] Nestled in the mountains of North Carolina, a place where artists with high-energy needs get a helping hand. The power to fire their vision comes from garbage.
[Terry Woodruff, Site Manager, Energyxchange:] We're trying to offer a low-cost fuel and a and a nice studio and furnish the major equipment so these folks will have up to three years to utilize this facility.
[Brooks:] Power to fire the furnaces and kilns of the glass blowers and potters comes from the local landfill. Buried garbage produces methane. By tapping the gas and burning it, the crafts people have a steady fuel supply with an added benefit.
[Johnn Ellenbogen, President, Energyxchange:] The use of the methane in the way we are using it is the equivalent of removing 20,000 automobiles from the highways of western North Carolina. So by using this gas, we not only save money, but we make it a little easier for everybody on the planet to breathe.
[Brooks:] Methane also heats the greenhouses of the sprouting agribusiness, part of the project that could generate enough funds to make EnergyXchange self-supporting.
[Greg Fidler, Penland School Of Crafts:] Well, the fact that we're actually helping to clean the environment by burning the methane, which is a pollutant, I definitely feel like that I'm giving back.
[Brooks:] Giving back is what this project is all about. Formed in the community by the community to foster young craftspeople.
[Liz Sparks, Project Potter:] It's just nice to have the support. You know sort of the extra support like I'm not quite so much on my own.
[Brooks:] Handcrafting their future and molding their opportunities, local artists get a head start and EnergyXchange may be a model for other landfill sites across the country. Rich Brooks, CNN, Penland, North Carolina.
[Haynes:] Finally today, space shuttle Discovery ends a two-day chase through space and docks with the international space station. The shuttle brings with it a new crew for the orbiting outpost and literally tons of food, clothing, replacement parts and hardware. The new crew consists of one American and two Russians who will live and work aboard space station Alpha for the next five months. And with that, our work is done for the day. Thanks for watching this Monday and we'll see you back here tomorrow. CNN NEWSROOM is part of Cable in the Classroom, a service of the cable television industry and your local cable company. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Vince Cellini, Cnn Anchor:] But back down to Earth and the scene from the destruction on lower Manhattan and we go back again to our colleague Garrick Utley who is with us in New York. He's been up for much of the night. Garrick, again you'll see the sun rise from your vantage point and there is much to ponder here as we it seems like this day we start the grieving process. It seemed like it was anger and then shock and now many people are into this grief mode.
[Garrick Utley, Cnn Correspondent:] And indeed a mixture of grief and anger and anxiety and perhaps even fear as to what's going to come next. But a moment ago, Vince and Carol, you were showing that scene from the satellite of lower Manhattan, the World Trade Center there and then suddenly gone, no longer there. And over my shoulder right here you can see the plume of smoke which has been there ever since those buildings collapsed. But something strange has happened this morning as the sun indeed is coming up or the light is coming up over the east side of Manhattan that not yet the sun, that plume of smoke is circling all the way around. The wind has shifted around the southern end of the island. Over my right shoulder, you may not be able to see it, all the way up here the east side. It's as if a shroud now is being wrapped around Manhattan Island. Again, nearly 48 hours after those two planes struck the Twin Towers at the World Trade Center. Well, as the new day starts this Thursday, the papers are out and no surprise as to what they're offering the seven million people plus in New York City. This is "The New York Times." Again, a banner headline about the stunned rescuers working, the FBI tracking the hijackers' movements and wondering what's going to happen next. In the New York "Daily News," well, in bleak headlines, red letters, 10,000 Feared Dead and scenes of the rubble and the rescue workers. And finally, the city's other tabloid, "The New York Post," if I can control the wind right here, it doesn't have a headline. How about that, no headline. It does...
[Cellini:] I might have a headline for you right here, Garrick.
[Utley:] It does have a picture, oh there you go, a picture of the American flag being raised there. Three firemen down at the site of the disaster and the quote "Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there." Indeed it is. Also down there in lower Manhattan is Alessio Vinci who's standing by to give us the latest on the rescue efforts. Good morning, Alessio.
[Alessio Vinci, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, good morning, Garrick. Well, we were we've seen that picture from space of the of the of the big thick cloud of smoke still raising from the debris. We can provide you a picture close up here, the debris, the cloud I'm going to try to get out of the way here the big thick cloud here provoked by still smoldering metal and iron and we have seen some pocket of fire. I think the camera can zero in here a little bit, tilting up the camera a little bit, there is a little bit of fire here and there and obviously nothing compared to what the scene was here 24 hours ago. But still, as you can see from these pictures, not only there is still of smoke but also a few pockets of fires, and this, of course, making the work of the rescue officials rescue workers difficult and indeed very dangerous because, of course, it is extremely hot there still. It is still very difficult to work in that kind of environment. They have to use gas masks of course, the buildings all around there is also very unstable. We have seen several refrigerator trucks getting closer to the area there. Obviously those refrigerator trucks will be used to take some of the body parts and the bodies back to the morgue.
[Cellini:] Alessio, excuse me, I don't mean to interrupt, this is Vince Cellini in Atlanta at our studios. We do want to pass this along and get back to you that we understand that after the FAA shut down of a couple of days ago, the airports are opening around New York. Kennedy, LaGuardia and Newark open on a limited basis for travel. So that is positive news as we as we try to regroup from this. And now I will I will return to you, Alessio, so...
[Vinci:] Right.
[Cellini:] ... thank you. Pardon my interruption for that news.
[Vinci:] Not at all, Vince. On that note, we actually heard a couple of jets military jets flying overhead here several hours ago so certainly now we're going to perhaps start hearing a couple of commercial jets flying back into JFK and LaGuardia airport. I was just telling you that we have seen earlier on some refrigerator trucks and also some dumpster trucks that were brought into the area. Obviously the refrigerator trucks to bring some of the body parts and the bodies back to the morgues and the dumpster truck to remove so far we understand more than 3,000 tons of debris that have been already collected on site and be brought away from the site to make some more room for the rescue operation. The mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani, asked the Federal Emergency Management Agency to deliver 6,000 body bags. This means that despite that the official count the last official count has 82 people dead and 16 of those of those 16 have been identified, they do expect more people once the rescue operation continues well now entering into its second day in about a few hours. Back to you, Garrick.
[Utley:] Mentioned the airports will be opening on a limited basis, that means that those planes which were headed towards Kennedy or LaGuardia or Newark on Tuesday morning when the terrorists struck and were diverted, most of them to Canada, especially the international flights, those passengers have been waiting up there in Canada, unless they decided to come down in a rental car or by train, and now those passengers and only those flights will be allowed to come to the New York airport starting this morning. It's not expected to be later in the day or indeed tomorrow until further traffic air traffic is allowed into the New York City area. Otherwise schools will be open, museums are open, Times Square is going to be filled because the Broadway shows are open. Life will be getting back to as nearly normal as it can be considering what's happening down there at the foot of Manhattan Island Vince and Carol.
[Cellini:] All right. Thank you very much, Garrick Utley, as we are slowly creeping back to some signs of normalcy.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Right now George Bush has just taken the podium at an awards ceremony. He's expected to make a comment about the China standoff.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Thank you all; thank you very much; thank you.
[Bush:] Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for that kind introduction. And thank you for agreeing to serve your country once again. My friend Don Evans couldn't make it, but we have a pretty darn good replacement with Norm Mineta. Dr. Wood, thank you very much, sir, for your leadership. You may wonder why Dr. Wood has got such white hair. My mother's on his board. And if she were here, she'd say she has white hair because of me. I'm thrilled to see the Baldridge family. Thank you all for being here. And thank you for staying with this award. They tell me you never miss, Midge, and that's important. I want to congratulate the winners who are here, the CEOs, the leaders, the employees, the rowdy Texans. I rest my case. It's an honor to be here. Before I begin, I'd like to update you on a situation in China. Earlier this morning, I talked with General Sealock, who once again visited with our crew for about an hour today, and reports that they are doing just fine. They are housed in officers quarters, and they are being treated well. We're proud of these young men and women who are upholding the high standards of our armed forces. We know this is a difficult time for their families, and I thank them for their patriotism and their patience. We're working hard to bring them home through intensive discussions with the Chinese government, and we think we're making progress. And now, to the business at hand. It's an honor to be here to be a part of an awards ceremony that has stood the test of time. And the reason why, it's just it's based upon principles, such as high standards, quality and excellence. The philosophy of Malcolm Baldridge and the Baldridge Awards makes clear that everyone in an organization...
[Allen:] All right; brief comments from President Bush as the diplomacy continues in full force. As we just heard from Senator John Warner, a letter being drafted to spell out what both countries think about this incident. President Bush pointing out that he has learned that the crew on Hainan Island doing just fine; he learned that from the military attache Neal Sealock, who met with the crew on Hainan Island and called Mr. Bush spoke with him for about 10 minutes. And Mr. Bush continuing to express his support for the crew and for the families back in the United States who await their return. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] We are introducing a new segment this morning. We are calling it, "Here's what I don't get." So every at this time, we will attempt to clear up one of the day's confusing issues, with our very own Jack Cafferty. He's one guy who is always willing to tell us what's on his mind. Today he's been talking about the latest videotaped message from Osama bin Laden. Good morning.
[Jack Cafferty, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning. Last week, this fellow who were he not so malignant would be almost comical I think, issued this proclamation that all Muslims in the world should come to Afghanistan to aid in the struggle he's undertaken. So I got to thinking, you know, are they really ready, what if the Muslims in this country there are almost six million decide it is a good idea, let's go to Afghanistan and help Osama bin Laden. There are 5.8 million of them, which means you need a lot of caves to put them in.
[Zahn:] Right, we know where the caves are.
[Cafferty:] Right, well, we know where some of the caves are, but do they have enough caves to accommodate all the people who would maybe put their house up for sale in the United States, leave incomes of $50,000, $60,000, $70,000 a year, pull the kids oust the store, stop by the feed store, get some burlap sacks for mom to wear when she gets over there. The kids don't have to worry about a back-to-school post, because they won't go to school, they'll be out looking for food packets everyday while they're dodging the bombs that are falling. You can spend the winter in one of these mountainsides with these guys. There is no electricity. There is no running water. Winter is coming, which means you probably won't get out for a lot of fresh air, at the risk of either freezing to death being shot, so by spring, it's probably going to get a little ripe in those places, you know, no shower facilities. And yet the media rushes, they can't wait to legitimize the statement from this guy that he is summoning his colleagues from around the world to come aid him. I mean, come on, the average per capita income in Afghanistan is less than $1,000 a year. The women, of course, don't work. Kids don't there are no jobs for kids, so that's one income for a family of four.
[Zahn:] Well, women beg. So women are forced to beg.
[Cafferty:] Or get beaten in the street, if the men take I mean, this is insanity, this whole thing being played out is just insane, and the news media, in their rush to grab on to any little piece of the story, this guy puts out a videotape, and he's summoning the Muslims to come back who the hell in their right mind would go to Afghanistan any reason, let alone help this guy, who is nuts?
[Zahn:] So basically, you are saying this morning that bin Laden is winning the propaganda war?
[Cafferty:] Well, I just think the media in this country is so hungry any little tidbits. You know, we've done overkill with this story. I mean, right here, we've been on the air with this thing 24-7 for five weeks now.
[Zahn:] Keeping us all employed, Jack.
[Cafferty:] I understand. Well, I do a business show downstairs, so we got to do a little stock market, Wall Street stuff. I supplement my income that way. But it's just, the media, people criticize the media, there is room to do that, and this kind of thing...
[Zahn:] But there's an important point in all of this, because now the administration is going to set up this special service, where they make sure that every time Osama bin Laden talks there is some sort of reaction from the administration to counteract it. Good idea or bad idea, Jack?
[Cafferty:] Who cares what he says? The guy's a murdering thug, who cares what he says? Get his head on a stick and go on.
[Zahn:] I don't think there's any question to what Jack wants to happen here, Miles.
[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] It's opinion day.
[Zahn:] Jack?
[Cafferty:] I just say, you know, why legitimize this guy? He doesn't represent the legitimate political views of anybody except for a little murderous gang of thugs that is operating under the umbrella of the Taliban, which is another little murderous gang of thugs. Nobody with an IQ over 28 gives this guy any credibility at all, and you know, who cares what he has to say? Let's just, you know, take him out, and his people with him, and the government that lets him operate, and then go on to next group, the Hezbollah, and get them all cleaned up. It's like killing cockroaches. Get Black Flag and get rid of him.
[Zahn:] I wish it was that easy, except some of the roaches in New York, as you will discover, Miles, if you spend more time here. Jack, see you tomorrow morning, same time, same place, nice to see you.
[O'brien:] All right, from the winds of war to winds of another kind, let's look at Hurricane Michelle as it skirts Florida. CNN's Miami bureau chief, John Zarrella, noted hurricane chaser is out there on the beach there in Miami, and has the latest for us. Good morning, John.
[John Zarrella, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey, Miles, wish you were here with us this morning. I tell you, it's gusts about 40 miles per hour, right at tropical storm force, hurricane Michelle at 150, 170 miles to the east of us. You could see here, we are getting a lot of beach overwash here. At the ocean, we're reaching high tides the next hour. The waves really pounding in on the shoreline. That wind from Michelle coming in directly from the east. You can see the wind whipping the tops off those whitecaps there. Now this is really adding insult to injury here. In many place along Hollywood, Hollywood Beach, all of Broward County, they've lost 40-60 yards of beach already, after a week of pounding by other high-pressure system that brought in wind and rain, and high surf, and then adding Hurricane Michelle too this. Now fortunately, I guess to use that old cliche, really dodged a bullet here, because Michelle stayed true to form, stayed east. That was a worry for the folks at the National Hurricane Center.
[Cafferty:] We were concerned last night about a possible shift to left. We're not concerned at all. This is really good news for the southeastern United States. The core of this hurricane stayed well down to the south of us, and we're not going to have any problem in Florida here whatsoever, even in the Florida Keys.
[Zarrella:] Again, very good news, you can see the trees, the palm trees really blowing here, we expect here to last for a few more hours, until the storm moves far enough away. Schools closed in Miami-Dade County, Broward County, Florida Keys, no power outages. Florida Keys fine from reports emergency officials down there today. So all in all, it's South Florida, again, use the cliche, Miles, really, just barely dodged a bullet here from a very, very powerful hurricane. John Zarrella, reporting live from Hollywood, Florida.
[O'brien:] Looks like in the nick of time; we lost his satellite transmission.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] South Carolina today removes the Confederate Flag from the top of the State Capitol. It was put there in 1962, during the height of the Civil Rights movement, and has been the center of a bitter and growing controversy. CNN's Brian Cabell joins us from Columbia, South Carolina Brian.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Gene. as we are speaking the flag is coming down, all three flags, the American flag, the South Carolina state flag and the battlefield flag for the Confederacy has just gone inside the capitol dome. It has come down after some 38 years. It will brought down to the rotunda and handed over to governor in next five, 10 minutes, and then it will retired to a state museum. Now after that, and almost simultaneously, we will have another battle flag similar to that one, not quite the same, designed differently. It will be brought to flag pole erected in the front of the capitol, and it will be flown from there. This is the result of a compromise that was reached by the legislature just about a month or two ago. And as can you hear, not everybody happy about what's happening. I would say most of the 5,000 or so people that are gathered here are flag supporters. What you're looking at right now we believe is a color guard. These are reenactors, Confederate reenactors. They will be putting a Confederate flag on top of a poll in front confederate statue. Once again, this is a compromise that was reached after a great deal of struggle because neither side wanted it. Those who favored flag wanted it kept on top of the capitol. Those who opposed the flag wanted it removed from capital grounds altogether, or at least encased in glass and put here on the capital grounds. But they reached was a compromise. And what you're hearing right now, again, is some jeering. It's been a rather busy last four hours, demonstrations for and against, mostly milling around. We have the NAACP out here marching silently, about 2,000 strong a little while ago. And now, as you watch, that is new Confederate Flag being raised in front of the capitol. It is going to be raised about 30 feet high on that staff. It will be lit at night. Those were some of the stipulations made by the legislature when they reached this compromise. Many people upset that it's being raised here at all, because actually they're saying that it may be more prominent in this location because it's right alongside a very busy street in front of the capitol. Again, on the other side, African-Americans saying it shouldn't be at all, it should no be the representing the state of South Carolina at all. It represents, to them, oppression, racism, slavery. Here is a battle flag of the Northern Virginia Confederacy. It is square. It is designed slightly differently. It has a white border on it, unlike the rectangular one taken down from the capital. There are also two flags inside of the legislature, both in house and senate sides. Those have been taken down. Those, too, will be taken over to the state museum. The controversy here continues because the NAACP for the last six months has been boycotting the state of South Carolina, telling tourist to stay away. At least 100 groups have stayed away because of the flag. NAACP says the boycott will continue, and in fact, maybe even broaden to include sporting events and motion picture production. They want the flag taken off the capital grounds altogether. So, Gene that's the way it looks like right now. There have been know serious disturbances. A lot of hooting and hollering, but no problems. Heavy police presence. No fights have broken out. Some yelling back and forth, but not much, and frankly, most of the yelling has come from the pro-flag supporters. The NAACP march that came by here about two hours ago was absolutely silent. They were dressed white, and they had nothing to say. They simply marched by with a single
[Randall:] Brian, I know there is a lot of noise there, but if you can hear me, apparently what you're saying is the bottom line is, as important as today's event is, it will not end the controversy?
[Cabell:] Well, if the NAACP has it way, that is certainly the case. They want this boycott to continue. They say it will continue, so South Carolina will continue to lose some tourism dollars. So in their mind, it will not end. In mind of Governor Jim Hodges and many legislators it will end. They say that people will ignore the NAACP boycott since this is, in a sense, a partial victory. But of course the NAACP say it is no victory whatsoever for them. This is still a blatant display and a violation of their rights, as it was when it was flying atop the capital. Again, there was nothing what we have right now are African Americans mostly walking through the crowd, saying "shame," with placards saying "shame." They are making way through flag supporters, so there is some possibility of some disturbance here, but frankly, it doesn't look like it's anything terribly physical. It's look as though these people will simply make their way through crowd and people will be shouting back and forth at one another with a little bit of jostling and with a heavy police escort. There are some I would say at least a few hundred police officers out here making sure that peace is maintained here. And so far, they have done a very good job of doing that, considering that emotions are running very high and that people are crowded in here considerable here around the flag that was just raised up by the flag staff Gene.
[Randall:] Thank you, Brian. Brian Cabell in Columbia, South Carolina, where it is a milestone day and a very noisy day as well.

[Lian Pek, Cnn Anchor:] India and Pakistan have held their first high- level talks since last month's Agras summit. Foreign ministries of the two countries met today on the sideline of the South Asian Regional Cooperation Forum, in Sri Lanka. Kasra Naji reports.
[Kasra Naji, Cnn Correspondent:] The first high-level contact since the collapse of the India-Pakistan summit last month produced no progress at all. Both sides said afterwards there was a need to continue with the process of dialogue, but they failed to fix a date for next summit in Islamabad, although the Pakistani said it was ready to receive Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee anytime. There's been a spurt in violence in Kashmir since the summit, and that has created extremely negative sentiments in India, said the Indian foreign secretary late. Pakistan rejects the charge it has a hand in the violence in the Indian-controlled Kashmir. The Indian side didn't commit itself to a meeting of the leaders of two countries in New York during the UN General Assembly next month. The latest meeting was held on the sidelines of the South Asian Association for Regional Corporation, or SAARC, a regional grouping made hostage to the troubled relations within its biggest members, India and Pakistan a reminder how the feud between the two nuclear neighbors is affecting the whole region and beyond. Kasra Naji, CNN, Colombo.

[Woodruff:] President Clinton is meeting for a second day with the leaders of Israel and the Palestinians in talks that could decide the future of peace in the Middle East. CNN senior White House correspondent John King has the latest John.
[John King, Cnn Sr. White House Correspondent:] Judy, those meetings under way at the secluded Camp David presidential retreat. Day one was about atmospherics, a senior administration official telling CNN, saying the talks were going along informally. But this official saying they have not really embraced the substantive issues yet, obviously, the major divides between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Mr. Clinton was briefed by his immediate Mideast peace team this morning. He is meeting individually with the prime minister of Israel, Ehud Barak, then the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. As of this hour, no three-way negotiating sessions planned, although U.S. officials say they may try to arrange one of those for later in the day. A short time ago, the president's spokesman, Joe Lockhart, telling reporters up near Camp David that the atmosphere is informal, folks are getting along, using golf carts to travel around the camp, but he said the issues, still very difficult.
[Joe Lockhart, White House Press Secretary:] To the extent that we went into this knowing it would be a struggle, we have not been disappointed by that. This is a very difficult process in a short time frame with a very difficult issues, and there they are working in a very serious way. But we certainly know that this effort from the beginning will be a struggle.
[King:] In a somewhat related development, the Israeli government informing the United States today it is canceling plans to sell an airborne radar system to China. That had been an irritant in U.S. relations and had brought threats from Congress that it would halt or at least freeze U.S. assistance to Israel Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, John King at the White House.

[Michael Holmes, Cnn Anchor:] Well, as it maps out its response to last week's attack, the White House remains mindful of public reaction. Kelly Wallace now reports President Bush and his team of advisors face the sensitive task of reassuring the country while preparing for possible war.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn Correspondent:] After huddling with his national security team at Camp David, President Bush returned to the White House with the First Lady and urged Americans to try to get on with their lives.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Tomorrow the good people of America go back to their shops, their fields, American factories, and go back to work. Our nation was horrified, but it's not going to be terrorized.
[Wallace:] Mr. Bush, in a 15-minute session with reporters, showing so many different faces disbelief that hijackers could crash into buildings filled with innocent people, anger when asked about suspected terrorist Osama bin Laden's claim he was not involved, and determination to win the war.
[Bush:] They have roused a mighty giant, and make no mistake about it we're determined.
[Wallace:] The President's words part of a full-court administration offensive to reassure a jittery public.
[Unidentified Male:] We're pursuing over 40,000 leads.
[Colin Powell, Secretary Of State:] They can't destroy America.
[Dick Chaney, Vice President Of The United States:] Things have changed since last Tuesday. The world shifted in some respects.
[Wallace:] The administration facing a delicate balancing act, encouraging an anxious country to go back to work while making the case its campaign against terrorists and those who harbor them will not be an overnight solution.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Of Defense:] And it will take time. It's not a matter of days or weeks it's years. It it's going to take the support of the American people, and I have every confidence it'll be there.
[Wallace:] The support is there now. In a CNN-"USA Today" Gallup poll, 86 percent said they'd back a military action even if it lasts several months. Support does drop, though, to 66 percent if a conflict lasts several years. For a public angry about how these tragedies could have happened, Attorney General John Ashcroft says he will send proposals to Capitol Hill in days to strengthen laws targeting terrorists.
[Attorney General John Ashcroft:] We will develop the tools...
[Wallace:] While Secretary of State Colin Powell called for a return to normalcy.
[Powell:] If we stick in our bunkers and walk around afraid, they will have won. Well, we're not a fearful people. We know how to overcome tragedy.
[Wallace:] To underscore that point, on Monday Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neil rings the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange and major league players return to the ball fields while the administration continues planning its response to the worst act of terrorism on U.S. soil. Kelly Wallace, CNN, the White House.

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] The Pentagon has been considering preemptive bombing of some targets in Afghanistan. Let's get more now on that from Jeanne Meserve in Washington. Jeanne.
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Correspondent:] Paula, first let me tell you about the secretary of defense and his continuing travels in the region. He at this point is scheduled to arrive shortly in Uzbekistan. He will be having meetings in Tashkent. They're scheduled to last about three hours. Don't draw from that the conclusion that these meetings are not important. They definitely are. Uzbekistan is potentially a key player in any U.S. military action because of its location. It is just north of Afghanistan, as you can see on this map, a border about 80 miles long. It would be the perfect place to put any special operations forces, also, possibly, any troops that might be needed for extractions out of Afghanistan. This is how Donald Rumsfeld framed the purpose of his trip there.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary Of Defense:] The United States, of course, does not have any longstanding relationship with Uzbekistan and it is in a significant geographic location and we have had a number of interactions over the period of weeks and it seemed to me that it's a useful thing to meet the people and get to know them a bit and to express appreciation for any cooperation they care to offer in this exercise.
[Meserve:] Rumsfeld is traveling to Uzbekistan from Cairo, where he met with the Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak. The U.S. is a major patron of Mubarak's. Egypt gets about $1 billion in U.S. military aid annually. But Egypt not expected to cooperate in any significant way in any U.S. military action because of the domestic political situation. Some of Osama bin Laden's top lieutenants are Egyptians. There's a very strong and active Islamic fundamentalist movement there. There already have been anti-American demonstrations. So what the U.S. wants to see and has gotten from Mubarak is a statement against terrorism, something the U.S. needs from some of its Muslim allies in the region. One additional stop on the Secretary's schedule, he has decided to stop in Turkey on his way home. Turkey, a NATO ally. It has agreed to allow U.S. planes, transport planes to stop on its, at its air bases and use its air space, the U.S. wanting to cement that relationship. You asked me about the possibility of preemptive strikes against Afghanistan. This is in reference to the massive drop of food and medicine that the U.S. is considering undertaking, $320 million worth. The secretary of defense said to reporters on his trip that the U.S. would only undertake this if it knew that U.S. aircraft would not be under threat from Stinger missiles or surface to air missiles. Senior U.S. defense officials telling us that the U.S. is considering preemptive strikes. Paula back to you.
[Zahn:] All right, Jeanne. How much reaction is there this morning to that "Washington Post" story which basically is trying to assess a bunch of intelligence information which would indicate that there will be more terrorist strikes if the U.S. hits Afghanistan?
[Meserve:] Paula, this building is sewn up very tight. The word here is say as little as possible. I have to tell you, quite honestly, we've had no reaction from this building to those reports yet this morning. Paula, back to you.
[Zahn:] All right, Jeanne Meserve, thanks so much. See you a little bit later on this morning.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Back to the other breaking story we've been covering extensively this morning, a bank hostage situation in Lowell, Indiana, about 40 miles southeast of Chicago. You're looking at a live picture from the scene. The bank hostage situation is actually happening in the building at very top of your screen there. The helicopter shot is almost behind the building now. What's been happening since about 10:00 Eastern, about 10:10 Eastern this morning we're actually now looking at a live picture. This is another picture of what looks like some SWAT team members walking up to the bank. This time they have a bag with them. We saw this happened moments ago. They just dropped the bag. Now they are backing off. Moments ago, we saw them walk up and take away with them two hostages. Now we see that they have walked up to the door, and they have dropped some kind a bag there at door of the bank. I suppose that we will have to sit back and watch to see who comes out to get it, or if someone does come out to get it. But this has going on now, as we said, for almost two hours. Here we see the door open.
[Colleen Mcedwards, Cnn Anchor:] Someone retrieving the bag, it looks like.
[Harris:] And rather calmly, we might add. And it looks like another hostage has been freed and has walked over to the SWAT team members, who are now backing her away. That's the third hostage we have seen released. We, right now, can't say for sure how many have been. We have been away for some time from this story. There may have been more in the meantime.
[Mcedwards:] We heard earlier, Leon, in your interview with the deputy chief that the officers had been and were still trying to make contact with that suspect who is in there with a sawed-off shotgun. So perhaps, you can suggest at this point that some communication has been taken place. A bag has been dropped off. A third hostage has been released.
[Harris:] It's tough to figure out how they have been communicating. At one point, we had someone who was listening to the discussions going over the police radio. We have not heard about that ion some time. Let's see if we can dip into the affiliate coverage.
[Reporter:] ... was a bank robbery and not another type of situation? Everything that we have learned so far points to the fact that this was a robbery that had been in progress, a robbery that had gone wrong, that it was from, the officers' standpoint here, that arrived at the scene, that you had persons that obviously was in the process of holding people at gunpoint. And considering the fact that it is a financial institution, considering the time of day very close to opening, if not at opening, when the main deposits would still be at the bank, when they would not have had a money pickup yet that it would have, of course, been something akin to a robbery... Chris, we're having some trouble with your signal at this point.
[Harris:] We're going to switch away and go back to the other picture that we have been watching this morning. This is the staging area facing the bank, to the left of it. This is a Pizza Hut restaurant that has been evacuated, and the authorities are using it as something of a staging area. Here is what we have been hearing: There are up to maybe 20 hostages inside. That's the number that we saw before we saw those released. There now may be now between 10 and 20. We don't know for sure at this particular point. That number is made up of the employees and customers. We spoke, a moment ago, with a deputy chief who told us that what happened was a woman had gone to the bank around 9:10 local time and had noticed, in the process of opening the door, that there was a man inside with a shotgun. She then called 911, and that's when all the police officers got there. And the man was note able to escape. They then evacuated the restaurants and local businesses and put the schools in the area under lockdown. We say that because there is a school that is about maybe 300 yards away from this building, directly across the street. The helicopter shot you're looking at right now is coming to you from above the campus of Lowell High School. No one's been in or out of the schools. We understand that no one's been hurt, and that's not a situation that is causing any concern right now. There are FBI and local and state police right now on the scene. We should mention this is Centier Bank in south Lake County, Indiana, which is just east of Chicago. In case anyone is familiar with that area, that's exactly what we are talking about right now.
[Unidentified Male:] There was a 911 caller, someone who did see something happen a person a gun in the bank...
[Harris:] We still don't know right now the status of any negotiations with this person who is holding the people hostage. We understand he did have a sawed-off shotgun, and that, at one point, police were talking to him about releasing at least two people. We did see that happen. And since then, we have seen one more person come out. And we would love to know what is going on with the bag that was dropped off at the front of the bank.
[Mcedwards:] That happened just a couple of moments ago, so we are going to stay with this and see what happens. But a bag was set by police in front, by the front door, a person came out, pulled that bag very carefully in and then another hostage was released. Let's listen in to WBBM here for a moment.
[Reporter:] And here's what we know so far: a single gunman reportedly is holding between 10 and 20 people hostage; some are bank employees, some are customers. And officials say that students at Lowell High School, down the street, about 300 yards from the bank, are safe. And the school is under what they call lockdown, with no one being allowed in or out of the school. However, students at five other schools are in lockdown as well at this hour. Lowell's school superintendent says that all are indeed safe. On the scene of course is Chopper 2. Our own Chris Hobermill has been at the scene. And, Chris, are you with us?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, I am, Michael. Here's a picture right now of some of the units which are involved in this standoff. They are up the street from the Centier Bank in the 900 block of the East Commercial Avenue in the Lowell, Indiana. It's in a little strip shopping center. The bank is freestanding in the parking lot of this strip mall here along state road two, which bisects the downtown area, the business area of Lowell, Indiana. In order to maintain security we're going to give you the wide shot, the bank coming into view on the far right-hand corner of your screen, next to the red roof of the Pizza Hut restaurant there. In the foreground off to the this is Lowell High School. Now, as you mentioned, Lowell High School, the students are during are in the midst of their learning day right now, they are in class at the moment. They are on lockdown. They're being held inside the building, nobody is free to go or free to enter the school. The employees of the Lowell High School are manning all doors and all entrances to the school.
[Unidentified Female:] Chris?
[Unidentified Male:] The doors and entrances are locked. Yes, Linda?
[Unidentified Female:] Let me just tell you what is moving across the AP wires, it just moved about three minutes ago: According to AP, authorities have escorted at least two people from the bank, where a gunman is holding several hostage; the two were seen being escorted away shortly after four officers went up to the bank door. And the Deputy Lake County police chief, Melvin Maxwell, says authorities had negotiated with the gunman for the release of the two people. So presumably, this means that the authorities have made contact with the gunman inside the bank. The FBI says, initial reports, that one armed man right, no word of any injuries. I'm just reading this as I'm seeing it come across the wires here. Nine people according to a Lowell police staffer, says nine people are still held hostage. Students are being kept inside as we have been telling you, inside the Lowell High School, which is right across the street. So according to AP, this is the latest wire on the story now, authorities have escorted at least two people, two hostages, from inside the Centier Bank in downtown Lowell on Commercial Avenue in Lowell. The two were escorted away after four police officers walked up to the bank door and, according to the Deputy Lake County police chief, authorities had negotiated with the gunmen for the release of the two people. We don't know who they are, whether they were employees, whether they were customers, under what circumstance they were allowed by the gunman to leave. But according to a police source, there are still nine people being held hostage inside the bank over which Chopper 2, Chris Hobermill, is reporting to us live.
[Unidentified Male:] Linda, that is certainly good news and that is an important break in this case; that indicates that they have established negotiations of some sort, to some degree, with the gunman inside, they have calmed down to the point where they're actually allowing themselves to release some of the people who are being held. In coordination with the Lake County sheriff's police we are showing you a wide shot here. That operation took place while we were in the area. However, we have been requested not to show any live pictures of any movements up close to the bank building itself. So we are working to try and help out as much as possible and not hinder the investigation, not hinder the negotiations with the hostage-taker inside. The robber entered the bank around 9:00 this morning. The bank is in the upper right-hand corner of your scene, it's the blue roof right there you see just above the trees. There are units that are spread out all up and down the street on all sides and in the back and side parking lots. They have taken up some forward positions. And, as you mentioned, Linda, a short time ago, they were actually able to get some negotiating officers up to the door of the bank in order to escort four people away. So that is certainly good news. We had heard between 10 and 20 people had been held hostage. We know that we're just starting to get hard numbers anyway that there may be still nine people inside the bank, plus the gunman. The gunman's said to be armed with a shotgun. Evidently a robbery gone bad around 9:00 a.m. this morning, when the Lowell Indiana police and the Lake County sheriff's police responded to a 911 call. We're trying to get some independent information as to how exactly the police were notified about the incident. But the end result was the same. They have come to the bank, that person is barricaded inside, has people inside the bank, a mix of customers, employees, and has been doing so since 9:00 a.m. this morning. We're going to go around to the one side of the bank here and show you some of the police cruisers, which are in position, also ambulances, which thankfully have not been needed. So far no shots have been fired, nobody has been hurt, either inside or outside, and that is exactly how the authorities want this to proceed.
[Unidentified Female:] And as we've... And as we've said, AP news wire reporting that at least two people have been allowed to leave and have been escorted away from the bank in the last, I would say, maybe 10, 15 minutes at the most. They were being escorted away from the bank by authorities after four police officers were allowed to go up to the door of the Centier Bank on Commercial Avenue in Lowell. So that, as Chris says, is good news. There have been no shots fired so far, nobody injured. We're looking at a picture now, you can see the I think that's Lowell County Sheriff's Department or Lake County Sheriff's Department, I should say, a fairly sizable piece of equipment there, a big van.
[Unidentified Male:] It's like a tactical van.
[Unidentified Female:] Tactical van, right. And Chris has been very careful to not go in too tightly on the bank building itself because of obviously not wanting to compromise what is going on. From what we know now from AP, the authorities are in communication with this, the bank robber, alleged bank robber, the man who's holding hostages inside. And as from what we know so far, nine people, plus the gunman, are still inside this bank as we speak.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, certainly good news, that answers a couple questions that we had leading up to the report from AP, whether they actually made contact and how many people were in the bank. And now we know there were probably about 11 people, but there's currently nine remain, two were removed. And if I do the math it comes out about nine left and that makes 11 total. And then there's a gunman as well. And again, we are precluded from showing you close pictures of the bank because there are tactical maneuvers taking place, because not only are the Lake County Police Department on the scene, but also state police and the FBI as well.
[Unidentified Female:] Chris, the building that has the long blue roof, is that the bank?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes, this is the bank here, Linda. You can see that blue roof right there just adjacent to the familiar roof outline of the Pizza Hut restaurant, and it is literally several hundred yards away from the Lowell High School. Lowell High School is this large circular-shaped building down below here, you see Lowell High School in the foreground, all the school buses all lined up there. And you will notice a peculiar thing: nobody is moving, nobody is moving out of Lowell High School. The students know what's going on. The teachers know what's going on. The staff is completely briefed as to what is happening across the street. They have seen everything, and have been in contact with the authorities, and that building is on lockdown right now. They have locked the doors. They have employees standing next to the doorway to make sure nobody comes in and nobody goes out. And that is the best to be expected in a tense situation like this, considering the proximity to the focal point of the standoff. We're taking a look at Commercial Avenue, which is Route 2, west of Interstate 65. This is actually closer to Route 41 in Lowell, and you can see some of the forward positions. And these officers here have been out parked on Commercial Avenue since shortly after 9:00 a.m. this morning, when the entire incident began. And a short while ago we got word by the news wire that four people have been released, so obviously negotiations are proceeding at this time. We are keeping our distance, trying to help out the authorities as best we can by not showing any live pictures of what is going on in close proximity to the bank. We are illustrating where some of the perimeter security has been set up, but in order to preserve the tactical elements of this operation we will not go in close to the bank building at this time. So far what we know is a single gunman has been barricaded inside the bank, the Centier Bank at 1940 East Commercial Avenue, since just around 9:00 a.m. this morning. Evidently a robbery gone wrong. A call to 911 tipped police to the fact that the robbery was in progress. They arrived at the bank and the standoff began. Elements from the FBI, the Indiana State Police, hostage barricade teams, specially outfitted SWAT teams, special weapons and tactics units are on-site. Negotiators have now evidently made some headway with the person holding the people hostage inside this bank building. The strip mall that you see off to the left of the bank and the businesses immediately adjacent to the bank have all either been: A, evacuated; or, B, placed on lockdown. Basically, lockdown is nothing more than order by the police department to stay inside, stay away from the windows and do not come outside the building.
[Unidentified Female:] Chris?
[Unidentified Male:] So as long as this person is holding these people hostages, other people will be on lockdown as well and unable to leave their building.
[Unidentified Female:] And Chris, this is latest AP wire that moved just a few minutes ago. It says another person has been escorted from the bank. Four armed officer behind large shields approached the front door of the bank and left a large bag, then two people came out of door, one of the walked to the officers
[Unidentified Male:] I think it's pretty clear.
[Unidentified Female:] It sounds like another now maybe three people altogether have been released by the gunman who is inside the Centier Bank here in Lowell, Indiana.
[Unidentified Male:] As with any situation that is this tense and this fluid, there is no way to tell how many people may have been inside that bank. You have not only a set number of employees, but a variable number of customers. This being the first business day after the Labor Day holiday, many people are conducting large transactions inside the bank, the bank may have on deposit a sizable amount cash and that could have figured into the suspect's mind-set as to why it took place on this particular day at this particular time. It's been going on since 9:00 a.m. this morning, and it's been very tense considering that you have an armed suspect inside. We are not aware of any negotiations that have been going on, what the specifics are of those negotiations, or what demands may have been made to the police department in order to effect the release of any of the hostages. Unlike an airliner, where you have a passenger list, you have...
[Harris:] Now, we're going to jump in right now because we want to clear you guys up, any folks who are listening in and perhaps any of you who are just tuning in on exactly what it we're watching and what we have been able to confirm here at CNN, because we've been watching this for at least the last 40 minutes or so. What we're watching here is a bank robbery situation, a robbery that went bad in Lowell, Indiana, just east or southeast of Chicago, about 40 mile away. And what we saw this morning is well, we heard reports initially of there being some 10 to 20 people inside this bank along with the gunman, who's holding a shotgun on these people. We understand that this number represented both employees and customers. A customer was actually coming to the bank at 9:10 local time, which is 10:10 Eastern Time, and actually saw the robbery in actually in actually occurring, and then called 911 to alert the police. The police arrived there and that's when they locked down all the schools in the area and they evacuated the buildings and the businesses nearby. Now, as you're looking at right now a rather long shot, pictures, away from the bank because authorities have asked the helicopters from the news organizations to back off so as to not tip off the gunman, if he's watching local television. But when we did have a camera up close, let's show you what we saw happen moments ago. This is the release of two of the hostages. We saw this happen roughly about 20 minutes ago, 25 minutes ago. As we said, we can't tell what number of people are inside right now because we didn't know for sure at the beginning. But we did see these two released. These SWAT team members walked up, in formation with the shield in front of them, up to the door of the bank, the door opened, these two women were escorted back by one of the troopers there, and you see they walked them back over to the Pizza Hut next door, which they have been using as a staging area. About 10 minutes later, we did see another person released when the SWAT team members again, the tactical team members, went to the door of the bank, dropped off some sort of a bag, it was a white bag with something inside of it, we could not tell what it was. The doors then opened, one person came from outside inside the bank, picked up the bag and took it back inside. And then one other person came out of the bank and walked away with the tactical team member. So we have actually seen here three people released from inside this bank.
[Mcedwards:] Yes, bottom line is three people released at this point. We heard the Chicago station's trying to sort waiver between whether it was two or three. We have seen three people come out of this bank, as Leon says. The total number in there we don't know, although the deputy chief told CNN just a short time ago that there were between 10 and 20 hostages inside. Let's get back into our affiliate coverage. We're going to look right now at
[Wls. Unidentified Male:] I don't know if they're doing it via cell phone or if they're the Pizza Hut using that as their communication center.
[Unidentified Female:] And so since our angle has changed because we are complying with what the police have asked us to do, where we are look now is that pizza restaurant, and you see the mobile van there, that is part of their command center, and Paul is to the right of that. And just a few minutes ago you saw the shot of Lowell High School. Once again, it looks very peaceful there, and it is because that school is in a lockdown situation. It is the closest of all of the six schools in that district. It's only very clearly you can see it. It's about 300 yards, it's just across the street from where the situation is taking place. All of the students, once again, are inside, everyone is safe. They are going through normal school day schedule. This is about the eighth or ninth day of school, so they are able to continue their normal schedule. All of the children have been informed, we are told, of by the school superintendent of what is going on across the street from them. So they know why they have to be kept safe there inside of their classrooms. There is no recess time. There are no phys-ed classes outside. And it will be matter of trying to determine later on in the afternoon whether the buses can follow their normal schedule and whether the after-school athletic activities can also follow their normal schedule; that's still a few hour away. I'm sure it's a little unnerving too for the parent, nonetheless. Imagine being a parent who's child's at one of these schools. And you talked earlier about the morning kindergarten at Three Creeks Elementary being released soon from their regular schedule, and that they have been told the parents have been told that they can come to the front door and that it is a safe situation. But in the meantime, these schools are on lockdown just to play it safe. And as Linda said, everyone is doing absolutely just fine in these schools. It's just a safety measure to make sure that no one takes any chances. For parents who feel...
[Unidentified Male:] Sylvia?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, Paul.
[Unidentified Male:] We're told that a number of people have just exited the rear of the bank, so we don't know for sure and no one's come over to tell us, but they appear to have been people who were in the bank. And through the camera we can see that at least one of the women had her hands over her eyes as if she was crying. I don't know how many, but that certainly would be a positive sign.
[Unidentified Female:] That definitely is. You know, we were told a couple of hours ago, or an hour almost an hour and a half ago by some people that they thought there could be as many as 20 hostages inside. We are getting word now that that number is probably was half that, and since then, about, 45 minutes ago, two and then one more hostage released, and now as Paul is telling us, more people have come out of the bank from the back door. Once again, as we told you, the law enforcement has asked us to be careful with what we shoot from our choppers, and we are complying with that, so we have not been able to see...
[Harris:] Now, as we've been listening to our affiliate discussing whether or not they've seen people come out of the bank, we just saw another person coming out of the rear. As you see there, the troopers, the tactical members, they're dressed in black and right in front of the Pizza Hut, they had just finished escorting yet another hostage from inside the bank.
[Mcedwards:] That's right. As you mentioned earlier, Leon, it looked like this Pizza Hut area is being use as a kind of a staging area. When the other three hostages were released we saw them back along this area, sort of crossed in front of that Pizza Hut into the parking lot area around there, people running...
[Harris:] Right.
[Mcedwards:] ... out, even though they clearly had some police protection. And we heard earlier too that the windows on the front of the bank were making it difficult for police to see in, not many of them, tinted glass, but that some communication efforts were underway clearly some communication has taken place because we also saw that bag come to the front door, a man come out and pull it in.
[Harris:] Now, we did not see, again folks, we're not in control at all of any of these camera shots, that's one reason why we're pretty much at the mercy of the folks in the choppers from our affiliates there to zoom in and out for us. But if we could get a shot of the back of the bank, as we heard the one helicopter reporter saying that he saw that heard a report that there were people being ushered out of the back of the bank, we never did see that, so we can't say for sure. And by the time we did hear him say we didn't see any activity outside of the Pizza Hut either. So it's very difficult to say right now how many people may be inside. We have been able to eyeball ourselves at least four who have walked outside of this bank- hostage situation.
[Mcedwards:] Right. And all of this happening, in case you're just joining us, in Lowell, Indiana, 40, 45 miles southeast of Chicago. This all got underway 9:00 a.m. local time when a customer actually came to the front door of a bank, saw a person pointing what looked like a sawed-off shotgun inside, called 911, got police out there. It's been described as a bank robbery that went wrong, clearly something went wrong, and people that people were then taken hostage. Police say about 10 to 20 taken hostage. We're showing you tape here from earlier.
[Harris:] Want to be clear on that.
[Mcedwards:] This is the first two that we saw taken out.
[Harris:] This, yes. This is the first two that we saw taken out. Since then they've come out in ones.
[Mcedwards:] And as we described earlier, there they are running across that Pizza Hut parking lot to the area that police are clearly using as a staging area in the hopes of getting people out. All of the businesses in the area, and six schools in the area are locked down, buildings have been evacuated.
[Harris:] And one of the schools, we should say, one of those schools, and the largest one of them, is Lowell High School, which is directly across the street from this bank. And the helicopters are hovering right now over the school, the schools have been locked down, the kids are all inside safe, and they will have to stay there for some time.
[Mcedwards:] That's right. They're safe. No suggestion that anyone's been injured, no suggesting any shots have been fired. We did talk to a local business person in the area, probably 40, 45 minutes ago who said that people were just staying inside the building. Let's listen in again to our affiliate coverage here. We're looking at
[Wbbm. Karen:] I think so. My secretary is here with me, we're the only two that made it in so far. I did see some of the other people from the other businesses. And I would say on the whole, yes, we feel safe. We don't have fear right now.
[Unidentified Female, Wbbm-reporter:] You don't have any children in the high school there, do you Karen?
[Karen:] No, I don't. I have children in the grammar school that's down around the corner for the Walgreen's. But I feel that they're OK there.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, and from everything we know, from the authorities, the children are all fine in the various schools.
[Karen:] Yes.
[Unidentified Female:] And the high school right across the street from the bank, as we've been saying, has been on lockdown since this started this morning just before 9:00. This has been going on 2 12 hours. And from what we know, the latest that we know, two, possibly three of the hostages have been released by the gunman inside who went into this bank this morning, early this morning, and when the bank opened. And I guess that he was trying to rob the bank, something went wrong and a hostage situation developed.
[Karen:] That's what I understand. And I heard on the news, of course, the radio that's all we have here right now, that some were released. I couldn't vouch for that, other than seeing them leaving the restaurant on the corner. I can't see the front end of the bank.
[Unidentified Female:] Right.
[Unidentified Male:] Karen, have police remained in constant contact with you? Are they keeping you updated on how the situation is going, or have they basically told you to stay where you, and they'll get back to you at some other time?
[Karen:] No, the police have not come to tell us anything. When we see people opening the doors from the business to step out, they're just telling us to step back, We're basically hearing what's going on by listening to the room. Our customers, and clients, and family have been calling here at our place of business informing us what they are seeing on television and so forth.
[Unidentified Female:] Karen, let me just interrupt here. I'm reading the latest wires we have now from the Associated Press. Lake County, Indiana. Police say that the three people escorted from the bank in Lowell are two adults and a child. It never even occurred to me to think that there would be children in there. Of course, in they are in there with their mom or their dad, or their grandparents, they're going into the bank, and it didn't even occur to me that one of them might of been a child. Thank goodness all three of those have been safely released. Again, three people escorted.
[Karen:] Wonderful.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes, that is good news, isn't it?
[Karen:] Yes.
[Unidentified Female:] Two adults and a child. Several people still being hostage. But, according to AP, it's still not clear how many. A Lowell police staffer said nine people were taken hostages. Again, thankfully no word of any injuries. And from what we have heard so far and learned so far, the police are and have been in contact with the gunman who is inside this bank, this Centier Bank in Lowell.
[Karen:] Wonderful.
[Unidentified Male:] Karen, we've been referring to Lowell as a rural area, a farming community.
[Karen:] Correct.
[Unidentified Male:] Give us your description of what Lowell is like?
[Karen:] We're probably about well, from Hammond, which a lot of people are familiar with, we're probably about 20 miles south of there. We're very close to the Illinois border. The town itself has maybe a population of around 6,000, 6,500, surrounding rural communities where people live on acreage. It's not so much a farming town as it used to be, but it is definitely rural, small-town atmosphere. Very friendly, very safe, a great place to live and raise your children, but yet close to the big city, so to speak. Just very friendly area to be in. We do things early here in the morning, so it doesn't surprise me that there were a lot of people in the bank first thing in the morning. We don't expect this in Lowell, but it happens I guess.
[Unidentified Female:] Well, it sounds like your community was well prepared.
[Mcedwards:] All right, we're going to break in here for just a moment here at CNN Center. We're going to take a short break from our coverage. But, we will keep watching this during the break, and bring more to you when we come back. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Michael Holmes, World News:] Protesters occupying a small island off Puerto Rico say the United States military must find another site for what they call its war games. But the U.S. military insists it needs part of Vieques islands to remain to maintain its combat readiness. CNN's Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre reports on why the U.S. top brass consider Vieques indispensable.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Correspondent:] The Navy has used Vieques for target practice for more than 50 years. Between 1941 and 1950, it bought up two-thirds of the 52-square-mile Puerto Rican island for what it says was fair market value roughly $1.5 million. Now the Pentagon claims it can't be replaced at any price.
[Adm. Craig Quigley, Pentagon Spokesman:] It is a question of money to a certain extent, Jamie. But money aside, we've simply not found a location that offers the combination of attributes that Vieques offers today.
[Mcintyre:] About 9,300 U.S. citizens live in the center of the tiny island, mostly in two coastal cities in the north and south. Protesters shut down the bombing range in April of last year after a Marine Corp F- 18 mistakenly dropped two bombs on an observation post, killing a civilian security guard.
[Juan Figueroa, Puerto Rican Legal Defense & Education Fund:] Can you imagine if this was happening in the Florida Keys? Can you imagine if the Navy decided to use one of the keys to do target practice 60 years ago? You probably can't imagine it because it would never happen.
[Mcintyre:] The Navy insists there is nowhere else on America's East Coast where Marines can practice an amphibious assault, while jet fighter planes drop live bombs from overhead the kind of realistic training the military says is essential to producing battle-ready troops.
[James Inhofe, U.s. Senate Member:] This is a life and death issue for young American troops, and I might add some of those troops are Puerto Rican troops. Now, we own that island. That's owned by the Navy, and all we're asking is the same things I do in my state of Oklahoma when we have a live firing range at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.
[Mcintyre:] Last year, the Navy studied 18 possible alternatives to Vieques, including nearby uninhabited islands and existing bombing ranges in the United States. None were deemed suitable, either because their beaches were too small for an amphibious landing or the sites were too close to busy commercial air corridors, or they were home to endangered plants and animals. [on camera]: There is an inherent contradiction in the Navy's position. On the one hand, officials insist there is no alternative to Vieques. But on the other hand, they've agreed to leave if the island's residents vote them out in a referendum. In that case, they concede, they'll simply have to find an alternative. Jamie McIntyre, CNN, the Pentagon.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] At this hour, the European stock markets are looking somewhat mixed, but for the most part moving sideways on this Friday morning.
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Philip Coggan is markets editor of the "Financial Times" and joins us now from the "FT"'s London newsroom with a read on what exactly is going on.
[Philip Coggan, Markets Editor, "financial Times":] We're getting a bit confused by you guys, Wednesday you were down a lot, Thursday you were up a lot, you know, just let us know what's going on and then we can decide which way to move ourselves. We got a bit of a rise in the CAC in Paris, a bit of a rise in the FTSE in London, and the Dax in Frankfurt is down a little, but nothing substantial. I'm sure they're all still waiting for the latest U.S. economic data to see how Wall Street opens this afternoon, and of course, for the big Federal Reserve decision on Tuesday. Now, on the currencies, the euro is sorry, yes?
[Marchini:] That's OK, that was my next question, it looks as though the currencies have stabilized a bit, the pound is back over $1.51, and the euro is holding above 90 cents.
[Coggan:] Yes, that's right, I think there was a sudden big fall in the pound after the Bank of England indicated the interest rates weren't likely to rise, but it's a bit of a catch-22 because the reason the bank said interest rates wouldn't have to rise was because the pound was too strong. So if the pound falls enough, then they'll have to put interest rates up again. So there's a bit a floor under the pound, probably, it can't fall too far.
[Haffenreffer:] I understand there's a lot of corporate news out on this Friday as well?
[Coggan:] Yes. The British are coming, the British are coming. WPP, which was originally a company that made supermarket trollies, it's on the shopping trail again, it's going to buy Young & Rubicam, they've been talking on and off for a while, and they seem to be agreeing to a deal at $53 a share. The other big deal is the Terra Networks, which is Europe's second-biggest Internet service provider, and it's big in Latin America, Mexico and Brazil, that's in talks with Lycos, and that, of course, would create a huge company. At the moment, it is just alliance talks, but the Spanish newspaper that had the story said it could lead to a merger, so you might see some action in Lycos shares when Wall Street opens. And the other corporate development that we are waiting for a lot in the U.K. here is, of course, Ford is going to make a full announcement about its Dagenham plant in the U.K., a lot of concern about job losses, but it sounds as if Ford is going to sort of sweeten the pill a little bit by stepping up the production of diesels at Dagenham and that will create some new jobs to offset the big job losses there.
[Marchini:] All right, Philip Coggan of the "Financial Times," great to have you with us this morning. Thanks for the update.

[Donna Kelley, Cbs Anchor:] A panel of experts is asking a critical questions: Are Americans doing enough to protect themselves from deadly diseases, potentially deadly diseases? The group raising a number of issues here, ranging need to improve vaccination efforts, to the challenges that are facing vaccine programs. And joining us now is David Neumann of the National Partnership for Immunization. Mr. Neumann, hello, glad you could talk with us.
[David Neumann, National Partnership For Immunization:] Good morning. And thank you for inviting me in this morning.
[Kelley:] You bet. What diseases are we talking about? What could cause trouble?
[Neumann:] I'm sorry, I missed the start of your question.
[Kelley:] What diseases are we talking about that could potentially cause trouble for Americans.
[Neumann:] We're talking about all of the vaccine preventable diseases. There are 10 diseases in this country that are threatening to various segments of our society. They're infants or children, adolescents or adults. All of these are diseases that have considerable importance for us. We do have vaccines that can prevent the pain and suffering, and even death that these diseases can cause, and we think that there's an urgent need to make sure everyone in the U.S. is aware of the need to be immunized against these diseases.
[Kelley:] OK, can you tell us what some of those 10 are?
[Neumann:] Yes. They're diphtheria, tetanus, measles, mumps, rubella, pneumococcal disease, influenza, meningococcal disease, just a whole host of common diseases that were very prevalent in this country over the last 100, 150 years. In the age of vaccines, they've sort of disappeared from the radar screen. Yet many Americans are vulnerable because they are not adequately immunized, or they travel internationally and are exposed to these infectious agents oversees and bring back here, where other people who are not immunized also become vulnerable.
[Kelley:] Yes, travel can a problem. And a lot of those shots that you mentioned for those diseases, you are supposed to get those shots, you know,even as infant, and many people don't. So what should people do? You should of course get your children done? And if you're older, maybe you checkup and get boosters?
[Neumann:] Well, you should checkup. Tetanus is a good example. Most of us had our last tetanus shot when we are 10 or 12 years old or going away to summer camp. We need to have a booster every 10 years. Now this year, there is a shortage of the tetanus toxoid that is part of that vaccine. Hence people are encouraged to recognize that they need the booster and arrange to get the booster, see their physician next year, in the next six to 12 months, or as the vaccine becomes available. There's also the influenza vaccine, which people at high risks. That is people with chronic health conditions, chronic heart disease, chronic lung disease, and who are particularly susceptible to the complications of an infection should be getting their vaccines against flu in September, October. The healthy population should delay their immunization against flu until November and even December.
[Kelley:] All right, David Neumann, of the National Partnership for Immunization, thanks so much for coming in and talking with us, telling us about this.
[Neumann:] All right, well, thanks very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Announcer:] this is a CNN Election 2000 special report.
[Al Gore, Vice President Of The United States:] For the sake of our unity as a people, and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession.
[Announcer:] Al Gore bows-out, making-way for President-Elect George W. Bush.
[George W. Bush, President-elect Of The United States:] Our nation must rise above a house divided. Americans share hopes and goals and values far more important than any political disagreements.
[Announcer:] In this special hour, analysis from our experts, and reaction from public figures in and out of Washington. As the nation begins to move-on, we look ahead, past the transition to the beginnings of the Bush administration. To our viewers in the U.S. and around the world, welcome to this CNN special report
[George W. Bush:] THE NEXT PRESIDENT. From Washington, anchor Wolf Blitzer.
[Wolf Blitzer, Cnn Anchor:] Good evening. It took 36 bitter days, but the U.S. presidential election is now over. Vice President Al Gore tonight formally conceded to Texas Governor George W. Bush. In fact, he made a point of referring to Bush as president-elect. Just before his televised address to the nation, Gore telephoned Bush to congratulate him. The vice president promised to try to, quote, "heal the divisions of the campaign." The two men agreed to meet next Tuesday here in Washington. Bush, in his address, went out of his way to praise the vice president, and he pledged to reach out to Democrats. In short, if you missed the past five weeks, you never would have guessed exactly how extraordinarily contentious the situation was. Gore's speech centered on several key points, all surrounding an overall theme of conciliation and gratitude. He was clear on what he thought about yesterday's Supreme Court decision, but he also made clear he believes this election is over.
[Gore:] Now the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken. Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the court's decision, I accept it. I accept the finality of this outcome which will be ratified next Monday in the Electoral College. And tonight, for the sake of our unity of the people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession. I also accept my responsibility, which I will discharge unconditionally, to honor the new president elect and do everything possible to help him bring Americans together in fulfillment of the great vision that our Declaration of Independence defines and that our Constitution affirms and defends. I know that many of my supporters are disappointed. I am too. But our disappointment must be overcome by our love of country. And I say to our fellow members of the world community, let no one see this contest as a sign of American weakness. The strength of American democracy is shown most clearly through the difficulties it can overcome. As for the battle that ends tonight, I do believe as my father once said, that no matter how hard the loss, defeat might serve as well as victory to shape the soul and let the glory out. Now the political struggle is over and we turn again to the unending struggle for the common good of all Americans and for those multitudes around the world who look to us for leadership in the cause of freedom. In the words of our great hymn, "America, America": "Let us crown thy good with brotherhood, from sea to shining sea." And now, my friends, in a phrase I once addressed to others, it's time for me to go.
[Blitzer:] An hour after the vice president's concession speech, George W. Bush stepped into the Texas House of Representatives, introduced at least as the president-elect. He praise Al Gore and after the bitter election and its aftermath, called for national unity.
[Bush:] The spirit of cooperation I have seen in this hall is what is needed in Washington, D.C. It is the challenge of our moment. After a difficult election, we must put politics behind us and work together to make the promise of America available for every one of our citizens. I am optimistic that we can change the tone in Washington, D.C. I believe things happen for a reason, and I hope the long wait of the last five weeks will heighten a desire to move beyond the bitterness and partisanship of the recent past. Our nation must rise above a house divided. Americans share hopes and goals and values far more important than any political disagreements. Republicans want the best for our nation, and so do Democrats. Our votes may differ, but not our hopes. I know America wants reconciliation and unity. I know Americans want progress. And we must seize this moment and deliver.
[Blitzer:] As to what he wants to deliver aside from unity, President-Elect Bush promised to work for Social Security and Medicare reform, tax relief and a bipartisan international policy. But even in listing his priorities, the president-elect returned to the theme of unity.
[Bush:] During the fall campaign, we differed about the details of these proposals, but there was remarkable consensus about the important issues before us: excellent schools, retirement and health security, tax relief, a strong military, a more civil society. We have discussed our differences. Now it is time to find common ground and build consensus to make America a beacon of opportunity in the 21st century. I'm optimistic this can happen.
[Blitzer:] You'll be able to see both the George W. Bush and Al Gore addresses to the nation in their entirety during a CNN special report at 1:00 a.m. Eastern, 10:00 p.m. Pacific. Two people who have reported on this extraordinary campaign since day one and who know these two men quite well are CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley, and senior White House correspondent John King and they join us now, live. Candy, first to you. The themes that Governor Bush, now President-Elect Bush, sought to focus on during his brief speech in Texas, conciliation, unity, those are themes that may not sit all that well with some of the conservative, more conservative members of the Republican Party. How much of a concern, if at all, was that to Mr. Bush?
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Senior Political Correspondent:] One of the things that I have thought all along, as you watch how George Bush campaigned and the people that he was with, and how he's governed here in Texas is he may have more trouble with his own party than he does at least with moderates in the Democratic Party. And it's really not just the more conservative wing of the Republican Party. Remember, of course, that George Bush is a self- professed conservative Republican, so much of what he wants will be on their agenda. But once you reach the social issues, it's not something that George Bush has always put on the front burner nor I judge will he put them on the front burner now. But he also has problems with others of the Republican Party John McCain, who said tonight I'd really like campaign finance reform to be the first bill out of the box and it took John Breaux to say, gee, I'm not sure that's a great idea. We ought to, you know, work on something that's a little less divisive. So, you know, he may well have problems with his own party but what George Bush's great strength has been in Texas according to people who have fought against him and with him, is that he does is able to form coalitions, and he's going to have to look right down the center of the House and the Senate, and go to the moderates on both sides..
[Blitzer:] John King, if you listen carefully to Vice President Gore's speech, as you of course did, and everyone seems to conclude it was very gracious in his remarks towards President-Elect Bush, it was, though, in marked contrast to what some members of the Democratic Party had earlier said, particularly the Reverend Jesse Jackson. How Does gore resolve those kinds of problems? People a lot of people around Gore think, of course, that he was robbed.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Well, the vice president in his heart, I think, believes a disservice was done to him. I don't know if he would use the term rob. But let's remember here, this is a great moment in history and he knew his challenge was to step aside gracefully. He also knew that he's a young man in his 50s, who might want to run again. Unlike the Reverend Jesse Jackson, the vice president the sitting vice president of the United States right now, a member of the government who will be part of a transition of power in just five weeks. He cannot make public statements like that right now, but he also made clear, if you listen closely, that he would fight on. He said he didn't quite know how yet, and he said one of those groups he wanted to fight for was those whose voices have not been heard, You might translate that into those whose votes, in his view, were never counted. The big question now: How does the vice president move forward? The next week will be dedicated to that meeting with Governor Bush on Tuesday. Then he will wrap up his tenure as vice president. Twenty- four years he has been on the Federal payroll: eight years in the House; eight in the Senate; now eight in the vice presidency. He faces very big decisions in the months ahead about whether he wants a rematch in four years and if he does, about how to position himself and most believe he exited tonight in a way that was very graceful to Governor Bush, but also, very graceful to his supporters, and left him openings to come back should he want to try it. It'll be much more difficult, though. Democrats will not give him a pass next time.
[Blitzer:] Candy, how quickly will President-Elect Bush now start naming Cabinet members and the senior staff, his senior staff at the White House?
[Crowley:] I sense that we will get some maybe Friday. I was kind of waved off the idea that tomorrow the governor might announce a senior staff or some Cabinet members. We know that he is settled on senior staff, and that there are some Cabinet names that he's ready to announce. They're looking for a little, if you will, a transition within the transition. They want to treat this period were with great respect, for the feelings of not just the vice president, but his supporters. They don't want to sort of overplay and say OK, well that's over with. Now here's the Cabinet and here's the and sort of move quite that quickly. The one the only thing that is on the governor's public schedule as of right now is a prayer meeting at the church that he attends. So that's sort of in keeping with his tone of, let's keep this at sort of a higher level tone and move kind of gently into it. Having said that, they have lost half the time they have for transition. They know that they have to move quickly, because there is another message that the country needs and that is, I'm on the job, you know, we despite the fact that we lost 36 days, the government will be in place and we can get moving right after the inauguration. So, he is sort of fighting twin poles at this point, the need to kind of give us a little breathing room, this period of letting people kind of getting used to this idea, and the need to kind of move quickly, so I sense that we'll get the beginnings of some of this by Friday, but maybe not tomorrow.
[Blitzer:] John, how serious is all this talk that Bush may seek out a Democrat or two to bring into the cabinet; if it is serious, what names are you hearing?
[King:] Well, his aides themselves say it's very serious. Dick Cheney has told Republicans on Capitol Hill to be prepared for a Democrat or two in the cabinet. And the Democrats, who Governor Bush has spoken to, Senator John Breaux, Candy mentioned earlier, also say that Governor Bush has made quite clear that he would look to them. There has been some talk just tonight, Norman Sisisky, a retiring Democratic member of the House of Representatives from the state of Virginia, among those being considered, still early in the process we are told but among those being considered for the post of secretary of veterans affairs. So Governor Bush said to be quite serious about wanting to name at least one, perhaps two Democratic members of his cabinet, the so-called "blue dog," moderate Democrats also being looked at and not just for the cabinet. One of the key things Democrats looking for when Governor Bush comes to Washington early next week, he will meet with President Clinton, meet with Vice President Gore, meet most likely with Dick Gephardt and Tom Daschle, the leaders in the House, but they are also looking down the road a bit for meetings with the people who will actually have to do the work here: moderate Republicans, centrist moderate to conservative Democrats, the governing coalition, if you will, that great center of the political dynamic that President Clinton so often spoke about. Governor Bush now must seize it if he can govern effectively.
[Blitzer:] John King and Candy Crowley, always great to talk with both you of, because I always learn something. Thanks so much for joining us. A concession, and an invitation two speeches with lots of reaction. When we return, two political leaders from outside the Beltway give us their take on tonight's addresses. And later, reading between the lines and looking ahead. CNN's Bill Schneider gets out his crystal ball. Plus...
[Lyndon B. Johnson, President Of The United States:] I shall not seek and I will not accept the nomination of my party for another term as your president.
[Blitzer:] A look back at some other famous farewells. Welcome back to this CNN special report. Many of the events in recent days have taken place here in Washington, but let's go outside the Beltway for some additional perspective. Joining me now are Republican Governor Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey, she joins us from our bureau in New York; and Democratic Governor Gray Davis of California, he happens to be here in Washington. Governors, thanks for joining us. And I wanted to begin with you, Governor Davis, were you surprised how the nature of the Gore concession a lot of people had been speculating he wouldn't use that "C" word, he wouldn't formally concede?
[Gov. Gray Davis , California:] I thought it was a wonderful speech, maybe the best I've heard the vice president give in the last year and a half. It was very human, it was very personable, it reached out to the best of us in America, and certainly not the worst of us, and he reached out the hand of friendship to Governor Bush, so I thought it was a very good beginning, and I thought Governor Bush responded to the challenge and I thought those two speeches really said to us that both men seized the moment and they moved us closer together.
[Blitzer:] And, Governor Whitman, same question to you as far as President-elect Bush's speech is concerned, very conciliatory, reaching out to Democrats; presumably, maybe making some conservatives nervous about the tenure of what he hopes to establish in Washington?
[Gov. Christie Todd Whitman , New Jersey:] Oh, I think we saw democracy at its best tonight. We saw two men who have vied fervently for the greatest position in the land and arguably the world, who stepped outside the partisan politics to reach out to the country to say, now it's time to come together, to seize the moment and to take advantage of the fact that we have an opportunity to move this country forward by bringing people together, by not trying to appease wings the far extremes in either party, but to move toward the center and move an agenda that speaks to all people and brings all people together. I thought both speeches were very good and I thought it shows the very best of what this country is all about.
[Blitzer:] Governor Davis, some of the close political associates of President-elect Bush are now saying he's going to reach out to people in California, your state, knowing that if he wants to be re- elected in 2004, California could be very, very important. Practically speaking, if he does that in addition to visiting California, let's say, as President Clinton used to do almost every few weeks, what does he have to do to become more attractive to people in California?
[Davis:] Well, as Christie said, and I agree 100 percent with her, America is really looking for centrist problem solvers. We don't want ideologues or extremists. All of us privileged to have been in government have been hired by the electorate to solve their problems, so he will make progress in California if he helps us solve our problems, helps us improve our schools, protect our environment. We in California believe in common sense gun control, we believe in a woman's right to choose. If he can deal with seniors and the need for prescription drugs, if he can solve problems, I think he will not only build bridges to California, but to all America, and I would hope that he would begin by looking to an issue where he can get strong majorities in both houses of the Congress, and get a victory which will get him off to a good start and get the country off to good start.
[Blitzer:] Governor Whitman, what about you? There has been speculation, you may or may not want to serve in a Bush cabinet. Do you have any interest in doing that if the president-elect came to you?
[Whitman:] Well, that's entirely up to him, but obviously it would be a high honor to be considered for a position like that, to have someone think that you had something that you could offer the country, but I love the job I'm in, so I'm in a very actually a very good position, I can't lose from that perspective. But I'm just delighted to have seen what when on tonight, to see both of these men give the kind of speeches they did and I really believe, we have seen George Bush bring people together before. I don't think the venue tonight that he chose for his speech is lost on any one. It's reflective of how he has governed, and I am feeling very, very optimistic. I know there is a real potential for a partisan divide, because everything is so close, but there's also an enormous potential to come together and to move this country forward, and I think that's what the American people want more than anything else right now.
[Blitzer:] All right, Governor Davis, what is the most important thing, the first thing that should be on President-Elect Bush's agenda once he takes office on January 20th?
[Davis:] Well, I think that he has to remember that more people voted for Al Gore than vote for George Bush. So he has to reach out to America and let them know that he's going to work hard to earn their trust, as I's sure he will. He's going to work with people of all stripes. I believe in California and I'm sure Christy agrees, that I don't care if a good idea comes from a Republican or a Democrat, if it helps us solve a problem, let's get both parties to agree and solve the problem. So, I think humility is in order, graciousness both of which I'm sure he'll bring to the task and to reach out to both parties.
[Blitzer:] Governor Whitman, Senator McCain says campaign finance reform should top the agenda of the Bush administration. Presumably, it won't. They disagree on that issue. What do you think should be atop President-Elect Bush's agenda?
[Whitman:] Well, I think one of the first issues he outlined it in his speech tonight and the way he outlined the issues, what his priorities were, he started with education. That's something that extraordinarily important to the future of this country and everyone agrees we want to ensure that no child is left behind. I believe that as he looks and puts his agenda together, first of all, he's going to do the right thing and he's going to pick those issues where he can build consensus fairly rapidly. I think education is certainly a good one to start on. It's one where there is less contention than some of the other issues. It's one that everyone agrees needs to be addressed and he has some very good ideas to ensure that we have the very best future we can offer anyone.
[Blitzer:] Governor Whitman and Governor Davis, thanks to both of you for joining us on our CNN special report. And in a moment, the view from the U.S. Senate in the quest for common ground. We'll be joined by one Republican, and one Democrat. Up next, though, a melancholy moving day, Gore workers pack it up after 36 days in Florida. A quick update now on the events of this historic night. A little more than two hours ago, Al Gore addressed the nation and announced he was conceding defeat.
[Gore:] I spoke with George W. Bush and congratulated him on becoming the 43rd president of the United States. And I promised him that I wouldn't call him back this time. I offered to meet with him as soon as possible so that we can start to heal divisions of the campaign and the contest through which we've just passed.
[Blitzer:] About an hour later, George W. Bush publicly accepted Gore's concession. In a speech from inside the Texas state house, he pledged to work with Gore to heal the country, and he also pledged to work for political unity in Washington.
[Bush:] Tonight I chose to speak from the chamber of the Texas House of Representatives because it has been a home to bipartisan cooperation. Here in a place where Democrats have the majority, Republicans and Democrats have worked together to do what is right for the people we represent. We've had spirited disagreements. And in the end, we found constructive consensus. It is an experience I will always carry with me, an example I will always follow.
[Blitzer:] George W. Bush becomes the fourth man to win the White House despite losing the overall popular vote. Out of about 100 million votes cast, Bush and Gore were separated by about 337,000 votes. Bush also becomes the first man to win the White House despite losing both California and New York. Florida's 25 electoral votes gave Bush the 271 vote total he needed. Many of the people who worked on the Gore effort in Florida are beginning the process of moving on. CNN national correspondent Gary Tuchman on how some are letting go of a dream.
[Gary Tuchman, Cnn Correspondent:] It's a house that's now available to be leased after four months as the Florida campaign headquarters for Al Gore.
[Marcus Jadotte, Gore Florida Director:] I think we're all surprised at the court's action, and now dealing with the aftermath. It hasn't sunk in yet.
[Tuchman:] This is where the vice president's top lieutenants in Florida and volunteer workers toiled during the campaign and the recount effort. But now everybody is moving out. And many here can't believe it.
[Tasha Cole, Florida Scheduling Director:] It hasn't hit me yet. I'm sure, you know, over the next couple of days and weeks, it will probably start to sink in. You know, we have to travel to D.C. And, you know, the Inaugural comes up. I mean, at this very moment, it hasn't sunk in yet that he's not going to be president.
[Tuchman:] As Florida's undervotes started getting counted this past Saturday, many of these Gore workers thought their candidate might be on the verge of the presidency. But then came the U.S. Supreme Court stay and the ruling late Tuesday night.
[Unidentified Female:] You felt emotional, but you had a sense of pride. You did everything that you could. Every day I woke up realizing how good I felt about what I was doing, and glad that I was here, and would not trade it for anything, wouldn't trade these three days and this recount, as hard and confusing as they were, for anything.
[Tuchman:] Most of these people had planned on being here for a while longer to watch hand counts get completed. But now they move on elsewhere, thinking about what might have been. Gary Tuchman, CNN, Tallahassee, Florida.
[Blitzer:] A new Republican president, and a new politically- divided Congress. Can they work together for the common good? Let's explore this with two senators, one from each party. Republican Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine has been a leader in building bipartisan consensus on key issues. Democratic Senator John Edwards, a freshman from North Carolina, was himself on Al Gore's short list for potential running mates. Senators, thanks for joining us. Senator Snowe, a 50-50 Senate 50 Republicans, 50 Democrats, a Republican vice president who could break a tie. It doesn't look, at least the consensus is, that there's a whole lot of opportunity for bipartisan cooperation despite the conciliatory nature of the two speeches we heard tonight.
[Sen. Olympia Snowe , Maine:] Well, I think tonight did set the right tone for a new Congress, and I certainly want to commend both Vice President Gore and President-Elect Bush for striking the right tenor and expressing the correct sentiments that I think can bring this country together because that is going to be important. We have two choices in Congress. We can either proceed down the road of harmony or we can proceed down the road of discord, and I think many of us in the Senate want to do everything that we can to overcome the obstacles and the barriers of an evenly divided Senate and to proceed in working a cooperative effort. Maybe tonight end a tumultuous chapter in America's history and ushers in a new era of cooperation, and that's why we created the centrist coalition that John Breaux and I are heading up with more than 26 members of the Senate, almost evenly divided among party lines, which I think is going to be really important and critical not only to advance the agenda for President-Elect Bush, but also for America.
[Blitzer:] Senate Edwards, are you part of that centrist coalition?
[Sen. John Edwards , North Carolina:] I am, Wolf, and Olympia is exactly right. I actually think that what we have here is an extraordinary opportunity. The closeness of the presidential election and the fact that we have a 5050, evenly divided Senate, I think what the American people are saying to us is not that they're deeply divided, but instead that they expect us to work together. I think they had a difficult time making a decision between Governor Bush and Vice President Gore and that should send a message to all of this. They expect us to lower the rhetoric, lower the partisanship, and find ways to work together, and that's what Olympia and I and the others are doing in the Senate. And I also might add, Wolf, I think it's critically important that those of us on the Democratic side of the aisle now, given that the election is over and Governor Bush is now going to be president of the United States, that we reach out to him and that we be willing to work with him, that we find issues on which we can cooperate. I think that the people of this country expect that from us. And in fact, I think they deserve that from us.
[Blitzer:] One pocketbook issue, Senator Snowe, that a lot of people think probably is not going to go very far is the $1.3 trillion tax cut proposal that President-elect Bush campaigned on over the past year. Is a 50-50 Senate, a narrow Republican majority in the House of Representatives, likely to approve anything close to that kind of massive tax cut?
[Snowe:] Probably not as high. I mean, I think, obviously, the question of a tax cut would be determined in terms of scope and size. And as we know, in the last Congress, we had $792 billion, which was the Republican package, and the president, who wanted $300 billion. And the centrists came between the two with $500 billion. So in fact, today, the moderate Republicans met with Vice President-elect Cheney, and we discussed the issue of tax cuts. And we think that there is support on both sides from some kind of tax cut, including marriage penalty relief and estate tax relief, and I...
[Blitzer:] But a lot less than $1.3 trillion.
[Snowe:] Probably a lot less.
[Blitzer:] What are we talking about, $500 billion?
[Snowe:] Yeah, I would say, you know, somewhere, you know, maybe a little bit more. You know, it certainly is possible. Depends on the surplus, the projections. And also, as Vice President-elect Cheney said today, you know, we do have a slowing of the economy, and so that may be important in creating some impetus in the future. So that certainly will be on the agenda. The question will be, obviously, you know, to what extent we can provide it.
[Blitzer:] Senator Edwards, what about that, $500 billion, $700 billion tax cut is that something you think the majority of Democrats could accept?
[Edwards:] I think that there are the majority of Democrats can definitely support a tax cut, so long as it's balanced against the other priorities maintaining a balanced budget, paying down the debt, providing a prescription drug benefit, passing a "patients' bill of rights," providing education funding. I mean, there are a number of things that need to be done, but clearly, one of the components is a tax cut. And the whole issue is how much of a tax cut can we provide, given these other priorities and still staying within a balanced budget. And I think Olympia and I actually agree on that.
[Blitzer:] All right, what about, Senator Snowe, on some of the other big issues that that President-elect Bush ran on? For example, Social Security reform, Medicare reform. These seem to be very ambitious agenda kind of issues with a very slim majority that he has.
[Snowe:] Well, you know, that's true, but I think, given the narrow margins, you know, in the House and the evenly divided Senate, I think it's going to compel us to work together. I mean, otherwise, if we don't work with President-elect Bush, obviously, those of us like John and I who are centrists in the United States Senate, nothing can happen. With us, a lot can happen. Again, Vice President-elect Cheney mentioned he wants to work with the Senate on the on the Social Security, on the tax cuts, on education and all the other issues, and I think it's a matter of time during the course of this year in terms of when we work on these issues. But I do believe that this should not deter us from working on these issues for this country.
[Blitzer:] Senator Edwards, despite all the very, very gracious talk tonight, are you among those Democrats and there are many out there who believe Vice President Gore was robbed?
[Edwards:] No, I don't think that sort of that sort of talk is healthy. I don't think we should be talking about that, Wolf. In fact, when this whole post-election dispute was going on, during that time, I was saying very publicly that I thought it was really important for people in leadership positions, people like Olympia and myself, and others to tone down the rhetoric, tone down the partisanship, let the process work, and when the process was concluded, as it was last night by the United States Supreme Court, to not only accept what occurred but to move forward and support the president. Governor Bush, President-elect Bush, is going to become our president, my president. And it's very important for the entire country to get behind him so that we can reunite this country.
[Blitzer:] Senator Edwards, Senator Snowe, thanks for joining us on our special report. And up next: lessons from history that could apply to the new Bush administration. And later: what the Supreme Court's controversial ruling might have done to its reputation. Welcome back. Let's get some further perspective on this dramatic night. Presidential historian Doug Brinkley joins us from San Francisco to consider several important questions, including this one, Professor Brinkley. How will historians view these past 36 days?
[Doug Brinkley, Presidential Historian:] Well, political historians will find it one of the most surreal, strange times in American history. There's never been anything quite like it for the Supreme Court of the United States to rule in an election to overturn the Florida supreme court. There's going to be a lot of work for historians. I just picture political historians going down now and actually counting these dimpled ballots themselves and books coming out trying to decide who really won the election of 2000. So it's going to be fodder for historians for a long time to come, and I have a feeling there'll be a quite a few books that say that Al Gore not only won the popular vote but really won the Electoral College but lost the battle in the courts of law.
[Blitzer:] What about the two speeches we heard tonight? How historic will those speeches turn out to be?
[Brinkley:] They were very historic speeches, and I think, in some ways, quite predictable. Al Gore was was eloquent and actually funny, and I thought it was a very well-crafted speech. And he always has been a great healer. I mean, one thing about Al Gore, he is a patriot. No matter what we said about him serving in Vietnam in 1970, he went and served for his country, and he served in Congress, in the Senate, and eight years as perhaps the most significant vice president in the 20th century. So he's somebody who believes in public service, and I think you saw that healing gesture. And Governor Bush made the big gesture of bipartisanship, which he's going to have to continue. I thought it was very wise to make that speech from Austin, in front of all the Texas legislators. It worked very well. And so it's an A-plus for both Bush and Gore for the way they finally resolved this strange election mess.
[Blitzer:] Everybody seems to agree, Professor Brinkley, that Al Gore was certainly looking ahead in his speech. Even being as gracious as he was, he was looking down the road. Give us an historic perspective on political comebacks of unsuccessful candidates.
[Brinkley:] Well, look, Wolf, you know Washington, D.C.'s filled with formers and ex's. And right now, Al Gore is going to soon to become an ex-Senator and an ex-vice president, while George Bush is going to be the most powerful person in the world. But Vice President Gore is young and energetic, and I think he has an opportunity now to cast himself as the voice of democracy, as the person who says that "I care about every vote in the country." He's perfectly situated for four years to to run in 2004, and he may take a post. There's been rumors of him perhaps becoming president of Harvard, for example. And I remember Dwight Eisenhower was president of Columbia University, using that as sort of a launch pad for his 1952 run. But the most famous comeback of all is, of course, Richard Nixon, who lost by that narrow margin in 1960 and then said lost the governorship of California and miraculously won in 1968, you know, eight years after he first lost. So I have a feeling you're going to be seeing another you know, Al Gore at least entering the arena in 2004. And right now, you'd have to say he's the front-runner for the Democratic Party, although surely people like either one of the Senator Kerrys or Dick Gephardt or many others might try to challenge him for that spot.
[Blitzer:] You know, some people are saying that the fact that Al Gore lost his home state of Tennessee is going to ill-serve him down the road. How important will it be, assuming he wants to come back in 2004, for him to reestablish his Tennessee base?
[Brinkley:] It's going to depend whether he wants to have that base, and I think he does. He loves the state. When he said he was going to go there and mend fences in a joke tonight, meaning the fences on his farm in Carthage and also political fences it's an embarrassment and a humiliation. It has to just gnaw at the vice president. If he only won his home state of Tennessee, he would be president of the United States today. So I think he has a lot of work to do. But you know, his father, of course, lost the Senate seat in 1970 in Tennessee and was very wounded. And his father had served 32 years in the Senate. And Al Gore, Senior, was so in such despair after losing, and he and his son said, "Dad, don't worry about it. You did the right thing on Civil Rights. You did the right thing about opposing the war in Vietnam. And you had 32 great years." And Al Gore will go down in history, 20th century history, along with Estes Kefauver, the vice president of of Dwight Eisenhower, as one of the great Tennessee politicians of the century.
[Blitzer:] Doug Brinkley, thanks for joining us from San Francisco. A lot to think about.
[Brinkley:] Thank you, Wolf.
[Blitzer:] Thank you. And still to come: the impact of the Supreme Court's decision, a closer look.
[Justice Clarence Thomas:] Whatever you do, don't try to apply the rules of the political world to this institution. They do not apply.
[Blitzer:] What some of the Justices are saying on this day after, as this CNN special report continues. On a day when healing and unity were the watchwords here in Washington, a few sharply partisan remarks stood out. In a written statement attacking the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to stop the Florida recounts, New York Democratic Congressman Charles Rangel said, quote, "This Court, which has often covered over racism with judicial language, this time could not find the words to hide the injustice of its ruling," end quote. Republican majority whip Tom DeLay of Texas singled out Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens. Quoting from DeLay's written statement, "I am compelled to express great disappointment with the dissent offered by Justice Stevens, who suggests, quote, `We may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's presidential election.'Justice Stevens is wrong. It is precisely known which candidate has won a majority of the whole number of electors and the presidency." There was no response from Justice Stevens, but a couple of other Justices were talking today about the high court's difficult role in this presidential election. Here's CNN senior Washington correspondent, Charles Bierbauer.
[Charles Bierbauer, Cnn Correspondent:] The Supreme Court, in its decision effectively halting Florida's recount, split philosophically and ideologically. But Justice Clarence Thomas says this is not a political Court.
[Thomas:] I plead with you that whatever you do, don't try to apply the rules of the political world to this institution. They do not apply. Now, you can criticize, and there are bases for disagreeing. But it's not the model that you use across the street. They're entirely different worlds.
[Bierbauer:] "Across the street" is Congress. Chief Justice Rehnquist, encountering reporters after Thomas's remarks, concurred. "Absolutely. Absolutely." Justice Thomas told visiting high school students the Court's 5-4 opinion was difficult.
[Thomas:] The last few weeks have been exhausting, I think, for the entire Court. But in a lot of ways, it shows the strength of our system of government.
[Bierbauer:] Justice Thomas said there was passion in the Court's deliberation but no self-interest. The passion was most evident in the four dissents to the ruling. Justice Stevens: "The identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law."
[Richard Lazarus, Georgetown Law Center:] This Court itself is divided quite often, but there's no question division among the Justices in this case was as intense as we've seen in recent years.
[Bierbauer:] But is it lasting?
[Daniel Meron, Former Kennedy Clerk:] They have a lot of respect for each other, and there's not going to be any lasting damage to the internal workings of the Court. The Justices often decide very difficult cases, and then they move on.
[Bierbauer:] The lasting impact may lie in public and political arenas.
[Lanny Davis, Former White House Special Counsel:] That is going to be very bitter for many people who believe that this was all about stopping the count from taking place to begin with.
[Bierbauer:] That bitterness could be reflected when the next president names a new Supreme Court Justice who must be confirmed by an intensely political Senate split 50-50. Charles Bierbauer, CNN, the Supreme Court.
[Blitzer:] Straight ahead, our Bill Schneider on tonight's speeches by Bush and Gore. Then a different look at a different kind of speech.
[Richard Nixon , Former Vice President:] You don't have Nixon to kick around anymore. Thank you, gentlemen. And good day.
[Blitzer:] Some good-byes mean good-bye. Sometimes not. Famous farewell speeches as this CNN special report continues.
[Albert Gore , Vice President, Presidential Nominee:] For the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession.
[George W. Bush , President-elect:] Our nation must rise above a house divided. Americans share hopes and goals and values far more important than any political disagreements.
[Blitzer:] Two men tonight, two very gracious speeches. Joining us now to talk about all of this, CNN's senior political analyst Bill Schneider. Bill, despite all the unity and all the graciousness, how badly divided is the country right now?
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Well, Wolf, Americans are not really divided much over policy. The division we're seeing is over values, and you could see it in the election returns. They reflect really lifestyle differences differences by gun ownership and church-going and single versus married people. You could see it on the map. The conservative heartland went for Bush, and the liberal coasts went for Al Gore. And I think that division comes right from Bill Clinton. Clinton brought Americans together on policy, like Welfare reform and a balanced budget, but his personal values created a deep cleavage in the country. Clinton was the first president to come out of the culture of the 1960s. First impeachment, and now Florida were the latest skirmishes in that long cultural war.
[Blitzer:] And some are saying that Al Gore's speech tonight, despite the tone, may actually have been his opening salvo looking towards 2004.
[Schneider:] Well, you know, everything depends on how President- elect Bush does. If two years from now Americans conclude that electing Bush was a bad mistake, Gore's going to look very good. But Democrats know this election should have been slam dunk for Al Gore. We had peace. We had prosperity. We had a low crime rate. And yet he couldn't make it happen. Why? Well, a lot of Democrats have concluded he ran a terrible campaign.
[Blitzer:] And as far as George W. Bush's speech was concerned, the setting was very, very symbolic, the tone very conciliatory. He's trying to set a tone for the next four years, as well.
[Schneider:] He is. And you know, conservatives may have been dismayed. Conservative Republicans have been patient throughout this entire campaign. They didn't give Bush a lot of trouble the way they did his father or Bob Dole. But now Republicans control Congress and the White House for the first time in almost 50 years, and there's going to be some pressure on Bush for a pay-off. They didn't hear any sign of it in Bush's remarks tonight. They heard consensus and common ground. But you know, Bush knows this is not 1980, when Reagan got elected and people wanted radical change, or even 1992, when Clinton got elected and they wanted something very different. Bush understands that this year, Americans voted for a change of leadership, not a change of direction. And the Florida struggle made that yearning for consensus in the country even stronger.
[Blitzer:] So you think George W. Bush can risk alienating the conservative wing of the Republican Party?
[Schneider:] He can if he is effective and popular with the rest of the country, which means he's got to create a government of the middle. He's got to carve out something unusual, a coalition of moderate Democrats and most moderate-to-conservative Republicans without the fringe groups on either side and see if he can govern with that coalition. Figures like John Breaux, a moderate Democrat, are going to become very crucial in the new Congress, which is otherwise divided right down the middle along party lines.
[Blitzer:] You heard Governor Gray Davis of California, a Democrat, and you heard Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, a Democrat, on this program tonight reaching out to Governor Bush.
[Schneider:] That's right, and Governor Bush is reaching out to them. You know, Governor Gray Davis is a sort of model of a pragmatic kind of Democrat that Bush can work with. He wants to be a pragmatic Republican. If he can find common ground, then he could develop his own effective base and maybe even create a new coalition in this country that cuts across party lines. That would be remarkable.
[Blitzer:] Bill Schneider, thanks for joining us.
[Schneider:] Sure.
[Blitzer:] And just as Al Gore tonight said good-bye to the presidential race, farewell speeches are often best remembered when presidents and personalities step from the public spotlight. But as CNN's Garrick Utley reports, history also reminds us "Farewell" doesn't always mean forever.
[Garrick Utley, Cnn Correspondent:] It's not easy to leave the stage of public attention with style. A farewell is a revealing moment that can take us behind the public face and let us see the inner person, as when baseball great Lou Gehrig had to leave the game in 1939, when he faced a fatal illness.
[Lou Gehrig:] Today I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the earth.
[Utley:] Ever since George Washington offered his farewell address to the nation, well-known figures in the United States have understood the importance of last impressions. They can be important in helping to shape a person's place in the public mind and in history. [voice-over]: That was the goal of General Douglas MacArthur when he offered his theatrical farewell to Congress and the nation.
[Ret. Gen. Douglas Macarthur:] An old soldier never dies. They just fade away.
[Utley:] And so do entertainers. Johnny Carson has chosen not to perform on television since his departure in 1992.
[Johnny Carson:] I bid you a very heartfelt good night.
[Utley:] Carson's ability to see when and how to go was shared by Lyndon Johnson, who understood when it was time to give up not a TV show but the presidency because of the Vietnam war.
[Lyndon Baines Johnson, President Of The United States:] I shall not seek and I will not accept the nomination of my party for another term as your president.
[Utley:] Sometimes public figures may feel the game is over.
[Michael Jordan:] It's time for me to move away from the game of basketball.
[Utley:] But Jordan came back to the game, just as Richard Nixon came back to win the presidency following the bitterness of earlier political defeats.
[Nixon:] You don't have Nixon to kick around anymore. Thank you gentlemen. And good day.
[Utley:] So there have been plenty of examples and lessons for Al Gore on how to handle and not handle defeat. He may be out of a job, but he doesn't want to be out of the public's mind. [on camera]: A hope which cannot be shared by Bill Clinton, for whom no presidential comeback is allowed, which raises a question. [voice-over]: After eight years of prosperity, domestic peace, scandal and impeachment, it'll soon be time for this president to offer his farewell speech to the nation. What will he tell us? Garrick Utley, CNN, New York.
[Blitzer:] And that's it for our election 2000 special report. Thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. Join me tomorrow night and every night at 8:00 PM Eastern, 5:00 Pacific for a special edition of The World Today. The Spin Room is now ready to whirl! Here are Bill Press and Tucker Carlson with a preview.
[Bill Press, Co-host, Cnn "the Spin Room":] All right, Wolf. Thank you. And to mark this special day, Vice President Gore and Governor Bush have personally requested that THE SPIN ROOM be open for an entire hour tonight. We accept.
[Tucker Carlson, Co-host, Cnn "the Spin Room":] And in honor of this emerging bipartisanship, it'll be a full hour of niceness!
[Press:] Oh, no!
[Carlson:] Can you stand it? Find out in two minutes. We'll be back on THE SPIN ROOM.

[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] While politicians and oil producers squabble or possibly because of their squabbling there has been a rally in oil stocks of late, as well as in stocks of oil field service and drilling companies.
[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Oil field services analyst Robin Shoemaker of Bear Stearns is here with us to talk more about this. Welcome to AHEAD OF THE CURVE. And, Robin, this was a sector that really took off yesterday.
[Robin Shoemaker, Bear Stearns:] Yes, the catalyst yesterday was Smith International, which reported that it will, in the first quarter, exceed analyst estimates by a considerable margin. And that sparked some renewed interest in the group because they're now earning money as opposed to talking about it in the future.
[Marchini:] Exactly. And to what extent does that generalize? If one company is going to do well, is it fair to say that the others will also?
[Shoemaker:] Well, I think this was a preview of better earnings to come because this company has its primary business in Canada and the United States where activity has picked up quickly. But the recovery in oil field activity is starting to spread around the globe. Other companies will follow in Smith's path.
[Haffenreffer:] Yes, we did have the price of oil, light sweet crude, in the U.S. yesterday down 35 cents, $27.46 a barrel. Obviously we're down from the above-$30-a-barrel area. What are your expectations for the price of oil, and how will this affect this sector?
[Shoemaker:] Well, we think oil prices will settle in a range of $20 to $25 a barrel within the next six to nine months. And at that level, the oil companies themselves have ample incentive to drill for new oil and gas reserves.
[Marchini:] Question for you: How long do prices have to stay at $20 to $25 a barrel before oil companies are willing to actually make the investment?
[Shoemaker:] Well, they have to stay there, obviously, for several years, but I think we're in the early stages of a three- to five-year upturn in oil and gas drilling worldwide based on the $20 to $25 price. Now, if we go below 20 and we see any evidence that we're going to have a repeat of 1998, then my scenario would not prove to be correct. But I believe that we're on a three- to five-year upturn here, and in the very early stages.
[Haffenreffer:] You expecting any surprises out of the OPEC meeting next Monday?
[Shoemaker:] Well, we don't have a lot of expectations going into it other than they are going to raise production by at least a million barrels a day, and perhaps as much as two million barrels a day. But that increase in production is needed to prevent oil prices from going higher. And when they do increase production, we think the price will slowly come down in a kind of a soft landing between $20 and $25 a barrel.
[Marchini:] This is not exactly an undiscovered sector. I mean, the price of oil has pretty close to tripled in the past year, and oil services companies have responded with the stocks going up. Are there any that still represent reasonable bargains?
[Shoemaker:] Yes, I think that companies like Baker Hughes and Halliburton, which are two of the biggest oil service companies, have lagged a little bit here, and they are two of my top picks in the group right now.
[Haffenreffer:] Smith International already...?
[Shoemaker:] Smith International has done very well. And at this point, I would favor Halliburton and Baker Hughes because they will be reporting the kinds of earnings surprises a few quarters down the line that Smith did yesterday.
[Marchini:] All right. Robin Shoemaker of Bear Stearns, the oil- services analyst, we thank you so much for being with us this morning.
[Shoemaker:] Thank you. Search CNN.com CNNSI.com CNNmoney.com The Web

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] We begin in Israel, where the cabinet voted unanimously Sunday to withdraw its troops from southern Lebanon. Under the plan, Israel would pull out by July, ending nearly two decades of Israeli military presence in the volatile border region. In a statement, the cabinet said, "Israel would prefer to have a peace agreement with Syria before bringing the troops home from Lebanon." But the statement says the withdrawal could take place regardless of whether there is such a deal. Lebanon is welcoming the withdrawal, but is expressing concern the plan may simply be a ploy. We get more reaction now from CNN Beirut bureau chief Brent Sadler.
[Brent Sadler, Cnn Correspondent:] Even as Israel announced the decision to withdraw its troops from South Lebanon within five months, war with the Hezbollah-led Lebanese resistance continued unabated: retaliatory Israeli air raids and artillery bombardments. After decades of occupation in one form or another in Lebanon, Israel, it seems, is ready to cut its loses and retreat to the international border, irrespective of a hoped-for peace with Syria and Lebanon.
[Salim El-hoss, Prime Minister Of Lebanon:] I hope it's genuine and not just a ploy, because we have a long experience with Israeli ploys.
[Sadler:] What hope of completing three-way IsraeliSyrianLebanese peace before any withdrawal?
[El-hoss:] Well, frankly, I'm not very optimistic of the prospects. Time is running short. There is a risk that the whole process might be put off until after the presidential elections in the USA, and in the interim, God knows what will happen affecting the peace prospects.
[Sadler:] The Lebanese themselves are skeptical about the Israeli decision and doubt there'll be no strings attached.
[Unidentified Male:] They will ask for many things before they leave, but we want them to leave without any requests, just to leave.
[Unidentified Female:] They could pressure Syria during this time to have to reactivate the negotiations in the States. But again, you can never tell: They are full of surprises.
[Sadler:] At face value, an Israeli pullout from the south should satisfy the Lebanese. But Arab diplomatic sources suspect the timing of the Israeli decision may be an attempt to put pressure on both Syria and Lebanon into acceptance of a peace deal before July. [voice-over]: If so, Syria previously warned, it won't work, and that any go-it-alone Israeli troop withdrawal from South Lebanon could make efforts to find peace even more complicated than they already are. Brent Sadler, CNN, Beirut.
[Hall:] For more insight into Israel's decision and the possible reasons for it, at least at this point in time, we are joined by Mark Perry in Washington. He's the editor of "The Middle East Review" and author of "A Fire in Zion." It's a book about the Middle East peace process. Mr. Perry, thanks for joining us.
[Mark Perry, Editor, "middle East Review":] My pleasure.
[Hall:] Some diplomats would view this announcement as an olive branch extended by Israel, perhaps with the end result jump starting peace talks. How do you see it?
[Perry:] I think that Israel feels it's a necessity. Prime Minister Barak said during his election campaign and soon after being elected that he would withdraw Israeli troops from South Lebanon. And in fact, Israel has had not much success there in the last 10 years in ensuring the security of the northern border. I I just don't see this as a political ploy.
[Hall:] Well, some you mentioned security, and some Israeli politicians have publicly said that they are concerned about the security of that northern border without an agreement with Syria. You don't see that being the case?
[Perry:] I think that it's clear that the Lebanese army and the Lebanese state has to take control of the Hezbollah militias in South Lebanon in order for there to be a complete peace. But Israel has not gained much security by being in South Lebanon, and it's really gained the criticism of the international community. Just over the last four weeks alone, fighting has increased in southern Lebanon and there's been real loss of life throughout the country, and including Israeli military.
[Hall:] What do you believe are Syria's biggest concerns right now, especially in light of this announcement?
[Perry:] Well, I think that this is not a surprise to Syria. Mr. Barak has made his views known. The Syrians would like to see the peace process between Syria and Israel accelerated, but there is some evidence that that is happening. This really takes a card off the table for the Israelis. They don't have to negotiate over Lebanon if they withdraw from it.
[Hall:] That's true. Israel does say, however, that it's first preference is to carry to pull out the troops with an agreement in place. How much closer does this announcement bring all parties to that possibility?
[Perry:] Well in spite of Mr. Assad's criticism of Israel for prospectively doing this or planning to do this, I think it actually brings a negotiated settlement that much closer. We know and the rumors are rife here in Washington that President Clinton over the last three weeks has taken a very forward role in bringing the Syrians and the Israelis back to the peace table. And we may be a lot closer now in the next three or four months to a peace deal than we've ever been before.
[Hall:] So perhaps this olive branch may be received?
[Perry:] It may be.
[Hall:] Mark Perry, author of "A Fire in Zion" and editor of I want to make sure I get that in there. You may as well say it.
[Perry:] "The Middle East Review."
[Hall:] "The Middle East Review." Thank you very much for joining us.
[Perry:] My pleasure.
[Hall:] OK, appreciate that insight.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] The nation's doctors are not giving their support to the president's plan to reduce deadly hospital errors. But they are supporting a plan to track the errors. CNN medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen is here with more on this vote today.
[Elizabeth Cohen, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] Medical errors are have become a very big problem in this country. A report by the Institute of Medicine says that errors made in hospitals kill as many as 98,000 people a year. So in February, President Clinton proposed a mandatory reporting system. Hospitals would be required to report a mistake that killed someone or caused serious injury. The goal: to cut the number of medical errors in half within five years. And today, the nation's largest organization of doctors failed to say one way or another what they think of Clinton's plan. At its annual House of Delegates meeting, the AMA passed a resolution supporting the advancement of some type of system to track errors, but the group didn't specify whether the system should be voluntary or mandatory. One of the AMA's concern is that some states already have mandatory reporting and it simply hasn't worked because doctors and nurses are scared of the consequences, so they don't report when something goes wrong.
[Dr. Nancy Dickey, American Medical Assn:] The issue is not mandatory or voluntary, the issue may not even be reporting. The issue needs to be: What do we have to change so that the system makes fewer errors? and if data collection is part of that, how do we do collect data in a fashion that enhances the process, rather than diminishes it?
[Cohen:] So Natalie, the bottom line here is that the AMA is very powerful and they didn't do anything today to help President Clinton's proposal go through.
[Allen:] Have they spelled out why they think that doctors shouldn't have to report these mistakes, that it shouldn't be mandatory?
[Cohen:] Yes, what they feel is that in hospitals, errors usually are not the result of one person's mistake. For example, if a surgeon injects someone with wrong medicine and the person dies, you might say: Well, it's the surgeon's fault. Well, the nurse handed the surgeon the syringe, and maybe the nurse grabbed the wrong syringe. But then again, the pharmacist prepared that tray for the nurse, and so maybe the pharmacist mislabeled the syringes. So it's what's called "systems errors" rather than personal errors, in most cases it's a systems error, not a personal error.
[Allen:] All right, so you are patient at the hospital, you're vulnerable, is there anything you can do to assure your safety, that there are no mistakes?
[Cohen:] Right, exactly, because when you're a patient in a hospital, you are really you're just there, they're doing these things to you and you really don't you really often don't know what's going on. So what the AMA suggests is they say: ask questions. Don't be afraid to ask questions and if you're going to be too sick to ask questions, then you need to find someone to come with you who is hopefully very smart and can ask lots of questions too.
[Allen:] Elizabeth Cohen, thanks.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] The Central Intelligence Agency has released some long-classified files on Nazi war criminals. So-called "Name Files" are a who's-who of the infamous, topped by Adolf Hitler himself. CNN national security correspondent David Ensor is joining us from Washington with more David.
[David Ensor, Cnn National Correspondent:] Donna, about 20 of the files have been released today. That's about 18,000 documents. And they make fascinating reading, but I am still in the thick of it. I have just started. Some initial reactions, though, we talked to some historians who have read all of them. For one thing, the documents suggest that the Nazi former intelligence officers, like Klaus Barbie or Emil Augsburg or Wilhelm Heitel that were hired by the U.S. intelligence and other Western intelligence agencies after the war to help against the Soviet KGB were not of much use and were not very reliable. So, the argument is being made by historians and by at least one Justice Department official that it was a mistake to have hired them in the first place.
[Eli Rosenbaum, Justice Department:] These files demonstrate, as a body, that the real winners of the Cold War were Nazi criminals, many of whom were able to escape justice because East and West became so rapidly focused after the war on challenging each other that they lost their will to pursue Nazi perpetrators, and they even deemed some of the criminals to be useful allies in conducting Cold War intelligence operations.
[Ensor:] The documents also shed some light on an enduring mystery of the World War II, which is the disappearance of Heinrich Mueller who was the head of the Gestapo. He had not been seen since Berlin 1945. There have been enduring stories that might have become come to the West, come to Latin America, been an agent for the CIA or for the KGB. This set of files suggests that none of that is true. It shows that the CIA did an extensive investigation to try to figure out if he had gone to Russia, pretty much satisfied itself that he had not, and he had certainly have never come to the West. The assumption is that he probably committed suicide, as did Hitler. Another matter of interest, some of the there is a new light shed on the role of Allen Dullis, who was a key U.S. intelligence officer in Switzerland during the war and became later the head of the CIA, in saving the necks of a couple of key Germans who had helped to negotiate some early surrenders. And finally, some interesting insights into Adolf Hitler himself. A file quoting a German doctor, back in 1937, who knew Hitler well, and who said in his opinion, the Nazi leader was a border case between genius and insanity, and in his opinion, the decision would take place in near future whether Hitler's mind would swing toward the latter. Professor Sauerbruch then said that if so, Hitler would become, quote: "The craziest criminal the world ever saw." And this German doctor also predicted that Hitler's end would come either in an insane asylum or by suicide Donna.
[Kelley:] David Ensor in Washington, thanks very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Paula Zahn, Cnn Anchor:] Now we move on to the latest on the international campaign against terrorism. There have been more arrests in the global dragnet. Joining us for a closer look is CNN's Eileen O'Connor. Good morning, Eileen.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Paula. Well, there were three people arrested in Central England. One of them French authorities say is of North Africa origin, who they say they wanted in connection with an alleged plot against U.S. interests in Europe, including perhaps the U.S. embassy in Paris. Here in the United States, the Justice Department says at least 10 people, including four Iraqis were arrested in three states for trying to fraudulently obtain commercial trucking licensees that would have allowed them to transport hazardous materials. Sources tell CNN the FBI has already begun compiling a list of all companies in the United States that carry such materials, and they are going to be checking the licenses of all their employees. Now, in New York, trucks are being inspected. In other states, routine inspections are being conducted even more carefully. The attorney general says law enforcement is on a heightened state of alert, but the possibility of a future attack, one perhaps using chemicals, not ruled out. So far, the arrests of individuals in Seattle, Detroit and Kansas City arrests for fraudulently trying to obtain licenses have not been tied to any terrorist plot. Now, all the licenses were issued in Pittsburgh beginning in July, 1999. The most recent license was issued in January 2000. According court documents that were filed yesterday, a state examiner was given $50 to $100 for each of those licenses that were granted. Now, those applying did not, authorities say, complete the required courses or they did not have valid licenses Paula.
[Zahn:] All right, thanks so much, Eileen, O'Connor for that update. And in a bid to prevent any possible attacks, including or involving hazardous materials, authorities have, among others things, as Eileen just reported, stepped up cargo inspections. We have correspondents who are following this story very closely. Our own Bill Delaney is at a checkpoint along the U.S.-Canadian border in Vermont, Jason Carroll is at the 59th Street Bridge, also known as the Queensboro Bridge. It connects midtown Manhattan with Queens. And Ed Lavandera is at a truck stop in Texas. First to Bill Delaney at the U.S.-Canadian border. What are you finding there, Bill?
[Bill Delaney, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, thanks, Paula. You know, we are at an outpost called High Gate Springs Vermont, of the long frontier between the United States and Canada, 3,987 miles of frontier, across which $1.5 billion a day of trade comes. The great difficult balance right now, balancing that all-important trade with all-important security. All along this border, we are on a level-one alert, a code red alert. Very involved in all of that, we are fortunate to have with us port director Craig Jehle. Craig, since September 11th, how have your routines here at Height Gate Springs, Vermont changed?
[Craig Jehle, Port Director:] Well, we have increased the level and the intensity of our inspections. We are doing more of what we do, which is to inspect and examine goods and merchandise coming across.
[Delaney:] Eleven thousand trucks a month coming across here, a million passengers cars in Vermont alone coming across each year. Have you narrowed your focus as to what you're looking at, who you are looking at?
[Jehle:] Well, we are pretty much doing a hundred percent inspection, so we are talking to, and inspecting and checking IDs of pretty much everyone who comes through, and we're looking at most of the trucks. We haven't, per se, narrowed our focus. We are clearly looking more at security than perhaps we are on the commercial end, to see if there are any more weapons or persons we're concern about from that regard.
[Delaney:] In the first few days after September 11th, there were waits as long as 12 hours to get across this border. Now truck drivers are telling us, waits are fairly routine, 15 minutes to half hour. How did you get there?
[Jehle:] Well, at this station we never quite had the 12-hour delays. We did have some delays. We have increased the hours that we're working, increased the staff, and some of it is just settling down. We had a large pulse of traffic right afterwards, and now, we're back to our normal routines.
[Delaney:] Craig Jehle, port director at High Gate Springs, Vermont. One thing customs officials tell us, tremendous cooperation, both from truck drivers and passengers, Paula, unbelievable, customs officials tells us, the cooperation they have had since September 11. Back to you, Paula.
[Zahn:] All right, thanks so much, Bill. We're going to travel south to Texas, where Ed Lavandera stands by. Ed, what kind of reaction to truckers to these new searches from there?
[Ed Lavandera, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Paula, throughout the morning, the sense that I'm getting is that truck drivers are waiting for all of that to kind of make its way down to this part of the country. We are at Flying J's truck stop along Interstate 20, south of Dallas, Fort Worth. Thousands of trucks make their way through this part of the country everyday. It takes you from West Texas all the way out to eastern southern states. And joining us now is one of the drivers who makes it through this part a lot, Darrell Overbey. Darrell drives a lot between Chicago and Dallas. Darrell, the ideas the inspections will not stepped up, are you seeing that, and do you think it will benefit the situation in this country?
[Darrell Overbey, Truck Driver:] I've noticed the scales have been open more often than they usually are. As far as really making anything more secure, I don't know that they can. It's just too many trucks, and you know, short of putting an armed guard in each one, what are you really going to do?
[Lavandera:] Should people worry about what is carried in these trucks. We see hundreds here this morning. Are you worried about what's driving alongside next to you along the road?
[Overbey:] Honestly, I worry more about the people in cars that don't know how to drive than I do about what's going to happen with a truck. Yes, something could happen. We saw it with you know, we didn't expect planes to fall out of the sky and hit buildings, so It could happen. But I don't know that I'm worried about it.
[Lavandera:] If the inspections become very tedious and in high numbers, this country depends a lot on what happens along these roads, doesn't it?
[Overbey:] Everything you have, except the air you breath, is moved by truck at one point or another. If you really tried to make it secure by inspecting that much, you'd bring everything to a halt. So I don't I know they will have to do more inspections just because everybody is nervous about it. But I really don't know what good it will do.
[Lavandera:] Darrell Overbey, thank you very much. Good luck to you on the road. And as Darrell was saying, a lot of ramifications, so much merchandise and goods are moved along the roads in this country. And as one driver pointed out to me earlier this morning, he was driving from Maryland to Houston, and he said that the inspections he has come across in the last few weeks seem to be a little bit more intense in the East Coast, and it's actually kind of lessened as he's moved westward. Paula, back to you.
[Zahn:] Ed, what kind of impact does this have on trucks coming in from Mexico.
[Lavandera:] A lot of, you know, folks who drive the routes from South Texas to Loredos into the border cities, they're accustomed to long lines and a lot of delays along the borders. It is something they are used to. The drivers I have spoken there of this morning, only one of them has come from the Loredos area, and he said, it was pretty standard. The Department of Public Safety, that does a lot of the checks on the inspections here in Texas say it is just business as usual, so I think here in Texas, and perhaps as we move a little more westward, these inspections and the intensity to this is just now perhaps staring to pick up.
[Zahn:] All right, Ed, thanks to much for that report. Let's check in now with Jason Carroll who continues to stand by at what is called the Queensboro Bridge. How are truckers and commuters behaving this morning, Jason?
[Jason Carroll, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, so far, Paula, everyone seems to be cooperating. But I have to tell you, it's a much different story out here today than what we saw out here yesterday. We talked yesterday. I know you saw it. Nearly every truck that was out here was stopped and searched by police officers. I want you to take a look behind me right now at the same site where we were yesterday, but it's a much different story, as I said. Nearly every truck that we've seen out here this morning, Paula, has been passed through without being searched by officers out here. I asked one officer, why the change, why the difference today, as opposed to yesterday? He told me that the officers out here today are using a different strategy, a more specific approach, if you will. That officer telling me the criteria they are using is much more narrow focused. He said he received a list of things to look for. For example, now they will only be stopping certain types of trucks or vehicles. Only those types of trucks or vehicles will be searched. When I asked him to elaborate a little further, he said the rest was classified. I did get an opportunity it call the New York City Police Department to see if they could clarify and find out how the search had changed. They said they were looking into it, but right now, they couldn't give me any further information about that. I can tell you, though, Paula, that security here is still very tight. Every truck that comes through this check point is eyed by at least several officers. But again, it's just a different approach in terms of who gets stopped and who gets searched Paula.
[Zahn:] As soon as have you that information, we will come back to you live. Jason Carroll, thanks so much for your insights this morning. Bill Delaney, once again, who joined us from along the U.S.-Canadian border, and Ed Lavandera, who is way down south in Texas, thank you all, gentlemen, appreciate your reports. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Willow Bay, Cnn Anchor:] Gas prices head higher, and summer hasn't even begun. This is MONEYLINE for May 7, 2001. Americans are paying more to gas up than ever before. Will it be another blow to consumer confidence? What, if anything, can Washington do to help? Downsizing, direct from Dell. The PC maker is laying off thousands more. Just months ago, she was honored as corporate America's second- most powerful woman. Now Debby Hopkins is out of her job as Lucent's CFO. And a story we broke here on MONEYLINE becomes official: Apple Computer going retail.
[Announcer:] This is MONEYLINE. Reporting tonight from New York, Willow Bay.
[Bay:] Hello, everyone, and welcome to MONEYLINE. We begin tonight with bombshell news for thousands of workers at Dell Computer. The Texas PC giant, struggling with slumping sales, said after the bell it would slash thousands of additional workers, as many as 4,000, over the next two quarters. Checking the late reaction, Dell shares up 64 cents in after-hours trading, still down more than 50 percent from its 52-week high. Peter Viles reports.
[Peter Viles, Cnn Correspondent:] Just four days after an executive reportedly vowed Dell would be quote "ruthless" in managing costs, the company announced a second round of deep job cuts. In a press release after the closing bell, Dell said it will cut 3,000 to 4,000 jobs over the next two quarters. The cuts will come primarily in central Texas, and warned it will require most salaried workers to take unpaid time off this spring. Wall Street had been expecting a second round of cuts, particularly after Dell confirmed in late April it had slashed prices by 20 percent on some desktop models.
[Bruce Upbin, "forbes":] My heart goes out to the people at Dell who are losing their jobs, but I think it's just going to be even more painful for Compaq and Gateway, because Dell's clearly doing this so that they can cut prices aggressively.
[Viles:] Dell in February announced 1,700 job cuts, also mainly in Texas. The two waves of layoffs could add up to 5,700 jobs: That's 26 percent of Dell's work force in the United States.
[Robert Walberg, Briefing.com:] You're probably going to see additional announcements of jobs cuts from other PC makers like Compaq and Hewlett Packard going forward. So I think this is an indication that we're still seeing the industry slowing down. It hasn't bottom quite yet.
[Viles:] In announcing the job cuts, Dell said it will meet previous first-quarter former guidance of 8 billion dollars in revenue. That's a drop of 8 percent from fourth-quarter revenue, but it means Dell is outperforming its rivals; Gateway, which suffered a 14.4 percent revenue drop; and Compaq, which saw revenues slip 20 percent. And Dell shares have been quietly rallying. Since bottoming at 16 and change in December, Dell shares have gained 55 percent. So one message from these layoffs is that Dell is bracing for an all-out price war. And analysts say that price war could last all the way into the holiday selling season 7 months from now.
[Bay:] So, Pete, these job cuts qualify as ruthless?
[Viles:] Certainly ruthless in the computer industry. Dell has always been known as being aggressive in containing cost, but it hadn't come to job cuts until this year.
[Bay:] Pete, thanks. In addition to growing layoffs, another threat to American consumers stems from the surge in gas prices. Millions of Americans face sticker shock at the pump as retail gasoline is rising along with the temperature. Lisa Leiter has the story from the city paying the steepest price of all: Chicago.
[Lisa Leiter, Cnn Correspondent:] A gallon of gas has never cost this much. The average retail price over the past two weeks spiked more than 8 cents to $1.76 a gallon, an all-time high not adjusted for inflation. And here in Chicago, a gallon of regular gas is well above the national average, costing more than $2.
[Unidentified Male:] If it gets any higher I'm going to sell this truck.
[Leiter:] No doubt SUV owners are the hardest hit. It cost this man $80 to fill up his Chevy suburban.
[Unidentified Male:] I don't have a choice. I need a large vehicle for work.
[Leiter:] Prices are so high because it costs more to produce the cleaner-burning gas required in the summer months. Also, refineries are having trouble catching up with demand. They got a late start with summer gasoline production because they spent all winter making enough heating oil to avoid a shortage.
[Phil Flynn, Alaron:] The big problem is, is that we still have a refinery capacity problem in this country.
[Leiter:] Low capacity means even higher prices as the peak-demand summer driving season approaches. But not all analysts see gas prices reaching $3 a gallon, as many have predicted.
[Michael Rothman, Merril Lynch:] The prospects of seeing another dollar increase in gasoline prices would really probably have to stem from major refinery catastrophes and a dramatic loss of capacity.
[Leiter:] And already there are some signs prices may actually drop, an unexpected jump in gasoline stockpiles and imports. [on camera]: Record gas prices have put an even bigger spotlight on consumers, whose confidence is already damaged from rising layoffs. The question is whether consumers will pull back on spending overall if they're paying more to fill up at the pumps. Lisa Leiter, CNN Financial news, Chicago.
[Bay:] This rise in gas prices has raised eyebrows at the White House. For the latest we got to senior White House correspondent, John King John?
[John King, Cnn Correspondent:] Raised eyebrows, Willow, but this administration saying there's not much a president or any politicians can do: no magic wand, no quick fixes. The administration saying it is concerned about rising gas prices because, in the view of the White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, they are tantamount to a tax increase on the American people. But this president, once again, saying today as he said as a candidate for president, that he would not be in favor of a temporary cut in the federal gas tax. And we asked a question about what about the moral authority of a president? Should this president stand up and say urge Americans to go online less, to conserve electricity, or stop driving those big gas guzzling sport utility vehicles? Here's the White House response.
[Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary:] The president believes that it's an American way of life, and that it should be the goal of policy-makers to protect the American way of life. The American way of life is a blessed one, and we have a bounty of resources in this country. What we need to do is make certain that we're able to get those resources in an efficient way in a way that also emphasizes protecting the environment and conservation into the hands of consumers so they can make the choices that they want to make as they live their lives day-to-day.
[King:] So the administration believing no short-term solution to rising gas prices. There will be a political debate about this for sure, many people saying the president should do more. The White House view is that this president will spend his time and his political capital talking about long-time solutions. The administration's plan quite controversial due out next week Willow?
[Bay:] So John, is the president absolutely, positively ruling out a cut in the gas tax?
[King:] A little wiggle room added to the White House today, and here's why, Willow. CNN is told that administration officials know much of their plan will be a tough sell on Capitol Hill. Just like the tax cut plan was changed to win over some votes, they don't rule out that perhaps to get the energy plan through Capitol Hill they might have to agree, say, to a one-year suspension of, say, four or five cents of the federal gasoline tax. If that is the price it takes to get the rest of the president's energy plan through, the White House would be open to that.
[Bay:] OK, John, thank you. And we should point out that John King will be talking to Vice President Dick Cheney tomorrow, and we look forward to bringing you that interview. As policy makers and consumers focus on the rising cost of energy, investors are keeping their eyes on the industry wheelers and dealers. Today, refining giant Valero energy, offering $4 billion in cash and stock, plus $2 billion in debt for rival Ultramar Diamond Shamrock. The combined company will be second only to ExxonMobil in refining capacity. And Williams company is paying $2.5 billion in cash and stock, or about $73 a share, for Barrett Resources. That trumps a hostile bid from Royal Dutch Shell. And Shell says it will not raise its $60- dollar a share offer. Barrett is relatively small, but its highly coveted stockpile of reserves will vault Williams into the top 10 U.S. natural gas companies. Williams fell nearly 2 12 on the news, Barrett jumped almost 34. Ultramar gained nearly 8. But overall it was a go-nowhere session on Wall Street. Up next we'll look at why. Why stocks failed to build on Friday's big gains. We'll go live to the big board and we'll go to the Nasdaq. Plus, the CFO shuffle at Lucent, a big blow to one of corporate America's most powerful women, Debbie Hopkins. And the treasury secretary says the Bush tax plan is a boon to small business. But is the White House using fuzzy math?

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] We begin with the haunting case of a Halloween killing more than a quarter century ago. The suspect goes to court and the Kennedy name faces new trials and tribulations. Arraignment is due to begin any minute in the case of Michael Skakel. He is a nephew of Robert and Ethel Kennedy. This case has drawn attention not only for who he is, but how he got to this day in court. The 40-year-old Skakel is appealing the ruling that he must be tried as an adult. His lawyers say that he should be charged as a juvenile because that is what he was. He was 15 at the time of Martha Moxley's death when they were neighbors in Greenwich, Connecticut. CNN's Deborah Feyerick now with the latest from Stamford, Connecticut.
[Deborah Feyerick, Cnn Correspondent:] Michael Skakel will be in court to be arraigned for murder, this time as an adult. He is not expected to enter a plea. His lawyers are appealing a judge's ruling which has now moved this trial from juvenile court to adult court. Now, usually during an appeal, all court proceeding are suspended. But the judge met with all sides yesterday and decided to go ahead with this arraignment today. Now, Skakel will also be asked whether he wants another probable cause hearing. That is a hearing very similar to the one we had over the summer when witnesses testified both for and against Michael Skakel. The purpose of that is so that Skakel's lawyers can try to convince the judge that this case doesn't deserve to go to trial because there's not enough evidence. The judge in the juvenile court did not buy that, so it will be interesting to see whether, in fact, that changes here in adult court. Now, prosecutors are asking that this trial be moved out of Stamford, Connecticut to Bridgeport, Connecticut, which is about 25 minutes from here. The reason is that Bridgeport is where the prosecutors offices are. But it's also where major crimes were tried back in 1975. However, Michael Skakel's defense attorney says this is where the crime took place, in Greenwich, Connecticut, this is the jurisdiction, and this is where the trial should be held. In Stamford, Connecticut, Deborah Feyerick, CNN.
[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Deb, thank you very much. Now let's get some legal perspective on this case, turning to our legal analyst Roger Cossack, who is in Washington. Roger, good morning.
[Roger Cossack, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Good morning, Daryn.
[Kagan:] This is an odd case on so many fronts. First of all...
[Cossack:] Yes.
[Kagan:] ... and forgetting the whole Kennedy connection, let's go to the idea, is this 40-year-old man an adult?
[Cossack:] Well, the courts in Connecticut so far have said he is, and one would think that he is an adult at 40 years old. As you know, that's the issue here. This crime was committed when he was 15 years old. The argument from the defense is, therefore, you have to try him as if he was a juvenile. A court has already heard this and made the decision that, no, he must be tried as an adult for various reasons, one of which is there is no juvenile facility to hold him, he has to be tried as an adult. And Mr. Skakel has...
[Kagan:] Interesting twist there, Roger.
[Cossack:] ... said they're going to take it right up on appeal.
[Kagan:] Roger, interesting twist there with the judge saying, well, if you convict him as a juvenile, we have no place to put him.
[Cossack:] That's right. It's almost putting the cart before the horse because, you know, we always talk about...
[Kagan:] Innocent until proven guilty.
[Cossack:] Innocent until proven guilty. But in this case, this is one of those things where the blocks don't quite fit no matter how you want to turn them in and put them inside the puzzle. And so it's now been set that he's going to be tried as an adult, and that's why there's a different jurisdiction. That's why they could have this probable cause hearing in juvenile and now have it again in adult court.
[Kagan:] But aren't there some who suggest, Roger, that he could actually benefit by being tried as adult because he would go before a jury rather than a judge?
[Cossack:] Greta Van Susteren happens to be one of those people who believes that. And there is that argument. "Tried as an adult" means that he will have a jury of 12 which must agree unanimously to convict or acquit. But of course there's always that hung jury aspect that you don't get. As you point out, as a juvenile, there is no jury and there would be just a judge who would listen to the facts and make the decision. So some would argue that he's better off, although the penalties that he would be facing are much more severe.
[Kagan:] Compare those for us, please.
[Cossack:] Well, in juvenile court, you know, you would him, I suppose, until see, it's really unclear because when a juvenile is juvenile, you hold him until he becomes an adult and then decisions are made. In this case, the man's already 40 years old. And that was one of the arguments: There is no place to put him. And, of course, if he is found guilty of first-degree murder, he could get life without possibility of parole. Now, there's a long ways to go before this man is convicted of anything, and we haven't yet heard all of the evidence. And there is some questions about what some of the evidence will be. But nevertheless, this is a very strange case.
[Kagan:] No cameras in the courtroom, but we will be following the case closely. Roger, thank you so much.
[Cossack:] My pleasure.
[Kagan:] Roger Cossack in Washington, we'll see you on "BURDEN OF PROOF."

[Michael Holmes, World News:] It has been 25 years since the United States pulled its troops out of Vietnam. Today, vivid photographs bring the horrors and lessons of war to a new generation. Some who captured those images went back to Vietnam. CNN's senior international correspondent Richard Blystone has their story.
[Richard Blystone, Cnn Correspondent:] Heavy fighting on Highway 1, June 8, 1972, just the kind of day when accidents will happen. Frozen on Nik Ut's electronic contact sheet, a South Vietnamese skyraider. A napalm canister tumbles earthward. The rest is beyond words.
[Huynh Cong "nik" Ut, Photographer:] And I hear somebody say, "Too hot, too hot," and I look that way black smoke.
[Blystone:] This day, Nik Ut revisits Trang Bang. With him, a handful of legends of the Vietnam press corps combat photographer Dang Van Phuoc, who paid for his daring with an eye got a glass one, and went back to the field; two time Pulitzer Prize winner Horst Faas, then-AP photo chief in Saigon.
[Horst Faas, Ex-ap Saigon Photo Chief:] When I looked at the film for the first time, I knew that was one of the great pictures of the war.
[Richard Pyle, Ex-ap Saigon Bureau Chief:] Horst walked out of the darkroom at one point, and he held the film up like this, and said, "We have got another Pulitzer Prize."
[Blystone:] This was the picture. It continues to define the war for generations born after it ended.
[Faas:] The picture moved. We were lucky to get it across the shaky radio waves.
[Blystone:] It moved the world. And it won a Pulitzer prize for the 21-year-old who had stepped into the boots of his older brother, Huynh Thanh My, after he was killed covering the war. In 1972, the Fon children had been hiding in this Cowdhyde. A bomb scared them out just in time to be hit the napalm. It killed two of them. That's Fon Thanh Tung. He was 12. Today, just a small burn scar around one eye, he runs a roadside cafe a few yards from where the firebomb hit. His sister Kim Fuh was 9 and terribly burned.
[Ut:] Then after I took a picture of Kim running, I just left my camera on highway, so I don't want she die.
[Blystone:] He took her to a hospital and has looked after her ever since. Fan Thi Kim Fuh lives in Canada now. She's been made a United Nations goodwill ambassador and has children of her own. They all keep in touch with Uncle Nik. [on camera]: But there are thousands of other victims of the war's accidents, most of them condemned to live out their tragedies in obscurity. Duc is in tenth grade and does well. His separated Siamese twin Vyet does nothing. They come from an area sprayed from the air with agent orange to clear the jungle. Their mother was found to have the poison dioxin in her blood. It was wasn't intended to poison people, but study after study has linked it with birth defects, cancer, diabetes. U.S. quit using dioxin and has quit using napalm.
[Ut:] You know, napalm is a terrible, sort of burning, you know, the children. You could see the Vietnam War how many people died by napalm. A lot, many.
[Blystone:] Many people witnessed the blind brutality of war. Not many can think that they might have made a difference. Richard Blystone, CNN, Trang Bang, Vietnam.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] New York, a new tragedy at least 265 people are killed when a plane crashes in Queens. So far, there is no indication it was an act of terrorism.
[Unidentified Witness:] My guess, I guess, you know, until I know differently, my initial reaction was that it was the terrorists and it was another one. We were so close to the World Trade Center. We've lost probably about 95 people here on the peninsula, about 77 that were firefighters. So we've been mourning for the past two months and then to have this, it was the first thing that came to my mind.
[Harris:] And overseas, Kabul clears out. The Taliban forces leave the Afghan capital, but no one says it's over just yet.
[Unidentified Male:] Well, we should remember that the strategic objective is the destruction of bin Laden, the network of bin Laden in the country and the Taliban government that supported him. So if he's headed west, that's where we're headed as well.
[Harris:] Good morning. It is Tuesday, November 13. And from the CNN Center in Atlanta, I'm Leon Harris.
[Phillips:] And I'm Kyra Phillips. Thanks so much for joining us.
[Harris:] It's one of those days, we've got lots of things to cover this morning. It's one of those days we've got two major news stories of significance to report. Overseas, the Northern Alliance has surrounded the capital city of Kabul as the Taliban forces inside there begin to pull out.
[Phillips:] And in New York and in the Dominican Republic, hundreds of families are devastated by the crash of an American Airlines jet. We begin with the latest developments in that story. Investigators say so far all indications are that yesterday's crash in New York was an accident. The crash and fire killed at least 265 people. The voice recorder from Flight 587 is being analyzed by investigators right now in Washington. The NTSB says all communications from the cockpit were normal before the crash. The plane's flight data recorder has not yet been found. Flight 587 was headed for the Dominican Republic when it crashed and friends and relatives crowded in that airport in Santo Domingo and grieved openly when news came that there were no survivors. President Bush is expressing his sympathy following the crash. He says the people of New York have suffered, but they are strong enough to overcome this tragedy.
[Harris:] You know, in the first moments, first hours that followed the crash, it was almost impossible not to wonder if this was the work of terrorists once again. There were just so few details at the time. Well, that is not the case this morning. Here's what we know now. As of late last night, rescue workers had recovered 265 bodies. There were 260 people aboard Flight 587 but keep in mind that people on the ground were apparently killed, as well. The mayor's office tells us at least six people are missing from the ground. It was an Air Bus 8300 that crashed. The most recent model went into service 15 years ago. This air bus took off from Kennedy Airport at 9:14 a.m. Eastern time. It was 74 minutes late. It was bound for Santo Domingo, but it disappeared from radar only three minutes after takeoff. CNN's Kathleen Koch picks up the story from there.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] After examining wreckage and the cockpit voice recorder, investigators say the evidence points in one direction.
[Unidentified Female:] Some of the early indications we have all point in the direction of this being an accident. No evidence of criminal activity. I think one of the key things, Lisa, that you might bear in mind is that there are only the voices on the cockpit voice recorder of the pilot and co-pilot.
[Koch:] The NTSB says the co-pilot was at the controls, a normal practice, as the plane took off at 9:14 a.m. There was no distress call and less than two minutes later, debris began raining down.
[Unidentified Witness:] I see like the wing and the engine separate from the plane. It tilt to the left and then it nose dived. The left engine coming away from the plane.
[Unidentified Reporter:] You actually saw it separate?
[Unidentified Witness:] Yes, I saw it coming away from the plane and I saw a lot of debris coming from behind it.
[Koch:] The plane's vertical stabilizer was found in Jamaica Bay, large engine parts at a Texaco gas station and further away, more engine parts near a family's home, part of the main debris field covering a 10 block area. A Transportation Department official tells CNN investigators are now focusing on a "catastrophic engine event" as a likely cause of the crash, though investigators say aircraft can fly even if an engine drops off or comes apart.
[Jim Hall, Former Ntsb Chairman:] The aircraft, of course, is designed to perform even during the takeoff sequence only on one engine. If there was an explosion that took the systems of the aircraft out, you know, that obviously could have prevented the performance of either engine.
[Koch:] Catastrophic failures of similar engines have been implicated in previous fatal airline accidents. The American Airlines Air Bus 8300 was 13 years old and had one engine that was coming due for a major overhaul. Aviation experts say investigators will carefully scrutinize its maintenance history. Both the FAA and the NTSB had warned airlines that cracks in the same make of engine could cause them to break apart and lead to a plane crash.
[Marion Blakey, Ntsb Chairman:] They will go back through every maintenance procedure that was done on this aircraft, on these engines, to see that every recommendation that every air worthiness directive, that every procedure that should have been done on these engines was done.
[Koch:] There's no word on whether American Airlines or other air carriers have begun checking the other Air Bus 8300s in their fleets for potential problems. Kathleen Koch, CNN, Washington.
[Phillips:] The plane that crashed was an 8300 Air Bus. That type of plane has been involved in at least six fatal crashes in the last 13 years. The most recent crash was in February of 1998 in Taipei, Taiwan. 8300s have also crashed in Indonesia, Japan, Nepal and Iran. The 8300 first went into service in 1974. It's a wide bodied jet built in Europe and it can carry 266 people.
[Harris:] Well, as word of this crash made it to Santo Domingo, about 200 family, friends and relatives got together and paced away the hours in an area set aside from them at the Los Americas International Airport. And CNN's John Zarrella has what happened next with that.
[John Zarrella, Cnn Correspondent:] The families of the victims who had gathered here at the International Airport throughout the day had all gone home by nightfall. President Mejia has declared the next three days, days of mourning. Flags will be at half staff. A United Airlines team of specialists arrived late this evening, specialists who deal with the trauma faced by the families of these victims. They are here for grief counseling and whatever other services they can lend to the people. The process now, according to government officials, is that a team of government officials will travel to New York City to try and handle some of the, what is going on on that end in the United States. Then there will be the process of returning the bodies, the 175 plus bodies back here to the Dominican Republic. That is said to be the next order of business, to work out the logistics for that to be arranged so that all of the family members' bodies can be returned here to the Dominican Republic. It is a very difficult time here. It is really a national tragedy. So many people have lost their lives and so many people's relatives here in the Dominican Republic now grieving. John Zarrella, CNN, Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic.
[Harris:] Now, if you fear that someone in your family may have been on American Airlines Flight 587, there are a couple of ways that you can get some more information. The airline has set up this 800 number for you, 1-800-245-0999. Now, that number is for family members only. So please bear in mind it's only for the victims' families here. Now, if you're not a family member, try this one. Pull up American Airlines' Web site. It's amrcorp.com. There you'll find a partial list of passengers and crew members that were on the plane. Now, the eyewitness accounts of what happened are stories that you'll never forget. Log onto cnn.com. There you're going to find some sights and sounds from the crash scene with complete coverage of the Flight 587 story. For AOL users, the keyword there, of course, is
[Cnn. Phillips:] Well, we're going to update you on the latest from the many fronts in the war against the Taliban in just a minute, after a break, how the Northern Alliance closed in on Kabul and what the Taliban's next move might be.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Many of us will enter the millennium with a promise to eat healthfully. To do that, the advice we hear most often is follow a low-fat diet. But our guests say you may want to reach back a few millennia instead and adopt the eating habits of our ancient ancestors. Doctors Mike and Mary Eades are authors of "The Protein Power Lifeplan." And these medical doctors join us today from our Detroit bureau. Welcome. What is "The Protein Power Lifeplan"?
[Dr. Mary Dan Eades, Co-author, "the Protein Power Lifeplan":] Well, I think that's the way of eating for this new millennium. It's based really on what we were designed to eat as humans. You know, we have been recognizable as humans on this planet for several million years, and when you look at what humans had available to eat, it was basically meat, roots, fruits, nuts, berries, and not the kind of things that the low-fat diet would have you eat. So we try to get back to that.
[Waters:] The low-fat, the diets, we have been promoting those, have we not, for years now? Eat less fat and yet we have more obesity than ever before in our history?
[Dr. Michael R. Eades, Co-author, "the Protein Power Lifeplan":] Yes, absolutely. I mean, it's pretty much been proven that the low- fat diet has been a dismal failure. I mean, for the last 20 or 25 years people in this country have been exhorted to cut the fat in their diets and increase the carbohydrates in their diets. And if it's true that low-fat diets were good for us, then we would have seen obesity improving and diabetes improving and all these other diseases associated with fat in the diet. But not only have we not seen an improvement, we've seen just the opposite. Diabetes, for example, is up by almost a factor of 12. Obesity has doubled in just the last decade along. So clearly, the low-fat diet has not lived up to its billing. And when you go back to what we were designed to eat by 2.6-7 million years of evolutionary pressure, and you put people in those kinds of dietary programs that contain a little bit more meat, more fresh fruits and vegetables, you find that their blood pressure goes down, they're less prone to heart disease, their diabetes improves or goes away, and they lose weight quickly, and they're not hungry and they feel good.
[Waters:] I've got one of the people on our staff here, apparently has some personal experience on this about protein being risky for diabetics. What is your experience with that?
[Michael R. Eades:] Absolutely not true. It's not risky for diabetics at all. Diabetics sometimes have problems with their kidneys. They have problems with kidney function. That's usually brought on by the elevated sugar in their blood. But the protein doesn't cause the problems. And most people need to eat the right amount of protein. They don't need to eat too little. They don't want to eat too little. They need to eat the right amount, which is exactly what we prescribe.
[Waters:] You talk about our ancient ancestors and the way they ate, but they didn't have the processed foods we have today, which we many of us rely on, and you're telling us that they're all bad for you.
[Mary Dan Eades:] Virtually anything that's processed is not good for you. If we could tell people one thing, I think, going into the new millennium, it would be eat more at home: Eat your own food that you fix and try to not eat anything that's processed simply because of the things that are in it: the chemicals, the transfats, the incredible sugar.
[Waters:] Well, how do you how do you get around that? Even if you cook at home, if you go to the supermarket, you're going to get fruits and vegetables even that have been treated with pesticides.
[Mary Dan Eades:] Well, you know, you can organic and that's helpful. But by processed what we mean is foods that are treated with chemicals in the processing of the food and that are packaged. They usually have all kinds of chemicals as preservatives added to them, and they also usually have fillers: corn starches and wheat and things like that, that humans never had before the dawn of agriculture.
[Waters:] I can hear folks saying now as they peruse the diet book sections of their favorite bookstore, oh, here comes another one. How are we to believe how are we to believe this one this time?
[Michael R. Eades:] Well, it's not so much this one this time. I mean, if you go back to the dawn of man, this is the way people have been eating for 2.6, 2.7 million years. This high carbohydrate diet, low-fat diet is really the fad diet. I mean, it's just been around for the last few decades basically, but even agriculture itself has only been around for 8,000 or 10,000 years, which is not only a blink of an eye in evolutionary time. And we haven't had a chance to adapt to that. We haven't had time physically to adapt to that kind of a diet. And as all anthropologists know, when you look at the anthropological evidence, what you find is that when man converted from basically a hunting-gathering existence to an agricultural existence that relied primarily on grains, his health cratered. Stature declined when that happened. Infant mortality went up. Bone health decreased. Bone density decreased. All kinds of bad things happened, and that's all clear from the anthropological data. So if anything is a fad diet, it's the low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet. And a higher protein, a protein-rich diet with lots of fresh fruits and vegetables is basically what we've cut our teeth on as humans.
[Waters:] OK. I'm going to try that tonight. Doctors Mike and Mary Eades, authors of the new "Protein Power Lifeplan" book. Thanks so much. Happy New Year to you both.
[Mary Dan Eades:] Thank you, and to you.
[Michael R. Eades:] Same to you.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Voters in the former republic Soviet republic of Georgia have given President Eduard Shevardnadze a second term in office by a landslide. With 61 percent of the ballots tallied, Shevardnadze has 80 percent of the vote. CNN's Mike Hanna takes a look now at the election and its significance.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] Apathy is the greatest threat to Georgia's young democracy, but organizers are confident that a final poll of well over 50 percent will be achieved thus insuring that the election is constitutionally valid. [on camera]: Despite the poor performance of his government in the past, many still respect Shevardnadze as the architect of an independent Georgia, and on this day in particular there are strong memories of the struggle for democracy. [voice-over]: The flowers placed outside Tbilisi's parliament in memory of those who died on April 9, 1989. It was exactly 11 years ago that dozens were killed in a Soviet crackdown on Georgian nationalists. This was just the beginning in a tumultuous sequence of events that led to the establishment of a sovereign Georgian republic. After the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991, the eruption of a bitter civil war in Georgia, as the opposing nationalist groups battled for control. Thousands of refugees fled in panic, and the deaths continued in secessionist conflicts in other parts of Georgia, in south Ossetia, which is still only partially under Georgian control, and in Abkhazia in the west, where after months of vicious fighting the Georgian troops withdrew and separatists unilaterally declared independence. Throughout this period, Eduard Shevardnadze remained in control, eventually bringing about a tenuous peace and stability. He says now his work is not over.
[Pres. Eduard Shevardnadze, Georgia:] The program that I am proposing to the people will complete the construction of the Georgian state and bring to the country a better life for every citizen.
[Hanna:] Words that may not easily pierce the veil of cynicism in a society still to experience any real benefit of democracy. But the hundreds of thousands of votes cast in these elections, a signal that many of the republic's people still live in hope. Mike Hanna, CNN, Tbilisi, Georgia.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] If you're traveling, you're paying higher gas prices. People are looking at the big energy picture for the summer as they think about their plans. Well, obviously, what's at stake now in this power shift on Capitol Hill is what's going to happen to President Bush's long-range energy plan and the power shift there. So joining us this morning is Senator Craig Thomas of Wyoming. He is the senior senator from that state. And he is also a member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Good morning, Senator.
[Sen. Craig Thomas , Wyoming:] Good morning.
[Lin:] Well, I imagine you were in this two-hour caucus meeting yesterday with moderate and conservative Republicans. It was described to me as a frank and open discussion, which I think is a code word for possibly that all hell broke loose.
[Thomas:] Well, no. I think there was real self-examination of the party. You know, how do you take 50 people, each of whom has their own ideas, 45 of them have pretty much consensus on the point of view. Some others do not. How do you put that together and recognize everyone? We reviewed that. And I think we can probably do a better job than we've done in the past.
[Lin:] Well, how do you do that when it comes to the energy policy of the country, when the Democrats and the Republicans have already had open debate over more conservation vs. more oil drilling?
[Thomas:] Well, you know, part of that's been a political thing. When it comes right down to dealing with the issue, we have to have more energy, we have to have more production, we have to have more available at a lower price to everyone in this country. At the same time, you have to be conscious of conservation and of the environment. And you can do these things. We've had some outside pressures that try to build the notion that if you drill or explore on public lands, you ruin it. That's not the case. You can have multiple use. And we'll again find some middle ground and move forward, I'm sure.
[Lin:] Well, where is the middle ground on an issue that is very close to your home state? I was surprised to learn that half of your state is actually owned by the federal government half of the state...
[Thomas:] Right.
[Lin:] ... of Wyoming is federal land. You are for more, what's been called multiple use of federal lands, which may include oil drilling, if I'm not mistaken. So how does that sentiment pass through this committee, then?
[Thomas:] Well, I think, first of all, you have to understand that out of that 50 percent, there are several different kinds of public lands. There's national parks. There's wilderness. Those things are not going to be used for multiple use. There are special uses. We will not have oil wells on those. On the other hand, much of it, the majority of it is BLM-managed lands. And it is for multiple use. So we have to find a way and we have a way where you can explore and produce without doing lasting damage to the land. So you can have hunting. You can have fishing. You can have hiking. And you can have production of coal and minerals at the same time. We've shown that you can do this.
[Lin:] So what is the committee both Democrats and the Republicans on the Energy Committee what's going to come out of the committee? What's going to survive of Bush's energy plan?
[Thomas:] Well, as you know, the administration, Dick Cheney and President Bush have a plan. So does our chairman, who's now our chairman, Frank Murkowski. And the incoming chairman, Jeff Bingaman, also has a bill. So there are three points of view out there. The administration and the Murkowski plan are fairly close. And, frankly, Jeff Bingaman's isn't that far away. We're going to have to put a little more emphasis on the environment, a little more emphasis on conservation, perhaps a little more emphasis on renewables. But the fact is, the basic thrust is going to be to improve some production and generation so that we can meet the needs of the American people.
[Lin:] Well, now the emphasis in Washington seems to be changed. Do you still have confidence in Republican leader, Senator Trent Lott?
[Thomas:] Oh, yes, I do. And we're going to go forward. Look, the vote now is 50-49 and one. So you can see how close they've been in the past. The big difference is going to be setting the agenda by the Democrats. But in terms of going forward, there's a Republican president, there's a Republican majority in the House, and there's one short of a majority in the Senate. So the direction the president has pointed us is not over, nor changing.
[Lin:] All right, thank you very much Senator Craig Thomas...
[Thomas:] My pleasure.
[Lin:] ... from Wyoming Republican. We are going to, just minutes from now, talk with Senator Jeff Bingaman. He is the Democrat who is expected to become chairman of the Energy Committee. And Democratic Senator Tom Daschle, who is expected to become the Senate majority leader, will be a guest on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS" at 8:00 Eastern tonight on CNN.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Back to the Elian matter now, a case that has a legal and political hot potato all around it. And few corners of government have felt that heat as much as the Justice Department. Our Justice correspondent, Pierre Thomas, now live from Washington outside the Justice Department with more. A lot of attention being focused today again, Pierre.
[Pierre Thomas, Cnn Justice Correspondent:] Well, Bill, there's nervous and quiet anticipation here at the Justice Department this morning. Justice Department officials hoping that the Supreme Court will either not hear the case or simply reject the move by the Miami relatives to have Elian stay in the United States. The Justice Department position has been the same throughout. Basically, they hold that the father speaks for the boy, that Elian is too young to speak for himself, and they hope that the Supreme Court will uphold that position. Now, again, today, they're expecting to hear from the court. They don't think it will be before early morning. But, again, they're waiting to see what the court will decide Bill.
[Hemmer:] Pierre Thomas in Washington, we'll be in touch. Pierre, thanks.

[Larry King:] Tonight, U.S. military action in Afghanistan enters a significant new phase. We'll talk with the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Carl Levin. He's in Detroit. From Tuscaloosa Senator Richard Shelby, ranking member on the Select Intelligence Committee. In Washington, retired Air Force Colonel Randall Larsen, director of the ANSER Institute for Homeland Security. In San Diego, retired Admiral William Owens, former vice chairman, joint chiefs of staff. In Washington, former NATO supreme allied commander, retired General George Joulwan. We'll also get an anthrax update from the surgeon general, Dr. David Satcher. Then her husband was one of the heroes of Flight 93. Today, Lisa Beamer took the airline trip he never finished. They're all next on LARRY KING LIVE. Our closing musical selection later tonight will feature John Mellencamp live from New York. Let's start with Senator Carl Levin. He's in Detroit. Senator Richard Shelby. He is in Tuscaloosa. Senator Levin, what can you tell us about this significant new phase?
[Sen. Carl Levin , Chairman, Armed Services Committee:] I can't tell you anything more than what you've already reported except it should come as a surprise to nobody. There's been hints about this for the last couple of days. I expect and this is not based on any inside information, because I would not disclose that but I would expect that you're going to see a gradual ratcheting up of pressure on the Taliban militarily from a number of different directions. And so this is surely no surprise.
[King:] Senator Shelby, ground troops in the north, from the west, where?
[Sen. Richard Shelby , Vice Chairman, Select Intelligence Committee:] Well, I can't say where or anything like that, Larry, but I can tell you that this is a measured campaign. This is a step-up, and I believe you'll see more in the days ahead.
[King:] Do we we know it's a small amount, Senator Levin, but they're calling it significant. Is that a contradiction in terms?
[Levin:] No, I think it's not. It is what is significant is that now there is an acknowledgement that there are American ground forces on the ground in Afghanistan, that that's going to have an impact both militarily and I think psychologically on the Taliban. But there is going to be a gradual process, I believe, because it's a complicated process. And during this period of gradualism here, as we're tightening the noose, it seems to me a lot of important things can be done, including the gathering together, the coordination, hopefully gathering the support of a number of opposition forces in Afghanistan, so this can truly at the end, when finally the bin Laden operation is destroyed, will be an Afghan operation, hopefully, if possible, supported by us. I think it really would be, if practical and if possible, it would be desirable for Afghans to be at the least at the tip of this spear, which finally finishes the job, because this would certainly give the total lie to the propaganda that bin Laden is trying to perpetrate, promulgate that somehow or other that this is a war of the West against Islam, which it is not. And one of the ways to dramatize that will be when the Afghan forces get deeply involved in this war with our support.
[King:] Senator Shelby, does this mean a taking down somewhat of the air involvement?
[Shelby:] I wouldn't think so, because I I'm not the one to make those decisions. Secretary Rumsfeld and the chairman of the joint chiefs will make those decision with their people. But I do believe that we're going to step this fight up and we're going to bring it to a conclusion. And that's very important. And as Senator Levin said, we're trying to and I believe we'll be successful in getting a lot of help from the Afghanistan people themselves and a lot of their people as they see what's going to happen. We are going to make a difference. We're going to carry it to a conclusion, and we're going to win it.
[King:] Senator Levin, Secretary Rumsfeld said today that the military mission will be complete when the Taliban government, the al Qaeda group are gone, that is what this is all about. Gone means, Senator Levin, gone-gone.
[Levin:] I think it's gone surely as we know it. There may be elements, according to Secretary Powell, there could be some elements of the Taliban that could be part of a broader coalition, but not the Taliban as we know it, not the leadership as we know it. But the Pashtunis, the Pashtuns have got to be a major part of a coalition. They are the majority in Afghanistan. It is important that they coalesce with the northern groups and some of the other opposition groups that already exist in Afghanistan so that there's a broad coalition. That is important in terms of the ultimate success, and it's also important in terms of keeping Pakistan fully on board, I believe. But one way or another, this is going to end successfully. I think that there is going to be even greater coordination than we have seen so far between U.S. air forces and airpower, and opposition forces on the ground as this unfolds.
[King:] If it comes down, Senator Shelby, the Taliban regime comes down, does the United States consult with the U.N.? Do we get into nation-building? What's our involvement post this?
[Shelby:] Well, basically, whether you want to call it nation building or not, we're going to have to be involved with our allies in the restructuring and bringing some institutional help to the people of Pakistan. And we're already looking down the road past the Taliban to the government that would come about and the people that would make up the government. I hope we're successful. One thing I thought we did in 10, 12 years ago was leave: When the Russians left, we basically left Pakistan and we basically left Afghanistan, and a vacuum occurred. We cannot let that happen again.
[King:] Senator Levin, do you expect this to widen to Iraq?
[Levin:] No, not in the short term. I would hope that the dynamic totally changes, however, relative to terrorism. When you look at Afghanistan now, we find that the countries surrounding Afghanistan are now coalescing against the Taliban. We look at Russia there's an opportunity here for a whole new positive relationship with Russia. We look at Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, who are now on our side. Pakistan has clearly thrown their lot in with us. Even Iran has now given an indication that they will assist us if there are any pilots that are shot down in Iran. And there are other ways in which Iran can be helpful, other signals. So we have the possibility of some real dynamic changes in this world, which would put the squeeze on some of the countries like Iraq, who have been supported by Russia, for instance, or at least not given a tough time by Russia. That can change now if we're successful, and I'm going to say when we're successful in Afghanistan. So we're going to keep the heat on Iraq, keep one eye on Iraq. But I don't think we should be doing anything at this time but focusing all of our energies on Afghanistan, putting together the coalition, which will end the bin and the Al Qaeda regime.
[King:] Agree or disagree, Senator Shelby?
[Shelby:] I basically agree. I believe the dynamics will be changed appreciably after the Taliban is overthrown and we get another government in place, help them build this government economically, politically and militarily. And the message is going to go out that there is a different message, there is a different dynamic in the whole area, and it's going to be positive. But it's not there yet. It's not going to be easy.
[King:] Senator Levin, President Bush was rather strong in his statements about our friendship with China. Is that going to be on the upgrade with all of this?
[Levin:] I think so. China has indicated some very strong opposition now to terrorist activities, and this tragedy, which killed 6,000 of our innocent lives in America, could lead to a very significant strategic shift in the world, and make the countries that have tolerated terrorism or helped assist terrorists like Iraq, like Iran, like Libya be so totally isolated, be on the outs, no longer being given any support of any kind by China hopefully, no more support from Russia, we could see a very major change in this world, and an anti-terrorist effort that is very coherent, cohesive, comprehensive, which can, I think, change the entire environment against terrorism.
[King:] Senator Shelby, would you describe the military operation thus far to this minute as successful?
[Shelby:] I would. And even as Secretary Rumsfeld and others have said, we're in to a second, third, perhaps fourth phase now. There will be other phases. But it has been measured. It has been stepped up. And we've got a plan, we're executing the plan, and we're going to bring it to a conclusion. We're not backing away. And we're going to win.
[King:] We're going to take a break, and when we come back, Colonel Randall Larsen, U.S. Army retired, will join us and will talk about anthrax. Senators Levin and Shelby will remain. I'm Larry King. Don't go away.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] As you all know, I committed American troops to a very important cause in the last couple of weeks, and I did so with the full confidence that our military is the best in the world. The American people have got the full confidence that our military will fulfill its mission.
[King:] Now in Washington, joining Senator Levin in Detroit and Senator Shelby in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, is Colonel Randall Larsen, U.S. Army retired been a very frequent guest on this program director of the ANSER Institute for Homeland Security. Their Web site, as we remind you, is homelandsecurity.org. And, Colonel Larsen, would you say now, with the reports today at "The New York Post," a "New York Times" reporter in Rio de Janeiro that we are close to a panic stage?
[Randall Larsen, Director, Anser Institute For Homeland Security:] Well, no. I haven't seen any panic in the streets here in Washington, D.C., Larry, but...
[King:] But there are people running to emergency rooms.
[Larsen:] Yes. And I'm a little bit worried about that. And, I'll tell you, one of the reasons that I'm concerned about this is let me say, a lot of the press have been doing a great job reporting this. But there have some folks who have made great rushes to get their stories out on deadline. This is not some light story about elected officials having little problems and everyone wants to get the first rumor on evening news. This is serious national security business. And we need to remember that accuracy is much more important than speed. So I have seen some stories in newspapers and on the TV that scared me more than the terrorists have. We have had one person die since the 4th of October of anthrax. In that same period, we have had 1,600 people die in automobile accidents, OK? Anthrax is not contagious. Fear can be. So we need to keep this under control. And I just have been very pleased with the performance in the last two days I have seen from Secretary Ridge in the press conferences they have been having in communicating to the American public. And this is not a high-tech attack. And that has been something that was misreported here by a major newspaper just a couple nights ago. And they were saying this is military-quality stuff and everything. I talked to that reporter before they went to file the story. And I said, you know: "Tell me what the particle size. Tell me what the sporulation rate was." And the reporter didn't even know what I was talking about. If you don't have the facts and the details, you need to be careful what you are reporting.
[King:] Senator Levin, do you agree with what Colonel Larsen is saying?
[Levin:] Very much so. We have just simply got to be commonsensical and calm. The most important thing we all should remember is that, even if one is exposed and that is rare even for those people that are exposed, antibiotics do the job. It is that direct. It is that simple. It should give everybody confidence. And we all ought to go about our business in a commonsensical, calm way, and not in any way be distracted by scare stories or horror stories or headlines.
[King:] But, Senator Shelby, it hit your majority leader.
[Shelby:] Well, I can tell you, I believe, Larry, that people need to be calm. I'm one, as you know, that has been tested twice for exposure. The results have been negative twice. And I have been telling people all along that anthrax is not that contagious. There are a lot of things out there that would be, but this is not one of them. And should we be concerned? Yes. But should we panic and hide and run? No. Let's don't do that, because everything is going to work out. I have confidence, Larry, in our basic investigative tools, the FBI, the postal people, that they are going to find out who is doing this. And this is going to help calm a lot of the stories that are coming out today. But we do need to know and we need to put an end to it.
[King:] Colonel, when you did your dark winter scenario, your bioterrorism simulation, smallpox was one of the ingredients, right?
[Larsen:] That is correct. That was the primary agent used, yes.
[King:] Do you fear that now?
[Larsen:] No, I don't, because we chose smallpox because that was the worst-case scenario, the least likely scenario. We wanted to over stress the system so we could have some lessons learned to see what we needed to work on for some other sort of biological attack. The purpose was not to make it realistic. It was a very unrealistic scenario, but it was a good test of the system. Now, we are making a lot more smallpox vaccine right now. And so people have asked me, "Well, hey, if it is not really a threat, why are we making more smallpox?" Well, my answer is pretty simple. How many people do you know had their houses burned down last year? I don't know anybody. But I still pay my homeowners insurance. And that is really what this smallpox vaccine is going to be: homeowners insurance, Larry.
[King:] Would you vaccinate more people by the way, is the Senate Senator Levin, are you vaccinated for smallpox? There were stories around that the Senate and the military are vaccinated.
[Levin:] No, not since I was kid. And, apparently, that vaccination doesn't last as long. But I really agree with the colonel. This is an insurance policy. When we get enough vaccine, a decision will be made whether or not we all ought to be inoculated simply as protection against an extraordinarily unlikely event. This is the most difficult of all substances to obtain by any terrorist. It is only located, we think, in two locations: one in the United States, one in Russia very secure, very safe. I just think that the scare stories should be saved for Halloween night, and we ought to just simply do things in a commonsensical way, and listen to scientific people, listen to the medical people. We are told that, for instance, back to anthrax that antibiotics, we have lots of them. More than one type will work and just go about our business way.
[King:] Is it odd for you, Senator Shelby, that there wasn't talk about anthrax before September 11, and now suddenly we are seeing it? I mean, does it do the dots connect?
[Shelby:] Well, they do. There has been talk about. A lot of the military people have been inoculated against it, and all. For years, we have been dealing with it. But it has never spread to the public domain like it has. I believe this. What we've got to do, Larry, is listen to our public health officials, the people who know a lot about contagious diseases and chemical and bioterrorism. And if we do this, at end of the day, we are going to be OK. We are going to have that insurance. And I believe that our public officials, the people for the Centers for Disease Control. The head of the Centers for Disease Control I believe is Dr. Jeffrey Koplan, that you had...
[King:] He's been on, yes, twice.
[Shelby:] ... on CNN several times. I thought he was one of the most informative and one of the most calming influences I have seen on television.
[Levin:] And the majority leader, Senator Daschle, I've got to say, with 30 people in his office who were exposed, was extremely calm, because he knew that antibiotics would do the job.
[King:] All right, Colonel Larsen, what do you do with are we contradictory here when we say, "Don't worry, but be cautionary; do this, but watch that"?
[Larsen:] No. No. I mean...
[King:] Are we are creating two bouncing balls?
[Larsen:] No. Every day in this country, about an average of 112 people die in car accidents. So we are going to say
[King:] No. But if we learned that there were implants put into the car and the cars were careening off the road based on something put in the gas tank, yes, we would be concerned.
[Larsen:] Yes. Yes. But the important thing is, it's like wearing our seat belts. And that's just showing good caution. And so we need to be alert. I don't think the threat to this nation is from biological warfare right now. I think five to 10 years down the road, we need to be taking it very seriously, doing a lot of research and development now to prepare for that. What I'm most concerned about today are car bombs, suitcase bombs. Someone just told me they found some C-4 in a locker in a bus station Philadelphia or something.
[King:] In Philadelphia.
[Larsen:] Yes. So, yes, that is what we should expect. We are really disrupting the terrorist operations. The FBI is doing a great job at home. The military is doing a great job overseas. But the attorney general said there are still a couple hundred in the country. They are going to fall back on what they know best. And those are simple explosions. So we do need to be alert.
[King:] Would you agree, Senator Levin, that the average citizen, the average guy in the street is more concerned about the biological than the taking of an airplane?
[Levin:] Yes, I do. And I think that the biological threat is a real one. I'm just saying that the anthrax exposure that we have had can be contained and contained with antibiotics. But the colonel really makes an important point here. We've got to keep a focus on terrorists and the likely means that they will use to attack us. And that is that items that he talked about. These are car bombs, trucks, ships and those kind of things. Just because we think that anthrax is easily contained and controllable which it is with antibiotics doesn't mean that we should be naive about the terrorists trying to attack us in this country. Those efforts are going to continue. And we should focus the majority of our resources, it seems to me, on where the likely terrorist threats are, rather than worrying about where the attack is with the anthrax envelopes, which are you can deal with, with the antibiotics.
[King:] Senator Shelby, is there enough antibiotics around?
[Shelby:] Well, I hope it is. I basically trust our public health people to deal with it. I believe, in the years ahead, we are going to be more prepared. I believe this brought the attention of real potential for bioterrorism to the United States of America. It's resonating in the Congress and it's going to be out there with the people. The people are concerned about it. They're concerned about the immediate and in the future. And if we deal with the immediate and think about the future and do something about it, we can protect our people.
[King:] Colonel Larsen, going to get worse before it gets better?
[Larsen:] It may, but I'll tell you the Americans I'm most worried about tonight, Larry, and those are the ones flying F-18s and F-14s and B-1s over Afghanistan, the folks that are flying C-17s and dropping food to a lot of hungry people over there right now. And now there's reports that we may have some troops on the ground. Those are the Americans I'm concerned about, and I think the best way for America to support them is to go about their jobs, go to work, go to football games tomorrow, and carry on with our lives, and support the troops, Larry.
[King:] Thank you all very much. Senators Carl Levin, Richard Shelby and Colonel Randall Larsen of the ANSER Institute. When we come back, Admiral William Owens, United States Navy retired, former vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, and General George Joulwan, former NATO supreme allied commander, two of the top military folks around. We'll get their thoughts, and later John Mellencamp will do our closing musical number. And we'll also check in with the surgeon general. Don't go away.
[Tom Ridge, Director, Homeland Security:] Every day, the Office of Homeland Security is looking to enhance or improve our prevention capability and our response capability, our borders and our ports of entry are tighter, our airports and aircraft get progressively more secure. As reported today, Reagan National Airport is now expanding its flight operations to include more flights. And our water supply, power plants, dams, and other critical infrastructures are being guarded and strengthened as well. Many of these new security measures are clearly visible, but many, many more are not.
[King:] We now welcome to LARRY KING LIVE from San Diego, Admiral William Owens, United States Navy retired, former vice chairman of the joint chiefs, former commander of the Sixth Fleet, was senior military assistant to Dick Cheney when Cheney was secretary of defense. And in Washington, General George Joulwan, United States Army retired, former NATO supreme allied commander, former commander in chief of the U.S. European command. This item in: A special forces operation involving U.S. combat troops is under way in Afghanistan. Sources have confirmed to CNN a modest number of troops are involved. It's called a significant new phase. The president on a visit to China had a one-hour brief video conference with his national security team Saturday morning China time to be briefed on the operation. What do you make of it, Admiral Owens?
[Ret. Adm. William Owens, Former Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs Of Staff:] Well, you know, Larry, I think it is an important new phase in this operation. Clearly, we have the ability to control the skies, and we have the ability to catch these guys on the ground, these Taliban, al Qaeda forces by surprise. We want them to feel like we are in charge, and this is the beginning of a phase where we can operate where we want to and surprise them, be in and out quickly, and start to tighten that noose around their necks. So I think this is an important next phase, and I think it's one that will lead to success in the tactical sense on the ground here in Afghanistan.
[King:] General, what's your read?
[Ret. Gen. George Joulwan, Former Nato Supreme Allied Commander:] Well, a little bit different. I think what you're going to see is special operating forces that will be working with the Taliban excuse me with the Northern Alliance against the Taliban in a way to provide actionable intelligence for air and other assets to be used. These special forces, I've used them in Bosnia, very effective. They are small teams that provide good communications, good intelligence. They can provide artillery. So I think you're going to see that. You're not going to see, as we saw in Desert Storm, tanks at this point rushing across the desert, but small teams operating to gain this intelligence and to make the opposition forces more effective.
[King:] And General, what kind of troops are they?
[Joulwan:] You're talking about our troops, these are very small, well-trained, highly well-trained. America should be proud of them. They're the best we have. They are very good at what they do. They're language trained. And they, in my opinion, have been there for sometime trying to establish this rapport with the opposition leaders. So I think they could provide the actionable intelligence, and if we have to bring in larger numbers of U.S. forces for specific operations, these are the ones that will provide the good intelligence, the eyes and ears on the ground. And that's what they provide, but they're small, seven- to 10- to 12-man teams.
[King:] Admiral, do you expect the Navy to remain involved? Will planes still be taking off from ships? Are the air attacks going to continue?
[Owens:] Well, I think the Navy will stay involved, Larry. This is obviously, though, a joint activity. This is, as George Joulwan said, special forces on the ground. We are organized against the Taliban. We're organized jointly against the Taliban. The Navy will be a part of it, but you know, we're seeing lot of very interesting things happen in this campaign. We're seeing Army helicopters, operating off the deck of an aircraft carrier. I think this is the first time that's happened in decades. We're seeing a great emphasis now on these unmanned drones, the Predator, with real capability to see what's going on, on the ground, to pass that information to the special forces. And we're seeing a lot of the joint activities coming together with new technologies, new technologies of high bandwidth interfaces among these various platforms. And it's a little bit of a glimpse into a future kind of warfare that is very relevant for this new world. And of course, the Navy is involved with those carriers. They're important. But this is a joint activity.
[King:] General, isn't the technology superiority way in favor of the American forces?
[Joulwan:] Absolutely.
[King:] Like night and day.
[Joulwan:] Well, but, look, I've made it a rule, never underestimate your enemy. And we have to understand that this is a different enemy than we faced in the past. And we have a lot of high- tech and great advantage in many areas. But in the end, I think it's going to require some sort of ground action, whether that's by the opposition northern and southern alliances, some action on the ground, and that time is coming. And that will be low-tech in many cases. We can provide a lot of information, but in the end it's going to be those sorts of ground elements that will provide success in the end. So I think we have to be very careful, even though we have a lot of high-tech and very important systems, that we don't that we don't underestimate the enemy we're facing.
[King:] Let's take a call. Boca Raton for Admiral Owens and General Joulwan, hello.
[Caller:] Hi, Larry. How are you?
[King:] Hi.
[Caller:] Good. I have a question. One of the gentleman on the panel before, prior to just a little bit ago, mentioned that there were about three or four phases that had already gone through to attacks on Afghanistan. And I was wondering of the three or four phases mentioned, how many do there intend to be approximately or do we have any idea?
[King:] How long is it going to take, Admiral, to get rid of the Taliban? That's what Rumsfeld said is the goal.
[Owens:] Yeah. I think it is a long-term campaign, Larry. I think that is the goal, to get ride of al Qaeda and to get rid of the Taliban. This we have to be prepared. As George Joulwan said, there's a lot of uncertainty on the ground. We can use a lot of this new technology and make a difference. But we have to just hang in there. We have to persevere. We have to be there until it's finished. And we don't know how long it's going to take. We may go into phase three and four, and it may take a lot longer than we may think. But I think the administration has been warning us that this is a long-term campaign, not only in Afghanistan, but the other bin Laden organizations in dozens of countries around the world. So we have to get ourselves ready. Our men and women in the military are ready. And I think America has to be ready as well, to support them and this effort that will take a long time.
[King:] General, we hear long-term. We know about the size of Afghanistan, the size of the United States, the difference in military power. What is the big problem, militarily, we face?
[Joulwan:] Well, I think the key to me is that the center of gravity, as we'd like to call it, for the Taliban is its military. And so the challenge is going to be to disrupt, to find, to fix and destroy the Taliban military. And by doing that, I think you eliminate the Taliban. It's like taking hay away from the haystack and to find the needle. If that needle is bin Laden, you've got to strip away the Taliban and strip away the military of the Taliban. And that's the phase we're going into now. To answer to the lady's question for the operational commander, he has several phases in here, to try to get at this objective, that I think they're trying to get at, which is eliminate the Taliban and Bin Laden. And we're going through the air superiority phase. We're now going through targeting, I think, the Taliban military. And that's going to take eyes and ears on the ground. And the best eyes and ears on the ground are going to be our special forces. The final phase will be some sort of, I hope, civil military integrated staff that would come in and restore some form, whether it's the democracy or government in Afghanistan. And that's a long way off.
[King:] Algonquin, Illinois, hello.
[Caller:] Hi. Do we have security measures in place to make sure that Osama bin Laden has not left Afghanistan? Or do we know that he has not left Afghanistan?
[King:] Admiral?
[Owens:] Well, I think that's really a good question. I think all of us would like to know that and the American public. And I suspect that our many intelligence organizations and the President, Secretary of Defense, the National Security team knows a lot more about this on a day-to-day basis. But my guess is that it's hard. We're doing everything we can with all the resources that the military and the various agencies have at hand, to know where he is, but it's never certain. I'm sure that there could be surprises. I do think here, though, that Secretary Rumsfeld's statements are very important. He didn't mention today that I heard Osama bin Laden. He talked about the Taliban and the al Qaeda organization. The goal here is not just Afghanistan. It is really that organization, that network around the world. And we have to take that network down. That's what this is about. And I think that's what's critical, not just the location physically of Osama bin Laden. But clearly, we're looking at where he is, because he is a leader of their team, of their organization. And we are trying to find him. I'm not sure we know quite a lot about that.
[King:] General?
[Joulwan:] I think he's still in Afghanistan, but regardless, you want to take down not just bin Laden, but as has been said, this sanctuary that has been a sanctuary for terrorism, its camps, its training. I'm concerned if bin Laden is taken out and someone else comes in, and the apparatus is still there, you're going to be faced with this problem years down the road. So it's a much larger objective than just bin Laden, but I think he's still there. And I think I don't know this for fact, but I think our intelligence agencies have a pretty good idea that he's still in Afghanistan.
[King:] Let's take another call. Hamilton, Texas, hello.
[Caller:] Yes, sir.
[King:] Go ahead.
[Caller:] I was just wondering, you know, 10 years ago, we helped out Osama bin Laden. So how do we know that in 10 years the Northern Alliance isn't going to become another bin Laden?
[King:] Yes. What do we know and when do we know it, admiral? That's true. We did help bin Laden against the Russians.
[Owens:] Yeah, you know, I think it is a part of the world we're all learning a lot about. And one of the things that seems to me is to do just as the administration is doing now, to assist the Northern Alliance, but also remembering what Senator Levin said. It is the Pashtun, the 40 percent of the 26 million people, who are generally in the southern part of Afghanistan, that we have to bring into this fight. So it's not just one element, the Northern Alliance. It's many other of these tribal cultures and tribal leaders. And we need to leave in place, it seems to me, the culture of the leadership of the tribes, balanced against one another. That's the way it has been for hundreds of years, before the Taliban arrived. And not necessarily to leave a new dominant force there that can be negative.
[King:] General, what problem does winter bring?
[Joulwan:] It's a big problem. I had to face this in Bosnia when we had to do winter campaign in December of '95. It is a challenge. And I think that what we're seeing between now and perhaps four weeks from now, I truly believe there has to be some success on the ground before winter sets in. That doesn't mean everything stops, but it really slows you down. And the same thing, some issue has to be made with Ramadan, which begins on 17. We have to take into it consideration. Whether it stops our operations or not, I doubt that. But it is something that has to be taken into consideration. I think winter and Ramadan are two issues that need to be made. So political decisions, and as I said the other day, that I think are our military actions are ahead of our political decisions right now.
[King:] We'll be calling on both of you again. By the way, do both of you miss being in the hunt? Admiral and general, do you miss being part of the decision-making here?
[Owens:] I do, Larry.
[King:] Do you, general?
[Joulwan:] Yes, I do, but we got some good troops out there. I know many of these commanders, Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. Our country's in good hands.
[King:] Thank you both very much, Admiral William Owens and General George Joulwan. When we come back, the Surgeon General of the United States. Don't go away.
[Donald Rumsfeld, Defense Secretary:] The military role will be over there, when the Taliban and the al Qaeda are gone. Gone. I mean that's what this about. The United States has said that it's going to take the effort to the terrorists. And the terrorists are in among other places, are in Afghanistan. And that is what this is about.
[King:] We welcome to LARRY KING LIVE, Dr. David Satcher, the Surgeon General of the United States, a return visit. Late item breaking, "The New York Times" is e-mailing employees, telling them that their reporter in Rio de Janeiro has received an envelope of some kind, that's tested positive for spores. What do you make of that, Dr. Satcher? We've just learned of it and probably you are, too.
[David Satcher, U.s. Surgeon General:] I am just learning of it. And I think it means that the attacks continue. And we have to continue to be vigilant. It's sad, but I think as long as these threats and the takes continue, we have to continue to maintain high alert in the public health system, but also in our individual lives.
[King:] What can you tell us about the situation in New Jersey and at "The New York Post"?
[Satcher:] Well, as you know, we have just learned today that the person at "The New York Post" was indeed positive. She had been taking antibiotics. And therefore, the original tests were negative. But using a special test of a biopsy, the CDC determined today that she was indeed positive for anthrax. The good news, of course, is that she has been on treatment now for several days.
[King:] Big difference Dr. Satcher, between exposed and infected, right?
[Satcher:] Very big difference. To date, there have been, as you know, seven people infected, documented to be infected. One died of inhalation anthrax. Another person is diagnosed with inhalation anthrax. And the other five have cutaneous anthrax, which is a very treatable disease, by the way. But I do want to say one thing, Larry about exposed. And this is especially relevant to the situation on Capitol Hill. There are several people who were presumed exposed, because they were in the area of the fifth and sixth floor near Senator Daschle's office on Monday. And they will be treated for the full 60 days, not because they necessarily had a positive nasal swab test, but because the environment has tested positive. And therefore, we have to assume that they were exposed. And that's how we protect people.
[King:] Antibiotic update. Do we have enough? I know that Senator Schumer has called upon the government to let the generic companies make the generic version of Cipro before the time has run to where they can make it in 2003. Do you agree with that or what?
[Satcher:] Well, I think there are some legal issues involved there. But let me comment on the issue of whether we have enough. We feel that we have enough antibiotics. As you know, we now have enough to treat two million people for the full 60 days. And within the next 30 days, we should have enough to treat 12 million people for the full 60 days. And our scientists, who project in terms of these kinds of attacks, would believe that that should be more than enough. However, we are in discussions that could in fact lead to an increase in that number. But we now have plans...
[King:] Oh, possibly...
[Satcher:] We now have plans that would provide up to 12 million people for 60 days. And that should be available within next 30 days or so. But these discussions are ongoing. And the pharmaceutical companies, I think, are being cooperative and trying to be very supportive in making sure that we have the antibiotics that we need.
[King:] Cipro is very expensive. Would you say unequivocally that any American who gets anthrax or needs anthrax testing or needs the antibiotic will get it?
[Satcher:] Well, yeah, but not necessarily Cipro. I think you know, what we do is we start everybody on Cipro, for the most part. And then after it's very clear that they're sensitive to other drugs like penicillin, doxycycline, then we put them on different drugs. So they don't have to necessarily just stay on Ciprofloxacin. They can be changed to other drugs, doxycycline or amoxicillin drugs later on. And many are changed. So we're not just relying on Ciprofloxacin.
[King:] And those other drugs are less expensive?
[Satcher:] Less expensive, but can be very effective against anthrax. And the only concern we have is whether in fact they are sensitive or resistant. And so, once we determine that they are sensitive, then people can be changed from Cipro to other drugs. And in many cases, they will be.
[King:] What do you make of this apparently run on emergency rooms all over the country? Anybody who has any symptom. And I know New York City is reporting that health centers are overcrowded.
[Satcher:] Well, there is a lot of anxiety throughout the country. There is terror. And so, we're trying very hard to reassure people, for example, that we can deliver the antibiotics when they're needed. But I understand that many people are concerned. And that concern is probably going to continue for a while. I think the more we talk about this, and the more we educate people about the appropriate things to be concerned about, that will diminish somewhat. But this is a very tense time. So I think we understand how people are reacting. And it does put a lot of pressure on the health care system. And that's why we had the conference with physicians all over the country yesterday. And I understand over 50,000 participated in that conference, talking about the role of the provider on the frontline.
[King:] Dr. David Satcher, the Surgeon General. Let's now go to the Pentagon, where our Pentagon chief Pentagon correspondent Jamie Mcintyre is standing by. What's the latest on this troop movement, Jamie?
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Correspondent:] Well Larry, we've just finally got official confirmation from the Pentagon of this special operations mission conducted in the overnight hours in Afghanistan involving more than 100 special operations troops, including U.S. Army Rangers, went in by helicopter to conduct an operation against an unspecified target inside Afghanistan. We're being told about it now because we're told all of the helicopters have cleared Afghani airspace after completing this mission of several hours. A U.S. official telling CNN that in fact an operation has taken place tonight involving U.S. special forces and Army Rangers. There was a report apparently of two of helicopters crashing in Afghanistan. A U.S. official told us that they're not aware of any reports of any helicopters crashing in Afghanistan. But they are giving no word at this hour of whether there was the United States took any casualties, whether it took any prisoners, or exactly what the operation involved. There will be a more complete accounting of what happened in this first venture of U.S. ground troops into Afghanistan at a Pentagon briefing, in all likelihood tomorrow morning. But at this hour, the Pentagon has not made any official announcement, but a U.S. official telling CNN, that the operation has been completed, an operation that was of several hours duration against an unspecified target in Afghanistan Larry.
[King:] And where, Jamie, are they now?
[Mcintyre:] Well, we are told that the helicopters have all cleared Afghan airspace. So they are presumably on their way back to their base, which we were just told was in the region. We're assuming that that's the U.S. aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk, which is in the Arabian Sea.
[King:] So the troops have accomplished what they set out to accomplish, and they've gone back?
[Mcintyre:] Well the U.S. no one has characterized the success or failure of the mission at this point. They simply told us it's been completed, that the troops are now out of harm's way, and that they'll have a further assessment for us later about exactly what it was all about.
[King:] So at this moment, there are no ground troops present?
[Mcintyre:] At this point, there are ground troops in other parts of Afghanistan, but these combat troops that went in have come back out.
[King:] Thank you, Jamie, as always.
[Mcintyre:] OK.
[King:] Jamie Mcintyre at the Pentagon. When we come back, Lisa Beamer. Her husband was supposed to fly from Newark to San Francisco. He died in a plane field in Pennsylvania. She made that trip today. We'll talk to her, and then John Mellencamp will close us out musically. We'll be right back. By now you all know Lisa Beamer. Her husband, Todd, one of heroes of United flight 93, flying from Newark to San Francisco, died in the crash in Pennsylvania, as he and other passengers took the plane down. Lisa made that trip today. It's now flight number 81. How did it go?
[Lisa Beamer, Took Hero Husband's Flight:] It went great. I'm here and I'm safe. And that is what I expected when I woke up this morning. So it was a good flight.
[King:] Were at all nervous?
[Beamer:] No. You know, I have that six weeks to kind of think through what happened on that flight, and kind of come to some amount of peace in terms with it. And no, I wasn't nervous today. I think it's probably one of the safest times to fly that we've had in recent history.
[King:] Why did you make this flight?
[Beamer:] I actually...
[King:] It's now, by the way, flight number 81, right? They're never going to use 193 again?
[Beamer:] Right it's flight 81. And I actually had an opportunity to come out to San Francisco today, to meet with actually the some of people that Todd was coming to meet with on the 11th at Oracle, which is the corporation where he worked, and introduce them to the foundation which we've established and in Todd's name, and give them an opportunity to partner with us in funding that, which they are going to do, which is exciting. The foundation has a couple different pieces to it. One of which is a passion for me. I have three little children who are left without a dad at this point. And there's quite a few other people, due to the September 11 tragedy, in my position. And these children have long-term needs. Even just providing health care for them over the next 18, 20, years is going to be significant financial strain on many families. And you know, after the publicity dies down and these children still have needs, we want to be able to kind of help meet those. And we hope that there's not future terrorism like this. But if there is, that victims are also taken care of. And there's another important piece for me in that Todd loves to mentor youth. And that was a passion for him. And we want to help be involved in programs that will raise up people to make wise decisions like Todd did.
[King:] That's great. And you have a foundation web site. It's beamerfoundation.org, right?
[Beamer:] That's right.
[King:] Beamerfoundation.org. She flew the flight today that her husband was making. She met with the Oracle people. They're going to cooperate in the foundation. I understand there was a report that GTE phones on the backs of the seats were covered up, to spare you the reminder of talking to the GTE operator. True?
[Beamer:] Yes they were. United has been helpful many ways. And they thought that that might be a little bit emotional for me. And the flight actually went very smoothly. And like I said, I felt very safe the whole time and felt like I had had enough time to process what happened to be able to do that today.
[King:] The amazing Lisa Beamer handled this superbly. She flew today. The flight is now flight 81, no longer flight 93. It's beamerfoundation.org. Thank you, Lisa.
[Beamer:] Thank you, Larry.
[King:] When we come back, singer, songwriter, rock idol, one of the major figures in American music over past couple decades, John Mellencamp. Don't go away. John Mellencamp joins us from New York. What a 25-year career he has had. His new album is "Cutting Heads." He'll perform tomorrow night at that big Paul McCartney get-together, the concert for New York City, a five-hour extravaganza. You looking forward to that, John?
[John Mellencamp, Singer:] Yes, I'm excited about it. All THE people playing are people that I grew up listening to. And it's going to be, you know, quite a few different people I think that. Mick Jagger's going to be playing with The Who. So there's going to be a lot of combinations. It's exciting, yes.
[King:] And we're excited to hear this song. This is a song from the album "Cutting Heads." India Arie will joining you on the vocal.
[Mellencamp:] Right.
[King:] It is called "Peaceful World." And I think the public's going to be hearing this for the first time. John, I salute for you all you have done for American music over the years, and for being part of this tomorrow night.
[Mellencamp:] Well, I appreciate it. Thank you very much.
[King:] Here's John Mellencamp with India Arie and the new release "Peaceful World." [MUSIC, JOHN MELLENCAMP SINGING "PEACEFUL WORLD"] TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] We begin with one of the worst maritime disasters in recent history, and the questions it has raised. What exactly happened onboard the nuclear submarine Kursk and could the deaths of 118 sailors aboard been prevented? Norway, which played a big role in the rescue effort, says lower-level Russian officers were slow to give essential details about the sophisticated Kursk. Russian President Vladimir Putin has taken full blame for the disaster that has outraged many Russians. Hans-Wilhelm Steinfeld is Moscow bureau chief for the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation, and he joins us on the phone from Moscow. Hans, what role will Norway play in determining the cause of this tragedy?
[Hans-wilhelm Steinfeld, Moscow Bureau Chief, Nrk:] It is a little bit early to say. Criminal investigations are underway here in Russia to try to sort out the reason for this tragedy. Last night, the Norwegian admiral of northern Norway said that the Russians by inertia actually placed the fate of the Norwegian divers in danger, and he really had to square with them. Today, Russia's minister of defense says that a substantial amount of theories that might explain it this is a step back from a more self assured version the Russian authorities carried through the air earlier, claiming that they were convinced that a foreign submarine clashed with Kursk. It seems now that this version is challenged and notably in the more critical part of the Russian press. Now, in the course of 10, 14 days, Norwegian divers may be the first ones to go into the hole of Kursk, and they may become the first ones actually to see and carry to a solid information as to the reason for why this submarine nose dived and everyone was killed.
[Namdar:] Hans, clearly Norway has been very critical of Russia for this entire operation. Is this going to affect the relationship between the two countries?
[Steinfeld:] The Russians have spent the last three months blasting Norway because of the military radar complex we have in the far north. However, it was also built in cooperation with the USA. Obviously, the efforts of the Norwegian divers have brought some relaxation in these relations now, and of course, there are a lot of people here who also Russians hope that we may come and step forward when it comes to corporation in the Arctic. There exists a treaty between the USA, Norway and Russia to try to secure the Arctic against nuclear radiation and pollution. And next week, an assistant secretary of state from Norway goes to Murmansk, it may be the first visit to Murmansk after this tragedy and, of course, the hope is that we may get out of the stormy situation when it comes to cooperation stemming the dangers of nuclear pollution in the far north.
[Namdar:] Hans, very quickly, can you tell me what you think this will do for Russian President Vladmir Putin politically? He had a lot of support and he's lost a lot of that.
[Steinfeld:] Already, severe criticism against authorities under way. Russia's former minister of defense, Igor Ideynov, have blasted the authorities because they did not respond quicker; among other things, they did not respond to Western proposals to assist them. Putin obviously has to worry that he was not really quick into this matter, he was washing his hands in the warm waters of the Black Sea having his vacation there when he should have been washing his hands in a much colder water, namely, the Barents Sea.
[Namdar:] Thank you very much, that was Hans-Wilhelm Steinfeld from the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We we've been pointing out, President Bush is marking a big benchmark of sorts. It's his first 100 days in office. We have a pretty good idea of what he's been up to during that time, but what about his former presidential rival? Our Jeanne Meserve joining us now from Washington on the latest on both President Bush and former Vice President Al Gore Jeanne, good morning.
[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Daryn. First, a look at the president and the polls. After 100 days in office, the American public is viewing him quite favorably, giving him an approval rating of 62 percent. That's above where Bill Clinton was after his first 100 days in office. But if you compare him to the eight other presidents who have been elected to office, he ranks somewhere just below the middle. I think we have a graphic to show you that will point that out. Apparently not. What about that other guy, Al Gore? Whatever happened to him? Well, we saw his SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE incarnation this past Saturday at the White House Correspondents Association Dinner.
[Unidentified Actor:] There will be a lock box. And I'm going to tell you what... Can I do some more of him? I like doing him. I'm so sorry I worked a year to do the damn guy and then you beat him.
[Meserve:] So where is the real Al Gore? Let's check in with Candy Crowley, our chief political correspondent. Why aren't we seeing more of him?
[Candy Crowley, Cnn Sr. Political Correspondent:] He's laying low deliberately. He's had plenty of chances to come out and talk, sometimes after the class he teaches up in New York reporters have been waiting for him for comment on one thing or another. He teaches down in Tennessee, as well. But he has chosen to lay low.
[Meserve:] Is he preparing for 2004, quietly, behind-the-scenes?
[Crowley:] Well, you know, who knows, because he's not talking to that many people. We're told no, that's not even on his radar screen at this point. He has been quietly thanking supporters for 2000, but they say, well, that's not related to 2004. But right now he's kind of waiting to see how this all shakes out. In some sense, he's waiting for the final recounts down in Florida.
[Meserve:] And what does his party want him to do?
[Crowley:] Well, you know, they're of two minds about this. There's sort of two factions. One is, you know, he deserves it. He, you know, he was robbed from the last one and he really should have a second chance. And the other side says wait a minute, he blew it. He should have won. It was a strong economy, a popular president. So there's there are really two minds about that.
[Meserve:] And meanwhile the other guy who was on the ticket, Joe Lieberman, we've been actually seeing a lot of him by comparison in particular.
[Crowley:] A lot of him. You know, a lot of people say that just by watching the weekend talk shows you can tell who wants to run for president, who might be thinking about running for president. Certainly Joe Lieberman has been very front and center. Part of that is that, you know, the Democratic Party doesn't really have an elected official that really is the leader, Clinton having gone out of the White House and Gore having gone somewhat underground. But part of it is that Joe Lieberman is sort of thinking about that. That national spotlight is awfully nice. But we're also told that he's made it quite clear that a lot depends on what Al Gore wants to do.
[Meserve:] Candy Crowley, thanks so much.
[Crowley:] Sure.
[Meserve:] And we'll be taking a look at some of the other Democrats jockeying for position for 2004 in the noon hour. Right now back to you in Atlanta.
[Kagan:] Jeanne, thank you very much.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Meanwhile, thousands of miles away, the number of Al Qaeda and Taliban prisoners is rising at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Another 30 detainees arrived at Camp X-Ray yesterday. That brings the total number there to 50. Their arrival is being met by some sharp criticism over their treatment. Our CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr has more on that for us now Barbara.
[Barbara Starr, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Leon. Yes, there's quite a bit of news on that front. First, the international committee for the Red Cross is expected to visit the U.S. military detention facility at Guantanamo Bay later this week, possibly as soon as Thursday, and these international Red Cross members will inspect the facility and verify and report on the conditions in which the detainees are being held. The U.S. is continuing to say that the detainees are receiving humane, if not comfortable treatment. And their latest evidence of that is of one of the detainees underwent a two-hour operation on Sunday for a gunshot wound that he had suffered over a month ago in Afghanistan. He had been wounded on his upper right arm, and Navy surgeons at U.S. Naval hospital at Guantanamo Bay performed an operation on him. The man was apparently in stable condition and awake prior to the surgery. They were able to explain to him exactly what they plan to do. But of course, he was held under very strict security conditions throughout the surgery. It is expected that another planeload of detainees will arrive in Guantanamo Bay, possibly as soon as tomorrow. And eventually, the Pentagon says it plans to move most of the detainees it's holding in Afghanistan to Guantanamo Bay, where it says they will get food, medical treatment and humane treatment and be held in humane conditions. But it will all depend on what the International Red Cross says late this week as to whether this criticism continues Leon.
[Harris:] Barbara, yesterday we spoke briefly about the idea that Pentagon was still trying to work out the procedures for actually interrogating these people. Have they come any closer to coming up with a protocol yet.
[Starr:] No, and this is quite a confusing issue at the moment. They are shipping these detainees to Guantanamo, and no one here at the Pentagon appears ready to say exactly what will happen to them, and how long they will be held in detention. We are told they will begin to undergo more interrogation, but after that, nobody seems to know or is ready to say, at least, whether or not they will face military tribunals, under what conditions they will face military tribunals, or whether the Pentagon will attempt to send them back to their home countries, or simply hold them for an indeterminate period of time at Guantanamo Bay. I should add that Defense Secretary Rumsfeld has said, he doesn't want to be in charge of a large prison population for months and months and months. He wants to hold as few people as possible, and he wants to concentrate on getting the really big fish, as it were, but we will have to see how it all sorts out.
[Harris:] You got it. Barbara Starr, thank you very much.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Experts are still trying to unravel a mystery. A number of people, from Virginia to New York, reported seeing bright lights in the sky and also hearing loud noises. Witnesses say they saw a fireball fall into a cornfield. So what happened? What was it? Robert Lang from our affiliate WGAL takes a look.
[Unidentified Male:] You can't see anything. It's a cornfield.
[Robert Lang, Wgal Reporter:] It looks like any of the other cornfields that dot Route 973 north of Williamsport. But as this home video shows, last night, pieces of a meteorite struck, leaving behind dust and wilted corn. But you wouldn't know today.
[Unidentified Male:] It's really hard to tell what it is.
[Lang:] Today, as firefighters and DEP inspectors look over the land, everything appears to be normal.
[Unidentified Male:] No burn marks, no dust, no evidence. We scanned it with some vapor meteors and the radiation detectors and everything is normal.
[Lang:] One of the amazing things is that one day later, much of the corn in this Lycoming County field has sprung back to life. You have to search very close for damage, this is a burn mark caused by the space debris. [voice-over]: Regardless of what hit this cornfield, this is a night that those who live here won't forget. But still, some aren't surprised.
[Unidentified Male:] I think this is a common occurrence that just happened to happen here. I think many times it happened over the ocean or something and goes unnoticed.
[Jack Benedict, Witness:] I guess with everything else they're putting up in space nowadays, the old satellite, space stations and stuff, you never know what is going to come back down and where it's going to hit.
[Kagan:] That was Robert Lang with our affiliate
[Wgal. Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] And our reporter Ann Kellan is up in Boston right now, and she's been talking to some experts up there, some scientists up in that region, and she joins us now with her take, and the scientists' take, on what that little event yesterday afternoon was. Hello there.
[Ann Kellan, Cnn Science Correspondent:] Hello there. How are you? I talked to some folks at "Sky & Telescope" magazine who are saying that they are a little skeptical that there was actually a touchdown, because there was no evidence on the ground of anything. But they tracked, from eyewitness reports, where it was spotted, and it was spotted, coming in, they think, from the south, in North Carolina, and moved north, where it was spotted in Virginia, Washington, D.C., and then Pennsylvania, where people heard a noise, and that's where they say it probably entered the atmosphere, whatever this object was. But they wonder if pieces of debris may have fallen from the object and my have you saw that corn being burnt a little bit. Maybe that's what caused it. Whether the whole object fell they are a little skeptical, because people further north saw it as well, in Buffalo, Rochester, and as far as Ontario.
[Nelson:] Is there consensus, Ann, on whether this was a piece of a meteor or perhaps something that was manmade, perhaps a piece of an old spacecraft?
[Kellan:] We haven't heard anything from U.S. Space Command, and they're the ones who track this space junk in space. And there are about 9,000 objects up there. It could have fallen from the sky. But we heard nothing from them, and they have made no reports that it was a piece of space junk. Some scientists are wondering if it was a rogue rock, they call it an asteroid which would consist of metallic rock material or whether it's a piece of a comet, which would be more of an icy material. They don't know because there really is nothing to study; there's no evidence of an actual thing falling to earth.
[Nelson:] There's been a whole range of estimations on the size of this thing. Have the scientists you've talked to been able to make some correlation between the bang that people heard, the flash that they saw, and the size that this might have been?
[Kellan:] No, because it was, basically, eyewitness accounts, and I don't think they really can tell by the size. People were saying it was the size of a refrigerator flying, but no, there is nothing that they can ascertain, and they really can't specify what it was. Right now, it's a mystery.
[Nelson:] Stay there Ann.
[Kellan:] OK. We're going to bring in Robert Lang, a reporter from our CNN affiliate WGAL. He's been out in the field, where there is some suspicion that pieces of that rock or whatever it was fell. Robert, are you there? Can you hear us?
[Lang:] Yes, Brian, I can. Good afternoon, from Salidaysburg, Pennsylvania. That's about five miles from where the meteorite hit. As we were out there today, you really can't tell that a meteorite fell. There's really no debris, no dust, and there's not a lot of the damage to the corn crop. The corn, from what we understand, fell forward, as you saw in some of the home video earlier, last night. But that corn was standing tall today. The only damage you could see are small, microscopic burn marks that are in the leaves. You can tell that those are burn marks because of the black rings around it. That's compared to the insect damage which some of corn around here has also been experiencing.
[Nelson:] Robert, let me stop you right there. I'm assuming that those burn marks were not there yesterday, and that's why we went out there?
[Lang:] That's exactly it. Those burn marks were not there yesterday. But those burn marks are small, and you really can't tell whether this has destroyed the corn crop. It appears it really hasn't. The corn continues to grow, and I think some of the corn will be able to be salvaged. I think one of the things that the farmer was worried about and the emergency crews were spectators coming through and trampling through the cornfield, because it's in the cornfield. And they don't want spectators to do more damage than the meteorite did.
[Nelson:] But it's something I don't understand. You've got corn, and you've got evidence of burn, and you can't find any object no residue, no rim of a rock nothing?
[Lang:] That is the mystery, and that's mystery a number of scientists from some local colleges are going to be examining today. A firefighter did tell me corn is a hearty grain, so apparently, it can withstand meteor damage. You learn something new every day, I guess.
[Nelson:] Is there suspicion among authorities out there that this could be a hoax?
[Lang:] No, because they heard the boom. A lot of communities throughout Pennsylvania and throughout the Northeast heard and saw something last night.
[Nelson:] Sure, they heard the boom, but I'm talking about that particular farm field with those burns in the corn?
[Lang:] They're taking it seriously. They are not considering it to be a hoax, but I suppose anything is possible.
[Nelson:] So there's no evidence of anything yet, just a little burn in corn.
[Lang:] That's right.
[Nelson:] Thanks, Robert Lang from CNN affiliate WGAL. Thanks for being with us.
[Lang:] Take care. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] We've got a mixed bag for you coming up, from earnings to warnings to stock splits.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] And for a preview of all of that, we go right to Sasha Salama at the Nasdaq marketsite this morning Sasha.
[Marchini:] Hi.
[Sasha Salama, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, David and Deborah and viewers. A lot going on this morning. Listen up in case you own shares of any of these stocks, companies, or if you're looking to buy or sell. First of all, Protein Design Labs, PDLI is the ticker symbol, it's up more than 5 in the pre-market to 192. The drug developer splitting its stock two for one, payable to shareholders of record August 1. We're also watching Qualcomm, QCOM, the stock up 2 12 in the pre-market. The company scoring a big coup for its wireless technology in Taiwan. The biggest maker of cordless phones in Taiwan will be using Qualcomm's technology known as CDMA. Qualcomm's stock has sold off sharply in recent months amid setbacks both in South Korea and China. We're also watching Centura Software. CNTR could be the stock of pain today. In the pre-market8, the company warning of an earnings shortfall. It expects a loss of 11 to 13 cents a share. Wall Street had expected a profit of one penny a share. Electro Scientific, a different story, ESIO the ticker symbol. This company makes equipment for manufacturing electronic components, and it came in with 61 cents a share. That's 5 cents better than estimates. The stock up 2 in the pre-market. Northwest Airlines,
[Nwac:] The "Washington Post" says that American Airlines is offering to buy Northwest for $44 a share, or $3.7 billion. The "Post" does say talks are still reportedly still far apart, and that bid price, $44, is way above NWAC's close of 35 34. We've got Yahoo! up 15 12 in the pre-market. You see the close over my shoulder. It's at 121 after reporting better-than-expected results. Biogen up 1 in the pre-market on better-than-expected results. And David and Deborah, Nasdaq 100 futures are seeing a nice gain this morning. If it holds, we may test that 4000 level again this morning.
[Haffenreffer:] Sounds terrific, Sasha. Thank you for much.
[Marchini:] Thank you, Yahoo! Right. OK, thanks, Sasha.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] They say everyone talks about the weather, but no one does anything about it. True. The same cannot be said about the economy, though. Federal Reserve policymakers wrapping up a two-day meeting later today, and they will announce a decision on interest rates: to change, to lower, or keep it the same. Live to Chicago and our financial news reporter Ceci Rodgers filling us in now on this one. Ceci, good morning.
[Ceci Rodgers, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning, Bill. Well, Alan Greenspan and his colleagues are wrapping up their two-day meeting and right now, even as we speak, they are probably discussing the current state of the economy and whether things are cooling off enough to allow them to leave interest rates unchanged, at 2:15 this afternoon Eastern time, Alan Greenspan and the Fed, they are expected to announce no change in interest rates, but, they are also expected to release a statement suggesting that perhaps they are still a little concerned about inflation. This is what the widespread expectation is on Wall Street. And the Fed usually likes not to surprise Wall Street traders, the stock market, and the other financial markets. Well, the Fed embarked on its credit tightening campaign a year ago. Raising the overnight federal funds rate six times for a total of 1 34 percentage points. The federal funds right now stands 6 12 percent. That is a nine-year high. That last move was a 50 basis point rate hike, a very aggressive move, to try and cool down the economy and prevent run away inflation. Since then, economic reports, though, have been suggesting the beginnings of a cool down. We've had retail sales falling; construction seems to be moderating and the housing market is moderating. And just yesterday, we got a read on consumer confidence, showing the biggest drop there in more than a year. So there is a lot of expectations that the economy is cooling down but what people really want to know, what economists want to know is, is this temporary or will the economy gather steam in the months ahead? So most of the people in the markets are looking forward, already, to that August Fed meeting Bill.
[Hemmer:] All right, Ceci Rogers, August 22, is my calender is correct. We'll watch it today.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] The body of Syrian President Hafez Assad is now being taken to his hometown for burial. Officials from around the world have joined the Syrian people today in paying their final respects. More now on the day-long ceremony. CNN's Mike Hanna live from Damascus with more Mike.
[Mike Hanna, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, at the moment, the body of President al-Assad is leaving Damascus. It is now on an aircraft taxiing along the tarmac at Damascus Airport. It will go from here to an airport near the home village of Qardaha, where President al-Assad will be buried alongside his eldest son, Basil, who died in 1994. This aircraft that you're seeing now will have a full military escort for the short journey to the airport near the coastal and very mountainous village of Qardaha, the humble village where President al- Assad was born 69 years ago. But the funeral proceedings began earlier in the day, some eight hours ago, with a procession through the streets of Damascus. Tens of thousands of people lined the route to pay their last respects to President Assad. And once the procession through the city had been completed, the body laid in state in what is called the "People's Palace" for a number of hours. And there in the People's Palace, large numbers of dignitaries came to pay their last respects to President al-Assad and commiserate with his son and his likely heir, Bashar al-Assad. Among those who came to pay their respects, U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who had a brief conversation with the heir apparent of Bashar Assad. Here, too, were the chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization, Yasser Arafat, an old foe of President Assad. Also here, old friends of the late president, such as the Iranian leader, Mohammed Khatemi. So certainly the entire Arab community, the entire Arab world, as well as many international figures, came here to pay their last respects. And his coffin was then carried out of the People's Palace, was once again walked down the steps and put on a transport to be driven out to the airport. This his final drive, his final walk along the streets of Damascus. Now, the coffin is in the aircraft, the airplane about to take off from Damascus Airport as President al-Assad nears the end of his final journey home. Back to you.
[Hemmer:] All right, Mike Hanna, live in Damascus, thanks.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] Now to the Texas capitol. We are hearing some familiar names being tossed about as possible members of a Bush cabinet, and they're not all Republican. Joining us again with that, CNN's Eileen O'Connor in Austin Eileen.
[Eileen O'connor, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, they aren't, but is not surprising, according to aides in the Bush camp who say that, you know, Governor Bush has a history of bipartisanship. And of course, they also say, with a closeness of an election this election with the divisions in Congress that it is not that obviously he'll be looking at what they say is a host a list of a host of capable and able Democrats who can agree with his vision and his agenda. And he was hard at work today at the state capitol. He met with his chief of staff Andrew Card. He came back to the governor's mansion, but only after greeting a lot of schoolchildren outside on the steps of the state capitol. One Republican strategist put, it's all about imagery right now maintaining the image that this is the president-elect, that what the vice president is doing in Florida by contesting a certified election is about overturning the results of an election and taking away the presidency. And so Governor Bush wants obviously wants to appear presidential and stay above the fray, leaving it to his lawyers in Florida. His chief of staff Andrew Card saying that, of course, they are looking for a government that will unify the country.
[Andrew Card, Bush Chief Of Staff:] It's a good, comprehensive list that will reflect the governor's ability to bring people together. I'm not going to comment about any names.
[Question:] Is he making good progress [OFF-MIKE]?
[Card:] Oh, yes. The governor is very attentive to the responsibilities that he may have to assume; and he and Secretary Cheney have talked, so making a lot of progress.
[O'connor:] Obviously, the Bush campaign awaiting the vice president's remarks Natalie.
[Allen:] OK, thank you Eileen O'Connor.

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Anchor:] We are waiting for the House leadership, Speaker Hastert and Dick Gephardt, to come to the microphones in Washington to talk about the decisions that they have made, which are somewhat different, somewhat different than the decisions the Senate leadership has made about whether to stay open for business, when to shut down, when to go home, what to do with the staff. All of this, of course, in light of the anthrax that was found in the office of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle the other day. The early tests on that, 31 people, most of them staffers of Senator Daschle's but some of them Capitol Police, have tested positive for exposure we underline exposure to anthrax. So far, no evidence of infection. And in fact, just a short time ago, someone was asked at a briefing that the Senate leadership did if anyone is sick. The answer was no. It seems like a good time to go back to Atlanta and Dr. Sanjay Gupta. Let's let's I want to clarify one thing I mentioned and then a couple of other things.
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] We did check actually with the Centers for Disease Control, and in fact 20,000 deaths nationwide from the flu, 100,000 hospitalizations. But the point here only is to try and help context, just keep what's going on in context. So on the subject of exposure and contraction, let's run this through one more time. What is the difference?
[Gupta:] Exposure merely means, Aaron, that someone has actually had anthrax near them, either on their skin, perhaps in their nose. It does not mean the second step, which you worry about, but has not occurred, which is that those spores have actually gotten into the blood stream, gotten into the base of the lungs somewhere and actually started to wreak their havoc. Anthrax actually works by releasing toxins, which can get into your bloodstream, get into your lymph glands, all these sorts of things. But none of that has happened if you've only been exposed.
[Brown:] The reason they do a nasal swab, by the way?
[Gupta:] The reason for they do a nasal swab basically is just to see if there's any spores that are actually in your nose. It's sort of just a test to say, well, if there's actually spores in the nose, we need to be vigilant, we need to actually make sure there's no spores that have gotten down into the lungs. But even before that, just let's start treating it to make sure we never see any symptoms develop in somebody in case some of those spores did get down into the lungs.
[Brown:] And this nasal swab that we have heard so much about now, is that a certain test? Can we be confident that if someone is swabbed negative that they in fact have not been exposed to anthrax?
[Gupta:] Right, and I've asked that same question to some of the people who conduct these tests. What they told me was that it is very unlikely for spores to have passed through your nose and to your lungs without having some spores left in your nose. So it is a good test to see if you've actually been exposed. There is a very, very remote chance that all of the spores that you inhaled actually passed right through your nose, none of them stayed behind, and all went to your lungs, but they said that's very much a remote possibility.
[Brown:] So, that's the kind of good newsbad news. If it comes back negative, clearly or it would seem almost certain you're OK. If it comes back positive, at the minimum and this is the minimum you've been exposed to it. This may sound absolutely off-the-wall. I apologize. I'm clearly not a doctor. If you take an ounce of anthrax, does it grow? Does it become an ounce and half at some point without some intervention?
[Gupta:] Bacteria like any other organism does need nutrients to grow, Aaron. It will not grow, for example, in an envelope. But certainly, when it gets into your bloodstream, when it gets into the base of your lungs, it can grow, it can divide, and actually increase the numbers of spores or actual bacteria. So it can if provided with the proper nutrients.
[Brown:] But just if it were in the ventilation system of a building or one of the experiments that I read about recently, they were talking about it being released in the subway system. An ounce doesn't become a pound simply because it's in the subway system or in the ventilation system.
[Gupta:] That's correct, Aaron. Just in the without any sort of nutrients, it should not grow, and I'll add to that as well that these spores are very, very sensitive to sunlight, meaning sunlight is very likely to deactivate them, essentially kill them. So in fact, if you have a lot of spores out in sunlight, in fact they won't grow. They may actually decrease in number over time.
[Brown:] OK. One more question I want to ask, but I need to go to Kate Snow up on the Hill first. Kate, as I think you probably know, has been working the House-Senate side of the story, trying to figure out what they are going to do. Kate, what do you know?
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Aaron, I can tell you that the House is looking now at taking a recess later this afternoon. They're going to be closing their House office buildings around 7 o'clock tonight. The Senate, we understand, is going to be closing down their Senate office buildings later this evening at close of business, we're told, and sending their staff home. Both of these measures being taken so that they can do some further environmental testing in all of the buildings that house the Senate and House offices. But the Senate, as you just heard a short time ago, is going to stay in session, if you will. They're going to probably have at least one vote tomorrow. This is more symbolic than anything else, to show that they're still open for business. And one interesting note on the House side we're hearing from one of our producers in the House that they're just looking at this possibility. But they're looking at whether or not there might be another place where members of the House could convene and could hold their sessions. They're looking into alternative sites. I'm told by representative Bob Ney, who is chairman of the Administration Committee, though, they're not at the stage where they would actually go and meet there. They're just simply looking at options. And one other note on that, tomorrow there was a hearing that was already scheduled to happen. It's being conducted by Bon Menendez. He's going to be conducting his hearing on bioterrorism and homeland defense. And Aaron, they're telling us that they're going to be look at a hotel or maybe a townhouse where they can hold that hearing somewhere off campus. So they can still get some of the work of the Congress done Aaron.
[Brown:] Kate, in all honestly, you can only shake your head. You think about the symbolism of that for a second, of the House or the Senate deciding that it is not safe to do business in the Capitol of the United States of America. You remember the kind of low-level fuss there was on September 11th that it took the president quite some time to get back to Washington and the symbolism of that. Now, at least on the table being kicked around, is the idea that maybe the Congress of the United States has to find a safer place to meet.
[Snow:] Right, but again maybe. Maybe they have to find a safer place. And you heard from the senators, Senator Daschle and Senator Lott and Senator Daschle, in fact, just spoke a few moments ago on the floor of the Senate, emphasizing again that this is not a dire situation, that this is eminently treatable, that there are 31 people who have been exposed, but they are not coming down with anthrax. So there is a lot of note of caution on Capitol Hill, a lot of people trying to stress that it's not an incredibly bad situation, but just one where they're trying to take some precautions Aaron.
[Brown:] Kate, thank you. Back to Sanjay Gupta. Doctor, I had a question on antibiotics. We talked about Cipro all the time. Is there anything magic here about Cipro or is there a range of antibiotics that can be used, could be used if necessary?
[Gupta:] Aaron, it has a sort of interesting history. Certainly for the naturally occurring anthrax that we've been hearing a lot about, a lot of different antibiotics work, such as penicillin even. The reason Cipro became so popular and so advocated was because there's genetically manipulated anthrax strains, which actually are genetically manipulated simply to become antibiotic-resistant. Ciprofloxacin was one of the antibiotics it was very difficult to make resistant against, and that's why it gained such popularity against the inhaled anthrax.
[Brown:] Sanjay, thanks. Sanjay Gupta in Atlanta.

[Unidentified Male:] Just when you thought it was safe to go back to Florida: The ballots are back, and some people are dying to count them.
[Ii:] Curse of the Chad." Coming soon to a news channel near you.
[Bill Press, Co-host:] Well, you know, maybe George Bush resigned as governor too soon. They're still counting ballots in Florida, watch out.
[Tucker Carlson, Co-host:] I don't think so, Bill. The movie's over, the lights are up, they're sweeping up the popcorn and going home, thank heaven.
[Press:] Good evening, everybody. It's THE SPIN ROOM right here on CNN. I'm Bill Press, thank you for joining us.
[Tucker:] And I'm Tucker Carlson. Tonight, another recount story it never ends. We want to know what you think; we have the suspicion you think something about this. You can call us, as always, toll-free, 1-800-310-4CNN. You can join our live, online chat at cnn.com, or you can send us an e-mail. Our address, needless to say, is spin@cnn.com.
[Press:] Yes, giving you a chance to sound off about the issues you care about and, of course, our purpose, as every night, is to prove that, no matter how serious it gets, it never has to be grim no grimness, Tucker.
[Carlson:] Even when the news is grim; and it's getting a little grim. The recount goes on and on and on. As if we needed another reason to hate the press of course, Bill and I don't but many of you out there, we suspect, hate the press. And of course the press has begun the recount again. News organizations plan to recount the ballots.
[Press:] As we know, here is what's going on: The Associated Press, "Miami Herald," "The New York Times," "The Los Angeles Times, and "The Wall Street Journal," among the newspaper organizations they've all requested, under Florida's sunshine law, the opportunity, the right, to go in there and count these ballots. And they've already started. I think they started in Broward County, and they sit around the table and Tucker, you know, pretty soon we're going to know there they are. Pretty soon we're going to know who really won in Florida. We don't know yet, Tucker.
[Carlson:] The problem is, Bill, that at some point you move from mathematics to metaphysical questions. There are 65,000 overcounts. That means there are 65,000 approximately ballots on which voters wrote the names of two candidates. How do you decide who that voter meant to vote for? There's no way, unless you're a psychic; and, perhaps, there are psychics on the staffs of those daily newspapers. Otherwise, we will never know.
[Press:] Well, I would submit that overcounts will be discredited, and should be. But it's the undercounts, the ones the machine didn't get isn't this sounding awfully familiar that we're going to have to take a look at. But my question to you is: What are you going to do maybe before January 20, maybe January 21, when we find out that Al Gore not only won the popular vote, but he won Florida; thereby he won the electoral vote and you have an impostor in the White House. What are you going to do will you ask him to resign?
[Carlson:] Actually, I have an answer for that. I would send a team of psychiatric nurses, burly, male psychiatric nurses with nets to wherever Al Gore is staying and put him under 24 hour suicide watch because this will push that poor man completely over the edge.
[Press:] No, I think you better send those psychiatric nurses to the White House, because this will push George W. Bush right over the edge.
[Carlson:] One suspects not.
[Press:] It doesn't take much, I think, to push him over the edge. But I also think this is great; to me, it's the power of the press. The courts Supreme Court stopped the counties from counting the vote, but they can't stop the press from...
[Carlson:] The guardians of the First Amendment, that would be us. And you know, Bill, if it was so much fun the first time, why not do it again?
[Press:] God bless America, our viewers are already into this count in their e-mail. Tucker, here's one from Francis Ward: "The current manual count in Florida is secretly being orchestrated by the mysterious allies of Tucker Carlson with the sole intention of keeping THE SPIN ROOM alive."
[Carlson:] You know, Francis Ward is onto something, and it goes without saying that all of our allies are mysterious, and for good reason.
[Press:] Francis saw right through us.
[Carlson:] Our viewers are very perceptive. This is from Ann Jane, who's been watching. She's taking issue with something we said on another show: "You said that there was never going to be closure in this election because. Even when the vote count is finished by news organizations, their numbers might vary. There will be closure," she counters. "It will happen in January 2005 at President Rodham's inauguration." Sometimes closure isn't pretty.
[Press:] Right on, Hillary. All right, Rob's e-mail about the recount: "If we are going to say Bush might not have won the election because of undervotes, then you have to say that Gore might not have won the popular vote for the same reason."
[Carlson:] Actually, I think you could say more than that. I think you could say that, in 1992 and 1996, Bill Clinton didn't win those elections because there were a number of uncounted votes, and that, actually, has been my theory for the past eight years. But you know, up until this point nobody's taken me seriously. Thank you, Rob, for doing so.
[Press:] I think you can say nobody takes you seriously, Tucker, you know that. But I think you could say that, with Al Gore heard by 544,000 votes in the popular by margin of that in the popular vote I think he's safe. I do think...
[Carlson:] There are a lot of disenfranchised voters.
[Press:] We want to look right inside of those counting rooms; and we're lucky tonight because we have somebody who sort of instigated the whole thing. He joins us now from Miami.
[Carlson:] We have an actual chad-gazer. Joining us from Miami is a familiar face from the days of the Florida election marathon. Mark Seibel is assistant managing editor, AME, of "The Miami Herald." Thank you for joining us.
[Press:] Good evening, Mark. Good to have you here.
[Mark Seibel, Assistant Managing Editor, "miami Herald":] Good evening. Thank you.
[Press:] Now, Mark, one of the big questions a lot of people have is, why are you guys doing this and, in fact, one of our colleagues from the media, John Gibson, who's moved over now to Fox...
[Carlson:] I think colleague is a little strong.
[Press:] I guess it may be. Well, he's another journalist moving over to Fox, and he is saying that you've got no business doing this. I want you to respond. Here's what John Gibson said just a couple days ago on Fox: "George Bush is going to be president. And who needs to know that he's not a legitimate president? Al Gore? Jesse Jackson? His political opponents? How does it do any good for the country to find out that, by somebody's count, the wrong guy is president?" What do you say to that, Mark?
[Seibel:] Well, we've looked at the situation in the same way we look at many situations. We're journalists; there are documents. In this case, there are ballots out there that might shed some light on something people are debating, that there's a lot of lingering questions about; and that, in fact, at least in Florida, there will be legislative action about. So I think it would be completely irresponsible for us to not take a look the ballots and try and see what light we can cast on this controversy.
[Carlson:] But I guess my question is more of a kind of, inside journalism question here. Once you have assessed these ballots and used the various standards to do it, my first question is: What are you going to do with that information? Are you going to put out some sort of special edition? And do you expect that anyone will read it? And [b] who gets the assignments to count the ballots? Do you draw straw I mean, it's got to be the worst assignment in all of journalism.
[Seibel:] Well, actually, we have lots of volunteers to count the ballots. We've been getting calls from all over the country, volunteers wanting to count the ballots. And our own staff, you know, lots of our reporters would like to be part of this story. This is a if nothing else, it's a historic moment. It's a footnote in the history books, perhaps, because I think people are right when they say George Bush won the election and he's the president. But an awful lot of people, actually, are interested; and my volume of e-mail and calls and those kinds of things indicate to me that all over the country people are looking forward to reading whatever conclusion we might have at the end of this.
[Carlson:] Let me just make sure we get this straight: You're taking volunteers, kind of randoms off the street to help count the ballots?
[Seibel:] No; we have lots of volunteers but, fortunately we don't need them.
[Press:] All right, Mark, here's my insider question: What standard are you using? I mean, if the judges couldn't sort it out dimple, pregnant, hanging, daylight test what did you guys decided to use as your test?
[Seibel:] Well, what we started out doing and I mean, what we are doing, is reviewing the ballots just to objectively describe them. And we've put together a form that has, you know, seven potential characteristics and then the opportunity for comment, should there be one we haven't allowed for. And we've asked our reviewers to just note, is there a dimple? Is there a hanging chad that's attached by one corner, two corners, three corners? Is there, you know, a clean punch? Or is there no mark at all in the presidential row? And that's what we've asked them to do. And then, based on that, we'll do a computer sort.
[Press:] All right; so, then, you're going to report and say, if you count hanging chads, Gore won; if you count dimpled chads, Bush won is that it? I mean, you're going to give us different scenarios?
[Seibel:] Yes, we'll come up, I suspect, with a range. You know, people talk about, you know, what standard we're going to use but we, in fact, have standards that the Palm Beam Canvassing Board and the Broward Canvassing Board did work with. And so we hope we've constructed our review process in a way that we can apply both the Palm Beach and the Broward standards.
[Carlson:] But what about the ballots themselves? I mean, Republicans this is a talking point, but it's still a real question these ballots have been handled a lot, they've been in the Ryder truck. And then you're going to have reporters, many of whom, let's be honest, have shaky hands, trying to look at these ballots that maybe be ragged around edges. Is that not a concern?
[Seibel:] It's not much of a concern, to be honest. One, the reporters don't get to touch ballots; the elections workers are the only people under state law who can handle the ballot. The other thing I look at the ballots. They're not ragged around the edges. Ballots are meant to be handled. They go through lots of handling, and the only chads, we're told, that one would expect to fall out is chads that were meant to fall out. So I think that is I think you aptly described it as a talking point. These ballots, in our review process, look perfectly fine. I mean, they're, you know, they're marked in different and sometimes unusual ways. But they don't seem to be any the worse for wear.
[Press:] All right, Mark, hang in there, because we have a lot more questions for you. By the way, I never would have accused you, nor Tucker, of having shaky hands. I don't...
[Carlson:] Oh, I would excuse him of having shaky hands.
[Press:] Well...
[Carlson:] You don't know Mark Seibel. Come on.
[Press:] We're going to take a break. We've got a lot more questions about the Florida recount. Get your nominations in for "Spin of the Day," folks, you know that moment that you just found so outrageous a statement by somebody. And you can get them in by phone. It's a free call, no charge: 1-800-310-4CNN. Join our chat room at cnn.com, or send us an e-mail. Our address, again, spin@cnn.com. We'll be right back with the ongoing count in Florida.
[Carlson:] We shall.
[Press:] There we go.
[Carlson:] Welcome back to THE SPIN ROOM. I'm Tucker Carlson here with Bill Press. It is time for our Canada moment, Bill: that time we reserve in the show to pay tribute to our...
[Press:] Favorite favorite part of the show.
[Carlson:] ... friends to the north. We have an e-mail. More than an e-mail, an invitation. "Dear Bill and Tucker, how about coming up to Toronto and hosting a SPIN ROOM in Canada..."
[Press:] I'm ready.
[Carlson:] "... for a week. If you're good, we may even give you tickets to a hockey game."
[Press:] Red carpet.
[Carlson:] ... because as of last week, we are now officially honorary Canadian citizens. We received these in the mail. Our citizenship certificates. These are valid at any international border. We're on our way. SPIN ROOM from Canada. Thank you to our friends from the north.
[Press:] Yes. And Tucker, I have my honorary citizenship as well...
[Carlson:] And handsome it is.
[Press:] ... I just want you to know. So we both have them. And in addition to that, I just want to say thanks to, here it is, Ulysses Promotions from Long Beach, California. This ties right into the topic of tonight's show, which is, did Bush really win in Florida? This T-shirt, the "Bush presidency" actually if you read it closely, it says "The Ambushed Presidency."
[Carlson:] "The Ambushed Presidency." Tonight's SPIN ROOM brought to you by Ulysses Promotions.
[Press:] We love it. We love it.
[Carlson:] Ulysses Promotions loves it...
[Press:] There was some other news of the day.
[Carlson:] Indeed, there was tons of news.
[Press:] However, it wasn't it wasn't all just about the Florida recount.
[Carlson:] And it wasn't all promotional T-shirts. No, today George W. Bush resigned from his position as governor of Texas in an emotional ceremony. His seat was taken by Lieutenant Governor Rick Perry. News organization spotted cardboard boxes in the governor's mansion. He is, in fact, leaving.
[Press:] And of course, the question that we're raising tonight is did he resign too soon. The governor was also busy in Austin today deciding some other Cabinet nominations. I want to acknowledge last night, I sort of pre-empted what do I say? Got ahead of myself. I mentioned that Tommy Thompson had been appointed yesterday.
[Carlson:] You may have.
[Press:] He's going to be appointed tomorrow as secretary of HHS, and big news: New Jersey Governor Christie Todd Whitman is going to be the new director of the Environmental Protection Agency. And as we will see a little later in the show, Tucker, that nomination is driving some conservatives bananas.
[Carlson:] You know, Bill, the news was good until I heard that. There's always one fly in the ointment. Is that the phrase? But in good news today, the Nasdaq has Salon.com, the online magazine that once panned us, down to 93 cents a share from a high of over $10 this year. Bill and I, as your investment managers, recommend selling. If you're holding Salon.com stock, sell. At 93 cents, it's still overvalued.
[Press:] Don't put my name on that recommendation. I like Salon, and I hope they make it, We're talking about the Florida recount with a man who's helped organize it. He's taking part in it. He's accepting volunteers from all over the country who want to help. Mark Seibel, the assistant managing editor of "The Miami Herald." Now, Mark, one of our viewers actually has nominated you for "Spin of the day," if I may, and this is what's he said. He's quoting you, where you said quote "We are expecting whatever we find." Do you remember saying that and what did you mean?
[Seibel:] Well, I might have said that, not a very good sentence. But basically, you know, people ask us what we are expecting, and I would have to say we're very much just beginning this process, and I don't know what we're expecting. And we will, in fact, find whatever it is we find. We're going to look at the ballots. We're going to compare them to whatever we can compare them to. We're going to judge them. We're going to write what seems to us to be appropriate conclusions to be done from that review. But people ask us, what we're going to write, and like any journalist, I think I say, I don't know what we're going to write until we've done the reporting.
[Press:] Good man!
[Carlson:] But this has been I mean, this has been looked at by lawyers and judges and appellate judges and justices from the state and federal supreme courts. I mean, you must have, after all that looking and of course, they've been recounted twice by machine you must have some sense that Gore, if they were counted as you're going to count them, will come out on top, don't you think?
[Seibel:] Well, actually, no, I don't think that's true at all. We did sort of a little analysis here again based on precinct by precinct information, when the state Supreme Court issued its order for a recount. Our conclusion from that it was probable, if not likely, that Bush would remain ahead. So I think it's we don't no what these ballots will actually have in them, and to say that they've that lawyers and judges and whoever have reviewed them, well, in fact, that's not true. Nobody has really looked at most of these ballots.
[Press:] Mark, a couple of quick questions: How long is it going to take you? When are you going to be finished?
[Seibel:] Well, we hope to measure it in weeks and not months, but the truth is the first two days of Broward County counting earlier this week went much more slowly than we anticipated.
[Press:] And...
[Seibel:] Go ahead.
[Press:] And I saw one of the election officials I forget for what county said she wasn't going to let you see these ballots. She was putting them under lock and key until unless a judge ordered her to give the ballots to you. So are you going to have access to all 67 counties?
[Seibel:] Yes, because I'm sure a judge will order her to do that.
[Carlson:] And very quickly, Mark, I'm just wondering...
[Press:] That's the answer.
[Carlson:] What is this costing "The Miami Herald"? This must be enormously expensive.
[Seibel:] Well, we don't know yet. Knight-Ridder, which is our parent company it owns newspapers all over the United States, "The Kansas City Star" and "The Fort Worth Star Telegram," and "The Philadelphia Inquirer," "Detroit Free Press," "San Jose Mercury," and others.
[Press:] All right. End of plug.
[Carlson:] Do you have a web site? Just kidding.
[Seibel:] They're yes.
[Carlson:] Just kidding.
[Seibel:] You know, they're they're going to help underwrite the cost of it. Knight-Ridder believes very strongly that it's a good project for the country's interest and certainly of interest to our readers. The final analysis, we don't know.
[Press:] They've got lots they've got lots of money, and Mark, we don't have lots of time, because we're going to have say goodbye to you.
[Carlson:] But we appreciate thank you for coming out and explaining that.
[Press:] And when you get the count, OK, we want you to come back and give us that whole breakdown hanging, dimpled, you know, who wins by what standard.
[Carlson:] In fact, you can come on the night before it goes to print. If you could break it here, we'll be grateful.
[Seibel:] We'll need the show.
[Press:] OK, you got it. Mark Seibel, thanks very, very much. And now, going to take a break and come back with your favorite, our favorite part of the show, our "Spins of the Day."
[Carlson:] Yes.
[Press:] Our "Spins of the Day."
[Carlson:] We're going to sort through the pile that you're going to send in the commercial break, we hope. We'll be right back.
[Press:] It's THE SPIN ROOM, of which we call in all humility the newest sensation on CNN. I'm Bill Press...
[Carlson:] Do we call it that?
[Press:] ... here with Tucker Carlson.
[Carlson:] Let's call it that.
[Press:] Somebody has to. Time for "Spin of the Day." We start out with a phone call from Dan in Kansas. Hello, Dan. Thanks for joining us. You're in
[The Spin Room. Caller:] Hello Bill and Tucker. I was wondering, I'm a veteran. I was in the Marine Corps for a number of years and I voted absentee a few times and I was wondering if these absentee ballots, I think over 1,400 of them, were thrown out on different technicalities. In Broward County itself, only 92 were accepted and 304 were rejected. Are they going count those ballots, too? It should be pretty clear whether they're whether they're, you know, for the who or what.
[Press:] Dan, I hear your question and I think they should be counted but I think none of us know whether or not they...
[Carlson:] I think we have to leave it to "The Miami Herald," Dan. Doesn't that make you feel better. It warms my heart. And speaking of warm heart, Bill, we've been getting tons of Christmas cards.
[Press:] I know, from everybody but...
[Carlson:] Mostly for you, and the best one I think we've received all season comes not from a politician, not from the garbage collectors in California you get those Christmas cards from, but from a journalist. Tim Russert.
[Press:] Look at this.
[Carlson:] NBC's "Meet the Press." Is that fantastic?
[Press:] That's a great guy. The staff of "Meet the Press" and Tim with his chalkboard that he used on election night. Indeed, not the only Christmas card that we've received. I wanted you to know here's one, a person who has a warm spot in my heart. Now, folks look very, very, very closely. You won't recognize that grizzly bear on the left, but you may recognize Shelley Buchanan on the right and yes, hidden away in that fur coat is Pat Buchanan.
[Carlson:] Going after the Eskimo vote. It looks like he's hugging a dog.
[Press:] President-Elect Buchanan, there he is.
[Carlson:] Doesn't he look like he's kissing a dog?
[Press:] So, Tucker, there it is, add Pat Buchanan, add Tim Russert to the list. I would point out none from Crawford, Texas and there's only one more night for George W. to get his card in.
[Carlson:] As I told you, Bill, you made fun of his dog.
[Press:] I know, but why not? It's a dumb name.
[Carlson:] Bill Press, please apologize for making fun of Bush's dog's name, writes Karen Noles. Spot is a nice, honest name for a dog. If you left it up to Bush's handlers and speechwriters, the dog would probably be named Thomas Jefferson.
[Press:] I like Thomas Jefferson better than Spot. My "Spin of the Day" today. Conservative Gary Bauer was on CNN's "INSIDE POLITICS." He's not happy with George Bush's appointees, believe it or not. Here's what he said, first of all.
[Gary Bauer, Campaign For Working Families:] I'm changing my position, here. I think I might be in favor of bipartisan if that means we can get some conservatives in the Cabinet.
[Press:] Now, he said that, and then here's how he whacked Christie Todd Whitman, the new head of EPA. Listen to Gary Bauer, of all people.
[Bauer:] Appointing her is like waving a red flag in front of the people that stuffed the envelopes, rang the doorbells and made George Bush president.
[Press:] I would just like to point out to Gary Bauer that George won, you lost.
[Carlson:] I would just like to point out to Gary Bauer that if he had said this earlier, I might have voted for him. Here's my "Spin of the Day." This comes we put up on the screen at a recent party at which the President and Mrs. Clinton were dining, somebody said to the president, you ought give the Medal of Freedom out. And he said, well, people who get the Medal of Freedom tend to die earlier, maybe I should have given one to Katherine Harris. "The Washington Post" found out about this and White House Press Secretary Jake Siewert said quote to "The Post": "It is inappropriate to print something like this during the holiday season." Now, we like Jake Siewert, but if it's inappropriate to print, perhaps it's inappropriate to call for the death of Katherine Harris. Does that qualify as inappropriate, Bill? I know you're not a fan.
[Press:] I would say it was appropriate to print and to say.
[Carlson:] To call for her death.
[Press:] All right, we're going to have to pick that up again tomorrow night.
[Carlson:] We call that the politics of personal destruction.
[Press:] We'll be back tomorrow night. Out of time of time for now. We'll be back tomorrow night at 10:30.
[Carlson:] And every single night, now through eternity.
[Press:] But don't go away because the sports guys are coming up next right here on CNN.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] In New York City, a man who was staying in a hotel overlooking the World Trade Center on September the 11th was in court today and has been found guilty of making false statements. With more on that, CNN's Susan Candiotti Susan.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Judy. Well, actually he's only been charged at this point. From what we understand, there will be a hearing later on this afternoon. But so far, this man has been charged in a criminal complaint of allegedly of making false statements about his alleged possession of a radio. Now, let's start from the beginning. This is a man who is identified to us as an Egyptian national. His name is Abdallah Higazy. That is the name of the person charged in the criminal complaint. It is alleged that he checked into the Millennium Hotel it's Hilton hotel on August the 27th in New York City. This hotel overlooks the World Trade Center. He was scheduled to leave on September the 25th, checked in on August the 27th. He was staying, according to the criminal complaint, on the 51st floor in a corner room with a view of the World Trade Center. Now, according to court papers, he entered the U.S. on August 27 on his Egyptian passport with a student visa. Now, according to the complaint, after the World Trade Center crash occurred attack occurred, the hotel was evacuated. At some point after that hotel employees, according to court papers, found a radio inside a combination safe inside the hotel room. This was let's describe the radio for you. This is a radio that is described as one that can communicate air-to-air among pilots and also air-to-ground. It's a transceiver. We understand, according to aviation experts, that this is a very commonly held radio transmitter. That is, again, hand-held. It is commonly used by pilots. Oftentimes they carry it aboard flights, according to experts, in their flight bags just in case there is failure with the on-air radio. This is a radio that can communicate with the air traffic control tower. Now, according to back to the criminal complaint when Higazy returned to the hotel on December 17 it is unclear whether the FBI was alerted at that time or if they were waiting for him, but they questioned Higazy at that time. And he was arrested, picked up that day for questioning and then later held as a material witness in connection with the investigation, according to sources, with the September 11 attacks. At this point, we do know that he is expected to make a court appearance this afternoon; his first appearance in response to the criminal complaint before the court Judy.
[Woodruff:] And Susan, once again, he's only been charged with making false statements at this point?
[Candiotti:] That's right.
[Woodruff:] And as far as we know, even though they interviewed him and it looks suspicious, they don't have anything beyond this to connect him to what happened?
[Candiotti:] Now, additionally we have learned this, though, from the court papers: that, according to the FBI criminal the information from the FBI, he claimed that he used to repair these types of radios because he used to be with the Egyptian air corps. And he said he part of his job was to repair radios that were able to communicate with people on the ground, that pilots would use. But he denied that this radio belonged to him. We want to make that very clear. He claimed he had no knowledge of; claimed he didn't know that it was in the hotel safe. Nevertheless, he has been charged with making false statements. And we hope to, of course, learn more about this as the day goes on.
[Woodruff:] All right, Susan Candiotti, thank you very much. And we'll probably be talking to you later on.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] And we go live right back to Tallahassee, to the Florida to the capital of Florida for this latest news. Actually, let's bring in our Bill Hemmer, my partner, Bill Hemmer, who is standing by in Tallahassee. Bill, you take it from here.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Yes, Daryn, we just heard from James Baker, making his latest case for what he calls "finality" right now in the race for the White House in this wild and wacky election year. He pointed to three precincts in Broward County that he says shows what the Democratic Party is trying to do at this time, talking about precincts that were chosen that were overwhelmingly in favor of Al Gore over George Bush. And for that, Baker says the Gore campaign is right now focusing on selectivity and not fairness. Now, whether or not Baker has a point that settles in will most probably be decided, in the near term anyway, by a circuit court judge here in Leon County in the city of Tallahassee. We expect a decision probably within the hour, expected earlier this morning, but right now it looks like around 12:00 noon Eastern time, which is about 35, 36 minutes from now. So stay tuned for more on that to give us more direction possibly for where we are headed for later today. In the meantime, though, Palm Beach County. Let's go down to John Zarrella, who is standing by live now to bring us up to date on yet another judge who has recused himself from the current issue. John, what's happening there?
[John Zarrella, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Bill. What we have is that over in circuit court here in Palm Beach County, there were about half a dozen lawsuits brought by individuals who said that they were cheated out of their right to vote because of the so-called butterfly ballot and the way it was laid out. They went before a judge yesterday in emergency hearing. That judge recused himself, said he could not deal with the issue for certain reasons; went to another judge this morning, that judge recused herself. Now a third judge in Palm Beach County has also recused himself. So we would be onto the fourth judge. I don't know how many more judges there are left in Palm Beach County Circuit Court to go through here, but the first three have now recused themselves. That's one set of legal action going on here. Other sets of legal action, of course, here we are at the emergency operations center where they were expected to begin the manual recount of the entire county's ballots this morning at 7:00 a.m. That was put on hold and suspended because of two differing legal opinions. First the secretary of state, a Republican, her legal opinion came in saying they did not have the right to recount the votes, the legal authority to do it, because it wasn't something wrong with the machine or the counting equipment that led them to want to do a complete recount. Then Bob Butterworth, the attorney general, who's a Democrat, said in his opinion, strictly an opinion, that they did have the right to go ahead and do a recount. So now the county is going to circuit court seeking an opinion from a judge as to what they should do. The Democratic Party is also going to circuit court here and they are asking that the so-called pregnant chads, just the little pin- point pricks in the ballots, be counted here by the election workers because, up until now, the election workers have not been counting those pregnant ballots. So there are at least three or four different, separate legal actions going on here. The Rev. Jesse Jackson has arrived here about 25 minutes ago. He's actually off to my left side out of view right now, and he is calling on the secretary of state to recuse herself, saying that it's a completely partisan and arbitrary decision to have this 5:00 p.m. deadline. He said that he's also asking Gov. Bush to "trust the" quoting now "trust the count over the clock," that the disenfranchised, as he put it, the voters here in Palm Beach County, their voices must be heard in order for this to be a fair election in the state of Florida. So lots of legal action on the ground. And of course lots of politics here in the state of Florida Bill.
[Hemmer:] The battle over the ballots and the battle over chad, we may have to go to Chad, the country of Chad, to find a judge who can sit on this case. John, thanks again to you. Again, I mentioned this hearing that took place yesterday here in Tallahassee. We expect a decision shortly. Let's go over to Mike Boettcher, who is inside that courthouse right across the street, in fact, here in Tallahassee. Mike, what's the latest over there?
[Mike Boettcher, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Bill, Judge Terry Lewis took his homework with him last night. He was supposed to work on this hearing, this opinion overnight and was going to dictate it to his clerk and then have it ready at about 10:30. But we're told it's going to be more like noon. Now, there are three more prominent ways he could probably go: completely stick with the state law that says 5:00 p.m. Tuesday; he could also choose to overlook that and order the count to be done, the final county certification on the Friday deadline; or he could give time for all the recounts to be done before they're certified. But whatever happens, this is going to go to the Supreme Court, which is another block away from here. Either side, Republican or Democrat, will appeal this ruling. Normally, it would be appealed to a circuit court of appeals here in Florida, but there is an emergency provision in the law which will allow them to bypass that and go straight to the Supreme Court for some sort of emergency relief. So we're waiting for Judge Terry Lewis's decision. Interestingly enough, Bill, he's a novelist, and his book, his last book, was titled "Conflict of Interest."
[Hemmer:] We'll see if his decision reads like a book shortly here. Mike, are the lawyers for either side over there just yet? And if so, are they speculating at all about possibly their next move on this?
[Boettcher:] No, but they were speculating last night, judging by the questions that Judge Lewis was asking in court. He was taking a couple of tacks, saying if the legislature had intended to have a manual recount law, seven days wasn't enough for large counties. He also asked questions about this Friday deadline. If you're not going to certify the complete election until Friday, why have these two separate deadlines? And I think he's trying to interpret the intent of the legislature. We may have law being made here, but we'll find out when this opinion comes down in about 30 minutes.
[Hemmer:] OK, Mike. Mike Boettcher inside the courthouse across the street, Mike, thanks to you.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Now back to the subject of the Middle East. President Clinton is not giving up his effort to get the parties in the Middle East together before his time is up. Joining us now from the White House, CNN's Major Garrett. What's the latest, Major?
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Hello, Lou. Well, the president is certainly not giving up, but today, in very strong language he told both sides in his words, it's time to close this; meaning it's time for the both the Palestinians and the Israelis to accept his blueprint for peace and come to the table once and for all to work out these excruciating compromises that they have known, in the president's words, for seven years they would have to make. The time of reckoning has come; and the president said, based on all the conversations he and his top advisers have had, the two sides have never been closer to an ultimate deal.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] If you just look at the last two months, it's the best argument for going ahead and finishing this. It's not going to get any easier. So this is, by far, the closest we have ever been. We are much closer than we were at Camp David, but there are still differences and, you know, we're just waiting.
[Garrett:] What the president is waiting for is a green light from the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat that he will, in fact, accept the president's blueprint. The Israelis have already signaled that they will; and all the president wants is a green light from Mr. Arafat. Then he will invite him and Mr. Barak, the Israeli leader, here to the White House for more talks that could lead to a second, Camp-David style summit. It would be there, Lou, that a comprehensive peace deal creating a Palestinian state and providing security for Israel would be hammered out.
[Waters:] The president indicated today, Major, that Barak didn't make it to Sharm el-Sheikh for a meeting with Arafat because of the violence in the Middle East.
[Garrett:] Actually, Lou, that was a bit of a misstatement on the part of the president. One the White House corrected very soon after he came to the White House briefing room. The president had been briefed earlier this morning that there had been these two explosion, one in Tel Aviv, one in Gaza, and he sort of communicated or thought to himself that those were the things that had prevented Mr. Barak from going to that planned summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. In fact, the sequence of events is exactly the opposite. He decided not to go to Sharm el-Sheikh for that summit, then the bombs went off. So the president was little bit of off his facts of that. What the White House has said since then is what really caused Mr. Barak not to go to Sharm el-Sheikh for that summit was this continued reluctance on the Palestinian's part to accept this blueprint for peace. Mr. Barak doesn't want to go to see Mr. Arafat unless he has a green light that, in fact, this blueprint has been accepted Lou.
[Waters:] All right; Major Garrett at the White House, on the Middle East.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] As you could see by that graphic, the Atlantic hurricane system officially begins tomorrow. Some officials are predicting what they call an average season, with an average number of storms. In the past, these predictions haven't always been that accurate, but technology could be changing that. Here's our Miami bureau chief, John Zarrella.
[John Zarrella, Cnn Miami Bureau Chief:] Hurricane Andrew was a mere tropical storm, with just 60-mile-an-hour winds three days before it hit south Florida, the third most intense hurricane to ever strike the United States. Last year, Hurricane Debbie was forecast to become a major storm threatening Florida. It fizzled out. Until now, forecasting the strength of hurricanes has been next to impossible, but a new computer model is showing promise.
[Jack Kelly, National Hurricane Center:] We've been testing it for the past two years at the Hurricane Center, and have come to the conclusion it is beneficial and it will help our intensity forecasts.
[Zarrella:] By dropping a data probe into the eye wall of the hurricane, forecasters are getting information about storm winds they've never had before. The information, coupled with atmospheric data and sea surface temperature measurements, are plugged into the computer model. The result: first steps towards predicting intensity.
[Max Mayfield, National Hurricane Center:] There are still a lot of things that go on in the core of the hurricane that we're really not even measuring as well as we need to.
[Zarrella:] Computer models that forecast where storms are going have become steadily more accurate. Those models are based on weather conditions surrounding the hurricane. Intensity modeling has lagged behind because it's based on a storm's internal dynamics, about which little is known. In 1995, last-minute evacuations had to be ordered in Florida's panhandle. The reason: Hurricane Opal had, within hours, gone from a category 1 hurricane, with 75-mile-per-hour winds, to a near category 5 storm, with winds of 150 miles per hour. When it eventually hit, Opal's winds had cooled to 120 miles per hour. Understanding those wild fluctuations could save millions of dollars when evacuations aren't necessary, and thousands of lives when they are. John Zarrella, CNN, Miami.
[Kagan:] For more on the hurricane season for 2001, we're joined by Max Mayfield. He is the director of the National Hurricane Center, joining us from Miami. Max, good morning. Good to see you.
[Mayfiled:] Good morning, Daryn. Good to see you.
[Kagan:] How are you seeing 2001 shaping up for hurricane season?
[Mayfield:] Daryn, I'm a little concerned because I've had a lot of people make comments to me, in the last few weeks, about this so- called near-normal season, and I really don't want people focusing on the numbers. Normal season typically brings around 10 storms, six of which will become hurricanes, but it's not all about numbers. What really counts is whether they make landfall and how strong are their landfalls. You can have very damaging hurricanes, with average numbers, or even below-average numbers. In fact, the deadliest hurricane the United States ever had, the great Galveston hurricane, in 1900; the costliest hurricane we ever had, Andrew, in 1992; and most intense hurricane this country ever had, the Labor Day hurricane in 1935 all occurred in years with below-average numbers.
[Kagan:] So you're saying don't mix up quantity and quality when it comes to these storms.
[Mayfiled:] Exactly. The message is very, very clear here: If you live in hurricane prone area, you need be prepared.
[Kagan:] Be prepared, and that means have a plan not next month, but starting today.
[Mayfiled:] Have that plan in place now, before the hurricane comes knocking on your door, and that really means you need to know your vulnerabilities to the different hazards of the hurricane.
[Kagan:] Let's talk about some of the things. Vulnerability, but also have a plan about how you're going to get out of there, how you're going to get out of Dodge when the hurricane shows up.
[Mayfiled:] The first step in that plan is really to know if you live in a storm-surge-evacuation zone. The storm surge, historically, has killed nine out of 10 people in the hurricanes, and the people that die in hurricanes are the nine out of ten people killed by the storm surge. So if you live if one of these storm-surge zones, you need to know exactly where you'll go to a shelter and how you'll get there. But even if you're outside the storm-surge zone, you still need to have that plan, including storm cellars, all the common sense things the extra food, medicine, drinking water, flashlights, batteries and again, have them on hand now before the hurricane comes threatening.
[Kagan:] Max, every time we have one of these big storms, there are always the yahoos who choose to stay back and stay behind. If you are going to be a die-hard like that, what are some of the things you should have ready?
[Mayfiled:] You want to be really clear on this: If the local officials tell folks to evacuate, they need to do so immediately. I've got a lot of stories people have shared with me of people staying back at a hurricane party, and many of those people lost their lives in hurricanes.
[Kagan:] Get out. And also, you say get over this love affair with your boat.
[Mayfiled:] We're always concerned about the marine community. It takes people a long time to secure their boats. When we put up a hurricane warning, we want to get people away from the water, not in water. Last year, we had several people down in the Caribbean that lost their lives because they stayed on a boat in a hurricane.
[Kagan:] Max Mayfield, thanks so much for those tips. I'm sure we'll be seeing you soon as soon as that first big storm pops up.
[Mayfiled:] Let's hope not. OK, Daryn, thank you.
[Kagan:] Good luck with the safe season this year.
[Mayfiled:] Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Neville:] And welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE, everybody. Before the break, Reggie here wanted to weigh in on whether or not you think Tyson should fight in
[D.c. Reggie:] Definitely. Let him fight. I love the sport of boxing. I'm a boxing fan. Mike Tyson is a great fighter. Lennox Lewis is a great fighter. The whole world wants to watch the fight. It is going to generate a lot of revenue for the city of D.C. And I guarantee you everyone here is going to be at a fight party. Everyone here is going to either buy the pay-per-view. Arthel told me she is coming to my house to watch to my fight party.
[Neville:] You see what happens when I forget to wear my ring for one day?
[Reggie:] And I guarantee you Rob is going to watch the fight.
[Becker:] You are wrong. I am not going to watch it.
[Reggie:] I'm sure Rob is a fan of boxing. And, Rob, you are welcome to come to my fight party as well.
[Becker:] While I'm very happy you invited me, I must respectfully decline.
[Reggie:] Once again, in my opinion, Mike Tyson is not a saint. He's not a preacher. I don't really care what Mike Tyson does outside of the ring. No one should emulate Mike Tyson to be a role model. But Mike Tyson is a great fighter. And it is going to be a great fight. And I'm sure the world wants to watch it. It is just too bad that Vegas did not allow the fight to happen in Vegas, because I love Vegas. I love to go to gamble.
[Neville:] Well, thank you, Reggie, for weighing in on that. I appreciate your comments. And I think we have a caller now, Brian or Ryan from...
[Caller:] Yes, Ryan.
[Neville:] Go ahead, Ryan. What do you have to say?
[Caller:] Well, I think that Tyson is basically an animal. He has bitten people twice. He has been convicted of rape. I think that what we should do for Lennox Lewis is, the first time he fought Holyfield, he was obviously robbed. They should let the fight go on in London. And maybe, just maybe, Lennox Lewis will pound some sense into Mike Tyson. And that is pretty much all I have to say.
[Neville:] Joe or Rob, go ahead and respond.
[Madison:] Well, I want to make something clear. I am not a fight fan, even though my grandfather was a prize fighter. I am not going to the fight, because I certainly can't afford the ticket. And doubt if I am even going to watch it on pay-per-view. What I am saying is and I am not a fan of Mike Tyson. I have three daughters, and I don't want any of them to bring him home. This is not what it is about. The decision by the commission is going to be made on economic and legal reasons. You know, we have NFL players that are peeping through holes drilled in locker rooms to watch women take showers. No one is suggesting that we not play...
[Becker:] Right. And they have gotten sued. And they have been sued.
[Madison:] No one is suggesting that we not have NFL games. We have rap artists that rent out facilities all over this country that have misogynistic lyrics, some of them very racist lyrics, but yet we still have these concerts. And Hugh Grant should never be allowed to make another movie or have it distributed if we want to play that kind of game.
[Becker:] There is a difference here?
[Neville:] What's the difference, Rob?
[Madison:] Yes, what's the difference?
[Becker:] I'll tell you. We have a public body regulating the situation. And they have to use their discretion. It is not a question of: Does Tyson have a right? He does not a right to fight anywhere until someone gives him a license. And when this body is using their discretion and representing the city and, to some extent, I would say even the country, they should keep in mind what this says to people. It says you to people: Look, you can do all of these things and you can still make millions and millions of dollars. It is really OK. We say it is not OK, but it is really OK, because you can make a lot of money. And I think it is about time this commission which, by the way, I do not know if you are aware of this. This commission has an inborn conflict of interest. They, on the one hand, promote fights and draw the fighter to come to Washington and then they regulate it. In fact, in particular, Michael Brown, the vice chairman of this committee, he brought in he has been recruiting Tyson for weeks. And now this same guy is going to vote on whether it's OK. What do you think is going to happen tonight?
[Madison:] This same guy is a very distinguished individual in our community.
[Becker:] Yes, that's right. He paid a $5,000 fine for illegal campaign contributions five years ago.
[Neville:] What does that have to do with the subject, Rob? Rob, come on.
[Madison:] This same guy is a very. He is a son of a very good friend of mine, the late Ron Brown. He is a distinguished individual. My point is that there are a lot of cab drivers, a lot of maids, a lot of hotel managers, and, you know, quite honestly, a lot of people around this CNN studio who want this fight.
[Neville:] We have got an interesting caller now. His name is Phil. He's in Arizona. And he used to be on the boxing commission in Arizona. Phil, what do you have to say about all of this?
[Caller:] Thank you for taking my call. I am a past chairman of the Arizona State Boxing Commission. First of all, I would like to say that any fighter that we find to be suspended in D.C. or any other state, when they come to Arizona, we reciprocate by not allowing them to fight, with our suspension relevant to theirs. And the other point is that D.C. needs the money. Well, so does Phoenix. So does Tucson. And so does New York and Detroit and every other city in the country. And we do not allow them to just take any fight they want once they've got a suspended fighter. And the last part is that Tyson is a convicted felon. He is a public batterer. And he is a wife beater. And, frankly, this state wouldn't have someone like that in the ring.
[Neville:] You know what? Joe, excuse me. I would like to hear a woman's opinion in response to what the caller just said.
[Helen:] Well, I just believe very strongly that there are just more things in life more important than just money: principle and role models. And I believe that what Mike Tyson needs is he is out of control and he needs to be in a mental institution. That is my personal opinion.
[Neville:] Thank you, Helen. Go ahead, guys.
[Madison:] Like I said, I am not a psychiatrist. I have all the same feelings at some point in time. All I am saying to you, though, and this comparing the city, outside of federal government, the No. 1 industry in Washington, D.C. is tourism. And all I am saying is, if people were coming to Washington, D.C., if their schoolchildren were coming here on their spring breaks and their summer, maybe this wouldn't even be an issue. But the mayor has an obligation to try and find revenue for this city and get it back on its feet. We were hit hard by the terrorist attack, like New York was. And New York received a tremendous billion-dollar bailout. Washington, D.C. did not get that. So, all I am saying is, I agree with the attitude everybody has about Tyson. But if that is the way you feel, there would be a lot of people who wouldn't be in sports. Didn't we just see Darryl Strawberry?
[Neville:] Yes.
[Madison:] And excuse me.
[Becker:] Strawberry is a different issue. He does not hurt people and he has a problem with cancer. That's a completely different issue from Mike Tyson. We cannot put them together.
[Madison:] Of course it is different, but he obviously can't be a good role model. And they are getting ready to bring him back to New York to work for the Yankees.
[Becker:] No, I don't believe they are.
[Madison:] Yes, they are.
[Neville:] Joe, Rob, we can go on with it, because there are lots of other comparisons we can make to this story.
[Madison:] Yes.
[Neville:] But I do have to go now. But, Joe, can you do me a favor, please, when you see Mr. Mayor, Anthony Williams? Let him know that I was not calling him a pimp.
[Madison:] I think he understands.
[Neville:] I'm asking the questions.
[Madison:] I understand.
[Neville:] OK. All right.
[Madison:] All right.
[Neville:] Joe Madison and Rob Becker, thanks so much for being here today.
[Becker:] Thank you.
[Neville:] All right, still ahead: David Letterman's new deal. Is Dave worth it? We will talk about that when we come back. [Begin Video Clip, "the Late Show With David Letterman"]
[David Letterman:] What I have decided to do and this has not been a very easy decision for me I have decided to stay here at CBS. And I want to thank...

[Jeanne Meserve, Cnn Anchor:] We turn our attention back to the Democratic National Convention. Our focus now is on labor issues and the Democratic Party and jobs. I'm joined by Alexis Herman, the U.S. secretary of labor. Thanks a lot for coming in.
[Alexis Herman, U.s. Secretary Of Labor:] Thank you for inviting me.
[Meserve:] I know we are going to hear the numbers from you in just a second about how many new jobs have been created. But there seems to be a problem here. Despite this incredible economy, Al Gore doesn't seem to be getting much credit for that. How do you change that?
[Herman:] That is going to change after the convention. A lot of people know who Al Gore is, but they don't know all of the wonderful things he has done, and especially the hard choices that he had to bring about this good economy.
[Meserve:] Why the heck don't they know?
[Herman:] Oh, I don't think that's atypical for someone who has been in the role of vice president. But coming out of this convention, I think the next president, Al Gore, will emerge for the strong leader he has been for this country and for our economy.
[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] We're hearing that Al Gore is going to make this point that he's fighting for the people, not the powerful. And yet, you're trying to say there are 22 million jobs that have been created for everybody. Isn't this populous rhetoric a little out of place?
[Herman:] Well, I think what we're trying to say when we talk about the people verses the powerful: Everyone wants health care. Everyone wants to make sure that their pensions are going to safe and secure when they retire. When we talk about Social Security, the people verses the powerful, it's about really putting the public's interests, Frank, over the special interests. And that's the distinction when we talk about the people versus the power.
[Sesno:] Talking to a powerful Democrat yesterday, he was a little bit nervous about this, because he said: Many of these jobs have been created because of a partnership or more of partnership between government and business. This sounds like an anti-business kind of thing.
[Herman:] This is not an anti-business rhetoric, if you will. We believe very strongly that the business community, in partnership with this administration, has helped to create many of the jobs. But there is a difference here. Al Gore really has fought for the issues that support working families in this country, whether it's been supporting the minimum wage increase, protecting Social Security, what we have to do now to strengthen Medicare and Medicaid. All of these are the issues that he has championed and will champion and I might add with a lot of business support along the way.
[Meserve:] No surprise we heard contrary point of view at the Republican Convention, where George W. Bush said the administration had been coasting, that it had squandered opportunities. How hard does this convention hit back at what George W. Bush had to say about the economy?
[Herman:] We are going to make very clear at this convention that this economy did not happen by accident. We got here with hard choices the president and that the vice president made. And at the end of the day, this is the people's prosperity. It is their progress that we are going to be celebrating.
[Sesno:] Why are we hearing that it's so necessary to introduce Al Gore to the American people? He said so himself. He's been vice president for eight years, senator for eight years, congressman for eights year before that, and somehow people don't know him?
[Herman:] But you know, they don't know that he served in Vietnam, that he went to serve in an unpopular war, that he was a journalist who really developed his own passion for public service. He went to Congress because of real issues that motivated him to fight for the public good. There's a side to Al Gore, the strong family man that he is he didn't just wake up in public office. We need to get those values out. You know, the Republicans put a lot of values on the stage. We are going to talk about how we put our values into action to support working families.
[Meserve:] Alexis Herman, U.S. secretary of labor, thanks for joining us. We'll see you on the stage tonight.
[Herman:] Thank you.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Now we go to the White House. Some words from President Bush.
[George W. Bush, President Of United States:] -anymore; or could be in a cave where he can get out or may have tried to slither out into neighboring Pakistan. We don't know. But I will tell you this: We're going to find him. And one of the things I said early on in this war was that I told the American people that this administration would be patient and would be relentless. And you're talking to a patient man when it comes to achieving the objectives. I understand the degree of difficulty has increased significantly. First part of the objective was to destroy the Taliban's military; that was relatively easy. Secondly, the objective was to hold those accountable who had harbored Al Qaeda. It took a while, but once we were able to bring our military strength, made our military strength, air strength in particular, with boots on the ground, commitment of troops, it unfolded well. Now we're on the hunt, and we're chasing one or two, three or four, 20 individuals at a time. And this is pretty rugged country, as you know. And so we are slowly but surely chasing down every single lead, and as our friends and allies take over more and more of the country, and as the new government gets in the beginnings, gets into place, we'll continue to get good intelligence and we'll continue to chase Mr. bin Laden and others. Abu Zabeda. Zawahiri. And I could give you the list of names. But if they think they can hide from the United States, they're making a terrible mistake again. And we'll get them, we'll bring them to justice. I wish I could give you the exact moment, but I can't. And, frankly, since this administration is in the fight against terror for the long pull, I am not the least bit anxious about bringing a particular individual to justice. I know that we've disrupted the Al Qaeda network. Today I was briefed that there are hundreds of Al Qaeda fighters being held hostage. And by the way, we're in the process of developing a system to deal with each and every fighter, depending upon the nature of the fighter, how to deal with them legally. And I've instructed the National Security Council to take their time and to come up with a process to deal with foreign Al Qaeda fighters, Taliban, Walker. I have no answer on Walker yet, because I want the process to be able to address all the different circumstances that may arise and then we'll be able to brief the country as to how we're going to deal with these people.
[Question:  G. Bush:] Well, I've tasked the National Security Council to work up a strategy on how to deal with each and every person that we capture. And obviously, Walker is unique in that he's the first American Al Qaeda fighter that we have captured. And we will announce to the country when we have made up our mind on all on how to deal with a wide variety of cases. Walker himself is being well-treated on a ship of ours. I suspect he's finding his berth a little better than it was when he was placed in the prison in Afghanistan. And, you know, we've heard the administration has heard from his lawyer. And we've told his lawyer that, at the appropriate time, we'll let everybody know, including his family, how we're going to proceed with Walker, as well as others that have become captured during this war. But, no, I don't have an announcement today.
[Question:] And nothing's been ruled out on treason...
[G. Bush:] No, nothing has been ruled out, because I want to make obviously, every decision we make at this point will set precedent for future decisions. And I want us to fully think through all the ramifications of the different options. And Defense and the Justice Department are taking the lead on preparing a strategy. This ought to be a strategy, by the way, that when we capture somebody who has a certain characteristic to him, then the process ought to automatically kick in as to how that person is dealt with. And I think we owe that to the country to take our time. And then I'll make it clear somebody will make it clear, once the decision is made.
[Question:] Sir, would you consider bringing of asking Congress to come back early to finish the economic stimulus?
[G. Bush:] No.
[Question:] Are you angry at anyone?
[G. Bush:] No, I'm not angry at all. I'm joyous. I welcome the holiday season. No, I don't intend to bring them back early.
[Question:  G. Bush:] Well, the impact was, it was disappointing. I mean...
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] with the American people.
[G. Bush:] Well, we just have to see. We have to see what the affects are. And we'll have time when they come back to take a look- see at the state of the economy. And, you know, we're continuing to get mixed signals. Hopefully, the economy will be good, but we'll deal with it when we get back. But I think a lot of people are going to ask the question, "Why couldn't get something done?" And, you know, one of my jobs was to facilitate an agreement.
[Bush:] And I went up to Capitol Hill, as you know one of my rare appearances up there and sat down with Democrats and Republicans from both bodies who had made the commitment to work together to get a bill. And there was a great it's a very good bill, by the way. Billions of dollars of help for displaced workers. And the will to get something done just wasn't there.
[Question:] Mr. President, do you think the stimulus is a must?
[Bush:] Is a month?
[Question:] Is a must?
[Bush:] Oh, a must? We'll see. I mean, I thought it was important to get a good stimulus package out, as well as I thought it was very important to take care of displaced workers. And the bill that I supported and my administration helped craft with both Democrats and Republicans would have done just that. But we'll see when we come back and take a look.
[Question:] Mr. President, you had said that the next phase of the war, following the defeat of the military in Afghanistan, would be [OFF-MIKE]...
[Bush:] Yes.
[Question:] ... and that countries who didn't work with us were against us. So do we have any sort of time lines or goals that we have set out for these countries [OFF-MIKE]? Or do we say at a certain point, you're going to have to [OFF-MIKE]?
[Bush:] Yes, I see what you're saying. Well, I also said that, sometimes, a war will take place and actions will take place that the American people won't be able to see. And by that, I mean that this is a multi-front war that will be effective when we cut off money or encourage governments to round up Al Qaeda cells. And we are encouraging governments to try to round up and sometimes and bring to justice Al Qaeda cells. But it wouldn't be very wise for me to describe those to you, because the Al Qaeda cell we're trying to round up may flee. But, yes, we're constantly talking to countries, reminding them that, "If you're with us, perform." I'm a performance-oriented person. I believe in results. And many of the world leaders that have been here in the Oval Office will tell you that one of the strong messages that I send is, "Thank you for your condolences. I appreciate your flowers. Now arrest somebody if they're in your country. And we will help you. We'll give you the intelligence necessary to show you who they are and where they are. And we will if you need be, we'll be glad to lend some troops." Now, that hasn't happened yet, but the enemy needs to know that we're on the hunt. And part of being a and the friends need to know if you're a member of the coalition, we expect you to perform.
[Question:] [OFF-MIKE] Are there any phone calls [OFF-MIKE]?
[Bush:] All the time, all the time, we're reminding people that this is a performance-oriented world. If you want to win the war on terror, you must perform. And a good area, for example, is in the financial area, where we're constantly working with nations to help them chase down money that is moving illegally. We are there's a lot of cooperation. But you ask a very interesting question: Do you keep a scorecard? And the answer is, I do. I do, because I'm an old baseball guy. And I like to keep the score, I like to see who's performing and who's not performing. That's a part of being a coalition. Tommy Franks said something interesting the other day and by the way, he was one year ahead of Laura at Midland Lee High School. They were Fighting Rebels together. But Tommy said, the phase of this war is kind of like a baseball game. Of course, my ears perked up. He said, "There will be a lot of moments of boredom and then there would be some great joy." What he was saying was, is that, it's just we're in slow pursuit to achieve the objective that Ron talked about.
[Staff:] Thank you all very much.
[Bush:] Last question.
[Staff:] Last question.
[Question:] Did you say that the country is more secure today and less vulnerable to terrorism than it was before September 11?
[Bush:] Yes, sir. The country is more secure today and less vulnerable to attack than before September the 11th, because the enemy has made it clear that we are a target, and we've responded. America never dreamt before September 11 anybody would attack us. We knew there were threats. During the summer there had been some threats to overseas assets that we responded to. But we really never felt that we've had a sense that we were invulnerable. And now they've made it clear that they're not afraid to attack us. And so, one, we're aware. Secondly, we have got a much better system of sharing information information we gather overseas to agencies here at home. When we get a hint and by the ways, as a result of the coalition, there is much more intelligence-sharing going on. So oftentimes we'll get a lead from an intelligence service, you know, say, in the Middle East or in Europe. And that piece of information will be analyzed and passed immediately on to the FBI; that has now shifted its culture from one of doing important work like white-collar crime or spy-on-spy work to prevention that is the most primary job of the FBI, is to prevent a further attack. And there's over 4,000 agents working on every single lead we get. Leads that, you know, sometimes prove to be false, but sometimes indicate that there could be somebody here in the country that intends to do us harm. And we'll use whatever resources necessary to haul them in, if that's the case. And so, yes, the country is safer. Is it still totally safe? No. And that's why, as I've told you, my main job, my main worry for America is to prevent another attack. Every morning at 6:50 in the morning I come in here and I think about the possibilities. And every day I meet with the FBI Director Tom Ridge and John Ashcroft, along with George Tenet, reminding them that we have an awesome responsibility to do whatever we can to protect the American people. And we made great progress since September the 11th. The American people need to know that, even though we go into a holiday season, this government will be doing everything we can to keep our country safe. We're keeping camps up, we're keeping those are military flights around, just to make sure that if somebody tries to attack us, there will be you know, we have the measures in place to prevent it. Listen, I hope you all have a great holiday. Thank you.
[Unidentified Female:] Have fun. Happy holidays.
[Kagan:] Wanted to share with you there some videotape we're just getting in from the White House with some comments from President Bush. Some interesting comments on a number of topics. First of all, on John Walker, who to remind you, is the 20-year- old American who was found allegedly fighting alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan. President saying no decision has been made yet on what charges the U.S. government might file against John Walker. Also he says, the President says, he believes that the country is more secure today and less vulnerable to attack than it was on September 11th, but he does believe America is not totally safe and that's his number one worry, preventing another attack on the United States. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Stephen Frazier, Cnn Anchor:] A clip from "The Merchants of Cool," and now to join us from New York to talk a little bit more about it is Barak Goodman, producer and director of "Merchants of Cool." Mr. Goodman, thanks for joining us.
[Barak Goodman, Producer, "merchants Of Cool":] Thanks for having me.
[Frazier:] The germ of this idea, we understand, actually come to you during your production of "The Lost Children of Rockdale County." How so?
[Goodman:] That's right. We spent a lot of time with the kids in suburban Atlanta and we found that to a greater extent than perhaps ever, certainly to a surprising extent for us, these kids had a very intense relationship with pop culture, a relationship that excluded in many ways other kinds of influences, even their own parents. And so we wanted to investigate the other side of the camera, those people who were creating media for kids to consumer.
[Frazier:] Is this the first generation that's been marketed to directly by pop culture without the filtering effects of parents or teachers or church, other influences like that?
[Goodman:] Yes, I think that's true. I think in previous generations, while of course marketers still very much wanted profit, they had a healthy respect for parents. They didn't want to upset parents. And so they tempered what they did with that in mind. I think for the first time ever, marketers recognize that teenagers control their own purse strings, that they have the power, the means to be consumers themselves, and so that filtering is gone, and marketers are really addressing teenagers directly.
[Frazier:] Well, that's been tried for a long time. Why is the filtering gone? That's not just a marketing issue, that's a larger sociological phenomenon, isn't it?
[Goodman:] There's no question that's a larger sociological issue, but these things are very interwoven. The point that we try to make in the show is that as marketers do address teenagers directly, they have the effect of further kind of distancing kids from other kinds of influence. They become the lens into which kids watch their own lives in a sense, and in some ways emulate what they see. So, you have this kind of feedback loop that happens between kids and the media in which other possible influences are kind of driven off and there is a kind of direct line, pipeline between kids and producers of culture.
[Frazier:] While you've been speaking, we've been showing some clips from the new program. Both of your comments remind me of the prior program, "The Lost Children of Rockdale County." I have to compliment you for incredible access to those young people and their frankness in talking to you. But one of the things that came away that struck me about that program was the absence of parents and did you artificially create that? Did you exclude them from your program?
[Goodman:] No, absolutely not. Certainly, in that program we sought parents out and what we found in that situation is that the parents are fighting a battle with popular culture in many cases, and finding themselves on the losing end of that battle. And so that's what prompted us to want to do this show, and in this show we focus not so much on kids and their families, but on the people who make popular culture and what drives them and what interest them and it was a very interesting look.
[Frazier:] It has to be greed driving them. You mentioned purse strings, these are the biggest purses that teenagers have ever controlled.
[Goodman:] No question, this generation has more money to spend, more ability to spend it freely than any generation in history and that has made them, naturally, the focus of the largest corporations on Earth.
[Frazier:] And when you say the focus, you mean the focus of a lot of market research into what they like or what they might like, because these are creating desire, not just reflecting, is that right?
[Goodman:] That's interesting, yes. What you find what you hear from marketers all the time is that this generation can't be fooled, that they are savvy to marketing, and so the approach that most marketers take is to try to understand the kids, try to learn about their lives, try to kind of get down on their level and really understand them. Ironically, though, when you watch what marketers produce for kids, it has very little to do with their real lives. It's not nuanced like real life is. Instead, it's kind of boiled down to its crudest, most elemental level. And then...
[Frazier:] Boiled down to a lot of sex, we've been showing pictures that...
[Goodman:] ... model to which kids aspire. So again, you get this sort of self-fulfilling quality.
[Frazier:] As you've been talking, we've been showing some of the clips of what they use to market, and you just said they boil it down to the crudest model. It looks like they just boil it down to a lot of sex.
[Goodman:] Well, we actually kind of put names to the stereotypes that the media tends to put forward. For boys, we call him the mook, and he tends to be loud, obnoxious, crude, in your face. For girls, we call her the mid-riff, and she is a confection that is basically sexualized, prematurely adult, and these are the lures that the media uses to bring teens in. Obviously, there are exceptions to this, but these tend to be the creations the media uses to attract consumers.
[Frazier:] Mooks and mid-riffs. Promises to be fascinating. Barak Goodman, thank you for joining us tonight. We'll look forward to the airing of your broadcast. "Merchant of Cool" airs on PBS Tuesday night as part of the series "Frontline." You can check your local listings for details.
[Goodman:] Thanks very much.

[Frank Sesno, Cnn Anchor:] Returning to our top story, campaign 2000, presidential politics, specifically the GOP horse race and what George W. Bush must do to get back on a winning track. We took some focus on John McCain earlier, we talked to John King. Now, we're joined by Bush communications director Ari Fleischer. He's in Austin, Texas. We did hear from our correspondent, John King, as to what the McCain camp is saying: They are very optimistic. We heard from McCain. He says he is going to lay claim to the mantle of the Reagan uniter, the person who is bringing the Reagan coalition together, going after Reagan Democrats. Looks like it worked in Michigan, Ari Fleischer.
[Ari Fleischer, Bush Communications Director:] Well, we're not quite sure they were Reagan Democrats in Michigan, Frank. And Senator McCain did get a very good bounce out of Michigan by the fact that there was no Democrat primary to compete with. So he got 18 percent of the vote in Michigan came from Democrats. That's four times as high as New Hampshire and twice as high as South Carolina. I suspect when March 7 rolls around and primaries are closed to Democrats and the states where they are open and the Democrats can vote for Gore or Bradley, Senator McCain is traveling down a dead end road that won't be sustainable.
[Sesno:] What is George W. Bush's message to the Republican prospects and party now? He has lost in three separate regions of this country.
[Fleischer:] Well, he's also won in three separate regions of the country; he won in Alaska, he won in Iowa, he won in Delaware, he won in South Carolina. So, that's kind of three and a half regions of the country. But the governor's message is that, in this race, there's only one candidate who can you unite the party and reach across the center. Senator McCain can unite the Democrat Party and reach across the center. Governor Bush can unite the Republican Party and reach across the center. He's in California...
[Sesno:] Is Bush going to contest McCain, specifically, on his claim to the Reagan mantle?
[Fleischer:] I think that claim won't go far. I mean, the biggest difference between John McCain and Ronald Reagan is that Republicans like Ronald Reagan. So far in this contest, when you add it all up, John McCain has gotten 30 percent of the Republican vote everywhere he has gone. He had about 37 percent in New Hampshire, and he has plunged since then; he got less than 30 in South Carolina, less than 30 in Michigan. You can't call yourself Ronald Reagan if Republicans won't vote for you.
[Sesno:] It is said, Ari Fleischer, that the aura of invincibility was George W. Bush's best friend, and that has been pierced. What's your response to that?
[Fleischer:] I think his best friend, frankly, has been his success in Texas as a reformer who has gotten things done, particularly...
[Sesno:] But, there was the aura of inevitability...
[Fleischer:] Yes, as far as inevitability, Frank, we are locked in a battle for the nomination. No question about it, and that's a...
[Sesno:] Nothing inevitable not inevitable any longer, Ari Fleischer?
[Fleischer:] I submit to you, the victory is inevitable principally because you can't win a Republican primary on the backs of Democrats. And, that's Senator McCain's strategy. As the calendar turns into March 7, where you have 12 races, Democrat votes count in only five of them. And in all those five states, the Democrats are going to have a choice among Bradley, Gore and McCain. And as attractive as Senator McCain may be, he is less attractive to the Democrats than those two characters. So, it's just a question of Senator McCain's strategy is not sustainable down the road. But we are, indeed, involved in a battle for the nomination.
[Sesno:] Ari Fleischer, communications director, Bush campaign, appreciate it. It is a battle, and you'll be with it, and so will we. Thanks again.
[Fleischer:] Thank you, Frank.
[Sesno:] Appreciate it.

[Linda Stouffer, Cnn Anchor:] In just about a half hour, Democratic presidential nominee Al Gore will sit down for breakfast with a group of firefighters in Tampa, Florida. It's part of a sleep- deprived campaign run to bolster support in some key battleground states. CNN's Tony Clark is up this early, too. He joins us from Tampa with a look at what's ahead for Gore and his running mate, Joe Lieberman. Good morning to you, Tony.
[Tony Clark, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning. I think we haven't been to bed yet. The vice president is about 12 hours into his 27- hour-long, nonstop campaign. We're now right now, we're at in Tampa, Florida, but the campaign began in Philadelphia yesterday afternoon. In Philadelphia, the vice president and his running mate, Sen. Joe Lieberman, met with construction workers. They talked about economic prosperity, but added that there are still many people that have not received the benefits of that economic prosperity and he wants to spread it to all of them. Speaking to workers at a hotel that's being constructed entirely by union workers, he said that the labor members are traditional Democratic Party supporters and he called on them to support them again. Away from the crowd, he voiced disappointment over Gov. George Bush's proposal accepting only one of three planned debates sponsored by the Presidential Debate Commission.
[Vice Pres. Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] It's not about Gov. Bush, it's not about me, it's about the American people, and it's about giving the American people the chance they deserve to make an informed judgment as to who they want to be the next president of this country.
[Clark:] From Philadelphia, it was on to Flint, Michigan. And around a midnight meeting shift change with hospital workers, it was a chance for him to stress his medical packages, hospital care package. He said he wants to take away medical decision-making from HMOs and what he called "bean counters" sitting at computers and give those decisions back to the doctors and nurses. And he won a large round of applause then. From there, as the day changed, he came on to Tampa, Florida. It is here that he is currently at a diner talking to people here. And in about a half hour from now, he will meet with firefighters, have breakfast with firefighters. He's going to a number of states. He will end up in Kentucky later today. He'll make one more stop back in Pennsylvania. So it is, Linda, a long day for the Gore campaign, but one that allows him to talk a lot about economics to what he says are his key supporters.
[Stouffer:] And, Tony, when you look at the states that he's visiting today, and Florida in particular, does Gore think he has a shot at winning Florida, even though, of course, the Republican candidate's brother is the governor there.
[Clark:] See, that's the key on all of these states, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Florida, Michigan. These are toss-up states where he has a good chance. And he's seeing here in Florida his ratings in the polls increase surprisingly because Jeb Bush, the Texas governor's brother, is the governor here. And so that's why he's spending so much time, that's why he's hitting these states, because he believes the Gore- Lieberman campaign believe they have a chance to carry these in November.
[Stouffer:] Tony Clark, thank you very much.

[Bobbie Battista:] In just about an hour from now, Elian Gonzalez is scheduled to meet with his grandmothers. It is a meeting held under the shadow of suspicion, fear and mistrust.
[Spencer Eig, Attorney For Gonzalez Family:] One fear that the family has in this today is that these grandmother's, who still have family back in Cuba, are being manipulated by the long arm of Fidel Castro.
[Raquel Rogriguez, Elian's Maternal Grandmother:] We are the ones that brought him up. They have only had him for two months. And with that, they would have him for five and a half years. I think we're the best to know him.
[Sister Jeanne O'laughlin, Barry University:] I hope that somehow, he will experience the fact that many people love him, and these two women, grandmothers, do love him, and the family that he's with, that he has a loving environment so that he can he come to grips pretty soon with an ending that's going to hurt one of the other of them.
[Battista:] Hello, everybody, and welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. A Catholic nun will host the much-publicized private reunion between Elian Gonzalez and his grandmothers. The women say they haven't seen the boy now in more than two months. CNN's Mark Potter is in Miami Beach, outside the home where the family will meet. Mark, what's the latest?
[Mark Potter, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Bobbie. That meeting was scheduled for 4:00 Eastern Time. We're told that there is now a slight delay of about a half hour, and the reason is that the grandmothers were late leaving Washington. The plan is for them to fly into a local airport. They will then be brought by helicopter to a nearby hospital, Mount Sinai, and then they'll be driven here to this residence on Miami Beach. This is the home of Sister Jeanne O'Laughlin. She's the president of Barry University. The house is actually owned by the university. As president, she stays here. She is a very important community activists here. She's a friend of Janet Reno, and she was asked by the INS to sort of mediate this reunion. The way it's scheduled to work is that the grandmothers will be brought in here first, then young Elian will be brought in by his relatives. They will go inside to a second floor room called a "Florida room." Everywhere else in the country calls it a recreation room. Here, we call it a Florida room. In there, there will be toys and snacks. And under an agreement worked out between the family lawyers and the INS, the grandmothers and the boy will have about a two-hour private meeting. The Miami relatives will be nearby, but they will not be present for that meeting. The plan, according to Sister O'Laughlin, is to make this calm, and quiet and secure for everyone involved, so that the boy and his grandmothers can spend some quality time together. Now the security here is very tight. There was a little bit of a problem here a short while ago, a very minor scuffle. I don't want to overstate it, but it did happen. There are a handful of demonstrators here in support of Elian staying in the United States. A man walked up and shouted out that he should be go back to Cuba. That caused a very brief fistfight. There have been a few of those in the last few weeks, as this as the passions heat up in this community. There was another very brief one today, but it was behind the camera platform, it was away from the house. The security here that has been put together by the Miami Beach Police is very tight. We're across the street. This is a gated community. The boy, and his family and the grandmothers will all be inside, away from the cameras. Again, the key word here is "privacy." They are trying to make this a private visit that is good for Elian Bobbie.
[Battista:] And what happens, Mark, after this meeting is over, for both sides?
[Potter:] They will go separate ways. The grandmothers know that they cannot take the boy with them. So the boy, Elian, 6-year-old Elian will go with his relatives back to the home in the Miami, Little Havana neighborhood, where he has been staying since his rescue two months ago. The grandmother's, meanwhile, will board a plane and head back to Washington, where it's presumed they will continue their lobbying efforts. And then everyone waits for the next developments, which are expected in Congress and in the courts.
[Battista:] Now it seemed earlier in the week, Mark, that the grandmother's had only planned to stay until, say, Monday night or so. It's now Wednesday, and it seems like every day there are new things on the agenda for them. How long are they planning to stay in this country, do you know?
[Potter:] I don't know the exact time. But what has happened is that there has been increased lobbying efforts. Both sides lobbying very hard, particularly in Congress. Efforts are under way in Congress to make Elian either a citizen or a U.S. resident, and both sides are pushing very hard their point. And so the grandmother's are staying here to do that. The other venue, by the way, is the courts federal court. The family lawyers have filed a lawsuit asking a federal judge to prohibit the INS from sending the boy back to Cuba and to grant him an asylum hearing. The Justice Department is expected very soon to send to file its response, and we can expect that they will oppose, of course, the family position, and maybe even argue, most likely, that the lawyers don't even have any business coming into court, because their position is that the lawyers for the boy and the family here really don't have any right to represent him. Only the father in Cuba is his true legal representative.
[Battista:] All right, Mark Potter, in Miami Beach, thanks very much, and I'm sure we'll be getting back to you within the hour or so, if that the plane, as we hear now, is scheduled to land perhaps in the next half an hour. On the phone with us from Miami, before we take a break, is Eduardo Rasco, an attorney working for the Gonzalez family in maybe. And, Mr. Rasco, this sort of meeting on neutral territory is certainly not unusual in a custody case. Of course, this case is anything but usual. Do you have any problems with this meeting?
[Eduardo Rasco, Gonzalez Family Attorney:] No, we don't have any problem whatsoever. As has been well-documented, the family here in Miami wants to meet with the grandmothers. It's a shame that they may not have the Lazaro Gonzalez, the great uncle, may not actually have the opportunity to meet with the grandmother's, but certainly Elian will, and we have not opposed that from the very beginning, and so we are not in any way dismayed by this meeting.
[Battista:] If you could, fill us in on the status of the federal challenge, of the legal aspect of the case at this point.
[Rasco:] Well as previously stated, we are awaiting a response from INS. We have filed a petition, and we have filed a motion for preliminary relief, and they will be responding to both of those legal documents, and we expect a response soon. The petition is the overall request, and the motion is for interim relief.
[Battista:] All right, let me take a break at this time, and we'll return with Mr. Rasco and some other guests. And let me get a little bit of a barometer of the audience here. Moe, your thoughts on this?
[Moe:] Well, I believe that like the Super Bowl, we're playing stupid bowl between the United States and Cuba. Elian belongs to his parents. The rightful ownership of a son is to his father andor his mother, and I believe he should go back.
[Battista:] We'll take a break and continue here in a moment. Sister Jeanne O'Laughlin is president of Barry University, Florida's oldest and largest Catholic university. She is a longtime child advocate and activists for Miami's immigrant community. In 1998, she went to Cuba on an ecumenical mission to promote religious freedom.
[Spencer Eig, Attorney For Gonzalez Family In Miami:] If he gets back to Cuba, he'll be carted around the country with Fidel as a symbol of Fidel's victory over the United States. He won't be going back to his father and grandmothers anyway. Ultimately, he's too risky for Fidel to allow an ordinary and free life, even an ordinary enslaved life in Cuba. He'll have to be held in a tight, tight grip. And that won't be good for the boy.
[Battista:] Sharon, go ahead.
[Sharon:] I'm the mother of a son. I would gladly give my life for that son. I'm also from Florida, and the raft-people situation is something that we have dealt with for years. I feel like Elian is here with relatives who love him. And I feel like one thing that needs to be considered is he is not a possession of his parents, he is not a pawn in the political situation but a person, and his well-being needs to be first considered.
[Battista:] And as we talk about this, we're looking at live picture now from Miami where the plane carrying the two grandmothers is landing at this time. Tamiami Airport there in Miami. As Mark Potter said a few moments ago, the grandmothers will be flown by helicopter to a hospital where they will then be driven to Barry University to see their 6-six-year-old grandson, who they have not seen for the last couple of months, in a very private meeting, in a very public outdoor setting, shall we say. Eduardo Rasco is still on the phone with us. And I was curious to ask you that if this matter should end up in family court, who would likely be the preferred guardian under Florida law?
[Rasco:] The guardian would be the person who will be legally able to speak to on behalf of Elian will be the person who is nominated by the court. The court, of course, has to be petitioned by somebody. At this point, Lazaro Gonzalez is the only person who has petitioned the court, and so the court would only have the authority to appoint him. The court does not just go out and choose a guardian. It is based upon the petition has been filed, and since it has been filed by Lazaro Gonzalez, he could be the only one who would be named.
[Battista:] Why would the relatives want this to end up in family court when it seems like the law, though, is certainly on the side of the father?
[Rasco:] Well, I completely disagree with you. The law is not necessarily on the side of the father, and we want it to go to family court because that's the way we resolve family disputes in the United States.
[Battista:] But why not is why not is it not on the side of the father? He's shown to be a very loving and fit father.
[Rasco:] Well, that hasn't been determined. That's been the picture that's been presented by the telecast. You know that...
[Battista:] Who's going to say he's not?
[Rasco:] ... it's very curious that the father is not here, only the grandmothers. My understanding is that the father has been taken into custody and has been sequestered by the government. And he doesn't have the freedom over his own person right now, much less the freedom to raise his son the way he wants to raise a child. In Cuba, fathers don't have that right. They must raise the child in accordance with the communist ideology. Otherwise, there will be repercussions. So the father as we speak of here in the United States is very different than a father in Cuba.
[Battista:] All right. We'll process that here for just a moment and take a break and continue in just a second. All right. Joining us now is Jeffery Leving, a custody attorney who filed a friend of the court brief with the INS outlining why the boy should be returned to his father. Jeffery, we were talking just a few moments ago with Eduardo Rasco about if this case should end up in state family court. Mr. Rasco is trying to make the argument that the courts would not necessarily favor the biological father, as they usually do, because basically he would not be portrayed as being the same sort of father as we envision here in the United States. I don't know if you heard any of that or care to comment.
[Jeffery Leving, Custody Attorney:] Well, first of all, I don't believe this case should ever end up being litigated in the state court, especially in Florida in the domestic relations division. This is a federal matter. The federal government has exclusive jurisdiction in determining immigration issues, and they have given that authority to the INS. However, if everything falls apart and what I believe to be an incorrect decision is made in this case, is litigated in state court in Florida in a custody dispute I really think this father will probably lose. This father will have to deal with not only gender bias, because I believe many fathers have to fight against gender bias in America because fathers are considered biological necessities but social accidents in many place in America, but this father will even have a more difficult burden, because I believe that the judges sitting in state court in Florida are somewhat dependent on the Cuban exile vote, and if this father's future and his future relationship with his boy is at risk and dependent on what a Cuban exile or a judge who is dependent on votes from Cuban exiles, I think this father will lose.
[Battista:] So you are saying that if this situation was reversed and it was the mother in Cuba who was trying to regain custody of the boy, we wouldn't be here?
[Leving:] I definitely believe that's true. If the father had drowned while trying to come to America with this little boy, and especially if the mother made allegations of parental kidnapping, I believe that the boy would have been immediately returned. The problem here is that the mother drowned, and fathers in America are considered really insignificant parenting. And if the gender roles were reversed and the father had drowned, this boy would probably be back in Cuba right now.
[Battista:] Meanwhile, this proposed legislation to grant permanent residency or citizenship to Elian that's going to be taken up by Congress, how does this complicate the whole situation?
[Leving:] Well, that complicates the matter tremendously, because if this boy is granted U.S. citizenship, then the INS will have no authority to make any determinations concerning this boy's immigration status. So one way to circumvent the INS, which I believe is wrong, but a legal way to circumvent the INS is to grant the boy citizenship, but I think that, that would not be the right thing to do.
[Battista:] Let me take a phone call, Mary Beth in Maryland. Mary Beth, are you there?
[Mary Beth:] Yes, I'm here.
[Battista:] Go ahead.
[Mary Beth:] I just wanted to say this is not a battle of good and evil, it's about a little boy who needs to go home and be with his family, his grandparents and his dad, and if it was any other country but Cuba, I don't think this would be an issue. And another thing, I am really upset with Congress, because I think that a lot of congressional members are using this as a platform to get exposure, and they are not necessarily looking at the best interest of the child. Everybody is already projecting what Castro is doing, and in a way we are doing the same thing here only in the name of being free. We are withholding the boy. We are determining where he needs to be, where who he needs to be with. It is not up to the American courts. This is a Cuban citizen, and I don't think that it is really up to us. I think he should go home today with his grandmothers.
[Battista:] All right. Mary Beth, thanks very much. Again, live pictures of the plane, two grandmothers onboard that plane, the helicopter you can see there in the foreground, which will take them to Mount Sinai Hospital momentarily, and from then onto the university for the meeting with their little grandson. Mary Beth brings up some good points. How does all of this affect a little boy? Alan Delamater is a pediatric psychologist with the University of Miami School of Medicine, and he joins us from Miami. I don't even know where to begin with you, Alan. But let's start with this meeting today and whether or not this neutral ground meeting with the grandmothers is a good thing for Elian.
[Alan Delamater, Pediatric Psychologist:] Well, I think it is certainly a good thing. Let's remember that this boy had a life before two months ago. He grew up in a family that was supportive in Cuba, where he had significant emotional bonds with not only his father, but also with both sets of grandparents. These are, therefore, very important relationships, and I do think it is important to reestablish that connection for him.
[Battista:] How is he likely to react to them after not having seen them for a couple of months?
[Delamater:] Well, I'm sure, you know, in many ways it is going to be a mixture of a lot of emotions. I'm sure there's a lot of anticipation, and I'm sure that he must be feeling a lot of anxiety right now, because even a 6-year-old can understand that there's a lot of uncertainty about his status at this point, where is he going to live. A 6-year-old wants to know that, they want to know where they are going to live, and where they are going to eat, and who they are going to play with, and who is going to care for them.
[Battista:] Is he likely aware of the hostility between the two sides involved here?
[Delamater:] He probably is picking up a lot, and kids don't necessarily have to pick this up from words that they hear, they can pick it up from the feelings and from the atmosphere, the emotional atmosphere around him. It is probably a pretty tense situation in his Miami household right now.
[Battista:] You know, a lot of people from the audience always want to know how does Elian feel about this, where does he want to be. Is it fair to ask a 6-year-old that question?
[Delamater:] I don't believe it is fair to ask a 6-year-old that question at all. A 6-year-old is going to be motivated to please those important adults in his environment, and to say the things that he perceives they want to hear. There is a lot of pressure exerted on young children to say those kinds of things. This is not a decision a 6-year-old could make or should make, and this 6-year-old needs to stay out of this. Reasonable adults need to resolve this as quickly as possible.
[Battista:] And this little boy has been so through so much since Thanksgiving day, you have to wonder if he's even been able to come to grips with the death of his mother yet.
[Delamater:] Well, I think that is a very valid point. It is clear that young children are affected by traumatic stress, it is clear that young children are affected by the death of their parents. It is also clear that in the two months since all of this has happened he's been the subject of intense scrutiny by the media, and he's been the subject of a real geopolitical struggle right now. With all this distraction it is reasonable to think that he hasn't had a chance to really deal with these losses and this type of trauma.
[Battista:] And if he loses his father on top of that, what might be the repercussions of that?
[Delamater:] Well, I mean, this is also a very significant relationship in his life. To be separated from his father and to be separated from his family of origin is itself an additional stress that this child has had to deal with in these last couple of months. I think that it will be difficult for him to really do well without these primary relationships with his family of origin.
[Battista:] Let me go to the audience quickly here, Laurie.
[Laurie:] I do not understand our misconception in this country about Cuba being this hellhole where people go and they're imprisonated. It is actually a country just like ours. We are in the land of politicians and media that spins and lies to us. This father was on television and told us personally that he works in the hotel tourism industry, makes a good living, Elian had his own room, friends, life. This was a happy life and child, and the mother brought him here for her own services. I don't think she was thinking of her child honestly.
[Battista:] Is Mr. Rasco still on the phone with us there?
[Rasco:] Yes.
[Battista:] You do have concerns about the sort of life that Elian would have if he returned to Cuba, what are those fears?
[Rasco:] Well, they are very real fears. First of all, in Cuba unlike the last caller, what she said, life is not at all...
[Battista:] Mr. Rasco, I'm sorry, forgive me. I need to interrupt. We need to go to Washington, D.C. now for a press conference at the National Press Club. This is one of the survivors from the original boat tragedy.
[Unidentified Male:] I ask everybody that's here and the American community that is listening to this to please respect the memory of the mother, that I lived those three days with that mother and the only thing she wanted was that her son would come to a free country. Thank you.
[Unidentified Female:] And I think Donato has a few words.
[Donato Dalrymple, Elian's Rescuer:] Good afternoon, my name is Donato Dalrymple. I'm not one of the family members, but I've had the privilege to know this family in the last 60 days, and I've had the great privilege to be one of the fishermen my cousin Sam wasn't able to be here. But I represent both of us that we were able to pull Elian Gonzalez out of the waters off of the shore of Fort Lauderdale Beach. And it is very emotional to be even here at this moment, not just because we are in front of you the press because this has been going on for some days and it is just very emotional to know that Elian was struggling for his life and now the boy is going to have to be sent back. Somehow, this government is trying to pull that, and it is unfortunate that he can't speak for himself and his mother cannot speak for him either. And there's a lot of people here that talk about democracy, that we live in a democracy. I'm American. I'm American-born. I love this country. My father raised me to abide the laws in this country. And it is very emotional to pull a little boy out of the ocean and to be able to send him back to a place where his mother her she will he will she will be put he will be excuse me, I'm sorry. The mother will be put down in front of this little boy. He'll be traumatized. He's already been traumatized by having to flee a country and also to survive two and a half days in the deep. And to go back to a country where they say he has a loving father, that wouldn't come to see him because of the struggles of Fidel Castro separating the families, I think it's a crime. And as an American, I just want to stand up. I know I'm only known as the fisherman. But I'm also an American, born in this great country. And I think that we, the American people, should look at what's going down just 32 miles from my house in Little Havana. I've spent the last 40 days going down there to visit this little boy, and this loving family. The reason I say they're loving, they welcomed me, and I'm a stranger. They fed me. I've danced with them on Christmas Eve and New Year's. They're a very loving family. They love this boy. He was just put in their lap one day on Thanksgiving, and they've done nothing but try to love this little boy and to give everything that they have. And believe me, I've been down there to Little Havana, they don't have what the average Americans have, but the one thing that they have, is they have love. And I'll tell you what, people are trying to strip that from these people, saying that this is a circus, and all the other things they've been saying, this fiasco that's been going on. And I'll tell you, for me, as an outsider from this family, I'm ashamed of the Council of Churches that they would come forth as Christians, as men of God, and want to bring this boy back to a place where they know that is not fit for human mankind. Now there are a lot of Cubans living there, and they surviving, but that's what they are doing, they're surviving down there in a tyranny that's been going on for 41 years under Fidel Castro, and I think it's about time that we stand up against this. We talk about the Cold War is over. The Cold War is not over. Just 90 miles south of Key West, we still have a socialist dictator, and there's a lot of abuse going on, and we want to stop it here with Elian. His mother fled that country so that he could be free. She was hoping for that same freedom, but she wasn't strong enough to make that trip. And we're just standing here today, I'm standing from my heart I'm not a professional at this, just to say that I want to fight for this little boy and continue the fight that his mother had for him.
[William Gonzalez, Elian's Cousin:] Good afternoon. My name is William Gonzalez. I'm a second cousin of Elian. And I grew up with his father in Cuba. In 1998, I went to Cuba to visit my family, and I spoke to my cousin, Juan Miguel, and I didn't want to say that before, because I didn't want the make him any trouble in Cuba, because like you guys see, he says he's free; we know that he's not free. He's talking about the government. Everything when you stop, stand up in front of a lot of people, like you guys, and I have to talk about my son I have a little son, too I don't need to read no paper; everything come from the heart. So that way we all know that he's not the cousin that we have over there. He's manipulated by the government, and he has to say everything that the government tell him to say. And I went to Cuba has year I mean, 1998, and he told me him and his brother and my other two cousins that are already here they came in the rafter that as soon as he got a chance, he would come here. He asked me, what was the deal here? And I told him, if you're going to go, just try to get, like, a good boat; don't go on something that you will risk your life like, the mother did on his son. And he told me, he will, assuming he got a chance, he will. So right now, my point is, I'm looking at two different persons, you know. I'm looking at him and...
[Battista:] We're listening to press conference in Washington D.C. These are folks and family members who are sympathetic to the relatives of Elian Gonzalez in Miami. They're in Washington, lobbying congressmen up there to their side of this issue. And again, a picture of Tamiami Airport in Miami, where the helicopter there waits to take Elian's two grandmothers to Barry University and a meeting with their grandson. Jeffery, one question here before we take a break. One of the things that when Donato Dalrymple was speaking, and he was one of the fishermen who rescued Elian out of the ocean I think it's always disheartening to hear people talk about everybody is loving family except the family back in Cuba.
[Leving:] Well, we can't assume that the biological father in Cuba loves his son any less than any of us love our children just because we're Americans and he's in Cuba. I'm anti-Castro. I'm anti- communist. However, I don't want to use this child to attack Castro. I don't believe it's in the best interest of this child. Now at the press conference, a statement was made, and I wrote it down here: "Don't strip love from these people." "Love from these people," referencing the relatives in Miami. Well, if you don't strip love from them, and leave Elian with them, then you are stripping Elian with the love of his father, his grandparents, his half sibling and his stepmother, and these are people that he knows, these are people he is familiar with. His relatives in Miami didn't raise him from birth. They weren't his primary caretakers. These people aren't familiar with him the way the biological father is. And if you look at pages 46 and 47 of my book, "Father's Rights," that I wrote with psychologist Dr. Ken Dachman, I have statistics that show what can happen to fatherless children. One is an increase in suicide. Another is drug abuse. Another is chronic asthma. And I can go on and on and on. So we need to focus on what's in the best interest of this boy, not the Miami relatives, not the Cuban government, not public interests groups or private interests groups or people with personal agendas. And there are too many personal agendas intertwined within case that have nothing to do with the best interest of this child.
[Battista:] And we need to take a break at this time. Our thanks to Jeffery Leving, Eduardo Rasco and Alan Delamater for joining us this half hour. If Elian is sent back to Cuba, we'll talk more about what his life would be like. Can he ever be just another normal kid again? We'll have two views of that when we come back. Welcome back. Joining us now is Nicolas Gutierrez, an attorney and president of Bridge of Young Cuban Professionals. Also with us, Pamela Falk, a former director of Latin American Affairs at the America's American Society rather. She spends a lot of time traveling back and forth to Cuba. And welcome to both of you. Nicolas, I had to interrupt Eduardo Rasco just a few moments ago. I was asking him about his fears and concerns about what Elian's life would be like in Cuba, and Americans don't seem to have a single view on that. What are your fears and concerns?
[Nicolas Gutierrez, President, Young Cuban Professionals:] I believe you're right. I think most Americans cannot really be expected to know what life is like in Cuba. It's a life that's so different and so alien from our own, a totalitarian where dictatorship controls every aspect of the society, including a systematic stripping of parental control over their children as a matter of policy.
[Battista:] Can you be more specific? What do you mean by stripping them of control? Can you hear me OK?
[Gutierrez:] OK. I can hear you. Go ahead.
[Battista:] Could you get a little more specific for us and tell us what you mean by stripping of control?
[Gutierrez:] Yes. Remember, this regime in Cuba, as a matter of policy, has separated parents from their children. Children in many cases when they show some athletic prowess are taken from their parents and sent for specialized training. All children assist what they call
[Battista:] No, I'm sorry. I just want to interrupt here and get Pamela in quickly. Pamela, you have been back and forth to Cuba a number of times. This is this the sort of thing that you have witnessed in terms of family life there?
[Pamela Falk, Cuba Analyst:] Well, I think there is one story here, and that is how Elian lived. And he lived very well, with both his mother and his father, and I think we have to take both of their interests into account. There have been a lot of things that have been said about what his mother had wanted or not wanted, and I don't think we should speak ill of her. I think the issue is that she obviously wanted him out, or at least that's what we can glean from what people have said, and to come to the United States, and the father wanted him to stay. At least that's what we can glean right now. The only the only bottom line here is that the boy has to be back with his father. There's got to be some voice of reason here that says there's a way to do this. And you can't send him back in a taxi or in a with federal marshals. So the logical solution is to find a way to have the father sit down with him here and discuss what he wants. And if he goes back, he goes back with some of the rights that his mother earned for him. But there's we've been spun eight waste ways from Sunday by all sides on this, Bobbie, and I think it's so sad. This is a young boy he's only six who has witnessed something unimaginable to all of us: to watch the mother who he fell asleep with every night die as he slipped out of her hands. I mean, it's just unbelievable to think how sad this is. He's got to be back with his father, and we've got to find a way to work that out.
[Battista:] Let me take a phone call from Jesse in Florida Jesse.
[Jesse:] Yes, it's a good thing that the INS wasn't here when the pilgrims landed. They would have sent the pilgrims back. Nobody is taking the mother's wishes into consideration. She died to give him freedom. Evidently, we're not the home of the free and the land of the brave anymore, because we the don't have a president who is brave enough to stand up to Castro. Thank you.
[Battista:] All right, Jesse, thank you. And we'll take a break and continue in a moment. Live pictures from Barry University, a lot of protesters out in front there, awaiting the arrival of the two grandmothers who will meet with Elian. This is a very passionate issue for both sides involved, and, Nicolas, if you can hear me, do all of the, you know, political groups and adjunct groups who are getting involved with both sides of this issue even give a thought to how all of this and all of what's going on there could affect or damage Elian?
[Gutierrez:] Yes. I think it's innately cruel to submit a 6-year- old psyche to the circus that is here. I mean, since when is the INS in the family law business? How can they condition the parole or the custody, parental custody of Elian's great uncle to whether or not he will agree to meet at the home of a nun here in Miami Beach, Sister Jeanne McLaughlin from Barry University? I don't know that it is in the the INS's strong suit is family law. This is a country of rule of law. This is a country where a family court should be making these delicate decisions, where the best interests of Elian as a child will be looked at. It should some INS bureaucrat should not determine whether Elian should be sent back to a country where his milk ration will end next year, where he and his report cards at school will be graded on ideological compliance with the regime as well as his parents. I mean, that is just not appropriate.
[Battista:] Well,at the same time, you know, you're calling what the INS is doing a circus. At the same time, is it right for the relatives and the supporters of those relatives to parade this little boy down the street, waiving a subpoena, things he can't even begin to understand? I mean, both sides are conducting a circus here, are they not?
[Gutierrez:] I dare say no, I don't think that's correct. I dare say that the Cuban-American community in Miami is a slightly better arbiter of what life in Cuba would be like if Elian was sent back than an INS bureaucrat, or a Clinton administration official. I don't know that why can't they meet family to family with the child, not alone with the grandmothers in the upper room of Sister McLaughlin's house. Let the two family's get together in a family environment. The grandmothers have been welcomed to Miami. Flowers have been thrown in their path. All the family all the great uncle wanted was for them to come and have dinner together at their house without bureaucrats, without press, without Castro diplomats escorting these poor grandmothers around in a plane apparently chartered by the National Council of Churches, a group whose history of soft spot for Fidel Castro and of alignment with radical communist regimes goes back to when they orchestrated anti-U.S. protests...
[Battista:] Let me get Pamela...
[Gutierrez:] ... turn a deaf ear to Soviet dissidents...
[Battista:] I only have about a minute left, Nicolas, so I need to get Pamela in here.
[Falk:] Bobbie, you asked before what his life would be like in Cuba. Elian has a very loving family in Cuba, all four grandparents and his father, and he has a very loving family in Miami. They should sit down together and on that I think we are all in agreement. The INS could show some leadership, get the father up here, ask Fidel Castro to please let him come up and let them all sit down and determine and the father should determine what's best for Elian and that's the only way that they can really make sure that this little boy will survive all of this.
[Battista:] And very quickly in five seconds, do you think Congress should be involved in this, Pamela?
[Falk:] I think it will help the process. It's a check to give him his rights, to give him permanent resident status. It will make it more reasonable for him to come back and forth. If he goes down he might be able to come back next year and I think that would rationalize the situation quite a bit.
[Battista:] All right. Pamela Falk, Nicolas Gutierrez, thank you both for joining us this afternoon. We are out of time. Stay with CNN's continuing coverage of the Elian Gonzalez story. We'll be back tomorrow.

[Gene Randall, Cnn Anchor:] When most people run for office, their goal is getting elected. But from Florida, we have the story of a man doing everything he can to lose his race. Here is Mark Potter.
[Mark Potter, Cnn Correspondent:] A month and a half ago, Douglas Couvertier decided to run for town council in Southwest Ranches, a rural bedroom community near Ft. Lauderdale. He was actually doing quite well. "The Miami Herald" endorsed his candidacy. But suddenly, he changed his mind. [on camera]: What's your greatest fear?
[Douglas Couvertier, Reluctant Candidate:] To be elected. To win. At this point, if I win, I'm in trouble, so I've got to make sure I don't win.
[Potter:] Recently, he got bad news from his boss at the Miami-Dade fire department, where he works as a battalion chief. It turns out the county charter prohibits someone with his job from holding elective office.
[Couvertier:] If I'm elected to this office, I have to be terminated, and I can't afford that, because I'm three years away from retiring, and it'll affect my retirement.
[Potter:] Not wanting to lose his full pension, he asked the elections supervisor to remove him from the ballot. But it was too late.
[Couvertier:] I didn't want people to vote for me, because I'd lose my job, so the only alternative was I was to communicate the fact that, please, don't vote for me.
[Potter:] Couvertier quickly went to work, convincing the local newspapers to write stories about how he hoped to lose. He explained it by phone to radio reporters.
[Couvertier:] I am three years away from retiring. It would affect my retirement. So I couldn't do that.
[Potter:] Couvertier also contacted his neighbors, who at first thought he was kidding.
[Couvertier:] As soon as I talk about it a little, they realize I'm serious, and they go, oh my God, no, I won't vote for you, don't worry.
[Potter:] On election day, the now-reluctant candidate will come here to the polling place to greet voters. He will wear a tee-shirt that says "Please Don't Vote for Douglas Couvertier," and he means it. Mark Potter, CNN, near Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] How is the president being received by members of the U.S. Military? Joining us from New York, to ponder that question and other questions is senior political analyst Bill Schneider. Bill, good morning, thanks for being with us.
[William Schneider, Cnn Senior Political Analyst:] Good morning, Daryn.
[Kagan:] First question right off the bat: How is the new president being perceived by this military?
[Schneider:] As a friend and as supporter, much more so than Bill Clinton, who was suspect to a lot of people in the military. George W. Bush is very popular with service people. A lot of service people are men, and he's been very popular throughout with men. But there's one potential problem: Donald Rumsfeld, the secretary of defense, spoke a few minutes ago, and he's undertaking a thorough review of the military service the contracting, the arrangements, and how it should be modernized for the 21st century. He mentioned that a few minutes ago. And that's got a lot of people in the so-called military-industrial complex very nervous about what this administration might do to reform the military.
[Kagan:] But might this administration have to reassess what its plans are for the military, now with the shift of the balance of power in the U.S. Senate, Carl Levin, a Democrat, set to take over the Armed Services Committee. He's a big critic of a lot of these suggestions, like missile defense.
[Schneider:] Missile defense, certainly. This administration acknowledges that missile defense has not been perfected. They seem determined to go ahead and deploy it anyway. Senator Levin, the Democrat who's going to chair the Armed Services Committee says, along with other Democrats, like the new majority leader, Tom Daschle, that they might be reluctant to authorize deployment of missile defense. Democrats have always favored more research. The Democrats have got to be careful on this and other issues, not simply to be the party that stands up and says we're going to stop George Bush and right-wing agenda, as they refer to it. They've got to have an agenda of their own. Interestingly, Senator Levin does favor a lot of military reforms that Secretary Rumsfeld is considering.
[Kagan:] Let's look ahead here, Bill. The president from here goes to Mesa, Arizona, just outside of Phoenix, and then on to California, a state where somehow he hasn't quite managed to make it in his first 100-plus days in office.
[Schneider:] It's amazing. One eight of Americans live in California, the nation's largest state. He's visited 26 states, but he hasn't been to California yet. Well, he's going this week. He invested over 10 million in the California campaign, and he ended up losing it by 12 points; it just did not pay off. He's making his first trip there. There's kind of a war going on between California and Texas over the California electricity crisis. The Californians, including the governor, Senator Feinstein, blame Texas energy companies for price- gouging California consumers and utilities, and they want the federal government to impose wholesale price caps on electricity, and they're getting no sympathy there the federal government. Californians claim it's because it's being run by two former energy executives, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
[Kagan:] So what kind of reception do you think he'll be getting in California?
[Schneider:] There are a lot of Republicans in California, and I'm sure he's going to be very careful where he shows up. There's still a lot of money in California that Republicans want to raise, and a lot of worried Republicans trying to figure out what's the future of their party in that state. I think the electricity crisis throws everything in California up in the air, and the president, we all expect, is going to make a serious effort to address that issue and talk about what the federal government is prepared to do.
[Kagan:] Bill Schneider, enjoy your time in New York. We've enjoyed your brief time with us here this morning. Thank you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Sen. Robert Torricelli , New Jersey:] Perhaps I've earned some enemies in government and in politics. But I have never ever done anything at any time to betray the trust of the people of the State of New Jersey. Never.
[Greta Van Susteren, Co-host:] Today on BURDEN OF PROOF, Senator Robert Torricelli fights back against criminal allegations. What is the law? The answers could be found in a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
[Announcer:] This is BURDEN OF PROOF with Greta Van Susteren and Roger Cossack.
[Van Susteren:] Hello. Welcome to BURDEN OF PROOF. To those close to him, Robert Torricelli is known as the torch. Now the New Jersey senator is feeling the heat of a campaign finance investigation. From 1996 to 1999, David Chang, a campaign contributor, claims he gave Torricelli thousands of dollars of cash and gifts.
[Roger Cossack, Co-host:] The probe involving Torricelli could turn on a 1999 Supreme Court decision in the case of former Agricultural Secretary Mike Espy, which said that a gift to a federal official must be linked to a specific official act to make it illegal. Senate ethics rules limit gifts from an individual to $50 with a yearly limit of $100 from each individual. But gifts from friends are exempted from those regulations, so if you want to give me some money, it's OK.
[Van Susteren:] I'm not giving you anything because I'm going to our guests, who are joining us today from San Diego, California. First, is Charles LaBella. He's former head prosecutor of the Justice Department's campaign finance task force and he's also a former federal prosecutor. From New York, we're joined by "Newsweek" investigative reporter Mark Hosenball.
[Cossack:] And here in Washington, Frank Grimes, Eric Bloom, former attorney for Mike Espy and Ian Mahoney. And in the back, Dennis San Giorgio and Andy Martin. I want to go first to Mark Hosenball. Mark, what are the allegations against Senator Torricelli now?
[Mark Hosenball, "newsweek":] Well, there are three different sort of classes of allegations. The first set of allegations is that he may have known about the laundering of campaign contributions through straw donors. And five, or, sorry, seven people have already plead guilty to making sort of straw donations to his 1996 campaign, and three of his aides have been sent target letters by the prosecutors indicating that they may be involved in or may have known about straw donor contributions to his 1996 campaign. Secondly, there are the allegations by David Chang that you mentioned in your intro that he gave gifts andor other, you know, cash even to Torricelli about the same time. Thirdly, there are allegations that haven't received much publicity, but they're out there, by Chang and possibly othersor people around him engaged in some sort of campaign to intimidate Chang and maybe other witnesses not to tell prosecutors their story about what had gone on. So it's a very complicated investigation.
[Cossack:] It's sort of, so the last part would be an obstruction of justice allegation?
[Hosenball:] Correct.
[Cossack:] All right, let me just...
[Van Susteren:] Mark, let me ask you...
[Cossack:] Let me just, one question. What's a straw donor that you talked about in the first, you said there'd be through straw donors laundering of perhaps campaign funds. What does that mean?
[Hosenball:] Well, as you know, in the case of hard money, particularly money that goes directly to a specific political candidate for a specific political campaign, there are upper limits on the amount of money that any individual donor can give. Now, in many cases, there have been cases where somebody who wants to give more than that limit will spread out the money amongst a bunch of people whose money it isn't really to give and give his own money through people who are not giving it on their own, and that's a sort of straw donor.
[Van Susteren:] Mark, I want to talk about Senator Torricelli. I mean when you have allegations and you're a politician it's pretty sort of deadly in the sense even, you know, an innocent politician, to have someone say that. But has he actually received a target letter indicating that he himself is the target of the investigation rather than just the people around him?
[Hosenball:] Well, last week when he came out and gave this sort of denunciation of the prosecutors and everything, his lawyers also said on the side, as I recall, that he had not received a target letter. On the other hand, his lawyers have also said that they're in some sort of "dialogue," whatever that means, with the U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of New York, in other words, Mary Jo White's office in New York. So this, I mean he knows that there's a very serious investigation. As I understand it, he hasn't received a target letter, which by the way I understand it, a target letter means that they have notified whoever the target is that they believe they have enough information to indict him. He hasn't received such a letter yet, as I understand it.
[Van Susteren:] All right, now, there has been a search of his home, has there not?
[Hosenball:] There has.
[Van Susteren:] And when was the search of his home and have you had a chance to see the affidavit in support of the search warrants so we know what was being looked for?
[Hosenball:] Well, we don't even know there was a search warrant. As his lawyers sort of cast it, they took representatives of the Southern District of New York or the FBI or whatever through this house. We're not even sure which house it is. He has a residence in Washington and he has a residence in Englewood, New Jersey. But we think it was in New Jersey. To look around. We don't know whether that was as a result of a search warrant. We don't know whether that was as a result of him merely inviting them in. We don't know whether there was a threat of a search warrant. We don't know the circumstances. There's a lot of material about this investigation that we don't know. There are extensive sealed files and sealed litigation in this case.
[Cossack:] Charles, let's talk about the discussions that Mark has talked to us about, that he said his lawyers are in discussions, if you will, with the U.S. attorney's office. What kind of discussions are they having?
[Charles Labella, Former Head, Campaign Finance Task Force:] Well, that sounds like with respect to the search, they may have done a consent to search. They may have all agreed that rather than go through the formality of getting a search warrant signed by a judge, they would consent to search. Those sorts of discussions are probably going on. I would assume, given the lawyers that he has, he's got very good lawyers, Mr. Wells, Mr. Pomerantz, very good lawyers, I would suspect that the kind of negotiations that are going on now are by way of explanation as the government uncovers various evidence, as they elicit testimony from various witnesses. The defense team would inevitably try to counter that by explaining or putting in context that evidence.
[Van Susteren:] Let me go back to Mark. Mark, David Chang, who's he and what's what are the specifics on that allegation? And I underline allegation.
[Hosenball:] Well, David Chang is a very mysterious businessman from somewhere in Asia. There have been various stories about where he was born and where he wasn't born. But according to the prosecutors themselves, they prosecuted him for obstruction of justice and, I believe, sort of campaign finance violations, he's given several dates of birth. I mean nobody really knows exactly who he is. He appears to be some sort of businessman stroke, you know, swindler from Asia, maybe Korea, maybe China, who moved to New Jersey in the 1990s at some point, got involved in various business deals, both locally and in Asia, and approached Torricelli and various other politicians, so I'm told, for help with his business deals, particularly some very complicated business deals involving North Korea and agricultural commodities and South Korea and an insurance company. And we do know now that Torricelli, at any rate, you know, wrote various letters to the American government and also put pressure on the South Korea government to help Chang with his business deals. We also know that Chang, since he was picked up and arrested and charged and plead guilty, I believe, to the violations that he was charged with, he's now essentially become a government witness and has made various allegations against Torricelli and possibly others.
[Cossack:] All right, let's take a break. When we come back, the limits of gift giving on Capitol Hill and how the Justice Department tracks cash exchanges in Washington. Don't go away.
[Legal Brief:] The U.S. Supreme Court Monday rejected Jack Kevorkian's appeal of his $10 million libel lawsuit against the American Medical Association. Kevorkian, the assisted suicide doctor who is serving between 10 and 25 years in prison for second degree murder, had sued the AMA for calling him a "killer."
[Torricelli:] I do not believe that any candidate for president of the United States or anyone who has ever managed a similar United States Senate campaign could have withstood such an inquiry, resulted in nothing more than a handful of commonplace regulatory issues. Seven people were found to have engaged in reimbursing contributions from among 20,000 campaign donors. Only one of those seven people, David Chang, despite numerous previous denials, now claims that I had knowledge of his activities.
[Cossack:] Federal investigators are looking into alleged gifts and cash payments to Senator Robert Torricelli. At issue are the senator's relationship with businessman David Chang and whether the New Jersey Democrat lobbied on Chang's behalf for the purchase of a South Korean insurance firm. Now, last summer Chang pleaded guilty to making illegal donations to Torricelli's 1996 campaign. Eric, let's talk a little bit about what the burden of the government is to prove in these cases. It's not just enough, and you were involved in making the law in this case, it's not just enough to show that a politician accepts money from a consistent. It has to be shown, the government has to show that they took the money with the intent of giving back something, right?
[Eric Bloom, Former Attorney For Sun-diamond:] Well, that's right. Well, you have two different statutes, of course. You've got the bribery statute and the giver, there's got to be an exchange, the quid pro quo, the giving of a gift in exchange for an act. The other statute, and that was the case that I argued before the Supreme Court, is the gratuity statute, and the intent element there is different. You have to give a gift and the statute says, "for or because of any official act performed or to be performed." Now, that language has gotten a lot of play in the courts of appeals and now in the Supreme Court. And let's talk a bit about what that does that does not mean, it's not giving a gift to simply ingratiate yourself generally, to get in the good graces of the elected official. It's not getting access.
[Cossack:] It's not taking somebody just out to dinner and saying nice meeting you, don't forget me?
[Bloom:] Even if the purpose is to get access to the person, that's not enough. The Supreme Court says it has to be for an act, an official act, and it has to be for a specific official act. That's a very high standard and after the Supreme Court ruled in our case that that was the standard, the independent counsel who had prosecuted Mike Espy dropped the charges against our client because I think it's a materially much more difficult standard for the government to satisfy.
[Van Susteren:] Charles, how do you satisfy that? If I'm going to contribute to a candidate because I think, let's say I want some national park preserved and I know that candidate is going to do what I want for that national park so I flop down 10 bucks. That's not, there's nothing wrong with that, right?
[La Bella:] Right.
[Van Susteren:] Where does it become wrong? I mean in, where does it become a crime?
[La Bella:] It's really, as was said, it's an extremely high threshold now after the Supreme Court case in Sun-Diamond. It's, you know, you almost have to have a videotape or a recorded conversation saying look, I'm giving you this for that. It almost has to be that clear. It's a very difficult standard right now for prosecutors.
[Van Susteren:] Than why pursue it? I mean so how if you were back in your old days as a prosecutor up in New York, where would you investigate this? Now, no one, I mean we don't know that Senator Torricelli did anything wrong at all. He denies it.
[La Bella:] Right.
[Van Susteren:] But how do you go about investigating and prosecuting?
[La Bella:] Well, I think what the Southern District is doing now is they're looking for corroboration. They went into the home. They're looking for evidence of the gifts that were given. They're going to interview all the people who were associated with those gifts, whether they can corroborate the witness or not is going to be the real test here.
[Van Susteren:] What if in David Chang's mind, let's say that he gave Senator Torricelli all these great gifts and in his mind he thought that Torricelli was going to turn around and help him. In Torricelli's mind let's say that he didn't, but he thought he was just some of constituent and writes a letter. That's not enough, is it?
[La Bella:] No. That's going to make it a very difficult case, almost an impossible case on the gratuity statute and on the bribery statute. It does make a more interesting case, though, on a mail fraud and a, also failing to disclose gifts. That's more problematic, I think, in this situation.
[Cossack:] Well, Mark, let's talk about what the government, at least at this stage, is claiming was the quid pro quo. Now, David Chang says that I gave a certain amount of money or certain gifts and things to Senator Torricelli. As we all agree, that's not enough, and there must be and he agreed to do the following. What was that?
[Hosenball:] Well, I mean, the problem is, of course, we don't know what the government is claiming. The government hasn't put anything on the record specifically about, you know, its investigation about, of Senator Torricelli other than the sort of straw donor aspect of the investigation. So we don't know the extent of the government case. It appears that Chang, however, has made allegations that in return for cash and gifts, Torricelli did various favors for him such as pressure the U.S. government and maybe foreign governments to, you know, help him with his business deals. Now, whether you can tie any of those specific acts by Torricelli helping Chang to any of the specific gifts, you'd have to know the dates. You'd have to know, you know, the way the gifts were paid, if the gifts, indeed, were paid and, of course, you have the problem with Chang's credibility. So we don't really know the strength of the government's case now. But with, I agree with your previous guest. What the prosecutors now are doing is looking for corroboration for Chang's allegations, allegations from a problematic witness.
[Van Susteren:] Charles, how does this end up in New York? This is a New Jersey senator and, I mean, what, maybe you don't know this. I mean this is being investigated in New York. Why? Do you know?
[La Bella:] Well, I think, I mean my information is that as the campaign financing task force was winding down, Bob Conrad was made U.S. attorney. This case was being handled out of the task force. It just was natural to send it to a U.S. attorney's office. It had to be done, had to be done competently and the prosecutors who are now still on the case are being supervised by the Southern District of New York. The case is being handled by the Southern District of New York. I think it couldn't go to New Jersey because the senator probably had some hand in picking the U.S. attorneys there. So I'm sort of reading tea leaves here, but I think that it probably went to the Southern District of New York because it's the closest jurisdiction and it has venue over the allegations.
[Van Susteren:] And that's the...
[Hosenball:] The germ of the investigation began in New Jersey, in fact, with the U.S. attorney's office in New Jersey. They were the ones who first heard the allegations about Torricelli and, indeed, the U.S. attorney there under Clinton was conflicted out. So it transferred to main Justice and then main Justice, Ashcroft abolished that task force that Conrad ran and that Mr. LaBella ran and so then they switched it over to the Southern District, which seems to be cleaning up a lot of the messes left behind by the Clinton administration.
[Van Susteren:] And the appearance that...
[Cossack:] How did they get jurisdiction? Probably somebody made a phone call from New York?
[Van Susteren:] Or even the thing I think that probably the smart thing is because, as Charles pointed out, Senator Torricelli probably did help choose the U.S. attorneys in the State of New Jersey and everyone would be screaming about that, and rightfully. It would have the appearance of impropriety. We're going to take a quick break. We'll be right back. Stay with us.
[Q&a;:] Why did authorities at a New Mexico prison have to fire tear gas at prisoners Monday night? Why did authorities at a New Mexico prison have to fire tear gas at prisoners Monday night? To break up a daylong protest. About 700 inmates had refused to leave the recreation yard to go to classes or work assignments.
[Van Susteren:] Welcome back to BURDEN OF PROOF. We're talking about Senator Torricelli of New Jersey and the allegations that underline, allegations against him having to do with campaign contributions and the like. Eric, talking about the law. In order to be fair, the law must be clear. In your opinion, is the law clear for politicians in this area?
[Bloom:] Well, no. The truth is there is such a morass of very complex administrative regulations in the House, in the Senate, in the executive branch and they've changed several times, too. It is very easy for someone simply to trip over some of those regulations. One of the things that the Supreme Court, in fact, pointed to in ruling that you apply the criminal statute very narrowly is the fact that you do have these administrative regulations and suggested that more times than not, that's where these cases should go.
[Van Susteren:] Charles, do you agree about, with Eric about whether or not the law is clear?
[Labella:] Well, I think some of the administrative regulations are unclear, but I think the law on bribery and gratuities is pretty clear and I think one thing you have to keep focused on is the Southern District of New York is not going to bring a criminal case on petty or trite conduct. It's going to make sure that if they ever go forward on a case like this, it's going to be pretty substantial conduct.
[Cossack:] Charles, you know, one of the things lawyers talk about from the Supreme Court is looking for bright line decisions, you know, bright line decisions.
[La Bella:] Right.
[Cossack:] OK, this is the line in the sand. We all know what it is now. Is the case that we talked about, that Eric talked about, the Sun-Diamond case, does that lay down a bright line decision to make it so difficult now for prosecutors that they say, you know, we'd better have the goods before we do anything about this?
[La Bella:] I don't think it makes it impossible, but it makes it, I mean it raised the bar. I mean it clarified the law. Prior to that, there had been some confusion about what would sustain a gratuity conviction and I think the Supreme Court case cleared it up and raised the bar.
[Van Susteren:] And let me tell you, you know, let me tell you, I don't know if it raised the bar. I mean I'll take all of you to task a little bit. Maybe it just made it fair. I mean and the question of making it more difficult for prosecutors, maybe that the problem was is that in some ways it was being abused. I mean the law must be clear and definitive and I don't know if the Supreme Court necessarily raised the bar, but simply said to Congress when you write these statutes, you'd better be fair to everybody and make it plain and simple.
[Bloom:] Well, I agree with that.
[Unidentified Speaker:] I think that's true, yeah. That's true.
[Bloom:] Let me give you a couple of examples. The Supreme Court pointed to the New York Yankees, for example, are a championship baseball team, goes to the White House and they give a jersey to the president. Is that a gratuity? You're giving a thing of value and you're giving it to him because of his position. If the secretary of agriculture goes and speaks to farmers...
[Cossack:] Well, but you're not asking, but you're not asking him to be a Yankee fan, either, you know? You're just saying here's a gift, Mr. President. You're not asking him to...
[Van Susteren:] His wife is.
[Bloom:] But that's just the point. I mean if you're, but you are giving it to him because of his position, because of his status. At the trial court, the client was initially convicted because to the trial court judge, that is sufficient. If you're giving it to him simply because of his position, that is enough to convict.
[Cossack:] Oh...
[Van Susteren:] And sometimes the law can be really stupid, right?
[Cossack:] Well...
[Van Susteren:] Thank you. Let me go back to Mark, though, for a second. Mark, Senator Torricelli is a bit flamboyant. We've read about the fact that he's gone out with some rather flamboyant women. Is that, I mean tell us who, tell us how flamboyant he is and whether or not that has any sort of bearing on this story?
[Hosenball:] Well, he's very colorful. He's very outspoken. Remember also, he was the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, in other words, the fundraising arm of the Democrats in the Senate for the last couple of years. So to some extent he's a poster boy for the current campaign finance system. Now, that's attracted both television attention to him but also the attention of "The New York Times," which seems to regard him as the poster boy for campaign finance abuses. So "The New York Times" has kind of launched a campaign against him. Moreover, you know, his abrasive, he's an abrasive personality. He talks a lot on TV. He's gone out with Bianca Jagger and Patricia Duff. So he's kind of a colorful character and colorful characters, you know, attract attention. And yes, sure, that's probably increased the interest of the prosecutors in going after this guy, his high profile.
[Cossack:] Eric, it would seem to me that of all of his problems, maybe the least of it is these, the actual quid pro quo claims. But these claims of perhaps taking money through straw donors, that may be much more of a problem for him.
[Bloom:] Well, let me just add two things to give a little bit of perspective. First, as I think the clips showed from the senator, the only evidence the prosecutor has to show knowledge, knowledge the senator himself was involved. In all of these cases, you have straw donors happening all the time but that's from the other side, from the donor's side, not the donee's side.
[Van Susteren:] Unless they deliberately look the other way and sort of a nod and a wink. I'm not saying that happened here, but I mean it's conceivable you could do that.
[Bloom:] Sure. My point is in terms of evidence, that's very hard to establish. The second thing is, just to give it some proper perspective, the statute under FECA, the Federal Election Commission Act, actually makes it a misdemeanor. It's only been through, in my view, creative pleading that it's been felonized.
[Cossack:] Oh, I see. All right, that's all the time. I'm getting a note. That's all the time we have for today. Thanks to our guests. Thank you for watching. Today on "TALKBACK LIVE," did Navy Commander Scott Waddle get the right punishment? Send your e-mail to Bobbi Batista and tune in at 3:00 P.M. Eastern Time.
[Van Susteren:] And tonight on THE POINT, he claims he was pushed around and that drove him to fire on his fellow students. Now Charles Andrew Williams faces trial. Should he be tired as an adult? That's tonight at 8:30 Eastern. And join Roger and me tomorrow for another edition of BURDEN OF PROOF. We'll see you then.

[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Now for a little more insight into Al Gore the man, we're joined by Robert Delabar, who served in Vietnam with the vice president. He knows Gore as both a soldier and a friend. Al Gore said of you that you were one of his best buddies in Vietnam. Now, you know that there is an image problem, or it's been said there's an image problem, with Al Gore the campaigner and Al Gore the man. What's the difference as far as you see it?
[Robert Delabar, Friend Of Al Gore:] I don't see much of a difference at all, as a matter of fact. I've known Al for about 30 years now. Are you referring to...
[Waters:] Well, we're going to you're in rehearsals now to tell the public tonight about who Al Gore is. We had his daughter last night making delivering a speech, telling us who Al Gore is. You would think after being vice president for eight years, in the Senate, in the Congress, we would know who Al Gore is, but apparently we do not.
[Delabar:] I don't know why you don't because he's certainly been on television enough and written about enough and discussed enough to know as much as there is to know about him, I think.
[Waters:] Well, is he different in private than he is on television? When you turn from what you know about him as a private man and you see him on television, how do you do you connect the dots? How do you see it?
[Delabar:] Well, of course, I think a lot about the person that I knew back in the Army a long time ago, and of course I've spoken to him several time you know, quite a few times since he's been out, or since he's been in public life. I don't know how to explain that or what to say about that. I when I see him on TV, I see the person that I know.
[Waters:] What are you going to do tonight? What kind of Al Gore story are you going to tell tonight?
[Delabar:] I want to tell the story that he was in the service, that he served his country in Vietnam, that I think he's an exceptional man who has a great sense of humor, very strong sense of commitment, and he's been a great friend.
[Waters:] Do you think it is important to the public to know that he was in Vietnam?
[Delabar:] I think so. If they're interested in knowing about that, he was a regular guy in the Army. I think that he saw his commitment clearly, his and he chose to stand beside all of us who maybe didn't have that much of a choice about our lives in that period of time.
[Waters:] There are those words again, "regular guy." I think that's what folks are trying to get across at this convention, that Al Gore's a regular guy. What was regular about this regular guy?
[Delabar:] Well, he certainly didn't expect or receive any special privilege, as far as I know, at least when we were in the service together. He enjoyed doing the things that all the rest of us did. You know, he was typical Army soldier, buddy, friend.
[Waters:] Well, good luck at the convention tonight and your performance before a national audience.
[Delabar:] Thank you.
[Waters:] Robert Delabar.

[Anand Naidoo, World News:] The trial of two Libyan men accused in the world's worst airliner bombing is scheduled to begin in the Netherlands in less than 90 minutes. The men face charges of murder, conspiracy to murder and air security violation in connection with the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988. CNN's Colleen McEdwards is at the converted U.S. military base where the trial will be held. She joins us now with the latest. Hi, Colleen.
[Colleen Mcedwards, World News:] Hi, Anand. Over the last half hour or so, people have actually been arriving at the courthouse here at Camp Zeist. I can tell you that the lawyers for the Crown, the prosecution side and the defense side have arrived. There are special UN observers who are here. A Libyan delegation has arrived, and also members of the victims' families. They are here in force. They waited a long time to try to see justice in this case. They lost their loved ones in the crash almost 12 years ago and lobbied hard to have this trial take place. They lobbied the British government. They lobbied the U.S. government. They even lobbied Libya itself in the years when they believed, when they feared that no trial would ever take place. When this trial actually does get under way, just over an hour from now, we are told by the prosecution team that they will begin with that night, December 21, 1988, the night that Pan Am Flight 103 went down over Lockerbie, Scotland. The court will hear evidence from people who were on the scene at the time, people who lived in the town of Lockerbie. Eleven people were killed on the ground. All the people onboard the plane were killed. The court will also hear eyewitness accounts from police officers and civil aviation authorities. Some of the special circumstances around this trial is the fact that it's being held in a neutral third country and the fact that it's being held before a panel of three judges instead of a jury. These provisions were made in exchange for the hand- over of the suspects from Libya. The two suspects are both in their 40s. They are Basset Ali Mohammed al-Megrahi and Lamen Khalifa Fhimah. The prosecution alleges that both men were Libyan intelligence agents. That is an allegation that both of them deny. They are faced with charges of murder, conspiracy to murder, contravention of aviation security act. And they were surrendered by Libya in April of last year. They've been held here at Camp Zeist since then in a specially designed prison area. It has a large concrete wall around it and a wire fencing around that wall. They are held in two separate cells and also have a common area which they are allowed to use to visit with one another. They have access to television. They have access to exercise facilities, and they can also meet, of course, with their lawyers and family members, who have been here as well. Anand?
[Naidoo:] Thank you, Colleen, for that update. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Chris Wolfe is equity markets strategist for the J.P. Morgan Private Bank. He's our featured guest this morning. And he says there's a prospect, at least, that the Federal Reserve won't wait until its next meeting before cutting interest rates again. Why do you think so? Good morning.
[Chris Wolfe, Equity Markets Strategist, J.p. Morgan Private Bank:] Well, I think what you had yesterday was the 25-basis-point rate cut. What you saw was further bias towards weakness. And you had, in the statement, kind of wording leaving the door open for more cuts. Now, I think what it will take, though, to have a surprise cut is an amazing amount of bad economic data. So the possibility does exist. And I think to the extent you're looking at revisions to GDP, you're looking at retail sales, you're looking at some of the order numbers for June and July, because the next meeting is not until the end of August,...
[Marchini:] Do you...
[Wolfe:] ... that's going to be key.
[Marchini:] Do you agree with the assessment that the markets were disappointed because it was only a quarter point?
[Wolfe:] Well, I think you got three things there. You just didn't get the magnitude of the cut. And, fully, we had expected 50 basis points so getting 25, plus the bias, plus indications that, you know, "If we need more, we'll give it to you," which is a good thing.
[Marchini:] All right. Chris Wolfe, sit tight. We'll be back to you. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] We've got more information now on the escaped prison inmates from the Alabama maximum security prison. The story this morning is that a routine call to the Tennessee Highway Patrol brought officers out to a BP convenient store, which is where they ended up chasing down three of the six inmates. Three were captured, two captured later, but one is still on the loose. He is a convicted murder. So joining us right now is Lilla Marigza. She is with our affiliate in Nashville. Lilla, what is the latest on this investigation. Have they found the six suspects?
[Lilla Marigza, Wkrn Reporter:] They have not found the sixth suspect, but again, they have captured five out of the six of the Alabama Six, those escapees. We're about 50 miles west of Nashville in Bucksnort, Tennessee right off Interstate 40. This is between Nashville and Memphis. Joining us now with an update is Phil Thomas, special agent in charge of the west Tennessee division here. Tell us you've just captured a fifth.
[Phil Thomas, Fbi Special Agent:] That's correct. At this point, we've captured Jack Allred, who was fifth person captured this morning. And the only person out in the woods remaining is Gary Scott. And it's important for the public to be aware that Gary Scott is a convicted murder and should be very alert and vigilant until this guy is captured.
[Marigza:] How is the search continuing, and how did you manage to capture all these others so quickly?
[Thomas:] Well, actually it was very alert police work by a Hickman County Sheriff's deputy. He had responded to a suspicious activity report, went down a deserted road, and basically came upon these people in the woods. They bolted from the car when he turned on lights, and they when into a wooded area behind us. And we've been on scene since about 2:00 this morning, with the help of Hickman County Sheriff's Department, TVI, and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.
[Marigza:] You know you used dogs, of course, to flush these men out?
[Thomas:] We have about three teams in the woods now. And as I understand it, one of the dogs, Chaos, is responsible for the capture of three of these individuals. So he's had a good day.
[Marigza:] Now, one of the men said that he was injured.
[Thomas:] That's correct, one of the individuals was running away from an FBI agent who was pursuing him, and he fell and injured his leg.
[Marigza:] Tell us once again the one who still remains on the loose.
[Thomas:] Yes, that person is Gary Scott, and he has been convicted of capital murder, and he was serving a life sentence without parole. So from a public perspective, he is a very dangerous individual. And we're treating all these individuals as armed and dangerous.
[Marigza:] Thank you very much, Phil Thomas with the FBI. I just heard the helicopter fly over. They're searching still with those dogs and teams on the ground and from the air. They're not going to let that sixth escapee escape the perimeter that they have set up. Now, as Phil Thomas told us, this was an alert local authority who started this whole manhunt. It was Here at the BP station, a gas station right off of the interstate, where this manhunt started this morning. The employees at the gas station say the three men came into the store, made six sandwiches this morning. About 45 minutes later, they had called the sheriff's deputies out to kind of check the area because there had been some burglaries in this area. They pulled down a dirt road into the woods behind the BP station, came up on these inmates sitting in the car and then fled into the woods and when they ran the tags on that car, it did come back as the one that Alabama authorities had been looking for in connection with the escapees. So again, this manhunt continues, and we're hoping they will find that sixth escapee very soon Carol.
[Lin:] Lilla Marigza, thank you very much, from our Nashville affiliate WKRN. Once again, we want to show you the picture of the six men, one of whom is still missing right now, outstanding. Of the five they've got captured: O.C. Borden, he was serving a life sentence for murder; Steve Murphy, life sentence for murder; Billy Gamble, 25 years for robbery; and Jack Allred, life a life sentence for robbery; as well as James McClain, 20 years for robbery is what he was serving for. But now, at least one or perhaps all of these men may face charges in a convenient store robbery. EARLY EDITION will be right back with more news.

[Announcer:] Bringing you the world for 20 years, this is CNN.
[Jim Moret, Cnn Anchor:] From Fort Worth, Texas today, so many difficult and seemingly unanswerable questions both for that community and the rest of the nation. A gunman opened fire at a church service for teenagers last night, killing eight people, including himself. Today police learned about the suspect and the weapons used in that attack. Our coverage begins with CNN's Jim Hill in Fort Worth.
[Jim Hill, Cnn Correspondent:] From the gunfire and chaos at the Wedgwood Baptist Church, an image is emerging of how police say 47-year-old Larry Ashbrook stormed a crowded prayer meeting of teenagers and adults. Authorities say Ashbrook used two semiautomatic handguns and a pipe bomb. After killing three adults inside the church entrance, he rushed into the prayer meeting of 150 people. Inside, he opened fire again, reloading several times and tossing the bomb. Police say he killed seven people before killing himself.
[Unidentified Reporter:] What did he do? Describe what he did.
[Unidentified Female:] He put it to his head and he shot himself.
[Hill:] Wedgwood Baptist Church is in a middle-class community, a conservative congregation of about 1,000. The prayer meeting was supposed to be a time for teenagers to reflect on and pray over the troubles of the world. But Wednesday evening, the troubles of one man, Larry Ashbrook, came to them. Jim Hill, CNN, Fort Worth, Texas.

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] The Pentagon is picking up the pace in its race to develop a working missile shield for the United States. There is another intercept test that is coming tonight, and we get more on it from CNN's military affairs correspondent Jamie McIntyre.
[Jamie Mcintyre, Cnn Military Affairs Correspondent:] The fourth U.S. intercept test is a replay of last July's failed attempt. A target missile will be fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base toward Hawaii, and an interceptor launched from the Marshall Islands will try to collide with the mock warhead in space. That's only worked once in three previous attempts. [Begin Video Clip, July 2000]
[Lt. Gen. Ron Kadish, U.s. Air Force:] We'll have an idea what we think happened at this point.
[Mcintyre:] Last year, when a crucial deployment decision hung in the balance, General Ron Kadish looked crestfallen when the test failed, because a tried-and-true booster rocket didn't separate.
[Kadish:] This time it will separate. Either that, or we're going to find another rocket.
[Mcintyre:] There's a reason General Kadish can joke about it now. President Bush, unlike President Clinton, is committed to missile defense no matter how many misses there are early on.
[Kadish:] This is one test in a series of tests, and if it's successful, we'll gain confidence. And if it fails, we will learn a lot.
[Mcintyre:] Kadish has been given approval to schedule major tests every month or two at $100 million a pop not just tests of ground- based missiles but ship-based as well in order to try to meet the ambitious goal of having something that works by 2004. And he's been given the green light to start clearing trees off a site at Fort Greely, Alaska, next month to get ready to build a missile test facility to make future tests more realistic. [on camera]: So don't look for any long faces around here if they miss. The new attitude at the Pentagon is, no intercept, no problem. Just figure out went wrong, give it another shot. Jamie McIntyre, CNN, the Pentagon.
[Nelson:] In a related development on the diplomatic side of this issue, the U.S. is reportedly taking another look at the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty, which many say would be abrogated with continued testing of this missile shield. Secretary of State Colin Powell tells "The Washington Post" that the Bush administration needs a new agreement with Russia. CNN's Kelly Wallace is live at the White House with us this morning with more on that. Good morning, Kelly.
[Kelly Wallace, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Good morning, Brian. Well, Brian, as you know, for some time the Bush administration has been saying that Antiballistic Missile Treaty is outdated, and that it prevents the United States from moving forward with research and development to deploy a missile defense system. But really, all the administration has been saying for some time is that it needs to develop a, quote, "new strategic framework" with Russia. But exactly what that means is not clear. Now we're getting some specifics. As you said, the secretary of state, Colin Powell, telling "The Washington Post" that he believes the U.S. needs to forge a new agreement, a new understanding, maybe a joint statement, if not, a new treaty with Russia that would not only cover defensive systems, such as a missile defense shield, but would also cover offensive systems and would likely include some promised reductions in the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Now, yesterday, Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security advisor, briefing reporters before the president's upcoming trip to Europe, said that no way would the U.S. go ahead and do something illegal and go ahead and violate the ABM Treaty. She said, though, it is time to forge a new relationship with the Russians.
[Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor:] So what we're saying to the Russians is, Let's move beyond that treaty. We have some time now with the Russians over the next period of time here to try and come to a new strategic framework. But I can assure you that we understand our obligations, and we understand our legal obligations, and we would do anything that we're going to do, we're going to do it legally.
[Wallace:] And so the president has a bit of a diplomatic challenge ahead when he meets again with Russian President Vladimir Putin. As you know, the two leaders met for the first time last month. They will be meeting again next week at the summit of the most industrialized nations plus Russia. They also spoke on the telephone just about a week ago. The challenge, again, to get the Russians to come to some understanding, some agreement, that again would allow the U.S. to go ahead and move forward with the missile defense system and would not be violating any agreements with Russia. The challenge, though, the Russians have said that if the U.S. goes forward with the missile defense system, and if it doesn't agree to make any changes, that it could go ahead and put multiple warheads on its own intercontinental ballistic missiles. So some challenges ahead when it comes to diplomacy. Brian, back to you.
[Nelson:] All right, thanks very much, Kelly Wallace for us at the White House. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Time to look ahead now to tonight's convention session. That rolling roll call, as it's called here, for the states and then the Bush nomination will resume. And, Bill Cheney rather, Dick Cheney, he'll speak tonight, accepting the vice presidential nomination. CNN's Kate Snow, outside the First Union Center to talk about Dick Cheney and more now. Hey, Kate.
[Kate Snow, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Bill. Dick Cheney will be speaking tonight, Governor George W. Bush is already here, as you know, and he will be listening. He intends to stay back at the hotel and listen from there, not make an appearance here at the convention. But who knows what will happen tonight. Now you remember the scene in the movie "Rocky," Bill, where Rocky ran up the steps of that big Philadelphia art museum and raised his hands in air. Well that is where George W. Bush just appeared a few moments ago, creating his own victorious moment of sorts, side by side with his former rival Senator John McCain. There they were, appearing for one of the first times together, and talking about how they intend to campaign together. They were at this event for Latino voters, George W. Bush, of course, appealing to that contingent. He said over and over again "juntos polemos," "together we can." George W. Bush, of course, speaks Spanish. He used quite a bit of that in his short speech. It was a rally with Latino theme. It was geared with entertainment from Latino performers, also an appearance from George P. Bush, the son of Governor Jeb Bush of Florida and his wife. He is a Mexican-American, has made quite a number of appearances on behalf of the Bush campaign, very appealing to some of the younger Hispanic voters. On his arrival here in Philadelphia, Governor Bush said that this campaign and this convention will be focused on the positive.
[Gov. George Bush , Presidential Candidate:] Guess what's going to happen come November? This campaign is going to take a campaign that is positive and hopeful and optimistic to the people. We're a campaign of ideas, and the American people are going to respond. If all goes well, you are looking at the next president of the United States.
[Snow:] Now Bush was greeted at the airport by historical figures, among them a Benjamin Franklin look-alike, he shook his hand. He rang a replica of the Liberty Bell, rang it three times before leaving to go to that Latino rally. Later today he will come here where we are, at the First Union Center. He will go inside, have a look around, do sort of a walk- through of what he plans to do tomorrow night with his big speech to the convention. Bill, back to you.
[Hemmer:] All right, Kate, thanks for the update, outside the First Union Center, Kate Snow there. Three of our political analysts, joining us now to talk about Bush, the convention and Republican hopes for the fall campaign: Susan Page, Washington bureau chief for "USA Today" with us, far right there; Rich Lowry with the "National Review"; and Cynthia Tucker, editorial page editor of the "Atlanta Constitution." Good morning to all you.
[Susan Page, "usa Today":] Good morning.
[Cynthia Tucker, "atlanta Constitution":] Good morning.
[Hemmer:] This is like "CROSSFIRE" times three. Time for us to get riled up, in the words of John McCain, we saw McCain just 15 minutes ago. Susan, why don't you start us off there. Pretty good indication right now, 12 hours after his speech, he's back there with George Bush?
[Page:] He's on board and he got a good reception here last night. But I think there was actually some disappointment among the people who supported him. And he didn't mention an issue that was a signature of his own campaign; which was campaign finance reform. We see how much control the Bush campaign has over this convention. He didn't mention campaign finance reform. On the first night, Colin Powell didn't mention abortion rights, although he did four years ago, they are avoiding conflict here at any cost.
[Hemmer:] Which kind of goes with the whole package, we'll talk about that more in a second. Rich, go ahead.
[Rich Lowry, "national Review":] Well, it's also in McCain's interest, obviously, if he has ambitions in the Republican Party in the future, to be as supportive as possible. And that's what we saw last night where he did everything but genuflect before George W. Bush. And it was I thought his speech was extremely eloquent, his writer, Mark Salter, is one of the most talented writers in the Republican Party. But it was odd, it wasn't just campaign finance reform that was missing, it was any policy at all. And I think the thinking behind that was McCain wants to connect with these delegates and a lot of policies he supports, like campaign finance reform, are extremely unpopular to these delegates. So he kept it all at the level of generalities.
[Hemmer:] Jump in here.
[Tucker:] Well, let me echo what Rich just said. It was an eloquent speech but it definitely had its odd moments. What did McCain mean, for example, when he said at the very end "I'm haunted by the future?" did he mean by that that I'm haunted by specter of a Bush, George W. Bush presidency. Also, there were a couple of things that I thought implicitly sent the wrong message about George W. Bush. For one thing, McCain said: We want to inspire Americans, by being an American is about more than just materialism. Well, the fact of the matter is that George W. Bush was born into a wealthy family. The other thing is all the strong emphasis on patriotism, patriotism, patriotism. McCain, a Vietnam War veteran, it seems to me implicitly, it draws attention to the fact that during the Vietnam War, George W. Bush was in the National Guard in the United States.
[Lowry:] Cynthia, are you suggesting no one born to a wealthy family can have any ideals be nonmaterial?
[Tucker:] No, absolutely not, Al Gore...
[Lowry:] There you go.
[Tucker:] Al Gore was also born to privilege. But it seems to me that when you're talking about inspiring Americans to something beyond materialism, it's going to be hard for George W. Bush to convey that message. He's lived very well all his life.
[Lowry:] So has Al Gore, why can Al Gore do it, but George Bush can't?
[Tucker:] And George W. Bush has had many things handed to him during his lifetime.
[Lowry:] Well, so has Al Gore, that's totally irrelevant.
[Page:] You know, we saw a military theme last night, and, Cynthia, you mentioned his lack of service. "The Wall Street Journal" points out this morning that this is the first time since 1928, that the Republican ticket has not had either a presidential candidate or a vice president candidate who actively served in the military.
[Tucker:] That's right.
[Page:] So this could be in contrast to the Democratic ticket, Al Gore served as an Army journalist in Vietnam. If he chooses John Kerry, the senator from Massachusetts, who is on his short list, he would have two Democrats who served in Vietnam against two Republicans who avoided serving in Vietnam. And I wonder if that takes this military issue, which has traditionally been a Republican strength, and gives it over to the other side.
[Hemmer:] Let me jump in, just want to move the conversation a little bit, just to clarify, last night with Bernie, Judy and Jeff Greenfield, John McCain, after his speech, said before I used the words "I am haunted by the vision" he spoke of optimism prior to that. That was a sort of explanation we got from McCain.
[Lowry:] It's also a de Tocqueville quote, it didn't come out of nowhere, when you referred to it earlier.
[Hemmer:] Let's talk about the Hatfield and McCoys out there right now, the Clintons and Bushes, what's happening on this front, Rich?
[Lowry:] Well, I think what is going on here is that Clinton just can't help himself. He's such a natural campaigner. He loves to fight so much. He can't restrain himself. And I thought we saw from President Bush just a little of the contempt that he must have felt, all through these seven years, for President Clinton, and what he's done to the office, beginning to bubble up. So it's a great soap opera sort of twist for the week.
[Page:] Well, you've got to put it in the context of the 1992 election, you know, George Bush the senior was running. He was denied a second term by the ticket of Clinton and Gore. Now his oldest son rises to face Al Gore and try to win back the Oval Office, it's really like a mythical story.
[Tucker:] But George W. Bush is not running against Bill Clinton. He's running against Al Gore, and for me that is one of the interesting things about the continuing references implicit, of course, to Bill Clinton.
[Hemmer:] But maybe the suggestion there is that Al Gore's best campaigner could be Bill Clinton in this whole thing.
[Tucker:] Well, that depends, the fact of the matter is, at the Democratic convention, obviously we will get the chance to have Al Gore and Tipper highlighted. And while Al Gore certainly has some lingering issues about campaign finances and contributions, he doesn't have the Monica Lewinsky issue. He has a very solid marriage. And so the implicit references to Bill Clinton's own integrity issues make you think that this is between George Senior and President Clinton.
[Hemmer:] We have two minutes left here, let's talk about this convention, the packaging that has been so highly profiled through this. Is it possible that as a party, be it Republican or Democratic, that after this convention, this is what a party wants to relay? Certainly as news people we want news, but looking back, when this thing is over, is this the prototype? is this the example? the model that political parties will use to say, look, America, we are together on this?
[Page:] You know, this is a model for parties that tend to win in November. A united party all together behind their nominee, avoiding the things they want to fight about. It's what the Democrats did in '92. And you see the Republicans really willing to put aside their differences, and there are differences in this party, in the hopes of winning in November.
[Lowry:] Well, I agree with that, and what was a key factor was that Bush was able to solidify and nail down his base in during the primaries, because he was challenged from the left by John McCain. And that's why you have conservative base solidly behind him and willing to put up with often times extremely substance-free show here.
[Hemmer:] Listen, we have 30 seconds left. Quickly now, it's August 2 now, where are we in a month? where are we on Labor Day?
[Tucker:] Well, in Labor Day, I think, at Labor Day, the voters will just be beginning to pay attention. I think that by then the polls will have tightened, George W. Bush will not be enjoying quite the lead over Gore that he is at the moment.
[Lowry:] Well, we'll wait and see, it probably will tighten, I don't think these polls that show 16 or an 11 point lead are real and that it will get tighter.
[Page:] Around Labor Day, the polls really start to matter, when the candidate who's leading at Labor Day tends to win in November.
[Hemmer:] How's your Spanish by the way?
[Page:] Not too good.
[Hemmer:] Start brushing up, all right? Cynthia Tucker, Rich Lowry, Susan Page, thanks, really appreciate you time coming back, OK?
[Lowry:] Thanks for having us.
[Hemmer:] "CROSSFIRE" times three.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Here in Washington, much of the city focused today on the collapse of the giant emergency concern Enron and the fallout from that. New information surfacing yesterday and then more today about efforts by Enron officials to reach top people in the Bush administration in the days before the company declared bankruptcy. Now we know a Senate subcommittee is serving something like 50 subpoenas as it proceeds toward an investigation, trying to find out who knew what and when. Joining us now from Capitol Hill with more on all this is our own Jonathan Karl Jonathan.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Congressional Correspondent:] Well, Judy, in a sign that life really is getting back to normal here in the nation's capital, the full-blown scandal industrial complex, as it was known during the Clinton years, is back up and running. You mentioned the 51 subpoenas that are going out from the Senate Permanent Select Committee on Investigations. Those 51 subpoenas going out to Enron executives and board members, as well as executives of the Arthur Andersen Consulting firm, which of course did the audits for Enron. What's interesting, Judy, is that one of the people getting a subpoena for documents will be Wendy Gramm, the wife of Senator Phil Gramm, who also served on the board of directors of Enron. But that is not the only action. Also, on the House side, you have the Commerce and Energy Committee, which is also preparing for investigations into Enron. They didn't send out subpoenas today, but they sent out formal requests for personal records, the personal records of executives with the Arthur Andersen Consulting firm, records of the top executives in the Houston office of Arthur Andersen, which is the office that conducted that audit of the Enron corporation. Meanwhile, there is a lot more going on. On the Senate side alone, you have six committee hearings in the works on the Enron issue. The Government Affairs Committee, the full committee will be having a hearing the day the Congress gets back, chaired by Joe Lieberman. Also, there is some subcommittee investigations. The one that sent out those subpoenas will also be having full-blown investigation, hearings some time later in February. Also, Ted Kennedy plans hearings in February with his Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. The Commerce Committee having hearings. The Banking Committee planning hearings in February. And the Energy Committee all planning hearings. Meanwhile, over on the House side, you have the Commerce Committee, the Energy and Commerce Committee, preparing for hearings on Enron, and also the Financial Services Committee. Add it all up, eight committees and subcommittees planning to hold hearings on the Enron issue. This clearly will be a major focus of attention here on Capitol Hill when Congress returns at the end of month Judy.
[Woodruff:] Jonathan, there are already those who are characterizing much of this reaction, though, as just Democrats at payback time, that the Democrats suffered as the Republicans went after them. Now they are coming back. To what extent is this Democratic-driven?
[Karl:] Well, perhaps it's no mistake, Judy, that you have six committee hearings from the Democratically-controlled United States Senate, and only two committee hearings on the Republican House of Representatives. But what is important to point out is that most of these hearing, what people the staffers that are conducting the investigation are saying they are focusing on is not so much what the White House did and what Republicans did vis-a-vis Enron, but what happened with the corporation itself, what happened with Arthur Andersen, why those documents were destroyed. They are focusing, they insist, not so much on the political angle on this, but on the actual possible criminal angle, looking at the companies themselves not the political implications. But clearly, there is a political context here. And also, interestingly, Judy, a lot of Democrats are worried about this. They know what happened in the Whitewater years with the endless scandal, investigations into Whitewater, scandal investigations that actually ended up hurting Republicans politically and didn't do much damage to Bill Clinton and the Democrats. They are worried that their own party, Democrats, may overplay their hand on this. So Democrats, some of them anyway, will be talking about playing this very cautiously in the months ahead.
[Woodruff:] Jon, you say much of this is going after information from Enron itself, from its accountant Arthur Andersen. But to what extent will they be seeking information from the administration?
[Karl:] Well, right now, what you are seeing is requests going to the companies. Remember, those 51 subpoenas going to Enron and Arthur Andersen executives, and also the personal request for documents going to Arthur Andersen. So far nothing much coming from the administration.
[Woodruff:] All right. Jon Karl at the Capitol. And now, we want to go quickly to the White House, where John King is with us. John, from the White House perspective, what are they saying about this? And I know you have another story to report about recess appointments.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] We may not have time to get to it because of the Pentagon briefing. First on Enron. The White House saying it did nothing wrong, the president did nothing wrong, none of the cabinet agencies did anything wrong. The White House, though, has asked the agencies to go back and look and log any contacts with Enron. And today, word of additional contacts. A senior Treasury Department official, Peter Fischer, he is the under secretary for domestic finance. He says through a spokeswomen that he received six to eight phone calls from a top Enron official back in late last year, when Enron was trying to negotiate an extension with its banks of credit due, trying to avoid bankruptcy by getting a new line of credit from its banks. In one of those conversations, Mr. Fischer says he was asked to call the banks. He refused to do so. He took that as a request from Enron that he help the company. He did not do so. The administration says it did nothing wrong, didn't help a company tied very closely to this president. Over to the Pentagon briefing, the Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Today, December the 20th, is 100 days since the terror attacks of September 11. President Bush, among other things, is marking this day by announcing at the White House in just a moment that he is taking another step in the financial war on terror, by going after two foreign organizations that are believed to be funneling money to terrorists and to terrorist organizations. For a little bit more on what the president is going to be announcing in an about a minute, let's go to our Major Garrett at the White House Major.
[Major Garrett, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Judy, no details on these two organizations, but senior administration officials told CNN just moments that the White House believes that once the two organizations are named by the president, it will represent the most significant effort to date in the financial war against terrorism. And the point of this entire Rose Garden event, this White House official said, is for the president to remind the nation that a strike against terror financially is just as important as a military strike against terrorism. And you can see when the Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill joins the president, and the Secretary of State Colin Powell, that there will clearly be a financial and diplomatic element to this announcement the president is going to make. Again, the 100 days are sort of an artificial demarcation point a lot of journalists here in Washington put, either on a domestic agenda for a president, or in this case, the war on terrorism. The White House thought it was important, as the holiday season kicks in, to remind the country again what's at stake, what the president and the administration and the coalition have been doing. All that's going to be a part of this event in the Rose Garden Judy.
[Woodruff:] Major, we're getting closer to the president coming out. They do think they're making progress here, I assume.
[Garrett:] Progress on many fronts, not only militarily. Clearly, the things on the ground are going well in Afghanistan. Much work remains to be done, but a lot of successes. The administration also believes the financial war is going well. I can see the president. Let's turn to the president now.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] ... afterwards, to answer any questions you have on this particular initiative, that we'll be announcing today. This the 100th day of our campaign against global terrorism, and in those 100 days we've accomplished much. We've built a broad international coalition against terror, and I want to thank the secretary of state for his hard work. We broke the Taliban's grip on Afghanistan. We took the war to the Al Qaeda terrorists. We're securing our airways. We're defending our homeland. And we're attacking the terrorists' international financial network, and I want to thank the secretary of the treasury for his hard work. Today I'm announcing two more strikes against the financing of terror. We know that Al Qaeda would like to obtain nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and we know that oftentimes they do not act alone. Al Qaeda has international supporters, and some of those supporters hide themselves in the disguise of charity. Last year a former official of the Pakistani atomic energy commission set up an organization known as the UTN. UTN claims to serve the hungry and needy of Afghanistan, but it was the UTN that provided information about nuclear weapons to Al Qaeda. So today I'm adding UTN and three of its directors to our list of terrorist-supporting financial organizations and individuals. We're issuing orders to block any of their assets within U.S. jurisdiction, and putting the world on notice that anyone who continues to do business with UTN and its principal figures will not do business with the United States. Since September the 11th we've witnessed a series of terrorist attacks aimed at the United States and our friends around the world: anthrax mailings here at home, suicide bombings against Israel, and only last week an armed attack on the Indian parliament. The legislature of the world's largest democracy, a nation founded on the principles of freedom and speech, freedom of worship was ruthlessly attacked. The terrorists killed eight innocent people. If their mission had succeeded, they would have kidnapped and killed many of India's elected representatives. Last week's attack was only the most recent terrorist assault on the institutions of Indian democracy. More than 30 people were killed in a car bombing at the state legislative assembly in Srinigar on October the 1st. These attacks on Indian's parliament buildings remind us that whatever grievances or causes the terrorists may cite, their real target is democracy and freedom. The United States condemns these terrorist attacks against India, and we extend our sympathies and friendship to the families of the murdered. American power will be used against all terrorists of global reach. And so today I'm adding another terrorist organization to the list of those whose assets are blocked by my executive order. Lashkar- i-Taiba is an extremist group based in Kashmir. LAT is a stateless sponsor of terrorism, and it hopes to destroy relations between Pakistan and India and undermine Pakistani's president, Musharraf. To achieve it's purpose, LAT has committed acts of terrorism inside both India and Pakistan. LAT is a terrorist organization that presents a global threat, and I look forward to working with the governments of both India and Pakistan in a common effort to shut it down, and to bring the killers to justice. I'm optimistic about the future of our struggle against terror. I know we've accomplished a lot so far, and we've got a lot more to do. Over the past 100 days, we and our British allies and others in the coalition have destroyed at least 11 terrorist training camps inside Afghanistan, terrorist factories that produce thousands of trained operatives. We've also destroyed 39 Taliban command-and-control sites. Senior Al Qaeda and Taliban officials have been captured or killed. And potential escape routes for the survivors are constantly being blocked to prevent the cowards from running. American, Australian and German aid workers held hostage by the Taliban have been liberated. We've dropped some 2.5 million humanitarian rations to the hungry people inside Afghanistan. Our attack on terrorist finances is progressing. The assets of more than 150 known terrorists, their organizations and their bankers have been frozen by the United States; 142 countries have issued freezing orders of their own. The result: More than $33 million in terrorist assets have been blocked inside the United States; more than $33 million more have been blocked abroad by our partners in the international coalition. At home, we've created a new Office of Homeland Security under my friend Tom Ridge and worked with Congress to provide more than $20 billion to safeguard our territory. New airline security legislation has been signed into law. Our law enforcement agencies are protecting our safety while respecting the constitutional rights of our citizens. We listed the 22 most wanted foreign terrorists. We're reorganizing the INS so it can more effectively prevent the entry into the United States by those who want to threaten our national security. We arrested one of the murderers of the September 5, 1986, hijacking of Pan Am Flight 73, showing would-be terrorists and current terrorists that we have a long memory, that we're patient, that if you think you can hide we'll come and find you and bring you to justice. We made the first indictment against the terrorists, those murderers of September the 11th. We and our coalition have done much in the past 100 days. With the help of freedom-loving countries around the world, we will do much more to rid the world of evil and of terrorists. Thank you very much.
[Question:] Your deliberations over John Walker, and have you...
[Woodruff:] President Bush, announcing that two more organizations outside the United States have been added to the list of those that the United States will not do business with, and will freeze the assets of one of them based in Pakistan, the other one based in Kashmir. Major Garrett, still with us from the White House. Major, in moving to this organization in Kashmir, this was not an organization aiming its terror at the United States. It apparently, he is saying, had something to do with the attack on the Indian Parliament.
[Garrett:] That's right, Judy. And as advertised, these two announcements are very significant. The first one, the one about the organization in Kashmir, is significant for the very reason that you explained. This is not about terrorism or threatened terrorism against United States, but terrorism among two recent allies, recent coalition partners in the war against terrorism: India and Pakistan. And there had been some criticism from the Indian government, though much muted. And nevertheless, it was felt here at the White House that the initial White House reaction last week on the Indian Parliament was not stout enough, was not loud enough, in condemning what happened. And only two days ago, Ari Fleischer, the White House press secretary, was saying the only really White House reaction was that both nations would act responsibly in trying to resolve the situation. As the president just said, it was an attack on the seat of government for the world's largest democracy. So this announcement puts the United States and those who seek to join and stay in the coalition, four square against this organization, which the president has said is trying to destabilize the situation between these two nuclear powers, who have fought for decades over Kashmir. And the situation in Kashmir has become so volatile that many senior U.S. policymakers are concerned about possible armed hostilities between India and Pakistan the last thing this government would like to see occur as it continues to wage the global campaign against terrorism and waging it most specifically in Afghanistan. But this other announcement about Pakistan, and the organization UTN the president mentioned there, also significant in its own right, because the president said that organization has tried to create and funnel money to al Qaeda in its pursuit of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons weapons of mass destruction which the president, senior advisers say, has now added to the list of potential terrorist threats around the United States. Any attempt to obtain weapons of mass destruction by organizations the president believes could pose a threat to the United States in the coming years, is a legitimate target in the war on terrorism. So, taken together, these are two very significant developments in the financial campaign against terror Judy.
[Woodruff:] And, Major, just quickly, we heard the reporter shouting a question at the president about a decision on John Walker, what's to come of him. We learned today that the president is still, in effect, receiving the advice of his attorney general, Defense Department officials, as well as others.
[Garrett:] That's right. The Defense Department has been working on the military tactical information from John Walker, extracting as much as they can from him about what he knows about al Qaeda and the Taliban. Now the Justice Department is over there. The FBI are interrogating him, and the president is going to review all options from defense and justice. And again, it's going to be a situation where the U.S. government is going to try to decide what charges best fit John Walker's behaviors there. They don't have all the facts yet. That's why the president is reviewing you all options Judy.
[Woodruff:] All right, Major Garrett, joining us from the White House. Thank you, Major.

[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Let's go back to Washington, back to our bureau this time around. CNN's legal analyst Roger Cossack joins us now. Roger, first impression after hearing this news about the Al Gore camp now going back to court to get Miami-Dade County ordered back to the counting tables.
[Roger Cossack, Cnn Legal Analyst:] Well, Leon, I understand why they want to do that. They need those votes, they believe, out of Miami-Dade County. But, you know, if you think about exactly what they're asking for, I think what we've had here is a little act of civil disobedience, if you will, by the Miami-Dade County voters. They just finally threw up their hands yesterday and said, look, we are just not going to count anywhere. They want it done by Sunday, so now they are going to court, and what they are really asking for, in legal talk, is called a writ of mandamus. And what that means is, they want the court to order these people to do something. Now these people are volunteers, it's Thanksgiving Day. They want them to say, they want the court to the say, OK, you volunteers, give up this turkey and Thanksgiving and all of the stuff that we are giving up, by the way, today, and come on in here and start counting. Well, you know what the Miami-Dade County Board is going to say: Hey, listen, you count. We don't want to do this anywhere. And how do you enforce this order? While this would be contempt of court if they didn't continue, and what are they going to have to do? Send out marshals, forcing these people to come back and count. I think it is almost a frustrating situation for the courts because the people are saying: We just don't want to do it anywhere.
[Harris:] And the problem that they're going to have is getting enough people to do it. They have got some 416,000 plus to go through, plus this number of 10,000 or so that are disputed. And if you were watching a while ago? Were you watching when we were talking to Susan and we were watching the canvassing board in Broward County. Did you see how long it took these guys to go over one ballot? It is understandable. How do they expect these people to complete that process then?
[Cossack:] It's a little Boston Tea Party down there. They just said: Listen, we are not going to do this. We don't want to do this anymore. If you want it counted, get somebody else to count it. We don't want to count. So how are they going to force them to come back into court? They could issue an order and I suppose, if the volunteers say: OK, we will come back, we will come back. But if they say: We are not coming back, now what happens? So I think this is an exercise in frustration.
[Harris:] Explain something else to me because what happened was, that Broward County Canvassing Board reversed itself. Remember, the first time around...
[Cossack:] Right.
[Harris:] ... that they had to count every single ballot, otherwise it wouldn't be fair. Then they said, OK, we will just count and go over the 10,000 disputed ballots, and then they changed their mind on that again, saying it would be unfair to do just that.
[Cossack:] Right.
[Harris:] Now that they have gone back to their original position, what is about counting just the 10,000 ballots that are being disputed that is unfair?
[Cossack:] Are you talking about Broward or Miami, which says that we are not going to count at all?
[Harris:] That is Miami-Dade, thanks for correcting me, that is Miami-Dade that has been going and doing the flip-flopping on that.
[Cossack:] Well, counting the 10,000 undercounts or the ones that had the no vote on them whatsoever?
[Harris:] Exactly.
[Cossack:] Well, the argument is that they come back and say: Listen, you are going to pick 10,000 ballots out of the hundreds of thousands that were cast, and you are going to count those, and those are the ones that you are going to report, what about the rest of them? And I understand their argument is saying: Look, we agree that these 10,000 or so ballots were kicked out by the machine because people didn't vote or because these were ones that the machine couldn't pick up, and perhaps, these are the ones that really needs to be counted. But you know, that is an assumption. And I see why the other side says, if you are going to count, you are going to count. Look, the Miami people have said from Miami-Dade, we just don't want to count any more. You can go to court, you can do anything, but I would be real surprised if some court and by the way, they have already lost last night in the Third Circuit in Florida and now they are going to the Supreme Court And I don't know if the court has enough power to say, you better get back in there and stat counting. Because if they don't, what are they going to do?
[Harris:] Let me ask you one last question, then, because it seems like the only way they could get this through the court, or get the court to even consider this, or maybe even get Miami-Dade officials to consider it is if they got that deadline moved back some We are talking about a Sunday at 5:00 p.m. deadline. Now, if the court were to consider that, is that that is basically what the Gore campaign is going to have to ask the court to do first before they can convince the Miami-Dade officials to actually begin the recount again. correct?
[Cossack:] That is right. But here is the problem with that. That date wasn't just picked out of the blue. The reason that the Florida Supreme Court picked that date is because they know very well that the losing candidate, under Florida law, has a right to the contest the election. Right now, we are hearing a protest of the election. The losing candidate has the right to protest the election. That takes time too. So the reason they wanted everything done soon was to give a few days before this December 12th deadline so if the losing candidate wants to file a lawsuit to contest the whole darn election, they would have some time to do it. You just can't keep moving this date back, because, as the court said, we have to get our things in by the December 12, or else, then they might have the Florida state legislature to deal with.
[Harris:] Can't we just wake up tomorrow and have this all be a bad dream?
[Cossack:] Just as long as you understand that I am not the guy from the Turkey Institute.
[Harris:] All right, thanks, buddy, appreciate you sticking around for Thanksgiving. Have a good holiday.
[Cossack:] All right. You too Carol.
[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] By the way, I want to remind you that you are asking that on the one year anniversary of Elian Gonzalez being found floating off of the shores of Florida. So we know how long a story can go on for. OK, well, continuing on this story. Let's go to ground zero in Miami-Dade County, where Frank Buckley, if your head is not spinning yet, maybe you can tell us whether, even if the court does rule today on the Gore petition, is there anyone there to even continue counting?
[Frank Buckley, Cnn Correspondent:] My sense of it is, Carol, that actually the canvassing board was quite willing to take on the task of counting the 10,750 undervote ballots, those are the ballots with a chad that might be partially removed, or a pinhole, or something that the machine, when they put it through the machine, it didn't say, well, yes, that is a definite vote for Bush or Gore or Nader or somebody else. These are what these undervote ballots are called. They were quite willing to take on the task of counting those by Sunday. They felt they could just barely, if they could do it in this tabulation room in the county building. Why do they have to do it there? Because that is the where the machines are where they also had to segregate some of those ballots. Some of the machines some of the undervote ballots in 109 precincts had not been sent through the machines to be segregated, They have to go through and those undervote ballots have to be sent out. Now the canvassing board members, as it has been explained to me by the county, have to be there to witness this process as it's going through. Their sense was, when that decision was made in the early afternoon that OK, we're not going to do this in the tabulation room because the Republicans were protesting that, the media was protesting that, we'll do it back on the 18th floor, and do this so that everyone can see, and there won't be the protests. When they made that decision, David Leahy, the election supervisor, said: Wait a minute. We can't be in two places at the same time. We can't be upstairs on the 19th floor watching the tabulation go through, while we at the same time examine each individual ballot. If we could be in the same room, we might be able to just make it. But if we can't be in the same room, his thinking was, he couldn't guarantee that it would get done. And Leahy's position was, if they couldn't do all of the undervote, that he wouldn't certify the undervote ballot. And so, and just couldn't guarantee that it would get done by Sunday. So that was really what the thinking was, in terms of not wanting to continue with the count. It wasn't that they were tired, yes, they were exhausted, but that wouldn't the primary motivating factor for them. They just felt that physically, it couldn't be done.
[Lin:] So regardless of the ruling, or just focusing on whether they can actually complete the work, any work at all by Sunday afternoon, is it really just the sense that the bottom line, is, they need more time, and they need a court to tell them that this 5:00 p.m. deadline can change, and then...
[Buckley:] Absolutely.
[Lin:] And then, they are more than willing to start the recounting and they can work out all those details, logistics, about where they do the counting and who is going to be in the room et cetera, et cetera, later, but they need more time.
[Buckley:] That is their position. They felt that they needed until December 1st, that is this next Friday, to get through all of the ballots. But they felt that they could get when the time was cut in half by the Supreme Court so that the deadline became this Sunday. They thought, well, we can't get through all of the ballots, but we can get through just this limited number of undervote ballots.
[Lin:] Gotcha.
[Buckley:] That was their vote yesterday morning. But then they changed. So they really do need more time from their point of view.
[Lin:] All right. Well, we will see what happens, if the court takes it up today or as soon as tomorrow. Thanks so much Frank Buckley Leon.
[Harris:] All right, let's go out now to Austin, Texas. CNN's Tony Clark is standing by. he has been covering the Bush camp there. Tony, any reaction to what we have just heard?
[Tony Clark, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, we haven't heard any formal reaction this morning. But everything was anticipated. You know, this was an important move for the Bush campaign to see Miami-Dade decide not to go ahead with the recount because they have argued all along that Miami-Dade keeps changing the rules. First, they are going to recount one way, and then they're not; and then they are going to do the undervote. And so Barry Richard last night was saying, this has all been very confusing, they keep changing the rules. And that is why they ought to stick with what they have now decided, stick with those numbers that they give the secretary of state on November 8th. All of this comes at the same time that the Bush campaign has gone to the U.S. Supreme Court, filing two appeals, an appeal of the Florida Supreme Court's decision allowing the hand count. And also appealing a decision lower court, lower federal court decision about the manual count. In both of those cases, they argue, that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were the winners in Florida. And that efforts are being made to overturn that. They're saying that what is happening in Florida now is a circus, bordering on anarchy, and they have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to step in and either force the hand count to be discontinued, or simply throw it out of the tabulations and all of that. As for the governor himself, he was out jogging this morning. Wished everyone a happy Thanksgiving. He and his family will have Thanksgiving meal at a friend's house here in Austin, and then go to their ranch near Crawford, Texas. Tony Clark, CNN, Austin, Texas.
[Harris:] All right, thanks, Tony.
[Lin:] Thank you, Tony.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] The presidential race has long hinged on Florida and, more than ever before, Al Gore's hopes for capturing the White House seem to have gone south. Legal teams for Gore and George W. Bush have until 3:00 p.m. Eastern to file their briefs with the Florida Supreme Court. Gore lawyers are asking the court to revisit the validity of hand recounts, which drew critical scrutiny from the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday. The Gore legal team is also appealing another setback dealt yesterday: a circuit court's refusal to order more manual recounts. Despite those rulings that were favorable to the Bush campaign, Bush supporters are presenting lawsuits this hour before the 11th Circuit court of appeals here in Atlanta. Oral arguments are now underway on suits claiming that all manual recounts should be excluded from the official results. Just over three hours from now a hearing is scheduled for a Democrat's lawsuit that seeks to invalidate all 15,000 absentee ballots from Seminole County. That suit claims that Republican workers illegally altered ballot applications. And let's go ahead now and check in with my partner Bill Hemmer in Tallahassee. Bill, good morning once again.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Correspondent:] Hey, Daryn, good morning once again to you. Want to talk about two things right now the two things we're tracking at this hour. No. 1 is the appeal by Al Gore and the Democrats to the state Supreme Court coming off of Judge Sauls' ruling from yesterday. Now, the Democrats are saying that the decision was so decisive one way toward George W. Bush that they will argue that the judge, in this case, misinterpreted the law. That's the first thing we're watching. The second thing we're watching, as you just mentioned, is the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday, when they remanded their decision back to the state Supreme Court here in Tallahassee. What the U.S. Supreme Court is asking for is a clarification for how the justices made their decision was it based upon state law or was it based upon the Florida state Constitution? And again, we hope to flush both those matters out throughout the day here in Florida. Meanwhile, let's talk about those cases with CNN's Susan Candiotti, who is tracking the latest movements across the street in the state Supreme Court. What do we know right now, first of all, about the appeal that we expect from Al Gore?
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, just a few minutes ago, Bill, we had word that attorneys for Mr. Gore went to the Florida Supreme Court, marched up the front steps and delivered a copy of the transcript of Judge Sanders Sauls' ruling yesterday in order to help the court along, so to speak to help interpret what happened yesterday before the Florida Supreme Court makes a decision about whether to accept the case.
[Hemmer:] All right; now we have three options here, from our understanding: they can not accept the case; they can take the case and consider it; they can take the case, consider it, and then schedule oral arguments. Is that what we know right now?
[Candiotti:] Those are the three options. And by all accounts and, naturally, the Supreme Court could surprise us and reject it altogether, but most legal observers seem to think that the court will go ahead and set a briefing schedule to hear from attorneys from both sides. And, most likely many people agree that oral arguments are likely in this case. Simply because the whole world is watching, they may very well want to get everyone on the record before issuing a final decision.
[Hemmer:] All right; now let's shift our focus to the U.S. Supreme Court. Those briefs in response are due at 3:00 today. One would assume they're still working on it do we know that?
[Candiotti:] That's right, yes. Attorneys for both sides would be working on those briefs and also working on, at least Mr. Gore's attorneys, the briefs on the appeal, naturally. But, regarding the Supreme Court issue, it is up to the court to decide whether to schedule oral arguments. That will be the big question there. They might just decide to issue their clarification to the Supreme Court simply based on the briefs that it receives.
[Hemmer:] And you know how much we like to follow a schedule, and we like to get times. But in this case, we really can't say for certain how this time schedule will work with the court.
[Candiotti:] No can do. Everyone would like to know when it's going to be over once and for all. A columnist in the local paper wanting to know when she'll be able to get her Christmas shopping started, for example. But the fact of the matter is the seven justices sitting in that building over our shoulders, they're the ones that ultimately will decide. If, in fact, there are oral arguments scheduled, many legal observers hope that and believe that things could get wrapped up by week's end.
[Hemmer:] All right; shopping's on hold for now, though, anyway. Susan Candiotti, again, thanks. About five hours away, now, Daryn, from that deadline that we expect here for those briefs in response to the U.S. Supreme Court, so we are tracking that. Also coming up in about 25 minutes, CNN's Michael Boettcher is going to join us here live in Tallahassee. We'll give you the latest on what we are finding out about the special session that may or may not happen this week. But for now back to Atlanta and Daryn Daryn.
[Kagan:] Bill, thank you very much. You need a chart to follow all the court action. The action taking place right now is actually happening not too far from us here at CNN in downtown Atlanta. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals oral arguments taking place at this moment. Let's check in now with our Bob Franken, who is covering that for us Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, Daryn, as you know the Supreme Court the U.S. Supreme Court sent things back to the Florida Supreme Court. The question was, is this a federal matter? There is a federal discussion going on here in the court of appeals. It's an appeal of two defeats for the Bush campaign who claimed that, because not all the counties in Florida were conducting a recount, the people of the state were not getting equal protection under the, which, of course is promised, guaranteed in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. This is the case that the Supreme Court decided not to take for now to allow it to go through the normal three-tiered process of the federal court system. They're hearing two cases, both of them related one from Miami, one from Orlando. The arguments have been going on for about the last hour. We're expecting CNN's Charles Zewe, who was inside the courtroom, to come out in just a moment and discussion the arguments. But the arguments are really distilled in the briefs that have been filed. The Republicans, the Bush campaign lawyers saying that the hand recounts were unequal, constantly shifting, standardless, subjective and procedurally flawed. Those are the arguments that they're presenting up there. It's almost after-the-fact, since the hand recounts have now become a part of the history, but the Bush lawyers are saying they proceeded with this case to make sure that they were not blind-sided by an adverse ruling. So it is possible, depending on what the ruling is here, that there might be still another appeal another appearance before the U.S. Supreme Court Daryn.
[Kagan:] Bobs, it looks like you have a lot of company with you in downtown Atlanta today. It looks like quite a few protesters have shown up.
[Franken:] You know what, it's interesting. They have become quite sophisticated in looking like a large group of protesters; there are probably about 20 here with a megaphone, which makes them sound like much more. This has become part of the ritual of covering these court cases. Both campaigns in this case, it's the Bush campaign trying to, frankly, get on television. And I say that without any fear of contradiction because right before we started the fellow with the megaphone said: "Let's get on
[Cnn." Kagan:] They're getting good they are on
[Cnn. Franken:] Yes they are.
[Kagan:] Bob Franken here with us in downtown Atlanta, thank you very much. We'll check back with you and Charles Zewe when we have more information when he comes out of the courtroom. Meanwhile, still elsewhere on the legal landscape of Florida, it is a judge in Pensacola who is hearing arguments this morning on a Republican effort to get more military absentee votes counted. Republicans have sued canvassing boards in seven counties that rejected undated absentee ballots. Bush led Gore by about a two-to- one margin among overseas voters. And now it's time to check in with the presidential candidates themselves. Our Jonathan Karl is shadowing the vice president today, while our Tony Clark is following the Texas governor. We're going to start with Jonathan in Washington. Jonathan, the momentum, right now, clearly with the Bush camp.
[Jonathan Karl, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, nobody, not even the most, you know, firm Gore partisans would deny that; clearly a major blow for the vice president yesterday. Up on Capitol Hill today you have a case of dueling vice presidential candidates. Of course, earlier, we saw Dick Cheney up talking to Republican leaders. The vice presidential candidate Joe Lieberman is also on the hill; he is meeting, now, with congressional leader. We expect to hear from him any minute now. He's expected to come to the microphones and talk with Dick Gephardt, the House democratic leaders. He'll be coming out of those closed doors and to those microphones. Basically what Joe Lieberman is telling congressional Democrats and he will bring the same message to congressional to Senate Democrats later on is, hang with the vice president, this is almost over. Basically the message is, this is not over until the fat lady sings, if you will. And the fat lady, in this case, is the Florida state Supreme Court. And the fat lady, in this case, is on the stage ready to sing. So they're saying, be patient; this is almost over. And they believe that the vice president, Joe Lieberman, making the case the vice president has a decent shot despite what everybody else is saying has a decent shot before Florida state Supreme Court. A forum that, he is telling Democrats, is much more friendly than Judge Sanders Sauls. They believe they have the case on the law; they are going to fight that. And they're saying, regardless of the matter, it's before the Florida state Supreme Court, let it run its course. Florida must certify its electors by December 12. Lieberman is telling Democrats up there, especially nervous Democrats, that the vice president has no intention of going beyond December 12; and, indeed, no intention of going beyond the Florida state Supreme Court. As one top Gore adviser told me this morning, look, whatever the Florida state Supreme Court says we will abide by. There's no plans for further appeal. So that's the basic message saying, we may be down but we're not out, hang with us.
[Kagan:] Jonathan, how much can the Gore-Lieberman camp depend on leaders in Congress to stay with them and stay unified, and how important is that unified front?
[Karl:] Well, it's extremely important and, as far as the leadership in Congress goes, the vice president has been given word by both Dick Gephardt on the House side and by Tom Daschle on the Senate side that the congressional democratic leadership is with him through the appeal. That's the very firm message he has gotten. Far less certain, Daryn, though, is what about some of the other Democrats, what about some of those moderate to conservative Democrats who are far more nervous about that? There's already grumbling, you know, among many of them and it's time for the vice president to turn it in, to throw the towel in. But vice president Joe Lieberman, the vice presidential candidate, saying OK, you may believe that, but please give us a couple of days. Let this run its course before you come out, because they know it's extremely important. As another Gore aide told me, when you have two decisions like you had yesterday coming from the U.S. Supreme Court and coming from the district court in Florida, coming against you or, definitely in the case of the Florida court case, you create the impression that you could have a stampede. They're very worried about a stampede. They're very worried that if you have one, two, three Democrats coming out raising questions about the vice president's strategy, you'll have many more follow suit. So they're very nervous about what's going on on Capitol Hill.
[Kagan:] Jonathan Karl in Washington, thank you very much. As you mentioned, we're waiting for Senator Joseph Lieberman to come out and speak as he meets with Democratic leaders. And when he does, just as you heard Dick Cheney, you'll see that live here on CNN. Meanwhile, let's check in with the Bush camp; and, once again, that is Tony Clark covering that camp for us. Tony, we heard from the man that George Bush calls vice president and that would be Dick Cheney, the former secretary of state.
[Tony Clark, Cnn National Correspondent:] I think that, Daryn, that gives us some idea of the confidence that the Bush campaign feels. This morning the governor getting his intelligence briefing from the CIA, moving ahead as if he's the president-elect at least moving in that direction. Right now we're waiting for the governor to leave the governor's mansion. In fact, his Suburban is right in front of the door. He will go over to the state capitol, spend a few hours at the state capitol this morning working, we presume, on both state business and talking to both the attorneys in Florida and the transition folks that are in Washington, D.C. working on a possible Bush administration. As I say, the governor is excited; he is pleased. In fact, the words that we get, that the Bush campaign is energized by the court decisions they have seen over the last 24 hours. And right now Dick Cheney, the vice presidential candidate, Bush's running mate is in Washington. He went on the hill this morning to meet with Republican leaders. He is going to be on the hill all day today. And just a short time ago he said that the reason he's on the hill is to discuss with the Republicans leaders the plans for a possible Bush administration.
[Dick Cheney , Vice Presidential Candidate:] The subject of conversation that I wanted to hold again, at the request of the governor today, is to talk to Republican members about the transition, about the process that's underway, about our ongoing efforts to get on with the business of putting together a cabinet, sub-cabinet and building an administration so that we'll be ready to exercise our responsibilities beginning on January 21.
[Clark:] Governor Bush says that he knows it is a difficult situation that Vice President Gore is in. He's not calling for the vice president to concede, but the governor is saying he still feels very confident that he and Dick Cheney won the election in Florida and will be the next administration. Tony Clark, CNN, Austin, Texas.
[Kagan:] Tony, thank you very much. I want to correct myself a slight slip of the tongue I called Dick Cheney former secretary of state; of course, he was former secretary of defense.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Just a few minutes ago, live right here on CNN, we were able to answer the questions, since the revolution began in Yugoslavia: Where is Slobodan Milosevic? Apparently still very much in that country and potentially a player in that government.
[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] Alessio Vinci, such good work yesterday as an eye-witnesses to what we saw in the streets, back with us now. Alessio, what are we finding up today, coming up to about 5:00 local time there?
[Alessio Vinci, Cnn Correspondent:] That is correct, Bill. Just before 5:00 here and we now have one answer to one of the many questions here that was posed by many people: Where is President Milosevic? Well, he is here in Serbia, here in Belgrade. There was a lot of speculation whether President Milosevic had fled the country or perhaps was hiding in a bunker in eastern Serbia. No, Mr. Milosevic is now here in Serbia. He was meeting earlier today with Igor Ivanov, the Russian envoy. You saying that Milosevic will be a player in this country. I think, at this point, with the recognition of Russia for Mr. Kostunica, who will be sworn in as the next Yugoslav president, I think that Mr. Milosevic at this point is on his way out. We will have to see. I believe, in my opinion, is once Mr. Kostunica will be sworn in as the next president of Yugoslavia, he will become the commander-in- chief of the Yugoslav armed forces. At that point, I think we are going to hear a clear statement by the army supporting Mr. Kostunica. They have said all along, they will respect the will of the people. If Mr. Kostunica is sworn in as the president, the army will follow behind him.
[Hemmer:] So then clarify this matter: What is the message that Ivanov wants to deliver Milosevic in Belgrade today. Is this the final sales pitch to cut and run? or what is the message he is delivering from Moscow?
[Vinci:] I think Mr. Ivanov came here with two goals. The first one was to recognize Mr. Kostunica as the next president of Yugoslavia. The second one was trying to try to tell President Milosevic and perhaps his top henchmen here that Russia was going to ensure that a peaceful transition of power was going to take place between the old government and the new government. There has been a lot of questions here, why President Milosevic has not tried to address the people? why the army has not come out clearly stating that they were supporting Vojislav Kostunica? I think that Mr. Ivanov here today managed to create that situation whereby that mediation between the two sides, we heard yesterday, from Vojislav Kostunica, they are aware today, and we don't even know if it's happening now, there were no contacts between Kostunica and Mr. Milosevic. Therefore, the Russian foreign minister came here, trying to bridge this gap, trying to bring the two sides, if not together, at least to act as an intermediary.
[Kagan:] And Alessio, so if looks like Mr. Kostunica wants to build a government without Slobodan Milosevic, he cannot do that however without Milosevic's supporters?
[Vinci:] Well, the opposition here is trying to convene a new federal parliament. They need, of course, the deputies from Montenegro. That is those 20 deputies from the upper house and some other half a dozen, a dozen of deputies for the lower house. At this point, we understand from the Socialist People's Party in Montenegro, which has so far supported always Mr. Milosevic, they are still supporting him, and therefore, they're not willing to at least vote in favor of Mr. Kostunica. However, there is a possibility that within that very same party, there might be a split. And some deputies may decide, if not to switch sides, but at least vote in favor of Mr. Kostunica as president. And that would really unfold this situation here in Serbia and in Montenegro. Back to you.
[Hemmer:] That seems like a bit of an understatement. But it is an amazing 24 hours in that part of the world.
[Kagan:] Certainly has, and the story is far from over.
[Hemmer:] Alessio Vinci, live in Belgrade. Thank you, Alessio.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] As election day nears, the campaign's heating up, Lou.
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] Well, maybe that's why the candidates are dressing down. CNN's Jeanne Moos takes a look at the strategy of undressing for success.
[Jeanne Moos, Cnn Correspondent:] A lot's been made about Al Gore's changing image. But why look at how he dresses when you can watch him undress?
[Vice Pres. Al Gore , Presidential Candidate:] Getting hot up here.
[Moos:] You can watch them both undress.
[Gov. George W. Bush , Presidential Candidate:] I may just take my jacket off.
[Moos:] Their clothes aren't tight but the race is when the candidates start stripping in public. Al Gore even has a favorite line.
[Gore:] It may be a little cold outside, but I feel hot. It may be chilly out here, but I feel hot.
[Moos:] The presidential race has become a series of hot flashes.
[Bush:] Thanks for coming.
[Moos:] Actually, George W. takes off his jacket a lot less than Al Gore.
[John Marino, Fmr. New York Democratic Chairman:] Democrats are traditionally better taker-offers of jackets.
[Moos:] Public relations executive John Marino, appearing jacketless, used to be an adviser to former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo, who only rarely appeared in his shirtsleeves. Marino says peeling off a jacket is usually premeditated.
[Marino:] You've got to look like you're closer to the people.
[Gore:] I'm going to take my coat off.
[Moos:] Doesn't take much to make some people cheer.
[Bush:] I'm going to talk a little policy, I'm going to talk a little politics. First, I'm going to take my coat off.
[Moos:] Marino says strategists really do discuss such things, as they did in the season finale of "The West Wing." [Begin Video Clip, "the West Wing"]
[Unidentified Actress:] How do you feel about him taking his jacket off?
[Rob Lowe, Actor:] No.
[Unidentified Actress:] I like it.
[Lowe:] It will look staged.
[Moos:] But the president in "The West Wing" winged it. [Begin Video Clip, "the West Wing"]
[Martin Sheen, Actor:] Can I trust you all to read nothing into it other than that I've been talking for two hours and it's a little hot under these lights?
[Moos:] Two hours? In real life, candidates disrobe in two minutes. And then there's the matter of who holds the jacket.
[Bush:] Only in America where the most popular governor in Pennsylvania history will hold my coat.
[Moos:] But not all candidates take it off. Hillary Clinton kept her jacket on even when she went bowling. At the opposite end of the scale is Bobby Kennedy, who appeared on campaign posters in shirtsleeves.
[Marino:] There is another strategy, which is to keep the jacket on because you don't want to show the sweat stains in the back.
[Moos:] But once the jacket's off, can the sleeves be far behind? [on camera]: I'm calling this the "Full Monty" strategy. [voice-over]: Since full frontal nudity was such a crowd-pleaser in "The Full Monty," let's hear it for full frontal campaigning. Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.
[Waters:] So if you're talking coattails this election season, you have to check with the guy holding the coat.
[Allen:] Ah, good one, Lou.

[Varney:] Visa and MasterCard took center stage today in a Justice Department antitrust lawsuit. Government lawyers claim the two companies use unfair business practices that hurt customers in the trillion-dollar credit card business. The argument from Visa and MasterCard: Well, they say that their policies promote competition and any government intrusion would cause harm to the credit-card business. Susan Lisovicz reports on day one of the case.
[Susan Lisovicz, Cnn Correspondent:] Visa and MasterCard together control three-quarters of the nation's banking card industry, but that's not why the government says they have a duopoly that stifles innovation. Visa and MasterCard share the same network of banks and financial institutions, and the government says that makes them reluctant to compete against each other. In opening statements in Manhattan's federal court, the government said a prime example of that collusion was the long delay in introducing smart cards. Even though MasterCard long possessed the technology which allows consumers many more services, it was rival American Express who finally brought them to market. But MasterCard says the delay was all about good business sense.
[Kevin Arquit, Mastercard Attorney:] We did a study, and it turned out it would cost us a billion dollars to develop this. It would be 10 years before we turned a profit, and it was just seen as too expensive a venture. The fact of the matter is that in United States there simply isn't a business case yet for smart cards.
[Lisovicz:] American Express, Discover and other competitors want access to Visa's and MasterCard's vast network of member banks. But Visa and MasterCard say the government would in effect be giving their rivals a free ride and they say consumers have plenty of choice already.
[Kelly Presta, Vice President, Visa Usa:] Visa itself offers more than 24,000 different kinds of Visa cards to consumers, whether you like jazz or a sports team or your local university. And in addition, last year, consumers received more than 4 billion solicitations in the mail. That's a red-hot competitive environment.
[Lisovicz:] But the government and consumer groups say there would be even more competition if Visa and MasterCard's network were opened up to other bank cards.
[Frank Torres, Consumers Union:] If the banks were allowed to issue other products, and I think that's what the suit is all about, is who ultimately gets to control the payment system and should there be one or two companies that dominate or should there be a lot of companies that can get into that market.
[Lisovicz:] The government poured through 8 million pages of documentation in preparing for its case against Visa and MasterCard. But just this past weekend, government lawyers dropped two of its six accusations. Visa and MasterCard say that proves just how difficult it will be for the government to win its case Stuart.
[Varney:] All right, Susan Lisovicz, thank you. In tonight's "Tech Watch," add another victim to the growing list of dot.com duds: Reel.com. The online retail division of video chain Hollywood Entertainment is closing after the company was unable to get outside financing. Reel.com will continue to provide entertainment content, but all e-commerce transactions will be redirected to Buy.com. All employees of the retail division have been laid off. Reel.com is the latest in a string of dot.com burnouts. Investigative news site APBNews.com is technically still in business, but the company has no money and its employees are now working for free. Retailer Boo.com and toy retailer ToySmart.com also went belly up recently. And when MONEYLINE continues: more bad news for drivers as oil prices today surge to a three-month high. The details after this break.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] Now on to an international story with consequences for many folks, even in this country: the plane which exploded in Bangkok, right before the Thai leader was about to go on board. Investigators looked into what seemed to be a likely possibility at the time, that would be an assassination attempt. But what they found could have implications for airline passengers all around the world. On this story, CNN's Deborah Feyerick.
[Deoborah Feyerick, Cnn Correspondent:] When a Boeing 737 exploded at Bangkok International Airport last month, Thai officials first thought it might be an assassination attempt. Thailand's newly-elected prime minister was waiting to board the plane, along with his son and other passengers. Now investigators believe the cause was not a bomb, not sabotage, but an explosion in the center fuel tank. The same kind of explosion that plunged TWA flight 800 into the waters off Long Island in 1996, killing everyone onboard.
[Michael Goldfarb, Fmr. Faa Chief Of Staff:] The similarities are that it was a hot day in New York, it was a hot day on this crash. The air conditioning system was running in New York, the air conditioning system was running in this crash, on the ground.
[Feyerick:] NTSB investigators tell CNN air-conditioning units in both flights heated up under the near-empty center fuel tank. In the case of TWA 800, a Boeing 747, vapors inside the tank became lethal when ignited by an unknown spark.
[Goldfarb:] There's been only three cases in aviation history where a fuel tank has exploded. It's exceedingly rare for this problem to occur.
[Feyerick:] A Boeing spokesman says it's too early to speculate on the Thai Airways explosion, adding, more testing must be done. [on camera]: Last year, Boeing advised airlines worldwide to use outside air-conditioning units rather than internal systems to cool planes waiting for long periods of times at the gates or on the runways. And the advisory wasn't just for hot days, but anytime the temperature climbs above 60 degrees Fahrenheit. [voice-over]: The Federal Aviation Administration did not make the recommendation mandatory, but it did notify FAA inspectors of the Boeing advisory. The agency has been looking at ways to make fuel tank fumes inert, so they don't ignite under any circumstance. Deborah Feyerick, CNN, New York.
[Chen:] More on this story now. We're joined from Seattle by Kevin Darcy. He's a crash investigation consultant with Safety Services International. We appreciate your being with us. Not only the TWA flight and the Thai Airways would-be flight, I guess, it never got off of the ground. And you say that there's a parallel to a third accident. Can you talk a little bit about the parallels here?
[Kevin Darcy, Crash Investigation Expert:] Yeah, sure. The third accident was actually the first one to have occurred, back in 1990, is under very similar circumstances. An airplane, 737, that was on the ground with a virtually empty center fuel tank. And it exploded, and the reason for that explosion, the ignition source for that is was never determined.
[Chen:] So has there been advice from, say, Boeing and the FAA to, I guess, fill up the fuel tank? Or what else could you do?
[Darcy:] Well, there was a number of things that were looked at to try to decrease the likelihood that the the vapors in the fuel tank would be explosive. And unfortunately, no single one really will fix the problem. And so they weren't able to come up with a specific recommendation that would take care of the situation.
[Chen:] So, beyond Boeing saying: "Use different air conditioning units when you're on the ground," nobody said fill up the fuel tank? I mean, I guess that's the problem, if it's a nearly empty tank, that's a bigger problem than if the thing is full. Which sort of runs contradictory in the mind of a layman like me. I mean, I would think more fuel would be a bigger problem for an explosion.
[Darcy:] Well, you have the situation exactly right. It is counter to one's intuition. The problem is most critical when there is very little fuel, virtually, just residual fuel in the tank. It heats up and is able to produce enough vapors that you have an explosive potentially explosive environment.
[Chen:] You're said that they haven't been able to prove anything conclusively, so that they could firmly tell people: "OK, do this with your aircraft." But doesn't it seem like the FAA ought to do something, or make some sort of advisory?
[Darcy:] Well, I think we're getting to that point now, that that the FAA is going to have to take some more drastic measures. In the past, we've always tried to control the problem by eliminating ignition sources. And I think now the next step will have to be taken, and that is to do something about decreasing the flammability of the fuel, or the possibility that it would be in an explosive mixture. And there is various things that have been proposed to do that. All those will take a lot more work, but I believe the time is right that we start taking a real hard look at doing those things.
[Chen:] Kevin Darcy, Safety Services International, we thank you for being with us today.
[Darcy:] Thank you, Joie. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Jeff Greenfield:] Boston's Cardinal Law says he's not resigning, but for decades his church failed to protect children from pedophile priests. Why? And has bad intelligence led to deadly U.S. attacks on innocent civilians? Is that the price of waging war? Painful truths, tonight on GREENFIELD AT LARGE. Last week, U.S. forces fired a missile from an unmanned CIA predator drone. The target, a group of people believed to be al Qaeda. Maybe, the Pentagon hinted, Osama bin Laden himself. Today, human remains from that attack are being sent to the U.S., to see what, if anything, can be learned of their identities. Some of the local Afghan commanders say the men hit were not terrorists, just smugglers. This is another in a series of incidents involving military action against targets who may or may not be the enemy. Confusion seems to be part of the landscape, as Pentagon officials acknowledged today.
[Victoria Clarke, Pentagon Spokeswoman:] To say that the situation, to say that conditions in Afghanistan are confusing is an understatement. You know, and it's impossible to say these people are on this side and these people are on the other side. People are on multiple sides and they switch sides.
[John Stufflebeem, Rear Admiral, Pentagon Spokesman:] And once got in there, the more we learned about it is, the more difficult it is to operate, certainly as Americans, in a difficult country like this. Because you hear a piece of information from this individual, who will tell you things like, "You ought to go hit those guys because they're al Qaeda." But then that individual says, "Well, I'm not al Qaeda. I'm anti-Taliban."
[Greenfield:] Joining us now to talk about how to penetrate the fog of war are; in Washington, Alabama Senator Richard Shelby. He's vice chair of the Select Committee on Intelligence. And in Oakbrook, Illinois, CNN military analyst, retired Brigadeer General David Grange. General Grange, when you hear those statements and you think back to your own career, what how does it happen that in a situation where it is literally life and death to pick the right targets, with all the attention now being focused in Afghanistan, we still may find ourselves, American forces, picking the wrong targets?
[David Grange, Retired Brig. Gen., U.s. Army:] It's a very difficult situation to be in. When you act, you have to act with not 100 percent intelligence. You want the most clear, accurate picture as possible. You use different sources of intelligence, whether it be signal, overhead, human intelligence. But at one point in time, a commander on the ground, the commander in charge of the operation, whichever level that may be that the decision's made for that type of target, he has to make that decision. He has to make that decision with maybe 80, 85 percent, to the best of his ability. And there's a risk benefit that he goes through in his analysis to say, OK, go after it. And it's tough to make.
[Greenfield:] But in a situation like Afghanistan, where you have to make that risk benefit analysis, knowing the centuries long history of blood feuds, of tweed and among tribes, at what does a commander have to say, "I'm just going to have to take a take my best shot at this, so to speak. And I've got to I can't stay my hand completely. So I'm going to go, even though I know in this particular situation, the odds of somebody giving me deliberately, maliciously false information may be fairly high."
[Grange:] Yes, that risk is always there. And that's what commanders get paid to do. They make the decisions. They get paid for judgment. And it's not easy. In this type of environment, it's very confusing. You have people that are opportunists, people that are putting out disinformation. They're great at deception. They're tribal feuds. It's very difficult to vett the source of information. But then again, we're working on think that very hard. And probably better than many other nations would, you know, in a fight like this. But you know, it's a tough environment to work in. Maybe one of the toughest that I've seen.
[Greenfield:] And Senator Shelby, that I think, leads to a somewhat broader question. Because you're part of the effort to try to find out what happened in the leading up to September 11 in terms of what you, among others have called it, "failure of intelligence." But doesn't this situation maybe tell us that there are some things, maybe a lot of things, that we simply can't know with any reliable certainty, particularly given this confusing part of the world?
[Sen Richard Shelby , Intelligence Committee:] Well, you will never know everything. And as the general just said, after a while, you have to make a judgment, especially if you're in war. And we are in war there. But Afghanistan is a complex situation because of the shifting alliances it was talked about. The tribal feuds, everything that goes with it. But I believe that our intelligence, overall, has been pretty good on the ground. It's not perfect. We're sorry about when we make mistakes, but we will make mistakes, but we're trying to minimize those mistakes more and more. As a matter of fact, we're trying to train more and more of the Afghan people that are loyal to us, that are working with us, to help us with intelligence on the ground. And a lot of that's coming through, but it's not perfect, Jeff.
[Greenfield:] But I guess what I'm getting at is, we've heard so often that we, meaning the United States, should have known what was coming September 11. Given the fact that even in this arena where our intelligence efforts are focused like a laser, if you will, on trying to find out what's going on in Afghanistan, we still don't know with absolute certainty, doesn't that tell us that there may simply be human limits to what we can know, even in a situation like how we may be attacked again?
[Shelby:] Well, that's true. What you're saying is true. We will never know everything, but we try to minimize this. Now on what I would call in Afghanistan, I'd call that tactical intelligence, as opposed to strategic surprises. We were warned in '93 that terrorists, after the terrorist attack in New York, that they would hit. In '98, they hit. Our embassies in Africa. And then, the U.S.S. Cole, Khobar Towers in '96. We had a lot of warnings. The question is what have we learned, Jeff?
[Greenfield:] OK. General Grange, if I may, does this kind of an incident, knowing that the commander may have made a good faith, but mistaken decision, does it have a chilling effect on future decisions?
[Grange:] Yes, it does, because I can assure you that from the investigations, the chain of command, does get asked questions about just what happened, what's going on here. And it's tough on the commanders. I'm not saying that's wrong, but we do follow up with investigations in the United States of America. And this is a situation where you have nine good targets. And you have one that goes bad. And you're dealing with the attitude of the local populace. You're trying to win their support. It has a lot of effect with the media, with world opinion on how we're doing this fight. But I can assure you that when our military operates, from my experience, we have quite a few constraints on our people. In fact, the rules of engagement and the authorization to do a hit has several checks and balances, moreso than many other military. So it's already pretty difficult for the commanders, but it will have an effect. Sure, it will.
[Greenfield:] Senator Shelby, we're just about out of time. So quickly, is this, in the end, the final analysis, just something where what the United States has to say to the world is, "We don't want it to happen. We'll make every effort not to have it happen, but we know it's going to happen. And it's the price of war?"
[Shelby:] I think it's the price of war, but we try to minimize it. And I think we will do better.
[Greenfield:] All right. Senator Richard Shelby, General David Grange, thank you both very much. And still ahead, why would a church let a pedophile run free for decades? And still later, a time honored contest that gives us pause.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] As the Republicans move out of Philadelphia toward the end of this week, a number of issues that were brought up here in Philly will certainly carry over into the election leading up to the White House the first Tuesday in November. Joining us now with his take on those issues and more, a Democrat: Vermont's Senator Patrick Leahy. Nice to see you.
[Sen. Patrick Leahy , Vermont:] Nice to be with you, Bill.
[Hemmer:] You OK around all these Republicans around here?
[Leahy:] Oh, yes. Remember, I come from a state that has a lot of Republicans, and fortunately a lot of them vote for me. So I'm fine.
[Hemmer:] No sense of insecurity here, I see.
[Leahy:] No.
[Hemmer:] Let's talk about the issues. And one of the biggest issues is going to be this projected budget surplus: $2.2 trillion. Republicans in Congress have made it quite clear they want tax cuts. What's wrong with that?
[Leahy:] Well, with tax cuts, if we didn't have a national debt I'd say, heck, just cut it all immediately. But the fact of the matter is that during the Reagan-Bush years, the national debt was tripled. They talked about balancing the budget. Instead, they had the biggest budget deficits in history, tripled the national debt. Today, a lot of people don't realize, every working day, we spend almost $900 million a day in interest, primarily to pay off the debt of the Reagan-Bush era. And I would like to get some of that debt paid off. I'm thinking of my children and grandchildren. I don't want them to be paying debt just so I can get a tax break. And I'm in the tax category I'd get the biggest tax break. I don't want to do that and not pay off the debt. What I'd like to do is see some very targeted things. We could the Democrats proposed that we eliminate all estates up to $100 million from estate tax. Republicans wouldn't accept that. We proposed to eliminate, truly eliminate, the marriage penalty, any marriage penalty, immediately.
[Hemmer:] So you would support that but not the death tax, the estate tax?
[Leahy:] But, they didn't but we also said up to $100 million. Over $100 million in your estate, you could probably afford to pay a little tax. In fact, I would rather tax that dead millionaire than the working mother.
[Hemmer:] Well, what about the people, the mother who is working out there? If the economy continues to motor along at the current rate, that $2.2 trillion might be able to go to 3 trillion. Who knows what's going to happen over the next five or 10 years? But do you think Democrats lose a bit of this argument when they know that surplus is out there and it's so large?
[Leahy:] No, not if we do a couple of major things with it. One, pay down the national debt, this huge national debt, so that we're not paying $900 million every single working day for interest on the Reagan-Bush debt. And secondly, make absolutely sure that we've locked in to protect both Social Security and Medicare. Do those two things and then, as far as I'm concerned, do any kind of tax cut you want. But don't say that we'll give tax breaks to billionaires; we will give special interests tax breaks, but we won't protect Social Security, won't protect Medicare, and we'll tell our children to pay off the national debt. I don't think that's the way to handle the surplus.
[Hemmer:] Governor Bush argues, and other Republicans in Congress, that, indeed, they can take care of that because the Social Security issue has been placed to the side.
[Leahy:] Well, these are the same people who said that if we went to balance the budget, we'd have devastation. Instead, we had economic expansion.
[Hemmer:] Good deal. Wish we had more time to talk. There's a lot to talk about.
[Leahy:] Good to be with you.
[Hemmer:] Good luck getting back to Vermont.
[Leahy:] Thank you.
[Hemmer:] Patrick Leahy, senator here with us today.

[Matalin:] Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. Only three days after the critical South Carolina primary, McCain and Bush face another crucial contest in Michigan today. McCain continued to pitch to crossovers while Bush crisscrossed the state to boost GOP turnout. And once again, with only about 15 minutes until polls close, pundits predict a race too close to call with turnout being the determinative factor. CNN will have full election coverage following CROSSFIRE, but first, former presidential warriors for opposing sides now: for McCain, Christian conservative Gary Bauer and for Bush, budget meister and new double-daddy Ohio Congressman John Kasich.
[Press:] Congressman Kasich, congratulations and welcome to
[Crossfire. Kasich:] Hey, I have to tell you, I watched the debate last night at the Apollo Theater that the Democrats had and it was better than the WWF. I mean, I'd never seen anything like that, attacks and everything. It was unbelievable theater.
[Press:] Made those Republican debates look like Sunday school.
[Kasich:] It was amazing.
[Press:] If you were living in Michigan this time of this primary and you picked up the phone, you might hear a familiar voice coming to you about this primary. I'd like you to listen to a message that being has been heard in Michigan the last couple of days.
[Pat Robertson, Bush Supporter:] Tomorrow's Republican primary may determine whether our dream becomes reality or whether the Republican party will nominate a man who wants to take First Amendment freedoms from citizens' groups while he gives unrestricted power to labor unions. A man who chose as his national campaign chairman, a vicious bigot, who wrote that conservative Christians in politics are anti- abortion, homophobes, and would-be censors. John McCain refused to repudiate these words.
[Press:] And that of course is the voice of reverend Pat Robertson, a Bush Supporter. I want to ask you congressman, do you believe that George Bush did not know about those telephone calls?
[Kasich:] Well, I can't speak for George Bush, Bill. But you know, I don't believe that George Bush would associate himself with those kind of phone calls. I really don't. And I look, I think that George Bush is a great man of faith. And I just don't think he would on the short, you know, try to take advantage or smear, you know, name call. But you know, these telephone calls have been going on between both campaigns. And you know, all it does is, in a sense of course, in South Carolina, it actually drove voter turnout up, which is pretty bizarre. But this is not good in the long term for the for our system and for politics in general: the name-calling, calling Bush saying that Bush is anti-catholic and this kind of a phone call I mean, it's just not what we ought to be doing in politics.
[Press:] Well, Gary Bauer is here tonight. I don't think anybody would ever doubt Gary Bauer's moral credentials. Do you think Gary Bauer would be supporting George Bush if he were not convinced I mean supporting John McCain I'm sorry, if he were not convinced that John McCain has strong moral character?
[Kasich:] Oh, I think John McCain has very strong moral character. I think...
[Press:] So where is Pat Robertson coming from?
[Kasich:] Now, Bill, you know, you've got to call Pat and ask him. Nobody tells Pat what to say or how to think. Pat's I know Pat very well. I know Mary knows him very well. Pat just Pat feels strongly about things, and he says what he thinks. And, you know, I don't always agree with him. And I don't agree with name calling in this case, but I don't think that I mean, George Bush would be make a huge mistake if he had been part of this. I don't believe that he is anymore than I think that John McCain knew about these calls that label Bush anti-Catholic because he went to Bob Jones.
[Matalin:] Well, we're going to get to that in a minute, but let's talk about, Gary, the pattern that is emerging in this process, and it is simply that John McCain is not winning Republicans even in those states that he won the one state he won New Hampshire. He didn't win Republicans. He didn't win them in South Carolina, he didn't win them in Delaware, he's winning them nowhere. Non-Republicans are backing him four to one, but Republicans are backing Bush three to one. Tell me how do you win the Republican nomination, particularly when we look at the rest of the calendar which is going to be closed to non-Republicans, how are you going to win the nomination without winning Republicans?
[Bauer:] Well, Mary, I'm a little puzzled by this concern about independents and Reagan Democrats participating in our primary. That's something good. That's something we ought to encourage. It was just a few months ago that supporters of Governor Bush were saying that he was the only one that could win because all of these Democrats in Texas had voted for him. Now the Democrats are voting and independents are voting for Senator McCain, suddenly it's viewed as some sort of big problem. I you know I was following the questioning between Bill and John. I think there's a very important issue here and that is the effort to savage Senator McCain in this campaign. Mary, we need to make sure that the debate...
[Matalin:] Not a victim, Gary.
[Bauer:] We need to make sure OK well, let me just...
[Matalin:] I am not done with these Democrats, let me follow-up No, no, no, let me follow-up on the kind of Democrats that are coming into the party.
[Press:] Let him finish his sentence.
[Matalin:] That's a whole different topic...
[Bauer:] What kind of Democrats are coming into the party?
[Matalin:] Well, these kind of Democrats. Here's a McCain brochure: "Courage, integrity, reform paid for by John McCain 2000 even if you vote in Tuesday's Republican primary, you can still participate in future Democratic party, political activities."
[Bauer:] Of course you can.
[Matalin:] The kind of Democrats that are coming over for Bush are staying over for Bush. What is being encouraged in Michigan and in South Carolina.
[Bauer:] Mary, come on, Mary, you're smarter than this. Mary: This is a John McCain... Well taken, it's fine, that's wonderful. So what? So you tell a Democrat that the vote. You can tell a Democrat he can vote in the Republican primary but he has to stop being a Democrat? The Reagan Democrats, Mary, that made the guy we work for...
[Matalin:] Are now Bush Republicans.
[Bauer:] ... Who have the guy we work for president in two terms by overwhelming elections didn't leave the Democratic party. We lost them in the last two presidential elections when we got our heads handed to us. Mary: So Debbie Dingell, the wife of the huge Democratic leader, who got two turnout calls to vote... You know, Mary.
[Matalin:] ... for McCain is going to stay and vote for McCain, right?
[Bauer:] You know, Mary, I've been in rallies all over Michigan, I didn't see Debbie Dingell. Who I saw were the kind of people that used to be at Reagan rallies: veterans; people that love their country; people that want to have a sense of honor again in the oval office; people who believe that we ought to appeal to the better angels of our nature instead of slash and burn campaign.
[Press:] John Kasich, I hear you wanting to jump in.
[Kasich:] You know, I'd like to just say...
[Press:] Go ahead, please.
[Kasich:] I want to just say one thing about this. And Gary, I love Gary Bauer. He's a man of deep compassion...
[Bauer:] Thank you, sir.
[Kasich:] ... and here comes the but, right? But there's not a but here. I think Gary, however, as Republicans, we've got to be careful that we may have people choosing the menu who aren't coming to the dinner. Now when Kevorkian's lawyer is up there trying to recruit Democrats into our primary, I think we've got to think about this as Republicans. In addition, Bill Schneider, your political expert on CNN made a comment I thought was pretty clever. He said the Reagan Democrats now are all Republicans. I get very concerned look, we want independents and Democrats to come into our party, but we don't want people who come into this party who then go back and are Democrats in the fall which is what we're going to see, a number of these.
[Bauer:] John.
[Kasich:] But, Gary, that's not even the issue.
[Bauer:] Yes, well, let me answer what you just said. John, if the Reagan Democrats were Republicans, we wouldn't have gotten 40 percent of the vote in the last two presidential elections. We even had the Reagan Republicans back since the last time Ronald Reagan ran for office. I was with John McCain in Michigan a couple of days ago and he was asked about Kevorkian's lawyer. He said he didn't want those votes.
[Kasich:] No, of course not.
[Bauer:] He wasn't campaigning for those vote. Of course not. So let's not raise straw men.
[Kasich:] Well, look I'm not trying to...
[Bauer:] The people in that audience are conservative Democrats who haven't seen a clear Republican message in the last two presidential races. They like John McCain. And that's why in the national polls, the guy that you and Mary are supporting, George Bush, is now tied with Al Gore, but Senator McCain, the guy I'm backing, has got a 15-point lead.
[Kasich:] Gary, my only point is, is that you may not have seen Debbie Dingell or Jack Kevorkian or his lawyer at this rally, but the fact is there is a concerted effort by a number of Democrats to hijack this election. Now...
[Bauer:] John, is Senator McCain...
[Kasich:] That's just an issue for us...
[Bauer:] Is senator McCain a conservative, John?
[Kasich:] That's just an issue for us to discuss in the future. But let me just say this to you.
[Press:] I want to jump...
[Kasich:] We're going to be heading into a number of primary states where only Republicans and people who come across and declare themselves Republicans are going to be able to vote. And I think that'll be healthy also for our party. But Gary, I'm just talking to you as a fellow Republican to make sure that...
[Bauer:] Right.
[Kasich:] ... we attract new people, but we don't have people coming in here and trying to disrupt things. I mean, the party faithful ought to choose its nominee.
[Bauer:] Then you ought to close the primaries, then, and only allow Republicans to vote. But you know, the wing of the party that liked us for years suddenly doesn't like it because they can no longer control the outcome.
[Press:] All right. Hold it.
[Kasich:] Well, Gary, you know, your dad was a truck driver; my dad was a mail man.
[Press:] Let me jump in here.
[Kasich:] We want blue collar Democrats. But I'm telling you, a lot of them have come over and they vote Republican, which has given us control of the House.
[Press:] All right, John, I just want to put you at ease, OK? I'm a Democrat. I don't belong to any organized party. I'm a Democrat. For you to think that Democrats have organized this is a total red herring. I want to...
[Kasich:] I'm not saying that, Bill.
[Press:] No, I want to quote but I want to quote Bill Schneider back you. Bill Schneider polled those Democrats that voted for John McCain. Do you know why they said they're voting for John McCain? Not to make mischief. They're voting for John McCain because they like him. But I've got a more important question for you, John, OK? There is somebody else who is around here, people think he's going away, he hasn't. He's the president of the United States. He had a news conference last week, and here is what he said about both of you guys' candidates that I would like to get on the table. President Clinton.
[William J. Clinton, President Of The United States:] They can't run against the longest economic expansion in history or the lowest crime rate in 30 years or the lowest welfare rolls in 30 years, the progress America has made in promoting peace around the world, or the fact that our party overrode theirs and passed the Family Leave, and it's benefited 20 million people and it hasn't hurt the economy.
[Press:] There's the question: The times are so good these days that if you ask the question, "Are you better off than you were seven years ago?" the answer is yes, John Kasich. Why make any change?
[Kasich:] Well, Bill, I think that, first of all, it's going to be a very tough election this fall. I have been saying that for a solid year, and I think Al Gore will be the nominee, and I think he'll be very aggressive and I think he'll be very tough. But Bill, I think people have kind of had enough of the whole Clinton-Gore thing intuitively? Now can Al Gore turn that around? You know, it's possible he can. But I think that people intuitively like George Bush, and I think they like John McCain, and I think that's going to be a big advantage. And I think, when I watched that debate last night, at that at the theater last night, I've got to tell you, they are so far out in left field they're not even on the field anymore. I think that the people are unsettled about the future, which is curious in a time when things are so good. And I think that the big issue is going to be about self-governing and about the ability of people to be decent to one another.
[Press:] All right.
[Bauer:] Bill...
[Press:] Gary, real quick.
[Bauer:] Yes, Bill, I think there's a lot to run against. There's the decline of the military, which is underfunded and overcommitted. There's the...
[Press:] All right, polls are closing, so we've got to go. Gary Bauer, thank you for being here.
[Bauer:] All right. OK, thank you.
[Press:] John Kasich, thank you so much for joining us, from Columbus, Ohio. Get back to changing diapers, and Mary Matalin and I will be back with closing comments.

[Announcer:] CNN & TIME. Tonight, a special edition of
[Cnn & Time:] "Visions 21: Questions For the New Century." "Will We Plug Chips into Our Brains?"
[Ray Kurzweil, Author, "the Age Of Spiritual Machines":] We'll be able to download knowledge, we'll be able to learn new skills.
[Announcer:] "Will Smell-o-Vision Replace Television?"
[Weird Al Yankovic, Comedian/musician:] In the future, we'll be picking our political leaders at least partially based on their smell. Commercials will be completely different.
[Announcer:] "Will We Close the Book on Books?"
[Anne Rice, Author:] I'm really old fashioned, I want to hold a book on my hands and I want to sit back in my easy chair with it.
[Announcer:] "Will Cybercriminals Run the World?"
[Unidentified Male:] You name the crime, we have a case where a computer is involved.
[Announcer:] "Will My PC Be Smarter Than Me?"
[Garry Kasparov, Chess Champion:] I don't think that any human brain, even a very superior human brain, can be compared to the computer.
[Announcer:] "Will My Child Love Her Smart Toys Better Than She Loves Me?"
[Unidentified Female:] This generation, these next two generations are really at a watershed moment where we are changing the nature of our relationships with the objects around us.
[Announcer:] "Visions 21: The Future of Technology." Here now is Jeff Greenfield.
[Jeff Greenfield, Co-host:] Good evening, and welcome to this special edition of CNN & TIME. Tonight, part five of "Visions 21": the future of technology, how it will change and how it will change us. The boundary between man and machine has never seemed so porous. The artificial hearts, the smart machines, the industrial robotics of today are mere child's play compared to what's coming. Here's just one example: A group of neurobiologists in Philadelphia recently wired the brains of lab rats to a computer, allowing the animals to operate a robotic arm purely by thought. The reality of melding mind and machine led Bernard Shaw to raise this question: "Will We Plug Chips into Our Brains?"
[Bernard Shaw, Co-host:] One of the great joys in Tucker Davis' life is scuba diving.
[Tucker Davis, Neuroscience Patient:] Somebody violated my scrap here.
[Shaw:] But the happiness he gets from the sport, or from anything else for that matter, he says he owes to a battery-powered generator wired to his brain.
[Davis:] Stimulate electrically stimulating my brain, OK? Without it, I lack the neurochemical balance. I would be, you know, right back where I was two years ago.
[Shaw:] Two years ago, he was in a deep depression, considering suicide. When medications didn't work, he signed on to an experiment at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and stepped into the future.
[Davis:] Coming from the generator.
[Shaw:] Doctors implanted in his chest a generator the size of stopwatch and connected it to a nerve in his neck.
[Davis:] It's two lead wires and a ground wire that are hooked up to the Vagus nerve on the left side here. The Vagus nerve goes on up to the brain stem into the limbic region of the brain, where our mood and emotions are controlled.
[Shaw:] Every five minutes, the generator sends a few milliamps of electricity to his brain. As a result, he's enjoyed less anxiety, a better appetite, more sleep, and a sense of optimism that's lasted for more than a year. The only side effect: a temporary change in his voice.
[Davis:] Now it's going off, OK? Now you notice that my voice is getting hoarse, as it's constricting the left side of my vocal chord as it's going off. This will last for 20 seconds, then after that my voice turns to normal, or I can take the magnet, put it on the generator and return right back to normal voice.
[Shaw:] Some experts say the technology that transformed Tucker Davis' life is only a first step toward a day when computers could actually be placed inside our brains. They predict it's inevitable, as computers become smaller and more powerful, and as we learn more about how the brain works.
[Kurzweil:] Right now, our brains are constrained to a mere 100 trillion connections.
[Shaw:] Ray Kurzweil is a pioneer in the field of artificial intelligence. During the last quarter century, he's become an established visionary, who's also practical enough to create his own technologies. The synthesizer was the first to reproduce accurately the sounds of all the instruments in an orchestra from a single slim keyboard. He invented the first machine to convert any style print into audible speech.
[Computer:] Scanner moving to top of page.
[Shaw:] Thus creating a reading machine for the blind.
[Computer:] Fourscore and seven years ago, our fathers brought upon this continent a new nation.
[Shaw:] What sounds to most of us like science fiction, Kurzweil describes casually as technology that will soon affect our everyday lives.
[Kurzweil:] Thirty years from now, we'll be building computers in a different way, we'll be building them as at the molecular level and they will be able to enhance our both our experiences and our intelligence by communicating with our biological circuits.
[Shaw:] Computers built like molecules plugged into our brains?
[Kurzweil:] I actually think that the scenarios I'm describing are conservative simply because...
[Shaw:] Conservative?
[Kurzweil:] I think so, because there is no way that I or anyone else can imagine all of the creative breakthroughs and innovations that everybody is going to think of. I mean, how could I anticipate every innovation? [Begin Video Clip, "the Matrix"]
[Unidentified Actor:] How about combat training?
[Shaw:] If Ray Kurzweil sounds like a character from "The Matrix"... [Begin Video Clip, "the Matrix"]
[Unidentified Actor:] Jujitsu?
[Keanu Reeves, Actor:] I'm going to learn jujitsu.
[Shaw:] ... that's because he shares the movie's vision of future technology. [Begin Video Clip, "the Matrix"]
[Reeves:] Hell, yeah.
[Kurzweil:] We'll be able to download knowledge, we'll be able to learn new skills, we'll be able to perceive things more quickly, think more quickly and more intelligently.
[Shaw:] But are we prepared? No, says Bill Joy, one of the founders of Sun Microsystems and an expert in computer networking. He thinks many scientists ignore the dark side of their research.
[Bill Joy, Co-founder, Sun Microsystems:] When these things come together, we have an unprecedented situation where individuals can cause harm on a scale that we've never seen before.
[Shaw:] Joy worries that using computers to enhance the brain could lead to a super-intelligent ruling class with little regard for anyone else.
[Joy:] I think it would perhaps be for those of us who weren't in that small privilege to lead the equivalent of a new Dark Age. The scary part is if everybody has it and lots of us are crazy, it's very likely that someone will do something crazy.
[Kurzweil:] We've always encountered problems with technology, but few people today would really want to go back several centuries to the much shorter life spans we had, to the poverty filled, disease-filled lives we had hundreds of years ago.
[Shaw:] Fundamentally, you're talking about tampering with humankind. What about the human consequences, what about the uniqueness of the individual?
[Kurzweil:] Well, I think that's something that we're going to enhance. We'll actually have much greater diversity among people in terms of our skills and interests.
[Shaw:] You use the phrase "enhancing the brain." Take the nine justices on the United States Supreme Court, they implant themselves with chips to do what?
[Kurzweil:] Well, they'll have greater command of more knowledge and more information, and hopefully that will lead to better wisdom.
[Davis:] Those legal decisions always come back in the final analysis to a moral and ethical judgment, and you're not going to find any brain chip or any device that's going to put morality and ethics into a human being.
[Shaw:] Tucker Davis, who lives each day as man dependent on machine, sees the technology as a mixed blessing.
[Davis:] To me it's a prosthetic device, it's no different in my mind than a hip replacement, you know, with the titanium ball and socket, or sewing my hand back on if I've lost it.
[Shaw:] At the same time, he's uncomfortable with the idea that we might soon download books to our brains as simply as we now copy data from one computer to another.
[Davis:] If you take away that effort by making it easier, I don't see that humanity is progressing. I think it's just a fundamental part of humanity that we suffer and we the harder we work at things, the better we perform, and I wouldn't want to take that equation out.
[Kurzweil:] It's really an evolutionary process, one generation of technology provides more powerful tools, which means that the next generation can be created more quickly and can be more powerful, and so this process is going to continue. It's not going to settle down, it's going to continue to grow at an exponential rate.
[Announcer:] To chat live with futurist and inventor Ray Kurzweil at 10:00 Eastern, 7:00 Pacific, log on to cnn.comchat after the show.
[Greenfield:] Plug-in technology, artificial intelligence if we can digitize our thoughts and emotions, why not our senses? Coming up, from Weird Al Yankovic, this mind boggling thought: "Will Smell-o-Vision Replace Television?"
[Yankovic:] Pretty soon, your friends will come over for movie night and they'll be like, oh, you don't have Smell-o-Vision? We have to go.
[Announcer:] When "Visions 21" CNN & TIME continues.
[Greenfield:] Now let's say you're a passionate gourmet, addicted to those cooking shows; you may cheer on the "Iron Chefs," or shout "bam" with Emeril, but you know you're missing something: the glorious smell of great food. But what if smells could be digitized? Researchers say it is theoretically possible scented TV. A weird thought, no? Well, that's why we turned to Weird Al Yankovic to answer our next question: "Will Smell-o-Vision Replace Television?"
[Yankovic:] It's inevitable, because every technology becomes obsolete. Once they've pushed the envelope as far as they can with audio and video, they're going to have to go on to the next logical frontier: Smell-o-Vision. Pretty soon, your friends will come over for movie night and they'll be like, oh, you don't have Smell-o- Vision? We have to go. It's going to change our entire TV watching experience. You'll be able to watch the Food Network and smell the garlic, and you'll cry when they cut the onions. You'll actually be able to smell Richard Simmons sweating to the oldies. Movies will be a lot different, too. You'll be able to watch "Apocalypse Now" and actually smell the napalm in the morning, and it will add a whole new dimension to the eating baked beans around the campfire scene in "Blazing Saddles." In the future, we'll be picking our political leaders at least partially based on their smell. And commercials will be completely different, like anti-perspirant commercials, you know, I used to smell like this, but now I smell like this. Well, not everybody is going to want Smell-o-Vision and I think that's why it's going to be an option. It will be like, you know, do you want your movies wide-screen or pan-stand? And then there will be people who can't really appreciate Smell-o-Vision, so they'll have to have subtitles for the smelling impaired. Have a you know, subtitles that say things like, smells kind of fishy. Of course, once we've bought every single piece of Smell-o-Vision hardware and software that exists, then they're going to come out with quadraphonic Smell-o-Vision. What's that smell behind me? Whoa, that's great!
[Announcer:] Next, from television you can smell, to literature online, "Will We Close the Book on Books?"
[Mark Bernstein, Eastgate Publishing:] The future of reading, as much we can know what any future is, is going to be on screens, or things that come after screens, not on scrolls and not on chopped up trees.
[Announcer:] When CNN & TIME "Visions 21" continues.
[Greenfield:] This is a book, pages bound together with words printed on them in ink. If you show this to someone living 500 years ago, he'd instantly recognize it. It's got a heft, a smell, a feel that offers a sensory pleasure quite apart from the pleasures its contents provide. But it may be an endangered species. In fact, what is inside this vessel can now be accessed without ink, without pages, with the simple click of a button. So, "Will We Be Closing the Book on Books?"
[Book Printer:] Lutitia is my favorite place.
[Greenfield:] Ten years ago, David Dice of Bradford, Vermont gave up practicing law and started making books by the letter- press print method.
[Dice:] It's a good job here. This is basically what Gutenberg did. I mean, he had wooden type obviously. This is the way books have been done for 500 years, more or less.
[Greenfield:] For Dice, it is an act of love.
[Dice:] I think people will always want to have a physical contact with a structure, with a book, to touch the paper or to experience the pleasure of actually turning pages.
[Greenfield:] Really? Right now, countless millions of people read newspapers and magazines not on paper, but on their computer screens, and there are clear signs that books are now migrating as well. Last March, famed author Stephen King released his latest book, "Riding the Bullet," only on the Web. And last month, prominent book publishers announced plans for a major move into e-publishing. And what of the threat to the joys of settling down with a satisfying feel of cloth, and paper, and ink?
[Bernstein:] This is nostalgia for an imaginary past.
[Greenfield:] So says Mark Bernstein, who heads up Eastgate Publishing, a Watertown, Massachusetts-based e-book publisher. His books don't exist on paper at all, but on CDs and zip drives, and as bits and bytes speeding over the Internet. He publishes six to eight e-books a year and scoffs at the notion that something precious is at risk.
[Bernstein:] First, we never curled up by the menorial fireplace with our big dog and our glass of Claret and our fine leatherbound books. That wasn't something most of us ever had the opportunity to do, and certainly not our ancestors. So the book as a finely crafted artifact is partly imaginary in any sense.
[Greenfield:] Of course we will read books, Bernstein says, just not the way we do now.
[Bernstein:] The future of reading, as much we can know what any future is, is going to be on screens, or things that come after screens, not on scrolls and not on chopped up trees.
[Greenfield:] But how does that future sit with a Yale-educated man of letters, say a man like William F. Buckley Jr.?
[William F. Buckley Jr., Author:] The physical existence of a book has a really it's a certain kind of poetry that can't be duplicated in a chip.
[Greenfield:] He's written more than 40 of them, his two latest, a collection of speeches and a novel, "Spy Time," now grace the shelves of bookstores. But this founding father of modern conservatism was also one of the first prominent writers to become computer literate, and if the future is in e-books, that holds no terrors for him. [on camera]: But is there something tactile for you about picking up a book with the binding and the pages, and turning those pages, that as far as you're concerned, a computer just can't replace?
[Buckley:] I would say yes. If people were to ask me the same thing about a typewriter back in 1981, I would have said yes. There is absolutely no nothing to replace the sound of that key hitting the paper. Well, the answer is there is. So that the question you really ask is, how hard would the adjustment be? And my guess is it would be less difficult than the adjustment already made to a word processor.
[Greenfield:] Anne Rice, author of the best-selling Lestat vampire books, and of high-toned erotica as well, has readily adapted to the e-world. Her Web site draws an estimated 360,000 page views a year. So how does she regard the prospect of a book without paper, or cloth, or binding?
[Rice:] I'm really old fashioned, I want to hold a book in my hands and I want to sit back in my easy chair with it, and I guess I want pages that I can not only turn and spill coffee on, but actually mark on with a pen.
[Greenfield:] Love it or loathe it, the real future of reading may be a device like this. It's called an e-book, it can store a dozen or more books that can be downloaded over the Net. Its screen is readable. Its portability ends the oft-repeated complain about reading on a computer: how can you take that thing on to a bus, or into the bathroom? From intercontinental travelers to kids with a heavy book bag, this could change everything.
[Buckley:] There is nothing inherently here that doesn't satisfy your curiosity about what's composed there, and there is a lot that, on the contrary, makes life easier, pushing this button instead of turning the page.
[Greenfield:] But it's not just putting books in a device, or on the Net. Publishers like Mark Bernstein are using technology to change the way books are written and how they are read. It's called hypertext, and it works like this: when a word is underlined, the reader can click his or her mouse on it and find out more about that particular part of the book, or make a decision to skip ahead, or just simply read on.
[Bernstein:] It means that we can show things from several different angles at once.
[Greenfield:] This has obvious advantages when it comes to reference books like encyclopedias, or guide books. A few clicks can provide everything from updated data to the latest restaurant menus. But what about literature, works where the author's narrative sense may be crucial? Bernstein says we may be talking about a whole different way of telling a story.
[Bernstein:] There is a famous moment in the first released successful hypertext fiction where Michael Joyce, the author of "Afternoon," asks, "Do you want to hear about it?" The hypertext responds to yes or to no. No leads to, "I understand how you feel." Instead of simply stopping the conversation, it reacts as the speaker, the protagonist, and also as the author would want to react to the skeptical or impatient reader.
[Greenfield:] But as technology marches on, one invention may actually make the physical book more viable than ever before. It's called the "Bookbuilder," and it will make a book for you from a library of CDs.
[Ed Eakin, Publisher, Eakin Press:] You don't print X numbers, large numbers of copies and put them in the warehouse. You print them as you need them.
[Greenfield:] It may be coming to a mall or bookstore near you soon.
[Eakin:] You will ask for a book and certain books, they'll go back and make it while you wait.
[Greenfield:] And even David Dice, the guy who still makes books by hand, is embracing technology.
[Dice:] I don't really feel any competition with the modern age in this at all, I sell my books on the Internet.
[Greenfield:] So the answer is, yes, of course there will be books around, books will survive.
[Rice:] Really, all of this is no threat to the printed book. People are predicting that the printed book is going to go out, but people have been predicting that for I'm trying to figure 40 years. So I don't think e-publishing is going to do away with the printed book. I think it may add a whole dimension, you know, it may reach a whole different audience, but it's not going to do away with the printed book.
[Greenfield:] The future of books, whatever the form, may be secure, but the digital age has already begun to breed some chilling insecurities. Still ahead on "Visions 21," "Will Cybercriminals Run the World?"
[Unidentified Male:] Any 12-year-old can download some of the software and use it to commit major crimes without even thinking about it.
[Announcer:] When "Visions 21" CNN & TIME continues.
[Greenfield:] Welcome back to "Visions 21." They have beguiling names like Melissa, and the Love Bug, but these are devastating computer viruses posing as harmless e-mails, virtual infections that spread fast and have caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damage. Hardly a week goes by that we don't hear stories about some type of new virus or about a hacker breaking into our most secure institutions. With vulnerability leading to more and more online insecurity, here again is Bernard Shaw, and the question: Will cybercriminals run the world?
[Shaw:] Tim Runsberg says the Internet helped someone murder his stepdaughter.
[Tim Runsberg:] The Internet, I think, made it possible.
[Shaw:] Liam Ewens had been stalking Amy Boyer without her knowledge. He knew where she lived but was afraid to go there. He didn't know where she worked. Over the Internet, he paid money to find out her Social Security number. He also paid to find her employer's address in downtown Nashua, New Hampshire.
[Runsberg:] He knew just where to find her because of the information he found off the Internet. There's no question in my mind that that information directly led to the death of Amy.
[Shaw:] On October 15th last year, not long after getting the information from an Internet search company, Ewens took a semiautomatic handgun and drove to Amy's office. He waited for her to leave. He murdered her. Then he killed himself. On his Web site, which had been up for two year, he wrote about his plans to kill Boyer. Ewens also wrote, "It's actually obscene what you can find out about a person on the Internet."
[Runsberg:] For two and a half years this diary was on the Internet for the world to see, yet not one phone call by anyone, to anyone.
[Shaw:] Tim Runsberg is campaigning for new laws to protect privacy on the Internet.
[Runsberg:] This killer purchased the domain name Amy Boyer from register.com and created these Web sites in her own name.
[Glen Klinkhardt, Anchorage Police Department:] We've had several; cases involving homicides where the computer has given us valuable information.
[Shaw:] Glen Klinkhardt is a cybercop for the Anchorage Police Department. He's not surprised by the Internet angle to Amy Boyer's death. He says cybercrime covers the spectrum, from hacking to homicide.
[Klinkhardt:] You name the crime, we have a case where a computer is involved. You want to separate this as evidence?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Klinkhardt:] OK.
[Unidentified Male:] Let's go ahead and do that.
[Klinkhardt:] OK.
[Shaw:] A few years ago, there were no jobs like Klinkhardt's. A few years from now it could be one of the hottest tickets in law enforcement.
[Klinkhardt:] I believe that computer forensics and the use of computer evidence is going to be as popular in five years as the use of fingerprints and DNA is today.
[Shaw:] The computers may be new, but the crimes aren't. Much of the cybercrime that Klinkhardt sees involves theft or fraud. But he also sees new sorts of crimes, like attacks which cripple computer systems, and new sorts of criminals. Some of them are getting younger and younger.
[Klinkhardt:] The software is getting easier to use it's point and click and yet it is much more sophisticated. It's able to do more. So any 12-year-old can download some of the software and use it to commit major crimes without even thinking about it.
[Shaw:] Klinkhardt also expects to see more crimes against children.
[Klinkhardt:] We're starting to see child pornography coming in from Russia. That's one of the new big ones.
[Shaw:] He worries that the Internet is actually making it easier for pedophiles to act out their fantasies.
[Klinkhardt:] All of a sudden, the Internet has given them a sense of, I'm not alone, there's other people out there. There are literally now pedophile support groups online that are telling each other it's OK to sexually assault children.
[Shaw:] Klinkhardt foresees more repeat offenders.
[Klinkhardt:] In police work a lot of times, we say that 10 percent of the population causes 90 percent of the problems. And we're seeing it as well in the computer world. There are names that I keep, that I have, that I know I'm going to be seeing five years from now.
[Shaw:] Glen Klinkhardt says he's always been something of a hacker, ever since he was 12. And that helps him think like the cybercriminals.
[Klinkhardt:] Every day there's something new. There's new computers, there's new software, there's new techniques and there's new crimes. So you have to be open to that. You have to be willing to zig when they zag.
[Shaw:] Zigging when others zag has never been a problem for this man, known in the computer world simply as "Mudge." Like Klinkhardt, his roots are in hacking, figuring out how computers and software work. Mudge advises the United States government and corporations on cybersecurity. [on camera]: Can cybercriminals rule the world? "
[Mudge":] I hope not. The security in place right now leaves a lot of things very vulnerable. The generic operating systems you're putting on your desktops are not designed with security in mind.
[Shaw:] Mudge says the Internet can make some crimes possible, and profitable. "
[Mudge":] If you have a person who's a pick-pocket and they steal two cents from a person, and on average they get one out of every 1,000 people that goes by them and they can steal two cents, this person is going to starve in the real world. But on the Internet, on the electronic world, this is a very viable attack. If you're looking for computer security then the Internet is not the place to be.
[Shaw:] He has warned Congress that Internet service itself is vulnerable to a crippling attack. "
[Mudge":] We said at that time this was two years we could disrupt service for the entire Internet in less than 30 minutes. The problem still exists.
[Shaw:] It does? "
[Mudge":] Sure, absolutely.
[Shaw:] Mudge sees a recent attack that hit major e- commerce sites as a warning that worse could be in store. "
[Mudge":] That was a very trivial attack. There could be much nastier ones done on the infrastructure routing protocols, which is what moves a packet or a bit of information from, you know, the West Coast to the east Coast. When you start having the big ones that are branching further out, those end up being larger organizations. And if you started lopping off all of those, you could isolate, in turn, you know, each individual state or each individual geographic area into its own island, unable to communicate with the outside world. These black ones here are military. Here you go.
[Shaw:] Mudge now runs research and development for At Stake, a computer security firm. [on camera]: Does it take a hacker to catch a hacker? "
[Mudge":] It takes the understanding of how you have to think that way. You have to understand the motive. You have to understand the various tools and techniques, because if you can't understand how they're getting into your place, you're never going to be able to understand how to fix it.
[Shaw:] The future calls for more strategic thinking, says Mudge, designing systems with security in mind from the beginning. [on camera]: What does the landscape look like for the next 10, 15 years or so? "
[Mudge":] If people start going down the route of not just putting bandages on the surface wounds and addressing instead the actual sickness or illness that they might have, I think we're going to see the small viruses start to go start to diminish. That's if people start looking at it in the strategic mindset.
[Shaw:] But even Mudge concedes staying one step ahead of the cybercriminals is a tough job. [on camera]: Ever been hacked? "
[Mudge":] Not that I'm aware of.
[Greenfield:] The solution to cybercrime may be more intelligent computer systems, but that raises another troubling question. Coming up, Gary Kasparov with, will my PC be smarter than me?
[Kasparov:] we will not be able to even come close to the way a machine is exchanging information, the database and calculating billions and billions of possibilities.
[Announcer:] When "Visions 21," CNN & TIME, continues.
[Greenfield:] If there's anyone who knows how frustrating it must be to be outwitted by a machine, it's Gary Kasparov. In 1997, Kasparov, one of the best chess players of all time, was beaten at his own game by a supercomputer known as Deep Blue. With that in mind, we asked Kasparov this question: In the future, will my PC be smarter than me?
[Kasparov:] I think first we have to define what it means that computers getting smarter than a human being, because we don't know how computers exactly approaching different problems. But what's more important, we do not understand how the human brain is approaching the same problems. The match had such enormous public interest because it reflected the fear of every housewife about the future of her children that could be potentially threatened by computer dominance. I am a firm believer that the machine will always lack human creativity. And without this creativity, the whole issue of machine getting smarter than humans is absolutely irrelevant. I think chess can be used as a model for many scientific experiments. And a man-versus-machine contest is a part of that experiment, no matter who wins. Because as long as we are able to win one single game, we are still doing fine. Chess is still a decision- making game. And if I play the computer, I'm still basing my decisions on my assessment of computer psychology. And computer as my opponent is an opponent with sort of an alien mentality. Even with the computer, we're still bringing chess to, you know, one-one encounter of two individuals, quote-unquote. Now I play against it. I mean, I can play this game. It's not very convenient now because with this mouth, you know, you don't have a chance. I didn't have time to win. But anyway, so it's a game. And normally I play with a better mouse.
[Announcer:] Virtual intelligence and children: High-tech playthings threaten to become all too real.
[Unidentified Female:] These new toys have their own agenda.
[Announcer:] Parents wonder, will my child love her smart toys better than she loves me? When "Visions 21," CNN & TIME, continues.
[Greenfield:] At this year's American-International Toy Fair in New York, the prevailing theme was basically this: There is no such thing as too much technology in a toy. Today's children are too sophisticated, it seems, for the playthings of yesteryear. When the gift-giving holidays roll around, parents can look forward if that's the right phrase to a whole slew of microchip-enhanced toys, some of them so lifelike it may be difficult for kids to understand that their new playmate isn't real. From interactive dolls to animatronic pets, parents now get to ask themselves, will my child love her smart toys better than she loves me?
[Begin Video Clip, Tv Commercial) Announcer:] Miniature toys provide a world a child can manipulate.
[Greenfield:] It's been true for generations... [Begin Video Clip, Tv Commercial]
[Announcer:] Playing out his fantasies of reproducing his actual life.
[Greenfield:] ... when children play with toys, they bring their understanding of the world to the dolls and the trucks and the playhouses, their emotions, their joys and sorrows. And for at least the last half century, those who study children have worried about what it means when kids spend their time where others imagine for them, when they stare at a TV or play video game. Well now...
[Unidentified Male:] Wake up Furby baby for you me the baby.
[Greenfield:] ... there's a whole new generation of toys that makes those past diversions child's play.
[Unidentified Male:] They'll respond to, you know, clapping, you know, loud noises.
[Greenfield:] There's Furby...
[Unidentified Male:] Probably when you go to sleep.
[Greenfield:] ... a computerized toy that appears to carry on whole conversations with your kid. Or Poochy, a dog that sings, barks, talks to other Poochies...
[Unidentified Male:] You can also feed them with a bone.
[Greenfield:] And responds to the offer of a bone with hearts in his eyes. He likes you he really, really likes you. Or interactive Yoda, a toy that goes on the market next week, a toy that really seems to be teaching you how to use the Force.
[Yoda:] Let the force flow.
[Unidentified Female:] Time to wake up.
[Greenfield:] Or My Real Baby...
[Unidentified Female:] There you go.
[Greenfield:] ... a toy that is expected to hit the stores this Christmas season.
[Unidentified Female:] Yes you are, you're a very ticklish little girl.
[Greenfield:] It's been designed to show emotions far more subtly than toys of the past. It does more than laugh or cry, its facial muscles responds the way a real infant's would.
[Jonathan Klein, Irobots:] What we've done is we've taken technology that enables us to enhance a traditional doll in a lot of in a number of really interesting ways.
[Greenfield:] Jonathan Klein is director of iRobots interactive toy division, the makers of My Real Baby.
[Klein:] We've given her the ability to smile, the ability to frown, the ability look surprised. She can laugh, she can cry. In fact, we've given her a whole broad range of emotions, as well as a lot of needs.
[Greenfield:] This, says Klein, is the wave of the future.
[Klein:] Kids are going to be able to interact with their toys in some sense like they're other people and other creatures. It's going to be a very magical time for toys.
[Unidentified Children:] Cool.
[Greenfield:] But that magical time may not be good news for children or parents, says Sherri Turkel, professor of the sociology of science at MIT. She has spent years studying the interaction of kids and toys, and she raises a warning flag about how these smart toys work.
[Sherri Turkel, Mit:] The new toys ask something very different of the child. They ask the child to nurture them. So this is now the first generation of children who are going to be growing up seeing their toys, seeing these computational objects, as something that need to be taken care of and nurtured in order for the child to be gratified.
[Greenfield:] And this is different from, say, a kid playing with a Raggedy Ann doll, treating the doll as a baby and feeding it and stroking it and scolding it.
[Turkel:] Yes.
[Greenfield:] Because?
[Turkel:] Because when the Raggedy Ann doll it's a great question. When the child is playing with the Raggedy Ann doll, the child is projecting on to the doll the child's needs to take care of, the child's needs to discipline you've been a bad doll the child's needs to love or be loved or to be disliked. The doll's mad at them that day. These new toys have their own agenda. They tell the child, I love you. They tell the child, take care of me. They tell the child, I'm unhappy now. So you have a situation where you move from projection to engagement to interaction. They believe, at least for a while, that the Furbies they take the Furbies at their word that the Furbies love them.
[Greenfield:] Roger Schiffman is president of Tiger Toys, which makes the Furby and the Poochy. He says kids aren't all that confused between what's alive and what's not.
[Roger Schiffman, President, Tiger Toys:] I think they just actually realize that this is a cool toy, they like it, they think it's cute, and they want to try it and see what they can make it do. But, you know, clearly people know that it's not living and it's not human and it's not a dog. But, you know, it's a live toy-type product in some kids' minds, and they understand that very clearly.
[Greenfield:] It's not just these smart toys that are changing the way children play and learn. For nearly 20 years, the computer has been making its way into our living rooms and bedrooms, and experts like Dr. Stanley Greenspan, child psychologist, professor and author, argue that parents have been all too willing to leave their children alone with their machines.
[Dr. Stanley Greenspan, Child Psychologist:] Well, kids need humans. That should be the new saying. I want to put that on shirts that everyone can wear: Kids need humans. When you play with a video game or play with a fancy toy, you're using only a few of your mental capacities, and by and large you don't have that rich emotional interchange which is the orchestra leader, which guides the whole operation. So in our latest research, we found that the emotions are the orchestra leader for our intellect, but you need human interaction for that orchestra leader to learn how to work.
[Unidentified Female:] He was 2 years old when he first began his interest in computers. You hungry?
[Greenfield:] The Garalus family of Chicago watched their son Pascuali become entranced by machines from near infancy. Now, they say, his fascination has driven them to take action.
[Unidentified Male:] When he comes home from school, if we don't stop him he'll go directly to using the computer. And so what we do is we kind of schedule him into, like, you know, playing catch with me for a little bit. It's more our choice for him to do, although he likes doing those things, But he counts the minutes and says, OK, are we done yet?
[Greenspan:] Technology is a two-edged sword. If used properly, it can really enhance human interaction, enhance all these skills that we need to develop. In many, many families now, it's being misused. It's being used instead of human interaction.
[Klein:] There are 16 different motors in IsaiB.
[Greenfield:] For parents and for children, that challenge will be tested by a future in which toys may take on a life of their own.
[Klein:] Dolls are going to be able to be smarter...
[Unidentified Female:] Here you go.
[Klein:] ... they're going to be able to have more sophisticated emotions, they're going to be able respond in more interesting and more sophisticated ways.
[Turkel:] We're seeing toys now that are the tip of the iceburg of a development in toy making and the objects around us that is going to be continuing. And now is the time to really think it through about what are the child's needs and whether you know, why do we need these toys?
[Greenfield:] With all of these fears for the future we've been talking about, we want to end with a note of reassuring uncertainty. Often those considered most qualified to predict the nature and shape of things to come can be astoundingly, gratifyingly wrong. Lord Kelvin used fluid mechanics to prove that no airplane would ever fly. And IBM's Thomas Watson estimated the worldwide market for computers would peak at half a dozen. Imagine what futurists will be certain of tomorrow. And that's it for this fifth and final edition of "Visions 21." I'm Jeff Greenfield. Thanks for joining us.

[Asieh Namdar, Cnn Anchor:] Some of China's most important archaeological treasures are its terra cotta warriors and horses. The figures were discovered by peasants in the city of Xi'an 26 years ago. China's Shanghai Television reports these life-sized statues are beginning to go show signs of their age.
[Zhou Yi, Shanghai Tv Correspondent:] China's ancient capital city Xi'an became the focus for the world in June 1998 when U.S. President Bill Clinton, his wife and daughter posed for pictures in front of Xi'an's famous 2,200-year-old terra cotta warriors. Soon after, enterprising travel agencies were offering a new form of sight- seeing package called the President's Tour. Hailed as 8th Wonder of the World, the 8,000 warriors and horses in the tomb of the Chinghua, the first king to unify in 200 B.C., are back in the spotlight. In a recent study by Chinese archaeologists reviews that the ancient site faces major threats from erosion, shrinkage, and to a lesser extent, tourism. The Ching Dynasty terra cotta warriors were discovered 24 years ago by a peasant from the village of Xahu. The find was opened to the public in 1979, and since then, over 34 million people have visited this archaeological site located in the west of China. In recent years, a dramatic increase in visitors from all over the world has commanded the difficult task of preserving the precious warriors from the past. Groups of visitors are causing constant changes in temperature around the ancient site. In many of the pits in the museum, ancient pieces have lost their color. Even the cotta warrior unearthed last year, which dazzled the world with its sharp green face and red hat, gives only a small indication of its original color. According to the director of Chinhua terra cotta warrior museum, Chinese and German scientists are currently working together to try and design a way of preventing the outer color of the terra cotta warriors from being eroded. When the terra cotta warriors were buried, no one would have dreamt this army would have one day be woken up from a 2,000 year sleep to stand attention to a U.S. president of the 20th century. Nevertheless, the exposure to day air and visitors is gradually robbing the terra cotta warriors of their color, form and shape. We can only hope that the work of scientists in the public concern will succeed in holding the gradual deterioration of these ancient warriors. This is Zhou Yi from Shanghai TV for CNN WORLD REPORT.

[Unidentified Male:] Now is the time for Mississippi to step out of its racist past.
[Unidentified Female:] That flag is a part of our history.
[Announcer:] A banner vote in Mississippi on the future of the state flag. Also ahead...
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Max Cleland said that he is interested in supporting the $1.6 trillion plan.
[Announcer:] Is Georgia's senior Democratic senator really behind the Bush tax cut? We'll ask him about that and his re-election headaches. And: so long trees, hello visitors! A growing controversy on Capitol Hill. Now, Judy Woodruff takes you
[Inside Politics. Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] Thank you for joining us. We begin in Mississippi, where voters have another three hours to weigh in on the future of their flag. Other states have grappled with criticism of banners that bear the controversial Confederate emblem. But Mississippi is the first to let voters decide whether the flag is a symbol of racism that should be banished or a piece of history that should be preserved. CNN's Brian Cabell joins us from Jackson, Mississippi Brian.
[Brian Cabell, Cnn Correspondent:] Good afternoon, Judy. We should get results here on this referendum in about three hours or so. But if the pre-election polls are any indication, those that have been taken in the last few months, it will be an uphill battle for those who want to change this flag. A few month ago, there was a 20-point lead for those who wanted to keep the flag. Just about three weeks ago, there was a 30-point lead for those who wanted to keep that flag. So, as I say, an uphill battle for them. The turnout today, it's been spotty in some places, along the Gulf Coast in Meridian over by the Mississippi river, but here in Jackson, we are being told, it's been quite heavy as a matter of fact. For the voters, the ballot is really very simple, very straightforward. It will take all of 10 seconds to vote. You either vote for the old flag with the Confederate emblem on it in the corner or you vote for the new flag that contains 20 stars over the blue background.
[Unidentified Male:] It's time now for us to look for things that can bring us together, rather than to maintain symbols that continues to divide us.
[Unidentified Female:] You know, I really don't like the magnolia, which is our flower. I would much rather have a pine tree. But I know we're not going to change it. And also, I don't really like the bird that we have. I would like to have a turkey. And I think we have a lot of turkeys around that would appreciate that.
[Cabell:] I think that what she is trying to say is that Mississippi already has a flag, it's a perfectly good flag and Mississippians will have to learn to live with it. Now, we've got one report of irregularities, this in a town of Clinton, about 10 miles north of Jackson. Apparently, there is a number of dog, we are told, German shepherds outside of one of the precincts, apparently intimidating some voters. That has been reported into federal monitors. But overall, this has been a very peaceful and quiet campaign. As I said, Judy, we should have the results here in the next three our four hours or so. Back to you.
[Woodruff:] Brian, any sense of just how interested people are in this, how many of them are actually coming out to vote on it?
[Cabell:] Well, as I say, the turnout has been spotty in some places, and, frankly, what we have seen in the last couple of days is that there is quite a bit of apathy on the part of both black and white voters. They I think that in a sense, people outside of Mississippi seem to care more about this election than people within the state of Mississippi. There hasn't been an awful lot of money spent on either side of this campaign. It's been a campaign devoid of really heated rhetoric, and people are just waiting for this to get over with. But for the most part, it has not been like South Carolina and Georgia, where it was a very big and hot campaign.
[Woodruff:] All right. Brian Cabell, reporting from Jackson, thanks. Meantime, in Cincinnati, concerns about race and civil rights remain very much on the agenda today within the city council, the police department and throughout the community. CNN's Bob Franken joins us with an update on the fallout from the recent violence on Cincinnati's streets Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn National Correspondent:] Well, Judy, this is the violence has subsided. Last night was the first night without the curfew that was imposed as I response to the violence, and the city streets were normal, the city streets were quiet, and now people are talking about reform in the wake of the shooting of the 19-year-old unarmed African-American male, which set off all of the confrontation. It was over a week ago. And right now, the city council is having a hearing to decide on the reform over the police department, which would change the city charter. This is live picture, by the way would change the city charter to allow the police chief to be chosen from outside of the Cincinnati police department. Right now, the requirement is he must come through the ranks. In any case, that's the reason for this hearing, but it's really been a long discussion about the issues that are the hostilities that exist between the police department and the African-American community, including the plight of African-American men who say that they live in consistent danger.
[Unidentified Male:] We feel that, you know what I am saying, we are tired of just, you know what I am saying, getting harassed for no reason at all. We want to be treated like you all are getting treated. We want love in your communities. We want everyone to be able to come together. We are tired of all the pain.
[Franken:] Now, recurring subject was the incident that followed the burial of the young man on Saturday in which police officers left their cars and fired bean bag pellets from their shotguns into the crowd. Any number of people said that they did this without provocation, and there were a lot of a large number of witnesses.
[Unidentified Female:] I was assembled peacefully after Timothy Thomas' funeral when an 11-year-old girl and a 7-year-old girl were shot with bean bag bullets. Don't tell me that those two girls also had guns. Don't tell me we weren't peacefully assembled. Don't tell the police that police actions have been to serve us. This is very, very wrong.
[Franken:] Now, there are any number of investigations that are under way into this incident. Among them, the FBI investigation to see if, in fact, the police acted in an inappropriate way. They have not been taken off the streets. The investigations are far and wide. There is a grand jury investigation of the shooting of the 19-year-old young man. There are federal investigations into the conduct of the Cincinnati police department. There is a lawsuit that has been filed, charging racial profiling, that was the lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union. It has now been joined by the NAACP Judy.
[Woodruff:] Bob, which of all of these investigations takes precedence, the ones at the federal level, or all in there in there with equal running, or what?
[Franken:] Well, they all have their own purpose. The federal investigation, of course, would look at other among other things, at civil rights violations. There is the possibility that the Justice Department could decide that the Cincinnati police department needed to be taken over, at least have some of its operations taken over. The grand jury investigation into the shooting is certainly a priority for that police officer, because he faces the possibility if there is an adverse finding that he could be charged criminally.
[Woodruff:] All right. Bob Franken, reporting from Cincinnati. Now, we turn to the Bush administration and its environmental policies. After weeks of being attacked by Democrats and environmental advocates, the president appears to be trying a different tack. Here is our senior White House correspondent John King John.
[John King, Cnn Senior White House Correspondent:] Well, Judy, in the announcement here today at the White House that is significant both from the substantive standpoint and from the political standpoint, the EPA administrator, Christie Whitman, brought into the White House briefing room this afternoon to announce that the administration was allowing to stay in place regulations issued in the final hours of the Clinton administration that significantly reduced the levels of lead that industries are allowed to put out into the environment without reporting it to the government. Now, many small business organizations had hoped the Bush administration would overturn these regulations. Of course, the administration has been criticized for overturning other Clinton administration regulations: arsenic in drinking water for one, some rules against minors that the Clinton administration put in place trying to reduce levels. The Bush administration overturned those. Still, Secretary Whitman and the White House insisting today she was not here for political reasons, and the secretary saying that the Bush administration would not have been put into this predicament of having to review so many Clinton administration regulations, if the former president hadn't waited until the final days in office to issue all of those rules.
[Christie Whitman, Epa Administrator:] We have been undertaking an appropriate review of a number of the things that the previous administration couldn't get done in eight years. And now, we are taking steps to get them done, to make sure they happen. And what we want to make very clear to the American people is that this administration, this president, cares about these issues, and on a case-by-case basis as we move forward, as we look at them, as we analyze them, we are going to make what we feel are the appropriate decisions.
[King:] Now, despite the public denials from the White House and from Administrator Whitman, privately senior administration officials acknowledging this is part of the effort by the White House to rehabilitate the president's image on the environment. He has been widely criticized by major environmental groups, and just today, a new television advertising campaign launched by a dozen such groups in key states around the country. [Begin Video Clip, "environmental Anti-bush Ad"]
[Narrator:] President Bush is already active to ignore global warming pollution, weaken arsenic standards in drinking water and open national forest to new logging, all to help his coal, oil, mining and logging contributors. Send President Bush a message. Let's move forward, not backward, and save our environment.
[King:] Now, the administration insists that criticism is unfair and that on balance, the president's record is pretty good whether it comes to the environment. But again, Administrator Whitman here today for a clear reason. The White House has made a political calculation that they're not doing a good enough selling the president's agenda when it comes to the environment. They acknowledge it's an issue very important across the country, especially to women in suburban swing districts Judy.
[Woodruff:] John, the White House had to know that some of their early actions would bring on criticism. Why now have they decided that this criticism is so damaging for them?
[King:] Privately, they concede they were caught flat-footed, the political steps. So much emphasis put on selling the president's tax cutting agenda and his education agenda, even the faith-based administration in the early days of the administration, that they had not thought it through that if they were going to roll back some of those Clinton administration regulations and they make the case that those regulations go too far that they should have sprinkled in with those announcements of the retreat from the Clinton administration some of the announcements like yesterday, when they left in place wetlands protection, like today's announcement: that they could have balanced their announcements somewhat better. That's what they're trying to do now. They acknowledge and they admit that this a bit of a rehabilitation effort.
[Woodruff:] So are they learning a lesson, you might say, John, from this?
[King:] Well, I think they learned a lesson that they could perhaps better coordinate their announcements in the early days of the administration. But they also say, look, the No. 1 priority here is the tax cut and the budget agenda and the spending agenda. And that was where their emphasis had to be placed. Look what we went through with a 5050 Senate. They had a difficult fight there. They did need to dedicate significant resources to it, and they still are, including the president's travel tomorrow and in the week ahead. But they do acknowledge they could have done a better job here, trying to strike a better balance and perhaps reaching out more to those environmental groups that are now being so critical of the new administration.
[Woodruff:] All right, John King at the White House, thanks. Well, speaking of priorities, while others focus on his environmental policies, President Bush says he would prefer to keep the spotlight for now on his proposed tax cut. While pitching the plan yesterday, Mr. Bush said he may have picked up the support of another Senate Democrat.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] I've learned that the people can make a big difference in a lot of debates, particularly the tax relief debate. We're making some pretty good progress. I saw a good, good Democratic senator out of Georgia the other day. Max Cleland said that he is interested, and when he comes back, interested in supporting the $1.6 trillion plan. I think that's what he said. It certainly sounded like it to me.
[Woodruff:] Well, what did Senator Cleland mean? Senator Max Cleland joins us now from Augusta, Georgia to answer that question and to talk about his newly launched bid for re-election. Senator Cleland, did the president understand you correctly that you're going to be with him on this tax cut?
[Sen. Max Cleland , Georgia:] Well, I'm on board with 64 other senators to support, and did support, a $1.2 trillion tax cut that included an $85 billion up-front economic stimulus package that rolls the taxes back and actually is retroactive to 1 January of this year. I think that's a healthy bite for us to take this year. I have indicated that we should maybe look at the full 1.67 tax cut that the president is talking about next year if we need a continued economic stimulus for our economy.
[Woodruff:] Where do you think the president got the idea that you were willing to support him for that much right now?
[Cleland:] Well, I wrote an op-ed piece for "The Atlanta Constitution" about a week ago when I voted for the $1.2 trillion tax cut as part of the centrist coalition. And there were 65 of us: 50 Republicans and 15 Democrats that supported that position. I indicated that I was willing to look another look at this next year to see if we needed to go the full point 1.67 trillion. I think we still ought to keep our options open. My problem is with a sinking economy, we can't bite off too much too soon.
[Woodruff:] Well, what do you think, senator, are the economic conditions that have to be there before you and others would be willing to support a tax cut the size the president wants?
[Cleland:] Well, you know, it's interesting: One of the things you want to do, if the economy is still sinking, is to continue to cut taxes. I just think that right now we do have a surplus, we don't want to get out of our surplus, we want to stay in a surplus situation, and we don't want to bite off too much too soon. That's why I supported the centrist plan that had 65 votes in the Senate.
[Woodruff:] All right. Well, just to be clear then, senator, as of right now, you would not support a tax cut for 10 years, starting now, that would be of the level of the president is asking, just to be clear?
[Cleland:] That is that is correct. I am part of a centralist coalition, a bipartisan centralist coalition that voted 65 votes in the Senate, very bipartisan, and we said that the middle road was the best road: 1.2 trillion now, which includes reform of the inheritance tax, the death tax, and reform of the marriage penalty. I think that's a good tax package.
[Woodruff:] Senator, some people are surprised that you're announcing your decision to run for re-election a whole year-and-a- half away from the time of election day. Is it because President Bush did so well in in your state of Georgia last November?
[Cleland:] No, it's because I would like to do well in November 2002. I mean, that's why I'm running. I love the Senate, I want to stay there, I want to make sure everybody in Georgia knows that. And we're going all out. We're going over some 10 cities in about seven days here in Georgia. Today, we're in Augusta. Tomorrow, we'll be in Macon and Columbus and other cities. So I want everybody to understand I'm running, I'm in this race to win.
[Woodruff:] The conservative business group called the Club for Growth is is already targeting you, not only talking about the president's tax cut, but about other issues. Is this the sort of thing that makes your nights sleepless?
[Cleland:] I don't have sleepless nights.
[Woodruff:] Senator, the Senate, as we all know, 5050 right now: 50 Republicans, 50 Democrats. Are the Republicans going to come after you and any other Democrats who are up next year who they think they might have a chance to beat with greater intensity than usual because the Senate is split right down the middle?
[Cleland:] Well, I've been a target for a long time, and the South is a very competitive region of our country. Georgia is a very strong two-party state. I'm sure there will be an able opponent on the other side. And I understand that the Republicans have targeted me, but that's OK. I'm targeting to win. I'm targeting to represent Georgians in Washington, not Washington in Georgia. I think Georgia voters are moderate, they're split-ticket, and they vote for the person, not so much the party.
[Woodruff:] You're fellow Democratic senator, Zell Miller, was one of the only Democrats, very few Democrats, to support the president's tax cut in its full size, 1.6 trillion. Does that make it any harder on you, does that make it any harder on you in terms of what you can do?
[Cleland:] Well, he started out at that level, but he wound up voting with the rest of us, 64, the rest of us, at the 1.2 level. You know, there were 15 Democrats, and he was one of them. He was part of the centralist effort to make sure we didn't bite off more than we can chew. I think that's the key. I'm open to considering further tax cuts next year as we see how the economy goes.
[Woodruff:] All right, with Senator Max Cleland, we thank you very much for joining us on
[Inside Politics. Cleland:] Thank you.
[Woodruff:] Thank you. Good to see you.
[Cleland:] You, too.
[Woodruff:] There's much more ahead on INSIDE POLITICS, including a discussion on the Mississippi flag vote. We'll hear from state residents for and against a change, right after the break. Also: new video of a Chinese pilot intercepting a U.S. flight up close and personal. We'll preview tomorrow's talks between the U.S. and China over the U.S. surveillance plane incident. And the latest on the escalating violence in the Middle East. Secretary of State Powell calls on both sides to exercise restraint. This is INSIDE POLITICS.

[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Some Cabinet appointees have had an easier time than others, though. CNN's Bob Franken joins us from Capitol Hill with a look at how the hearings have been going. Hi, Bob.
[Bob Franken, Cnn Correspondent:] Good morning. And, of course, by that, you probably mean Colin Powell, who had the cakewalk that everybody thought he would have. John Ashcroft, of course, is having nothing of the sort. The hearings have now gone into a fourth day. They just didn't get through with the witnesses. We heard yesterday from the main witness for the opponents of Ashcroft, that was Missouri State Supreme Court Judge Ronnie White, complaining about the fact that Ashcroft so badly misrepresented his record when he was up to be a U.S. federal judge and was subsequently defeated in the Senate. Those hearings are still going on. It does appear that Ashcroft has the votes to be confirmed, even though Senator Edward Kennedy is now talking about filibustering that nomination when it gets to the Senate floor, which would require more votes. The intrigue never stops. And, of course, the Gale Norton hearing we know all about. She is the designate to head the Interior Department, much to the consternation of the environmentalists. Tommy Thompson, governor of Wisconsin, who is somewhat controversial for some of his views among social liberals. He is up to head the Health and Human Services Department, which administers so many of the nation's programs. Still undergoing hearings. And as you pointed out, Mitch Daniels, he is somebody who is well known in town, somebody who is considered very adept at handling budget matters, which is exactly what he would do as the head of the Office of Management and Budget. So it's quite a busy day here. It's a day that is, of course, also dedicated to all the pre-inauguration festivities, but it is also a day of business. There will actually be tomorrow, Inauguration Day, a vote some of these Senate nominations, by the way, Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld, for example. So things are just moving right along while the pomp and ceremony swirls around us.
[Carol Lin, Cnn Anchor:] Well, Bob, as you mentioned, Gale Norton faces another round of questioning today.

[Greta Van Susteren, Co-host:] Today on
[Burden Of Proof:] Lawmakers in Washington are putting a magnifying glass on Ford and Firestone. This week, Ford CEO Jacques Nasser sent a letter to Capitol Hill clarifying his earlier testimony about tests conducted on recalled tires.
[Rep. W.j. Tauzin , Louisiana:] Neither Firestone nor Ford tested Ford Explorers with Firestone tires subject to this recall in high-speed tests at 26 miles per square inch. While testing occurred, it occurred on other vehicles and very often in other types of conditions.
[Rep. Edward Markey , Massachusetts:] There should be a grade which every one of these vehicles, in combination with a particular set of tires, has been given, because, in fact, that's why people buy these vehicles: to protect their families.
[Rep. Fred Upton , Michigan:] I don't believe that we will, today, find out precisely what was causing those defects. We may never learn the answers, in fact. But I'll tell you one thing: There was something rotten in Decatur.
[Announcer:] This is BURDEN OF PROOF, with Roger Cossack and Greta Van Susteren.
[Van Susteren:] Hello and welcome to BURDEN OF PROOF. Roger is off today. Today on Capitol Hill, two House subcommittees are holding hearings in the massive recall of more than 6 million Firestone tires. The tires are commonly found on Ford Explorer vehicles. On Tuesday, Ford CEO Jacques Nasser sent a letter to the chairmen of the two subcommittees, clarifying his previous testimony on Capitol Hill. Nasser says Ford, not Firestone, conducted the high-speed tests on the tires at its training grounds in Arizona. Yesterday, Ford officials said the tests were not actually conducted on Explorers but on what is called a "mule," a vehicle designed to emulate an Explorer.
[Tauzin:] First of all, we have received a letter from Jacques Nasser of the Ford Motor Company correcting his sworn testimony that was presented to us at our last hearing. Contrary to his testimony, Ford, not Firestone, he now says, performed high-speed testing on tires at 26 pounds per square inch at the Arizona Proving Grounds. So that Mr. Nasser's written letter now confirms that Ford did not ask Firestone to do testing.
[Van Susteren:] Joining us today from Los Angeles is product liability lawyer Bart Williams. And in Boston, we're joined by former federal prosecutor Dan Small. Here in Washington, Sam Potolicchio, Joan Claybrook of Public Citizen, and Luis Gonzalez. And in our back row, Andrew Kilpatrick and Rachel Scolnic. And also joining us here in Washington is CNN correspondent Carl Rochelle. Carl, first to you. What is going on on Capitol Hill today about these recalled tires?
[Carl Rochelle, Cnn Correspondent:] Greta, the hearing is going on right now, still going on, started about 9:00 this morning. You heard a little bit of it in the testimony that you heard from Chairman Tauzin of the subcommittee. He wants to know why Ford didn't test those tires at 26 pounds per square inch of pressure on the Ford Explorer. Now, Ford explained to them that they tested it on a test vehicle. They call it a "mule," but it's a test bed that mimics a Ford Explorer. They said it's actually even better because it's a little heavier and they get a little more duress, and that's why they tested it that way. Tauzin is not satisfied with that. He says it should have been done on a Ford Explorer and he feels like he was misled when they were told.
[Van Susteren:] All right, let me stop you right there about the issue, about testing on a "mule." Joan, does it make a difference if the testing is done on a "mule" than an actual Explorer?
[Joan Claybrook, Public Citizen:] I think it's far better to test it on an actual Explorer. And one of the provisions that was in the original McCain bill that was introduced the other day has been knocked out by the auto industry which requires testing before they can certify compliance with the standards.
[Van Susteren:] But what is a "mule"? I mean, why wouldn't they test on the real Explorer. I don't understand the wisdom of testing on a "mule" versus an Explorer.
[Claybrook:] Well, they like to test on a "mule" because they can do it far in advance of introducing the vehicle in production. But they do do mockups of the production vehicle, hand-made versions of the production vehicle. And I believe that before they certify compliance for safety standards, they should have to test based on the mockup the actual hand-built version of the vehicle.
[Van Susteren:] All right, let me go back to you, Carl. I interrupted you. Can you tell me what else is going on today in terms of the tires?
[Rochelle:] Well, that was one of the two arguments that are out there today. The other argument is Firestone testing. Now, Tauzin and other members of the committee say that Firestone tested tires in 1996 and seven of eight or eight of nine of the tires that were tested at the Decatur plant failed. Now, Firestone said that was a side wall failure and they did a redesign and everything was OK. But Tauzin says, if you had a failure with the tire, if you had a problem with the tire, then you should have issued a recall then. He wants to know why they didn't do that, why the testing is not real-life.. And, also, NHTSA has come under question, too, for using a 30- year-old standard to test the tires. Thirty years ago, steel-belted radials were just coming into the very beginning of use. Most of the tires are the old bias-belted tires and members want to know why NHTSA hasn't update its testing standards in 30 years, Greta. So that's what they're doing up there right now.
[Van Susteren:] All right, Joan, let me talk about this failure rate. I read this morning that 13.5 percent failure rate on 229 tires, that was what happened during their testing. Is there an acceptable rate of failure? I mean, what does NHTSA set standards where upon you can have a 5 percent failure rate or a 2 percent? I mean, explain this 13.5. Is that unacceptable for standards?
[Claybrook:] I think it's unacceptable.
[Van Susteren:] Well, what about does the government have standards? You may think it's unacceptable, but do we have standards?
[Claybrook:] The government standard is an absolute standard. You cannot fail the government standard. Now, the standard is very out of date. But whatever government standard there is, you have to comply with every piece and part of that.
[Van Susteren:] But doesn't that require perfection, and isn't that a little bit unrealistic? I mean, obviously we would love to achieve perfection in every product we put out there for the consumer, and something that could be life-threatening. But isn't a zero percent failure rate unrealistic?
[Claybrook:] Well, it's a minimum standard, it's not a maximum standard. And often the companies have their own higher standards to which they test. And that's one of the confusing things to the public. The government standard is a minimum test. No one should be below that test.
[Van Susteren:] All right, Carl, there is some legislation that Sen. McCain was interested in yesterday. Can you tell us what that was?
[Rochelle:] Commerce Committee reported out legislation yesterday requiring the companies that would require the companies if, of course, passed by the full Congress, to tell everything they know about any problems that come up with tires in the testing, anything that they've found, whether in the United States or in other countries. And they have assessed criminal and civil penalties for failure to do so. The House is probably going to do about the same thing. They say they'll get it done by some time later this week, we think. But McCain's committee has already reported this legislation out and looking for the House to catch up with them. So they're moving forward on it, Greta.
[Van Susteren:] Dan, let me go to you in Boston. Would criminal penalties, do you think, enhance the consumer issue about getting companies to report when they discover a defect in a product, or does it discourage it?
[Dan Small, Former Federal Prosecutor:] I think it would enhance it. I think that the problem is companies and executives every day are making these decisions balancing profits against lives, and they've got to know that there's more at stake than money and PR. They've got to know that there is a price to pay if those decisions go this far awry.
[Van Susteren:] All right, I'm going to take us now to the United States district courthouse in Washington, D.C. We have a developing story there. We have a man named Klayman who has filed a lawsuit on behalf of Kathleen Willey against the United States president, his wife, and the White House and others. Let's listen. Officials at Ford Motor Company and BridgestoneFirestone are facing new inquiries from two congressional subcommittees today. New evidence indicates that problems with now-recalled tires were detected as early as four years ago. So far, the tires have been linked to 101 traffic deaths in the United States. Let's go to California to Bart Williams. Bart, let's talk hypothetically, since the facts are, at least from my perspective, I think they're a little bit they're not determined yet. But when can a corporation and its chief executives be held criminally responsible for a product that may have caused harm?
[Bart Williams, Product Liability Attorney:] Well, the first point, I think, it's important to make is that, in the United States it's unusual, as compared with other countries, for that a corporation can be held criminally liable as opposed to individuals. In Mexico, for example, you can't hold a corporation criminally liable for something; so that's something that's relatively unique to the United States that bears pointing out. But a corporation can be held liable where the conduct of the individuals who make up that corporation the employees of the corporation, people who are high enough in the corporation to bind the corporation take part in activity that meets the criminal standards, meets the elements of a particular crime.
[Van Susteren:] Dan, when does a corporation have to run scared, when do its chief executives have to worry, what do you think the point is?
[Small:] Well, it's a classic question: What did the president know and when did he know it? At what point did they know that they were putting a defective product on the road that was, foreseeably, going to kill people; and that's the manslaughter, the old reckless endangerment, very well- established standard. If you drive drunk and you kill somebody, you didn't intend to kill that person, but you acted recklessly and it was foreseeable that someone would be hurt. What's the difference if you knowingly put a defective tire on that car and send it out on the highways?
[Van Susteren:] Bart, do you have to have a smoking gun, do you have to have a memo that says, essentially, I know this is going to happen, but let's hide this because it will cost us too much money if we tell anybody?
[Williams:] Well, you don't have to have that type of evidence. As a former prosecutor, a federal prosecutor, I can say that it sure helps if you have that kind of information. But, in my view, it does help to try to wait until you have that kind of evidence that demonstrates real criminal intent...
[Van Susteren:] Is it, though, Bart, is it actual knowledge or is it, you should have known? I mean, let's say that you have a lot of statistics coming in which shows that you've got a serious problem, but you just decide to look the other way. You don't really know, but, boy, I tell you, something certainly smells funny. Is that enough for criminal responsibility?
[Williams:] Well, no. The fact that something merely smells funny is not enough to establish criminal liability; which is one of the reasons why I think, in this particular case, it makes sense to let the civil process go forward, let these congressional hearings go forward, see what evidence develops, before you hear the healing cry for a criminal investigation. If there are such documents or other pieces of evidence, believe me, they'll come out in this civil investigation, and then I think it would be appropriate to go criminal.
[Van Susteren:] And I emphasize I'm speaking hypothetically; I don't know. But, Joan, I imagine you want to get in on this topic. Where do we draw the line?
[Claybrook:] Well, I think that, if a corporate official ratifies the actions of someone below, then the corporate official can be held liable, as well as if they knowingly did something themselves, if they knowingly ratified it as opposed to signing off and saying...
[Van Susteren:] How about looking the other way ignoring? Is that a ratification, in your mind?
[Claybrook:] Well, they don't really I don't think that is what happens. What happens is, they have safety review committees in these big corporations. If a problem emerges, they're going to be informed about it. They get lawsuits the standard at the Consumer Product Safety Commission is: You get three lawsuits, you've got to let the government know of the same make, model, alleged defect. So they have reasons to know from consumer complaints, from lawsuits, from their own testing before it went into production, from information they get from dealers. There's a huge array of information that comes into these corporations, and if they wait, as they did here, for 10 years since this vehicle and tire combination were first sold, that is a pretty bad thing. And then, what they did in this case, a recall abroad before they did the United States, they've certainly known for the last year; and so I think that there's no question they knew. But the problem is that, under the auto safety law, there's no criminal liability spelled out if they refused to recall or delayed recall. So it would have to be today, for this case, it would have to be under the RICO statute, but Congress is putting criminal penalties into the bills that they're considering, the auto industries trying to knock them out.
[Van Susteren:] All right, we're going to take a break. Up next, Ford and Firestone are fighting to keep documents in a civil lawsuit sealed, but should the information be released for the good of consumers? Stay with us. [Begin Q&a;]
[Q:] Why has the Miss America Pageant sued Philadelphia radio talk show host Howard Eskin?
[A:] Eskin is being sued for slander. The suit alleges that comments Eskin made about contest being fixed could hurt the pageant's ability to raise scholarship money. [END Q&A;]
[Van Susteren:] Welcome back to BURDEN OF PROOF. We're talking about Firestone tires and the hearings on Capitol Hill. Dan, let me go to you. Oftentimes, when lawyers settle civil lawsuits, one of the things they do is, they ask the court to seal the documents, so the consumers never hear about the problems. Why do lawyers do that Dan?
[Small:] Well, both sides have an interest in having the case go behind them. The company doesn't want someone else coming along and basically taking advantage of all of the discovery that's happened in the in the earlier case. So, it's fairly common to have a confidentiality agreement as part of the settlement.
[Van Susteren:] And, is it not true, Dan, I mean, let's say that you are suing an auto someone who makes cars and is it not is it not true that oftentimes they say, we will pay, you know, $500,000, but if you agree to have it sealed we will think about make it $600,000, and the lawyer then has the obligation to the client.
[Small:] Absolutely, and if I'm representing a victim and I'm trying to get money for the victim, my interest I don't care what is going to happen to the next person as much.
[Van Susteren:] How can you not care what happens to the next person? What if you know there's a bad product? And, you've been part of this. You've hidden the documents because you squeezed more money out of the company for your client. Don't you feel bad about that?
[Small:] That's the problem. Your job, as a lawyer, is to represent the individual and get the best result for that individual, and there are cases where it's you walk a very difficult line trying to figure out what is your obligation to your client and what is your obligation to society. And, here particularly where the building blocks -and I have to disagree with Bart cases are built circumstantially, very often, and the building blocks are going to be each one of these deaths and what happened and who knew what.
[Van Susteren:] Bart, what about this business about I call it hiding documents, although I must confess I've been I've been a party to this sealing business myself when I practiced law. What about a corporations pushing to have document sealed so the rest of us never hear about the problems? Do you have a problem with that?
[Williams:] Well, it depends on the circumstances. Sometimes I do have a problem with it. What often happens, though, is that the corporation has to articulate some sort of a reason why the documents need to be sealed, some proprietary information, that type of thing.
[Van Susteren:] Bart, when both sides agree to it, you can just skip the judge, can't you? If both sides agree, look, we're going to settle this case and part of the settlement agreement is, look, we're going to ask that these records be sealed or withdrawn from the court record, or whatever it is. I mean, lawyers do this without the judge, do they not?
[Williams:] Well, actually, there are two different things you are talking about. Actually, during litigation, the judge has to agree to it, even if the parties would stipulate to it. For purposes of a settlement, though, after a case is being disposed of, you are quite right. The parties can decide between themselves that they are going to be confidential, things should be kept confidential, and that happens quite often.
[Van Susteren:] Joan, in the 40 seconds or so we have left, I do it I did it all the time practicing law. We all stand behind it. What does the government
[Claybrook:] I think it is unethical...
[Van Susteren:] As a lawyer?
[Claybrook:] Yes, I think the bar association ought to say that the corporation can't ask for...
[Van Susteren:] Wait a second, the court says represent your client as effectively, it doesn't say represent the rest of consumers.
[Claybrrok:] No, but I think that when health and safety, critical health and safety information is available, I think the Bar Association ought to say lawyers cannot ask for protective orders or gag orders because it is a public policy issue and the the corporation is the one who puts the plaintiff's attorney in the awkward position. They have to represent their client. I don't think the corporation should be allowed to ask for secrecy of non-trade, non-commercial information that effects the health and safety of the American public.
[Van Susteren:] Dan, unethical?
[Small:] Well, I agree with Joan. I don't think it is unethical. Now, it's required, now, to represent your client. But, it would be wonderful if a corporation was prohibited from asking for it, and then I wouldn't be in the position having to decide on behalf of the victim.
[Van Susteren:] But, when they dangle that money out in front of your client, Dan, what are you going to say? Listen, client, accept the less. This is more ethical. Forget the other $100,000 to pay for your starving children at home.
[Small:] If there is no clear bar to doing it that way, you have to, as a lawyer, represent your client vigorously. And, your client is that victim. It is not all other possible or future victims, that's the problem.
[Claybrook:] But, if there is a bar...
[Van Susteren:] And, Joan, I'm sorry. I have to cut you off because that's all the time we have for today. Thanks to our guests and thank you for watching. Today on "TALKBACK LIVE," 135,000 actors are walking the picket line. Weigh-in with your questions for today's guest, Richard Dreyfuss. That's at 3:00 p.m. Eastern time, noon Pacific. And tonight, on "NEWSSTAND," tune in to my report on the uranium workers at a Paducah, Kentucky nuclear plant. They made the fuel for the nation's nuclear bombs and now they claim they are suffering from illnesses caused by high levels of radiation. How will Congress compensate them? That's at tonight at 10:00 p.m. Eastern time, 7:00 Pacific. And, of course, we will be back tomorrow with another edition of BURDEN OF PROOF. We will see you then.

[Aaron Brown, Cnn Correspondent:] The world, of course, has been watching all of this unfold as you have, and has been reacting to this as you have. Christiane Amanpour joins us now from London. She has been watching the world react. Christiane, good evening.
[Christiane Amanpour, Cnn Correspondent:] Good evening, Aaron. Well, all day, really, people have been describing this as really a day that will live in infamy. The shock is growing. And it is a profound sense of shock. And really, people and nations across the world have been shaken to the very core, that if the once impregnable fortress, America, can be attacked in this unbelievably appalling manner, they say, then which nation is safe? Now in an unprecedented act, NATO has met today and invoked a Cold War-era treaty clause that says, essentially, when one member is attacked, all measures are attacked. Therefore, NATO saying in essence, that should the United States decide that it needs to take a military response, NATO will stand full square behind the United States and help it militarily or politically. Now amongst the United States allies around the world, particularly here in Britain, outpourings of sympathy and solidarity. People here really believing that the momentum is gathering for some kind of retaliation, some kind of attempt to, as the British Prime Minister says, defeat and eradicate these terrorists. Leaders here saying that while cool heads should prevail, while leaders should make sure that they do not act under impulse, that they should be cool. They should neither ignore the scale and the magnitude of what has happened, not just in the United States but to the entire civilized world.
[Tony Blair, Prime Minister Of England:] We all agreed that this attack is an attack not only on America, but on the free and Democratic world. It demands our complete and united condemnation, a determination to bring those responsible to justice.
[Amanpour:] European bosses and brokers suspended trading for a minute to show respect for the dead. European leaders have called emergency security meetings, and for the first time in its history, NATO has invoked its cold war treaty that provides for all members to come to the defense of any one of its members under attack.
[Unidentified Male:] We stand firm, we stand committed. Thank you very much.
[Amanpour:] One after the other, world leaders stood up in sympathy and solidarity. President Vladimir Putin saying Russia saying that Russia will observe a moment of silence on Thursday. German Chancellor Gerhardt Schroeder says that Germany stands with America and everyone who is for peace and freedom around the world. The same messages came from all European capitals, from Japanese leaders and the Chinese president as well. There were sour notes sounded too. Some people in some countries said the catastrophe should be a warning to the United States. "To have so many people die, though it's unreasonable, is a warning to Bush and his administration not to make policies that bully other countries," says this Chinese taxi driver. Back in Britain, which is one of America's strongest and closest allies, Prince Charles came to offer condolences to the United States Ambassador, mindful that many Britains working in New York are likely to be among the victims.
[General Wesley Clark, Fmr. Nato Supreme Commander:] Well,this is the essential political action taken by NATO members acting together to say they stand with, and will stand with the United States in taking whatever actions might become necessary to deal with this attack on the United States. So it is the precondition that will make everything else possible.
[Amanpour:] Is this important in the speed with which it was done? I mean, you remember from building the coalition for Kosovo that it took a long time, relatively, to do so. Is this an important timeline that we see here?
[Clark:] I think the timeline is highly significant. Of course, this is in response to an attack on a NATO Member State. It's the first time, to my knowledge, that article 5 has ever been invoked. It's the first time we have had an attack on a NATO member state. And I think that NATO scholars and Diplomats from previous eras would never have suspected that that state that would be attacked first would be the United States. So, I think this is a very, very clear signal to those around the world, that the United States is supported completely by its NATO allies and I think that is a very powerful weapon to have in our arsenal.
[Amanpour:] General Clark, this is an unprecedented attack, not just against U.S. interests and territory, but against any interest that we have seen in recorded memory. There has not been this kind of act of terrorism that anybody I talked to can remember. Does the United States have to take military action to not in revenge, but to deter any further kind of terrorism such as this?
[Clark:] Well, the first thing United States has to do is determine precisely what its objectives are. As we heard the president articulate over the last couple of days, it seems pretty clear that the objectives are beyond revenge, they are certainly beyond retaliation. He wants and he has directed, it seems, that we are going to go after and destroy these terrorist organizations, and we will hold any states that supported them equally responsible. So this is, thus far, probably the most sweeping interpretation of the objectives. And what it means is that we are in for a relatively long campaign. We have seen some of the opening moves here by the United States today. We have seen the FBI extraordinarily active and very, very effective by first reports. We have had today, the word from Attorney General Ashcroft, and FBI Director about their activities and what they found in the Boston area, for example. And they are following up leads in Florida and presumably other nations are right now taking the same or similar activities either in response to this or other chains of evidence that might be available. So the first step is to gather the information and follow it through and take this organization and the people out. And Christiane, if I could just say, there might well be a military strike or whatever is associated with this, but let's remember that the target here these are not buildings that we are after, these are the people that masterminded this and all of their supporters. And so, simply striking in revenge at an isolated training camp, or whatever, that's not likely to be the objective here at this time, not now.
[Amanpour:] So what is, General Clark? We are talking about a faceless, maybe nameless terrorist organization potentially, if they decide that it is Osama bin Laden, this is an organization apparently that has successfully morphed into sort of semi-autonomous operating cells around the world. Can you tell us how you take these people out?
[Clark:] Well I think we are seeing the first evidence of that right now by the action of the FBI and the local police in Boston. I think you take them out person by person, face by face. It is an organization with faces and they can be identified and removed.
[Amanpour:] General, we have to go. We have some breaking news that Atlanta is making us aware of Bill. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] Let's get more reactions to this wave of deadly Middle East violence and some perspective on the prospects for peace in this highly charged atmosphere. We are joined now from New York by Hassan Abdel Rahman. He's chief PLO representative to the United Nations. Mr. Rahman, good to have you join us again. Thank you very much.
[Hassan Abdel Rahman, Chief Plo Rep. To U.n:] Thank you.
[Kelley:] Can you tell us any more about the arrests that we're hearing about now, 50 in custody, 150 more by Monday morning that Mr. Arafat is talking about?
[Rahman:] Well, the Palestinian Authority is taking a very unprecedented drastic measures to bring the perpetrators of those tragic events in the last two days to justice, and control the violence. But I must reiterate that those measures by themselves are not going to succeed unless there is a change in the behavior of the Israeli army and the Israeli government in the Palestinian territories. If Israel continues its assassination policy of community and political leaders, if it continues its settlement activities in the territories, if it continues the siege of the Palestinian towns and villages, making the life of the Palestinian people impossible this is not going to be conducive toward the kind of environment that is needed for us to succeed in our effort.
[Kelley:] President Bush has said...
[Rahman:] We need Israeli cooperation.
[Kelley:] President Bush has said that no cause justifies the action that has happened. And you talk about life being made impossible, how do you fix that without resorting to violence?
[Rahman:] What I'm saying is, I am not trying to justify. I'm trying here to explain the environment that has been created by Israel over the last 35 years, and in particular in the last 14 months, where more than 1,000 Palestinians were killed. This is not the kind of behavior of Israel that is conducive toward constructive behavior. We are calling on Israel to stop treating the Palestinians as a security issue, because this is not a security issue. This is an issue that has to do with three million people living under foreign military occupation. You cannot enslave three million people for 35 years and not expect them to react. Therefore, we are interested in bringing this cycle of violence to an end...
[Kelley:] And what do you want to do? What are you going to do to help that along?
[Rahman:] We are what the Authority is doing is to arrest those who are responsible. It took the drastic measure of the state of emergency. It declared anyone who would take any action similar to that an outlaw, he and his organization. But we want simple steps from the Israeli side so we can succeed in our effort and go back to the negotiating table. Let me warn here that if Mr. Sharon uses those tragic and horrific events as a pretext for him to implement his agenda in the West Bank and Gaza by increasing Jewish settlements and continuing his aggression against the Palestinians, none of us is going to succeed, neither Mr. Sharon or the Authority, in trying to achieve an end to violence.
[Kelley:] Mr. Rahman, there are those who have wondered out-loud whether or not Chairman Arafat has the power to control all of the groups. Some say that's impossible. You could never have control over everyone. But can he get things under control and stop the violence so that you can get back to the negotiating table?
[Rahman:] In order to achieve that, Yasser Arafat is the elected leader of the Palestinian people. He has prestige and he has power. There are two difficulties that he is facing. One is logistical, because remember that the Palestinian territories are under Israeli occupation. The Israeli army is in every single town and village of the West Bank and Gaza, cutting off roads, making it impossible to move the Palestinian security forces from one area to the other. Adding to that that in the last 14 months Israel has targeted the Palestinian police stations and the security apparatus of the Palestinian Authority, thus debilitating the ability of the Palestinian police to carry on its functions. The second is political. Through the practices of Israel, through the aggression committed by the Israeli army and the brutality of the Israeli army in the Palestinian territory, there is a great deal of anger, frustration. Those two issues need to be addressed so Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority can do the job.
[Kelley:] Hassan Abdel Rahman, who is the chief PLO representative to the United States, we're very thankful for your time today. Thanks very much.
[Rahman:] Thank you. Thank you very much.
[Kelley:] And now for Israeli reaction to the bombings and some insight into what's next for the peace process, we have actually confirmed that Prime Minister Sharon has convened an emergency cabinet meeting for tomorrow. Mr. Pinkas, we're glad to have you join us as well. Thanks very much. You are the Israeli Consul General to New York.
[Alon Pinkas, Israeli Consul General To New York:] Yes. Thank you, Donna.
[Kelley:] You just heard Mr. Rahman. He said that, you know, Mr. Arafat has declared a state of emergency. They have these arrests now. They're doing what they can, but they need some reciprocal behavior and a change of behavior from Israel.
[Pinkas:] Yes, well, Mr. Rahman is a habitual liar to the extent that it's just unbelievable.
[Kelley:] What's he lying about?
[Pinkas:] That they I'll tell you exactly in a second, Donna. The day after three suicide bombers murder 25 people, he expects Israeli to reciprocate. He expects Israel to do this. He expects Israel to exercise that, etcetera, etcetera. Now, let me tell you something, Donna. We have submitted to Arafat a list of 114 names which then became a list of 108 suspected terrorists from the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, and some from Mr. Arafat's own Fatah Movement. They have not arrested one of them. So, if this morning Mr. Arafat arrested tens of them, one, he is either lying. Possibility number two, they were all known and their whereabouts have been known to the Palestinian security organs, and the question is, then, why have they not been arrested in the last year?
[Kelley:] Well, if they're working on the arrests now and they've declared a state of emergency, are they trying to get things under control? With the 50 arrests they say they've made now, and 150 by Monday morning?
[Pinkas:] Well, first of all, the term arrest, you have to understand, all your viewers, I think, understand by now, that the term arrest in the United States of America and the term arrest in the Palestinian Authority is not even in the same language, not to mention has the same meaning. Arrest usually means what we call a revolving door hotel arrest. Someone is being locked in his house for several hours, uses the phone, meets people, invites people, goes down, goes out of the apartment, rather, to continue on his business of terrorism. Now, I have not heard that the Palestinian authority did in fact arrest tens of people. And I'm very surprised. This is what I mean when I said that he's lying about. Mr. Abdel Rahman has absolutely no idea about anyone that's being arrested. Now, these suicide, these steps that have been taken in response, supposedly, to the suicide attempt, clarify two things and expose two things. One, that this indeed was an action condoned by the Palestinian Authority in order to subvert and disrupt the mission of General Zinni and Assistant Secretary of State Burns, and that is why the administration and indeed the America public is so angry at the Palestinians. Number two, I think they are just frightened of the repercussions. They have condoned terrorism for a year. This is a culture that manufactures suicide bombers. This is the same culture of anti-Israeli and anti-American sentiments. This is the same political culture that bred Osama bin Laden, and their bluff should be called.
[Kelley:] Mr. Pinkas, you heard Mr. Rahman probably say with the settlements and the incursions and seizing towns and yesterday he said to me that, in an interview, that when people are hungry and jobless and you take their land, they're hard to control. And today he said that the Israelis have made life impossible for the Palestinians.
[Pinkas:] Yes, well, in order to address that, and in order to fix that, and because we think that he has a point in terms of the 35 years of anomaly that exist, we have convened a summit. It was called Camp David last year. It was convened by then-president Bill Clinton. A proposal was being put on the table that would have ended occupation, eliminated the closures, eliminated hunger, found economic solutions, and would have provided the Palestinians with an independent state and full sovereignty. In fact, the Palestinians that have been killed in the last year as a result of Palestinian violence have all been killed in areas that would have been part of the Palestinian state had they said yes at Camp David. But there was one guest at Camp David, Donna, that never showed up and never said yes, and that's Mr. Arafat. And the only thing he knows how to do is to call for an emergency situation after people, who are coming from areas that he controls, being supported by organizations that he controls, perpetrate these acts of terrorism and suicide.
[Kelley:] And as you can image, we try to keep your time equal, so we must leave it there. Alon Pinkas, who is the consul general of Israel to New York, our thanks to you and we appreciate you talking to us today.
[Pinkas:] Thank you, Donna. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] He may not be a household name here in the U.S. but the Italian doctor working with Panos is very well known at home. As CNN's Chris Burns reports this doctor knows plenty of controversy in his own country.
[Chris Burns, Cnn Correspondent:] Like other industrialized countries, Italy is struggling to raise its sagging birthrate. At his clinic here in Rome, Dr. Severino Antinori says he has one solution. He vows to become the first to help sterile men have children by cloning them. He calls it "therapeutic cloning." "We can make humanity happier by producing a child in that way," he says, "a way to continue the species." But in this deeply Catholic nation, Antinori faces searing criticism. Some call the flamboyant doctor a publicity hound seeking fame and fortune by becoming the first to photocopy babies. The Vatican has another word for cloning. They call it "eugenics" creating the perfect human being, as the Nazis tried. "The Nazi attempt was eugenics," he said, "but they didn't have the scientific resources. Today, they can do worse than Hitler did." The Italian order of doctors is even threatening to bar him from practice, but the order says it can't until Antinori actually starts his project. That's not expected until November. Italian law remains unclear though authorities are warning Antinori. "Reproductive cloning is forbidden," he said. "Therapeutic reproduction is deferred, since the results from animal testing have yet to prove we can proceed." Antinori first made an international name for himself in 1994, when he claimed a 62 year-old woman patient of his had a child no law against that either, though it sparked outrage here. Outrage is mixed with apprehension this time, over how cloning could change society and whether it's medically safe. "Science must advance," she said. "but I'm afraid."
[Unidentified Female:] It's against nature. You don't know what the results would be.
[Burns:] Doctors, governments and the church may try to stop him but Antinori vows to forge ahead. He says he will carry out his plan in a remote country or in international waters if necessary. Chris Burns, CNN, Rome.
[Hemmer:] And there are those who believe human cloning could help them. Let's meet two of them tonight. Live with us from Washington are Damaris Bonilla and Scott Camper. They're engaged and medical reasons prevent Damaris from carrying a child. Good evening to both of you, appreciate you taking time with us tonight. Damaris, let's begin with you. How much do you think you understand about the cloning process?
[Damaris Bonilla, Interested In Cloning:] I think what I understand about the cloning process is that I believe you know that this can be an option for people that want to have a hope that want to have a baby.
[Hemmer:] Mm-hmm, and you want to have a baby with your husband soon to be. How do you respond to those who believe it's morally wrong and it's based on the wrong principle? How do you respond to that argument?
[Bonilla:] Well, if it is done with the wrong intention yes, I don't think you know, it should be done for that purpose. You know, but if this can bring some happiness to some couples that today do not believe that they cannot have a baby, I think that this can be an option.
[Hemmer:] Scott, you agree. I'm assuming.
[Scott Camper, Interested In Cloning:] Yes, I agree. I think everybody should have the right to have a child that it their child, you know, that is genetically related to both the parents.
[Hemmer:] What about the problems out there, people worrying about deformities in a child, possibly danger, damage physically to a woman physically carrying that child? How to you respond to those claims?
[Camper:] Well, I think there's dangers in any pregnancy. I just think there's difference types of dangers, and they've had success in primates, like with monkeys so there's only a couple chromosomes difference, so there should be some optimism for success with humans.
[Hemmer:] Damaris, also people watching this program tonight may wonder why not just go in-vitro fertilization? It's been done for years and might be a safer option? Why not pursue that line?
[Bonilla:] Well, I guess because for us, at this time I don't think that will be an option. I think we have kind of tried that option and it didn't work out for us, so that's why we are not saying that the cloning might work but we are hoping that it can work for us.
[Hemmer:] And what about the dangers physically? How do you feel about that?
[Bonilla:] I have to say I'm very nervous.
[Hemmer:] And have you contacted scientists to pursue cloning?
[Bonilla:] We have e-mailed them with a lot of questions. I mean we don't have all the answers but we certainly are looking for, you know, more answers to the matter, and so we are just hoping that they will contact us and that we can discuss it a little further.
[Hemmer:] So, you would like to go through with it if given the option, correct?
[Bonilla:] Yes.
[Hemmer:] Scott, you the same?
[Camper:] Yes, I would. Like I said, our reason for it is not any mad science or anything. Ours is just, we want to have a child that's, you know, genetically related to both of us just like any couple.
[Hemmer:] And how do you feel about having a child that looks just like you at one point?
[Camper:] Well, I mean they can do cloning where they can combine, you know, both sets of DNA, so...
[Hemmer:] One from each parent?
[Camper:] Yes.
[Hemmer:] It was my understanding scientists today, scientists say they can't do that. They can only pick from the male or the female.
[Camper:] Well, they can put different genes inside different cells.
[Hemmer:] And the science is not proven just yet, but I'm wondering, when you talk to relatives, how do they respond to this idea?
[Bonilla:] They are going to think we are crazy but this is only related to Scott and I. And we are the ones who want to go through this.
[Hemmer:] Well come on back and talk to us as you go down the road, Ok?
[Bonilla:] Absolutely.
[Hemmer:] When's the wedding, by the way?
[Bonilla:] Pretty soon.
[Hemmer:] Maybe you can get back to us on that one too. Damaris Bonilla, Scott Camper, live from Washington. Thanks for sharing with us this evening and best of luck. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Shihab Rattansi, Cnn Anchor:] Overseas investment is giving Uruguay hope as it attempts to rebuild its economy. The South American nation suffered two years ago when demand for its agricultural exports dropped in neighboring Argentina and Brazil. Now, Uruguay is working to reduce its dependence on agriculture. But as United Nations Television reports, finding new ways to fuel economic growth in Uruguay is proving to be a job itself.
[Steve Whitehouse, Untv Correspondent:] Walter Guariglia travels for two hours each day to work in downtown Montevideo, Uruguay's capital. He's an attendant at a parking lot. It's the only job Walter can find. Wages are low and it is a struggle to make ends meet.
[Walter Guariglia, Parking Lot Attendant:] I hope to find better work, a descent job, so that I can maintain my family.
[Whitehouse:] Walter's hopes for a higher paid job are echoed throughout Uruguay and indeed many developing countries. But as Uruguay opens its economy in an increasingly globalized world market, foreign imports are replacing local products and layoffs of workers are widespread. Once dependent on agricultural products to generate export income, Uruguay is now increasingly counting on its education system for future growth.
[Louis Romero, Investment Consultant:] The population is well trained. We have a good level of formations, so it's very easy to work high-tech with the population in Uruguay, with the labor force in Uruguay.
[Whitehouse:] The economic downturn in neighboring Argentina and Brazil is adding to Uruguay's woes and it's making the search for economic growth more urgent. Like many countries, Uruguay is therefore seeking foreign investors. It means a considerable change in attitude.
[Sergio Abreu, Ministry Of Industry:] We are having one of the lowest rate in foreign investment in the south, and we need to improve it and all the companies know that we have comparative advantage in terms of market and in terms of some tax exceptions.
[Whitehouse:] Providing incentives is part of the package. The state of San Jose has donated land for an industrial estate. Goodyear, a transnational company, is the first to seize the opportunity to create jobs. Countries have little choice but to make themselves attractive to investors.
[Juan Somavia, Director, General Ilo:] You need to create a environment that is conducive to investment and to the creation of employment.
[Whitehouse:] Rubber soles for footwear will be one of the main products produced by Goodyear. The aim is to not only satisfy the local needs, but to export throughout the region. In a word, it means jobs. To low paid workers like Walter, the factory offers a prospect of a better life.
[Guariglia:] It's a huge initiative, this factory, in terms of providing jobs, for example, for my family and for the people who live in the area.
[Whitehouse:] Scrambling to attract foreign investors is a big ideological turnaround from the era where multinationals were regarded with suspicion. Providing investors with incentives is becoming the name of the game. For the U.N. Television, this report was prepared by Mary Ferrara Steve Whitehouse for the CNN WORLD REPORT.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Well, the markets will not be open today, but we'll have a lot of stuff of interest to watch this week.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Yes, Christine Romans is here with a bit of a preview on this holiday.
[Christine Romans, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi. After Friday's pre-President's Day sale, some people are going to be happy that the markets are not open today, giving them a chance to sort of think about what happened last week and move on to this week. We have a lot of interesting things that will be happening starting on Tuesday. Today the markets are closed, as you know. The week ahead should be pretty interesting, earnings on tap and also some data, specifically that data of the CPI, the consumer price index, on Wednesday. Friday, one of the reasons why the market was was so hurt was because of that producer price index PPI was much stronger than expected. So they'll be closely zeroing in on Wednesday's consumer price index that's for the month of January to see if it continues the same trend. There's also the December trade balance numbers, which can be interesting when you watch the bond market and the currency market as well. So those Wednesday data Wednesday data is really the key on the Street here. Also federal budget for January that one that one also will be much less noticed than the consumer price index. Thursday, we get leading economic indicators for the month of January, sometimes known as the lagging economic indicators, as you know, because we've already seen much of the data that are in those and weekly job, as well. Weekly jobless claims have been more interesting of late because so many people are very curious about just how just how tight the labor market is. And we've been hearing so much about the layoffs going on in the jobs market as well. So that will be a good thing to continue to watch.
[Marchini:] I hear the jobless claims may take on special significance this week because this is also the week that the government does its survey for the overall February unemployment and nonfarm payroll.
[Romans:] Very interesting. Well, you're probably right then: That will be very important to watch as well, because that will give us a better indication of what's going to come in that big, huge report that everyone watches the jobless for.
[Haffenreffer:] Is this likely to be a week in which the markets are pushed around by the economicator, rather than earnings figures coming out?
[Romans:] Well, it depends: Some people are starting about the fact that there were those sort of scary confessionals last week already, and a bit earlier than they would have liked to have seen. So people are going to be on guard for what kind of guidance might be coming out, if any kind of corporate reports that come out this week. We have a pretty full plate of numbers this week to watch, as well. The retailers are going to get under way. We'll talk a little bit more about that in the next hour. But you really have people on the Street concerned. Something interesting, though: The Dow, last week, actually closed slightly higher for the week. The Nasdaq did not. The Dow is now actually slightly higher for the year, and the Nasdaq is not. So there's some interesting rotation continuing to go around. The defensive stocks continue to get a little bit of interest from time to time. The thing to watch at this point is what happens tomorrow, when people come back from the three-day weekend. Is there going to be bargain hunting that comes in? Are people going to say you know what last week, we pushed it down too far too fast, and they start to come back to that whole idea that all the bad news is factored in? We hear that from time to time, and then suddenly we get another warning and then people say oh, no, it's not factored in yet. So will there be bargain hunting when we come back to the markets tomorrow, or will there be continuation of these worries about what corporate America what kind of damage they're going to sustain and for how long?
[Haffenreffer:] Are people still saying, for the most part, the markets in general cannot make a recovery without the Nasdaq?
[Romans:] Absolutely. I'm hearing people don't think that the markets can make a recovery until we start to see numbers that are better from the corporate side of things, not necessarily from the economic data. And as you know, everyone lots of people keep saying the first half of the year is in question, at least the first half of the year. So you know, markets are supposed to look beyond, they're supposed to look ahead, and they're having a really hard time doing that right now.
[Marchini:] They're not getting much guidance, either. When you hear the likes of Dell and others saying we're not going to project beyond the next quarter because we don't have a clue.
[Romans:] Exactly: The buzz word is visibility, you know. Everyone keeps talking about the visibility. When we get visibility back in the earnings, then we'll be able to start to think that it might be the right time to try to find a place to buy in the market. Right now, there's just no visibility.
[Marchini:] All right, thanks, Christine.
[Romans:] Sure.

[Kyra Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] Well, this is the season for football fans to kick back and enjoy the game. There's even a new face on "Monday Night Football." But does Dennis Miller have what it takes to draw more viewers? With us to discuss just that, among other things, Julian Rubinstein, a contributor to the "New York Times" magazine, and former sports reporter for the "Washington Post" and "Sports Illustrated." Hi, Julian.
[Julian Rubinstein, "new York Times" Contributor:] Hi, Kyra. How are you?
[Phillips:] Good. Thanks for being with us.
[Rubinstein:] Thank you.
[Phillips:] All right, let's start with football and do you think it's losing its appeal? I mean when I talk to the sports guys they always say oh, it's the best season yet. But you have a little bit of a different opinion.
[Rubinstein:] Well, relative to some of the other things going on in television today, it's perhaps not as exciting as it used to be. You can't certainly count on a game to be exciting from start to finish like some of the other programs that we're seeing today that, you know, really draw it out and leave you with one big bang at the end of your two hour special. And I think they're starting to feel the effects. They're certainly losing a lot of the young male demographic that they once used to own and this is the demographic that they really take to the bank, at least have in the past.
[Phillips:] OK, you touch on a very interesting point because football, baseball, whatever the sports game used to be where we would look for minute by minute action, we didn't know what was going to happen, now you have "Survivor," "Big Brother," these reality based shows. Is that sort of replacing sports?
[Rubinstein:] Well, it's very interesting, I think, what's going on, and I think all of that definitely is having an effect here. You know, sports used to really be considered the original reality TV, you know, the one formula that never needed reinventing. But today with all this reality out there, it's a lot harder to for the real reality to actually sort of match up against that and, you know, it was interesting, I was one of the few journalists who were out in Pulautiga, where "Survivor" was being filmed, and sitting there watching it being filmed it was, you know, it was, all of us were bored, even the contestants were bored. But you know what? They were able to package and produce and edit the show into, you know, this great beautiful and very suspenseful two hour or one hour show and that you were going to watch until the very end. But on a sports show or a football game or even a basketball game, for that matter, it very well could be over in the first quarter or the first half and why watch till the end? You know, viewers now, they love the highlights but to get them to sit through a whole game isn't so easy anymore.
[Phillips:] OK. So here comes Dennis Miller. What's the game plan with this? Is this going to make a difference, bringing in folks like him?
[Rubinstein:] Well, that's the big question. I mean it really, for ABC, that they certainly hope he's going to make a difference and obviously he's gotten them a lot of press and publicity and attention. You know, realistically he is probably not going to be able to have much more than a couple tenths of a ratings point of a difference and, you know, is that enough? I don't know, especially given that sports are so expensive these days. The difference or the interesting contrast is that we have another league that's going to come out in, debuting in February, put on by NBC and the WWF, this league called the XFL, and unlike the NFL, they are going to be able to do a lot more innovative things because they don't have a commissioner to answer to, for one. They can, they're going to have cameras in the huddles, cameras in the locker rooms, microphones in the huddles, all kinds of things that are really going to enable them to ratchet up the level of entertainment for that program. So unlike what the NFL and "Monday Night Football" face, these guys have all the freedom they want to make the telecast as exciting as possible.
[Phillips:] Julian Rubinstein, no doubt everybody will be watching now. Thanks for joining us this morning.
[Rubinstein:] Thank you.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] We want to bring you the latest now on the investigation. In fact, investigators have uncovered more links tying Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda organization to the attacks of September 11. And our Susan Candiotti is here, she's been tracking it, and she has the latest. Susan, hello.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Daryn. At least four of the suspected hijackers received training at camps in Afghanistan, an intelligence source tell CNN's Justice Department correspondent Kelli Arena. That would establish ties to Osama bin Laden. Source say authorities now believe most of the hijackers have ties to the al Qaeda network. Meantime, an FBI build-up in Germany, as investigator work closely with their counterparts overseas. Sources say there is growing evidence Germany might have been a central meeting place for those masterminding the attack. And in Great Britain, prosecutors rearresting pilot Lofti Raissi. They say he may have trained some of the hijackers. His attorney denies any connection. In Raissi's apartment, missing pages from his flight log. The FBI hopes to extradite Raissi on a separate charge of lying to the Federal Aviation Administration to get a pilot license. Raissi at one time took flight training in Arizona with one of the 19 named hijackers, Hani Hanjour. And in Iowa, another break. The FBI find someone they have been looking for since last week, named Youssef Hmimssa. His photo found during the search of a Michigan apartment linked to another man held on immigration charges.
[Unidentified Female:] It is very significant. It is someone we have been looking for. We didn't know who it was, and we would like to have the opportunity, and we will, to talk with this person and find out exactly who he is, and his name appeared on a false passport. So, we just we have a lot of work ahead of us.
[Candiotti:] Sorting out false identities continues to be a major problem for investigators. The FBI admits they are not sure of the real names of some of those identified in FBI photos as the hijackers. In fact, source say, during that when the case is over, it's possible some of the hijackers' true identities may never be known.
[Kagan:] Well, let's talk about other pieces of the puzzle they are still trying to put together. The money trail, where are they still looking, and what kind of information will it help them tell the story?
[Candiotti:] Well, the trail, as you can imagine, is very involved indeed. The trail goes from Nevada and Florida, for example, all the way to the United Arab Emirates. In some cases, in many cases, the suspected hijackers, sources say, were using debit cards, not credit cards, to try to hide their transactions to pay for some of their expenses. And in fact, near the end, right before the attacks, sources say that the suspects, some of them, were mailing back their leftover money. In fact, in one case, from a Kinko's copying store in Florida, all the way to a so-called money master, a pay master, in the United Arab Emirates.
[Kagan:] It will be interesting to hear a lot more. Susan Candiotti, thank you very much.

[Bill Press, Co-host:] Democrats are falling head over heels in love with George W. Where is the outrage?
[Tucker Carlson, Co-host:] Outrage is out this season. Bill, these days, it's all hugs and rose petals.
[Press:] And hugs and rose petals to all of you. Thank you for joining us. This is THE SPIN ROOM. I'm Bill Press.
[Carlson:] And I'm Tucker Carlson here with Bill Press. This is our love show. We have a great show. We have Donna Brazile, who's campaign manager for Al Gore. Doesn't do a lot of TV, but she's doing THE SPIN ROOM tonight. We're pleased about that.
[Press:] First appearance since the campaign.
[Carlson:] It's love show, as we said. You know the numbers, but we'll repeat them: 1-800-310-4CNN. Join our live, online chat at cnn.com or you can send us an e-mail. Our address is spin@cnn.com.
[Press:] We know some of you have just been absolutely as just stupefied as we have about this love affair this week, all these Democrats rushing down there to kiss George W.'s cheeks or boots whatever. We want to hear what you think about it, whether you thinks it's a good idea, you love all this bipartisanship or you're suspicious or even just angry, like I am.
[Carlson:] Yes, or you're wondering if the new president is so stupid, then why do all the Democrats love him so much.
[Press:] Or how could he be such a charmer. I mean, people fall for this stuff. Get to the bottom of it.
[Carlson:] They've been making pilgrimages, and his latest suitor, you knew it would come to this, is Ted Kennedy from the state of Massachusetts.
[Press:] I know. He sort of started it all off going down to the White House.
[Carlson:] Let's listen to him fawn over the new president, shall we? I can't get enough of it.
[Sen. Edward Kennedy , Massachusetts:] I just commend the president for putting education first on the national agenda. He did so in the course of the campaign, and now he's doing so in Congress, and I think he'll get a very positive response.
[Carlson:] Did you see that? He just pushes George Miller out of the way. No, I love him more. I love him more.
[Press:] Senators always go first. That's what that was all about.
[Carlson:] It was pure enthusiasm.
[Press:] As we debated this earlier on "CROSSFIRE" with Maxine Waters and Ellen Tauscher, and I just would repeat something I said then. I mean, I think Democrats have to remember that we fought this election about something. We fought this election about some differences and once the election is over, you don't just forget the differences and then fawn all over the other guy.
[Carlson:] You know, one person one thing we did learn on "CROSSFIRE" is that one Democrat who is not in love, it turns out, with George W. Bush is Maxine Waters.
[Press:] I think it's safe to say...
[Carlson:] She's not smitten yet. It's going to take a fair amount of charm to get Maxine in the Bush camp.
[Press:] Indeed it will, and our viewers watching "CROSSFIRE" and watching all this this week are, of course, right on top of this. Amy sends in: "Bill and Tucker, thanks for your "CROSSFIRE" show. As a life-long Democrat who has been working most recently for the defeat of Ashcroft as AG, I don't think I can express the way I feel about the betrayal of my party leaders without resorting to obscenities." Amy, I understand. I fell your anger.
[Carlson:] Actually, Bill, I have this Amy mail and let me read the unexcoriated version where Amy says seriously, I'm considering moving to France. where capitulation in the face of right-wing opposition was turned into an art form in 1940. That was striking to me because you know, Democrats, when they get miffed, always promise to move to France but they never do. Make good on your promise, Amy, go.
[Press:] No, I say stay here and fight. And also, just before we meet Donna, here, another one: "Bill, I watched you on "CROSSFIRE" tonight, you and Tucker. I share your frustration, Bill. Everything that came out of your mouth could have come out of my mouth. It seems that you, me and Maxine Waters are only people in the world that know what's going on." What great company.
[Carlson:] And you know, it's not only Democrats who are upset. It's Republicans. Bruce Hardy from Bam, Alabama I wonder if that's a real town Republican writes in: "I truly regret that Mr. Bush is reaching out to people like Maxine Waters. They're not going to reciprocate. They're going to bite his hand off. Well, Bush has pretty quick hands, but this is theory that a lot of Democrats have, that it's the spider and the fly, Democrats being, of course, the spider; Bush the fly.
[Press:] I don't think that's true. We thought it would be good to know what someone very close to Al Gore thinks about seeing all these Democrats who were supporting Al Gore suddenly fawning all over George W. Bush, and who better to ask, Tucker than Mr. Gore's campaign manager...
[Carlson:] No one better to ask.
[Press:] ... Donna Brazile, who joins us tonight in THE SPIN ROOM. Hello, Donna.
[Donna Brazile, Frm. Gore Campaign Manager:] Hey, good evening, guys. How are you guys doing?
[Press:] Great.
[Carlson:] Great. Now before the show, in the interest of full disclosure, we got note from you, Donna Brazile, Bill and Tucker, be nice.
[Brazile:] Be nice. Be gentle.
[Carlson:] We're going to put it right next to our spinning top to remind us.
[Brazile:] Thank you.
[Press:] Donna, let's just put this whole thing in context. We're going to show you a little medley of video, here, OK. You have seen all of these scenes. Maybe not everybody at home has seen them yet. So let's just start. Here's the week with the Democrats. Meeting with elder statesman Democrats. Then meeting with George Miller and Teddy Kennedy. Then Zell Miller, Democrat, comes out in support of the tax bill. Russ Feingold in support of Ashcroft. Joe Lieberman there in support of the faith-based initiatives. Teddy Kennedy is going to a movie at the White House...
[Carlson:] With his son, Patrick.
[Press:] ... and the black caucus meets with the president today at the White House. Donna, I ask you, when you see all of those Democrats down there, you know, what's left for the Democratic Party to do?
[Brazile:] Well, first of all, let me quote a song from Tina Turner, "What's love got to do with it?" This is pure politics. The president has reached out to Democratic leaders across-the-board. He's indicated that he is looking for common ground, and many of our Democratic leaders are reaching back out to him to talk about some of his initiatives and this is the early part of the post-election season. And I expect over the next couple of weeks he'll continue to have a warm welcome and a gracious, you know, city to host him here. But let's see what happens once the budget gets up on Capitol Hill.
[Carlson:] So, is this all calculation? I mean, when you say that love has nothing to do with that, I mean, this is just a way to sort of pull in George W. Bush before whacking him over the head?
[Brazile:] Well, I think the president let me just applaud him. He's made several trips inside the city here in Washington, D.C. He's met with our mayor, Tony Williams. He talked about some of the issues facing the city. He sat down tonight with members of the Congressional Black Caucus, and I believe that Karl Rove and team is advising him right.
[Press:] But did I hear you say that it's not going to last?
[Brazile:] Well, nothing lasts forever. You all know that. I know that, but what I'm saying is that I believe that he's reaching out. It's early in the administration. Democratic leaders are returning his phone calls. He's making phone calls. He's visiting inner city neighborhoods. He went to church in my own backyard on Capitol Hill...
[Press:] I know, Lincoln Park.
[Brazile:] ... Lincoln Park, about five blocks from my house. So, I salute him for visiting us on Capitol Hill. He should stop by Eastern Market, by the way. You can find some nice ground beef.
[Press:] I'm with you on that but look, Donna, let's get real, here. I mean, you ran this campaign. You know if Gore had been elected Gore was elected, but if Gore had made to it to the White House, you know the Republicans would not have treated him as well. Aren't you just a little miffed that Democrats are falling all over George W.?
[Brazile:] Well, you know, this again, it's politics. It's not love. It's politics. People Democratic leaders, we have an agenda that we're going to push forward to the American people, campaign finance reform. We're going to try to provide all seniors with a prescription drug benefit. We're going to try to make sure that his tax cut is smaller and reach middle class people who need it. And we're going to fight for some of things that we fought for in the last election. So. I believe, you know, that the president is making a great beginning here in Washington, D.C., and we'll see what happens once his budget gets up on Capitol Hill. But it will be tough, trust me.
[Carlson:] But don't some of the Democrats who are cavorting and consorting with him run the risk of being seen as traitors? And before you answer that, let me just show you we had, as we said, Maxine Waters on "CROSSFIRE" tonight. We asked her about Senator Feingold's decision to vote for Ashcroft and listen to what she said about his motives.
[Rep. Maxine Waters , California:] I think he's got another agenda.
[Carlson:] So he's willing to ignore racism for that other agenda he has?
[Waters:] Obviously. The actions speak for itself.
[Carlson:] Now you've been working with Senator Feingold on campaign finance reform. Does Maxine Waters know something we don't?
[Brazile:] Well, Maxine Waters, as you all know, is a very popular congresswoman. She, as you all know, is very outraged over the decision to by the president to nominate Mr. Ashcroft. She's led many protests with others here in Washington, D.C. against his nomination and she will continue to speak her mind as she should still. There is still a lot of anger. Look, I can't walk down the street without people walking up to me and asking me how are you feeling? And I say, look it's over. Six hundred and forty-three days from now I'll feel differently because we'll take back the Congress. But until that time, the president has the right and I applaud him for reaching out to Democratic leaders and reaching out to our mayor and other people across country. But let me assure you that members of the black caucus tonight expressed strong reservations about some of programs. They also talked to him about electoral reform. They talked to him about education and the priorities of the Congressional Black Caucus. Police Brutality came up, and I understand they even discussed racial profiling.
[Carlson:] Did he charm them? I mean, from you conversations you've had with people did he charm them?
[Brazile:] Well, I didn't hear any gushing over the phone, but I heard it was a serious meeting and, you know, members of the Congressional Black Caucus were shunned in the last time the Republicans held the White House and he opened a door. And I understand that he and Vice President Cheney have decided to have other dialogues and more meetings with members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
[Press:] Donna, before we get away from Maxine Waters and Russ Feingold, here, Jeff is calling from Texas. One of our SPIN ROOM viewers. He's got a question for you.
[Caller:] I was watching that show earlier on "CROSSFIRE" with Maxine and it was so outrageous. It seems now, that the term racist, or known as, is anybody that disagrees with a black liberal. Isn't that basically the truth? I mean, Russ Feingold is no liberal.
[Press:] We got it Jeff. Go ahead, Donna.
[Brazile:] Sir, I didn't see the show unfortunately. I was over on Capitol Hill at Dick Gephardt's birthday party. But Russ Feingold is a great Democratic leader. I understand that has reservations about Mr. Ashcroft's record but he's indicated that he would like to sort of, you know, support the president's person at this time. Many people disagree with his decision and Congresswoman Waters is one of those persons that disagrees. I don't represent her staff and I don't know what she said I know Congressman Waters is a tenacious fighter and she has strong views
[Carlson:] And there is the understatement of the year.
[Press:] She is my friend.
[Carlson:] And if you hold on for a second, Donna Brazile, we will be right back.
[Press:] Lots more questions for you
[Carlson:] And awaiting your nominations for "Spin of the Day." We'll be back in just a moment.
[Press:] Welcome back to THE SPIN ROOM. Our guest is former Gore campaign manager Donna Brazile, talking about the seeming love affair that Democrats have with George
[W. Carlson:] Passionate.
[Press:] Falling all over him. Before we get back to Donna and the love affair though, there is other important news of the day, including we may have some sad news, very sad news for your buddy, your hero, Katherine Harris. We thought that she was going to get a certain job. Well, today President Bush was meeting with some religious leaders and one of the religious leaders, I think an archbishop or something, mentioned he was from Florida and he said, Mr. President, we know you have a special affection for the state of Florida. Everybody laughed. And then President Bush said, yes, in fact, he had a special job for his brother down in Florida, the governor of Florida, he said I'm about to name my brother the ambassador to Chad. Tucker, that is the job that Katherine Harris was going to get. Poor Katherine Harris, she's just getting left out.
[Carlson:] She will just have to go on to become governor of Florida, and I bet you Bush would have that country running smoothly, like a top. In other news, out of Danville, Kentucky tonight at a Dairy Queen in Danville, a customer came in, bought $2 worth of food, and paid with a $200 bill.
[Press:] There is no such thing.
[Carlson:] There it is. There's a picture of George W. Bush on the front, there's an oil well on the back, he received 198 dollars in change, but the best quote came from a local detective who said, at a distance, it looks like a real bill. A real $200 bill, anybody could have made that mistake.
[Press:] Look. It has the sign that says, we like broccoli.
[Carlson:] Nothing looks like a $200 bill.
[Press:] I just want to point out that this happened at a Dairy Queen in Kentucky. Do you know what they eat in Kentucky? Squirrel brains. Now you know what happens.
[Carlson:] There is nothing with that.
[Press:] I don't eat squirrel brains. OK, here is Don from Ohio: "The love affair with GWB is because D.C. is so relieved that there is finally some adults in charge in Washington."
[Carlson:] A lot of acronyms. An e-mail from an anonymous e- mailer raises a great question: "Are you better off today than you were seven days ago?" Speaking for myself, yes, and Bill, you look a lot better.
[Press:] But I'm feeling it inside, feeling the pain, so is Donna Brazile, our guest tonight. She's Al Gore's former campaign manager, lives in Washington, D.C., who lives on Capitol Hill.
[Carlson:] Donna, have spoken to Al Gore? I'm certain you have since all this. How is he doing?
[Brazile:] Fine. He is Al and Tipper Gore both are doing quite well, they spent time away from Washington, went out to Colorado before the inaugural, and I understand that he's on travel this week. As you know, he's accepted a couple teaching jobs at Columbia and Middle Tennessee and Fisk University and UCLA, so he is in great shape.
[Carlson:] He must be pretty angry. How does he express his anger when you talk to him?
[Brazile:] That is not Al Gore's style. I believe that the Al Gore you saw on December 13, seven weeks ago tonight, is the Al Gore that exists. In reality, he's very gracious, and he is very composed and he's focused on the future.
[Press:] How about you? Do you think George Bush stole this election?
[Brazile:] I believe we lost this election because the members of Supreme Court stopped the count. I also believe we lost this election because Katherine Harris and others in Florida put up barriers to, not only participation, but also they stopped the count.
[Press:] All right. Now, let me pick up on that I want that come back, now, where is the outrage? Why is everybody being so nice? Donna, when I got started in politics, I was taught the first rule in politics, which I can't repeat on this show, it says what happens to nice guys in politics isn't that still true?
[Brazile:] Don't get mad, get even; 643 days.
[Carlson:] Now, you worked for Jesse Jackson in '84, if I remember. Explain to us what this dynamic between Bush and Jesse Jackson is all about. Bush takes a call from Jackson the day after and then calls Jesse Jackson on the phone when this scandal hits last week. Are they friends now?
[Brazile:] I don't know I haven't spoken to Reverend Jackson about his relationship with President Bush. I think President Bush reached out to him and placed a call to Reverend Jackson and his family and I think it's a good and kind gesture. I don't have anything personally against George Bush. He is a fine fellow, according to some of my friends that know him and I wish him well, but 643 days from now, we're going to take back the House and Senate.
[Press:] Some people don't want to wait that long they're thinking about this recount that is still going on in Florida. John from New York, in fact, has a question. Welcome to
[The Spin Room. Caller:] Thank you. This is a question for Donna.
[Press:] Go.
[Caller:] I would like to know, with this recount that has been talked about in the state of Florida, all 62 counties, how is that progressing and is there going to be an announcement made when it's finally complete?
[Brazile:] I have seen "The Washington Post" has come up with an analysis on the overvote and I understand that some of the Florida papers have come up with additional analysis, in terms of the amount of votes we have recovered. Some votes say George Bush recovered. But right now, I think the jury is still out, in terms of the actual number of votes that have been recovered from the observation by independent sources, so I can continue to tune in to some of the news stories but, you know, George, I have learned a long time ago this was my seventh presidential campaign; you win some, you lose some, but you focus on the future. I'm going to focus on the future and I hope that the true story comes out in Florida and when it comes out, many of us will be relieved, but we will continue to focus on tomorrow.
[Carlson:] Very quickly now, Donna, speaking of the future,- are you running for office in the District of Columbia for city council.
[Brazile:] I'm glad you asked that question.
[Press:] Sounds like a yes to me.
[Brazile:] First, I'm on my way up to Cambridge next week to serve as a fellow at the Kennedy School. I'm looking forward to doing that and I'm looking forward to coming back and settling back in my neighborhood in Capitol Hill and taking a look at some of my options here in the District of Columbia. All politics is local.
[Carlson:] Be sure to hit Bill up for a contribution.
[Brazile:] I'll hit you up as well, Tucker.
[Press:] But one of those options is running for the city council; right?
[Brazile:] One of those options is looking at everything from commission to city council.
[Press:] All right.
[Carlson:] Well, shoot high is our advice. Thank you, Donna Brazile.
[Press:] That is going to be a great campaign. Thanks, Donna. Thanks for joining us in THE SPIN ROOM. And "Spin of the Day" coming up. Your nominations for "Spin of the Day," Tucker's and mine to spin@cnn.com.
[Carlson:] But especially mine. We'll be right back. Welcome back to THE SPIN ROOM, the tail end of THE SPIN ROOM. I'm Tucker Carlson. This would be Bill Press.
[Press:] That would be me.
[Carlson:] That would be you, also in the tail end. In any case, we are back to our "Spins of the Day." But before we go there, I just want to read a couple pieces of e-mail. "Shame on you," this is to me. "You are constantly criticizing Hillary Clinton for accepting all those gifts but you are always begging for gifts on the show, and we know you won't send them back."
[Press:] I was going to criticize you for that.
[Carlson:] No, we'll load them in the back of a truck, Bill and
[I. Press:] I just want you to know, we have a ton of e-mail from Canada today.
[Carlson:] That's a good sign.
[Press:] And all of them have two things to say. Number one three thing to say. One, half of them say invite the Jean Chretien when he comes here to be THE SPIN ROOM. The other half say, we don't want him on the SPIN ROOM because he's too boring. But all of them have this to say, Tucker: "My wife and I were pleasantly surprised that you, Bill, pronounced Jean Chretien properly. Tucker still has to practice." Jean...
[Carlson:] Jean...
[Press:] Chretien.
[Carlson:] Chretien.
[Press:] Very good. You see, it didn't take much practice.
[Carlson:] That's six years of French classes and you know, that was sort of a subtle dig at the prime minister.
[Press:] Andrew from Illinois on the phone with his "Spin of the Day".
[Caller:] Hi, I have a "Spin of the Day" for you.
[Press:] Oh, Andrew, 12-year-old, right?
[Caller:] Yes.
[Press:] Hi, Andrew. What is it, quickly?
[Caller:] First of all, I'd like to say that us teens in Chicago haven't forgotten. We're still fighting. Second, that I think one reason Democrats are warming up to Bush is that he has no real substance to him so he's more malleable than perhaps other Republican presidents have been. Third, my mother is a French teacher and congratulations, Bill.
[Press:] Merci, Andre. All right, let's go. You have the "Spin of the Day" here in "Spin of the Day": "Charm or snake oil. Only GW knows for sure."
[Carlson:] I'll go with charm.
[Press:] I think I'll go with snake oil. Surprise, surprise. And "Spin of the Day" from Linda R. who says: "I think Bush is a closet Democrat just waiting to come out. We can only hope so." Well, Linda.
[Carlson:] And here's quick, a poignant e-mail: "I happened to stumble across SPIN ROOM and found program magnetic. At that moment, that very instance I came to realize that I live a truly dull life." From Kirk Conts. Kirk, don't be so hard on yourself. Is it time, Bill?
[Press:] Unlike the exciting life that we lead.
[Carlson:] It is time.
[Press:] All right, it is time, and I'm going to first tonight. My "Spin of the Day" comes from, I hate to say, the new secretary of the interior. Here name is Gale Norton and here's a message she had for environmentalists today, I believe, on CNN. Let's listen
[Gale Norton, Interior Secretary:] I understand people who are concerned that we be as responsible as possible, and I want to show people that we don't have to fight between the environment and having the energy resources that we need. We need to proceed carefully so that we can have both of those things at the same time.
[Press:] Both of those things at the same time. What she is saying is Alaska, here we come. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, kiss it good-bye. Why doesn't she just say that?
[Carlson:] There's oil in them there refuge, Bill, and that's good news. There's nothing wrong with that. But we continue this after the show. OK, my "Spin of the Day" comes from the well-spring, the essence, the pure source of "Spins of the Day." That would, of course, be Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.
[Press:] Who has replaced Jesse Jackson as your favorite spinner.
[Carlson:] Exactly. I get a little obsessed. In any case, she was asked why are you not going to vote for Senator Ashcroft for AG? This was her response.
[Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton , New York:] Justice demand vigorous enforcement of the law, not vigorous subversion.
[Carlson:] Says the woman who carted away almost $200 grand in gifts days before the gift ban applied to her. You could see the smoke coming off her lips. Those words burned her as they left her mouth.
[Press:] Can we just say again when people give you gifts, there is nothing wrong with accepting them.
[Carlson:] Let me repeat, Hillary says justice demands rigorous enforcement of law, not vigorous subversion.
[Press:] Yes, right.
[Carlson:] Hillary Clinton is saying this, Bill.
[Press:] The attorney general is supposed to enforce the law, Tucker. I'll explain it to you.
[Carlson:] Hit me with it.
[Press:] I wish I could right now except we are out of time.

[Juanita Phillips, Cnn Anchor:] The funeral of Syrian President Hafez al-Assad is underway in Damascus. The coffin of the late president has been taken to the city's main square to allow the public to pay their last respects. The ceremonies will be led by his son, Bashar Assad. He's expected to take over as president. And for the past hour, we've been watching live pictures coming in from Damascus of huge crowds of mourners turning out to watch the funeral procession. That funeral started about one hour ago, the casket carried on the shoulders of pallbearers from Mr. Assad's home to the main Ummayad Square. That is one of the major landmarks of Damascus. And already it's filled with thousands of mourners; has been since Saturday, when Mr. Assad died. Now, a lot of focus this morning has been on the heir apparent, the late president's son, Bashar al-Assad. He is expected to take over from his father. At 34, he's an eye doctor. He's an educated man, educated in the West. He has a reputation as a modernizer and a forward thinker. But he has only recently developed his political credentials. Also, much focus today on the effect that the death of the president will have on the peace process. The Syrian track of the peace talks have always been the most difficult, they've always been the slowest and even before President Assad's death, the SyriaIsrael, peace process was deadlocked; the main issue, the Golan Heights. Syria wants every inch of the territory handed back. Israel will only agree to most, and it wants guaranteed access to the sea of Galilee. So all of those issues very much in focus as the funeral of Syrian President, Hafez al-Assad, gets underway in Damascus. Well, joining us now from Damascus is CNN's Brent Sadler. He's been covering the funeral since it began. Brent, what's happening now?
[Brent Sadler, Cnn Correspondent:] Juanita, the state funeral of Hafez al-Assad, the late Syrian leader, is now well underway. We saw the coffin bearing the Syrian flag for the first time just over an hour ago. That coffin has already passed through the main Ummayad Square here in the center of Damascus. Tens of thousands of Syrians still milling around, even though the coffin passed here several minutes ago. It's now on its way, being taken by a military vehicle, with military escort, up to what's known here in Damascus as the People's Palace, which sits atop a hill, has a commanding view of the city. And the coffin will remain in the People's Palace here in Damascus for several hours. This will give the opportunity, under a controlled environment, for the many international dignitaries that have been pouring into the Syrian capital to pay their condolences and to pay their respects to Bashar al-Assad, who's the anointed heir to his late father. I'm joined here in Damascus by Professor Michael Hudson, who's an expert on Arab affairs from Georgetown University in the United States. What do you make of it so far in terms of the numbers here, and in terms of what we've been seeing on the streets, particularly people trying to burst through the security cordon to try and touch the coffin as it passed through here?
[Michael Hudson, Georgetown University:] Well, Brent, it's been a most impressing and moving ceremony. It is the crowd has been respectful, well behaved. Certainly many among them, I think, have been overcome by emotion. At the same time, it is a well organized ceremony, and it's pretty clear that elements from the public sector workforce have been brought in. Transportation has been supplied, and banners and the necessary accoutrements of proper mourning have been provided. But, there's no doubt that this is an impressive ceremony, and I think that it marks a real turning point in Syrian modern political history.
[Sadler:] Now, CNN's Rula Amin has been on the streets of Damascus since early this morning. The area where the cortege passed through has been closed to vehicular traffic. Rula Amin, if you can hear me, what's been your perspective of the funeral so far?
[Rula Amin, Cnn Correspondent:] Every Syrian that is present here has that on his mind. I'm here with the crowd. Some of them have climbed over the
[Sadler:] Rula, do you think the Syrians are informed enough about their economic situation, and do you think there's any real nationwide perception public perception that life might get better under a younger leader, who may improve the economic situation within Syria, but also who has a lot of challenges in that respect ahead, given the fact that the old order is still in place in many parts?
[Amin:] Brent, you know, the old order is in place. But in the last few months especially in the last few months, Dr. Bashar has been making changes. He has changed the government. The government of Syria was bad for the last, like, nine years. He changed the government. He had put new people there technocrats
[Sadler:] All right. CNN's Rula Amin, on the streets of Damascus. Thank you very much indeed for that insight. Continuing live coverage will go on throughout the day from Syria. In the meantime, back to the studio and Juanita Phillips.
[Phillips:] All right. Thanks for that, Brent. Well, joining us now from Atlanta to discuss President Assad's 30- year legacy is Murhaf Jouejati. He's a political analyst. Mr. Jouejati, over those 30 years, both positive and negative aspects to President Assad's rule. Will history remember him, do you think, as a strong leader who brought stability to a very fractured society, or as a ruthless, repressive leader who held Syria back?
[Murhaf Jouejati, Political Analyst:] Well, I tend to identify more with the first. He is certainly the leader, the last in a long line of Arab nationalist leaders in Syria, that has truly put Syria on the map. After all, before President Assad was there, Syria was a highly unstable country. It was pushed and pulled by different regional pulls of power, such as Egypt and Iraq. President Assad, in his 30 years, to his credit, managed to make Syria a strong state, a strong regional player and has given Syria a stability that it has never known until he was in power.
[Phillips:] We've been watching the huge crowds of mourners who've turned out for the funeral this morning. Is that a genuine sign, do you think, of the late president's popularity?
[Jouejati:] I think so. I think the crowd is very moved. I think the loss of President Assad is a major loss for Syria. It's a major loss for the Arab world. Most Syrians have known no other president than President Hafez al-Assad, and I think it is a very genuine feeling of sorrow. There are those who loved President Assad. There are those, certainly, who despised President Assad. But I think both opponents and proponents of Mr. Assad admired him very much.
[Phillips:] President Assad came to symbolize, over the time that he was in power, hard line Arab opposition to Israel. Is that going to change now that his son is poised to take over? Is he going to take a more flexible approach, do you think?
[Jouejati:] Syria is believes itself to be, whether rightly or wrongly, the most Arab of Arab countries. It is the spearhead of Arab nationalism. And this is the legacy of Hafez al-Assad in that he wants a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East in which Israel withdraws from all the territories it occupied in 1967. I think Dr. Bashar al-Assad will continue Assad's legacy. I think the tone may be softer, but the principle will be unchanged. The principle of recovering the Syrian Golan Heights is very popular among Syrian public opinion. And nothing indicated to me that Dr. Bashar would ask for anything less than the recovery of Syria's lands.
[Phillips:] Now, Dr. Bashar is said to be a very different man in style from his father. He's an eye doctor. He's only 34. He doesn't have a lot of political experience. Do you think he has the strength to rule Syria? It is a very difficult country with many different groups, and obviously some very serious issues facing it in the future.
[Jouejati:] I think so. I think Dr. Bashar will be a strong leader. The first legitimizing thing he gets, obviously, is the stature of his father. Also, he has been now trained for six years. He is popular. Syrians are waiting for further reforms. They want further liberalization, and they know that these things are embodied in Dr. Bashar al-Assad. You are right. He is young. And you are right. His style might be different. And we noticed that, in terms of the peace process, I think in a different tone, Dr. Bashar gave recently some interviews to Western and Arab newspapers. We did see a different tone toward Israel, but I think the same demands. And I think Dr. Bashar is truly in sync with Syrian public opinion as it stands today.
[Phillips:] All right. And just quickly, Mr. Jouejati, what about the leadership challenge being launched by the late president's brother Raf'at? How serious a threat is that?
[Jouejati:] I personally don't take it too seriously. I think Raf'at al-Assad does not have any forces on the ground. He does not have any human resources on the ground. Raf'at al-Assad let us say it let us say it openly is an unpopular man. He is a man who has been fired from the vice presidency. His functions in the Baath party have ceased. He was expelled from the Baath party. He is not only a persona non grata, but the Syrian state has declared him a common, low criminal. So, he may issue as many statements as he wishes. I do not think that it will upset at all the balance of power in Syria.
[Phillips:] All right. And Mr. Murhaf Jouejati, speaking to us today from Atlanta, thank you very much. And you've been watching our special live coverage of the funeral of the late Syrian President Hafez al-Assad. We're going to take a short break and be back after that with more of the day's news from CNN center in Atlanta. And then we'll be continuing with our live coverage of the president's funeral in about 15 minutes' time. Do stay with us. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Martin Savidge, Cnn Anchor:] Even as we speak, more developments coming from the battlefields of Northern Afghanistan, specifically the Northern Alliance now claiming that it has captured the key town of Taloqan. And also, in this country, the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld saying that there is still some fighting resistance on the part of the Taliban around another key city, which is Mazar-e Sharif. For the latest on the situation, we want to check in with CNN's Satinder Bindra. He is in Northern Afghanistan, in and around the areas where these confrontations are taking place. Satinder, first let me ask you this: What do we know about Taloqan and the Northern Alliance and their claims to have taken it?
[Satinder Bindra, Cnn Correspondent:] Well Martin, when we spoke last, I told you that the Northern Alliance had launched a major offensive toward Taloqan. Now Northern Alliance forces telling us that their forces have capture Taloqan. What we do know about Taloqan is first, it's about 15 to 20 kilometers south of here, and it was once a major stronghold of the Northern Alliance. So this victory if, indeed, this has happened, will be a significant morale booster, probably second only in line to the victory in Mazar-e Sharif. So clearly, all through the day Northern Alliance commanders have been quite
[Savidge:] Back to the subject of Taloqan. As you mentioned, there is the psychological benefit for the Northern Alliance in taking that town. What is the strategic benefit, if any?
[Bindra:] The strategic benefit of capturing Taloqan means now that the forces of the Northern Alliance can move slightly westward towards another large Taliban-occupied town called Kunduz. And if they can capture Kunduz, then pretty well they've sown up the north, because for the West, Mazar-e Sharif is already with the Northern Alliance forces. So again, there is a strategic importance if, indeed, this news is true, that Taloqan has been captured Martin.
[Savidge:] All right. CNN's Satinder Bindra reporting to us from northern Afghanistan. We want to get more now on these developments as far as victories the Northern Alliance is claiming. This is a news conference by the Northern Alliance. Abdullah Abdullah is the person speaking.
[Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, Northern Alliance Foreign Minister:] They are at least to the
[Savidge:] You have been listening to Abdullah Abdullah. He is the spokesperson for the Northern Alliance. That, we believe, coming from Jabal Saraj, which is in northern Afghanistan. Updating, apparently, the successes of the Northern Alliance, which have been relatively significant, according to them, over the past 24-48 hours. The most recent success now, the Northern Alliance claiming to have captured Taloqan. He also reported several hundred dead on the part of the Taliban, dozens of prisoners, but he also mentioned that in some of those engagements, most of the Taliban managed to escape. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Well, it doesn't matter whether there's plus signs or minus signs ahead of most of those numbers, because our guest this morning still feels pretty bullish about the market.
[David Haffenreffer, Cnn Anchor:] Ash Rajan, senior vice president at Prudential Securities, joins us now with his market outlook and some stock picks for this Monday morning. How are you?
[Marchini:] Good morning to you.
[Ash Rajan, Prudential Securities:] Fine, thank you, good morning.
[Haffenreffer:] Really, volatility was the key last week as well that we had that stronger than expected, for the most part, report out on Friday. People have been bandying about the 25 or 50-basis-point increase that the Fed is expected to be doing coming up a little bit later on this month. Where do you stand, and what is the impact here on the markets for interest rates?
[Rajan:] David, I'm very encouraged by the type of rallies we saw, the quality of the rallies. It's a little better than what we anticipated. In other words, they stuck at 4:00 p.m., the breadth is a little better it's not as narrow as it was. However, we have sort of discovered the fact that we have a 50-basis-point increase May 16, perhaps further increases down the road, on the year. So my point here, as you debate between terrific earnings first- quarter, great guidelines for earnings second-quarter, and perhaps even third, great second half, in terms of technology deployment. So that's the reason we have the volatility. You have very great points, and you have not so great points about the market.
[Marchini:] It's not going to be a great second half, Ash, if the Fed has anything to say about it. Not that they're out to kill the party, but they sure just want to squeeze down the economy a little bit.
[Rajan:] And they're doing very well; it looks like the Fed's going to win this war. But you can come back and say, a good economy actually has good things going for you, if your a telecom, technology, e-commerce investor. Why? Because if you have a strong U.S. economy followed closely by a strong European and Asian economy, it only means one thing: Technology budgets go up. That means better revenues, better visibility.
[Marchini:] I thought conventional companies cut spending on capital investment when their sales softened. Why will they buy more technology rather than less?
[Rajan:] Think about it. It's the nature of the times. Even the poorer countries, even if they can't afford the core infrastructure investments, technology and telecom they're not prepared to wash their hands of. As we speak, 1 12 billion Chinese people are waking up there wanting telephone infrastructure. They don't have it. But they're hungry, and they're signing contracts with Nokia, Ericsson, Motorola as we speak. So I'm convinced tech budgets will still be on the rise. Just think about this: We spent billions of dollars on Y2K remediation, and that was a defensive project. Now, we're talking about offensive infrastructures. So I think techs tech stocks will come back.
[Haffenreffer:] You talk about the jitters, or rather the battle between interest-rate jitters, and the strong earnings that we saw in the first-quarter. Didn't Wall Street sort of ignore the strong earnings anyway and just say it was a very nervous time?
[Rajan:] Wall Street gets obsessed, David, with any one particular notion the one big notion was excesses in valuation; that was the theme for the last three, four weeks as you probably witnessed. So you came up with good numbers, but those good numbers never really benefited those specific companies. Texas Instruments, Intel, Atmel had terrific numbers, but they didn't help those particular stocks, but they helped to band-aid the wounds that we saw in the market overall. They kept reassuring people, look, yes we're having an excessive valuation debate, but fundamentals are still out of sight. And now what's happening in stock selection is investors are coming back once again to good old fundamentals, good old revenues, good old earnings, and that's still owning, that's still buying stock, and that's encouraging.
[Marchini:] This week, we're going to be hearing from three companies that represent three key segments, really, of the technology business. We'll hear from Cisco on Tuesday, Applied Materials on Wednesday, and Dell on Thursday. What are your expectations generally?
[Rajan:] Very strong numbers in all three companies. They are core platforms of the technology sector and the market for that matter. Cisco also represents the whole Internet protocol, Internet infrastructure area. Applied Material would be white hot only because semiconductor book-to-bill ratios have been so strong. And there's this transition of semiconductor chips, not just being PC-dependent, but telecom- dependent or wireless-dependent. So Applied will have a good number. And suddenly, Dell one would imagine that the whole PC-centric world is gone and dead and behind us, but we saw a fairly decent number with Compaq and the Gateway, so you're going to see some pretty decent numbers with Dell as well.
[Haffenreffer:] I noticed on your stock picks list for us this morning, Target is in there. Obviously, you have continued faith in the U.S. consumer. Why? and what are you're other picks?
[Rajan:] Yes. If you're looking beyond tech and telecom, which is hard to do sometimes if you're as focused as I am in that two sectors, but if you're looking at energy and retail are the two other areas that I like to be in in my portfolio analysis, and certainly retail, yes, I look for strong consumer behavior. But Target is also specifically a good story. They're streamlining their operations. They seem to be perfectly a good fit to the demographics. That brought some very upscale consumers can sometimes step into a Target and that's very encouraging. That's the reason I have Target as one of my picks, and so does Halliburton on the energy side.
[Haffenreffer:] All right, Ash Rajan, Prudential Securities, thanks for being here this morning.
[Rajan:] You're welcome. Thank you David.

[Natalie Allen, Cnn Anchor:] And we want to go now CNN's Greg LaMotte. He's at the Los Angeles International Airport again today talking with people about the twists and turns of this election 2000 Greg.
[Greg Lamotte, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Natalie the majority of people that we've been speaking to say their interest in Florida is making sure that the election there is fair, legitimate and above all else, legal. Forget who specifically wins, these people say that whenever a winner is announced, they just want to make sure that that winner is indeed legitimate. Joining me, among others, is Muriel Ellis from Arizona. Thank you very much. What do you make of what's going on in Florida?
[Muriel Ellis:] It's driving everybody a little crazy. I just hope that once it gets settled that people who decide, neither extreme way as won anything and try to get together. Otherwise, we're in a big mess and I was primarily concerned about the Supreme Court going into this one. I still am. But all we can do is hope for the best and try to keep it out of the court and dragging it for weeks and weeks and weeks or we're in big trouble.
[Lamotte:] If I put you charge of the process, what you would do in Florida?
[Ellis:] If I thought it was legal, I would say have a new election, do it very quickly, which can be done with modern technology. But I'm afraid whichever side lost would immediately file suit that this wasn't legitimate and so I don't damned if I know what I would do.
[Lamotte:] Thank you very much. Phil Ricotto is from Colorado. What do you make of all of this?
[Phil Ricotto:] It's pretty much a mess. You know, with the ballots that they look a little confusing to me, even, that all of the counties should revote. That you know, it's just a mess and needs to be straightened out and until they get it all tallied up that they should wait and hold off before they make any decisions on the president.
[Lamotte:] Today, it's been reported that Governor Bush of Texas has been at least in part putting his transition team together. Do you think that that's premature on his part?
[P. Ricotto:] I do. I don't think that he should be doing it. I think he should wait out if has made president. And it's just kind of tacky.
[Lamotte:] If I put you charge of the election now down in Florida, what would be your remedy?
[P. Ricotta:] Probably to have them revote, at least in the counties throughout the state that are in question or possibly the whole state and do it as soon as possible and when the results come in, then make your decision from that.
[Lamotte:] Very good.
[P. Ricotta:] Thank you.
[Lamotte:] And his wife, Kathy, what do you make of what's going on in Florida?
[Kathy Ricotta:] I think that Bush's people probably have something to do with the way it's mixed up. He doesn't want to lose that state. It's a big slap in the face, if he doesn't, you know. And I think that this whole process of showing it on TV, you know, from state to state is wrong. I feel that they should wait until all the votes are counted and then the next morning, you wake up and find out who's the president.
[Lamotte:] Thank you very much. Just the opinion of three folks that we have talked to. Earlier today, I spoke with some folks who were heading back to Korea. They're Koreans and they say they are mystified of what's going on in the United States. They say in Korea who wins the most votes wins. So they were saying they were very confused. It makes me wonder if there are people living outside of the United States elsewhere that are very confused by this electoral college vote Natalie.
[Allen:] All right, Greg LaMotte, thank you. Perhaps they want to check out the electoral colleges.
[Lou Waters, Cnn Anchor:] We are all getting a civics lesson here.
[Allen:] Indeed we are. And as you see there on your screen, four more counties in this recount yet to be tallied. Bush ahead by 341. We'll continue to watch it come in. I'm Natalie Allen.
[Waters:] I'm Lou Waters. A special edition of "INSIDE POLITICS" next. I guess you know what they'll be covering.

[Joe Lockhart, White House Press Secretary:] OK. Let me bring you up to date since we spoke last a few hours ago. As I indicated this morning, the president, just before 11, went into the first meeting with the small group of negotiators. He had a series of meetings that lasted between 11 and 3. The president took a break at 3. I expect him to meet with the team within the next half- hour and resume the negotiating at roughly 6 tonight. Our team, for their part, spent the break time together working through a number of issues. I talked to several of those on our side who are involved in negotiating. In addition to the intensive and substantive, they added that it was both exhaustive and exhausting. I think everyone is feeling the effect of some late nights, but they're still hard at it. Other than that, the evening will be open. There, obviously, is a possibility for a number of meetings of different types. We'll let you know before we let you go tonight.
[Question:] Joe, can you fill in a couple of small blanks? Those series of meetings were meetings with mixed a mixed team of negotiators?
[Lockhart:] They did things in a variety of formats, both separately and together between 11 and 3.
[Question:] And you said this morning, they're working their way through all issues, is that still the case?
[Lockhart:] That is still the case.
[Question:] As the summit spokesman, you tell habitually that the president met with his people, but what have Arafat and Barak been doing? Have they been getting reports?
[Lockhart:] They've been getting reports from their team and they've been meeting in a variety of formats with their own teams.
[Question:] Joe, what's the latest on the rolling assessment?
[Lockhart:] It's still rolling.
[Question:] It's still rolling, but I mean has he decided has he come to a point where he would make another one in this rolling series of assessments? Are we still operating on a one front that...
[Lockhart:] I think we're still operating from where we were this morning, that it's still constructive to continue these sessions. And, you know, I think they had almost four hours worth this morning. They'll go back at it this evening and we'll just have to see where they go.
[Question:] Joe, with those extremely complicated issues, would it be fair to say that the lead negotiators are not keeping all the details in their heads, pieces of paper, on tables?
[Lockhart:] Well, certainly people are taking notes.
[Question:] Joe, what's the significance of the president's meetings with teams of negotiators and with and without the presence of Arafat and Barak?
[Lockhart:] Well, I think the significance is that there are a number of issues, all of which have significant sub-issues and they're trying to work through to find areas of agreement.
[Question:] Did you say the president's going to meet with the team, to resume the negotiations at 6. Is that the U.S. team?
[Lockhart:] U.S. team, yes.
[Question:] And then assess the evening. How close are they to getting a meeting with the president and the prime minister and Chairman Arafat?
[Lockhart:] Well, they're in proximity very close. When we call and ask for a meeting, we generally get one. It's the question of what's the most useful thing to do. Right now we think working with the negotiating teams is the most constructive way to move forward, but I certainly wouldn't rule out that he'd sit and talk to the leaders tonight.
[Shaw:] White House spokesman Joe Lockhart speaking in Thurmont, Maryland with an update on the Middle East summit at Camp David between the Palestinians and the Israelis. He says that the talks are intense and substantive, exhaustive and exhausting, and they're still hard at it. That concludes our coverage of Mr. Lockhart's remarks, and we go back to "SHOWBIZ" in progress.

[Joie Chen, Cnn Anchor:] We want to bring you the latest information we're getting from Washington. Today is the first meeting of the Homeland Security Council, just a short time ago. We are receiving pictures this afternoon from Washington of the events the Homeland Security Council. President Bush, of course, chairing this important meeting. And there were some comments made there. John King, our senior White House correspondent, is standing by. John, before we actually see this tape which, I understand, is coming down in just a minute, here, can you explain to us what the mission of this particular meeting was? There are a lot of folks involved who are actually cabinet members. Isn't this part of sort of their regular sort of briefing on all this?
[John King, Cnn White House Correspondent:] Well, this is the first formal meeting of the Homeland Security Council, which is the domestic counterpart, of you will, of the National Security Council. There you have the secretary of state, the defense secretary and the generals meet, to brief the president on national security matters. This is a group that does include the defense secretary, but also the secretary of health and human services, the new homeland security director, Tom Ridge. It can, at times, involve transportation and public health officials as well. The president's mission today was to bring them together for their first formal meeting, and to announce the formation of a new foreign terrorist tracking task force. That, an effort to find out just how easy it is for people who are suspected terrorists to get into the United States, and propose any changes in immigration and other laws. I believe now we can listen in to the president, meeting with that team in the Cabinet Room.
[George W. Bush, President Of The United States:] Today I have the first official meeting of the Homeland Security Council, that has been chaired by when I'm not here, by Governor Ridge. And as you can see, I've assembled many of the members of my administration here senior members of the administration, because our task is to do everything we can to protect the American people from any threat whatsoever. The American people are beginning to understand that we fight a two-front war against terror. We fight in Afghanistan, and I appreciate so very much the efforts or our men and women who wear the uniform. And we fight at home here to make sure America's as safe as possible. Along these lines, we've set up a foreign terrorist tracking task force to make sure that the land of the free is as safe as possible from people who might come to our country to hurt people. We welcome legal immigrants. We welcome people coming to America. We welcome the process that encourages people to come to our country to visit, to study or to work. What we don't welcome are people who come to hurt the American people, and so therefore, we're going to be very diligent with our visas and observant with the behavior of people who come to this country. As an example, if a person applies for a student visa and gets that visa, we want to make sure that person actually goes to school, in other words, that they're using the visas for the intended person. The American people need to know that we are doing everything we possibly can to prevent and disrupt any attack on America and that we're doing everything we can to respond if there are to attacks. And I'm proud of the public health workers, the people that report to Tommy Thompson's agency, about their hard work. They're working hours on hours. And I believe that lives have been saved as a result of their diligent efforts. Be glad to answer a couple of questions.
[Question:] Yesterday, there's been quite a bit of talk on Capitol Hill about the need for ground troops, to step up the military action another notch Senator McCain and Senator Dodd, among others. Do you think the American public is ready for a significant number of ground troops in Afghanistan?
[Bush:] I think the most important thing that the American people realize is that we're steady and determined and patient; that we have got a strategy in place to bring Al Qaeda to justice; and at the same time make it clear that any nation which harbors terrorists will be held accountable for their decisions. And we are implementing our strategy. And we appreciate any suggestions people may have, but the strategy we have at the time right now is to use our military to dismantle Taliban defenses; use our military to destroy Al Qaeda training bases; and to work with troops that now exist on the ground to fulfill our mission. And I am pleased with the progress we're making. And I'm really pleased with the fact that the American people are patient. They realize this is a war the likes of which they have never seen before, and therefore they are rooting on their government and the men and women who wear the uniform. They understand that it's going to take a while to achieve our objective, and I appreciate that patience.
[Question:] Sir, since so many of the hijackers were in the country illegally, do you plan to crack down on student visas or political asylum cases things of that sort?
[Bush:] Well, we plan on making sure that if a person has applied for a student visa will actually go to college or university. And therefore we're going to start asking a lot of questions that heretofore have not been asked. We're going to tighten up the visa policy. That's not to say we're not going to let people come into our country. Of course we are. But we're going to make sure that when somebody comes, we understand their intended purpose and that they fulfill the purpose on their application. You bring up a very good point, and that is that sometimes people come here with no intention to fulfill their purpose. And when we find those, they will be escorted out of the United States.
[Question:] Mr. President, a couple of weeks ago, the FBI issued an alert indicating over the next several days the country could be attacked by terrorists again. Does the government still believe and have information to support the notion that Osama bin Laden is planning a second wave of attacks? And do you believe that all the resources now dedicated to the anthrax situation reduce the country's level of preparedness?
[Bush:] We believe that the country must stay on the alert; that our enemies still hate us. Our enemies have no values that regard life as precious. They are active. And therefore, we're constantly in touch with our law enforcement officials to be prepared. Having said that, the American people must go about their lives, and I recognize it's a fine balance. But the American people also understand that the object of any terrorist activity is to cause Americans to abandon their lifestyles, and every American is a soldier and every citizen is in this fight. And I am proud of our country. Our country is united and strong, and we are prepared. We've got ample resources to fight the war on the home front on many fronts. And part of our purpose for being here is to make sure that those resources are well organized and that fit into a strategy that this administration is designing.
[Question:] Mr. President, [OFF-MIKE] some new consumer confidence numbers coming up tomorrow, so perhaps this would be a better question to ask then, but [OFF-MIKE] what is your sense of the extent to which the terrorist attacks and now the anthrax [OFF-MIKE] are having on consumer confidence? Is it your sense that people really are hunkering down [OFF-MIKE] Are they finding it difficult to get back to [Off-mike]
[Bush:] Well, I haven't seen the numbers, but my view of the mood of the country is that the country understands we've entered into a new period in our history, and that lives are simply not going to be as normal as they were in the past. And that so long as there is terrorist activities in the world directed toward our country, that people are going to have to be diligent and on guard. And they are. Having said that, the American people are very patient and they appreciate the efforts of the government and they appreciate the efforts of our military. They understand better than most, better than the world, that this is going to take a long period of time and they are prepared for this. They are prepared to wait in long lines at airports. They're prepared to support our military. They are prepared to support local law enforcement as the local law enforcement works hard with federal officials to disrupt any potential terrorist activities. And so the mood of the country is certainly different from what it was on September 10, but I find the mood of the country to be incredibly refreshing and strong and powerful. It is a clear statement to anybody who would want to harm us that instead of weakening America, they have strengthened America. And what that means for the economy, it means that over time our economy is going to be just as strong as the American spirit.
[Bush:] And so I'm very optimistic about the economy. How long it will take to recover to the levels that we hope is beyond my pay grade, but I can tell you that the people of this country are strong and resolute, and for that I am grateful and incredibly proud. Next question.
[Question:] Mr. President, we understand this task force is to help tighten and close the loopholes in immigration laws. Why were these loopholes so vast and why were they left for so long? Also, what can you say to the American public who is concerned about anti- American sentiment among Americans who may have helped these immigrants who came in and [OFF-MIKE] September 11?
[Bush:] Well first, our country has been an incredibly generous country the most generous country in the world. We're generous with our universities. We're generous with our job opportunities. We're generous with what a beautiful system it is that if you come here and you work hard, you can achieve your dream. And never did we realize that people would take advantage of our generosity to the extent they have. September 11 taught us an interesting lesson, that while by far the vast majority of people who have come to America are really good, decent people, people who we're proud to have here, there are some who are evil. And our job now is to find the evil ones and to bring them to justice, and to disrupt anybody who might have designs on further hurting Americans. The second part of your question?
[Question:] The second part is about the Americans in this country who some may have helped [Off-mike]
[Bush:] Well, I think Americans who unwittingly helped people that hurt Americans regret that now. Americans who are willingly participants in plans to hurt America, they will be brought to justice. My judgment is anybody who is a terrorist or helps a terrorist are equally culpable. And so we are doing everything we can, obviously within the law. And we've got now a new law that will help us pursue those who would harm Americans and those who would help them harm Americans. People need to be held accountable in America and we're going to do just that. Thank you all.
[King:] The president, meeting a short time ago, the first formal meeting of his new Homeland Security Council, discussing steps the government is taking to fight the war on terrorism here at home. Discussing a new assessment that will be under way to reform the visa process and immigration laws, in any way the task force the president named today deems it necessary, to try to limit or restrict access to the United States by those suspected of being affiliated with terrorist groups, or to remove from the United States anyone who comes here. The president cited the example of a student visa, and then does not enroll in a college or university. The president also talking about what he called a new period in our history. Things will not be as normal as they were in the past, but he said he was confident the American people had the patience to wait longer in lines, say, at airports and places like that, to support law enforcement efforts under way. The president refusing to discuss the military strategy in any specific way. He was asked if more ground troops were part of the operation in the near future. He declined to answer, simply saying he was pleased with the progress so far. That there was a steady, determined and patient strategy in place. The president, on several occasions, saying he believed he had the support and the patience of the American people, as that strategy unfolds Joie.
[Chen:] Our senior White House correspondent John King for us this afternoon. Of course, CNN will continue to follow up on the latest developments on America striking back and the homeland security issue. We'll bring you the latest updates here. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] Well, a three-day concert series helped win the new Experience Music Project museum called EMP some rave reviews.
[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Alternative music icons like Patti Smith and Joe Jackson toured the museum and mingled with visitors, while other stars worked their stuff on stage. CNN's Paul Vercammen brings us a closer look at the opening weekend excitement.
[Paul Vercammen, Cnn Correspondent:] An all-star lineup of acts including Metallica rocked Seattle as the city rolled out its new Experience Music Project. Even rock stars, known for their flash, are astounded by this museum designed by architect Frank Gehry.
[Beck, Musician:] I like that kind of fluid, free-forum architecture.
[Kirk Hammett, Metallica:] What the hell is it? It is like this big molten mass of titanium and I know it means something, I just haven't figured it out yet.
[Vercammen:] EMP showcases everything from Eddie Van Halen's modern-era guitar to the older instruments that struck the chords that would evolve into rock "n'roll. [on camera]: By all historical accounts, rock 'n" roll started out rather poor and low-tech, and now in the new millennium, a $250 million high-tech cathedral in Seattle. [voice-over]: Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, the world's richest Jimi Hendrix fanatic, funded EMP and a three-day series of concerts that ranged from Alanis Morissette to Filter.
[Richard Patrick, Filter:] Let's face it. This is the best museum money can buy, you know.
[Chris Bruce, Emp Curator:] We've been working on this thing for so long, to just see really the public come in and just enjoy it so much, I can't tell you how much it means to me.
[Unidentified Male:] Even if your music ability is limited to turning on the radio, it's not a problem.
[Vercammen:] The ultimate interactive exhibit, jam with your own band. Meet the whole family, Mom on keyboards.
[Unidentified Female:] It would be like if a real band would ask you to sit in with them and let you play. That's probably how you would feel.
[Vercammen:] The Experience Music Project fuels that desire to rock on.
[Unidentified Female:] Are you going to play some more shows in the area? Yes, we're touring the Northwest.
[Vercammen:] Paul Vercammen, CNN, Seattle.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Over the weekend, more than 7,000 people responding to a poll on our CNNfn.com Web site about the markets at the start of the fourth quarter, and some of the results are a bit surprising. Here now to fill us in is Susan Lisovicz.
[Susan Lisovicz, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi, Deborah.
[Marchini:] Hi. What did we learn?
[Lisovicz:] Well, I'll tell you, one of the most startling things for me was the optimism of the people who did respond because, you know, all three major indices are down year-to-date. In fact, the Nasdaq's down nearly 10 percent. The S&P; and the Dow also down. The Dow's down 7 12 percent. And the first question was: How will the markets end the year? And nearly two-thirds of the respondents look at it there 34 percent said a single digit gain; 32 percent said a double-digit gain. So they're clearly expecting a big fourth quarter. Eighteen percent said flat, 16 percent said down. Another interesting area is what will have the biggest impact on the markets. Now, I know that you've been talking a lot, we've been talking a lot about oil prices, the surge in oil prices, but they were a distant second. Profits, it's all about profits. Two-thirds of the respondents said that that is what is going to determine the fourth quarter. But, you know, interestingly enough is that most of the respondents also said that they're more pessimistic about the markets since March, which is of course when we saw a lot of the correction in tech stocks.
[Marchini:] That puzzled me because when the people were asked if you feel better or worse about the markets than you did in March, a lot of them said they felt worse. So if they're expecting single and double-digit gains and they feel worse, heaven knows what they must have been expecting before.
[Lisovicz:] Exactly. Well, I think the fact is, is that they have been well rewarded for their investments in the stock market. And in fact, the last question's is: What would you do if you had $10,000? And there you have it, they would still buy stocks. They have been rewarded; it's I think 10 years now, later this month, by a lot of calculation, the bull market. So bears still have a lot of faith in the market, even if they've taken some hits along the way this year.
[Marchini:] Yes, it's pretty remarkable. I don't know, if I had $10,000, I'm a little risk-averse, I think I might take a vacation with it.
[Lisovicz:] I might diversify myself or take a vacation.
[Marchini:] Exactly. It is surprising that the elections figured as such a minor portion of this because we hear so much from the candidates about economic issues.
[Lisovicz:] You know, the other thing is that, you know, these debates have been put off for a long time. There was debating about the debates. And so we do have three of them, the first one tomorrow, and perhaps that could put a little fire into investors about who they're going to vote for in terms of economic issues and whether that will have a bigger place more priority in terms of their voting.
[Marchini:] All right. Well, we'll ask Greg Valliere about that. He's going to be coming on a little while too. Susan Lisovicz, thank you.

[Deborah Marchini, Cnn Anchor:] Well, we're going to take a look this morning at an economic statistic that would ordinarily put most investors to sleep, but not, perhaps, today. Jennifer Westhoven is here to tell us more hi.
[Jennifer Westhoven, Cnn Correspondent:] Hi. We are talking about, of course, business inventories. And you're right, normally, this is a snoozer. But lately, we've had so many companies and not just manufacturing companies that's the key technology companies talking about the fact that they have loads of inventory. They've got all these components that they thought they were going to sell or build into their networks. They're piling up. And, at this point, they're gathering dust compared to the point when we first started hearing these warnings. So this comes later this morning. It's expected to be up about two-tenths of a percent, is the estimate according to a poll of economists polled by Reuters. And you see that that is up a bit from December when it was 0.1 percent. Now, the one thing about this indicator, of course, it is considered pretty old. This is we're talking about January here. But it's something that the Fed has been talking about. It's something that's weighing on a lot of the economists' minds because, of course, as these companies build up inventories. they can't go out and buy new products for their inventories because they're not selling anything. And it's that overhang that's the keyword that people use that could have real consequences for growth going forward, for the GDP, is what people are talking about.
[Marchini:] This is a statistic, of course, that has to be taken in context. In a strong economy, rising business inventories would be good. We have to assume that, if they rise this time by more than 2 percent or two-tenths of a percent, as expected, it's going to be a negative for the markets because it means that stuff is not being sold.
[Westhoven:] Well, it's certainly a negative for corporate profits, right? The only other thing is, if it was really, really out of whack, maybe it would make the Fed the think twice about just a 50- basis-point cut. But it would really have to be a shocker.
[Marchini:] All right. Jennifer Westhoven, thanks a lot.

[Bill Hemmer, Cnn Anchor:] NASA saying it will scrub the latest shuttle mission, due to trouble high above the earth. Miles O'Brien watching this story from the Kennedy space center. A lot of folks thought this might be in doubt as of last night and indeed it is off. Tell us why, Miles.
[Miles O'brien, Cnn Correspondent:] It is, Bill. Well, it goes back to yesterday afternoon, when the Russians attempted to dock an unmanned freighter at the international space station, a so-called progress vehicle, in an automated docking. Apparently what happened during that docking is a piece of debris got stuck in the docking collar, making it impossible for a tight seal between the two vehicles. So the progress is a little bit off center, not quiet or it's centered, but it's not quite tight as it should be. A so-called hard dock. Now, the Russians say that to clear that piece of debris, they're going to have to do a space walk involving the two cosmonauts currently on the space station. That space walk will happen no sooner than Monday. So the question is, is it safe for the space shuttle Endeavor, on the launch pad behind me, three miles behind me, safe to dock at the space station with that progress vehicle sort of, wobbling, if you will. That's is probably a stronger word than is reality, but nevertheless, not tightly sealed to the space station. The Russians insist it is safe. Nasa engineers want to double-check the math, quite frankly. That's what they're doing right now. And so when all that came down to the decision whether to fuel up the space shuttle Endeavor, they decided to wait 24 hours for the launch and feel very comfortable that it'll be safe for the progress vehicle, the shuttle, as well as the space station. Now, meanwhile, while we've been waiting here to talk to you, Bill, a couple of F-15 fighters have been circling overhead, right on top of the space shuttle, if you will, about 20, 000 feet above, at launch pad 39b. They are here, part of an unprecedented security effort. This is the first space shuttle launch since September 11th. Let's take a look at some of those precautions.
[Maj. Mike Rein, Air Force Spokesman:] All of our national space assets are very important to America, and the shuttle is the star of the fleet. And, we need to protect our access to space.
[O'brien:] An Air Force mobile air traffic control squadron set up shop on Cape Canaveral Air Station shortly after the terror attacks. Its high-powered radar scanning a 200-mile radius.
[Lt. Col. Randy Nelson, 728th Air Control Squadron:] In communications, the data-linking capability that we provide to the decision makers both up and down channel is literally instantaneous.
[O'brien:] Airspace around a shuttle launch has always been restricted. Private planes were allowed no closer than five nautical miles from the pad. For this launch, the map has been re-drawn. General aviation banned for 30 nautical miles, and from 30 to 40 miles, private planes will be allowed only with permission and with close contact to air traffic control. Fighter jets will be there in case a plane goes astray. Last month, they escorted the $2 Billion shuttle to the pad. But don't ask when and where they will be during the launch. Such is the nature of security measures, of course. [on camera]: Simply talking about them undermines their efficacy. But this much is clearly evident. The shuttle is a high profile icon of American technological achievement. And when fully fueled with a half million gallons of liquid hydrogen and oxygen, it has the explosive force of a small nuclear bomb. In short, it is a very tempting target for terrorists. [voice-over]: Nasa is thinking about human targets as well. When the astronauts march out to the launch pad, the public and media will not be there to wish them well as usual. Just one more way the space agency hopes to ensure things do, in fact, go well.
[Hemmer:] A really good tribute in space. Miles, quickly, what are they going to do with all of this security that had been in place? All those aircraft that had been on standby. I mean, this certainly is something that hasn't been done before. Now you have to make revisions. What's going to happen, any idea?
[O'brien:] Well, well, provisions quite literally. I don't know if you noticed at the beginning of the piece,here, there was a lot of honking.
[Hemmer:] Yeah.
[O'brien:] They're having to send over a vehicle to feed us because they will not let us leave the press mound to walk across the parking lot, about a half mile to the cafeteria. Onerous security, much of it focused at the media. We keep trying to tell them we're not the enemy, but they keep trying to... ...check into our...
[Hemmer:] Keep telling them that.
[O'brien:] cases and double-check us. But, nevertheless, it is unprecedented here. A bit of tension surrounding this launch. I think Nasa will breathe breathe a sigh of relief when Endeavor leaves the pad safely.
[Hemmer:] So they were honking the horn to let you know the food's there, that lunch has arrived, or what?
[O'brien:] Yeah. Well,, the term we use around here is the roach coach, Bill. And I should tell you right now, I'm hearing the F-15 fighters behind me. I don't know if we can see them, but they are orbiting around here, kind of adding to the whole, kind of surreal atmosphere we have been involved in. Steve Sorgas, my photographer unit, try to get it? Can you reach can you see them? He's going to pan off, Bill.
[Hemmer:] Yeah, right over your head. Yeah, we can see, sure.
[O'brien:] And then, we'll show you the F-15s up there, as they continue their efforts here to protect this airspace over the space shuttle Endeavor.
[Hemmer:] Look right there...
[O'brien:] And we're unable to see them right now.
[Hemmer:] We can see them slightly, a little lower, just off to the left a little lower on the horizon there. Going off to the left-hand side, for our viewers watching there.
[O'brien:] Yeah this has this has never happened in the history of Nasa. All going all the way back to the mercury days. There's never been this kind of tension surrounding a launch and this kind of security.
[Hemmer:] Got it. Well, keep us posted. Let us know what they decide when they decide. Miles, thanks.
[O'brien:] Will do.
[Hemmer:] Live in Florida, good deal.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Now we take you to Florida, where the electors arrived in Tallahassee today ahead of tomorrow's historic vote. They will gather at noon tomorrow in the Senate chambers to officially give George W. Bush the state's 25 electoral votes. Our Susan Candiotti is standing by live in Tallahassee with more on that. Hi, Susan.
[Susan Candiotti, Cnn Correspondent:] Hello, Andria. The electors say they are ready to go when they meet tomorrow, their work almost upstaged by the Florida legislature, which said it was going to pass a resolution to commit all the electors, all the votes to Governor Bush if there had been a count of under votes for Vice President Gore and Governor Bush throughout the state of Florida. Now because here in Florida electors must sign a loyalty pledge to the GOP or to whichever party is involved, political observers say it is unlikely there will be any defectors.
[Unidentified Male:] I can't imagine it. These are Republican, devout Republican people. And Al Gore himself has disavowed rogue electors. He doesn't want them, and I don't think you'll see them, not in Tallahassee and not elsewhere.
[Linda Kleindienst, "the Sun-sentinel":] The legislative session sort of fizzled. The U.S. Supreme Court sort of took the air out of the Gore campaign balloon, and everything just fell apart last week. And I think the Electoral College is a little bit of an afterthought at this point, but still maybe people will get a sense of finality out of it when they sign their pledges.
[Candiotti:] Tomorrow the electors are scheduled to have brunch with Governor Jeb Bush, then make their way to the Senate chambers, where they will cast their ballots at high noon, a scene to be repeated nationwide in various state capitals. Back to you, Andria.
[Hall:] Thank you, Susan.
[Brian Nelson, Cnn Anchor:] And now we turn to the state of Arizona, where seven GOP electors are prepared to cast their votes. They will do so in the executive tower of the state capital, and that will be tomorrow as well. CNN's Jennifer Auther joins us now live from Phoenix. Jennifer, what have I got in store?
[Jennifer Auther, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Brian, actually there are eight electors here in Arizona. This is one state that does not bind them, either by oath or by law, to vote for the candidate that their name appeared next to on the November 7th ballot. However, these are also devout Republican electors. They've been asked by the media through the months if any of them would defect. None of them said that they will. What's going to happen here is tomorrow, 2:00 Arizona time, 4:00 Eastern, Secretary of State Betsy Bayliss will administer an oath of office. She will then explain to the eight electors what they are going to be signing. She will be telling them that they're signing a certificate of vote, that Governor Jane D. Hull will be seated here, she's a Republican, and that each of the eight electors will be seated in alphabetical order in this room. What they will get is called a certificate of vote. And we were just lucky enough to get a copy of one of those. And this is what it looks like. Each of the eight electors will sign his or her name and then pass it on to the next elector. There are one of these for the president-elect and then a separate one for the vice president-elect. In all, 12 of these copies will be signed. We're told that six copies go to the president of the Senate, which we should all know by mow is Al Gore, two will got to the National Archives and then two will go to the Arizona U.S. District Court. And then the remaining certificate of votes that are signed will remain here. Each of them will have placed on them the seal of the great state of Arizona, and then they will be overnight super mailed to Washington for later count for the overall tally. I'm Jennifer Auther reporting live from Phoenix,
[Cnn. Nelson:] Thank you, Jennifer. And once again, there are eight GOP electors in Arizona.

[Andria Hall, Cnn Anchor:] Former Dallas Cowboys coach Tom Landry is being remembered for his strength and dignity. His admirers say Landry brought something different to the game. CNN's Charles Zewe with more.
[Charles Zewe, Cnn Correspondent:] Outside Valley Ranch, the Cowboys' headquarters where Tom Landry led "America's Team" for 29 seasons, fans left flowers and notes. "Thank you for being so kind," read one. Connie Shackelford placed a pot 0of tulips at the makeshift memorial, recalling how Landry once signed her Cowboys cap after encountering him at a shopping mall.
[Connie Shackelford:] And he was just such a nice, you know, good Christian man.
[Zewe:] At a sports carnival where fans got autographs from Cowboys' cheerleaders and foam-headed mascots, Mike Kinard remembered the man known for his quiet demeanor and trademark Fedora.
[Connie Shackelford:] He was just always just such a good person.
[Zewe:] And in a game where big egos rule, sportscaster Norm Hitchka says he was struck by Landry's unflappable nature.
[Norm Hitchka, Sportscaster:] He was absolutely, unbelievably disciplined.
[Zewe:] Landry had 20-consecutive winning seasons, 13 division titles and five Super Bowl appearances, including two championships. For Mark Ammerman, however, Landry's legacy transcends football.
[Mark Ammerman:] God-fearing, religious man. Just a wonderful person.
[Zewe:] He avoided getting close to his players out of worry it would interfere with personnel decisions. He ruled with a stare that came to be known as "The Look." Sportswriter Frank Luksa said Landry influenced more lives than scoreboards.
[Frank Luksa, Sportswriter:] I think Tom Landry did more than coach football. He coached people how to live.
[Zewe:] 100,000 people turned out to say good-bye to Landry after he was fired in 1989. Known for being emotionless, Landry said after being let go that he was moved most over the years by his relationship with his players.
[Tom Landry, Former Dallas Cowboys Coach:] When it's all over with and you look back, that's what you're going to look at. You're not going to look at Super Bowls or how many championships you won. You're going to look at the relationships you had. And you're going to miss those. Anytime you get out of this business, you're going to miss it a whole lot.
[Zewe:] "He was," said football commissioner Paul Tagliabue, "the NFL at its best." Charles Zewe, CNN, Dallas.

[Donna Kelley, Cnn Anchor:] Lovely day for a shuttle launch. Endeavour lifted off a launch pad just a couple of minutes ago on its mission to make an immensely detailed map of the Earth. CNN space correspondent Miles O'Brien join us now from Kennedy Space Center. Hi, Miles.
[Miles O'brien, Cnn Space Correspondent:] Hi, Donna. NASA breathing a sigh of relief. You could only call this launch flawless. It was a perfect day, and the climb into orbit eight minutes and 30 seconds worth, was flawless as well. Now, 35 minutes into this mission, an 11-day mission, the crew already somewhere over the Middle East as we speak, traveling 17,000 miles an hour, working on precisely refining their orbit, as we speak. Let's take a look at that launch, which happened 35 minutes ago right now. And it was, as we say, a picture-perfect launch. They only had a few problems. Let's listen in
[Joel Wells, Nasa Public Affairs Commentator:] Booster ignition and liftoff of space shuttle Endeavour on a 21st century mission placing Earth back on the map.
[O'brien:] The voice of Joel Wells, NASA public affairs commentator. The reason he called it a mission of putting them on the map is this 11-day mission is about creating a three-dimensional topographic map of the world. And to that end, the crew is not going to spend any time having some fun up in orbit at the moment. No high- fives for them. They are going to get right to work deploying a 200- foot mast which will lean over the side of the shuttle's payload bay. Now, on that mast, at the end of it, is an antenna which beams radar beams down to the earth. There's another antenna on the payload bay. Those two images bounce off the Earth and are received back in the shuttle. The net result is a three-dimensional map, which has never been accomplished before. Some 70 percent of the Earth's surface expected to be mapped in all this. The primary customer for NASA on this, the Pentagon, obviously interested in good maps to guide their plane's and troops, but also scientists, geographers, geologists, hydrologists who want to learn more about how the Earth and the water around it is moving. That mission, as we say, going to last 11 days. Ten nine solid days of mapping is planned, the crew right now doing their best to get that map deployment process underway. That should happen about five hours from now. That'll be the first moment of truth on this mission. Miles O'Brien, CNN, reporting live from the Kennedy Space Center.

[Judy Woodruff, Cnn Anchor:] We go to Tampa, Florida where the head of the Central Command, Tommy Franks, the general, is going to be briefing reporters there and in Washington General Franks.
[General Tommy Franks, Commander, U.s. Central Command:] ... it reminds me of the sacrifices made by our men and women in uniform throughout the history of our country. And as I speak to you, we honor, we remember those sacrifices and we mourn the loss of three great soldiers in Afghanistan day before yesterday. I offer condolences to their families and to their loved ones, as well as to the families of those wounded in the service of their country in this honorable cause. These men are heroes, and America remembers. I'm also honored to be one of the commanders of this coalition in our global fight against terrorism, and I'm honored to serve alongside soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and national leaders of more than 50 nations who stand side by side with us. Today I'm especially pleased to be joined here by military representatives of two of these nations, Air Marshal Jack Stewart from the United Kingdom and Brigadier General Ken Gillespie from Australia. They've been with us since we first stood up this coalition out here at MacDill Air Force Base. As we speak today, we have more than 230 representatives from more than 20 nations out here with us, a very visible sign of the international commitment we see to our overall effort. Similarly, I want to recognize today the hospitality of the local community here in Tampa, which has opened its arms to our guests. It's an honor to have several friends from Tampa with us here today. I appreciate you being here. Today's the 62nd day of this fight in Afghanistan. Our objectives have not changed: We will remove the Taliban, this illegitimate leadership, as the governing power in Afghanistan, and we will destroy the Al Qaeda network, and we'll do this as part of a global effort to rid the world of terrorist organizations with global reach. We're progressing. Progressing well. But we have a long way to go. We're tightening the noose, but the way ahead has been correctly described as one where we'll find a dirty environment and a very dangerous environment. There remain pockets of Al Qaeda and very dedicated Taliban fighters in Afghanistan. The country is not yet stable. And we still have an awful lot of work to do. With that, I'll bring Jack and Ken up here, and we'd be pleased to answer your questions. Gentlemen?
[Question:] First question for General Franks. I think a lot of us want to know what's happening in Kandahar today. There seems to be a great deal of confusion about the status of the opposition forces, and our forces in particular.
[Franks:] The situation in Kandahar is, interestingly, as you described it. It reminds me of the situation in Mazar-e Sharif some weeks back, as well as the situation in Kunduz and Taloqan and then Herat. I think what we have seen reported is, in fact, true. We have seen the surrender of a great many Taliban forces inside Kandahar. We are not yet sure, we do not yet have a sense of comfort that there is stability in the city, and I don't expect that we will have a sense of comfort for, perhaps, two or three days, until we get a valid assessment of exactly what is going on in Kandahar.
[Question:] If I could hear either the air marshal or the brigadier. Do you feel like you're a part of the team here? JACK STEWART,
[Air Marshal, United Kingdom:] Absolutely. We've been here from pretty much the outset. I think, as our prime minister and other leaders around the world have said, we stand shoulder to shoulder with the United States in its response to the attacks of the 11th of September. We're all committed to making sure that terrorism is removed as a force in international affairs. That's what this coalition is all about, and that's what we are all here to do. It's a United States-led coalition. It's being organized here at Central Command, so that's why we are here. We are here to contribute our military capabilities. We're here to contribute our advice in the planning and execution of the campaign and to feed back to our national capitals the commander in chief's intent so that each of us can frame our military response appropriately within that overall intent. But this is one coalition, with one aim in mind, and everybody is resolved to see it through until that aim is achieved.
[Brigadier General Ken Gillespie, Australia:] If I could just add, not only do we feel part of it, but we feel like we belong. Many of you will remember that on the day of the attacks, on the 11th, that our prime minister was, in fact, in Washington and immediately committed Australians to the cause against terrorism. Many of our senior officers were, in fact, in the Pentagon at the time of the attack on that building. And, of course, tens of Australians disappeared in New York on the 11th of September. And so we feel like we belong as well as being part of what is a very happy and hardworking group here in MacDill.
[Franks:] It is, in fact, happy and hardworking. Although I must confess that the language characteristics of some of its members leave something to be desired.
[Question:] I wanted to ask you about Kandahar again. You said you had seen the surrender of a great many Taliban forces. There are also reports from the area that many of these forces are leaving with their weapons. I'm wondering whether either U.S. or opposition forces are pursuing or have, in fact, engaged or captured any of these forces.
[Franks:] Thank you. Yes, we have engaged forces who are leaving Kandahar with their weapons. This is a situation that's very similar to the situations we found in Mazar and also the situations that we found in Kunduz, when opposition forces moved there. I think a similar question was asked of Secretary Rumsfeld a few weeks ago. And he said, "As long as these people, as long as these Taliban fighters have their weapons and represent a threat, it's a war." Yes, they will be engaged.
[Question:] General, you said that they will be engaged. Number one, are they being engaged in hot pursuit, or are you just doing a blocking action? Are they being engaged from the air as they retreat? And what can you tell us about Mullah Omar, who supposedly was supposed to be facing justice and now apparently has vanished?
[Franks:] Let me begin at the end. I don't think that I would say that Mullah Omar has vanished. I think we have said all along, I think the president said, that we'll either bring him to justice or bring justice to him. So that's what I believe about Mullah Omar right now. With respect to what's going on in Kandahar, in an operational sense, we are blocking, in some cases, from the air. We are blocking, in some cases, with direct fires from the ground. And yes, Taliban forces have been engaged as they have moved out of the city of Kandahar.
[Question:] General Franks, are you getting any closer to locating bin Laden?
[Franks:] We're not sure. We think so. The situation that we have faced inside Afghanistan now for two months is that one will read dozens and dozens of intelligence reports, and it would probably not surprise you that they don't all agree with respect to where the key leaders are. And so, we have said that we're tightening the noose. And I think I probably would describe it that way. There are certain areas where we have opposition groups very much in control in Afghanistan and, of course, there are other areas where we do not yet have opposition groups in control of territory. And so, I will tell you honestly, no, I'm not sure that I know where bin Laden is right now.
[Question:] General, can you tell us about the Marines that have established this forward operating base? There was a report yesterday that they have, in fact, perceived some sort of a threat and they actually fired at something. Can you explain a little bit more about what happened there, and if, in fact, there was a threat to them at that forward operating base?
[Franks:] Yes. The Marines we have set up at Forward Operating Base Rhino, in fact, have a force from that forward operating base interdicting roads up in the vicinity of Kandahar. They also have security established around Forward Operating Base Rhino. They were involved in fights in both locations yesterday: one, interdicting roads up in the vicinity of Kandahar; and secondly, they identified what was perceived to be a threat, a small threat, to the forward operating base, and both of these enemy elements were engaged.
[Question:] Hamid Karzai has said he would like to see the non- Afghan fighters expelled from the country. Do you support that? And if not, what do you plan to do to prevent them from leaving the country?
[Franks:] I think that the exact legal approach that we will take, I really can't comment on. I will tell you that I think there is a possibility that a great many of the fighters that we see in Afghanistan will be treated as criminals. Additionally, there is the possibility that they may be brought out of the country of Afghanistan and be brought to trial, either by a tribunal in our own country. I think it's possible that some of the senior leadership of the Taliban may be dealt with in one or the other of those ways. So right now, I really can't tell you. I'll stay by the line that says we will bring them to justice or bring justice to them.
[Question:] You spoke a moment ago about tightening the noose, and you also said that you did not believe that Omar had vanished, and yet by all accounts on the ground he has escaped from Kandahar. Can you reconcile those?
[Franks:] I'll go back and say the same thing I said a minute ago about one receiving a great many intelligence reports. I will tell you that, as I stand here, I do not have reason to believe that Omar has in, fact, escaped Kandahar. I have not seen information that will prove that to me, nor have I seen information that he is still in Kandahar. So we simply don't know right now where Omar is.
[Question:] Basically with the pace in Afghanistan seeming to shift somewhat, what's the command's interest now, perhaps, in Sudan, Somalia or Iraq?
[Franks:] Let me ask you to put up chart number four, if you would please, if you can on the screen here. No, number four please. If the secretary was here, he'd use this plotter and he would have pointed out who those guys were, and I can go back and do that next time. In fact, if you look at this, this represents the area of responsibility of the United States Central Command, and you will see within this area of responsibility over on the left side Egypt, and all the way down to the horn of Africa and Kenya. Certainly Sudan is within this area. You'll also find Somalia. One finds Yemen in the Arabian peninsula there. Moving over to the northeast, Afghanistan, and then to the northwest of that, at least on this graphic, Iran and Iraq. In terms of what we expect to do next, I will only say that Central Command retains interest in the countries that are represented within this AOR, and the list of terrorist states, I think, has been published by our State Department, and so one can surmise where we're paying the greatest amount of attention.
[Question:] General, as a result of the friendly fire, if you want to call it that, accident, has anything changed policy-wise either in the air or on the ground how we're doing things to prevent something like that from happening again?
[Franks:] In a policy sense, no, nothing has changed. What we have done with this incident, as well as with the incident up in the vicinity of Mazar-e Sharif, is to investigate the incidents so that we can determine precisely what the cause of the incidents are, so that if it has to do with a technological solution, we can take that solution; if has to do with the training issues, so that we can take that kind of decision. But the short answer to your question is no, we have not made a policy change. I think several of us have said, this is a war. It's a hard thing. We mourn and I grieve for those who are lost in this. And it's our obligation to do the very best we can with the technology and the training that we have to avoid a repeat of these kinds of accidents and incidents, and we certainly will, within our power, do everything we can to do that. But it's also been said that there is no such thing as the perfect scientific war. There's a great deal of art involved in this. And so we will treat this as a war in which we're engaged, and that will be the way we'll continue to pursue it.
[Question:] Is there any indication of what might have been the cause of the incident?
[Franks:] I do not yet have that. I think we my view is that it's possible in dealing with a global position weapon, it's possible to either have an incorrect target location provided from the ground or to have a correct target location provided from the ground and to incorrectly program it into a weapon system. It's also possible to have a technical malfunction. And so what we have done is we have created an investigating body to take a look at that, to review the facts and circumstances to determine which of those possibilities we may have here. And that investigation is ongoing now.
[Question:] Opposition leaders near Tora Bora were warning earlier today of their concern that senior Al Qaeda members might be slipping over the border into Pakistan. Can you bring us up to date on what the U.S. effort there consists of to keep that from happening, and also what the Pakistani effort consists of?
[Franks:] The Tora Bora area certainly is an area that's of interest to us. We would like to prevent these senior Al Qaeda people from escaping to go anywhere, that's for sure. We have opposition forces in the Tora Bora area, as you know, and we have some of our special forces people with those forces. We're in coordination, certainly, with Pakistan, as well as with our opposition forces, watching carefully to do the best we can in this terribly rugged terrain to prevent the escape of these leaders.
[Question:] General Franks, what conditions has the government of Uzbekistan set on their reopening of Friendship Bridge? And specifically, what are they asking of the U.S. military in that regard?
[Franks:] President Karimov has made it clear to us that he wants to reopen Friendship Bridge. And obviously we want to get it opened as soon as we can, because we want to be able to open that humanitarian pipeline up there. No specific condition has been placed on the opening of Friendship Bridge, with the exception of making sure that the bridge can stand the heavy traffic and to be sure that it not booby trapped or mined, and to settle himself, in Uzbekistan, that the security situation in northern Afghanistan is such that he can do that. And so no specific demands have been made on us to take security action or anything like that. I believe that the bridge will be open in the next two or three days. That's my belief right now.
[Question:] With the situation so confused around Kandahar, how do your forces know who's friendly and who isn't?
[Franks:] The way they know who's friendly and who isn't is just by being not conservative, but by being cautious. One of the difficulties that one has any time you have a whole lot of people all wearing generally the same-looking clothing is the business of identification, friend and foe; we say IFF. And so the business of IFF is very much an issue, it was an issue in Mazar-e Sharif, it is an issue in Kandahar, and it's just something that we have to pay attention to, using all the means at our disposal.
[Question:] The current situation between Israel and Palestine, how is that impacting holding the coalition together?
[Franks:] The situation in the Middle East, essentially, while certainly problematic and I think I would join all of our leadership in hoping for a cessation of the violence there but it has not affected our ability to conduct this operation inside Afghanistan. I have seen no change in the willingness of the states in the region to support this effort.
[Question:] Are you concerned at all that Hamid Karzai cut a deal with Mullah Omar for his safe passage out of Kandahar?
[Franks:] One never knows precisely. Well, I'll say that the secretary and I have both communicated in no uncertain terms with the leadership, with Hamid Karazi, our expectation, and we believe that he shares the goal of a better Afghanistan that we share. And we believe that he will remain a part of our effort to bring Al Qaeda to justice, as well as to be sure that we have no opportunity to have the senior Taliban leadership be able to negatively influence the stability which we're working for inside Afghanistan. And so, of course, I'm concerned. I'm concerned until we are able to assure ourselves that there will be no loss and no escape of any of this Taliban leadership. But I will also say that I believe Mr. Karzai knows what our expectations are now.
[Question:] General, if I may just follow-up, too, just to clarify, you said, "I don't think Omar has vanished." And then you said, "I don't think we know where he is."
[Franks:] If I said, "I don't think he's vanished," let me correct that. What I will say is that, I do not have a reason to suspect that he has vanished. We continue to work on the area around Kandahar. And we simply do not know where he is right now, but that does not lead me to believe that he's vanished, if that makes sense to you.
[Question:] There is a wire service report out of Kabul today quoting a spokesman for the Northern Alliance who says that the caves in the Tora Bora complex have been secured now by Northern Alliance forces, that a mopping up operation is going on, that the main base of Osama bin Laden has been taken by the Northern Alliance. And he quotes his commander in the area, saying that some wives or some women, I should say some vehicles and some weapons were recovered, but no Osama bin Laden, and this commander believes that Osama has now escaped into Pakistan. Would you comment on that please, sir?
[Franks:] I read the report, and the report simply does not square with what I believe to be the situation on the ground right now. There certainly is movement by opposition forces in the Tora Bora area. but that area is by no means completely secured and searched. And so that operation in Tora Bora continues.
[Question:] General, I'm curious, from your coalition partners here, I'd like to hear if you all can tell us what whether your forces are involved in what's happening in the southern part of the country right now, and in particular, how much you, General Franks, are relying on them to carry out the coalition mission?
[Stewart:] Well, as regards to where our forces are currently operating, I mean it's certainly not our policy to comment on the details of operations while they're ongoing. I mean, what I will say is that, as far as the United Kingdom is concerned, we've had a substantial military contribution from the very start of this campaign. We have contributed air assets, particularly in those areas where the demand is greatest, particularly in the areas of intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, air-to-air refueling and on those sorts of things, and materiel transport, maritime patrol and so on. We have and have had for a considerable time a substantial of surface vessels in the area contributing to the maritime component, as well as Tomahawk-armed submarines that have launched missiles against targets in Afghanistan. And we have had and we do have forces operating on the ground in Afghanistan. But as I say, those operations are ongoing, so you'll understand if I don't comment on any detail.
[Gillespie:] And from an Australian perspective, we do have forces operating on the ground in Afghanistan. I, too, won't venture as to what they're doing at the present time. And the Australian forces are also taking part in other military operations in the region. And we have ground, maritime and air assets currently working, either with General Franks' coalition or with other U.S. commanders. And, I mean, we think they're making an important military contribution, but you'd better ask the commander.
[Franks:] First off, I'm sure that you all understood what Air Marshal Stewart said. I'm not really at all sure you were able to understand what Ken said.
[Question:] Speaking of troops, General, as we draw closer to Christmas, are we thinking of sending more people, more troops from the United States? And what can some of the, you know, military people here expect?
[Franks:] Our practice throughout this is to say that we continue to plan for a variety of activities. And so it really would be premature, it really wouldn't be right for me to tell you whether I think we'll increase the number of forces that we have on the ground in the region. I will simply say that the possibility of increasing forces on the ground is certainly on the table, the possibility is on the table.
[Question:] General Franks, can you give us any better sense of the number of specific engagements that the Marines have encountered with fleeing Taliban, the degree of resistance that they're facing from those retreating troops, and also whether you anticipate Marines going into Kandahar, the city itself?
[Franks:] Let me begin with the end of that one. I will not say that we anticipate the Marines going into Kandahar. I would simply leave it on the table. We certainly have not ruled out the possibility of the Marines going into Kandahar. We have not ruled it out. In terms of the overall number of engagements by the Marines, I'm not sure. Since they moved into Forward Operating Base Rhino, I can tell you in the last 24 hours they have been involved in several fights, both from both ground-to-ground and air-to-ground.
[Question:] General, I know a lot of people around this building have expressed concern about Taliban troops reorganizing east of Mazar-e Sharif. What's the level of stability in Kunduz, in particular? We've gotten indications that special forces need to reinforce Kunduz. Is that accurate? And if you can describe the scene there.
[Franks:] Pull up that map, please, that shows Afghanistan. The question had to do with Kunduz. And Kunduz, in the city itself, we are not seeing any, sort of, dramatic instability. The area that I think was probably being reference is down south of Kunduz in the general vicinity of Baghlan and just a bit further to the south. In fact, there is a pocket of Taliban down there. We have not seen that body of people threaten anyone, but they do continue to have a dialogue they, being that group of Taliban with the leaders who are currently up the opposition leaders up in Kunduz. We do not believe that the road between Kunduz and Mazar-e Sharif is a very safe road to be using right now. Inside Mazar-e Sharif we are not seeing any great difficulty in terms of turbulence. One will find the occasional instability of looting food and so forth like that, but Mazar-e Sharif remains essentially calm. The same thing out here in Herat. The same thing over here in Kabul. Kandahar I talked about, and it's just going to take us two or three days, probably, to be sure that we understand everything that's gone on in Kandahar, as well as down here on the border by Quetta at Spin Boldak.
[Question:] On the redeployment of the Rangers yesterday back to Fort Benning, should we read into that any sign that the U.S. military commitment is starting to pull down now? There's been a theme in some of the coverage that with the fall of Kandahar and the redeployment of Rangers the mission may be starting to ebb down.
[Franks:] The mission has not started to ebb down, and the short answer to your question is, no, one should not read the redeployment of these Rangers as an indication that we are going to pull down the force structure over in the theater. That is not the case. And that would be a misread.
[Question:] Last week you talked about evidence of weapons of mass destruction research found. What's changed with that?
[Franks:] The short answer is, we have not yet found evidence of weapons of mass destruction in the sites that we have been in. I mentioned last week that we were somewhere over having identified 40- plus potential places to look. As of this point, we have been more than 20 of those to take samples and to pick up evidence, if you will, but we have not yet seen anything that convinces us that there were WMD assets in those facilities. That doesn't mean we're going to stop looking, though.
[Question:] General, those Taliban fighters who have left Kandahar without being disarmed, what is your sense of their numbers and their offensive capabilities at this point?
[Franks:] It's a fair question, and I can't give you an honest answer. My assessment is that there certainly have been some who have left. We do not know the numbers. I do not know the numbers. The last update that I had was probably six hours ago, and I have not seen Taliban leaving in large numbers, armed, up to this point.
[Question:] You said there's still a focus in Tora Bora. Locals there in Eastern Afghanistan say there's another mountain complex called Malawa about 50 miles southeast of Jalalabad along the Pakistani border, that's a lower elevation and also possibly a location that's easier to get into Pakistan. Do we have U.S. soldiers around there, and is it a focus in the hunt for bin Laden?
[Franks:] Each place where we do not have opposition forces in control of a piece of geography remains a focus for us, and I won't break the practice, I think, of not describing exactly where our special forces and special operating forces are. But I will acknowledge that the area you mentioned, as well as several others certainly are interesting to us.
[Question:] Can you say whether the engagements involving the Marines from the air, have they been with helicopter gunships? And also, have U.S. special forces been involved in those firefights on the ground around Kandahar?
[Franks:] The Marines had been involved from air to ground. My understanding is that they have used some helicopter firepower. They have also used some of their ground systems. They have been in constant contact with our people who are with the opposition groups, and they'll continue to do that. As we consider whether we want to keep all of our forces positioned just as they are right now or whether we intend to shift some of their locations will be the business of the next two, three days in front of us.
[Question:] The special forces, have they also been involved in those firefights on the ground around Kandahar?
[Franks:] Our special forces have certainly been involved in the fights around Kandahar. As a matter of fact, these three brave young men that we lost the day before yesterday were involved in firefights up to the north of Kandahar. So yes, we have had our forces involved in the fight in the vicinity of Kandahar.
[Staff:] Ladies and gentlemen, just a couple more please. Maybe one more.
[Question:] Are there any countries in the Middle East represented in the coalition, specifically Iraq? And also, what have their contributions been?
[Franks:] Iraq is not in the coalition.
[Question:] If I heard you correctly earlier, you said our goal in Afghanistan is to bring justice to the Al Qaeda leadership, but said that, regarding senior Taliban leadership, we want them in a position where they can no longer negatively influence stability inside the country. Are you drawing a distinction between how we might handle Al Qaeda leaders and senior Taliban leaders such as Omar, and suggesting the possibility there could be something we could be satisfied with something less than international tribunal, military tribunal or imprisonment for folks like Omar?
[Franks:] Well, I think it's a fair question, but on the latter point about the Taliban, I really can't give you what the overall policy would be with respect to Taliban senior leadership. What I am sure of is that there is a sense that they must be brought to justice, and that goes without saying. And I think the thing that causes the question to keep coming back is the business of, do we demand to take them ourselves out of Afghanistan, or could they be perhaps handled in some other way in terms of the law by a government within Afghanistan? And so, that's the reason that I gave you the answer I did. I'm not sure what the appropriate what the policy decision will be that is taken on that issue. And so for me to say that the foreign fighters inside Afghanistan will be treated exactly the same way as the Taliban leadership, I simply can't say that because I don't know it to be true. And that's what I was trying to communicate. OK, thank you very much.
[Woodruff:] CENTCOM Commander Tommy Franks there in Tampa, Florida, where the Central Command is headquartered, answering questions from reporters in both cities. I think there are a couple of things we want to stress right now. And that is that he painted, I think, what you have to say is a pretty well less than optimistic picture at this point of how the allied forces are doing in finding not only Osama bin Laden but also Mullah Omar, who is the Taliban leader. He said, and I just want to quote a couple things, he said, "We are progressing well, but we still have a long way to go. We are tightening the noose, but the way ahead he said is a dirty environment." He said, "there remain pockets of al Qaeda and dedicated Taliban fighters. The country is not yet stable. We still have an awful lot of work to do." With regard to Kandahar, he said some Taliban soldiers have been apprehended. He said those with weapons are being stopped and they are being attacked, he said, both by allied and opposition forces on the ground. But he said when it comes to finding Omar, at one point, he said, "Well, I wouldn't say he's vanished," but then went on to say, 'We don't have reason to believe that he's escaped but neither do we know where he is." The same answer almost virtually with regard to Osama bin Laden. He said reporters said, "Are you any closer to finding Osama bin Laden?" He said, "I'm not sure. We think so. We read dozens of intelligence reports and they don't all agree. I'm not sure I know where he is." Just quickly, two other points, one is with regard to how much longer this engagement will go on. He said there is a possibility that we will increase the number of forces on the ground in Afghanistan. He said that is something that is on the table. And when one of the reporters asked him whether the fact that the Army Rangers have been redeployed back to the United States, if that indicates that this war in Afghanistan is starting to ebb down, he said not at all. You should not read that as any lessening of the effort on our part. Again, Central Command head, General Tommy Franks, briefing reporters there in Tampa, where his headquarters is and the Pentagon. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[John Bogle, Founder, The Vanguard Group:] Energy, energy, I have so much energy I almost don't know what to do with it. I mean it's kind of scary, honestly.
[Beverly Schuch, Host:] John Bogle has a 70-year-old body and a 26-year-old heart. He burns off his scary energy by playing a ferocious game of squash and by brilliantly investing the half trillion dollars Americans have entrusted to his various Vanguard mutual funds. Twenty-five years ago, Bogle single-handedly revolutionized the mutual fund industry by a simple and elegant invention, the index fund. [on camera]: What was the initial reaction?
[Bogle:] This will amount to nothing. There's no point in even paying any attention to it. No one ever heard the name Vanguard.
[Schuch:] Bogle's folly.
[Bogle:] The Index Fund was called Bogle's folly.
[Schuch:] Bogle's folly, the Vanguard 500 Index Fund, is now the number one or number two mutual fund in the world, depending on which day you check. And his concept of indexing has spawned legions of imitators.
[Unidentified Reporter:] Indexing continues to grow. Either way, index funds are popular. The index funds have outperformed 80 percent...
[Bogle:] I've taken all the mutual fund manuals going back over the years and calculated the returns of the average common stock fund. For 30 years before 1975, '45 to '75 and I could show that the average, the Standard & Poor's 500 Index had outperformed those mutual funds by about 1.3 percent a year.
[Schuch:] Oh, but it's so boring, I mean it's just an average thing.
[Bogle:] Boring.
[Schuch:] There's growth companies out that. They're glamorous, they're exciting.
[Bogle:] But the reality of all this is so easy and that is if there's a 10 percent market return out there and you own the market, you're going to get 10 percent and $10,000 over a period of time is going to turn into, say, $300,000. If you put $10,000 in an average fund and earn the same 10 percent, which is what they're going to do, and they're going to take two and a half percent out. So you're earning seven and a half percent. The manager's getting it. You're not going to have $300,000. You're going to have $150,000. So if you think of it in this way, it's not very complicated. You the investor put up 100 percent of the money, take 100 percent of the risk and get 50 percent of the return and the manager puts up none of the capital, takes none of the risk and gets the other 50 percent of the return. That just isn't right. That just isn't right. So the index fund does that. And it is boring. It's terribly boring but you've got to decide when you want to retire do you want to retire interested or rich.
[Schuch:] John Bogle has gotten tremendously rich from that boring, boring idea and he has no intention of retiring. He's had seven lives to live, a new one after each of his five heart attacks, one operation and finally the transplant that gave him the heart and energy of a 26-year-old. A larger than life legend of Wall Street, the founder of the Vanguard Group, John Bogle, is next on PINNACLE. Let me toss some adjectives out to you that have been attributed to you both inside and outside the industry self-righteous, maverick, iconoclast, bad boy of mutual fund industry, over zealous and irritatingly preachy.
[Bogle:] I don't know, I'd just have to say true.
[Schuch:] John Bogle revels in being a zealous maverick and his many admirers love it, as well. They even call him Saint Jack.
[Bogle:] A brave new heart with steady gaze, you've sailed your flagship into waters uncharted.
[Schuch:] He's been canonized for his thriftiness. He wears belts that are older than some of his employees. And he's still faster and more accurate with a slide rule than a computer.
[Bogle:] Well, how do I get it on my machine?
[Unidentified Employee:] Let me show you.
[Schuch:] You are a kind of a legendary penny pincher, you know?
[Bogle:] I suppose.
[Schuch:] You have a well earned there's a story about you at the Plaza Hotel in New York. You know that story?
[Bogle:] Sure. I was going up to a dinner and two of my associates at Vanguard were in front of me in line. We went in there and they got the room at the corporate rate and it was $200, I think. And so I got up there and I said to this room clerk who was kind of, you know, very kind of haughty, Frenchified guy like they have at The Plaza, I said, "Let me, I want a room please." And I said, "Let me tell you this, there is no way in god's world I'm going to pay $200 for a room here." So he said I said, "I've always, whenever I've stayed here a few times in the past I've always stayed at the cheapest room at The Plaza." And he said, "Just how, when was the last time you were here?" I said, "Well maybe 10 years ago." He said, "How much was the cheapest room?" And I said, "$34." He said, "Well we can't do that for you, but I do have a sort of..." I think he said a converted broom closet, something like that up there, no windows, which is great in New York.
[Schuch:] Because you don't want the...
[Bogle:] Yes, you don't want that garbage can banging around every morning. So I said, "That'd be great." And I think it was, I think he said, it was something still outrageous like $105. And I said, "Do I get the corporate rate on that?" No, I didn't get the corporate rate. And the funny part of the story is I turned around, of course, after all the squabbling up there, I said to the man behind me, I said I'm so sorry to hold everybody up. You know, I had this little thing about I don't want to spend too much money. And he says, "Aren't you John Bogle?" That's absolutely true. And I laughed and I said, "How would you know that?" And he said, "Oh, I'm a Vanguard shareholder. I recognized you and now I believe. I believe everything they say about economy and cheapness."
[Schuch:] You see, the shareholders love you.
[Bogle:] Yes.
[Schuch:] That word shareholder is one of the secrets of Vanguard's success. Unlike other mutual fund companies, Vanguard is set up as a non-profit organization which manages money for its owners, the investors in its 124 mutual funds. Vanguard's other major secret is simple and powerful its costs are the lowest in the industry.
[Bogle:] To save our business from ruin, we must at once undertake a vigorous risk lowering. To do this, the first step must be to reduce expenses, reduce expenses. That is the message I bring to you today.
[Schuch:] So what are you showing me?
[Bogle:] Well, this is the original thesis, "The Economic Role of the Investment Company."
[Schuch:] Now, you wrote your senior thesis at Princeton, which it sounds very prescient, actually, for the rest of your life. What gave you the idea to write it about the mutual fund industry?
[Bogle:] Well, that's a wonderful story. I went into Firestone Library in Princeton University and I opened "Fortune" magazine for December 1949. On page 116 there was an article and it was called...
[Schuch:] What memory.
[Bogle:] Well, I had good occasion to look back at this. And it was called "Big Money In Boston," which is where the headquarters of the mutual fund industry was in those days. And it was a tiny little industry. It was described in the article as tiny but contentious, tiny but contentious.
[Schuch:] And that appealed to you?
[Bogle:] That appealed to me and I was looking for a thesis. I also, what also appealed to me is I wanted to write a senior thesis on a subject on which nobody had ever written before. So it was uniqueness and tiny but contentious.
[Schuch:] But this really determined the course of your life, then. Did you know when you were writing this that this was going to be such a major part of your life?
[Bogle:] I couldn't have dreamed it.
[Schuch:] Bogle's college thesis was so good it got the attention of Wall Street big shots, especially Walter Morgan, one of Bogle's heroes. He was then president of Wellington Management, one of the nation's most successful investment funds.
[Bogle:] Walter Morgan was a great, great man, certainly the great man of my life. He took kind of a shine to me when he met me. He wasn't sure he wanted to bring me into his company because he had gone to Princeton, too. It was a kind of playboy kind of thing. People didn't take life very seriously. People had a lot of money and he thought well, do I need anybody from Princeton around here?
[Schuch:] Didn't he read your thesis and say something like this guy knows more about mutual funds than we do?
[Bogle:] Exactly right. And I've kept a copy of that, his little memo. He wrote a little two page memo to everybody and it was really very generous and very, very nice. And so I started there. "As a result of this thesis we have added Mr. Bogle to our Wellington Management Company organization," very, very nice words because remember, nobody came into this business in that era. The business was...
[Schuch:] It was in its infancy.
[Bogle:] It was dead. The whole industry was $2.5 billion and now we take in $5 billion in some months, take in new money. It's twice the size in one month it's twice the size of an entire industry.
[Schuch:] John Bogle became president of Wellington then got fired. Find out why when PINNACLE returns. John Bogle named his great experiment Vanguard after the flagship of his hero, Lord Nelson. Nelson's ship, Vanguard, led the British fleet to victory over Napoleon at the Battle of the Nile in 1798.
[Bogle:] There's the HMS Vanguard sitting there. And I read Lord Nelson's dispatch, so it's quite something. Without the naval achievements of Great Britain, there's no name Vanguard.
[Schuch:] The battle's symbolism is appropriate for Bogle. He's a great lover of military history and his life has been one battle after another. In spite of great efforts to destroy him both in business and in life, he's survived brilliantly.
[Bogle:] I've got a brand new heart so I don't have the old heart disease. It's gone. It's in a jar of formaldehyde down at Hanneman Hospital and that's history. No pickles, no chips, no onions. A little bit of sauerkraut.
[Schuch:] John Bogle's first life came to an end on a tennis court when he was just 31 years old. [on camera]: What happened that day?
[Bogle:] I was playing tennis with my brother-in-law and I felt this kind of funny thing go wrong, like a big bright light. I was throwing the ball up to serve it and a bright light, and I couldn't do it. Nothing was there. So I, and I felt kind of funny in my chest and I sat under a tree for a minute and I said if I didn't know better, I'd swear I just had a heart attack. And we both roared with laughter. And I got up and finished the match. This is not too smart.
[Schuch:] Was it over then?
[Bogle:] And within about a half an hour I thought I was going to die. It just kind of crept up on me in that way and I could barely, I couldn't pick up a phone to call the hospital or anything. We finally got a doctor, took me to the hospital and they had a, I think a pretty close call with me. So I was kind of immobilized for a while, six weeks in the hospital. And then back to work.
[Schuch:] Did you think it was a one time event and that was going to be it then?
[Bogle:] Well, they diagnosed it as a standard heart attack.
[Schuch:] Heart attack.
[Bogle:] And it turns out to be this unusual disease that was only discovered in the mid-1980s and it's genetic and it involves the heart muscle gradually slowing. It's unable to pump and it gets a lot of fatty tissue on it and eventually you just die.
[Schuch:] When you're 31 years old, though, and you've got a young wife and a young family and you're, you feel like you're pretty immortal, you've been in good health your whole life. What affect did that have on how you fashioned your life?
[Bogle:] I guess I'm embarrassed to say I don't think too much. I was just it drives my wife crazy but I say press on regardless is the family rule. And she says don't say that anymore. But you just kind of press on regardless.
[Schuch:] That was the beginning, though, of a succession of, what, five, six...
[Bogle:] Yes, I think there were six.
[Schuch:] ... major heart attacks.
[Bogle:] And biopsies and all that kind of thing going don. And then finally they put a pacemaker into me in 1967. It didn't do any good at all and it was kind of a terrible operation. They had to cut you wide open. It was a mess. And I almost died then.
[Schuch:] Does it make you very either religious or fatalistic or, you have to come to grips with this somehow that I, there's no reason on god's green earth why I should be here today. It has to do something to you.
[Bogle:] Well, I kind of, I'm a day to day kind of person. I never, I don't recall, one is never sure, but I don't recall lying awake all night thinking I was going to die. I don't recall ever in my whole life, even waiting for the transplant when I you know, I used to say at night in the hospital not my will but thy will be done and at first I knew that was going to be the way it was whether I said it or not. But I thought it was a good idea to let him know.
[Schuch:] I'm with you.
[Bogle:] Yes. And thanks again.
[Schuch:] Right. So, but even waiting, knowing that you were going to, what, how, whatever shape your heart was in it was going, that was it, this was your last chance?
[Bogle:] Well, you kind of hope that the heart would last until a transplant came and 128 days in the hospital intravenous is not exactly fun, but it was not bad. It's not bad. And they took wonderful care of me at Hanneman Hospital here in Philadelphia and, you know, you kind of get through each day. My way of doing it was to stay very busy, working most all day just about every day just to keep my mind off, you know, difficult things. What's the point of dwelling on them?
[Schuch:] Do you know whose heart you have?
[Bogle:] I found out down the road actually I ran into the guy, a young man who got his liver and the first thing they told me, the only thing they told me when I, the first words I heard was you've got a great heart, young and strong. Then right away when they put the heart in you it starts, just by itself. It doesn't usually even take a shock.
[Schuch:] Really?
[Bogle:] Boom.
[Schuch:] It just knows?
[Bogle:] It's kind of scary, I think of lying there in the hospital without either heart but there you go. But I didn't dwell on that either. But this, he told me it was a young man. This liver recipient told me it was a young man 26 years old and it's a fantastic I have a wonderful match. They match for blood. That's essential. That's the only thing they can really match for, blood type. And it just was a great match because my body and I'm one of the most, if not the most, I think, successful heart transplant recipients in America.
[Schuch:] When PINNACLE returns, Bogle battles with the mutual fund industry. And how losing his job has made millions of Americans rich. Tell me why I should invest in an index fund.
[Bogle:] Because in the long run we're all average less cost and the index fund is average less a teeny cost and a mutual fund is average less a large cost.
[Schuch:] It sounds like a no brainer now, but when John Bogle first proposed an index fund, it was revolutionary and it not only made his clients rich, it saved his job. He had become CEO of Wellington, the precursor of Vanguard. But just as he reached the pinnacle, the foundations began to shake. [on camera]: The year that you became CEO of Wellington was a bad health year for you that year.
[Bogle:] Yes. They didn't want to make me the CEO because of my health and I said well look, if I'm going to die, you know, it would be nice to do that before I went. That was '67 and I was really running the company long before that because around 1964 or 5 Mr. Morgan said make the decisions, whatever decisions you're going to make to get the company going again. We were having a little slow spell there. And so I did the, I did a merger. I was impulsive, brash and wrong.
[Schuch:] And it turned out to be your downfall.
[Bogle:] Yes, but it was my own stupidity because I believed that there were such things as super investment managers. They had a super investment record, this Boston group that I merged with, and we got along well at the beginning and they were money managers. I've always been more of the businessman, the one that developed the company concept and strategy.
[Schuch:] When did things start to go wrong?
[Bogle:] Well, it was a sort of constant struggle because they felt that we should have kind of a collegial participative management they called it. And I'm sort of a bull. I want to hear both sides, but I've already thought about both sides to the best of my ability.
[Schuch:] You've made your decision.
[Bogle:] I've pretty much made the decision and they didn't like that. I fear I'm not the best compromiser in the world.
[Schuch:] You're not the best loser, either. You...
[Bogle:] Well, there is that. So I finally got fired. I had a I've got a wonderful speech that I gave, and it was really a darned good speech, one of my better efforts. This is quite necessary. I mean that's, ooh my goodness, I'm going to have to pare it down to get it into my 25 minutes. And my own wonderful wife Eve, who came to hear the talk.
[Schuch:] Bogle loves writing and making speeches and he's become legendary for his apt use of quotation and his lucid style. The speech he gave upon getting fired ultimately convinced his board to let him try a new kind of fund management, none at all. The index fund, which holds the stocks in the S&P; 500 Index, allowed for a real no load fund, all profits returned to the shareholders. The shareholders returned the favor. In 1999 when Bogle reached 70, the Vanguard board told him it was time to retire. He refused and with investor pressure, the board relented. He vows to stay until the final act.
[Bogle:] And this is a speech for the Woodrow Wilson house in Washington, D.C. tomorrow night. It's about economics and idealism and how they go together, how Woodrow Wilson's economics were dictated by his idealism and how Vanguard's economics were dictated by my idealism.
[Unidentified Businessman:] So economics is not a science apart from the person?
[Bogle:] That's exactly right. It comes to what kind of moral and ethical values you have, at least that's the way I feel about it. We've also got Ralph Waldo Emerson and Theodore Roosevelt here. The Emerson we're working on is an institution, in fact, the length and shadow of one man.
[Schuch:] Just as Vanguard is the length and shadow of John Bogle, so is he the living measure of William Yates Bogle, his father.
[Bogle:] He was in the Royal Flying Corps in W.W.I. He was an American who went over and had to join the action.
[Schuch:] The Bogles lived a comfortable life in New Jersey until the great crash of 1929. The fortune made by Jack's grandfather, founder of the American Can Company, evaporated and the three Bogle boys went to work.
[Bogle:] I used to worry about money all the time.
[Schuch:] You did?
[Bogle:] Yes. Where was the next dollar going to come from?
[Schuch:] Oh, after the crash.
[Bogle:] Yes, absolutely, I mean really have it on my mind. So I started, as my brothers did, too, to work at a very young age. And we were working summers certainly at the age of nine or 10 years old, and sometimes in the winters, too.
[Schuch:] Bogle's hard work and determination got him into Blair Academy, which was a turning point in his life.
[Bogle:] I thrived and I think, I think, in retrospect, that the teachers saw something in me that said we are going to beat the devil out of this kid and make him work because he has something going for the world. I can still see our English teacher in our junior, in our senior year and I can see the papers that he sent back to me, the themes we did. And it looked like a chicken had walked through red ink and then walked over my paper.
[Schuch:] What Bogle has given the world is not only his vision, but his unique determination to make it happen, the grit that overcame a weak heart.
[Bogle:] I asked my children once, if you could use one word to describe me, what would it be? Every one of them said exactly the same thing, determination. Determination. I use this quote, it's a quote of Churchill's when he was aging. He went back to Harrow School and frail, a year or so before he died, and the headmaster asked him if he'd like to speak at this black tie school dinner in England. And he stood up and he said, "Never give up. Never, never, never, never, never." And then he sat down to thunderous applause.

[Jonathan Mann, Insight:] With goodwill and hopeful words. The 54 nations of the British Commonwealth addressed coup plotters and criminals. The means they choose are comparatively weak. [on camera]: Hello, and welcome. The prime minister of Fiji must be wondering what the world has come to. Mahendra Chaudhry has been a prisoner in his own parliament for nearly three weeks now. His captor is negotiating the formation of a new government that would exclude him, and the military has taken over and imposed martial law on the country to try to end the chaos. Tuesday in London, a Commonwealth committee gathered to consider what it could do. Its answer to bar whoever claims to speak for Fiji from routine Commonwealth meetings. It is not the kind of measure known to frighten ambitious gunmen or professional soldiers, but the Commonwealth is itself not known to frighten them either. On our program today the Commonwealth copes with crisis. We begin with CNN London bureau chief Tom Mintier. Tom?
[Tom Mintier, Cnn London Bureau Chief:] Jonathan, for the past three weeks, the Commonwealth has been talking mostly behind closed doors. Well, today, they finally acted. It was an action that was pretty much expected but not as strong as many might have hoped for.
[Mompati Merafhe, Botswanan Foreign Minister:] Fiji should be suspended from the council of the Commonwealth, pending the restoration of democracy and the rule of law.
[Mintier:] The suspension is not a first for Fiji. It was cast out once before following a coup in 1987 but allowed back three years ago. The council of the Commonwealth is a 54-nation grouping of Britain and many of its former colonies. The Australian foreign minister said that while his country may enact some measures, he fears punishing Fiji would cause more damage than help.
[Alexander Downer, Australian Foreign Minister:] Despite our immense anger about what has happened in Fiji, we are not going to try to destroy the whole of the Fijian economy. We just don't think that is the right thing to do.
[Mintier:] What appears to be on the agenda right now is diplomacy. Because hostages are involved in Fiji, the Commonwealth grouping is seeking an end to the crisis before considering any form of diplomatic punishment. A representative from the human rights group Amnesty International says the Commonwealth's involvement is the right move.
[Maya Catsanis, Amnesty International:] So anything they do and say will bear some influence on what is going on there on the ground at the moment.
[Mintier:] Despite Fiji's suspension from the Commonwealth grouping, most of the ministers seem to prefer dialogue to drastic action. One saying that economic sanctions is really not the thing to do because it would have a ripple effect on other nations in the Pacific something they're apparently unwilling or unable to do right now. Jonathan?
[Mann:] Tom, so what is the practical impact of the punishment that they've chosen the suspension?
[Mintier:] Well, I think the practical impact is fairly minimal. They are going to be excluded from all Commonwealth meetings and technical aid, nothing even close to what the Australians and the New Zealanders have been talking about. They've been talking about limiting all the military ties and the assistance and training and even going so far as to sporting events. You know, the Rugby Union is extremely big in Fiji, and saying the teams might not be willing to go there and play or allow the Fijians to play in any Rugby Union games. So right now, it appears that the dialogue is on the front burner.
[Mann:] It sounds, from what you're saying, like there were other options on the table. Was it obvious to those involved that really doing something symbolic was the only way to proceed?
[Mintier:] I think because hostages are involved, they wanted to go a little bit past symbolism by, you know, coming out and actually suspending them from belonging to the Commonwealth. While they can't do that in this meeting it has to be at a meeting of the full Commonwealth, not just the foreign ministers. So they were hand-tied a little bit as to what action they could do. They came out probably with the strongest thing they could from this group waiting for full action from the Commonwealth.
[Mann:] I can't help but wonder if I were a hostage or you were, if you would feel like you were getting a lot of help from these kinds of people. Was there much talk about Mr. Chaudhry and about the other hostages who are still being held?
[Mintier:] There was discussion in their communique afterwards, saying that because hostages are involved that should be the highest priority and dealing with the safe release of the hostages. And they say that they want to deal with the military in Fiji to ensure that the constitution that has been set aside is once again put forward and that human rights are respected. So because the hostage situation is still an ongoing problem, they felt it was probably best to deal with that first and deal with any type of political punishment possibly at a later time.
[Mann:] Our bureau chief Tom Mintier. Thanks very much. Fiji and the Solomon Islands are much better known for relaxation than tension. After the break, we'll ask why there is now so much trouble in paradise. Stay with us. For most of us, Pacific islands are hard to find on a map, harder still to find in a newspaper. They are forgotten by much of the world, except when it comes time to fantasize about the sand, the sun and the lifestyle. The truth, when we learn it, can be a bit of a surprise. [on camera]: Welcome back. The poet John Donne once reflected that no man is an island untouched by the events that surround him. In that sense, no island is really an island either. In the South Pacific, Fiji is just one of the out-of-the-way places feeling the kinds of political or economic pressures that can touch any country in the world. CNN's Tim Lister has a look.
[Tim Lister, Cnn Correspondent:] Say South Pacific, and many people will think of a musical and "Some Enchanted Evening." [Begin Video Clip, "south Pacific"]
[Actor:] Some enchanted evening.
[Lister:] This is not a region traditionally regarded as the vortex of unrest. The typical image conjured up is of palm-fringed beaches, spectacular sunsets and easy-going people blessed by nature's bounty. The reality is less rose-tinted. In Fiji, ethnic chauvinism, always rumbling like some political volcano, erupts into a coup. The prime minister and 30 others are held hostage at the parliament, the security forces divided, the economy sinking. In the Solomon Islands, ethnic tensions between the main islands explode. The prime minister is held hostage, the security forces divided, the economy sinking. This was the Solomons' prime minister speaking two weeks ago.
[Bartholomew Ulufa'alu, Solomons Prime Minister:] I'm asking for civilian police that will enforce the law because of the problems in our own police force.
[Unidentified Male:] That's armed police force, an armed police intervention.
[Ulufa'alu:] That's right. An armed police you're dealing with criminals.
[Peter Lyon, University Of London:] This internal migration and the difference, the very strong difference that some islanders feel toward people on nearby, but the adjacent islands, even though they're all supposed to be members of the same nation state.
[Lister:] Throughout the South Pacific, economies are stagnating, partly because of their isolation from world markets. Tourism isn't enough to sustain these island states and modernization brings as much risk as it does opportunity.
[Lyon:] It's almost as if the Internet age and cyberspace have arrived at the same time as the mobile phone is being moved into these countries for the first time. So there's a much sharpened awareness, not only of the outside world and the differences there, but of the differences within the country.
[Lister:] Papua New Guinea has been plagued by sectarian violence since independence 25 years ago. Despite a super abundance of minerals, it's getting poorer. One in 10 children die before they reach the age of 5. Even traditionally stable communities such as the Kingdom of Tonga are feeling the winds of change.
[Lyon:] In Tonga, for instance, where there's a very stable, conservative monarchical system, there are groundswells of unrest and of disquiet about such a traditional system. I think there's nowhere in the South Pacific where you could say these things couldn't happen.
[Lister:] In the Cook Islands, half of all civil servants have lost their jobs. The country's national debt is one of the highest in the world. The tiny island of Nauru used to make good money out of exporting phosphates. Last week, Australian justice minister Amanda Vanstone said there was evidence Nauru was now being used by Russian crime syndicates to launder million of dollars through shell companies and brass plate banks. A leaked analysis from the Australian foreign ministry recently predicted that incompetence and corruption among South Pacific states threaten financial collapse and instability across the region not quite the serene picture of the travel brochures. Tim Lister, CNN.
[Mann:] Joining us now to talk more about the region is James Clad, a former diplomat from New Zealand who is now professor of Asian Studies at Georgetown University. Thanks so much for being with us.
[James Clad, Georgetown University:] Sure.
[Mann:] When we look at Fiji and at the Solomon Islands, it seems like very similar situations. Is there a reason that they are both happening and both happening now?
[Clad:] Well, I think there is some trigger effect by what happened in Fiji, and I think that much of the commentary just a moment ago shows that some of these problems are things that just didn't happen overnight. There's a lot of expectation that these places, even the largest of which are quite small I mean, there's 400,000 people in the Solomon Islands, six islands, 70 languages that somehow these would hang together as countries. And the fiction, if you like, held together for a long time. But particularly in parts of Melanesia you have to understand that the South Pacific is Polynesian and Melanesian. But in the Melanesian side Papua New Guinea, now the Solomons and Fiji there's a lot of tension under the surface, and I think things are beginning to kind of crack open the structures that were put in place after the colonial powers left.
[Mann:] So are these places inherently unstable politically?
[Clad:] I think that we're asking a lot of these countries to be full-fledged nation states. Some of them are already aid junkies. A report just a moment ago mentioned the fact that there seems to be criminal syndicates possibly in place in Nauru. Some of these countries make a living by selling passports to Chinese criminal syndicates as well. I think the blush is off the bloom in the South Pacific, and I think the countries nearby Australia and New Zealand are having to look very closely at the viability of some of these countries. The Cook Islands, for example, is actually still governed in theory by New Zealand, and it's just been run miserably for a very long time.
[Mann:] Many of these islands receive a lot of visitors, a lot of tourists. What do the tourists find when they go? Do they find places that are superficially pleasant, or would anyone arriving on their shores see the kinds of things you're describing?
[Clad:] No, not at all. I think it's important to understand much of this is capital city tensions. Fiji consists of many scores of islands, some of which really are idyllic and you can be there and some people are there right now and wouldn't know that there's trouble over the horizon at all. So it's extremely unlikely, moreover, that these tensions which tend to be jealousies between adjoining ethnic groups would spill over to affect the traditional warm welcome that you get in the South Pacific to visitors. But nonetheless, I mean, who wants to be in the situation where there is this potential and to pass through an airport where there is this kind of problem?
[Mann:] Does it surprise you that in Fiji in particular this crisis has dragged on so long with no one getting involved? It's been three weeks since the prime minister has been held at gunpoint.
[Clad:] No, it sure doesn't. Yes, it's a good question. But I think we've got to remember a little bit of recent history. In 1987, there was a coup by an indigenous Fijian at the time, Colonel Rabuka against a system that he thought was giving too much influence to the Indians, and these are Indians who came from South Asia during the British time. And I think this is a recurrent issue, where the indigenous Fijians felt that bit by bit they were losing control of their country. And I think it's a mistake to just see this as sort of one deranged person holding a government to ransom. The tensions and the jealousies and I think the legitimate grievances go a lot deeper than that. The second thing that's worth mentioning is that Australia and New Zealand are really torn. To intervene would probably guarantee that the indigenous Fijians would swing to the side of the coup plotters and would create, I think, a very unpleasant situation in Fiji. To do the same in the Solomon Islands is to probably exacerbate the tension. So they're hoping that they can buy time and gradually let things cool down.
[Mann:] Well, what are the feelings like between indigenous Fijians and the descendants of the Indians?
[Clad:] Well, things are often very good, and I think it would be a mistake to overplay some kind of rigid communal divide. The indigenous Fijians retain control over their land. Up to the early `80s, the migrant peoples had been there since really the turn of the century and a bit later were the majority. But as a result of migration out to Australia, to Canada, have now become the minority, and I think that there is a feeling by the indigenous Fijians that if they keep up the political pressure like this, they'll see demographically a reduction yet again, and these people who are urban people by and large and are disproportionately important in their commerce.
[Mann:] Let me ask you more about this because wherever there are ethnic tensions some of them go back a long way. But some of them tend to be fueled by economic problems. None of these islands, it sounds like, are terribly rich. Is there enough to go around, or are people fighting essentially over scarce resources and dwindling economies?
[Clad:] You've really identified the key issue, and it goes back to what I said at the beginning, which is what are the viability of these micro states? And some of them are really, you know, half gone at high tide places like Tuvalu or Niue or these little places really we're expecting an awful lot of them. Moreover, with comparatively high demographics young people coming into the job market, the ability of these countries, even with the sizeable aid monies from Australia, New Zealand and in French Polynesia from metropolitan France can't create enough public sector jobs. So you've got frustration, and there is less opportunity to migrate now to places like Melbourne or Auckland, New Zealand, which, by the way, is the world's largest Polynesian city. And so you have frustrations building up and then, of course, it's always easy to find a scapegoat. And beneath the veneer of this nation state created, you've got a problem with people still remembering the old traditional rivalries, and we're seeing that playing out really very much in the Solomons, where the people from Malaita Island and Guadalcanal are have been at each other's throat increasingly over the last seven or eight years.
[Mann:] So these aren't really functioning states. They aren't really functioning economies. When you look ahead, what's going to happen? Are they just going to totter along, do you think?
[Clad:] Well, that would be a little too strong. I think that there is an underlying degree of commitment to try to make these nation states work. A lot of investment has been put by, for example, the current secretary-general of the Commonwealth, Don McKinnon, who is foreign minister for New Zealand, and trying to deal with that country's Papua New Guinea civil war. And I think that there probably are some prospects. But the difficulty is that in the meantime, we've got people with very little shared sense of, you know, this kind of formal parliamentary political culture. And unfortunately, the habit of looking both to Papua New Guinea, now to Fiji and seeing people settling old scores by some pretty crude means. And I think the short-term outlook is probably for more of the same.
[Mann:] James Clad of Georgetown. Thanks so much for being with us.
[Clad:] Thank you.
[Mann:] Turning now to the wider picture. Violence in Zimbabwe. [voice-over]:.where veterans from the war of independence and other armed squatters occupy farms owned by whites. The Commonwealth of nations along with other groups tried to intervene, but they weren't welcome. Another conflict in another Commonwealth nation, Sierra Leone. Government troops, rebel fighters and UN peacekeepers become embroiled all in clashes once again as a peace accord unravels. Coupled with the tensions in the South Pacific, Commonwealth crises seem to be more commonplace. [on camera]: The Commonwealth of nations is supposed to be a group of friendly countries with much in common. But did British rule, no matter how objectionable, simply keep a lid on the kinds of internal divisions and power struggles that are now surfacing? Neville De Silva, a freelance journalist who writes for the Commonwealth-funded Commonwealth Feature Service, as well as other publications, joins us now to talk about that. Thanks so much for being with us. Let me ask you, first of all, about Fiji. Is that essentially the kind of decision you would have expected of the Commonwealth?
[Neville De Silva, Journalist:] Yes, basically I think that would be the decision because I think basically they find if you impose too many sanctions, then the chances of achieving what you want to achieve that is, a return to democratic rule becomes much more difficult. I mean, take the case of Iraq. You have had sanctions on for so many years, but who has ultimately suffered from that? The people of Iraq, the children of Iraq who do not have medicines, who are dying because they don't can't get the correct medical treatment. Now, you're not punishing the leaders. So this is the problem. I think and particularly the new secretary-general, Mr. Don McKinnon, he knows he's from that area. He realizes that you have to proceed step by step and try to engage them in some kind of dialogue.
[Mann:] It's a very careful and limited diplomatic measure that they've taken, and you're suggesting that it's the right one, which certainly seems appropriate on this day. But let me ask you if the Commonwealth is just predisposed to careful diplomatic measures, if it's less like the U.S. or the UN or NATO or even the EU, less eager to be bold and more eager to be cautious?
[De Silva:] Right. But the thing is they have not always been cautious. For instance, the case of Nigeria. The Milbrooke agreement in New Zealand when the leaders met, they took a very tough stand against Nigeria, which had then ousted the civilian government and been taken over by the military. Now in that instance, in the case of Nigeria, the Commonwealth took up a position of trying to isolate Nigeria and tried to engage the international community in isolating Nigeria. So there have been instances, depending on the kind of crisis it faces, what steps measured or tough that it should take.
[Mann:] Let me ask you about more current ones the coup in Pakistan, the political violence that's being fomented by the government of Zimbabwe. Has the Commonwealth really been a player in trying to address those situations?
[De Silva:] Well, these are two entirely different situations. One in the case of Pakistan, where there was this military coup ousting the civilian elected government of Nawaz Sharif. This happened just before or couple of months before the heads of government met in South Africa in November last year. Now this was the ousting of an elected government and a return to military rule. The question of Zimbabwe is what I would call the gray area, where the Commonwealth still has not been able to sort out what it should do in the case because it is not
[Mann:] So let me jump in and ask you a question. Implicit in all this are the expectations of outsiders too high? Should we expect the kind of things you've spoken about strong statements and very clear diplomacy? Because many people look to international organizations and perhaps even the Commonwealth for more than that. They look for decisive action that can turn a bad situation around, that can push coup plotters off of the stage, that can change the fate of countries. Are expectations too high when we look to the Commonwealth to do that kind of thing?
[De Silva:] Well, the Commonwealth does not have that kind of mandate. I mean, it is not a United Nations. The United Nations could act through the Security Council and send peacekeeping forces. But the Commonwealth does not have that kind of mandate. And in fact, if you look back, people considered the Commonwealth a kind of social club, where you know the old leaders met once in two years and had a short break, holiday, perhaps at state expense. I mean, this is how the Commonwealth was considered at that time. But there has been a sea change to my mind in the Commonwealth. I think it's opening a new chapter because the old decolonization period ended when South Africa went back to majority rule. So the Commonwealth was never expected to act in the way that the United Nations is expected to act.
[Mann:] But it's changing slowly. Neville De Silva, journalist, thanks so much for talking with us. And that's INSIGHT for this day. I'm Jonathan Mann. Stay with us. The news continues. END TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE THE SECURE ONLINE ORDER FROM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

[Lou Willcoxon, Atlanta, Georgia:] My name is Lou Willcoxon. I came from Atlanta, Georgia. And my question for CNN is: Why do women live longer than men?
[Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Cnn Medical Correspondent:] In the United States, the average life span for a woman is 79 years; for a man, 72 years. There are probably both evolutionary reasons as well as environmental reasons for this. First, throughout evolution, in order to preserve the human species, women not only had to bear children but also ensure that these children would grow to childbearing age. Men simply had to reproduce. While men no doubt were important to the preservation of individual families, they were less important to the preservation of the entire human species. Second, moving to a more modern day environmental reason, three of the most common things that lead to the demise of human beings affect men more than women. Men are more likely to fall victim to heart disease, cancer and trauma, thus, perhaps leading to a shorter life span.

[Daryn Kagan, Cnn Anchor:] Talking about travel now, there is no mistaking in increased support at airports all over the U.S. In fact the airlines are keeping a close watch on certain passengers the ones who fit a profile. More now from Kathleen Koch.
[Kathleen Koch, Cnn Correspondent:] A security checkpoint at Chicago's O'Hare Airport missed the knives and stun gun that a man carried in his bag there Saturday, but an aviation industry group says that airline computers did flag Subash Gurung as a potential threat, prompting airline employees to search his bags at the gate and find the weapons. It's an example of passenger profiling and airlines say it's a key security tool.
[Carol Hallett, President, Air Transport Association:] That is what we need to be looking for, is who is that individual who is a potential threat to all of the other passengers.
[Koch:] The computer-assistant passenger prescreening system flags passengers who, among other things, buy one-way tickets, pay wish cash, or have an unusual travel history. Before September 11th passengers who were identified had their checked baggage screened by explosive detection equipment. Now in addition a passenger's carryon luggage is hand-searched and he or she can be questioned and detained. Another change, the FBI and law enforcement have given the airlines access to their watch list of suspects.
[Norman Mineta:] As soon as the ticket agent puts in your name and terms of your reservation and if it's already in the in the machine, then they the machine will not even spit out a boarding pass.
[Koch:] Mineta insists to avoid discrimination the system does not factor in a person's ethnicity. Some security experts believe it should.
[Neil Livingstone, Security Analyst:] It's not racial profiling. It's ethnicity profiling that says we're concerned about people from a particular region of the world. They tend to be young, they tend to be male, and we ought to spend most of our time looking for them.
[Koch:] Civil liberties advocates, though, insist there are rising numbers of complaints from passengers who say they've been unfairly targeted. Such critics warn profiling opens not closes security gaps.
[Gregory Nojeim, American Civil Liberties Union:] Profiles are notoriously under-inclusive. Who knows what the next terrorist will appear as it could be a grandmother, it could be a student, we just don't know.
[Koch:] But in the current environment many expect the profiling system to become more, not less, intrusive raising concerns that privacy will be increasingly sacrificed for security. Kathleen Koch, CNN, Washington.
[Kagan:] So you might be wondering speaking of traveling, where's Leon? He hasn't been with me all week. He is traveling. He's traveling coast to coast this week, and he's spending a lot of time in airports no doubt. We're going to catch up with him now in Colorado where he's been talking with some airline industry experts.
[Leon Harris, Cnn Anchor:] Security, there's plenty of concern about it both in Washington, as well as in the airline industry itself, and we're joined this morning by a number of members of the industry who are going to give us some insight as to what the insiders think about the security at the nation's airports and in the system overall. Now we all know, because we all travel, you all travel more than I do, that's for sure, that there are varied levels of security at every single different airport, every single different airline. Does that concern you as members of the industry?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes I think we need to standardize it and we need to make it more effective. It has to be achievable, and it has to be something that's agile in a changing landscape that can address changing threats, but still be effective and return serenity to the environment.
[Harris:] Now do you all go through the same security that we go through when we go to the airport?
[Unidentified Female:] Yes we do.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes absolutely.
[Harris:] OK.
[Unidentified Male:] And you know we go through the same kind of security checks as passengers. They check our bags. They wand us with, you know, the metal detectors just to ensure it also shows passengers that they're checking crews, and that it's security is a concern for everyone, and to ensure they're showing the public that the crews are going through the same kind of ridicule as the passengers.
[Harris:] But since you go through it and you're also responsible for maintaining the security system for passengers as well, are the folks that are in charge of changing things of updating security, are they talking to you to get your feedback and it seemed to me that if I want to learn how to stop bank robbers I'd talk to people who work at banks.
[Unidentified Female:] Constantly. We started ever since the 11th of September, we've been it went from hourly conferences on up. We get all of our directives from the FAA. Our PSI in Seattle is constantly keeping us updated and it is changing. It is improving, and aviation security is inherently better today than it was a week ago.
[Harris:] Will federal involvement here make it even better, worse, whatever does it matter whether or not the security personnel are federal employees or not...
[Unidentified Male:] Professional security is what we need. We don't have that today. What we have is the employer of last resort doing it. Now whether it's federalized or whatever else, we have to have professional security at every spot in the airport not just the screening checkpoints, but the parameters of the airports, and we're a long way from that right now. We got to get the leadership that does that.
[Harris:] Finally what do you all think about what this means for the future of the airline industry?
[Unidentified Male:] Not good.
[Harris:] Yes.
[Unidentified Male:] Not good. I mean people are staying away in droves, a 100,000 people laid off. Airlines are heading toward a financial abyss unless they get people back on airplanes and that means getting confidence back. I think to do that we have to do the right thing. It has to be well thought out and it has to be implemented well, and it has to be to show that we are concerned and intelligent about our choices.
[Harris:] Are you all confident you'll be working in this industry five, 10 years from now?
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Unidentified Female:] Absolutely.
[Unidentified Male:] Yes.
[Harris:] In that case, then we'll leave it on that positive note.
[Kagan:] All right you want trouble, let's check out where Leon is today. Leon is in Las Vegas. Later this morning he'll be talking with hotel workers who have lost their job because of the month-long tours and slump and hopefully our friend there won't be getting into too much trouble in Las Vegas. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com