Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

America Recovers: How Well is United States Prepared to Meet Threat of More Terrorist Attacks?

Aired October 12, 2001 - 09:37   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: How well is the United States prepared to meet the threat of more terrorist attacks? Juliette Kayyem of Harvard University is executive director of the Executive Session on Domestic Preparedness. You don't know what that means, you're not alone. That is a private task force of academic specialist concerned about terrorism and emergency management. She joins us now from Washington.

Good to have you with us. Welcome.

JULIETTE KAYYEM, HARVARD UNIVERSITY: Good morning, Paula.

ZAHN: You no doubt have heard the FBI warnings. Is the United States ready for another potential attack?

KAYYEM: The United States is a lot better off than it was five or six years ago, that's for sure, when Congress in the mid-1990s in the Nunn-Lugar Act gave money to the states to tell them, basically, to begin to prepare for the potential of what we call a WMD, weapons of mass destruction, or terrorism. And I would say that after September 11th, we're actually in better shape, because of the fact that our guard is up, and not just within the FBI and local and state police officials, but even the private sector citizens are sort of on guard as well.

ZAHN: Let me throw out a couple of areas I'd like to assess this morning. How protected are our borders right now, in particular the border with Canada, Where we know that some of the alleged hijackers came through?

KAYYEM: The same thing happened at the millennium. The border now, we are sending scores, hundreds of new agents to the Canadian border, which is clear weak link. When we think of borders in America, we think of Mexico and the drug trade or illegal immigration. Canada has a lot of land that we did not, or have not secured forcefully. But since the 11th, the government has sent agents up there to secure not only the highways, but land masses where people could walk over, because once you make it into Vermont or Maine, you are very close to Boston, where I am, and that's where it all began.

ZAHN: Let's move on now to the U.S. water supply and dam system.

KAYYEM: Yes. Well I want to put in perspective. September 11th did not make it easier for terrorist to use nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. We have always known, those of us in the field, that it's an incredibly difficult thing to do. I mean, not only would terrorist group, and I'm not talking about states like Iraq, but a terrorist group, a solo group, would have to acquire the anthrax or whatever, they would have to multiply it, so it could be effective, and then have to weaponize it, and then they would have to distribute it, to have the kind of mass impact, let's assume, with mass casualties.

So for people listening, it's no easier after September 11th to do that. In fact, because our law enforcement agents on guard want might argue, it's harder. What September 11th did was made those long suspected it realize that there's a group of people where it doesn't matter to them how many people they can. It's 2,000, 5,000 or 25,000, so there's a motivation there. So in terms of the water supplies and other areas since then, each state and locality has, you know, been on guard, has secured water facilities, and most importantly, the airspace over water facilities.

ZAHN: So in the meantime, the president advised all Americans last night to be on guard, to be vigilant about what they see going on around them. What is your advice to all of us who live here this morning? I know -- I know we've been told don't go buy Cipro, that's overreacting, but what should we be doing if we're going to be cautious with our families?

KAYYEM: My advice to people who ask me, because I am in this field, is we are doing so much since the September 11th to make ourselves safer, but obviously, you know, one of the difficulties with domestic preparedness, is when have you done it enough, when have you sort of reached that point? And the problem with terrorism, of course, is that it's unpredictable, and we could do the harshest things and most Draconian things, but we might still be at risk. So we have to always say to people, there is a potential, but let's -- of terrorism, but let's put that in perspective, with one, the things that have been done by law enforcement, both federal and, you know, most importantly on the state and local levels, to protect us and, two, that we gain a lot of benefits by being able to go out, shop, do all the things that make us -- make America, you know a great country to live in. And so we don't want to give those up.

So it's a fine line, and to be quite honest, it's a fine line that the government has to walk. At the one hand yesterday, you have Ashcroft announcing this threat for the next couple of days, but then Bush coming on later in the evening, saying, go out, spend money, and it's a fine line.

ZAHN: Well, it certainly is, and I know just based on our conversations with people on the street today, it's either emboldened them to do just that or it's made it even more frightening. I guess there's no middle ground there. Julia Kayyem, thank you so much for your perspective this morning.

KAYYEM: 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