Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Talkback Live

Guests Discuss Future of Public Health; Recent Anthrax Attacks

Aired October 23, 2001 - 15:00   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.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN NOLAN, DEPUTY POSTMASTER GENERAL: There was no information at all that indicated that there was any risk.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOBBIE BATTISTA, HOST, TALKBACK LIVE: Was the U.S. caught unprepared for an anthrax attack, even though government leaders warned it might happen?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Never even touched it. That's where we're stumped.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BATTISTA: Do government and health officials know enough about bioterrorism to protect Americans from another attack?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We recognize that there's a vulnerability in our system.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We also need to make sure that we plug the gaps in our public health system today, so that we are prepared for tularemia, the plague, botulism.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BATTISTA: Do you trust the government to protect your life, or are you taking matters into your own hands?

Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to TALKBACK LIVE: "America Speaks Out."

Another day, another postal worker is being treated for suspected anthrax infection. Postal workers lining up for Cipro are complaining that the government did not act fast enough to protect them after anthrax spores were found on letters sent to Congress.

Joining us today is Deputy Postmaster General John Nolan. Mr. Nolan, thanks for joining us.

NOLAN: My pleasure.

BATTISTA: Let me ask you this first, because there seems to be some confusion. Why was the Brentwood facility in Washington, D.C. not shut down completely, as soon as there was the first indication of anthrax exposure?

NOLAN: Well, if you mean by anthrax exposure, that there was knowledge of the presence of anthrax in the facility, it's one thing. The letter that went through to Congressman Daschle, obviously had to go through Brentwood, but was not opened in the Brentwood facility.

The advice that we got from the CDC, based on all scientific evidence, was that there was no danger at that point to the employees in the facility in Brentwood. And therefore, extensive testing or other prophylactic-type treatments were not recommended at that point by the experts in the field.

BATTISTA: So you're saying that's why it took so much time -- even though you knew that letter had gone through the Brentwood facility, it took that much time to sort of link the two together.

NOLAN: No, no, the understanding that it went through the facility was very clear right from the beginning.

BATTISTA: Right.

NOLAN: The issue was, was there any hazard remaining in that Brentwood facility to our employees.

BATTISTA: Right. When did you first know that one of your employees at that facility had been diagnosed with anthrax?

NOLAN: I can't remember the exact day. I believe it was on Saturday morning or late Friday night.

BATTISTA: This past weekend?

NOLAN: Yes.

BATTISTA: And so the facility was then closed for a time after that, or not?

NOLAN: It remains closed.

BATTISTA: OK, so it's closed today.

What do you say to the employees of the U.S. postal service, who feel like that the government -- and to them, that is you -- didn't shut this facility, or the one in Harrison Township, or react as quickly as you could have, in light of what we now know seems to be going on in the nation's capital? And especially when you compare it to the fact that the federal buildings on the Capitol were closed very quickly, and are still closed today?

NOLAN: We have been explaining this to our employees on a regular basis. Again, the advice that we got -- it's very different to be sorting a piece of mail as opposed to opening it, which is what occurred in the Capitol. So there was very clear and present danger in the Capitol, which is why the actions taken there took place.

Our concern was that we had a situation where there was no evidence of any physical threat, based on the expert advice. And yet, we wound up taking action in advance of the actual advice from the authorities, based on our concern about the mental state of our employees, who were very concerned. But at that point that we actually acted, it was in advance of getting scientific evidence that there was a concern.

BATTISTA: So, how you are containing the situation now?

NOLAN: Well, we're doing a number of things. One is education of our employees. Second is investigation. We're working with the FBI to try and find the person or people responsible for the actions to cut off any possibility of future action in this regard.

And third is what we call intervention, where we're looking at technology capabilities to sanitize or radiate the mail, to eliminate any and all bacteria. All the while, providing as much information and assistance to our employees, from a gloves, mask, other types of advice that we can, so that they can operate safely. And in those cases where we're not sure they can operate safely, to close the facilities.

BATTISTA: And in the meantime, how many of your employees are being put on a Cipro or antibiotic plan right now?

NOLAN: I don't know the exact number at the moment. There are obviously a number of employees in the Brentwood facility. All the employees working there have been put or offered that plan. Some, for health reasons, would not be put on that, but a different kind of a plan. And we're also investigating some specifics, obviously in Trenton, and in New York City.

BATTISTA: Now, are these just employees that are working in these facilities? I mean, what about, say, mail carriers who walk the streets?

NOLAN: Again, where there is evidence that there was a possibility of them coming in contact with it, we are in fact taking those same actions for letter carriers on the streets.

BATTISTA: There was some thought that you may extend this program nationwide, if necessary? How would you decide to make that decision?

NOLAN: We will do whatever is necessary to protect our employees and the safety of the mail. So obviously, as you can imagine, it's a very fluid situation. But we're making those decisions as required, to ensure the safety of our employees. BATTISTA: What is your best guess, and I know that's really up to investigators at this point, but there a number of theories going around, as to how that anthrax may have escaped a sealed envelope?

NOLAN: Guessing, at this point, is not something that we're spending a whole lot of time on. We've got our postal inspection service working with the FBI, working with the Center for Disease Control, to examine our processes and to determine what exactly happened.

And so what we are looking at is any and all possibilities in trying to cut off future situations like that, by upgrading our procedures, again, educating our employees, and dealing with situation very carefully.

BATTISTA: If anthrax escaped a sealed envelope, does it put other mail in the area also at risk?

NOLAN: I don't know. You'd have to speak to more informed or better knowledgeable health people about that. But obviously, we are treating it as if it could be a problem.

BATTISTA: Yes, I'm just trying to determine, as most people are, whether or not there is any kind of threat to the general public. But I'm not sure we know that yet.

NOLAN: Well, our best information is that the threat to the general public of being injured by this is again, extremely remote. Most of the mail that's produced in this country comes from major businesses, magazines, direct mailers, et cetera, where the processes are very tightly controlled for the manufacturing of the product.

And therefore, the opportunities to introduce this kind of bacteria really doesn't exist. If there is some bacteria that is spread during the process, the sense would be that it would be extremely small quantities.

BATTISTA: All right, John Nolan, thank you very much for joining us today. We appreciate your time.

NOLAN: My pleasure.

BATTISTA: Still ahead: are you in danger? Do you rely on your own instincts, or do you trust the government and health officials to know what's best?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BATTISTA: Welcome back.

Joining us now, Candice Delong, a former FBI profiler and author of "Special Agent: My Life on the Front Lines as a Woman in the FBI." And CNN bioterrorism analyst, Javed Ali. Javed, let me ask you that question that I just asked the deputy postmaster general a few moments ago, about whether or not anthrax that leaks outs of an envelope could possibly contaminate other mail that might come to you or me.

JAVED ALI, CNN BIOTERRORISM ANALYST: I think it's very difficult, Bobbie, to assess that question with any precision, because you have to try to determine exactly how much material may have been contained in any one piece of mail, to then try to figure out how much of a residual or secondary threat it could pose to any addition pieces of mail. So it's kind of difficult.

Is it theoretically possible? Yes, but do we have any hard and fast answers? I don't think we know at this point. And the bottom line is, I don't think people should be overly concerned about their -- you know, the pieces of mail coming to them, as posing these kind of threats.

BATTISTA: House Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt earlier today called the anthrax that was sent to Senator Daschle's office "highly sophisticated and weapons grade." And he said, "I think we've got to stop parsing words and trying to be anything other than accurate about what this is." That, of course, sort of contradicts Tom Ridge, who is our director of the Office of Homeland Security, last week, who said that it was not of that sort of quality, it had not been weaponized. So let's try to straighten that out. What does it mean to weaponize anthrax?

ALI: Well, the term weaponization is a term of art that's used in the -- or has been used, with respect to the field of biological weapons. And I don't think there is an accepted or generally defined concept of what that really means. But I think there are some major points or issues that refer to the whole sort of art of weaponization.

And I think those points are, basically -- the most basic definition of weaponization is anything that someone would do to a biological agent once they have produced it. in whatever quantity they saw fit. Because usually when you're producing an agent, it's in a liquid form initially. I would argue that weaponization could mean anything that you do to that agent in a liquid suspension to make it enhanced, or enhance it as a weapon that you would then try to put into a delivery system, and then try to put onto a target. So it could mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people.

BATTISTA: I was going to make you go out a limb here, and ask your opinion, if your felt, then, that this, what we're talking about here is weapons grade anthrax. Just by your definition, though, I would say that you would have to say that.

ALI: It's almost a semantic point, at this point. The bottom line assessment is, the material that has been released or was contained within these letters or pieces of mail is a threat, in and of itself. Whether it's weaponized to a higher degree, meaning that the material has been milled down to a finer particle size, or the concentration of the actual bacteria inside the powder is of a higher concentration level, those are the types of things you look at, with respect to assessing whether something is weaponized or not.

But the mere fact that this material is being used as means to effect injury, I think in and of itself, indicates that it's weaponized.

BATTISTA: Let me bring Candice in here then.

Candice, if it is this highly refined, sophisticated strain of anthrax, what does that tell about the people who might be responsible?

CANDICE DELONG, FORMER FBI PROFILER: Well, I've heard some people say that it may be a homegrown group, or one person acting by themselves. I tend not to think so. I don't believe in coincidences. I'm thinking it probably has to do with the international terrorism that we just suffered on September 11th.

BATTISTA: You're a profiler. So actually, what you're saying is you think it's a direct link, then, or do you think it's sympathizers with, perhaps, the international terrorism? I'm trying to get a profile, since that's the way you would approach something like this.

DELONG: Well, I would be surprised if it's one person in this country, you know, sitting in his basement making weapons grade anthrax and then sending it to a few targets. This was pretty well orchestrated, and it did have the effect of harming a lot of people. I mean, a number of people are dead so far.

I'm tending to think it's a more sophisticated or organized group.

BATTISTA: So how do you go about trying to begin this investigation, by having to track a letter and the delivery process that it goes through? Where do you start?

DELONG: It's very tough. One of very first things is, of course, the United States postal inspection service being involved in this. And I've worked with them before. I worked with them on the Unabomb case. When someone sends a bomb through the mail -- and of course, an envelope full of anthrax spores is certainly a bomb -- there is a lot that can be done. There can forensic analysis of the paper, the ink that the note was written on. Of course, tracing of the postmark.

But on the other hand, there's only so much that can be done. I mean, the Unabomber got away with his crimes for a number of years.

BATTISTA: Let me go to the audience for some questions. Up here to the top row.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is Karen. Go ahead.

KAREN: Does anthrax retain its potency, or is it something that's primarily potent the first 24 hours, then it's less so afterwards?

BATTISTA: Javed?

ALI: Anthrax can -- the organism itself will remain viable, depending on what form it's in. If it's the actual bacteria or if it is sporulated (ph), meaning if it has formed a protective outer coating. But that's something that happens when you're actually trying to produce the organism and expose it to oxygen.

If it has indeed sporulated, it can remain viable, meaning it is alive and has the capacity to cause an infection in somebody for days, weeks, months, even years, depending on where it exists in the environment.

BATTISTA: And, Dave, in the audience, question.

DAVE: Yes, I'm curious, have they been able to find some continuity in the strain of anthrax in these letters that they've uncovered thus far?

(CROSSTALK)

BATTISTA: Javed, go ahead first. Then Candice.

ALI: I believe that, at least in three of the instances, the strain or the material that was found in Senator Daschle's office, one of the letters that was found mailed to NBC, and then the case or the incidents in Florida, all three of those -- the strain has been found to be the same. Now, I don't know what that strain is.

And just that in and of itself wouldn't necessarily tell you one way or the other whether the sponsor of these incidents, or perpetrators, are international or domestic. Anthrax, as a disease, occurs in 82 countries. There are dozens of culture depositories all over the world that have different strains of anthrax, so it's very difficult to identify where the particular organism itself came from.

BATTISTA: Candice, did you also want to comment?

DELONG: That was what I was going to say.

BATTISTA: OK.

DELONG: One of the things that -- go ahead.

BATTISTA: No, go ahead.

DELONG: One of the things that you had asked me earlier, about whether I thought that the perpetrators behind this were from our country or related to the acts of the 11th, is that I believe it was only 14 days ago or so, that President Bush held a press conference to advise Americans that the government had intercepted what they believed was a very credible threat that we were going to be under -- or suffer another terrorist attack shortly. And shortly after that announcement, the anthrax cases hit.

BATTISTA: Are you surprised that there has not been some sort of claim of responsibility? I'm guessing maybe not, since you think this is connected with the international terrorists.

DELONG: I was surprised when Bin Laden didn't claim responsibility for the attacks on the World Trade Center. Initially he did not. Perhaps he thought that we wouldn't be able to link him to it, but of course now we have. I was initially surprised at that, because he always claimed credit for his work in the past. So if he and his organization are behind this, then I suppose we shouldn't be surprised.

BATTISTA: To the audience for another question, for I think Javed here. Victoria? No.

VICTORIA: Hello. How are bioterrorism outbreaks handled differently than regular outbreaks?

JAVED ALI, CNN BIOTERRORISM ANALYST: You mean regular infectious disease outbreaks?

VICTORIA: Yes.

ALI: There's a difference -- maybe not from the public health response, because the public health communities and the medical communities will respond to an incident just they like they would for a naturally-occurring disease outbreak, even if that disease outbreak is unusual. That component of the response is not necessarily different.

There may be a greater urgency to containing the disease outbreak. But I think the difference comes into the law enforcement, the criminal, investigative matters, the intelligence component of that. Because then -- when you are talking about a disease that has been intentionally introduced into a local community anywhere, that brings those other sort of channels into the picture.

BATTISTA: Robert here in the audience.

ROBERT: I was just wondering, are the materials readily accessible to make the anthrax? Or, you know, how do they go about getting it? Is there someone higher up that knows how to get it?

ALI: You mean actually acquiring what is called the seed stock of the organism?

ROBERT: Yes.

BATTISTA: Yes.

ALI: Well, there are possible ways that that could be done. And I don't know which method was used for the incidents that are occurring. But one possible way is that a group or an individual who had the knowledge could actually attempt to isolate an organism from a naturally-occurring strain. Because as I indicated, the disease does occur in nature in 82 countries all over the world. There's one possibility.

The other possibility is that it could have been acquired, even though illegitimately or illegally, through a culture repository. Now these are institutions that have different strains of different organisms for sale. Usually the sale of those organisms are to legitimate institutions that have a need to do research on those organisms, So it's much more difficult within the United States for someone to illegally obtain a dangerous pathogen, and that has been the case for the last four years. But again, there are other explanations. Those are just two of them.

BATTISTA: I suppose that might help for the investigation, Candice. How confident are you that the FBI will be able to track done who is responsible for this?

DELONG: Well, I don't lack confidence in the FBI. I would just like to point out these cases can be extremely difficult -- these mail types of cases where somebody mails something and it reaches destination and does what it is supposed to do. It can be very, very difficult to solve. In the case of the unabomber, he acted alone, he planned his crimes out well and it took a very long time to find him.

BATTISTA: And eventually it was his brother who turned him in, so sometimes that's best you can do there.

DELONG: Yes.

BATTISTA: All right. Javed Ali and Candice DeLong, thank you both very much for joining us. Appreciate it as always.

DELONG: Thank you.

ALI: Thank you.

BATTISTA: We will be back and continue here in just a moment.

Still ahead: are government and health officials giving Americans the best advice about dealing with bioterrorism? Imagine what postal workers are thinking.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When it goes to the Capitol, it has to come to our building any way. Better safe than sorry. They should have closed it and then said all clear. No one said nothing. Keep working, keep working.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BATTISTA: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE: AMERICA SPEAKS OUT. Let me do a quick couple of e-mails, here. I'm way behind on them. Marge in British Columbia says: "20,000 people die from the flu every year in the U.S.. So does that mean we shouldn't be too worried about two or three deaths from anthrax? Do we have to wait until there's 20,000 anthrax deaths before the government starts to really worry? That's what it sounds like to me." Karen in Idaho says: "The authorities are handling the anthrax problem very efficiently. They have released as much information as they can to verify to the American public. The press, however, is exploiting the situation and creating a fear across the nation that may not end up being a national problem at all, but one that is only local."

All right. Joining us now Clarence Page -- I feel like I'm in hostile territory down here today. Clarence is a Pulitzer Prize- winning columnist and member of the "Chicago Tribune's" Washington- based editorial board. Armstrong Williams is a columnist and host of Talk America Radio Network's "The Right Side with Armstrong Williams." His latest book is "Beyond Blame: Moving Beyond Being a Victim." Good to see both of you.

CLARENCE PAGE, COLUMNIST, "THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE": Thank you.

BATTISTA: I think we have that general feeling going. I was telling the audience earlier that I look at like this as sort of a dry run for something that could be bigger and far worse to come, the way government is behaving. So I feel like it is OK to engage in a little bit of not criticism, so much, but observation about whether or not our government officials are all on the same dark page. I mean, you would you agree?

ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS, "TALK AMERICA" RADIO SHOW HOST: It's very difficult, Bobbie. Because they are using our freedoms that we celebrate against us. I don't know if you remember -- you do remember the days of the pony express and the western expansionism, and all that led -- one of the things that fuelled our economy is our postal service.

And there is a law. It is a felony for you to open first class mail. So if someone wants to send a letter to any post office or any mail box in the world and it's first class, you cannot open it. The bottom line is, if you want to be truthful about it, there is not much the government can do, because it would take us to go back and change our Constitution and the freedoms which we celebrate which makes America great.

BATTISTA: I understand that, but -- go ahead, Clarence.

PAGE: I was just going to say, I was intrigued by the audience's applause when you said that the media are blowing this thing up. I would love to pursue that. But as far as the actual crisis is concerned right now, I think there is a reasonable response being made by the government that has been caught off guard.

The terrorist's most effective weapon in trying to unsettle the public is the element of surprise. This was a development that was not expected. Although we have been talking about bioterrorism for years, we weren't really ready for it. I agree with you that this is a dry run for a larger crisis that could happen. At the same time, when mistakes happen at this level, people unfortunately get hurt and some have died. That is very tragic, and that in itself is enough for us all to take this very seriously. WILLIAMS: I do think the media -- and I don't want to be one to bash the media, but I must confess that...

BATTISTA: Oh yes, you do.

WILLIAMS: I was just thoroughly upset when I watched "60 Minutes" on Sunday night, and hear "60 Minutes" telling these terrorists how to really make anthrax effective by putting it into the ventilation and how to go to our nuclear plants and attack our nuclear plants. And I said, "My God! What are they doing? It's just idiotic. It's insane. It's crazy. But let me just tell you -- I am not talking about CNN -- but the media has gone overboard to try to tell the terrorists how to kill more of us. In my opinion, it's insane.

BATTISTA: I know what you are saying. I will still have you back on the show, since you put aside CNN. But you are right. What I am talking about is engaging more in a conversation about response, and you know, what sort of response we are getting from our government officials and whether they are on the same page. Because there has been an awful lot of confusing information over the last week of two.

We had the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Tommy Thompson, on the show yesterday as well as Surgeon General Satcher, and they was even some disagreement and correcting of each other there. And I mean, you have to admit, we have never been through this before. So we are learning as we go. Is that OK?

PAGE: That is the element of surprise. When you have got people like Congressman Gephardt saying this is "weapons-grade anthrax" as you quoted him earlier, and the same day as Senator Bill Frist, who is a doctor, says, "No, this is garden variety anthrax that responds to all forms of penicillin and other antibiotics." These are conflicting messages.

When the -- when Tom Ridge is corrected from the podium on some of the facts of the developing problems in the post offices, that does not engender confidence in the public. These are problems that the government was not expecting. Tom Ridge, I kind of feel sorry for. I think he is in a perfect position to be blamed for whatever goes wrong and not to receive much credit for what goes right. He is still feeling his way along in an office that never existed before.

WILLIAMS: But Clarence, you would ...

PAGE: He's still trying to get his footing right now.

WILLIAMS: But Clarence, you would have to admit, though, we have to deal with the human element. These people, many of these governmental officials, it's trial and error. I think when Bill Frist speaks, he's a medical doctor, you should listen. I think when the surgeon general speaks you should listen. It wasn't until recent that they decided to bring the surgeon general into this conversation.

And yes, the government is going to make mistakes, but there is a hunger out there from us in the public that we want to know something. Tell us something. And in the rush to try to address our fears, they make mistakes. But I think in the end the government is trying to protect us, trying to make us aware of the dangers surrounding anthrax and everything else that is out there.

So I think in the end as we've trusted our government since September 11th, now is not the time to question our government. If you question them, do it in a constructive way. Because in the end, they do have our interests at heart.

BATTISTA: Let me just...

PAGE: It shows a refreshing new unity, Armstrong, to hear you praise the government. I am delighted to hear it.

BATTISTA: Let me take a phone call from Elaine in Texas. Elaine, go ahead.

ELAINE: Hi. Thank you for putting me on the air. I would like to say for one, I feel so sorry for you people in the media. You're kind of damned if you do, damned if you don't. And no, I do not trust the government as far as I can throw 'em. Mr. Bush himself has come on TV repeatedly and said, you know, use your common sense. That right there sums it up. Use your common sense. Hello.

BATTISTA: One person we have not heard from really much in this -- the whole anthrax situation -- and I realize he has got a war to run -- but I'm wondering if we need to hear from the president, maybe, a little bit, in helping to keep people calm and...

PAGE: That's a very good idea.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

PAGE: Certainly when you are looking for a voice of guidance and reassurance, you turn to the guy at the top. And I praised President Bush at the time of his Congressional address after the September 11th catastrophe. He had just the words right and the music right, so to speak. He gave the country the voice of confidence that people needed and was able to pull people together, allowed a sense of common purpose.

That has been lacking since, partly because we have heard kind of cacophony of different voices. Tommy Thompson is very good at reciting the statistics of how many antibiotics we have got in our stockpile, but as far as that music, that tone of confidence and reassurance that the public needs, it's been looking.

WILLIAMS: I agree and embrace what my colleague Clarence has been saying. I just think that our president has just been wonderful. We should keep him in our prayers, because he has a very tough job ahead of it.

But I do think that the president cannot be all things to all people all the time. He must trust those that he has appointed in these positions to give a very clear message. But I do think that when all of the facts are in and there is a clear message, that the president will probably have another national audience with us and tell us exactly what is going on.

But again, I think these guys are doing the best that they can. And look. You should use common sense. I think common sense is necessary in matters that are going on right now. But in the end we still have to trust our government to protect us as much as they can.

BATTISTA: David in the audience. Comment or question?

DAVID: Well, I kind of agree with what you are saying, but I think the president -- he has his administration's hands tied. There are certain things that he won't let out, and there are certain things that are leaking out and he gets upset about it. But you know, the media is doing the best they can for us, trying to let the public know what is going on. But then there's things, like I've said, that's been held back that we need to know.

BATTISTA: Clarence and Armstrong, do you feel -- and I don't mean this with any disrespect -- but do you feel that the government is being straight with us about this -- about the anthrax situation and how to handle it?

PAGE: I think they are being as straight as they can be with the information at hand. The postal situation here in Washington is a great example of that. The postal service followed the CDC guidelines saying you first must have evidence of anthrax, that there must be an evidence chain -- I believe that was the language they used -- before you alert people to be tested. Meanwhile, the House of Representatives said, "Hey, we are getting the heck out of here." And they -- at that point they didn't have any evidence of anthrax in the House.

We knew of it in the Senate at that time. But they just got out. And meanwhile the postal workers kept on working. I think when the public sees that, they wonder about their leadership. It was a bad move. I am sure House Speaker Hastert and the rest wished they done it differently and maybe let the staff go home if they had wanted to, but stay on the job when you're the leadership. When you've got that many mixed signals going around, I think it does shake the public's confidence.

WILLIAMS: But I do think that -- I think that most Americans, and I could be wrong -- don't feel they need to know everything. I don't think the government...

BATTISTA: But Armstrong -- I'm sorry, let me interrupt real quickly, because the president's spokesman Ari Fleischer is back on the podium.

(INTERRUPTED FOR CNN COVERAGE OF BREAKING NEWS)

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com