|
CNN LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE
Powell's Speech to U.N. Gains Some Support, Not All Security Council Members; Threat of Terrorist Attacks Against the United States Raised
Aired February 5, 2003 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE for Wednesday, February 5, 2003. Here now, Lou Dobbs.
LOU DOBBS, HOST: Good evening. Tonight setting the stage for war against Saddam Hussein. Members of the United Nations are considering evidence against Iraq presented by Secretary of State Colin Powell. The secretary said it's clear that Iraq is hiding weapons of mass destruction and is linked to the al Qaeda terrorist network.
Secretary Powell asked the United Nations how much longer are we willing to put up with Iraq's noncompliance. We begin our coverage with Michael Okwu at the United Nations -- Michael.
MICHAEL OKWU, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, good evening to you. The secretary of state spoke for almost 90 minutes laying down his case like a prosecutor at a trial. And making the case quite emphatically that Iraqi government is systematically, hiding weapons of mass destruction and that's just the beginning.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: Saddam Hussein has directly participated in the effort to prevent interviews. In early December, Saddam Hussein had all Iraqi scientists warned of the serious consequences that they and their families would face if they revealed any sensitive information to the inspectors.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
OKWU: In addition to secret audiotapes of Iraqi communications, Powell relied on satellite photos featuring biological and chemical weapons plans, mobile production facilities for biological agents and video of Iraqi flights simulating the spraying of anthrax. Iraq's U.N. ambassador said Powell's were arguments were "utterly unrelated to the truth."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MOHAMMED ALDOURI, IRAQI AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N. (through translator): The pronouncements in Mr. Powell's statements on weapons of mass destruction are utterly unrelated to the truth. No new information was provided. Mere sound recordings that cannot be ascertained as genuine.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
OKWU: Now, the foreign ministers of great Britain and Bulgaria were staunchly supportive of what the secretary of state had to say. In the meantime, foreign ministers from Russia, France and China were not as supportive. They said that this is just evidence that the inspectors need more time on the ground -- Lou.
DOBBS: Michael, thank you. Michael Owku from the United Nations.
Despite Secretary Powell's presentation, France, Germany, China and Russia have, indeed, refused to move from their opposition to war against Saddam Hussein. Senior White House Correspondent John King joins us now. John, what is the administration's reaction to this continued opposition on the part of those countries?
JOHN KING, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, certainly they are disappointed here at the White House that they did not get more vocal support from those key Security Council members, veto powers in the hands of China, Russia and France.
But they also say here at the White House stay tuned. All of the statements read by those ministers after Secretary Powell's presentation were prepared in advance. What the White House says will be critical is what those governments say two, three, four, five days from now and especially critical what those governments say after they next hear from Dr. Hans Blix, the chief inspector on February 14.
The White House believes the secretary made a compelling case that inspectors are being played with, being toyed with, being manipulated on a daily basis.
The argument now, Lou, will be should this be about containment or consequences? France, Russia and Germany saying give the inspectors more people, more money, more resources to contain Saddam Hussein. Secretary Powell and look for the president to make this case tomorrow saying that is not what Resolution 1441 was all about. It said full Iraqi compliance immediately or move to consequences. That will be the debate over the next week.
DOBBS: John, is there any indication that the president again is going to raise strongly the issue of the relevance of the United Nations?
KING: That indeed will be part of the focus. The administration believes it has now proven to the world that Saddam Hussein is not cooperating and has no intention of cooperating.
What Secretary Powell began today, and the president will join this debate we are told in the days ahead, is to make the case to the United Nations and especially to the Security Council, that all 15 nations signed on to a resolution that states in explicit terms, if you read it, any interference would be considered a material breach. And that if Iraq does to the cooperate fully and immediately and proactively, that it will come to the clause invoking serious consequences.
Secretary Powell and the president will follow up on this, Lou. Will make the compelling case that the Security Council must now rally to the U.S. and British position or it must step aside and let the United States and its allies work outside of the United Nations.
DOBBS: John King, thank you very much. Our senior White House correspondent. John referring to a paragraph that Secretary of State Powell highlighted in his presentation. What he called the "operative paragraph" talking about further material breach.
Leading Democrats on Capitol Hill today said the secretary of state made a strong case against Saddam Hussein. Senator Joe Biden the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee says Saddam now has to choose between war and peace.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOE BIDEN (D), DELAWARE: I think Secretary Powell made a very powerful and I think irrefutable case today before the Security Council. The evidence he produced confirms what I believe and I have known for some time now. Saddam Hussein continues to attempt to maintain and garner additional weapons of mass destruction. And he continues to flaunt the world's command through the United Nations to disarm.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: Overseas, ten Central and Eastern European countries announced their support for Secretary of State Powell's presentation. They said it is clear that Iraq has breached U.N. disarmament resolutions.
Their declarations follow a letter of support from eight other European countries last week, including, of course, Britain, Italy and Spain. France and Germany, however, remain opposed to military action against Iraq. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said those two countries represent old Europe.
Officials in Iraq were quick to criticize Secretary Powell's presentation. One official said it was a, quote, "typical American show complete with stunts and special effects." Nic Robertson has the story from Baghdad -- Nic.
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the very man responding to Colin Powell's address, General Amer al-Sa'adi, President Saddam Hussein's top scientific adviser here, was the man Colin Powell specifically mentioned in his report, saying that he was thwarting the work of the U.N. inspectors and he was part of a commission that was trying to eavesdrop on the inspectors communications.
General Amer al-Sa'adi said absolutely not true. Everything was baseless. He said that in his case, his job and his orders were to tell everything as it was. He said that the notion of radio intercepts was something that could have been fabricated by a third world intelligence agency. He characterized the whole presentation as a typical American show.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEN. AMER AL-SA'ADI, SADDAM'S SCIENTIFIC ADVISER: This was a typical American show complete with stunts and special effects. Regarding the telephone intercepts, from what we have heard, any third rate intelligence outfit could produce such recording. It's nothing beyond their capability. It is simply untrue and not genuine.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERTSON: While he went on to say that from his point of view Colin Powell's address merely undermined the work of the U.N. inspectors. He said that Iraq would give a more lengthy and detailed point by point analysis of everything that had been put forward and they would send that to the U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan. They would also send it to all the members of the U.N. Security Council.
Now, he hasn't ruled out further continuing cooperation with the U.N. inspectors here. Indeed, talking about the visit this weekend by Hans Blix and Mohammed ElBaradei. Keenly watched and waited for here in Baghdad -- Lou.
DOBBS: Nic, General al-Sa'adi said that he would not rule out further continuing cooperation with weapons inspectors. Did the general respond to the fact that chief weapons inspector, Dr. Hans Blix, said that cooperation had been extraordinarily limited and that the Iraqis had not been forthcoming?
ROBERTSON: Iraq's position, and he said it again, one of the accusations from Colin Powell was that Iraq had been hiding weapons of mass destruction. He said the whole notion of hiding was rubbish because he said Iraq has nothing to hide. It has no weapons of mass destruction.
That appears to be the key stumbling block. When Hans Blix and Mohammed ElBaradei come here, they've got some key issue this want to address, private interviews with Iraqi scientists, the use of U-2 surveillance aircraft.
But it seems to be this fundamental issue that Iraq has said it's done all it can, it has no weapons of mass destruction. It does raise a very difficult question for Hans Blix when he comes here.
DOBBS: Nic Robertson reporting live from Baghdad. Nic, thank you very much.
The Iraqis said the satellite images used by Secretary of State Powell today are "cartoons." But those images demonstrate how the United States can watch other countries from space. Secretary Powell's presentation also included audiotapes of Iraqi communications and information from sources within Iraq. National Security Correspondent David Ensor has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
POWELL: Here you see 15 munitions bunkers...
DAVID ENSOR, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): There was high drama in the satellite pictures and intercepted conversations. But the most significant new assertions from Secretary Powell concern Iraq's ties with terrorists. And come from multiple sources, officials say, that simply could not be revealed.
Evidence of connections between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda, through this man, Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi, the al Qaeda figure who Powell said spent two months in Baghdad last year.
POWELL: During this stay, nearly two dozen extremists converged on Baghdad and established a base of operations there. These al Qaeda affiliates, based in Baghdad, now coordinate the movement of people, money and supplies into and throughout Iraq for his network. And they've now been operating freely in the capital for more than eight months.
Iraqis officials deny accusations of ties with al Qaeda. These denials are simply not credible.
ENSOR: Drawing on an array of surveillance photos, Powell offered the Council evidence that the Iraqis are playing cat and mouse with the inspectors.
This bunker contained chemical weapons, he said. Telltale signs are there.
POWELL: The truck you also see is a signature item. It's a decontamination vehicle in case something goes wrong.
ENSOR: Powell's question: Why does Iraq even have such trucks if it has no chemical weapons? And the picture on the right shows the same site sanitized for the U.N. inspectors' arrival.
POWELL: The signature vehicles are gone. The tents are gone. It's been cleaned up.
ENSOR: Still more dramatic, Powell played the intercepted voices of Iraqi officers, apparently conspiring to hide the Iraqi weapons program just prior to a visit from a visit from ElBaradei and the U.N. nuclear arms inspectors.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
POWELL: Not what he says. We evacuated everything. We didn't destroy it. We didn't line it up for inspection.
ENSOR: In another intercept, an Iraqi officer orders all references to chemical agents Iraq claims not have removed from some records and his subordinate repeats the words to show he understands.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
ENSOR: One senior intelligence official told CNN that in scope, this was the broadest release of eavesdropping intelligence the U.S. has ever made.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ENSOR: Senior intelligence officials say some of the evidence from Powell does potentially compromise certain U.S. intelligence sources and methods. What's the point in collecting this, said one, unless you use it? On the evidence of ties between al Qaeda and Iraq, the senior officials say as they focus more and more resources on that question, the evidence, Lou, is accumulating.
DOBBS: David, talking about the fear on the part of the United States that either sources or methods of intelligence gathering would be compromised, is it fair to assume that even the pictures that we saw, the remote sensing images, have been doctored a bit to not portray scale and effectiveness on the part of that imaging equipment?
ENSOR: You know, I think it is a fair to assume that, yes, Lou, because if you look at the pictures, I know that U.S. spy satellites, national technical means can take much better, much closer pictures than those. So either these are commercial photographs that the government has had made for it, or, as you say, they've been doctored a bit so as not to reveal just how good American spy satellites really are.
DOBBS: David, you have long experience in covering national security issues. Did you detect in anything that the secretary of state said -- any information that would even suggest to you that a source, that is, a human being's identity, might in any way be compromised there?
ENSOR: Well, I did actually talk to officials after the speech about that. And they said that there maybe be some information that may have come from human sources, but they don't believe any of it can be traced back, if so.
Some of the sources, of course, were defectors who were out of the country. Some of the information, though, did come from people who are still spying for the United States in Iraq -- Lou.
DOBBS: David, thank you very much. David Ensor from Washington, our national security correspondent.
Coming up next, satellite images do make it clear Iraq is hiding weapons of mass destruction. Abraham Sofaer says the case against Saddam Hussein, however, was made long ago. He says now is the time for the world to act. Abraham Sofaer joins me next.
And a new threat to our homeland security tonight. Officials say there is a heightened threat of terrorist attacks against the United States.
Kitty Pilgrim will have a special report tonight on North Korea's primary source of income -- Kitty.
KITTY PILGRIM, CNNfn CORRESPONDENT: Lou, one of the countries in the axis of evil is also a merchant of death. North Korea sells ballistic missiles to countries all around the world. We'll tell you who's buying them -- Lou.
DOBBS: Kitty, thank you.
And on Wall Street today, the Dow went back below the 8,000 level. We'll have all of those stories and a great deal more when we continue.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: After Secretary of State Colin Powell's presentation to the United Nations Security Council today, the question tonight is, did he make a convincing case?
Joining me now is Abraham Sofaer. He is the George B. Shultz senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a former legal adviser to the State Department. Judge Sofaer, good to have you with us.
ABRAMAM SOFAER, SENIOR FELLOW, HOOVER INST.: Pleasure to be here.
DOBBS: Your impressions of the secretary's presentation? Was it convincing?
SOFAER: Very convincing to the extent that one needed to be convinced beyond what the evidence already is and what Hans Blix had said, when he made his presentation.
DOBBS: And, the resistance on the part of, particularly, I suppose, the resistance of China and Russia is not particularly surprising. But Germany and France remain absolutely opposed to action against Iraq. How important is their position in the scheme of things?
SOFAER: Well, I think their position is really important and I think we're making a real effort.
The president and the secretary of state are all making a real effort to get them on board. And, remember, Lou, that just before the votes in '91 and '90, the Secretary of State Baker went out there and turned the French around, turned the Chinese around, and turned the Russians around. They said at that time that they would never vote for a resolution. And here we have states saying they just want a little more time.
DOBBS: Is history prologued in your view?
SOFAER: Well, it's not as dramatic. You know, they haven't gone and invaded a country yet. But in terms of what the U.N. has said the standard was for violations, the violations are numerous and overwhelmingly demonstrated.
I mean, the Iraqis themselves, they're not saying this information isn't enough to convince the world that we have been lying and cheating. They're saying it's all made up. Now, does anyone really believe that Colin Powell made up that stuff? I just don't think anyone believes them.
DOBBS: Well, it's a very big world, Judge Sofaer, as you know, and I suspect there are a few people who believe precisely that.
SOFAER: You're quite right about that.
DOBBS: But the role of the United Nations here, the president has adopted a course of multilateralism on the course of Iraq along with Great Britain and other now member states in the coalition of the willing.
Should France, Germany, China and Russia remain absolutely opposed, adamantly opposed, even to the extent of should it come to that, a veto of a resolution which may or may not be introduced, should the United States proceed without U.N. sanctions?
SOFAER: Absolutely. And it will. And it is with U.N. sanctions. It's just wrong to think that where the U.N. has made all the findings that are necessary, found material breaches, warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences, in a process that began, remember, with an authorization to use force and that was withdrawn only on condition that Saddam would disarm, I just think we have multilateral approval for this action.
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Judge Sofaer, we appreciate your time.
SOFAER: Pleasure to be with you.
DOBBS: The possibility of war with Iraq is now raising serious concerns about a terrorist attack here at home. Concerns are so great, in fact, that government officials are now considering raising the national threat level. Officials have told CNN that they're concern an attack could be carried out by al Qaeda operatives, Iraqi government agents or individual terrorists.
Coming up next, North Korea is not only a nuclear threat, it is also the -- one of the world's largest exporters of ballistic missiles. We'll have that report for you.
And there is new doubt tonight about one of the leading theories about the cause of the shuttle disaster. We'll tell you why the investigation of the Columbia disaster is now apparently headed. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Still ahead tonight, curing what ails us. Tonight in a special report, we look at a deadly disease that affects thousands of Americans and many don't even know they have it. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Tonight, investigators looking into the cause of the shuttle Columbia disaster are examining new evidence. Now NASA says the foam debris that struck the shuttle during liftoff may not be the root cause of the disaster. Miles O'Brien is at the Johnson Space Center in Houston and has the very latest for us -- Miles.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN SPACE CORRESPONDENT: Lou, we just heard from the shuttle program manager Ron Dittemore a little while ago and he said it just doesn't make sense. They have looked at it several different ways and that foam striking that area of the left wing 80 seconds after the launch of Columbia just doesn't make sense to them as the root cause.
Now they release some days pictures which are kind of isolated frames from that same film we've been watching over and over again. And what it shows very clearly is before and after that strike, no indication of any serious damage. And so as a result, as Dittemore put it, a lot of us may be focusing on the debris which came off that external tank but it's very likely there might be something else.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RON DITTEMORE, SHUTTLE PROGRAM MANAGER: We're focusing our attention on what we didn't see. We believe there's something else and that's why we're doing a falutry (ph) analysis and that's why we're investigating every area.
Right now it just does not make sense to us that a piece of debris would be the root cause for the loss of Columbia and its crew. There's got to be another reason.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O'BRIEN: Dittemore brought with him an example of this insulative (ph) foam. Anybody who's done any home improvement and used some of that spray-on insulation knows a little bit about what we're talking about. It sprays on kind of in a liquid form and gets very hard and very light. And as a result, Dittemore believes it just does not have the density or mass or weight, however you want to put it, to cause enough damage to be the root cause of all of this.
They have decided they feel very strongly, that it's unlikely ice was a factor in all of this. It was not a day where ice was forming in any great amount on the external tank. And the ice teams looked it over very thoroughly. That's the team that does that inspection prior to launch and determined and with an eye toward that specific area because it's a very critical area, said they saw no evidence of ice.
Now, what then are they left with? Well perhaps there was something else that struck Columbia, but when did it happen? Did it happen on assent, did it happen in orbit or did it happen as the orbiter was coming down during its descent? Lots of things to consider at this point. It puts the investigation in the realm of being wide open once again.
Now, there is one key piece which was found in California, potentially, I should say. We don't know for sure that it is, in fact, a piece of Columbia. But based on the accounts at the scene, NASA is considering them credible. It looks like it could possibly be a piece of a carrier panel, so-called aluminum carrier panel, which carries those tiles in certain places, makes it possible to take some tiles out more easily in order to get at equipment and for example to close the hatch and that sort of thing.
Anything found on the West Coast is going to be very crucial because that's where the breakup began and those pieces will be the pieces which first failed -- Lou.
DOBBS: Miles, a quick question if I may. The fact that Columbia was out on Pad A for just about seven weeks, has Dittemore -- has NASA suggested one way or another whether they think there's any possibility that that relatively long period of time out on the pad could have had any influence on anything?
O'BRIEN: Well, and there's even one other thing to consider, not just the time on the pad, Lou. Also the time between the manufacturer of that tank to its usage was about three years. That tank was the heavier tank. They call it a light-weight tank but the tanks they've been using mostly, as you know to the space station missions, are the super light weight tanks.
This tank was one of two sitting that had been kind of sitting in storage for a long period of time. Then you couple that with the long period on the launch pad and you have to ask the question what is the shelf life of a tank?
They are looking at that other tank. Fortunately there were two kind of manufactured at the same time. And because these tanks as you know, are the one piece of a shuttle which are ultimately destroyed, they re-enter, we don't have any evidence from it, but we have nearly identical tank at the cape being poured over right now.
DOBBS: To the point that even NASA initially said that this tank on Columbia was the light weight and that had to be cleared up rather quickly. Obviously the questions are going to go on and on and on, frustrating for everyone who wants to know obviously as quickly as possible what happened. Most especially frustrating to Ron Dittemore and his team there.
Miles, thank you very much as always for the terrific reporting. Thank you. Miles O'Brien from the Johnson Space Center.
Coming up next here, North Korea is fueling an arms race by exporting missiles to almost any country that wants them. Kitty Pilgrim will have a special report on country that is indeed a merchant of death.
And I'll be talking about the North Korean crisis with former Under Secretary of Defense Fred Ikle. We will also be talking, of course, about the secretary of state's presentation to the U.N. Security Council on Iraq.
Also tonight, curing what ails us. In our special report we'll take a look at a deadly form of cancer that only a handful of hospitals in this country know how to treat. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: North Korea today announced it had reactivated its nuclear plants. North Korea claims that it will use those plants to generate electricity. Tonight, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld described North Korea's announcement as dangerous.
North Korea's defiance over its nuclear program has raised many new concerns about its sale of weapons all around the world. For years, North Korea has earned hard currency selling missiles.
Kitty Pilgrim has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM (voice-over): North Korea earns nearly $600 million a year selling missiles to other countries around the world.
MARCUS NOLAND, INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS: The missiles and other associated weapons account for roughly half of North Korean exports, something between 40 and 50 percent. The missiles are mainly short- to medium-range missiles. And North Korea sells them to a whole variety of countries.
PILGRIM: Military experts say, for years, North Korea has taken old missiles apart, mostly Soviet ones, and copied, manufactured, and sold them. Clients include Pakistan, Iran, Yemen, and Egypt. It's a fortune for North Korea. With its economy in collapse, its people starving, the one thing it has is military equipment.
VICTOR CHA, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: North Korea's one of the foremost proliferators of ballistic missile technology in the world. Because it's a country that so decrepit in terms of its economy, it's basically willing to sell these technologies and these finished missile products to any country that's willing to buy them.
PILGRIM: North Korea was sending Scud missiles to Yemen in December when the ship was intercepted. The United States decided not to risk straining the relationship with Yemen, a needed ally in hunting al Qaeda, by blocking the ship, so Yemen ultimately accepted the delivery of the Scuds.
Many say turning a blind eye is no longer an option. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told senators on Capitol Hill yesterday the main fear over North Korea now is, it will sell nuclear material to rogue states such as Iraq or to terrorists. North Korean specialists are now arguing for a blockade of North Korean missile sales.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: The risks are growing of doing nothing. North Korea has not signed the treaty that prohibits exports of missiles. And by attempting to block sales, that would put pressure on North Korea and also cut off one of their biggest sources of revenue -- Lou.
DOBBS: Kitty, thank you very much.
Former Undersecretary of Defense Fred Ikle says North Korea is using the Iraq crisis to put pressure on the West. But he says the United States should not take unilateral action, at least yet.
Fred Ikle joins us now from our studios in Washington, D.C. He's chairman of the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Korea.
Good to have you here.
FRED IKLE, FORMER UNDERSECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Pleasure to be here.
DOBBS: The pressure on the United States, on a number of countries, is being intensified as North Korea continues to flaunt its obligations and is starting up now -- it announces itself -- its nuclear plants. What is your best judgment as to what should be done?
IKLE: Well, the North Koreans have put pressure on us before during the Kosovo crisis. They used the same threatening language they're using today.
But it's true that we have to stop the exports and we have to be prepared to have a better effort of interdiction than we had so far with the Scud missiles to Yemen. And that is not easy to do. On the other hand, I find it puzzling that so many thoughtful people in Congress and in the media urge the administration to negotiate one more agreement.
They have had six arms agreement, South Korea and the United States, with North Korea. Each one has been broken. So, what good will it do to purchase a seventh agreement? And what do we do when that's broken? Make it eight, number nine, just go on feeding North Korea to build up its missile capability and its weapons capability, while they break one agreement after another?
DOBBS: Well, not only are some people urging another agreement, but they're urging the United States to restart aid, to simply meet the terms. They're saying that they're not negotiating or meeting the terms of blackmail; they're simply providing aid.
This is becoming, if you will, a bit of madness on the issue of how to deal with North Korea. Do you have a suggestion as to what would make sense here on how to deal with...
IKLE: It doesn't make sense to provide economic aid to North Korea, which will further strengthen it and make it easier for it to build new facilities, some which we cannot see, hidden in caves and so on, for an agreement which cannot be verified, given the society that you have in North Korea.
What makes sense is to put more economic pressure on it. And, in the long term, I think the answer has been provided, indirectly, by Colin Powell, when he spoke in connection with Iraq of the countries that have truly gotten rid of their nuclear weapons. He named South Africa, Ukraine, and Kazakstan. What do these three countries have in common? They all had a change in regime.
DOBBS: Well, regime change, as you well know, is somewhat problematic, at least in the case of North Korea. Kim Jong Il, their great leader, their dear leader, is considered by some to be about as entrenched as any dictator could be. How would you bring about regime change there?
IKLE: I don't think that he's that entrenched. It's a very bizarre regime. It's a fragile power structure. The dictatorship of Kim Jong Il is not well-founded.
But a third of the population is essentially in slavery. That is not a solid regime. I think that's less solid than some of the regimes in the communist empire that have been -- fell on their own weight before.
DOBBS: Fred Ikle, we thank you very much. And we hope you'll continue to join us to discuss the perplexing issue of North Korea.
IKLE: Pleasure.
DOBBS: That brings us tonight's MONEYLINE poll question: What should come next in the conflict with Iraq, more weapons inspections, more dialogue with U.S. allies, one last chance to disarm, or bombs over Baghdad? Cast your vote at CNN.com/MONEYLINE. We'll have the preliminary results of this poll later in the broadcast.
The final results to last night's question, that poll question: Should the United States be prepared to attack North Korea if it proceeds with the manufacture of nuclear weapons? Fifty-one percent of you voted yes; 49 percent voted no.
Still ahead here: Researchers say girls are more likely to become addicted to drugs and alcohol than boys. We'll tell you about that study and why.
And also tonight: the struggle for quality medical care, Casey Wian with have the special report -- Casey.
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, the best medicine has to offer doesn't do patients any good when they can't get access to that care. We'll explain how many victims of one rare deadly disease are going without treatment -- Lou.
DOBBS: Thanks, Casey.
We'll also tell you how William Donaldson convinced senators he will be tough on corporate crime, Donaldson the president's nominee to be chairman of the SEC.
All of that, much more still ahead -- stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: More reasons tonight for the parents of girls to be concerned: A new study finds that girls and young women more easily addicted to drugs and alcohol than boys. And this study says it takes lesser amounts of those to hook them. The Columbia University study showed that boys experiment with drugs for the thrill of it, but girls are usually trying to ward off stress or depression. Now we turn to our special report tonight on unequal access to medical care in this country. Tonight, we examine how difficult it can be for people with rare diseases in particular to seek the help of specialists. The barriers to treatment can be both physical and financial.
Casey Wian has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Chief, how you doing? How you feeling?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A little better. Not much.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How's the stomach?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Still hurts me.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Still hurts.
WIAN (voice-over): Jay Ross (ph) has mesothelioma, an especially deadly cancer that attacks the area around the lungs and is linked to asbestos. The former Navy shipyard worker lives in Mississippi, but he's had to travel to Houston for treatment.
DOROTHY ROSS, WIFE OF CANCER PATIENT: We had no options there. We had gone to a lung specialist and he told me that there was nothing he could do for him. All he could do was for us to make him comfortable.
WIAN: In other words, a death sentence. So the Rosses sought a second opinion from a specialist at Houston M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, one of only a handful of hospitals equipped to treat mesothelioma.
Dorothy and truck driver son John Jr. have spent tens of thousands of dollars and missed months of work making the 700-mile, 11-hour trip to Houston.
JOHN ROSS JR., SON OF CANCER PATIENT: Before this happened to my dad, he was diagnosed with it, I had a few dollars set aside. And now I just -- I work from week to week to pay my bills.
DR. ROY SMYTHE, M.D. ANDERSON CANCER CENTER: Most patients who get this disease, I would say about 75 percent are blue-collar-type people that were exposed to asbestos during the course of those sorts of jobs earlier in life.
The major problem that we have with these patients is the fact that there are out-of-pockets costs that insurance companies don't cover, which include the travel to and from centers, staying in hotels, spouses not working.
WIAN (on camera): About 4,000 Americans get mesothelioma each year. It's linked to inhaling asbestos fibers and can take decades to show up. It's also difficult to diagnose because symptoms mimic pneumonia and other conditions.
(voice-over): Last August, retired auto mechanic Eduardo Sanchez (ph) saw a doctor for a persistent cough; the first diagnosis, asthma; the second, tuberculosis. Finally, after two months, tests revealed mesothelioma had engulfed 92 percent of one lung.
Ivonne Verdecia.
IVONNE VERDECIA, DAUGHTER OF CANCER PATIENT: The surgeon decided not to do surgery since it would be too detrimental to him to remove the lung. So, he didn't even advise any kind of treatment or anything.
WIAN: Verdecia began searching for a mesothelioma specialist willing to accept state health insurance. It's a common problem for patients seeking specialists of all kinds. It's complicated by cuts in Medicare payments to doctors, rising malpractice insurance premiums, and cost-cutting by HMOs.
DR. ROBERT CAMERON, UCLA MEDICAL CENTER: There's say that there's no good treatment for this disease. And they basically don't want treatment to be given. So, they put patients through lengthy review procedures and try to delay treating the patients.
WIAN: Sanchez had to wait five months to begin receiving Alimta, a drug now undergoing clinical trials that has shown some promise. But even with the best treatment, most mesothelioma patients die within a year.
VERDECIA: I hope to God that it wasn't too long.
WIAN: Advocates want more federal funding of mesothelioma research and treatment, since about a third of victims had asbestos exposure in military-related jobs. As for getting patients to treatment centers, Houston's Dr. Smythe has started a foundation to help with out-of-pocket expenses.
Casey Wian, CNN, Los Angeles.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: And tomorrow night, in our special report, "Doctors For Hire," as we continue to look at access to medical care in this country.
Coming up next tonight: Senators today questioned the man who would replace Harvey Pitt as chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Tim O'Brien is covering the story from Washington.
TIM O'BRIEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, what would you do if you were 71 years old and had $100 million in the bank? Well, William Donaldson appears poised to take a really good government job.
DOBBS: Tim, thank you. And ahead, I'll have my commentary on our friends France and Germany on the issue of Iraq and world leadership.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: President Bush's nominee to head up the Securities and Exchange Commission today promised to crack down on corporate corruption and to rebuild investor confidence. William Donaldson appeared before the Senate Banking Committee in his confirmation process.
Tim O'Brien has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
O'BRIEN (voice-over): Although senators gave William Donaldson a cordial reception, several observed that the hearing was against the backdrop of Enron and corporate scandals in which executives enriched themselves at the expense of shareholders.
As chairman and CEO of Aetna, Donaldson was given a salary and stock options totaling around $19 million, compensation Donaldson told lawmakers was -- quote -- "strongly aligned with shareholder interests."
WILLIAM DONALDSON, SEC CHAIRMAN NOMINEE: The value created since the day I took over Aetna as CEO until today for the shareholders was, according to my calculations, $4.3 billion.
O'BRIEN: Senator Paul Sarbanes, author of last year's landmark corporate governance legislation, questioned Donaldson about his efforts to stave off hostile takeovers at Aetna which might have benefited investors by driving up the stock price.
DONALDSON: We wanted to protect our shareholders from somebody coming in, swooping in, in the process of turning a company around, and taking it over for some other group of shareholders.
O'BRIEN: Most of the questioning, however, was not nearly so pointed. Donaldson is 71, worth an estimated $100 million. Lawmakers praised him for his willingness to reenter government service.
SEN. RICHARD SHELBY (R), ALABAMA: I believe that you bring more than the requisite experience: your educational background, your commitment to this country.
O'BRIEN: The SEC has been understaffed and underfunded. Last year, the White House indicated it might even trim the $776 million the House had authorized for the agency. But Mr. Bush's new budget calls for $842 million for the commission for fiscal year 2004, nearly double the 2002 level.
(END VIDEOTAPE) O'BRIEN: Donaldson's confirmation by the full Senate seems all but assured. Senators today also seemed satisfied that, for the first time in a long time, the SEC may soon have both the money and the leadership to actually succeed at rooting out corporate crime and restoring investor confidence -- Lou.
DOBBS: And if it does come up short on some money, Tim, it looks like Bill Donaldson would be able help out a bit.
O'BRIEN: He could.
(LAUGHTER)
DOBBS: Tim, thanks a lot -- Tim O'Brien.
Well, on Wall Street today, an early rally evaporated, the Dow up as much as 139 points, but the gains obviously didn't last. The Dow closed back below 8000, in fact. The Nasdaq dropped to its lowest level since last October.
Christine Romans is here to tell us about this market.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Bit of a wild day.
The market is grappling with these deadlines, these Iraq deadlines. And once Colin Powell was speaking and got done with his evidence to the U.N. Security Council, then the market got to its best levels of the day. But then people looked at the next deadline, which is, when is there going to be a confrontation? What happens next? And the market sold off. So, that continues here. Volume was pretty light, though.
DOBBS: We should probably tell those investors there a few intervening dates, like the 8th of February, the 14th of February.
ROMANS: Oh, there are. There are.
So, oil and goal fell and the stocks rose early. And then it all turned around and oil firmed and stocks fell. You have AOL pretty active here today. This one was down another 5 percent. Lou, this is down 24 percent in five trading sessions, by the way.
DOBBS: And this is where we point out that AOL Time Warner is the parent of this network.
ROMANS: It most certainly is. And it's down...
DOBBS: How much is it down?
ROMANS: Down about 5 percent here, but down 24 percent in just about five or six days.
El Paso slashing its dividends, selling $3 billion worth of assets. The was the most actively-traded stock here. It was down 20 percent. And you had Cisco closing down a penny. It was pretty active as well. But Cisco Systems down a penny after an earnings report, not a lot of movement there. So, that's behind it.
DOBBS: Well, following that earnings report, we're just about wrapped with this earnings season.
ROMANS: More than three-quarters of the way through and, thankfully, because the fourth quarter came in pretty decent.
But Chuck Hill, who tracks these things, says the first quarter and the second quarter this year could be a little rough. But I wanted to show you, sequentially, what 2002 looks like. Year over year, the numbers are skewed, because it's been so tough around here. But, sequentially, this year, first quarter up -- that actually should be 17 percent.
(CROSSTALK)
ROMANS: Right, 2002, first-quarter profit up 17 percent. Then you had the second quarter up just a little bit, the third quarter down a little bit, fourth quarter up 1.1 percent. So, little by little by little, quarter by quarter, things are stabilizing. We'll see how the first quarter and the second quarter turn out this year.
DOBBS: Christine, thank you very much.
ROMANS: Sure.
DOBBS: Coming up next, we'll have the results for you of our MONEYLINE poll tonight. We'll share your thoughts. And I'll have a few thoughts about the French, the Germans and world leadership.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Now the preliminary results of tonight's MONEYLINE poll. The question: What should come next in the conflict with Iraq? Thirty-five percent of you said more weapons inspections; 9 percent said more dialogue with U.S. allies; 9 percent said one last chance to disarm; 47 percent of you said bombs over Baghdad.
Well, turning now to a few thoughts of my own, Secretary of State Colin Powell today presented the nations of the Security Council convincing evidence of Saddam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction. Secretary Powell, who once urged caution and patience, today presented clear evidence of Iraq's deceit.
And what is the reaction of our good friends the French and Germans on the Security Council? They say all this deserves further study. The German representative of Herr Schroeder, whose voters spanked him at the polls last Sunday, was able at least to muster the diplomatic courage to say Iraq should disarm itself of weapons of mass destruction.
Foreign Minister Fischer also took pains to note the weapons inspectors had destroyed more Iraqi weapons of mass destruction than the United States- and the British-led coalition in the Gulf War. Dr. Hans Blix, you may recall, made the same point in his report to the Security Council a week and a half ago. I find it interesting that neither saw fit to credit the United States and Britain and other coalition allies with throwing Saddam out of Kuwait and making those inspections ultimately possible.
But the disingenuousness of French Foreign Minister de Villepin was breathtaking, even by United Nations standards. The preening de Villepin's reaction to the case against Iraq? Why, the French would have the United Nations double or triple the number of weapons inspectors in Iraq. The Syrian U.N. ambassador was quick to embrace the bold French position, thereby expanding the axis of appeasement on the Security Council.
We all recall the criticism of President Bush early last fall for unilateralism on the issue of Iraq. Now I hope those same critics will applaud his forbearance with the process of multilateralism and applaud the good faith of the United States in working through the United Nations.
The shame is, so little of that good faith on the part of the United States is reciprocated by the governments of some nations that claim, unconvincingly, to have more than pretensions to roles of world leadership. But that shame is all theirs.
Let's take a look at your thoughts.
David Mazzarella of Massachusetts wrote to say: "If it weren't for the United States and the rest of the world during and after World War II, France might be doing the goose step and drinking Rhine wine. It seems Germany and France have short memories."
On the subject of North Korea, Mary MacVica of Columbus, Ohio, wrote to say: "North Korea sells weapons of mass destruction to other nations, refused to allow inspections, etcetera. So, why are we not going to bomb them with the same gusto as Iraq?"
Fredrick Wilson of Michigan says: "The United States should have the fortitude to destroy North Korea's capability as quickly as Israel did with the Iraqi reactor at Osirak in 1981. And it should be done today, before it's too late."
As always, we appreciate your thoughts. Please send your e-mails to us at MONEYLINE@CNN.com. We thank you for that.
That's MONEYLINE for this Wednesday evening. And we thank you for joining us.
Be with us tomorrow. Our guests will include Education Secretary Rod Paige and former Ambassador to South Korea and China James Lilley. We'll be talking about why he believes North Korea is a critical issue now.
Thanks for joining us. For all of us here, good night from 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
Security Council Members; Threat of Terrorist Attacks Against the United States Raised>
|
