Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Today

Rebellion from Shia Muslims Turns Bloody; What Can We Expect from 9/11 Commission Proceedings?; ACLU to Bring Lawsuit Over No-Fly List

Aired April 06, 2004 - 11:00   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.


DARYN KAGAN, ANCHOR: It is 11 a.m. on the East Coast, 8 a.m. on the West Coast. From CNN Center in Atlanta, good morning once again. I'm Daryn Kagan.
Iraq is up first on CNN this hour. Flash points flared today with Sunnis in Fallujah and Shiites in a poor Baghdad neighborhood. The toll now: 20 Americans, 60 Iraqis dead after three violent days in Iraq.

In the south of the country, a firebrand cleric blamed for stirring much of the violence is hiding out now in one of Islam's holiest sites.

Jim Clancy is covering all the angles for us. He is live in Baghdad -- Jim.

JIM CLANCY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Daryn, good evening from the Iraqi capital. I think we should note, it's 85 days before the U.S. is going to hand over sovereignty to Iraqi lawmakers here in Baghdad. And yet, if we asked Iraqis themselves, they might feel more insecure, more uncertain of the future than ever before.

Why, because there's battles on two fronts. Not only the Sunni, but also, now, a new front with a radical Muslim -- Shia Muslim cleric, a young man who's been a troublemaker from the start in Sadr City, one of his strongholds.

His fighters, his so-called al-Madi army, fought with U.S. troops overnight. It was a very one-sided battle if you look at the statistics. More than three dozen of his fighters were killed, 100 others wounded. U.S. forces reported no casualties.

Elsewhere in Baghdad, though, three U.S. soldiers died in separate incidents, coming under fire in a predominantly Shia Muslim neighborhood, not Sadr City, with rocket-propelled grenade.

Moving on to Fallujah and the situation there, U.S. Marines have reined in that area. All the roads are closed. We have limited access. We're getting some pictures out via a pool that is in place now, sending us out reports. And they tell us today that there was a loud explosion around noon in the center of the city, the rattle of gunfire duels being fought.

U.S. troops, the Marines there, moving in M1-A1 Abrams tanks and Humvees that are heavily armed, in to meet with insurgents that are battling them there. Heavy fighting overnight, as well, shelling by mortars, rocket-propelled grenades, the U.S. fighting back, capturing some people, as they did here in Baghdad.

So two fronts are open. A lot of people wondering where is all this going to lead? They're particularly concerned about the fighting with this Muslim cleric, because his supporters, while they're not, perhaps, the majority among the Shia -- he probably only has the support of about a fourth of the Shia Muslims in Iraq -- they still are the majority in the country itself. Nobody quite sure where this one is going -- Daryn.

KAGAN: Yes, and Jim, that's my question for you. How does Moqtada al-Sadr end up being a martyr, since what he is wanted for is the murder of another Shiite leader, not for killing Americans?

CLANCY: I think that most Iraqis know that Moqtada al-Sadr wants some share of power, if not all of the power.

You know, in the past, he tried to declare an Islamic state. Nobody -- He ran that up the flagpole. Nobody stood up and saluted. He backed away from that. They know him for what his is.

But they're mystified why the U.S. shut down his newspaper that nobody -- people regarded it as an unsubstantiated tabloid here in Iraq. And they feel that perhaps the U.S. has in a rash way, provoked him. Now they are facing attacks in their neighborhood. Now they are hearing the sound of gunfire in Baghdad. It's not something that they're comfortable with.

Moqtada al-Sadr is issuing a list of demanding, saying he wants U.S. troops to pull out of all the populated areas and hand over all of the prisoners, or he's going to continue this fight. And that's not good news. Everyone knows the U.S. isn't going to give in to those demands.

KAGAN: Jim Clancy, live from Baghdad.

The U.S. civilian administrator for Iraq appeared on CNN this morning. He was discussing the rising tide of violence there. Paul Bremer rejects the notion of a Shiite uprising.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAUL BREMER, U.S. ADMINISTRATOR IN IRAQ: There is no question we have control of the country. Of course, I know if you just report on those few places it does look chaotic.

Actually, if you travel around the country -- and I was up north on two different trips last week -- what you find is a bustling economy, people driving around, people opening businesses right and left. Unemployment has dropped to below 10 percent in the three major cities of the country. It was over 60 percent at liberation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: Late developments on Iraq anytime you're away from your television. Just log on to CNN.com/Iraq. You can also sign up for breaking news e-mail alerts on the situation.

The commission investigating the September 11 attacks hears from National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice later this week. On CNN's "AMERICAN MORNING," commissioner member Bob Kerrey talked about the importance of Rice testifying publicly and under oath before the panel.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB KERREY, 9/11 COMMISSIONER: Well, it's not so much what we're going to learn (ph). It's that we need to get her statement under oath and we need to have a public statement in order to be able to get the complete picture out in front of the public.

We'll produce a report, but it's very important for the public to hear the statements as much as possible, especially from someone who was at the nexus, not just of foreign policy decisions but also domestic decisions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: President Bush says that National Security Advisor Rice will lay out the facts when she testifies publicly before the 9/11 commission on Thursday.

Our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider is with us -- he's in Washington -- to talk about Rice's testimony.

Bill, good morning.

BILL SCHNEIDER, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Good morning, Daryn.

KAGAN: Such a build-up. So much anticipation. Do you think when it's all said and done, with all the time to prepare, we will really hear anything new from Condoleezza Rice on Thursday?

SCHNEIDER: Well, it's not like we haven't heard from her before. She's been all over the press. She's been on many shows on CNN and other networks, talking about the record on this.

What she needs to produce at this particular hearing, because these -- people who will be questioning her are very familiar with the evidence. She needs to produce some evidence of her own to essentially refute Richard Clarke's allegations that this administration was warned about a terrorist threat, including presumably some specific warnings about the possible use of airplanes as missiles.

And that they had a plan that they were working on to not just roll back but to eliminate al Qaeda. She said that many times, that the president said he did not want to just swat flies, which is his characterization of the Clinton administration policy, but actually eliminate al Qaeda.

She said there was a plan in the works, but there's no evidence of that. And on many occasions when she spoke or made statements in the press, spoke to the Council on Foreign Relations before September 11, there was no indication that that was an urgent priority.

So the commission is going to want some indications that the warnings were taken seriously.

KAGAN: Bill, the other part of the work that's left to be done with the White House and with this commission, President Bush and Vice President Cheney will appear together. This is not testifying. I think the president is referring to it as a meeting.

But interesting that they will be doing it together and meeting with the full commission, not just the chairman and the vice chair, as was the original proposal.

SCHNEIDER: That is a also concession, just as Condoleezza Rice's public testimony is a concession to the realities of politics, namely that this commission has suddenly ratcheted up in public attention because of the Clarke book and his testimony and his charges.

The president and vice president have said there will nobody limit of time, and while it will not be sworn testimony because of their concern about the separation of powers, since the commission was set up by Congress, they will not be under oath. There will not be a detailed record. Nevertheless, they will be appearing.

The question that's emerging out of all this is simple: why does the president of the United States have to appear jointly with the vice president of the United States? I mean, can you imagine Clinton and Gore testifying before such a commission or the first George Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle? Why do they have to appear together?

It's raising some damaging questions about whether or not George Bush knows enough to testify on his own or whether he's dependent on Vice President Cheney.

KAGAN: Well, to be fair, a lot of the other public testimony that we saw didn't just have the chief official but had the next person in line sitting next to them, and they testified together in public before the commission, Bill.

SCHNEIDER: Well, Daryn, this is the president of the United States. He's the guy in charge. He's the guy who was elected. Of course, the vice president was elected, too, with him as a team.

But just politically, the idea that the president cannot have this meeting without the vice president there with him, I think it just raises a damaging image. If this were public testimony, I think President Bush would probably have to do it on his own. But it is, of course, private testimony with no public record, so it's a little bit easier to do it this way.

KAGAN: Yes. No record, no pictures.

SCHNEIDER: That's right.

KAGAN: No oath as well.

SCHNEIDER: Exactly.

KAGAN: Bill Schneider in Washington. Thank you for that.

The heightened airline security in the wake of the 9/11 attacks includes a so-called no fly list. This would bar people -- actually some people from commercial flights. Next hour, the ACLU will announce plans for a lawsuit over that list.

Our homeland security correspondent, Jeanne Meserve, is in Washington with that.

Jeanne, good morning.

JEANNE MESERVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Daryn.

The suit, which will be filed in one hour's time, is being billed by the American Civil Liberties Union as the first ever nationwide class action challenge to the government no-fly list.

The seven plaintiffs include a minister, a member of the military and a college student.

The no-fly list, which is intended to keep terrorists and people would potential terrorist links off airplanes, is compiled by the Transportation Security Administration with data supplied by the FBI, the CIA, and the Terrorist Screening Center.

The data is provided to airlines, and each time a reservation is made, the passenger name is supposed to be checked against the list.

An administration official acknowledges this is not a perfect system. Thirteen to 15 percent of airline travelers get selected for secondary screening, sometimes because their name or one similar to it appears on the no-fly list.

The Department of Homeland Security has been trying to replace the current no-fly list with a new passenger screening reservation system called CAPS 2, which would run passenger names against government and private databases, and assign a color-code risk classification.

The department claims it would significantly reduce the number of innocent passengers subjected to additional questioning and screening. But the development of CAPS 2 has been held up, in part because of privacy and other concerns raised by the ACLU, the very group bringing the no-fly suit lawsuit today.

As for this case, we'll have more detail next hour on the suit and the plaintiffs. Until then no comment from the Transportation Security Administration -- Daryn.

KAGAN: well, Jeanne, let's talk about this no-fly list. If somebody appears on that, is that the only reason they would be rescreened by the TSA?

MESERVE: No, it may be that they bought a ticket at the last minute, they bought a one-way ticket or they paid with cash. All of those would be red flagged. But in addition, it could be because their name or one similar to it was on this list.

Here's the problem, you have a suspected terrorist. His name is Paul Smith, but you don't know much else about him. Therefore, anybody with the name Paul Smith would be stopped and would be looked at more closely.

The Department of Homeland Security says under the new system, CAPS 2, that would happen less often. The ACLU has said they might be substituting a -- taking a bad system and substituting one that is even worse.

The fact is we don't know which one is right. We don't know if CAP 2 would be better, because tests of the system have been held up, because TSA and DHS have not been able to get the data from the airlines required to do testing of the system to see if it works.

KAGAN: Jeanne Meserve in Washington, thank you.

Interpreting the rules of engagement. Straight ahead, we're going to examine tough choices that U.S. soldiers faces on a daily basis in Iraq.

Also, focusing on the economy, we'll get a live update from the campaign trail on President Bush and Democratic frontrunner John Kerry.

And one down, one to go. Ahead, the University of Connecticut goes for a shot at history.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(STOCK REPORT)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAGAN: This just in. We're following a developing story out of Iraq. And that is supporters of the maverick Muslim cleric Moqtada al-Sadr apparently are moving into parts of Najaf and controlling key government, religious and security buildings, including the governor's office, police stations, and the Imam Ali Mosque. That is one of Shia Islam's holiest shrines.

Apparently, supporters of al-Sadr are busing in other supporters from Sadr City and also members of his outlawed militia. Businesspeople around the area in Najaf reportedly are closing their shops. They're either leaving the city or hoarding their wares in their homes.

So that's the situation from Sadr City, spreading into Najaf, surrounding Moqtada al-Sadr.

More on that just ahead.

Also from Iraq, there are two video clips from the war in Iraq that are raising questions about the conduct of U.S. troops in the heat of combat.

Our senior Pentagon correspondent, Jamie McIntyre, has been investigating these claims. And we do need to warn you, you might find the videos disturbing to watch.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Two video clips show U.S. troops finishing off wounded Iraqis.

Here, U.S. Marines who just fought their way to Baghdad, encounter armed Iraqi guards at an industrial site thought to be a possible location of WMD. A CNN cameraman captures the scene, as one wounded Iraqi attempts to get up and is felled by a second shot.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Got him!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes!

MCINTYRE: Seven months later, as the U.S. is embroiled in a guerrilla war with Iraqi insurgents, U.S. Army Apache helicopter pilots, using a nighttime infrared targeting system, fire a second volley of 30 millimeter cannon fire at an Iraqi who appears to still be moving.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Roger, he's wounded.

UNDENTIFIED MALE: Hit him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) The truck and him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Go forward of him an hit him.

MCINTYRE: Recently, the German television network ARD aired the tapes, along with analysis from a retired American three-star general who called both killings inexcusable.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: According to the Geneva Conventions this is murder.

MCINTYRE: But when we played the tapes again for General Garde (ph), including this shot, showing how the telephoto lens on CNN's camera made the Marines appear much closer to the Iraqis than they were, he softened his criticism.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I had the impression that when the Marine shot the individual lying on the ground, he was very close by.

MCINTYRE: Still, Garde (ph), a former president of the National Defense University, questions why in both cases the wounded Iraqis could not have been captured alive, especially the man gravely wounded by the Marines.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He does appear from that tape to be incapacitated to that point that he can no longer offer any resistance. And I didn't see any particular reason why he needed to be killed.

MCINTYRE: But the German television broadcast included this sequence from the helicopter tape, showing the suspected Iraqi fighters dumping what appears to be a weapon in a field.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's running off into the field. See this?

MCINTYRE: That potential threat makes them fair game up to a point, according to experts on the international law of armed conflict.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Even though they look like sitting ducks, there's nothing wrong with the engagement.

MCINTYRE: James Carofano (ph) is a former West Point instructor now with the Heritage Foundation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Roger. He's wounded.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hit him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. I think -- you know, that's the part of the tape that people might find problematic.

MCINTYRE: The legal and moral question, when is it acceptable to shoot a wounded enemy fighter?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because somebody's wounded, necessarily, and injured, doesn't necessarily mean that they at that point are not a combatant whatsoever. Really, I mean, at the end of the day, it's almost unless somebody actually surrenders and gets taken into custody, it's really difficult in a combat situation to critique.

MCINTYRE: Nevertheless, the gritty combat footage raises questions about whether U.S. troops always act within the Geneva Conventions, says law professor Robert Goldman of American University, who has served as a consultant to human rights groups investigating military atrocities.

ROBERT GOLDMAN, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL: Certainly, it is something that would warrant raising questions with the military about it. But I don't think that anyone in good faith, frankly, who knows the law could say that this is conclusive.

MCINTYRE: The term of art (ph) is French, hors de combat, in English, out of the battle. Defined as no longer able or willing to engage in hostile acts.

According to the applicable 1949 Geneva Convention, it is a grave breach of the law of war to cause death or serious injury to someone who is incapacitated by wounds, incapable of defending himself, or otherwise engaging in a hostile act.

For the wounded on the battlefield, the fatal decision is deciding to move on crawl to shelter. GOLDMAN: He may be dazed at first and he's not wounded as seriously as one thinks that he is. And yet, he still has access to weapons. Does he have grenades? He can lob those grenades. It wasn't that far away from where this is being done. These are close questions.

MCINTYRE (on camera): Pentagon officials say that instruction on the law of war is a routine part of U.S. military training. And while allegations of abuses are investigated, when the threat is unclear, wide latitude is given to soldiers in the heat of combat.

Pentagon sources say an initial investigation into the conduct of the Marines caught on video by CNN has cleared them of wrongdoing. A review of the actions of the Army helicopter pilots is not yet completed.

(voice-over) None of our experts was willing to say a war crime had been committed.

GOLDMAN: We don't have all of the context. Again, these are judgment calls frequently, split-second judgment calls that have to be made. We're sitting back in the greater tranquility.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Making these life and death decisions in the split second with the information that's available to a soldier when he's standing there, they're tough things.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But again, it's one of those gray judgment areas. And it's very difficult from observing on the tape to draw any definite conclusions.

MCINTYRE: Jamie McIntyre, CNN the Pentagon.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KAGAN: We are at 21 minutes after the hour. A break now and weather is after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(WEATHER REPORT)

KAGAN: The Republican P.R. machine is looking to soften Dick Cheney's image. After the break, John King explains why that's an important mission in the president's reelection campaign.

And still to come, as golf's greats prepare to tee off for the masters, we're going to talk with Martha Burk about her campaign to change an Augusta national tradition.

(COMMERCIAL 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


Aired April 6, 2004 - 11:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DARYN KAGAN, ANCHOR: It is 11 a.m. on the East Coast, 8 a.m. on the West Coast. From CNN Center in Atlanta, good morning once again. I'm Daryn Kagan.
Iraq is up first on CNN this hour. Flash points flared today with Sunnis in Fallujah and Shiites in a poor Baghdad neighborhood. The toll now: 20 Americans, 60 Iraqis dead after three violent days in Iraq.

In the south of the country, a firebrand cleric blamed for stirring much of the violence is hiding out now in one of Islam's holiest sites.

Jim Clancy is covering all the angles for us. He is live in Baghdad -- Jim.

JIM CLANCY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Daryn, good evening from the Iraqi capital. I think we should note, it's 85 days before the U.S. is going to hand over sovereignty to Iraqi lawmakers here in Baghdad. And yet, if we asked Iraqis themselves, they might feel more insecure, more uncertain of the future than ever before.

Why, because there's battles on two fronts. Not only the Sunni, but also, now, a new front with a radical Muslim -- Shia Muslim cleric, a young man who's been a troublemaker from the start in Sadr City, one of his strongholds.

His fighters, his so-called al-Madi army, fought with U.S. troops overnight. It was a very one-sided battle if you look at the statistics. More than three dozen of his fighters were killed, 100 others wounded. U.S. forces reported no casualties.

Elsewhere in Baghdad, though, three U.S. soldiers died in separate incidents, coming under fire in a predominantly Shia Muslim neighborhood, not Sadr City, with rocket-propelled grenade.

Moving on to Fallujah and the situation there, U.S. Marines have reined in that area. All the roads are closed. We have limited access. We're getting some pictures out via a pool that is in place now, sending us out reports. And they tell us today that there was a loud explosion around noon in the center of the city, the rattle of gunfire duels being fought.

U.S. troops, the Marines there, moving in M1-A1 Abrams tanks and Humvees that are heavily armed, in to meet with insurgents that are battling them there. Heavy fighting overnight, as well, shelling by mortars, rocket-propelled grenades, the U.S. fighting back, capturing some people, as they did here in Baghdad.

So two fronts are open. A lot of people wondering where is all this going to lead? They're particularly concerned about the fighting with this Muslim cleric, because his supporters, while they're not, perhaps, the majority among the Shia -- he probably only has the support of about a fourth of the Shia Muslims in Iraq -- they still are the majority in the country itself. Nobody quite sure where this one is going -- Daryn.

KAGAN: Yes, and Jim, that's my question for you. How does Moqtada al-Sadr end up being a martyr, since what he is wanted for is the murder of another Shiite leader, not for killing Americans?

CLANCY: I think that most Iraqis know that Moqtada al-Sadr wants some share of power, if not all of the power.

You know, in the past, he tried to declare an Islamic state. Nobody -- He ran that up the flagpole. Nobody stood up and saluted. He backed away from that. They know him for what his is.

But they're mystified why the U.S. shut down his newspaper that nobody -- people regarded it as an unsubstantiated tabloid here in Iraq. And they feel that perhaps the U.S. has in a rash way, provoked him. Now they are facing attacks in their neighborhood. Now they are hearing the sound of gunfire in Baghdad. It's not something that they're comfortable with.

Moqtada al-Sadr is issuing a list of demanding, saying he wants U.S. troops to pull out of all the populated areas and hand over all of the prisoners, or he's going to continue this fight. And that's not good news. Everyone knows the U.S. isn't going to give in to those demands.

KAGAN: Jim Clancy, live from Baghdad.

The U.S. civilian administrator for Iraq appeared on CNN this morning. He was discussing the rising tide of violence there. Paul Bremer rejects the notion of a Shiite uprising.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAUL BREMER, U.S. ADMINISTRATOR IN IRAQ: There is no question we have control of the country. Of course, I know if you just report on those few places it does look chaotic.

Actually, if you travel around the country -- and I was up north on two different trips last week -- what you find is a bustling economy, people driving around, people opening businesses right and left. Unemployment has dropped to below 10 percent in the three major cities of the country. It was over 60 percent at liberation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: Late developments on Iraq anytime you're away from your television. Just log on to CNN.com/Iraq. You can also sign up for breaking news e-mail alerts on the situation.

The commission investigating the September 11 attacks hears from National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice later this week. On CNN's "AMERICAN MORNING," commissioner member Bob Kerrey talked about the importance of Rice testifying publicly and under oath before the panel.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB KERREY, 9/11 COMMISSIONER: Well, it's not so much what we're going to learn (ph). It's that we need to get her statement under oath and we need to have a public statement in order to be able to get the complete picture out in front of the public.

We'll produce a report, but it's very important for the public to hear the statements as much as possible, especially from someone who was at the nexus, not just of foreign policy decisions but also domestic decisions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: President Bush says that National Security Advisor Rice will lay out the facts when she testifies publicly before the 9/11 commission on Thursday.

Our senior political analyst, Bill Schneider is with us -- he's in Washington -- to talk about Rice's testimony.

Bill, good morning.

BILL SCHNEIDER, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Good morning, Daryn.

KAGAN: Such a build-up. So much anticipation. Do you think when it's all said and done, with all the time to prepare, we will really hear anything new from Condoleezza Rice on Thursday?

SCHNEIDER: Well, it's not like we haven't heard from her before. She's been all over the press. She's been on many shows on CNN and other networks, talking about the record on this.

What she needs to produce at this particular hearing, because these -- people who will be questioning her are very familiar with the evidence. She needs to produce some evidence of her own to essentially refute Richard Clarke's allegations that this administration was warned about a terrorist threat, including presumably some specific warnings about the possible use of airplanes as missiles.

And that they had a plan that they were working on to not just roll back but to eliminate al Qaeda. She said that many times, that the president said he did not want to just swat flies, which is his characterization of the Clinton administration policy, but actually eliminate al Qaeda.

She said there was a plan in the works, but there's no evidence of that. And on many occasions when she spoke or made statements in the press, spoke to the Council on Foreign Relations before September 11, there was no indication that that was an urgent priority.

So the commission is going to want some indications that the warnings were taken seriously.

KAGAN: Bill, the other part of the work that's left to be done with the White House and with this commission, President Bush and Vice President Cheney will appear together. This is not testifying. I think the president is referring to it as a meeting.

But interesting that they will be doing it together and meeting with the full commission, not just the chairman and the vice chair, as was the original proposal.

SCHNEIDER: That is a also concession, just as Condoleezza Rice's public testimony is a concession to the realities of politics, namely that this commission has suddenly ratcheted up in public attention because of the Clarke book and his testimony and his charges.

The president and vice president have said there will nobody limit of time, and while it will not be sworn testimony because of their concern about the separation of powers, since the commission was set up by Congress, they will not be under oath. There will not be a detailed record. Nevertheless, they will be appearing.

The question that's emerging out of all this is simple: why does the president of the United States have to appear jointly with the vice president of the United States? I mean, can you imagine Clinton and Gore testifying before such a commission or the first George Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle? Why do they have to appear together?

It's raising some damaging questions about whether or not George Bush knows enough to testify on his own or whether he's dependent on Vice President Cheney.

KAGAN: Well, to be fair, a lot of the other public testimony that we saw didn't just have the chief official but had the next person in line sitting next to them, and they testified together in public before the commission, Bill.

SCHNEIDER: Well, Daryn, this is the president of the United States. He's the guy in charge. He's the guy who was elected. Of course, the vice president was elected, too, with him as a team.

But just politically, the idea that the president cannot have this meeting without the vice president there with him, I think it just raises a damaging image. If this were public testimony, I think President Bush would probably have to do it on his own. But it is, of course, private testimony with no public record, so it's a little bit easier to do it this way.

KAGAN: Yes. No record, no pictures.

SCHNEIDER: That's right.

KAGAN: No oath as well.

SCHNEIDER: Exactly.

KAGAN: Bill Schneider in Washington. Thank you for that.

The heightened airline security in the wake of the 9/11 attacks includes a so-called no fly list. This would bar people -- actually some people from commercial flights. Next hour, the ACLU will announce plans for a lawsuit over that list.

Our homeland security correspondent, Jeanne Meserve, is in Washington with that.

Jeanne, good morning.

JEANNE MESERVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Daryn.

The suit, which will be filed in one hour's time, is being billed by the American Civil Liberties Union as the first ever nationwide class action challenge to the government no-fly list.

The seven plaintiffs include a minister, a member of the military and a college student.

The no-fly list, which is intended to keep terrorists and people would potential terrorist links off airplanes, is compiled by the Transportation Security Administration with data supplied by the FBI, the CIA, and the Terrorist Screening Center.

The data is provided to airlines, and each time a reservation is made, the passenger name is supposed to be checked against the list.

An administration official acknowledges this is not a perfect system. Thirteen to 15 percent of airline travelers get selected for secondary screening, sometimes because their name or one similar to it appears on the no-fly list.

The Department of Homeland Security has been trying to replace the current no-fly list with a new passenger screening reservation system called CAPS 2, which would run passenger names against government and private databases, and assign a color-code risk classification.

The department claims it would significantly reduce the number of innocent passengers subjected to additional questioning and screening. But the development of CAPS 2 has been held up, in part because of privacy and other concerns raised by the ACLU, the very group bringing the no-fly suit lawsuit today.

As for this case, we'll have more detail next hour on the suit and the plaintiffs. Until then no comment from the Transportation Security Administration -- Daryn.

KAGAN: well, Jeanne, let's talk about this no-fly list. If somebody appears on that, is that the only reason they would be rescreened by the TSA?

MESERVE: No, it may be that they bought a ticket at the last minute, they bought a one-way ticket or they paid with cash. All of those would be red flagged. But in addition, it could be because their name or one similar to it was on this list.

Here's the problem, you have a suspected terrorist. His name is Paul Smith, but you don't know much else about him. Therefore, anybody with the name Paul Smith would be stopped and would be looked at more closely.

The Department of Homeland Security says under the new system, CAPS 2, that would happen less often. The ACLU has said they might be substituting a -- taking a bad system and substituting one that is even worse.

The fact is we don't know which one is right. We don't know if CAP 2 would be better, because tests of the system have been held up, because TSA and DHS have not been able to get the data from the airlines required to do testing of the system to see if it works.

KAGAN: Jeanne Meserve in Washington, thank you.

Interpreting the rules of engagement. Straight ahead, we're going to examine tough choices that U.S. soldiers faces on a daily basis in Iraq.

Also, focusing on the economy, we'll get a live update from the campaign trail on President Bush and Democratic frontrunner John Kerry.

And one down, one to go. Ahead, the University of Connecticut goes for a shot at history.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(STOCK REPORT)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAGAN: This just in. We're following a developing story out of Iraq. And that is supporters of the maverick Muslim cleric Moqtada al-Sadr apparently are moving into parts of Najaf and controlling key government, religious and security buildings, including the governor's office, police stations, and the Imam Ali Mosque. That is one of Shia Islam's holiest shrines.

Apparently, supporters of al-Sadr are busing in other supporters from Sadr City and also members of his outlawed militia. Businesspeople around the area in Najaf reportedly are closing their shops. They're either leaving the city or hoarding their wares in their homes.

So that's the situation from Sadr City, spreading into Najaf, surrounding Moqtada al-Sadr.

More on that just ahead.

Also from Iraq, there are two video clips from the war in Iraq that are raising questions about the conduct of U.S. troops in the heat of combat.

Our senior Pentagon correspondent, Jamie McIntyre, has been investigating these claims. And we do need to warn you, you might find the videos disturbing to watch.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Two video clips show U.S. troops finishing off wounded Iraqis.

Here, U.S. Marines who just fought their way to Baghdad, encounter armed Iraqi guards at an industrial site thought to be a possible location of WMD. A CNN cameraman captures the scene, as one wounded Iraqi attempts to get up and is felled by a second shot.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Got him!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes!

MCINTYRE: Seven months later, as the U.S. is embroiled in a guerrilla war with Iraqi insurgents, U.S. Army Apache helicopter pilots, using a nighttime infrared targeting system, fire a second volley of 30 millimeter cannon fire at an Iraqi who appears to still be moving.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Roger, he's wounded.

UNDENTIFIED MALE: Hit him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) The truck and him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Go forward of him an hit him.

MCINTYRE: Recently, the German television network ARD aired the tapes, along with analysis from a retired American three-star general who called both killings inexcusable.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: According to the Geneva Conventions this is murder.

MCINTYRE: But when we played the tapes again for General Garde (ph), including this shot, showing how the telephoto lens on CNN's camera made the Marines appear much closer to the Iraqis than they were, he softened his criticism.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I had the impression that when the Marine shot the individual lying on the ground, he was very close by.

MCINTYRE: Still, Garde (ph), a former president of the National Defense University, questions why in both cases the wounded Iraqis could not have been captured alive, especially the man gravely wounded by the Marines.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He does appear from that tape to be incapacitated to that point that he can no longer offer any resistance. And I didn't see any particular reason why he needed to be killed.

MCINTYRE: But the German television broadcast included this sequence from the helicopter tape, showing the suspected Iraqi fighters dumping what appears to be a weapon in a field.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's running off into the field. See this?

MCINTYRE: That potential threat makes them fair game up to a point, according to experts on the international law of armed conflict.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Even though they look like sitting ducks, there's nothing wrong with the engagement.

MCINTYRE: James Carofano (ph) is a former West Point instructor now with the Heritage Foundation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Roger. He's wounded.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hit him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. I think -- you know, that's the part of the tape that people might find problematic.

MCINTYRE: The legal and moral question, when is it acceptable to shoot a wounded enemy fighter?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because somebody's wounded, necessarily, and injured, doesn't necessarily mean that they at that point are not a combatant whatsoever. Really, I mean, at the end of the day, it's almost unless somebody actually surrenders and gets taken into custody, it's really difficult in a combat situation to critique.

MCINTYRE: Nevertheless, the gritty combat footage raises questions about whether U.S. troops always act within the Geneva Conventions, says law professor Robert Goldman of American University, who has served as a consultant to human rights groups investigating military atrocities.

ROBERT GOLDMAN, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL: Certainly, it is something that would warrant raising questions with the military about it. But I don't think that anyone in good faith, frankly, who knows the law could say that this is conclusive.

MCINTYRE: The term of art (ph) is French, hors de combat, in English, out of the battle. Defined as no longer able or willing to engage in hostile acts.

According to the applicable 1949 Geneva Convention, it is a grave breach of the law of war to cause death or serious injury to someone who is incapacitated by wounds, incapable of defending himself, or otherwise engaging in a hostile act.

For the wounded on the battlefield, the fatal decision is deciding to move on crawl to shelter. GOLDMAN: He may be dazed at first and he's not wounded as seriously as one thinks that he is. And yet, he still has access to weapons. Does he have grenades? He can lob those grenades. It wasn't that far away from where this is being done. These are close questions.

MCINTYRE (on camera): Pentagon officials say that instruction on the law of war is a routine part of U.S. military training. And while allegations of abuses are investigated, when the threat is unclear, wide latitude is given to soldiers in the heat of combat.

Pentagon sources say an initial investigation into the conduct of the Marines caught on video by CNN has cleared them of wrongdoing. A review of the actions of the Army helicopter pilots is not yet completed.

(voice-over) None of our experts was willing to say a war crime had been committed.

GOLDMAN: We don't have all of the context. Again, these are judgment calls frequently, split-second judgment calls that have to be made. We're sitting back in the greater tranquility.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Making these life and death decisions in the split second with the information that's available to a soldier when he's standing there, they're tough things.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But again, it's one of those gray judgment areas. And it's very difficult from observing on the tape to draw any definite conclusions.

MCINTYRE: Jamie McIntyre, CNN the Pentagon.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KAGAN: We are at 21 minutes after the hour. A break now and weather is after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(WEATHER REPORT)

KAGAN: The Republican P.R. machine is looking to soften Dick Cheney's image. After the break, John King explains why that's an important mission in the president's reelection campaign.

And still to come, as golf's greats prepare to tee off for the masters, we're going to talk with Martha Burk about her campaign to change an Augusta national tradition.

(COMMERCIAL 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