Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

Fighter Jets Scrambled For Air France Flight; Passengers Should Expect Long Delay; Iraqi Forces Showed No Will To Fight; Military Will Retake Ramadi In Days; Iraqi Prime Minister Responds To Washington Criticism; Iraqi Forces Weren't Outnumbered; ISIS Executes 90 In Palmyra; Cleveland Protesters In Court; ISIS Executions; Cleveland Cop Acquittal. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired May 25, 2015 - 13:00   ET

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

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: Hi there, I'm Brianna Keilar in for Wolf Blitzer. It is 1:00 p.m. here in Washington and New York, 8:00 p.m. in Baghdad, and 2:00 a.m. in Pyongyang. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks so much for joining us.

We begin with breaking news. A series of threatening calls were made today against several flights, none of which have proven legitimate so far. One was against an Air France jet headed to New York. And when the pilots didn't respond to U.S. authorities, the Air Force quickly scrambled two F-15 fighter jets to escort the plane to JFK airport.

We're joined now by CNN Correspondent Jean Casarez as well as CNN Aviation Analyst Mary Schiavo who joins us by Skype from Charlton, South Carolina. Jean, what can you tell us about this? There are certainly some missing pieces here.

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: There are missing pieces. This is a working story right now. But it all started this morning with Air France Flight 22 that left Charles De Gaulle Airport at 8:23 Monday morning from Paris and did land safely at 10:17 at JFK. But with a source that is familiar with this situation, a threatening call was made to law enforcement in regard to this particular flight. And because air France didn't respond, two F-15 fighter jets escorted that plane safely to land at JFK.

Now, it has not been cleared. It is being checked now by law enforcement. It will probably take all day for that check. But we are now learning it was not the only call that was made threatening a flight in the air today. But we want to reiterate, none of this is legitimate so far. None of this. But it is being taken very carefully by law enforcement and we will bring you the latest news as this keeps coming in -- Brianna.

KEILAR: Very important to note that none of it is legitimate but certainly still concerning, Mary. You hear of threats like this being made, even if they're empty. What do you make of that?

MARY SCHIAVO, CNN AVIATION ANALYST (via Skype): Well, unfortunately, I make of it what the law enforcement authorities have to make of it and they have to take each and every one of these threats as if it is -- as serious as it is. And they have to follow up on each and every one given the state of the world and the many threats in the past that have not been fake. You know, the underwear bomber, the shoe bomber, September 11 and various other attacks.

The thing that makes this different is, of course, it was -- it was alleged to be a chemical threat, that it was some kind of a chemical threat on board which is usually different. People who are -- have a grudge against the airline or grudge against someone on the plane or just trying to wreak havoc often call in bomb threats. So, this one's a little different. And that means, of course, that, literally, every piece of luggage, everything on that plane will have to be searched because chemical weapons threats, in the past, have been difficult to detect.

KEILAR: The unfortunate reality is that threats are made when it comes to planes and law enforcement has to evaluate each and every one. In this one, is it because of the breadth of the threat or is it because it dealt with chemical weapons that law enforcement authorities took it so seriously?

SCHIAVO: No, because it was -- in this particular case, because it was against a specific flight. But, you know, law enforcement takes, in theory, if they can identify the flight and they -- and they can identify the threat -- identify the threat, identify the flight, they will act on it. They will take action on it because it's impossible for them, at this point, to tell whether it's a hoax or a disgruntled employee or whatever. But because it did mention a specific flight, the passengers on that flight can expect to be -- have everything searched and be there for a very long time, probably all day.

KEILAR: Very frustrating for them. Mary, thank you so much. Jean, thanks for your report.

Iraqi and Iranian officials are pushing back on claims by defense secretary, Ash Carter, that Iraqi forces, quote, "showed no will to fight ISIS as the key city of Ramadi fell." We'll have those reactions in just a moment. But first, listen to what Carter said exclusively here on CNN to Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ASHTON CARTER, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: What apparently happened was that the Iraqi forces just showed no will to fight. They were not outnumbered and, in fact, they vastly outnumbered the opposing force. And yet, they failed to fight. They withdrew from the site. And that says to me, and I think to most of us, that we have an issue with the will of the Iraqis to fight ISIL and defend themselves.

Now, we can give them training. We can give them equipment. We, obviously, can't give them the will to fight. But if we give them training, we give them equipment and give them support and give them some time, I hope they will develop the will to fight because only if they fight can ISIL remain defeated.

[13:05:00] BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: A lot of people in Washington that you deal with on the other side of the aisle are saying, look, put in ground troops, put in forward air controllers, air strikes are not working. What do -- what do you foresee? What is your view on this?

CARTER: Air strikes are effective but neither they nor really anything we do can substitute for the Iraqi forces will to fight. They're the ones who have to beat ISIL and then keep them beat. We can participate in the defeat of ISIL, but we can't make Iraq run as a decent place for people to live. We can't sustain the victory. Only the Iraqis can do that. And, in particular, in this case, the Sunni tribes to the west. And if there comes a time when we need to change the kinds of support we're giving to the Iraqi forces, we'll make that recommendation.

But what happened at Ramadi was a failure of the Iraqi forces to fight. And so, our efforts now are devoted to providing their ground forces with the equipment, the training, and to try to encourage their will to fight so that our campaign enabling them can be successful, both in defeating ISIL and keeping ISIL defeated in a sustained way.

STARR: And they can --

CARTER: But these things, we need to -- we -- all of our tactics --

STARR: They can surely understand you. You are not --

CARTER: -- and our procedures need to --

STARR: -- you are not at forward air controllers on the ground, yet?

CARTER: We have not made that recommendation.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KEILAR: Iraqi Prime Minister, Haider Al Abadi, told the BBC that Ramadi may be taken back in days and he's disagreeing with those statements made by Secretary Carter that Iraq's military showed no will to fight.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HAIDER AL ABADI, PRIME MINISTER, IRAQ: I'm surprised why he said that. I mean, he was very supportive of Iraq. I'm sure, as he was fed that -- he was fed with the wrong information.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: The White House says Vice President Biden called the Iraqi prime minister today. They say, quote, "The vice president recognized the enormous sacrifice and bravery of Iraqi forces over the past 18 months in Ramadi and elsewhere."

Meanwhile, an Iranian newspaper reported today, the head of the elite Quds forces accused the U.S. of having no will to stop ISIS and the failing to stop the fall of the Iraqi city of Ramadi. General Qassem Soleimani (ph) said this, "Mr. Obama, how far are your bases from Al Ramadi? You established a presence in Iraq on the pretense of supporting that nation but you did not do a damn thing." That is a quote. And let's get perspective now on this story. I'm joined by CNN Military Analyst, retired Major General James Spider Marks. He is in Phoenix, Arizona. And we also have CNN Intelligence and Security Analyst, and former CIA operative, Bob Baer. He is in California.

Gentlemen, thanks so much for being with us. General Marks, let's begin with this very important question of whether Iraqi forces have the will to fight. We heard President Obama before say, you know, this is their fight. We can't fight it for them. And now, these are the strongest words yet coming from the Obama administration from the defense secretary. What is the Iraqi will, at this point? How great is it?

MAJ. GEN. JAMES MARKS, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, clearly it doesn't exist to confront ISIS where it needs to be confronted. I would say, at this point, Iraq is going to be balkanized. I think we would acknowledge that it's spiraling into pieces. As long as Baghdad is held, we're still in an OK position. I think that's what the strategy of the United States is right now is that they're going to end up with half a loaf here.

But for the Iraqi forces to allow Ramadi to fall that quickly it clearly demonstrates there isn't sufficient professionalism and leadership at all those levels that within fighting units to be effective. At the very tactical level, that's what we're talking about. Clearly, the Iraqi will to fight has to extend up to the strategic level, at the national level as well. And I would suggest that they've written that off as well and that this caliphate that's been created is going to be OK as long as it doesn't expand and threaten Baghdad.

KEILAR: We've heard from military officials, Bob. You provide the equipment for Iraqi troops. You provide the training. But then, there's this psychological element of wanting to defeat the enemy. We heard Ash Carter say that the -- that ISIS, they had an underwhelming force compared to the Iraqi forces. What do you think of whether you can hope that someone gains the will to fight?

ROBERT BAER, CNN INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY ANALYST: Well, you know, I agree with General Marks 100 percent that Iraq is going to break up. There's nothing we can do to hold it together. Giving weapons to the Shia militias, which we're not right now of course, but even the Iraqi armies, primarily Shia, the ones fighting.

[13:10:05] And, you know, frankly, they have no will to go into the Sunni areas to keep the peace to get rid of ISIS. It's almost -- they're saying, you know, if you want ISIS, you guys live with it but we're not going to die for you. And a lot of it -- a lot of the army -- a lot of army people have died today around Habbaniya and other places.

So, I just don't see the Iraqi army ever going into the Sunni heartland, which is Al Anbar Province, or even retaking Mosul. It's just not going to happen. And the fact is Ashton Carter is right. There isn't the will to do it and I don't think we can create that will. KEILAR: General Marks, you look at that map that we just had up and

you can see Baghdad is so close to these Sunni areas where ISIS is supported, where ISIS has taken control. Are you confident that Baghdad will remain under Iraqi control?

MARKS: I am, Brianna. The very best units that exist, and I'm not being facetious here. But the Iraqi military has some superb fighting units. They are concentrated in and around Baghdad. I mean, that has to be held at all costs. And I would say that Baghdad is in good shape. Its surroundings are fine. They understand what the defense of Baghdad needs to look like. And it is a defense that's in layers. So, Baghdad's OK.

The challenge is, as Bob has described, it's the Sunni heartland. And the only one showing up in combat right now are the Shia Quds force, Badr (ph) Corps, MEK (ph), the militia that are being supplied by Tehran. That's the most troubling aspect that we see right now is a much broader, intergenerational sectarian fight that we're just watching unfold.

KEILAR: What of this idea, Bob, of forward air support? What exactly is that and is that realistic, at this point, or is that just something that a minority of folks are calling for?

BAER: You know, I don't think it's realistic. I mean, General Marks could certainly comment on this. But putting our troops on the front without a -- without a full-scale commitment is just -- is -- I don't see that. The military is not going to want to do it. And they can't completely trust the Iraqi units and they certainly can't trust the Shia militias. And so, why put our troops out there? And we just -- we can't do it, at this point.

The fact is Iraq is in the middle of a civil war. The most vicious civil war I've ever seen in the Middle East. And it's not going to die down. The Islamic state owns 50 percent of Syria and 30 percent of Iraq and it looks like it's going to exist for some time. And the only way to get rid of it is if we went full-on support, of the Shia and Iran, against these and invaded these places. And I don't see that either. The American people won't put up with that sort of commitment.

KEILAR: Yes, it doesn't seem that that will happen. All right, gentlemen, thanks so much. General Marks and Bob Baer, appreciate you both.

And still ahead, we will look at the deteriorating situation, specifically in one Syrian city, that's Palmyra. A human rights group claims that nearly 100 people have been executed by ISIS fighters this week, 11 of them children.

And later on, arraignments in Cleveland today for protesters arrested after a police officer was acquitted in the shooting deaths of two unarmed people. We will exam this verdict.

[13:13:22]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:16:40] BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: ISIS fighters are conducting what can only be described as a campaign of horror in the Syrian city of Palmyra. A Syrian human rights organization tells CNN the terror group has executed more than 90 people in the city. And then to add to the atrocity, 11 of those killed were children.

Let's talk about the situation in Palmyra with CNN contributor Michael Weiss in New York. He's the co-author of "ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror." And in London we have Paul Cruickshank. He is a CNN terrorism analyst and the co-author of the book "Agent Storm: My Life Inside al Qaeda."

So, Michael, what we're seeing them do in this city, this is becoming a classic ISIS campaign. They come into a city, they terrorize, they slaughter a number of residents to make an example, and a show of it, right? I mean what does this get ISIS?

MICHAEL WEISS, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I reported when they took Palmyra. I interviewed an activist on the ground who said that they had already drawn up an enemy's list of the way they classify them was, agents or stooges of the Assad regime. Of course, what ISIS sis means by that is, not just people who support Damascus and the dictatorship of Bashar al Assad, but also revolutionaries who are against ISIS. So the idea that they're rounding up civilians and executing them, including children, should come as no surprise.

This is what they do. They try to project their force and power and dominance by essentially committing acts of savagery and then telling everyone else, you'll either submit to us, you'll pledge allegiance and loyalty (ph) to us wholeheartedly, or this is what's going to happen to you next.

KEILAR: And then, Paul, we - tell us, do we expect this onslaught to really continue? And then also you have the other issue and - of the artifacts that are in Palmyra. I know a lot of people will say, don't worry about the artifacts when you have human lives at risk here. But the fact is, some of these, right, could be sold for money to fund ISIS? And then it's also about sending a message of control, isn't it?

PAUL CRUICKSHANK, CNN TERRORISM ANALYST: Well, that's absolutely right. I mean there's great concern now about these artifacts in Palmyra, also these Greco Roman sites in Palmyra, that they could be destroyed by ISIS. And we've seen that videotape before literally when they destroyed artifacts in Nimrud and a Syrian site near Mosul in Iraq. So there's concern that they could do this again.

But above all, ISIS wants to get money for these kind of artifacts. So they'll be looking to raise money from overseas to sell some of these artifacts that they're able to get their hands on in the city.

But there's also a lot of concern that now they've taken control of Palmyra, that they now have an even stronger logistical support base in Syria, along the Syria/Iraq border, to send fighters, weapons, supplies, into Iraq to reinforce in Anbar province, in areas around Ramadi, real concern that they'll be able to use those supply lines to consolidate their position in Anbar.

KEILAR: So if they are using those supply lines, Michael, and you look at really the just perilous state of Ramadi at this point, you do have Shia militias that are massing outside of the city there, what happens? What happens there especially when you look at the situation in Palmyra and how that could affect the efforts by Iraqi forces to try to regain Ramadi?

[13:20:05] WEISS: Well, the - the tie that binds, I suppose, the sacking of both of these cities, is that ISIS now has a very convenient launch pad or staging platform in both Syria and Iraq through which they can attack the capitals of both those countries. So, you know, you had in the previous segment Spider Marks saying that Baghdad is pretty well fortified. I agree, I don't think Baghdad's going to fall. But Baghdad doesn't have to fall. I mean ISIS is within 70 miles striking distance now that they have Ramadi. And what they're - they've already begun to do, in fact, you've seen an uptick in these opportunistic vehicle-born suicide bombing attacks inside the capital.

So what ISIS does very well is, if they can't conquer terrain, they try to wage a campaign of terror and discombobulation to keep the enemy on the back foot. Similarly, in Syria, as Paul pointed out, I mean Palmyra will lead them to Homs and from Homs into Damascus. Now, they were in Damascus previously about a month ago, in Yarmuk (ph), the Palestinian refugee camp, and they were expelled. I would expect to see their presence return to the capital in Syria now.

KEILAR: A quick, final word to you, Paul, as we are talking today about Defense Secretary Ash Carter's comments that when it comes to Ramadi, the Iraqi military essentially just gave up. Who was his audience in your view when he said that?

CRUICKSHANK: Well, I think he was just sort of stating the facts. Obviously perhaps not particularly diplomatic and there's a certain amount of fence mending going on today from the White House, the vice president, but clearly the Iraqi army basically gave up in Ramadi. And one of the reasons for that is what Michael was talking about is the fact that ISIS are massacring people, putting out all these brutal, horrific videos. Well, the Iraqi soldiers in Ramadi don't want to be on the receiving end of that and so it's not, perhaps, surprising that they turned and fled from the city.

KEILAR: All right, Paul Cruickshank, thank you so much. Michael Weiss, thanks for joining us. Great to talk with you gentlemen.

And still ahead, more than 70 protesters arraigned this morning after weekend unrest in Cleveland. We'll be discussing the acquittal of the officer who fired multiple shots into a car with two unarmed people inside.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:25:43] KEILAR: Today there is relative calm in Cleveland after a weekend of protests and tension following the acquittal of a Cleveland police officer in the shooting deaths of two unarmed African- Americans. Nearly six dozen protesters were arrested over the weekend, that included some kids, and they were arraigned in a special court session this morning on charges ranging from obstruction of justice to aggravated rioting. Officer Michael Brelo was acquitted on all counts on Saturday. He was one of 13 officers who fired 137 shots at this couple following a 22-mile high-speed chase in 2012. Brelo himself shot 49 times, this included at least 15 shots into the windshield after he reloaded and climbed on the hood of the couple's car. The officer's attorney says that justice was served.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAT D'ANGELO, ATTORNEY FOR MICHAEL BRELO: Individuals have their own opinions and sometimes the facts don't matter because of their own agendas or their hatred and animosity towards law enforcement. In essence, the case came down to the fact that there was a question as to causation, which bullets caused the deaths of the two decedents. And in addition to that, the major issue was one of legal justification. That pursuant to law, Officer Brelo, as well as the other 12 officers, were legally justified in using the deadly force that they used.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Now joining me to talk about this is CNN law enforcement analyst and former assistant director of the FBI, Tom Fuentes.

So this is the question I think so many people have, Tom, after Officer Brelo had shot dozens of times at this car, he then gets on the hood of the car and shoots into the windshield. Why?

TOM FUENTES, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, the testimony was given, Brianna, that that car had not stopped moving and it had attempted to strike police officers, so the car itself became a weapon. If you shoot, you're taught, you know, in firearms that because of the safety shatter proof glass on windshields, that if you shoot at an angle of a windshield, a bullet's going to ricochet, you know, sideways or up into the air. We don't know if there was apartment buildings beyond that. So you have to fire at a 90-degree angle. And the only way to do that would be to either be at a higher place nearby, or jump on the hood and shoot directly perpendicular to the windshield.

KEILAR: But they were unarmed.

FUENTES: Well, they didn't know that at the time though.

KEILAR: You know, the car was a weapon is - as you -

FUENTES: But they don't know that.

KEILAR: They don't know that, why?

FUENTES: Right. Because the reports early are that there were shots fired at the earliest stage of this pursuit. So if that's the case, and I think they had civilian witnesses that told the police that they also heard what sounded like gunshots, because the car later turns out to not have a weapon in it, that they're saying - KEILAR: They say there was a backfire.

FUENTES: Well, that's why they're saying it's a backfire. My question would be, how do they know, in the dark, going 120 miles an hour, that if they had a gun they didn't throw it out the window?

KEILAR: But there are many times where there's a confusion between a backfire and the firing of a weapon.

FUENTES: Yes.

KEILAR: I wonder ultimately, in the end, there are no weapons.

FUENTES: Right.

KEILAR: The car may be a weapon, but there are no - there are no guns.

FUENTES: Yes.

KEILAR: Perhaps the officers are operating under the belief that there are guns. But even in the - police chase is a crime. But even in the - even in the process of that, if by the end of it there is no weapon, they are unarmed ultimately, doesn't it seem excessive when we're talking about more than 100 shots?

FUENTES: Well, from a - from a legal standpoint that doesn't matter. It's whether or not the officer believes that they might be armed and believes that the threat has not ended, and that's what the judge basically said is that they can keep shooting until the threat is over. So if you're - if you're justified in using deadly physical force, which the judge is saying they believe Officer Brelo was, then you can have that array of shots, if you will.

[13:29:30] Now, you know, the other moral of the story is, that people that led police on 120-mile-an-hour high speed 23 mile chase, or people that run from the police, or people that wrestle from the police, you might have a bad outcome. And that's what you have in this case. Even if they were totally innocent and just decided to go for this high-speed pursuit of eluding the police officers, you know, the bad outcome, they could have drove into a building or a tree and gotten killed, they could have run over innocent people and killed them. So, bad things happen. That's why you shouldn't be eluding the police. If the red lights or blue lights come on, pull over.