Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsnight Aaron Brown
Is the Bush Administration Split on Whether to Attack Iraq?; Should Violence and Sex Be Edited Out of Movies Without Filmmakers' Consent?
Aired September 03, 2002 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
AARON BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening again everyone. There is something about the day after Labor Day. You know you are well on the backside of summer. You know that schools are back in session, and this year you know that the 11th, whatever that day is going to be like, is closing in on us.
One of the things we have been kicking around, all of us in the business, is "how much is too much?" How much do we want to relive that awful day. How many times will we see planes hitting buildings, how many times will we see rescue teams go in, how many times we will we see those buildings fall. how many times will we weep again before we say "enough?". Caryn James of the "New York Times" today, put the question this way:
"At what point do all the tragic stories blend into one big tragic story, making individual memories seem less, rather than more personal? " She argued the saturation point came months ago, and in some respects, we do not disagree.
But we also believe there is a natural cycle to life and grief, and a year is an important marker in that cycle. A year of birthdays and anniversaries, a year of holidays with one empty chair. A year to consider how we have changed, and what those changes mean. A natural cycle that cannot be rushed or ignored simply because there has been so much loss and so much change. Over the next week, we will spend a good deal of time on the events of the 11th, a year ago. And you will, as you have done for almost a year now, tell us when we get it right, or have gone too far. It is one of the reasons it is nice to be back at work.
We begin tonight with what may well be the next war, the debate over Iraq, and strong words today from the defense secretary. Jamie McIntyre covers that from the pentagon. As always, Jamie, a headline from you, please.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SENIOR PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well Aaron, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is hinting U.S. may have secret intelligence about Iraq's intentions and capabilities. And at the same time Secretary of State Powell is hinting that President Bush may put an end to the debate within his cabinet as early as next week.
BROWN: Jamie, thank you. The President meanwhile, has asked to meet tomorrow with congressional leaders. This is part of the campaign to make the case about Iraq. Suzanne Malveaux picks up the story at the white house.
Suzanne, a headline, please.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, the president has not made his case for striking Iraq. That is the message from republican and democratic lawmakers who are back from their month long recess.
BROWN: Thank you, back to you all shortly.
And on to a controversy tonight about movies. Movies rated E, as in edited.
Thelma Gutierrez is on that tonight. Thelma, a headline from you.
THELMA GUTIERREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, if you think there's too much profanity, violence and sex in the movies, you could buy rented -- edited versions, or so-called E-rated films that have been changed without permission, and that growing business is causing controversy in Hollywood. Aaron.
BROWN: Thelma, thank you. Back with all of you shortly.
Also coming up tonight, senator John McCain on Iraq and the administration, and what the administration must do to prepare the country for war. Writer Frank Deford is here tonight. He has written a new novel. We will talk about that. And we will probably talk some sports with Frank as well.
And Disney fanatics need not apply to SEGMENT 7 tonight. The segment deals on the obsessive compulsives in the world of Japanese animation: the cast of characters who packed the New York anime expo this weekend.
All that and more in the hour ahead. We begin with Iraq.
Last week the administration seemed to decide it had not done the job of selling the possibility of a war with a country, or a leader of a country. Not for what he had done, but what he might well do. At some point, Saddam Hussein, of course. There was no shortage of critics, including former Secretaries of State, from some members of congress, and from most of our allies. None of whom yet persuaded. The vice President, twice last week, sought out sympathetic audiences to make the case and did so forcefully. Today, the Defense Secretary joined in. Clearly, the administration has decided it cannot rely on post 9/11 fear and fervor to win the day. Facts and arguments still count.
We have two reports tonight. We begin first, Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MCINTYRE (voice over): The Bush administration has been charging that Iraq is on the fast track to developing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, and is a threat to use them. Now, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is hinting the U.S. may soon release secret intelligence to back up that claim.
DONALD RUMSFELD, DEFENSE SECRETARY: We know some other things, but those are the kinds of things that would come out if and when the President decides that he thinks it is appropriate.
MCINTYRE: In a BBC interview Secretary of State Colin Powell said the United States will eventually need to make that intelligence public, to make a convincing case against Saddam Hussein.
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: I think that the world has to be presented with the information, with the intelligence that is available. A debate is needed within the international community so that everybody can make a judgment.
MCINTYRE: Powell also called for sending U.N. weapons inspectors back as a "first step." Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister, Tariq Aziz, told U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, Iraq would be willing to discuss resuming inspections, if the talks also covered lifting economic sanctions, and ending the no-fly zone restrictions. The pentagon says that is a ploy.
RUMSFELD: And, kind of, play the international community and the U.N. process like a guitar, plucking the right string at the moment to delay something.
MCINTYRE: With Powell saying inspections are a first step, and Rumsfeld arguing they'll never work, is there a rift between the state department and pentagon. "Baloney," says Rumsfeld.
RUMSFELD: And anyone who goes out of here thinking that there's some difference between anything I am saying and what Colin said, I think would be a total misunderstanding of the situation.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MCINTYRE: Now tomorrow Defense Secretary Rumsfeld heads to Capital Hill for closed briefing with key congressional leaders. The pentagon it was a long scheduled meeting to update the members of congress on general war on terrorism. But Secretary Rumsfeld is going prepared to answer a lot of questions about Iraq.
And also, tonight, our state department producer, Elise Lavitt (ph), who's traveling with Colin Powell, Secretary of State, tells us that Powell is hinting, on his aircraft as he arrived in Johannesburg, he thinks the President may pull the threads together on Iraq as soon as next week. And maybe making some kind of decision. Aaron?
BROWN: Well, there we go. I want to go back a bit. I hate to be the one that walks out the room thinking there's disagreement between members of the cabinet. But I am having a problem here and I know you'll straighten me. The Defense Secretary, the Vice President last week seem to dismiss the idea of inspectors at all. Clearly the Secretary of State has not. How can the administration argue there is no difference of opinion? MCINTYRE: Well by simply -- and see, this is one of those cases where they -- where by insisting that their version of events is correct, they hope to carry today.
But clearly, if you listen to the statements from Colin Powell and also from Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, Powell said that the inspections would be a first step. And Rumsfeld said he does not see any way there could be inspections, that would have to be as intrusive as it would be, that Iraq would agree to them, plus even if Iraq did agree, he said he wouldn't trust them, essentially. So this is part of the debate within the cabinet, I guess a debate you would expect to have with a decision this momentous.
But as the Secretary Powell indicated on his plane, he thinks that some the differences are overstated. And he thinks when push comes to shove, the President is going to make a decision, and everybody is going to step in line and salute it.
BROWN: Jamie, thank you. Jamie McIntyre, at the Pentagon.
Tonight the President will meet tomorrow with congressional leaders, and there is division on Capital Hill about the merits of war, but there is a united sense that members of congress need to be part of the decision, at least part of the debate, if not making the actual decision.
For that side of the story, we go back to CNN's Suzanne Malveaux at the White House.
Good evening, to you, again.
MALVEAUX: Good evening. President Bush has not made his case about striking Iraq. That is the case that the republican, as well as the democratic lawmakers are actually saying, coming back from their month-long recess. They went back to their hometowns, they got an earful from their constituents who said we want a better explanation from this White House. Why it is necessary to oust of Saddam Hussein. And we want that explanation from the President himself.
Now, the White House is listening to these concerns, and there is a chance tomorrow for the President to meet with congressional leaders, both republicans and democrats. White House Aides to say, to really show that he is truly interested in actually listening to their opinions. He values their opinions and consultations, also to lay out all the options when it comes to U.S. policy dealing with Iraq. Including military action. And also to show the President, yes, is concerned. That he realizes the -- important to get support from congress as well as the American people. If, and is stress, if there is going to be military action.
If you take a listen at the comments from lawmakers, if this is any indication, it looks like this White House has not made its case.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TRENT LOTT (R-MS), MINORITY LEADER: I do think we are going to have to get a more coherent message together, and making sure the American people understand the threat in what we may have to do. Hopefully something could be worked out. But I do not have any faith in Saddam Hussein.
SEN. TOM DASCHLE (D-SD) MAJORITY LEADER: ... I expect others to raise. One has to do what information do you have specifically that would lead us to take any action today? What is it that is triggering this new found determination to move forward, even unilaterally if -- if we choose that course.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: Now the chair the republican policy committee, Senator Larry Craig told CNN tonight, and I am quoting here. he said, "If I have to vote now for immediate action against Iraq I would vote no."
There are a number critical issues that have yet to be resolved, first one of course, is whether or not President would ask for congressional approval. Whether or not that would be in some sort of resolution, and if the administration decides it will pursue that way. whether or not congress will even approve and grant that resolution.
And also, just how much information is the administration going to give these congressional members, who are holding hearings on U.S./Iraq policy. Are they going to give the kind of information intelligence that is necessary to convince lawmakers, that this is even important. Aaron.
BROWN: Suzanne, thank you. We look forward to the meeting tomorrow. What comes out of it. Thank you.
A little later in the program we will talk to senator John McCain about Iraq.
A quick update now though, on the case of Dr. Steven Hatfill, the man the justice department has referred to as a person of interest in the anthrax investigation.
The bioweapons expert has lost his job at Louisiana State University. In a statement, LSU said the move was in the University's best interest. It went on to say the school: "is making no judgment as to Hatfill's guilt or innocence regarding the FBI investigation." Sources tell CNN there are as many as 20 people under scrutiny in the anthrax case, although Dr. Hatfill is the only person that has been discussed publicly. He has denied any involvement in the anthrax attacks, and, today, once again, took aim at the FBI and the attorney general, saying his "professional reputation is now in tatters."
Still ahead on NEWSNIGHT as we said, we will talk with John McCain, the senator, about selling an attack on Iraq, and related issues.
Later, a Hollywood flap over who has the right to edit movies. This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BROWN: We are not huge fans of polls. But there has been some very interesting polling done on the question of Iraq of late. CNN- "USA Today"-Gallup poll found that 86 percent of those surveyed believe that Saddam Hussein supports terrorists who want to attack the U.S.
But just how much of a stomach does the public have in doing something about it? A bare majority thinks U.S. ground troops should go in to get Saddam out, and the support drops like a stone when asked whether U.S. troops should go in without support from our allies.
And While polls are just a momentarily snapshot, and these numbers came out after weeks of criticism, some of it from very unexpected places, support for the war with Iraq has weakened considerable, which is not to say it will not rise again. It is one of the questions we talked about with senator John McCain earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: Has the administration made the case for a war against Iraq?
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I think the evidence is there. I think the administration is making the case. I think the President will continue to make the case and he will go to congress, and seek approval, which I think he would get significant support. Certainly majority, and I think he will talk to the American people as well.
BROWN: If the case has been made, or if they are making the case, why is it that the United States, at this moment at least, seems to be out there quite alone in the world, in believing that the war option is the option?
MCCAIN: Well I am not sure we have made the case yet with our allies. I think that there is some underlying resentment out there, in the European community particularly, with regards to the United States. But I believe there is a very good model for what the President needs to do, and that is what his father did, in assembling the coalition that fought and won the gulf war conflict. And no two situations are exactly similar, but I am confident the President's commitment to consult with the American people and our allies.
BROWN: And if the United States has to go it alone, if the Europeans do not come along, as they did in the gulf war, if many Arabs countries that join the coalition in gulf war, if they do not come along, if the United States has to go it alone, then so be it?
MCCAIN: Well, I hate to put it that way, Aaron. Because I do believe that our friends, our major friends who are the Turks, will assist us in use of their bases, is critical. I think other countries in the region, although perhaps not as supportive as we would like, would certainly not do anything to impede.
But I also believe that scenario is not necessarily one that has to happen, because this man, Saddam Hussein, is acquiring weapons of mass destruction. He has proven he will use them on his own people. And so I do believe he poses a clear and present danger, not only in the United States of America, but countries in the region as well. And I think we can make that case. Has the administration done a perfect job, or even a good job so far? No, I do not think so. But I think they are embarking on an effort that I think can and will be very effective.
BROWN: And if the administration has not done an especially good job to this point in making the case, the critics of the policies, some of whom do in fact go back to the gulf war coalition and know something about this, have certainly made their case. What is it they do not seem to get about the necessity of war, if it comes down to it?
MCCAIN: Well, first of all, we all know divisions within the administration. Those have to be resolved. I think in any administration, differing views are welcomed. But at some point, the President says this is where we are going and everybody gets on board. Second of all, I respect General Scowcroft as much as any man that I have ever known. And I not only have respect, but affection for him. And I pay careful attention to what he has to say.
But in this case, we just have a disagreement. And so we do not always have to agree. And finally, this is a big step. This is, in some ways a precedent, shattering move, because we are going to remove a regime because they pose a threat for the United States of America. So we are going to have to make a stronger case, perhaps than we made in 1991, after Saddam Hussein had invaded and occupied Kuwait. But I believe the President will do it. I believe that we can convince the American people, and I also appreciate the fact and support has eroded by some 20 percent according to public polls in the last month or so. I think that is a wake-up call to the administration.
BROWN: Just dealing with something you just said, that this is somewhat unique in American experience, this war would be. Where does it stop then? At what -- which bad regimes do we change and which bad regimes do we live with? Because there is, as you know, and as you've written about, there is no shortage of bad regimes out there?
MCCAIN: Well, I think that this is a unique situation, because even the North Koreans possess nuclear weapons, I do not think they pose an immediate threat. I think the Iranians are doing bad things, including evidence recently that they're sheltering al Qaeda operatives. But again, that does not pose the kind of threat, direct threat that Saddam Hussein does, if and when he acquires these weapons of mass destruction.
So I would by no means say that we, therefore, have an axis of evil out there, where we have to change every regime. But, having said that, and I am sorry for the long answer, but you really asked a most serious question. But I believe that, as long as there are countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, Iran, Syria the Palestinian Authority, where there's absolutely no democracy, you will have a breeding ground for terrorist. But that does not mean you go in and invade their countries. What it means, you embark in policy of insisting on a policy of democratization. And the United States has a lot of other options besides the use of military force. BROWN: Sir, thank you again for your time. It is always good to see you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: Senator John McCain earlier today.
Coming up on NEWSNIGHT, dramatic photos from the day of the attack on the World Trade Center, taken by New York City Police photographers on the ground and in the air.
Up next, editing Hollywood hits to sanitize them.
This is NEWSNIGHT from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: This story really goes back to the first campfire, the first storyteller, and the first person to say, "Hey, hey, not in front of the kids you don't." There has always been tension between telling strong stories and protecting delicate sensibilities, and a disagreement as well, about how to reconcile the two. Some say it is impossible. If you do not like it, do not watch. Others wonder why it has to be so either/or. Nearly 200 years ago, an English doctor published "The Family Shakespeare": Shakespeare with all the sex and violence taken out.
Today, at a growing number of video retail counters, mostly out west, you can rent sexy, violent movies minus the sex and the violence. The difference between then and now, among others, Shakespeare was not around to complain, movie directors today, are.
Here again, CNN 's Thelma Gutierrez.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GUTIERREZ (voice-over): "Saving Private Ryan," one of the most realistic battle scenes captured on film:
Here it is again, soldiers slaughtered, but no blood.
Remember "Erin Brockovich"?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "Erin Brockovich")
JULIA ROBERTS, ACTRESS: You're trying to make yourself feel less guilty about firing someone with three kids to feed. Well (EXPLETIVE DELETED) if I'm going to help you do that!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GUTIERREZ: Here she is, not a curse word to be heard.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "Erin Brockovich")
ROBERTS: Don't bother. UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR: Come on, I'm...
ROBERTS: You're trying to make yourself feel less guilty about firing someone with three kids to feed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GUTIERREZ: Then there's "Shakespeare In Love," the love scene, completely edited out.
In Salt Lake City, all 46 Albertson's supermarkets carry E-rated films, clean versions of Hollywood films they say are in demand.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The good thing at least someone is starting to do it.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A lot of shows that I'd like to take the kids to that I don't because of that.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think it's a great idea.
GUTIERREZ: Albertson's told us the films are very popular, but they don't plan to expand outside of Utah.
GIL CATES, SECRETARY TREASURER, DIRECTORS GUILD OF AMERICA: If someone thinks a film has too much sex in it, or gore in it, they shouldn't watch the film.
GUTIERREZ: Gil Cates represents the Directors' Guild. The guild is furious their films are being altered.
CATES: The issue is not the bad words or the nudity or the clothes. The issue is changing something that does not belong to you.
GUTIERREZ: The Directors' Guild says altering films is more than just upsetting, it is illegal.
CATES: There is no difficulty in understanding that they do not own it. They are not the copyright holders, they cannot do it.
GUTIERREZ: The issue boils down to who owns the films. The studios hold the copyrights, so the DGA is working with the studios to determine what legal action to take, to stop companies from altering the films.
RAY LINES, CEO OF CLEAN FLICKS, INC: The copyright laws I am aware of do not say anything about altering.
GUTIERREZ: Ray Lines is CEO of CLEAN FLICKS, INCORPORATED, which edits what he calls "less offensive versions of Hollywood's best."
LINES: We take out the sex and nudity. We take out the really gory violence out of these films.
GUTIERREZ: In Steven Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan," which won an Academy Award for editing, Clean Flicks edited out five minutes.
LINES: Most of the people who watched our edited version have said to me, you know what, I cannot even tell you've edited anything here. I mean, you still get the full effect of what happened in Normandy that day."
CATES: The hubris. The absolute, extraordinary -- I cannot even think of an adjective appropriate for television. I would be edited. I mean, "Private Ryan" was a product of years of intense work. To think that someone is going to help Steven along with "Private Ryan" by making five or six adroit changes is idiotic.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GUTIERREZ: Hollywood heavyweight directors like Robert Altman and Steven Soderbergh say they're appalled that their films are being edited without their involvement.
Soderbergh, who won an Oscar for best director for the movie "Traffic," and was nominated for "Erin Brockovich," likens this practice to ripping pages out of book, leaving author's name on it, and then selling it.
As for edited films that you watch on television or on an airlines flight, they are changed only with director's input.
Now, this is a growing business. Clean Flicks has 10 corporate stores and 67 independent dealers in the U.S., and they're just one company -- Aaron.
BROWN: Thelma, thank you. We'll talk a little bit more about this now -- or talk a little more about this now.
Joining us now in Los Angeles, producer and director Marshall Herskovitz, who produced "Shakespeare In Love," "Traffic," lots of other really good and interesting films, and TV projects as well. It is good to have you here. This is, in the end, it is about control, it is who owns the product?
MARSHALL HERSKOVITZ, MOVIE DIRECTOR: Yes. I think it is about us having to reevaluate what intellectual property means, given the new technologies that are available today. That is really what is going on here. You could not have done this five or 10 years ago.
BROWN: You can do this relatively easily because you digitalized it all and no one -- and that argument, actually it is true. If you have not seen the movie you would not know. It is all pretty clean cutting?
HERSKOVITZ: That is the thing. 10 years ago, if you tried to edit video tapes, you would see that they would be second, third, fourth generation, and people would not want to watch them. So this is a new problem and fits with other new problems we are going to be facing in the next 10 to 20 years, when you could change the looks of actors. You know, where you can put different actors in a story. Put different newscasters on newscasts if you don't like their face. I mean...
BROWN: Hey!
HERSKOVITZ: There's a whole range of things coming.
BROWN: You know, it's one thing to mess with a movie, OK.
(LAUGHTER)
BROWN: Here's -- I mean, there are two issues that are interesting to me here. One is the legal one. And I gather that's a little murky. That there is some -- you can read the copyright law one way and maybe directors have an argument, read it another way, maybe once they sell it they've really given up the right to it?
HERSKOVITZ: Well, I'm not a lawyer, but this is my understanding of it. There are two issues in conflict here.
One is the concept of first sale, which means once you sell the damn thing it belongs that person and they can do whatever they want with it. There's another issue called derivative work, which means if they change it so much that it becomes a different work, then that's infringing on your copyright.
These people are clearly stating that by editing out violence or sex, they are not making a derivative work. Those of us who consider ourselves to be creative vehemently disagree with that.
BROWN: And when you edit a movie, as you surely do, for airlines or for television broadcast, or cable television -- not necessarily HBO and the like -- you make these choices all the time. Are they making choices different than what you'd make?
HERSKOVITZ: Well the thing is, first of all, the editing process for broadcast television is mandated by the government. Broadcast television is not covered by the First Amendment, and if someone is going to be shown on television, it has to be edited. So the filmmakers and the studios often reluctantly participate in that process and decide what that finished product should be like.
You know, to talk about airliners, I don't know one filmmaker who isn't disgusted by that whole process as well. But at least it's voluntary on the part of the studios.
In this case, this is someone who has no interest in what we're doing, who has no understand of what we're doing, who never took part in any of the process, who is deciding what the film should look like at the end.
BROWN: You got about a minute. Talk about your view of the editing that was done to your film, "Shakespeare In Love."
HERSKOVITZ: Well, the love scene in that was intercut with the rehearsal of the play "Romeo and Juliet." And it's the central concept of the whole movie. And to say that taking out the love scene doesn't change that work of art is patently ridiculous. It just eviscerated the whole artistic premise.
BROWN: And for people who say, look, we really want to see the movie, but the sex or the violence really troubles me, and I don't want to watch that, you would say?
HERSKOVITZ: I would say, life is not always fair. And if it troubles them, then they have the choice not to watch the film.
But, you know, should school boards around the country, instead of banning the books they don't like, rewrite them and republish them under the author's name?
I think this is a slippery slope toward everyone deciding what the artist's work should be and should look like. I think that we as a nation have to decide that that's the author's decision.
BROWN: Thanks for your time. I think you put some interesting things for people to think about on the table tonight.
As I said to you earlier, it's good to talk to you. Thank you.
HERSKOVITZ: Thank you.
BROWN: Still to come on the program tonight, we'll see some amazing pictures taken by New York City police photographers of Ground Zero during the attacks in the hours and days and weeks that followed. "Above Hollowed Ground" as NEWSNIGHT continues from New York City.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Been a little crazy around here today. Larry is here, and so was former President Clinton. Always makes thing interesting.
The former president and Bob Dole appeared together on "LARRY KING LIVE" to give a progress report on a joint project they helped launch, and did so just days after the 11th, a scholarship fund for the children of those who lost their lives or were disabled in the attacks and the rescue effort. The fund, they said, has now exceeded its goal of raising $105 million. It's going to send a lot of kids to college in the years ahead.
Someone asked me the other day which of the many 9/11 books I thought was a best, and I answered, I don't have a clue. Each of those we've seen has been powerful in their own way. David Halberstam's simple story of one firehouse; Dennis Smith's broader look at the fire department, both terrific books.
The "New York Times" did an exceptional job in its book "A Nation Challenged." And tonight we look -- and look is the right word -- at another. The book is called "Above Hallowed Ground," the pictures from New York police photographer, retired Detective Dave Fitzpatrick who really was above Ground Zero long before anyone decided that's what it should be called.
Mr. Fitzpatrick joins us tonight.
We say that because you just retired.
DAVE FITZPATRICK, CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHER, "ABOVE HALLOWED GROUND": Last Friday.
BROWN: Welcome. It's a nice piece of work.
Just as we go along today we'll show some of the pictures. You went up in a helicopter how soon after the attack?
FITZPATRICK: Just after the second plane hit.
BROWN: So it's 9:00 or so in the morning, between 9:00 and 10:00. And you you're above it and you look down, what do you see?
FITZPATRICK: When we first saw the buildings up, we had no idea they were going to come down. And then once they came down, it was just utter disbelief. We couldn't believe what we were seeing.
But it almost came down in slow motion, how it came down.
BROWN: And were you just hovering over...
FITZPATRICK: No, we were orbiting, flying all around.
BROWN: And I gather that you weren't flying around here to take pictures; that this was, in fact -- well, you were taking pictures, but there was also policework going on in that helicopters.
FITZPATRICK: Sure, sure. They were watching for, maybe, another incoming aircraft.
BROWN: Let me just interrupt you, and tell me if you can see that picture in the monitor.
FITZPATRICK: Sure.
BROWN: Well, obviously you're at the end of the island looking back towards it in that one.
FITZPATRICK: That's right. At different times I went to different altitudes. At one time we went to 6,500 feet to see how high the smoke actually went. SO we went to 6,500 feet and we orbited around for several times.
I tried to get a view of some of the people trying to leave the island. A lot of people were fleeing across the bridges, the tug boats, the ferry boats.
BROWN: What are you thinking here? Are you thinking this is history? This is -- I need to frame this right, the composition of the shot, or are you just shooting as fast as you can?
FITZPATRICK: A little bit of everything.
I knew it was history. I mean, I knew before me, this had to be documented because it was history. But I still had to -- feel like I had to size it up and frame it properly to make it a proper picture.
But, yes, it was history every minute. I knew that we were looking at something that just had to be documented.
BROWN: The kind of photography you've done for the police department had been what?
FITZPATRICK: All aspects, from surveillance to...
BROWN: Crime scenes?
FITZPATRICK: Crime scene-type stuff, VIP stuff. A little bit of everything
BROWN: But certainly not history?
FITZPATRICK: There's a lot of history in New York, so I do take a lot of history, too, that happens here.
But nothing like this.
BROWN: How -- is the book just your pictures, or is it a team of pictures?
FITZPATRICK: No, it's a team of pictures. Yes, it's a team of pictures.
BROWN: And when you thumb through it now, now almost a year later, because this is one of those things we're all going through these days, is how, seeing these images again on the year anniversary is going to affect us all.
Does it still feel strong to you, powerful to you?
FITZPATRICK: Oh, sure. It feels that -- well, now that the book is out, the police department's feeling was that we owed it to America to see what happened. And our photographs, we hope, will generate that kind of feeling that it will bring some closure, and to document it the way, hopefully, it should be remembered.
BROWN: Yes, I'm not sure this is a fair question, I apologize if it's not. There are -- I think we both know this, 100 books out there these days. Have you thought about, at all, how this book and these pictures are unique, why this book stands apart from all the others?
FITZPATRICK: Well, the aerial shots certainly make a difference. But I know I shot so many. And I was so relentless every day, that I don't think people had the same vantage point I had by climbing over the rubble every day for several months.
So I think that's the difference, that we have a lot of views that other people don't have.
BROWN: Do you ever get, frankly, tired of looking at the pictures? You've obviously -- you not only shoot them, but then you have to make editing choices about them, you look at them again and again and again.
FITZPATRICK: Well, that's true. It's been a long year, but it was something that had to be done. So that was the motivation factor behind it all, just to -- it had to be done. It had to be done the right way.
BROWN: And are you happy with how the book came out?
That's the motivation, it had to be done, it had to be done the right way.
Are you happy with the book?
FITZPATRICK: Yes, very happy.
BROWN: It's a terrible event to have to chronicle in the way you did.
FITZPATRICK: Yes, well hopefully it shows -- also what we want to show was not just -- to me the book was important not just by what, visually source (ph) of devastation, but the teamwork that everybody developed, you know.
BROWN: Well, it certainly did that. It's a terrific piece of work. Nice going, and nice to meet you. Good luck.
FITZPATRICK: Thank you sir.
BROWN: A couple of other quick things. A pretty sobering reminder today in one of the papers of just how long it takes to decide on and build a memorial.
It was a chronology of Oklahoma City and the event that happened there in April of 1995. The National Memorial was dedicated five years later. There's no doubt that rebuilding Lower Manhattan is going to be an ongoing debate, a process for years to come.
And as you know we have been collecting what turned out to be thousands of your ideas. You can send one in if you'd still like to: cnn.com/newsnight and follow the links. As far as I know, it's all still working.
Again, not a contest, a competition, no prizes. But it's been delightful to see the different and varied takes on what should go on in Lower Manhattan.
Max in New York sent this one: a sphere rising up from the ground. This looks sort of science fiction to us, but interesting.
Joe in Michigan: a pyramid theme. We've seen this before. In fact, these are two pyramids built into each other, one large building. On the top of each pyramid, beams of lights aiming at the sky.
Allan Abraham in Delta, British Columbia: towers that could rise above a covered plaza. They could have beacons on top of each tower. Whatever you decide to do, if you decide to do, we hope you'll send them to us: cnn.com/newsnight, follow the links. And you can also take a look at all the -- I'm not sure all, but many of the proposals that have come in.
When we come back we'll talk with Frank Deford. Be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Along with all the pleasures of taking a week off, there's always one little gotcha: A week's worth of great and interesting stories to report, and no chance to do it. And I know playing golf and watching baseball makes up for most of it, but habits are hard to shake.
So we're glad to have someone like Frank Deford with us tonight. He's a wonderful sportswriter, terrific writer, period; a commentator for National Public Radio, a novelist. And for years whenever I had a sports story to write and need a little poetry in the piece, I called on Frank, and that is the truth.
His most recent novel is called "An American Summer."
And it is terrific to see you here.
Honestly I mostly wanted to talk to you about sports, and then I was looking through the book today and it is -- it takes place and is about this, what I think of as a seminal period of American life for people of my age, polio.
FRANK DEFORD, AUTHOR, "AN AMERICAN SUMMER": Yes, it was, in many respects, Aaron, it was terror.
BROWN: Yes.
DEFORD: I mean, another form of terror, but we were terrified of it.
And my story is about a boy coming of age at that time.
But, you know, the '50s was also a time of innocence. And so it's facing reality in a time of innocence, coming of age in a time of terror and being accompanied through this by a young woman and an iron lung.
BROWN: It is -- you know, I try and tell my daughter about these things about iron lungs, and my mother was terribly afraid for us to go to the state fair.
I mean, there was this pervasive fear that polio would get you and you would end up in this tube with a mirror, and that would be your life.
DEFORD: It was capricious; it could attack anyone. And so it really was -- polio itself, as terrible as it was, the fear was much greater. And it surrounded us all. And, you know, they talked about the Soviets were going to nuke us. If you were a little kid, you didn't really think that, but you knew somebody with polio. You knew people who died with people who died with polio or who were wearing iron lungs.
And that's my little boy. And he knows this is happening all around him. And this wonderful girl he meets, this older woman -- really a young woman, 23 -- and she becomes like his guiding light through this summer when he faces these tough realities of the real world. And he, at the same time, gives her a purpose to her life.
BROWN: A pretty sweet story for a crusty old sportswriter.
DEFORD: Well, it is absolutely the sweetest thing I've ever written for a curmudgeon of a sportswriter, yes.
BROWN: Do you remember standing in line -- I don't know where you grew up -- standing in line wherever that town was an getting your polio vaccine?
DEFORD: Yes, in the summer of '55, the spring of '55 during the sauk (ph) I was in Baltimore. And that's where the story takes place. But it could have taken place anywhere because the scourge was throughout the country.
And within days, years, months, polio was gone. It was an extraordinary thing. It just fell off our consciousness.
BROWN: That's the other thing about it, is -- I've talked to you about this -- I remember lining up at Alice Smith (ph) Elementary School in little Hopkins, Minnesota, and everyone in town was there. And there was a fair amount of crying because we're all getting shots.
And then like that it seemed like this terrible thing disappeared.
DEFORD: You read now more about "I Love Lucy" and "Elvis Presley" when we talk about the 1950s than you do about polio. It was extraordinary. And yet it absolutely dominated our lives for 10 years, really, from the time of the -- we had a president, Franklin Roosevelt, who had polio. The March of Dimes...
BROWN: Not that we ever talked about it...
DEFORD: No, no, we kept that quiet because it would have scared us too much. But it's amazing how it disappeared, and that's why I always wanted to write about it, because it meant so much to me and to everybody growing up. And bingo, it was gone.
BROWN: All right. Now enough that of that. One sports question, OK?
DEFORD: By the book.
BROWN: Yes. By the book, always. What are those wacky people at Augusta National thinking, they are eventually going to lose this. They will eventually invite a woman to join.
DEFORD: Yes, of course. I did a piece for HBO a few years ago and I called it "America's Singapore." And that's what it is. It's this pristine little autocracy that runs things its own way as if nothing else is going on in the rest of the world. And by God they're going to cut off their nose to spite their face. And it's all idiocy because eventually they have to back down. I'm amazed that the women's groups who are fighting them, first they were going to go after the sponsors, then CBS. The obvious people to go after are other members. Because I can't believe they buy into the act of the leadership. These are responsible people. And they're going to say, hey, this is crazy. And then it will turn around real fast.
BROWN: Come back and talk to us on a day when you haven't wrote a book of such interesting stuff. Will you do that?
DEFORD: Aaron, I'd love to.
BROWN: Though I don't know when that will be. It's always nice to see you.
DEFORD: Nice to see you.
BROWN: Frank Deford.
When we come back, cartoon characters come to light in Manhattan. It's quite a program tonight. This is NEWSNIGHT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: OK. Finally from us tonight. Think of the people you're about to meet as sort the Trekkies of animation world. We're talking about Japanese animation, and unless you want to get laughed out of room, you better say anime, anime may sound obscure, but it's half billion dollar business and growing. And this past weekend the most devoted and we think the least inhibited fans make quite a scene getting together here in New York.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED GROUP: You're at the New York Anime Expo Convention 2002.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My name is Mike Tosigawa (ph), I'm founder of the Anime Expo. The Anime Expo is a trade show dedicated to Japanese animation, we've been running for 12 years in California. And this is the first time we've been in New York.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What used to be a swap meet where enthusiasts would trade their import VHS tapes, and some of their local fan subs, where they've localized the material themselves, it's grown into a situation where we have some 30 to 40 companies here representing their products.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Anime is Japanese term, basically just means Japanese animation, at least that's how it's used in the U.S. In Japan, anime can be referred to any kind of animation. You get into shows, you get into the stories, anime is one of those types of fantasy where the stories themselves are very involving, and it's one of the things that people really get into in America.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The costuming, there's nothing strange about it. It's natural. If you can draw it, if you can put it on paper, you can make it come alive. So people when they put on costumes are doing the same thing. They're just making it come alive in the third dimension
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mine took about three days, about five hours of work each day.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm the Wood Card (ph), from Card Captor Sacra (ph).
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm dressed as Neo Queen Serenity (ph), from the Visojo Sanje (ph) Sailor Moon.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Turiku (ph), he's just a grobbet (ph).
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Sammomo (ph) from Choavis (ph).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: People dressed as character they want to identify with so they can meet other friends or other people for the first time who understand them and understand the shows that they like. If you dress as an unpopular character or as a really old show, they won't think that you're quite as hip and cool as everybody else.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm here as part of the convention. I will be entering the masquerade competition later with this costume.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Masquerade is a tradition that originates from Japan which started as close (ph) play.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's basically to show your talents in making your own costume, that they have to be original. You are judged on how well you make things and whether or not you made it or you bought it.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Everybody here is so creative.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Close (ph) playing is about being something different than you are in real life, it's about being something better. Some people work entire months on a skit. Working it out, finessing, choosing music, choosing the costumes. The fun part is that you're a part of it.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: Sometimes I feel oh so Midwestern. Nice to see you. Thanks to Anderson. We'll see you tomorrow. Good night from all of us at NEWSNIGHT.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
