Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsnight Aaron Brown
International Debate Grows Over Iraq's Intentions; Santa Cruz Supports Couple Arrested for Growing Medical Marijuana
Aired September 17, 2002 - 22:00 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.
AARON BROWN, HOST: Good evening, again, everyone.
I think this page is about choosing sides tonight. I've become fascinated by the story of the three young Muslim medical students and last Friday's hysteria.
First, all these days and countless and countless TV appearances later, the only people who know the truth are still the four people involved, Ms. Stone and the three students.
Consider it possible, possible that they are all telling the truth. That Ms. Stone believes she heard something that was threatening. I believe she did, or at least I have not a single reason to believe that she did not.
Consider, also, that the three men said, as they claim, absolutely nothing threatening at all. Not seriously or in jest. That it was an innocent conversation by three young men that was misconstrued. This seems possible, as well. After all, I do know that words are sometimes misconstrued.
What we have found fascinating here is the reaction. People choosing sides. Our e-mail box was filled with people perfectly willing to call Ms. Stone a bigot, or the three men creeps. Some saw her as an example of the worst of these times. Others wanted the three young men thrown in jail. In our reading of the mail today, we found few people who were neutral. And, in all of this, that's what we find troubling.
Too many people seem too willing these days to believe the worst about everyone, and it's not just this instance, or this issue. We see this with Iraq, too, for example.
We see notes from people who believe that the real reason the president believes Saddam must go is because he has friends in the oil business and Iraq has a ton of oil.
We also see notes from people who say that those opposed to the war are like Neville Chamberlain, or worse.
In the case of Scott Ritter, we've heard him called a traitor. For speaking his mind.
Name the issue, and people don't just take sides, they ascribe the worst motives to those who see the issue differently. And that is what is dangerous. That is what really is a threat to the country, or at least, the country as we believe it should be.
On to the whip. And it begins over at the U.N., where there'll be quite a bit of activity over the next several months.
Richard Roth is there. Richard, the headline from you tonight, please.
RICHARD ROTH, CNN UNITED NATIONS CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, there was an old TV game show you may remember in the U.S., called "Who Do You Trust?" The latest contestants in this sequel could be Iraq and the United Nations Security Council.
BROWN: Richard, thank you. Back to you at the top tonight.
The Iraqi offer to allow inspectors in puts the U.S. in a tricky spot diplomatically. Suzanne Malveaux has the reaction from the White House today. Suzanne, the headline from you tonight.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, it was really just yesterday that it seemed that the White House was well on its way to getting a tough U.N. resolution to hold Saddam Hussein accountable. It looks like that's not going to happen anytime soon. World leaders backing off today. The foreign ministers of Egypt, Russia, and France all say they no longer believe a U.N. resolution is necessary, at least for now. At the White House and U.N. should go with Saddam Hussein's recommendation and allow the weapons inspections back in.
BROWN: Suzanne, thank you. And back to you in a moment.
And as we continue around the horn on Iraq, we go to our Baghdad desk. Rula Amin is there. Rula, headline from you, please.
RULA AMIN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, for four years, Iraq would not allow the inspectors back. Now they have made the turn, and they are calling their compromise a courageous, balanced decision. Diplomats say it's preemptive strike that may be working.
BROWN: Rula, thank you.
And it's not all Iraq tonight. A fascinating battle involving the federal government, and one town fighting back over medical marijuana. Frank Buckley is in Santa Cruz, California, for us. Frank, the headline from you tonight.
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, a remarkable scene here at the Santa Cruz city hall today. Hundreds of people coming out in support of medical marijuana. They watched as patients received their medical marijuana in public. Among those supporting the demonstrations, the city's mayors and other top officials -- Aaron.
BROWN: Thank you. Back with all of you shortly.
Also, coming up tonight on the program, we'll talk once again with the former chief U.N. weapons inspector, Richard Butler, on Iraq's latest move and what the United States can or should do.
Maria Hinojosa on the tiny speck of western New York that's become the focus of nationwide scrutiny: Lackawanna, New York, and the Arab-Americans trying to make sense of what is happening in their city.
And, before September 11, 2001, there was September 17, 1862, a day that, even now, remains the bloodiest in American history. Bruce Morton tonight on the battle of Antietam, and an uncomfortable role that money plays in keeping its memory alive.
All of that in the next 60 minutes.
We begin with that moment when Wile E. Coyote looks back and sees the Roadrunner standing at the edge of the cliff, which means he isn't standing on anything but thin air. Seems a bit like where the Bush Administration is tonight, scrambling to get back onto solid ground after the Iraqi offer to let U.N. weapons inspectors come back into the country.
The president is trying to shift the spotlight back to Iraqi misbehavior. The secretary of state, meantime, is in New York, trying to keep members of the Security Council from taking an Iraqi "yes" for an answer, but momentum is already gathering.
We begin there tonight at the U.N. with our U.N. correspondent, Richard Roth.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ROTH: Iraqi diplomats left their first face-to-face meeting at the U.N. with their first agreement on the inspectors' fate, to talk some more.
SAEED HASAN, IRAQI DELEGATION: We agreed to meet in Vienna in 10 days to finalize the practical arrangements.
ROTH: Iraq and the U.N. danced in Vienna before, just last July Fourth. But now Baghdad has dropped demands for lifting of sanctions, and is ready to open its doors to international inspectors, pulled from Iraq nearly four years ago.
Iraq has also once again attempted to split the powers on the Security Council, this time over the need for a new, tougher resolution, threatening Iraq if it blocks access again for inspectors.
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: The only way to make sure it is not business as usual, and to make sure it is not a repeat of the past, it seems to me, anyway, is to put it in the form a new U.N. resolution.
IGOR IVANOV, RUSSIAN FOREIGN MINISTER (through translator): From our standpoint, we don't need any special resolution for that to occur.
ROTH: Many diplomats here are pleased at the Iraqi change of heart, but remain skeptical.
BILL GRAHAM, CANADIAN FOREIGN MINISTER: This is now, this is where the rubber hits the road, as they say, and now there is no opportunity for wiggle room. There's no more wiggling to be done by Iraq, and the world community has made that clear to them.
SHIMON PERES, ISRAELI FOREIGN MINISTER: In order to trust a letter, you must trust the author of the letter.
ROTH: Arab foreign ministers, who met with the U.S. about the Mid-east, disagree.
AHMED MAHER, EGYPTIAN FOREIGN MINISTER: This is the beginning of a solution.
MARWAN MUASHER, JORDANIAN FOREIGN MINISTER: Take it as face value and work with it to ensure that we are in a course that would bring back inspectors to Iraq.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROTH: And just when those inspectors might return to Iraqi soil where they have not been in years, well, the Iraqis say it's up to Hans Blix, the chief weapons inspector. But Blix is first going to get a hearing with the United Nations Security Council, maybe on Thursday, before any marching orders are issued.
And Aaron, Blix has said in the past, it could be up to a year before he certifies whether Iraq has complied with weapons of mass destruction disarmament programs. And a year is a long time for any type of obstructions to occur.
BROWN: Well, that presumes what I don't think the administration does presume, which is that the inspectors would have unfettered access.
ROTH: And unfettered access is not listed in the Iraqi letter of Monday to the United Nations. The U.S. is seizing on that and wants to put that kind of language in a new resolution, which China and Russia oppose. They don't even want to even have any hint of a resolution threatening the use of force, which might trigger a U.S. military strike at the first parking lot stand-off.
BROWN: But if you look back at the existing resolution, what does existing resolution say in terms of access? Because that's the one that is in play, right?
ROTH: Well, the 687 is the major resolution, and in that jargon there, there's phrases like Iraq is in material breach and all necessary means could be used.
But of course, Iraq is now out of Kuwait. A lot of those resolutions were based upon that kind of stand-off in 1990. Some diplomats think you need new language now to clarify.
Washington wants to get as much on the books as possible. France is kind of in the middle, wanting to test Iraq. They are kind of right back where they were before President Bush spoke, when there was some form of unity that lasted about four days.
BROWN: Richard, thank you. Richard Roth at the United Nations.
Tricky spot, as we've indicated, for the president. He went to the United Nations to seek international support, and he seemed to get a considerable amount of it.
It is unlikely that the administration didn't anticipate the Iraqi reaction, saying for now, at least, it will let inspectors in.
So where does that leave the president, who has never believed, the best we can tell, that inspections will work, and who really wants Saddam gone?
Here again, CNN White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: At an education event in Tennessee, the president blasted the Iraqi leader.
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: This is a man who has delayed, denied, deceived.
MALVEAUX: The Bush Administration says if and when inspectors return, the terms will be set by the United States and the United Nations.
POWELL: We cannot just take a one and a quarter page letter signed by the foreign minister as the end of this matter. We have seen this game before.
MALVEAUX: The White House says Iraqi weapons inspections and disarmament are not enough. It wants a new U.N. resolution with teeth, that demands Iraq comply with other commitments, such as addressing human rights violations, reparations to Kuwait and an accounting of Gulf War prisoners.
But the administration's big concern now is that Saddam's offer will undermine a push to get the U.N. Security Council to the enforcement of the current U.N. Security Council resolutions, or the proposal of new ones.
Security Council members may decide simply to put inspectors back in and wait to see what happens before they authorize military action, a two-step process preferred by Russian and France which does not address Mr. Bush's goal of regime change.
RICHARD HOLBROOKE, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: No matter what Iraq does, regime change would mean Saddam Hussein being removed from power. And that's a very different objective from the one most of the international community, with the exception of the British, are prepared to support.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: But there is some good news for the administration, and it's now gaining bipartisan support from lawmakers. Tomorrow the top four Congressional leaders will be having a breakfast meeting with Mr. Bush. They say they hope to bring a draft of a congressional resolution in support of the president on Iraq -- Aaron.
BROWN: It's interesting to me that the president - He did this at the United Nations, talked about it again today. There are these other five issues: human rights, Kuwaiti reparations and the others. As best as you can tell, does anyone at the White House believe that if those were the only things on the table, that there would be a war with Iraq?
MALVEAUX: If those were the only things besides the weapons inspections?
BROWN: No, set the weapons inspection issue aside for a second. Not including that issue.
MALVEAUX: Well, certainly they believe that the weapons inspections are all a part of this, but that is really the main point of the argument, that it has to be a regime change, because Saddam Hussein has not complied with weapons inspections.
The other violations, the resolutions that have been violated, of course also on the table. The administration's point is that they do not believe Saddam Hussein is going to comply with any of these. Weapons inspections being the top priority for the administration, but also all of the other resolutions, as well.
They do not believe that he is actually going to agree to any of this. That's why they say a regime change is really the only option for the administration.
BROWN: Suzanne, thank you. Suzanne Malveaux at the White House for us tonight.
The view now from Baghdad. No surprise: Iraq's deputy foreign minister today called his leader's decision to allow the inspectors back in the correct one, and a brave one. And we'd like to meet the Iraqi official who would say otherwise.
His reaction was echoed on the streets of Baghdad. Here again, CNN's Rula Amin.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
AMIN: Iraq's decision was announced too late into the night for the local newspapers to print it. Iraqis didn't learn about it until later in the morning, mostly through word of mouth. And it was a big relief.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (speaking Arabic)
AMIN: We hoped this would be an opening, a chance to move forward, said this man.
Iraq's deputy prime minister was congratulated as he met with lawmakers and delegates from different parts of the world, here to voice support for Iraq in a stand-off with the U.S.
Delegates like the British MP, George Galloway, a long-time advocate on lifting the sanctions, and who had repeatedly urged Iraq to accept the return of the inspectors. Now, urging the world to reciprocate as Iraq has acted.
GEORGE GALLAWAY, BRITISH PARLIAMENT MEMBER: And I think that the world atmosphere will know, should know, quickly assure Iraq that if it complies in good faith, and in good grace, with the demands of the Security Council, that it will not be invaded. That's logic.
AMIN: The threat of war is still looming. The U.S. dismissed the Iraqi announcement that Baghdad will allow the inspectors back and the practical steps is going to heat up U.N. action.
Iraq says the U.S. response to its compromise proves Iraq's suspicions that the U.S. is only using the weapons of mass destruction issue as a pretext to attack Baghdad.
TARIQ AZIZ, IRAQI DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: The issue is not so- and-so, the issue is oil.
(through translator): America, which now feels it is the great power, cannot use force whenever it wants. It wants to control oil, and it can only control the oil of Iraq by destroying Iraq.
AMIN: Despite the skepticism, Tariq Aziz says Iraq will deliver on its promises.
GALLAWAY: I think that Iraq, to use an English phrase, has now bitten the bullet, and I don't think it's going to spit the bullet out and spoil the effect.
AMIN: Iraq's deputy prime minister says this was a courageous, balanced decision. Diplomats say this was a preemptive strike by Iraq, aimed at U.S. efforts to get the United Nations Security Council to issue a new resolution regarding Iraq that it sanction the use of force against Baghdad.
The U.N. weapons inspectors say they are ready to come to Baghdad any time. Iraq says it's ready for the challenge to give the inspectors unfettered access.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
(on-camera): There are no illusions here that this is the end of this crisis. But people know that they have bought some time. They are hoping friendly countries like the Russians, like the French, the Chinese, would try now to argue their case at the Security Council and try to avoid a war -- Aaron.
BROWN: Rula, is the government saying that the inspectors can go anywhere, anyplace, anytime; because that's seems to be the rub right now?
AMIN: Well, what we heard -- we have not heard from the government yet, apart from what Iraq's diplomatic prime minister said. And he said that they are going to allow inspectors back in without conditions.
However, we did talk to Iraqi officials off the record. We spoke to people who are very close to the government, and they said that Iraq is getting ready to allow the inspectors to go wherever they want. And they know that if they don't, there is going to be a war. So they are willing to do that.
The official line they're giving is that they have already destroyed their weapons of mass destruction and they have nothing to hide. But this is the official line. We will see -- Aaron.
BROWN: We will see indeed, truer words never spoken. Thank you. Rula Amin in Baghdad.
Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, the story of a town where six young men were arrested for terrorist connections. That's a little later.
Up next, for more on the Iraq, we'll talk with the former chief U.N. weapons inspector, Richard Butler joins us, after a short break. This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(AUDIO/VIDEO GAP)
RICHARD BUTLER, FORMER U.N. CHIEF WEAPONS INSPECTOR: ... Iraq and outlaw back under the law on several counts, but in particular, weapons of mass destruction. Now the purpose of the Iraqi letter has been to deflect that, has been to slow down that momentum that was developing towards bringing it to account.
The main way in which it believed it could slow that down would be to divide the major powers. And frankly, Aaron, it succeeded.
Look what's happened overnight. Russia and the United States are now divided about whether or not in the light of this letter there needs to be a new resolution.
BROWN: But doesn't there have to be Iraqi follow-through at this point? I mean, they can't just send a letter, and then a month from now, say well actually we didn't send the letter.
BUTLER: Oh, for goodness sake, Aaron, that's what they do all time. Let's look at this letter. Forty-eight hours before it was sent, I personally saw Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz saying there will never be a resumption of inspections in Iraq until the sanctions are removed and there's a comprehensive settlement. All the buzz words of five years ago.
And then 48 hours later, we have a letter from the foreign minister Sabre saying, we will -- inspectors can come back without conditions, without any reference to or any explanation of this change in position.
That's classical Iraqi behavior, as if they've always been in the same place.
Look, what I'm saying, why am I taking the line I am? Why am I being skeptical about this letter, which after all says, you can come back to country without conditions. Why?
Because Aaron, this letter has a big black hole in it. And that's with respect to the conditions under which inspections will be conducted. Come back to the country without conditions sounds good. But what we really needed to hear, is that you can inspect without conditions. That is, you could go anywhere, anytime. It did not say that, that's a big black hole. That's a significant omission from this letter.
And what it says in the concluding paragraphs further supports what I'm saying because they misrepresent what Annan said, they claim to selectively apply U.N. resolutions to themselves and so on and so forth.
I mean, it is a very snaky letter.
BROWN: Ambassador, let me try to get a couple of things in before we run out of time here. Let's just assume something, and I know you're not quite willing to go there with me yet.
But let's assume that, in fact, inspectors come in and, in fact, they get unfettered access. Could we still be certain that the Iraqis do not have weapons of mass destruction?
BUTLER: Perhaps not absolutely.
BROWN: Well, we have satellite problem. Are we going to get it back?
BUTLER: What's that?
BROWN: Here we go. We're back. We lost the satellite for just a second. You were saying not absolutely certain?
BUTLER: Not absolutely certain. Without unfettered access, we haven't got a snowball's chance in hell. Iraq could hide whatever it chose to hide.
With unfettered access, the chances are good, because the inspectors are good. And they have a good database. The chances are good that we would have a very clear idea of Iraq's weapons status.
And bear this in mind, Aaron, Iraq's basic position is to say it has no weapons of mass destruction.
BROWN: Right.
BUTLER: I want to say to you quietly and as clearly as I can, that is a black lie. That is simply not true. The Russians know it, the French know it, the United States knows it.
I mention the Russians and the French, because they're the ones who are saying, this letter is okay, let's go with it, you know. They know it. Everyone with any intelligence knows it. The job is to expose that Iraqi lie. And for that purpose, one needs unfettered inspections.
This letter doesn't offer that. It offers -- it offers a conversation about maybe having that.
BROWN: Which seems to be where we are 10 days from now in Vienna, and we'll see how that one goes. Ambassador Butler, we apologize for the little satellite problem. It's good to talk to you again; thank you, sir.
BUTLER: Sure. Good to talk with you.
BROWN: Thank you. Former chief U.N. weapons inspector Richard Butler. Obviously more than a little bit skeptical about the Iraqi intentions, and he's not alone in the world tonight.
Coming up on NEWSNIGHT, a New York town split over the arrest of some young men for their alleged terrorist connections.
But up next, the California town where they're handing out pot. This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Our next story is an issue wrapped inside an issue, and it has the good fortune that both of them are fascinating.
The first one is really an emotionally charged one for a lot of people, not to mention a complicated policy question: the use of medical marijuana to help the sick.
The second one is as old as the nation itself. How far can people at the local level go in governing their lives without meddling by the federal government?
The clash of these two issues have come together in Santa Cruz, California, to create what has to be one of the stranger things to ever happen at a city hall: a city-endorsed pot rally for people who really need the pot.
Once again, CNN's Frank Buckley.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BUCKLEY: They gave away marijuana muffins and baggies of cannabis to a select few patients in a symbolic demonstration on the steps of Santa Cruz city hall.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE AND FEMALE: [singing] They watch my children grow. They watch the Goddess. BUCKLEY: It was a Sixties-style demonstration to draw attention to a federal government drug raid that happened on September 5. DEA agents came to this marijuana farm in the Santa Cruz mountains and confiscated 167 plants.
They arrested the farm's operators, Mike and Valerie Corral.
MIKE CORRAL: Marijuana is medicine!
BUCKLEY: The demonstration was a show of support for the Corrals, and for the 250 people who receive marijuana from the farm to fight nausea and pain and ailments they say conventional medicines don't effectively treat.
Wayne Meyer has AIDS.
WAYNE MEYER, AIDS PATIENT: AIDS took the recreation out of drugs. We're not taking drugs to have fun. It's for survival, and to ease pain.
BUCKLEY: In California and eight other states, medical marijuana is legal. The Corrals worked openly with local law enforcement to assure them that the pot was medical marijuana.
But DEA officials don't recognize a medical exception to marijuana. And, medical marijuana supporters say recent raids by the agency are part of an aggressive shift against them that began under the Bush administration. Something DEA officials deny.
ROGER GUEVARA, DEA OPERATIONS CHIEF: These people that are involved in this, you know, have a hidden agenda: their hidden agenda is to traffic in narcotics.
BUCKLEY: Something the Corrals deny.
VALERIE CORRAL: I'd like to legalize an end to suffering. I wish that the DEA could come in and arrest illness.
GERALD UELMAN, CO-COUNSEL FOR CORRALS: We are teaching our children compassion for the sick and dying. And only a twisted and perverted federal bureaucrat could call that the wrong message.
BUCKLEY: The Santa Cruz city mayor and several city council members were on had to endorse the demonstration, but at least two people in the crowd criticized them for supporting the cause.
JANE BAER, MEDICAL MARIJUANA OPPONENT: And I just want to make it clear that I'm against it, and there are people against it. And all of Santa Cruz isn't for it.
We're not a pot town.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BUCKLEY: City officials are also concerned about Santa Cruz being perceived in that way. Over and over they stressed that this is not about condoning the recreational use of marijuana. But this is about medical patients and about their right under California law to receive marijuana -- Aaron.
BROWN: Thank you. Frank Buckley in Santa Cruz. One writer in the California press described what's happening in Santa Cruz as a kind of modern-day Boston tea party.
Not quite a valid comparison, as we see it, but we think you get the idea.
We're joined tonight from Santa Cruz by the mayor, who has been out in front on this issue. Christopher Krohn. Is it "Krone" or "Kron"? Did I pronounce it...
MAYOR CHRISTOPHER KROHN, SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA: Good evening, sir.
BROWN: Yes, nice to see you.
KROHN: "Krone," you had it right, sir.
BROWN: Thank you.
KROHN: Good to see you.
BROWN: I heard in Frank's story the DEA agent saying that the real agenda, the hidden agenda of people growing the marijuana is to traffic in narcotics.
Why don't I get you to react to that, and we'll move on.
KROHN: Sir, I would like to say that today was about the patients. And the patients were first. And we started the day off with the patients. These are medical marijuana patients who have, on the advice of their physician, are receiving medical marijuana.
And it was passed overwhelmingly by voters in the City of Santa Cruz. Seventy-seven percent voted for that initiative back in 1986.
And I think the -- this was not a city council sponsored event, as such. But we were invited, council members were, to be here. And there was a county supervisor. There were four ex-mayors here. So, it was a very widely supported initiative today.
BROWN: Have you tried to negotiate this with the federal government at all?
KROHN: You know, that's the thing I've been telling folks all day. It's like, we're dealing with, you know, I'm the mayor of a city. You have Sacramento, our capital, and you have Washington, we have representatives there.
We did have our U.S. representative call the whole raid outrageous when it happened. And I think there is something that the federal officials need to do on this matter.
But at the local level, we're going along, we're following state law.
BROWN: You're following state law, and here's the conundrum, is that you are in fact violating federal law. And how do you reconcile which federal laws you're going to break and which federal laws you're not going to break?
KROHN: Again, this is about the patients and folks who are receiving medical help. You know, some people are coming out of chemotherapy. Some folks have cancer. And they're getting help from this, on the advice of their doctor.
And, again, we passed 215 overwhelmingly in the state of California in 1996.
BROWN: Respectfully -- I'm not sure you answered the question, so let me try it again.
The problem here is a conflict between federal law and state law. And in these matters, federal law has primacy.
How do you decide which federal laws that you'll break?
KROHN: Again, sir, I think that folks at our, in our capital, Sacramento, our legislators, need to bring forward -- if there needs to be clarifying legislation, and also our representatives, our senators and Congress people in Washington, I understand that there is an initiative underway now, at least to get talking about it.
BROWN: Mayor, it's an interesting issue that you found yourself in the middle of, and your town's found itself in the middle of. We appreciate your time tonight. Thanks for joining us.
KROHN: Well, I appreciate it, too. And, you know, there's a lot of other issues going on here. And, again, I just want to stick with the issue that's front and center, and that's folks who are in severe pain who are using this to alleviate that pain.
Thanks a lot.
BROWN: Thank you. I think that's a fair point to end on. Thanks a lot.
Still to come on the program tonight, history comes with a price, as it turns out. We'll go to the Battle of Antietam, and explain that before we leave you tonight.
Up next, though, the story of two towns, two realities -- both in Lackawanna, New York.
This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: In a way, Lackawanna, New York is a classic story of an aging rust belt town. The steel business collapses and the ethnic groups -- some of them old, some of them newer -- end up in a struggle for the scraps that are left.
What makes this rust belt story different is that one of those ethnic groups is made up of people of Arab descent. Mostly Yemeni and half a dozen young Lackawanna men have been arrested for allegedly supporting terrorism.
Now the ethnic tension that might have simmered just below the surface is very much in plain sight. Here's CNN's Maria Hinojosa.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MARIA HINOJOSA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): 1:00 in the afternoon in small town Lackawanna, the Adhan sounds -- the Muslim call to worship.
IMAM: (SPEAKING ARABIC)
HINOJOSA: The imam leads the predominantly Yemeni group of men in prayer at a simple mosque.
On the other side of Lackawanna, a very different scene. At upscale Curly's restaurant, the lunch crowd lingers over gourmet sandwiches.
The people of Lackawanna are struggling to comprehend how six local men could be charged as possible terrorist collaborators.
KRISTA VAN WAGNER, OWNER, CURLY'S BAR & GRILLE: And I sit on boards with many of the Muslims, and they're just like me. We sit and talk about our children. We have concerns as far as the education.
And that's been my experience.
HINOJOSA: Lackawanna is a town united by its shock, but divided in so many other ways.
(on camera): Locals say this bridge is symbolic in Lackawanna. It's a distinct dividing line. On that end of town Yemenis, African- Americans, Latinos, mostly poor. On this end of town, Polish, Irish Catholic, long-time residents.
(voice-over): Many of these people used to work together at the steel mills. But once they closed down in the 1980s, the common spaces where all of Lackawanna's residents once came together are now almost non-existent. And some are choosing to be isolated.
KATHY KHADIJA BARTHOLOMEW, WIFE OF IMAM: So just sound it out, right? How do we break it into parts?
HINOJOSA: The imam's wife, Kathy, a Buffalo native, is home schooling their children -- a way to guarantee they learn the moral beliefs of the Muslim religion she adopted in 1994.
But often, she feels as if she's on a tightrope.
BARTHOLOMEW: I'm sitting a little bit on both sides. I can understand the American culture. I, you know, I understand the viewpoints of the American people.
At the same time, I'm privy to the culture of Islam, and I understand the Muslim viewpoint and the Arab lifestyle.
And sometimes it's really strange.
HINOJOSA: The men arrested were friends of the family, neighbors, an integral part of their side of Lackawanna, a neighborhood that is poor, depressed and rundown.
BARTHOLOMEW: I think in the community as a whole, we feel so sad. You know, we're saddened by what's happened.
These people are people that we've known, we socialized with. You know, they've had plenty of opportunities to espouse what they believe in, and we haven't heard from them, you know, any kind of terrorist-like things.
They're not angry people. You know, I mean, they're not what you would think a terrorist would be like.
HINOJOSA: Her husband spends most of his days on this side of the bridge. Still, he says, he loves the freedom in America.
IMAM ABDULWAHAB ZIAD, IMAM, LACKAWANNA, NEW YORK: We feel this is our home, our country, because we are American citizen.
HINOJOSA: But the arrests are taking their toll. Anger once kept bottled up is now at the surface. There is talk now among African-Americans about boycotts of Arab-owned stores.
ROBERT HARRIS, LACKAWANNA MERCHANT: I'm kind of worried about the community now, because everybody's divided, you know, because of it. And it's not necessary.
HINOJOSA: The concern is that the divisions in this small town will grow even deeper before the healing can begin. Maria Hinojosa, CNN, Lackawanna, New York.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: And on NEWSNIGHT, how and why did three young men wind up being questioned as potential terrorists?
We'll take another pass at this as NEWSNIGHT continues from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Coming up tomorrow morning on AMERICAN MORNING, Paula Zahn has an exclusive interview with former President Bush. They talk about Iraq, missed opportunities and about Saddam Hussein.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAULA ZAHN, ANCHOR, "AMERICAN MORNING": This day, how much are you haunted by Saddam Hussein?
GEORGE H.W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Not at all.
ZAHN: But you hate him.
BUSH: Oh, yeah. I hate Saddam Hussein. I don't hate a lot of people. I don't hate easily. But I think he's, as I say, his word is no good, and he's a brute. He's used poison gas on his own people, so there's nothing redeeming about this man. And I have nothing but hatred in my heart for him.
But, he's got a lot of problems, but immortality isn't one of them.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: That's "AMERICAN MORNING" tomorrow, 7:00 a.m. eastern time. They're in new digs tomorrow. Very cool. We'll get ours eventually, I promise.
Up next on NEWSNIGHT, what history tells us about succumbing to fear.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: As we said at the top of the program, we would like to try as best we can not to choose sides, especially in the case of three medical students and what they said, and the Georgia woman and what she said.
Putting that all aside, there's no denying that we've all been put in a position of fear since the 11th of September a year ago, and wondering and second-guessing and sometimes being suspicious, for questionable reasons, that we ourselves can barely understand or articulate.
This is both unfortunate and natural, needless to say. America has been here before.
Eric Foner is a historian from Columbia University. It's nice to have him with us tonight.
Welcome.
ERIC FONER, HISTORIAN, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: Nice to be here.
BROWN: Let's talk about the three kids and the woman in Georgia for a second. What do you make of all of that?
FONER: Well, look, I wasn't there. I didn't hear what they were saying. But I think it does bring back -- it resonates with things that have happened in our past. I mean, it's not quite as serious as some infringements on our civil liberties in the past. But we have to realize that even though we pride ourselves on tolerance, in moments of crisis, Americans have tended to sort of stigmatize whole groups of people without worrying about individual guilt or innocence.
I mean, in World War I, German-Americans, the vast majority of whom were totally loyal Americans, were persecuted and harassed. The speaking of German was outlawed in some states.
BROWN: Is that right? I didn't -- that I did not know.
FONER: Yes, yes. In World War II, as you know, over 100,000 Japanese-Americans were interned, removed from their homes and put into internment camps on the west coast without any due process, just because of their racial, ethnic background. So...
BROWN: Is anything uniquely American about this?
FONER: No,...
BROWN: This is like reacting to fear.
FONER: Well, it is. I mean, I don't -- you know, I'm sure other countries have their examples of intolerance, obviously.
I think what is particular about our history is this tension between what is sometimes called the American creed of equality and liberty for all, and the reality that we haven't quite lived up to it at many times.
I mean, we started with slavery. And at many times, different groups who were, can be defined as "other," whether by ethnicity or race or immigration status have been stigmatized.
And especially at times of tension or crisis, it's very easy to pick out a particular group and forget about the notion, you know, that people are innocent until they're proven guilty, and that you can't judge an individual guilty because of a, you know, group identity.
We have done this in the past, and there is a danger that we might be moving down that road today.
BROWN: Well, I, you know, I think it's more than a danger that we might. I mean, I think you see, setting this one example aside, you do see examples of that all the time.
The president almost from the get-go would come out and say, this is not a war against Islam. This is not a war against Arab nations per se.
Do you get from the White House, though, or from the administration mixed signals in...
FONER: Yes, I think they are very mixed. It is -- I give the President credit for making it clear that we are not at war with a million Islamic people all over the whole world.
But, in fact, the policies of the government have tended to, you know, move toward what used to be called racial profiling. Immigrants or people trying to enter the country, whether they're students or tourists or whatever from the Middle East have been scrutinized far more carefully than people from other areas.
And, you know, the so-called TIPS program this summer, where...
BROWN: Right.
FONER: ... people were asked, you know, UPS men and pizza delivery guys and cable TV installers were asked to report on anything suspicious they saw in people's homes.
BROWN: You know what was interesting about that is that, how people, how Americans reacted to that is that there really was, from the postal workers and the UPS and the cable people, and just about everybody, there was this kind of revulsion at the idea.
FONER: Absolutely. I mean, your UPS guy doesn't want to be considered a spy when he turns up to deliver your package.
That program was really stymied, because it seemed to apply to everybody. Nobody wants, you know, your neighbor spying on you. But...
BROWN: It's OK to spy on someone else.
FONER: Well, when steps are taken that seem to only apply to a particular group that can be identified by race or ethnicity or color or something like that, then, unfortunately, historic -- history suggests people are, you know, most people are less worried about that.
I mean, during World War II, there was almost no protest whatsoever against the internment of Japanese-Americans.
Later on, 25 years later, the government apologized and all of that.
BROWN: Right. One of the things you hear, I hear often, and it actually resonates to some degree is, you go to the airport and they're strip-searching some 82-year-old woman, because they're proving that it's at random. And people are saying, that's preposterous. She's not the terrorist. Why don't you focus on the people who logically are?
And to -- that's at least understandable, isn't it? I mean, it isn't...
FONER: It's totally...
BROWN: ... it isn't likely going to be an 82-year-old woman...
FONER: No, it... BROWN: ... who's packing a bomb.
FONER: ... it's completely understandable. But we also have to realize that just being from the Middle East, just being a follower of the Islamic religion...
BROWN: Of course.
FONER: ... does not automatically make you a terrorist. I mean, after the Oklahoma City bombing, you remember very well, we didn't start rounding up all the white men in the Middle East or even all the members of some of these extremist groups.
There was, you know, we tried to find the specific individuals who were guilty or could be, you know, suspected of particular crimes.
And history shows that in times of crisis, we sometimes tend to move beyond that to this group stigmatization.
BROWN: I think the history of this is helpful to have. Next time come back and we'll talk about human nature, because I don't think you can separate it.
It's nice to meet you.
FONER: OK. Very nice to be here. Thanks a lot.
BROWN: Thanks for coming in.
Still ahead on NEWSNIGHT, a bit more history. This time with a sponsor. Wait until you see this. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: One hundred and forty years ago in a field near the town of Sharpsburg, Maryland on Antietam Creek, thousands of young Americans died in war. We remember the accounts of the soldiers. We've seen the aftermath in the pictures of Matthew Brady.
For many today, the lessons of the Civil War are learned by re- creating the battles. And now, just as it was then, raising an army costs money.
Here's CNN's Bruce Morton.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRUCE MORTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This is the Battle at Bloody Lane, 5,500 men killed or wounded, part of the larger Battle of Antietam, the bloodiest day in American military history.
This re-enactment marks the 140th anniversary of the battle, and the clash at Bloody Lane is brought to you by -- no kidding -- the Farmers and Merchants Bank and Trust. You can't see their logo on the battlefield, but corporate sponsors, who contributed a quarter of a million dollars, are a major reason this re-enactment is happening. Just ask event co-chairman, Dennis Frye.
DENNIS FRYE, CO-CHAIRMAN, BATTLE OF ANTIETAM RE-ENACTMENT: Well, without the corporate sponsorship we would not be able to do the media advertising, the public relations. We would not be able to attract the number of people that need to come here into our community to enjoy this. We wouldn't be able to do the educational programs.
MORTON: And ticket prices would soar. Re-enactors, 13,000 of them here, pay from $10 to $25, adult spectators pay $17 a day, less for children.
FRYE: We're providing a family educational event at very moderate prices -- very, very cheap compared to what it would cost to go to a ballgame, or even the movies.
And so, through our sponsorship, we were able to keep this very reasonable for families.
MORTON: More than 60,000 re-enactors and spectators attended the three-day event. No logos on the battlefield, no logos at the campsites.
FRYE: It's very, very low-key. We certainly do not want to intrude upon any of the sacredness of this particular historical event.
MORTON: In fact, to find the sponsors, you have to go to the sponsorship tent, not a compulsory stop. The F&M Bank, which brought you Bloody Lane, has a car there. And you'll see other corporate logos, but that's it.
You can spend you day watching fighting -- this is the cavalry demonstration -- or watching men march, women in hoop skirts, whatever, and never see an ad.
You can learn about the battle at Turning Point, many experts say, a victory the North badly needed, a victory which convinced some European countries to stay out of this American war.
It's authentic, though tourists in shorts sometimes outnumber soldiers. It's authentic, well, mostly. I mean, the Confederates didn't really have walkie-talkies, did they.
And these beans look authentic, but you can find hotdogs and modern stuff, too. It's a great big battlefield party. And the one thing everyone here agrees on is that the 140th anniversary of Gettysburg re-enactment new year will be even bigger.
Bruce Morton, CNN, with Union and Confederate forces, Antietam.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: We'll see you tomorrow. Good night.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Cruz Supports Couple Arrested for Growing Medical Marijuana>
Aired September 17, 2002 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
AARON BROWN, HOST: Good evening, again, everyone.
I think this page is about choosing sides tonight. I've become fascinated by the story of the three young Muslim medical students and last Friday's hysteria.
First, all these days and countless and countless TV appearances later, the only people who know the truth are still the four people involved, Ms. Stone and the three students.
Consider it possible, possible that they are all telling the truth. That Ms. Stone believes she heard something that was threatening. I believe she did, or at least I have not a single reason to believe that she did not.
Consider, also, that the three men said, as they claim, absolutely nothing threatening at all. Not seriously or in jest. That it was an innocent conversation by three young men that was misconstrued. This seems possible, as well. After all, I do know that words are sometimes misconstrued.
What we have found fascinating here is the reaction. People choosing sides. Our e-mail box was filled with people perfectly willing to call Ms. Stone a bigot, or the three men creeps. Some saw her as an example of the worst of these times. Others wanted the three young men thrown in jail. In our reading of the mail today, we found few people who were neutral. And, in all of this, that's what we find troubling.
Too many people seem too willing these days to believe the worst about everyone, and it's not just this instance, or this issue. We see this with Iraq, too, for example.
We see notes from people who believe that the real reason the president believes Saddam must go is because he has friends in the oil business and Iraq has a ton of oil.
We also see notes from people who say that those opposed to the war are like Neville Chamberlain, or worse.
In the case of Scott Ritter, we've heard him called a traitor. For speaking his mind.
Name the issue, and people don't just take sides, they ascribe the worst motives to those who see the issue differently. And that is what is dangerous. That is what really is a threat to the country, or at least, the country as we believe it should be.
On to the whip. And it begins over at the U.N., where there'll be quite a bit of activity over the next several months.
Richard Roth is there. Richard, the headline from you tonight, please.
RICHARD ROTH, CNN UNITED NATIONS CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, there was an old TV game show you may remember in the U.S., called "Who Do You Trust?" The latest contestants in this sequel could be Iraq and the United Nations Security Council.
BROWN: Richard, thank you. Back to you at the top tonight.
The Iraqi offer to allow inspectors in puts the U.S. in a tricky spot diplomatically. Suzanne Malveaux has the reaction from the White House today. Suzanne, the headline from you tonight.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, it was really just yesterday that it seemed that the White House was well on its way to getting a tough U.N. resolution to hold Saddam Hussein accountable. It looks like that's not going to happen anytime soon. World leaders backing off today. The foreign ministers of Egypt, Russia, and France all say they no longer believe a U.N. resolution is necessary, at least for now. At the White House and U.N. should go with Saddam Hussein's recommendation and allow the weapons inspections back in.
BROWN: Suzanne, thank you. And back to you in a moment.
And as we continue around the horn on Iraq, we go to our Baghdad desk. Rula Amin is there. Rula, headline from you, please.
RULA AMIN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, for four years, Iraq would not allow the inspectors back. Now they have made the turn, and they are calling their compromise a courageous, balanced decision. Diplomats say it's preemptive strike that may be working.
BROWN: Rula, thank you.
And it's not all Iraq tonight. A fascinating battle involving the federal government, and one town fighting back over medical marijuana. Frank Buckley is in Santa Cruz, California, for us. Frank, the headline from you tonight.
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, a remarkable scene here at the Santa Cruz city hall today. Hundreds of people coming out in support of medical marijuana. They watched as patients received their medical marijuana in public. Among those supporting the demonstrations, the city's mayors and other top officials -- Aaron.
BROWN: Thank you. Back with all of you shortly.
Also, coming up tonight on the program, we'll talk once again with the former chief U.N. weapons inspector, Richard Butler, on Iraq's latest move and what the United States can or should do.
Maria Hinojosa on the tiny speck of western New York that's become the focus of nationwide scrutiny: Lackawanna, New York, and the Arab-Americans trying to make sense of what is happening in their city.
And, before September 11, 2001, there was September 17, 1862, a day that, even now, remains the bloodiest in American history. Bruce Morton tonight on the battle of Antietam, and an uncomfortable role that money plays in keeping its memory alive.
All of that in the next 60 minutes.
We begin with that moment when Wile E. Coyote looks back and sees the Roadrunner standing at the edge of the cliff, which means he isn't standing on anything but thin air. Seems a bit like where the Bush Administration is tonight, scrambling to get back onto solid ground after the Iraqi offer to let U.N. weapons inspectors come back into the country.
The president is trying to shift the spotlight back to Iraqi misbehavior. The secretary of state, meantime, is in New York, trying to keep members of the Security Council from taking an Iraqi "yes" for an answer, but momentum is already gathering.
We begin there tonight at the U.N. with our U.N. correspondent, Richard Roth.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ROTH: Iraqi diplomats left their first face-to-face meeting at the U.N. with their first agreement on the inspectors' fate, to talk some more.
SAEED HASAN, IRAQI DELEGATION: We agreed to meet in Vienna in 10 days to finalize the practical arrangements.
ROTH: Iraq and the U.N. danced in Vienna before, just last July Fourth. But now Baghdad has dropped demands for lifting of sanctions, and is ready to open its doors to international inspectors, pulled from Iraq nearly four years ago.
Iraq has also once again attempted to split the powers on the Security Council, this time over the need for a new, tougher resolution, threatening Iraq if it blocks access again for inspectors.
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: The only way to make sure it is not business as usual, and to make sure it is not a repeat of the past, it seems to me, anyway, is to put it in the form a new U.N. resolution.
IGOR IVANOV, RUSSIAN FOREIGN MINISTER (through translator): From our standpoint, we don't need any special resolution for that to occur.
ROTH: Many diplomats here are pleased at the Iraqi change of heart, but remain skeptical.
BILL GRAHAM, CANADIAN FOREIGN MINISTER: This is now, this is where the rubber hits the road, as they say, and now there is no opportunity for wiggle room. There's no more wiggling to be done by Iraq, and the world community has made that clear to them.
SHIMON PERES, ISRAELI FOREIGN MINISTER: In order to trust a letter, you must trust the author of the letter.
ROTH: Arab foreign ministers, who met with the U.S. about the Mid-east, disagree.
AHMED MAHER, EGYPTIAN FOREIGN MINISTER: This is the beginning of a solution.
MARWAN MUASHER, JORDANIAN FOREIGN MINISTER: Take it as face value and work with it to ensure that we are in a course that would bring back inspectors to Iraq.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROTH: And just when those inspectors might return to Iraqi soil where they have not been in years, well, the Iraqis say it's up to Hans Blix, the chief weapons inspector. But Blix is first going to get a hearing with the United Nations Security Council, maybe on Thursday, before any marching orders are issued.
And Aaron, Blix has said in the past, it could be up to a year before he certifies whether Iraq has complied with weapons of mass destruction disarmament programs. And a year is a long time for any type of obstructions to occur.
BROWN: Well, that presumes what I don't think the administration does presume, which is that the inspectors would have unfettered access.
ROTH: And unfettered access is not listed in the Iraqi letter of Monday to the United Nations. The U.S. is seizing on that and wants to put that kind of language in a new resolution, which China and Russia oppose. They don't even want to even have any hint of a resolution threatening the use of force, which might trigger a U.S. military strike at the first parking lot stand-off.
BROWN: But if you look back at the existing resolution, what does existing resolution say in terms of access? Because that's the one that is in play, right?
ROTH: Well, the 687 is the major resolution, and in that jargon there, there's phrases like Iraq is in material breach and all necessary means could be used.
But of course, Iraq is now out of Kuwait. A lot of those resolutions were based upon that kind of stand-off in 1990. Some diplomats think you need new language now to clarify.
Washington wants to get as much on the books as possible. France is kind of in the middle, wanting to test Iraq. They are kind of right back where they were before President Bush spoke, when there was some form of unity that lasted about four days.
BROWN: Richard, thank you. Richard Roth at the United Nations.
Tricky spot, as we've indicated, for the president. He went to the United Nations to seek international support, and he seemed to get a considerable amount of it.
It is unlikely that the administration didn't anticipate the Iraqi reaction, saying for now, at least, it will let inspectors in.
So where does that leave the president, who has never believed, the best we can tell, that inspections will work, and who really wants Saddam gone?
Here again, CNN White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: At an education event in Tennessee, the president blasted the Iraqi leader.
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: This is a man who has delayed, denied, deceived.
MALVEAUX: The Bush Administration says if and when inspectors return, the terms will be set by the United States and the United Nations.
POWELL: We cannot just take a one and a quarter page letter signed by the foreign minister as the end of this matter. We have seen this game before.
MALVEAUX: The White House says Iraqi weapons inspections and disarmament are not enough. It wants a new U.N. resolution with teeth, that demands Iraq comply with other commitments, such as addressing human rights violations, reparations to Kuwait and an accounting of Gulf War prisoners.
But the administration's big concern now is that Saddam's offer will undermine a push to get the U.N. Security Council to the enforcement of the current U.N. Security Council resolutions, or the proposal of new ones.
Security Council members may decide simply to put inspectors back in and wait to see what happens before they authorize military action, a two-step process preferred by Russian and France which does not address Mr. Bush's goal of regime change.
RICHARD HOLBROOKE, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: No matter what Iraq does, regime change would mean Saddam Hussein being removed from power. And that's a very different objective from the one most of the international community, with the exception of the British, are prepared to support.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: But there is some good news for the administration, and it's now gaining bipartisan support from lawmakers. Tomorrow the top four Congressional leaders will be having a breakfast meeting with Mr. Bush. They say they hope to bring a draft of a congressional resolution in support of the president on Iraq -- Aaron.
BROWN: It's interesting to me that the president - He did this at the United Nations, talked about it again today. There are these other five issues: human rights, Kuwaiti reparations and the others. As best as you can tell, does anyone at the White House believe that if those were the only things on the table, that there would be a war with Iraq?
MALVEAUX: If those were the only things besides the weapons inspections?
BROWN: No, set the weapons inspection issue aside for a second. Not including that issue.
MALVEAUX: Well, certainly they believe that the weapons inspections are all a part of this, but that is really the main point of the argument, that it has to be a regime change, because Saddam Hussein has not complied with weapons inspections.
The other violations, the resolutions that have been violated, of course also on the table. The administration's point is that they do not believe Saddam Hussein is going to comply with any of these. Weapons inspections being the top priority for the administration, but also all of the other resolutions, as well.
They do not believe that he is actually going to agree to any of this. That's why they say a regime change is really the only option for the administration.
BROWN: Suzanne, thank you. Suzanne Malveaux at the White House for us tonight.
The view now from Baghdad. No surprise: Iraq's deputy foreign minister today called his leader's decision to allow the inspectors back in the correct one, and a brave one. And we'd like to meet the Iraqi official who would say otherwise.
His reaction was echoed on the streets of Baghdad. Here again, CNN's Rula Amin.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
AMIN: Iraq's decision was announced too late into the night for the local newspapers to print it. Iraqis didn't learn about it until later in the morning, mostly through word of mouth. And it was a big relief.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (speaking Arabic)
AMIN: We hoped this would be an opening, a chance to move forward, said this man.
Iraq's deputy prime minister was congratulated as he met with lawmakers and delegates from different parts of the world, here to voice support for Iraq in a stand-off with the U.S.
Delegates like the British MP, George Galloway, a long-time advocate on lifting the sanctions, and who had repeatedly urged Iraq to accept the return of the inspectors. Now, urging the world to reciprocate as Iraq has acted.
GEORGE GALLAWAY, BRITISH PARLIAMENT MEMBER: And I think that the world atmosphere will know, should know, quickly assure Iraq that if it complies in good faith, and in good grace, with the demands of the Security Council, that it will not be invaded. That's logic.
AMIN: The threat of war is still looming. The U.S. dismissed the Iraqi announcement that Baghdad will allow the inspectors back and the practical steps is going to heat up U.N. action.
Iraq says the U.S. response to its compromise proves Iraq's suspicions that the U.S. is only using the weapons of mass destruction issue as a pretext to attack Baghdad.
TARIQ AZIZ, IRAQI DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: The issue is not so- and-so, the issue is oil.
(through translator): America, which now feels it is the great power, cannot use force whenever it wants. It wants to control oil, and it can only control the oil of Iraq by destroying Iraq.
AMIN: Despite the skepticism, Tariq Aziz says Iraq will deliver on its promises.
GALLAWAY: I think that Iraq, to use an English phrase, has now bitten the bullet, and I don't think it's going to spit the bullet out and spoil the effect.
AMIN: Iraq's deputy prime minister says this was a courageous, balanced decision. Diplomats say this was a preemptive strike by Iraq, aimed at U.S. efforts to get the United Nations Security Council to issue a new resolution regarding Iraq that it sanction the use of force against Baghdad.
The U.N. weapons inspectors say they are ready to come to Baghdad any time. Iraq says it's ready for the challenge to give the inspectors unfettered access.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
(on-camera): There are no illusions here that this is the end of this crisis. But people know that they have bought some time. They are hoping friendly countries like the Russians, like the French, the Chinese, would try now to argue their case at the Security Council and try to avoid a war -- Aaron.
BROWN: Rula, is the government saying that the inspectors can go anywhere, anyplace, anytime; because that's seems to be the rub right now?
AMIN: Well, what we heard -- we have not heard from the government yet, apart from what Iraq's diplomatic prime minister said. And he said that they are going to allow inspectors back in without conditions.
However, we did talk to Iraqi officials off the record. We spoke to people who are very close to the government, and they said that Iraq is getting ready to allow the inspectors to go wherever they want. And they know that if they don't, there is going to be a war. So they are willing to do that.
The official line they're giving is that they have already destroyed their weapons of mass destruction and they have nothing to hide. But this is the official line. We will see -- Aaron.
BROWN: We will see indeed, truer words never spoken. Thank you. Rula Amin in Baghdad.
Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, the story of a town where six young men were arrested for terrorist connections. That's a little later.
Up next, for more on the Iraq, we'll talk with the former chief U.N. weapons inspector, Richard Butler joins us, after a short break. This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(AUDIO/VIDEO GAP)
RICHARD BUTLER, FORMER U.N. CHIEF WEAPONS INSPECTOR: ... Iraq and outlaw back under the law on several counts, but in particular, weapons of mass destruction. Now the purpose of the Iraqi letter has been to deflect that, has been to slow down that momentum that was developing towards bringing it to account.
The main way in which it believed it could slow that down would be to divide the major powers. And frankly, Aaron, it succeeded.
Look what's happened overnight. Russia and the United States are now divided about whether or not in the light of this letter there needs to be a new resolution.
BROWN: But doesn't there have to be Iraqi follow-through at this point? I mean, they can't just send a letter, and then a month from now, say well actually we didn't send the letter.
BUTLER: Oh, for goodness sake, Aaron, that's what they do all time. Let's look at this letter. Forty-eight hours before it was sent, I personally saw Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz saying there will never be a resumption of inspections in Iraq until the sanctions are removed and there's a comprehensive settlement. All the buzz words of five years ago.
And then 48 hours later, we have a letter from the foreign minister Sabre saying, we will -- inspectors can come back without conditions, without any reference to or any explanation of this change in position.
That's classical Iraqi behavior, as if they've always been in the same place.
Look, what I'm saying, why am I taking the line I am? Why am I being skeptical about this letter, which after all says, you can come back to country without conditions. Why?
Because Aaron, this letter has a big black hole in it. And that's with respect to the conditions under which inspections will be conducted. Come back to the country without conditions sounds good. But what we really needed to hear, is that you can inspect without conditions. That is, you could go anywhere, anytime. It did not say that, that's a big black hole. That's a significant omission from this letter.
And what it says in the concluding paragraphs further supports what I'm saying because they misrepresent what Annan said, they claim to selectively apply U.N. resolutions to themselves and so on and so forth.
I mean, it is a very snaky letter.
BROWN: Ambassador, let me try to get a couple of things in before we run out of time here. Let's just assume something, and I know you're not quite willing to go there with me yet.
But let's assume that, in fact, inspectors come in and, in fact, they get unfettered access. Could we still be certain that the Iraqis do not have weapons of mass destruction?
BUTLER: Perhaps not absolutely.
BROWN: Well, we have satellite problem. Are we going to get it back?
BUTLER: What's that?
BROWN: Here we go. We're back. We lost the satellite for just a second. You were saying not absolutely certain?
BUTLER: Not absolutely certain. Without unfettered access, we haven't got a snowball's chance in hell. Iraq could hide whatever it chose to hide.
With unfettered access, the chances are good, because the inspectors are good. And they have a good database. The chances are good that we would have a very clear idea of Iraq's weapons status.
And bear this in mind, Aaron, Iraq's basic position is to say it has no weapons of mass destruction.
BROWN: Right.
BUTLER: I want to say to you quietly and as clearly as I can, that is a black lie. That is simply not true. The Russians know it, the French know it, the United States knows it.
I mention the Russians and the French, because they're the ones who are saying, this letter is okay, let's go with it, you know. They know it. Everyone with any intelligence knows it. The job is to expose that Iraqi lie. And for that purpose, one needs unfettered inspections.
This letter doesn't offer that. It offers -- it offers a conversation about maybe having that.
BROWN: Which seems to be where we are 10 days from now in Vienna, and we'll see how that one goes. Ambassador Butler, we apologize for the little satellite problem. It's good to talk to you again; thank you, sir.
BUTLER: Sure. Good to talk with you.
BROWN: Thank you. Former chief U.N. weapons inspector Richard Butler. Obviously more than a little bit skeptical about the Iraqi intentions, and he's not alone in the world tonight.
Coming up on NEWSNIGHT, a New York town split over the arrest of some young men for their alleged terrorist connections.
But up next, the California town where they're handing out pot. This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Our next story is an issue wrapped inside an issue, and it has the good fortune that both of them are fascinating.
The first one is really an emotionally charged one for a lot of people, not to mention a complicated policy question: the use of medical marijuana to help the sick.
The second one is as old as the nation itself. How far can people at the local level go in governing their lives without meddling by the federal government?
The clash of these two issues have come together in Santa Cruz, California, to create what has to be one of the stranger things to ever happen at a city hall: a city-endorsed pot rally for people who really need the pot.
Once again, CNN's Frank Buckley.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BUCKLEY: They gave away marijuana muffins and baggies of cannabis to a select few patients in a symbolic demonstration on the steps of Santa Cruz city hall.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE AND FEMALE: [singing] They watch my children grow. They watch the Goddess. BUCKLEY: It was a Sixties-style demonstration to draw attention to a federal government drug raid that happened on September 5. DEA agents came to this marijuana farm in the Santa Cruz mountains and confiscated 167 plants.
They arrested the farm's operators, Mike and Valerie Corral.
MIKE CORRAL: Marijuana is medicine!
BUCKLEY: The demonstration was a show of support for the Corrals, and for the 250 people who receive marijuana from the farm to fight nausea and pain and ailments they say conventional medicines don't effectively treat.
Wayne Meyer has AIDS.
WAYNE MEYER, AIDS PATIENT: AIDS took the recreation out of drugs. We're not taking drugs to have fun. It's for survival, and to ease pain.
BUCKLEY: In California and eight other states, medical marijuana is legal. The Corrals worked openly with local law enforcement to assure them that the pot was medical marijuana.
But DEA officials don't recognize a medical exception to marijuana. And, medical marijuana supporters say recent raids by the agency are part of an aggressive shift against them that began under the Bush administration. Something DEA officials deny.
ROGER GUEVARA, DEA OPERATIONS CHIEF: These people that are involved in this, you know, have a hidden agenda: their hidden agenda is to traffic in narcotics.
BUCKLEY: Something the Corrals deny.
VALERIE CORRAL: I'd like to legalize an end to suffering. I wish that the DEA could come in and arrest illness.
GERALD UELMAN, CO-COUNSEL FOR CORRALS: We are teaching our children compassion for the sick and dying. And only a twisted and perverted federal bureaucrat could call that the wrong message.
BUCKLEY: The Santa Cruz city mayor and several city council members were on had to endorse the demonstration, but at least two people in the crowd criticized them for supporting the cause.
JANE BAER, MEDICAL MARIJUANA OPPONENT: And I just want to make it clear that I'm against it, and there are people against it. And all of Santa Cruz isn't for it.
We're not a pot town.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BUCKLEY: City officials are also concerned about Santa Cruz being perceived in that way. Over and over they stressed that this is not about condoning the recreational use of marijuana. But this is about medical patients and about their right under California law to receive marijuana -- Aaron.
BROWN: Thank you. Frank Buckley in Santa Cruz. One writer in the California press described what's happening in Santa Cruz as a kind of modern-day Boston tea party.
Not quite a valid comparison, as we see it, but we think you get the idea.
We're joined tonight from Santa Cruz by the mayor, who has been out in front on this issue. Christopher Krohn. Is it "Krone" or "Kron"? Did I pronounce it...
MAYOR CHRISTOPHER KROHN, SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA: Good evening, sir.
BROWN: Yes, nice to see you.
KROHN: "Krone," you had it right, sir.
BROWN: Thank you.
KROHN: Good to see you.
BROWN: I heard in Frank's story the DEA agent saying that the real agenda, the hidden agenda of people growing the marijuana is to traffic in narcotics.
Why don't I get you to react to that, and we'll move on.
KROHN: Sir, I would like to say that today was about the patients. And the patients were first. And we started the day off with the patients. These are medical marijuana patients who have, on the advice of their physician, are receiving medical marijuana.
And it was passed overwhelmingly by voters in the City of Santa Cruz. Seventy-seven percent voted for that initiative back in 1986.
And I think the -- this was not a city council sponsored event, as such. But we were invited, council members were, to be here. And there was a county supervisor. There were four ex-mayors here. So, it was a very widely supported initiative today.
BROWN: Have you tried to negotiate this with the federal government at all?
KROHN: You know, that's the thing I've been telling folks all day. It's like, we're dealing with, you know, I'm the mayor of a city. You have Sacramento, our capital, and you have Washington, we have representatives there.
We did have our U.S. representative call the whole raid outrageous when it happened. And I think there is something that the federal officials need to do on this matter.
But at the local level, we're going along, we're following state law.
BROWN: You're following state law, and here's the conundrum, is that you are in fact violating federal law. And how do you reconcile which federal laws you're going to break and which federal laws you're not going to break?
KROHN: Again, this is about the patients and folks who are receiving medical help. You know, some people are coming out of chemotherapy. Some folks have cancer. And they're getting help from this, on the advice of their doctor.
And, again, we passed 215 overwhelmingly in the state of California in 1996.
BROWN: Respectfully -- I'm not sure you answered the question, so let me try it again.
The problem here is a conflict between federal law and state law. And in these matters, federal law has primacy.
How do you decide which federal laws that you'll break?
KROHN: Again, sir, I think that folks at our, in our capital, Sacramento, our legislators, need to bring forward -- if there needs to be clarifying legislation, and also our representatives, our senators and Congress people in Washington, I understand that there is an initiative underway now, at least to get talking about it.
BROWN: Mayor, it's an interesting issue that you found yourself in the middle of, and your town's found itself in the middle of. We appreciate your time tonight. Thanks for joining us.
KROHN: Well, I appreciate it, too. And, you know, there's a lot of other issues going on here. And, again, I just want to stick with the issue that's front and center, and that's folks who are in severe pain who are using this to alleviate that pain.
Thanks a lot.
BROWN: Thank you. I think that's a fair point to end on. Thanks a lot.
Still to come on the program tonight, history comes with a price, as it turns out. We'll go to the Battle of Antietam, and explain that before we leave you tonight.
Up next, though, the story of two towns, two realities -- both in Lackawanna, New York.
This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: In a way, Lackawanna, New York is a classic story of an aging rust belt town. The steel business collapses and the ethnic groups -- some of them old, some of them newer -- end up in a struggle for the scraps that are left.
What makes this rust belt story different is that one of those ethnic groups is made up of people of Arab descent. Mostly Yemeni and half a dozen young Lackawanna men have been arrested for allegedly supporting terrorism.
Now the ethnic tension that might have simmered just below the surface is very much in plain sight. Here's CNN's Maria Hinojosa.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MARIA HINOJOSA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): 1:00 in the afternoon in small town Lackawanna, the Adhan sounds -- the Muslim call to worship.
IMAM: (SPEAKING ARABIC)
HINOJOSA: The imam leads the predominantly Yemeni group of men in prayer at a simple mosque.
On the other side of Lackawanna, a very different scene. At upscale Curly's restaurant, the lunch crowd lingers over gourmet sandwiches.
The people of Lackawanna are struggling to comprehend how six local men could be charged as possible terrorist collaborators.
KRISTA VAN WAGNER, OWNER, CURLY'S BAR & GRILLE: And I sit on boards with many of the Muslims, and they're just like me. We sit and talk about our children. We have concerns as far as the education.
And that's been my experience.
HINOJOSA: Lackawanna is a town united by its shock, but divided in so many other ways.
(on camera): Locals say this bridge is symbolic in Lackawanna. It's a distinct dividing line. On that end of town Yemenis, African- Americans, Latinos, mostly poor. On this end of town, Polish, Irish Catholic, long-time residents.
(voice-over): Many of these people used to work together at the steel mills. But once they closed down in the 1980s, the common spaces where all of Lackawanna's residents once came together are now almost non-existent. And some are choosing to be isolated.
KATHY KHADIJA BARTHOLOMEW, WIFE OF IMAM: So just sound it out, right? How do we break it into parts?
HINOJOSA: The imam's wife, Kathy, a Buffalo native, is home schooling their children -- a way to guarantee they learn the moral beliefs of the Muslim religion she adopted in 1994.
But often, she feels as if she's on a tightrope.
BARTHOLOMEW: I'm sitting a little bit on both sides. I can understand the American culture. I, you know, I understand the viewpoints of the American people.
At the same time, I'm privy to the culture of Islam, and I understand the Muslim viewpoint and the Arab lifestyle.
And sometimes it's really strange.
HINOJOSA: The men arrested were friends of the family, neighbors, an integral part of their side of Lackawanna, a neighborhood that is poor, depressed and rundown.
BARTHOLOMEW: I think in the community as a whole, we feel so sad. You know, we're saddened by what's happened.
These people are people that we've known, we socialized with. You know, they've had plenty of opportunities to espouse what they believe in, and we haven't heard from them, you know, any kind of terrorist-like things.
They're not angry people. You know, I mean, they're not what you would think a terrorist would be like.
HINOJOSA: Her husband spends most of his days on this side of the bridge. Still, he says, he loves the freedom in America.
IMAM ABDULWAHAB ZIAD, IMAM, LACKAWANNA, NEW YORK: We feel this is our home, our country, because we are American citizen.
HINOJOSA: But the arrests are taking their toll. Anger once kept bottled up is now at the surface. There is talk now among African-Americans about boycotts of Arab-owned stores.
ROBERT HARRIS, LACKAWANNA MERCHANT: I'm kind of worried about the community now, because everybody's divided, you know, because of it. And it's not necessary.
HINOJOSA: The concern is that the divisions in this small town will grow even deeper before the healing can begin. Maria Hinojosa, CNN, Lackawanna, New York.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: And on NEWSNIGHT, how and why did three young men wind up being questioned as potential terrorists?
We'll take another pass at this as NEWSNIGHT continues from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Coming up tomorrow morning on AMERICAN MORNING, Paula Zahn has an exclusive interview with former President Bush. They talk about Iraq, missed opportunities and about Saddam Hussein.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAULA ZAHN, ANCHOR, "AMERICAN MORNING": This day, how much are you haunted by Saddam Hussein?
GEORGE H.W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Not at all.
ZAHN: But you hate him.
BUSH: Oh, yeah. I hate Saddam Hussein. I don't hate a lot of people. I don't hate easily. But I think he's, as I say, his word is no good, and he's a brute. He's used poison gas on his own people, so there's nothing redeeming about this man. And I have nothing but hatred in my heart for him.
But, he's got a lot of problems, but immortality isn't one of them.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: That's "AMERICAN MORNING" tomorrow, 7:00 a.m. eastern time. They're in new digs tomorrow. Very cool. We'll get ours eventually, I promise.
Up next on NEWSNIGHT, what history tells us about succumbing to fear.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: As we said at the top of the program, we would like to try as best we can not to choose sides, especially in the case of three medical students and what they said, and the Georgia woman and what she said.
Putting that all aside, there's no denying that we've all been put in a position of fear since the 11th of September a year ago, and wondering and second-guessing and sometimes being suspicious, for questionable reasons, that we ourselves can barely understand or articulate.
This is both unfortunate and natural, needless to say. America has been here before.
Eric Foner is a historian from Columbia University. It's nice to have him with us tonight.
Welcome.
ERIC FONER, HISTORIAN, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: Nice to be here.
BROWN: Let's talk about the three kids and the woman in Georgia for a second. What do you make of all of that?
FONER: Well, look, I wasn't there. I didn't hear what they were saying. But I think it does bring back -- it resonates with things that have happened in our past. I mean, it's not quite as serious as some infringements on our civil liberties in the past. But we have to realize that even though we pride ourselves on tolerance, in moments of crisis, Americans have tended to sort of stigmatize whole groups of people without worrying about individual guilt or innocence.
I mean, in World War I, German-Americans, the vast majority of whom were totally loyal Americans, were persecuted and harassed. The speaking of German was outlawed in some states.
BROWN: Is that right? I didn't -- that I did not know.
FONER: Yes, yes. In World War II, as you know, over 100,000 Japanese-Americans were interned, removed from their homes and put into internment camps on the west coast without any due process, just because of their racial, ethnic background. So...
BROWN: Is anything uniquely American about this?
FONER: No,...
BROWN: This is like reacting to fear.
FONER: Well, it is. I mean, I don't -- you know, I'm sure other countries have their examples of intolerance, obviously.
I think what is particular about our history is this tension between what is sometimes called the American creed of equality and liberty for all, and the reality that we haven't quite lived up to it at many times.
I mean, we started with slavery. And at many times, different groups who were, can be defined as "other," whether by ethnicity or race or immigration status have been stigmatized.
And especially at times of tension or crisis, it's very easy to pick out a particular group and forget about the notion, you know, that people are innocent until they're proven guilty, and that you can't judge an individual guilty because of a, you know, group identity.
We have done this in the past, and there is a danger that we might be moving down that road today.
BROWN: Well, I, you know, I think it's more than a danger that we might. I mean, I think you see, setting this one example aside, you do see examples of that all the time.
The president almost from the get-go would come out and say, this is not a war against Islam. This is not a war against Arab nations per se.
Do you get from the White House, though, or from the administration mixed signals in...
FONER: Yes, I think they are very mixed. It is -- I give the President credit for making it clear that we are not at war with a million Islamic people all over the whole world.
But, in fact, the policies of the government have tended to, you know, move toward what used to be called racial profiling. Immigrants or people trying to enter the country, whether they're students or tourists or whatever from the Middle East have been scrutinized far more carefully than people from other areas.
And, you know, the so-called TIPS program this summer, where...
BROWN: Right.
FONER: ... people were asked, you know, UPS men and pizza delivery guys and cable TV installers were asked to report on anything suspicious they saw in people's homes.
BROWN: You know what was interesting about that is that, how people, how Americans reacted to that is that there really was, from the postal workers and the UPS and the cable people, and just about everybody, there was this kind of revulsion at the idea.
FONER: Absolutely. I mean, your UPS guy doesn't want to be considered a spy when he turns up to deliver your package.
That program was really stymied, because it seemed to apply to everybody. Nobody wants, you know, your neighbor spying on you. But...
BROWN: It's OK to spy on someone else.
FONER: Well, when steps are taken that seem to only apply to a particular group that can be identified by race or ethnicity or color or something like that, then, unfortunately, historic -- history suggests people are, you know, most people are less worried about that.
I mean, during World War II, there was almost no protest whatsoever against the internment of Japanese-Americans.
Later on, 25 years later, the government apologized and all of that.
BROWN: Right. One of the things you hear, I hear often, and it actually resonates to some degree is, you go to the airport and they're strip-searching some 82-year-old woman, because they're proving that it's at random. And people are saying, that's preposterous. She's not the terrorist. Why don't you focus on the people who logically are?
And to -- that's at least understandable, isn't it? I mean, it isn't...
FONER: It's totally...
BROWN: ... it isn't likely going to be an 82-year-old woman...
FONER: No, it... BROWN: ... who's packing a bomb.
FONER: ... it's completely understandable. But we also have to realize that just being from the Middle East, just being a follower of the Islamic religion...
BROWN: Of course.
FONER: ... does not automatically make you a terrorist. I mean, after the Oklahoma City bombing, you remember very well, we didn't start rounding up all the white men in the Middle East or even all the members of some of these extremist groups.
There was, you know, we tried to find the specific individuals who were guilty or could be, you know, suspected of particular crimes.
And history shows that in times of crisis, we sometimes tend to move beyond that to this group stigmatization.
BROWN: I think the history of this is helpful to have. Next time come back and we'll talk about human nature, because I don't think you can separate it.
It's nice to meet you.
FONER: OK. Very nice to be here. Thanks a lot.
BROWN: Thanks for coming in.
Still ahead on NEWSNIGHT, a bit more history. This time with a sponsor. Wait until you see this. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: One hundred and forty years ago in a field near the town of Sharpsburg, Maryland on Antietam Creek, thousands of young Americans died in war. We remember the accounts of the soldiers. We've seen the aftermath in the pictures of Matthew Brady.
For many today, the lessons of the Civil War are learned by re- creating the battles. And now, just as it was then, raising an army costs money.
Here's CNN's Bruce Morton.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRUCE MORTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This is the Battle at Bloody Lane, 5,500 men killed or wounded, part of the larger Battle of Antietam, the bloodiest day in American military history.
This re-enactment marks the 140th anniversary of the battle, and the clash at Bloody Lane is brought to you by -- no kidding -- the Farmers and Merchants Bank and Trust. You can't see their logo on the battlefield, but corporate sponsors, who contributed a quarter of a million dollars, are a major reason this re-enactment is happening. Just ask event co-chairman, Dennis Frye.
DENNIS FRYE, CO-CHAIRMAN, BATTLE OF ANTIETAM RE-ENACTMENT: Well, without the corporate sponsorship we would not be able to do the media advertising, the public relations. We would not be able to attract the number of people that need to come here into our community to enjoy this. We wouldn't be able to do the educational programs.
MORTON: And ticket prices would soar. Re-enactors, 13,000 of them here, pay from $10 to $25, adult spectators pay $17 a day, less for children.
FRYE: We're providing a family educational event at very moderate prices -- very, very cheap compared to what it would cost to go to a ballgame, or even the movies.
And so, through our sponsorship, we were able to keep this very reasonable for families.
MORTON: More than 60,000 re-enactors and spectators attended the three-day event. No logos on the battlefield, no logos at the campsites.
FRYE: It's very, very low-key. We certainly do not want to intrude upon any of the sacredness of this particular historical event.
MORTON: In fact, to find the sponsors, you have to go to the sponsorship tent, not a compulsory stop. The F&M Bank, which brought you Bloody Lane, has a car there. And you'll see other corporate logos, but that's it.
You can spend you day watching fighting -- this is the cavalry demonstration -- or watching men march, women in hoop skirts, whatever, and never see an ad.
You can learn about the battle at Turning Point, many experts say, a victory the North badly needed, a victory which convinced some European countries to stay out of this American war.
It's authentic, though tourists in shorts sometimes outnumber soldiers. It's authentic, well, mostly. I mean, the Confederates didn't really have walkie-talkies, did they.
And these beans look authentic, but you can find hotdogs and modern stuff, too. It's a great big battlefield party. And the one thing everyone here agrees on is that the 140th anniversary of Gettysburg re-enactment new year will be even bigger.
Bruce Morton, CNN, with Union and Confederate forces, Antietam.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: We'll see you tomorrow. Good night.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Cruz Supports Couple Arrested for Growing Medical Marijuana>
