Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsnight Aaron Brown
Group Claims to Have Cloned Human Baby; North Korea Kicks U.N. Inspectors Out; Steel From WTC Wreckage to Become Warship
Aired December 27, 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.
ANDERSON COOPER, GUEST HOST: Good evening, everyone. I'm Anderson Cooper in for Aaron Brown, who is off tonight. He'll be back on Monday. Don't worry. I promise.
So, I don't know about you but this whole cloning story in the news -- all day I've had this tune stuck in my head.
It is a case so out of this world, Scully and Mulder couldn't even figure it out. Now, is it just me? Or does the guy at the center of this cloning kurfafel (ph), look a little bit like Beldar. You know, Beldar Conehead from the old S&L. "We are from France." This guy, too, is from France, just like Beldar.
This guy calls himself Rael. Actually, that what he says the four-foot tall alien called him back in the early 1970s, when he revealed to Rael the secret of human life. Which is that alien scientists created all of us through cloning.
I'm sorry, did I say alien? Rael and his followers seem to prefer the more formal term extra terrestrials. So, he'll probably hammer that home to us a little later on in the program, when he's here.
It's been said the Raelians want to build an embassy to welcome back the aliens which, I guess, is nice. And there are reports that they built a sort of a theme park in Canada called UFO Land, to practice what they called meditation. Which I think I've seen on one of those late-night HBO documentaries. But the center of the Raelians' worldview can be summed up by the title of their groundbreaking manifesto, "Yes to Human Cloning" -- Anderson.
SECOND ANDERSON COOPER: Thanks, Anderson.
They believe cloning is the key to eternal life. And now they say they've ushered forth the Baby Eve, the first cloned baby, a girl. Actually, they say they've cloned a baby. The first question is whether Rael is for real.
Then there are the more ethical questions than the universe has stars. Is the truth out there? Too bad the "X-files" was canceled -- Anderson.
COOPER: Thanks very much, Anderson.
And so we begin with that story, the claim of a real-life human clone, with the best person we have to give us a reality check, the doctor, our doctor, Sanjay Gupta.
Sanjay, the headline?
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Science fiction or fact? The world's first human clone, did this really just happen? We don't know. We're going to tell you what we do know and more importantly what we don't -- Anderson.
COOPER: All right. Back to you in a moment.
On to the situation involving North Korea. Sohn Jie-Ae is in Seoul once again for us.
Jie-Ae, a headline?
SOHN JIE-AE, CNN INT'L CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Anderson, North Korea has managed to raise the nuclear stakes one more time by say it is kicking out U.N. inspectors from its nuclear facilities. South Korea has harsh words, but still is hoping for a peaceful resolution.
Back to you, Anderson.
COOPER: The reaction from the White House tonight, in terms of North Korea. Suzanne Malveaux is in Crawford, Texas.
Suzanne, the headline, please.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, the U.S. is reiterating again that it wants a peaceful resolution with North Korea, but the administration insisting that it refuses to negotiate in response to North Korea's threats or broken promises.
COOPER: Now onto Michael Okwu and a story about the remnants of 9/11 destined for a new place in our history.
Michael, the headline?
MICHAEL OKWU, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, steel from the wreckage of the World Trade Center was hauled off from New York to Pascagoula, Mississippi today, where it will be melted down and made into the hull of a U.S. warship -- Anderson.
COOPER: It is a fascinating story. We'll be back to you shortly, back with all of you in a moment, in fact.
Also coming up, we'll talk with Rael and one of his bishops, who is also his director of science for the cloning effort. And we'll talk with bioethicist Art Caplan, who has some choice words for what the Raelians are doing.
And have you been to the movies lately? Such life affirming, family fare isn't it? Just perfect for the holidays. We'll look at what's happening at the multiplex, more Freddie Kruger than Julie Andrews, we thought.
But you can forget "Gangs of New York" with this story. This story is about Foodies of New York, a much more civilized bunch they say. We'll take a tour of New York restaurants history with a man feared by all Manhattan chefs, Food Critic William Grimes.
All of that to come, but first the Baby Eve, her birth announcement today either a very big deal or a very big hoax. We don't know the answer to that. We are not going to know for days or longer perhaps. In fact, all we have are the claims of a new age religious group with some pretty novel ideas about a lot of things.
For the moment let's take one of the claims at face value. They say there's a brand new baby girl out there in the world tonight. They say she has her mother's eyes. And we suppose, no idea of all the fuss is about. This little girl, if she exists, doesn't know from cloning or the priests and politicians grappling with this issue. At least for now she appears to be the lucky one. Here again CNN's Sanjay Gupta.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRIGITTE BOISSELIER, CEO, CLONAID: I'm very, very pleased to announce that the first baby clone is born. She was born yesterday at 11:55 a.m.
GUPTA (voice over): The scientific director of a group called Clonaid claims the clone, a baby girl named Eve is healthy, weighing in at seven pounds.
BOISSELIER: She is doing real fine and the parents are happy.
GUPTA: But the announcement brought outrage almost immediately from cloning experts.
DR. ROBERT LANZA, ADVANCED CELL TECHNOLOGIES: Without any scientific data, one has to be very skeptical. This is a group, again, that has no scientific track record. They've never published a single scientific paper in this area. They have no research experience in this area. In fact, they've never even cloned a mouse or a rabbit.
GUPTA: They think it's really, really dangerous to try and do this. Why did do you this?
BOISSELIER: Through the years I started to have requests from parents who would like to have a child. Infertile couples, homosexual couples, sing individuals or people with AIDS or all kinds of people who would like to benefit from this service.
GUPTA: Although, Dr. Boisselier came with reasons, she came without any proof. No baby, no pictures, now scientific tests.
BOISSELIER: You should have the answer and all proof that you request in eight or nine days from now.
GUPTA: Clonaid was founded by a controversial group called the Raelians. They call themselves a religion. They follow the teaching Rael, who preaches that all human life was created by aliens. And they want to clone to become immortal.
RAEL, RAELIAN MOVEMENT LEADER: Your memory, your personality -- and to download it into a clone of yourself, an adult clone. That's the secret, the key toward eternal life. When you die, you wake up in a young body. That's the ultimate goal.
GUPTA: In addition to Eve, they claim other clones are on the way.
BOISSELIER: The first one was born yesterday. The next one is due in Europe next week. So it's very close. And the three others will be by the end of January.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GUPTA: Now if everything works out just as Dr. Boisselier plans, 20 more implantations will occur in January. Also, they plan on putting these cloning clinics on every continent in the world. That's their final plan.
It's not illegal, but many scientists think it's probably unethical. All of us, we're just waiting for the proof. We don't have it yet.
COOPER: Unethical, because right now the science that exists out there, I mean, we know that clonings of mammals that have been done have severe congenital defects? And that's why it is unethical?
GUPTA: That's right. We're sort of mixing science and ethics here, to a certain extent. But most agree they weren't just ready to do this yet. It took 276 attempts before you got Dolly. What you didn't see were all these sort of miss-attempts, all the damaged, defective dead sheep that actually came out of that. Is that what we're going see in human beings as well?
Not to mention, this particular organization has never cloned anything. Many people think it was irresponsible for them as their first attempt to try to clone a human.
COOPER: So, theoretically, there were dead and damaged babies before this baby was actually born?
GUPTA: We don't know. What she's told us -- and I actually talked to Dr. Boisselier earlier as well. She said they tried 10 implantations, of which five actually went on to a viable pregnancy, the first one being born yesterday at 11:55. That's the number she's giving us.
But Anderson, it is all a bit of a black box, because, you know, we haven't seen anything.
COOPER: Right.
GUPTA: There is no baby, no picture, no scientific tests.
COOPER: All right. Dr. Gupta, thanks very much. A little bit later on in the program we'll be talking to the founder of the Raelians and the woman who headed up the cloning effort. That's right, Rael and Brigitte Boisselier, bioethicist Art Caplan also weighs in after that.
For the moment, though, we shift our focus from one kind of nucleus to another, from biology to physics, from North America to North Korea. Also, how often do we get a chance to go from Sanjay to Sohn Jie-Ae? Because we can, we do. Here she is once again from Seoul.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SOHN (voice-over): North Korea said it was booting out U.N. inspectors from its suspected nuclear facilities. But the head inspector is appealing to the government to let them stay.
MELISSA FLEMING, IAEA SPOKESMAN: We are expecting a response from North Korea. At the moment our inspectors are staying put. They are awaiting further instructions. They have been informed locally about the decision. They're aware of Mr. El Baradei measures here and are standing by.
SOHN: International Atomic Energy Agency director Mohammed El Baradei said this is one step away from diffusing the crisis and called upon the North to let the inspectors stay as well as reinstall the monitoring equipment.
The North also said it was getting ready to reactivate a laboratory that Washington suspects could be used to reprocess the spent fuel rods into weapons grade plutonium.
Adding to rising tensions in the Korean Peninsula, the U.S.-led U.N. command said North Korea had violated the armistice that halted the Korean War by bringing machine guns into the buffer zone separating the two Koreas, a charge that the North has previously denied.
Diffusing this escalating crisis was very much the topic of an emergency national Security Council meeting in South Korea . The council members called the recent moves a grave threat to the peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SOHN: South Korea wants to send a message to North Korea directly. A ministerial talk between the two Koreas are scheduled for early next year. And other inter-Korean projects so far have continued without major disruptions. So such contacts have many South Korean officials here hoping still for a peaceful resolution.
Back to you, Anderson.
COOPER: Jie-Ae, this story is being seen here in the United States as a story of escalation. Is there a sense of escalation on the Korean Peninsula? SOHN: There is. South Koreans here are looking very concerned. They're worried about this escalating. They still think North Korea is playing a very dangerous poker game, that they're upping the ante, trying to get Washington to negotiate, to offer concessions to North Korea. But South Koreans here are very concerned that North Korea may not be knowing exactly what kind of card they have been dealt with and may be playing a losing game. That's the concern here in South Korea , Anderson.
COOPER: All right, Sohn Jie-Ae, thanks very much.
Now to the White House to get their take from Eastern and Central time zones, President Bush at the ranch, his national security planners back in Washington. With the focus, these days, shifting back and forth from Iraq to North Korea. Here again, CNN's Suzanne Malveaux.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: The president's national security team left the White House after a meeting on North Korea with the Bush administration spokesman saying, quote, We will not negotiate in response to threats or broken commitments. We call on the regime in North Korea to reverse its current course, Scott McCullum (ph), told reporters to take all steps necessary to come into compliance with its IAEA safeguards agreement and to eliminate it's nuclear weapons program in a verifiable manner.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: This is the ineptness of the North Koreans who have never understood how to have a dialogue. They believe they have to try to intimidate the rest of the world and push us into this dialogue. And, of course, it is not going to work.
MALVEAUX: Washington plans to send an envoy, likely to be Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly, to South Korea as early as next week for urgent consultations with the present leadership and the new president elect. The moves about North Korea's Kim Jung Il are described at the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency as nuclear brinkmanship.
MOHAMMED EL BARADEI, U.N., INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY: I hope they will understand that countries are not ready to negotiate under threat or under blackmail. And they should take the first step to come into compliance with their non-proliferation obligation.
MALVEAUX: The IAEA board will meet in just over a week. U.S. officials believe that agency may ask the U.N. Security Council to impose stiff sanctions against North Korea, letting the U.N. take the lead on North Korea, analysts note, could leave the U.S. free to deal with Iraq.
PETER BROOKES, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: There's a lot of things going on. We shouldn't get too caught new the public rhetoric. There's a lot of things going on behind the scenes diplomatically and quietly that could be very productive. (END VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: Now, contrary to some reports the U.S. intelligence officials tell CNN that North Korea does not have the capability of producing a new nuclear weapon before the end of the year -- Anderson.
COOPER: Suzanne, it seems like in the past week or two, the White House has been trying to play down this story. Is that still the case? Or is there a growing sense of escalation in the Crawford White House?
MALVEAUX: The White House definitely feels that it has time on its hands in terms of diplomacy working, because they feel that -- contrary to some reports and that is they said within the year, that they would be able to go ahead and develop a new nuclear weapon -- that the White House administration does not believe that that really is the case. That they can allow economic as well as diplomatic pressure by working with our allies to really make North Korea comply. North Korea is in a very delicate situation.
Of course, they are going to be facing a harsh winter as well as starvation of some of its people. It's in economic dire straits. They believe it will eventually cooperate, but again, the United States needs help from our allies, Russia, Japan, South Korea , as well as China.
COOPER: All right, Suzanne Malveaux, thanks very much tonight.
What options are open to the president? We're joined by one man who may have some idea, James Lilley, former ambassador to South Korea, former ambassador to China, and a long-time student of East Asian affairs. .
Thanks for being with us, Mr. Ambassador.
JAMES LILLEY, FRMR. AMB. SOUTH KOREA: Thanks.
COOPER: How serious do you perceive the threat from North Korea to be?
LILLEY: The threat from North Korea is manageable, but there's always a large variable in this. They have got probably one Fat Boy type nuclear weapon, the kind that was dropped on Hiroshima. They have really no delivery system yet. They have the great threat of conventional warfare.
But let me make two points to you, right now. The first point is this, we close off the military option. There is no military option for them -- or for us. If they ever go ...
COOPER: And you say that because?
LILLEY: Pardon?
COOPER: You say, there's no military option for the United States regarding, vis-a-vis North Korea? LILLEY: No, there isn't. There isn't. If you go militarily into North Korea you're going to cause incredible damage to South Korea. They're dead set against it. And we can't do it without their support.
At the same time, we're going to say to North Korea if you ever get involved in military provocation that's serious. That's the end of you. President Clinton said this in 1993. I'm sure we reiterate it now.
Let's just say the military option is off the table. Then you move over to the side where they are really vulnerable as your White House correspondent said, economically. They're going into a winter. They have screwed up completely their agriculture, they can't grow anything. They've let their money go into their military. They are very, very susceptible to this because they've been sucking on the lifeline from China, South Korea, Japan and us for the last eight years.
If it is cut off, they're very badly hurt. We have to play this very skillfully with them. Take out the military option, use their vulnerabilities to draw them in. And say, if you actually do these things we're asking you to do with your military, we are prepared to go into a full economic program for you, not a giveaway but a reciprocal transparent program.
COOPER: But when you look at the nuclear threats the United States faces now and may face 10 years down the road, do you see Iraq as more pressing than North Korea? North Korea, you said, we have a little time, I'm assuming, that's because as you said the delivery systems are not there yet.
LILLEY: Also the five-megawatt reactor isn't alive yet. Of they put the 7,000 rods in that, it produces six kilograms of plutonium, they need 8 for a bomb. They are quite a long way from having a bomb.
But it seems to me they are not a direct threat to the United States. They're a threat to our allies, Japan, South Korea, perhaps even Taiwan. That we must stop. We must stop their proliferation. We caught the ship shipping missiles to Yemen. We let it go through. And I think that was what probably gave them a little bit of encouragement to get tough. The next time, if they ever try to ship a nuclear weapon or something like this, the ship is caught, that's the end of it.
COOPER: Let me ask you about the larger picture. There are those critics that say by using that rhetoric, the axis of evil that the president used last year, in a sense the administration has created a very viable axis of evil that has nuclear capabilities or desires nuclear capabilities. Do you put any credence to that?
LILLEY: No, I don't. I think that's ridiculous.
COOPER: Because?
LILLEY: Because axis of evil is nothing compared to the millions of word of invective they pour out on us every day, every hour.
COOPER: You're talking about the North Koreans?
LILLEY: Onto the United States.
COOPER: Yes.
LILLEY: To take this one phrase and say this changes the balance, it's just not true. You can't change your policy on the basis of this. They were building the uranium enrichment bomb in 1998 four years before the axis of evil was even used. They have been trying to build a plutonium bomb probably since the 1980s, 30 years. They have a program to do this and they're going to try everything they can to keep this because they think their survival depends on it. A little phrase like this means nothing to them.
COOPER: Ambassador James Lilley, thank you for being here tonight.
LILLEY: Thank you.
Before we take a break, one other item Iraq. And another footnote, by the looks of it. Two navy carrier groups have gotten orders to prepare for quick deployment to the Gulf next month. Two amphibious assault groups got the call as well. So did units from five air force combat wings and thousands of U.S. soldiers. A source put the number at more than 25,000 but the Pentagon is not saying.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Even if you don't already hold strong views on cloning, you've probably formed some sort of opinion of our next guests tonight. They're not exactly strangers to controversy or the public eye. Brigitte Boisselier and Rael, join us tonight from Miami.
Thank you for being with us.
Ms. Boisselier, I'd like to start off with you, you've have offered no proof today, not evidence that you're company has actually cloned anybody or anything. You've not named any scientists involved in the effort, nor have you said where this effort took place. Why should anyone believe you?
BOISSELIER: Well, it's true that I haven't been presenting the scientists and the parents and everything, but you will agree with me that it would be hard right now to tell you this is a picture of the baby and this is the first baby clone. You will tell me give me the proof, and give me the proof. The press has been afraid and talking about defects and now they are talking about doubts.
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: No, I'm talking about evidence. Why do you not come forward with any evidence?
BOISSELIER: OK. So there will be evidence from an independent expert that has been hired by somebody else. I think it's the best proof that you can have. But, you know, I always told you that when the baby is born, you will know about it.
Today was my day. I told you the baby was born yesterday and you will have proof next week. You have the choice to treat me as fruit or not, or to doubt, but now or not. You'll have all the proof that you need from an independent expert in a week from now.
COOPER: OK. Rael do you have any concerns about the ethical implications about this? Just about every bioethicist you talk to say that the science really isn't there yet. That the mammals who have been cloned have congenital heart defects, kidney defects, lung defects. And often they do not show up until later in life. Is it fair to subject a child to this?
RAEL: I have no doubt that the child will be perfectly healthy. First of all, I want to say that the Clonaid company and the Rael Movement are two separate things. It's completely separate. I initiated the project at the beginning but the cloning company belongs to Dr. Boisselier.
I support her spiritually, philosophically, and religiously. And she is also a bishop in my organization. But it's completely separate. I don't know where is the laboratory. I don't know the name of the scientist. I don't know the child. And know nothing and I don't want to know.
I trust her. And I think I trust science. And I trust the possibility -- everybody in the world now is crazy about what if the child has a problem? What if? OK, I say what if the child is perfectly healthy and beautiful? I think opponents to cloning are more afraid of that than of default. They are more afraid of the success.
COOPER: What is the point, as you see it, of cloning?
RAEL: Right now cloning a baby is just a first step. For me it's not so important. It's a good step but my ultimate goal is give humanity eternal life through cloning. That's my goal.
COOPER: I've heard you say this before. You want to give humanity eternal life and that ultimately you believe people will be able to download their memories into the clone.
RAEL: Exactly.
COOPER: How is that going to happen?
RAEL: OK, I'll just give you an image. Right now we take a cell from your body. Then you can have cloning. You need nine month in the womb of a mother to have a child and then you need 18 years to have a clone copy adult of yourself. This is not so interesting. When we will discover soon accelerated growth process, which is to accelerate the multiplication and can you have an adult clone of yourself in a few hours with like a blank tape no memory, no personality, nothing, just the hardware, if you want, the body. Then the third step, which is the ultimate goal is to transfer download, upload, everything that makes you who you are, everything recorded here in your brain to download it when you die into an adult clone of yourself and then you can have eternal life through different bodies.
COOPER: Ms. Boisselier, let me bring you back in here. You have no track record in cloning either in humans or in mammals. How were you able to do this and do you have any ethical concerns?
BOISSELIER: OK, well, first of all, you have to realize that I'm the head of the company. I'm not the one playing with the joystick, even if I know how to do it. Actually, I learned how to do it. I have a team and I would say my strength is probably to select the people and to make sure that they work together and they work in the right direction.
COOPER: Will you tell us the names of any of the people involved in the process?
BOISSELIER: Well, they will when it's ready. And it's not easy right now to face the public and say I was the one who did the cloning. You have to respect that. You know, the publications are all written and we are ready to send that out. The only debate we had with the scientists and this week, and the week before, is when do we do that? Because the moment we do that, their name will be known and for some of them it can be a problem.
COOPER: We only have about 20 seconds left, my understanding is that you say there are four more babies that will soon be born. Is that correct?
BOISSELIER: This is correct. The next one is due in a week in Europe and there are three others by the end of January and just early February. So I'm very pleased. And after the five births, then I will proceed with 20 new cases and hopefully many cases by June all over the world. That's the goal.
COOPER: Ms. Boisselier and Mr. Rael, thank you.
BOISSELIER: Thank you.
COOPER: Coming up on NEWSNIGHT, the players have had their say. When we come back, the ethics of it all.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: More on today's announcement involving the cloning of a human baby. One reaction came today from Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, who comes at this from two perspectives: He's a doctor and now the most powerful Republican in the Senate, replacing, of course, Trent Lott. Senator Frist had this to say, quote: "Today's announcement is disturbing. While its validity is unclear, it should serve as a chilling reminder that individuals are still trying to clone human beings. These actions offend our human sensibilities and undermine fundamental respect for the decency of human life. Today's announcement reinforces the need for Congress to continue its efforts to enact a ban on human cloning."
Again, the validity of this is unclear, but there's no doubt that the announcement alone is getting the politicians talking and the ethicists pondering. We want to do a little of that with Art Caplan. He's a bioethicist with the University of Pennsylvania. And he joins us now from Philadelphia. Thanks for being with us, Art.
ART CAPLAN, BIOETHICIST, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: Good evening.
COOPER: Your gut reaction to this story?
CAPLAN: Well, I'm still doubtful that we have got an actual cloned baby. I think that we have to wait for the proof. We had a lot of talk today, but no evidence, no genetic testing, no production of a picture of anything, no independent verification and no papers. So we'll see. We'll see. I have my doubts, too, that the skill required really to bring off cloning is there.
COOPER: Are you concerned about human cloning just theoretically?
CAPLAN: I am. I Have two concerns about human cloning. One is if you looked at animals, the outcomes have been miserable. You've got dead animals, dying animals, stillborn animals, and those born alive about a third of all species die within a year. If I came in and said I'm going to try a new drug, half the people who take it drop dead as soon as they take it, and out of the half that don't, a third of them are dead within a year, I couldn't get that experiment launched. And it seems to me the height of irresponsibility to see cloning being tried when that basically is the backdrop in the animal studies.
The other concern is, to make a clone, it's going to be psychologically burdensome on the child. You're going to look like somebody else, you're going to have to, if you will, know certain facts about what awaits you in terms of possible diseases, possible problems that you might encounter genetically, and that's going to narrow your freedom, narrow your ability to be who you want to be.
COOPER: There are those, as you know, who say, look, these are the same arguments that were made 20 years ago about test tube babies.
CAPLAN: I think some of these arguments were made about test tube babies. Some of them had some bite at the time in the sense in which we weren't really sure on animal studies that this was completely safe to try 20 years ago to do a test tube babies, but there were many, many more animal studies. The data was a mountain. Today, we have got a little anthill, and that's all the information we have about animal cloning.
So if we had as much as we had then on doing test tube baby work in animals, I'd be quieter about my safety concerns, about my worries that we're going to create a lot of dead and sick children.
COOPER: It does seem that whether it's this company or some other company, this is coming down the road. I mean, scientifically, it's somewhat viable. It can be argued over the fine points. It is coming. What from an ethicist's perspective, do you think the U.S. should do about it?
CAPLAN: Well, you know, the main problem here with cloning is that we're in the middle of a heated debate about abortion yet again. Because if we were just going to talk about making babies by cloning, we could have a ban on that tomorrow morning, and indeed the United Nations, despite the disparity of values and cultures there, could have a ban on that by next week.
The problem is that some people want to make cloning not to make babies but for research. They want to make embryos; they want to mine those embryos for cells and tissues to repair diseases, to fix disabilities. The administration, the Republicans in the Senate have basically said if we don't ban it all, we're not going to ban just reproductive clothing. We're not going to ban just the making of babies. I think we ought to ban the making of babies and then turn around and finish the debate about whether we're going to use cloning for research.
If we don't do that, we leave the door open to anyone and everybody who wants to to give it a try to make a baby.
COOPER: The FDA has said that they will investigate this. They're going to try to find out where this took place, and if they, in fact, have any jurisdiction over any of this. Is that solution, or is a solution something that has to come from Congress?
CAPLAN: The FDA is going to have a hard time regulating this. There is no drug, there is no device, there is no food. Exactly what their authority would be -- last time I heard Dr. Boisselier, she said they were outside the country. The FDA has a hard time extending authority there. This is a legislative matter. It's not an administrative matter. It's not even clear, to tell you the truth, that it's research. If you say you're going to treat infertile couples, I don't know that the FDA has a business there. Congress does. The administration does. That's the place to turn to get the at least a moratorium in place.
COOPER: And just to play devil's advocate, those who support this will say, look, there a lot of infertile couples, there are a lot of gay couples, whomever, who are in desperate need of this sort of thing.
CAPLAN: You know, no one's ever had a right to make a biological child that's 100 percent identical to them. At best we get to go for about 50 percent. You can use an egg donor, you can use a sperm donor. You can adopt. The world is full of kids that need homes. I'm not much moved by this argument that, hey, we've got to risk the death of babies in order to fix this problem of infertility. I think there are other ways to get after that.
COOPER: All right. Just hold on a moment. Still to come on NEWSNIGHT, we're going to try to bring Rael and Brigitte Boisselier back into our talk about the ethics of all this, so stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: More on cloning now and the ethical questions. Rael and his scientists wanted to join us -- join into the talk about the moral quandaries this all poses. So once again, here's Art Caplan in Philadelphia, and in Miami, Rael and Brigitte Boisselier. Thanks to you all for being here.
Rael, you heard what Mr. Kaplan said before the break. You wanted to respond.
RAEL: Yes. You know, this is a beautiful day for humanity. A creation of life. I don't understand -- ethical -- the word ethic is just an accumulation of outrageous prejudices. It's so incredible that today the most powerful country in the world is about to kill hundreds of thousands civilians in Iraq and nobody thinks about ethics, but when we give birth to a baby and nobody say if this birth is perfectly healthy and is possible, then they are afraid of that. I cannot believe.
COOPER: Art Caplan, your response?
CAPLAN: Well, I think there's more to ethics than just religious prejudices. I think at the end of the day, a powerful ethic in medicine is do no harm. What I worry about when people undertake to try cloning is not the miracle of life, I'm fine with that, I'm even fine with a healthy baby, however it gets here. But I worry a lot when you've got half the animals dead who have been cloned and another third of them dead after they've been born or sick, you have got a situation where you have to wonder what's the price of this pursuit of this miracle.
COOPER: Well, let's ask Mr. Boisselier. What was the price of this miracle?
BOISSELIER: I really want to respond to that, because I've been saying that all along and I'd like some experts to really confirm that because it's been too long.
Animal clonings defects have been observed also in IVF of the same species. When you do IVF of cow, you have defects, the exact same defect and you have when you do cloning of cow. Same thing with the mice. Same thing with the pigs. I'd like you to realize this is not a problem related to cloning, it's a problem related to assisted reproduction of the species. So when the people are saying, we have defects with cows. They implant everything. They don't shape (ph) the embryos. They have the same defect with IVF.
And if you look at that, that's not what we're doing with human being. We have expertise in IVF and we have been doing that for 24 years. We don't have defects in IVF and we don't have defects in human clones and this is -- we had the proof yesterday.
This baby is perfectly alive. So I'd like Art Caplan to just think about that and try to find other arguments. The fear, the defects and the yuck effect is over now. We have to have more rational discussion about the subject and try to think that there are parents who would like to have a child. This technology can give them child. It could give them hope and they have a lot of parents who have hopes about that. I hope you will consider that once in a while.
CAPLAN: You know, you're talking to the person who invented that term, the yuck factor, and I said it wasn't enough to just go around saying, Things made us revolted or things made us feel yucky. Lots of things have done that in the past that have turned out to be good things.
But IVF has proven to be a huge problem. About a third of the babies born through IVF are premature. They're not healthy because they wind up being prematurely born. It's been a huge problem in IVF. Cloning is worse.
This isn't a question of emotion or some kind of revulsion to the idea to making people in a new way. The question is, Why start until you can do it safely not just in cows and pigs but even in monkeys and primates? We haven't got that down. You know that. And that really leads us to the situation again of saying, Sure, we would like to help infertile couples but not at the price of risking babies' health who can't consent to it.
COOPER: We are going to have to leave it. We appreciate al involved. Art Caplan, Rael, Brigitte Boisselier.
CAPLAN: My pleasure.
COOPER: Thank you very much for coming in and speaking. It was really very fascinating.
RAEL: Thank you.
BOISSELIER: Thank you.
COOPER: Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, a tour of vintage New York dining when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Before 9/11, many in the United States had never heard of the Fresh Kills Landfill. But afterwards, of course, it because almost a household name. The place where the ruins of 9/11 ended up. The wedding rings, the fragments of a handbag maybe, the pieces of firetrucks.
And, of course, there were the stretches of steel that once made up the Twin Towers. The personal effects have gone back to families. For many of them, that is all they got.
Now some of the steel is going on to a new place to build something as steel should, building something for the war that began on that Tuesday morning.
Once again, here's Michael Okwu.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
OKWU (voice-over): They are both 7 foot wide, 12 foot long 15 ton fragments of steel. Remnants of the World Trade Center, vestiges of broken lives.
But now, perhaps, symbols of the nation's resilience.
The last steel fragments at this landfill in New York are destined for Pascagoula, Mississippi, where Northrop Grumman intends to use them to build an assault ship, the USS "New York."
DENNIS DIGGINS, DIRECTOR, FRESH KILLS LANDFILL: It was all Peal Harbor. To memorialize this and to have it as a tangible remembrance of what happened is fitting.
OKWU: Veteran firefighter Lee Ielpi needs little to help him remember. He lost his 29-year-old son, Jonathan.
Today, the thought of Twin Towers steel in a U.S. warship gives him comfort and resolve.
LEE IELPI, RETIRED FIREFIGHTER: From what I understand, the bough so it will always be plowing through the water first, looking for those people that think they can come at us but we're going to come at them first.
OKWU: The steel still needs to be tested for strength before it can be used for the ship. Officials here at the Intrepid Sea/Air/Space Museum contacted Northrop Grumman about using it.
Mark Albin of the Intrepid says there's a deep connection between the Intrepid's past and the attack on the World Trade Center.
On November 25, 1944, two kamikazes struck the Intrepid, then a war vessel. Sixty-nine crew members were killed, part of the reason why officials at the naval museum are proud to showcase a model of the USS "New York," what experts say will be an instrumental force in the fight against terrorism, the fifth of 12 ships in the Navy's San Antonio class, capable of transporting 800 Marines, amphibious vehicles.
MARK ALBIN, INTREPID MUSEUM: All the latest radar detection equipment, the missile launching devices and what have you -- it is the most technologically advanced vessel that the Navy has today.
OKWU: Since 9/11, much of the World Trade Center steel has been sold as scrap, or used for mourning and remembrance in cities all across the country.
This memorial stands over Ground Zero.
This one at a high school in Tennessee.
Lee Ielpi is eager to see the latest memorial put to use.
IELPI: I just hope we're able to accomplish what we're out to do and do it as quickly as we can.
OKWU: Every vessel in the Navy has a tag line or motto. The USS "New York"'s will be "Never forget."
(END VIDEOTAPE)
OKWU: No doubt that is a sentiment that many of the 9/11 families will are have in mind when this $800 million vessel is deployed to active duty in 2007 -- Anderson.
COOPER: I can understand why it gives so many families hope.
Who is it who determines how the steel is used, whether it's to this ship or other uses?
OKWU: Well, that's an interesting question. What happened was back when we were all getting ready to start remembering at the anniversary of 9/11 this past August, Governor George Pataki, of course of New York state, went forward to the Navy secretary and said, Look, would it be nice if we could have a naval vessel named after New York?
The Navy secretary signed off on it and then what happened is an executive of Northrop Grumman, of course the manufacturers of the ship, decided they wanted to use pieces of steel from the World Trade Center to make this ship and basically like minds came together. They all sort of collaborated and that was that.
COOPER: All right. It's a great story. Michael Okwu, thanks very much.
OKWU: Thanks.
COOPER: Well still ahead on NEWSNIGHT, how about a full gourmet meal for $1.50? Champagne pouring for pennies? Food from faraway China and something new called "The Menu." Join us as we look back at the history of dining in the city of New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Well, New York restaurant folks are paid to be unflappable, managing the most high maintenance diner with ease. But there's one diner who makes them all scramble. So picky, so powerful that restaurants spread the word of his alias if they figure it out so the next restaurant can avoid his wrath.
"New York Times" restaurant critic William Grimes. He's been moonlighting for the New York Public Library for a look back at New York dining history where, for the price of a subway ride today, you could get a full spread at the Four Season of centuries ago.
As you'll see, we will not blow his cover.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WILLIAM GRIMES, "NEW YORK TIMES" RESTAURANT CRITIC (voice-over): I'm William Grimes, restaurant critic of "The New York Times." And part of my job is to keep my face out of the public domain so that I can review restaurants anonymously.
The president of the library called me up out of the blue about a year and a half ago and asked me to organize an exhibition that would show of the menu collection.
When you go back, you could see that they really applied some artistic thought to the menus when they put them together in the old days.
If you came to New York in 1825, you would be hard pressed to find a meal worthy of the name. Del Monaco's changed everything. It had a menu, for one thing. Restaurants didn't have men use before that.
I think what most people will find striking about the exhibition, first is the difference in cost of eating out 100 years ago and now. A three-course at a fine restaurant for $1.50. I think that's astounding.
One of the pleasures of doing the exhibition was discovering how diverse ethnic dining has always been in New York. Starting in the 1880s, the most adventurous could go to this new place called Chinatown. Once people conquered their fear of going into this very strange, exotic world, they discovered that Chinese food was awfully good.
Let's see where this is. I have to say that almost anything was an excuse for a big meal in New York. And in 1890, ladies' prize bowling was an event that deserved its own dinner.
On this great evening, they started out with blue point oysters, had consume and an assortment of relishes. We would not even pay for these relishes today.
Back before, just when Times Square was getting started around 1904, the champagne flowed by the gallon. Lobsters and steaks were on the menu. These were the kind of places you would go, if you were a man, you would probably not take your wife. You would you take a chorus girl. You would take a big bankroll. You would probably regret it deeply.
The 21 Club started out down in the Village as a little speakeasy where they would pour you your gin in a tea cup and you could pretend that you were taking afternoon tea.
Not everybody was eating squab or woodcock on toast. Father Divine was a charismatic preacher, who established what he called peace missions, hundreds of them in the height of the Depression.
I think the postwar period is a fascinating study for the attempts to recapture some of the glamour of fine dining in New York as it existed before prohibition. The first modern-- truly modern restaurants start appearing in New York. Restaurant associates came up with one of the most audacious restaurants in New York in the mid 70's, Windows on the World. 107 stories atop the World Trade Center. For those who took the ride up, it was shocking to be up there and eat. Really up there floating in the clouds.
The most interesting thing to me was the sense of continuity and dining in New York. Not the specifics of certain ethnic foods or certain types of restaurant, but the overall sense that New York was always a city whose population loved to eat out and was restless and adventurous, would seek out exotic cuisines and if they looked, those cuisines were there in a way that no other city could offer.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: I don't know about you, but I'm hungry right now. Thanks for joining us for NEWSNIGHT.
Aaron Brown will be back on Monday night. Have a great weekend, everyone.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
U.N. Inspectors Out; Steel From WTC Wreckage to Become Warship>
Aired December 27, 2002 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANDERSON COOPER, GUEST HOST: Good evening, everyone. I'm Anderson Cooper in for Aaron Brown, who is off tonight. He'll be back on Monday. Don't worry. I promise.
So, I don't know about you but this whole cloning story in the news -- all day I've had this tune stuck in my head.
It is a case so out of this world, Scully and Mulder couldn't even figure it out. Now, is it just me? Or does the guy at the center of this cloning kurfafel (ph), look a little bit like Beldar. You know, Beldar Conehead from the old S&L. "We are from France." This guy, too, is from France, just like Beldar.
This guy calls himself Rael. Actually, that what he says the four-foot tall alien called him back in the early 1970s, when he revealed to Rael the secret of human life. Which is that alien scientists created all of us through cloning.
I'm sorry, did I say alien? Rael and his followers seem to prefer the more formal term extra terrestrials. So, he'll probably hammer that home to us a little later on in the program, when he's here.
It's been said the Raelians want to build an embassy to welcome back the aliens which, I guess, is nice. And there are reports that they built a sort of a theme park in Canada called UFO Land, to practice what they called meditation. Which I think I've seen on one of those late-night HBO documentaries. But the center of the Raelians' worldview can be summed up by the title of their groundbreaking manifesto, "Yes to Human Cloning" -- Anderson.
SECOND ANDERSON COOPER: Thanks, Anderson.
They believe cloning is the key to eternal life. And now they say they've ushered forth the Baby Eve, the first cloned baby, a girl. Actually, they say they've cloned a baby. The first question is whether Rael is for real.
Then there are the more ethical questions than the universe has stars. Is the truth out there? Too bad the "X-files" was canceled -- Anderson.
COOPER: Thanks very much, Anderson.
And so we begin with that story, the claim of a real-life human clone, with the best person we have to give us a reality check, the doctor, our doctor, Sanjay Gupta.
Sanjay, the headline?
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Science fiction or fact? The world's first human clone, did this really just happen? We don't know. We're going to tell you what we do know and more importantly what we don't -- Anderson.
COOPER: All right. Back to you in a moment.
On to the situation involving North Korea. Sohn Jie-Ae is in Seoul once again for us.
Jie-Ae, a headline?
SOHN JIE-AE, CNN INT'L CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Anderson, North Korea has managed to raise the nuclear stakes one more time by say it is kicking out U.N. inspectors from its nuclear facilities. South Korea has harsh words, but still is hoping for a peaceful resolution.
Back to you, Anderson.
COOPER: The reaction from the White House tonight, in terms of North Korea. Suzanne Malveaux is in Crawford, Texas.
Suzanne, the headline, please.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, the U.S. is reiterating again that it wants a peaceful resolution with North Korea, but the administration insisting that it refuses to negotiate in response to North Korea's threats or broken promises.
COOPER: Now onto Michael Okwu and a story about the remnants of 9/11 destined for a new place in our history.
Michael, the headline?
MICHAEL OKWU, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, steel from the wreckage of the World Trade Center was hauled off from New York to Pascagoula, Mississippi today, where it will be melted down and made into the hull of a U.S. warship -- Anderson.
COOPER: It is a fascinating story. We'll be back to you shortly, back with all of you in a moment, in fact.
Also coming up, we'll talk with Rael and one of his bishops, who is also his director of science for the cloning effort. And we'll talk with bioethicist Art Caplan, who has some choice words for what the Raelians are doing.
And have you been to the movies lately? Such life affirming, family fare isn't it? Just perfect for the holidays. We'll look at what's happening at the multiplex, more Freddie Kruger than Julie Andrews, we thought.
But you can forget "Gangs of New York" with this story. This story is about Foodies of New York, a much more civilized bunch they say. We'll take a tour of New York restaurants history with a man feared by all Manhattan chefs, Food Critic William Grimes.
All of that to come, but first the Baby Eve, her birth announcement today either a very big deal or a very big hoax. We don't know the answer to that. We are not going to know for days or longer perhaps. In fact, all we have are the claims of a new age religious group with some pretty novel ideas about a lot of things.
For the moment let's take one of the claims at face value. They say there's a brand new baby girl out there in the world tonight. They say she has her mother's eyes. And we suppose, no idea of all the fuss is about. This little girl, if she exists, doesn't know from cloning or the priests and politicians grappling with this issue. At least for now she appears to be the lucky one. Here again CNN's Sanjay Gupta.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRIGITTE BOISSELIER, CEO, CLONAID: I'm very, very pleased to announce that the first baby clone is born. She was born yesterday at 11:55 a.m.
GUPTA (voice over): The scientific director of a group called Clonaid claims the clone, a baby girl named Eve is healthy, weighing in at seven pounds.
BOISSELIER: She is doing real fine and the parents are happy.
GUPTA: But the announcement brought outrage almost immediately from cloning experts.
DR. ROBERT LANZA, ADVANCED CELL TECHNOLOGIES: Without any scientific data, one has to be very skeptical. This is a group, again, that has no scientific track record. They've never published a single scientific paper in this area. They have no research experience in this area. In fact, they've never even cloned a mouse or a rabbit.
GUPTA: They think it's really, really dangerous to try and do this. Why did do you this?
BOISSELIER: Through the years I started to have requests from parents who would like to have a child. Infertile couples, homosexual couples, sing individuals or people with AIDS or all kinds of people who would like to benefit from this service.
GUPTA: Although, Dr. Boisselier came with reasons, she came without any proof. No baby, no pictures, now scientific tests.
BOISSELIER: You should have the answer and all proof that you request in eight or nine days from now.
GUPTA: Clonaid was founded by a controversial group called the Raelians. They call themselves a religion. They follow the teaching Rael, who preaches that all human life was created by aliens. And they want to clone to become immortal.
RAEL, RAELIAN MOVEMENT LEADER: Your memory, your personality -- and to download it into a clone of yourself, an adult clone. That's the secret, the key toward eternal life. When you die, you wake up in a young body. That's the ultimate goal.
GUPTA: In addition to Eve, they claim other clones are on the way.
BOISSELIER: The first one was born yesterday. The next one is due in Europe next week. So it's very close. And the three others will be by the end of January.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GUPTA: Now if everything works out just as Dr. Boisselier plans, 20 more implantations will occur in January. Also, they plan on putting these cloning clinics on every continent in the world. That's their final plan.
It's not illegal, but many scientists think it's probably unethical. All of us, we're just waiting for the proof. We don't have it yet.
COOPER: Unethical, because right now the science that exists out there, I mean, we know that clonings of mammals that have been done have severe congenital defects? And that's why it is unethical?
GUPTA: That's right. We're sort of mixing science and ethics here, to a certain extent. But most agree they weren't just ready to do this yet. It took 276 attempts before you got Dolly. What you didn't see were all these sort of miss-attempts, all the damaged, defective dead sheep that actually came out of that. Is that what we're going see in human beings as well?
Not to mention, this particular organization has never cloned anything. Many people think it was irresponsible for them as their first attempt to try to clone a human.
COOPER: So, theoretically, there were dead and damaged babies before this baby was actually born?
GUPTA: We don't know. What she's told us -- and I actually talked to Dr. Boisselier earlier as well. She said they tried 10 implantations, of which five actually went on to a viable pregnancy, the first one being born yesterday at 11:55. That's the number she's giving us.
But Anderson, it is all a bit of a black box, because, you know, we haven't seen anything.
COOPER: Right.
GUPTA: There is no baby, no picture, no scientific tests.
COOPER: All right. Dr. Gupta, thanks very much. A little bit later on in the program we'll be talking to the founder of the Raelians and the woman who headed up the cloning effort. That's right, Rael and Brigitte Boisselier, bioethicist Art Caplan also weighs in after that.
For the moment, though, we shift our focus from one kind of nucleus to another, from biology to physics, from North America to North Korea. Also, how often do we get a chance to go from Sanjay to Sohn Jie-Ae? Because we can, we do. Here she is once again from Seoul.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SOHN (voice-over): North Korea said it was booting out U.N. inspectors from its suspected nuclear facilities. But the head inspector is appealing to the government to let them stay.
MELISSA FLEMING, IAEA SPOKESMAN: We are expecting a response from North Korea. At the moment our inspectors are staying put. They are awaiting further instructions. They have been informed locally about the decision. They're aware of Mr. El Baradei measures here and are standing by.
SOHN: International Atomic Energy Agency director Mohammed El Baradei said this is one step away from diffusing the crisis and called upon the North to let the inspectors stay as well as reinstall the monitoring equipment.
The North also said it was getting ready to reactivate a laboratory that Washington suspects could be used to reprocess the spent fuel rods into weapons grade plutonium.
Adding to rising tensions in the Korean Peninsula, the U.S.-led U.N. command said North Korea had violated the armistice that halted the Korean War by bringing machine guns into the buffer zone separating the two Koreas, a charge that the North has previously denied.
Diffusing this escalating crisis was very much the topic of an emergency national Security Council meeting in South Korea . The council members called the recent moves a grave threat to the peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SOHN: South Korea wants to send a message to North Korea directly. A ministerial talk between the two Koreas are scheduled for early next year. And other inter-Korean projects so far have continued without major disruptions. So such contacts have many South Korean officials here hoping still for a peaceful resolution.
Back to you, Anderson.
COOPER: Jie-Ae, this story is being seen here in the United States as a story of escalation. Is there a sense of escalation on the Korean Peninsula? SOHN: There is. South Koreans here are looking very concerned. They're worried about this escalating. They still think North Korea is playing a very dangerous poker game, that they're upping the ante, trying to get Washington to negotiate, to offer concessions to North Korea. But South Koreans here are very concerned that North Korea may not be knowing exactly what kind of card they have been dealt with and may be playing a losing game. That's the concern here in South Korea , Anderson.
COOPER: All right, Sohn Jie-Ae, thanks very much.
Now to the White House to get their take from Eastern and Central time zones, President Bush at the ranch, his national security planners back in Washington. With the focus, these days, shifting back and forth from Iraq to North Korea. Here again, CNN's Suzanne Malveaux.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: The president's national security team left the White House after a meeting on North Korea with the Bush administration spokesman saying, quote, We will not negotiate in response to threats or broken commitments. We call on the regime in North Korea to reverse its current course, Scott McCullum (ph), told reporters to take all steps necessary to come into compliance with its IAEA safeguards agreement and to eliminate it's nuclear weapons program in a verifiable manner.
GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: This is the ineptness of the North Koreans who have never understood how to have a dialogue. They believe they have to try to intimidate the rest of the world and push us into this dialogue. And, of course, it is not going to work.
MALVEAUX: Washington plans to send an envoy, likely to be Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly, to South Korea as early as next week for urgent consultations with the present leadership and the new president elect. The moves about North Korea's Kim Jung Il are described at the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency as nuclear brinkmanship.
MOHAMMED EL BARADEI, U.N., INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY: I hope they will understand that countries are not ready to negotiate under threat or under blackmail. And they should take the first step to come into compliance with their non-proliferation obligation.
MALVEAUX: The IAEA board will meet in just over a week. U.S. officials believe that agency may ask the U.N. Security Council to impose stiff sanctions against North Korea, letting the U.N. take the lead on North Korea, analysts note, could leave the U.S. free to deal with Iraq.
PETER BROOKES, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: There's a lot of things going on. We shouldn't get too caught new the public rhetoric. There's a lot of things going on behind the scenes diplomatically and quietly that could be very productive. (END VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: Now, contrary to some reports the U.S. intelligence officials tell CNN that North Korea does not have the capability of producing a new nuclear weapon before the end of the year -- Anderson.
COOPER: Suzanne, it seems like in the past week or two, the White House has been trying to play down this story. Is that still the case? Or is there a growing sense of escalation in the Crawford White House?
MALVEAUX: The White House definitely feels that it has time on its hands in terms of diplomacy working, because they feel that -- contrary to some reports and that is they said within the year, that they would be able to go ahead and develop a new nuclear weapon -- that the White House administration does not believe that that really is the case. That they can allow economic as well as diplomatic pressure by working with our allies to really make North Korea comply. North Korea is in a very delicate situation.
Of course, they are going to be facing a harsh winter as well as starvation of some of its people. It's in economic dire straits. They believe it will eventually cooperate, but again, the United States needs help from our allies, Russia, Japan, South Korea , as well as China.
COOPER: All right, Suzanne Malveaux, thanks very much tonight.
What options are open to the president? We're joined by one man who may have some idea, James Lilley, former ambassador to South Korea, former ambassador to China, and a long-time student of East Asian affairs. .
Thanks for being with us, Mr. Ambassador.
JAMES LILLEY, FRMR. AMB. SOUTH KOREA: Thanks.
COOPER: How serious do you perceive the threat from North Korea to be?
LILLEY: The threat from North Korea is manageable, but there's always a large variable in this. They have got probably one Fat Boy type nuclear weapon, the kind that was dropped on Hiroshima. They have really no delivery system yet. They have the great threat of conventional warfare.
But let me make two points to you, right now. The first point is this, we close off the military option. There is no military option for them -- or for us. If they ever go ...
COOPER: And you say that because?
LILLEY: Pardon?
COOPER: You say, there's no military option for the United States regarding, vis-a-vis North Korea? LILLEY: No, there isn't. There isn't. If you go militarily into North Korea you're going to cause incredible damage to South Korea. They're dead set against it. And we can't do it without their support.
At the same time, we're going to say to North Korea if you ever get involved in military provocation that's serious. That's the end of you. President Clinton said this in 1993. I'm sure we reiterate it now.
Let's just say the military option is off the table. Then you move over to the side where they are really vulnerable as your White House correspondent said, economically. They're going into a winter. They have screwed up completely their agriculture, they can't grow anything. They've let their money go into their military. They are very, very susceptible to this because they've been sucking on the lifeline from China, South Korea, Japan and us for the last eight years.
If it is cut off, they're very badly hurt. We have to play this very skillfully with them. Take out the military option, use their vulnerabilities to draw them in. And say, if you actually do these things we're asking you to do with your military, we are prepared to go into a full economic program for you, not a giveaway but a reciprocal transparent program.
COOPER: But when you look at the nuclear threats the United States faces now and may face 10 years down the road, do you see Iraq as more pressing than North Korea? North Korea, you said, we have a little time, I'm assuming, that's because as you said the delivery systems are not there yet.
LILLEY: Also the five-megawatt reactor isn't alive yet. Of they put the 7,000 rods in that, it produces six kilograms of plutonium, they need 8 for a bomb. They are quite a long way from having a bomb.
But it seems to me they are not a direct threat to the United States. They're a threat to our allies, Japan, South Korea, perhaps even Taiwan. That we must stop. We must stop their proliferation. We caught the ship shipping missiles to Yemen. We let it go through. And I think that was what probably gave them a little bit of encouragement to get tough. The next time, if they ever try to ship a nuclear weapon or something like this, the ship is caught, that's the end of it.
COOPER: Let me ask you about the larger picture. There are those critics that say by using that rhetoric, the axis of evil that the president used last year, in a sense the administration has created a very viable axis of evil that has nuclear capabilities or desires nuclear capabilities. Do you put any credence to that?
LILLEY: No, I don't. I think that's ridiculous.
COOPER: Because?
LILLEY: Because axis of evil is nothing compared to the millions of word of invective they pour out on us every day, every hour.
COOPER: You're talking about the North Koreans?
LILLEY: Onto the United States.
COOPER: Yes.
LILLEY: To take this one phrase and say this changes the balance, it's just not true. You can't change your policy on the basis of this. They were building the uranium enrichment bomb in 1998 four years before the axis of evil was even used. They have been trying to build a plutonium bomb probably since the 1980s, 30 years. They have a program to do this and they're going to try everything they can to keep this because they think their survival depends on it. A little phrase like this means nothing to them.
COOPER: Ambassador James Lilley, thank you for being here tonight.
LILLEY: Thank you.
Before we take a break, one other item Iraq. And another footnote, by the looks of it. Two navy carrier groups have gotten orders to prepare for quick deployment to the Gulf next month. Two amphibious assault groups got the call as well. So did units from five air force combat wings and thousands of U.S. soldiers. A source put the number at more than 25,000 but the Pentagon is not saying.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Even if you don't already hold strong views on cloning, you've probably formed some sort of opinion of our next guests tonight. They're not exactly strangers to controversy or the public eye. Brigitte Boisselier and Rael, join us tonight from Miami.
Thank you for being with us.
Ms. Boisselier, I'd like to start off with you, you've have offered no proof today, not evidence that you're company has actually cloned anybody or anything. You've not named any scientists involved in the effort, nor have you said where this effort took place. Why should anyone believe you?
BOISSELIER: Well, it's true that I haven't been presenting the scientists and the parents and everything, but you will agree with me that it would be hard right now to tell you this is a picture of the baby and this is the first baby clone. You will tell me give me the proof, and give me the proof. The press has been afraid and talking about defects and now they are talking about doubts.
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: No, I'm talking about evidence. Why do you not come forward with any evidence?
BOISSELIER: OK. So there will be evidence from an independent expert that has been hired by somebody else. I think it's the best proof that you can have. But, you know, I always told you that when the baby is born, you will know about it.
Today was my day. I told you the baby was born yesterday and you will have proof next week. You have the choice to treat me as fruit or not, or to doubt, but now or not. You'll have all the proof that you need from an independent expert in a week from now.
COOPER: OK. Rael do you have any concerns about the ethical implications about this? Just about every bioethicist you talk to say that the science really isn't there yet. That the mammals who have been cloned have congenital heart defects, kidney defects, lung defects. And often they do not show up until later in life. Is it fair to subject a child to this?
RAEL: I have no doubt that the child will be perfectly healthy. First of all, I want to say that the Clonaid company and the Rael Movement are two separate things. It's completely separate. I initiated the project at the beginning but the cloning company belongs to Dr. Boisselier.
I support her spiritually, philosophically, and religiously. And she is also a bishop in my organization. But it's completely separate. I don't know where is the laboratory. I don't know the name of the scientist. I don't know the child. And know nothing and I don't want to know.
I trust her. And I think I trust science. And I trust the possibility -- everybody in the world now is crazy about what if the child has a problem? What if? OK, I say what if the child is perfectly healthy and beautiful? I think opponents to cloning are more afraid of that than of default. They are more afraid of the success.
COOPER: What is the point, as you see it, of cloning?
RAEL: Right now cloning a baby is just a first step. For me it's not so important. It's a good step but my ultimate goal is give humanity eternal life through cloning. That's my goal.
COOPER: I've heard you say this before. You want to give humanity eternal life and that ultimately you believe people will be able to download their memories into the clone.
RAEL: Exactly.
COOPER: How is that going to happen?
RAEL: OK, I'll just give you an image. Right now we take a cell from your body. Then you can have cloning. You need nine month in the womb of a mother to have a child and then you need 18 years to have a clone copy adult of yourself. This is not so interesting. When we will discover soon accelerated growth process, which is to accelerate the multiplication and can you have an adult clone of yourself in a few hours with like a blank tape no memory, no personality, nothing, just the hardware, if you want, the body. Then the third step, which is the ultimate goal is to transfer download, upload, everything that makes you who you are, everything recorded here in your brain to download it when you die into an adult clone of yourself and then you can have eternal life through different bodies.
COOPER: Ms. Boisselier, let me bring you back in here. You have no track record in cloning either in humans or in mammals. How were you able to do this and do you have any ethical concerns?
BOISSELIER: OK, well, first of all, you have to realize that I'm the head of the company. I'm not the one playing with the joystick, even if I know how to do it. Actually, I learned how to do it. I have a team and I would say my strength is probably to select the people and to make sure that they work together and they work in the right direction.
COOPER: Will you tell us the names of any of the people involved in the process?
BOISSELIER: Well, they will when it's ready. And it's not easy right now to face the public and say I was the one who did the cloning. You have to respect that. You know, the publications are all written and we are ready to send that out. The only debate we had with the scientists and this week, and the week before, is when do we do that? Because the moment we do that, their name will be known and for some of them it can be a problem.
COOPER: We only have about 20 seconds left, my understanding is that you say there are four more babies that will soon be born. Is that correct?
BOISSELIER: This is correct. The next one is due in a week in Europe and there are three others by the end of January and just early February. So I'm very pleased. And after the five births, then I will proceed with 20 new cases and hopefully many cases by June all over the world. That's the goal.
COOPER: Ms. Boisselier and Mr. Rael, thank you.
BOISSELIER: Thank you.
COOPER: Coming up on NEWSNIGHT, the players have had their say. When we come back, the ethics of it all.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: More on today's announcement involving the cloning of a human baby. One reaction came today from Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, who comes at this from two perspectives: He's a doctor and now the most powerful Republican in the Senate, replacing, of course, Trent Lott. Senator Frist had this to say, quote: "Today's announcement is disturbing. While its validity is unclear, it should serve as a chilling reminder that individuals are still trying to clone human beings. These actions offend our human sensibilities and undermine fundamental respect for the decency of human life. Today's announcement reinforces the need for Congress to continue its efforts to enact a ban on human cloning."
Again, the validity of this is unclear, but there's no doubt that the announcement alone is getting the politicians talking and the ethicists pondering. We want to do a little of that with Art Caplan. He's a bioethicist with the University of Pennsylvania. And he joins us now from Philadelphia. Thanks for being with us, Art.
ART CAPLAN, BIOETHICIST, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: Good evening.
COOPER: Your gut reaction to this story?
CAPLAN: Well, I'm still doubtful that we have got an actual cloned baby. I think that we have to wait for the proof. We had a lot of talk today, but no evidence, no genetic testing, no production of a picture of anything, no independent verification and no papers. So we'll see. We'll see. I have my doubts, too, that the skill required really to bring off cloning is there.
COOPER: Are you concerned about human cloning just theoretically?
CAPLAN: I am. I Have two concerns about human cloning. One is if you looked at animals, the outcomes have been miserable. You've got dead animals, dying animals, stillborn animals, and those born alive about a third of all species die within a year. If I came in and said I'm going to try a new drug, half the people who take it drop dead as soon as they take it, and out of the half that don't, a third of them are dead within a year, I couldn't get that experiment launched. And it seems to me the height of irresponsibility to see cloning being tried when that basically is the backdrop in the animal studies.
The other concern is, to make a clone, it's going to be psychologically burdensome on the child. You're going to look like somebody else, you're going to have to, if you will, know certain facts about what awaits you in terms of possible diseases, possible problems that you might encounter genetically, and that's going to narrow your freedom, narrow your ability to be who you want to be.
COOPER: There are those, as you know, who say, look, these are the same arguments that were made 20 years ago about test tube babies.
CAPLAN: I think some of these arguments were made about test tube babies. Some of them had some bite at the time in the sense in which we weren't really sure on animal studies that this was completely safe to try 20 years ago to do a test tube babies, but there were many, many more animal studies. The data was a mountain. Today, we have got a little anthill, and that's all the information we have about animal cloning.
So if we had as much as we had then on doing test tube baby work in animals, I'd be quieter about my safety concerns, about my worries that we're going to create a lot of dead and sick children.
COOPER: It does seem that whether it's this company or some other company, this is coming down the road. I mean, scientifically, it's somewhat viable. It can be argued over the fine points. It is coming. What from an ethicist's perspective, do you think the U.S. should do about it?
CAPLAN: Well, you know, the main problem here with cloning is that we're in the middle of a heated debate about abortion yet again. Because if we were just going to talk about making babies by cloning, we could have a ban on that tomorrow morning, and indeed the United Nations, despite the disparity of values and cultures there, could have a ban on that by next week.
The problem is that some people want to make cloning not to make babies but for research. They want to make embryos; they want to mine those embryos for cells and tissues to repair diseases, to fix disabilities. The administration, the Republicans in the Senate have basically said if we don't ban it all, we're not going to ban just reproductive clothing. We're not going to ban just the making of babies. I think we ought to ban the making of babies and then turn around and finish the debate about whether we're going to use cloning for research.
If we don't do that, we leave the door open to anyone and everybody who wants to to give it a try to make a baby.
COOPER: The FDA has said that they will investigate this. They're going to try to find out where this took place, and if they, in fact, have any jurisdiction over any of this. Is that solution, or is a solution something that has to come from Congress?
CAPLAN: The FDA is going to have a hard time regulating this. There is no drug, there is no device, there is no food. Exactly what their authority would be -- last time I heard Dr. Boisselier, she said they were outside the country. The FDA has a hard time extending authority there. This is a legislative matter. It's not an administrative matter. It's not even clear, to tell you the truth, that it's research. If you say you're going to treat infertile couples, I don't know that the FDA has a business there. Congress does. The administration does. That's the place to turn to get the at least a moratorium in place.
COOPER: And just to play devil's advocate, those who support this will say, look, there a lot of infertile couples, there are a lot of gay couples, whomever, who are in desperate need of this sort of thing.
CAPLAN: You know, no one's ever had a right to make a biological child that's 100 percent identical to them. At best we get to go for about 50 percent. You can use an egg donor, you can use a sperm donor. You can adopt. The world is full of kids that need homes. I'm not much moved by this argument that, hey, we've got to risk the death of babies in order to fix this problem of infertility. I think there are other ways to get after that.
COOPER: All right. Just hold on a moment. Still to come on NEWSNIGHT, we're going to try to bring Rael and Brigitte Boisselier back into our talk about the ethics of all this, so stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: More on cloning now and the ethical questions. Rael and his scientists wanted to join us -- join into the talk about the moral quandaries this all poses. So once again, here's Art Caplan in Philadelphia, and in Miami, Rael and Brigitte Boisselier. Thanks to you all for being here.
Rael, you heard what Mr. Kaplan said before the break. You wanted to respond.
RAEL: Yes. You know, this is a beautiful day for humanity. A creation of life. I don't understand -- ethical -- the word ethic is just an accumulation of outrageous prejudices. It's so incredible that today the most powerful country in the world is about to kill hundreds of thousands civilians in Iraq and nobody thinks about ethics, but when we give birth to a baby and nobody say if this birth is perfectly healthy and is possible, then they are afraid of that. I cannot believe.
COOPER: Art Caplan, your response?
CAPLAN: Well, I think there's more to ethics than just religious prejudices. I think at the end of the day, a powerful ethic in medicine is do no harm. What I worry about when people undertake to try cloning is not the miracle of life, I'm fine with that, I'm even fine with a healthy baby, however it gets here. But I worry a lot when you've got half the animals dead who have been cloned and another third of them dead after they've been born or sick, you have got a situation where you have to wonder what's the price of this pursuit of this miracle.
COOPER: Well, let's ask Mr. Boisselier. What was the price of this miracle?
BOISSELIER: I really want to respond to that, because I've been saying that all along and I'd like some experts to really confirm that because it's been too long.
Animal clonings defects have been observed also in IVF of the same species. When you do IVF of cow, you have defects, the exact same defect and you have when you do cloning of cow. Same thing with the mice. Same thing with the pigs. I'd like you to realize this is not a problem related to cloning, it's a problem related to assisted reproduction of the species. So when the people are saying, we have defects with cows. They implant everything. They don't shape (ph) the embryos. They have the same defect with IVF.
And if you look at that, that's not what we're doing with human being. We have expertise in IVF and we have been doing that for 24 years. We don't have defects in IVF and we don't have defects in human clones and this is -- we had the proof yesterday.
This baby is perfectly alive. So I'd like Art Caplan to just think about that and try to find other arguments. The fear, the defects and the yuck effect is over now. We have to have more rational discussion about the subject and try to think that there are parents who would like to have a child. This technology can give them child. It could give them hope and they have a lot of parents who have hopes about that. I hope you will consider that once in a while.
CAPLAN: You know, you're talking to the person who invented that term, the yuck factor, and I said it wasn't enough to just go around saying, Things made us revolted or things made us feel yucky. Lots of things have done that in the past that have turned out to be good things.
But IVF has proven to be a huge problem. About a third of the babies born through IVF are premature. They're not healthy because they wind up being prematurely born. It's been a huge problem in IVF. Cloning is worse.
This isn't a question of emotion or some kind of revulsion to the idea to making people in a new way. The question is, Why start until you can do it safely not just in cows and pigs but even in monkeys and primates? We haven't got that down. You know that. And that really leads us to the situation again of saying, Sure, we would like to help infertile couples but not at the price of risking babies' health who can't consent to it.
COOPER: We are going to have to leave it. We appreciate al involved. Art Caplan, Rael, Brigitte Boisselier.
CAPLAN: My pleasure.
COOPER: Thank you very much for coming in and speaking. It was really very fascinating.
RAEL: Thank you.
BOISSELIER: Thank you.
COOPER: Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, a tour of vintage New York dining when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Before 9/11, many in the United States had never heard of the Fresh Kills Landfill. But afterwards, of course, it because almost a household name. The place where the ruins of 9/11 ended up. The wedding rings, the fragments of a handbag maybe, the pieces of firetrucks.
And, of course, there were the stretches of steel that once made up the Twin Towers. The personal effects have gone back to families. For many of them, that is all they got.
Now some of the steel is going on to a new place to build something as steel should, building something for the war that began on that Tuesday morning.
Once again, here's Michael Okwu.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
OKWU (voice-over): They are both 7 foot wide, 12 foot long 15 ton fragments of steel. Remnants of the World Trade Center, vestiges of broken lives.
But now, perhaps, symbols of the nation's resilience.
The last steel fragments at this landfill in New York are destined for Pascagoula, Mississippi, where Northrop Grumman intends to use them to build an assault ship, the USS "New York."
DENNIS DIGGINS, DIRECTOR, FRESH KILLS LANDFILL: It was all Peal Harbor. To memorialize this and to have it as a tangible remembrance of what happened is fitting.
OKWU: Veteran firefighter Lee Ielpi needs little to help him remember. He lost his 29-year-old son, Jonathan.
Today, the thought of Twin Towers steel in a U.S. warship gives him comfort and resolve.
LEE IELPI, RETIRED FIREFIGHTER: From what I understand, the bough so it will always be plowing through the water first, looking for those people that think they can come at us but we're going to come at them first.
OKWU: The steel still needs to be tested for strength before it can be used for the ship. Officials here at the Intrepid Sea/Air/Space Museum contacted Northrop Grumman about using it.
Mark Albin of the Intrepid says there's a deep connection between the Intrepid's past and the attack on the World Trade Center.
On November 25, 1944, two kamikazes struck the Intrepid, then a war vessel. Sixty-nine crew members were killed, part of the reason why officials at the naval museum are proud to showcase a model of the USS "New York," what experts say will be an instrumental force in the fight against terrorism, the fifth of 12 ships in the Navy's San Antonio class, capable of transporting 800 Marines, amphibious vehicles.
MARK ALBIN, INTREPID MUSEUM: All the latest radar detection equipment, the missile launching devices and what have you -- it is the most technologically advanced vessel that the Navy has today.
OKWU: Since 9/11, much of the World Trade Center steel has been sold as scrap, or used for mourning and remembrance in cities all across the country.
This memorial stands over Ground Zero.
This one at a high school in Tennessee.
Lee Ielpi is eager to see the latest memorial put to use.
IELPI: I just hope we're able to accomplish what we're out to do and do it as quickly as we can.
OKWU: Every vessel in the Navy has a tag line or motto. The USS "New York"'s will be "Never forget."
(END VIDEOTAPE)
OKWU: No doubt that is a sentiment that many of the 9/11 families will are have in mind when this $800 million vessel is deployed to active duty in 2007 -- Anderson.
COOPER: I can understand why it gives so many families hope.
Who is it who determines how the steel is used, whether it's to this ship or other uses?
OKWU: Well, that's an interesting question. What happened was back when we were all getting ready to start remembering at the anniversary of 9/11 this past August, Governor George Pataki, of course of New York state, went forward to the Navy secretary and said, Look, would it be nice if we could have a naval vessel named after New York?
The Navy secretary signed off on it and then what happened is an executive of Northrop Grumman, of course the manufacturers of the ship, decided they wanted to use pieces of steel from the World Trade Center to make this ship and basically like minds came together. They all sort of collaborated and that was that.
COOPER: All right. It's a great story. Michael Okwu, thanks very much.
OKWU: Thanks.
COOPER: Well still ahead on NEWSNIGHT, how about a full gourmet meal for $1.50? Champagne pouring for pennies? Food from faraway China and something new called "The Menu." Join us as we look back at the history of dining in the city of New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Well, New York restaurant folks are paid to be unflappable, managing the most high maintenance diner with ease. But there's one diner who makes them all scramble. So picky, so powerful that restaurants spread the word of his alias if they figure it out so the next restaurant can avoid his wrath.
"New York Times" restaurant critic William Grimes. He's been moonlighting for the New York Public Library for a look back at New York dining history where, for the price of a subway ride today, you could get a full spread at the Four Season of centuries ago.
As you'll see, we will not blow his cover.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WILLIAM GRIMES, "NEW YORK TIMES" RESTAURANT CRITIC (voice-over): I'm William Grimes, restaurant critic of "The New York Times." And part of my job is to keep my face out of the public domain so that I can review restaurants anonymously.
The president of the library called me up out of the blue about a year and a half ago and asked me to organize an exhibition that would show of the menu collection.
When you go back, you could see that they really applied some artistic thought to the menus when they put them together in the old days.
If you came to New York in 1825, you would be hard pressed to find a meal worthy of the name. Del Monaco's changed everything. It had a menu, for one thing. Restaurants didn't have men use before that.
I think what most people will find striking about the exhibition, first is the difference in cost of eating out 100 years ago and now. A three-course at a fine restaurant for $1.50. I think that's astounding.
One of the pleasures of doing the exhibition was discovering how diverse ethnic dining has always been in New York. Starting in the 1880s, the most adventurous could go to this new place called Chinatown. Once people conquered their fear of going into this very strange, exotic world, they discovered that Chinese food was awfully good.
Let's see where this is. I have to say that almost anything was an excuse for a big meal in New York. And in 1890, ladies' prize bowling was an event that deserved its own dinner.
On this great evening, they started out with blue point oysters, had consume and an assortment of relishes. We would not even pay for these relishes today.
Back before, just when Times Square was getting started around 1904, the champagne flowed by the gallon. Lobsters and steaks were on the menu. These were the kind of places you would go, if you were a man, you would probably not take your wife. You would you take a chorus girl. You would take a big bankroll. You would probably regret it deeply.
The 21 Club started out down in the Village as a little speakeasy where they would pour you your gin in a tea cup and you could pretend that you were taking afternoon tea.
Not everybody was eating squab or woodcock on toast. Father Divine was a charismatic preacher, who established what he called peace missions, hundreds of them in the height of the Depression.
I think the postwar period is a fascinating study for the attempts to recapture some of the glamour of fine dining in New York as it existed before prohibition. The first modern-- truly modern restaurants start appearing in New York. Restaurant associates came up with one of the most audacious restaurants in New York in the mid 70's, Windows on the World. 107 stories atop the World Trade Center. For those who took the ride up, it was shocking to be up there and eat. Really up there floating in the clouds.
The most interesting thing to me was the sense of continuity and dining in New York. Not the specifics of certain ethnic foods or certain types of restaurant, but the overall sense that New York was always a city whose population loved to eat out and was restless and adventurous, would seek out exotic cuisines and if they looked, those cuisines were there in a way that no other city could offer.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: I don't know about you, but I'm hungry right now. Thanks for joining us for NEWSNIGHT.
Aaron Brown will be back on Monday night. Have a great weekend, everyone.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
U.N. Inspectors Out; Steel From WTC Wreckage to Become Warship>
