Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsnight Aaron Brown

City Councilman killed in New York City Hall

Aired July 23, 2003 - 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, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening everyone.
Nearly two years after 9/11 it is still an alarming sight, police and local news helicopters swarming the skies over Lower Manhattan. It happened today. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg was quick to say today's deadly shooting at City Hall was not terrorism and that seemed clear as soon as the details began coming out but it was perhaps the next worst thing, a massive security breach in a place that's a short walk away from Ground Zero.

So, the questions at hand tonight are not only what happened at City Hall but how it could have happened at all. We're going to ask those questions coming up, more on that in a moment.

We begin the whip with details of the deaths of Saddam Hussein's sons and U.S. efforts to convince Iraqis that they really are dead. Senior Pentagon Correspondent Jamie McIntyre has the latest on that, Jamie the headline.

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Anderson, the Pentagon is preparing to release pictures of Uday and Qusay to prove they really are dead. The pictures do seem to show that they were trying to change their appearance. One picture raises a question about whether Uday might have committed suicide, a question that's likely to be answered, not by the pictures, but by an autopsy.

COOPER: All right, Jamie thanks for that. We'll be back to you in a moment.

To Iraq itself now, the latest from the city of Mosul where the brothers were killed, Nic Robertson is there, Nic the headline.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SR. INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, some angry reaction to the deaths of Uday and Qusay in this town here, some less angry reaction in Baghdad as well. Some people pleased to see them dead but coalition commanders releasing more details of their deaths raising for some also the question of why were they killed rather than captured - Anderson.

COOPER: Nic.

The latest now on that shooting at City Hall in New York, Maria Hinojosa is covering that for us, Maria the headline.

MARIA HINOJOSA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, what was once unthinkable has again become possible in New York City today, two men shot dead inside City Hall, one of them a City Council member, lots of questions, lot of intrigue but one thing is for sure, this City Hall hasn't seen anything like this in its 191 year history - Anderson.

COOPER: Certainly not.

To the political circus formerly known as Sacramento now, Candy Crowley has the latest on the Gray Davis recall effort, Candy the headline.

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, in California the improbable got a lot more likely today. The secretary of state has certified that the people who want to oust Governor Gray Davis do have enough signatures to hold a statewide recall election - Anderson.

COOPER: All right, back with all of you in a moment.

Also coming up tonight on NEWSNIGHT, a follow-up on last night's buried headline, the White House official who accepted blame for letting those 16 words make it into the State of the Union speech.

Also, an update on the priest abuse scandal in Boston and why the church leadership will not face charges for looking the other way for so long.

Also tonight, the baseball announcer who calls them like he sees them, kind of, he hasn't actually seen a game in his entire life. In fact, he's never seen anything ever. This announcer is blind, all that to come in the hour ahead.

We begin, however, with what we are learning about the raid that killed the sons of Saddam that and the impact of the raid. A day later the coalition and administration now have the challenge of persuading ordinary Iraqis that this despotic duo is, in fact, dead and that their deaths do matter.

We start with CNN's Senior Pentagon Correspondent Jamie McIntyre with the late details - Jamie.

MCINTYRE: Well, Anderson, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz has just returned from Iraq and one of the things he said he noticed was that there were widespread conspiracy beliefs about the United States and what was going on, so it's important for the U.S. to establish that, in fact, they have killed Uday and Qusay, the sons of Saddam Hussein.

To that end, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld today said the U.S. is planning to release photographs that would establish that they were dead, photographs of their dead bodies but what's not clear is how graphic those pictures will be. Some pictures taken right after Tuesday's raid are quite graphic and described to CNN by a senior military official who has seen them.

They show that both brothers apparently tried to change their appearance, growing beards, and in other ways trying to change their appearance but in the case of Uday there's also a mysterious what appears to be an exit wound on the back of his head. Some are suggesting that that might indicate he shot himself in a self-inflicted gunshot wound but the Pentagon is saying at this point that that's all pure speculation, speculation that would likely be answered when an autopsy is performed.

Now, when this autopsy is performed they may also clean up the bodies and re-photograph them, therefore being able to release pictures that would not be as graphic as the ones taken right after the attack.

Again, the object of this is to essentially prove to the skeptical Iraqi population that, in fact, Uday and Qusay are dead and not coming back and that the United States is committed to hunting down Saddam Hussein as well - Anderson.

COOPER: Do we know has there been an internal debate over whether or not to release these photos and do we know any details of that debate?

MCINTYRE: Well, we don't know the details. The impression that I get from talking to Pentagon officials is that the debate has centered more over how and what kind of pictures to release rather than whether to release them at all.

It gets to the point of how graphic an image the United States wants to be putting out. If they release the first pictures they had they are quite gruesome but, again, if the bodies are cleaned up, dressed by say a mortician and they may not be as graphic as the ones that were initially taken at the end of the raid. I think that's really where the debate was centering.

COOPER: I suppose, though, if the pictures are too cleaned up, I mean if the bodies are so cleaned up it runs the risk of the photos somehow looking doctored or not being believed as being accurate.

MCINTYRE: Well, I think the feeling of the Pentagon is people who are predisposed to not believe the United States may still be skeptical even if there were pictures released.

Those who are predisposed to believe the United States are going to believe it whether or not the pictures are released but they do think it's important to establish beyond any doubt that both the brothers are dead.

COOPER: All right, Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon thanks very much for that.

More now on the situation on the ground in Iraq, any celebration today was muted by the killing of two more soldiers and a new tape purportedly from Saddam Hussein. Add to that even in Mosul the lingering loyalty to the old regime that was plain to see.

Here again, CNN's Nic Robertson.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ROBERTSON (voice-over): Pro-Saddam Hussein and angry over the killing of his two sons, protesters press up to the razor wire cordon securing the house where the pair died, some blaming the house owner.

"He was a collaborator" says this man, his friend adding "That's all the U.S. does, bribe people."

The crowds quickly dispersed by warnings from coalition troops backed up by stick-wielding Iraqi militiamen. Inside the ruined building, U.S. troops catalog destruction.

LT. COL. MIKE ROREX, 101ST AIRBORNE: Any house you have here in Iraq is going to be well fortified so they can hide very well and get down from gunfire, so they had to use some heavier weapons than normal.

ROBERTSON: Not only well fortified but stiffly defended.

GEN. RICARDO SANCHEZ, COMMANDER, COALITION GROUND FORCES: We had an enemy that was defending. It was barricaded and we had to take the measures that were necessary in order to neutralize the target.

ROBERTSON: Three assaults before successfully securing the building. On the final push, according to Sanchez, coalition troops, still facing fire, killed the remaining survivors.

Abid Hamoud (ph) Saddam Hussein's private secretary, now in coalition captivity one of the former regime members used by the coalition to identify Uday and Qusay.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTSON: From all the evidence presented by the coalition it seems Uday and Qusay had no intention of giving themselves up alive. How much help they might have been to the coalition in locating their father is a question that may dog coalition officials for sometime to come as people examine why they were not captured rather than killed - Anderson.

COOPER: Nic, I'm fascinated to see some of those pictures from demonstrations, pro-Saddam demonstrations, people complaining about the deaths of these two. I mean by all accounts, I mean Uday especially, a rapist and a murderer, Qusay as well. Are the people protesting in support of these two sons of Saddam or is it more against the U.S.?

ROBERTSON: I think one of the things here that we're seeing is this is perhaps a neighborhood of Mosul and this is where the demonstration took place, a neighborhood that was perhaps pro-Ba'ath Party, pro-Saddam Hussein's regime. Perhaps that is why we saw a demonstration of this kind.

The Ba'ath Party around the country and Mosul included is we're told by many people beginning to regroup, beginning to reorganize. There is an element of anti-U.S. There is that sentiment in Iraq that wherever U.S. troops are, whatever they do, some people are always going to come out and criticize them.

There is an element of that but certainly some of the people we've talked to today as well said, look, these people were Iraqis. It's difficult for us to condone their killings but it is a real eye- opener, if you will. There are still people who will come out and praise these people who were as feared - who were feared across the whole country.

ANDERSON: It's fascinating. Nic Robertson thanks very much live from Mosul.

So, how will the pictures of Uday and Qusay play in the port of Umm Qasr and points elsewhere for that matter? With us now in Abu Dhabi is Nart Bouran of Abu Dhabi Television news. Welcome to the program. Thanks very much for getting up so early. Do your viewers accept that these two are in fact dead?

NART BOURAN, DIRECTOR, ABU DHABI TV: I believe so. I think people have come to accept that and they believe they are dead but there is an element of requiring closure and that's what those pictures would do. People are still skeptical a bit and they want to see for a fact that they have been killed.

But, in general, I think the feeling is that there's no tears shed in the Arab world for these two and they were known for their brutality and Qusay, for example, was a dictator in the making and Qusay was seen as a psychotic son of a president who couldn't believe that he was the son of the president who could do anything at any time to anyone.

So, in that sense I think people in general in the Arab world and the viewers would see that as an end to an era as such but there is a requirement for closure. They want to see what exactly had happened and see the bodies.

COOPER: How, I mean there is apparently, according to Jamie McIntyre, some debate about how graphic the photos should be. I mean there are apparently a set of very graphic images. There is some question about whether those are the images that will be released. I mean does it matter? I mean do viewers want to see the most graphic images there are?

BOURAN: I don't think, you know, the pictures being graphic is a problem. For sure there will be some who will, you know, emotions will come out and say, you know, why have they done this? They could have captured them instead of killing them, especially if the pictures are really graphic. But, I think they want to see it whatever it is and for a lot of Iraqis they just want to see the end of this.

COOPER: How does this affect the general resistance? I mean, you know, U.S. forces are still being shot at, U.S. soldiers still being killed almost on a daily basis now. Does this have a big impact? I mean has a page been turned?

BOURAN: Well, unfortunately I believe it hasn't. I don't think the resistance really has anything to do much with the Ba'ath Party at the moment. Yes there is an element of that. There is a fraction of the resistance coming from those people who have nowhere else to go and they fought all their lives for the Ba'ath Party and for the regime.

But, I think there's a large part of the resistance that hasn't anything to do with that. They are just anti-American and anti- occupation and there's also an element, a very dangerous element of Islamic militants growing in Iraq against the American presence over there and more as we go along as long as this continues you will see more of that than actually Ba'ath Party loyalists and that's the dangerous part.

COOPER: It's hard to get a sense, even viewing images we see in the states on television, of I mean how widespread this anti-U.S. sentiment is. I mean if you believe the demonstrations you see, you think okay it's happening everywhere. Do you have a sense of how widespread?

BOURAN: Well, I think in the rest of the world, of the Arab world, it's more of wanting to see an end to the occupation and maybe the fact that it took so long to have the governing body and it's taking longer for free election that will bring in their view a legitimate government ruling Iraq and not one that is appointed. So, I think as long as that takes time and it's taking longer and longer, that's where the anti-American sentiment would even increase.

COOPER: But that's, I mean what's confusing for some. I mean just as a viewer watching this sort of unfold, I mean, it seems people are saying they want the U.S. out. They want Iraqi democracy now but there's I mean the very open question of can they handle it now? I mean is Iraqi really ready?

BOURAN: Well, that's a completely different question, what is possible on the ground and what people want to see are two different things, maybe not at the moment.

It's going to take a little bit longer. These people were in decades of dictatorship so, in reality, it should take a little bit longer until everything is settled and they know where they're going.

But, you can't help but people saying that that they want to see democracy and a freely elected government. What is wanted and what they say is completely different from what is possible on the ground.

COOPER: And that is about the same anywhere in the world. Nart Bouran with Abu Dhabi TV appreciate you joining us, thank you. It was interesting.

Coming up on NEWSNIGHT a wild shootout in New York City Hall, two political rivals are dead. We're going to have the details coming up.

Also, politics California style, a recall vote for the governor.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) COOPER: Well, there is rough and tumble politics and then there is what happened today inside New York City Hall. It threw much of Lower Manhattan into turmoil and until we learned exactly what transpired, all the post 9/11 memories and questions came rushing back. The answer soon followed, terrorism no, terror most certainly, tragedy as well, the story from CNN's Maria Hinojosa.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MIKE NELSON, NYC COUNCILMAN: I just heard bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, and I thought it was firecrackers, the first three or four until people started, you know, screaming. That's when a bunch of us just went right on the floor.

HINOJOSA (voice-over): City Council members scrambled for cover and went into emergency mode. City Hall was evacuated, then surrounded, SWAT teams, machineguns, bomb-sniffing dogs.

DAVID WEPRIN, NYC COUNCILMAN: Dialed 9-1-1. While I was on the floor under the chamber but, you know, all I did was keep it on and the gunshots were going. Then they told us to leave the building, get out, get out.

HINOJOSA: Within hours two men declared dead, one of them City Councilman James Davis, a 41-year-old African American Democratic city councilman representing a hard hit part of Brooklyn. He campaigned against gun violence.

NELSON: He's a minister. He's a former police officer. He actually, it's ironic that he was the one that's shot in the chamber. He actually led a movement called Stop the Violence and he had marches every year. I used to participate in his marches.

HINOJOSA: Also dead, Othniel Askew, who police say shot Davis in the balcony of the City Council chamber before he was himself killed by a police officer.

RAY KELLY, POLICE COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK POLICE DEPARTMENT: Witnesses say they saw Askew standing over Davis repeatedly firing shots.

HINOJOSA: New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Askew was able to get the gun inside City Hall because it was Davis who led his political rival into City Hall bypassing the metal detector.

GEOFFREY DAVIS, JAMES DAVIS' BROTHER: The system killed my brother but it's all right. I'm confused right now. How is it at City Hall? How can this happen in City Hall?

MAYOR MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, NEW YORK: They went through the security booth but did not go through the Magnetometer. Apparently, the City Council members and the mayor have not been going through a Magnetometer.

HINOJOSA: City Hall is just blocks from where the World Trade Center was attacked nearly two years ago. Witnesses said that was the first thing they thought of.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was just like are we under attack? I don't know. I was just frightened.

HINOJOSA: Outside the city councilman's home, friends and neighbors gathered to mourn creating a makeshift memorial.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: James Davis candle and his light will never go out in Crown Heights.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HINOJOSA: Now, Anderson, a bizarre twist to this story came earlier in the day. The FBI says that at about eleven o'clock this morning they got a call from a man identifying himself as Othniel Askew saying that he was being harassed by a New York City Council member, James Davis.

Now, CNN has just learned from law enforcement sources that Askew's claim was that Davis was trying to blackmail him to get him out of running against him for his City Council seat, so a lot of questions, Anderson, certainly for a story that has shaken New York, at least for today - Anderson.

COOPER: Obviously, we're going to be getting a lot more developments in the coming hours. Maria Hinojosa thanks very much for the update.

Now to California, California Governor Gray Davis today seemed to take a cue from one of his possible challengers in a recall election, Arnold Schwarzenegger, that is, the Arnold we saw in "Terminator 3." Like the terminator, the governor basically said "talk to the hand" today to the political forces trying to oust him.

He said, "I'm a fighter." He better be a fighter. Tonight, the prospect of a recall election went from strong possibility to harsh reality, more now from CNN's Candy Crowley.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CROWLEY (voice-over): Since 1911, there have been 31 failed recall attempts against California governors. The 32nd time was the charm.

KEVIN SHELLEY, CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE: It is my duty today to certify the first recall election of a governor in California history. As of today, my office has received over 1.6 million total signatures. Of these, more than 1.3 million have been found to be valid.

CROWLEY: You didn't have to read between the lines to know there would be enough signatures on the recall Gray Davis petitions to put the matter to a vote but the true measure of the governor's problem is not how many names a well financed opposition can gather. Not even his 22 percent job approval rating captures the essence of what's going on. If you really want to know the depth of this quicksand talk to one of the governor's supporters.

Can you defend Gray Davis for me?

ART PULASKI, CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION: This is not about whether you like Gray Davis or not.

CROWLEY: Alrighty then, put it this way. For Gray Davis to stay in office the recall vote will need to be about something other than Gray Davis and nobody ever said Gray Davis doesn't understand politics.

GOV. GRAY DAVIS, (D), CALIFORNIA: This election is not about changing governors. It's about changing direction and I think at the end of the day the voters are going to opt for a progressive agenda not a conservative agenda.

CROWLEY: Still, the elements are not favorable. Davis is presiding over a $38 billion deficit. The budget process is gummed up with politics and decisions nobody wants to make and, honestly, Gray Davis is not warm and fuzzy. Minority California Republicans knew a perfect storm when they saw it.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CROWLEY: And the perfect storm is still gathering because, as we said, they had more than a million signatures that were certified here today by the secretary of state. Now, from here, what's supposed to happen is that between 60 and 80 days from now there will be an election but there's a lot to do between now and then, Anderson.

We are told by the secretary of state that some counties in California don't have any voting machines because they threw out the old ones waiting for the new ones, so he's going to have to go to the State Assembly and ask them for more money and, of course, part of the problem here has been that huge budget deficit, so stay tuned.

COOPER: Yes, 60 to 80 days that's a very short amount of time.

CROWLEY: That's right.

COOPER: How much time is there for people to register to run against him?

CROWLEY: Well, they have up until - I'm not really sure of the exact amount of time but they have a little while here. It's all sort of set up in their Constitution. What has been interesting here is that there's been this - since they've never done it before they're not exactly sure about the details of it.

For instance, there seems to be a disagreement, even among Democrats, about whether the ballot is simply do you want to recall Gray Davis or don't you, or whether the ballot should also include those names.

What we do know is that Democrats will not put their names on the ballot and it will be on Republicans. There have been a couple of names that we've thrown out there.

Arnold Schwarzenegger certainly is one of them. Now we hear about Arianna Huffington but until they file we won't know. They've got to have I think about $3,200 and they have to go through an official thing, so there will be a couple of them on there.

COOPER: I mean is this unstoppable at this point? Could he resign I guess and I don't even know what that would do?

CROWLEY: Sure. Well, it wouldn't do much except for it would give the lieutenant governor a little time in office before there was an election but, again, the secretary of state said today, look, once a recall effort has been certified there's no stopping it.

So, even if he resigned today, which by the way as you noted he said I'm a fighter, he shows no intention of resigning but even if he should there would still be a recall vote. Now, who'd be on that recall and whether Bustamante would put his name on, you know, it's another one of those stay tuned questions.

COOPER: And for a state that's already strapped with cash this is going to be expensive, this - any upcoming election.

CROWLEY: Sure, and it sounds like it's going to be even more expensive than they thought. First of all, they have to notify voters. They have to have people who can, you know, sit at the voting booths and, you know, sometimes that costs money and, again, there are some places that don't have voting machines so they've got to figure that out. Estimated about $30 million, which up against this budget is a pittance but, you know, they can't afford much here because of the huge deficits.

COOPER: And it's just a fascinating development. Candy Crowley thanks very much.

Coming up on NEWSNIGHT, the weapons of mass destruction issue and the continuing questions over whether the Bush administration hyped the intelligence.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Well, you don't have to be a political whiz to notice that stories on the selling of the war and the handling of the peace for that matter have died down somewhat, which is not to say the criticism itself has vanished, only that the raid on Mosul crowded it off the front page at least for now.

It's a breather and a boost for an administration that badly needs one and the White House today made the most of it. Here's CNN White House Correspondent Suzanne Malveaux.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Flanked by the defense secretary and the administration's point man on Iraq, President Bush said with the death of Saddam Hussein's sons, the brutal Iraqi regime died too.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Saddam Hussein's sons were responsible for torture, maiming, and murder of countless Iraqis. Now more than ever, all Iraqis can now that the former regime is gone and will not be coming back.

MALVEAUX: The administration's hope is that with Saddam's sons gone, there will be a boost in morale for weary U.S. soldiers, a chance for calm on the ground, and a new impetus for international allies to send troops and supplies.

But there are questions still over how dubious intelligence used to support the case for war made it into President Bush's State of the Union speech.

Tuesday, Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, who vetted Mr. Bush's speech, said he forgot previous repeated warnings from the CIA not to include a controversial claim that Iraq was attempting to acquire uranium from Africa.

But calls continue for President Bush to take responsibility.

SEN. EDWARD M. KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: The buck does not stop with CIA director George Tenet, and it does not stop with Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. The buck stops with the president.

MALVEAUX: Two weeks after the intelligence controversy erupted, the administration is still trying to explain.

SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: These words, these 16 words, do not change the fact that there's a mountain of evidence about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed, and that it was important that we act on this threat.

MALVEAUX: The White House is getting support from an unlikely ally, former president Bill Clinton, who's urging Bush critics to move on.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON (on phone): I thought the White House did the right thing in just saying, Well, we probably shouldn't have said that. And I think we ought to focus on where we are and what right thing to do for Iraq is now.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: But the controversy has given Democrats a rare opening to challenge Mr. Bush on foreign policy. And as a growing number call for congressional hearings, Mr. Bush's approval ratings in the polls continue to drop.

Suzanne Malveaux, CNN, the White House.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Well, we mentioned a moment ago, you don't have to be a political whiz. Just the same, it doesn't hurt to have one around, so we're joined tonight in Aspen, Colorado, by David Gergen, who's been a frequent adviser to presidents and now teaches at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.

David, welcome back. Good to see you.

First I want to talk about timing a little bit...

DAVID GERGEN, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL ADVISER: Thanks, Anderson.

COOPER: ... about the Stephen Hadley announcement. It came sort of as a lot of focus had drifted toward the killing of Uday and Qusay Hussein. Was that a coincidence?

GERGEN: Well, I'm sure that they were very happy to be able to put that, the news out, the Hadley story out in the wake of this huge story coming out of Iraq, because they knew it would be buried.

But I think it was probably a coincidence. I am sure they felt they had to get this out. This story about a 16-word sentence in the president's speech has now going on -- has now been -- had nearly 16 days of life, something no one ever expected when it started.

I am sure it's a huge irritant to the administration. I've talked to people there who believe it's been way overblown by the Democrats and by the press. But nonetheless, it has touched a sore nerve. But, you know, I think it's taken off in part because the White House has not handled it well, and part because there have been some doubts about the evidence because we haven't found any weapons of mass destruction to speak of so far.

COOPER: Well, with the Hadley announcement, I mean, does the story end there? Do you think -- I mean, do you have -- feel like you have, and the American public has, a very good sense of exactly what went on in the White House?

GERGEN: I think Stephen Hadley helped the White House by saying, Yes, of course we looked at this, and I take some of the blame for it, and Mike Gersten (ph), the speechwriter, found a memo that's also been put out. I do think that's helped. I do not think it's ended the story.

What has surprised me also from the beginning of this is, it would have been -- they would have been -- helped themselves so much had the president shown anger right from the beginning and said, I do not -- I take full responsibility for my speech having been this way. It should have not been this way. Now I want to find out what happened.

I think the president was innocent when he spoke this. But if he'd taken the lead and pushed inside for an internal inquiry, led by his Andy Card, the chief of staff, or someone else, get all the facts out, Mr. Hadley, Condi Rice, whoever up and down the line, saw, talked, or had anything to do with, get all the facts out there at one time, and this story would not continue to have legs.

Every time you put out a new explanation, it gives new legs to the story, and it goes on, and we gets into days 15 or day 16 of this 16-word story.

COOPER: Well, and, I mean, talking about a -- perhaps a future leg, I mean, does Condoleezza Rice now need to come forward and say something? I mean, you now have her, the deputy national security adviser, saying I take responsibility. I mean, down the road, is she going to have to say something?

GERGEN: I think that she ultimately is going to have to provide an explanation, as -- and I think there -- but, you know, the nature, Anderson, of one of these kind of things is, it -- that people on the outside, the partisans on the other side, want to first identify somebody in the agency, and then they want to bring the controversy into the White House, and they want to push it toward the president's desk.

That's what name of the game is among Democrats, to keep pushing this, to try to get it up to Condoleezza Rice, get her to respond, and then get the president to respond. Get the vice president to respond.

You know, so there's going to be a lot of pressure for her...

COOPER: Well, then, how (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

GERGEN: ... to say something more. I think they should, I think the president, again, should step and say, Let's get all the facts out. You know, we made a mistake, look, we blew this, but the rest of our case was strong. We are doing the right thing in Iraq. Now, let's get all the facts out.

COOPER: How surprised were you then to hear former president Clinton on "LARRY KING LIVE" last night, or hear reports about it, saying, in essence, you know, time to move on?

GERGEN: Well, I was surprised by that, but not totally. President Clinton has taken a view for some weeks now, and I've heard him say this, he's told many people that, look, when he was president, he was presented with evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He's always felt that the Democrats ought to get off this case that there were no weapons of mass destruction, because he said the intelligence agency told him some years ago.

And indeed, talking to people in the Clinton administration, I'm convinced that they would have gone after Saddam had it not been for two things. They did not see the imminent threat that the Bush administration did, and the weapons of mass destruction. They saw a program that was under way on weapons of mass destruction. They didn't see an imminent threat.

And so they didn't have a rationale for going in. 9/11, of course, helped the Bush administration on that.

But second thing that stopped the Bush administration, and I've, you know, I've known this, you know, they've been talking about this for a long time, they couldn't see who was going to succeed Saddam. They thought it was going to be a mess.

If you go to Secretary of State Jim Baker's book about his time of secretary of state, one of the arguments he made in that book is, We didn't go to Baghdad way back in the Persian Gulf War. But one of the reasons was, we worried that it would be a mess when it was over. And that's what worried the Clinton administration.

COOPER: This, I mean, obviously, the nine Democratic presidential candidates or wannabe candidates right now do not seem willing to take President Clinton's advice and sort of let this thing go. Is this an issue they -- I mean, feel that they can win with?

GERGEN: They cannot win with this. (UNINTELLIGIBLE), I think Bill Clinton did give them good advice on one major, major point, and that is, they ought to be putting a lot more focus on, What are we doing in Iraq now? Is this going well? Do we have the right strategy? Do we have enough resources on the ground? How are we going to get out of this?

Now, it -- all of us hope, for the country's sake, we have to hope that the killing of the two sons yesterday will be a major turning point in Iraq. And we'll see much more (UNINTELLIGIBLE) much more security, and this thing will calm down, and we can get about the role of nation building.

But from the Democrats' point of view, they ought to be very much looking for ways to make sure the country succeeds in Iraq. All of us have an interest in that. And they should not -- you know, this 16- word (UNINTELLIGIBLE), (UNINTELLIGIBLE) speech idea is a small piece of a much larger puzzle. And they ought to -- I think President Clinton was right, they ought to start focusing on much the bigger picture.

Because if they're going to criticize the president for lacking a policy in Iraq or lacking an effective policy, what is their alternative? Does anybody know what the Democrats would do to solve this problem? I don't think we do right now.

COOPER: All right, we're going to leave it there tonight. David Gergen, thanks very much. It was very interesting.

GERGEN: OK, (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

COOPER: All right. Well, as NEWSNIGHT continues. tomorrow's big story, the release of the report on what went wrong before September 11. Be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Well, it's a headline in and of itself. The congressional report into 9/11 is coming out tomorrow, nearly two years after it all happened. There has been enormous reluctance to lay blame in what's got to be remembered as one of the worst intelligence failures in American history.

But as one victim advocate argues, sometimes you have to point fingers, and this is one of those times.

We're getting some early hints at where the fingers are pointed in the report.

We get more now from CNN's Jonathan Karl.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JONATHAN KARL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The long-awaited report on the September 11 intelligence failures includes revelations about several missed opportunities that one of the report's Democratic co-authors says could have allowed the FBI to the uncover the 9/11 plot before it was too late.

SEN. BOB GRAHAM (D-FL), FORMER CHAIR, INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: It would have been avoided if our agencies had been less turf protective, if they'd been more communicative, if they had been more creative in their analysis of intelligence information that they had, and had had a little bit of luck.

KARL: But Graham's charge appears to be contradicted by the report itself. According to sources who have seen the report, it concludes, quote, "This inquiry has uncovered no intelligence information in the possession of the intelligence community prior to the attacks of September 11 that, if fully considered, would have provided specific advance warning of the details of those attacks."

No specific warning, but the nearly 900-page report reveals several blown chances to track the hijackers before they acted. Exhibit A, hijackers Khalid Almidhar and Nawaf Alhazmi. Although the CIA knew about their ties to al Qaeda, they did not tell the FBI until three weeks before September 11.

And it may have been possible for the FBI to track the hijackers. They came into contact with three people under FBI investigation after moving to San Diego in January 2000. And while living in San Diego, they actually rented a room in a house of an FBI informant.

SEN. EVAN BAYH (D-IN), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: If FBI agents in San Diego are not aware of other information that the bureau possesses, or the CIA does not inform the bureau of information they have, then it's very difficult to protect our country in a coordinated manner.

KARL: But government sources tell CNN that the hijackers did not tell any of those under FBI investigation about the plot.

REP. RICHARD BURR (R), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Hindsight's a wonderful tool. But I'm not sure that we understand the connection of the dots well enough to lock at it and say, Had we done this, this couldn't have happened. I don't think we reached that conclusion. KARL (on camera): A section of the report exploring ties between the hijackers and the government of Saudi Arabia was censored after the administration cited national security concerns. According to sources who have seen the uncensored report, the section is highly critical of the Saudi government.

Jonathan Karl, CNN, Capitol Hill.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Well, a few stories from around the world tonight, beginning with an intriguing admission from the intelligence minister of Iran. He said Iran has some senior al Qaeda members in custody, quote, "a large number of them have been deported already. And a number of them are currently in our custody," end quote. White House spokesman Scott McClellan wasn't able to confirm that, but he said it furthers the belief that there is a significant al Qaeda presence in Iran.

Moving on to Liberia now, 20 more U.S. Marines arrived at the U.S. embassy in Monrovia to boost security. A senior White House official said today that an African-led peacekeeping force could be there within five days, that a U.S. role in that force would be limited to logistical support.

Still coming up on NEWSNIGHT, the priest abuse scandal in Boston. And the report that shows it was far worse and went on far longer than anyone even imagined.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Well, in Boston today, the Massachusetts attorney general issued the results of a sweeping investigation into the priest abuse scandal. Now, the first line of summary report calls it, quote, "one of the greatest tragedies to befall children in the Commonwealth." And that about sets the tone for the rest of it.

The attorney general says the law doesn't give them a way to press criminal charges against the church leadership. What he could offer the victims was his outrage, and plenty of that was on display today.

Here's CNN's Jason Carroll.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JASON CARROLL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): His voice shaking with anger, Massachusetts attorney general revealed the results of a report alleging the level of sexual abuse by priests was far greater and took place longer than many had imagined.

TOM REILLY, MASSACHUSETTS ATTORNEY GENERAL: It is very important that there be an official public record of what occurred. The mistreatment of children was so massive and so prolonged that it borders on the unbelievable. CARROLL: The scope of the scandal outlined in a 76-page report based on an 18-month investigation, using the archdiocese of Boston own records. They project nearly 1,000 victims of abuse, involving more than 250 clergy and church workers going back six decades.

REILLY: There's simply no way to calculate the damage, other than to say that what has been done to innocent children is horrible.

CARROLL: A spokesman for the archdiocese did acknowledge past mistakes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, there was a whole kind of cultural protection that did never -- that never recognized that the number one thing that we had to do was protect children.

CARROLL: Much of the criticism is directed at Boston's former cardinal, Bernard Law, and other clergy, saying they knew they were putting abusive priests with children. Law and others have denied this. The cardinal was forced to resign over the crisis.

But the attorney general says no laws were broken at the time, so he can't pursue criminal charges.

REILLY: I can say this, that if the conduct of what happened in the past, happened in the past year, with the laws that the legislature passed last year, it would be a far different story.

CARROLL: Gary Bergeron is one of the victims who met with the attorney general. He wanted to see some clergy face criminal charges, but the release of the report provides some relief.

GARY BERGERON, CLERGY ABUSE VICTIM: To have the attorney general stand up and say, Not only did it happen, but it was worse than anybody could imagine -- I don't need anybody's affirmation, but, my God, did it feel good today.

CARROLL (on camera): The report did not find any recent allegations of abuse. Victims say perhaps that means it draws a line between a painful past and a hopeful future.

Jason Carroll, CNN, Boston.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Well, traditionally, being a congressman means never having to say you're sorry, or rarely, at least traditional M.O. following gaffes, pratfalls, indictments, and other sundry embarrassments is to play past it and wait for the news cycle to move on. And it does, usually.

House members have nicknames like the Hammer, not the Apologizer. So it's with a measure of surprise that the apology of a powerful House leader starts off our national roundup tonight.

Last week, during a row with Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee, and after a pretty ugly verbal exchange, Chairman Bill Thomas called the cops. Today, he called that a case of poor judgment and more.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. BILL THOMAS (R-CA), CHAIR, WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE: I believe my intensity has served useful purposes fixing problems and passing laws that otherwise may not have made it. But when you're charged and entrusted with responsibilities by you, my colleagues, as I have been, you deserve better. Moderation is required.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: There you go.

And former ImClone CEO Sam Waksal is now inmate Sam Waksal. He reported today to a federal minimum security prison in Pennsylvania. He'll be doing a seven-year stretch for stock fraud.

Coming up next on NEWSNIGHT, an amazing story of a baseball announcer. He describes games. He can't see because he's blind.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: I hate morning papers.

All right, have you heard about the blind baseball announcer? This isn't some lame joke, as much as it sounds like one. This is a real question. Because if you haven't heard about the blind baseball announcer keep listening.

John Zarrella recently met the guy who listens to the ball game and sees the action better than a lot of folks behind home plate.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Two hours before every home game, you'll find Enrique Oliu on the field.

ENRIQUE OLIU, WAMA BASEBALL ANNOUNCER: Are you surprised you didn't play left field?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, my shoulder's hurting.

OLIU: Oh, OK, I was just wondering why...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, I couldn't throw.

ZARRELLA: Oliu loves baseball. And his appetite for detail is insatiable.

OLIU: In the big picture, that's just -- that kind of a strikeout, or was it a big deal?

ZARRELLA: Yet the Spanish-language radio announcer for major league's baseball's Tampa Bay Rays has never seen a home run or a play at the plate. Oliu has been blind since birth. But Enrique scoffs at the notion that he is sightless. OLIU: You don't have to use your pupils to see. See, I can see. I always say that I can see, because if sight is perception, I can see as well as the next guy.

ZARRELLA: During the broadcast, Oliu's wife's, Debra (ph), sits to his right. His partner, play-by-play man Danny Martinez, sits to his left. Periodically, Debra will whisper to him player statistics from the Media Guide.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: One point five point six seven ERA.

OLIU: Right.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) innings, 40 hits.

ZARRELLA: But Oliu takes the facts and analyzes the game he can't see.

OLIU (through translator): Right now, I think they've got to attack the defense.

ZARRELLA (on camera): The players say they respect Enrique because he knows the game, and he knows its history. But, they say, they don't cut him any slack or treat him any differently just because he's blind.

(voice-over): Yet they marvel at what he sees without seeing.

AL MARTIN, RAYS OUTFIELDER: The other night, he says, Hey, this one pitcher, he didn't have that good a curve ball, did he? And I am sitting there going, How would you know that? You know, I guess he really listens to how the batters are swinging, and you know, the pitcher's stats. So, I mean, he's pretty good.

ZARRELLA: Oliu's blindness may be an advantage on radio. In a medium where only words can paint the picture, Enrique Oliu can see perfectly.

John Zarrella, CNN, St. Petersburg, Florida.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: And that's a great story to end on tonight. Have a great evening, everyone. You can join me at 7:00 Eastern time tomorrow night, also I'll be back on NEWSNIGHT tomorrow at 10:00 Eastern time.

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







Aired July 23, 2003 - 22:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening everyone.
Nearly two years after 9/11 it is still an alarming sight, police and local news helicopters swarming the skies over Lower Manhattan. It happened today. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg was quick to say today's deadly shooting at City Hall was not terrorism and that seemed clear as soon as the details began coming out but it was perhaps the next worst thing, a massive security breach in a place that's a short walk away from Ground Zero.

So, the questions at hand tonight are not only what happened at City Hall but how it could have happened at all. We're going to ask those questions coming up, more on that in a moment.

We begin the whip with details of the deaths of Saddam Hussein's sons and U.S. efforts to convince Iraqis that they really are dead. Senior Pentagon Correspondent Jamie McIntyre has the latest on that, Jamie the headline.

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Anderson, the Pentagon is preparing to release pictures of Uday and Qusay to prove they really are dead. The pictures do seem to show that they were trying to change their appearance. One picture raises a question about whether Uday might have committed suicide, a question that's likely to be answered, not by the pictures, but by an autopsy.

COOPER: All right, Jamie thanks for that. We'll be back to you in a moment.

To Iraq itself now, the latest from the city of Mosul where the brothers were killed, Nic Robertson is there, Nic the headline.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SR. INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, some angry reaction to the deaths of Uday and Qusay in this town here, some less angry reaction in Baghdad as well. Some people pleased to see them dead but coalition commanders releasing more details of their deaths raising for some also the question of why were they killed rather than captured - Anderson.

COOPER: Nic.

The latest now on that shooting at City Hall in New York, Maria Hinojosa is covering that for us, Maria the headline.

MARIA HINOJOSA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, what was once unthinkable has again become possible in New York City today, two men shot dead inside City Hall, one of them a City Council member, lots of questions, lot of intrigue but one thing is for sure, this City Hall hasn't seen anything like this in its 191 year history - Anderson.

COOPER: Certainly not.

To the political circus formerly known as Sacramento now, Candy Crowley has the latest on the Gray Davis recall effort, Candy the headline.

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, in California the improbable got a lot more likely today. The secretary of state has certified that the people who want to oust Governor Gray Davis do have enough signatures to hold a statewide recall election - Anderson.

COOPER: All right, back with all of you in a moment.

Also coming up tonight on NEWSNIGHT, a follow-up on last night's buried headline, the White House official who accepted blame for letting those 16 words make it into the State of the Union speech.

Also, an update on the priest abuse scandal in Boston and why the church leadership will not face charges for looking the other way for so long.

Also tonight, the baseball announcer who calls them like he sees them, kind of, he hasn't actually seen a game in his entire life. In fact, he's never seen anything ever. This announcer is blind, all that to come in the hour ahead.

We begin, however, with what we are learning about the raid that killed the sons of Saddam that and the impact of the raid. A day later the coalition and administration now have the challenge of persuading ordinary Iraqis that this despotic duo is, in fact, dead and that their deaths do matter.

We start with CNN's Senior Pentagon Correspondent Jamie McIntyre with the late details - Jamie.

MCINTYRE: Well, Anderson, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz has just returned from Iraq and one of the things he said he noticed was that there were widespread conspiracy beliefs about the United States and what was going on, so it's important for the U.S. to establish that, in fact, they have killed Uday and Qusay, the sons of Saddam Hussein.

To that end, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld today said the U.S. is planning to release photographs that would establish that they were dead, photographs of their dead bodies but what's not clear is how graphic those pictures will be. Some pictures taken right after Tuesday's raid are quite graphic and described to CNN by a senior military official who has seen them.

They show that both brothers apparently tried to change their appearance, growing beards, and in other ways trying to change their appearance but in the case of Uday there's also a mysterious what appears to be an exit wound on the back of his head. Some are suggesting that that might indicate he shot himself in a self-inflicted gunshot wound but the Pentagon is saying at this point that that's all pure speculation, speculation that would likely be answered when an autopsy is performed.

Now, when this autopsy is performed they may also clean up the bodies and re-photograph them, therefore being able to release pictures that would not be as graphic as the ones taken right after the attack.

Again, the object of this is to essentially prove to the skeptical Iraqi population that, in fact, Uday and Qusay are dead and not coming back and that the United States is committed to hunting down Saddam Hussein as well - Anderson.

COOPER: Do we know has there been an internal debate over whether or not to release these photos and do we know any details of that debate?

MCINTYRE: Well, we don't know the details. The impression that I get from talking to Pentagon officials is that the debate has centered more over how and what kind of pictures to release rather than whether to release them at all.

It gets to the point of how graphic an image the United States wants to be putting out. If they release the first pictures they had they are quite gruesome but, again, if the bodies are cleaned up, dressed by say a mortician and they may not be as graphic as the ones that were initially taken at the end of the raid. I think that's really where the debate was centering.

COOPER: I suppose, though, if the pictures are too cleaned up, I mean if the bodies are so cleaned up it runs the risk of the photos somehow looking doctored or not being believed as being accurate.

MCINTYRE: Well, I think the feeling of the Pentagon is people who are predisposed to not believe the United States may still be skeptical even if there were pictures released.

Those who are predisposed to believe the United States are going to believe it whether or not the pictures are released but they do think it's important to establish beyond any doubt that both the brothers are dead.

COOPER: All right, Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon thanks very much for that.

More now on the situation on the ground in Iraq, any celebration today was muted by the killing of two more soldiers and a new tape purportedly from Saddam Hussein. Add to that even in Mosul the lingering loyalty to the old regime that was plain to see.

Here again, CNN's Nic Robertson.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ROBERTSON (voice-over): Pro-Saddam Hussein and angry over the killing of his two sons, protesters press up to the razor wire cordon securing the house where the pair died, some blaming the house owner.

"He was a collaborator" says this man, his friend adding "That's all the U.S. does, bribe people."

The crowds quickly dispersed by warnings from coalition troops backed up by stick-wielding Iraqi militiamen. Inside the ruined building, U.S. troops catalog destruction.

LT. COL. MIKE ROREX, 101ST AIRBORNE: Any house you have here in Iraq is going to be well fortified so they can hide very well and get down from gunfire, so they had to use some heavier weapons than normal.

ROBERTSON: Not only well fortified but stiffly defended.

GEN. RICARDO SANCHEZ, COMMANDER, COALITION GROUND FORCES: We had an enemy that was defending. It was barricaded and we had to take the measures that were necessary in order to neutralize the target.

ROBERTSON: Three assaults before successfully securing the building. On the final push, according to Sanchez, coalition troops, still facing fire, killed the remaining survivors.

Abid Hamoud (ph) Saddam Hussein's private secretary, now in coalition captivity one of the former regime members used by the coalition to identify Uday and Qusay.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTSON: From all the evidence presented by the coalition it seems Uday and Qusay had no intention of giving themselves up alive. How much help they might have been to the coalition in locating their father is a question that may dog coalition officials for sometime to come as people examine why they were not captured rather than killed - Anderson.

COOPER: Nic, I'm fascinated to see some of those pictures from demonstrations, pro-Saddam demonstrations, people complaining about the deaths of these two. I mean by all accounts, I mean Uday especially, a rapist and a murderer, Qusay as well. Are the people protesting in support of these two sons of Saddam or is it more against the U.S.?

ROBERTSON: I think one of the things here that we're seeing is this is perhaps a neighborhood of Mosul and this is where the demonstration took place, a neighborhood that was perhaps pro-Ba'ath Party, pro-Saddam Hussein's regime. Perhaps that is why we saw a demonstration of this kind.

The Ba'ath Party around the country and Mosul included is we're told by many people beginning to regroup, beginning to reorganize. There is an element of anti-U.S. There is that sentiment in Iraq that wherever U.S. troops are, whatever they do, some people are always going to come out and criticize them.

There is an element of that but certainly some of the people we've talked to today as well said, look, these people were Iraqis. It's difficult for us to condone their killings but it is a real eye- opener, if you will. There are still people who will come out and praise these people who were as feared - who were feared across the whole country.

ANDERSON: It's fascinating. Nic Robertson thanks very much live from Mosul.

So, how will the pictures of Uday and Qusay play in the port of Umm Qasr and points elsewhere for that matter? With us now in Abu Dhabi is Nart Bouran of Abu Dhabi Television news. Welcome to the program. Thanks very much for getting up so early. Do your viewers accept that these two are in fact dead?

NART BOURAN, DIRECTOR, ABU DHABI TV: I believe so. I think people have come to accept that and they believe they are dead but there is an element of requiring closure and that's what those pictures would do. People are still skeptical a bit and they want to see for a fact that they have been killed.

But, in general, I think the feeling is that there's no tears shed in the Arab world for these two and they were known for their brutality and Qusay, for example, was a dictator in the making and Qusay was seen as a psychotic son of a president who couldn't believe that he was the son of the president who could do anything at any time to anyone.

So, in that sense I think people in general in the Arab world and the viewers would see that as an end to an era as such but there is a requirement for closure. They want to see what exactly had happened and see the bodies.

COOPER: How, I mean there is apparently, according to Jamie McIntyre, some debate about how graphic the photos should be. I mean there are apparently a set of very graphic images. There is some question about whether those are the images that will be released. I mean does it matter? I mean do viewers want to see the most graphic images there are?

BOURAN: I don't think, you know, the pictures being graphic is a problem. For sure there will be some who will, you know, emotions will come out and say, you know, why have they done this? They could have captured them instead of killing them, especially if the pictures are really graphic. But, I think they want to see it whatever it is and for a lot of Iraqis they just want to see the end of this.

COOPER: How does this affect the general resistance? I mean, you know, U.S. forces are still being shot at, U.S. soldiers still being killed almost on a daily basis now. Does this have a big impact? I mean has a page been turned?

BOURAN: Well, unfortunately I believe it hasn't. I don't think the resistance really has anything to do much with the Ba'ath Party at the moment. Yes there is an element of that. There is a fraction of the resistance coming from those people who have nowhere else to go and they fought all their lives for the Ba'ath Party and for the regime.

But, I think there's a large part of the resistance that hasn't anything to do with that. They are just anti-American and anti- occupation and there's also an element, a very dangerous element of Islamic militants growing in Iraq against the American presence over there and more as we go along as long as this continues you will see more of that than actually Ba'ath Party loyalists and that's the dangerous part.

COOPER: It's hard to get a sense, even viewing images we see in the states on television, of I mean how widespread this anti-U.S. sentiment is. I mean if you believe the demonstrations you see, you think okay it's happening everywhere. Do you have a sense of how widespread?

BOURAN: Well, I think in the rest of the world, of the Arab world, it's more of wanting to see an end to the occupation and maybe the fact that it took so long to have the governing body and it's taking longer for free election that will bring in their view a legitimate government ruling Iraq and not one that is appointed. So, I think as long as that takes time and it's taking longer and longer, that's where the anti-American sentiment would even increase.

COOPER: But that's, I mean what's confusing for some. I mean just as a viewer watching this sort of unfold, I mean, it seems people are saying they want the U.S. out. They want Iraqi democracy now but there's I mean the very open question of can they handle it now? I mean is Iraqi really ready?

BOURAN: Well, that's a completely different question, what is possible on the ground and what people want to see are two different things, maybe not at the moment.

It's going to take a little bit longer. These people were in decades of dictatorship so, in reality, it should take a little bit longer until everything is settled and they know where they're going.

But, you can't help but people saying that that they want to see democracy and a freely elected government. What is wanted and what they say is completely different from what is possible on the ground.

COOPER: And that is about the same anywhere in the world. Nart Bouran with Abu Dhabi TV appreciate you joining us, thank you. It was interesting.

Coming up on NEWSNIGHT a wild shootout in New York City Hall, two political rivals are dead. We're going to have the details coming up.

Also, politics California style, a recall vote for the governor.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) COOPER: Well, there is rough and tumble politics and then there is what happened today inside New York City Hall. It threw much of Lower Manhattan into turmoil and until we learned exactly what transpired, all the post 9/11 memories and questions came rushing back. The answer soon followed, terrorism no, terror most certainly, tragedy as well, the story from CNN's Maria Hinojosa.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MIKE NELSON, NYC COUNCILMAN: I just heard bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, and I thought it was firecrackers, the first three or four until people started, you know, screaming. That's when a bunch of us just went right on the floor.

HINOJOSA (voice-over): City Council members scrambled for cover and went into emergency mode. City Hall was evacuated, then surrounded, SWAT teams, machineguns, bomb-sniffing dogs.

DAVID WEPRIN, NYC COUNCILMAN: Dialed 9-1-1. While I was on the floor under the chamber but, you know, all I did was keep it on and the gunshots were going. Then they told us to leave the building, get out, get out.

HINOJOSA: Within hours two men declared dead, one of them City Councilman James Davis, a 41-year-old African American Democratic city councilman representing a hard hit part of Brooklyn. He campaigned against gun violence.

NELSON: He's a minister. He's a former police officer. He actually, it's ironic that he was the one that's shot in the chamber. He actually led a movement called Stop the Violence and he had marches every year. I used to participate in his marches.

HINOJOSA: Also dead, Othniel Askew, who police say shot Davis in the balcony of the City Council chamber before he was himself killed by a police officer.

RAY KELLY, POLICE COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK POLICE DEPARTMENT: Witnesses say they saw Askew standing over Davis repeatedly firing shots.

HINOJOSA: New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Askew was able to get the gun inside City Hall because it was Davis who led his political rival into City Hall bypassing the metal detector.

GEOFFREY DAVIS, JAMES DAVIS' BROTHER: The system killed my brother but it's all right. I'm confused right now. How is it at City Hall? How can this happen in City Hall?

MAYOR MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, NEW YORK: They went through the security booth but did not go through the Magnetometer. Apparently, the City Council members and the mayor have not been going through a Magnetometer.

HINOJOSA: City Hall is just blocks from where the World Trade Center was attacked nearly two years ago. Witnesses said that was the first thing they thought of.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was just like are we under attack? I don't know. I was just frightened.

HINOJOSA: Outside the city councilman's home, friends and neighbors gathered to mourn creating a makeshift memorial.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: James Davis candle and his light will never go out in Crown Heights.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HINOJOSA: Now, Anderson, a bizarre twist to this story came earlier in the day. The FBI says that at about eleven o'clock this morning they got a call from a man identifying himself as Othniel Askew saying that he was being harassed by a New York City Council member, James Davis.

Now, CNN has just learned from law enforcement sources that Askew's claim was that Davis was trying to blackmail him to get him out of running against him for his City Council seat, so a lot of questions, Anderson, certainly for a story that has shaken New York, at least for today - Anderson.

COOPER: Obviously, we're going to be getting a lot more developments in the coming hours. Maria Hinojosa thanks very much for the update.

Now to California, California Governor Gray Davis today seemed to take a cue from one of his possible challengers in a recall election, Arnold Schwarzenegger, that is, the Arnold we saw in "Terminator 3." Like the terminator, the governor basically said "talk to the hand" today to the political forces trying to oust him.

He said, "I'm a fighter." He better be a fighter. Tonight, the prospect of a recall election went from strong possibility to harsh reality, more now from CNN's Candy Crowley.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CROWLEY (voice-over): Since 1911, there have been 31 failed recall attempts against California governors. The 32nd time was the charm.

KEVIN SHELLEY, CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE: It is my duty today to certify the first recall election of a governor in California history. As of today, my office has received over 1.6 million total signatures. Of these, more than 1.3 million have been found to be valid.

CROWLEY: You didn't have to read between the lines to know there would be enough signatures on the recall Gray Davis petitions to put the matter to a vote but the true measure of the governor's problem is not how many names a well financed opposition can gather. Not even his 22 percent job approval rating captures the essence of what's going on. If you really want to know the depth of this quicksand talk to one of the governor's supporters.

Can you defend Gray Davis for me?

ART PULASKI, CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION: This is not about whether you like Gray Davis or not.

CROWLEY: Alrighty then, put it this way. For Gray Davis to stay in office the recall vote will need to be about something other than Gray Davis and nobody ever said Gray Davis doesn't understand politics.

GOV. GRAY DAVIS, (D), CALIFORNIA: This election is not about changing governors. It's about changing direction and I think at the end of the day the voters are going to opt for a progressive agenda not a conservative agenda.

CROWLEY: Still, the elements are not favorable. Davis is presiding over a $38 billion deficit. The budget process is gummed up with politics and decisions nobody wants to make and, honestly, Gray Davis is not warm and fuzzy. Minority California Republicans knew a perfect storm when they saw it.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CROWLEY: And the perfect storm is still gathering because, as we said, they had more than a million signatures that were certified here today by the secretary of state. Now, from here, what's supposed to happen is that between 60 and 80 days from now there will be an election but there's a lot to do between now and then, Anderson.

We are told by the secretary of state that some counties in California don't have any voting machines because they threw out the old ones waiting for the new ones, so he's going to have to go to the State Assembly and ask them for more money and, of course, part of the problem here has been that huge budget deficit, so stay tuned.

COOPER: Yes, 60 to 80 days that's a very short amount of time.

CROWLEY: That's right.

COOPER: How much time is there for people to register to run against him?

CROWLEY: Well, they have up until - I'm not really sure of the exact amount of time but they have a little while here. It's all sort of set up in their Constitution. What has been interesting here is that there's been this - since they've never done it before they're not exactly sure about the details of it.

For instance, there seems to be a disagreement, even among Democrats, about whether the ballot is simply do you want to recall Gray Davis or don't you, or whether the ballot should also include those names.

What we do know is that Democrats will not put their names on the ballot and it will be on Republicans. There have been a couple of names that we've thrown out there.

Arnold Schwarzenegger certainly is one of them. Now we hear about Arianna Huffington but until they file we won't know. They've got to have I think about $3,200 and they have to go through an official thing, so there will be a couple of them on there.

COOPER: I mean is this unstoppable at this point? Could he resign I guess and I don't even know what that would do?

CROWLEY: Sure. Well, it wouldn't do much except for it would give the lieutenant governor a little time in office before there was an election but, again, the secretary of state said today, look, once a recall effort has been certified there's no stopping it.

So, even if he resigned today, which by the way as you noted he said I'm a fighter, he shows no intention of resigning but even if he should there would still be a recall vote. Now, who'd be on that recall and whether Bustamante would put his name on, you know, it's another one of those stay tuned questions.

COOPER: And for a state that's already strapped with cash this is going to be expensive, this - any upcoming election.

CROWLEY: Sure, and it sounds like it's going to be even more expensive than they thought. First of all, they have to notify voters. They have to have people who can, you know, sit at the voting booths and, you know, sometimes that costs money and, again, there are some places that don't have voting machines so they've got to figure that out. Estimated about $30 million, which up against this budget is a pittance but, you know, they can't afford much here because of the huge deficits.

COOPER: And it's just a fascinating development. Candy Crowley thanks very much.

Coming up on NEWSNIGHT, the weapons of mass destruction issue and the continuing questions over whether the Bush administration hyped the intelligence.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Well, you don't have to be a political whiz to notice that stories on the selling of the war and the handling of the peace for that matter have died down somewhat, which is not to say the criticism itself has vanished, only that the raid on Mosul crowded it off the front page at least for now.

It's a breather and a boost for an administration that badly needs one and the White House today made the most of it. Here's CNN White House Correspondent Suzanne Malveaux.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Flanked by the defense secretary and the administration's point man on Iraq, President Bush said with the death of Saddam Hussein's sons, the brutal Iraqi regime died too.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Saddam Hussein's sons were responsible for torture, maiming, and murder of countless Iraqis. Now more than ever, all Iraqis can now that the former regime is gone and will not be coming back.

MALVEAUX: The administration's hope is that with Saddam's sons gone, there will be a boost in morale for weary U.S. soldiers, a chance for calm on the ground, and a new impetus for international allies to send troops and supplies.

But there are questions still over how dubious intelligence used to support the case for war made it into President Bush's State of the Union speech.

Tuesday, Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, who vetted Mr. Bush's speech, said he forgot previous repeated warnings from the CIA not to include a controversial claim that Iraq was attempting to acquire uranium from Africa.

But calls continue for President Bush to take responsibility.

SEN. EDWARD M. KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: The buck does not stop with CIA director George Tenet, and it does not stop with Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. The buck stops with the president.

MALVEAUX: Two weeks after the intelligence controversy erupted, the administration is still trying to explain.

SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: These words, these 16 words, do not change the fact that there's a mountain of evidence about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed, and that it was important that we act on this threat.

MALVEAUX: The White House is getting support from an unlikely ally, former president Bill Clinton, who's urging Bush critics to move on.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON (on phone): I thought the White House did the right thing in just saying, Well, we probably shouldn't have said that. And I think we ought to focus on where we are and what right thing to do for Iraq is now.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: But the controversy has given Democrats a rare opening to challenge Mr. Bush on foreign policy. And as a growing number call for congressional hearings, Mr. Bush's approval ratings in the polls continue to drop.

Suzanne Malveaux, CNN, the White House.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Well, we mentioned a moment ago, you don't have to be a political whiz. Just the same, it doesn't hurt to have one around, so we're joined tonight in Aspen, Colorado, by David Gergen, who's been a frequent adviser to presidents and now teaches at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.

David, welcome back. Good to see you.

First I want to talk about timing a little bit...

DAVID GERGEN, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL ADVISER: Thanks, Anderson.

COOPER: ... about the Stephen Hadley announcement. It came sort of as a lot of focus had drifted toward the killing of Uday and Qusay Hussein. Was that a coincidence?

GERGEN: Well, I'm sure that they were very happy to be able to put that, the news out, the Hadley story out in the wake of this huge story coming out of Iraq, because they knew it would be buried.

But I think it was probably a coincidence. I am sure they felt they had to get this out. This story about a 16-word sentence in the president's speech has now going on -- has now been -- had nearly 16 days of life, something no one ever expected when it started.

I am sure it's a huge irritant to the administration. I've talked to people there who believe it's been way overblown by the Democrats and by the press. But nonetheless, it has touched a sore nerve. But, you know, I think it's taken off in part because the White House has not handled it well, and part because there have been some doubts about the evidence because we haven't found any weapons of mass destruction to speak of so far.

COOPER: Well, with the Hadley announcement, I mean, does the story end there? Do you think -- I mean, do you have -- feel like you have, and the American public has, a very good sense of exactly what went on in the White House?

GERGEN: I think Stephen Hadley helped the White House by saying, Yes, of course we looked at this, and I take some of the blame for it, and Mike Gersten (ph), the speechwriter, found a memo that's also been put out. I do think that's helped. I do not think it's ended the story.

What has surprised me also from the beginning of this is, it would have been -- they would have been -- helped themselves so much had the president shown anger right from the beginning and said, I do not -- I take full responsibility for my speech having been this way. It should have not been this way. Now I want to find out what happened.

I think the president was innocent when he spoke this. But if he'd taken the lead and pushed inside for an internal inquiry, led by his Andy Card, the chief of staff, or someone else, get all the facts out, Mr. Hadley, Condi Rice, whoever up and down the line, saw, talked, or had anything to do with, get all the facts out there at one time, and this story would not continue to have legs.

Every time you put out a new explanation, it gives new legs to the story, and it goes on, and we gets into days 15 or day 16 of this 16-word story.

COOPER: Well, and, I mean, talking about a -- perhaps a future leg, I mean, does Condoleezza Rice now need to come forward and say something? I mean, you now have her, the deputy national security adviser, saying I take responsibility. I mean, down the road, is she going to have to say something?

GERGEN: I think that she ultimately is going to have to provide an explanation, as -- and I think there -- but, you know, the nature, Anderson, of one of these kind of things is, it -- that people on the outside, the partisans on the other side, want to first identify somebody in the agency, and then they want to bring the controversy into the White House, and they want to push it toward the president's desk.

That's what name of the game is among Democrats, to keep pushing this, to try to get it up to Condoleezza Rice, get her to respond, and then get the president to respond. Get the vice president to respond.

You know, so there's going to be a lot of pressure for her...

COOPER: Well, then, how (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

GERGEN: ... to say something more. I think they should, I think the president, again, should step and say, Let's get all the facts out. You know, we made a mistake, look, we blew this, but the rest of our case was strong. We are doing the right thing in Iraq. Now, let's get all the facts out.

COOPER: How surprised were you then to hear former president Clinton on "LARRY KING LIVE" last night, or hear reports about it, saying, in essence, you know, time to move on?

GERGEN: Well, I was surprised by that, but not totally. President Clinton has taken a view for some weeks now, and I've heard him say this, he's told many people that, look, when he was president, he was presented with evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He's always felt that the Democrats ought to get off this case that there were no weapons of mass destruction, because he said the intelligence agency told him some years ago.

And indeed, talking to people in the Clinton administration, I'm convinced that they would have gone after Saddam had it not been for two things. They did not see the imminent threat that the Bush administration did, and the weapons of mass destruction. They saw a program that was under way on weapons of mass destruction. They didn't see an imminent threat.

And so they didn't have a rationale for going in. 9/11, of course, helped the Bush administration on that.

But second thing that stopped the Bush administration, and I've, you know, I've known this, you know, they've been talking about this for a long time, they couldn't see who was going to succeed Saddam. They thought it was going to be a mess.

If you go to Secretary of State Jim Baker's book about his time of secretary of state, one of the arguments he made in that book is, We didn't go to Baghdad way back in the Persian Gulf War. But one of the reasons was, we worried that it would be a mess when it was over. And that's what worried the Clinton administration.

COOPER: This, I mean, obviously, the nine Democratic presidential candidates or wannabe candidates right now do not seem willing to take President Clinton's advice and sort of let this thing go. Is this an issue they -- I mean, feel that they can win with?

GERGEN: They cannot win with this. (UNINTELLIGIBLE), I think Bill Clinton did give them good advice on one major, major point, and that is, they ought to be putting a lot more focus on, What are we doing in Iraq now? Is this going well? Do we have the right strategy? Do we have enough resources on the ground? How are we going to get out of this?

Now, it -- all of us hope, for the country's sake, we have to hope that the killing of the two sons yesterday will be a major turning point in Iraq. And we'll see much more (UNINTELLIGIBLE) much more security, and this thing will calm down, and we can get about the role of nation building.

But from the Democrats' point of view, they ought to be very much looking for ways to make sure the country succeeds in Iraq. All of us have an interest in that. And they should not -- you know, this 16- word (UNINTELLIGIBLE), (UNINTELLIGIBLE) speech idea is a small piece of a much larger puzzle. And they ought to -- I think President Clinton was right, they ought to start focusing on much the bigger picture.

Because if they're going to criticize the president for lacking a policy in Iraq or lacking an effective policy, what is their alternative? Does anybody know what the Democrats would do to solve this problem? I don't think we do right now.

COOPER: All right, we're going to leave it there tonight. David Gergen, thanks very much. It was very interesting.

GERGEN: OK, (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

COOPER: All right. Well, as NEWSNIGHT continues. tomorrow's big story, the release of the report on what went wrong before September 11. Be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Well, it's a headline in and of itself. The congressional report into 9/11 is coming out tomorrow, nearly two years after it all happened. There has been enormous reluctance to lay blame in what's got to be remembered as one of the worst intelligence failures in American history.

But as one victim advocate argues, sometimes you have to point fingers, and this is one of those times.

We're getting some early hints at where the fingers are pointed in the report.

We get more now from CNN's Jonathan Karl.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JONATHAN KARL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The long-awaited report on the September 11 intelligence failures includes revelations about several missed opportunities that one of the report's Democratic co-authors says could have allowed the FBI to the uncover the 9/11 plot before it was too late.

SEN. BOB GRAHAM (D-FL), FORMER CHAIR, INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: It would have been avoided if our agencies had been less turf protective, if they'd been more communicative, if they had been more creative in their analysis of intelligence information that they had, and had had a little bit of luck.

KARL: But Graham's charge appears to be contradicted by the report itself. According to sources who have seen the report, it concludes, quote, "This inquiry has uncovered no intelligence information in the possession of the intelligence community prior to the attacks of September 11 that, if fully considered, would have provided specific advance warning of the details of those attacks."

No specific warning, but the nearly 900-page report reveals several blown chances to track the hijackers before they acted. Exhibit A, hijackers Khalid Almidhar and Nawaf Alhazmi. Although the CIA knew about their ties to al Qaeda, they did not tell the FBI until three weeks before September 11.

And it may have been possible for the FBI to track the hijackers. They came into contact with three people under FBI investigation after moving to San Diego in January 2000. And while living in San Diego, they actually rented a room in a house of an FBI informant.

SEN. EVAN BAYH (D-IN), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: If FBI agents in San Diego are not aware of other information that the bureau possesses, or the CIA does not inform the bureau of information they have, then it's very difficult to protect our country in a coordinated manner.

KARL: But government sources tell CNN that the hijackers did not tell any of those under FBI investigation about the plot.

REP. RICHARD BURR (R), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Hindsight's a wonderful tool. But I'm not sure that we understand the connection of the dots well enough to lock at it and say, Had we done this, this couldn't have happened. I don't think we reached that conclusion. KARL (on camera): A section of the report exploring ties between the hijackers and the government of Saudi Arabia was censored after the administration cited national security concerns. According to sources who have seen the uncensored report, the section is highly critical of the Saudi government.

Jonathan Karl, CNN, Capitol Hill.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Well, a few stories from around the world tonight, beginning with an intriguing admission from the intelligence minister of Iran. He said Iran has some senior al Qaeda members in custody, quote, "a large number of them have been deported already. And a number of them are currently in our custody," end quote. White House spokesman Scott McClellan wasn't able to confirm that, but he said it furthers the belief that there is a significant al Qaeda presence in Iran.

Moving on to Liberia now, 20 more U.S. Marines arrived at the U.S. embassy in Monrovia to boost security. A senior White House official said today that an African-led peacekeeping force could be there within five days, that a U.S. role in that force would be limited to logistical support.

Still coming up on NEWSNIGHT, the priest abuse scandal in Boston. And the report that shows it was far worse and went on far longer than anyone even imagined.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Well, in Boston today, the Massachusetts attorney general issued the results of a sweeping investigation into the priest abuse scandal. Now, the first line of summary report calls it, quote, "one of the greatest tragedies to befall children in the Commonwealth." And that about sets the tone for the rest of it.

The attorney general says the law doesn't give them a way to press criminal charges against the church leadership. What he could offer the victims was his outrage, and plenty of that was on display today.

Here's CNN's Jason Carroll.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JASON CARROLL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): His voice shaking with anger, Massachusetts attorney general revealed the results of a report alleging the level of sexual abuse by priests was far greater and took place longer than many had imagined.

TOM REILLY, MASSACHUSETTS ATTORNEY GENERAL: It is very important that there be an official public record of what occurred. The mistreatment of children was so massive and so prolonged that it borders on the unbelievable. CARROLL: The scope of the scandal outlined in a 76-page report based on an 18-month investigation, using the archdiocese of Boston own records. They project nearly 1,000 victims of abuse, involving more than 250 clergy and church workers going back six decades.

REILLY: There's simply no way to calculate the damage, other than to say that what has been done to innocent children is horrible.

CARROLL: A spokesman for the archdiocese did acknowledge past mistakes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, there was a whole kind of cultural protection that did never -- that never recognized that the number one thing that we had to do was protect children.

CARROLL: Much of the criticism is directed at Boston's former cardinal, Bernard Law, and other clergy, saying they knew they were putting abusive priests with children. Law and others have denied this. The cardinal was forced to resign over the crisis.

But the attorney general says no laws were broken at the time, so he can't pursue criminal charges.

REILLY: I can say this, that if the conduct of what happened in the past, happened in the past year, with the laws that the legislature passed last year, it would be a far different story.

CARROLL: Gary Bergeron is one of the victims who met with the attorney general. He wanted to see some clergy face criminal charges, but the release of the report provides some relief.

GARY BERGERON, CLERGY ABUSE VICTIM: To have the attorney general stand up and say, Not only did it happen, but it was worse than anybody could imagine -- I don't need anybody's affirmation, but, my God, did it feel good today.

CARROLL (on camera): The report did not find any recent allegations of abuse. Victims say perhaps that means it draws a line between a painful past and a hopeful future.

Jason Carroll, CNN, Boston.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Well, traditionally, being a congressman means never having to say you're sorry, or rarely, at least traditional M.O. following gaffes, pratfalls, indictments, and other sundry embarrassments is to play past it and wait for the news cycle to move on. And it does, usually.

House members have nicknames like the Hammer, not the Apologizer. So it's with a measure of surprise that the apology of a powerful House leader starts off our national roundup tonight.

Last week, during a row with Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee, and after a pretty ugly verbal exchange, Chairman Bill Thomas called the cops. Today, he called that a case of poor judgment and more.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. BILL THOMAS (R-CA), CHAIR, WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE: I believe my intensity has served useful purposes fixing problems and passing laws that otherwise may not have made it. But when you're charged and entrusted with responsibilities by you, my colleagues, as I have been, you deserve better. Moderation is required.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: There you go.

And former ImClone CEO Sam Waksal is now inmate Sam Waksal. He reported today to a federal minimum security prison in Pennsylvania. He'll be doing a seven-year stretch for stock fraud.

Coming up next on NEWSNIGHT, an amazing story of a baseball announcer. He describes games. He can't see because he's blind.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: I hate morning papers.

All right, have you heard about the blind baseball announcer? This isn't some lame joke, as much as it sounds like one. This is a real question. Because if you haven't heard about the blind baseball announcer keep listening.

John Zarrella recently met the guy who listens to the ball game and sees the action better than a lot of folks behind home plate.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Two hours before every home game, you'll find Enrique Oliu on the field.

ENRIQUE OLIU, WAMA BASEBALL ANNOUNCER: Are you surprised you didn't play left field?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, my shoulder's hurting.

OLIU: Oh, OK, I was just wondering why...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, I couldn't throw.

ZARRELLA: Oliu loves baseball. And his appetite for detail is insatiable.

OLIU: In the big picture, that's just -- that kind of a strikeout, or was it a big deal?

ZARRELLA: Yet the Spanish-language radio announcer for major league's baseball's Tampa Bay Rays has never seen a home run or a play at the plate. Oliu has been blind since birth. But Enrique scoffs at the notion that he is sightless. OLIU: You don't have to use your pupils to see. See, I can see. I always say that I can see, because if sight is perception, I can see as well as the next guy.

ZARRELLA: During the broadcast, Oliu's wife's, Debra (ph), sits to his right. His partner, play-by-play man Danny Martinez, sits to his left. Periodically, Debra will whisper to him player statistics from the Media Guide.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: One point five point six seven ERA.

OLIU: Right.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) innings, 40 hits.

ZARRELLA: But Oliu takes the facts and analyzes the game he can't see.

OLIU (through translator): Right now, I think they've got to attack the defense.

ZARRELLA (on camera): The players say they respect Enrique because he knows the game, and he knows its history. But, they say, they don't cut him any slack or treat him any differently just because he's blind.

(voice-over): Yet they marvel at what he sees without seeing.

AL MARTIN, RAYS OUTFIELDER: The other night, he says, Hey, this one pitcher, he didn't have that good a curve ball, did he? And I am sitting there going, How would you know that? You know, I guess he really listens to how the batters are swinging, and you know, the pitcher's stats. So, I mean, he's pretty good.

ZARRELLA: Oliu's blindness may be an advantage on radio. In a medium where only words can paint the picture, Enrique Oliu can see perfectly.

John Zarrella, CNN, St. Petersburg, Florida.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: And that's a great story to end on tonight. Have a great evening, everyone. You can join me at 7:00 Eastern time tomorrow night, also I'll be back on NEWSNIGHT tomorrow at 10:00 Eastern time.

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