Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsnight Aaron Brown

Polls Show Clarke Controversy Does Not Affect Presidential Race; Massachusetts Passes Amendment Banning Gay Marriage

Aired March 29, 2004 - 22:00   ET

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

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


AARON BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening again, everyone.
We are a week and a day into the matter of Richard Clarke versus the Bush administration's decisions or lack of decisions in fighting terrorism before and after 9/11, a week and a day of relentless coverage that continues tonight and beyond, a week and a day of public hearings, news reports, high profile interviews, attacks, counterattacks, accusations of profiteering and perjury and more, a week and a day and you know what, not a single mind has been changed.

A CNN-USA Today Gallup poll released today says essentially that. Republicans, or at least who say they were planning to vote for President Bush tend to disbelieve Mr. Clarke. The Democrats, or at least those who say they are planning to support Senator Kerry, tend to believe Mr. Clarke.

A week and a day of this with more to come and no one seems really moved at all by the substance, just the politics of the one issue we would hope would be seen as non-political. It tops the news again tonight.

Our Senior White House Correspondent John King starts us off with a headline, John good evening.

JOHN KING, CNN SR. WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good evening to you, Aaron.

In those same polls, though, evidence that over the long term this controversy could cause some damage to this president in a reelection year. That is one of the reasons the White House is very actively trying to reach a compromise with the commission to allow Dr. Rice to testify in private but make her remarks part of the public records, talks about a compromise, still no deal -- Aaron.

BROWN: John, thank you.

On to Boston, same-sex marriage and the not so gentle art of politics, CNN's Dan Lothian there for us tonight, Dan a headline.

DAN LOTHIAN, CNN BOSTON BUREAU CHIEF: Well, Aaron, it was a close vote but in the end lawmakers did agree on an amendment. They said no to gay marriages but yes to civil unions, a major development but this battle is far from over -- Aaron.

BROWN: Dan, thank you. To the Pentagon and a report today on a very dark moment in the war with Iraq, Jamie McIntyre has the watch and the headline.

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, responsibility for the worst friendly fire incident of the Gulf War has been placed squarely on the shoulders of one Marine captain but some of his comrades in arms believe that maybe he shouldn't bear all of the blame -- Aaron.

BROWN: Jamie, thank you.

And finally it isn't the trial of the century but it ain't half bad either, CNN's Chris Huntington on Dennis Kozlowski and a hamstrung jury, Chris a headline from you.

CHRIS HUNTINGTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, it appears the jury for now has avoided a mistrial. They are back at work, apparently stopped feuding and have continued deliberations. We may get a verdict yet on the man who is perhaps best know for spending $6,000 on a shower curtain -- Aaron.

BROWN: Chris, thank you. Back to you and the rest shortly.

Also coming up on the program tonight, growing anti-Semitism in Iraq and what's fueling it, not exactly what the U.S. had hoped for but not exactly a shocker either.

Plus, what happens when all the bars and the restaurants in an entire country go no smoking overnight? They did in Ireland and we took a chance getting the story.

And maybe the rooster will stop by with a pint or two, not a bad idea that. Pint or not the rooster will be here with your morning papers, all that and more in the hour ahead.

We begin tonight with a story that isn't going away. The commission investigating 9/11 wants the president's national security adviser to testify in public and under oath. She continues to say no even as pressure on her and her boss appears to be growing and compromise is in the air.

What's more the public is still evenly divided over what it all means is clearly taking notice and that Gallup, CNN-USA Today poll shows that despite a rough couple of weeks the president tonight enjoys a narrow lead among likely voters.

With all of that in mind here again our Senior White House Correspondent John King.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KING (voice-over): Welcoming seven new members to the NATO Alliance, a picture perfect event for a president whose reelection theme boils down to one word leadership.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We will face the mortal danger of terrorism and we will overcome it together.

KING: But for all the celebration, Mr. Bush's stewardship of the war on terror is increasingly a campaign year question mark. Seventy percent of the American people say they are very closely or somewhat closely following former White House official Richard Clarke's allegation the president did not pay enough attention to terrorism before the September 11 attacks.

GLEN BOLGER, REPUBLICAN POLLSTER: People are paying a great deal of attention to this issue. You can't ignore it and hope it goes away.

KING: In a new CNN poll, the public is evenly divided when asked whether they are inclined to believe Clarke or the White House and evenly divided when asked if the president paid too little attention to terrorism because he was too focused on Saddam Hussein.

PETER HART, DEMOCRATIC POLLSTER: Any time you have the American public split between a bureaucrat and an administration, the administration is losing.

KING: Two-thirds of Americans do not think the Bush administration should have been able to prevent the 9/11 tragedy and the administration's hope is that come November voters will judge Mr. Bush more by his actions after the attacks.

DICK CHENEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I've seen calm when calm was needed, a decisive action when action was required. I'm honored to serve at his side.

KING: Despite mounting pressure, the White House says National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice will not testify before the 9/11 commission in public, something strategists in both parties say is risky.

HART: This has been a very bad period for the president. It almost feels like he's out of step or wearing two right shoes. Everything that he does seems off target and away from the heart of the matter.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING: In that same poll, 58 percent of the American people say they support Mr. Bush when it comes to the war on terrorism. That's still a solid majority but it is his lowest score on that question since the pollsters started asking it 30 months ago, Aaron, right after the attacks.

And, again, conversations between White House lawyers and the commission, they're trying to reach a compromise to keep Dr. Rice in private not under oath and make most of her remarks in that session part of the public record. An interesting question as to whether they can work that out.

BROWN: Let's talk about that a bit. She has testified before or she's talked. I guess you can't call it testimony.

KING: Right.

BROWN: She's talked to the commission or at least some of the commissioners and there's no transcript of that so how do you make it public?

KING: The commissioners took notes who were at that meeting. It ran about four hours and some White House staffers, Condoleezza Rice's aides at that meeting took notes. There is also involved in the conversations could you make some of that part of the public record?

Much of it was classified. The entire session is considered classified. Much of the items under discussion are considered highly sensitive intelligence. Can you go back and take some of that first four hour session and put that in the public record?

The main focus is on if there is a second session can you make sure at that session you bring in a stenographer. You take much better notes and then you take out the classified information and try to make more of it part of the public record.

Some at the commission, though, are holding out. They think the pressure is mounting, maybe they will get her in public and they're also worried, Aaron, about being used essentially. They do not want to strike a compromise with the White House that essentially gives Dr. Rice what she wants.

BROWN: We'll talk to a couple of the commissioners a little later in the program. John, thank you our Senior White House Correspondent John King tonight.

This story has started the weekly news magazines doing what they do best bringing their formidable resources to bear. They are formidable. "Time" magazine's Michael Elliott has the cover story this week and we're pleased to see Michael this week or any week, nice to have you here.

MICHAEL ELLIOTT, EDITOR-AT-LARGE, "TIME" MAGAZINE: Good to be here.

BROWN: This is a leading question but there's a part of me that thinks the administration really and the whole Clarke mess had a very easy way out which is just simply to say none of us really got it well enough before 9/11. We all thought we did but none of us could imagine it exactly this way.

ELLIOTT: I agree absolutely with you, Aaron. When Dick Clarke went on "60 Minutes" eight days ago and said they're going to sick the attack dogs on me, remember?

BROWN: Yes.

ELLIOTT: The smart thing to do in my view would have been not to sick the attack dogs on him at all but to have said we've read Mr. Clarke's book. He was a distinguished member of a number of administrations. We disagree with his book; however, plainly we failed to identify the extent of the threat from al Qaeda as did previous administrations and we wish Mr. Clarke a happy and long retirement and leave it to the 9/11 commission to come out with a report to which everyone could respond in a measured way.

BROWN: We'll move on from this but what's interesting about this, as Jeff Greenfield will point out a little bit later in the program, on the substance there's not a lot of difference.

ELLIOTT: No, there isn't.

BROWN: There's a lot of difference in interpretation of the substance but on the facts themselves there's not. The underlying question it seems to me in the "Time" piece this week and in a lot of the buzz in Washington is, is Dr. Rice in over her head here these days in this job?

ELLIOTT: Well, I think, you know, one starts out by saying that she has a really, really tough job and one of the reasons that she has a tough job is because there are these great beasts in the jungle down in Washington. There's Rumsfeld. There's Cheney. There's Colin Powell.

There's people with tremendous experience with agendas of their own. Not all of those agendas necessarily agreeing one with the other. So, the role of the national security adviser in this administration I think has been extremely tough.

She is bound to come under criticism though for the priorities that she set during a period when I would argue she was actually at her maximum power. That was in the first six months of the administration. She is the person who had been close to President Bush during the campaign. She's the person who had his ear.

BROWN: And he was at that moment relatively inexperienced in the area of foreign policy.

ELLIOTT: Absolutely. Absolutely and she was the person who was as it were, you know, on the Stairmaster next to him and tutoring him and acting as his mouthpiece.

And so, I think it is -- in my view whether or not Clarke had published his book last week, Dr. Rice's performance in the first six to eight months of the administration would naturally come under scrutiny when the 9/11 commission started to kind of really crank up its public work, which really only started last week.

We're going to have a report from the commission in two or three months and it is bound to look, as well as looking at the Clinton administration, it's bound to look at those first eight months, no getting away from it.

BROWN: Just her area of expertise...

ELLIOTT: Right. BROWN: ...had nothing to do with terrorism. She's really a cold warrior.

ELLIOTT: Yes and she's been very honest about that.

BROWN: Yes.

ELLIOTT: She was very honest about that in the run up to the election in 2000. She said, you know, I'm really a European scholar. She was a tremendously distinguished scholar of the Soviet Union, a country that unfortunately didn't exist by 2000. Now, you know, none of that is necessarily a bar to doing what a national security adviser does.

BROWN: Absolutely not.

ELLIOTT: And one should specify that. And in our interview with him this week, Vice President Cheney went out of his way to say that, you know, when she needs to be tough and decisive she can be tough and decisive. But this is the administration where you have these huge figures with their own agendas and, you know, maybe you need someone very, very tough knocking their heads together.

BROWN: Just when all is said and done the Dick Clarke flap right now seems to be the most important thing on the planet. When all is said and done and we look at this commission is the Dick Clarke flap going to play that big a part in it?

ELLIOTT: Well, I don't think so personally. I mean I think if the question, you have to be precise about your question here, if the question is what could have stopped 9/11, what might have stopped 9/11, then the handover of the Clinton administration to the Bush administration, which has made for great journalism, isn't really the story.

I mean the story, if there is a story, is there were two terrorists in the country living happily in San Diego with the FBI and the CIA seemingly unable to find them. There was Zacarias Moussaoui up in Minnesota for a crucial ten days with the Minnesota FBI trying to get everyone's attention in Washington and failing to.

So, I imagine that those are the things that the commission will look at but the commission is bound to look at what the Clinton administration did, certainly mistakes made there, what the Bush administration did in its first eight months, certainly mistakes made there.

But I would be shocked if the 9/11 commission said that this botched handover actually meant that 9/11 could have been prevented. I don't think that will happen.

BROWN: Good to see you. It's the cover story in "Time" this week. You're always welcome here. Thank you. It's been too long.

ELLIOTT: Thank you, Aaron.

BROWN: Michael Elliott, "Time" magazine.

On to other matters, in three federal courtrooms today opening arguments in three trials each one challenging a new law banning a late term abortion procedure in medical circles it's known as intact dilation and extraction. Abortion opponents, of course, call it partial birth abortion. The new law makes it a crime to perform it.

A key issue in all three cases, is this procedure ever medically necessary to protect a woman's health, reporting for us tonight CNN's Kelli Arena.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ARENA (voice-over): In San Francisco, Lincoln, Nebraska and New York City, a legal face-off over whether the so-called partial birth abortion ban is constitutional.

Signed into law in November, the act was immediately challenged by abortion rights advocates who say it does not provide an exception for a woman's health and they say it's too vague, possibly opening the door for banning other types of abortions.

LOUISE MELLING, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION: What you see is doctors testifying all around the country before three different courts about the importance of physician discretion to provide procedures doctors say are safe and appropriate.

ARENA: Government lawyers argued: "Partial birth abortion is never necessary for maternal health and has no proven safety advantages." What's more they say the law is not vague and refers to a very specific procedure, one in which a fetus is partially delivered before its skull is punctured.

JAY SEKULOW, AMERICAN CTR. FOR LAW AND JUSTICE: The thematic of the case is this, that this procedure blurs the line between live birth and abortion and when you've got a situation like that you have to tip in favor of the child, of the unborn child at that point.

ARENA: The trials, which are expected to last several weeks, follow intense legal skirmishes over government subpoenas of private medical records and battles over whether the issue of fetal pain could be introduced.

(on camera): Regardless of the outcome of these trials, both sides say they expect there will be appeals and legal experts predict the Supreme Court will ultimately have to weigh in.

Kelli Arena, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: On now to Massachusetts which has been a watershed state in the national debate over who should be able to marry. When the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled last fall that gay marriages must be permitted in the state starting this coming May, a cascade of similar legal challenges followed across the country. With the deadline fast approaching now, Massachusetts lawmakers have been scrambling to amend their state's constitution. They scrambled again today.

Here's CNN's Dan Lothian.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LOTHIAN (voice-over): As people on both sides of the highly charged gay marriage debate in Massachusetts shout in the hallways of the state house and on the sidewalks outside, state lawmakers take the final and most crucial vote.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One hundred and five votes in the affirmative, 92 in the negative.

LOTHIAN: Approving and sending to next year's legislature a constitutional amendment that bans gay marriages but legalizes civil unions minus federal benefits. For those fighting to protect traditional marriages it is a partial victory.

RON CREWS, PRESIDENT, MASSACHUSETTS FAMILY INSTITUTE: At least we have the legislature on record now as preserving marriage as one man and woman.

LOTHIAN: But for same-sex couples fighting to hold onto their court mandated marriage rights there is shock.

MARY BONAUTO, GAY LEGAL ADVOCATE: It's clearly disappointing.

LOTHIAN: And defiance.

MARIE ST. FLEUR (D), MASSACHUSETTS LEGISLATURE: We do believe in liberty and justice for all here. We are not going to take these rights away from people.

LOTHIAN: State lawmakers have debated in three separate conventions since the state's high court ruled in favor of gay marriage in November. In the final hours, amid strategic maneuvers, confusing language and frequent interruptions, passionate pleas are heard on both sides.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My God does not judge on differences. My God taught me to treat everyone as a human being.

PHIL TARVIS (D), MASSACHUSETTS LEGISLATURE: I do not step back and apologize from anyone because I stand for traditional marriage.

LOTHIAN: The vote has no bearing on the May 17 date when the high court says same-sex couples can legally marry but armed with this new amendment, Governor Mitt Romney vows to put up the first roadblock.

GOV. MITT ROMNEY (R), MASSACHUSETTS: I will seek a stay of the court's decision until the constitutional amendment process has run its course.

(END VIDEOTAPE) LOTHIAN: The governor will deliver his request to the state attorney general tomorrow. As for the amendment, as I mentioned earlier it will go before lawmakers in 2005. If they approve it, then it would be put before the voters in 2006 -- Aaron.

BROWN: Assuming, I think we have to assume a couple of things here but assuming them, assuming the governor is unsuccessful in getting his stay from the courts, including the Supreme Court, does the law deal with those couples who are married between May of this year and when or if this amendment goes into effect?

LOTHIAN: Well that is the very confusing issue with what is happening right now and that is the reason the governor says that he wants the stay until the issue of the amendment can be resolved because he says it is unclear what would happen. If indeed it is taken before the voters and they approve it, what happens to all those folks who have been married in the meantime?

BROWN: Thank you. It was actually a fairly confusing question too. I apologize for that, Dan thank you, Dan Lothian in Boston tonight.

Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, the deadliest friendly fire incident in the war in Iraq and the Marine officials -- and the Marine, rather, that officials say is responsible.

And later, one more troubling byproduct of that war in Iraq, increased anti-Semitism, a break first.

From New York this is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: In the year since the Iraq invasion began, the earliest days of the war have come into greater though not perfect focus. What happened in the fog of war and how it has started to sort itself out, including what went wrong and why.

Today the military released a report of the worst friendly fire incident of the war. It happened during a fierce battle on the 23rd of March, a year ago last week, when a Marine captain mistakenly called in an air strike against fellow troops.

Here's CNN's Jamie McIntyre.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MCINTYRE (voice-over): As Marines from Charlie Company fought to secure a key supply route through Nasiriya, the battle took a tragic turn. Pinned down by enemy fire the Marines were attacked by U.S. Air Force A-10s by mistake.

CAPT. DAN WITTNAM, CHARLIE COMPANY COMMANDER: The first thought that went through my mind was thank God an A-10 is on station.

MCINTYRE: And then? WITTNAM: Holy cow. The earth went black from the dirt being kicked up and a feeling of absolute utter horror and disbelief.

MCINTYRE: Investigators faulted a Marine captain far from the action who called in the A-10 strikes unaware Charlie Company had pushed ahead of his unit. The two A-10s made multiple passes over a group of vehicles dropping bombs, firing missiles and (unintelligible) with their tank busting 30mm canons.

As many as ten Marines were killed but because a total of 18 Marines died in the battle and some had wounds from both enemy and friendly fire, the exact number of fratricide victims is unknown.

TINA CLINE, WIDOW OF CPL. DONALD CLINE: Unknown, everything is left unknown and you just have to come to your own conclusion what you want to believe.

MCINTYRE: That's left Tina Cline, widow of Corporal Donald Cline, still looking for closure.

CLINE: This actually I think has brought me to a new level of my grieving and it's the angry stage.

MCINTYRE (on camera): While the Air Force was absolved of blame, some in the Marine Corps question why the A-10 pilots weren't better trained to spot friendly vehicles, why they failed to see cease-fire flares fired by the Marines and why the cockpit videotapes of the incident disappeared, apparently recorded over.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MCINTYRE: Now the Marine captain who called in the deadly strike has not been identified; however, he could face disciplinary action for failing to get the proper authorization to call those strikes in, in effect violating a standing order that was designed to prevent just this kind of incident. However, investigators did note that he cooperated fully and performed admirably and with bravery after his mistake -- Aaron.

BROWN: Are they talking about court-martialing him?

MCINTYRE: No. Court-martialing would be a possibility but, as I said, there were mitigating factors, the so-called fog of war. It was what you'd call an honest mistake not one that was based on negligence. He thought he was going the right thing. There were other mitigating factors and while he could be disciplined it's unlikely he'd be court-martialed.

BROWN: Jamie, thank you very much, Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon tonight.

Some other stories that made news around the country today, a grand jury began hearing testimony in the case of Michael Jackson out in Santa Barbara, California. The proceedings taking place under cloak and dagger secrecy it seems. Prosecutors are taking the grand jury route to eliminate the need for a public preliminary hearing. Steve Moore, the Colorado hockey player whose neck was broken by an opponent's cheap shot during a game two weeks ago, spoke in public for the first time since the attack. He says he doesn't know if he'll ever be able to play hockey again and has not talked to his attacker, Todd Bertuzzi, who has been suspended for the rest of the year.

And the actor Peter Ustinov has died, not just an actor but a gifted mimic, an avid art collector, a diplomat, a novelist, a storyteller, fluent in a half a dozen languages, not a bad resume and a very full life. He had been ill for some time. Mr. Ustinov was 82 years old.

Coming up on NEWSNIGHT, back on track or just delaying the inevitable, the Tyco jury gets back to work, a break first.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: Well you can't say the judge in the Tyco trial isn't earning his pay. Along with the media circus, high-powered attorneys, gazillionaire defendants and the like, he's also dealing with a jury that cannot agree on a verdict, at least not yet.

In this case not 12 angry men but, if you believe the tabloids, one angry woman. She's been called the "batty blue blood" in one tabloid. Given all that, there was somewhat of a surprise today we think. Everyone is still at it, the judge, the jury, blue blood and all.

Here's CNN's Chris Huntington.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HUNTINGTON (voice-over): Jury deliberations in Dennis Kozlowski's corporate fraud trial appeared back on track as Judge Michael Obus denied yet another defense request for a mistrial indicating that all of the jurors said they could resume deliberating including Juror No. 4.

She's the 79-year-old former schoolteacher with a law degree who made front page news for flashing what appeared to be an OK sign toward defendants in court on Friday.

BRUCE SHAEFFER, ATTORNEY: That's the one juror who has come to the conclusion that there was not criminal intent is basically deciding it the way the judge directed them but if she in good conscience holds that belief then she's diligently following the court's instructions and doing what she was told to do.

HUNTINGTON: Defense attorneys arguing unsuccessfully their fifth mistrial motion since Thursday said Juror No. 4 had been at the center of the jury's deadlock dispute and that unflattering press reports, such as a "New York Post" front page sketch and headlines calling her a "batty blue blood" and "paranoid socialite" would have been seen by other jurors further poisoning the deliberations.

STEVEN BRILL, CEO, VERIFIED IDENTIFIED PASS, INC.: Given the circumstances I don't think there was anything wrong with what some of the newspapers did. They did nothing other than tell the public something the public had a right to know, which is who is this juror who seems to be causing this disruption in the process.

HUNTINGTON: In denying the mistrial, Judge Obus said the only thing that mattered were the jurors' assurances that they had buried the hatchet and could get back to work.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HUNTINGTON: And there was evidence that the jury had gotten back to work today from the notes that they passed out asking for trial exhibits, more testimony to be read back, and even a clarification of just what an accessory to a crime is. As for the media's role in this case, Judge Obus scolded reporters in court to basically leave the jurors alone -- Aaron.

BROWN: How long have they had the case?

HUNTINGTON: They have had the case a little bit more than a week. They got it last -- two Wednesdays ago. So they have really had it for quite some time. Nobody thought that the case in total would go this long or even the deliberations this long.

BROWN: It is complicated. There's many charges. And they may get there or we may do it again.

Thank you, Chris -- Chris Huntington with us tonight.

A few business items before we head to break. A judge in the state of Alabama has cut ExxonMobil a bargain, slashing an $11.8 billion judgment against the oil company to $3.8 billion. Yippee. This is a case over royalty payments to the state of Alabama for offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

The price of gas, speaking of oil, hit another record, $1.75 on average, unless you live in New York and I guarantee it's more. However, adjusted for inflation, gas actually is far cheaper than it was 20 years ago. Don't you feel better?

Wall Street did just fine today. Profit takers last week were bargain hunters today. The market's had two of our three good days, hasn't it The numbers sharply higher on this Monday.

Still to come on NEWSNIGHT, agreeing while disagreeing, how the White House spins Richard Clarke.

We'll take a break first. Around the world, this is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: It's fundamental rule of rhetoric. No matter what you're saying, how you say it matters most. Some would call this spin. And in a little fracas over Richard Clarke's testimony about the White House he once served in, it's fair to say a lot of spin is to be expected. The rhetoric for sure has been fiery on both sides, which can make it hard to miss the glass of water at the center of it all. One side is calling it half full, the other half empty.

Beneath the heap, our senior analyst, Jeff Greenfield.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SR. ANALYST (voice-over): It is the fiercest firefight of the Bush presidency. His former top terrorism aide charges insufficient attention to the threat before 9/11 and a dangerous diversion from it after.

The president's top aides and supporters charge Clarke with everything from inaccuracies and misrepresentations to profiteering and even perjury.

(on camera): But look and listen closely and you find something remarkable. On a number of points, Clarke and his critics are saying essentially the same thing. They just interpret the same facts very differently.

(voice-over): For instance, Clarke says that, on September 11, President Bush demanded that he look for proof that Iraq was behind the attacks. That, Clarke says, shows Bush's obsession.

The White House first suggested that conversation may never have taken place. But on "60 Minutes," National Security Adviser Rice said the president wanted to know about Iraq, for good reason.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "60 MINUTES")

CONDOLEEZZA RICE, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: The president asked a perfectly logical question. We had just been hit and hit hard. Did Iraq have anything to do with this? Were they complicit in it? This is a country with which we'd been to war a couple of times, that was firing at our airplanes in the no-fly zone. It made perfectly good sense to ask about Iraq.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GREENFIELD: Another example, Clarke said he offered the Bush administration a plan to confront al Qaeda in January 2001. But it took eight months, until September 4, for the plan to be adopted. Way too slow, says Clarke.

RICHARD CLARKE, FORMER COUNTERTERRORISM ADVISER: Almost every day, the president was hearing from George Tenet that there's an impending al Qaeda attack. As far back as February, George Tenet testified before the Congress that al Qaeda was the major national security threat and yet they have 100 meetings before they get around to dealing with it.

GREENFIELD: Now here's Secretary of State Powell on "Face the Nation."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "FACE THE NATION")

COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: Condi Rice and Don Rumsfeld and I spoke every morning at 7:15. I met with my experts every day at 8:30. We put out warnings throughout that period. So did the CIA. We began to review the bidding. With respect to where we were on the 4th of September, by the time we got to the 4th of September, there was a comprehensive plan.

GREENFIELD: Yes, Powell and Rice also say that the administration was taking other steps, but they're describing the same time frame as Clarke. But in Powell's and Rice's view, it is the sign of a careful, comprehensive approach, while Clarke sees it as an unconscionable delay.

(on camera): Clearly, some of the differences between Clarke and his critics go way beyond interpretation. They see his current scathing assessment of Bush as blatant self-promotion and blatantly dishonest at worst. He sees the whole Iraq policy as potentially catastrophic. But it really is striking that, on some matters involving this dustup, the bitter fight is about how to deal with the same set of facts.

Jeff Greenfield, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: The most important question perhaps is what the 9/11 Commission will make of those facts, apart from the heat.

We're joined from Washington tonight by two members of the commission. Between them, they have many years of political experience as Republican officer holders. Former Illinois Governor Jim Thompson joins us, as does former U.S. Senator from the state of Washington Slade Gorton.

It's good to see you both.

(CROSSTALK)

BROWN: Senator Gorton -- I guess both of you, because both of you have to weigh in on this. There's talk of compromise, that Dr. Rice would come, testify privately, that some portion of her testimony would be released publicly. Is that acceptable, Senator Gorton, to you?

SLADE GORTON, FORMER U.S. SENATOR: I think that Condoleezza Rice needs to testify before the general public. As you know, she's already spoken for several hours to members of the commission and the commission staff. We may learn a little bit more from her and we'll know enough to write our report.

But a major part of our duty is to see to it that everything possible is released to the general public. And no compromise on a private visit by Condoleezza Rice is going to satisfy that need.

BROWN: And, Governor Thompson, Quickly, to get you on the record on that, are you moved at all by this talk of compromise?

JAMES THOMPSON, 9/11 COMMISSIONER: No, I'm not, actually. Look, two things should be made clear. One, we have been in business for over a year now. And we have never had a partisan vote on the commission. Our votes have always been bipartisan. And that's how we'll continue.

On the other hand, this commission has voted unanimously to ask Dr. Rice to appear before us as a witness under oath in public. And I think that's what she should do.

BROWN: Let's talk a little politics here. I want to talk a little substance, too. Governor, are you at all concerned that the public perception of the commission after last week's public hearings has changed, that it now looks more partisan than I know any of you want it to seem?

THOMPSON: Well, you know, the strange thing is that I think most of the members of the public never knew of our existence until last week. And so we're making progress on that score. It took all these high-powered witnesses and a lot of controversy over Mr. Clarke and his book to bring the commission to the public attention. And I'm glad we're there.

I think, in the end, the public will be impressed by the report we issue. And my fervent hope and my belief is that that report will be unanimous. If we can get five Republicans and five Democrats to agree on an unanimous report, then I think the American people will have been well served.

BROWN: Senator Gorton, are there substantive differences in the facts presented by Dr. Rice and Mr. Clarke? I know you can't talk about the facts that Dr. Rice presents -- they're classified right now -- but are there differences, significant differences?

GORTON: I'm not one who wants to attack Dick Clarke at this point, because I believe that he answered the only question that was truly relevant totally honestly.

When I asked him whether if all of his recommendations had been adopted by the Bush administration on the day after he made them, it would have prevented 9/11, he quite honestly and unequivocally answered that question, no. The rest of it is all smoke and mirrors. hand your earlier analysis was entirely correct, first, that there aren't too many differences on the actual facts. It's a mood change over where priorities lay in both the Clinton and Bush administrations, without having had any impact on the entire matter.

And earlier in your program this evening, the editor of "TIME" magazine pointed out, I think quite correctly, that, if 9/11 were to be prevented, it was going to be prevented here in the United States by better work on the part of the FBI, other law enforcement agencies and better exchange of information between the FBI and the CIA.

BROWN: Then, Governor Thompson, at the end of the day, you're not going to tell us -- the commission's not going to tell us if only it could have been; you're going to tell us how not to let it happen again? THOMPSON: We're going to tell you a number of things, I think, what really did happen on September 11, why did it happen, was there fault, if there was fault, whose fault was it, could it have been presented. I think the answer to that one is pretty clear, the answer by everybody, Bush friend and Bush foes. No, it could not have been prevented.

But, just as importantly, and there hasn't been enough emphasis on this, but I think the commission will place emphasis on it in the report, how do we lessen the odds against something like this happening again? We know we can't guarantee anything in this life. The nation is too big, too open, too free, too vulnerable, but how do we lesson the odds? What things can we do in terms of protecting America and its people to lessen the chances that something like this will happen again?

That's just as an important part of our report as what happened on September 11.

BROWN: Governor, thank you. Senator Gorton, it's always good to see you. You both are welcome here any time you have something you want to add to this. Thank you both.

THOMPSON: Thank you.

BROWN: Thank you.

Ahead on NEWSNIGHT tonight, the latest battle cry in Iraq and why U.S. officials aren't exactly happy to hear about it.

From New York, this is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: In Iraq today, more protests following the closing of an Iraqi newspaper by the U.S. civil administrator, Paul Bremer. He shut the paper down yesterday, saying it was inciting violence against U.S. forces. Winning the hearts and minds of Iraqis is far from a done deal. And the same goes for building a self-sustaining democracy there. Tolerance being a measure of any democracy, a wave of anti- Semitism in postwar Iraq speaks to the obstacles ahead.

Reporting for us tonight, CNN's Walter Rodgers.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

WALTER RODGERS, CNN SR. INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A fire-breathing Muslim cleric leads believers in a chorus of "Down with Israel." In Iraq, hatred of Israel, Zionists and Jews has become more, not less poisonous, since the American occupation. Many Iraqis now see last year's war as an Israeli-American plot to keep Iraq weak and divide the nation into separate Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish enclaves. Even Iraqi intellectual believe it.

SAAD JAWAD, POLITICAL ANALYST: Whatever is happening here in Iraq is not in the interest even of the United States, this chaos and instability and security. In fact, it's in the interest of Israel.

RODGERS: Israel's assassination of Palestinian Sheik Ahmed Yassin in Gaza fueled the hatred. And any tragedy like this recent car bomb is suspected of being a Jewish plot on Baghdad's streets.

DR. OMAR AL-RAWI, SURGEON: They are kill the Muslims. They are destroy the Muslims' country. They're -- all the war that happen here in Iraq or in Palestine or anywhere, this is directed and pushed through the Jewish people.

RODGERS: Iraqi newspapers fan the anti-Semitism. One recently published these allegations, that: "Israel has 560 spies here, some disguised as American soldiers; 200,000 Israeli Jews buying up prime real estate to recolonize Iraq. Another claim, that Israel and the United States plan to expand the Jewish state into Iraq.

"How can they come back with all the blood on their hands? We know they're buying houses here," she says. Specialists on anti- Semitism say Iraq has long been fertile ground.

ROBERT WISTRICH, HEBREW UNIVERSITY: In Iraq, you had an older tradition of anti-Semitism, going back to the Nazi influence in the 1930s and '40s.

RODGERS: The American experiment in Iraq was not supposed to work like this.

(on camera): A year ago, the Bush administration openly envisioned a new, more liberal and tolerant Iraq. Instead, Iraqis seem more xenophobic now and there are growing fears one possible outcome here might just as easily be an Islamic state as a democracy.

Walter Rodgers, CNN, Baghdad.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Still ahead on the program tonight, tomorrow dawns a dark day across Ireland, as one pub staple is banished. Oh, my.

A break first. This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: So the office wise guy was saying in our afternoon meeting -- I wonder who that wise guy was, by the way -- you know, you guys might want to put a fact or two in this page tonight. And, by golly, they did.

A report out today says tax receipts at bars and restaurants in the city of New York have actually gone up since the mayor pushed through a smoking ban last spring. In other words, prohibition pays in a city, granted, a large city. Well, what about an entire country, where it wouldn't be Friday night without a pint in one hand and a spoke in the other?

In Dublin for us, CNN's Diana Muriel. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DIANA MURIEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The smoke-filled haze of an Irish pub is now a thing of the past. A total ban on smoking in public workplaces going into force Monday.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They completely overstepped the mark and putting in an all-over ban on smoking.

MURIEL: Ireland's health minister enjoying a smoke-free breakfast in a Dublin coffee house says the movie is aimed at reducing the 7,000 smoking-related deaths each year.

MICHEAL MARTIN, IRISH HEALTH MINISTER: And it's no-brainer. Smoking is the clear single greatest cause of death and illness in Ireland.

MURIEL: Some pub goers predict problems for Ireland's tourism industry.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It will affect me because there's nothing like going to Canamara (ph) and old country pub, log fire, sitting down, having a glass of wine and a cigarette. You know, I'm consider going to Northern Ireland from now on or over to England.

MURIEL: Pub managers like Paul Corcoran must enforce the new law or risk big fans, even losing their licenses.

PAUL CORCORAN, PUB MANAGER: I don't think, actually, that the police really want to get involved in this at all, at all. I think so it's basically up to bar managers and staff to enforce this.

MURIEL (on camera): That signal means it's last orders in this Dublin pub and a last chance to light up with that last pint. Although it will mean be a big change in the atmosphere of the average Irish pub, the smoking ban is something many customers welcome.

(voice-over): Twenty-year-old Toby Allen (ph) hopes it's an incentive to give up tobacco

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Although I smoke, I feel that anything that tries to prevent people from smoking isn't a bad thing.

MURIEL: Enjoying his last night of puffing on a cigarette in the pub, Toby knows that, from now on, if he wants to smoke, he'll be out here in the cold.

Diana Muriel, CNN, Dublin.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Morning papers coming up from the office wise guy. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(ROOSTER CROWING)

BROWN: OK, time to check morning papers from across the country and around the world, though I'm not sure we're actually going to get to around the world. So I wish I hadn't said that. But I did. And it's too late.

This is a day where there's not a dominant national story to lead with, so a lot of good local leads in the newspapers, at least as we see it.

"Fireman's Death Reveals Problems" the lead in "The Cincinnati Enquirer." "Department Probe Finds Failings in Training and Equipment." And that's a sad tale. I'm not sure what this story is about. "Bad Weather is Good for TV News, Ratings and Profits. " Does that mean we should be doing more weather stories here? Maybe we'll just end this segment with a weather note every night.

"Chattanooga Times Free Press" leads local also, unpleasantly so. "Jet Crashes in Rhea County." "Pilots Go Through Years of Training" is the sidebar story to the crash. It's a FA-18 Hornet jet that crashed on Monday. That's too bad. What else? There was something else in -- oh, this story will appear on a lot of front pages tomorrow. "National Abortion Law Being Tested in the Courts." We reported on that earlier.

Two Philadelphia papers. "The Philadelphia Daily News," the people paper, reports on "What's on Deck." The new ballpark is opening. Citizens bank park, a name, of course, you'll never forget.

"The Cincinnati Enquirer" leads -- has a good story here. "Ghost Voting to Come Into the Open. Letters Prod the House Ethics Panel to Look Into the Not So Hidden Practice" of I guess legislators sort of voting, but not really showing up. This is the most interesting political story in the paper. "Arab-Americans Shift to Kerry in Four Key States. A New Poll Shows Iraq, Israel and Immigration Have Cost Bush Support Among Arab-Americans," of which there are many.

"The Oregonian" out in Portland.

Did you say 30 seconds already? Thirty seconds. OK. I realize the clock still ticks.

"The Oregonian" leads local, also. "Man Killed By Police Unarmed. Portland Officers Have Not Said Why An Officer Shot James Perez." But I guess we'll eventually find out. That's "The Oregonian."

Ten seconds left, which means time for "The Chicago Sun-Times." And because we have heard that ratings benefit when we do weather, we'll tell you the weather tomorrow is "back to reality," 47 degrees in the Midwest in Chicago.

Soledad O'Brien with a look ahead at "AMERICAN MORNING."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks, Aaron.

Tomorrow on "AMERICAN MORNING," defending Saddam Hussein. We are talking to Jacques Verges, the lawyer who has been chosen to lead the defense when the former Iraqi dictator eventually goes to trial. Despite all the evidence of brutality, could Hussein actually go free? A look at that tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. Eastern tomorrow -- Aaron.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Soledad, thank you.

Good to have you all with us tonight. Want to hear something crazy? I'm here all week. See you tomorrow. That means 10:00 Eastern time.

Until then, good night for all of us.

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 March 29, 2004 - 22:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
AARON BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening again, everyone.
We are a week and a day into the matter of Richard Clarke versus the Bush administration's decisions or lack of decisions in fighting terrorism before and after 9/11, a week and a day of relentless coverage that continues tonight and beyond, a week and a day of public hearings, news reports, high profile interviews, attacks, counterattacks, accusations of profiteering and perjury and more, a week and a day and you know what, not a single mind has been changed.

A CNN-USA Today Gallup poll released today says essentially that. Republicans, or at least who say they were planning to vote for President Bush tend to disbelieve Mr. Clarke. The Democrats, or at least those who say they are planning to support Senator Kerry, tend to believe Mr. Clarke.

A week and a day of this with more to come and no one seems really moved at all by the substance, just the politics of the one issue we would hope would be seen as non-political. It tops the news again tonight.

Our Senior White House Correspondent John King starts us off with a headline, John good evening.

JOHN KING, CNN SR. WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good evening to you, Aaron.

In those same polls, though, evidence that over the long term this controversy could cause some damage to this president in a reelection year. That is one of the reasons the White House is very actively trying to reach a compromise with the commission to allow Dr. Rice to testify in private but make her remarks part of the public records, talks about a compromise, still no deal -- Aaron.

BROWN: John, thank you.

On to Boston, same-sex marriage and the not so gentle art of politics, CNN's Dan Lothian there for us tonight, Dan a headline.

DAN LOTHIAN, CNN BOSTON BUREAU CHIEF: Well, Aaron, it was a close vote but in the end lawmakers did agree on an amendment. They said no to gay marriages but yes to civil unions, a major development but this battle is far from over -- Aaron.

BROWN: Dan, thank you. To the Pentagon and a report today on a very dark moment in the war with Iraq, Jamie McIntyre has the watch and the headline.

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, responsibility for the worst friendly fire incident of the Gulf War has been placed squarely on the shoulders of one Marine captain but some of his comrades in arms believe that maybe he shouldn't bear all of the blame -- Aaron.

BROWN: Jamie, thank you.

And finally it isn't the trial of the century but it ain't half bad either, CNN's Chris Huntington on Dennis Kozlowski and a hamstrung jury, Chris a headline from you.

CHRIS HUNTINGTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, it appears the jury for now has avoided a mistrial. They are back at work, apparently stopped feuding and have continued deliberations. We may get a verdict yet on the man who is perhaps best know for spending $6,000 on a shower curtain -- Aaron.

BROWN: Chris, thank you. Back to you and the rest shortly.

Also coming up on the program tonight, growing anti-Semitism in Iraq and what's fueling it, not exactly what the U.S. had hoped for but not exactly a shocker either.

Plus, what happens when all the bars and the restaurants in an entire country go no smoking overnight? They did in Ireland and we took a chance getting the story.

And maybe the rooster will stop by with a pint or two, not a bad idea that. Pint or not the rooster will be here with your morning papers, all that and more in the hour ahead.

We begin tonight with a story that isn't going away. The commission investigating 9/11 wants the president's national security adviser to testify in public and under oath. She continues to say no even as pressure on her and her boss appears to be growing and compromise is in the air.

What's more the public is still evenly divided over what it all means is clearly taking notice and that Gallup, CNN-USA Today poll shows that despite a rough couple of weeks the president tonight enjoys a narrow lead among likely voters.

With all of that in mind here again our Senior White House Correspondent John King.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KING (voice-over): Welcoming seven new members to the NATO Alliance, a picture perfect event for a president whose reelection theme boils down to one word leadership.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We will face the mortal danger of terrorism and we will overcome it together.

KING: But for all the celebration, Mr. Bush's stewardship of the war on terror is increasingly a campaign year question mark. Seventy percent of the American people say they are very closely or somewhat closely following former White House official Richard Clarke's allegation the president did not pay enough attention to terrorism before the September 11 attacks.

GLEN BOLGER, REPUBLICAN POLLSTER: People are paying a great deal of attention to this issue. You can't ignore it and hope it goes away.

KING: In a new CNN poll, the public is evenly divided when asked whether they are inclined to believe Clarke or the White House and evenly divided when asked if the president paid too little attention to terrorism because he was too focused on Saddam Hussein.

PETER HART, DEMOCRATIC POLLSTER: Any time you have the American public split between a bureaucrat and an administration, the administration is losing.

KING: Two-thirds of Americans do not think the Bush administration should have been able to prevent the 9/11 tragedy and the administration's hope is that come November voters will judge Mr. Bush more by his actions after the attacks.

DICK CHENEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I've seen calm when calm was needed, a decisive action when action was required. I'm honored to serve at his side.

KING: Despite mounting pressure, the White House says National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice will not testify before the 9/11 commission in public, something strategists in both parties say is risky.

HART: This has been a very bad period for the president. It almost feels like he's out of step or wearing two right shoes. Everything that he does seems off target and away from the heart of the matter.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING: In that same poll, 58 percent of the American people say they support Mr. Bush when it comes to the war on terrorism. That's still a solid majority but it is his lowest score on that question since the pollsters started asking it 30 months ago, Aaron, right after the attacks.

And, again, conversations between White House lawyers and the commission, they're trying to reach a compromise to keep Dr. Rice in private not under oath and make most of her remarks in that session part of the public record. An interesting question as to whether they can work that out.

BROWN: Let's talk about that a bit. She has testified before or she's talked. I guess you can't call it testimony.

KING: Right.

BROWN: She's talked to the commission or at least some of the commissioners and there's no transcript of that so how do you make it public?

KING: The commissioners took notes who were at that meeting. It ran about four hours and some White House staffers, Condoleezza Rice's aides at that meeting took notes. There is also involved in the conversations could you make some of that part of the public record?

Much of it was classified. The entire session is considered classified. Much of the items under discussion are considered highly sensitive intelligence. Can you go back and take some of that first four hour session and put that in the public record?

The main focus is on if there is a second session can you make sure at that session you bring in a stenographer. You take much better notes and then you take out the classified information and try to make more of it part of the public record.

Some at the commission, though, are holding out. They think the pressure is mounting, maybe they will get her in public and they're also worried, Aaron, about being used essentially. They do not want to strike a compromise with the White House that essentially gives Dr. Rice what she wants.

BROWN: We'll talk to a couple of the commissioners a little later in the program. John, thank you our Senior White House Correspondent John King tonight.

This story has started the weekly news magazines doing what they do best bringing their formidable resources to bear. They are formidable. "Time" magazine's Michael Elliott has the cover story this week and we're pleased to see Michael this week or any week, nice to have you here.

MICHAEL ELLIOTT, EDITOR-AT-LARGE, "TIME" MAGAZINE: Good to be here.

BROWN: This is a leading question but there's a part of me that thinks the administration really and the whole Clarke mess had a very easy way out which is just simply to say none of us really got it well enough before 9/11. We all thought we did but none of us could imagine it exactly this way.

ELLIOTT: I agree absolutely with you, Aaron. When Dick Clarke went on "60 Minutes" eight days ago and said they're going to sick the attack dogs on me, remember?

BROWN: Yes.

ELLIOTT: The smart thing to do in my view would have been not to sick the attack dogs on him at all but to have said we've read Mr. Clarke's book. He was a distinguished member of a number of administrations. We disagree with his book; however, plainly we failed to identify the extent of the threat from al Qaeda as did previous administrations and we wish Mr. Clarke a happy and long retirement and leave it to the 9/11 commission to come out with a report to which everyone could respond in a measured way.

BROWN: We'll move on from this but what's interesting about this, as Jeff Greenfield will point out a little bit later in the program, on the substance there's not a lot of difference.

ELLIOTT: No, there isn't.

BROWN: There's a lot of difference in interpretation of the substance but on the facts themselves there's not. The underlying question it seems to me in the "Time" piece this week and in a lot of the buzz in Washington is, is Dr. Rice in over her head here these days in this job?

ELLIOTT: Well, I think, you know, one starts out by saying that she has a really, really tough job and one of the reasons that she has a tough job is because there are these great beasts in the jungle down in Washington. There's Rumsfeld. There's Cheney. There's Colin Powell.

There's people with tremendous experience with agendas of their own. Not all of those agendas necessarily agreeing one with the other. So, the role of the national security adviser in this administration I think has been extremely tough.

She is bound to come under criticism though for the priorities that she set during a period when I would argue she was actually at her maximum power. That was in the first six months of the administration. She is the person who had been close to President Bush during the campaign. She's the person who had his ear.

BROWN: And he was at that moment relatively inexperienced in the area of foreign policy.

ELLIOTT: Absolutely. Absolutely and she was the person who was as it were, you know, on the Stairmaster next to him and tutoring him and acting as his mouthpiece.

And so, I think it is -- in my view whether or not Clarke had published his book last week, Dr. Rice's performance in the first six to eight months of the administration would naturally come under scrutiny when the 9/11 commission started to kind of really crank up its public work, which really only started last week.

We're going to have a report from the commission in two or three months and it is bound to look, as well as looking at the Clinton administration, it's bound to look at those first eight months, no getting away from it.

BROWN: Just her area of expertise...

ELLIOTT: Right. BROWN: ...had nothing to do with terrorism. She's really a cold warrior.

ELLIOTT: Yes and she's been very honest about that.

BROWN: Yes.

ELLIOTT: She was very honest about that in the run up to the election in 2000. She said, you know, I'm really a European scholar. She was a tremendously distinguished scholar of the Soviet Union, a country that unfortunately didn't exist by 2000. Now, you know, none of that is necessarily a bar to doing what a national security adviser does.

BROWN: Absolutely not.

ELLIOTT: And one should specify that. And in our interview with him this week, Vice President Cheney went out of his way to say that, you know, when she needs to be tough and decisive she can be tough and decisive. But this is the administration where you have these huge figures with their own agendas and, you know, maybe you need someone very, very tough knocking their heads together.

BROWN: Just when all is said and done the Dick Clarke flap right now seems to be the most important thing on the planet. When all is said and done and we look at this commission is the Dick Clarke flap going to play that big a part in it?

ELLIOTT: Well, I don't think so personally. I mean I think if the question, you have to be precise about your question here, if the question is what could have stopped 9/11, what might have stopped 9/11, then the handover of the Clinton administration to the Bush administration, which has made for great journalism, isn't really the story.

I mean the story, if there is a story, is there were two terrorists in the country living happily in San Diego with the FBI and the CIA seemingly unable to find them. There was Zacarias Moussaoui up in Minnesota for a crucial ten days with the Minnesota FBI trying to get everyone's attention in Washington and failing to.

So, I imagine that those are the things that the commission will look at but the commission is bound to look at what the Clinton administration did, certainly mistakes made there, what the Bush administration did in its first eight months, certainly mistakes made there.

But I would be shocked if the 9/11 commission said that this botched handover actually meant that 9/11 could have been prevented. I don't think that will happen.

BROWN: Good to see you. It's the cover story in "Time" this week. You're always welcome here. Thank you. It's been too long.

ELLIOTT: Thank you, Aaron.

BROWN: Michael Elliott, "Time" magazine.

On to other matters, in three federal courtrooms today opening arguments in three trials each one challenging a new law banning a late term abortion procedure in medical circles it's known as intact dilation and extraction. Abortion opponents, of course, call it partial birth abortion. The new law makes it a crime to perform it.

A key issue in all three cases, is this procedure ever medically necessary to protect a woman's health, reporting for us tonight CNN's Kelli Arena.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ARENA (voice-over): In San Francisco, Lincoln, Nebraska and New York City, a legal face-off over whether the so-called partial birth abortion ban is constitutional.

Signed into law in November, the act was immediately challenged by abortion rights advocates who say it does not provide an exception for a woman's health and they say it's too vague, possibly opening the door for banning other types of abortions.

LOUISE MELLING, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION: What you see is doctors testifying all around the country before three different courts about the importance of physician discretion to provide procedures doctors say are safe and appropriate.

ARENA: Government lawyers argued: "Partial birth abortion is never necessary for maternal health and has no proven safety advantages." What's more they say the law is not vague and refers to a very specific procedure, one in which a fetus is partially delivered before its skull is punctured.

JAY SEKULOW, AMERICAN CTR. FOR LAW AND JUSTICE: The thematic of the case is this, that this procedure blurs the line between live birth and abortion and when you've got a situation like that you have to tip in favor of the child, of the unborn child at that point.

ARENA: The trials, which are expected to last several weeks, follow intense legal skirmishes over government subpoenas of private medical records and battles over whether the issue of fetal pain could be introduced.

(on camera): Regardless of the outcome of these trials, both sides say they expect there will be appeals and legal experts predict the Supreme Court will ultimately have to weigh in.

Kelli Arena, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: On now to Massachusetts which has been a watershed state in the national debate over who should be able to marry. When the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled last fall that gay marriages must be permitted in the state starting this coming May, a cascade of similar legal challenges followed across the country. With the deadline fast approaching now, Massachusetts lawmakers have been scrambling to amend their state's constitution. They scrambled again today.

Here's CNN's Dan Lothian.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LOTHIAN (voice-over): As people on both sides of the highly charged gay marriage debate in Massachusetts shout in the hallways of the state house and on the sidewalks outside, state lawmakers take the final and most crucial vote.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One hundred and five votes in the affirmative, 92 in the negative.

LOTHIAN: Approving and sending to next year's legislature a constitutional amendment that bans gay marriages but legalizes civil unions minus federal benefits. For those fighting to protect traditional marriages it is a partial victory.

RON CREWS, PRESIDENT, MASSACHUSETTS FAMILY INSTITUTE: At least we have the legislature on record now as preserving marriage as one man and woman.

LOTHIAN: But for same-sex couples fighting to hold onto their court mandated marriage rights there is shock.

MARY BONAUTO, GAY LEGAL ADVOCATE: It's clearly disappointing.

LOTHIAN: And defiance.

MARIE ST. FLEUR (D), MASSACHUSETTS LEGISLATURE: We do believe in liberty and justice for all here. We are not going to take these rights away from people.

LOTHIAN: State lawmakers have debated in three separate conventions since the state's high court ruled in favor of gay marriage in November. In the final hours, amid strategic maneuvers, confusing language and frequent interruptions, passionate pleas are heard on both sides.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My God does not judge on differences. My God taught me to treat everyone as a human being.

PHIL TARVIS (D), MASSACHUSETTS LEGISLATURE: I do not step back and apologize from anyone because I stand for traditional marriage.

LOTHIAN: The vote has no bearing on the May 17 date when the high court says same-sex couples can legally marry but armed with this new amendment, Governor Mitt Romney vows to put up the first roadblock.

GOV. MITT ROMNEY (R), MASSACHUSETTS: I will seek a stay of the court's decision until the constitutional amendment process has run its course.

(END VIDEOTAPE) LOTHIAN: The governor will deliver his request to the state attorney general tomorrow. As for the amendment, as I mentioned earlier it will go before lawmakers in 2005. If they approve it, then it would be put before the voters in 2006 -- Aaron.

BROWN: Assuming, I think we have to assume a couple of things here but assuming them, assuming the governor is unsuccessful in getting his stay from the courts, including the Supreme Court, does the law deal with those couples who are married between May of this year and when or if this amendment goes into effect?

LOTHIAN: Well that is the very confusing issue with what is happening right now and that is the reason the governor says that he wants the stay until the issue of the amendment can be resolved because he says it is unclear what would happen. If indeed it is taken before the voters and they approve it, what happens to all those folks who have been married in the meantime?

BROWN: Thank you. It was actually a fairly confusing question too. I apologize for that, Dan thank you, Dan Lothian in Boston tonight.

Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, the deadliest friendly fire incident in the war in Iraq and the Marine officials -- and the Marine, rather, that officials say is responsible.

And later, one more troubling byproduct of that war in Iraq, increased anti-Semitism, a break first.

From New York this is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: In the year since the Iraq invasion began, the earliest days of the war have come into greater though not perfect focus. What happened in the fog of war and how it has started to sort itself out, including what went wrong and why.

Today the military released a report of the worst friendly fire incident of the war. It happened during a fierce battle on the 23rd of March, a year ago last week, when a Marine captain mistakenly called in an air strike against fellow troops.

Here's CNN's Jamie McIntyre.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MCINTYRE (voice-over): As Marines from Charlie Company fought to secure a key supply route through Nasiriya, the battle took a tragic turn. Pinned down by enemy fire the Marines were attacked by U.S. Air Force A-10s by mistake.

CAPT. DAN WITTNAM, CHARLIE COMPANY COMMANDER: The first thought that went through my mind was thank God an A-10 is on station.

MCINTYRE: And then? WITTNAM: Holy cow. The earth went black from the dirt being kicked up and a feeling of absolute utter horror and disbelief.

MCINTYRE: Investigators faulted a Marine captain far from the action who called in the A-10 strikes unaware Charlie Company had pushed ahead of his unit. The two A-10s made multiple passes over a group of vehicles dropping bombs, firing missiles and (unintelligible) with their tank busting 30mm canons.

As many as ten Marines were killed but because a total of 18 Marines died in the battle and some had wounds from both enemy and friendly fire, the exact number of fratricide victims is unknown.

TINA CLINE, WIDOW OF CPL. DONALD CLINE: Unknown, everything is left unknown and you just have to come to your own conclusion what you want to believe.

MCINTYRE: That's left Tina Cline, widow of Corporal Donald Cline, still looking for closure.

CLINE: This actually I think has brought me to a new level of my grieving and it's the angry stage.

MCINTYRE (on camera): While the Air Force was absolved of blame, some in the Marine Corps question why the A-10 pilots weren't better trained to spot friendly vehicles, why they failed to see cease-fire flares fired by the Marines and why the cockpit videotapes of the incident disappeared, apparently recorded over.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MCINTYRE: Now the Marine captain who called in the deadly strike has not been identified; however, he could face disciplinary action for failing to get the proper authorization to call those strikes in, in effect violating a standing order that was designed to prevent just this kind of incident. However, investigators did note that he cooperated fully and performed admirably and with bravery after his mistake -- Aaron.

BROWN: Are they talking about court-martialing him?

MCINTYRE: No. Court-martialing would be a possibility but, as I said, there were mitigating factors, the so-called fog of war. It was what you'd call an honest mistake not one that was based on negligence. He thought he was going the right thing. There were other mitigating factors and while he could be disciplined it's unlikely he'd be court-martialed.

BROWN: Jamie, thank you very much, Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon tonight.

Some other stories that made news around the country today, a grand jury began hearing testimony in the case of Michael Jackson out in Santa Barbara, California. The proceedings taking place under cloak and dagger secrecy it seems. Prosecutors are taking the grand jury route to eliminate the need for a public preliminary hearing. Steve Moore, the Colorado hockey player whose neck was broken by an opponent's cheap shot during a game two weeks ago, spoke in public for the first time since the attack. He says he doesn't know if he'll ever be able to play hockey again and has not talked to his attacker, Todd Bertuzzi, who has been suspended for the rest of the year.

And the actor Peter Ustinov has died, not just an actor but a gifted mimic, an avid art collector, a diplomat, a novelist, a storyteller, fluent in a half a dozen languages, not a bad resume and a very full life. He had been ill for some time. Mr. Ustinov was 82 years old.

Coming up on NEWSNIGHT, back on track or just delaying the inevitable, the Tyco jury gets back to work, a break first.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: Well you can't say the judge in the Tyco trial isn't earning his pay. Along with the media circus, high-powered attorneys, gazillionaire defendants and the like, he's also dealing with a jury that cannot agree on a verdict, at least not yet.

In this case not 12 angry men but, if you believe the tabloids, one angry woman. She's been called the "batty blue blood" in one tabloid. Given all that, there was somewhat of a surprise today we think. Everyone is still at it, the judge, the jury, blue blood and all.

Here's CNN's Chris Huntington.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HUNTINGTON (voice-over): Jury deliberations in Dennis Kozlowski's corporate fraud trial appeared back on track as Judge Michael Obus denied yet another defense request for a mistrial indicating that all of the jurors said they could resume deliberating including Juror No. 4.

She's the 79-year-old former schoolteacher with a law degree who made front page news for flashing what appeared to be an OK sign toward defendants in court on Friday.

BRUCE SHAEFFER, ATTORNEY: That's the one juror who has come to the conclusion that there was not criminal intent is basically deciding it the way the judge directed them but if she in good conscience holds that belief then she's diligently following the court's instructions and doing what she was told to do.

HUNTINGTON: Defense attorneys arguing unsuccessfully their fifth mistrial motion since Thursday said Juror No. 4 had been at the center of the jury's deadlock dispute and that unflattering press reports, such as a "New York Post" front page sketch and headlines calling her a "batty blue blood" and "paranoid socialite" would have been seen by other jurors further poisoning the deliberations.

STEVEN BRILL, CEO, VERIFIED IDENTIFIED PASS, INC.: Given the circumstances I don't think there was anything wrong with what some of the newspapers did. They did nothing other than tell the public something the public had a right to know, which is who is this juror who seems to be causing this disruption in the process.

HUNTINGTON: In denying the mistrial, Judge Obus said the only thing that mattered were the jurors' assurances that they had buried the hatchet and could get back to work.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HUNTINGTON: And there was evidence that the jury had gotten back to work today from the notes that they passed out asking for trial exhibits, more testimony to be read back, and even a clarification of just what an accessory to a crime is. As for the media's role in this case, Judge Obus scolded reporters in court to basically leave the jurors alone -- Aaron.

BROWN: How long have they had the case?

HUNTINGTON: They have had the case a little bit more than a week. They got it last -- two Wednesdays ago. So they have really had it for quite some time. Nobody thought that the case in total would go this long or even the deliberations this long.

BROWN: It is complicated. There's many charges. And they may get there or we may do it again.

Thank you, Chris -- Chris Huntington with us tonight.

A few business items before we head to break. A judge in the state of Alabama has cut ExxonMobil a bargain, slashing an $11.8 billion judgment against the oil company to $3.8 billion. Yippee. This is a case over royalty payments to the state of Alabama for offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

The price of gas, speaking of oil, hit another record, $1.75 on average, unless you live in New York and I guarantee it's more. However, adjusted for inflation, gas actually is far cheaper than it was 20 years ago. Don't you feel better?

Wall Street did just fine today. Profit takers last week were bargain hunters today. The market's had two of our three good days, hasn't it The numbers sharply higher on this Monday.

Still to come on NEWSNIGHT, agreeing while disagreeing, how the White House spins Richard Clarke.

We'll take a break first. Around the world, this is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: It's fundamental rule of rhetoric. No matter what you're saying, how you say it matters most. Some would call this spin. And in a little fracas over Richard Clarke's testimony about the White House he once served in, it's fair to say a lot of spin is to be expected. The rhetoric for sure has been fiery on both sides, which can make it hard to miss the glass of water at the center of it all. One side is calling it half full, the other half empty.

Beneath the heap, our senior analyst, Jeff Greenfield.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SR. ANALYST (voice-over): It is the fiercest firefight of the Bush presidency. His former top terrorism aide charges insufficient attention to the threat before 9/11 and a dangerous diversion from it after.

The president's top aides and supporters charge Clarke with everything from inaccuracies and misrepresentations to profiteering and even perjury.

(on camera): But look and listen closely and you find something remarkable. On a number of points, Clarke and his critics are saying essentially the same thing. They just interpret the same facts very differently.

(voice-over): For instance, Clarke says that, on September 11, President Bush demanded that he look for proof that Iraq was behind the attacks. That, Clarke says, shows Bush's obsession.

The White House first suggested that conversation may never have taken place. But on "60 Minutes," National Security Adviser Rice said the president wanted to know about Iraq, for good reason.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "60 MINUTES")

CONDOLEEZZA RICE, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: The president asked a perfectly logical question. We had just been hit and hit hard. Did Iraq have anything to do with this? Were they complicit in it? This is a country with which we'd been to war a couple of times, that was firing at our airplanes in the no-fly zone. It made perfectly good sense to ask about Iraq.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GREENFIELD: Another example, Clarke said he offered the Bush administration a plan to confront al Qaeda in January 2001. But it took eight months, until September 4, for the plan to be adopted. Way too slow, says Clarke.

RICHARD CLARKE, FORMER COUNTERTERRORISM ADVISER: Almost every day, the president was hearing from George Tenet that there's an impending al Qaeda attack. As far back as February, George Tenet testified before the Congress that al Qaeda was the major national security threat and yet they have 100 meetings before they get around to dealing with it.

GREENFIELD: Now here's Secretary of State Powell on "Face the Nation."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "FACE THE NATION")

COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: Condi Rice and Don Rumsfeld and I spoke every morning at 7:15. I met with my experts every day at 8:30. We put out warnings throughout that period. So did the CIA. We began to review the bidding. With respect to where we were on the 4th of September, by the time we got to the 4th of September, there was a comprehensive plan.

GREENFIELD: Yes, Powell and Rice also say that the administration was taking other steps, but they're describing the same time frame as Clarke. But in Powell's and Rice's view, it is the sign of a careful, comprehensive approach, while Clarke sees it as an unconscionable delay.

(on camera): Clearly, some of the differences between Clarke and his critics go way beyond interpretation. They see his current scathing assessment of Bush as blatant self-promotion and blatantly dishonest at worst. He sees the whole Iraq policy as potentially catastrophic. But it really is striking that, on some matters involving this dustup, the bitter fight is about how to deal with the same set of facts.

Jeff Greenfield, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: The most important question perhaps is what the 9/11 Commission will make of those facts, apart from the heat.

We're joined from Washington tonight by two members of the commission. Between them, they have many years of political experience as Republican officer holders. Former Illinois Governor Jim Thompson joins us, as does former U.S. Senator from the state of Washington Slade Gorton.

It's good to see you both.

(CROSSTALK)

BROWN: Senator Gorton -- I guess both of you, because both of you have to weigh in on this. There's talk of compromise, that Dr. Rice would come, testify privately, that some portion of her testimony would be released publicly. Is that acceptable, Senator Gorton, to you?

SLADE GORTON, FORMER U.S. SENATOR: I think that Condoleezza Rice needs to testify before the general public. As you know, she's already spoken for several hours to members of the commission and the commission staff. We may learn a little bit more from her and we'll know enough to write our report.

But a major part of our duty is to see to it that everything possible is released to the general public. And no compromise on a private visit by Condoleezza Rice is going to satisfy that need.

BROWN: And, Governor Thompson, Quickly, to get you on the record on that, are you moved at all by this talk of compromise?

JAMES THOMPSON, 9/11 COMMISSIONER: No, I'm not, actually. Look, two things should be made clear. One, we have been in business for over a year now. And we have never had a partisan vote on the commission. Our votes have always been bipartisan. And that's how we'll continue.

On the other hand, this commission has voted unanimously to ask Dr. Rice to appear before us as a witness under oath in public. And I think that's what she should do.

BROWN: Let's talk a little politics here. I want to talk a little substance, too. Governor, are you at all concerned that the public perception of the commission after last week's public hearings has changed, that it now looks more partisan than I know any of you want it to seem?

THOMPSON: Well, you know, the strange thing is that I think most of the members of the public never knew of our existence until last week. And so we're making progress on that score. It took all these high-powered witnesses and a lot of controversy over Mr. Clarke and his book to bring the commission to the public attention. And I'm glad we're there.

I think, in the end, the public will be impressed by the report we issue. And my fervent hope and my belief is that that report will be unanimous. If we can get five Republicans and five Democrats to agree on an unanimous report, then I think the American people will have been well served.

BROWN: Senator Gorton, are there substantive differences in the facts presented by Dr. Rice and Mr. Clarke? I know you can't talk about the facts that Dr. Rice presents -- they're classified right now -- but are there differences, significant differences?

GORTON: I'm not one who wants to attack Dick Clarke at this point, because I believe that he answered the only question that was truly relevant totally honestly.

When I asked him whether if all of his recommendations had been adopted by the Bush administration on the day after he made them, it would have prevented 9/11, he quite honestly and unequivocally answered that question, no. The rest of it is all smoke and mirrors. hand your earlier analysis was entirely correct, first, that there aren't too many differences on the actual facts. It's a mood change over where priorities lay in both the Clinton and Bush administrations, without having had any impact on the entire matter.

And earlier in your program this evening, the editor of "TIME" magazine pointed out, I think quite correctly, that, if 9/11 were to be prevented, it was going to be prevented here in the United States by better work on the part of the FBI, other law enforcement agencies and better exchange of information between the FBI and the CIA.

BROWN: Then, Governor Thompson, at the end of the day, you're not going to tell us -- the commission's not going to tell us if only it could have been; you're going to tell us how not to let it happen again? THOMPSON: We're going to tell you a number of things, I think, what really did happen on September 11, why did it happen, was there fault, if there was fault, whose fault was it, could it have been presented. I think the answer to that one is pretty clear, the answer by everybody, Bush friend and Bush foes. No, it could not have been prevented.

But, just as importantly, and there hasn't been enough emphasis on this, but I think the commission will place emphasis on it in the report, how do we lessen the odds against something like this happening again? We know we can't guarantee anything in this life. The nation is too big, too open, too free, too vulnerable, but how do we lesson the odds? What things can we do in terms of protecting America and its people to lessen the chances that something like this will happen again?

That's just as an important part of our report as what happened on September 11.

BROWN: Governor, thank you. Senator Gorton, it's always good to see you. You both are welcome here any time you have something you want to add to this. Thank you both.

THOMPSON: Thank you.

BROWN: Thank you.

Ahead on NEWSNIGHT tonight, the latest battle cry in Iraq and why U.S. officials aren't exactly happy to hear about it.

From New York, this is NEWSNIGHT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: In Iraq today, more protests following the closing of an Iraqi newspaper by the U.S. civil administrator, Paul Bremer. He shut the paper down yesterday, saying it was inciting violence against U.S. forces. Winning the hearts and minds of Iraqis is far from a done deal. And the same goes for building a self-sustaining democracy there. Tolerance being a measure of any democracy, a wave of anti- Semitism in postwar Iraq speaks to the obstacles ahead.

Reporting for us tonight, CNN's Walter Rodgers.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

WALTER RODGERS, CNN SR. INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A fire-breathing Muslim cleric leads believers in a chorus of "Down with Israel." In Iraq, hatred of Israel, Zionists and Jews has become more, not less poisonous, since the American occupation. Many Iraqis now see last year's war as an Israeli-American plot to keep Iraq weak and divide the nation into separate Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish enclaves. Even Iraqi intellectual believe it.

SAAD JAWAD, POLITICAL ANALYST: Whatever is happening here in Iraq is not in the interest even of the United States, this chaos and instability and security. In fact, it's in the interest of Israel.

RODGERS: Israel's assassination of Palestinian Sheik Ahmed Yassin in Gaza fueled the hatred. And any tragedy like this recent car bomb is suspected of being a Jewish plot on Baghdad's streets.

DR. OMAR AL-RAWI, SURGEON: They are kill the Muslims. They are destroy the Muslims' country. They're -- all the war that happen here in Iraq or in Palestine or anywhere, this is directed and pushed through the Jewish people.

RODGERS: Iraqi newspapers fan the anti-Semitism. One recently published these allegations, that: "Israel has 560 spies here, some disguised as American soldiers; 200,000 Israeli Jews buying up prime real estate to recolonize Iraq. Another claim, that Israel and the United States plan to expand the Jewish state into Iraq.

"How can they come back with all the blood on their hands? We know they're buying houses here," she says. Specialists on anti- Semitism say Iraq has long been fertile ground.

ROBERT WISTRICH, HEBREW UNIVERSITY: In Iraq, you had an older tradition of anti-Semitism, going back to the Nazi influence in the 1930s and '40s.

RODGERS: The American experiment in Iraq was not supposed to work like this.

(on camera): A year ago, the Bush administration openly envisioned a new, more liberal and tolerant Iraq. Instead, Iraqis seem more xenophobic now and there are growing fears one possible outcome here might just as easily be an Islamic state as a democracy.

Walter Rodgers, CNN, Baghdad.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Still ahead on the program tonight, tomorrow dawns a dark day across Ireland, as one pub staple is banished. Oh, my.

A break first. This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: So the office wise guy was saying in our afternoon meeting -- I wonder who that wise guy was, by the way -- you know, you guys might want to put a fact or two in this page tonight. And, by golly, they did.

A report out today says tax receipts at bars and restaurants in the city of New York have actually gone up since the mayor pushed through a smoking ban last spring. In other words, prohibition pays in a city, granted, a large city. Well, what about an entire country, where it wouldn't be Friday night without a pint in one hand and a spoke in the other?

In Dublin for us, CNN's Diana Muriel. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DIANA MURIEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The smoke-filled haze of an Irish pub is now a thing of the past. A total ban on smoking in public workplaces going into force Monday.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They completely overstepped the mark and putting in an all-over ban on smoking.

MURIEL: Ireland's health minister enjoying a smoke-free breakfast in a Dublin coffee house says the movie is aimed at reducing the 7,000 smoking-related deaths each year.

MICHEAL MARTIN, IRISH HEALTH MINISTER: And it's no-brainer. Smoking is the clear single greatest cause of death and illness in Ireland.

MURIEL: Some pub goers predict problems for Ireland's tourism industry.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It will affect me because there's nothing like going to Canamara (ph) and old country pub, log fire, sitting down, having a glass of wine and a cigarette. You know, I'm consider going to Northern Ireland from now on or over to England.

MURIEL: Pub managers like Paul Corcoran must enforce the new law or risk big fans, even losing their licenses.

PAUL CORCORAN, PUB MANAGER: I don't think, actually, that the police really want to get involved in this at all, at all. I think so it's basically up to bar managers and staff to enforce this.

MURIEL (on camera): That signal means it's last orders in this Dublin pub and a last chance to light up with that last pint. Although it will mean be a big change in the atmosphere of the average Irish pub, the smoking ban is something many customers welcome.

(voice-over): Twenty-year-old Toby Allen (ph) hopes it's an incentive to give up tobacco

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Although I smoke, I feel that anything that tries to prevent people from smoking isn't a bad thing.

MURIEL: Enjoying his last night of puffing on a cigarette in the pub, Toby knows that, from now on, if he wants to smoke, he'll be out here in the cold.

Diana Muriel, CNN, Dublin.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Morning papers coming up from the office wise guy. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(ROOSTER CROWING)

BROWN: OK, time to check morning papers from across the country and around the world, though I'm not sure we're actually going to get to around the world. So I wish I hadn't said that. But I did. And it's too late.

This is a day where there's not a dominant national story to lead with, so a lot of good local leads in the newspapers, at least as we see it.

"Fireman's Death Reveals Problems" the lead in "The Cincinnati Enquirer." "Department Probe Finds Failings in Training and Equipment." And that's a sad tale. I'm not sure what this story is about. "Bad Weather is Good for TV News, Ratings and Profits. " Does that mean we should be doing more weather stories here? Maybe we'll just end this segment with a weather note every night.

"Chattanooga Times Free Press" leads local also, unpleasantly so. "Jet Crashes in Rhea County." "Pilots Go Through Years of Training" is the sidebar story to the crash. It's a FA-18 Hornet jet that crashed on Monday. That's too bad. What else? There was something else in -- oh, this story will appear on a lot of front pages tomorrow. "National Abortion Law Being Tested in the Courts." We reported on that earlier.

Two Philadelphia papers. "The Philadelphia Daily News," the people paper, reports on "What's on Deck." The new ballpark is opening. Citizens bank park, a name, of course, you'll never forget.

"The Cincinnati Enquirer" leads -- has a good story here. "Ghost Voting to Come Into the Open. Letters Prod the House Ethics Panel to Look Into the Not So Hidden Practice" of I guess legislators sort of voting, but not really showing up. This is the most interesting political story in the paper. "Arab-Americans Shift to Kerry in Four Key States. A New Poll Shows Iraq, Israel and Immigration Have Cost Bush Support Among Arab-Americans," of which there are many.

"The Oregonian" out in Portland.

Did you say 30 seconds already? Thirty seconds. OK. I realize the clock still ticks.

"The Oregonian" leads local, also. "Man Killed By Police Unarmed. Portland Officers Have Not Said Why An Officer Shot James Perez." But I guess we'll eventually find out. That's "The Oregonian."

Ten seconds left, which means time for "The Chicago Sun-Times." And because we have heard that ratings benefit when we do weather, we'll tell you the weather tomorrow is "back to reality," 47 degrees in the Midwest in Chicago.

Soledad O'Brien with a look ahead at "AMERICAN MORNING."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks, Aaron.

Tomorrow on "AMERICAN MORNING," defending Saddam Hussein. We are talking to Jacques Verges, the lawyer who has been chosen to lead the defense when the former Iraqi dictator eventually goes to trial. Despite all the evidence of brutality, could Hussein actually go free? A look at that tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. Eastern tomorrow -- Aaron.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Soledad, thank you.

Good to have you all with us tonight. Want to hear something crazy? I'm here all week. See you tomorrow. That means 10:00 Eastern time.

Until then, good night for all of us.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com