Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Congress Debates Extending Unemployment Benefits; BP Tests Oil Leak Cap; Watch Hidden Airline Fees; Boeing's Big Dream; U.S. Counterterrorism Efforts Scrutinized; U.S. Seeks Stronger Afghan- Pakistan Effort; Libya: No Lockerbie-Oil Deal; Flu Vaccines Via Mail

Aired July 19, 2010 - 13:00   ET

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

TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: OK. The man is back. CNN NEWSROOM continues right now with Ali Velshi.

ALI VELSHI, CNN ANCHOR: Tony, good to see you, my friend. Like I said earlier, I like what you've done with the place.

I'm Ali Velshi. As Tony said, I'm going to be with you for the next two hours, today and every weekday. I'm going to take all these important topics that we cover a step further and try and give you a level of detail that will help you make important decisions about where you travel, how you spend your money and what you put out there on the Internet.

Let's get started. We've got a lot on the rundown today. Here's what I've got.

President Obama pushes lawmakers to extend jobless benefits for people whose checks are running out. But Republicans and Democrats are at odds over how to pay for it.

Boeing's new airplane, the Dreamliner passenger jet, makes its international debut today. Guess who? Richard Quest got the short straw on that one. He's in London to tell us all about it.

And today's "Big 'I'" is the flu shot of the future. You can do it yourself: no needles, no waiting in line. We're going to tell you all about that very shortly.

But I want to tell you about something that's brewing, something very, very important. It's about unemployment benefits right now. This is something that we've known about for a long time.

A lot of unemployed people in this country. In fact, there are 14.6 million unemployed people in this country. And by the way, a lot of people say that's not counting those people who aren't even on the rolls.

Now, as of last week, 46 percent of those people, 46 percent of 14.6 million, so let's call it almost 7 million people, have been unemployed for more than six months. Now, the Senate is going to vote on Wednesday on whether or not to extend their unemployment benefits. They're running out of benefits, because you don't get unemployment benefits forever. You get them for a set period of time.

Two and a half million Americans have already exhausted all of their federal benefits and their state benefits. In fact, they don't qualify for anything else except Food Stamps and maybe -- maybe subsidized housing but not things that pay the bills.

Now, the Labor Department estimates that another 3.2 million people stand to lose their -- their benefits by the end of the month if Congress doesn't do something.

Now, this morning in preparation possibly for Wednesday's vote, this morning, President Obama stepped out into the Rose Garden, flanked by unemployed people, and he said this to those people who are holding up these unemployment benefits. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I have to say, after years after championing policies that turn a record surplus into a massive deficit, the same people who didn't have any problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars on tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans are now saying we shouldn't offer relief to middle-class Americans like Jim or Lesley or Denise who really need help.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELSHI: All right. I've been on vacation a little bit. I'm losing track of time. It's tomorrow that vote is expected to happen, not Wednesday.

Now, let me just tell you how this happens. This vote goes before Congress. Lots of people support extending unemployment benefits. Some people don't for various reasons. They think we don't have the money to do it. You've got to find a way to pay for these benefits. They're expensive.

Others feel -- some people have the opinion that unemployment benefits, giving them to people, encourages those people not to look for jobs and rather to stay home.

But every month, they've had to go through this process, and every month, ultimately they've passed an extension. But in June, they tried three times, and they weren't able to do it. So what's going to be different tomorrow? Let me show you. This is going to be different.

Carte Goodwin, he's a former gubernatorial aide and lawyer who's been tapped to replace Senator Robert Byrd, who passed away recently. He's expected to be seated tomorrow, which then allows the Democrats to pass this -- this extension of unemployment benefits.

This is, as you can tell, a very, very political issue. Let's bring in our senior political analyst, Gloria Borger. She's joining me in Washington.

Gloria, first of all, good to see you. It's been a while.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Good to see you, Ali. Welcome back.

VELSHI: Thank you, thank you.

But some things don't change. You can go away and you come back. And this problem has been around. And we talk about it every month. But we think what's going to happen next month? This is going to continue to be a problem well into the midterm elections. This is going to be something that's going to come up on the campaign stumps. There are some people who think we've got to stop extending unemployment insurance benefits. Set the stage for me here.

BORGER: Well, you know, I think it's really a matter of theology. On the one hand, as you were pointing out, the Democrats actually believe that extending unemployment benefits is a fiscal stimulus in its own way, and the Republicans believe that it's a disincentive for people to go out and look for jobs.

Now, we could be heading up to 99 weeks for people on unemployment benefits. Even in the '80s when you had a terrible recession, we only got up in the mid 70-plus weeks. So, you know, Republicans are saying, "OK, you've got to pay for it." And what they want to do is use the unobligated and unspent part of the stimulus program.

And the Democrats are saying, "Absolutely no way. And by the way, Republicans, funny how you don't feel the same way about fiscal discipline when it comes to tax cuts for the wealthy and you want to extend George W. Bush's tax cuts."

So Ali, of course this is setting the stage for the 2010 midterm elections. The Democrats don't want it to be just about Barack Obama.

VELSHI: Sure.

BORGER: They want it to be about, OK, here's what it would look like if Republicans ruled the roost in Congress.

VELSHI: Let's just talk about a recent CNN poll where we asked people whether you feel we're still in a recession.

BORGER: Sure.

VELSHI: As you know, a lot of economists say we're past this recession. Of course, tell that to people who've been on unemployment insurance for a long time.

Look at what most of America says. Seventy-eight percent feel that we're still in a recession.

BORGER: Yes.

VELSHI: Only 21 percent say no. And then take a look at who they blame for the economic mess. Forty-eight percent blame Republicans; 28 percent blame Democrats; and 26 percent say both. So one doesn't really know how the strategy is going to play out for elections.

BORGER: Right. You know, the president can only go to the well so many times and say, "I inherited this fiscal crisis. I inherited this fiscal crisis." And he said that last week, Ali. He said, you know, "People need to remember where we came from, but I take responsibility for what is going forward."

Now, the problem the president has is a very high unemployment rate. People don't believe that their lives are getting any better. And so who are they blaming? They are blaming the congressional Democrats. They still like Barack Obama. But there are a lot of polls that also show that more and more independent voters are saying, "You know what? I want a Congress that puts a check on Barack Obama."

VELSHI: Right.

BORGER: And that's their worry.

VELSHI: I'll just show you those numbers again. Forty-one percent of respondents felt the Republicans are to blame. Twenty- eight say the Democrats. When you add up Democrats, both, you get more.

BORGER: Both.

VELSHI: Here's the -- here's the issue. How do you position this? Because ultimately, whether the money's coming out from stimulus or it's coming out from somewhere else, it is -- the Democrats are still arguing that it's going to be taxpayers' money, going out to people who are long-term unemployed.

And there still remain some people, not a majority of Republicans in the Senate, but some people who think it's just bad policy because you're giving money to people and it's forcing them or it's encouraging them to not take a job.

BORGER: Right.

VELSHI: I don't see that the evidence supports that. But some people are making that argument.

BORGER: Right. And neither -- and neither do the Democrats. And I might add that lots of these folks will go home to their districts and say, "You know what? We passed unemployment benefits for you," even though they didn't vote for them. That happens all the time. It happened with the stimulus plan in the House of Representatives.

But I do -- you know, I do believe that what we are seeing now, Ali, is a way to kind of set up this election. The Democrats don't want the narrative just to be about Barack Obama.

VELSHI: Right. BORGER: They want it to be about the other guys, as well. And they're going to use it with financial reform, which the president is going to sign later this week. And they're going to say, "Look. Look at all these Republicans who voted against Wall Street reform. I'm the one who brought it to you."

Now, Wall Street reform is popular. But the question is whether people hate the government so much...

VELSHI: Right.

BORGER: ... they don't even think the government can fix Wall Street.

VELSHI: Right, right.

BORGER: So that's another problem they've got.

VELSHI: It's complicated.

BORGER: It is.

VELSHI: Gloria, good to see you as always. Thank you, Gloria Borger, our senior...

BORGER: Good to see you. Welcome back. We missed you.

VELSHI: Thank you. Good to be back. Gloria Borger, CNN senior political analyst. And we'll be talking to her a great deal over the course of the next few weeks and months.

OK. The oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico, here's one thing good that happened while I was away, it's been capped. Is it going to hold? Could something catastrophic still happen with that oil well? We've got your questions and your answers after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: I was sort of hoping that well would stop spewing -- spewing oil into the Gulf of Mexico by the time I got back. And I sort of got my wish. We need to find out a little bit more about this.

It's day 91 of the oil spill disaster, and they have capped the well -- sort of, kind of. Let's talk about this.

They put a cap on the well, and they're testing the pressure in the reservoir, which is the thing that's much deeper. It's the thing that's deep under the ocean. That's the big pool of oil that's underneath -- underneath there. And when you cap the well, like you cap any other kind of leak, if the pressure in there increases, that's a good sign. That means it's holding. I'm going to bring you up to speed with what the test results are.

But there are some concerns. The pressure was rising, and then it sort of stopped rising as much. And that -- think about a tire, if it's leaking and you put your thumb on the little thing and you stop the leak, but there's still some -- the pressure is not staying steady, that means there might be a leak somewhere else. And that's the concern, that there's a seepage nearby. And they're trying to figure out more about that seepage and what to do about it.

The other concern which we're going to talk a little bit more about, is the build-up of methane over the oil well. Now, Thad Allen sent a letter to BP yesterday about some unanswered questions. Here's what he had to say.

He said, "The federal science team got the answers they were seeking and the commitment from BP to meet their monitoring and notification obligations. I authorized BP to continue the integrity test for another 24 hours, and I restated our firm position that this test will only continue if they continue to met their obligations to rigorously monitor for any signs that this test could worsen the overall situation. At any moment, we have the ability to return to the safe containment of the oil on the surface until the time the relief well is completed and the well is permanently killed."

So you can see that there are some complications, this whole thing.

One gentleman who I've spoken to a few times during the last 91 days is Don Van Nieuwenhuise, who is a professor of petroleum geoscience at the University of Houston. He joins us again from Houston.

Don, thank you for being with us again. Tell me. This -- they've stopped the well. For a guy like me who's not an engineer and not a scientist, I just think we should be dancing in the streets. But this isn't actually a permanent stop. This is a test, really. Explain to me what is going on.

CR. DON VAN NIEUWENHUISE, UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON: Well, what they've done is they've actually stopped -- completely stopped the flow of the test to see if the drawn-down pressure, the pressure's been reduced by flowing. And they want to see if they can get that pressure all the way back up to where it should be if there are no leaks and if the reservoir is not depleted.

Now, there's two possibilities here because it's not up to 8,000 psi. One is that the reservoir...

VELSHI: Eight thousand psi is what that reservoir should be at. That's pounds per square inch. That's -- how do we know that that's what it should be?

VAN NIEUWENHUISE: Based on the fact that it's over 11,000 at the bottom.

VELSHI: Right.

VAN NIEUWENHUISE: As you come up the column in the light -- the low weight of oil and gas, it should only be about 8,000 psi at the top of that wellhead. VELSHI: Got it.

VAN NIEUWENHUISE: And -- but if we -- if we have something below that, it could be one of two things. There could be a small leak or there could also be a condition where you've had some depletion of the reservoir. When you draw the fluid -- in your example that you gave in letting air out of a tire, if you let some air out of a tire and then you stop, of course, the pressure is going to be lower. And that's what you're seeing.

But unlike the tire, in a reservoir, oil and gas can fill in from the outer reaches of that reservoir and start to build that pressure up slowly. And that's what we're seeing. It's building up slowly as that pressure comes back into the tire-like situation that you used as an example.

VELSHI: Why do we think that there is seepage? Tell me about this and what this -- what the implications are.

VAN NIEUWENHUISE: Well, they -- they've seen a little bit of a spike in the methane content around the well, but they haven't seen bubbles because they've been looking very closely at that. So as far as BP is concerned, there is no leak there.

But some distance -- and I still haven't heard what that distance is, away from that, they actually can see some methane escaping at the surface. And it's essentially bubbling through the strata. And in that case, it's possible that some of the sands below the surface have been charged with oil and gas. And, of course, the oil and gas have different size requirements for leaking through a particular capping rock. And usually what happens is the pressure builds up, the gas will leak out first and then later on, the oil will start to leak out.

VELSHI: You mentioned that they're seeing methane close to this thing. What are the implications of that? Over the last three months, we've all become sort of scientists to some degree. What does this mean? Why do we now have to be concerned about methane?

VAN NIEUWENHUISE: Well, when the cap was opened, you had oil and gas coming out of the well all concerned it. That wasn't too much of a problem, because that's what you would expect to see.

But if the well is completely sealed in, you do not want to see an increase in methane. And of course, they cannot see a leak around the wellhead. And one of the most serious situations would be is that, if you had a leak very close to the wellhead, and you could have a potential erosion of the substrate or the rocks around that wellhead, which could cause it to collapse if the flow increased enough. Right know, they don't see any leak...

VELSHI: Right.

VAN NIEUWENHUISE: And they don't see anything to be concerned about.

VELSHI: Don, my producer was telling me you have -- you seem to have expressed a view that maybe carrying on with this test for a long time is not a good idea?

VAN NIEUWENHUISE: Well, one of the things that they could do is they do have production lines already available, and they could add production lines. And if they start to draw down the pressure by producing even a small amount of that oil, it will drop the pressure within the wellhead.

And a lot of this is pressure thresholds. So when the pressure gets over a certain limit, it can become dangerous and start to be dangerous if there is a leak. But if you draw down on that pressure by producing some of the oil, you'll get back down below that threshold. And you'll essentially slow down and maybe even end that leak for a while, as long as you keep that pressure drawn down.

VELSHI: Don, Chad Myers is with me here. He's, of course, been following this more closely than anyone here at CNN -- Chad.

CHAD MYERS, CNN METEOROLOGIST: We've been talking here in the office all day long about this 40 million gallon normal leakage into the Gulf of Mexico. Is this true? Really, do 40 million gallons of oil naturally leak into the Gulf of Mexico every year without wells even being there, just in cracks in the surface, or is this just something that someone made up? Tell me the truth.

VAN NIEUWENHUISE: Actually, I don't know what the actual number is, but that sounds about right. All over the Gulf of Mexico, you have formations that actually leak to the surface. And when we look for oil and gas, we're looking for situations. We call them trapping situations, where the oil that's being formed in the earth does not follow up faults or actually break through capping rocks itself and -- and leak to the surface.

A lot of oil that's formed naturally by the earth ends up escaping or leaking to the surface in the form of natural seeps. And yes, there are a lot of these all around the world.

MYERS: so we've found these seeps or these something near the well -- we don't know what the word "near" means yet. Isn't that really the reason why they drilled that hole in the first place? Because they knew that something was seeping around it so they knew that there was probably something below there?

VAN NIEUWENHUISE: Actually, yes, whenever we see seeps, we know there are hydrocarbons stored. And again, the first thing that comes out of a seep is going to be the natural gas, because the -- the buoyancy of natural gas is higher than that of oil. And it can overcome the capillary pressure in these little pores in the ceiling rocks, and it can push its way through. Whereas the oil has to have more pressure to push its way through the same rocks. And so we see natural gas, we're also looking for natural gas seeps to find where the oil has been trapped.

VELSHI: I thought just following this leak was complicated. I didn't realize it would be this complicated following how you plug this leak. Professor Don Van Nieuwenhuise, it's good to see you again. As always, thank you very much. I suspect we'll be having occasion to talk a lot more in the future.

Chad, good to see you, as well.

MYERS: Good to see you, Ali.

VELSHI: And I'll talk to you a little later on in the show.

All right. Latest airline innovations are on display in England this week. Going to take you out there for a closer look at the bell of the ball. You're going to want to see this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: All right. Checking top stories, Utah's attorney general says he'll launch a formal investigation into the release of an illegal immigration hit list. The list of around 1,300 alleged illegal immigrants was anonymously distributed last week. The attorney general tells CNN he expects to have the names of two possible suspects as early as today.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton landed in Kabul, Afghanistan, a short time ago. She's there for a donors' conference. Before arriving, Clinton was in Pakistan to announce a major aid package aimed at building up that country's infrastructure. It includes hundreds of millions of dollars for power and water projects. Pakistan is the linchpin, some say, in the war against terror. We're going to talk more about that a little later in the show.

Zsa Zsa Gabor is having hip replacement surgery today. The 93- year-old actress was hurt when she fell out of bed last week. She's been in a wheelchair since a car accident eight years ago.

And if you haven't flown for a while, you may get some bottom- line surprises when you pay for your airline ticket. I'm going to talk it over with Robert Reid of Lonely Planet. We'll also find out why he thinks you should visit the Gulf Coast despite the oil disaster.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: All right. After bottoming out during the depths of the recession, air travel is actually up. And for those of you who travel a lot, you'll find prices are starting to go up, but they've been relatively low for the last year and a half or so.

Passengers are returning to the skies. You might notice some changes, though, since the last time you flew. In addition to the basic fare, airlines collect government-imposed fees. A lot of these have been around for a while. The airplane passenger facilities charge, up to $18 a ticket. Federal segment fees, $3.70 a flight. September 11 security fee, $2.50 per flight segment. There are also additional flights -- fees for flights to or from Alaska or Hawaii or for international travel. Airlines are also charging a wide variety of add-on fees, including fees for making reservations by phone and fees for early boarding, for seat selection, for checked bags, for Wi-Fi, for carry- on bags -- can you believe that, charging you for carry-on bags? -- for blankets, for meals.

Let's talk about what's necessary and what's not, what's probably here to stay, what isn't and how you can get around that with Robert Reid. He's Lonely Planet's U.S. travel editor, joining me from New York.

Robert, good to see you.

ROBERT REID, U.S. TRAVEL EDITOR, LONELY PLANET: You, too.

VELSHI: Robert, there are a bunch of these fees you can't blame the airlines for. They are -- they're government-imposed fees or taxes.

But some of the ones that the airlines do decide to charge you for independently, I'm sort of the mind that some of them are worthwhile and they allow you to choose certain things. I use Wi-Fi on the plane. Not everybody wants to, so everybody shouldn't have to pay for it. I'm happy to pay for that.

Some of the more ridiculous ones are things like paying to carry baggage on the plane.

REID: That would be one of them, yes. Not a very popular fee for many people. This has happened since 9/11 as the airline industry is trying to make money. And, you know, with rising fuel costs, with the recession, with the concerns about terrorism, they're trying to find different ways to make money.

And all these fees are adding up to quite a bit of revenue for them. In the last year, according to the Bureau of Transportation, $8 billion in various fees including the ones you're talking about.

VELSHI: Now, it would be...

REID: It is making a difference.

VELSHI: Right. Now, I guess you would say that if it's a business, it should make money, and we'd like them to be profitable so that they continue to fly nice, new, safe airplanes with well-trained staff.

Why can't they just charge the amount for the ticket that would actually allow them to stay in business and be profitable rather than do it with these fees? I understand the fuel surcharge fees. But what's some of the logic behind some of these fees?

REID: It's -- it's confusing. It feels a little bit like trying to find the fountain of youth to really understand everything that's within a fee structure, everything that you might be charged for.

And when people are shopping around tickets, there is a little bit of a benefit for not everything being upfront about it.

So I think that one of the challenges is, is that consumers need to have all information at hand when they make a decision what ticket they're going to get, whether just talking to an agent and booking it by telephone is going to charge extra money. Recently they were in the House talking about that, possibly new regulations to make sure that every single fee that's part of the ticket price is very clear up front to the people buying tickets.

VELSHI: Where's the best place for a consumer who's looking to travel to get the greatest disclosure or to compare as fairly as they can what different airlines are charging?

REID: Get this question a lot. And the thing about it is, what I always do and it sounds very old-fashioned, I just make a call. I look on search engines and airline Web sites. And then I call the airlines and find out what are the hidden costs here, because sometimes on the Web site, it's very hard to find some of them. Literally, they're buried like on the fifth page of a frequently asked questions second.

So I call. I ask about what if I change the fee? Does that include a meal? Is there -- how many bags? And then I go online and book it.

VELSHI: All right. Well, it takes a little bit more research than maybe it should. But I guess that's the best advice.

Robert, real quick. We don't have too much time. Tell me about what you're seeing in terms of travel to the Gulf of Mexico? Obviously, some people think the whole place is awash in oil and don't want to go.

REID: Well, the truth is, is that very small percentage of the Gulf right now is affected still. I mean, in Florida alone, there's 800 miles of beaches, less than 100 of them have seen tar balls or any oil activity.

So you still can go. In fact, I think you should. You know, Obama talked in the Oval Office speech about minimizing the damage to the region. One of the ways is tourism. It's the No. 1, 2 revenue earner there. When I was there recently, I could still go swimming. There was a lot of things away from the beach, like in Pensacola it's a historic place. And anywhere you go, the locals are there, and they're kind of counting on it. This is the first year that they're really back from Katrina, and they could use a break. So I think it might be time to think beyond the beach a little bit for your vacation plans and still go.

VELSHI: Robert, good to see you, and excellent choice in suits. Thanks for matching what I'm wearing. Robert Reid is Lonely Planet's U.S. travel editor, joining us from New York.

This next guy I'm going to talk to could really be called our travel editor. Richard Quest is at the Farnborough International Air Show, although that's not how he's going to say it. He'll call it "Farn-bur-rah." It's basically -- think about this as the big fair, the shopping center for airlines. It's where airlines go to see what the latest and the greatest and the newest is. And poor old Richard drew the short straw again and ends up at an air show.

Richard, my friend, always good to see you.

RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Nice to see that being away hasn't dulled your pleasantness, sweetness and light, my dear friend.

Welcome. Welcome to Farnborough. And look behind me at these brilliant planes. We've got the 380, we've got the 787 Dreamliner, the A-330, the A-400m, a real potpourri.

But, Ali, today the talk was all about orders. GCAS of the U.S., huge orders for Boeing and for Airbus. ALC, a new leasing company, huge order for Airbus. And Emirates, the Dubai-based airline, ordering 30 777s from Boeing, that'll take their fleet to 101.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

QUEST (voice-over): A quick look, a first glance. Yet without the name on the tail, it isn't that easy to see what is different. But look more closely and there are plenty of telltale signs that this is a new aircraft.

(on camera): Let's start at the nose. A sharper, sleeker, much more pronounced nose on the front of the 787 with large side windows. Look out from the front and just at the side, well, it could only be the 787.

Now look at the windows. Boeing has made a lot of noise about the fact the windows on the Dreamliner are much bigger, allowing more light into the aircraft. But what will really excite us will be the new technology, innovative, interesting and fiddle with until your heart's content. You can make them darker. When you've got bored of that on those long flights, you can make them lighter again. Oh, yes, hours of fun.

They call them the chevrons, or maybe the cookie cutter at the back of the Rolls Royce engines. It's probably the most distinctive part of the 787. Rolls Royce put them there to reduce the noise from the engines and help the performance.

If all else fails, then look to the beautiful wings of the 787. Everyone pretty much agrees the uniquely shaped wing with its sweeping arc at the end, gives it a very distinctive profile.

JIM MCNERNEY, PRESIDENT & CEO, BOEING: The wings, those carbon wings, very graceful the way they're swept back, the way they unload when the plane lands is beautiful. Just beautiful.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

QUEST: So there you have it, Ali. Not only do you have the new plane, the famous 787 Dreamliner just nestling between those two Airbuses, now you even will know how to recognize them at an airport, even you.

VELSHI: Even me.

Hey, Richard, OK, so the 777 that Emirates bought, that's a good long airliner, but if you look over your right shoulder, our left, you pointed to the 380. And when you see the 380 next to these big, big planes, it's a massive, massive piece of metal in the air. How is that plane doing because that thing has two decks on it -- is that a 380 over your right shoulder? Yes, there is.

QUEST: Yes, yes. This is the 380. You can also see all the accoutrements of television as we go about it. That's a 380. It is simply vast. No U.S. passenger airline has bought the 380 yet, although it is now flying with Emirates, Quantas, Singapore Airlines. I'm sure I'll get an email from the ones I've forgotten. Air France and Lufthansa.

But to answer your really important question, Airbus has written off the majority of the money that it costs to design, develop and build it and they told me today they expect the new planes being built will break even by 2014 because they've written off the old debt. It's huge.

VELSHI: It's a good sign for the economy when people are shopping for airplanes. You remember at the brink of the recession, fewer people were showing up at these things.

QUEST: Yes. And the really important thing, of course, that plane right in the middle, the 787, which is making its debut outside the United States, the Dreamliner, that has sold 863 of them. So that tells you the importance, not only for the Puget Sound and the northwestern United States, but right the way through the Midwest, through to Chicago where Boeing has its headquarters. The whole industry that builds that plane is crucial. And that's why that plane is the star of this show.

VELSHI: Richard, come and visit us again. I haven't seen you for a long time, it'll be nice to see you in person.

Richard Quest at the Farnborough Air Show in England. Good to see you, my friend.

QUEST: Yes.

VELSHI: After 9/11, President Bush created the Department of Homeland Security. The point was to streamline intelligence and counterterrorism. But did the creation of that body create more problems? We're going to give you an answer to that straight ahead. Stay with me.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: There are a few must-read opportunities that you can't miss. One of them is in "The Washington Post" today. They have spent two years looking into the intelligence community in the United States, trying to get an understanding for how big it is, how vast it is, how well-connected it is and whether it answered the questions of its very creation after the September 11th attacks to try and streamline information that comes into the intelligence community to prevent terror attacks to fight terrorism and to gather intelligence.

Well, it is quite fascinating. Nine years after the formation of the Department of Homeland Security, it turns out the intelligence community is apparently larger, much larger than it was even then.

Now this was explained in this article. Let me show you what the article found. They were looking at things like office space and personnel -- 1,271 government organizations comprise our intelligence community; 1,931 private companies are tied to it, those could be contractors, could be providers of services or products; an estimated 854,000 people are not part of the intelligence community, those are only the people who hold top-secret clearances; 854,000 people, that's nearly 1.5 times the number of people who actually live in the Washington, D.C. area.

There are 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work that are under construction or have been built since the creation of the Homeland Security Agency in September of 2001. That's the equivalent of three Pentagons, 22 U.S. Capitol buildings, 17 million square feet of space. That's the extra stuff.

Robert Gates, the secretary of defense, noted the difficulty in making -- and this is kind of obvious -- all these different bodies and parts and moving parts work together to effectively monitor intelligence and terrorism. He told "The Washington Post," here's a quote from the article, "There's been so much growth since 9/11 that getting your arms around that -- not just for the director of national intelligence, but for any individual, for the director of the CIA, for the secretary of defense -- is a challenge."

What are the concerns? Duplication of effort, first of all. Are there people doing the same thing or is everybody involved in this massive enterprise actually busy doing something new?

In addition to the size, there's the issue of oversight. Who is actually looking at this massive, massive operation? And are there things being missed if so many people are involved? Now in fairness, a lot of these people are involved in things like IT and administrative responsibilities, but it is much bigger than we all thought.

President Bush, I want you to hear this, President Bush announced the creation of the Department of Homeland Security actually in 2002 in response to 9/11. Here's what he had to say about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, SEPTEMBER 20, 2001)

GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Today, dozens of federal departments and agencies as well as state and local governments have responsibilities affecting homeland security. These efforts must be coordinated at the highest level. So tonight I announce the creation of a cabinet-level position reporting directly to me, the Office of Homeland Security.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELSHI: So, again, the assumption there was that this would streamline things, this would make it more effective. And some would argue that the intelligence community in the United States has been quite effective since 9/11, but this investigation by "The Washington Post" certainly draws some attention to whether or not it's become too big to control.

Let's talk about one of the reasons behind the formation of this, and this was terrorist activity that was going on in Afghanistan, delivering millions of dollars in aid to a key ally in the war in Afghanistan, that would be Pakistan. The U.S. does that, but is it enough to take a tougher stand against al Qaeda and the Taliban? We're going "Globe Trekking" for the answers coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Time now for "Globe Trekking." Let's start in Pakistan.

Obviously, you've seen this before. Here's Pakistan. Here's Afghanistan. Here's a big mountain range in the middle. The hot spot in Afghanistan is in this mountain range on the Pakistani side, what some might call "ungovernable," led by tribal warlords, even the Pakistani authorities don't have much power in there. And a lot of the people who live in there, ethnic Pashtuns, have relatives or connections or ethnically connected to people on both sides. So this, you might say, is the heart of the issue in terms of fighting terrorism.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has just wrapped up a two-day visit to Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan, and as you can see, it's fairly close to this area of concern. Basically, she was there to say, we're not the bad guy. For years now, Pakistan has been one of the major rip recipients of U.S. aid, both in terms of military and other aid. The idea is that they are one of our biggest allies in at least dealing with some of the issues in Afghanistan.

But anti-American feeling is running rampant in Pakistan. In fairness, it's been there for awhile, but there are a lot of tensions right now. The U.S. has pledged or is going to give Pakistan $7.5 billion in aid over the next five years. And, of course, that makes it one of the biggest recipients of U.S. Foreign aid.

What do they have to do in return for that? The secretary of state has asked Pakistan to do more in the fight against al Qaeda, many of whom are involved in this particular area. Still up for discussion as to whether they're going to do that.

Secretary Clinton is wrapping up her visit in Islamabad and is on her way to Afghanistan now. Let's pop in to Reza Sayah who's in Islamabad for more on her visit.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) REA SAYAH, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Washington has made it clear that it desperately needs Pakistan's help in the fight against militants. And when you need someone's help, you obviously have to be nice to them, you have to say nice things and it doesn't hurt if you do nice things for them.

And that's what U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was doing during her one-day visit here in the federal capital of Islamabad. Mrs. Clinton on a 24-hour charm offensive to win as many Pakistani hearts and minds as possible. Mrs. Clinton unveiling a number of aid projects paid for by U.S. Aid money approved by Congress.

The programs are designed to address Pakistan's biggest needs around concerns, among them an energy crisis, a water shortage and jobs. The plans include the building of several hospitals, the building of hydroelectric dams. One of the projects calls for the increase of the exhort of Pakistan's world-famous mangos. The U.S. hoping that project generates jobs in Pakistan.

HILLARY CLINTON, SECRETARY OF STATE: We know there is a perception held by too many Pakistanis, that American's commitment to them begins and ends with security. But in fact our partnership with Pakistan goes far beyond security. It is economic, political, educational, cultural, historical, rooted in family ties.

That this misperception has persisted for so long tells us we have not done a good enough job of connecting our partnership with concrete improvements in the lives of Pakistanis.

SAYAH: Make no mistake, the ultimate goal for Washington is the fight against militants. The Obama administration has said over and over again that there cannot be any success in Afghanistan if there is no help from Pakistan, if Pakistan doesn't do more against militants. The militants especially who are taking refuge on Pakistani soil.

But fueling the insurgency across the border in Afghanistan, it hasn't always been easy for the U.S. to get Pakistan to do more because of the huge trust deficit here. Mrs. Clinton hoping some of these projects will bridge that trust deficit.

Reza Sayah, CNN, Islamabad.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VELSHI: A new twist today in the investigation into whether BP had a hand in the release of the Lockerbie bomber.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Time now for "Crime & Consequence" and some geopolitical intrigue.

Four U.S. senators want to talk to Prime Minister Cameron about the release of the only man involved in the Lockerbie bombing in 1988. Hearings were announced into whether BP may have played a role, having spent years trying to negotiate a major oil deal with Libya, which is the bomber's homeland.

Now eventually last August, the bomber was freed from a Scottish prison allegedly on compassionate grounds because he had cancer. Eventually, BP did secure a historic oil exploration agreement with Libya. But BP, the British government and now the head of the Libyan National Oil Corporation have all denied that there was any quid pro quo.

Speaking of deals, "The New York Post" is reporting that Anna Chapman is shopping her story of infiltrating U.S. society as a Russian mole. "The Post" says Chapman wants a media deal in the range of about $250,000 payable via Swiss bank to an associate. By law, she can't profit herself. Clearly, she did pick up a thing or two about the American way.

OK, no needle pricks, no nasal sprays, just a little patch. We're talking about the flu vaccine of the future. I'll have that for you after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Influenza, the flu. You may not think that much about it. It might be something you got once or maybe you get it every few years, bottom line is that it is still a very, very serious illness. Twelve thousand people died of the flu in the United States last year. This isn't some special flu, this is just the flu. Hundreds of thousands of people die worldwide.

Now the fact is the reason why you probably don't think this is all that serious is because for most healthy adults, it's preventable. It's preventable to most people usually with just a vaccine.

Why doesn't everybody get a vaccine? Same reason you don't get injections for all sorts of things. Some people just don't like needles. They're afraid of needles. For some people, it's just tough to get to the doctor. They're schedules don't allow it and it's not at the top of the priority list because you don't really think you're going to get sick. There are all sorts of issues about this.

What if you could just get your vaccine mailed to you? Or you could more easily? Or didn't have to worry about a needle? Well, there's a guy we're going to introduce you to right now on "The Big 'I'" who's actually been working on that. He's Dr. Mark Prausnitz. He's a vaccine delivery expert at the Georgia Institute of Technology joining us right now from lovely Oakland, California.

Mark, thanks for being with us. What's the plan? What can you do to address some of these issues of people not being able to get to doctor or not liking needles?

PROF. MARK PRAUSNITZ, GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: The key is to enable people to, we think, self-administer the vaccine. That would mean getting rid of the hypodermic needle and in our case, developing a patch that could simply be applied to the skin, left in place for about ten minutes and then be removed and discarded. VELSHI: Where has this been done before? I know that there are patches for people who want to quit smoking. There's some sort of patch you can put on a patch if you're on a cruise. This is different?

PRAUSNITZ: This is different. Most drugs or vaccines will not absorb into the skin. A few, like nicotine, will. That's why a hypodermic needle is usually used. We have made what we're calling "microneedles," needles that are microscopically small, you can barely see them. They pierce into the skin in a painless way but enable the vaccine to be administered.

VELSHI: And you've been involved in designing this. Is it close to being available on the market?

PRAUSNITZ: At this point, we have a lot of good data in animal models and we are hoping to do experiments in people soon, but it's still, I would say, at least five years away before it's available to the public.

VELSHI: We're looking at the screen, we're looking the picture of those microneedles. They look pretty fierce. Are they really small?

PRAUSNITZ: You're looking at them under some magnification. In fact, they're just at the edge of visibility. If you look with the naked eye, you can barely see some texture.

VELSHI: But they do enough that they actually get that vaccine into you? It doesn't need to go all that far in?

PRAUSNITZ: That's right. The barrier in the skin is very thin, so even small needles like that are able to put the vaccine into the body effectively.

VELSHI: Now, I understand we're looking at maybe five years for this being available as a flu vaccine. Is this a viable way of getting other vaccines or other drugs into the body?

PRAUSNITZ: We have the most experience with flu vaccine. But we have done some earlier stage work with other vaccines and the approach seems to work for them also. We've also done some work with a few different drugs, including insulin.

VELSHI: What impact could this have if you do this? I mean, what portion of the population isn't getting their flu vaccine because they're not getting to the doctor or they don't like needles?

PRAUSNITZ: As of now, almost the whole United States population is recommended for flu vaccination every year and it's really a small fraction that is receiving it. We're hopeful that by eliminating the needle and empowering patients to self-administer the vaccine, that number could be very much increased.

VELSHI: Dr. Prausnitz, great work. Thanks very much for joining us. Dr. Mark Prausnitz is a vaccine delivery expert at the Georgia Institute of Technology.

Coming up, we know it's day 91 of the oil spill disaster. We know it's sort of been capped. We know there might be some leaking. I'll bring you up to speed. You'll know everything about it after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)