Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Floods Threaten Pakistan Security; Humanitarian Aid Lacking for Pakistan; Robots Developed to Guide Fish to Safety

Aired August 18, 2010 - 13:00   ET

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

ALI VELSHI, HOST: I'm Ali Velshi. I'm going to be with you for the next two hours today and every weekday, taking every important topic that we cover a step further. I'm going to try and give you a level of detail that will help put your world into context.

Let's get started on it right now. Here's what I've got on the rundown.

Natural disaster in Pakistan. Security around the world. You can't talk about one without talking about the other. You'll find out why a leading security analyst calls Pakistan the most dangerous country in the world.

Plus, the divisions over that planned Islamic center near Ground Zero just keep on multiplying. President Obama just weighed in again, and so have New Yorkers.

And it's around lunch time. How about a juicy burger? Better yet, how about the best burger in America? We'll tell you where to get it in just a moment.

We're going back to Pakistan, though. It is a topic that has been something we've covered daily here, and it's a big discussion on my Facebook page. You can continue on that conversation by going to Facebook.com/AliVelshiCNN.

Pakistan is on the edge of the abyss right now, overwhelmed by the worst flooding in 80 years, and now its very security is threatened by this natural and humanitarian disaster.

These pictures, you've seen them, they are pictures of people suffering. They keep coming in. Pakistani military officials quoted by the "Washington Post" warn that if much more international aid does not arrive soon, key operations against the Pakistani Taliban and cooperation with the U.S. in the war in Afghanistan could be affected.

Now, let me show you a map. It tells the story. At least part of the story.

The Pakistani military has three basic missions. One is fighting the Pakistani Taliban and al Qaeda. Battlegrounds are the Swat Valley and the North -- and North and South Waziristan.

The second mission they have is aiding U.S. forces in Afghanistan, in part by preventing the Afghan Taliban -- remember, you've got Afghanistan and Pakistan. You've got Taliban on both sides of the border. By preventing the Afghan Taliban from using the areas on the Pakistani side of the border as operational bases.

And No. 3, maintaining most of its 500,000 troops on the border with rival India, where tensions continue to be high.

Last year, Pakistan claimed that it drove Pakistani Taliban forces out of South Waziristan. But the flooding has put on hold the military's plan to escort some 2 million refugees back to their homes. And as a result, the government faces a double-edged sword: a restive refugee population demanding to return to their homes, and the strong chance of the Taliban moving back in.

The pictures of the flood damage in the Swat Valley underscore the problem.

Heavy fighting between government forces and Taliban took place here last year. Today, this valley is cut off from the rest of the country. The only way to get there now is by helicopter.

Now, these pictures show the military operation under way last year. The next stage of the overall mission against the Taliban was to move into North Waziristan. But because of the flooding, that offensive has been put on hold. So this is likely going to play into the hands of the Taliban.

New reports today indicate that the Taliban may be taking advantage of this flooding crisis. In the northwestern part of the country yesterday, militants reportedly attacked police outposts and, yesterday, killed two civilians active in the fight against the Taliban.

All of this is being played out among the suffering of these victims. Those most at risk to deadly diseases, some 3.5 million children. The United Nations says it's received less than half of the $460 million it needs for relief efforts.

Now, I asked you why you think Pakistan has not been getting the international attention, the international aid, the superstars, the kind of vibe and buzz that other natural disasters got. And I also asked you whether you want to keep on hearing about this story, whether it's too much or too little or what you think you don't know about this.

And we've had a very, very active conversation on my Facebook page, which you can participate in by going to Facebook.com/AliVelshiCNN.

A lot of comments about Pakistan and why it's not getting the sort of responses that -- that we might have expected, the kind of responses that we saw in Haiti. And I'm going to just give you some of them.

Somebody -- one person says, because it's a poor country. Others say, "It's still people, people who are in need. It shouldn't matter that their religion is different." And religion has played a big part in some of the answers that I've had about the United States. For instance, someone has written here, Colleen says, "For the United States to rush over to Pakistan in order to help these folks would be like feeding Christians to the lions. I thought the Taliban was supposed to take care of its own."

A response to that is that "The Taliban are about 2,000 people residing in the northern part of Pakistan, bordering Afghanistan. To compare the whole of Pakistan to a few extremists would be like comparing the whole of" -- let me just click on that, "the whole of Germany to extremist Nazis."

There's that sort of discussion. People saying that there might be a reason why people are not responding to Afghanistan as much -- or to Pakistan in this crisis as much as you might expect that they would.

To get more information on ways that you can make a difference if you want to -- to help provide relief for the flood victims in Pakistan, you can go to CNN's "Impact Your World" page at CNN.com/impact.

Also, more on how the flooding may be undermining Pakistan's security. A little more of the conversation I just had with you. We're going to get into it with an international security analyst, Jim Walsh. He's joining me in just a moment.

But first, a three-ring circus from start to finish. The Rod Blagojevich corruption trial featured big hair and big personalities. After his client's conviction on just one of the 24 counts, Blago's lawyer sounded off on the prosecution, a tirade tailor-made to be today's "Sound Effect."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SAM ADAM SR., BLAGOJEVICH DEFENSE ATTORNEY: This guy is going wild. This guy is nuts. He -- he doesn't indict people for crimes and then prove it. He didn't prove it against Scooter Libby, and he can't prove it against Rod Blagojevich.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They just said not guilty...

ADAM: They said they couldn't prove it. They had a government -- you know, we don't have to prove our innocence. And don't forget that's a good -- that's a good point. Don't forget. We didn't put on any defense. None. Zero. Zip. Nothing. And they still couldn't get a conviction. And they couldn't get a conviction.

I could give you this as an absolute prediction with guaranteed certainty. Before the sun goes down tonight on the Chicago River, Ron Schaffer (ph) and Pat Cotter and the rest of those ex-U.S. attorneys will be saying this was a great government win.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELSHI: Well, all the government's said publicly is "see you in court." It plans to retry the ousted Illinois governor ASAP.

The jurors split on the bulk of the charges but found him guilty of lying to the FBI. As for the bombshell charge, trying to sell the Senate seat that was vacated by President-elect Barack Obama, they were hung, 11-1 in favor of convicting.

On his way out of court, Blagojevich said he'd been prosecuted and persecuted by U.S. attorney Patrick Fitzgerald. Now, you know this guy. That's the guy that Blagojevich's lawyer called nuts. The next chapter in this thing starts next week with hearings on the details of a retrial.

Some see unrelenting misery in the Pakistani floods. Washington sees misery and opportunity. The trouble is, so does the Taliban. We're going to talk about it right after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Pakistan's humanitarian disaster is almost beyond description. Let me bring you some more on the flooding crisis there. A major question: why has international aid been so slow in reaching those in need?

Reza Sayeh joins us now from Pakistan's capital of Islamabad.

Reza, what have you got?

REZA SAYEH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Ali, over the past 24, 72 hours, there's indications that aid is starting to pick up momentum from the international community, but according to the U.N., they are nowhere near where they need to be.

Of course, it was last week where the U.N. called for $460 million to meet the needs of 20 million flood victims for the next 90 days. At this point, they're not even halfway there.

Today, U.N. officials saying they're 47 percent of the way there. With pledges and promises, it makes it 54 percent there. So, again, a long way to go.

And if you take the pledges and promises, you have to remember, the process through which those pledges and promises are converted into money, and then relief goods like water, food, shelter, then delivered to these flood victims, that takes another week, maybe two weeks. That's another challenging process, especially with access, a challenge: many of these places cut off by floodwaters. The only way you're going to get there is by helicopter and boat.

But one thing people are still stressing is that the international community hasn't stepped up, Ali, like it has in previous disasters, if you recall, and in Haiti, they got records of $13 billion in aid within 24 hours of that disaster. You had Hollywood celebrities ranging for a television telethon. Not this time. Yet Angelina Jolie this week urged for aid, but no Hollywood celebrities stepping up for Pakistan, it seems. VELSHI: During the earthquake, Reza, there seemed to be a faster response to aid. I'm just trying to -- we're trying to explore on this show whether or not it's got to do with the fact that the precipitating event is more urgent or bigger, or I don't know what it is. But the world did step in then.

SAYEH: Well, it's very difficult to say why the world is not stepping up this time. But I think there is a few reasons that are being tossed about. But analysts and aid groups say none is a good excuse.

One is the relative death toll. You've had roughly 1,500 people killed in these floods. And that could create the impression that this is not such a big deal. That's absolutely not the case. You have 20 million people affected. With that figure, this, according to the U.N., is the worst disaster anywhere in recent memory.

Another term you heard -- you hear often is donor fatigue. It seems like Pakistan, over the past several years, has been on a seemingly endless campaign to get money to fight the Taliban, to help its hurting economy. You had the earthquake here in '05, a refugee crisis last year. And now you have these floods.

And also, the perception that maybe Pakistan is just not a good place, that it's full of extremists and militants with a corrupt government. I can tell you, firsthand, from being here, that that's absolutely not the case when it comes to the people of Pakistan. The overwhelming majority of people here are good, humble, hard-working people, Ali, who've lost everything, and they need help now.

VELSHI: All right, Reza, thanks very much for your continued coverage. Reza Sayeh in Islamabad today, the capital of Pakistan.

The floods now swamping Pakistan would be a catastrophe anywhere in the world, but for many reasons, on many levels, as Reza said, Pakistan isn't just any country. My next guest, in fact, considers it the most dangerous country in the world. And you don't need to be an expert in international security to know what he's getting at. Jim Walsh is, however. He's a preeminent voice on geopolitics and a research associate at the securities studies program at MIT. Joins me now from Watertown, Massachusetts.

Jim, first of all, let's start with that. Why do you think Pakistan is the most dangerous country in the world?

JIM WALSH, RESEARCH ASSOCIATE, MIT: Well, myself and a lot of my colleagues feel this way, because it brings together a lot of different things all at the same time.

You have three different big categories of extremists. You have the Taliban, the Afghan Taliban, as you alluded to. You have the Pakistani Taliban, which is attacking the government, and then you have these other groups, Islamic militant groups, that have been active in Kashmir and who have been targeting India.

It's a country that, by the way, happens to have nuclear weapons and nuclear material that, if it was stolen, could end up in the hands of a terrorist. And it's a government that has been traditionally been a weak civilian government with lots of corruption and other problems.

So you bring that all together, and that's not very good. It's not good for Pakistan, and it's not good for the United States for international security.

VELSHI: And we sort of knew this wasn't a good scene six weeks ago before the flooding started. All of a sudden, you've got this flooding, and it complicates the situation, because what it does do is perhaps create in-roads for those who would do the U.S. harm, or further the insurgency in Afghanistan. It also presents this challenge where Pakistan needs $460 million in aid, and it's unclear how much the west is stepping up to help.

WALSH: Yes, I sort of think of this as two different parts. There's a logistical part and a political part. And logistics doesn't sound very interesting or important, but it is important.

And logistically, what I mean is, now this is the No. 1 priority. Pakistan's No. 1 priority is not fighting the Taliban. It's not fighting al Qaeda. It is trying to deal with this crisis.

So they're going to be taking troops and helicopters and all sorts of resources away from fighting the Taliban, the Pakistani Taliban and al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban, and putting it towards dealing with this issue. So you're transferring a lot of resources from are one problem over to another problem.

And the second is political. You know, if Pakistan does not do a good job in meeting these needs, and if we are not able to find the funds to support the NGOs on the ground doing the relief work, that will create an opportunity for extremists, because there will be much unhappiness, and that unhappiness will be directed at the government.

VELSHI: OK. So there's an opportunity for extremists. There's an opportunity for the Taliban. Richard Holbrooke last week talking on Charlie Rose outlined an opportunity for the United States. And here's what he said. Quote, "If we do the right thing, it will be good not only for the people whose lives we saved, but for the U.S. image in Pakistan. The people of Pakistan will see that when the crisis hits, it's not the Chinese, it's not the Iranians, it's not other countries, not the E.U., it's the U.S. that always leads."

What do you think of that?

WALSH: Well, I think that's theoretically true. But, of course, it's not an opportunity anyone would have wished for.

VELSHI: Right.

WALSH: You know, no one went in saying, geez, I hope there's a big crisis here so that the U.S. can step up to the plate.

And there - this is an opportunity, but there are significant obstacles to achieving success here. As I said, the government itself is a little shaky. It's not the most efficient, corrupt-free government in the world.

Moreover, there are logistical issues getting to some of the outlying regions. So -- and even when you get the aid, which is slow to come in, unbelievably slow to come in, it's not just getting it, it's how you deliver it. If you go in there and you upset a lot of local customs, or you don't handle things well, you can also make friends, even though -- I mean, make enemies, even if you're delivering aid. So it is an opportunity, but it's a tough opportunity, and a lot of things are going to have to go right.

VELSHI: Jim, good to see you. Thanks very much for joining us. This continues to be an issue that vexes us all.

Jim Walsh is an international security analyst at MIT.

OK. Are you in line to pay more tax under the Obama tax plan? If you're a big earner, you probably are. I'll tell you what you're in store for, for all of us, when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: President Obama's tax plan, as it is, doesn't renew tax cuts introduced by the Bush administration in 2001 and 2003. That might change. But as it stands, it doesn't.

Now, the result is going to be higher tax bills for earners in the two top tax brackets. Let's break that down for you.

What it really means is that individuals earning more than $200,000 a year will be pushed to a higher tax bracket. Right now, they're taxed at a rate of between 33 and 35 percent. That will jump to between 36 and 39.5 percent.

Of course, it's never that simple. For some people, in part -- in the lower part of that 36 percent range, only a small part of their income will be taxed at that higher rate. Their overall tax bill would theoretically be lower than it is now.

It really bumps up when your income jumps over 300,000. You could end up owing thousands more in taxes under this plan.

And for the millionaires out there, a single filer who makes $1 million in taxable income would owe $32,000 more under the Obama tax plan.

The question is, of course, are people who earn these kinds of incomes going to be greatly impacted by paying a few more percent in taxes? Well, proponents of keeping the tax cuts in place say it's simple trickle-down economics. If they have the money, they will spend it, and that is much needed in this economy.

Those who argue for the increased taxes say state and federal governments desperately need the revenue for jobs and programs, and that, too, is good for the economy. We're going to have a very, very in-depth discussion about in this weekend on "YOUR $$$$$," Saturday at 1 p.m. Eastern and Sunday at 3 Eastern. We'll be talking about these issues and all of these important issues for you as we head into midterm elections.

Let me give you a check of top stories right now.

This is the last day that BP will handle claims for individuals and businesses impacted by the Gulf oil disaster. It's turning everything over to the Gulf Coast Claims Facility headed by Kenneth Feinberg. It will be open for business on Monday.

Feinberg is overseeing BP's $20 million -- $20 billion compensation fund. The oil giant says it's already paid out $368 million in claims.

President Obama huddled around the kitchen table with an Ohio family today. It was part of a White House push to show how the administration's policy have helped Americans like Rhonda and Joe Weithman deal with the recession. He then met up in their backyard with their neighbors, where he said the U.S. housing market remains, a quote, "big drag," and will take more time to recover.

And it seems more Americans are grinding their teeth these days. A new study blames the slumping economy, though one dentist says there could be a number of factors. Symptoms include waking up with a headache, muscle pain and chipped teeth. If it's a problem, a night guard in your mouth could actually help. But you should check this out with your dentist.

You could call it the pied piper of the sea. After the break, we'll show you a small robot that could guide fish to safer waters. It's something we used as our "Big I" several months ago. We're saving Nemo, straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Well, the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico left millions of fish in harm's way. But now researchers are working on a robot that could lure them away from danger.

CNN's Gary Tuchman takes us to the "Edge of Discovery."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GARY TUCHMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): There are plenty of fish in the sea. But this one could help us understand how they communicate. So what makes this fish so special? It's a robot.

MAURIZIO PORFIRI, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, NYU-POLY: We can control the speed as he moves, and then we can make it go in circles.

TUCHMAN: It's powered by batteries and a motor. And while it might lack intricate details and shiny scales, researchers focused on one special feature: the tail.

PORFIRI: The main thing is that what we try to do is to get the same type of flow between the robots and the animals.

TUCHMAN: Researchers say the fish they studied didn't mind that the robot wasn't the same size and shape. The fish determined the robot was safe based on the way it moves. So by programming the robot to accurately mimic natural swimming motion, real fish will follow it.

PORFIRI: My specific goal as a scientist are to understand more how the fish swim together.

TUCHMAN: In the future, robot fish could be used to help lead schools of fish away from dangers, like pollution or underwater turbines.

Gary Tuchman, CNN.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VELSHI: Fun story.

All right. We've been hearing from everyone and their mother on this Islamic center controversy. How about we hear from New Yorkers? There's a new poll out ,and it's pretty interesting to see what people in New York are saying about this mosque. We'll have that when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Let me bring you up to speed with some of the headlines that we're following here on CNN.

The numbers help tell the story about the magnitude of the flooding in Pakistan. Twenty million people are affected; 6 million people are in dire need. The United Nations has requested $460 million in aid. About 20 percent of the country is under water.

President Obama sat down at an Ohio family's kitchen table today to talk about the economy. His conversation continued with the neighbors in the family's backyard, where he said the housing market remains a big drag and will need more time to recover.

And a former Alabama prosecutor is accused of trying to entice what he thought was a teenage girl online for sexual purposes. Steven Giardini had specialized in cracking down on sex crimes against minors. The so-called teen was actually an undercover agent. More details on this story coming up.

After his comments and clarifications on the New York Islamic center project, President Obama got slammed by some folks of being wishy-washy.

Basically, he said the developers of the site near Ground Zero absolutely have the right to build there. The next day he said he was talking about legalities, not wisdom or his personal views.

Well, it turns out many New Yorkers straddle that very same line. A new poll from the Sienna Research Institute find that 63 percent of New Yorkers oppose the Islamic center mosque project; 27 percent support it.

But pretty much the same number, 64 percent, think the planners do have the constitutional right to build it at that site, and 28 percent disagree.

Meantime, new comments from President Obama on where he stands right now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Any comments about the Islamic center? I'll tell you, it's working in Columbus. The coverage is working in Columbus.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I The answer is, no regrets.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELSHI: And he said -- he was asked whether he has any regrets about what he said, and he said the answer is no regrets. The president speaking during today's visit to Columbus, Ohio.

You might remember last month, I checked in on some sea turtles being rehabbed after the Gulf oil spill. Well, good news about some of these guys. CNN's John Zarrella is live from Cedar Key, Florida with the latest on them. Hey, John.

JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Ali, yes, we're on the west coast of Florida, a couple hours north of Tampa. This is Cedar Key.

And you're right. Not just good news, Ali, this is really great news as far as the oil spill recovery goes. At least one aspect of it.

Today, the first of the rehabilitated turtles, turtles taken to facilities all across the Gulf Coast from Sea World to Moat (ph) Marine Lab to the aquarium over in New Orleans, were released here today about a mile off shore. Twenty-three Kemps Ridley Turtles - those are endangered, very endangered sea turtles -- were taken out by boats and were released.

Now, Admiral Thad Allen, who of course has led the entire spill effort for the nation, he went along and helped with the release today. He actually got to go out there and take some of these sea turtles and lower them out into the water. And these Kemps Ridleys, Ali, when they hit the water, boy they scoot across, take off. It's almost as if they sensed they were home.

Now, biologists were saying on this release that in fact there is still a little bit of concern about the oil out there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ZARRELLA: Do you worry there is still oil out there? I know there's plumes and things like that, and it may not be visible on the surface and thick like it was.

MEGHAN KOPERSKI, TURTLE BIOLOGIST: Absolutely. It's definitely a concern, but we have had folks going out recently, taking a look at the habitat that these guys will be spending most of their time in, and everything is looking great.

We aren't seeing any oil in the sargasm (ph). There is abundant prey that doesn't seem to be impacted, and so the best thing for these guys right now is to get back out in the natural habitat and do what they do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZARRELLA: Yes, they sure are. And they're back out there now, and they are home and sure seemed happy to be there. They've got about 350 turtles in all that will ultimately be released. These, again, the very first 23 of these endangered Kemps Ridleys to be released.

And they are all actually tagged. In fact, up on their left shoulder, up in here, they've got microchips implanted. The same kind that veterinarians implant in dogs and cats, your pet, so that if they're ever recaptured by whatever means, for whatever reason, they turn up, they can check them. And they'll know that these were rehabilitated sea turtles that had been released back into the wild.

So, a terrific day here. You know, the sad part of this, Ali, is, of course, that, you know, more than a thousand sea turtles were covered during the spill. Heavily oiled. Many of these were very heavily oiled. But more than half of them did not survive. So -- but this is the success story, and these are the lucky ones. Ali?

VELSHI: We know for a few months we have been talking about all the things that didn't work and the bad stuff that came out of it, so at least we've got something of a success story for some of those turtles.

John, thanks very much.

Well, the United Nations calls it one of the worst humanitarian disasters in memory. The deadly flooding in Pakistan. So, why aren't the 20 million people affected getting more of the international aid they desperately need? We'll tackle the question when we go "Globe Trekking."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Time now to go "Globe Trekking," as we do everyday. First to Pakistan and that country's devastating and deadly flooding. Some 20 million people affected, more than 1,400 killed. No end in sight to this. And adding to the desperation is the slow response of the international community. CNN's Reza Sayah looks into the perplexing problem.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) REZA SAYAH, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The U.N. calls Pakistan's floods the worst natural disaster in recent memory. But despite urgent appeals for the world to help the 20 million victims, relief groups say aid has been painfully slow.

Aid workers and analysts say it's impossible to figure out why government and individual donors are not giving to Pakistan the way they have done with other disasters. But they say there could be at least four reasons, and they say none is a good excuse.

Reason one. The death toll is relatively low for a natural disaster. That creates the impression that Pakistan's floods may not be such a big deal.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That is misleading, when we're not able to quantify it in our heads.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The needs here are quite clear enough, that there are many millions of people relying on the international community to step forward.

SAYAH: Reason two. Donor fatigue. For years now, Pakistan has been on a seemingly constant campaign to ask for money, to save its economy, to fight the Taliban, for the 2005 earthquake, the 2009 refugee crisis, and now the floods.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A donor never gets fatigued. I mean, giving, as -- just as an idea, is not about, you know, sort of I'm fresh and so I'll give. You don't give because you're fresh or flush with cash, you give because of a sense of humanity.

SAYAH: Reason three. The perception that Pakistan is run by corrupt politicians, and the aid won't get to those who need it. This week, Prime Minister Galani insisted all aid would be transparent, and relief groups say if you don't want to give to the government, then give to an aid agency you trust.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There are different ways that people can actually give. That doesn't have to be routed through the government if that is a concern people feel.

SAYAH: Finally, reason four. What aid groups call the worst excuse of all. The perception in the west that Pakistan is just not a good place. A country filled with extremists and militants.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, there is militancy within the country, but when you take it into proportion, I think that's very small.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If the only time you see the word Pakistan is sandwiched between two evil words, words that make you feel bad, make you feel insecure, make you worry about your children and their future, how are people supposed to feel, you know, energetic about wanting to help this country?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VELSHI: That was Reza Sayah reporting from Islamabad, Pakistan. Let's go over to China now.

A North Korean fighter jet crashed in a rural area near the border between China and North Korea. Chinese and South Korean media say the pilot was killed. He was the only person on board. It was believed he was trying to defect to Russia. The reports say the plane was a Soviet-era military jet. The last time this happened was in 1996.

All right. We're going to take a break. When we come back, "Crime and Consequence," a defender of children becomes a defendant, accused of crimes against children.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Bringing you a look at the top stories we're covering here at CNN.

Two states, Wyoming and Washington, have set their November ballots. In Washington, Democratic senator Patty Murray and Republican candidate Dino Rossi came out on top. President Obama appeared at a fundraiser for Murray last night. Rossi beat out several conservatives, including a former NFL tight end supported by Sarah Palin.

In Wyoming, Republicans are trying to take back the governor's mansion as the Democratic governor heads out. Former U.S. attorney Matthew Mead squeaked out that GOP win. Former chair of the Wyoming Democratic party, Leslie Peterson, came on top for the Democrats.

Musician Wyclef Jean is going to have to wait until Friday to see if he will be able to run for president of Haiti. There are questions on whether he can since he supposedly hasn't lived there for five years, which is a requirement for eligibility. But his lawyer says he has been paying taxes, which would make able to run for president.

A new poll finds that New York voters oppose plans to build an Islamic center near Ground Zero by a nearly 2-to-1 margin. That's according to the Sienna Research Institute. But the same voters do say the center's developers have a constitutional right to build it there.

OK. Time now for "Crime and Consequence." Prosecuting the prosecutor. Steven Jiardini is free today in Mobile, Alabama - free on bail. Charged with trying to lure an underage girl for sex and child pornography. The offenses, sadly, are unremarkable. The suspect, however, is not. Until last spring, Jiardini was an assistant district attorney in Mobile County, specializing in sex crimes against children. He left the post when FBI agents raided his home for reasons that were never made public.

Yesterday, 16 months after the raid, Giardini was arrested by the FBI and the state attorney general's office. The 15-year-old girl he supposedly thought he was chatting with online was actually a Fed. The A.G. says the people of Alabama should be reassured that no one is above the law. The D.A. says he is speechless. Giardini's former colleagues don't want to comment at all. His lawyer says, and I quote, "the facts of the case will turn out to be interesting," end quote. His client, he promises, will plead not guilty.

As for the alleged victims, we can't help looking to the Alabama child advocacy center. Giardini was a member of the staff there, but as shocked and as disappointed as those people are, they are not the ones we're thinking about. We're thinking of their young and vulnerable clients who, if these charges are true, have been betrayed again by someone they have turned to for help.

The side of a building, the top of a car, maybe even your hat. What do they all have in common? They can all be turned into solar panels, and we'll show you how after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: So here I am, back in New York City, and the one thing that always stands out here is all those buildings. And all those buildings have, you know, at least four sides to them. Some of them have more. The different shapes of buildings here, but imagine being able to somehow spray or apply a solar panel to the side of all of those buildings or the side of your home or the top of your car, or the top of your hat.

Simple concept. Spray-on solar panels, our "Big I" today. The University of Leiscester along with a company called Ensol (ph) are developing nanotechnology to do just that. And you know that in many of the conversations we have here on "Big I," they involve nanotechnology.

Now, this guy you're looking at right now who does not have much light on his face, but he is actually there. He is professor Chris Binz of - he is a professor of nanotechnology at the University of Leiscester, joining me from the United Kingdom.

Chris, let's talk about this. This sounds fantastic. Some kind of spray-on technology that turns all of these surfaces that are exposed to the sun into solar panels. Is it that simple?

CHRIS BINNS, PROFESSOR OF NANOTECHNOLOGY, UNIV. OF LEICESTER: Hi, Ali, yes, that's right. Yes. When you say spray-on, we're not really talking about an aerosol spray, at least not yet. The coating technology is actually a vacuum coating technology. But, you know, these technologies exist to coat large areas with thin films. And it's basically a thin film material, what we're producing here.

VELSHI: Let's talk about this for a second. I get the concept of making everything that is exposed to the sun a collector of solar energy. What do you do with it at that point? How does that become power, where does it go, what does it connect to?

BINNS: Okay. Well, the basic material consists of two electrodes, one on the top and one on the bottom. And the sandwich in the middle, the active layer that actually converts the energy contains metallic nanoparticles. These particles typically, 10,000 times smaller than the width of a human hair. And at that size, these particles have special optical properties that absorb light, very strongly, and convert it to electrical energy.

So, the trick is to find a way to extract that electrical energy. And that's basically down to a choice of the right materials. And in our devices, the one side is one electrode. The other side of the thin film is the other electrode. So, you simply connect wires across the two sides of the film, and connect them to whatever you want to power.

VELSHI: And what can this sort of application power? What are we talking about? If it's a building or a car or -- what type of power does that generate?

BINNS: Well, the beauty of this technology is that it's a thin film coating, so anything that can be put into a coater can be coated with the material. So, for example, buildings, as you have already mentioned, roof tiles, the material is transparent and can also be coated on to windows, although all it will do is produce a slight tinting of the window. It will still produce power.

Whatever you want -- your umbrella, your hat, as you've already mentioned. Whatever you want to coat can be coated with material so it becomes a producer of power.

VELSHI: How much power could this produce? I don't really have any sense of what a square yard could produce in terms of energy.

BINNS: Well, the standard is set up in the United States. I think on an autumn or spring day in the U.S., you're collecting about 1,000 watts per square meter of raw energy from the sun. Of course, there's an efficiency of conversion and the best solar panels at the moment, which is probably (INAUDIBLE) about 15 percent. So, you're talking about 150 watts per square meter or pretty close to a square yard, which is over ten energy-saving light bulbs.

VELSHI: OK. I described as spray on. But you said it's not really that. It's a vacuum technology. Tell me how that works, because I guess my viewers can understand spraying something on from an aerosol can. How would you apply this to a car, a building, an umbrella, a hat? Is it something that rolls out and you put on to it and attach it -- or how does it get attached?

BINNS: There are two ways of doing it. (INAUDIBLE) You have a large chamber with a vacuum inside. And you evaporate metal onto it. Now, that can be a (INAUDIBLE), so you just wind plastic sheet through and coat it.

Or you can actually put the component that you want to put into the evaporator into the vacuum coater. And these things can be huge. I mean, they can coat whole windows, whole panels. Whatever you like. And so, basically anything that would go into the vacuum coater can be coated.

This aerosol technology, I think it was mentioned once during the whole publicity of this. And I have to say, that's probably some way off. But eventually, that may be possible as well. So, you wouldn't be able to do it in a single film. You'd have to have three spray bottles: one from the bottom electrode, one from the active material and one from the top electrode. But yes, maybe one day that will be possible.

VELSHI: Tell me when you are in this research and when this might be available, when we might start seeing it be used?

BINNS: Well, at the moment, I have to say we're still at the fundamental research stage. We're producing very small areas. Like a few square centimeters of material, and we're simply trying to get thoe process to work reliably. So, it's a long mountain to climb. But Ensol (ph) is talking about trying to have it commercially available by 2016. So, we're talking five or six years.

One good thing about this, once the fundamental research has been done, all of the technological problems for scaling have already been solved because industry has developed huge coaters that can coat large areas. So, once we've perfected the material, it's simply a matter of putting those particular materials into existing coaters.

VELSHI: Is this coating -- it's the kind of thing that works on windows or other surfaces?

BINNS: It will work on any surface. The reason that we make a big deal about windows is that the material is transparent. And so, it will even work on windows, that's the key point.

But it will work on anything. Anything you can put into your vacuum coater, whether it's a roof tile, the roof of a car, an airplane wing, your hat, your umbrella, your coat -- whatever can be put into a vacuum coater can be coated with this material and can produce power.

VELSHI: And do you think it will make sense? Once this comes out and becomes commercially available, is it the kind of thing -- do you envision that -- talking about 2016. So, you think in maybe about five years we'll all have seen some of this in use around us?

BINNS: Well, if it all works out -- the problem is being at this early stage doing the fundamental research, there might be some huge problem that turns up that we've not foreseen. But at the moment, we can't see that. So, yes, within five years, this product should start to take over.

I mean, there are other thin-film solar cell technologies. I don't want to pretend this is the only one. But it's a completely different principle to exisiting solar cell material, which is based on semi-conductors. And in that respect, it could in principle, become more efficient.

And also uses very benign materials. The problem with the existing solar cell materials is they use a lot of toxic materials, which create a problem when you come to dispose of this stuff wheras this is very benign stuff. VELSHI: Chris, great conversation. Thank you for being with us.

BINNS: (INAUDIBLE) Pleasure to join you.

VELSHI: Chris Binns is a professor of nanotechnology at University of Leicester in the United Kingdom.

Few topics spark as much passion as the country's best burger. Zagat has released its annual survey. And there is a new king! Not the king you're thinking of. I'll tell you about it when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: All right, I want to hear from you. Log on to my Facebook page, facebook.com/alivelshiCNN. We've been talking about Pakistan, we've been talking about the mosques. Some fantastic discussions going on there.

But now I want to hear about your favorite burger. And don't get all preachy on me about how there's important issues in the world, and why am I talking about burgers? Burgers are important business as well.

There's a new list. Zagat has put out its new list of top burgers in the United States. And the number one burger has been knocked out. It was In-and-Out burger; California chain which I enjoy a great deal. They're in second place. Virginia chain Five Guys has bumped them out of the top spot. Five Guys -- are there Five Guys around here? I haven't had one in New York. Is there Five Guys around -- OK, I'm told they're here. I know they're in Atlanta. They're in Philly, they're in Washington. They're a Virginia-based chain.

Wendy's and Burger King, by the way, are on the list of top burgers as you saw there. McDonald's pulls it it in at number 5. Zagat surveyed more than 6,500 burger fans to get these results. McDonald's Fries, by the way, are the clear winner in the fries category. It's been a perennial winner in that category.

Five Guys - which also, Five Guys and In-and-Out do not use frozen anything in their fries. They're fresh fries. They were in the number 2 and 3 spot. Wendy's and Burger King got into the top list as well.

Five Guys has 625 locations in the United States and Canada, and it sells more than 250,000 burgers a day. But McDonald's sells 4 million burgers a day worldwide.

All right. That's the burger thing. Post something. Tell me what you think about - or tweet me, tell me what your favorite burger is. Add why you think that's your favorite burger. Because I enjoy burgers a lot. Actually, I just had one the other night. Really enjoyed it. New York's a good burger town.

All right, Valerie, should I keep talking about burgers or would you like me to move on to something more -- all right. That's my boss, Valerie. Says time to start giving you some news.