Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Warplanes Strike Libyan Targets; Japan's Nuclear Crisis Worsens
Aired March 28, 2011 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: Wow. Randi Kaye, thank you so much.
And hello to you.
Bombs and missiles falling on targets again today in Libya. And according to France's Defense Ministry, French warplanes struck a military command center just a couple of miles south of the capital city of Tripoli.
No word yet as to damage or casualties, but here's one big question today: Were these warplanes operating on orders from the coalition, from an American general, or, as we look at this map here, was this one of the first missions of the brand-new NATO-controlled enforcement of the U.N.'s no-fly zone?
The answer to that means a lot, both operationally and historically. Plenty to get to right now here top of the hour. We will take you live to Paris, where the French military is talking about those specific airstrikes. But we're also -- also going to take you live to the White House, and we will look ahead to President Obama's speech that will be dedicated to the military action in Libya. That's tonight 7:30 Eastern. And we will also take you, of course, to the ground to Libya.
But I want to begin the hour in Paris, where French military officials spoke to reporters about today's airstrikes and their new role supporting the NATO mission now over Libya.
And I want to bring in CNN senior international correspondent Jim Bittermann there for me in Paris.
And, Jim, I want to begin with this. Let's talk about this weekend. Obviously it was a very, very busy one for the French air force. They reportedly destroyed several aircraft, tanks, ammunition, all in Libya.
JIM BITTERMANN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely, Brooke.
In fact, they have been busy all the way along. Yes, they have been very forward-leaning on the attacks against Libya. In fact, they had -- the first attacks to take place were French aircraft hitting targets on the ground.
So I think that the French have carried on doing what they have been doing for the last 10 days or so and basically trying to stop Gadhafi's forces from threatening the civilian populations, as well as the rebels -- Brooke.
BALDWIN: Well, today also with regard to NATO, very significant, this is day number one that NATO is now officially running the show in country, and big picture here, Jim, we know France's relationship with NATO is rocky. In fact, they just rejoined the alliance with current President Nicolas Sarkozy. So how, Jim, is the new NATO situation; how will it work out here on forward?
BITTERMANN: Well, I think that the French are part of NATO now for good. I mean, they have gotten themselves several big jobs, including a major planning post with NATO. And I think that they support NATO.
But what the French were trying to do all the way along by putting together this coalition outside of NATO was to avoid the problems they see for NATO. One of the things they say is that NATO is going to get self-involved in yet another conflict on Arab territory, and that may not be good for the brand. It may not be good for NATO to be involved on the ground in so many Arab countries. And so they were trying to avoid that kind of an image problem for NATO. And that's why they put together this 23-nation coalition, which was outside the NATO auspices -- Brooke.
BALDWIN: Well, Jim, then, with regard to NATO's image, historically speaking, would France prefer to go it alone, or would they prefer a role within NATO?
BITTERMANN: Well, I think if you go way back in history, if you go back several decades, the fact is that the French have done what they always have always done, going alone.
But the fact is that they understand there's a modern world out there and they're now big partner players in -- not only in NATO, but other European institutions because they realize they have to be. No longer is it the case that a country can take on outside military operations on its own.
And that's why they have put together here in Paris -- it was Saturday a week ago -- this coalition of 23 different governments and bringing in some Arab countries and other people into this coalition, because they felt that they couldn't do it alone. That's exactly why they did it -- Brooke.
BALDWIN: But, Jim, big picture here with France, France is the first country to recognize the transitional council as a legitimate government in Libya, but also militarily significant because it was the first country to strike military targets within Libya. So why is France so eager to effect some sort of change in Libya?
BITTERMANN: Well, I think there's two reasons as they used to say in "The Godfather," business and personal. I think the business side of things is that it's the right thing to do. Basically the rebellion was about to be crushed. And if nobody acted, the rebellion against Colonel Gadhafi, and this was a great opportunity for the world to get rid of Gadhafi, the rebellion was going to be crushed.
So the French felt that they had to act. But there's a personal thing, too, in that President Sarkozy, one of his first ventures into foreign policy when he took over was to try to improve relations with Libya, try to get Libya back on board with the West. And it was a massive debacle.
He basically was criticized here in France. He looked like he was trying to curry favorite with the leader of Libya. And as a consequence, he was stung personally by that. And I think a lot of people, a lot of -- and analysts feel that, in fact, some of this has to do with the fact that it's a time to make amends for the criticism that he took back then.
BALDWIN: OK. Jim Bittermann, thank you so much for the historic perspective and "The Godfather" quoting there. Jim, my thanks to you.
And now I want to go live to Libya to Reza Sayah.
And, Reza, let's first begin with anything -- before we talk Sirte and the significance there and the upcoming battle, have you seen or have there been any reports of any airstrikes where you have been today?
REZA SAYAH, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: No.
Benghazi is firmly in the hands of opposition forces. In this area we haven't seen airstrikes. But within the past several hours, French officials he telling us that there were a fresh set of airstrikes targeting what they called Gadhafi command center in or near Tripoli. Of course, it's been French, British, U.S. fighter jets that have been launching most of the airstrikes, but again, today another set of airstrikes, according to a French official, in or near Tripoli targeting a command center, Brooke.
BALDWIN: Reza, here is a new town, we're all learning. It's Sirte. It's Gadhafi's birthplace. We know the rebels are now moving westward toward Sirte.
Is that the next big battle, symbolic battle as well, for the rebels here?
SAYAH: Well, it looks like it's the first battle in about three days. The opposition forces over the past 72 hours have been making it look relatively easy, rolling through west. This is the first time they're seeing some resistance, a little bit of fight.
And that's probably because Sirte is the hometown, the birthplace of Colonel Gadhafi. He has got a lot of supporters there. Not clear how many of them have remained in this location. His tribe, the Gadhafi tribe, the Gadhafa tribe, is based out of this place.
Rebel fighters telling CNN that they're seeing some resistance. They're telling us that Gadhafi loyalists using chicanery, trickery to fight off the opposition. One rebel fighter telling us that it looks like civilians have been armed, opposition fighters coming under fire from those armed civilians.
Another rebel fighter telling us he and fellow fighters were approaching Gadhafi soldiers who were waving a white flag, the universal signal, the universal sign of surrender. But as they were approaching them, this rebel fighter says, they came under fire, so things heating up in Sirte, again, the first resistance this opposition force has seen in the past three days, Brooke.
BALDWIN: Well, we know that the rebels have taken a couple of key oil cities over the weekend. And my question is, what are rebels finding when they get to a certain city? Are they finding that Gadhafi's forces are pulling back, and if so, is it because the militia is weak or is it because they're perhaps preparing for a larger battle ahead?
SAYAH: Well, they say they're finding tank units; some of them are damaged by airstrike. Some of them are still intact, which is an indication that the Gadhafi forces ran away. But what's interesting is, for the past 48 hours, the opposition officials here have not been able to provide us with a death toll, whether it's civilian death toll, rebel fighters' death toll or death toll from Gadhafi forces.
I think that's the best barometer that indicates how fierce the fighting has been. And they have held a couple of news conferences over the past 48 hours. We still haven't seen a death toll. That's the clearest indication of how tough the fighting has been, so still waiting on that critical number.
BALDWIN: OK, Reza, we're waiting with you on that number -- Reza Sayah for me in Benghazi. Reza, my thanks to you. We will talk next hour.
And in just a couple of hours here, we will be hearing from the president, President Obama, on all things Libya. He will be addressing the nation from the campus of the National Defense University and CNN of course will be carrying that address live.
Want to go to senior White House correspondent Ed Henry.
And, Ed, let's talk about the timing of tonight's address. Certainly no coincidence that the president will be speaking the day the operation is now in NATO's hands.
ED HENRY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Brooke, because White House officials see this as sort of a key pivot point. They have been hammered for days now, president getting a brunt of criticism not just from Republicans, but some of his fellow Democrats on the Hill saying that they have not gotten a full explanation of exactly how this mission will be carried out.
And you know the mantra from the White House has been since the beginning was basically that the U.S. would be in the lead role for days, not weeks. And as this mission has now gone into the start of its second week, there was great pressure on this White House to show it was turning it over. Now that NATO is assuming command-and-control, it's a perfect opportunity for the president to kind of show that pivot point. But there's also some peril here for him. It's not just opportunity. The fact of the matter is presidents typically explain a lot of this before a military mission. He's now doing it after the mission has started, and there are a lot of unanswered questions beyond just NATO taking over command-and-control.
BALDWIN: Well, look, we know it's a number of people are asking questions. We have members of Congress. Wasn't it last week when Speaker Boehner sent that letter to the president with several questions for him?
But you also have the Americans. I think it was a CNN poll done just last week that only a third of Americans want to see Gadhafi go. So how is the administration responding to that?
HENRY: Well, they are going through this very carefully, but they see the pressure building on the president because, again, it's not just Speaker Boehner with that letter that had some 16 questions last week about how are you going to pay for this? What if Gadhafi does not give up power? What then?
Also, what if -- while NATO assumes command-and-control, what if this no-fly zone drags on for months and months with sort of a stalemate and the allies start getting weary and want the U.S. to step back up to a lead role? What then?
These are all very tough questions. And what I find most interesting is that the last time the president had a big speech like this was probably in January in Tucson after that awful tragedy, the shooting there in Arizona. And he really rose to the occasion there.
But if you think about it, the atmosphere was much different. The country was coming together. It was a sign of unity. In this case, he's trying to rise to the occasion at a time when even Democrats in his own party are very, very skeptical of this mission. It makes this job tonight much tougher, Brooke.
BALDWIN: What about just finally the venue of the speech, Ed? We know it's not just some Oval Office speak. This is a war college. This is National Defense University. Why there?
HENRY: At Fort McNair here in Washington.
And because White House aides say the president wants to highlight the sacrifice of the U.S. military and not just in Libya, by the way, but ongoing operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, also helping right now, let's not forget, to deal with the aftermath of that earthquake and tsunami in Japan. The U.S. military has played a pivotal role as well.
But I think the other significant thing is symbolic, which is that he chose not to do it in the Oval Office, perhaps because if you had done that it would suggest that it was on the par with Iraq, Afghanistan, wars where at various times you have had over 100,000 U.S. troops, or tens of thousands, over 100,000 U.S. troops on the ground in Iraq, for example.
In this case, he really wants to highlight the scope being very limited. If he did it in the Oval Office, it might put it on the same par as Iraq and Afghanistan, Brooke.
BALDWIN: That is interesting, the nuance and the difference there. Ed Henry, thank you so much., live from the White House for us this Monday.
And also new developments at the crippled nuclear plant in Japan. Folks, this is not good news today. For the first time, radioactive material has been found in multiple soil samples. We're going to go through the implications of that with an expert in studio.
And in case you have heard or read the headline today here, radiation from Japan has now reached the East Coast of the U.S.? I will tell you where and why there is no need to worry.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: OK. Well, serious, serious stuff at the nuclear site in Japan. It's gotten worse. Here's the news today.
Reactor number three suffered a hydrogen explosion two weeks ago today. That is why the outer containment looks like there a pile of matchsticks. As you may have heard here first, the fuel at number three contains this mix of plutonium; we talked about this, what, one or two weeks ago; this is bad stuff.
Today the Japanese are saying they are finding that stuff in the ground, plutonium in the soil. Here's another issue that we're going to throw at you. Reactor number two specifically, radioactive water has found its way into a maintenance tunnel and might have leaked into the ocean.
They're saying the level of radiation is 100,000 times higher than normal. And we're now getting reports of radioactive water turning up in other tunnels.
So, joining me now, Dr. Cham Dallas, nuclear expert University of Georgia.
First, let's talk. We have called it MOX in the past. But that's -- an easy way, it's plutonium; it's the plutonium with the uranium, right?
DR. CHAM DALLAS, UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA: That's right. It's a plutonium/uranium mix used in a lot of reactors.
BALDWIN: And so from what I read, they found it in not just one, two or three, they found it in five different soil samples somewhere around the plant.
DALLAS: Yes, that's right.
They found plutonium samples probably in this area here. It's really great that you're getting some kind of data out of this thing because they're not giving us data very quickly. But these plutonium samples, we don't really know how they got there. It could have come -- some of it could have come from an atomic bomb fallout from 30 years ago. More than likely, it came out of here.
(CROSSTALK)
DALLAS: Yes.
BALDWIN: So what does that mean specifically? If it were to come from the nuclear reactor, reactor three, would that then imply there had been a breach in the vessel?
DALLAS: That is definitely one possibility, is that it was a breach. It could have come from a variety of other sources, from water. It could have come from like I said atomic bomb fallout from years ago.
BALDWIN: But really, really, do you think that would be it? Or would it be something more recent --
(CROSSTALK)
DALLAS: I think it's probably both.
BALDWIN: Really?
DALLAS: Yes, that's my guess, because I'm only having to guess because they won't give us the numbers. They're only giving us qualitative data, and it makes it very hard to interpret.
BALDWIN: OK.
(CROSSTALK)
DALLAS: It's not a good move, though. The detection of plutonium here, one of my most negative experiences in my life was walking through plutonium fields at Chernobyl. And that's something I would like to save these people from having to do.
BALDWIN: What could that do to you?
DALLAS: Well, plutonium is a bad one because if you inhale it or you ingest it, it's a very powerful emitter of alpha radiation, which is very strong up close, right next to tissue. If it gets on your clothes, it can't even penetrate your shirt even or a piece of paper. But if it gets in your lung or in your stomach, it's extremely bad news.
BALDWIN: It's bad news.
So that was issue number one, that was the news today with the plutonium in the soil. But the next issue here is you have the radioactive water, this highly, highly contaminated water now in some of these tunnels which I didn't even know there were tunnels. But apparently -- so here are the four reactors, this is my best lay of the land, the two -- the turbines there, and then closest to the water is you have these underground tunnels. How is there water even in the tunnels, Cham?
DALLAS: Well, they're pumping water from the reactor down to the turbines. And as a matter of fact, they're circulating water to keep water circulating around these reactor cores.
BALDWIN: To keep it cool?
DALLAS: That's the most important thing, is to keep these things cool because they're still very hot, very thermally hot. They're also radioactively hot as well.
And there is water circulating around in here. Well, it could have gotten out in many ways. They had a 9.0 earthquake here, and so the junctures could have broken off. But somewhere in here --
BALDWIN: So somewhere in here, there's a tunnel underground. And what you can't really see is right here and down, this is the ocean.
DALLAS: That's right. Yes. The ocean is right here, and somewhere in this area here they probably had a number of breaches and that's how the water is contaminated.
BALDWIN: So if this is highly radioactive water and you have workers presumably who have to extract it, correct?
DALLAS: They will have to get that water out of there somehow or another.
BALDWIN: How dangerous is that for a worker to try to get the water out?
(CROSSTALK)
DALLAS: It's very dangerous. At the levels they're telling us now, if they go in these containment areas, it's very dangerous for them, which means to me they probably won't send them in there.
BALDWIN: Final question, I'm just going to throw it out there. Is it possible, given the piecemeal information that we're getting, could there have even been some sort of meltdown that we don't even know about?
DALLAS: My guess, or as we like to call it a prediction in science, is that they probably had some partial meltdown from the top down. Kind of like candles do, they melt from the top down.
BALDWIN: OK.
DALLAS: They uncovered those reactor cores a little and so they melted from the top down, which means those pellets would have filtered down to the bottom, which means they could be reacting with each other.
BALDWIN: Right now?
DALLAS: Right now. But we don't know.
BALDWIN: OK. We don't know.
DALLAS: No.
BALDWIN: Cham Dallas, thank you so much for helping us all understand what's happening there today.
DALLAS: Thank you. Yes.
BALDWIN: And now let's watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JACK HANNA, DIRECTOR EMERITUS, COLUMBUS ZOO: My understanding is you get blurry eyes, your heart starts to slow down, just kind of like a numbing effect.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: A numbing effect. Have you heard this story? That was wildlife expert Jack Hanna describing what happens when you're bitten by a cobra snake. Why are we talking about this? Because one is missing in New York City right now. It disappeared from the Bronx Zoo. It has not been found. The big question, where is it?
And then, do you remember on Friday we showed you former House Speaker Newt Gingrich doing what some called a flip-flop on Libya? Well, now some are asking, why is it that Republicans are having a hard time finding one voice when it comes to the U.S. involvement there? That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: You know we talked about the president a moment ago with Ed Henry at the White House. And he has obviously got his work cut out tonight explaining our involvement in Libya.
Republican critics, meantime, are struggling to find their own footing. Did you hear this? This was from Michele Bachmann.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R), MINNESOTA: Now he has us engaged in yet another, third Middle Eastern war. And so I think, talk about March Madness, can anyone say Jimmy Carter?
(LAUGHTER)
BACHMANN: That's kind of where we're going.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: Michele Bachmann uncovers a parallel to Jimmy Carter. And as you may have heard already, Newt Gingrich called for a no-fly zone before we did it, and now he's apparently against it.
Jessica Yellin is back, finally.
We missed you, Jessica Yellin.
JESSICA YELLIN, CNN NATIONAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Thank you.
BALDWIN: She is our national political correspondent. Jess, tell me what is going on here.
YELLIN: Right. Yes, some of these potential presidential candidates do seem to be doing a political dance, Brooke. It's not just Newt Gingrich, but here we found some sound from Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas. A month ago he told John King that he clearly favored intervention. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIKE HUCKABEE (R), FORMER ARKANSAS GOVERNOR: I think I would make it very clear that the United States is not going to stand by and watch a country slaughter its own people in cold blood, that there is a sense in which there's a virtual genocide going on.
JOHN KING, HOST, "JOHN KING, USA": Would you use military force? Would you impose a no-fly zone --
(CROSSTALK)
HUCKABEE: I think a no-fly zone would be --
(CROSSTALK)
HUCKABEE: Yes, a no-fly zone very important because that way you keep him from flying mercenaries in.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
YELLIN: Clearly for a no-fly zone. Well, then last week, days after the U.S. did intervene, he sounded a different tune on FOX Business News. He said that he worries about the U.S. feeling the need to jump in whenever there's a crisis like this and asked, where do we draw the line? Mike Huckabee:
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
HUCKABEE: If we get rid of the devil we know, is the devil we don't know going to be perhaps even worse? And that's one of the issues that I don't feel has been resolved. What exactly are we going to see in place --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.
HUCKABEE: -- if we get rid of Gadhafi?
(END AUDIO CLIP) YELLIN: Huckabee's folks say the fact that he said, well, where do we draw the line, why are we there, that's not a change in position. And Newt Gingrich has said, look, his flip-flop wasn't a flip-flop. He always opposed a no-fly zone. He only said that he was for a no-fly zone because the president wanted Gadhafi to go and the only way that Gadhafi could go was with a no-fly zone, but he didn't really want one.
BALDWIN: OK. So this is fairly unfamiliar territory for the Republicans. My question I guess would be do they risk then being labeled soft on Gadhafi?
YELLIN: Well, broadly speaking, there are really two schools of thought in the Republican Party right now, Brooke.
One is, look, don't spend any money on overseas military campaigns period. But I think you're talking about the other camp, Republicans who backed the Iraq war during the Bush years and do they seem like they're being softer on Gadhafi than they were on Saddam Hussein, for example?
OK. Well, of those Republicans I speak with, they, look, object they say to the way the president is executing the Libya effort. They say they did want him to take military action, but they wanted him to do it more quickly, weeks ago, when the rebels had momentum. They're not going to cry if Gadhafi goes, but they don't like the process.
BALDWIN: OK. OK. Jessica Yellin with a little bit of color from the Republicans here with regard to what's happening in Libya, Jessica, my thanks to you.
(CROSSTALK)
YELLIN: Good to see you.
BALDWIN: Good to see you.
Now this:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm sorry, but they seem to be against everything that I believe in, and so I don't want them necessarily in my neighborhood.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: Not in my neighborhood, he says. He's talking about Muslims. Did you watch this? This is part of the CNN documentary a lot of people are talking about today. They're taking to CNN.com, all kinds of feedback. That is trending and it's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: All right, let's get you caught up on the other top stories of the day here. First, to the U.S. Supreme Court rejecting a Georgia man's request to delay his execution. The justices turned aside two September appeals from Troy Davis without comment. Davis was convicted of killing a Savannah police officer more than 20 years ago. He claims, with more time, he can prove his innocence.
And now to the video I have not been waiting for. Have you seen this snake? Well, it's missing and it's deadly. Hoping your answer is no. The 20-inch poisonous snake went missing from an exhibit at the Bronx Zoo's reptile house. The exhibit is now closed indefinitely. The people who run the zoo say it is it confined to an enclosed nonpublic area of the building that I won't be visiting anytime soon.
Today, reaction to Soledad O'Brien's much-talked about documentary over the weekend. Did you watch this? "Unwelcome -- Muslims in America, which aired this past weekend on CNN. And there has been so much reaction. We'll air it again this coming Saturday in case you missed it.
Soledad basically chronicled the dramatic fight over the construction of an Islamic center and mosque in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. It ultimately ended up in court. I'll speak with her about it here in just a moment, but I want you to watch this first.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KEVIN FISHER, PLAINTIFF IN LAWSUIT AGAINST RUTHERFORD COUNTY, TENNESSEE: Testing, one, two, three.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: For months, Kevin Fisher and other opponents had tried everything to halt the construction of the 53,000-square-foot Islamic center.
FISHER: We went through every conceivable means to ensure that our rights were upheld. The meetings at the commission, we went through petitions, we went through speaking with our representatives, our mayor.
O'BRIEN: Armed with his bullhorn, Fisher attended another commission meeting in September once again to press local officials to halt construction of the mosque.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm full down here, sir. Try upstairs.
FISHER: He's the one that told me I couldn't go in and speak.
O'BRIEN: The meeting was so crowded he couldn't go in. Lema Sbenaty, a member of the Muslim community did get to speak.
LEMA SBENATY, RESIDENT/MEMBER, ISLAMIC CENTER OF MURFREESBORO: So you see, I'm actually not very different from any of you or your kids or your grandkids except for one thing. I was born and raised as a patriotic American Muslim. On September 11, 2001, my religion was had hijacked by extremists.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BALDWIN: Oh, technical issue. I was listening to every word. Sorry, Soledad O'Brien. We'll all get to watch it on Saturday night. I know that. I know you have gotten huge reaction. You were tweeting about it. I know CNN.com has gotten amazing feedback. What have you heard so far?
O'BRIEN: Yes, we were a trending topic on Twitter last night from all sides involved in the documentary because we've been following this story for the last ten months, really watching it unfold. I think people felt we were very fair and accurate in depicting what exactly happened in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, both people who oppose and support the mosque.
And in terms of feedback from people watching the show, we had a lot of conversations about just the discussions that are going on about Islam and Muslims and Sharia law. And overwhelmingly people were positive in their assessment of how the documentary was. I do hope that anybody who only got to hear the part where the technical difficulties came in will have a chance again to watch it as we rerun it on Saturday.
BALDWIN: Don't you think, bottom line, no matter what side of the issue you fall on, I feel this documentary, from what I read on dotcom, it's getting people talking, that's a good thing.
O'BRIEN: Here's the thing about documentaries. We have an hour to lay out a story of something that's unfolded in a community that has 140 churches and one mosque. And that one mosque wanted to expand. And when you do that, you actually have enough time to allow all sides to tell their side of the story.
BALDWIN: It can breathe, as we say.
O'BRIEN: Yes. And people have a chance to really have their perspective, whether you agree with it or not, heard and reflected on. That's really been sort of our agenda and our goal in our documentary series, which we call "In America," to look at these stories happening in America and allow people to tell their own story, because often everything is done in eight-second sound bites.
BALDWIN: You have the luxury of getting to work in documentaries, which is lovely.
O'BRIEN: Yes. We recognize the luxury, trust me.
BALDWIN: But this documentary, Soledad, is timely because we know tomorrow the Senate is having a hearing on Muslims and specifically discrimination, what should we expect out of that hearing?
O'BRIEN: You know, it's interesting. We were talking to Senator Durbin's office, one of the two holding that hearing, and what he had said was that he was very interested in examining the spike in anti- Muslim bigotry with the Koran burning, the vandalism at various mosques which we talk about in our documentary, hate crimes, hate speeches, and also other forms of discrimination against Muslims. That's what he hopes comes oust the hearing, more specific conversations about that.
BALDWIN: We'll continue that conversation tomorrow. We'll look for your doc Saturday, Saturday night re-airing. Soledad O'Brien, thank you so, so much. In case you missed it, you can catch the entire documentary "Unwelcome -- Muslims next door" 8:00 p.m. eastern on Saturday. Go to CNN.com/belief for more on how American Muslims are increasingly being treated, again, CNN.com/belief.
And it is a bold move by the "New York Times," but will people really pay to read articles online? We will tell you what just took effect a little over an hour ago and how it will, if you read "New York Times," affect you.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: Now a brand new era for "New York Times" and perhaps you et cetera readers. If you're used to downloading whatever you want from the web site, that has officially changed, starting this afternoon, the "times" who click on more than 20 articles a month, it will cost you 15 bucks a month for the basics up to $35 if you want unlimited access on your phone or tablet. CNN's Allan Chernoff visited the "Times" to find out about the change.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ALLAN CHERNOFF, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The "New York Times" is trying to harness a force that's been wrecking the newspaper business, free access on the Internet. Executives plan to walk a fine line to generate revenue from avid readers willing to pay while still retaining casual customers who boost ad revenue with clicks. After much research, the "Times" believes the fine line is 20 art dells every four weeks.
MARTIN NISENHOLTZ, SR. VICE PRESIDENT, "NEW YORK TIMES": We're as confident as we can possibly be in a research setting. Obviously, whenever research hits the real world, there are changes.
CHERNOFF: Whatever the right number of clicks is, the "Times" intends to become the largest general interest newspaper to emulate what business papers, the "Wall Street Journal" and "Financial Times" have done -- collect subscription fees from online customers.
JILL ABRAMSON, MANAGING EDITOR, "NEW YORK TIMES": When I say it's a bet on the future, we want to maintain the most robust kind of newsroom, full of talented journalists. And in order to do that, it seems sensible to begin asking some readers to pay for it.
CHERNOFF: As newspapers have given away their product for free online, paper subscriptions and advertising have dropped. The prestigious "Times" is no exception. Its online readership and web advertising have steadily grown, but that hasn't made up for the drop in print revenue. The paper needs a's second stream of online revenue, and executives believe now is the right time to start charging. PAUL SMURL, VP, NEWYORKTIMES.COM PAID PRODUCTS: A few things have changed recently. You know, one is that people are more used to paying for digital content with the add vent of apps and app store and the ease of purchase through apps.
CHERNOFF: Still, the "Times" anticipates the vast majority of online readers will not reach the limit. It is counting on the most devoted of those readers to reach for their wallets just like they used to for the daily newspaper.
Allan Chernoff, CNN, New York.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BALDWIN: Still to come, is Syria's leader Bashar al Assad as ruthless as his father was? Are Syrians about to find out? We'll get a live report, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: There are more disturbing scenes out of Syria today. The material is leaking out and in many cases we can't fully confirm its authenticity. What we are tending to see here is consistent with what we're hearing on government crackdown. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CROWD: Syria! Syria!
(GUNFIRE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: We showed you the scene just last week. Today we have gotten even newer footage, shot the same day, it was Wednesday in the same town south of Damascus where we told you about the reports of authorities opening fire on civilians. Listen to just a piece of that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(GUNFIRE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: Obviously horrible scenes there in Syria an apparent government crackdown against people who have taken to the streets demanding more freedom and a closing of the gap between the rich and the poor.
Syria, deep ties to Iran, shares a border with Iraq, deeply involved in Lebanon, and still in a state of war with Israel. Clearly, big picture, the Arab world is watching to see what happens in Syria. Joining me now from his post in Abu Dhabi is CNN's Mohammed Jamjoom. What are you hearing today in terms of the antigovernment protests and the bloody crackdown by the Assad government? MOHAMMAD JAMJOOM, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Brooke, contradictory reports out of the city of Daraa where these protests have been happening in the country's south, we spoke to eyewitnesses there. One told us there's a very much more steeped-up security presence in the city. They fanned out across the city early this morning, that they started tearing down tents put up in a town square where protestors were camped out. They started tearing down their signs.
Another eyewitness says security forces numbers in the thousands had camped out on the roofs of nearby government buildings, some of them firing into the air to try to disperse crowds.
Now, the Syrian government in a statement on Syrian television, they deny this. They say that there were no clashes, that they did not shoot at any of the protestors or into the air. But a lot of contradictory information has been very difficult to verify because the Syrian government has not allowed us to have access to the country to report from inside Syria.
But as you said before, so many videos coming out, so many reports coming out of activists and eyewitnesses there that really tends to lend credence to the idea of these crackdowns going on. We've gotten so many accounts and it's interesting, even more, that there are protests today because just yesterday we were told by the Syrian government that they would lift the emergency law that the protestors there have been demanding they lift.
Now, they did not say when they would lift it, but the protestors were speaking, saying they're committed to continue coming into the streets even though the government is making conciliatory remarks and making concessions, but protestors saying too little, too late. We want more rights. We're going to continue to none straight.
BALDWIN: Maybe the Syrians would hear -- once they hear from President Assad, we don't know when that will be, we're just told he'll be addressing the country at some point soon. But when he does speak, Mohammad, what should Syrians expect to hear?
JAMJOOM: This is going to be very interesting. It's remarkable not only that the Syrian government is saying that they're going to make some of these concessions now, that's extraordinary in itself. But the fact that the president is feeling compelled to address the nation, we're told could be 24, could be 48 hours, it's going to be soon, we just don't know at this point.
What we're hearing from people on the ground there, they expect that he will try to make more concessions, that he like other embattled leaders in this part of world that have been taken by surprise by the protest movements in their countries will try to offer concessions, will say mistakes were made.
But we just won't know until we hear it. It's really causing a lot of concern in this part of the world as to what exactly Assad will do to quell the 'do discontent in his neck of the woods. BALDWIN: I think for some Americans who are familiar with Syria, they know how ruthless Assad's father was. Do Syrians believe that Bashar Assad, the son here, would take measures as extreme as his father did?
JAMJOOM: One of the reasons people are so upset right now, the people we're speaking with, the ones gathering and demonstrating, is because they saw Bashar Assad as somebody who would try to reform. When he took power after the death of his father, he promised reforms. He knew there was discontent in that country, that people are getting angry.
It's ten years later. A lot of human rights groups call this past decade in Syria the "lost decade," lost opportunities, nothing was done. The government insists there were economic reforms. The people say there's still a huge gap between the rich and poor and they want their rights.
That is what is fueling the anger. They say Bashar Assad is a young leader, could have changed things. Instead they see more of the same. Instead of breaking with the past, they see him staying with the past. That's what making them so upset. They say this is too little too late. They're saying they want regime change altogether.
BALDWIN: Mohammed, thank you.
Now I want you to look at this picture. This is certainly something you don't see every day. This is former U.S. president Jimmy Carter arriving in Cuba. President Carter landing there just a short time ago, and he plans to meet with Cuban president Raul Castro. We'll take you live to Havana to talk about the significance of this visit next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: The only U.S. president to visit Castro era Cuba has just arrived in Havana, so On the Record Jimmy carter is there at the invitation of the Cuban government to talk about ways to improve U.S. relations with the communist island. But there is speculation his real mission is to win the release of an American who has just been sentenced to 15 years in Cuban prison.
I want to go live to Havana to Shasta Darlington. And let's just back up and explain who this American is and why Cuba put him in prison for so long.
SHASTA DARLINGTON, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brooke, Alan Gross was a subcontractor for USAID in Cuba when arrested in 2009. And pretty much everyone agrees he was working to connect people to the Internet, but that's where the agreement stops. Cuba accuses him of illegally bringing satellite equipment into the country to connect groups of people with the ultimate goal of destabilizing the government.
Washington, on the other hand, says that he was simply helping Jewish groups communicate better with the rest of the world and wasn't doing anything illegal. But to put this in context, you have to remember that for Cuba all USAID projects are legal because, among other things, they seek regime change, Brooke.
BALDWIN: Shasta, what are the signs as we talk about Alan Gross, what are the signs that his case is even on Carter's radar?
DARLINGTON: Well, to begin with the timing. As you mentioned, it was just this month that he was sentenced to 15 years in prison and lo and behold here comes this visit. Now even when he was sentenced, foreign diplomats were saying that there was a chance that Cuba could release gross early for humanitarian reasons. Both his mother and his daughter are battling cancer, and they say that more than anything Cuba just wanted to show the world that the United States is still up to what they call the same dirty old tricks, that under President Barack Obama these programs aimed at destabilizing the country haven't ended and that they might be willing to let him go now.
Also, you have the fact that secretary of state Hillary Clinton talked to Carter shortly before his departure. We assume this was the topic of conversation.
And finally from the Cubans, they are the ones who put a visit with Jewish leaders on the agenda. That's where Carter is right now. He's visiting with the main Jewish leaders here in Cuba as we speak, Brooke.
BALDWIN: Well, obviously Shasta Darlington, let us know if we do see that release. That will be news and we'll bring you back on. Thank you.
And we're not going to far from Libya. We'll take you back there in mere moments. Reza Sayah is there to tell us how far the rebels have advanced on Gadhafi's hometown. Also ahead Wolf Blitzer has some fresh news off the Political Ticker. He is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: And now for the latest on the CNN Political Ticker let's go to Wolf Blitzer live in Washington. Wolf, last time you and I spoke it was last Wednesday before I left for vacation. I tell you what, you totally called it. The president was cutting his trip to Latin America short. You said he has to come back and has to address the Americans and here we go, tonight, 7:30.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST, "THE SITUATION ROOM": At 7:30 p.m. eastern at the National Defense University here in Washington. He'll have an audience there of a lot of colonels and up, as far as military personnel who study at the national defense university.
Obviously he's going to have a teleprompter to read the speech. This is a very, very carefully drafted speech because he's got to make the case to a skeptical public out there why the United States effectively is at war.
I'll be listening closely, I know you will, Brooke, to see if the president actually says the United States is engaging in war. I suspect that word war will not be used. He'll use some other euphemism for war. But for all practical purposes when you've launched 185 or so tomahawk cruise missiles at sites in Libya and launched hundreds of jet fighter sorties and bombing strikes against various targets in Libya, it certainly sounds like war even though I suspect the president will not use that word.
He's going to have to explain why he is now making the case. A lot of his critics said, you know what, attorney days ago, two weeks ago is when he should have gone on television and made the specific speech to the American public instead of now. And his critics, as you know, they have been arguing he is much more concerned about what the United Nations thinks and what the Arab League thinks, what the European allies, whether France or Britain, what they think than what the U.S. Congress thinks.
And that's a charge that resonates because, you know, to a certain degree when he was in the opposition to the war in Iraq, when the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was a senator and in opposition to the war in Iraq, they made some of these same arguments that his critics are now leveling against him.
So he's got some explaining to do, and I'm sure, you know, he's got a very strong speech ready to go tonight at 7:30 p.m. eastern.
BALDWIN: Do you think, Wolf, to your point, that he likely will not use the "w" word, will not say "war," likely humanitarian mission, operation? And another point and Ed Henry was making this to me earlier, when we think about a presidential speech speaking about Afghanistan and Iraq and he's generally in the oval office and this time he's very much at the war college very much on purpose, I imagine.
DARLINGTON: The National Defense University, there's a separate war college someplace else in Pennsylvania, so let's be precise. This is the National Defense University here on a military base, Ft. McNair, in the District of Columbia, so it's obviously a military- related installation where a lot of the smartest, the best military officers come to spend some time studying on defense-related national security issues.
BALDWIN: Why there, Wolf? Why give a speech there?
BLITZER: I think some of his aides thought he would be more effective speaking before an audience as opposed to simply looking into a camera from the oval office and delivering prepared remarks that way, you know, when you're surrounded with military personnel -- and remember, this is the most difficult decision a commander-in-chief can make, when he orders young men and women into battle to risk their lives. It doesn't get more difficult than that and it doesn't get more serious than that.
So, I think the president -- I don't know this for sure -- I suspect he wanted to thank these military personnel who are going to be there in the audience for their service to the country and for what not only they are doing but all the other fighting men and women who are out there.
BALDWIN: OK. Wolf Blitzer, we'll most definitely be watching, 7:30 Eastern Time. Wolf Blitzer, we'll talk to you --
BLITZER: It's a big -- it's a big, big speech for the president, and I think the stakes are really serious right now.
BALDWIN: Absolutely, Wolf. Thank you so much. We'll get another Political Ticker update for you in half an hour and updates online. Go to CNNPolitics.com or hop on Twitter, go @PoliticalTicker, a lot on Libya and the president's speech there.
