Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Congressman Anthony Weiner Hires Lawyer Over Tweet; WHO: Cell Phones May Cause Cancer; Dominique Strauss-Kahn's Defense Strategy; Egyptian Military's "Virginity Checks"; CO2 Emission Hit Record High; Rating the President

Aired May 31, 2011 - 14:01   ET

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

RANDI KAYE, CNN ANCHOR: And we start with a bizarre controversy this hour. Some are calling it "Weinergate."

Congressman Anthony Weiner has hired an attorney to advise him on what to do next after a lewd photo of a man was sent from his Twitter account to a college student in Seattle. The photo showed a man from the waist down in his underwear with an apparent erection.

The photo and tweet were quickly deleted. While Weiner has hired a lawyer, the Capitol Police and the FBI tell CNN they are not currently investigating the case. Representative Weiner is denying he posted the photo and says it was a prank by a hacker. We caught up with the congressman again today to try and get some more answers. This is what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ANTHONY WEINER (D), NEW YORK: I have spent a couple of days cooperating and trying to help you do your job, but at a certain point I have got to get back to work, and I think we have reached that point today.

QUESTION: This distraction might go away if you answer some of the questions that are out there.

WEINER: I'm not convinced of that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAYE: Earlier, I spoke with conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart, who first shared this story on his Web site, BigGovernment.com, and our senior legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, for some perspective.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KAYE: The source of this photo was a conservative blogger as well named Dan Wolfe. Do you know any idea -- have any idea how he got this photo, how he uncovered this photo? And did you know him before at all?

ANDREW BREITBART, BIGGOVERNMENT.COM: I didn't know him before. He was the one that tweeted it. He sent it -- he forwarded it through Twitter to many prominent people within the blogosphere, including Arianna Huffington and "The Huffington Post." I just happened to be there at my kitchen island, and I saw it, and so --

KAYE: What's your understanding of how he discovered it?

BREITBART: Well, we have that exclusive at BigGovernment.com right now, but he has been monitoring, Rep. Weiner, for quite some time now.

KAYE: I do want to ask you about the photo, because it was apparently sent to this woman, 21-year-old woman Gennette Cordova. She issued a statement to "The New York Daily News" saying that she never had met the congressman, she simply followed him on Twitter, and she jokingly referred to him as her "boyfriend" in a tweet.

But take a look at the statement that she gave "The New York Daily News" with me. She says, "I do not have a clear understanding as to how or why exactly I am involved in this fiasco." She goes on to call all of this speculation and faulty allegations, saying, "My reputation has been called into question by those who lack the character to report the facts."

Now, yet, a lot of conservatives like yourself, Andrew, seem to be implying a possible relationship between Cordova and the congressman.

BREITBART: This is about Congressman Weiner, who for over 72 hours, allowed for people to believe that his Web site was hacked, which caused for this poor guy who discovered this thing to be accused of being a hacker, and he has gotten death threats. What has happened in the last 24 hours is that he is downgrading it to a prank. There is something fundamentally different between a prank and a hack. A prank is a --

KAYE: Do you have any evidence to show that this wasn't a hack or a prank?

BREITBART: A prank is innocuous. A hack is criminal and malignant.

We have called for an investigation to clear Wolfe's name, because for the last 72 hours, the supporters of Congressman Weiner have accused him online, and many prominent ones, including "The Daily Kos" of having hacked him. So if there was in fact --

KAYE: So what evidence is there that this wasn't a hack? I'm just asking you.

BREITBART: Well, why doesn't he want an investigation? He's saying it's a prank.

What is a prank? How does he know the motivation? How does he know if -- prank implies he knows who the person is, and that it was done in a lighthearted and innocuous fashion. A hack means that a sitting congressman who has national security issues has been hacked by both Facebook and Twitter. There should be an investigation. (END VIDEOTAPE)

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Twitter is not a very secure environment. Twitter is, you know, an example of social media where people talk back and forth, and sometimes they do it in a lighthearted manner, but think this case is a good illustration that you have to be careful, just like you have to be careful with anything on the Internet. You know, Wikipedia is a great thing. Sometimes Wikipedia is wrong. Twitter is a great thing. Sometimes the information is not reliable and doesn't even come from the people it appears to come from.

That's the lesson here. And I think buyer and reader beware.

KAYE: But wouldn't it be easier -- I mean, we know that he has hired a lawyer. Why not just go to the Capitol Police and the FBI to investigate who hacked his account? I mean, from your perspective, as a lawyer, the right way to go here? Or should there be an investigation and we can just put this to rest?

TOOBIN: Probably. But, you know, there is a famous expression, "Don't make a federal case out of it." That strikes me has the appropriate reaction here.

No one was hurt, no one was injured, no one was horrified or shocked. There was no obscenity here. There was no -- nothing malicious.

I mean, sure, if this continues, or if something really sinister comes out, then perhaps it calls for an investigation. I mean, I think Congressman Weiner is handling this in the appropriate way, as far as I can tell, which is basically treating it as kind of a joke.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KAYE: Democrats and Weiner supporters question Breitbart's reporting record and say this an attempt by Weiner's political opponents to smear and undermine the congressman.

All right. Now I'm going to ask you a question, and knowing the answer could save your life. We want you to pay attention here.

What does your cell phone have in common with engine exhaust, chloroform and lead? The World Health Organization says they all possibly cause cancer. This isn't just another study, by the way. It is the stark conclusion of many studies going back years, conducted all over the world.

And CNN Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen joins me now with the 411 on this.

All right. So this is pretty scary. What should we make of it?

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I would use the word "important," not "scary."

KAYE: OK. It sounds scary to me.

COHEN: All right. So the World Health Organization comes out after spending a lot of time reading every study done on cell phones and cancer to say that cell phone and other mobile devices are a possible carcinogen for humans. Specifically, they're talking about gliomas, which is a kind of brain tumor.

OK. So, now you're thinking, why isn't that scary, Elizabeth? Right?

KAYE: Yes. It sounds scary. I'll say it again.

COHEN: OK. All right. Here's why it's not scary.

First of all, it's possible. All right? They haven't definitely linked it.

Second of all, it's not like your cell phone is toxic. OK? The kind of risk that we're talking about is a risk that builds up day after day after day, week after week after week, year after year after year of being on a cell phone. One call is not going to give you cancer.

KAYE: OK.

COHEN: All right? It's something that builds up.

Here is the third reason why it's not scary. All right. This it is right here.

You know what this is? You see what that is?

KAYE: All right. I see a little ear piece.

COHEN: It's a little ear piece, right. Cell phone can be problematic, or possibly problematic, when hold it right up to your ear.

KAYE: Yes. That's how I do it.

COHEN: Right, because your brain is inside there. Your brain is on the other side of the cell phone, right?

KAYE: Right.

COHEN: Hold it as a distance, and that radiation dissipates into the air. And so you put this thing on, and you can hold your cell phone at a distance and use it. You could also use a Bluetooth ear piece, you could also a speaker phone.

But there is something you can do, and I always am happy to say that, because a lot of times there aren't things you can do about problems. But you can do something about this.

KAYE: OK. That's good. So we shouldn't be freaking out.

COHEN: Right, we should not be freaking out. Absolutely. Absolutely.

KAYE: All right.

What about kids? Is it any more dangerous to them than an adult? I mean, certainly, they haven't been using it as long as you or I have.

COHEN: Right.

KAYE: But there's a lot of kids using them today.

COHEN: Right. The concern about kids is twofold. One, their brain cells and their cells in general are dividing and developing quickly. Right? And so that the cells are often more vulnerable to some kind of a carcinogen than an adult cell. So there is a concern about growing children and the risk.

The other thing is you and I were not using cell phone as kids because they didn't exist. So the risk that we have after using them starting at, what, age 30, or whenever we started using them, is not as great as someone who's using them starting at age 6 or 7 or 8. Right?

So the kid who is on their cell phone starting at age 7, by the time they are 50, that's a lot of years of cell phone usage. And so when you start -- the younger you start, the more years of cell phone usage you have, is the easiest way to put it.

KAYE: Yes. And if it's not on my ear, I tend to leave it on my lap, which probably isn't a good thing either.

But I want to ask you, what does this mean for the cell phone companies?

COHEN: Well, the cell phone industry has a response. And so I want to read you a part of that response.

What they have to say is "This classification" -- meaning as a possible carcinogen -- "does not mean that cell phones cause cancer. The WHO finding is based on limited evidence."

And that is true. This is not an absolute cell phones cause cancer.

KAYE: No, but it is interesting, because it has been studied for so long, and this is all sort of coming together now.

COHEN: Right. And they're the first big group that has said, wait a minute, there might be a link to this, because every other group has said the jury is still out. So, to say there might be a link, it is a big deal.

KAYE: All right. So it might be possibly just play it safe. COHEN: Play it safe and just use an ear piece. It's so easy.

KAYE: Bottom line, all right. Get a piece. OK.

Elizabeth, thank you. Appreciate it.

COHEN: Thanks.

KAYE: Well, phone calls are front and center in today's session of the Casey Anthony murder trial. Heart-wrenching calls to police from Anthony's grief-stricken mother, finally realizing her granddaughter Caylee had gone missing.

Casey, as you may know, is charged with first-degree murder, aggravated child abuse, and several other crimes in the death of 2- year-old Caylee, who disappeared in June of 2008 and never was seen alive again. Her remains were found six months later.

Today, in Orlando, jurors heard three separate calls to 911, all from Cindy Anthony, Casey's mother and Caylee's grandmother, and all from the same day, July 15, 2008. At that point, Caylee had been missing for one month.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CINDY ANTHONY, CASEY ANTHONY'S MOTHER: My daughter finally admitted that the baby is (INAUDIBLE). I need to find her.

911 OPERATOR: Your daughter admitted that the baby is where?

ANTHONY: That the babysitter took her -- that my daughter has been looking for. I told you my daughter was missing for a month. I just found her today, but I can't find my granddaughter.

And she just admitted to me that she has been trying to find her herself. There is something wrong. I found my daughter's car today, and it smells like there has been a dead body in the damn car.

OPERATOR: OK. What is the 3-year-old's name?

ANTHONY: Caylee, C-A-Y-L-E-E, Anthony.

OPERATOR: Caylee Anthony?

ANTHONY: Yes.

OPERATOR: OK. Is she white, black or Hispanic.

ANTHONY: She's white.

OPERATOR: How long has she been missing for?

ANTHONY: I have not seen her since the 7th of June.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAYE: The babysitter Cindy Anthony referred to was never found, and a woman with the same name later sued for defamation.

Today, jurors also heard a jailhouse call from Casey Anthony to a friend who sounded a lot more broken up about Caylee than her mother Casey did. Casey's is the second voice that you are about to hear.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Casey, you have to tell me if you know anything about Caylee. If anything happened to Caylee, Casey, I will die. Do you understand? I'll die if anything happens to that baby.

CASEY ANTHONY, DEFENDANT: Oh, my God. Calling you guys, a waste. A huge waste.

Honey, I love you. You know I would not let anything happen to my daughter. If I knew where she was, this wouldn't be going on.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, how come everybody is saying you are lying?

CASEY ANTHONY: Because nobody is (EXPLETIVE DELETED) listening to anything that I'm saying. The media completely misconstrued everything that I said.

The (EXPLETIVE DELETED) detectives told them (EXPLETIVE DELETED). And they got all of their information from me. Yet, at the same time, they are twisting stuff. They have already said they are going to pin this on me if they don't find Caylee. They have already said that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAYE: The defense claims Caylee accidentally drowned in her grandparents' pool. Casey Anthony could face the death penalty if convicted.

Well, first, Dominique Strauss-Kahn lost his job as head of the International Monetary Fund. Now he is fighting to stay out of prison. How he will defend himself against these charges, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: Dominique Strauss-Kahn was forced to resign as head of the International Monetary Fund shortly after his arrest. Well, now he is facing felony charges, but he is assembling a powerful team to fight them.

First, they are high-powered lawyers. They include Benjamin Brafman, whose clients have included Michael Jackson, Sean "P. Diddy" Combs, and Jay-Z; and William Taylor, who has represented clients in the Whitewater, Lincoln Savings & Loan, and Salt Lake City Olympic organizing committee investigation. But Strauss-Kahn's dream team goes far beyond that, with equally high-powered experts to handle other aspects of the case.

TD International is a Washington-based firm run by former CIA officers. It describes itself as a strategic advisory company. Strauss-Kahn has used the firm's services before when he was campaigning to become the IMF chief.

Guidepost Solutions is a prominent private investigative firm led by former U.S. prosecutors and Secret Service agents.

Judy Smith is a nationally known attorney and communications and public relations consultant. She joins us from Los Angeles to talk about this.

Judy, you are not involved in advising Dominique Strauss-Kahn, but if you were, what would be your most important piece of advice to him right now?

JUDY SMITH, ATTORNEY: Well, I think he's doing it. The most important piece of advice would really be to assemble this type of team that he has.

He has a great attorney that's working for him. He's going to need a good group that would probably include a forensic expert based on the information that was released. He is also going to need someone that is very good, obviously, in crisis communication, someone that also knows the landscape I think that's important in France and also in the United States as well, because he has his reputation that he has to worry about in both states.

KAYE: But whatever happened to just having some good lawyers? I mean, that used to be enough. We read off a whole list of names there. Why does he need all these other people?

SMITH: Well, you know what? Because, really, it used to be enough, you're right, but now it's not. The landscape has changed.

I mean, this case is a good example of a nexus between politics, law and the media. And he has to deal with all of those things across board, and he needs a good team that's able to do that.

KAYE: And his team really has already tried to question the credibility of the maid and her story. How critical is that, do you think?

SMITH: I think it's critical, but I think there is a line that you have to be very careful with, which is that you can disagree on the facts of the case, but you don't want to be viewed as attacking the maid personally. And that's a big difference, because she is being viewed, whether rightly or wrongly so, to this day as a victim here. So, you don't want to look like that you are attacking the victim in this case.

KAYE: And we certainly know that other prominent figures have been accused of sexual misconduct, sometimes admitted it, and they have still survived. So why is Strauss-Kahn, would you say, in so much trouble?

SMITH: Well, you know what, Randi? There's a line here.

I think both in France and the United States, the public is used to and has really grown accustomed to politicians having extramarital affairs. There is a line here that's been crossed with these allegations and charges which is sexual assault. So it involves criminal charges and, to some degree, it involves a crime of violence.

So I think the line has been crossed here. And there is a difference.

KAYE: All right. Judy Smith, appreciate your insight. Thank you.

SMITH: Thanks so much.

KAYE: A new twist to an old strategy for beating high gas prices. Are you ready to be a slug? Yes, that's what it's called. How it works, right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: You have heard of carpooling, but have you heard about slugging? It's carpooling with a very unique twist. And like carpooling, it aims to help you beat those high gas prices.

Sandra Endo became a slug to find out firsthand how it works.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SANDRA ENDO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Long lines to hop in a car with strangers. With gas prices --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Ridiculous.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Outrageous.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Disappointing.

ENDO: -- more people are resorting to blind carpooling called slugging, a way commuters from northern Virginia going to Washington catch a free ride with drivers looking to beat the rush.

(on camera): These are slugs.

DAVID LEBLANC, FOUNDER, SLUG-LINES.COM: These are all slugs waiting to hop in cars.

ENDO (voice-over): It started more than 30 years ago, but David LeBlanc's Web site helped organize this pseudo-secret society listing where passengers can line up to find a ride.

(on camera): For the drivers, especially with gas prices so high, it's not really benefiting them or saving them any money to pick up slugs, right?

LEBLANC: Correct. It's not saving them any money, but it is saving them a lot of time. Like I said, it probably saves me at least 20 to 30 minutes each way on the commute.

ENDO (voice-over): That is because Virginia law requires drivers to have at least three people in a vehicle to use carpool lanes to breeze by the stop-and-go traffic.

LEBLANC: We have added more and more slug lines. As gas prices have increased, those that may not have considered slugging now look at it as an option.

ENDO: LeBlanc easily picks up a passenger hitching a ride from Virginia to the Pentagon.

(on camera): Why did you decide to slug? How does it help you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's inexpensive. It gets me to where I need to go. And gas is really expensive nowadays.

ENDO: So, otherwise, what options would you have to go to work?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I would have to drive, I would have to catch a cab or catch the commuter bus.

ENDO: So how much would that cost?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: With gas nowadays, anywhere from $50 to $75 to fill up my tank. And with the commuter bus, it's $7, which would be $14 for a whole day.

ENDO: These nondescript slug lines form for the evening commute for commuters heading back to northern Virginia from D.C. And the practice is catching on in other congested cities like in Dallas and San Francisco.

(voice-over): A commuting partnership to save time and money.

(on camera): This is a free ride.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I know. You can't beat it.

ENDO (voice-over): Sandra Endo, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(NEWSBREAK)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: Welcome back.

Severe weather expert Chad Myers joining us now.

(WEATHER REPORT)

KAYE: We're going to go "Off the Radar" today as well.

What do you have?

CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Something else. Something else coming into Florida probably shouldn't be affected at all by the weather because of that big word right there, "sunny." KAYE: Yes.

MYERS: Although when the shuttle is coming down tonight, it will be moon-filled.

KAYE: Right.

MYERS: I won't say moony.

KAYE: Moonlit.

MYERS: It will be moonlit. It won't be sunny, but the shuttle coming down. Two attempts tonight, at 2:35 and little after 4:00 in the morning. They should be able to get it down on the first try. I think the weather should be pretty good, although they have to have weather good spots other places and not just there.

KAYE: Not just Florida.

MYERS: The criteria to get this thing on the ground is just like sending a rocket into space.

KAYE: Yes.

MYERS: You have to have good weather here. You have the wind in the right direction. You have to have no cross winds. You have to have clouds within -- you know, it goes on and on and on, and it looks like the criteria will be in good shape tonight.

KAYE: All right. I'll take your word for it. Thanks, Chad.

MYERS: You're welcome.

KAYE: Nightmare of a revolution. Reports that Egyptian women were subjected to virginity tests now confirmed. The shocking details right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: The reports were horrifying. Egyptian military forcing women to undergo virginity checks. The military has denied that women protesters arrested back in March had been subjected to the test until now.

Michael Holmes joins us with much more on this really such a disturbing story.

MICHAEL HOLMES, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT: It's horrible. The virginity tests, I mean, let's call it what they are. They are sexual assaults is what happened to these women, 17 women.

KAYE: Right.

HOLMES: Now, this happened to a protest on March 9th, which, of course, was after Hosni Mubarak had stepped down.

KAYE: Yes.

HOLMES: But this is when the protesters were still trying to push for more reform, saying that the pace of the changeover with the military running the country was too slow. And what happened for the first time, you saw the military actually target protesters, and you can see it there, and they went in and they arrested -- they arrested hundreds actually. But there was a group of women that were taken into custody, 17 of them.

And Amnesty International raised the allegation a few weeks after this protest said that they had been given electric shocks, they were beaten, they were strip-searched, threatened with prostitution charges, and given these virginity tests. Now, at the time, one of the spokesmen for the Army said, it didn't happen. No, we would never to do.

What's happened now is that we've been able to speak to a general who actually had confirmed that, indeed, these things did happen. You want to know the worst thing about it? He's not sorry. This isn't a whistle-blower.

KAYE: No, he's actually defending it, right?

HOLMES: Yes. He's defending it. He's saying that they wanted to ensure that these women would not later claim that they had been sexually molested by soldiers. Absolutely extraordinary.

KAYE: And now, with the military -- I mean, with Mubarak out of power, the military is running the country, I mean, for now.

HOLMES: Yes.

KAYE: So, what are you going to do? I mean, they're the ones who did it.

HOLMES: Unlikely if anything will happen. I mean, these women, a couple of the women have spoken out and incredibly brave. And you're going to put yourself in a position of this is a very, very conservative society -- it's not the most conservative in the Middle East, but it's conservative. And one woman who spoke out about it, spoke out with her brother who was then taken into custody. So, nobody knows what's happened to him at the moment.

So, these are sort of things that continue to go on in Egypt that worry the protesters who are concerned about the pace of reform.

KAYE: Yes. I just want to talk about Afghanistan, and president there, Karzai, warning NATO, that his government will no longer tolerate airstrikes.

HOLMES: Yes.

KAYE: Because we've seen them, they have killed some civilians here.

HOLMES: Well, and this has been a problem. You and I have talked about this before, about the damage done by civilian deaths. On this occasion, Karzai saying he's not going to tolerate airstrikes that result in civilian casualty. He actually used the word not allowed. He said that NATO-led forces are not allowed to launch attacks on Afghan homes, and he said if they continued, he said -- these are his words -- we will be forced to take unilateral action in this regard.

This follows an attack on a compound the other day that killed 14 civilians. That attack followed an attack on the U.S. military patrol, a foot patrol, in which a U.S. serviceman was killed. And those insurgents ran, there are (INAUDIBLE), they ran back into this compound. And the compound was targeted, but it just turns out that this compound was actually full of civilians as well.

KAYE: Yes.

HOLMES: And it's just further shows the strained relationship between NATO and Karzai.

He's spoken about this before, and he's been very bellicose about it before. But this is more direct that he's been. NATO says that they take all the care they can. They do work with Afghan military before they start.

KAYE: Yes. And General David Petraeus, I mean, he apologized. Others have apologized, but it doesn't seem to be enough.

HOLMES: Well, I mean, Petraeus made it clear too, that every civilian killed damages what the U.S. is trying to do in Afghanistan, and there had been numerous instances of civilians killed -- you know, mainly killed by insurgents, let's be honest about it. Last year, I think it was 2,700 civilians died in Afghanistan. Most of them killed by insurgents but quite a few killed by NATO forces as well.

KAYE: Germany. Interesting story coming out of Germany.

HOLMES: Don't eat the cucumbers.

KAYE: Yes. The E. coli outbreak is all about cucumbers, I guess. It appears to be.

HOLMES: And it's getting worse, too. It's not getting better. And a couple of doctors, kind of, they don't expect this, with 16 who have died already so far, hundreds are in the hospitals very, very ill indeed. And 39 people from Sweden actually who ate cucumbers and other vegetables while in Germany while on a visit, they are back in Sweden and they are sick as well.

KAYE: They think this is coming from where, though? The cucumbers?

HOLMES: Well, the feeling was that they were coming from cucumbers that were grown organically and perhaps treated with manure as fertilizer in Spain. Now, the Spanish are up in arms, saying there is no evidence. You cannot pinpoint that back to us. There's no yet foolproof trail back to the origins. KAYE: Right. Don't blame our farmers.

HOLMES: Not yet anyway. They are losing $200 million I think a week because of this, because of the lack of trade. This E. coli, too, this particular strain is very nasty. It causes intestinal hemorrhaging and it's not the sort of common old E. coli. So, very nasty stuff.

KAYE: Yes. But it sounds like it's still at the point where they think they know, but they are not positive.

HOLMES: Yes. And, of course, quite apart from the damage being done to people is economic damage, too. Russia has banned all imports of all fruit and vegetables pretty much from Europe for the time being, and Spain is in big trouble. And it becomes a European issue as well. But certainly, in terms of the human costs, hundreds and hundreds of people have been struck down and 16 dead. And as I said, some of them are saying it could get worse.

KAYE: Yes. All right. Michael Holmes, good to see you. Thank you.

HOLMES: Nice to have you back.

KAYE: Thank you. Good to be back.

Now to a lesson in courage, quick thinking and love. Martha Rivera Alanis had one thought when she heard gunshots outside the windows of her kindergarten classroom in Mexico, save the lives of her students. So, in a calm voice, Rivera Alanis coaxed 15, 5 and 6-year- olds to the floor and led them in song assuring little girl nothing is going to happen. You have to see this.

(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)

KAYE: And yesterday, Rivera Alanis was honored for outstanding civic courage by the governor of Nuevo Leon. She says her kids are the brave ones and those gunshots, by the way, five people were gunned down at a taxi stand just one block away.

Despite our attempts to be more green, we are seeing record breaking emissions of greenhouse gases. We breakdown why that is, and what it means to us, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: Carbon emissions last year worldwide were the highest in history. The International Energy Agency is calling its latest findings a, quote, "serious setback." But what does this all mean? The implications to the environment and as a result to you and me are quite troubling and we are going to break it down for you today in our big breakdown.

So, here is what the International Energy Agency found.

Emissions went up 5 percent, breaking the previous record set in 2008. Levels jumped to 30.6 gigatons. To give you an idea of just how much that is, consider one gigaton is about 1 billion tons, one car weighs about one ton. The world is emitting what weighs of a 30.6 billion cars in greenhouse gases.

But the thing is that the U.N. set a 2 degree goal during their talks last year in Cancun. That goal was to limit the increase in global temperatures to 2 degrees Celsius. Well, greenhouse gas emissions have to rise less than that over the next 10 years for the U.N.'s goal to be attainable. But what's the source?

You can see here, take a look -- yes, there it is -- mostly from the use of coal and oil. And a lot of the greenhouse gases are coming from developing countries it turns out, about 40 percent. Experts say it's a sign of economic growth, and that is the case in China, which emitted six tons and India which emitted 1.5 tons -- which brings me back to the U.N.'s goal to limit global warming to a 2 degree Celsius increase.

Some scientists believe think that the goal is way too optimistic and really unrealistic. They say that the world's infrastructure simply doesn't allow it, and believe a 4 degree increase is more feasible during this century.

But some scientists are warning the effects to the ecosystem and many people will be devastating. Scientists say that if predictions hold, sea levels could rise two meters by the end of the century, displacing more than 2 percent of the world's population.

In the meantime, studies show rain forest in parts of Central America and Africa will be at risk.

Rating the president. We have some new numbers now on how people think the president is doing his job. It's kind of a good news/bad news sort of thing.

CNN's senior political editor Mark Preston joins me now from Washington.

Mark, tell us. What are the numbers? What are you seeing?

MARK PRESTON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL EDITOR: Well, you know, Randi, as you said, good news/bad news.

Let's looking at the macro number right now about what Americans think about President Obama and how he's handling his job. Right now, 54 percent of Americans in the new CNN/Opinion Research Poll say that President Obama is doing a good job right now. Only 45 percent disapprove of how he's handling his job. So, that's a good macro number.

And you know something, let's break the poll down a little bit and look at specifically the issues. First of all, let's look at foreign policy. Let's look at those numbers right there. On the issues of terrorism, Afghanistan and Iraq, President Obama rates well over 50 percent as you can see, on terrorism, 65 percent. Of course, this poll was taken right after Osama bin Laden was killed. So good numbers, but where he does not do so well is that he's upside down on the domestic issues. Let's look at those numbers right there. On issues of Medicare, the economy, health care, the deficit and gas prices -- he's well below 50 percent in those numbers right there, which is really remarkable when you consider that President Obama and Democratic candidates in general seem to thrive on being good on domestic issues and just not necessarily on foreign policy issues.

So, President Obama, of course, has some time to make up, try to turn those numbers around as he runs for a second term. But those numbers are very interesting especially when we hear the likes of Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty and Newt Gingrich and other Republicans who are at least running for president or say they are interested in running for president start criticizing the president -- Randi.

KAYE: Yes. And then Senator Obama -- we certainly spent a lot of time covering his credentials when it came to foreign policy back when he was first running for president. So, it's going to be interesting how that all plays out in this election in light of bin Laden and everything else.

PRESTON: Yes, no question. And we'll leave it on this, Randi -- do you remember in the Democratic presidential primary, there was that scathing ad from Hillary Clinton that said, would President Obama be the person you would want to answer the phone at 3:00 a.m.

KAYE: Right, the 3:00 a.m. call.

PRESTON: And if you look at our numbers right now, it looks like the Americans don't mind having President Obama answering that phone call at 3:00 a.m.

KAYE: Yes, it's amazing to see those numbers.

All right. Mark Preston, thank you.

And your next update from "The Best Political Team on Television" is just an hour away.

Cyber war or conventional attacks? Should the U.S. be battling hackers with live ammunition? Our Stream Team weighs in, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: I want to show you some new video from Rotterdam where former Serbian military leader Ratko Mladic has just arrived in The Netherlands where he is to be tried in the U.N. War Crimes Tribunal at The Hague. He faces, as you may recall, genocide charges over atrocities committed during the Bosnian war in 1990s. He'd been on the run for about 15 years. Earlier in Serbia, a court rejected his appeal against extradition.

Cyber attacks as a weapon of real war. According to "The Wall Street Journal," the Pentagon has a plan now to respond against attackers and hackers, treating cyber attacks as acts of war. That means real, physical retribution for attacks on critical computer systems, bombs for bits so to speak.

So, where are the threats coming from? Here are a list of the numbers. Take a look.

Twelve percent of the attack traffic comes from Russia, followed by Taiwan, Brazil, China, and the United States. Those are the latest numbers.

Now, to be clear, not all of those attacks are aimed at the U.S. Russia and China routinely trade cyber threats. Even Iran's nuclear grid fell victim to a virus.

Well, these new rules don't focus on routine hacks and Internet pranks. These are national security threats that we are talking about. So, we wanted to put the question today to our Stream Team. Should cyber attacks from other countries be considered acts of war?

On the team today is former NATO supreme allied commander, General Wesley Clark. And Noah Shachtman, the editor of Wired.com's national security blog, "The Danger Room."

General, let me start with you. How long has the Pentagon been working on this type of plan?

WESLEY CLARK, FORMER NATO SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER: Well, we've been looking at this for more than 15 years. This is nothing new. But it is new that it's being announced and part of a broader U.S. plan to improve cyber security.

KAYE: And, Noah, what do you think that the message is coming from this policy or the announcement of this policy?

NOAH SHACHTMAN, EDITOR, WIRED.COM NATL. SECURITY BLOG: Well, the message is: don't mess with us. It's treating our networks like we treat our ports or airport, there are matters of vital national interest.

But how you exactly would pull off this retaliation and how you would know how to respond -- those are very open questions.

KAYE: What are your -- do you have doubts about it, that it can be handled?

SHACHTMAN: I don't know -- yes, I do have doubts. Look, you can all -- you can tell slowly but surely who -- which computer might have been behind a particular attack, but which person was sitting at that computer, that is very hard to tell.

And very often, the Pentagon is left with questions about was it a hacker, was it a criminal gang? Was it someone hired by a government? Or was it a government, itself, that launched a particular attack?

So, that the idea that we're going to go then, you know, bomb Moscow in response to some virus or some worm I think is a matter that we got to take with extreme caution.

KAYE: General, do you think the U.S. can pull this off? And is this an actual plan for using this? I mean, for actually, taking action or more of a deterrent?

CLARK: No, it's not actually a plan. It's a policy. It says that it will be treated as an attack, and that means that you can respond diplomatically, legally. You respond with cyber and you could respond with force.

Now, can we actually do this? Well, first you enunciate the policy and then you bring together all of the technology that's required to do it. Remember, that we are not limited in this only to cyber detective work. We got all of the other national sources of information that would be pulled together to support a policy like this.

And you may not be able to determine instantly who was at the computer and why they were there. But over a period of time, and in using all of the source intelligence -- yes, I think we can do this. It may be that the best response is not to use force. But what this policy will say is that an attack is an attack, and it could be met by force. And it is a matter first of deterrence.

KAYE: But do you get the sense, general, that there is an urgency for this? I mean, we know that the Pentagon, their system was attacked not too long ago. But I mean, do you get a sense of urgency here?

CLARK: I do. And I think that it's long overdue. We've known these cyber vulnerabilities for years, and we've slowly ratcheted up our attention it to. But we haven't done so rapidly enough. And there are other nations who have strategic objectives that don't match ours that use cyber attacks and theft of data and other things to advance their own national security.

When they come after our national security and it's not just a matter of data collection but as a matter of interfering and critical national infrastructure -- then, yes, it has to be viewed as an attack, and it is best to enunciate that up front so that there is no misunderstanding.

KAYE: Noah, I mean, do you think that enforcement like this going to leave the U.S. open to physical attacks from other nations who may claim cyber attacks are coming from here?

SHACHTMAN: Yes, it's kind of ironic that this policy is being announced now. Just the other day, the Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn when asked whether the U.S. was behind Stuxnet, that's the worm that hit the Iranian nuclear facilities, he sort of gave a non-answer. But if the U.S. was behind it, according to this policy, we would open ourselves up to physical retribution. So, it's something that we got to think carefully about.

That said, I think the general is right on that we've got to announce the policy that, you know, our networks, you know, should not be messed with. The question is whether the way -- is the way they are going to be messed with, with some big catastrophic attack, some big attack on our attack, or the slow attack of our intellectual property, of our bank account numbers and of our money, to me, that's what seems to be going on here. And I think we need to pay attention to that sort of low, slow taking away of our money and property rather than the catastrophic hit.

KAYE: All right. Interesting discussion. Thank you, Noah. Thank you, General. Appreciate your time.

CLARK: Thank you.

KAYE: So, she won't tell us where she's going, but that has not stopped us from following her or trying to. We are on the trail, sort of, in my "XYZ," next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: Time now for my "XYZ."

She calls it the One Nation Bus Tour. Others call it something else. I'm talking about Sarah Palin's cross-country extravaganza. It has no schedule, at least that we know of. Palin is refusing to tell the lame stream media, as she refers to us, where she's going, except for FOX News, who she works for. Sarah Palin says this isn't about her or about getting publicity. It's about raising awareness and passion for the Constitution.

Do you buy that? Does this feel like a bit of rehearsal ride for a presidential run?

She just after attention a la Donald Trump? Regardless of what's really behind the bus ride, the media is following here, at least trying to follow her every move. She's sure is revving up her base, though, while names like Mitt Romney, who many consider the front- runner among Republican in the polls is out of the headlines -- oh, by the way, he's planning to announce this Thursday in New Hampshire.

Where will Sarah Palin be then? Well, we wish we could tell you.

That will do it for me. CNN NEWSROOM continues right now with Brooke Baldwin.