Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Fresh Account of Bin Laden Raid; Massive Quake Hits Off Indonesia; Syrians Under Siege; Conservatives Not Rushing To Romney; Late-Night Comedians Target Romney; "Snackman" Stops Subway Fight; North Korea Fueling Rocket; Backyard Chicken Gain Popularity; Helping Troubled Homeowners

Aired April 11, 2012 - 12:00   ET

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

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: Live from CNN headquarters in Atlanta, where it's 12:00 noon, 9:00 a.m. on the West Coast -- I'm Suzanne Malveaux.

I want to get you up to speed for this Wednesday, April 11th.

Tsunami, no. Emergency, yes. A massive earthquake rattled the coast of Indonesia today, not far from where the killer quake and tsunami hit back in 2004. The ground had not stop shaking yet. We are hearing about aftershocks several hours since the initial quake.

Disaster officials feared a repeat of 2004. They sent out a tsunami warning for the entire Indian Ocean. So far, no reports of serious damage or injuries.

Chad Myers from the severe weather center, we're going to talk to him in just a couple minutes.

(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)

MALVEAUX: Syrians under siege, endure another day of brutal violence as the deadline for tomorrow's ceasefire looms. The plan drafted by U.N. Kofi Annan calls for both the Syrian government and the opposition to put down their weapons. Annan says he has received, quote, "assurances" from forces loyal to Syrian President Assad that they're going to respect the ceasefire, but the government has ignored a deadline for a troop pullback.

The North Koreans say they are close to launching a long-range rocket. Why they're doing it depends on who you believe. North Korean officials say they are sending up a satellite. U.S. and South Korea see the launch as a cover for testing a weapon. Japan promises to shoot down anything that comes into Japanese air space. The North Koreans say they are fueling the rocket now and will launch it sometime between now and Monday.

New developments in the Trayvon Martin case. The boy's parents are holding a news conference. That's going to happen in the next hour. Plus, special prosecutor Angela Corey, she is promising to release new information within three days.

All of this is happening amid new concerns about the whereabouts of George Zimmerman. He's the man who says he shot the unarmed 17- year-old in self-defense. Now even his lawyers have lost contact with him and have quit the case.

It has been almost a year since U.S. Special Forces killed the most wanted man in the world. Now, we got new details about the mission that took out Osama bin Laden -- coming out in the know from those who know firsthand. Today, we have got a fresh account of those tense, agonizing moments during that raid. It comes from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at a news conference at the U.S. Naval Academy.

She talked about these extraordinary moments, huddling in the White House Situation Room as this mission unfolded.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON, SECRETARY OF STATE: When we gathered that Sunday, it was a pretty intense, tense, stressful time because the people who were actually doing it on the ground were thousands of miles away. We did have good communications.

So, in the White House there's a large Situation Room in the whole protected sort of secret area in the basement, and there are smaller rooms. So, we were in one of the smaller rooms when the attack began, and we were able to have some communication. So, we were in real time aware of what was happening.

And I'm not sure anybody breathed for, you know, 35 or 37 minutes. And for me, the worst part was when one of the helicopters -- if you remember looking at drawings of what the compound looked like, there was a yard, and there was a wall, and as the helicopter went in, the tail got stuck, and it was not flyable.

That had been planned for, but it was still somewhat, you know, worrisome, that this had occurred.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: I want to bring one of the few people who knows what it's like to be in the Situation Room waiting for a critical mission like the bin Laden raid as it plays out, our national security contributor, Fran Townsend. She was homeland security adviser under President George W. Bush. She's joining us via Skype from New York.

And, Fran, you know, it was extraordinary to actually see Secretary Clinton come out and talk about what that was like -- a raid, a mission, waiting in real-time to find out what the outcome was. How common is that when you see something like that play out, that you're actually there and able to determine what's happening on the ground?

FRANCES TOWNSEND, CNN NATIONL SECURITY CONTRIBUTOR: Well, in real -- that's new. I mean, you know, welcome to technology. The ability to actually track a mission in real time inside the West Wing of the White House in the Situation Room is new.

We often would have -- that raid on that bin Laden compound, obviously the tension associated with that and the risk is much higher. But we would have counterterrorism operations where we were working with partners around the world and I and others from the interagency would be collating and assembling information, but it was nowhere near real time.

We would very carefully watch the searches and what was coming out of the searches, the arrests and what we were learning from individuals who had been taken into custody, but it wasn't like that. That would happen over a period of several hours or an hour. I would collate that information and take it to the president.

But this is really extraordinary where she describes their ability to have real time communications, at least -- and she makes the distinction. She says once they go into the house, they're not real time. They're waiting then for feedback to come back out about what's happened, and they learn that the SEALs believe they have killed bin Laden. She talks about the tension of waiting for that to be confirmed.

MALVEAUX: And what do you think? What does her account tell us about the difficulty, the complexity of that mission, to actually capture and kill bin Laden?

TOWNSEND: Look, she makes the point that they are going -- although they had planned for all these contingencies, there were real risks associated with it. I mean, if this mission -- I think few Americans really appreciate -- the SEALs have done thousands of these kinds of missions before, they actually executed the bin Laden raid. There are always the possibility that the SEALs going in to execute that mission will not come back.

And the notion of the cabinet and the president sitting there real time with that being a possibility really tells us a lot about the risks and the tension, the stress involved on the decision makers who were going to have to contend in real time if it had gone badly.

And so, I think it's a real testament that she shared that information at Annapolis.

MALVEAUX: And what is it -- typically, how many people are a part of that inner circle? We see those pictures inside the Situation Room, but who has access to those moments as they happen?

TOWNSEND: It is but a handful of people. I think she tries to make that point. You've got the secretary of state and the secretary of defense. You'll likely also have -- well, Leon Panetta, who is the director of CIA at the time, was not in the room. He was watching his operation from his command center at Langley.

But you'll have the CIA, the DNI, the homeland security secretary if she's got a role to play. But it's only those whose direct authorities are really implicated on -- the director of the NCTC, the National Counterterrorism Center was in the room. So, it's only people who have a direct responsibility and the execution and planning their mission.

Fran, was it possible when you -- during these delicate missions, that that could have been compromised, that someone could have eavesdropped on that transition?

TOWNSEND: Well, you know, anything is possible but they use encrypted, coded communications so I think it's unlikely.

The one thing she did say which I found fascinating is that when she became secretary of state, her first meeting, she sort of confronted the Pakistanis that someone in the Pakistani government had to have known where bin Laden was, and when they get the lead information that leads to this raid that does place him inside Pakistan, in her remarks she never comes back to that.

But it's clear she shared the sentiment, if you will, that Leon Panetta has expressed publicly that someone in the Pakistan government had to have been aware of this. And I think that's pretty telling.

MALVEAUX: All right. Fran Townsend, thank you so much. I mean, it's just a fascinating story. New details coming out by Secretary Clinton today and obviously, Fran taking us through some of those details and what this means. It is a new time, a new era in technology and communications, and real time going after the terrorists, the bad guys.

Thank you, Fran.

TOWNSEND: Thanks.

MALVEAUX: Here is a rundown of some of the stories we're covering.

First, a massive quake hits off the coast of Indonesia. We're going to take a look at the fallout.

Also, hope now fading for peace in Syria. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says Russia is standing in the way of American action.

Then, Rick Santorum out of the race. But will he throw his political weight behind Mitt Romney?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: Two massive earthquakes and terrifying tsunami warnings for the people of Indonesia. Frightened people ran outside far away from the buildings when the first quake hit with the magnitude of 8.6. The second earthquake shook the island, people braced for a tsunami with thankfully never happened.

Two guys here with me now, Chad Myers at the CNN weather center, and Michael Holmes from CNN international, to talk about what happened here.

Chad, first of all, what did we see? What did they experience?

CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: An 8.6, very, very large. Now, significantly smaller than the 9.1 in 2004. Five times less energy put out with this earthquake than with the other one.

But let me show you why there was not a massive -- with an 8.6 mega thrust, there would have been a significant tsunami. It didn't happen today because it wasn't a thrusting fault, two box of wood, two 4x4s. I just painted this one.

We have today -- two plates that slipped -- it's called a strike slip. You don't get what we had in 2004 where this plate went up, a mega thrust. It went up meters, like maybe tens of meters in some spots. That pushed up all the water when it went up.

This is kind of basic geometry. But when it pushed up the water, the matter made a bubble, the bubble had to go out and that bubble made the --

MALVEAUX: How was it different than 2004, when there was just an absolute disaster?

MYERS: Well, because you don't have any dirt or land or sea floor going up like we did, the only have it going sideways, there wasn't the displacement of the land. The sea floor did not rise significantly and, therefore, the bubble did not get generated whatsoever.

MALVEAUX: And is it a part of the world that is particularly vulnerable to this type of thing happening?

MYERS: Oh, sure. Oh, yes. This is ring of fire and ring of fire for a reason. It was big.

And there are earthquakes all around this region, all the way around, all the way around. Back here around the other side as well and that's part of America over there where we have the earthquakes and all the way down even to South America down toward Peru.

So, the 8.6 today, a little bit further from the coast than the one we had, what, 12 years ago almost now. Banda Aceh, about 1.2 foot wave, about 3.5 foot wave. The thing is the shaking didn't occur so much.

This is the shake map. In 2004, it was violent shaking. Today, it was only moderate shaking. Buildings literally didn't fall down because the shaking today.

It was significantly farther away. It was a little bit less deep but the problem was one piece of land in 2004 went significantly up making the bubble. Today the land just shifted in two different directions with nothing getting higher.

MALVEAUX: Michael, tell me about that time, 2004, because that was an incredible story and so many people lost their lives in Indonesia.

MICHAEL HOLMES, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Yes. Well, in 14 different countries actually. Indonesia was the worst hit though. It had nearly three-quarters of the deaths, but you're talking about 240,000 people killed -- 240,000, think of that. I remember this so clearly -- as Chad was saying, 9.1.

Now, Aceh was the most badly affected, and this is Phuket, which is a tourist area, of course, in Thailand. But Aceh was the worst affected.

You know, you had -- that was biggest, put it this way, it was the biggest earthquake that happen in the Indian Ocean area in that part of the ocean in 700 years.

MALVEAUX: What has changed since then?

HOLMES: A lot has changed. You've got -- the biggest change let's talk about is the early warning system that's now being put in. When this happened in 2004, the first people knew about it was when the waters went out and that precipitated the wave coming in.

Millions and millions and millions of dollars have been spent putting in new infrastructure in Aceh, these new roads, new buildings. Indonesia, unlike some of the other countries, opened up the doors to international aid, and that has really helped.

The place has not just been rebuilt. People seem happier there now than they were before. One of the reasons for that is that there had been a 30-year civil war going on there, rebels in Aceh wanted independence.

MALVEAUX: Right.

HOLMES: And this basically -- when this all happened in Aceh, everyone just lost the will to fight. Eight months later, they did a peace deal. There's now peace there.

Aceh has really come back. There's tourism. The locals there who lived a basic life, have some Wi-Fi now. It's a real success story in Aceh and Indonesia.

But the biggest change is the early warning system that's in now. I'm sure Chad has been talking about that as well during the day, where they now know before it comes, and they don't just see the water go out and that's the first sign.

MALVEAUX: Chad, how important is that? I mean, this seems to be a community and country of people who are much more prepared for the worst.

MYERS: And these are called dart buoys, D-A-R-T buoys. You can look them up. They are phenomenal.

hey can tell whether the ocean has gone up one inch or not. It's by the pressure of the ocean below the sensor at the ocean floor. They know how heavy the water should be. If that ocean goes up one inch, they know it's heavier than it should be, so wave was generated. It goes up a foot, a big wave was generated. That whole one foot that's taken onshore and becomes a giant tsunami as that water rushes on land.

HOLMES: They're very cool, too. You have got sensors on the ground, sonometers (ph) or something they called, and they will send the information on the ground shift to the buoys which are on the ocean, floating on the ocean, which send it to a satellite, which then sends it down to stations in the U.S. and elsewhere.

There's a whole system of text messages even can be sent out. It's tragic though it wasn't there before because these things have been around for a while. It took this for that to happen in that part of the coastline. There's plenty of others on our oceans.

MALVEAUX: And it's good people have that kind of information, despite the fact that it might be a false alarm. They might get nervous. They might afraid. It might not be the kind of thing that is a disaster, but at least they know.

HOLMES: Yes, exactly.

MALVEAUX: At least they can go ahead and get prepared.

MYERS: It's not like a tornado warning. Not every tornado warning is going to create a tornado, but at least if you're prepared and you're in your house, you can be safer than you would have been. It's getting the information to the people.

MALVEAUX: All right. Chad, Michael, thank you. Good to have you both.

MYERS: Good to see you.

(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)

MALVEAUX: Peace in Syria starting to look like a pipe dream. Secretary Clinton says the situation there is now deteriorating. We're going to get a live report about what it means for people living in what is quickly becoming a war zone.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: Bricks and twisted metal littered the streets while smoke was rising from burnout buildings. These are just some of the scenes of destruction in Syria.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, she is putting blame now on the Syrian government for the bloody crackdown that shows no signs of ending.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLINTON: Despite Assad's commitment to abide by the six-point plan that Kofi Annan presented, he has failed to do so and, in fact, the violence is even increasing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: Nic Robertson is in London.

Nic, good to see you. Secretary Clinton saying that the Assad regime has ignored this Tuesday deadline to pull back. Now, you've got this ceasefire planned set for tomorrow.

Is there any reason to believe that the Syrian government is actually going to abide by that and cooperate?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: You know, it's hard to take the Syrians at their word. Apparently, they gave their word to Kofi Annan earlier on the week or last week, that they would abide by pulling back their troops. That hasn't happened. In that period since Kofi Annan began to work on this peace plan, 1,000 people have been killed.

But late this afternoon in Geneva, which is where Kofi Annan is now, his spokesman said he received guarantees from the Syrian foreign minister saying that the Syrians will go on a cease-fire at 6:00 a.m. Thursday morning local time in Syria.

And the Syrian military has been on television in Syria saying that they now control all the territory in the country, that they have completed their operation, and they will go on this ceasefire but remain -- retain the right to strike back at what they call terrorists if those terrorists, as they say, attack the civilian population.

So, it is beginning to look like there is a potential here for the cease-fire to begin tomorrow morning. But the reality is 1,000 people killed. If Assad was serious up until now, that wouldn't have happened, Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: And, Nic, we also heard from Secretary Clinton warning about a potential civil war. Are you seeing signs there that that is already starting to happen?

ROBERTSON: So the many people have been killed, 9,000 by U.N. estimates so far in the past year. If just a tiny fraction of that number were killed, that would have created a huge amount of anger.

What the Syrian government, Bashar al Assad has done, is generated a huge amount of anger against him and the regime. It's hard to see how people are going to bottle all that up, agree to a cease-fire, and move ahead on his terms because that is what he wants to do -- is move ahead on his terms, stay in power until 2014, and that -- what that effectively means is the conditions are set for the potential for a civil war here.

MALVEAUX: Nic, neither side trusts each other, but they're both being required to put down their weapons.

Which side is more likely to abide by this agreement here? I mean, they're both turning to the other and saying, you know, I'm not going to put mine down until you put yours down.

ROBERTSON: This is always the situation. I mean, we've even had the Syrian government demanding that the Free Syrian Army turn over their weapons.

That never happens in a cease-fire, particularly in this type of insurgency. You will never get the other side to hand over their weapons.

It seems that certainly the heavy forces are on the side of Bashar al Assad. The government, his heavy weapons still remain in many of the cities. Videos coming out of Syria show tanks not withdrawing from those cities in Hama for example, just the tanks hiding behind sand berms.

It seems inevitable there will be a breakdown in any ceasefire that may happen. What may trigger it? The government here trying to portray the opposition, the Free Syrian Army, as terrorists -- as they have continued to try to do.

Whatever happens at 6:00 a.m. tomorrow morning, it seems unlikely that the last bullet will be fired in the minutes before, that there will be more to come, Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: All right. Nic, we'll be watching. Thank you very much.

It is game on now for the general election, but does Mitt Romney really have the Republicans behind him? The threats continue from his Republican rivals and the party base. Are they going to rally to support him? We're going to ask our political round table.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: Here is a rundown of some of the stories we are working on:

Next, it looks like Mitt Romney may finally be done fighting off his Republican rivals. But will the base get behind him?

Then, for the international community it is a slap in the face. North Korea fueling up a rocket.

And later, going to get some hard core workout tips from one of America's most popular personal trainers. Want you to stick around for my interview with Dolvett Quince from "The Biggest Loser."

All right. You can almost hear Mitt Romney breathing a sigh of relief today. Rick Santorum's exit from the presidential race gives Romney a clear path to winning the Republican nomination, but can he win over the social conservatives?

Joining us to talk about the race moving forward, Democratic strategist Estuardo Rodriguez and Republican strategist Lenny McAllister.

So, good to see you both.

Social conservative groups not exactly lining up to support Romney. I want you to listen to Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TONY PERKINS, FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL: If Mitt Romney wants to capture some of that support that Rick Santorum gained with very little money, based solely upon his message, then Mitt Romney needs to pick up that message. Not just when he's asked in debates or cornered by a reporter to say, "Yes, I'm pro-life," or, "Yes, I support marriage," but intertwined that in his message.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: Lenny, how does he do it? How does he manage to get the Santorum supporters and the social conservatives?

LENNY MCALLISTER, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: It's very simple. Remind them that he's running against President Barack Obama and he is the only person that can beat him in November. He's going to be the nominee.

He doesn't need to be as much as social conservatives want him to do now that it looks as though he's definitely going to be the nominee. With Santorum backing out, there is no anti-Romney. It is just Mitt Romney.

And the social conservatives are going to coalesce around him. They may do it in a lukewarm fashion, but they will do it. If we thought that they did not as much as we thought they might in 2008, they're definitely going to do it after one presidential term from President Obama. He will speak to them. He will do some kind of olive branching out to them.

But for the most part, he's going to stick to the economy. He's going to make sure he has that base coming around when he needs them. He's not going to do that much but he will have their support going into the fall.

MALVEAUX: Estuardo, it's not likely that President Obama is going to be able to capture those social conservatives. But clearly here, it does look like he has some sort of advantage he can capitalize off of the fact that the Republicans aren't all lockstep behind Mitt Romney. What does the president need to do?

ESTUARDO RODRIGUEZ, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, you know, I have to just quickly say I think Lenny is 100 percent right. Romney not only doesn't have to do as much to attract the conservative voters.

It's simply because he's it and the challenge that Romney's going to have really is to avoid having to confront his moderate record of governor of Massachusetts, avoid having to address the fact that he has been more moderate than most conservatives want.

That's the big fight that he's had throughout the primaries. I'm sure that when Santorum announced yesterday that he was moving on and dropping out, there was a huge sigh of devastation from the true conservatives out there who are now left to confront the fact that this is it.

You either get behind him and go out and vote, or you sit it out. So I think --

MALVEAUX: There is this enthusiasm gap here that they are going to have to deal with, and Lenny, talk about that a little bit because how is he going to drum up that type of support here?

It really is going to come down to who comes out and votes here. It does look like the president is starting to kind of rile up his base and get people excited again.

MCALLISTER: The president is riling up his base, this war on women, the strategy with that, contraception issue. That has gotten the progressive base engaged with President Obama, but one thing that Mitt Romney does have to his side is time.

It's still early April. If he can crescendo this up and start building a head of steam in August, get a good vice presidential candidate that he's going to put into that slot that will keep that base going and invigorated and then do well in the debates.

He wants to have momentum going in the right direction. He was able to get that coming out of Michigan barely winning, being able to do well on Super Tuesday. Now seeing Rick Santorum leave before Pennsylvania.

If he can continue momentum going from April to now, he has six months. If he takes a methodical approach, kind of like what he's done with this primary process, not get caught up in the infatuation with Herman Cain and Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann and even Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich. He was methodical, if he could stay that way, he'll be OK.

MALVEAUX: All right, let's talk about what builds on the momentum here and that's clearly the money. Mitt Romney, he actually planned to spend more than $2 million on ads in Pennsylvania before Santorum dropped out.

We have President Obama who it was just yesterday three fundraisers raking in $1.75 million there, and that's not even to mention the "Super PAC" money.

Estuardo, talk a little bit about whether or not we think this is going to turn into a negative and nasty campaign because you have those kind of dollars out there.

RODRIGUEZ: Exactly. I mean, what we saw Mitt Romney outspending his primary opponents five to one and with the efficiency that he was able to destroy any momentum that Santorum or Newt Gingrich had at any point throughout those primaries. We're going to see that doubled, if not tripled, because not only do we have to look at the Romney affiliated "Super PAC," but Karl Rove's crossroads. They have already come out and said we have $1.7 million and we're starting today if not yesterday.

So you can bet right now that this is just going to -- what we saw in the primaries was just a hint of what we're going to see when now we enter the one-on-one, and Romney is going to definitely benefit from all that money that's coming in.

MALVEAUX: We saw the Obama campaign issuing this pretty scathing statement here about Romney after Santorum dropped out of the race. They said, here's the quote, "It's no surprise that Mitt Romney finally was able to grind down his opponents under the avalanche of negative ads, but neither he nor his special interest allies will be able to buy the presidency with their negative ads, their negative attacks."

Essentially saying bring it on here, Lenny. They are ready to fight Romney. How does he actually counter the fact that he does have a lot of money and he's seen as being very much an elitist?

MCALLISTER: Well, he has that image, but President Obama has the incumbency and he has a pretty darn big war chest himself. When you look at this, one of the things that President Obama is going to have to look at that Mitt Romney will not necessarily have to deal with is the fact that President Obama had the knight in shining armor, the white horse type of campaign in 2008.

He's going to probably run a more negative campaign in 2012. He has a record he has to defend and he will have to throw a lot more mud at Mitt Romney with all the big money that's coming into it and that's going to harm the president's image as well.

So if they both get into the mud, it's not as though that Romney will lose out and President Obama will have this clear advantage. It's going to hurt President Obama's image as well and unfortunately, this is what American politics have devolved into.

RODRIGUEZ: I have to just add, I don't think it's a matter of Obama throwing any mud here. I think what Romney is going to try to do is avoid everything he's already been campaigning on to get the Republican nomination.

And that is extreme conservative positions, and he's going to try to run away from that and the president merely has to state you can't etch-a-sketch your way through only the primaries, but also --

MALVEAUX: You brought back the etch-a-sketch line.

RODRIGUEZ: I'm sorry, I had to.

MCALLISTER: We don't want to get into activism here.

MALVEAUX: We have to leave it there. All right, Estuardo, Lenny, good to see you both. We'll pick this up later. So now Mitt Romney looking more like the Republican nominee. He's also becoming number one target of late night comedians. Here is Conan O'Brien.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CONAN O'BRIEN, COMEDIAN: In financial news, the Dow Jones is down for the fifth day in a row. Yes. When asked for comment, GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney said, don't worry, America, all my money is in Switzerland.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: This guy ending violence one snack at a time. Armed with only a bag of chips, he steps in and stops a fight.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: A man on a New York subway is being called a hero. What did he do? He stops a fight simply by standing and snacking on potato chips. I'm not kidding. Jeanne Moos, she has more on this guy known as "Snackman."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEANNE MOOS, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In other places, citizens may dress up like Batman or a kid might save the day by taking over the wheel when a bus driver becomes incapacitated, but in New York City, we have "Snackman." That's right, "Snackman" to the rescue. Man breaks up subway fight by fearlessly eating potato chips.

A man and woman were fighting on the subway. She said he'd been following her. Enter "Snackman."

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Put his hand up, inserted himself, continues to eat his chips.

MOOS: Security expert Steve Kardian was impressed and New Yorkers were smiting giving "Snackman" a red cape and all "Snackman" did was masticate.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He changed the dynamic and he deescalated the incident.

MOOS: Steve Kardian says most people don't really want to fight if they have an excuse to disengage.

STEVE KARDIAN, SELF DEFENSE EXPERT: It's like kind of the kid that come on, I'm going to beat you up, and Johnny, come home. I would have to beat you up if my mother didn't call me.

MOOS: The only thing he said snack man did wrong was leave himself vulnerable by completely turning his back to the guy. New Yorkers appreciate a cool cucumber like the man with a book who refused to be drawn into a fight after he accidentally bumped the guy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. That's cool.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Look in my -- eyes. Remember that -- name because you ain't going to never --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm writing it down.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Write that ASAP.

MOOS: But "Snackman" was so cool one fan posted that guy for president. His potato chip plan will bring peace to the Middle East.

(on camera): Soon the speculation turned to which snack "Snackman" was snacking on.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a bird.

MOOS: It's Doritos.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's a plane.

MOOS: It's Pringles.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's Superman.

MOOS (voice-over): The chipped crusader, the web site NYU local tracked down "Snackman" and identified him as Charles Saunder on his way uptown to have drinks chopping on cheddar Pringles. He said he had to do something. As someone posted, saving the world one snack at a time. Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MALVEAUX: North Korean rocket is being fuelled right now. The controversial launch could be just hours away. The U.S. wants the North Koreans to call it off, but we have a report from the Pentagon on how this launch may actually help U.S. intelligence.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: The North Koreans say their rocket is a go for launch. This is a rocket, this is the launch pad. We are just waiting to see if the North Koreans are actually going to go through with sending it up.

The United States doesn't want it to launch, same for the South Koreans and Japan. They all believe that North Korea is testing a weapon.

Barbara Starr, she's at the Pentagon. And, Barbara, U.S. military leaders certainly I imagine playing very close attention to this potential launch, which could happen at any moment. What are they watching for?

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, Suzanne, all eyes on it right now. They want to know exactly what the North Koreans are up to. The North Koreans are saying this is a rocket and they will use it to launch a satellite to monitor the earth. All very peaceful, scientific research purposes. But the U.S. believes this is the same missile technology that would be used in a long-range missile that some day could attack the United States.

So they -- first, they want to know exactly what this technology is all about. They are going to monitor this launch if it happens and get whatever electronic data they can. How far does it fly? How reliable is it? How does the fuel burn? How does it operate as it moves through the atmosphere? That's what they want to know because if North Korea has some success in this, the big intelligence question is going to be, who's been helping them? Who got them to this point? All of their previous launches have run into trouble.

MALVEAUX: And, Barbara, how does the Pentagon actually keep an eye on this launch?

STARR: Well, that's a good question -- you know, that's a really good question. Some of the nation's most classified technology will be deployed, is already in the region to look at this, a series of radars, U.S. Navy warships that are in the region with their radars patrolling, aircraft and, of course, spy satellites overhead monitoring the site. Even though reporters are on the ground looking at it at the invitation of North Koreans, there will be spy satellites gathering up, scooping up all that electronic data once the launch happens to try and answer some of those questions we talked about.

MALVEAUX: What is the worst case scenario here? If this rocket goes up, it is a weapon, flies in a different direction than expected, what can actually be done once it's in the sky?

STARR: Well, at this point -- pardon me. At this point they're not really classifying it as a weapon. They are taking the North Koreans sort of at their word right now that there's a satellite on it. Some day they could put a warhead on it and turn it into an outright weapon. But it is weapons technology.

It will fly, the North Koreans say, in a southerly direction towards Japan, the Philippines, and, of course, South Korea. So the question is, once it launches, will its various stages, its various elements drop into the sea off the coast of all those Asia countries, as the North Koreans say, or could it go astray and could some of that debris fall over land? That will be a very significant problem.

MALVEAUX: All right, Barbara Starr. Thank you, Barbara. Appreciate it.

STARR: Sure.

MALVEAUX: Put out the dog, let in the cat, feed the chickens? Well, that's right, urban farming is sweeping the nation. We're going to tell you how to start a farm in your own backyard.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) MALVEAUX: All right, you don't often hear rooster's cock-a-doodle doing in the middle of the big city neighborhoods, but it is actually happening across the country more and more. It's called urban chicken farming. Fredricka Whitfield checked out one in Atlanta.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In Saunders (ph) case, she's created an organic oasis, bringing the countryside to her in-town hideaway. A real scramble of all that she loves.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And this is a Sussex. She's a British bird. And she's a Barred Rock.

WHITFIELD (on camera): I mean, as varied as their feathers are, the color of the eggs are different, too.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They're different as well.

WHITFIELD: And are the flavors any different?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No.

WHITFIELD: Oh, my goodness.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You know when you go to the --

WHITFIELD: So it's Easter all the time here.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Right. It is. It is.

WHITFIELD (voice-over): She's driven more by her passion for pets than appetite for fresh eggs, although, she says, once you taste farm fresh, you'll never want anything else.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: To me it tastes like there's a watered down egg that you get at the grocery store or a really deep, rich flavorful egg that your, you know, backyard hens will lay for you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MALVEAUX: CNN Eatocracy editor Kat Kinsman, she's joining us with all the tasty details.

Kat, I know of one person on our team, this is very popular, and he likes to do this urban chicken farming. Is this a big deal?: Are more and more people getting involved in this now?

KAT KINSMAN, EDITOR, CNN EATOCRACY: If there is an empty rooftop or a little bit of grass available, somebody is trying to figure out a way to house a chicken on it. So there -- no, this -- urban chicken farming isn't anything new, but it's coming more into prominence.

Now there's established chicken culture in say Atlanta and Austin and a lot of places around the country, but it's becoming more and more evidenced online. There's so much more help available. You can go to somewhere like backyardchickens.com. There are 128,000 registered members there who are just waiting to help you start with your backyard chicken farming.

MALVEAUX: All right.

KINSMAN: There's a great podcast by the "chicken whisper" as well.

MALVEAUX: Kat, I've got to ask you this because -- why are folks interested in having chickens in the backyard? Why not just go to the store? I mean what are the benefits of this?

KINSMAN: Well, first of all, if you have ever tasted a freshly laid egg, there is nothing in the world like that. It's creamy. It's delicious. It's just nothing like the supermarket chickens you can ever have -- you've ever had before.

Now, secondly, in 2010, when the salmonella crisis happened with eggs, people took a lot closer look at how their chickens were being raised, and they found some really uncomfortable facts that chickens were being raised in battery cages, which were barely big enough to contain them and that they were being kept in fairly unsanitary, really upsetting conditions that led to salmonella, to sort of other conditions that were very unhealthy and even deadly to the people consuming the eggs. If you raise a chicken yourself, you know exactly what that chicken has been eating and that it's had a really happy life. And you can, indeed, have a happy chicken. They have -- they make a great pet. They have individual personalities. I've met a few and they're distinctive.

MALVEAUX: OK. Really? So you've got the happy chicken. Do you have the happy neighbors who are listening to this saying perhaps at the break of dawn, cock-a-doodle doing? I mean how does that work in a city environment?

KINSMAN: Well, one of the great misconceptions is that you have to have a rooster to have eggs. You do not. Chickens will just produce eggs on their own. So they're not -- you know, they're necessarily super quiet. But I was woken up by a jackhammer this morning, so I have nothing to complain about.

There is a cost associated with it. And you have to make sure that you have the space available. There also is -- as I said, they're lovely creatures and you get attached to them. And they have a fairly long life span. Once they go into, as they call it, henopause, you have to face the fact, do you want to support this creature who is no longer producing eggs or are you going to, frankly, eat your pet? And it's a decision that not everybody is willing to deal with. There are also a lot of local zoning laws.

MALVEAUX: And you said too that in your article, your Eatocracy article, that the chickens have different personalities, like cats and dogs. Is that really true?

KINSMAN: They really do. I spent time on Buggy Creek Farm in Austin, Texas, and met a little chicken named Toesy (ph) who changed my life forever. She's got fans. She's got a fan club. She's got tote bags about her. She's really an absolutely adorable creature. And they can be really loving if you give them a chance to sort of know them on a one-by-one -- on a one-by-one basis.

MALVEAUX: Who knew.

KINSMAN: And I always say rabbits can, too.

MALVEAUX: All right, who knew, Kat. I'm just learning so much today. I had no idea chickens had personalities. Thank you very much. It's good to talk about it. Very interesting. Interesting trend happening. Thanks, Kat.

KINSMAN: Thanks for having me.

MALVEAUX: Could be help on the way for people struggling to pay off their mortgages. We're going to tell you what it could mean for your monthly payment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: Some of the 30 million homeowners with loans backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could get some help with their underwater mortgages. That's at least the plan the government is talking about. Felicia Taylor, she is live at the New York Stock Exchange with some of the details.

Do we know, Felicia, it was just last week the Justice Department approved, what, $26 billion for homeowner relief with the major banks, but it didn't include Fannie and Freddie. What are we hearing now?

FELICIA TAYLOR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, it's a little complicated. I mean the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees Fannie and Freddie, says that he's considering a principle reduction plan for struggling homeowners. Fannie and Freddie service 60 percent of all mortgages in the United States. The FHFA is also charged with looking out for investors and U.S. taxpayers. It's already been determined that doing nothing will obviously lead to massive losses totaling about $100 billion.

So, do they offer forbearance, which is what it's called, and that would temporary reduce principal? Short term payments are cut down, but the borrower is still responsible for the amount of the original loan. Forgiveness, which is the other option, which would be permanent but more costly. Estimates show an additional $3 billion loss for the agency if it chooses forgiveness over forbearance.

Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: So if the new plan's approved, how many people would it actually help, do we know?

TAYLOR: Quite a few. I mean about 600,000 homeowners would be eligible for this kind of modification under the program. Those eligible include homeowners in financial hardship or those who have missed two payments in a row. Now, an agency spokesperson says that this would not be a silver bullet for the housing market. It's not going to make anything better. It has serious reservations about this though. And one of the worries is that homeowners who are under water but are actually current on paying their loans will start skipping payments on purpose in order to, you know, meet that criteria of missing two payments in a row in order to become eligible for the principal reduction. The FHFA says that currently more than 2 million Fannie and Freddie mortgages are underwater, but yet the homeowner remains current on loan payments, so what's the incentive to incite this program?

MALVEAUX: Right. So why not offer relief to people who pay it on time?

TAYLOR: Huh, such a good question. Sounds really nice. Get more people out from under their loans before they get into trouble. Wouldn't that be great? Putting a little more --

MALVEAUX: Yes.

TAYLOR: Exactly. I mean that makes -- just makes sense. And putting a little bit more money in people's pockets every single month. But the FHFA is just kind of against it. The director says borrowers, quote, "demonstrating a continued willingness to meet their mortgage obligations should be recognized and encouraged, not dampened with incentives to not continue paying."

Also it says that it would add to the overall taxpayer burden, which is obviously massive when it comes to Fannie and Freddie. So it's complicated. There's no easy solution on this one.

MALVEAUX: All right, Felicia, thanks. Good to see you.