Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Airport Shooting Witness Tells His Story; Letter: TSA Officers Overstepping Bounds; Running a White House, Advising a President; A President and Oval Office Loyalists; Challenging Nuclear Stereotypes; Tech Giants Outraged at Snooping Report

Aired November 03, 2013 - 19:00   ET

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

DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. Don Lemon here in the CNN NEWSROOM. Thank you so much for joining us.

We are watching a situation right now in Birmingham, Alabama. Not sure yet how serious it is or if there is -- this is just out of an abundance of caution. But the international airport there is under a security alert now. And at least one terminal has been evacuated -- this at Birmingham-Shuttlesworth International Airport northeast of downtown Birmingham.

Here is what we know right now, now that much though airport security and police officers say they are responding to a threat they received about 4:00 p.m. local time about two hours ago. One terminal was evacuated.

Now we're closely watching what's happening in Birmingham. We're going to update you as soon as we know something. Of course we're going to be watching it closely because of what happened at Los Angeles International Airport last week.

New details are emerging tonight on the Los Angeles airport shooting. Prosecutors say the shooter fired at point blank range at TSA Officer Gerardo Hernandez, who crumbled to the floor. The suspect then walked away he rode the escalator up and then turned around and saw a bloody Hernandez squirming on the floor. Prosecutors say the shooter came back and shot Hernandez, again killing him. The FBI says five people were shot at the airport including the suspected gunman Paul Ciancia who is in critical condition.

Two other TSA officers were wounded and treated at hospitals and released; 29-year-old high school teacher Brian Ludmer is in fair condition. He was shot in the leg.

CNN's Stephanie Elam is live outside Los Angeles International Airport for us. Stephanie you spoke a little bit earlier with the passenger who witnessed the shooting. Horrific what he witnessed but what did he say to you?

STEPHANIE ELAM, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Very much so, Don. He was back here at the airport today to pick up the bags that he and his son and wife deserted as everything was going down. They heard the first fire shots they hit the ground and then there was a pause. And now, this gentleman I spoke to, he believes that's when he ran -- the shooter ran up the stairs and then went back to shoot that TSA agent. This is what he said he saw from his perspective.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT GREENE, WITNESSED SHOOTING: We were up in security at the time of the shooting. And we heard the initial gunshots. And everybody in security hit the ground. A lot of folks were scrambling forward. So I scrambled forward also.

And there was a pause. And so I looked down the escalator. And I saw the gunman. He had his gun trained on the wall there and he shot him twice. So I was kind of knelt down. And he ran up the escalator and I saw him up the escalator. He yelled something. Then after that, I hit the ground --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ELAM: He said it was just terrifying. And his family, they got separated. They reunited hours later after walking back to where they parked their car. And luckily they all had their cell phones so they were able to contact each other.

The other thing I want to be able to tell you here now, Don, is that we now have the two other names of the other two TSA agents that were also wounded. Their names are James Speer, he's 54 years old; and Tony Grigsby 36. Both of those agents were also shot during this incident. And both are said to be at home and recovering from their wounds. So a little bit of good news there that these two gentlemen have made it home -- Don.

LEMON: So Steph, you were there not long after the shooting. You were there this weekend have you noticed any changes in security? What kind of security changes are they expected to make at the airport now that it is fully operational?

ELAM: It means -- it definitely feels like a normal day from out here. On Friday when I got here it was actually my day off until I came running in and I was walking on foot to get here. I got stopped over and over again to see my ID to make sure I could pass.

They are not playing around out here now. The presence is much heavier than it normal is, even though it's usually pretty heavy. They're also looking at ways that they can redo their protocol about how they handle these kinds of incidents. But overall if you come here now you definitely can feel the police presence -- Don.

LEMON: All right Stephanie Elam at LAX, appreciate that.

This just in -- a scathing 2012 letter is sent to the TSA Chief John Pistole from airport police officials raised major concerns about airport security around the country. The letter claims some TSA agents are overstepping their bounds and putting passenger security at risk. The letter appears to argue against repositioning of airport officers away from TSA check points.

Remember, we told you yesterday, that LAX Airport chief -- LAX airport police excuse me were repositioned last year away from TSA checkpoints to monitor larger areas.

Here is part of the letter from airport police crews. All right so go with me. It says "A current statute requires that a law enforcement officer be able to provide prompt responsiveness to problems occurring at the screening check points. The definition of prompt has been interpreted broadly. A uniformed standard should be applied to all Category X airports which would examine a law enforcement officer within 300 feet of the passenger screening area."

So joining me now on the phone to talk about this letter is one of the letter's authors, Marshall McClain. He is the president of the LA Airport Peace Officers Association. Mr. McClain we appreciate you joining us. Were you involved in any effort to move airport police away from TSA checkpoints at LAX?

MARSHALL MCCLAIN, PRESIDENT, L.A. AIRPORT CHIEF OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (via telephone): Don, good evening, thank you for having me. Let me explain that -- that letter is from an affiliation of sorts. Three airport police associations on the West Coast middle of America at Dallas Fort Worth Airport and New York, New Jersey Port Authority.

So we wanted to add a standardized plaque just across the nation on how security profiles would be throughout the airports. Because what we're doing at LAX is not the same that New York's doing and not the same that DFW is doing.

So we wanted to ensure that we always have the correct amount of staffing available to end or anything that came our way. And what that letter addresses, is some of the different inconsistencies in allowing the TSA federal security directors at every individual airports or even Pistole himself to make different changes like the one about having knives going on the plane without having local law enforcement -- without being able to push back like they should.

LEMON: Ok.

MCCLAIN: So to answer your question about our officers, doing the roving checkpoints, clearly it works because they were there within 60 seconds. It's more of a broader statement about nationwide how things are addressed. At JFK or LaGuardia, you wouldn't have anything there. There may be one officer and terminal for the entire terminal.

LEMON: Ok so my question was, were you involved with any of the changes at LAX to reposition officers there?

MCCLAIN: Not in that matter, no.

LEMON: Ok do you think Friday's shooting would have turned out differently if an airport officer was within 300 feet of the TSA check point.

MCCLAIN: I don't believe having an officer where -- the way our position -- I tell you in just positioned currently, I don't believe that officer would have made a difference in that -- the outcome of the TSA -- employee being killed.

LEMON: Ok.

MCCLAIN: Because where he was shot -- where he was shot and where the podium was placed, you wouldn't even have been able to have the vantage point to see that.

LEMON: Ok.

MCCLAIN: Does that make sense?

LEMON: Yes, because --

(CROSSTALK)

MCCLAIN: Where he was shot is at the bottom of the stairs --

LEMON: Right.

MCCLAIN: So some of the -- some of the changes that we wanted to have in place was to better fortify the screening post, fortify where the officer is positioned and actually have them at an elevated position where they could see down and see people coming up before they got up on the screening station.

LEMON: Right. So if the video that when you were talking, it was perfect before because when you enter LAX, you go to the curb, and almost immediately someone checks your boarding pass to make sure have you it. And then almost immediately you go up the escalator, up the steps and then security is right there. Right? So that he was at the top of the stairs, is that what you're saying?

MCCLAIN: The TSA employee was at the bottom of the stairs.

LEMON: Was at the bottom of the stairs ok.

MCCLAIN: So from where the screening station is, it's actually back a few ways, probably about, I don't know, ten yards or so from the stairs.

LEMON: Right.

MCCLAIN: So if you are at the rear of the screening station, you can't see to the bottom of the stairs.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: Ok. I want to read something from you. This is TSA's response. I want to get your reaction ok. Here is what they say. "Each airport authority along with its state and local law enforcement partners is responsible for securing airport property. Commercial airports in the United States are required to have an approved airport security program -- ASP. These plans are written and drafted by each local airport authority and approved by the TSA. It is up to each airport authority and their state and local law enforcement partners to follow the plan that has been implemented."

And so that was a response to a question that we had. What do you make of their response?

MCCLAIN: Well first I'd like to say I'm glad to finally get an actual approved response from Mr. Pistole because we met with him a year ago about these concerns and he was pretty dismissive about them. And as far as every local law enforcement agency having a say in the security profile that is correct but when you have -- when you don't have an industry standard that the TSA can say, "Hey look we're -- we're going to change this and you guys either -- either take it or leave it, but we're changing it." That kind of the mode, I mean for the example in the (inaudible) you have to have a complete national outcry, just to get the Administrator Pistole to back away from him.

LEMON: Yes.

MCCLAIN: He was -- he was adamant that it was going to happen because he is over at D.C. and he believed that was definitely is going to be a (inaudible) --

LEMON: Yes.

MCCLAIN: So when you are -- when you are taking away and the letter talking about addressing issues about cooperation that stand in your lanes and you have what they call cipher (ph) detail where they've taken the air marshal bringing him on the ground and they are showing up at different local airports saying that they are augmenting airport police when they actually have no authority to enforce any state or local law.

LEMON: Yes.

MCCLAIN: So what we're trying to do is say, how about augment airport police with airport police.

LEMON: Yes.

MCCLAIN: Whatever it ought to be a local municipality that does it, airport police department that does it, a sheriff's department that does it, these are the trained professionals that are the experts at the airport.

LEMON: Ok.

MCCLAIN: Not TSA agent, not air marshals.

LEMON: Ok producers, I know you want me to move on but this is important stuff. So we'll just have to kill some stuff in the back half of the newscast ok.

MCCLAIN: Sure.

LEMON: So I want to ask this. There is a letter from 2012, two TSA agents were on the LAX were there any armed TSA officers at LAX on Friday?

MCCLAIN: I have no idea. There is -- I believe there is only two armed TSA agents throughout the country. But they are in upper management level positions. They are not on the ground. So why they need --

LEMON: Two?

MCCLAIN: Yes, they're up in management level positions. So I don't know why they need to be armed. And I -- I'm for guns but what their necessary need is to have those armed or to try and talk the idea of arming 54,000 TSA agents, I just don't think that's a great idea. Let's let the experts deal with it to train officers and train deputies that actually go to a police academy who are properly trained to do these things.

LEMON: Ok. Good information from you. Thank you sir. We appreciate you joining us here CNN ok.

MCCLAIN: Thank you Don, can I add one more thing?

LEMON: Absolutely.

MCCLAIN: Our hearts go out to all of the TSA agents employees that were affected on this and the passengers as well. But I just you know something that didn't get recognized, Officer Kay Sadle (ph) and Officer Dabney and even a security officer I believe, Morris, that actually provided life-saving efforts to the TSA employee. Unfortunately it did not work. If you see that video of those officers rushing the TSA employee to the RA, the rescue ambulance, they actually grabbed a smart cart, some quick thinking on their part and took his body on there and pushed him to get their track.

Unfortunately it didn't work out the way we wanted -- we couldn't save them all but I just wanted to let you know that those guys did everything possible to try to save lives.

LEMON: Marshal McClain, thank you very much. Our sentiments as well go with you. I want to say that TSA did respond to that question that we asked him and you got a response. That was an initial response and we hope to get more from them as well. They have every opportunity to respond. And again our thanks to Mr. McClain.

Now we've heard promises that it is getting better. Still the troubles with the Obamacare Web site have prompted some to say Secretary Sebelius should be shown the door.

But do moves like that absolve a sitting president to of? I'm going to ask two men who've seen the White House like the rest of us never will. Andy Card, the former chief of staff of President George W. Bush, and Mike McLarty former chief of staff -- I'm Mack McLarty sorry -- to President -- for President Clinton. And we're going to get a rare peek inside the White House. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Under fire this past week, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was grilled for hours by a congressional committee over the trouble Obamacare Web site rollout. And we've heard grumbling from several corners calling -- for her ouster. If she does take the hit for the botched rollout she would join a growing number of people under this President, who for various reasons, were shown the door, went out the door voluntarily or never made it to their appointed posts.

And as far as what's been called the second toughest job in the world, the President is now on chief of staff number five. So far, that's the most chiefs since Harry Truman. Little bit of trivia there for you.

People come and go from high-profile high-stress jobs in every administration but are some of those personnel moves ultimately designed to protect presidents from taking a political hit. We have asked some of the White House experts to talk about the comings and goings in administrations.

Thomas "Mack" McLarty served as chief of staff for President Bill Clinton; Andrew Card, better known as Andy Card is the former transportation secretary for George H.W. Bush and former chief of staff for George W. Bush; and David Gergen is a senior political analyst; he was an adviser to Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton; and in Princeton, presidential historian Julian Zelizer.

Thank you all for joining us. I ask is this a reunion of sorts for any of you?

JULIAN ZELIZER, PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: I think it will quality for that, Don.

LEMON: David Gergen used -- someone said in the break that Gergen has worked for -- it looks like every single administration so it would be a lot of reunions for him.

Let's talk now about Secretary Sebelius and one of her deputies this week, grilled on Capitol Hill, both apologizing and taking the blame for Obamacare, the Web site rollout.

Andy Card, does every White House need staffers, even cabinet secretaries willing to take the blame or resign if it helps protect the president?

ANDREW CARD, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF, GEORGE W. BUSH: I don't think they should take the blame if there's no culpability. But if they are culpable, yes, they have to step up and take responsibility.

You know, I was very troubled. The word of the President of the United States means an awful lot. You don't want to see him embellish or exaggerate. You certainly don't want him to represent a lie. And it's staffers around the president that help to keep the president's language consistent with the realities of laws and with diplomacy. And that's something that we have seen diminish over the course of the last several months maybe even more than that.

So if Secretary Sebelius allowed the President to make statements that were not a hundred percent accurate, without going out to correct them like you will be able to keep your doctor -- period. Or you'll never have to change your insurance if you like your insurance, and they didn't put any caveats on that for a very long period time. They allowed the expectations of the American people to be very high, then yes, somebody should be held accountable.

LEMON: You said something that's very important. You said "consistent with reality". Consistent with reality and Mack McLarty, we're told that President Obama didn't know the health care Web site was a mess until after it launched and that he didn't know the U.S. was spying on allied leaders like the German chancellor. I mean is "I didn't know" an acceptable defense for a sitting U.S. President?

THOMAS "MACK" MCLARTY, FORMER CLINTON WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: It may be in some cases but it's certainly not a consistent defense or consistent position. I think, Don, you really have two cross currents here. First I do think cabinet officers and White House officials are expected to take and assume full responsibility as Andy noted and to take some criticism and heat perhaps sometimes when it is not fully justified.

But I think, ultimately Harry Truman had it right. The buck stops in the Oval Office. And I think that's the way the majority of the American people look at it.

LEMON: Other presidents have certainly had to say, "I didn't know". I mean is there a time when as chief of staff, the, top aides -- whomever -- decide that a president does not need to know the details of how a policy is being carried out, David?

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, of course, that's a judgment call. And that's why chiefs of staff are so critical. They are the gate keepers not only for people coming in but also a lot of what the President is told. And that's why you need a chief of staff and Andy and Mack have both been there and done well with it, who keeps the President fully informed and keeps him you know.

Look at the famous picture of Andy Card on 9/11 whispering in George W. Bush's ear to let him know that there had been plane crash in one of the World Trade Centers. That's what a good chief of staff does.

LEMON: David, one more question for you. Supporters see President Obama as cool and collected. Critics say that he is sometimes is aloof and out of touch. He has a few -- if any -- close relationships. With anyone in Congress or in Washington really, do you think that his personality helped or hurt his presidency?

GERGEN: I think his personality has not been a good fit with the presidency, I must say. But listen, in fairness, let's put one proposition on the table. Seven presidents tried to get universal health care passed. Mack and I were there with President Clinton. Seven failed. President Obama came along. He was the first in history to get it passed.

So you have to give him credit, legislatively, for a big milestone. But the execution of that policy has been lousy. And now we learn in retrospect as Andy Card pointed out, you know, we were grossly misled as a country and the passage of that bill might have been threatened had they been straight with us about what was going to happen to as many as 10 million people who were going to lose their health care policies and were assured they would not. LEMON: Professor Zelizer, then let's talk about history. You heard what David Gergen said, that you know, we felt -- many Americans feel misled about that. How will this go down in history -- the President' legacy about leading -- or will it go down that he misled the American public when it comes to health care?

ZELIZER: I think there's two parts of it. One is just the immediate impression that what he said was not true. Or there were limits to his promises. And you can see that on health care and some of the benefits delivered and can you see that with the changes he had promised in programs like the NSA.

The second is more of a leadership question. Knowing how much political opposition he faced on health care, why wouldn't he be making sure and asking the questions that were necessary to see if this health care program would be working and why when the NSA has emerged with such a controversial topic wouldn't he be probing into who exactly we were surveilling.

So there is a bigger question of leadership that I think historians will wrestle with as we look back at this period.

LEMON: Ok, gentlemen. This is a great conversation. I want to keep it rolling.

Next, we want to talk about the influencers -- those who have the ear of the President. The ones you know about like our two chiefs of staff here and the ones you may not know about. We're going to talk about that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: We're having a fascinating conversation with some White House experts including Mack McLarty, former chief of staff for President Bill Clinton; Andrew Card was chief of staff for George W. Bush; David Gergen, a CNN senior political analyst and former advisor to Presidents Nixon, Ford, Regan and Clinton -- I mean couldn't you get one more president in there?

GERGEN: I'm trying. I'm trying. I might have one more chance. It will all come back.

LEMON: And presidential historian, Julian Zelizer in Princeton tonight. Some on Twitter said, "Well Don, I mean come on, you have all these guys. Was Rumsfeld not available?" As a matter of fact, we asked for him. Yes he was not available.

So anyway I want to ask you about real White House insiders, Valerie Jarrett is the top adviser to President Obama. She has known him since his earliest days in Chicago. She's not elected but she has a huge amount of influence.

Mr. McLarty, does every White House have people close to the President who wield a lot of power in that way, in the way that Valerie Jarrett does? MCLARTY: I think the answer is yes. I think the president or any president will have a number of influences if you will -- and I use that in an appropriate way. I think certainly the White House staff -- I do think this president has had a little bit tighter control of the White House and not used his cabinet quite as much as other presidents have.

But you've also got the First Lady is always influential with every president as Andy and David know firsthand and foreign leaders. It depends on the subject matter, Don and the decision at hand. So there's a number of people who the president will reach out to, listen to, and that's part of any president. You've got to take in that information and make the best decision possible.

And the old adage, you know, don't agree with the last person you just talked with, I think that's still very much appropriate.

LEMON: Mr. Card, you heard Mr. McLarty there saying that this White House has had control over the White House more than any other president. Do you agree, even more so than the Bush administration -- the previous Bush administration?

CARD: I do feel as if they've been hypersensitive about control. And I don't think they've used their cabinet as much as most presidents have used their cabinet. With regard to Valerie Jarrett, there are always senior White House officials who have a very close relationship with the President.

What's very important, however, is that there be people at the White House who take a look at the job and do it in an unvarnished way. In fact they speak very candidly to the President. And I worry about that. I'm not sure the President is getting completely candid advice. For example, he should have been told, "Mr. President, don't say 'You'll be able to keep your doctor, period' there'll be some exception to that.

LEMON: Right.

CARD: Don't say that if you want to keep your insurance, you'll be able to keep it no matter what. Those statements were not accurate. Now I worry that they may have been a conspiracy of sorts to let those statements to stand when people knew that they weren't accurate. And that troubles me even more than who is close or not close to the president.

So I want the president, first of all, to get advice from people he respects and likes. I don't want her to get monolithic counsel and I want the president to have some candidate counsel from people that might not want to tell him what he wants to hear. He's got to hear the realities of his words and what they mean, and not just accept the personalities as being supportive or loving or whatever.

I'm reminded that Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain said America wants to be loved, but it can't be loved. It must be admired by its neutrals, must be respected by -- I mean, admired by its friends, respected by the neutrals and feared by the enemy. LEMON: Right. Right.

CARD: And I work in the international forefront. The president has focused on trying to get people to love America rather than admire us, respect us and fear us. And so I think that he has diminished the role of the presidency around the world as well.

LEMON: Andy Card, listen, I want -- I want to give the other guys a chance. So -- but quickly, you said conspiracy. What did you mean by conspiracy, in a sense?

CARD: Well, if people around the president knew that his -- his public comments were not being fully reflective of the reality of the law, they should have gone to him and said, Mr. President, you shouldn't say, period. There will be a handful of exceptions to that. That's not an unusual thing to happen at the White House.

David Bergen and Mack McLarty know that there are infrastructures at the White House that pay attention to the words the president is going to say. Especially if they're major addresses. And some of these promises came in the form of a major address. Those words get scrubbed by staff, policy experts from not just the White House but all around the departments and agencies. And if someone allowed the president to say something that was not accurate, I worry about that happening too frequently.

And I don't want that to happen. There should have been corrections gone out there. The press secretary could have gone to day, I know the president said period, there will actually be a handful of instances where this may not be the case.

LEMON: Yes.

CARD: Tell us --

LEMON: David Gergen, I want to continue on in that vein and ask you this. CNN.com quoted you as saying this administration has been good at creating poll policies but it's never good about executing policies. Explain what you mean by that and why do you think they can't executive policies as well.

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, let me go back to the very beginning of this. Listen, all presidents bring with them people who have been their friends, people who have been on the campaign trail, people they trust. And -- Barack Obama has done that, Valerie Jarrett is a first-rate person in there, she's a wonderful human being.

The danger for presidents is insularity. And that is they only bring people who have been close to them. And you've got to watch that. John Kennedy was extraordinarily good at reaching out and getting a number of Republicans to help him in key posts in order to avoid insularity.

Ronald Reagan, you know, brought his Californians but he also asked Jim Baker to come in and be his chief of staff. We haven't seen that in this administration. It's meant two things. One, there are not a lot of heavyweights who have independent standing around the president who can give him advice, you know, shoulder to shoulder. Very, you know, hard-hitting advice and disagree with him. There just aren't a lot of people.

And he does not have, in particular, heavyweights around him to execute policy. The "Washington Post" has an extremely interesting revealing story today, a major story about the -- about the struggle inside the White House on who was going to run health care once it was passed. Who was going to have the biggest startup in American history. Who's going to be the captain of that ship.

Larry Summers and Peter Orszag, heavyweights in that administration, urged the president to get an outside person, someone who have a startup experience. Technical experience. Experience and new technologies. Insurance business. The president refused to do that. He went with someone who's a terrific individual but did not have that kind of world class experience and I think that, you know, what followed is that we didn't get very good execution of one of the biggest and most important acts in American history and -- you know, signature issue for this president.

LEMON: Yes. So, listen, I want to ask you this, Professor Zelizer. Before I came to work here for CNN, I worked in Chicago and I knew Barack Obama as then senator -- State Senator Barack Obama. I got the chance to introduce him and his wife, but you know, chicken dinners and fundraisers and those sorts of things. And he was always this guy who was very sort of quiet and kept to himself. You wouldn't even know, many times people would say, is he in the room?

And then I'd announce him and he'd show up, he'd be standing next to a pole or are sitting down and no one would recognize him because he was so quiet. He doesn't socialize after hours with congressional leaders. He doesn't seem to enjoy the back-slapping or the back and forth of Washington, the compromise.

Is he too removed from the dirty work of governing and especially the dirty work of Washington?

PROF. JULIAN ZELIZER, AUTHOR, "RIGHTWARD BOUND": I would have to say yes and no, meaning, I think his coolness and his detachment which was such an asset during the campaign has been something of a problem since he's in Washington. But we have to remember the opposition he faces. It's very intense. Republicans since 2010 have fought some pretty fierce budget battles and they have made it very difficult for a lot of the implementation of this program to take place.

So it's not just the problems of the administration, it's the effectiveness of his opposition. Go back to John F. Kennedy. He did bring in people, and that is correct. But he also was unable to get a lot of bills through Congress because of the environment he faces. So I think part of this has been about Obama but part of it has been a very, very effective Republican legislative strategy that even though it's cost the party in its polls has really hurt the administration in implementing these bills.

LEMON: I'm going to coin a phrase --

GERGEN: It did not -- I just want to say, that opposition did not responsible for the lousy execution here of the health care bill.

LEMON: Right, right. Thank you for that, David.

Again, I'm going to coin the phrase, powerhouse panel because that's indeed what this is. I want to thank historian Julian Zelizer, former chief of staff Andrew Card, as well as Mack McLarty and also David Gergen. Thank you very much.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Back to our airport security situation that we are watching. And this one is in Birmingham, Alabama. We just found out that the alert there is over and police have given the all-clear. Airport security officers evacuated one terminal this evening responding to what they call a threat.

According to the airport's Twitter feed and Facebook page, the buildings have all been secured and operations are returning to normal. No details yet about what caused the alert at Birmingham Shuttlesworth International Airport but we will check on it for you.

CNN's newest film "PANDORA'S PROMISE" is challenging the existing stereotypes about nuclear energy. We may associate nuclear to some of history's -- episodes but now some industry leaders, including Pulitzer Prize winner, Richard Rose, actually believes nuclear power can do good.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Turns out that the United States has been buying up nuclear warheads from the Russians for over 10 years now. 16,000. Nuclear warheads. And we're recycling all of these nuclear warheads into energy, electricity, nuclear power. So nuclear power is doing more to de-nuclear weaponized the world than any other thing that we do.

Poetically, it's rather beautiful. The very things that were designed to blow up our cities are now lighting up our cities. And amazingly 10 percent of American electricity, half of our nuclear power, comes from reprocessed Russian warheads. Ideally, every single nuclear weapon in the world eventually can get turned into electricity.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: CNN's film "PANDORA'S PROMISE" airs November 7th at 9:00 p.m. Eastern. And this is a topic that fires people up.

Next we're going to talk to "PANDORA'S PROMISE" filmmaker Robert Stone. And then Andrew Birch as well. He works with a solar energy company and suffice it to say, he's not a big fan of nuclear power. That's just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) LEMON: Nuclear energy is an issue that is highly personal and fiercely debated. I want to bring in Oscar-nominated documentary filmmaker Robert Stone and Andrew Birch, the co-founder and CEO of Sungevity Inc., a solar energy company.

Robert Stone, I'm going to begin with you. How did you decide on this topic?

ROBERT STONE, FILMMAKER, "PANDORA'S PROMISE": Well, I've been an environmentalist my whole life. My first documentary that a nominee for an Oscar was an anti-nuclear film like 25 years ago. So been involved in this for a long time and I just -- practically just became increasingly alarmed that everything we environmentalists have been counting on to tackle climate change for the last 25 years hasn't worked. Everything is trending in the wrong direction. And, yes.

LEMON: Yes. But just the word nuclear, though, itself it's -- has a huge set of connotations attached to it. I mean, how do you think that we're going to ease those sorts of terms?

STONE: I found -- in taking this film around, I found that there is a sort of -- there's a broadly-felt sort of anti-nuke vibe among sort of liberal Democrats as sort of a default position. But young people, young people are not afraid of technology. They see technology as a solution to problems. And they've been coming around to this in droves.

They're actually -- I don't find them to be that anti-nuclear. But it's a real generational split. The older people who came of age during the Cold War, duck and cover, all of that, they'd remain implacably anti-nuclear.

LEMON: Yes.

STONE: But the young people, the existential threat they've grown up with, their life -- their whole life is climate change. And so they see it as a solution.

LEMON: Andrew, is he calling you an old person here with this?

ANDREW BIRCH, CO-FOUNDER AND CEO, SUNGEVITY: I believe -- I believe so.

(LAUGHTER)

LEMON: Because you --

BIRCH: I was probably older than he is.

LEMON: You sell solars. What, you work for a solar company.

BIRCH: That's right.

LEMON: So you're completely against nuclear.

BIRCH: Well, I wish nuclear worked. I wish it costs less. I think the primary problem with nuclear power today is it cost twice as much as solar power. We, as a society, have spent over $100 billion trying to make nuclear power cheap and affordable. The price, however, has just gone up. So about 30 years ago it was by 5 cents per kilowatt hour. Just as recently as last week in the UK, my home country, kind of embarrassingly, has decided to subsidize nuclear so that they're going to buy from that power plant at 20 cents per unit of energy.

That's twice the cost of solar.

LEMON: So if what you say is correct, right, then why is it so tough for people to get the idea in their heads, in their thick skulls, if you will, about solar power? It's tough to sell solar. My neighbor, I told you, sells solar. He said, I don't make any money. Nobody wants to buy solar. What is it? A lobby, like the gun lobby? I mean, what is it?

BIRCH: It just -- it used to be that way. Things have changed very, very quickly. So just in the last few years, solar has really come of age. The industry is a $100 billion dollar industry today in revenues and it's growing at 35 percent per year. So Sungevity is one of the leadings companies making solar more accessible. We've taken online so you can go online today, put your home address I and very easily sign up for the monthly pay solar solution.

LEMON: Robert, I want to read out some of the names here. Some of the world's worst disasters happen at nuclear plants. The Fukushima, there was Chernobyl, the Three Mile Island. Right? We're just talking about, I live in Philadelphia, and not far outside of Philadelphia there is a huge nuclear plant.

How do you sell it as something that's good for people when people have lived through these tragedies?

STONE: Look, I think when people talk about nuclear, all they focus on are the three accents we've had.

LEMON: Right.

STONE: We've had -- look at the context. We've had nuclear power for about 50 years now. There are 440 reactors operating all over the world. Out of that we've had three significant accidents which you just cited, and according to the best science we have from the World Health Organization, United Nations, that all of those -- the only accident that had any fatalities or even any elevated levels of cancer was Chernobyl. And even then, the cancer mortality is less than 60 people. I mean, it's extraordinary.

LEMON: Why should people watch this film?

STONE: They should watch this film because this is the most important topic in the world right now is how do we leave a viable planet to future generations. If you love your children, as we all do, and you care about this planet, we've got to find a way to displace the use of fossil fuels. And I'm all for solar. I think solar is great. I just don't think we have enough of it. We need solar, we need wind, and we need a lot of nuclear. LEMON: You're not against the watching of the film, are you, so people can learn?

BIRCH: No --

LEMON: Why should people watch this film?

BIRCH: I think hat's off to you for creating the energy debate, putting it forward.

LEMON: Right.

BIRCH: We need to have this debate. We don't talk enough about energy. But again, we both want clean energy, we want clean energy for our children, and -- per the film, we need a lot more energy over the next couple of decades. The problem is, again, cost. Those 440 plants are generating 10 percent less energy than they did just two years ago because it's so expensive.

LEMON: Right.

STONE: Well, let's talk about cost for a second. I mean, look, OK.

LEMON: Quickly.

STONE: Go ahead.

LEMON: You said to me, I don't know how you do this job. Because people are talking to me, saying we got to go. But go ahead.

STONE: Every time a nuclear power plant is taken offline it's because -- in the United States it's because gas is cheap.

LEMON: Right.

STONE: And gas is displacing. It'd be nice -- it'd be nice if nuclear plants were being displaced by solar energy, but they're not.

LEMON: Yes.

STONE: They're being displayed as a natural gas.

LEMON: Gas is cheap.

STONE: And we're both against natural gas, I think.

LEMON: It's becoming winter here. Gas is cheap. Wait until people get their bills, they don't think gas is so cheap.

(LAUGHTER)

Thank you. Thank you, Andrew, thank you, Robert. Appreciate both of you.

STONE: Thank you. LEMON: CNN's film "PANDORA'S PROMISE" airs Thursday, November 7th at 9:00 p.m. Eastern. And as you can, it's going to be pretty interesting and pretty controversial. Make sure you tune in.

You've heard about the allegations of spying by the NSA. Now there are reports that the NSA busted into Google's supposedly secure servers. What that means for your privacy, your e-mails, and your photos. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Yahoo and Google are angry, this after reports that the NSA broke into their data links. Earlier I asked a cyber security expert about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT CLELAND, PRESIDENT, PRECURSOR LLC: Well, I think, you know, first of all, they're very upset because they know that they're supposed to be keeping their information private and secure. So if the government is breaking into Americans' accounts potentially in America, they shouldn't be doing that.

LEMON: And tell us about this drawing that was leaked along with some other Edward Snowden documents. I mean, does it show how the NSA broke into Google?

CLELAND: Yes. Think of, you know, Google as having multiple data centers around the world. And what apparently it did is the fiber optic connections between those big super data centers, they tapped into. They put a clip on or had a way to, you know, monitor what was going through those fiber optic cables. And, you know, that's something we've learned from Snowden that they've been doing around the world.

But it's particularly disturbing that it's done with Google because Google is unique. It's the only entity in the world that has a mission to collect all the world's information. That's public and private information. So it's a unique pressure trove.

Remember the NSA is only collecting information about people that they think are a threat to the United States and to others. Google has a mission to collect all information.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So the NSA flatly denies tapping into any private Google or Yahoo user information.

Next, I'll explain what this is.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Finally tonight, at sunrise, the East Coast was treated to a -- particle solar -- is that partial? Partial solar eclipse. The moon's shadow cast a total eclipse that could be seen as far away as Africa. Very cool.

I'm Don Lemon. The premier of "ANTHONY BOURDAIN, PARTS UNKNOWN, TOKYO" just one hour from now and right now Anthony Bourdain takes us on a trip to South Africa.