Return to Transcripts main page
Live From...
Interview With Tom Johnson
Aired June 09, 2003 - 14:03 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Federal agents looking for evidence in the 2001 deadly anthrax attacks. They are draining a pond right now in Maryland. It's not the first time the FBI has shown interest in that pond. Live pictures now, aerials, over that location in Maryland. Not far from Fort Detrick where former Army researcher Dr. Stephen Hatfill once worked. You may remember Hatfill was named as a person of interest. That's the term the Justice Department used in the probe.
We turn now to CNN Justice Correspondent Kelli Arena, joining us from Washington. Kelli, Stephen Hatfill's attorney today very adamant, saying you could drain the Pacific Ocean and not find any evidence to support the Justice Department claims.
KELLI ARENA, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Actually, that was Hatfill's spokesperson, Miles, and he has said that repeatedly. As you know, these pond searches date back to the wintertime. Now, the FBI does say that it is conducting what they call forensic searches, which they say are indeed related to the anthrax investigation, and city officials there in Frederick, Maryland say that the FBI has hired an engineering firm to drain the pond and this pond is huge. It spans an acre. It holds approximately 50,000 gallons of water, and the work is expected to take several weeks.
Now, this is a major undertaking, and it underscores the importance that investigators are placing on the pond for possible leads in the anthrax investigation. In a statement, the FBI said that the purpose of these searches is to locate and collect items of evidence related to the attacks.
Now we have previously reported that in searches in the past, sources said investigators found a plastic box with holes in the side. One source likened it to something that could be used for tests in a laboratory. We also reported that several viles were found. Now, nothing the FBI has done so far has led to any arrests or the naming of any suspects, but as you said, Miles, the attorney general did name former Army researcher Stephen Hatfill as a person of interest.
Now, Hatfill has consistently denied any involvement in the anthrax attracts and today, his spokesman sold CNN if the FBI wants to waste a quarter of a million dollars, and he's referring to draining the pond, he said be my guest. Now, he was referring to an estimate in the "Washington Post" of how much it would cost to drain the pond -- Miles.
O'BRIEN: All right. CNN's Kelli Arena. Thank you very much. So why -- why would anyone use a pond in all of this? How would that help anyone who is attempting to use anthrax as a weapon of terror. What happens to it? Is it dangerous? Is it deadly? Let's get some answers to those questions. Joining us is Professor Tom Johnson. He is the director of respiratory therapy at Long Island University. He designed, developed, and marketed the HEPA filter system to protect health care workers. He joins us from New York city. Good to have you with us, sir.
TOM JOHNSON, LONG ISLAND UNIVERSITY: Thank you very much for asking me to be here.
O'BRIEN: All right. If someone were bent on conducting some sort of terror campaign with anthrax, how would submerging the anthrax underwater in one of these so-called glove boxes assist that person?
JOHNSON: Well, you certainly wouldn't have the anthrax in your house or some place where inadvertently it could be found. Also, that you don't have to worry about it necessarily leeching out into the ground where some animal could pick it up, and then you would have some victims, probably animal victims, showing up with the disease, and possibly even humans.
O'BRIEN: So what it does is it protects the person, the suspected terrorist in this case, and in a couple of ways, it would reduce the amount of evidence, but it would also protect him from ingesting the anthrax?
JOHNSON: It would offer him a place where the anthrax could be stored without chance of it being either discovered or inadvertently disseminated.
O'BRIEN: OK. And so would somebody (AUDIO GAP)
JOHNSON: ... not. You probably would retrieve it because it would be rather cumbersome to try to figure out a way in which to get it in, let's say, envelopes as the attacks did in September -- through November of 2001.
O'BRIEN: All right. At a certain point, though, the anthrax has to be deposited in an envelope under the scheme that we had witnessed in the fall of 2001.
JOHNSON: Right.
O'BRIEN: At that point, doesn't that put the attacker in jeopardy as well?
JOHNSON: Well, at that point the attacker would probably have a good respirator on and some sort of environmental control to filter out anything -- any of the spores that might become airborne. So therefore, he will have some sort of protection during that period of time, probably a small box-like device with a fan filtration system so that it wouldn't leech out into the neighborhood and, again, be found.
O'BRIEN: How much sophistication would it require for any person to have -- to know all of what you're just talking about here in order to isolate anthrax? Is this the kind of thing where somebody who is diligent could find out all of this on the Internet, or do you need some additional expertise?
JOHNSON: No, you need quite a bit of expertise. This anthrax was not only the -- the weaponized version, but it was even milled rather finely, and this was a very, very sophisticated operation. This was not somebody going into an old pasture, finding anthrax in the soil, isolating it, and trying to weaponize that dust. The Aum Shinrikyo cult in Tokyo, the one that did the sarin gas attack, also tried to do this and did it even with considerable amount of money invested in it, still did not have the ability to come up with a weaponized version of it.
O'BRIEN: And a final point, time is running out here but quickly, if in fact, there were anthrax inside a box in that pond or in the pond itself, would that sort of make the pond area a hot zone of any kind?
JOHNSON: Probably not. It would probably be -- plastic doesn't usually leech out. You also are in a freshwater pond, so you don't have corrosion effects. In the likelihood of it becoming a gastrointestinal anthrax through ingestion of the pond water, not likely. Not likely at all.
O'BRIEN: OK. Professor Tom Johnson, Long Island University, thanks for straightening out a lot of questions we had in our mind. We appreciate it.
JOHNSON: You are welcome.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired June 9, 2003 - 14:03 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Federal agents looking for evidence in the 2001 deadly anthrax attacks. They are draining a pond right now in Maryland. It's not the first time the FBI has shown interest in that pond. Live pictures now, aerials, over that location in Maryland. Not far from Fort Detrick where former Army researcher Dr. Stephen Hatfill once worked. You may remember Hatfill was named as a person of interest. That's the term the Justice Department used in the probe.
We turn now to CNN Justice Correspondent Kelli Arena, joining us from Washington. Kelli, Stephen Hatfill's attorney today very adamant, saying you could drain the Pacific Ocean and not find any evidence to support the Justice Department claims.
KELLI ARENA, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Actually, that was Hatfill's spokesperson, Miles, and he has said that repeatedly. As you know, these pond searches date back to the wintertime. Now, the FBI does say that it is conducting what they call forensic searches, which they say are indeed related to the anthrax investigation, and city officials there in Frederick, Maryland say that the FBI has hired an engineering firm to drain the pond and this pond is huge. It spans an acre. It holds approximately 50,000 gallons of water, and the work is expected to take several weeks.
Now, this is a major undertaking, and it underscores the importance that investigators are placing on the pond for possible leads in the anthrax investigation. In a statement, the FBI said that the purpose of these searches is to locate and collect items of evidence related to the attacks.
Now we have previously reported that in searches in the past, sources said investigators found a plastic box with holes in the side. One source likened it to something that could be used for tests in a laboratory. We also reported that several viles were found. Now, nothing the FBI has done so far has led to any arrests or the naming of any suspects, but as you said, Miles, the attorney general did name former Army researcher Stephen Hatfill as a person of interest.
Now, Hatfill has consistently denied any involvement in the anthrax attracts and today, his spokesman sold CNN if the FBI wants to waste a quarter of a million dollars, and he's referring to draining the pond, he said be my guest. Now, he was referring to an estimate in the "Washington Post" of how much it would cost to drain the pond -- Miles.
O'BRIEN: All right. CNN's Kelli Arena. Thank you very much. So why -- why would anyone use a pond in all of this? How would that help anyone who is attempting to use anthrax as a weapon of terror. What happens to it? Is it dangerous? Is it deadly? Let's get some answers to those questions. Joining us is Professor Tom Johnson. He is the director of respiratory therapy at Long Island University. He designed, developed, and marketed the HEPA filter system to protect health care workers. He joins us from New York city. Good to have you with us, sir.
TOM JOHNSON, LONG ISLAND UNIVERSITY: Thank you very much for asking me to be here.
O'BRIEN: All right. If someone were bent on conducting some sort of terror campaign with anthrax, how would submerging the anthrax underwater in one of these so-called glove boxes assist that person?
JOHNSON: Well, you certainly wouldn't have the anthrax in your house or some place where inadvertently it could be found. Also, that you don't have to worry about it necessarily leeching out into the ground where some animal could pick it up, and then you would have some victims, probably animal victims, showing up with the disease, and possibly even humans.
O'BRIEN: So what it does is it protects the person, the suspected terrorist in this case, and in a couple of ways, it would reduce the amount of evidence, but it would also protect him from ingesting the anthrax?
JOHNSON: It would offer him a place where the anthrax could be stored without chance of it being either discovered or inadvertently disseminated.
O'BRIEN: OK. And so would somebody (AUDIO GAP)
JOHNSON: ... not. You probably would retrieve it because it would be rather cumbersome to try to figure out a way in which to get it in, let's say, envelopes as the attacks did in September -- through November of 2001.
O'BRIEN: All right. At a certain point, though, the anthrax has to be deposited in an envelope under the scheme that we had witnessed in the fall of 2001.
JOHNSON: Right.
O'BRIEN: At that point, doesn't that put the attacker in jeopardy as well?
JOHNSON: Well, at that point the attacker would probably have a good respirator on and some sort of environmental control to filter out anything -- any of the spores that might become airborne. So therefore, he will have some sort of protection during that period of time, probably a small box-like device with a fan filtration system so that it wouldn't leech out into the neighborhood and, again, be found.
O'BRIEN: How much sophistication would it require for any person to have -- to know all of what you're just talking about here in order to isolate anthrax? Is this the kind of thing where somebody who is diligent could find out all of this on the Internet, or do you need some additional expertise?
JOHNSON: No, you need quite a bit of expertise. This anthrax was not only the -- the weaponized version, but it was even milled rather finely, and this was a very, very sophisticated operation. This was not somebody going into an old pasture, finding anthrax in the soil, isolating it, and trying to weaponize that dust. The Aum Shinrikyo cult in Tokyo, the one that did the sarin gas attack, also tried to do this and did it even with considerable amount of money invested in it, still did not have the ability to come up with a weaponized version of it.
O'BRIEN: And a final point, time is running out here but quickly, if in fact, there were anthrax inside a box in that pond or in the pond itself, would that sort of make the pond area a hot zone of any kind?
JOHNSON: Probably not. It would probably be -- plastic doesn't usually leech out. You also are in a freshwater pond, so you don't have corrosion effects. In the likelihood of it becoming a gastrointestinal anthrax through ingestion of the pond water, not likely. Not likely at all.
O'BRIEN: OK. Professor Tom Johnson, Long Island University, thanks for straightening out a lot of questions we had in our mind. We appreciate it.
JOHNSON: You are welcome.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
