Return to Transcripts main page
Live From...
Congress Reconvenes; Second-Term Shuffle; After Falluja, Mosul Next Battleground?
Aired November 16, 2004 - 13:34 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.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Well, taking a look at stories now in the news, grim news over the fate of a British hostage in Iraq. A British official says CARE director Margaret Hassan is believed to have been executed. Hassan was kidnapped about a month ago in Baghdad.
A guilty plea today from the first suspect tried in the deadly train bombings in Madrid, Spain. That suspect, a 16-year-old boy, was accused of helping transport dynamite used in the March attack; 191 people were killed. That teen was sentenced to six years in youth detention.
Calling her one of the most trusted advisers, President Bush nominates Condoleezza Rice to become the next secretary of state. President Bush made the announcement about an hour ago. If confirmed, Rice will succeed Colin Powell.
Well, Congress is back at work and lawmakers, looking to complete the lame-duck session quickly, have already tackled one important issue, naming a Senate Democratic leader.
CNN congressional Joe Johns join us with all the details.
Hi, Joe.
JOE JOHNS, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Kyra. Get to that in a moment. One of the things happening here on Capitol Hill today, Senator Arlen Specter has been the source of continued controversy here, because he is in line for the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee. But he's come under fire of course from a number of conservative groups that say he is out line with the values of the country, particularly on issues of abortion. Well, today, senator specter had the first of two meetings he's having on Capitol Hill today, to try to shore up his position in line for the chairmanship. He met with the Republican leadership today. Later today, he is expected to meet with the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee.
Of course, the question is, how long will it be before Arlen Specter gets any kind of certainty over whether he will be allowed to keep the job that he's in line for? A Senate aide has told reporters this afternoon that it could drag out until January before we know for sure.
Meanwhile, as you mentioned, the other thing happening on Capitol Hill today, the Senate Democrats have selected their next leader. And as expected, he is senator Harry Reid of Nevada who takes over the job for Senator Tom Daschle, who lost his re-election bid. Of course, Harry Reid is known as a soft-spoken Democrat. He's also known for working behind the scenes as a tactician here on Capitol Hill. He is pledging to continue to try to compromise with Republicans, but he does say he will draw out the line.
Let's listen to what he said earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HARRY REID (D), INCOMING MINORITY LEADER: We're going to try to work with the president. We're going to work with the president. He said four years ago, he wanted to be a uniter. He called me the day after the election and said he wanted to be a uniter. Didn't work too well the first four years. We hope it works the second four years.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNS: Meanwhile, this lame duck session getting under way in earnest. This Congress, the last Congress, the 108th Congress, has a number of issues to try to work on, including increasing the debt limit. They also have to deal with nine spending bills that have been left unfinished. And they are still trying to get some resolution on that big intelligence reform bill that they were working on before the election.
Kyra, back to you.
PHILLIPS: All right, Joe Johns, thanks -- Tony.
TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Out with the old and in with the new, that's the name of the game in Washington. In addition to the changes in Congress, a dramatic is reshuffling is taking place within the Bush cabinet.
Joining me with reaction from Washington, CNN contributor and former Congressman Bob Barr.
Hi, Bob. Good to see you.
BOB BARR, FMR. CONGRESSMAN: Hi.
HARRIS: And syndicated columnist Julianne Malveaux, also in Washington.
Julianne, good to see you.
JULIANNE MALVEAUX, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Hi, Tony. Thank you.
HARRIS: Well, let's start with Julianne, spending bills, spending bills -- what are we likely to see here, some big, bulky omnibus spending program package passed this week?
MALVEAUX: Well, that's the name of the game. They didn't get it done before they left before. This is the fourth time, or maybe the fifth, that in an election year, the lame-duck Congress has had to come back and do a spending bill. The problem is that they want to get in and they get out, and so we don't know what we're going to end up with. There's not a lot of time for careful scrutiny, and there ought to be. Democrats have an opportunity here, especially to talk about the deficit, as we talk about increasing the ceiling. But even as Democrats have that opportunity, they don't have a lot of power.
HARRIS: Yes, and, Bob, what do you think about this, this idea of -- do you think we're going to see an omnibus spending bill? And is that the best way to approach this?
BARR: Well, no, it's not the best way, the second best, or even the third best way, it's unfortunate. It's -- but it does happen, as Julianne said, with increasing frequency.
There are two dangers here. One, that you wind up with a spending bill that is very heavily Laden with pork, from both sides of the aisle.
And secondly, even perhaps more importance from a substantive standpoint, it gives members an opportunity to sneak stuff in there that might substantively effect the laws in this country, when most members haven't even paid any attention whatsoever to it. So it's a very dangerous time for the American people.
HARRIS: Julianne, let me pick up on a point you just made. What are Democrats going to be able to do about this? Where are they going -- where can they have their voices heard?
MALVEAUX: Well, I think there are opportunities for people to make statements. I think that's all. Clearly, Democrats are not in the majority. They can't take over the vote. There may be some niggling. Although, as Bob says, when you have got these omnibus bills, people aren't going to have time to go through line by line so people can cut programs or supplement programs as they will. But I think that Democrats will have the opportunity for some rhetorical leadership about points about the budget, about the fact this Congress has taken -- or this president, really, has taken us from a surplus to deficit. These are points that I hope Democrats will not let go because these are very important points for the American people.
HARRIS: Bob, conservatives upset with all of this spending that has gone on?
BARR: Certainly not upset enough, if you ask this particular conservative. We worked very, very hard in the middle and late 1990s to get our budget back in balance. And it's been frittered away over the last four years. And I really do hope that the president was serious during the campaign when he said that he would get the budget back under control. But thus far, I don't see a lot of hope or optimism there.
HARRIS: Bob...
MALVEAUX: ... campaign point, Bob.
HARRIS: Go ahead.
MALVEAUX: I was just saying to Bob that was a campaign point, he wasn't serious about that.
HARRIS: Julianne, let me ask you a question here. What is going on with Arlen Specter and do you believe that Republicans will ultimately block his seniority and his move to the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee?
MALVEAUX: I think they're playing a very dangerous game. If they block his seniority, they can block someone else's. Or they can make sure -- some very ambitious young person without much seniority can say, gee, I think I want that committee chairmanship. The reason why the Senate operates on these arcane rules is because it keeps order. And so Arlen Specter has paid his dues.
The other reason I think they're playing a dangerous game is because they're putting litmus tests down on him. He has got to be in favor of certain positions. While conservative Republicans certainly held sway in the election, they represent most, half, of the Republican Party. They're not all of the Republican Party. So I think this really raises a question about whether we're going to ask people to punch a button about their positions.
Specter is not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination. He's a moderate Republican. But that seems to be an endangered species in Washington these days.
HARRIS: And Bob, Joe Johns just said to us that this thing may drag out until January. So are they trying to make him grovel for this chairmanship? What is this all about, from your perspective?
BARR: It bothers me a great deal. One, as Julianne said, and I hope, that we're not entering an era where we have litmus tests before a person can assume a chairmanship to which they would otherwise be in line, in the Senate or the House. Ultimately, I think that he will obtain the chairmanship. But what worries me is at what price?
If, in fact, has to give up his independence -- and that has always been one of the strengths of Arlen Specter, that he does have some independence and stands up against even his own party sometimes when he believes principles are at stake. If he is forced in order to gain the votes or support of the White House to get his chairmanship, to give up that independence, then that will set also, a very, very serious precedent.
And we're going to see now a lot of time wasted if, in fact, this does drag out until January, during which the next several weeks should be spent by the incoming chairman to set forth the agenda for the Judiciary Committee.
HARRIS: OK, let's leave it there. Bob Barr and Julianne Malveaux, good to see you, thanks for taking the time to talk.
BARR: Thank you.
MALVEAUX: Thank you, Tony.
PHILLIPS: A number of headlines coming out of Iraq as we've been talking today. Military launches a stepped-up operation against insurgents now in Mosul. Also the U.S. military is probing a killing of an unarmed insurgent by Marines. At the same time, the military is saying its retaking of Falluja has come to the endgame, the last part of that battle.
Matthew McAllester, a Pulitzer Prize-winning "Newsday" correspondent, also author of "Blinded by the Sunlight: Emerging from the Prison of Saddam's Iraq," I'm just getting word that we've joined forces with him. He joins us live out of Camp Falluja.
Matthew, why don't you set the scene for us there?
MATTHEW MCALLESTER, "NEWSDAY": Well, I think one of the interesting things, other than those you mentioned today to come out of Falluja, is the news that there are really very few foreign fighters that were captured or killed. About 5 percent, the U.S. says.
Now this says one of two things. Either there just weren't that many there to begin with and the threat of foreign fighters in Falluja was overhyped, or they've gone elsewhere. And it's quite possible that they have. Now remember that this was a sort of two-pronged defense, two reasons for defending Falluja for the insurgents.
One was because it was an ideological battle by the Islamists and by the more terroristic elements of the insurgents. But the second element was that there were a lot of local boys, if you will, a lot of guys defending their hometown.
Now that would probably be the more nationalistic and local element. And if the ideological Zarqawi, al Qaeda-type element decided that, really, they didn't care about Falluja, Falluja was just a place for them, their agenda is broader, their agenda is spreading radical Islam and attacking U.S. forces all over Iraq, then they could well have moved to other cities and other places in Iraq.
PHILLIPS: Well, as a journalist, I'm curious what you think about those numbers? It's the first thing that came out of your mouth and it got me thinking about -- there was so much media attention about the fight for Falluja, the talk that it was going to be another shock and awe, that there were so many Marines and Army and Special Forces and Iraqi troops involved. Do you feel it was overhyped, especially when you saw so many members of the media involved also, embedded in this operation? It seemed maybe a little too constructed?
MCALLESTER: I don't think so. I think this was an enormous battle. I mean, one of -- the two issues here was to dislodge a place, a safe haven, for insurgents and/or terrorist. And secondly, there are elections coming in January. And you really couldn't have held meaningful elections without allowing, or at least trying to allow, the participation of Fallujans and others in the Sunni Triangle. Now, the rights and wrongs of it are for others to debate. But those were the motivating factors behind it. And I think that what happened was, indeed, when I was there, the most intense battle and more intense, I think, than anything that actually happened in the invasion in 2003. It was extraordinary. I mean, there was a lot of lead flying around Falluja. And a lot of American soldiers have died. A lot of Iraqis have died. And it was -- I think it will go down as an historic battle and the next months and possibly a year or two will tell as to what the consequences of it were.
And much of that will come in the success or failure of the reconstruction effort. And it's not just buildings that the American and Iraqi governments have to build in Falluja. It is good will. And it's a very hostile town to some extent. They're not keen on being pushed around. They weren't keen on it under Saddam. And then they haven't been keen on it since April 9, 2003.
Now will they suddenly welcome American forces and Iraqi government forces in with open arms? Only time will tell. At the moment, it's extremely unstable in there. And the engineers that are pushing in from the Marines and from the Iraqi government are doing so with great caution, I can tell you.
PHILLIPS: Well, let's -- I want to ask you about the video that has been circulating in the past couple days, Matthew, and that is of the Marine shooting that insurgent. I mean, in no way, unless we're there, can we understand just the realities of urban combat, and be in the mind of those soldiers, and what they're up against. But what's being talked about there at Camp Falluja? What are commanders saying? What are soldiers saying? What are Iraqi soldiers saying about that videotape? And I'm assuming it's tough for them to have to deal with hearing about how it has made the headlines here.
MCALLESTER: I think, as you're aware, officially, the word is that there is an investigation. And they'll get to the bottom of this. But, you know, between soldiers, I think it's important to understand the nature of this battle. This was an all-out battle. It was a sort of "us or them" battle. And essentially, almost anyone who is moving in that kill zone was a threat to American soldiers.
This was not a uniformed enemy, remember. This was people in civilian dress, moving around civilian homes and firing from them and firing from mosques as well. Now, that puts the American troops into -- or put them into a state of sort of hypersensitivity, and what's coming through at the moment is a report that possibly one of the Marine's colleagues, comrades, was killed slightly prior to this by possibly the body of an insurgent that may have been booby-trapped.
Now that's one -- possibly one tiny little detail in what will inevitably be a very complex story behind an image. And images, as we saw in the Abu Ghraib scandal, have enormous power. And they don't necessarily represent the breadth and scope of what was actually happening across Falluja itself.
PHILLIPS: It's a point well made. It's almost impossible to know your enemy in some of those circumstances. Matthew McAllester, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist with "Newsday," thanks for your time today, from Camp Falluja.
We're going to take a quick break. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARRIS: Meet The Beatles again. What have you booked on this show now, Kyra Phillips?
PHILLIPS; You're the singer. You're not going to give us a little Beatles?
HARRIS: No.
Ahead on LIVE FROM...
(CROSSTALK)
HARRIS: There you go. The first word from the Fab Four, out with a new collection with some extras even the most diehard Beatles fans have probably have never heard.
PHILLIPS: LIVE FROM's hour of power will roll over, Beethoven, right after this.
HARRIS: Yea, yea, yea.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
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 November 16, 2004 - 13:34 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Well, taking a look at stories now in the news, grim news over the fate of a British hostage in Iraq. A British official says CARE director Margaret Hassan is believed to have been executed. Hassan was kidnapped about a month ago in Baghdad.
A guilty plea today from the first suspect tried in the deadly train bombings in Madrid, Spain. That suspect, a 16-year-old boy, was accused of helping transport dynamite used in the March attack; 191 people were killed. That teen was sentenced to six years in youth detention.
Calling her one of the most trusted advisers, President Bush nominates Condoleezza Rice to become the next secretary of state. President Bush made the announcement about an hour ago. If confirmed, Rice will succeed Colin Powell.
Well, Congress is back at work and lawmakers, looking to complete the lame-duck session quickly, have already tackled one important issue, naming a Senate Democratic leader.
CNN congressional Joe Johns join us with all the details.
Hi, Joe.
JOE JOHNS, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Kyra. Get to that in a moment. One of the things happening here on Capitol Hill today, Senator Arlen Specter has been the source of continued controversy here, because he is in line for the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee. But he's come under fire of course from a number of conservative groups that say he is out line with the values of the country, particularly on issues of abortion. Well, today, senator specter had the first of two meetings he's having on Capitol Hill today, to try to shore up his position in line for the chairmanship. He met with the Republican leadership today. Later today, he is expected to meet with the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee.
Of course, the question is, how long will it be before Arlen Specter gets any kind of certainty over whether he will be allowed to keep the job that he's in line for? A Senate aide has told reporters this afternoon that it could drag out until January before we know for sure.
Meanwhile, as you mentioned, the other thing happening on Capitol Hill today, the Senate Democrats have selected their next leader. And as expected, he is senator Harry Reid of Nevada who takes over the job for Senator Tom Daschle, who lost his re-election bid. Of course, Harry Reid is known as a soft-spoken Democrat. He's also known for working behind the scenes as a tactician here on Capitol Hill. He is pledging to continue to try to compromise with Republicans, but he does say he will draw out the line.
Let's listen to what he said earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HARRY REID (D), INCOMING MINORITY LEADER: We're going to try to work with the president. We're going to work with the president. He said four years ago, he wanted to be a uniter. He called me the day after the election and said he wanted to be a uniter. Didn't work too well the first four years. We hope it works the second four years.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNS: Meanwhile, this lame duck session getting under way in earnest. This Congress, the last Congress, the 108th Congress, has a number of issues to try to work on, including increasing the debt limit. They also have to deal with nine spending bills that have been left unfinished. And they are still trying to get some resolution on that big intelligence reform bill that they were working on before the election.
Kyra, back to you.
PHILLIPS: All right, Joe Johns, thanks -- Tony.
TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Out with the old and in with the new, that's the name of the game in Washington. In addition to the changes in Congress, a dramatic is reshuffling is taking place within the Bush cabinet.
Joining me with reaction from Washington, CNN contributor and former Congressman Bob Barr.
Hi, Bob. Good to see you.
BOB BARR, FMR. CONGRESSMAN: Hi.
HARRIS: And syndicated columnist Julianne Malveaux, also in Washington.
Julianne, good to see you.
JULIANNE MALVEAUX, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Hi, Tony. Thank you.
HARRIS: Well, let's start with Julianne, spending bills, spending bills -- what are we likely to see here, some big, bulky omnibus spending program package passed this week?
MALVEAUX: Well, that's the name of the game. They didn't get it done before they left before. This is the fourth time, or maybe the fifth, that in an election year, the lame-duck Congress has had to come back and do a spending bill. The problem is that they want to get in and they get out, and so we don't know what we're going to end up with. There's not a lot of time for careful scrutiny, and there ought to be. Democrats have an opportunity here, especially to talk about the deficit, as we talk about increasing the ceiling. But even as Democrats have that opportunity, they don't have a lot of power.
HARRIS: Yes, and, Bob, what do you think about this, this idea of -- do you think we're going to see an omnibus spending bill? And is that the best way to approach this?
BARR: Well, no, it's not the best way, the second best, or even the third best way, it's unfortunate. It's -- but it does happen, as Julianne said, with increasing frequency.
There are two dangers here. One, that you wind up with a spending bill that is very heavily Laden with pork, from both sides of the aisle.
And secondly, even perhaps more importance from a substantive standpoint, it gives members an opportunity to sneak stuff in there that might substantively effect the laws in this country, when most members haven't even paid any attention whatsoever to it. So it's a very dangerous time for the American people.
HARRIS: Julianne, let me pick up on a point you just made. What are Democrats going to be able to do about this? Where are they going -- where can they have their voices heard?
MALVEAUX: Well, I think there are opportunities for people to make statements. I think that's all. Clearly, Democrats are not in the majority. They can't take over the vote. There may be some niggling. Although, as Bob says, when you have got these omnibus bills, people aren't going to have time to go through line by line so people can cut programs or supplement programs as they will. But I think that Democrats will have the opportunity for some rhetorical leadership about points about the budget, about the fact this Congress has taken -- or this president, really, has taken us from a surplus to deficit. These are points that I hope Democrats will not let go because these are very important points for the American people.
HARRIS: Bob, conservatives upset with all of this spending that has gone on?
BARR: Certainly not upset enough, if you ask this particular conservative. We worked very, very hard in the middle and late 1990s to get our budget back in balance. And it's been frittered away over the last four years. And I really do hope that the president was serious during the campaign when he said that he would get the budget back under control. But thus far, I don't see a lot of hope or optimism there.
HARRIS: Bob...
MALVEAUX: ... campaign point, Bob.
HARRIS: Go ahead.
MALVEAUX: I was just saying to Bob that was a campaign point, he wasn't serious about that.
HARRIS: Julianne, let me ask you a question here. What is going on with Arlen Specter and do you believe that Republicans will ultimately block his seniority and his move to the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee?
MALVEAUX: I think they're playing a very dangerous game. If they block his seniority, they can block someone else's. Or they can make sure -- some very ambitious young person without much seniority can say, gee, I think I want that committee chairmanship. The reason why the Senate operates on these arcane rules is because it keeps order. And so Arlen Specter has paid his dues.
The other reason I think they're playing a dangerous game is because they're putting litmus tests down on him. He has got to be in favor of certain positions. While conservative Republicans certainly held sway in the election, they represent most, half, of the Republican Party. They're not all of the Republican Party. So I think this really raises a question about whether we're going to ask people to punch a button about their positions.
Specter is not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination. He's a moderate Republican. But that seems to be an endangered species in Washington these days.
HARRIS: And Bob, Joe Johns just said to us that this thing may drag out until January. So are they trying to make him grovel for this chairmanship? What is this all about, from your perspective?
BARR: It bothers me a great deal. One, as Julianne said, and I hope, that we're not entering an era where we have litmus tests before a person can assume a chairmanship to which they would otherwise be in line, in the Senate or the House. Ultimately, I think that he will obtain the chairmanship. But what worries me is at what price?
If, in fact, has to give up his independence -- and that has always been one of the strengths of Arlen Specter, that he does have some independence and stands up against even his own party sometimes when he believes principles are at stake. If he is forced in order to gain the votes or support of the White House to get his chairmanship, to give up that independence, then that will set also, a very, very serious precedent.
And we're going to see now a lot of time wasted if, in fact, this does drag out until January, during which the next several weeks should be spent by the incoming chairman to set forth the agenda for the Judiciary Committee.
HARRIS: OK, let's leave it there. Bob Barr and Julianne Malveaux, good to see you, thanks for taking the time to talk.
BARR: Thank you.
MALVEAUX: Thank you, Tony.
PHILLIPS: A number of headlines coming out of Iraq as we've been talking today. Military launches a stepped-up operation against insurgents now in Mosul. Also the U.S. military is probing a killing of an unarmed insurgent by Marines. At the same time, the military is saying its retaking of Falluja has come to the endgame, the last part of that battle.
Matthew McAllester, a Pulitzer Prize-winning "Newsday" correspondent, also author of "Blinded by the Sunlight: Emerging from the Prison of Saddam's Iraq," I'm just getting word that we've joined forces with him. He joins us live out of Camp Falluja.
Matthew, why don't you set the scene for us there?
MATTHEW MCALLESTER, "NEWSDAY": Well, I think one of the interesting things, other than those you mentioned today to come out of Falluja, is the news that there are really very few foreign fighters that were captured or killed. About 5 percent, the U.S. says.
Now this says one of two things. Either there just weren't that many there to begin with and the threat of foreign fighters in Falluja was overhyped, or they've gone elsewhere. And it's quite possible that they have. Now remember that this was a sort of two-pronged defense, two reasons for defending Falluja for the insurgents.
One was because it was an ideological battle by the Islamists and by the more terroristic elements of the insurgents. But the second element was that there were a lot of local boys, if you will, a lot of guys defending their hometown.
Now that would probably be the more nationalistic and local element. And if the ideological Zarqawi, al Qaeda-type element decided that, really, they didn't care about Falluja, Falluja was just a place for them, their agenda is broader, their agenda is spreading radical Islam and attacking U.S. forces all over Iraq, then they could well have moved to other cities and other places in Iraq.
PHILLIPS: Well, as a journalist, I'm curious what you think about those numbers? It's the first thing that came out of your mouth and it got me thinking about -- there was so much media attention about the fight for Falluja, the talk that it was going to be another shock and awe, that there were so many Marines and Army and Special Forces and Iraqi troops involved. Do you feel it was overhyped, especially when you saw so many members of the media involved also, embedded in this operation? It seemed maybe a little too constructed?
MCALLESTER: I don't think so. I think this was an enormous battle. I mean, one of -- the two issues here was to dislodge a place, a safe haven, for insurgents and/or terrorist. And secondly, there are elections coming in January. And you really couldn't have held meaningful elections without allowing, or at least trying to allow, the participation of Fallujans and others in the Sunni Triangle. Now, the rights and wrongs of it are for others to debate. But those were the motivating factors behind it. And I think that what happened was, indeed, when I was there, the most intense battle and more intense, I think, than anything that actually happened in the invasion in 2003. It was extraordinary. I mean, there was a lot of lead flying around Falluja. And a lot of American soldiers have died. A lot of Iraqis have died. And it was -- I think it will go down as an historic battle and the next months and possibly a year or two will tell as to what the consequences of it were.
And much of that will come in the success or failure of the reconstruction effort. And it's not just buildings that the American and Iraqi governments have to build in Falluja. It is good will. And it's a very hostile town to some extent. They're not keen on being pushed around. They weren't keen on it under Saddam. And then they haven't been keen on it since April 9, 2003.
Now will they suddenly welcome American forces and Iraqi government forces in with open arms? Only time will tell. At the moment, it's extremely unstable in there. And the engineers that are pushing in from the Marines and from the Iraqi government are doing so with great caution, I can tell you.
PHILLIPS: Well, let's -- I want to ask you about the video that has been circulating in the past couple days, Matthew, and that is of the Marine shooting that insurgent. I mean, in no way, unless we're there, can we understand just the realities of urban combat, and be in the mind of those soldiers, and what they're up against. But what's being talked about there at Camp Falluja? What are commanders saying? What are soldiers saying? What are Iraqi soldiers saying about that videotape? And I'm assuming it's tough for them to have to deal with hearing about how it has made the headlines here.
MCALLESTER: I think, as you're aware, officially, the word is that there is an investigation. And they'll get to the bottom of this. But, you know, between soldiers, I think it's important to understand the nature of this battle. This was an all-out battle. It was a sort of "us or them" battle. And essentially, almost anyone who is moving in that kill zone was a threat to American soldiers.
This was not a uniformed enemy, remember. This was people in civilian dress, moving around civilian homes and firing from them and firing from mosques as well. Now, that puts the American troops into -- or put them into a state of sort of hypersensitivity, and what's coming through at the moment is a report that possibly one of the Marine's colleagues, comrades, was killed slightly prior to this by possibly the body of an insurgent that may have been booby-trapped.
Now that's one -- possibly one tiny little detail in what will inevitably be a very complex story behind an image. And images, as we saw in the Abu Ghraib scandal, have enormous power. And they don't necessarily represent the breadth and scope of what was actually happening across Falluja itself.
PHILLIPS: It's a point well made. It's almost impossible to know your enemy in some of those circumstances. Matthew McAllester, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist with "Newsday," thanks for your time today, from Camp Falluja.
We're going to take a quick break. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARRIS: Meet The Beatles again. What have you booked on this show now, Kyra Phillips?
PHILLIPS; You're the singer. You're not going to give us a little Beatles?
HARRIS: No.
Ahead on LIVE FROM...
(CROSSTALK)
HARRIS: There you go. The first word from the Fab Four, out with a new collection with some extras even the most diehard Beatles fans have probably have never heard.
PHILLIPS: LIVE FROM's hour of power will roll over, Beethoven, right after this.
HARRIS: Yea, yea, yea.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
