Return to Transcripts main page
Live From...
Rumsfeld Makes Surprise Visit to Iraq; Personal Information on Thousands of People Stolen; U.S. Files Charges Against Terror Suspects; Victim of Identity Theft Warns Others
Aired April 12, 2005 - 15:00 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, CO-HOST: The three men are accused of scouting several U.S. financial institutions for possible attacks. Potential targets included the Citigroup and New York Stock Exchange buildings in Manhattan, Prudential's headquarters in Newark, New Jersey, and the International Monetary Fund and World Bank buildings in Washington.
We'll join the Justice Department hearing as soon as it gets underway.
Meanwhile, President Bush says Americans are safer at home because Americans are serving in Iraq. This week marks the second anniversary of the fall of Baghdad, and Mr. Bush took note at the largest home front military base, Fort Hood, Texas.
He likened the toppling of Saddam Hussein to the smashing of the Berlin Wall. He says the job's not finished yet.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Terrorists have made Iraq a central front in the war on terror. Because of your service, because of your sacrifice, we are defeating them there where they live so we do not have to face them where we live.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIPS: Many people in the president's audience are newly returned from Iraq, or due to ship out soon. A base spokesperson says that 146 Fort Hood soldiers have died in the war so far.
MILES O'BRIEN, CO-HOST: Another surprise visit to Iraq by America's defense secretary. This time Donald Rumsfeld brought messages for both U.S. Troops and Iraq's new leaders.
CNN's Aneesh Raman has the highlights from Baghdad.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANEESH RAMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A twofold purpose as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld arrived in Iraq today: politics and security. On the former, he met with leaders of Iraq's transitional government, Prime Minister designate Ibrahim al-Jafari and President Talabani.
In those meetings, he voiced some of the strongest rhetoric coming from the Bush administration, telling this government to take formation as quickly as possible. One vote remains on the prime minister and his cabinet for them to take over authority of Iraq.
Rumsfeld also said that corruption should not exist in this country's governance and said that diversity should exist within the country's ministerial makeup.
Now obviously, given his position, Rumsfeld also talking with top American commanders here on the ground. Among the myriad of issues they discussed is also any potential troop reduction in the coming year. The U.S. has about 140,000 troops on the ground. A key to any reduction in those numbers is the ability of Iraqi security forces to take hold of the security situation.
Rumsfeld spoke to that earlier today.
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: The goal of the United States and the coalition is to work with the Iraqi security forces, to help to build them, increase their size, increase their -- improve their equipment, and increase their capability in command and control, and increasingly transfer responsibility to the Iraqi security forces.
RAMAN: Now, another key factor in any reduction of troops is obviously the state of Iraq's insurgency. Today the insurgents making their presence known again, two car bombs going off north of the capital city in Mosul. The first apparently intended to hit an American convoy. Bombs were parked into a white van. It detonated too early to cause U.S. casualties. Five Iraqis were killed. Three others were wounded.
Another car bomb going off, as U.S. Soldiers were on patrol in Mosul. Four U.S. soldiers were wounded in that incident.
Aneesh Raman, CNN, Baghdad.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PHILLIPS: More than three and a half years since the 9/11 attacks, John Negroponte took center stage today as President Bush's nominee for the first intelligence czar. After the 9/11 failures and the WMD fiasco, the veteran diplomat told a confirmation panel that he wants better results from the nation's intelligence services. He didn't offer specific, but his approval is widely expected.
A former official who worked with John Bolton gives a scathing description of the nominee for U.N. ambassador. Testifying at Bolton's confirmation hearing, the former State Department intelligence chief described Bolton as a kiss-up who abuses subordinates. Bolton faces questions over actions he might have taken against two colleagues who differed with his views about Cuban weapons programs.
O'BRIEN: Yet another stark reminder today that, try as we might to protect, it our personal information is just out there. And sophisticated thieves are out there to steal it. This latest case of identity theft involves the massive database known as LexisNexis. To tell us more is our technology guru, Daniel Sieberg.
Daniel, as far as we know, while this information has gone out of the door, we don't know that there was any motive here which would lead somebody to lose money as a result, right?
DANIEL SIEBERG, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right, and the company, LexisNexis, is saying that they are not aware of any incidents when someone's personal information has been stolen and then subsequently led to identity theft.
So they're saying at this point, although the numbers are very high in terms of people whose information was accessed that nobody has this done to them yet.
What we're talking about here is LexisNexis and a subsidiary of LexisNexis called Seisint. They handle massive amounts of personal data. We're talking about Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, anything that an I.D. theft needs to create a profile and to basically steal your information.
And this was released about last month. About 30,000 people were reported to have been a victim of this case of this information being stolen. Now it's up to about 310,000.
Why would they have this information of yours? Well, they're doing background checks. They're looking for information about you that is used for people who are trying to, say, approve a home loan. It's an insurance company. They're sharing this information, LexisNexis and others, they're sharing this information through qualified or approved third parties who need this to prove who you are.
So the irony here is these companies are designed to try and protect your identity, but if the information is compromised, obviously it works in the reverse. You might remember ChoicePoint. Just a couple of months ago, they were another big company in the headlines. They had about 145,000 records in that case.
With ChoicePoint the information was stolen through something called social engineering. Basically they're faking people out. They're pretending they're a real company getting this information, but they're not.
And again, you can see the shelves. The amount of information here is staggering. These are millions and millions of records. On those shelves is your personal information. A huge amount of information and again, possibly being used for identity theft.
O'BRIEN: So give us a sense, then, of why it seems to be on the surface so easy to do this?
SIEBERG: And it does seem easy, because in this case LexisNexis is basically saying people somehow got a hold of passwords. You can go onto the web site and access the information using passwords. Whether it was done through social engineering or tricking people or if it was simply looking over someone's shoulder to get the password, we're not sure yet, but it does seem less high-tech than you might imagine.
So in this case they're contacting people. The company has come without a statement saying they're aware of this and that they're sending out letters to anyone who may have been affected.
O'BRIEN: Daniel Sieberg, thank you very much.
SIEBERG: All right.
O'BRIEN: Kyra.
PHILLIPS: We told you about the three men already in British custody in connection with the scouting of U.S. financial targets in preparation for a possible terrorist attack.
Now we're going to listen to James Comey, deputy attorney general, live there from the Justice Department to talk about how they're being charged.
JAMES COMEY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: ... for counterterrorism and counterintelligence. Also joined by criminal division prosecutor George Toskas (ph) and two assistant U.S. attorneys from Manhattan June Kim and Eric Bruce.
You may recall that last summer, August 1, 2004, to be exact, the Department of Homeland Security raised the threat level from elevated to high for parts of New York, New Jersey, and Washington, D.C. This threat elevation was made after evidence was discovered of surveillance of financial service targets and buildings in a variety of areas.
We're here today to announce that three men who are alleged to have conducted this surveillance that resulted in that threat elevation have been indicted by a grand jury sitting in the southern district of New York on charges of conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction against people and buildings in the United States. And for providing material support to terrorists.
The four-count indictment, which was unsealed earlier, today names three British nationals: Dhiran Barot, Nadeem Tarmohammed and Qaisar Shaffi. Those three men are charged with engaging in terrorist plots against the United States.
The indictment specifically alleges that these three men entered the United States in 2000 and 2001 and conducted surveillance of the International Monetary Fund headquarters and the World Bank headquarters here in Washington, D.C., the Prudential Corporate Plaza and World Headquarters building in Newark New Jersey and the New York Stock Exchange building and Citigroup Center in New York City. This surveillance allegedly included, among other things, video surveillance conducted in Manhattan in or about April of 2001. The indictment further alleges that the surveillance was part of the conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction in a terrorist attack against the United States, a conspiracy that continued up until August of last year.
As the indictment details, Barot, who in 1998 served as a lead instructor at a jihad training camp in Afghanistan, went to some lengths to conceal the nature of his activities in the United States.
In June 2000, according to the indictment, Barot allegedly applied to a college in New York. And even though he was admitted to that school, in both 2000 and 2001 the indictment alleges that he never enrolled or attended any classes at that college. The indictment goes on to recount several subsequent trips made by Barot and the other defendants from the United Kingdom to the United States and back during the course of this conspiracy.
The defendants are charged with conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction against persons within the United States; with conspiracy to provide and conceal material support and resources to terrorists; with providing and concealing material support and resources to terrorists; and with conspiring to damage and destroy buildings used in foreign and interstate commerce.
If convicted of these charges, and these are charges at this point. These defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Barot, Tarmohammed and Shaffi will face a possible term of life imprisonment.
The three of them are currently in custody in the United Kingdom, and the United States will seek their extradition at the conclusion of the prosecution in the UK.
Today's indictment sends a message about our resolve to terrorists. We will continue to use all tools at our disposal to protect our nation from the acts of terrorists and to prosecute those who fought to harm us, whether those individuals are found in the United States or overseas.
This case also demonstrates that we, as a government, will take whatever measures are necessary upon learning of this type of threat information, as we did in the summer of 2004 to protect the American people.
Although these elevated threat warnings and other steps taken in the wake of receiving this kind of information impose costs and hardship on ordinary folks and businesses, we believe that the burden we bear together saves lives.
The coordinated effort of federal, state, and local law enforcement, as well as the private sector, in responding to this type of threat information, protects our fellow Americans and makes our country safer.
This case is brought under the leadership of the United States attorney David Kelly, Assistant Attorney General Ray and is being handled by the individuals I mentioned at the beginning: Georges Toskas (ph), who is a trial attorney in the counter-terrorism section; and Eric Bruce and June Kim, who are assistant U.S. attorneys in the southern district of New York.
I also want to thank the New York office of the FBI, the New York Police Department, the New York joint terrorism task force and the FBI's legal attache office in London for their usual spectacular work, as well as the great work of the many FBI agents and JTTF members in New Jersey and in Washington and everywhere else who participated in this investigation, many offices across the country.
And I'd like to take this opportunity to make special note of the very strong and cooperative relationship that we have with our law enforcement counterparts in the United Kingdom, in particular the crown prosecution service and the metropolitan police at New Scotland Yard.
I'd be happy to take any questions you might have.
Yes, sir?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Your indictment indicates that they engaged in the conspiracy and the surveillance from 1998 up to August of 2004, in one form or another. That's three years before and three years after the attacks in 2001. When did you first become suspicious of these men? And what does that say about the failures and the successes of your war on terrorism and the problems that you had in identifying these people in the first place?
COMEY: Well, it's a question I can't answer except in a general way. I can't say anything about the evidence in particular against these individuals.
As we made clear in August of last year, and as I just repeated, we developed certain evidence that led us to these surveillances in or about August 1, 2004. But your question makes a broader point that I'd like to emphasize about the nature of the enemy we face.
All of us know that terrorists looking to harm Americans will work for a very long period of time conducting sophisticated surveillance, and they are very, very patient.
We in law enforcement, our colleagues in intelligence and in the military, know the nature of the enemy we face and about the importance of remaining vigilant, especially because time doesn't offer the kind of comfort that people might want to take from it otherwise. These kinds of operations take years to plan, as demonstrated by the scope of this conspiracy.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: To follow-up, what I'm trying to get at is that, in view of the intelligence reviews, reports that are out about the -- the lack of communication between agencies, the failures to understand what was going on, to connect the dots and all that. Is this another example of that? Or at some point -- well, at one point did the realization of what you are up against really impact on this case? COMEY: I don't believe this is any example of a failure. I believe this is an example of a success. Information was developed. It was brought to the attention of the American people when the threat level was elevated. We have followed up on it very, very aggressively.
But again, it highlights the nature of the enemy we face. And that's an enemy that is patient, that is spread throughout the world, and that is bent on killing Americans in a spectacular way.
Yes, sir?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Comey, can you talk a little bit about how detailed or voluminous this surveillance was? And is the entirety of the information that caused the threat level to be elevated?
COMEY: No and no. I can't talk about the details of the report. But this is not the entirety of the information. There was a variety of things going on in the end of July, end of August last year. But these surveillance reports were important.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you concerned that there may be individuals at large still who either had knowledge of this particular surveillance or who were doing other types of surveillance?
COMEY: Well, we charge in this indictment that the conspirators were these individuals and others known and unknown. As I said, we face an enemy that is patient, spread throughout the world. So we are constantly worried and on guard to look for other members of these kind of conspiracies.
But I don't want to say anything beyond the face of the indictment about who we might be looking for or whether there are others we haven't identified.
Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These three men are already charged and jailed in Britain. What was the thinking in bringing additional charges in the U.S.? And secondly, it's not clear from the indictment what form of material support (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the surveillance operation of being in material support on the videotape?
COMEY: To answer your first question first. We believe it was appropriate, even though our British counterparts are very, very good at what they do and are bringing charges, that we bring charges because they were violations of American law, and the surveillances took place here in the United States. What was your second question, Eric?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What was the material support? The videotape and the surveillance, was that material support, or was there other support not cited?
COMEY: I don't want to parse it too closely. A fair answer from the indictment is that some of the material support was the provision of their services, their travel, their investment of resources to conduct these surveillances, but I don't want to go beyond that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Jim, two questions. First of all, these guys were allegedly conducting surveillance around the same time that the 9/11 hijackers were completing their preparations for their hijackings. Is there any evidence that there was any communication between these guys and the 9/11 hijackers? And secondly, administration officials have said that this was part of a preelection threat. Is that something that you still believe?
COMEY: We have not alleged a connection to the 9/11 hijackings. And I can't say, despite what administration officials might have said, I can't say beyond that, what's in the indictment. I'm sorry.
Yes, ma'am?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Jim, in terms of the...
PHILLIPS: The New York Stock Exchange, the New York headquarters of Citigroup and the World Bank in Washington, all of which allegedly were scouted in 2000-2001 by three men now named in a terror indictment. Just unsealed there by Deputy Attorney General James Comey from the Justice Department.
The three men have been held in Britain since last August, he said, when the alleged surveillance first came to light, prompting Code Orange alerts, you may remember, in New York, D.C. and northern New Jersey.
Britain plans to try these men next January, meaning it could take a very long time to get them here to the United States. A number of charges, James Comey announcing, including charges with conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction in a terrorist attack against the U.S. Once again, those three men now in custody.
Straight ahead on LIVE FROM, hundreds of thousands of dollars charged in his name. A victim of identity theft. We'll tell you how to protect yourself and what to do if it happens to you.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIPS: LexisNexis beginning the process of notification for nearly 280,000 additional people who may have been victims of identity theft. The firm says that its massive databases were breached by people using passwords they managed to obtain illegally. The problem, much larger than initially feared when it was first disclosed last month.
Joining us now, an unintentional expert of the perils of identity theft. John Harrison of Hartford, Connecticut, had his identity stolen in 2001. Ever since, he's been explaining to a pack of creditors that it was someone else who rang up a fortune in charges in his name.
John, good to have you with us. How much is a fortune? JOHN HARRISON, VICTIM OF IDENTITY THEFT: He -- they totaled about $265,000.
PHILLIPS: Wow! How did you find out about it?
HARRISON: I was contacted by a police officer tracking down one of the accounts of a Harley-Davidson motorcycle in November of 2001.
PHILLIPS: So do you know how it initially happened?
HARRISON: I am a retired military officer from the Army. And somehow he was able to go into a military installation, and they issued him an I.D. card in my name and Social Security number.
PHILLIPS: So it was pretty easy for him to do it?
HARRISON: It sounds like it was pretty easy. I suspect probably someone on the inside was involved in helping him do that.
PHILLIPS: Someone from the inside. You mean -- what do you mean by that?
HARRISON: I mean maybe an I.D. clerk or some up type of admin clerk probably helped him to get that I.D. card.
PHILLIPS: Interesting. So tell me about the impact that it made on your life, no doubt personally, professionally, emotionally.
HARRISON: Oh in all those ways. It's been about 41 months I have been fighting this. I still have some stragglers that are contacting me. Actually, the Army just recently garnished my retirement pay for a third time, and I still haven't gotten that money back.
And you know, acute stress disorder, depression. I lost my job over this. Obviously, my-- my ability to get credit was damaged. And also my own creditors, when my credit report -- when my credit score was low, they also took actions against me like lowering credit limits and raising interest rates.
PHILLIPS: John, how did you lose your job over this?
HARRISON: The distraction, the time involved, and then the emotional distress of it. It starts to become such a distraction and almost such an obsession that you start spending more time on fighting the identity theft than you do on other things that you would normally be doing.
PHILLIPS: Well, I know you're very well spoken with regard to what to do if, indeed, this does happen to someone else. I mean, what type of advice? Just hearing right now about LexisNexis and that almost 300,000 people, if not more, could be at stake here and go through what you've had to go through and continue to go through. What do you say to individuals?
HARRISON: Well, I say, really if you're in a state, like California or Texas, those states have made some laws where you can have your credit report frozen. And I'm not talking about monitoring your credit. I'm talking about freezing it so that only you -- it gives you control over who accesses your credit. That is probably the best way I know to prevent identity theft.
After that, it's a matter of just trying to find out when you become a victim as soon as you possibly can, and knowing the steps that you should take it start clearing that up.
PHILLIPS: What is it you are having to continually do now? And has anything gotten better? I mean, how is your life at this point?
HARRISON: Things have gotten better. I was unemployed for seven months, but I eventually was hired again. So I have a job. And I did get a lot of the credit -- a lot of the creditors off of my credit report, although my credit score's probably kind of permanently damaged because of other issues. Like I said my own creditors lowering my credit scores, hurt me over all.
But the stragglers that are out there are just basically people that maybe have come back one or two times. Or sometimes these things just sit in databases, these debts, and then they decide to look them up years later. So there's three, four of those right now that I'm dealing with.
PHILLIPS: Well, John, I'm glad you're remaining strong, and you gave great testimony before the Senate banking committee hearing. We'll continue on follow up on acts that are hopefully going to go through and get past. And we appreciate your time today. Thanks, John Harrison.
HARRISON: Thank you, Kyra.
O'BRIEN: That's quite a story.
PHILLIPS: Yes, that's not easy. And you can see that it still has such an impact on him. I mean, just imagine, it does. It affects your entire life from career to personal.
O'BRIEN: And for him to say, "My credit score is permanently damaged" through no fault of his own is -- that's a bitter pill to swallow indeed. All right.
PHILLIPS: I'm going to have John call us. If he can't get a job, we'll employ him here on CNN. That's for sure.
O'BRIEN: Absolutely. He can sit here.
PHILLIPS: Yes, with us.
O'BRIEN: With us. There you go.
PHILLIPS: And Judy.
O'BRIEN: That wraps up this Tuesday edition of LIVE FROM.
PHILLIPS: Judy Woodruff now with "INSIDE POLITICS." Hi, Judy.
JUDY WOODRUFF, HOST, "INSIDE POLITICS": Hi, Kyra. Thanks to you and Miles.
Well, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay is back on the Hill today. We'll look at how he is responding to the ethics accusations against him.
Plus, we'll look at changing politics of embryonic stem cell research. How has the controversy evolved over the years? I'll sit down with Dana Reeve, widow of the late Christopher Reeve and an advocate of stem cell research.
"INSIDE POLITICS" begins in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: The hammer is back on the hill, meeting with colleagues and facing questions about his ethics.
SEN. TRENT LOTT (R), MISSISSIPPI: When you have a strong dynamic leader like Tom DeLay, you better get ready to be pounded in this city.
ANNOUNCER: Back to Iraq, the president returns to a politically comfortable subject.
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Our success in Iraq will make America safer for us and for future generations.
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 April 12, 2005 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CO-HOST: The three men are accused of scouting several U.S. financial institutions for possible attacks. Potential targets included the Citigroup and New York Stock Exchange buildings in Manhattan, Prudential's headquarters in Newark, New Jersey, and the International Monetary Fund and World Bank buildings in Washington.
We'll join the Justice Department hearing as soon as it gets underway.
Meanwhile, President Bush says Americans are safer at home because Americans are serving in Iraq. This week marks the second anniversary of the fall of Baghdad, and Mr. Bush took note at the largest home front military base, Fort Hood, Texas.
He likened the toppling of Saddam Hussein to the smashing of the Berlin Wall. He says the job's not finished yet.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Terrorists have made Iraq a central front in the war on terror. Because of your service, because of your sacrifice, we are defeating them there where they live so we do not have to face them where we live.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIPS: Many people in the president's audience are newly returned from Iraq, or due to ship out soon. A base spokesperson says that 146 Fort Hood soldiers have died in the war so far.
MILES O'BRIEN, CO-HOST: Another surprise visit to Iraq by America's defense secretary. This time Donald Rumsfeld brought messages for both U.S. Troops and Iraq's new leaders.
CNN's Aneesh Raman has the highlights from Baghdad.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANEESH RAMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A twofold purpose as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld arrived in Iraq today: politics and security. On the former, he met with leaders of Iraq's transitional government, Prime Minister designate Ibrahim al-Jafari and President Talabani.
In those meetings, he voiced some of the strongest rhetoric coming from the Bush administration, telling this government to take formation as quickly as possible. One vote remains on the prime minister and his cabinet for them to take over authority of Iraq.
Rumsfeld also said that corruption should not exist in this country's governance and said that diversity should exist within the country's ministerial makeup.
Now obviously, given his position, Rumsfeld also talking with top American commanders here on the ground. Among the myriad of issues they discussed is also any potential troop reduction in the coming year. The U.S. has about 140,000 troops on the ground. A key to any reduction in those numbers is the ability of Iraqi security forces to take hold of the security situation.
Rumsfeld spoke to that earlier today.
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: The goal of the United States and the coalition is to work with the Iraqi security forces, to help to build them, increase their size, increase their -- improve their equipment, and increase their capability in command and control, and increasingly transfer responsibility to the Iraqi security forces.
RAMAN: Now, another key factor in any reduction of troops is obviously the state of Iraq's insurgency. Today the insurgents making their presence known again, two car bombs going off north of the capital city in Mosul. The first apparently intended to hit an American convoy. Bombs were parked into a white van. It detonated too early to cause U.S. casualties. Five Iraqis were killed. Three others were wounded.
Another car bomb going off, as U.S. Soldiers were on patrol in Mosul. Four U.S. soldiers were wounded in that incident.
Aneesh Raman, CNN, Baghdad.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PHILLIPS: More than three and a half years since the 9/11 attacks, John Negroponte took center stage today as President Bush's nominee for the first intelligence czar. After the 9/11 failures and the WMD fiasco, the veteran diplomat told a confirmation panel that he wants better results from the nation's intelligence services. He didn't offer specific, but his approval is widely expected.
A former official who worked with John Bolton gives a scathing description of the nominee for U.N. ambassador. Testifying at Bolton's confirmation hearing, the former State Department intelligence chief described Bolton as a kiss-up who abuses subordinates. Bolton faces questions over actions he might have taken against two colleagues who differed with his views about Cuban weapons programs.
O'BRIEN: Yet another stark reminder today that, try as we might to protect, it our personal information is just out there. And sophisticated thieves are out there to steal it. This latest case of identity theft involves the massive database known as LexisNexis. To tell us more is our technology guru, Daniel Sieberg.
Daniel, as far as we know, while this information has gone out of the door, we don't know that there was any motive here which would lead somebody to lose money as a result, right?
DANIEL SIEBERG, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right, and the company, LexisNexis, is saying that they are not aware of any incidents when someone's personal information has been stolen and then subsequently led to identity theft.
So they're saying at this point, although the numbers are very high in terms of people whose information was accessed that nobody has this done to them yet.
What we're talking about here is LexisNexis and a subsidiary of LexisNexis called Seisint. They handle massive amounts of personal data. We're talking about Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, anything that an I.D. theft needs to create a profile and to basically steal your information.
And this was released about last month. About 30,000 people were reported to have been a victim of this case of this information being stolen. Now it's up to about 310,000.
Why would they have this information of yours? Well, they're doing background checks. They're looking for information about you that is used for people who are trying to, say, approve a home loan. It's an insurance company. They're sharing this information, LexisNexis and others, they're sharing this information through qualified or approved third parties who need this to prove who you are.
So the irony here is these companies are designed to try and protect your identity, but if the information is compromised, obviously it works in the reverse. You might remember ChoicePoint. Just a couple of months ago, they were another big company in the headlines. They had about 145,000 records in that case.
With ChoicePoint the information was stolen through something called social engineering. Basically they're faking people out. They're pretending they're a real company getting this information, but they're not.
And again, you can see the shelves. The amount of information here is staggering. These are millions and millions of records. On those shelves is your personal information. A huge amount of information and again, possibly being used for identity theft.
O'BRIEN: So give us a sense, then, of why it seems to be on the surface so easy to do this?
SIEBERG: And it does seem easy, because in this case LexisNexis is basically saying people somehow got a hold of passwords. You can go onto the web site and access the information using passwords. Whether it was done through social engineering or tricking people or if it was simply looking over someone's shoulder to get the password, we're not sure yet, but it does seem less high-tech than you might imagine.
So in this case they're contacting people. The company has come without a statement saying they're aware of this and that they're sending out letters to anyone who may have been affected.
O'BRIEN: Daniel Sieberg, thank you very much.
SIEBERG: All right.
O'BRIEN: Kyra.
PHILLIPS: We told you about the three men already in British custody in connection with the scouting of U.S. financial targets in preparation for a possible terrorist attack.
Now we're going to listen to James Comey, deputy attorney general, live there from the Justice Department to talk about how they're being charged.
JAMES COMEY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: ... for counterterrorism and counterintelligence. Also joined by criminal division prosecutor George Toskas (ph) and two assistant U.S. attorneys from Manhattan June Kim and Eric Bruce.
You may recall that last summer, August 1, 2004, to be exact, the Department of Homeland Security raised the threat level from elevated to high for parts of New York, New Jersey, and Washington, D.C. This threat elevation was made after evidence was discovered of surveillance of financial service targets and buildings in a variety of areas.
We're here today to announce that three men who are alleged to have conducted this surveillance that resulted in that threat elevation have been indicted by a grand jury sitting in the southern district of New York on charges of conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction against people and buildings in the United States. And for providing material support to terrorists.
The four-count indictment, which was unsealed earlier, today names three British nationals: Dhiran Barot, Nadeem Tarmohammed and Qaisar Shaffi. Those three men are charged with engaging in terrorist plots against the United States.
The indictment specifically alleges that these three men entered the United States in 2000 and 2001 and conducted surveillance of the International Monetary Fund headquarters and the World Bank headquarters here in Washington, D.C., the Prudential Corporate Plaza and World Headquarters building in Newark New Jersey and the New York Stock Exchange building and Citigroup Center in New York City. This surveillance allegedly included, among other things, video surveillance conducted in Manhattan in or about April of 2001. The indictment further alleges that the surveillance was part of the conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction in a terrorist attack against the United States, a conspiracy that continued up until August of last year.
As the indictment details, Barot, who in 1998 served as a lead instructor at a jihad training camp in Afghanistan, went to some lengths to conceal the nature of his activities in the United States.
In June 2000, according to the indictment, Barot allegedly applied to a college in New York. And even though he was admitted to that school, in both 2000 and 2001 the indictment alleges that he never enrolled or attended any classes at that college. The indictment goes on to recount several subsequent trips made by Barot and the other defendants from the United Kingdom to the United States and back during the course of this conspiracy.
The defendants are charged with conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction against persons within the United States; with conspiracy to provide and conceal material support and resources to terrorists; with providing and concealing material support and resources to terrorists; and with conspiring to damage and destroy buildings used in foreign and interstate commerce.
If convicted of these charges, and these are charges at this point. These defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Barot, Tarmohammed and Shaffi will face a possible term of life imprisonment.
The three of them are currently in custody in the United Kingdom, and the United States will seek their extradition at the conclusion of the prosecution in the UK.
Today's indictment sends a message about our resolve to terrorists. We will continue to use all tools at our disposal to protect our nation from the acts of terrorists and to prosecute those who fought to harm us, whether those individuals are found in the United States or overseas.
This case also demonstrates that we, as a government, will take whatever measures are necessary upon learning of this type of threat information, as we did in the summer of 2004 to protect the American people.
Although these elevated threat warnings and other steps taken in the wake of receiving this kind of information impose costs and hardship on ordinary folks and businesses, we believe that the burden we bear together saves lives.
The coordinated effort of federal, state, and local law enforcement, as well as the private sector, in responding to this type of threat information, protects our fellow Americans and makes our country safer.
This case is brought under the leadership of the United States attorney David Kelly, Assistant Attorney General Ray and is being handled by the individuals I mentioned at the beginning: Georges Toskas (ph), who is a trial attorney in the counter-terrorism section; and Eric Bruce and June Kim, who are assistant U.S. attorneys in the southern district of New York.
I also want to thank the New York office of the FBI, the New York Police Department, the New York joint terrorism task force and the FBI's legal attache office in London for their usual spectacular work, as well as the great work of the many FBI agents and JTTF members in New Jersey and in Washington and everywhere else who participated in this investigation, many offices across the country.
And I'd like to take this opportunity to make special note of the very strong and cooperative relationship that we have with our law enforcement counterparts in the United Kingdom, in particular the crown prosecution service and the metropolitan police at New Scotland Yard.
I'd be happy to take any questions you might have.
Yes, sir?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Your indictment indicates that they engaged in the conspiracy and the surveillance from 1998 up to August of 2004, in one form or another. That's three years before and three years after the attacks in 2001. When did you first become suspicious of these men? And what does that say about the failures and the successes of your war on terrorism and the problems that you had in identifying these people in the first place?
COMEY: Well, it's a question I can't answer except in a general way. I can't say anything about the evidence in particular against these individuals.
As we made clear in August of last year, and as I just repeated, we developed certain evidence that led us to these surveillances in or about August 1, 2004. But your question makes a broader point that I'd like to emphasize about the nature of the enemy we face.
All of us know that terrorists looking to harm Americans will work for a very long period of time conducting sophisticated surveillance, and they are very, very patient.
We in law enforcement, our colleagues in intelligence and in the military, know the nature of the enemy we face and about the importance of remaining vigilant, especially because time doesn't offer the kind of comfort that people might want to take from it otherwise. These kinds of operations take years to plan, as demonstrated by the scope of this conspiracy.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: To follow-up, what I'm trying to get at is that, in view of the intelligence reviews, reports that are out about the -- the lack of communication between agencies, the failures to understand what was going on, to connect the dots and all that. Is this another example of that? Or at some point -- well, at one point did the realization of what you are up against really impact on this case? COMEY: I don't believe this is any example of a failure. I believe this is an example of a success. Information was developed. It was brought to the attention of the American people when the threat level was elevated. We have followed up on it very, very aggressively.
But again, it highlights the nature of the enemy we face. And that's an enemy that is patient, that is spread throughout the world, and that is bent on killing Americans in a spectacular way.
Yes, sir?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Comey, can you talk a little bit about how detailed or voluminous this surveillance was? And is the entirety of the information that caused the threat level to be elevated?
COMEY: No and no. I can't talk about the details of the report. But this is not the entirety of the information. There was a variety of things going on in the end of July, end of August last year. But these surveillance reports were important.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you concerned that there may be individuals at large still who either had knowledge of this particular surveillance or who were doing other types of surveillance?
COMEY: Well, we charge in this indictment that the conspirators were these individuals and others known and unknown. As I said, we face an enemy that is patient, spread throughout the world. So we are constantly worried and on guard to look for other members of these kind of conspiracies.
But I don't want to say anything beyond the face of the indictment about who we might be looking for or whether there are others we haven't identified.
Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These three men are already charged and jailed in Britain. What was the thinking in bringing additional charges in the U.S.? And secondly, it's not clear from the indictment what form of material support (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the surveillance operation of being in material support on the videotape?
COMEY: To answer your first question first. We believe it was appropriate, even though our British counterparts are very, very good at what they do and are bringing charges, that we bring charges because they were violations of American law, and the surveillances took place here in the United States. What was your second question, Eric?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What was the material support? The videotape and the surveillance, was that material support, or was there other support not cited?
COMEY: I don't want to parse it too closely. A fair answer from the indictment is that some of the material support was the provision of their services, their travel, their investment of resources to conduct these surveillances, but I don't want to go beyond that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Jim, two questions. First of all, these guys were allegedly conducting surveillance around the same time that the 9/11 hijackers were completing their preparations for their hijackings. Is there any evidence that there was any communication between these guys and the 9/11 hijackers? And secondly, administration officials have said that this was part of a preelection threat. Is that something that you still believe?
COMEY: We have not alleged a connection to the 9/11 hijackings. And I can't say, despite what administration officials might have said, I can't say beyond that, what's in the indictment. I'm sorry.
Yes, ma'am?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Jim, in terms of the...
PHILLIPS: The New York Stock Exchange, the New York headquarters of Citigroup and the World Bank in Washington, all of which allegedly were scouted in 2000-2001 by three men now named in a terror indictment. Just unsealed there by Deputy Attorney General James Comey from the Justice Department.
The three men have been held in Britain since last August, he said, when the alleged surveillance first came to light, prompting Code Orange alerts, you may remember, in New York, D.C. and northern New Jersey.
Britain plans to try these men next January, meaning it could take a very long time to get them here to the United States. A number of charges, James Comey announcing, including charges with conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction in a terrorist attack against the U.S. Once again, those three men now in custody.
Straight ahead on LIVE FROM, hundreds of thousands of dollars charged in his name. A victim of identity theft. We'll tell you how to protect yourself and what to do if it happens to you.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIPS: LexisNexis beginning the process of notification for nearly 280,000 additional people who may have been victims of identity theft. The firm says that its massive databases were breached by people using passwords they managed to obtain illegally. The problem, much larger than initially feared when it was first disclosed last month.
Joining us now, an unintentional expert of the perils of identity theft. John Harrison of Hartford, Connecticut, had his identity stolen in 2001. Ever since, he's been explaining to a pack of creditors that it was someone else who rang up a fortune in charges in his name.
John, good to have you with us. How much is a fortune? JOHN HARRISON, VICTIM OF IDENTITY THEFT: He -- they totaled about $265,000.
PHILLIPS: Wow! How did you find out about it?
HARRISON: I was contacted by a police officer tracking down one of the accounts of a Harley-Davidson motorcycle in November of 2001.
PHILLIPS: So do you know how it initially happened?
HARRISON: I am a retired military officer from the Army. And somehow he was able to go into a military installation, and they issued him an I.D. card in my name and Social Security number.
PHILLIPS: So it was pretty easy for him to do it?
HARRISON: It sounds like it was pretty easy. I suspect probably someone on the inside was involved in helping him do that.
PHILLIPS: Someone from the inside. You mean -- what do you mean by that?
HARRISON: I mean maybe an I.D. clerk or some up type of admin clerk probably helped him to get that I.D. card.
PHILLIPS: Interesting. So tell me about the impact that it made on your life, no doubt personally, professionally, emotionally.
HARRISON: Oh in all those ways. It's been about 41 months I have been fighting this. I still have some stragglers that are contacting me. Actually, the Army just recently garnished my retirement pay for a third time, and I still haven't gotten that money back.
And you know, acute stress disorder, depression. I lost my job over this. Obviously, my-- my ability to get credit was damaged. And also my own creditors, when my credit report -- when my credit score was low, they also took actions against me like lowering credit limits and raising interest rates.
PHILLIPS: John, how did you lose your job over this?
HARRISON: The distraction, the time involved, and then the emotional distress of it. It starts to become such a distraction and almost such an obsession that you start spending more time on fighting the identity theft than you do on other things that you would normally be doing.
PHILLIPS: Well, I know you're very well spoken with regard to what to do if, indeed, this does happen to someone else. I mean, what type of advice? Just hearing right now about LexisNexis and that almost 300,000 people, if not more, could be at stake here and go through what you've had to go through and continue to go through. What do you say to individuals?
HARRISON: Well, I say, really if you're in a state, like California or Texas, those states have made some laws where you can have your credit report frozen. And I'm not talking about monitoring your credit. I'm talking about freezing it so that only you -- it gives you control over who accesses your credit. That is probably the best way I know to prevent identity theft.
After that, it's a matter of just trying to find out when you become a victim as soon as you possibly can, and knowing the steps that you should take it start clearing that up.
PHILLIPS: What is it you are having to continually do now? And has anything gotten better? I mean, how is your life at this point?
HARRISON: Things have gotten better. I was unemployed for seven months, but I eventually was hired again. So I have a job. And I did get a lot of the credit -- a lot of the creditors off of my credit report, although my credit score's probably kind of permanently damaged because of other issues. Like I said my own creditors lowering my credit scores, hurt me over all.
But the stragglers that are out there are just basically people that maybe have come back one or two times. Or sometimes these things just sit in databases, these debts, and then they decide to look them up years later. So there's three, four of those right now that I'm dealing with.
PHILLIPS: Well, John, I'm glad you're remaining strong, and you gave great testimony before the Senate banking committee hearing. We'll continue on follow up on acts that are hopefully going to go through and get past. And we appreciate your time today. Thanks, John Harrison.
HARRISON: Thank you, Kyra.
O'BRIEN: That's quite a story.
PHILLIPS: Yes, that's not easy. And you can see that it still has such an impact on him. I mean, just imagine, it does. It affects your entire life from career to personal.
O'BRIEN: And for him to say, "My credit score is permanently damaged" through no fault of his own is -- that's a bitter pill to swallow indeed. All right.
PHILLIPS: I'm going to have John call us. If he can't get a job, we'll employ him here on CNN. That's for sure.
O'BRIEN: Absolutely. He can sit here.
PHILLIPS: Yes, with us.
O'BRIEN: With us. There you go.
PHILLIPS: And Judy.
O'BRIEN: That wraps up this Tuesday edition of LIVE FROM.
PHILLIPS: Judy Woodruff now with "INSIDE POLITICS." Hi, Judy.
JUDY WOODRUFF, HOST, "INSIDE POLITICS": Hi, Kyra. Thanks to you and Miles.
Well, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay is back on the Hill today. We'll look at how he is responding to the ethics accusations against him.
Plus, we'll look at changing politics of embryonic stem cell research. How has the controversy evolved over the years? I'll sit down with Dana Reeve, widow of the late Christopher Reeve and an advocate of stem cell research.
"INSIDE POLITICS" begins in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: The hammer is back on the hill, meeting with colleagues and facing questions about his ethics.
SEN. TRENT LOTT (R), MISSISSIPPI: When you have a strong dynamic leader like Tom DeLay, you better get ready to be pounded in this city.
ANNOUNCER: Back to Iraq, the president returns to a politically comfortable subject.
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Our success in Iraq will make America safer for us and for future generations.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
