Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

Fighting the Flu; Fallen Comrade, Fallen Comrade

Aired November 01, 2005 - 14:00   ET

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

KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Fighting the flu. A new plan to protect against a pandemic in the United States, how would it protect your family?
And will the Fed raise interest rates? Wall Street is watching as the decision is minutes away. We're going to bring it to you as soon as it happens.

From the CNN Center in Atlanta, I'm Kyra Phillips. This hour of CNN's LIVE FROM starts right now.

Ever since 9/11, homeland security has meant defense against terrorism. But today, President Bush announced a $7 billion plan to protect America from another threat that could be just as deadly, a flu pandemic.

Scientists have been watching with growing concern as a bird flu virus that started in Southeast Asia has spread to 16 countries. So far, the official human death toll is only 62, but experts worry that the disease could mutate and gain the ability to spread easily from person to person.

Now, President Bush announced his plan from the National Institutes of Health. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Our strategy is designed to meet three critical goals.

First, we must detect outbreaks that occur anywhere in the world.

Second, we must protect the American people by stockpiling vaccines and antiviral drugs, and improve our ability to rapidly produce new vaccines against a pandemic strain.

And third, we must be ready to respond at the federal, state and local levels in the event that a pandemic reaches our shores.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIPS: Now, President Bush says if a flu pandemic strikes it would be much more serious than the annual seasonal flu shot that most of us get and know about.

Joining us now, Dr. William Bornstein, chief quality officer for Emory Healthcare here in Atlanta. We've been talking a lot even before the segment here. So many areas that we can touch on. But just hearing the president talking about making more vaccines faster, well, it's a complex process. Right?

Kind of tell us how it works. I mean, I was reading just the intricate parts of fertilized chicken egg, and it takes six -- I mean, how does it work?

DR. WILLIAM BORNSTEIN, EMORY HEALTHCARE: Right. Well, first you have to figure out what the virus is going to look like at the time that it's causing a problem. So there's a certain amount of guesswork or predicting that goes into it.

And then once you've established what the virus is going to look like, then in our current system, then you've got to use chicken eggs to produce the vaccine. You know, so it takes -- we actually -- it takes nine months or more to actually plan for the routine flu vaccination every season.

PHILLIPS: So, taking into account all that time and all that preparation, OK, the vaccine research is focusing on H5N1...

BORNSTEIN: Right.

PHILLIPS: ... avian bird flu right now. But there's no guarantee that that could be the ultimate problem, the one strain that causes a pandemic, right?

BORNSTEIN: Correct. There's no guarantee that that will be the one, or if it is the one what exactly it will look like at the time it causes a pandemic, if that occurs.

PHILLIPS: Now, there was talk, too, about creating a vaccine that would protect against all types of strains. I mean, is that a reality? Could that really happen soon? Or is that something that's just far off into the future?

BORNSTEIN: I think that's an unknown right now. But I think, you know, with growing interest in this, the announcement today of the federal program, hopefully there'll be more incentives for the drug companies to be doing this kind of work in developing these vaccines.

PHILLIPS: Now, let's talk about the drug companies for a minute, because I was talking to you about -- talking about AIDS, and so many people wanted drug companies to get involved and help figure out other types of medical treatment for those suffering from AIDS, or possibly generics. And there was this controversy, well, we're not going to make enough money, so we don't want to do it. I mean, you've heard all the stories.

So now we've got this scare on a different level. Are drug companies fighting over whether they're going to make enough money or not, and if they should pursue doing this, or are there enough incentives out there right now for companies to want to do this?

BORNSTEIN: Well, I think, you know, it's hard to say. Right now things are changing.

I think in the past there haven't been a lot of incentives. Last year, as you know, we had a shortage. One of the companies had some problems with their vaccine production. They went off line and we ran into a problem with a shortage.

So we've been basically operating without much reserve, because of this lack of incentives. I think now, with the concern about pandemic flu, growing interest in vaccination against more conventional strains of flu, drug companies are sort of picking up the scent on this. But partly they're going to be watching to see what the federal government does in terms of how this is all going to be financed.

PHILLIPS: So what are the incentives for drug companies right now?

BORNSTEIN: Well, I mean, the ultimate incentive for them is profit.

PHILLIPS: Right. So they know for sure, because this could be such a big problem, that they're definitely going to make money, if, indeed, various companies discover something?

BORNSTEIN: Well, I wouldn't say they know for sure. I mean, if we're talking about H5N1, they could invest a lot of resources in developing a vaccine. And as you said, it may not be H5N1, or the vaccine may not be as successful as they hoped.

So anything in drug development, and in general, in development of these kinds of healthcare technologies, involves a certain risk. And there's a regulatory process that has to occur. And they could invest a lot of money and fail, which is part of the reason why many think that the federal government needs to be heavily involved in incentivizing this.

PHILLIPS: And we're seeing birds dying, we're seeing people getting infected. How fast could a virus develop where we will actually be able to say, this is spreading from human to human? Can we even guess?

BORNSTEIN: Well, there are lots of guesses out there, but it's hard to predict with any degree of accuracy. You know, what we know is that, as you mentioned, about 120 people have been infected with H5N1. The birds now, some infected birds, have been in eastern Europe, and as far as the United Kingdom.

So what happens from here, all we can do is plan for various scenarios. And I think that's what the federal government is starting to do now.

PHILLIPS: A lot of planning going on, a lot of testing gone on, a lot of money put into this initiative.

Dr. William Bornstein, thanks for your time today. Appreciate it. BORNSTEIN: Thank you.

PHILLIPS: Well, stay tuned to CNN day and night for the most reliable news about your security and, of course, anything concerning bird flu.

Well, nearly every day we bring you reports of American troops killed in the war in Iraq. And certainly not all, but many are grunts, enlisted men and women. And that's not the case with Colonel William Wood, the 44-year-old commander of the 1st Battalion of the 184th Infantry Regiment.

The U.S. military says that Wood died in a roadside bomb blast just south of Baghdad last week. Wood is the highest ranking U.S. soldier killed in combat since the start of the Iraq war two years ago.

He was giving orders to his men after a roadside explosion when a secondary bomb went off, killing him instantly. Wood was based at Fort Stewart, Georgia, and he is survived by his wife and his daughter.

Well, Colonel William Wood was a member of a very unique group, American troops fighting in Iraq who share long hours of boredom that's often shattered instantly by moments of horrifying combat. It's an experience that binds them together in a way that is impossible for those of in civilian life to comprehend.

Lieutenant Colonel Ross Brown is a member of the incredibly tight-knit community and was a close friend of Colonel Wood's. Brown was on a combat patrol when he learned of Woods' death.

CNN's Aneesh Raman has our first-hand report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LT. COL. ROSS BROWN, U.S. ARMY: (INAUDIBLE) has an informant. Come here, Strobol (ph). Listen up, please.

ANEESH RAMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Like the soldiers he commands, Lieutenant Colonel Ross Brown suits up daily, trying to rid his area of roadside bombs.

BROWN: Whenever you roll out of the gate, and you're out there operating, and you don't know if you're going to hit one of these or not.

RAMAN: The first stop today is Route Tampa, some of the worst stretch of highway in what's called the triangle of death, where these stall owners, Brown is told, are aware of impending attack.

BROWN: Did you know in advance that the IED was going to go off?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (SPEAKING IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. BROWN: Tell him to look me in the eye and tell me that again. He's lying.

RAMAN: It a fine line to walk, routing out information without creating new enemies, battling an insurgency that kills at will, that turns civilians into accomplices.

BROWN: They're scared to death. I think they see us as temporary, and they've got to live with those people forever.

RAMAN: Finding friends locally seems the toughest part of Brown's strategy, but his next task proves just as difficult.

(on camera): Here, the lieutenant colonel has stopped at one of the firm bases, one of the areas that Iraqis are manning their own position.

(voice-over): The commander on duty emerges out of uniform, and the lieutenant colonel struggles to find progress.

BROWN: They didn't do too much work yesterday. They didn't do too much work the day before. They haven't done too much work since they've been here.

RAMAN: Brown is unsure if this unit can survive an insurgent attack, uncertainty shared by the U.S. forces as well, each soldier with his own way to cope.

BROWN: Hey, Morales (ph), you carry anything special with you on mission to help you out?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Roger. I carry my wedding ring, a bracelet my wife sent me, carry the Bible, Psalms 91.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A patron angel, archangel.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I carry a this little packet my kids gave me. See what my daughter -- "Daddy, I love you, I miss you. Be safe. Come home ASAP." Isn't that cool?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right, let's go.

RAMAN: Overhead, helicopters are responding to an IED attack that killed Colonel William Wood, the highest ranking officer to die in combat in Iraq, a personal friend of Brown's, an added personal reason why tomorrow, he'll be suiting up again.

Aneesh Raman, CNN, Northern Babil Province.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PHILLIPS: Well, the military is reporting the death of a U.S. soldier who was killed in combat in Anbar province, just west of Baghdad. That soldier, who was not identified, was on foot patrol when he died in the blast of a roadside bomb yesterday. The death raises the total of American troops killed in Iraq in October to 94, making it the second deadliest month for U.S. troops this year. Since the start of the war, two years ago, 2,027 American troops have been killed in Iraq.

Roadside bombs are one of the most powerful and deadly weapons used by insurgents in Iraq, and the military calls them IEDs, as you know. That's short for improvised explosive devices. And increased efforts to protect American forces from IEDs appears not to be working.

Joining us with that, CNN Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr -- Barbara.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Kyra, perhaps difficult to come to any conclusion at this point about whether it's working or it's not working. That may only be something we know definitively in the future.

Certainly October was one of the deadliest months, 94 troops losing their lives in Iraq. The most deadly month since January, when it was 107 troops.

Now, there was just a news conference here in this room, in the Pentagon briefing room. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, talking about the situation in Iraq. IEDs one of the major topics.

General Pace really articulating the traditional view that the IEDs are indeed a problem, that that these attacks, the insurgents are desperate against the political progress being made in Iraq, the sort of "they're attacking our success mode," if you will. But an awful lot of people asking exactly what is going on in Iraq with all of these IED attacks.

Senior military commanders are now confirming, almost all of them now confirming there is a new generation of IEDs in Iraq, perhaps not so improvised, more manufactured. These IEDs involve the use of something called explosively formed projectiles. That's an expression we're going to hear an awful lot about, on can only suspect, in the days and months ahead.

These IEDs, these new types of IEDs, capable of punching through U.S. armor, through portions of tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, and those up-armored Humvees that the U.S. has spent so much money on trying to protect U.S. soldiers. General Pace saying that the U.S. continues to work on this problem between the armor and new tactics and techniques that soldiers are using in the field, that they are making progress against them. But still, Kyra, very deadly times for U.S. troops in Iraq -- Kyra.

PHILLIPS: Well, Barbara, you know about that training very well. I mean, your good friend, Lieutenant General Russel Honore, who we saw, of course, in New Orleans, is involved with training a lot of troops with regard to IEDs. You're even getting ready to work on a report coming up soon, I know. So training is happening on a regular basis here in the states to try and help those soldiers prepare for those, right?

STARR: Well, yes, but there are two parts of this equation, Kyra, of course. There is the training to try and help troops find the IEDs and disarm them, and roll up those terrorist networks before they even get to the IEDs.

You know, the general sort of theory at the moment is, once you encounter an IED on the road, it's already too late. So the critical question, perhaps, at the moment, is what is the threat? What is lying out there in the roads of Iraq?

Now, these IEDs can penetrate U.S. armor one of two ways. They can do it through either sheer mass, the bomb is so big it can roll a tank, it can roll a Bradley fighting vehicle. You can't really put enough armor on any vehicle and still have it be maneuverable in the field and protected against all threats.

So, first, the threat can be the bomb is just simply too large. But what is of great concern is this small number of new generation IEDs that they are seeing that have these penetrating warheads, if you will, these explosive charges.

They're not such large IEDs, but they're explosive charges. They punch through U.S. armor, and that puts U.S. troops at risk. It's a problem they're working on very urgently a the moment -- Kyra.

PHILLIPS: Barbara Starr live from the Pentagon.

Thanks, Barbara.

Well, from abortion to the roles of church and state, Samuel Alito could help decide some of America's toughest issues. Straight ahead on LIVE FROM, insight into the impact he might have on the Supreme Court.

SUSAN LISOVICZ, CNN FINANCIAL CORRESPONDENT: I'm Susan Lisovicz at the New York Stock Exchange. We're waiting for word from the Fed. Its decision on interest rates due in just a few moments. I'll have it as it happens.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIPS: Well, the Fed is expected to announce its decision on interest rates any minute now. Susan Lisovicz standing by, as always, at the New York Stock Exchange to bring it to us.

(STOCK MARKET REPORT)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIPS: The battle lines are drawn. Republicans now -- vow, rather, a fight to the finish, while a leading Democrat says that the threat of a filibuster is back on the table. The issue, Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. He's back on Capitol Hill today, meeting with senators who will decide whether he should be confirmed.

President Bush picked Alito to succeed retiring justice Sandra Day O'Connor. This happened after his first choice, Harriet Miers, withdrew her nomination under a scathing attack from the conservative wing of the president's own party.

Joining us in our Washington studio to talk about all of this, former U.S. District Judge Stephen Orlofsky. And the reason why we asked the judge to come back once again is because he knows Samuel Alito very, very well.

And judge, he reversed you twice. Are you still holding a grudge?

STEPHEN ORLOFSKY, FMR. U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: No. As a matter of fact, he affirmed me more than he reversed me. But the fact that he reversed me twice just shows that he's not perfect.

PHILLIPS: Well, let me ask you, what were those cases, or maybe one of the cases? And what do you remember, what kind of message did that send you? What did it tell you about Samuel Alito?

ORLOFSKY: Well, I think for the most part, he affirmed most of my decisions. And in these particular cases, I think that we just disagreed on the direction of the law. But there was nothing -- they were -- they both involved novel questions, and they were things about which reasonable people can disagree.

I still think he was wrong; however, he was on the court of appeals and I was on the district court. And so he the final say.

PHILLIPS: But you -- OK. So aside from that, you said that you definitely would be comfortable arguing in front of him, no matter what. You have very strong feelings about him as a professional and a friend. You say he's very fair-minded.

Tell me why you would feel so comfortable. Not that he's just fair-minded, but what is it about him that gives you that confidence?

ORLOFSKY: Because he's willing to listen. He will consider the arguments presented on both sides of a case.

I don't think there's any preordained result. He'll consider the record, the arguments of counsel, and the applicable law. I don't think he is doctrinaire or ideological in any sense. And I think his judicial record over the past 15 years shows that.

PHILLIPS: All right. Let's talk about his judicial record.

You and I talked about this yesterday. It wasn't brought up yesterday, so we're going to talk about it today.

Planned Parenthood, New Jersey, versus Farmer. Alito affirms striking down partial-birth abortion, or the statute, rather.

Explain to viewers what that means and why we should pay attention to this, and what it tells us about Alito.

ORLOFSKY: Well, the thought of many people both on the right and the left is that Judge Alito is going to vote to overturn abortion. The case you've just -- you've just identified, Planned Parenthood versus Farmer, involved a decision by the district court in New Jersey striking down New Jersey's partial-birth abortion ban.

Judge Alito joined an opinion in the court of appeals. He filed a concurring opinion, which was written -- the majority was written by Judge Barry (ph), in which he concurred that the statute in question should be struck down. He did so for different reasons than did the majority, but clearly, it was a decision voting to affirm a lower court decision striking down a state statute banning partial-birth abortions.

PHILLIPS: So while a member of people in Washington are coming forward saying he's going to strike down -- or he's going to overturn Roe versus Wade, you're saying, hold on, not so fast?

ORLOFSKY: I don't think so. I think he has a healthy respect for precedent and (INAUDIBLE). And I don't think he is going to overturn any prior decision of the United States Supreme Court, much less Roe v. Wade, quickly or easily.

PHILLIPS: I know that when you were in New York yesterday you were in mediation all day, that so many of your colleagues know that you know him, and they were coming up to you and saying, "What do you think about him? Tell us about him."

What are you telling all of your colleagues yesterday?

ORLOFSKY: Well, what I said is he's a very decent -- first of all, he's a very bright guy, a brilliant, brilliant lawyer. A very kind, gentle, decent, ethical, down to earth, and possesses a quality that more federal judges should possess, humility.

He's a very easy guy to talk to. And my view is, is that he's going to make an excellent Supreme Court justice.

PHILLIPS: Now, stepping aside from his credentials, and how you feel about him personally, we've established that. I thought something you said to me yesterday was very interesting.

You would have liked to have seen a female on the court, a female take the seat of Sandra Day O'Connor. At a judge, as a professional, why?

ORLOFSKY: Well, I think, first of all, the vacancy which is being filled is being filled -- is Justice O'Connor's vacancy. And as Justice O'Connor said when Chief Justice Roberts was first nominated, she said everything about him was good, except he was -- he's not at woman. And I think Justice O'Connor was the first woman to be appointed to the United States Supreme Court, and I think it would have been fitting and appropriate for her to have been replaced by a woman. But obviously that was not meant to be. PHILLIPS: And then, of course, there have been other judges and attorneys out there saying, well, you know, there really wasn't a strong pool of women, there weren't a lot of nominees that would have been as strong. Do you agree with that? Because I know you have some very strong relationships with other female attorneys and judges. And so you see things a little differently.

ORLOFSKY: Well, first of all, my wife is an attorney. So I would never say that.

But secondly, there is a -- there is a very large pool of talented female attorneys throughout the United States, as well as talented female judges. So I don't buy into that argument that there isn't a qualified female.

PHILLIPS: Judge Stephen Orlofsky, always a pleasure. We talk about you in Iraq, helping the judicial system get up and running, and now we find out you're friends with Samuel Alito.

Anybody you don't know? I'm just curious. Any place you're not traveling?

ORLOFSKY: Well, I'll have to think about it, Kyra. And I'll get back to you.

PHILLIPS: All right, Judge. Always a pleasure. Thank you.

ORLOFSKY: Thank you for having me.

PHILLIPS: Well, does the choice of Samuel Alito restrict the high court's diversity? We touched on that a little bit with the judge, but we're going to discuss that issue straight ahead on LIVE FROM with two people with very strong opinions.

And we know that it's only the 1st of November, but some people are already looking back. We've got the list of the year's most fascinating people straight ahead in entertainment.

(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