Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

Terror Suspects in Miami Caught in FBI Sting; D.C. Plans to Deal With Dirty Bomb; Software to Judge Sincerity

Aired June 23, 2006 - 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: Hello, everyone. I'm Kyra Phillips from CNN world headquarters in Atlanta. Terror suspects charged. The Feds say they wanted their jihad to be quote greater than 9/11. Today, they're behind bars. Ahead this hour, how the group was infiltrated and their alleged plans disrupted.
Plus, Sears Tower a target? Chicagoans say it's business as usual in the nation's tallest building. We'll have a live report.

The boss is back and he's singing a new tune. Our interview with Bruce Springsteen coming up. The second hour of LIVE FROM starts right now.

Well, within the past hour, five of the seven terror suspects were in Federal court in Miami. CNN's John Zarrella brings us up to speed now.

JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Kyra. Yes indeed, five of them, very brief hearing, their first appearance in Federal court here in Miami district court, expected it to be brief and indeed just a few minutes long. Five of the seven appeared here, one of the other two appeared in a courtroom or is appearing at this hour in a courtroom in Atlanta. We understand that the arraignment has now been scheduled for a week from today, next Friday for these, these individuals.

Now, I am, of course, standing outside the warehouse building here, which is where much of the activity went down yesterday, where the FBI came in, broke into this building and no one was there, came out, asked the people in the neighborhood if they knew where the men were, showed them mug shots of the individuals.

Ultimately found them and this is where at least a couple of the plots, alleged plots were hatched, according to the indictment. This is where they plotted to blow up the FBI building. They also plotted here to blow up several other Miami buildings and the Sears Tower.

And these plots were made with a man who they thought was an al Qaeda operative, but, instead, turned out to be an informant. They had no idea he was an informant, thought they were dealing with an al Qaeda operative. In fact, at one time thought that they might -- that they asked him if he could get some training at one of the al Qaeda training centers.

Now a little while ago, we saw some video from one of our affiliates. I don't believe -- I think you may have rolled it or are rolling it. Actually they took the pictures through that keyhole there inside the door looking in the door of this warehouse facility.

On the floor of the warehouse facility you can see tables and chairs, really not very descript location in there, not much to see other than it was a place where these men hung out. And what they told us, Kyra, right along was one that we talked with, one of the men we talked with said inside here is a place where they came to pray.

By looking at the video, you know, they insisted that they weren't terrorists, aren't terrorists, had no ties to al Qaeda and as you can see from the video, really not much in there that would indicate one way or another what they were doing. There are no windows in the building. It is completely windowless. It was padlocked in the front and, again, the FBI had to break its way in, in the back to get in yesterday.

But, again, at least two of the plots were hatched here at this building in March. One thing we can say, which, of course, is of good news. These men, they did not have the wherewithal according to Federal agents and in the indictment to carry out any of the things they wanted.

They asked this informant who they thought was the al Qaeda operative for shoes, for uniforms, for money, for vehicles, for bulletproof vests and they even gave him shoe sizes that they needed. So, Federal authorities are telling us that these men didn't have the wherewithal necessarily to carry it out, but they certainly had the desire and the will to carry things out at some point in time. Kyra?

PHILLIPS: And John, yes, we did get that video from WFOR our affiliate to be able to show the inside of where you're standing, actually. Appreciate you referencing that. This is the video that John was talking about. John's on the outside of that warehouse. You can tell it was all boarded up. This is just a peek inside, doesn't really tell us anything, but you kind of get a feel for how some of these suspects were living and where they were living before they were arrested. John Zarrella, thank you so much.

Now, I want to talk with former DC detective Mike Brooks, former member of an FBI joint terrorism task force. In addition, I want to bring former prosecutor Paul Callan back and we are kind of flying by the edge of our seats here, but Paul, the reason why I wanted to take a break, bring you back, bring Mike here and I don't know if you heard this Mike, because you've been working your sources, but, Paul, just briefly, again, tell us why you have some hesitations about this informant and what the informant did to get this information.

PAUL CALLAN, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, the reason I said the indictment looks thin is because normally in a conspiracy case, there are two parts to a conspiracy. One is the agreement to commit the crime and the second thing is the overt act and furtherance of the crime. You have to do something concrete, something substantive.

If you read through this indictment, basically, the group that gets charged, these seven men, really do nothing of substance except they take pictures of an FBI building, but they take that picture with a camera supplied by the FBI informant. Pretty much everything else consists of conversations between themselves and the FBI informant, who's claiming that he is an al Qaeda representative. So, it's an indictment that doesn't look to be very strong on its face.

PHILLIPS: Now, it's interesting, Paul, you brought that up. Mike, you used to do the undercover operations. You've been the one having to ask the questions, get things on tape to make arrests. What do you think? What do you think about what Paul's saying?

MIKE BROOKS, FORMER DC DETECTIVE: Paul, I have to agree with you. When I first took a look at the indictment, I went, it is pretty thin. Just to see what more they have besides what's in the indictment, what kind of evidence they have.

Yesterday we didn't see any evidence being brought out of the warehouse, but I'm sure, as you know, that they're going to have some -- a lot of undercover tapes, exactly what they said on those tapes. You know, did possibly swear an allegiance to al Qaeda through this what they call the al Qaeda representative who was the undercover officer? Would that be enough? I don't know.

CALLAN: I don't know, Mike. What's troublesome about it is, I mean if you think the FBI sends an informant in. He says I'm with al Qaeda. I'd like you all to take an oath. And he administers the oath and then they get charged with taking the oath administered by the FBI, it's -- I think that's a case that they're going to have trouble with in front of a jury.

I know in my experience and I'm sure you've seen also, Mike, U.S. attorneys like to put as much detail as possible in the indictment because when they do the press conference, the code of professional responsibilities that lawyers abide by, they're allowed to refer to everything in the indictment. So usually you see a lot of substance in indictments and I don't see it in this indictment. You're correct, there might be things coming down the road later on, but it looks thin at this point.

BROOKS: No, you're absolutely right. It does look thin to me. There are a number of meetings. They did say verbally about kill all the devils we can and they want to destroy the Sears Tower by explosives, those kind of things. But did they have the capability to carry this out. To me, Paul, it looks like a group of hapless wannabes and my sources last night as this news was breaking were telling me that they didn't think there was any direct connection at all to al Qaeda by any of these seven.

So, again, I'm going to be interested to see what they have down the road, you know, evidence wise. But I have to agree with you. Some of this does look very, very thin and for an indictment, a four-count indictment on seven people, it's one of the thinnest indictments I've seen.

PHILLIPS: Paul, what about section two of the indictment when it defines jihad. You had some questions about this.

CALLAN: Well, the only thing that I raised with respect to that is, you know, this enormous sensitivity in the Muslim community about the fact that we're stereotyping Muslims and saying everybody is violent. Even when the attorney general had his press conference one of the things he made a point or maybe it was Mueller made a point of saying, that we don't mean to target any particular religious or ethnic group with this indictment.

When they define jihad in the indictment, they define it as a philosophy that embraces maiming, killing, kidnapping and a number of other things. It is true that the most radical fundamentalist Muslims may define jihad that way. But there is a large number of people in the Muslim community who define jihad as a spiritual quest and in a much more benevolent way. So I'm betting that in the weeks to come that definition of jihad, as listed in the indictment, is going to cause controversy within the Muslim community.

PHILLIPS: So, Mike, when you go into a situation like that and you're wired up and you know what you're looking for. You've got suspicions. You think they're involved with the terrorist group, tell me your checklist. OK, because you've got to watch every word you use. You got to make sure you're not leading them, right?

BROOKS: Right.

PHILLIPS: Entrapment issues I guess. What goes, as an FBI counterterrorism guy, informant, what do you ...

BROOKS: One of the other things too as Paul and, please, I'd like your opinion on this, what exactly were the overt acts they said they were going to carry out and how were they going to carry it out? Did this al Qaeda representative, did he push them before this or where did the initial information come from?

I'm hearing from some sources it came from people in a neighborhood who kind of dimed them out, if you will and that's where everything kind of got the ball rolling and then that's where the FBI came in and just started the undercover operation. If that's the case, if they were talking about doing these overt acts, even before the al Qaeda representative got in there, then I think that would make a stronger case.

CALLAN: I agree with you, Mike. That will make a stronger case for the government, if they were thinking about doing this before the FBI agent approached them. And I have to think that must be true otherwise why would the FBI agent haven gotten involved in this?

But when you look at, I think there are 21 or 22 overt acts listed in the indictment, virtually everyone involves conversation. Somebody in the group saying, we'd like to blow up the Sears Tower and the FBI agent participating in the conversation.

The only thing that they do independently that I can see is they apparently take a picture of an FBI building that they said they wanted to blow up, but they even take that picture with a digital camera, supplied by the FBI. So, that looks to me to be the only independent overt act that you can really take the agent out of the picture when they do something substantive. BROOKS: You know also, Paul, at the end, it talks about one of the reasons in late May they went ahead and did this because it sounded like the relationship between the al Qaeda representative and Narseal Batiste, who seemed to be the leader of this group, was -- sounded like it started to fall apart and maybe they were concerned that he was going to go somewhere else and look for someone else to get funding from because they said maybe his whole group seemed to be falling apart. That is what it sounded like in the indictment.

CALLAN: I think you're right about that, Mike. People have to understand from a prosecutorial standpoint that one of the hardest things to decide is when to make the arrest in a case like this. You want to let the conspiracy go on and you want them to do enough things that you can make out a case in court.

But on the other hand, you don't want anybody to get hurt. You don't want a building to be blown up. So at some point, you have to make a decision that it is time to go in, make the bust, make the arrest and hand down the indictment and the question here is going it be, did they move too soon or did they move when it was appropriate?

PHILLIPS: Former prosecutor Paul Callan. Thanks so much Paul, appreciate it.

CALLAN: Nice to be here, Kyra.

PHILLIPS: Mike, I want to hear about the informant, great to have you, Paul. The ethical checklist for an informant. We got to wrap, but I still want to get back to that, all right. So put your thoughts together.

BROOKS: OK, we will. All right, will do.

PHILLIPS: Well, you can follow this developing story at CNN.com, included online, the text of the Federal indictment against the seven suspects. It makes for pretty interesting reading. That and more on CNN.com.

Preparing for a bomb threat, a dirty bomb, radiation, toxic gases. Could the U.S. government get caught in the middle? A look ahead on CNN, the most trusted name in news.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIPS: Tracking the money, under the radar and under the umbrella of the U.S. war on terror. It's the no longer secret CIA program to follow the flow of dollars and cents overseas. The White House says it's legal, doesn't invade your privacy and has paid off.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TONY SNOW, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECY.: The government has said many times, we're going after your finances. It's also clear that the financial trails have been drying up. It's also clear that in some cases, you do have stories of people bailing up wads of cash and carrying them through the mountains of Pakistan and so on to try to transmit.

So there clearly has been the deterrent effect. I don't know if it's traceable to this program. I don't know if it's traceable. I'm not sure I can disaggregate at the specific causes of it, but it is clear that the efforts to try to choke off terror financing have enjoyed a certain measure of success and that's a good thing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIPS: The program came to light this week. It centers on a financial clearing house based in Belgium and known by the acronym SWIFT.

The only Democrat in President Bush's cabinet is stepping down. Norman Mineta also has a distinction of being the longest serving Transportation secretary in his department's history. He's been at the helm since the start of the Bush presidency, but will give it up, apparently, voluntarily, next month. Spokesperson says the president is happy with him and for him. Mineta represented California in Congress for 20 years before joining the Clinton cabinet as Commerce secretary. He's 74 years old.

Most wanted, now arrested. Less than three days after his name was added to the FBI's most wanted list, a wealthy Nevada murder suspect has surrendered in Mexico. 45-year old Darren Mack is accused of murdering his estranged wife and shooting a judge who was handling their divorce. Family court judge Chuck Weller was wounded inside a Reno courthouse June 12. A few hours later Mack's wife Charla was found stabbed to death in the garage of Mack's townhouse.

We've heard all day what the government has to say, but listen to this. Friends and family of several of those arrested speaking this morning to CNN affiliate WPLG.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SYLVAIN PLANTAIN, TERROR SUSPECT'S COUSIN: This guy is a humble dude. He helps his mama. He does construction. He just put the tile down and I'm hurt because, you know what I'm saying? This is not true. Anything that somebody don't understand, they fear.

And I understand that, but what I'm saying is to you is that you can't sit here and judge everybody that's around, so one person that caused it and everybody goes down for something for one person. What I'm saying is they need to get the person that made the allegation to the Fed. They need to get him, because Sonny does not have anything to do with it.

ELIZENE PHANOR, MOTHER OF TERRORISM SUSPECT: My son, he doesn't have the heart to kill people.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He don't have the heart to kill nobody.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He got no heart to kill nobody.

E. PHANOR: Has no heart to kill people. (END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIPS: That was the mother of suspect Stanley Grant Phanor, allegedly known to his fellow suspects as brother Sunni. She says her son is a churchgoing Catholic.

Well, it could happen anywhere, a so-called dirty bomb, huge but crude, spewing toxic gas and radiation in a crowded place. What if it happened in Washington?

CNN's David Ensor looks at first responders preparing for the worst.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DAVID ENSOR, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): An average morning in the nation's capital, fair weather, wind out of the southeast at about 10 miles an hour, Congress is in session. The president is in the White House. Buses along the mall are carrying tourists to and from museums and other sites. Suddenly, an explosion -- a massive bomb in a school bus rips into a museum and Federal office buildings nearby. Suddenly, there are hundreds of dead, thousands of injured.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Always when we respond to incidents, life safety is first.

ENSOR: In such a scenario District of Columbia police commander Cathy Lanier and fire battalion chief, Larry Schultz, the on-site emergency commanders would be on the front lines.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Every engine company in the city is equipped with detection devices. So, right away, as they approach a scene we will have a good idea of what we're dealing with.

ENSOR (on-camera): Under this scenario devised by a Washington think tank, those devices detect radiation, a dirty bomb, about a pound and a half of cesium 137 added by terrorists to 3,000 pounds of TNT.

The law enforcement when they arrive, they're going to immediately don some sort of protective equipment.

ENSOR: While the fire department personnel, wearing breathing devices would be working feverishly to help and evacuate the wounded, the police and authorities would face the biggest danger of all from a radiological bomb, panic.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We Americans are radiophobic. We're desperately concerned about any source of radiation.

ENSOR: In Phil Anderson's scenario, the Secret Service moves quickly to get the president out of the area for fear of additional bombs.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Human nature is going to flee, and if the president has to be moved, then that's reported in the media and people respond to that.

ENSOR: It is the natural human instinct to run. It's what people did on 9/11 in New York and at the U.S. Capitol. It was the right instinct then, but with a dirty bomb, it could be a mistake.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you're in a building and the envelope of that building hasn't been ruptured, in other words, you don't have broken windows and there's no structural damage to the building, you are much safer off staying where you are, keeping the windows closed, shutting off the AC system.

ENSOR: Why shouldn't I run?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Once you come out into the open air, you are exposing yourself to contaminants that not only can be harmful to you, but that you could take home and actually bring into your own home and contaminate your whole family.

ENSOR: In "Dirty War," British filmmakers present a dirty bomb attack scenario in London.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It (INAUDIBLE) being overwhelmed by self- presenters coming out of the hot zone. Crowd is contaminated. Hospitals requesting police assistance to hold them back.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tell them they'll have to wait.

ENSOR: Everyone caught within the radioactive plume created by the wind would have to be corralled by police and held, whether they like it or not, until decontamination tents could be set up, a challenge noted by DC police who have used the film in training.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think it was a very well-done movie. What struck me the most was the responders and how what I do and what Larry does. When the government comes in to deal with a situation, your activities very much influence the emotions of those people.

ENSOR: As in the British film, civilians and first responders inside the hot zone, about 10 percent of Washington, would have to leave their clothes and be forced to take showers before they could leave.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is the District of Columbia's emergency operation center. So this is the nerve center.

ENSOR: Deputy Washington Mayor Eduard Riscon (ph) showed us where a dirty bomb explosion in the nation's capital would initially be managed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If this is what was on the screen, we'd be gathering information from the field. We'd, obviously be doing a lot of coordination with the Federal government. This is actual Federal property. As a terrorist incident, the FBI would be the lead investigative agency.

ENSOR: Whether it's planning for a presidential inauguration or responding to the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon, the local and Federal officials know each other well.

We've been able to train together. We've been able to plan together and, certainly, one of the biggest strengths that we now have is the ability to communicate together.

ENSOR: Are you confident, are you both confident that your personnel faced with a radiological device blown up on the mall would all stay on duty?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There's no doubt in our minds that we're not going to have to face that issue. They will report to work and they'll do the incredible job that they do every day.

ENSOR: In fact, Shultz and others say a dirty bomb laced with cesium 137 would not make many people radiation sick, though it could raise cancer rates in the population and it would not be terribly difficult to clean up.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The psychological aspect of this thing is something altogether different. You could have a perfectly safe city, free from radiation and a fearful public that would continue to be unwilling to live and work in Washington.

ENSOR: First responders in Washington have rehearsed reacting to a dirty bomb. They believe they are ready, if it should ever come to that. Much would depend on whether Washingtonians would panic or keep their wits about them and listen to what the authorities advice.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PHILLIPS: Well, it's a scary thought. A building where you work and play, the target of terror. We'll see what people in Chicago are saying about the alleged plot against the Sears Tower when LIVE FROM continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIPS: Well, the boss is back. Bruce Springsteen talks about his new album and the politics that are a big part of it. That interview straight ahead on LIVE FROM.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN: I always sort of -- I like that to be an organic part of what I'm doing, I think because I always search those -- in trying to explain the world and the times to myself, I search those elements out in the music that I like and, so, it wouldn't -- a Pete Seeger record without politics in it wouldn't feel right.

(MUSIC)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I haven't had much success as far as finding a romantic partner. In my dating history, I've dated all kinds of different people. I like to talk to people for maybe a week. Then I want to meet them. I find that there's a lot of deception. Like one gentlemen, he told me he was 35 and when I met him, he turned out to be 50. I don't know how he thought he was going to pull that off, but he tried. I love the idea of having the removable lie detector. I would like to know that you are just basically full of it and then I can move on and try to find someone more compatible with me.

MILES O'BRIEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So who do these guys they're fooling? Eventually, usually sooner rather than later, women like Lorraine will figure out the score. There's got to be a better way for singles to cut through the baloney and the anxiety of meeting new people.

Sandy Pedland (ph) is with the MIT media lab. He says it's not what we say that matters when we meet new people, but how we say it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I've been building software that can read other people. It's called social signaling. This is reading your tone of voice. It's reading your gestures.

O'BRIEN (voice-over): As you talk, the software measures the tone and stress level in your voice. It lets you know if you're hitting all the right notes or striking out. Pedland says it is 80 percent accurate.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If I were talking to young women, I might like to get a little feedback about how she's responding to it. Is she really going to say yes if I ask her out? So it's the cell phone that listen to the interactions and says oh, hey, she sounds interesting.

O'BRIEN: In the future, Pedland predicts it will be commonplace and we will all be able to measure the sincerity of others, as well as ourselves.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If everybody has this, we won't have so many misunderstandings and failed expectations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(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