Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Today

Iraq Troop Reductions; Safe in Cyberspace

Aired June 22, 2006 - 11:00   ET

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

DANA BASH, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: ...as you said, both coming from Democrats, one from Senator John Kerry and Senator Russ Feingold. That says that there should be a date certain for troops to come home and that date is about a year from now -- July 1, 2007.
They say that is the only we to ensure that Iraqis are really taking control of security forces and security for themselves, to give them a deadline.

But the other proposal is from probably the majority of the Democrats. We'll see them vote for this. And that is to say that basically you should just start a phased withdrawal starting this year, begin in 2006 to have a phase withdrawal. And then the president should give plans for future withdrawals.

Now those are with the two proposals. No Republicans, we don't think, at least not many will vote for them. Let's listen to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist on the floor.

SEN. BILL FRIST (R), MAJORITY LEADER: ... pluralistic society that until now has been absent from the Arab world.

Mr. President, another reason we went into Iraq was because we were convinced that Saddam Hussein was continuing his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, chemical weapons that he had developed and used before. And the events of 9/11 taught us that there is no greater threat to us today than that posed by state sponsors of terrorism, such as Iraq under Saddam Hussein working to acquire such weapons.

After the war, as we all know, there emerged a big debate over whether Saddam Hussein really was working on weapons of mass destruction in 2003. But there is no debate that there was a strong international consensus prior to 2003 that Saddam Hussein must be pursuing weapons of mass destruction. That was the view not only of the Bush administration, but also the Clinton administration, as well as the opinion of most other governments around the world.

And it made sense for two reasons. First, Saddam Hussein had a long track record of not only seeking to acquire, but actually using weapons of mass destruction.

He'd used chemical weapons against his own people in the 1980s. And at the end of the Persian Gulf War in 1991, he was found to have an advanced nuclear weapons program, a program that may have only been one or two years away from producing a nuclear weapon. Second, Saddam Hussein was acting like a man who had something to hide. He was obstructing the U.N.'s weapons inspectors and repeatedly defying U.N. disarmament mandates.

Now, no one can explain why Saddam acted this way if he, in fact, had no weapons of mass destruction programs to hide. And it's certainly true that if Saddam Hussein were still in power today, Iraq would remain on the list with Iran and North Korea, of countries that we fear will develop weapons of mass destruction and pass them on to terrorists.

Because Saddam Hussein has been removed from power, Iraq is no longer on that list.

But we must remember that many of Saddam's weapon scientists, those who produced the chemical weapons he used against the Kurds in 1980s and who came close to producing those nuclear weapons in the early 1990s are still in Iraq.

But in a democratic Iraq, these scientists pose no threat because of democratic Iraq would never seek to revive Saddam Hussein's weapons programs.

If we were to cut and run from Iraq and risk letting the terrorists take power, we would again have to fear that these scientists and what remains of Saddam's weapons infrastructure would once again be put to work, producing weapons that in the hands of international terrorists could destroy our cities and decimate our populations.

Again, every senator will have to live with his own conscience, but this senator does not want to be complacent in that decision that could reverse the success we've achieved since 9/11 in keeping terrorism off our shores and weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of terrorists.

Mr. President, the amendments before us are intentionally misleading. They're written in soft language and they're wrapped in reassuring concepts. They don't use terms such as retreat or withdrawal, but instead call for redeployment of our armed forces from Iraq.

They don't say that the withdrawal should take place on an artificial timetable and be concluded by an arbitrary date. Instead they say that the redeployment should take place under a schedule, and that the schedule should be planned, and that the plan should be coordinated with the government of Iraq, and that the Congress should be consulted at every stage.

But none of this artful, this fine language can conceal what is really proposed and what is really at stake.

The proponents of these amendments was us to tell the government of Iraq, that new government of Iraq, that we're leaving, that we're leaving no matter what the implications for the future of their country, no matter how much they plead with us to stay, no matter how great the risk that the investment that we and they have made to date in building, in constructing that new Iraq to be squandered and turned to null.

The amendments may differ in some of the details, how long we'll wait until we actually leave, how emphatically to tell the Iraqi people we really care about them as we walk out the door. But the bottom line is exactly the same.

The amendments tell us to set a deadline and leave by that deadline. This would be a dangerous policy, a reckless policy, a shameless policy. The time to leave Iraq is when we have achieved our objectives.

If we knew our objectives were unachievable, then these amendments might make sense. But our objectives are achievable and we are achieving them.

The brave men and women of our armed forces are fighting daily to win victory in Iraq. And it would dishonor them to say nothing of their fallen comrades, to cut and run at a time as promising as now.

The spirit of these amendments is the spirit of defeatism and surrender. This is not the spirit that made America the great nation it is today and I trust that when we vote, we will send the message that there is no room for defeatism in the United States.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: So there you have Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, as he speaks against both Democratic proposals that talking about bringing U.S. troops out of Iraq. We do expect a vote on one of the proposals just in a few minutes.

And while we await that, let's bring in Capitol Hill Correspondent Dana Bash.

Dana, if you could break down the two proposals and how the votes are likely to go on each of them, please.

BASH: That's right. Well, Daryn, you know how the votes are going to go is really going to be interesting to watch.

First of all, you have, as I mentioned, Senator John Kerry who says that the troops should come home, combat troops, by July 1st, 2007. That will be the first Democratic measure voted on.

Now, they think perhaps they could get between 10 and 15 Democratic senators on that. They will claim that as a victory because just last week there was a vote on something similar. There was a deadline at the end of this year that got only a handful of votes.

But after that, we will see the Democratic measure put forward by the leader and by the majority of the senators -- Democratic senators who do believe that there should be a debate and sort of a discussion, get on record that troops -- that you should start thinking about troops being withdrawn. But no date certain. They do not believe that that is the right course, so that will say that there should be a beginning of a phase withdrawal starting this year.

Now, what we will likely see with that is maybe as many as 40 Democrats voting for that. There we will see the Democrats coming into the Senate gallery, having a press conference and likely declaring that every discussion about divided Democrats was just wrong because that would mean that most of the Democrats would rally around that that proposal.

So that's likely what we will see, but likely no Republicans voting for either -- Daryn.

KAGAN: Right, yes, but real quickly, isn't this a Democrat spin because lost is lost. Neither one of these are going to pass?

BASH: Absolutely. And neither one was ever expected to pass. You're absolutely right. But let's face it, this is about putting a debate on the Senate floor that is a big issue this political year.

And they fundamentally believe that despite their divisions over the fundamental issue of when troops should come home, that the American people want to see a debate on the Bush policy on the Senate floor.

And they do point to polls that say actually the what majority of Americans are with them, that they do not believe that the direction is going well in Iraq and specifically the majority of Americans now are saying that they should start talking about when troops should come home, despite the arguments we've heard over and over from Republicans saying that simply plays into the hands of insurgents and terrorists in Iraq.

KAGAN: Dana Bash on Capitol Hill, we will go back live to you when we see the vote begin. Thank you.

BASH: Thank you.

KAGAN: Meanwhile, let's get some military news in here. Talking about these troop reductions in Iraq, the political clamor loud and frenzied in Washington. We're getting word of this new development. The commander of U.S. forces may be ready to recommend lower troop levels.

Our Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr is following the story. Joining us with details.

What kind of numbers are we talking here, Barbara?

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Daryn, at best, we are told very, very modest reductions. General George Casey, the top commander in Iraq, is in Washington today. He spent the morning on Capitol Hill, actually, with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, briefing senators about the situation in Iraq. He and the secretary are scheduled to have a press conference here in Pentagon later this afternoon. Sources here in Pentagon are telling us that Casey's preferred option at this point, and it's just an option, we are told, is for a very modest troop reduction phased over time.

Perhaps at best, at best -- at best, one to two brigades, which would be about 6,000 to 10,000 troops. But the way that would be achieved is not by an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, but instead, postponing the deployment of troops now scheduled to rotate into Iraq later this year. So gradually letting those numbers in Iraq come down from their current level of 127,000 U.S. troops.

We are told that, in fact, that some decisions have been made about postponing certain troop units deployments to Iraq. But all of this is going to be announced as a very gradual step. All of it, Daryn, will continue to depend on the security situation in Iraq -- Daryn.

KAGAN: And, Barbara, let me just kind of step in here and point out that as we look at the other side of the screen, as we break up our screen here, the vote is under way on the first bill, the Democratic proposal. This is the one that is sponsored by John Kerry and Senator Feingold, as well, that would call for all U.S. troops to be out of Iraq by July of next year.

Now, let's ask you about another story that's been developing with these charges of Marines at Camp Pendleton, also a Navy corpsman, who have been charged with some very serious allegations.

STARR: Right, Daryn, a press conference yesterday out in Camp Pendleton, California. Seven Marines and one Navy corpsman charge with murder of an Iraqi man several months ago. The charges indicate that they murdered this man, this Iraqi, and then planted a shovel and an AK-47 weapon next to the man, trying to make it appear that he was laying IEDs out in the road.

Now, of course, innocent until proven guilty. Family members saying that this was not a crime that took place, but nonetheless, very serious charges filed against these eight men.

The next step will be the commander will decide whether to go to a so-called Article 32, the equivalent of a grand jury proceeding, essentially, and whether to take it all to a courts martial trial -- Daryn.

KAGAN: Barbara Starr at the Pentagon. Barbara, thank you.

Once again, the vote underway at the U.S. Senate and we'll continue to watch that. This is on the Kerry proposal that would call for all troops to be withdrawn, U.S. troops to be withdrawn from Iraq by the end of -- by July of next year.

Also want to let you know on this Pentagon issue we're going to have live coverage of the Pentagon briefing by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and General George Casey 3:30 Eastern. Kyra Phillips will be handling that on "LIVE FROM." In Iraq, hostage drama, now in its second day. Authorities saying that gunmen commandeered busses outside of a factory, kidnapping dozens of workers who were heading home. Iraqi officials say two of the hostages were killed. We're told dozens of others have been freed. It's believed at least 30 workers are still being held.

The military says separate attack have killed five members -- U.S. service members, four Marines were killed in the western Anbar Province on Tuesday. A soldier died south of Baghdad yesterday. U.S. troop deaths now stand at 2,510.

It was a call to arms. It's from al Qaeda to the people of Afghanistan. A new video by Ayman al-Zawahiri has turned up on Islamic Web sites. In it he urges Afghan university students to rise up and attack what he calls the invaders. Al-Zawahiri is considered the number two man in al Qaeda. The message prompted a quick response from the Afghanistan's president. This morning Hamid Karzai called for al-Zawahiri's capture.

Once again, we are watching what's happen on the U.S. Senate. They will look at two Democratically-sponsored proposals, looking at troops in Iraq. The vote underway on the one that's proposed by Senator John Kerry and Senator Russ Feingold. We'll be watching it. More in just a bit.

Also, they go to the mall and you tell them not to talk to strangers, but what do you tell teens who socialize online? Tips for parents, coming up.

And something weird is happening in Tulsa.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They're blue, they're red. They sometimes move, which is really bizarre.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This didn't seem like anything I had ever seen that was coming out of a human body.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: A medical mystery gives patients the creeps. Doctors are baffled. Details ahead on CNN, the most trusted name in news.

But first, we're looking at Los Angeles, California. A truck into a fire hydrant. Looks like the fire hydrant won this one. It looks like firefighters have had to go under a tarp in order just to get control on that fire hydrant.

We'll have more after a break on what's happening in L.A.

Also, of course, the floor of the U.S. Senate.

We're back after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) KAGAN: The vote is underway and we are watching on the floor of the U.S. Senate. They're looking at two different Democratic proposals. You can see if you look really closely in the kind of bottom right quadrant of your screen, Senator John Kerry is standing there. This is his proposal that he's put forward with Russ Feingold. It would call for all U.S. troops to be withdrawal from Iraq by July of next year.

Another Democratic proposal to be voted on after this.

And look at this! That is not Old Faithful. That's the middle of Los Angeles. Fredricka Whitfield is going to fret us in -- is going to fill us in.

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, we know, Daryn, always a challenge drive in L.A., in particular. Earlier we saw, you know, what happens when two tractor trailers collide on Route 5 and now look at what happens when a vehicle crashes into a fire hydrant. You have a...

KAGAN: Looks like the fire hydrant won.

WHITFIELD: Yes, the fire hydrant did, in fact, win. And you know what's funny about this picture -- well, maybe not funny. Well, It's a little comical. No one got hurt, so we're able to say that. See that yellow tarp? Well, underneath there are some workers who are going to try and hand crank some control over this water, this geyser their has now erupted there and what used to be that hydrant. And you will see that they really do manage to get the matter under control.

I think there are about three, maybe even four workers there. I don't know if they're firefighters or if they're with Water Works there. But they're able to kind of hand crank, the old-fashioned way, to get the water under control before finally that geyser is reduced to a little bubble, a little trickle in the roadway.

KAGAN: But that's their low-tech answer for having to deal with it.

WHITFIELD: Yes. But it works. And you know what? The traffic goes on. You saw around there, even despite that huge spillage.

KAGAN: Yes. Free carwash.

WHITFIELD: Free carwash, I like that.

KAGAN: Like when you're stopped at a stop light and the guys come up and try to wash your window.

WHITFIELD: That's right. Only this time you don't have to tip.

KAGAN: Exactly. Just keep on going. Thank, you Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right.

KAGAN: We'll see what more we can learn about that. What is a brave relatively new world for young people, a scary one for parents, though. We're talking about social sites on the Internet. Friendship is just taps away on a keyboard, but all too often so is danger.

We've all heard frightening stories about young people who are lured by adults. It's such a big issue that right now the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, holding a day long event devoted solely to keeping kids safe online.

And the hugely popular site, myspace.com, has come up with new safety features. The biggest change bans adults from contacting 14- year-old and 15-year-olds if they don't know the teen's full name or e-mail address.

MySpace also plans targeted ads to age appropriate groups and all members will have the option of making their profiles public. The top MySpace security officer told CNN's "AMERICAN MORNING" that safety begins at home.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HEMANSHU NIGAM, MYSPACE.COM: Parents play a very, very important role, just like they do in the offline world. I have four children myself and every day I teach them about safety offline.

When my daughter crosses the street, look both ways. And I teach her about not talking to strangers. Parents have the same role to bring that offline safety dialogue into the online world.

And if they do that, they're going to raise their children in a digital age where by natural learning, they will be doing things that are safe online as they do every single day offline.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: Well, if you're a parent, what should you do to keep your kids safe online? Parry Aftab wrote a book. It's called "The Parents' Guide to Protecting Your Children in Cyberspace." That's about as straight forward as you can get. She's also executive director of wiredsafety.org. And Parry's with me from New York.

Good morning.

PARRY AFTAB, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WIREDSAFETY.ORG: Good morning.

KAGAN: Got to explain a little CNN etiquette before we go down our list. The way things work around here, we're following a bunch of stories at once. Might have to interrupt you and head to the floor of the U.S. Senate where they're voting on an Iraq resolution.

AFTAB: Not a problem.

KAGAN: My apologies upfront if that happens. OK? All right. Now, let's get to how we can have parents helping their kids stay safe. Number one, you need to talk to your kids.

AFTAB: Absolutely. You have to talk to them. It's all about communication, not about technology. Don't freak. Remember that we were 14 and the kind of things we used to do we'd would still be grounded for.

KAGAN: Uh oh. Yes. Now, you should ask to see your kid's profile page. Is that like looking in their diary though?

AFTAB: Absolutely not. A diary is between your kids and the written page and locked in their sock drawer. Their online profile may be public to 700 million people. The rule is not everybody but my parents can see it.

But tell them you want to see it tomorrow. That way it gives them 24 hours to clean it up in panic and learn what's right and what's wrong.

KAGAN: I like that. I like a little bit of notice.

It says get involved. How do you do that?

AFTAB: Sit down and say do you have one? I'd like to see it. Know that if they have one, they probably have four. One they show their parents and other ones. But sit down and say I want to see it. Why do you have it? They have it because they want to have protests on the war issues, on immigration issues. They have it to talk to their friends. They have it to share their creativity. They have it for a million reasons, to communicate with kids they were in camp with.

Find out why they have it and then we can fashion the right security and safety for that use.

And we'll help you do that WiredSafety is the world's largest Internet safety and help group. We're all unpaid volunteers. It's all free. Come to us, we'll get you involved.

KAGAN: I think you made a real interesting point I haven't heard before. If your kid says you have one, they probably have four. How do you know?

AFTAB: You don't -- well, what you can do is we've got some issues we're going to be posting over the next week or so. We're adding a guide on MySpace. How to find your kids, where they are, what to consider, and what the new safety measures mean and more importantly, what they really don't mean. So that you're in charge.

Then, once you find one of their friends -- if you can't kind your kid, find one of their friends there. Once you find their friends, it will lead you back. They link to each other. So it's you know, you follow the yellow brick MySpace road.

KAGAN: Got it. Don't believe everything you read. What do you mean by that? AFTAB: Well, don't believe everything your read, especially if your kids are posting it. A lot of parents come to me, saying their kid said that they were out drunk at 3:00 in the morning, when they thought they were home in bed. It's not cool to say you were home babysitting for your 5-year-old niece or coloring with your little sister or baking cookies with your grandma. So kids pretend they have these exciting lives. They don't.

Don't believe everything you see online. If their friends are posting it or if your kids are posting it, it may be something they're doing just to impress others.

KAGAN: And finally, I'm still the parent.

AFTAB: If I could do nothing else, I want to parents to know I've got to have at least one parent in that household who's willing to be the parent. I'm tired of the, we're trying to be best friends. Somebody's got to be in control. Kids are being killed these days. Terrible things are happening. They're hurting each other. And these days it may affect which colleges they get accepted to.

So the parents who won't care about the predator issues may certainly care of their kids can't get into Stanford because of something they got posted last night.

KAGAN: It's a good thing they didn't have MySpace because that's probably how I got into Stanford. Back in the day.

Thank you, Parry. Really good tips. Thank you. It's WiredSafety.org, where people can get more tips on that, right?

AFTAB: Thank you very much. We're a charity, we're unpaid and we've got a new program called, Take Back the Net. Let's get everybody involved.

KAGAN: You're doing a good service. Thank you, Parry.

AFTAB: Thanks.

KAGAN: And let's go back to the floor of the U.S. Senate and look at how the vote is going with the Senate. They're looking at two proposals. Right now the one that is up for a vote is sponsored by Senator Kerry and Senator Feingold. And after that, it will be the one by Senator Carl Levin.

Do we have Dana Bash? Yes, there's Dana.

Dana, what can you tell us about how the vote's going?

BASH: Hi, Daryn. Well, by our count seven Democrats have voted for the Kerry amendment so far. The Kerry team, if you will, they were hoping to get between 10 and a dozen, maybe as many as 15 to make the point that they have been trying to make, which is that their position is not so off base, even as you would -- you hear some Democrats, many Democrats saying, their position in that they believe Senator Kerry, Senator Russ Feingold, Senator Barbara Boxer of California, that the only way to deal with Iraq and the way forward, if you will, is to say troops need to come home by a date certain, a year from now. I think we are up to eight now Democrats voting for that.

It's going to be a very different kind of vote when we see the next amendment, the next amendment from Senator Carl Levin, which has the backing of most Democratic senators, which doest not give a date certain because many believe that is not good policy and frankly, not good politics to say that kind of thing at this point.

So that's probably where we'll see that vote when that comes up in just a short while -- Daryn.

KAGAN: But as you're pointing out, neither one of these are going to pass, but it does all have interesting implications, even going as far forward as presidential election 2008.

BASH: Yes, that is very true. One of the things that's always fascinating to watch in the United States Senate is, especially right about now, is the dynamic between the potential contenders for president in 2008 and there are a lot of them. On both sides of the aisle, frankly.

But specifically, when it comes to this debate about Iraq. It has really been interesting to see how it falls. You have Senator Kerry, as I mentioned, Senator Russ Feingold -- those are potential contenders for 2008.

They are appealing basically to the left side of the Democratic Party. They -- many of them think this is their number one issue, that Iraq was a complete mistake and that the only thing to do is to pull troops out right now.

But on the other hand, you have people like Senator Joe Biden, of course, Senator Hillary Clinton, who have been on the other side of the Democratic divide, if you will, during this debate. They have been speaking forcefully saying that, yes, they do think the Democrats should have a voice in this, but trying to make the case that that is the wrong approach, that it is not the right thing to do, to say, you know, to set an arbitrary date for troops to pull out.

So it's been interesting to see the positioning, you're right, among the 2008 candidates, particularly on the Democratic side.

KAGAN: And as we're looking at it, we're hearing only 10 votes in favor of the Kerry proposal so far. Is that about how you would expect or is that less or fewer?

BASH: Probably -- I think we're up to about 10 Democrats so far. That's about where they thought this was going to come down in terms of on the Democratic side. Jim Jeffords, an independent, but somebody who often votes with the Democrats actually did also vote for this.

So that's about where Senator Kerry and his team thought this was going to come down. And again, we probably will expect them to claim that this shows that their position has momentum because it is more than this kind of position got last week, which is really a handful of senators who voted for an immediate troop withdrawal. That particular measure was to bring troops home by the end of this year, so just in six months.

KAGAN: All right. Dana Bash, we'll keep watching it, from Capitol Hill. Thank you.

BASH: Thank you.

KAGAN: Also today, fire, the big worry today in the western U.S. About two dozen major blazes are burning this morning. One of the most worrisome is south of Flagstaff, Arizona. Hundreds of firefighters are scrambling to get ahead of the flames before they threaten Flagstaff. The immediate danger is to several homes located in Oak Creek Canyon in Sedona. So far none has been lost.

(WEATHER REPORT)

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com