Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Survivor of Airport Attack Shares their Story; Trump & Clinton respond To Istanbul Attack; Are Airports the New Favorite Target of Terrorists? Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired June 29, 2016 - 07:30   ET

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

[07:30:00] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: Thank you for that. Paul, Kayleigh, thank you for the debate.

KAYLEIGH MCENANY, TRUMP SUPPORTER: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: What is your take on all of this? You can tweet us @NewDay or post your comments on facebook.com/NewDay. Let's get over to Victor.

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: Imagine what it was like to see the death and the destruction after the blast went off at Istanbul's airport. Well, up next, we'll talk to an eyewitness who landed moments after that attack.

[07:30:20]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:34:15] CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST: Two men entered the Istanbul airport and pulled out their weapons, they started to fire, then they detonated bombs. Another man then did it in the parking lot. Right now, 41 people have lost their lives, over 230 are injured, so those numbers will most likely change.

This happened in one of the world's busiest airports. (Video playing) Imagine being on your screen right now. That scene -- people not knowing what's going on. And then, the explosions and the aftermath which lasted a long time.

What was it like? Joining us now from Istanbul, Laurence Cameron, who was coming off a flight in Istanbul when the explosions went off. He is a video journalist who has covered Afghanistan and Ukraine. Laurence, how are you this morning? How are you feeling?

[07:35:00] LAURENCE CAMERON, VIDEO JOURNALIST, WITNESSED ISTANBUL AIRPORT ATTACK: Good, thanks, Chris. I've not had much sleep but everything's quite calm right now, which is a little surreal as opposed to the scenes that we saw here last night. Watching that footage back, it's crazy to think everything's kind of back to normal now.

CUOMO: We've been remarking on that this morning. I want to talk to you about what the experience was like inside but the timing here is relevant also, especially on the heels of Brussels where it took days for the airport to get back on its feet because of investigations and just the practicalities on the ground. Here, they're already back up and running. What does that tell you?

CAMERON: I guess the Turks are just trying to move on as quickly as possible. I was in the airport this morning looking for my lost luggage and they had just put a panel out. They were sweeping up debris and someone had hung a big Turkish flag pretty much right at the spot where the bomb had gone off as a sort of active defiance, which is quite moving really.

A lot of people taking photos and a real sense that everyone was just carrying on as normal and, you know, obviously, to remember what happened and the awfulness of it, but to think the best way to defeat this is, I guess, to just carry on.

I talked to some pilots this morning in my hotel and they said yes, we're ready to -- we're ready to go, ready to fly. You know, everything back to normal as much as it can be.

CUOMO: You get off the plane, you get into the airport, you see the scene. Describe it for us.

CAMERON: So, I didn't actually hear the explosion. I'd had a very pleasant flight, a couple of whiskeys, watched a movie, and I got up and grabbed my bag. And as I came out of this little walkway that leads up into the main terminal I just heard these screams. I turned around the corner and it's just this wall of people running towards me, tripping over themselves. Police with guns out. In the middle of it all there was some old chap in a wheelchair just sort of -- I mean, just horrendous, really.

CUOMO: You know what it's --

CAMERON: Just pure panic.

CUOMO: I'm sure it had to be a moment of pure panic, and you were seeing it on their faces. And you also got a sense of the range of injuries that these explosions caused. What did you see?

CAMERON: To be honest, Chris, we were on the side with the passport inspector. We didn't see -- no one on our side was actually hit. The worst -- all the damage was at the other side of the passport gate. So, if you imagine an airport, the passport control is very heavily guarded and, clearly, the attacker, I guess, had got close to it but he hadn't got through. So, actually, on our side, initially, no one was hurt. It was just pandemonium.

It was only until we were finally let out that you started to see blood on the floor, people coming out holding rags to their head, holding cuts on their arm, and so forth.

CUOMO: Do you think that that was -- the weapons that you saw -- with your familiarity of being in places where you see hostilities all the time, do you think that they were injured from glass shards and the material of the airport or do you think it was about the bombs, themselves, and what they may have been -- had in there in terms of frag?

CAMERON: You know what, I'm not a ballistics expert but I would assume from looking at the building itself, a lot of shattered glass, a lot of ceiling panels had fallen down. Even all the way out to the baggage carousel you had debris on the floor, so I can only assume that a lot of those injuries were caused by glass, by masonry, by plaster.

CUOMO: How were people handling it? How was the response?

CAMERON: You know, as you'd expect, just panic and people -- everyone asking what's happened, what's happened in a number of languages. And, I guess, the worst thing was when the police were following us out of the airport, clearly there had been families that had been split up. Tour groups that had been split up. Friends that had been split up.

People were looking back towards the airport shouting names, and the police were pushing them out and they were getting in arguments over wanting to go back in. Andwhether or not they'd been killed or injured, or just lost in the sort of chaos is anyone's guess.

CUOMO: When you see an attack like that and how they did it, and they were before security and they just came out of a cab and started to shoot, detonated themselves -- do you think that that is the kind of thing that you can be 100 percent safe from in today's world?

CAMERON: No, I don't think so. I mean, where do you -- where do you push the security barrier? Do you then stop people on the main road coming to the airport and they'll attack that? And then, do you keep going to the next -- I mean, where does it end, really?

[07:40:00] I don't see -- beyond stopping these things prior, to them actually happening through good intel or whatever else. I don't -- you can't really prevent this kind of thing if it's going to happen on such a busy intersection. If we're going to have free travel and be able to move so many people through these places, I don't really see how else you'd do it.

CUOMO: And that's why how quickly you respond becomes one of the measures of defense that you show. That it didn't have the impact that the terrorists wanted to have. Laurence Cameron, thank you very much for joining us. I'm glad you're safe. Appreciate you telling us what happened inside that airport.

CAMERON: Thank you.

CUOMO: Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Well, the Istanbul attacks just another reminder of how dangerous the world feels right now. Next up, David Axelrod on how terror impacts this presidential race.

[07:40:50]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [07:44:15]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESUMPTIVE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE: Can you imagine them sitting around the table, or wherever they're eating their dinner, talking about the Americans don't do waterboarding and, yet, we chop off heads. They probably think we're weak, we're stupid, we don't know what we're doing, we have no leadership. You know, you have to fight fire with fire.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: That was Donald Trump renewing calls for waterboarding after the Istanbul terror attack last night. So, how does terror shake up the 2016 race? Let's ask CNN's senior political commentator and former senior adviser to President Obama, David Axelrod. David, great to have you here in the studio.

DAVID AXELROD, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER OBAMA SENIOR ADVISER: Good to be here, yes.

CAMEROTA: So, conventional wisdom holds that terror attacks like we saw last night increase enthusiasm for a Donald Trump presidency. There's a new Quinnipiac poll out just this morning that seems to reflect that. Which candidate would be more effective handling ISIS? Fifty-two percent say Donald Trump, 39 percent say Hillary Clinton. What do you think?

[07:45:00] AXELROD: I think that the great thing about presidential races is there is always a poll to support whatever argument you want to make. "The Washington Post" had Hillary with a 12-point edge in terms of dealing with terrorism, so it's hard to say.

Look, Donald Trump basically treats every problem in the world like a nail and he's the hammer, and that has appeal when people are feeling insecure. So, events like this that may make people feel more insecure could benefit him. On the other hand, there is this sense that Hillary is more measured, perhaps more presidential, and more equipped to deal with these kinds of issues in the real world.

The temperament issue has dogged Trump in the last few weeks. And whether he has the temperament to deal with an unstable world or whether he would add more instability is the counter-argument, and it's not clear which argument will win.

CUOMO: Well, what you see over time here is that when they -- there's a disconnect between who the voters, or whoever responds to the poll, thinks would be the better commander in chief versus who would be tougher on ISIS.

AXELROD: Yes.

CUOMO: So how do you deal with that, politically?

AXELROD: Well ultimately, he's going to have to -- he's going to have to speak to what that means, being tougher on ISIS. The fact is that ISIS' territory is shrinking and that's one of the reasons why they're lashing out in various ways --

CUOMO: Right, but their attacks are increasing.

AXELROD: Right.

CUOMO: He said yesterday they do whatever they want, they're savages. We have our hands tied and we're too civilized.

AXELROD: No, I understand that.

CUOMO: Waterboarding --

AXELROD: No, I understand that --

CUOMO: What people like to hear.

AXELROD: -- it's a very visceral appeal but the question is what happens when the next question comes, which is OK, what does that mean? What are you going to do about it? What would you do differently? Waterboarding isn't really a serious answer to a lot of these questions. I'm not sure that anyone would argue that waterboarding -- we don't even know whether this was a coordinated attack, a command in control kind of attack, or whether this was -- or how it was planned.

So, it's really -- as this goes on I think what happens in the presidential races is the tests get harder month by month. And once you reach those debates you're going to have to answer questions in more than a visceral way, I think, to win the day, and he hasn't yet flushed out those approaches and plans.

CAMEROTA: Well, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump even had different approaches to talking about it last night. Donald Trump had a rally in Ohio. He came out to the podium, he spoke about it front of -- there you saw -- hundreds, maybe thousands of people. Hillary Clinton put out a written statement.

AXELROD: Yes.

CAMEROTA: So, do you -- what do you think about how effective either of those are?

AXELROD: Well, this goes back to the point that I raised earlier, which is there's no doubt that he knows how to make a visceral appeal and the appeal he made last night may have connected with voters. There are other voters, I'm sure, who are concerned about whether he is presidential in the sense that he can deal with these things in a measured, thoughtful way.

CAMEROTA: Right, but in politics does emotion win? Does the emotion and the visceral appeal at the ballot box win?

AXELROD: Well, I think when you get closer to the presidency I do think people start measuring candidates based on whether they can see them in that office. So, I think that's the big question you raise. Can he overcome those questions about his temperament and preparedness through raw visceral appeal?

CUOMO: You need both, though, right? In 2008, I remember then-Sen. Obama had been very measured.

AXELROD: I remember it, too.

CUOMO: I know you do, that's why I'm asking you, Axe. He had been very measured about what you would do with Pakistan. Pakistan was a big focus then. There was a belief, at the time, that they were really being used as a transit place --

AXELROD: Yes.

CUOMO: -- for terror. It turned out to be true. And he had been keeping an arm's length on it. That, well look, we've got to be careful. They're a big ally in the region. Big ally in there. And in an interview I kept pushing him what if Osama bin Laden was in there, what would you do? Would you go in? Would you go in if they weren't doing? And eventually, it was forced for him but he said yes, we'd go in.

And you guys make it a point of the election when you start talking about it. Clinton immediately turned around and said hey, you have to be strong. If Iran pointed missiles at us we would obliterate them. People want to hear the tough talk.

AXELROD: No, well actually it was a little bit different -- I remember it a little bit differently, which was he said if we knew where Osama bin Laden was and we had actionable intelligence and the Pakistanis were unable or unwilling to act, then I would go in after bin Laden.

And actually, he was rebuked by all the Democratic candidates who said that that would be irresponsible because Pakistan was an ally and you have to work with your allies. So in that case, he made a more visceral appeal, but it was also based on what he deeply believed and he,ultimately, acted on that as president.

CUOMO: He liked the idea of action --

AXELROD: He acted on that as president.

CUOMO: That's what it was. People want to hear that you act against the enemy.

[07:50:00] AXELROD: But that was a specific -- that was a specific set of circumstances that he was responding to. My point is that Trump is going to have to go beyond these visceral representations and say this is what it means, and this is how I'm going to move forward. He has to pass that test or I think people are going to be a little skeptical about him as commander in chief.

CAMEROTA: David Axelrod, thank you. Good to talk to you this morning. AXELROD: Great to see you guys.

CAMEROTA: Let's get to Victor.

BLACKWELL: Two airports attacked by terrorists in the last three months, Istanbul and Brussels. Are airports the new favorite target of terrorists, and how concerned should you be when you fly? We'll discuss, next.

[07:50:45]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:54:35] BLACKWELL: U.S. airports are tightening security after the terror attack in Istanbul's international airport. Now, this attack follows the deadly bombings at the Brussels airport three months ago. Is this the new target for terrorists and what could be done to protect travelers?

Let's discuss with Juliette Kayyem, CNN national security analyst and former assistant secretary for the Department of Homeland Security. She's the author of the book "Security Mom". Juliette, good morning to you.

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST, AUTHOR, "SECURITY MOM": Good morning, Victor.

[07:55:00] BLACKWELL: So, this airport was the 11th busiest in the world. Knowing what we know now, and we know that details will come out through the day and the rest of week, do you see any security holds or is this not really a story about airport security?

KAYYEM: No, it is absolutely a story about airport security and I think just looking at the pictures, there are questions about -- given Istanbul's security layers, even before you get into the airport, how did these men get in simultaneously and could they put more security at the area where they're entering?

The people should get out of their heads that airports are hardened, right? There's a range of security. We call it layered security in airports. Think of it like the cockpit is, right, the most secure. We secure pilots, we secure the cockpit, the airplane.

The further you get from the airplane, including on the sidewalk, is where you are going to have to just accept a level of vulnerability because there's just too many people coming in and out of airports. For airports to function in the world that we live in you are going to have soft targets somewhere near their vicinity.

BLACKWELL: So, we know that this airport, specifically, is hardening even a larger perimeter around the airport. I mean, you remember -- we remember when the security started at the gate, and then it started at the terminal.

KAYYEM: Right. BLACKWELL: And the departure, and then the sidewalk. We heard from a guest who was speaking with Chris this morning that they're checking taxis on the drive up the airport. I mean, how far can this perimeter go?

KAYYEM: It can only go so far because at some point you're going to have sort of a choke moment, right? You're going to have a moment where people are not going through security, and then they're through security. You could put it 10 miles outside of an airport but at mile 10.1 it is going to be a soft target. So, what we have to do is focus on layered security and also engaging the public.

Look at this. This is the second attack in which taxicab drivers were used. We need to engage those who might be transporting terrorists and not know it. You know, the airline security personnel, the airline flight attendants, the ticketing people. You have to engage everyone because there's no way the security apparatus is going to be able to make airports hard enough that they are invulnerable.

Just looking at the Istanbul numbers -- I mean, this is an airport that is servicing 113 countries a day, 285 flights internationally, only. This just -- the magnitude of the size, which we should applaud in the kind of world that we're in, is just overwhelming.

BLACKWELL: You know, I started this conversation by asking if the airport, or airports, are the new favorite for terrorists. We know that seven out of 10, according to the latest CNN poll -- more than seven out of 10 Americans expect that there will be, in the near future, another attack on U.S. soil. What's the degree of concern that a U.S. airport will follow Brussels and Istanbul?

KAYYEM: So, there's always a level of concern, and like everywhere else in the world there is layered security at our airports. I think what you are going to see, especially leading up to this July 4th weekend, which is always sort of an elevated threat level, is a surge of resources, public safety, local law enforcement, TSA at each of these big airports just to sort of make the public assured that they are safe and secure.

But look, if people want to move in a world that we're in, including in the United States, you can't have the security apparatus so strong that it impedes the flow of people, and that's the challenge for people in airport security or in homeland security, generally. But I think you're going to see mayors responding and sort of anticipating July 4th nervousness with a surge of these resources.

BLACKWELL: You know, we all remember that hashtag that was popular a few weeks ago, #hatethewait to the long lines at TSA. Let me ask you this. You mentioned the surge leading up to July 4th. July 5th, the final day of Ramadan and now the final five holiest days of the holy month.

We know that there is this constant competition between ISIS and al Qaeda in the one-upmanship in global Jihad supremacy. A week after Paris, al Qaeda went after a Bamako hotel in Mali and killed 21 people, took 170 hostages. What's your degree of concern that al Qaeda will have to respond to this somewhere in the world in the last few days of Ramadan?

KAYYEM: I think we are in an elevated threat level. I think that not only requires government action but for people to be engaged. I have to be honest with you. If you're traveling, talk to your kids. Do you know what the 911 number is abroad? People need to get very smart. My concern is not only the elevated threat level, it is with ISIS losses in Syria and Iraq -- OK, let's just be realistic here. They've lost Fallujah. They are losing.

BLACKWELL: Yes.

KAYYEM: They need to have successful attacks for recruitment efforts and that's essentially what's going on. They want to show that they're sort of alive and well.

BLACKWELL: Juliette Kayyem, thanks so much for being with us this morning.

KAYYEM: Thank you.

BLACKWELL: There's a lot of breaking news coverage on the Istanbul terror attack. Let's get to it.