Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Houston Death Row Inmate Escapes Prison; President Bush Faces Protests in Argentina; Security Changes Ahead For America's Airports?; Interview With Former President Jimmy Carter

Aired November 04, 2005 - 15:00   ET

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

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Wolf Blitzer. And you're in THE SITUATION ROOM, where new pictures and information are arriving all the time. Standing by, CNN reporters across the United States and around the world to bring you the day's top stories.
Happening now, it's 5:00 p.m. in Argentina, where they're certainly not crying for President Bush -- his summit visit marred by some serious mass protests and lots more questions about the CIA leak case.

It's 2:00 p.m. in Houston, where a manhunt is on for a death row inmate who walked out of a jail in civilian clothing with a fake I.D. badge.

And it's 3:00 p.m. at New York's La Guardia Airport. Passengers nationwide may soon avoid extra security checks by paying for the privilege. Will they also be allowed to carry knives on to airliners?

You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

We will get to the situation with the president at the Summit of the Americas in a moment.

But on the road right now, a Texas death row inmate convicted of shooting his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend to death, he's on the loose right now. His name is Charles Victor Thompson. And police consider him very dangerous. Thompson -- Thompson walked right out of the door of the Harris County Jail in Houston yesterday, hard as it is to believe. Officials say he somehow managed to get a hold of civilian clothes and an I.D. indicating he was with the attorney general's office.

Relatives of Thompson's victims are outraged.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE DONAGHY, BROTHER OF MURDER VICTIM: How can this happen? You know, he's in custody. He's -- you know, he's a convicted murderer. And he's being sent back to death row. How can he escape?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Thompson was re-sentenced to death just this past month for the 1999 killings. We are going to some live pictures in from Houston right now. We are standing by for a news conference. You see the picture there behind me. Once the news conference with the law enforcement authorities begins, we will go there and update you on the manhunt, a massive manhunt, under way right now for this convicted killer on death row.

Let's move on now. We will come back to the news conference.

Actually, it looks like it's starting right now, that news conference. Let's listen in.

Actually, it's not starting. But let's give it a second to see if -- if this news conference is about to begin. We're waiting to hear from Lieutenant General John Martin, the Harris County Sheriff's Department spokesman.

Here he is.

LT. JOHN MARTIN, SPOKESMAN, HARRIS COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT: And if everybody's ready...

QUESTION: We're ready.

MARTIN: OK. I would like to thank you all for coming. Obviously, this is something that has generated a -- just a tremendous amount of attention. And I -- I wanted to have an opportunity to address everybody's questions all at one time.

Unfortunately, the news is that he has not been located yet. We have we have -- we have received a -- a number of significant leads. And our criminal warrants division and the Gulf Coast Violent Offenders Task Force are continuing to follow up on those leads at this time.

The vehicle that had been described this morning has been located, that -- that Nissan Frontier. Unfortunately, that is not something that led us to the location of Mr. Thompson. Again, I wanted to -- to give you guys an opportunity to -- to ask questions all together. I know there have been a number of questions about exactly how the escape occurred and at what point the -- the search effort is at right now.

We have learned some additional information about the escape itself. The items of clothing that Mr. Thompson had were the -- the clothing that he wore to his last court appearance. Apparently, he smuggled those items back to his jail cell after his court appearance.

He did have an attorney visit yesterday at approximately 1:45 in the afternoon. While he was in the attorney booth, he -- he got out of his inmate jumpsuit, the orange clothing they commonly wear, changed into civilian clothing. He was handcuffed when he was taken into the attorney booth and, apparently, was able to -- to get out of the handcuffs. We do not know if he had a key or if he just slipped the cuffs off. Again, he -- he was in civilian clothes at that time when he approached the FCC.

There had been an indication that he had a card identifying himself as being with the attorney general's office. This morning, I was informed he did have some type of a card with him. It had his -- his photograph on it. It was a laminated card, like, similar to a driver's license. It did have some kind of a black strip on the back of it. We're not clear at this point if it was magnetic or simply a piece of tape placed on the back of the card to give that appearance. And it's my understanding, the only -- the only association he had with the attorney general's office were the comments that he made to the deputies.

So, at this point, there is no indication that the card itself actually identified him as being with the attorney general's office.

QUESTION: What did he say to the deputies?

MARTIN: Again, he told the deputy that he was with the attorney general's office and that he was conducting an investigation inside our jail.

QUESTION: How did he manage to keep all of that stuff in his cell without anybody spotting it or finding it?

MARTIN: We don't know that exactly.

Our -- our suspicions at this point are that he may have kept it with his legal documents when he came back from court. Obviously, he had it concealed in some manner, both inside the cell and when he went to his attorney visit.

QUESTION: I understand the attorney visit, that was not his attorney of record.

MARTIN: That's correct.

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: That was...

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Do you know who this person was?

MARTIN: We do know who it was.

QUESTION: Have you questioned that attorney?

MARTIN: If we have not spoken with him yet, we will be speaking with him. At this point, you know, we're just looking at him as a possible witness, someone who may be able to give us additional information about the escape.

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: And, having said that, I would like to also point out that we are conducting a thorough investigation inside our jail with regard to that escape. We are interviewing everybody who may have information regarding his escape, which includes staff members, other inmates. We have had a couple of witnesses inside the lobby who said they actually saw him leaving. We will be attempting to contact them as well.

QUESTION: Do you have all any inside theory that there might have been some inside help with the escape?

MARTIN: At this point, we don't have conclusive evidence to suggest that, but we have not eliminated any possibilities at this point.

QUESTION: A follow-up question.

MARTIN: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Do you -- how -- how long did it take before you all noticed that he was missing?

MARTIN: He was discovered almost immediately.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Now, when they -- when they leave -- when he left...

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: ... the big question, everybody, a lot of attorneys want to know...

MARTIN: Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: He's in a secured area on one side of the Plexiglas.

MARTIN: Exactly.

QUESTION: A guard or someone had to open the door for him.

MARTIN: Somebody had to have let him out, yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: And the alarm should have been raised when they see someone in civvies in a secured area.

MARTIN: We -- we have a -- a number of civilian personnel that do work within the secure area of the jail. So, that, by itself, is not necessarily something that would -- would be of concern.

QUESTION: But wouldn't a guard -- one would think that the guard would recognize his face.

MARTIN: The -- well, that's not always the case. There are a number of civilian personnel that are known to the deputies, simply because they come into contact with each other on a daily basis. There are also some that -- that may not be as familiar to the deputies. We have -- we -- we have chaplains. We have MHMRA personnel. We have medical staff, maintenance personnel. There -- there are a number of civilians that do operate legitimately within our jail facility. QUESTION: But what I'm -- what I'm saying is that the guard who accompanied him over there opens the door and, presto change-o, but you would think that he would recognize the inmate's face that he had let in a few minutes earlier.

MARTIN: Well, no. There, it -- it would not have been the same deputy. There was a deputy that would have escorted him to the attorney booth and left him in the attorney booth.

Now, that door should have been locked. It's not clear at this point if the door was left unlocked or if he was able to -- to defeat the locking mechanism somehow. And, apparently, again, while he's in the attorney booth, he changed into his civilian clothes. Then, he approached the FCC, which is our floor control center. That controls access between the secure part of the facility and the public side, where the public will come to visit inmates.

QUESTION: Now...

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: He actually had to go talk his way past three people. He had the FCC...

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: At least...

QUESTION: ... on the second floor, the first floor and then the -- and then the one at the visitor cabin.

MARTIN: There were -- there would have been at least three people.

QUESTION: Do you all have any evidence that this was planned or is just -- is all spur...

MARTIN: It -- no. It does suggest that it was pre-planned.

QUESTION: Do you all have any theories on where he might be or which direction he might head so far?

MARTIN: Again, we have received a number of significant leads, nothing that we want to release at this time, for obvious reasons, I would think.

We do continue to actively search for him and follow up on a lot of those leads. We're still getting a number of -- of tips by phone call. We're -- we are getting a number of reported sightings.

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: And we're checking out all of those as -- as quickly as possible. QUESTION: One more question.

QUESTION: What happened...

MARTIN: Yes, ma'am, go ahead. Go ahead.

QUESTION: What -- what about the car? You said you found it, but did it have anything to do with him? Or did you find that he had used the car?

MARTIN: The -- no. The vehicle has been located. And, obviously, it has not led us to -- to the location of inmate Thompson.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: But do you think he used it at any point?

MARTIN: That's -- that's not clear at this point. We have not -- we have not determined whether or not that vehicle was used.

QUESTION: What -- what -- what -- what...

MARTIN: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: What -- what ways have been taken to -- to protect the victims of the family right now? Is there any concern for them itself in retaliation...

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: There -- of course, there's a concern. He's extremely dangerous. Obviously, he has a propensity for violence. I know the victims of the family were notified by TDCJ immediately following the -- the escape to let them know that he was no longer in custody, so that they could take measures to protect themselves.

QUESTION: What about his family?

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: ... he could get...

MARTIN: I'm sorry.

QUESTION: The three people he had to get past...

MARTIN: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Obviously, at least some alarm bells were raised, because he was questioned.

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: Exactly.

(CROSSTALK) QUESTION: ... very end, they had a problem. He didn't have a 1200 Baker (ph) badge.

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: No, that's exactly right. When he approached the floor control center on the first floor, the deputy asked him who he was, why he was here. Again, he stated he's with the attorney general's office, that he was conducting an investigation.

Now, the -- the deputy at the floor control center called for another deputy at the visitor control center, who came over to that location. They both asked him why he didn't have a -- a security tag for this facility. His comment was that he entered over at 701, which is feasible -- feasible because the buildings are connected.

At that point, the deputy in the visitor control center took him out to the lobby, where they were talking with deputy in the visitor control center, trying to verify his story. At that point, he made a comment he had someone waiting on him. He just wanted to go out and let them know what was going on. He would come right back and clear it up. And, apparently, at that point, he left the facility.

QUESTION: Well, if they hadn't verified his story yet, why did they let him exit the building?

MARTIN: There -- there are a number of things that we will be trying to answer. Of course, that's one of them.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Where did he get the civilian clothes?

QUESTION: Are those deputies from the first and second floor still working right now? Are they working today?

MARTIN: All of the staff members are still working.

I don't know if they're on duty today. I don't know what their days off are. There -- there have not -- has not been anyone suspended. I have had a number of questions about that. And, again, we have a -- a -- large investigation being conducted right now by our internal affairs division.

Everybody who may have either come into contact with this individual or may just have information regarding the escape will be questioned about it.

QUESTION: Let me ask you this.

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: I'm sorry. Ms. -- Ms. O'Hare (ph).

QUESTION: How did he get the civilian clothes to the attorney?

MARTIN: I...

QUESTION: Was he wearing them under the orange jumpsuit? Did he carry them?

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: That's -- that's not clear. It's certainly a possibility that he was wearing it under his -- under his inmate jumpsuit, although it's...

QUESTION: Does that mean...

(CROSSTALK)

MARTIN: It's more -- it's more -- excuse me just a second. It's more likely that he had them with his legal papers and he carried them to the attorney booth. The other thing that I want to point out is that, you know, it's not clear at what point the attorney left. Of course, the inmate could have remained in the inmate booth for -- for some time after the attorney exited.

QUESTION: Let me ask you...

BLITZER: Lieutenant John Martin of the Harris County Sheriff's Department in Houston, speaking about an incredible case. An inmate on death row actually walked out of a prison in Houston, brazenly walked out, managed to get some civilian clothes, managed to get some sort of fake I.D., and simply left -- convicted of murdering his ex-girlfriend and the boy -- the new boyfriend of the -- of his ex-girlfriend in a 1998 shooting attack.

Only the other day, he was sentenced to die by lethal injection. And now he's on the loose -- a massive manhunt under way in Texas right now and maybe elsewhere. We will continue to monitor this news conference, get more information for you, as it becomes available.

Let's check in with Jack Cafferty, his first report of the day. This is a pretty amazing storying, Jack.

JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: You want to -- you want to take bets on how long the warden of that place is going to have his job?

BLITZER: Geez. I mean, it's amazing. A guy on death row...

CAFFERTY: Death row guy, yes.

BLITZER: Yes.

CAFFERTY: I mean, that's just -- that's ridiculous. No excuse for that.

After all of the work and all of the money spent to upgrade the airline industry security-wise, passengers may soon be able to bring small knives and scissors on board airplanes once again. The Transportation Security Administration says it's thinking about possibly reversing its post-9/11 ban on these things. The chief of TSA told Congress yesterday that too much time is given to objects that don't pose a real threat on aircraft.

A spokesman for the Association of Flight Attendants says it's a bad idea, saying these weapons could prove fatal.

So, here's the question this hour. Should small knives and scissors be allowed on plane? Your thoughts, please -- CaffertyFile@CNN.com -- that's one word -- or you can go to CNN.com/caffertyfile. And we will read some thoughts on this in a bit.

BLITZER: Good. Thanks, Jack...

CAFFERTY: Sure.

BLITZER: ... very much.

Coming up here in THE SITUATION ROOM, the former president of the United States, Jimmy Carter, he lost to Ronald Reagan 25 years ago today. He has rebuilt his legacy as a global peace leader. And he's writing about politics for the first time since leaving office. Jimmy Carter, live here in THE SITUATION ROOM, that's coming up next.

Plus, riots and rage -- the violence spreading in France. We have the story. We will go there live.

And, a little bit later, the royals in New Orleans. Charles and Camilla in hurricane-devastated areas. We will take you there.

You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. Twenty-five years ago today, November 4, 1980, Jimmy Carter suffered a crushing reelection defeat to Ronald Reagan. It was a huge blow to the Democratic Party, as well as to President Carter himself. But both eventually bounced back.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER (voice-over): At first, Americans saw Jimmy Carter as an antidote to the scandal-plagued Nixon era. But a series of unfortunate events pulled him down -- an energy crisis, inflation, recession, and the Iran hostage crisis. In 1979, more than 50 Americans were seized at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran by Islamic revolutionaries, and held captive for 444 days.

President Carter paid a price for his failure to rescue them or win their release. He lost his reelection bid to Ronald Reagan in a landslide. On the day of Reagan's inauguration, the hostages were freed. A golden era for Republicans was launched, along with a 12-year White House exile for Democrats.

Carter was shunned by many in his own party. But he ultimately repaired his public image. He became active in a program to build affordable homes, Habitat for Humanity. He became a leading voice for free and fair elections, monitoring votes around the world. And he won the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to resolve global conflicts, from Haiti to North Korea.

A quarter-century after his defeat, Carter says he can't deny what many have said about him, that he's been a better ex-president than president.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: And joining us now, the 39th president of the United States, Jimmy Carter. He's the author of a new book entitled "Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis." It's his first political book since leaving office.

President Carter, thanks very much for joining us. Congratulations on the new book.

JIMMY CARTER, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Thank you.

I would like to correct one thing. I spent the last three days of my administration negotiating the release of the hostages. And I would like to point out that every hostage came home safe and free.

BLITZER: Well, thank God they did. And I remember those days vividly, as I'm sure you do as well.

Let me read a -- this passage from the book, "Our Endangered Values."

"It became apparent soon after the presidential election in 2000 that some of our new political leaders were determined to attack Iraq. With false and distorted claims after 9/11, they misled the U.S. Congress and the American public."

Do you want to offer some specifics, the evidence, how they misled the American public?

CARTER: Well, I don't think there's any doubt that the American public was misled. That's been proven over and over.

There were claims, very fervent, that we would see mushroom clouds, that tens -- or hundreds of thousands of Americans would die in a single day made by the national security adviser and the -- and the vice president. There were claims that Iraq held massive quantities of weapons of mass destruction, that we could blame Saddam Hussein for the attacks on 9/11.

BLITZER: But I guess the question -- let me rephrase the question. Was the president the victim of bad intelligence or did he deliberately distort that intelligence to try to -- to achieve his political goals?

CARTER: Well, I have never said that the president himself deliberately distorted the information. I don't know what information the president had from his subordinates, including the national security adviser and the secretary of Defense and the vice president.

The fact is that the American people were, indeed, misled. The big altercation in the Senate in this week, as a matter of fact, has been, finally, after 18 months of delay -- perhaps deliberate delay -- to find out, was the intelligence erroneous, or was the intelligence misinterpreted inadvertently, or was the intelligence twisted to make the American people think that the invasion of Iraq was justified?

(CROSSTALK)

CARTER: And I think that still has to come out about. But so far, the adequate investigation has not been completed, as you know.

BLITZER: Because I remember those days vividly.

And I remember Colin Powell, the secretary of State at the time, going to the U.N. Security Council. And pointedly, sitting right behind him was the director of the CIA, George Tenet, who was appointed, as you well remember, by Bill Clinton, vouching for all of this intelligence. So much of it, as you correctly point out, proved to be wrong.

So, I will rephrase the question once again. Was the president just getting bad intelligence from the CIA or was he lying to the American public?

CARTER: Well, I will -- I will repeat the same answer.

Again, I don't know what the president was told. I think that was probably the -- one of the worst days that -- that Colin Powell ever experienced in his life. I think it's one that he regrets to this day. We don't know yet, pending an investigation -- which I hope will soon be forthcoming -- what was the intelligence actually received. Was there an independent intelligence agency created within the Defense Department with a strong orientation toward invading Iraq? And maybe they twisted or maybe they misled the president.

I don't have any way to know. But I think, if the investigation will go ahead and proceed, as the Democrats have been trying to do in the Senate now for more than 18 months, then we will know the circumstances under which the American people, and I think an entire world, was misled about what was going on in Iraq and whether or not we should have invaded -- invaded Iraq.

BLITZER: I -- I interviewed the president's counselor, Dan Bartlett, here in THE SITUATION ROOM the other day, on Wednesday.

Listen -- listen to what he said on this very important, sensitive issue. Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAN BARTLETT, WHITE HOUSE COUNSELOR: President Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Vice President Al Gore, John Kerry, there's a whole list of Democrats who stepped up, as did President Bush, looked at the threat in a post-9/11 world, and said, this man is a threat. We removed this dictator for good reasons.

Now, everybody recognizes that the intelligence wasn't all correct. But the decision was correct in a post-9/11 world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: I would like your response to what he -- the point he just made.

CARTER: I don't think the decision was correct to start with. And obviously, the people after the election in 2000, all of those Democrats, including the ones in the Senate, who voted for the -- to approve the invasion were given the same intelligence, I presume, that was forthcoming to the American people.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: It was the same national intelligence -- it was the same national intelligence estimate that the CIA prepared for the president was prepared for the Congress. And the Congress voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq.

So, you know, you -- I guess the argument that the -- the White House says is, you know, we -- we just got bad intelligence, but you can't blame us for that.

CARTER: I'm sure the White House has said that, Wolf. I don't -- I don't deny what the White House has claimed. The fact is, the intelligence was based on erroneous information, or the information came in correct and it was misinterpreted by someone, either inadvertently or on purpose. We don't yet know that.

That's just one of the profound changes that has taken place in this country.

And as you know, President Bush has put forward the proposition that we don't need to wait in this country for our country to be in -- threatened from a foreign country in order to go to war. This has been the policy of our nation for more than 100 years. Now we have a policy absolutely radical in nature, different from what George Bush Sr. did, different from what Ronald Reagan did, different from what Dwight Eisenhower did. We will go to war on a preemptive basis. That is, if we believe that a leader in a foreign country ought to be removed from office, we will go to war with him. We will send our troops in to invade. We will bomb, strafe, and send missiles against their people, even though our -- our security is not directly threatened.

This is contrary to international law. It's also contrary to what every president has done in this country for more than 100 years, Democratic or Republican. That's just one of the profound changes that has taken place in the policies of this country in recent years that caused me to write this book, somewhat reluctantly.

There's another issue that is in the news this week. And that is about torturing prisoners. You know, we have always had the -- ever since the United Nations was formed, a prohibition against this. My own uncle was tortured by the Japanese for four years. John McCain has expressed this very clearly. We saw what happened under Hitler against the Jews with the Holocaust. And because of that, in the Second -- in the Second World War, all the nations assembled at Geneva and -- and evolved the Geneva Accords. Our country was one of those that did this. We have never departed from those Geneva Accords until just recently. Now, it's not a mistake. It's -- it's an allegation by the vice president and others: Let's let the CIA have this authority.

And now we know that there are secret black places, black holes somewhere, where this is going on. So, this is just two of the very radical changes that has caused me deep concern.

BLITZER: All right.

CARTER: It's not a matter of arguing about facts. It's arguing about basic changes in American policy that are unprecedented.

BLITZER: We are going to pick up both of those thoughts, and a lot more, including the future shakeup, if there will be a shakeup, in the White House, what should happen to Karl Rove.

But stand by, Mr. President, please.

We are going to continue this conversation with the former president of the United States, Jimmy Carter. He's got an important new book out. We are going to talk about all that and a lot more.

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. We're continuing our conversation with former President Jimmy Carter. He's at the Carter Center in Atlanta. He has an important new book out, "Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis," his first political book since leaving the White House some 25 years ago.

Let me read to you from "Our Endangered Values" once again, Mr. President.

"Some neocons" -- referring to neoconservatives in the administration -- "now dominate the highest councils of government. They seem determined to exert American dominance throughout the world and approve preemptive war as an acceptable avenue to reach this imperialistic goal."

The argument about preemptive strikes is that, after 9/11 -- 3,000 people were killed that day, as you know -- the United States can no longer wait to be the recipient of a Pearl Harbor-type attack. If you have information that the terrorists are coming to kill you with a radiological bomb or poison gas or terror attack, you go out and kill them first, before they come here and kill us.

That's their argument for preemptive strikes, an argument you -- you reject.

CARTER: I don't reject that at all. I think that's a -- that's a false premise that you just described.

You know, all presidents in the past, if we have direct evidence that our nation is threatened with an attack, we have the absolute right, under international law and the policies of our country since its founding, to protect ourselves.

It -- that's not what preemptive strike means. Preemptive strike, as defined by the president himself in a speech to -- at West Point, said, if we think that in the future, our nation might be threatened by some, we -- we reserve the right to invade that country or to launch missiles and bombs against them. And this is what is a radical departure from the policies of any president who has served his country, Democratic or Republican.

BLITZER: If the intelligence had been good though, if the intelligence on Iraq and Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles -- poison gas, chemical, biological, maybe even trying to develop nuclear capability -- if that intelligence had been good, would it then have been justified to preemptively go to war against Iraq?

CARTER: Well, you have to make a judgment on what the facts are. That's one surmise. If those weapons of mass destruction had been in such a form that they could have been used against the United States, yes. If Saddam Hussein had had, say, weapons, say, bombs and missiles or warheads on short range missiles that could not have been used to attack the United States, to take some military action would have been justified.

But to send our troops in there, as we have done, and now to have more than 2,000 of them killed, 39,000 estimated civilians in Iraq killed, to prevent an attack that might someday take place is different from the policies of our country since its founding. So, yes, if we expected an imminent attack from Iraq or even now if we found that a foreign country had capability and intention of attacking our country, we would certainly have the right, justified under international law, justified under the policies of our country since -- for the last 230 years to defend ourselves.

BLITZER: All right, well I just wanted to ...

CARTER: That is certainly not what preemptive war means.

BLITZER: Right. I wanted to clarify that, because you're not rejecting completely a preemptive strike if there's a real clear and direct threat to the United States.

CARTER: That's not what preemptive means. You know, preemptive means you take military action even if your security is not directly and immediately threatened.

BLITZER: Well, maybe I'm just a little confused because what I thought I heard you say was that under certain circumstances if the United States knows that it's about to be attacked and hasn't been attacked yet, the United States could preemptively launch a strike. CARTER: Well, you keep saying the same thing I can't disagree with. If we know that an enemy -- a potential enemy -- has the capability to attack our country soon, in the immediate future and intentions to do so, if I were president, I would certainly launch an attack to protect our country. That's not what preemptive strikes mean.

BLITZER: All right. Let's move on and talk about an issue of the day, Karl Rove, the president's deputy White House chief of staff, his top political adviser. He's in South America in Argentina today, the president. He was peppered with questions from the traveling White House press corps today whether he should apologize, what should happen to Karl Rove.

Here's the gist of what the president said in response to all of these questions earlier in the day. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I understand the anxiety and angst by the press corps to talk about this. On the other hand, it's a serious investigation, and we take it seriously. And we're cooperating to the extent that the special prosecutor wants us to cooperate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: And then he declined to comment, saying that the CIA leak investigation by the special counsel is continuing. First question, does the president owe the American public an apology?

CARTER: Well, I agree completely with what the president just said. You know, I don't believe that just an allegation mostly through the news media, not from the special investigator, that Karl Rove might have been involved warrants an explanation of any kind.

You know, if Karl Rove had actually been indicted, if that should happen in the future -- nobody knows if it will be -- then the president would have to take action against Karl Rove, maybe removing him from his position until the trial is complete, whether he's innocent or guilty.

But that hasn't arrived yet. And if I were president, and one of my top assistants had been mentioned in the press as possibly involved and it was not proven or even alleged officially by grand jury, then I think the president made an absolutely correct statement.

BLITZER: But on the question of leaking the name, someone in the administration leaked the name of Valerie Plame-Wilson, the wife of the former U.S. ambassador. On that issue, that narrow issue, does the White House, does the president, owe the American public an apology for that entire episode?

CARTER: Well, I would maybe move back to the vice president. I don't have any evidence even in news reports from CNN, which is very authoritative as I'm sure you would agree, that the president has been involved or anyone inside the White House has been involved, although there has been some allegation made to that effect from many sources.

But I think there has been a very clear accusation by the special prosecutor, special investigator, that the vice president's office was involved. And it may be that the vice president should explain to the public if he was involved or if his assistant, Mr. Libby, acted on his own without the vice president's knowledge. But I haven't seen anything that convinces me the White House itself and the people within the White House are involved.

BLITZER: All right. Mr. President, we're going to ask you if you're kind enough to spend another segment with us. We'll take another quick commercial break. We'll continue our discussion with the former president of the United States, Jimmy Carter, in just a moment.

Also, later here in THE SITUATION ROOM, knives and scissors on passenger airplanes. Should they allowed? It's our question of the hour. Jack Cafferty has been going through your emails.

Plus, take a look at this. An SUV skids off the road and into a fast-moving river. We'll show you the risky rescue.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. We're continuing our conversation with the former president of the United States, Jimmy Carter. He's got a new book "Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis." He's joining us from the Carter Center in Atlanta. Mr. President, thanks very much, once again, for joining us.

We're showing our viewers some pictures we're getting in, very disturbing pictures, huge protests unfolding on streets in Argentina right now. These are live pictures, by the way that our viewers, are seeing from demonstrations against the president who's involved in the Summit of the Americas right now. I think it's fair to say this is breaking news. Some of these demonstrations getting violent, getting very angry. You see broken glass there. You see some of the fires. People are angry at the president, at least at this summit right now.

How does the president of the United States deal with this kind of controversy in the midst of an international summit like this?

CARTER: Well, I'm sure that President Bush is dealing with it properly. He's ignoring it, if possible. As I describe in my book, Wolf, the reputation of the United States and the admiration of the United States is at a bottom, so far as I know in my lifetime and maybe a long time before that.

We had almost unanimous support after 9/11 to join in a team, to address a threat of terrorism around the world. We've just about threw away all of that support. And now I think, in the Mid East and the in the Arab world, it's even worse than it is in Latin America, if that's believable. I quote in my book a poll by Zogby, which is a very respected firm, that shows that in Egypt, 2 percent of the people look with favor now on the United States of America. In Jordan, only 4 percent of their people favor the United States. These used to be our two most close and loyal allies in the Arab world. So the disfavor that's with which America's addressed around the world now is alarming. And I think every American ought to know, ask themselves, what can we do to change this?

Obviously, claiming the right to torture prisoners, going to war with regard, which we've already discussed, without justification, are two reasons. But these are not the only two dramatic changes made.

As you know, many conservative people, including Republicans, have expressed concern about the unprecedented deficits that we have accumulated -- primarily not because we're giving better services, that cost a lot of money to the Americana people, but, because of unprecedented and enormous reductions in taxation for the richest people on Earth.

And we have always had Democratic and Republican support for protecting America's environment. This commitment has also been abandoned. And this week, we're trying now, through the Congress, the administration is, to abandon protection of Alaska National Wildlife area. This is not an area that was set aside by Democrats. It was set aside by Dwight Eisenhower, a respected Republican president.

A whole gamut of things has been dramatically changed by this administration and that's what causes me concern.

BLITZER: Even as we see these live pictures coming in from Argentina, this angry demonstration against the president of the United States, President Carter, we're going to shortly see what they call a class photo of the summit, the Summit of the Americas, all of the world leaders are going to be there, including the president of the United States, George W. Bush, and the leader of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez. It's going to be a very different kind of picture. The president earlier saying that he would be polite if he happened to meet with President Chavez of Venezuela.

In this dispute with the Venezuelan leader from your perspective -- and you know this area about as well as any American does, you spent a lot of time monitoring elections down there -- what goes through your mind between Bush and Chavez?

CARTER: Well, Chavez is a radical-speaking leader whom I know quite well. The Carter Center has monitored five elections in Venezuela in which Chavez has been involved. He's a demagogue in appealing to his people, claiming that the United States has threats against him. And so he's very popular in some areas of Latin America.

There's been a tremendous transfer in Latin America of power through elected officials to very leftist leaders for the first time in history, the secretary-general of the United Nations, of the Organization of American States, excuse me, was chosen over the opposition of the United States.

We have lost our prestige. We have lost our authority. We have lost our influence in Latin America. This causes me some concern. But the personal attacks on the president and the condemnations of America by Hugo Chavez from Venezuela, I think, are completely unjustified and uncalled for. And I think it's admirable in President Bush to state that he will be polite -- I think, I'm sure he will be -- and diplomatic if the two should meet.

But, Chavez is a difficult person with whom to deal personally. I know from my own experience. I think the -- his leading these demonstrations against the president of the United States, I think are completely unjustified.

BLITZER: One final question before I let you go, Mr. President. You're quoted in the "Chicago Tribune" today as saying, "I can't deny that I'm a better ex-president than I was a president". You're smiling when you heard me read that. Explain.

CARTER: Well, we did a lot of good things when I was president. We kept our country at peace. We negotiated peace for a lot of other people. We set aside enormous contributions in the environment. We normalized relations with China. We brought peace to the Middle East. We did some good things.

The last 25 years of my life since I left the White House has been the most gratifying and enjoyable, and I think productive part of my existence. We have been able to promote peace, democracy, human rights, environmental quality and the alleviation of suffering around the world through The Carter Center, not because of me, but because we have a good organization.

In fact, Rosa and I just returned from Liberia recently where we helped conduct an election that I hope will bring peace and democracy to that troubled country. That happens to be the 61st election in which we've tried to help people have democracy and freedom. I've been very gratified at the experience and opportunities that we've had since I left the White House.

BLITZER: Jimmy Carter, former president of the United States, the author of this new book, "Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis". Mr. President, it was kind of you to spend some time with us here in THE SITUATION ROOM.

CARTER: Thank you, Wolf. I'm on my way to a book signing and try to sell some more books.

BLITZER: I'm sure you will. Thank you very much and keep up the good work.

CARTER: Thanks.

BLITZER: We're going to continue showing you some live, dramatic pictures coming in from the streets of Argentina, where President Bush and other world leaders are meeting right now. In fact, let's go there right now.

Our producer, Alec Miran, is on the scene for us. Alec, these pictures are very dramatic, but you're right there. What's going on?

ALEC MIRAN, CNN PRODUCER (voice-over): Wolf, as you note, the demonstrations have turned violent after a day of very peaceful demonstrations and rallies at the stadium. A group known as the Picateros (ph), who are notorious for staging violent demonstrations, made it very clear that they were going to march on a certain point about six blocks from where the summit is being held. They arrived. They started shooting large fireworks at police. They burned a couple of paper American flags. Then, they rushed the fence.

And at that point the police, who were there in huge force, rallied back. They stormed up against the fence and then fired a huge volley of tear gas. The demonstrators then started lobbying Molotov cocktails at various places at the police.

Then they withdrew about a block away from where I'm standing now. They started smashing large plate glass windows, I believe there is an auto car dealership across the street. The police have not come out to challenge this property destruction.

The demonstrators are using large rocks and sticks. They carry sticks, that's one of their trademarks. They're sort of truncheons, that are about four feet long.

I think there was another volley of tear gas. I saw people running way from the site. But, they clearly plan to go confront the police again, it would appear.

BLITZER: Alec, is this a demonstration specifically designed against the president of the United States, George W. Bush? Or is it designed against some of the economic policies, the free trade area agreements, the capitalist policies, shall we say, that are now emerging, becoming very, very prevalent throughout the Western Hemisphere?

MIRAN: Wolf, people are running down the street. I heard part of that. I think the easy answer is both. Most of the -- again, not everyone in this demonstration was out for violence. There was a very clear group at the front of the group who wanted to have a fight and they've gotten their fight with the police.

Most of them carried anti-Bush signs. They also -- they all have songs. They have slogans. They accuse all of the leaders of being in cahoots with President Bush. No, they don't like the free trade policy either.

BLITZER: It looks like it's getting worse now than it was a few moments ago. At least there's a lot more smoke on these live pictures that we're getting. Is that what you're seeing as well?

MIRAN: Yes. What you're looking at, Wolf, is the Avenida Colon, which is a six-lane avenue, major, major avenue, through the middle of Mar del Plata. It led from the stadium right here.

At the other side of those police barricades, the police are behind the smoke, obviously. About six blocks behind that is the Hermitage Hotel, where the summit leaders are. So, I think you are seeing more smoke because the demonstrators continue to advance and continue to get repelled by the police. I think they're going to at least two advances, maybe three now.

BLITZER: How close are they, these demonstrators to where the summit leaders, including President Bush are?

MIRAN: How far, Wolf?

BLITZER: Yes, how far away are they?

MIRAN: Five or six blocks.

BLITZER: That's all?

MIRAN: Yes. If the summit -- my calculation is, if the summit leaders or any of their staff were looking out the windows of the meeting site, they could clearly tell that something was going on.

BLITZER: What time is it there, now?

MIRAN: Say again, Wolf? It's very loud here.

BLITZER: What time is it in Mar del Plata, where you are right now?

MIRAN: We're two hours ahead of you.

BLITZER: It's approaching 6:00 p.m.?

MIRAN: Yes, it is. But remember that we're in the other hemisphere, so we're going to have daylight for a little while longer than you do up in Washington.

BLITZER: Because that's what I was wondering, how much longer it's going to be daylight there. Presumably, once it gets dark, these demonstrators, they're hurling rocks and they're clearly very, very angry. There's smoke. And the police are showing remarkable restraint, at least from these images that we're seeing on live television.

And I want to alert our viewers we're now being seen on CNN and we want to welcome viewers on CNN International around the world as well. What we're seeing here are angry demonstrations on the streets of Mar del Plata, demonstrations against the Summit of the Americas, where President Bush and other summit leaders are participating right now.

We're continuing our live coverage here in THE SITUATION ROOM. On the streets in Mar del Plata for us is our veteran producer Alec Miran, who's telling us what's going on. Looks like the fires are erupting in various storefronts, as well. This is a relatively affluent area, isn't it, Alec?

MIRAN: I'm sorry, Wolf, say that again, please.

BLITZER: This is a relatively affluent area.

MIRAN: Yes. It's a very commercial area. A lot of hotels. Our hotel, as a matter of fact, is about a block from where you're seeing that smoke. There's a very large casino that's just behind the barricades. I'm hearing a lot of popping of -- I guess another volley of tear gas has been fired. People are running away from where the police are.

Let me describe the police setup here, Wolf, because it was very well-advertised that these demonstrators wanted this confrontation. We went to the police side of the barricades about an hour ago, and there were waves of policemen behind the barricades. The first group had, you know, riot helmets and truncheons, but no arms. The second wave -- and there are about 80 of them. The second wave had more serious stuff. Some had shotguns. And that's also where the tear gas guns were.

Behind them were two rows of mounted Argentine police, probably up -- looks like the police -- I guess not. Anyway, two rows with about 40 of each of mounted police. Behind that, there was a row of police vans, including detention vans, where they could, you know, lock up anybody they arrested. Behind that, there was probably another -- we couldn't really see -- 300 or 400 really, really heavily armored cops with a lot of body armor. So, you know, they were ready, I guess.

BLITZER: What a contrast we're seeing. Only a few blocks separating these demonstrators on the streets of Mar del Plata in Argentina from the actual summit itself. Quiet inside the summit. The speakers are continuing their addresses.

You see the bottom part of the screen, the left-hand side. There's a wide shot. If we take that wide shot, you'll see the president of the United States and the other summit leaders sitting around that area. There's Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela.

MIRAN: Wolf, Wolf.

BLITZER: Yes, go ahead, Alec.

MIRAN: Yes, I don't you if you can see it, but there's smoke coming out of one of the buildings that the demonstrators -- they've set fire inside a bank. It's about two blocks up, a block up, one long block up from where the police are. And black smoke is billowing out of the bank building. I don't know what they've set on fire. But I guess I would ask how much longer the police are going to, you know, sit behind the barricades. I would imagine they have to do something here pretty soon.

BLITZER: Well, and I want you to be careful because right now the police are showing remarkable restraint, as we see these live pictures coming in from our affiliates in Argentina and see them -- we these protesters setting fires, hurling rocks, in effect, throwing Molotov cocktails.

There it looks like that bank that you were talking about, Alec. Smoke coming from the ground level of the building here. I assume that's the bank you're talking about. But at some point, firefighters and the police are going to have to move in on these demonstrators. Does it look like anything along those lines, Alec, is imminent? MIRAN: Yes. I am not in a place where I can see the police lines anymore, Wolf. We've sort of taken cover. We're down the street. Describe for me, Wolf, if you would -- if you're looking at your screen, is the police barrier on left of the screen or the right of the screen?

BLITZER: It's hard to tell from this shot. It probably is to the right of where we're seeing the smoke coming in from this ground level building. I suspect this is the bank you were talking about. The fire is now raging on the ground level, the demonstrators torching this building, protesting the Summit of the Americas.

And let me remind our viewers in the United States and around the world that the summit is going on only four or five or six blocks away. Speakers are addressing the Summit of the Americas, including the president of the United States. Inside, it's calm and tranquil in there, but only a few blocks away, anything but. The demonstration getting ugly right now and increasingly violent, with fire, Molotov cocktails.

The police are showing remarkable restraint, as I say. They're outside this perimeter and they're basically letting these demonstrators do what they're doing.

Our producer on the scene, Alec Miran, is watching all of this together with our CNN team. Alec, is there way of estimating how many demonstrators, approximately, are on the streets?

MIRAN: They've scattered into several side streets now, Wolf. It was a very big group of demonstrators that came from the stadium, whereas it's important to note that, you know, the very festive crowd that listened to Hugo Chavez. And it appears that a lot of those people -- there are probably, our estimate is maybe 10,000, toward the stadium. Many of them may have been in the march that led them about, oh, 20 or 30 blocks here to where the trouble has started.

And as I pointed out earlier, at some point, they were joined by a group known as the Picateros (ph), which doesn't translate exactly, but it's a term that's only really used in Argentina. And when people say that they know it means violent demonstrators. It's a group that's well-known for causing these sort of problems.

BLITZER: Their main grievance, you say, is really two-fold. They're protesting President Bush and his policies, but they're also protesting the economic policies of the Summit of the Americas, is that right?

MIRAN: That's correct. I mean, I guess at some point, you'd have to, you know, you have to label them as anarchists. And you know, there would be a theory that anarchists are anti a lot of things. But specifically the signage that we saw, a lot of, you know, "Go Home Bush," some of it, quite frankly, I can't repeat here on a family channel because it was, you know, just not in good taste. But then they were also, in their chants and in their songs, singing about free trade, saying how bad it is for Argentina and Latin America. And those are the two main themes, I guess, Wolf. BLITZER: Is there -- is the security -- talk about the security surrounding the summit leaders. The area where the summit is actually taking place, as you say, only five or six blocks away from where these violent demonstrations have erupted. I assume security -- Argentine security must be incredibly tight right now.

MIRAN: Yes. Wolf, just to put it in perspective, you know, you and I have done a lot of these sort of events. I think it's safe to say that this was the most -- has been so far, you know, the top security I've probably seen. To get from our hotel to where we were working across town, maybe 20 blocks, you go through at least six or seven checkpoints.

There are 7,500 members of the Argentine police and military, mostly police. There's district police, federal police, special police. And they have created three security rings around the city. And each one gets tighter than the next. And as you might imagine, the Hermitage Hotel, where the summit is being held, that's the tightest security there. So getting there -- even if these demonstrators were to break through this barricade, even if, there's a whole another one about two blocks behind it, where it's basically the third ring of security.

BLITZER: Was this anticipated? The Picateros (ph), these protesters, anarchists, whatever we're calling them -- you spent a lot of time preparing yourself of our coverage of this summit, Alec. Was this kind of violence fully anticipated?

MIRAN: No. The only demonstration we had heard about before today was the -- was the one, that there was a long march -- the train station. And, of course, our bureaus may have seen that Diego Maradona, soccer star Diego Maradona, was on a train that came from Buenos Aires. They marched 30 or 40 blocks. Took us maybe two hours to follow them to the main soccer stadium here. And that was very peaceful. And that was the only march that we had heard of.

And then around midday, word started coming out that this other group was going to confront the police. And they gave everybody the exact corner. They wanted it known. They wanted coverage. And it was a very bizarre sort of atmosphere as they approached, because hundreds, probably -- along with the journalists, hundreds of average Mar del Plata residents were there sort of just waiting to see what would happen.

BLITZER: Alec, I'm going to ...

MIRAN: You know, it probably wasn't the smartest thing for them to be there, but ...

BLITZER: Alec, I'm going to interrupt you for a second.

MIRAN: ... they were just waiting to see what happened, and now I guess we're all watching.

BLITZER: Alec, I'm going to interrupt you for a second, because we're now seeing these live pictures coming in. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com