Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Sunday Morning
Terror Alert Remains High
Aired February 16, 2003 - 07:03 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Now, the nation's struggle with the threat terror. The alert level remains high this weekend. We've heard a lot about preparing for possible attacks, anything from duct tape, to safe rooms, to bottled water, but what can we really do?
CNN's security analyst Kelly McCann in Washington to try and set us on course here. Good morning, Mr. McCann, good to see you.
KELLY MCCANN, CNN SECURITY ANALYST: Hi, Miles, good to see you.
O'BRIEN: All right, when the administration comes out and suggests everybody run out and buy duct tape and plastic, does that really do any good?
MCCANN: It would do good if you were within the elliptical downwind pattern, in other words, if you were threatened, and there was a high concentration that was in a downwind pattern, yes, it would limit the amount of particulates that could get to you.
The question is, and I don't think anyone's disputing that an attack of some kind is imminent, and that people will probably die, however I think there's great argument in the magnitude of that incident, and people have to really think about if they believed they'd be in that downwind pattern.
O'BRIEN: Well, of course, there's no way of knowing that. Would the prudent thing be to stock up on these sorts of materials, or could this really do more harm than good?
MCCANN: I don't know that it could do more harm than good, other than just people feeling like they've done something, when actually they haven't. If you go to the functionality of the weapon, and you think through it logically, we know they've got ricin, for example, and that's a stable, persistent agent, that a -- unless it's atomized, you can inhale it, could be put into food.
So you say, well, OK, how would they make an attack like that work? Taking some volume, and then exploding it. When you explode it, probably 50 percent of the volume of the container incinerates. The rest of it is not designed other than to just blow up and become atomized, to particulate size.
So, based on the size of the explosion, I mean, you're probably talking about a limited scope kind of attack that will be 50 to 75, maybe 100 meters in width, and then the droplets, which are not properly atomized, or weaponized, do not do a significant -- create a downwind hazard.
So, I mean if you really look at this thing, unless they did multiple attacks, which would have a footprint, or if they tried to up the scope of it, and you could put sarin in there, we know they've looked and learned at what happened in Japan, really, you know, unless you live near what you believe could be a lucrative target, I don't know that I'd be that concerned with plastic and duct tape. I would be concerned about all these demonstrations.
O'BRIEN: Well, I want to ask you about that in just in a moment, but first of all, let's go back quickly here, because it seems to me that what you're laying out a fairly compelling case that these sorts of weapons, whether it's a dirty bomb, or ricin, or sarin, they are more effective for their psychological impact, and to the extent that we are responding in advance to them in such manners, aren't they already succeeding?
MCCANN: They are, if it's to -- strike terror, absolutely, it is terrifying -- but, you know, people, as they learn more about this, as more information is passed about what threat does ricin really present, what threat does sarin really present, as you learn about it, you know, you could be standing in a room with a pot full of sarin, and it's less -- until it's actually made into a weapon by atomization and then the vapors come off it, no one's effected. I mean, all NDC people know that, nuclear biological, chemically trained people.
So, I mean, really it's the fear of the unknown, and it's worked to some degree, and it's difficult for an administration to put out as much data as is necessary to learn about these things.
O'BRIEN: All right, now what about these demonstrations? That was kind of interesting and provocative, what you said there at the end.
MCCANN: Well, quite frankly, I mean, if you think about the best way to use these kinds of things, then you would need a concentration of people, and I mean all -- out of all the individual protective measures I've heard in the last week, I haven't heard anybody talk about the introduction into food, and how that would happen, i.e. the food services industry, which is largely unsecure. Gatherings of people, I mean, those kinds of things do more to protect you then wrapping your house in plastic and duct tape. I mean, because it prevents -- it presents an obvious target. So, I mean, I would be more concerned about that, and I'm sure that the police, state, local, and federal are very concerned about this.
O'BRIEN: All right, so quickly, some take-away facts for everybody here, aside from the first point that you've been making is that don't panic unnecessarily; should people be going out and buying certain things, have a kit, have a plan, how far should they go?
MCCANN: Well, I think that that's fundamental to what you should have on hand, a light, a radio, so you can stay in touch in the event something does happen. You should obviously have water and enough food to subsist for four to five days -- just if the confusion factor gets up high. But I don't think that anybody is looking at this as Armageddon. You know, you sometimes you're your own worst enemy, when you're left to your own design in your imagination, it makes people quite crazy, and I don't think we're at the survivalist stage yet, you know what I'm saying?
O'BRIEN: All right, good. Good place to leave it. Kelly McCann, thanks for setting the rudder straight, we appreciate it as always.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired February 16, 2003 - 07:03 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Now, the nation's struggle with the threat terror. The alert level remains high this weekend. We've heard a lot about preparing for possible attacks, anything from duct tape, to safe rooms, to bottled water, but what can we really do?
CNN's security analyst Kelly McCann in Washington to try and set us on course here. Good morning, Mr. McCann, good to see you.
KELLY MCCANN, CNN SECURITY ANALYST: Hi, Miles, good to see you.
O'BRIEN: All right, when the administration comes out and suggests everybody run out and buy duct tape and plastic, does that really do any good?
MCCANN: It would do good if you were within the elliptical downwind pattern, in other words, if you were threatened, and there was a high concentration that was in a downwind pattern, yes, it would limit the amount of particulates that could get to you.
The question is, and I don't think anyone's disputing that an attack of some kind is imminent, and that people will probably die, however I think there's great argument in the magnitude of that incident, and people have to really think about if they believed they'd be in that downwind pattern.
O'BRIEN: Well, of course, there's no way of knowing that. Would the prudent thing be to stock up on these sorts of materials, or could this really do more harm than good?
MCCANN: I don't know that it could do more harm than good, other than just people feeling like they've done something, when actually they haven't. If you go to the functionality of the weapon, and you think through it logically, we know they've got ricin, for example, and that's a stable, persistent agent, that a -- unless it's atomized, you can inhale it, could be put into food.
So you say, well, OK, how would they make an attack like that work? Taking some volume, and then exploding it. When you explode it, probably 50 percent of the volume of the container incinerates. The rest of it is not designed other than to just blow up and become atomized, to particulate size.
So, based on the size of the explosion, I mean, you're probably talking about a limited scope kind of attack that will be 50 to 75, maybe 100 meters in width, and then the droplets, which are not properly atomized, or weaponized, do not do a significant -- create a downwind hazard.
So, I mean if you really look at this thing, unless they did multiple attacks, which would have a footprint, or if they tried to up the scope of it, and you could put sarin in there, we know they've looked and learned at what happened in Japan, really, you know, unless you live near what you believe could be a lucrative target, I don't know that I'd be that concerned with plastic and duct tape. I would be concerned about all these demonstrations.
O'BRIEN: Well, I want to ask you about that in just in a moment, but first of all, let's go back quickly here, because it seems to me that what you're laying out a fairly compelling case that these sorts of weapons, whether it's a dirty bomb, or ricin, or sarin, they are more effective for their psychological impact, and to the extent that we are responding in advance to them in such manners, aren't they already succeeding?
MCCANN: They are, if it's to -- strike terror, absolutely, it is terrifying -- but, you know, people, as they learn more about this, as more information is passed about what threat does ricin really present, what threat does sarin really present, as you learn about it, you know, you could be standing in a room with a pot full of sarin, and it's less -- until it's actually made into a weapon by atomization and then the vapors come off it, no one's effected. I mean, all NDC people know that, nuclear biological, chemically trained people.
So, I mean, really it's the fear of the unknown, and it's worked to some degree, and it's difficult for an administration to put out as much data as is necessary to learn about these things.
O'BRIEN: All right, now what about these demonstrations? That was kind of interesting and provocative, what you said there at the end.
MCCANN: Well, quite frankly, I mean, if you think about the best way to use these kinds of things, then you would need a concentration of people, and I mean all -- out of all the individual protective measures I've heard in the last week, I haven't heard anybody talk about the introduction into food, and how that would happen, i.e. the food services industry, which is largely unsecure. Gatherings of people, I mean, those kinds of things do more to protect you then wrapping your house in plastic and duct tape. I mean, because it prevents -- it presents an obvious target. So, I mean, I would be more concerned about that, and I'm sure that the police, state, local, and federal are very concerned about this.
O'BRIEN: All right, so quickly, some take-away facts for everybody here, aside from the first point that you've been making is that don't panic unnecessarily; should people be going out and buying certain things, have a kit, have a plan, how far should they go?
MCCANN: Well, I think that that's fundamental to what you should have on hand, a light, a radio, so you can stay in touch in the event something does happen. You should obviously have water and enough food to subsist for four to five days -- just if the confusion factor gets up high. But I don't think that anybody is looking at this as Armageddon. You know, you sometimes you're your own worst enemy, when you're left to your own design in your imagination, it makes people quite crazy, and I don't think we're at the survivalist stage yet, you know what I'm saying?
O'BRIEN: All right, good. Good place to leave it. Kelly McCann, thanks for setting the rudder straight, we appreciate it as always.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
