Return to Transcripts main page

On the Story

Uday, Qusay Hussein Killed by U.S. Forces; Should Kobe Bryant's Accuser Be Named?; Lynch Arrives in West Virginia

Aired July 26, 2003 - 10:00   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.


BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Welcome to CNN's ON THE STORY, where our journalists have the inside word on the stories we covered this week. I'm Barbara Starr on the story of U.S. forces killing Saddam's sons. What happened, and what next.
RYM BRAHIMI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I'm Rym Brahimi in Baghdad on the story of the reaction of the killing of Uday and Qusay. And whether releasing the paragraph photographs and videotape will finally convince the Iraqis.

JOSIE BURKE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I'm Josie Burke in Vail, Colorado on the story of the Kobe Bryant rape case, all of the pretrial publicity and the national debate over whether to name his accuser.

ELAINE QUIJANO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I'm Elaine Quijano on the story of the best-known soldier from the war on Iraq. Jessica Lynch arriving home in West Virginia.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: I'm Susanne Malveaux, a president celebrating a victory in Iraq and reacting to a congressional report about opportunities the government missed along the road to the 9/11 terror attacks.

We'll also look at the City Hall shooting that stunned New York, which likes to think it is the most on guard against terrorist attacks.

And we'll join a ceremony at Arlington Cemetery to mark the 50 anniversary of the end of the Korean conflict.

And we'll listen to the president's weekly radio address released just a few minutes from now.

We want to hear from you. E-mail us at onthestory@cnn.com.

Now to Barbara Starr and Uday and Qusay.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN. RICARDO SANCHEZ, CMDR., GROUND FORCES, IRAQ: Four persons were killed during that operation and were removed from the building. And we have since confirmed that Uday and Qusay Hussein are among the dead.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STARR: General Ricardo Sanchez, commander of coalition ground forces in Iraq announcing the news of the week, the killing of Saddam Hussein's two sons, Uday and Qusay. And of course, that was really just the beginning of the story, because we rapidly then saw these very graphic pictures. We certainly want to warn our viewers again as we show some of them.

Very graphic pictures, first of the very battered bodies of the two sons pictures taken immediately after, and now these subsequent pictures, videotape of them taken after autopsies were performed and after military morticians touched them up a bit. Mainly, we are told, so that they would then, like you see them here on our air, look more familiar to the Iraqi people, if they could make their faces look a little more recognizable. The feeling was this would finally make the Iraqi people believe that it was them and convince them that Uday and Qusay were really dead.

And that this would begin to have some positive effect in Iraq. Perhaps leading more people to really truly believe the regime was gone.

And Rym, in Baghdad, I'd like to ask you, you know, the reaction on the street in Baghdad, in Iraq, that you are beginning to hear from there about whether people now finally believe these two men are gone?

BRAHIMI: Barbara, you know, it's been like a roller coaster of emotions for many Iraqi people. This whole episode, it started with the news of the deaths, the announcement of the deaths that triggered celebratory reactions, gunfire in the air, people very joyful. And then immediately after, the doubt, the skepticism, is this true? Is it another American lie, in the Iraqi people's views? And then they demanded in a way to see those pictures, to see some proof.

When those pictures came, the still photographs -- again, warning here that those pictures both the still pictures and the videotape, very, very graphic, gruesome pictures of death of the two sons of Saddam. When those photographs were released, well, a lot of people still weren't convinced and said that's just a trick, especially as to be very fair, the pictures actually, there could be some doubt, especially Uday's picture didn't really look like him that much.

And then after that the videotape was released. The U.S. authorities actually took journalists to the airport where the bodies were, had been, as you said, fixed up by a mortician, and arranged to look more like what people were used to seeing them in the newspaper pictures, for instance, before.

And then that changed the minds of many Iraqis, Barbara, but still, a lot of people here remain skeptical. And that's because they're skepticism generally speaking with regard to the U.S. And with regard to that, basically what I want to ask you, of course, one ever the aims of the U.S. in so doing, although they said they were reluctant to release those pictures, was they were hoping in a certain way maybe that it would help reduce the numbers of attacks of U.S. soldiers. But we just heard this morning another three U.S. soldiers were killed in Baquba about 45 minutes north of Baghdad, they were guarding a children's hospital. What does the U.S. -- does -- does U.S. authorities really think that this is going to die down now that Uday and Qusay or gone? What do they think they have to do now -- Barbara?

STARR: Well, Rym, they believe here that releasing the pictures will convince Iraqis they're dead. Therefore, they will get more informants like they did in this case coming forward, telling them where the leadership is. And that that ultimately will save lives. But you're quite correct. It hasn't quite happened yet. In fact, military authorities have told us this week they are concerned, actually, about a short-term increase in attacks. More sophisticated attacks, against U.S. forces before, you know it turns around and gets better.

But there was, of course, as you know, Rym, an indicator this week informants are coming forward. Another informant came forward, led to a raid on a house in Tikrit in the north. And they believe they captured many of Saddam Hussein's personal security detachment.

So I guess the question partially on the table now is, how close are they to Saddam? Are we going to be sitting here next week discussing, or the week after, discussing how they got Saddam? They have -- they have hope that the noose is tightening. What are you hearing on your side?

BRAHIMI: Well, what we're hearing here mainly is that a lot of people are still, again, there's a lot of skepticism. And a lot of people upon hearing or finding out that Uday and Qusay had indeed been killed, well, then, of course, the next concern was the father. A lot of people saying, well, OK, that's fine to get the two sons, but the father's still on the loose.

And other people yet seem to be a little more relaxed, and it seemed to indicate to them, OK now with what they saw as the two main pillars supporting Saddam Hussein gone, then Saddam Hussein was not in even weaker a man than he was since the U.S. troops entered Baghdad on the 9 of April. And this was maybe definitely a new era and chapter in their history.

That said, again there was a whole range of reactions a whole range of emotions. You know, some people, again, saying that, you know, after they showed the videotape in particular that, OK, this is now too emergency information. We didn't have to make it that gruesome. Let's just move on and bury them.

Other people yet angry, because some people you know felt cheated. They said, the Americans went in and did that. First of all, they criticized the whole operation saying what, this superpower of the world needs 200 men to fight six men in a house for six hours? And then other people said he cheated us of the right to try these two men that made us suffer for so long.

BURKE: Barbara, do you think there was surprise both of these brothers were together and that they hadn't disbursed in order to alleviate and lessen the possibility that they both would go down at once?

BRAHIMI: Was that for Barbara or for me?

BURKE: Both can answer. I addressed it to Barbara.

STARR: Oh, Josie, I'm so sorry. I couldn't hear you from here for a moment.

Well, I think that was the big surprise, actually. What were they doing together? These two guys were not known to be close family. They had been apart for some time. And what were they doing in northern Iraq? That was one of the great unanswered questions in this whole puzzle. They were found in the city of Mosul, very far to the north, close to the Turkish boarder, close to the Iranian border. Were they about to make a run for it, were they going to try and get themselves smuggled across the border?

Rym's question or Rym's point about, was it really necessary to launch such a violent raid so quickly? Why didn't they wait them out? Why didn't they try and capture them alive and get what intelligence they could from them, because, certainly, they know the secrets of the regime.

Also, is one that's tough to answer at this point, the military says of course, that they had to go after them. They warned them. They tried to get them to come out alive. It was clear that they were going to fight to the death. And they couldn't risk having them escape from that house, possibly through an underground tunnel that the U.S. might not have known about or something like that. So they believe they really only had the choice to proceed with this assault.

And they believe that it sends a message to the rest of the people of Iraq that if they can come across the very senior leadership, they will show them no mercy. They will take them out if they have to.

MALVEAUX: And I know the reaction from the White House was really rather subdued in the beginning because of course, they are looking at Iraq and they're thinking, no weapons of mass destruction, no Saddam Hussein here. And clearly, U.S. soldiers are dying on a daily basis. We can't appear to gloat because of this news, because of Saddam Hussein's sons.

At the same time I wonder, what is the payoff here? I mean did they really score some points? You have a lot of criticism from those who are saying, you know, against Muslim custom that this is insulting, that it's offensive to show these kind of pictures. And also, a lot of people here who are criticizing the move, they say, well, OK, the Iraqis, yes, this is to prove that they're dead. But what about showing the pictures here in the United States, what was the purpose of that? Rym and Barbara.

STARR: Well, basically it's a global village. You know you can't show something just in the Arab world these days with the Internet and all of that without it being shown everywhere. But you're quite right, Suzanne. For the U.S. military, this was a tough call to watch Don Rumsfeld make, because there is a great cultural tradition had the U.S. military. They don't show their war booty, if you will. They don't show dead people that they have killed in action. And it's a real concern.

The next time America's enemies should have, God forbid, dead American soldiers and show those pictures, what happens? How does the U.S. maintain the moral high ground the next time around? It's a problem.

BRAHIMI: Well, Uday and Qusay were just part of the challenge facing U.S. coalition forces here in Iraq. I'll be back on the story in just a few minutes from now.

ANNOUNCER: Rym Brahimi is a CNN international correspondent and reported from Baghdad during the war in Iraq. She has a masters in English literature from the University of Paris, and a journalism degree from Columbia University. She speaks French, Italian and Arabic.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAUL WOLFOWITZ, DEPUTY DEFENSE SECRETARY: The pervasive fear of the old regime is still alive in Iraq. That's not surprising, particularly when you have a chance to view firsthand the kinds of horrors that Saddam and his regime perpetrated.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRAHIMI: Deputy of Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz after seeing firsthand what the situation is here in Iraq.

Welcome back, we are ON THE STORY.

Now, there may be some optimism voiced by some U.S. officials about what the situation is in this country. But that said, that's not the perception by many Iraqis. Yes, many of them are grateful the old regime is gone, but many are still wondering what the U.S. is still doing here, if it's not helping improve their daily lives?

With that, you add the number of U.S. deaths every day, the number of U.S. attacks every day against U.S. soldiers, and you do get a lot of questions being raised. Especially as these attacks continue after the deaths ever Uday and Qusay.

QUIJANO: Rym, I wanted to ask you, one thing we don't really hear so much about, but I think is so interesting is that, not only are the security issues and logistical issues that they're trying to deal with right now, but also, even just as you mentioned, day-to-day living. Women, particularly now, in this society, are finding it very difficult to come out and address some of the problems that they encountered, you know, during all of this upheaval. The problem of sexual assault, certainly, I keep reading about that being a problem, continuing to be a problem. BRAHIMI: Definitely. You know, there's a lot of insecurity. And a lot of people actually, interestingly enough, link the electricity problem to the insecurity issue, because they say if when he electricity at night, at least we'd be more protected. Armed robbers wouldn't come out at night and try and, you know, rob us as gunpoint from our possessions.

That said, there's also the problem of the insecurity with regard to women, the increased number of rapes and kidnappings of women. I'd just like to mention here, though, that a week ago we did a story about a woman whose 16-year-old daughter had been kidnapped, gone missing for 10 days. Well, two weeks later she found her 16-year-old daughter. She was returned to her in exchange for a ransom of $30,000, which here in Iraq, as can you imagine, is a huge amount of money.

Now, the little girl said, or the young girl said that she had been kept for 15 days in a house with five other young girls, and there was a whole ransom system going about.

Now, of course, that also doesn't help that there is a lot of weapons lying around. Still a lot of people have weapons. There's still a lot of armed robbers and not enough policemen on the street just yet.

BURKE: Rym, getting back to the death of the brothers' Hussein. Can you talk about how people -- you mentioned the mixed emotions they had about the death. But how are people reacting to the informant, the fact that this man is supposedly going to get $30 million. Is he being hailed as hero or a villain?

BRAHIMI: You know, I think in most cases he's not regarded particularly well. Although many people will say that they're very happy that this is the end of Uday and Qusay, many people say they were criminals. I think they've now come to realize that, or see, that their deaths as a bit of a shock in the way it was carried out, if you will. And especially this whole betrayal issue, they see that as something very bad. They see this loyalty; it's a very bad trait here in the Middle East, especially in exchange for money, although, obviously, it does happen.

So people are really -- I mean this man is, we understand, kept under U.S. custody for fear, probably, that he would be attacked either by loyalists of Uday or Qusay or by people who just don't have any respect for what he did. It appears interestingly that a lot of people did know that Uday and Qusay were in the neighborhood. But many of them didn't come forward. Probably most out of fear and maybe very few out of some sense of loyalty, or just the fact that they wouldn't want to collaborate with the occupying power, especially as the occupying power is the United States.

MALVEAUX: And what about Saddam Hussein? Are we any closer to finding Saddam Hussein, Barbara, or Rym? I mean I know that -- are we seeing more informants coming forward and saying, yes, we think we may be tipped off? We think we may know? STARR: Well, they certainly believe that, you know, they are getting closer. With all the raids they're conducting, that they're sort of taking away whatever support structure he has, reducing the number of Iraqis who will protect him.

But Rym's point is really, very fascinating. If the U.S. military is fostering a society in Iraq of informants, of people turning against other Iraqis, whatever their political beliefs, or the regime's support. There may be an issue that the U.S. leaves behind here when it finally leaves Iraq, because this is not really something, as Rym points out, that is looked upon too kindly in that region of the world.

Whatever your political beliefs, informants are generally poorly regarded. That may be something the U.S. has to deal with down the road, since it's financing, you know, the $30 million reward on Saddam's head is going to lure someone, they hope, into turning him in.

BRAHIMI: Also interesting enough, you know, the whole issue of the informant, you know, comes against this backdrop of, again, this occupation. That people obviously see very badly or perceived, as an attempt to their dignity, humiliation in the way that they needed the Americans to liberate them in a way from Saddam Hussein is something that doesn't go down well here at all.

And so there's been a sort of reflex of me and my brother against my cousin, if you will. We hated -- everybody hated Uday and Qusay, but at the same time, if we're dealing, if it's an Iraqi versus U.S. business, well, you know, a lot of people aren't sure they would like the U.S. to prevail here. And so there's been that hesitation as well.

And, again, against the backdrop of the current situation, the daily lives of Iraqis is very, very important. It plays an extremely important role in this, because a lot of people say, well, you know, the U.S. will not improve their situation here. They will not improve their standing in our perception until they're able to show us they've done something for us. And until they're able to deliver on security and on electricity, well, we might just stand back and not really push for any changes or help them improve their situation or tell them if somebody's about to attack them.

BURKE: Rym, we want to thank you for joining us. We're going to let you get back to work. But before we do that, can you tell us what sorry stories you'll be following in the days ahead?

BRAHIMI: Yes. I've actually, again, put up a list of that, just to answer your question. There is an interesting movement that seems to be developing, actually several movements with regard to women. Women's freedom movements, but, also, Islamic women's movements. So a variety here of directions that women might want to be taking.

There are issues with businessmen. Businesses that are trying to emerge here. For instance, mobile network is soon, everybody hopes, up to -- for bids. But again, that's something that -- everything here is dependent upon the security situation. We're hoping there will be commercial flights in and out of Baghdad, again, that's depending on the security situation. But we're following all these stories and we'll keep you posted.

BURKE: Thanks again, Rym, stay safe.

We're going to turn our attention away from the international world to a story that cuts across sports lines, entertainment lines, and certainly news lines. It's the sexual assault charges against basketball star Kobe Bryant, and all of the attention that's being focused on his 19-year-old accuser. I'm back ON THE STORY in two minutes.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a town of Eagle, Colorado, of only about 3,500 people. And it's beginning to seem to some of them that there are that many reporters out here as well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURKE: That's a local reporter here in the Vail Valley exaggerating just a little bit about how many members of the media descended upon Eagle County here.

Welcome back to ON THE STORY. I'm Josie Burke here in Vail.

And it was really an unprecedented week covering this story, because mainly all of the things that came out about the alleged victim. Information about her background and not just that, specifics. She was named by name by Los angels talk show host. So her name was out there. On the Internet, they put pictures out there, unfortunately for one woman here who lives in this part of the country, her picture was put out there instead of the alleged victim. That woman hired an attorney.

And just yesterday a tabloid newspaper went ahead and published a picture of the alleged victim. They blacked out just her eyes. But really, this is something that is a test case for rape cases all across the country.

Now, we're seeing because of Kobe Bryant's involvement, he's such a huge star, the rise of the Internet, all sorts of things really changing in the way that this case is being covered. And putting lots of pressure on more mainstream media to keep up.

QUIJANO: Josie, I wanted to ask you, that so many comparisons have been made between this case and the OJ Simpson case. Just in terms of the publicity, what kind of affect is that having on the judge, on the people there? Explain to us what are some of the things that you've seen.

BURKE: Well, one big difference with the OJ case -- actually, there are a couple big differences. It took place in a major market. So there were a little better equipped to handle all the attention. Another change is the rise of the Internet. The OJ Simpson case was almost a decade ago. Then, what changed in that case was how the tabloids covered it. They actually got in and had legitimate stories.

Here in Eagle County, they've will to change their lives so much. Not just the alleged victim, not just the town people, but the people who are directly involved in this case. The judge who's going to be hearing the August 6 hearing, when basically Kobe Bryant will be arraigned had to come out and issue -- he didn't call it a gag order. But in effect it was a gag order. He called it an order regarding pretrial publicity, because he was seeing all of the things coming out, and not really from the lawyers but from all of the people in town who knew or said they knew the alleged victim.

There was so much information, he went out and put out that order that says, don't talk about this case in public. There was no threat of repercussion, but the idea was trying to get all of the rumor and the innuendo and any facts that could come out to really put a clampdown on that.

MALVEAUX: But Josie, why is it, then, they decided for these hearings, these initial hearings, that they would allow a camera inside the courtroom? You would think it would just make it worse?

BURKE: Well, it looks like because of the attention, their idea could be that if they make it available, there's going to be one still camera in the courtroom. There's going to be one video camera in the courtroom, and a live audio feed will be available. Probably the thinking behind that is, maybe some of the people who would otherwise feel like they had to be down in the courtroom will now think they can listen to it on the radio or in some other way get the information.

And it's also interesting that they to have a meeting yesterday. The judge with people in the county, to try to figure out what to do about this courtroom that only seats 68 people, where they're supposed to hold this hearing on August 6. Clearly, there could be 10 times that many people looking to get in. So they're having to struggle with things that really has nothing to do with the facts of the case. Just in terms of how they're going to allow people to cover it, because there is so much interest.

STARR: Josie, we know you're also keeping your eye on another huge sports story emerging this weekend, I think, and that's Lance Armstrong.

BURKE: Yes. That's actually happening now as we speak. Obviously, Lance Armstrong, 31 years old, the best cyclist in the world right now, is looking to win his fifth consecutive Tour de France. But this has been a lot different than his previous four victories. And in those victories, he's gone into the final weekend, and that's what this is, with at least a lead of five minutes. Well, his lead right now is 65 seconds. And today is very likely the day that will decide who wins the Tour de France, whether it is Lance Armstrong or his chief rival Jan Ullrich.

They're having this 30-mile time trial. Lance Armstrong is scheduled to start any moment now. And if he can pick up some time, maybe he'll be able to coast down the Champs-Elysees tomorrow. But if he loses time to Jan Ullrich, in the last time trial, he lost more than a minute and a half to Jan Ullrich. If that were happen again, his chances of winning are over.

If it's neck-and-neck, we're going to see something unprecedented tomorrow in Paris because normally it's a ceremonial ride. The guy in the yellow jersey just comes down the Champs-Elysees to great cheers because he's already wrapped it up. Well, tomorrow that might not be the case. It could be the most exciting finish in the 100 years of this great race.

Just so you know, the closest finish ever was back in 1989 when Greg Lamon won by a mere eight seconds. He, of course, another American.

MALVEAUX: So what are the odds he's going to pull it through?

BURKE: I think people are saying that he has a good chance. But the big difference is, he's not as strong as he was in the past. He's gotten a little older. That time trial I referred to earlier, he was beaten and beaten badly. And he didn't do the one thing that he's always done in the Tour de France, and that's pull away in the Alps. He's such a great climber. A lot people attributed that also to the weather. Weather conditions supposedly today in France are supposed to be more conducive to Lance Armstrong riding well, and that it's going to be cool and a little bit wet.

QUIJANO: Josie, talk to us on a different story; but also, a very interesting story that is surfacing about golfer Suzy Whaley. I mean, the situation there. So many comparisons to Annika Sorenstam, but at the same time, a different situation for her. She's sort of doing this for others, to be a role model for others, not just for herself.

BURKE: Naturally, you have to draw the comparison between Suzy Whaley, who just played the first two rounds at the Greater Hartford Open and did not make the cut and Annika Sorenstam who back be in May played at the PGA's Colonial Tournament. But again, there, Annika said this was something he was trying to do for herself. She really endeared herself to people.

Suzy Whaley came out and said she wanted to do this, take this step so she could be a role model for her two daughters and for women everywhere. But in the same way Annika Sorenstam did, she really presented herself well; she really endeared herself to people. And even though she didn't make the cut, people are saying that she really took a step forward with her great smile and also the fact that her job is -- she's a teaching coach.

She said her job is to grow the game of golf. She said on Friday it was the experience of a lifetime, and she felt like she really did her job.

QUIJANO: All right, Josie. Thanks. From winners and losers in the sports world, to a victory lap this week for Jessica Lynch, the former prisoner of war in Iraq, finally home from the hospital. I'm back ON THE STORY in two minutes: But first, a check on the headlines this hour with Heidi Collins.

(NEWSBREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PFC. JESSICA LYNCH, U.S. ARMY: Those were my works. I am an American soldier, too. Thank you for this welcome, and it's great to be home.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUIJANO: Former prisoner of war Jessica Lynch, an injured soldier coming home, but also a huge celebrity. And you know, I was out there in West Virginia, and it was unbelievable. It was like the Fourth of July. You would see the people lining up along this motorcade route, and anticipating her arrival for hours and hours.

I mean you can only imagine what affect this had on a small, small community that kind of plays where certainly everybody knows everybody, everybody knows each other's business. And you know, just as an indication of how small this is, I asked one of the governor's representatives, well, how many people live in Elizabeth, which is just down the road from Palestine, Jessica's hometown. And he says, well, let me give you the whole population of county. The county is 5900-some people. It's a small place; and they certainly look at Jessica Lynch as -- as nothing less than a hero.

MALVEAUX: What was it like for you, and -- and to be there in that moment? It seemed like it was, I mean, such a special time for that young woman. And at the same time I wondered, what kind of pressure was she under to go before the cameras and to make a statement because clearly, that must have been pretty difficult for her to do...

QUIJANO: Oh yes, absolutely. And you keep in mind this is person who is 20 years old. I mean, let's not forget, I mean, she is a young, young woman. And to show the poise that she did under the circumstances that she had gone through, where she certainly was in a lot of pain. According to family spokesperson, she still doesn't have enough feeling left in her feet to be able to walk. So, she needs a walker to get around in. She was actually wheeled out onto the stage.

She wanted to get up on her own power and walk herself, but she's not able to do that. So -- and actually, her family has made some adjustments to their home to make it wheelchair accessible for her. And it's just a tremendous amount of pressure on this young woman. And then, of course, the questions about the controversy surrounding the details, what exactly happened to her. You know, she through it all, showed a tremendous amount of poise, I thought. Yes.

BURKE: Elaine, I want to ask you about that controversy. You talk about how it affects her. She doesn't seem to notice it, but the townspeople who are hailing her as a hero. What's been their reaction to all the questions about what actually happened over there? And how she should really be characterized?

QUIJANO: Yes, you know, I asked people about that. And they absolutely are adamant that no matter what, the fact is, she was held captive. The fact is she suffered some very devastating, debilitating injuries. And the fact is, she's got months and months of hard, grueling, painful work ahead of her.

So, they look at her and they, you know, they basically told me, it's not important to us. It really, truly doesn't matter to them, because this is their hero coming home. This is a woman who's been through so much, and they are just simply glad that she is back in their town, and back safe.

STARR: Well of course, the Army acknowledging constantly that this woman went through a terrible situation. Was grievously injured, very, very difficult. But the Pentagon reminding people that there were a number of other people in this ambush incident, and many people lost their lives. It was really a terrible tragedy that touched so many military families across the country. So, they want to acknowledge Jessica Lynch, but they don't want people to forget that there were other soldiers there that day.

MALVEAUX: And is that important to the Pentagon, just how it was that she was rescued or her story? I mean is that something that they are sensitive about? How that came about?

STARR: What they mostly have said is, they believe the news media has gone a little off the deep end in; you know, por -- in portraying this situation as some sort of Hollywood commando rescue. This was done by Special Forces in the cover of night, very covert. It turned out they didn't, of course, go into a hostile situation; that there were many Iraqis that had been involved in caring for her.

We still don't know, however, the really full story. How this young woman completely got all of these injuries. How it all happened. She has had some memory issues that have made it difficult. So, it may be some time before we still really know what happened to Jessica Lynch.

MALVEAUX: From Jessica Lynch, to her Commander in Chief. A week where President Bush could celebrate her homecoming, applaud the killing of Saddam Hussein's sons, but continue to weather questions about the war and the 911 -- 9/11 terror attacks. I'm back ON THE STORY in 90 seconds.

ANNOUNCER: Suzanne Malveaux is a CNN White House correspondent. Earlier she reported for NBC for six years, covering the Pentagon and the Clinton administration. She has degrees from Harvard and Columbia.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Now, more than ever, the Iraqis can know that the former regime is gone, and is not coming back!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: President Bush this week, reacting to the killing of Saddam Hussein's sons, an event applauded by many. But President Bush also finds himself the target of continuing questions. Not only about the way and the 9-11 terrorist attacks.

Welcome back. We're ON THE STORY.

Now, this is an amazing week. I spoke with Democrats, Republicans. And this issue will not go away. It is the intelligence flap over the State of the Union Address. Last week, you had the CIA taking responsibility for this. George Tenet saying, yes, you know, we fumbled here the ball. This week, you have the Deputy of National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, who says, well, you know, as a matter of fact, we did receive some memos warning against the statement that Iraq was trying to obtain uranium from Africa. And that's the reason why it was taken out the October speech.

He says, well, I don't recall -- I didn't recall those memos or that phone conversation that I had regarding that warning three, three and half months later, when he was dealing with the State of the Union Address. It's something that Democrats have a hard time believing. They have a hard time swallowing. And there's still a lot of questions. Why was that statement in the speech?

STARR: And it seems like the administration's own stumbles, if you will, are keeping the story alive.

MALVEAUX: Well I -- even Republicans who you talk to are quite amazed that it has been handled the way it's been handled. And one of the things that keeps it going, that gives it life, is the fact that things are not going well in Iraq. You don't have the weapons of mass destruction. And also, as long as you have these killings of U.S. soldiers, almost on a daily basis. Today three soldiers lost their lives. Then, people are going to still look with a critical eye to the Bush administration and say, why are we here? Lay out your case. And if there's any doubt, about that case going to war, then answer our questions.

And I think what the Democrats are doing is that they see the opening. They see the opportunity, and they're seizing on it. And they say OK, we want -- even Senator Kennedy says this week, we want President Bush directly to take responsibility for this speech. The White House says, look, you know, Stephen Hadley said something. The CIA has taken responsibility. Let's just move on.

BURKE: Suzanne, one prominent Democrat, though, came out and said he forgives President Bush, because every president makes mistakes. And that's former President Bill Clinton. How is his coming out and saying that being received on both sides, Republican and Democrats? MALVEAUX: Well, you know, the Democrats are baffled by it, quite frankly. A little bit upset by this because, though, the one time he's speaking out here, he's actually supporting President Bush. And they're all, really, trying to hammer not only the president, because they see this as one of the -- his biggest assets is that he is considered to be trustworthy. That he is a plainspoken individual who gets out there and tells the truth. And that is something that you know, they're chipping away at, they're trying to chip away at his credibility here.

President Clinton comes along and -- and says, well, you know, it's OK. You know, we all make mistakes as presidents, so yes, frustration on that part. Republicans, though, are worried. They are worried, in terms of how this is going to affect the re-election bid.

Already, you see the poll numbers are going down with his approval ratings, anywhere from, you know, we saw a couple months ago, it was 70 percent. Now, it's in the mid-50s. Respectable number, but nevertheless, they -- they are dipping. They are dropping.

STARR: The -- the congressional report on the 9-11 attacks also raises a lot of questions about how the administration handled the intelligence information it had just before 9-11. Is that going to start sticking to the White House? Is that going to be a problem for them?

MALVEAUX: You know, it's hard to tell at this point, because there was a lot of blame to go around. You had the FBI. You had the CIA that were -- that were fingered for this whole thing. One thing that the Bush administration was defensive about, however, was what wasn't in the report. What wasn't revealed was Saudi Arabia, and other governments and -- and their knowledge about what was happening before 9-11, whether or not they had knowledge, or their potential; the potential links to this. And that is something they're criticized for. They want the administration to be more forthcoming. We'll see. Of course, you know there's still more reports and investigations that -- that are stilling coming out next year.

QUIJANO: And now, the U.S. getting involved in Liberia. I mean this is a potentially difficult situation now, and what's the plan here?

MALVEAUX: Well, you know it's -- and as you know, Barbara, I mean, it's a difficult position for the Bush administration, under an incredible amount of international and domestic pressure, to move in to get U.S. troops to do something about this. It seems as if they've -- you've got the Pentagon on one side, the State Department on the other; the president somewhere, vacillating in the middle, and not really moving that much farther from there. Saying, OK, we'll position ourselves, and be ready for logistic support. We're -- we're on the coast here. And we'll see what happens.

But it -- it's clear to me, and I don't know if it's clear to you Barbara, that they are not particularly enthused about putting U.S. soldiers' boots in Liberia. STARR: Pentagon is very nervous about going into this situation. They're just not sure how they're going to handle it. And what they are going to be able to do to really help. That's their problem.

QUIJANO: Well, from the White House to New York City, where I also was this week, and the shooting inside New York City Hall, a place many thought would be among the most secure anywhere. I'm ON THE STORY, and back in two minutes.

ANNOUNCER: Elaine Quijano is a national correspondent for CNN Newsource. She files reports for more than 700 television stations affiliated with CNN. She joined CNN in 2000. Earlier, she worked as a reported in Tampa and Champagne, Illinois. And, she graduated from the University of Illinois.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, MAYOR, NEW YORK: We will make sure that everybody goes through a magnetometer. Tragically, we live in a world where we have to balance security with people's rights to come and go.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUIJANO: New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg about improvements to security after the shooting in City Hall on Wednesday.

Welcome back. We're ON THE STORY.

And you know, of course, the big question everyone was asking after this happened is how could this has happened there of all places? You know, shootings happen every day, in large cities they happen, but not in City Hall. Not where there is a policeman, a policewoman, you know, every few feet, and a place where there are magnetometers set up.

And it just baffled a lot of people, and then the reaction, of course, New York already so tense in the wake of 9-11. They shut down subway lines; they shut down bridges because for a time they thought that this gunman had, perhaps, escaped. And we know now that was not the case. But certainly, this has raised a lot of questions. If this could happen at City Hall, where else? Where else in New York City may there be some security issues?

So, certainly Mayor Michael Bloomberg is looking at all that, and he has vowed to make whatever changes are necessary to make sure that something like this doesn't happen again.

MALVEAUX: I have a lot friends who are so personally impacted by that. I mean what was it like for New Yorkers when they got that news, even if it was just looking up at the screen or hearing it on the radio that there was a shooting that was so close to ground zero?

QUIJANO: Yes. It was stunning. You know, I was talking to a few people. And just in terms of location, where City Hall sits in relation to Ground Zero, it's literally about a five-minute walk, just three or four city blocks away. And so for a lot of people, those same feelings immediately came to the surface. Was this terrorism? Is this something now that I need to be ready for as some sort of, you know, emergency action that I need to take?

And even though it was determined, not too long after the shooting, that this was not a terrorist act, it still brought to the surface all of those memories and those horrible feelings of fear that New Yorkers are feeling. So it -- it was a difficult thing.

And you know, interestingly, Mayor Michael Bloomberg came in the next morning, made a very big show of walking through, emptying his pockets, first of all, you know, on the conveyor belt where the magnetometers were, and then walking through it. And all the cameras captured that. But some of the reports indicated that a reporter who was trailing along actually bypassed security and didn't -- you know, and got in. And this is the day after the shooting. So, certainly they're going to be looking at a lot those issues a lot more closely.

BURKE: Elaine, we all saw those pictures. You talked about the reaction of New Yorkers first being baffled, scared. Has the emotion, anger, come in to play from people you've talked to about how they could be put in this position here at City Hall and where do they go from here? At not just this one building, but at federal, in county, in court buildings across the city and state there?

QUIJANO: Yes. Absolutely. Because the way that the mayor described it, that this was sort of the procedure that they normally were not elected officials, city staff, so on, were not required to go through the metal detectors. But visitors -- you know if you and I walk in, we would have to go through those magnetometers. And so, yes, there was some anger.

Why is it that this was allowed in the first place, you know? What kind of special treatment is that at the expense of security and safety? And so now, as I said, the mayor has been very adamant about saying, look, we're going to do our best to balance that access, and public access to these buildings, but we're also going to take these steps to make sure.

MALVEAUX: How do they explain that, though? It must have been an embarrassment, really?

QUIJANO: Oh, absolutely. I mean it certainly an embarrassment. As I said, special treatment then for these elected officials? And you know for the mayor, to be able to walk in. A lot of New Yorkers just baffled and angered by that. But you know, it's the idea that this was how it was done, thousand had been done. And it was never called into question.

STARR: But even here in Washington, where we come and go, all of us, from government buildings all day long, there is that -- still that issue of the right of public access to these places. And that you can never really, as tragic as this incident was and as difficult, you never really going to shut down public places entirely in America. It's just not the way things are done. QUIJANO: True, true. But you know what New Yorkers thinking is exactly what Josie brought up. Is this idea of if at City Hall this could happen, where else? What other places, where it should be common sense, you're absolutely, you know, focused on security, and of all places, like I say, City Hall, where you think it's so heavily fortified, where else? If this was that lax, you know, where else could it happen?

STARR: Well, indeed this is a week when the news kept coming. Thanks to all of my colleagues and thank you for watching ON THE STORY. We'll be back next week.

Still ahead, "PEOPLE IN THE NEWS" focusing this week on Laci and Scott Peterson, the marriage and the murder case. At 12 noon Eastern, 9 a.m. Pacific, "CNN LIVE SATURDAY," and at 1:00 p.m. Eastern, 10 a.m. Pacific, CNN's "IN THE MONEY," the cost and benefit of beefing up the military to help rebuild Iraq.

Coming up at the top of the hour, a news alert. But first, the president's weekly radio address.

(BEGIN AUDIO TAPE)

BUSH: Good morning.

This weekend marks the 13th anniversary of the Americans With Disability (sic) Act, one of the great compassionate acts of American government. Since becoming law, the ADA has helped to improve the quality of life for more than 50 million Americans with physical and mental disabilities. As a result, it is easier today for people with disabilities to find a job, to enter public buildings and to live more independently in their communities. These are all welcome changes in American life.

Many citizens have dedicated themselves to serving the interest of persons with disabilities, and some of them are here with me at the White House. I am joined by members of the President's Committee on Mental Retardation. The men and women on this committee include people with disabilities, as well as parents, teachers, health-care workers and advocates.

They recently voted to change the committee's name to the President's Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities. And I was pleased to sign an executive order instituting that change.

There is much more we can do to assure that Americans with disabilities are treated with dignity and respect. In 2001, I announced the New Freedom Initiative, to further promote the full participation of people with disabilities in all areas of society.

As part of the New Freedom Initiative we're giving states funding to help people with disabilities commute to work, or purchase equipment that allows them to work from home. We are promoting homeownership for people with disabilities, and educating builders about the need for more accessible rental housing. We are working with Congress to provide record levels of funding for special-education programs, and to make sure the money is used to provide the most help to the most children.

And we are making government Web sites more accessible to people with disabilities so that they can more easily find information about services and programs of the federal government.

We're also focused on providing better care to people with mental illness. I'm committed to making sure people get the treatment and support they need and don't fall through the cracks.

My administration continues to work with states to ensure full implementation of the Supreme Court's Olmstead decision. That decision rightly mandates that individuals with disabilities who can receive support and treatment in a community setting should be given an opportunity to live close to their families and friends whenever possible. People with disabilities now have more freedom to do productive work and live independent lives.

We're making good progress toward ensuring that persons with disabilities know the American dream is meant for them. With changes in old ways of thinking, the development of new technologies, and the federal government's firm commitment to equality, more and more people with disabilities continue to become full participants in the American life.

Thank you for listening.

(END AUDIO TAPE)

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




Bryant's Accuser Be Named?; Lynch Arrives in West Virginia>


Aired July 26, 2003 - 10:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Welcome to CNN's ON THE STORY, where our journalists have the inside word on the stories we covered this week. I'm Barbara Starr on the story of U.S. forces killing Saddam's sons. What happened, and what next.
RYM BRAHIMI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I'm Rym Brahimi in Baghdad on the story of the reaction of the killing of Uday and Qusay. And whether releasing the paragraph photographs and videotape will finally convince the Iraqis.

JOSIE BURKE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I'm Josie Burke in Vail, Colorado on the story of the Kobe Bryant rape case, all of the pretrial publicity and the national debate over whether to name his accuser.

ELAINE QUIJANO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I'm Elaine Quijano on the story of the best-known soldier from the war on Iraq. Jessica Lynch arriving home in West Virginia.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: I'm Susanne Malveaux, a president celebrating a victory in Iraq and reacting to a congressional report about opportunities the government missed along the road to the 9/11 terror attacks.

We'll also look at the City Hall shooting that stunned New York, which likes to think it is the most on guard against terrorist attacks.

And we'll join a ceremony at Arlington Cemetery to mark the 50 anniversary of the end of the Korean conflict.

And we'll listen to the president's weekly radio address released just a few minutes from now.

We want to hear from you. E-mail us at onthestory@cnn.com.

Now to Barbara Starr and Uday and Qusay.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN. RICARDO SANCHEZ, CMDR., GROUND FORCES, IRAQ: Four persons were killed during that operation and were removed from the building. And we have since confirmed that Uday and Qusay Hussein are among the dead.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STARR: General Ricardo Sanchez, commander of coalition ground forces in Iraq announcing the news of the week, the killing of Saddam Hussein's two sons, Uday and Qusay. And of course, that was really just the beginning of the story, because we rapidly then saw these very graphic pictures. We certainly want to warn our viewers again as we show some of them.

Very graphic pictures, first of the very battered bodies of the two sons pictures taken immediately after, and now these subsequent pictures, videotape of them taken after autopsies were performed and after military morticians touched them up a bit. Mainly, we are told, so that they would then, like you see them here on our air, look more familiar to the Iraqi people, if they could make their faces look a little more recognizable. The feeling was this would finally make the Iraqi people believe that it was them and convince them that Uday and Qusay were really dead.

And that this would begin to have some positive effect in Iraq. Perhaps leading more people to really truly believe the regime was gone.

And Rym, in Baghdad, I'd like to ask you, you know, the reaction on the street in Baghdad, in Iraq, that you are beginning to hear from there about whether people now finally believe these two men are gone?

BRAHIMI: Barbara, you know, it's been like a roller coaster of emotions for many Iraqi people. This whole episode, it started with the news of the deaths, the announcement of the deaths that triggered celebratory reactions, gunfire in the air, people very joyful. And then immediately after, the doubt, the skepticism, is this true? Is it another American lie, in the Iraqi people's views? And then they demanded in a way to see those pictures, to see some proof.

When those pictures came, the still photographs -- again, warning here that those pictures both the still pictures and the videotape, very, very graphic, gruesome pictures of death of the two sons of Saddam. When those photographs were released, well, a lot of people still weren't convinced and said that's just a trick, especially as to be very fair, the pictures actually, there could be some doubt, especially Uday's picture didn't really look like him that much.

And then after that the videotape was released. The U.S. authorities actually took journalists to the airport where the bodies were, had been, as you said, fixed up by a mortician, and arranged to look more like what people were used to seeing them in the newspaper pictures, for instance, before.

And then that changed the minds of many Iraqis, Barbara, but still, a lot of people here remain skeptical. And that's because they're skepticism generally speaking with regard to the U.S. And with regard to that, basically what I want to ask you, of course, one ever the aims of the U.S. in so doing, although they said they were reluctant to release those pictures, was they were hoping in a certain way maybe that it would help reduce the numbers of attacks of U.S. soldiers. But we just heard this morning another three U.S. soldiers were killed in Baquba about 45 minutes north of Baghdad, they were guarding a children's hospital. What does the U.S. -- does -- does U.S. authorities really think that this is going to die down now that Uday and Qusay or gone? What do they think they have to do now -- Barbara?

STARR: Well, Rym, they believe here that releasing the pictures will convince Iraqis they're dead. Therefore, they will get more informants like they did in this case coming forward, telling them where the leadership is. And that that ultimately will save lives. But you're quite correct. It hasn't quite happened yet. In fact, military authorities have told us this week they are concerned, actually, about a short-term increase in attacks. More sophisticated attacks, against U.S. forces before, you know it turns around and gets better.

But there was, of course, as you know, Rym, an indicator this week informants are coming forward. Another informant came forward, led to a raid on a house in Tikrit in the north. And they believe they captured many of Saddam Hussein's personal security detachment.

So I guess the question partially on the table now is, how close are they to Saddam? Are we going to be sitting here next week discussing, or the week after, discussing how they got Saddam? They have -- they have hope that the noose is tightening. What are you hearing on your side?

BRAHIMI: Well, what we're hearing here mainly is that a lot of people are still, again, there's a lot of skepticism. And a lot of people upon hearing or finding out that Uday and Qusay had indeed been killed, well, then, of course, the next concern was the father. A lot of people saying, well, OK, that's fine to get the two sons, but the father's still on the loose.

And other people yet seem to be a little more relaxed, and it seemed to indicate to them, OK now with what they saw as the two main pillars supporting Saddam Hussein gone, then Saddam Hussein was not in even weaker a man than he was since the U.S. troops entered Baghdad on the 9 of April. And this was maybe definitely a new era and chapter in their history.

That said, again there was a whole range of reactions a whole range of emotions. You know, some people, again, saying that, you know, after they showed the videotape in particular that, OK, this is now too emergency information. We didn't have to make it that gruesome. Let's just move on and bury them.

Other people yet angry, because some people you know felt cheated. They said, the Americans went in and did that. First of all, they criticized the whole operation saying what, this superpower of the world needs 200 men to fight six men in a house for six hours? And then other people said he cheated us of the right to try these two men that made us suffer for so long.

BURKE: Barbara, do you think there was surprise both of these brothers were together and that they hadn't disbursed in order to alleviate and lessen the possibility that they both would go down at once?

BRAHIMI: Was that for Barbara or for me?

BURKE: Both can answer. I addressed it to Barbara.

STARR: Oh, Josie, I'm so sorry. I couldn't hear you from here for a moment.

Well, I think that was the big surprise, actually. What were they doing together? These two guys were not known to be close family. They had been apart for some time. And what were they doing in northern Iraq? That was one of the great unanswered questions in this whole puzzle. They were found in the city of Mosul, very far to the north, close to the Turkish boarder, close to the Iranian border. Were they about to make a run for it, were they going to try and get themselves smuggled across the border?

Rym's question or Rym's point about, was it really necessary to launch such a violent raid so quickly? Why didn't they wait them out? Why didn't they try and capture them alive and get what intelligence they could from them, because, certainly, they know the secrets of the regime.

Also, is one that's tough to answer at this point, the military says of course, that they had to go after them. They warned them. They tried to get them to come out alive. It was clear that they were going to fight to the death. And they couldn't risk having them escape from that house, possibly through an underground tunnel that the U.S. might not have known about or something like that. So they believe they really only had the choice to proceed with this assault.

And they believe that it sends a message to the rest of the people of Iraq that if they can come across the very senior leadership, they will show them no mercy. They will take them out if they have to.

MALVEAUX: And I know the reaction from the White House was really rather subdued in the beginning because of course, they are looking at Iraq and they're thinking, no weapons of mass destruction, no Saddam Hussein here. And clearly, U.S. soldiers are dying on a daily basis. We can't appear to gloat because of this news, because of Saddam Hussein's sons.

At the same time I wonder, what is the payoff here? I mean did they really score some points? You have a lot of criticism from those who are saying, you know, against Muslim custom that this is insulting, that it's offensive to show these kind of pictures. And also, a lot of people here who are criticizing the move, they say, well, OK, the Iraqis, yes, this is to prove that they're dead. But what about showing the pictures here in the United States, what was the purpose of that? Rym and Barbara.

STARR: Well, basically it's a global village. You know you can't show something just in the Arab world these days with the Internet and all of that without it being shown everywhere. But you're quite right, Suzanne. For the U.S. military, this was a tough call to watch Don Rumsfeld make, because there is a great cultural tradition had the U.S. military. They don't show their war booty, if you will. They don't show dead people that they have killed in action. And it's a real concern.

The next time America's enemies should have, God forbid, dead American soldiers and show those pictures, what happens? How does the U.S. maintain the moral high ground the next time around? It's a problem.

BRAHIMI: Well, Uday and Qusay were just part of the challenge facing U.S. coalition forces here in Iraq. I'll be back on the story in just a few minutes from now.

ANNOUNCER: Rym Brahimi is a CNN international correspondent and reported from Baghdad during the war in Iraq. She has a masters in English literature from the University of Paris, and a journalism degree from Columbia University. She speaks French, Italian and Arabic.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAUL WOLFOWITZ, DEPUTY DEFENSE SECRETARY: The pervasive fear of the old regime is still alive in Iraq. That's not surprising, particularly when you have a chance to view firsthand the kinds of horrors that Saddam and his regime perpetrated.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRAHIMI: Deputy of Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz after seeing firsthand what the situation is here in Iraq.

Welcome back, we are ON THE STORY.

Now, there may be some optimism voiced by some U.S. officials about what the situation is in this country. But that said, that's not the perception by many Iraqis. Yes, many of them are grateful the old regime is gone, but many are still wondering what the U.S. is still doing here, if it's not helping improve their daily lives?

With that, you add the number of U.S. deaths every day, the number of U.S. attacks every day against U.S. soldiers, and you do get a lot of questions being raised. Especially as these attacks continue after the deaths ever Uday and Qusay.

QUIJANO: Rym, I wanted to ask you, one thing we don't really hear so much about, but I think is so interesting is that, not only are the security issues and logistical issues that they're trying to deal with right now, but also, even just as you mentioned, day-to-day living. Women, particularly now, in this society, are finding it very difficult to come out and address some of the problems that they encountered, you know, during all of this upheaval. The problem of sexual assault, certainly, I keep reading about that being a problem, continuing to be a problem. BRAHIMI: Definitely. You know, there's a lot of insecurity. And a lot of people actually, interestingly enough, link the electricity problem to the insecurity issue, because they say if when he electricity at night, at least we'd be more protected. Armed robbers wouldn't come out at night and try and, you know, rob us as gunpoint from our possessions.

That said, there's also the problem of the insecurity with regard to women, the increased number of rapes and kidnappings of women. I'd just like to mention here, though, that a week ago we did a story about a woman whose 16-year-old daughter had been kidnapped, gone missing for 10 days. Well, two weeks later she found her 16-year-old daughter. She was returned to her in exchange for a ransom of $30,000, which here in Iraq, as can you imagine, is a huge amount of money.

Now, the little girl said, or the young girl said that she had been kept for 15 days in a house with five other young girls, and there was a whole ransom system going about.

Now, of course, that also doesn't help that there is a lot of weapons lying around. Still a lot of people have weapons. There's still a lot of armed robbers and not enough policemen on the street just yet.

BURKE: Rym, getting back to the death of the brothers' Hussein. Can you talk about how people -- you mentioned the mixed emotions they had about the death. But how are people reacting to the informant, the fact that this man is supposedly going to get $30 million. Is he being hailed as hero or a villain?

BRAHIMI: You know, I think in most cases he's not regarded particularly well. Although many people will say that they're very happy that this is the end of Uday and Qusay, many people say they were criminals. I think they've now come to realize that, or see, that their deaths as a bit of a shock in the way it was carried out, if you will. And especially this whole betrayal issue, they see that as something very bad. They see this loyalty; it's a very bad trait here in the Middle East, especially in exchange for money, although, obviously, it does happen.

So people are really -- I mean this man is, we understand, kept under U.S. custody for fear, probably, that he would be attacked either by loyalists of Uday or Qusay or by people who just don't have any respect for what he did. It appears interestingly that a lot of people did know that Uday and Qusay were in the neighborhood. But many of them didn't come forward. Probably most out of fear and maybe very few out of some sense of loyalty, or just the fact that they wouldn't want to collaborate with the occupying power, especially as the occupying power is the United States.

MALVEAUX: And what about Saddam Hussein? Are we any closer to finding Saddam Hussein, Barbara, or Rym? I mean I know that -- are we seeing more informants coming forward and saying, yes, we think we may be tipped off? We think we may know? STARR: Well, they certainly believe that, you know, they are getting closer. With all the raids they're conducting, that they're sort of taking away whatever support structure he has, reducing the number of Iraqis who will protect him.

But Rym's point is really, very fascinating. If the U.S. military is fostering a society in Iraq of informants, of people turning against other Iraqis, whatever their political beliefs, or the regime's support. There may be an issue that the U.S. leaves behind here when it finally leaves Iraq, because this is not really something, as Rym points out, that is looked upon too kindly in that region of the world.

Whatever your political beliefs, informants are generally poorly regarded. That may be something the U.S. has to deal with down the road, since it's financing, you know, the $30 million reward on Saddam's head is going to lure someone, they hope, into turning him in.

BRAHIMI: Also interesting enough, you know, the whole issue of the informant, you know, comes against this backdrop of, again, this occupation. That people obviously see very badly or perceived, as an attempt to their dignity, humiliation in the way that they needed the Americans to liberate them in a way from Saddam Hussein is something that doesn't go down well here at all.

And so there's been a sort of reflex of me and my brother against my cousin, if you will. We hated -- everybody hated Uday and Qusay, but at the same time, if we're dealing, if it's an Iraqi versus U.S. business, well, you know, a lot of people aren't sure they would like the U.S. to prevail here. And so there's been that hesitation as well.

And, again, against the backdrop of the current situation, the daily lives of Iraqis is very, very important. It plays an extremely important role in this, because a lot of people say, well, you know, the U.S. will not improve their situation here. They will not improve their standing in our perception until they're able to show us they've done something for us. And until they're able to deliver on security and on electricity, well, we might just stand back and not really push for any changes or help them improve their situation or tell them if somebody's about to attack them.

BURKE: Rym, we want to thank you for joining us. We're going to let you get back to work. But before we do that, can you tell us what sorry stories you'll be following in the days ahead?

BRAHIMI: Yes. I've actually, again, put up a list of that, just to answer your question. There is an interesting movement that seems to be developing, actually several movements with regard to women. Women's freedom movements, but, also, Islamic women's movements. So a variety here of directions that women might want to be taking.

There are issues with businessmen. Businesses that are trying to emerge here. For instance, mobile network is soon, everybody hopes, up to -- for bids. But again, that's something that -- everything here is dependent upon the security situation. We're hoping there will be commercial flights in and out of Baghdad, again, that's depending on the security situation. But we're following all these stories and we'll keep you posted.

BURKE: Thanks again, Rym, stay safe.

We're going to turn our attention away from the international world to a story that cuts across sports lines, entertainment lines, and certainly news lines. It's the sexual assault charges against basketball star Kobe Bryant, and all of the attention that's being focused on his 19-year-old accuser. I'm back ON THE STORY in two minutes.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a town of Eagle, Colorado, of only about 3,500 people. And it's beginning to seem to some of them that there are that many reporters out here as well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURKE: That's a local reporter here in the Vail Valley exaggerating just a little bit about how many members of the media descended upon Eagle County here.

Welcome back to ON THE STORY. I'm Josie Burke here in Vail.

And it was really an unprecedented week covering this story, because mainly all of the things that came out about the alleged victim. Information about her background and not just that, specifics. She was named by name by Los angels talk show host. So her name was out there. On the Internet, they put pictures out there, unfortunately for one woman here who lives in this part of the country, her picture was put out there instead of the alleged victim. That woman hired an attorney.

And just yesterday a tabloid newspaper went ahead and published a picture of the alleged victim. They blacked out just her eyes. But really, this is something that is a test case for rape cases all across the country.

Now, we're seeing because of Kobe Bryant's involvement, he's such a huge star, the rise of the Internet, all sorts of things really changing in the way that this case is being covered. And putting lots of pressure on more mainstream media to keep up.

QUIJANO: Josie, I wanted to ask you, that so many comparisons have been made between this case and the OJ Simpson case. Just in terms of the publicity, what kind of affect is that having on the judge, on the people there? Explain to us what are some of the things that you've seen.

BURKE: Well, one big difference with the OJ case -- actually, there are a couple big differences. It took place in a major market. So there were a little better equipped to handle all the attention. Another change is the rise of the Internet. The OJ Simpson case was almost a decade ago. Then, what changed in that case was how the tabloids covered it. They actually got in and had legitimate stories.

Here in Eagle County, they've will to change their lives so much. Not just the alleged victim, not just the town people, but the people who are directly involved in this case. The judge who's going to be hearing the August 6 hearing, when basically Kobe Bryant will be arraigned had to come out and issue -- he didn't call it a gag order. But in effect it was a gag order. He called it an order regarding pretrial publicity, because he was seeing all of the things coming out, and not really from the lawyers but from all of the people in town who knew or said they knew the alleged victim.

There was so much information, he went out and put out that order that says, don't talk about this case in public. There was no threat of repercussion, but the idea was trying to get all of the rumor and the innuendo and any facts that could come out to really put a clampdown on that.

MALVEAUX: But Josie, why is it, then, they decided for these hearings, these initial hearings, that they would allow a camera inside the courtroom? You would think it would just make it worse?

BURKE: Well, it looks like because of the attention, their idea could be that if they make it available, there's going to be one still camera in the courtroom. There's going to be one video camera in the courtroom, and a live audio feed will be available. Probably the thinking behind that is, maybe some of the people who would otherwise feel like they had to be down in the courtroom will now think they can listen to it on the radio or in some other way get the information.

And it's also interesting that they to have a meeting yesterday. The judge with people in the county, to try to figure out what to do about this courtroom that only seats 68 people, where they're supposed to hold this hearing on August 6. Clearly, there could be 10 times that many people looking to get in. So they're having to struggle with things that really has nothing to do with the facts of the case. Just in terms of how they're going to allow people to cover it, because there is so much interest.

STARR: Josie, we know you're also keeping your eye on another huge sports story emerging this weekend, I think, and that's Lance Armstrong.

BURKE: Yes. That's actually happening now as we speak. Obviously, Lance Armstrong, 31 years old, the best cyclist in the world right now, is looking to win his fifth consecutive Tour de France. But this has been a lot different than his previous four victories. And in those victories, he's gone into the final weekend, and that's what this is, with at least a lead of five minutes. Well, his lead right now is 65 seconds. And today is very likely the day that will decide who wins the Tour de France, whether it is Lance Armstrong or his chief rival Jan Ullrich.

They're having this 30-mile time trial. Lance Armstrong is scheduled to start any moment now. And if he can pick up some time, maybe he'll be able to coast down the Champs-Elysees tomorrow. But if he loses time to Jan Ullrich, in the last time trial, he lost more than a minute and a half to Jan Ullrich. If that were happen again, his chances of winning are over.

If it's neck-and-neck, we're going to see something unprecedented tomorrow in Paris because normally it's a ceremonial ride. The guy in the yellow jersey just comes down the Champs-Elysees to great cheers because he's already wrapped it up. Well, tomorrow that might not be the case. It could be the most exciting finish in the 100 years of this great race.

Just so you know, the closest finish ever was back in 1989 when Greg Lamon won by a mere eight seconds. He, of course, another American.

MALVEAUX: So what are the odds he's going to pull it through?

BURKE: I think people are saying that he has a good chance. But the big difference is, he's not as strong as he was in the past. He's gotten a little older. That time trial I referred to earlier, he was beaten and beaten badly. And he didn't do the one thing that he's always done in the Tour de France, and that's pull away in the Alps. He's such a great climber. A lot people attributed that also to the weather. Weather conditions supposedly today in France are supposed to be more conducive to Lance Armstrong riding well, and that it's going to be cool and a little bit wet.

QUIJANO: Josie, talk to us on a different story; but also, a very interesting story that is surfacing about golfer Suzy Whaley. I mean, the situation there. So many comparisons to Annika Sorenstam, but at the same time, a different situation for her. She's sort of doing this for others, to be a role model for others, not just for herself.

BURKE: Naturally, you have to draw the comparison between Suzy Whaley, who just played the first two rounds at the Greater Hartford Open and did not make the cut and Annika Sorenstam who back be in May played at the PGA's Colonial Tournament. But again, there, Annika said this was something he was trying to do for herself. She really endeared herself to people.

Suzy Whaley came out and said she wanted to do this, take this step so she could be a role model for her two daughters and for women everywhere. But in the same way Annika Sorenstam did, she really presented herself well; she really endeared herself to people. And even though she didn't make the cut, people are saying that she really took a step forward with her great smile and also the fact that her job is -- she's a teaching coach.

She said her job is to grow the game of golf. She said on Friday it was the experience of a lifetime, and she felt like she really did her job.

QUIJANO: All right, Josie. Thanks. From winners and losers in the sports world, to a victory lap this week for Jessica Lynch, the former prisoner of war in Iraq, finally home from the hospital. I'm back ON THE STORY in two minutes: But first, a check on the headlines this hour with Heidi Collins.

(NEWSBREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PFC. JESSICA LYNCH, U.S. ARMY: Those were my works. I am an American soldier, too. Thank you for this welcome, and it's great to be home.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUIJANO: Former prisoner of war Jessica Lynch, an injured soldier coming home, but also a huge celebrity. And you know, I was out there in West Virginia, and it was unbelievable. It was like the Fourth of July. You would see the people lining up along this motorcade route, and anticipating her arrival for hours and hours.

I mean you can only imagine what affect this had on a small, small community that kind of plays where certainly everybody knows everybody, everybody knows each other's business. And you know, just as an indication of how small this is, I asked one of the governor's representatives, well, how many people live in Elizabeth, which is just down the road from Palestine, Jessica's hometown. And he says, well, let me give you the whole population of county. The county is 5900-some people. It's a small place; and they certainly look at Jessica Lynch as -- as nothing less than a hero.

MALVEAUX: What was it like for you, and -- and to be there in that moment? It seemed like it was, I mean, such a special time for that young woman. And at the same time I wondered, what kind of pressure was she under to go before the cameras and to make a statement because clearly, that must have been pretty difficult for her to do...

QUIJANO: Oh yes, absolutely. And you keep in mind this is person who is 20 years old. I mean, let's not forget, I mean, she is a young, young woman. And to show the poise that she did under the circumstances that she had gone through, where she certainly was in a lot of pain. According to family spokesperson, she still doesn't have enough feeling left in her feet to be able to walk. So, she needs a walker to get around in. She was actually wheeled out onto the stage.

She wanted to get up on her own power and walk herself, but she's not able to do that. So -- and actually, her family has made some adjustments to their home to make it wheelchair accessible for her. And it's just a tremendous amount of pressure on this young woman. And then, of course, the questions about the controversy surrounding the details, what exactly happened to her. You know, she through it all, showed a tremendous amount of poise, I thought. Yes.

BURKE: Elaine, I want to ask you about that controversy. You talk about how it affects her. She doesn't seem to notice it, but the townspeople who are hailing her as a hero. What's been their reaction to all the questions about what actually happened over there? And how she should really be characterized?

QUIJANO: Yes, you know, I asked people about that. And they absolutely are adamant that no matter what, the fact is, she was held captive. The fact is she suffered some very devastating, debilitating injuries. And the fact is, she's got months and months of hard, grueling, painful work ahead of her.

So, they look at her and they, you know, they basically told me, it's not important to us. It really, truly doesn't matter to them, because this is their hero coming home. This is a woman who's been through so much, and they are just simply glad that she is back in their town, and back safe.

STARR: Well of course, the Army acknowledging constantly that this woman went through a terrible situation. Was grievously injured, very, very difficult. But the Pentagon reminding people that there were a number of other people in this ambush incident, and many people lost their lives. It was really a terrible tragedy that touched so many military families across the country. So, they want to acknowledge Jessica Lynch, but they don't want people to forget that there were other soldiers there that day.

MALVEAUX: And is that important to the Pentagon, just how it was that she was rescued or her story? I mean is that something that they are sensitive about? How that came about?

STARR: What they mostly have said is, they believe the news media has gone a little off the deep end in; you know, por -- in portraying this situation as some sort of Hollywood commando rescue. This was done by Special Forces in the cover of night, very covert. It turned out they didn't, of course, go into a hostile situation; that there were many Iraqis that had been involved in caring for her.

We still don't know, however, the really full story. How this young woman completely got all of these injuries. How it all happened. She has had some memory issues that have made it difficult. So, it may be some time before we still really know what happened to Jessica Lynch.

MALVEAUX: From Jessica Lynch, to her Commander in Chief. A week where President Bush could celebrate her homecoming, applaud the killing of Saddam Hussein's sons, but continue to weather questions about the war and the 911 -- 9/11 terror attacks. I'm back ON THE STORY in 90 seconds.

ANNOUNCER: Suzanne Malveaux is a CNN White House correspondent. Earlier she reported for NBC for six years, covering the Pentagon and the Clinton administration. She has degrees from Harvard and Columbia.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Now, more than ever, the Iraqis can know that the former regime is gone, and is not coming back!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: President Bush this week, reacting to the killing of Saddam Hussein's sons, an event applauded by many. But President Bush also finds himself the target of continuing questions. Not only about the way and the 9-11 terrorist attacks.

Welcome back. We're ON THE STORY.

Now, this is an amazing week. I spoke with Democrats, Republicans. And this issue will not go away. It is the intelligence flap over the State of the Union Address. Last week, you had the CIA taking responsibility for this. George Tenet saying, yes, you know, we fumbled here the ball. This week, you have the Deputy of National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, who says, well, you know, as a matter of fact, we did receive some memos warning against the statement that Iraq was trying to obtain uranium from Africa. And that's the reason why it was taken out the October speech.

He says, well, I don't recall -- I didn't recall those memos or that phone conversation that I had regarding that warning three, three and half months later, when he was dealing with the State of the Union Address. It's something that Democrats have a hard time believing. They have a hard time swallowing. And there's still a lot of questions. Why was that statement in the speech?

STARR: And it seems like the administration's own stumbles, if you will, are keeping the story alive.

MALVEAUX: Well I -- even Republicans who you talk to are quite amazed that it has been handled the way it's been handled. And one of the things that keeps it going, that gives it life, is the fact that things are not going well in Iraq. You don't have the weapons of mass destruction. And also, as long as you have these killings of U.S. soldiers, almost on a daily basis. Today three soldiers lost their lives. Then, people are going to still look with a critical eye to the Bush administration and say, why are we here? Lay out your case. And if there's any doubt, about that case going to war, then answer our questions.

And I think what the Democrats are doing is that they see the opening. They see the opportunity, and they're seizing on it. And they say OK, we want -- even Senator Kennedy says this week, we want President Bush directly to take responsibility for this speech. The White House says, look, you know, Stephen Hadley said something. The CIA has taken responsibility. Let's just move on.

BURKE: Suzanne, one prominent Democrat, though, came out and said he forgives President Bush, because every president makes mistakes. And that's former President Bill Clinton. How is his coming out and saying that being received on both sides, Republican and Democrats? MALVEAUX: Well, you know, the Democrats are baffled by it, quite frankly. A little bit upset by this because, though, the one time he's speaking out here, he's actually supporting President Bush. And they're all, really, trying to hammer not only the president, because they see this as one of the -- his biggest assets is that he is considered to be trustworthy. That he is a plainspoken individual who gets out there and tells the truth. And that is something that you know, they're chipping away at, they're trying to chip away at his credibility here.

President Clinton comes along and -- and says, well, you know, it's OK. You know, we all make mistakes as presidents, so yes, frustration on that part. Republicans, though, are worried. They are worried, in terms of how this is going to affect the re-election bid.

Already, you see the poll numbers are going down with his approval ratings, anywhere from, you know, we saw a couple months ago, it was 70 percent. Now, it's in the mid-50s. Respectable number, but nevertheless, they -- they are dipping. They are dropping.

STARR: The -- the congressional report on the 9-11 attacks also raises a lot of questions about how the administration handled the intelligence information it had just before 9-11. Is that going to start sticking to the White House? Is that going to be a problem for them?

MALVEAUX: You know, it's hard to tell at this point, because there was a lot of blame to go around. You had the FBI. You had the CIA that were -- that were fingered for this whole thing. One thing that the Bush administration was defensive about, however, was what wasn't in the report. What wasn't revealed was Saudi Arabia, and other governments and -- and their knowledge about what was happening before 9-11, whether or not they had knowledge, or their potential; the potential links to this. And that is something they're criticized for. They want the administration to be more forthcoming. We'll see. Of course, you know there's still more reports and investigations that -- that are stilling coming out next year.

QUIJANO: And now, the U.S. getting involved in Liberia. I mean this is a potentially difficult situation now, and what's the plan here?

MALVEAUX: Well, you know it's -- and as you know, Barbara, I mean, it's a difficult position for the Bush administration, under an incredible amount of international and domestic pressure, to move in to get U.S. troops to do something about this. It seems as if they've -- you've got the Pentagon on one side, the State Department on the other; the president somewhere, vacillating in the middle, and not really moving that much farther from there. Saying, OK, we'll position ourselves, and be ready for logistic support. We're -- we're on the coast here. And we'll see what happens.

But it -- it's clear to me, and I don't know if it's clear to you Barbara, that they are not particularly enthused about putting U.S. soldiers' boots in Liberia. STARR: Pentagon is very nervous about going into this situation. They're just not sure how they're going to handle it. And what they are going to be able to do to really help. That's their problem.

QUIJANO: Well, from the White House to New York City, where I also was this week, and the shooting inside New York City Hall, a place many thought would be among the most secure anywhere. I'm ON THE STORY, and back in two minutes.

ANNOUNCER: Elaine Quijano is a national correspondent for CNN Newsource. She files reports for more than 700 television stations affiliated with CNN. She joined CNN in 2000. Earlier, she worked as a reported in Tampa and Champagne, Illinois. And, she graduated from the University of Illinois.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, MAYOR, NEW YORK: We will make sure that everybody goes through a magnetometer. Tragically, we live in a world where we have to balance security with people's rights to come and go.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUIJANO: New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg about improvements to security after the shooting in City Hall on Wednesday.

Welcome back. We're ON THE STORY.

And you know, of course, the big question everyone was asking after this happened is how could this has happened there of all places? You know, shootings happen every day, in large cities they happen, but not in City Hall. Not where there is a policeman, a policewoman, you know, every few feet, and a place where there are magnetometers set up.

And it just baffled a lot of people, and then the reaction, of course, New York already so tense in the wake of 9-11. They shut down subway lines; they shut down bridges because for a time they thought that this gunman had, perhaps, escaped. And we know now that was not the case. But certainly, this has raised a lot of questions. If this could happen at City Hall, where else? Where else in New York City may there be some security issues?

So, certainly Mayor Michael Bloomberg is looking at all that, and he has vowed to make whatever changes are necessary to make sure that something like this doesn't happen again.

MALVEAUX: I have a lot friends who are so personally impacted by that. I mean what was it like for New Yorkers when they got that news, even if it was just looking up at the screen or hearing it on the radio that there was a shooting that was so close to ground zero?

QUIJANO: Yes. It was stunning. You know, I was talking to a few people. And just in terms of location, where City Hall sits in relation to Ground Zero, it's literally about a five-minute walk, just three or four city blocks away. And so for a lot of people, those same feelings immediately came to the surface. Was this terrorism? Is this something now that I need to be ready for as some sort of, you know, emergency action that I need to take?

And even though it was determined, not too long after the shooting, that this was not a terrorist act, it still brought to the surface all of those memories and those horrible feelings of fear that New Yorkers are feeling. So it -- it was a difficult thing.

And you know, interestingly, Mayor Michael Bloomberg came in the next morning, made a very big show of walking through, emptying his pockets, first of all, you know, on the conveyor belt where the magnetometers were, and then walking through it. And all the cameras captured that. But some of the reports indicated that a reporter who was trailing along actually bypassed security and didn't -- you know, and got in. And this is the day after the shooting. So, certainly they're going to be looking at a lot those issues a lot more closely.

BURKE: Elaine, we all saw those pictures. You talked about the reaction of New Yorkers first being baffled, scared. Has the emotion, anger, come in to play from people you've talked to about how they could be put in this position here at City Hall and where do they go from here? At not just this one building, but at federal, in county, in court buildings across the city and state there?

QUIJANO: Yes. Absolutely. Because the way that the mayor described it, that this was sort of the procedure that they normally were not elected officials, city staff, so on, were not required to go through the metal detectors. But visitors -- you know if you and I walk in, we would have to go through those magnetometers. And so, yes, there was some anger.

Why is it that this was allowed in the first place, you know? What kind of special treatment is that at the expense of security and safety? And so now, as I said, the mayor has been very adamant about saying, look, we're going to do our best to balance that access, and public access to these buildings, but we're also going to take these steps to make sure.

MALVEAUX: How do they explain that, though? It must have been an embarrassment, really?

QUIJANO: Oh, absolutely. I mean it certainly an embarrassment. As I said, special treatment then for these elected officials? And you know for the mayor, to be able to walk in. A lot of New Yorkers just baffled and angered by that. But you know, it's the idea that this was how it was done, thousand had been done. And it was never called into question.

STARR: But even here in Washington, where we come and go, all of us, from government buildings all day long, there is that -- still that issue of the right of public access to these places. And that you can never really, as tragic as this incident was and as difficult, you never really going to shut down public places entirely in America. It's just not the way things are done. QUIJANO: True, true. But you know what New Yorkers thinking is exactly what Josie brought up. Is this idea of if at City Hall this could happen, where else? What other places, where it should be common sense, you're absolutely, you know, focused on security, and of all places, like I say, City Hall, where you think it's so heavily fortified, where else? If this was that lax, you know, where else could it happen?

STARR: Well, indeed this is a week when the news kept coming. Thanks to all of my colleagues and thank you for watching ON THE STORY. We'll be back next week.

Still ahead, "PEOPLE IN THE NEWS" focusing this week on Laci and Scott Peterson, the marriage and the murder case. At 12 noon Eastern, 9 a.m. Pacific, "CNN LIVE SATURDAY," and at 1:00 p.m. Eastern, 10 a.m. Pacific, CNN's "IN THE MONEY," the cost and benefit of beefing up the military to help rebuild Iraq.

Coming up at the top of the hour, a news alert. But first, the president's weekly radio address.

(BEGIN AUDIO TAPE)

BUSH: Good morning.

This weekend marks the 13th anniversary of the Americans With Disability (sic) Act, one of the great compassionate acts of American government. Since becoming law, the ADA has helped to improve the quality of life for more than 50 million Americans with physical and mental disabilities. As a result, it is easier today for people with disabilities to find a job, to enter public buildings and to live more independently in their communities. These are all welcome changes in American life.

Many citizens have dedicated themselves to serving the interest of persons with disabilities, and some of them are here with me at the White House. I am joined by members of the President's Committee on Mental Retardation. The men and women on this committee include people with disabilities, as well as parents, teachers, health-care workers and advocates.

They recently voted to change the committee's name to the President's Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities. And I was pleased to sign an executive order instituting that change.

There is much more we can do to assure that Americans with disabilities are treated with dignity and respect. In 2001, I announced the New Freedom Initiative, to further promote the full participation of people with disabilities in all areas of society.

As part of the New Freedom Initiative we're giving states funding to help people with disabilities commute to work, or purchase equipment that allows them to work from home. We are promoting homeownership for people with disabilities, and educating builders about the need for more accessible rental housing. We are working with Congress to provide record levels of funding for special-education programs, and to make sure the money is used to provide the most help to the most children.

And we are making government Web sites more accessible to people with disabilities so that they can more easily find information about services and programs of the federal government.

We're also focused on providing better care to people with mental illness. I'm committed to making sure people get the treatment and support they need and don't fall through the cracks.

My administration continues to work with states to ensure full implementation of the Supreme Court's Olmstead decision. That decision rightly mandates that individuals with disabilities who can receive support and treatment in a community setting should be given an opportunity to live close to their families and friends whenever possible. People with disabilities now have more freedom to do productive work and live independent lives.

We're making good progress toward ensuring that persons with disabilities know the American dream is meant for them. With changes in old ways of thinking, the development of new technologies, and the federal government's firm commitment to equality, more and more people with disabilities continue to become full participants in the American life.

Thank you for listening.

(END AUDIO TAPE)

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




Bryant's Accuser Be Named?; Lynch Arrives in West Virginia>