Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports
America's War on Terrorism: Anthrax inside Supreme Court, State Department; Ashcroft Advises Heightened Alert
Aired October 29, 2001 - 19:00 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.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Today on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS: "America Strikes Back."
More disturbing discoveries in the nation's capital. Anthrax inside the Supreme Court and the State Department. Were there traces in mail sent to the very program that offers rewards for information on terror attacks?
The Pentagon faces criticism over civilian casualties and the deliberate pace of the campaign in Afghanistan. Is it time for a ground war?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: This will not happen overnight. It is a marathon, not a sprint. It will be years, not weeks or months.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: The U.S. is expanding the reach of its bombing campaign, but how does it target an enemy hidden in caves? We'll go to Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Pentagon, as "America Strikes Back."
Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer reporting from Washington, where Attorney General John Ashcroft will be holding a news conference at the bottom of this hour in about 30 minutes, to announce a new threat against U.S. interests. CNN's senior White House correspondent John King is over at the White House. He has details on a story he broke just a few minutes ago-- John.
JOHN KING, CNN SR. WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, unclear to us just how specific the attorney general will be, but two senior administration officials telling CNN the attorney general wanted to make a public announcement about a new terrorist threat, or alert, if you will. These two officials telling us that based on intelligence data that they believe to be timely and credible, it was decided that the attorney general should reiterate, essentially, a warning that's been in place for some time, but with more specificity, we are told.
You will remember a week or 10 days ago the FBI posted on its Web site a warning of the threat of a terrorist attack here in the United States or on U.S. interests abroad. The FBI saying at the time it had credible information that such an attack might be in the workers. That advisory spread to law enforcement agencies around the country, as well as the state and local governments, so that they could have it ready for their emergency preparedness teams.
But we are told that the attorney general wanted to make this announcement himself. There's a great deal of sensitivity in the administration over how to handle such information. Obviously, it is a difficult balance of when to go public, when to withhold such information. We are told they decided that the attorney general would issue a new alert to law enforcement agencies and directly to the American people, because again, this information -- and our details are sketchy, because of the sensitivity of it.
But we are told by both senior administration officials they have what they believe to be credible and timely intelligence about the threat of an additional wave of attacks on domestic terrorist -- domestic terrorism here, excuse me, in the United States or on U.S. interests overseas -- Wolf.
BLITZER: John, as you remember, the last time the FBI issued this heightened alert about two or three weeks ago, it was done in a written statement that was posted on the Justice Department Web site, almost casually, although it caused a huge uproar, a lot of concern around the country, and a lot of criticism that the Bush administration was preempting, was going too far in panicking, if you will, the American public. How are they dealing with it this time?
KING: Well, the administration has said from the very early on that it has to deal with these things on a case-by-case basis. And the balance here always is if the information is deemed to be timely and credible, they believe they must go public with it. Even if no attacks happen, people say you are causing jitters around the country. You are raising the fears of the American people.
The administration has said it will err on the side of caution. If it has information that it believes to be credible, it believes it has a responsibility to share that information, not only with relevant law enforcement agencies, but also directly with the American people as well.
We have heard the president say consistently, the attorney general as well, that in this new environment -- the president today called it a new period in our history -- it's imperative that the American people, the president himself called them soldiers in this new war, that every American has a responsibility to look out for their own personal security, but also the suspicious activity in their community.
We should wait and hear exactly what the attorney general says, but we are told by two senior officials that it is credible and timely intelligence data that prompted the administration to decide to make this announcement this evening.
BLITZER: John King at the White House. Take that phone call. We'll come back to you, obviously, with more news. And we're going to follow up on this, of course, during the course of the next hour. I want to go to Joie Chen in Atlanta. She's got a quick check of the day's other headlines -- Joie.
JOIE CHEN, CNN ANCHOR: Wolf, we do want to bring our viewers up to date on the latest. At the top of the news this hour, more government buildings test positive for anthrax. Trace amounts of anthrax have been found in two State Department mailrooms now. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher says the bacteria were found in mailbags. Boucher says that all department mailrooms have been shut down now, and the distribution there stopped.
Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court are holding court in borrowed quarters, something that has not happened since the main building opened more than 60 years ago. This comes after weekend tests revealed that anthrax was in the mailroom of the Supreme Court building. The building has been closed since Friday, and will remain closed at least through tomorrow.
A building used by the Department of Health and Human Services also has tested positive for anthrax. The Cohen building houses the Food and Drug Administration and the Voice of America. Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson says that employees are being given antibiotics, and a mailroom there has been closed.
In Chicago, the observation deck in the Sears Tower is open for the first time since last month's terror attacks. The deck, on the 103rd floor, was closed on September 11th. On hand for today's ceremony, President Bush's father, Former President George Bush. The Sears Tower, at 110 stories, is the nation's tallest building.
In the skies over Afghanistan, U.S. warplanes pounded Taliban and Al Qaeda targets in the north and south. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says that some leaders of the Al Qaeda terrorist network have been killed in the bombing raids, but not the most senior ones. Rumsfeld also discounted high civilian death tolls cited by the Taliban as, what he described as "unsubstantiated propaganda." And he accused the Taliban of using Afghan civilians as human shields.
Iran is reversing course and agreeing to open its border to Afghans fleeing their homeland. A member of Iran's parliament says the move comes after repeated requests from the United Nations. Iran sealed its border with Afghanistan last month. It already houses nearly 2.5 million Afghans, victims of the Soviet invasion and civil war.
We will continue to follow the latest developments here. Now let's go back to Wolf, in Washington.
BLITZER: Thank you very much, Joie.
And we are standing by for a news conference with the Attorney General John Ashcroft, at the bottom of the hour in about 25 minutes or so. Our John King reporting that he will announce a new terror threat, an alert to the American public. Of course, we'll get details when the attorney general speaks.
Meanwhile, officials here in Washington say they still do not know the source of the anthrax contamination. As the hunt for the source continues, so does the spread of the bacteria. Look, for a moment, at the picture before this weekend. On Friday, the spread of anthrax had reached these sites. Now, today, more locations are on the map. You can see them in red.
CNN national correspondent Susan Candiotti is here to bring us up to date on these developments -- Susan.
SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Wolf.
Investigators remain stymied about how anthrax is showing up at so many locations in the Washington area. Is it cross-contamination from that letter to Senator Tom Daschle, the one that had the finely- milled, very pure and more dangerous form of anthrax? Did it spread from a post office in Trenton to that Brentwood facility in Washington, and on to other places? Or is there more than one letter?
Different answers from different officials. Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge says the FBI is trying to figure it out, so far without much luck.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TOM RIDGE, HOMELAND SECURITY DIRECTOR: The FBI has secured its own independent facility to run the mail that had been basically sequestered after we discovered that there was anthrax contained in one letter. And they're in the process of investigating to determine whether or not there are additional letters.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CANDIOTTI: Back to that Daschle letter, military researchers insist the only additive they've been able to find on that sample so far is silica. Experts tell CNN that chemical would have made the anthrax in that letter dryer, lighter and more easily absorbed into the lungs. It's very common, and, Wolf, it can be made commercially.
BLITZER: I know this isn't our lead story, the alert that the attorney general is about to issue. What you are hearing from your sources about what he might be saying?
CANDIOTTI: Well, my law enforcement sources say -- tell us that so far, as to the nature of it, there isn't that much more information, in terms of specifics. And already local law enforcement officials around the country have already been notified that this alert is coming out.
There is some concern being expressed by the FBI that this might unduly alarm the American people again. But the idea is, as John indicated, that they want to make sure that they put all the information out there, so the American public is at least aware of the latest information.
BLITZER: Susan Candiotti, thank you very much.
Let's go over to Capitol Hill right now. Our Congressional correspondent Kate Snow is standing by. Kate, I understand some new recommendations, on how to deal with the problem of anthrax in the Hart Senate office building. We have a map of Capitol Hill. I want to put it up on our screen and show our viewers where it is.
Right over here, the Hart building, which is where the initial anthrax was discovered in the office of the Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, right up there. What is the latest? What are you hearing?
KATE SNOW, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, and then it was found in the freight elevator, which you see mapped out there, and also between the eighth and ninth floors. So quite a few locations in that Hart office building of concern, where they found anthrax contamination.
What we're learning now is about 20 senators just emerged from a briefing with Environmental Protection Agency officials, the EPA. And they've gotten a recommendation from the EPA as to how they should clean up that particular building. The EPA recommending chlorine dioxide gas, which would be basically sent into the building through the ventilation system. In other words, they'd be fumigating the entire Senate Hart office building through the ventilation system.
At first they would do a peer review, to make sure this is what other scientists think should be done. And here you're looking at old video. Right now that building is closed down. You're looking at some file videotape of the Hart building.
If all the scientists agree, Wolf, what they would do is start the process, seal up the entire building, fumigate the building with this chlorine dioxide gas. It would take about 16 days, if all goes as planned. And we expect to get more information out of a briefing less than a half hour from now.
One other note, Wolf, this is very interesting, because it is so brand new. Nobody has experience with how to decontaminate a building of this size, apparently. The EPA saying that this is was they want to do to tackle the problem, and Senators saying it will be almost like a test case. And if they do it and it works well, then perhaps it can be applied to other locations in the country where there's anthrax contamination -- Wolf.
BLITZER: The key question is, if it can work well. Kate Snow on Capitol Hill, thanks again for that information.
The U.S.-led military campaign, meanwhile, against Afghanistan's Taliban regime is now in its fourth week. CNN military affairs correspondent Jamie McIntyre is covering Operation Enduring Freedom. He joins us now live from the Pentagon with the latest -- Jamie.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, after four weeks of bombing Afghanistan, the Pentagon continues to insist its making progress in its war against terrorist and their Taliban backers. Remember the talk early on that the Pentagon might be running out of targets? Well, it turns out there are plenty of things to bomb. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEN. RICHARD MYERS, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF CHMN.: As the secretary said, we're pretty much on our plan. And we are in the driver's seat. We are proceeding at our pace. We are not proceeding at the Taliban's pace, or Al Qaeda's pace. We can control that. And we are controlling it in a way that I think is right along with our plan that we set out -- the Central Command set out some time ago.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCINTYRE: Now, one of the ways they're controlling that is to put U.S. special forces on the ground with the Northern Alliance to designate targets, using laser target designators, to increase the efficiency of strikes against front line Taliban positions, as some of these videos, released by the Pentagon today, show.
Still though, the Defense Department says it has not been able to kill any of the top Al Qaeda leadership.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUMSFELD: We've seen enough intelligence to know that we have damaged and destroyed a number of tanks, a number of artillery pieces, a number of armored personnel carriers, and a number of troops. Are there leaders mixed in there? Yes. At what level? Who knows? There are middle to upper high, but to our knowledge, none of the very top six, eight, 10 people have been included in that number.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCINTYRE: Defense Secretary Rumsfeld again urging people to have patience with the timetable for this campaign. He again restated his statement that this is a marathon, not a sprint -- his words. He also confirmed that U.S. Air Force planes have begun dropping ammunition to the Northern Alliance to help them. They say they need more troops, equipment, and more air support, before they can move on key cities in northern Afghanistan.
And one other note today. We learned that the USS Enterprise, which had taken part in the early part of the campaign, is well on its way home. Pentagon officials say the ship will be home in time for the crew to have Thanksgiving dinner back in the United States -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Jamie, the criticism that the Pentagon is now facing criticism directed at the defense secretary, the chairman of the joint chiefs -- how are they reacting for the first time, to some of the serious criticism that there has been a lull, they're not getting the job done, they're reluctant to put ground troops in Afghanistan -- how are they reacting to that kind of criticism?
MCINTYRE: Well, they claim that they're not actually hearing the criticism. They say it's not the feeling of the Bush administration that this is in any way behind the timetable that they expected. Of course, publicly they had said all along that they expected this to be a long, drawn-out campaign.
But the question is, were there some private expectations that it would be making more progress than it is now? If there is, the officials are learning that what they said publicly is turning out to be true. It's not an easy war. But that said, they're expressing some puzzlement at the fact that some people would think that after just three weeks of completed bombing, that there would be more progress than there is now.
They say they have done pretty good for three weeks. They have reduced the Taliban military ability and they are setting the conditions, they claim, for what will come next. And what will come next will undoubtedly involve more troops on the ground, both U.S. and British troops -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon, thank you very much.
In this note, we are standing by for a news conference. The attorney general of the United States, John Ashcroft, expected in about 15 minutes or so at the Justice Department, to announce a new terror threat, apparently facing the United States. We don't have details. We're awaiting the news conference for those details from the attorney general.
Meanwhile, as Jamie McIntyre just reported, the United States is of course facing a very difficult military challenge. Will it be able to hold together its delicate antiterror coalition, or will it lose not only face, but international influence? Joining us now for some perspective, CNN national security analyst James Steinberg, who served as the deputy national security adviser during the Clinton administration.
Mr. Steinberg, thank you for joining us. Before we get to that, a quick question. When does a president of the United States and his administration -- when is it proper to alert the public to a terror threat, and when is it proper to avoid that kind of alert, which of course is going to get a lot of people worried?
JAMES STEINBERG, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: It's a very tough question, Wolf, because on the one hand you have an obligation to share information with the American people. But if you don't have any specific information, things that they can actually act on, then there is the danger that you'll alarm them, but you won't give them the tools to be able to respond.
I think the lesson the administration should have learned early on is that if you only have a generalized threat, the American people are ready for that. They know to be more alert and on guard. And what they need now is information whether there's a specific threat, a particular place, a particular kind of activity, that could allow them to make some personal decisions about what they should do to protect themselves.
BLITZER: As far as war being waged, some people are getting impatient. They heard one of the Pentagon briefers, about 10 days or so ago, say that the Taliban's combat strength has been eviscerated. Now they hear from other Pentagon briefers, including the defense secretary, saying this is going to be a long, drawn-out struggle. There seems to be some confusion, as a result of these kinds of conflicting statements.
STEINBERG: I think, to be fair to the administration, the president and Secretary Rumsfeld, from the beginning, said this was going to be a long effort. And I think they recognized that particularly the use of air power, it can only have a limited effect in these circumstances. It can have some effect in damaging troop concentrations or tanks, or fixed installations. But it's not going to do a good job in dealing with fighters who are hiding out, and particularly, not a good job in trying to get at the terrorists themselves.
BLITZER: You can't really blame this administration, or the administration you served, the Clinton administration, for wanting to avoid casualties, U.S. military casualties. At the same time, you just said air power alone can't get the job done. At what point did you invest heavily in a ground attack?
STEINBERG: I think there are two separate objectives here, Wolf. The most important is to deal with Al Qaeda, the terrorist organization. And there, I think that we should be reluctant to use ground forces, unless we've got what they call actionable intelligence -- real time intelligence that would allow you to get at the terrorist leaders. Now, that's something we should prepare to do if we've got that information. But not risk lives unless we have it.
Dealing with Taliban is a different story. We can take the time to weaken them militarily. What they're doing is making it harder for them to sustain control over the country. We need to support the opposition forces, give them the tools they need. In effect, to act as the ground forces in this campaign.
BLITZER: How formidable of a military power are these Taliban forces? The impression that we have, is the United States is a superpower, the latest high-tech equipment. Whatever military equipment they have seems to be pretty ancient.
STEINBERG: We've learned that lesson from when the Soviets tried to invade Afghanistan as well. It's true that we have technologically superiority, and we're using it very effectively. But if you actually want to try to change tacks on the ground, then that superiority doesn't help you that much. They know how to use the territory. They're not trying to confront the United States directly. They're hiding their assets. They're hiding the things that will allow them to continue for a long time.
So I think in that part, the administration is right to counsel patience. But our goal here, after all, in the long term, is to make it harder for Al Qaeda to operate in this environment, so that they don't feel that they have a sanctuary.
BLITZER: I spoke with your colleague, the former U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Richard Holbrooke, yesterday. He said that he's worried that within a month or so, winter will set in and it will be -- that any military operations are going to be a lot more complicated. How important is it to try, at least, to get the job done before winter?
STEINBERG: I don't think we should set artificial limits on this. I think that could create a danger in its own right, because if we say that's our objective and we don't succeed, it will embolden the adversary and make us have doubts about what we're trying to accomplish.
I think we need to be realistic about our goals, here. The goal is to end the use of Afghanistan as a sanctuary. At the same time, we have to focus on what's also important, which is breaking up the terror cells, not only in Afghanistan, but around the world, and making sure that we have the international support to do that. And that's where you have conflict, because as we continue this bombing campaign, it is causing problems with some of the key allies that we need for that broader campaign.
BLITZER: Jim Steinberg, thank you so much for joining us.
I want to bring back our senior White House correspondent John King. He's over at the White House. He's got some more details on the upcoming news conference from the Attorney General John Ashcroft.
John, what you are hearing?
KING: Wolf, we have checked in now with several more administration officials, as well as Congressional sources and other government officials. They're telling us the attorney general will announce a new alert, will announce that there is believed to be credible and timely information about the threat of possible new terrorist attacks here in the United States. We are told by two of these sources, it is credible but not specific. this threat.
We also know that the administration, putting to the test, if you will, the new homeland security apparatus here at the White House. The attorney general will make the announcement of this new threat in just a few moments. We know that the director of homeland security, Former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, has been calling his former colleagues, the governors around the country, asking them to put law enforcement in their states on a higher state of alert.
Andy Card, the White House chief of staff, has been calling key members of Congress, telling them, in the words of one Congressional source, the United States government will go to a higher level, again, of security, because of this perceived threat.
And the attorney general will make the announcement himself, we are told, because the administration wants to convey this not only to law enforcement agencies through the Justice Department and the FBI, but also directly to the American people.
Again, we are told the attorney general will say there is new intelligence data believed to be both timely and credible, that there are continued threats, new threats, of terrorist strikes here in the United States and perhaps on U.S. interests overseas as well -- Wolf.
BLITZER: John, the president had his first meeting with his homeland security council, as he calls it, earlier today -- not directly, we don't assume, not directly related to what the attorney general is going to announce. But what was the major headline emerging from that meeting?
KING: We are told now, Wolf, the president was aware of this information at the time he held meeting. You see him here in the cabinet room. The secretary of state to the president's right, but budget director there, the chief of staff, the transportation secretary, other key administration officials.
The president announcing a new task force, the first charge for this new homeland security council, to take a look at U.S. immigration policy. The president specifically mentioned student visas. We know that at least two of the suspected hijackers were in the United States on student visas.
The president says he wants a government-wide effort to look at immigration policy to see if it is perhaps too easy for suspected terrorists to get into the United States, to see if there are people in this country who are not doing what they promised to do when they received those temporary visas, whether they be student visas or work visas. The president saying this, one of the many painful lessons of those tragic terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: September the 11th taught us an interesting lesson: that while by far the vast majority of people who come to America are really good, decent people that we're proud to have here, there are some who are evil. And our job now is to find the evil ones and to bring them to justice, to disrupt anybody who might have designs on further hurting Americans.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: The president, promised in this review, will try to strike the right balance and not in any way punish those legally in this country. But the task force charged with looking for loopholes, if you will, in U.S. immigration policy. The president also saying he expected the American people to be patient in the days and weeks ahead -- Wolf.
BLITZER: John King at the White House, thank you very much. And we're only about six or seven minutes away from that news conference with the attorney general. Of course, CNN will bring it to you live.
When come back, though, we'll speak with John Dickerson of "TIME" magazine, the White House correspondent. He has an inside look at what's been going on these past few days. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Welcome back. We're following developments on several fronts, including standing by for a news conference within next the few minutes from the U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft, announcing a new terrorist alert, an alert for additional terrorist operations against U.S. targets, presumably either here or U.S. interests abroad. Of course, we will have that news conference when it becomes available.
Nine months ago, however, when President Bush was inaugurated, no one could have conceived that his administration would now be facing a crisis unprecedented in American history. The latest issue of "TIME" magazine examines how the president and his cabinet are dealing with a two-front war against terrorism.
To quote from the cover story, "For a president who likes his facts straight and his decisions clean, the advice George W. Bush got from his top aides was no help at all."
Joining us now from some perspective is one of the story's authors, John Dickerson. He's the White House correspondent for "TIME" magazine.
I read the piece, John. Good reporting.
Let's begin, though -- we'll put up some pictures. "TIME" magazine had some pretty good access to some of the officials on the list. There was a picture of Vice President Dick Cheney, Governor Ridge, the homeland security director. We'll put it up right now.
One of the points being that the czar, in your words, the homeland security czar hasn't found his new voice yet. What is that about?
JOHN DICKERSON, "TIME" MAGAZINE: Well, Tom Ridge has been here for three weeks. He's got to oversee 50 different agencies. He's got to deal with the bureaucracies there, and he's got to come out and brief public. What's happened, though, is when he's briefed the public, he's often raised more questions than he's answered. And he's trying to deal with this impossible job, in a town that gives people very little room to work, in a very tough atmosphere.
Last week, it was anthrax. Now we have this new threat that John Ashcroft is about to tell us about this evening.
BLITZER: Is there any significance to the fact that John Ashcroft will be telling the American public about this new terrorist threat, as opposed to Tom Ridge?
DICKERSON: Well, this is the trouble the White House has had. There are lots of different people who have -- the reason they want Ashcroft to come out tonight is, as the attorney general, he oversees the FBI. He wanted to send a clear message that this is of a new order and a new level.
But with Ashcroft coming out, what happened to Ridge? They need to find the one voice. And with so many different jurisdictions, it's hard to give the American people one voice they can trust on these homeland security issues. BLITZER: There's also a picture in "TIME" magazine -- I hope we have it, we can show it. A picture of Karl Rove, Karen Hughes, Andy Card, the White House chief of staff, two top aides. They're trying to deal with this balancing act: not get the American public overly frightened, while at the same time, being honest and saying, "make sure you're on alert."
DICKERSON: That's right. And it's an impossible balancing act to really achieve, because on the one hand you've got to weigh the information, that sometimes it's just a gut-level thing. Last week we found out from the White House that this anthrax was particularly potent. Well, there were some people who were saying 10 days before that that was the case.
So when does the White House come out and make its call? Some people were criticizing -- some friends of the White House were criticizing the White House last week for being too slow. It looks like tonight they want to grab the moment. John Ashcroft will come out and give this alert, making sure that everybody knows well ahead of time.
BLITZER: We don't see a lot of President Bush and Vice President Cheney together, but they do continue to have their little private meetings, don't they?
DICKERSON: Indeed. They not only have their Thursday lunch, which is a tradition now, since Al Gore, but they talk in a kind of rolling conversation throughout the day. And Cheney is with the president in the morning, when he gets his intelligence briefing, he has his national security meeting, and when he gets briefed by the FBI. So the vice president is really in contact with him all day long.
BLITZER: And as far as the entire issue of who is in charge, right now -- the president is obviously in charge. But is there some competition among his other aides, to see who is going to be going out and saying this or that, on the domestic home security front?
DICKERSON: Sure, and it may not even be just ego. I mean, a lot of these people are working hard. They want to get out and sort of prove what they've done and take hold of this situation. A lot of them are motivated by trying to get the people who did this, or properly warn the American people.
So even if you leave ego aside, and there are plenty of big ones here, you've got people who want to just go out and talk to the American people because they think they've got something to say. And that's one of the troubles for Tom Ridge. He has to tamp down those egos and take hold of this himself.
BLITZER: He has gotten some criticism but I think it is fair to say that Tommy Thompson, the secretary of Health and Human Services has received a little bit more criticism than Governor Ridge. Why is that? DICKERSON: Secretary Thompson came when we had the first anthrax report and said, this is an aberration, it is not terrorism. The gentleman who is now passed away got it from drinking from a mountain stream. All of that information turned out not to be right. And ever since then, people had the view that the secretary was coming out and sort of being Polly Ann-ish, not giving a true view of what was happening and how serious the threat was.
BLITZER: And one of the other issues though, is that there is so much medical information, scientific information. Tommy Thompson doesn't necessarily have that specific scientific or medical background. Would it have been better if the surgeon general, for example, Dr. David Satcher, if he would have gone out from day one and started explaining some of the medical problems and the fact is, that there is a steep learning curve. They are learning as they go along?
DICKERSON: Indeed, that's right. Although the White House would argue, or some inside the White House would argue, that there's a political element here. You need to have this careful weighing of what to tell public and whether to tell them everything and when to tell it to them. And that is something the politicians are more skilled at than say, the surgeon general who might be just there talking about the medical facts.
BLITZER: Because they seem to be doing a much better job explaining the issues on the military front, the military campaign inside Afghanistan when we see the defense secretary going out, the chairman of the joint chiefs. They seem to be getting their message a lot better across than on this domestic homeland security front.
DICKERSON: That's right. And what the White House would say though is, wait a minute, these military leaders have been trained all their lives for this situation. The folks here that are now in charge of the homeland security effort, they are just getting up to speed. And in fact, chief of staff Andy Card chalked it up to the fog of war.
And so there is a lot of this that is new to lot of the people who are here and it is not just Tom Ridge, who has only been in Washington for three weeks. All of these agency heads were not coming into their offices thinking that they would face this kind of situation.
BLITZER: John Dickerson, of "TIME" magazine doing some excellent reporting. Thank you very much. Great pictures, too.
DICKERSON: Thanks, Wolf.
Or sister publication, "TIME" magazine.
We are standing by for a news conference. The attorney general of the United States, John Ashcroft, about to announce a new terror alert to the American public. Warning of potential terrorist threats against U.S. target here in the United States, potentially abroad. As we await that news conference, I want to bring our senior White House correspondent John king back in. We do have another story we are following in New York City, John. The postal union has filed an environmental lawsuit to force the closing of New York's biggest mail sorting center. The lawsuit comes as the postal service announced that absenteeism at the mail sorting center has climbed to nearly 30 percent since traces of anthrax were found on four mail-sorting machines. Clearly a lot of concern among postal workers in New York City. Also a similar suit being filed in New Jersey as well.
John, as we await the news conference from the attorney general at the Justice Department officials at White House obviously had to approve the attorney general's decision to go forth and make this announcement, didn't they?
KING: We were told -- yes, they did, Wolf. We were told that decision was made this afternoon. Again, once the president and his top advisers were briefed on this new intelligence information, senior administration officials telling us that is viewed as both timely and credible intelligence data from a number of sources of a credible but not specific threat of terrorist strikes here in the United States or against the U.S. interests overseas.
The president, you are right, did have to approve the attorney general's decision to put law enforcement agencies in this country on an even higher state-of-alert already on a considerably high state-of- alert in the wake of the September 11 strikes on the United States.
Also, a difficult decision over just how to make that alert. Do you, as the FBI has done in the past, just put out a piece of paper. Send it around country to law enforcement agencies? Or do you take the extraordinary measure that we will see in just a few minutes of the United States attorney general making a public announcement of this new threat.
The administration saying Mr. Ashcroft wanted to make it directly to the American people. And we know as he prepares to speak out publicly a number of senior administration officials making calls behind the scenes. The chief of staff, Andy Card, calling key members of congress, the homeland security director, former Pennsylvania governor, Tom Ridge, calling his former colleagues, governors around country asking them to put state and local law enforcement agencies as well as emergency preparedness teams on a higher state-of-alert.
So the administration kicking the new homeland security apparatus into gear, if you will and we will hear, we are told, not too many specifics from the attorney general, but that he will say he decided it was necessary to make a public announcement because of credible timely intelligence data suggesting the high possibility of new wave of terrorist strikes on targets here in the United States.
BLITZER: All right, John, stand by.
We are looking at a live picture of that room where the news conference with the attorney general is about to take place. We will take a quick break. When we come back, more on this breaking story. A new terror threat facing the United States. Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Welcome back. We are standing by for the start of a news conference at the Justice Department. The U.S. Attorney General, John Ashcroft, will walk into this room, a picture of which you are now seeing. And he will make an announcement of an alert, a new terrorist alert, facing U.S. interests in the United States, potentially around the world. We don't have specific details. Our senior White House correspondent John King has been reporting on this.
We want to go back to John in a moment, but I also want to alert our viewers as we await the start of this news conference, two developments in New Jersey. We have now learned from state officials in New Jersey, that a New Jersey woman who is not employed by the postal service, is not a media employee, does not work for any of the news media organizations, did come down with cutaneous or skin anthrax. She is doing just fine we are told, but apparently this may be the first person who was not directly associated with either the news media or the postal service in New York or New Jersey who has come down with the less serious form of anthrax, skin or cutaneous anthrax.
At the same time, we are also hearing in Hamilton Township, New Jersey, another postal worker has come down the more serious anthrax the inhaled anthrax. We are getting details on both of these developments. We are following them. We of course will have more details as they become available.
I want to go back to north lawn of White House, that is where our Senior White House correspondent John king is standing by. We have been talking, John, about this news conference the attorney general is about to hold. I assume that when the attorney general comes into this room not only will he make a statement, he will also answer reporters questions.
KING: He may take some questions, Wolf, but we are told he has very little to say about the specifics of the intelligence data on which they have based this decision to make a new alert to the people of the United States and to law enforcement agencies and government officials around the country.
We are told that we will see not only the attorney general, John Ashcroft, but also Bob Mueller, the director of the FBI, the Federal Bureau of Investigation. When the last alert went out, it went out through the FBI to law enforcement agencies around the country. But we are told the attorney general wanted to make this announcement himself. The administration again has been walking a very delicate line, if you will, in making decisions about what information to make public and when.
But we know from our reporting now several senior administration officials, some senior congressional sources as well as other government officials telling us that top officials in the government have been calling around in the past hour or so, a little more than that, putting governors on alerts, senior members of Congress on alert, that the United States will increase its level of security, already quite high because of the September 11 attacks, and asking state and local governments to do so as well.
All of these sources saying there is credible intelligence data, but not specific to any target, but credible intelligence data suggesting a very high risk of additional terrorist strikes here in the United States and perhaps on U.S. interests overseas. The information from a number of sources viewed as credible enough that the attorney general himself will make this public announcement that we are waiting for.
BLITZER: As you remember, John, and our viewers will remember, about three week ago, before the first anthrax-laced letter was unveiled, the FBI did issue a written statement warning of a heightened state of alert because of terrorist threats, unspecified, here in the United States or against U.S. targets around the world.
Just to review, that earlier FBI threat, that was not directly related to the anthrax attacks was it?
KING: It was not. Officials say they had received credible information then of a threat, not anything specific like anthrax. When asked if that was the reason they issued that threat, U.S. officials say they cannot draw a direct connection between issuing that threat and anthrax letters. They simply say they received credible information at the time and wanted to make it public.
There was some criticism at the time that the FBI decided to do that in a paper press release that was then posted on the Web site, the Internet Web site of the FBI. That raised as many questions as it answered. There was some criticism that the administration should do so in public and take those questions.
BLITZER: John, while we await the news conference from the attorney general, another news conference is starting on Capitol Hill. You are looking at a picture of Senator Harry Reed talking about an EPA agency decision on how to cleanup the Hart Senate office building. Let's listen in.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
SEN. HARRY REED (D), NEVADA: ... the most protected and least disruptive approach that we can take. The EPA also made it clear that this is the only method that will preserve important papers, documents, while protecting senators, staff and the public. This proposal will now be reviewed by senators and scientific experts.
If we adopt it and we expect the Hart office building to reopen on or about Tuesday, November 13. This is a large-scale operation. This is a huge building. This is a very aggressive timetable. This has been a very difficult time for everyone. But the work of the Senate has continued. We had a very productive week on the Senate floor last week.
Senators and staffs are working in temporary office spaces in the Capitol and all nearby buildings. They will continue to do so until we can safely move back into the Hart building. As much as we want to do this quickly, it's port important that we do it safely. That's what the EPA is asking us to do.
We have a number of people with us. General Enhart (ph) of course, is Sergeant-at-Arms. We have Dr. Bethany Groves who is with the Environmental Protection Agency. We have Dr. Paul Schaudies, who is a consultant to the EPA on the Heart project. He has a Ph.D. in molecular biology. We will be happy to take questions now.
QUESTION: How much will this cost?
REED: We didn't discuss cost at all. It will cost whatever it takes to make that building safe.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) ultimately gives it the go-ahead?
REED: There is a plan that should be ready to go forward tomorrow, and -- is that right.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes and we also have a 24 hour, perhaps 48- hour peer review process that this plan will go through.
QUESTION: And that is just by scientific experts?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Internal, the EPA as well as outside agencies other than EPA.
QUESTION: But it doesn't need a green light from say, Senator Daschle, or does it?
REED: At this stage what we want is to make sure the EPA feels comfortable with this. This is not Senator Daschle's plan. It's the EPA's plan. The EPA wanted to make sure that this is peer reviewed and that is the purpose for the day or two peer review period.
QUESTION: Can you take a moment and just run us through what will happen, how it will work, will they shut down the building, seal it off or what?
(CROSSTALK)
DR. PAUL SCHAUDIES: My name is Dr. Paul Schaudies, spelled S-C- H-A-U-D-I-E-S...
REED: You didn't like the way I pronounced it, huh?
SCHAUDIES: It was excellent, Sir.
(LAUGHTER)
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Could you just run through the actual process? What will happen?
SCHAUDIES: Initially what will happen is that we will seal the building. We will seal the building off from the inside areas where there is no known contamination and from the outside areas of known contamination.
We will then generate the chlorine dioxide on-site. It is not the type of gas that you can generate and then bring in. You generate it on-site. We will bring air out of the building through our chlorine dioxide generation system and back into the building to negate getting a positive pressure and that would exacerbate leaks. We don't want to do that and we won't do that.
We will use the existing HVAC system within the building to move the air around. It will be supplemented by fans. We will prop open areas that are not normally supplied by the HVAC, such as fire escapes, for obvious reasons. We will be able to have individuals go into the building to measure and verify and validate the levels of chlorine dioxide in different regions of the building.
We are going to put spore strips with Bacillus Suttlis (ph) strain niger (ph) in various locations within the building areas that are known to be contaminated as well as areas known not to be contaminated in order to validate the kill, in order to show that we were able to do what we want to do.
In addition, we will go in and swipe from areas of known contamination to demonstrate two things: Because the chlorine dioxide reacts with proteins. So it will take that spore that is now a hard ball and essentially make a whiffle ball out of it so that it can no longer germinate. We want to be able to demonstrate that we have the DNA from that organism, which indicates that we have removed where it was, live and demonstrated that it does not grow.
But it's hard to quantify that because you don't know how many organisms you have wiped up when you are wiping up pieces. That's why we will have validation strips.
QUESTION: What is necessary to -- it sounds like you are saying to insert some new anthrax into the building...
SCHAUDIES: No, no, no. It is Bacillus Sutlis strain niger, also known as Bacillus Cobechei (ph) . It is a simulant, it is not harmful. And it will actually be in little sealed envelopes so we are not introducing anything harmful that into the building.
QUESTION: Why is it necessary to do that? Is it difficult to test for absence of anthrax?
SCHAUDIES: Proving a negative is very, very difficult. And we -- our target is what is called a six-log kill. That is 99.999 percent efficiency. So if you start out with 1 million organisms you end up with zero. Our test, we will be able to test up to an eight- log kill.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was going to say the other way that we are going to ensure that we have remediated the building sufficiently, is there is two ways to run tests after we have done the remediation. One test lets you know whether or not there are still viable spores. We want to be sure that we have no germination. The other test lets you know that there are remnant pieces of the DNA from the spores that were there.
That tells us, yes, they were there and now they are no longer viable. We have killed them. So that proof right there makes us feel comfortable that we remediated the building sufficiently.
QUESTION: So is this a reliable method of remediation? Has it been used before?
SCHAUDIES: Yes.
QUESTION: On anthrax?
SCHAUDIES: There are laboratory tests that are ongoing this week with the Bacillus Anthracis (ph) . We have called colleagues at the U.S. Department of Agriculture who said they have used the chlorine dioxide on Bacillus Suttlus strain niger, which in their opinion is a tougher nut to crack than Bacillus Anthracis, and they say it works very well.
QUESTION: How much gas will you need to be able to remediate that building?
SCHAUDIES: Well, those calculations are being worked. I don't have those numbers right in my head. We have data that we get a six log kill with a 4,000 PPM over a one-hour period. And with this gas, that is the same as a 1,000 PPM over four hours. And so the approach that we are going to take is going to be a 200 PPM over 24 hours which gives you a 4,800 PPM an hour in order to...
(LAUGHTER)
(CROSSTALK)
BLITZER: All right, we are going to go from Capitol Hill to the Justice Department. We just heard some details how they plan on cleaning up the Senate Hart office building, which of course, did find several traces of anthrax.
Officials of the EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency, saying they plan on using a chemical, chlorine dioxide, gas to seal off most of that building, the parts that have been contaminated and then to clean it up. They say the building will reopen on Tuesday, November 13.
John King, our senior White House correspondent is over at the White House. He broke the story about the announcement that the attorney general is about to make. We were literally a minute or two away from that announcement.
John, just recap, as we go into the news conference, the headline.
KING: Several senior administration sources telling us, Wolf, the United States government has new, credible and timely intelligence information raising the possibility, some would say a high possibility of new terrorist strikes in the United States. So the Attorney General of the United States wanted to come out in public and issue a new alert to the American people. Here he is with the FBI director Bob Mueller.
JOHN ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL: Good afternoon.
The administration has concluded, based on information developed, that there may be additional terrorist attacks within the United States and against United States interest over the next week. The administration views this information as credible, but unfortunately it does not contain specific information as to the type of attack or specific targets.
Consequently, a terrorist threat advisory update has been issued to 18,000 law enforcement agencies across the country through the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System, known as NLETS. We have notified law enforcement to continue on highest alert and to notify immediately the FBI of any unusual or suspicious activity.
We ask for the patience and cooperation of the American people, if and when they encounter additional measures undertaken by local law enforcement or federal law enforcement authorities and others who are charged with securing the safety of the public.
As always, we urge Americans in the course of their normal activities to remain alert and to report unusual circumstances or inappropriate behavior to the proper authorities.
Additional security alerts and security measures have been or are being taken by a number of governmental agencies, including the INS, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Energy, among the departments who have been notified of the alert.
Governor Ridge has also discussed this heightened state of security with the governors, who are asked to take appropriate precautions based upon security assessments in their respective states.
Mr. Director?
ROBERT MUELLER, FBI DIRECTOR: Thank you.
Good afternoon.
On every occasion when the government has received credible information, we have chosen to warn our colleagues in the law enforcement community, and we are doing so again today because we have such information, even though it is not specific as to intended target or as to intended method.
I should add that I've just come from addressing the International Association of the Chiefs of Police, and I know how difficult it is for the officers they represent and all other state and local officers out there to respond without greater detail. Even given that, I believe it is advisable to alert law enforcement and local authorities as to what knowledge we have received.
We are again asking them, and through them local communities, to remain extremely vigilant. Doing so gives us a force multiplier that could well prevent another terrorist attack. And we appreciate their willingness, however difficult, to join in this national effort.
Thank you.
QUESTION: Mr. Director, do you consider that the earlier threat advisory you put out October 11 helped to avert such an attack?
MUELLER: It is very difficult to tell, but it may have well have helped to avert such an attack.
QUESTION: Mr. Director, can you give us a sense of whether this is electronic information or from a human source?
MUELLER: I cannot get into the source of the information, for obvious, I think, reasons.
QUESTION: Mr. Director, what realistically should Americans do with this information? You never rescinded the last one. And my presumption is that most Americans already are on a heightened state of alert.
MUELLER: I think that is true. However, when we have received this additional information, specific as to time but not specific as to other details, we think it is important to put it out there so chiefs of police, other law enforcement entities, can again refocus their efforts on potential targets in their communities.
ASHCROFT: May I just make a comment there?
We have decided to share with the American people that we have alerted law enforcement, and that's important. Because we are alerting law enforcement and conferring with them, we think this gives people a basis for continuing to live their lives the way they would otherwise live them, with this elevated sense of alertness or vigilance.
I trust the American people to be able to understand in this context of conflict, where there is a front overseas and there is another front here in the United States, that they can make good judgments and can understand this kind of information. And we are sharing it exactly in the context that the director has indicated. It is not specific, but it is information that we think the American people have good mature judgment and capacity to accommodate and to understand. And it's with that in mind that we are speaking to them about a notice that we are providing to law enforcement.
QUESTION: General, did you brief the president about the warning, and did he agree with the release of this warning to the people?
ASHCROFT: The president is aware of this situation, was made aware of the situation early in the day. QUESTION: Do you have concerns that if you issue these alerts and nothing happens, people may not take them seriously the next time?
ASHCROFT: If people take these warnings seriously, they go about their lives, but they participate with patience in the additional steps that are taken by law enforcement authorities. They are very likely participating in the prevention of terrorism and in the disruption of terrorism. There is no reason for a success on the part of the American people in forestalling or otherwise interrupting terrorism for that to lull them into a false sense of indifference.
It's important for the American people to understand that these are to be taken seriously, but by taking them seriously on a continuing basis, we can have the good outcome of avoiding very serious additional terrorist problems.
QUESTION: Mr. Director, you said the other day that the earlier warning could have been conceivably related to the anthrax attacks. Do you think that this warning could in some way relate to anthrax intelligence?
MUELLER: I would be speculating if that were on that issue. I have no reason to believe at this point in time that it is related.
QUESTION: Do you have reason to believe that this is a more credible threat than the last threat that you...
ASHCROFT: I think we've stated we believe this threat to be credible, and for that reason is should be taken seriously.
Thank you.
BLITZER: The attorney general of the United States and FBI director announcing that there is a new threat, a now terrorist threat facing the United States -- U.S. interests here in the United States as well as U.S. interests around the world.
The attorney general saying it's a credible threat, although he does not have specifics. The FBI director saying that this credible information once again, no information about the intended target or intended method.
Senior White House correspondent John King, about an hour or so ago, broke the story. He is still on the north lawn of the White House.
John, when you hard the attorney general and the FBI director walk this very, very tight tightrope, on the one hand alerting law enforcement authorities around United States as well as the American public, knowing it would heighten concern, perhaps even panic for some Americans. It's a delicate and difficult tightrope to walk.
KING: Very difficult and indeed very delicate. You heard the attorney general himself say that they believe this information to be credible and therefore they had a responsibility to share it not only with 18,000 law enforcement agencies across the country, but the attorney general saying that the American people might encounter additional -- security precautions, perhaps even some hassled if you will, in their day to day live because of added precautions taken by state and local law enforcement officials.
As a result of this, the attorney general saying he thought the American people deserve to know why. As you noted, they say this information is credible, not specific as to target or method but they say they decided to make this public announcement because of the immediacy of the threat. They believed there was a high possibility of additional terrorist attacks here in the United States or on U.S. interests overseas in the period over the next few days.
Now the FBI director Bob Mueller refusing to discuss sources in any way, but we do that there is an unprecedented international intelligence operation and law enforcement operation under way not only here in the United States but through the Pakastani intelligence service, the Russians are cooperating. The United States working with friendly governments like Germany, where the hijack plot of September 11 is believed to have been hatched.
And we have been told by sources in the past three weeks that they are monitoring conversations and activities of people believed to be associated with the bin Laden network and with the terrorist networks. So we do know of this unprecedented effort here in the United States and overseas to track suspected terrorists. The attorney general and FBI director not willing to discuss any sources in public because of their hope that these sources could prove fruitful here in the immediate and also in the future.
BLITZER: John King at the White House, thanks for that good reporting. I will be back in one hour much more coverage on all of this as well as the war on terrorism. We also will be back here in the CNN war room with three experts to assess the progress on the war on terror.
I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. "LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE" begins right now.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
