Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports
Skakel Convicted of Murder; Is Search for Elizabeth Smart Getting Warmer?; What Will It Take to Create Homeland Security Department?
Aired June 07, 2002 - 17:00 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, HOST: Now on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS, the blue blood murder case, after a quarter century.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DOROTHY MOXLEY, VICTIM'S MOTHER: You know, this is Martha's day.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Judgment day for a Kennedy cousin.
A strange encounter in a canyon.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) saw a man who was trying to conceal footprints.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Is the search for a missing girl getting warmer?
Americans taken hostage on their anniversary. Today, the inside story of a raid in the jungle.
The homeland power play.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There's nothing wrong with a good turf battle fight.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Turning the president's mission impossible into mission accomplished.
Chaos in the cabin.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I said, oh, my gosh, this is what he was trying to light. This is now not a shoe and a weapon, this is a bomb.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Lessons from a frightened crew.
It's Friday, June 7, 2002. Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. We begin with a dramatic case, which lets us into the world of privilege, wealth, dysfunction and murder. This evening, resolution in the eyes of the law. Michael Skakel, a relative of perhaps the most famous American family, is a convicted murderer, and the mother of the victim, Martha Moxley, relief after spending the last 27 years of her life in anguish.
We begin our coverage of this verdict with CNN's Deborah Feyerick. She has been following this story from day one in Norwalk, Connecticut. Deborah.
DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, at the beginning of this case, because of its age, many people thought that prosecutors did not have a chance of winning. But every day piece by piece they began to build their case, showing the jury that there was enough evidence, albeit circumstantial to prove that Michael Skakel was the person who had killed Martha Moxley so long ago. And, in the end, it was Michael Skakel's own words that prosecutors used as the ace up their sleeve.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
FEYERICK (voice-over): Michael Skakel walked into court as he has every day for five weeks, but this time when he left, his hands were cuffed, a jury finding him guilty of murdering Martha Moxley in 1975, when both were only 15 years old.
As the verdict was read, Michael Skakel stood frozen, the victim's family sobbing with relief, calling this Martha's day.
MOXLEY: You know this whole thing was about Martha, and I just, I am so, I just feel so blessed and so overwhelmed that we've actually, we now, you know this is Martha's day.
FEYERICK: The judge denied bail and did not give Skakel a chance to speak as he requested following the verdict. Skakel's lawyer vowed to get his client out, no matter how long it takes.
MICKEY SHERMAN, MICHAEL SKAKEL'S ATTORNEY: And I think that this jury needed to find some way to give closure to Dorothy Moxley. I understand it. I appreciate it, but you don't offer up a carcass of Michael Skakel in order to make her feel good.
FEYERICK: The jury deliberated three full days before announcing the verdict early Friday morning. In the end, it was Skakel's own words to students at a drug rehab school, and to an author on a proposed biography, that prosecutors believe helped convict him.
JONATHAN BENEDICT, PROSECUTOR: The defendant's own words are what did him in, and where they came from, you know, three or four (UNINTELLIGIBLE) witnesses were extremely helpful. They're the ones that really got the show on the road. His last words that we know of to Richard Hoffman of course, he kind of walked himself to the crime scene with that.
FEYERICK: One alternate juror, who did not deliberate, said after hearing the evidence, she believed Michael Skakel was guilty and that it was prosecutor's closing arguments that confirmed it.
ANNE LAYTON, ALTERNATE JUROR: I felt that he put himself right at the location. That, combined with several other pieces of testimony where there was conflict in his alibi, I felt really finalized that decision for me.
FEYERICK: Michael Skakel's lawyer plans to appeal.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
FEYERICK: I asked that juror whether, in fact, this was an emotional decision as, in fact, Michael Skakel's lawyer had suggested, and she said no, that when she left the court after hearing all the evidence, and again she did not deliberate, but after hearing all the evidence, she really thought that Michael Skakel was guilty of this crime.
Now he is to be sentenced on July 19. He faces a minimum 10 years, a maximum 25 years to life. And, Wolf, keep in mind that this case actually is not only going to be appealed, but as soon as he is sentenced, the Supreme Court is likely going to reevaluate to see whether, in fact, it was legal to move this from juvenile court to adult court, because this murder happened back in 1975 when Michael Skakel was only 15 years old -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Deborah Feyerick reporting, thank you very much.
The Skakel trial was unusual in many ways. Prosecutors had no witnesses or physical evidence to link Skakel directly to the crime. It's also been more than a quarter century, of course, since the murder took place.
Our legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin joins us now from New York for some analysis of what this all means. How effectively did the prosecution get over that burden? There was no physical evidence, no DNA, no witnesses, yet a unanimous jury verdict.
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Wolf, in all the trials that I've seen as a journalist and as a lawyer, I have never seen a case that was more clearly won by the prosecutor in his closing argument.
Jonathan Benedict did an absolutely brilliant job of pulling all these disparate pieces together, but the most important thing he did was use Michael Skakel's own words, especially in that tape recorded interview with his would-be biographer, where Benedict showed that Skakel both lied about certain facts and placed himself in places that were absolutely incriminating.
And to do that with Skakel's own voice echoing through the courtroom was extraordinarily successful. Remember, the jury asked to hear that summation again, so they were impressed by it and I think that's what really turned the tide in this case.
BLITZER: But Mickey Sherman, as you well know, the defense attorney for Michael Skakel, highly respected. He couldn't raise a reasonable doubt in the minds of these jurors. I want you to listen to what Sherman said afterwards, his reaction to this verdict. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHERMAN: There are two Michael Skakels. It's the one that you know, because you've seen him portrayed in the media. You've read the books. You've seen the television shows. You've heard the spin. He is the arrogant brat rich kid who seems to have no ability to have self-control. That's not the real Michael Skakel.
The real Michael Skakel we know is a compassionate, warm, honest, fun-loving, genuine, sincere person. That's the one we know. That's the one we love, and that's the one that the jury really should have seen.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: How come he couldn't convince the jury of that?
TOOBIN: Well, for all those kind words, there really is no evidence that Michael Skakel is warm and loving and kind and all of those fond adjectives. The only evidence that was put forward was that he was a temperamental, difficult young man, and I think it is worth noting that what this jury did was, they not only convicted Michael Skakel of murder, but they said implicitly that several of his brothers, his cousin, were all lying under oath to protect him.
They all, they completely rejected all of the Skakel witnesses who supported Michael's alibi, which is just an extraordinarily incriminating verdict on everyone who was involved in this case from that family.
BLITZER: Jeffrey, very, very quickly, was there any sign, as some suggest, of a backlash against Skakel by the jury because he was a Kennedy cousin?
TOOBIN: Boy, I give the jury more credit than that. This was a very serious group of people. If you look at what they, the parts of the evidence they analyzed. They zeroed in on the important evidence.
I don't think there was any -- that this was tried as a celebrity murder case. I think they decided it on what was in front of them and they reached a very reasonable verdict.
BLITZER: Jeffrey Toobin, our legal analyst, thank you very much. And just an important note, tonight on "LARRY KING LIVE" members of the Moxley family will speak out about today's verdict. That's at 9:00 Eastern, 6:00 Pacific. Here in Washington, embarrassed police are returning to the park where the remains of Chandra Levy were found, after private investigators following up at the scene made a disturbing discovery. CNN national correspondent Bob Franken is all over this story. He joins us now live. Bob. Bob Franken, go ahead.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BOB FRANKEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Not only did D.C. police fail to find a major part of the skeleton when they scoured the Rock Creek bed for several days, but it took more than two weeks after Chandra Levy's remains were turned up before a large leg bone was found, just 25 yards from the site evidence teams say they went over with a fine tooth rake, and it was private investigators for Chandra Levy's family who uncovered it, not the police.
CHIEF CHARLES RAMSEY, D.C. METROPOLITAN POLICE: Obviously, all of these bones have had considerable animal activity in terms of animals dragging them off and bringing them back and so forth. So, I don't know if it was there at the time they searched and was there later, or they just blew it and just missed the search.
FRANKEN: It was a major embarrassment for a D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, already widely criticized for missing Chandra Levy's body in its first search of the park last summer.
LOU HENNESSY, FORMER D.C. HOMICIDE DETECTIVE: They obviously have egg on their face. They missed it, missed evidence a second time. It's inexcusable.
FRANKEN: Because of the 24-year-old former Washington intern's relationship with her 53-year-old home town Congressman Gary Condit, the Chandra Levy questions dominated world attention for months, with no answers, and now this.
MIKE BROOKS, FORMER D.C. DETECTIVE: Does it lead people to say that the Metropolitan Police possibly incompetent, leaves some things to be desired? That's possible too.
RAMSEY: It's easy for people to sit back and Monday morning quarterback and guess, but most of you folks have walked that same area and you know how difficult that terrain is.
FRANKEN: Levy's investigators also found wire at the scene. Police say it might have had something to do with her death, or not, they simply don't know.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
FRANKEN: There are other important items still missing. There are Chandra Levy's keys. There's a bracelet she usually wore, a gift from Condit, a ring, and investigators say they don't know whether these too are hidden where they've already searched -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Bob Franken here in Washington, thank you very much. Two days after an intruder grabbed young Elizabeth Smart at gunpoint from her Utah home, authorities spent hours combing a canyon where a volunteer spotted what was described as a suspicious man and heard gunshots. Let's go live to CNN national correspondent Frank Buckley. He's in Salt Lake City -- Frank.
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, this was the site of an overnight search and into the morning, sheriff's deputies coming to this location, the hills overlooking Salt Lake City.
Down there in the canyons, known as Immigration Canyon, in the ravines, looking through all of that brush after, as you say, a volunteer searcher saw someone who he thought was acting suspiciously. He said it appeared as though the man was covering his tracks. He also heard gunshots.
A few moments ago, however, the search here ended, sadly with no suspect in custody. Down below in the city, Salt Lake City, the 14- year-old was being missed.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BUCKLEY (voice-over): Friends and family gathered for what should have been a joyous occasion, a promotion ceremony from junior high. Eighth-grader, Elizabeth Smart, among the students recognized for her high grade point average and good citizenship, but she was also recognized with a moment of silence, her brother accepting her promotion certificate.
UNIDENTIFIED GIRL: We really miss her and want her to come back.
BUCKLEY: The search for Elizabeth continues around the clock. Sheriff's deputies followed up on a volunteer searcher's sighting of a man who appeared to fit the description of the suspect and investigators poured through tips coming in at a rate of one per minute. But police concede, they are frustrated by a lack of progress.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're not finding any information that's building towards any particular suspect and that's frustrating.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BUCKLEY: And in addition to the frustration that's building among law enforcement officers, clearly it's taking a toll on the family. Last night, Ed Smart, the father of Elizabeth Smart, had to be hospitalized for exhaustion -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Frank Buckley in Utah, thank you very much.
He said he had a sick feeling something horrible was about to happen. Sadly, an American held hostage was right. Coming up, the inside story of a jungle raid that did not go according to plan.
New accounts of an air scare, and what to keep in mind if a suspected shoe bomber is on your flight. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One of the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) called the cockpit to say, you know, I'm coming in with something.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: And will a change in the charts really make you safe from terror? The shakeup that will take your government from this to this when we return.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Since September 11, you've been barraged with warnings about possible attacks from the air from radioactive dirty bombs, from biological or chemical weapons, from terrorists commandeering not only planes but trucks, trains and ships, even the possibility of underwater attacks.
You've heard about threats to landmarks in New York City and the nation's bridges, but the crucial question remains. Is the United States equipped to prevent another major attack?
President Bush last night answered that question by proposing a dramatic shakeup of the federal government. Today he was out in the heartland selling his new Homeland Security Department, which would bring together more than 100 federal offices already supervised by dozens of congressional panels.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: I'm confident it's going to happen, particularly when the American people understand it is in our national interest that we bring these agencies under one head, so that we can do everything in our power, and I mean everything in our power, to keep you all safe.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: President Bush says there's nothing wrong with a good turf battle and that's clearly what's in store. The new Department of Homeland Security would have four main branches, Border Transportation and Security would absorb agencies like the Coast Guard and the Customs Service. Emergency Preparedness and Response would handle disasters. Another division would deal with chemical, biological, and nuclear threats, while the fourth would evaluate intelligence information.
CNN's Jeanne Meserve joins us now to tell us how it's all supposed to work. First of all, Jeanne, what about the concerns that some people are expressing?
JEANNE MESERVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, let me tell you first of all that there is widespread for reorganization because the current system obviously doesn't work as well as it should. But amongst the concerns being raised: 1) Are there too many agencies involved here that have too many different responsibilities? Will this be inefficient? Is it manageable? Will it, in fact, improve our safety in the long run? Does it include every agency? It should. Some people say there should be other agencies involved, for instance the Postal Inspection Service, which played an important part in the anthrax investigation.
Some people are asking are important missions being split in a way that is not productive. For instance, do we really want the Department of Homeland Security to be spearheading the search for vaccine or is that something that should be handled exclusively by NIH or the CDC?
What about all those agencies being placed within the Department of Homeland Security who have other missions, unrelated to homeland security? For instance, the Coast Guard, which is also involved in policing fisheries and also in search and rescue operations, what is going to happen to that mission? Will it be less important under this department, or conversely, will its other missions draw off sites and off resources from a department that is supposed to focus exclusively on homeland security? Some people are...
BLITZER: Jeanne, we're having a little audio trouble with your microphone, but we got the gist of the report. Jeanne Meserve reporting, thank you very much. And we've been hearing recently about the lack of communication within and between the FBI and the CIA before September 11. Will the government overall help the right hand know what the left hand is doing?
Joining me now, Congresswoman Jane Harman, she's a member of the Intelligence Commit`tee, ranking Democrat on the Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee. Congresswoman, thanks so much for joining us. You've been proposing a lot of these changes...
REP. JANE HARMAN (D-CA), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Yes.
BLITZER: ... for some time, so you give the president credit for in effect accepting this mid course correction?
HARMAN: You bet I do. I'm a mother of four, and I know that perfection is not an option, and this plan may not be perfect, but it's bold. It's courageous. It expands the war on terrorism to a war on turf.
That's a good war to wage, and the president made clear to me and nine other members who were with him this morning in the White House, that he's prepared to expend personal capital to get this adopted in his administration and that, of course, then means on Capitol Hill it will take a lot of work, a lot of leadership, but I think it's doable.
BLITZER: Speaking about turf, I want you to listen to what the president said earlier today, specifically about a turf battle that could develop.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: We've got a lot of work to do to get this department implemented. There's going to be a lot of turf protection in the Congress, but I'm convinced that by working together that we can do what's right for America and I believe we can get something done.
To this end, I'm going to direct Tom Ridge to testify before Congress about the need for the establishment of this cabinet agency. I feel strongly that he is the -- he can represent the interest of the administration on the Hill, and he can bring our message to them.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Do you believe that this turf battle will develop, because a lot of our viewers out there simply don't understand the bureaucracy, the various conflicting turf battles that could unfold on Capitol Hill?
HARMAN: Oh, I think it is developing. I was just hearing my good friend and colleague David Obey, who is the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, talking about everything that's wrong with this proposal.
There are, as the administration points out, probably 80 places in Congress that have some jurisdiction over Homeland Security. After all, we mirror the administration that we fund. Both have to change, both the administration and Congress to develop a coordinated, integrated national homeland security strategy, if we're really to protect against a second wave and that's where I'm coming from.
BLITZER: You noticed the president did not say in the speech last night that Tom Ridge would become his nominee to become the Secretary of Homeland Security. Is Tom Ridge, as far as you're concerned, the man for the job?
HARMAN: Well, I think he's qualified. He's come to town unfortunately under bad circumstances. I've been saying for months that he doesn't have a real job. He hasn't been given the tools to do the job. This is a real job. It's the president's call, but I can't imagine that he won't be at the top of a list of a short list of good people.
One comment, Wolf, a lot of people are saying it's so hard to integrate agencies. How are we going to do this? We have no experience. Well, the private sector has been merging and integrating functions a great deal over the past decade or so, and so there are best practices and lessons learned there that we should borrow.
We can do this as a government. We went to the moon. We did the Manhattan Project. This is our next big project. I think the president's got that right.
BLITZER: OK, Jane Harman, congresswoman from California.
HARMAN: Good to see you.
BLITZER: Thank you very much.
And here's your chance to weigh in on this important story. Our Web question of the day is this: Will a new Cabinet-level agency make the U.S. more secure from terrorist threats? Go to my Web page, cnn.com/wolf.
That's where you can vote, and while you're there let me know what you're thinking. There's a "click here" icon on the left side of the page. Send me your comments. I'll read some of them on the air each day at the end of this program. That's also, by the way, where you can read my daily online column, cnn.com/wolf.
Dramatic new details surrounding a firefight that killed an American hostage, coming up, a premonition, a lost letter and who was involved in the raid.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SENIOR PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: I'm Jamie McIntyre. To what extent was the U.S. military involved in planning the rescue operation? I'll have that coming up.
BLITZER: And raging wildfires are about to consume something very valuable. This is a live picture, the latest coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Let's check our top stories at this half hour. A wildfire sparked by welders' tools is forcing hundreds of people to leave their homes north of Los Angeles. The flames have already destroyed seven houses and consumed 23,000 acres of brush. Authorities say the fire is moving quickly, about a mile an hour.
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak is getting ready for a weekend at Camp David where he'll discuss the crisis in the Middle East with President Bush. Mr. Mubarak tells CNN's Paula Zahn he'll ask the president to move forward on creating a Palestinian state. He says he believes the move would give Palestinians hope and end suicide bombings against Israelis.
An American missionary is free, but her husband is dead, after a raid by Philippine government troops on an extremist group that held the couple more than a year. Gracia Burnham suffered a leg wound. Her husband, Martin, and another hostage, a Filipino nurse, died during the firefight.
CNN State Department Correspondent Andrea Koppel has uncovered dramatic details about today's raid in the Philippines, and about a premonition Martin Burnham had several days ago. Here's her report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): CNN has learned details of Martin and Gracia Burnham's final hours as hostages, ending after a chance encounter between Philippine soldiers and Muslim rebels on the southern Philippine province of Zamboanga del Norte.
Philippine Rangers, trained by U.S. Special Forces, had spent 12 days in the jungle. Early Friday morning local time, they found boot tracks in the mud. At 11:30, the Rangers found leftover food, perhaps lunch for Abu Sayyaf guerrillas.
Three hours later, the Rangers stumble upon the guerrillas resting by a stream. The Rangers tried to surround them. A firefight erupts. About 30 minutes later, the guerrillas retreat, while the rangers find Gracia, alone and wounded in the leg. Gracia is airlifted to a military hospital and has an operation. She finds out Martin is dead only after the operation is over.
Back in the U.S. President Bush calls Philippine President Arroyo, who says her troops did their best.
BUSH: She assured me that the Philippine government would hold the terrorist group accountable for how they treated these Americans, that justice would be done.
KOPPEL: In a strange twist, CNN has also learned that a couple of days ago, Martin Burnham had a premonition something bad was going to happen to him, so Gracia says he wrote a letter to his three children. He wanted to say goodbye.
During the firefight, Gracia lost the letter, but it's since been found and we're told that she'll get the letter back tomorrow.
In the meantime, back in Kansas, Martin's parents say that they plan on holding a memorial service, Wolf, once Gracia is well enough to travel -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Andrea Koppel at the State Department, thank you very much.
And Martin Burnham's father Paul says the family had no advance word the Philippine government was planning any rescue attempt.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAUL BURNHAM, MARTIN'S FATHER: We trust them do what was right, but we don't know the details. It has been a year. It's been frustrating for everybody trying to get them out. The real enemy is the Abu Sayyaf, who were ruthless killers, and so we're not going to say one thing or another, whether anybody did the right or wrong thing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: At the family's request, Martin Burnham's body will be returned to the United States.
And while U.S. troops did not participate in today's firefight, the Filipino unit that conducted the mission did have some U.S. help. CNN' senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre joins us now from the Pentagon with details -- Jamie.
MCINTYRE: Well, Wolf, the U.S. has about 1,200 troops operating in the Philippines, of which about 160 are advisers, and the Pentagon today said that some of those advisers were in fact in on the planning and provided technical support for something called Operation Daybreak. The Philippine military hunt for Abu Sayyaf had been going on for over a week.
But officials here draw a distinction between that overall plan and the rescue effort, which they say was not pre-planned and resulted from a chance encounter with the guerrilla fighters. No U.S. troops have been part of the operation or had any involvement in the rescue, although the U.S. did provide intelligence before the gunfight and medical attention to some of the wounded afterward.
So what is the U.S. doing? Well, it's giving training in counterterrorism tactics along with equipment to make the Philippine military more effective, including a C-130 cargo plane, two Coast Guard cutters, eight UH-1 Huey helicopters and 30,000 M-16 rifles.
Even while the Pentagon does acknowledge being in on some of the planning for the overall operation, there seems to be a feeling here of trying to distance itself from the rescue itself -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon, thank you very much.
And while much of the U.S. war on terrorism has been conducted in Afghanistan, the Bush administration has been concerned about radical Muslim groups in the Philippines for quite some time. Peter Bergen is a CNN terrorism analyst, the author of "The New York Times" best- seller "Holy War, Inc." Peter, thanks for joining us. This Abu Sayyaf group in the Philippines, how dangerous is this group?
PETER BERGEN, CNN TERRORISM ANALYST: This Abu Sayyaf group actually is really a criminal organization, which does a lot of kidnappings. It's not -- they dress themselves up in the name of Islam, but really they don't have -- their knowledge of Islam is very limited. They really are a ransom group that has actually made tens of millions of dollars by kidnapping Americans, Europeans and Filipinos over the past decade.
BLITZER: But they do have links to al Qaeda?
BERGEN: Historically they have had some links. Bin Laden's brother-in-law financed Abu Sayyaf in the early '90s. Ramzi Yousef, who was the lead bomber in the first Trade Center attack in 1993 linked up with Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines. So they certainly have historical links with terrorists and the United States terrorists in Afghanistan, bin Laden himself.
BLITZER: There is some speculation that al Qaeda could try to reestablish its base not in the Middle East, but in the Far East. Are you among those that accepts that notion?
BERGEN: If I was going to reestablish a base, I would look at Indonesia, just because it's a, you know, enormous country, 200 million Muslims. There are some radical groups in Indonesia. It's made up of 2,000 islands, some are very remote. Just the geography of Indonesia is attractive. I don't think al Qaeda is going to reestablish itself in, let's say, the Philippines. The government is obviously has quite an aggressive campaign against them. I don't see them necessarily reestablishing in Malaysia, but Indonesia would be, just because of its geography, attractive. Now, whether that will happen is another issue.
BLITZER: You are just back now from Pakistan, Afghanistan. How much of a threat did you sense al Qaeda still represents there, especially in trying to trigger some sort of a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan?
BERGEN: I think that al Qaeda -- you know, al Qaeda believes that the world is sort of a conspiracy of the United States, Israel and India. India is one of the enemies of the group. Certainly if they could ferment some kind of a conflict between Pakistan and India that would be part of their strategy. And al Qaeda in Pakistan is pretty active right now. I think, you know, all the attacks that we have seen in the last -- since 9/11, whether it would be murder of Danny Pearl or the attack in Karachi that killed 12 French defense workers recently, these are groups that have had historic links to al Qaeda. They may not be al Qaeda itself, but they are quite closely linked.
So I think al Qaeda is quite active in Pakistan right now.
BLITZER: Could al Qaeda engage in a kind of terrorist attack along the lines of September 11 or, God forbid, even worse right now, given its current capability?
BERGEN: I think they've been severely disrupted. The only problem is, one of the hallmarks of this group is a lot of patience, and it is possible that there is another big one in the pipeline pre- 9/11. That's my main concern.
On the other hand, the group has been quite disrupted. But in the past, they have been able to do two operations simultaneously. They were planning 9/11, and at the same time they were planning to blow up the USS Cole in Yemen. So they are able to do things on two separate tracks.
BLITZER: Peter Bergen, our terrorism analyst, the author of "Holy War, Inc.," now out on paperback, right? With a new preface introduction.
BERGEN: Yeah.
BLITZER: We'll be reading it. Thank you.
And new details about the alleged shoe bomber and terror at 30,000 feet. Coming up, flight attendants recount the events of that fateful day.
And two down, one to go. If you haven't heard of War Emblem, after this weekend he could become a household name.
Still ahead, meet the horse who might soon wear a medal of honor, but first our news quiz. "Who was the last horse to win the Triple Crown? War Admiral, Affirmed, Secretariat, Seattle Slew?" The answer coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BLITZER: The man the U.S. government says intended to be the 20th hijacker on September 11 may get his wish to act as his own attorney. Federal prosecutors say they believe Zacarias Moussaoui is mentally competent to represent himself at trial, based from findings of two psychologists and a psychiatrist who recently examined him. Moussaoui made the request in April, saying he did not trust his court-appointed lawyers and wanted them fired.
Chilling new details now about what happened aboard American Airlines Flight 63 last December. That was the flight that carried accused shoe bomber Richard Reid.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(voice-over): CNN and its affiliate, WFAA in Dallas, have obtained new information found in a training tape distributed by the Allied Pilots Association. On that tape, three pilots and two flight attendants do not give their names, but they do give an amazing account of the sequence of events onboard American Airlines Flight 63 last December.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I heard a scream from the number three flight attendant.
BLITZER: Flight 63 was about 30,000 feet over the Atlantic, bound from Paris to Miami, when witnesses say Richard Reid began acting strangely. Reid had been assigned to an aisle seat near the middle of the plane, but moved to an empty window seat after take-off. A seat close to the plane's exterior, where his bomb could have done more damage.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He tried to light something on fire. We didn't really know what it was.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The flight attendant had told him to put it out and put it out (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
BLITZER: He was overpowered by passengers and crew members, but not without a struggle.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The number three flight attendant was either running by me or there was a voice saying, "he bit me, he bit me."
BLITZER: Despite pleas from the flight attendants, the pilots could not find a place to land immediately.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Unfortunately, we were two hours away from anything close by us, over two hours.
BLITZER: He was sedated by a doctor onboard, and two F-15s were called to escort the flight to Boston.
But there was still a danger from the explosives inside Reid's shoes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I took them up to the front, and one of the dumbest things I ever did was call the cockpit to say, you know, I'm coming in with something. You know, the way in there, they have to open the door, just before I sat down, I realize and maybe they realized the same thing I do -- the time I do, that I smelled the cord and I see that the burned end -- and I think oh, my gosh, this is what he was trying to light. This is now not a shoe and a weapon, this is a bomb.
BLITZER: The device was taken to the back of the plane and wrapped in blankets and pillows to absorb a potential explosion.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We made sure no one came near it. Of course, any time the airplane even made a little jolt, we were like, oh, you know, it was just very -- a little disturbing, to say the least.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: Richard Reid is now in federal custody in Boston, facing nine charges, including attempted murder.
Even though the horror of last year's terrorist attacks remains very vivid, many Americans are looking toward the future. The Department of Housing and Urban Development presented New York City with a check for more than $300 million today, as part of the effort to help rebuild the area around Ground Zero. A short time ago, I spoke with HUD Secretary Mel Martinez.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: Mr. Secretary, thanks for joining us. The money that you are providing today to encourage people to live in lower Manhattan, how confident are you that environmentally it's safe to live in that area around the World Trade Center site?
MEL MARTINEZ, HUD SECRETARY: Well, it looks like there are no environmental problems at all. In fact, the money is to help families that are in that area stay in the area. People who have thought of moving into the area not be deterred by the additional costs, the inconvenience of it, because, frankly, Wolf, before we can rebuild, we have to keep what's there and not allow Ground Zero to expand and extend beyond the current damaged area, but also to have the economic vitality that comes from having people living in the area around Ground Zero.
BLITZER: You've got about $2 billion at your disposal, you are releasing 300 million. How many people do you estimate will be affected by the grants, the one-time sums that you are going to be providing?
MARTINEZ: Well, I think we will see thousands of people impacted by it, and we are very excited that this is focused on the families, the people who live in the area, who have been disrupted in so many ways, and frankly who find that living in the area is a little more costly right now.
So we are really excited that thousands of families are going to be helped by it. A couple of months ago, we released some money for the businesses in the area to maintain the business -- the economic viability of the area. But now, we're pleased that this is coming to the families.
The $300 million is the first installment of what is going to be a total of $2 billion that has been appropriated by Congress, and we are implementing this in accordance with the plans that have been submitted to us by the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation.
BLITZER: I know you have given the city about $350,000 for interim memorial at Ground Zero, the site there. What do you think should be done permanently at those 16 acres of that devastated site?
MARTINEZ: Well, we are pleased to be a part of the reimbursement of the city of New York, for that memorial, we think it's a fitting tribute to the people who had died there. The fact is that one of the things we do in the federal government is let the locals make those decisions of what should happen at the site.
We believe that obviously some of it will be dedicated to memorials, and that's very appropriate. But in addition to that, I think there are great ideas and great plans for the revitalization and the redevelopment of this area.
One of the things I think the terrorists misjudged is the fact that by destroying these buildings, they thought they might destroy the will of the American people. In fact, nothing of the kind, and stronger than ever, the city of New York is leading the nation, really, as we seek to recover from this terrible attack.
BLITZER: Secretary Martinez, thanks as usual for joining us.
MARTINEZ: Good to see you.
BLITZER: Good luck to you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: America looks to its leaders to make the country safe. From decorated war hero to U.S. senator -- Bob Kerrey tackles protecting America, and the future of the U.S. intelligence community.
Plus, War Emblem tries to enter the racing history book. Straight ahead, is the colt a fluke or a true Triple Crown threat? Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Bob Kerrey has been a soldier, a governor, a senator, and now a university president. He is also the author of a new autobiography, "When I Was a Young Man."
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: Senator Kerrey, thanks for joining us. What's your sense of all the recriminations, the second-guessing that's going on right now in Washington about what could have happened, should have happened prior to September 11?
BOB KERREY, FORMER U.S. SENATOR: Well, I think we have to be very careful that it doesn't just become another one in a series of dust-offs when something bad happens. I mean, no question that the CIA and the FBI made mistakes, but I was there when we did the evaluation of Aldrich Ames, of the Chinese influence over American election, our failure to detect the Indian nuclear detonation. And now we've got another one, that's been others besides the ones I have mentioned. A lot of energy is expended. The CIA and FBI are running around, producing all kinds of reports, they come up to the Hill and answer all the questions, but the most important thing is, what are you going to do afterward?
And in '93, after Aldrich Ames, with this great report that Harold Brown and his committee had produced, we couldn't get 10 percent of the things that report contained and had done enacted in the law. And the reason is, we are now on to something else and have forgotten it.
BLITZER: So, senator, so what are you saying, the new reorganization the president is announcing, the Department of Homeland Security, all the changes in the FBI, is it a waste of time that the culture, the structure really can't be changed? Is that what you're saying?
KERREY: No, I'm not saying that. I think there are some fundamental changes that need to occur. What I'm saying, Wolf, is that once we're on to something else, once we have forgotten all this, we may not have the will to make the changes. I mean, in '93, the problem was committees in Congress didn't want to give up authority, the Department of Defense didn't want to give up any authority. We couldn't get the things done.
BLITZER: So, are you saying, senator, that the American public and the government in Washington has a short attention span, basically?
KERREY: Well, I won't be the first to say it, but the answer is yes. We'll be moving on to something else. There will be some other crisis two years from now, a year from now. At the time when the recommendations -- and I, by the way, think that what Senator McCain and Lieberman are calling for is absolutely needed, a broader investigation that just the Intelligence Committee, because the Intelligence Committee has to conduct most of their work in secret.
Well, you know, that's a big part of the problem. Too much of this stuff has been secret. I can't even tell you what the budget for all of the intelligence is; it's against the law. I have to say, according to Tom Clancy, it's about $30 billion, without violating the law.
BLITZER: Senator, so much of what's going on in Washington, as you and I well know, is still influenced by Vietnam and the Vietnam War 30 years ago. In your new book, "When I Was a Young Man," you write this, and I want to read it verbatim: "I let the president give me the medal. In truth, I was badly confused. The war seemed like such a terrible mistake, politically, morally and militarily. The suffering that was being inflicted on the people of Indochina did not seem worth the potential gain." Do you believe that all of that -- that that impact, the effect of Vietnam today can restructure what the United States is doing in the war on terrorism?
KERREY: Well, you know, I think the Vietnam syndrome was a very negative syndrome. It caused us to not be engaged in the world. And in some ways, it is a syndrome, by the way, that's not just caused by Vietnam. During the interim between the First World War and the Second World War, there was even worse withdrawal from the world and isolationism and pacifism and neutrality that were going on in the country that led to the death of 50 million people throughout the world.
So that's the first that America thought it could stay outside of the course of human events. But Vietnam unquestionably still hangs over us. It probably contributed to our unwillingness to use force in a much more effective way against Osama bin Laden. After '96, he writes his declaration of war, in which he says America withdrew from Vietnam, from Lebanon, from Somalia, they're a paper tiger, they won't respond if we hit them. And that produces, unfortunately, greater risk and greater casualties when we don't respond, and we don't take an active role. Even understanding that when you're taking an active role, you can make mistakes, you can be second-guessed and you put yourself in considerable risk when you do it.
BLITZER: You received a medal, obviously, for your heroic work during the Vietnam War, but you write this also in the book: "I have convinced myself that my injury was retribution, punishment, rather than a combat wound from heroic duty." You were injured, obviously, during the war. Elaborate, tell us what you mean. That's a very, very deep thought that you have there, that you are punishing yourself almost for the heroic work that you did do.
KERREY: Well, it's not an uncommon thing. I mean, I was raised in a Christian Church in Lincoln, Nebraska, and that was part of my belief system, that up in heaven somewhere there is a pile of rocks, and every time I did something bad, another rock get added to the pile, and I'd just done something that I thought was the worst thing that I ever did in my life. So yeah, I don't feel like it today. I have learned a great deal. In a lot of ways, I'm grateful that I have been injured, because it's enabled me to see things differently than I could see them before. But that's what I meant at the time.
BLITZER: Senator Kerrey, you've written a very powerful memoir, "When I Was a Young Man." Thanks so much for joining us.
KERREY: You're welcome, Wolf.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: It's a record no other living being has accomplished. Also, a national tribute to a moment the nation will never forget. It's a touching tribute, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BLITZER: Earlier we asked, who was the last horse to win the Triple Crown? Twenty-four years ago, Affirmed sprinted across the finish line to win the Belmont Stakes and capture the Triple Crown. Tomorrow, a horse named War Emblem will make a run for the coveted award.
But first, let's get a preview of LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE that begins right at the top of the hour -- Lou.
LOU DOBBS, HOST, LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE: Wolf, thank you very much. Coming up tonight, the Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines has killed an American hostage. We will have a report for you. We will also continue our coverage on the issue of war against Islamists. Middle East expert Bavaz George (ph) says he thinks this war is expanding well beyond Osama bin Laden. He is an expert on Islam and the geopolitics of the Islamists. He will be my guest tonight.
And we will tell you what's in store for the Space Shuttle Endeavour astronauts. They've docked with the International Space Station. We'll have that and a lot more coming up at the top of the hour. Please join us.
BLITZER: I certainly will. Thank you very much, Lou.
Is War Emblem up to the task? The black colt will have to outlast 10 rivals in a race that's often thwarted Triple Crown hopefuls. The Belmont Stakes is a longer and tougher contest than the Kentucky Derby or the Preakness. But the cranky 3-year-old who's bitten a couple of grooms and recently a couple of bystanders, may have just the temperament to stay the course. We shall find out tomorrow.
How our Web question of the day. Will a new cabinet-level agency make the U.S. more secure from terrorist threats? Look at this, 39 percent of you say yes, 61 percent of you say no. Remember, this is not a scientific poll.
Time also to hear from you. Chris writes this: "Has anyone ever seen testimony like that of Coleen Rowley? Such forthrightness is rare. She's willing to name names. The committee members ignored that. The last thing they want is a straight answer to a question. Maybe she should take Mr. Mueller's job. Bravo, Coleen."
And that's all the time we have today. I will see you Sunday on LATE EDITION, the last word in Sunday talk. Among my guests, the homeland security director, Tom Ridge. Until then, I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. LOU DOBBS MONEYLINE begins at the top of the hour, but we leave you now with our picture of the day at the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial, the debut of the new heroes of 2001 postage stamps, showing the hoisting of the American flag at Ground Zero.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
