Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

Condemned Man Freed; Co-pilot Repeatedly Sped Up Plane; More Than 2,000 DNA Samples Collected; Women And ISIS; Selling Iran Deal To Congress; Iran Ready To Cooperate With The World; Tensions Still High Over Agreement; Interview with Rep. Peter King; Obama Warns Congress; Iran's Influence Grows. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired April 03, 2015 - 13:00   ET

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

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: Hi, there. I'm Brianna Keilar in for Wolf Blitzer. It is 1:00 p.m. here in Washington, 7:00 p.m. in Dusseldorf, 8:00 p.m. in Sanaa, and 9:30 in Tehran. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks so much for joining us.

The flight data recorder found yesterday from that downed Germanwings aircraft has already yielded more information about how the plane crashed. French investigators say the data shows co-pilot Andreas Lubitz actually increased the plane's speed after setting the autopilot to 100 feet. The recorder also showed that Lubitz increased the speed many more times as Flight 9525 descended toward its ultimate demise.

And, by the way, that box that you see, well, it's normally bright orange. This dark color here that you're seeing is a testament to the fact that it was scorched in the crash and the impact was so severe that it buried this recorder under eight inches of dirt.

Joining us now from Dusseldorf, Germany CNN's Will Ripley. And, Will, this is key information that investigators are getting. They're really just starting to go through it and already they're learning so much.

WILL RIPLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This is the first analysis, Brianna, you're right. And they will continue to go through it, again, to try to extract as much as they can about what was happening, technically, with Flight 9525 when it made that deadly collision course with the French Alps.

But the information just released today is horrifying, to say the least, because it shows, once again, evidence of a deliberate act by this 27-year-old co-pilot, Andreas Lubitz. When the plane was at 38,000 feet, he changed the autopilot settings, he programmed in 100 feet, 30 meters or so above the ground which, of course, started that terrifying descent.

And passengers were well aware of what was happening. They were well aware something was horribly wrong for a full eight minutes as the plane not only continued descending toward the mountain range, but also accelerating because, as you said, Andreas Lubitz continually increased the speed of the aircraft, ignoring the cockpit alarms that were sounding. Very loud alarms that passengers near the front of the aircraft would have been able to hear. And you saw those photos of the black box, the sheer force of the impact damaged it so extensively. It's still not clear how much data will be able to be extracted.

But what has been learned, very troubling. Also, a tablet seized from the co-pilot's apartment by investigators shows that in the week leading up to doing this, including just the day before the crash, he was searching on the Internet for ways to commit suicide and also searching about cockpit doors and their security measures. It shows that he wanted to lock himself in the cockpit. He wanted to commit suicide. And he wanted to take a lot of innocent lives along with him -- Brianna.

KEILAR: And, Will, talk to us about something that's so important to the family members of the victims. They're trying to get -- investigators are trying to get DNA samples collected at the site. Where does that stand?

RIPLEY: So, they have collected 150 what they call DNA profiles. As you know, when the plane hit this how -- hit the mountain ridge at 420 miles an hour, 675 kilometers an hour, it was -- it was a tremendous impact that scattered debris and sadly remains over a very large area. But they have now -- they've taken DNA samples from a number of the families. They've collected DNA from the crash site.

But it will still be months and months before the families have closure. And that closure will come in a positive identification, not in any sort of significant remains being returned to them, Brianna. Just another tragic -- just another tragic part of what has just been an awful, awful week here. There's a task force that's been set up to try to figure out everything that went wrong. All of the safeguards that were put in place that failed so that they -- hopefully some good can come of this and this will never happen again, someone with these issues won't be allowed back in the cockpit.

KEILAR: Yes, and your heart just really goes out to those families. Will Ripley, thank you so much, for us from Germany there.

I want to dig deeper now, into what we have learned, with our panel. In New York, we have Les Abend. He's a CNN Aviation Analyst and contributing editor to "Flying" magazine. He's also a triple seven captain. And then, with us in New York, we have aviation attorney and private pilot and former military pilot, Justin Green.

So, Les, this is the new thing that we have learned. Previously, we knew, from the voice recorder, that you could hear Lubitz breathing. So, there was certainly a sense that he was very much alive. But now, we're -- we've learned from this data recorder that he was turning off these velocity alarms and descending at an even faster pace, right?

LES ABEND, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: I'm not sure he was turning off alarms necessarily. But let me go back to the breathing, Brianna. I mean, this is speculation, on my part, and I've mentioned this before. I think we might have been hearing him breathing through the oxygen mask which is bizarre. It's a routine at the altitude that they were flying to have that mask on when there's only one pilot at the duty station. So, that's my speculation on that part because it's hard to hear normal breathing.

[13:05:21] But what I think he did with the autopilot was he used a mode called vertical speed and increased that vertical speed to maybe impact quicker or less -- or tried to just utilize it to get to the point of impact that he was aiming for, at this point.

KEILAR: And, you know, Justin, is there any sort of automation in a way -- there's nothing that stops a situation like this from happening. Is there any way to find some sort of control outside of the cockpit when -- you know, a computer knows that something is wrong when you're aiming for a mountain.

JUSTIN GREEN, AVIATION ATTORNEY: Well, what I'd like to say is since the dawn of aviation, since airplanes have been started to be designed and built, people, very smart people have been trying to design them so that they won't crash. So, you've had improvements like the stall warning system. You've had improvements like the ground proximity warning system, and now the enhanced ground proximity warning system. And now, people are talking, and I think rightfully so, about potential future advances, including one in which, you know, a terrorist who takes over the airplane can be locked out of the airplane.

But what I think is really important to understand is that any change you make, you have to look out for unintended consequences. So, as a lawyer, I could say -- and maybe I'm not the right person to talk about it. But I do think it is important to talk about safety improvements and because the people that are doing it, the people like Les, the people like -- at Boeing and at Airbus who are trying to design new technology, sometimes need the attention to get them across the goal line.

KEILAR: Yes. And even if you were to control some sort of safeguard, if for some reason it was open technologically, there's always the concern of a cyberattack, something like that. You know, Les, we've been talking about this now for over a week since this happened. And I think, at first, people -- some people were giving this pilot a bit of the benefit of the doubt. There were, I guess, questions of whether he was suffering a mental breakdown. But I wonder if you're -- as you're seeing this now, are you seeing this more moving towards this is a cold-blooded killer?

ABEND: Well, you know, Brianna, it's hard to say what was going through this young man's mind. I don't understand mental illness. But, obviously, where we've got to today, that's the situation that we seem to be investigating. The whole aspect of not being able to trust my colleague, it just -- it's baffling to me. I would never even consider it.

I think I'd mentioned early on in this discussion when we first started in the week, when we found out that this man was committing suicide with other -- with his passengers behind him, I flew back from London with a Gulf War hero, 27 years in the Air Force, that had his own family issues. Never once would I consider getting outside that cockpit door and thinking I'd never get back in.

KEILAR: Yes. And you are speaking for so many pilots when you say that. Les Abend, thank you so much. I really appreciate you being with us as well, Justin Green.

GREEN: Thank you.

KEILAR: Coming up, an American woman arrested and charged with trying to join ISIS. This news coming just one day after two other American women were in court charged with plotting an attack on the United States. We'll dig a little deeper on both of these cases.

And then, there's an outline for an Iran nuclear deal. But this is where the tough sell now begins. What can President Obama do to get Congress on board? We'll be asking Republican Congressman Peter King.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:12:16] KEILAR: "Iran is ready to cooperate with the world." That's a quote on its nuclear program. That's the word from President Hassan Rouhani who praised the framework agreement that will limit his country's nuclear capabilities.

The preliminary deal was announced yesterday and the final details worked out by the end of June. Rouhani says the agreement proves that the world acknowledges Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear power. But Israeli is certainly not buying it. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says the agreement paves Iran's path to the bomb and would threaten the very survival of the state of Israel. But secretary of state, John Kerry, says that Iran will be under very tight control. Here's what he told our Elise Labott.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ELISE LABOTT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: When this is over in 15 years, Iran can, you know, pretty much do whatever it wants. So, this is a real --

JOHN KERRY, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, it can't, no --

LABOTT: This is a real political gamble, Mr. Secretary, that the regime is going to be different in 15 years.

KERRY: No, it is not a gamble on the regime being different. It is not a gamble. It is based on proof. There's no element of trust in here. This is based on --

LABOTT: You don't trust Iran?

KERRY: -- verification. That's not the issue. In any negotiation about arms, you can't just do it on words. You do it on actions and verifiability.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KEILAR: So, Iran agrees to go along with the requirements laid out by this framework. But there's obviously still a whole lot of tension over this deal and there's plenty of final details to hammer out before the end of June.

I want to bring in Congressman Peter King. Thanks so much, Congressman, for being with us. Really appreciate it.

And you heard that question that Elise asked Secretary Kerry. Is this agreement a gamble? Do you think it's a gamble?

REP. PETER KING, R-NEW YORK: Right now, I'd have to say it's a gamble. I had a very long conversation with the U.N. ambassador, Samantha Power, yesterday. The administration believes that these verifications, these examinations, these -- basically right to inspect is going to be sufficient. I have real concerns about that. I don't know how we can trust Iran. And I don't know if the IAEA -- for instance, can they make spur-of-the-moment inspections? Are they going to be able to inspect everywhere or just the known facilities?

So, again, considering Iran's history, it's, to me, very doubtful. Having said that, the president and his administration have negotiated this. I think we, in Congress, have a -- really an obligation to examine it carefully, to go through it and then make a decision. And I wish the president would agree to have Congress have more leeway. And not just leeway have more oversight. But also, we in Congress have the obligation to inspect it carefully before we make any final judgment.

[13:15:00] But right now, I am skeptical.

KEILAR: Let's listen to what President Obama said about Congress's role and we'll talk about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: If Congress kills this deal, not based on expert analysis, and without offering any reasonable alternative, then it's the United States that will be blamed for the failure of diplomacy. International unity will collapse and the path to conflict will widen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: OK, so he's saying Congress needs to have an alternative. Is - I guess, what would that be and is there anything the president can do to sway you and other members of Congress and give you a sense that this is sufficient to ensure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon?

KING: Well, first of all, the president has not been getting in his dealing with Congress in a way that - win friends and influence people. To basically say that it's his way or no way and if Congress disagrees, apparently it's, you know, the whole world is going to be critical of Congress. The fact is, you have many states in the Middle East, many of the Arab nations, equally concerned about it. And I think I have a concern there that we could see an arms race started by the Saudis and the Egyptians, the Qataris, perhaps the Jordanians. So it's not just Congress that has these concerns. And, again, I think the president would do better if he acknowledged

that Congress has very legitimate concerns and attempts to address them, not to put it in a take it or leave it type proposition and not to be somehow lining up with the rest of the world against the United States Congress. I mean this agreement, even accepting the way the president's laying it out, is far different from when the negotiations began. I mean right now we are agreeing to leave Iran's nuclear infrastructure in place. Now, they are going to reduce the number of centrifuges. They are going to have - as far as the enriching of the uranium, it's going to be done at civilian grade level. Again, that's assuming that everything here is complied with by the Iranians and that's never happened before.

So I think the president would do a lot better to talk in good faith and not be arrogant and above it all as if somehow he's the font of all wisdom here and he's the only one operating out of good intentions because a lot of people question his intentions.

KEILAR: I know that's one of the big issues for you are the centrifuges. You have Iran that basically Iran is cutting down on its centrifuges and, as you mentioned, they're not going to be as technologically advanced. So you're talking about civilians -- civilian grade material. Then they're also cutting the uranium stockpiles by 97 percent. Of course that is certainly not 100 percent. And so you have this issue of the inspections that you mentioned, which I'm assuming you feel this is the way to ensure that Iran, with its more limited means to develop nuclear material, that this doesn't go towards making a bomb, even though certainly the ability to do that will be diminished and would take much more time.

KING: Right. And, again, that's why the inspections are necessary. Also, you know, the president said yesterday, really for the first time, that Iran was only three or four months away from having a bomb. So assuming that all of this goes well over the next eight or nine years and everyone lives up to the agreement, Iran then would have billions of dollars coming into its economy with the release of the sanctions. So in eight or nine years of increased funds it wouldn't have otherwise. And then they would, at best, be a year away from the bomb.

So with all of this all we're buying ourselves is an extra eight months of leeway here. And that's assuming that we could even fully detect it. I mean I - I - you know, what I would foresee is having questions - is Iran violating it or not? Then the process begins. And you go through that process to determine if they are or not. And after let's say four or five years, if that is the case, is the world really going to reinstitute sanctions? Is the U.S. really in a position to take military action at that time?

So, again, let me say on the face of it, I'm willing to concede the president's making a good faith effort. But then he gets to make the good faith effort of having his people sit down with Congress and in good faith go through it step by step and not just ask us to trust him and the Iranians.

KEILAR: All right, congressman, thank you so much for your insight on that. Really appreciate it. Congressman Peter King joining us.

KING: Thank you, Brianna. Thank you very much.

KEILAR: Could this nuclear deal make Iran a bigger threat to peace in the Middle East? We know that Iran is taking sides, it's aiding groups in Iraq and Yemen. When the sanctions end, will Tehran be in position to wreak havoc in the region? We'll be discussing that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:22:51] KEILAR: As we discussed the framework for a peaceful Iran nuclear deal, it opens up some broader issues concerning Iran and its influence around the region. Richard Haass is the president on the Council on Foreign Relations. He's joining me now.

Thanks so much for being with us, Richard. And I want to talk to you about this landmark deal. When you look at this, positive or negative, is this good for the U.S. and for other countries involved?

RICHARD HAASS, PRESIDENT, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Well, it's a little bit soon to start making definitive judgments, Brianna. As you know, we've got to go from an interim framework into an actual deal and then it's got to be - it's got to be implemented. So I think the jury's got to stay out.

But, yes, are there some promising and attractive features of this? Absolutely. But it seems to me what depends is whether you can go again from the frame - you know, the draft framework that was announced yesterday, the parameters, to an actual deal. And then you've got to live with it and you've got to deal with the inevitable questions where -- where Iranian compliance questions are raised.

BOLDUAN: And that's the question that Congressman Peter King just raised. He said that when it comes to Iran it is not trustworthy. You can't always expect it to hold up its side of the bargain. When you look at the changing leadership in Iran, the changing sentiment in Iran, but also the fact that Iran's becoming such a big player in the Middle East, do you think that Iran right now can be trusted to live up to its end of the deal?

HAASS: Well, by and large, you don't sign agreements with countries you trust. You sign agreements with countries that you - of this sort with countries that you worry about and that's why you build in all sorts of intrusive mechanisms for monitoring and inspections. And what's then really important is you're prepared, not just you, the United States, but others in this case, to reintroduce sanctions if need be.

I think the larger point to make, and you're getting at it, is this is a significant deal but it's a narrow deal. It deals simply with the Iranian nuclear weapons program. It doesn't deal with deliver systems and, more important, it doesn't deal with the full range of Iran's bid to be a regional, if you will, an imperial power in the region and all that it's doing in places like Yemen or Syria or Iraq or Lebanon or what have you. So I think, you know, one has to place this in a larger context so even if this deal works, and I obviously would hope it would, that even if it quote/unquote "succeeds" in its own terms, it still does not begin to address a much larger set of issues, which is Iranian behavior in the Middle East.

[13:25:20] KEILAR: And let's talk about that a little bit. You have in Iraq the U.S. maybe not working with Iran but certainly working toward the end goal that Iran is as well trying to defeat is. In Yemen it's a different story. The U.S. special forces left as Iran-backed militias started taking control of those locations. What happens now to the U.S. counterterrorism campaign there against ISIS and al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula if you have Houthis continuing to have control?

HAASS: It's got to be a real area of concern. It's not just Houthis, but obviously it's al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. So Yemen is on the edge of being a failed state, on the edge of a major civil war. It could become almost like Afghanistan was a generation ago. It could become a place in which a group like al Qaeda could mount not just regional but global attacks. The United States has very few tools now to influence what goes on there.

I've got another concern, to be honest. Saudi Arabia, for understandable reasons, is getting very involved. They're obviously worried about spillover from Yemen into their own country. But it's not at all clear to me that Saudi Arabia will succeed. That as it gets more involved militarily, that it will go well. And, if not, I think that has real risk for stability back in Saudi Arabia itself.

KEILAR: So what's telling you that Saudi Arabia may not succeed and what are the ramifications, do you think, in this case if they don't?

HAASS: Well, partially it's just the - it's the nature of Yemen for a large part given all the divisions, given the size of the country, given the size of the population. This is not going to be an easy place to pacify. It's an enormous, enormous undertaking. And Saudi Arabia's military strength is located largely in its air force. It's not located in its ground force.

So the idea that the Saudis and this constellation of Sunni Arab states or Sunni states would dispatch some type of an expeditionary force that would succeed on the ground, you've got to be skeptical given both their own lack of military prowess and the nature of the situation they're walking into. So I think skepticism is the order of the day. And, again, then there's the issue of, what's the consequence of what is not perceived as success?

KEILAR: Yes. And we've learned all over the region an air campaign is not sufficient to defeat an enemy there. Richard Haass with the Council on Foreign Relations, thanks so much for being with us.

HAASS: Thank you.

KEILAR: Coming up, another arrest of an ISIS sympathizer. It's a woman accused of plotting to join the terror group overseas. One of several, actually, that we've seen in recent days, including two women accused of trying to build a bomb to kill people right here in the U.S.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)