Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

Strike Kills Top Terror Leader; U.S. And Coalition Battling ISIS-Khorasan Group; Major General Praises Courage of Victims; Leads In Shooting; Hillary Hits a Bump in Polls; Digital Carjackers; Clinton Trails Republicans in Recent Polls; Lasers Targeting Planes Over New York Metro. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired July 22, 2015 - 13:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: Hi there, I'm Brianna Keilar in for Wolf Blitzer. It is 1:00 p.m. here in Washington, 6:00 p.m. in London and 8:00 p.m. in Nairobi, Kenya. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks so much for joining us.

Up first, a strike by the United States takes out a top terrorist leader. He was head of the Khorasan group. Their mission, find new ways to attack the United States and Europe.

The Pentagon says that leader, Muhsin Al Fadhli, was a top Al Qaeda operative. He was plotting external attacks against the U.S. and its allies. He had expertise in bomb making and he was one of the few Al Qaeda members trusted enough to receive advanced notice of the 911 terrorist attack.

I want to bring in CNN Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr. We also have CNN Terrorism Analyst Paul Cruickshank and Stephen Walt. He's a professor of International Affairs at Harvard.

Barbara, to you first. Give us the details here on this strike that killed Al Fadhli.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Oh, very interesting strike indeed, Brianna. This was on July 8 but it was not until yesterday that the Pentagon publicly confirmed the death of Al Fadhli. It was a drone attack in northern Syria. This is the stronghold of the Khorasan group.

You know, there are no U.S. troops on the ground but the U.S. clearly had the intelligence that it believed it needed to take the shot. He was traveling in a vehicle west of Aleppo in northern Syria. A drone was tracking this vehicle. And when they were convinced it was him, they took the shot and killed him. There's been a lot of Internet chatter over the months that he might have died in some other strike. But I have to tell you, the Pentagon putting out a very detailed, for them, public statement about all of this and saying that they did take the shot and that he is dead.

KEILAR: And, Paul, the Pentagon is saying that Al Fadhli's death is going to, quote, "degrade and disrupt ongoing external operations of Al Qaeda against the United States and our allies and partners." That sounds like good news. How significant do you think this is?

PAUL CRUICKSHANK, CNN TERRORISM ANALYST: Brianna, this is a very significant break. Sir Al Fadhli was leading Al Qaeda efforts to use Syria as a base to launch attacks against the west, to launch attacks, potentially, against U.S. and western aviation. For Al Qaeda, Syria is a kind of promised land. There are thousands of western and European recruits there. And Al Fadhli was leading efforts to talent spot them and to train them and to send them back to potentially launch attacks in Western Europe and the United States. He's been doing that for the past couple of years.

So, this is a very significant breakthrough. It makes the United States safer. It makes Europe safer. But the danger from this group has not gone away. There are still a number of operatives, veteran Al Qaeda operatives, including Al Beramin (ph), Al Jahani (ph), Assaudi (ph) who was with Al -- the Al Qaeda set up in the tribal areas of Pakistan, considered very dangerous as well, a number of bomb makers still at large. So, still a significant threat from this veteran Al Qaeda group in Syria -- Brianna.

KEILAR: And, professor, give us a sense of this because this is a veteran Al Qaeda group. There is supposed to be tremendous bomb- making capabilities, certainly some creativity, as we've heard from sources here. The goal of Khorasan has been to find new ways to directly attack the U.S. and Europe. But until last year, you had many Americans who hadn't even heard of this group. So, give us a little bit of the back story here.

STEPHEN WALT, PROFESSOR, INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, HARVARD UNIVERSITY: Well, I think that the important thing is to sort of not view this as a dramatic development. It's an important bit of progress but it's just one piece of progress. I guess I'd tell you two things to keep in this in context. This particular death is not going to end the danger we may face from Al Qaeda. It's certainly not going to lead them, you know, roll up their tents and not continue to try and do things to the United States.

At the same time, I think we want to keep the threat in perspective. Al Qaeda has not been very effective in attacking the United States or its allies in recent years and the size of the threat that it now poses is greatly reduced. Indeed, some would argue there are other organizations that now pose more of a problem to the United States than Al Qaeda does.

So, I guess I view this as a piece of good news but it's certainly not the end of the campaign and it's also important to keep just how serious the threat is in some perspective.

KEILAR: Paul, this was a targeted drone strike. What does that tell you? Does that tell you that this was an intelligent success? Is this just one data point? Does this tell us a trend about where intel is, at this point, in capturing terrorists or targeting terrorists in the area?

CRUICKSHANK: Well, Brianna, we don't know whether they had intelligence about where he was going to be at a particular point of time or they just got lucky through one of these so-called signature strikes where they see a sort of vehicle convoys, groups of jihadis which, potentially, they think could be Al Qaeda. It's certainly possible that they could have got lucky here.

[13:05:08] But if, indeed, they did have intelligence on this group, that's very significant, because they've been trying to play catchup in Syria. They haven't got the same eyes and ears, human intelligence sources there that they have in other places like the tribal areas of Pakistan, like, in recent times at least, Yemen. So, it'll be interesting to see if we hear more about what led to this strike.

KEILAR: And we expect to hear that, Barbara, do you think? What are you hearing?

STARR: Well, I think the Pentagon is going to play their cards very close, not likely to hear much more than we did yesterday which was the bare bones of what they did. But they do say, behind the scenes, it was a targeted strike, if you will. That when they took the shot, they did indeed have the intelligence to know he was in the vehicle. That is what they are saying at the Pentagon.

KEILAR: OK, they knew it was Al Fadhli. So, professor, I want to talk to you, really, about the broader fight against ISIS in this region. You say that the U.S. needs to rethink its strategy or risk ISIS developing into a full-blown operational state. Why is that?

WALT: Well, I think the United States needs to at least contemplate the possibility that its efforts to degrade and destroy ISIS will not work. That doesn't mean that ISIS will start expanding in the Middle East or to other parts of the world. It simply means that ISIS might be able to retain power in the areas it now controls. And if that's the case and if the United States doesn't want to go back in in large scale in Iraq, then it's going to have to figure out a way to, for lack of a better phrase, live with it and focus its efforts on containing ISIS. I think we're already doing that. We're organizing other forces, local forces in particular, to try and do that.

But I think we have to recognize that ISIS is in the process of trying to build what, for all intents and purposes, is a territorial state. They may call themselves a caliphate or whatever but a territorial state is what they're trying to create. And if they continue to do that, the United States and its partners in the region should focus their efforts on making sure it doesn't expand and making sure that it doesn't attract a substantial number of sympathizers elsewhere.

KEILAR: Professor Stephen Walt, Paul Cruickshank, Barbara Starr, thanks to all of you.

WALT: Thank you.

KEILAR: And we are following some breaking news. We have just heard a major general in a news conference praising the bravery of the five service members massacred in last week's shooting in Chattanooga.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) MAJ. GEN. PAUL BRIER, U.S. MARINES: Rapidly going from room to room, they got their fellow Marines to safety. Once they had gotten to safety, some willingly ran back into the fight. All of us can be extremely proud of what our Marines did that day.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: The FBI also says they have received more than 400 leads in their investigation. CNN's Alina Machado in Chattanooga for us with the latest developments. Alina, what more did we learn here about the gunman?

ALINA MACHADO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brianna, the FBI is treating Mohammad Abdulazeez as a home group violent extremist who, at this point, investigators believe acted alone. The FBI is saying it is too early to say if he had been radicalized. But they say that is something they are looking into as a possibility in their investigation.

We also got a clearer picture of what happened inside the naval reserve center where five service members were shot and killed. The entire incident there happened very, very quickly. It lasted anywhere from three to five minutes. Authorities say the shooter crashed through the front gate. At the center, he got out of his car armed with an assault rifle, a handgun and several magazines of ammunition. A service member inside the facility spotted the shooter and fired several rounds.

Abdulazeez, according to the FBI, then started shooting at the building. He walked inside, he shot his first service member and then continued to pursue others while he was shooting. The FBI says that he eventually made it out of the building through the back and then shot and killed four service members. Chattanooga police responded to the scene, as we know, and it was one of their officers who eventually shot and killed Abdulazeez.

Now, here's what authorities had to say about how many weapons and what kinds of weapons were found at the site.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ED REINHOLD, SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE, FBI: We found three weapons inside the facility that we know belonged to the shooter. One weapon was located in the vehicle and two weapons were located on this person. Two additional weapons were recovered at the scene. Those weapon weapons belonged to service members and they were -- at least one of the weapons was discharged at the subject. Whether he was struck by those individuals is unclear at this time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[13:10:09] KEILAR: Now, authorities are still waiting for a ballistics report. But according to preliminary information, Brianna, they do not believe any of the service members died in friendly fire.

KEILAR: All right, Alina Machado, thank you so much. Really appreciate it.

And still ahead, Hillary Clinton hits a bump in the presidential race. There's a new poll that has her trailing in three key swing states. Plus, what the numbers reveal about some of her Republican rivals.

And imagine driving down the highway when this happens. Hackers making your car go haywire. The new danger exposed for half a million American drivers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: She's considered the Democratic presidential front-runner. But in a new poll, Hillary Clinton is trailing top Republicans in three important swing states.

[13:15:00] KEILAR: The Quinnipiac University poll asked voters in Colorado, Iowa and Virginia, if the election were held today between Clinton and three of the Republican candidates, who would you vote for? And in a matchup between Clinton and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, Bush leads by a few percentage points in each state. More than a few, actually, in some. There is a margin of error here, of course. Then the numbers against Florida Senator Marco Rubio, they aren't much better for her. It is close in Virginia, as you can see there. The only difference, two points, two percentage points, so within the margin of error. But it seemed that the largest gap between Clinton and Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, this is where the big gap exists. Again, you can see the closest between them there in Virginia.

And I want to take a closer look now at this poll and the candidates. We have CNN political director David Chalian joining us to talk about this.

Sometimes polls come out and they just confirm what you already know or suspect. This is interesting, this poll. What is the big takeaway, the big headline from this?

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: So first let's put all the caveats in place, right?

KEILAR: Yes, of course.

CHALIAN: Like, it is a snapshot in time looking at a general election that's not until a year and a half from now is very difficult to do. But I do think you're right, it gives us information. Listen, there are warning signs here for Hillary Clinton just about how voters in these key states are perceiving here. These are battleground states, as you mentioned, and she is, in terms of her favorability rating, underwater, right? A majority of voters in these three states say that she's more unfavorable than favorable. That is not a place you want to be. Same on her honest and trustworthiness, right? Majorities are saying that.

So right now, if you're the Clinton campaign, listen, they're not worried about this. They have their plan. They look at their data. They love to question all the public polls that are out there thinking that they have a better sense of where the electorate is. But I do think it is clear that this is something that is going to be part of the Hillary Clinton project for the next year and a half if she is the nominee, is going to be addressing this issue of giving a reason for voters to have a perceptions about her that is more favorable than unfavorable.

KEILAR: So she has this issue about the sort of likability issue, the trustworthiness. Do you think the issue on -- can -- does she understand, and not just for Hillary Clinton, but for Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio as well, does she understand my problems? That is a huge thing. Voters want to know that someone understands that it's hard for them to scrape together to, you know, put food on the table, to clothe their kids, all of these real pocketbook issues and democrats think economics are what is going to define this election. What do -- what do we know from this pole about that and how big of a concern should that be to these candidates?

CHALIAN: So, again, we see Hillary Clinton upside down in all three states in these numbers about, whether or not she is caring about these issues, right? I think, actually, this isn't that different from the likability at this stage of the campaign, Brianna. I think the two get mixed together, right?

KEILAR: Yes.

CHALIAN: If you don't -- if you don't want to have a beer with the candidate, you're probably thinking that they're not looking out for your interests, right?

KEILAR: You're just down on them a little bit, is that it?

CHALIAN: You're -- however, the policy debate is not fully engaged yet and so you are right, I think voters are looking for which of these candidate are going to have my back. And the Clinton campaign believes they -- when that policy debate gets engaged -- that they're going to be able to win out on that argument, on the economic arguments in a similar way that Barack Obama was able to do with Mitt Romney.

KEILAR: Because she just started talking about her economic policies really early last week and she's sort of now talking about corporations and how she sees Wall Street, right? That's just sort of evolving. It takes a while for that to percolate to the masses, right?

CHALIAN: Yes, and to be fully engaged from both sides in the context of a general election. But again, you're right, Jeb Bush is having this problem also. Marco Rubio is right side up in all three of these battleground states on this topic. It is something that perhaps feeds into his generational argument that he's on the trail making every day, which is that he is the leader for the future and that ties into how people envision their economic future.

KEILAR: Real quick before I let you go, so who, at this moment in time very far out from the election, is faring the best against Hillary Clinton?

CHALIAN: Oh, well, listen, in this poll --

KEILAR: In this poll.

CHALIAN: You know, as you said, Walker does nicely against her. Rubio does well against her. She, I think -- even Jeb Bush is doing well against her in Iowa and Colorado. Virginia, she seems to have a little bit of -- more of a stronghold. But, again, I wouldn't read too much into sort of where is the election a year and a half from now. I think we should look at these polls as the snapshots they are and say, so what here do all of these candidates now need to address.

KEILAR: Yes.

CHALIAN: And I think that's how you want to read these polls. So I don't -- I don't know who matches up against her best.

KEILAR: Yes.

CHALIAN: But I do think that the Clinton campaign is probably worries about all three Republicans tested here, Walker, Rubio and Bush, as potential strong Republican contenders.

KEILAR: We'll call it a mid-semester report card or something like that.

CHALIAN: There you go.

KEILAR: All right, David Chalian, thanks so much. Really appreciate it.

CHALIAN: Thank you.

KEILAR: Donald Trump sat down with our Anderson Cooper. You don't want to miss that interview on "AC 360." That's tonight at 8:00 Eastern. And for the latest in politics, head on over to cnnpolitics.com.

[13:20:01] Now still ahead, the alarming and growing trend near the nation's airports. More pilots are reporting lasers aimed right into their cockpits. Where it happened this time.

Plus, planes packed with passengers nearly collide with flying drones. The two frightening incidents that happened in a single week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: Some new developments on a troubling and dangerous trend. It involves lasers and commercial planes. At least six more flights over the New York metro area report being hit by lasers just on Tuesday. And these powerful lights, they can temporarily blind pilots.

We want to bring in CNN's aviation correspondent Rene Marsh here with us in Washington, and we have Patrick Tucker, he's the technology editor for Defense One.

First off, Rene, just tell us more about these incidents. And it's pretty startling that you're talking about several in one day, right?

[13:25:02] RENE MARSH, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: Yes, in the New York/New Jersey last night between 9:30 and 12:10 a.m. is when the FAA said four commercial aircraft, they were hit with these lasers, an American Airlines flight, Express Jet, as well as Shuttle America and Spirit. And then the Port Authority reported to us that two more were struck with lasers, so that's a total of six within one night. So now they're trying to get to the bottom of who's behind it.

KEILAR: And that certainly poses its difficulties. We'll talk about that in a moment. But, Patrick, it is a federal crime to do this.

PATRICK TUCKER, TECHNOLOGY EDITOR, DEFENSE ONE: Yes.

KEILAR: If you're someone with a laser and you're pointing it at an aircraft, there's supposed to be a law in effect, President Obama signed it into effect in 2012. Is it working?

TUCKER: Not according to, you know, what we've seen very recently. You're supposed to face a penalty of as much as five years in prison and a fine of $250,000 if you use lasers to what is technically called dazzling the pilot. So that means shining an optical laser towards the cockpit in a way that might distract the pilot. There's no technical way really to prevent a wide number of people from doing it. It's impossible when you're in the plane to track the lasers to the ground. So there's no way to enforce that 2012 law, which is the problem.

KEILAR: They catch people sometime, right, Rene? How do they do that?

MARSH: I mean it really is like looking for a needle in the haystack, but it does happen. And when they do find the person, you do face those charges. Today we know in Bakersville (ph), California, there's a man who's making his initial appearance. He's been indicted for shining a laser at a police helicopter and he's facing up to five years behind bars, as well as $250,000 in fines. So when they catch you, you're really going to get those charges, and these are hefty charges. But to your point, it's not easy at all.

KEILAR: Yes, certainly not easy. And there's another issue, Patrick, I want to talk to you about while we have you here, drones. You have seen them used in frightening ways. They fly too close to commercial airplanes at some points. That is a tremendous danger to both -- to certainly whether it's freight or whether it's passenger cargo. There are firefighters in California who actually say they're hampered by drones. You saw what happened at the White House somewhat recently.

TUCKER: Right.

KEILAR: What needs to be done?

TUCKER: This is an extremely big and growing problem. The FAA project that there might be as many as 30,000 commercial UAVs over U.S. airspace by 2020. And figuring out how to get them away from places where they're not supposed to be is proving to be just a larger and larger problem every day. As you mentioned, this weekend, firefighters were hampered for about 20 minutes from taking to the air to fight a fire because of about five commercial drones in the area. And that's happened at several different fires over the course of the past few months. Also very recently, a drone got in the way of a commercial airliner

out of Poland that didn't result in any incidents but it was a cause of huge concern. So in terms of stopping this sort of thing, there's -- technically there's not a lot you can do. You can potentially jam the signal and there's a lot of talk that maybe that's what happened or could happen around certain areas around D.C. But when you jam a cell or wi-fi signal, you risk damaging other electronics in the area. And also, if you're a consumer, if you're a regular person like you or I, it's illegal to jam that signal.

There's a bunch of off-the-shelf technologies you can use to actually find drones sort of that are operating around you and you can see a number of people picking those up and then using kind of more old- fashioned means to take drones sort of, you know, away from the area that they're operating in, like shooting at them and things like this. But it's this growing concern. The FAA has said that what they want is some means to basically track drones in the air and that's a technological feat that they haven't yet figured out how actually to do.

KEILAR: Let's look at a -- let's look at a drone that is -- this is rather scary. This is something that an engineering student came up with and it is a weapon on a drone. This video popped up on YouTube. Certainly this is very alarming and, you know, I wonder what happens here, Rene? I mean this -- this is -- is this illegal?

MARSH: It is alarming and, you know, here's the other layer to all of this, it's really tough to regulate this sort of thing because, frankly, the laws are so far behind this technology.

KEILAR: Antiquated compared to the technology.

MARSH: Exactly. So when you have law enforcement, when they go to the books to see what are the laws here, how can I enforce and what can I enforce, there's nothing there to give them guidance. But what we're looking at there, as far as that video goes, Clinton, Connecticut, police saying there's nothing illegal about that. That was on that person's private property. They're allowed to fire a gun on their private property as long as someone's life is not in danger. And they tell me they have no evidence that anyone was in danger. So as alarming as that is --

KEILAR: But they could -- but -- so who might step in here, real quick, before I let you go, Patrick, because we need to put a little lid on this before we go.

MARSH: Yes.

[13:30:03] TUCKER: Well, the -- the FAA is one of the bodies that's in charge of regulating potentially reckless or careless use of commercial UAVs.