Return to Transcripts main page

Your World Today

Iraqi Elections See Massive Turnout Despite Some Violence; General Casey Pleased with Elections; Bush, Congress Reach Compromise on Torture Measure; New York City Transit Strike Looms

Aired December 16, 2005 - 12:00   ET

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

ANNOUNCER: Live from CNN Center, this is YOUR WORLD TODAY.
ZAIN VERJEE, CO-HOST: Was it a case of here one day, gone the next? How was it that Iraqi security forces captured Abu Musab al- Zarqawi last year but released him?

MICHAEL HOLMES, CO-HOST: And in Washington, senators opposed renewing a controversial anti-terror bill. They want some provisions to run out.

Noon right now in Washington, 8 p.m. in Baghdad. Hello, everyone. I'm Michael Holmes.

VERJEE: And I'm Zain Verjee. A warm welcome to our viewers throughout the world. This is CNN International, and this is YOUR WORLD TODAY.

HOLMES: Well, after a big election turnout by all segments of Iraqi society, it will be a while before all the ballots are counted. At least two weeks, according to officials.

But there is new hope today for a country that has been beset for so long by turmoil. And there is hope in Washington that the day is in sight when U.S. troops can begin to withdraw.

Hailing organizers for meeting a difficult challenge, election monitors said the vote met international standards. There were some complaints, however. But despite the largely peaceful poll, there were warnings from both the U.S. military and militants in Iraq that the insurgency is far from over.

VERJEE: Iraqi officials say preliminary estimates show more than two-thirds of voters participated in the election.

We want to go now to General Casey who is speaking. Let's listen.

GEN. GEORGE CASEY, U.S. ARMY: ... happening in a polling station in Karma, which is a place between Baghdad and Fallujah. An IED blew down the wall of the polling station in the middle of the night. The Iraqis fixed it and were open for business and polling at 7 a.m. in the morning. That was the spirit that led the day.

The second thing I'd like to just share with you, having been at this for 18 months now, is what was -- has been accomplished here not just over the last 18 months but really in less than three years is unprecedented. And if you think about it, Saddam Hussein was still ruling Iraq three years ago and tyrannizing the Iraqi people.

In the less than three years since then, Iraqis have been liberated; they've taken their sovereignty; they've brought in an interim government, elected a transitional government, peacefully passed power, written a constitution, approved a constitution, built an army of over 200 -- Army and police forces of over 200,000, got them into the fight. And yesterday they elected an assembly that will form a government to lead them for the next four years.

All of this against a ruthless and resilient insurgency. So a remarkable effort here in less than three years, and every man and women -- woman who has served here or fought here owns a piece of this success, and particularly the loved ones of our fallen comrades.

Third point I'd make is that as great a day as it was we still have a lot of work to do in 2006. The government's got to get firm, take the reins and get on with governing. And I think as we've all been quite clear about. There is some tough political and economic challenges that Iraq has to deal with. Not just next year, but over the coming years.

There will be a debate in the assembly about the constitution, about whether or not to amend it, and there will be a debate no doubt on federalism. And I certainly expect these to be he heated and probably divisive. And as all the insurgents haven't given up using violence to get their political ends. I expect that these debates will be done against a background of violence.

So lots of tough work to do here. And we should not expect the insurgency to just go away because of yesterday's great success. But we should expect it to be gradually weakened and reduced as more and more Iraqis adopt a political process and the root causes of the insurgency are addressed by the new Iraqi government and by the coalition.

So, yesterday was a day to celebrate, but we still have a way to go here.

Finally, I'd like to close just with a word to the families of the men and women of our military, State Department and other agencies of the government that are serving here in Iraq. Your loved ones made history yesterday. And it's your support that keeps us going. Thanks for your sacrifices, particularly through these holiday periods. For us, helping give the gift of freedom for Iraq in these last elections will make for a pretty happy holiday season, even without being with you all.

So thank you all very much for your continued support. And happy holidays to everybody back there in the Pentagon. Thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well thank you, general for that overview. And we'll get started with a few questions here, then. Charlie?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: General, Charlie Arlinger (ph) with Reuters. I've got three quick questions. Two of them I think the American public is very interested in this.

No. 1, how many U.S. troops and other coalition troops are there in Iraq today? When do you expect firm date to get down to the baseline 130,000. They are saying it will be rather quickly. And when do you expect to begin, you might be able to begin going beyond that. In other words, withdrawing troops?

CASEY: Yes, OK, Charlie. Right now I think we're at about 170,000. And I think you know that we are -- we will enter into another transition process here over the next weeks, and the two extra battalions that we brought over for election security will leave in January. So we should be down to the old baseline there, I'd say, probably around the end of January, maybe early February.

But as I said, there's another rotation that's going to take place here that will go through February so that the number will stay elevated as units come in and units go out.

And then, as I've said all along, Charlie, we just had the elections. We're doing our assessments. And I'll make some recommendations in the coming weeks here about whether I think it's prudent to go below that -- the baseline that you spoke of.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Excuse me, when you say 170,000, you mean 170,000 U.S. troops or are you talking about overall total? And could you...

CASEY: That's total, Charlie. That's yes, the coalition, and that's what we got. That's the total number.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What about U.S.? How many are U.S. 0f the 170?

CASEY: I'm sorry. I think we're probably about 150 today.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. Barbara.

BARBARA STARR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: General Casey, Barbara Starr from CNN.

You've spoken a little bit about the insurgency. But what's your assessment right now? The chairman had said several weeks ago that they had the same capacity to launch attacks that they had a year ago. Do you think that is still the case? Do you think there's a turning point in the insurgency? What do you militarily expect in post election now?

CASEY: First of all, Barbara, I think -- I think you know that the insurgency is not a homogenous group. We look at it with the terrorists and the foreign fighters, Saddamists, and a larger group, the predominant group there, the Iraqi rejectionists.

Our operations over the fall here have had a great impact on that insurgency, particularly on the terrorists and the foreign fighters. I think you'll recall the operations in the north and Tal Afar, where we took away a major transit point for foreign fighters and suicide bombers coming from Syria into northern Iraq to Mosul and down the Tigris Valley.

In October we began a series of operations in the western Euphrates Valley, designed to set the conditions for the people in Anbar province to vote. And I'm very happy to report that we expect the turnout in Anbar province in these elections to be in the 45 to 50 percent range, which is a huge jump from where they have been in the past two elections.

But our operations, in addition to doing that, have also restored Iraqi control to that Syrian border. And we have disrupted the facilitation network that al Qaeda used to bring suicide bombers and foreign fighters from the border with Syria, down the Euphrates valley, and into car bombs in Baghdad.

To give you some indication of the effectiveness of that, in June, last June there were over 60 suicide attacks across Iraq. In November there were 26. In December we were averaging less than one a day. So we believe that our operations out there have in fact had had an impact on that.

So, now you're asking what do I expect the insurgency to do after the elections? The answer is, on the terrorist and foreign fighter side, I expect them to attempt to resume attacks against civilians and us and Iraqi security forces and attempt to discredit the process and attempt to demonstrate that they are still strong and a factor to be reckoned with. We will continue, obviously, with our operations with the Iraqi security forces to frustrate them in doing that.

The rest of it remains -- remains to be seen. And there was, again, good participation. And we will continue to dialogue with the Sunni leaders and Sunni groups, in fact with all Iraqi groups, to continue to bring people away from the insurgency and into the political process.

STARR: Can I just follow up briefly? Do you subscribe to the notion that the Baathists entered into some sort of agreement, essentially, during the election to reduce their violence, but yet they will continue on their own two-track strategy, of both political and violent activity? In other words, do you think there is a turning point yet in the Baathist portion? Or the Saddamist portion of the insurgency?

CASEY: Barbara, I think it's too early to tell. I certainly understand why you're asking the question. And I'm asking myself the same question. But I think it's too early to tell. We'll just have to wait and see.

But I think what you'll see is -- is folks trying to play -- use both means to achieve their ends and not renouncing violence totally but also working within the political process. So it'll be a much more complicated situation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Over here.

VERJEE: We have lots of tough work to do here; we should not expect the insurgency to go away because of yesterday's great success. Yesterday was a day to celebrate, but we have a long way to go.

General George Casey, the commander of multinational forces speaking in -- from Baghdad, really giving his assessment of the insurgency, saying that the U.S. has successfully been able to disrupt the facilitation networks, as he called it of, al Qaeda to bring in foreign fighters.

He also said that, after the elections, he expects that terrorists and foreign fighters will continue the violence. He expects more attacks in order that they make the effort to discredit the process and show that they can fight, General Casey saying the U.S. is just going to continue to fight alongside Iraqi forces.

He also added that, look, you know, you have to point to some of the successes that have been quite remarkable in less than three years in Iraq. He said Iraq's been liberated, has taken its own sovereignty. There was an interim government. They've written a constitution. They've approved a constitution. They've built an army, he said, and now they've elected an assembly that will permanently run Iraq over the next years.

And this he said all happened around a context of enormous violence and an insurgency.

We're going to continue to monitor his comments and bring you anything else that he adds.

Well moving on, a bipartisan group of lawmakers just emerged from the White House just a short while ago and offered their thoughts on the election and what's to come in Iraq. Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman says that he believes the election is a turning point for President Bush.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN (D), CONNECTICUT: I believe the president has begun a new conversation with the American people. Looking back and talking again about why we went into Iraq to overthrow Saddam Hussein, why we remain there, why success in Iraq is so critical to America's national security, and how we intend to win.

And in my opinion the difference in this town, here in Washington, on the war is not between Democrats and Republicans. It's between people who believe essentially we've already lost in Iraq and it's time to get out, and most of the rest of us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VERJEE: Republicans Senator John McCain was asked about violence that always accompanies the political process.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: Now let's see what happens in the next couple of weeks. But in a period of the run-up when you might expect the insurgents to try to disrupt the elections, they were either unable or unwilling to do so. So this may be kind of a tipping point in that direction. And I emphasize, may.

As you know, I think we need to leave the level of troops we have there. And I think that it's a mistake to start drawing down prematurely. But I am guardedly optimistic. And Sunni turnout yesterday was also an important step forward.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: U.S. President George W. Bush has agreed to a measure that will ban all U.S. personnel from cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of detainees. Getting Mr. Bush's acceptance, though, was not easy.

As Dana Bash reports, agreement in the end appears to follow a pattern set by the administration.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DANA BASH, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It was vintage Bush, in the Oval Office with Senator John McCain claiming victory.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We've been happy to work with him to achieve a common objective. And that is to make it clear to the world that this government does not torture.

BASH: Smiles and compromise, after months of resisting and threatening to veto McCain's rules for treating detainees in the war on terror.

It has become a Bush trademark: oppose proposals he views as congressional meddling, resist, but ultimately, if left no choice politically, compromise and act as if it was his plan all along.

After September 11, the president wanted homeland security run from the White House. Senator Joseph Lieberman and others demanded a new cabinet level agency. The president said no, resisted for months, then counted the votes and not only gave in but began touting the new Department of Homeland Security as one of his proudest accomplishments.

BUSH: Combining under one roof, with a clear chain of command, many agencies responsible for protecting our nation.

BASH: The 9/11 Commission was another example. Mr. Bush initially wanted a congressional review that would have been largely out of the public eye.

BUSH: It's best for the ongoing war against terror that the investigation be done in the intelligence committee.

BASH: But 9/11 victims joined congressional lobbying and six months later the president signed on.

The president wanted to keep some records from the commission and then balked at calls for then national security adviser Condoleezza Rice to testify in public. Again, pressure, then compromise, then embrace it as your own, as Mr. Bush does now in speaking of the sweeping intelligence reforms born out of the 9/11 Commission's work.

BUSH: I'm also responsible for fixing what went wrong by reforming our intelligence capabilities. And we're doing just that.

BASH (on camera): This latest compromise was forced not only by the persistence of Senator McCain with most of Congress behind him, but by the toll the already battered U.S. image is taking around the world because of allegations of torture and inhuman treatment at Guantanamo Bay and other prisons.

Dana Bash, CNN, the White House.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HOLMES: Don't go away. Still to come right here on YOUR WORLD TODAY.

VERJEE: Politicians in the U.S. and elsewhere are declaring the elections a victory for Iraq. But do the hundreds of election monitors on the ground think it was a free and fair election? We're going to have a guest, and they will fill us in.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VERJEE: Hello and welcome back to CNN International.

HOLMES: You are watching an hour of the top stories from throughout the world.

Well, the non-profit IFES Center for Transitional and Post- Conflict Governance helped Iraqi officials prepare for Iraq's historic parliamentary elections. The group's Denise Dauphinais joins us now live from Washington.

How do you think it went?

DENISE DAUPHINAIS, IFES CENTER FOR TRANSITIONAL AND POST-CONFLICT GOVERNANCE: Well, we think it went pretty well, Michael. We are happy that things went off quite well, better I think, than January, smoother, I think, than the referendum in October.

HOLMES: What -- was anything real concerning? There was -- there was no real concern that things were improper, but was there anything that worried you?

DAUPHINAIS: Well, in an environment like Iraq, you always are worried about the normal sorts of problems that you have with a large- scale election, which has to do with logistics and the materials arriving on time. Did the workers show up on time? And those sorts of procedural things.

And although we had a few issues beyond the ordinary that we see in elections, particularly transitional elections.

And in a place like Iraq, with the security environment that's there, you always worry about violence and other incidents. But yesterday, from all reports, went -- went very well.

HOLMES: Were you surprised at the turnout, particularly from Sunni? I don't think there's any figures at the moment, but it was certainly more than people thought.

DAUPHINAIS: Actually, I'm not surprised. The indications that we were getting with interactions with various Sunni groups and with just every day Iraqis and voters out there was that the Sunni community really wanted to participate in these elections, that they do see the political process in Iraq as an alternative, a viable alternative to violence.

And the fact that they would come out in numbers this large was not particularly surprising. But it was extremely gratifying.

HOLMES: You work with post-conflict governance. That's my next question. I tell you, the one thing about this election, it was perhaps, if I can say, a little too Democratic. Hundreds of candidates, dozens of mini coalitions going on. It could be mid-year before they can work out a cabinet.

How difficult is that going to be in terms of organization? Is it destabilizing, in a way, to take that long?

DAUPHINAIS: Well, I think in a transitional environment, one where, like Iraq, where there are a multiplicity of voices, there are the three big groups that we all hear about, the Shia, Sunni and Kurds. But there's a multiplicity of other groups there that are smaller, the Turkmen, the Syrian, Chaldeans and other groups. They all need to be represented, especially at this early stage of Iraq's return to self-governance.

So I do think you might be right. It might take them awhile to sort out once the council of representatives is seated, who is going to be president and all of the other offices that they have to fill within that body. But I think at this stage of things, the more groups that are represented, the better, the more voices that are heard, the better.

HOLMES: All right, Denise Dauphinais, thanks so much.

DAUPHINAIS: Thank you, Michael.

HOLMES: All right. Going to take a break now. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VERJEE: Cheering erupted as this plane made an emergency landing on Venezuela's Margarita Island. It had taken off from the Venezuelan capital of Caracas and had trouble with its landing gear. The plane, which had 40 passengers on board, landed safety, and no injuries are reported -- Michael.

HOLMES: All right, time for us now to check on what's moving the markets in the U.S. and Europe. Gerri Willis is in New York to fill us in. Red, green, what's going on? (STOCK REPORT)

HOLMES: All right, thank you, Gerri.

Now coming up a little later, we're going to have a live interview with Andrea Koppel about the changes to the Patriot Act and what's going on, on the floor in Congress in the Senate. We're going to be back in a moment, though.

VERJEE: And we're also going to talk to the emergency relief coordinator for the United Nations, Jan Egeland.

And later, it's called a Jib-Jab, a musical revenue that reviews the political events of the last year. You're watching CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HOLMES: Welcome back, everyone, to YOUR WORLD TODAY on CNN International. I'm Michael Holmes.

VERJEE: And I'm Zain Verjee. Here are some of the top stories we're following. Millions of ballots are being counted in Iraq after the country's largely peaceful parliamentary election. Iraqi officials say preliminary estimates say more than two-thirds of eligible voters cast ballots. Strong turnout by Sunni Arabs was reported, raising hopes that participation may calm the insurgency.

HOLMES: One of the most controversial laws to come out of the 9/11 attacks faced a crucial vote in the U.S. Senate. Let's get result now of the Senate vote on reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act.

Andrea Koppel is in Washington. She has more. There was talk of filibusters and all sorts of things. What happened, Andrea?

ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Michael, the filibuster prevailed. The Republican leadership was unable to get the 60 votes that would have been necessary to cut off debate and move to an up-or- down vote on the floor. That puts the immediate future of the Patriot Act really under a big question mark. It's supposed to expire at the end of this month, on December 31st.

We heard the Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist earlier today saying that there would be no extension. That would be approved by the leadership or by President Bush. There had been some talk, perhaps, of a three month extension, maybe a six-month extension or even a year extension. But clearly, the majority leader ruling that out.

Now, there are a couple of other options right now. We still need to find out whether or not Bill Frist, who had the parliamentary option of changing his vote once he realized that his move to cut off debate had failed. He could change his vote from a yes to a no. That would give him the option, if he so chooses, to bring this back up again next year. In another words, some time in January. According to a senior Republican aide our Ed Henry spoke to, Senator Frist said that he would have been prepared to make that move -- we don't know whether or not he has -- and then let the Democrats stew, according to this aide, over the next several weeks when they go home for their Christmas holiday in the hopes that their constituencies would turn up the heat on them.

Senator Frist saying that he's going to be declaring, if the filibuster prevailed as it has, that the Democrats are guilty of pushing, quote, "unilateral disarmament in the war on terror." Remember the Patriot Act had a number of provisions in which the government would be able to do things like eavesdrop on your conversations. They'd be able to send a security letter for information, what's known as the SLI, and they would be able to search people's homes, all without notifying the target for 30 days.

Clearly, Democrat Russ Feingold and other Republicans who joined him have the majority, Michael. And so the future of the Patriot Act right now hangs in the balance -- Michael.

HOLMES: There was some furious lobbying by the administration to get this renewed. What sort of damage does it potentially do to the administration?

KOPPEL: Well, we heard President Bush on Thursday, just yesterday in an 11th-hour push, appeal to Democrats and Republicans to support this, saying that the Patriot Act was crucial -- a crucial tool in the war on terror ever since 9/11.

I've just learned, Michael, that Senator Frist did vote no, changed his vote, which would mean that he now has the option of bringing the Patriot Act back up when the 109th Congress resumes some time next month. So at this point it appears that the Patriot Act, I believe -- we need to confirm this -- would expire at the end of this month, and Senator Frist would have the option then of bringing it back up to see if he again would have the vote to cut off debate.

Another option would be that this would go back into committee and that the Democrats and are Republicans will have to try to hammer out the various restrictions that a number of members were objecting to -- Michael.

HOLMES: All right, Andrea Koppel in Washington. Thanks, Andrea.

And from the "New York Times" newspaper, a report that President Bush secretly -- as Andrea was talking about -- this authorizing the National Security Agency, a very top-secret agency, to eavesdrop on Americans and others in the United States for signs of terrorist activity.

Now let's go to the White House spokesman, Scott McClellan. He's holding a briefing at the White House. Let's listen.

SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN: ... and ongoing intelligence operations that are aimed at saving lives. And there's a reason why we don't get into discussing ongoing intelligence activities: because it could compromise our efforts to prevent attacks from happening.

And we are doing all we can to disrupt plots and prevent attacks from happening. And it could telegraph to the enemy what we are doing.

The enemy wants to know exactly what we are doing to go after them and prevent attacks from happening. And we don't want to do anything to compromise sources and methods.

QUESTION: Right, but all I asked you was whether it was your position that it always requires a court order for surveillance of U.S. citizens?

MCCLELLAN: Well, what it's getting into -- again, let me reiterate, the president is firmly committed to upholding our Constitution and upholding people's civil liberties. That is something he has always kept in mind as we have moved forward from the attacks of September 11th, to do everything within our power to prevent attacks from happening. It's very important to him. We are meeting both those priorities. Those are two important priorities.

Now, in terms of talking about the National Security Agency or matters like that, that would be getting in and talking about ongoing intelligence activities. And they are classified for a reason, because they go to the issue of sources and methods, and protecting the American people.

MCCLELLAN: And because they're classified, I'm not able to get into discussing those issues from this podium.

QUESTION: Is it your position that the congressional authorization for war against Al Qaeda in 2001 allows the president to take some steps to collect intelligence?

MCCLELLAN: I just told you why I'm not going to get into discussing ongoing intelligence activities.

QUESTION: You mean you cannot say whether it's lawful to spy on Americans or not?

MCCLELLAN: We have a Constitution and we have laws...

QUESTION: We're not asking for any details. We're asking you...

MCCLELLAN: That's why I'm making a broad statement to let you know...

QUESTION: Very broad. Is it legal to spy on Americans?

MCCLELLAN: We have a Constitution and we have laws in place and we follow those.

QUESTION: So you say you are abiding by the law?

MCCLELLAN: Absolutely. And there's congressional oversight of intelligence activities. There's other oversight of intelligence activities.

QUESTION: How many secret orders have been issued by this president?

MCCLELLAN: I think the American people appreciate what we do to work within the law to prevent attacks from happening.

The Patriot Act is being debated right now.

QUESTION: It's never been within the law to spy on Americans.

MCCLELLAN: But the Patriot Act is something that members of the Senate are debating right now. The House has already acted on it. And the House, in a strong bipartisan fashion, renewed these vital tools for our law enforcement intelligence officers to protect the American people. This law has helped prevent attacks from happening by breaking up terrorist cells in parts of the United States.

And while the Senate didn't pass the vote that they were looking to do right now, the leadership is committed to moving forward on this. They're still in for some more time this year. We urge them to get this done now and pass that legislation.

The president's made it very clear that he is not interested in signing any short-term renewal. The terrorist threats will not expire at the end of this year. They won't expire in three months. We need to move forward and pass this critical legislation.

QUESTION: To what extent is the administration confident that it has maintained communications with the necessary committees of jurisdiction on the Hill so that they're not going to claim that they were kept in the dark on this?

Are you prepared to assert from the podium today that there is the necessary communication with the Hill so that their oversight remains intact?

MCCLELLAN: Yes. We stay in contact with members of Congress, the appropriate members of Congress who are responsible for these matters on intelligence activities.

MCCLELLAN: I noticed that report pointed something like that out within it.

QUESTION: To the extent that there has been, quote, "shock and dismay" already expressed from the floor of the U.S. Senate this morning, does that run contrary to your understanding of some of the communications that would allow them their oversight jurisdiction?

MCCLELLAN: Well, let me again just repeat that the Congress does have an important oversight role. We stay in touch with them on intelligence activities.

We all share the responsibility of doing our part to prevent attacks and save lives. And we will continue to work with members of Congress on those efforts. QUESTION: Two questions, writing opinion for the year and issues of (inaudible) today on two subjects: one on international terrorism. How the president will have or what kind of message he will have for the world leaders as far as terrorism and terrorists are concerned in the future and coming new year? And what they can do and what the president will do to protect other nations?

MCCLELLAN: What message does he have for, you said, terrorists or...

QUESTION: For the world leaders, what they can do, how they can work together to...

MCCLELLAN: Well, we remain engaged in an ongoing war on terrorism. And it's critical that we all work together to do everything within our power and within our laws to protect our citizens.

We are making good progress. But this is a long war against a deadly and dangerous enemy, an enemy that wants to strike us again, wants to strike America again, wants to strike the civilized world, and they have.

We must continue to take the fight to them. We must continue to work to spread freedom, to bring hope and opportunity to troubled regions, in order to prevail in this war on terrorism. And we will win.

And the terrorists need to be reminded that they cannot shake our will.

HOLMES: Scott McClellan there, White House spokesman, speaking to reporters, saying on that issue of who's been spied on by whom and the report in "The New York Times," basically saying he's not going to talk about it, he's not going to discuss ongoing intelligence activities. Doesn't want to tell the enemy, he said, what we're doing. He did say that the U.S. is trying to do everything it can to prevent attacks from happening while preserving civil liberties.

Senators were a little bit more concerned when elements of the Patriot Act were up for renewal in the Senate today. It was rejected, a crushing blow really to the Bush administration and Republican leaders.

Scott McClellan saying urging senators to reconsider that. OK, we are going to take a short break now, aren't we?

VERJEE: We are, and when we come back we're going to talk to Jan Egeland. He's the U.N.'s emergency-relief coordinator, and we're going to be discussing a new emergency fund aimed at providing relief to follow natural disasters. We'll be back in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VERJEE: Former U.S. president George H.W. Bush now has more on his plate. Bush has been chosen by U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to be the special envoy for relief and reconstruction in Pakistan and in Kashmir. An earthquake devastated the region two months ago. Bush, along with former President Bill Clinton, has also led the way on tsunami relief.

Following a year of disasters, the U.N. General Assembly has established a central emergency response fund. The goal is basically to create quicker, more predictable U.N. funding for various crises. Jan Egeland is the emergency-relief coordinator for the U.N., and he joins us now.

Mr. Egeland, thanks for being with us.

Where is this money coming from?

JAN EGELAND, U.N. RELIEF COORDINATOR: This money is coming from generous donors. So far the pledges are from European nations. We have $175 million pledged to the fund. We hope to reach up to $500 million altogether. This is money we need to start up immediately when there is a disaster. Tell our people on the ground, start saving lives immediately; we have the money for you to start.

VERJEE: OK, you say this money has been pledged. Are you confident that they'll pay up?

EGELAND: I think they will indeed pay up. The United Kingdom, Sweden, Norway, Netherlands, Ireland, all of these with generous pledges have said it will come in December, January, March. And the fund will be operational as of March. We really needed the fund this year. We didn't have it. We were too late. Many places as an international community, because we didn't have the predictable funding that you just mentioned, Zain.

VERJEE: How do you decide, then, which disaster, which crises, be it Niger, or Pakistan, or Darfur in western Sudan gets the money from this fund? What are your parameters for that?

EGELAND: All major sudden onset disasters, the earthquakes, the terrible floods and so on would get money within 72 hours. After we have the initial assessments on the ground, we will say this is for telecommunications, this is for logistics, this is food, this is for shelter and so on.

We will also use the fund for some of the chronically underfunded emergencies. Malavi, Niger, some of these places who do not easily get into the limelight, but where people die because we do not have enough money for an otherwise very effective relief effort.

VERJEE: Jan Egeland, the emergency-relief coordinator for the United Nations. Thank you, Jan.

EGELAND: Thank you.

HOLMES: All right, don't go away.

VERJEE: We are going to have a treat in store for you when we return. HOLMES: Oh, goody.

VERJEE: We like treats, especially around this time of the year, right?

HOLMES: Yes, the people at JibJab have been at it again, and they have outdone themselves, if we may say so.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HOLMES: Welcome back, everyone. Well, the threat of a transit strike looms for New York City, one that could cost the local economy $400 million a day. That's the estimate. Such a strike would be illegal, however.

CNN's Allen Chernoff joins us now from New York with the latest. Allen, I can't imagine, a transit strike in New York. What a place to have one.

ALLEN CHERNOFF, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Michael, certainly it would be crippling for the city, because people are very dependent here upon the subways and the buses. And the situation right now is not looking very good. No strike today. It had been threatened for today.

But early this morning, the Transit Workers Union rejected the latest offer from the Metropolitan Transit Authority. And within the last half hour, the chairman of the MTA said that was the final offer. There is no more room for negotiation, the transit had said.

As a result, we have an impasse here. And the tension appears to be heightened, as well, because the union is now threatening to begin a strike against two private bus lines. Shop stewards are saying that strike would begin Sunday night at midnight. These are two bus lines that are to be acquired by the MTA. And the threat of a strike against the entire system still looms -- Michael.

HOLMES: And Allen, the impact not just on millions of New Yorkers in terms of convenience, but the economy?

CHERNOFF: Clearly. This is the holiday shopping season. I'm actually standing only one block away from Macy's, which advertises itself the world's largest store. So many, many people come into Manhattan, of course, to do their holiday shopping. So a particularly precarious time for the New York City economy.

HOLMES: All right, Allen Chernoff in New York. Hope you can get home. Thanks, Allen.

CHERNOFF: Well, the year is ending on at least one bright note.

VERJEE: There is a new JibJab out.

HOLMES: Yes, you've heard of this. JibJab's amazing. The people who put out those funny animated online songs, they found plenty material to spoof in the past year, with a focus on one prominent character.

VERJEE: So without further adieu, here it is now.

(MUSIC)

HOLMES: Imagine the work that goes into that. Not to mention, it's just a clever, clever song. It's jibjab.com, by the way. J-I-B- J-A-B dot-com. And thanks for letting us play it.

VERJEE: We'll probably play it again. This is YOUR WORLD TODAY. I'm Zain Verjee.

HOLMES: And I'm Michael Holmes. Thanks for watching.

(MUSIC)

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