say, is we should not leave out and we have not left out where any
of this leads to.

BLITZER: Senator Biden, if the U.S. does move against other
countries, whether Iraq or Iran or Syria perhaps, the coalition that
the president is attempting to put together would crumble very
quickly.

BIDEN: Look, Wolf, I think we have to do what we can prove was
done to us. I think we'll keep the coalition together if in fact we're
able to demonstrate clear evidence that, wherever we go is the
reason we're going there is we have proof of it. I think the coalition
will stay together.

I don't know anybody talking about going into Iran, I don't know
anybody talking about going in to Syria. I have heard discussion
about the possibility of Iraq being involved.

I think we should -- as Senator Shelby as I said, he and I shouldn't
really be commenting on that at this moment. But wherever the
evidence leads, I think you'll be able to keep the coalition.

BLITZER: Senator Biden, on the issue of Saudi Arabia and its
cooperation, is it your sense that the Saudis are doing whatever the
United States is asking them to do?

BIDEN: I predict to you they'll do whatever we ask of them. I
predict also they will have to hedge what they say now. I don't think
we should ask them publicly to do more than they need to risk
doing. But I am absolutely confident that, notwithstanding some
news reports that have been out, they will allow us access to and we
will be permitted to carry on any operation that we deem necessary
with their cooperation. BLITZER: Senator Shelby, you're the vice
chairman of the intelligence committee. You've been critical of
George Tenet, the CIA director, for the failure to appreciate what
was about to happen in these attacks. The president and vice
president seem to still have strong confidence in George Tenet.
Have you lost confidence in him?

SHELBY: Well, I believe now and I've always believed that we
need a strong, very strong and powerful person heading up the CIA.
I like George Tenet personally, I think he has some good attributes.
I don't believe he's this man. But ultimately that's up to the president
of the United States. And right now what we need to do is win this
terrorist war and not blame everybody.

BLITZER: Senator Biden, I want to show you yet a third number
from our new CNN-USA Today poll. It's the job, how the president
is doing in his job. Look at this number. It's the first time in the
history of this Gallup poll that a president has gotten a 90 percent
job approval rating. Only 6 percent of the American people
disapprove of the way the president is doing his job right now.

By the way, just for historic reference, his father got 89 percent, or
88 or 89 percent during the Gulf War. Ninety percent job approval
rate for President Bush. What do you say about that?

BIDEN: Count me in the 90 percent. And I think the difference here
is, not only is he doing a good job, not since Franklin Roosevelt has
any president been in power when in fact the United States has been
struck by a foreign entity or a foreign group of foreign individuals.

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPT/20010926/00000000000000000000000000000000

10/10/01

["[L.C.]", "MAYOR RUDOLPH GIULIANI, NEW YORK: I am told that there is very little hope, but that they wanted two weeks or a little more than that in order to make certain that they could find people. And we're still within that timeframe, and the experts say that there are still situations in which people have survived for this length of time, I think, survived even beyond the two-week period.", "GIULIANI: So, the reality is that we'll continue the operation exactly the way it is now for quite some time, because the same things that we have to do in order to react if we should be able to find anyone alive, those are exactly the same things we have to do in order to recover human remains in the very difficult circumstances that these men are facing in doing the recovery effort.", "So I don't know the best way to describe it except to say the operation will remain exactly the same for quite some time for the foreseeable future. And as time goes by, obviously the chance of finding anyone diminishes greatly.", "BLITZER: What is the key priority right now in New York?", "GIULIANI: Beyond the rescue and recovery effort right at the immediate site of the attack, the immediate priority is to appropriately mourn and pray for those that we have lost, and then, with that strength, to go back to normal. Things are open for business, people should not be afraid. We should -- if we feel afraid, the way to deal with our fear is to do the things we would normally do anyway.", "GIULIANI: People should be going to plays and they should be going to movies and they should be going to school and going to work and doing the things that they normally do.", "People are constantly asking me, \"What can I do to help?\" And probably the thing that everybody can do to help is go back to normal, be Americans, do the things we normally do and show these terrorist cowards that they can't stop us, they can't affect us.", "It doesn't mean you don't mourn and it doesn't mean you don't cry. You're going to do that anyway. But there's time for crying and mourning, and there's also time for getting back to our normal way of life, and that's what we should be doing now. We should work at it.", "BLITZER: But you know, Mr. Mayor, there are people that are still frightened out there, especially in New York, especially around some of the other landmarks in New York. Is there any evidence whatsoever, any intelligence that's been provided to you to suggest that those fears are warranted?", "GIULIANI: The fears are warranted in light of the attack and just the obvious nature of what we're facing. So I can't tell anyone not to be afraid. What I can tell them is to overcome their fear, not let that fear paralyze them, not let that fear stop them.", "Everything is being done to protect the citizens of New York and the citizens of the United States by President Bush, in the case of New York by Governor Pataki, by me, by the police, by the National Guard, military surveillance. Everything is being done that can be done in a free society and even more than would normally be the case to protect everyone.", "So people are as safe as you can be in life. You can't -- you never want to be in a situation where you're not as safe as you can be in life. So people have", "http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCEND/safety/in life/00000000000000000000000000

[L.C.]

to go about their normal way of life, and there's certainly enough
safety for people to do that.

**BLITZER:** Last Sunday on this program you made the same point about trying to get back to some normal day-to-day activities, go see a play, go see a ball game. In this past week, have you seen some evidence that that is, in fact, happening?

**GIULIANI:** It's happening slowly, but it's happening. You know, on Friday night the Mets and the Atlanta Braves played at Shea Stadium and 40,000 people-plus showed up.

Last night the Metropolitan Opera gave a benefit concert, raised $2.6 million for the families of the people affected by this. And there were -- not only did they sell out, but they had 3,000 people outside the Metropolitan Opera that watched it in open air. And I went out to see them, and I was very heartened by that. I said, "New Yorkers aren't afraid to go out. They're out in large, large numbers. They're overwhelming the Plaza."

So I do think things are going back to normal. But it's understandable. And I think some of this is -- I think some of what we're seeing is not just fear. I don't think fear is the primary thing here. I think people are mourning. I think we are in a state of tremendous sorrow, and we're working our way through the sorrow. And I believe we're doing it as quickly and as effectively as we can. I'm very, very proud of the people of New York. I've never been prouder.

**BLITZER:** Mr. Mayor, we have seen some of the reports, and they're pretty disturbing, about looting that's going on around ground zero. What can you tell about that?

**GIULIANI:** Any theft that goes on down there is a sacrilege, as far as I'm concerned, and outrageous. But the reality is there hasn't been much. Any individual act is going to get a lot of attention, as it should. It's going to get a lot of attention from the police; we've arrested people. One of the deputy police commissioners, whose used to be on my security detail and is one of my closest friends, made an arrest himself the other day of people trying to steal watches. In my presence, two days ago, someone was arrested who was there in an unauthorized fashion trying to steal things.

But it's very, very isolated in light of the way something like that could happen. I would not describe it as looting. I don't think we've had that. I think what we've had is some individual acts of theft, and they've been more than containable by the police and the National Guard.

**BLITZER:** And we know that you're going to be attending a prayer service -- a prayer for America at Yankee Stadium later today. What do you hope to accomplish at that event?

**GIULIANI:** I believe it's very helpful to see the leaders of all the different religious faiths, each of them represented there, the Jewish religion and the Muslim religion and the Catholic, Protestant, various Christian religions represented -- the Orthodox faith. They'll all be represented, they'll all be praying together, demonstrating in song and in act and in prayer the fact that we're all united as decent, good human beings, that we're all united as children of God, that good people all around the world and of every different faith are together praying to God to unite us and to give us strength. I think that's what we're all about.

http://www.cnn.com/TRAIS/RT/PT5000000000000000000000000000000

10/10/01

[Lc]

And I also think it's a way in which the families who are going through this, all of us who are going through this, understand we're not alone. We're all together, and if we have to, kind of, lean on each other to gain the strength to move forward, there are plenty of people to lean on it.

I certainly have had them. I've been leaning on very, very strong shoulders, and I'm not doing this alone by any means. I need a lot of help, and I'm getting it.

BLITZER: And a lot of people are getting help from you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you so much for joining us once again on this Sunday. Good luck to you.

GIULIANI: Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: And just ahead, many economists are saying the United States and much of the world are now in a recession. Can the economy rebound in war time? We'll get an outlook from two top American businessmen. LATE EDITION will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: Someone conducted an act of war on us. Our economy has slowed way down and this is an emergency.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: President Bush earlier in the week talking about the impact of the terrorist attacks on what was already a sagging U.S. economy. Welcome back to LATE EDITION.

We now get some perspective on America's financial health from two guests. Joining us from New York is Robert Hormats. He's the vice chairman of Goldman Sachs International, also a member of the board of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Here in Washington, Bill Marriott. He's chairman and CEO of the Marriott International Corporation.

Gentlemen, thank you very much for joining us.

Mr. Marriott, first to you, you had two hotels right there at the ground zero vicinity. What happened to your hotels?

J.W. MARRIOTT JR., CEO, MARRIOTT: Our World Trade Center hotel was right between the two towers, the towers fell on the hotel and literary destroyed it.

BLITZER: And the second?

MARRIOTT: The second hotel was partially damaged with windows going out and that type of thing, but no structural damage. We hope to get it open in the next three to six months.

BLITZER: And you're going to reopen even in that location?

MARRIOTT:

http://www.cnn.com/TRADE/ARTS/0109/23/le.00.html

10/10/01

[L.C.]

**BLITZER:** What about casualties? What about missing, killed, injured? **MARRIOTT:** Well, we have two managers that are missing; they stayed behind to make sure that everybody was out of the building, and they just didn't get out soon enough and they're still missing.

**BLITZER:** So they're missing and presumed dead. It's almost a miracle, everybody else, all the guests in the hotel were evacuated?

**MARRIOTT:** As far as we know, we went room by room with the fire and police department, we cleared the hotel as soon as the strike hit, we evacuated the hotel and as far as we know, everybody -- most everybody got out.

**BLITZER:** Robert Hormats, a lot of financial institutions were located down there at the World Trade Center, the complex, Goldman Sachs, you had any business dealings down there?

**ROBERT HORMATS, VICE CHAIRMAN, GOLDMAN SACHS INTERNATIONAL:** Yes, our offices are nearby, we weren't damaged. We were quite blessed. But we had a lot of friends and colleagues and other firms who are lost and are missing now, and there's a lot of mourning going on in the financial community and Goldman Sachs and other firms for those people.

It's been a tough time. We were up and running when the markets opened Monday, thanks to a great many people working 24 hours a day and so we're ready now. But the mourning goes on. I have some memorial services to go to next week and I think we all do. It's a very tough time for everyone in the financial community.

**BLITZER:** How -- Mr. Marriott, how tough is it right now for the hotel industry?

**MARRIOTT:** It's very tough. We rely tremendously on air travel and, as you know, air travel is way down. And so we're going to have a very tough September.

However, bookings are holding for October. Many of the major groups that we have booked on our books in our major convention hotels are still there. We've called them, they say they intend to come to their meetings. And that's the whole point here is we got to get America moving, we got to get them back on the road again, we got to get people feeling good about traveling again.

**BLITZER:** Well, on that point, Mr. Hormats, how do you get the American public off of its edge, if you will? A lot of people are afraid to get on a plane, are afraid to leave their homes, if you will. What do you do about that?

**HORMATS:** Well, I think there are a number of things that are needed to boost confidence -- personal confidence and economic confidence. Clearly I think from an economic point of view, the government has to do the right things and I believe is doing them. Federal Reserve's creating a lot of liquidity and I think we're going to see big fiscal stimulus over the next several months with tax cuts and additional spending. But the other side of the confidence factor is the government has to demonstrate that it can launch a very effective set of actions against terrorism at home and abroad. And when you combine the economic measures with those security measures, that, I think, can help boost confidence over the medium

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSPRESS/2001/09/28/00.html

10/10/01

[L]

BLITZER: Mr. Marriott, what do you want, if anything, the government to do as far as your narrow industry is concerned, tourism, hotels, airline?

MARRIOTT: Well, first of all, I'd like to see them get Reagan National Airport open back up again.

BLITZER: Here in Washington?

MARRIOTT: In Washington, right, because if they do, I think this sends a very strong signal to the travelers that this airports are safe again and that National is safe, and they can provide the right kind of security at National. If we can get that open and going, that would be great.

And we also have to be concerned about the statements that many of our officials are making about impending terrorist events of which they don't have the backup information to sustain. Like, for instance, last week there were three cities that the government said were possible targets for an immediate attack last week, and, of course, it proved to be unreliable.

BLITZER: And that scares people from visiting those...

MARRIOTT: That scares people everywhere.

BLITZER: But this bailout, the $15 billion bailout of the airline industry, is presumably going to spill over and help your industry.

MARRIOTT: Well the airlines can stay in business, which they have to do, we'll be fine. As they go up, but they've been taking a while to come back.

BLITZER: Bob Hormats, I want you to listen to what Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, said earlier this week at a Senate hearing looking ahead on the strength of the U.S. economy. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALAN GREENSPAN, FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN: As we struggle to make sense of our profound loss and its immediate consequences for the economy, we must not lose sight of our longer-run prospects which have not been significantly diminished by these terrible events.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: And in a new CNN-"USA Today"-Gallup Poll just out, we asked the American people how confident or not confident they were in the long-term prospects of the economy. Look at this: 91 percent of the American people still express confidence in the long-term prospect of the U.S. economy; only 8 percent are not confident. Are they overly optimistic, in your professional assessment?

HORMATS: I think it shows how wise the American people are. The American economy is going through some very tough times. Unemployment's up, consumer confidence is down, people have lost a lot of money on Wall Street in their stock portfolios. But the underlying economy still has enormous strength and resiliency.

http://www.cnn.com/TRADE/0109/23/00.cfm?mod=part001

10/10/01

[L]

years. The banking system in this country is much stronger than
anywhere else in the world. We have a big increase in productivity
over -- in the course of the 1990s -- much of it is going to continue.
So there are strengths.

There are temporary disruptions. Those disruptions could slow the
economy down for two or three quarters perhaps, but there's a lot of
resiliency and we will come out of it, assuming that the government
does the right thing, that consumers begin to go back to more
normal kinds of activities, as Mayor Giuliani has suggested. And
also assuming the government can take effective action against
terrorism and make Americans feel more secure. Those things are
important. If that occurs -- if they occur, then I think we'll go back
to a much stronger economic performance sometime next year.

BLITZER: And, Mr. Marriott, the fact is that Bob Hormats talks
about temporary disruptions, but I think in the last week or so alone,
if my math is correct, there were 115,000 layoffs, jobs mostly in the
airline industry. I'm sure you're laying off people in your industry.
How many are you laying off at Marriott?

MARRIOTT: Well, we're rescheduling our people or putting people
in two and three days a week and trying to retain as many of our
associates as we can because we think this is going to come back.

BLITZER: You think the economy will come back?

MARRIOTT: Right.

BLITZER: How long do you think it will take?

MARRIOTT: We think travel will come back. Well, the airlines are
predicting a 60 percent drop in September, which is probably about
right in terms of air travel.

MARRIOTT: We're predicting a 40 percent drop through the
balance of the year, October, November, December. We think that
may be a little too tough. But we're hanging in there at about maybe
a 25 to 30 percent drop.

BLITZER: Bob Hormats, a lot of nervous traders on the stock
market right now. Billions -- billions if not trillions of dollars in
equity have been lost. How nervous should the average person
watching this program be right now about their 401(k)s, their stock
portfolios in the short and long term? HORMATS: Well, many
people certainly have lost a great deal of money, and their 401(k)s,
for the average citizen, are much lower now than they were six or
eight months ago.

But it really depends on the long-term perspective of the investor.
Someone who needs the money right away should be making an
effort to be more diversified, but if you have a longer-term outlook,
the stock market historically has come back. It may take some time,
it may not come back to the boom period we had in most of the
1990s, but the probability is very high that it will come back.

But the point -- the broader point is that diversification is extremely
important if you're an investor. And a lot of people had concentrated
a large portion of their portfolios in the high-flying technology
stocks when more diversification would have been appropriate. And
I think that's the point to emphasize going forward.

http://www.cnn.com/TRADEMARKS/SETTLEMENTS/20010303/00000000-00000000-0000-0000-0000 but be diversified, so that your

10/10/01

[L]

risk in any particular sector is reduced.

BLITZER: OK, Bob Hormats, always good to have you on LATE EDITION.

HORMATS: Thank you.

BLITZER: Mr. Marriott, welcome; this is your first time on our program. We hope that you'll be back. And, of course, our deepest condolences to those Marriott employees who are still missing, presumed dead. Thanks so much for joining us.

MARRIOTT: Thank you very much, Wolf.

BLITZER: Thank you.

And, when we return, the challenges and potential pitfalls of America's new war. We'll talk with two men who've served as close advisers to presidents: former Nixon and Ford Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and former Carter National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back.

Joining us now with insight on how the United States should proceed in its new war are two former president advisers: in Kent, Connecticut, Henry Kissinger; he served as national security adviser to former president Nixon, later as secretary of state to both former presidents Nixon and Ford. And here in Washington, Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, served as national security adviser to former President Carter.

Gentlemen, always good to have both of you with us. And, Dr. Kissinger, let me begin with you. Some are saying this new war against terrorism could go on for years and years and years and years. Is this, in effect, a new Cold War facing the United States?

HENRY KISSINGER, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, it's a new kind of war, and I wouldn't compare it necessarily with the confrontation with the Soviet Union, because that had a very large direct military component.

This one has a military component, but we have to be clear what the objectives are to be. One, we are to punish the perpetrators of the attack, to make it clear that you cannot attack the United States with impunity. Secondly, we have to act strongly enough, so that the moderates know that they have a permanent support of the United States. Third, we have to convey to those who support state terrorism that they will face comparable consequences. And fourth, we have to try to keep our alliances together while we do this. And those are difficult balances to strike, but they're doable, and we'll do it.

BLITZER: Dr. Brzezinski, those seem very formidable, those objectives that Dr. Kissinger just laid out. Has the United States ever fought a war like this before?

ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI, FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSLATE/TRANSLATE1.cfm?c=101&b=1&h=0&u=0 of a war, if you want to use the

10/10/01

word "war." It's a prolonged campaign.

But we have to differentiate in it different phases. The first phase is
response and retribution. And that's called for, the country expects
it, we're entitled to it, and even the world needs a demonstration of
American will.

BLITZER: All right, let me -- on that issue of retribution, what do
you specifically mean by that?

BRZEZINSKI: A strike, a strike at some of the bases and facilities. I wouldn't overpersonalize the Osama bin Laden issue, because we shouldn't measure success or failure by whether we get him right away or not.

But we ought to strike at some of the facilities. We know where they
are, not only, incidentally, in Afghanistan.

Then, beyond that -- and that will take then many more months --
we have to determine which countries have sheltered or maybe even
clandestinely supported terrorism. And if we can identify them,
we'll have to take action.

And then, last but not least, there is the long-range, worldwide effort
to tighten security, to make financial transactions more transparent,
to detect the relationship between drug trafficking and terrorism,
and in that we'll have to enlist the widest possible coalition.

BLITZER: Dr. Kissinger, as you know, the Clinton administration,
after the embassy bombings in East Africa in 1998, did strike
Osama bin Laden, targets in Afghanistan, with cruise missiles. That
proved to be very ineffective. What's to suggest an additional strike
of that kind would be any more effective this time than it was the
last time?

KISSINGER: Well, first of all, the rules of the game have changed.
Under the previous rules, the terrorists could plan their attacks,
launch them, face one or maybe two retaliatory strikes, and then go
back to business. I do not visualize that this state of retribution that
people are talking about will be confined to one strike. And, frankly,
I don't know whether it should be confined to Afghanistan alone.

And I agree that it shouldn't focus entirely on bin Laden. What we
have to do is to separate the terrorists from the states that support
them. If they become individuals looking for refuge, and fugitives
looking for survival, then, sooner or later, they are going to
disintegrate.

And that should be the focus of our campaign. And I believe that we
are capable of launching a sustained attack on these terrorist cells
that will get them on the run, either by direct attacks or by getting
the states that now support them to end their support. And we
should not let states that support them escape their responsibility by
joining the anti-terrorist coalition on paper unless they're actively
willing to do something.

BLITZER: All right. Dr. Brzezinski, does the United States know
how to fight a war like this war?

BRZEZINSKI: I think we do. And we'll also learn how to do it.

Bear in mind two factors. First of all, we have a very good national

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/01dec01.htm

10/10/01

[L]

best in many years. And that's very important. We should have
confidence...

BLITZER: So you have confidence in the people surrounding the president?

BRZEZINSKI: That's right. These are tough-minded, able and experienced people. So that's point number one.

Point number two, the country is united, and the country is
determined. And that's terribly important, because you can only do
these difficult things if the country is united.

And last but not least, we have a great deal of international support,
though we will have to differentiate carefully between real friends
and false friends.

Some countries will be in with us all the way from the start. And we
should have them from the start if we make some strikes.

And I agree with Henry, they should be serious strikes. They should
not just be some cruise missiles from afar, we should use our own
forces.

But secondly, there will be countries that will try to take us for a
ride and will try to charge us a price for their collaboration. And we
shouldn't pay them politically nor financially, because most
countries have a stake in this. And those who want to exploit this
issue for some benefit are not real friends.

BLITZER: You want to name names?

BRZEZINSKI: No. I wouldn't name names, but I will say this. For
example, I think we should welcome Russian help and work with
the Russians on this. But we shouldn't pay them politically because
a lot of these networks were established in the '70s, nurtured in the
'80s, trained and armed. And hence, the Russians now have a stake
also in dealing with this problem before turns against them with full
force.

BLITZER: Dr. Kissinger, as you well know, if these U.S. strikes
expand, let's say, beyond Afghanistan, move against Iraq, for
example, Russian support for this coalition, Chinese support,
perhaps even French support may quickly go away. How do you
deal with that problem?

KISSINGER: Well, I don't want to speculate what actions would or
would not get support. Russia, I agree completely with Zbig, has at
least as much to fear from these terror networks, I would say even
more, than we do. So I think we will keep Russian support for quite
a long while. Other countries, they don't have to support us
necessarily as long as they don't actively oppose us.

I think it is probably necessary to expand the retribution to areas
beyond Afghanistan that leads to some places where we know that
foreign terror places exist to make it clear that there are no safe
havens anymore. Now, where these are and what we do this, I think
Russia has to determine.

We have to strike a balance between looking timid and looking so
unilateral that we lose all support. But we won't lose all support, we
will lose the support of a few countries. The Europeans, in their
decisions, should know that it is not alone to New York, to a country

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/NEWS/1999/10/01/asia09.htm

10/10/01

that has massive means of retaliation, they are totally defensiveless if the United States were to quit the game out of disgust with allied support. But we have got amazing allied support, and I would count on it for a substantial period of time.

BLITZER: Dr. Brzezinski, you've heard critics say that this desire to get this coalition together, in the end, could turn against the U.S. by handcuffing the United States and not allowing the U.S. to take the kind of steps that it should take in this war.

BRZEZINSKI: I very deliberately differentiate between partners -- partners who go in with us -- and a coalition which engages collectively in all of the long-term measures that are needed. We'll have a very broad coalition because most states are interested in stability and security. But real partners, real allies will be those who are going with us when we have to make the first strikes. And I would hope that we have some allies maybe even some symbolically in first strikes.

And secondly, they will be in with us in the second very difficult phase of identifying what countries, what governments not only tolerate it but, perhaps, quietly sheltered the terrorists. Because then we'll have to make some very difficult, discriminate decisions. And I would hope that we would have allies in that as well.

But I also want to emphasize that the first strikes should not be thought of merely as involving Afghanistan. There are a lot of terrorist facilities in the Persian Gulf, Middle Eastern area. And I think we have the right, maybe even the duty, to go after some of them.

BLITZER: And where else outside of Afghanistan do you suspect they are?

BRZEZINSKI: I don't want to name countries, but some of the facilities are outside of Afghanistan. And I think since the governments concerned have not acted against them, I think some direct action by American forces -- and I emphasize forces, not just standard missiles -- would be quite justified, even, I would say, required.

BLITZER: All right. We're going to take a quick break. We have a lot more to talk about.

We'll continue our conversation with Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski when LATE EDITION returns. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: Our nation, this generation will lift a dark threat of violence from our people and our future. We will rally the world to this cause by our efforts, by our courage. We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: President Bush in his address to Congress this week. Welcome back to LATE EDITION.

We're continuing our conversation with former Nixon National
Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and

http://www.cnn.com/TALK/CRR/00008/00000.htm

10/10/01

Dr. Kissinger, King Abdullah of Jordan was on ABC's This Week earlier today. He made a statement that I want to play for you. Listen to what King Abdullah said about his nation's, his kingdom's willingness to cooperate. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KING ABDULLAH II OF JORDAN: Today, we expect everybody in the international community to decide where they're going to stand. No sitting on the fence is going to be accepted by anybody. And if you've been supporting terrorist activities in the past, it's high time that you make up your mind whether you're going to continue or stop.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Jordan clearly a moderate Arab nation, very much inclined to work together with the United States. But if you look at the rest of much of the Arab world, you're probably not going to get uncategorical statements like that.

KISSINGER: That may well be true. But the Arab countries that are not yet under terrorist control, and most of them are not, have more to lose even than the United States. And the major threat, the immediate threat, is aimed even more at them than at us. We are just a symbol of -- they want to turn us into a symbol of vulnerability so that they could go after their immediate targets.

So, I think we need to provide a checklist to these countries by which we will determine whether they are actually cooperating in the anti-terrorist campaign. And one principal component of that must be to stop the flow of financial support to terrorist groups or to charities that are fronts for terrorist groups.

We have to reassure the moderates, like the king, who was characteristically courageous, and we have to warn the ones on the fence that they have more to fear from us than from the terrorist if they continue to support the terrorists. It's a tough road, but we have no other choice.

BLITZER: Dr. Brzezinski, what should the Bush administration be telling the prime minister, Ariel Sharon, of Israel right now, in terms of dealing with this new war?

BRZEZINSKI: I would be saying that we have a common stake in isolating the terrorists, isolating them regionally, not just in the area around Israel. And that means helping the moderates and isolating the extremists. Without popular passions, the terrorists will be easier to identify and eliminate.

So I would say anything that can be done to advance the peace process. Have a meeting, let Sharon and Arafat meet. Either Sharon or Peres, but Sharon would be better actually because you'll be more dramatic. Anything of that sort would help.

It's a long road, and we will have to bear in mind that beyond dealing immediately with the most evident manifestations of terrorism wherever we can reach them, we have to undercut, in the long run, their base. Isolate the extremists by strengthening the moderates.

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/23/le.00.html

10/10/01

BLITZER; Dr. Kissinger?

[c]

KISSINGER: I would say this. The biggest progress towards Middle East peace has been made in the wake of two major American strategic successes: after the 1973 war and after the 1991 war. I think symbolic meeting between Sharon and Arafat might be very useful. But for Israel to make concessions before a big success has been achieved against terrorism, will enable the terrorists to say that after they bombed New York and killed thousands of people, America exacted concessions which we wouldn't do before and would establish anti-American terrorism as the method for dealing with the Arab-Israeli conflict.

So what we have to tell Arafat is this: If you want American support, you have to help us win the fight against terrorism. For peace, you need American diplomacy. But you can't get American diplomacy until you help us win the war.

But I would try to prevent Israel from doing things that will disturb the equilibrium, and I would not recommend that this is the time to make significant concessions.

BRZEZINSKI: Well, I certainly was not saying that, and I don't think Henry implied that I was, but it might sound that way.

KISSINGER: No, I didn't imply that you were. I said that as a general principle.

BRZEZINSKI: Right. I would say that the basic formula I would use is that Arab moderates and Israel should be on the same side because that makes it easier isolate the extremists who in turn support the terrorists. So we do have a stake and some resumption of the peace process, and the more dramatic and symbolic that is, the better.

BLITZER: Dr. Kissinger, how vulnerable, how endangered potentially is President Musharaff of Pakistan? As you know, he's working, he's cooperating with the Bush administration with the U.S. right now, but there are opponents to his policy within Pakistan itself.

KISSINGER: Well, Musharaff has taken a very courageous decision. It's also overwhelmingly in Pakistan's interests because any other decision would have totally isolated Pakistan.

Nevertheless, he is running some risk, and I think that we should show our respect for that decision, which we have done, and also that we don't forget it after this struggle is over. I think he's under some danger, but he's pursuing a course which thoughtful Pakistanis must recognize prevents the total isolation of Pakistan and undermining of Pakistan. So it's also acting in Pakistan's own interests.

BLITZER: Dr. Brzezinski, you agree with that?

BRZEZINSKI: Yes, I agree with that. I would say that there are three Muslim governments that are very vulnerable. Pakistan is one of them, and Henry has just spoken to that. Egypt is also very vulnerable. The Muslim Brotherhood has been very active in Egypt. There have been very bloody incidents in Egypt. We have to very careful because that's a major, major country, and if it were to go sour, it would vastly complicate the situation in the Middle East.

10/10/01

[Lc]

And thirdly, the Saudi regime. After all, Osama bin Laden comes from Saudi Arabia, originates in Saudi Arabia. And our concerns that perhaps some of the princes were shaken down by blackmail to provide funds that have fueled a very large-scale international terrorist network. That's a very vulnerable government.

So we're dealing here with a region that's explosive. Doesn't only contain enemies of the United States, but even friends who could be blown up in the process of helping us. So how we conduct ourselves is absolutely strategic and central.

BLITZER: Dr. Brzezinski, Dr. Kissinger, I want to thank both of you for joining us, and we'll have both of you back, of course, many times. Thank you very much.

KISSINGER: Pleasure to be on.

BLITZER: Thank you.

And just ahead, what's the best military strategy for winning America's new war? We'll talk with NATO's former supreme allied commander, as well as a former Green Beret. LATE EDITION will continue right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back to LATE EDITION.

Military experts have said the United States should expect to fight a guerrilla war in Afghanistan. Would American troops be at a disadvantage?

Here to discuss that and much more are two guests. Joining us from Little Rock, Arkansas, the former supreme allied commander of NATO, General Wesley Clark, and with us here in Washington, Bob Bevelacqua, a former Green Beret.

Gentlemen, welcome to LATE EDITION.

And, General Clark, militarily, what is the United States seeking to achieve right now?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, the first requirement is to position forces so we've got options, options to respond to the information, options to strike effectively at a time of our own choosing, as the president has said. So, right now, we're seeing the mobilization, we're seeing the deployment, we're seeing some indications of onward movement and positioning, readying to strike. That's the first requirement.

The next requirement is then to follow the intelligence. If we have indications that a strike by terrorists against us is imminent, and we can break that strike up by going after them somewhere, we should certainly do that. If we think we can disrupt the terrorist network and make them more easily detected and detained somewhere else, we should do that.

But we also have to understand, we're in a very long campaign here, and so we've got to be patient and follow the intelligence lead on this.

BLITZER: Bob Bevelacqua, you're a former Green Beret. Is this, General Clark, a good time to take a break?

http://www.cnn.com/TRAONSPECIAL/operation绿point, going into Afghanistan?

10/10/01

[L.C.]

Presumably that would be the next immediate step. Is that an achievable, win-able objective?

**BOB BEVELACQUA, FORMER GREEN BERET:** Yes, Wolf, it is. The fact that the Northern Alliance exists...

**BLITZER:** Which is the opposition to the Taliban.

**BEVELACQUA:** ... the fact that they've actually had Taliban leaders leave their organization and go to the Northern Alliance shows that there's destabilization within their organization.

I see a great SF fit for this mission with unconventional warfare. We don't have to go in and build it from scratch; the Northern Alliance currently exists. So you take advantage of the fact that there's a movement within the country that is supported by local dissidents. And I think it's a very good fit for SF.

**BLITZER:** General Clark, working together with the Northern Alliance, the guerrillas who are fighting the Taliban within Afghanistan itself, is that something the U.S. military should be engaged in?

**CLARK:** Well, it's something that we can do. The question is, is that the best way to accomplish our purpose?

I think there's no question but that the Northern Alliance has a role to play here, and if we want that to play that role, we're going to have to provide some kind of assistance to them. Whether that's with third-party assistance or us directly, we've got to leave that to the people on the ground who really know the circumstances. They're best to determine.

**BLITZER:** Bob, I want you to listen to what Secretary of State Colin Powell, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Powell, said earlier today on Meet the Press. Listen to this.

*(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)*

**COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE:** I can assure you that our military will have plans that will go against their weaknesses and not get trapped in ways that previous armies have gotten trapped in Afghanistan.

*(END VIDEO CLIP)*

**BLITZER:** You're a former special operations, a former Green Beret, what do you need, assuming you're going back in -- and you're obviously not going back in -- but what do the special operation forces need to hear from the civilian leadership to reassure them that they're not getting sucked into another Somalia or Vietnam?

**BEVELACQUA:** Wolf, there's absolutely no comparison, what's going on right now. I think we are hearing exactly what we need to hear. With the approval rating -- not that I've ever put much into statistics -- but with approval rating that Bush is getting right now, I think it's quite obvious that what he's saying is right on the mark, and there is no reason to start questioning him now.

**BLITZER:** Is that your sense, as well, General Clark, that the military, the rank and file, the guys who -- and the gals, I guess --

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPT/0109/01/09/090109transcript.shtml

10/10/01

[L.C.]

like this, are they going to be getting the kind of support they need from the civilian leadership?

CLARK: I think it's very clear we're getting support, but what we also need are clear objectives, and those haven't been made public yet. But we're certainly getting the support, the public support, that will ensure we get the leadership support.

BLITZER: As you well know, General Clark, the terrain in Afghanistan is ugly, as far as a military assault is concerned. I don't think they've lost a war, the Afghanis. They've been invaded by all sorts of forces, including the former Soviet Union, the British. It's not easy, going in there, is it?

CLARK: Well, the terrain is going to be tough in there, but if you look at the campaigns that have been fought, especially the Taliban's efforts in the mid to late '90s, the battles have really see-sawed back and forth. And so, the fact they're on the ground doesn't give them any special skill in using the terrain, it doesn't give them any real advantages over the Northern Alliance.

This is a very fluid battlefield. The mountains provide cover for the attacker as well as strength for the defender. So it plays both ways, and we're very good as using terrain.

BLITZER: All right, General Clark, Bob Bevelacqua, stand by. I want to take a quick break.

There's still another half hour of LATE EDITION ahead. We'll continue our discussion about U.S. military strategy, plus, a special conversation with Arizona senator and Vietnam veteran, Senator John McCain. LATE EDITION will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back to LATE EDITION. We'll get back to our guests in just a moment, but first, here's Carol Lin in Atlanta with a check with the latest developments.

(NEWSBREAK)

BLITZER: Now back to our conversation about U.S. military strategy in the new war against terrorism. We're talking with former NATO Supreme Allied Commander General Wesley Clark, former Green Beret Bob Bevelacqua. General Clark, we've heard the president say on few occasions, if necessary the U.S. will go in and smoke out Osama bin Laden and supporters from those caves in Afghanistan. Some have suggested that perhaps he's speaking literally of a need to go in there and smoke him out, if you will. Is there such a military contingency that you know of?

CLARK: Well, I don't know the specific plans, and if I did I wouldn't be at liberty to reveal them. But of course, we've got capacity to put people in there on the ground virtually anywhere we want. And if we don't have the plan now, we'll have it very soon. And we'll be able to support them in there.

The question is, what's the mission? What risks are we willing to take? And how do you balance off the pursuit of Osama bin Laden with the diplomatic efforts that are under way and the larger campaign to roll up the whole organization? So, people will be looking at this from many different dimensions.

10/10/01

[L]

But, yes, I'm confident that we could literally do what the president
has said.

**BLITZER:** When you were a Green Beret, Bob, did you ever train to go into a cave and find individuals and bring them out?

**BEVELACQUA:** Wolf, it's funny you mention that. When we were in Haiti, we actually did very similar-type activities. There was a group called the Zimlemdu (ph) that operated just north of Port au Prince that killed an American citizen, and we had go into very similar circumstances. It's all very doable.

I know the training that's involved to get these guys prepped, and the way country is right now backing everybody, the president, the forces, I think they would carry a bucket of gasoline into hell right now.

**BLITZER:** General Clark, as far as the military capabilities of the Taliban, assuming they're not going to hand over Osama bin Laden, how much military capability do they actually have?

**CLARK:** Well, they do have some heavy equipment. They've got some aircraft. They've got some helicopters. They've got some anti-aircraft weapons. Presumably, they've got some stinger missiles. Well, we know they don't have comprehensive defense capability, but where they mass, they've been able to bottle up the Northern Alliance pretty well and drive it back into the northeastern portion of Afghanistan.

So, we are not dealing with bunch of people on foot. Their campaign in the '90s was characterized by rapid movement, by maneuver, by being able to move forces from place to place in Pakistan very quickly. And so when we go in there, we know we have got to go in with a full array of capabilities. If we need heavy fire power, of course, we can always call that down from the sky.

**BLITZER:** And, Bob, I know you've been looking into the whole issue of homeland defense here in the United States itself.

**BLITZER:** How concerned should the American public be, based on what you know, about additional threats that may be out there?

**BEVELACQUA:** Wolf, I believe they should be concerned and they should practice what we call situational awareness/operational security. That is knowing what's going on around you, not walking about day-to-day business, business as usual. Do your day-to-day business, but recognize that things have changed. There are certain things that you need to look for to protect yourself and protect your family.

**BLITZER:** General Clark, Americans aren't used to being as suspicious as Bob would have us all be, are they?

**CLARK:** Well, we're not. I was in New York City last week, I was flying all over the country, and I noticed that we all have a new awareness of who we're next to and who's passing us by. I was walking through Penn Station and everybody was looking; it was very quiet. And it wasn't just this somber note of grieving, it was also a new awareness, a new sense of personal relationships in this country. And I think ultimately that, as much as anything, is going to make us much stronger.

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/200109/09/10/00.shtml?part=world

10/10/01

[L]

before we have to leave it. Over the years, as you well know, special
operation forces were always seen as the step-child of the U.S.
military -- not enough energy, not enough money, not enough forces
being devoted to that, being devoted to other aspects of the military.
Is that going to come back to haunt the U.S. military right now?

CLARK: I think we've got an absolutely superb group of people
leading and serving at all ranks in the special operations forces in all
of our services. We may end up wanting more of them, and we may
want to expand these forces. But they've had very good resourcing,
in terms of new technology and training opportunities.

So I think, as we look ahead, what we need to consider is how to
transform the whole defense establishment a little bit. This was the
debate before the terrorist incident began. It's going to be followed,
and probably we'll see a shift toward more special operations forces.

BLITZER: General Clark and Bob Bevelacqua, thanks to both of
you for joining us. We'll have you back.

And when we return, a conversation with Arizona senator and
Vietnam war hero Senator John McCain. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back.

Earlier today I spoke with the Arizona senator, John McCain. The
Vietnam War veteran and former POW shared his experience and
thoughts about going into battle.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Senator McCain, thanks once again for joining us on
LATE EDITION.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: Thank you.

BLITZER: There are a lot of Americans out there who are
concerned that the U.S. may be getting sucked into another
Vietnam- like conflict, except this time in Afghanistan. Given your
background, your experience, is that a serious concern?

MCCAIN: No. I think that there can be failures, because this is a
very, very difficult -- probably the most difficult kinds of military
operations that you could ever imagine. But I cannot imagine a
Vietnam War scenario, because there's no way we're going to send a
half a million men there, and we're going to be very judicious as to
how we use force.

Look, I think that there may be people on the ground, but that would
be for short periods of time, and that will be to carry out a specific
mission.

Now, that mission may fail. And that's what the president, I think,
was trying to tell us. There may be failures and casualties, but
there's no scenario where we would have a half a million
Americans, a return to the draft, the kind of scenario we had in the
Vietnam War.

BLITZER: What happens if the Taliban continues to defy President
DICK MCCAIN'S order to hand over Osama bin Laden?

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/000083/000000.htm

10/10/01

[L]

MCCAIN: Then I think we develop, which I know they're planning on now, special operations, using our highly trained and specialized special ops -- special forces, Delta Force, SEALs, those kinds of people that you can insert in on the ground for a short period of time, and then pull them out.

But, again, I would urge everyone who's watching to look at a map of the area. And that'll give you some idea of the challenge we face. Surrounded generally by countries that are not our friends. A thousand miles from the water, which means our aircraft carriers are going to have to go the longest kinds of missions for our planes off of carriers. The most rugged terrain in the world that you can imagine. And, of course, an enemy that is ferocious, ferocious: defeated the Russians and defeated the British a couple hundred years ago.

So the challenges are enormous, but we have the technical, military capabilities and the issue is, as the president said in his inspirational speech, we have to be patient.

BLITZER: After Vietnam, a lot of military officers said they want a very defined mission.

MCCAIN: Yes.

BLITZER: Is there a defined mission right now?

MCCAIN: I think there is in this respect: that we have to eradicate the threat to the United States of America from terrorist attacks.

Now we may never be able to totally eradicate it, but I am convinced that we will be able to reduce it to a minimal kind of challenge. And one way is to get them out on the run.

They have been able to do a lot of these things -- media reports as many as 11,000 were trained in camps in Afghanistan. That's because they had sanctuary, they had safe harbor. When you don't have safe harbor, and you get on the run, it's a lot harder to carry out these kinds of operations.

And we're going to go after the money, we're going to go after a lot of the things that they've been able to get away with in the past.

But yes, it's doable, and the goal is to reduce, if not completely eliminate, the threat to Americans' lives.

BLITZER: So, what I'm hearing you say, instead of this being a conventional war, like the war against Iraq, in the Gulf War, 11 years ago, 10 years ago, this is going to be more like a war on drugs that the U.S. has been engaged in now for -- what? -- decades.

MCCAIN: Well, I hate to compare it to the war on drugs, because I don't think the war on drugs has succeeded, and one of the reasons is, we called it a "war" and didn't pursue it as a war.

I believe that this is an unconventional, very difficult, very challenging enterprise, but one that we have the capability -- and will develop the capabilities -- to address. A lot of it is going to depend on the degree of cooperation we get from countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan. Countries that a lot of Americans had never even heard of are now becoming important

10/10/01

[L]

But I don't think that you've seen this kind of display of national
will since December 7, 1941, and that national will, I believe, will
cause the United States to prevail.

BLITZER: We heard Condoleezza Rice earlier in this program say that stage one will be the Al Qaeda organization, Osama bin Laden, Afghanistan, but there could be a stage two, maybe a stage three, other countries that harbor, support terrorists: Iran, Syria, certainly Iraq.

MCCAIN: Yes.

BLITZER: If that happens, if the U.S. engages in activities -- actions against those countries, then the coalition that the U.S. is trying to put together could crumble. MCCAIN: I think it could crumble, but I also think, as in the Persian Gulf War, we could get allies that perhaps we would not have gotten in the past, if they feel that there is a direct threat from these organizations that are harbored by these nations.

I also believe this, and I am an optimist; I am an eternal optimist. If we take care of the situation in Afghanistan, and the Iraqis and the Iranians and the Syrians and Libyans and others believe that we are dead serious -- as Gadhafi believed we were dead serious after we bombed him -- then I think that they may be -- or they may make decisions that are very favorable to us.

MCCAIN: The Syrians have to make a decision. The Syrians have a U.S. embassy in Damascus. They also had headquarters of a couple terrorist organizations in Damascus. We're now telling them, you have to make a decision, and if you make the wrong decision, then you're going to pay the consequences. If they believe the consequences are high enough, then I think they might make the right decision. And so, a lot of how they act will be dictated on our success or failure in Afghanistan.

BLITZER: So, for years the United States has included Syria on a list of countries that support terrorism as Iran, as Iraq, Libya, Sudan. But the president of the United States met with the president of Syria. What kind of message does that send?

MCCAIN: Wrong message. If you look at the list of terrorist acts, beginning with the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, through the bombing of our embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, the USS Cole, Khobar Towers, shoot down Pan Am 103, when you look at that and other acts of terror that have been committed by these terrorists, our response has not only been ineffective, in some ways it may have been encouraging, because we would launch some cruise missiles, everything would watch it on CNN and then nothing.

So, from the terrorist standpoint, you might say, look, they have been encouraged in the past because of our lack of sustained response. But the president's message, which was so inspirational, is: My friends, the party's over. And I think they're going to get that message.

BLITZER: On that note, I want to thank you, Senator McCain.

MCCAIN: Thank you, Wolf.

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/200110/23/le.00.html

10/10/01

BLITZER: And up next, Bruce Morton's "Last Word."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRUCE MORTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Being
targets at home is new for Americans. We haven't had casualties in
the continental U.S. since the Civil War.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BLITZER: Do Americans have the fortitude
for a new kind of war?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Time now for Bruce Morton's "Last Word" on the
world's newest combat zone, the United States.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Speaker, the president of the United
States.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MORTON (voice-over): We know now, because the president has
told us, that the struggle against terrorism is likely to be long. We
know too, because he told us, that civilians here in the United States
can be attacked again.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: And I ask you to be calm and resolute even in the face of a
continuing threat.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MORTON: And if that needed underlining, Vice President Cheney
was not in the House chamber when the president spoke --
elsewhere for security reasons.

Being targets at home is new for Americans. We haven't had
casualties in the continental U.S. since the Civil War and, before
that, the War of 1812.

And it's hard to look around and feel especially safe. The airplane
hijackings proved airport security was far from perfect. We know
from unsuccessful efforts to stop drug shipments that America's
long borders and coasts cannot, or at least have not, been perfectly
sealed.

So here we are under a kind of threat we haven't seen before. The
British during World War II faced the Nazi's bombing. The Battle of
Britain, most agree, made Britain's people stronger.

How we Americans will react to this sense of being targets, we don't
know yet. Will people want to move out of the cities, get away from
Washington and New York? Too soon to tell, though this reporter
grew up in cities and certainly has no plans to leave this one.

10/10/01

The United States has a pretty good record in its wars. We do well on bravery, on industrial power, on technology. We do less well on patience. Vietnam brought a lot of frustration. The U.S. was patient in World War II, but you could see progress being made. Everyone had maps with pins and moved them as the troops advanced.

This will clearly be different. Some splashy, big operations that we can see, of course, but others -- hey, we wiped out that cell in Seattle -- that may be invisible. It will be hard to know how well or how badly we are doing.

One thing for sure, security at home can and will be improved at airports and elsewhere. Paying security people more than the minimum wage would be a start.

So, a test of patience and a test of new kind of endurance for American civilians -- being in the combat zone while the war goes on.

I'm Bruce Morton.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

BLITZER: Thank you, Bruce.

An now a look at what's on the cover of this week's magazines.

"Time" magazine proclaims: "Target: Bin Laden," with the al Qaeda leader on the cover.

"Newsweek" examines "The trial of terror: Inside the 10-year hunt for Osama bin Laden," with a picture of him in cross hairs on the cover.

And on the cover of "U.S. News and World Report": "Terror, Inc.: Targeting the bin Laden network."

And that's your LATE EDITION for Sunday, September 23. I'll be back tonight at 8:00 p.m. Eastern for a special edition of "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS." We'll focus on the military options.

And this important programming note: Starting tomorrow night, our nightly program will move to new time -- one hour earlier, 7:00 p.m. Eastern, 4:00 p.m. on the West Coast. We'll also expand from a half hour to a full hour.

CNN's coverage of "America's New War" continues now with Aaron Brown and a special preview of the prayer service at Yankee Stadium in New York. Thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington.

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

Search

Back to the top

© 2001 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.
An AOL Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our terms of use

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/2001/09/23/c00.html

10/10/01