tv PBS News Hour PBS September 11, 2013 3:00pm-4:01pm PDT
captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions >> woodruff: all eyes are on the u.s. and russia to craft a plan to seize control of syria's chemical weapons and avoid military action. >> ifill: we get two takes on the president's push for diplomatic and military action. from former national security advisor zbigniew brzezinski and senator john mccain. >> the question is whether the russians are really sincere in this effort. >> woodruff: new york city mayor michael bloomberg is not on the ballot, but hari sreenivassan reports his legacy has dominated the race to replace him. >> new york city is thriving. its economy is growing. crime is at historic lows. and the city's 8 million residents are healthier and living longer than a decade ago.
>> ifill: margaret warner sits down with egypt's prime minister, as the country is divided by yet another political crisis. >> woodruff: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. those are just some of the stories we're covering on tonight's "pbs newshour." >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> supported by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation. committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. more information at macfound.org >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.
>> ifill: our lead story tonight: the furious pace of developments surrounding syria gave way today to the more deliberate tempo of diplomacy. president obama's call for military action was on hold, as the wait began to see if syria's patron, russia, can deliver on putting syria's poison gas beyond use. >> i don't have a timeline to give to you. it will obviously take some time to develop a plan to secure and verifying the location of chemical weapons. >> ifill: the white house message today: shifting syria's chemical arsenal to international control won't be easy, but the u.s. won't tolerate delaying tactics, either. >> by making this proposal, russia has, i think, to its credit, put its prestige on the
line when it comes to its close ally and the activities of its close ally. >> ifill: negotiating began in earnest at the united nations, where the permanent members of the security council-- the u.s., russia, france, britain and china-- met to discuss what comes next. the french government wants any u.n. resolution enforced by military action, but russia says that's a non starter. in moscow today, lawmakers in the lower house of parliament declared the united states should not resort to force. >> ( translated ): the military strike on syria can lead to most negative consequences. it will lead to more deaths among civilian population, but this time caused by american missiles. it will lead to destruction of it will lead to extremist radical forces seizing power, so it is no accident that even in the united states people say that in case of the strike the united states will act as al qaeda's air force. >> ifill: in his televised address last night, president
obama called once again for a limited strike. but he said he plans to pursue the russian proposal to take control of syria's weapons cache. >> it's too early to tell whether this offer will succeed, and any agreement must verify that the assad regime keeps its commitments. but this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force, particularly because russia is one of assad's strongest allies. >> ifill: the president also asked congress to delay voting on military action, for now. lawmakers today were both relieved and skeptical. >> i hope that the russian proposal works. i hope that diplomacy is operative. but we've go to dot the "i"s and cross the "t"s, vet it out and make sure it is a viable solution. >> after years of trying diplomacy, after years of using sanctions and economic tools to try to get the syrian government to change and trying to get the
russians from blocking progress to all of a sudden see this last moment diplomatic effort by the russians there's reason to have pause, be skeptical. >> ifill: left unmentioned in the presidential address: support for the rebels challenging the syrian government. and a spokesman for the syrian coalition that represents a number of opposition factions, suggested it was a lost opportunity. >> one area that we felt was missing and is an area we get asked about is who is the ideas that people have, thinking that the opposition is filled with al queda affiliated organizations and we were hoping to see mr. obama answer some of those. >> ifill: but the spokesman also questioned whether the russian plan is serious, or just a ploy. >> now we're supposed to trust him because the russians say so. at the same time, we're supposed to trust the russians to actually force assad to implement this agreement and we all remember what mr. putin called secretary kerry, calling him a liar less than a week ago. it seems that the russians are
doing all they can to buy assad more time and more time means killing more syrians. >> ifill: tomorrow, secretary of state john kerry gets to size up russian intentions for himself, when he meets with russian foreign minister sergey lavrov in geneva. we'll have more on syria right after the other news of this day. >> woodruff: americans today marked the 12th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and honored the nearly 3,000 victims. at ground zero in new york, reflecting pools now occupy the space where the twin towers once stood. today, family members and friends again read out the names of all who perished there. elsewhere, separate ceremonies remembered those killed when another hijacked jetliner smashed into the pentagon. president obama emphasized it takes more than military measures to fight terror. >> let us have the wisdom to know that while force is at times necessary, force alone cannot build the world we seek. so we recommit to the
partnerships and progress that builds mutual respect and deepens trust and allows more people to live in dignity, prosperity and freedom. >> woodruff: there were also remembrances at the united flight 93 national memorial in shanksville, pennsylvania. officials broke ground on a new visitor center yesterday. in benghazi, libya, a car bombing marked the first anniversary of the attack that killed the u.s. ambassador and three other americans. it tore through a wall of a libyan foreign ministry building, scattering desks and filing cabinets amid the debris. there was no word of any serious casualties. meanwhile, the investigation of last year's attack continues. "the washington post" reported this week that key suspects have been identified, but none are in custody. a double bombing hit a shi-ite mosque in baghdad today, killing at least 35 iraqis. police said more than 50 people were wounded. they said a suicide bomber blew himself up, and then a car
exploded nearby. iraq has suffered mounting bloodshed since april, with 800 people killed in august alone. north korea may be re-starting a nuclear reactor and fueling a new round of nuclear tensions. the johns hopkins school of advanced international studies reported the finding today, based on a new satellite image. researchers said a building at the nyong-byon nuclear site is putting out steam, that suggests the reactor itself is ready to resume operations after six years. the reactor produces plutonium, used in nuclear bombs. there's major news out of east africa today, where scientists have discovered enormous underground water reservoirs in northern kenya. the government says the aquifers could supply the country's needs for 70 years. we have a report from martin geissler of "independent television news." >> reporter: a thousand feet below this parched african plain there is water. a lot of water.
potentially enough water to solve kenya's water problems forever. scientists have suspected it has been there for some time but now using a new mapping system they have found it they are measuring it and bringing it out of the ground >> we already change the economy of this area but we can change the economy progressively of all kenya. and if we can do it in kenya, we can do it everywhere. >> reporter: this is the man that made the discovery but the science he used is not new, he simply collected existing radar, satellite and geological charts and combined them to give one complete picture. he has used this method to find oil in africa in the past >> this is really one of the major discoveries in africa from these last years. >> reporter: the kenyan government share his enthusiasm. they announced today that they will use this system to map the country in search of more hidden reserves. the united nations are backing the plan but there is a note of
caution: don't expect miracles overnight. >> we need to have investment, we need to put in place infrastructure and so and so on. >> reporter: unesco is going to roll this out not only across kenya but in ethipoia and somalia, too. it's a huge stretch to suggest this is a panacea for africa, but in time they think the system could help to reduce the numbers on this continent who rely on these mountains of food aid to stay alive. "i want to thank god and the people who brought us this water." in times, millions more like her could be doing the same. >> woodruff: currently, nearly half of the 41 million people living in kenya lack access to clean drinking water. gun rights advocates claimed victory tuesday in colorado in a pair of recall elections. they ousted state senate president john morse and another
democrat who has backed tougher gun laws. morse said he had "absolutely no regrets" about his stance. in the new york city mayor's race, it appeared democrat bill de blasio avoided a runoff by a whisker, pending a count of absentee ballots. republicans nominated joe lhota. on wall street, blue chip stocks shot up again, as jitters over syria eased. the dow jones industrial average gained 135 points to close at 15,326. the nasdaq slid four points to close at 3,725, after apple dropped 5%. the tech giant's loss came as investors registered disappointment with the new iphone lineup announced yesterday. >> woodruff: still ahead on the "newshour," mccain and brzezinski on syria; how mayor bloomberg transformed new york; egypt's prime minister on calming a political crisis and the evolving role of the internet in international adoptions.
>> ifill: the president's speech has delayed but not diminished the syria debate on the international stage and on capitol hill. even some who support pursuing both military action and diplomacy still have more questions than answers. one of those is republican senator john mccain of arizona. senator mccain, thank you for joining us. so assuming that the president last night tried to do two things-- sell diplomacy, and sell military action-- did he accomplish either? >> i think he was able to appeal to the emotions of the american people, and i think he was very eloquent in talking about the tragedies that have been caused by this war and by bashar al-assad. i don't think he made a strong case because i think he was trying to sell the idea of attacks but at the same time
saying that we have to pause. i think that perhaps it might have been more effective if he had waited a couple of days to see how this whole russia option plays out. finally, i was saddened that he didn't mention of our need to support the free syrian army because he himself two years ago said that bashar al-assad had to leave office, and we know the only way he's going to leave is if he believes that he's not going to win in the battlefield. >> ifill: i want to get back to you on the free syrian army question, but first i want to ask you about what you just said about the russia option. do you believe that the russia option can succeed, that the meeting between secretary of state john kerry and his counter-part hirkz russian counter-part is going to yield something? >> i don't quite understand why john kerry has to go to germany
nevy to meade lazaroh. remember, the russians have been supplying syria for many, many years. and recently, as of as least a year ago, the russian support stepped up dramatically as far as weapons are concerned. and so one has to question whether the russians are really sincere in this effort and it doesn't give you confidence when president putin says, "well, the united states has to renounce all iewfs violence." that is, obviously, unacceptable. but this has to be played out, gwen. it has to be, at least for a period of time eye hope a short period of time, but you cannot ignore it. >> ifill: you are in frequent contact with people in the fee syrian resistance. do you know how they reacted to last night's speech? >> they're-- they're-- they're terribly dispirited. they're still courageous, and they'll still fight obut they--
it was a real blow to hir moral. they were hoping that the president would at least make reference to increased assistance to them. he assured people, americans, of no boots on the ground, but he said to senator graham and to me that he would be very favorable to-- in fact wanted to increase assistance to the free syrian army. >> ifill: he also assured people last night that america would not be the world's cop. is what you're-- you have been arguing consistently that there be very muscular action taken to basically engage the u.s. in the syrian civil war. isn't that making the u.s. the world's cop? >> first of all, i understand and the president understands that americans are weary, and they really are not going to allow this country to get into another conflict that lead to the risk of american lives. so i don't think i or anyone
else rational they know believes that we should in any way put a single american into harm's way. what activities we do advocate have to do with standoff weaponry that would cripple his air force, take out some of their capabilities. but having said that, this has turned into a regional conflict. we've seen the terrible deterioration of events in iraq. we've seen lebanon destabilized, and we've seen the king of jordan basically jeopardize his position of remaining in power. so this has become a regional conflict, and one which is of a priority that has grown rather dramatically from what was initially just a fight against bashar al-assad. >> ifill: if russia does come to the table and says, "sure, we'll take overlet control of the syrian chemical weapons stash, and we'll be able to control it and we will make
syria sign a chemical weapons agreement, but we don't want any threat of military action," is that acceptable to you? >> no. first of all, i think it would have to be a whole lot more people than just the russians. it's got to be an international u.n.-sponsored effort. it can't be just russians. that's just not credible, given the fact that the russians have given them so many weapons for so many years. but the united states still cannot renounce the use of force because suppose that bashar al-assad, even though he is getting rid of his chemical weapons, uses other weapons, commits other atrocities. i mean, you just can't do that. so that would still be not viable for the united states to renounce action when we know that if this-- if it was progressing in a satisfactory fashion, the removal of those chemical weapons, the united states would not have a reason
to use violence. >> ifill: so if this comes back to congress, if for some reason the diplomatic track peters how, how do you change minds in the senate, even your own party, and how do you change americans' means about getting involved? >> i think it's a tough slog. i think you have to identify more with american national security interest, particularly the threat to israel of us doing nothing, and the encouragement of iran of us doing nothing. i think we have to make the case, which i think the president could, if the russian initiative turns out to be a false one, that he's tried every possible other option. i think he could also argue that perhaps one of the reasons why the russians sought this, at least this path to go on, was the fear of american military action. so it will be hard. it will be very difficult to achieve, but then the president's going to be faced
with very difficult decision-- should he act on his own? >> ifill: senator john mccain of arizona, thanks again for joining us. >> thank you, gwen. >> woodruff: now for a different perspective. for that we turn to zbigniew brzezinski, former national security adviser to president jimmy carter and the author of "strategic vision: america and the crisis of global power." dr., welcome to the program. >> it's nice to be with you. >> woodruff: do you share senator mccain's skepticism that the russians are sincere in this whole effort? >> i wouldn't say skepticism. i do have uncertainties. after all, what the russians have proposed is merely a general ides outline of an approach-- how to deal with the weapons-- chemical weapons-- that the syrians are expected to yield. but that, of course, raises a lot of additional questions. and i don't know how far the russians are prepared to go with us. but it opens the door to something that senator mccain
mentioned and with which i actually agree-- even though on some other issues we do not-- namely, nawhat is needed is really a u.n.-sponsored effort-- u.n.-sponsored effort. what does that mean? it means, first of all, the principal powers with veto rights in the u.n. that means not only the russians orors you, also the chinese, for example, who can be a very important player here, given their stake in a stable middle east. and i think the senator was correct in saying this will take time, and we have to be patient and persistent. >> woodruff: but isn't the administration's position that they've tried the united nations, that russia has vetoed, the chinese have not been cooperative, and that's why this new opportunity, this opening that just came up in the last few days, is the one hope right now of aof avoiding a military action? >> that is correct, and this is why we have to pursue it. if we pursue it seriously and systematically, we will
eventually establish whether the russians are serious or not. my own personal guess is they are serious up to a point in that the russians are beginning to realize that we are on the brink of a region-wide explosion, and if that occurs, not only will we be adversely affected, but eventually they will be adversely affected. the caucuses is just on the point of explosion-- >> woodruff: this is the western part of russia. >> southwestern. and the russians have made a very major investment-- putin, personally-- in the olympics and that could go up in smoke. >> woodruff: you're saying if the russians are now looking at a situation that they think it could blow up-- so do you think this is a way to avert that happening? do you think this this effort to work with the russians could produce a result that could lead to success? >> i think there is the potential for it. and in any case, we shouldn't discount it in advance without trying to see if there is some
reality to it. i happen to believe-- and i have said this many times on this issue and the senator and i have disagreed publicly-- that an expansion of the conflict to include the united states would be very disadvan tablous to the united states. >i think the senator now agrees with that. he says we don't want any boots on the ground. if we use force, it will only be airpower. airpower is not going to win this conflict. if we are going to be decisive in asserting outcome, we would have to step in. >> woodruff: isn't the ?lt administration sending though, dr. brez, is if this effort with the russians doesn't work out, the president is prepared to go in with a limited military strike to punish the syrians? >> that's right, it is a limited military strike, which means it doesn't really have an impact on the outcome of the conflict, but if the conflict in the meantime escalates we can be sucked into it and the region becomes so volatile that even the global economy begins to be affected.
>> woodruff: my question to you is if this effort secretary kerr semaking with the russians does not bear fruit, what should happen next? >> i think we shouldn't agree publicly to commit ourselves on something different on the assumption it will not bear fruit. it is worth exploring. and i think we ought to approach it somewhat differently. for example, we have taken the stand that we and our friend are engaged in a point of view. who are these friends that are so visible-- britain and france. can we overlook their role in the region and their standing in the region? they're hateed in the region. we want to engage-- we should be engaging the european union as a whole, which has a stance and a point of view-- which is not for military action, incidentally. we should also seek to engage some asian bhowrs are very dependent on continued flow of oil from the middle east,
particularly china, which has veto in the u.n. security council. china is not linked at the hip to russia. china has its own interests and i think it could be a constructive player. >> woodruff: and you're saying the united states has not been doing this. >> that's exactly right. >> woodruff: and are you confident that that's what the administration will be prepared to do? >> i can't speak for the administration. i have talked to some members of it, but i really can't even speculate publicly on that. i think it's a reasonable course of action, and i think it should be explored and pursued. and if we become engaged with the russians, i think the dynamic of that process will have that effect. >> woodruff: do you think that right now the administration has the right, larger strategy in the region. >> it's moving in that direction. i have been a critic of our position so far because i have felt all along that we have been articulating either demand or red lines, but we haven't been pursuing a strategy. i think circumstances now are beginning to force us to really think strategically.
>> woodruff: and you believe the president is doing that? he's been-- he's received some praisefor his address last night, but he's certainly also been criticized. >> well the address was to some extent triggered by the commitment to use force, and i think it's quite evident the kind of force he is willing to use is not going to resolve the issue, and to resolve the issue we'll have to use much more force, including eventually boots on the ground, and even senator mccain says he doesn't want that. >> woodruff: dr. zbigniew brzezinski, thank you very much. good to have you with us. >> nice to be with you. >> ifill: yesterday marked the beginning of the end of a political era in the nation's largest city. democrats delivered a rebuke to outgoing new york mayor michael bloomberg, choosing one of his chief critics, bill de blasio, as their nominee. the city's public advocate scored a convincing victory, but he may not have achieved the 40 percent threshold needed to avoid a run-off.
former city comptroller william thompson placed second. former congressman anthony weiner, meanwhile, finished a distant fifth. on the republican side, former transit authority head joe lhota won with more than 52 percent of the vote. hari sreenvasan examines what's next for a post-bloomberg big apple. >> sreenivasan: the next mayor of new york will inherit a city that in many ways has been transformed during michael bloomberg's 12 year tenure. by many measures, new york city is thriving. its economy is growing; crime is at historic lows and the city's eight million residents are healthier and living longer than a decade ago. michael powell has reported on the city for more than 20 years. he's now a columnist at "the new york times." he says when bloomberg took office, right after 9/11, the city's future was far from secure.
is in many ways transformed the city. >> sreenivasan: the city's financial health is one area where the mayor generally gets credit. new york city's budget, which is $70 billion this year has been in the black throughout bloomberg's tenure. mitchell moss teaches urban planning at new york university and was an adviser to bloomberg during his first run for mayor. he argues bloomberg's tax fls policies have not only stabilized the city's economy but helped it survive the recession. >> when mike bloomberg came in we were tied to income tax. bloomberg came in and a year after taking over he raised the property tax. now this is a very important issue because the property tax is largely a tax on office buildings and homeowners, and most mayors don't want to do this because the real estate industry is too strong and homeroarnz very active voters and that created a new stable
set of revenue. when 2008 occurred we weren't like the state of california which was in dire straits. yes income taxes weren't growing but our property taxes were. >> sreenivasan: even so, like many cities, u.s. faces huge and growing costs of the pension and health benefites of city please alcohol run into the billions of dollar dollars. additionally, according to economic and professor at the new school, richard mcgahe, will have to negotiate long overdue contracts for the city units. >> there are pent of up demand to get more wages, up to $8 billion to $10 billion, and there is no provugz in the budget to pay for those so the next mayor will be having to negotiate way fairly angry coalition of unions across the board. >> sreenivasan: what about the fiscal health of the city's residents? unemployment is 8.4%, a point higher than the rest of the country. nenew york's real estate boom
continues. the median value of a home across the industry's five boroughs is half a million dollars, nearly trim the national average. that's great for landlords and homeowners, but two-third of new yorkers rent, and sky-high rent eat up a larger percentage of wages here than elsewhere. >> so what does this mean? if you're a secretary married to somebody who is work at a restaurant, the day-to-day struggle to find an apartment that you can afford is enormous. for instance, in the bronx, i believe the average family spends upward of 40% of their income on rent. that's very troubling. it means that they have very little money left over for food. it's one of the reasons you've seen a very sharp increase in food stamp usage in new york. >> sreenivasan: while new york is home to more billion arizona than nearly any place in the world, according to the city's own data, over 20% of residents here live below the poverty line
and another quarter live just above it. the homeless population in new york has also grown in recent years to more than 50,000 people. >> new york inequality is really quite staggering. if you compare the incomes of the top 20% to the woman 20%-- to the bottom 20%, our income ratios are worse than many developing african countries. that's because we have rich people here. it's not bad to have rich people in new york. we want them here. but what we need is a smarter economic development strategy that will use the city's economic strength to create good jobs for low-income people. >> sreenivasan: perhaps the most indurg legacy the next mayor will inherit is how safe new york city is today. for those who lived here in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, the drop in crime is nothing short of remarkable. while crime had fallen sharply during rudy giuliani's administration, it has continued to do so under bloomberg. since 2001, car thefts are down
73%, burglaries 41%; assualts, 17%; rapes, 27%, and murders are down 35%. n.y.u.'s mitchell moss argues the city's drop in crime goes hand in hand with economic development. >> if you want to make a good housing program, make an area safe, people want to live there. if you want to have people come to visit, make the city safe, people will come there. safety has been the underpinning of almost all of ne new york's renaissance. >> reporter: critics argued, however, that the police have trampled on the rights of tens of thousands of young minority men because of the department's reliance on stop and frisk, a program recently ruled unconstitutional by a district court judge. david ehrlich was one of the plaintiffs in that case. >> they think creates distrust within the communities. becausic these communities year, we want safe things but i also don't want my son or my child or uncle or niece or 97ee or family
and friends to be abused. >> reporter: the mayor a stop and frisk policy, and his cuts to some poverty programs have fueled the perception that bloomberg hasn't paid enough attention to the needs of poorer new yorkers. >> it's the great challenge for new york is kind of how do you make room for and have this great vibrant metropolis that it's been for so many years while well over half your population is running very hard just to keep up-- and, frankly, they aren't keeping up. >> sreenivasan: another long-term legacy of the bloomberg era will be the reimagined landscape, everything from the hy-line i'm standing on here, or the creation of brooklyn bridge park, both of which are part of that borough's renaissance and will be with the city for decades to come. under bloomberg, new yorkers added 400 miles of new bike lanes across the city and two new subway lines are being dug.
>> now zoning is done 20 blocks at a time. almost 20% of the whole city has been rezoned under mike bloomberg. >> sreenivasan: bill de blasio, who researched the most votes in yesterday's mayoral primary carbon monoxide on a platform to address the inequality between the rich and poor in new york. what role any mayor can play in brimming that divide is unclear, but many believe it remains one of the great challenges for the city going forward. >> ifill: we shouldn't be surprised that new york had a crazy election, that it went from someone being way ahead to bill de blasio coming out of nowhere, and incredible bad blood between deblawlzio and mike bloomberg. you saw his family there and there was a question whether he was using his family because he is married to a black woman and has black kids. >> woodruff: the issue of the stop and frisk issue you became an issue that really had not been discussed to one that was on everyone's minds and one could argue helped determine the outcome. >> ifill: only in new york
>> woodruff: now to another look at egypt. the obama administration has voiced concern over violent crackdowns and arrests in the country following the military ouster of former president mohammad morsi in july. the armed forces, headed by general abdel fatah al-sissi, declared they were handing over power to civilian leadership and appointed an interim president who, in turn, picked a prime minister and cabinet members. many suspect, however, that the military is still calling the shots. so, who is in charge of egypt? "pbs newshour" chief foreign affairs correspondent margaret warner put that question to the country's interim prime minister hazem el beblawi earlier today in cairo. >> warner: prime minister, thank you for having us. now an issue what washington and cairo seem at odds on right now is the way your government came to power, essentially as the result of the military deposing the elected president of this
country, mohammed morsi. by any known definition, is that not a coup? >> if you take a single picture and not seeing the whole picture, you are failing to get the reality. as a matter of fact, it started with an uprising of millions in the streets. and then the army just responded toon appeal of the people. and it's exactly, almost exactly the same as happened with the previous regime mubarak. so i don't see a great difference, technically speaking. and i would see that it would have been very bad if we had let down those people. >> warner: and you don't think the army helped engineer these protests in any way? >> i don't think so.
i don't think so. if the army can move, it must have magic to be able to convince young people, old people, women, to take the streets for such a phenomena, i would imagine. >> warner: i'd like to ask you now about the crackdown that has occurred since morsi was deposed, starting with the fact that an estimated 1,000 people have been killed, most of them protesters at the hands of the security forces, the u.n. high commissioner for human right is calling for an independent investigation into what really happened. is there going to be such an investigation? >> we are-- the government-- we are asking to form an independent investigation, and this is to our. our. benefit. we would like for the benefit of
history to form an independent investigation to give as recommended a description of what exactly happened. we are doing it because we need it. >> warner: also, some 2,000 members of the muslim brotherhood-- midlevel moobz have been detained without charges. you were quoted last month as actually calling for banning the muslim brotherhood. really? >> no. i always said that the muslim brotherhood must respect the rule. this movement is acting as either a political party, and political parties should not use religion for political objectives. if they are promoting ideas for welfare and this kind, they should abide by the law to make clear their financial resources,
to be subject to observation and control, like any social society. we will go by the rules. >> warner: now, yesterday, your religious affairs minister announced that more than 50,000 clerics, unlicensed-- quote, unquote-- would be silenced, would be banned from preaching. is there a danger if more islamist thought and activity is driven underground that it will simply generate terrorism? >> absolutely. i am very aware that the way to deal with political islam is not to repress them and to push them underground. but to make sure that they abide by the law. and to make sure that you-- we know exactly what they are saying in public, not under the ground. so this is exactly what we think. >> warner: and so now you're under this state of emergency. the police have sweeping powers.
there are reports public prosecutors are look spog charges against many liberals who were active in the 2011 uprising to topple mubarak. is there an effort now to go after liberal contribution of this military-- at least military-appointed government-- of which you're a part? >> not at all. as a matter of fact, we are looking forward to ending the emergency by the end of the month-- but we were surprised-- actually, not surprised by the action but by the magnitude of the explosion. >> warner: by "explosion" you mean the assassination attempt on the superior minister? >> exactly. and that situation is under control and probably will extend the emergency for a month or two. but we are forbidden by law to extend it more than three
months, unless we have a referendum. >> warner: you can guarantee that liberal critics of the military and of the military-appointed government are not going to be harassed or prosecuted? >> i can't say i guarantee, but i will do anything to fight any liberal who is taken because of what he is thinking, of his opinion. this is definitely something i will think that this is not accepted, and will fight it. >> warner: how much control does the civilian government that you head actually have over the security service? >> a great deal of power, and at least we have the power to say, "sorry. we will not continue." >> warner: so you have the power to say no. >> of course. >> warner: and does the president have any control at all over general al-sissi and the armed forces? >> i assure you that we are
going by the law, and the president is assuming his role as head of the country, the cabinet has all of the authority. general acece is a member of the cabinet, and i can tell that you he is a very disciplined member of the cabinet. >> warner: now, in the united states, the president has the power to fire, replaix the army chief of staff, the head of the armed forces. does the president here, this current president have, that power? >> the president of the republic has all the prerogative of a head of a state. >> warner: even though that general is the one who appointed him? it is not yet put to the test, but definitely, there is no evidence of the contrary. legally, the power of the head
of the state is secured. we haven't seen that he was denied by this, and i'm sure that if the need comes, he will use his power. >> warner: so can you assure the world that in the next seven months, which is exwh wh your road map-- your self-imposed deadline sup-- that egypt will once again have a fully elected, freelily elected civilian democracy and the army will return to the barracks for good? >> definitely we owe this not only to the world. we owe it to our people. we said when we came, we came for a transitional period. we know a transitional period is by definition temporary but we are fully aware that it's very important, and we would like to be up to our promise, to our people. >> warner: prime minister, thank you so much. >> you're most welcome. thank you for coming. >> woodruff: and we'll have more of margaret's reporting from egypt in the coming days.
you can see her early reports and more of her interview with the prime minister on our world page. >> ifill: now, adoption in america in the age of the web. a new series of investigative reports published this week is raising serious questions about how some adoptive parents who seek help online are encountering unintended consequences jeffrey brown has the story. >> brown: the stories focus on how some parents are using the internet to turn over their adopted children to new families, after finding they're having problems raising the children, in a practice called private re-homing. the investigation by reuters, titled "the child exchange", documents cases in which the transfer began on online bulletin boards and led to instances of neglect and abuse. despite grave danger, government allows internet forums to go unchecked and were carried out in a largely un-regulated
environment. the latest stories come at a time when foreign adoption has decreased in the u.s. as many countries have limited or restricted their policies. meghan twohey spent 18 months working on the investigation for reuters. and adam pertman is executive director of the evan b. donaldson adoption institute, a national non profit that focuses on adoption research and policy. meghan twohey, some background first so we understand this. why are parents giving up their adopted children? and how are they doing it? >> well, that's a good question. i spoke to many adoptive parents for this 18-month project who had gone on the internet and solicited new families for their unwanted adopted children, and the reasons that they turned to this largely underground network were three-fold. one, they had that they didn't feel like they had received proper training going into their adoptions. two, they didn't feel like the issues that--- the children they adopted came to them with measure and behavioral programss that wasn't disclosed and when
the adoption went south, the adoption agency would not help them. what they turned to the state, the child welfare assistance for help, they didn't get any assistance. they were told if they wanted to relinquish their child to the state foster child system they could face charges of abuse and neglect and put other children in hir home in jeopardy. the parentfept desperate and felt like this underground, online network was their only option. >> brown: in this private system you show how this can be done we a simple power of attorney and in some cases, it led to some serious neglect and abuse. >> that's right. it's important to realize when parents go into this sort of online rehoming-- and these have been @groups and facebook groups with people go to solicet now families for their unwanted adopted children, and oftentimes
they transfer these children over to strangers with nothing more than a power of attorney, a simple slip of people that you can download from the internet and get notarized saying you're placing this child in the hand of another adult and they're now in their custody. there are no child welfare officials involved. there is no court system monitoring that and vetting the person who is taking the child. so we found multiple cases where people who had criminal backgrounds, histories of abuse and neglect, obtained children in this manner. and bad things happened to those kids. >> brown: adam perman, help us place the context here. you read these articles. are these worst-case scenarios, a hand full of cases? what kinds of questions do they raise for people in your-- where you sit? >> well, from where i sit, it's so appalling that it's hard to even look straight at anybody and say anything that is vaguely positive, except that maybe
these parents, who certainly are feeling they're in dire straits, certainly are feeling as though it's their last resort, at least they are looking for a home for the kid. but that said, this is really over every ethical line, every good practice line, over every line we could possibly draw. parents have to be vetted. children have to be cared for. the answer to your question-- no, this does not appear to be a big, prevalent problem. these are the worst-case scenarios but it's not just a hand full but what it really does is shine a very bright light on two more pervasive problems -- we have to deal with this one, no question-- but the internet is opening so many world of opportunity in adomgz we published a report "untangling the web" where we reported on a slew of these-- and this certainly is one. we didn't talk about this one, by the way. we didn't know about this one.
but there are many untoward practices occurrings tha occurro one is paying attention, just like in this case. and it really shines another bright light on the need for post-adoption service for families. if there are fam these are so distraught that they would think to do something like this, then what about all the other families who wouldn't think to do it but need help, too? we are not providing those services to help families succeed. if we looked at those two big issues-- the internet and post-adoption services -- i seri think we would go a long way toward solve other problems like this but we have to address this singularly. >> brown: megan, to pick up on this, you were looking at these cases in-- i think you used the words largely lawless marketplace--" what kind of oversight is there in case like this? >> well, that's a good question, and i would like to point out, going back to your last question about how frequently is this happening, i mean, that is a great question. and the answer is that nobody in
the united states government can tell you the answer to that question. there's nobody here in the united states who is trying to track what happens toes these children. there's no law that recognizes that re-homing is taking place, let alone tries to regulate it. so you're left with basically kind of a patchwork of state laws-- you know, in certain states it's illegal to go online and offer your child up for adoption. you have to be a licensed child-placement agency to do that kind of advertising. in other states you don't. there are different laws that govern adoptions and granting of guardianship for the most part, this has been largely a lawless world where there is no government oversight and nobody here in the united states trying to track that. un, so you can't say-- nobody in the government can tell you how often this is happening. but at reuters, we spent a lot of time-- 18 months-- looking at the online forums in which people were going to advertise
their unwanted adoptive kids. we did a deep dive on a single yahoo group where the rehoming was popular, we built a database and found a child was being offered up on a single yahoo group on average once a week. >> brown: adam perman, we just have a minute left, but give than scenario for these kinds of cases, but in more general instances, what should be done in terms of oversight and regulation? >> that's not to be decide i mean, as megan said, we don't have the laws. we don't have the practices. we don't have the monitoring. what we need to do is immediately understand that something has to be done, and we need to convene law enforcement officials, legislators, because it is a patchwork. and unless it's done in a coordinate fashion, we're not going to nail this one. >> brown: real briefly, is there resistance to that? why doesn't that happen? >> it hasn't happened because we didn't know. i mean, this is a big-- a big
kudos for journalism. we learned something from this series and now we have to do something about it. >> brown: all right, shining a light on these cases, meghan twohey, thank you and adam perman, thank you. >> my pleasure >> woodruff: finally tonight, we return to the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and, specifically, the rebuilding of ground zero in new york city. that's the subject of tonight's "nova" on pbs, which chronicles the construction of the new skyscraper at the site-- known as one world trade center. it's expected to top out at open sometime next year. it also looks at the creation of memorials and a museum where the twin towers once stood. here's an excerpt about the challenges of figuring out what should be collected for the museum. >> the museum will house artifacts that have been stored for over a decade in an old hangar at new york's j.f.k.
airport. >> engineers and architects who went through the debris had the charge of identifying remnant piece of the buildings that could help scientists better understand what happened. they also were looking for things that might some day help reconstruct the events. >> reporter: in twisted steel and broken beams, the full scale of what happened on 9/11 can be witnessed. >> this material filled an 80,000 square-foot airline hangar. what was in that hangar represented less than 1% of what was at the site and filled it to capacity. so just walk into the hangar, you had a sense of just the enormity of what had happened. >> reporter: some of these artifacts are so large, they are brought on site before the
museum is finished. so it can be built around them. like these seven-story tridents. these enormous piece of steel, which weigh 50 tons each, formed the distinctive gothic arch motif at the base of the twin towers. so many tridents survived the attack, their silhouette has become a symbol of strength. in 2010, two were brought on site and set in place. >> the two we chose were in fact side by side on the north tower. so you have a twin presentation. they embody a kind of memory of the twinness of the twin towers. >> reporter: over the next few years, the entrance of the museum will be built around th
them. >> woodruff: gwen, no matter how many years pass, the agony of the entire of what happened on 9/11 is still with us, and decisions like these, so painful. >> ifill: one of the most popular hash tags on twitter today was something called "where were you?" everybody told their story. i remember being here at our studios in suburbab washington. we could smell the smoke from the pentagon for at least two weeks. >> woodruff: which is very close to our studios. >> ifill: it was an amazing time and it's amazing it has been 12 years. now we turn to the other major story of the day, president obama's call for military action against syria was on hold as diplomacy ramped up, the focus was on whether russia can deliver on our proposal to put syria's poison gas beyond use. >> woodruff: online, as we try to capture the conversation surrounding guns in america, we take a look at americans whose firearms are part of their daily
toolkit-- from a farmer, to a guard, to a gunsmith. guns are a part of their everyday lives. read and listen to their stories on our homepage. and on science wednesday, how marijuana farms in the santa monica mountains are threatening the reintroduction of the once common red-legged frog, an endangered species. all that and more is on our website newshour.pbs.org. and that's the "newshour" for tonight. on thursday, how poetry can help those with alzheimer's live in the moment. it's the first report in a new series where jeff brown travels the country with poet laureate, natasha trethewey to find where poetry lives. i'm judy woodruff. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. we'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. on behalf of all of us at the "pbs newshour," thank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪
moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> support also comes from carnegie corporation of new york, a foundation created to do what andrew carnegie called "real and permanent good." celebrating 100 years of philanthropy at carnegie.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
♪ >> this is "bbc world news america." funding of this presentation is made possible by the freeman foundation of new york, stowe, vermont, and honolulu, newman's own foundation, giving all profits to charity and pursuing the common good for over 30 years, and union bank. >> at union bank, our relationship managers work hard to understand the industry you operate in, working to nurture new ventures and help provide capital for key, strategic decisions. we offer expertise and tailored solutions in a wide range of industries.
what can we do for you?♪ >> and now, "bbc world news america." >> this is "bbc world news america." >> reporting from washington, i am katty kay. syrian forces are trying to retake a christian city. our bbc reporter is there. united nations powers try to putting syrian chemical weapons under international control. and why just did the woolly mammoth meat