Return to Transcripts main page

AT THIS HOUR

Two Hostages Killed in U.S. Drone Strike on Al Qaeda; Weinstein Family Statement; Intelligence Community: Surveillance Did Not Show Hostages. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired April 23, 2015 - 11:00   ET

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


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

[11:00:19] JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, I'm John Berman.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Kate Bolduan. Hi everybody.

President Obama just a short time ago offering a dramatic announcement that the White House is calling a terrible tragedy. A U.S. drone strike on an al Qaeda compound in January killed two innocent hostages. One of them an American, Dr. Warren Weinstein, who had been held for nearly four years. The other, an Italian humanitarian worker named Giovanni Lo Porto.

BERMAN: Now, the government has spent years trying to find these men. Weinstein was abducted in Lahore in 2011. He was in Pakistan on an aid mission to help the Pakistani people. The president says there is no reason to think that either of these men, they had no reason to believe either of these hostages was inside the strike zone, which we're saying was in the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Now, the president has also promised an independent review of what went wrong.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We do believe that the operation did take out dangerous members of al Qaeda. What we did not know, tragically, is that al Qaeda was hiding the presence of Warren and Giovanni in this same compound. It is a cruel and bitter truth that in the fog of war generally, and our fight against terrorist specifically, mistakes -- sometimes deadly mistakes -- can occur.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Now, in what was apparently a separate series of strikes after Weinstein and Lo Porto were killed, two American members of al Qaeda apparently also killed. Those are their names: Ahmed Farouq, believed to be the deputy emir of al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, and then a name you might recognize, Adam Gadahn, born in California, known as sort of an American spokesperson for al Qaeda, been in the sights of the U.S. and intelligence service for years. These men apparently killed not on purpose but in a separate strike after Weinstein and Lo Porto.

BOLDUAN: We're exploring all of the angles of this breaking news story. Let's bring in our correspondents. Michelle Kosinski's at the White House for us. Global affairs correspondent Elise Labott joining us as well. Justice correspondent Pamela Brown is in Washington, as is chief national security correspondent Jim Sciutto.

Jim, first to you. You've been getting a lot of the details coming out about what exactly happened here and how exactly they believe this went wrong. What more are your learning AT THIS HOUR?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: John and Kate, truly a remarkable day, a sad day for families involved. Significant strikes here.

But let's run through some of the details. First of all, this was a drone strike, took place on Afghan-Pakistan border. And all the -- two separate strikes. One strike in January that sadly killed the American hostage Warren Weinstein as well as Italian Giovanni Lo Porto. In that same strike is when the American al Qaeda member Ahmed Farouq, who was the deputy emir of al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, also their operational leader, he was killed in that strike, the same one that killed Weinstein and Lo Porto.

Another strike also in January, but a second strike, killed American Adam Gadahn, well-known propagandist for the group.

I'm told there were no ground forces involved in these operations, that these were drone strikes. Typically it's the CIA that carries out these drone strikes on the ground. Additional information: the Weinstein family just notified yesterday. A senior White House official along with other senior administration officials delivering the news in what was, in effect, the equivalent of classified briefing for the family. The administration laying out its evidence to make this determination. As part of that evidence, we know that they do not have a body of Weinstein or Lo Porto. They don't have DNA evidence. This was based on an intelligence community assessment where they came to this conclusion -- not 100 percent, but based on the information they have they made that conclusion.

But really just remarkable sensitivity here. Because there has always been a debate about these drone strikes, about civilian casualties on the ground. That is why, in Pakistan, they are extremely unpopular, an enormous source of anti-American feeling there because of the number of civilian casuals. Of course, in this case, two of those civilian casualties, one of them an American, another an Italian, bringing that problem home to some degree. But really with all these operations, there is tremendous risk for all those involved. And here we are seeing that p, play out right now.

So truly a remarkable day here for these families. But in addition to that, you have two significant al Qaeda figures killed. Adam Gadahn, the propagandist, but this American and this deputy commander of the group al Qaeda in the India Subcontinent.

[11:05:10] Was a significant leader, I'm told. I'm told he was a big deal, Ahmed Farouq. And just to give you an idea of the operations that they've attempted to carry out. In September of last year, September of 2014, this group, an al Qaeda offshoot, al Qaeda in the India Subcontinent, attempted to hijack Pakistani Navy vessels, hijack them and then use them as weapons. That's just an example of their ambitions and the size of operations they're attempting to carry out.

So really, truly remarkable day. And you saw just in how somber the announcement was from the president as to how difficult an announcement this was to make for him, and how difficult these decisions are.

BERMAN: Jim, as you said, it's extraordinary what the White House has done over the last couple of days as they've walked through the process. The press release, when we all first learned about this, the first words are, "It is with tremendous sorrow."

Michelle Kosinski, bring us up to speed on what the White House has been doing the last couple of days as they have prepared to declassify this information and make it public to the American people, and the president spoke to the family of Warren Weinstein.

MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: yes, well, the White House isn't telling us much about this process. We're hearing from other sources though, that there is pushback from U.S. officials that their hand was forced by reporting.

What we're hearing is that the White House worked with this particular reporter on this information, that the president was personally involved, this was sort of an orchestrated rollout so that the story would come out at the same time as this lengthy, profusely apologizing statement on paper and then from the president himself. These officials insisting that the decision to put this information out there was 100 percent the president's and that the timing isn't such that the reporting was going to come out and that, in turn, forced the president's hand. These officials and sources out there saying that it happened in the opposite way.

But you mentioned words at the beginning of the statement. They used words like tremendous sorrow, profound regret, deepest apologies, grief, condolences. And from the president himself saying, as a father, he can't begin to imagine the anguish that these families feel. That there's nothing he can say or do to ease that heartache.

So first, this lengthy apology. Secondly, avowing to do better in the future. I mean, the written statement by the White House ends this way. "Many within our government spent years attempting to locate and free Dr. Weinstein and Mr. Lo Porto. The pain of their deaths will remain with us as we rededicate ourselves to adhering to the most exacting standards and doing all we can to protect the American people."

But there's another part of this, too, that we heard from the president, something of a justification. I mean, he wanted to focus on what was done wrong and the grief and condolences surrounding that, but also saying, in no uncertain terms, this counter-terrorism operation that killed two hostages, one of them American, was in his words "fully consistent" with the counter-terrorism guidelines. He mentioned that there were hundreds of hours of surveillance done on what these operatives thought was an al Qaeda compound, and he said that these hostages were, this entire time, hidden within that compound.

BOLDUAN: Michelle Kosinski at the White House for us. Michelle, thank you so much.

Let's now go over to Elise Labott, our global affairs correspondent. Elise, you've been following the case of the capture and holding of Warren Weinstein for years. Weinstein's family speaking out in very -- issuing a very emotional statement, understandably so, just a short time ago.

ELISE LABOTT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Kate. Well, certainly over the years, Warren Weinstein's family have been wanting answers about where he was, what the U.S. government was doing to secure his release. There have been times that they -- U.S. officials have told us they think they know the general area where Warren was, but it was never really clear. And for the last several years, officials were pretty candid about the fact they had absolutely no idea where Warren was. And the Weinstein family was getting increasingly frustrated that Warren was forgotten.

I'll read to you a statement by Elaine Weinstein, Warren's wife, issued today following the announcement by the White House today that the American humanitarian worker, Warren Weinstein, who was abducted more than three and a half years ago in Pakistan, has died in captivity during a U.S. counter-terrorism operation.

I'll read to you a little bit of the family -- from the Weinstein family. "On behalf of myself, our two daughters, our son-in-law, and two grandchildren, we are devastated by the news and the knowledge that my husband will never safely return home. We were hopeful that those in the U.S. and Pakistani governments with the power to take action and secure his release would have done everything possible to do so and there are no words to do justice to the disappointment and heartbreak we are going through.

[11:10:08] We do not yet fully understand all of the facts surrounding Warren's death but we do understand the U.S. government will be conducting an independent investigation of the circumstances.

Elaine Weinstein goes on to say, "We look forward to the results of that investigation but those who took Warren captve over three years ago bear ultimate responsibility. I can assure you he would still be alive and well if they had allowed him to return home after his time abroad working to help the people of Pakistan. The cowardly actions of those who took Warren captive, and ultimately to the place and time of his death, are not in keeping with Islam. And they will have to face their god to answer for their actions." Mrs. Weinstein said.

But listen, Kate, this also part goes to the frustration of the Weinstein family. Elaine Weinstein going on to say, "Warren spent his entire life working to benefit people across the globe and loved the Pakistani people." She went on to say that she was disappointed with the government of both the United States and arms of the United States, and the government of Pakistan, because they felt that not everything was really being done to find out where he was and to secure his release. She said given what Warren had done for the Pakistani people, this should have been a priority, not a nuisance. And there is a heavy dose of criticism for the State Department, Kate.

BERMAN: When you have a family member taken hostage, your one interest is for the well-being and return of that family member. We can understand that family's frustration and our heart certainly goes out to them.

All right. Elise Labott, stand by. There were two other Americans killed we learned about just today. Adam Gadahn, an American terrorist born in California, went to work for al Qaeda in 1998. And a man named Ahmed Farouq. Now, the White House says that these men were not killed on purpose. Farouq was killed in the strikes that also, by mistake, killed Lo Porto and Weinstein. Adam Gadahn killed in a separate strike. Again, not targeted.

I want to bring in Pamela Brown, our justice reporter. Pamela Brown, the fact that they were not targeted somewhat significant because there are legal questions. The White House says it has the right to if it wants to, but there are people who ask the question can the United States target Americans abroad?

PAMELA BROWN, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely. It's been an ongoing legal debate ever since the killing of Anwar al Awlaki, the American involved with al Qaeda who was killed back in 2011 in Yemen. And in that, we know from the Justice Department, a legal memo that was released years after that, that there was justification according to Justice officials, that killing al Awlaki, given his relationship with al Qaeda, was within the scope of the 2001 authorization by Congress to use military force.

But that said, there's a lot of debate about whether you can kill an American without due process. In this case, we learned, John and Kate, that there was intelligence indicating that there were senior al Qaeda members meeting but that U.S. officials did not know specifically that Ahmed Farouq and Adam Gadahn were among those senior al Qaeda members meeting at that time, that essentially their killings were unintentional, which would lead you to believe that perhaps U.S. officials did not go through the additional steps, the additional procedure, in order to get authorization to kill Americans in a drone strike. Those steps were laid out by President Obama back in 2013 after the killing of al Awlaki. John and Kate.

BERMAN: Pamela Brown, interesting questions. Thanks so much.

BOLDUAN: (INAUDIBLE) questions.

BERMAN: Exactly. I want to bring in CNN terrorism analyst Paul Cruickshank, here with us In New York, and also on the phone CNN intelligence and security analyst and former CIA operative Bob Baer.

Bob, let me start with you. The U.S. said it had hundreds of hours of surveillance on this compound. Hundreds of hours from the air, presumably, and had near certainty that not only were there no hostages there, but near certainty that there were no civilians there. Clearly, that turned out to be wrong. What does that tell you then about the limits right now of the U.S. drone program and intelligence in this key part of the world?

ROBERT BAER, CNN INTELLIGENCE & SECURITY ANALYST (via phone): Well, John, the problem is these drones are very useful for overhead coverage obviously, for following a car or looking at the roof of a house. But you can't see inside. And now, in the last decade, we've had virtually no sources inside the tribal areas of Pakistan. There's no way to get another view of this. And any hostage attempt or release or even when hostages are potentially involved, you need boots on the ground, as they say, or eyes on, as the military says. In the old days, you wouldn't go near a target like this unless you could put an American soldier in the vicinity (AUDIO GAP) going on in a house like this, and clearly you couldn't do that in tribal areas.

[11:15:09] And this has always been the problem, and that's why there's so many civilian casualties around drones. Ultimately it's a self-defeating strategy to go after terrorism simply from the air.

BOLDUAN: Though, Paul, the White House, the administration says these two men were not targeted, these two Americans were not targeted. Talk to me about the significance of these two men and the fact they have been taken out.

PAUL CRUICKSHANK, CNN TERRORISM ANALYST: They're both very significant. Adam Gadahn is an American convert to Islam. He actually left the United States in 1998 before 9/11 and joined al Qaeda before 9/11 and eventually became their chief English language propagandist.

BERMAN: He's taunted America.

CRUICKSHANK: He's taunted America. He celebrated 9/11 attacks. He's called for lone wolf attacks in the United States. He's called for American radicals to go to gun stores, gun fairs, get guns, shoot up shopping malls, things like that. So the Americans absolutely would have wanted to get him. He was a dangerous propagandist encouraging Americans to launch attacks.

He also rose up the al Qaeda hierarchy to have quite a prominent position. Actually, just a few days ago, in London, I actually met an al Qaeda operative who greeted Adam Gadahn when he first arrived in Pakistan at Peshawar Airport. He was only about 19 years old. al Qaeda knew he was coming. They sent somebody to go and meet him, this former al Qaeda operative that I met in London. He was transported to the tribal areas of Pakistan. He was there in the run-up to 9/11.

BERMAN: So just to be clear, it wasn't just that he spoke English and was somehow taunting America, or an embarrassment to the U.S., he was an important leader among those in al Qaeda.

CRUICKSHANK: He was an important leader. This American convert to Islam that went there as a teenager really did rise up the ranks. And when the Navy SEALs went in to Abbottabad, they found quite a few letters from Adam Gadahn there. He was communicating with other al Qaeda leaders. He was criticizing some factions. He was playing a significant role. For al Qaeda, they wanted to understand their enemy, the United States. Adam Gadahn allowed them to do that.

BOLDUAN: Bob, "The Wall Street Journal" in their reporting, as John was pointing out, their reporting is that CIA had been monitoring this compound in Pakistan's tribal regions for weeks and that there is no indication in all the reporting CNN has, officials say they were near certainty there were no Americans, no hostages, or other noncombatants on that site. Well, clearly, that was wrong in this situation. How big of a blow when you have this now -- this being declassified and this being announced -- how big a blow is this to the CIA? How big a blow is this to the drone program, that President Obama not only embraced but has expanded?

BAER: Well, he's actually -- it's been cut back since January. There have been very few drone strikes. There have been a couple in Yemen. The head of the drone program at the CIA has left. I cannot find out if it was because of this particular strike. You have to wonder.

And of course, the whole strategy against terrorism has now moved to Iraq and Syria where you see fewer drone strikes and you see a more measured policy to turn back -- and more local cooperation -- to turn back the Islamic State.

So I think the story of the drones has been one of success. It broke the backbone of al Qaeda. But at the end of the day, it's not a totally accurate way to fight terrorism. I mean, there were a lot of civilian casualties. And of course now there's American casualties thanks to inadequate intelligence. But then again, they always knew it was never 100 percent certain. If you're taking a hostage and walking him around at night, there's no way to see whether somebody's in that building, simply because you can't see through walls. And that was the problem here.

BERMAN: As the White House now says, it is a day of tremendous sorrow. Paul Cruickshank, Bob Baer, our friends in Washington, thanks so much.

We have much more on this breaking news just ahead. Stay with us.

[11:19:30]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BOLDUAN: Welcome back. We're following our breaking news AT THIS HOUR where President Obama just a short time ago, the White House announcing the death of three Americans, one American hostage and two top -- two Americans linked -- very much linked to al Qaeda, al Qaeda leaders, in two separate drone strikes. This coming from the White House. The president saying in the statement that it is with tremendous sorrow that they've announced that American was killed along with hostage, an Italian humanitarian aid worker.

Let's get back to Washington where our Jim Sciutto is standing by with more details. Jim, we've been talking throughout this hour and last about the fact that these two innocent hostages were killed. They have been tracking -- the administration, the CIA, has hours upon hours upon hours of surveillance on this, what they thought was just an al Qaeda compound. They've been tracking it for weeks. But they thought with near certainty that no Americans, no hostages, no noncombatants were in this building.

Have you gotten any color, or any more detail, on why then they deemed it necessary to do a drone strike on this compound?

SCIUTTO: I have. I have spoken to intelligence officials to get at this question. You have hundreds of hours of surveillance of this compound, how do you not see, with that surveillance, that there were hostages there?

And this is how it's explained to me. These hostages, extremely high value, not just in dollar terms -- because they do have a dollar value on them in these groups -- but also in terms of power and leverage and influence. And because they are, they are kept extremely we will hidden. May very well have never left that compound during those hundreds of hours of surveillance. So you could be watching that compound and have no idea that they have these very valuable -- very, very valuable hostages inside.

During that surveillance, what the intelligence community did see is evidence that there were senior al Qaeda leaders present.

[11:25:00] Keep in mind, this is two compounds, because two strikes taking place in two different places. One that killed the hostages Weinstein and Lo Porto, as well as Ahmed Farouq, the American al Qaeda leader. A second strike that killed Adam Gadahn, the al Qaeda -- also an American al Qaeda propagandist.

But anyway, on both these sites, you have a tremendous amount of surveillance. And in both these site, it was the conclusion of the intelligence community that there were senior al Qaeda leaders present, but they did not know who those senior al Qaeda leaders were. If they knew or believed them to be Americans, Gadahn and Farouq, they would have had to run through an enormous number of legal traps, so to speak, to then justify airstrike, as you had with Anwar al Awlaki, for instance, in Yemen. Because they did not, I'm told, know that they were these particular leaders, they did not run through those traps. And they also, even with all that surveillance, did not see any indication that those hostages were inside.

And the way it's explained to me as to how that would be possible is because they are such high value hostages, that they would be kept so well hidden and may very well never have left that compound. That's the explanation that they have. But of course there is tremendous regret right now, not only in the White House but in the intelligence community. Because, keep in mind, it's the CIA who makes these judgments but also carries out these strikes.

BERMAN: All right, Jim Sciutto, thanks so much. Stand by for a second here, because Jim brings up a really interesting subject. There were two al Qaeda leaders killed, Americans -- Ahmed Farouq and Adam Gadahn -- who were not apparently targeted. Killed in two separate airstrikes; the U.S. says they did not know they were there. Had they known they were there, there would be people who say that the United States does not have the right to target Americans abroad. The White House says it does have that right in certain circumstances, but it's very, very controversial.

That's why I just want to bring in CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin. Jeffrey, the White House says this is not even a case where we have to justify the killings because they were not intentional. However, killing Americans overseas is controversial.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: It is controversial. And this came up most prominently in the murder of the cleric al Awlaki, who was targeted. And the argument is, look, in the United States, if you want to kill someone, American citizen or otherwise, we have to have a trial. We have to have defense lawyers. We have to have a judge, jury, appeals process. Why, when they are overseas, can we kill them just on the say so of the president?

And the answer from the administration is because there's a war on. Because, since 2001, Congress has authorized, in effect, a war on al Qaeda. And if you join up with al Qaeda as an American citizen, you can be killed like anyone else. They do say that they exercise an extra level of scrutiny on those drone strikes, but they say that's our due process, not a court's.

BERMAN: (INAUDIBLE). The self justification. They do it themselves.

TOOBIN: Correct. The president said today you need due process to kill an American overseas, but the definition of due process is an internal one to the administration, not one involving courts or defense lawyers.

BOLDUAN: It's not one that any of us learn anything about.

TOOBIN: Not until afterwards.

BOLDUAN: Exactly.

TOOBIN: It is an entirely secret internal process, which the administration says of course it has to be secret and has to be internal, because if it's public, they'll simply just go away and you won't be able to, in effect, carry out the sentence.

BOLDUAN: So in the statement that the president reiterated when he spoke, they made very clear in -- to make the point that neither Ahmed Farouq or Adam Gadahn, neither was specifically targeted. We did not have information indicating their presence at the sites of these operations. After the fact, when this was unintentional, is there any legal responsibility?

TOOBIN: The answer is no. In the real world -- I mean, remember, also, these discussions about what's legal and what's not, I think they're very important, but they don't have much effect because this is never going to be before a court.

BOLDUAN: Because it's almost theoretical. TOOBIN: Exactly. Who is going to sue? Just, realistically, it is not something that will ever wind up before an American court. However, that doesn't mean it's unimportant and the American government takes seriously the idea that it has to follow the law. And that's why this issue of whether they can kill people intentionally is so controversial.

BERMAN: Look, the ACLU has come out and said they shouldn't kill Americans intentionally abroad. There are politicians who suggest the same thing. It is a controversial issue. The White House clearly wanted to avoid here, and make clear from the very beginning as it released its statement.

Jeffrey Toobin, great to have you here with us. Really appreciate it.

BOLDUAN: Thanks, Jeffrey.

BERMAN: Following more, again, on this breaking news. Two innocent -- well, an Italian and an American innocents killed in a strike against al Qaeda overseas. We'll be right back.

[11:29:44]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)