tv CNN Newsroom CNN September 10, 2013 6:00am-8:01am PDT
that is it for us here on "new day" but "cnn newsroom" with carol cost ello starts right now. have a good day. cnn "newsroom" starts right now. we do begin with breaking news out of syria that could stop -- stop a potential u.s. military strike. just about an hour ago, syria announced it will accept a russian proposal. seary's chemical weapons will be placed under international control and seary's foreign minutes tr says the deal was done to avoid american aggression. and this breakthrough comes hours before president obama heads to capitol hill to make his case to senate democrats and republicans. later tonight, the president will lay out his case to you, the american people, in a prime time address.
senior white house correspondent brianna keilar will have more on the president's push. let's begin in moscow with phil black. this seemed to happen so >> reporter: it was very fast moving. held a press conference in the morning. they were still talking about the same old ideas for the international peace conference. and second of state john kerry made those remarks about the possibility of syria giving up its chemical weapons even though the state department hosed down those remarks quickly afterwards. they've really been embraced by rush wra and by syria as well. how it will be enforced. russia will want to go to the united nations on this.
will it allow a potential air strike with some military action as punishment if syria doesn't live up to its commitment? russia doesn't like that sort of thing. how to make this work on the ground in syria, how to find, account for, secure and ultimately destroy syria's highly secretive chemical weapons program within the context of an ongoing civil war. that's what russia is now working on with the syrian government. >> we'll talk about that with david kay, a former u.n. weapons inspector in just a bit. the the threat of military action, is the obama administration right? >> reporter: the exact origins and evolution of this idea is a bit murky. there is a strong feeling in russia that had this idea been suggested by the united states, syria wouldn't have gotten on
board, would have seen it as blackmail at gunpoint. the russian involvement here is being championed as key to pulling this off just as an idea and perhaps ultimately making it work as a reality. what is clear is that we know that russia and the united states, the presidents of both these countries were talking about this last week at the g-20 summit on the sidelines there in st. petersburg. but it was after skt john kerry made those remarks and russia has jumped on board. they're very much on board now. >> phil black reporting from moscow. let's get white house reaction to this deal now. if that could change the tone of the president's prime time address tonight. senior white house correspondent brianna keilar joins us with that side of the story. good morning, brianna. >> reporter: good morning to you, carol. the white house at this point is certainly welcoming the pobt of a nonmilitary solution to the
crisis in syria. at the same time, they are skeptical. they have seen russia's role in this is to be sort of slowing things down, trying to gum up the works. in that regard, they are skeptical. i think that what you could say here is this proposal that has now been accepted by syria, according to syria's foreign minister, has diminished the chances that there is a u.s. military strike on syria. whether syria actually gives up its chemical weapons, that's something that i think the white house, as a lot of observers of the situation in syria are skeptical about. when president obama does speak to the american people, we're told, care, he is still going to make his case for military acti action. this military option would not have come about without there being this military threat. we're kind of seeing them take a
little credit for this. it also reflects a little sensitivity on their part. where does this whole idea come from? was it from john kerry? i think this white house was sensitive to the idea that perhaps the president's policy on syria may be perceived as having stemmed from sort of off-the-cuff comment from the secretary of state. >> isn't it likely that now that this deal is supposedly in the wovgs, isn't it less likely that lawmakers will go along with the president? now they have another option. >> reporter: i think that's exactly the read, carol. in a way, it gave lawmakers who were really not on board with this military option an off ramp, another option. they were very eager to take it. and i think ultimately the white house was, too, because they wanted to -- i think when they started to realize -- although publicly they'll say that they thought they could get the votes, that they were sure congress was going to go ahead and give them the victory that they needed, but i think behind
the scenes there was very much a realization that they were in trouble, not just in the house, which is a heavier lift, but in the senate. now you see the senate has decided they're not going to go ahead with their vote, which was planned for tomorrow. at least the short-term effect of this, carol, is that the white house has avoided being what could have been a very stunning defeat with that senate vote. >> all right. brianna keilar, senior white house correspondent reporting live for us this morning. let's bring in the former chief u.n. weapons inspector in iraq, david kaye. good morning. >> good morning, carol. >> you heard about this deal. what do you think? is it a delaying tactic? is it serious? >> well, you never know. the russians both, before the 1991 gulf war and the 2003 invasion came up with ideas that would hopefully postpone it. now, they turned out to be delaying tactics. secretary baker was very blunt with his counterpart in '91. but, look, if it works, it's a
win/win situation. not only does it avoid the consequence of military action, it really removes the serious threat that most of us worried about. that is, the rebels might gain access to those chemical weapons or terrorists coming from abroad just for the purpose of getting those chemical weapons could happen. if this works, it really is a genuine win/win. >> you're saying if this works. so how exactly would it work? >> well, first of all, you have to start with do you know where all the syrian chemical weapons are? and if they tell you they're in six places, do you know there's not a seventh or eighth? now, in this -- you're going to lean on both the intelligence community and, quite frankly, the russians know a lot more about this than we do from the outside because they're actually in syria and have been at the heart of that program. secondly, the security council and you get agreement on a
resolution, which not only implements this, but says if anything fails, if the syrians violate it, you go to chapter 7 which authorizes -- preauthorizes, really, action. the final one, which i see as a huge difficulty, you have to find international inspectors which are both acceptable to the west and acceptable to the syrians and you're putting them in a hostile environment. what do you do for their own protection? several of these sites are on the edge of rebel action. so it's not a peaceful walk in the park by any means for the inspectors. >> so they would need security, right? they would need security. would that involve u.s. troops on the ground in syria? >> no, it probably would not. but it would involve, i would guess, turks, jordanians and, quite frankly, the iraqi
security force that we have trained would be well put to do this, but it also includes a layer of international responsibility. the hardest thing for inspectors, let me tell you, is to report violations. usually your political bosses don't want to hear that something that looks so good, kept them out of trouble is actually not working. so you have to have absolute integrity in the process. there are a number of technical dangers along the way. but we're not there yet. finally, i should answer -- say that one of the interesting things about the russian proposal is not only international control, but finally destruction of these weapons subsequent to the control. that is a very hopeful sign. and we should push the syrians to agree to this. their foreign minister this morning, in fact, did agree to it. it has to be in the final gremt. >> that would be the best-case scenario, if these chemical weapons would be destroyed. if syria doesn't agree to that
but agrees to some sort of -- i don't know, international depository for these chemical weapons, where would that be? >> initially, look, it's got to be in syria. their stockpiles are huge. we're talking about over ten tons of chemical agent. and maybe as much as twice that. we really don't know fully the size of their stockpile. it's dangerous to move them. the question is where would you move them to. the experience we had in 1991 and '92 about moving iraqi chemical weapons, no state wanted to receive them. you finally had the destruction capability in iraq. i suspect that's what you would have to do in syria. >> fascinating. thank you so much, david kay, for your insight this morning. also thanks to brianna keilar and phil black, who will be back with us in the next hour of "newsroom." president obama addresses the nation tonight at 9:00 pm. you can watch it right here on cnn.
there's a lot i had to do... ... watch my diet. stay active. start insulin... today, i learned there's something i don't have to do anymore. my doctor said that with novolog® flexpen, i don't have to use a syringe and a vial... or carry a cooler. flexpen® comes prefilled with fast-acting insulin used to help control high blood sugar when you eat. dial the exact does. inject by pushing a button. nom a vial. you should eat a meal within 5 to 10 minutes after injecting novolog® (insulin aspart [rdna origin] injection). do not use if your blood sugar is too low, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients.
the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause symptoms such as sweating, shakiness, confusion, and headache. severe low blood sugar can be serious and life-threatening. ask your health care provider about alcohol use, operating machinery, or driving. other possible side effects include injection site reactions and low potassium in your blood. tell your health care provider about all medicines you take and all of your medical conditions. get medical help right away if you experience serious allergic reactions such as body rash, trouble with breathing, fast heartbeat, or sweating. flexpen® is insulin delivery my way. covered by most insurance plans, including medicare. find your co-pay cost at myflexpen.com. ask your health care provider about novolog® flexpen today.
syria's chemical weapons under international control. should that fall through, it will be a tough sell for president obama to get congress' go ahead for military action. if you need another example, talk to his most ardent supporters, the congressional black caucus. the president met with the caucus at the white house for more than an hour yetd yesterday to no avail. emanuel cleaver said everyone in the room wanted to say we are with you, but simply could not. we'll talk to congresswoman martha fudge, chairwoman of the national black caucus. she's not quite ready for us yet. when she gets to the microphone, of course, we'll take it live. we'll take a quick bake until she gets there. we'll be right back.
his most ardent supporters, the congressional black caucus. he met with them more than an hour but to no avail. congressman cleaver said, quote, we wanted to say we were with you but simply could not. martha fudge joins me now, the chairwoman of the black caucus. welcome, congresswoman. >> thank you. thank you for having me. >> thank you. syria's acceptance of the proposal to turn over its chemical weapons. >> that's outstanding. if there is some way we can find a diplomatic way to address the atrocities in syria, i think that we should move forward with all due speed to make sure it is something that is credible and we should engage with this kind of a discussion. >> do you trust russia, trust syria? >> i don't know that i trust any of them, but that doesn't mean that this is not something that
is not going to happen. we need to take chemical weapons away from syria and because of the threats that have come from the united states, russia and syria both understand that there needs to be some action. i'm hopeful, certainly, that this is something that is going to move forward. >> when i introduced you, i read a quote from congressman cleaver who said we want to be with you, president obama, but we just can't. we can't be with you. how many members of the congressional black caucus are with the president and support military action? >> we have not taken any kind of a poll. every member is going to make their own decision so i really don't have that answer. i don't think anyone has that answer. >> the way it looks now, it's unlikely that the president will get congressional support, especially from the house of representatives, for a military strike. does this deal that russia has put forth and presented to
syria, does this save face for the president? how do you characterize this? >> i don't know that it's a matter of saving face. i think the president did the right thing, coming to congress. it's many, many of us that wrote letters, we sent all kinds of messages to the white house saying that this was a decision we would like to be involved in. he did that. now, whatever happens in congress, i can't call it. but i would say to you that if, in fact, this situation does work itself out in a nonmilitary way, i think it's a benefit for the entire world, not just for the united states. >> so the president talked with the congressional black caucus for a little less than an hour, also his national security adviser, susan rice, was there. obviously they didn't change minds enough for people to come out and say, yes, i agree with you president obama. so, in light of that, what more does the president need to say tonight?
>> i think the president needs to convince the american people. we do have responsibility as members of congress but as well we have constituencies who have been very vocal about their opinion. i think it's important for him to make the case to the american public, why this action needs to happen. and i think that if he does that, i think he has a very good shot at getting the support in congress. if he doesn't, i think it's going to be a very difficult -- >> you really do? >> -- road ahead. >> especially in the house of representatives? you think the president has a good chance, like a military strike? sthaes what we're specifically talking about. >> no, i said if he makes the case to the american public, i think that it is possible. but he has to make the case to the american public and to those members of congress who are still skeptic. i think if he does that, i think there will be some people who will side with him, because so many -- more than 300 members of
the congress are undecided. i think this is his opportunity to give us the kind of information we immediate to make a decision. i'm one of the undecideds. i want to hear what he has to say. >> i'm just curious about something. i think many political pundits are curious as well. you urged cbc members to remain largely silent on syria until more information comes forth. why was that? >> i didn't urge them to be silent. my words were limit your comments. >> why? >> until we have all of the information. >> because i think it's important that we have all of the information before we start making statements and don't really know, in many instances, what it is we're making statements about. >> i just ask you that because some s some cynics may say here are president obama's most ardent supporters and they can't get behind him and fight the fight beside him. >> i am a member of the u.s.
congress. i have a constituency just as every other member here. he is the president of the united states, just as there have been other presidents. we make decisions based upon what we think is best for the country, what we believe is best for our constituents. we do not make a decision based upon who is in the white house. and so i am hopeful that people will understand, wherever we end up as a caucus, that we are doing what we believe is best for the american people and the united states of america. >> congresswoman marcia fudge, chairwoman of the congressional black caucus, thank you for joining me this morning. >> thank you. still to come in the "newsroom," domestic dispute and shellie zimmerman's 911 all. >> i don't know what he's capable of. i'm really scared. >> questions this morning about what really happened at the couple's old home. >> he wasn't aware of it. when he showed up to see a truck and trailer at his house, it was really concerning to him. >> both sides of the story after the break.
a bizarre incident puts george zimmerman back into the spotlight t all began with this 911 call made by his wife, shellie. >> 911 splis and medical. >> i need police. >> we have units en route to you, ma'am. is he still there? >> yes, he is. he is trying to shut the garage door on me. >> is he inside now? >> no. he is in his car and he continually has his hand on his gun and he keeps saying step closer. he's just threatening all of us. >> step closer and what? >> and he's going to shoot us. >> okay. >> he punched my dad in the nose. my dad has a mark on his face. i saw his glasses were on the floor. accosted my father, took my ipad
out of my hand, slashed it and cut it with a pocket knife. and there's a worker across the street that i believe saw almost all of it. he is getting in his truck right now. he just showed up here. my phone died so i had to call you from my father's phone. >> i wondered because i kept trying to call you and it kept going to voice mail. stay on the line with me. >> okay. okay. i don't know what he's capable of. i'm really, really scared. >> all right. there are multiple units in the area. this is shellie, right? what's the phone number you're calling on now? >> the police are here. >> what is he doing right now?
>> he is in his truck. >> does he see him? >> yeah. they're tell iing him to get ou of the way. dad, get behind the car or something. i don't know if he's going to start shooting at us or not. >> are you standing outside right now? >> yes, we are. dad, get inside the house in case they start shooting at us. i don't know. we're going in the house. >> okay. go back inside. >> oh, my god. >> are you guys both inside now? >> yeah. >> okay. stay in there, okay? let the police take care of it. >> okay. he has his hands in the air. he's not touching his weapon. >> okay. does your father need medical? >> dad, do you need medical? he says no, but i think he does.
he does need medical. he's shaking, says he feels like he's going to have a heart attack. yes, you do, because your nose looks like it's all -- it could be broken. i think he should have medical, if we can have an ambulance come. >> sure. they won't be able to approach until the situation outside is secure. >> okay. >> okay. >> oh, my god. oh, my god! >> you guys are still inside, correct? >> yes. >> shellie, you're doing really good, okay? this is a tough situation for anyone. all right? >> yeah. >> i'll stay on the line with you until our units can speak with you. all right? >> okay. >> all right. are you okay? you said he took something out of your hand.
do you need medical as well? >> i don't think so. just shock. >> okay. i'm going to go ahead and get a unit to respond. okay? >> okay. dad, get inside right now. >> make sure he stays inside. until someone comes and lets you know it's okay for you to step out, stay inside. >> okay. we're getting someone on the line to come check on you. they can't check out your father until they secure the scene. okay? >> okay. hold on one second. >> shellie, take a couple of dao deep breaths for me, all right? >> someone's in there? there's a woman in there.
oh, my god! >> shellie? >> okay. so after all that, shellie zimmerman declined to press charges during which she alleged that george zimmerman threatened her and her father with a gun. here is what his attorney and cnn analyst mark o'mara said about that incident. >> yes, he had a gun with him. he was allowed to, absolutely. there were reports that said he did not have a gun with him, but he did. >> o'mara added that while zimmerman did have a gun, he never showed it. he also spoke a little bit more about the challenges facing his client and his soon-to-be ex-wife. >> the reality is what happened here, it is a divorce case. these people have been living through 16 months under the spotlight. and, you know, they're suffering from it. i think the divorce itself is a
fallout from the whole case. and it's now showing up with people acting inappropriately. >> shellie zimmerman filed for divorce last week after seven years of marriage. we should be clear, george zimmerman was detained and released. he was never arrested. joining me now to help sort through all of this is cnn analyst mark dujain. good morning, mark. what do you make that shellie zimmerman declined to press charges? >> not uncommon that domestic cases like this start off with police involvement and one or the other parties end up saying no, i don't want to proceed because they realize all the consequences and repercussions. we know in this case she reached out to her lawyer and discussions were had that said do you really want this to be under the microscope of public
scrutiny or handle it on our own behind closed doors? i suspect that's what happened. george zimmerman got a terrific break here. aggravated assault with a firearm is a mandatory minimum three years in prison in florida. so i think that it could have gone either way. because her and her father apparently declined to prosecute, law enforcement opted to go ahead and proceed without an arrest. he got a break. >> on this 911 call, shellie zimmerman did seemed frightened. it didn't seem to be fake. sometimes when you're going through a divorce, you do strange things. in this case, she truly did sound scared. right? >> she did sound scared. but perception is reality and, you know, they're not going to be able to prove that he was, in fact, holding a gun. she was aware that he kept a gun and had a gun throughout. wherever she saw him reaching, she presumed it was a gun. you also saw some other acts of
violence. at least you heard that. he broke her, i think it was, ipad, that her father was punched in the face. so, you know, usually when police respond, somebody is going to get arrested in a domestic violence situation. not always, but often times. >> mark, could police -- >> i think he caught a real break. >> could police charge him even though shellie may not want to? >> without independent corroboration, likely not. it happens a lot in domestic abuse cases that you have one party initially calling law enforcement, then tliening proce declining prosecution. if there are independent witnesses or a videotape. we know they took a videotape from the house. the video is not going to be in the area where the incident is alleged to have occurred. it will likely be of no value. that said, this case will likely go away. >> mark nejame, thank you for your input this morning. we appreciate it.
>> thank you very much. shaken up the stock market. in a good way or bad way, you ask? let's ask alison kosik. >> wall street kind of breathed a bit of a sigh of relief. bulls came out to play yesterday. look at the numbers now. they're not going back inside. the dow up another 74 points. we're seeing some of that volatility over the past week kind of subsiding. big shake-up on the dow industrials this morning, some of you haven't seen for queers, the average made up of 30 stocks is kicking not one, not two, but three of its companies, kicking it to the curb. bank of america, co-op being shown to the door. the dow, as we know, we refer to it every day -- certainly what i go to tell you what the numbers are. it's meant to give us a broad picture, made up of companies
from the financial industry, technology, retail and pharmaceuticals. the companies -- they actually see it as an honor to be included. if you're wondering, these changes will be going into effect on september 23rd. welcome to the club. carol? >> that's right. alison kosik, reporting live from the new york stock exchange. let talk more about that deal that syria reportedly came to with russia to turn over its stock of chemical weapons that it will turn over to international forces, which usually means the united nations. that's where nick peyton is this morning. is anyone from the united nations commenting yet? >> reporter: it is still early in the day here. the french today are beginning a series of discussions with different members of the security council. obviously, mostly amongst them the permanent five members, russia, china, u.s. and uk, to try to agree on a text. key principles is that they should hand over chemical
weapons, that they should be a strong resolution, which suggests, quote, serious consequences and that the perpetrators of the attacks around damascus should face, eventually, trial in the international criminal court. that's the complexity of the task ha ahead of the french here. we understand the usual mep mechanism you would see is the permanent five members meeting to hammer out the text. they're not at that point yet. they seem to be in talks one on one with different countries here. once that's gone satisfactory, you will see -- bit of a challenge for the french to get this together. what they're proposing is some distance from the russian plan, which is much more simply about putting these chemical weapons, if syria actually admits they have them officially, under u.n. control or international control of some sort. so, while there seems to be this massive flurry of diplomat ic
solution and practically applying this, carol, there's a bit of daylight between the different proposals. we have to see how this pans out at the u.n. today. >> that sounds complicated and sounds like it might take a long time. is there a deadline attached to this? >> reporter: that's interesting. i specifically asked the u.n. diplomat about the timelines, specifically if the french proposal had a timeline. they're not really going there. wouldn't even be drawn, if we're talking a month at this point. the diplomacy on this, backdoor trading at the u.n. could in itself take weeks to get a resolution together. you have to get a mechanism for inspectors, et cetera. this could be a russian and syrian delaying tactic to kick the ball into the long grass, so to speak. carol? >> nick paton walsh, thank you.
where president obama is head this had afternoon before his big address to the nation to you tonight. athena jones is live in washington. makes you wonder what the president will say tonight, right? >> reporter: it does. he has a tall order here. this new proposal by russia to have syria hand over control of its chemical weapons to the international community is being met here on capitol hill with cautious optimism by some and serious skepticism by others. folks have a lot of questions about this. now, even the skeptics, though -- people like arizona republican senator john mccain say this proposal can't be ignored. here is what he had to say this morning about it on "new day." >> it must be examined and i think we could have a very good initial test, chris. and that would be for the immediate dispatch of monitors, international monitors to these chemical weapon sites, which we know where most of them are and secure them.
so that they can't be used by bashar al assad. then we work out the procedures for keeping them under international control. >> reporter: senator mccain also said he believes these international monitors could arrive on site in syria immediately. he and other members of congress say that if this is a serious proposal, and that would be one test to see if it is serious, to let those international monitors in, that it can't be ignored. it has to be considered. that's why harry reid is delaying a vote in the senate on this. it is a wrinkle in the process here. >> the senator will still ha-- >> the president will still have lunch today, right? >> that's right. we expect to hear from senate minority leader mitch mcconnell on this issue of syria. and then later on the house armed services committee is holding a hearing for
new iphone today. if it can live up to fierce expectation and top what it's done before. there's a lot riding on this. as usual, all the details are shrouded in secrecy. oh, man! christine romans, we'll get her back in a second. she has a taped story for you anyway. let's listen to that now. >> apple unveiling new iphones it hopes will help it win the smart phone war. this leaked photo posted on the blog iphone in canada, the 5s. here is what tech insiders expect. it's not a total redesign but will have a faster processor. the screen size roughly stay the same. it will come in new colors, including a gold or champagne option, improved camera will take better pictures and there are rumors of a fingerprint scanner as a replacement for password. the cost for the basic model expected to remain the same as the current iphone, $199 with a two-year contract or $649 without. apple also debuting a cheaper
model, iphone 5c which will reportedly come in multiple hues. >> it's really important for apple to not just make the premium product but a good product for the rest of the people. >> some experts say these aren't innovative enough to overcome the bruises, losing marketshare to companies like google and samsung. others say apple hasn't lost its luster. >> people wonder has apple lost its imagination? i don't think so. it took us 20 years of the mac and ipod to get where we are with the iphone. it's not as fast as people think it is. i think apple is still doing great. >> all right. carol, there's a lot riding on this. iphone sales made up more than half of apple's revenue last quarter. those in the know say there won't be a new ipad on ipad mini, no iwatch.
watch what this company says about selling phones in china. 750 million people use cell phones in china. apple has had a hard time cracking that market. that will be important for shareholders. you probably are one, carol. it is among the most widely held stocks in the country. >> that's true. i'm looking forward to the rainbow colored iphones. that's kind of cool, right? it isn't that big but everybody wants a pink iphone. >> you can go to the corner and buy a sleeve, carol, and have whatever color you want already. will these colors be available here or just in the cheaper consumer markets that apple is looking for? we'll find out for sure at 1:00 pm eastern. >> yes, we will. christine romans, thank you. here's what's all new in the next hour of "newsroom." his off-the cuff remark may have
change changed the syria. plus, confessed to killing a navy veteran after a night of drinking and driving. now the man behind that viral youtube video is behind bars and due in court. and what's a brand new nfl season without a little controversy? >> the term redskins is obviously wrong and sensitive and unacceptable. we do not deserve to be called redskins. >> the fight to change the team name some call derogatory. i'll talk to the man leading the charge. that's all new in the next hour of "newsroom."
new york city voters head to the polls to pick their nominees mayor. recent polls show bill deblasio leading among democratic opponents. he'll need 47% of the vote. anthony weiner is in a distant fourth place. which ever democratic candidate wins will go up against a republican in month of. a fast-moved wildfire tripled in size. fire near mt. diablo is on 20% contained. threatens 100 homes. the fire threatens communication lines, infrastructures and mt. diablo's visitor center. record-breaking swimmer diana nyad faces her critics today. a group of marathon swimmers voicing skepticism about the 64-year-old's recent swim from cuba to key west, florida. more than a dozen say nyad may have held on to a support device
swimming through waters. she's the first person to swim from cuba to florida without a protective cage. take a look at this, that, my friends, say 741-pound alligator. a mississippi man made that record-setting catch over the weekend. >> and with the travel hooks i actually set into him. put five lines on him. tied him up to the side of the boat. we had a good fight on our hands for about an hour. really didn't know how big he was until his whole body was until he pulled us down the river. >> the new record was set in claire born county, mississippi. in case you're wondering the alligator measured 13 feet, 26 inches. last week, a 727-pound gator was caught in the same county. a philadelphia eagles new coach unveiled his fast pace and
high octane pressure. it was impressive. joe carter has this morning's "bleacher report." good morning, joe. >> hi, good morning. carol, yeah, it was fun to watch last night. we know bringing that chip kelly offense was a big fwourn the eagles, well documented at the college of oregon. but people wondering how is that going to translate in the nfl. would the players be able to keep up with the fast-paced offense. they scored 26 points and ran an eye-popping 22 points. the steelers ran the same number of games. michael vick has seen this as absolutely fast. >> i've never been a part of anything like this where in the first quarters it feels like we've gone through halftime. i mean, it was unreal. only thing i could say to myself, it's going to be a long season. in the final game of the
opening weekend, san diego, boy, they blew it. they gave up a 21-point lead and lost to houston on the final play of the game. houston scored 24 you answered points. including this game-winner as time expired. what a win for texas. a gritty comeback. 31-28. trending this morning on bleacherreport.com, rafael nadal, he's the comeback king of tennis this year. remember last year, a knee injury threatened his entire career. now he's having one of the most dominant seasons ever. nadal won his second u.s. open title. he's 27. he's got a lot of grand slam titles. 13 in all. we've seen managers yelling at umpires, baseball players at other players. last night it was jgirardi and showalt
showalter. here's the reaction out there. >> he's yelling at the third base coach. and, now, somebody's wearing black and orange, i'm not going to let that happen. >> i'm going to protect our players always. that's what i'm going do. and there was something that i saw. and i'm just going to leave it at that. >> so why so heated, carol? we got a wildcard race going on between these two teams. obviously, baltimore and the yankees battled for that last wildcard spot. that's why was such a big deal. the pressure is mounting for the managers to make the playoffs. >> i wish they would have let them fight. i think buck showalter could have taken him. >> he's fiery when it comes to the yankees. he's got some type of a chip on his shoulder with the yankees. >> joe carter, thanks very much. "cnn newsroom" after a quick break. [ male announcer ] ah... retirement. sit back, relax,
pull out the paper and what? another article that says investors could lose tens of thousands of dollars in hidden fees on their 401(k)s?! seriously? seriously. you don't believe it? search it. "401(k) hidden fees." then go to e-trade and roll over your old 401(k)s to a new e-trade retirement account. we have every type of retirement account. none of them charge annual fees and all of them offer low cost investments. why? because we're not your typical wall street firm that's why. so you keep more of your money. e-trade. less for us. more for you.
happening now in the "newsroom," military strike or diplomatic solution? president obama says he's open to both and makes his case to you tonight. i don't know what he's capable of. i'm really, really scared. >> george zimmerman's wife dials 911 saying zimmerman threatened her with a gun. wait until you hear her frantic call. get ready for faster, smarter, maybe even cheaper.
all eyes on apple as it announces a brand-new iphone today. is the name redskins racist? the new nfl season kicks off and a old fight picks up. second hour of "newsroom" starts now. good morning, i'm carol costello, thanks so much for being with me. as the world reacts to a breakthrough plan over syria's use of chemical weapons, president obama's trip to capitol hill is still on as he tries to persuade both sides of the senate to back his plan to limited military action. while the president's plan is not an easy sale in the senate it faces a bigger hurdle in the house especially after syria has put its chemical weapons under control. house gop leaders are wrapping up their weekly conference meeting and we expect to hear from the house speaker john boehner. when he speaks, of course, we'll
bring those to you live. the armed services committee takes up president obama's formal request to congress for an authorization to strike syria. on the hot seat, three men who have spent a lot of time on the hot seat this week presenting the president's case, secretary of state john kerry, defense secretary chuck hagel and joint chiefs chair general martin dempsey. those three men have been getting grilled since asking for approval. if anything happens in this hour, we'll bring it to you live as well. let's talk more about the diplomatic breakthrough until syria as president obama prepares for hirst big address to the nation. a new nonviolent solution has emerged all because of this seemingly off-the-cuff comment from secretary of state john kerry. >> he could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week, turn it over. all of it. and without delay, and allow a full and total accounting for that. but he isn't about to do it.
and it can't be done, obviously. >> well, mr. secretary of state, maybe you can. this morning the war-torn nation agreed to accept russia's plan, syria will hand over its chemical weapons -- will hand it over to international control and possibly avoid u.s. military strikes. but voices out there like senator john mccain are wondering if this deal is too good to be true. >> i am very skeptical, very, very skeptical. but the fact is that you can't pass up this opportunity, if it is one. but you've got to, right away, determine whether it's real or not. >> retired air force colonel and cnn military analyst rick francona live now in washington. welcome. >> good morning. >> so what do you make of this? is syria -- i mean, do you think syria will really turn over its chemical weapons stash to international control? >> not until they are absolutely
forced to. you know, every welcomes this development. i mean taking chemical weaponses off of anybody is great. but i just don't see the syrians giving up what they believe is their strategic deterrence to israel. now, we may see them give up some of the sarin, they'll say, okay, here's the artillery rockets. shears some warheads and certain other things. but, you know, he has a pretty large stockpile of a better agent called v.x. that's what is on the asked you missiles. that's what he plans to use on the israelis there-f there's a large-scale war. i don't see him giving those up unless he's forced to. >> colonel, i want you to stay with us. we're going to take you and our viewers to the armed services committee. they're meeting right now. >> -- very, very busy week. we appreciate your time and the effort you've made to inform us and this committee and the american public of the important
work that you're engaged in. this committee has closely monitored the conflict in syria. throughout, this committee has focused on understanding the strategic contexts, the options, the risks of those options, as well as the cost of military action in syria. today, i hope our witnesses will focus not only on the case for military action that has been made over the last two week, but also address the justifiable concerns raise by members on a bipartisan basis. this includes understanding more about likely second order effects. how a limited strike will achieve our policy goals. and the planning that's been done to respond, should assad miscalculate, in terms of both operational and financial planning. what options, short of additional military action, do we have to respond to escalation or retaliation.
a and, secretary hagel, although you've estimated that this will cost tens of millions of dollars, in april of this year, you testified, let's start with the question of how do you pay pour military acts in syria if we do something. yet, i do believe it's clear that a supplemental will be required. history tells us there will likely be second or third military effects that demand military action. therefore it gives me great pause that we have not addressed our devastating consults due to the military sequestration. even as we commit the military to another new mission, we've surged troops to afghanistan and cut the military's budget. we've flown missions over libya and cut the military's budget. we're pivoting to the asia pacific and cutting the military's budget. all told, these cuts total an outstanding $1.2 trillion. and now we're considering strikes on syria, while the military's budget continues to
be cut. i share president obama's concern about assad's vicious use of chemical weapons on his people. i'm also deeply concerned about the united states' standing in the region. when the president drew his red line, he put america's cards on the table. a leader either enforces his red lines, or he becomes irrelevant. however, i'm equally concerned about the condition of a military that's been chewed up from budget cuts and years from fighting. and the lack of certainty. this chief and the chiefs that serve with him have not had a budget in their term in this office. they do not know, really, what they have to spend at the end of this month, going into next year. it's not a way to run an organization. we cannot keep asking the military to perform dangerous mission after mission, with multiple rounds of defense cuts, including sequestration
happening over their heads. through decisiveness, clarity of purpose and leadership, the president has the power to allay many of these concerns. i look forward to answers to these questions and to your testimony here today. mr. smith. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i thank you for this hearing. i think our witnesses, secretary carry kerry, secretary hagel and general dempsey on the many difficult issues we face as a country. i think there's no question at this point that assad used chemical weapons in syria. the evidence, intelligence case that's been made, it's been overwhelming in the hearings that i have been to. this, of course, is on the heels of a civil war in which assad has killed somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 of his own civilians which is a series of abhorrent acts in and of themselves. the challenge for us and this panel and the people who are testifying today is how best to respond to all this.
how best to hold president assad accountable for all of this. there is no question, and i agree completely that trying control the privilege racing of chemical weapons say goal that we must have as a nation. we must go forward. but can a one-time, limited military strike accomplish that? and i think what our committee wants to hear today how will that happen? how will this one-time strike be enough to hold assad accountable while not creating a chaos or risk that these very dangerous weapons would frankly fall into more dangerous hands given the presence of al qaeda and other groups in syria that would not be friendly to us and very dangerous. how do you strike that balance between holding assad accountable? and not creating a worse situation? it's very, very difficult. we're going to have serious goes today how that is accomplished. and we look forward to hearing from witnesses to help us better understand this problem. also, we're very interested in how serious the russian proposal
is. if you think that as a worthy goal in terms of holding assad accountable in eliminating the chemical weapons, is that something that can happen? now, we definitely want to hear how -- how you think that plays into our decisions going forward. lastly, i just want to agree with the chairman on sequestration. it is an enormous problem. certainly, it adds a layer of complication for every conflict that comes up, including the one in syria. personally, i would end sequestration tomorrow. you know, we can talk about thousand get the budget deficit undercontrol long term. revenues, spending and all of that. one thing we know, sequestration is really devastating our military caution problems in our budget and other portions. it was never meant to be an enforcing mechanism. an intention that has clearly failed. and i think we should just eliminate it and then we can get back to the issue of how to control the deficit without torturing the daily budget on a day in and day out basis.
so if this syrian crisis prompts a more serious discussion of that that will be a tiny positive in what is otherwise a >> reporter: dangerous situation. i look forward to many it and the questions from our committee. again, i thank this distinguished panel pour beifor here today. >> thank you, secretary kerry. >> chairman mckeon, ranking member smith and distinguished members of the committee, a privilege to be here this morning, with secretary hagel and general dempsey. and we are, all of us you all three of us, very much looking forward to a conversation with you. about this complicated, challenging but critical issue that our country faces. and we don't come to you lightly. i think secretary hagel and i particularly come here with an enormous amount of respect for this process.
for what each of you go through at home. and the challenges you face with constituents and the complexity of this particular issue. so, this is good. it's good that we're here. and we look forward to the conversation. and as we convene at this hearing, it is no exaggeration at all to say to you, that the world is watching. and they're watching not just to see what we decide, they're watching to see how we decide it. and whether or not we have the ability at this critical time, when smoch son the line, and so many parts of the world as challenges to governments were at large, it's important that we show the world that we actually do the ability to hopefully speak with one voice. and we believe that that can
make a difference. needs less to say, this is one the most important decisions that any member of congress makes during the course of their service. and we all want to make sure we leave plenty of time here for a discussion. obviously, this is a very large committee. and so we'll try to summarize in these comments. and give the opportunity for the q and a. but i just want to open with a few comments about questions i'm hearing from from many of your colleagues. and, obviously, from the american people, and what we read in the news. first, people ask me and they ask you, i know, why we are choosing to have a debate on syria at a time when there's so much that we need to be doing here at home. and we all know what that agenda is. let me assure you, the president of the united states didn't wake up one day and just kind of flippantly say, let's go take
military action in syria. he didn't choose this. we didn't choose this. we're here today because bashar al assad, a dictator who has chosen to meet the request for reform in his country with bullets and bombs and napalm and gas because he made a decision to use the world's most heinous weapons to murder more than -- in one instance, 1,400 people including more than 400 children. he and his regime made a choice. and president obama believes and all of us at this table believe that we have no choice but to respond. now, to those who doubt whether assad's actions have to have consequences. remember, that our inaction
absolutely is guaranteed to bring worse consequences. you, every one of you here, we, all of us, america, will face this. if not today, somewhere down the line, when the permissiveness of not acting now gives us that license to go do what he wants. and threaten israel. threaten jordan, threaten lebanon. greater instability in a region already racked by stanlt. where stability is one of the our greatest securities in national interest. that brings me to the second question that i've heard lately which is sort of what's really at stake here? you know, does this really affect us. i met early yesterday today with steve shabet and asked him what are you hearing? i know what you're all hearing. the instant reaction of a lot of
americans anywhere in our country is whoa, we don't want to go to war again. we don't want to go to iraq. we don't want to go to afghanistan. we've seen how those turned out. i get it. and i'll speak to that in a minute. but i want to make it clear at the outset as each of us at this table want to make it clear what assad has done directly affects america's security. america's security. we have a huge national interest in containing all weapons of mass destruction. and the use of gas is a weapon of mass destruction. allowing those weapons to be used with impunity would be an enormous chink in our armor that we have built up over years, against proliferation. think about it. our own troops benefit from that prohibition against chemical weapons. i mentioned yesterday, in the briefing, many of you were
there, and some of you, i notice from declarations, otherwise, i know many of you have served in the military. some of you still in the reserves. and you know the training that we used to go through when you're, you know, learning. and i went to chemical/nuclear/biological warfare school. i remember going in the room with a gas mask. they make you take it off. and they see how long you can do it. and it ain't long. those weapons have been outlawed. and all of those weapons in world war i have never been subjected to it because we stand up to that prohibition. there's a reason for that. if we don't answer assad today we will irreparably damage a century-old standard that has protected troops in war. for all the constituents that say why did you go for this, even though we said we don't want to go to war, because you
want to america america's troops and the prohibition, and the world's provision against these weapons. the stability of this region is also in our direct security interest. our allies, our friends in israel, jordan and turkey. are all of them just a strong wind away from being injured themselves. or potentially, from the purposeful attack. failure to act now will make this already volatile neighborhood even more combustible and it will almost certainly pave the way for a more serious challenge in the future. and you can just ask our friends in israel or elsewhere. in israel, they can't get enough gas masks. and there's a reason that the prime minister has said this matters. this decision matters. it's called iran. iran looms out there with its potential -- with its nuclear program. and the challenge we have been
facing. and that moment is coming closer in terms of a decision. they're watching what we do here. they're watching what you do. around whether or not this means something. if we choose not to act, we will be sending a message to iran of american ambivalence. american weakness. it will raise a question, i've heard this question -- secretary of state, as i meet with people, and they ask sort of about our long-term interests and the future with respect to iran. they've asked me many times did you really mean what you say? are you really going to do something? they ask whether or not the united states is committed. and they ask us also if the president cuts a daill deal, wi congress back it up? can he deliver? this is all integrated. i have no doubt. i talked to prime minister
netanyahu yesterday, israel does not want to be in the middle of this, and we know that their security is at risk. and the region is at risk. i also want to remind you, you have already spoken to this. your word is on the line too. you passed the syria accountability act. and that act states that syria's chemical weapons threatens the middle east. that's in plain writing. that's in the act. you voted for it. we already decided these chemical weapons are important to the security of our nation. i quote "the national security interests of the united states are -- the national security interests of the united states are at risk with chemical weapons of syria." the fourth question i've been asked, a lot of times, is why diplomacy isn't changing this dynamic. isn't there some alternative that could avoid this?
and i want to emphasize on behalf of president obama, president obama's first priority throughout his process has been and is diplomacy. diplomacy is our first resort. and we have brought this issue to the united nations security council on many occasions. we have sent direct messages to syria. and had syria's allies bring direct messages don't do it. don't use these commonwealth of pennsylvanias. all to no avail. in the last three years syria and china have revoted the regime for inciting violence or resolutions that simply promote a solution to the dialogue to the conflict. russia has even blocked press releases, press releases, that do nothing more than express
humanitarian concern of what schaaping in syria or merely condemn the using of chemical weapons, not even assigning blame, they have blocked them. we've brought these concerns to the united nations making the indication that the security council, protecting civilians, prohibitsing the use of chemical weapons and promoting peace and security are in our shared interests. and those general statements have been blocked. that is why the president directed me to work with the russians in the regions players to get a geneva 2 peace negotiation under way. and the end to the conflict in syria, we all emphasize today, is a political solution. none of us are coming in today asking for long-term military -- i mean, some people think we ought to be. but we don't believe there is
any military solution to what is happening in syria. but make no mistake, no political solution will ever be achievable, as long as assad believes he can just gas his way out of this predicament. and we are without question building the coalition of support for this now. 31 countries have signed on to the g-20 statement, which is a powerful one, endorsing the united states' efforts to hold assad accountable for what he is doing. turkey, saudi arabia, qatar and france joining with us in any action. we're now in double digits with respect to countries actually prepared to take action, should they be needed, were they capable of it. more than 25 -- i mentioned 31 nations signing on to the g-12 statement. but our diplomatic hand, my
former colleagues, our diplomatic hand only becomes stronger if other countries know that america is speaking with a strong voice here. with one voice. and if we're stronger, as a united nation around this purpose. in order to speak with that voice, we need you, the congress. that's what the president did. many of you said, please bring this to congress. the president has done that. and he's bringing it to congress with confidence that the congress will want to join in an effort in order to uphold the world of the united states of america, not just a president. but the united states of america with respect to these weapons of mass destruction. now, i want to be crystal clear about something else. some people want to do more in syria. some people are leery about doing anything at all. but one goal we ought all be able to agree on is that
chemical weapons cannot be under the control of a man so craven that he has repeatedly used those chemical weapons against his fellow syrians, with a horrific results that all of us have been able to see. yesterday, we challenged the regime to turn them over to the secure control of the international community so that they could be destroyed. and that, of course, would be the ultimate way to degrade and deter assad's arsenal. and it is the ideal weapon -- ideal way to take this weapon away from him. assad's chief benefactor, the russians, have responded by saying that they would come up with a proposal to do exactly that. and we have made it clear to them, i have some several conversations with foreign minister lavrov that this cannot be a process of delay. this cannot be a process of avoidance. it has to be real, it has to be measurable, tangible.
and it is exceedingly difficult i want everybody here to know, to fulfill those conditions but we're wait for that proposal. but we're not waiting for long. president obama will take a hard look at it. but it has to be swift. it has to be real. it has to be verifiable. it did not abe delaying tactic. and if the united nations security council seeks to be the vehicle to make it happen, that cannot be allowed to simply become a debating society. now many countries and many of you in the congress, from those who wanted military action to those who were skeptical of military action, want to see if this idea could become a reality. but make no mistake, make no mistake about why this idea has any potential legs at all. and why it is that the russians have reached out to the syrians and why the syrians have initially suggested they might
be interested. a lot of people say that nothing focuses the mind like the prospect of a hanging. well, it's the credible threat of force that has been on the table for these last weeks that has, for the first time, brought this regime to even acknowledge that they have a chemical weapons arsenal. and it is the threat of this force, and our determination to hold assad accountable that has motivated others to even talk about a real and credible international action that might have an impact. so how do you maintain that pressure? we have to continue to show syria, russia and the world that we are not going to fall for stalling tactics. if the challenge we laid down is going to have the potential to become a real proposal, it is only because of the threat of force that we are discussing today. and that threat is more
compelling if congress stands with the commander in chief. finally, let me just correct a common misperception. in my conversation with steve shabet earlier today, he mentioned this, i've heard it. i've talked with many of you who hear it. the instant reaction of a lot of americans, and i'm completely sympathetic to it, i understand it. i know where it comes from. i only stopped sitting where you sit a few months ago. i know exactly what the feelings are. people don't want another iraq. none of us do, we don't want an afghanistan. but, mr. chairman, with all due respect, we can't make this decision based sole on the budget. we can make this decision based solely on our wishes. on our feeling that we know we've been through the wringer
for a while. we're the united states of america, and people look to us. they look to us for the meaning of our word and they look to us for our values in fact being volumed up by the imprint of action where that is necessary. we are not talking about america going to war. president obama is not asking for a declaration of war. we are not going to war. there will be no american boots on the ground. let me repeat, no american boots will be on the ground. what we're talking about is a targeted, limited, but consequential action that will reinforce the prohibition against chemical weapons. and general dempsey and secretary hagel will tell you how we can achieve that and their confidence in their ability to achieve that. we're talking about an action that will degrade assad's capacity to use these weapons.
and to ensure that they do not proliferate. and with this authorization, the president is asking for the power to make sure that the united states of america means what we say. mr. chairman, mr. ranking member, and members of this committee, i can say to you with absolute confidence, the risk of not acting is much greater than the risk of acting. if we fail to act, assad will believe that he has license to gas his own people again. and that license will turn prohibited weapons into tactical weapons. general dempsey can tell you about this. it would make -- it would take an exception, a purposeful exception that has been in force since 1925 and make it the rule
today. it would undermine our standing, deroad america's credibility and erode our strength in the world. in a world of terrorists and extremists, we would choose to ignore those risks at our peril. we cannot afford to have chemical weapons transformed into the new, convenient weapon. the ied, the car bomb, the weapon of everyday use in this world. neither our country, nor our conscience can bear the cost of inaction. that's why we've come before you at the instruction of the president to ask you to join us in this effort. secretary hagel. >> mr. chairman, ranking member smith and members of the committee, the department of defense has responsibility to protect the national security interests of the united states. and general dempsey and i take that responsibility very seriously. that's why i strongly support
president obama's decision to respond to the assad regime's chemical weapons attack on its own people. a large-scale and heinous sarin gas assault on incident civilians including women and children. i also wholeheartedly seek the president's use of force in syria. and i believe secretary kerry outlined those reasons very clearly. the president has made clear that is in our country's national security interest to degrade assad's chemical weapons capabilities, and deter him from using them again. as secretary kerry mentioned, yesterday, we outlined a way to accomplish this objective and avert military action. it would require the assad regime to swiftly turn its chemical weapons arsenal over to international control, so it can be destroyed forever.
as president obama noted in a verifiable manner. all of us are hopeful that this option might be a real solution to this crisis. yet, we must be very clear-eyed and ensure that it is not a stalling tactic by syria and its russian patriots. the threat of a u.s. military action, the credible, real threat of u.s. military action, must continue as we are talking today. and will continue to talk and discuss throughout the week. it was the president's determination to hold assad accountable. and the fact that he put military action on the table that enabled this new diplomatic track to maybe gain some momentum and credibility. the support of congress for holding assad accountable will
give even more energy and more urgency to these efforts. so congress has a responsibility to continue this important debate on authorizing the use of force against the syrian regime. as each of us knows, committing our country to using military force is the most difficult decision leaders will make. all of those who are privileged to serve our nation have responsibility to ask the tough questions. before that commitment is made. we must be able to assure the american people that their leaders are acting according to u.s. national interests. with well-defined military objectives. and with an understanding of the risks and the consequences involved. the president is an entire national security team, asked those difficult questions before we concluded that the united states should take military action against syrian regime
targets. i want to address briefly how we reached this decision by clarifying the u.s. interests at stake here today and in the future. our military objectives, and the risks of not acting at this critical juncture. as president obama has said, the use of chemical weapons in syria is not only an assault on humanity, it is a serious threat to america's national security interests and those of our closest allies. the syrian regime's actions risk eroding the longstanding international norm against the use of chemical weapons. a norm that has helped protect united states homeland and american forces operating across the globe from these terrible weapons. the weakening of this norm has grave consequences for our troops, our country's future security and for global stability. these weapons are profoundly destabilizing. and have rightfully been
rejected by the international community. syria's use of chemical weapons also threatens our friends and partners along its borders including israel, turkey, lebanon and iraq. it increases the risk that terrorist groups like hezbollah which has forces in syria supporting the assad regime could acquire chemical weapons and use them against our interests and our people. we must do all we can to prevent hezbollah or any terrorist group determined to describing the united states from acquiring chemical weapons. and we cannot allow terrorist groups in authoritarian regimes to mistakenly believe that they can use chemical weapons against u.s. troops or america's friends or partners in regions without severe consequences. our allies throughout the world must be assured that the united states will stand by its security commitments and stand by its word. our adversaries must not believe
that they can develop and use weapons of mass destruction without consequence. a world where these adversaries are emboldened instead of deterred is not the world that we want to live in, as president obama said last week. for example, north korea with its massive stockpile of chemical weapons threatens our treaty ally republic of korea. directly threatens the 28,000 u.s. troops stationed there on the dmz. during my recent trip to asia, i had a very serious and long discussion with the south korean defense minister about this real threat that north korea's chemical weapons presents to them and to our troops. given these threats to our national security, the united states must demonstrate through our actions that the use of chemical weapons is unacceptable. the president has made clear
that our military objectives in syria would be to hold the assad regime accountable for its chemical weapons attack. degrade its ability to carry out these kinds of attacks. and deter the regime from further use of chemical weapons. the department of defense has developed military options to achieve these objectives. and we have positioned u.s. assets throughout the region to successfully execute the mission. we believe we can achieve them, we can achieve them of the military action that would be targeted, consequential and limited. general dempsey and i have assured the president that u.s. forces will be ready to act whenever the president gives the order. we are working to build broad international support for this effort. as secretary kerry has noted. last week at the g-20, the leaders of a number of countries condemned this atrocity and
called for a strong international response. in the days since a number of other nations have also signed on to this state, as secretary kerry has also noted. in defining our military objectives, we have made clear that we're not seeking to resolve the underlying conflict in syria through direct military force. we will not send america's sons and daughters to fight another country's civil war. we are not contemplating any kind of open-ended intervention. or an operation involving american ground troops. a political solution created by the syrian people is the only way to ultimately end the violence in syria. and secretary of kerry is helping lead that international effort to help the parties in syria move toward a negotiated transition. >> all right. we're going to jump out of this. that's defense secretary chuck hagel testifying before the house arms committee. we're going to discuss this with jason johnson, ann navarro our
political analyst and colonel rick francona, our cnn military analyst. we're going to talk about this deal that the russians made with syria to take control of the chemical weapons stash and put it in control of the united nations. we're going to talk about that when we come back. ort benning, . [ male announcer ] usaa auto insurance is often handed down from generation to generation. because it offers a superior level of protection and because usaa's commitment to serve military members, veterans, and their families is without equal. begin your legacy, get an auto insurance quote. usaa. we know what it means to serve.
i don't know. how did you get here? [ speaking in russian ] look, look, look... you probably want to get away as much as we do. with priceline express deals, you can get a fabulous hotel without bidding. think of the rubles you'll save. with one touch, fun in the sun. i like fun. well, that went exactly i as planned.. really? about yoplait's fall favorites. so we brought pumpkin pie and apple crisp back for a limited time. see? you really do call the shots. ♪ yoplait. it is so good. ♪ trust your instincts to make the call. to treat my low testosterone, my doctor and i went with axiron, the only underarm low t treatment. axiron can restore t levels to normal in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer.
women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. ask your doctor about the only underarm low t treatment, axiron. vo:remember to changew that oil is the it on schedule toy car. keep your car healthy. show your car a little love with an oil change starting at $19.95.
41 minutes past the hour. for those of you just joining us, there has been a surprise twist to the crisis in syria. syrian officials reportedly are agreeing to a russian plan to turn over its chemical weapons. it's a plan that has many in washington and beyond hoping that a u.s. military strike on syria could be avoided. right now there's a house armed services committee hearing going on. and we just heard testimony from the secretary of state and the secretary of defense. this is the joint chair general dempsey talking now. they did mention their plan of syria turning over its chemical weapons. and we want to talk about that with our cnn military analyst colonel rick francona and also jason johnson and anna navarro, two of our best political minds out there. i'm going to start with you colonel rick because john kerry said during testimony said -- i'm going to read "it's the threat of assad that has held
assad accountable talking about credible solutions." by credible solutions he meant this plan, is that right? >> i believe so. i'll give the secretary credit that it was remark that triggered this but it was the looming threat of military action in syria. the syrians don't know exactly what we were going to do but it was going to dos them degradation of their forces. if you believe secretary hagel, i'm sure general dempsey is making that point that we were going to cause degradation in their forces. the syrians don't want that. they want to continue to prosecute this civil war to their own benefit without what they would call interference. i would see this as a positive development, but i'm very worried that this is just a tactic on the part of the syrians to delay this. we're going to see from the syrians what we saw from the iraqis just obfuscation and agree to talk about this and set up the protocol.
>> the secretary of state went on to acknowledge that. he went on to say, lawmakers if you support a strike on syria that will button this up. they will have to accept the deal because now they know the united states is quite serious. jason, is that going to happen? that's the big question, right? >> i think it's going to happen in the senate. it was never going to happen in the house. this is like -- you've got to put your foot on the gas right now. we've got the syrians and russians coming to the table. the russians who for years have tried to block any action on syria. the syrians who pretty much denied they had chemical weapons until this attack now is not time for the u.s. senate to back off. >> it was supposed to happen, what, tomorrow? now they've delayed it because they're interested in this diplomatic solution. and isn't that a good thing, anna navarro, because that's what most americans want? >> look, i think it's up in the air and has yet to be seen. what we have seen right now is
the most incoherent policy from this administration. what this does is buy time for the syrians and it also buys time for this administration that was heading towards a sure defeat in congress if this was brought up to a vote. and i think it's absolutely essential that the congress include provisions that demand if syria does not meet these conditions by a certain time, a time certain, very specified, then the u.s. will be able to strike. i think this may actually get more votes now than it would have before. but at the same time, we've got to -- you know, we've got time. and we've got to do what president obama hasn't done in the last three years. we've got to keep trying to change momentum on the ground which means arming the rebels, supporting the rebels. >> colonel francona, let's talk about that. john mccain still wants to arm the rebels but he also came out and says, doesn't really trust syria. doesn't really trust russia because we don't know. he believes what you just said
this is something to delay things so russia and syria can figure out what to do. so what is the answer? >> well, there's two different issue here's. anna brings up the point that, you know, this is to avert a u.s. strike and degrade their chemical capabilities. so right now, we're talking about stopping syria from using chemicals. no one is addressing the real problem, how do you stop a civil war. everybody wants a diplomatic solution to that. and that's a whole other problem we're not addressing that. we've been talking about that for two years now but we really haven't done anything. the president said the last time when the syrians used chemical weapons we were going to start arming the rebels but we haven't done it yet. and we haven't given them the right weapons. this is two different issues and hopefully this will conflate them into one. we need to address all of this, not just the chemicals. >> the president is to address the nation tonight, jason.
in light of what the colonel just said, will the president make it easy for the people to understand exactly what's going on? will he talk about the bigger picture in that region? >> yeah, i think so. and now it's going to be easier for him to do so. we're at the 1 yard line here. the president can say, we're almost there. we've got everybody else on board. now, all we have to do is make sure that congress supports this action because it is a wider issue. it's not just chemical weapons. it's doing something about the flood of refugees. it's also finding the rentals to arm. we do know that hair al qaeda rebels we do know that the civil war is not a coherent hold. so if the president gives a little history lesson that will assuage a lot of concerns in russia. >> how important is the president's speech tonight, anna? the world will be watching, not just the united states, the world will be watching for some
strong message from president obama? >> i think it's very important because we haven't heard a coherent strong message from president obama, or actually, his administration so far. i think the american people want to hear it. i think it's important for the stature of the united states worldwide. yesterday, i spoke to congressmen who had been in that classified hearing, they told me they left there with more answers than questions. they told me that hearing could have been conducted by the keystone cops. so for once, there's got to be some clarity, some strategy. there's got to be strength, determination. and the president has got to make the case as to why this is relevant to the u.s., to the people of the united states of america. he hasn't done that yet. i hope he takes this chance tonight to do so. >> retired air force general francona, jason johnson, anna navarr navarro, thanks to all of you. you can watch president obama
it would run on the most affordable energy source available. it would charge overnight. every morning, you'd wake up with a full tank, ready to go. if the car was invented today, it would be the 100% electric nissan leaf. with over 200 million gas-free miles driven and automatic hov lane access, the question isn't "why electric?" it's "why gas?" [ male announcer ] the 100% electric nissan leaf. nissan. innovation that excites. now get a 2013 nissan leaf for $199 a month. ♪
the visitor center. people in new jersey are a step closer to enjoying medical marijuana options. governor christie is expected to sign a petition by the sate assembly. the legislation stems from a new jersey father's effort to find a treatment for his daughter's severe epilepsy. apple is expected to unveil not one but two new iphones today. the 5-s is expected to come in new colors and have a faster processor. it's also likely the new gadget will have an improved camera. techies think the 5s will have a finger print scanner to allow users to logon outa pass word. and a cheaper model that would sell for less than 200 bucks in some countries. and country music star vince gill has some strong words for members of the west borough baptist church, a group known
for protesting outside of funerals of fallen service members. the singer confronted the group outside of a concert in kansas city, missouri. the protesters say they targeted gill because he's divorced and then he got remarried. well, the confrontation was caught on tape. listen. >> vince gill, what in the world are you doing out here? >> i just came to see what hate looked like. >> most importantly, what are you doing with another man's wife? >> i came out to see what hatred looks like. >> jesus christ said -- >> you know what else he said, a lot of stuff about forgiveness, about grace, you guys don't have any of it. >> believe me, vince gill went on and it got quite spicy. gill has been married to singer amy grant, as you know, for 13 years. today is the peak of hurricane season and so far we haven't seen any major storms. cnn's karen maginnis is in the cnn weather center. that's good news.
>> that is good news. we still have the rest of the season to watch, yes, we're in the peak time period when typically we would have seen at least one hurricane. you have to go back to 2002 before you see one that's even later. well, it looks like humberto may be the first hurricane of the season, well off the coast africa. it has moved past the cape verde islands moving north-northwest at 9 miles an hour now supporting winds at about 65 miles an hour. we think during the overnight hours or possibly into early wednesday morning, we might see it become our latest hurricane. by thursday, it should have supporting winds about 100 miles per hour. and then quickly, as it begins to move towards slightly cooler waters, we'll see it perhaps downgraded then, as we head towards the week end to tropical storm status. well, the spaghetti models, that's looking at all the different models that tell us
what they estimate the system will do. they generally keep it on that north-northwesterly track and move it towards the west and kind of weaken it to tropical strength but that's not to diminish it. we still got a lot to talk about sand a lot of ocean to cover. and not to give up on what used to be tropical storm gabrielle, that kind of fizzled out but it's back again. supporting winds of 40 miles an hour it looking like it will move over bermuda going into early wednesday morning. so batten down the hatches if you're watching us there. pretty heavy surf, 2 to 4 inches of rainfall and higher gusts around 50 miles an hour. so the potential there is pretty good but still keeping it at tropical storm intensity. carol. >> carol, thanks so much. thank you for joining me on carol cost tele. "legal view with ashleigh banfield" after a quick break.
♪ and i'll never desert you ♪ ♪ i'll stand by you yeaaaah! yeah. so that's our loyalty program. you're automatically enrolled, and the longer you stay, the more rewards you get. great! oh! ♪ i'll stand by you ♪ won't let nobody hurt you ♪ isn't there a simpler way to explain the loyalty program? yes. standing by you from day one. now, that's progressive. hearty cheeseburger. creamy thai style chicken with rice. mexican-style chicken tortilla. if you think campbell's 26 new soups sound good, imagine how they taste.
m'm! m'm! good! >> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. hello, everyone, i'm ashleigh banfield. and it is tuesday, september 10th. a busy day. we're going to start with breaking news, syria accepting the russians' plan to turn over chemical weapons to international control. this is absolute a dramatic turn of events causing president obama to put a bit of a pause in the bid to attack syria for launching an alleged chemical attack on civilians last month. russia's proposal came yesterday, as mr. obama was preparing to make his case for a military strike against syria to the american people in a prime time address tonight, he's planning to continue that effort. it starts at 9:00 eastern. and cnn is going to bring it to you live. but right now, we've got a list of the countries that have