tv PBS News Hour PBS October 10, 2011 10:00pm-11:00pm PDT
after deadly clashes among muslims, christians, and government forces yesterday. good evening. i'm judy woodruff. >> brown: and i'm jeffrey brown. on the newshour tonight, ray suarez gets the latest on the worst violence since president mubarak was ousted in february, from david kirkpatrick of the "new york times" in cairo. >> woodruff: then we turn to the g.o.p. presidential race, where the issue of religion surfaced after a baptist preacher referred to mitt romney's mormon faith as a "cult." >> brown: tom bearden reports on the economic hopes and environmental fears surrounding a proposed pipeline to carry oil from canada to the gulf coast. >> woodruff: we look at the questions raised when unmanned drones are used to target terrorists. >> brown: and gwen ifill talks to anita hill about her new book on race and gender, 20 years after she accused then-supreme court nominee clarence thomas of sexual harassment. >> woodruff: that's all ahead on >> if i can symbolize the ability to pursue gender
equality, racial equality and to be truthful about our experiences, then absolutely that's what i want to be. >> woodruff: that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> oil companies have changed my country. >> oil companies can make a difference. >> we have the chance to build the economy. >> create jobs, keep people healthy, and improve schools. >> ...and our communities. >> in angola chevron helps train engineers, teachers and farmers, launch child's programs. it's not just good business. >> i'm hopeful about my country's future. >> it's my country's future. >> computing surrounds us. sometimes it's obvious and sometimes it's very surprising where you find it. soon computing intelligence in unexpected places will change
our lives in truly profound ways. technology can provide customized experiences, tailored to individual consumer preferences. igniting a world of possibilities from the inside out, sponsoring tomorrow starts today. >> and by the bill and melinda gates foundation. dedicated to the idea that all people deserve the chance to live a healthy, productive life. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> woodruff: egypt struggled to return to calm today after deadly riots that involved coptic christians, muslims, and security forces.
the weekend violence was the worst since the february uprising that toppled president hosni mubarak. ray suarez has the story. >> suarez: outrage and sadness filled cairo's main cop tick christian cathedral today. funerals were held for some of the 26 protestors killed last night. more than 500 others were wounded. one mourner held up a bloodied t-shirt as the cop tick pope presided at saint mark's cathedral. the killings raised the specter of sectarian conflict in predominantly muslim egypt where roughly one tenth ofhe 80 million people are coptic christians. political activists and television host:. >> everyone knows what happened yesterday. what's more important is what happened today and tomorrow and in the future. i do believe that if we do
clean up this wound that has been covered and closed for long years without the proper cure, if we properly cure this wound this time and close it forever sauers some 1,000 christians gathered last night to protest the slow response of the military government from muslim attacks on coptic churches but the peaceful protest quickly grew into a melee. security forces battled in the streets. the clashes later spread to the world renown birth place of the revolution tarir square. by this morning the avenue that hugs the eve bank of the nile through central cairo was strewn with rocksnd burned-out cars. shop keepers picked up the pieces. in washington the obama administration condemned the violence. the white house statement said the united states continues to believe that the rights of minorities, including cops,
must be respected. these tragic events should not stand in the way of timely election and a continued transition to democracy that's peaceful, just and inclusive. the timetable for that transition was recently muddled further when the ruling military council postponed next year's presidential election until 2013. parliamentary elections are scheduled for later next month. and at a news conference presidential candidate tried to play down the prospect of christian-muslim violence. >> yesterday was not a clash between muslim and christians, but it was led by thugs who want to stab the revolution in the political process. you must be careful so things do not get out of control. the situation is critical, and there are threats of civil war. and we hope we won't rch that point. >> suarez: but today brought
scattered new clashes. in one instance a motorist was dragged from his car, his offense unknown and surrounded by a crowd. one man wielded a machete. in the meantime official investigations have been ordered to probe the violence, and the military has pledged stepped up security. david kirk patrick has been covering the story for the "new york times" in cairo. david, what kind of night has it been in the egyptian capital? what's the latest from the street? >> today it has been more or less peaceful. there was a funeral this morning that was fairly rowdy. the funeral i should say was called off at the last minute. a number of coptic families decided they don't trust the state-run hospital to perform the autopsy their children. they're summoning doctors to their own coptic hospital and as a result thousands of cops left the cathedral and marched to the hospital in protest. the funeral couldn't go on without the body.
>> suarez: so that funeral we saw at saint mark's cathedral stopped short of an actual burial. >> that's right. there will be another funeral. there were some bodies that made it. but some 17 bodies at the coptic hospital were retained so that the families could bring in their own doctors to do the autopsies. >> suarez: has the interim government made any statement about the loss of life, its causes, who was responsible? >> the military council, which is the real government, expressed some condolences to the victims. they described some unfortunate but unspecified events that they said, quote, turned a peaceful demonstration violent. but the implication was that someone other than the military and the police forces themselves had turned that demonstration violent. and they took no responsibility for any of the killings that took place. the military has instructed
their prime minister, their civilian prime minister to launch an investigation into the events and the attacks of last night. but of cour right now we're living under military rule so it's unclear how much authority that investigation will have to probe into the military itself since there's no higher authority they could appeal to. >> suarez: is it fully understood yet how all this got started? >> there was a demonstration, a peaceful march that began in the neighborhood of shobra. cops demonstrating over the attack on a church in the southern part of egypt. they joined another group of demonstrators that had been stationary outside the radio and television building. about 6:00 something went wrong. there had been scuffles with neighbors who wanted to oppose the protests along the way but nothing too serious. some witnesses said that there was some stone throwing at the security forces. one account i read described some of the coptic christian
demonstrators trying to attack a security officer. and then after that very quickly security forces were driving a truck into the coptic christian protestors and firing ammunition also at the protestors so today we had bodies that were badly mangled by those vehicles and others that had those bullet wounds. >> suarez: is this a big change for the army? isn't is it the same army that was hailed a couple of months ago for not targeting civilians during the uprising? >> now you're really getting to the big issue here. to my mind i think this is a qualitative change in the army's posture with relationship to the public. a number of liberal politicians today said this is it. it's over. theartnership between the people and the military has come to an end. but really it's also the culmination of a long deterioration. things have been rocky here economically in terms of stability since since the
revolution. and the military is the incumbent. they are responsible for running the country. and so anything that goes wrong, they take the blame for. so over time the tremendous prestige that they had for exiting of president mubarak has gradually worn off. and at the same time they have put off and put off and put off their promises to hand over power to some new civilian authority. so you have a kind of a volatile mix right now of people that are impatient with the protests, impatient with the military for not bringing about stability and impatient with the military for not getting out of the way. and it is is against that back drop that yesterday's protests really caught fire. because what started out as a kind of sectarian event became a kind of anti-military event by the end of the night with both muslims and christians joining in to fight against the military while other
muslims came out to help the military and fight against the christians. >> suarez: this is not the first time that churches and christians themselves have been attacked since the revolution. did the christian minority lose a protector in hosni mubarak? >> they very much did. president mubarak had a kind of a practical, pragmatic partnership with the coptic pope. the pope would endorse president mubarak around election time, not th elections were very competitive here under president mubarak. but it helped to have his endorsement and his patronage. he would remind his people that mubarak was looking out for them. in exchange every once in a while mubarak would do the pope a favor. the pope might disappear for a few days, go on a hunger strike. in response, mubarak would let some coptic prisoners out of jail. in various ways intervene to keep laws that the pope liked because they enforced certain
coptic moral code just on the coptic population and not on the muslims. another quirk of the system. >> suarez: david kirk patrick of the "new york times" joining us from cairo, good to talk to you, david. >> good to talk to you, too. >> brown: still to come on the newshour, religion and the g.o.p. field; a pipeline that would run from canada to the gulf of mexico; drone strikes to target terrorists; and anita hill on gender and race. but first, the other news of the day. here's kwame holman. >> holman: wall street rocketed higher today on upbeat news about the european debt crisis and troubled european banks. on sunday, german chancellor angela merkel and french president nicolas sarkozy promised "comprehensive response" soon. that was enough to send the dow jones industrial average 330 points higher to close at 11,433. the nasdaq rose 86 points to close at 2566.
two americans won the 2011 nobel prize in economics today, christopher sims of princeton and thomas sargent of new york university. they were honored for their work in the 1970s and '80s on how government policies can affect economic growth and inflation. the nobel committee said central banks now use their methods daily. at princeton today, sims joked that he and sargent have sparred >> not so sure to say that we have worked together. we have a series of continuing arguments. many of which are still going on. as i slowly persuade him of the error of his earl yes position. >> holman: the two men said they had no quick solutions to today's economic troubles. sims said, "if i had a simple answer, i would have been spreading it around the world." deadly clashes erupted in syria over the weekend. at least 31 people were killed, human rights activists reported. they said troops loyal to president bashar al assad fought army deserters around the city
of homs. seven people died there. and in damascus, mourners at a funeral were sent fleeing when gunfire erupted. at least three people were killed. in libya, rebel forces claimed they've taken most of moammar qaddafi's hometown of sirte. fighting in the town, on the mediterranean coast, has raged for weeks, and sporadic gun battles and shelling continued today. but the rebels raised their tri- colored flag outside the convention center, and fired guns in celebration. they said the pro-qaddafi forces now are holed up in two neighborhoods. taliban suspects in afghanistan have been victims of beatings, electric shocks, and other means of torture. the abuses occurred in 47 prisons run by afghan police and security forces, according to a u.n. report today based on interviews with hundreds of detainees. it said the afghan security ministries cooperated with the investigation, and are working to stop the abuse. republican presidential candidate jon huntsman called today for a faster wind-down of
u.s. involvement in afghanistan and a reduced role in other conflicts. the former utah governor and ambassador to china said the focus should be on rebuilding the u.s. economy. in a speech in new hampshire, huntsman said u.s. troops have done all they can do in afghanistan. >> it is cultural arrogance to think we can me tribal leaders into democratic leaders. it is wishful thinking to believe that our troops by staying for a couple more years will prevent further instability. or even civil war. >> holman: huntsman disagreed with republican rival mitt romney, who favors expanding the military. he said, "simply advocating more ships, more troops, and more weapons is not a viable path forward." a deep sea exploration outfit in florida confirmed today it's found a second shipwreck full of silver in the north atlantic. odyssey marine exorationaid the cargo could be worth $20 million.
company video showed the s.s. "mantola," torpedoed by a german u-boat in 1917. it's about 8,000 feet down and 100 miles away from another shipwreck holding even more silver discovered last month. the company will attempt retrieval next year. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to judy. >> woodruff: and to the latest evidence of the role religion may play in the 2012 presidential campaign. it surfaced at a forum for the republican contenders at the end of last week. the spark was struck at the value voters summit in washington on friday. baptist minister robert jeffress of dallas took the stage to introduce the man he's backing for president: governor rick perry. >> rick perry is a proven leader. he is a true conservative and he is a genuine follower of jesus christ. >> woodruff: he turned to perry's rival, former massachusetts governor mitt romney and his mormon faith in
an interview afterwards. >> in m estimation mormonism is a cult. it would give credence to a cult to have a mormon candidate. i believe mitt romney is a good, moral person, has a wonderful family, but that's not what makes you a christian. >> woodruff: romney spoke at the value voters summit on saturday and opted not to take on jeffress directly. instead he counseled tolerance and restraint. >> poisonous language doesn't advance our cause. it's never softened a single heart nor changed a singing mind. >> woodruff: governor perry brushed aside questions on the issue as he campaigned friday in iowa. but he issued a statement saying he does not believe mormonism is a cult. on the sunday talk shows other republican presidential candidates criticized rev. jeffress's statement but were careful when asked if romney is is a christian. >> none of us should sit in judgment on somebody else's religion. i thought it was very unwise and very inappropriate.
>> do you think that mitt romney is a christian. >> i think he's a mormon. mormons define themselves as a branch of christianity. >> is mitt romney not a christian? >> he's a mormon. that much i know. i am not going to do an analysis of mormonism versus christianity for the sake of answering. i'm not getting into that. >> woodruff: romney has had to deal with the issue before in his failed 2008 campaign for the republican nomination. >> i do not define my candidacy by my religion. a person should not be elected because of his faith. nor should he be rejected because of his faith. it's unfortunate... if i'm fortunate to become your president i will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause, and no one interest. a president must serve only the common cause of the people of the united states. >> woodruff: this time around romney is one of two mormon candidates in the g.o.p. race. former utah governor jon
huntsman is the other. for more, we are joined by david brody, chief political correspondent for the christian broadcasting network. >> thanks, judy. great to see you. >> woodruff: how did this pastor's comment come about and did the perry campaign have anything to do with it? >> no, there's no indication that the perry campaign had anything to do with it. as a matter of fact this is starting to be a problem for the perry campaign. everywhere rick perry goes, as we saw a little bit in that piece, he's being confronted with the question. do you think mormonism is a cult? i mean, this could be a problem for perry because there are quite a few evangelicals who think mormonism is a cult. if perry is going to say, no, mormonism isn't a cult. then indeed that could be problematic because he's going against many of his evangelical base. >> woodruff: what do you see as the immediate effect on the campaign what this pastor said and how the other candidates are responding? >> well as it reals to the perry campaign, i think they're going to address it straight on. there was a statement as you mentioned put out.
but i think at some point rick perry-- and there is a debate in new hampshire tomorrow night and one in las vegas the next week-- at some point rick perry is going to have to be pretty strong about it and say whether he uses the word distance or whatever word he decides to use he's going to have to make that break if he wants just to put this behind him. i say him because at this point with jeffress tied to perry sms this is something the perry campaign is going to have to deal with. >> woodruff: you're saying that perry is on the spot. >> i think to a degree. it's also a news cycle story as well. maybe it's more than one news cycle. probably a couple. >> woodruff: let's talk about the role of mormonism. we mentioned this that piece just now that mitt romney did address his mormonism in the last campaign. has he talked about it in this campaign? >> you know, he really hasn't. i spoke to him in 2007 when he was governor of massachusetts. he was just getting ready to run in 2008. he did talk about it. as a matter of fact he talked
about it at length with me. but in this campaign in 2012 it hasn't come up at all until this... these comments by the pastor. look, i mean, i think mitt romney and his campaign would be the first to admit that that's the way it should be. in other words this shouldn't come up. it's a been there done that story. this has been vetted, if you will, if that's the correct word in 2008. now with the economy taking center stage in 2012, it's time that the train has left the station on this at least according to the romney campaign. >> woodruff: so but what do the polls show? among those republican voters who romney needs to win, to get to the nomination which is what he wants, what do they think about mormonism? >> there's a numbers problem for him. it's kind of like in kindergarten where you give everybody else the head start in the race and then the person, you know, there's one kindergartener who is far back. this is the situation with mitt romney. in other words, the bachmanns and the cains and the perrys are starting with a lead if
you will because there's a problem with evangelical voters as it relates to mitt romney. 30% maybe 40% won't even take a look at him. mitt romney is at a disadvantage already to begin with. the good news is he's been the most solid candidate of everyone in terms of being able not to make any mistakes and to be able to be pretty adept during those debates. he's going to have to be on his game from the beginning for people to take even a second look at him. >> woodruff: i want to ask you about that in a minute. when you say 0-some percent of evangelical voters said they could not vote for someone who is morm, what portion, what proportion do they make up of the republican vote in those key, those early primaries? >> iowa it's close to 60%. we'll say anywhere from 40 to 60%. anywhere from 50 to 60% for sure. in south carolina it's close to 60%. so if you look at the actual primary states and the calendar that's coming up here, iowa, south carolina, are two
states that mitt romney is going to have problems in just to begin with. he needs to do well in new hampshire. he is. nevada as well it call comes down to florida for mitt romney because the truth of the matter as it relates to the mormonism issue if he can win florida it may be a train left the station scenario and people will get on board. >> woodruff: and if... this is all speculative-- if he were to win the nomination and head to the general election what does it look like at that point for democratic voters and independents. >> this is the biggest challenge for the romney campaign. if they win the nomination. because we've already heard people like david axelrod, a few others, coming up with the "weird" word. they put that in quotes. romney seems a little weird. we're already hearing that now. when it comes to the general election if might romney is the nominee you can be sure there will be democratic staffers and liberal staffers getting ready to leak certain memos to reporters about the mormonism religion.
this could be a potential problem with independent voters come 2012. >> woodruff: even though it's pretty much assumed that the economy is going to continue to be the big issue in the primaries and then again in the general election. >> absolutely. i think this is the best news of all for mitt romy that it is the economy in 2012. it wasn't the situation in 2008 at all. and the last time i checked evangelicals who are social conservatives are also fiscal conservatives. the last time i also check they want a job just as much as the next person. if mitt romney can speak to that, there will be a lot more folks that will not worry about the mormonism. >> woodruff: quickly, you've written a book about the role of evangelicals are playing in the tea party movement. of course that is going to be a huge factor in the turnout in these primarys. >> the book is coming out in june of next year. i call them the t-evangelicals. as i looked around the country there are indeed so many ivan skbrel cals within the tea
party movement. this is a challenge for mitt romney to appeal to not just evangelicals but also the tea party. what we're finding is we'll have a t-evangelical-type candidate, a mitt romney, as we move forward in those primaries. >> woodruff: fascinating. we'll continue to keep an eye on it. i know you will. we'll have you back to talk about it. david brody, thanks very much. >> thanks, judy. >> brown: now, the high stakes battle over whether the obama administration should approve a major oil pipeline bisecting the u.s. newshour correspondent tom bearden updates the story from nebraska. >> hi, everybody. thanks for coming. >> reporter: hundreds of land owners, environmentalists and union members jammed into high school gyms, community hall and rec centers in six states last week. they were trying to persuade state departme officials that proposed pipeline will either create thousands of
jobs or will destroy the life and livelihoods of family farmers throughout the midwest. >> creating jobs, enhancing energy independence, improving national security, the keystone pipeline will do all of these and more. >> all this is good for is big oil. and at our expense. with our life blood at stake.... >> reporter: a canadian company called trans-canada wants to build the keystone excel pipeline. the $1 billion system would carry crude oil from the so- called tar sands region in alberta to houston texas for refining. the 1700-mile pipeline would cross six states and go through the heart of nebraska farm country. one of the largest aqua fers in the world lies just beneath the sand hills of nebraska. it provides the water for 30% of all the irrigated crop land in the united states. people who run those farms around here are deeply concerned that a pipeline accident might seriously damage that resource.
susan runs a ranc near stewart nebraska. trans-canada paped out a route that would cross about a quarter mile of her property. last spring she added political activism to her regular chores trying to convince anybody who will listen that the pipeline is just too risky. >> we don't know why we have to put up with this kind of crap and why we work so hard out here and why we can get run over by a foreign company. i think we're going to let them know that they've picked on the wrong people. >> reporter: the pipeline won't just cross the aquafers by being buried four feet deep it will actually be in it. >> that aqua fer is close to the surface so a rancher can stick a pipe in the ground and water will come out of it. that's how they water their cattle. >> reporter: she says the company has had problems with other pipelines it operates in the u.s. and canada. >> trans-canada has already had 14 leaks in the united
states over 30 if you combine the leaks that have happened in canada as well. there has been one leak here in nebraska. they've had to dig up the pipeline in three different areas in nebraska for pipeline anomalies. >> reporter: she and others claim the type of oil the pipeline would carry is far more toxic than the lighter crude carried by other pipelines. >> tar sands oil is 16 times nor corrosive than traditional oil which means that there will be more pipeline ruptures. it produces three times the amount of greenhouse gas emissions. not only is the oil not guaranteed for the united states. it's also a dirtiest form of oil than traditional oil. >> reporter: robert jones is vice president of the keystone excel project. he says the past spills were all minor and extraordinary safety systems will be in place to prevent any large spill from ever happening. >> there's 16,000 sensors on the pipeline. those sensors send data via satellite every five seconds. we have a back-up satellite and we have back-up land line.
so we have to make sure those signals are always going back to the control center. if there is a pressure drop, the sensors pick that up and automatically shut down the pipeline. >> reporter: jones says there's nothing special about the oil either. >> the oil we move is a natural product. the oil that comes out of the sands has to match the specification of this natural product. the same oil that the industry has been moving for decades, the same oil that goes through pooip lines through nebraska for decades. >> reporter: in august anti-pipeline activists staged a two-week long protest at the white house hoping to persuade the administration to reject the permit request. about a thousand people were arrested. a few days into demonstrations, the state department released the final environmental impact statement on the project, a study three years in the making. it says the pipeline would carry a blend of synthetic crude oil and poses no significant impact to the environment. but assistant secretary kari ann jones says it doesn't mean
the state department will ultimately grant the final permit. >> a decision has absolutely not been made. we don't plan to make any decision until we're finished with the process. we want to make sure very rigorous and impartial and transparent. submit your comment via mail. >> reporter: as is often the case with these debates it comes down to environmental concerns versus economic ones. supporters say keystone excel will create an estimated 20,000 good-paying construction jobs. members of local 1140 of the laborers international union showed up as a lincoln nebraska hearing to urge the state department to approve the permit. workers like jason. >> i've got a family. i have a daughter in college. i've got a 14-year-old, seven-year-old and a 10 month old. i want to take care of them. i've worked with trans-canada before on another pipeline. i've never had a company like them that took care of environmental issues like they have. they really care about the environment.
i appreciate that. i want to leave something for my kids too. >> reporter: local 1140s business manager says opponents are pursuing an agenda that has little to do with keystone excel. >> these environmentalists want to end our dependence on fossil fultz. that is not going to happen in our times. we need to be realistic about it. these guys could be more focused on the last 20-plus years instead of the safest most technologically advanced pipeline in the state of nebraska. >> reporter: this time, however, the issue has created some unusual bedfellows. republican state senator tony fulton finds it odd to be on the same side with groups he normally opposes. >> i would be doing a bad job if i didn't step up and say that i have some concern about the proposed pipeline. if that puts me on the same side as environmentalists or folks that i don't typically see eye to eye with, so be it. >> reporter: fulton wants
trans-canada to reroute the pipeline. he's promoting legislation he hopes would give state government the power to force the company to by-pass the aquafer. he says building this pipe without without nebraska's input is a violation of state's rights. >> we ought to have some say as to how that pipeline makes its way through nebraska. at this point it's been president obama, secretary clinton and trans-canada who have chosen this route. >> reporter: trans-canada vice president robert jones says despite all the vocal opposition, the company has already secured easements from most of the land owners along the route. >> the utilities actually compensate land owners. we are going to kpen sent land owners. we give them a value with the property land value. 95% of the time everybody agrees on these terms. >> i don't believe that's true at all. there's a ton of us up here in the sand hill region that have not sign. >> reporter: susan says trans-canada made ridiculously
low offers. when she refused, tried to intimidate her and her neighbors into signing, telling them they would receive nothing if the company exercised the right of eminent domain. both sides accused each other of playing fast and loose with the truth. assistant secretary kari ann jones. have you heard exaggerations, falsehoods, half truths? >> i think what we've heard is a lot of enthusiasm. everyone is very.... >> reporter: very diplomatic answer. >> i do work for the state department. everyone is very enthusiastic about their position. i don't mean that light heartedly. they're passionate about it. i think people pick up the pieces of information that are important to them and their position which is what we do. we're humans. but we a from the state department we're trying to take all of this together and see what is really best in the national interest. it's a very important project. we're trying to make sure we do it well. >> reporter: jones says the administration is on track to make a final decision by the end of the year.
>> brown: tonight, remote control bombing attacks as a weapon of war. the recent killing in yemen of the u.s.-born a qaeda militant app we are al awlaki with several others was the latest example of a high-profile missile attack by c.i.a. drones. in fact the u.s. has dramatically increased its use of remotely controlled of unmanned aerial vehicles to go after targets in hard to reach areas including in afghanistan, somalia, libya and especially pakistan. where u.s. reaper and predator drones have reportly killed more than 2,000 taliban and al qaeda militants. they've also stirred protests including last june in karachi where pakistanis complained too many innocents are killed by errant strikes.
just yesterday in nevada protestors outside the air force base also condemned the deaths of innocent civilians. there are also questions about what happens as the technology spreads. britain and israel have already used dronz. other nations are in the process of developing their own models. and we explore some of the questions about the use of drones now with retired major general charles dunlap, executive director of the center on law, ethics, and national security at duke law school. he previously served as a top military lawyer in the air force. and david cortright, director of policy studies at the kroc institute for international peace studies at notre dame university. among his many books is "uniting against terror: cooperative non- military responses to the global terrorist threat." safd david courtright, you and others have raised questions about use of drones. why do you think it's not an effective tool? >> these weapons can destroy targets but they cannot
achieve the political goal of ending the threats from terrorism. they have posed many grave dangers in terms of security, legal and moral questions for our country. as you said, the technology is spreading. as many as 50 countries may now be developing or purchasing this technology, including countries like china, russia, india, pakistan, iran, hezbollah has deployed an iranian-designed drone aircraft. iran is reportedly developing a drone with a 1,000-mile range. these are for surveillance now but it's not that difficult to attach missiles and bombs to these weapons, to these drones. what kind of future are we creating for ourselves, for our children, our grandchildren? a world where all major states would have this technology. the threat of war striking of missiles coming out of the sky with no warning would be persuasive. >> brown: you've raised a lot
of issues there. so let me get to general dunlap. first, what is is the general case for the use of drones? why are they considered effective and why is their use on the rise? >> this is a way of using technology in a way that minimizes the threat or the danger not only to the u.s. personnel employing the drones but also to the people on the ground. because drones give you the opportunity for persistent, long-term surveillance before striking a target. in addition, the technology, the weapons technology allows for very prise strikes. do innocent people get killed? of course they do. but is the nature of war is such that that is inevitable. this is a way of limiting those unnecessary deaths. >> brown: one of the questions, general dunlap, that colonel comes up and mr. courtright just raised it is by making it easier to strike, to hit targets it sort of lowers the bar on when military action
can and will be used. >> actually, military action can take place by a single individual crossing the border. it's not particularly new to use long-range strike. david defeated goliath with a long-range strike with a missile weapon. as agincourt the english bowman destroyed the flower of the french nighthood with long- range strike. we have long range strike bombers for some time. this really is not new conceptually. it makes people uncomfortable because, as you point out it's unmanned but from a military per perspective it really isn't anything new except a greater capability to be precise and to focus the force on the person or site that you want to focus it on. >> brown: david courtright, do you find something here that is unique, that is different? >> i disagree. i think it is new morally and politically. we are now at a point where
it's possible for political leaders to think that we can make war cheaply and seemingly easily. this is a part of the justification that the general noted. we can wage war without endangering our troops at seemingly lower cost. any development that makes war seem cheaper or easier is morally troubling. our principles are based on an aversion against the use of force. we should use force only in an absolute emergency under strict ethical principles. now we have a development which will make it easier. it's very troubling, i think, and also raises many legal issues in terms of where we stand as a country, what our political and legal principles are. >> brown: general dunlap.... >> i think it's very new and very dangerous in that regard. >> brown: general dunlap, what about... you can pick... i want to ask you to pick up on the proliferation part of that. what changes once other nations develop and start
using... or terror groups for that matter... start using these kinds of high-tech weapons? >> well, let me just say this. i think that we should be troubled any time we have to kill another human being, and my experience has been even at the very senior level there's no idea that war is going to be easier or cost-free no matter how it's waged. that said i think that this technology especially in its present form is a lot more complicated than people think... may think. and so while it will proliferate among nation-states, i think in terms of terrorists, they are going to continue to use their low-tech easier-to- deploy methodologies to inflict terror. as to the technology of the drones that we have today, it's... they're generally not survivable in a contesteded environment so it would take another generation of drones to be able to be useded against another nation-state
that had an air defense system. >> brown: staying with you, general, what about the legal issues? of course in the case of mr. awlaki, there were some special circumstances because he was an american. but generally speaking, with the use of drones, this kind of high-tech weaponry, can it be done, do you think, within the international and domestic legal norms? >> absolutely. i think that the supreme court for our domestic concerns said in 1942 that an american citizen who becomes a belligerent against the united states suffers the consequences of that belligerencey. accordingly people can be targeted if they are part of the enemy force as any other belligerent. i do think that international law needs to be scrupulously adhered to. from what we know in the public record, it appears that that was the case. and it certainly is permissible under international law to strike an individual who is part of an armed, organized armed group
engaged in violence against the united states. in fact, the leaders of the united states have an obligation to defend the people against that kind of a threat. >> brown: david courtright, you started to raise the legal issue. flush that out a bit. what's your concern? >> well, we do have the right to wage war in afghanistan under the congressional authorization. that is to say, soldiers, legally defined combatants do. does that authority extend to pakistan? and the concern also is that these drone attacks are apparently from the reports being managed by the c.i.a., not by military personnel. soldiers are allowed under the rules of war to engage in combat against those who are bee ledge rents but does this apply to the c.i.a.? and how does this authority apply in yemen or somalia or other places where we are using this? this broadly stretches any kind of legal justification, and i think goes beyond what
is permissible under the rules of war. and under our own legal standards and principles. and moreover these weapons are, i think, perpetuating the illusion that we can defeat terrorism with military force. we should know by now that this cannot be done. we need to prey tekt ourselves, yes. security measures are part of the mix but ultimately terrorism is is a political phenomenon. it must be defeated by political means through bargaining and negotiation, through police work, law enforcement. it will not be defeated through military attacks. the more we use the drone, the more we increase animosity towards our countries. >> brown: and i want to get.... >> and lead to more recruits. >> brown: and brief last word from you, general? all of these issues taken in, do you expect this technology to continue? >> it will. i just want to say that military force is just one element of defeating terrorism. i agree with that. but if we forego military force, then we leave ourselves vulnerable to people who
cannot be otherwise detered from attacking us. this is an important step forward. >> brown: charles cup lan and david courtright, thank you both very much. >> woodruff: finally tonight, it was 20 years ago this week that the senate held confirmation hearings for supreme court nominee clarence thomas. that's when sexual harassment became the focus of a national debate. the subject was raised by a young black law professor named anita hill. she had been an attorney advisor and special assistant to thomas at two government agencies. >> my working relationship became even more strained when judge thomas began to use work situations to discuss sex. the conversations were very vivid. when i was asked by a representative of this committee to report my experience, i felt that i had
to tell the truth. i could not keep silent. >> woodruff: thomas denied hill's allegations then and now. in the end he was confirmed by the narrowest margin for a high court pick in a century. and now 20 years later anita hill is back with a new book "reimagining equality: stories of gender, race and finding home." gwen ifill sat down with her recently at georgetown university law center in washington. >> ifill: professor hill, thank you for meeting with us. >> my pleasure. >> ifill: it's been 20 years since a lot of people ever thought of you, have seen you. what have you been doing in all that time? >> well, i've been doing in a large way what i was doing before the 20-year thomas hearing. i'm teaching. i have been teaching now since 1983. i'm writing. i do some public speaking.
and i'm spending time with my friends and family and really enjoying life in many ways. >> ifill: you say in your book that you received 25,000 letters from people in the 20 years. were they mostly positive or were they not? >> many of the letters were very, very supportive. and there's a whole range of them. and what i do like about them is the range. they come from all over the country. they come from people of all walks of life. they come from women and men. in fact, the trend is now that i'm getting more or a higher percentage of letters from men. >> ifill: saying what? >> well, they say some things that are very supportive. they say... they tell me what the hearings meant to them in their lives. i am especially very recently since people are thinking about the 20th anniversary i'm hearing from women who say what the hearings meant and
what my testimony meant. and then what they have been able to do in their lives in response to it in terms of their own life situations. >> ifill: did it change your life situation, looking back on it 20 years now? would you do it again? >> yes. to both those questions. yes, i would do it again. yes, it changed my life. it changed my life in some internal ways, the terms of my thinking. but it also, i believe, changed what i do. i have continued teaching. but in fact i am no longer teaching in a law school. now i'm teaching in a policy school. the way i look at at the law has changed. i do believe now that i look at law and equality from a broader perspective. >> ifill: people look at you still and think of you as the poster girl, the poster woman for gender and race discussions, debates in our country. is that what you want to be?
>> i often say to people that you really don't get to decide your own legacy. i mean, what you do is you try to beyour own authentic self. and then people decide how they're going to interpret that and what it means to them. if i can mean to people... if i can symbolize the ability to pursue gender equality, racial equality and to be truthful about our experiences, then absolutely that's what i want to be. >> ifill: i look at your book and i thought i think i know what this is about. i discover it's really about finding home. how do you make the connection between gender and racy quality and home? >> well, when you think about it, the place where we call home really decides for many of us our access to jobs. it decides for many people
what kind of schools we're going to go to. for our children. it determines... for a lot of people just whetr or not they're going to have access to good, healthy food. we don't think about many of those things in terms of what it means for eality so what i try to do is to sort of get us to think about the whole. particularly in the wake of the foreclosure crisis. how essential it is to our access to opportunity and think about equality as access to opportunity. so much of that stems from where we call home. >> ifill: there's a portion of this book, a good portion of it which talks about your own proud oklahoma roots. and your family went in one generation i think you put it from being property to owning property. how does that shape you? >> the story of my grandparents who homesteaded 80 acres in arkansas, only to
lose that. they lost it for a number of factors. bad lending policies and practices. problems with the economy. a downturn in the economy. racial violence was also contributing factor. but what i look... when i looked at their story of having made such gains in one single generation, my grandfather was born a slave and then had this 80-acre farm in arkansas and they lost it, i saw the gain as really access to the american dream. it's a gain i'm very proud of. then i looked at the loss, and all of the factors that contributed to it, and i realized that some parts of their story really were reminiscent of the stories that i read in the newspaper today. >> ifill: you write in the book-- and i want to quote it.
you write that the 2008 election when you witnessed the choice in the democratic primary between a black man and a woman made you begin to, quote, feel more at home in america than i had since 1991 when the public rejected the testimony of my life experience. why? >> well, because what i felt in 1991 was a rejection of myself. my life experience. what had happened to me when i was a young woman just starting out on my first job. when i looked at the primary election, what i saw was really through the surrogates of hillary clinton and barack obama i saw an acceptance of people who i felt could identify with my life. because of race. because of gender. i thought, okay, this is for me a symbol of acceptance of me that i had lost a part of in 1991.
but i will say this. that i have started to regain that feeling anyway. i have gotten thousands, 25,000 i estimate, of letters since those hearings. and what i have in those letters are messages from people who feel very passionate about equality. really do believe that this country can achieve equality in my lifetime. that's critical. that's something that helps really restore my sense of being at home in this country. >> ifill: your mother, erma hill, would turn 100 years old on october 16. what would she see about what's become of her daughter and what's become of the country that she sacrificed so much to be part of? >> i worked every day to live up to my mother's model. she was a very proud woman. and she really prepared me to
go off into the world as a proud daughter. but it was a world that she really didn't understand. because she had lived through years of segregation, through years of outright gender bias. nevertheless, i think she was the most courageous woman i know to be able to send her daughter out with the expectation that she would do well. i think she would see... she was very proud of me. oi worked to make her proud even though she's no longer with me. that is the standard that i apply in what i do. >> ifill: she's the first person to teach you about home. the book is reimagining equality: stories of gender, race and finding home. the author is anita hill. thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you for having me.
>> brown: again, the major developments of the day. there was mourning in egypt, and new tensions, after deadly clashes among muslims, christians and government forces. wall street rocketed higher after france and germany vowed comprehensive action on the european debt crisis. the dow industrials gained 330 points. and the u.n. reported hundreds of taliban suspects in afghanistan have been abused with beatings, electric shocks, and other torture. online, you can find everything kwame holman explains. kwame? >> holman: our partners at globalpost have a new series about the use of u.s. drones. there's a preview on our world page. plus, see what paul solman might look like as a muppet on our making sense page. paul responds to a critique from comedy central's stephen colbert. on art beat, there's a photo essay from a librarian-turned- artist who took on an unusual challenge: illustrating each page of the maritime classic "moby dick."
that's on art beat. all that and more is on our web site, newshour.pbs.org. judy? >> woodruff: and that's the newshour for tonight. on tuesday, we'll look at the senate debate over the president's jobs bill. i'm judy woodruff. >> brown: and i'm jeffrey brown. we'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. thank you, and good night. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: chevron. we may have more in common than you think. intel.