The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. MacNeil: Good evening. I'm Robert MacNeil in New York.

MR. LEHRER: And I'm Jim Lehrer in Washington. After our summary of the news this Thursday, we look at the man chosen to investigate the Whitewater affair, Jeffrey Kaye reports from the rebellious Mexican state of Chiapas, Charlayne Hunter-Gault talks to Deborah Cannon about acrimony and public life, and Fred De Sam Lazaro explains the disease called Gulf War syndrome. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: This was another day of cold and power worries on the East Coast. The federal government and most Washington businesses closed down for one day to reduce the demand for electricity. Congressional hearings were put off, and the President cancelled his public appearances for most of the day. States of emergency were also declared in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Power company officials along the East Coast said customers had cut back enough to prevent massive blackouts. There was little relief from record cold temperatures from the Dakotas to the Atlantic states. It was fourteen below zero in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Albany. New York registered minus 16. At least 101 deaths have been blamed on the cold weather since last Friday. Robin.

MR. MacNeil: Colder weather also added urgency to the effort to get shelter for victims of the California earthquake. About 20,000 people have been unable to return to their homes and are camped out in public parks. Temperatures fell into the forties overnight and colder weather and rain were in the forecast. Federal officials said getting people into more permanent shelter was their top priority. The death toll from the quake was raised to 51 today. Some 40,000 San Fernando Valley residents remain without water, and more than 50,000 have no electricity. The Federal Emergency Management Agency opened 11 disaster aid centers. They were swamped with quake victims seeking low interest loans, emergency housing grants, and counseling. In Washington, President Clinton announced he was advancing an additional $100 million in emergency federal aid to repair damaged roads and other infrastructures.

MR. LEHRER: Attorney General Reno today named New York Lawyer Robert Fiske to investigate the so-called "Whitewater Affair." He is a former U.S. attorney. He will look into allegations about President and Mrs. Clinton's involvement in an Arkansas land deal and their relationship with the owner of a failed savings & loan. The Clintons have denied any wrongdoing. Fiske is a Republican who was appointed U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York by President Ford and retained that job under President Carter. At a Washington news conference this morning, Fiske said he intended to question the President and First Lady under oath. Reporters asked him about his timeframe for completing the investigation.

ROBERT FISKE, Whitewater Special Counsel: My timeframe is to finish this as quickly as I can consistently doing the job right. It's very difficult not knowing the facts, other than what I've read in the newspapers, to try to put any timeframe on it. My experience in these matters has always been every time you try to put a time limit on something, you're always wrong, it always takes longer. So I'm reluctant to do that, but other than to tell you that I'm going to start Monday and just go flat after we're through.

REPORTER: Could you give a general estimate, whether it's a month.

ROBERT FISKE: I think it's more than a month.

MR. LEHRER: We'll have more on this story right after the News Summary.

MR. MacNeil: In Russia, another key reformer quit Boris Yeltsin's government today. His resignation came just after Yeltsin named a new cabinet dominated by opponents of rapid reform. Overall economic policy will be handled by the prime minister, Viktor Chernomyrdin, who said today the period of market romanticism is now over. We have more in this report narrated by David Symonds of Worldwide Television News.

DAVID SYMONDS, WTN: Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin announced a reshuffle. Two key reformers were sacked and three others demoted. He said the era of market romanticism had ended, reforms needed corrections so that people's lives could be easier. But he insisted that market reform would continue. Yeltsin, who'd engineered the reshuffle with Chernomyrdin, met the speaker of the upper house of parliament, Vladimir Chumeko. Chumeko was one of two top economic reformers dropped from the cabinet under Yeltsin's shake-up. Yeltsin also met the speaker of the lower chamber, Yvonne Rifkin. This house is dominated by hard-line nationalists and Communists opposed to market reforms. Acknowledging that many Russians voted for them and protested the economic hardships they're suffering, Rifkin has called for softening the effects of market reforms. But Finance Minister Boris Fyodorov wasn't standing for it. Although Yeltsin had tried to convince him to stay on, Fyodorov announced he was quitting. He warned the government's new policy would cause higher inflation, falling wages, and the collapse of the ruble. His departure leavesonly one radical reformer in a senior government position and alarm bells ringing in the West.

MR. MacNeil: So far, there has been no reaction from U.S. officials to the new Russian cabinet.

MR. LEHRER: The Commerce Department reported today 1993 construction of new homes and apartments was the highest in four years. Housing starts were up 6.2 percent in December, 7.1 percent for the year. The National Urban League released its annual report on the state of black America today. They found some economic gains since the early 1980s but many problems remain. The civil rights group called for blacks to mobilize around the concept of self-help and asked President Clinton to push for business opportunities and anti-discrimination laws to encourage a self-help movement.

MR. MacNeil: A children's advocacy group released a report today saying that 50,000 children and teenagers were killed in gun- related violence between 1979 and 1991. It said homicide was now the third leading cause of death for children between the ages of five and fifteen. Marian Wright Edelman of the Children's Defense Fund spoke at a Washington news conference.

MARIAN WRIGHT EDELMAN, Children's Defense League: We are calling for a cease-fire in the war against children who are besieged on three fronts by gun violence, by poverty, and neglect. A gun takes the life of an American child every two hours. We believe we must hold juvenile as well as adult offenders responsible through swift, effective, and fair punishment. The public must be protected. But I also believe that we adults must hold ourselves responsible for the culture of violence that we have created in our homes, in our communities, and in our culture that has left millions of our children without hope and with too few options for the future.

MR. LEHRER: That's it for the News Summary tonight. Now it's on to the Whitewater investigation, the rebellion in Mexico, incivility in the public discourse, and Gulf War syndrome. FOCUS - SPECIAL COUNSEL

MR. MacNeil: We go first tonight to the appointment of a special counsel to investigate President and Mrs. Clinton's involvement in the Whitewater Development Company when he was governor of Arkansas. Attorney General Janet Reno picked a New York lawyer, Robert Fiske, a Republican and former U.S. Attorney. Fiske was with Reno this morning at a Washington press conference.

JANET RENO, Attorney General: A week ago, I said I was looking for someone who would be fair and impartial, who has a reputation for integrity and skill, someone who would be ruggedly independent, and I think Mr. Fiske fits that description to a tee. He exemplifies public service at its best, and I am enormously grateful that he has heeded this call one more time. I have talked with Mr. Fiske and told him that I want him to do everything he thinks proper and appropriate to make sure that he is truly independent. Mr. Fiske.

ROBERT FISKE, Whitewater Special Counsel: I am totally satisfied that I will have the independence and complete authority to do this job right. Starting Monday, I'm going to take a leave of absence from my law firm so that I can work full-time to conduct and complete as expeditiously as possible a complete, thorough, and impartial investigation.

SPOKESPERSON: We'll take your questions.

REPORTER: Will you continue to use the Justice Department officials serving attorneys who've been working on the case?

ROBERT FISKE: I've thought about that, and I've come to the conclusion that without in any way reflecting in any slightest way against their ability and competence that in order to conduct a truly independent investigation I should have people working for me who are not also reporting to the attorney general, therefore, I will recruit a totally new staff of lawyers to work with me on this which I would assume will consist primarily of experienced former prosecutors from around the country. I certainly, though, intend to work with the lawyers in the Justice Department who have been working on these matters to date so that we will get the full benefit of everything that they have done so that we hit the ground running as fast as we get it.

REPORTER: How about the FBI? Will you be using the FBI?

ROBERT FISKE: I have talked to Director Freeh this morning. He has assured me that the FBI will be at our complete disposal.

REPORTER: Do you expect to talk to the President and the First Lady, and, if so, do you expect to do it under oath?

ROBERT FISKE: I would certainly expect that before this investigation is over that I would question both the President and the First Lady, and it would be under oath.

REPORTER: Will you operate out of Washington or Little Rock?

ROBERT FISKE: I would expect to open an office in Little Rock. I think that's where the center of gravity in this investigation is. There is already a grand jury sitting there, and that is where the base of operation of this investigation is.

REPORTER: What were some of the considerations and other personal reasons why you decided to do this?

ROBERT FISKE: I think first and foremost I consider this an extremely important assignment. I think it's very important that someone that meets the attorney general's qualifications do this job. It's important for the country to get this done and get it done as quickly and as thoroughly and as fairly as possible. And when someone asked me to do that, I felt an obligation to respond.

REPORTER: Do you think that a congressional hearing of any kind at this point might hamper your investigation?

ROBERT FISKE: I think the history of these, these situations is that it is difficult to conduct this kind of investigation at the same time a congressional investigation is going on. The decision whether to have such an investigation obviously is not mine, but I think just looking back at the past, we could all see that that is not an easy relationship.

MR. MacNeil: We get more on the Fiske appointment now from Stuart Taylor, a senior writer with American Lawyer Magazine and Elkan Abramowitz, an attorney in New York and former chief of the criminal division at the U.S. Attorney's Office. Mr. Abramowitz, what kind of a choice is Mr. Fiske?

MR. ABRAMOWITZ: I think it's an excellent choice, Robin. I think that Mr. Fiske represents the best in public service. He is a Republican but he is non-partisan. Never in the time that he was U.S. Attorney under both a Republican presidency and a Democratic presidency did his politics step in the way from professional law enforcement. He's also a man of complete integrity and a lawyer's lawyer, not interested in his own self-aggrandizement, and interested in only professional aspects of what he has to do.

MR. MacNeil: What do you think about Mr. Fiske as the choice, Stuart Taylor?

MR. TAYLOR: I think Mr. Abramowitz stated it very well, and I think that will be the judgment of political Washington. Early reactions from Republicans on Capitol Hill are very favorable, including the leading critic, Rep. James Leach, of the Clintons' conduct in this matter has said it's a quality appointment. He would be on, I think, any big law firm list of the top, of the most respected 10 lawyers in the country, let's say. He has the right background. He's been a prosecutor. He's been a U.S. Attorney. He's handled cases like this. He's got the right amount of gray hair. He's 63 years old. I think his -- he will have learned from his former law partner, Lawrence Walsh's experience that we ought to find a way to cut this off short of six or seven years. But I'm sure he'll do a thorough job.

MR. MacNeil: He -- you say that he's an independent person and approved by the Republicans, but back earlier in his career when he was the chairman of the American Bar Association's Committee on choosing, on advising of the choice of Reagan appointments to the bar, there were a lot of conservative Republicans who were quite unhappy with him, isn't that true, and, in fact, blocked his appointment as a deputy attorney general? Does this remind us of that?

MR. TAYLOR: That is true. President Bush had nominated him to be deputy attorney general, deputy to Dick Thornburgh and the attorney general whose choice he was, I believe, and the conservative Republicans did block it. Their complaint against him was basically twofold. They thought he was consorting with liberals too much. They thought that the American Bar Association Committee both in the matter of the Bork nomination and in dealing with some other conservative Republican nominees had been acting in concert with liberal groups that were opposing the nominees for ideological reasons. That was their basic complaint against Mr. Fiske. He denied it. There are enough people who felt strongly that way in the Senate at that time so that Bush administration decided not to fight him. I would be surprised if that element raised a big ruckus now, because I think the complaint they had about him at that point, true or not, fair or not, doesn't have a whole lot to do with his qualifications to do this investigation.

MR. MacNeil: Supposing, Mr. Abramowitz, Mr. Fiske investigates and ends up deciding there is not a case to prosecute here, that the evidence doesn't warrant it, is he -- is that decision going to be credible with the same people in the conservative wing of the Republican Party who criticized him as we just heard?

MR. ABRAMOWITZ: I would think so. He is a credible person. He is a hard working person and will approach this job with utmost professionalism. If the public sees that and sees the progress of that as it goes along, whatever decision he makes will be accepted because it will have the credibility behind it of the integrity of his investigation. I also think that the political issues that arose at the time he was appointed deputy attorney general were really illusory. I think they were unfair in many respects and ultimately will not play any role in this investigation.

MR. MacNeil: Stuart Taylor, tell us what he'll be looking for. This story is still fairly new to many people. What's he trying to find?

MR. TAYLOR: The heart of it will be whether there is any evidence to support suspicions -- there's a lot of smoke -- there aren't really any strong allegations -- that Bill Clinton as governor of Arkansas and Hillary Clinton as a lawyer at the time with the Rose Law Firm, one of the most prestigious law firms in Arkansas, used this savings & loan, Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan as their own private piggy bank, whether they exchanged favors with their personal friends, James and Susan McDougal, who ran the savings & loan, in order to get campaign contributions, in order to get personal financial favors. They were coinvestors in the Whitewater Development Company with the McDougals, the people who owned the savings & loan. There had been allegations that the Clintons were involved in various forms of coziness with the McDougals, and in particular, a man named David Hale, who's a judge, a former judge in Arkansas, a Bill Clinton appointee as judge has claimed that Gov. Clinton at one point allegedly pressured him to make a $300,000 loan to Susan McDougal, the co-owner of this savings & loan. And there's some suspicion, there's some suggestion by Mr. Hale, who's under indictment himself, that, that there was some favor to the Clintons involved in all this, not an allegation of criminality but a suggestion of possible impropriety that could lead toward criminality if it bears out.

MR. MacNeil: Mr. Abramowitz, Rep. Leach, who was mentioned a moment ago, who has been one of the chief people pushing for the appointment of independent counsel, said on this program a couple of weeks ago he believes nothing should be prosecuted, if there's no wrongdoing. Perhaps -- if there is wrongdoing, perhaps there might be a civil remedy. Will it be in Fiske's power to make those decisions, that -- whether, whether there is wrongdoing that doesn't warrant prosecuting under federal laws, but there should be some sort of civil penalty paid?

MR. ABRAMOWITZ: Well, I'm not sure as to the discussions that Mr. Fiske had with the attorney general as to his mandate. I would assume that his mandate is primarily to determine whether there should be a criminal prosecution. He indicated he's going to be - -

MR. MacNeil: Under federal law.

MR. ABRAMOWITZ: Under federal law he's going to be in the stead of a U.S. Attorney in Little Rock, and he will be conducting a grand jury investigation. Whether there are proceedings after, after he's completed his work, I think is something that he would have to discuss with the attorney general, other authorities at that time.

MR. MacNeil: Do you -- can you throw more light on this, Stuart Taylor, what the terms of his appointment are in that regard?

MR. TAYLOR: He was a little ambiguous on that in his press conference. The terms of his appointment are strictly limited to criminal violations. He has no jurisdiction, as I understand it, to go in the court bringing some kind of a civil lawsuit. I'm sure he could in the course of investigating for criminal violations and investigating thoroughly come across things that he decides are not criminal but possibly, possibly somebody needs to get sued for civil, some kind of civil violation connection with the savings & loan. I suspect that if that's what happens, he would refer that matter to the appropriate federal agency, for example, the reconstruction, Resolution Trust Corporation that handles those sorts of things. He also said, however, that he is going to make a very full report when he finishes not only of who he prosecuted and why he prosecuted them, if anyone, but who he didn't prosecute and why he didn't prosecute them, if anyone. So he's at least created an expectation that he's going to lay out all the facts of what happened, whether or not he prosecutes anybody.

MR. MacNeil: Mr. Abramowitz, tell me what goes on in the mind of somebody taking on a job like this. I mean, here is something that if he found criminal violations could seriously interfere with, if not ruin, this presidency. Does he have to find something to prove his virility as a lawyer and demonstrate his independence? What works on him psychologically that way in this situation?

MR. ABRAMOWITZ: You've hit on why I think this appointment is a tremendous appointment. He doesn't need to prosecute in order to establish his virility as you put it. He needs to do a professional job. If he feels that he's not doing a professional job, he will be frustrated. He will have the courage to do what is right. He said so at his press conference. That is a credo of his and has been throughout his public career and his private career as well.

MR. MacNeil: How has that been demonstrated in his public or private career, the courage to do what is right?

MR. ABRAMOWITZ: When he was U.S. Attorney he declined prosecution in cases where there was pressure from agencies to bring cases, when he thought that the evidence was insufficient to obtain a conviction. He was --

MR. MacNeil: Excuse me interrupting but --

MR. ABRAMOWITZ: Sure.

MR. MacNeil: But that's what intrigues me here. Evidence insufficient -- a smart prosecutor doesn't try and get -- and get charges laid and a trial begun if he doesn't think he can win the case, am I right?

MR. ABRAMOWITZ: An honest prosecutor doesn't.

MR. MacNeil: An honest prosecutor doesn't. But in this case, if he finds grounds, would not the motivation be different in this kind of case?

MR. ABRAMOWITZ: I don't think so. I think --

MR. MacNeil: That he would want the certainty that he could get a conviction.

MR. ABRAMOWITZ: I think he would apply the same standards to these facts and to this case as he did when he was United States Attorney. Obviously, we're dealing with an extremely sensitive investigation involving the President and the First Lady, and he can't be immune to the fact that there is that kind of sensitivity. But it won't stop him, in my judgment, if he thinks that a prosecution is warranted. It won't stop him from bringing it, and it won't stop him from declining to bring it if he doesn't think it's warranted either. That's why I think he's a perfect choice, and he has shown that kind of discipline and integrity in the work that he's done both in the public and private sector in the past.

MR. MacNeil: Well, Mr. Abramowitz, and Stuart Taylor, thank you both for joining us.

MR. LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight, the troubles in Mexico, acrimony in the public discourse, and the Gulf War syndrome. UPDATE - UPRISING

MR. LEHRER: Now a report on the recent fighting in Southern Mexico. On January 1st, rebels seized control of several towns in the state of Chiapas. The uprising produced a political crisis in Mexico just as it was implementing the NAFTA trade treaty with the United States. The Mexican army was put on alert there today after the government predicted a new rebel offensive. Jeffrey Kaye of public station KCET-Los Angeles, has our story from Central Chiapas, 50 miles North of the Mexico-Guatemala border.

MR. KAYE: On Sunday, residents of the town of Oxchuc celebrated Mass. The ceremony was conducted in Tzeltal, the language of most of the area's inhabitants, descendants of the Mayans. Life here was severely disrupted January 1st, after Indian rebels briefly occupied this and other towns and villages in the southern state of Chiapas. The priest, Father Antonio Garnica, had hoped that by coming to church, residents could find a semblance of comfort. But as it turned out, this was no place for peace. [planes flying overhead] Outside, as the service continued, low flying planes and army helicopters shattered the calm. People ran, afraid that a battle was imminent. On the road outside Oxchuc, hundreds of heavily armed Mexican soldiers took up positions. Local residents put up white flags to show neutrality. As troops entered town, their immediate mission became clear. This was a round-up. One by one, soldiers and police pulled people from their homes and arrested them, at least sixteen in all. This man said he had no idea why he was targeted. In the town square another arrest. The two men who dragged a teenager to waiting soldiers aid they were city police. They refused to say why these people had been detained but Alejandro Santis Gomez had no doubt. He said he was being persecuted for belonging to a political group that opposes Oxchuc Mayor Emilio Gomez Santis. It was the mayor who had asked the troop to come into a town that he said was a hotbed of rebel sympathizers. He showed an army official some of the destruction caused by insurgents who call themselves the Zapatista National Liberation Army. The group is named for Emiliano Zapata, who led the successful peasant revolution in 1910. The Zapatistas' New Year's Day offensive in Central and Eastern Chiapas claimed over 100 lives. Rebel troops, believed to number between one and two thousands, battled the Mexican army for nine days until the president ordered a unilateral cease-fire. In Oxchuc, the Zapatistas moved methodically, targeting centers of power. Hardest hit were the city government offices. They also trashed the homes of city leaders and ransacked the local offices of Mexico's ruling party. Here, everything was in ruins except the case containing the Mexican flag. But as the mayor rode through town flanked by soldiers, there was no question as to who was in control. In Oxchuc, at least, the political status quo was reinforced by a military show of strength. One soldier told us that troops have been informed that half this town is sympathetic to the rebels and that the army would be dug in here indefinitely. Throughout the area, 12,000 troops are making their presence felt. The military maintains roadblocks along major highways, stopping and searching travelers. But the government is looking beyond a military solution. The insurrection produced a political crisis in Mexico. It led to resignations by a cabinet minister and the Chiapas governor. The nation's popular foreign minister was appointed to head up an independent peace commission and ordered to begin negotiating a permanent end to the conflict. His right- hand man, Juan Enriquez, said no one should be surprised at the uprising in Chiapas, where land reform programs were never fully implemented.

JUAN ENRIQUEZ, Mexican Peace Commission: Chiapas has been a very conflictive state for many, many years, almost for 500 years. And it's a state in which we've had land wars, particularly as people have more and more children and as the pressure on the land becomes more substantial, we've had outbursts of violence, but nothing on the scale of this particular uprising.

MR. KAYE: Father Garnica says land is not the only issue in this conflict; it is also about political power.

FATHER ANTONIO GARNICA: It's a phenomenon here in Chiapas, not only here but in different towns in Chiapas, we have this phenomenon, but the people who, who owns the power, who owns the political power, owns everything, you know, and if you are not with them, you are against them.

MR. KAYE: And that's the case here?

FATHER ANTONIO GARNICA: And that's the case, that's the case.

MR. KAYE: Chiapas, with a mostly Indian population, is one of Mexico's poorest states. On market day in Oxchuc, peasants, known as campesinos, offer dead rats for sale as food. The area has a history of deep-seated poverty, human rights abuses, and political corruption. The rebels have demanded fair elections and improved economic conditions. The majority of the state's population is spread out in remote, rural areas. We were taken to one such community, a 40 minute walk from Oxchuc. The homes on this mountainside have no electricity or water supply, no sewage system. There are no paved roads. The community is called Chenchauk, or Cave of Lightning. Indian legend has it that lightning emanates from a nearby cave. A thunderbolt of another kind also came from areas like this one, it is in the mountains around here where the Zapatistas find a strong base of support. Ten people sleep on the dirt floor in this hut, and Margarita Santis Gomez says often there's not enough food for her family. Closeby Tomas Gomez Lopez grows corn and beans on a plot he inherited from his father. It is a tradition here that sons inherit equal shares of their father's land. But with only so much land and a growing population, the meager resources are dwindling, and the soil is being depleted. The campesinos have asked for government loans for fertilizer but have been turned down, as they were when they requested electricity and water. Like other men in this community, to earn money, Tomas Lopez leaves his family for several weeks a year to work on a coffee plantation in another part of the state. There he makes $3 a day. The extreme poverty and frustration has fueled a long history of political activism throughout this region. Less than a week after most of the fighting ended, a number of campesino organizations from around the state of Chiapas met in a warehouse to discuss their grievances. These campesino leaders said they were eager to take advantage of the political opening created by the Zapatistas. They endorsed the rebels demands. That message was then relayed throughout the area through local meetings. In Oxchuc, organizers pressed the need for continued activism so as to keep up the pressure for change nationally as well as locally. In Oxchuc, there is a fierce rivalry between the mayor, who has the backing of state and federal authorities, and members of this group, a civil association, who complain they have been harassed and even prevented from voting because they don't agree with the mayor's policies. Opposition leader Francisco Gomez Sanchez acknowledged that some members of the association had joined the Zapatistas out of frustration. He said he wasn't a Zapatista even though he agreed with their demands. The day after this interview the day the troops swept into town, several members of the Civic Association were arrested. Gomez Sanchez and other leaders went into hiding. For his part, while his opponents were going underground, Oxchuc Mayor Emilio Gomez Santis was in the town square looking on as Mexican soldiers handed out provisions to townspeople. In an interview, the mayor denied any political reasons for the arrests of his rivals and he said the Zapatistas were motivated not by any desire for social change but by a quest for political power. An associate called the Zapatistas criminals and displayed rope burns on his wrists where the rebels had tied him up when they trashed his house. But if local officials are downplaying the insurrection, the national government facing an August election is putting its best face on the efforts to cope with the aftermath. A press center with free phones set up in a deluxe Chiapas hotel assists reporters in getting out the story. The story the government wants told is although mistakes were made in the past, change is coming. But the story is also 30 minutes away at a newly built, now empty prison. It stands as mute testimony to the Zapatistas' military skill. This building once housed 179 prisoners, freed when the rebels broke in here. The Zapatistas are pledging to renew their offensive if the government reneges on promises to improve the conditions of Mexico's Indians.

MR. MacNeil: Still ahead on the NewsHour, a conversation with Deborah Tannen and the Gulf War Syndrome. CONVERSATION - YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND

MR. LEHRER: Now, the harshness that goes with public life in the United States these days. It is an issue Bobby Ray Inman raised earlier in the week when he withdrew his nomination to be Secretary of Defense, and it is the subject of a Charlayne Hunter-Gault conversation.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: According to the author of a recent New York Times op/ed piece, more and more these days journalists, politicians, and academics treat public discourse as an argument, not in the sense of making an argument but in the sense of having one, of having a fight. The author, Deborah Tannen, is a leading authority on language and how people use it. A professor of linguistics at Georgetown University, Tannen has written widely on the subject, including the best-selling book You Just Don't Understand, Women and Men In Conversation. We spoke with her this week in her Washington, D.C., home. Deborah Tannen, thank you for joining us. You talk about a culture of critique. Tell me what that means.

DEBORAH TANNEN: More and more these days it seems like the media, academia, certainly law, all walks of life, people have the idea that opposition is the path to truth, that public discourse is like an argument. I actually thought of this term -- I was responding to a feminist researcher who had started with a scathing critique of another researcher, and then went on said things of her own. The argument that she was making made a lot of sense, but she started out by attacking someone else's argument and completely misrepresenting it in order to attack it more easily. And I put the question to her: Why do you have to make somebody else wrong for you to be right? Her response was: "It's an argument." And something clicked. That's what's going on with public discourse more and more.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, what's new about that? I mean, people have always argued that way, haven't they?

DEBORAH TANNEN: Not really. Public discourse should be more of making an argument rather than having an argument. When you have an argument, you're not trying to understand what the other person is saying. You're looking for weaknesses in their arguments or to make them look bad. You want to come out on top. It's like a fight. It's really not the most effective way to get at information.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: If this is new, this level or low level of public discourse, when did it start, and what were the reasons for it? Do you -- do you have any idea?

DEBORAH TANNEN: I don't think, I don't think it's a completely new phenomenon. It really goes back to the intellectual, western intellectual tradition, the idea that a debate is the best way to get at the truth. But it seems to be coming -- it seems to be more and more common for the spectacle of a fight to be privileged in public discourse, so the media, for example, if there's a topic that's important, they may not cover it if it's not controversial. For example, I read recently that AIDS hasn't been covered as much recently now that the administration is supporting AIDS research, and one of the Times journalists was actually quoted as saying, well, gee, we can't get anyone to get on and complain about the administration, so that's why we don't cover it. Umm, I've been asked at the beginning of interviews what's the most provocative thing about your book? Well, maybe the most provocative thing isn't the most important thing, but it may not be covered if it isn't as entertaining. I think it has a lot to do with the increasing competition for readership. Newspapers don't have a captive audience anymore. They feel that they're competing with TV and television stations, competing with each other. And I think that a feeling is out there that people like to watch a good fight. Well, there are a lot of consequences of that. For example, if you want a good fight, the most extreme views are going to be preferred. But the extreme views are probably not as close to the truth. Another side of it is people always looking for the other side. The most extreme example of this is all the public attention that's been paid to the Holocaust deniers. Now the people who are giving a forum know that it's not true, that the Holocaust may not have happened. Everybody knows -- it's history that it occurred. But it's so provocative. It's too tempting, I think, to avoid giving attention to these topics that are going to be so provocative.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But where do you draw the line? Because in journalism at least we make an effort to, to look out for more than one side of an argument. We consider it fair and balanced to present two sides if there are two sides. What's the difference between fairness and what you're talking about?

DEBORAH TANNEN: Yes, you're absolutely right, of course. I think it's simply taking what is a fundamental and very positive aspect of journalism and simply taking it too far. Yes, if there is more than one side, of course, it's the responsibility of journalists to present it.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But what's too far?

DEBORAH TANNEN: But what happens when there isn't another side? What happens when -- take the Holocaust as an example. It's historical fact. Everybody knows that the Holocaust occurred, and yet, people are giving a forum to people who say that it didn't occur. Those who are giving them that forum know that what they're saying, to put it simply, isn't true. But it's, it's such a provocative argument that it's often too tempting for them. And I think quite commonly there may be more than two sides. There may be three, four, five. But there's a temptation to simply put forth two sides and have them go at each other and think that that is going to somehow lead to the truth. In some cases, it does, of course. If there is a genuine argument between two sides, of course, it's good to present it in that way. But many issues are better explored, complexity will be brought out much more, if you allow people in the middle to talk about it.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: You said something also about some of the effects of this kind of attitude about public discourse, and you mentioned disinformation. Explain that one to me.

DEBORAH TANNEN: Yeah. I think if you go out of your way to find another side when there isn't one that's really very serious, you can end up giving a forum to a side, a point of view that is really not true. There's a very common practice lately where a journalist will take all the rumors that have been said about someone and in an interview confront them with it in order to provoke the person, and then from one point of view, I think the feeling is, well, we're giving them a chance to defend themselves. But at the same time, you're actually planting that accusation in the minds of the readers or the hearers. And I think too, it's a feeling that if you provoke someone, you're going to get a more interesting interview. I think the assumption is that maybe they'll be, they'll reveal something very fascinating if they get a little bit upset, so you might interview an actress and say, is it true that you're really difficult on the set, that nobody wants to work with you, but when people are confronted with the negative gossip about them, they get upset, they get hurt, and it often makes people less articulate rather than more.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Would you say the journalists should stop asking tough questions, stop putting the tough questions to, you know, to politicians, public officials, people who perhaps should be intensely scrutinized?

DEBORAH TANNEN: I'm clearly not suggesting that any tough questions be out of bounds. Certainly a very large part of the responsibility that journalists have is to ask the tough, challenging questions if they have reason to believe that the facts are not being presented. What am I challenging is whether we need to approach everything as a fight, whether controversy must be stirred up when it isn't there of its own, when opposition is the only path to inquiry that we're pursuing.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Does that affect the way a politician then presents himself or herself?

DEBORAH TANNEN: Yes. Well, I think now there's such a feeling that any false move -- and it's going to be leapt on and magnified and disseminated -- makes politicians very guarded, and it means that they are less able to communicate to the people as they would like to. And I think it makes them, makes it a lot harder for them to do their jobs, simply harder for them to formulate any kind of policy, plan, or message that they want to get across because it always has to be molded with that self-defense built in.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Is it time, you know, for journalists and others who lead the public inquiries to step back and re- think their line of inquiry?

DEBORAH TANNEN: I think so. I think if journalists, themselves, think about some of the complex consequences of the culture of critique, think of some of the other ways that they could lead us to a fuller understanding of the very complex issues that we're dealing with now in our society, that they will see that there may be more creative ways to be added certainly to the oppositional forms of inquiry that we already are so comfortable with.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Is this just mainly within the realm of intellectual discourse, or does this affect the climate of violence in the country that is, that is sort of tearing at the fabric of communities and American society, life in general?

DEBORAH TANNEN: I think the atmosphere of animosity feeds into this, and it's especially frightening when so many people express their anger with guns. This -- it can poison people's relationships with each other, the way that they are provoked, continually provoked from all sides, and encouraged to see, to see views and extremes, rather than trying to understand what other people are trying to get at.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, you've been laboring in this vineyard at one level or another for a very long time. When you look into your crystal ball, what do you see happening? Where do you see us ending up?

DEBORAH TANNEN: I feel that there really is a frustration among people now at the tremendous contentiousness of public conversations that they're exposed to, and I think people are tired of it, and I believe that if they were given another option, they would, they would grasp at it.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, we'll have to wait and see. Deborah Tannen, thank you. FOCUS - THE BATTLE CONTINUES

MR. MacNeil: Next tonight, the so-called "Gulf War Syndrome." Like Vietnam, many vets came back from the Gulf War with mysterious ailments which have so far confounded doctors and left the veterans in a kind of medical limbo. Our medical correspondent, Fred De Sam Lazaro of public television station KTCA, Minneapolis-St. Paul, reports on their problem.

MR. LAZARO: To most Americans, Desert Storm was a huge military triumph for the allies. But for soldiers, themselves, the Gulf War has a different legacy. U.S. Veterans Affairs Secretary Jesse Brown.

JESSE BROWN, Secretary, Veterans Affairs: In my view, this has been one of the most dirty wars in our -- in this century, and we are talking about veterans being exposed to the smoke from the burning of the oil wells. You're talking to veterans being exposed to depleted uranium. We're talking about veterans being exposed to carp. We're talking about veterans being exposed to leishmaniases, and God knows what else.

MR. LAZARO: What else they were exposed to is the subject of growing dispute, or a mystery, depending on whom one asks. Thousands of Gulf War veterans have developed rashes and sores like the ones that cover Willie Hicks's body, along with disabling fatigue, muscle and joint aches, and various other symptoms.

WILLIE HICKS, Veteran: I have a headache. I've had a headache for two years. It's nothing -- I pass out a lot, you know. That's why I try to be around somebody when I, you know, where I go. I wouldn't drive a car right now for -- ain't no way in the world. My memory's bad. I don't sleep. I average about two, three hours a day.

MR. LAZARO: Willie Hicks was in perfect health until he returned from Saudi Arabia, where he served in an army reserve ammunition unit. His various aliments cost him his job as an assistant manager in an auto parts store. In different combinations and degrees of severity, Hicks's symptoms have been reported by thousands of Gulf veterans. They've confounded doctors, like Robert Roswell, at the VA Hospital in Birmingham, Alabama, where many veterans in the Southeast have sought help.

DR. ROBERT ROSWELL, Birmingham, VA Hospital: Some of the symptoms many of you have experienced simply don't fit a standard medical diagnosis. We have been looking at a large number of possible causes of exposures that may have been associated with service in the Persian Gulf.

MR. LAZARO: Many Gulf veterans have been diagnosed and treated for predictable exposures. The oil fires caused asthma in some, and a desert parasite caused an outbreak of sand fly fever. But among those suffering the non-specific symptoms, only one many, William Tay, has gotten a diagnosis from a VA doctor, a controversial one that the VA system, itself, has not accepted.

WILLIAM TAY: [in audience listening to Roswell] My diagnosis was Persian Gulf Syndrome and chemical-biological warfare exposure.

DR. ROBERT ROSWELL: The problem that we've had to date is that the symptoms, even though they're very real symptoms, are not a medical diagnosis.

MR. LAZARO: Tay's diagnosis came from doctors at the VA Medical Center in Tuskegee, Alabama.

DR. CALVIN REBER, Tuskegee, VA Hospital: When you look at the usual things you look at when people are ill, you come up blank, and when sufficient of them say they were exposed to chemical-biological warfare, you tend to pay attention to it.

DR. CHARLES JACKSON, Tuskegee, VA Hospital: We felt that the symptoms that they were having were also consistent with some certain biological agents which have been documented as having been used by the Iraqis and which were suspected but not proven by the Russians.

MR. LAZARO: By the Russians?

DR. CHARLES JACKSON: Yes. In Afghanistan.

MR. LAZARO: Dr. Jackson's theory caused a stir in Washington. It contradicted the Pentagon's long insistence there was no evidence of chemical weapons anywhere in the war theater.

REPORTER: Are you confident that Iraq did not use chemical weapons during the war?

LES ASPIN, Secretary of Defense: We're making no definitive conclusions at this time.

MR. LAZARO: The Pentagon's stand was somewhat modified recently, after officials in the Czech Republic reported that one of their units serving in the allied forces did find evidence of a chemical called Sarin [map on screen reads: Sarin Reported 19 Jan. - with arrow pointing to location between Hafar Al Batin and Kuwait on map] and also traces of mustard gas. The Pentagon then dispatched its own investigators to Prague.

LES ASPIN: [standing next to map] The investigating team which based its investigation on the professionalism and equipment of the Czech military concluded that the detections were valid.

MR. LAZARO: But beyond that, Defense Sec. Les Aspin added U.S. investigators have found no physical evidence to corroborate the Czech report. There were no reports of either Iraqi or allied use of chemical agents. Even the destruction of an Iraqi chemical facility was too distant to have caused the kind of symptoms reported by soldiers, Aspin said.

LES ASPIN: Given the known characteristics of the chemical agent involved and given the date and concentrations detected, our findings to date establish no linkage between the detections reported by the Czechs and the illness reported by some of the veterans. At the same time, I want our Desert Storm veterans to know that I personally take these health problems stemming from the war very, very seriously.

MR. LAZARO: But Willie Hicks does not take the secretary seriously. To him, there's an air of deja vu in the Pentagon pronouncements.

WILLIE HICKS: 'Cause I was in Vietnam also, and if you remember correctly, the army said that we was never sprayed with agent orange. We continued to say we was. Respiratory problems, lower problems, all kinds of urine -- there was blood in your urine, blood in your feces, sores all over, but the army continually said that that never happened. Last year, after 22 years, they came up and said it did happen. But what you got to look at is how many guys have died, you know. If we didn't fight right now, the same thing would happen to the guys from Saudi Arabia.

MR. LAZARO: It's a fear that is reinforced every Friday when Hicks meets other Persian Gulf and Vietnam veterans in this support group. These men are convinced that the so-called Persian Gulf Syndrome is similar to the maladies of Vietnam vets who were exposed to the defoliant agent orange. Doctors have yet to establish any such link, but to many in this group there's no mistaking the agony of having symptoms the VA cannot explain and being treated piecemeal for them.

FIRST UNIDENTIFIED VETERAN IN GROUP: I take 15 pills a day right now myself.

SECOND UNIDENTIFIED VETERAN: I got to take medication to sleep, wake up.

FIRST UNIDENTIFIED VETERAN IN GROUP: I take medication to wake up. I take medication to walk, and I can't breathe sometimes.

MR. LAZARO: There's also medication for depression. Sears McQueen was unable to return to the job he held before Desert Storm because he failed a company physical. Disability pay is not awarded for Persian Gulf Syndrome, but some of its symptoms are now eligible, like Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, which is an official medical diagnosis.

DR. ROBERT ROSWELL: Now, I have no evidence to suggest that service in the Persian Gulf would cause Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, but because it is something we can make a diagnosis and put a label on, the Veterans Benefits Administration is now processing claims - - my understanding -- for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

MR. LAZARO: Still, it's not quickly enough for many veterans who complain they've already waited more than two years for disability benefits. VA Sec. Brown is sympathetic.

SEC. JESSE BROWN: Any time that you have at issue a question for which there is no precedent, there is no foundation, there is no reference. It's going to be a slow process. My message to our Persian Gulf veterans is that we do not intend to just turn into another agent orange problem.

MR. LAZARO: Unlike the agent orange situation, the VA is acknowledging that some environmental toxins may have caused health problems in Persian Gulf veterans. All Desert Storm veterans are being urged to register at VA hospitals and their cases are being tracked by doctors. Major General Ronald Blanck, head of the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, says the Pentagon's investigation is looking into all possibilities, not just the warfare agent's hypothesis.

MAJ. GEN. RONALD BLANCK, Walter Reed Hospital: I just think because someone says that this is a possibility doesn't mean that everyone has to jump on the bandwagon when, in fact, there's far more compelling evidence for other explanations. And that's this combination of all of the various chemicals, environmental hazards that were present in the Gulf. Saudi Arabia stores many chemicals. We used many, many chemicals in the building up and in the carrying out of the military operations. I can say absolutely unequivocally with no consideration of the politics of anything that we have been as open and forthright as I know how to be with all of this information. You know what I know.

MR. LAZARO: Persian Gulf veterans may, indeed, benefit from the lessons learned in Vietnam, but to Vietnam veteran William Gains, their treatment has been no different than that of agent orange victims and far more ironic.

WILLIAM GAINS, Veteran: You know, you come back with a hero welcome, and then all of a sudden you're not a hero, you're a heel. And that's really something that, you know -- you went from an up to a down. And that's --

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Too quick.

WILLIAM GAINS: -- that's painful. You see, what a Veteran -- you see, we came from a down and we're still down.

MR. MacNeil: Tomorrow, three federal departments are expected to announce plans to form an inter-agency board to respond to the health concerns of the Gulf War veterans. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Thursday, there was more cold weather from the East Coast West to the Dakotas. The federal government closed down for the day to conserve energy. There was new urgency to find shelter for earthquake victims as colder weather and rain threatened the Los Angeles area, and Attorney General Reno named New York Attorney Robert Fiske as special counsel to investigate the Whitewater affair. Good night, Robin.

MR. MacNeil: Good night, Jim. That's the NewsHour for tonight. We'll be back tomorrow night with the political week in review as seen by Mark Shields and company. I'm Robert MacNeil. Good night.