The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

MARGARET WARNER: Good evening, I'm Margaret Warner. Jim Lehrer is on vacation. On the NewsHour tonight, new revelations about what the FBI did at Waco; out-of-this world pictures from NASA's new telescope; religious leaders on what the 2000 election should be about; and Poet Laureate Robert Pinsky on the sounds of summer. It all follows our summary of the news this Thursday.

NEWS SUMMARY

MARGARET WARNER: Attorney General Reno vowed a new investigation today into the April, 1993 fire that consumed a religious cult compound at Waco, Texas. Dozens of members of the Branch Davidian cult, including their leader David Koresh, died when their wooden compound burst into flames. The fire exploded as FBI agents were closing in, but the government has always contended that the cult members started the fire. Reno's comments today followed an FBI admission that its agents may have fired incendiary tear gas canisters near the compound shortly before the raid. She spoke to reporters this morning.

JANET RENO, Attorney General: I have no reason whatsoever at this point to believe that the FBI was responsible for the deaths of the people. But I think it is important for the American people to know that we have pursued every question and pursued it as far as we humanly can to get to the truth.

MARGARET WARNER: We'll have more on the story right after the News Summary. Also at her weekly briefing this morning, the attorney general declined to discuss the FBI's probe of an alleged Russian money-laundering scheme using U.S. banks. But Russia's prosecutor general today ordered an official inquiry into the matter. Newspaper reports have said as much as $20 billion in funds generated by Russian organized crime may have been laundered through accounts at the Bank of New York. United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan called on the Indonesian government in Jakarta today to put a stop to the violence in East Timor. Several people have been killed in clashes between supporters and opponents of East Timorese independence, just days before a referendum on the territory's future. We have more from Ian Williams of Independent Television News.

IAN WILLIAMS: The violence erupted as the pro-Indonesia rally filled into a staunchly pro-independent part of Dilli, the East Timorese capital. There were running battles on the streets. Militias loyal to Jakarta unleashed guns, knives, and homemade bombs. Their opponents replied with rocks and swords. The violence looked premeditated and the police again seemed unable or unwilling to stop them. At least three people were killed. This comes three days before a United Nations-sponsored vote in which the East Timorese are to choose between autonomy or outright independence from Indonesia. And it deals a cruel blow to U.N. efforts to stop the violence. Earlier some ten thousand people had attended a pro-Jakarta rally in Dilli, their last before Monday's vote. They have been addressed by militia leaders who warned of massive fighting but fear fire if the votes go for independence as is widely expected. By late this afternoon, the officers of the main pro-independence group had been burned and trashed -- as the homes belonging to supporters of a break with Jakarta.

MARGARET WARNER: There was a sign today that the U.S. economy is cooling. The Commerce Department reported the nation's Gross Domestic Product-- its total output of goods and services-- grew at annual rate of 1.8 percent in the second quarter. That's a sharp decline from the 4.3 percent growth of the first quarter. The slow-down was attributed to a higher-than-estimated second-quarter trade deficit of more than $14 billion. On Wall Street today, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed down 127 points at 11,198. The NASDAQ Index was down 30 points at 2774. Turkey's stock exchange plunged 10 percent today, the first trading day since the August 17 earthquake. The exchange reported massive selling in early trading. In the capital, Ankara, a parliamentary committee approved a proposal late yesterday to raise taxes to pay for repairs. The government estimates the damage is between $5 and $7 billion. NASA released the first pictures today from the world's largest and most powerful space telescope, the Chandra X-ray Observatory. The images show a giant star exploding about 300 years ago. Project scientists said the observatory and its instruments are performing well. The $1 billion orbiting telescope was launched July 23. Its mission: To help scientists study the origin and evolution of the universe. We'll have more on the story later in the program tonight. Hurricane Dennis gathered force and inched toward Georgia and the Carolinas today. It had been upgraded from tropical storm status late last night. But forecasters said it isn't clear whether Dennis will eventually hit land or spin out to sea. A second storm, tropical storm Emily, could eventually threaten the East Coast. But yet another Atlantic storm, Hurricane Cindy, appears to pose no threat to land. That's it for the News Summary tonight. Now it's on to the FBI and Waco, a new eye in the sky, agenda 2000, and a summertime poem.

FOCUS - STILL SMOLDERING

MARGARET WARNER: We lead tonight with the sudden new developments in the Waco story. We begin with this report from Kwame Holman.

KWAME HOLMAN: It was six years ago last April an inferno ended the 51-day standoff between federal authorities and the group known as the Branch Davidians. At least 76 members of the sect died in the fast-moving fire that engulfed the Davidians' wooden compound in Waco, Texas. The group's leader, David Koresh was among the dead. Almost from the moment the blaze began, its exact cause was a subject of dispute. Group members who escaped the fire and families of those who didn't filed a wrongful death suit against the federal government claiming police agencies caused the catastrophe. Federal agents used tanks and teargas during their attack on the compound but from the outset and throughout several Justice Department and congressional investigations, the government denied using any fire-causing devices. Arson investigators said they found evidence the Branch Davidians had spread gasoline and other fuels throughout the compound before the fire. Nine days after the fire, Attorney General Reno told a House Committee "I wanted and received assurances that the gas and its means of use were not pyrotechnic. I was concerned about intentional or accidental explosions." Today, however, the government's story changed.

JANET RENO: I am very, very troubled by the information I received this week suggesting that pyrotechnic devices may have been used in the early morning hours on April 19, 1993 at Waco. At this time, all available indications are that the devices were not directed at the main wooden compound, were discharged several hours before the fire started, and were not the cause of the fire. Nonetheless, it is absolutely critical that we do everything humanly possible to learn all the facts as accurately as possible and make them available to the public and Congress. Prior to April 19, I received assurances that the gas and its means of use were not pyrotechnic. Since then, I have consistently been told that no pyrotechnic devices were used. I will continue to pursue this matter to get to the truth. That is why Director Freeh and I have ordered a full review of all the facts concerning this matter. I intend the results of the review to be made public and I will not stop till I get to the bottom of this. One of the things that you have learn, if you care about public service is that it's not always the easy issues -- that you face very difficult issues. You do the best you can. You try to pursue every avenue to get to the right thing to do, to get to the truth. And if you are going to let things get you down, maybe you should go do something else.

KWAME HOLMAN: The F.B.I. and Justice Department today began a fresh investigation into what happened at Waco, assigning agents to re-interview witnesses. Meanwhile, members of Congress are asking questions of their own. Both the House and Senate panels that oversee the F.B.I. are planning inquiries.

MARGARET WARNER: To explain what's behind this we turn to two journalists: Lee Hancock of the Dallas Morning News, who has covered the Waco story since 1993, and Roberto Suro, who covers the Justice Department for the Washington Post.

Roberto Suro, what caused this turnaround on the attorney general's part?

ROBERTO SURO, Washington Post: Well, from the outset she has based her position that she takes responsibility for what happened at Waco on the firm belief that law enforcement had no part in starting the fire. The mere possibility that in some way law enforcement might have become involved in setting off that fire and the deaths that resulted is deeply troubling to her, and sparked her determination, her very angry determination, as you could see, to get to the bottom of this.

MARGARET WARNER: And what was she told that made her decide that she had to do this?

ROBERTO SURO: Well, she was told, contrary to everything she has been told since 1993, she was told that there were pyrotechnic devices, teargas canisters that were capable of starting a fire that have an incendiary quality in the way they were propelled at the structure were on the scene and may have been used. She had previously been told, as she said this morning, quite consistently, that there was nothing in the law enforcement arsenal that could have started that fire. And this evidence directly contradicts that point.

MARGARET WARNER: Lee Hancock, how did this new evidence come to light?

LEE HANCOCK, Dallas Morning News: Well, over the summer it became apparent that an independent investigator, a gentleman who's done one documentary on Waco, had been allowed into the evidence lockers at the Texas Department of Public Safety in Austin to look at some evidence that he had gotten photographs of from crime scene pictures. These were given to the defense attorneys in the Davidian criminal trial. And there were questions as to what those pieces of evidence that were projectiles actually were. The Rangers began investigating, the Texas Rangers, who have custody of the evidence. We began asking experts to look at these photographs and an expert from James Information actually looked at one picture and said it was, in fact, a pyrotechnic teargas grenade made for the U.S. military that this photograph was taken from the area around the compound and the Rangers said they further have developed evidence that it was used by the FBI on the 19th. After that, over the weekend, we had an interview with Danny Coleson, he's a former -- senior FBI official. He's the founding commander of the Hostage Rescue Team, which was on scene at Waco. They were trying to -- they were trying to get a peaceful end to this entire standoff. Mr. Coleson was not actually in Waco, but he said he learned from others on the hostage rescue team that two of these devices, two M651 CS gas grenades were actually fired and were fired with the permission of supervisors in the FBI on the 19th.

MARGARET WARNER: Okay. Now, Roberto, the attorney general and FBI, though, are still insisting that these could not have caused the fire. Explain that.

ROBERTO SURO: Well, the evidence available thus far to Reno's office indicates that these devices were fired a good three, perhaps even four hours prior to the outbreak of the fire that caused the deaths in the major part of the compound -- and that they were fired at an outbuilding a good hundred yards away from the main building where the people died in the fire some hours later. The problem is that once the question is raised, that there may have been these pyrotechnic devices -- these project isles were fired at one point, Reno is obliged to determine and be certain whether or not they may have been fired at some other point and whether they were fired at the building where the fire took place at some point.

MARGARET WARNER: Lee Hancock, there had also been,had there not, an independent arson investigation that it also concluded that the fires started in the complex itself. Does this new evidence fight with that in any way?

LEE HANCOCK: Well, I don't think so in the main because the arson investigators relied on chemical testing which found that the residues of four or five different kinds of flammable liquids, gasoline, charcoal lighter fluid, camp stove fuel were poured throughout the compound before the fire. In addition, there were FBI bugging devices that picked up voices of Branch Davidians in the compound starting almost immediately after the gas assault began to talk about spreading fuel. A Davidian who came out of the fire who survived told investigators and testified before a federal grand jury that in fact he had heard someone -- he did not know who -- say "start the fire, start the fire." So the problem is that the arson investigators much like Ms. Reno and other senior federal officials relied on assurances of the FBI that no pyrotechnic devices were used. And in their report they state that the gas insertion by the FBI had no effect on the fire. And they base that on the report that there were no pyrotechnics of any kind that day.

MARGARET WARNER: All right, staying with you, Lee Hancock, and I know that is complicated - but explain this as briefly as you can or simply why is it -- it is been five, six years now since this fire -- why has this evidence been sitting in a room and has never come to light before given all the investigations, given the lawsuits that some of the family members have filed? Why has it not become public till now?

LEE HANCOCK: Very simply, the Texas Rangers were bought in to investigate this matter. They were deputized as United States Marshals. And after the criminal trials, they were asked to keep the evidence in the case. But the Justice Department told them that if anyone asked to see it, they were supposed to route that request up to Washington. And then in turn, people in Washington would simply tell any persons who wanted to see the evidence they were sorry but Washington and the Justice Department didn't have custody of it. So they would then route it back to Austin. That resulted in what the head of the Texas Department of Public Safety Commission James B. Francis of Dallas said, amounted to a catch-22. He said it had not been an intentional cover-up but it was a stone wall blocking people from seeing the evidence.

MARGARET WARNER: Go ahead. Roberto, how does the FBI explain that this evidence never came to light?

In other words, what's the version being told up here in Washington?

ROBERTO SURO: The FBI officially is expressing its surprise at uncovering this information, and vows an investigation of itself. At this point it's not offered a full explanation of how its operatives had possession of this ordinance and that failed be noted in the reports that the FBI presented to Congress and to the attorney general.

MARGARET WARNER: But Lee Hancock just told us that in fact even an FBI agent, a former agent that she spoke with this weekend knew about this. I mean....

ROBERTO SURO: He knew about it only in just this the summer. Coleson has said he did not know about it at the time or the time he wrote a book of all of that. He has come to understand the existence of these projectiles only recently himself. What remains unknown and what the very difficult question here is whether senior FBI executives who were running the seeing now about the projectiles and did not inform either their superiors here in Washington or, most importantly, the attorney general. If that, that certainly will be a major focal point of this investigation.

MARGARET WARNER: Lee Hancock, anything you want to add to that? Have you done any, for instance, reporting into that aspect?

LEE HANCOCK: Yes. Actually, what Mr. Coleson told me was that he heard about questions being raised by the Rangers trying to figure out what some of the evidence they had was. And so he simply he called his colleagues up at HRT, the guys he used to work with.

MARGARET WARNER: HRT?

LEE HANCOCK: Hostage Rescue Team -- last week, they said, oh, yes, it was no secret. It had long been commonly known in hostage rescue teams that these devices were used. And they were surprised that was any big deal.

MARGARET WARNER: Lee, staying with you, what are the implications of this for the lawsuit that has been filed in this case?

LEE HANCOCK: Well, certainly the plaintiff's lawyers are saying that this admission by the FBI should call into question the government's entire story about what happened. They are going to argue that the government can't be trusted with anything that it's told us about what happened on the 19th or during the entire siege.

MARGARET WARNER: And, Roberto, what are the implications here for Justice and the FBI?

ROBERTO SURO: There is a very fundamental and question of credibility here that is very difficult for Reno and very difficult in a personal way. You have to remember that Waco followed the Ruby Ridge incident which -- in which there was an FBI shooting under disputed circumstances which led to several senior FBI executives being forced out of work and one of them pleading to an obstruction of justice charge for covering up evidence of a disputed actions in the Ruby Ridge. Many of those same individuals were involved at the time of Waco. Beyond that, the level of concern in certain circles about the FBI action at Waco has haunted Reno throughout her career. It was Waco which was in the mind of Tim McVeigh when he set off the bomb of Oklahoma City on the anniversary of this fire. And so it's a deeply difficult question to face at this point that somehow there has been evidence lurking around in Texas that has not come to light, the possibility of a cover-up. All of these things resonate quite forcefully in Washington and beyond and among the many people in certain political circles here who question the FBI, question the justice establishment and have a basic suspicion of all the events surrounding Waco.

MARGARET WARNER: Is there, Roberto staying with you, is there any question within the Justice Department about whether the FBI now is really the agency to investigate this?

ROBERTO SURO: There is a question and one of the things that has been under debate today is whether to go outside to ensure the credibility of this investigation. When you have to admit, when Reno has to admit that she has been misinformed for six years, how does she regain credibility? And that's what was very much under discussion today. The results should be known perhaps later today or tomorrow. But one of the possibilities is to go to a U.S. Attorney, who is not involved in this, or to another prominent prosecutor or investigator who could look into this matter and produce a report that would carry some greater credibility.

MARGARET WARNER: All right. Well, Roberto Suro and Lee Hancock, thank you both very much.

FOCUS - EYE IN THE SKY

MARGARET WARNER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight: New pictures from outer space, agenda 2000, and poet laureate Robert Pinsky. Spencer Michels begins our look in space.

SPOKESPERSON: We have booster ignition and liftoff of Columbia reaching new heights for women, x ray astronomy.

SPENCER MICHELS: When the space shuttle Columbia launched safely into orbit, it was carrying not only NASA's first female shuttle commander but also the world's most powerful X-ray telescope, the Chandra X-Ray Observatory. Seven hours after launch, Air Force Colonel Eileen Collins and her crew accomplished the main objective of their commission, ejecting the Chandra and placing it in orbit eventually one third of the way to the Moon.

SPOKESPERSON: Houston we have a good deploy.

SPENCER MICHELS: NASA officials say Chandra's X-ray vision is so powerful it would make Superman jealous. With a combination of sensitive instruments and mirrors that reflect X-rays into the instruments that will process them, the observatory will allow scientists to study the origin, structure and evolution of the universe in greater detail than ever before. They say because of its sensitivity it can peer back ten billion years when the universe was very young. Chandra is the third in NASA's family of great observatories. The first and flagship mission of the NASA observatory program, the Hubble Space Telescope, began its orbit in 1990 -- after the space shuttle Discovery carted the $2 billion instrument to outer space. Hubble was created to help scientists see ten times further into the universe than earthbound telescopes. The images it sent back to earth - allowed scientists to see galaxies never before visible and to study black holes. Second into space the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory. The $617 million structure was launched from the space shuttle Atlantis in 1991; weighing more than 17 tons it was then the heaviest civilian spacecraft ever deployed from the shuttle. The Compton is still studying gamma rays emitted by some of the most mysterious objects in the sky. The mission's accomplishments includes the discovery of the most powerful gamma ray burst ever detected. The third and latest observatory mission, the Chandra, uses X-rays because most stars, galaxy and other space objects emit X-rays. The observatory will spend at least five years scanning the universe trying to learn the real nature of mysterious gravitational sinks called black holes and peering at galaxies, exploded stars and other bodies. Astronomers hope, among other things, to better determine the distance to various objects in the universe. At $2.89 billion -- including the shuttle ride and five years in orbital operations-- it is one of NASA's most expensive robotic projects to date. Still to come, as long as Congress funds it, an infrared telescope to be launched in 2001.

MARGARET WARNER: Terrence Smith takes the story from there.

TERENCE SMITH: With me is NASA's chief scientist for the Chandra X-Ray Observatory Project, Martin Weisskopf. Joining us a member of the astrophysics community, Doctor Robert Kirshner and Professor of Astronomy at Harvard University.

Gentlemen, welcome to you both. You've been working on this project for a long time -- 22 years, and now you have some payoff. Tell us what it is and how you feel about it.

DR. MARTIN WEISSKOPF, Chief Scientist, Chandra Project: Well, the payoff which is spectacular is that after all these years of hard work by so many thousands of people, scientists, but also engineers, managers, technicians, we see the fruits of our labors and a few weeks ago the shuttle brought other pay load into orbit as you saw on the lead-in and now after several weeks of operation, we have the first X-ray images from this observatory and believe me, we are so excited about what we're seeing and very glad to share it with you.

TERENCE SMITH: Dr. Kirshner, maybe you can put it in perspective -- the whole project and the immediate results.

DR. ROBERT KIRSHNER, Harvard University: Well, X-ray Astronomy allows us a new window on the universe. X-rays are emitted by objects that are extremely hot. So places where stars are exploding, places where gas is swirling into a black hole, places where there is gas that is trapped in the gravitational grip of a huge cluster of galaxies, those are the places that we see with X-ray Astronomy, and Chandra is the most powerful X-ray observatory ever. It is made with an exquisite system that images the light. It makes very sharp images, and that has been a tremendous breakthrough in X-ray Astronomy .

TERENCE SMITH: Let me ask to you look at some of the images that have come back from this telescope and tell us what we're seeing. Here is the first.

DR. MARTIN WEISSKOPF: Well, that image that we're taking a look at is not a visible lighting that we could normally see with our eyes. This is an image taken with this X-ray telescope of a region of space where 300 years ago a star exploded. That star exploded and spewed forth material that went into the interstellar medium that is the region around the star and heated it up to incredibly high temperatures. In this image what you are seeing is the intensity, the very bright spots are the brightest in the X-rays, and the redder spots are not so bright and the darker spots are not so bright at all. And, as my 91-year-old uncle said, there are incredible things to be seen there. He looked at the dot in the middle and said, "What is that?" And that's a darn good question: What is it? That is one of the questions we're going to study and it may be the remains of the central part of the star that exploded.

TERENCE SMITH: Doctor Kirshner, we're looking at a piece of history there?

DR. ROBERT KIRSHNER: Yes, that is something that exploded about 380 years ago, and the way we know that is that we can see that this has been expanding. That object has been detected in the radio; it's been detected in the optical, but in those wave bands you don't see most of the star. It's only in the X-rays where you get to see most of the mass of the exploded star -- shreds of it which are moving out at more than ten million miles an hour which get heated to very high temperatures, a thousand times hotter than the Sun by the collisions of this stuff with the surrounding mediums. The interesting thing is those stars are supposed to explode by means of gravitational collapse. That is the center of the star crunches down under the force of gravity, it becomes a very dense thing which has the mass of a star but the size of a city, a neutron star. Well, we have had optical pictures of Cas A and we've had -

TERENCE SMITH: Which one of these.

DR. ROBERT KIRSHNER: Right. And we have had X-ray images before, but nobody had seen that little dot that is in the middle that probably is the neutron star, the real remnant of the star that collapsed.

TERENCE SMITH: The actual star itself. Let's take a look at the next image now and we'll see whether you can see a great deal more here.

DR. MARTIN WEISSKOPF: This an X-ray comparison. In a little while we'll see a opti-visible light but the picture on the right is the previous best X-ray telescope and the picture on the left is the Chandra image; the Chandra image was taken in about an hour and a half of observing and the one on the right was taken in threedays. And you can just see the remarkable clarity and advances that are made by this wonderful telescope. For example that point object in the middle you couldn't find in the observatory previous work and the Chandra itself will do much, much more.

TERENCE SMITH: All right. And we have yet another one which has come back. Tell us about this.

DR. ROBERT KIRSHNER: Well, this is a comparison of optical data shown on the right with the X-ray data on the left. Optical light comes from stars. And you can see the field is studded with stars. The Cas A remnant is in the plain of our Milky Way Galaxy. On the left you see the X-ray image and there aren't all those point sources, because stars - even though you think of them as very hot -- are too cold to emit much X-ray light. But the very hot gas that is in that volume of the remnant is emitting in the X-rays. That's what we see. And you can even tell from the optical data and especially in the near future from the X-ray data what that is made of. It turns out it's made of elements that are heavier than the hydrogen and helium that make up most of the universe. That stuff is made up of oxygen and the products of fusion of oxygen - silicon, sulfur, calcium, all the way up to iron. And it is literally the case that calcium that is in your bones, the oxygen that's in the air you're breathing, the iron that's in your blood came from exploded stars that went off before the Sun and the Earth formed. So we're really seeing where we came from when we look at a picture like that.

TERENCE SMITH: And that is the significance, Doctor Weisskopf, the origins of the universe?

DR. MARTIN WEISSKOPF: Well, that is certainly the story begins of planets, of stars, and the spreading of heavier material throughout the universe -- that is one of the significances. As we start to look at other objects, we will be looking at the hot matter that is every where in the universe. Regions that we haven't shown in this image will start to come out, and we will do searches for dark matter. Studies of some normal stars that do emit X-rays, which are very fascinating, and trying to answer questions as to how do super massive black holes that are supposed to be at the center of galaxies ... that are at the center of galaxies how they can possibly produce huge jets of emission- - numerous questions that I know will not only interest astronomers but also the young people in the count troy start looking at these scientific questions and seeing what implications they have.

TERENCE SMITH: What implications could they have? What could they teach us?

DR. ROBERT KIRSHNER: Well, I think the big picture is the universe has gotten more complex every overtime. We think that the universe began in a hot, dense, Big Bang maybe 15 billion years ago -- then the elements that were present were hydrogen and helium that cooked in the Big Bang. And everything else that you see around you is the results of something happening -- of stars cooking, the light elements into the heavy ones. So we really are made of stardust. We really came from that whole set of processes. Many things have changed in the universe over the last 15 billion years but one of the threads is that matter has evolved to become more complex, more interesting and to have more possibilities.

TERENCE SMITH: Dr. Weisskopf, the possibility I believe exists what we could draw energy from some of this -- from quasars which you also see on -- through this telescope.

DR. MARTIN WEISSKOPF: Well, I think perhaps that is speculating a bit but it's certainly true trying to understand the mechanisms that produce these enormous amounts of energy ultimately has of course the end conclusion that we'll understand our physics better and perhaps be able to make use of such knowledge in harnessing energy for ourselves. This may be in ten years, it may be in twenty years, it may be in a thousand years.

DR. ROBERT KIRSHNER: I think that is a little far fetched. I think that is a kind of science that you don't have to justify in practical terms or you is shouldn't try to justify it in practical terms because it really isn't a practical sort of thing. This is the science of exploration and we're not claiming that we're going to make a better cell phone although making the technology for the satellite is a fantastic push on what is possible. We're not claiming that we're going to make you live forever -- even though, you know, we would all like to live a long time. This is about nourishing another part of our humanity, of our person. It's about satisfying your curiosity. And I think we are incredibly lucky that we get to do this for a living, and that it is also something that ha a very broad resonance with I think lots of people, with kids and with a broad range of people who are interested in the question of how the world got to be the way it is. And by looking at it and developing these techniques we're actually measure it, we're taking that from the realm of legend into a kind of experimental science where we can really take a look and see how things happen.

TERENCE SMITH: To a brave new world. A final thought. For you -- after all these years working on it, and your colleagues, tell me it must have been an exciting moment when the first images came back and you knew it was working.

DR. MARTIN WEISSKOPF: Yes, we knew it was working immediately from the first few -- we count as single X-rays we call them photos and from the first 20 or 30 that came into the telescope we knew that everything was working as well if not better than we thought.

TERENCE SMITH: Did you cheer?

DR. MARTIN WEISSKOPF: We cheered and the moment was tremendously exciting and it still is exciting. I find myself grinning all the time. I'm not quite sure I believe it yet having worked on it so long but it's just wonderful. And we hope that things continue to go smoothly as they have thus far. It's not always easy up there as we know.

TERENCE SMITH: Dr. Kirshner, thank you very much, Dr. Weisskopf, appreciate both of you coming in.

EMPHASIS - ELECTION 2000 - CAMPAIGN AGENDA

MARGARET WARNER: Now, another in our series of special emphasis discussions about the 2000 presidential election. As our regular viewers know, we've been asking a variety of individuals and groups what issues they want to hear the presidential candidates address. Elizabeth Farnsworth has tonight's discussion.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: And tonight, we hear the views of a group of clergy and religious thinkers. Dr. Laurence White is senior pastor of Our Savior Lutheran Church in Houston and chairman of the Greater Houston Area Pastors Roundtable. The Reverend Cecil Williams is minister of Glide Memorial United Methodist Church in San Francisco. Azizah Al-Hibri is a professor at the T.C. Williams School of Law at the University of Richmond. She is founder and president of Muslim Women Lawyers for Human Rights and has written widely on Islam and law. Rabbi Charles Kroloff is senior rabbi at Temple Emanuel in Westfield, New Jersey, and president of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, representing 1,800 reform rabbis worldwide. And Father Jerry Pokorsky is rector of St. Peters Catholic Church in Washington, Virginia. Thank you all for being with us. Rabbi Kroloff, what would you like to hear candidates discuss and debate in the coming campaign?

RABBI CHARLES KROLOFF, Temple Emanu-El: I would like to hear them talk about campaign finance reform. American citizens feel very distant from their government and special interests are making that happen. I would like to hear them speak about gun control, guns are out of control in this country, and I'm going to ask my congregation at the holidays in two weeks to vote only for candidates who take strong positions on gun control. I believe that hate crime is a central issue, and finally I want to hear some serious talk and creative talk about education.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Reverend White, what do you want to hear?

DR. LAURENCE WHITE, Our Savior Lutheran Church: Well, I would be pleased to hear the candidates speak about any issue of substance. I think unfortunately Former President Gerard Ford was right a few weeks ago when he observed that the 2,000 presidential election was in danger of becoming an exercise in triviality in which candidates -- and these are President Ford's words -- candidates without ideas are hiring consultants without conviction to conduct campaigns without content at a time when our nation is facing a host of fundamental moral issues, to deal with the most basic issue of all, the issue of life as we go on in a 26 year abortion holocaust as the family unit among us is constantly under assault within our culture and the government has taken in so many ways a posture that is hostile to marriage and to families. I think the people are hungry for substantive discussion of those kinds of issues among us.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Reverend Williams, what do you want to hear?

REV. CECIL WILLIAMS, Glide Memorial United Methodist Church: First of all, I would like the politicians to not be so political.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: You are not asking a lot are you?

REV. CECIL WILLIAMS: No, I'm not asking a lot, just don't be so political because what often happens is when you become so political, you lose a sense of yourself and you lose a sense of the community and you lose a sense of what we call the participatory democracy. I would like for politicians to become more human. I would like for them to certainly work harder when it comes to the glass ceiling for women. I would like for them to make sure they put on and the agenda violence because violence is critical and the interesting thing every time we talk about violence, we talk about the children. What about the adults? It's time for politicians to say look, we bear responsibility for this also, and finally, I would hope that we as a people would stop politicians saying the American people. You know, it's like they know the American people and I'm not sure they know what the American people really want.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Azizah Al-Hibri, what would you add or subtract to all this?

AZIZAH AL-HIBRI, University of Richmond: Well, I feel that we need now candidates who are less interested on winning and more interested in service. I agree with a lot of the colleagues who spoke before me, that there are some serious issues in our society that need to be addressed and we are not hearing that. We are only hearing things that are calculated to get certain candidates into the White House. I want them, for example, to move away from the politics of destruction, from attacking privacy of various candidates. We are really scaring very good candidates from entering this kind of very uncivilatmosphere. I'm also concerned about our children. I'm concerned about our families. And I need to know what are the candidates going to do to promote certain values in society so as to reduce violence because guns alone do not produce violence, it is certain moral issues when they are lacking in society we might end up in violence. What are they doing to promote a society, which is civil, where people deal properly with each other and welcome diversity, instead of being threatened by it? And what are they going to do to protect the democratic process? I feel that our democratic process is under attack, and part of the reason I feel that way is the whole issue of campaign finance.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Father Pokorsky, do you agree with everybody so far that the really important issues aren't being addressed?

FATHER JERRY POKORSKY, St. Peters Catholic Church: Well, I don't know if they have been addressed or not. I've been busy in my parish but I would like to see politicians to say yes when they mean yes and no what they mean no. So I would agree that we need men and women of principle. We need men and women of character and honesty. And I would be looking for politicians personally. I particularly like the idea of politicians not saying the American people want. I would like to see politicians to say this is what I believe and this is what I stand for and have the courage to say that at the end of the day, when the votes come in and perhaps they lose and they are asked the question why didn't they win, they would say, well, the people didn't want me. I think it takes a good deal of courage to say something like that. And, naturally in my position as a Catholic priest and also which I think extends overall I think that we ought to have a newfound respect for human life and human rights, including the rights of unborn babies.

REV. CECIL WILLIAMS: Elizabeth, I get the feeling that most politicians feel that they can play the American people, the people of America short. So you know, their politics even come across as we've got the upper hand on you and, therefore, we can by you or we can so create those images in the media that we'll make you vote the way we want you to vote.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: What do you think the source of that is, that they don't really respect, they don't know people -- they don't hear enough so they don't respect them?

REV. CECIL WILLIAMS: I think that is part of it. But I think the other part has to do with the fact that in many ways they don't respect themselves. What am I really saying? I'm really saying that for a great sense of who we are in America, it seems to me that we could begin to move from denial so much. You know, we need to start being honest and truthful and not be in denial because denial takes us a different direction. Some folks will know what I'm talking about who are looking at the program today. What I think is critical, though if we begin to be honest, what we will have I think is a new direction in regards to all of the issues we're talking about. I certainly feel very strongly that we must look at abortion and support abortion. You know, that is personally for me, but I don't know how other people feel about it but I got a strong feeling about it and I think we should now have passion about what we're doing and certainly politicians should have passion that is meaningful.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Father Pokorsky, as a religious person, as a priest, how do you think the issues that you think are important or the candidates' way of approaching them in a way that you think is important can be made to happen?

FATHER JERRY POKORSKY: Well, I think if a politician calls himself Catholic, for example, he should strive to live up to the Catholic faith, certainly espouse Catholic principles, certainly agree in substantive ways with -- in essential matters -- with the Catholic faith. Now this doesn't mean he is imposing any morality on anybody. It simply means if he calls himself a Catholic or a Lutheran or a Jew, that he is going to live up to the respect of faith traditions. I don't think it's too much to ask for, and if there is a choice, for example, in the right to life area for a candidate who is Catholic to say, for example, that he is pro-choice because he doesn't want to impose his morality on anybody, but he's personally opposed, that doesn't square with his faith. And so something has to give in these kind of situations. Again, principle is something I would be looking for and honesty and integrity.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Yes. Go ahead.

AZIZAH AL-HIBRI: I find it very interesting that we're all stressing the concept of honesty and integrity in the political process. And it is interesting for me because if you look at our society, we find that we have put a lot of value on honesty and integrity in for example truth in advertising, and in the economic market. For example, if you are offering shares on the market, you are by law required to disclose information and it better be accurate and it better be complete. We have no analogous rules about the political process. We have not required our politicians to speak honestly, to speak with integrity. We just have left that totally unattended. I think we really need to put our values in the right order and worry about who is going to be the leader of our society. I think people get the leaders they deserve and we have to start acting like we deserve better leaders.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Reverend White - it's either you or - I can't tell - Rabbi Kroloff - that's trying to break in here.

RABBI CHARLES KROLOFF: Rabbi Kroloff.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Go ahead.

RABBI CHARLES KROLOFF: I wanted to refer to the Iowa caucus of last week. The best word that I can think of to describe it is carnival. And a carnival is exactly the opposite of the moral issues that my colleagues and I have been raising. I think it's time to move away from the carnival atmosphere, not to be satisfied with sound bytes and for the American people to speak up through their communities, through their clergy people and in so many other ways, say we want to be treated in a more serious way. The kinds of sound bytes and quick responses to the issues are no longer satisfactory to us -- that moral issues must be addressed and insist that candidates find means to do them in ways that they adhere and listen to the American people.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Reverend White do you agree with that?

DR. LAURENCE WHITE: Absolutely. I think the Rabbi is exactly right. I think that we're dealing with a self-reinforcing negative process at this point. The establishments of both of our political parties are clearly driven by polls, power and the purse -- not principle. And that means that our candidates use split-the-difference platitudes that are vague so that they can send signals in every direction so as not to alienate anyone. And that is going to continue as long as the voters, as long as people of faith and conviction throughout our culture allow it to continue. We must put our faith into action, and participate in the democratic process.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: And, Reverend Williams, what would you say to people who say my morality, my, the big ideas that you all are grappling with, really, I want to deal with between me and my minister, I don't want it to be part to the political process? How do you respond to that?

REV. CECIL WILLIAMS: I would say that it's very important for people to come to understand that when they talk about whatever it is that they want to happen, it means that they then bear the responsibility of making it happen. And so, therefore, what I think is critical is we must make sure that our politicians again become states women and statesmen. What we should do I think is be -- it's now time for the people -- the people of this country to stand up and say, look, enough is enough; we're going to do something about the political process because we -- it's ours and if we don't do something about it, who is going to do something about it? So, the big question to me is: Are you going to participate in justice, are you going to participate in righteousness, are you going to take action that even the churches need to know and the synagogues and the temples and all of us need to know -- that it's time for us to stand up and make things, those things that have been against humanity and against certainly the people of this country; that what we must do is stand up and say no more. We're going to change it and we have the responsibility to make a change.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Azizah Al-hibri, how would you answer that question about people who just don't want to have the big religious or moral issues as part of the political process?

AZIZAH AL-HIBRI: I think the colleague who preceded me was exactly right. If we're getting into details, there will be diversions among people on the details but we have to agree on a certain common denominator, or else we have no political or social fabric to build a country upon. If the issue is one of justice, of democracy, of preserving the rights of the various groups in this country, I don't think this is a matter really that is to be left to the home. This is part of our civic responsibility. And I think as a Muslim, as somebody who is in touch with Muslims around this country, I know that Muslims are very concerned about these various issues and would like to very much work through interfaith activities with other people of faith to promote the spiritual values in this society, values that really are the underpinnings for justice, for democracy, and for liberty. This is what our Constitution speaks about. We cannot stray away from that.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Rabbi Kroloff, your answer to that?

RABBI CHARLES KROLOFF: I agree completely. And I would like to point out that all of us on the program right now share a common religious tradition. If you look at the five books of -- the first five books of the Bible which we call the Torah, it is also a basis for Koran, is also a basis for the New Testament. So here we have Christians, Jews and Muslims -- all of whom share a common religious tradition that has some very clear things to say about morality, about the protection of life, and that is our common basis to build upon. And I'm convinced that if we have those kinds of dialogues, that we can make those points very well to the politicians. And one of the ways of doing it is for each of us in our national groups and local groups to come together and as Protestants, Catholics, Jews and Muslims to make those points. And when they are heard from all of us, they will be heard.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: And Dr. White, very briefly because I would like to get to Father Pokorsky too.

DR. LAURENCE WHITE: I agree that the key here is voter involvement. The people must rise up. The problem with democracy, as John Adams once said, is that you get the kind of government you deserve. As long as we allow the politicians to evade the issues, they will continue to do so, because that's in their self-interest. We must act on our convictions; we must participate in terms of what we believe.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Okay. And, Father Pokorsky, very briefly, your final word.

FATHER JERRY POKORSKY: G.K. Chesterton, the Catholic apologist, said the reason people get angry is because they never learned how to argue. I think we should learn how to argue well. Take positions and from the point of view of principle not get angry, simply argue things out and come up the conclusions.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Thank you all very much for being with us.

MARGARET WARNER: Our agenda 2000 project continues. You can participate by visiting our web site at: Pbs.Org/newshour and also by regular mail to: The NewsHour, Box 2626, Washington, D.C., 20013.

FINALLY - SUMMERTIME

MARGARET WARNER: Finally tonight, NewsHour contributor Robert Pinsky, poet laureate of the United States, reads a poem about summertime.

ROBERT PINSKY: Scientific discoveries and explorations-- in genetic codes, in subatomic particles, or in the vastness of space-- seem to make the world as a whole all the more mysterious, even while they explain some part of it. That sense of mystery, for Emily Dickinson, is associated with this time of year. Dickinson imagines the secret summer rituals of crickets or cicadas, her isolation from those hidden insect ceremonies -- the sound of the invisible insects making the august world around her seem more rich and attractive, and, at the same time, more beyond comprehension. "Further in summer than the birds pathetic from the grass a minor nation celebrates its unobtrusive mass. No ordinance be seen so gradual the grace a pensive custom it becomes enlarging loneliness. Antiquest felt at noon when August burning low arise this spectral canticle repose to typify. Remit as yet no grace no furrow on the glow yet a druidic difference enhances nature now."

RECAP

MARGARET WARNER: Again, the major story of this Thursday: Attorney General Reno vowed a new investigation today into the April, 1993 fire that consumed a religious cult compound at Waco, Texas. Her comments followed the FBI's admission that incendiary tear gas canisters may have been fired near the compound before government agents closed in. We'll be with you on-line, and again here tomorrow evening, with Mark Shields and Matthew Rees, among others. I'm Margaret Warner. Thank you and good night.