The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. We'll again have a summary of the day's developments (Focus - America Strikes Back), including the latest on the growing anthrax threat (Focus - Anthrax Scare); a Newsmaker interview with attorney general John Ashcroft (Newsmaker); the views of Senators Kerry and Thompson; a medical official (Focus - Tracking Anthrax) and an anthrax terrorism expert.

FOCUS -AMERICA STRIKES BACK

JIM LEHRER: The anthrax threat shut down the U.S. House of Representatives today. Speaker Dennis Hastert said the House will reopen Tuesday after medical experts sweep all House offices for signs of anthrax. That action followed word that more than 30 people, mostly in the office of Senate Majority Leader Daschle were confirmed as having been exposed to anthrax spores. Daschle said the Senate would remain on a normal schedule, but its offices would also be closed and tested. The spores originated in a letter mailed to Daschle's office. In an interview with "the NewsHour," attorney general Ashcroft said no arrests were imminent on the anthrax mailings. He said groups and individuals could be trying to take advantage of "a vulnerable time" in the country. We'll have that interview in its entirety right after this news summary. At a Senate hearing, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson asked for $1.5 billion to fight bioterrorism. In New York Governor Pataki announced initial testing found the presence of anthrax in his Manhattan offices. The complex was closed for decontamination, and the Governor said he and his staff were taking antibiotics.

GOVERNOR GEORGE PATAKI: We all, of course, get upset when this type of activity occurs, particularly when it hits home in your own office. But there's a very simple message. We can't let them win. These are evil people who we're going to drive back to their caves where they belong, and in the process we're going to continue to live our lives as New Yorkers, maybe we'll be a little more diligent and a little more cautious in what we do, but we're not going to overreact.

JIM LEHRER: In Afghanistan, U.S. planes continued intensive raids around Kabul and other key cities. A Pentagon spokesman said Taliban resistance was "falling away." He also said the battle for a key northern city was "going back and forth," between the Taliban and opposition forces. Last night, the Pentagon confirmed U.S. planes accidentally bombed Red Cross warehouses in Kabul, in a pre- dawn raid. It said Taliban military equipment was near the site. International aid organizations appealed today for a pause in the assault allowing them to get food to Afghan civilians. The Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, spoke to his followers by walkie-talkie. According to the Afghan Islamic press, based in Pakistan, he said: "We will succeed whether we live or die. It does not matter whether we die today or tomorrow. The goal is martyrdom." President Bush left today for a gathering of Asian-Pacific leaders in China. Before his departure, he told a group of Asian editors the war on terrorism could last more than two years, and he said Americans could get tired of it. Israel, the minister of tourism was assassinated in a Jerusalem hotel. A radical Palestinian faction said it was revenge for Israel's killing one of its leaders last August. Israel warned it would retaliate for today's attack.

NEWSMAKER

JIM LEHRER: Now a Newsmaker interview with the Attorney General, John Ashcroft. I talked with him late this afternoon.

JIM LEHRER: Mr. Attorney General, welcome.

How close are you and the FBI to knowing who's behind these various anthrax mailings?

JOHN ASHCROFT: Well, this is an investigation, which is ongoing and obviously we are working very diligently in two respects: One, to try and anticipate -- prevent any other incidents -- the other to try and investigate. But it's very difficult, and I don't think it would be fair to say that there are any announcements that are on the verge of being made. We have a lot of activity. We really only have a couple of incidents where we have confirmed anthrax. And we have similar delivery and there are a lot of things that are in common, but we are not in a position to be able to make an announcement about responsibility.

JIM LEHRER: Are you convinced, or does it still remain an open issue as to whether or not this is a concerted effort by a group of people working in concert, or one or two, three, four, five people working independently?

JOHN ASHCROFT: You know it may be that there is some of both here. All too frequently when we ask ourselves either/or questions, we forget that it could be a combination. I'm certainly not in a position to rule out relationships between both the valid or the real anthrax situations, between them. And it could be that individuals involved in delivering or threatening or terrorist acts with real anthrax would also send out "so-called hoax items" because they might want to occasion the additional instability, the additional uncertainty with the hoax items. Both of them are very damaging. Obviously the health threat of real anthrax is substantially different. But our resources, our law enforcement resources, our ability to do the things we want to do -- we have to treat all reports as serious. We've had several thousand of those in the last week. So I'd put it this way: I believe anyone who sends anthrax in the mail to someone else is a terrorist, although I'm not in a position to link specifically the terrorism of anthrax with the terrorist attacks of September 11, but we're certainly not in a position to rule that out. And I'm not in a position to say that there is no linkage between some of the real anthrax and some of the hoax, but there may in fact be some linkage. There may be that people would do both. It's pretty clear to me that there are individuals who have sought to be a part of this vulnerable time and have sought to take advantage of it, and we're working very hard to prosecute those individuals. This is not a time for a joke. This is not a time for personal vendettas, getting back at individuals. We have cases, and cases are being brought in Connecticut, and Rhode Island, and Ohio, and Albuquerque and across America because we simply cannot suggest to people that this is not serious.

JIM LEHRER: The anthrax that was in the envelope received in the office of Senator Daschle is said to be of a higher quality and clearly was designed to commit harm. Do you agree with that, that unlike some of these others, this was serious business?

JOHN ASHCROFT: Well, I haven't received a final analysis that would come from that. Our preliminary analysis indicates that it's a virulent, strong, very serious but whether it had been treated in any way that would make it especially more dangerous, our tests are not complete.

JIM LEHRER: Have you reached any conclusion as to whether or not whoever's involved in this is really aiming to kill people, or to just put fear in us and cause chaos?

JOHN ASHCROFT: Well, it would be awfully hard to say that people who send you a letter with a virulent strain of anthrax, which is a deadly toxin, were not - that such a person was not trying to kill you would be a stretch. I think there's no question that sending anthrax in the mail is an attempt to injure, to kill, to hurt people. It provides a basis for a lot of other fear and terror. And the terrorists I think most want to interrupt our way of life, to deprive us of our freedom, and frankly, killing obviously makes that credible. I think there is an intention to kill. We're very fortunate that only one person has died. I really think it's important to note that we have been detecting other situations and treating and the treatment is very effective. The use of antibiotics, it's a prolonged use it takes some time because it has to be in your system when the disease begins to develop. And the incubation or gestation period in people is quite some time. But it's very effective, and so the prognosis for the people where we've been able to help them is excellent.

JIM LEHRER: Have you found any links - even small, thin links to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida?

JOHN ASHCROFT: We haven't been able to rule out relationships, but we cannot conclusively demonstrate those relationships. It's pretty clear that, as the Vice President said, that this is a suspicious setting, that these and the onset of these attacks with the sort of vile terrorism of anthrax comes in the wake of and in the circumstance and environment of the attacks on the World Trade Centers in New York, on the Pentagon in the United States, here in the Washington, D.C., area, in Virginia, and in the hijacking in Pennsylvania, but I think it would be inappropriate for us to indicate that we had a kind of conclusive determination either to say that we had made the linkage complete or that we had ruled it out.

JIM LEHRER: But as we sit here right now, there are no arrests imminent on any anthrax case, is that correct?

JOHN ASHCROFT: Well, we've made a number of arrests on hoax cases where -

JIM LEHRER: Sure.

JOHN ASHCROFT: -- we have got the people who were -

JIM LEHRER: Playing games.

JOHN ASHCROFT: -- playing games, lying to the police, threatening. It violates a federal statute to send a threat of biological nature through the mails - or to make such a threat or to lie to law enforcement officials. But we don't -- our investigation has not proceeded to an adequate focus to have solved any of these cases.

JIM LEHRER: What about the link between the Daschle letter and the Tom Brokaw letter, is that now pretty sure that they came from the same people?

JOHN ASHCROFT: Well, we have common postmarks, and we have - you -- the American people have had a chance to see what the envelope looks like. I think a lot of people would say that that certainly looks like these could have been developed by the same individuals. Our investigation is ongoing with a view toward developing an understanding of who that individual - if it's one individual - or who the individuals are, but we're not in a position yet to be able to conclude definitively that that's the case.

JIM LEHRER: On the more general threat front, the FBI alert that -- possibility of another major terrorist attack against the United States - that remains very much in effect, does it not?

JOHN ASHCROFT: We want individuals to be at a high state of awareness and alert. In all of our lives we have learned how to reduce risks. If we are walking by the road in the evening, we try to wear light clothes, preferably light trousers, where we'll be seen if - if - just virtually everything we do includes risk reduction. And we're learning to adjust our behavior to reduce our risks. If a letter comes in the mail from a source that we're not accustomed to receiving, no return address, it looks suspicious, it's - frankly, we're adjusting our behavior. In the things that the FBI has done when there is developed in our gathering of information a suggestion that there might be a special period of vulnerability, we've simply said we need to trust the American people to take the information and to adjust their behavior to reduce the risk. It's important to say that we're not suggesting that people not do things, that we cease being free, that we cease being Americans, but we take those little measures to adjust our behavior like wearing the lighter clothing by the roadside.

JIM LEHRER: But the specific alert that went out last week from the FBI, do you now believe that - that this anthrax or these anthrax incidents - was not that, was not that threat that you all were warning about?

JOHN ASHCROFT: You know I'm not able to make the kind of - any real hard and fast conclusion. Very frankly, when you develop information about potentials and threats, if they are credible, if they seem to be corroborated by circumstances and facts, we try to share them in a way that will help the American people reduce the risk. But, you know, people don't send you an engraved invitation saying don't open the letter that you're going to get or - because they obviously have a different purpose. And there are times when an elevated sense of alertness and the action we take can actually disrupt or postpone or even defeat what would otherwise be an attack. I think shortly after the September 11 events, we developed information about crop dusters and noted that there had been an interest expressed in the dispersal of chemical agents by some of the individuals who had relationships with the hijackers and were the hijackers, and we asked those who were associated with the agriculture, chemical industry, and crop dusting to begin to be more careful, to lock their airplanes, to be aware of anyone seeking to adjust thekind of way in which the nozzles would be, which would maybe require a different approach. And frankly we may well have had a disruptive influence, but we can't know for sure.

JIM LEHRER: How many people are you now holding - detaining as a result of September 11?

JOHN ASHCROFT: We have arrested and detained between six and seven hundred people in three basic categories: Individuals that the courts have agreed with us could have information that would be appropriate for use in grand jury and might otherwise flee, and they issue what's called a material witness warrant for those individuals. That's a court-supervised detention based on that need for information. Secondly, there are some people who are being held because they have violated state or local laws, and they are being held in the ordinary course, but we have an interest in them because of a relationship that we've detected or learned of with the hijackers or the groups that we feel were associated with and involved with the hijackers. Thirdly, there are those who we have asked be detained, who are illegal aliens, they are out of status, that they are violating the law regarding their presence in the United States, and while their case is being adjudicated in the immigration setting, because we know of an interest or a relationship or we feel that there may have been some connection between the hijackers and them, we've asked that they be detained, and they have.

JIM LEHRER: Are you holding anybody that you believe was geared up to commit a terrorist act in the United States and you got them before them committed them?

JOHN ASHCROFT: I can't say with certainty that we are. We are holding individuals who have a variety of things that we found. Individuals were detained who were - who had maps of airports - individuals were detained who had hazardous material licenses and - but we frankly - I think that those individuals - the kind of associations they have - being illegal in their status or having violated the law, that they should be maintained in custody, until their cases are disposed of.

JIM LEHRER: In a general way, are you getting any level of cooperation from any of these people in trying to find out what happened on the 11th and what might be planned as a future act against the United States?

JOHN ASHCROFT: We've not been overrun with cooperation, which is not to say that we don't have some capacity to improve our awareness of what happened and what may happen, but we're still working hard. And our responsibility in the Justice Department is not just to prosecute, but we have a new priority, which is to prevent. And it's very important for us to develop information. That's why we've gone to the American people with a number of the things we have to ask them if they know as a result of association with certain individuals or of their just observation, if they know of things that can be helpful to us.

JIM LEHRER: Are you comfortable as Attorney General holding these people, continuing to hold them for a long period of time?

JOHN ASHCROFT: We are only holding those individuals that the law allows us to hold. We are holding the individuals in accordance with the Constitution; they're all being given a right to counsel; their rights are being observed. If there is any indication of abuse, I want to know about it. There have been people who have said, well, this is inappropriate, inordinate. Frankly, it's in accordance with the law, and it's my job to enforce the law; we will do so. We will be aggressive in seeking to disrupt, to interrupt and prevent any further acts of terrorism.

JIM LEHRER: Do you believe that holding these people has, in fact, done that already?

JOHN ASHCROFT: We cannot say with a certainty, but we are grateful for the fact that we haven't had major terrorist acts and activities since the horrendous and horrific acts of September 11.

JIM LEHRER: All right. Mr. Attorney General, thank you very much.

JOHN ASHCROFT: My pleasure.

FOCUS - TRACKING ANTHRAX

JIM LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight: More on the threats, and facts, concerning anthrax. Kwame Holman has the details on anthrax at the Capitol.

KWAME HOLMAN: The House of Representatives was scheduled to go into session at 10:00 this morning. But when that hour arrived, Speaker Dennis Hastert was before reporters announcing a shutdown of the chamber. The word came as the 17,000 staff people who work in the Capitol complex reeled from the news over the last 48 hours of anthrax exposure in the Senate Majority Leader's office.

REP. DENNIS HASTERT: We think it's prudent also to take some time and go through and make sure that this building is... This building and the... Our office buildings are environmentally safe. So we're going to allow members to leave after today's business is done, and we will be screening the buildings this weekend through Monday. It's not our intent to close up shop. We're going to be here and do the work. You know, one of the things the terrorists would love to do is to take away our freedom, our liberty, and part of that freedom and liberty is have elected people elected by the people to do the work in this nation. And we're not going to relinquish that duty.

KWAME HOLMAN: Since Monday, 31 Capitol complex workers have tested positive for exposure to anthrax. Most work for the offices of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle where an anthrax-laced letter was discovered. Five are Capitol police officers. And today three employees of another Senator, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, were added to the list. Feingold's office is near Daschle's. None of the workers is sick. Nonetheless, 1400 people, including members of the press and Capitol visitors, were tested yesterday. Testing by nasal swab continued today. At mid-day, House members assembled for a briefing on safety measures against anthrax by the House physician. On his way to the briefing, Majority Whip Tom Delay defended Speaker Hastert's decision to close down the House for the rest of the week.

REP. TOM DELAY: We were going to work on the floor on Thursday and go home on Friday and Monday anyway. So this isn't a big change of what we already planned.

KWAME HOLMAN: But Senate leaders decided to keep their chamber in session. That pleased House member and District of Columbia delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton.

DEL. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON: Hooray for them! I may go over to the Senate. There's nothing to go home about. The only reason I can find for going home is if they need to get into your office to sweep. So I say, "look: Come in, sweep, leave." Then leave so I can continue business as usual. Some people are going to get the impression that we were trying to "get out of Dodge" quick. And most members protested when they heard that the House was closing.

KWAME HOLMAN: The Senate's party leaders talked about the decision this afternoon.

SEN. TOM DASCHLE: It is my strong determination and Senator Lott's, as well, that we will not let this stop the work of the Senate. There will be a vote this afternoon. We will be in session had have a vote or votes tomorrow. And I am absolutely determined to ensure that the Senate continues to do its work.

SEN. TRENT LOTT: I think we've made the right decision to stay in session here in the Capitol and have votes in the Senate this afternoon and probably tomorrow, also, because, you know, there is no risk there in the Capitol, and we feel confident we can continue to get our work done while taking necessary precautions to affect the people that work with us.

KWAME HOLMAN: The Senate leaders were joined by U.S. Army medical research commander John Parker.

MAJOR GEN. JOHN PARKER: This particular strain of anthrax is sensitive to all antibiotics, penicillin all the way through ciprofloxacin. It's a very sensitive strain. We have not identified the strain at this time.

REPORTER: General Parker, another question, if we may. If in fact it was pure spores, as you've said, doesn't that mean that in fact this is not necessarily a "particularly virulent" strain, and may in fact be rather common variety anthrax?

MAJOR GEN. JOHN PARKER: I agree with you, it's common variety, from all our testing at this point in time.

KWAME HOLMAN: The Capitol complex will be closed this evening for a full security sweep by health 6oficials. The Senate occupies one half of the Capitol building -- the House, the other. The three buildings containing House members' offices will be closed until next Tuesday. The three Senate office buildings, including the one housing the offices of Senators Daschle and Feingold, may reopen this weekend at the discretion of each Senator. There also were reports today anthrax spores were found in the ventilation system on the Senate side of the Capitol. A Defense Department expert spoke to that point.

ROBERT GIBBS: We have taken test samples from within the ventilation system...the first series that came back. We have no positive tests, no positive indication of contamination spread within the vent system. We've taken additional samples; those are still in for analysis. It takes some time to get these results back. We have no further information on those samples.

KWAME HOLMAN: And late this afternoon federal health officials see those who were exposed to anthrax were in a very specific part of one Senate office building.

DR. KENNETH MORITSUGU, Deputy Surgeon General: Only those individuals who worked in or visited the fifth or the sixth floor Southeast wing of the Senate Hart Building on Monday should receive the entire 60-day course of antibiotics. With regard to the environment, at this time there has been no evidence of spores in the ventilation system. We continue to evaluate both for medical as well as the environmental status, and as was mentioned before, we will bring you that information as it becomes available.

KWAME HOLMAN: Even as the anthrax related flurry royal today, the House stayed in session, passing an anti-terrorism measure on money laundering and two spending bills.

JIM LEHRER: Margaret Warner takes it from there.

MARGARET WARNER: We get more on the anthrax scare on Capitol Hill and other aspects of the investigation from two Senators. Democrat John Kerry of Massachusetts is a member of the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on International Operations and Terrorism. And Republican Fred Thompson of Tennessee is the ranking member of the Governmental Affairs Committee, which has been holding hearings on homeland defense. He also sits on the Intelligence Committee. Welcome, gentlemen.

Did you ever think the day would come, Senator Thompson, when the business of the U.S. Congress would be curtailed and its office buildings shut down by an act of biological terrorism?

SEN. FRED THOMPSON: No, never did. You know, we live in interesting times, as they say. But, you know, it's something that we've got to be prepared for; it's something that we really have been warned against. I don't think any of us really took it to heart, up until now. But there's been information out there for some time that we face a new series of threats, we face a different kind of enemy out there, different kind of people who are interested in doing us harm. But unfortunately it takes some dramatic event to really get our attention. But our attention has been gotten and I think that we're doing a responsible job of responding to it -- not going to extreme, not going overboard, not panicking or anything like that, but simply acknowledging that there is some potential harm, some potential threats out there dealing with it and going about our business.

MARGARET WARNER: Your thoughts, Senator Kerry?

SEN. JOHN KERRY: I think we always knew it was a possibility, but it was one of those possibilities that you leave in a theoretical status. And the optimism of the human spirit sort of pushes it off into the "I come think it will happen" category, or hope it won't. Obviously September 11th has sent shock waves through all of the entities that are charged with the responsibility for preventing or for prosecuting these kinds of efforts. I think the new alertness is already paying off. We lost the fellow in Florida, and we're obviously all affected by that. But the better side of this story is that we now are discovering each of these other episodes, almost immediately, we're responding effectively. We have been able to provide antibiotics to people almost immediately. And there's 100% certainty that those who get those antibiotics will not get sick, and certainly I think we all feel better about where we're heading here. We also need to remember terrorists are setting out to do exactly what is happening today -- to send terror, to send anxiety, to disrupt. So it is particularly incumbent on all of us, I think, to without stepping over the line of not being cautious or sensitive, to not allow them to do that, to continue our lives. And that is what we must do in this country.

MARGARET WARNER: Senator Thompson, do you think that the reaction, and I'm not being critical here, I'm just asking for what message you think Americans may take from this, that such a symbolic institution as the U.S. Congress has been so affected, that it may just heighten the sense of vulnerability that all Americans feel?

SEN. FRED THOMPSON: Well, I certainly hope not. I think we do have a special obligation and really a special line to walk. We have an obligation for one thing to the parents of those many young people who work for us. They're reading and seeing television reports, some of which are not accurate and are very concerned. So we've got to make sure that we do things that give assurance that we're looking out for those young folks. On the other hand, what we do sends a message, as you say, to all of America. So it's very important that we not overreact. But if you look at what's actually happening, we're not overreacting. The three Senate office buildings, the professional said an abundance of caution would be good if we had the opportunity to do some environmental checking just to make sure. And we're going to do that. But the Senate was in session today; the Senate will be in session tomorrow. There will be some committee actions, maybe we'll get some of those judges approved that we need. So we're going on about our business, we'll be back here Monday or Tuesday, as we otherwise would have been. So although there's an awful lot of talk, a lot of speculation, and we have the 24-hour news cycle now, and the most extreme speculation gets reported sometimes. The fact of the matter is that we're pretty much going on business as usual, and I believe in a real good bipartisan basis where both leaders have really come together and provided leadership to all of us. We're meeting together as a whole, Democrats and Republicans and are in total agreement as to how to handle this. I think there's some good coming out of this.

MARGARET WARNER: One quick question to you before I go back to Senator Kerry, has your office received any suspect letters?

SEN. FRED THOMPSON: Not specifically of the kind that we're concerned about.

MARGARET WARNER: And Senator Kerry, how about yours?

SEN. JOHN KERRY: No.

MARGARET WARNER: There have been some suggestions by terrorism experts that, and we don't know who the perpetrators are, but that it is fairly small scale attack, as frightening as it's been, but that it's also a way to sort of probe America's defenses to see how prepared we are for something like this and perhaps something on a much broader scale. What do you think, whether it's the perpetrators or anyone else who wishes us ill, would conclude from the way this country has responded to this?

SEN. JOHN KERRY: Well, if that's the strategy, it's a mistake, because, to paraphrase Admiral Yamamoto, awakened a sleeping giant. The United States of America is now closing in on a whole series of sectors. Today we just passed out of the Congress committee a rail, Amtrak security money. I hope we will get out of the Congress as a whole the full measure of what we need to do to federalize our airport security system. Our health system is gearing up, the Center for Disease controls - the awareness and alertness of police officers all across the country -- the INS, the Immigration Service -- the testing of visas, of personalities coming into the country. It is going to be harder and harder each day that goes by for those with this kind of evil intent to carry out their acts in this country. Now, I don't want to pretend and I'm sure Fred Thompson would agree with me, if someone wants to commit suicide and they are already here in this country, tragically, there is the ability to find some place where they can hurt some people. But that's why from a generational perspective in term of our country and this moment in history, it is so important for Americans to understand the full degree of the challenge that we face, and why it is so important for us to prosecute terrorism on a global basis. The best protection the United States of America in the long run is to prevent the will of the terrorists, to prevent their capacity to grow and prevent their ability to come into this country and carry out these acts and that is going to require a change in many of the things that we have taken for granted in past years.

MARGARET WARNER: Could I infer or should I from your answer that you have reason to think or you suspect that this anthrax attacks are linked to the global terrorist network?

SEN. JOHN KERRY: No. I'm purely being precautionary and I want to be very careful on that. We don't know yet. It is entirely possible that this could be home grown, that this could be a derivative of the type of people who pulled off Oklahoma City, or a Ted Kuczinsky, who did what he did, which was terror for a long period of time in this country, which went many years before we discovered who did it. It could be people piggybacking on the efforts. On the other hand, there is a coordinated aspect to it, and it certainly fits in with the warnings. The bottom line is we don't know the answer to that. Americans going to have to understand that this risk exists. But, boy, I think all of us want to convey to our fellow citizens that we ultimately will be able, I think, to be victorious in this effort. And while there are some threats like this, Margaret, we shouldn't change our lives in a significant way other than being alert, vigilant, aware of where we are, who's around us, but we should do the things that we have normally done.

MARGARET WARNER: All right. And, briefly, Senator Thompson, what do you think we should conclude from our reaction to this about our ability to protect against, I'm talking about a broader form of biological terrorism.

SEN. FRED THOMPSON: Well, I think there's a lot of good news that's going to be coming out of this, and that we've already seen. In an odd way, and I certainly don't want to minimize what's happened to those people directly affected, it's indeed tragic. But in an odd way we may look back upon this and say who ever did this did us a favor, because it's been a minimal attack, if it is in fact an orchestrated attack, and it has got our defenses up tremendously. We saw today with Secretary Thompson testifying before our committee, the national government is coordinating in a way that they haven't before, state and local governments are being coordinated with the federal government as never before. We're looking at our vaccine policy, we're looking at our prevention policy, our detection policy in ways that we never have before. So we're going to be really prepared, I believe, in short order for something that might come along that's a potentially much, much worse than what we've seen.

MARGARET WARNER: All right, Senators, thank you both very much.

FOCUS - TRACKING ANTHRAX

JIM LEHRER: Now continuing to track the health and terrorism questions raised about what's happening. And we begin with a report from Susan Dentzer of our health unit, a partnership with the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

TOMMY THOMPSON: In the wake of September 11th, the recent anthrax cases in Florida, New York and here on the Hill, there are significant questions about our preparedness, our overall coordination within government and, yes, our ability to respond.

SUSAN DENTZER: Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson was one of several top officials who briefed lawmakers today on the bioterrorist attacks and investigations. They asked about reports suggesting that the perpetrators had produced samples for dispersal in an extremely effective manner.

SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN: Is it correct to infer that the reason that such a large number were infected in Senator Daschle's office, larger in the other instances where it was mailed was to other offices, was because of the pure and more refined state of anthrax that was sent to the Daschle office?

TOMMY THOMPSON: You certainly can draw that conclusion. But the tests have not been finalized, so I don't want to speculate. But there's no question this was a very serious attempt at anthrax poisoning.

SUSAN DENTZER: Thompson also took pains to point out that so far, those in or near Daschle's office had only been exposed to anthrax spores, not infected and made ill. Thompson then explained that the anthrax samples were prepared to be easily dispersed in the air, enabling the disease to be spread in its most deadly inhalational form.

TOMMY THOMPSON: It has to be a certain size to get into the body. If it smaller than one micron or larger than ten microns, then it's not able to be inhaled.

SUSAN DENTZER: Dr. Scott Lillibridge, Thompson's top assistant on bioterrorism, explained that although the samples used in the attacks had been highly concentrated, it was unclear whether they had been "weaponized."

DR. SCOTT LILLIBRIDGE: The issue of weaponization, or weapons grade, is often used in literature to evoke large industrial investment in preparing samples for dissemination. It includes milling down the spores so they're easy to disseminate, it involves coding the spores so they stay in the air a little longer. It involves research into dissemination devices, different ways to move it to the population. We don't have any of that information on this particular sample.

SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN: How difficult is it to obtain anthrax?

SPOKESMAN: Well, there's a lot of different anthrax, a lot of it is naturally in blood of animals, that once the animal dies gets emitted into the air, it's emitted in culture. There are laboratories across America that have had anthrax and have done research and experiments on it. This anthrax that we have right now we're still doing research on, we do not know the exact strains or where it comes from.

SUSAN DENTZER: Late today it was reported that preliminary analysis of the anthrax used in the New York and Florida attacks show both to be of the same genetic strain. But still other experts noted today that even with the most sophisticated genetic analysis, it will be difficult if not impossible to pinpoint a single source of the anthrax.

JIM LEHRER: Ray Suarez has more on the health issues.

RAY SUAREZ: Joining me for that is Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of the National Institutes of Health.

Dr. Fauci, a lot of attention is being paid to the people who contracted, not contracted, who came in contact with anthrax at the Hart Senate Office Building. Now it's been very carefully worded that they've tested positive for exposure, but are not ill. Help us understand what that means.

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI: Sure. Exposure means that you have the identification of a spore on a part of the body -- usually in the nasal passage, when you swab -- or, for example, if they were on a skin where they were able to swab it. So they've been exposed. They don't have the disease and they're not infected. Infected means when that spore makes the transition from a relatively inert particle, what we call germinating, that it becomes the full-blown bacteria. Once it does that, it actually infects the individual. It could be inhalation infection, which is very serious, or the less serious form, which is the cutaneous form. That's what infection means, whereas exposure alone doesn't necessarily mean that you've gone onto that next step of actually being infected.

RAY SUAREZ: Could that number 31 in a way almost overstate what we're dealing with here? Would many of those people never have even known that they were exposed in this way had we not swabbed them?

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI: That is conceivable, but you must err on the side of great caution, because we know that these spores can actually germinate several days, weeks or even more beyond the point that they actually get in the person, on the person's skin or in the nose. So that's the reason why you want to treat individuals who have been exposed, and in fact you don't want to take a chance, anyone who even conceivably could have been in that arena where the exposure occurred, because often wedon't know how often, you could swab someone and they would test negative when actually there might be a spore here or a spore there, because they're very tiny and it depends on what the concentration of the exposure is.

RAY SUAREZ: What about the common wisdom that you have to come in contact with an awful lot of spores to actually get sick?

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI: Well, that's not necessarily so, except under the circumstance when you talk about the number of spores that would be required to give you inhalation anthrax. They usually say it has to be around ten thousand, somewhere between eight and fifteen thousand spores. That's the inoculum that would be required for those spores to get into the position to do what I just mentioned, to ultimately germinate, become the full blown bacteria and then do their nasty things in the body, which is secrete toxins, infect cells and then widely disseminate.

RAY SUAREZ: A lot of attention is being paid to the form that these spores took. Maybe we can understand a little better the two tracks that these questions are on. First, virulence of strain: Are there different genetic lines, some that would make you more sick more readily and others that would -

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI: Yes, there are certainly that. For example, the strain that was attempted to be used in a terrorist fashion in Japan a few years ago by the Japanese terrorist group happened to be a very relatively benign and not virulent strain. But when people are talking about the capability of the microbe, it's the grade of the spore and how they were refined and put in a way that's much more likely to disseminate in an aerosolized or airborne way, versus one that's crudely made and just might clump to the ground and be much less dangerous. That's the danger -- is the potential for the spread of the spores. That really dictates the potential and the capability of either getting in the lung of a person, or disseminated widely like sneaking into the ventilation system, the way it seems to be the case in the Daschle building one.

RAY SUAREZ: So spores from the same family, the same genetic line, depending on how they're milled, on the form that they take always a powder, could be more or less dangerous?

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI: Right. That's the point, if it's not well prepared, it could be a relatively not very dangerous component of what's trying to be done, namely bio terror. If it's put in a form where it has the capability of this dissemination or just the right size to get through into the nasal passages, that one to ten micron size, those are the ones that are dangerous because they can get into the respiratory tract, whereas, if you get one that's crudely made, starts to clump, different sizes, it may not do anything with regards to getting into the nasal passages.

RAY SUAREZ: We had 31 exposures on two floors in a corner of one building. Does that signal to you that this was well made stuff, that the people who may it knew what they were doing?

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI: From the phenomenological standpoint, just observing to me, having not seen the data on the analysis, would suggest to me that in fact that was of a grade that had the potential to disseminate in an aerosolized way much better than perhaps a more crude preparation.

RAY SUAREZ: It was mentioned in an earlier report that people are doing 60-day regimes of antibiotics. That's unusually long, isn't it?

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI: Well, that is long, but that's based on an animal model of infecting animals and treating them for 30 days and then observing that some animals even afteryou stop treating for 30 days perhaps even up to 20 or more days beyond the termination of treatment, they were still able to demonstrate spores in those individuals. So because of that, an empiric decision was made that it should be 60 days of the antibiotic, and it was purely on the basis of trying to err on the side of safety to make sure you get those, all of those spores eliminated rather than stopping perhaps prematurely with 30 days.

RAY SUAREZ: But, I guess what I'm getting at is, this isn't something you would want to embark on lightly or frivolously. People are stocking you on antibiotics around the country.

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI: That gets to the point that has been discussed a considerable amount -- is the value or lack thereof of having individuals be taking antibiotics in a relatively empiric way, namely without necessarily having the kinds of exposure that we've been seeing demonstrated, identified and appropriately treated. That's the difficulty with inappropriate antibiotic administration. Not only could it be toxic, particularly if you're giving it for a 60-day period, but then you have all the other problems of perhaps even selecting for resistance of microbes that are not anthrax, something else that you might ultimately need those class of antibiotics for. So there are a number of reasons to be, (a), careful if there indeed is an exposure and err on the side of caution for treating. But if there's no indication whatsoever that you were physically in a place where there was an exposure, that that person who maybe looks at television or reads in the newspaper and said oh my God I'm going to start throwing down some antibiotics, that's inappropriate and that's where you get into trouble.

RAY SUAREZ: Dr. Fauci, thanks a lot.

JIM LEHRER: Gwen Ifill picks up the anthrax investigation issue.

GWEN IFILL: And for that part of the story I'm joined by Dr. Richard Spertzel. He is the former head of the biological weapons inspection team for the United Nations Special Commission On Iraq, known as UNSCOM. A retired army colonel, he was deputy commander of the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick. Welcome, Dr. Spertzel. The Centers for Disease Control reports tonight that there is a connection between the strain, if you want to use that term of anthrax found in New York, and the strain found in Florida. What does that mean?

DR. RICHARD SPERTZEL: What they're saying is that based on, most likely, genetic fingerprinting of the DNA of the two strains, that there is either close or perhaps even an identical relationship between the two. That is they are the same strain.

GWEN IFILL: And here the same source perhaps?

DR. RICHARD SPERTZEL: It would suggest a common source. But the same strain may in fact be found in different laboratories. So without further information at this point, we probably can't say that specifically a laboratory was involved in both of those situations.

GWEN IFILL: It seems that so much of this story revolves around definition, so let walk through a few. One of the ones we keep hearing about is the word weaponized, or weapons grade anthrax. What are they talking about?

DR. RICHARD SPERTZEL: A weapons grade anthrax is one that is of the correct particle size that Dr. Fauci said that's capable of getting down into the lungs. It also has certain other properties attributed to it that makes it readily releasable into the air. A true weapons grade anthrax would have the properties that if it were a pile on this table, waving your hand over it would be enough torelease some of that into the air ---- once airborne --.

GWEN IFILL: Is that what we think we saw in Senator Daschle's office?

DR. RICHARD SPERTZEL: It would appear in the case of Senator Daschle's office that the act of opening a paper, the letter, was enough to release the material into the air. And once airborne, again, an attribute of weaponized grade, is it's going to stay airborne.

GWEN IFILL: So what would it take, and more importantly I guess, who would it take to produce this grade of anthrax that we're talking about here?

DR. RICHARD SPERTZEL: To start with, it requires someone who knows very specifically what to do, how to do it, and then has the capability to accomplish that act. The accomplishing part of it requires some specialized equipment. The level of the specialized equipment may vary, depending on the quantity. If you were producing quantities of warfare application, you're going to be dealing with larger pieces of equipment and perhaps even more sophisticated. The level that we're seeing in this case is at a lesser scale but still there is specialized equipment involved.

GWEN IFILL: So the question who then focuses on who has access to this kind of equipment, who has access to this kind of material. Does it have to be a state sponsor?

DR. RICHARD SPERTZEL: The access to the equipment, if you know what it is is needed, anybody could theoretically buy it, it's not specialized made, it's commercially available, but it's a very specific type, perhaps and hopefully not known to most people. The knowledge related to that is limited to individuals who either have developed that over an extended period of time or have related to programs in which they have accomplished that. And there are today a few states with that capability.

GWEN IFILL: Well, let me cut to that chase because you spent some time with UNSCOM investigating the possibility of this sort of stash in Iraq. Do you believe that Iraq is capable of this?

DR. RICHARD SPERTZEL: Iraq is certainly capable of producing weapons grade material, and specifically I would say weapons grade anthrax.

GWEN IFILL: And do you believe they have a connection to Osama bin Laden or anybody else?

DR. RICHARD SPERTZEL: Yes, I do -- as a personal individual. Now that is not based necessarily on the technical aspects of what we know so far, the scientific aspects of the strains. But it's related to a lot of things including the Iraq - bin Laden connection, or Atta's connection in Prague, as an example.

GWEN IFILL: Attorney General Ashcroft said today that it has now become the Department of Justice's responsibility to prevent and protect. How do you prevent, that seems like the toughest part of this question?

DR. RICHARD SPERTZEL: Prevention, prevention is truly the toughest part. Unless you have information, intelligence, in which you can interrupt and prevent it from ever happening, it's pretty difficult otherwise to prevent an attack happening. And I believe that future terrorists, such terrorist events will happen. Now, that's not a reason for alarm, because if the system responds properly as it appeared to do this time, cases will be identified early enough, therapy, appropriate therapy can be initiated early enough, and you'll minimize the effect and hopefully prevent any deaths from occurring.

GWEN IFILL: Now, the investigation part of this, is there a way to trace this, is it a waste of time or is it the best use of time to trace this directly to the kinds of states you're talking about or to those kinds of experts, or should there be a broader net thrown?

DR. RICHARD SPERTZEL: I'm not sure I totally understood the question. But if, to attempt to trace the specific strains to a certain country may be extremely difficult, what the identification of the strains can do would be to narrow the range of suspects that would have to be looked at.

GWEN IFILL: You understood the question; you answered it perfectly. So do you think in the end that there's going to be a connection that is going to be made between the events of September 11th and the events that are happening today - now, with the anthrax dissemination?

DR. RICHARD SPERTZEL: I'm one of those individuals who think there is a very definite connection going to be may. I find it far too coincidental that a series of letters, both fake ones, such as received by the "New York Times", and one at the NBC headquarters, and actual letters would go out, that is actual letters containing anthrax spores, in a very narrow time frame in mid, late September. That's coincidence far too much.

GWEN IFILL: Thank you very much, Dr. Spertzel.

RECAP

JIM LEHRER: Again, the major developments of the day on anthrax: The House and Senate closed their office buildings through Monday for anthrax inspections. It followed word that more than 30 people, mostly in Senate Majority Leader Daschle's office, tested positive for exposure to anthrax spores. They were sent to the office in a letter. And a Pentagon spokesman said Taliban resistance was falling away, as U.S. air raids continued in Afghanistan. We'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.