The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . world of mobility. Welcome to the new AT&T, the world delivered. Pacific Life, Chevron, and the National Science Foundation, supporting education and research across all fields of science and engineering. And with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. And this program was made possible by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you. Thank you.

A triple car bombing erupted today in southern Iraq, killing at least 41 people. It was the worst such attack in four months. The target was the market district in Amara, a Shiite area that's been spared much of the violence up until now. In addition to the dead, more than 150 Iraqis were wounded, immediately afterward, the police chief was fired and a driving ban took effect. We'll have more on this story right after the news summary. The official death toll and yesterday's bombings in Algeria rose to 31 today. Hospitals and local newspapers in the North African nation put the count as high as 72. At least nine UN employees were among the dead, scores of people were wounded and five or six were still missing. Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the attack will have more on this story later in the program tonight. A car bombing in Lebanon killed a top general today, at least one other person was also killed when the bomb went off in Beirut.

The general Francois Haj was a leading candidate to become head of the military. Anti-Syrian politicians blamed Damascus for the bombing. The Syrians denied it. The US homeland security chief warned Americans today not to relax. In a year-end review, Secretary Michael Chertoff said the risk of an attack here has not abated. The fact that we have not had an terrorist attack on this country, in this country, in the last six years is not a cause for complacency or a time to celebrate the end of the struggle. The threat is not going away, the enemy is not lost interest, and if you had doubt about it, look at yesterday's reports about bombings in Algeria. Chertoff said in the year ahead he wants to complete 670 miles of fence along the Mexico border. He also appealed for states to make their driver's licenses more secure. Pentagon officials kept up the pressure on NATO today to do more in Afghanistan. Yesterday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates roundly criticized some of the allies.

Today, a Pentagon spokesman said this mission is too vital to let it in any way be jeopardized by the fact that allies have not fulfilled commitments. Also today, two NATO soldiers were killed in eastern Afghanistan. Israel and the Palestinians resumed direct peace talks today for the first time in almost seven years. The session lasted just 90 minutes. The Palestinians complained about Israeli plans for a new construction in East Jerusalem and the Israelis condemned rocket fire coming from Gaza. The two sides have agreed to try to reach a peace settlement by December of 2008. President Bush today vetoed a second attempt to expand a children's health insurance program. Democrats and a number of Republicans wanted to increase coverage to 10 million children over five years. Mr. Bush complained the bill went far beyond the original purpose of helping the poor, an earlier version was also vetoed. Leaders of the House Intelligence Committee complained today the CIA withheld information about interrogation videos. They said they should have been told more

about the tapes of terrorist suspects, which were destroyed in 2005. The committee chairman and ranking Republicans spoke after a closed-door session. We feel on a bipartisan level that our committee was not informed has not been kept informed and we are very frustrated about that issue. The House Intelligence Committee was not kept fully informed of what was going on with these tapes, whether it was the existence of these tapes, the discussion and the plans to destroy these tapes, and then actually the destruction of these tapes a few years ago. The committee heard today from the director of the CIA General Michael Hayden. He took the post after the tapes were destroyed, but he said today the committee leaders have a point. I think it's fair to say that particularly at the time of the destruction, we could have done an awful lot better in keeping the committee alerted and informed as to that activity. We work hard every day to make sure the committee

knows everything they need to know to fulfill their constitutional function and frankly to enable the agency to do its job for the nation as well. Hayden told the Associated Press he learned of the tapes more than a year ago. At the time he was deputy director of National Intelligence. The Midwest struggled to recover today after a deadly ice storm that was blamed for at least 27 deaths. More snow and sleet fell across parts of Oklahoma and Texas and hampered efforts to restore power. 800,000 homes and businesses in six states remained in the dark. The storm system also moved today into the Northern Ohio Valley and into New England. The UN Secretary General warned today a proposal for cutting greenhouse gas emissions may be too ambitious for now. Banji Moon spoke at a conference in Bali, Indonesia. It's supposed to set goals for a new climate accord. Europe and developing nations support a call for cutting emissions 25 to 40 percent by 2020. The US says it's too soon to focus on a figure. A federal judge in California today upheld

California's move to regulate greenhouse gases from vehicles. The state is called for cutting new car emissions 30 percent by 2016. Automakers sued to block enforcement of the standards. They could still appeal today's ruling. California also needs a federal waiver to go ahead with their program. The federal reserve announced new efforts today to ease the credit crunch. It's injecting another $40 billion into the US banking system. The news helped send oil prices up nearly 5 percent back above $94 a barrel. On Wall Street, the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 41 points to close at nearly 13,474. The NASDAQ rose more than 18 points to close at 2671. The International Olympic Committee formally stripped track star Marion Jones of her five medals today. Jones has admitted using steroids to fuel a record breaking performance at the 2007 Olympics. She has returned her three gold and two bronze medals. Jones also faces

possible prison time for lying to federal investigators. Rock and Roll Pioneer, Ike Turner died today at his home outside San Diego. There was no word on the cause of death. Turner and his then wife, Tina Turner, had a number of hits in the 50s and 60s, including proud Mary, but he was shattered by allegations of wife abuse and drug addiction. This year he staged a comeback winning a Grammy for a blues album. Ike Turner was 76 years old. That's it for the news summary tonight. Now, deadly violence in southern Iraq. Car bombings in Algeria, Republican candidates in Iowa, new technology for airplanes, and shorter sentences for crack cocaine offenders. Bommings in two countries. We start with a report on the latest attacks in Iraq. I spoke earlier this evening with Damien Cave of the New York Times in Baghdad.

Damien, the last time we spoke, it was about how violence in Iraq seemed to be on the decline. Now, we're hearing about these attacks in Amara, the bloodiest in months. What happened? Well, in this case, there was at least three car bombs that exploded in quick succession in a city in my son province south of Baghdad. It was a pretty coordinated attack that killed quite a few people and wounded dozens more. Can you tell us a little bit about my son province in Amara, in particular? Sure, my son province is about 200 miles south of Baghdad. It's a pretty remote region that borders Iran. And Amara is one of the major cities there. And it's a largely Shiite area that's dominated by two militias in particular, the body army, and the border organization, which is connected to the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council. These two groups have been warring for control of my son province, Basra, and several other oil-rich regions in the south for quite a while now. And it appears to have spread from areas like Basra into Amara.

Tell us about, do we know at this point tonight, who is responsible? No, it's actually quite difficult in this case to figure out who it is. These kinds of car bombs are typically attributed to Sunni extremist groups. But in a region that's almost exclusively Shiite and pretty protected by Shiites, it's hard to imagine Suni's getting in there to be able to do this. That said, I spoke to the British military officials and we spoke to Iraqi officials there. And at this point, no one can really tell what the reason was or who exactly did it. We've spoken before about violence in Baghdad and in violence in the northern part of the country, but this is something that's happening in the southern part. In fact, in a province where control was handed over from the British back to the Iraqi, some months ago, you mentioned what British officials had to say. Did the handover spur any of this? Well, they handed over the province in April. And in recent months, this area, as the British have pulled back to large bases, has continued to stay violent. And there are questions about whether

or not their pullback has a direct impact on security there. But this is, you know, an area of the country that's been chaotic and difficult since at least 2003. The Brits have essentially said, we're going to go back to our bases in the hopes of us not being attacked and trusting the Iraqi security forces to pick up the slack. But at this point, it's not clear that they're able to do that, which raises questions about other areas as the Americans start to pull back and send some of the surge troops home. And in fact, Basra, a town we are more familiar with that the British are preparing to fully handover control up was considered one of the success stories in Iraq, wasn't it? It was initially, I mean, but as in the past year, you're in a half, one of the trends of Iraq has been violence that's not just sectarian Sunni on Shia, but actually within the same sect, in Basra is in many ways the best example of that. Shiites there have been fighting for control of money and resources and government jobs and power. And this is something that's happened there as perhaps the best example. But it's also happening in other neighborhoods in Baghdad

and to some extent in Ambar province where it's exclusively Shiite. I mean, exclusively Sunni, excuse me. So, you know, the fighting here is in many cases not just about sect or religion, but as it often is in wars, it's about money and power. Does this make the South the new battle ground? Well, it's clearly a battleground and it's been a battleground for much of this year. As violence has declined through much of the country in places like Baghdad and Diala province and Ambar, Basra has in some ways been an anomaly. It's a place that remains as violent today or appears to remain as violent today as it was a few months ago. So, you know, it's a sign of the fact that even as security improves in much of the country, there are still places in Iraq that are very dangerous and that have yet to be brought under control. One of those places we've heard about is Mosul, where there have been reports of insurgents returning to that area. Is that another example of a place where the violence seems to be entrenched? That is another example, actually. American commanders have said that they believe some of the Sunni extremist groups that have been pushed out of Baghdad and Diala province

have moved up north to Mosul. That's also an area where, in terms of concentrations of American troops, there are fewer there than in other areas with similarly large populations. So, that appears to be a factor there. But it's the case that in the north, that appears to be one of the places where al-Qaeda and Mesopotamia and other Sunni extremist groups appear to be concentrated. It's possible that that's the last readout for them as they've been pushed out of other areas. But it's also possible that it could be a staging ground for what could be a resurgence in violence later on. At this point, who knows which direction things are heading up there? As you speak to American officials and British officials and Iraqi officials about the security situation right now on the ground, do you have a sense that they are trying to figure out a way to anticipate or account for or prepare for the kinds of attacks that we saw today in Amara? It's very hard to tell. I mean, at this point, there's still a euphoria over the fact that security is down. Most of the officials that I talked to are talking mostly about that,

about the fact that Baghdad is safer. And even Prime Minister Nori Kamala Maliki today said that this attack in Amara was just a distraction and effort to blind people to the fact that security has gotten better elsewhere. So there hasn't been too much of a focus on how exactly to fix the problem in the South. And that's something that is increasingly difficult for American Iraqi officials here in Baghdad because it is, in fact, quite a different world down there. And the influence of Baghdad down there appears to be diluted the further it gets away from the center. So I have yet to hear any sort of comprehensive plan besides naming a new police chief here and there to actually get that area under control. And so far, the official alliance still seems to be one of optimism about the direction of the violence level. There is still optimism, but also a cautious optimism. I mean, American commanders here repeatedly say they're not quote, dancing in the end zone, that the war is in over, that this is simply conditions have been created for what they hope will be some kind of national political reconciliation, which has yet to come. You know, I was out in Amara province for much of last week,

and commanders there while very proud of the accomplishments out there also feel that things are fragile and they fear that things could go back to at least some level of violence. So at this point, there is optimism, but it's still a pretty cautious optimism. Thanks again for giving us the view from the ground, Damien Cave of the New York Times. Sure, my pleasure. Next, another deadly attack this time in the North African nation of Algeria. Margaret Warner has the story. Emergency crews spent the night digging through the rubble of the gutted UN buildings in Algiers as rescuers search for survivors and bodies, family members of the missing waited at the scene for word of their loved ones. Yesterday's twin car bombings by an al-Qaeda affiliated group hit the Algerian Supreme Court building and minutes later, the UN buildings in an upscale neighborhood of the Algerian capital.

Today, the unofficial death toll estimates soared well above the interior ministry's official tally of 31, with scores perhaps hundreds more reported wounded. One thing remains certain, at least nine of those killed were UN staff, making it the worst single attack on a UN installation since the 2003 bombing at UN headquarters in Baghdad, 22 died in that blast. Speaking from a climate conference in Bali, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was among the many world leaders condemning the bombing. This is a direct to them the strongest terms. This is just an acceptable in whatever the circumstances you cannot be justified in any circumstances. A group called Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb claimed responsibility for the attack in a website posting. It described the UN offices as the headquarters of the infidel's den,

and declared its aim is to overthrow the Algerian government. The terrorist group is an offshoot of the Islamic guerrilla movement that waged a bloody decade-long civil war in the 1990s that left at least 150,000 people dead. The organization renamed itself Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb last January. Since then, it has claimed responsibility for a number of bombings that have killed more than 80 people. For more on these attacks and what they may mean for Algeria, North Africa, and the West, we turn to Daniel Biman, director of Georgetown University Center for Peace and Security Studies. His new book is The Five Front War, The Better Way to Fight Global She Had, and Mary Jane D. who served as a United Nations Monitor during the Al-Gurion elections of 1997. She is chief of the African and Middle East Division at the Library of Congress, but the views she expresses here are her own. And welcome to you both.

Let's start by just talking a little bit more about this group, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb Professor Biman. Tell us more about this group, and do you have any doubt that they are in fact behind this? This is a group that grew out of the Algerian Civil War that produced a number of very bloody nasty groups that, over time, became linked with a more celothist brand of combatant that increasing over time became linked with bin Laden. And there's no doubt that this group is behind the attack. They've claimed credit for it, and it's the type of target, the type of method that Al-Qaeda surrogates tend to favor. So what explains the UN as a target here? The UN actually is symbolic. It means that Al-Qaeda is joining with the Algerians to fight not an internal war in Algeria, but a much broader war, a war of the Islamic nation, if you want, the Islamic Uma against the West. And so by attacking the United Nations, it simply says,

this is a war against Western presence in the Muslim world. And Algeria, you are part of this global war that we're fighting in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and elsewhere. So the fact that this local group, Dan Biman, adopted the Al-Qaeda name and adopted this affiliation, do you agree that that really has a significance, that it has caused the group to expand its agenda and its aims? Expand and change. The group initially was very focused on Algeria, on overthrowing the Algerian government, and its targets. And installing a theocratic, absolutely. Theocratic government that followed a very, very narrow version of Jihadist ideology. But this is a much more international agenda. It's much more focused on the world, not only Algeria itself, but well beyond it. And what are these links consist of with Al-Qaeda? I mean, are they operational? Are they logistical? Is it financial? Initially, the links were primarily financial and ideological,

al-Qaeda ideas that were expanding the horizons of a very local group. Over time though, we've seen personnel go both ways. In particular, we've seen people go from Algeria to Iraq, and learn ideas that are between there. But so far, the operational links are elusive. It doesn't look like bin Laden himself is calling the shots. But there does seem to be some broad strategic agreement on the type of targets. Regent, you fit this into the broader context of North Africa for us, if you could. The Director of Homeland Security, that is the Homeland Security Advisor to the White House. Francis Townsend went to Algeria, Morocco, and Libya earlier this year to express and talk about U.S. concerns about Al-Qaeda moving into that region. And she was quoted as saying that the U.S. was worried that that Al-Qaeda could use this area really as a base not only to attack Europe, but perhaps to the United States. Is that a valid concern in your view? Well, certainly, Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia are on the front line. They are on the shores of the

Mediterranean. It is quite possible for operatives in North Africa to move easily to Europe. And then from Europe to the United States, it's another step. But I would say that definitely those countries are critical. Because also of migration to Europe, there's a very great number of people moving legally and illegally from North Africa into Europe. And I think that Homeland Security is very worried about this movement of people. And is Algeria particularly vulnerable to either al-Qaeda influence or just generally the sort of message and mission of radical groups among these North African countries? Algeria is the country that historically has had the most problems. The Civil War in the 1990s killed well over 100,000 people. And although the situation is far more stable than it was 15 years ago, it's still less stable than Algeria's neighbors.

And why? The government there has less legitimacy in the eyes of many people. It doesn't have the traditional authority that Morocco's government has. And simply the history of violence and the incredible brutality on both sides has endured many Algerians. And I would concur and I would add that there are certain factors today that make Algeria even more vulnerable. And that is the election or the real election rather of the president with Africa. That was really manipulated by the Hontain power. And it is a military hunt. It is a military hunt. And that left a lot of Algerians very disappointed, dissatisfied with the type of regime that they have in power. On the other hand, they also are faced that is the Algerians, also faced with these lambists. So they have little choice in terms of who to look up to or to look for help to. And kind of knows that that Algeria is a very vulnerable country. A country that is searching for leadership, if you want. And therefore it is proposing,

in a way, an alternative to domestic Islamists and to the government forces there. Is there any way of knowing how much support this slumism as a political movement has within the population as a whole? You know, it's difficult to say people have estimated it somewhere between 15 and 30%. But then exactly what does that mean? Those who carry out violence are violent acts. I usually very small a minority of people. But then there are those who support them, but will not really kill anyone. Then there are those who will give money for the broader Islamic cause, but really don't want to know what people are doing. Then there are those who are neutral. And then there are those who are critical. So there's a vast difference in opinion between people in Algeria. There's a big continuum. And there's also a revulsion with the violence that has taken place.

So in fact, these actions today may very well boomerang and create a stronger reaction in Algeria against Islamists than the quite anticipates. So how well, how is the government there now trying to handle this threat? Because there have been several bombings, including what looked like around an assassination attempt on the president earlier this year, and how well equipped are they to fight it? The government is quite well equipped to fight the general threat of terrorism. During the 1990s, it developed an extensive intelligence operation, a very effective security services, although quite brutal, but also did things like an amnesty program and tried to co-opt rival leaders. So it was really effective across the board. The most recent attacks have not elicited a massive crackdown. And that may be a strategic decision by the government that they don't want to drive people who are undecided or not sympathetic to the radicals into their arms. So in a way, the government, by its standards at least, has been showing some

degree of restraint. And I think their hope is that because the targets are UN targets, because they feel that the violence will not elicit sympathy, that simply by going for more low profile efforts, the rest of radicals, and so on, they can cut this off before it starts to snowball. Now Algeria has been enjoying a bit of an economic, I don't know if boom is too strong a word, but because it's a major natural gas exporter, rising energy prices have helped us economy. To a tax like these undermine that in any way. Not really. There's so much demand for oil and gas that those attacks will really not affect Algeria in this way. What is important is that the increase in the wealth generated by gas and oil is not reflected in developments in the country. In other words, there is not enough housing. Health care is deplorable. The education system is not keeping up. And therefore, there is resentment against the government.

So bottom line here is Professor Biman. You expect Algeria to continue to be a sort of al-Qaeda target that is for al-Qaeda to see Algeria as a good potential target for operations? Absolutely. There's a strong sense of ideological sympathy between what the Algerians now believe in what al-Qaeda believes. But also there are a lot of personal connections and Algeria has a lot to offer al-Qaeda. It has a large reservoir of skilled fighters, people trained in violence, and extensive networks in Europe. And these are attractive from an al-Qaeda point of view. Daniel Biman and Mary Chaney, thank you both. Next, the Republicans' matinee meeting in Iowa, NewsHour correspondent Kwame Holman has that. From the studios of Iowa Public Television, this is a Des Moines Register presidential debate. The political dynamics in Iowa preceding this

afternoon's debate had shifted in recent days with polls now showing Mike Huckabee as the front runner, a position Mitt Romney had held since campaigning began. Carolyn Washburn, editor of the Des Moines Register and the sole questioner, announced she would stay away from Iraq and immigration as issues, but asked about the deficit as a threat to national security. Do you agree our country's financial situation creates a security risk, and why or why not? Most like former Governor Huckabee agreed it did. It's most certainly a national security threat because a country can only be free if it can do three things. First, it has to be able to feed itself. It has to be able to put food on the table for its own citizens. Secondly, it's got to be able to fuel itself. If it looks to somebody else for its energy needs, it's only as free as those are willing for it to be. And it also has to be able to fight for itself. It's got to be able to manufacture its own weapons of defense, tanks, airplanes, bullets, and bombs. When we start outsourcing everything and we're in that kind of

a trade deficit, then just remember who feeds us, who fuels us, and who helps us to fight. That's to whom we are enslaved. Right, California, Congressman Duncan Hunter. The trade loss this year is going to be $800 billion. It's going to be $200 billion to communist China, which is rapidly becoming our banker. And there's an old saying, you don't want to have a banker who doesn't have your best interest at heart. And Texas Congressman Ron Paul. It's absolutely a threat to our national security because we've spent too much. We tax too much. We borrowed too much and we print too much. When a country spends way beyond it means eventually, it will destroy the currency. And we're in the midst of a currency crisis. However, none of the candidates would identify specific sacrifices Americans could make to lower the deficit. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. The problem is not the American people. What we should be doing is restraining the amount of money that Washington spends in a concerted way, with major reductions in civilian spending, using attrition, and returning, actually leaving more money in the pockets of the American people.

The strength of America is not its central government. The strength of America are its people. Restrain the central government, give people more choice, more money to spend. We're going to see our economy booming. That's the kind of future where we can have unlimited dreams. Governor Romney, are there programs or situations that are so important that you'd be willing to run a deficit to pay for them? Well, we don't have to run a deficit to pay for the things that are most important, because we can eliminate the things that aren't critical. We have in the federal government 342 different economic development programs, often administered by different departments. We don't need 342. We probably don't need 100 of those. We probably need a lot fewer than that. Surely protecting our country and our defense of our military is critical. Getting our free market finally able to allow all of our citizens to have insurance, health insurance, that's something we did in Massachusetts. Improving our schools with school choice, better pay for better teachers, these are a lot of things that we can do, but they don't require us to eliminate the things that are most critical in our society.

Colorado, Congressmen, Tom, 10 Kratos. And honestly, if you think about it, if you ask America, what would you do? What would you sacrifice? The one thing I would say is this. Don't ask the government for womb to tomb protection for your life to build a bubble around you, because all of that will cost a humongous amount of money and money that we don't have. On the issue of climate change, the candidates balked at Washburn's attempts to get them to state their positions with a show of hands. I'm not doing that. I'm not doing hand shows today. No hand shows. However, Arizona Senator John McCain said he believed the threat of climate change is real. Suppose that climate change is not real, and all we do is adopt green technologies, which are economy and our technology is perfectly capable of, then all we've done is given our kids a cleaner world. But suppose they are wrong. Suppose they are wrong and climate change is real, and we've done nothing. What kind of a planet are we going to pass on to the next

generation of Americans? It's real. We've got to address it. We can do it with technology, with cap and trade, with capitalist and free enterprise motivation. And I'm confident that we can pass on to our children and grandchildren a cleaner, better world. Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson appreciated being asked one of the few foreign policy questions of the afternoon. Senator Thompson, you've expressed doubts that the recent report on Iran's nuclear capabilities is accurate. As President, how would you decide when to disagree with available intelligence, and then what would you do? That's probably the most important questions I've been asked today. We have a real problem with our intelligence community. It, along with certain parts for military, we're neglected for a long, long time in this country, and we're paying the price for it. Now, so you've got to rebuild from the bottom up. I think that in the meantime, we have to rely on other people. The British are helpful to us. These really sometimes are helpful to us. Former Ambassador Alan Keyes was the most combative of the candidates,

challenging Washburn for not offering him a chance to state his position on education. Do I have to raise my hand to get a question? I'd like to address that question. I'm going to take it. No, you're not. You haven't in several go-round, so I have to make an issue out of it. I would like to address the question of education. So ahead. I don't wish it to pass on you. You have 30 seconds. Oh, they had a minute. Why do I get 30 seconds? You see, your unfairness is now becoming so apparent that the voters in Iowa must understand there's a reason for it. And the reason for it is what I'm about to say. Governor Huckabee just addressed the question of education. He has stood before values, voters, and moral conservatives claiming that he has their spokesmen. You know the major problem in American education today. We allowed the judges to drive God out of our schools. We allowed the moral foundation of this republic, which is that we are created equal and endowed by our creator, not by our constitution or our leaders with our rights. If we don't teach our children that heritage and the moral culture that goes along with it, we cannot remain free. They will not be disciplined to learn science,

to learn math, to learn history, to learn anything. This was the last Republican debate before Iowa's January 3rd caucuses. The Democrats will debate tomorrow. Next, a science unit report on a new air traffic control system. The government hopes will eventually take some of the hassle out of air travel. A news hour correspondent, Tom Bearden, reports. This is the future of air traffic control. A moving map display tells pilots like Bryce Albert exactly where they are, what other planes are in the vicinity, whether there are any terrain hazards to avoid, and gives them constantly updated weather information. On board equipment uses GPS, global positioning satellites, to pinpoint the plane's location, somewhat like the familiar

navigation devices in cars. Planes then broadcast their position to all other aircraft, and also to ground stations that feed computer displays for air traffic controllers. The FAA has been testing the technology for the last seven years, paying for it to be installed in approximately 200 aircraft that apply the skies in and around Bethel, Alaska. The technical name is automatic dependent surveillance broadcast, or ADS-B. Many in the aviation industry believe it could help make flying much more efficient, and bring relief to tens of thousands of passengers who get stranded by cancelled flights every year. ADS-B will eventually supersede today's ground-based radar technology, which hasn't changed much since the 1940s. Radar is only accurate to within a mile or so of a

plane's actual location, so controllers separate them by five miles or more. Leonard Kirk has been at the forefront of developing the technology. ADS-B allows to move aircraft closer together safely, because the greater accuracy and integrity we have with that over-rater, so we'll gain capacity in the airspace. We'll be able to surveil more airspace and provide access to more airports in less than ideal weather and so forth. And bad weather is one of the reasons why Alaska is one of the most dangerous places on Earth to fly, and why the FAA chose the state to test the new system. I've used this when you're applying through thunderstorms or should say around thunderstorms. Jim C. Plac works for the Alaska Aviation Safety Foundation. During the decade of the 1990s, statistically we had an accident in Alaska every other day. And how did that compare with the lower 48? Four to five times greater the fatal eight accident right here in Alaska than anywhere else in the US. Why was that?

Multiple reasons. One, just the environment here in Alaska. Remote areas, weather changes very quickly. You have mountains, you have snowstorms, extreme cold weather. In addition, we have a lack of infrastructure up here, lack of aviation infrastructure, so radars, communications, weather reporting systems. Air travel is just about the only way to get around here much of the year. No roads lead in or out of Bethel, and river traffic comes to a halt in the fall when ice begins to form. So a small aircraft allowed Bethel to act as a hub for 52 surrounding Eskimo villages, turning these scattered settlements into a community. Airplanes take people to hospitals and grocery stores. Let native Alaskans bring their handmade crafts to market. Albert took us to a tiny village called New Talk to show us how it all works. It's a typical flight for this part of Alaska, cruising over a seemingly endless, featureless, expansive tundra interlaced with thousands of lakes and ponds. But the new system

makes it easy to navigate. It also receives a continuous stream of weather information that Albert can bring up by punching a few buttons. Real quick, now I can give the weather a battle. I got other weather changes up here pretty quickly. It's changing real fast. Real fast, so it's, you know, if you're out in the area that's down, you want to know where there's weather's good. And before, if you're down, low, we had nothing. Perhaps even more valuable is a continuous visual display of potential obstacles. Sea plaque showed us how the display can keep pilots out of trouble among the peaks just east of Anchorage. The rich rain is stream that is at our altitude or above. Meaning it's stream we can hit as you can see out the window. We do have a lot of mountains out to our right. The number one cause of accidents in Alaska is controlled flight into terrain, aircraft crashing into things the pilot never sees. Now anticipating where the train is, seeing where the other airplanes are relative to you, getting the direct weather uplink data directly to your display,

the pilot's pilots make better pilot decisions in that case, safer flying all around. Back out over the tundra, Albert began his approach to the tiny gravel airstrip at New Talk. His plane was quickly followed by nearly a dozen other flying school buses, bringing children from surrounding settlements to participate in the native youth Olympic Games at the New Talk School. Although most of these students weren't aware of it, the new GPS devices made their trip here much safer. We estimated when we started out that we would possibly get a 28% reduction accident and we were absolutely amazing, static, happy that we got a 47% reduction accident. GPS technology has also helped rescue teams find downed aircraft. John Lane is the support manager at the FAA's Anchorage Center. We can almost tell the rescue folks exactly where to fly to and we've had documented cases

when that's exactly what's happened and just with a matter of two hours we could have somebody on the scene whereas in the past it may have taken days if they ever found them at all. The first steps toward installing the system in the lower 48 are now underway. It will take until about 2020 to install the 800 systems believe necessary to cover the whole country at a cost of about $15 billion. In addition to that, each aircraft will also need to install the GPS devices to take advantage of the new system. Estimates are it will cost between $200 and $400,000 each to equip the 7,600 commercial airliners currently in operation in the US. But the FAA argues that ultimately the system will more than pay for itself in cost savings from fewer cancellations and reduced delays. The owners of small aircraft will have to buy the new equipment too if they want to fly into the larger airports. It will cost between $10,000 and $15,000 per plane.

The United Parcel Service has been using a version of this technology at its Louisville hub for several years. The company estimates it's been able to fly with a nearly 15% greater efficiency saving almost a million dollars in fuel each year. While many believe this technology will help reduce congestion in the sky, passengers stuck in airports won't see immediate relief from this year's record flight delays. It's still going to take years to install ADS-B and while a lot of planes might be flying closer together when it's done, many of them will still be circling the busiest airports waiting for a slot to land. Because there aren't enough runways to accommodate the ever-growing number of commercial flights. Finally tonight, reducing sentences for crack cocaine offenders and to Jeffrey Brown. Twenty years ago, an increase in the use of crack cocaine led to fears of an epidemic of addiction

and violence around the country. Congress responded with a law that set far higher sentences for possession of crack than for possession of powder cocaine, treating one gram of crack as equivalent to 100 grams of powder. The U.S. Sentencing Commission, which sets guidelines for federal prison sentences, decided that disparity was too great and in November voted to reduce sentences handed out for crack cocaine possession. Yesterday, the commission took a further step, making its new rules retroactive, making more than 19,000 present inmates eligible to petition the courts to reduce their sentences. For more on these changes, we get two views. Judge Reggie Walton sits on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and Gretchen Schappert is the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina. Welcome to both of you. Thank you. Judge Walton, the decision to make these new rules retroactive, was quite controversial. Why do you think it was a good move? Well, because I think it's been determined that the disparity that exists now is fundamentally

unfair and that it disproportionately impacts a certain segment of American society, African-American males. Because the great percentage of these cases are involving African-Americans. That's correct. As opposed to the powder, I understand. That's correct. And there are socioeconomic underpinnings. Crack cocaine is cheap. It's sold many times in poorer communities and unfortunately a lot of young black men get caught up in involvement. And as a result, about 86% of those who are serving federal prison sentences for crack cocaine or African-American males. And that's an argument for changing the disparity. What about for making it retroactive? That's just to even it out for everybody. But I mean, look at it this way, the new change took effect on November 1st. I think it's illogical to say that just because somebody got sentenced on October 31st, the rule doesn't apply to them, whereas it does apply to someone who was sentenced on November 1st. Gretchen Shepard, the Justice Department, was against this.

That's correct. Attorney General McCasey spoke against it even this week. Why? Our concern is that this is a group of individuals who are associated with violence. Crack is a drug that's associated with violence. We believe that 19,500 defendants will be eligible for resettancing. That represents fully 10% of the federal criminal prison population. But this group is a unique population. The studies of the Sentencing Commission show that those persons convicted in the federal system for crack cocaine are more likely to be recidivist based on their criminal histories, based upon their use of weapons and based upon their leadership roles in drug organizations. Our concern is not just the impact it's going to have on the court system, which will be considerable. Our concern is going to be the impact it has when people are released prematurely into the very communities that we're trying to help bring back. Fragile communities have been ravaged by crack cocaine. The findings of the Bureau of Prisons indicates that it takes about 30 months to prepare someone for release back into the community once they're incarcerated for a lengthy federal sentence. They will receive probably

450 hours of training in six core areas, things like anger management. They'll get, they may get degrees, they may get job training and identification of driver's license. Accelerating their return to the communities will deprive them of those social services and programs that will prepare them for release and increase the likelihood that they will recidivate and be a negative impact on their communities. We've raised a number of issues here. Let's start with the recidivism and the potential for new violence of violent offenders coming back into the community. Well this change is not a get out of jail free pass. Judges deal have to make a discretionary assessment as to whether or not the change is made applicable to individual offenders. And I don't disagree that there are individuals associated with the crack cocaine trade who have been involved in violence, but that is not 100 percent the case. There are individuals who are detained for lengthy periods of time who were not involved in violence and would not pose a danger to the community if they come back out. And if a

decision's been made that the disparity is fundamentally unfair and it's disproportionately impacting a certain segment of American society, I just think it's unprensible to say that you're not going to afford a means of relief to those who don't pose a danger to the community and there are some who fit within that category. Just explain so we're clear how it works. The case would be a person with petition to you if you had been the judge. You would have discretion to make that decision. That's correct. And obviously I mean the policy statement of the sentencing commission said that we have to take into account whether the individual would in fact pose a danger if they were released back into the community earlier based upon getting the benefit of this change. And I'm confident that judges will go up off the business of trying to make that assessment and not be willing to letting people come back into the community just because the change took effect. Okay we'll stay on that issue because he's saying there will be a review of who gets back into the community. Yes there will be a review. The problem is a lot of these cases are being reopened where files have been closed and let me point out that all of these individuals coming back

for resettencing had legitimate credible sentences. There's no question as to the legitimacy of the convictions. What we're going to be doing is reopening files that have been archived potentially transporting back to their districts up to 19,500 people for resettencing. Trying to resurrect all cases where agents have retired prosecutors have gone, files have been destroyed, and then having to reopen these matters for review. With all due respects to the judge I have concerns about how this process is going to work. And again these are legitimate sentences that we submit should not be revisited. So this goes more to almost the workload question or what it will do to the court system. Well if a policy is concluded as a sentencing commission concluded it's fundamentally unfair. I don't think that just because I'm going to have to work a little harder is a sufficient reason to not provide relief to people who should not have been sentenced to the term that they were sentenced to. I don't again disagree that there are individuals who've

been involved in the crack cocaine trade who've been valid. But there was a case several years ago involving a young lady who went to Hampton University. A good girl came from a good home, went there, got involved with a guy who was involved in drugs, started trafficking drugs for him after he had beaten her, threatened her. And yes she should have been punished. She should have known better. But did she have to receive a 24-year sentence which she received? I don't think so. So there are individuals like her who fit within that category. She is now going throughout the country speaking to kids, trying to deter kids from getting involved in this type of behavior. So rather than sitting in a jail sale, consuming 24,000 of our tax dollars per year of our tax dollars, she's now out being a contributing member of society. There are many individuals I believe within that 19,000 who fit that category. What about to come back to the retroactivity issue here? The judges argument that why treat someone different who was sentenced on October 31st as opposed

to November 1st? There are some constitutional questions but we don't give someone necessarily a benefit when the law gets more severe. I don't know that we necessarily have to give a benefit when the law becomes less severe. But the other thing is the retroactivity, the fairness question is not just with regard to this population of criminal offenders and I respectfully reject the judges argument that is fundamentally unfair. But the other fairness component is the impact it's going to have on these communities. And my concern is releasing possibly 2,500 people right back to their communities within the first year. Many of these individuals will be going back to neighborhoods that have been impacted by crack cocaine. I would submit, and I've heard it said, and I do believe, the difference between crack and powder is, particle cane destroys an individual. Our experience is that crack cocaine destroys a community. Let me ask you because the Supreme Court weighed into this in one way this week, given in a case that involved crack cocaine and decided the judges could have more discretion with the sentencing rules. To what extent does that impact

this discussion now? You also know that Congress is looking at changing the rules of the disparity in sentencing. Where does all that play into this debate? Well obviously for certain individuals as a result of the Supreme Court's ruling, judges will have the ability to have greater discretion and will exercise that discretion prudently in deciding whether someone should receive a lesser sentence taken into account the disparity that the sentencing commission has concluded is unfair. I understand that there's a concern, I'm concerned about what will happen to communities when people come back, but the current state of the law is also demoralizing in those communities. I know in Washington DC, I don't know what it is like in Charlotte, but I've had jurors who've come out potential jurors and said that they would not serve because the system's unfair. I've had jurors who refuse to convict because they feel the system is unfair because they know about the disparity. People who won't come forward and reveal information because they believe the system is unfair. You can't have a system of laws. This locking up is many African

Americans as we have related to this particular offense and have people in those communities respect our system of justice. Time for a response. Well for example in the area of methamphetamine and crystal methamphetamine, the overwhelming majority of people we prosecute are Hispanic or white, we prosecute based upon criminal conduct not based upon race and I do not accept that the process is fundamentally unfair. We do not look at the identity of the individual who commits the crime and we regard to a disparity. It was Congress that passed the statutory mandatory minimums which has created the difference between crack and powder. It was Congress responding to a need that they saw and we are in the business of upholding the law the way it was written. And the end result is that the major wholesale traffickers who are bringing turns of that stuff into this country end up getting sentences significantly less sometimes than the retail seller who's selling a one rock or one rock of cocaine. In my view that can't be considered fair.

All right we'll have to leave it there. Judge Reggie Walton excuse me and US Attorney Regent Shapper. Thank you both very much. Again the major developments of the day. A triple car bombing killed 41 people in southern Iraq. It was the worst such attack in four months. The Midwest struggled to recover from an ice storm blamed for at least 32 deaths and the federal reserve announced it's injecting another 40 billion dollars into the banking system to ease the credit crunch. We'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening with an interview with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi among other things. I'm Gwen Eiffel. Thank you and good night. Major funding for the news hour with Jim Lehrer is provided by every day it seems talk of oil energy the environment where are the answers right now we're producing clean renewable geothermal energy generating enough energy to power

seven million homes imagine that an oil company as part of the solution. This is the power of human energy. The new AT&T. Pacific Life. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation working to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. And with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations and this program was made possible by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you. Thank you. to purchase video of the news hour with Jim Lehrer. Call 1-866-678-News.

We are PBS. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Gwen Eiffel. On the news hour tonight the news of this Wednesday then the latest

on the deadly explosions in two countries a trio of car bombings in southern Iraq and yesterday's twin al-Qaeda attacks in Algiers. Exurps of the last Republican presidential debate before the Iowa caucuses a science unit report on new technology that will make air travel easier and two views on reducing prison sentences for crack cocaine offenders. Major funding for the news hour with Jim Lehrer is provided by. Now headquarters is wherever you are with AT&T data, video voice and now wireless all working together to create a new world of mobility. Welcome to the new AT&T, the world delivered. Pacific Life, Chevron and the National Science Foundation

supporting education and research across all fields of science and engineering. And with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations and this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you. Thank you. A triple car bombing erupted today in southern Iraq killing at least 41 people. It was the worst such attack in four months. The target was the market district in Amara, a Shiite area that's been spared much of the violence up until now. In addition to the dead, more than 150 Iraqis were

wounded immediately afterward, the police chief was fired and a driving ban took effect. We'll have more on this story right after the news summary. The official death toll and yesterday's bombings in Algeria rose to 31 today. Hospitals and local newspapers in the North African nation put the count as high as 72.