Inspectors Search Iraqi Palace as Weapons Hunt Goes On
AARON BROWN, HOST: And good evening again. Briefly tonight at the top, because the day is packed. And forgive the self indulgence, but I found myself without the news for four full days. My family will tell you I was, at first at least, like an addict in withdrawal. No "New York Times" to read in the morning, just a few short stories faxed to an island in the middle of nowhere. No cable TV, no Internet connection to check the headlines in the middle of the night. And, yes, I do that. Cold turkey nearly. Just a few paragraphs on the attack in Kenya, another few on the inspectors in Iraq. There was an ongoing mention of the unhappiness with the Saudis and a sports story here or there. It was like near beer, when you crave a shot of 100 proof vodka. Then a funny thing happened. The cravings calmed, the adventures of a 14-year-old with a scuba tank seemed far more important than the arms inspectors, if only for awhile. A holiday together without a cell phone or e-mail interruption proved not just survivable, but fun. The joy of this job is that it's always good to be back, always. But to be away, really away from the madness that has dominated our world for more than a year now, that was a luxury. And now back to work we go. On with "The Whip." And we begin with the inspection of the presidential palace in Iraq, or a presidential palace. Rym Brahimi is in Baghdad for us. Star us with a headline, please.</s>RYM BRAHIMI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, day six of the inspection and four days before Iraq has to submit its full, final and complete declaration on weapons. The inspectors visit a majorly sensitive site, a symbol of Iraq's national sovereignty.</s>BROWN: Rym, back to you at the top tonight. Thank you. Some intriguing comments from the Bush administration, as this weekend's deadline approaches for Iraq to detail its weapons. Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon for us. So, Jamie, a headline from you.</s>JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SENIOR PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, is it enough for Iraq to disarm, or does Saddam Hussein have to end the repression of his people to fully comply with the U.N. resolution? That's what Secretary Rumsfeld seemed to be implying today.</s>BROWN: Jamie, thank you. And a big push from Saudi Arabia today to prove it's doing enough to crack down on terror. Andrea Koppel is on that for us. So Andrea, a headline from you?</s>ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, after weeks of bad press, allegations rich Saudis have been supporting terrorism through charitable donations. Today, the Saudi government launched a PR offensive.</s>BROWN: Andrea, thank you. Back to you and the rest shortly. Also tonight, we'll talk with the Saudi spokesman Adel Al-Jubeir. Joe Klein (ph) of the "New Yorker" is here to talk politics. A couple of interesting political stories in the news today. A speech by former President Clinton among them. We'll talk with Jim Frank (ph) of "Golf" magazine about Suzie Wally's (ph) decision to become the first woman to play in a men's PGA event. And another chapter in the Augusta National story tonight as well. And then there are the Bolger brothers of Boston. Whitey, the mobster wanted by the law, William the power broker, facing uncomfortable and very personal questions. A fascinating story in segment seven tonight. A full hour. And we begin with questions of how well the inspections are going in Iraq and how important they are to begin with. And the answer depends on who you ask. Ask the U.N. and you'll hear, at least, that the inspectors are getting good access and that their work is key to getting Iraq to disarm without a shot being fired. But ask the White House and you'll hear that the inspectors are not the issue. What Iraq does is what matters, and the big test comes this weekend, when the country has to document the weapons they have. Clearly, the administration is laying the groundwork for a tough response, trying to leave Iraq with as little wiggle room as possible. More on that in a moment. First, for the U.N. Weapons inspectors, a visit to one of the presidential palaces. We begin tonight with CNN's Rym Brahimi.</s>BRAHIMI (voice-over): The moment of truth for the U.N. inspectors. For the first time since the new round of inspections began six days ago, they enter one of Saddam Hussein's presidential palaces. This is the</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): They entered all of the utilities on the site, all of the buildings, the main building and the service buildings. They had nothing else to enter.</s>BRAHIMI: Then journalists are ushered into the grounds past the mused (ph) gardeners and into the palace itself. (on camera): And for a few brief moments, an incredible opportunity to get inside one of Saddam Hussein's palaces. (voice-over): A sumptuous hall of marble crowned by a grand chandelier. Models of the palace now and as it was after it was bombed back in the 1991 Gulf War. All the while, agitated Iraqi officials look on at this unprecedented invasion. After a few minutes, we're escorted out. This visit by the inspectors is surprisingly brief for such a large site; approximately a mile long on one side. But it's symbolic of their determination to visit even the most sensitive of sites.</s>BRAHIMI: The visit was also symbolic, Aaron, of maybe Iraq's goodwill and at least keenness to show that it's been cooperating. Now that seems to have been one major hurdle for the moment. But the next major hurdle, Aaron, as you well know, is going to be December 8. And that's when Iraq is supposed to submit its full, final and complete declaration of what it has in terms of weapons of mass destruction. As you know, it says it doesn't have any, but we're waiting for that declaration -- Aaron.</s>BROWN: And what do we know about how that will be presented? Do we know anything about what it will say? And have the Iraqis suggested perhaps they will acknowledge some weapons in it?</s>BRAHIMI: Well, Aaron, that's quite interesting because, first of all, we understand from the head of the national monitoring directory, these are, if you will, the</s>BROWN: Rym, thank you. We'll wade through all those documents eventually. Thank you very much. Rym Brahimi in Baghdad tonight. The inspections go on. The administration has never pretended it actually believes in the inspections process. The vice president said so directly last summer before pressure built on the president to seek U.N. support for regime change in Iraq. Former U.N. Ambassador Bill Richardson on this program a couple of weeks ago wondered out loud if the administration was prepared to take yes for an answer. What would the president do in the unlikely event the Iraqis did cooperate with the U.N.? That question remains hypothetical tonight. But there are at least hints of an answer. Here's CNN's Jamie McIntyre.</s>MCINTYRE (voice-over): The U.S. government is making it clear that, at the end of the day, it will be up to President Bush, not the U.N. inspectors and not the Security Council, to decide if Saddam Hussein's compliance is enough to forestall war.</s>GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: If he does not disarm, the United States of America will lead a coalition and disarm him in the name of peace.</s>MCINTYRE: And a day after the British government released a dossier and video documenting Iraq's mistreatment of its citizens, the Pentagon appeared to up the ante for Saddam Hussein. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld argues the alleged human rights abuse could by itself put Iraq in violation of the U.N.'s disarmament resolution.</s>DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Disarmament is only one of the steps required of Iraq in Resolution 1441 and the 16 Security Council resolutions that proceeded it. Resolution 1441 also calls for Iraq to end repression of its civilian population.</s>MCINTYRE: The Pentagon also offered more evidence it says shows Saddam Hussein's disregard for the lives of his own people. Video from a predator spy drone taken a week ago shows an Iraqi spoon (ph) rest radar being parked next to what the U.S. says is a civilian facility to protect it from attack from U.S. and British planes.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think that's just an indication of how the Iraqi regime treats its civilian population. And that they're willing to use them as shields.</s>MCINTYRE: But Rumsfeld admits his interpretation could be disputed. Ending repression isn't mentioned in the 14 main points of the latest U.N. resolution, only in the preamble, where the U.N. deplores that Iraq has failed to comply with the 1991 resolution. And while the U.S. contends Iraq's firing at U.S. and British planes patrolling the no-fly zones also violates the new resolution, the U.N. has so far not agreed.</s>MCINTYRE: So, Aaron, does the United States have to take yes for an answer? In one word, no, they don't. The U.S. is reserving the right, no matter how compliant Iraq may appear to be, to deem that it's not good enough. The U.S. is prepared to take military action with a coalition of the willing -- Aaron.</s>BROWN: Well, all right. Let's just walk through this a little bit. Again, on the hypothetical assumption that the Iraqis cooperate here, that coalition of the willing includes whom besides the United States and I guess Britain?</s>MCINTYRE: Well, the United States, Britain. Did I mention Britain, by the way, and the United States? Australia, maybe. It depends really what kind of case the United States can make. Because if the case -- if it happens that Iraq, for instance, admits that it had some weapons of mass destruction, even gives up some that it said it hadn't accounted for, and gives the impression to most of the world that it has essentially come clean, the United States is going to have to be able to make the case that there is more there that they're not giving up. But the U.S. is reserving the right not to have to make the case, not to have to go to the U.N. But if President Bush decides himself that Iraq hasn't come clean and it's worth going to war over, he has the right to do that. The question is, who will be with the United States?</s>BROWN: And that is an interesting question, Jamie. Thank you. Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon tonight. On to Saudi Arabia and today's PR campaign, which seems to be, does seem to be that. And the Saudis do seem to need one. There are at least 15 reasons they do. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers were Saudis. But it is almost more than that. There are concerns about Saudi money ending up in the hands of terrorists, not just the September 11 killers, but others as well. There is suspicion that the rulers of the country have made a devils deal with Islamic extremists. Let us rule and get rich and you can do and say as you please. The country of Saudi Arabia has been beaten up pretty well in recent weeks in this country and today it said, literally, enough is enough. The conversation with the principal Saudi spokesman in a few minutes. First the news of the day from CNN's Andrea Koppel.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We've been allies for more than 60 years.</s>KOPPEL (voice-over): Call it public relations American style from Riyadh to Washington. Adel Al-Jubeir, the Saudi kingdom's American educated spinmeister has taken to the airwaves to try to set the record straight. A series of recent reports alleging connections between Saudi citizens and 9/11 hijackers, Al-Jubeir says, have turned his country into a convenient scapegoat.</s>ADEL AL-JUBEIR, SENIOR ADVISER TO SAUDI CROWN PRINCE: I never expected to see this side of America. This visceral knee jerk, if it's Saudi, it's got to be bad reaction.</s>KOPPEL: Part of the problem, he says, a difference in cultures.</s>AL-JUBEIR: You tend to be public about expressing your emotions. We tend to be quiet. And that comes across or came across after 9/11 as not caring, which is not the case.</s>KOPPEL: The centerpiece of Al-Jubeir's PR pitch, a new report, summarizing steps the Saudis have taken since 9/11 to keep Saudi donations from falling into the hands of terrorists. The steps include auditing all charitable groups, establishing new guidelines and regulations, and insisting charities report to the foreign ministry. The report also claims the Saudis have frozen $5.6 million belonging to three individuals in 33 bank accounts with suspected links to terrorism.</s>AL-JUBEIR: Are all the funds accounted for? I believe in some of the charities they're not. Do we have any evidence that those funds went to terrorist groups? No, we don't. Does that mean none went? I can't answer that question.</s>KOPPEL: The Bush administration welcomed the Saudi announcement, saying it is encouraged. But it remains unclear as to whether this Saudi PR blitz will be enough to temper reports about alleged charitable donations to terrorists by Princess Haifa al-Faisal, who, Aaron, happens to be the wife of the Saudi ambassador here in Washington.</s>BROWN: Was there a last straw in this? I mean, it has been going on for several weeks. Was there one charge more than others, or one leak more than others or one accusation more than others that seemed to make the Saudis so indignant today?</s>KOPPEL: This really has been in the works for some time. And by that I mean a number of the steps of the Saudis have laid out in this report. But the sense one gets is that the accusations against Princess al-Faisal, who is the daughter of the former King al-Faisal, who was himself killed by terrorists, really was the straw that broke the camel's back, so to speak. And the Saudis realized and Al-Jubeir will tell you shortly I'm sure, that they would accept some of the responsibility for the lack of getting the message through, not only to the American people, but to the Bush administration throughout the various arms to lay out really, spell out exactly what it is the Saudis have been doing these many months.</s>BROWN: Andrea, thank you. Andrea Koppel at the State Department tonight. And ahead on NEWSNIGHT, we'll talk with the Saudi spokesman, Mr. Al-Jubeir. Also, later in the program, a look at the Bolger brothers of Boston. One's the president of a university; the other is running from the law. This is NEWSNIGHT.</s>BROWN: In the end, the position of the government of Saudi Arabia was simple: we are misunderstood. After today, that claim cannot be made. Not only did the country's most Americanized spokesman meet with a room full of reporters in Washington, Adel Al- Jubeir then sat down and pressed his case further in a series of one- on-one interviews. This was a full court press. A combination of both facts and just enough outrage. We talked with Mr. Al-Jubeir ate this afternoon.</s>BROWN: You said today that there is almost a visceral knee jerk anti-Saudi feeling going on in the United States. Do you think this -- why do you think this is happening?</s>AL-JUBEIR: I think, Aaron, it has several factors. One factor is people are angry about what happened September 11. People are afraid about what might happen again. People are puzzled about what Saudi Arabia has done or has not done. The image of 15 Saudis on the planes, I think, still lingers in the minds of Americans. We have been very -- we have a different nature from yours. We don't express our emotions or our feelings as openly as you do, and that -- and our lack of expressing those feelings was perceived by Americans to mean we don't care. And that further fueled the anger. I think as we embarked on the war on terrorism with the United States, many of the things that we were doing we didn't talk about, nor did your government, because it was either classified or covert work, or because we were too sensitive about speaking publicly. That allowed charges against Saudi Arabia that are really baseless to stick.</s>BROWN: It is not simply that political commentators have taken shots at Saudi Arabia. It has seemed clear to me that people within the government, within the administration, have as well, not by name, but they have been out there. Why doesn't the administration, or at least some people within the administration seem to believe in you all?</s>AL-JUBEIR: I think, Aaron, that the administration at the highest level has extremely close ties with Saudi Arabia. They know what we're doing. We're in this together. We both are in the cross hairs of al Qaeda. So that's not where the problem lies. I believe where the problem lies is in your government, which is very vast and very complex. You have many, many departments and institutions that deal with terrorism and counterterrorism and financial issues. And our government is very small and very tightly run. And so we have discovered that a lot of the information that we share with your government through official channels may not be getting to the departments that expect to receive it. And when they don't receive it, they come back and complain that the Saudis are not cooperating. The flip side of it is we have had situations in Saudi Arabia where we received the same request many times over from various U.S. government departments, and our guys scratch their head and say, what's going on here? And so what we've done, working very closely with your senior leaders over the last few weeks, was to say, OK, how do we make sure that our communications is clear? How do we intensify and broaden and deepen our links? How do we ensure that specialists talk to specialists? How do we do that? And we've come up with a mechanism that we are beginning to implement now, which will begin sometime in early next year. It will involve intensified contacts, intensified visits from Saudi officials to the U.S., from American officials to Saudi Arabia. It will involve broadening the channels of communications in the anti- terrorism effort. We want this to be totally open. We want it to be totally transparent. And we want it to be totally effective. And we're hoping that, when that happens, many of the criticism that people leak out of the U.S. government regarding Saudi Arabia will disappear, unless it's driven by malice, which I hope that's not the case.</s>BROWN: And just one final question. It also seems to me, and you may disagree with this, part of the undercurrent here has been about the fact that the Saudi government, to this point, has been reluctant, at least publicly, to sign on to supporting a U.S. effort in Iraq. Is that a misunderstanding? Is the Saudi position in motion, evolving? Where is the Saudi government here?</s>AL-JUBEIR: Yes. I think you're absolutely right, Aaron. And on this issue, that does not reflect, I think, the anger of the American public. We stand with the United States. We are right next to Iraq. We are most threatened by Iraq. We believe he must comply with the U.N. resolutions. We believe this issue is a legal matter for the U.N. to decide, so does the president, as a matter of fact. He took this issue to the U.N. The U.N. issued a resolution, the Iraqis accepted it. The inspectors are on the ground. Let's see if they can achieve the job without firing a single bullet. If that doesn't work, the United Nations will have to decide what the next step will be. We have made it clear that, as a member of the United Nations, we are bound by the resolutions of the U.N. So when people ask us hypothetical questions, we don't like to respond with hypothetical answers. Our history is very clear. For 60 years, we have been friends and allies. We have never let America down during those 60 years; America has never let us down during those 60 years. Whenever we needed each other, we always came through for each other. Why are people doubting Saudi Arabia's commitment and sincerity to this friendship?</s>BROWN: We'll leave it on that note. That's a good question to hang out there. It's always good to talk to you. We appreciate your time. We know it's been a long and difficult day. Thank you.</s>AL-JUBEIR: Thank you, Aaron. Appreciate the time.</s>BROWN: So the Saudi position laid out today for people to consider. Coming up on NEWSNIGHT, talk politics with Joe Klein (ph), who joins us. And up next, documents reveal more about what the Archdiocese of Boston knew about sexual abuse by priests. This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.</s>BROWN: Last night we heard the anger from parents directed at a real estate broker who felt he should have been told that a pedophile lived nearby. Now imagine the fury of Catholic parents in Boston not told that some of the people they actually entrusted their children with were pedophiles and that their leadership knew it all along. It's been another week in Boston, where outraged was heaped on top of outrage in terms of the priest abuse scandal. First came the news the archdiocese may file for bankruptcy. A move that's seen as trying to gain leverage in settlement talks with the victims and their families. Today, another paper trail was released. A trail of more bad priests, more leaders who turned a blind eye. From Boston tonight, CNN's Bill Delaney.</s>BILL DELANEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Thousands of pages of documents newly made public from the files of the Catholic Archdiocese of Boston.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What's striking to me, at least, about these documents, Cardinal Law and other top archdiocesan officials knew far more, far earlier, about far more priests and their abusive behavior than the officials have ever let on.</s>DELANEY: Paper trails in these new documents concerning in all eight priests, like Father Robert Burns. First mentioned in 1982 in the Boston Archdiocese in notes from a meeting of church officials. Highlighted even back then the priests "problem with little children." Burns would come to Boston anyway from Ohio in 1982 and serve in two parishes.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think it's an extraordinary insight into the functioning of this archdiocese.</s>DELANEY (on camera): How many victims in all in the Archdiocese of Boston in the past quarter century?</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thousands and thousands and thousands. And we don't know. And we're still counting, and we just don't know.</s>DELANEY (voice-over): In 1991, after repeated allegations of sexual misconduct, Cardinal Law removed the priest. In 1996, Father Burns was convicted for sexual abuse of a minor. Accusations against another priest in the documents related to his alleged sexual misconduct with young girls. One document marked personal and confidential, noting allegations all revolve around spiritual advice given to vulnerable young girls. Which encouraged literal interpretation of the scriptural image of the bride and bridegroom. The priest wrote in rambling response to the accusations against him that ended his Boston ministry in 1996, saying, I live my life now, as a prisoner of love, not because I chose it, but Christ permitted it. Signing it prisoner of love. Cardinal Law, in his sympathetic reply wrote, it is important that all of us be reminded of the pain of those who have been accused. Plaintiffs' attorneys believe the priest, now in his 70s, lives somewhere in Massachusetts. The archdiocese declined comment on the new documents.</s>DELANEY: Attorneys who want release of the documents say they plan to depose Cardinal Law about him in coming weeks. As they continue to shift through it all, 12,000 documents with information on more than 80 priests. Bill Delaney, CNN, Boston.</s>BROWN: Few other stories to fit in tonight beginning with a story by the U.S. Postal Service. Postal workers will be offered potassium iodine pills to protect against thyroid cancer in case of exposure to radiation. Comforting thought, that. There are 750,000 postal workers around the country. The cruise ship Fascination was moving toward Key West and Mexico today. Passengers guarding against whatever it is that made nearly 200 people on board sick, on the ship's last voyage. No reports of anyone sick this time yet. We don't often do stories like this, but sometime you can't ignore them, can you. It's about Michael Jackson, in this case shoeless Michael Jackson. You could call him that today at least because he said he had a spider bite on his foot. That's why he was wearing no shoes. He was testifying a breach of contract case filed by one of his concert promoters. Just from time to time. Later on NEWSNIGHT the flap over admission of women to Augusta National turns another chapter today. We'll talk about that. Up next, political writer Joe Klein, talking about 2004.</s>BROWN: If it were published in the classified ads it would read wanted leader for a national political party, left leaning but moderate enough to win the South, capable of beating a popular sitting president. Must have a message. Must be able to raise large amounts of cash. Not even a month after the elections and already the search is on for the next Democratic candidate for president. Former President Bill Clinton weighed in today about the same time Senator John Kerry was speaking, about the same time President Bush was making a political speech in Louisiana. Maybe we aren't jumping the gun after all. Joe Klein has just written a profile of John Kerry for "The New Yorker" magazine. He joins us tonight to talk politics, his stock and trade. Always nice to see you. Democrats understand why they got hammered last month yet?</s>JOE KLEIN, "THE NEW YORKER": They're beginning to assess it, and it comes down to Homeland Security. It turns out that the Republicans standing with married women improved dramatically in this past election over the issue of Homeland Security. Which is a military defense issue, which women usually aren't interested in, but in this case it's a domestic issue and the Democrats mishandled that.</s>BROWN: Former President Clinton actually -- former President Clinton today in his speech said one thing Democrats must do is find a consistent strong message on that question.</s>KLEIN: Boy, that's hard for Democrats, to be consistent.</s>BROWN: Why?</s>KLEIN: Democrats are big messy party like this big messy country. They're a party of workers and minorities and various interest groups. They are not the executive party. And so they're born to be rowdy. And That's, you know, that's why they sometimes come up with very dynamic candidates, and other times they look like utter fools, as they did in this past election.</s>BROWN: Senator Kerry, John Kerry, you wrote about him. He seems to have his foot deepest in the water at this point.</s>KLEIN: Yes.</s>BROWN: He's in.</s>KLEIN: Yes, he said he's forming a committee. James Carville the political strategist, said he's not only testing the waters. He's immersed, he's growing gills. And I think he's been aiming his whole life for this moment. And he has no doubts about it.</s>BROWN: He has no doubts about whether he's in.</s>KLEIN: Yes, I mean...</s>BROWN: Watching him over the years, he's not the greatest campaigner I have ever saw in my life.</s>KLEIN: I saw him first 30 years ago run from Congress when he was an anti-war leader after having been a war hero, and he was a miserable candidate. I think he's gotten somewhat better but that remains the big question about him. This is a Boston Brauman who is a very reserved guy who looks like he came out of central casting for politicians with an absolutely ridiculous amount of hair. But he's also -- also very eloquent. And he's very tough. And he's smart. And he is especially knowledgeable in those areas the Democrats aren't usually strong, foreign policy, military policy.</s>BROWN: Al Gore, relevant or not at this point?</s>KLEIN: Well -- always relevant, I think, or at least for the moment. But, you know, in the last few days what I have been hearing down in Washington is increasing numbers of people questioning whether he's going to go ahead and run. Apparently the Al Gore redo, the latest one, hasn't been going all that well. And there's some questions being raised about why, when he was supposed to appear on George Stephanopoulos' Sunday show last Sunday he suddenly didn't appear. We haven't heard any answers about that yet.</s>BROWN: You know what? Do you care what I think about that? I don't think he's going.</s>KLEIN: You don't think he's going?</s>BROWN: I don't think he is going. I really don't, I think that he gets it. That in a rematch, he gets hammered. I don't know why I think that. I just have that feeling.</s>KLEIN: You might well be right. But, you know, I don't like making predictions about that. It's really easy to sound stupid.</s>BROWN: Look. I'm a Cable TV anchor. Stock and trade. Where, if anywhere in the Democratic side of this, is Bill Clinton? Does he have the power to affect anything for the party?</s>KLEIN: He has the power to give his wife advice.</s>BROWN: Yes.</s>KLEIN: He's all an elder statesman now. That's a really tough for him to do. He's pretty darn young to be an elder statesman. When you're an elder statesmen the thing that you should do is sit back and be quiet and give people advice when they come to you, but not make big speeches like the one he made today. The Democratic party has to find out where his future is.</s>BROWN: Not where it's been.</s>KLEIN: Yes.</s>BROWN: Just a minute or so and a couple quick thumbnails. Howard Dean. Is he going to go?</s>KLEIN: He's already said he's going to go. He's working very hard.</s>BROWN: Jimmy Carteresque 1976.</s>KLEIN: Or Paul Tsongasesque 1992 or John Andersonesque or Bruce Babbittesque 1988. There's always room in the Democratic Party for a maverick candidate. Usually they're more fun when they have a sense of humor. My experience with Dean, which is limited, he doesn't seem to have one.</s>BROWN: Anybody -- is there anybody on the Democratic side who will surprise us, do you think? Somebody who isn't talked about a lot?</s>KLEIN: Well I don't know. There are all kinds of names floating out there. Senator Joe Biden who ran in '88 is a possibility. Dennis Kucinch the populist congressman from Ohio. General Wesley Clark. Who knows.</s>BROWN: All of whom have to take on...</s>KLEIN: Al Sharpton.</s>BROWN: All would have to take on a candidate who is sitting there with 60 plus approval rating and the prospects of a war.</s>KLEIN: I think you have to say if things go well, as I'm sure we all hope they will, George Bush will be very, difficult to beat.</s>BROWN: Yes. Nice to see you, as always.</s>KLEIN: Good to be here.</s>BROWN: As we go along here, we'll see more.</s>KLEIN: I like to do this kind of high pressured conversation with you.</s>BROWN: I'm pretty intense, aren't I? Thank you, Mr. Klein. It's nice see you again. Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, the twisted tale of Boston's Bulger brothers. And up next a high-level defection at Augusta National. This is NEWSNIGHT from New York.</s>BROWN: Just have to trust me on this. The fact is there actually are two interesting stories about golf that made news today. They weren't saving them up until I got back. The first involves Augusta National, the home club of the masters, and a high level resignation there. And the other involves Connecticut golfer Suzy Whaley, who qualified to play in a men's PGA tournament and wasn't sure what she was going to do. Jim Frank is the editor of Golf" magazine, is here to talk about both of them. I keep screwing up her name. Did I screw it up again?</s>JIM FRANK, "GOLF" MAGAZINE: No you didn't. You did it right this time. It's Whaley.</s>BROWN: Whaley. Let's start with her then. Because she was here on night and she wasn't sure whether she was going to play or not play. It's an interesting argument in this month's issue of the magazine, she decides.</s>FRANK: In the issue that will be out next week, she says finally for the world she is going to play. She has decided that it's worth it to her to take the chance, maybe be a little embarrassed and play against the men next July in the Hartford Open.</s>BROWN: Men golfers that I talked to a couple weeks ago to a person were hoping she would not.</s>FRANK: Really?</s>BROWN: Yes. They all -- and I think that it was not sort of the politics of men and women. It was, she's going to be embarrassed. She's going to embarrass herself. This is one of her concerns is that she could get out there, shoot 110. It's a very long golf course for a woman to play.</s>FRANK: That's true but she's already acquitted herself remarkably well. She had to qualify. She had to win a tournament against all men to qualify for this. She's already won something. She's already done pretty well against the men. Granted, she played a slightly shorter course...</s>BROWN: Than the men played.</s>FRANK: ... then the men played. She'll have to play from the same tees as the pros in July, but who cares if she shoots 80, 90, 110. This is about proving it can be done. The fact that she's made it. The fact that she has the nerve to get up there and play is what's important. I don't care how she does as long as she gets up there and plays and says this is the way the world should be. Why not?</s>BROWN: And besides that, anyone who has ever met her and talks to her falls in love with her. She's got a great attitude about it all. It's not somebody out there making some big political statement for the sake of making a statement. She's delightful.</s>FRANK: She isn't a pro. She is not a tour pro. She did that. She didn't do all that well. She's a teaching pro. She's a club pro. That's her job. But to prove that she can take this extra step, say something to the world, do something for women, girls of all ages and just say look at the opportunities, that's what it's about, I think, to her.</s>BROWN: On to the Masters. Tom Whimen (ph) in the "New York Times" announced he would resign, former head of CBS Television Network. Why is this story have such legs?</s>FRANK: Well, what I think the three words you said in there are key and that's "New York Times." They seem to be keeping that story going almost alone. Now, there is a great deal of interest. It's a fascinating problem we have. Here is this private club, private 51 weeks a year. One week a year they open up to the world, they're on television, most prestigious, arguably, the most prestigious tournament on the golf tour but they're opening up to the world. They are paid for. They're on TV. They have commercials. Are they a private club? Are they not a private club? Should there be a female in the membership? Should there not? It seems to have hit a hot button with all</s>BROWN: Do you think it's just that the "Times" -- I'm not sure what you're saying. You're saying the "Times" single handily has kept the story alive and on the other hand you're saying it's hit a nerve with people and they're e-mailing you to death.</s>FRANK: That's part of it. And that's part of the problem. I'm not sure what I am saying in that I don't know which side I come down on. One day I say it's a private club, they can do whatever I want. That's the law. On the other side you say, but they have a tournament, everybody is watching. They advertise. They're on TV. Which one should it be? There are all of these contradictions, all of these question. That's why I don't think there's an easy answer. Other people smarter than I shouldn't have come up with one. I don't know how you deal with it exactly for that reason.</s>BROWN: About 10 seconds. Wherever you think they ought to be, they haven't handled it very well.</s>FRANK: Neither side has handled it well.</s>BROWN: You think neither side has?</s>FRANK: I don't think either side has handled it well. I think it's -- it has think it's spun out of their control. They're both stuck with it. They have to -- they can only drive themselves further apart. It can only get nastier. And it won't be settled by April when they play the tournament.</s>BROWN: No, it won't. Nice to meet you. Thanks for coming in tonight.</s>FRANK: My pleasure. Anytime.</s>BROWN: Thank you. Next on NEWSNIGHT, we'll wrap it up tonight with a story of the Boston Bulger brothers. The university president and is he protecting the brother who is a fugitive from the law? This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.</s>BROWN: Finally from us tonight, another story from Boston. But in a way it's a lot more universal than that, because it's a story about brothers. The tale of the brothers Bulger, born and bred in the toughest parts of South Boston. One becomes a notorious mobster now on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted List. The other becomes one of the most prominent citizens in the state, in the state's power establishment. Men, who on the surface at least, are as different as men can be, but still undeniably brothers.</s>BROWN (voice-over): He is a legend in Massachusetts politics: William M. Bulger. For decades a power broker in the state house, now president of the University of Massachusetts. And today, for the first time in years, he finally publicly talked about the one thing he has largely refused to talk about in public: his brother James. A fugitive from the law.</s>WILLIAM BULGER, PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS: I can only say that I just -- it's a very personal matter, but I do have the regret always that we were not closer, that, in fact, I might have had some greater beneficial influence on him if I had been closer. And he's just a wee bit troubling.</s>BROWN: A wee bit troubling because his brother James Whitey Bulger is on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted List, wanted after fleeing Boston seven years ago rather than face indictment and arrest on charges of racketeering and murder. And troubling, too, because a congressional committee now has issued a subpoena for the long-time politician to testify, a subpoena he is instructing his lawyers to fight.</s>W. BULGER: They have many misgivings about this committee and some of it's behavior, so they're doing their assessment of the situation now and I'll be heeding their good advice.</s>BROWN: The House committee wants to talk with William Bulger on the record because it's investigating how much the Boston bureau of the FBI cooperated and protected his brother Whitey. For years, the government now acknowledges, Whitey Bulger was on the payroll, an informant for the Boston FBI. Agents even warned him of pending criminal investigating and some in Boston believe the brothers Bulger met regularly with organized crime figures.</s>HOWIE CARR, COLUMNIST, THE BOSTON HERALD: We have testimony from two FBI agents who admitted accepting gifts from the mob that they saw Billy Bulger at these weekly gangland confabs. I want to know how often Billy Bulger, the Senate president at the time, met with the two leading organized crime figures in the city of Boston to plan what they were going to do next.</s>BROWN: William Bulger flatly denies that, but says he did talk to his brother once by telephone since Whitey disappeared in 1995.</s>W. BULGER: It was brief. It -- there was a discussion of some legal aspects and also his assurance that he was quite well. I can't think of anything that I can be helpful with because they've indicated a couple of areas of interest but they're areas that I know nothing about.</s>BROWN: Areas of concern that Congressional investigators are anxious to discuss come Friday in Boston, areas that only a brother might know of.</s>BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Aaron, thank you. Tomorrow morning on "AMERICAN MORNING," there is no other factory like it in the U.S. It's the McAllister Army Ammunition plant. It's in the state of Oklahoma. It's where virtually all of America's non- nuclear bombs are made. And now with a possible war with Iraq looming, it is fair to say right now, Aaron, business is booming. I'll have a look at that for you tomorrow morning 7 a.m. Eastern here on "AMERICAN MORNING." Hope to see you then -- Aaron.</s>BROWN: And we'll see you tomorrow night at 10:00 Eastern time. Good night for all of us at NEWSNIGHT. Goes On>