MSNBC Hardball - Transcript

MSNBC Hardball - Transcript
Wednesday, December 7, 2005

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

MATTHEWS: Let‘s see how this purports to the legislative intent from congress. We‘ve go Edward Markey, Democrat from Massachusetts, a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security, a ranking member.

Congressman Markey, is this the way the law is intended to be carried out as we watch today?

REP. ED MARKEY, (D) MASSACHUSETTS: The air marshals have a responsibility to protect passengers on planes and they had to exercise their best judgment.

It is a rare incident, but when it happens, these air marshals are hired and committed to the protection of the public safety.

MATTHEWS: I was surprised, we‘re all learning everything today, there were two of these assigned per airplane. Do we have enough per flight?

MARKEY: We don‘t have enough air marshals to, in fact, ensure that every flight in the United States has one. They are on flights that are considered to be high risk and also on other random flights across the country, but that‘s a budget that should be increased, without question.

Obviously what happened today could happen anywhere in the United States.

MATTHEWS: Is this air marshals program proceeding along the course we expect it to? This today in Miami at 2:00 this afternoon was the first time, apparently, we are told, that an air marshal has had to use firepower, use lethal weaponry to subdue someone, in this case killing them dead on the spot. Is this working the way you hoped it would when you legislated this program?

MARKEY: It is working. These men and women are very dedicated. I speak to them frequently on the flights as they are waiting on the flights. I can identify who they are and they are a committed group of people.

But the air marshals themselves believe the program is going backwards. They are, in fact, protesting, along with the flight attendants, the decision by the Bush administration last week to allow scissors back onto: scissors that can be turned into two knives in the hands of a potential terrorist. And the air marshals are protesting this decision.

MATTHEWS: Who is lobbying for scissors on airplanes?

MARKEY: That is the inexplicable part of all of this. As far as air marshals and flight attendants and the families of the victims of 9/11 are concerned, the safeguards have been working. We haven‘t seen incidents. What happened today was very rare.

Why would we make it possible for people to bring very dangerous instruments back into the passenger cabin and make the job of air marshals and flight attendants even more difficult?

MATTHEWS: The weapon used by the 9/11 terrorists was a box cutter.

That seems to be less dangerous than scissors.

MARKEY: Mohammed Atta and the other nine terrorists who hijacked the two planes in Boston that destroyed the World Trade Center used box cutters. There is no difference in terms of the lethality of a box cutter and a scissors that is taken apart that is four inches long that could kill an air marshal or a flight attendant and then wreak whatever additional havoc they want on that plane.

I think it‘s a bad decision and taking the whole system backwards. If we need more screeners, we should find the money for more screeners, but we shouldn‘t be taking dangerous, lethal sharp instruments off the protected list and allowing them into the passenger cabins. It only makes the decisions which air marshals have to make even more difficult.

MATTHEWS: Congressman Markey, are air marshals indemnified? In other words when they make a decision to shoot to kill like this, are they protected against litigation? Are they protected in this very difficult decision that was made this afternoon?

MARKEY: You know that‘s a good question, Chris. I can‘t tell you the answer to it. I just don‘t know. I‘m sure if they‘re acting in good faith.

MATTHEWS: ... in this very difficult decision that was made this afternoon.

REP. ED MARKEY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: You know, that‘s a good question Chris, and I can‘t tell you the answer to it. I just don‘t know. I‘m sure if they‘re acting in good faith, I‘m sure if they‘re acting with all of the best intentions that they are protected, but I just can‘t tell you the extent to which they are given full legal protection.

MATTHEWS: Air traffic is international, Congressman Markey, and of course this flight was coming from Medellin, Colombia. Is there an international protocol, is there real international enforcement, I should ask, with regard to screening passengers? This guy apparently suffered of a mental illness, a bipolar patient out of control on the airplane.

Would there have been a way to make sure he wasn‘t out of control when he entered the plane. Are we sure that Colombia and the other airports around the world are operating in an intelligent fashion?

MARKEY: Again, one of the most serious criticisms which the 9/11 Commission leveled on Monday of this week is that we still do not have an integrated one-stop shopping terrorist list, that can be checked to make sure that before people get on to planes, before they fly, they have been checked.

Unfortunately, in too many instances, they begin to fly and then the checking is still going on. And that was a very, very, one of the top three criticisms, which the 9/11 Commission had of the Department of Homeland Security.

MATTHEWS: While we have you, Congressman, what was your reaction to the 9/11 Commission report yesterday that talked about—it gave sort of high school grades to various categories of reform, which we‘ve seen since 9/11. And it gave the president‘s—the administration, I should say, a lot of F‘s. Could you talk about where you saw the problems still in airline safety?

MARKEY: Well again, we don‘t—the Bush administration still does not require the screening of six billion pounds of cargo which is placed on passenger planes, under the feet of passengers who have taken off their shoes and had their own bags inspected.

That six billion pounds of cargo goes onto passenger planes every year in the United States, uninspected. They‘re lowering the standards for bringing scissors and other dangerous sharp instruments into the passenger cabin. And rather than asking for more screeners, for more technology, they‘re saying that we can‘t afford it.

But unfortunately, 9/11 was a warning to our country, it was a hard attack and we should put the prevention in place that avoids the second heart attack, the second terrorist attack. The 9/11 Commission was saying that that has not been done.

MATTHEWS: Not to beat a dead horse, Congressman Markey, but why would you need a pair of scissors on an airplane?

MARKEY: That‘s the question I think that all Americans will be asking as they fly during this holiday season. They put their loved ones on planes. Why should an air marshal have to look across the aisle of someone who is pulling out a pair of scissors and wondering whether or not they are a potential terrorist.

It‘s a question that they haven‘t had to ask for four years and beginning on December 20, five days before Christmas, once again, air marshals will have to worry about box-cutter like devices, sharp scissors being in the hands of individuals on planes.

MATTHEWS: Thank you very much, Congressman Edward Markey, a ranking member of the House Committee on Homeland Security. Thanks for joining us, Sir.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10380323/