Return to Transcripts main page


Three Hundred More U.S. Troops Sent to Iraq; Undetectable Bombs Raise Airport Concerns; Major Setback For Obamacare; GM Issues Yet Another Recall; Israel Launches Airstrikes Against Hamas; Did Facebook Play With Your Emotions?

Aired June 30, 2014 - 19:00   ET


DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: Next, breaking news, 800 U.S. troops now in Iraq. That's more than double what President Obama said he would send. Is this mission creep?

Plus, Facebook admits conducting psychic experiments on hundreds of thousands of its users, were you one of them?

A U.S. flight forced to make an emergency landing when one of its evacuation slides deployed mid-flight. It's not the first time its happened. Let's go OUTFRONT.

Good evening, everyone. I'm Don Lemon in tonight for Erin Burnett. OUTFRONT tonight, breaking news, two major stories we are following right now. More U.S. troops now in Iraq while new terror concerns are forcing U.S. officials to consider beefing up airport security measures.

We are going to start with the troops first, though, an additional 300 U.S. military personnel are now in Iraq. That's in addition to those the 300 President Obama announced he was sending earlier this month.

Let me get straight to CNN's Barbara Starr at the Pentagon. Barbara, what do you know?

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Don. These additional 300 troops, the Pentagon says are purely for security. They will work out protecting the embassy, U.S. installations, and perhaps most importantly protecting Baghdad International Airport. Why is that? Because there are growing concerns that ISIS fighters are building up and reinforcing northwest of Baghdad. That is where the airport is located.

The U.S. cannot afford to let Baghdad Airport even, by any measure, remotely fall to the insurgence. They simply cannot afford to have that happen. So 300 troops going in. Security helicopters drones many of them will be based at the airport. Others at embassy. This is, as you say, Don, in addition to the 300 advisors that the president was sending in about 180 there.

So until this afternoon when we learn this latest news, there were about 500 troops on the ground plus these new 300. Coming up to 800, it's inching closer and closer every day to a thousand troops on the ground in Iraq -- Don.

LEMONS: So it seems like, you know, the number there keeps increasing. Now the president announcing now 800. The question is, will this number keep growing? That's what everyone wants to know.

STARR: Well, I think that is the question right now. You know, you can only deal with the facts as you find them and facts are, once again, today, the Pentagon says, this is it. Baghdad is not about to fall. We have security concerns. We have to send more security in to protect the people we have sent there and protect the airport and the embassy.

But you know, they insists that Baghdad is safe. The embassy is not about to be evacuated, but the fact is, almost every day we see some additional forces being sent. It was just last week that the Pentagon put another 1,000 Marines on board a ship in the Persian Gulf -- Don.

LEMON: Barbara Starr following the story for us from the Pentagon. Barbara, thank you very much.

I want to get to our other top stories tonight. U.S. officials are considering new airport security measures due to increased concerns that terrorists are developing undetectable bombs that could be smuggled on to airports, on to airplanes, I should say, headed to the United States. Our chief national security correspondent, Jim Sciutto, has the very latest for you.


JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): They are Homeland Security's most dreaded threats. Explosive devices hidden in objects from shoes to toothpaste tubes and undetectable by airport security. Now, the U.S. is considering new airport security measures due to increased concerns that terrorist from al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula or AQAP, are developing new bomb designs to full current security screening.

GEN. PHILIP BREEDLOVE, COMMANDER, U.S. European Command: We remain concerned about the capability of some of these elements to develop weapons that could be thwarted by our current security systems.

SCIUTTO: Officials tell CNN there is no imminent threat or plot. However an additional vulnerability has been identified, which the Department of Homeland Security is currently working to address.

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The Department of Homeland Security is regularly reviewing our security procedures to adapt to the threat that is faced by our transportation system. As advisories are required to adequately inform the traveling public, we will make those announcements.

SCIUTTO: Representative Peter King discussed the threat on ABC's "This Week."

REP. PETER KING (R), NEW YORK: A number of airports do not have the type of security they should have. But basically we are saying anyone that will be having children who can fly to the U.S., they have to increase their security. We are going to be pushing it. But overseas airport security is a real concern.

SCIUTTO: This is the man believed to be behind the threat, AQAP master bombmaker, Ibrahim Al Asiri. In recent months, U.S. officials warned that Asiri and AQAP terrorist trained under him were improving designs of new explosive devices, such as shoe bombs, that could fool screening systems. The threat has grown all the more severe as chaos in Syria and Iraq has created a safe haven for terror groups to train, plot and recruit westerners to join their fight.

REP. MIKE ROGERS (R), MICHIGAN: Allowing them to pull up in Syria, allowing them to have safe haven the size of Indiana between Syria and Iraq, and I say they, I mean, al Qaeda minded individuals that now have an Army. That is as dangerous a time for an al Qaeda threat to the United States as I've ever seen.


SCIUTTO: There is no evidence of ties between AQAP and ISIS. No evidence of cooperation on this particular threat. That said, with ISIS now controlling all this territory, it has heightened the awareness of the intelligence community to a whole range of threats, Don. They are looking very closely and they are particularly looking closely at this constant effort to find ways to get explosives on the flights going to Europe but also the U.S.

LEMON: Very disturbing. Thank you very much, Jim Sciutto reporting from Washington tonight. Joining me now OUTFRONT to discuss these latest threats is CNN military analyst, Retired Army Major General James "Spider" Marks and CNN counterterrorism analyst, Philip Mudd, a former FBI and CIA official, who served as deputy director of CIA counterterrorism.

Thank you, Gentlemen, for joining me tonight to discuss, very serious subject. General Marks, how serious is this new threat?

MAJOR GENERAL JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS (RET.): Well, it is serious and I don't know that it is specifically new. I think what we're getting is good intelligence feeds telling us they are in advanced levels of development. What we are really talking about is intelligence exchange. You can't just stop this directly as a result of increased security with TSA.

The United States intelligence community has to be able to reach out to its friends and neighbors, partners around the globe and many who aren't partners but we have to find some convergence of interest here and exchange intelligence to find out what is happening and what we are talking about. And clearly this is beyond simple liquids. This gets into paste, materials. That aren't easily detectible, but we have to catch it early on in the process.

LEMON: It's been almost four years since the same group got the underwear bomber on to a plane in the U.S. How concerned are you about bomb making advances, Phil? PHILIP MUDD, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: I wouldn't say I'm concerned about AQAP, what I'm concerned about is this particular bomb maker. When we were chasing bomb makers in Pakistan while I was at CIA, bombmakers, for example, like we are now seeing in Yemen, you would be surprised at how difficult it is to graduate a become maker from making say a roadside pipe bomb, which we saw in the war in Iraq, to the kind of bombs we saw in cargo air track.

Remember those printer cartridges, the underwear bomber over Detroit in 2009. This particular bomb maker, we can stop plots all we want. He will continue to create new and creative devices until he's dead.

LEMON: And what about what Jim mentioned, Phil. The cooperation between AQAP and ISIS. How big of a concern is that?

MUDD: I think the concern is that the experiences built up in terms of not only the successes of getting those cartridges on an aircraft but the failures. What did they learn about aircraft security is significant. There is a lot of bomb makers in Syria, as we know, but nobody with the experience this guy has.

LEMON: OK, General Marks --

MARKS: And Don also --

LEMON: Go ahead.

MARKS: Don, if I can pile on to what Phil just said, also this relationship between AQAP and ISIS, what this gives, in this particular skill set of bomb making, is this is now a petri dish of experimentation. An opportunity, it's a live fire if you will where these new devices can be used in a very open area that is completely ungoverned. It certainly is an opportunity to learn more lesson before they enact those and try to take some, what I would call, a very dangerous step as it is to vis-a-vis the United States.

LEMON: All right, well said. General Marks, another question for you. You said that AQAP considers airline security a weak spot. After more than a decade of increased security measures, how could this still be a weakness?

MARKS: Well, it still is a niche. The issue really remains as our relationships with others overseas, we establish various standards. We all agree internationally to what those standards look like. But then the implementation is done locally and the United States has a handshake deal and trust its friends and neighbors to enforce those standards. It is either done exceptionally well or not. You can trust, but you also have to verify. That always becomes a very weak point that allows for penetration.

LEMON: Phillip Mudd and General Marks, thanks to both of you, Gentlemen. Appreciate you joining us this evening here.

OUTFRONT, next, Obamacare dealt a major setback today. The court makes a major decision about birth control, plus another huge recall by General Motors. Why the car company says millions of more vehicles may not be safe for the road.

And Facebook's controversial experiment. Were you one of the hundreds of thousands of people studied by the company?


LEMON: Another major setback for President Obama's signature health care legislation and big win for conservatives. That's thanks to the Supreme Court decision in the Hobby Lobby case today. A deeply divided court rule that certain privately-owned companies cannot be forced to pay for specific types of contraceptives for their employees. Pamela Brown reports from the Supreme Court.


PAMELA BROWN, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Fiery protest on a ruling that converge three contentious issues into one, religious freedom, abortion and Obamacare. Today, the high court striking down a key provision in the Affordable Care Act that requires for-profit companies to provide comprehensive birth control coverage. The main plaintiff, the Evangelical Christian owners of Hobby Lobby craft stores challenged the law saying it violated their religious beliefs.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The court reaffirmed that American families don't give up their constitutional right to religious freedom just because they open a family business.

BROWN: Obamacare covers 20 types of birth control. This Supreme Court case focused on four of those, Plan B, the morning after pill, and the week after pill known as Ella and also two types of IUDs. Hobby Lobby equated those four forms of contraceptives with abortion because they say they prevents a fertilized egg from attaching to the womb. Supporters of the contraception mandate say this ruling unfairly brings a woman's boss into her private medical affairs and will dump a huge financial burden on female employees.

ILYSE HOGUE, PRESIDENT, NARAL PRO CHOICE AMERICA: I think immediately tens of thousands of women who were employees of these companies will either be out of their birth control or will absolutely have to double pay because we already pay and that adds up at the end of the month.

BROWN: The five conservative justices on the court used a 20-year-old federal law it make the case that closely held for profit company have religious liberty right just like individuals do.

Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito say, that plain terms of the federal law makes it perfectly clear that Congress did not discriminate in this way against men and women who wish to run their businesses as for profit corporations and the manner required by their religious beliefs.

But in a strongly worded descent, Justice Ruth Ginsburg says now company owners can force their own religious beliefs on their employees. She says, it would deny legions of women who do not hold their employer's belief access to contraceptive coverage that the ACA would otherwise secure. While the court settled this specific fight, the ruling could open the

door to even more legal challenges to Obamacare with other companies tried to argued their religious beliefs should exempt them from having to provide things like coverage for same-sex couples, vaccinations and medical marijuana.

Pamela Brown, CNN, Washington.


DON LEMON, CNN HOST: All right, let's get into all of this. Jeffrey Toobin is here. He is our senior legal analyst here at CNN.

Jeffrey, simplify this for us. So ruling applies to, let me read this for you so we can, you know, get a sense of what the court called closely held corporation, those with at least 50 percent of stock held by five or fewer people, about 90 percent of all businesses in the U.S. are closely held. And slightly more than half of the work force works for such corporations.

So what are the implications of this ruling down the road for all of those companies and its employees?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: So the -- half of the work force, millions and millions of people are potentially affected by it. So what has to happen now is these privately held corporations have to decide, a, if they have religious belief. You know, before today, we didn't even know that companies, corporations, could have religious beliefs. But the Supreme Court said they could. And if they have religious beliefs, do those religious beliefs compel them to fail to pay for certain aspects of health insurance. Some religions don't believe in blood transfusions. Some religions don't believe in vaccinations. Some religions, like Christian scientists, don't believe in much medical care at all. So the question now is, which companies say so their employers -- employees we won't pay for your health care anymore?

LEMON: Do you remember, you know, it sounds to me like you are saying corporations are people. Do you remember that when it was such?

TOOBIN: Citizens United, absolutely. Yes, absolutely. And this is an extension of that idea that corporations have rights that we used to associate only with people. As you point out, citizens united was about first amendment rights to political expression. This is about religious expression.

LEMON: OK. So politically then, what does this mean for the president and the Democrats?

TOOBIN: Well, it means that the president's signature achievement is slightly smaller, in less they can figure some worker at work-around. But I think the Democrats basically welcome this fight because the polls show individuals by and large believe that their employers should not have a religious veto on what kind of health care you received. If you go to work as a clerk for Hobby Lobby, you should have the same right to health care as a clerk at Macy's or at K-Mart. But now, because Hobby Lobby is privately-owned by a religious family, those clerks have very different health care rights than other clerks do.

LEMON: So moving forward then, I said what does it mean for the employees and what -- moving forward, what can we expect? Can we expect more suites like this to --?

TOOBIN: Definitely. There are already lawsuits in the pipeline awaiting the resolution of this case. But certainly there will be more --

LEMON: Does this set a precedent, though, for those that are in the pipeline?

TOOBIN: Absolutely. It is a very important precedent. Supreme Court has the last word. Now, how it actually works out with all of these companies that may make religious claims, you know, we don't know for sure. But we do know now that companies have religious rights. They can assert them. They in some circumstances can prevent their employees from getting certain kind of birth control and we can expect quite a few companies to assert those successfully.

LEMON: Interesting. Jeffrey Toobin, appreciate it.

TOOBIN: All right, Don.

LEMON: Thank you, sir.

Still to come, yet another massive recall by GM, their largest this year. We are going to tell you why.

And the horrifying moment for passengers after a plane's evacuation slide deploys, midair.


LEMON: Time now for tonight's money and power.

Breaking news, General Motors issues yet another recall. The automaker is an additional 8.4 million vehicles. Most are linked to faulty ignition switches. There had been three deaths and eight injuries connected to today's recall. This comes on the heels of GM's announcement today that it will give at least, $1 million to each family of the 13 people GM were killed in accidents linked to faulty ignition witches.

Peter Valdes-Dapena, is an auto writer for CNN Money and her is OUTFRONT with us tonight.

Peter, good to see you.

You know, GM has issues 54 recalls so far this year, 54. That's more than 27 million vehicles here in the United States. Can we expect to see more recalls from GM? What is going on here?

PETER VALDES-DAPENA, CNN AUTO WRITER: Yes, you can expect to see more recalls with GM. And Gm is already on pace by itself to break the record number of recalls for the entire industry, which I think was setback in 2004. But you can expect more because what General Motors is doing now is they are going through every single issue they've ever had on any of their cars. They are looking for issues and they never again want to be in a situation where they are saying look, we should have recalled this car years ago as they were in the Cobalt edition switch case. This time they want to call them as soon as they think they even might have to recall.

LEMON: So, they are going over everything with a fine-tooth comb. And that is raise the number of recalls, right, because they want to make sure that everything is --?

VALDES-DAPENA: Yes. Absolutely correct. And so, yes, you can you expect more.

LEMON: OK. The sales haven't been impacted, Peter. I mean, the stock was only down just a little bit today, 32 cents on the news. Why?

VALDES-DAPENA: You know, we know from looking in past cases of recalls, I've talked to analyst who looked at the numbers. Recalls don't actually hit sales that much. You might expect they would. But in reality, a certain model of car getting recalled will impact sales of that model for about a month. But they don't recall -- they don't impact sales of the overall brands like Chevrolet or Cadillac or whatever. And they certainly don't impact sales overall for the manufacturer. Right now, GM, I have to say, is making very desirable automobiles. They are selling well. People are not scared off by this.

LEMON: OK. Interesting. So, as I said, when I was, you know, telling the story before you, I introduced you, that they announced they are going to give pay families of the victims who died linked to this faulty ignition switch issue at least $1 million. Why are they doing this?

VALDES-DAPENA: Well, first of all, and also that point out, it is not just 13, because they are paying -- 13 is the number of people who died in front -- in front impact fractures in front seats. They are paying at people that were sitting in the back seats or no matter what the situation was liable to be many more that this 13, they are going to paid in this case. And they are doing it because, look, the alternative is they could be faced with lawsuits. That's an ugly situation to be in. It is also a big unknown. You don't know how much you will pay out in a lawsuit. They are doing this because they want to be seen as doing the right thing. I'll give them credit for that. I think they are also doing it because it is more manageable way to handle the situation than going through countless lawsuits.

LEMON: Peter Valdes-Dapena, thank you very much. Appreciate you, sir.

OUTFRONT next, Facebook under fire tonight. The company admits it tampered with 700,000 users' profiles as part of a psychological study. Did it go too far? Plus, the search is finally over. Secretary of defense Chuck Hagel

reunited with one of his biggest military influences.

And Pippa Middleton gets back it basics with Matt Lauer.


LEMON: We have some breaking news tonight, and it involves those Israeli teenagers whose bodies were found in the West Bank. Israel has now launched airstrikes targeting Hamas in Gaza. More than 20 strikes so far. More than 20 strikes so far. This come after the bodies of three missing Israeli teenagers were found in the West Bank.

Again, the teens, one with dual U.S.-Israeli citizenship, kidnapped earlier this month from a Jewish settlement in the West Bank. As soon as we get more information on the story, we'll bring it to you throughout the evening here on CNN. That is breaking news for us this evening.

Moving on now, we want to talk about one of the most talked about stories of the day, as a matter of fact. We all have bad days. But what if Facebook intentionally made it worse for you and for its users?

The social media giant now admitting it allowed researchers to manipulate users' news feeds to either hide good news or bad. It was all part of a secret social experiment and without knowing nearly 700,000 Facebook users were guinea pigs. The results, people who were shown more negative content were more likely to write negative post. And those in a positive group responded with more upbeat messages.

OUTFRONT tonight, media analyst Steve Adubato, CNN senior media correspondent Brian Stelter, and CNN legal analyst Paul Callan.

Well, that explains all of the negative comments I've been getting on my Facebook posts.


PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: That's why they put the bow tie on, is it, Don? Yes.

LEMON: No, no. Just I had something before the show. I wanted to make sure I got back in time and wanted to read in. I was concerned more about content than my bow tie.

All right. So, Steve?


LEMON: Thank you. So, people are outraged about this. Facebook responded to the backlash in a statement. Here's what they said. Quote, "We do research to improve services and to make the content people see on Facebook as relevant and engaging as possible. A big part of this is understanding how people respond to different types of content." I mean, why would Facebook do something like this? I'm not surprised. Are you shocked? Really?

But go ahead, Steve.

ADUBATO: Well, I'm not shocked. But it is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen a corporation this big or small do, and I'll tell you why. It is one thing to know who we are and what we do, Don. It's one thing to try to understand or have it, so that they can use that information to make business decisions.

All right. We get that. It's the age we're living in. But when you start messing with our news feeds and decide that Paul Callan is a little too depressed today or Brian is a little too upbeat and we're going to change the tone so that we see how people react, I ask the question, when did we sign up to be guinea pigs, for you not just what you monitor and say and do on the Internet, but to tweak what we say and do to see the reaction. Facebook is going to see some fallout. Instagram is going to see an uptick. This is a dumb move.

LEMON: OK, Steve, you're a journalist, I'm going to play devil's advocate here.


LEMON: We have focus groups in the news business, where we tweak and change and do things, and, you know, we are programming because of focus groups, and in a way that may manipulating the news a little bit. Not just us, I don't mean not just CNN.

There are focus groups that say, do you like Don Lemon's tie? What do you think? Should he wear more blue, should he more read? What about blonde hair? What about this?

And, Brian, you said this -- but this kind of move should be expected from Facebook, correct?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: Do you know (INAUDIBLE) if you're not outraged, you're not paying attention? This is one of those cases where if you are outraged, you're not paying attention. This is what Facebook exists to do. We all opted in the day we signed up for Facebook.

By the way, this is one of the reasons my wife doesn't sign up for Facebook. Some people opt out so they're not experimented, so they're not part of this grand trial that Facebook is doing. I'm much more bothered by advertisers that manipulate by emotions than I am by a very small study by Facebook.

LEMON: Because advertisers do what they do with the music --

STELTER: Every time I drive by a fast-food restaurant and I see a billboard, and I'm being manipulated.

ADUBATO: That's not what we signed up for, Don, respectfully, that's not what we signed up for. LEMON: Go ahead.

ADUBATO: It isn't. It isn't. Brian, respectfully, that's not what we signed up for. We never signed up and said Facebook, take my post on news feed, and you know, you can change it because you want to see what the reaction is going to be if it's a different post and see how people react. Where is that? Is that in the legal fine print? Maybe Paul can tell me it is, but I don't remember that deal.

LEMON: That's what I want to ask you, Paul. What about it? Is it in the legal fine print?

CALLAN: Well, technically, it is.

I was reading the disclosure form today that everybody has to sign off on when they say I accept. And it's got vague terminology about we have the right to experiment, to use different methodologies to speed you data, but this remains shocking to me nonetheless. What they are doing is going through your friends feeds and picking up the bad news to feed to some people and the good news to feed to other people.

And guess what? If you feed depressing news to people they get depressed.

ADUBATO: Shocking.

CALLAN: Getting to the lawsuit question, what happens if you push somebody over the edge and they shoot themselves?

LEMON: Great questions. That's what I want to ask. Can they be held liable for that?

CALLAN: Well, they could if you could prove there's an action called negligent infliction of emotional distress. But here's a problem and why it's a hard lawsuit. There is so much bad news in the world, how is a lawyer going to prove Facebook pushed me over the cliff rather than, you know, watching a prison show on television?

So, it would be hard -- ever watch the local news, how depressing that is.


STELTER: Only about 90,000 people involved. I think Facebook should give us all happier news. They should probably take the results of the study and push more positive stuff up for everybody.

ADUBATO: And what about my right to be depressed that day and feel what I want -- oh, come on, Don. You know I'm a happy guy, Don. But if that day I'm a little down and I want it post something and say, not feeling up to it today. Just want to share my thoughts, I want that on Facebook. I want to post that on my news feed, isn't that my right?

STELTER: You know what worry me, Don, the idea that they can tilt the balance in more important ways. If they just show me Republican stories or just show me Democratic news stories, sources in one direction, that's a problem. Even bigger problem if that is on the eve of an election. So, that is something we should be severely concerned about when it comes to Facebook, and by the way, no evidence they actually do that.

LEMON: What about advertisers who do it? Am I the only one who cries due something commercials? Like, you know, when the guy comes home from the war and the kids are there and they buy the house, like oh, my God --

CALLAN: You know, we're used to that kind of manipulation. And getting back to the point you made when you were starting out about television shows. I mean, there are people who like depressing shows. They want it watch shows about prison. There are other people who like optimistic shows. So, we do that in the business.

But this is a secret feed of depressing or happy news to people who didn't sign up for it. I think it is a disgrace that Facebook did it. They stopped doing it, fortunately.

ADUBATO: That's right.

CALLAN: But it shows you know, Facebook, Google, they know everything about every American citizen and heaven help us if they become malevolent forces.


ADUBATO: Why don't they announce they were doing it, Don? If they were so proud of it and had nothing to apologize for, why didn't they put out a big press release and announce it all over Facebook? It's in a fine print for a reason.

LEMON: I got to run. But I want to ask you, tip of the iceberg? First, Steve, just say yes or no?

ADUBATO: Absolutely. That's the culture of Facebook. I don't have evidence or proof. But if you do this, it means you're doing other stuff in my opinion.

LEMON: Brian?

STELTER: Well, they're doing a lot of other experiments right now. I don't think any of them are probably about positive or negative emotions but they run A/B Test all the time and I think they will continue to.

LEMON: Paul?

CALLAN: The worse is yet to come. Technology is moving at such a rate we can't keep up to it. And the law can't control it. Strap yourself in.

LEMON: Thank you, guys.

STELTER: Also positive emotions? CALLAN: OK, appreciate it.

ADUBATO: I'm trying to be positive.

LEMON: That's a crazy series of neck ties along that screen there that I'm looking at today.

ADUBATO: No, I love yours.

LEMON: Look at that.

Thank you, guys. Appreciate it. Always good to see you guys.

You know, Facebook had been around earlier. They have helped Chuck Hagel who is trying to reconnect with his platoon commander during the Vietnam War. It wasn't until he became secretary of defense that he was able to track down Lieutenant Jerome Johnson.

Barbara Starr reports on the man who changed the face of war for Hagel, who is the first enlisted combat veteran to lead the Defense Department.


CHUCK HAGEL, DEFENSE SECRETARY: It's only been 40 years --

STARR (voice-over): It was a reunion more than four decades in the making. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel reuniting with his commanding officer from Vietnam, Lieutenant Jerome Johnson.

Chuck Hagel was just 22 when he and his brother Tom went off to war in Vietnam, in the toughest of times on the battlefield and at home.

HAGEL: We had huge problems. The Army had, as you know, in 1968, bad year for everybody. We sent 16,000 dead Americans home in one year.

STARR: Back home, civil rights marchers fill the streets. An assassin's bullet would take the life of Martin Luther King, Jr. The racial tension felt by the troops in Vietnam, thousands of miles away.

HAGEL: Young, 21-year-old African-American from Chicago took over --

STARR: Secretary Hagel explained in an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper --

HAGEL: Huge racial problems --

STARR: The young Lieutenant Johnson set out to fix that.

HAGEL: He walked into that company. There's this young African- American lieutenant. I said, no, no more. We're all-Americans. We're going to take care of each other, we're going to live together, we're going to fight together and we're going to like each other. No segregated tents, let's get it done.

STARR: And Johnson did just that. JEROME JOHNSON, VIETNAM WAR VETERAN: We came from different places.

We were all children for the most part, not having had any experience with combat or that type of thing. In order for us to be successful or be able to do the mission that was given to a single home, we had to try to work together and resolve whatever little differences we might have.

STARR: After the war, the men lost touch. But Hagel never forgot his lieutenant.

As a senator, he tried to find him but came up short. It wasn't until he took the helm of the entire U.S. military that he was able to find his old battle buddy.

Johnson and his family came to Washington to see the Hagel brothers, who decades later, still defer to their commanding officer.

HAGEL: He's the officer in charge, yeah.

JOHNSON: Well, actually, it's quite fulfilling to have had the time to digest experiences that we went through then together and to have gone and done separately throughout our life over the years and come back together, but still to feel that connectedness and unity that we had that time.

STARR: A relationship forged by the fires of combat unbroken by decades of separation.

HAGEL: War is messy. There's no glory when we suffer. But in the end, this is what matters, the relationship, the friendship.

STARR (on camera): Secretary Hagel made one last stop with his lieutenant from Vietnam. They went over to the White House to meet their current commander-in-chief, President Obama -- Don.


LEMON: Thank you, Barbara. CNN's original series, "The Sixties" looks at the Vietnam War. If you missed that episode or any of the others, you can catch up on Thursday night with a special marathon. It starts at 7:00 Eastern, right here on CNN.

Still to come on this program, a U.S. flight makes an emergency landing after an evacuation slide deploys in midair. It's not the first time it's happened.

And Pippa Middleton speaks. How Kate Middleton's sister plans to put all of the hoopla behind her.


LEMON: Let's check out Mr. John Berman in for Anderson with a look at what's ahead on "AC360". Hi, John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you very much, Mr. Don Lemon. We are keeping them honest ahead on "360." Money that you thought was going to help wounded veterans, but instead lining a fundraiser's pockets. Now, as a result of our investigation, there is action in this case, serious action. You'll only get it here.

Also ahead for us, the case against Justin Harris. Is there enough evidence to keep him jailed? Will prosecutors gather evidence on the charge of murder for leaving his 20-month-old son in the backseat of an SUV on a hot summer day in Georgia? One of the lawyers we speak to says no, not enough evidence. We'll get a live report from Martin Savidge, also speak with our full legal panel. That's ahead.

It's all at the top of the hour -- Don.

LEMON: Yes, I just can't stop watching that story. It is terrible. And, you know what? It happens a lot. If it was an accident, it does happen a lot. It's sad, though, John. We'll be watching.

BERMAN: Thanks, Don.

LEMON: See John Berman at the top of the hour.

Terrifying moment for passengers onboard a United Airlines flight. An evacuation slide opened up midair inside a packed Boeing 737 last night. The plane heading to Chicago from Southern California was forced to make an emergency landing in Kansas.

Now, according to FlightAware, it descended 20,000 feet in just 10 minutes to get to the ground as quick as possible. Luckily though, no one was injured. The flight landed safely. But look at that right there in the middle of the plane. Can you see this?

OUTFRONT tonight, a man who was on that flight. His name is Mike Schroeder.

Mike, that looked terrifying. Was it?

MIKE SCHROEDER, ON FLIGHT WHEN EMERGENCY SLIDE DEPLOYED: Well, you know, it's not everyday that world's largest air bag goes off inside your plane. But you know, I was actually surprised by how calm everybody was. I mean, passengers had their cell phone out and they were taking pictures of it. And the flight attendants were going, gosh I've never seen that. And when the pilots said that, that got me.

No, I wouldn't say that the people were very excited at all. My first reaction was to think, gosh, I hope there's nobody in the rest room, because if there is, they're going to be there for a long time.

LEMON: And no one getting squished against the wall or caught in the wrong position there.

When did you know there was trouble?

SCHROEDER: I heard a pop. Like noticeable pop. Which you are not supposed to hear on an airplane. Then I heard a hissing noise. I turned my head to look behind me. It took me a second to figure out

what was going on, but it looked like a giant air bag. But planes aren't supposed to have those inside. I'm pretty sure that the slide -- I mean, I'm only a philosophy major. But I thought they were supposed to open outside, this one opened inside. But once we figured it out, it was -- well, the slide opened and, you know, it took a few second to figure that out, but not very long.

LEMON: You said you were surprised that people were actually calm. I'm sure the flight attendants calm, correct?

SCHROEDER: Yes. The pilot did a very nice job. He came on the P.A. real quickly and said, the obvious is the slide opens. We haven't lost cabin pressure. I'm going to take you down pretty fast. And he did.

I mean, it seemed like we were down there awfully fast. He goes, I'm going to figure out where we will land and I will let you know in a minute or two where that's going to be, and it turned out to be Kansas and we landed in Wichita and they figured out if they could install a new slide. There wasn't one available. We got off the plane. My general feeling about flying is if any flight that you land and you walk away from is a good one.

LEMON: So, were you concerned at all about your safety?

SCHROEDER: Not really. I mean, it was one of these things where you thought, so far we're okay. If one more thing goes wrong, like we lose cabin pressure or something like that, then we seriously are in trouble. But we never had that one additional thing happen. And I don't think anyone -- I didn't hear a single person yell out or freak out or anything like that that you might think would happen in a situation like that.

LEMON: United hasn't said anything afterward about what happened to you?

SCHROEDER: No. I was actually sitting in the front row so I could hear the pilots and engineers talking. One thing that was very clear is they had no idea why this happened. I could hear them discussing it.

LEMON: Mike Schroeder, glad you're OK. Thank you, sir. Thanks for coming on.

SCHROEDER: My pleasure.

LEMON: You know, this is not the first time a slide is actually deployed onboard a flight. We said that in November a slide opened on a JetBlue flight pinning a flight attendant against the wall of a plane. It even happened on the Obama campaign flight back in 2008, remember that?

OUTFRONT tonight, CNN analyst, aviation analyst, Mary Schiavo.

Good to see you, Mary. How big of a safety hazard is this? MARY SCHIAVO, AVIATION ANALYST: Well, it's a big safety hazard, and

it's a real problem because surprisingly, it happens a lot. Now, actual deployment inside the plane, of all the slide malfunction, that's only about 6.3 percent of the time. But of all the times you need the slides, the statistic is about 37 percent of the time, they malfunction. So, it happens a lot.

LEMON: So, why does it keep happening, though?

SCHIAVO: Well, it is interesting. The NTSB and Canada, Transport Canada, has looked at it and they found in 40 percent of the cases, they weren't put together right in the first place, and they weren't packed right. You know the old joke about know who packs your chute. They were packed wrong.

And then, that was followed closely by mechanical and maintenance issues. There's a few key component and they were often bent or dirty or not taken care of well. In a couple cases, the protective cover had just come off.

That's what happened in the case of President Obama's plane. Somebody had taken off the cover. They tried to blame it on the Secret Service. But they said no. Sometimes it is just a malfunction that way.

So, lots of issues. Usually it comes down to the way it is assembled and put together and the maintenance.

LEMON: All right. So, packing and maintenance. What can you do to resolve the problems and their check list? What?


LEMON: Well, the NTSB has -- and by the way, before the Asiana crash in San Francisco, there were some air directive on the slides and there were problems with the slides. So, two things, one, the NTSB has to be very careful any time this happens, and they will look at this, too, because the causes are very different. It is a different mechanism, failing, it's a different issue, it's different maintenance, not the same model of plane. So, they will point out any mechanism failure and then issue directives to maintenance.

You've got to check these things. You've got to make sure they are assembled properly. You've got to make sure nobody has bent the mechanisms, and my goodness, make sure the cover is on them. These will usually prevent the accidents from happening. And this does count as an accident. That will do it.

LEMON: Always a pleasure. Thank you, Mary Schiavo. Appreciate it.

SCHIAVO: Thank you.

LEMON: Still OUTFRONT tonight, and there are no buts about it. It's a major royal interview. Jeanne Moos is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) LEMON: We in the press, we often have to ask some embarrassing questions, sometimes we ask some silly ones. But imagine having to ask about a derriere that rocketed to fame three years ago during the royal wedding.

CNN's Jeanne Moos reports on the bootylicious that was the elephant in the room when Pippa Middleton sat on her booty for an interview.


JEANNE MOOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It's a big get.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Worldwide exclusive.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Not every day you can say you have a world exclusive.

MOOS: Finally, Pippa Middleton speaks and Matt Lauer has to figure out a way to ask about her bottom. Yes, that bottom. Ring a bell?

The booty that stole the show when Pippa's sister Kate married Prince William. The butt that inspired a Facebook page entitled Pippa Middleton (EXPLETIVE DELETED) appreciate society.

A butt that launched workouts.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Pippa booty workout.

We're going to get a butt just like Pippa.

MOOS: And if you didn't want to work to create it, you can have one made.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The Pippa boot lift will use liposuction to take fat from Christina's stomach and inject it into her backside.

MOOS: A backside that took a back seat to the queen on SNL.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You want to see a real bum? Regard.

MOOS: Talk about a bum steer. They were even selling Pippa merchandise, T-shirts emblazoned with "If only Pippa were a stripper", and calling her queen of the asstocracy.

(on camera): For this world exclusive, Matt had to find a perfect way to put it as he went in for the kill.

MATT LAUER, NBC NEWS: People started talking about you. And for lack of a better way to explain it, the way your dress fit.

MOOS: Ahh, the way your dress fit. He must have spent hours dreaming that one up.

LAUER: How did you feel about that?

PIPPA MIDDLETON, SISTER OF DUCHESS OF CAMBRIDGE: It was completely unexpected. I suppose it's flattering.

LAUER: A legal embarrassing?

MIDDLETON: Embarrassing, definitely.

MOOS (voice-over): Pippa said her dress was almost meant to be insignificant compared to Kate's. Matt was smart enough not to ask about unsubstantiated speculation that Pippa's bottom was somehow false, the product of padding or silicone. He did coax her into saying the B word.

LAUER: You said fame can have an up side, a down side and --

MIDDLETON: A backside.

MOOS: A commenter who evidently thinks bigger is better, sniffed, "I still don't know what all the fuss was about. She hasn't even got a backside." Even if she does, it's not as if it has a skill like Homer Simpsons. Homer can't shuffle cards.

Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.


LEMON: Only Jeanne Moos. At least she wasn't twerking. And that would be interesting.

OK. So listen, I have breaking news I want to tell you about, before we get off the air.

Another major call recall tonight -- Chrysler recalling 696,000 vehicles for an ignition switch problem. It's similar to the one that forced General Motors to recall 2.6 million vehicles worldwide, and about 525,000 of the Chryslers are in the U.S. The recall includes some of the Dodge Journey SUVs, Dodge Grand Caravans, Chrysler Town and Country minivans. They're all made between January 2007 and January 2009. It is an expansion of a recall that was issued in 2010.

And I want to update you on more breaking news. This is out of Israel. Israel's launched airstrikes targeting Hamas in Gaza. More than 20 strikes so far.

Earlier the bodies of three missing Israeli teenagers were found in the West Bank. The teens, one with dual U.S.-Israeli citizenship, were kidnapped earlier this month from a Jewish settlement in the West Bank.

We're going to bring you more on this story as we get it here on CNN. Make sure you tune in to "AC360" which starts in a little bit.

Also, "CNN TONIGHT" at 10:00 p.m. Eastern where I will be hosting that program.

So, before we go off the air, I want to explain the bow tie. I was at an event tonight that was a little more formal, and I had to get on the air quickly. So, there you go. That explains the bow tie, no other meaning.

Thank you for watching. I'm Don Lemon, see you back here at 10:00 p.m. Eastern.

And "AC360" with John Berman starts right now.