Return to Transcripts main page

ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES

Religious Mystery Sparks Firestorm of Debate; Al Qaeda in Pakistan?; Supreme Court Examines High-Speed Police Chases

Aired February 26, 2007 - 22:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everyone. I'm John Roberts.
KIRAN CHETRY, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Kiran Chetry. Anderson is off tonight.

Tonight, we're talking about the growing signs that al Qaeda is making a comeback, growing concerns about the country where it's happening, Pakistan, America's nuclear-armed ally -- coming up, what Vice President Dick Cheney said to Pakistan's president, and what our terrorism experts say about al Qaeda's new threat.

ROBERTS: Kiran, first, a story from the intersection of Hollywood and holy writ -- if true, it could overturn centuries of belief, rewriting a narrative that two billion Christians share about the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, if true.

Our story began in 1980, with the discovery of an ancient tomb.

It picks up tonight with a movie and CNN's Tom Foreman.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And action.

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It's an idea worthy of a Hollywood spectacular, that the tomb of Jesus has been found. And that's the point of the new documentary from James Cameron, the director of "Titanic."

JAMES CAMERON, FILMMAKER: But, to a layman's eye, it seemed pretty darned compelling. And, as a -- as a documentary filmmaker, I was very, very attracted to this story. I -- I said, I think literally, this is the biggest archaeology story of the century.

FOREMAN: But Father David O'Connell of Catholic University believes something else.

REVEREND DAVID O'CONNELL, CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY: Publicity stunt, a big one.

FOREMAN: Skeptics and scholars are hammering this claim, first on the geography. The tomb was discovered near where Jesus is believed to have been crucified in Jerusalem. But that doesn't explain why many other members of his family would also be buried in the same place, more than 60 miles from their home. O'CONNELL: The Jesus of history is on referred to as Jesus of Nazareth. Joseph, the father, is from Nazareth. Why would they be buried in Jerusalem? It doesn't make sense.

FOREMAN: Second, the odds: Team Cameron says caskets from the tomb bear names, Jesus, Joseph, Mary, Mary Magdalene. To find all those names in one tomb, by accident, they say, defies probability.

(on camera): The skeptics, however, say those names were common back then. These tombs may have held hundreds of people. And they question the interpretation of the tomb markings anyway.

(voice-over): And, third, the DNA.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "THE DA VINCI CODE")

TOM HANKS, ACTOR: Dear God.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOREMAN: The movie and novel "The Da Vinci Code" suggest that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were secretly married, with a child. And, astoundingly, Cameron's researchers insist one of the caskets says it contains the son of Jesus. They say they were able to take DNA from the supposed Jesus box and the one for Mary Magdalene.

SIMCHA JACOBOVICI, DOCUMENTARY FILMMAKER: The DNA did not match. The forensic archaeologists concluded that they must be husband and wife.

FOREMAN: Like the Shroud of Turin, this tomb has been surrounded by questions since it was discovered in 1980.

DARRELL BOCK, DALLAS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: There are a lot of questions here, but the answers do not point in the direction that these are the bones of Jesus.

FOREMAN: Believing this is or isn't the tomb of Jesus still comes down to faith.

Tom Foreman, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTS: So, there's the story and the controversy.

Joining is now, Bruce Feiler -- he is the bestselling author of "Walking the Bible" and most recently "Where God Was Born." In addition, his face appears on a postage stamp in the Grenadines...

(LAUGHTER)

ROBERTS: ... which, of course, makes him an expert on this topic.

(LAUGHTER) ROBERTS: Also with us, Delia Gallagher, who is CNN's faith and values correspondent.

Bruce, first of all, you -- you believe that this whole thing is bunkum.

BRUCE FEILER, AUTHOR, "WHERE GOD WAS BORN": Well, I think there's certainly a lot of signs putting that direction.

And I think we will start with the fact that these two filmmakers, six months ago, produced a documentary claiming to prove that the exodus was true, and, therefore, the Bible. And now they're claiming to prove that the New Testament is false, and, therefore, the Bible.

Well, which is it? There are -- one of those is false. And I think they're talking out of both sides of their mouth. And it raises the question, well, clearly they're profiting from both. And is that really what is going on here, a kind of get-rich-off-the-Bible scheme?

ROBERTS: Delia, James -- James Cameron and Simcha Jacobovici, who is the filmmaker, the actual director, are -- are saying that they have proven the basic premise of the book "The Da Vinci Code," with the exception of people trying to hide the identity of the lineage of Christ.

But this is the idea that he was married; they had a child together. If this were true, how hard would it shake the foundations of the Christian faith?

DELIA GALLAGHER, CNN FAITH AND VALUES CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think, in terms of Jesus being married and having a child, we have heard that before in "The Da Vinci Code." And, certainly, the Christians that have spoken to today have said, you know, that's not a claim that is going to cause them too many problems.

The claim that -- that they are disputing is the idea that there were bones of Jesus or some remains of Jesus, which suggests perhaps that Jesus wasn't sort of bodily ascended into heaven, because that is the central Christian belief, that Jesus died, was resurrected, and ascended with his full body into heaven.

(CROSSTALK)

GALLAGHER: So, there -- there shouldn't be any kind of bones or remains of Jesus to do DNA testing on.

ROBERTS: Yes, but I would assume that the -- the reason why he could ascend into heaven and not leave any bones on Earth was because he was divine.

But, if he were married and were having children, that would challenge that whole concept of divinity, wouldn't it?

FEILER: What is going on here, if you actually look over the last 200 years, pretty much every generation, whatever is the kind of science of the moment, that's where this battle between science and the Bible has been waged.

So, it was about evolution 100 -- Darwin -- 150 years ago. Then it was about physics. Now it's about DNA. They're not proving that they're married. They're just proving that they're not mother and son. And I think that -- I actually think, if you through the litany that we just heard in the setup package, that the family was from Nazareth, you cannot get a body in 24 hours, when you have to bury a Jewish body, to Jerusalem. The names themselves are very common.

If you look at it, I actually think...

(CROSSTALK)

ROBERTS: Well, the filmmaker said that you had here on this ossuary and on this tomb the names of Jesus, Joseph, Mary, and Mary Magdalene, and I -- I think, as well, Judah, who is the -- the child -- or the presumed child.

(CROSSTALK)

ROBERTS: So -- but you're saying that that's not unusual?

Twenty-one percent -- I talked to an archaeologist today in Jerusalem, Avner Goren, who traveled with me through all my journeys that you just mentioned, "Walking the Bible" and "Where God Was Born."

Twenty-one percent were named Mary at the time. Jesus and Joseph were among the top three names for men. I actually think, when you look through -- I am prepared to say, Delia, that I think that there is more truth in Dan Brown's fiction than there is in this film's facts.

(LAUGHTER)

GALLAGHER: But I think the -- you know, the statistics and the names and everything aside, I think, for Christians, the issue is, why is it always Jesus and some central belief of Christianity that people are making discoveries about each time?

I mean, the Christians that I speak to -- these are scholars and archaeologists and so on -- say, we have our evidence, and it's in the scriptures. It's in the Bible. And science is welcome. I think that, you know, that's part of the problem here, is this science and faith question, and how much does one help or hinder the other.

And they say: Science is welcomed, but we also believe that Christianity is scientific and -- and -- and historically rooted.

ROBERTS: So, that works for some people.

But what about the idea, Bruce, that the Bible is one side of the story, and there may be another side of the story?

FEILER: I think that's why "The Da Vinci Code" and this echoes, because we now know that there are Gnostic Gospels and things that were left out. And that is why this matters, John. And that is because people are trying to figure out the relationship between the Bible, between history, and their own beliefs.

(CROSSTALK)

FEILER: And for those of us who are going to on this journey and taking it seriously, this kind of -- kind of cheap tawdriness is disappointing, in a way, because they're preying on the emotions of people who do care deeply about the role of these stories in their lives.

ROBERTS: And -- and it just shows you how fascinating it is, that those emotions are held so deeply on both sides of the debate.

Thank you very much, folks. Appreciate it -- Kiran.

CHETRY: Thanks, John.

We get another view now from forensic anthropologist Kathy Reichs. She's the author of "Cross Bones," which deals with tombs and artifacts found in and around Jerusalem. She joins us from Charlotte, North Carolina, this evening.

Thanks so much for being with us, Kathy.

KATHY REICHS, AUTHOR, "CROSS BONES": First of all, you know, as we read through this, one of the first questions that pops into my mind, at least, is, after all these years, where did they get the DNA?

REICHS: Well, it's matter that has been removed from two of the ossuaries that were found in this tomb. It's not exactly clear what matter means. It must be bony residue of some kind.

CHETRY: OK. They also refer to patina or -- or patina -- and that they got DNA off of that.

REICHS: Well, I think...

CHETRY: So, how did they...

REICHS: Yes.

I think those are two separate analyses that were done. One was a chemical analysis of the patina, and the other was the DNA analysis of the bony residue.

CHETRY: I got you.

Now, how exactly are these remains tested? The bony residue that you're referring to that could contain that DNA, how exactly do they do that testing?

REICHS: Well, that was done at a paleo-DNA lab in Canada by Carney Matheson. He would have -- to simplify greatly, he would have purified it, ground it up, purified it, and then extracted any DNA that he could get.

And, in this case, he used mitochondrial DNA, which is a particular type of DNA that is only transmitted through maternal lines. You get all of your mitochondrial DNA from your mother, and none from your father.

CHETRY: I got you. OK. So, that's the type of DNA that they used.

They also said that they were able to use the DNA to prove that at least two of the people that they tested -- and, in this case, they're saying it was possibly the remains of Jesus and possibly the remains of Mary Magdalene were not related.

So, is -- why is that a big deal?

REICHS: Well, what it would show is that they had different mitochondrial DNA sequencing, which means they're not maternal relatives, which is -- is not a particularly big thing. These tombs contained families. And some of those individuals would have been related, and some of them would not.

Spouses would have married in from other families. So, you would expect to find individuals with different DNA.

CHETRY: Mm-hmm.

REICHS: So, you have got a Jesus and a Mary, who do not have the same DNA.

CHETRY: Right.

REICHS: It's not a particularly astounding finding.

CHETRY: So, why didn't they, then, test the remains of Judah, that they claim was the son of Jesus, to link him?

REICHS: Well, that's -- that's an interesting question, and they don't address that question, to my knowledge. And, if Judah is the offspring of Mary, this particular Mary, they would share the same mitochondrial DNA.

CHETRY: All right. And, so, you know, as you said, they -- they don't do that testing. And the even the writers of the documentary say, you know, we -- we can't definitely prove anything.

So, is there any way, scientifically, to prove without a doubt some of these mysteries, especially when it comes to -- in this case?

REICHS: Well, if somehow you could obtain a sample for comparison -- usually, DNA is for comparative purposes, and exclusively so with mitochondrial DNA.

If, somehow, you could get a comparative sample, if some artifact existed, like the Shroud of Turin, which, it turned out, has -- is a fraud -- but, if something like that existed, which did have the absolutely known documented bodily fluids of Jesus, or a member of the Jesus family, then you could compare to that.

CHETRY: All right.

REICHS: But, otherwise, you're kind of working this -- this tomb exists kind of in a vacuum.

CHETRY: Right.

Kathy Reichs, interesting stuff.

By the way, we are going to talk about the shroud a little bit later as well.

Thanks for joining us tonight.

REICHS: Thank you.

CHETRY: And, as we said, if it is somehow authenticated, the discovery of Jesus' tomb would go against everything that Christians believe about his death and resurrection.

And, once again, there are about two billion Christians around the world. Here's the "Raw Data."

That makes 33 percent of the planet's population Christian, including Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox, 20 percent Muslim, 13 percent Hindus. Almost 6 percent are Buddhists, and 0.4 percent Sikh; 0.2 percent are Jewish -- John.

ROBERTS: Kiran, just ahead: other mysteries, other leaps of faith, and perhaps even a few new answers.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTS (voice-over): A biblical story, but is it just a story?

BOB CORNUKE, PRESIDENT, BIBLE ARCHAEOLOGY SEARCH AND EXPLORATION INSTITUTE: We just found what could be the carcass of the Ark?

ROBERTS: In search of Noah's Ark, with spy satellites pointing the way.

Also, shrouded in mystery.

DAN PORTER, ARGUES SHROUD OF TURIN IS REAL: Oh, there's no question in my mind that it's authentic, that it is the burial cloth of Jesus.

ROBERTS: Believers say Jesus was buried in it. What does modern science say? Unlocking the mystery of the Shroud of Turin -- 360 next.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROBERTS: We're talking tonight about faith and facts and mysteries of the Bible.

The Book of Genesis describes a great flood created by God to destroy all life under the heavens. Before the flood, God told one of his followers, Noah, to build an ark and fill it with two of every species on Earth.

While many Christians believe this story is simply a matter of faith, some scholars and archaeologists have been trying for decades to prove that the Ark did exist.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTS (voice-over): Many believe the Ark came to rest on Mount Ararat, a 17,000-foot-high extinct volcano in Turkey.

In 1949, a U.S. spy plane first took photos of an anomaly on the mountain, an anomaly that some believe is the Ark. Then, last spring, new satellite photos of the mountain sparked new interest.

PORCHER TAYLOR, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF RICHMOND: This is a paradigm-busting satellite photo of what might be the remains of Noah's Ark on Mount Ararat.

ROBERTS: Professor Porcher Taylor of the University of Richmond has been hunting the Ark for years. He's also a national security analyst.

TAYLOR: I have had very intriguing conversations and meetings with intelligence officials regarding the spy satellite imagery of this exact site, and more than a few CIA photo interpreters believe this is the remains of a huge boat on Mount Ararat.

ROBERTS: But some analysts weren't so sure, saying, the images suggest an Ark so big that it wouldn't hold together, also that the Ark was 15,000 feet up the mountain.

Then, a new theory: Over the summer, a group of Christian archaeologists hiking in the mountains of Iran made their own discovery.

BOB CORNUKE, PRESIDENT, BIBLE ARCHAEOLOGY SEARCH AND EXPLORATION INSTITUTE: We just found what could be the carcass of the Ark.

ROBERTS: Members of the U.S.-based Bible Archaeology Search & Exploration Institute found a rock formation emerging from a ridge. This one was 13,000 feet up, and it looked like a fossilized wooden boat.

CORNUKE: Some of those rocks look they have been cut at right angles, and even beams. And others look just like pieces of log.

Well, you can see here that these -- this is definitely looking like sea life, and that it's definitely clams. And what's it doing at that altitude, so high up on the mountain?

ROBERTS: Did the great flood carry the Ark up this mountain in Iran? Or is this the Ark captured in satellite photos of Turkey? We may never know. And, for true believers, it may never matter.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTS: Joining me again is Bruce Feiler. He is the author of "Where God Was Born" and several other bestselling books.

So -- so, what do make of this -- quote -- "anomaly" on Mount Ararat? You know, it's -- it's so long -- it's the size of an aircraft carrier -- that it couldn't be anything made out of wood. But -- but people are very intrigued by this whole thing.

FEILER: Well, which anomaly? Is that the one that Czar Nicholas found in 1916, or the one that Air Force One you have been on many times, when President Carter was flying to see the shah of Iran?

Every three or four years, one these stories pops up. And -- and here's kind of my view on this. And that is that -- and I have, personally, been up Mount Ararat, looking for Noah's Ark.

And we are not going to find Noah's Ark. But, even if we found an ark, and it was 40 cubits long, and, even if, on the wood, it said, "Noah built me..."

(LAUGHTER)

FEILER: ... we are still not going to find evidence that God ordered Noah to build it. And that really is the essence here, is that we're asking too much of the Bible, to think we can go back with a computer chip and an abacus and attempt to prove it.

ROBERTS: Well, and here's -- and here's one thing that I would like to point out, is that, even if rained 10 inches an hour, which, by any of the stretch of the imagination, is a rain of biblical proportions, 24 hours a day for 40 days, you would only have 800 feet of water. This is at the 15,000-foot level. So, how does it get that high?

FEILER: Well, this is the tallest mountain, and this is -- is -- would have been the first piece of land that emerged out of the water.

But here's -- I think that what we have in the media today, John, is a false dichotomy, between every sentence in the Bible is literally -- literally true, or the entire thing is a work of fiction.

Most of us in the middle are trying to develop a relationship with God and find out the role of the Bible in that. And that's really what the Bible is about. It's about humans and God attempting to develop a relationship with one another.

ROBERTS: But, for these people who went up the mountain in Iran, they want some -- I don't know if they want proof of -- that the Bible stories are true or -- or they just want to try to find the artifact.

FEILER: Because there's this idea here, if we can prove that one screw existed, the entire thing existed. But the reality is, is that what is the -- the Bible could have told us exactly which mountain it was. It tells us scenes and dialogue. It has great memory when it wants to. Maybe it doesn't want us to focus on the physical meaning, but on the spiritual meaning. And, to me, that is the message.

I was in Iraq, where you have been many times, and where God was born. And, looking at the -- the ziggurats, which were the inspiration for the Tower of Babel -- it's the story right after Noah's Ark. And what happens when God disperses humans? He gives them all a different language.

Diversity is the call of God in that moment. He asks us to speak to him in a different language. And that's the point.

(CROSSTALK)

FEILER: You can have a fundamentalist interpretation, or you can be open-minded to respect and tolerance. And the Bible contains that nuance, and that's, I think, the way that it invites us in.

ROBERTS: And it's all just so fascinating. And we love these mysteries.

Bruce Feiler, thanks.

FEILER: My pleasure.

ROBERTS: Appreciate your coming in -- Kiran.

CHETRY: Well, you love mysteries. We have another one, another unsolved mystery of the Christian faith: a piece of cloth that some believe is sacred, others consider a scam. It's the Shroud of Turin -- what science has found, and why those findings have not convinced true believers.

Plus: Vice President Cheney's stealth visit to Pakistan, and what it says about the strength of al Qaeda and the Taliban -- when 360 continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHETRY: The tomb in James Cameron's controversial new documentary isn't the first religious relic to be contested.

Before the break, we looked at the debate over Noah's Ark.

Now another disagreement, this one over the Shroud of Turin, a piece of cloth that some believers call holy, but others say is just a holy hoax.

Here's CNN's Randi Kaye.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RANDI KAYE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It measures 14-feet- by-3-feet, said to be bloodstained, and shows the shadowy image of a man, tortured, crucified.

The faithful believe the man on the linen cloth is Jesus.

DAN PORTER, ARGUES SHROUD OF TURIN IS REAL: There's to question in my mind that it's authentic. There's no question at all.

KAYE: The Gospels suggests Jesus was removed from the cross, placed in a tomb, and wrapped in cloth. That would explain how the shroud ended up with Jesus' bloodied image on it.

But nonbelievers, like Joe Nickell, dismiss the cloth as medieval forgery.

JOE NICKELL, ARGUES SHROUD OF TURIN IS A HOAX: Clearly, the blood on the cloth is -- is not authentic. Old blood would be dark and blackened with age.

KAYE: Forensics in the past 40 years didn't show blood, instead, something similar to paint.

Still, shroud supporters stand by its authenticity.

PORTER: It's a dead argument. It's leveled constantly, but there just is no paint particles on the shroud.

KAYE (on camera): Another wrinkle: Three of the top carbon- dating labs in the world independently confirm the shroud only dates back 700 or 800 years. That means it was made more than 1,000 years after Jesus died.

NICKELL: The three laboratories were in such close agreement, it was almost like three arrows hitting a bullseye.

KAYE (voice-over): So, how do believers explain the carbon- dating test from the 1980s?

PORTER: They cut a piece from a repaired area of the shroud, that what you ended up with was a mixture of old thread and new thread, and, therefore, you got an invalid date.

KAYE: Even if it's authentic, skeptics argue, where was it for the 1,300 years after Jesus died?

NICKELL: The shroud just shows up, under really questionable circumstances, in -- in the middle of the 14th century, with no history prior to that, shows up in the hands of a soldier of fortune, who couldn't say how he acquired it. So, it's really just very suspicious.

KAYE: Damaged in fires in both 1532 and 1997, today, the shroud is stored safely inside Italy's cathedral at Turin, where it will be displayed and debated for years to come.

Randi Kaye, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE) CHETRY: And, so, the debate over the Shroud of Turin, like so many others, continues, in spite of what science seems to say.

So, joining us again to talk about it, CNN faith and values correspondent Delia Gallagher.

Thanks for joining us again.

The argument that the gentleman made in the piece is that they accidentally -- or they -- not accidentally, but they snipped a piece that ended up being a reconstructed part of the shroud.

GALLAGHER: Yes.

CHETRY: Do we buy that?

GALLAGHER: Well, generally, scholars are saying that this is not a shroud that dates back to the time of Jesus.

It has been studied many times. And there seems to be a kind of general academic consensus that it's not from the time of Jesus. Yet, the question is, does it have any less importance because of that? You know, the scientific evidence may point to one thing. And scholars are still debating that. But there is sort of -- I think it weighs more on the side of doesn't quite go back to the first century.

CHETRY: Yet, people still believe in it.

GALLAGHER: People believe in the importance of -- of this shroud, and not believe in it, as such, as believe in what it points to.

CHETRY: Mm-hmm.

GALLAGHER: And I remember. I was with John Paul II. And John Paul II, was somebody who supported the -- he went and visited this -- the shroud several times.

And -- and what he said was, you know, it pointed to Jesus' death. It was a reminder of Jesus' death, and that science was welcome to come in...

CHETRY: OK.

GALLAGHER: ... and -- and test it. And, in fact, you know, that's what they did, and that -- he said, you know, you shouldn't be afraid of whatever the results of that are, because that's not the central point of the shroud, that the central point of the shroud is a reminder of, you know, what the -- the central point of Christianity was...

CHETRY: OK.

GALLAGHER: ... which was Jesus and his crucifixion and his suffering. So...

(CROSSTALK)

CHETRY: ... not in the literal sense that on this shroud is the blood of Jesus?

GALLAGHER: Well, there are people who would want to sustain that. And, so, the science is -- is not 100 percent on it. But it leans towards the fact that it wasn't from the time of Jesus.

Yet, it remains a huge symbol of popular piety for people. It was, you know, something that many considered touched the body of Jesus. And, so, in tradition, in Catholic tradition, that's very important, the fact that it is this symbol of popular piety. They have lots of those kind of symbols that people give great importance to. So, because of the science, it doesn't necessarily mean that the item has less importance.

CHETRY: Right. Interesting.

Delia, thanks so much.

GALLAGHER: You're welcome.

CHETRY: And back to you, John, now.

ROBERTS: Kiran, we are going to turn next to a very troubled corner of the Muslim world, a hotbed of Islamic radicalism, a breeding ground and training ground for al Qaeda. And it's an ally.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTS (voice-over): America's ally in the war on terrorism, or is it? Al Qaeda's comeback, Pakistan's dilemma, America's nightmare scenario -- terrorism growing in a country with nuclear weapons.

Also: the high price of high-speed police chases.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My daughter didn't need to die to keep the public safe.

ROBERTS: Now the Supreme Court will decide. When chases go too far. 360 tonight.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROBERTS: Vice President Dick Cheney made a surprise visit to Pakistan on his way to Afghanistan today. In a meeting with Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, Cheney urged him to do more to fight the Taliban and al Qaeda this spring when there's expected to be a huge offensive in Afghanistan.

The "New York Times" reported that Cheney delivered a tough message from President Bush, warning that Congress might cut off money to Pakistan, aid money to Pakistan, unless it turned up the heat on al Qaeda and Taliban fighters. U.S. officials believe both groups are operating from safe havens along Pakistan's border.

Joining me now to tell us more about this is terrorism analyst Peter Bergen.

Peter, it looks like the vice president dropped into Pakistan to crack some heads, which would seem to make it pretty clear that the White House is increasingly worried about what Musharraf is not doing here in the war on terror.

PETER BERGEN, CNN TERRORISM ANALYST: Yes, John. I mean, President Bush some days ago mentioned that had al Qaeda and the Taliban was operating in, quote, remote parts of Pakistan. And we've had similar kinds of statements by other public officials, John Negroponte, the outgoing national director of intelligence, saying that al Qaeda is headquartered in Pakistan.

So suddenly, in the last, I don't know, six to eight weeks you've heard a lot of public calls for more to be done about al Qaeda and the Taliban in Pakistan.

ROBERTS: So what's Pakistan's policy with al Qaeda and the Taliban, after this deal that they struck last September? Is it basically hands off?

BERGEN: Well, they vary between the fist and appeasement. First of all, they sent 7,000 troops in there. Pakistan took about 700 casualties. That military approach wasn't much of a success.

Then they turned to basically appeasement, a series of -- a couple of peace agreements with the militants. That has not really been that successful either. Because after the peace agreements won in September of last year, attacks from that area went up in Afghanistan, according to U.S. military officials, by 300 percent.

So unfortunately, there's sort of being two different policies, neither of which have really worked particularly well, John.

ROBERTS: Pakistani officials are really pushing back, Peter, against this idea that there's a resurgence of al Qaeda and the Taliban in those wild tribal areas. Mahmoud Durani (ph) told Wolf Blitzer a while ago that there's a problem every once in a while. And we find it. We go in there. We get rid of it.

A Pakistani official as recently as last week said, "Hey, it looks like this deal is working. The families of some of these foreign fighters are moving out." But that would seem to ignore reality.

BERGEN: Well, but not least of all, there's been six suicide attacks inside Pakistan, some of which coming out of tribal areas just in the last several weeks.

So I mean, I think the way to look at this more constructively, John, rather than just dumping on Pakistan, because they feel that it's a lot of Pakistani bashing, is to sort of say it's in all our interests to sort out the tribal areas. This is a major national security problem for Pakistan, Afghanistan, the United States and NATO. And it's something, as you said in the intro, the spring offensive is -- we all know it's coming. This is something that needs to be fixed now and not tomorrow.

ROBERTS: Peter, the United States knows where a lot of these camps are and has been watching them via satellite. It believes and knows where one camp is where fighters are being trained for operations beyond Afghanistan.

If this is really a threat that the United States perceives as an urgent one, why doesn't it just spend Special Forces in or send in some gun ships and take out these camps?

BERGEN: Well, you know, obviously, I'm not privy to those kinds of decisions. But I think one of the things, John, these camps are not very large. They're looking -- their compounds are 10 or 20 people. It's not like they're there are barracks from the air that you could easily target.

You could probably send in U.S. Special Forces, but that is an incredibly sensitive issue in Pakistan, where you know, U.S. military operations on Pakistani territory, is that is a Pakistan would have a very hard time swallowing.

ROBERT: Yes, ultra sensitive, particularly since, you know, you push Musharraf, you might push him right off the edge.

Peter Bergen, thanks very much. Appreciate your time.

Fair to say that there's plenty of blame to go around for al Qaeda's resurgence and the Taliban's come back in Afghanistan. Many believe that the U.S. took its eye off of the ball there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You just leave a reservoir of infection even stronger to come back after you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERTS: And he should know. He was the CIA's man in Afghanistan. Now he's speaking out. His story, coming up tomorrow night on 360 -- Kiran.

CHETRY: And we're following several other stories tonight. The high court takes on high-speed police chases. The driver involved in one pursuit says that his civil rights were violated, and now it's up to the Supreme Court to decide. We have a look at the case and more of this video, next on 360.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHETRY: Coming up on 360, a former insurance company insider on the hardball tactics that insurers are using to maximize profits and to minimize payouts to drivers. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: As long as the public allows this to occur, the insurance companies will get richer, and people will not get a fair and reasonable settlement. Period.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHETRY: Tonight, what every car driver needs to know. Insurance companies under fire for sticking people with major medical bills on top of their injuries. We're going to see what our investigation uncovered in the next hour of 360.

First, though, the future of high-speed police chases may rest with the U.S. Supreme Court. Today the justices took up a 2001 case from Georgia.

The driver, who failed to stop for speeding, led deputies on a dangerous pursuit. And as you can see here from the video, it ended when one of the patrol cars bumped the suspect's vehicle. That sent it down an embankment, and the driver was paralyzed. He says his civil rights were violated because the pursuit involved an unreasonable use of deadly force.

Long before they became a constitutional issue, police chases were creating controversy about the risks to innocent bystanders.

Once again, here CNN's Randi Kaye.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RANDI KAYE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): January 22, 2002, it was 6 p.m. and the sky was clear. The sun had gone down. The Priano family of Chico, California, was headed out for what should have been a fun evening for the four of them.

C. PRIANO: Right before the crash I heard the kids laughing, Steve and Christy were laughing in the back seat, and I'm looking out the window thinking I'm the luckiest mom in the world.

KAYE: Candy Priano and her family had no way of knowing across town a 15-year-old girl had just stolen her mother's car to go joyriding. Neither driver had any idea they were on a collision course.

Police were on the move after being told the girl was a runaway. It was a low-speed chase through neighborhood streets until the very end, when for some reason, the girl floored it. The family never saw her coming.

(voice-over) Christy Priano was in the family van with her parents and her brother. They were on their way to a basketball game at Christie's school.

But as the Prianos drove through this intersection going this way, little did they know another car was heading this way. It was fleeing police. It slammed right into the Prianos' van, right into Christy.

C. PRIANO: I hear a thud, and I feel the car spinning and turning. I feel air blowing on my face, and then I feel like we were like a cotton ball just whirling through the air.

MARK PRIANO, DAUGHTER KILLED IN POLICE PURSUIT: The van was laying in the backyard of a house, took out their entire fence.

C. PRIANO: I said to Steven, "Do you see your sister? Do you see Christy?" And he didn't answer.

She always was so talkative. I mean, if she had been all right, I know she would have said something. So in my hearts of hearts I knew that something was really bad.

KAYE: The Priano family would soon learn just how bad. Candy and Mark Priano and their son, Steven, were in shock but alive. Fifteen-year-old Christy was unconscious.

M. PRIANO: It was like a shaken-baby syndrome only multiplied by 100. She had no visible injures. It was just like her brain was just shook from side to side and just broke.

KAYE: Christy went into a coma. She would never regain consciousness. One week after the crash the Prianos' only daughter, a high school sophomore who they called the spark plug of the family, was gone. And the driver police were chasing, at home uninjured.

C. PRIANO: My daughter didn't need to die to keep the public safe.

KAYE: Remember, the suspect in the Priano case was an unlicensed 15-year-old girl who had stolen her mother's car, not a murderer, not even a dangerous felon, but a high schooler who took the family car for a joyride. Does that warrant a police chase?

CHIEF BRUCE HAGERTY, CHICO, CALIFORNIA, POLICE DEPARTMENT: Yes, because it fits of policy, because it's more than just a vehicle infraction.

KAYE: Bruce Hagerty was not the chief of Chico police when Christy Priano was killed, but he studied the case closely and calls it a valid case.

M. PRIANO: Well, that's very interesting since an innocent, young woman, young girl is dead. What constitutes an invalid, uncontrolled chase, then? Six or seven dead people? Fifteen injuries?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They've got so many cop cars around here, he's just running over them.

KAYE: So why, then, do police departments around the country continue to chase?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He hit that car! KAYE: You think after so many people were injured or killed, hundreds each year, law enforcement would use safer means to snare a suspect or restrict pursuits to keep innocent bystanders like Christy Priano out of harm's way.

PROF. GEOFFREY ALPERT, DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINOLOGY & CRIMINAL JUSTICE: A lot of dinosaur chiefs are still out there and a lot of departments that still have the wild west mentality, chasing them until the wheels fall off.

KAYE: Geoff Alpert has studied police chases for more than 20 years. So we asked him, should you or should you not chase?

ALPERT: It's not a simple yes or no question.

KAYE: Therein lies the problem. Victims like the Prianos want police to chase only violent criminals, but most police departments fear restricting pursuits would only encourage the bad guys to do more harm.

HAGERTY: They know if the police officers have to stay at a certain speed or if they can't pursue under certain circumstances, then the bad guys are going to take advantage of that.

KAYE: Alpert disagrees.

ALPERT: It's a myth. We know empirically from studying departments that have made these changes over the years that, while there might be a very small increase for a short period of time, it reverts back to its normal -- its normal situation.

KAYE: In the five years since their daughter's death, Candy and Mark Priano have been working to curb police chases. In California, Christy's Law would restrict police chases to violent felons posing an immediate threat and make it a felony to flee police.

But despite the Prianos' efforts, the bill has yet to pass.

The Prianos lost more than just Christy in the back seat of their van that January evening.

C. PRIANO: I hoped to see her graduate from high school with her brother. That didn't happen. I hoped to see her go to college. All of that is gone. Her wedding day is gone. You know, having babies is gone.

KAYE: A lifetime of memories that would never be made because of a police chase Christy's parents say that should never have happened.

Randi Kaye, CNN, Chico, California.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CHETRY: Senior legal analysts Jeffrey Toobin joins us next to discuss the case that's now before the Supreme Court. Plus, it's not over yet. Anna Nicole Smith, the saga continues. This time it's her mother who wins a key court battle. We're going to have the developments when 360 continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHETRY: Well, this video was watched by several U.S. Supreme Court justices. Again, the speeding driver with a suspended license wouldn't stop for police. As you saw there, the chase ended when one of the patrol cars bumped the suspect's vehicle, and it slid down an embankment. The driver ended up paralyzed is now suing. He says his civil rights were violated.

Now, we know they can be dangerous, sometimes deadly, but are police chases unconstitutional?

We're going to ask our expert, CNN senior legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin.

Great to see you today, Jeffrey.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Hey, Kiran.

CHETRY: Well, the tape of that car chase, it was not shown in court, but eight of the Supreme Court justices had a chance to see it before today's arguments.

Justice Alito saw it and said that the fleeing driver, Victor Harris, quote, "created a tremendous risk for drivers on that road."

And then Justice Scalia said, quote, "He created the scariest chase I ever saw since 'The French Connection'." How big of a part will the tape play in any decision that they make?

TOOBIN: Well, you know, Supreme Court justices usually deal with cases that are entirely paper records. And obviously, from the argument today, they really got into the fact that they had the opportunity to watch this tape, and several justices commented on it.

And many of the issues that are raised by Christy's Law, the cost and benefit of these searches -- of these kind of chases, were on display. And the justices were very obviously struggling with how to -- how to set the right balance.

CHETRY: So if the Supreme Court allows the case to go forward because it's been appealed before, Victor Harris will sue the deputy for violating his civil rights. In your opinion, does he have a case?

TOOBIN: Well, Justice Kennedy was struggling with this like the others. And he said, "Look, we don't know what the right decision is here. Maybe the right decision is to let a jury decide. I mean, they're the voice of the people. They get to decide what's reasonable, what's not."

Justice Scalia said, "No, you know, we want to cut these lawsuits out altogether." After all, this was a lawsuit not brought by an innocent bystander but by the person who set off the chase, the bad guy, the guy in the lead car. And even though it was a relatively minor offense, these kind of lawsuits shouldn't -- shouldn't be allowed in court.

CHETRY: Right. And that leads to my next question. The guy is not perhaps the most sympathetic case for a high-speed chase crash victim since he was the suspect. He didn't stop. Unlike Christy in Randi's piece. How that factor into a jury decision, if the justices allow this to go forward?

TOOBIN: Well, I think it will -- it will hurt his case a lot. Because you know, the fault is obviously with him.

But then again, Justice Souter raised the point, look, when is it ever reasonable to chase someone at 90 miles per hour and nudge them off a road?

And again, this is another thing raised by Christy's Law. It was a minor offense. This was speeding by someone with a suspended license. Is this something worth the incredible risk to not only just the driver of the car, the bad guy, but the whole community?

These are the kind of -- these are the reasons why a lot of police departments on their own, like the Los Angeles Police Department, are cutting back on these chases a lot. They're saying, look, we don't want -- the risk is simply too great. Unless there is a violent crime out there, unless there's a really dangerous perpetrator, we're not going to get involved in these searches.

They don't need the Supreme Court to tell them. It's just sort of the modern approach to law enforcement that's telling them, hey, don't do this.

CHETRY: All right. Very interesting discussion. Jeffrey Toobin, thanks so much.

TOOBIN: OK, Kiran.

ROBERTS: Under the ice an amazing deep sea discovery. Incredible creatures, never seen before. Our "Shot of the Day" is coming up in just a moment.

First, though, a "360 News and Business Bulletin".

Never a dull moment in the battle over Anna Nicole Smith's body and baby. Today a judge ruled that her remains could not be sent for burial to the Bahamas, at least not until the appeal of Smith's mother is heard. Virgie Arthur wants her laid to rest in her home state of Texas.

Meanwhile, the paternity dispute over Smith's baby daughter moved to the Bahamas. Stay tuned. More to come on that.

In Washington, a shake-up in the perjury trial of Scooter Libby. During deliberations, a female juror was dismissed for receiving outside information. The deliberations will go on with the 11 remaining jurors.

Libby is accused of obstructing the investigation into the leak of the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame.

On Wall Street, stocks fell for the fourth day in a row. Worries that the market may be headed for a correction led investigators to sell. The Dow lost more than 15 points. It closed at 12,632. The NASDAQ and the S&P 500 were also down for the day.

And another black eye for JetBlue. The airline canceled dozens of flights after a winter storm hit the Northeast yesterday. This comes after JetBlue apologized for leaving hundreds of passengers stranded on airplanes in the wake of a blizzard earlier this month.

But of course, JetBlue is hoping that, because they canceled all those flights today, they'll be able to make up their schedule much more quickly in the next couple of days.

Time now for our "Shot of the Day". It also happens to be one of the most popular stories on CNN.com.

Exotic, mysterious, downright bizarre. Today scientists reported finding a startling collection of creatures off of the coast of Antarctica. These specimens, including possibly more than a dozen newly discovered species, were found in water at that used to be covered by an ice shelf.

But the collapse of those ice shelves, which researchers believe was caused by global warming, led to this unique find. So you lose a little, you gain a little because of this global warming thing.

CHETRY: Yes. And that thing was creepy looking. It was like half alligator, half fish.

ROBERTS: It's kind of cuter by half, you know? Things that we've never seen before.

CHETRY: Yes. Pretty fascinating.

ROBERTS: All in the day of discovery.

CHETRY: That's right. Well, still to come tonight, a warning about our overstretched armed forces, a warning actually coming from the very top.

ROBERTS: Also tonight, a 360 investigation and what it uncovered about the secret hardball tactics that insurance companies are using to minimize payouts to you. That and more, coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROBERTS: Good evening, again. Anderson is off tonight. I'm John Roberts.

CHETRY: And I'm Kiran Chetry.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.voxant.com