Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
Julian Assange Arrested, Faces Hacking Charges; Judge Finds Assange Guilty of Breaking Bail Conditions; U.S. Charges Assange with Computer Hacking Conspiracy; Sudan's President Al-Bashir Forced Out in Military Coup; Former Pope Benedict Breaks Silence on Church Sex Abuse Crisis; Theresa May Addresses Parliament After Brexit Delay; Benjamin Netanyahu Set to Begin Historic Fifth Term; Katie Bouman Developed Algorithm that Created Black Hole Image. Aired 11-12p ET
Aired April 11, 2019 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[11:00:00] CYRIL VANIER, CNN HOST: Hello and a warm welcome to Connect the World. I'm Cyril Vanier and today we connect you to breaking news on two
continents.
In the U.K. we are learning more about the charges against the man behind WikiLeaks. Julian Assange was dramatically arrested earlier today.
Dragged from the Ecuadoran embassy where he has lived for nearly 7 years now. We'll get you the latest details in a moment.
Also in Sudan, scenes of jubilation after Sudan's military ousted the dictator who has ruled that country for three decades. The protesters say
their demonstrations continue. We'll be taking you out into streets of Khartoum.
First though, we begin with the dramatic developments unfolding in London right now. In the last hour a judge found WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange
guilty of breaking his bail conditions in the U.K. Meanwhile, the U.S. government charged him with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion in 2010
with Chelsea Manning. This comes after this extraordinary scene outside the Ecuadoran embassy in London earlier. After almost seven years living
there Assange was arrested and taken from the premises. That follows Ecuador's government withdrawing us on his asylum.
Let's get all the details from our reporters in London. Nina dos Santos is outside that embassy. Atika Shubert who has interviewed Mr. Assange and
has an interesting perspective on this, is in Berlin. Nina, I want to start with you and there are many legal questions that we'll get to and the
process in the courts. But first, why did Ecuador suddenly do this 180 and allow the U.K. to arrest Julian Assange after seven years?
NINA DOS SANTOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well that is the big question here, Cyril. Basically Ecuador appears to have been blindsided by some
allegations that Julian Assange's own legal team and WikiLeaks made yesterday. When they unveiled in a press conference that they believed
they had unearthed evidence, of what they call, a massive spying operation inside the embassy on Julian Assange. Which included and they showed
journalists present at this press conference video footage that had been taken by secret surveillance inside the embassy of Julian Assange having
doctors' visits and important meetings with his lawyers.
They claim that would have infringed on his human rights and were planning to yet again complain to various international bodies about that. But
obviously, they haven't had the opportunity to do that because basically four or five hours ago Ecuador decided to abruptly cancel his right to
asylum inside the embassy and then invited the British metropolitan police to come in and arrest him in those dramatic scenes that you saw on social
media. With grayed, white haired, white bearded Julian Assange being led away protesting and pointing his finger at the press. Saying that
essentially the government should resist this attempt to try and arrest him. Because he's always said that he was an advocator of free speech.
Now obviously, we know that he's appeared in front of Westminster Magistrates Court in a hearing that lasted around about an hour. That
hearing has finished. He was found guilty of having violated his bail conditions when he entered this embassy all the way back in 2012. And we
now know there is this U.S. warrant in his name that his lawyers say was issued in 2017. And then of course this indictment that was released by
the DOJ just a couple of hours ago that appears to date back to 2018 and involves that crime, as you said, of computer information intrusion --
Cyril.
VANIER: Tell us a little bit more about that. Because it does appear that the U.S. indictment is probably going to be the biggest, most dangerous
legal hurdle for Julian Assange. So what is that indictment exactly?
DOS SANTOS: well the indictment essentially alleges that Julian Assange helped then Private Bradley Manning, a U.S. officer in the U.S. army, now
Chelsea Manning, to -- gave him information that would have enabled him to get into important classified government servers to get access to reams of
information.
Now, remember that WikiLeaks in 2010 released a whole series of thousands of classified documents and material from the U.S. army pertinent to
operations in places like Afghanistan and in Iraq, information that at the time the U.S. government said could have put troops' lives at risk. What
we also know from a diplomatic source I've been speaking to is that a red notice appears to have been in existence for Julian Assange issued by
Interpol, the international police force, with his name on since all the way back to March 2011. Exactly one year after the alleged activity of
cracking into those -- attempts to crack into those U.S. government servers.
[11:05:00] And then Assange's legal team say that this arrest warrant by the United States relating potentially to that activity involving Chelsea
Manning was issued in 2017. Now what we're going to be finding more about over the course of the next month or so is there's going to be a hearing
for potentially his extradition on May 2nd. That emerged in the court hearing we heard a couple of hours ago. And Sajid Javid, the U.K. Home
Secretary, has spoken to the House of Parliament to make a statement on Julian Assange's arrest today. And has said that the U.S. has 65 days to
table their official documentation for this extradition request. The sentence that the indictment you were referring to before, the potential
sentence for that crime is five years.
VANIER: All right, Nina, there are a lot of interesting legal angles to dissect and we will be bringing in a legal expert a little later on in the
show. Stand by. I want to go to Atika Shubert now. She's in Berlin. But Atika, you've interviewed the man himself Julian Assange not once but
twice. Tell us a little bit more about what window that gave you into his mindset and what could be his mindset at this time?
ATIKA SHUBERT, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Julian is a fighter. Let's put it that way. OK. I think that he has a very well
stocked legal team and he is certainly going to try his hardest not to be extradited. In fact, going back many years now, this was his biggest
concern, that whatever allegations he was facing in Sweden of sexual assault, he felt that was actually just a ploy to get him to the United
States and face charge there. And it now seems that he was partially right.
This is why he walked into the Ecuador embassy seven years ago because he felt that ultimately the U.S. government was out to get him. And you know,
he ended up creating for himself a sort of -- what was supposed to be a refuge, it ended up being something of a prison.
The Ecuadoran embassy is very small. It only has a few rooms, a few desks. It's really only the ambassador's office that has a window. So he had no
natural light. He had to have a sun lamp. His friends were concerned for his health. So they put in an exercise machine for example. But it was
really -- the conditions were not good. And I think it took a tremendous toll on both his physical health and his mental health. Especially now
that we're hearing a lot of the details of the many disagreements, arguments that he had with the Ecuadoran embassy staff. So I think it's
going to be a tough legal battle ahead, but Julian Assange is not one to give up.
VANIER: Yes, certainly if you saw that video of him arrested and just how he looks and sounds in those brief moments before he's taken into custody
in that police been. It does raise questions about his mental health. Did he -- when you spoke to him, did he expect that it would end this way? I
mean, he's done a remarkable job for seven years of holding at bay the most powerful countries I the world. Did he expect that it would end like this?
SHUBERT: I don't think he had an idea that he would end up in the embassy --
VANIER: Atika, respectfully, I've got to interrupt you because Assange's legal team is speaking. Let's listen in.
JENNIFER ROBINSON, ATTORNEY FOR ASSANGE: Since 2010 we've warned that Julian Assange would face prosecution and extradition to the United States
for his publishing activities with WikiLeaks. Unfortunately today we've been proven right. Mr. Assange was arrested this morning at about 10:00 at
the Ecuadoran embassy after the ambassador formally notified the police that his asylum had been revoked and he was arrested by British police.
Today I received a warrant and a provisional extradition request from the United States alleging that he has conspired with Chelsea Manning in
relation to the materials published by WikiLeaks in 2010.
This sets a dangerous precedent for all media organizations and journalists in Europe and elsewhere around the world. This precedent means that any
journalist can be extradited for prosecution in the United States for having published truthful information about the United States.
I've just been with Mr. Assange in the police cells. He wants to thank all of his supporters for their ongoing support and he said I told you so.
KRISTINN HRAFNSSON, WIKILEAKS EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Well, the only thing to add to this is the fact that this is a dark day for journalism. As Jennifer
said, this sets a precedent. We don't want this to go forward. This has to be averted. The U.K. government needs to make a full assurance that a
journalist will never be extradited to the United States for publishing activity.
[11:10:00] This pertains to publishing work nine years ago. Publishing of documents, of videos of the killing of innocent civilians, exposure of war
crimes. This is journalism. It's called conspiracy. It's conspiracy to commit journalism. So this has to end and we urge everybody to support
Julian Assange in fighting this extradition. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What legal avenues are available to you to prevent his extradition?
ROBINSON: We will be contesting and fighting extradition, we have requested that he now gets medical treatment. He's been refused medical
treatment for the past 7 1/2 years since being inside the embassy. We will be fighting extradition and he'll be brought before the court again within
the next month.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How is he now?
ROBINSON: We're not going to be taking any more questions today. Thank you very much.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are there health problems?
HRAFNSSON: You were asking about the elements in the extradition request. It is quite obvious that the U.S. authorities have picked just one element
of what they have been working on for a long time including the espionage act. Acts that have decades in prison. There is no assurance that there
will not be additional charges when he is on U.S. soil. And I think and I believe that this was an angle in the approach to increase the likelihood
of him being extradited. It is obvious.
VANIER: OK. You have been listening to Julian Assange's legal team, legal representation speaking in London. This comes just a few hours after the
arrest of the WikiLeaks founder. Let me recap you just in case your joining us right now.
The WikiLeaks founder after spending seven years in the Ecuadoran embassy, his asylum was revoked by Ecuador who then invited the British police to
come in and arrest him which they did mid-morning on Thursday. He is now in jail and of course, it now becomes a legal process. Isa Soares joins
us. She's at the courthouse in London Isa, recap us right now on the successive layers of legal charges that Julian Assange faces.
ISA SOARES, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Cyril. Let me give viewers a sense of what is happening behind me. As you can see many people
here screaming as Assange came in. Of course, he's now gone now. But many people calling for Assange not to be extradited, no extradition, no U.S.
extradition. And many people saying, free speech and really echoing what we heard from Assange's representatives from WikiLeaks here. Saying this
sets a dangerous precedent -- so we heard in the last few minutes -- for journalists and media around the world.
And then one of them went onto say if this is a conspiracy, then it's a conspiracy to commit journalism. We heard from the lawyers for Assange
basically saying they'll be contesting and they'll be fighting every aspect of this extradition.
When asked what was Assange's reaction that this was happening. He thanked his supporters and he told his lawyer, I told you so. In terms of what we
saw today here at around 2:15 or so, Cyril, we saw Julian Assange came into court wearing a dark suit, beard was white beard as we saw in the early
hours of this morning as he was dragged from the Ecuadoran embassy, with his hair tied back.
He went in, he looked calm, he looked confident. He gave thumbs up to the press. He was then told to give his name and his date of birth and he was
then given the details of his warrants. One of those, of course, skipping bail in 2012. The over the extradition hearing from the United States, as
you outlined, that you were mentioning before you came to me.
In terms of the bail, we're expected to hear what he should get. He was found guilty. His lawyers said that the reason he skipped bail was because
he didn't think he was going to get a fair trial and so he went to the Ecuadoran embassy. To which the lawyer, the judge then said -- I'm going
to quote him here, if I can find it first -- basically accusing him of just skipping it and calling him a narcissist who basically cannot get beyond
his own self-interest.
In what regards the extradition hearing, we're now waiting for that. That's now moved to May 2nd. And in the meantime, he will have to make a
video appearance with court every single week.
[11:15:00] And now really the United States has 65 days to table that extradition -- to actually put that request to the government and then a
judge has 65 days from today to receive it. So it gives you a sense of what we saw here today. The crowd behind me still having for his
tradition, still calling for freedom of the press and also calling for Manning to be released.
VANIER: Yes, and the United States has viewed Julian Assange as a national security threat for a number of years. So you would assume that they would
draw up those legal documents expeditiously. It's going to set up a legal conversation about freedom of the press versus national security. We'll
have that with our legal expert coming up later on in the show. Isa Soares from the courthouse in London. I want to thank you. I want to think also
Atika Shubert in Berlin and Nina dos Santos outside the Ecuadoran embassy in London.
You're watching CNN. This is CONNECT THE WORLD. Stay with us we'll be back in a second.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VANIER: You're watching CNN. This is CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Cyril Vanier. Welcome back.
Let's get you to our other breaking news this hour. Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir is under house arrest after being forced out of power in a
military coup.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AWAD MOHAMED AHMED BIN OUF, SUDANESE DEFENSE MINISTER (through translator): I, the minister of defense, announce the removal of the head of the country
and keeping him in a safe place after his arrest.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VANIER: Military sources say it all started before dawn on Thursday. Al- Bashir was told by his security chiefs that there was no alternative but to step down and he went quietly. The army has dissolved the government and
declared a state of emergency.
[11:20:00] But the coup declaration has angered anti-government protesters who feel that the military hijacked their movement. They were heard
chanting, revolutionaries were free, we will continue the journey.
CNN senior international correspondent, Nima Elbagir, is back from reporting on those Khartoum demonstrations. She joins us from New York at
the moment. Nima, your Sudanese. So this is one of those stories that's also personal. What is it like for you to see Bashir go after 30 years?
NIMA ELBAGIR, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It's pretty extraordinary. It's pretty unbelievable actually.
[11:20:00] The most extraordinary part of this is that clearly there were others who did believe it was possible. You know, I am 40 years old. I
was 11 when al-Bashir took power. And I really have known no other government than him. But at least I had some concept of a life before al-
Bashir.
Most of the population of Sudan is under 30. So the reality is that this is his generation. These are his children who were able to rise out and
force him out. And these are now his generation and his children who are saying that this is not enough. It is almost inconceivable that for a
generation that knew no freedom of expression, freedom of press, freedom of assembly, that they are very, very clear, Cyril, about what it is they do
want.
What they want is a civilian transition of power. What they don't want is what is being offered to them now by this high military counsel, which is
two years of transitional military rule, three months of emergency rule and a curfew from 10:00 p.m. to 4:00 a.m. every morning.
And you saw there in that video we showed, those female protesters saying we will persevere. And there's a faceoff happening right now, Cyril.
Extraordinarily the defense minister, Ahmed Ibn Auf, has now issued an apology to the Sudanese people for the blood that was spilled during these
demonstrations. Many of those we're speaking to, Cyril, say it's not enough.
VANIER: When you were in Khartoum reporting on the protests a few days ago, could you feel that things were at a tipping point?
ELBAGIR: It was really after we left. When we were there it was very much at the height of the repression. Part of our coverage was an attempt to go
undercover and investigate the torture houses, the stacking up of the infrastructure of oppression that President al-Bashir had managed to put in
place to prolong his rule. And it was really only last weekend when you saw this influx of hundreds of thousands of people standing in front of the
military high command and daring the army essentially, daring the Army to open fire on them and they stayed and stayed. And there were skirmishes.
Over two dozen people perhaps give or take passed away unfortunately, but they stayed and they're still staying. And this is what's going to be
really important to watch very closely in the coming hours and days, what the army does now. Will they continue to exercise the patience, the
semblance of patience that we've seen or will they take the more tried and tested route that al-Bashir walked so many times and opened fire again and
again on these people. They're asking that we continue to follow this story as closely as we can.
VANIER: Absolutely, and I know you will help us do that and you've already started doing that with your fantastic coverage. And as you say, the
central question here is for extraordinary as it is, that Bashir is gone and has been forced to step down after 30 years in power. How much of a
regime change does it really represent if the military continues to run the country? Nima Elbagir, we'll be speaking to you again. Thank you.
ELBAGIR: Thank you.
VANIER: So who exactly is Omar al-Bashir? They now ousted president is a former paratrooper who seized power in a bloodless coup in 1989. Sudan has
experienced prolonged periods of isolation under his rule. After the United States added the country to its state sponsors of terrorism list.
Al-Bashir now faces five counts of crime against humanity and two counts of war crimes over accusations of ethnic cleansing in Darfur between 2003 and
2008. He barely escaped arrest while visiting South Africa in 2015
We're joined now by journalist, Reem Abbas, live in the Sudanese capital. She's been covering and participating in the protests. Rheum, you've been
out on the streets today. Tell us what you're seeing, what you're hearing and also how you're feeling?
REEM ABBAS, JOURNALIST (via Skype): The morning when I was out there was a lot of uncertainty because people were waiting for the statement from the
army. So we know that the army took over the radio stations and the TV stations at about 3:30 a.m. and the statement was made about almost 12
hours later.
For a very long-time people had no idea what was happening but they were assured that Bashir is gone. So people were celebrating. The whole
country was on the streets. The streets were full. People were coming, crossing the bridges on foot. They were celebrating. They were passing
candy. They were crying tears of joy. They just could not believe that after this very long fight after 30 years Bashir is gone. This was the
mood in the morning.
VANIER: And then what was the feeling when the Defense Minister made the statement that a military council would now be running the country for two
years?
[11:25:00] ABBAS: I think people were frustrated because his statement was very vague. Because his statement really did not give a lot of recognition
to the civilian led movement that has been on the ground and that has been leading the protests for the past four months. I think people wanted more
clarity. And they wanted more clarity on how a civilian government is going to be given power.
So I think there was a lot of frustration and disappointment and people saw that Bin Ouf whose now, you know, the facto leader of the country, is just
kind of an old face from the same regime. So right now our people are still on the streets. They are still protesting. The Sudanese
Professional Union, which has been guiding the protesters throughout this process in the past four months. It has asked people to stay on the
streets and to protest. Because this is just the beginning basically of removing the regime. Omar al-Bashir is gone but his regime is still here.
VANIER: Do you get a sense that that view that you just expressed is widely shared? And you get a sense that these protests will keep having
momentum?
ABBAS: Yes, I think so. Because I feel that people have come such a long way and they have been out on the streets on the front lines. They have
been intimidated, arrested and killed, just shot dead on the streets for the past four months. And they feel that after all of this they can't go
back after actually guaranteeing that they will live a dignified life. That they will have some kind of democratic country.
And a lot of people are saying that we would have had elections next year in 2020. And right now this military rule wants to postpone the elections
even more and wants a military, you know, basically completely to be in power for two years. And this is unacceptable for people. So many lives
were lost and so many people suffered and people are expecting a better situation, basically.
VANIER: So is it fair to say that people want elections or is it fuzzy at the moment?
ABBAS: I think right now people are waiting for -- they want a transitional civilian government. So they don't want military rule. And
Sudan for a very long time has always been ruled by the military. So I think removing this establishment, this very well-embedded establishment is
very, very difficult. But I think the only way out for people is a civilian democratic regime which is the highest demand in the freedom
declaration. Which is the declaration that we're all basically abiding by right now. And that were all respecting and using as a document right now.
VANIER: Reem Abbas, joining live from Khartoum. We really appreciate your time. What an extraordinary day in Sudan. The end of the Omar al-Bashir
era. It's only the beginning of another story, as we've discussed. But it's still an extraordinary day today. Reem, thank you.
Still ahead on the show, a major update in the ongoing saga that is Brexit. The EU has granted the U.K. an extension.
Plus, we continue to monitor the latest developments as we learn more about the charged faced by WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange. Stay with us.
[11:30:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VANIER: Welcome back. You're watching CNN. This is CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Cyril Vanier.
We're following breaking news in London where WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, has appeared in court. The judge ordered him to be held in
custody and return next month for an extradition hearing. This comes after his dramatic arrest this morning in London.
Assange had lived in the Ecuadoran embassy for nearly seven years. The government this morning withdrew his asylum status. In court he was found
guilty of breaching his bail conditions. That came quickly after an announcement from the U.S. that Assange has been charged with conspiracy.
He's accused of working with a former U.S. army intelligence analyst, Chelsea Manning, to hack into Defense Department computer systems.
Let's also remember the sexual assault allegations against him were dropped by Swedish authorities. Let's bring in CNN legal analyst, Carrie Cordero.
She's live from Washington. First of all, Kerry, how is the extradition process going to work? From the U.S. perspective, is there any way --
they've been after him for years -- is there any way to botch this from Washington's perspective?
CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, the U.S. and the U.K. have a well working a strong extradition process and agreement between the two
countries. So it's something that they are accustomed to cooperating with each other. There are probable cause standards and there needs to be
equitable legal process for it to work on both sides. And so, I think this'll go according to the normal process, which is that there will be the
hearing in the U.K. and as long as the judge is satisfied that there's appropriate legal process on the U.S. end, I don't imagine there should be
any hiccups to that process. The important part is the indictment --
VANIER: And Carrie, we imagine that the U.S. indictment revealed today that would be appropriate legal process, right?
CORDERO: Exactly. So this was an indictment that was unsealed in federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia in the U.S. And so that
establishes the basis upon which the grand jury brought that indictment and that would be appropriate for the U.K. process.
VANIER: So Assange's lawyers say that he's a journalist and this is an attack on freedom of the press. But interestingly, the allegations against
him from the Department of Justice, the federal charges have nothing to do with releasing information.
Right. So it's important to point out that the charges brought against him are not for publishing classified information. Chelsea Manning, the case
that he's accused of conspiring with, that person because that was the person in the position of trust was charged and convicted of unauthorized
disclosure of classified information. But that's not what Assange is being charged for. So he's not being charged with publishing. Which is what
media organizations would be concerned about. He is charged with conspiracy of actually committing the computer fraud itself. And the
indictment includes some information about that activity.
VANIER: Because we just heard Assange's lawyers and their entire case that they're making to the public or at least as of five minutes ago, was he is
a journalist. He is being attacked for his work as a journalist for publishing truthful information, by the way, that revealed misconduct by
the U.S. military in the Iraq war.
[11:35:02] And if Assange is extradited then there is a clear and present danger to all journalists and media around the world. Which I think is an
argument that people can engage with but it falls flat. From a legal perspective, that's just not the issue here.
CORDERO: Right. So that is absolutely what their defense is going to be. They're going to try to make this all about -- the defense is going to try
to make this case all about the First Amendment. They will try to shape the media coverage accordingly. So if they think that they could have
favorable coverage by making that First Amendment defense, and that's what they're going to argue.
But it's important that he is charged with conspiracy because they have specific facts, at least according to the Justice Department, that he
assisted and was part of the conspiracy to engage in the actual activity itself. Trying to get unauthorized access into the Defense Department
which is a violation of the computer fraud and abuse act. So it is beyond what I think most normal reputable journalists would consider journalism.
It's a criminal act.
VANIER: And Assange's lawyers say this might be just kind of a gateway charge. Those are my words not theirs. But they were saying this might be
a way to get him to the U.S. and then there's nothing to tell us there won't be further charges once he's there.
CORDERO: That makes a lot of sense to me. I would be surprised actually if this is the only document that he is charged with. This was a big deal
for the Justice Department to bring this case. Because there has been a longstanding debate over whether or not he could be charged with something
to avoid that appearance that it was trying to charge a media organization. So I think the Justice Department has spent many years thinking about the
theory of this case and it would not prize me at all if there were more charges related to other computer fraud and abuse cases that he might be
implicated in later.
VANIER: Why have we not seen these charges until today?
CORDERO: That's a good question. Part of the reason, I think, had to do with the fact that he has been residing in the Ecuadoran embassy in the
U.K. And it could have been just the period of time that it took for them to finally agree to allow him to be arrested by U.K. authorities. So there
is a huge international law enforcement cooperation component in this case that would have involved, U.S., U.K., Ecuadoran and perhaps other
countries' cooperation as well. And I think those pieces had to come together in order for the indictment to finally be unsealed.
VANIER: All right, Carrie Cordero, CNN legal analyst, thank you so much for shedding some light on all of this. Thanks.
CORDERO: Thanks for having me.
VANIER: And turning now to some other news. The former Pope, Benedict XVI, has broken his silence on the sexual abuse crisis gripping the
Catholic Church. In a new essay he lays out a controversy of theory on what has caused the crisis. The former Pope blames the sexual revolution
of the 1960s and an increasingly liberal slant to the Church's moral teachings.
Let's turn to Vatican correspondent, Delia Gallagher, now -- Delia.
DELIA GALLAGHER, CNN VATICAN CORRESPONDENT: Cyril, hello. You know, it's really rare to hear from the Pope Emeritus. That's one of the things which
makes this essay which he published in a German magazine, so interesting. The other is his view on some of the origins of the sexual abuse crisis,
which as you mentioned, he links to the sexual revolution of the 1960s. And he says that that society revolution also affected seminarians and
priests and the Catholic Church.
He mentions in particular, homosexual clicks in seminaries and pornography in seminaries. He also takes to task liberal theologians for rejecting
traditional Catholic teaching.
Now as you can imagine all this is causing a stir in Catholic circles, Cyril, with conservatives feeling vindicated by some of the Pope's views.
Because they have long held that those are some of the causes of the sex abuse crisis. While some liberals are calling the essay embarrassing and
not helpful at this time. Particularly as it connects homosexuality with pedophilia.
What's interesting in the essay -- which is 11 pages, 6000 words, so it's quite long -- Pope Benedict says that he contacted Pope Francis before he
published the essay. So we can assume that Pope Francis is OK with Benedict's view of things even though those are not views, Cyril, the
current Pope has publicly expressed. He tends to refer to the causes of the sex abuse crisis as being ones of an abuse power on the part of
priests.
So it's an essay which is likely to continue the debate over some of the causes of the sex abuse crisis. Pope Benedict says in it that he hopes it
will contribute to a new beginning -- zero.
[11:40:00] VANIER: Delia, because I haven't read the essay, I want to make very sure I understand the Pope Emeritus's argument here. Because the
controversy in the Church hasn't been just about liberal sexual values. It has been about abuse and coverup of abuse. That is criminal activity. Is
Benedict XVI, is he saying that more liberal sexual values are what has caused abuse in the ranks of the clergy?
GALLAGHER: Yes, that is part of what he's saying. We should clarify that he did not deal with the question of coverup per se. So that is indeed one
of the criticisms of the essay. That he's talking about root causes of the crisis, Cyril. So he's dealing with it from what we've heard from him
before when he was Pope from a very kind of societal point of view and the liberalization in general of the church's sexual morality. He spends a lot
of the essay talking about that. The sort of increasing secularization and indeed he says at the end that the absence of God is the thing that has
currently contributed most crisis of pedophilia.
So he doesn't directly address the issue of coverup and certainly some of the other issues that have become very important for the Vatican to
address. But again, this is a letter from the Pope Emeritus. So he's not even officially in charge anymore, although obviously he's had decades of
experience already in dealing with many of these cases -- Cyril.
Yes, absolutely. Delia Gallagher, thank you so much for your reporting.
And a never-ending story that is Brexit, well, it never ends. British Prime Minister Theresa May addressed Parliament after agreeing to a new
six-month delay to Brexit with the European Union on Wednesday. The U.K. is now due to leave the bloc on October 31st. That is Halloween if you're
keeping track. And many are hoping that's the day the Brexit nightmare will finally end. Having repeatedly failed to get her deal through
Parliament, Mrs. May reluctantly reached across the aisle to the opposition Labour Party in an effort to find some way through the impasse.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
THERESA MAY, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: This is not the normal way of British politics and it is uncomfortable for many in both the government and
opposition parties. Reaching an agreement will not be easy, because to be successful it will require both sides to make compromises. But however
challenging it may be politically, I profoundly believe that in this unique situation where the House is dead locked, it is incumbent on both front
benches to seek to work together to deliver what the British people voted for.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VANIER: Let's bring in Alistair Burt. He's a British Conservative MP. A rare pro-European member of Parliament. He joins us now from London. Sir,
how do you see the steps forward? And specifically do you think if you take a step back, there is room for consensus between the Conservatives and
Labour in this Parliament?
ALISTAIR BURT, BRITISH CONSERVATIVE MP: I think the situation we're in is an extremely difficult -- it's very hard to say where the consensus
actually lies. I think the truth is there are members of Parliament on all sides who share views about our leaving the EU. And sometimes those views
are shared better between back benches than between those on the front benches of each party.
There is a significant group of colleagues who want to leave without any deal. There is a larger group of colleagues who want to leave but with
some form of deal. And then there's a group of colleagues who would like to remain in the EU if they possibly can. The Prime Minister's difficulty
has been trying to get a majority of any of those to have a clear direction of moving forward. It is indeed, as you introduced it, a never-ending
story.
VANIER: Are you comfortable with that? Are you comfortable with Mrs. May's efforts to reach a deal with Labour, with your opposition?
BURT: Yes, I am. I think she's absolutely right. We don't have a tradition in the U.K. unlike the continent of Europe of working across
parties because our electoral system is a bit like the system in the United States. Is very straightforward, producing two major parties with very
little sometimes between them. As the United States has seen in its system.
But I agree with what the Prime Minister is trying to do. We are in an impossible situation. She wanted to try and get an agreement through
members of her government. That is the Conservative Party and the Democrat Unionists from Northern Ireland. She's not been able to do that. And so
the national interest requires that she tries something deferent. The official opposition are the only other people to go to in these
circumstances. So I think she's right. It is difficult.
[11:45:00] We don't often do it but when you have to put national interests above party interests. Which we think is what a lot of the nation would
like, then it has to be done.
VANIER: And that happens to align with your views because you are a pro- European Conservative MP. So on this particular issue which really takes up all the oxygen in the room at the moment and for the last three years,
you're actually perhaps closer to Labour than you are to some people within your own party.
BURT: No. I think that's a bit of a mischaracterization. There are people in each of the parties who are very strongly involved with the
European Union. And certainly I voted to remain in the EU and I wish the referendum had gone differently. But I'm also one of those democrats who
accept that the country voted a different way. And accordingly we have to deliver this.
I want to deliver it in a way which gives us a good future with the European Union. One of the problems over the last couple of years is that
the debate has gotten very bitter and divisive. There are some colleagues in Parliament who seem to want to make almost make enemies of the European
Union as opposed to our future partners and friends. It's been so divisive in terms of the debate.
As someone who wants a good relationship with the European Union but now believes the better thing to do is for the United Kingdom to leave and
create a new relationship rather than try to go backwards, I have friends in the Conservative Party and in the Labour Party who seek something
similar. And I think ultimately that is what we will get. It will be an agreement through Parliament as much as anything. But I do wish the Prime
Minister well with the attempts that she's making. She's right to do so.
VANIER: All right, sir, thank you so much for joining us. That's all the time we have for today but we thank you for your time today, thanks.
BURT: Thank you very much.
VANIER: Conservative member of Parliament Alistair Burt there.
Still to come, with his main rival conceding there is nothing left standing in his way. Benjamin Netanyahu is set to become the longest serving Prime
Minister in Israel's history. We're live in Jerusalem ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
You're watching CNN. This is CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Cyril Vanier. Welcome back.
We're still waiting for the final certified results from the Israeli elections but the outcome is no longer in doubt. Benjamin Netanyahu has
pulled off a historic victory with the help of his right-wing allies and he's set to become Israel's longest serving Prime Minister. His main
rivals in the Blue and White party have already conceded defeat.
Let's bring in Oren Liebermann in Jerusalem to talk about what happens next. Oren, it is unquestionably now Netanyahu's Israel. So I suppose the
question is, what he's 's he going to do with it?
OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well the real answer to that question right now is, pretty much anything he wants. His Likud Party is so much
bigger than all of those other coalition partners that he very much will guide where this coalition goes and what this coalition does. The other
parties are smaller and simply aren't able to extract that many demands.
[11:50:00] In that sense he has more influence -- and his Likud party has more influence in this coalition than it did in the last coalition.
Does he want to pursue annexation? Analysts say he won't do it unilaterally here but Trump's peace plan is just a few weeks or perhaps a
few months away. And that may give him the cover he's looking for at least too an annex the settlement blocs. In any peace plan put forward to this
point over the past decades, annexation of the settlement blocs or the blocs being part of Israel was part of that plan. Only it was part of the
end of the plan after process.
Under Trump, Netanyahu may have the cover to annex those very soon. We'll see when the plan comes out and how this moves forward. As you pointed
out, Cyril, there is a process here. Next week all of the parties will go to Israel's President, recommend a Prime Minister and now having seen the
results, that will be Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
VANIER: Oren, from the outside looking in, the remarkable thing here is that there is actually an indictment for corruption looming against
Netanyahu. Does his reelection change anything to that and to his legal troubles?
LIEBERMANN: So in terms of the legal process here, we're expecting to have his preliminary hearings sometime over the summer. In fact, it could be
right around the same time he becomes Israel's longest serving Prime Minister. He is expected to try to pass immunity laws. Some suitable that
would shield him from indictment as the sitting Prime Minister.
Does he have the seats for it? Well that may very well depend on the sort of the political bargaining he does with the other parties. I'll give you
this if you promise to protect me in the event of an indictment. That is what he's expected to pursue and will find out, I suspect, very soon,
again, in the coming weeks or months whether he is able to do that. If he's indicted and this goes to trial, then this will go to the courts to
decide. Can he actually sit in a trial while he serving as Prime Minister? And that will be its own legal battle.
One thing is certain, Cyril, as this process moves forward expect everything to be dragged out as long as possible by Netanyahu's legal team
and an Attorney General who although deliberate, and although methodical, is taking this process quite slowly as it is.
VANIER: Oren Liebermann, live in Jerusalem. Great to talk to you, Oren, thank you.
All right, let's get you up to speed on some other stories that are on our radar right now.
South Korea's Constitutional Court has ruled to lift the country's decades old ban on abortion. They say the law must be changed or repealed by the
end of next year. The ban has been in place since 1953 and allows both women and doctors to be jailed.
U.S. President Trump is once again attacking the investigation which he says, quote, totally exonerates him. He says everything about special
counsel, Robert Mueller's Russia probe was crooked. Calling it an attempted coup. A redacted version of Mueller's report is due to be
released within days.
And the world's biggest election is now underway in India with the political fate of Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the line. Officials are
reporting heavy turnout so far. Some 900 million people are eligible to vote so the election is taking place in phases and will last six weeks.
The world recently got its first opportunity to actually see a black hole. The remarkable story of who made it possible, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:55:00] VANIER: You have probably seen that historic first ever picture of a black hole. Here it is in case you haven't. This is really,
really impressive stuff. Black holes are supposed to be invisible. You're not supposed to see this. What you might not know is this woman, Katie
Bouman, gets the credit for making it happen. She developed an algorithm three years ago that paved the way for the photograph to be taken. At the
time she was a graduate student at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Her alma mater tweeted about her achievement after the image was released.
Writing her into the history books alongside another MIT graduate, Margaret Hamilton -- on the left there -- helped write the code in the '60s that put
a man on the moon. Yay MIT.
I'm Cyril Vanier. That was CONNECT THE WORLD. Thank you so much for watching.
END
