Return to Transcripts main page

Isa Soares Tonight

U.S. Military Almost Intercepted a Chinese Vessel Based on a Report that Contained False Intelligence Provided by Artificial Intelligence; Russia Heads to the Polls for the First Parliamentary Elections Since the Full-Scale Invasion of Ukraine; U.S. Democrats And Republicans Unable To Come Together On A.I.; New Excerpts Released From Memoir By Princess Diana's Brother; First New Cat Species In 100-Plus Years Discovered In Bolivia; Japan Has Record 100,000 Centenarians. Aired 2-3p ET

Aired September 18, 2026 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: A very warm welcome to the show, I'm Richard Quest. Isa Soares has the evening off. You're most welcome. We

begin with breaking news. CNN exclusive sources telling us that the U.S. military almost intercepted a Chinese vessel based on a report that

contained false Intelligence provided by A.I.

We understand that the report was circulated last Spring, with one source saying that the incident almost started a war. I'll have more details on

that in just a moment with our correspondent, and that comes up in just a moment or two. We'll have more on our exclusive report in a moment.

Now, this all happens, of course, against the backdrop of war and economic woes. Russia is heading to the polls for the first parliamentary elections

since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The polls opened earlier for three days of voting.

There were 450 members of the State Duma, and there's virtually no meaningful opposition, with opponents critical of the Kremlin barred or

fleeing Russia. These are the images of Russian soldiers accompanying election officials voting in Russian-occupied Eastern Ukraine.

Even though President Vladimir Putin's United Russia Party is expected to win the majority of seats, the contest will give the Kremlin the chance to

gauge how much support the war has publicly.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VLADIMIR PUTIN, PRESIDENT, RUSSIA (through translator): Your choice and your will, will once again demonstrate that millions of people are behind

our soldiers, that we are a united people bound together by shared values, historical memory and love for our homeland.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUEST: Now, Vladimir Milov is one of the leading public critics of Vladimir Putin. He was also an adviser to Alexei Navalny. Like other serious

opposition figures, Milov has had to leave Russia. He now joins us from Lithuania.

When we talk about these parliamentary elections, and the -- we understand that those running and the way the campaign is held or has been held,

obviously is far from free and fair. On the day itself, is voting and counting free and fair?

VLADIMIR MILOV, RUSSIAN OPPOSITION POLITICIAN: Hello, many thanks for having me. Actually, I did participate in a lot of election campaigns

myself, and I used to vote in the Soviet Union in the first free elections when I was young. I would have to say that this is probably the worst

election in more than 40 years in terms of total control by the government.

You saw that the parties who did not even descend, but they were demonstrating certain signs of slight disagreement with Putin on something,

they were taken down from the campaign at the very early stages in mid- Summer, and court decisions banned them from participating.

We see candidates being jailed. It's essentially, you know, it reminds me of the so-called election in Germany in 1933 after the Reichstag Fire,

where basically most of the candidates whom Hitler didn't like, he simply jailed and taken out of the ballot or something.

So, that's the worst election in more than 40 years. I didn't even begin to speak about the fraud techniques which Putin has been polishing over the

years. So, please don't expect any contested result here.

QUEST: Right, so, if that is the case, how will we witness or evidence opposition to the war, to the president? How will it manifest itself if

there is and such be opposition?

MILOV: Usually, in totalitarian regimes like that, people begin to lose fear and speak up once the government is showing cracks, and the authority

of the central power begins to wane.

[14:05:00]

This is currently beginning to be the case with the development of very harsh economic crisis in Russia, of the consequences of Ukrainian deep

strikes into Russian territory, fuel crisis and many more. If you look across the Russian public space, you see a lot of signs of dissent, which

we haven't witnessed in the past few years.

And so -- but elections will have nothing to do with that. It will have to wait until --

QUEST: OK --

MILOV: Russia moves more towards becoming something resemblant of a failed state than it is now.

QUEST: How will President Putin, do you think, handle the election, the results and going forward? Because he obviously -- unless he is completely

and utterly out of touch, he must realize that there is growing opposition to a way of life that is becoming harder to -- intolerable.

MILOV: His only tool so far that he's been showing to people that he's pretty much ready to use is fear. We saw very much intensified repression

in the light of this election campaign. Also, significant repression against the members of the ruling elite.

We saw former ministers arrested, like the former Communications Minister, Nikiforov --

QUEST: Right --

MILOV: And some others as well. So, he's clearly -- he's putting forward some message of consolidation. He says, you will have to back me up or I

will jail those who try to stick their head out and demonstrate dissent. Whether this will work remains to be seen.

Russia is to pass through some turbulent period ahead where it's clear that the society doesn't like what's going on.

QUEST: Just --

MILOV: But Putin is committed to push his way through.

QUEST: Does the EU or the U.S. -- does President Trump have any leverage, do you believe?

MILOV: Sanctions, pressure, military assistance to Ukraine. And I think if Putin did see a lot of commitment on part of the West in terms of

continuing to help Ukraine withstand Putin's attacks, in terms of tightening the sanctions, if Putin have seen this resolve, he would

seriously reconsider what he is doing because pressure --

QUEST: All right --

MILOV: Is mounting in any case, and sanctions are taking the toll on the Russian economy. So, more pressure is needed.

QUEST: Right, well, let me reverse that question into the negative. If he does not see more pressure, if he does not see more sanctions, even though

he won't take that as a tacit approval, he might take it as being -- as being, you know, almost we don't care. Therefore, he will get stronger and

harder.

MILOV: His resources are depleting objectively. Money, manpower, military industries, all are -- you know, he's having difficulty continuing this

war. He's trying to mobilize as much resources as he can to still continue for some time.

These elections and the so-called consolidation is a part of it. So, you know, less sanctions, less pressure will simply give him more time. So,

we'll see more atrocities, more bombardments --

QUEST: Right --

MILOV: Of Ukraine, more attempts to carry offensive on the front. So, ultimately, it will end up badly for Putin because we see that he can't

win. But less resolve on part of --

QUEST: Right --

MILOV: The West will only give him more space to continue with his aggression.

QUEST: I'm grateful to you, sir, thank you for joining us in Vilnius. In Germany --

MILOV: Thank you --

QUEST: The Chancellor Friedrich Merz is facing a vote that could test his political survival. The far-right AfD could win its second state election

in two weeks. Voters are going to the polls in the eastern region of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the city-state of Berlin also votes on Sunday, and

that's where people have taken to the streets to protest against the far- right.

Instead, the far-left, the left party is leading in the polls. Immigration is the top issue in some parts of the country. In Berlin, soaring rents and

housing shortages dominating the campaign. Around 85 percent of Berliners rent their homes. Fred Pleitgen is with me now. Fred, where are you? Where

are you at the moment?

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, there, Richard. Well, I'm in the east city of Neubrandenburg, which is in that

state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. And the folks that you're seeing behind me might be the reason that Friedrich Merz; the German Chancellor, is in

serious political turmoil.

[14:10:00]

This is the Alternative for Germany, the AfD, that right-wing party that has been doing extremely well in the polls, and also won that landslide in

an election here in another state three weeks ago. Now, they're looking to capitalize on that again.

But in this very state, Richard, the big question is whether or not Friedrich Merz's party is even going to make it into the state parliament.

And if they don't make it, he could be in serious trouble, and it could be jeopardy to his chances. But that was a big issue here in the election

campaign. We were there, here's what he said(ph).

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PLEITGEN (voice-over): Germany's right-wing AfD looking to race to another state election victory in the former communist east of the country, doing

25 miles an hour on old socialist-era motorbikes like at this campaign event.

Their most potent fuel, voter anger at Chancellor Friedrich Merz, a participant who would only give his first name, Chris, tells me. "He's the

wrong guy", Chris says. "He had his chance. He will never be able to recover. Many people just feel this man is incapable."

The AfD is leading the polls here in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, capitalizing not just on Germany's economic turmoil, but also propagating mass

deportations of undocumented foreigners, as well as ending all military aid to Ukraine and renewing ties with Russia.

A position the AfD's candidate for governor tells me aligns them with the Trump administration. "Like America first, we want Germany first", he says.

"That's our core value, and it's also good for international stability. If Germany is stable in the middle of Europe, with good relations with the

U.S. and towards the east."

Mecklenburg-Vorpommern could be the AfD's second big win in only a matter of weeks. In early September, they beat Merz's CDU in the state of Saxony-

Anhalt by a landslide. A desperate Friedrich Merz then attacked the AfD's mass deportation policy, which they themselves call remigration in German

parliament.

"If what you demand became true, remigration, which is nothing more than ethnic cleansing by skin color and country of origin", he says. But so far,

Merz's political counter-punches don't seem to be landing. His popularity has fallen off a cliff, and there's a discussion even among some in his own

party, about him possibly being replaced as chancellor soon.

Merz himself says he will not step down. But back at the AfD's communist- era scooter rally, Chris explains how Merz lost his vote. "Many voters feel they're just not interesting for the chancellor", he says. "That's why I

think maybe it's not just a protest vote, but you have to try something new if the old doesn't work."

A sentiment that appears to be growing in parts of Germany, jeopardizing the current government and turbocharging the far-right.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PLEITGEN: And we can really see that turbocharge here as we are on the ground in Neubrandenburg. The lady that you see speaking behind me,

Richard, is Alice Weidel, the head of the Alternative for Germany, and she recently told me she believes that Friedrich Merz will not be chancellor of

Germany anymore.

QUEST: Fred, we have -- you're bringing us the moment in the movement, and I'm grateful. Thank you, sir. But we're having difficulty with our

connection to you. Thank you, I'm grateful. Fred Pleitgen in Germany tonight. So, we return to our breaking news where sources are reporting to

us that an Intelligence report made with the help of A.I. almost started a war.

The U.S. military apparently was on the verge of intercepting a Chinese vessel in the Middle East last Spring. Apparently, a chatbot had

inaccurately identified the cargo it was carrying. Senior national security reporter Zachary Cohen is with me from Washington. So, this A.I., hell --

well, it wasn't A.I.-generated, but A.I. involved. Tell me what happened.

ZACHARY COHEN, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes, Richard, this Intelligence report did set off immediately alarm bells within the

Pentagon. Obviously, the Intelligence report itself laid out a scenario where it concluded that this Chinese vessel that was moving through the

Middle East was carrying components of a nuclear weapons program.

And that obviously got the attention of the U.S. military, which we're told by multiple sources immediately responded to launch this operation and was

preparing to board the vessel. Military aircraft, we're told were also already in the air at the time that U.S. officials took a closer look at

the report itself, and did conclude that it was generated with assistance from A.I., and that the chatbot that was used by the special operations

analyst who produced the report had incorrectly identified the cargo.

[14:15:00]

Now, we don't know exactly what the cargo on that vessel actually was, but this does speak to the human-A.I. relationship and the concerns around

that, as particularly when it comes to how the U.S. military is using A.I. at a time when it is ramping up its use of that in things like targeting

operations.

And that's something a source told me in this story, saying A.I. and targeting is definitely something that is ramping up, and there is no real

guidance for how having a human in the loop will prevent --

QUEST: Right --

COHEN: Civilian casualties or fratricide.

QUEST: You know, you can have two views on this. Obviously, something went badly wrong with the A.I. in the way it identified, but there'll be those

who say, ah, yes, but at the same time, you know, all was well because the human intervention came along, thought something looked a bit fishy and

then they properly checked it afterwards and all was well.

You paid your money; you take your choice. Which one are you going to go with on that?

COHEN: Yes, Richard, this is not an isolated incident we're told either. And that the A.I. models that are being used --

QUEST: Yes --

COHEN: By the Pentagon, these hallucinations that have been reported in various circumstances, I think, do raise a little bit more of a concern

than if this had been a one off. And so, multiple sources or everybody does agree that at least, nothing actually transpired here.

There was no escalation or no direct confrontation as a result of this apparent hallucination by the A.I. chatbot. But it does also raise

questions about the vetting of these A.I. involved, Intelligence reports and how those reports are being acted --

QUEST: So --

COHEN: On prior to being fully vetted.

QUEST: I'm grateful. Thank you. Joining us from Washington. A new report from the United Nations has found that the deadly U.S. strike on the

Iranian school may have been a war crime. It was a strike back in February. It hit the school in the southern city of Minab.

At least 156 people were killed, and that included 120 children, according to Iranian officials. The report also looked into consideration, a second

U.S. strike, which hit a residential area on the same day. There, the UN says 22 civilians were killed.

The investigators say they found grounds to believe the U.S. had committed a specific war crime, launching indiscriminate attacks resulting in the

loss of life or injury to civilians. CNN's Jennifer Hansler is with us, and bringing us the reaction.

Now, the issue here, as I understand it, is, and is really that the U.S. was so either negligent or wanton miscreant in the way they did it. So

indiscriminate in the way they targeted that this rose to the level of a war crime. They didn't care what they were aiming at. They just -- they

just fired. What did the U.S. say in return?

JENNIFER HANSLER, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Well, Richard, the U.S. is pushing back on the findings of this report, saying that they are

not credible. This is a document that was produced by a group of independent investigators. It will be shown to the United Nations Human

Rights Council next week.

That is, of course, a U.N. body that the U.S. has withdrawn from alleging it as anti-Semitic. We have heard from the State Department saying that

there are no grounds to the findings of this report. We also heard from White House spokesperson Anna Kelly.

I want to read you a little bit of what she said in a statement, quote, "the U.N. Human Rights Council has accomplished nothing for human rights

while spouting unserious nonsense for decades. The only party in this conflict that has committed war crimes is the Iranian regime, which has

murdered thousands of its own people, killed Americans overseas, executed acts of terrorism in the Strait of Hormuz and launched indiscriminate

attacks against its neighbors in the region."

Now, we should note that this report not only found that the U.S. may have committed war crimes, it also said that the Iranian government may have

committed crimes against humanity in its deadly pushback against those anti-government protesters before the start of the war.

Now, as you said, Richard, this report is claiming essentially that the U.S. did not do its due diligence when it came to launching that strike

that killed more than 100 people, according to the Iranian officials. Now, this -- Pentagon has not comment on the report, other than to say they are

conducting their own ongoing investigation.

But you may recall that in the early days, in the aftermath of that strike, sources who were briefed on the preliminary findings said essentially that

CENTCOM was given outdated targeting information when it launched that strike.

Now, even though this report was conducted by independent experts, and it does not actually have any judicial backing or any necessary action that

comes of it, this could be used in other investigations, including by the ICC. Richard.

QUEST: Right, now, so in the sense of the actual attack and the bombing, the U.S. still really hasn't come up with a satisfactory or proper

explanation. Every time I've heard Hegseth talk about it, he says, we don't target civilians.

[14:20:00]

The U.S. never targets civilians, and that there's an investigation, and it is still to report. But we don't have any indication of when we're going to

get the formal U.S. version of this.

HANSLER: No, we don't. And this, of course, has been months and months in the making here, and we have still yet to see any sort of result from that

ongoing investigation, despite continued questions to the White House and the Defense Department. Richard.

QUEST: There we go. The State Department tells CNN the Trump administration does not find the report credible. U.S. is not part of the Human Rights

Council, and Donald Trump has accused the Council of anti-Semitism. And I just -- a final thought for you. I guess they're not going to do anything

as a result of this report.

HANSLER: Well, the U.S. probably will not, but this could be used by groups like the International Criminal --

QUEST: Right --

HANSLER: Court, if they were to bring charges against folks --

QUEST: Sure --

HANSLER: Who are alleged to be involved with the alleged war crimes or the crimes against humanity when it comes to the Iranian government. Of course,

the United States has launched an aggressive campaign against the ICC, calling for its dismantlement, calling for countries to withdraw from that

international criminal body.

This is something that they have continually and aggressively pushed as they have alleged, that the ICC is unfairly targeting both the U.S. and

Israel. So, if the ICC is to pursue any sort of investigation related to this, they are likely to face even more pressure from the Trump

administration. Richard.

QUEST: I am grateful, Jennifer, thank you very much clarifying all of that for us. Still to come on this program tonight, the U.S. is shifting some of

its firepower from Africa. An exclusive report on where the drones may be headed.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

QUEST: In an exclusive report, CNN has learned that the Pentagon is moving drones from Africa to South America ahead of anticipated counter-narcotics

and counterterrorism operations. We're learning that most of the MQ-9 Reaper drones could be transferred, potentially for operations in Ecuador,

and that's despite concerns about Jihadist threats in Africa.

CNN's Haley Britzky is with me, joins me now. Right, you have a limited number of drones. They are in one part of the world, and you now want to

move them to another part of the world. Why is the administration making the move?

[14:25:00]

HALEY BRITZKY, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes, Richard. So, sources have told us that they are moving these drones to the South America

region in anticipation of more counter-narcotics and counterterror operations.

Which we've heard from recently in recent weeks from senior administration officials such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete

Hegseth, that, you know, kind of praising some of these South American countries for their partnership, and for sort of welcoming more partnership

with the U.S. military and conducting joint operations within the region.

Secretary Hegseth, just in August, at a conference in Panama, particularly pointed to Ecuador, Honduras, Guatemala, Colombia and others for their

partnerships and for partaking in these joint operations against narco- terrorists, as the administration calls them.

And so, we've seen that partnership expand as well in the U.S.'s campaign against alleged drug boats in the Eastern Pacific and in the Caribbean that

they have named Operation Southern Spear. We're seeing countries participate in that more and partner with the U.S. military in that way.

So, sources saying that this is -- it's sort of hinting at further operations happening in that part of the world. And as you mentioned in

particular, possible operations in Ecuador, specifically. But something that is also causing concern here on the other side of this is that, as you

said, there is a limited number of these kind of capabilities and of these drones and moving them out of Africa Command.

While the U.S. military is very much still conducting strikes and trying to gather Intelligence on ISIS in Africa, on groups like Al-Shabaab, it is

raising concerns of what the U.S. military's capabilities will be in that region as well. Richard.

QUEST: It's judgment, isn't it? If the -- if those in charge believe that the bigger threat is on the other side, then that's the decision that they

take, and they have to live with. What is the -- as opposed to -- I am, you know, keeping the drones where they are.

And I suppose the argument would also be, well, we're not really sure just how much of a threat there is in the Caribbean. The U.S. seems to be going

after anybody and everybody in -- without too much evidence or at least evidence that they're prepared to show us.

BRITZKY: Right, there are a lot of questions about the sort of evidence that the U.S. military is using in a lot of these cases, but we also know

that the military and its national defense strategy put out in January, made the Western Hemisphere and the defense of the U.S. homeland its number

one priority. So, a lot of this is, as --

QUEST: Right --

BRITZKY: Sources told us, sort of aligning with the priorities that the Pentagon has already set out and moving its equipment and personnel into

place to prioritize those parts of the world.

QUEST: I'm grateful for you, thank you very much indeed joining us. As we continue tonight, still to come on the show, A.I. regulation. Why it's so

difficult for Congress to agree on how to control the A.I. industry.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

QUEST. I'm Richard Quest in for Isa and a warm welcome.

All week we've been talking about the dangers and concerns on the growth of A.I. One obvious answer seems to be government regulation. After all, think

about it. There are regulations in food and medicine and all kinds of other products that impact our lives. And back in 2024, a bipartisan U.S.

Congressional task force suggested more than ways that lawmakers could act on A.I. Since then, nothing has been done actually to rein in the industry.

Our senior reporter Annie Grayer has been looking into the lack of action on A.I. from Capitol Hill. And nothing. I mean, what is their

justification? Is it that something should be done, we just don't know what or we can't agree amongst ourselves?

ANNIE GRAYER, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, this is something I dug into all week, Richard, and there's a lot of different opinions. But one thing that

is clear is lawmakers are really frustrated about the lack of progress and are really frustrated about what -- how this issue is really exposing how

Congress as an institution has become just so dysfunctional.

So, going back to December 2024, the Republican Congressman Jay Obernolte who was leading this task force that come up -- came up with all these

regulations went to House Republican leadership to say, I want to take these recommendations and create a special committee where I'll be able to

create legislation and easily bring it to the floor. And leadership said, no, we don't think that's a good idea. Instead, we'll have the current

committees of jurisdiction just look at your recommendations and then craft legislation from there.

The problem is the momentum completely fell apart because what the Republican congressman was warning about who wanted the special committee

is as we know A.I. is an industry that touches so many different facets of our lives, so many different industries, and therefore it would have -- any

legislation having to do with A.I. would have to go through so many different committees to get approved before it could go to the floor.

And that's exactly what's happened here. We've seen a number of bipartisan proposals come out in the last year and a half, both from Democrats and

Republicans in the House and Senate, but none of them have been able to get the momentum to pass through committee or even get a floor vote.

QUEST: All right. But what I don't follow is why not? I see the procedural differences between setting up a special group, but when these various bits

go into the individual committees, why can't Republicans and Democrats come together and agree? Or is there fundamental disagreement between the two

sides just on anything, including whether to switch the lights on?

GRAYER: Well, I think there's a huge question of political will here. When the president came into office and Republicans took over control of all of

Washington, there was a very anti-regulatory approach to A.I. The President did not want to see new regulations to A.I. and that really trickled down

to the posture that we saw from Republicans in Congress.

Now, Democrats see this as a complete abdication of responsibility that Congress should be having a seat at the table and have a central role here.

As we saw this week, House Speaker Mike Johnson said by contrast that they want to see the A.I. executives themselves come up with these proposals and

not have Congress lead the way on this.

The other big issue here, Richard, is the age of some of these lawmakers. We know there are a lot of members in Congress who are 70 years or older

who don't use this technology themselves, who don't have a real understanding of it. And a lot of lawmakers and sources that I talked to

for my latest story told me that they think that that is a real hindrance on progress here because some lawmakers who don't understand the

technology, don't use it themselves, like don't understand how important this regulation is.

[14:35:12]

QUEST: I'm grateful. Annie, thank you. Joining us from Washington.

I mean, a chorus of warnings about A.I. even from some of the tech leaders themselves, there's huge concerns about what it means for children. Two

larger school districts in the U.S. Los Angeles Unified and New York City schools have announced measures to limit student access to A.I. during the

school day. And researchers are worried that using A.I. chatbots can change children's brain activity.

Here's our Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: I think the metaphor that a lot of people have used in some way is they're sort of likening this

to ultra-processed foods. Ultra-processed foods do provide energy but they are -- you know, they taste really good. They're addictive to some extent.

And often time they crowd out other good food choices.

If you start to think about A.I. chat bots in the same way, they can be endlessly engaging, addictive to some extent, but more importantly, I think

what a lot of people kept telling us was what are you not getting instead as a result of that A.I. chatbot conversation? You're not getting that

human connection. You're not getting eye contact. You're not getting shared laughter. You're not getting sort of the rupture and repair that come with

normal human relationships. Those A.I. chatbots are designed to basically please you in any way possible.

All those things they say are important but especially during the early childhood years, 90 percent of your brain's architecture is being built and

so much of that is coming from human-to-human connection. These A.I. chatbots they threaten to basically sort of crowd out a lot of that human

connection. I think that's where a lot of the concerns sort of revolve.

Way before A.I., way before social media or even devices, there were these studies looking at what happens to humans who don't have contact with other

humans and looking what happens to their brains especially at a very young age. And again, so much of that brain architecture is developed during

those early childhood years and so much of that is driven by human-t0-human contact.

It was interesting when I asked my daughter, I said, "What are you what are you doing? What is this thing you're having with ChatGPT?" And she said,

"You know, look, Dad, I'm just I'm just sitting here rotting." is what she said which was interesting. And I asked Dr. Suskind about this idea of

brain rotting and she made an interesting point about brain rotting versus brain stunting. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. DANA SUSKIND, PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO: So, you can't rot something that hasn't been built. So, I think about that in the early years

as brain stunting. You are stunting. You haven't even built the skills that you can deskill. Like the ability to connect and have critical thinking and

all those other skills that you want to have, you're going to stunt. So, brain rot, brain -- you know, brain stunting, it's not a good thing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUPTA: Stunting the brain. So, maybe more brain rot as you get into your late teens or early 20s. But younger children, they don't ever get the

chance to sort of build those skills because of these conversations with chatbots.

They -- you know, Dana gave me a few rules which I'll just share with you quickly because I think they're really relevant here. The red flags. If the

chatbot is acting too sycophantic, too agreeable with everything, red flag. If it's starting to anthropomorphize, refer to itself as a human in some

ways, that is a red flag. If it is starting to steal your time -- you're like, hey, I got to go. No, why can't you stay a little bit longer? That's

a red flag.

And one thing she also said is that every time you interact the chatbot, start a new search as opposed to sort of continuing an old one. That sort

of resets the platform at least and sort of eliminate -- or reduces at least some of those red flags.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

QUEST: I'm not sure whether I've stunted or rotted when I have my conversations with ChatGPT.

As you and I continue tonight on ISA SOARES TONIGHT, we're going to be talking about the royal book that has everybody talking about in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:41:53]

QUEST: Well, whether you call them stunning or extraordinary or whatever, there are new lines that have come out from Earl Charles Spencer's book on

his sister, the late Princess of Wales. Swan Song: Diana, My Sister. The latest revelations published by the Daily Mail, Earl Spencer discusses the

day of his sister's funeral, especially how her children were handling the proceedings.

He notes how devastated her youngest son, Prince Harry, was. He says, "My chief memory of that train journey is being concerned at the lack of

obvious care for Harry." The earl continues, "Instead of calm and nurture, he was allowed to spin out of control."

On the late Queen, he says, "The late queen offered to give back Diana's royal title." He relayed a conversation with a royal official. "I've just

received a call from her majesty, and she would like to offer Diana her HRH title back." It was taken away, of course, after the late Princess divorced

from the then Prince Charles.

Now, we've not seen the book ahead of its publication, but joining me is CNN's World Commentator Sally Bedell Smith. Before we get into the nitty-

gritty, if you will, before we have to put on the rubber gloves and get into it, just how damaging do you believe this book is at this time?

SALLY BEDELL SMITH, CNN WORLD COMMENTATOR: Well, I think it's potentially very damaging because it is a scathing personal attack on a reigning

monarch. At least unprecedented in modern times after the death of Diana, when the press and the crowds were criticizing the queen for staying up in

Balmoral, that was nothing compared to this. It is visceral. It is intense. It is really quite cruel in the words he has chosen to repeat whether they

occurred or not. And it really paints the reigning monarch in a -- in an -- in a -- as a -- as a callous and vindictive person.

QUEST: Right.

SMITH: And so, I think it is very damaging to him. Whether it's more widely damaging, I don't know. But palace immediately issued rejoinder in the

strongest terms.

QUEST: All right. Now, let's talk about the rejoinder because what was immediately noticeable was the similarity of phraseology. The late Queen

Elizabeth used the phrase some recollections may vary which had become legendary. She then was talking about Meghan and Harry and how they felt

they had been treated. Some recollections may vary. King Charles used just about the same sort of phraseology saying King Charles learned that lesson.

The palace response is also full of news. The pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason affect judgment and color memories in ways others do not

recognize. That's basically another version of some recollections may vary. And he's tied his -- it's -- the speed of that statement is quite

remarkable.

[14:45:09]

SMITH: Yes, the speed. Yes, the speed. And I think even though it's -- I think it's more pointed than recollections may vary and I think it's more

personal. It is basically saying that maybe Charles Spencer's mind was clouded but that what he was saying was absolutely in their view untrue.

He, as you may know, has doubled down in an interview with the BBC saying that he was telling the truth and he's proceeded to drag in his family

members unnamed, saying that he told them at the time. But he said, I have told the truth. So, we have --

QUEST: Right. The problem then --

SMITH: -- the whole idea of what is my truth versus your truth. Sorry.

QUEST: The problem is the late -- my former colleague, the late Larry King interviewed Earl Spencer years ago and then what he had to say was very

different 10 years later. Listen to what the Earl told Larry then.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LARRY KING, TV HOST: Did Charles say anything to you?

EARL CHARLES SPENCER, BROTHER OF PRINCESS DIANA: Not about the speech. No, but he was -- you know, he was perfectly polite all day. We all caught the

train from London together to go to the burial in my family home and nothing nasty has ever been said about it by him to me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUEST: Now, let me just say, nothing nasty has ever been -- how can you in say nothing nasty has ever been said about him to me and 11 years later say

no Charles said -- you know, he was giddy with -- I mean, it just -- one of them is not right, Sally. Which is it?

SMITH: Yes. Well, I think there are other contradictions that we will discover in what he's saying now and what he said some 30 years ago And as

I guess Larry King was years after Diana's death. It has to be one or the other. And I assume that since it was closer to the time of loss that his

words to Larry King, I think carry more weight. He was specifically talking about the speech.

QUEST: I'm grateful that you're with us tonight. Thank you very much.

SMITH: OK.

QUEST: Thank you. Still to come, as we continue, the challenges facing French winemakers. The impact of the sweltering summer heat on a grape

harvest, in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:50:30]

QUEST: Now, for the first time in a century, scientists have discovered a new cat. I'm serious. This small cat is called a tigrillos. It was found in

the mountainous cloud forests of Bolivia. Genetic testing confirms it is a brand-new species. Cat never previously studied. The tigrillos is a smaller

than the average house cat and weighs just three pounds, around one and a half kilogram. Scientists think it most likely comes out at night and

probably eats small rodents. Who knew?

France's wine industry is facing one of its lowest production years in decades after summer's record-breaking heat waves. CNN's Melissa Bell has

been speaking to wine makers in the Medoc region about the state of this year's harvest.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MELISSA BELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Never had the harvest started this early in Saint-Julien. In the Medoc region, as elsewhere, France's

hottest summer on record is changing wine and producing smaller, thicker- skinned grapes.

DAMIEN BARTON, CHATEAU LEOVILLE BARTON: Because there's so little juice, of course, the effort we put in a vineyard is divided by the volume we get out

of it. So, the cost of production for a single bottle of wine will be through the roof. For the consumer side, it's wonderful. For the producer

side is going to cost us a lot of money to produce a single bottle.

BELL (voice-over): And times have been tough for producers of Bordeaux wines for a while, partly because the world is drinking much less of it

than it did.

ROBERT JOSEPH, WINE EXPERT AND INDUSTRY ANALYST: In the 1980s, there were 20,000 individual Bordeaux estates. Today, there are around 5,000, although

it's probably 4,900 and whatever. And we're losing them probably at a rate of one a day. They're either uprooting their vines or being swallowed by

the next-door vineyard.

BELL (voice-over): Fewer drinkers of Bordeaux wines means that only those properties at the very top end can continue to thrive. And amongst them, at

the celebration of last year's Bordeaux in the spring, the word was already of a small but excellent 2025 vintage and a very tight market.

BRUNO BORIE, OWNER, CHATEAU DUCRU-BEAUCAILLOU: People are drinking certainly less. They are more concerned, but they want to drink better all

the time. So, we are probably in the -- on the right -- on the right side of the -- of the consumption.

BELL (voice-over): At the top end, global warming has been driving change for some time. Here at Chateau Siran, the oldest bottles are more than a

hundred years old. Now the wines can be drunk sooner.

EDOUARD MAILHE, CHATEAU SIRAN: The fruitiness of the berries is so lively and the vinification process have improved so much that the Bordeaux wines

were in the past a bit hard, a bit difficult and needed to --

BELL: They needed time.

MAILHE: -- time. Now you can open a bottle of wine in the -- I always say in the five years following the bottling.

BELL (voice-over): So, good news for those who can continue to adapt to a more challenging market and more challenging weather.

SASKIA DE ROTHSCHILD, CEO, CHATEAU LAFITE ROTHSCHILD: We see a trend that goes towards more heat and a little bit less water in the spring and in the

summer, which means we're harvesting almost 10 days earlier than we were 20 years ago.

BELL: Wow.

DE ROTHSCHILD: So, it's really moving the needle.

BELL (voice-over): That needle moved further still this summer with days of heatwave conditions making the 2026 harvest even smaller than the last.

BARTON: This cost of production will start to hit even the higher wines because um because the cost of production is so high. So, this global

warming will impact everyone. And not just a consumer's problem about volume of wine drank per year or even trends about wine regions, it's

really it's you know global warming literally.

BELL (voice-over): Which likely means more challenging times ahead even for those chateaus still able to carry the cost of making great wines despite

the heat.

Melissa Bell CNN, Saint-Julien.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

QUEST: Now, 100th birthday parties are becoming more common in Japan. For the first time, the number of people aged 100 or older has surpassed

100,000 in the country. Hanako Montgomery met one who's 103 years old and who's still working. Grief.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HANAKO MONTGOMERY, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Fuku Amagawa is 103 years and seven months old and she still works days a week.

FUKU AMAGAWA, CENTENARIAN (through translator): I'm truly happy. It's wonderful to still be able to work even at 103.

[14:55:02]

MONTGOMERY (voice-over): Her specialty is making ramen at a shop she and her family opened six decades ago.

MONTGOMERY: Oh, looks so delicious.

MONTGOMERY (voice-over): Amagawa is just one of over a 100,000 centenarians in Japan, a new national record. Experts say the country's healthy diet,

low obesity rates, and universal health care are some reasons why people here live so long.

MONTGOMERY: But Japan's overall population is shrinking. The birth rate is at a record low, leaving few workers to support a growing elderly

population.

MONTGOMERY (voice-over): But Amagawa isn't ready to retire just yet. Most Japanese aged or over are women like her. And while scientists don't

exactly know why, Amagawa has her own theory.

AMAGAWA (through translator): Maybe it's our willpower. I think men rely too much on women and say, I'm too old to do things now.

MONTGOMERY (voice-over): She tells me she has a few tips for living long. Drinking a beer every night. Eating a lot. And most importantly, to find a

reason to get up every morning.

Hanako Montgomery, CNN Tokyo.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

QUEST: I'm exhausted just watching her and I'm 40 years younger. Anyway, I'm very grateful that you're watching us tonight. "WHAT WE KNOW" with

Paula Newton is coming up next. I'll be back later, of course, with "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS." Oh, can we have a bell?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

END