Skip to main content
Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo

tv   PBS News Hour  PBS  February 17, 2016 6:00pm-7:01pm PST

6:00 pm
captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. >> woodruff: on the newshour tonight, an epic battle on capitol hill. we hear from two high-ranking senators about the fight over nominating justice antonin scalia's successor. >> ifill: also ahead this wednesday, apple opposes a judge's order to unlock the iphone used by one of the san bernardino shooters, saying the ruling would undermine customers' privacy. >> woodruff: and: >> i am guilty. i am sorry. will you please forgive me? >> woodruff: a story of reconciliation; how an apartheid-era police official is now helping the people he once brutalized. >> they say, can you believe adrian vlok can change!? i said, i believe what i saw. what i see is what i believe, and i am ready to say that adrian vlok has changed.
6:01 pm
>> ifill: all that, and more, on tonight's pbs newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: lincoln financial. you're in charge.
6:02 pm
♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> supported by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation. committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. more information at macfound.org >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.
6:03 pm
>> ifill: turkey's capital city is alive with fear and anger tonight, after a car bomb killed at least 28 people and wounded 61. we have a report on the blast in central ankara, from juliet bremner of independent television news. >> reporter: moments after an explosion was heard across the turkish capital, flames leapt into the night sky. the bomb had hit a convoy of military buses which had been taking soldiers home from their barracks. in the chaos, immediately after the attack, the governor said that he believed the bomb had been left in a car, and first reports said 18 people had died and anther 45 were injured. it was rush hour. commuters tried to help move a parked car that was blocking the emergency services-- unable to access the vehicle, they smashed the window and drove it away. the buses were targeted close to the turkish parliament.
6:04 pm
the prime minister, president, and security minster were in the middle of a security meeting about syria when the bomb went off. this is the fourth terrorist attack on turkey in recent months. last october, more than 100 peace activists were killed during a rally in ankara. on that occasion, so-called islamic state were blamed. on this occasion, early indications are, this attack is more likely to be the work of the kurdish separatist group, the p.k.k.-- striking at the heart of turkey, days after their army hit across the syrian border. >> woodruff: and in syria today, convoys carrying humanitarian aid made their way to besieged parts of the country. it is part of an agreement between the assad government and the u.n. one convoy arrived in madaya, a town west of damascus that has been sealed off by government forces for months.
6:05 pm
locals say dozens of people have starved to death. >> ifill: pope francis spent this final day of his visit to mexico, near the u.s. border. he journeyed to ciudad juarez, just across the rio grande from el paso, texas, and once a cauldron of violence and drug trafficking. the pontiff's first stop was at a prison, where he embraced inmates and preached a message of redemption. >> ( translated ): the one who has suffered the greatest pain, and we could say has experienced hell, can become a prophet in society. work so that this society, which uses people and discards them, will not go on claiming victims. >> ifill: the final event of the papal trip was a huge outdoor mass this evening. >> woodruff: tensions in the south china sea escalated today, as u.s. and taiwan officials confirmed china has deployed advanced surface-to-air missiles on a disputed island. the batteries are on woodly island in the paracels-- claimed by taiwan and vietnam, but
6:06 pm
controlled by beijing. >> ( translated ): china's move of setting up limited, necessary and self-defense facilities on the islands and reefs where chinese troops are stationed is in line with the right of self- defense endowed by international law to any sovereign state. therefore there is nothing wrong about it. >> woodruff: but the united states sharply criticized the move. secretary of state john kerry spoke in washington as he met with poland's foreign minister: >> when president xi was here in washington, he stood in the rose garden with president obama and said china will not militarize in the south china sea. but there is every evidence, every day, that there has been an increase of militarization of one kind or another. it's of serious concern. >> woodruff: the news came just a day after president obama called for a peaceful resolution of disputes in the south china sea.
6:07 pm
>> ifill: iran pushed back today against a proposal to limit supply and boost prices. russia, saudi arabia, venezuela and qatar said yesterday they would cap oil output at january levels, if other major producers do likewise. but iran said today that with international sanctions easing, it will increase oil exports. it called for the other producers to pump less. >> woodruff: despite iran's statement, the price of oil traded higher today, and that kept wall street's rally alive. the dow jones industrial average gained 257 points to close near 16,454. the nasdaq rose 98 points, and the s&p 500 added 31. >> ifill: and, there's a new top dog in the land. a german short-haired pointer named c.j. took "best in show" last night at the westminster dog show in new york. the three-year-old champion beat 2,700 canine competitors over two days. he's only been showing for six months, but has already won 18
6:08 pm
"best in show" awards, culminating at westminster. good for cj. still to come on the newshour: top senators weigh in on the next supreme court nominee; should apple grant law enforcement access to iphone data? political charges and countercharges fly in south carolina, and much more. >> woodruff: the passing of justice antonin scalia has unleashed a political battle of epic proportions that is reverberating from the campaign trail to capitol hill. president obama has made clear he will nominate someone. but in the senate, most republicans say he shouldn't, and if he does, they won't confirm. we hear now from two senior members of the judiciary committee, which first considers any nominee.
6:09 pm
first up: democratic senator diane feinstein of california. she's in san francisco. welcome, senator feinstein. so what is your response to your republican colleagues who say this should be left to the next president? >> well, i would say this, judy, 14 nominees have been confirmed in the final year of a presidency in history. and as a matter of fact, ronald reagan presented judge kennedy to become justice kennedy, and he became that and was confirmed in the last year of reagan's administration. so it is a well-established fact that this can happen. i mean i remember back, one of my very first confirmation hearings was justice ginsburg. and both the chairman of the committee today senator grassley and senator hatch voted for her. and i remember their statements
6:10 pm
to this day about a president being entitled to his nominees, provided they were qualified, provided they had the recognize businessity skills, the integrity, the moral exas to be enacted. and they both voted for justice ginsburg. i wish we could go back to those days. >> because what's happening now is very destructive of the process. >> woodruff: well, let me just cite quickly what senator hatch has said. and i'm going to be talking to him in just a minute. he said the senate has never allowed a term-limited president to nominate someone this late in his term. >> well, the record reflects that 14 have been confirmed in the final year. we're well able to do it in the time thatj now why not do it because what is left o are serl very important-- several very important cases whereby if there is a tie vote, the appellate
6:11 pm
court decision takes press dense, therefore, shorting the justice system for whoever it was that was on the other side of the appellate court decision. and we shouldn't do that. that, i think, is destructive to what is, you know, a very well put together system of justice. >> woodruff: just quickly, two other questions. republicans say it was the democrats who polit sized this process with the way they went after robert bork, the way they went after clarence thomas, that the democrats started this. >> yeah, well, i wasn't here then so i really can't comment. but whoever it was, it seems to me the time has come to end it. and i had hoped that we were in the process of ending it. we have confirmed 11 judges last year. we have 78 pending. and it shouldn't be that way. and you know, barack obama has almost a full year left. are you saying then that his hands could-- should be
6:12 pm
handcuffed and that he can't make appointments in that full year of his presidency? i think that's a mistake. and one thing, one more thing, what goes around comes around. and i reread orrin hatch's statement after the ginsburg hearing. and regardless of what has happened since then, i think he was absolutely right. and so the ability to process a nominee becomes very important. and i think very significant. and i would hope that or written would remember that. >> woodruff: finally, senator feinstein, how far to the center should the president lean in choosing a nominee? should he try hard to find somebody who is going to appeal to republicans as well as democrats? >> well, i think the answer to that question is yes, if you want to get someone confirmed. i think somebody that has gone through the confirmation process and there are several who are well qualified on that score, or
6:13 pm
somebody that would be seen as outstanding by both sides of the aisle. and with either one of those were to happen, i think the chances of confirmation would be very high. >> woodruff: senator diane feinstein joining us from california. we thank you. >> ifill: now to a republican view: senator orrin hatch of utah. he's also on the judiciary committee, and joins us from salt lake city. welcome senator hatch. so the republicans are in the majority. the president has said he is going to nominate someone to fill the term or to take the place of justice scalia. what is going to happen then? ness well, the president has an absolute right to nominate whoever he wants to. and i would vote to protect that right. but the senate also has an absolute right to confirm or not to confirm. and so i do support senator mcconel in saying let's get it
6:14 pm
out of this terrible presidential brew what what that is going on and let's get it over to the next year and be fair to both sides because what would happen is whoever wins the presidency is going to be able to make this nomination. usually you never nominate anyone during the last year of a president. and the reason for that is because, well, there are many reasons but one reason is because there's always a very contested senate primaries and also election, and secondly, generally, one side or the other is going to get very, very upset about it. i would rather get the supreme court out of that type of condition. >> woodruff: we just heard senator fine stiern say there are 14 examples of nominations to the supreme court that took place during the final year of a presidency. >> well, in the last eight years there haven't been 80 years, and i am talking for 80 years exseptd for justice kennedy. but kennedy was nominated in the prior year.
6:15 pm
and that was only after a bruising set of fights that resulted in basically a choice of kennedy that both sides went along with. >> woodruff: well, let me just come back to you with whatnot only senator feinstein has said but so many others including the president. he still has almost a year left in office. that it is the duty of the senate to consider the nomination. senator feinstein pointed out that when you supported ruth bader ginsburg for the senate it clearly was someone whose views were different from yours. >> that's right. >> woodruff: you said the president's choice should be respected. >> well, i think the president's choice should be respected. but it doesn't mean you have to have-- you have to accept that choice. and in this situation, just think about it. they are already voting in the primaries. we're already in full swing in the presidential election, at least the primaries. it's contentious as can be. it's the most obnoxious
6:16 pm
political system, series of problems that i have seen in the whole time i've been in the united states senate. >> woodruff: senator, are you saying then that the majority of republican was not hold hearings on the judiciary committee? >> i think if you are not going to allow it do come up in this brew ha ha year where there is insighting and screaming and shouting, yeah, i don't think any reason, there would not be any real good reason to have hearings. >> woodruff: is there any precedent for that, for the senate ever having refused to consider the president's nominee to the supreme court? >> well, i don't know about that, whether there is any precedent. >> woodruff: i mean when the president himself didn't withdraw the nomination. >> well, we're talking about scalia's successor. we're talking about something that every person, every republican revered and many democrats revered by the way because they knew what a great injurist he really was. and-- ju rist he really was and we're talking about having a system that dnt become the
6:17 pm
brutalized system with the bob bourke nomination, one of the greatest legal minds of this country and they brutalized him and look at what they did to clarence thomas. the fact of the matter i would like to get it out of that type of brew ha ha and get it into the next year where there should be no brouha ha and whatever president should pick whoever that president wants. >> woodruff: you are saying to be clear republicans would sit on this nomination, not act on it? >> well, i'm saying the republicans should not act on it. because the proper way is to get this done in a way that cools the whole process around electing judges, in particular, justices to the united states supreme court. i just don't want the court polit sized. and this would be the biggest politiization in history, and that is saying something because there are other times that would come close to matching this. but in all honesty i just don't
6:18 pm
want to see the court den graded any further than it would be in this very cause particular-- cau stic election year the way things are going right now. >> woodruff: even with a centrist choice. >> well, who knows whether it will be centrist or not. we'll have to see. yeah, the president might pick somebody that everybody can agree with. that's another matter. i hope he does. >> woodruff: senator orrin hatch, we thank you very much. >> well, thank you. >> ifill: now, the battle over privacy versus security is back front and center, as apple digs in against the f.b.i. and the courts over the issue of access to data on phones. december 2nd, 2015... that's the day syed farook and his wife, tashfeen malik, went on a murderous rampage in san
6:19 pm
bernardino, california, killing 14 people. hours later, they were, in turn, killed by police. ever since, the f.b.i. has been trying to read the contents of a cell phone farook used. >> we still have one of those killer's phones that we have not been able to open. and it's been over two months now, we're still working on it. >> ifill: last week, f.b.i. director james comey told a senate hearing that the apple iphone's encryption has made it impossible for the agency to access its content. now, a federal judge in california has ordered the company to create software that will do just that. but apple c.e.o. tim cook forcefully rejected that order early yesterday, writing in a letter addressed to apple customers: "in the wrong hands, this software-- which does not exist today-- would have the potential to unlock any iphone in someone's physical possession." white house press secretary josh earnest disputed that today,
6:20 pm
saying the government wants access only to the single device associated with farook. >> we're not asking apple to redesign its products or to create a new back door to its products. this is a much more specific request that the dept of justice has put forward. >> ifill: apple stepped up its protections after n.s.a. leaker edward snowden exposed government surveillance of phone traffic, in 2013. one feature can even erase the iphone's contents after ten failed attempts to unlock it. prosecutors say they are worried that this feature could be on the phone farook used. and unless apple devises a way to unlock it, they could lose all its data. the company now has five days to make its formal response in court.
6:21 pm
and now for a look at the wider stakes surrounding this case, with: nate cardozo, a staff attorney who focuses on digital civil liberties for the electronic frontier foundation. he joins us from san francisco; and stewart baker was assistant secretary of homeland security during the george w. bush administration and general counsel at the national security agency during the nineties. he's now in private practice at steptoe and johnson. stewart baker, tim cook says that building this access, this back door access to the iphone as he describes it would permanently weaken privacy, is he right? >> no, i don't think he is. the order says you must defeat this one security feature which is the automatic erasing of all the information on the phone. and that's not building a permanent back door into anything. that's one phone, one order, one security feature. >> ifill: so nate, if it's one phone, one order, one security feature what is the haza all
6:22 pm
about? >> it's not about one phone and it's not about one security feature. the fbi chose this case to get the precedent, right. we know who the shooters were. we know who they were talking to. the fbi already has the metadata. they chose this case because they want press denlt that they-- precedent that they can order a company to define a particular feature at their whim. so when you hear stewart or you know the white house press secretary say it's only this one phone, that is simply disingenuous. >> ifill: are we talking about precedent here stewart baker? >> well, there is long-standing precedent. 200 years old that says that if someone has an obligation to help law enforcement to take action, then the government can order other people to help that person carry out his obligation. if somebody jumps into a cab and says there is a bank robber up ahead, follow that car. the cab company has an
6:23 pm
obligation to follow that can be. >> ifill: why is the government standing to make a request like this. >> there is an act that has been around for almost 200 years that says that essentially the government can ask someone who is in a uniquely-- unique position to help to assist in carrying out an obligation that law enforcement has. >> ifill: nate car doazo, what-- cardozo, what slippery slope do you envision. >> it is more than a slippery slope. no court in the united states has approved a breathe under this act. never ordered an american company to compromise the security of their customers, no court has ordered a safe make tore make a master key. and the courts that have addressed it, the in the company case that you are aware of, the court found that onstar could not be ordered to sub vert its emergency phone system and turn it into a wiretap act.
6:24 pm
this isn't just a slippery slope. if the fbi is permitted to get the order in this case, that is it, they will be permitted to get a back door order in every case going forward and more than that, apple will be unable to resist identical demands from china, from india, from russia. and that is the end of secure devices. >> i have to say that the concern here that apple has is they have said this phone cannot be cracked. and now it turns out that may not be true. and they would like to suppress that possibility because they're afraid china or russia might order them to use that capability. china and russia are perfectly capable of ordering apple to do that tomorrow whether they have help from the court in this case or not. >> ifill: you are talking about china an russia. i want to ask you both this. since you brought it up, how do international actors see this kind of discussion that we're having here? does it make us look weak? >> i think it.
6:25 pm
>> i think authority tairian regimes around the world are sal vaiting at the prospect of the fbi winning this order. if apple creates the master key that the fbi has demanded that they create, governments around the world are going to be demanding exactly the same. >> whether or not they do that in response to this order, if it's possible to build that capability, then the russians and the chinese are going to order apple to do it sooner or later and probably sooner. whether or not the united states tells apple to do this. >> ifill: can i ask you both to make one thing clear. do you both agree that apple is capable of doing what they are being asked to do and they're just resisting it on principle, nate car dozena. >> we think apple is capable of doing it for this generation of phone, the phone at issue is an iphone 5c which is i guess two generations back at this point. the iphone 6 and iphone 6s, it is our belief that apple is probably not capable, at least
6:26 pm
not capable of using this exact technique to unlock. but we think they are capable of unlocking the 5c iers and you think that is true. >> that appears what apple has said, they think they can do it, they choose not to do it, not withstanding the stakes for terrorism in san bernardino. >> ifill: so if you are the owner of one of these phones which could be unlocked if apple decided to go along with this, how much-- how worried should you be, nature cardozo that your privacy is about to be compromised? >> well, you know, every individual should create, should do their own threat assessment. if you have particularly sensitive data, if you are a human rights worker in syria, if you are an lgbt activist in any country around the world where you may be percent cuted for your orientation or beliefs, make sure to tune up your security in response to this. use a pass code longer than four digits. >> ifill: i hope that everyone is doing that anyway.
6:27 pm
>> yes, certainly there are times when everyone wants to worry about security. but the idea that the desire for security could trump a lawfully obtained search warrant to find out whether we're at risk of other people who con spired with the san bernardino shooters right now, strikes me as odd. and for apple to say well, it interferes with our business model and our consumer trust to help the u.s. government find out about this possible additional attacker, it does not make any sense. >> ifill: this security versus privacy sounds like it will continue nate cardozo. >> you know, it's not security versus privacy. this is security versus surveillance. this is security versus security. before apple instituted this level of encryption on devices, when devices were stolen, they were susceptible to any run of the mill hacker opening it up. and that is what the fbi wants apple to return to? thaz's crazy.
6:28 pm
>> ifill: we have to leave it there, nate cardozo from the electronic frontier foundation, stewart baker former deputy assistant secretary at the department of homeland security, thank you both. >> thanks. >> thank you. >> woodruff: stay with us. coming up on the newshour: a notorious apartheid leader seeks penance for his wrongs; and the man who composed the music for the movie "carol" scores his first oscar nomination. but first: in the race for the white house, tensions are heating up in south carolina. our political director lisa desjardins reports. >> reporter: the republican 2016 race-- already full of twists and turns-- took one more today, when south carolina governor
6:29 pm
nikki haley announced she would endorse marco rubio, four days before the state's primary. otherwise, the contest has become a blur of blistering attacks. starting with the man at the top, donald trump: target-- ted cruz. cruz has said trump is not truly conservative. cruz has a series of anti-trump ads that make the point. today in bluffton, south carolina, trump again shot back: >> you can't lie about people like that. ...but i've never dealt with anyone who lies like that. >> reporter: as for cruz, consider it the third law of politics: every trump attack gets an equal and opposite counterattack. >> look, ethics matter. >> reporter: today, the texas senator went after trump's attempt to block his ads. >> mr. trump has sent me a legal "cease and desist" letter saying, "stop telling the voters my record." now, that is objectively, legally, frivolous. i will point to substance and >> reporter: but this is not a two-man war, and cruz is also targeting fellow senator marco
6:30 pm
rubio. >> when you have donald trump and marco rubio repeatedly putting forth fabrications with no evidence, no basis whatsoever-- just trying to throw mud and attack. >> reporter: rubio is more focused in his attacks on fellow senator cruz-- and defense spending. >> some people talk to me, and say, "well, why vote for you and not ted cruz?" well, ted cruz voted for a budget that cut it even more. i'm not cutting defense spending when i'm president. >> reporter: he may not be in the top three right now, but jeb bush is not to be left out-- firing away in beaufort today at trump, rubio and john kasich. >> with all due respect, senator rubio, your four years, or five years, or whatever it is, does not match up to my capabilities of understanding how the world works. donald trump says we don't need to spend more money on the military. and john kasich has a similar kind of view. they're wrong. >> reporter: kasich kept his distance from the scrimmage,
6:31 pm
hoping a positive message wins. >> let's not be negative about the future of our country or negative about our country today, we're doing fine. >> reporter: the democrats were less sharp-edged. but hillary clinton, in chicago, did seem to dig at her rival, bernie sanders. >> we need a president who is passionate about reigning in wall street, but we need a president who is dedicated to creating jobs and economic growth, like i am. >> reporter: sanders left the campaign trail briefly today, returning to vermont. up next? candidates in both parties hit national television-- for town halls the next two nights. for the pbs newshour, i'm lisa desjardins. >> woodruff: just three days away from the next voting contests, we turn our attention to nevada, where sanders and clinton will face off for the third time, and south carolina, which we just heard about. joining us tonight from las vegas is jon ralston of "ralston live;" and from south carolina, randy covington, a professor of journalism at the university of south carolina.
6:32 pm
he is also the former news director of wis in columbia. gentlemen, welcome to you both. let's start with the dem rat-- democrats in nevada, jon ralston the race has tightened up between clinton and sanders. what has happened, why? >> hillary clinton had the state locked up. she came here early last year, set up an infrastructure, hired all these operatives from 2008 who had worked here. she reached out to the latino community. bernie sanders was invisible. his campaign didn't even arrive until late last year but then slowly the tide began turning. he started to turn. he raised a lot of money. put resources in here, spent money on tv and then after new hampshire, judy, the tide completely turned when she lost by a landslide in new hampshire. her internal polts showed she was hemorrhaging. suddenly the clintons were making new hampshire and iowa seem like nevada when it is
6:33 pm
nothing like nevada. they said it was an all-white state essentially. so her campaign essentially has been in a free fall here. they've been trying to stop that. and they're hoping to have a parachute before they hit the ground on saturday. >> woodruff: and quickly jon ralston, hillary clinton had shown strength among latino voters, we know she had some strength among the labor unions, what has happened to all of that? >> well, she does have strength among latino sloaters here, judy. in fact, she has had some high profile endorsements. she has the legendary civil rights activist campaigning for her here today. henry sisser in os, the former cabinet secretary, mawr of san antonio is here. a lot of local dreamers including maybe the most famous dreamer in the country who was on stage with president obama, astrid sila-- sil va endorsed her. but bernie sanders made inroads, even the clinton campaign acknowledged his message is resonating in the latino community. i think she will win latinos but will she win by enough to win
6:34 pm
the awe kus on saturday. >> woodruff: rany covington, to the democrats in south carolina where hillary clinton seems to be holding on to her lead a little better. what does it look like? >> for the democrats there is not the passion that existed eight years ago when barack obama was running. most african-american leaders here are supporting clinton. the sanders message is fairly alien in a conservative state. i think it's fairly safe for hillary clinton here. more of the focus, more of the excitement is on the other side. >> it sure. is and that's where all the, as we saw in that report from lisa deses are d-- desjardins, that is where a lot of the yelling and tv spots are directed. randy covington, why is donald trump doing so well in south carolina? >> well, south carolina has a long history of being con trairian. civil war started here, when the
6:35 pm
civil rights legislation passed in the 1960s. we raised the confederate flag on top of the state house. his message resonates in a state like this. and at a time in the nation where there is frustration over government, clearly trump is tapped into that. and in a statement four years ago in this primary went for neut ging rich, i don't think there is anything surprising about trump's strength. >> woodruff: and what about the message from ted cruz. we know that he and trump are in a vicious back and forth. who is listening, who is responding positively to ted cruz? >> all right, so judy, if i could turn the clock back, 16 years, you were at cnn. i was working in television at that time. and jon mccain in the straight
6:36 pm
talk express came rolling too south carolina. and then things got really interesting. and i think we're at this exact same moment today. you have the apparent frontrunners, however it is much more nuanced and complicated than that. jeb bush, this is his last stand. and he is putting enormous strength, power, resources into this. >> woodruff: and meanwhile if i could interrupt you had your governor nikki haley today endorsing marco rubio does that help him a lot? >> absolutely. so you have bush who i think is strong debate performance. you have rubio, just a few minutes ago,ed influential state newspaper here in columbia endorsed kasich. so i think this field is very
6:37 pm
much in play. probably most people expect the insurgent message of trump to win. but everything else is very volatile. where i live every day my phone rings incessantly with robo calls. i brought in my props. this is from my mail box in the last two days. three projeb, jeb, one anti-jeb, one anti-trump, two anti-rubio, one prorubio. what i think there is much more to unfold in the next few hours. >> woodruff: it sounds like, in the feks few days am but meanwhile back to nevada and jon ralston, the republicans are competing there. one week later, how is that shaping up or is everything on hold until they see how south carolina goes? >> well, they're waiting to come here until after south carolina, judy. but donald trump is dominating here in the polls. the other campaigns that are organized here, cruz, bush and
6:38 pm
rubio, all privately acknowledge they're fighting for second place but that could be important depending on what happens in south carolina. but i think nevada is going to mirror what is happening elsewhere, that as long as there are three or four candidates running against donald trump, he will get his 25, po, 35% and the rest are going to divide it up until someone decides to get out or a couple of them decide to get out it will be interesting to see what happens in south carolina because i think that will have an impact on nevada. but probably only on who finishes in second and third. >> one thing for sure, it's not dul. john ralston, randy covington, thank you both. >> ifill: a generation has passed since south africa ended apartheid. and while the country has made progress towards reconciling years of state-sanctioned, violent oppression, the
6:39 pm
reckoning continues. at the same time, there have been smaller, individual efforts to do penance. tonight,special correspondent martin seemungal brings us the story of a man who was once the very symbol of apartheid, as he tries to make amends. >> reporter: it is an unusual scene in south africa. a white man in his late 70's in a black township delivering free food to the needy. but its not just what the man is doing, its who the man is-- or, who he was. >> reporter: his name is adrian vlok, and he was a cabinet minister during the harshest years of apartheid, known as a ruthless defender of white minority rule over the black majority. >> adrian vlok was the manifestation of the evil that the apartheid regime was. he was the worst of the worst. >> reporter: mondli makanya was
6:40 pm
an anti-apartheid activist then. today he is an outspoken editorial writer for a johannesburg newspaper. >> from the mid-1980's i would venture to say, other than president p.w. botha at the time, he was the most evil man in south africa and he was the face of the evil of the apartheid regime. >> reporter: as minister of law and order, vlok was responsible for the police-- the shock troops in the war against black activists fighting apartheid. a bloody, violent fight-- thousands were killed, tens of thousands were detained, locked up without trial-- all under the watch of adrian vlok. three decades later now, in the black township of olievenhoutbosch, vlok passes
6:41 pm
unrecognized as he does his rounds. vlok visits this township every week delivering food donated by local supermarkets to three daycare centers and a charity for the disabled. he is reaching out to the people he once helped oppress, to atone for what he calls the sin of apartheid. vlok has always been a devout christian--but in the early years he believed in white superiority. his transformation began after the fall of aparthied and the first all-race elections. over a period of about ten years, he began to rethink and ultimately repent. >> i submitted to the lord and i said, "lord, i have sinned. here i am. please forgive me. i am not offering any excuses. i am not offering an excuse that this and this were the reason why i did that. i am guilty. i am sorry. will you please forgive me?" >> reporter: so his mission today is about redemption.
6:42 pm
its about reconciliation. >> reporter: 43-year-old dinah sekese runs the disabled center vlok is helping. as an 18-year-old, she joined the protests against the apartheid regime. she knew who he was. >> i know the man that adrian vlok was. for me, he was a bad man. >> reporter: in the several years she has worked with vlok she never showed him the scars from the rubber bullets fired by his police in 1986-- but on this day she did. she told him what happened during a march on a police station. >> stones go over me and then i hear pap-pap-pap and almost eight rubber bullet hit me. my arms, you can see all over.
6:43 pm
>> i can't take away that scar, but i can love her and i can help her. >> reporter: painful memories for dinah-- poignantly ironic that adrian vlok is the one offering comfort. obviously they were police under your command? >> yes. i feel bad. i didn't feel good about that. i feel sorry that this has happened and as i said i can't take away those scars, they are there, as a witness to what we did to these people. >> reporter: the most infamous case linked to vlok was the attempt to assassinate frank chikane. rev frank chikane was a key member of the anti-apartheid leadership. in the late 80's the apartheid government saw him as a significant threat. did you give the instruction to kill frank chikane? how did that come about? >> his name was put before me
6:44 pm
and i said that there is an instruction that you could consider killing him and i said, "do it," so i pass it on. >> reporter: vlok says he didn't know how or when it would be done. in 1989, chikane's clothes were laced with poison-- he barely survived. in 2006 vlok confessed to his involvement in and was given a ten-year suspended sentence. but he wanted to do more-- an act to underscore his sincerity. in a private meeting with chikane he offered to wash his feet. vlok admits he was afraid. >> i have been a guy in this country who had power. i was a minister. i am afrikaans speaking, i am a white man and here i am going to bow down on my knees in front of a black man. and i stuttered and i ask the
6:45 pm
question, will you allow me to wash your feet? and he was taken aback. and he said, "why do you want to do that?" then we talk a little bit and i said, "frank, i believe that i've hurt you through apartheid and through what we did to you and your family," and he said "okay, you can wash my feet." and i cried and i think frank cried and he prayed and i prayed. >> reporter: the people who work with vlok in the township do not doubt his sincerity. >> they say, can you believe adrian vlok can change!? i said, i believe what i saw. what i see is what i believe, and i am ready to say that adrian vlok has changed. >> reporter: and they believe he should be forgiven. >> here in our country the only thing that we appreciate is when a person comes out and says sorry, can you forgive me? its what we want. and i believe its something that builds this peace that we have
6:46 pm
in this country. >> reporter: but mondli makanya says there is still enormous bitterness among black south africans because of the crimes committed by the apartheid regime. not everyone is willing to forgive so easily. >> ideally people like adrian vlok should have gone to prison for a very long time, and there but it was necessary in the wisdom of mandela that we actually make those compromises and we accept that will never happen. but forgiveness comes hard. >> i think it is of the utmost importance, because if you are not prepared to forgive and to be reconciled, what is the alternative? it is hatred: "i blame you, they blame me and we will not find each other." >> reporter: a scene like this would have been unimaginable 30 years ago. south africa's most feared apartheid minister, embracing young black children, singing the national anthem.
6:47 pm
adrian vlok says he will dedicate his remaining years to peace and reconciliation, one day at a time. for the pbs newshour, i'm martin seemungal in olievenhoutbosch township near pretoria, south africa. >> ifill: tomorrow, as part of our year long series: "race matters: solutions:" special correspondent charlayne hunter gault reports on similar reconciliation efforts here at home, in birmingham, alabama. >> woodruff: finally, a little more than a week away, the academy awards recognize the many elements-- both seen and unseen-- that go into filmmaking. one of those is the musical score. jeffrey brown visited oscar- nominated film composer carter burwell recently in his new york
6:48 pm
studio to see how he creates the sound tracks to the movies. >> brown: it's one of the elements of film that often goes unnoticed-- unless it's very bad, or in the case of "carol," very good: the musical score. >> you know, i think of that theme as being about the excitement, the heart beating excitement and mystery of seeing someone, feeling that tug. >> brown: carter burwell has been composing music for movies for more than 30 years. and, for the first time, he's been nominated for an oscar for his work on the film directed by todd haynes, about two women falling in love in post-war america. >> i don't want there to be music in the scene, or in the film, just because it's expected, i want it to be there to say something, and ideally to say something that you wouldn't otherwise, that wouldn't
6:49 pm
otherwise be said. so, you know, carol is a perfect example of this because it's very sparse for dialogue, to begin with, and also it's a love story between two women at a time when that actually couldn't be spoken of openly. >> brown: literally unspoken. >> literally unspoken. so the music is saying a lot that the characters either can't, or won't, say. >> brown: a one-time architecture student and punk rocker, burwell has composed music for more than 80 films, beginning with the coen brothers' "blood simple" in 1984. since then he's done most of their major films, including the just-released "hail caesar." he's also worked on commercial giants, like the "twilight" saga... and this year, composed music for the oscar-nominated stop- motion picture "anomalisa."
6:50 pm
burwell often begins by reading a script to determine, with the director, what kind of music-- if any-- might be appropriate. >> if it is early in the process we can have a conversation that at least suggests what type of instrumentation there might be, in other words, how expensive might this music be. is there going to be a symphony orchestra, is it going to be a guy with a ukulele. >> brown: wait a minute, so that's the first thing, is how expensive it is, not the what are we looking for here, what kind of sound, what kind of-- ? >> well, you know, they go hand- in-hand, but early on, honestly, figuring out the budget is, especially, you know, i work on a lot of low budget films, and squeezing everything, and fitting it as tightly as you can is important. >> brown: he doesn't begin writing music until he watches early cuts of the scenes, using visual cues-- the "look" the director is after-- to determine his musical ones. in the case of "carol," he
6:51 pm
created individual instrumental "voices," both woodwinds, for the two women. >> i thought they would be capable of the fluidity that would seem feminine, and also appropriate to the look of the film. >> brown: and this before we've even met the two women in the film. >> exactly, right. >> brown: so you've introduced the characters. >> that's right, exactly, i've introduced the characters. >> brown: another example-- this time with the piano filling in the dialogue-- comes in a key scene in which the two women drive to carol's house. >> the left hand of the piano is playing a rhythm, but it goes into these echoes that pile up and pile up, so that you kind of lose the rhythm. the right hand of the piano is different, it's crystal clear,
6:52 pm
and sort of pointilistic, and very simple. >> brown: and we're inside a different universe now, right, in the car. >> exactly, and the way it's shot it gets more and more subjective, it's just a little fur, a glove, something like that. >> brown: with "carol," burwell had eight weeks to craft the music, but in this world even that is longer than usual. >> it's deadline composing, that's-- there are a lot of qualities that maybe make you a film composer, but dealing with deadlines, and that kind of stress is certainly an essential one. >> brown: another key to this aspect of filmmaking, burwell says, is to think of music like any other tool of storytelling. >> well, as a viewer, and listener, i prefer to be a little less informed. i prefer that feeling of
6:53 pm
discomfort and uncertainty about, i'm not sure what's going on, what's happening here in this scene. music, no matter what specific thing it's saying, it does lend a certain emotional comfort, and if you withhold that, like for example in the movie "no country for old men," we realized that whenever we put anything that sounded like music in the movie, the tension evaporated, or lessened anyway, and that movie's all tension. >> brown: you've done scores for eighty or ninety films.
6:54 pm
>> apparently. >> brown: apparently, yeah, never won an oscar. >> apparently. >> brown: so you're, are you anticipating, excited by, what's the, trying to stay away from the whole thing, or what? >> you know, i love this work, and i have great admiration for my, you know, my peers, but it's also not the, the industry awards are not the most important thing to me, but i think it's great, no keep your oscar, no, i'm looking forward, it's going to be fun. >> brown: carter burwell, congratulations, and good luck, and thank you. >> thanks a lot. >> brown: from lower manhattan, i'm jeffrey brown for the pbs newshour.
6:55 pm
>> woodruff: later tonight on "nova," new technology is revealing insights about the iceman, "otzi," the frozen, preserved mummy discovered in the alps in 1991. in "iceman reborn", scientists are trying to unlock secrets from his genetic code to discover his true origin and help researchers understand how people lived at the end of the stone age. that's tonight, on most pbs stations. >> ifill: and that's the newshour for tonight. on thursday, making sense of gambling on the presidential election, and who's taking the bets. i'm gwen ifill. >> woodruff: and i'm judy woodruff. join us on-line, and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> and by bnsf railway. lincoln financial.
6:56 pm
you're in charge. >> supporting social entrepreneurs and their solutions to the world's most pressing problems-- skollfoundation.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
6:57 pm
6:58 pm
6:59 pm
7:00 pm
>> announcer: this is "nightly business report" with tyler mathisen and sue herera. personal security versus national security. a court orders apple to help the fbi unlock an iphone used by a domestic terrorist. apple says no, and the battle is highlighting one of the most important and contentious privacy issues of our time. off the rails. why cheap oil is causing a business that had once been booming to go bust. and closing the gap. how one program is helping urban youth gain the skills they need to get the jobs they want. the second part of our "bridging the divide" series tonight on "nightly business report" for wednesday, february 17th. good evening, everyone. i'm sharon epperson in tonight for sue

123 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on