reports from capetown, south africa, on drugs, poverty and gangs in the shadow of the city's world cup stadium. >> i don't mean anything to my own family. that's why i look up to these guys. to show me the way. >> lehrer: ray suarez looks at a violent week in afghanistan just ahead of a major nato operation. >> woodruff: and geoffrey jean michel cousteau about the environmental disaster in the gulf. >> my hope is that this is the kick in the butt that we needed for change. >> lehrer: that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by >> this is the engine that connects aabundant grain from the america heartland to aaron's best selling whole wheat while keeping 60 billion pounds of carbon out of the atmosphere every year. the engine that connects us. >> chevron. this is the power of human energy. >> pacific life. the power to help you succeed. >> and the national science foundation, supporting education and research across all fields of science and engineering. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station, from viewers like you. thank you. >> lehrer: on this day 50 of the gulf disaster, officials still don't know how much oil is escaping from the damageded well or where it's headed. a mile deep a containment cap over the blown-out well head is now pumping even more of the leaky crude to the surface. at a news conference in washington, coast guard admiral thaad allen said the device captured more than 600,000 gallons yesterday up from 460,000 on sunday. but the government's pointman said he wasn't optimistic. >> i have never said this is going well. we're throwing everything we've got at this. this is the largest oil spill response in the history of the country. i've said time and time again nothing good happens when oil is on the water. we're making no illusions that this is anything other than as catastrophe. we're addressing it as such and still continue to do that. >> lehrer: criticism of the government's handling of the spill continues to mount. an abc news/"washington post" poll shows 69% of americans have a negative view of the government's response to the spill. >> here is what i can say. we have responded with unprecedented resources. >> reporter: on nbc's today show this morning, president obama defended both his administration's actions and his own personal reaction to the spill. >> i was down there a month ago, before most of these talking heads were even paying attention to the gulf. a month ago i was meeting with fishermen down there, standing in the rain talking about what a potential crisis this could be. and i don't sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar. we talk to these folks because they potentially had the best answers so i know whose ass to kick, right? you know, this is not theater. >> lehrer: that strong language comes just a day after officials say the slick has broken up into thousands of oily patches. thick oil has enveloped endangered birds in louisiana, tar balls have washed ashore in alabama, and a sheen has dotted the florida coast. and now the head of the national oceanic and atmospheric administration has confirmed what some scientists have suspected. there are oil plumes deep below the surface more than 40 miles from the gushing well. >> the we've just gotten the samples. they indicate that there is definitely oil sub surface. it's in very low concentrations. i mentioned 0.5 parts per million. >> lehrer: put together oil above and below the gulf's waves will take months to clean up. and will impact the region for years. the 1990 oil pollution act sets no limit on clean-up costs and bp has committed to paying those. company officials said they will ignore the law's $75 million liability cap. so far they've paid out $49 million in damages and face more than 150 lawsuits. on the today show, president obama had harsh words for bp's ceo tony hayward who has been quoted saying the spill's environmental impact would be very, very modest. >> he wouldn't be working for me. after any of those statements. i don't want to pre-judge it. but the initial reports indicate that there may be situations in which not only human error was involved but you also saw some corner cutting in terms of safety. bp is a multibillion dollar corporation. it's talking about paying $10.5 billion in dividends just for this quarter. >> lehrer: at a news conference today in alabama, bp executive said the company is moving quickly to compensate those affected by the spill. >> i think there's a perception that somehow we're designing this process so it doesn't compensate people who have had an impact. that's not the purpose at all. we're trying to get money into the people's hands who had a legitimate impact. >> lehrer: meanwhile the senate judiciary committee held a hearing on the question of liability today. christopher jones, whose brother was killed when the doomed rig exploded in april, said he couldn't understand why a company with so much money can't stop the gusher. >> it's mind boggling how they can throw up their hands and say that they could not have anticipated this or not have had the resources in place to prevent it. >> lehrer: officials hope the containment cap's performance continues to improve. bp plans to switch to a larger one soon in an effort to capture even more oil. president obama will make another visit, his fourth, to the gulf next week. according to a white house statement released late today. more on the liabilities question now from tracy hester, a professor of environmental law, director of the university of houston's law center's environment, energy, and natural resource center. and noah hall, a professor of water and environmental law at wayne state university law school. professor hester, in general are there any real limits on bp's liability for this oil spill? >> well, there are limits for one particular sub set of claims to be brought against bp, which would be $75 million for claims brought for damages under the oil pollution act. that cap does not apply, however, for direct removal costs, getting the oil actually out of the water. that is unlimited under the oil pollution act. that cap doesn't apply to state law tort law suit or civil or criminal peenlts that the united states or state governments might want to pursue. >> lehrer: the answer is yes, there's no real limit. even under the $75 million cap there are ways to even raise that, are there not, depending on allegations? the president was saying there was corner-cuting on safety and things like that? >> well, if there's a cap it's a pretty leaky one. the $75 million cap only applies if there is a situation where there hasn't been gross negligence or willful misconduct or failure to comply with federal safety or operational regulations. if any of those get proven in litigation, even that $75 million cap comes off. >> lehrer: professor hall, do you agree with that in general that there are no limits on bp at this point? >> absolutely. the $75 million cap has probably been an overplayed issue. it's really a non-issue. bp has said that it's not going to wore he about the $75 million cap, nor should they because i think as professor hester pointed out, it's almost certain that bp is going to be shown to have violated in federal health, safety, occupationing standard, some negligence on bp's part so they won't have the benefit of the cap and they're facing liabilities of billions and billions of dollars here. >> lehrer: when they talk about liability and claims of bp as we reported has already gotten and paid out 150, there are 150 lawsuits but there are thousands of claims that have already been paid out. what are the standards for determining whether or not a person's job or a person's income or a... any injury to a person beyond physical injury, which is obvious, has actually either the result of this bp oil spill. how do they go about determining this? >> well, the short answer is there's going to be a lot of disputes, a lot of litigation and for many of these claims the victims really won't see justice for many years to come. it's not always immediately apparent who has been hurt. whose business has suffered because of the oil spill. which fishermen have lost their catches for the season. even health damages often don't appear right away. there's a lot of latent effects of pollution that we don't see for many years to come. there's going to be quite a bit of litigation and controversy over what disputes over what claims should be properly paid out. bp will say that many of the claims aren't proper, that the injuries aren't total... don't total to the amount of money that the victims are seeking. but at the end of the day that's what lawyers are very good at fighting over, how much money is needed to compensate somebody's claim. >> lehrer: professor hester, what does the record indicate about liability for prior events in terms of how close you have to be to the damage, say, an example i read today where a travel agent in boston might say, well, wait a minute, i'm losing money because i had some tourists who were going to go to louisiana who now can't go because of the oil spill. give us some feel for that. >> i think it's going to be a question of proximity. professor hall is right. it's going to have to be sorted out in litigation. it's going to be fairly straightforward and easy to have claims processed for people who are geographically chres to the spill, who can show a direct nexus to how the spill has affected the way that they make their livelihood or personal injury. as you spread out further in time and location, that ripple is going to get harder and harder to prove. that's where a lot of litigation will probably be the most fierce. unfortunately it's not something that we've had a lot of case law on yet to give us a bright line on. >> lehrer: what about the record from the exxon valdez spill ? what happened then? >> kpan valdez, we actually had litigation on the tort claim that stretched on for up to 20 years. much of that fighting was over punitive damages which originally were at $5 billion for exxon but were ult maely trimmed down in a u.s. supreme court decision last year to only $500 million. given the fact that we have a spill that impacts multiple states, a wide variety of economic activity and the fact we're dealing with a spill that under new laws that weren't in place when the valdez spill took place we're probably looking at a longer period of litigation and much more complex legal issues. >> lehrer: do you see it the same way, professor hall? >> i don't want to minimize the impact that alaska felt after the exxon valdez spill but what we're seeing in the gulf is a whole magnitude different it's not just the number of states and the miles of coast line but the economics of the gulf region are very closely tied to the quality of the waters in the gulf itself. as those waters become polluted, as the beaches start becoming covered in oil, you're going to see a ripple effect through the entire gulf region economy that will make computing damages very difficult, very controversial and frankly very expensive for the lawyers to sort out. you're going to see property owners up and down the gulf coast claiming loss of value to their investments, to their real property , thousands and thousands of businesses. what we saw in alaska after the exxon valdez spill gives us a small case for what this will be like but it's really much smaller scale event than what we're seeing in the gulf. >> lehrer: professor hester, president obama has already made a big thing of the fact that the u.s.... the federal government has already presented a bill to bp for several million dollars. is that just as simple as it appears? the united states government sends them a statement and says you now owe us $65 billion or million or whatever it is and the federal government pays? >> or bp pays. >> lehrer: i mean bp pays, yes, right, sorry. >> absolutely. the idea is that the federal government has already designated bp as the responsible party for this spill as a leaseholder for, you know, underneath the spill. frankly their presentation of that bill , the hope is that bp will voluntarily pay it. if bp chose not to, the federal government would have to go to court and pursue that claim. given the circumstances though, it would not be a good tactical call on bp's part to fight over the legality of that presentation. >> lehrer: on the criminal liability issue, there was a big flurry about that when attorney general holder went to the gulf a few days ago and went last week. what are the realistic possibilities there? and what does the record tell us about that? >> well, i think we've got a pretty good sense of what the possibles are for criminal action. criminal prosecution against bp and the other companies involved in the spill. for folks who want to see bp executives put in jail, the criminal process is going to be very unsatisfying. what we're much more likely to see are significant fines, probably in the hundreds of millions of dollars imposed under a variety of federal statutes such as the clean water act, the oil pollution act, even some old treaties mike the migratory bird treaty act. bp as a company will pay those fines and probably reach a negotiateded plea deal. those criminal fines are really going to be pretty small in comparison to the economic damages that bp is is going to be paying out over the next years and maybe even decades. >> lehrer: do you agree with that, professor hester? probably nobody is going to go to jail. they'll just pay out a lot of money? >> after some very unusual new facts coming to light, i would agree with professor hall. the real consequences of any criminal conviction may not be the fine that gets paid. it might be restitution papts as part of a criminal settlement or to bar them from federal contract or others might have. >> lehrer: okay. gentlemen, thank you both very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> woodruff: still to come on the newshour, a health care reform update, the drug epidemic gripping capetown, south africa. the deadly week in afghanistan. and jean michel cousteau on the long-term impact of the oil spill. but first the other news of the day. here's kwame holman in our news room. >> holman: iranian president mahmoud ahmadinejad urged the international community to support his country's agreement brokered with turkey and brazil to swap nuclear fuel. he said it would resolve the nuclear issue. but he warned it is a one-time opportunities, and that imposing more sanctions on iran would be a mistake. the u.n. security council is scheduled to vote on a new round of sanctions tomorrow morning. in washington, a state department spokesman said iran has had more than enough time to change its course. >> iran wants to portray itself as the victim here. iran is not the victim. iran is an actor in this play. it's iran that has failed to come forward and meet its international obligations. what we are saying is that failure has consequences. we are not closing the door to any step beyond, you know, the sanctions vote tomorrow. >> holman: in london u.s. defense secretary robert gates insisted it's not too late to stop the iranians from developing a nuclear weapon. he said the clock is ticking. >> voters in 12 states headed to the polls this primary tuesday to determine the fates of senators, house members, and governors. primaries or run-offs were underway from maine to california, georgia to north dakota. in california's gubernatorial race, republican meg whitman, a former e-bay executive, already has spent more than $70 million in her bid against state insurance commissioner steve poizner. in south carolina voters are choosing a successor for republican governor mark sanford in a race charged with allegations of infidelity against one of the candidates. opening statements in the federal corruption trial of former illinois governor rod blagojevich began today. a federal prosecutor alleged blagojevich was part of a series of illegal shakedowns. he has pleaded not guilty to trying to profit from his right to pick someone to fill president obama's former senate seat. blagojevich arrivedate the courthouse in chicago smiling and joking with journalists. he told them the government has lied to the media and the public about the case. general motors announced it's recalling a million-and-a-half vehicles worldwide because of the potential for fires. the recall affects several pick-up trucks, sport utility vehicles and passenger cars from the 2006 to 2009 model years. gp plans to disable a heated washer fluid system module that could lead to fires. nearly all of the vehicles affected were sold in the u.s. it was a mixed day on wall street today. the dow jones industrial average gained 123 points to close at 9940. the nasdaq fell three points to close above 2170. those are some of the day's major stories. now back to judy. >> woodruff: it's been almost three months since the president signed a new health care reform law. today he was out making the case for its merits. newshour health correspondent betty anne bowser has the story. the health unit is a partnership with the robert wood johnson foundation. >> just two generations ago. >> reporter: the president hosted a meeting in sub urban washington where he addressd the concerns of seniors. one of those groups of voters most worried about how the health care overhaul will affect them. >> what you need to know is that the guaranteed medicare benefits that you've earned will not change. this new law gives seniors and their families greater safings, better benefits, and higher quality health care. >> reporter: the legislation which mr. obama signed into law in march extends health coverage to 32 million uninsured americans by 2014. mandates most people buy insurance or pay a fine, sets new regulations on insurers, and provides subsidies and medicare expansion to millions of individuals . it will also cut some $500 billion in future medicare spending, something that has seniors very concerned. >> today's town hall was the first of many events aimed at winning over a skeptical american public between now and mid-term elections. democrats and allies of the obama administration are raising $25 million to set up a new tax exempt group to head off criticism that might impact candidates in november. >> a key part of the strategy is showing americans how the law will benefit them. the president told seniors today the first batch of $250 rebate checks are being mailed to help millions of them when they fall into their coverage gap known as the donut hole. >> it's being phased in, but by 2020, this law will close the donut hole completely. the donut hole will be gone. ( applause ) it will be gone. >> reporter: seniors aren't the only ones unsure about new law. recent polls show more than 50% of americans don't like it. however, most people don't want to repeal the legislation. that is something republicans are trying to do in at least 30 states. while much of the new law takes effect in 2014, the administration is already beginning to roll out some of its provisions. including a high-risk pool for those who are hard to insure. and most major insurance companies have agreed to allow parents to keep children on their insurance policies until they turn 26. >> woodruff: more now about some of those changes that are already taking place or will be in the next several months. susan dentzer is with us once again. she's the editor in chief of the journal health he health affairs and an occasional analyst for the newshour. good to have you back with us. >> great to be back, judy. >> woodruff: before anything else, let me ask you about something the president said to the seniors today. want to assure you that your medicare benefits are not going to change. at the same time we are reporting there's going to be a $500 billion cut in medicare benefits in the future. how do you reconcile that. >> not a cut in benefits. the $500 billion people should understand is a $500 billion slowdown in the rate of growth. medicare spending is still going to grow substantially. the last couple of decades medicare has grown 4% per year per beneficiary. in the future it will grow 2% per year per beneficiary. so spending is still going to go up, including for benefits. it's just that hospitals in particular aren't going to see their payments rise as quickly as they would have otherwise. there will be other entities that won't be paid quite as much as well particularly entities that operate so-called medicare advantage plans. their payment is going to change. >> woodruff: an important distinction here. >> an important distinction. we don't know frankly what that means for benefits. when the president said you're guaranteed benefits won't change. he's kreblgt. it's some of the extras that some of these plans have provided that may or may not change. quite honestly we won't know that for several years. >> woodruff: today the president talked about the $250 rebate checks. who will get them and how significant is that? >> everyone who has drug spending high enough to fall into the so-called donut hole will qualify. that means people who have total drug costs this year of $2,830. so what happens with this program is, first he pay a $310 deductible. then from $310 up to $2830 the government pays three quarters of your drug bills. you pay a quarter. then it stops. until you get total drug costs of $4,550. this is not a huge innovation in benefit design. it was just a big hole to save a lot of money on the part of the government. what happens is when you hit that $2,830 total drug spending now, you'll get this $250 rebate check which, of course, will just help a little bit while you get through that donut hole. then when you get through the donut hole, you get broad coverage once again. >> woodruff: it's a little bit but they're trying to get it out there quickly with these checks. >> that was the point. as was said by 2020, the donut hole disappears altogether. >> woodruff: let's move on to another feature of health care reform coming on-stream. that is expanding insurance coverage for children up to the age of 26. >> that's right. the number of the insurance provisions take place right away or very soon. as of september essentially all insurance plans are going to be required to offer coverage for dependents up to the age of 26. now about 65 insurance companies step forward in advance of september and said we're going to do that now. particularly as people are leaving college or leaving school and going off , helps plans they have in college. they will now be able to enroll in their parents' plan. that will start to phase in across the country. if you're an employer-provided insurance particularly if your employer self-insures, it may not be the case that a child can be covered until january which is typically when the new plan year starts. essentially from now through january we're going to see a lot of younger adults becoming covered under their parents' plans. >> woodruff: movement in that area. susan, the so-called high risk pool. this is establishing insurance coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions. there's movement in that i can't... in that area. >> that's right. there are at least 5-7 million americans who lack insurance now primarily because they have pre-existing medical conditions. usually these are chronic conditions that are high cost. because the full blown coverage plan doesn't come into effect until 2014 the government set aside $5 billion to either help states provide coverage for this population in so-called high- risk pools or if state didn't want to do that, the federal government would come in and do it for them. we now have that money on the table. about 30 states have signaled that they want to take advantage of the money and use that to basically create their own pools or augment, change some of their existing ones. 20 or two states have said thanks but no thanks. we honestly don't know how many people are going to be able to be covered through them. the bigger issue is whether there is enough funding apropose rated for this purpose. in fact, $5 billion by some estimates may mean that only a couple of a hundred thousand people will be able to be covered under this. >> woodruff: out of a potential? >> 5 to 7 million. it may well be the case that congress will have to go back at some point and reexamine the funding or some of the provisions that are required of this high-risk coverage because the coverage has to be relatively generous under this federal program compared to what it is under other programs. >> woodruff: susan, you watch this whole area so closely. you were telling us earlier today, there are other things happening now in the health care delivery realm. beyond the things we've just talked about. >> that's absolutely right. one of the most important goals of the legislation is to bend the cost curve. basically slow the rate of growth of overall health spending and achieve more value for the dollars that we spend on health care. a lot of this is going to be accomplished by reforms of the health care delivery system. americans are going to start to hear about concepts like accountability care organizations and the medical home. new features, new ways of organizing health care that the new law allows and indeed in some senses compels to happen. there's a lot of ferment in the hospital sector in particular as people are looking at this thinking how should we reorganize ourselves for the new delivery systems and the new payment systems? that's going to have an impact on the way many americans receive their health care. hopefully for the good. >> woodruff: in just a very few seconds there are a number of people who don't like this, a number of attorneys-general, states and the country, that are trying to repeal it in several states. can you give us just a quick sense of where those legal moods stand. >> most of those cases have targeted the so-called individual mandate which is the provision that will take effect in 2014 that compels people to have health insurance or pay a penalty. many of the states' attorneys- general argue that that's unconstitutional. there's a lot of difference of opinion on that though. i think the preponderance of the constitutional think ing is that actually the federal government is allowed to do this under the clause of the constitution which gives it the right to regulate commerce among the states. of course that will be up to the courts. we'll see what happens. >> woodruff: the health care reform conversation keeps going on. >> it does indeed. >> woodruff: susan dentzer, thank you for helping to make it all clearer for us. >> thanks, judy. >> lehrer: now, drugs and despair in south africa. jonathan miller of independent television news reports from capetown, the nation's second largest city, and the most for eight world cup soccer games. ♪ >> reporter: in the city where the mountain is transcendent, the rich and the white live on its flanges. capetown's poor-- and there are millions more of them-- occupy the sprawling flats. these the tin-roof shacks of the cape of no hope where gangster gun law rules. but there's a diva in this township. she refuses to accept her fate. ♪ she sings an aria. follow my heart, it's called. her philosophy of hope. ♪ >> i feel like i'm in a place where there's no one, just you and your voice. we have to be happy, forget about where you come from, forget about the clan , the drugs and all that. you just have to be somebody else. >> reporter: her mother gave her four daughters a tick ...et out of the township. they've all been to university. the diva sets her sights on europe. >> living here is not good. very bad. you go to the shop and you get mugged in a very few minutes. you lose your wallet and everything. murders happen in the daylight. >> yes, they do. it's the young boys. they just take the cell phones and the wallet and going to sell them. >> for the drugs. >> for the drugs. >> reporter: drugs and poverty are a dangerous mix. four out of five of all the murders and armed robberies are drug related. addiction to crystal meth which locals call tick is a playing. capetown's metro cop describes themselves as the hardest gang of the lot. they wield their guns. acting on police intelligence, the rating... the raiding of a suspected drug dealer's house right next to a world cup training ground. stealth is everything. lookouts, everywhere. they nail a man on the stairs and they cuff him. in the family sitting room, they were certainly surprised by their unwelcome guest. children looked on as the metro police turned their home inside out. no tick and no gunmen. but in a back room they pick up a wanted gang member. >> he's a lone gangster. >> do you know what the warrants were? >> i think crystal meth. tick. >> reporter: i briefly spoke to the man they had arrested. he told me he'd been in and out of prison all his life. ask people around here privately what they make of the metro police and they scoff. nowhere is safe from tick and tick crimes. and the contagion just gets worse. more than half the population down here are of mixed race. under apartheid they were labeled cape coloreds. the country used to be ruled by whites. now it's blacks. the mixed-race community remains an underclass in this so-called rainbow nation. this tells the story of gang life on the streets and in jail. extreme sexual violence is depicted. conquests. kills. and wishful exultations. say no to tick. all three of men have been convicted of multiple murders. between them they've spent a lifetime in prison. all three told me of their violence , deprived childhoods and and arc i can family life. >> even my own family treat me like a piece of (beep). i don't mean anything to my own family. that's why i look up to these guys to show me the way. i spent 12 years in prison. i stabbed someone 18 times to get what? to get this. to get this. >> reporter: six tattooed stars on each shoulder, fabian jacobs, captain of the 28th, the most vicious and fierce prison gang. lot. we're in another broken drug- infested neighborhood. a man trained his fighting dog strengthening its jaws for a weekend kill. this is about as poor as south africa gets. two-thirds adults are unemployed, a quarter h.i.v. positive. the murder rate is one of the highest in the world. much of the crime goes unreported. all those i met with no exceptions told me the world cup would mean nothing to them. a short bus ride from crystal meth central and you're at capetown's new stadium. 1.3 billion pounds has been lavished on this city for the tournament. the authorities boast that it's... the world cup will not be a magic wand that will cure poverty, build houses, schools home and touch every suburb. right here in capetown we have 220 informal settlements, people living in the shacks. where we in a concerted fashion are upgrading those settlements with infrastructure, sewage, water, electricity. this is an enormous task. so the world cup was never capable of solving all of that or making that disappear. >> reporter: his son would have loved the world cup. he had been a sporting teenager until he started doing tick which turned him into a psychotic monster. she showed me the shack she built for him just to keep him out of the house. she'd have to put up burglar bars on the windows and doors because her junky son would steal everything even her clothes to buy tick. her son was extremely violent, attacking his mother with scissors, a bread knife, even an ax. >> i just wanted somebody to help me. but there was nobody. >> reporter: it can gone on for years before she finally snapped. early one morning she took some rope and entered the shack. >> it's like i had to get the courage to put it around his neck. he then, you know, you wake him up. he got this and he wanted to hit me with a board. i just said father, forgive me for what i did. i was standing there just looking at him because he was lying so peaceful. >> reporter: ellen strangleded her own son. the judge gave her a three-year suspended sentence and ruled that she was the victim. ♪ stories of hope on the cape are few. the ka catastrophe is felt more harshly here than anywhere else in the world. the cape cops continue to wage their war of attrition . the government says it's trying. it hopes the world cup will change lives for the better , but there be a chilling contrast between this celebration of the beautiful game and the ugly reality of life in the murderous ghettos. ♪ >> woodruff: it was another deadly day for nato troops in southern afghanistan. two americans died in a roadside bombing, and a british soldier was shot and killed while on patrol. 24 nato soldiers have been killed(m last week alone. for more on recent military and political developments, we get a report from jean mckenzie of global post, the international news website. ray suarez talked with her from kabul earlier today. >> suarez: jean mckenzie, welcome. this most recent action represented the largest nato one-day loss of life since last year. are taliban fighters were active than they've been in previous months? >> i think that would be a pretty accurate assessment. the taliban has declared an offensive called the victory. they have warned that they are going to step up their attacks. i think that that's what we're seeing. there were five nato soldiers killed the day before. at least three were killed today. so we've seen 20 soldiers lose their lives over the past three days. of course, there are more soldiers in afghanistan now than there were because of the u.s. troop surge. this is also contributing to the rise in casualties. we have more boots on the ground in more dangerous places. that, combined with taliban's new aggressiveness is making life very difficult. >> suarez: there was also violence around the peace jirga, the conference of 1500 tribal and political leaders that meant to discuss president karzai's efforts to reach out to the taliban. did some of the increase in combat and bombing have to do with that jirga, the gathering, brought together by president karzai? >> well, i think the taliban delivered a very clear message to the peace jirga which is that they were not prepared to talk at this point. until they saw a real opening with the afghan government and with the international community, they would answer any overtures or what they called phony overtures with violence that we saw on the first day of the jirga. >> suarez: at the conclusion of the peace jirga, what did they finally come up with? what were their recommendations for going forward? >> well, the conference came up with a set of suggestions that were then coordinated into a final declaration. the final declaration included outreach to the taliban, a beginning of negotiations, reintegration of low-level taliban fighters, release of taliban prisoners from detention centers in afghanistan , both foreign and afghan detention centers, and also more control over the foreign forces. an end to night raids, house searches and bombing of civilian areas. >> suarez: also in the past few days we've seen the resignation of the head of afghan intelligence and the interior minister. were these significant cabinet posts, significant losss to the karzai team? >> they were very significant cabinet posts. this is two of the three security ministers, and they were very strong and very powerful ministers. i think people in kabul are talking about little else these days except what the reasons are for the removal of these two men. of course, their resignations were forced. they were quite open about this. karzai apparently had a very acrimonious meeting with both of them, at the end of which they tendered their resignations which were immediately accepted. the announced reason for this was the attacks on the jirga, but very few people in kabul are giving this any credence. we've heard versions ranging from the ministers have been plotting against karzai to american involvement that they wanted one or both of the ministers gone to british involvement that they wanted one or both of the ministers gone. everyone has got an explanation but none of these explanations seem to jibe with each other. >> suarez: it's interesting that you mentioned the british and the americans because a lot of the reporting around these two men's depart you're describes them as men who worked well and closely with their counterparts in western intelligence and were considered pretty competent. >> they were considered to be competent managers. they were known as the technicrats. one of them has been in three different ministries since 2002. the other one has been the intelligence chief since 2004. it was a significant loss and will be a significant loss. there's likely to be a period of great instability until we know who is going to head these ministries. but i think a lot of time is going to pass before we know exactly why atmar and salay were removed and what actually stands behind them. >> suarez: jean mckenzie, thanks for joining us. >> thank you. >> lehrer: finally tonight, another perspective on the gulf oil spill. since the april 20 disaster, we've spoken with company executives, administration officials, community residents, and many experts. well, tonight, we talk to an outspoken environmentalist and ocean explorer jean michel cousteau. he recently went to the gulf with a team of divers to examine the damage there. he's the son of the late jacques cousteau and the author of a new book about him titled "my father the captain." geoffrey brown spoke with him earlier today at the studios of sirius-xm radio in washington. >> brown: jean michel cousteau, welcome. >> thank you. >> brown: today government officials confirmed what everyone filled, these large plumes of oil lurking below the sea. what does that mean? what is going on beneath the ocean? >> first of all, what it means is instead of letting the oil go to the surface to recover it , dispersants have been put, chemicals have been put into that oil to keep it below the surface. so now you find that oil pretty much all along the water column or the 5,000 feet of depth. some of it stays on the bottom because of dees dispersants. but a lot of it is kind of in mid water which means it will be affecting the entire water column. >> brown: we all talk now a lot about the world underneath the surface. that's your world. i mean under the sea. what should we know about life, the eco-system? >> well, we need to learn. we need to learn more because we know very little . i know it's a cliche. we know more about the other side of the moon than we know about our own ocean. there's a lot more research that needs to be done. we cannot fool around with nature like we do now by certainly decide to go have the dispersants being put in there because we don't know what the long-term effect will be on the marine life. we're talking about everything. we're talking about animals. we're talking about plants. ultimately all of that reaches the coast line, as we've seen it now going under the booms and reaching the marshland which is a very, very sensitive environment. as well as florida where pretty much all forms of marine life will spend some time there to hide and find food and protection from predators and on and on and on. >> brown: with the dispersants isn't there a trade-off? isn't the idea to keep more of the oil from coming to the coast? >> i don't believe that's the answer. i think the long-term damage and consequences are much higher than if we allow them to come to the surface and start to skim it. pick it up like we've done in other parts of the world. playing god is not acceptable. >> brown: playing god, you think that's what they're doing. >> that's what we're doing by pouring these chemicals without even knowing what it does. it's completely unacceptable. >> brown: you know, most of us, i imagine, think that as the technology improves for leaching into the earth to extract the oil that the technology for dealing with a problem wouldal advance. maybe we just don't think about it. now we learn otherwise. >> when we go in space, we have prevention regulations and we have in case of an accident we can do this, this and that. that's not the case there. you go to different parts of the world and they're playing different games. we're finding out now that a lot of shortcuts have been taken. we need to stop that. we need to change. we need to have a system whereby everybody plays the same game. because we all get affected, no matter where you live. >> brown: we've had correspondents down there and talked to people in the region. this is an important industry to many people. this is jobs. this is money for the state government. a lot of people depend on this. right? >> i'm not saying we need to stop. i've never said that. i'm saying we need to do it the right way. not only do we need to do it the right way but let's assume that that particular industry is is still doing fine. what about the people , tens of thousands of people, whose families now are out of work? because they cannot go fishing anymore, because the restaurants are getting empty and the gift shops and the hotels are getting empty. the transportation systems are being affected by all of this. i mean, i've met some of those fishing families . the stress in their faces is shocking. not just one industry but another industry. it's us. as a family. we need to really face up to the realities . i believe, we can put a system which will take care of that. >> brown: one of the big questions now, of course, is how long will the impact of this be felt? >> decades. >> you were there in the aftermath of the exxon valdez. >> i can go back there today and see how much some of the people are still affected by it. i can give you a shovel. you can find oil in about a foot-and-a-half below the surface. it's there still and the people are still paying the price psychologically if not otherwise. i'm talking about now something which is, who knows, 10, 20, 30 times what the exxon valdez has done which is happening right in the gulf right now. and still going on. it's going to spill out into the gulf stream and it's going to go all the way to europe. >> brown: what do you hope might come out of this disaster? >> high hope is that this is is a the kick in the butt that we needed to change. and to stop blah-blahing and make really very strong decisions to keep a system which will protect us , which will protect nature because we depend on nature for our own survival and well being. we can do it. we need to do it. and that's the exciting time today. we are looking forward to and i believe we're going to do it. >> brown: jean michel cousteau, thanks for talking with us. >> you're very welcome. >> lehrer: again the major developments of this day, plumes of oil has just reported, plumz of oil have been detected deep underwater far from bp's ruptured well in the gulf of mexico. the u.n. security council prepared to vote on new sanctions against iran for its nuclear violations. the newshour is always online, of course. qualm owe holman in our news room previews what's there. >> holman: on the oil spill there's more from jean michel cousteau plus a report on rescues oiled birds in gulf. on the world cup, find a photo essay on south africa's new soccer stadium. on art beat geoffrey brown talks to the director of the spoleto arts center in charles town, south carolina. all that and more is is on our website newshour.pbs.org. >> lehrer: i'm jim lehrer. we'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. thank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by. >> bank of america. continuing to help fuel our nation's economic growth. >> chevron. this is the power of human energy. >> bnsf railway. >> pacific life. the power to help you succeed. >> the william and flora hugh it foundation, working to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> thank you for joining us for another "pbs newshour" is here i'm paul anthony here with chief operating operator. we're we encourage you to call us in support of "the newshour." you always know when you tune in the "pbs newshour" you'll receive your news in an intelligent and respectful way and we're proud to produce the very best news and public affairs programs right here on weta. but to do this member support is critical. and you can become a supporting member by dialing the number on your screen right now. >> when you watch pbs, the world comes to your doorstep. history comes to life. mysteries unfold. and the arts come home. when you support pbs, your gift helps everyone from all walks of life explore the wonders of the world. simply call the number on your screen. you can give by check or credit card. it's that easy. so please support your pbs station today. thank you. >> when we talk about "the newshour" on quality and respect a poll came out about a week or so ago and had some good things to say about public television and "the newshour" too. >> it certainly did. in fact for the seventh straight year the poll has found public broadcasting is the most trusted media institute in the united states. and we're very proud of that. but we also understand that's something that's tested every day and it's tested with programs like "the newshour" and we try to provide quality programming that will be trusted by the american people. and it's gratifying that, in fact, they do trust us. >> indeed, indeed. we've talked about the civility and other times that prevail on this program even when people have opposite persuasions. the best is your and my favorite program is brooks & shields program which is done under british rules. >> i don't know if it's british rules or not, paul, but it certainly is. and unlike a lot of other television programs where they have people with opposing points of view and all they do is shout at each other and you really can't understand their points of view, with brooks & shields and everything that's on "the newshour" it's done with a certain intelligence and civility where people really can understand the variety of points of view around a particular issue. >> yeah. absolutely. programs like "the newshour" reflect the values that weta holds in high esteem. programs like this are honest and of high quality. programs like this enrich lives. and programs like this elevate the impact television can have in our communities. programs like this can provide and re-enforce the value of lifelong learning. if a community resource like public television fits in with your values, then help make sure that it continues to grow and thrive. you can do that by dialing the number on your screen and becoming a member right now. joe, this program has endured for more than 30 years now. to what do you owe the success over the years besides the issues we've already talked about already. >> the reason for its success is twofold. first of all, it has maintained the kind of quality that we were talking about before. and i think that's the essential element in spite of the fact that technology has changed, it at its core remains the same. and the second is that its gotten this wonderful support from members of local stations like members of weta who give us the means to keep the program going. >> let's talk about the operating budget here. how important are individual contributions to the operating budget of both this program and the overall stang itself? -- station itself. >> people don't know that the individual donations is the single most important element. we do receive a relatively amount of money from corporations and foundations. we do receive a grant every year from the corporation of public broadcasting. but by far and away the most important and the largest portion of contributions comes from individuals who make the decision to write a check or go to the internet and pledge online which is sort of our favorite way to get it now. but we'll take it any way they can deliver it. >> uh-huh. people have said to me, why are you pledging for "the newshour" when all those corporate sponsors are there? >> well, these corporate sponsors are very important. putting together a nightly news program is an expensive proposition and requires a lot of resources. but the corporations only provide about 40% of the support for "the newshour," which is broadcast every night on public broadcasting. the remaining funds come from pbs and from local viewers >> thanks, joe for being here. >> thank you paul. and thank you to all of our members. >> indeed. all the people who called in, we hope. thank you so much if you called in during this brief break. we'd also like to take this chance to thank you if you're already a supporting member of weta. we appreciate all you've done to keep a program like "the neur" the very best in its class.